IR 05000206/1980002
| ML13323A781 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1980 |
| From: | Faulkenberry B, Miller L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13323A780 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-80-02, 50-206-80-2, NUDOCS 8005280068 | |
| Download: ML13323A781 (5) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
.a.REGION V 50-206/80-02 rNo__
Docket N License N DPR-13 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 San Onofre Unit 1 Facility Name:
San Onofre Inspection at:
Inspection conducted:
January 7-25, 1980 Inspectors:
,
L. Miller, Resident Ipspector'
Date Signed Date Signed Date Signed B. H. Faulkenberry, Chief, Reator Projects Section #2, Date Signed Reactor Operations ard Nuclear-upport Branch Sumary:
Inspection on January 7-25, 1980 (Report No. 50-206/80-02)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, resident inspection of plant operation The inspection involved 55 inspector-hours by one NRC inspecto Results: Of the two areas examined', no items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie RV Form 219 (2)
s 0 5 2 so 063
FEB V! 1980 II DETAILS Persons. Contacted J. Curran, Station Manager
- R. Brunet, Superintendent, Unit 1
- J. Dunn, Project QA Supervisor
- G. W. McDonald, QA/QC Supervisor
- J. R. Tate, Supervisor of Plant Operations
- M. A. Wharton, Plant Supervising Engineer R. Santusuosso, Supervisor of Instrumentation S. School, Associated Nuclear Engineer, Unit 1 J. Schwamm, Watch Engineer J. Reeder, Watch Engineer W. Frick, Nuclear Engineer K. Hadley, Supervisor of Plant Security R. Krieger,.SCE Senior Licensing Engineer The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees including licensed operators, health physics personnel, and contractor employee *Denotes those present at the exit intervie. Review of Plant Operations The inspector reviewed various shift logs and operating records, including data sheets, instrument traces and records of equipment malfunctio Cogni zance of significant plant operations was maintained by the inspecto No significant changes or trends in plant operations or plant parameters affecting the safe operation of the facility were observe The following specific areas were included in this revie a. Control Room logs were observed to be filled out for the period of this report. Abnormal conditions were identified by the operating staff in their logs, and resolution of these conditions was underway or completed. Specific abnormal conditions noted by the inspector during the inspection included:
(1) High reactor coolant pump 'C' seal leakoff flow indicatio (2) High 'B' feedwater flow indicatio (3) Nuclear flux, power range channel 1205 faile FEB
(4) Nuclear flux, power range channel 1207 gain setting was significantly lower than *the other-operable power range channel (5) The wide range pressure recorder, PR 425, reportedly did not track the pressure transient caused by the reactor trip of January 16, 198 (6) The thermal power calorimetric data obtained during the period from October 24, 1979 until December 3, 1979, reportedly was sometimes obtained from unapproved equipment installed without any quality assurance controls. This is an unresolved.item discussed further in Paragraph b. The Generating Station and Watch Engineer's Logs for the period of this report provided sufficient detail to communicate equipment status, testing of redundant components, clearances, permissions, and approval c. Staff log book reviews were not generally documented, as noted previously by the Performance Appraisal Team inspectors. This will be reviewed further during subsequent inspections (01 80-02-01).
d. The Temporary Operating Memoranda Nos. 212-255 were reviewed, and found not to conflict with.the intent of the Technical Specification e. The Temporary Modifications Log was reviewed on January 10, 1980. -It did not contain any bypassing that conflicted with the Technical Specifications or 10 CFR 50.59. The following lifted leads were verified to have.been approved and installed:
Automatic reactor coolant pump trip circuitry-leads lifte Station Incident Reports 79-36, 44, and 47-50 were reviewed. These reports were reviewed by the licensee in accordance with regulatory requirements with the possible exception of No. 79-50, which is discussed below:
Station Incident Report 79-50 This report stated that from October 24, 1979, until December 3, 1979, a digital differential pressure meter was installed in the feedwater system in parallel with the existing 'Barton' differen tial flow meter The readings from these meters are significant data used in the reactor thermal >power calculation required daily by the Technical Specifications.. According to the report, some operators used the completely unauthorized, unapproved and unre viewed digital meter data in the reactor thermal power calculatio At the conclusion of this inspection period, the details of this event were still under investigation by the inspector, and at his request, by the licensee personne This item is unresolve (01 80-02-02)
g. Tours of accessible areas were performed periodically by the inspector in order to independently assess equipment and plant condition Speci fically, the following areas were reviewed:
(1) Monitoring recorders were operable and did not indicate any Technical Specification violation (2) Radiation controls appeared to be properly established. It was observed that the roped-off radiation control.areas were properly posted for the indicated radiation levels. Step-off pads and protective clothing disposal containers were adequat (3) Flammable materials were not observed to be stored inside or adjacent to safety related buildings or systems, although con siderable amounts of treated fire-resistant wood were present in both the 4KV switchgear room and the lube oil storage area to provide scaffolding for the installation of plant modifica-.
tions. Fire watches were always present when welding was observed to be in progress by the inspector. The general level of cleanli ness was acceptable, with evidence of continuing effort by the licensee to keep work areas reasonably clea (4) Some small fluid leaks were observed during the inspector's tou The most significant leaks were water from a sensing line to the
'A' steam generator feed flow Barton guage, and oil from the No. 1 emergency diesel generator. The licensee took corrective action to repair or ameliorate these leak (5) No gross piping vibrations were observe (6) Two safety-related hydraulic snubbers were noted to be leakin One of these, with its reservoir nearly empty, was refilled by the licensee, while the other.(5-1501R-40) had such 'a slow leak that the licensee chose to take no actio The inspector found this acceptable, but noted that these two snubbers have histori cally leaked over the last year based on his observations at the facility. (01 80-02-01)
(7) The inspector traced the piping in the new automatic fire suppressor system in the turbine building, main steam feed and condensate system principal piping paths, and the new automatic auxiliary feedwater piping. *No discrepancies were note (8) No discrepancies were observed in the licensee's clearance tagging system during the period of this inspection. The inspec tor did observe that a variety of uncontrolled yellow caution tags -were hung on equipment in the control room and throughout.
the plant, as previously noted by the Performance Appraisal Team report. This area will be evaluated further in subsequent inspection (01 80-02-04)
(9) Control room operators were always knowledgeable about the causes for every lighted annunciator selected, and took appropriate correc tive action for abnormal annuciators. Examples of annuciators discussed with the operators were "Pressurizer Level Channel III Hi-Lo," and "RCP C Hi Leakoff."
(10) Two licensed operators were observed to be present in the control room. :One of the operators.was always observed to be "at the controls."
h. No examples of:.equipment status or operating parameter which did not conform to the limiting Safety System Settings or Limiting Conditions for Operation were identifie i. The fire extinguishers that were observed were unobstructed and fully charged; fire alarm stations were clearly identified and unobstructed; the battery room ventilation system appeared operable; and no evidence of smoking in the no smoking areas was observe 'Shift turnovers between the Watch Engineers and the Control Operators were observed. The information conveyed was adequate to convey significant evolutions in progress as well as plant statu. Exit Interview An exit interview (Paragraph 1) was held on January 25, 1980, to summarize the scope and findings of this inspection.