IR 05000206/1986025
| ML13323B155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/06/1986 |
| From: | Driscoll J, Hayes J, Willett D, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13323B154 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-206-86-25, NUDOCS 8606200459 | |
| Download: ML13323B155 (4) | |
Text
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No. 50-206/86-25 Docket No. 50-206 License No. DPR-13 Licensee: Southern California Edison Company P. 0. Box 800 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofre Unit 1 Inspection at:
San Clemente, California Inspection conducted:
May 20-22, 1986 Inspector:
Willet Reactor Inspec Date Signed es, Engnee NR Pla t stems Date Signed J. Driscoll, Cont ct Eng'
e Date Signed Argo )fe Natio 1 Laborator Approved by:
T. Young Jr., Chief UDate Signed Engineering Section Summary:
Inspection during period of May 20-22, 1986 (Report No. 50-206/86-25)
Area-Inspected:
Special announced inspection of the Control Room and TSC Emergency Ventilation System Results:
In the areas inspected one unresolved item and no violations or deviations were identifie * 6062 04 59-1c (~PDR ADOCp 0606 S05000206 PDR
DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Personnel
@*
D.E. Nunn, Manager of Nuclear Generation Services o@*
- J.L. Rainsberry, Supervisor Unit-1 Licensing
@*
M.A. Wharton, Deputy Station Manager, o@*
- M.P. Short, Unit-i Project Manager
@*
D.L. Johnson, Cognizant Engineer, Ventilation O@*
- M.S. Tolson, Nuclear Safety Engineer
H.C. Schutter, Unit-1 Shift Superintendent
J.L. Reeder, Unit-i Superintendent
- #
G.T Gibson, Compliance Engineer
R.E. Reiss, QA Engineer,
@ * #L.A. Bennett, Unit-1 Licensing Engineer
@ *JM.F. Freedman, Compliance Engineer
@
W.G. Zintl, Manager Compliance,
@
D.L. Evans, Planning and Control Engineer
@
M. Zenker, Compliance Engineer
@
R. Ornelas, Unit-1 Licensing Engineer
@
D. Allstan, Unit-i Licensing Engineer
@
W. Flournuy, Unit-i Licensing Engineer
@.
A.J. Schramm, Unit-i Shift Superintendent'
@*
G. Hughes, President, Erin Engineering
@*
T. Hook, Engineer, Erin Engineering
@*
G.T. Vechinski, Bechtel Engineer NRC personnel o@*
- J.J. Hayes, NRR Plant Systems Branch o@*
- D.J. Willett,.RV Reactor Inspector O@*
- J.W. Driscoll, Consultant Argonne Lab"s
@* M.D. Carnes, Consultant Argonne Lab's
@*
A. Pawlak, IAEA O#
T. Young, RV Engineering Section Chief o# Pate, RV Reactor Projects Branch Chief o#
P. Narbut, RV Project Inspector
J. Milhoan,.NRR Plant Systems Branch Chief o#
T. Quay, NRR Plant Systems Section Chief
R. Dudley, NRR Project Manager The inspectors also held discussions with other licensee and contract personnel during this inspection. These included licensed and non licensed operators,. plant staff engineers,.technicians, administrative assistants and quality assurance personne @
Denotes those present during the entrance meeting on May 20, 1986
Denotes those present during the exit meeting on May 22, 1986.
- II Denotes those present during teleconference on June 4, 198 Denotes those present during teleconference on June 5, 198.
System Measurements On May 21 and 2,2, 1986, a Region V inspector accompanied by a NRR Plant Systems Branch Engineer and two consultants from Argonne National Laboratories, took flow measurements of the Control Room and.Technical Support Center (TSC) 'ventilation systems., while these systems were in the normal and emergency modes of operation. The four data sets recorded.were for the following combinations of possible operating modes (1) CR ventilation system in Normal, TSC system in Norma (2) CR ventilation system in Emergency mode, TSC system in Normal (3) CR ventilation system in Emergency mode, TSC system in Emergency (4) CR ventilation system in Emergency mode, TSC Normal & Emergehcy systems secure To'verify the HVAC. system design parameters,,flow measurements were taken with a hot-wire anamometer, differential pressure measurements were'
recorded across the control room to TSC, control room to outside,.and TSC to-outside boundaries with a differential pressure gauge and inclined monomete The ventilation system duct work joints are of a type known-as "Pittsburg lock seam". "The Nuclear Clean Air Handbook -
1976" states that systems with "Pittsburg Lock-Seam" type joints' are expected to experience average leakage on the order of 5 % of total flow. During flow measurements, the following additional leaks were identified, measured and leak flow rates computed:
(1) Leak in the C.R. normal/emergency cooling coi approx. 45 cfm (2) Leak in loop-seal for cooler drain in TSC system. approx. 1'to 2 cfm (3) Leak in TSC fan (no shaft seal) shaf approx. 100 cfm (4) Leak in Control Room return duct work (small hole).approx 1.0 cfm The significance of this leakage is still being evaluate The inspectors reviewed.the system operating, emergency operating and surveillance procedures;'design change packages; air balance tests; and system descriptions for the. TSC and control room ventilation systems; but could not, at the time of the site inspection, determine the design'.
basis for the system configuration because of conflicting details between the documents reviewed. Questions and concerns identified'in this review were included ina checklist of 44 items presented to the licensee at 'the beginning of the -inspection for discussion/resolution during the inspection. The licensee committed to provide the design basis for.the..current control room system by May 30, 1986, (submitted
June 2, 1986) and to also, at the same time, provide a schedule for a preliminary design of.the concepts outlined in the March 28, 1986, Control Room Habitability Systems Upgrade Plan submittal # 13 The inspectors reviewed the system design.basis as presented in the June 2, 1986 Control Room HVAC Description ( Ltr. M.O. Medford SCE to G.E Lear NRR.) and discussed their questions about the Design Basis and concerns resulting from an evaluation of the data obtained in the May 20 -
inspection, in teleconferences on June 4 and 5,.198 The licensee has.been providing additional information', on a daily basis, since the site inspection. This information includes additional licensee system measurements, revised calculations, revised assumptions:and upgrade efforts to seal the HVAC system duct work and wall penetrations between the Control Room and TS NRR concluded that because of the higher than design make-up flow and the interaction (leakage) between the Control Room and TSC, that the
"as found" control room configuration.may not meet it's design requirements and that the integrity of the control room HVAC system was questionabl The situation is under evaluation by NRR. The licensee stated that post inspection efforts to seal the approximately 50 penetrations between the Control Room and TSC accounted for, collectively a hole equal to approximately one square foo NRR stated that, prior to Unit-i restart, the Control Room HVAC System should be verified tocbe in accordance with design values and demonstrated to be independent of the TSC. 'This is an Unresolved item (86-25-01).
NRR Plant Systems Branch is currently analyzing the inspection data and evaluating this data relative to past, current and proposed system configurations. The licensee-'s June 2, 1986 submittal and it's revised estimates is being used as the system design basis. for the NRR evaluation. NRR acceptance criteria for HVAC'system performance will be transmitted to the licensee for resolution prior to Unit 1 restar.
System Operability Through discussions with licensee personnel, document review and data evaluation, it appears that the control room. ventilation system deficiencies identified -by SCE in April, and September 1984, regarding damper leakage, excess make-up flow, low return flow, and system leakage, were not adequately dispositioned prior to returning the.Uit to criticality and operatio The circumstances and details of the identification and disposition' of non-conformances relative to.the control room HVAC system are -considered an Unresolved Item (86-25-02). Unresolved-Items
.Unresolved items are.matters about which more information is required -in order to ascertain whether 'they are acceptable items, violations or deviations. Unresolved items identified during the inspection are discussed in paragraphs' 2 and.
Exit Interview The inspection team met with representatives. (denoted in paragraph 1) on May 20, 22, June.and 5, 1986. The scope and findings of the inspection,,
which were discussed during these meetings are summarized-as set forth in paragraphs 1 through 4 of this report.