ML20206P186
| ML20206P186 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 04/14/1987 |
| From: | Craig Harbuck, Hunter D, Johnson W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20206P159 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-87-08, 50-313-87-8, 50-368-87-08, 50-368-87-8, NUDOCS 8704210118 | |
| Download: ML20206P186 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000313/1987008
Text
-
1
&
B
APPENDIX B
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
Inspection Report:
50-313/87-08
Licenses: DPR-51
50-368/87-08
Dockets: 50-313
50-368
Licensee:
Arkansas Power & Light Company
P. O. Box 551
Little Rock, Arkansas 72203
Facility Name:
Arkansas Nuclear One (AN0), Units 1 and 2
Inspection At:
AN0 Site, Russellville, Arkansas
Inspection Conducted:
March 1-31, 1987
4/7/37
Inspectors:
)/ b
eso<w
. D. John
S~enior Resident Reactor
D' ate'
Inspector
Y] [)
ll
+-c.dev
&
D6te '
C.C.Hapck,ResidentReaftorInspector
Approved:
f bA T
~
Y/<*/
D.
R~. Hunter, Chief, Reactor
Date
Project Section B, Reactor Projects
Branch
8704210118 870415
ADOCK 05000313
O
ppR
~-
n
. ,-
-
.,
-
..
,
-
,
2-
-
.
Inspection Summary '
' Inspection Conducted March 1-31, 1987 (Report 50-313/87-08).
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection including operational' safety
verification, maintenance, surveillance, and the emergency operating
procedure.
~
Results: Within the four areas inspected, no violations or deviations were
identified.
,
-Inspection Conducted March 1-31, 1987 (Report 50-368/87-08)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of operational safety
- verification, maintenance, and surveillance.
Results: Within'the three areasLinspected, two violations were identified
(failure to maintain configuration control of a seismic class.I pipe support,
paragraph 2.B.8, and failure to have adequate procedures, paragraph 2.A.3).
,
'
<
L
,
i
-e
. . , - - . , - - - . . . . , . . , , - , . - - , -
.
r
y..,.c-w.,..,,----7.me,-,_,r..,-.y
...cm .4
,-,e,.ww
.y.-ww.
,www-
w,,,,m--,..
,,v-,r.,,-+ - -
-
_..
.m
1
%
,
-3-
<
'
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
J. Levine, Executive Director of Site Nuclear Operations
R. Ashcraft, Electrical Maintenance Supervisor
- B. Baker, Operations Manager
D. Bennett, Mechanical Engineer
A. Cox, Unit 1 Operations Superintendent
- E. Ewing, General Manager Technical Support
B. Garrison, Operations Technical Support
L. Gulick, Unit 2 Operations Superintendent
H. Hollis, Security Superintendent
- D. Howard, Special Projects Manager
- D. Lomax, Licensing Supervisor
B. McCord, Quality Control Inspection Supervisor
- J. McWilliams, Maintenance Manager
J. Merryfield, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor
P. Michalk, Licensing Engineer
G. Parks, Senior QC Inspector
V. Pettus, Mechanical Maintenance Superintendent
- S. Quennoz, General Manager, Plant Operations
C. Taylor, Operations Technical Support Supervisor
G. Wrightam, I&C Supervisor
- Present at exit interview.
The NRC inspectors also contacted other plant personnel, including operators,
technicians, and administrative personnel.
2.
Operational Safety Verification (Units 1 and 2)
The NRC inspectors observed control room operations, reviewed applicable
logs, and conducted discussions with control room operators.
The NRC
inspectors verified the operability'of selected emergency systems,
reviewed tagout records, and' verified proper return to service of affected
components, and ensured that maintenance requests had been initiated for
equipment'in need of maintenance.
The NRC inspectors made spot checks to
verify-that the physical security plan was being implemented in accordance
with the station security plan.
The NRC inspectors verified
. implementation of radiation protection controls during observation of
plant activities.
The NRC inspectors toured accessible areas of the units to observe plant
equipment conditions, including potential fire hazards, fluid leaks, and
excessive vibration.
The NRC inspectors also observed plant housekeeping
and cleanliness conditions, and verified implementation of radiation
protection controls during the tours.
, ,
..
..
.
. -
s:q
..
~
2
h-
-4-
,
!i,
'a.
. System Walkdown
The NRC inspectors walked'down the accessible portions of the Unit 2-.
-
emergency feedwater system using Procedure 2106.06-and Drawing M-2204 and
verified operability of the system. Several items were noted during the
walkdown.
-
(1) Two valves, 2CV-1036-2 and.2CT-41 were noted to have minor packing
i-
leaks. The licensee initiated action to correct these.
.
3-
'
(2) Backleakage from the "A" steam generator through Valve 2EFW-7A piping
pentration room noted during a previous inspection conducted in the
present cycle, was noted to still be occurring. -As found before,.
there did not appear to be any adverse effect on the system
.
operation.
(3) On March 19, 1987, the NRC inspector found that Valve 2EFW-17 did not-
have a lock as specified by Procedure.2106.06. Operations was
infonned and a lock was placed on the valve.- The valve position had
been correct (open). Subsequent' investigation by the licensee
revealed that most likely the lock had been-placed on the valve
,
during the lineup performed at the end of the last' refueling outage
' n September'1986, but had been removed during the unscheduled outage
i
>
following the reactor trip in November 1986, when Procedure 2106.08,
" Steam Generator Secondary Fill Drain _ and Wet Layup," was used..
- Step 12.5 of this procedure only required ~2EFW-17 to be open 'but not
locked in the restoration valve lineup.
In that these two procedures
'
are inconsistent regarding the_ locking of Valve 2EFW-17, they are
c
inadcquate to properly control:its locked status. This is an
apparent violation.
(368/8708-02).
E
b.
Observations and Concerns
The NRC. inspector made tne following observations and discussed each
with the licensee:
L(1) The main feedwater isolation valve in the north corner of the
upper north piping penetration room has had a steady inner
packing steam' leak during the present cycle,' which discharges to
- -
a floor drain via a ~ small tube. The result is that this area is
unusually. hot and humid. A concern was expressed to the
i
licensee that during the hot summer-months there may be a
i
possibility of adversely affecting safety-related equipment in
that area such as the EFW header isolation valves. Similarly,
.,
the added. heat from the EFW header pipe in the upper south
'
piping penetration room due to the check valve backleakage, as
noted above, might also adversely affect safety-related valves
1
i
nearby. The licensee plans to perform an evaluation of these
i
concerns.
4
A
!
l
_.. . . . . . . - _ _ . . - _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . - - . _ - _ . . , . _ _
_ . _ , _ . , .
. _ - - . , _ - _ . , . _ , _ _
r,
q-
_ '
. ; '
_
.
-
-
,
.
---
>
,
-
4
W o.! i
l
'
<
y -
-
, -
r
a
~
-5 '
m
m
i
l
$(2) The'NRC insp'ector noted that the excore' neutron flux indication-
r
'
L
drawers on Panel 2C336iin the Unit 2 control room were not
secured.in that the screw fasteners were-loose._. Subsequently,
it was learned that most of the screws cannot be fastened
~
- properly. When notified, the_ licensee issued a job request to-
correct this deficiency. ~ The?NRC inspector later observed that
a similar problem also existed _with drawers.in the control-
element a'sembly drive mechanism. cabinets.
Having already
s
.
. identified this,: license representatives stated their intent to
correct.these deficiencies during-scheduled outages,- but.they
had not yet developed a specific plan for doing so.
(3) The doors in the.back of control' panels in both control rooms
were frequently observed to-be partly open.
'(4) ~ The:NRC inspector noted that the' pump data trend book in Unit 2
was' missing the January 1987-data for 2P78 flow and differential
pressure.
This was promptly corrected by the licensee.
The
Unit I trend book also had missing data,_but this had already
-been identified and was being corrected.
(5) The NRC inspector found Unit 1 Fire Doors 51 and 57 ajar.on
March 17.
However, these doors were not required to be closed-
by_ Unit _1 Technical Specifications. On March 18, Fire Door 265
in Unit 2 was found ajar.
Security records.-showed it had been
that way for approximately 19 minutes.
It appeared that
security would probably have responded to the alarm within the
hour allotted by their procedure. The NRC inspector stated a
concern that some licensee personnel were apparently not
verifying fire doors closed after going through them.
(6) A large can of what appeared to be oil or cleaning solution and
an aerosol spray can were found sitting on the cover plate of
the Unit 2 "B" spray pump suction check valve.
Plant operations
was informed and the cans were removed.
(7) The flexible conduit to the low pressure safety injection
pump (2P60A) recirculation isolation motor operated control
valve (2CV-5123-1) was observed to be disconnected from the
limit switch cover fitting, exposing the cables inside.
This
problem was promptly corrected after the licensee was informed.
(8) A nut was observed to be missing from an anchor bolt on Seismic
Pipe Hanger 2HCB-15-H11.
This hanger supported the 20 inch pipe
supplying the suction of the Unit 2 "A"
train containment spray
(2P35A) and low pressure injection (2P60A) pumps from the
containment sump.
This was pipe also integral to the piping from
the refueling water storage tank which supplies these same pumps
and the high pressure safety injection pump (2P89A).
Failure to
maintain this support in the configuration depicted in the
design drawing (Hanger Sketch 2HCB-15-H11, Revision 3, as-built
.
_ -
....n.
-6-
.
verified on' January 18,'1982) is an apparent violation (368/8708-01).
The licensee was informed and promptly replaced the missing nut.
Subsequent engineering inspection identified additional problems
with this pipe. hanger:
Nearlylall the anchor bolts had no washers (washers were
.
subsequently installed).
One anchor was closer to an adjacent support base plate
.
anchor than allowed by the construction
specification (C-2305).
The licensee issued engineering
action request (EAR)87-208 to address the effect-of these
deficiencies on the operability of the pipe hanger.
The NRC inspector noted that operability evaluations of similar
deficiencies dating back to NRC Open Item 368/8622-01 had still
not been completed.
The NRC inspector stated his concern that
long delays in completing such evaluations could result in the
identification of an unacceptable condition long-after the event
was initially noted.
These reviews and observations were conducted to verify that facility
operations were in conformance with the requirements established under
Technical Specifications, 10 CFR, and administrative procedures.
3.
Monthly Maintenance Observation (Units 1 and 2)
Station maintenance activities of safety related systems and components
listed below were observed / reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted
in accordance with approved procedures, Regulatory Guides, and industry
codes or standards; and in conformance with Technical Specifications.
The following items were considered during this review:
the limiting
conditions for operation were met while components or systems were removed
from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiating the work;
activities were accomplished using approved procedures and were inspected
as applicable; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior
to returning components or systems to service; quality control records
were maintained; activities were accomplished by qualified personnel;
parts and materials used were properly certified; radiological controls
were implemented; and fire prevention controls were implemented.
Work requests were reviewed to determine status of outstanding jobs and to
ensure that priority is assigned to safety-related equipment maintenance
which may affect system performance.
Portions of the following maintenance activities were observed:
Adjustment to discharge flow indication FI-2400 for Spray Pump 2P358
.
(Priority 1 Job Order 730451, Procedure 1304.01)
.
- ,
, . . . .
-7-
- Process monitor system calibration using Xe-133 for the main
.
condenser offgas monitor (Job Order 729753, Procedure 2304.27)
Corrective maintenance on EFIC channel "B" LI 2673 (train-2 of "B"
.
steam generator wide range level indication) (Job Order 731068,
Procedure 1304.99)
Removal of the Unit 2 "B" service water pump, 2P48, initial
.
uncoupling (Job Order 729900, Procedure 2402.34)
Troubleshooting and adjustment of Letdown Flow Control
.
. Valve'2CV-4816..(Job Order 730862, Procedure 2304.119)
Ultrasound inspection of degraded joint in jacket cooling water line
.
for Diesel Generator 2K4B (Job Order 731349)
Troubleshooting of. Unit 2 reactor Trip Circuit Breaker TCB-7
.
(Priority 1 Job. Order 3001)
"
Verification of_ closing circuit for TCB-7 (Job Order 731485,
.
' Procedure 2408.031)
Reassembly of service Water Pump 2P48 (Job Order 729900,
.
Procedure 2402.34)
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
Monthly Surveillance Observation (Units 1 and 2)
The NRC inspector observed the Technical Specification required
surveillance testing on Low Pressure Safety Injection Pump 2P60A
(Procedure 2104.40, Supplement 1) and verified that testing was performed
in accordance with adequate procedures, that test instrumentation was
calibrated, that limiting conditions for operation were met, that removal
and restoration of the affected components were accomplished, that test
results conformed with Technical Specifications and procedure
requirements, that test results were reviewed by personnel other than the
individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during
,
the testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management
personnel.
The NRC inspector also witnessed portions of the following test
activities:
-
_ Core protection calculator channel "A" test (Procedure 2312.02,
.
JO 729765)
Excore channel "B" monthly test (Procedure 2304.101, J0 730155)
.
,
,
i
. , - - . . , ,
n
- - - - - - . , - - - - - - - ,-
,,
.
-- -,
- , - -
w
--. : .. ..
-8-
Area radiation monitor calibration check for the Unit 1, 317 ft.
.
elevation area (Procedure 1304.95, JO 730695)
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Emergency Operating Procedure Review (Unit 1)
The-NRC inspector determined that the Procedures Generation Package (PGP)
-submitted in 1983 had not yet been completely approved by the NRC Office
of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
The NRC inspector's' review of the E0P, which primarily consisted of verifying
that it met the commitments made in the PGP was continued, but was not yet
completed.
The review will be continued in a future inspection.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Exit Interview
The NRC resident inspector met with Mr. S. M. Quennoz, General Manager,
Plant Operations, and other members of the AP&L staff at the end of-
inspection. At this meeting, the NRC inspector summarized the scope of the
inspection and the findings.
.
l
f
4
- - _. . .
_ . _ . .,.
_ - . , , . _ , . . _ _ _ , _ . _ , _ . , _
_ ~ . , _ _ _ _ _ . _ , _ . . . _ , _
.,..._ _.. _,__ _ _ _ _ . . _ _
_
_