ML20137T209
| ML20137T209 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1985 |
| From: | Branch M, Elrod S, Luehman J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137T187 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-338-85-27, 50-339-85-27, NUDOCS 8512060410 | |
| Download: ML20137T209 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000338/1985027
Text
.
.-_ .
-
.
._.
-
.
.
.
[{jnD GEc
o
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
o,
'
- r
REGION il
y
j
j
101 MARIETTA STREET,N.W.
- ' -
2
ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323
%...../
.
Report Nos.:
50-338/85-27 and 50-339/85-27
Licensee: Virginia Electric & Power Company
Richmond, VA 23261
Docket Nos.: 50-338 and 50-339
Facility Name: North Anna 1 and 2
Inspection Conducted: Octobir 7 - November 3,1985
W.
A
dov7[J9kf
Inspectors:
.
,
M. W. Branch (SRI )
Date Signed
~5 L +
W
NJJlt15X
.
J. G. Luehman (RI)
Date Signed
Approved by:
h
M0JMiW(
.
S. Elrod, Section Chief
Date Sicjned
Division of Reactor Projects
i
SU E RY
Scope:
This routine inspection by the resident inspectors involved 175
inspector-hours on-site in the areas of engineered safety features (ESF) walk-
down, operational safety verification, monthly maintenance, monthly surveillance,
preparations for refueling, design changes and modifications, and Inspection and
l
Enforcement Information Notice follow-up.
Results:
One violation was identified - failura to maintain necessary quality
records to verify qualification of personnel performing the actions specified in
design change procedures (paragraph 7).
8512060410 851115
ADOCK 05000338
O
'
- - - . .
.,-.
. .-.
.-
-
..
. - - . - .
-
-
- ~.
- . .
.
.
'
.
t
i
REPORT DETAILS
1.
Licensee Employees Contacted
i
E. W. Harrell, Station Manager
l
D. B. Roth, Quality Control (QC) Manager
G. E. Kane, Assistant Station Manager
E. R. Smith, Assistant Statien Manager
,
R. O. Enfinger, Superintendent, Operations
J. R. Harper, Superintendent, Maintenance
A. H. Stafford, Superintendent, Health Physics
J. A. Stall, Superintendent, Technical Services
J. R. Hayes, Operations Coordinator
D. A. Heacock, Engineering Supervisor
D. E. Thomas, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor
E. C. Tuttle, Electrical Supervisor
!
R. A. Bergquist, Instrument Supervisor
F. T. -Terminella, Quality Assurance (QA) Supervisor
4
R. S. Thomas, Engineering Supervisor
G. H. Flowers, Nuclear Specialist
J. H. Leberstein, Licensing Coordinator
!
i
Other licensee employees contacted include technicians, operators,
mechanics, security force members, and office personnel.
1
2.
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 5,1985, with
selected individuals identified in paragraph 1.
The licensee acknowledged
the inspectors' findings.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any
of the material provided to or reviewed by: the inspectors during this
inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
This was not inspected during this reporting period.
.
,
4.
Unresolved Items
,
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Plant Status-
Unit 1
,
The unit . operated at or. near 100% power during most' of the inspection
period.
On the evening of November 3,1985, _ the unit was shut down to
commence.the cycle five six refueling outage.
'
-
4
-
,
- . . _ . - , . .
, . _
,
,
, , , ,
_
.,,.m,
-.#
,- .
._.,....cmy,.
, .. - , - - , , - y , .
. -
_
_
.
.
.
I
'
.
,
2
.
One reactor trip occurred on Unit 1 during the inspection period.
The
following paragraphs describe the operational transient which resulted in a
a
manual trip of the reactor by the control room operator on October 24, 1985.
-
At 3:30 a.m. , the 480 volt AC circuit breaker for battery room exhaust
-
fan 1-HV-F-57C failed and caused melting of the vertical bus bars in
motor control center (MCC) IJ1-1.
This resulted in an electrical trip
of the MCC supply breaker,14J-4, and subsequent loss of power to
equipment supplied from the MCC.
The equipment that was de-energized
included the battery chargers for two of the four instrument buses and
4
the solenoid valves (TV-CC-106A,
B, and C) which supply component
cooling water (CC) to all three reactor coolant pumps' (RCP) motor oil,
stator, and shroud coolers.
!
'
-
At 3:45 a.m., a power decrease was initiated because of increasing RCP
motor bearing temperatures.
-
At 3:50 a.m. , manual reactor and turbine trips were initiated in
preparation for securing the RCPs.
.
-
At 3:52 a.m. , all three RCPs were secured and natural circulation was
established.
The incident was classified as an unusual event (UE) per
the site emergency plan and the necessary notifications were initiated.
.
.
At 6:45 a.m. , the 1A RCP was restarted af ter installing a temporary
-
'
jumper which allowed opening TV-CC-106A, thereby re-establishing CC
flow to the RCP motor.
-
At 7:54 a.m. , repairs to MCC 1J1-1 were completed and at 8:56 a.m. 'all
loads except 1-HV-F-57C were re energized and returned to normal.
-
At 9:02 a.m. , the UE was terminated and subsequent notifications were
made.
The plant's response to the natural circulation event was as expected; the
conditions described in section 9.2.2.5.4 of the Updated Final Safety
.
Analysis Report (UFSAR), which describes a loss of CC to the RCPs, were
validated.
Unit 2
The unit was shut down from 100% power on October 11, 1985 because of a
failure of the 2H emergency diesel generator (EDG).
Following repairs to
the EDG the unit was returned to power on October 15, 1985, and operated at
or near 100% power for the remainder of the inspection period.
Details of
'the EDG failure are addressed in paragraph 12.of this report.
~
6.
Licensee Event Report (LER) Follow-up
This was not inspected during this reporting period.
,
,,_ __.
7
,- .
, . -
--
,
- - -
T
P-
- --*y
- ?
--7-
"-
"
._- .
__
__
_
..
. _ . __
.
.
'
.
3
7.
Follow-up of Previously Identified Items
(Closed) Unresolved Item 338,339/84-38-02; Validity of Quality Records
Associated With Design Change Procedures.
The conditions discussed in
paragraph 10 of Inspection Report 338,339/84-38 have been evaluated by the
NRC and appear to violate the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix B,
Criterion XVII, which requires that sufficient records be maintained to
provide information regarding the qualification of personnel performing the
actions specified in the procedures.
The inspector's original concern, as discussed in Inspection Report
338,339/84-38, is provided below:
Section 5.2.2.1 of Administrative Procedure (ADM) 3.1 discusses the
control of design change procedures. being performed by the Engineering
and Construction (E&C) group.
Specifically, the ADM states that, "upon
completion of each shift, the white working controlled copies are to be
returned to the design change log room and those steps completed shall
be signed in the master colored controlled copy by the supervisor
immediately responsible and knowledgeable of activities completed."
,
The current practice at North Anna is to only keep the master colored
controlled copy of the procedure.
The working copies are thrown away,
thereby destroying the ability to verify personnel qualifications.
The
following regulatory concerns associated with this practice were
discussed with station QA personnel:
r
Technical Specification (TS) 6.10.2.a requires records and drawing
-
changes reflecting facility design modifications made to systems
and equipment described in the Final Safety Analysis Report be
retained for the duration of the facility operating lic,e,nse.
-
Amendment 4 of the Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO)
'
Topical Report, VEP-1, " Quality Assurance Program, Operations
Phase", commits VEPC0 to collect, store, and maintain QA records
in accordance with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.88, Revision 2,1976,
which endorses American National Standards Institute (ANSI)
N45.2.9-1974.
r
-
Section-3.2 of ANSI N45.2.9-1974, provides instructions on what
-
constitutes a valid QA record.
The inspector reviewed several design change procedures and verified that
the record copy of the procedures do not identify the individuals who
4
actually performed the actions; therefore, no traceability of qualifications
'
exists.
The design change procedures (DCPs) reviewed, along with the
inspector's findings, are listed below:
_
-
DCP-82-148, Class IE Transmitter Replacement, required in section
4.2.1.13 as well ~ as in numerous other sections, that Conax seal
assemblies be installed using Rosemont and Conax installation
i
I
l
.
.
.
'
.
,
4
'
instructions.
The working copy and record copy of this procedure were
signed by different individuals.
,
-
DCP-83-24, Appendix "R" Emergency Diesel Generator Isolation, required
,
.
in section 4.11.2 as well as numerous other related sections, that
i
specific safety-related cables be disconnected.
The working copy and
record copy of this procedure were signed by different individuals.
-
DCP-84-15, Outside Recirculation Spray Pump Valve Replacement, North
Anna Unit 1, required in section 4.3.5 that certain precise measure-
i
'
ments be made.
The working copy and record copy of this procedure were
signed by different individuals.
Another section of this DCP (4.5.16)
required a verification that the temperature of the weld returned to
within 5-10 degrees Fahrenheit of room temperature using a contact
thermometer.
Once again, the working copy and record copy of the
procedure were signed by different individuals.
<
The failure to provide traceable records regarding the qualification of
individuals actually performing these actions is identified as violation
338,339/85-27-01, and applies to both units.
8.
Monthly Maintenance
Station maintenance activities affecting safety-related systems and
components were observed / reviewed to ascertain that the activities were
conducted in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory guides and
industry codes or standards, and in conformance with TS.
Specific items
observed include the repairs to the 2H EDG discussed in paragraph 12, and
repairs to the Unit 1, IJ1-1 MCC discussed in paragraph 5.
No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Monthly Surveillance
.t
The inspectors observed / reviewed TS-required testing and verified that
testing was performed in accordance with adequate procedures, that test
instrumentation was calibrated, that limiting conditions for operation (LCO)
were met and that any deficiencies identified were properly reviewed and
resolved.
l
No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
ESF System Walkdown
The following selected ESF systems were verified operable by performing a
,
walkdown of the accessible and essential portions of the systems on
October 25, 1985.
Unit 1 and Unit 2 EDG remote and local breaker alignment.
-
No violations or deviations were identified.
.
l
.
.
-
.
5
11.
Routine Inspection
The inspectors' observations during the inspection period verified that
control room manning requirements were being met.
In addition, the
inspectors observed shift turnover to verify that continuity of system
status was maintained.
The inspectors periodically questioned shi fi,
personnel relative to their awareness of plant conditions.
Through log review and plant tours, the inspectors verified compliance with
selected TSs and LCOs.
During the course of the inspection, observations relative to Protected and
,
Vital Area security were made, including access controls, boundary inte-
grity, search, escort and badging.
On a regular basis, radiation work permits (RWP) were reviewed and specific
work activities were monitored to assure they were being conducted per the
RWPs.
Selected radiation protection instruments were periodically checked,
and equipment operability and calibration frequency were verified.
.
The inspectors kept informed, on a daily basis, of the overall status of
,
both units and of any significant safety matters related to plant opera-
tions. Discussions were held with plant management and various members of
the operations staff on a regular basis. Selected portions of operating logs
and data sheets were reviewed daily.
The inspectors conducted various plant tours and made frequent visits to the
Control Room.
Observations included' the following: witnessing work
activities in progress; verifying the status of operating and standby safety
systems and equipment; confirming valve positions, instrument and recorder
readings, ann'unciator alarms, and housekeeping.
No violations or deviations were-identified.
12.
Diesel Generator Failures
<
Both units at North Anna have experienced numerous internal failures of
their EDG engines.
The failures can be categorized as either piston / ring
failure or cylinder liner scoring / cracking failures.
The licensee' has
attributed past failures _ to severe TS testing requirements (ie. fast, cold
starts and/or fast loading).
The term " fast, cold start" refers to the TS
requirement to start the'EDG from ambient conditions and reach rated voltage
.
and frequency within 10 seconds.
'
The diesel engines are manufactured by the Fairbanks Morse Engine Division
of Colt Industries (model 38TD8-1/8), and. use a 12-cylinder, opposed piston,
turbocharged design.
These EDGs are rated for continuous duty at 2750
kilowatts (KW), for 2000 hours0.0231 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61e-4 months <br /> at-3000 KW, and for 30 minutes at 3300 KW.
The diesel manufacturer and the licensee speculated that the most probable
cause of piston / liner failures could be attributed to stress-related damage
to the wrist pin-to-connecting rod and wrist pin-to piston insert bushings,
J
_ _.
.__.
.
1
.
.
6
,
causing piston distortion with ultimate contact between the piston and the
cylinder liner.
This contact causes excessive heating and continued piston
growth until high temperature stress-related piston or liner cracking
occurs. This results in pressurization of the crar.kcase and engine shutdown
by the engine protection system.
A wrist pin-to-connecting rod bushing on
damaged equipment removed from the 2H diesel was measured and found to have
<
elongated by approximately 0.2".
On October 18, 1985, the licensee' met with members of the NRC staff which
included personnel from NRR, IE, and Region II.
The purpose of the meeting
!
was to discuss the details and probable cause of recent engine failures, and
the proposed corrective actions to improve reliability.
The licensee
discussed past engine failures and presented their estimate of the most
probable cause; the upcoming complete engine overhaul was also discussed.
The licensee committed to complete the engine overhauls prior to returning
i
the units to power following the November 1985 and April 1986 refueling
cutages -for Units 1 and 2,
respectively.
Additionally, the licensee
.
presented information to justify continued operation of the units until
'
completion of these overhauls; this included past failure analyses and
details of previous component replacements.
The diesel generator reliability improvement program was required as part of
License Amendment No. 48 of the Unit 2 TS and will be closely followed by
the inspectors during the upcoming refueling outages; this is identified as
Inspector Follow-up Item (IFI 338, 339/85-27-02).
'
I
No violations or deviations were identified.
13.
Inspection and Enforcement Information Notice (IEIN) Follow-up
,
IEIN 85-82, Diesel Generator Differential Protection Relay Not Seismically
Qualified, identifies a concern that General Electric (GE) model 12CFD
rel_ays, often used for EDG protection against electrical shorts and grounds,
are not seismically qualified.
The . inspectors verified that EDG output
breaker protection at North Anna is 'not being provided by the type relays
,
identified in the IEIN.
The protection for both North Anna 1 and 2
is
4
l
provided by GE model 12HFA and 12CFVB relays which are not addressed in the
'
IEIN.
14.
Preparations for Refueling
,
During the week cf October 28, 1985, the inspector reviewed the upcoming
4
refueling outage schedule and discussed major objectives of the outage with
the refueling coordinator.
The inspector also reviewed several refueling
procedures and verified that the licensee had reviewed vendor change
recommendations and appropriately modified station implementing procedures.
No violations or deviations were identified.
'
,
.
_
_
_ _ _
.
. .
.
.
.
. .
. -
.
.
.
.
7
15.
Design Changes and Modifications (37700)
The design change and modification program was reviewed by the inspectors.
Specifically, the inspectors selected several design change packages and
verified the following:
-
that design changes were reviewed and approved in accordance with TS
and QA program requirements;
-
that design changes were controlled by established plant procedures;
-
that design changes were reviewed and approved in accordance with the
requirements of 10 CFR 50.59;
-
and that operating procedures and drawings were updated in a timely
manner to reflect the modification.
Those design changes reviewed are discussed in paragraph 7 of this report.
No violations or deviations, other than that listed in paragraph 7, were
identified.
t
4
7
i
,
--