IR 05000312/1979026
| ML19296B263 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 01/04/1980 |
| From: | Faulkenberry B, Zwetzig G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296B257 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-79-26, NUDOCS 8002200341 | |
| Download: ML19296B263 (6) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:' U. S. NUCLEAR RECUTJTORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION V
Report No.
50-312/79-26 79-26 Docket No.
Sn.31? License No.
Safeguards Group 1,1 c ens e e : Sacramento Municipal Utility District P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813 Facility Name: Rancho Seco Inspection at: Clav Station, California Inspection conducted: December 10-14, 19'9 Inspectors: [b JN $J74 /ty 'l /ffd $.B.7;wetzip,PeactorInspector [/ Date/ Sig' ed n Da'* Signed ' Date Signed ), 4<[[,,b.A_ ,,., / /9f/ ' Approved By: I B. HT Faulkenberry, hief,. Reactor Projects Section 7 Dat e/ S igned Reactor Operations d Nuclear Support Branch Surreary : Inspection on December 10-14, 1979 (Report No. 50-312/79-26) Areas Inpected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the completion of selected fire protection modifications; surveillance of pipe support and restraint systems; followup on IE Bulletins and Circulars and audit of health physics and respirator training. The inspection involved 37 inspector-hours onsite by one inspector.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were found.
RV Forr 719 (7) 9 02200 434/
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. Colombo, Technical Assistant R. Lawrence, Site Project Engineer J. Wheeler, Electrical Engineer
- J. Field, Mechanical Engineer W. Garrett, Mechanical Engineer M. Carter, Outage Coordinator
- ft. Brock, Instrumentation Supervisor A. Locy, fluclear Electrical Foreman
- H. Heckert Nuclear Engineering Technician
- R. Medina, Quality Assurance Engineer
- P. Oubre, Plant Superintendent
- W. Ford, Operations Supervisor
- G. Ccward, Maintenance Supervisor The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other licensee employees including health physics and training personnel and the site safety engineer.
- Denotes those attending the exit interview.
2.
Fire Protection Modifications The inspector examined the status of implementation of the fire protection modifications as required by License Amendement flo.19 with revisions noted in License Amendment flo. 25 and other corres-pondence. Based on discussions with the licensee's project repre-sentative, the only items considered complete since the 1978 refueling outage were: (1) The installation of additional smoke detectors in Fire Areas 34, 35, 39, 40 and 42 (Item 3.1.37*); (?) the installation of certain UL rated fire doors not required to be previously installed (Items 3.1.27 and 3.1.28) and (3) the installation of emergency lighting in accessways to safety-related areas (Item 4.6).
Accordingly, the inspection of fire protection modifications during this site visit was limited to these items.
The inspection consisted of review of Engineering Change Notices flos. 2020, 2183 and 2356, dealing with the above modifications, the associated Work Requests and Drawing Change flotices and a tour of the facility to verify on a sampling basis the implementation of the required modifications. Areas visited included each of the
- Item numbers refer to paragraphs in the Fire Protection Safety Evaluation Report issued in conjunction with License Amendment tio. 1,
fire areas listed in the preceding paragraphs plus other areas in the facility at the -47', -20', O', +20' and +40' elevations, where the modifications covered by this inspection were to have been-implemented.
Based on the facility tour it was determined that the modifications which were the subject of this inspection had been installed in conformance with the licensee's commitments.
Review of the documentation supporting these modifications indicated that the modification involving additional upgraded fire doors and additional fire detectors were satisfactorily completed. The inspection of documentation (Work Request) for the addition of emergency lights, however, revealed that as a result of testing, several areas were judged by those performing the tests to have insufficient illumination.
It was also noted that this Work Request had not yet been closed.
The licensee's project representative was advised of these test results and agreed to investigate the matter.
This matter will be examined on a subsequent ir.spection.
(79-26-01) No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
3.
Surveillance of pipe Support and Restraint Systems The inspector reviewed the following licensee documents: SP 201.10A, Rev. 5, " Safety System Hydraulic Snubbers Surveillance Inspection" SP 201.10B, Rev. 3, " Safety System Hydraulic Snubber Functional Testing" MT.020, Rev. 1, " Snubber Functional Testing" 1978 Inservice Inspection Manual for Rancho Seco, November 9, 1978 (Reviewed for Integrally Welded Supports, B4.9/C2.5, and Support Components, B4.10/C2.6 only) Based on the review of these documents, the inspector determined that with one exception the licensee's procedures for inspection of snubbers, welded supports and support components were technically acceptable and in conformance with applicable codes and the Facility Technical Specifications. The exception relates to the method of inspection of Class 1 integrally welded supports wherein the licensee uses surface examination techniques rather than volumetric examination as specified in Section XI of the ASME Code.
In support of this exception the licensee stated that he had re uested relief from NRR pursuant to the provisions of 10CFR50.55a ( )(5)(iii).
-3- , . The justification for granting relief was stated to be that volumetric examination was only appropriate for full penetration welds, and that code editions after Winter 1976 also permit surface examination of integrally welded supports. This matter will be resolved by NRR review of the licensee's request for relief.
The inspector examined the results of the visual and functional testing of accessible and inaccessible snubbers performed in November 1979.
Based on this examination and discussions with the licensee, the inspector concluded that the inspection had been performed in accordance with the approved procedures and that schedule for future inspections was selected in accordance with technical specification requirements. The inspector did note, however, that the data sheet used during the visual inspection of snubbers was poorly designed with regard to interpreting the acceptability of the data. This observation was mentioned to the licensee's representatives, who agreed and indicated an intention to revise the data sheet.
The inspector also toured the facility and observed on a sampling basis the condition of snubbers, fixed pipe supports and component support structures. The observations included examination for secure mounting, and the absence of bending, deformation, or leakage from snubbers. Based on these visual observations, the inspector determined that the units observed appeared to be in operable condition.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4.
Independent Inspection Effort The inspector participated in a portion of the licensee's program for employee general safety indoctrination, health physics training and resp-tor training.
In addition to lectures, the program included a whs body count, a determination of lung capacity and respirator fi tti r.). The inspector concluded that those portions of the program observed were of appropriate content and were presented in an acceptable manner.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were observed.
5.
Followuo on IE Bulletins and Circular The inspector discussed the licensee's status with respect to outstanding IE Bulletins and Circulars.
Significant conclusions or itens of information are summarized below:
-4- , . a.
IE Bulletin 79-18 (0 pen) The licensee's letter of September 12, 1979 stated that on the basis of the results of audibility testing, flashing lights would be installed in high noise areas to augment the existing audible evacuation alarm and that the volume of existing PA speakers would be adjusted and/or additional speakcrs added where observed audibility was inadequate.
During the inspection it was determined that the previous testing was considered invalid because a warble siren and several loudspeakers were out of service at the time of the test. Accordingly, another test was conducted while the inspector was onsite. The inspector monitored this test and determined that the evacuation alarm was inaudible at the condenser hotwell sample station.
This information was given to the licensee.
The inspector also stated that discovery that certain of the PA speakers had been disconnected at the time of the initial test indicated that if the PA system was to be used as an evacuation alarm, periodic surveillance should be provided. The licensee acknowledged the inspector's observation.
b.
IE Bulletin 79-23 (Closed) The inspector reviewed licensee document STP-831, Rev. 1, " Emergency Diesel Generator "A" Full Load Test" and the results of the test conducted on October 22 and 23,1979 in accordance with this procedure. The test was conducted in response to the guidance contained in IE Bulletit 49-23 and supported the conclusions presented in the licensee's letter of November 5, 1979.
Inasmuch as the results showed that the concerns expressed in the bulletin were not applicable at Rancho Seco, this completes the licensee's action on this matter.
c.
IE Bulletin 79-24 (Closed) The licensee's letter of October 23, 1979 stated that they had reviewed all of the safety related process, instrument and sampling lines exposed to the weather and had assured themselves that none of the lines would freeze during cold weather.
During this site visit, the inspector interviewed the engineer who performed this review to determine the scope and depth of the review. Based on the licensee's letter and this interview, this item is considered close.- . d.
IE Bulletin 79-05C (0 pen) The inspector reviewed the folicwing licensee procedures to verify conformance with Bulletin guidance concerning the tripping of reactor coolant pumps and the establishment of natural circulation cooling: Emergency Procedures: D.2, Rev. 5, " Rector Turbine Trip" D.5, Rev. 14, " Loss of Reactor Coolant / Loss of Reactor Coolant System Pressure" D.13, Rev. 4, " Steam Supply System Rupture" D.14, Rev.10, " Loss of Steam Generator Feed" Overall Plant Operating Procedure (OPOP): B.4, Rev.12, " Plant Shutdown" All of the procedure revisions appeared acceptable to the inspector. This bulletin remains open pending evaluation of the licensee's other actions, e.
IE Circular 79-17 (Closed) Based on discussions with the licensee and review of an internal memorandum dated October 18, 1979, the inspector verified that Circular 79-17 had been received by the licensee and had determined that it was not applicable to Rancho Seco because they did not utilize GE Type SB switches.
Accordingly, this completes the licensee's action on this circular.
6.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 14, 1979. The inspector sunmarized the scope and findings of the inspection. The licensee representative acknowledged the inspector's observations concerning the maintenance of an effective evacuation alarm system and the need for an improved data sheet for use during visual surveillance of hydraulic snut,bers. }}