ML19326C588
| ML19326C588 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 04/27/1976 |
| From: | Donna Anderson, Gagliardo J, Madsen G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19326C559 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-76-06, 50-313-76-6, NUDOCS 8004230695 | |
| Download: ML19326C588 (11) | |
See also: IR 05000313/1976006
Text
._
.
= =
,:.
==:
Q'
3~
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION IV
- gg.
==.
2: -Es
IE Inspection Report No. 50-313/76-06
Docket No. 50-313
==
Licensee: Arkansas Power & Light Company.
License NO. DPR-51
Sixth and Pine Streets
Pine Bluff,' Arkansas 71601
Category C
=
Facility: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1
Location: Russellville, Arkansas
...
Type of Licensee:
Type af Insp'ection: -Routine, Unannounced
==
Dates of Inspection: April 20-22, 1976
.
E.ates of Previous Inspection:
March 23-25, 1976
-
)
-
,
Gr ' W -c _3be
5
. Principal Inspector:
_-
"
-
D. G. Anderson, Reactor Inspector
Date
,
.
/
.
Accompanying Inspector:
f v . .- $
-.e
-
~'
9'/~ P M'6
'
'
J. E. Gagliardo, Reactor Inspector
Date
-
Reviewed By:
/.'O W
.= , > .
-.
~'
- / //M
G. L. Madsen, Chief, Reactor Op'erations and
Date
Nuclacr Support Branch
8004230
(
<
r
.-
.
. .
.
,
-
-
.
assia :
- .
-2-
==9
'
_
IYA .
.8
.
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
- := -
. -
- ==.
-I. , Enforcement Action
~~
==:
A.
Violations
se
'i=
None' identified by the inspectors.
- -iM[
=
B.
Infractions
contrary ~to TS 6.7.3, temporary changes were made to Procedure
1502.03 on (or about) March 29, 1976 without the spproval of
!the Plant Superintendent.
(DETAILS, paragraph 4)
.,_
C..
Deficiencies
Contrary to Criteria XI and XVII of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, the
licensee was not recording the original data taken in the boron
analyzes of vessel and spent fuel storage pool water samples.
(DETAILS, paragraph 5)
II. Licensee Action on Previ'usly Identified Enforcement Itecs
o
Not inspected.
'III. Design Changes
Not inspected.
IV. Unusual Occurrences
None reported to, or identified by, the inspector.
V.
Other-Significant Findings
A.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Unresolved Items
1. 7502/2 -- The halon fire system did not meet all of the
requirements of the acceptance tests.
(DETAILS, paragraph 7)
-2. 7605/11.- The licensec's engineering group and the Safety
-Review Cocmittee are reviewing the effect of the inadvertent
S0. n the NaOH tank.
(DETAILS,' paragraph 8)
addition of Na2. 23
(continued)
,
L.
-
,
shib
"
Fii" --- -
.
- '
-3-
.
-
.m-
VI.
Management Meetings
A.-
Entrance Meeting-
A pre-inspection meeting was conducted with Mr. J. W. Andersen, Jr.,
=i E
-Plant Superintendent and members of his staff on April 20, 1976.
==
Mr. Anderson was inferred that the purpose of this inspection was
.....
to review in detail the preparation for and activities conducted
7]
during this defueling cutage.
~1
B.
Exit Meeting
At the conclusion of the inspection on April 22, 1976, a management
exit coeting was conducted with Mr. J. W. Anderson, Jr., ANO-1
Plant Superintendent, and members of his staff.
Items reviewed at
this neeting are as follows:
.l. The items of noneccpliance noted as a result of this inspection.
..
.
2. Apparent inadequacy in the implementation of procedures with
- 2[
-regard to loose teals noted on the catwalk above the reactor
vessel.
(DETAILS, paragraph 10)
l
3. The need for a pre-startup test program / plans to be developed
in preparation for operations after this extended outage.
(DETAILS, paragraph 6)
4. Review of A0 76/01 and A0 76/02.
The inspectors expressed, in
-
general, satisfaction with the ANO-1 staff's detail to and
execution of procedures and activities during this defueling
outage. The licensee representative acknowledged this
.
commendation.
n=
.
(centinued)
.
a;
--
-
.
,
- .
g.
.
<
+ , . .
- z
A=:
-4-
- -
DETAILS
sE
1.
-Persons Contacted
En
G&
Arkansas Power'and Light Company (AP&L)
EE-
'
J.JW. Anderson, Jr., Plant Superintendent
G. H. Miller, Assistant Plant. Supervisor
T. Martin, Maintenance Supervisor:
R. G. Carroll, Health Physics Supervisor
L. W. Humphrey, Quality Assurance Engineer
V. Kinsey,: Secretary, PSC
M. Bishop, Records Supervisor
L. Alexander, Quality-Control Engineer-
R. Fishencord, Health Physicist
J. L. Bates, Radiochemistry Supervisor
C. Zimmerman, Reactor Operator
B. Simmons, Reactor Operator
_
B. Parker, Shift Supervisor
J. Robercson, Assistant Supervisor of Plant Operations
M. E. Frala, Radiochemist
C. Meyers, QA Inspector
Babcock and Wilcox (B&W)
.,
.
F. R. Faist
K. Wandling
2.
Plant Status
The plant was shutdown and conpletely defueled uuring the period
encompassed by the inspection.
The reactor core barrel and reactor
-
~
- lenum were removed and the surveillance specimen holder tubes were
p
being removed from the thermal shield at the time of the inspectors
exit from the plant on April 22, 1976. The licensee representative
indicated that a request had been submitted to NRC/DRL by AP&L to
provide relaxation of the requiremet.t (TS 4.2.7) related to the
surveillance schedule for these reactor vessel specimens. AP&L would
like to operate without these surveillance specimen tube holders in
place at least until the next anticipated refueling outage late in
1976.
(continued)
.
m,
.
-5-
E=
,
3.
Reactor Vessel Video Scanning
The inspectors observed' video movies of scans of the surveillance
.
""
specimen holder tubes and the area at the bottom of the reactor
vessel surrounding t2e incore instrucent nozzles.
Representatives of Bab :ock. and Wilcox (B&W) were present at the plant
to coordinate these in pection activities.
In particular, a 1-3/4"
diameter Reiss Series 80 Watertight camera was being used and the
visual image was being reproduced in tape on a Sony AV 3650 Videocorder.
The inspectors reviewed the tapes on a Setchell-Carlson television
conitor. The inspectors noted that due to the presence of suspended
caterial in the reactor vessel water, some optical clarity of the
picture was lost, but the B&W representatives indicated that further
filming vill take-place after the water is cleaned up.
The inspectors
indicated that a complete review of these films will be made by NRC
representatives at a future inspection.
4.
Preparation for the April 1976 Outage
The objective of this inspection effort was to verify that the licensee's
preparations for the April 1976 Outage were in confor=ance with all
applicable NRC surveillance requirements.
a.
Scope of Inspection
The inspector reviewed licensee records to verify that:
(1)
The fuel transfer system checkout had been performed in
acgordance with Procedure 1502.03.
(2) The tain-and auxiliary fuel handling bridges had been checked
out in accordance with Procedure 1502.03.
(3)
The spent fuel handling bridge checkout had been perforced in
-accordance with Procedure 1502.03.
(4) The communications systems had been checked cut in accordance
with Procedure 1502.03.
(5) The Source Range Monitors (SRM) had been functionally tested
in accordance with Procedure 1105.01.
1(6) The Area Radiation Monitors (ARM) on the refueling level
(RE-8017) and'the spent fuel storage area (RE-8009) were
operational.
(continued)
-
--
.
~
.
==
-6-
-
.
(7) Preventative maintenance checks had been performed on the
reactor building polar crane prior to handling vessel
components.
(8) The vessel water boron concentration for refueling was
established prior to head removal in accordance with TS 3.8.4.
b.
Inspection Findings
The inspector found that the licensee had completed and documented
all of the above requirements. While reviewing the licensee's
records, .the inspector found that changes had been made on (or about)
Ibrch 29, 1976 to the working copies of Attachments "D" and "F"
to
Procedure 1502.03 (Preparation for Refueling).
The intent of these
procedures was changed, however, the changes were not subsequently
approved by the Plant Superintendent.
Technical Specification (TS) 6.7.1 establishes the requirements for
detailed written procedures including the above procedure. TS 6.7.3
provides the mechanism by which temporary changes may be made to the
procedures covered by TS 6.7.1.
The second sentence of TS 6.7.3
states that, " Temporary changes which may affect the intent of the
original procedure may be made, provided such changes are approved
by the Plant Superintendent."
The licensee's failure to have the Plant Superintendent approve the
above temporary changes is contrary to the above TS requirement.
-
No other discrepancies were found in this area.
5.
Fuel Handling Activities
The objective of this part of the inspection was to verify that the
licensee's actions to defuel the reactor vessel and remove the vessel
internals were conducted in conformance with the requirements of the
licensee's technical specifications.
a.
Scope of Inspection
The inspector reviewed the licensee's records of the defueling and
verified-that:
(1)
neutron monitoring of the core was in accordance with TS 3.8.2.
(2)
containment' integrity was maintained in accordance with
TS 3.8.6 and 3.8.7.
(3)
radiation levels at the refueling area and at the spent fuel
storage area were monitored in accordance with TS 3.8.1.
(continued)
.
..-a
.
-
me:
ir sE.
- =
7_
,
-
'
v
.
t(4) 'one decay heat removal pump and cooler were operable.
(5)L boron concentrations in the reactor vessel and in the
m_=;
spent fuel storage pool-were maintained at greater than
- ~~
that required for refueling.
g;;,
h:
(6)
fuel' accountability methods were in accordance with
procedure 1502.05.
E:
The inspector also toured the facility to verify that items (3)
and (6) above were being maintained on a continuing basis. The
. _
inspector also observed the storage of core internals and studs
=
to assure that they were properly stored to protect against damage,
b.
Inspection Findings
LThe inspector found that all of the TS and licensee requirements
- ,=7
cited above had been completed satisfactorily. The licent .e was
also maintaining controls to assure that the requirements of items
(3) through (6) are being satisfied on a continuing basis,
b'hile revtewing the licensee's surveillance of boron concentrations,
_.
the inspector found'that the licensee was not retaining a record of
^
the data used to calculate the boron concentrations of vessel and spent
fuel stcrage pool water samples.
The chemistry technicians are
recording only the final boron concentration of the water sample.
Criterion XI of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 states in part that, " Test
results shall be documented and evaluated to assure that test
requirements have.been satisfied." Criterion XVII of 10 CFR 50,
Appendix B states in part that, " Inspection and test records shall,
as a minitum, identify the inspector or data recorder 3 the type
of observation, the results, the acceptability, .
."
. .
Sections 11.4.2 and 11.4.3 of the licensee's Quality Assurance
Manual amplify the licensee's commitment to the above Appendix B
gi
requirements as follows:
11.4.2
Records of test results shall include at least the following:
1)
Identity of part or material, system, structure, or
component'under test.
2)' Date of test.
3)- Date taken.
4)
Name and signature of individual performing test.
(continued)
?
,
__
ll .
-
'
-8-
==
,
- -
5) Test results.and conclusions.
6)
Identity of portable test equipment.
7). Recommendations for corrective action or
siesa
retesting resulting from the test.
==
"E==
8) Review signatures of cognizant supervisors, and
'
final review signature of Plant Superintendent
when required.
11.4.3
Testing records shall provide objective evidence that
the test was performed in compliance with approved pro-
cedures.
Testing records shall be maintained in the
plant files in accordance with the procedures for
document retention (QCP 1004.25).
The licensee's failure to record test data, other than the final
results, constitutes an item of noncompliance with the above
Appendix B requirements.
No other discrepancies were found in this area.
6.
Preparation for Operations After the Outage
The inspector discussed with licensee representatives their plans for
testing those systems which will be disturbed during- the outage. The
licensee representatives said that the plans for the preoperational
testing have not yet been formulated. They said that these plans
would be developed later into the outage.
This item will remain open
pending the inspector's review of the test program / plans at a future
inspection.
.
7.
Other Activities Underway during this Outage
The inspectors noted that several other activities were taking place
during this outage.
Representatives of Westinghouse are performing the warranty inspection
on the Main Turbine. The inspectors noted the disassembled turbine and
were favorably impressed with the excellent condition of the turbine
blades and internals.
The licansee representative indicated that the Na2 2 3 recirculation
S0
pump is~ scheduled for-installation-during this outage (7502/1).
(continued)
- _
_
. _ .
'
lEE
..
-9-
=i?
.
The inspector discussed.the results of the Halon Fire System
acceptance tests (7502/2) which were conducted on March 31, 1976.
The licensee representative indicated that the ceiling and false
.sg
floor areas of the relay rooms maintained the required halon
concentration for the specified ten minute period, however, the
_
ceiling of the control room was only able to maintain the required
2F
halen concentration for a period of four to cix minutes. A report
isLbeing prepared for review by NELPIA which documents the results
of this test.
The inspector will review this report and NELPIA
evaluation in a future inspection.
The inspectors had no further comments on these items.
8.
Inadvertent Addition of Na,S 03 to the NaOH Tank (76-05/11)
2
The inspector reviewed a cemorandum from the Plant Superintendent to
the Plant Safety Committee (PSC) addressing the need to investigate
the Na2 2 3 addition incident for possible safety implications.
The
'
S0
Plant Superintendent requested that the PSC recommend any corrective
action, procedures, or changes to procedures which might be needed in
order to prevent this type of incident in the future.
The PSC tet on April 13, 1976 and recoc= ended that AP&L Engineering
and the Safety Review Co=rittee investigate the effect of Na2 2 3
S0
on the carbon steel tank walls of the NaOH Tank.
Corrective action taken to date has been the labeling of each tank and
preparatien of additional procedures for sampling of both tanks.
The inspector reviewed rough drafts of the following applicable
procedures:
.
OP 1607.11
. Sampling the Reactor Building Spray Pumps
OP 1607.12
- Sampling of the Borated Water Storage Tank (BUST)
OP 1607.13
- Sampling the Sodium Hydroxide Tank (T-10)
-OP 1607.14
Sampling the Sodium Thiosulfate Tank (T-9)
This item remains unresolved pending analysis of this incident by the
SEC and approval of procedures by PSC.
(continued)
4
'
'
- =:.5:
.
2
-10-
.=
.
9.
' Review of Plant Operations
a.
' Shift Logs and Operating Records
~
"-
.
The inspector reviewed the records listed belew, held discussions
EE.
with plant staff. members and inspected the Control Room on
' April 21 and 21, 1976.
= r;;;
' " '
(1) ANO-1 Station. Log: Entries made in this log from January 1,
1976 to April 21, 1976 were observed to be filled out,
initialed, and reviewed.
(2) Auxiliary Operators Log: The inspector reviewed entries in
this log for the period January 1, 1976 to April 21, 1976.
(3) Jumper and Bypass Log: The inspector reviewed entries in
this log for the period December 30, 1975 to April 19, 1976.
The log did not contain discrepancies which were in conflict
..
.
with-Technical Specification requirements.
~~
(4) Trouble Reports: The inspector selected seven trouble
tickets for review, but cocplete history on each item was
not immediately available during the time period of the
inspection.
The licensee indicated that the information will
be available for evaluation at the next inspection.
.The inspector noted from observation of entries in the station log
that inspections are being made at least once per day of suction
line piping on the makeup,- decay heat removal, and building spray
systems.
The inspector had no further comments on this item.
-10.
Tour of Accessible Areas
The reactor was completely defueled, so access was allowed to all areas
of the plant.
The inspectors observed that the ncrmal shift require-
cents in the control room were being met even though there was no fuel
in the reactor.
The inspectors also observed that:
Monitoring instrumentation is being recorded as required.
Radiation controls have been properly established.
~ Plant housekeeping cohditions are adequate.
There are no significant fluid leaks.
There is no excessive piping vibrations.
'
Pipe hanger / seismic restraint setting and oil levels are satisfactory.
(continued)
~ ~
,
.
c-
r,
,.
,
=l =::
w
==E'
'
-11-
- EE
.,
-
- +e-
The inspectors did note, however, that a "C" clamp and an open end
. . .
='"
wrench were not secured on the catwalk above the reactor vessel
refueling pool. The inspectors also noted an empty reservoir on a
~
shock suppressor attachment to a main steam line in the reactor
building. This had been reported previously as Licensee Event Report
.76/05.- The licensee representative-indicated that the seals will be
se
replaced and the reservoirs refilled on any leaking shock suppressors
during this outage.
..
-The -inspectors had no further comments on this item,
11.
Review of Licensee Event Reports
The inspecters reviewed plant records related to the following Licensee
Event Reports:
A0 76/01
Grcup 6 Ratchet Rod Diop
A0 76/02
Failure to Record Station Battery Voltage for each Pilot Cell
This review was performed to verify that:
t.
.The cause was identified, evaluated, and corrective action taken.
~
b.
The details were clearly reported to the NRC and facility manage-
ment as required by the Technical Specifications.
c.
Each report was submitted for distribution and review was performed
as required by the Technical Specifications.
d.
Follow-up action is in progress or completed,
e.
Limiting conditions for operation were not exceeded.
~
The inspecters had no additional comments on this item.
4.2
.-.
/
&
?
.
J
.-
. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
e..
-
=:== ~:=:
-e
~
UNITED STATES
. . . . b
- - ' ' "
- -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
- +
REGION IV
611 RY AN PLAZA DRIVE. SUITE 1000
p;
ARLINGTON, TEXAS Mg 76Q11
-
June 28, 1976
f.....i
..
b::
Arkansas Power and Light Company
Docket No. 50-313
If
ATTN:
Mr. J. D. Phillips
3.-
Senior Vice President
!-
Sixth and Pine Streets
!-
Pine Bluff, Arkansas 71601
i'
Gentle =en:
F
Taank you for your letter of June 23, 1976, in response to our letter
dated June 2, 1976.
~.ie have no further questions at this time and will review your corrective
action during a future inspection.
Sincerely,
,h$ $f'ohW
G. L. Madsen, Chief
,
Reactor Operations and
.
Nuclear Support 3 ranch
<gooy 36A 7/0
r
P
<
~~
,, -
-
^@ o U Q / /
i
y
1
-l
,