IR 05000206/1986008
| ML20137X814 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 02/21/1986 |
| From: | Johnson P, Mendonca M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137X811 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-86-08-MM, 50-206-86-8-MM, NUDOCS 8603120019 | |
| Download: ML20137X814 (43) | |
Text
,
_ _ -.
._
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
. _ _ _.._
._ _____
f f
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
-
Report No.
50-206/86-08 Docket No.
50-206 License No.
DPR-I3 Licena.ect Southern California Edison Company P. O. Box 800, 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofre Unit 1 Location:
Region V Office Walnut Creek, California Conference conducted:
February l9, 1986 Prepared by:
N-
"
- 4' / f ra
-
M. M. Mendonca, Senior Resident inspector Date Signed Approved By:
b GWM 2'l
P. 11. Jr uson, Chief Date Signed Reactor P rojects Section 3 Summary:
Management Meeting an February 19, l986 (Report No. 86-08)
The licensee's plan and schedule to address concerns from a November 21, 1985 event for a May l986 restart, Were disCuMSed.
This management meeting involved a total of 49 hours5.671296e-4 days <br />0.0136 hours <br />8.101852e-5 weeks <br />1.86445e-5 months <br /> by fourteen NHC representatives.
8603120019Bhh06 PDR ADOCK O PDR
- - - - - -
.
<
_ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ -
e
MANAGEMENT MEETING 1.
Meeting Attendees Southern California Edison Company (SCE)
L. T. Papay, Senior Vice President K. P. Baskin, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering Safety and Licensing M. Wharton, Deputy Station Manager M. O. Medford, Manager, Nuclear Licensing J. L. Rainsberry, Supervisor, Licensing R. Ornelas, Licensing San Diego Gas and Electric S. B. Allman, Manager, Nuclear-Nu51 car Regulahory" Commission ~(NRC)_ Region V J. B. Martin, Regional Administrator B. H. Faulkenberryf Deputy Regional Administrator
.
J. L. Crews, Senior 'Rea'ctor Engineer
- D. F. Kirsch, Director, Division of Reactor Safety and Projects A. E. Chaffee, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch P. H. Johnson, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 3 R.'F. Fish, Chief, Emergency Preparedness Section F. R. Huey, Senior Resident Inspector, San Onofre M. ' M. Mendonca, Senior Resident Inspector, Diablo' Canyon P. P. Narbut, Project Inspector A. J. D'Angelo, Resident Inspector,' San Onofre Unit 1 NRC Nuclear Reactor Regulation R. Dudley, Project Manager, San Onofre Unit 1 J. L. Milhoan, Chief, Plant Systems PWR-A NRC Inspection and Enforcement E. W. Herschoff, Chief, Reactive Inspection Branch 2.
Meeting Summary The meeting convened at approximately 10:00 a.m.
in the Region V
,
conference room.
Mr. Martin made opening remarks and discussed the I
purpose of the meeting, i.e.,
to establish an understanding of the l
actions to be accomplished prior to restart of the San Onof re Nuclear
!
Generating Station (SONGS) Unit 1, in light of the November 21, 1985 l
event and evaluations of that event.
Mr. Hartin then requested a j
response to that purpose from the licensee, i
!
t
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _
i
t
l i
Hr. Papay then outlined the licensee's response and discussed the fact that management of the licensee's ef fort in response to the November 21 j
event was managed by Mr. Baskin. As explained, Mr. Baskin's lead of this l
cffort from SCE headquarters was a change that had occurred about two weeks earlier to allow site management to concentrate on site activities.
i
Mr. Baskin presented a handout which is included as Enclosure I to this
!
,
report.
Mr. Baskin confirmed that the leads from the NRC offices were as
[
indicated in Enclosure 1 (fourth page), and that also Mr. Medford was the
'
.}
lead for SCE as indicated in the handout.
}
Hr. Medford then discussed the licensce's major milestones related to
!
interactions with Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for the SONGS 1 j
restart program as indicated on the last page of Enclosure 1.
The staff i
found this consistent with their understanding and concurred that a
,
status meeting should be held on the week of March 10 with the licensee.
<
Mr. Medford then discussed the design changes that were listed in the
Enclosure 1 (second and third pages),
in the process of going through i
this list, Mr. Martin pointed out that item 8, which was to evaluate the
!
possibility of modifications for automatic loading of diesel generators
'
i on loss of power with no safety injection, requires evaluation prior to
'
the Commission meeting that is scheduled for March 18.
The staff indicated that this sort of information should be provided to the NRC by
[
February 28.
Mr. Martin also concurred with the licensee proposed
addition to include an evaluation of the need for automatic or remote actuation of main steam line isolation valves. These points were agreed
!
l to by the licensee.
Mr. Medford then presented an outline of the return to service report l
that is planned for issuance on March 28, 1986. This outline is enclosed
as Enclosure 2 to this report.
Mr. Martin indicated that the licensec
should consider highlighting evaluation of their design change program i
with specific attention as to the adequacy of their technical review t
related to water hammers in the feedwater system.
,
j Hessrs. Martin, Faulkenberry, Crews and Herschof f then discussed the
,
importance of the licensee's plans to evaluate plant equipment and I
i material condition (Haterial Condition Standards Program HCSP). This discussion included establishment of criteria and rationale for l
l consideration of plant components and systems important to the safe
,
!
operations of the plant as a whole. The interface of the NCSp with the
licensee's ongoing Area Honitoring Program and the importance of appropriate resource allocation and management guidance in this effort.
l Mr. Martin pointed out that an example of input to the NCSp is the l
failure modes evaluation on cabling as evidenced by the failure on the
'
auxiliary transformer during the November 21 event, i
l The licensee pointed out some of the short-term technique improvements for detection of cabling failures and long-term monitoring programs that
,
i are being investigated. This led to Mr. Chaffec's discussion of the l
licensee's Operational Readiness l'rogram f rom page 8 of Enclosure 2.
The j
inportance of a comprehensive review and critical evaluation of i
!
equipment., personnel, procedures, etc. was emphasized.
i J
!.
-~~e-s..
-ey
--w-w-
---r-%--e--we%--y
-
m e --- r m_.
. +-
, - _ - - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _. _
._
-_
_ - _ -
._
__
i'
e t
On the licensee's Check Valve Evaluation Program on page 8 to Enclosure 2, Mr. Herschoff indicated that the licensee should provide criteria and definition of which valves are included in this program.
Mr. Martin then indicated that a " Punch list" of items that the licensee considered necessary to support restart should be provide to the NRC by February 28, 1986. This list. should include design changes, procedure reviews, maintenance reviews, and particular emphasis in the evaluation of plant raterial condition.
The staf f then presented the licenace with a list of requests for additional information (Enclosure 3).
This information was considered necessary based on a meeting with the lincensee on January 31, 1986, and i
almost continuous discussions between the responsible offices. An earlier version of this list (Enclosurc 4) had been provided to the licensee for a February 14 conf erence call. The participants of thit conference call are listed in Enclosure 5.
.
The staf f then caucused to prioritize these information requests for licensee response. The staff decided that responses to Enclosure 3 items A 4 and 5 on a list of corrective actions from evaluations of the November 21 event and the SONGS 1 feedwater system should be provided by February 28, 1986; and should be included in the action item list previously discussed as necessary by February 28.
Response to item A.17 that is to evaluate the affect of long outages on plant components, i
should also be provided by February 28.
Item B.6 on automatic loading of diesel generators was agreed to be supplied by February 28 as previously indicated in this report.
Finally, items C.1 and 2 should also be provided by February 28 to provide the licennec's evaluation of check
,
valve failures and associated corrective actions.
'
Theme decisions were then communicated to the licensee on reconvening the meeting. The licensee asked if item C.1 was aclated to check valves and l
the staf f confirmed that fact. The licensee also asked for clarification
,
on items B.6 and A.17.
The staff indi:ated that in response to B.6 the
,
licensee should evaluate the advisability of automatic loading of diesel l
generators in light of the November 21 event and modern design criteria.
'
for item A.17 the staff indicated that the licensec should evaluate their experience from the long outages that Unit I has experientel and the impact on plant equipment and pcrnonnel as related to the Iick of l
continuity of operations.
Mr. Kirsch indicated that the licensee should not hesitate 'o <;-nununicate
.
with the NRC leads, if there are any questions or changes in +.6atus.
The meeting concluded at approximately 1:30 p.m.
'
l i
!
i
P
-
.
-
.
-
-
.
e
.
.
.
SCE Agende soNos 1 Water Hammer Walnut Creek February 19, 1996
.
1. Schedule of Design Changee II. Outline of SCE Investigation Neport III. Discussion of Organisettonal Interaction
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'
l
,
.
.
.
DESIGN CMANGES SCHEDULE 1.
Replace B feodwater line inside
containment wsCt continuous 1v sloped piptLF.
2.
Locate additional check valves.
I with in-serv ce test provisions.
in each feed line inside containment.
3.
Evaluate the addition of a void
sensing device, with Control Room alare. in each feedwater line, near the steam generators.
l 4.
Replace 8 existing Pacific Valves
check valves with new design valves.
l S.
Provide improved in-service test
capability for replacement valves.
6.
Inspect, and repair as necessary.
I feedwater system valves and piping l
outside containment.
!
7.
Repair. and modify as appropriate.
l damage in the area of the low pressure flash evaporators.
l l
8.
Evaluate possibility of modifications Cycle 10
,.
I that would provide for automatic l
Loading of diesel generators on loss of power, with no safety injection
!
condition.
l
!
9.
Evaluate alternative means of cvele 10 i
providing immediately available backup source of offsite power.
10.
Install additional protection for
!
auxiliary transformer feeder cabling that is currentiv exposed to i
potentially damaging environmental i
l conditions.
11.
Install Control Noas clock that
l does not depend on AC power.
l l
12.
Make modifications to preclude
l spurious annunciation of safety injection due to electrical transients.
13.
Modify the TSC computer to provide Undetermined for autoontic restart following
'
,
l restoration of power.
i
.
.
.
.
.
.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____ ________ -__-____
_
.. _ - _ _ __ _
'
.
.
.
.
.
DESIGN CHANGES SCHEDULE 14.
Evaluate provision of Uninterruptible Not before restart, power supply for the TSC computer.
but during oper-atton, subject to material avail-ability 15.
Provide for automatic closure of Undetermined main feed regulating valves following unit trip and loss of MFW pumps.
16.
Evaluate provision of Unir.terruptible Cycle 10 power supply for busses such as Vital Bus 84.
17.
Install Control Room indication of 1 - subject to blowdown status and provide for material avail-automatic isolation on actuation of ability AFW.
18.
Review Control Room indication of vital May 7, 1987 bus status, from a human factors viewpoint. as part of the control Room Design Review.
19.
Modify the current limiting bvpass
transformer reactor breaker d.mign to permit the diesel genorators ;o close onto their respective 4EY busses when the breaker is racked out.
Note 1:
To be completed prior to SONOS 1 restart
- --
- -
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
- -
-
- -
-
- -
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ -
___
t
.
.
s
.
SONGS 1 Water Namuser Lead Contacts E
G. Leer - NRII:
(301)492-7403 C. Zeck - I&E (301)492-9663 A. Chaffee - Negion V (415)943-3753 DG M. Medford - Leed (818)302-1749
._
<
i
.
' *
.,
,
NRC SONGS 1 Weter Namer Major Milestones NRC - SCE Meeting in Walnut Creek February 19, 1996 Region V - SCI Meeting in Week of March 10, 1996 Walnut Creek NRR - I&E - SCE Meeting in Week of March 10, 1996 Betheeds Comission Meeting March 18, 1986 Report Iesuance March 28, 1986
Unit 1 Restert May 1996
l
l L
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -,
.,, _
g -
b l
l i
t I
!
t
\\
I
!
ENCLOSlRE 2 f
l
.
l l
t
i l
I I
,
i l
t r
-..-
.
.
-
...
.
.
..
..
.. - _.
_ _. _ _ _ _ _. _._ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _
_
. _ _ _ _... -. _ _ _
l 't
'
.
,
Ie (PREFACE)
'
!.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (
11.
INTRODUCTION
!!!. PURPOSF AND SCOPE
,
l A.
Description of Report i
IV. 8ACKGROUND INFORMATION l
i
'
A.
Site Description
'.
Plant Description l
!
i 1.
History a.
Operating History 1.
Outages l
11.
Design Evolutten
!
b.
Cycle 8 Operation
[
2.
Design Information a.
General Design i
b.
Main Steam System c.
Main feedwater and Condensate System
!
'
(Including S/G. Blowdown)
d.
Auxiliary Feedwater System l
e.
Electrical System (Including Diesels)
!
l f.
Safety Injection System j
f 3.
Administration of Plant a.
Onsite i
!
b.
Offsite
,
I i
i-1-f
I
\\
r J
i
!
.
+
.
l'
I V.
LOSS OF POWER AND WATER HAMMER EVENT A.
Discussion of Pre-trip Sequence of Events
!
(Including Chronological Table)
I 8.
Discussion of Post-trip Sequence of Events (Including Chronological Table)
VI.
INVESTIGATIVE PROGRAMS, A.
Evaluation of Plant Performance 1.
Description of Plant Performance During Event 2.
Transient and Accident Analysis
I a.
Loss of Power L
i 1.
Description of Design Basis Event 11. Comparison to Actual Event l
b.
Loss of feedwater
,
1.
Description of Design Basis Event'
!
l 11. Cowarison to Actual Event
'
!
c.
Feedwater Line Break 1.
Description of Design Basis Event it. Comparison to Actual Event P
d.
Main iteam Line Break 1.
Description of Design Basis Event 11.
Comparison to Actual Event j
l e.
Degradation / Loss of Secondary Heat Sink l
l i.
Description of Design Basis Event l
11.
Comparison to Actual Event i
3.
Conclusions / Corrective Action
E i
l
!
-2-
!
l L
-
-
-- -- -
-
... ~. -..
-
- -.
. - -. -
- -... - -
_.
. -. - _.
.. _ - -
<
,
l
-
,
.
!
8.
Evaluation of Systems & Equipment Performance j
,!
1.
Electrical Systems
!
!
j a.
Performance During Event l
i l
l 1.
Parallel Operation of Bus IA/IC
b.
Design Basis
.
l
}
1.
Compliance with Regulatory Requirements
[
.
11. Compliance with Codes and Standards f
!
I c.
Post-Event Investigations
i
i.
Transformer
!
,
j 11.
Diesels
.
I j
111. 4kV Cabling j
!
iv.
0/G Output Breaker Design I
'
'
v.
t.oss of Voltage Auto Transfer Sequence
,
'
j (Including Testing)
i
vi.
Bus Configuration I
l vii. Vital Bus 4 i
j viii. Ground Detection l
l
~
d.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions t
\\
.
j 2.
Main Feedwater and Condensato Systems i
I
!
a.
Performance Ouring Event i
?
i.
Inability to Start Circ. Water Pump
[
j
)
b.
Design Basis
!
I 1.
Compliance with Regulatory Requirements t
l 11. Compliance with Codes and Standards
!
f i
!
i f
,
,
!
!
,
i-3-l
!
I
.
-- _. -. -
.
._ _ ~. ~.
,
.
i
.
..
,
.
t j
c.
Post-event Investigations 1.
MFWP Oischarge Check Valves 11. MfW Line Check Valves
,
iii. MFW Bypass Check Valves iv. MFW flow Control Valves l
v.
FW Line I
j'
v1. Condensate System Damage
!
'
i vii. MfWP Reverse Rotation l
l d.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 3.
Auxiliary Feedwater System i
a.
Performance During Event
j i
l, b.
Design Basis I
i t
1.
Compliance with Regulatory Requirements l
ii. Compliance with Codes and Standards i
{
c.
Post-event Investigations 1.
Piping
-
i it.
Start Time of Turbine Driven Pump
d.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions f
'
4.
Safety Injection System
!
a.
Performance During Event i
b.
Design Basis l
1.
Compliance with Regulatory Requirements
'
11.
Compliance with Codes and Standards
i
.'
c.
Post-event Investigations
!
!
1.
Safeguard Load Sequencing System
)
.
!
!
11.
Spurious St Actuation Indication on LOP
{
]
(
iii. Evaluation of 515 Operability During Event l
>
!
-4-
!
i
!
!
!
--
-
_ - _ - - - _ _ - - -. _ _ _ - - _ - - -
-__
- - _ - _ _
_
,
.
.
lo d.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 5.
Miscellaneous Systems and Components (Format Same as items 1-4 Above)
a.
S/G Blowdown b.
Security Systems c.
Red Telephone d.
TSC Computer j
e.
Control Room Clock f.
HF Design of CR Vital Bus Indication g.
Main Steam Block Valves Closure h.
RCP "B" Thrust Bearing High Temp 1.
Multiple Shifting of Charging Pump Suction j.
Recording of Dry S/G Parameters l
C.
Evaluation of Water Hammer 1.
Performance During Event 2.
Water Hamer Design Consideration I
a.
Feedwater Piping Design for Water Hamer j
l l
3.
Post-event Investigations
!
4.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 0.
Evaluation of Operator Performance 1.
Pre-trip Performance i
j a.
Technical Specification Implementation 2.
Post-trip Performance a.
RHR Interlock Overridden 3.
Post-event Investigations a.
Spurious St Indications b.
Energitation of Buses-5
.
.-
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ -
_ - -_
.
.
<.
L 4.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions
,
E.
Evaluation of Programs and Procedures 1.-
In-service Testing Program a.
Program Description and Basis
,
i
'
b.
Event Related Aspects
.
,
i.
Ability of IST to Detect These Failure Modes
l 11.
Criteria Subjective i
'
l l
111. Pressure Criteria Too High I
,
l iv. Higher Pressure More Rigorous Test c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions l
l 2..
Non-Emergency Operating Instructions
i l
a.
Program Basis
!
!
i b.
Event Related Aspects
!
l l
1.
Containment Entry to Shut RHR Bypass Valve l
11.
Paralle) Bus Alignment
'
111. Operation With High RCP Thrust Bearing Temp.
i
,
iv. Adequacy of $01-9-7 l
c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions l
3.
Emergency Operating Instructions j
l a.
Program Basis
!
I b.
Event Related Aspects 1.
AFW Flow Reinttiation to Hot Dry S/G's
11.
Start of RCP's 111. Single Verification of SIS iv.
Time Criteria to Load Diesels v.
S/G Blowdown Caution Too Late
,
l'
vi. AFW Flow into Volded Feed Lines
!
-6-
.
i-i
. - - -
.
.
....
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _. - _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _ -__-.--.
--
o
.
.
t c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 4.
Maintenance p
a.
Program Basis b.
Event Related Aspects 1.
Check Valves 11.
Records i
111. Tracking and Trending iv. Awareness
v.
SALP Rating c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 5.
Training a.
Program Basis b.
Event Related Aspects 1.
Operator failure to Restore Power 11. S/G Blowdown Reestablishment iii. Ground Locating Activities
.iv.
Operator Background Knowledge (a) Safeguard Load Sequencing Operation
. b)
Parallel Bus Operation (
I (c) Sync Bypass Switch Operation
i
'
(d)
Lockup Bus Reset Circuit Operation v.
SALP Rating r
c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 6.
Quality Assurance
'
a.
Program Basis b.
Event Related Aspects l
1.
SALP Rating
t
..
-
.
.
.
'
c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 7.
Program Basis b.
Event Related Aspects 1.
STA 10-minute Callout 11.
Event Declaration 111'. SALP Rating
!
c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions 8.
Post-trip Review a.
Program Basis b.
Event Related Aspects l
c.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions l
l 9.
Safety Review Process a.
Onsite b.
Offsite C.
Conclusions / Corrective Actions l
VII. PLANT IMPROVEMENT PROGRAMS
!
l A.
daterial Condition Standards Progrem B.
Area Monitoring Program
.
C.
Operational Readiness Program
!
l 0.
Check Valve Application Evaluation Program
!
i
.
8-
.
(
!
I
__
-.
..
_ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
'
l-
,
-
.
9 VIII. CORRECTIVE ACTIONS A.
Short-term Corrective Actions 1.
Program and Procedure Revisions
,
2.
Hardware Changes 3.
Schedule i
B.
Long-term Corrective Actions 1.
Program and Procedure Revisions 2.
Engineering Evaluations 3.
Hardware Changes and Evaluations 4.
Schedule i
IX. [0NCLUS10NS APPENDIX A - NRC Question Response Matrix
i l
'
6072F l
I
,
,
Y i
i
>
i
!
i l
l-9-
!
-
-
f
.c
.
ENCLOSURE 3
.
.
...
- -. -
-.
-
-
.
-
. -.
- -. - -
-
- - - - - -. - -
- -
- - -
February 19, 1986 Revision 7
.
.
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup Due Statys Item Description Date Completion Programmatic Actions The licensee's response to all the following requests for additional information shall include consideration of the IIT findings and the licensee's independent analysis of the November 21, 1985 event. The licensee shall provide responses to these questions to the requesting office with copies to the RV, NRR, and IE leads. The licensee shall also provide a list of Design Change Packages, revised Procedures, and documentation of other changes required f rom any of their November 21, 1985 event related evaluations to the SONGS Resident Inspector Of fice; and copies of selected documents from this list will be provided to the SONGS Resident Inspector Office.
Lead and. Address Phone No.
Fax RV
-
Al Chaffee (415) 943-3753 (415) 943-3804 or 5 USNRC 1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 NRR -
George Lear, NRR (301) 492-7403 (301) 492-8110 USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 IE
-
Gary Zech, IE (301) 492-9663 (301) 492-7376 USNRC Washington, D.C. 20555 l
A.
RV Requests for Additional Information 1.
Pravide a program plan to outline SCE's program that was developed and implemented in respense to the November 21 event.
(List I, Item 4)
2.
Provide a return to service report documenting the investigation conducted, the corrective actions to be implemented, the schedule for such. corrective actions, and the overall conclusions.
(4)
3.
Provide a description and evaluation of the SONGS 1 maintenance program for check valves.
Include:
February 19, 1986 Revision 7
<
,
.
IV.
Actions to b; Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
Due Status Item Description Date Completion a)
Trending of maintenance results and IST findings.
b)
Quality Assurance (QA) involvement.
c)
QA involvement in Onsite Review Committee activities, d)
Management involvement and followup c)
Assignment of Responsibilities (l.g)
Provide a description and schedule for the corrective actions required from your evaluation of the SONGS 1 design related to the November 21 event.
Coordinate with the Residerat Inspector Of fice the need for additional information.
(3.b)
5.
Provide a description and schedule for the corrective actions required from your evaluation of the SONGS I feedwater system design.
(3.d)
6.
Provide a description and evaluation of the process for SONGS-1 abnormal conditions evaluation and post-trip reviews. Also, include a description of responsibilities and independence of:
Offsite Review Committee
Onsite Review Committee
Quality Assurance Organization
Plant Enginerring Review (4.b.1)
7.
Evaluate process for abnormal conditions evaluations and post-trip reviews, including recent experience with feedwater line B noise evaluation by Onsite Review Committee. Provide a list of improvements identified from this evaluation.
(4.b.2)'
l
.
no
si ut
t e al t p S mo C
pu tra e
t et S
ua DD
-
t in U
s S
e
G
.
i N
g t
O
.
e i
S e
c v
.
r n
i s
r o
,
a t
g g
w
.
o f
y n
c n
n e
o f
t e
a i
i r
l m
i t
d w
u l
E a
l n
e n
o d
a C
r i
i v
i l
d e S
g b
a i
f l
ec h
o a
m t
o d o c
y r
v n
i f
ar i
b p
e f
e o
op h)
i o
v e
l w4 d
l r
e.
n h
nm e
o t
g rn o
.
t uo sd d
r e
n po i
s
r nn i
t r
i i
t e
rt ef oa v
n d
d t a
i on t
i
o o
d n
na r
t f e ad t3 r
c n
e at u
i v
r e i
P a
r n
g l
s e et d
,
e t
ee
.
i i
n pe n2 c
v y
vm s
f b
o5 ol o -
b i
c p
d iu d
n i
i8 e
c6 t
a u
n t c n
o s
t 9 nd o
a r
w a
co e
c n
c1 a
g.
t r
u o
ed r
o a
cy ns t
c l
g r
t t
p
,
l i g n
s c
l n
ry n
s e1 sr t P o
i a
o i
or h
a e
v2 r e n
i n
F k
co s
l r
i op e,
t i
,
c t
i p
t r t o v1 a
m s
d a
hs l
d ce ar e
.
m d
s n
r t i b
d e
eb r p r6 r
a e
a t
oh a
n n
r m em p1 o
n b
t a
g r e ni f
e e
w e
( t s
i ov e
dT n
h t
e h
n e
m s
co gs nI I
t e
i t
ne a
s N
a aI l
v om o
r a
d l w (
.
d f
p e
f i p t
g s
ee e
g n
o m
R s o
ti o
h d
i h s s n
a o
e au s
r t
r f t en i.
n c
ncs n
t q s
p i
o i
i a zs
d o
oaed o
ne e
w c
t m df i r e
i e
if ce i
e c
e e
no ne n
r t
r sran t
mn o
c s
r er er gm o
e a
u i ef g a
ui r
n e
df mo om i
d u
s vt ri u
c p
a s
e i
i t ca s
i l :
s rnes l
o)
n s
c d
t a eh i
s ae a
eI t s a
d s w
e e
n ye i
r v
n vd p
nA v
t e
t c
a ni f d)
r, e
o eu o
ueI e
es i
n o
n af oa6 re R
C n
l t
S c s
ce v
i r
e i
r -
ot o
d c nl e d
nu e
a p
t d t h
f a e
i nn s
d aoi n
aq r
m n
nn t o w
b t
aI d
nrrt a
ne e
i ae gt
.
s p
o auti er y
e h
a d
n g
nf o
n h
s nl n
t r
h t
m ni erP oo i
t r
o
.
t t soi o
nt o
t o
l e i
c i s e
nACb i
i n t
r f
i s w
sn
,
s s
td m
e i
t :
a e s
o o
o t m no5 i o n
e pr myys pe mm i
t f
a e op vi o
D i o f
et t n i d e
h n
w ul
ot
i rc o
gii o ru f r i
s e
l b nC
.
r a
t m
ce al l p cl ou t
e i
ao oA2 pi
c e
s r n
naa s sc c
n k
r v
vr i
t
A t
e o
a uue en eo e
c u
r ep t t7 f i
? QQR dI s r m
a d
e uu5 on
!
I d e i
,
c t
up p
b e
v nl a o i
an p
a i
d c
o a a chT k
.
V a
i
.
ed u
e o
r et I ce
I en r
es h n q
e r
A eu riI ah y
d e c
- - ***
dd T a E
F P
Q dd P w(
Lt r
it s
i r i e a
vn e
vo vc u
oi d
oc oo r
ra
)
r e
.
.
.
.
.
r r
.
.
b P m A
P r a
b c
d e
P p a
b e
.
)
F a.
b
.
.
0
.
.
(
(
.
February 19, 1986 Revision 7
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
Due Status Item Description Date Completion c.
Inadequate instructions for manually bringing power onto dead buses and for responding to malfunction of the loss of ac power automatic sequencer.
(llT 13.4, Pg. 3-6; 17.2.1.4, Pg. 7-5);
14.12.2.1, Pg. 4-11)
d.
Inalequate instruct. ions for trouble shooting of 4KV bus grounds.
Include an assessment of appropriateness of parrelleling buses with indicated ground fault.
(IIT $8.1, Pge. 8-1);
14.12.3, Pge. 4-11; 13.2, Pg. 3-2; T4.13, Pg. 4-15; 14.14, Pg. 4-16; 17.2.1.5, Pg. 7-6)
e.
Lack of provisions for identifying alternate methods of verifying SI actuation.
(IIT.57.2.1.3, Pg. 7-4)
f.
Need for revision to AFW system flow control procedures to factor in effect on reactor coolant system temperature.
(IIT $6.1, Pg. 6-3)
g.
Procedure for going onto RilR cooling implied clearing of isolation valve interlock at 400 vice 370 psig.
(IIT 18.8, Pg. 8-3; 17.2.1.8, Pg. 7-7; 13.8, Pgs. 3-12&l3; 54.10, Pg.4-8; 17.2.1.8, Pg. 7-7)
11.
In light of the above evaluations of item 10, provide a description of the program changes required to assure acceptable procedural development.
Include consideration ef:
a.
Management and supervision review and followup; b.
Peer Review c.
Dry Run-Throughs of New or Revised Procedures d.
Quality Assurance / Quality Control involvement e.
Compliance involvement f.
Tracking of commitments and requirements that are fulfilled by procedures, and assurance that procedure revisions do not obviate the compliance to any commitment or requirement.
(6.a & b)
!
February 19, 1986 Revision 7
.
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
Due Status Item Description Date Compleiion 12.
Provide an evaluation and any identified potential corrective actions on the following operator training concerns that arose from the November 21, 1985 event:
a.
Troubleshooting and isolating grounds including bus and transformer grounds.
(IIT 17.2.1.1, Pgs. 7-1 thru 4)
b.
Transfer of loads between 4KV buses.
(IIT 17.2.1.1, Pg. 7-1)
c.
Operator response to loss of offsite electrical. power.
(IIT 17.2.1.2, Pg. 7-4)
d.
Resetting Unit Trip.
(IIT 17.2.1.4, Pg. 7-5)
e.
Controlling SG lllowdown.
(IIT $3.7, Pgs. 3-10&l1)
f.
SLSS sequencer panel indications.
(IIT 54.13, Pg. 4-16)
g.
Not notifying NRC that a UE had been declared.
(IIT 17.2.2.2, Pg. 7-9),
and 17.3.2, Pg. 7-15) (Response should be included to item 14 of this list)
h.
Prompt implementation of technical specification action statements when warranted, i.e.,
reluctance to fully isolate failed tranformer.
(IIT E3.2, Pg. 3-2)
(7.a)
13.
Based on the above evaluations of item 2, provide a description of any changes to the operator training program that are deemed appropriate.
Include consideration of:
Training Material including component engineering and actual operational a.
in fo rma t i on.
b.
Training Time (Classroom and Simulator).
c.
Instructor Ef fectiveness.
d.
Emphasis on Technical Specifications and relationship to safe plant operations.
e.
Feedback of changes in procedures, plant configuration, and industry experience.
(N/A)
_.. _... - _ _. _ _ _ _... _
_
_.
_ _ _. _ _.
. _ _ -.., _ _ _ _... _ - _
-._.m
-
-...
_
.
_
i February 19, 1986 Revision 7 6"
,
,
b
]
IV.
Actions to be. Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 'l Startup
t I
'
- .
- Due
. Status
"
j Item Description Date Completion a
14.
a.
Describe the basis for the initial notification to the NHC at 07:51 a.m.
.
l EST (e.g., implementation of emergency plan, 10 CFR 50.72 one hour-report, etc.).
)
)
b.
If the initial notification was 10 CFR 50.72, was the emergency plan implemented?
{
If so, when was the event classified and declared?
,
Describe the offsite notifications mode and identify related procedures implemented,
.,
c.
)
including the initial notification to the NRC Operations Center. that an event had
~
been declared.
!
.
(8.a)
,
15.
a.
Describe the effort to identify whether the spurious ringing of the Emergency Notification System (ENS) which, apparently coincident with power system
,
i
!
transients, is the result of responsibilities belonging to Southern
!
i California Edison Company.
'
i i
i b.
Describe any findingsaor actions taken in response to Information Notice
'
]
No. 85-77.
j (8.b)
f
!
l 16.
Describe the onsite notifications, including any to the STA, made in connection
j with the November 21 event and identify related procedures implemented.
I i
(8.c)
17.
Provide an evaluation of the affect of long outages on plant components as related
!
to SONCS-1.
,
)
(10)
!
l 18.
Provide a description of your integrated program for review and upgrading overall t
i plant material condition (" Material Condition Standards Program".MCSP).
Include:
)
J Use of maintenance records including trending and feedback into the program.
a.
,
Include:
'
i
Preventive and Corrective Maintenance Activities j
Procurement Records.
- Equipment llistories i
i
.
I I
i
s
...
.
- _, _ - -
.. -.
.
.~,
. - - -
_.
.
,.
-.
___. -
-
-
.
-.
-
._- _.
.
.
._
- -
.
o
.
Februsry 19, 1986 R vinien 7
,
,
IV.
Actions to be Ccnsidered and Informatien to be Prcvided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
,
Due Status i
^
Item Description Date Completion b.
Use of test results including trending and feedback into the program.
P c.
Industry Experience
d.
Equipment layup and maintenance for long outages.
<
!
e.
Engineering evaluations I
i f.
Criteria and responsibilities for determination of_ maintenance frequency and-for priorities on plant improvements.
'
g.
Required changes to the operations, maintenance and engineering programs
,
(Area Monitoring Program) to implement MCSP.
!
(11)
!
B.
Request for Additional Information - PWR-A Items l
i 1.
Describe isolation features and provide an evaluation of the steam generator j
blowdown system, including the following:
'
Features which preclude automatic reinitiation of steam generator blowdown a.
I upon reset of the steam generator blowdown isolation signal or appropriate justification for not doing so.
b.
Features which' allow monitoring status of the steam generator blowdown system including the need for flow monitoring capability or valve position status.
Specifically address control room status indication.
i (3.a.3)
2.
Describe the current (as modified) SONGS-1 main steam and feedwater system design and the basis for the design, including the following:
a.
Specific water hammer design considerations and any instrumentation to indicate impending water hammer conditions.
Include in your discussion the basis for
,
)
concluding that-the water hammer occurred in the feedwater line and not the
'
feedring. Also compare your design considerations for water hammer with vendor recommendations to mitigate hamme _. _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_. _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.. _. _ _ _ _. _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _ _ _ _
_
_ ___
_
_
_
Februzry 19, 1986 Raviolen 7
,
,
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE'for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
Due Status
,
Item Description Date Completion
'
b.
Measures taken or to be taken to verify the integrity of feedwater piping and
[
]
supporting structures (including concrete) prior to return to service. Also,
' provide a summary of the results of NDE of pipe weldments and any metallographic l
examination of icedwater pipe cracks.
I
!
c.
Results of any re-evaluation of existing design of main steam and feedwater l
systems with respect to potential for loss of heat sink in the event of steam
,
or feedwater system rupture.
Include in your discussion, as appropriate, l
consideration of manual actuation of steam line isolation valves and assurance
'
of steam generator availability to remove decay heat.
(3, 3.a.2, and 3.c)
3.
Provide an evaluation and description of your consideration to provide an
[
uninterruptible power source (UPS) for the Critical Function Monitoring System (CFMS)
,
in order to enhance the plant post-trip review capability. Describe administrative.
!
procedures for resetting the CFMS after troubleshooting.
(4.c)
(
i
.
4.
Provide a discussion of the neutral grounding of auxiliary transformer "A".
!
is the neutral grounded through an impedance?
If.so, what is the value of j
neutral impedance and of the ground fault current.
(6.c)
i 5.
Provide a description of the relay protection and settings for the auxiliary transformer "A"
,
grounded neutral.
(6.c)
,
6.
Provide an evaluation of the rationale for not loading diesels automatically when l
power to Class IE buses is lost from the offsite source.
(3.a.1)
7.
Provide information on Safeguard Load Sequencing System (SLSS) including logic, i
,
l type, description of operating modes.
(3.a.4)
8.
Provide information on load sequencing of load groups for loss of station power
with discussion of status lamps in the surveillance panels.
(3.a.5)
,t 9.
Provide information on station loss of voltage auto-transfer scheme. Discuss
how the automatic transfer of electrical power recovery is accomplished.
(3.a.5)
i
10.
Provide information on any fault locating and/or maintenance testing procedures j
of 4.16 Kv cable circuits at San Onofre nuclear generating plant.
(7.a.1)
,
i
!
.
i
,
w
o
+
Febru:ry 19, 1986 R;vicien 7
,
,
IV.
Actions to be Cenaid2 red cnd Informatien to be Prsvid:d by SCE fer SONGS Unit 1 Stcrtup
.
Due Status Item Description Date Completion 11.
Provide a description of the power supply to vital 120V Bus #4.
Is the supply to vital 120 volt Bus #4 from 7.5 KVA transformer or unregulated 37.5 KVA transformer?
Are the transfer switches associated with the supply to vital 120 volt Bus #4 and the 7.5 KVA and 37.5 KVA transformer manual or automatic?
(No category)
12.
What is the phase-relationship between-transformer A and transformer C windings when both transformers.were momentarily paralleled.
(No category)
13.
For loss of Bus #4, provide an evaluation of the necessity to scram the reactor?
(No category)
14.
Provide the rationale for not restoring Bus 2C from Bus IB before manual scramming of the reactor?
(No category)
15.
Discuss any design changes to eliminate spurious SI indication.
(3.a.4)
16.
Discuss interlocks, including basis for interlocks, associated with the diesel generator output breaker; and provide an evaluation of the appropriateness of these interlocks.
(3.a.6)
17.
Discuss basis for maximum permissible time limits on loading of diesel generators following loss of station power.
(3.a.1)
18.
Describe provisions made for reconstructing event data following loss of station power.
(4.a)
19.
Describe any improvements made for labeling of selected control room indicators.
(3.a.7)
20.
Provide an evaluation of the need of an uninterruptible power such as inverter power to vital Bus #4.
(3.a.8)
C.
Provide a report and supporting documentation which addresses the root cause of the November 1985 water hammer event and SCE's proposed corrective actions.
(l.a)
2.
Provide a determination and supporting documentation of the adequacy of the various check valve designs for application in the feedwater and other safety-related systems. This determination should include, as appropriate:
o
.
Februtry 19, 1986 Revicies 7
,
,
IV.
Acticus to be Cracidered tnd Ieformatics to be Previd:d by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Stcrtup
,
Due Status Item Description Date Completion a.
Evaluation of check valves that do not have integral internals to:
-Assess existing inspection or test results.
-Assess existing maintenance histories.
-Perform and evaluate the results of disassembly and visual inspection of selected check valves based on the results of the above reviews.
b.
For check valves with integral internals:
-Determine which valves are only partially open during nominal operating conditions.
-Assess existing inspection and test results.
-Review existing maintenance histories.
-Perform and evaluate the results of disassembly and visual inspection of selected check valves based up on results of the above reviews.
c.
Provide a description of any modifications required from.these evaluations.
(1.b)
3.
Provide a determination and supporting documentation of the adequacy of the IST program and procedures, as implemented, to detect degraded and failed safety-related check valves.
Include QA over view.
(l.d)
4.
Provide a determination and supporting documentation of the adequacy of the design and related testing, maintenance, and inspection programs for safety-related check valves in other systems.
(l.f)
_ _.
__
ENCLOSUE 4 i
-
.
.
.
F_brua ry 14, 1986 Revicion 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
Due Status Item Description Date Completion A.
Programmatic Actions The licensee's response to all the following requests for additional information shall include consideration of the IIT findings and the licensee's independent analysis of the November 21, 1985 event. The licensee shall provide responses to these questions to the requesting office with copies to the RV, NRR, and IE leads. The licensee shall also provide a list of Design Change Packages, revised Procedures, and documentation of other changes required from any of their November 21, 1985 event related evaluations to the SONGS Resident Inspector Of fice; and copies of selected documents from this list will be provided to the SONGS Resident Inspector Office.
RV Requests for Additional Information 1.
Provide a program plan to outline SCE's program that was developed and implemented in response to the November 21 event.
(List'I, Item 4)
l I
2.
Provide a return to service report documenting the investigation conducted, the corrective actions to be implemented, the schedule for such corrective actions, and the overall conclusions.
(List II, Item 4)
3.
Provide a description and evaluation of the SONGS 1 maintenance program for check valves.
Include:
a)
Trending of maintenance results and IST findings.
b)
Quality Assurance (QA) involvement, c)
QA involvement in'Onsite Review Committee activities.
d)
Management involvement and followup e)
Assignment of Responsibilities (1.g)
J
.
.
.
,
February 14, 1986 Revi:: ion 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
'
Due Status Item Description Date Completion
Provide a description and schedule for the corrective actions required from your evaluation of the SONGS 1 design related to the November 21 event. Coordinate with the Resident Inspector Office the need for additional information.
(3.b)
5.
Provide a description and schedule for the corrective actions required from your evaluation of the SONGS 1 feedwater system design.
(3.d)
6.
Provide a description and evaluation of the process for SONGS-1 abnormal conditions evaluation and post-trip reviews.. Also, include a description of responsibilities and independence of:
Offsite Review Committee
Onsite Review Committee
Quality Assurance Organization
Plant Enginerring Review (4.b.1)
7.
Evaluate process for abnormal conditions evaluations and post-trip reviews, including recent experience with feedwater line B noise evaluation by Onsite Review Committee. Provide a list of improvements identified from this evaluation.
(4.b.2)
8.
Provide a description and evaluation of the administrative control program for maintenance records.
Include:
A description of methods to assure completeness, accuracy and retrievability, e.g.:
Management and Supervision Review and Followup
Quality Assurance Interfaces
Quality Control Interfaces
Responsibilities Assigned (5.a. O (
.
.
Fchrua ry 14, 1986 Revicion 5
IV.
Acticca to be Considered ccd Isformatica to be Provided by SCE fer SONGS Unit 1 Stcrtup
.
Due Status item Description Date Completion 9.
Provide a description and evaluation of the tracking and trending of maintenance records.
Include:
a.
The use of maintenance documentation (both corrective and preventive activities and procurement requests) in equipment history documentation.
b.
Equipment history review process to establish trends.
c.
Feedback into the maintenance program and plant configuration of findings.
d.
Procedures for the processes with assigned responsibilities.
c.
QA overview of maintenance records.
(5.b)
10.
Provide an evaluation and any identified corrective actions for the following problems identified from the November 21, 1985 event:
a.
Precaution on length of time diesel generators can operate unloaded without AC power to radiator fans was improperly deleted from procedure.
(IIT 57.2.1.5, Pg. 7-6)
b.
Lack of provisions for recognizing and preventing conditions which allow the initiation of water hammers.
(IIT T6.1, Pgs. 6-2, 3 and 4)
c.
Inadequate instructions for manually bringing power onto dead buses and for responding to malfunction of the loss of ac power automatic sequencer.
(IIT T3.4, Pg. 3-6; 17.2.1.4, Pg. 7-5);
T4.12.2.1, Pg. 4-11)
d.
Inadequate instructions for trouble shooting of 4KV bus grounds.
Include an assessment of appropriateness of parrelleling buses with indicated ground fault.
(IIT 18.1, Pge. 8-1);
T4.12.3, Pge. 4-11; T3.2, Pg. 3-2; T4.13, Pg. 4-15; T4.14, Pg. 4-16; 17.2.1.5, Pg. 7-6)
.
.
February 14, 1986 Revicion 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Pr:vided by SCE fer SONGS Unit 1 Stortup
.
Due Status Item Description Date Completkon Lack of provisions for identifying alternate methods of verifying SI actuation.
e.
(IIT 17.2.1.3, Pg. 7-4)
f.
Need for revision to AFW system flow control procedures to factor in effect on reactor coolant system temperature.
(IIT 16.1, Pg. 6-3)
g.
Procedure for going onto RNR cooling implied clearing of isolation valve interlock at 400 vice 370 psig.
(IIT 18.8, Pg. 8-3; 17.2.1.8, Pg. 7-7; 13.8, Pgs. 3-12&l3; 14.10, Pg.4-8; 17.2.1.8, Pg. 7-7)
11.
In light of the above evaluations of item 10, provide a description of the program changes required to assure acceptable procedural development.
Include consideration of:
a.
Management and supervision review and followup; b.
Peer Review c.
Dry Run-Throughs of New or Revised Procedures d.
Quality Assurance / Quality Control involvement e.
Compliance involvement f.
Tracking of commitments and requirements that are fulfilled by procedures, and assurance that procedure revisions do not obviate the compliance to any commitment or requirement.
(6.a & b)
12.
Provide an evaluation and any identified potential corrective actions on the following concerns that arose from the November 21, 1985 event:
a.
Troubleshooting and isolating grounds including bus and transformer grounds, (IIT 17.2.1.1, Pgs. 7-1 thru 4)
d b.
Transfer of loads between 4KV buses.
(IIT 17.2.1.1, Pg. 7-1)
!
c.
Operator response to loss of offsite electrical power.
(IIT 17.2.1.2, Pg. 7-4)
d.
Resetting Unit Trip.
(IIT 17.2.1.4, Pg. 7-5)
i
__
.
._
.
.
F brusry 14, 1986 Revicion 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Stcrtup
.
Due Status Item Description Date Completion e.
Controlling SG Blowdown.
(IIT 13.7, Pgs. 3-10&ll)
f.
SLSS sequencer panel indications.
(IIT 14.13, Pg. 4-16)
g.
Not notifying NRC that a UE had been declared.
(IIT 17.2.2.2, Pg. 7-9),
and 17.3.2, Pg. 7-15)
h.
Prompt implementation of technical specification action statements when warranted, i.e.,
reluctance to fully isolate failed tranformer.
(IIT 13.2, Pg. 3-2)
(7.a)
13.
Based on the above evaluations of item 2, provide a description of any changes to the operator training program that are deemed appropriate.
Include consideration of:
Training Material including component engineering and actual operational a.
information.
b.
Training Time (Classroom and Simulator).
c.
Instructor Effectiveness.
d.
Emphasis on Technical Specifications and relationship to safe plant operaticas.
e.
Feedback of changes in procedures, plant configuration, and industry experience.
(N/A)
14.
a.
Describe the basis for the initial notification to the NRC at 07:51 a.m.
EST (e.g., implementation of emergency plan, 10 CFR 50.72 one hour report, etc.).
b.
If the initial notification was 10 CFR 50.72, was the emergency plan implemented?
If so, when was the event classified and declared?
c.
Describe the offsite notifications mode and identify related procedures implemented, including the initial notification to the NRC Operations Center that an event had been declared.
(8.a)
.
.
.
F2brua ry 14, 1986 Revision 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
Due Status Item Description Date Completion 15.
a.
Describe the effort to identify whether the spurious ringing of the Emergency Notification System (ENS) which, apparently coincident with power system transients, is the result of responsibilities belonging to Southern California Edison Company.
b.
Describe any findings or actions taken in response to Information Notice No. 85-77.
(8.b)
16.
Describe the onsite notifications, including any to the STA, made in connection with the November 21 event and identify related procedures implemented.
(8.c)
17.
Provide an evaluation of the affect of long outages on plant components as related to SONGS-1.
(10)
18.
Provide a description of your integrated program for review and upgrading overall plant material condition (" Material Condition Standards Program"), MCSP.
Include:
a.
Use of maintenance records including trending and feedback into the program.
Include:
Preventive and Corrective Maintenance Activities
Procurement Records
Equipment Histories b.
Use of test results including trending and feedback into the program.
c.
Industry Experience d.
Equipment layup and maintenance for long outages.
e.
Engineering evaluations f.
Criteria and responsibilities for determination of maintenance frequency and for priorities on plant improvement.
.
.
Februnry 14, 1985 R vicie: 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Previd d by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
Due Status Item Description Date Complebion g.
Required changes to the operations, maintenance and engineering programs (Area Monitoring Program) to implement MCSP.
(11)
Request for Additional Information - PWR-A Items 1.
Describe isolation features of the steam generator blowdown system, including the following:
a.
Features which preclude automatic reinitiation of steam generator blowdown upon reset of the steam generator blowdown isolatioa isgnal or appropriate justification for not doing so.
b.
Features which allow monitoring status of the steam generator blowdown system including the need for flow monitoring capability or valve position status.
Specifically address control room status indication.
(3.a.3)
2.
Describe the current (as modified) SONGS-1 main steam and feedwater system design and the basis for the design, including the following:
a.
Specific water hammer design considerations and any instrumentation to indicate impending water hammer conditions.
Include in your discussion the bais for concluding that the water hammer occurred in the feedwater lien and not the feeding. Also compare your design considerations for water hammer with vendor recommendations to mitigate hammer.
b.
Measures taken or to be taken to verify the integrity of feedwater piping prior to return to service. Also, provide a summary of the results of NDE of pipe weldsents and any metallographic examination of feedwater pipe cracks.
c.
Results of any re-evaluation of existing design of main steam and feedwater systems with respect to potential for loss of heat sink in the event of steam or feedwater system rupture.
Include in your discussion, as appropriate, consideration of manual actuation of steam line isolation valves and assurance of steam generator availability to remove decay heat.
(3, 3.a.2, and 3.c)
-
_-
_..-
.._ --
'.
.
.
February 14, 1985 Ravicion 5
i IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
l Due Status Item Description Date Completion 3.
The staff understands that the licensee has verbally committed to providing an uninterruptible power source (UPS) for the Critical Function Monitoring System (CFMS)
in order to enhance the plant post-trip review capability. Please ascertain whether i
the licensee is indeed committed to this action. Describe administrative procedures for resetting the CFMS after troubleshooting.
(4.c)
.
}
4.
Explain the neutral grounding of auxiliary transformer "A".
Is the neutral grounded I
through an impedance; if so, what is the value of neutral impedance and of the ground
fault current.
(6.c)
i 5.
What type of relay protection and settings are provided on the auxiliary transformer "A" grounded neutral.
(6.c)
6.
Explain the reasons for not loading diesels automatically when power to Class IE l
buses is lost from the offsite source.
(3.a.1)
.
.l 7.
Provide information on safeguard load sequencing system (SLSS) including logic, type, description of operating modes.
(3.a.4)
8.
Provide information on load sequencing of load groups for loss of station power j
with discussion of status lamps in the surveillance panels.
(3.a.5)
l s
9.
Provide information on station loss of voltage auto-transfer scheme. Discuss i
how the automatic transfer of electrical power recovery is accomplished.
(3.a.5)
{
10.
Provide information on any fault locating and/or maintenance testing procedures of 4.16 Ky cable circuits at San Onofre nuclear generating plant.
(7.a.1)
11.
Is the supply to vital 120 volt Bus #4 from 7.5 KVA transformer or unregulated 37.5 KVA transformer. Are the transfer switches associated with the supply to
vital 120 volt Bus #4 and the 7.5 KVA and 37.5 KVA transformer manual or automatic.
i (No category)
j 12.
What is the phase-relationship between transfctmer A and transformer C windings
]
when both transformers were momentarily paralleled.
(No category)
i l
!
,_
. _ _.
_
._
_ _ _ _
..
Fchruary 14, 1986 Revicion 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE fcr SONGS Unit 1 Startup
,
Due Status *
Item Description Date Completion 13.
For loss Bus #4, why is it necessary to scram the reactor?
(No category)
14.
What were the reasons for not restoring Bus 2C from Bus IB before manual scramming of the reactor?
(No category)
15.
Discuss any design changes to eliminate spurious SI indication.
(3.a.4)
16.
Discuss interlocks, including basis for interlocks, associated with the diesel generator output breaker.
(3.a.6)
17.
Discuss basis for maximum permissible time limits on loading of diesel generators following loss of station power.
(3.a.1)
18.
Describe provisions made for reconstructing event data following loss of station power.
(4.a)
19.
Describe any improvements made for labeling of selected control room indicators.
(3.a.7)
20.
Discuss whether you have considered providing uninterruptible power such as inverter power to vital Bus #4.
(3.a.8)
Provide a report and supporting documentation which addresses the root cause of the November 1985 water hammer event and SCE's proposed corrective actions.
(1.a)
2.
Provide a determination and supporting documentation of the adequacy of the various check valve designs for application in the feedwater and other safety-related systems. This determination should include, as appropriate:
.
_. -.
. -. -
-
-~
_
-
. __
-
.
..
.-
. _ - -
..
Fcbru:ry 14, 1986 Revision 5
IV.
Actions to be Considered and Information to be Provided by SCE for SONGS Unit 1 Startup
.
Due Staths Item Description Date Completion a.
Evaluation of check valves that do not have integral internals to:
r-Assess existing inspection or test results.
l
-Assess existing maintenance histories.
i J
l-Perform and evaluate.the results of disassembly and visual inspection of i
selected check valves based on the results of the above reviews.
b.
For check valves with integral internals:
-Determine which valves are only partially-open during nominal operating conditions.
-Assess existing inspection and test results.
'
-Review existing maintenance histories.
-Perform and evaluate the results of disassembly and visual inspection of selected check valves based up on results of the above reviews.
c.
Provide a uescription of any modifications required from these evaluations.
(1.b)
i 3.
Provide a determination and supporting documentation of the adequacy of the IST program and procedures, as implemented, to detect degraded and failed safety-related check valves.
Include QA over view.
(l.d)
'
4.
Provide a determination and supporting documentation of the adequacy of the design and related testing, maintenance, and inspection programs for safety-related check I
valves in other systems.
(l.f)
,
_
_
_
--
ENCLOSilRE 5
_
_ _. _.
_
_
c r* *
Enclosure 5 Februa ry 14, 1986 SCE/NRC Teleconference NRC Region V A. Chaffee, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch P. Johnson, Chief, Reactor Project Section 3 H. Mendonca, Senior Resident Inspector, Diablo P. Narbut, Project Inspector A. D'Angelo, Resident Inspector, San Onofre IE E. W. Herschoff, Chief, Reactive Inspection Branch NRR R. Dudley, Project Manager, San Onofre
-
J. Milhoan, Chief, Plant System Branch, PWR-A J. W. Clif ford, Acting Project Director, Directorate 1 J. Shapaker, Section Leader Plant System Branch
,
SCE Site-T.-Mackey, Compliance Supervisor M. Wharton, Deputy Plant Manager L. Ra,fner, Compliance Engineer Rosemead M. O. Medford, Manager, Nuclear. Licensing J.- Rainsberry, Supervisor, Licensing R. Ornelas, Licensing Engineer B. Ducil, Licensing Engineer
.
,