ML19256A038
| ML19256A038 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 09/19/1978 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256A036 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-338-78-21, 50-339-78-22, NUDOCS 7810230241 | |
| Download: ML19256A038 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000338/1978021
Text
UNITED sT ATEs
t ** " t G uq'c
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[(#
,,
'o
REGloN il
9(
$
ici M ARIETT A STREET, N.W.
I
"
's, h. s.-
,f
ATL ANT A. GEORGI A 30303
s, . . . . . ,
50-338/78-21 and 50-339/78-22
Report Nos.:
Docket Nos.:
50-338 and 50-339
License Nos.:
NPF-4 and CPPR-78
Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company
P
O. Box 26666
Richmond, Virginia 23261
North Anna Power Station, Units 1 and 2
Facility Name:
North Anna Power Station, Mineral, Virginia
Inspection at:
Inspection conducted:
July 17-28,1978
Inspector:
M. S. Kidd, Resident Inspector
7. d e
kNf/78
Approved by:
Date
R. C. Lewis, Chief
Reactor Projects Section No. 2
Reactor Operations and Nuclear
Support Branch
Insoection Summary
Inspection on July 17-28, 1978 (Recort Nos. 50-338/78-21 and 50-339/78-22)
Areas Inspected: Routine, resioent inspection of licensee event reports,
followup on IE Bulletins and Circulars, and tour of Unit 2.
Within the three areas inspected, one infraction involving late
Results:
reporting of licensee events on Unit 1 was identified (338/78-21-01) -
por:gra;::. 5. L.
.
~
~78/ 013 0 $Ly[
.
IE Rat. Nos. 50-338/78-21
and SD-339/78-22
d-
/M
Details I
Prepared by:
M. S. Kid:, Resident Inspector
Date
Reactor Projects Section No. 2
Reactor Operations and Nuclear
Support Branch
Dates of Inspection:
July 17-28,1978
Reviewed by: [. b-
W/#7$
R. C. Lekis, Chief
Date
'
Reactor Projects Section No. 2
Reactor Operations and Nuclear
Support Branch
1.
Persons Contacted
Virginia Electric and Power Com any (VEPCO)
B. R. Sylvia, Director, Nuclear Operations
- J. A. Ahladas, Station Manager
- W. R. Cartwright, Superintendent, Station Operations
- J. D. Kellams, Operations Supervisor
- L. O. Goodrich, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor
- R. P. Kinsey, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor
- D. L. Smith, Resident QC Engineer, Oper ations
- D. C. Woods, Woods, NRC Coordinator
- E. R. Smith, Jr., Acting Supervisor, Engineering Services
- D. M. Hopper, Health Physics Supervisor
- J. H. Harton, Chemistry Supervisor
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings
None inspected.
3.
Unresolved Items
None
4
Management Interview
A management interview was conducted July 28, 1978, with J. A. Ahladas,
Station Manager and other licensee employees (certain of them denoted in
paragraph 1) to discuss findings of the inspection.
Findings presented
The nature
in paragraphs 5 through 7 of these Details were discussed.
.
.
IE Rpt. Nos. 50-338/78-21
1-2
and 50-339/78-22
of the resident insoection program for Unit 2 and methods of relating
Licensee Event Reports and ether information for Unit 1 to NRC were
also discussed.
Findings of the plant tour of July 28, 1978 (paragraph 6), were
discussed with station management on July 31, 1978.
5.
Review of Licensee Event Reports (Unit 1)
a.
Written Report Review
ihe f ollowing thirty-day LERs were reviewed to determine whether
reporting requirements had been met. The report assessed the
event and identified the cause and corrective action was appro-
priate:
1.
LER 78-14, Letter number 224, dated April 25, 1978
2.
LER 78-16, Letter number 229, dated April 25, 1978
3.
LER 78-17, letter number 229, dated April 25, 1978
Except for the timeliness of these reports, which wiLL be
discussed below, no other discrepancies were noted.
b.
Written Report Review Plus Followup Onsite
In addition to performing a report review as defined in a. above,
site fotlowup was performed for these LERs to determine whether
corrective action specified had been taken, the Licensee had
reviewed the event, whether it involved an unreviewed safety
question or violation of regulations, or whether a corrected LER
had been submitted, if required:
1.
LER 78-13, Letter number 224, dated April 25, 1978. This
event involved the determination of low boron concentration
in the Unit i ref ueling water storage tank (RWST).
Stratification in the RWST resulted in a nonrepresentative
(Low) sample. Also, the refueling purification ion exchanger
resin had been replaced without proper flushing to borate the
recin prior to use. The latter demonstrated a proceducat
weakness and MCP 90.7, " Generic Procedure for Resin Addition
to ION Exchangers," was revised April 28, 1978, to reavire
chemistry personnel involvement in determining when an
.
IE Rpt. Nos. 50-33S/78-21
I-3
and 50-339/73-22
Following
exchanger is ready for use af ter resin changeout.
discussions on July 25, 1978, coerations personnel drafted
procedure, 1-OF-16.7, " Returning RPIX 1-RP-I-1 to
a new
Service Af ter Resin Addition," which will further assure
that the exchangers are adequately flushed and borated prior
to use after resin changeout.
This LER, due April 21, 1978, was not submitted within the
specified time.
This is discussed further below.
2.
LER 78 15, Letter number 229, dated April 25,1978 (due
April 22, 1978). This report concerned a leak on a threaded
connection on residual heat removal pump 1.A.
Discussions
with plant personnel revealed that the LER was in error in
that there is no casing vent on this pump.
The threaded
connection in cuestion was in the seal Leakoff Line.
Management stated during the exit interview that a corrected
report would be submitted to IE:II. The inspector had no
further questions on this LER.
c.
Timeliness of Written Reports
As noted in~ paragraphs a. and b. above, all five of the LERs reviewed
were dated (date signed in corporate of fice) later than the recuired
submittat date of 30 days after the event per Technical Specification 6.9.1.9 or 14 days per Specification 6.9.1.B.
An analysis of LERs
001 through 038 for 1978 revealed that eleven of the thirty-eight
were signed Late, with a range of one to four days, and an average
Licensee personnel were informed that this appeared
of 2.5 days.
to be in noncompliance (Inf raction 78-21-01) with Technical Specifications 6.9.1.8 and 6.9.1.9 which require that reports be
submitted to NRC within 14 days and 30 days of event occurrence,
Licensee representatives stated that this would be
respectively.
investigated and the preparation and review system streamlineo.
6.
IE Circulars 77-16 (Units 1 and 2)
IE Circular 77-16, " Emergency Diesel Generator Electrical Trio Lock-
Features," was discussed with licensee personnel to verify that
Out
it was received by station management, a review for applicability to
Units 1 and 2 had been performed, and appropriate corrective action
had oeen taken. The IEC was reviewed by the Station Nuclear Safety
and Operating Committee (SNSOC) on two occasions, the latter on
February 13, 1975, at which time the results of an Engineering Study
The study stated that preoperational testing of
(77-7) was reviewed.
-
-
.
.
1
I-4
IE Rpt Nos. 50-33B/78-21
and 5D-339/78-22
Unit 1 had demonstrated that non-essential trips were bypassed upon
emergency start and that the surveillance procedure (Pt. 83.1 and 2)
would reperform the testing every eighteen months per Technical
The inspector's review of preep
Specification 4.8.1.1.2c.3.c).
testing per 1-PO-70 and draft Procedure 1-PT-83.1 confirmed the findings
In that Unit 2 procedures wiLL be patterned after Unit 1,
of the study.
there were no questions or comments.
7.
IE eulletin 78-05 (Units 1 and 2)
Licensee actions on this IEB, " Malfunctioning of Circuit Breaker
105X," were
Auxiliary Contact Mechanise-General Electric Model CThe VEPCO response for
reviewed and discusseo for Units 1 and 2.
31,1978 (Serial No. 226A) states that no GE model
Unit 1, dated May
CR105X auxiliary contact mechanisms are in use or in inventory for
As noted in the letter 22 a of June 7,1978, a review
that unit.
for Unit 2 had not been completed, but would be by August 1,1978.
Licensee personnel determined that no contacts of the above type were
used in Unit 1 through review of print' and other documents, inspection
Station findings
in the field, and the assistance of Stoc.e and Webster.
27, 1978. Licensee repre-
for Unit 1 were reviewed by the SNSOC May
sentatives were informed that there were no questions on Unit 1 but
that the IEB would remain open for Unit 2 pending completion of their
review (Item 78-22-01).
8.
Plant Tour (Uni
2)_
The Unit 2 containment building was toured July 28, 1978. Housekeeping
Equipment controls
was observed to be in order, with continuous upkeep.
via tagging of ecuioment turned over to Advisory Operations (S&W) was
Attempts to protect installed instrumentation were visible;
observed.
Security measures were in effect
no damaged instruments were observed.
A random selection of
at the interfaces of Units 1 and 2 observed.
portable fire extinguishers revealed them to have current inspection
dates. No discrepancies were noted.