IR 05000312/1985025
| ML20198C356 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1985 |
| From: | Albert W, Eckhardt J, Miller L, Perez G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198C341 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-85-25, IEB-79-14, NUDOCS 8511120066 | |
| Download: ML20198C356 (7) | |
Text
y J
'
.;
) ' ;(
,
.
.
-
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
REGION V
Report No.
50-312/85-25
'
Docket No.
50-312
,
License No.
'
Licensee:
Sacramento Municipal Utility District P. O. Box-15830 Sacramento, California 95813 Facility Name:
Rancho Seco Unit 1 Inspection at:
Herald, California (Rancho Seco Site)
Inspection conducted-Au us-S tember 27, 1985 Th
' 2 A6 Inspectors:
L a
J. W.'
k t
,S r'
sident Inspector Date Signed
&
>
(
@
c/- 2/ -K5
<
G. P.7 P6 -
esi en ec Date Signed
'
,
6Dh,
/
J l
Da al er
-
%'. ' Albert,- Reaclor I'n " ec.tof Date Signed Approved By:
!"U)
L. F.(Miller Jr., @(ief Date Signed Reactor Projects Section 2 Summary:
Inspection between August 1 - September 27, 1985 (Report No. 50-312/85-25)
Areas Inspected: This routine inspection by the Resident Inspectors and one regional based inspector involved the areas of' operational safety verification, maintenance, reactor startup,. essential safety feature system walkdown, and surveillance. ;During this^ inspection, Inspection Procedures.
30703, 61726, 62703, 71707 - 92706, 71710, and 72700 were used. This inspection involved =246 hours including'24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> on back shift onsite by two resident l inspectors and.one' regional based inspector.
+
,
.
,
,
Results:
=0f_the areas. inspected, no' violations or deviations were identified.
,.
l
-
- '
-"I
.,... -
, ^
.,
-
,,
- L
'
-. 7 3= * *.
j
,
,
,
'.i
,
'
'
',
,-
.s
,
8511120066 851022
'
.
PDR ADOCK 05000312
-
i G
-
-
j,-
.,J:
'
'
,
.)
- 4
-
sp
.
.
S
.
.
.
__
.
'
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- G. Coward, Manager of Nuclear Operations
- S. Redeker, Plant Superintendent
- N. Brock, Electrical /I&C Maintenance Supervisor
}
- M.
Bua, Training Supervisor i
- H. Canter, QA Engineer
- R. Colombo, Regulatory Compliance Supervisor
'
S. Crunk, Associate Nuclear Engineer
- J. Delezenski, Licensing Analyst
- J. Field, Engineering and Quality Control Superintendent J. Jurkovich, Site Resident Engineer
- F. Kellie, Assistant Chemical and_ Radiation Superintendent R. Lawrence, Hechanical Maintenance Supervisor C. Linkhart, Senior Electrical. Engineer
- J. McColligan, Assistant Manager of Nuclear Operations L. Schwieger, Quality Assurance Director
- W. Spencer, Operations Superintendent
- J. Shetler, B&W Outage Manager Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, mechanics, security and office personnel.
2.
Operational Safety Verification i
The inspectors reviewed control room operations which included access control, staffing, observation of decay heat removal system alignment, and review of control room logs. Discussions with the Shif t Supervisors and operators indicate understanding of the reasons for annunciator indications, abnormal plant conditions and maintenance work in progress.
' The inspectors also verified, by observation of valve and switch position indications, that emergency systems were properly aligned for the cold shutdown condition.
'
Tours of the auxiliary building, turbine building, and reactor 1,uilding, including exterior areas, were made to assess equipment conditions and
. plant conditions. Also the tours were made to assess the effectiveness of radiological ~ controls and adherence to regulatory requirements.
The inspectors also observed plant housekeeping / cleanliness conditions, looked for potential fire and safety. hazards, and observed security and safeguards practices.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Technical Specification Accuracy During this inspection period the inspector identified a deficiency in the licensee's Technical Specifications (TS). Amendment 70 to the
licensee's TS approved by the NRC on June 7, 1985, was issued by the licensee for update to the controlled copies of the TS.
On page 3-52, section 3.13.3 of the TS,.the first sentence of the NRC approved change
-
-
- - -
-
-
. _.
-
_
...
.
read in part, "With one Control Room...".
The licensee's issued change read in part, "With the Control Room...".
The inspector emphasized the importance of a proper and documented review of changes to.the TS.
The licensee's corrective action included revising
'the TS to change the word "the" to "one", and to develop and implement a documented three level review system for all TS changes prior to the licensee's issuance in the site's controlled TS books.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
Follow-up of Previously Identified Item (Closed) 85-14-03, Limitorque operator T-drains. During a special NRC inspection of the licensee's Equipment Qualification Program, a T-drain for the Limitorque motor of valve FSV-46203 was discovered to be installed on the top of the' motor. The' qualification for the motor was based on the absence of drains'in,the top of the motor housing. The licensee stated that they would inspect all'other Limitorque motors for the T-drain placement and perform any necessary rework to comply with the equipment qualifications.
,
The licensee verified that only two motor operators with T-drains on top of the motor housing were installed. The T-drains were replaced with plugs prior to plant startup. The licensee's actions have been documented (letter dated, June 28, 1985 R. J. Rodriguez to H. L. Thompson)
and inspected by quality assurance (QA Surveillance No. 330). The licensee's actions'were found acceptable.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Supplemental Program for NRC Bulletin 79-14 The NRC inspector examined the procedures controlling the engineering j
walkdown examinations and the evaluation of the results.
Selected records were examined to determine that discrepancies identified were dispositioned and that the review activities were addressed, i
Two hangers were examined in the field and were found to be in conformance with the revised drawings. The only question which arose from this field. examination was the observation of loose lock nuts on some other hangers of the main steam line that used a threaded clevis and rod for the supports. The licensee will further examine this matter to determine design requirements and whether this should have been coveren by the inspections of the supplemental 79-14 program. This item will be examined during a subsequent inspection.
(85-25-01)
.
'
The NRC inspector examined the actions of the QC/QA organizations of SMUD in controlling nonconformances generated by the walkdown program. These QC activities were in addition to the engineering inspections required for the closeout of the walkdown findings.
No violations or deviations were identified.
-
- - -
- - -
-
-
.
.
6.
Significant Meetings During this inspection period the -inspectors were involved in four significant meetings with the licensee staff. The first on August 13, 1985, was a visit from NRC Commissioner Zech. The visit included a tour of the plant and also many discussions with the licensee's staff and management on key issues and day-to-day activities at Rancho Seco.
Commissioner Zech stated that the material provided was very useful information. He also expressed the following items that he felt are pivotal in an organization: 1) the importance of the plant operators, 2)
the importance of a strong purposeful training program, and 3) people need to always be knowledgeable and deliberate when carrying out their duties at a nuclear power plant.
The licensee met with the NRC on September 6, 1985 for an Enforcement Conference. The details of the. enforcement action stemming from the June 23, 1985, pipe break accident can be found in Inspection Report 50-312/85-19.
On September 16, 1985, the licensee met for the NRC's formal presentation of the SALP report for the period of December 1, 1983 through May 31, 1985. The findings of the SALP report were detailed in Inspection Report 50-312/85-18.
The last meeting for this period occurred on September 23, 1985, due to NRC concerns regarding electrical work performed at Rancho Seco in light of the recent findings of inadequate quality of civil and mechanical work perfo rmed. The licensee's presentation indicated that the quality assurance and management weaknesses identified by the NRC did not extend to the plant electrical modifications done in the last few years. Some of'the important differences were stated as follows:
Electrical modifications have been performed on safety-related equipment for the past seven years. Major mechanical modifications have only been performed in the last three years.
- Personnel involved in the original electrical work at Rancho Seco were still involved in electrical modifications. These people included design and field engineers, and quality control inspectors.
This type of continuity was not present in the mechanical discipline.
- A higher work load throughout the years for electrical work has provided the need for a core group of electrical craft and quality control inspector personnel. The work load for mechanical modifications was such that craft personnel and inspectors for mechanical work were employed only during heavy modification outages.
- The licensee had developed and implemented detailed procedures for the construction and inspection of electrical work prior to the major electrical modification in the 1983 outage. Similar procedures for mechanical work were not develope _ _
.
Electrical work was different from mechanical due to the opportunity to test electrical modifications using startup and surveillance tests. Therefore, the modifications were called upon to perfonn their design function during tests, where as mechanical modifications can not be tested in this manner.
- The licensee has performed many electrical system walkdowns due to recent equipment qualification and fire protection modifications which have served to assure that the as-built condition was in compliance with the controlled drawings. This type of review was not performed in the mechanical areas.
- The NRC has performed two major audits, equipment qualification and fire protection, which did not identify any major weaknesses in the electrical engineering work. This provided some confidence that the i
previous actions had been effective.
- The licensee has performed a recent trend analysis on reportable events and did not identify any negative trends resulting from electrical engineering work, No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Emergency Preparedness Drill On August 28, 1985, the resident inspector observed the annual emergency preparedness drill. The inspector observed the following portions of the drill: offsite agency interface, security and operations interface, and the manning of the technical support center. The licensee appeared to perform well in the above situations.
No violations or deviations identified.
8.
Reactor Coolant Pump Inservice Inspection (Maintenance)
The inspector reviewed a portion of the documentation of work performed
on the "B" reactor coolant pump (RCP) during the recent refueling outage.
The "B" RCP underwent a ten year inservice inspection during April and May of 1985. The inspector became discovered that during the inspection
'
the licensee identified eleven of sixteen hearing cap screws broken.
These cap screws, stainless. steel (CF8/CF8M) socket head cap ' screws 1/2" - 13 T.P.I x 1.5 long, apparently provide support of the RCP bearing
-
assembly during assembly.
The licensee contacted the pump manufacturer, Bingham-Willamette Company, and determined that the failure had occurred due to relaxation of the mild fastening torque and cycle fatigue. The licensee requested and received a change in the vendor's technical manual torque value and installed new cap screws with the new higher torque valve.
In reviewing the documentation the. inspector noted that neither a nonconformance report nor an occurrence description report was issued
]
upon the identification of the broken cap screws. Furthermore, the
,
-
_
-,
, - - -
,
., -.
.e-.-4
-
-
-
.
.
maintenance inspection data sheet for the disassembly of the RCP did not indicate the failure of the eleven cap screws.
The inspector identified this problem'to the licensee on September 3, 1985. The licensee issued an occurrence description report on September 4, 1985, describing the. failure of the cap screws. Also a quality assurance audit was performed on the work involved in the RCP bearing disassembly and assembly and was issued on September 10, 1985.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for identifying, documenting, and correcting nonconformances, Quality Assurance Procedure (QAP) No. 17, "Nonconformance Material Control". The inspector did not determine whether the licensee's procedures required a nonconformance to be documented, evaluated, and appropriate corrective actions performed in
'
this case.
The inspector will further review the licensee's program in the next inspection. This item is considered unresolved.
(85-25-02)
9.
Auxiliary Feed Pump Maintenance and Surveillance Testing During this inspection period, major maintenance was rerformed on the tandem driven auxiliary feed water pump (P-318). This pump had failed the required flow portion of the surveillance test by a few gallons per minute. The maintenance performed included replacement of wear rings and replacement and modification of the impeller. The inspectors reviewed the maintenance procedure for the work, observed work in progress, examined the remachined rotor, and observed quality control inspection of i
the reassembly. After final reassembly, the subsequent surveillance test showed a significant increase in flow. The results of that surveillance
'
test were reviewed, and appeared acceptable.
No violations or deficiencies were identified.
10.
Licensee Staff Changes During this inspection period the SMUD General Manager retired, and Mr. Dewey K. K. Lowe assumed the responsibility of General Manager. Also the Rancho Seco Manager of Nuclear Operations was selected for a special assignment in the corporate office as an assistant to the Assistant General Manager, Nuclear.
Mr. George Coward was then assigned the position of Manager of Nuclear Operations and with Mr. Steve Redeker, in the interm, to fill the position of Plant Superintendent.
11.
Unresolved Items An unresovled item is a matter about d.ich more information is reugired in order to ascertain whether it is an acceptable item, an open item, a deviation, or a violation. An unresolved item is discussed in Section 8 i
of this report.
i
,
l
.
-
.
.
.
.
.
-.
..
.
.
-
.
.
..
.
.
.
.
.
.
-.
_
,
-4-+
,
>
-
-
..
+
12.
Exit Meeting The resident inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at various times during the reporting period and formally on September 27, 1985. The scope and findings of the inspection activities as given in this report, were summarized at the meeting. The licensee representatives acknowledged the inspectors' findings.
,
4
'
t I
e
,
r f
,
e-y g
-
w.y
-- -
,mw g
7-gwe 9m yyw w-
,-
,em 9--g
---
gy
-
w-