IR 05000348/1999003

Insp Repts 50-348/99-03 & 50-364/99-03 on 990404-0515.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Operations,Maint & Engineering

ML20196A354
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	06/10/1999
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20196A346	List: IR 05000348/1999003 ML20196A340
References
50-348-99-03, 50-348-99-3, 50-364-99-03, 50-364-99-3, NUDOCS 9906220200
Download: ML20196A354 (9)

Text

,

-9 l

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGIONll

,

Docket Nos.:

50-348 and 50-364 License Nos.:

NPF-2 and NPF-8 Report Nos.:

50-348/99-03 and 50-364/99-03 Licensee:

Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.

Facility:

Farley Nuclear Plant, Units 1 and 2

.

Location:

7388 N. State Highway 95 Columbia, AL 36319 Dates:

April 4 - May 15,1999

'

inspectors:

T. P. Johnson, Senior Resident inspector J. H. Bartley, Resident inspector R. K. Caldwell, Resident inspector D. B. Forbes, Radiation Protection Inspector (Sections R1.1, R1.2)

C. W. Rapp, Senior Project Engineer (Section E3.1)

N. Merriweather, Senior Reactor inspector (Section E3.1)

R. Chou, Reactor Inspector (Section E8.3)

l Approved by:

Pierce H. Skinner, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects j

l i

'

l Enclosure 9906220200 990610 r

PDR ADOCK 05000348 G

PDR

,,

'l u

-

u

f

.

'.,

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY FARLEY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS 1 and 2 Nuclear Regulatory Commission inspection Report 50-348,364/99-03 This integrated inspection to assure public health and safety included aspects of licensee operations, maintenance, engineering, and plant support. The report covers six weeks of resident inspection from April 4 to May 15,1999. In addition, the report includes regional announced inspections of the Year 2000 readiness; and, radwaste, transportation, effluents, and l

. chemistry programs.

Operations The licensee took conservative and appropriate actions during the observed e

evolution of placing the capacitor bank in service in the high voltage switch yard l

(Section 01.3).

e The inspector concluded that the safety evaluation of manual operator action to maintain PRF. system operability was not thorough in that the normal SFO duties may have prevented the SFO from fulfilling this function (Section 01.4).

Maintenance e'

The implementation of 12 week rolling schedules for on-line maintenance has resulted in timely completion of most work items. As a result, the maintenance backlog has been trending downward (Section M1.2).

Enoineerino The review and incorporation of Operating Experience Reports into plant e

procedures and programs have improved (Section E8.1).

l

i

t

-

)

r

.

.

.-

REPORT DETAILS l

Summary of Plant Status J

- At the beginning of this reporting period, Unit 1 was operating at full power and had been on line since December 29,1998. The unit continued to operate at or near full power for the period.

l.

At the beginning of this reporting period, Unit 2 was operating at 50% reactor power and had been on line since May 17,1998. During the period, the unit was returned to full power on May 9,1999. On May 12, the unit load was reduced to 94% power when the

.

' number four governor valve closed due to a failed electronic card in the digital electro-i j

hydraulic (DEH) system. The card was replaced and the unit was returned to 100%

L power later that day.

1. Operations

01 Conduct of Operations

'

01.1 Routine Observations of Control Room Operations (71707. 40500. and 93702)

!

The inspectors observed that control room operators consistently demonstrated a high level of awareness of existing plant conditions and ongoing plant activities.

..

Attentiveness to annunciator alarms and plant conditions was prompt as demonstrated l

by response to the unexpected closure of the Unit 2 number four turbine governor valve.

The inspectors also observed that shift personnel maintained proper focus, good coordination, and effective oversight during the Unit 2 retum to 100% power following six weeks at 50% power. Operators were also attentive in monitoring and tracking the l

indications of a Unit i fuel leak and a small 18 steam generator (SG) tube leak.

01.2 System Operator (SO) Tours (71707)

During the period, the inspectors observed the conduct of selected periodic SO tours and log keeping in the auxiliary building, turbine building, and outside areas. Overall, the tours were well performed and the SO effectively monitored equipment status.

01.3 Hiah Voltaae Switch Yard (HVSY) Evolutions (71707)

!

[

On April 14, the inspectors observed licensee testing and placing in service of a new

'

capacitor bank for the HVSY. The licensee considered this activity an infrequent evolution.~ Appropriate briefings, management oversight, and electrical personnel involvement were noted as directed by procedure FNP-0-AP-92, Infrequently Performed Tests or Evolutions, Revision (Rev.) 4. When the capacitor was initially placed in (

service, the HVSY feeder breakers sensed a high current condition. Because the pre-l Job briefing had addressed contingency plans and control room actions for abnormal

,

conditions, no loss of power to safety components occurred. The capacitor bank was placed in service with no further problems. The inspectors concluded that the licensee took conservative and appropriate actions during performance of this activity.

m

,

01.4 Penetration Room Filtration (PRF) Operability Determination (71707)

On March 29, the 1A charging pump room and hallway doors were opened to reduce airborne radioactivity in the room. Because the hallway door was a PRF boundary, an administrative LCO was written and the Shift Foreman-Operating (SFO) was assigned to ensure that the hallway door was shut if a PRF system actuation should occur. The inspectors reviewed procedure FNP-0-SOP-0, General Instructions for Operations Personnel, Rev. 57, and noted that the guidance for manual operator actions was not specific. The inspectors discussed the guidance with the Operations Manager who determined that having the SFO responsible for securing the hallway door did not meet the intent of procedure FNP-0-SOP-0. The procedure was subsequently revised to include clearer guidance regarding responsibility for manually closing the hallway door to ensure PRF system functionality. The licensee determined that, in this case, the PRF system operability was maintained.

The inspector concluded that the safety evaluation associated with this manual operator action to maintain PRF system operability was not thorough in that the normal SFO duties may have prevented the SFO from fulfilling this function. The licensee L

acknowledged this issue and clarified the guidance. During a Unit 2 PRF door replacement on May 17, the licensee demonstrated more attention to the system operability evaluation and a dedicated individual was posted locally to perform this function.

O2 Operational Status of Facilities and Equipment O2.1 General Tours and inspections of Safety Systems (71707)

General tours of safety-related areas were performed by the inspectors to observe the physical condition of plant equipment and structures. The inspectors verified the operability of selected, risk significant safety systems and equipment including containment isolation functions, power distribution, service water, and control room emergency ventilation. The systems were verified to be properly aligned and maintained.

II. Maintenance M1 Conduct of Maintenance M1.1 General Comments (61726 and 62707)

The inspectors witnessed or reviewed portions of the selected maintenance and surveillance test activities including control room ventilation testing, service water pump maintenance, and steam generator blowdown line repair. For those maintenance and surveillance activities observed or reviewed, the inspectors determined that the activities

]

were conducted in a satisfactory manner.

,

,

m

.

I

'

'

M1.2 Eauioment Outaae Schedulina (62707)

The inspector reviewed the licensee's on-line maintenance program as defined in procedure FNP-0-ACP-52.1, Guidelines For Scheduling On-line Maintenance, Rev. 8.

This process includes 12 week rolling schedules; planning prior to schedule implementation; work week coordinators from the Operations, Maintenance, and

! Planning organizations; and, post work week completion critiques. - The inspector observed several meetings during the process, reviewed schedules, observed coordinator's implementation, and assessed program performance. The program has been in place for several months to date, and has resulted in timely completion of most work items.' As a result, the maintenance backlog has been trending downward.

Ill Engineerina

,

E3

. Engineering Procedures and Documentation -

E3.1 Unit 1 Cycle 16 Startuo Test Report (37551 and 90713)

The inspector reviewed the Unit 1 Cycle 16 Startup Test Report, NEL-99-0170. The

!

report was complete, accurate, and all acceptance criteria were met. The inspector

. concluded that the licensee met the Technical Specification administrative reporting and core technical requirements, and the requirements as stated in the Unit 1 Cycle 16 Core Operating Limits Report.

t

'

!

E3.2 Year 2000 (Y2K) Readiness Proaram Review (Tl 2515/141)

!

' The staff conducted an abbreviated review of Y2K activities and documentation using -

L

Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515/141, " Review of Year 2000 (Y2K) Readinest, of Computer Systems at Nuclear Power Plants." The review addressed aspects of Y2K management planning, documentation, implementation planning, initial assessment,

detailed assessment, remediation activities, Y2K testing and validation, notification l

activities, and contingency planning. The reviewers used NEl/NUSMG 97-07, " Nuclear

'

Utility Year 2000 Readiness," and NEl/NUSMG 98-07, " Nuclear Utility Year 2000 Readiness Contingency Planning," as the primary references for this review. Based on this abbreviated review, the inspectors did not identify any issues that could affect Y2K readiness.

. Specific conclusions regarding the Y2K readiness of the facility are not included in this

report. The results of this review will be combined with the results of reviews of other I

licensees in a summary report to be issued by July 31,1999.

,

.

-

'

.

.

4'

l L

E8

. Miscellaneous Engineering issues E8.1 Operatina Exoerience (OE) Incorooration into Plant Proarams and Procedures (37551)

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's operating experience program and noted the OE

{

backlog had been reduced. Additionally, new Operating Experience Reports (OERs)

were routinely assessed within 60 days. Management was briefed on the assessment during routine Plant Operation Review Committee meetings. However, the delay in assessing NRC Information Notice 97-78 contributed to an operability review for the

,,'

PRF system that did not completely consider all of the effects of manual operator

act!ons.

E8.2 (Closed) Unresolved item (URl) 50-348. 364/97-05-07: Licensina Basis for PRF System Durina Post-LOCA Recirculation (92903)

After reviewing the licensing documentation for PRF, NRC determined that the licensing basis for PRF was to start on a safety injection (SI) signal as indicated in NUREG-

- 75/034, Safety Evaluation Report, Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant Units 1 and 2, dated May 2,1975. However, NRC also determined that the licensen was only required to analyze off site dose consequences for large' break LOCAs which would result in a Phase B signal. The current plant design started PRF on a Phase B signal. The licensee promptly modified the procedures which directed post-LOCA operation of PRF.

~ The inspectors reviewed the procedure changes and verified that they provided j

appropriate guidance.

In a letter dated September 12,1997, the licensee stated that the cause for PRF starting on an Phase B signal instead of a Si signal was due to conflicting statements in the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR). The licensee's failure to perform an

.

evaluation of these statements is a violation of the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

However, because of the low safety significance, this is a violation of minor significance

,

and is not subject to formal enforcement action.

j

' E8.3. -(Closed) URI 50-348/97-15-04: Adeauacy of Calculation No. SS-94-1-8751-001 (92903)

- The inspectors reviewed Revision 3 of the calculation which was in final approval.

During this review, the licensee stated that if the calculated support loads increased 10 percent or less then this increase was acceptable due to conservatism in the support design calculations. The inspectors accepted this statement because the licensee evaluated the supports with loads that increased greater than 10 percent and the results

were found to be acceptable. Based on this revision, the inspectors determined'that

..

calculation SS-94-1-8751-001 was adequate.

.

L

I

~

_

.

.

IV. Plant Suonort R1 Radiological Protection and Chemistry Controls R1.1 Tour of Radioloaical Protected Areas (86750. 71750)

During tours of the radiological protected areas,'the inspectors reviewed implementation

' of selected elements of the licensee's radiation protection program. The review included observation of radiological protection activities for control of radioactive material, including postings and labeling, and radioactive waste processing. The inspectors reviewed survey data of radioactive material storage areas. All radioactive material -

storage areas observed were appropriately posted to specify the radiological conditions.

Based on observations and independent radiation and contamination survey results, the inspector determined that the licensee was effectively labeling, controlling, and storing radioactive material.

Overall cleanliness of the RCA remained good. Plant personnel observed working in the RCA demonstrated appropriate knowledge and application of radiological control practices. Health physics technicians provided positive control and support of observed work activities in the RCA.

R1.2 Radioactive Effluent Monitorina (84750. 71750)

The inspectors toured relevant areas of the plant to determine the operational status of effluent monitors. Based on data obtained from logs, the inspectors determined monitors had been maintained at an average of 99 percent reliability and 93 percent availability in 1999. The inspectors observed the calibration of the Unit 1 air ejector radiation monitor.

' The air ejector radiation monitor calibration was performed in accordance with licensee procedures.

The inspector observed chemistry technicians sample and analyze primary coolant on Unit 1. Due to indications of a small fuel leak, the primary coolant was analyzed for fission product activity and Dose Equivalent lodine (DEI). Because the 1B steam generator continued to exhibit a small primary-to-secondary leak, secondary coolant was analyzed hr tritium activity. The main steam line Nitrogen-16 radiation monitor readings, analysis of gaseous activity samples at the air ejector, and the analysis of tritium activity all indicated a small primary-to-secondary leak of less than two gallons per day. The inspector concluded that the chemistry technicians were proficient, followed the sampling and analytical procedures, and that the licensee was sensitive to these Unit i steam generator and fuelleaks.

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's 1998 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report and 1998 Annual Effluent Release Report. Based on the report data, the inspectors determined that the environmental sampling and analysis frequencies had been met and the activity released from plant affluents has remained stable over the last several years. For gaseous and liquid effluent releases reviewed, the sample results

r

.

.

met the chemistry relcase permit procedure and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.

i S1 Conduct of Security and Safeguards Activities S1.1 Routine Observations of Plant Security Measures (71750)

The inspectors verified that portions of the site security program plan were being

properly implemented. Disabled vital area doors were properly controlled. Security

{

personnel activities observed during the inspection period were well performed. Site i

security systems were adequate to ensure physical protection of the plant.

FS Fire Protection Staff Training and Qualification F5.1 Fire Drills (71750)

During the period, the licensee conducted ecvers! fire drills to test the site fire brigade response. The drills were conducted, observed, and critiqued by Operations and Training personnel. The fire brigade's performance was self-evaluated as satisfactory.

Drill comments were discussed and documented appropriately.

,

i The inspectors observed several drills from both the scene and the control room and attended the post-drill critique. The inspector noted that the security guard designated to drive the fire equipment van was delayed until a relief individual could take the security

{

post. The licensee initiated programmatic changes to relieve the security guard and

)

improve response time. The inspector also noted that a brigade member bent a service water valve positioner feedback arm with his breathing apparatus. The licensee acknowledged this comment and took corrective actions. On May 4, another drill was run and the fire brigade responded quicker. The inspector concluded that the drills were a competent training tool.

V. Manaaement 'Weetinas X1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspectors presented the inspection results to members of licensee management at the conclusion of the inspection on May 14,1999. The licssee acknowledged the findings present.

The inspectors asked the licensee whether any materials examined during the inspection should be considered proprietary. No proprietary information was identified.

l

-

o

..-

J

Partial List of Persons Contacted

,

Licensee L

R. V. Badham, Safety Audit Engineering Review R. M. Coleman, Maintenance Manager

'

K. C. Dyar, Security Manager R. S. Fucich, Engineering Support Manager S.

Fulmer, Plant Training and Emergency Preparadness Manager L J. S. Gates, Administration Manager

' D. E. Grissette, Assistant General Manager - Operations

' J. R. Johnson, Operations Manager-D. H. Jones, SNC - Configuration Management Manager C. D. Nesbitt, Assistant General Manager - Plant Support L. M. Stinson, Plant General Manager - FNP G. S. Waymire, Technical Manager B. R. Yance, Plant Modification and Maintenance Support Manager Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, engineers, technicians, operators, mechanics, and electricians.-

List of Opened, Closed, and Discussed items Iygg item Number Description and Reference Closed

. URI 50-348,364/97-05-07 Licensing Basis for PRF SystemDuring Post-LOCA Recirculation (Section E8.2)

URI..

50-348/97-15-04 Adequacy of Calculation No.

SS-94-1-8751-001 (Section E8.3)

List of inspection Procedures (IP) Used IP 37551:~

. Onsite Engineering IP 40500:

Effectiveness of Licensee Controls in identifying, Resolving, and Prevent Problems

? iP 61726:

Surveillance Observations IP 62707:

Maintenance Observations IP 71707:

Plant Operation'

. IP 71750:

Plant Support Activities IP 84750:

Radioactive Waste Treatment,~ and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring IP 86750:

Solid Radwaste Management and Transportation of Radioactive Materials IP 90713:

Review of Periodic Reports IP 92903:

. Follow up - Engineering IP 93702:

Prompt Onsite Response to Events at Operating Power Reactors

, bl s