IR 05000313/1982001
| ML20042A707 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 02/22/1982 |
| From: | Callan L, Hunnicutt D, Johnson W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042A688 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.B.2, TASK-2.E.1.1, TASK-2.F.1, TASK-2.K.3.25, TASK-TM 50-313-82-01, 50-313-82-1, 50-368-82-01, 50-368-82-1, NUDOCS 8203230700 | |
| Download: ML20042A707 (15) | |
Text
.
APPENDIX B U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0!f11SSION
REGION IV
Reports: 50-313/82-01 Licenses: DPR-51 50-368/82-01 NPF-6 Licensee: Arkansas Power and Light Company Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear One (AN0), Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: AN0 Site, Russellville, Arkansas Inspection Conducted: January 1 - 31, 1982 Inspectors:
//M, /d...w
.o/g &a.
W. D.57ohnson, SeCor Resident Reactor Inspector
'Da'te W
C t 2.
L'. J. "allan, Resident Reactor Inspector Date Approved:
YYi LWC~
.2h2/c9L u
D. fl. Hun'nicutt, Chief, Reactor Pro.jects Section 2
/ Datd Inspection Summary Inspection conducted during perio_d of January 1 - 31, 1982 (Report 50-313/82-01)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection including operational safety verification, surveillance, maintenance, follow up on previously identified-items, follcw up on Licensee Event Reports, follow up on TMI Action Plan items, sealed radioactive material sources, and PSC reviews.
The inspection involved 92 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Results : Within the eight areas inspected, two apparent violations were identi-fied in two areas (radiation area posting, paragraph 5 and leak testing sealed so'urces, paragraph 8).
I
l
!
!
!
.
.
PDR m _
__
_
_
_.
_
_
_
_
-__ - _
.
-2
.
Inspection conducted during period _of January 1 - 31, 1982 (Recort 50-368/82-01)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection includino operational safety verification, surveillance, maintenance, follow up on previously identified items, follow up on Licensee Event Reports, follow up on TMI Action Plan items, sealed radioactive material sources, and PSC reviews.
The inspection involved 110 inspector-hours on site by two NRC inspectors.
Results: Within the eight areas inspected, two apparent violations were identi-
.
fied in two areas (radiation area posting, paragraph 5 and leak testing sealed
'
sources, paragraph 8).
,
h
-_ -
. _.
-
.
_.
-__
_ _ _ _ -
-_ __
-
f-3-
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted l
J. P. O'Hanlon, ANO General fianager L. Levine, Engineering & Technical Support Manager
!
B. A. Baker, Operations Manager T. N. Cogburn, Plant Analysis Superintendent E. C. Ewing, Plant Engineering Superintendent L. Sanders, Maintenance fianager
!
J. McWilliams, Unit 1 Operations Superintendent J. Albers, Planning and Scheduling Supervisor M. J. Bolanis, Health Physics Superintendent P.. Tucker, Electrical Maintenance Superintendent R. Hewers, Unit 2 Operations Superintendent
D. Wagner, Health Physics Supervisor
!
M. Stroud, Production Engineer l
L. Dugger, Special Projects Manager L. Humphrey, Administrative Manager J. Lamb, Safety and Fire Prevention Coordinator C. Burchard, Health Physics Supervisor S. Lueders, Radwaste Coordinator T. Baker, Technical Analysis Superintendent L. Schempp, Ouality Control Manager
,
l J. C. Garrett, Material Management Supervisor B. Neal, I&C Supervisor
,
D. Lomax, Nuclear Support Supervisor l
A. Cox, Nuclear Engineer The inspectors also contacted other plant personnel, including operators; technicians and administrative personnel.
2.
Follow Up On Previously Identified Items (Units 1 and 2)
(0 pen) Severity Level IV Violation 368/8124-02: Missed surveillance on containment penetration conductor overcurrent protective devices.
In a NRC Region IV letter to the licensee, dated December 21, 1981,
this item was declared unresolved pendina a position clarifica-tion by NRR on the proper interpretation of l' nit 2 Technical Specification 4.0.3.
In a memo to NRC Region IV, dated January 25, 1982, NRR provided the requested clarification by stating that
'
Technical Specification 4.0.3 should be interpreted to require that surveillance tests conducted within the specified time intervals are necessary to establish a basis for OPERABILITY.
Therefore, this item will remain a Severity Level IV Violation.
!
l i
t
___.
.
._
-_
-
.- -._
_.
.
_
.
.
-4-Additionally, in a letter to the licensee, dated January 25, 1982, NRR has requested that the licensee adopt, for Unit 1 and Unit 2, the clearer wording of Technical Specification 4.0.3 found in the CE Stredard Technical Specification, NUREG 0212, Revision 2, in order ta remove the present ambiguity. The inspector will follow up on the licensee's response to this letter in conjunc-i tion with the normal follow up on Severity Level IV Violation 368/8124-02.
(Closed) Severity Level V Violation 313/8130-03; 368/8129-03:
Facility Operating Licenses.
i The licensee has taken appropriate corrective action on this item, including entering changes into the licenses and using controlled copies.
(Closed) Severity Level IV Violation 368/8124-05: Control room ventila-tion intake duct monitor inoperable.
The licensee has completed the necessary corrective action on this
<
item.
.
(Closed) Severity Level V Violation 368/8128-03:
Combustibles in Cable
,
Spreading Room.
'
The licensee has completed the necessary corrective action on this item.
Housekeeping conditions in the cable spreading room have been satisfactory during area inspections by the NRC inspector.
(Closed) Severity Level V Violation 368/8124-01: Penetration fire barrier.
The mitigating circumstances discussed in the licensee's letter to the Commission of November 17, 1981, and discussions with cognizant on-site personnel indicated that the original classi-fication by NRC Region IV'of this item as a Severity Level V violation is not warranted. Therefore, as specified in an NRC Region IV letter to the licensee of December 21, 1981, this item is no longer classified as a violation.
,
(Closed) Open Item 368/8007-02: 2.800-01, Appendix it, " Chemistry and
'
'
Radiochemistry Test."
As stated in an internal memo, dated !1 arch 30,1981, from the licensee's licensing staff to the licensee's plant staff, the licensee does not consider the failure of the radiation monitor to meet the correlation requirements of Appendix !! with RCS l
[
.
.
--.
.
.
_. _
.
.
.
-5-
,,
'
radiochemistry to be an unreviewed safety question.
As a
,
result, the licensee's Plant Safety Corrnittee accepted the i
test results of Appendix M on April 14, 1981. The NRC inspec-
' tor reviewed the documentation of the above proceedings and
,
)
'
has no further questions.
'
,
.(Closed) Open Item 313/8135-04:
Revision to LER 81-14.
' '
The licensee issued Revision 1 to LER 81-14 on December 31, 1981. This revision effectively eliminates the ambiauity from the description of the lack of seismic qualification for the hiah speed differential relays.
(Closed) Open Item 313/8125-03: Steam Generator Manway Gaskets This item identified a problem in the identification of primary and secondary manway gaskets for the steam oenerators. The licensee has taken the following actions:
Destroyed six caskets with questionable identifi-
.
cation (Purchase Order 27084).
Specified asbestos material color coding (white
,
.
,
for 2500 psi gaskets) and metal tag identification
,
'
for gaskets ordered under purchase requisition number 35442.
Revised Procedure 1402.30, " Primary Manway & Handhole
.
Cover Removal and P.eplacement," to delete the ambi-
,
guous ring count identification criterion and add part number and filler material color identification criteria.
'
These actions are considered appropriate and the item is closed.
(Closed) Deviation 313/8022-01; 368/8022-04:
Calibration of Hioh P.ange Noble Gas Effluent Monitors not performed as committed.
The NRC inspector reviewed the records of the performance of Procedures 1304.080 and 1304.087. These procedures are beinc used to perform a monthly check and a quarterly calibration of the monitors as committed.
3.
Licensee Event Report Follow Up (Units 1 and 2)
,
Through direct observations, discussions with licensee personnel, and review of records, the followino event reports were reviewed to determine that reportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence has been accomplished in accordance with Technical Specifications:
,
'
,
!
!
.
'
k
_
_.
- _ _
__
.
._ _
_
.
-6-Unit 1 Unit 2 8107 8022 8019 8109 8030 8126 i
8110 8036 8129 8111 8050 8139 8112 8087 8143 8091 81a4 The followino sub-paragraphs provide inspector comments on certain of the above LERs:
Unit 2 Battery Charcer Output Breaker Trip-LER 81-39 discussed the trippino of the 2034 output breaker.
Licensee investigation and consultation with the vendor did not reveal a cause
,
for the breaker trippino.
Unit 2 Motor Operated Valve Control Power Fuse Failures LERs 80-87, 80-87 Rev 1, and 81-43 reported motor operated valve failures due to blown control power fuses. The cause for these failures has not been determined, but the Plant Safety Committee has initiated action item PSCL-2-81-043 to investigate the failures.
i Unit 2 DNBR Penalty Factors LEP,81-44 reported that the appropriate DNBR penalty factors had not been included in the Core Operatina Limits Supervisory System and the Core Protection Calculators. The NRC inspector discussed this event with licensee nuclear engineering personnel and found that surveillance pro-cedure 2302.05 Appendix F has been revised to preclude recurrences of this
event by including appropriate burnup extrapolations, j
Unit 1 flotor Operated Valve Torque Switch Failure i
~
I LER 81-09 reported failure of a motor operated valve due to excessive play in the torque switch assembly caused by normal wear. The NP.C inspec-tor discussed this event with the electrical maintenance supervisor and i
found that the licensee performs no routine preventive maintenance on POV torque switches.
This item will remain open pendina implementation of a M0V torque switch Pf1 program.
(0 pen Item 313/8201-03; 368/8201-03)
l Unit 2 Turbine-Driven Emeraency Feed Pump (2P7A) Overspeed Trips-LERs 80-22, 80-30, 80-36, and 80-50 document a significant number of-
!
overspeed trips of 2P7A as well as.the licensee.'s various efforts to
'
identify and remedy the causes. The licensee's final design changes, U
.
-7-completed in November 1980, have apparently provided an adequate solu-tion to the overspeed trips of 2P7A, as there have been no recurrences during the many surveillance tests and starts due to emergency feed actua-tion signals resulting from reactor trips since the completion of the last design changes. These design chances (DCP80-D-2174) included modifying the electro-hydraulic covernor to delay the initiation of the ramp signal, reducing the amount of governor valve travel, and reducing the idle speed settino. Additionally, the hydraulic tubing in the governor control system was replaced with tubing with increased internal size to reduce hydraulic flow resistance. The NRC inspector observed portions of the desion change activities and the post modification testing and noted that the modifications resulted in a significant improvement on the starting characteristics of 2P7A.
Unit 2 Refueling Water Tank (PMT) Level Transmitters Frozen LERs 80-91 and 81-09 documeat instances of losses of R!3T level indication channels due to freezing of the level transmitters or their sensino lines.
In one case (LER 80-91), three out of four level indication channels were lost due to freezing. To prevent recurrences of level transmitter freezino problems, the licensee has modified the heat tracino desian for the level transmitters and associated sensing lines (DCP 81-2018).
The desian changes included adding redundant power supplies for the heat tracing, increasing the thermal rating of the heat tracing, and installing heater elements in the level transmitter enclosures.
The NRC inspector observed portions of the design change activity and observed the satisfactory per-formance of level transmitters during period of sub-zero degree Fahrenheit temperatures.
4.
Follow Up On Three Mile Island Action Plan Requirements (Units 1 and 2)
The NRC's Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation issued NUREG-0737 entitled,
" Clarification of THI Action Plan Requirements," to the licensee in a letter, dated October 31, 1980. This document incorporated all TMI-related items approved for implementation by the NRC as of October 31,1980, and includes a listing of requirements and implementation schedules.
The inspector is reviewing, on a continuina basis, the licensee's actions in response to the requirements of NUREG-0737. The inspector's review of certain of the licensee's actions in this regard is summarized below. The numbering system and short titles correspond to those used in Enclosure 1 of NUREG-0737.
II.B.2.2 Plant Shieldina Modifications (Units 1 and 2)
In a letter to NRC(NRR), dated November 30, 1981, the licensee stated no plant modifications are planned as a result of the plant shielding reviews.
This item will be reviewed by NRR.
,
c
__
-8-II.E.1.1 Auxiliary Feedwater System Modifications (Unit 2)
In a letter to NPC(NRR), dated November 30, 1981, the licensee stated that-no modifications to the Unit 2 emergency feedwater systen were required to meet the NUREG 0737 requirements.
II.F.1.3 Containment High Range Radiation Monitors (. Units 1 and 2)
The licensee has installed containment high range radiation monitors as described in inspection reports 313/8108 and 368/8116. The higher ranges of the instruments have been calibrated electronically using Procedures 1304.133 and 2304.133.
The Unit 2 monitors, 2RE-8925-1 and 2RE-8925-2, were recently calibrated using a RT-ll area monitor calibration source at 10 R/Hr. The Unit 1 monitors, RE-8060 and RE-8061, are to be replaced by detectcrs with qualified cabling and source calibrated during the next i
outage of sufficient duration. Technical Specification changes are re-quired for both units. NRC(NRR) will perform a post implementation review of these systems.
II.K.3.25 Power on Pump Seals (Unit 2)
The licensee's responses to this iten, dated December 19,1980, and November 30, 1981, referred to the event analysis in Section 5.5.1 of the ANO-2 FSAR.
5.
Operational Safety Verification (Units 1 and 2)
The NRC inspectors observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators.
The inspec-tors verified the operability of selected emergency systems, reviewed tapout records and verified proper return-to-service of affected compo-i nents.
Tours of accessible arehs of the units were conducted to observe plant equipment conditions, including potential fire hazards, fluid leaks, and excessive vibrations and to verify that maintenance requests had been initiated for equipment in need of maintenance. The inspectors, by obser-vation and direct interview, verified that the physical security plan was being implemented in accordance with the station security plan.
The inspectors observed plant housekeeping / cleanliness conditions and verified implementation of radiation protection controls. The NRC inspec-tors walked down the accessible portions of the Unit 2 A, B, C and D Safety Injection Tanks, Unit 2 Containment Sump Recirculation line
,
(portion inside containment), Unit 1 Steam-Driven Emergency Feed Pump
!
(P7A), and the Unit 2 High Pressure Safety Injection, Low Pressure Safety Injection, and Containment Spray Pumps manual suction and discharge valves l
to verify ope-ability. The inspectors also witnessed portions of the
!
radioactive waste system controls associated with radwaste shipments and barreling.
l
..
_
.
- _
-.
.
.g.
,
j These reviews and observations were conducted to verify that facility operations were in conformance with the requirements established under Technical Specifications, 10 CFR, and administrative procedures.
Findings in this area include:
a.
Control Room Annunciators
Based upon routine tours of the Unit 2 Control Room and discussions with operations personnel, the NRC inspectors noted that on four occa-sions the licensed operators in the Unit 2 Control Room were unable. to
,
provide explanations for certain alarns on safety-significant control board annunciators. The inspectors further noted that a formal require-ment did not exist for operators to turn over to relievino shifts the
'
status of control board annunciator alarms. These observations were discussed during an exit interview with licensee management represen-i tatives who indicated that they viewed this matter as a serious issue and would take measures to upgrade operator awareness.
(368/8201-05)
b.
Posting of Radiation Areas i
l During plant tours, the NRC inspectors identified the following radia-l tion areas which were not posted as required by 10 CFR 20.203(b):
Date Location January 12, 1982 1) The 2T12 valve area behind door 277 (Room 2017) of the Unit 2 Auxiliary Building.
2) The "C" High Pressure Safety Injection Pump Room (Room 2010)
in the Unit 2 Auxiliary Building.
3) Passageway 2011 on elevation 317 of the Unit 2 Auxiliary Building.
>
4) The "B" ESF Pump Room (Room 2014)
-
of the Unit 2 Auxiliary Building.
'
j January 22, 1982 The area surrounding a resin storage cask mounted on a flat-bed trailer parked between the
'
Turbine Building and the Rad-
'
waste Building.
This is an apparent violation.
(313/8201-01; 368/8201-01)
6.
Monthly Maintenance Observation (Units 1 and 2)
i Station maintenance activities of safety-related systems and components
,
listed below were observed / reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted
.
,
P
'
.
.
-.
.
.
.--
-
-
-
,
,--~_.--m
. _ _ -
_.m..
,--.-
,
.
-
-
.__
..
.
-10-
,
in accordance with approved procedures, Reoulatory Guides, and industry codes or standards and in conformance with Technical Specifications.
The following items were considered during this review:
the limiting conditions for operation were met while components or systems were removed from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiatino the work; activities were accomplished using approved procedures and were inspected as applicable; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior to returning components or systems to service; quality control records were maintained; activities were accomplished by qualified personnel; parts and materials used were properly certified; radiolooical controls were implemented; and fire prevention controls were implemented.
Work requests were reviewed to determine status of outstanding jobs and to assure that priority is assigned to safety related equipment maintenance which may affect system performance.
The following maintenance activities were observed / reviewed:
!
Repair of Unit 2 "B" Reactor Coolant Pump breaker (J.0. 21954)
.
!
Repair of Unit 2 Containment Purge Valves (2V1 and 2V2)
.
Disassemble / Reassemble 2!15-39A and B for tack weld (J.0. 20670
.
and 21142)
Inspect Unit 2 Containment Coolers service water heaters
.
l Stroke test of flain Steam Isolation Valve 2CV-1010 (J.0. 219ES)
.
Change oil in Unit 1 Makeup Pump motor Pti-36B
.
No violations or deviations were identified.
l 7.
?!onthly Surveillance Observation (Units 1 and 2)
The NRC inspector observed the Technical Specification required surveil-
'
lance testing on Unit 2 charoing pump 2P-36A (2104.02 Supplement A) (. monthly and annual), and verified that testing was performed in accordance with adequate procedures, that test instrumentation was calibrated, that limit-ing conditions for operation were met, that removal and restoration of the affected components were accomplished, that test results conformed with Technical Specifications and procedure requirements, that test results were reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during the testino were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate manacement personnel.
l
.
.
-,
.,
.
.,
,
_
_ -.
.
-11-The inspector also witnessed portions of the following test activities:
Unit 1 ESAS Analog Channel No.1 Test (1304.49)
'
.
Unit 2 RCS RTD time response test (2304.45)
.
Unit 2 Fire Detection Instrumentation Operability test (230/.12)
.
Unit 2 Process Radiation ftonitors quarterly test (2304.16)
.
Unit 1 Steam-driven Emergency Feed Pump (P-7A) test
.
(1106.06 Supplement II)
Unit 2 Channel B Excore Nuclear Instrumentation monthly test
.
(2304.101)
>
Unit 2 B Sodium Hydroxide addition pump monthly test (2104.05
.
Supplement 5)
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
8.
Sealed Radioactive Material Sources
,
The NRC inspector reviewed the licensee's proaram for control of sealed radioactive material sources.
The inspector verified that the licensee had adequate procedures to implement the inventory and leakace testing surveillance requirements of Unit 1 Technical Specification (TS)
3.12/4.14 and Unit 2 TS 3/4.7.9.1.
However, the inspector noted that the licensee had exceeded the specified I,
surveillance interval of six months when leakane test of designated sealed radioactive sources were not performed during the period of December 12, 1980, through August 24, 1981. This is an apparent violation of Unit 1 TS 3.12/4.14 and Unit 2 TS 3/4.7.9.1 which require that sealed radioactive sources that contain greater than 100 microcuries of beta and/or gamma emitting material or 5 microcuries of alpha emitting material be leakane tested every six months to ensure that less than 0.005 micro-curies of removable contamination exists on external surfaces.
(313/8201-02; 368/8201-02)
Additionally, while reviewing the licensee's current inventory of gled
' radioactive sources, the NRC inspector noted that a 10 microcurie Ra source (an alpha emitter) was not included on the list of sources to be
'
tested for removable contamination.
Because this source had been received by the licensee on July 14, 1981, the six-month surveillance interval had not been exceeded.
The licensee has since added this source to the list
of sources to be tested for removable contamination and has satisfactorily completed such a test on the source.
l-l l
!
.
_
.
,
.
., _ -,
.
-12-9.
Plant Safety Committee Peviews (Units 1 and 2)
The NRC inspector noted that the licensee did not have procedures to ensure that the Plant Safety Committee (PSC) investigated all Technical Specification violations as required by Unit 1 and Unit 2 Technical Specification 6.5.1.6e.
The licensee utilizes two mechanisms for identi-fying and documenting violations of existing requirements, including Technical Specifications: (1) a Report of Abnormal Occurrence (RAC) as defined by Plant Administrative Procedure 1000.08, "NRC Reporting and Comt inications"; and (2) a Non-Conformance Report (NCR) as defined by Plan Administrative Procedure 1000.07, " Deviations, Failures and Non-Confo, ances." However, it is only in the case where a subject violation is judged to be reportable to the NRC that either the RAC or NCR is assured of receiving PSC review.
Since not all Technical Specification violations are reportable to tne NRC, the inspector is concerned that the PSC may not be informed of all identified Technical Specification viola-tions and, therefore, not conduct the investigations required by Techni-cal Specification 6.5.1.6e.
This item will remain open pending the licensee's implementation of an adequate mechanism to bring before the PSC all identified Technical Specification violations. (313/8201-04; 368/8201-04).
10.
Exit Interview The NRC inspectors met with Mr. J. P. O'Hanlon (Plant General Manager)
and other members of the APAL staff at the end of various segments of this inspection. At these meetings, the inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection and the findings.
l I
i
,
NIC.acPu 786 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I =NcANSPEC'oa <New w a se sno w ere
.na
O W on. W il b D.
INSPECTOA'S REPORT atCEWha Office of Inspection and En'orcement HunniCutt, Povle f'.
M. D. Johnson I
>NSPE C TCa $
L. J. Callan l
"a ANs ActoN atPoar NexY NsPEC oara uCENsseneNoon coCaer No s a,.cavCiNs No 'ev PacovCrms.,,a, y,
,g Arkansas Power & Light X
'
"5'"
ni 9 r d 411!1l l l l p jpin-
^
- -**"
ni c; O 0031 4 R I i i
8! 2in
8
_
o - :<me I
i i i i ! i i C 1 l
l l l l } l
l a
af etaCE l
~m
_
PtaCD OF 'NvisflGA,50N oN5PECTiON
.NsPEC? ion Pt ascawf D 9 e CaGAMZATON CODE Cs MEG 0NiMQ CON 9UCT-
!NG ACTfVITY g$ee TWC J$JO Waw a#00rf-p aog
'o
mEGioNAL G8F jOf=En eg_we,ev Weaponeer 8eportav W rone )
uo ca< 1 va wo ca,
<a
. 2 ans.oemNs,'CE Sf app
, Cry aEscN mm ew.c-i Gl 1 0111812 011 3! 1 8!2 2 Pf aroavaNCs AP*aa>s*L reau
,
W!hMr.y.m m !
p 1%m 1-
-
w., ;~ nem -. 1
-
.
a
..
., ; m. o ;. ; _
afG60NAL ACTRON f vPt oF aCTIViTV CoNoyC*Eo Cre a one noe oceva
- "D0"*'
I 02 - S AFEry
_
M - MGMT veSif
PLANT stC
_
- -lNovay i - NaC soau ssi os -.NCIDENT 37 - SPEC:AL l l 11 - INVENT VEa
_
95 - INvisT1GATON f 2 - 9..PusNT expoar y
2 *esioNaL cmCs Lenta os - assonCivf NT as - veNooa
-
-
os - uGur avoir w - var 4Ccr F
,-. oar
~
-v m g -, m,g,u m p.m,g,gm.mw 4 a.
c.waw.
, s... ;;:..
.
-"
g,;g:,,g;;;;;.
oraLNuusta suonCavsNr CoNesseNCa
.eacar Cohta.N z iso ter ga oa ni, oar raaNsu,rval cars
-~
GF vCLATONS aNo wito
'NFCa Ma TCN a
e C
o oEviafCNS NaC FCaM 591 aEPonTSENT 1 - CLEAa on aEG To 4 Fon LETTEa ISSUED aCTON X
X 2 - WOLAT3CN l e j C o
aisjCjoj elCjo yo oay lva vo j ea, j 3 - ofviArioN
a va 4-
<ouroN a cEv:ArcN
! i j ii vis i i i vis ojJ g !/ Q j i l t j g 7l n 7
,
,
t'
j # i?i:. V.L dla i Dh:il
~ 'it
'
.' u,
. lZ [....
>
b ' fdi _ '
,
,
YOOVLE 'N80avafioN voce F N50=MaroN MODULE NVMBEa INSP y M Moout5 aEQ FoLLoWyP
,'
MooVLE NUMBEa NSP gz c VoovLE =EC FCLLoWUP a
sink ie r
r 55$3r ie r
r firs?, iE:
- !
!5
! !5
- fie35 iE:
i!
!5
!s 8i s,* 5 2ists ;ja
- : !
8i s e
.
.
.
.
.j
i : !
si sc 5 ; isis sia 2 :
si s
r
I s5 2,
Od f 8:20s
- a 2
I s5 i3
- : 5 I s5 f!
2 3 I afs:s rSe
I s 5
n 5 3,0 l7,0,3l l
Iiil 7 ll 7 ni 91 9 ilt7 l i 0i G C
iliil
^
.
,
,,
,
e
,
, i i
t l
liil
i2il 1i0,0 C
lii!
i i i,
i i
liil liil c
c i i i i i
! i i i i
liil
'
li,l i i
, !
i ii i i i
l,,4
[,,l 5 l6,217 0,31
li,6 1,0,0 C
l,,l 5 9,2l7,qq a
,
,
,,
,
e
,
i
,
,1,0 l,
l
.l
,6 1, 0, 0 C
l, l
a
,,
,
,
,
,
,
cl l
IiiI d
liiI i i i !
,
ii i i i
=l i l I
I
l,,!
,,
,
.
,,
,,
,
5l 9,2 l 7, 0,1l
5 !7 l 17:0i91 i i i
e i 5 6 il l7 i 2 i61 d
i li n li qq r ilii1
^
.
i
,,
, !
5 7 il l7 :0 i91 1111 li 10 r i II i l ii5
'
cl liil iii,l c
ii i i
,
i i
, i
!
I,il
!.,
I,iI
,i
,,
.
,,
i 5l7,l[707!N i,2 l q O! d l,il i % ii.; 6! d ili7 i i i liii
?
.
,
1 1 i
,
a i
ii7 10dd liil J
il ! 9 i i i
l liil a
i iil i i i i i
i i I i i i i
a a:e. m.
-
- i, i
i
-_
,
,
.,. -
...
.
-
,
, j
,,,, !
t,
[,
l l l t 1 d23l4 l 5, -'
/4c 10 ( 'It2lti.h15 % N te
' te 20 !?tA
'r :.W 2e ?l73l e> M CM %
12 Of Ets m.A is.ls,20 is 7, s. O'25
)
.
l
.
NRCro.u mgA
'[,'['u Docust no <s eg,esica uctmst atpear woontN6usta
<
4010V PACOucTH13 cqws
,
NO.
l SEQ.
cf 7l ll 1 (j Q
' e v:
'
INSPECTOR'S REPORT
5 Oio n
1 A 2! 0' li
- ^ '** "*" ** T** 3Qto
^
(Continuation)
5
C r
f
e 9: n 1: e
,l,
-
-
,
,
,
,
,c Office of Inspection and Enforcement
!
!
C yj p
,A 8 o
_
!
I l
-
-
, eurn,.o.ofare an,--,.sawan--
.,,.,,
.,o -,.a a
~ :
..a - o.. m
. w a.
,. xen-a
.a,,,
<
Contrary to 10 CFR 2@03(b), the followino radiation areas were not posted
as reauired:
.
'
On.lannary 12.10P2 - 1 ) The ?T1? valvo araa hohind o
door 277 (Room 2017) of the Unit 2 Auxiliary Buildinc.
,
_
2) The "C" Hiah Pressure Safety a
Injection Pump Room (Room 2010)
.
y in the Unit 2 Auxiliary Buildino.
"
31 Passaceway 2011 on elevation 317
of the Unit 2 Auxiliary Buildina.
di The "R" FCF Purn ocem (onnm 20141 of the Unit 2 Auxiliary Buildina.
.
'o On January 22.19P2 - 1) The area surroundino a resin
"
storace cask mounted on a flat-c bed trailer oarked between the
Turbine Puildino and the Rad-a waste Buildina.
22 Z3
- s d-a
70
10
C l
u-l J
-
u
,
. -. -.. _..
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
"
.
seRC Poau MS A Docattwo<s a. ion uctmst mEpont uooutt*vusta
[g*h
,
No (SV P80 T)l13 091s'
NO.
i SEQ.
fy Q 7{ 7) (N gl
[
+
INSPECTOR'S REPORT 0 15 0 0 0 3i1
~
'
Bi 21 n
4 cu'e maa"oace yc= Sg, s
(Continuation)
5 0 0 0 1 6
8i 2i 0
m
,
3
.
,
.
ac Office of Inspection and Enforcement
.
I i c
p 3 e o[
y
!
I I o
-
_
, ow o., on ocu t o.,,,,,,, a,,.co.,,-,.,.,,, -,,,..
.
.
,,-
,,,,... o,.. so,,,,
,,.,
,
Unit 1 Technical Specification 3.12 and Unit 2 Technical Soeciication ?.7.9.1
recuire that each sealed source containino radioactive material either in excess
of 100 microcuries of beta and/or camma emittino material or 5 microcuries of
aloha emittinn material shall be free of removable contamination equal to or creater
'
than 0.005 microcuries.
a
Unit 1 Surveillance Requirement 4.14 and Unit 2 Surreillance Recuirement 4.7.9.1.1
recuire that the sealed sources soecified above be tested for removable contamination
'o at laaet nnea ner six mnnths.
'2 Contrary to the above, the sealed sources in use at Arkansas Nuclear One that
' 2-are rnauf red to be tested for removable contamination where not tested within the recuired six-month interval. Specifically, the sealed sources were tested on ic -
's recember 14. 1980, and then were not tested acain until Aucust 24, 1981.
1.
to
10
22
24
--
17
r
10 i
U u
M
.
a U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATOrtY COMMISSION