IR 05000313/1979025
| ML19294B206 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1980 |
| From: | Johnson W, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19294B201 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-79-25, 50-368-79-24, NUDOCS 8002270557 | |
| Download: ML19294B206 (12) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
Report Nos.
50-313/79-25 50-368/79-24 Docket No.
50-313 License No. DPR-51 50-368 NPF-6 Licensee: Arkansas Power and Light Company P. O. Box 551 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Units 1 and 2 Inspection at:
ANO Site, Russellville, Arkansas Inspection Conducted: November 22 - December 21, 1979
/
/
Inspector:
?
PMI fY C
.f. D. Johnson, Residept Rea'ctor/ Inspector
' Date V
Approved b :
b, l[et/ jlJo
'
.I n, T5ie, Reactor Projects Iht6 PSection Inspection Summary Inspection conducted during period of November 22 - December 21, 1979 (Report No. 50-313/79-25)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of previously identified inspection items, licensee actions in response to IE Bulletins, plant operations, and procedures.
The inspection involved 53 inspector-hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Results: Within the four areas inspected, one item of noncompliance was identified (infraction - failure to maintain procedure, paragraph 7b).
8 0 02 270W7
.
Inspection conducted during period of November 22 - December 21, 1979 (Report No. 50-368/79-24)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of previously identified inspection items, power ascension testing, 50% plateau data review, follow-up on Licensee Event Reports, and licensee action in response to IE Bulletins.
The inspection involved 54 inspector-hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Results:
Within the five areas inspected one item of noncompliance was identified (infraction - failure to adhere to procedure, paragraph 8).
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Arkansas Power and Light Company Employees J. P. O'Hanlon, ANO General Manager G. H. Miller, Engineering & Technical Support Manager B. A. Baker, Operations Superintendent T. N. Cogburn, Nuclear Engineer E. C. Ewing, Plant Engineering Superintendent P. Jones, Maintenance Superintendent B. A. Terwilliger, Operations and Maintenance Manager F. Foster, Plant Administrative Manager R. T. Elder, I&C Superintendent J. McWilliams, Assistant Operations Superintendent J. Albers, Planning and Scheduling Supervisor D. D. Snellings, Technical Analysis Superintendent The inspector also contacted other plant personnel, including operators, technicians and administrative personnel.
2.
Follow-up on Previously Identified Items (Closed) Open Item (313/78-22-01; 368/78-29-01): Revision of Administrative Controls Manual to reflect new organization.
The licensee has issued Station Administrative Procedure 1000.01,
" Organization and Responsibilities." This new procedure reflects the current staff organization and supersedes applicable portions of Procedure 1005.01, " Administrative Controls Manual."
(Closed) Open Item (313/79-15-04; 368/79-13-02):
Issuance of a procedure to define the activities and responsibilities of the Plant Safety Committee.
The licensee has issued Station Administrative Procedure 1000.02,
" Plant Safety Committee (PSC) Program."
(Closed) Open Item (313/79-21-05):
Differences between Unit 1 emergency procedures and the Babcock and Wilcox guidelines for Loss of Coolant Accident.
As stated in Inspection Report 50-313/79-21, the inspector referred the identified differences to NRC management for determination of acceptability.
It was deternined that item A, Immediate Trip of Reactor
Coolant Pumps, was acceptable.
Item B, Steam Generator Level to be Maintained for Natural Circulation, and Item C, RCP Operation During Overcooling Transients, were determined to require changes to the licensee's procedures.
The necessary procedure changes have been issued by the licensee and reviewed by the inspector.
3.
IE Bulletin 78-01 (Unit i)
This Bulletin, entitled " Flammable Contact-Arm Retainers in GE CR120A Relays," was issued on January 16, 1978.
It required that certain flammable contact-arm retainers in safety-related equipment be replaced with self extinguishing and flame resistant contact-arm retainers.
The licensee's response of May 1, 1978, identified the motor control centers in which the flammable contact retainer arms were used and committed to replace them when replacements were available.
The licensee completed the required replacement effort on November 8, 1979.
4.
IE Bulletin 79-24 (Units 1 & 2)
This Bulletin, entitled " Frozen Lines," was issued on September i, 1979.
It required a plant review to determine that adequate protective measures have been tzken to assure that safety-related process, instrument, and sampling lines do not freeze during extremely cold weather.
The licensee's response of October 31, 1979, reported the results of the required review. Among the possible freeze hazards identified in this response was the Refueling Water Tank overflow line.
Since the date of this response, the licensee's staff has determined that this overflow '.ine is not a freeze hazard. The licensee was requested to transmit a revised response to this Bulletin.
For the other identified freen hazards, the appropriate design changes have been implemented.
Review of these design changes completed the inspector's follow-up of Licensee Event Reports 50-368/79-01-03L, 79-02-03L, 79-08-03L, and 79-10-03L.
5.
Licensee Event Report 78-19 (Unit 1)
This reported the possible use of atypical weld filler wire in the reactor vessel closure head to flange and the outlet nozzle-to-nozzle belt regions.
The NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued a Safety Evaluation on this subject on December 12, 1979.
This item is considered closed based on this Safety Evaluation.
6.
Review of Plant Operations (Unit 1)
The inspector reviewed a sample of the Unit I shift logs and operating records.
This review included the items listed belo.
Station Log - September, October Auxiliary Log - September RCS Leak Rate Determination - August, September ESAS Shift Check Log - September NSS and Safeguards Auxiliary Log - September RPS Log - September Switchboard Log - September NSS Data Point Log - September Waste Control Log - September Jumper and Bypass Log - Current Entries No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Procedures (Unit 1)
A.
Scope The inspector reviewed selected plant procedures to verify the following:
(1) Review and approval was in accordance with Technical Specifications.
(2) Temporary procedure changes during the past year were properly approved and did not conflict with Technical Specifica ion requirements.
(3)
Procedure changes were made to reflect Technical Specification or license revisions.
(4)
Changes made to procedures during the past year were in conformance with 10 CFR 50.59(a) requirements.
(5) Records of changes in procedures made pursuant to 50.59(a)
are maintained as described in 10 CFR 50.59(b).
(6) Overall procedure content is consistent with Technical Specification requirement (7) Technical content of certain procedures is adequate to control safety-related operations within applicable Regulatory requirements.
(8) Selected maintenance procedures include provisions (if applicable)
for assuring hat safety-related system / components which are exposed to a reezing environment remain functional following such exposure.
.
(9)
Procedures, including checklists and related forms, in plant working files are current with respect to revision and temporary change.
The procedures selected for review are listed below.
An asterisk denotes those procedures which were selected for review of technical content.
Number Title Revision
- 1102.04 Power Operation R3, PC3
- 1102.05 Operation at Hot Standby R0
- 1103.02 Filling and Venting RCS R2, PC5
- 1105.09 Control Rod Drive System R1, PC2
- 1104.04 Decay Heat Removal System R6, PC7
- 1104.34'
Control Room Air Conditioning R2, PC2 System
- 1105.3 Engineered Safeguards R0, PC2 Actuation System
- '1104.06 Spent Fuel Cooling R4, PC3 System
- 1202 02 CRD Malfunction Action R3, PC3
- 1203.12 Annunciator Corrective R0, PC7 Action K08, D-2; RCP Motor Trip K08, A-2; DH Pump Motor Winding Temp Hi K10, A-1; Rad Monitors Trouble K09, F-4; ES Digital Power Failure K11, A-5; Spent Fuel Sto: age Pool Level Hi Lo
- 1202.11 High Activity in Reactor R2, PC2 Coolant
- 1202.12 Loss of Instrument Air R4, PCI
- 1202.13 Loss of Service Water R4
- 1202.23 Steam Generator Tube R3, PC2 Rupture 1401.02 Pressurizer Relief Valve R2 Removal and Replacement 1403.07 CRD Repatch and Verification R3, PC4 1402.04 DHR Pump PM R0, PCI 1304.45 ESAS Digital Subsystem Test R2, PC3 1401.01 Replacement of Strainers R2 and Filters 1005.04 Control and Use of Bypasses R3 and Jumpers 1005.21 General Plant Personnel R0 Authority, Responsibility and Access Control Sequence B.
Findings (1)&(2)
Review and Approval No items of noncompliance were identified, but two cases were noted in which a permanent change to a procedure inadvertently deleted a previous permanent change.
These are being corrected administratively by the licensee.
(3)
Procedure Changes to Reflect Technical Specification Revisions One apparent item of noncompliance was identified.
Procedure 1203.12, " Annunciator Corrective Action,"
K11, E-2 was not revised to reflect Technical Specification Amendment 39 which was implemented in April 1979.
This amendment changed the required Sodium Hydroxida Tank level from 31 feet to 34 (+1,
.8) feet.
.
Response Procedure K11, E-2, " Sodium Hydroxide Storage Tank Level Hi Lo" was still based on a required level of 31 feet.
(313/79-25-01).
The licensee is requested to address the review and updating of 1203.12 and the corresponding Unit 2 procedure, 2203.12, in his response to this item.
(4)&(5)
10 CFR 50.59(a) and (b)
The licensee was cited in inspection report 50-313/79-16; 50-368/79-14, issued on December 6,1979, for failere of the Plant Safety Committee to render determinations in writing with regard to whether or not procedures reviewed in accordance with Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Specification 6.5.1.6.a constitute on unreviewed safety question.
Since the date of the above inspection, the licensee has issued new Station Administrative Procecure 1000.06, entitled " Procedure Review, Approval and Revision Control."
This procedure was being implemented at the time of this inspection.
When fully implemented, this new procedure should ensure compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59(a) and (b).
(6)
Overall Procedure Content No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
(7)
Technical Content The inspector had several outstanding questions relating to certain reviewed procedures, but this portion of the inspection was not completed due to the unavailability of certain plant personnel.
This effort will be completed during a future inspection.
(8)
Freeze Protection Freeze protection considerations were not applicable to the maintenance procedures selected for review.
(9)
Plant Working Files No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
Inspector Review of Test Data (Unit 2)
During this inspection, the inspector reviewed certain tests performed at 50% power level plateau.
Items considered in this review included licensee evaluation of test results, acceptability of test data, resolution of deviations, correction of test deficiencies and administrative control of testing.
Tests reviewed during this inspection included the following:
Test Title 2.800.01 Appendix P Core Performance Record 2.800.01 Appendix R Variable Tavg 2.800.01 Appendix U Unit Load Trausient Test 2.800.01 Appendix L Process Variable Intercomparison Appendix P was performed in June 1979, at 50% power with equilibrium xenon.
The test included measurement of core radial power distribution and axi:1 power distribution. Test data was obtained in an INCA verfication file which was transmitted to Combustion Engineering for use in the CECOR code to obtain the power distributions.
These measured distributions were then compared to the predicted values.
The inspector performed independent comparison calculations for the axial power distribution and confirmed the result obtained by the licensee.
Appendix R was performed in July and August, 1979, at 50% power.
This
,
test determined the isothermal temperature coefficient and the power coefficient. The inspector reviewed the licensee's calculations and found no discrepancies.
Appendix U was performed in June 1979, at 50% power.
This test demonstrates that various control systems operate satisfactorily in the automatic mode to maintain plant parameters within acceptable limits during steady state operations and transients.
For the 50% plateau, Appendix U includes performance of four tests:
a.
Automatic Steady State b.
Megawatt Demond Setter (MDS) Test c.
Feedwater Control Systems (FWCS) Test d.
Reactor Regulating Systems (RRS) Test
.
.
The first two of these tests were not performed and will be performed at a later date.
Test deficiency number 1 was written to document the nonperformance of these tests.
The inspector reviewed the results of the FWCS and RRS tests.
No discrepancies were identified with the FWCS test.
A review of RRS test data indicated that the changes in primary coolant average temperature (Tavg) were accomplished by control rod motion.
The use of rod motion for Tavg changes was confirmed by the Test Director. Appendix U, Attachment U-5, RRS ~est, Steps B.5 and C.5 state, " Slowly raise the average RCS temperature, Tavg, by 4.5 F + 0.5 F above its programmed (Tref) value by dilution."
Steps B.10 and C.10 state, " Slowly lower the average RCS temperature by 4.5 + 0.5 F below its programmed (Tref) value by boration."
The licensee's failure to adhere to the requirements of this test procedure is an apparent item of noncompliance with Technical Specification 6.8.1.
(368/79-24-01)
Appendix L was performed in June 1979, at 50% power.
This test compares process instrumentation readings obtained from the plant computer, the plant protection system, the core protection calculators, and console meters to verify proper agreement between systems.
The inspector identified no test deficiencies which had not already been identified by the licensee.
9.
Authorization to Raise Power (Unit 2)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's evaluation of the 50% power plateau test results and his authorization to precede to the next test plateau (80%).
The Plant Safety Committee (PSC) and the Test Working Group (TWG) met jointly on December 16, 1979.
The inspector attended this meeting at which the results of the following tests were reviewed and discussed:
2.800.01 Appendices A, B, E, G, I, J, K, L, M, P, Q, R, U, W, X, Y, KK, LL, QQ, VV 2.800.03 2.800.04 2.800.05 2.800.06 2.800.07
.
.
2.800.09 2.800.10 2.800.15 Work Plan 2-72 Work Plan 2-73 Work Plan 2-74 The PSC found the results of these tests to be acceptable or, in the case of discrepancies, not to be a restraint upon further power escalation. The PSC Chairman, the TWG Chairman and the General Manager signed step 7.10.4 of procedure 2.800.01, Power Ascension Test, giving authorization to preceed to the 80% power test plateau.
10.
Inspector Witnessing of 80% Plateau Testing (Unit 2)
During this inspection, the inspector witnessed the performance of two tests at the 80% power plateau.
The test witnessed were:
2.800.09 Vibration and Loose Parts Monitoring 2.800.01 Appendix P, Core Performance Record The following items were verified by the inspector during the performance of these tests:
Latest procedure revision in use
.
Minimum crew requirements met
.
Test prerequisites and initial conditions met
.
Test equipment calibrated
.
Procedure is adequate
.
Crew actions correct and timely
.
Adequate test coordination
.
Test data assembled for analysis
.
Acceptance criteria met (preliminary)
.
Licensee's preliminary evaluation is adequate
.
..
The tests were observed to be adequately conducted.
Due to component problems, performance of 2.800.09 was incomplete.
This test will be completed by the licensee at a later date.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
11.
Exit Interviews The inspector met with Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon (Plant General Manager) and other members of the AP&L staff at the end of various segments of this inspection.
At these meetings, the inspector summarized the scope of the inspection and the findings.