ML19318B808
| ML19318B808 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1980 |
| From: | Eisenhut D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ferguson J VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006300086 | |
| Download: ML19318B808 (8) | |
Text
. _ _ -
7/ C w ta p
ys UNITED STATES y ' )er i
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g,*
..E WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
?
%%[,,,/
JUN 121980 Docket No.: 50-339
~
Mr. J. H. Ferguson Executive Vice President Power Operations Virginia Electric & Power Company P. O. Box 26666 Richmond, Virginia 23261
Dear Mr. Ferguson:
SUBJECT:
RESOLUTION OF ITEMS 7.3(1) THROUGH 7.3(24) AS DELINEATED IN APPENDIX A 0F THE NORTH ANNA UNIT 2 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND LICENSE CONDITIONS D.5(k), 0.5(o) and D.5(v) - OPERATING LICENSE NPF-7 Our Office of Inspection and Enforcement has informed us that you have satisfactorily resolved Items 7.3(1) through 7.3(24) as delineated in Appendix A of the North Anna Power Station, Unit 2 Technical Specifications for initial criticality and operation at power levels not to exceed five percent.
ney also advised us that you completed matters related to D.5(k) and D.5(o) as delineated in Operating License NPF-7.
Condit4 x s On this oasis, we have determined, with respect to the above items, that you have met our reouirements as delineated in the Technical Specifications and Operating License NPF-7 and consider the above matters resolved for initial criticality and operation at power levels not to exceed five percent.
With respect to Condition D.5(v) of Operating License NPF-7, representatives of the staff performed an audit at the site on May 14, 1980, to determine whether the corrective actions delineated in Condition D.5(v) have been completed. On the basis of our audit of your control room we have concluded that the corrective actions taken by you meet our requirements. Our evaluation of the control room audit is presented in the Enclosure. Therefore, we consider this matter resolved for operation at power levels not exceeding five percent.
In a letter, dated April 3,1980, you committed to have approved procedures regarding actions to be taken in one of the North Anna unit's control room during an emergency at the other unit. Our Office of Inspection and Enforcement has reviewed procedure 1-AP-47 " Unit Operations During Opposite Unit Emergency" and find it acceptable. Therefore, we consider this matter j
resolved.
i, i
800e300 Orb P
i Mr. J. H. Ferguson 2-JUN 131930 i
Based on the above we have determined that items required to be completed prior to initial criticality of North Anna Unit 2 have been satisfactorily resolved, and therefore, operation in Mode 2 to perform zero power physics testing is permitted.
It should be noted that certain conditions identified in Operating License NPF-7 and Section 7.0 of Appendix A of the Technical Specifications must still be complied with prior to operation above zero power.
Sincerely,
-5
- ~m
/
(.
,~,n w<tw'f-3"" " Darrell G. Eisenhut, Director Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation cc: See next page i
T
T Mr. J. H. Ferguson Executive Vice President - Power Operations Virginia Electric & Power Company P. O. Box 26666 Richmond, Virginia 23261 cc:
Mr. Anthony Gambaradella Clarence T. Kipps, Jr., Esq.
Office of the Attorney General 1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
11 South 12th Street - Room 308 Washington, D. C.
20006 Richmond, Virginia 23219 Carroll J. Savage, Esq.
Richard M. Foster, Esq.
1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Musick, Williamson, Schwartz Washington,.D. C.
20006 Leavenworth & Cope, P. C.
P. O. Box 4579 Mr. James C. Dunstan Boulder, Colorado 80306 State Corporation Conmission Commonwealth of Virginia Michael W. Maupin, Esq.
81andon Building Hunton, Williams, Gay & Gibson Richmond, Virginia 23209 P. O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Mrs. June Allen U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 412 Owens Drive Washington, D. C.
20555 Huntsville, Alabama 35801 Michael C. Farrar, Esq.
Mrs. James Torson Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board 501 Leroy U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Socorro, New Mexico 87801 Washington, D. C.
20555 Mrs. Margaret Dietrich Dr. John H. Buck Route 2, Box 568 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Gordonsville, Virginia 22942 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 William H. Rodgers, Jr., Esq.
Georgetown University Law Center Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel 600 New Jersey Avenue, N. W.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20001 Washington, D. C.
20555 Mr. Peter S. Hepp Mr. Michael S. Kidd Executive Vice President U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Sun Shipping & Dry Dock Company P. 0. Box 128 P. O. Box 540 Spotsivania, Virginia 22553 Chester, Pennsylvania 19013 Dr. Paul W. Purdom Mr. R. B. Briggs Department of Civil Engineering Associate Director
_ Drexel University 110 Evans Lane Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19104 Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 i
t Mr. J. H. Ferguson
.cc: Dr. Lawrence R. Quarles Apartment No. 51 Kendal-at-Longwood Kennett Square, Pennsylvania 19348 Mr. Irwin R. Kroot Citizens Energy Forum P. O. Box 138 McLean, Virginia 22101 James B. Dougherty, Esq.
Potomac Alliance 1416 S Street, N.W.
Washington, D. C.
20009 W. R. Cartwright, Station Manager P. O. Box 402 Mineral, Virginia 23117 W. L. Stewart, Manager P. O. Box 315 Surry, Virginia 23883 e
EfiCLOSURE EVAt.UAT10?!
fl0RTH AffilA UtilT 2 C0fiTROL ROOM DESIG!1 REVIEW AUDIT In Section IV of Part II of Supplement fio.10 to the Safety Evaluation Report for florth Anna Unit 2, we identified a number of corrective actions which we believed were necessary to improve operator effectiveness during i
emergency operation 3.
The Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO) was required to implement several of these actions orior to Mode 2 operation (operation at critical). Accordingly, the operating license for florth Anna Unit 2 was conditioned to reflect these actions.
On May 15, 1980 we audited the measures implemented by VEPC0 to meet the corrective actions requried prior to Mode 2 operation.
Our audit identified c number of significant human factors improvements made to the control room which will serve to substantially improve the operator's ability to take effective control actions under stressful conditions. The coorective actions that VEPC0 was required to implement prior to Mode 2 operation are:
(1) Significantly improve labelirg and instrumentation and control demarcation. Assess the need for other improvements in the area of labeling and demarcation and modify labeling and demarcation controls and displays as appropriate.
(2) Color code annunciator windows as an aid in identifying high priority alarms.
(3)
Review, and improve where necessary, administrative controls used to ensure proper safety injection status.
(4)
Correct problems associated with general maintenance and implement measures to prevent their recurrence.
JLN 101933
. (5) Institute controls to limit control room access.
(6) Test the adequacy of emergency lighting.
(7) Establish procedures to limit use of the public addre.ss system to plant related matters and take corrective action to reduce sound intensity in the control room.
The following human factors design related improvements made to the control room' to meet the above requirements were verified during the audit:
(1) Labeling and instrumentation and control demarcation have been significantly improved. For example.
- Control and displays important to safety were grouped and color coded on the control console and the primary vertical panels.
- Component labeling has been significantly improved.
- Panel / system labels were added on the control console and primary vertical panels.
- VEPC0 has selected and made a temporary installation of a system for improving the operators ability to read vertical meters accurately from a distance. The system which provides for the banding of meter faces to show normal operating ranges will be tested and permanently installed prior to escalation beyond 5 percent of rated power. The banding is deemed advantageous.
(2)
The emergency lighting system was modified to.caintain one-half of the normal lighting system operating during loss of normal control room lighting by assignment to the emergency power buses.
(3)
The direct current lighting system will be maintained as a back-uo to this system. A hardware design change to the ventiliation system was implemented to reduce sound intensity in the control room to an acceptable
' level.
In addition to this action, VEPCO has also corrected the other l
control room noise problem and is actively engaged in implementing' the corrac tiva actions ranuirad nrior to a<calation havnnd 5" of rated rower.
. (4) Priority annunciator alarm windows / lenses have been color coded.
Important alarm lenses are colored red.
OTHER SIGNIFICANT HUMAN FACTORS IMPROVEMENTS (1) Administrative procedures and controls have been imoroved to ensure proper Safety Injection (SI) system status and operation. Administrative procedures, ADM-29.4 will be used to verify SI status at the beginning of each eight hour shift. An operating procedure will require that, after the primary control room operator has executed the operators irrrnediate action procedures subsequent to an SI actuation, a second operator will verify proper operation of the SI system.
(2) Corrective Administrative actions to improve general maintenance and to minimize recurring maintenance problems have been implemented to the extent practical because of continuing improvements being made to the control room to meet the corrective actions required prior to escalation beyond 5 oercent of rated cower. He will audit the final effectiveness of the improved control room maintenance system prior to escalation beyond 5 oercent of rated oower.
(3) Administrative procedures have been implemented to limit control room access.
(4) VEPC0 has established administrativ~e procedure - ADMIN-20 to limit the use of the oublic address system to plant related matters.
CONCLUSION Based on our tudit of the corrective actions implemented by VEPC0 to meet the control room review and audit-of human factors requirements stated herein
1!.
n
}.
g
[
4 !
i.
and in Supplement flo.10 to the SER for North Anna Uni *. ?, we conclude that the unit can be safely operated in fiode 2 (operation at critical) and at power levels not exceeding five percent power.
i 4
s i
i i
i i
i i
T i
I 1
l i-i-
i 4
1 f
i-I' 9,
u.
a.
_