IR 05000313/1987020
| ML20236S544 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 11/20/1987 |
| From: | Boardman J, Seidle W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236S535 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-87-20, 50-368-87-20, NUDOCS 8711250243 | |
| Download: ML20236S544 (4) | |
Text
_ _. _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
.
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report:
50-313/87-20 Licenses:
DPR-51 50-368/87-20 NPF-6 Dockets:
50-313 50-368 Licensee: Arkansas "nwer & Light Company (AP&L)
P. O. Box 551 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO), Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Russellville, Arkansas Inspection Conducted: July 20-24, 1987
/lo/1r/
'
e Inspector:
J.
30ardman, Reactor Inspector, Operational Date P
rams Section, Division of Reactor Safety h
"/n// 7 Approved:
W. C. Seidl G Chief, Operational Programs Date Section, Division of Reactor Safety Inspection Summary
,
Inspection Conducted July 20-24, 1987 (Report 50-313/87-20; 50-368/87-20)
i Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of licensee's corrective action program.
Results: Within the area inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
9711250243 { h ia PDR ADOCK PDR G
._
_ _ _ - _ _ - - _ -
_.
.
_ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.., ;f.
!
j
'
DETAILS l
l .
Persons Contacted j
Licensee
- E. Ewing, General Manager.11 ant Support
- D. Howard, Special Projects Manager
- P. Michalk, Plant Licensing Engineer
- D. Lomax, Plant Licensing Supervisor
- H. Jones, Plant ' Modifications' Manager
- R. Lane, Engineering Manager Superintendent
- J. Taylor-Brown, QC Superintendent
- B. Converse,' Operations' Assessment Superintendent
- H. Greene, QA Superintendent '
,
NRC
- C. C. Harbuck, Resident Inspector
- M. E. Murphy, Region-Based Inspector
- Denotes attendance at exit interview.
l The NRC inspector.also held discussions with other station and corporate personnel 2.
Licensee Corrective Action System The NRC inspector began a performance oriented review of the licensee's corrective action system affecting reactor safety, which will be completed during NRC Inspection 50-313/87-26; 50-368/87-26.
a.
Root Cause Determination The NRC inspector found that, except for the licensee's Operations Assessment Group and Significant Events Review Group, there were neither prescribed training nor procedural methodology covering.-
the performance of root cause determination.
In reviewing a sample of Reports of Abnormal Conditions (RACs), the NRC inspector found inadequate root cause determinations such as the following:
RAC-186-016:
(Failure to perform required in-service inspection nondestructive examinations of welds in the letdown coolers)
!
i
_ _ _ _ _. _ _ _.... _ _. _ _. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _
__
_ _.. _ _ _ _. _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
__
__
_ - - _
,
,.,.
'
Root cause was identified in the RAC as "AP&L not having experienced personnel in the area of the'ASME Code and ISI examination requirements of Section XI who could properly evaluate the ISI program plan, had i
to rely on the expertise of B&W to have developed the program correctly."
Licensee actions to prevent recurrence dealt only with licensee oversight of inservice inspection.
l l
.The apparent root cause was lack of licensee control and monitoring of contractor actions which affect the quality of safety-related components, systems,.and structures.
Failure to identify the root cause and to take proper action to prevent recurrence could have i
resulted in the problems encountered later with welding and nondestructive examination (NDE) of Unit 2 pressurizer. heater welds (ANO Unit 2 LER 87-003, " Pressurizer Heater Rupture Results. in Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage and Pressurizer Vessel Corrosion"). The effectiveness on the licensee's pro ram for root cause determination will remain an unresolved item.
368/8720-01)
b.
Trend Analysis The NRC inspector reviewed an ANO Performance Indicator Report (PIR)
representing data for the period January through June 1987.
General NRC inspector comments on trend indicators were:
Several indicators show continuing trends outside control limits (goals) for the entire period; some indicators showed worsening trends. Discussions with licensee personnel did not identify corrective actions to improve these trends and bring them within the control limits.
The performance indicator graphs routinely did not identify upper and/or lower control limits or other criteria to permit
identification of the acceptability of the performance shown.
For apparently adverse trends, no_ data projections were given
to identify the planned corrective actions and to permit l
tracking the effectiveness of corrective actions.
The Trend of Plant Engineering Action Requests (PEARS) shows a
significant backlog, which has existed for over 3 years. The licensee has initiated actions to correct this condition.
These actions are an open item (313;368/8720-02) which will be. reviewed
.
by the NRC inspector during a subsequent inspection.
.(
I Trends such as Job Order Material Availability did not permit i
determination that a problem existed or in which area the I
problem existed (engineering, purchasing, etc.).
'i i
_
- - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ ___
_ _ - _ _ _
_ _ - - - _.
-___.
_
___
_
_ _ - - _ _ - - - - - _ - - _ - - -
_ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
..:...,
c.
Licensee Audits of Corrective Action The_NRC inspector reviewed the following licensee audits of.his corrective action program:
,
Operating Plant Surveillance Audit Corrective Action QAP-10-85, Memorandem SQA-2141, dated De:: ember 12, 1985 Operating Plant Surveillance Audit Corrective Action.
.
Program QAP-10-85, Memorandum SQA-2231, dated March 21, 1986
!
Operating Plant Surveillance Audit Corrective Action Program QAP-10-86, Memorandum SQA-2377, dated September 29, 1986 Operating Plant Surveillance Audit Corrective Action Program'QAP-10-186 Second Half 1986, Memorandum NQ-87-00091 l
These audit reports, especially SQA-2231, address weaknesses in the licensee's corrective action program. The licensee has contracted with a consultant to perform a review of the. complete corrective action program and to make recommendations on system betterments in September 1987.
Subsequently, the NRC will review the licensee's corrective action program and implementation schedule. This is an unresolved item.
(313;368/8720-03)
3..
Unresolved Item
$
An unresolved item is a matter about which more information is required in order to determine whether it is an acceptable item, a violation, or a deviation. Two unresolved items are discussed in paragraph 2 of this report.
4.
Exit Interview
<
The NRC insp)ector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1 on July 24, 1987, and summarized the scope and findings of l
inspection activities.
The HRC senior resident inspector was present.
)
,
i
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ - - - _.. _ _ _. _ _ _ - -. - _
_
.J