IR 05000206/1981014
| ML20005A847 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/12/1981 |
| From: | Chaffee A, Zwetzig G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20005A844 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-81-14, IEB-80-24, NUDOCS 8107010363 | |
| Download: ML20005A847 (4) | |
Text
F
~)
O U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fEISSION i
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCE!ENT l
REGION V
l Report tio. 91.14 Docket f!o. 50-206 License No. DPR-13 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Southern California Edison company P. O. Box 8G0 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead. California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofre. Unit 1 Inspection at:
San Onofre. California Inscection conducted:
May 4-7. 1981 bh
~
ll /4. /78/
Inspectors:
A.sChaf4a, Rd6ctbr Inspector U Date Signed Date Signed Approved by:
iLM1 /2. / 98 /
G. W. Zweuig, 4ti ig Chief () Date Sighe'd Reactor Projects Section 2 Sumary:
Insoection on May 4-7, 1981 (Report No. 50-206/81-14)
Areas Insoected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of rurveillance (containment local leak rate testing), follow-up on IE Bulletin 8C-24 and independent inspection. This inspection involved 16 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
RV Fonn 219 (2)
--
.
.
. _
_
._,
. l
.
o DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
-
- G. Katz, Supervisor of Plant Engineering
- G. Mcdonald, QA/QC Supervisar
- J. Curran, Plant Manager
- P. Penseyres,- Supervisor of Engineering
- J. Dunn, Project Quality Assurance Supervisor
- E. Gault, Clerk-Typist
- F. Briggs, Compliance Engineer
"H. Morgan, Superintendent, Units 2 & 3
- R. Brunet, Superintendent, Unit 1 G. McLandrich, Engineer G. Mills, Engineer T. Egan, Test Technician
- 'Jenotes those persons whc attended the exit interview.
Also present at the exit interview was the NRC Senior Resident Inspector, R. Pate.
.
2.
Surveillanca - Containment Local Leak Rate Testing The inspector reviewed procedura S-V-1.12 " Containment Penetration Leak Rate Testing" and examined local test panels. He also discussed the results of the tests which'had been conducted thus far with licensee personnel. Based on this review, the inspector concluded that the
'
licensee appeared to be meeting all applicable requirements for the performance of type B and C leak rate tests. The results of the inspection of the Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test, which was performed subsequently, are presented in Inspection Report 50-206/81-18.
No items of noncompliance or deviation were noted.
3.
IE Bulletin 80-24 The inspector performed a visual inspection of the following systems and components involved in the identification and control of water leakage inside containment:
Sphere sump pumps (2)
Reactor cavity sump pump Sphere sump Recirculation sump Reactor Cavity sump Containment water level indicator system (Float Type)
.
.
y
--
-
,
.
.
-2-Containment water level indicator systems (2), (analog type) (Post-TMI modification - not complete at time of inspection)
Various level switches and indications
,
The inspection revealed hat the two a.ew TMI containment level indicator -.
systems are physically located in the recirculation sump. Their ability to measure water level in the sphere sump is dependent on the size and number of gaps and holes in the baffle plate between these two sumps. The licensee has comitted to perform an evaluation of the ability of this system to measure sphere sump level prior to startup.
(01-81-14-01)
j The inspector also reviewed the following drawings:
5150344-1 " Elementary Diagram Sphere Sump Pumps" and 568365, Rev. 43 " Annunciator Window Engraving (Turbine Plant)". Based on this review and discussions with operations personnel the inspector concluded that the control system for the sphere sump pumps does not appear to be in accordance with tne above drawings. -In particular, based on dLcussions with control --
room personnel.it appears that level. switch (!.S-82) does not stop the two sphere sump pumps when it closes. The licensee comitted to perfonn a test to investigate this condition and perform an evaluation and take practicable corrective action, as needed, prior to startup.
,
The insp'ector also noted that several procedure revisions / additions
-
(related to identification and control of containment flooding) com.itted to by the licensee in a letter to the NRC dated March 23, 1981, were not complete at the time of this inspection.
!
The licensee had comitted in the above letter to complete these procedure revisions / additions prior to start-up. The licensee reaffirmed this comitment during this inspection.
The above items will be followed up at a future inspection, No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
s t
i 4.
Independent Inspection Effort l
l The inspectcr visually inspected the recirculation sump and sphere sump areas at the -10' level of the containment building. Based on this in:pection and discussions with licensae personnel the inspector noted the following itens of concern:
a.
The cleanliness of the recirculation pumps, recirculation sump, and sphere sump appeared to be degraded by the extended shutdown.
The licensee comitted to clean the sumps and pumps prior to startup.
i l
.
e
!
-
,.
-
.
....
.
--
. - -,.
J
...
-3-b.
The debris barrier for the recirculation sump may be partially breached if'the holes and gaps in the baffle between the recirculation sump and the sphere sump, reported by licensee personnel, are..
I large enough. The licensee comitted to investigate this concern and provide corrective action as necessary prior to startup.
The mor.thly surveillance (when the reactor is critical) of the c.
recirculation pumps may not always be accomplished with the pumps dry as required by the technical specifications. The inspector observed that the recirculation pumps were partially covered with water during his visual inspection. The licensee comitted to investigate this concern prior to startup and correct if necessary.
The licensee further comitted to perform a visual inspectio-at the impeller region of the pumps to verify existence of a satisfactory conditien prior to startup.
The above items will be followed up at a subsequent inspection.
(01-81-14-03)
No items of noncompliance or deviati ns were noted.
5.
Exit Intervi 2
-
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on May 7,1981.- The results of
thE inspection were discussed and the licensee provided the comitme'nts listed in paragraphs 3 and 4.
.
.
,- --
,, -
, - - -