ML19274D761
| ML19274D761 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 01/04/1979 |
| From: | Madsen G, Verduzco G, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19274D757 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-78-21, 50-368-78-28, NUDOCS 7902260022 | |
| Download: ML19274D761 (17) | |
See also: IR 05000313/1978021
Text
.
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0:@lISSION
OFFICE OF IllSPECTION AtlD EllFORCEMEllT
REGIO:1 IV
Report flos. 50-313/78-21
50-368/78-28
Docket Nos. 50-313
Lic;nse No. DPR-51
50-368
Construction Permit No. CPPR-89/
Facility Operating License llPF-6
Licensee:
Arkansas Power and Light Company
P. O. Box 551
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203
Facility Name: Arkansas fluclear One (Af!0), Unit !!os.1 and 2
Inspection At: Afl0 Site, Russellville, Arkansas
Inspection Condu ted: November 20 - December 17, 1978
Inspectors:
/ # '[ N d'l C-s ~.
9'
' 9"
-
T. F. Westerman, Reactor Inspector
Date
ell.buduuo
3/l mi
G. H. Verduzco,Jeactor Inspector
Da e
'
W.
Q/M
/k/77
h. W. Dickerson, Reactor Inspector
vat 6
h
(4 79
E. A. Cupp, R(attor Inspector
Dat6
d&21 J,>w/J
fM79
h. 6. Spangler',T/ReacAor Inspector
Fat 6
Approved By:
@2hd'v-
//Y!79
,G. L. fladsen, Chief, Reactor Operations and
Date
Nuc1 car Support Branch
geozz p F
.
.
_2_
Inspection Summary
Inspection during period of November 20 through December 17,1978 (Report
No. 50-313/ 78-21
Areas Inspected: Routine, cnnounced inspection of plant operations; design,
design changes and modifications; follow up on previous unresolved items;
and independent inspection effort. The inspection involved 99 inspector-hours
on-site by four NRC inspectors.
Results: Within the four areas inspected, one item of noncompliance was
identified relative to changes to procedures (paragraph 9, Infraction).
Inspection during period of November 20 through December 17, 1978 (Report
No. 50-368/78-28)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of design, design changes and
modifications; preparation for Operating License issuance; witness of initial
criticality; low power physics testing; Technical Specification required
calibration; non-Technical Specification required calibrations; and
independent inspection effort.
The inspection involved 74 inspector-hours
by three NRC inspectors and 187 hours0.00216 days <br />0.0519 hours <br />3.091931e-4 weeks <br />7.11535e-5 months <br /> by the resident inspector.
Resul ts: Within the seven areas inspected, three items of noncompliance were
identified relative to surveillance testing (paragraph 11.b(2) - two Infractions),
and calibration records (paragraph 8 - Deficiency).
,
t
..
.-
-3-
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Arkansas Power & Light Company Employees
J. P. O'Hanlon, ANO Plant Manager
G. H. Miller, Acting AN0 Plant Manager
L. Alexander, QC Engineer
J. R. Anderson, Assistant Production Startup Supervisor
B. A. Baker, ANO-2 Operations Supervisor
T. N. Cogburn, Nuclear Engineer
E. C. Ewing, Production Startup Supervisor
D. R. Hamblin, QC Engineer
T. Holcomb, Scheduler
P. Jones, Maintenance Supervisor
S. M. Strasner, QC Technician
B. A. Terwilliger, Supervisor Plant Operations
J. Robertson, ANO-1 Operations Supervisor
S. Petzel, Licensing Engineer
D. Williams, Licensing Manager
F. Foster, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor
M. Stroud, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor
G. Bruss, Shift Supervisor (Unit 2)
R. Weaver, Shift Supervisor (Unit 2)
L. Bell, Shift Supervisor (Unit 2)
Roark, Assistant Electrical Supervisor
n.
J. Lowman, Assistant I&C Supervisor
R. Elder, I&C Supervisor
R. Tucker, Assistant I&C Supervisor
R. Turner, Assistant I&C Supervisor
J. Waxenfeller, Assistant I&C Supervisor
J. McWilliams, Planning & Scheduling Supervisor
D. Hamblin, QC Inspector
R. Beta, QA Engineer
2.
Plant Status
Unit 1
Steady state 90% power operation.
Unit 2
Power ascension testing in progress.
Some problems experienced with
control drive upper mechanisms, control of steam generator levels at
low power level and steam dump valve operation.
'
'
.
.
-4-
3.
Inspector Follow Up on Previously Identified Items (Unit 1)
(Closed) Unresolved Item (Inspection Report 50-313/77-13, paragraph 2):
Conflicts between the Quality Assurance Procedure and the Nuclear
Services Procedure in the area of 'Q' design changes.
The QAP Procedure 1004.01, revision 4, and Generation and Construction
Procedure II-5 which supersedes NSP-II-5 are no longer in conflict.
4.
Review of Plant Operations (Unit 1)
The inspector reviewed plant logs and records to verify conformance to
plant procedures and to confirm that Technical Specifications were met.
The inspector also conducted a plant tour of accessible areas to observe
general housekeeping and to verify selected component configurations.
The following logs and records for October and November 1978 were
reviewed:
Station Log
NSS Data Point Log
NSS and Safeguard Auxiliary Log
RPS Log
Auxiliary Log - Inside
Auxiliary Log - Outside
Waste Control Log
Boron Titration Log Sheets
Hot Lab Technical Specification Surveillance Report
ESAS Log
Station Battery Daily Check Log
Daily Reactor Power History Log
Quadrant Tilt and Imbalance Log
Trouble Tickets
Reactor Trip Recovery Procedure for October 13, 1978
During this review of logs and records, the inspector noted that the
Unit 1 Outside Auxiliary Log had no entry for the Emergency Pond Level
on November 22, 1978 as required by Technical Specification 4.13.1.
A
check of Unit 2 Outside Auxiliary Log showed that the pond level had
been checked and recorded on that date by Unit 2 personnel. This was
discussed with the Unit 1 operations supervisor and resolved.
The following general observations were made during the plant tour:
No excessive fluid leaks or piping vibrations were observed.
.
Seismic restraints 2nd pipe hangers appeared to be in satisfactory
.
condition.
Selected valves were observed to be in the required positions.
.
.-
.
-5-
Selected equipment caution and hold tags were verified to be
.
correct.
Control room operators were knowledgeable in annunciator status.
.
Selected recorders were recording properly.
.
Radiation controls were observed to be established properly.
.
Control Room manning was in accordance with Technical Sreci fications .
.
Furthennore, the inspector noted that general cleanliness s as excellent
with the exception of the Unit 1 cable spreading room.
The licensee's
representatives indicated, prior to the conclusion of this inspection,
that actions had been initiated to correct the above.
However, the
inspector indicated a concern for the control of combustible substances
in areas such as the cable spreading room.
This item is considered
an open item.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
5.
Design, Design Changes and Modifications (Unit 1 and Unit 2)
The inspector reviewed the Controlling Procedure 1004.01 (Rev. 4),
Design Control for ANO Units 1 and 2, and selected design changes to
determine that these changes and modifications are in conformance with
the requirements of the Technical Specifications and 10 CFR 50.59.
The following design changes were selected fr
-aview:
DCR Number
Title
555
H Purge
' em Seal Water Disposal Modification
7
.
557
VTtal Elt.orical Equipment Rooms Temporary Fans
570
Replacement of RCS Pressure Transmitters with
Rosemont Models
571
Replace Blocking Diodes in Diesel Generator
Control Circuits
575
Control Room Isolation Valves for HVAC - CV7905,
CV 7906 and CV 7907
584
Remove 3/4" Half Coupling and DH-1010 Vent Valve
It appears that these DCR's were conducted in accordance with formal
procedures, that applicable acceptance tests were completed, and that
changes to operating procedures as required were made. The inspector
did note that although mast of these OCR's were completed during the
March 1978 refueling outage, the as-built drawings had not been updated
to reflect more than the fact that a DCR was outsta.1 ding.
Following the
completion of work on a DCR, the Little Rock Engineering Office is
notified and requested to issue upd 'ed drawings.
There is apparently
a significant delay in the turnarour.a time for the above.
This item will
be an open item.
.,
,-
-6-
No items of noncompliance or deviations weie identified in the above
DCR's for Unit 2 will be reviewed dm ing a future inspection.
area.
6.
Closcout of Mode 2 Open _ Items - Attachment 2 to Operating License
NPF-6 Amendment 7 (Unit 2)
a.
Item A.1 - Startup Punchlist
Heating in the PPS panels is still under review. With the cabinet
doors left open, there appears to be no loss of power supplies due
to heating.
The inspector was informed that a seismic analysis
with doors open has been performed.
The licensee has stated that
resolution of this problem will be pursued.
RIV does not consider
this item a further hold to entering Mode 2; however, the licensee's
resolution of this problem will continue to be followed.
b.
Item A.2 - Completion of Preoperational Test
All testing and modifications of the main steam safety relief valves
have been completed.
These actions include the following:
Hydraset of all valves
.
Verification of set point by actual lifts
.
Adjustment and modification of valve internals to improve
.
blowdown
Verification of blowdown to be c512%
.
Analysis was conducted by the NSSS which shows up to 15%
.
blowdown acceptable
Valve locking pins were replaced and valve PSV-1002 tested
.
to demonstrate the adequacy of the design change
There are no further deficiencies against Preoperational
.
Test 2.083.01
This item is considered closed.
c.
Item A.3 - Startup Program Test Deficiencies
The inspector verified that all 2.650 series test deficiencies
impacting on Mode 2 have been cleared.
This item is considered closed.
d.
Item A.4 - Approval and Issuance of 2.800.01, App. U
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-25)
. . .
- .
-7-
e.
Item A.5 - Containment Piping Penetration Main Feedwater Line
Break Modifications
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
f.
Item A.6 - Radiation Protsetion
(1)
Item 6.a - Installation and Calibration of HP Monitoring
Equipment
The inspector verified installation if a Hand and Foot Counter
and a Portal Monitor at the exit of i he Unit 2 auxiliary
building.
The inspector also verified the availability of
two CAM's for Uni- 2.
Each of these monitors identified
above were verified to have valid calibrations.
This item is considered closed.
'
(2)
Item 6.b - Area Radiation Monitors
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
(3)
Item 6.c - Process Radiation Monitors Calibration
The inspector verified the following monitors were calibrated
in accordance with Plant Calibration Procedure 2304.27,
Revision 1:
2RITS - 8271-2A
2RITS - 8231-1A
2RITS - 8233
2RITS - 8231-1B
2RITS - 8271-2B
2RITS - 8750-1
This completes calibration of all Technical Specification
required monitors.
This item is considered closed.
g.
Item 7 - Hanger Installation
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
h.
Item 8 - Penetration Breaker DC Power Supplies
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
1.
Item 9 - Facility Operating Procedures
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
.,
.,
-8-
j.
Item 10 - Resolution of Hydrogen Purge System Discrepancies
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
k.
Item 11 - LPSI Pump Motor Failure
This item has been previously closed.
(See Inspection Report
50-368/78-26)
1.
Item 12 - Safety Injection System Loose Part
This item has been previously closed.
(See Inspection Report
50-368/78-26)
m.
Ite. 43 - Conform oce to GDC-17 Off-Site Power Deficiencies
The inspector verified the following:
Surveillance procedures have been revised to provide for
.
verification of breaker position.
All breakers (A&H) to SU Transformer 2 for Units 1 and 2
.
have been red tagged and are in the pull to lock position.
Standing Orders have been issued which limit loading only
.
one H (6.9 KV) and one A (4160 V) bus from either plant.
This item is considered closed.
n.
Item 14 - Resolution of Inverter Deficiencies
This item has been closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
<
o.
Item 15 - Chloride Swipes Within Containment
This item has ' cen closed.
(See Inspection Report 50-368/78-26)
p.
Item lo - Resolution of Diesel Generator tio. 2 Failure
Three successive failures of Emergency Diesel Generator fio. 2
were experienced. The initial failure of the diesel generator
damaged the upper crank shaft and wiped the main bearings on the
upper crank shaft during a surveillance test.
The next two
failures wiped main bearings on the upper shaft prior to
,
- '
- r
_9_
completion of the vendor's reconmended break in test. This same
diesel had experienced multiple failures in the vendor's shop
prior to shipment to the site.
Investigation into the cause of engine failure indicates a
possible aeration problem in the lube oil and a possible uneven
expansion problem.
Although the lube oil in the engine at the
time of the failures was tested and found to be within specifi-
cation, the oil was changed to another brand and adjustments
were made to the forward mounting bolts to reduce possible
uneven expansion.
Popping noises had been observed during the
contraction of the engine after each run.
Following the last repairs, the engine appeared to perform satis-
factorily. The engine was run in accordance with the vend _or's
recommended break in test.
The engine was then load tested for
24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.108.
Vib ution
readings on the engine indicated a decreasing amplitude through-
out the final testing. The amplitude of the vibrations had
increased during earlier testing.
There was a general reduction of the aeration of the oil and
elimination of the popping noise coming from the engine. The
repairs and testing were witnessed in part by the IE Resident
Inspecto.'.
RIV plans no further action on this item.
The performance of the
diese'.s will continue to be observed by the Resident Inspector,
q.
Item 17 - Resolutio'n of CRD-58 Failur'
Exercising of the upper control rod drive (CRD) mechanism as
recommended by the NSSS appears to re~ solve the inoperability of
CRD-58.
This item is considered closed.
7.
Closecut of Mode 1 Open Items - Attachment 2 to Operating License
NPF-6 Amendment 7 (Unit 2)
a.
Item 1 - Startup Punchlist
The inspector verified that all items on the startup punchlist
have been closed.
This item is considered closed.
..-
_-
.----
. _.--
-. .
.-.
'
.-
.
-
.
30-
b.
_ Item 2 - Operations Punchlist
-
The data for the CECEC Code verification is to be taken on
brush recorders. There are sufficient brush recorders on site
between the licensee and the NSSS to perform this test'ng.
This item is considered closed.
8.
Calibration - Technical Specification Specified (Unit 2)
The inspector reviewed surveillance records, procedures, qualification
of individuals performing calibrations and held discussions with repre-
sentatives of the licensee to determine whether the calibration of
components and equipment were in conformance with the requirements of
the Technical Specifications (TS).
However, no calibrations were witnessed
since no T/S required calibrations were scheduled during the inspection.
Records of the following calibrations were reviewed:
Linear Power Level - High, Channel A
Pre-Operational Procedure 2.058.01, Plant Protection, completed
December 27, 1977.
Procedure 2304.100, Excore Instrument Channel A Test.
Steam Generator Pressure Low - Channel A
Pre-Operational Procedure 2.058.01, Plant Protection, completed
January 25, 1978.
Job Order 4836-2, completed November 8,1978 in accordance with
letter A-CE-7280.
DNBR - Low Channel A.
Pre-Operational Procedure 2.053.02, Core Protection Calculator,
completed July 20, 1978.
Pressurizer Pressure - Low, Channel A
Pre-Operational Procedure 2.058.01, Plant Protection, completed
December 28, 1977.
Job Order 4836-2, completed November 8,1978 in accordance with
letter A-CE-7280.
Containment Pressure - High, Channel A
Pre-Operational Procedure 2.058.01, Plant Protection, completed
December 27, 1977.
460 Volt Emergency Bus Unc_rvoltapa (Degraded Voltage)
DCR 649, completed April 24, 1978 for Relays 27-1/285
and 27-1/286.
DCR 251, completed October 29, 1978 for Relays 27-2/2B5 and
and 27-2/286.
. . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ .
. _ _ _ _ _ _
.-- _ _.
- _ _ ..
. . _ . _ _ .
, . ,
c.
-11-
Primary Standards
DVM #6, calibrated October 16, 1978
OSC #01, calibrated November 22, 1978
PAS #03, calibrated July 27, 1977
As a result of the review, it was determined that records were not
available which would substantiate that the steam generator low
pressure trip and pressurizer pressure low trip settings for Channels
A, B, C and D were calibrated in accordance with the appropriate
plant procedures.
Changes to the trip settings were made under
J.0. 4836-2, but there were no completed data sheets.
Representatives
of the licensee stated that appropriate portions of Procedures 2304.41,
2304.42, 2304.43 and 2304.44 (Plant Protection System Channels A, B,
C and D calibration, respectively) had been utilized but had apparently
become separated from the job order and lost.
The licensee also
indicated that the set points had been checked since completion of
the job order.
The licensee was informed that failure to maintain these records was
contrary to Technical Specification 6.10.1.d which requires that
records of surveillance activities, inspections and calibrations
required by the Technical Specifications be retained for at least five
years and is considered a deficiency.
The inspector had no additional questions in this area.
9.
Calibration - Safety Related not T/S Specified (Unit 2)
The inspector reviewed calibration records, procedures, qualification
of individuals perfsrming calibration and held discussions with repre-
sentatives of the licensee.
No calibrations were witnessed since no
calibrations were scheduled during the inspection.
Records of the
following calibrations were reviewed:
2LlS-5028 and 2LT-5028 Safety Injection Tank 2T2B Level, calibrated
October 10, 1978
2PlS-50J2 Safety Injection Tank 2T2B Pressure, calibrated March 28,
1977
2LT-5636-1 Refueling Water Tank Level, calibrated October 15, 1978
2 TIS-5675 Refueling Water Tank Temperature, calibrated September 9,
1978
.
- <
>.
32
2L15-5659-1 Sodium Hydroxide Tank Level, calibrated September 14, 1978
2TlS-5670 Sodium Hydroxide Tank Temperature, calibrated February 24,
1978
2LT-1977 Condensate Storage Tank Level, calibrated Augu: t 26, 1977
2LT-1937 Condensate Storage Tank Level, calibrated October 2;
1976
2L1-2801 Emerger .y Diesel Day Tank Level, calibrated January 5,1977
2L1-2821 Emergency Diesel Day Tank Level, calibrated January 5,1977
1304.80 Emergency Cooling Pond Sounding, completed August 10, 1978
Primary Standards
DWT #6, calibrated October 1977
DMM #31, calibrated August 14, 1978
CAL #9, calibrated May 10, 1978
The inspector als.o selected calibration of the Unit 2 Hydrogen Analyzer
for review.
However, it was determined during the inspection that
calibration of this instrument had not been completed but was required
before entering Mode 2 operation.
The inspector did, however, review
records of the calibration, dated March 17, 1978, for the Unit 1
Hydrogen Analyzer. These consisted of Procedure 1304.30 Hydrogen
Analyzer and Flow Indication Instrument Surveillance and the associated
records.
During this review it was determined that changes had been
made to the procedure without the required approval for the changes.
Changes were made to the accuracy required and to the desired output
for Instruments SQT-7441, SQT-7451, SQT-7442 and SQT-7452.
While the
changes appear to have been proper, Technical Specification 6.8.3.b
spe'ifies that temporary changes to procedures required by TS 6.8.1
be approved by two members of the plant staff, at least one of whom
holds a Senior Reactor Operator's License on the unit affected.
Since this was not done, the licensee was inforned that the use of the
changed procedure without the required approval constituted an item of
noncompliance.
From the review of the records for calibration of level instruments
2L1-2801 and 2L1-2821 for the Emergency Diesel Day Tank, it was found
that the data sheets did not include a specified accuracy. A represen-
tative of the licensee indicateu that this would be corrected by requir-
ing an appropriate specified accuracy for the instruments.
This item
remains as an open item.
The i'spector had no additional questions in this area.
.-.
. - _ . .
.
.. - . _ .. - . - . - . - - . . - - . . - .
-.
- - - . . -
.
.
-13-
10. Witness of Startup Activities (Unit 2)
.
The following startup activities were witnessed by the inspector:
Plant Safety Committee (PSC) Meetings
a.
The inspector observed the December 3,1978 PSC meeting.
This
was the final review of test discrepancies prior to going to
Mode 2.
b.
Test Working Group (TWG)
The inspector observed, on a part-time basis, TWG meetings of
December 1 and 3,1978.
c.
Scheduling
The inspector continued to observe the daily startup meetings
during the period covered by this report.
d.
_2.750.01, Revision 2, Low Power Physics Testing
The inspector completed review of 2.750.01 through December 13,
1978.
_ Test Program Chronological Log
e.
The inspector completed review of this log through December 13, 1978.
11.
Inspector Witnessing of Initial Criticality (Unit 2)
a.
Scope of Inspection
The following items were reviewed prior to control rod withdrawal:
Conformance to selected Technical Specifications
.
Calibration of excore nuclear instrumentation
.
Proper count rate and signal-to-noise ratio
.
Instrument trip checks performed
.
The following items were reviewed for conformance to administrative
and procedure requirements:
~
Crew staffing of licensed operators
.
Latest version of Plant Procedure 2.700.02,
.
Revision 2, " Initial Criticality" available.
Verified selected prerequisites satisfied
.
Special count rate instrumentation in place
.
.-
-14-
Inverse multiplication plots maintained
.
Adequacy of on-site technical support
.
Control room log
.
The following items of the "as-run" procedure were reviewed for
adequacy:
Control of procedure changes
.
Revieu of test deficiencies
.
Completeness of data sheets
.
The following items relative to test results evaluation were
reviewed:
Calculation of boron concentration for criticality using
.
licensee's procedure
Dilution calculations
Observation of boron analysis
Comparison of actual critical boron concentration to predicted
.
b.
Findings
(1) The measured boron concentration at criticality was 978 ppm
0
at 260 F with group 6 cor.crol rods at 75".
The predicted was
996 ppm with a + 100 ppm acceptance criteria.
(2) During the review for conformance to Technical Specifications
the inspector identified the following two items of noncom-
pliance:
(a) Technical Specifications 6.8.1 states in part that,
" Written procedures shall be established, implem'ented
and maintained for the activities referenced below:
...
c.
Survaillance and test activities of safety related
equipment." Plant Procedure 1004.12B, Revision 0,
Operational Test Control states in part with regard to
surveillance test scheduling, "To ensure that required
tests are performed within the specified interval, each
Plant Supervisor designated on the Master Test Control
List shall be responsible for establishing and maintaining
a departmental test control chart.
The test control chart
shall list all required tests under the cognizance of that
group, the test interval, scheduled date and date actually
performed."
.
e.
.
-15-
Contra.y to the above, the inspector found that the
test control charts were not being maintained current.
Examples of the failure to implement procedures include
the following:
I&C Test Control Charts
Eighteen month tests of the incore detectors and optical
isolators had not been incorporated into the test control
charts.
Scheduled dates for test completion were not shown in
some cases.
Maintenance Test Control Charts
Electrical test control chart was not being maintained
current. The flow of completed surveillance test paper-
work bypassed the designated supervisor.
Technical Test Control Chart
The schedula of testing was not being maintained current,
i.e., Main Safety Valve Testing for conformance to ASME
Section XI.
(b) Technical Specification, Table 4.3-4, Item 3, specifies
that the Triaxial-Response-Spectrum Recorder 2XR-8350 is
to receive a " Channel Functional Test" on a semiannual
"SA" frequency.
Contrary to the above, the interval of functional testing
for 2XR-8350 had exceeded six months between the period
of April 5,1978 to December 8,1978.
(3) The inspector observed one of the Intake Structure Exhaust
Fans 2VEF-25B (Hand Switch 2HS-8094 - 2SIAS MSIS) in a pull to
lock condition. The lic.ensee has indicated this hand switch
will be left in the auto position during conditions when the
Service Water System is required by Technical Specifications.
The operability of these fans is necessary under accident
conditions.
12.
Inspector Witness of Low Power Physics Testing (Unit 2)
a.
Scope
The inspector verified the following:
Appropriate procedure in use
.
Crew requirements
.
.
.
.-
-16-
Initial conditions and prerequisites met
.
Calibration and inservice use of test equipment
.
Proper control of test changes
.
Coordination of crew activities
.
Quick summary of test results
.
Proper collection of test data
.
Compliance with the test acceptance criteria
.
Adequacy of the licensee's test evaluation
.
Compliance with Technical Specifications
.
Resolution of test deficiencies
.
Adequacy of data sheets
.
The tests witnessed by the inspector included the following:
Pseudo rod ejection worth
.
Isotherral temperature coefficient
.
Control rod group worths
.
Boron concentration at all rods out position
.
Functional checkout of the reactivity computer
.
Each of the tests referenced above are included as an integral
part of Test Procedure 2.750.01, Revision No. 2, " Low Power
Physics Test."
b.
Findings
(1) The control rod initially predicted to be the most reactive
ejected rod was CEA 6-1 with a predicted worth of 0.348%
a k/k. The . measured worth of this control rod was 0.322%
a k/k which is well within the acceptance criteria of + 0.1%
a k/k.
The next most reactive control rod was predicted to
be CEA 4-11 with a predicted worth of 0.277% a k/k.
The
measured worth of this control rod was 0.345% a k/k, which
made it the most reactive.
It is still within the acceptance
criteria of + 0.1% a k/k.
The vendor subsequently found an
error in the ejected rod analysis.
CEA 4-11 was reanalyzed
as the most reactive ejected rod with a predicted worth of
.376% a k/k.
No further action on this item is considered
necessary by RIV.
(2) Due to problems in the control rod circuitry, there were a
number of rod misalignments <
to rod drops. These misalign-
ments were not a planned par t of the low power physics
testing program.
The licensee plans to make one 30 day
report to cover these events.
The start date for the report
is to be no later than the first drop in Mode 2.
. , . . ,,.
-17-
(3) The licensee has concurred that the test records associated
with the reactivity computer wil' be maintained as a part
of the permanent plant record.
This will include the
alignment check of the reactivity computer, , calibration
of vendor Digital Volt Meter, voltage sources, and picoamp
meter scale alignments.
(4) No items of nonccmpliance or deviations were identified during
this portion of the inspection.
13.
Exit Meetings (Units 1 and 2)
Exit meetings were conducted on November 24 and December 1,1978 with
Mr. Miller (Acting Plant Manager) and other members of the AP&L staff;
and on December 15, 1978 with Mr. J. O'Hanlon (Plant Manager) and other
members of the AP&L staff.
The inspectors discussed the scope of the
inspection and summarized the inspection findings which are detailed in
this report.