IR 05000327/1986042

Reviews Util 861024 Response,Denying Violation Noted in Insp Repts 50-327/86-42 & 50-328/86-42.Basis for Concluding That Violation Occurred as Stated in 860926 Notice of Violation Encl

ML20207T770
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	02/26/1987
From:	Zech G NRC OFFICE OF SPECIAL PROJECTS
To:	White S TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
References
NUDOCS 8703240322
Download: ML20207T770 (3)

Text

[

'

'

.

.. ~

q

<

FEB 2 61987 Tennessee Valley Authority EATTN: Mr. S. A. White Manager of Nuclear Power 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: REPORT NOS. 50-327/86-42 AND 50-328/86-42 We have completed our evaluation of your October 24, 1986, response to our Notice of Violation issued on September 26, 1986, concerning activities at your Sequoyah facilit After careful review of the basis for your denial of Violation 50-327,328/

86-42-01 (Example 2), we have concluded, for the reasons presented in the enclosure to this letter, the violation occurred as stated in the Notice of Violatio Therefore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201, please submit to this office within 30 days of the date of this letter, a written statement describing the reasons for the violation, the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved, corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations, and the date when full compliance will be achieve In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Roo The response directed by this letter is not subject to the clearance procedure for the Office of Management and Budget issued under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-51

Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY GARY G. ZECH Gary G. Zech, Assistant Director TVA Projects Division Office of Special Projects ccy w/ encl:

S. L. Abercrombie, Site Director Sequoyah Nuclear Plant cR'. W. Cantrell, Acting Director Nuclear Engineering I L. Gridley, Director Nuclear Safety and Licensing vd R. Harding, Site Licensing Manager 8703240322 870226 PDR ADOCK 05000327 O PDR ll1 M cj

_ -- ----_---- -

,

d e

E5L .Io 357 ENCLOSURE Your denial of Violation 50-327,328/86-42-01 (Example 2), is based on the grounds that the work instructions used for installation of the solenoid valves were adequate; however, this is questionable in light of the fact that the vendor bulletin (not pr.rt of the installation package) for the ASCO model 8316 valves for nuclear power plants, documents that the four valve bonnet (end plate) screws have torque values of 95 plus or minus 10 inch pounds in a crisscross manne Since the vendor was specific with regard to torquing values and the tightening pattern for the bonnet screws, these items are considered significant and should be followed. In addition, it is understood from informal discussions with Sequoyah that they have actually gone back arid tightened the bolts to the vendor value You further state that the environmental qualification of the valve was not affected by the reconfiguration of the mounting support as performed under work package 11806, since the area of the valve that would have been affected by the improper installation of the bolts is internally isolated from the portion of the solenoid valve which contains that electric coil. Since the valve is environmentally qualified as a whole device, this argument is considered not applicable to the situatio In fact, in a letter to Dr. J. Nelson Grace, RII Administrator, from R. L. Gridley, Director, Nuclear safety and Licensing, Subject: Watts Bac Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2 - Improperly Installed Solenoid Valves - WBRD-50-390/85-52, WBRD-50-391/85-14 - Final Report, dated May 2, 1986, TVA states that ASCO solenoid valves are supplied to them as a complete qualified package with supplier-imposed instructions which must be followed to ensure that their application in the plant conforms with qualification tests. The position taken in this letter seems to be contrary to the TVA Sequoyah position taken in the denial of the violation. The NRC concurs with the original TVA position dated May 2,1986, and disagrees with the Sequoyah position that the environ-mental qualification of the valves was not degraded. We, therefore, believe the violation occurred as state T !. .;r

.

Tennessee Valley Authority 2

'bcc w/ enc 1:

pk Keppler,. OSP Ebneter, OSP

. Zwolinski, OSP Liaw, OSP

-

'

R. Connelly, OIA

.:P. Barr, RII INRC Resident Inspector NRC Document Control Desk State of Tennessee

i'

l i

i-

!

d 2/N/87 2ht/87 A 2G/87