ML20197B832
| ML20197B832 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 07/24/1997 |
| From: | Richards S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | Hutchinson C ENTERGY OPERATIONS, INC. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197B838 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-97-201, NUDOCS 9803120192 | |
| Download: ML20197B832 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000313/1997201
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
_ - ___
- - -
v
,
pS Rf C
[a
%
UNITED STATES
g-
)
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~t
g
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055Mo01
s
/-
0,,,,,
July 24, 1997
- Mr. C. Randy Hutchinson
Vice President, Operations ANO
Entergy Operat:ons, Inc.
1448 S.R. 333
Russellville. AR 72801
SUBJEC.T:
ARKANSAS NUCLEAR ONE, UNIT 1, DESIGN INSPECTION
NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50 313/97-201
Dear Mr. Hutchinson:
During the period from February 10,1997 through March 14,1997, the U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission's (NRC) Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) performed a
design inspection of the Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1, Emergency Feedwater System (EFW)
and the Decay Heat (DH)/ Low Pressure injection System (LPI). The purpose of the
inspection was to evaluate the capability of the systems to perform safety functions
required by their design basis, adherence to the design and licensing basis, ano consistency
of the as-built configurction with the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
l-
[
The results of this inspection are contained in the attached inspection report. Overall, the
i
team found the design of the two selected systems to be good, with adequate design
margins. Your_ staff's understanding of the design basis was good, ss was their inspection
preparation and ability to address team identified concerns. The implementanon of the
design was found to be adequate with some concerns noted.
The team identified an issue regarding excessive EFW flowrates to a single steam generator.
To reduce steam generator tube vibration crossflow velocity, Framatome Technologies, Inc.
(FTI),in a 1991 report to ANO 1, recommended a maximum flow of 1500 gpm assuming
both pumps are available and one steam generator is isolated. However, ANO-1 plant
operating procedures have no provisions to monitor and preclude exceeding thic limit. In.
,
May 1996, ANO-1 experienced a transient in wiich peak EFW flowrates of 1716 gpm were
identified for a brief time. An analysis performed by FTl, together with the results of your
staff's steam generator tube inspection performed during the last outage, suggest that there
is no immediate operability concern. The NRR staff will review and evaluate the plant
specific and potentially generic aspects of this issue.
The team identified issues associated with an operability evaluation performed for the
borated water storage tank flange removal which did not acconunt for the instsilation of a
foreign material exclusion cover and did not adequately address radioactive releases from
the tank.
j
Other findings included an niadequate evaluation fcr non "O" steam traps which, if failed,
!
could significantly alter the EFW pump room environment; not periodically testing certain
3
molded case circuit breakers; not establishing a basis for determining design requirements
~
]l$.ll.llj[]}l@M.I
[ kI
9903120192 970724
A')DCK 05000313
l
'
.
,,,c
G
,
_ _ _ _ _. .. . _ . .
-
-
-
o
.
.
,;
.
for the installation of instrument tubing and sensing lines that were found to be
' inadequately supported; inr.dequate control of some field routed conduits; a vortexing
calculation which did not account for instrument error, and discrepancies in the FSAR.
You have initiated appropriate measures to aodress the immediate concerns identified by
team. For the other issues, you have initiated appropriate reviews and corrective actions,
such as revision of design documents, changes to procedures, and further evaluations of the
identified issues. Notwithstanding the weaknesses described above, the team concluded
that the reviewed systems generally adhered to the design and licensing bases.
Pleas.e provide a senedule, within 60 days of the date of this letter, for completion of you
corrective actions for the iterns listed in Appendix A to the enclosed report, so that we can
plan for re inspection of_thsse items. As with all NRC inspections, we expect that you will
evale- e the resuhs of this inspection, and where applicable, apply the specific findings to
other systems and components.
in accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of this letter an
i
inspection report will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. Any enforcement a
resulting from this inspection will be issued by the NRC Region IV office via separate
on
please contact the inspection team leader, Mr. Robert L. Pettis, Jr
.
Sincerely,
r_
L
Stuart A. Richards, Chief
Specialinspection Branch
Division of inspection and Support Programs
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure: Inspection Report No. 50 313/97-201
cc: See next page
\\
/
w
.
,
,
Mr. C. Randy Hatchinson
Entergv Operations. Inc.
Arkansas Nuclear One. Unit 1
cc:
Executive Vice President &
- Chief Operating Officer
Vice President, Operations
Entergy Operations, Inc.
Entergy Operations, Inc.
P. O. Box 31995
P. O. Box 31995
Jackson, MS 39286-1995
Jackson, MS 39286 1995
Director. Division of Radiation
Wise, Carter. Child & Caraway
P. O. Box 651
Control and Emergency Management
- Arkansas Department of Heal h
Jackson, MS 39205
t
4815 West Markham Street, Slot 30
Little Rock, AR 72205 3867
!
Winston & Strawn
1400 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20005 3502
Manager, Rockville Nuclear Licensing
Framatome Technologies
1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525
Rockville, MD 20852
k-
Senior Resident hispector
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
P. O. Box 310
London, AR 72847
- Regional Administrator, Region IV
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400
Arlington, TX 76011-8064
. County Judge of Pope County
Pope County Courthouse
Russellville, AR 72801
I
- _ - _ - _ _