IR 05000348/1980011
| ML19323F434 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 04/18/1980 |
| From: | Bradford W, Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19323F431 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-80-11, 50-364-80-07, 50-364-80-7, NUDOCS 8005290023 | |
| Download: ML19323F434 (4) | |
Text
_ _
j#" **%
%
UN11 ED STATES (v) %
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION H
o
REGION 11 E
f g
101 MARIETTA ST N.W., SUITE 3100
%,*****g'#
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 o
Report Nos. 50-348/80-11 and 50-364/80-07 Licensee: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street Birmingham, AL 35202 Facility Name: Farley Docket Nos. 50-348 and 50-364 License Nos. NPF-2 and CPPR-86 Inspection at Farley te near Dothan, Alabama 447(u b
[D Inspector:
i w
W. H. Bradford g
Date Signed Approved by:
/AM/
W/
[d R. D. Marfiti, Section Chief, RONS Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on March 28, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine, announced inspection involved 104 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of unit no. 1 plant operation, Plant security unit no. 2 plant tour, unit no. 2 preoperational startup listing and emergency planning.
Results Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
>
.
h s
I
<
l
,
8005290O M
_
_
.
_ _. _ _.
I t
a
l
,
DETAILS
-
,
1.
Persons Contacted
'
Licensee Employees W. G. Hariston, Plant Manager J. D. Woodard, Assistant Plant Manager W. D. Shipman, Maintenance Superintendent Dave Morey, Operations Superintendent R. S. Hill, Operations Supervisor R. W. McMracken, Technical Superintendent K. W. Kale, QA Engineer H. M. McDelland, Plant Engineer R. M. Coleman, Supervisor Engineering D. E. Mansfield, Startup Superintendent Unit No. 2 J. A. Mooney, APLO Consrtuction Project Manager R. E. Hollands, QA Supervisor (Unit No.2)
Other licensee employees contacted included shift supervisor, shift forman, plant operators, technician and Office personnel.
Other Organization S. M. Hall, Westinghouse Startup Manager and certain Westinghouse startup Engineers.
2.
Management Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized during management interviews on March 14 and 28, 1980 with the Plant Manager and selected members of his staff. The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Plant Operation The inspector reviewed plant operation to ascertain conformance with regu-latory requirements, technical specification and Administrative Procedure No. 16, " Conduct of Operation - Operation Group". Station logs, such as the shift supervisor, shift foreman, control room operators, shift turnover, the out of service equipment log, night order log book, and the limited condition of operation log were reviewed. The inspector conducted tours of selected areas of the plant which included portions of the auxiliary building l
l
,
_
_
_- _. _ _ _...... ~
__
.~ - -..._. _._, _ m <-
.
_
J
+
.
-2-
,
diesel generator building, and the turbine building. Observations were made of plant operations, monitoring instrumentation, radiation controls, fluid leaks, piping vibration, pipe hangers, certain valve positions, housekeeping, fire hazards, and equipment tagged out of service for main-
'
tenance. Discussions were held with plant operators throughout the plant concerning certain alarm functions and plant operations.
Within the areas inspected no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
]
6.
Plant Security
,
The inspector verified that physical barriers were intact and that gates into the protected areas were closed and locked if not attended, that doors into vital areas were closed and locked or attended, and that isolation zones were free of visual obstruction.
.
The inspector verified that access into protected areas was controlled, that person and packages were identified and authorized prior to entry into protected areas, and that all person, packages and vehicles were searched prior to entry in accordance with regulatory requirements and security procedures.
'
Within the areas inspected, no deviations or items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Plant Tour - Unit No. 2
.
The inspector conducted tours of the Farley Unit No. 2 facility to determine
,
the following:
That welding, burning and cutting in areas turned over to operations a.
had adequate fire protection and that protective measures for equipment in the area had been initiated.
b.
Miat fire protection equipment had not been damaged and that periodic inspection had been performed.
c.
Housekeeping practices had been initiated and were observed.
d.
A method had been initiated for equipment preservation and that an equipment tagging procedure was being carried out on equipment not
,
undergoing testing.
-
That installed instrumentation was protected and had not been abused.
-
e.
f.
That cable pulling activities appeared to be correct and that there
was no cable damage during the cable pulling activities.
~
i i
I l
., - -,,,
-
_ _ <
_ _ -
.
. - - - -.
- -.--.-.----
-
- - -
- - - - =... -.
... -.
-;
o
r-3-s
.
g.
That openings into systems were protected and that cleanliness control was observed.
h.
That deficiencies identified during testing were eatered on a control punch list.
Within the areas inspected no items of noncompliance were observed.
8.
Preoperational Startup Testing The inspector observed a portion of the following preoperational tests.
052-5-009, " Boron Injection Preoperational Test" a.
b.
016-5-003, " Component Cooling System Preoperational Test" 036-5-004, " Auxiliary Feedwater Pump (Motor Driven) Preoperational c.
Test" The completed test data for the above tests was reviewed by the inspector.
The inspector verified that the preoperational testing was conducted in accordance with approved procedures, that an approved test procedure was used by personnel conducting the test, that test equipment had been installed and calibrated, that test data was collected and recorded properly, and that test personnel were qualified to conduct the test.
Within the areas inspected no items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
Emergency Planning The inspector attended the NRR Emergency Planning Review Team meeting which was held on March 25 through March 27, 1980. The review team met with j
licensee officials and local Civil Defense officials at Dothan, Alabama, j
Ashford, Alabama, and Blakely, Georgia. A public meeting was conducted from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. on March 27, 1980 at the National Guard Armory in Ashford, Alabama.
.
i
-
i