ML20147D108

IE Inspec Repts 50-313/78-16 & 50-368/78-24 on 780925-1022 During Which 1 Item of Noncompliance Was Noted:Bypasses Were Not Properly Verified Upon Removal

ML20147D108
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	10/31/1978
From:	Madsen G, Spangler R, Westerman T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20147D084	List: ML20147D079 ML20147D098 ML20147D108
References
50-268-78-24, 50-313-78-16, NUDOCS 7812190061
Download: ML20147D108 (6)

See also: IR 05000313/1978016

Text

,

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

(~')

0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION IV

Report Nos. 50-313/78-16

50-368/78-24

Docket Nos. 50-313 License No. DPR-51

50-368 Construction Permit No. CPPR-89/

Facility Operating License NPF-6

Licensee: Arkansas Power and Light Company

P. O. Box 551

Little Rock, Arkansas 72203

Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear One (AN0), Unit Nos. 1 and 2

Inspection At: ANO Site, Russellville, Arkansas

Inspection Conducted: September 25 - October 22, 1978

0 / J .

i

Inspectors: :1' N/V k M //hr / A>/ N//

'T. F. Westerman,-Reactor Inspector Date '

/ ,Y k ,ea /dh/77

" R. G. Spangler,LReactor Inspector (Intern) Date

Approved By: hG. L. W. <--/h h

Madsen, Chief, R;tetor Operations and

/o/-3//78_

Da'te

Nuclear Support Branch

Inspection Sunmary

Inspection During Period of September 22 through October 22, 1978 (Report

No. 50-313/ 78-16)

Areas Inspectg: Routine, unannounced inspection of plant operations. The

inspection involved 17 inspector-hours on-site by cne NRC inspector.

Results: Within the one area inspected, one infraction relative to jumpers /

bypasses was identified (DETAILS, paragraph 3).

Irspection During Period of September 22 through October 22, 1978 (Report

No. 50-368/78-24)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of the startup program; the

event of September 16, 1978; and license conditions for Modes 1 and 2

operation. The inspection involved 36 inspector-hours on-site by the

resident inspector.

Resul t_s : Within the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were

identified. "f 81'319 0065,

a

'

.

-2-

DETAILS

..3

1. Persons Contacted

Arkansas-Power & Light Company Employees

G. H. Miller, Acting ANO Plant Manager

L. Alexander, QC Engineer

J. R. Anderson, Assistant Production Startup Supervisor

B. A. Baker, ANO-2 Operations Supervisor

R. L. Bata, QA Engineer '

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 Engineer

B. A. Terwilliger, Supervisor Plant Operations

R. Elder, Instrument Supervisor

J. Robert'on,

s ANO-1 Operations Supervisor

T. Ennis, Licensing

S. Petzel, Licensing

D. Williams, Licensing Manager

F. Foster, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor

G. Bruss, ANO-2 Shift Supervisor

M. Stroud, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor

Bechtel Employee

R. Ramey, Bechtel Startup Engineer

2. Plant Status

Unit 1

Steady state 100% power operation.

Unit 2

Post core hot functional testing is in progress. Problems have been

encountered in performing the flow coast down test due to the malfunction

of a D/P cell across the reactor coolant pumps. Repair may require a

plant cooldown. Estimated criticality date is now the week of

November 13.

'

3. Review of Plant Operations (Unit 1)

The inspector conducted a review of plant operations by:

a. Performing a review of plant logs and data sheets for the quarterly

period of July through September; and

<

,

-- - - , ,

. . . . . .

'

.

-3- i

b. conducting a tour of selected areas within the plant to

observe general housekeeping and to verify selected component

configurations.

'

During the review of plant logs and data sheets, the inspector found

that bypass tag numbers 77-121-1 and 77-121-2 annotated on Bypass /

Jumper log sheet No. 320 had not been verified by an individual on

their removal'on March 15, 1978. Procedure 1005.04, Control and Use

of Bypasses and Jumpers, in paragraph 6.1.6, requires the initials of

not only the individual removing the tag but also a second individual

to verify the removal. 'The failure to properly verify the removal of .

the above tags as required by procedure 1005.04 is contrary to Technical

Specification 6.8.1 and constitutes an ' item of noncompliance at the

infraction level.

Within the remaining areas of the inspection, the inspector identified

several minor discrepancies that were corrected and discussed with

licensee representatives. No further items of noncompliances or

deviations were identified.

4. License Conditions Unit 2 for' Modes'1 and 2 (Unit 2)

The inspector reviewed the conditions identified in Attachment 2 to

Amendment No. 1 of NPF-6. The status is as follows:

a. Mode 2 (Initial Criticality)

(1) Startup Punchlist Items

The list has been reduced to the following systems:

PlantProtectiveSystem(1)

Air and Gas Radiation Monitors (1)

Liquid Radwaste System (1)

(2) Preoperational Tests

Preoperational Test 2.083.01, Main Steam Supply and Safety

Relief Valves, has been completed. RIV's review of test

data is not complete.

(3) Outstanding Startup Program Test Deficiencies

The RIV review of test deficiencies is not complete.

(4) Unit Load Transient Test 2.800.01, Appendix U

i Revision 1 to this procedure was issued September 27, 1978.

This issue is considered closed.

i

a

.. . . ~ .

,

'

.

-4-

(5) Main Feedwater Line Break Witnin Containment Piping

Penetration Room

Required design changes are scheduled to be coupleted by

October.

(6) Radiation Protection

Calibration of radiation protection equipment is still in

progress. Estimated completion date is October 29, 1978.

(7) Hanger Installation

Three hangers remain to be installed and work is in progress.

(8) Independent DC Power Supplies for the Series Containment

Penetration Breakers

The Design Change Package (DCP-638) that installed this

design change has been completed by Job Order 5450 on

August 29, 1978. This issue is considered closed.

(9) Discrepancies in Facility Operating Procedures

A permanent change to 2304.92 through 95 was being prepared

to provide for comparison of the addressable CPC constants

before and after testing. This is the only discrepancy

remaining.

(10) Hydrogen Purge System Test

This issue remains unresolved and the necessity for maintain-

ing this system is currently under review by NRR.

(11) Low Pressure Safety Injection Pump Motor Failure

,

This issue was closed in IE Inspection Report 50-368/78-23,

paragraph 14.d.

'

(12) Loose Part in the Safety Injection System

The licensee had initially reported that during repair of

valve SI-18 a pin was found to be missing. Subsequently,

during discussions with the maintenance personnel involved,

the licensee determined that the missing pin had not been

l

reinstalled during earlier maintenance activities. Actions

I have been taken by the licensee to provide instruction to

I the maintenance personnel involved to prevent recurrence.

l This issue is considered closed.

,

, -.. _ .. _..

'

.

-5-

b. Mode l'(Power Operation)

..

(1) Startup Punchlist Items

The following systems have outstanding startup punchlist

items which affect their operability.

- Control Room H&V (1)

Miscellaneous-H&V (1) .

FeedwaterSystem(1)  ;

'

Fuel Pool and Auxiliaries (6).

Waste Gas System (1)

Solid Radiation Waste System (1)

Main Steam System (2) '

(2) CESEC Code' Instrumentation

i

The instrumentation for verification of the CESEC Code has

been obtained. The inspector will verify its installation

prior to Mode 1. >

There were no items of noncompliance or deviations identified during

the inspection of this item.

5. September -16, 1978 Incident (Unit 2)

During the period of this resident inspection report, a special

inspection was conducted of the September 16, 1978 incident involving

initiation of the Unit 2 Engineered Safety Feature Systems and spray

down of the Unit No. 2 containment building. (SeeIEInspectionReport

No. 50-368/78-25.)

Subsequent to this inspection, the licensee had proposed the following

preliminary plant changes and testing with respect to the instrument

inverters 2Y11, 2Y13, 2Y22 and 2Y24.

a. The input circuitry associated with fuse FU-2 which was '

found blown in 2Y24 is to be verified to be in accordance with

the vendor's recommendations for each inverter,

b. The current and voltage pots associated with the static transfer

switch are to be adjusted to their extreme position on each

inverter, i .e. , 185-190 amps vice the present nominal 154 amps on

overcurrent, and 20-30 volts vice the present 84 volts on under-

voltage. The licensee stated that the current setting of 190 amps

should cause .the inverter to go 'to 0 volts output as the result of

the saturation of the inverter output transformer.

- _

. . ~ . . - = ,

f

i

-6-

c. Each inverter is to be tested for the following:

(1) Operation on their respective DC bus with the normal

rectified 480 volt AC input de-energized.

(2) Tripping of the undervoltage coil associated with each

of the 480 volt essential buses. This would allow the

emergency diesels to start and assume the load on each

essential bus.

(3) De-energizing the power to the DC bus battery charger and

cycling of the breaker associated with the 480 volt AC

input.

(4) Determine if transfer switch operation does occur with

energization of the battery eliminator circuits associated

with the Reactor Trip Switchgear. This circuit draws

approximately 200 amps of starting current.

(5) Perform a load test of each inverter and verify appropriate

settings.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the

inspection of this item.

6. Pc c

o Core Hot Functional Test (Unit 2)

.,

Tht: inspector reviewed the Test Director's Log for the period of

September 11, 1978 through October 12, 1978. This log provides a

chronological record of the post core hot functional test program.

The inspector also reviewed the master sequence document 2.650.01

for the post core hot functional test which was in progress.

-

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

7. Exit Meetings (Units 1 and 2)

Exit meetings were conducted on September 29, October 11 and

October 20, 1978 with Mr. Terwilliger and other members of the plant

staff. The inspectors discussed the scope of the inspection and ,

summarized the inspection findings which are detailed in this report.

r

t