IR 05000312/1974009
| ML19309A296 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 12/06/1974 |
| From: | Andrea Johnson, Malmros M, Spencer G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309A274 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-74-09, 50-312-74-9, NUDOCS 8003270662 | |
| Download: ML19309A296 (12) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
- -________________
__
_ _ _ _ _
O
-
.
.
3
.U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
'
'
'
.
DIRECTORATE OF REGULATORY OPERATIONS O
.
.
,
.
EEGION Y
.
.
.,
<f.y,
.
.
n.
,
.
-
~
- .<
.
...
- .
-
,
..
.
,
.
,
...
..
-
.
30 Inspection Report No.
50-312/74-09 Licensee Sacramento Municinal Utility District Docket No. 50-312 I
6201 S. Street, P. O. Box 15830 License No. DPR-54
.
Sacramento, California 95813 Priority I
Facility unneho Seco Category
'
-
.
Location Clay Station. California i
Type of Facility PWR. B&W. 913 MWe (2772 MWe)
Type of Inspection RouMne. Announced & Unnnnounced
.
.
,
Dates of Inspection October 10, 11 & November 6, 7 & 12, 1974 Dates of Previous Inspection Sept. 15, 16, 24 & 25, 1974 Principal Inspector !
/
d
.a
[
/
A. D. Johnson, Reactor Inspector
/Date
.
-
G.
Accompanying Inspectors 419 M '77 L G.J
///Y9/py M. H. Malmro's, Reactor Inspector Date
.
.
Date Other Accompanying Pe::sonnel: None
/.4/d/7Y
Reviewed by A st,e A L.-
.
Date G.S.Spenceh, Chief,ReactorConstruction&
Operations Branch t
i
.e
.
.
.
'
.
l 8003270 O
'
,
.
...
,
-.
.
.
. - -
-
.
-
.
... -
.. -
.-
-.
. _ _ - _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ __-_ _ _____
. - - - -
_
-.
.
__
._-. _
_
-
-
.--_
.
-
.
,
.
..
f%*
.
(L)
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
. 4..%s!'-
,.
,
'
Enforcement Action
.
1.
The reactor was operated with the volume of water in the borated water storage tank less than the minimum required by technical specification 3.3.1.A.1.
(Paragraph 3.a of Details and licensee letter to Licensing dated October 9, 1974)
2.
The cooldown rate of the reactor coolant system subsequent to a
'
reactor trip following a loss of condenser vacuum, exceeded the
=v4="
value in technical specification 3.1.2.3, Figure 3.1.2-2.
(Paragraph 3.b of Details and licensee letter to Licensing dated
-
October 22, 1974)
.
3.
Receipt inspection planning using the receipt inspection data
,
report (RIDR) had not been performed for the receipt of Class 1 spara parts as required by the Quality Assurance Program.
(Para-graph 4.c of Details)
4.
The use of tags or stamps to identify the acceptance status of spare parts as required by the Quality Assurance Program had not
been followed.
(Paragraph 4.d of Details)
5.
Disposition of unaccepta' ole spare parts had not been documented on Nonconformance report forms as required by the Quality Assurance w
Program.
(Paragraph 4.d of Details)
6.
Records had not been maintained of quality assurance indoctrination and training of personnel performing receipt inspection planning, receipt inspection, or for the use cf tags or stamps to identify the acceptance status of Class 1 spare parts.
Records of these activities are required by provisions of the Quality Assurance Program and technical specification 6.11.3.G.
(Paragraph 4.e of Details)
,
7.
.The resolution of corrective action commitments related to an internal audit finding had not been accomplished promptly as required by the Quality Assurance Program.
(Paragraph 4.f of Details)
Liccusee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items Not applicable.
.
t
'
E..a
.
.
i
..
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ --
_____
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
W
-
.
.
.
.
r
.-
.
f 2-
-
q
!
Unusual Occurrences
- 1, 1,77-
,
The licensee's reports of the events and circumstances associated with abnormal occurrences 74-5 and 74-6 reported to Licensing in letters dated October 9 and October 22, respectively were confirmed by examina-tion of relevant records and through discussion with licensee representa-tives. The circumstances and proposed corrective action for six abnormal occurrences with thirty day reports pending submission to the Commission, were discussed with licensee representatives.
(Paragraph 3 of Details)
Other Significant Findings 1.
A meeting between the licensee and Licensing was held in Bethesda on October 29 and 30, 1974 with the inspector in attendance. A metallic noise detected during single reactor coolant pump operation, unexpected reactivity worth of the psuedo-ejected rod and the
-
excess cooldown rate reported in abnormal occurrence report No. 74-6 were among the items discussed.
(Paragraph 2 of Details)
2.
Repairs to the turbine stop valves and the motor driven auxiliary
,
'
feedwater pump have been completed.
(RO:V Daily Reports dated
,
10/22/74 and 11/1/74 and Paragraph 7 of Details)
3.
The Surveillance Testing Program required by Section 4 of the technical specifications had been satisfactorily implemented.
(Paragraph 5 of Details)
4.
Activities of the Plant Review Committee were found to be consis-tent with the requirements of the technical specifications.
(Paragraph 8 of Details)
'
Management Interview The insped ors met with Messrs. J. Mattimoe, D. Raasch, R. Rodriguez and L. Schweiger and other members of the licensee's staff at the conclusion of the inspection on November 12, 1974. The results of the inspection, including items 1 through 7 listed under Enforcement Action, were dis-
'
cussc The inspectors informed the licensee that the corrective action commitar.nts reported in the abnormal occurrence reports related to items 1 and 2 were verified to have been implemented. No specific commitments related to items 3 through 7 were made by the licensee.
.
%
i
.3
.
,
L'J
.
.
.
,
.
.
.
.7
.- -
.-
,
,
,
_
-
~
-
+
,
...
.
.
,
,
'
.
.
'
REPORT DETAILS
,
. -
-
.,s,
.
1.-\\ Persons Contacted 4.,
- * * ' -
,
,
-
.
.
'.,'
'
R. Rcdriguez, Manager, Nuclear Operations
.
P. Oubre'. Assistant Plant Superintendent, Operations
-
l
' J. McColligan, Assistant Plant Superintendent, Ten hair =1 Support
.
.Y R. Colcabo, Technical Assistant
'
D. Whitney, Plant Nuclear Engineer.
J. Haratyk, Station Electrical Engineer
.
D. Cass, Maintenance Superintendent F. Lopez, Warehouse Supervisor
-
H. Watson, Warehouse: Clerk
,
L. Schwieger, QA Director J. Jewett, QA Engineer
J. Sullivan, QA Engineer 2.
Licensee Action on Previously Reported Abnormal Occurrences 1.s The licensee and representatives frca Babcock & Wilcox met with
,
Licensing in Bethesda on October 29 and 30, 1974 to discuss pre-i
viously reported abnormal occurrences along with proposed corrective measures. Pertinent information concerning the related items follows:
-
+
a.
The results of the psuedo ejected control rod tests were
-/
discussed and the error relating to the predicted reactivity
'
worth of the pseudo ejected rod was explained by representativas -
from Babcock & Wilcox. The licensee made a commitment to,
revise the technical specifications and applicable operating procedures to preclude core configurations that could lead to reactivity values of control rods in excess of the limiting valuei prescribed in the technical specificaticus.
(R0 Inspection Report No. 50-312/74-08)
b.
The source of the metallic noise detected during single reactor coolant pump operation was explained in detail by the
licensee and representatives from Babcock.& Wilcox. The licensee's surveillance program to t.onitor possible reactor internals vibration consists of (1) the installed loose parts monitor, (2)
a clamping force monitor to' measure the com-i pression. forcer holding the core barrel in place and (3) a 4,
nuclear noise.onitor to measure neutron flux perturbation caused by core movement. ' Baseline data for nuclear noise monitorin?, will be obtained during the power" escalation-
. program at 40% and 75%'of full power. The insta11edeloese parts monitor has two c'vannels available for analyzing.the H
nuclear noise dats.
(KO Inspect' ion Report No. 50-312/74-00).
t
,
,
,
l 5,3
'
,
-
-
.
>
14
.
,
- -
'
,
.
.-..
, -
.. -
.,. -
.
.,
.,.
. - -
-,,. -
,. _,
-
'
~^
}
k
,
,
n
-
.
.
.,
.,
,
.
.
.
-
..
.
.
,
.
c.
The effect of the cooldown' rate resulting from the plant transient described in abnormal occurrence report 74-6 was found compatible with the stress analysis calculations per-i formed by Babcock & Wilcox as part of the plant design.
i (Licensee letter to Licensing dated October 22, 1974)
3.
Review of Abnormal Occurrences
,
,
,
,
s.
Abnormal Occurrence 74-5 s
Abnormal Occurrence 74-5 was reported to the Director, Regulatory
,'
Operations, Region V, on October 3, 1974. A review of plant, records and personnel interviews verified that the re' actor was taken critical with a borated water storage tank level of
'
375,000 gallons. The reactcr was aken critical at 7:03 a.m.'
and was manually tripped at 7:20 a.m when the low level condition was discovered by'the Operai. ions Supervisor. The
j occurrence was caused by operator error in that the Shift i
Supervisor thought the allowable minimum volume was 350,000
-
l gallons rather than the actual technical specifications limit
,
of 390,000.
Storage tank level verification methods and operating procedures have been changed to prevent recurrence of this situation.
b.
Abnormal Occurrence 74-6
,
!
Abnormal Occurrence 74-6 was reported to the Director, Regulatory Operations, Region V on October 8, 1974. During the inspection
,
+
the details of the abnormal occurrence were explained by the licensee representative. Through personnel interviews and a
'
review of the plant records consisting of recorder charts and computer printouts, the sequence and exact parameter values
experien'ced by the plant during the transient were verified.
i It was determined that:
.
'
.'
'
(1) Prior to the occurrence the reactor was at normal operating temperature and pressure, producing 15% of rated steam load with the steam being supplied to the condenser through the bypass valves and to the auxiliary steam system. The j
turbine jacking gear was in operation and the turbine stop valves were shut.
i
)
(2) The initiating event for the p15nt cooldown transient was the feilure of the turbine gland sealing steam system
which resulted in a detreasing condenser vacuum.
.
e
!
t
!
E.)
r
.
.
i
'
i
,!
'
,
I'
,,
~.
..
.
...
,.
.
.
_
_
_ _ _. _ _. - _ _. _...
_,- _ _..
-
.,.,
,
a s
N
'
-.
.
,
.
-
.
.
.
~
.
.
l I-5-(3) At the designated setpoint of 20" Hg condenser * vacuum, the mainsteam bypass valves shut and the control room operator manually tripped the reactor.
(4) The reactor coolant system temperature increased to approximately 580 F and main steam pressure increased to a maximum indicated pressure of 1004 psig, a
,-
(5) The atmospheric main steam dumps were. isolated to permit adjustment to the valve controllers. Therefore, the main steam pressure increase was controlled by the lifting of one main steam safety valve. This valve lifted for
)
approximately one minute.
,
-
(6) The main steam system continued to supply the auxiliary steam system loads causing a steadily dropping tiemperature condition in the reactor coolant system and a resultant decrease in pressurizer level.
.
(7) When the indicated pressurizer level reached two inches, the control room operator initiated high pressure injection.
This resulted in the injection of a sufficient volume of water to increase pressurizer level. However, the temperature
}
of the water injected.(approximately 80 F) continued the
'
decrease in the reactor coolant system temperaturs.
Additionally, the auxiliary feed pumps automatically
!
started when high pressure injection was initiated. This
'
further aggravated the cooldown of the reactor coolant system by the addition of cold water (approximately 80 F)
from the condensate storage tank,to the steam generators.
(8) The.high pressure injection was terminated when sufficient level had been regained in the pressurizer.
.
(9) The auxiliary boilers were placed in service and the
.
auxiliary steam system leads were transferred from the
'
main steam system to the auxiliary boilers.
The overall effect of the above events was a rapid decrease in the temperature of the reactor coolant system that exceeded the allowable cooldown rate of 100 F per hour.
Sgecifically, the temperature cycled from 580 F to.408 F to 460 F in a one hour peri >d.
t b
.
,
\\
U i
.
,
.
-
.
-
.
-
.
__
.._
l
~
~
.
!
.
,
.
r
?
'
.
,
-6-
"
c.
Thirty Day Reports
,.,,,.
-
~..r.
.
The circumstances and proposed corrective action for abnormal occurrences with thirty day reports pending submission to Licensing were reviewed and discussed with the licensee. The occurrences reviewed were as follows:
(1) Low flow in the Nuclear Service' Cooling Water System (NSCWS) was discovered as a result of surveillance
'
testing of the A and B NSCWS pumps. Low flow is attri-buted to the failure of a pin used to maintain the preset position of a flow control butterfly valve in the system.
(2) During surveillance testing of the B diesel generator the output breaker tripped open for no apparent reason. A ratest verified proper operation of the output breaker.
(3) Two safety features valves malfunctioned during sur-
'
ve111ance testing. The position indication readout in
.
the control room for SFV 22009 failed due to a misalignment of the position indication limit switch. Decay heat cooler' isolation valve SFV 2'6039 stuck in the closed position due to a broken tooth in the.aar of the valve
operator.
.
.
(4) The motor driven auxiliary feedwater pump failed due to
overheating when being used to fill the steam generators during a shutdown period. The overheating was attributed to an improper valve lineup that resulted in the pump
'
r.ning with the discharge valve isolated for approximately
30 minutes.,
4.
Procurement Control, Receipt, Storage and Handling of Equipment
!
and Materials l
i i
Tlia purchasing process, receiving inspection, handling and storage,
,
i and material identification methods related to the procurement of Class 1 spara parts were evamined during the inspection.
Specific controls for these activities are described in the licensee's Quality Assurance Program Manual. The procedural controls were
,
as follows:
'
l a.
QAP 4 - Procurement Document Control *
b.
QAP 5 - Supplier Quality Assurance c.
QAP 6 - Inspection Planning
!
d.
QAP 8 - Identification and Control of Material, Parts and Components
.
c.
QAP 10 - Receiving Inspection
.
f.
QAP 15 - Handling, Storage, Shipping and Preservation'
QAP 17 - Nonconforming Material Contro.
. -
-.-
.
-
-
-.
..-.
.
- -.
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
.
l l-7-The available records and documents generated as a result of the above listed procedural cont,rols were reviewed by the inspector with the following results.
'
a.
Purchase Order Processing
-
The records to show that the appropriate reviews of purchase orders and contracts for the inclusion of quality assurance requirements (QAP 4) were not available on site.
The Quality Assurance Director stated that this activity is performed in the corporate office where the records are available for inspection purposes. A review of the onsite purchase order file indicated an inconsistent application of quality assurance requirements in the purchase orders for Class 1 spare parts.
This inconsistency had been detected by a SMUD internal audit conducted on July 25, 1974.
(See item f. below.)
,
b.
Supplier Quality Assurance A review of the records verified that the quality assurance programs and capabilities of vendors supplying Class 1 spare
,
parts had been previously reviewed and evaluated by the licensee's quality assurance organization.
{
}
c.
Receiving Inspection A review of the records revealed that receipt inspection planning using the Receiving Inspection Data Report (RIDR)
required by QAP 6 had not been performed for Class 1 spare parts received and inspected by the licensee.
~
A review of the purchase order files indicated that the re-
,
. ceiving inspection stamp required by QAP 8 was being used by warehouse personnel to indicate receipt of materials and quality certification documents required in the purchase
.
order. The stamp is placed on the back of the purchase order only when all material and documents have been received.
d.
Material Identification and control A survey of Class 1, pare parte stored in the ready-for-issue bins revealed that no stamps or tags had been affixed to the items to indicate acceptance status as required by QAP 10 and 16.
Each item was identified by a unique part number which could be related to a material control card which in turn referenced the quality class of the item and purchase
.
,
.
-
.
' *
~ ^ -
.
.
.
.
,
l l-8-
.
orders under which the item had been procure'd. 'Upon deter-mining the purchase order number, the actual file containing the purchase order and quality certification documents could be reviewed. Even though the acceptance status of spare parts was not immediately evident by tags or stamps on the individual item in the storage bins, the traceability of several randomly selected Class 1 spare parts to the onfile quality certification documentation, through the use of the licer. nee assigned spare part number, was verified by tne inspector.
Material that was received and determined unacceptable because of shipping damage was segregated in a specific area. None of the material in the segregated storage area had been tagged with " hold" or " reject" tags as prescribed by QAP 16. A review of the records revealed that the nonconformance report form described in QAP 17 had not been initiated for items
-
determined unacceptable upon receipt in the warehouse. The unacceptable material had been identified by affixing a
" claims form" and retained in the segregated area until shipped back to the supplier.
Through discussions with warehouse personnel, the inspector determined that all un-
-
acceptable Class 1 spare parts have been returned to the supplier and no items have been dispositioned acceptable "as is" and then placed in the ready for issue storage areas.
d.
Related Quality Assurance Training A review of the quality assurance training activities per-formed by the licensee revealed that no records have been maintained to show the quality assurance training of personnel performing receiving inspaction and material identification activities. The Quality Assurance Director indicated that discussion sessions with the Maintenance Superintendent had been held regarding the Quality Assurance Program, however, these sessions vere not documented. A copy of the Quality
-
Assurance Program Manual is assigned to the Warehouse Super-visor; however, no records of quality assurance training in the use of procedural controls applicable to the activities performed in the warehouse were available.
.
f.
Related Internal Audits A review of the quality assurance organization's audit records revealed that two internal audits related to control of procure-ment had been performed. Audit No. 459 was performed on t
.)
v
_.._
- - _ _
.
-- -
- ---
?
s
,.
.
.
.
.
~
-
_9
.
4/.Sf 4 and corrective action commitments were completed.
/
radit No. 468 was performed on 7/25/74 and completion of
,
~
corrective action commitments remains an open item. The audit finding that remains unresolved concerns 66 purchssa orders
reviewed during the internal awlit.. Provisions for quality requirements and requested certificatiors were inconsistent in that certifications were requested but ra quality provisions
,
i were stated or that quality provisions were stated and no certifications requested. Discussions with the Quality
,
!
Assurance Director on 11/12/74 indicated that the methods to resolve this inconsistency had not yet been agreed upon between
'
the Pur:hasing Department aad the Quality Assurance Organization.
,
'
i 5.
Surveillance Testing l
.
.
The surveillance test program implemented by the licensee in response to the surveillance requirements of the technical specifications l
was examined during the inspection. A review of selected surveillance
,
procedures, records of results and schedules verified that the l
program was consistent with the requirements of the technical specifications. Specific surveillance tests that were examined in detail included the following.
a.
200.02 Daily Instrumentation Surveillance b.
200.07 Radiation Instrumentation Surveillance (Monthly liquid and gaseous monitor tests)
,
I c.
200.09 Monthly SFAS Surveillance
'
d.
202.06 Concentrated Boric Acid Iank (twice weekly)
e.
203.07 NSCW and NSRW Systems (quarterly)
j f.
204.03A/B Quarterly RBS-A/B Loop Surveillance g.
205.07 Isolation Valve Surveillance (quarterly)
h.
206.03 Monthly Diesel Generator Test i.
206.04 125 Volt D.C. System Testing (weekly and monthly)
'
6.
Power Escalation Program
.
a.
Review of Test Results The Zero Power Physics Test Program (ZPPTP) was completed on October 2, 1974. The ZPPTP was conducted in accordance with
,
test proc 2 dure (TP) No. 710- 1.
A review of the data sheets,
,
raw data conversion, and a comparison of test results with the prescribed acceptance criteria verified satisfactory completion of the program. Test deficiencies were noted and, as applicable, t
,
.
&'
-
_.
.-
-
-
,_
- _.. _ _. _.
- -
.
-
.
-
-
-
.
.
.-
.
.
,
- 10 -
non-conformance reports issued. Non-conformance' report S-030 had been issued for the results of the pseudo rod ejection tests (Reference RO Inspection Report No. 50-312/74-08). The test results from TP 710-1 had been approved by the Test Working Group with comments requiring resolution of the measured reactivity values for the ejected rod worth.
Tests being conducted in accordance with test procedures TP 800-2, 800-11 and 800-22 were in progress to determine core power distribution, to calculate the NSSS heat balance and to talibrate the power range instrumentation. A review of the results indicated that the tests verified satisfactory per-l 2ormance of the plant at the 15% power testing plateau.
!
j b.
Overall Program Status
'
'
Power Escalation Program testing at the 15% power level plateau wra completed on October 18, 1974 with the exception of testing the automatic feedwater control features of the boiler feedwater pumps as required by the Integrated Control System (ICS)
tuning test procedure (TP 800-8).-
Automatic ICS control of the boiler feedwater pumps will be tested prior to escalation of power t.o the 40% level. Following completion of the scheduled maintenance shutdown which commenced on October 19, 1974,
-
testing at power was to resume on or about November 14, 1974.
7.
Maintenance A scheduled maintenance shutdown commenced on October 19, 1974 to effect repaire to the turbine electro-hydraulic control system, an inoperative turbine stop valve and perform other required maintenance.
During the maintenance shutdown, the motor driven auxiliary feedwater pump overheated causing damage to the pump internals.
(RO:V Daily Report 11/1/74).
,
The maintenance activities related to the repair of the auxiliary feedwater pump were examined during the inspection. A review of
'
the documents available verified that the applicable quality assurance i
program requirements for the control of maintenance on Class 1 components had been Laplemented. The test procedure to be used upon completion of the repair was examined and found to provide an appropriate test of the pump to demonstrate that the performance characteristics were consistent with the requirement of the technical specifications.
t I J
,
(s_ /
.
i i
-
.
-
__
_
____
___._.
_
- - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,.
. _..
.
. __
m
.
,,,,....
,
'
'
'
'
I l
n-
-
8.
Plant Review Committee Activities
-* ;.
-
e,
.
..
The minutes of the Plant Review Committee (PRC) covering the period of August through October 1974 were examined. The inspector verified from the information contained in the records that the PRC was performing its responsibilities pursuant to the requirements prescribed in Section 6.5 of the technical specifications.
.
h a
.
,
I l
-
l
.
O O
%
%
e t
- g
.
.
e t
.
I l