IR 05000228/1981002
| ML20010E166 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Aerotest |
| Issue date: | 08/11/1981 |
| From: | Sternberg D, Willett D, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010E157 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-228-81-02, 50-228-81-2, NUDOCS 8109030162 | |
| Download: ML20010E166 (2) | |
Text
-
.
,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No. 50-288/81-02 Docket No. 50-288 License No. R-98
_ Safeguards Group Licensee: Aerotest Operations, Inc.
3455 Fostoria Way San Ramon, California 94583 Facility Name: ARRR
_
Inspection at: San Ramon, California Inspection ducted: August 6, 1981
\\
l[
h Inspectors a
D.7I. Sternber'g, Branc f
Date Signcd d4bdr e-rn p.J.pilett,ReactorInspector Date Signed Approved By:
T. Young, Jr., Chief, Section 2, Date Signed Reactor Operations Project Branch Summary:
Inspection on August 6, 1981 (Report No. 50-288/81-02)
Areas Inspected: Unannounced inspection for the purpose of evaluating first hand the intermittent spurious signal trips that the facility has been experiencing; and miscellaneous independent inspection effort including a tour of the facility.
This inspection consisted of three regular inspector-hours by two NRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8109030162 810812 PDR ADOCK 05000283 G
.-.
-
. _ -.,
-
.-
--
_
.
-
.
.
.
DETAIL S 1.
Persons Contacted
- J. Haskins, Reactor Supervisor
- I. Lamb, Manager of Quality Assurance
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Reactor Operations - General There were no scrams of an emergency nature during the past year. All reactor trips were considered to be due either to power failures, operator errors or spurious line noises.
There has been a recurring problem with intermittent spurious signal trips.
The problem seems to be power spikes on the incoming line (these spikes were observed by the inspectors on an oscilloscope). The licensee has observed that these signals always start about 8:30 a.m. everyday. One hypothesis is that the problem may be Radio Frequency pickup and ground loop current problems. Supporting evidence to this argument is the close proximity of a Pacific Gas & Electric facility that does insulator breakdown studies, with very high voltage. The licensee has initiated corrective action of swapping out instruments and detectors, added grounding, inspections, and are in the process of purchasing a DC Power Supply, which they hope to install within about a month.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Independent Inspection The inspectors toured the facility and observed, and were briefed on, radiograph experiments and processes.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Exit Interview The ins,
- ors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
i at the conclusion of the inspection on August 6, 1981. The scope and findings of the inspection are summarized in Paragraphs 2 through 3.
>
.
.
o
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- J. Haskins, Reactor Supervisor
- 1. Lamb, Manager of Quality Assurance
- Denotes these present at the exit interview.
2.
Reactor Operations - General There were no scrams of an energency nature during the past year. All reactor trips were considered to be due either to power failures, operator errors or spurious line noises.
There has been a recurring problem with intermittent spurious signal trips.
The problem seems to be power spikes on the incoming line (these spikes were observed by the inspectors on an oscilloscope). The licensee has observed that these signals always start about 8:30 a.m. everyday. One hypothesis is that the problem may be Radio Frequency pickup and ground loop current problems. Supporting evidence to this argument is the close proximity of a Pacific Gas a Electric facility that does insulator i
breakdown studies, with very high voltage. The licensee has initiated corrective action of swapping out instruments and detectors, added grounding, inspections, and are in the process of purchasing a DC Power Supply, which they hope to install within about a moilth.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Independent Inspection The inspectors toured the facility and observed, and were briefed on, radiograph experiments and processes.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
l 4.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
i l
at the conclusion of the inspection on August 6, 1981. The scope and l
findings of the inspection are summarized in Paragraphs 2 through 3.
,
.
+,
r
-
,,,,