ML19317H091
| ML19317H091 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Arkansas Nuclear  |
| Issue date: | 01/28/1974 |
| From: | Kidd M, Murphy C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19317H086 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-313-74-01, 50-313-74-1, NUDOCS 8004140574 | |
| Download: ML19317H091 (14) | |
See also: IR 05000313/1974001
Text
_ _ _
.
.
.
_
-
,
[ "'9 'k
m
%,,,
UNITED STATES
) , ,/
ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
17Jl,,e.
' -
V
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATCRY OPERATIONS
-
[
r
REGION ll * $UIT E 818
'4
+
4
230 P E ACMT R EE ST RE ET, NOHT HWEST
T w o-e m ouns
If4Tf 5 O*
AT L. A NT A. cE ORGI A 30303
s
RO Inspection Report No. 50-313/74-1
Licensee:
Arkansas Power and Light Company
Sixth and Pine Streets
Pine Bluff, Arkansas
71601
Facilf*y Name: Arkansas Nuclear One, Unit 1
Docket No.:
50-313
License No.:
CPPR-57
Category:
B1
Location: Russellville, Arkansas
Type of License: B&W, PWR, 2568 Mut
Type of Inspection: Routine, Unannounced
Dates of Inspection: January 15-18, 1974
Dates of Previous Inspection: December 18-21, 1973
Principal Inspector:
M. S. Kidd, Reactor Inspector
Facilities Test and Startup Branch
Accompanying Personnel: None
Principal Inspector:
Mt
[
[.2[ If
M. S. Kidd, Reactor Inspector, Facilities
Date
Test and Startup Branch
'
-h
.-[
//28!7f
Reviewed by:
C. E. MurphN CMei g
/ Date
Facilities Test and Startup Branch
.
i
I
v
8oo414017V
.
.
. . .
-
s
[' 'g .
V
,
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
-2-
,
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
I.
Enforcement Action
i
A.
Violations
None
B.
Safety Items
None
II.
Licensae Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Matters
A.
Violations
.
There were ne previously identified violations open at the time
of this inspection.
I
B.
Safety Items
i
.
,/
There were no previously identified safety items.
III. New Unresolved Items
74-1/1 Valve Deficiencies (Regulatory Operations Bulletin 74-1)
Regulatory Operations Bulletin (ROB) 74-1 identifies
deficiencies in certain Walworth and Darling valves. The
licensee is in the procesi of determining whether such
valves are installed at Arkansas Nuclear One (ANO).
(Details I, paragraph 2)
.
IV.
Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Itens
72-9/1 Incorporation of Safety Related Equipment in the FSAR Q List
Not inspected,
i
l
l
.
l
r-~s
.
\\s
I
,
- ~ . - . . . , ~ .
--.
_
.
%
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
-3-
72-12/2 Valve Wall Thickness Verification Program
'
Not inspected.
73-3/1 Completion of Radiological Waste Disposal System
No change in status. The FSAR is to be amended to identify
the solid waste system as a Unit 2 system. This item
remains open.
(Details I, paragraph 3)
73-5/2 Core Flood System Flow Rate Test
No change in status. See RO Report No. 50-313/73-19,
Details I, paragraph 10.
73-8/l Procedural Coveraire Per Safety Guide 33
Procedure development continues, but several are not yet
written,
(Details I, paragraph 4)
73-10/5 Clean Radwaste System Test Procedure
\\
s_,/
Not inspected.
73-10/6 Respiratory Protection Program and Procedures
'
Not inspected.
73-10/7 Representative Sampling of Caseous Wastes
Not inspected.
73-12/2 Diesel Generator Trips
Not inspected.
i
l
-
,
4'
%o
.
)
!
!
'
- _ _
,,
.
__
__ _ . - . _ __
__
.~
m
.
-
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
-4-
,
s
'
73-12/3 Control Rod Trip Test
No change in status. Comments on TP 330.05 remain open.
(Details I, paragraph 5)
73-14/2 Initial Core Load Procedure
The procedure is still in draft form. One additional
comment regarding response checks of excore instruments
was given. This item remains open.
(Details I, paragraph
6)
73-14/3 Leak Testing of the Personnel Hatch
No change in status. The Unit 1 Technical Specifications
are to be changed to agree with Appendix J to 10 CFR 50.
(Detaila I, paragraph 7)
,
73-16/1 Radiography Review
('~'T
Not inspected.
/
'-~'
73-17/1 Pressurizer Electromatic Relief Valve
No change in status. This item remains open.
(Details I,
paragraph 8)
73-17/2 Emergency Operating Procedures
These procedures are being reviewed and revised to incorporate
RO comments. This item remains open.
(Details I, paragraph 9)
73-17/3 Operational Test Program
Approximately half of the operational test procedures have
not been written. This item remains open.
(Details I,
paragraph 10)
73-18/l Emergency Planning
Not inspected.
.
n
.
.
'
v
i
-
.
. .
___
_
_
.
.
%
O
RO Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
-5-
s_s
73-18/2 Location of Radiation Monitor Readouts
Hourly readings are to be taken on the recorders for
plant radiation monitors. This matter is considered
resolved.
(Details I, paragraph 11)
73-18/3 Calibration of Raz ation Monitors
Not inspected.
73-19/1 Inverter Malfunction
Not inspected.
73-19/2 Reactor Building Ventilation System Ductwork
No additional information was available at the time of
the inspection. A licensee report per 10 CFR 50.55(e)
is due January 20, 1974.
(Details I, paragraph 12)
73-19/3 Makeup and Purification ES Test
s _,
Licensee personnel have agreed to take action to upgrade
the quality of chronological test logs. This item is
considered resolved.
(Details I, paragraph 13)
V.
Unusual Occurrences
Fuel Assembly Orifice Rods
During a pre-loading inspection of fuel assemblies and related
.
components, it was found that seven of the forty assemblies which
-
contain orifice (flow limiting) rods (OR) exerted more friction
than normal on the OR's when they were inserted and removed. The
licensee is investigating the problem.
(Details I, paragraph 14)
.
.
'\\ _,s)
s
,
.
1
w
~
c
--
- - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - -
.
-
.
%
~~
.
v
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
-6-
VI.
Other Significant Findings
Proj ect Status
.
AP&L has estimated core loading to start March 25, 1974, as
compared to the previous estimate of March 2,1974. The slippage
is due to delay of hot functional testing due to problems in the
cleanup of feedwater in the secondary plant.
i
VII. Management Interview
A management interview was conducted January 18, 1974, to discuss
findings of the inspection. The following licensee representatives
attended:
P
Arkansas Power and-Light Comoany (AP&L)
J. W. Anderson - Plant Superintendent
R. R. Culp - Test Administrator
'
N. A. Moore - Chief Quality Assurance Coordinator
J. L. Orlicek - Quality Control Engineer
M. H. Shanbhag - Procedure Administrator
s
B. A. Teruilliger - Operations Supervisor
The new unresolved item regarding valve deficiencies outlined in R0B
74-1 was discucsed. More information is given in Details I, paragraph 2.
The status of previously identifici unresolved items listed in Section
IV were discussed. The inspector stated that the items regarding
j
.
location of radiation monitor readouts and the makeup and purification
,
teet log were considered resolved and that all others would remain
,
open. Information on the previously identified unresolved items is
given in Details I, paragraphs 3 through 13.
The availability of procedures needed for fuel loading was discussed.
The inspector stated that unless RO were supplied with approved copies
of those procedures required for operations by Safety Guide 33 and
these required for zero power physics and power ascension testing by
Regulatory Guide 1.68 by February 25, 1974, he could not give assurance
.
[
\\\\
[x_ I
'
-
._
-
._. ..
- -
.. .
.
- .
. . -.
.-
-
.
- -
. - . - .
- -.___.-... -. ...
--
.
'
.
.
I
%
,
t
, t
'
!
l
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
~7-
i
i
,
I-
that RO's review of those procedures would be complete by the
j
'
estimated core loading date of March 25, 1974.
!
The subjects of Details I, paragraphs 14 through 17, were discussed.
!
l
The inspector stated that he had no significant questions outstanding
on them.
j
t
!
.
I
i
fi
e
!
l
. -
I
!
1
.,
.
-
'
!
I
i.
l
-
1
!.
I
t
'
.
. -
. . . . .
. . .
. .
. - . .
. . .
.
. .
. .
. - .
. . -
.
- -
.
. .-
..... .... .-. . -
__. _
_ _
l
.
.
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
I-l
'h N
/-lN 7
DETAILS I
Prepared by:
/j
M. S. Kidd, Reactor Inspector
Date
Facilities Test and Startup Branch
Dates of Inspection: Janua
15-18 1974
Reviewed by:_
Ad
M
/ .ff py/
C. E. MurphyL Chief _Jdc111 ties
/ Date
f
Test and Startup Franch
1.
Persons Contacted
In addition to those listed in the Management Interview section, the
following persons were contacted.
Arkansas Power and Light Company (AP&L)
P. Almond - Reactor Technician
W. Cavannugh - Production Project Manager
T. H. Cogburn - Nuclear Engineer
T. Holcomb - Assistant Plant Operator
)
J. McWilliams - Assistant Plant Operator
gv
Bechtel Corporation (Bechtel)
R. Sreekakula - Startup Engineer
2.
Valve Deficiencies (ROB 74-1)
R0B 74-1 discusses weld failures between the valve yoke and motor
operator mounting plate in certa 1n Walworth Company valves and a
backseating disc mislocation problem on certain Darling valves.
Preliminary investigatiou indicates that some of the Darling valves
may be installed in Unit 1.
Licensee personnel stated that Bechtel
had been requested to determine the status for the valves. A written
report will be submitted by AP&L in response to the ROB. The inspector
stated that this matter would te carried as an unresolved item.
3.
Completion of Radiological Waste Disposal Systems
This unresolved item was initially discussed in R0 Report No.
50-313/73-3, Details I, paragraph 4.
Licensee personnel maintain
that the solid radwaste system described in Section 11.1.3.3 of
the FSAR is a Unit 2 system and was not intended to be operational
,
for Unit 1 startup.
During the previous inspection (73-19),
licensee personnel stated that the FSAR would be amended to reflect
g
the status of this system. This has not yet been done, therefore,
)
the inspector stated that this item would remain open.
J
e
e
.
. _ .
.
.
~
.
t
C\\
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
I-2
s_,
4.
Procedural Coverage per SG 33
This unresolved item was first discussed in R0 Report No. 50-313/73-8,
Details II, paragraph 4.
The following represents the status of proce-
dures needed for operations and not yet completed based on information
provided the inspector during the current inspection:
a.
General Plant Operating Procedures
All of these have been written and most approved. RO has reviewed
those that have been approved and AP&L is rewriting them as needed,
b.
Alarm and Abnormal Procedures
Approximately 500 alarm procedures will be required. Licensee
personnel have gathered basic information such as alarm sources,
but have not yet written any of the procedures.
c.
Emergency Operating Procedures
of 49 procedures needed, 46 have been written and 36 approved.
\\
)
RO:II has reviewed those that have been approved and AP&L is
rewriting the procedures where necessary.
i
_,
d.
Chemical and Radiation Control Procedures
AP&L lists 27 of these as being needed and 20 have been written
and approved.
e.
Operational Test Procedures
There are 71 procedures required to implement 1004.12, " Operational
Test Control." Of those, 44 have been written and 38 approved.
Other test and inspection procedures are to be written to cover
testing other than Technical Specification requirements, covered
by 1004.12.
l
'
A few miscellaneous procedures are yet to be written, but do not
represent the workload of those enumerated above.
The inspector informed licensee personnel during the management
interview that the procedures required for operations by SG 33
would be needed by February 25, 1974, in order that his reviews
be completed by the estimated fuel loading date of March 25, 1974.
.
He also stated that this item would remain open.
5.
Control Rod Trip Test
~s
\\-
Comments on TP 330.05 were initially discussed in R0 Report No.
50-313/73-12, Details I, paragraph 5.
These comments were reviewed
.
.
.
m
.
[V
\\
RO Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
I-J
with a licensee representative who indicated that the procedure would
be revised prior to being used during power ascension tasting. This
item remains open.
6.
Initial Core Loading Procedure
This unresolved item was initially discussed in RO Report No. 50-313/
'
73-14, Details I, paragraph 4.
The procedure has not yet been writuct
in final form for review and approval. The inspector gavc an
additional comment regarding response checks on the source range
ins trumentation. He stated that they should be checked for response
to a neutron source within eight hours of the start of fuel loading
and prior to restarting the loading if delayed for eight hours or
A licensee representative stated that this would be incorporated
more.
into the procedure. The inspector stated that approval of the procedure
and resolution of 'R0 comments would remain open.
7.
Leak Testing of the Personnel Hatch
This unresolved item was initially discussed in R0 Report No. 50-313/
73-14, Details I, paragraph 5.
The inspector was informed that
[ 'h
Technical Specification 4.4.1.2.5(b) would be revised in Amendment 43
to the FSAR in February to make testing requirements comparable to
(
)
Appendix J to 10 CFR 50. This item remains open.
,,
8.
Pressurizer Electromatic Relief Valve
Information concerning possible deficiencies in this valve were dis-
cussed in RO Report No. 50-313/73-17, Details I, paragraph 4.
No
additional information on this valve was available during the current
inspection. This item remains open.
9.
Emergency Operating Procedures
R0 comments on emergency procedures, the basis of this unresolved
item, were discussed in R0 Report No. 50-313/73-17, Details III,
paragraph 2.
The inspector was informed that some of these procedures
have been revised and are undergoing review. The inspector stated
that this item will remain open until review of the procedures reveals
that comments and concerns have been resolved.
10. Operational Test Program
This unresolved item was initially discussed in RO Report No. 50-313/
73-17, Details III, paragraph 3.
Procedure 1004.12, " Operational
Test Control," has been revised to indicate the procedures which are
to be used to perform and document testing requirements.
This revision
(No.1) is currently under review by AP&L. As discussed in paragraph
-s
s
(
)
4.e of this Details section, slightly over half of the procedures re-
N-
quired by 1004.12 have been written. The inspector stated that this
item would remain open.
.
~
.
.
.
s
/s
RO Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
I-4
.
k
/
v
.
'!
1
11. Location of Radiation Monitor Readouts
This unresolved item was initially discussed in R0 Report No,
50-313/73-18, Details I, paragraph 3.
The recorders and meters
i
used for indicating the status of radiation monitoring instru-
mentation are not located in the control room.
The inspector
asked what monitoring frequency would be used to assure that
trends in radiation and activity levels would be detected in a
timely manner. Licensee personnel stated that these instrument
readings would be observed and recorded once each hour.
This
position was reaffirmed during the management interview at which
time the inspector stated that this item was considered closed.
12. Reactor Building Ventilation System Ductwork
The probability that the discharge ductwork of the reactor building
ventilation system would not withstand the differential pressure
expected during a loss of coolant accident was discussed in R0 Report
No. 50-313/73-19, Details I, paragraph 5.
A licensee report per
10 CFR 50.55(e) was due January 20, 1974. This item remains open.
13. Makeup and Pu.ification System ES Test
Concerns over the adequacy of the chronological log for TP 202.07
'~ /
were discussed in R0 Report No. 50-313/73-19, Details II, paragraph
4.a.
A second review of the test results revealed that the procedure
does call for recording various data on Brush recorders, thus these
charts are acceptable for demonstrating compliance with acceptance
criteria regarding flows and pressures. The inspector was informed
that a second run was made on the first test because it was noted
that this run exhibited the lowest flow data and might be marginal.
The inspector reviewed the chronological logs for several other
s-
tests, some of which were still being run and noted that all other
logs contained more information than the one for TP 202.07.
It
was also noted that there seemed to be a lack of consistency in
the types of information entered.
In discussing this problem,
licensee representatives stated that a letter to the station test
coordinators would be issued to define the information needed in
the logs.
This posicion was reaffirmed during the management
interview, at which time the inspector stated that the matter was
considered resolved.
14. Fuel Assembly Orifice Rods
While inspecting fuel assemblies and associated components in
-
preparation for fuel loading, AP&L personnel found that some of
the orifice rods (OR) used in certain locations to limit flow
(h
through assemblies did not move freely within their assemblies.
,)
All forty assemblies containing OR's were inspected and it was
.--
.
4
-
.
.
'
'
s
.
]
'
RO Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
I-5
,
found that seven demonstrated higher than normal resistance to free
movement upon insertion and removal of the OR.
These seven assemblies
and OR's are being shipped back to B&W's plant in Lynchburg, Virginia,
for detailed examination. The inspector witnessed a portion of the
loading operation for these components and had no questions.
Licensee personnel stated that records show that all assemblies were
checked for proper movement of control rods (CR) but not all were
checked with OR's.
It was noted that the OR's are approximately
forty mils larger in diameter than CR's.
The inspector stated that
he had no questions on this matter at that tire. Licensee personnel
stated that he would be kept informed of results of B&W's inspection.
15. Test Procedure Reviews
The inspector discussed findings of his review of four test procedures
with licensee personnel. These procedures were:
TP 600.10, "RCS Hot Leakage Test",
TP 600.14, 'Tipe/Cc ponent Hanger Hot Deflection Test",
TF 800.02, "Nucles, Instrumentation Calibration at Power," and
TP 800.23, " Unit Load Transient Tests."
'
,
The first two are hot functional tests and the latter two power
ascension tests. The following comments were discussed:
a.
TP 600.10
..
The inspector asked if the ability of leakage detection within
the time frames of Section 4.2.3.8 of the FSAR would be demon-
,
strated and documented.
A licensee representative stated that this would be cone.
b.
TP 600.14
The inspector asked if deflection measurements would be taken
after cooldown.
A licensee representative stated that such readings would be
taken and indicated that provisions would be made for documenting
these readings.
c.
TP 800.02
The inspector noted that Table 1 on page 12 needed to be updated
h
to agree with the latest FSAR amendment.
'~'
A licensee representative stated that this would be done.
-
. _ _
- _ - . .
-
.-
- -.
.
- - -
.- - . . - - -
-
- -
- ,
,
7
.
.
.'
.
,
.
,
e
.
R0 Rpt. No. 50-313/74-1
I-6
.
.
d.
TP 800.23
,
The inspector had no questions on this procedure.
4
In that agreement on action needed was gained in all cases, the
inspector stated that he had no further questions on those procedures.
16. Test Results Review
i
In addition to the test results package for TP 202.07 discussed in
paragraph 13, results of TP 203.01, " Decay Heat Hydro," and
TP 330.02, "CRD Control System Operational Test," were reviewed.
3
TP 203.01 had received a final endorsement and review indicated
that acceptance criteria had been met.
TP 330.02 had received
an interim endorsement with one deficiency open, which AP&L is
'
working with Diamond Power Corporation to resolve. Acceptance
i
criteria for the procedure had been met.
The inspector had no
questic~ s regarding these two test results packages.
1
17. Maintenance Program for Instrument and Service Air Systems
i
t
The preventive maintenance program for the instrument and service
'
air systems was discussed with station personnel. These systems
I
are described in Section 9.9 of the Unit 1 FSAR. The prograc
includes a monthly inspection of the compressors and motors and
'
quarterly inspections of the compressors. These inspections
include such items as bearings, flywheels and belts, pressure
control, safety valves (for leakage), foundations, etc.
The
qviarterly inspection also involves tearing down the compressors
and overhauling them as needed. Checklists are used by mechanics
,
to perform the inspections. These are signed by the mechanic and
reviewed and approved by the maintenance supervisor.
- ,
The equipmcat will be periodically rotated fcr operations. The
results engineer checks the moisture content of the air as it
'
leaves the dryer periodically.
,
i
The only. question the inspector had involved periodic checks of
the instrument air receiver tank relief valves. Licensee per-
sonnel stated that it was their practice not to test these valves
for setpoint unless they had actually relieved in service. It was
noted that Arkansas h0s ao code requirements regarding such valves.
13ut inspector asked if any problem in corrosion or buildup on the
valve seat faces which might prevent them from opening had been
considered in that there were no provisions for exercising them.
Licensee personnel stated that they expected no problems. The
inspector stated he had no further questions.
.
-
1
i
,
!
. - . .
~.
. __
. .
.
_-
_
. . , . - - . . . , _ .
.
-
-
. - -
. .
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _
_ _ . . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
_ - . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
..
-_
. _ _ _ _
__.
.
1
-
,,
$
,
t
.
1,
.1
r
4
'
i
,
.
!
.,
j
Ltr to Arkansas Power and Light fm N. C. Moseley
i
dtd
JAN 3 01974
,
l
DISTRIBUTION:
- '
H. D. Thornburg, RO
E
M:HQ (4)
)
Directorate of Licensing (4)
DR Central Files
!
_ *PDR
i
- Local PDR
- NSIC
(
!
- DTIE, OR
l
- State
'
l
I
'
- To be dispatched at a later date
i
l
!
!
,
9
l
-e
Y
,
w
n
r;;
.
~
.
m
2
%
G
-
..s
,
"g
{
.%
._ O
i
l
_.
e.
+*
, .
I
l
!
.--.
.
.-
. . . - .
-
_ . - -
.-.
. . -
- - -
- - -
-
.