IR 05000338/1979034
| ML19259D555 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1979 |
| From: | Kellogg P, Kidd M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19259D554 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-338-79-34, 50-339-79-46, NUDOCS 7910250075 | |
| Download: ML19259D555 (8) | |
Text
/
- o,,
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
g a
REGION 11
,
\\*****o#
101 MARIETTA ST N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-338/79-34 and 50-339/79-46 Licensee: Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, Virginia 23261 Facility Name: North Anna Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339 License Nos. NPF-4 and CPPR-78 Inspection at North an site ar Mineral, Virginia Inspector:
W 9 /M
M. S.
'"
'
Date'Si'ned
,e g
Approved by:
9 / 35,7 9 P. J Aectind' Chief,_RONS Branch Ifate Signe'd SUMMARY Inspection on August 16-31, 1973 Unit 1 Areas Inspected This routine inspection by the resident inspector involved twelve hours onsite in the areas of previously identified open items, licensee event reports, plant tours, and observation of an emergency drill.
Unit 1 Findings No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Unit 2 Areas Inspected This routine inspection by the resident inspector involved eighteen manhours onsite in the areas of previously identified open items, licensee reports per 10 CFR 50.55(e) and 10 CFR 21, plant tours, and administration controls for the startup testing program.
Unit 2 2 ding.;
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1213 117 yl0250
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- W. R. Cartwright, Station Manager J. R. Harper, Instrument Supervisor D. M. Hopper, Health Physics Supervisor
- J. D. Kellams, Superintendent of Station Operations E. G. Lifrage, Project Engineer
- E. R. Smith, Superintendent of Technical Services Other licensee employees contacted included two shift supervisors, three operators, and two office personnel.
Other Organizations Stone and Webster Engineer Corporation (S&W)
F. Carchedi, Field Quality Control, Mechanical W. L. Lehmbeck, Assistant Lead Advisory Engineer
- Attended one or more exit interviews.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 17, 24, and 31, 1979 for those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Followup on Previously Identified Open Items Inside Recirculation Spray Pump hotor Bearings (339/79-28-03)
a.
Followup of this 10 CFR 50.55(e) and 10 CFR 21 problem was documented in IE Report 50-339/79-40. At the time at the inspection, a topical report from General Electric to document reverification of environ-mental qualifications of the motors with new lower bearings had not been received. The topical Tepo'rt (491HA689) was submitted to NRC via
~
VEPC0 letter 636 of August 14, 1979.
Review of the report confirmed continued qualification for environmental and seismic conditions assumed in the design.
1213 118
,
.
.
-2-
.
Appendix G of the topic.1 included test data on the North Anna 2 and Surry 1 and 2 motors run on recire flow in North Anna 2 following installation of new bearings. The data was gathered during performance of normal construction checkout procedures, 2-TEP-7, Motor Test Record (Uncoupled) and 2-TEP-70, Coupled Motor Operation. Review of the topical report data, TEP's for the two North Anna 2 motors left in place after testing, and associated Rework Control Forms revealed that bearing temperatures reached equilibrium (150-160 F) after some five hours of operation and remained steady for the duration of the eight hour tests. Licensee personnel were informed that item 339/79-28-03 was considered closed.
As noted in IE Report 50-338/79-20, Unit 1 motors were run to assure looseness of the bearings.
These bearings will be replaced during the outage scheduled to begin September 15, 1979.
b.
Lower Pressurizer Support Assembly (339/79-39-04)
This Unit 2 problem was reported per 10 CFR 50.55(e) and 10 CFR 21 via VEPC0 letter 503 June 22,1979. An inspection documented in IE Report 50-339/79-40 revealed that the lower jam nuts and lockwashers had been installed, but that not all components had been locked together as described in Nonconformance and Disposition (N&D) Report 3800, Revision A.
This called for bending lockwasher tabs into the slots of all spherical nuts and jam nuts with reference to Station Specifica-tion NAS 377 and Drawing 12050-FY-19A. Revised disposition B to N&D 3800 was issued August 13, 1979 to clarify locking requirments.
This required bending only one tab or more into the jam nut slots and into the spherical nut slots if possible.
Visual examination of the support assemblies on August 22, 1979 confirmed that the above had been accomplished.
Item 339/79-39-04 is closed.
N&D 3800 required a revision to NAS 377, Installation of Pressurizer Support and Pressurizer. Review of Revision 4 of NAS 377, dated July 30, 1979 revealed that it had been annotated to denote a change pending because of the N&D. Review of the specification did reveal, however, an error in reference to the appropriate step to be changed by the N&D regarding the lower support assemblies.
When discussed with Stone and Webster FQC. a commitment was made to correct the references to NAS 377. The inspector had no further questions.
Calibration Procedures for Miscellaneous Equipment (338/78-37-02 and c.
339/78-32-02)
This open item involved development of calibration and/or preventive maintenance procedures for miscellaneous pieces of equipment. As of August 31, 1979 some seven instrument maintenance procedures had been written and approved.
It was acknowledged that others would be develop-ed if the need is identified. These items a closed.
.
1213 119
.
e
.
-3-
.
d.
Improvement in LER Coding (338/79-01-05)
LER 78-100/01T-1 was revised via No. 78-100/01X-1 on March 12, 1979 to revise cause code and subcode entries.
Item 338/79-01-05 is closed.
Lack of Specificity in LER Contect' (338/79-21-01)
e.
Tais open item concerned the lack of specific information in the
" Probable Consequences of Event" sections of Unit I LER's 79-30/03L-1 and 79-40/03L-1. Revised LER's were submitted July 2, 1979, to provide for more specific descriptions of probable consequences, thus this item is closed.
6.
Administrative Controls for the Startup Test Program - Unit 2 The post fuel loading (startup) test program format and administrative controls for governing its conduct were reviewed and compared to the commitments of FSAR Section 14, provisions of proposed Technical Specifi-cations, and recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.68.
Documents reviewed, bases for the inspection, and findings are discussed in the following
-
paragraphs.
a.
Test Program Content FSAR Sections 14.1.2.2 through 14.1.2.4 discuss the major phases of the startup program, namely precritical testing, initial criticality, and low power and power ascension testing.
The descriptions correspond to the recommendations of RG 1.68, Appendix A, paragraphs B, C, and D.
The inspector had no questions in this area.
b.
Organization The organization of personnel involved in the startup program is discussed in FSAR Sections 14.0 and 14.2.
Nuclear Power Station Quality Assurance Manual (NPSQAM) Section 11, " Test Control,"
administrative procedure 101.0, "Preoperational and Startup Testing Programs," and startup test procedure 2-SU-1, " Nuclear Steam Supply System Startup Sequence and Administration," define VEPCO's controls for the Unit 2 test program. No discrepancies were noted.
c.
Program Administration Section 11.5.2 of the NPSQAM defines controls for such activities as procedure usage and changes, logging of test data, documentation of deficiencies and resolutions, evaluation of results, and scheduling of tests. Requirements and commitments for these functions are given in proposed Technical Specifications 6.8.1 through 6.8.3 and FSAR Section 14.1.2, 14.1.2.3, and 14.1.2.4.
Controls for the above activities appeared to be well defined.
.
1213 120
.
. _ _ _..
-4-
.
d.
Document Control FSAR Section 14.0, Technical Specifications 6.8.1, 6.8.2 and 6.8.3, and Section 17.2.6 of VEP-1-A, " Topical Report, Quality Assurance Program, Operations Phase," define requirements and commitments for such activities as procedure development, approval, issuance, and revision. Comparision of NPSQAM Sections 5.4.0, 5.5.2, 5.5.4, 6.5.1.2.a, and 11.5.2.3 and ADM 101.0 to the above provisions revealed that controls had been defined and responsibilities assigned to assure their implementation. There were no questions in this area.
Control of Test and Measurement Equipment e.
Section 17.2.12 of VEP-1-A defines the general controls to be implemented for control of test and measurement equipment.
FSAR Section 14.1.2.4 specifies that test procedures will identify instrumentation to be used and require verification of their calibra-tion. Review of NPSQAM Sections 12.5 and 13.5 revealed that controls exist for identification, storage, and issuance of equipment. There were no questions in this area.
Implementation of this program was previously inspected as documented in IE Report 50-339/79-11, Details paragraph 15.
7.
Startup Test Procedure Format Licensee controls for startup test procedure format and content given in Section 5.5.8.15 and Section 11, page 18 (Startup Test Cover and Results Sheet) of the NPSQAM were reviewed and compared to the provisions of FSAR Section 14 and Appendix C to RG 1.68.
No discrepancies were identified.
8.
Scope of the Startup Test Program This review was in progress at the conclusion of the inspection period and will be discussed in a subsequent inspection report.
9.
Containment Electrical Penetrations - Potential for Degradation (Units 1 and 2)
On August 24, 1979, licensee personnel reported that it had been discussed that the Units 1 and 2 containmer.t electrical penetrations might not be protected from degradation due to overcurrent conditions by their respective overcurrent trip devices. This was reported as a prompt (twenty four hour notification ) LER on Unit 1 (79-104) on that date am under the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55(e) and 10 CFR 21 for Unit 2 on Augun 28. The discovery was made while performing a review prompted by an NRR letter of August 3, 1979 on the subject " Staff Fosition on Electrical Protection of Containment Penetrations for North Anna Unit 2."
The cause for this problem is that when the electrical protection of containment penetrations was originally analyzed, intermediate faults or 1213 121
.
.
.
-5-overloads slightly beyond the continuous rating of the penetration were not considered. Due to the time / current relationship of the existing protection scheme, an overcurrent condition beyond that of the penetration's rating will result in a breaker trip, but possibly after the penetration has been overloaded.
This could result in degradation of the seals at either end of the penetration through which the conductors pass, affecting the leak-tightness of the penetration. Licensee personnel noted that all Unit 1 electrical penetrations had been leak tested with satisfactory results during the April 1979 maintenance outage.
This problem will be inspected further and is identified as open items 338/79-34-01 and 339/79-46-01.
10.
IE Bulletin 79-13, Cracking in Feedwater-System Piping (Unit 2)
As discussed in IE Report 50-338/79-33 and 50-339/79-43, Details paragraph 7, VEPC0 elected to perform the examinations required of operating plants by this Bulletin on Unit 2 prior to operation of that Unit. Radiographic examination revealed five welds which could be interpreted to contain rejectable indications, thus these were repaired. Also, four welds were identified to have foreign material in or around them, making interpre-tation difficult.
Presence of the foreign materials was reported as a potentially significant construction deficiency in accordance with 10 CFR 50.55(e) on August 24, 1979. An indepth inspection of the examination program and its findings was conducted by another inspector August 30 and 31, 1979 and results reported in IE Report 50-339/79-44.
11.
Station Emergency Drill On August 23, 1978, an unannounced emergency drill was conducted per Section 7.1.2 of the station Emergency Plan, which requires an annual exercise to evaluate effectiveness of the Plan. This type of exercise is used to determine the operating staff's ability to classify and handle emergencies, determine the effectiveness of the station emergency organiza-tion in handling emergencies, cback communications with offsite agencies, and to verify adequacy of evacuauon and accountability procedures. The inspector observed the drill from the Units I and 2 control room in order to evaluate personnel responses within the scope of the drill scenario.
Members of plant management end QC personnel were stationed at various strategic locations in order to evaluate responses.
Local and state officials involved in emergency planning also observed the drill.
The exercise simulated dropping of a spent fuel assembly in the fuel building with rupture of all fuel pins. As analyzed in Section 15.4.2.4 of the FSAR, the assembly would have contained radioactivity levels requiring evacuation of portions of the plant, but not a total plant evacuation.
Responses by control room personnel appeared to be orderly. Immediately following completion of the exercise, plant management gathered for a preliminary critique. The inspector attended this meeting. Observations were given by each member of management. These were recorded and were compiled, along with critique checklists, for later review during an official meeting of the station Nuclear Safety and Operat.ing Committee.
1213 122
.
-6-
,
Most of the inspecte -s observations were encompassed by those of plant management.
In that weaknesses in emergency procedures and response techniques were identified and corrective actions planned, it appeared that the purposes of the drill had been accomplished. Station management was informed that the inspector had no further questions at that time.
12.
Plant Tours Tours of the selected plant areas conducted on August 22, 1979 and other dates during the inspection period in conjunction with other inspection activities. During the tours, the following items, as available, were observed:
a.
Fire Equipment Ope-ability and evidence of periodic inspection of fire suppression equipment b.
Housekeeping Minimal accumulations of debris and maintenance of required cleanli-ness levels in systems under or following testing.
c.
Equipment Preservation Maintenance of special preservative measures for installed equipment as applicable.
d.
Component Tagging Implementation and observance of equipment tagging for safety o-equipment protection.
e.
Communication Effectiveness of public address system in all areas coured.
f.
Equipment Controls Effectiveness of jurisdictional controls in precluding unauthorized work on systems turned over for initial operations or preoperational testing.
g.
Foreign Mr.terial Exclusion Maintenance of controls to assure systems which have been cleaned and flushed are not reopened to admit foreign material.
,
1213 123
,
.
_7 h.
Security Implementation of security provisions for both Units.
Within the above areas, no items of noncompliance or deviations were observed when compared to the applicable station programs and procedures.
13.
Fuel Storage Capacity Amendment 14 to the Unit 1 Technical Specifications was issued August 17, 1979, authorizing use of high density storage racks in the Units 1 and 2 spent fuel pool. The new racks will have a center-to-center spacing of fourteen (14) inches, allowing a maximum of 966 assemblies to be stored in the pool.
Installatica of the new high densi.cf racks was in progress at the conclusion of the inspection period. Tney will be used for storage of Unit I spent fuel, sciseduled for it's first refueling outage September 15, 1979.
14.
Updated LER Review - Unit 1 The following revisions to Unit 1 LER's were reviewed.
The revisions prinarily involved editorial changes and there were no questions on them by the inspector:
a.
78-026/99X1 dated November 14, 1978, b.
78-080/03X1 dated February 16, 1979, 78-090/03X1 dated July 2, 1979, and, c.
d.
79-032/03X-1 dated July 12, 1979.
1213 124
.