IR 05000206/1990023

Mgt Meeting SALP Repts 50-206/90-23,50-361/90-23 & 50-362/90-23 on 900425.Major Areas Discussed:Results of SALP Covering Period Oct 1988 - Jan 1990 & Other Items Re Plant

ML20043D778
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	05/20/1990
From:	Johnson P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20043D760	List: IR 05000206/1990023 ML20043D759
References
50-206-90-23-MM, 50-361-90-23, 50-362-90-23, NUDOCS 9006110162
Download: ML20043D778 (9)

Text

--

-

-

-

-. - -

-.. _

-

-

-.. -.

-

_ _ - _.

.-

,

,.

l U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION-V Report Nos.

50-206/90-23, 50-361/90-23, 50-362/90-23 I

Docket Nos.

50-206, 50-361, 50-362 License Nos.

DPA-13 R"! 10, NPF-15 Licensee:

Southern California Edison Company.

Irvine Operations Center

23 Parker Street Irvine, California 92718 Facility Name:

San Onofre Units 1, 2 and 3

'

Meeting Location:

San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station Meeting Date:

Apr11-25, 1990 Prepared by:

C. W. Caldwell, Senior Resident Inspector Approved By:

I ho[90 w

P. H./@hnson, Chief D~ ate Signed

Reactp Projects Section 3 Meeting Sumary:

Managem mt Meeting on April 25. 1990 (Report Nos. 50-206/90-23,50-361/90-23,

-

and 50-I62/90-23)

Management meeting to discuss the results of the most recent Systematir

.

Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP), covering the period October 1, 1988 through January 31, 1990, and other items of interest relating to the

• C San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station.

t

• .

.

.

.

9006110162 900525 l-ADOCK0500fCj6 g

DR

.

..

.

. i.

_

_ _

.

_.,..,,__.. ___,.

_

.

--.

- -.. -. -..... _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ __

.

,

.

,.

,

DETAILS f

1.

Meeting Participants Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)

S.Richards,Chlef,putyRegionalAdministrator B. Faulkenberry De ReactorProjectsBranch i

G. Yuhas, Chief, Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch C. Trammell, Senior Project Manager, NRR i

C.Caldwell, Chief,ReactorProjectsSection3 Senior Resident Inspector, San Onofre P. Johnson

<

A. Hon,jko,ident InspectorProjectManager,NRR L. Koka Res C. Townsend, Resident Inspector SouthernCaliforniaEji,s_o,nCompany(SCE)

H. Ray, Vice Presie nt i'uclear Engineering, Safety, and Licensing-R. Bridenbecker Vicefretident-SiteManager H. Morgan,StatIonManager R. Rosenblum,ger, Nuclear OversightNuclear Regulatory Affairs B. Katz, Mana Manage M.Merlo,NuclearEnInteringDesignManager K. Slagle, Deputy St tion Manager R. Krieger, Operations Manager J. Reilly, Technical Manager L. Cash, Maintenance Manager P. Knapp, Health Physics Manager M. Short, Technical Manager J. Reeder, Nuclear Training Manager R. Plappert, Supervisor, Technical Support & Compliance G. Moore,, Manager of Nuclear Licensing-Assistant Operations F. Handy Unit 1 V. Fisher, Operations Superintendent Units 2 L.Brevig, Manager,OnsiteNuclearLIcensing

= or D. Werntz, Licensing Engineer R. Lacy, Manager, Nuclear, San Diego Gas & Electric

2.

Discussion of 1988 - 1990 SALP Assessment Mr. Faulkenberry stated that the purpose of the meeting was to present the SALP Board's assessment for tie last SALP period ending in January 1990.

He stated that the licensee's overall performance had been very good.

Significant achievements were noted in the following areas:

Radiological protection program;

Engineering and gaality assessment upgrades; and,

Contfrued maintenance and surveillance program improvements.

&

,

'

.

,.

.

,

Mr. Faulkenberry encouraged open and candid disci.ssion throughout the meeting.

Mr. Ray stated that SCE had received the SALP report and that SCE management had held several meetings about it.

He loted that it did not require a written response and that SCE had no intention to make a written response.

Mr. Ray stated that he appreciated the coments of the SALP Board and the opportunity to gather useful in,ights from the NRC and

INPO in these and similar revlews.

Mr. Bridenbecker stated that Mr. Ray's opening coments had adequately covered his thoughts.

Mr. Faulkenberry introduced Mr. Richards to discuss the functional areas Maintenance / Surveillance of Plant Operations, Assessment / Quality Verific,ation. Engineering / Technical Support, and Safety Mr. Richards summarized the discussion' of the above listed functional areas as presented in the SALP report.

The following coments were provided after the discussion of each of the functional areas:

Plant Operations - Mr. Morgan commented that with regard to non-conservative technical specification interpretations, SCE had not performed as expected in the cases discussed.

He stated that it is SCE's policy to make conservative interpretations in cases such as those discussed, ions-have been counseled in this area.and that management for those kinds of decis He stated that SCE has renewed vigor in this area.

Mr. Krieger stated that'he agreed with the NRC's assessment that improvement was needed in the level of Operation's attention to detail, d that Operations has taken steps to improve operationsin training, and He state performance, including the following:

Professional operator development training;

[nhanced simulator training in routine operations; and,

w Curtailing the attrition problem with recent hiring of operator

classes in Units 2/3 and Unit 1.

Mr. Faulkenberry asked if the licensed operator attrition rates were still as high as before, and the licensee-responded that the-attrition rate during the first quarter of 1990 was the same as during the first quarter of last year.

Mr. Ray commented that there has been some movement of Operations personnel to other functional areas in the company.

He noted that-this is beneficial to the company but does take operators away from viare they are needed in Operation,s. Mr. Ray also recognized the Im,g time delay required for operations personnel between hiring and licensing.

He stated that SCE intended to keep the number of-

_

'

.

.

personnel in training full in order to maintain appropriate staffing levels.

Maintenance / Surveillance - Mr. Cash stated that he agreed with the NRC's assesIment and Wilh certain improvements needed in this area.

He stated that specific actions being taken by SCE include:

Continuing to implement the maintenance progr e ;

Continued involvement of Nuclear Oversight to identify addi-tional ideas for improving performance;

Upgrading the level of detail in mechanical and electrical procedures;

Increased staffing levels in the planning group, including-enhanced training by the end of next year;

'

Addition of the Work Coordinator position to assist maintenance supervisors;

Enhanced training for supervisors, planners, ant) craft personnel, to be completed and implemented by the end of the summer; and,

Increased Nuclear Oversight surveillance of outage work.

Engineering / Technical Supaort - Mr. Merlo stated that he agreed with the NRC's assessment of tieir performance; He stated that SCE has consicered the results of the recent NRC Electrical Safety System:

Functional Inspection (SSFI) as it relates to the design basis document (DBD) program and has reevaluated the setpoint methodology in the I&C area. He also stated that the response letter to the SSF1 would be out soon.

He concluded by reiterating that their internal efforts agree with the NRC comments.

Mr. Ray stated that the delayed' response to the SSF1 was to ensure oc that they had learned all they could from the SSFl.

.

Safety Assessment / Quality Verification - Mr. Katz stated that he agreed with the NRC's assessment of their performance.

He stated t1at SCE has established a proactive oversight plan that involves the new root cause program mo Assuranceinmajoractivitles,redirectinvolvementbyQuality-and the attraction of good persennel into the Quality Assurance area to improve the overall level of expertise.

He stated that he envisiens further enhancements in the future.

Mr. Rosenblum stated that he agreed with the NRC's assessment as.

well.

Ha! st6ted that SCE was working on improvin

. timeliness of-licensing submittals such as LERs. g the quality and He stated that the backlog of supplemental LERs was at zero as of the meeting.

.. _ _............. _..... _..

'

-

d

__ __

_.

?

-

.

Mr. Ray stated that the timeliness issue was frustrating, in that timeliness can sometimes conflict with quality of the submittal.

He added that SCE is nevertheless working hard on improving timeliness, consistent with quality.

Mr. Trammell stated that licensing interactions between the NRC and SCE seemed to be going well and t,at SCE was making progress in this

-

-

area.

He observed that SCE's manner of dealing with safety evaluationsap)earedtobeprogressingldancetoworkfrom.in part due to the NSAC 125

"

document, whic1 gives more detailed gu Mr. Richards concluded the discussion of these functional areas by stating that the Board recognized improved performance by SCE in three of the four areas and that the NRC will continue to review SCE's follow-through on the actions and staffing plans discussed.

Mr. Faulkenberry introduced Mr. Yehas to discuss the functional areas of Radiological Controls, Emergency Preparedness, and Security.

j Mr. Yuhas opened the discussion by commending the licensee on achieving category 1 tatings in each of these functional areas, indicating that a

their performance exceeded regulatory requirements.

He also stated that good performance in these areas cannot be achieved without the support of

_

all involved personnel.

Mr. Yuhas reviewed the SALP B)ard's assessment

in these functional areas, as discussed in the SALP reiort.

The licensee i

respondedtoeachareaassummarizedinthefollowingiaragraphs.

RadiologcalControls-Mr.KnapprespondedthattheF.,oardrecom-mendations were helpTul, and that the challenge of being category 1

^

is staying there and not getting too comforta)le.

Mr. Knapp stated that participation through the Management Monitor-ing Program, the development of the Radiological and Industrial Safety Handbook, the encouragement of first line supervisors, the

-

multidivisional ownership of ALARA goals, and the pledge of support to reduce the frequency of minor p9tsonnel contamination incidents all contribute to a good radiological controls program.

He also stated that the audit programs, such as the corporate health physics y

appraisal program, added QA involvement and studying the findings of QA will be helpful.

He further stated that the periodic retraining

-

program has been enhanced.

Emergency Prepairdness - Mr. Ray stated that he appreciated the feedback provided after the emergency exercises, and that changes have been made that greatly improve SCE's ability to respond.

P9 stated that the NRC input was col.structive and strengthened their program.

Mr. Rosenblum stated that he agreed with the observations, and

^

noted that Emergency Preparedness (EP) has been getting much more time dedicated to it.

He stated that the critique process to

,

improve EP performance is halpful and that the contribution from i

audit and followup activities is also important.

}

i

-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

~

-

-

.

,

,

Security lth Edison to learn from their security program, and that Mr. Slagle stated that there were plans to visit commonwea SCE will continue to improve their approach to security practices.

Mr. Ray stated that SCE will place em)hasis on the NRC's comments

.

regarding possible improvement, and tiat the comments were appreciated.

Mr. Bridenbecker stated that this was his first SALP meeting.

He said that the constructive suggestions for continued improvement were appreciated and that the positive comments were appreciated as well.

He i

said that the encouragement helps them to motivate themselves to maintain

'

or attain category I ratings.

Mr. Faulkenberry summarized the meeting by reiterating that the licensee's performance over the period had been very good.

Improved performance was observed in three areas, with a decline in only one area.

He encouraged SCE to continue their efforts to improve or to sustain their successful performance in the areas discussed.

3.

Other Discussions After the conclusion of the SALP discussion, the licensee made two presentations.

One addressed the Unit I reactor vessel thermal shield i

support modifications to be accomplished during the 1990 refueling l

outage.

The other covered the licensee's planned re-racking of the Unit 2/3 spent fuel pools.

Mr. Reilly described the planned thermal shield modifications.

The'

Unit 1 thermal shield repairs are to be accomplished during the refueling outage scheduled.to begin on June 30sixupperflexures,thefourupperlImiterkeys,planis 1990.

The and the six-lower support blocks.

Inspection ports will also be added-to assist in future inspections of these components. A description of the scop 6. of work was submitted to the NRC on April 20, 1990.

Mr. Merlo described the planned re-racking of the Units 2 and 3 spent fuel pools, as discussed in'the'licensse's submittal to the NRC dated January 18, 1990.

A copy of transparencies used in Mr. Merlo's-

.

presentation is enclosed.

The management meeting adjourned at 10:15 a.m.

,

s

"..

'$

-..

.,

.u'

-- -

,,,

.....

..

.....

.

.

.

>g

-

.

.

.

UNITS 2 & 3 SPENT FUEL

RERACKING PROJECT

-

-i

.

CONSIHUCisON

~

Removal of the existing racks will utilize

-

.

remote, underwater tools.

EDM (Electrical Discharge Machinery)

Hydraulic Rotary Saws / Vacuum System Underwater Threaders / Bolt Removers Thel construction sequence has been designed to preclude. movement of any heavy loads over spent fuel.

~

-

, _,, __ _ _ _

. _ _ -.

- - - - -

--

'-

~ ~ ' ^ ' ~ ^

^ ^ ^ ~

~ ~ ' ^ '

~

~

_

-

- - - - - - - -

_

- -

_ _ _ _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_.. _ -

,

..

.

.

}

._

.

UNITS 2 & 3 SPENT FUEL i

-

RERACKING PROJECT i

-

.

I

-

,

~

s CONSTRUCTION (Coritinued)

j

'

i All work in the main pool area will be done using a single failure proof crane.

!

'

Divers will-be used for underwater work where j

,

j remote tools are impractical.

j j

All diving operations will be conducted in strict

)

L accordance with station ALARA practices.

,

!

Rad waste will be minimized.

i li

.

!!

)

P i

i;

!

!

.

,

_.

.

..

-

t

,

.

UNITS 2 & 3 SPENT FUEL i

RERACKING. PROJECT

-

.

-

.

ENGINFFRING New racks will extend storage capacity.

Seismic design of racks is the most stringent in i

the U.S.

!

.

Design incorporate neutron poison (BORAFLEX1 between storage ceils which allows increased density storage.

Radiological & criticality analysis results for all possible accident conditions are acceptable.

.

i

. -.

,

.

.