IR 05000206/1979014
| ML13323A623 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1979 |
| From: | Faulkenberry B, Horn A, Miller L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13323A622 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-79-14, NUDOCS 7912050096 | |
| Download: ML13323A623 (7) | |
Text
U. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report N /79-14 Docket No 50-206 License No, DPR-13 Safeguards Group Licensee Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofre Unit 1
.
San Onofre Inspection at:
Insp ection conducted:
September 10-13, 1979 Inspectors:
7f L. 4elMiller, Reactor Inspector Date Signe A. >fiorn, Reactor Inspector Date Signed R. 'Kte, Resident Reactor Inspector Date Signed Approved By:
1,2
B. H. aulkenberry, C ea tor Projects Section #2,Date Signed Reactor Operations a d Nuclear Support Branch Summary:
Inspection on September 10-13, 1979 (Report No. 50-206/79-14)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of personnel qualifi cation; Quality Assurance/Quality Control administration; procurement; receipt, storage and handling of equipment and materials; licensee's Bulletin response review; review of plant operations; review of licensee event reports; followup on items of noncompliance; and independent inspection effort. The inspection involved 66 inspector-hours by three NRC inspector Results:
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie RV Form ?19(?)
7 9 12'0 0Q
DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted J. Curran, Plant Manager
- G. Morgan, Superintendent, Units 2 and 3
- R. Brunet, Superintendent, Unit 1
- J. Bankevich, Supervisor of Plant Maintenance
- W. Matter, Station Administrative Supervisor, Unit 1
- J. Dunn, Project QA Supervisor
- E. Rinard, Warehouse Supervisor, Unit 1
- D. Bertram, Supervising Engineer, Units 2 and 3
- M. Wharton, Supervising Engineer, Unit 1
- G. McDonald, QA/QC Supervisor
- S. Scholl, Associate Nuclear Engineer, Unit 1 B. Curtis, Plant Supervising Engineer, M. Short, Assistant Nuclear Engineer F. Briggs, Nuclear Engineer R. Reynolds, Bechtel Coporation Supervising Engineer The inspectors also interviewed several other licensee employees including licensed operators and warehouse personne *Denotes those present at the exit intervie. Quality Assurance/Quality Control Administration Program The inspector reviewed the onsite and offsite audits of the Quality Assurance organization for March, June and July, 1979, and verified that the audits' recommendations were reviewed and, where appropriate, implemente No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie. Personnel Qualification Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's personnel qualification progra The scope of this review included the licensee's technical specifi cations, current Final Safety Analysis Report, Station Procedure S XII-1.5, "Qualification of Quality Control Personnel," applicable industry guides and standards, and discussions of these documents with licensee personne The inspector determined that the licensee's administrative requirements for quality control personnel qualification adequately implemented the licensee's approved Quality Assurance Progra No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
Review of Plant Operations A tour of the facility was conducted during which the following conditions were observed:
a. Licensee monitoring of control room instrumentation was found to be in accordance with licensee requirement b. Radiation controls were properly establishe c. No significant fluid or steam leaks were observe d. No abnormal pipe vibrations were observe e. Selected valves in the diesel air starting system were verified to be correctly positione f. The control room was manned in accordance with the require ments of 10 CFR 50.54(u), the facility technical specifications and IE Bulletin 79-06C. Control room operators and supervisors appeared knowledgeable about the reasons for selected annunci ators. The shift turnover was observed, and appeared adequate to ensure system status continuit. Procurement Program The inspector reviewed licensee procedures directed at assuring that procurement of materials and selection of suppliers, is in accordance with requirements. Included in this review was a check that the commitments of the licensee's QA manual were implemented by their procedure The following components were selected to verify that they met the procurement requirements and that the procurement documents were prepared in accordance with licensee administrative controls:
Conoseal gasket, Material Request (MR) 4248T Compensated ion chamber, MR 4181T Steam generator snubber seal kits, MR 1838H Charging pump check valve parts, MR 1911H Diesel generator lube oil filters, Purchase Order B8273001 Except for the steam generator snubber seal kits, the procurement requirements and document preparation controls were in accordance with requirements. The snubber seal kits did not appear to conform to purchase order requirements even though they had been "accepted" by an SCE receipt inspection. The inspector noted that these parts had been purchased prior to the implementation of the present QA administrative controls which have added documentation requirements that more thoroughly control purchase and receipt. A licensee
-3 representative stated that this item will be corrected. In addition, the representative stated that all safety-related equipment in the warehouse received prior to 1977 (1977 having been previously audited).would be reviewed for conformance to purchase order require ments and for sufficient documentation onsite to support that conformanc No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
Receipt, Storage and Handling of Equipment and Materials Program The licensee's program for implementing their QA.requirements for the control of receipt, storage and handling was examined and found to be consistent with regulatory requirements and the licensee's commitments. The components listed in Section 5. of this report were selected to verify implementation of the licensee's control No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie. Bulletins and Circulars The licensee's responses to the following Bulletins and Circulars were reviewed:
a.Bulletin 79-17 S
.
The resident inspector at San Onofre observed the licensee's activities and reviewed weld records following notification by the licensee of cracks discovered in the refueling water pump suction lines while performing the inspections required by this Bulleti (1) Observations of Activities The linear crack indications that had been marked by the nondestructive test technician on welds 729-6 and 729-16 were observed. No water was dripping from 729-16 although a slight amount of moisture was presen SCE had dis covered the indications in the heat affected zones of two welds for line 729. (refueling water line to containment spray pump). After internal meetings and discussions with Region V personnel, SCE decided to fabricate re inforcing clamps to relieve the nonconforming welds of the stresses that could occur during a seismic even The pipe clamps were observed during fabrication, and appeared to be satisfactory to perform the design functio (2) Records Review The following records associated with the nonconforming welds in line 729 were reviewed:.
(a) Nonconformance Report No. S01-P-152 for weld 729-6 (three LP indications).
-4 (b) Nonconformance Report No. SOl-P-153 for weld 729-16 (one throughwall crack).
(c) Onsite Review Document, Routing and Document Control Form for NRC Nos. SO1-P-152 and SO1-P-153. Record of Meeting 79-4 (d) Isometric Diagram of line 729-8-HP Refueling Water Storage Tank (RWST) to Refueling Water Pumps No. G 27N and G-275 suctio (e) Inspection Planning Data Report No. C1P-107, NRC S01-P-152 and SO1-P-15 (f) Sketch of reinforcing clamp for refueling water lin The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's supplemental report of September 10, 1979 concerning the crack indication Several discussions with the licensee were held to assure that the licensee's proposed weld reinforcement was sufficient to allow continued plant operation. The inspectors stated at the conclusion of these discussions that the proposed measures appeared adequate. Subsequent to the onsite inspection, the licensee reported to the regional office that additional crack indications had been identified. An accelerated schedule for ultrasonically inspecting all welds referenced in the Bulletin was developed and executed by the licensee. The licensee stated that the final report on this Bulletin would include the results of metallurgical analysis of the nonconforming heat affected zones. In addition, it will consider the role that the near-ocean environment may have played in the cracks and, as appropriate, corrective action to monitor or protect susceptible schedule 10 piping from this environment (79-14 01).
b. Bulletin 79-06A The inspector reviewed the licensee's design change 79-12, which seals in the pressurizer low level trip signal to the safety injection circuitry, and the procedure for restoring this trip circuitry to service for periodic surveillanc This item is closed. (79-07-02)
The inspector also reviewed the licensee's program to identify errors in safety-related P&ID's (Item 79-07-03) and to consider alternative tagging systems in the control room (Item 79-07 05).
The inspector stated that the licensee's actions appeared adequate. These items are closed. The remaining inspector identified open item on this Bulletin (79-07-03) concerns the installation of instrumentation to indicate saturation con ditions in the reactor coolant system. This item remains ope c. Bulletin 79-06C The -inspector reviewed the licensee's response and discussed AD it with licensee personne Licensee personnel stated that the licensee's letter of January 31, 1973 (Ortega to Scovalt)
entitled "Small Break Analyses for San Onofre" had identified a six-inch break as the one for which the highest PCT could be expected, and had explicitly analyzed the PCT for all break sizes one-inch, two-inch, four-inch and six-inch. The.in spector also reviewed the licensee's design change, 79-23,
"Reactor Coolant Pump Trip on Safety Injection."
The inspector stated that it appeared adequate to meet the requirements for automatic tripping of the operating RCP' This Bulletin remains open pending review of the licensee's final report, and approval of the proposed design change by NR No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie. Licensee Event Report 79-14 The licensee reported a failure in the 15 v.d.c. power supply for
- the No. 2 Diesel Generator Safety Injection System/Loss of Offsite Power Sequencer, Subchannel X. The failure of this subchannel created the possibility that in the event of an actual design basis accident the correct sequencing of emergency core cooling system loads might not occur. Consequently the licensee shut down to replace the malfunctioning power supply. The inspector rbviewed the licensee's corrective actions and confirmed that a 30-day licensee event report would be submitted. The inspector stated that he had no further questions on this even No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
Followup on Items of Noncompliance a. 79-04-03 The inspector reviewed the revised procedures the licensee had implemented to ensure that operators review all design changes, and that the review is documented. In addition, the inspector verified that the revised procedure was effectively implemente This item is close b. 79-09-01 The inspector reviewed the revised system to ensure that required surveillances are completed, and verified that the system effectively checked that their.completion was correctly documented. This item is close c. 79-09-02 The inspector reviewed the licensee's response and discussed it with licensee personnel. The licensee's corrective action to ensure that all procedures continue to be adequately reviewed was adequate. This item is close No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifi.e.
Independent Inspections a. The inspector discussed the licensee's proposed design change 79-20 which will reroute San Onofre Unit I's offsite power to the combined site switchyard via a common tower. The inspector stated his concern that this change might involve an unreviewed safety question if implemented as shown in the Unit 2 and 3 FSAR. Subsequent to the inspection, the inspector verified that this modification had not been considered by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation to be part of the Unit's 2 and 3 licensing process. A licensee representative stated that this change was under review by the NARC and that the NRC regional office would be notified when the review is completed in order that this concern can be resolved prior to the installation of the modificatio (79-14-02).
b. The inspectors examined the effectiveness of the licensee's control measures to prevent the use of incorrect or defective material, parts, and components in safety-related system The inspectors selected several recent maintenance activities II on safety-related systems that required purchased material for replacement or repair and determined that the measures had been established and implemented for licensee identified safety-related material. It was noted, however, that some of the Flexitallic gaskets used as a reactor coolant pressure boundary (e.g., the steam generator primary manway gaskets)
were not considered to be safety related by the licensee and, as such, were not controlled under the Quality Assurance Manual Procedure A licensee representative stated that they had not considered that these items fell within the scope of the Quality Assurance Equipment List. The inspectors reiterated their concern that gaskets providing a reactor coolant system pressure boundary (e.g., steam generator primary manways), should be verified to be the correct size and specification for the intended us Subsequently, licensee personnel provided adequate documen tation to assure that the correct gaskets had in fact been used during repair No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on September 13, 1979 to summarize the purpose, scope and the findings of the inspection.