ML20039A223
| ML20039A223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 10/28/1981 |
| From: | Dance H, Shymlock M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20039A208 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-338-81-25, 50-339-81-22, NUDOCS 8112160384 | |
| Download: ML20039A223 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000338/1981025
Text
<
UNITED STATES
o,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,,
o
E
REGION li
o
101 MARIETT A ST., N.W., SUITE 3100
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
o
Report Nos. 50-338/81-25 and 50-339-81-22
Licensee: Virginia Electric and Power Company
Richmond, Virginia 23261
Facility Name: North Anna Units 1 and 2
Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339
Inspection at North Anna Site near Mineral, Virginia
C / Wb
/d/2-
Inspector: f
it: B. Shymfock, Retfdent inspector
06te Signed
Approved by:
(
/d
s'/f/'
w
H. C. Dance,' Section Chief, Division of
Ofte S'igned
Resident and Reator Project Inspection
SuftitARY
Inspection on September 6 - October 5,1981
Areas Inspected
This routine, inspection involved 49 inspector-hours on site in the areas of
followup of previous inspector findings, licensee event reports, previously
identified items, surveillance and maintenance activities, and plant operations.
Unit 1 Findings:
Of the five areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in four
areas. One apparent violation was identified in one area (failure to follow
procedures in response to a radiation monitoring system alarm - paragraph 8).
Unit 2 Areas Inspected
This routine inspection by the resident inspectors involved 47 inspector .
hours onsite in the ares of followup of previous inspection findings, licensee
event reports, previously identified items, surveillance and maintenance
activities, and plant operations.
Unit 2 Findings:
Of the 5 areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8113160 38V
-
.
..
. ._
_
_ _ _. . -
. _
. _ _ . _
-
. .
y
.
,
,,
,
'
DETAILS
(
~1..
' Persons Contacted
!
- Licensee _ Employees
-
.
.
'.*W. R. Cartwright, -Section Manager -
- E. W. 'Harrell, Assistant' Station Manager -
- J.'A..Hanson, Superintendent
Technical Services
.
!
J. -R. Harper, Superintendent - Maintenance -
i.
_ S. L. Harvey, Superintendent -= 0perations
.
'
- A'
H. Stafford, Supervisor. Health Physics
.
[
J. M. Mosticone, Operations Coordinator
i
- M. A. Harrison, Resident QC Engineer
- K. A. Huffman, Clerk
_
i.
Other licensee employee's contacted included six technicians, twelve
operators, three mechanics and several office personnel.
i-
.
-
- Attended - exitL interview
'
[
2.
Exit Interview
I
The inspection scope and < findings were summarized on '0ctober. 6,1981, with
those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The apparent violation
~
,
identified in paragraph 8 was discussed with. station management at that time-
i
and acknowledged.
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
l
a.
(Closed) Violation 50-338/81-13-02 and 50-339/81-10-02:
Failure - to
j
provide a training program for Auxiliary Operators to meet' technical
Specifications._ This violation is closed based'on issuance of
administrative procedure ADM-29.18, Operator Qualification for areas of
Responsibility dated July'27,1981 and its implementation.
This
1
procedure . identifies the method by which the operator will be trained
and also how completion will be checked.
.
.
'
b~.
- (Closed) Violation 50-338/81-18-01 and 50-339/81-15-01: ' Failure to
i
conduct' fire _ brigade drills quarterly- for ev.h brigade.
This violation-
is closed based on review of the program which the fire marshall has
implemented. =It identifies-the frequency for each brigade to conduct
.
their drill for the next year, and 'also has a formal drill critique
l
form. The plant computer will-be used to track completion of drills.
-c.
(Closed) Violation 50-333/81-16-01:
Failure to..have three fire doors
functional, Lin that the latching ' devices for these doors were
inoperative. This violation is closed based on the resident inspector
' verifying that the- following fire doors S-54-11, T-16, T-18, S-54-6,
i
'
and S-54-7 are functional.
I
~
,.
y.
.
%
w.
e
=.
4
<-y',a
F '^_-=
.T++-
r
w- w ig reW-
q-
.
--p
m*w
--9wu-
-3
--.mg
v-
y
e
g
-
- ..
..
4
2
.
4.
Unresolved ' Items
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Plant Status
Unit 1
During this inspection period Unit 1 operated at or near capacity load,
except for the following: the unit was ramped down on September 8 due to B
cold leg accumulator boron concentration being out of specification,
however, the problem was corrected at 30% power and the unit was returned to
full power; there was also a load reduction on September 25 for a-
containment entry to improve the ventilation on B-Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP)
due to motor temperature problems.
'I
Unit 2
During this inspection period Unit 2 operated at or near' capacity load
except for the following instances: the unit was ramped off line
September 17 due to C cold leg accumulator boron concentration being out of
specification, the unit tripped during startup on September 19 due to B
steam _ generator Hi/Hi level.
Which was caused by excessive leakage through
the B main feedwater regulating valve.
6.
Followup of Previously Identified Items
(
a.
(Closed)IFI 50-338/81-15-02 and 50-339/81-12-03:
Updating the working
copies of technical specifications.
Administrative procedure ADH-29.2,
section 2.6, dated August 21, 1981 specifically identifies how
amendments to technical specifications shall be routed. The working
copies will be updated when the NRC approved change is first received.
This procedure should keep working copies current. The inspector had
no further questions.
b.
(Closed)IFI 50-338/81-02-03: Rescue Squad refusal to transport a
contaminated individual. The licensee held a meeting with repre-
sentatives from the Mineral Virginia Rescue Squad on February 23, 1981.
This specific problem was discussed as well as methods to improve their
response and communications. Licensee management stated that the
meeting was productive and believed that proper response would occur in
'
the future. The inspector had no further questions.
i
c.
(0 pen)IFI 50-338/81-05-11 and 50-339/81-01-10:
Inspection of the
~
incore instrumentation sump prior to startup and surveillance of the
sump level instrument. The following operating procedures,1-0P-IE and
2-0P-1E, Containment Integrity Checklist, were revised to include
inspection of the incore instrument sump. The addition of this sump
.
level indicator to the surveillance program could not be verified.
This area will receive further inspection effort.
.
.
._-
.
.
3
d.
(0 pen) IFI 50-338/81-02-04, Evaluation of possible damage to core
internals due to -loose steam generator tube plug. The core plate and
lower core support areas of the lower reactor vessel internals were
searched with under water video cameras.
This search was video taped.
The search of the lower vessel areas indicated no damage. Migration of
the stem generator tube plug through the reactor coolant pump vanes
will be .further evaluated.
This area will receive futher inspector
effort.-
7.
Licensee Event Report (LER) Followup
The following LER's were reviewed and closed.
The inspectcr verified that
reporting requirements had been met, causes had been identified, corrective
actions appeared appropriate, generic applicability had been considered, and
the LER forms were complete. Additionally for those reported identified by
asterick, a more detailed review was performed to verify that the licensee
had reviewed the event, corrective action had been taken, no unreviewed
safety questions were involved, and violations of regulations or Technical
Specification conditions had been identified.
Unit 1
338/81-36
Chemistry personnel failed to sample 'C' safety injection
- 338-81-49
Control rod positions deviated by greater than twelve steps
338-81-54
Auxiliary feedwater pump failed to indicate flow
1
338-81-55
Control room bottle air fell below required minimum
pressure.
338-81-65
Fuel element defect in the reactor core
Unit 2
339-81-50
Rod position deviated greater than group position
- 339-81-51
PORV nitrogen tank pressure fell below minimum limit
339-81-53
Steam supply valve failed to completely shut
339-81-56
Tave temperature channel failed high
8.
Radiation Monitoring System
'During review of main control board annunciators on Unit 1 it was noted that
the -following annunciators were illuminated:
Rad Monitor System Hi/Hi rad
level, and Rad Monitor System Hi rad level.
Indication on the radiation
monitoring panel indicated the Hi and Hi/Hi levels were on the vent stack A
gas monitor (VG-104) instrument.
l
l
,
_
-.
. . _ _
..
- e
0-
e
j
' Discussions with operations' personnel indicated that the high levels were
.due to maintenance being conducted in one of the charging pump cubicles, and-
that grab samples were being taken out of the vent stack.
Further review with Health Physics indicated that only grab samples of the
charging pump cubicle had been taken and not the vent stack.
The vent stack A had been diverted through the charcoal filter banks when
the alarm was first received, however it was later returned directly to the
stack.
-It was noted that abnormal procedure 1-AP-5.2, Common Radiation Monitoring
System, requires that when vent stack A is in an alam condition a daily grab
. sample is required, and Health Physics is to recalculate release rates for
the affected system prior to restoring discharge paths to the environment.
Grab samples of vent stack A gaseous activity were not.taken from
approximately 1:30 a.m. September 30 until identified by the inspector at
5:15 p.m. October 1, even though the monitor was in an alarm condition.
The
recalculated release rates were not conducted prior to restoring discharge
path to the environment. These are examples of a violation of Technical Specification 6.8.1 which requires written procedures to be established,
implemented and maintained and is designated 338/81-25-01.
9.
Plant Operations
Tha inspector. kept informed on a daily basis of the overall plant status and
of any significant safety matters related to plant operations.
Discussions
were held with plant management and various members of the operations staff
on a regular basis.
Selected portions of daily operating logs and operating
data sheets were reviewed daily during this report period.
The inspector conducted various plant tours and made frequent visits to the
control room.
Observation included: witnessing work activities in
progress, status of operating and standby safety systems, confirming valve
positions, instrument readings, and recordings, annunciator alarms,
housekeeping and vital area controls.
Informal discussions were held with operators and other personnel on work
activities in progress and the status of safety-related equipment or
systems.
One violation and no deviations were identified.
.
h
-.