ML19289F672
| ML19289F672 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1979 |
| From: | Cavanaugh W ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | Stello V Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 1-069-7, 1-69-7, NUDOCS 7906150306 | |
| Download: ML19289F672 (3) | |
Text
,
ARKANSAS POWER & LIGHT COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 551 UTTLE ROCK. ARKANSAS 72203 (501)371-4422 June 12, 1979 WILLIAM CAVANAUGH 111 Vice President Generation & Construction 1-069-7 Victor Stello, Jr., Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555
Subject:
Arkansas Nuclear One - Unit 1 Docket No. 50-313 License No. DPR-51 Response to June 2, 1979 Order
{ File:
1510)
Gentlemen:
As required by your June 2,1979 order we have reviewed applicable existing procedures and our method of developing procedures.
- Also, as would be expected, we have reviewed the circumstances of the June 2, 1979 occurrence and are looking at additional ways to prevent a recur-rence.
The Plant Safety Committee (PSC) met the afternoon of June 2,1979 to review the incident, determine the cause, and determine corrective action.
It was detennined then that the procedure used for testing of the main feedwater check valves was deficient and that the operator had added a step to the procedure without the proper review. The confusion resulting from the chanae in shifts was discussed.
The Safety Review Committee (SRC) met June 3,1979 to discuss actions taken by the plant staff related to the incident of the day before.
The SRC concurred with the plant staff's evaluation of the incident.
They also worked with the plant staff to develop guidelines for evaluating and modifying procedures as required by your June 2,1979 order.
Specific actions taken in response to the items listed in Section III of your June 2,1979 order are as follows.
ITEM (1)
The licensee shall evaluate and modify as appropriate its methods for the development, review and approval of procedures for all modes of plant operation.
\\
i O
2230 114 7 9 0 615 0 Sc6 MEMBEA MICCLE SCOTH UT1UT ES SYSTEM
1-069-7 Mr. Victor Stello, Jr. June 12, 1979
RESPONSE
The Plant Safety Cmmittee and General Manager reviewed the methods for the development, review and approval of procedures.
Plant pro-cedures contain the following steps for the development of procedures and procedure changes:
1.
Any individual can identify the need for a procedure or procedure change to a group supervisor.
The group supervisor evaluates this request and assigns an individual to write the procedure or procedure change.
2.
The procedure writer develops the new procedure following formats specified in plant procedures.
3.
The procedure writer forwards the procedure to a member of the plant staff who independently reviews the procedure.
4.
The group supervisor reviews the procedure and insures the procedure complies with FSAR and technical specification requirements.
The group supervisor also insures that a safety evaluation is attached when required.
5.
The Plant Safety Cmmittee reviews the procedure.
6.
The Manager of Quality Assurance and Safety Review Cmmittee review the procedure if applicable.
7.
When all reviews are cmplete and cmments are resolved the plant General Manager then approves the procedure.
The above steps are deemed adequate to insure that procedures and procedure revisions are properly reviewed before issuance.
ITEM (2)
The licensee shall evaluate existing procedures to assure that such procedures include all actions necessary for safety; and,
RESPONSE
In their meeting of June 4,1979, the PSC fomed a procedure review group whose purpose was to evaluate existing procedures and propose any changes necessary to insure all actions required for safe oreration would be followed.
The procedure review effort in-uded all procedures that are similar to the procedure bypassed daturday morning, including surveillance procedures, controlling procedures, and any procedures reflecting philosophy or design changes.
In reviewing these prccedures the following guidelines were used:
2230 115
1-067-7 Mr. Victor Stello, Jr. June 12, 1979 1.
A step for all required actions.
2.
Single evolution per step.
3.
Verify prerequisites are explicit and satisfy the condition necessary to perform the evolution (i.e., step, supplement or su rveil lance).
4.
Verify no other safety systems are overridden or bypassed by the performance of that procedure except for the system in-vol ved.
5.
Incorporate proposed Technical Specifications.
A list of the procedures reviewed are included in the June 4,1979 PSC minutes.
Changes to the subject procedures judged necessary by the PSC will be incorporated prior to startup.
ITEM (3)
The licensee shall take appropriate steps to assure that all plant personnel adhere to approved procedures and do not add unauthorized steps to any procedures.
RESPONSE
A standing order has been issued which provides specific direction in all aspects related to procedure adherence.
All plant operations and maintenance personnel will be trained as to the importance of complying with this order.
We believe that the above actions will assure that the conditions in the order were met.
Very truly yours,
.. _ -. ~_ -
William Cavanaugh III,
WC/ CSP /vb Attachment cc:
Mr. G. L. Madsen, Chief Reactor Operations & Nuclear Support Branch Office Of Inspection & Enforcement Region IV E 0 116 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 1000 Arlington, Texas 76011
.