IR 05000312/1975002
| ML19319D981 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 03/18/1975 |
| From: | Malmros M, Spencer G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19319D973 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-75-02, 50-312-75-2, NUDOCS 8003270682 | |
| Download: ML19319D981 (8) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ _ _. , O - - U. S. NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION . . 0FF" ' 0F INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
- , . . s'IE Inspection Report No.
50-312/75-02 Licensee Sacramento Municipal Utility District Docket No. 50-312 . 6201 S Street - P. O. Box 15830 License No.OPR-54 Sacramento California 95'813 Priority
Facility Rancho Seco Category B ~ Location Clav Station. California . Type of Facility PWR, 8&W, 913 MWe (2772 MWt) e, Type of Inspection Routine - Unannounced . Dates of Inspection February 20, 25-27, 1975 Dates of Previous Inspection January 14-17, 24, 1975 \\ M kk/7,j%W - 3//p/yf Principal Inspector 'Date M. H. Malmros, Reactor Inspector
- . . Accompanying Inspectors None Date I
.
Date Other Accompanying Personnel: None O Reviewed by ('J'w' 3//WC I G. S. Spencer,'lChief, Reactor Testing and Date Operations Branch
l . . 8003 270 h [[ ,, - - - .- - _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ '
.
, . . . - . . SUfG1ARY OF Fill 0I!!GS Enforcenent Action . None.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items The corrective action described in the licensee's letter of January 17, 1975, in response to the enforcement action items identified in IE Inspection Report tio. 50-312/74-12 was verified to have been implemented.
(Paragraph 3. of Details).
Unusual Occurrences The circumstances and corrective action described in Abnormal Occurrence Reports Nos. 74-14, 75-1 and 75-2 submitted by the licensee to Licensing were confirmed.
(Paragraph 2. of Details) Other Significant Findings 1.
The implementation of procedural controls as corrective action described in the licensee's Abnormal Occurrence Report No. 74-10 has been designated an unresolved item.
(Paragraph 2. of Details) 2.
Plant operations and reporting were found consistent with' Technical V) Specification requirements.
(Paragraphs 4. and 5. of Details) 3.
The power asce'sion test program was scheduled for completion through 92.6% power by March 15, 1975.
(Paragraph 6. of Deta s) 4.
The licensee is evaluating minimum boron concentration requirements for the concentrated boric acid storage tank to fulfill the intent ~ of pertinent Technical Specification requirements.
Management Interview The inspector met with Messrs. D. Raasch, R. Rodriguez and L. Schwieger and other members of the licensee's staff at the conclusion of the ' inspection on February 27, 1975. A discussion of the results of the inspection included the following comments: 1.
The inspection findings verified the implementation of the licensee's corrective action related to enforcement items in IE Inspection Report No. 50-312/74-12.
' 2.
The licensee stated that the procedural controls described as corrective action in Abnormal Occurrence Report flo. 74-10 will be implemented prior to operation of the auxiliary feedwater pumps during' cold shutdown maintenance conditions.
' O ) U i I j _= - .
. . . . -2-REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted . R. Rodriguez, Manager, Nuclear Operations P. Oubre, Assistant Plant Superintendent, Operations J. McColligan, Assistant Plant Superintendent, Technical Support R. Columbo, Technical Assistant D. Whitney, Plant Nuclear Engineer S. Anderson, Plant Nuclear Engineer H. Heckett, Surveillance Scheduler B. Daniels, Electrical Engineer D. Comstock, Shift Supervisor R. Ozment, Mechanical Foreman A. Locy, Electrical Foreman L. Schwieger, Quality Assurance Director J. Jewett, Quality Assurance Engineer J. Sullivan, Quality Assurance Engineer 2.
Abnormal Occurrences Abnormal Occurrence Reports Nos. 74-14, " Aluminum in Containment;" 75-1, " Air-Operated Valve Failure;" and 75-2, " Isolation of LPI Flow (O Transmitter," were submitted by the licensee as thirty day reports f since the previous inspection. Based on an examination of the
records and discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector verified the following: , a.
The cause of each abnomal occurrence was identified and the details were clearly reported to facility management.
b.
The corrective actions described in the reports to prevent recurrence of the events were implemented by the licensee, c.
The abnormal occurrences had been reviewed by the Plant Review Committee and the Management Safety Review Committee.
d.
The limiting conditions for operation were met in all occurrences reported.
. e.
System and component failures have been reviewed by the plant ' staff and properly identified as abnormal occurrences, when s- '. applicable.
, ,,,, . - .. . . i . ..;.,_ . . . . . - . .. +.....% . . . . . . ,
V . . - - - ..,. - - -
- . . -3-i N The procedure to prevent recurrence of the conditions which resulted in the failure of the auxiliary feedwater pump (Abnormal Occurrence Report No. 74-10) was being written by the licensee.
This procedure was a corrective action commitment described by the licensee in the thirty day report of the occurrence and is scheduled for review, approval and implementation during March 1975.
3.
Maintenance Insoection - The corrective action described in the licensee's letter of January 17, 1975, in response to the enforcement action items in IE Inspection Report No. 50-312/74-12, was verified to have been implemented with the following observations: Quality Assurance Procedure No. 6, " Inspection Planning," has a.
been revised to better define the use of Maintenance Inspection Data Reports (MIDR's).
b.
MIDR's have been prepared and used for inspection t - maintenance on Class I and selected Class II items for the mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation and controls maintenance groups.
QA inspection stamps have been issued to designated inspectors.
c.
! d.
Inspections have been performed by designated inspectors not L' directly responsible for the maintenance activity.
e.
An internal audit of maintenance inspection activities was performed by SliUD QA on February 20, 1975.
f.
Video tape lectures covering the 18 criteria of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, and group discussions covering specific aspects of the SMUD QA program and proceduras were conducted during January and February 1975.
4.
Plant Operations , a.
Shift Logs and Operating Records Operating logs and records maintained in accordance with - - Administrative Procedures No. 23, " Control Room Watch Standby;" , , , No. 24, " Control of Special Orders;" and No. 26, " Abnormal Tag -' .,,,.s , . Procedure," were examined for the period December 1, 1974 - ' . February 26, 1975 and found to be consistent with the requirements' - , , ' i f., . . =
^ , , ,,
Jr ,. . . *. , -.' . . ' . .. . . . .. . , m e e> dn - -
. . -4- %
of the Technical Specifications and AflSI Standard fil8.7, " Administrative Controls for Nuclear Power Plants." The following observations were noted by the inspector: (1) The log sheets were complete and contained appropriate signature and initials of personnel responsible for log entries and log review.
(2)Abnormalconditionsdescribedinthelogscontained sufficient information to communicate equipment or system status and results of corrective action taken.
(3) Special orders issued by the Assistant Plant Superintendent, Operations, did not conflict with the intent of the Technical Specifications.
(4) Abnormal tags issued for jumper (bypass) purposes did not affect the control or function of safety related systems as prescribed in the Technical Specifications.
b.
Site Tour A tour of the plant, including controlled access areas in the auxiliary building, was conducted while the reactor was at 92% O power. fio abnormal piping vibrations or fluid leaks were observed. General housekeepina was found to be consistent with safety and fire hazard considerations.
Proper position of safety features valves (Nos. CBS 008, 019 and 025; BHS 001 and 002; and SIM 042) was verified by direct observation. The
normal boric acid supply train, including the volume, boric acid content, temperature of the concentrated boric acid storage tank and the operabili.ty of the associated heat tracing
circuits, was found consistent with the specified limiting conditions for operation.
Clearance tags (danger and caution) issued under Clearance .Nos. 8274, 8302.and 8353 were examined on installed components.
' ! . during the tour and verified to have been properly installed . through examination of control documentation maintained in the l control room. The installation and approval signatures for clearance tags were consistent with Administrative Procedure ' ,. ', No. 4, " Tagging System."
- . Discussions were held with the control room operator and the . shift supervisor regarding safety related annunciators which
t indicated an alarm condition. Both individuals were knowledgeable as to the cause and' significance of the apparent - ' alarm conditions.
, . .. s.
-: s , . . t , . . . . . . .. \\.s# . eeenere w =mee a
. . . . . . -5-5.
Reporting Reouirements Based on discussion with licensee representatives and a review of facility - -ds, the reports submitted by the licensee were found to be consiscent with the Technical Specifications and Regulatory . Guide 1.16, Revision 3.
The information contained in the Annual Operating Report to be submitted liarch 1, 1975 was reviewed and found consistent with facility maintenance and operations records.
Reports of containment penetration tests described in the Annual Ope:ating Report were verified by a review of the test data sheets inaintained in the surveillance test file.
The Startup Report for the initial startup of the facility was being prepared by the licensee for submittal nine months follcwing . initial criticality which occurred on Septer.ber 16, 1974 The Monthly Operating Reports submitted since initial operation of the facility were reviewed by the inspector with no anomalies noted.
6.
Power Ascension Test Program a.
Test Performance On February 20, 1975, the inspector observed the performance of the Loss of Offsite Power Test from 25% of full power conducted in accordance with SMUD Procedure flo. TP 800-26, " Loss of All Offsite Power Test." This procedure had ber-previously reviewed by the inspector. The test results obtained were consistent with the acceptance criteria of the procedure. The'following observations were made: (1)TheeffectiverevisionofTP800-26wasavailableand used by the persont ' pe" forming the test.
(2.)Thepersonnelparticipatinginthetestconsistedofthe ' , normal shift of~ licensed operators consistent with the ' Technical Specification requirements.
In addition, a i . shift test engineer and personnel to record and evaluate test data were available.
n ~ (3) The prerequisites for initial plant conditions, , - . ~ . . installation of analog recorders, and required procedure sign-offs by designated SMUD personnel were verified to have been completed prior to the performance of the test.
(4) The plant computer provided the common time base to which all transient test data were calibrated. A synchronizing - -
- .
pluse was imposed on all recorders at the start of the - O . test.
- ' Q,) .
. A
. - 'I u .
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - O) -6- . (5) Throughout the test, the shift test engineer coordinated the actions of the crew.
The in-plant public address system was used for communications. Continuous telephone ! communications were maintained with the system dispatcher.
The sequence of events as required by the test procedu.e was executed by the crew without interruption or modification.
(6) The raw test data were consistent with the inspector's indepenoant observations of electrical circuit breaker sequencing, reactor power, control rod motion, and main-steam bypass valve operation. All test data was assembled and a summary analysis made by the shift test engineer.
Formal reviews by the Test Working Group and the Plant Review Committee are to be performed to verify that the test results meet the acceptance criteria of the test procedure.
b.
Program Status The power ascension testing through 92.6% of full power was scheduled to be completed by March 15, 1975. The remaining tests to be completed by this date were as follows: (1) Unit Loss of Electrical Load This test.is to be performed from 75% and 92.6% power.
D The test has been successfully completed at 40% power, and the initial test at 75% power was unsuccessful since the reactor tripped due to ICS feedwater control , ! problems.
(2) Shutdown From Outside the Control Room This test is scheduled to be conducted on March 15, 1975.
(3) Neutron Noise Baseline Data 'This~-test ~will be performed at'50% and 92% of full power.
Is ' (4)TenPercentStepLoadChanges ,(5). Ten Percent Per. Minute Ramp Load Changes , , ,.,. ' (6) One Hundred Hour Run at.92% Power - These tests are performed to demonstrate contractual . acceptance requirements.
. . } * *
'
.g.
. , y, , ..
- . *
O - V ' , . - . t
.- ,. ._- - . _ - _,,, ,, _. - _. . _...
. . . .... . . - N-7- \\' ' Following completion of a three week maintenance shutdown for a turbine bearing inspection which commences March 15, 1975, the plant will be operated at 925 power. Escalation of power to
100% is contingent upon Licensing's review and approval of a ' report to be submitted by the licensee that demonstr=+es feed . and bleed control of the reactor during power tran- .ts at varying power levels up to 925 of full power.
. c.
Test Results The test data for all power ascension tests performed at 15%, 40%, 75% and 92.6% of full power were reviewed by the inspector.
Several of the tests reviewed have been reviewed during previous inspections by the inspector with the results described in the applicable inspection report. This review was a final verification for the completion of testing through 92.6% power.
The only tests not reviewed are described in Item b above.
Through discussions with licensee representatives and examination of test records, the following items were verified: (1) Test result data sheets were available and complete.
(2) Test deficiencies were noted and appropriate retesting was accomplished to resolve data deficiencies.
l O s
(3) The licensee verified that requisite tests were \\ completed and results approved prior to escalation of power to a new testing plateau.
' (4) Variations in test results from predicted values were identified by the licensee, and formal resolution was being attained using the Nonconformance Reporting System in the SMUD QA program.
(5) Formal reviews by the Test Working Group and the Plant Review Committee were being performed to verify that the test results meet the acceptance critcria..of the; test . "- ' ' procedures.
_ , - .
. - , .. - ~ . ' - , .. ,. , '. e
. %g , o w../ , . l .. - I - }}