IR 05000206/1980025

IE Insp Rept 50-206/80-25 on 800811-29.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Plant Operations During long-term Outage,Monthly Maint & Surveillance Observations & Review of LERs

ML13323A866
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	09/26/1980
From:	Faulkenberry B, Miller L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML13323A865	List: IR 05000206/1980025 ML13323A863
References
50-206-80-25, NUDOCS 8010280019
Download: ML13323A866 (4)

Text

U. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION V

Report N /80-25 Docket N License N DPR-13 Safeguards Group Licensee:

Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name:

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station #1 Inspection at:

San Onofre, California Inspection conducted:. Aogust 11-29, 1980 Inspectors: (_

_

__

_

L. MilleV, Resident Inspector Date Signed Date Signed

/Z Date Signed Approved By:

/

j9

-

Dat in B. H. Fau1 kenberry, Ghief, Reactor-Projects Section 2, Date Signed Reactpr Operations and Nuclear Support Branch Summary:

Inspection on August 11-29, 1980 (Report No. 50-206/80-25)

Areas Inspected:

Routine, resident inspection of plant operations during long term outage, monthly maintenance and surveillance observations, and review of licensee event reports. The inspection involved 60 inspector hours by one NRC inspecto Results:

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie RV Form 219 (2)

8o o1200S

DETAILS 1..Persons Contacted

• J. Curran, Plant Manager

• R. Brunet, Superintendent,.Unit 1 M. Wharton, Supervising Engineer, Unit 1

• D. Dunn, Project Quality Assurance Supervisor

• J. Tate, Supervisor of Plant Operations F. Gerardine, Westinghouse Project Manager F. Christopher, Westinghouse Project Supervisor J. Reilly, Nuclear Engineer, Unit 1

• G. McDonald, Unit 1 Quality Assurance Supervisor B. Allen, Consultant (Southern California Edison)

B. Reisling, Radiation Protection Technician The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees on the maintenance, security and operations staffs during this inspectio *Denotes those attending the Exit Interview on August 29, 198.

Inspection of Plant Operations During Long-Terni Outage The inspector observed control roo m operations and manning, discussed plans for steam generating repairs, reviewed logs and instrumentation, and followed changes in plant statu He frequently toured throughout the-facility, includ ing the controlled area Housekeeping throughout the facility was adequate, with management attention to improving a few weaker areas noted in a prior report being apparen The inspector reviewed the Temporary Modifications Log (lifted leads and jumpers) and the active "CLearances." Selected lifted leads, jumpers and

"CLearance" tags were verified to be in place as indicated by the record In particular, yellow "Caution' tags contained appropriate informatio (This closes inspector item 80-16-05.)

The inspector walked down portions of the temporary steam generator tube brazing equipment and verified the lineup of the emergency diesel generator air start syste The inspector observed that the physical security plan continues to appear to be properly implemented, and that existing radiation protection proce dures were being observe During this inspection period, the licensee reported the potential overexposure of 73 workers due to inadequate dosime try during steam generator wor This event and the adequacy of the licensee's radiation protection, program continues, to be an area of concer A management meeting to review the licensee's performance in this area has been scheduled for September 5,. 198 S

.No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie. Monthly Maintenance Observation The inspector observed portions of the following maintenance:

.

Steam generator tube test brazin.

Spent fuel cask quality and straightness measurement.

South Charging pump repai.

Spent resin return filter replacemen The maintenance activities observed appeared to be conducted in accordance with the applicable written procedure or technical manua The limiting conditions for operation were met as required; clearances to perform the work were obtained where necessary; records of the work performance were made; qualified personnel performed the work; and appropriate radiological and fire prevention measures were observe The inspector also observed that operators identified malfunctionin equipment promptly to the maintenance department for repai However, while inspecting the repair of the south charging pump, the inspector observed that both charging pumps seal injection lines had several welds which both appeared to have excessive surface roughness, slag and porosity. The north charging pump had two such welds, and the:south charging pump had three. A licensee representative stated that prior to the present outage, these pumps had not been repaired since 1973. Therefore, the previous repairs were made before the licensee's commitment to the present Quality Assurance Program. He further stated that the lines in question would be replaced during the current outage. (80-20-01)

The inspector reviewed the licensee's records of the charging pump repair performed June 6, 1980, S-XII-1.10, "Inspection and Repair of Charging Pumps."

The procedure used in the performance of this repair work did not address any requirement to sever a charging pump seal water injection line to remove the pump for repair, nor any requirement to reweld the severed line upon reinstal lation of the pump. Furthermore, it did not discuss the welding process, materials, and inspections which would be required. Licensee personnel were unable to determine at the time of this inspection, the procedural require ments which had been imposed, if any, on these two steps at the charging pump repair. This matter will be examined further during a later inspection to determine application of quality assurance requirements on the work performe. Monthly Surveillance Observations The inspector observed licensee personnel obtain and measure boron concentrations, perform portable radiation detector calibrations, and perform area radiation

-3 monitoring system checks. Surveillance activity was relatively low. The activities observed were performed in accordance with the appropriate procedures. Limiting conditions for operation were met where applicabl Logs and records of these tests were kept, and were reviewed independentl The licensee's records indicate that all surveillances required to be completed during this period were completed. No test deficiencies were identified by the license No items of noncompliance or deviations were identifie. Review of Licensee Event Reports (LERs)

The inspector reviewed several of the licensee's recent event reports with a licensee representative, verified that the conditions observed had been correctly reported, and discussed the completed and in progress corrective action The licensee's corrective action had been satisfactorily completed on LER Nos. 80-17, 80-21, 80-23, 80-24, 80-25, 80-27, and 80-29. The licensee representative stated that the radiographs obtained in connection with LER 80-27 (indications in main feedwater welds) would be retained for future reference, and the Westinghouse'report of reactor coolant pump flywheel repairs, LER 80-25, would be provided to the inspector when it became availabl The inspector noted that the licensee had completed its review of the diesel vault drainage system design in connection with LER 80-1 However, correc tive action to repair the inadequate waste removal capability of the vault during the rainy season had not been undertaken. A licensee representative stated that corrective action to prevent recurrence of this flooding would be performe (80-25-03)

6. Exit Interview An exit interview (Paragraph 1) was held on August 29, 1980, to summarize the scope and findings of this inspection. The inspector observed that the steam generator repair work by contractor personnel was still somewhat disorganized on the steam generator platform from an ALARA point of view, with personnel observed waiting to work in higher radiation areas than necessary during the test brazing operations. The licensee representative stated that the licensee was concerned about minimizing unnecessary radiation exposure and would continue to attempt to keep it as low as reasonably achievable.