IR 05000312/1982018
| ML20054F220 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 05/18/1982 |
| From: | Canter H, Obrien J, Sternberg D, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054F219 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-82-18, NUDOCS 8206150326 | |
| Download: ML20054F220 (3) | |
Text
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.
s
REGION V
Report No. 50-312/82-18 Docket No.
50-312 License No.
DPR-54 Safeguards Group Licensee:
Sacranento Municipal Utility District P. O. Box 15830 Sacramento, California 95813 Facility Name: Rancho Seco Inspection at: Clay Station, California Inspection conducted: April 21, 1982
__
Inspectors:
ewd b
M 5- // - & R d L. Cante[, Se or Resid[ fit Inspector Date Signed M[ N
- M 5 - // - P2
'
[ '. O' rien Resident Inspect Date Signed h
'Y, f-/[~~b
'
'
5 ou Chi teactor P >jef{s Section 2 Date Signed
,
Approved By h
i e
M h-l '/ - I2.-
D. M. Ster'nberg, Chief, React lperations Projects Date Signed Branch g
An Enforcement Conference was held on April 21, 1982. The following matters were discussed:
1.
Violations identified during inspection of License DPR-54 at Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Facility during the period of February 10 through April 28, 1982.
2.
NRC Enforcement Polices and Procedures.
3.
NRC actions being considered as a result of violations identified during the February 10 through April 28, 1982 inspection.
l l
4.
Possible future actions by the NRC if similiar violations occur.
5.
Other matters of concern to the NRC.
The enforcement conference involved a total of 18 staff-hours by six NRC representatives.
RV Form 219 (2)
!
i 8206150326 820607 PDR ADOCK 05000312 C
__ _ __________
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
'
.
.~
'
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Enforcement Conference Participants W. C. Walbridge, General Manager of Sacramento Municipal Utility District (SMUD)
J. J. Mattimoe, Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer, SMUD L. Schwieger, Quality Assurance Program Manager, SMUD P. Oubre', Plant Superintendent, SMUD R. Columbo, Technical Assistant to Manager Nuclear Operations, SMUD D. Whitney, Quality Cnntrol Supervisor, SMUD G. Coward, Main Wr.ance Supervisor, SMUD B. Faulkenberry, Acting Deputy Regional Administrator, Nuclear Regulatory Commission'(NRC), Region V J. L. Crews, Director, Resident, Reactor Projects and Engineering Inspection, NRC, Region V T. Young Jr., Chief, Projects Section 2, Reactor Operations Projects Branch, NRC, Region V H. L. Canter, Senior Resident Inspector, NRC, Region V J..P. O'Brien, Resident Inspector, NRC, Region V D. J. Willett, Regional Inspector, NRC, Region V 2.
Enforcement Conference On April' 21, 1982~, an Enforcement Conference was held at the SMUD
~
Corporate Office, with the individuals listed above participating.
The conference was related to safety inspections of activities authorized by NRC Licensee ' Number DPR-54, for the Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Facility. These inspections cover the period February 10 through April, 1982. The conference was announced in a letter to the licensee dated April 13, 1982.
The meeting was opened by Mr. Faulkenberry who summarized the enforcement polices and procedures of the NRC, as contained in 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C.
Principal emphasis was placed on the identification and discussion of recent changes that have been made to the NRC enforcement policy.
Mr. Canter described the violations identified during the period February and March 1982, and sunmarized the circumstances and events of each violation. A review of NRC files indicated that Licensee Event Report (LER) 81-33 described an earlier event similiar in root causes to the present violations.
Mr. Crews described the classification of violations and assignment of severity levels, e
r: -
,
,
.
e'
,
.
-2-The licensee was told that the violations involving the diesel generator (LER 82-05), high pressure injection system (LER 82-03),
and system verification were categorized as Severity Level III.
Severity Level III violations are safety-related and considered significant by the NRC. Mr. Crews concluded his presentation' sith a statement that Region V is recomrending imposition of a civil penalty and that procedural violations were being considered as a possible itam of noncompliance.
Mr. Walbridge questioned the Region's assessment and assignment of severity levels.
Similiarity to the 1980 civil penalty was taken exception to by Mr. Walbridge and he stated that management had taken corrective actions that were effective. Additionally, Mr. Walbridge stated that the violations were identified by SMUD in good faith, now as in the past, and that these problems were not willful actions but something that was overlooked.
Mr. Mattimoe stated that the NRC was expanding the interpretation of events to find similiarity in the 1980 Civil Penalty and the current problems being discussed. Mr. Mattimoe amplified Mr. Walbridge's sentiments by emphasizing SMUD's responsiveness to safe operation.
Mr. Faulkenberry stated that, because of the nature of these violations, the NRC would like SMUD to commit at this time to:
(1) review the adequacy of training provided the auxiliary operators with regard to their fully understanding the details of their duties; and (2) review the management controls in effect at Rancho Seco as relates to the effectiveness in providing plant supervisors with a full knowledge of the operating conditions of the facility.
Mr. Walbridge reiterated SMUD's position and committed to review auxiliary operator training and management controls at Rancho Seco.
Mr. Faulkenberry stated that the NRC considers the violations discussed to be serious concerns, especially since they are similiar to a past violation where corrective measures have not been fully effective.
Mr. Faulkenberry concluded the NRC's position with a statement that similar occurrences in the future could result in escalated enforcement actions which could involve higher civil penalties or even the issuance of orders.
,
$
l
-
-
.
._.
-