IR 05000312/1988042

Insp Rept 50-312/88-42 on 881227-30 & 890125-27.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Followup Items,Part 21 Repts,Lers & Licensee Program to Maintain Quality of Diesel Generator Fuel Oil

ML20245H880
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	02/13/1989
From:	Jim Melfi, Richards S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20245H876	List: IR 05000312/1988042 ML20245H873
References
50-312-88-42, IEB-88-004, IEB-88-4, NUDOCS 8903060072
Download: ML20245H880 (14)

Text

_ - _ .. . _ _

. _ _ - _ -

, ,

'

!if .. a . -t 7 t '- ,

a v ! .i;) , , ..f_

' '

, ""

M; A.pdfi';3 e '.

,_t z

.

M Mg , ; -

, ,

~

N,;,' , U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPEISSION y,

'

\', R.EGION V- ' ,a g%'

"

'

'

LReport Number; '50-312/88242

,

f JDocket N6mber 50-312 y ,- . . . .

Licens'e' Number- '

-

'

'

DPR-54 +

. Licensee: - Sacramento Municipal; Utility District 14440 Twin. Cities Road'

P at Herald, California' 95638-9799 4. > . ' Facility Name: Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating. Station

.

1 . Inspection at: Herald, California Inspection conducted: December 27 - December 30, 1988

. January 25 - January 27, 1989 c <

Inspectori .

E ' MM * [

J ,Date 5(gned d /f; f F. Melfi, Reacpbr spector

,

,>

Approved By

MI &

S. A. Ric1ards, Chief. Engineering,Section

,

,

13/8I Date Signed e ., , ., . ,

L ,

. , w p.'

Inspection ' Summary

-

'

,

e+

' ' v

'

1 9 .

, f.- '

,' Inspection on December 27 - December 130, 1988~ and January E5 - Januar~y 27,

, 1989 (Report No. 50-312/88-42). f -

% ,e n-Areas Inspected: A routine, unann~ounced' inspection of followup' items, Part'

'

21 Reports, Licensee Event Reports (LERs), and the licensee's' program to'

' maintain the' quality of diesel generator. fuel oil. Inspection procedures 30703, 25588'~25593, 92701 and 92702 were used during this inspectio ,

'

- >.

Safety Issue Management System (SIMS) Items:

,

Multi-PlantAction(MPA)itemA-15isclosedinthisreport.

1 .

l, 8903060072 890213  ?#

{DR ADOCK 0500 2 $

b _1_ -- _

, - --- ---

- - -

..

7. a n ,

3.m, <

.

it-

,

o

<

isc

. . .c

'

-

..

ly- ^/

3. . .

-2--

'

'

., ..

' '

Results:

'

GeneralcConclusions and Specific Findings:

The: inspector' concluded that the; licensee was monitoring'and maintaining '

c ...

'

the~ quality of their diesel generator fuel oil to meet or exceed their-

-

- ,

' technical .. specification Violations and De'viations:

, .. .

a

.NoL violations or deviations were identified...

Open Items Summary: c -

No, followup'o'runresolved,itemswereopened.duringthisinspectio s

.. v v

,

e 1<

.

IN p 't , -.. -

s g e f

, i

'

( i

. I,i A t M

. <

, < r r

'Y 4s

+

.$

.

.

I

!

.

,

___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

, _ _ __ -

_ - .____ ____ _ _ _____-___ _ _-_ - __ _ _ _ ,

y

I

.

o.

l L ,

DETAILS ~ Persons Contacted Sacramento Municipal Utility District

• B. Croiey, AGM, Technical Services 4

• T. Hill-Hardy, Quality Engineer

• D. Swank, Licensing Engineer

' *D. Schuman, Licensing Engineer

• J. Hendricks, Plant. Performance Engineering

.

M. Sullivan, Plant Support Superintendent 1 E. Yocheim, Nuclear Chemistry Manager J. Jones, Plant Performance Engineering C. Mackaman, Diesel Engineer B. Pate, I&C Engineer T. Redican, Nuclear Material Control Manager S. Miller Principal Electrical Engineer G. Jones,- Associate Electrical Engineer R. Negley, Procedure Writer -

L. Pritchett, Procedure Writer T. Barela,~ Shift Supervisor USNRC

• P. J. Qualls, Resident Inspector C. J. Myers, Resident Inspector'

A. D. D'Angelo, Senior Resident Inspector

• Denotes those attending the final exit meeting on December 30, 1988.

The inspector also contacted licensee operators, engineers, technicians, and other personnel during the course of the inspectio . Bulletins (92701)

(Closed) NRC Bulletin 88-04, " Potential Safety-Related Pump Loss" This bulletin requested all licensees to investigate and correct as applicable two miniflow design concerns. When a pump is on miniflow recirculation, an inadequate flow through the pump can cause damage to the pump. The first concern involves the potential for dead-heading (run without flow) of one or more pumps in safety-related systems that have a miniflow line in common to two or more pumps. Pumps are allowed to interact in this fashion, but the possible interactions between pumps should not be higher than code allowable values (ASME Section XI, IWP 3100). The concern is that if both pumpL were running on miniflow, the pump with the greater discharge pressure developed (stronger) will cause  !

the weaker pump to run without flow, damaging the weaker pump.. The first concern also involves the possibility for dead-heading in other piping  !

configurations during miniflow operation. The second concern noted in

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

_ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - . _ - _ =

. 4

.

.2

.

^

the bulletin was whether or not the' installed miniflow capacity is

' adequate for even a. single pump in operatio ~

The licensee. responded to this bulletin _in a letter dated July 8,198 The licensee' stated in this letter that the only system that shared a recirculation line was the High Pressure Injection (HPI)/ Makeup syste The licensee also stated in this letter that except for the quarterly surveillance test, no.other modes have been identified in which more than one pump 'is operated at minimum recirculation flow. The licensee further stated.that each miniflow line in this system has a pressure breakdown orifice before the common header, which minimized any interaction. The letter noted that the licensee performed a calculation which showed negligible interactio The inspector looked at several other safety-related system Piping and Instrument Diagrams (P&lDs) to verify that there is no other configuration with a common miniflow line. The inspector.did not find any other piping configurations .with a. common miniflow lin The inspector reviewed the licensee's calculation, (Z-SIM-M2452,

"HPI/ Makeup System Pump Flow Rates") dated July 6, 1988, in conjunction with the system P& ids. The calculation methodology is to determine the effective pipe length to the common junction, assume a common pressure where the lines meet during pump operation, and determine the pressure seen by the pumps during possible multiple pump operation. All the pumps have a separate breakdown orifice, which reduces the pressure from 2800 psigtoabout30psig(greaterthan99%). By the calculation, the pressure seen by the pump was well within the code allowable interaction (ASME Section XI, IWP 3100, 2% difference). The flow after the common i junction goes into a bigger pipe and into the volume control tank, and back to the pumps. The inspector did not have any concerns with-the calculation m'ethodology or conclusion The siring of the miniflow recirculation line was discussed with.the licensee. Based on discussions with the licensee, the line.seems to be

'

adequately size . , ,

This bulletin is close . Temporary Instructions (Closed) TI-15-100, 9 roper Receipt, Storage, and Handling of ;

Emergency Diesel Generator Fuel Oil" (25588) -

This Temporary Instruction (TI) provided for an assessment of the licensee's program to maintain the quality of Emergency Diesel j Generator (EDG) fuel oil that is stored on site. The specific items that were to be verified were the following: )

0 That the licensee routinely determines the quality of stored I fuel oil with effective analysi l l

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

j

- . _ _

.

. 3

-

.

' '

'That the licensee can detect degradation of stored fuel oil quality, as may be indicated by excessive w ter accumulation, oxidation, or biological contamination, among other possible causes of degradatio That the licensee' routinely monitors and cleans filters, strainers, and other components prone to fouling in the fuel oil syste O That the licensee routinely reviews and evaluates NRC-information on this subjec The licensee monitors the diesel generator fuel oil quality to meet technical specification 4.6. The licensee uses Surveillance Procedures (SPs) SP.57A&B, SP.221A & B, SP.222A & B, SP.909A & B, SP.910A & B, and SP.941, to sample and monitor the quality of the oil in the fuel oil tanks. The licensee uses chemistry procedures CHM-2138, -2143, -2145, -2146, and -5105 to analyre the quality of the . fuel oil . The licensee also had contracted a properly approved laboratory (Herguth Petroleum Laboratories) for monthly checks on the fuel and lube oil. ' Based on these procedures, discussions with the licensee, and review of surveillance records, the inspector concluded that the licensee is adequately monitoring the quality of their fuel oi The inspector discussed with the licensee the periodic checking and changeout of filters. The licensee does change out and check the fuel oil. filter on the diesel. The licensee personnel were noting when the. filters were changed and trending that data. There is no fuel oil filters installed in the tanks. / -

The inspector asked to see.the licensee evaluation of Information i Notice 87-04. The licensee has evaluated this notice for applicability to their site in an engineering sumary report dated 12/19/87. The summary repo'rt identified no further actions to be taken by the license Based on the above review by the inspector, the licensee appears to have an adequate, functioning program to verify the quality of their fuel oil. The information requested by this TI and a copy of this report section will be sent to the NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulatio I This Temporary Instruction is close B. -(Closed) TI-15-93 " Inspection for Verification of Quality Assurance !

Request Regarding Diesel Generator Fuel Oil Multi-Plant Action (MPA) Item A-15" (25593)

This Temporary Instruction (TI) provides inspection requirements for assessing whether the diesel generator fuel oil is included in the licensee's quality assurance program under 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B j requirements, and to close out the Multi-Plant Action Ite This TI was previously inspected in inspection report 50-312/88-21.

E-- __

g

- .-. _ _ - _ .

. .

.

.

-

-

,

The inspector reviewed how the licensee qualifie's diesel generator !

fuel oil'as discussed inl paragraph 3A above. The inspector questioned the licensee whether the diesel generator fuel oil'is on the "Q" list. The inspector was informed that fuel oil is not'on the

"Q" list, but it is bought to certain standards.and verified upon receipt'to meet those standards. The inspector reviewed' purchase order GP00833, dated 7/20/88.~ The diesel fuel ' oil acceptance criteria was specified in the purchase order, and the standar testing procedures used to' determine the criteria was also specifie .The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation had previously written licensees stating that fuel oil should'be on the "Q" list, or licensee's should document their position why it is not on the "Q" list. The licensee agreed to write a letter to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation documenting their methods to assure fuel oil quality. Based on the inspector review and discussions with the licensee, this TI and MPA A-15 are close . Licensee Event Reports- (Closed) LER 85-14, Revision 4. " Nuclear Service Cooling Water Pump 'A' Breaker - A Class 2 Breaker in a Class 1 Application" The LER was issued when a non class 1 breaker was installed in a class 1 application. The LER had several root causes, generally.in- .

the area of programmatic controls.- This LER was previously inspected'

and closed in inspection report 87-06, but the licensee had not taken final corrective action on the issuance of safety related materia The new revision adds some. additional information on the status of the material reverification progra The inspector reviewed the material' control department stock' material reverification program action' plan, dated June 20, 1988. This. action plan verified that the material control program has procedural *

controls on procurement, receipt, and handling and control of .

.

_'

materials to prevent the' inadvertent use of unqualified items at Rancho Seco. The licensee also reviewed the existing stock cards of items to verify the adequacy.of the description, application, and QA requirement of those items. The licensee has completed the original ,

stock reverification program for the items onsite. The stock

'

!

material reverification are now proceeding on a small population of items that were not classified in accordance with the' licensee's current quality classification system, but which are potentially class ~1.' This population consists of chemicals, conduit, cable trays, etc., which was part of bulk' original construction purchases by the licensee. The licensee is currently considering these items :

as class 0, which means that the classification of the items has not j been determined. The licensee is evaluating the correct '

classification of these parts via Potential Deviations to Quality l (PDQ). The inspector reviewed typical PDQ's (e.g. 88-1087, 88-1123, 88-1140) of items which were not upgraded to class 1, and did not l note any concerns with the evaluation j

!

L ---_o

g- - , 7- ym . . -- , ..

,

,

'

".

f , .

'

.

,,

t

--

t ,'*W ..  ; '

-

1>

, ,

5J

"

,

,

y, ,

.The Linspector also' . discussed 'the material .'c'ontrol: program 'with !the :

? licensee,.and the1 actions taken. ; Based on the actions taken by the-

.

'

-

, licensee since< revision 3 ofJthis LER this.LER isiclose S

~

I.- B (Closed) LER 87-08', " Inadequate Sequencing of High Pressure lnjectioni i y ' '

Pumps on the Emergency Diesel Generator During Automatic Loading"

'

LThis' Licensee Eve:t. Report (LERfwas written"on February r13,1987, . .

documenting conditions relating to the loading of' components onto theT n, Emergency Diesel < Generators (EDGs).1 The three. conditions identified inlthe;LER were the followin e 1) HighiPress'ure' Injection /Makeupl(HPI/MU) ' arid Decay Heat Removal -H 1(DHR)Pumpscouldstartalmostsimultaneouslyinstead'ofl 3 >

sequentially with an assumed three second time-delay between starts'as stated in chapter 8:of the FSA )

LTheHPI.andDNRpumpscouldbeloadedonanoperati includes:the-base. loads of the Motor Control Centers MCCs)and

"-

'a make-up pump. This condition could occur with an operator

. manually loading the makeup pump.after a lossiof offsite power and then subsequently receiving'an SFAS Signa c 3)f The make-up' pump, Reactor Building EmergencyLCoolers, Nuclear O

.

'/ J~ ' Service Cooling Water (NSCW)fPumps, and/or Reactor Building-

, f, ' . c , Spray . Pumps could be manually: loaded out'of sequence' during the-

-automatic '1oading sequence.-

,

p p ,The. inspector' reviewed the corrective actions taken by the licenseef n

'

. :the training given'to operators, and the: actions-taken by th '

,

3' ,- ' licensee to prevent further. problems in'the future /regarding the 1 9' *w

'q loading of the diesel: generator . ] i, .j

.s ; -

a sui

,

,>t The initial s'quential e loading on the' diesels of the HPI/MU pumps g i * J i i

' l* , ~ .

"e .g three seconds after the DHR pumps could'have been defeated by thef lube' oil pressure permissive: contact on- the'HPI/MU pumps. This e J$ *

'

" ' c permissive contact is to assure.'that lube oil pressure is available; 3

~

,' s J'

after a start of the-pump. This contact was'found to allow the start? ~

i;

-

sa

,,e of the pump 1.1 seconds after receipt of the start signal. This

~

, - ~/

pt'

F - *

, could have allowed for the starting of'2 pumps almost: simultaneously; l ,

4 '

. thereby causing the diesel to stall due' to the hiah starting currents . / //

q

.

- required to start both pumps. The licensee modified this design V

• '.

problem with the lube oil permissive contact under Engineering Chang >

'"

" Notice (ECN)'R-1760, which installed a three second delay in' .

';~ lenergiring the contact, even if lube oil pressure is adequate. If

" '

the lube oil is not at the pressure required, the pump will still'not i start. This modification still allows for the manual starting of the pump, but will-not interfere with the sequential loading on the diesel. The inspector reviewed the ECN, and discussed it with the

>. licensee, and did not identify any problems. The change to the pump circuit.should prevent starting the pumps simultaneousl The second item' concerns the possible loading of the swing HPI/MU pump, which can be powered off of either vital bus. The event of { ,

'

i

.

l i

___u___1-_ _2 __ 1

_

, _ _ - - _ --

.

' "'

^ '

-

-

+ .

,y ,

-

,

, .

6- ,

>

.

g e

, concern here was a Loss,of.0ffsite Power { LOOP), then an Safety Features Actuation Signal (SFAS). The first loads that could possibly be manually loaded after;a_ LOOP would be the makeup pum Then a subsequent SFAS would start the other HPI/MU pumps and not

'

trip the make-up pump. The swing pump was not assumed to be a base load. This mode of operation exceeds the nominal diesel generator rating, but not the 2-hour rating (110% of nominal). The licensee elected'to use procedural cautions to prevent the loading of the swing pump onto a bus with a running HPI pump. The inspector reviewed the procedures and discussed the loading with the operators, and did not identify any concern The licensee also elected to solve the third potential problem of loading additional pumps by operating procedures and operator training. The inspector noted cautions in several of the procedure In addition, the inspector discussed loading of the diesels with the operator crew that was in training. The crew was aware of the limits of diesel generator loading. Based on the procedures, and the discussions _ with the licensee, the possible loading of additional pumps does'not seem likel The inspector questioned whether the placement of additional loads on the diesel was being monitored by the licensee's engineering department, so as not to exceed the diesel rating. Based on-discussions with the licensee, the inspector was informed that the

' licensee's design. control procedures should preclude the occurance of a'similar proble Based on the inspectors review, and discussions with the licensee, this LER is close . Part 21 Reports (92701) (0 pen) Part 21 Report 87-20P, "IMO Delaval Inc. - Potential Problem with Oil in DSR Diesel Generator Starting Air Distributor System" This Part 21 report was sent to the NRC in a letter dated August 7, 1987 from IMO Delaval Inc. The vendor informed the NRC that a potential defect exists with the starting air distributor system for the DSR model Standby Diese On July 31, 1987, a' failure to start occurred on the Standby Diesel at the Gulf States, River Bend Station because of an accumulation of oil in the starting air distributor. The starting air distributor.is a vital component, because it delivers starting air to the engine cylinders on a timed. basis. During prelube and _ normal operations, oil can migrate through the existing lube oil system and may accumulate in the start air distributor. The speed of accumulation !

l 1s primarily dependent on component tolerances. The Rancho Seco Standby Diesels manufactured by IMO Delaval are similar to the River Bend Station Diesel Interim corrective action recommended by the vendor was for both distributors to be inspected daily in order for accumulation rates to

_- _ _ _ _ _ __ _

- , - _ _

'

,

, . ,

.7-

.

, be established., The vendor stated that permanent corrective actio required the installation of a permanent drain system in the startinge

,' -air distributo .

1. ~ ,- ? The. inspector walked down the starting air. system to the' distributo < d . The licensee has'not had any problems-with leakage to the ' start air-

! c n distributor from the lube ~ oil system or the air. system-feeding; the . < - , .

y71 '

• ', distributor.. The inspe'ctor did not note any oil-leakage on'the ~sta'rt 'I air distributor .'

' y!.

-

p /

'

. ~

.

The' licensee had not received any permanent drain system from the;E s u SeU. O)f

.

" *

,,:

c '

.:

. '

'

vendor for the starting air. distributor. The licensee initiated a~ -

!

Potential Deviation from Quality (PDQ) rcport (PDQ #2020).to; ,

( *

<m determine why the. permanent modification to the startingsa ir, .4

- '

>W'

, . ,

.A distributor had'not been received from the vendor. This Part 211 ' "

-

r s , '[ J I" report will remain open pending a resolution of.thisLPDQ and the "

.% 'N -installation of the permanent modificatio ' ~ '

-

g. . .

7 (0 pen) Part 21 Report 8'7-22P, " Power Conversion Corp. - Cr'abked- and . ' '

'

Chipped Insulators in Regulating Transformers".

. This Part 21 report was sent to the NRC in a letter dated July, 20,._ I D-r 1987 from the licensee. The licensee informed the-NRC~that a

'

potential defect exists with the bus bar insulators mounted on the

, Power Conversion Products Inc. Regulated ' Dry-Type 30 KVA Transformers, modeluno. RTF480/120-30. Cracks,and chipping were discovered on the bus-bar insulators. The cracks and~ chipping of .the insulators have the potential to ground fault the 120V'AC buse A Non-Conforming Report (NCR) was initiated by plant personnel and'

the disposition of the NCR was that the damage was caused by overtightening of the insulator support bolts during assembl New insulators were obtained from the' manufacturer and' installed'in

~

the transformers. .The manufacturer determined that the maximum torque to be applied to the insulator support bolts is 30 in-lbs, as documented in a letter from the manufacturer dated May 27, 1987. The licensee installed the new insulators to the' correct torqu The licensee's corrective action was to include a note on the installation drawing referencing the correct torque. At.the time of the inspection, this had not been done. This item will remain open pending verification of the correct torque value on the drawing (Rancho Seco CCTS item 881229005). (Closed) Part 21 Report 87-23P, " Syracuse Electronics Time Delay Relays in TransAmerica DeLaval Standby Diesel" This Part 21 report was sent to the NRC in a letter dated October 1, 1986 from the licensee. 'The licensee informed the NRC that a potential defect exists with the time delay relays manufactured by Syracuse Electronics. During pre-operational testing on the diesel, i the licensee noted that two relays could not be calibrated. A flat spot on the potentiometers' mounting holes which was intended to

.

.I 4

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ - . . . . _ - -- - - -- _ _ _J

a ~<

. ,-

'

.; -8;

.

'

restrain" rotation, had worn =away allowing the potentiometers. to'

rotate and short their. contacts.. In addition, a relay was found

"r without any solder on one pointiof its: internal circuit boar Improper calibration of theitime delay relays could' render the TDI diesel engine inoperable due to premature activ'ation of"the shutdown-circuitry.;

3 ,

The licensee ' issued NonconfdrnIingIReport"(NCR)' S1502'0 to address these deficiencies. The111cens'ee 'repaire'd arid replaced the erratic relays .under work request"117005. 'The-licensee modified.the relays

.by adding a lock washer to:several?of the components and replacing-several 'of the relay , ,

Theinspectorins"pected.thecabinetscontaihingtherelayslan'ddid- '

',

not note any' problems.1 .The relays were teste'd by theilicensee'and

'found to have accurate and repeatable settings. 'The' actions taken by the licensee'seem appropriate to close out~this' item.' '

ThisPart21reportisclose$. (Closed) Part 21 Report 87.-24P, "IM0 Delaval Inc. - Standby Diesel Generator Defective Rotor Pole Windings" , -

This Part 21' report was sent to the'NRC in~a letter dated' December 3, 1987 from IMO Delaval Inc., The diesel vendor-informed the NRC that a

' potential defect exists with the generator manufactured by NEI Peebles Electric Products Incorporated through IMO Delaval. On-November 16, 1987, Gulf States, River Bend Station informed'the vendor of a. problem with the wound rotor poles on.the generato The defect on the Diesel Generator rotor windings ~(on pole 14) was that the windings were separated from the shaft pole'and bowed to the stator. This defect was identified by a visual. inspection. The individual wires were found delaminated and overlapped. Electrical tests did not enow any fault. .The potential problem is that further ,

degradation in the generator could lead to 'a short and loss of all emergency AC powe The licensee performed'a visual inspection on the generator. The-licensee did not find any problems with the rotor pole windings or any other problems with the generato This part 21 report is close (Closed) Part 21 Report 88-05P, "IMO Delaval Inc./ California Controls - Defect in Component of DSR or DSRV Standby Diesel Generator" This Part 21 report was sent to the NRC in letters dated. April 29 and May 12, 1987 from IM0 Delaval In IMO Delaval informed the NRC in these letters that a potential defect exists with the pressure sensor manufactured by California Controls Company (Calcon), a sub-vendor to IM0 Delaval. IMO Delaval stated that they would perform source inspections on all safety related components prior to shipment until i

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _

gyn , , .

. .

y , ., .

.

, g y'

'

~ ' ' .

Dyl96. ' a E '

TL- *

.h" ,' } ~~ '

]4 7 # %njl1p #

y * d Qn:.ng : , p;x '

,

~9 Am 4e fYl , - ; _j .; Y ,','< vl_ vL

'

,,

"

'S Ks *

em v ,. , 4 . .

,

'

'theirf reaudit; verified thatathelsub-vendor wasifullyJimplementing a'

~

,~ y',

RJ6 e!  : Quality Assurance Program., IMO Delaval- recomme'ndedias .a, solution.to '

D;$ >

'

-the" problem with these~ pressure? transmitters;the.: drilling-a hole to- '

%f

%

%. relievefexcessEpressure. Thecomponents;arelspecifically.idsntified

"" '4~ ^

,

.

asifollows:? .

y e s

'

m-

-

w, t_ +

g, . .

,

y . , . ~, ~~v . < v ;.

ct L IMO Part NumberL il? " . Description ' i

' ,

'

KR-001-000- .'

' Air 3StartyVdive' kM '

,

3,

'

< 'KR-004-001: " .-r'

'

. Air; Start! Valve, ,

~

• KR-004-002- Airl: Start Valve 1

^ >

4 ,N - Fe573-156,

'

LowPressuretubeOil!Thi c' m

.

,

'

'.'F-573-330- ,

High;Temperaturefdacket Wat'er Tri High Pressure Crankcase.Tript

'

,

-F-573-359 __, , ,

w +,.

. The'NRC,Was furtherIinformed by Washington Nuclear' Project 11(WNP-1)

-

'

,

of an additional similar problem with' the lube-oil trip switch, which

,

was;alsoimanufactured by Calco . - 4" c '

'

I'n'a. memo dated 12/23/88, the licensee stated that they looked at the

,

stock" code numbers 1(IMO Part Numbers) for the sensors listed abov ~The' licensee.did not have any of the-stock on hand for. Air Start Valves or theilow pressure lube. oil trip sensors. The: licensee has 6

'( a ,'

- High Temperature Jacket. Water Trip sensors in stock,Lbut which were s

~

, purchased' subsequent. to the report and shouldJnot have this' defect. .

'

^The licensee had 3"of the High Pressure Crankcase Trip sensors, which:

-

,

'Were, returned to the vendo "

/Siiice,thElicenseedid'nothaveanyo'fthepartsLinquestionwiththe.

,

' '

E

, defect Land based on! inspector discussions with the licensee, this

$ Part 21 report ,is' close . (Closed) Part 21 Report 88-12P, "Stratham/Gould PD3200' Pressure Transmitters Manufactured with a Defect - Production tot G97005U"

+

The(Iicenseeissuedthispart21reporttotheNRCinaletter_ dated'

..

'

August, 8,.1988' documenting a. problem with some Stratham/Gould Pressure Transmitters. Three transmittersLon the licensee's:

l Emergency' Feedwater Initiation and Control (EFIC) system were'

' drifting at a' rateiin' exces's of the manufacturer's claim. These

- . .three transmitters had been returned to the vendor for inspection and

"'

evalu'ation of: the problem. This Part 21. report was inspected previously-and documented in inspection report 50-312/88-23e-The Alicensee had received 32 Transmitters from the suspect production;

/ lot. :At the time of.the previous inspection,'nine transmitters were

.

'

"

lin stock, three had been returned to the vendor, and the other 20' >

were'in use'as follows:

U 6 EFIC Ste'am Generator low range level transmitter h' '8 EFIC Steam Generator wide range level transmitter ~

U

,. 2 Decay Heat cross-tie flow transmitter ,

,

U 4 Reactor Coolant Hot' Leg' level transmitters..

e .

_

'

' '

' -

1. na m._.._ -__ __ .m .

- __ .__ _ .

.

. 10

.

~

'The previous inspection (50-312/88-23) of this.Part 21 report left the following issues to be addresse (1) Review of a documented engineering evaluation on the installed transmitter (2) Review of the licensee's monitoring program for these transmitter Theinspectorreviewedtheengineeringevaluation(PDQ 88-0114, Revision 3) on the transmitters. The inspector was informed that the problems with the transmitters involved a continual drift and a baseline zero shift. The transmitter operates on the principle o measuring the deflection of a thin film strain gage between two diaphragms.- This deflection is measured via-a wire to the transmitter's electronics. The wire goes through the metal barrier, and is brazed to the surrounding metal, providing part of.the-

'

pressure barrier. The fluid was slowly leaking up through the brazed area, causing the drift and the baseline zero shif > f The licensee's evaluation concluded that these problems were due'to 4 the leak past the diaphragm. This type of defect will either-happen- 1

.

. due.to the. brazing having a flaw allowing the fluid to seep past, or ~ '

'

it will not and will hold system pressure. Therefore, the .

transmitter's installed should not have this problem since they are'

not drifting. . 1

'-

,

Based on the discussions with the licensee, and a review of PDQ

, 88-0114, this Part 21 report is close . Followup Items (92701) (0 pen) 88-27-01, " Verification of Compliance to Regulatory Guide 1.97 for Status of Standby Power Instrumentation" This item was opened during the Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.97 team inspection at Rancho Seco. During that inspection, it was noted that the instrumentation for the Status of Standby Power variable had not been explicitly identified. The Status of Standby power instrumentation is the instrumentation that provides the operators

'

indication of the availability of emergency AC, DC, air, etc., power source '

The licensee issued a letter dated December 28, 1988 to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation on RG 1.97 indication. The licensee's specific instruments to monitor emergency AC, DC and pneumatic energy sources are provided in this letter. The indications in the control room are in annunciator window number and off of the plant compute This item will remain open pending a review of the calibration records showing frequency and the last time of calibration, the electrical diagrams, and the seismic and environmental qualification of these instrument _ _ _ _ - _

. _ _ _

. -

.

i

.B . '(0 pen) 88-27-02, " Resolution of Readout Discrepancy for CST Level" This item was opened during the Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.97 team .

inspection at Rancho Seco. During that inspection, it was noted that-the.. readout for the Condensate Storage Tank (CST) was in different units of measurement (Kilogallons and feet)- on the licensee's Safety

,

Parameter Display System (SPDS). One unit of measurement was to provide technical specification verification of level and the other was used for emergency procedure The licensee issued a letter dated December 28, 1988 on RG 1.97-indication. The licensee stated that they were going to modify the readout on the SPDS during the next refueling outage. The procedures would be changed at that time. The design change package has not yet been implemente ,

This item remains ope'n pending a review of the design change package and a date when the procedures would be changed,- tentatively scheduled'to be done next1 outag (Closed) 87-47-01, " Review of Licensee Determination of how to Control E0P Comparison Document" This followup item was open'ed during an Emergency Operating Procedure (E0P) evaluation inspection' conducted in December, 1987. In writing-the E0Ps, the licensee compares E0Ps to the generic B&W Emergency Operating Procedure Technical-Basis Document (TBD), and justifies an deviations from the TBD for Rancho Seco. The comparisen is done by the Comparison Document. The licensee then writes the procedures in accordance with the Plant Specific Writer's Guide. 'The issue in this followup item was whether the Comparison Document should be a controlled document, subject to administrative controls when being revised, since it represents an engineering evaluation of the E0Ps and the basis for deviating from the generic TB The licensee's action on this item was to make the comparison document a controlled document. The Comparison Document was properly used during the last update the the E0Ps. This item is close (Closed) 87-47-03, " Followup of Licensee's Comparison of E0P's to Writers Guide" This followup item was opened during an Emergency Operating Procedure (EOP) evaluation inspection conducted in December, 1987. During that inspection, the inspector reviewed the latest revision to the E0Ps and the E0Ps then in draft fc.7n and compared the format with the plant specific writers guide. The inspector found examples where the E0Ps did not conform to the writers guide. These discrepancies were discussed with licensee personnel, who indicated that they would perform a comparison of the E0Ps to the writers guide. The corrective actions for the examples found and the results of the comparison would be followed up at a later dat <

I

_ _ _ _ -. _ l

n; ?;; s C y .

,

--

,

, , ;

-

_

- - -

.,

,

,,

"

-

'

~

'A'Vs

lk. '

.

i

.

-f';

& ;L , * , s  :"

n j;

,; .& . .m -

, ,. - 12; y Ly ' -

a , .6 , i "

,S,~,.., , .

t i gf;t ,

'

'Th'e?six1 specific = examples (identified by the E0P inspector as

~

,

-

l deviations from.theTwriters guide were corrected by the. licensee.:

.

'

'

- .The licensee'also. perfomed a: review of the' E0 Psi to the.E0P' writers : m

"

A f8.. 'guidef and identified" additional: discrepancies', 'as. noted in a memo- 4 Y

"/  ; dated 2/16/88. The. discrepancies were justified or. fixed, and the:

3 writers guidelitself would be enhanced from the problems identified.

ye .3

,

c 8; .

,

. .

,

. . m . Based ~on; this memo, and on: discussions with lic^ensee personnel on lthe '

- :! ,,E..*  : co'rrective actions taken',1 this item;isiclose ,

. .. .

.

}

'

~ Exit Me'e tingI(30703) '

,

-

'

-

"

? ."

. . . - .

.,

,

L .

~

'On December 30,-1988 . and January 27,11989/an e t meeting was held with

~

!

e - the' licerisee. rep ~resentatives . identified in~ paragraph: 1. - The inspector

-

"

summarized the: inspection scope.and findingsfas described in this repor ,

,

s 1 -

'

.*-

.,

.

~,

.* ,s 4 +

V

, n

,

e

.

, --

/

'

g

,, ~,y , r ,

'

1 "( ,, w. . ,

y .. .

?

,

-

o

.w .

.$

!. i

,

b F

I

?

l I

l'

'

l

,

-' ..