ML20215F117

Insp Repts 50-313/87-15 & 50-368/87-15 on 870501-31. Violations Noted:Failure to Maintain Seismic Support in Design Configuration

ML20215F117
Person / Time
Site:	Arkansas Nuclear
Issue date:	06/12/1987
From:	Craig Harbuck, Hunter D, Johnson W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:
Shared Package
ML20215E682	List: ML20215E679 ML20215F096 ML20215F117
References
50-313-87-15, 50-368-87-15, NUDOCS 8706220246
Download: ML20215F117 (6)

See also: IR 05000313/1987015

Text

- 1

. .- '

'

,

-

$.

APPENDIX B

.

'

. m.,,

'

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY. COMMISSION

~

REGION IV ,

'

'

' Inspection Report: 50-313/87-15 Licenses: DPR-51' -

!

4 50-368/87-15 NPF-6' i-

'

'

Dockets: 50-313

.

'50-368

N . Licensee: Arkansas' Power & Light Company

P. 0.~ Box 551 i

Little Rock, Arkansas 72203: l

Facility Name: Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO),-Units 1 and 2

. Inspection At: 'ANO Site, Russellvilla, Arkansas

Inspection Conducted: May.1-31, 1987

.

I

Inspectors: //// m 6/3/87 .

W. D._ Johns ~, Senior Resident Reactor Date- l

Inspector

feeAef

C. C. Harbuck, Resident Reactor Inspector

sh er

Dafe /

0 l

Approvedi

..D. R. Hunter, Chief, Reactor-Project.

[2 [/8/OI-

Date

Section B, Reactor Projects Branch

t:

--.

,

i

l

!

8706220246 870615

PDR ADOCK 05000313 ,

--

t G PDR  !

<ey

k

.

. .

'2

Inspection Summary

Inspection Conducted May 1-31, 1987 (Report 50-313/87-15; 50-368/87-15)

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection including operational safety

verification, maintenance, surveillance, and followup on previously identified j

items.

]

Results: Within the four areas inspected, one violation was identified l

(failure to maintain a seismic support in the design configuration, '

paragraph 3).

Inspection Conducted May 1-31, 1987 (Report 50-368/87-15) 4

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of operational safety

verification, maintenance, surveillance, and followup on a previously

identified-item.

Results: Within the four areas inspected, no violations or deviations were

identified,

i

j

i

I

4

l

.

, , .

!

3

i

l

DETAILS

!

i

1. Persons Contacted

• J. Levine, Executive Director of Site Nuc~iear Operations

• B. Baker, Operations Manager i

.D. Bennett, Mechanical Engineer i

A. Cox, Unit 1 Operations Superintendent 4

• E. Ewing, General Manager Technical Support

J. Grisham, Administrative Manager li

L. Gulick, Unit 2 Operations Superintendent  :

A. Hatley, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor

H. Hollis,' Security Superintendent

D. Howard, Special Projects Manager

• L. Humphrey, General Manager, Nuclear Quality

• H. Jones, Plant Modifications Manager  :

• R. Lane, Engineering Manager

• D. Lomax, Licensing Supervisor

J. McWilliams, Maintenance Manager i

B. Michalk, Mechanical Engineer

• P. Michalk, Licensing Engineer

• S. Quennoz, General Manager, Plant Operations

• J. Taylor-Brown, Quality Control Superintendent

• R. Wewers, Work Control Center Manager

• Present at exit interview.

The NRC inspectors also contacted other plant personnel, including

operators, technicians, and administrative personnel.

2. Followup On Previously Identified Items (Units 1 and 2)

(Closed) Open Items 368/8627-04 and 313/8626-01: Temporary modification

backlog.

The primary concern of this item was the existence of many temporary

modifications (TMs) dating as far back as 1980. The temporary i

modification log books of both units were reviewed. Progress was noted i

in reducing the number of TMs. The NRC inspectors discussed this item

with the licensee and reviewed the program implemented to close out old

TMs. Since the start of the TM reduction effort, the number of TMs 1

'

(6 months old or older) has been reduced from 51 to 15 in Unit 1 and from

80 to 18 in Unit 2. The NRC inspectors also reviewed Procedure 1000.28,  !

" Temporary Modification Control," Revision 7, dated January 1, 1987, and l

determined that it appeared adequate to ensure that TMs are properly

reviewed and approved prior to installation and that they will not remain l

installed without periodic review and justification. Based on these

reviews the NRC inspectors concluded that the licensee's efforts to

, . .. .

. .

. . . . .

. .

.

,

_

., ,

W

'

. gy,' ,

3. ,.

,,

.

,

,

,

w

. s

.. .4 y

s

-

1 _

s

,}

reducethenumberofoldTMsandtoproperlyinitiateandcontrolnbwTMs

'

were satisfactory. These items are closed.

<

(0 pen) Unresolved Item 313/8601-06: Failure to assure that instructions

and drawings'were appropriate to the circumstances.

Thisite'mwasdisdussedinNRCInspectionReport.50-313/87-13.

Violation 313/86-01 (II.0.1.a-d) was ret ^erenced. Due to an. oversight,

this reference was incomplete. It should have included Items II.D.2 and- ';

II.D.3 as corrective action on these examples was also verified during -

Lthe~same inspection.~ ; This item remains open due to concern over

erroneous valve. position and locked status information.'being shown ori

piping and instrumentation diagrams.

No violations or deviations were identified.

3. OperationalSafetyVerification(Units 1and,Q

The_NRC inspectors' observed control, room operations, reviewed applicable 4

j

'

logs, and' conducted discussions with cpntrol room operators. .The NRC

inspectors. verified the operability of selected emergency systems.,,. i

revieweditagout records, and ensured that maintenance requests had'been

initiated for equipment'in' need of maintenance. The NRC inspectors made

spotcheckstoverifythatthephysicalsecurityplakwasbeing. .

irrplemented. The NRCl inspectors verified implementation ofLeadiation

prc,tection controls durirg observation of plant activities.-

TheNRCinspectorstouredaccessibleareasofth_eunits,sideludingthe

Unit'.2 containment building, te observe plant equipment' conditions, '

including potential- fire hazards, fluid leaks, and excessive vibration.  ;

The NRC inspectors also observed plant housekeepingLand cleanliness

. conditions during the tours.

The NRC inspectors walked down the accessible portiens of the emergency

diesel generator auxiliary systems for both units using

Procedures 1104.36, Attachments 1 and 2; 2104.36, Attachments A and B;

and Drawings M-217 and M-2217 to. verify operability. Some minor

deficiencies were noted. These did not affect system operability and

'

were promptly resolved by the licensee.

During a routine tour of the "A" decay heat vault in the Unit 1 auxiliary

building, the NRC inspectors noted the following problems:

. 'Large' diameter hoses and fittings had been placed on top of the

floor mounted room cooler (VUC-1A). Apparently they had been left

there following the flushing of the service water system during the ,

last refueling outage. The fittings and hoses were promptly removed i

after the licensee was informed. The NRC inspectors expressed a

concern to the licensee that this item indicated a need for ,

'

improvement in work closeout.

.w c

, , t

5-

i < ,

m ,

. Seismic. Support DH-60 was not in conformance with the configuration

depicted in Design Drawing HCB-2-DH60, Revision 2, dated August 27,

"

<,,

"

1980. Three of four anchor bolts in one of the support baseplates

> i were not torqued as evidenced by no contact between the nuts and the <

. baseplate. This support is next to Valve CV-1405 in the 14-inch  !

H . pipe which supplies Decay Heat Pump P34A and Spray. Pump P35A from

. - -

'

the reactor building sump. This deficiency is similar to the

violation identified in the Unit 2 supply line to the Train "A" i

engineered safety features pumps as documented.in NRC Inspection l

Report 50-368/87-08. After notifying the licensee of the deficiency

the .three bolts were properly torqued, thus returning the support to

its design configuration. This deficiency is an apparent violation

(313/8715-01). .' Subsequently, the licensee informed the NRC

inspectors that operability evaluations for these supports found

that system operability had not been affected. ,

These reviews and observations were done to verify that facility

operations were being conducted safely and were in conformance with the

requirements established under Technical Specifications, 10 CFR, and i

administrative procedures.

4. Monthly Maintenance Observation (Units 1 and 2) l

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.

lThe following items were considered during this review: the limiting j

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 j

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.

The following maintenance activities were observed / reviewed:

. Installation of Battery Charger 2D31 per DCP 86-2106 (Job

Order 729325)

. Wire check of emergency diesel generator control cabinets and engine

panels (Job Order 700018)

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

.w;,  ;

6

. Liquid penetrant examination of pressurizer heater (Job l

Order 733176) )

1

. Pressurizer heater penetraticn repair and nondestructive testing for  !

Unit 2 pressurizer Penetrations XI and T4  !

1'

. Pressurizer proportional Heater Breaker RUB 14 contactor replacement

(Job Order 734352)

. Repair of Unit 1 reactor coolant system loop "A" hot leg temperature

instrument (Job Order 734840)

No violations or deviations were identified.

5. Monthly Surveillance Observation (Units 1 and 2)

The NRC inspectors observed the Technical Specification required

surveillance testing on Unit 1 Decay Heat Removal Pump P34B

(Procedure 1104.04) and verified that testing was performed in accordance

with adequate procedures, test instrumentation was calibrated, limiting

conditions for operation were met, removal and restoration of the

affected components were accomplished, test results conformed with

Technical Specifications and procedure requirements, test results were

reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test, and

any deficiencies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and

resolved by appropriate management personnel.

The NRC inspectors also witnessed portions of the following test

activities:

. Emergency diesel generator operability test (Procedure 2104.36,

Supplement 2)

. Post installation performance test of Makeup Pump P36B

(Procedure 1409.061)

. Reactor protection system channel "D" monthly test

(Procedure 1304.40)

No violations or deviations were identified.

6. Exit Interview

The NRC inspectors met with Mr. J. M. Levine, Director, Site Nuclear

Operations, and other members of the AP&L staff at the end of inspection.

At these meetings, the inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection

.and the findings.

. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ .