IR 05000348/1986027
| ML20207P241 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1987 |
| From: | Brian Bonser, Bradford W, Dance H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207P237 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-86-27, 50-364-86-27, NUDOCS 8701150284 | |
| Download: ML20207P241 (7) | |
Text
-
'
'
.
m
%-' UNITED CTATES
[m 449'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION il'
[ I-
[
-
n g
j
<. 10) MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
't
-)
'f ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
'g*****/
.
,
'
,
,
..
,
,
-,.
,
.
'.,
-#
s Report Nos.: 50-348/86-27 and 50-364/86-27
,
i Licensee: Alabama Power Company
-
-
'
600 North 18th Street
.
Birmingham, AL 35291
',
'
-
Docket Nos.:
50-348 and 50-364
' License Nos.: NPF-2 and NPF-8 Facility name: Farley 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: November 11 - December 10, 1986 Inspection at Farle site near Dothan, Alabama
/!f!I7 Inspecto's:
f)4'
Le W.
Bradford Date Signed
'
yg J/MA-hh
B. R. Bonser Date Signed
'
/ !/>
Approved by:
wm H. C. Dan ~ce, Section Chief Date Signed
/* Division of Reactor Projects SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection included monthly surveillance observation, monthly maintenance observation, operational safety verification, review of design changes and modifications, plant startup from refueling, I&E Bulletin 86-03, and licensee events.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
hb Q
.
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Licensee Employees Contacted J. D. Woodard, General Plant Manager D. N. Morey, Assistant General Plant Manager -
W. D. Shipman, Assistant General Plant Manager R. D. Hill, Operations Manager C. D. Nesbitt, Technical Manager R. G. Berryhill, Systems Performance and Planning Manager
,
L. A. Ward, Maintenance Manager L. W. Enfinger, Administrative Manager J. E. Odom,. Operations Unit Supervisor B. W. Vanlandingham, Operations Unit Supervisor T. H. Esteve, Planning Supervisor J. B. Hudspeth, Document Control Supervisor L. K. Jones, Material Supervisor R. H. Marlow, Technical Supervisor L. M. Stinson, Plant Modification Manager J. K. Osterholtz Supervisor, Safety Audit Engineering Review Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operations personnel, maintenance and I&C personnel, security force members, and office personnel.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized during management interviews throughout the report period and on December 11, 1986, with the plant manager and selected members of his staff. The inspection findings were discussed in detail. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any material reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (92702)
(Closed) Violation 348,364/86-11-01, Failure to Comply with Administrative Procedure in that flammable liquids were found stored and unattended in the hot machine shop located in the Auxiliary building. The inspectors reviewed and verified the corrective actions stated in Alabama Power Company's letter of August 5, 1986. This item is closed.
4.
Konthly Surveillance Observation (61726)
The inspectors observed and reviewed technical specification required surveillance testing and verified that testing was performed in accordance with adequate procedures; that test instrumentation was calibrated; that limiting conditions were met; that test results met acceptance criteria and
- -. -
-
- -
___
.
..
.
.
were reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test; that any deficiencies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management personnel; and that personnel conducting the tests were qualified.
The inspector witnessed / reviewed portions of the following test activities:
STP-31.0 - Motor Operated Valve Power Isolation Verification STP-22.18 - Auxiliary Feed Automatic Valve Verification STP-9.0 RCS Leakage
-
STP-30.0 - Hot Shutdown Panel Instrumentation Channel Check Main Control Room Remote Valve Verification STP-71.0
-
STP-27.2 - Onsite A.C. Distribution Auxiliary Building D.C. Distribution STP-27.3
-
STP-1.0
- Operations Daily and Shift Performance Requirements STP-16.8 - Containment Spray Pump 1B Monthly Inservice Test Charging Pump 18 Annual Inservice Test STP-4.5
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Monthly. Maintenance Observation (62703)
Station maintenance activities of safety-related systems and components were observed / reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory guides, industry codes and standards, and were in conformance with technical specifications.
The following items were considered during the review: limiting conditions for operations were met while components or systems were removed from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiating the work; activities were accomplished using approved procedures and were inspected as appli-cable; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior to
,
l returning components or systems to service; quality control records were maintained;. activities were accomplished by qualified personnel; parts and
materials were properly certified; radiological controls were implemented; i
and fire prevention controls were implemented. The following maintenance activities were observed / reviewed:
2B charging pump Unit I reactor vessel flange seal area Unit I hydraulic and mechanical snubber testing l
Unit IC reactor coolant pump #1 seal leak repair
.
Airline Testing On Unit 1 MSIV's
!
!
No violations or deviations were identified.
i
!
_--
- - -
.
.
.
6.
Operational Safety Verification (71707)
The inspectors observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the report period.
The inspectors verified the operability of selected emergency systems, reviewed tagout records, and verified proper return to service of affected components. Tours of the auxiliary, diesel, and turbine building and service water.. structure were conducted to observe plant equipment conditions, including fluid leaks and excessive vibrations. The inspector verified compliance with selected Limiting Conditions for Operations (LCO)
and results of selected surveillance tests.
The verifications were accomp1f shed by direct observation of monitoring instrumentation, valve
. positions, switch positions, accessible hydraulic snubbers, and review of completed logs, records, and chemistry results. The licensee's compliance with LCO action statements were reviewed as events occurred.
The inspectors routinely attended meetings with certain licensee management and observed various shift turnovers between shift supervisor, shift foremen and licensed operators.
These meetings and discussions provided a daily status of plant operations, maintenance, and testing activities in progress, as well as discussions of significant problems.
The inspectors verified _ by observation and interviews with' security force members that measures taken to assure the physical protection of the facility met current requirements. Areas inspected included the organiza-tion of the security force; the establishment and maintenance of gates, doors, and isolation zones; that access control and badging were proper; and procedures were followed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Licensee Event Reports The following Licensee Event Reports (LERs) were reviewed for potential generic problems to determine trends, to determine whether information included in the report meets the NRC reporting requirements and to consider whether the corrective action discussed in the report appears appropriate.
Licensee action, with respect to selected reports, were reviewed to verify
.
that the event had been reviewed and evaluated by the licensee; that corrective action was taken by the licensee; and that safety limits, limiting safety setting and LCOs were not exceeded. The inspector examined selected incidents reports, logs and records and interviewed selected
'
personnel. The following reports are considered closed:
,
Unit 1 LERs Procedural inadequacy results in the actuation of the 86-10
-
,
[
penetration room filtration system
s
-,
-
%y-
-
, - - - -
...-r--r,,-
.
.,m_,-,,.
,.... -, _ _., - -, -,,. -,., - - - - -, - - - - - - - - _ -. -
.
--
..
.
.
4
..
L 86-11 - Control room and computer room HVAC inadvertent actuation Reactor trip and main steam isolation initiated by failed 86-15
-
printed circuit card Steam gGenerator tube plugging 86-19
-
Unit 2 LERs 86-08 - Technical specification action statements not met for inoperable fire door.
,
Both trains of control room emergency air cleanup system 86-11
-
inoperable due to both trains of Unit I service water being secured.
The inspector had no further questions.
8.
Design Changes and Modifications (37700)
Station design changes to safety related systems or components were reviewed to verify the following: (1) the changes had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the Technical Specifications and 10 CFR 50.59; (2) the reviews were technically adequate; (3) the design changes are controlled by established procedures; (4) post modification testing was required; (5) the testing was sufficient to adequately demonstrate the operability of the system; (6) test results were reviewed and evaluated; and (7) that lif ted
.
leads and jumpers are controlled in accordance with section 6 of the
'
Technical Specifications.
Unit I and Unit 2 reactor vessel level measurement system - reactor
-
vessel modifications Unit I charging pumps piping modifications
-
Unit I environmental qualification inspections of qualified motor
-
operated valve operators (MOV) per IEN-86-02 Unit 1 and Unit 2 SPDS hardware installation
-
-
Unit I containment spray check valve test line installation Unit I cooling of 7300 process cabinets
-
Service water 125V DC batteries
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
_ _ _ _
- - -
. -
- -
_
_
-
__
.
.
9.
Plant Startup From Refueling (71711)
The inspectors reviewed and/or inspected various systems and components to ascertain whether the systems / component which had been disturbed during the refueling outage had been properly returned to service and had been properly tested. System Operating Procedures were reviewed and inspected to verify that proper documentation was in place which indicates that valve line up had been made, independent verification had been completed and documented, that locked valves had been positioned and ' verified to be locked, and that startup activities had been conducted in accordance with the requirements of the technical specifications.
The following systems were reviewed:
Reactor Coolant System - System Operating Procedure (SOP) 1.1A RCS Pressure Relief System - S0P 1.2A RHR System - S0P 7.0A Safety Injection System - High Head Injection - SOP 9.0A Containment Air Cooling Systems - S0P 12.1A Auxiliary Feedwater System - SOP 22.0A Unit 4160 volt power system 12Vdc power system No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
IEB 86-03, Potential Failure of Multiple ECCS Pumps Due to Single Failure of Air-Operated Valve in Minimum Flow Recirculation Line (92703)
The licensee responded to IEB-86-03 in a letter dated November 12, 1986.
The licensee stated that Farley Units 1 and 2 were not vulnerable to single-failure of the ECCS pump minimum flow recirculation line. There are no air operated valves associated with the charging pump miniflow alignment.
Each charging pump is equipped with a motor operated miniflow valve powered from the
"A" train electrically.
These valves are normally open.
In addition there is a common miniflow isolation valve which is powered from the
"B" train electrically.
This valve can isolate all three miniflow valves on each unit.
This valve is normally open.
These miniflow valves are only operated to the closed position by procedure.
Each RHR pump has a separate miniflow bypass valve.
Each miniflow motor operated valve is electrically powered from the same electrical train as the pump.
These MOVs are controlled automatically by a flow switch in the discharge line of the related pump. The containment spray pumps for each train are provided with a manually operated miniflow valve which is locked open by procedure.
This item is closed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
11. Effluents (84723, 84724)
Technical Specification 6.9.1.8 requires the licenses to submit within 60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year, routine radioactive effluent release reports covering the operation of the unit during the previous six
'
....
months of. operation. A regional inspection reviewed the Semiannual Radio-logical Release Report for the period July I through December 31, 1985,.
and January 1 through June 30, 1986. The effluent release data summarized on the table below was obtained from current and previous Semiannual-Effluent Release Reports:
TABLE - EFFLUENT RELEASE SUMMARY OF FARLEY UNITS 1 AND 2 Liquids (Curies)
Calendar Fission and Year Activation Products Tritium 1984 1.50 E-1 7.79 E+2 1985 1.05 E-1 1.10 E+3 1986 9.62 E-2 7.91 E+2
(1st Half)
Gases (Curies)
Calendar Fission and Year Activation Products Iodine Tritium 1984 7.72 E+3 7.22 E-3 2.71 E+2 1985 2.37 E+3 5.84 E-3 4.70 E+2 1986 1.72 E+3 9.31 E-4 1.07 E+2 (1st Half)
In reviewing the reports, the inspector noted the facility had no unplanned, abnormal releases during the last half of 1985 or the first half of 1986.
No violations or deviations were identified.