ML19347C216

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Supplemental IE Insp Rept 50-312/80-15 on 800414-18,21-25 & 0505-08
ML19347C216
Person / Time
Site: Rancho Seco
Issue date: 09/05/1980
From: Stello V
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE)
To: Mattimoe J
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
Shared Package
ML19260G354 List:
References
NUDOCS 8010170045
Download: ML19347C216 (4)


See also: IR 05000312/1980015

Text

_

_ _ _ -

.

<

,'

[!

'

ocg#

,

0g

UNITED STATES

[

g

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

3

y

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

'%

/

SEP 5

1980

-,

Docket No. 50-312

,

Sacramento Municipal Utility District

Attn:

John'J. Mattimoe, Assistant General

Manager and Chief Engineer

P. O. Box 15380

Sacramento, California 95813

Gentlemen:

This is a supplemental report concerning the management inspection conducted

by A. T. Gody, D. G. Hinckley, D. R. Hunter, W. D. Shafer, and J. D. Woessner

of the Performance Appraisal Branch on April 14-18, 21-25, and May 5-8, 1980,

of activities authorized by NRC Operating License No. DPR-54, for the Rancho

Seco Nuclear Generating Facility.

This also refers to the discussion of the

findings held with you and others of your staff on May 8, 1980, at your

corporate office.

The enclosed Inspection Report No. 50-312/80-15 (supplement) identifies the

areas examined during the inspection.

Within these areas, the inspection

consisted of a comprehensive examination of your management controls over

licensed activities which included an examination of procedures and records,

plus interviews with many of your management and non management personnel.

This inspection was one of a series of management appraisal inspections being

conducted by the Performance Appraisal Branch under the Office'of Inspection

and Enforcement.

The results of this inspection will be used to evaluate the

performance of your management control systems on a national perspective.

The

enclosed inspection report does not discuss enforcement findings.

The enforce-

ment findings, including unresolved items, were documented in detail in Report

No. 50-312/80-15.

The enclosed supplement to the orisinal report addresses

observations and the conclusions from this inspection.

Paragraph 2 of the

i

report provides further information regarding the findings and how they will

be utilized.

It was noted that the PAB team believes that the Rancho Seco operating

management personnel appeared to be of high quality.

The primary concern of

the PAB Team was related to the lack of familiarization and implementation of

the management control systems.

The conclusions made by th'e inspection team indicate that seven (7) of the

,

eleven (11) areas inspected were considered to have poor management controls

iri that the management control system did not appear to be fully integrated.

l

I concur with these conclusions.

It appears that the majo problems in the

seven (7) areas with a poor rating are as follows:

Bs010170

j

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

.

.

9

Sacramento Municipal Utility

-2-

SEP 5

1980

District,

Committee Activities

The major problem identified in this area was the inadequacy of the written

. ,

program.

There were requirements identified in the Technical Specifications

'

that were not addressed in the Committee Charters.

There were also a number of instances where guidance and training were not

provided by management and as a result instances occurred where the committees

4

did not review all necessary information to provide their safety overview

"

,

1

function.

The problems identified indicate that the Committees are not being effectively

used by manegement.

,

Quality Assurance Audits

There were many indications that the QA audit program was not functioning

,8

adequately.

The licensee failed to audit required areas, did not require

corrective action on audit findings, and closed audits with open items left

"

unresolved and not tracked.

Audit report distribution to management appeared adequate; however, there were

no records to show that management responded to the findings.

Examples of

this lack of response were indicated whan QA Audits reported annually that the

i

non-licensed training program (AP700) had not been implemented.

Another example of questionable management response was indicated in the NCR

program.

QA wrote numerous NCRs identifying program deficiencies with correc-

tive action not taken within a reasonable time.

>

'

The inspection indicated a need for the licensee to adequately define the QA

audit program and to act in a responsive manner when program deficiencies are

identified.

Design Changes and Modifications

The Design Change and Modification program as implemented in the field does

4-

not provide systematic assurance that modifications on safety related systems

are being properly reviewed for negative impact on safety.

Maintenance

.

The program is not sufficiently formal with regard to procedures, training,

,

inspection, and management overview.

In addition, sufficient provisions have

i

not been made to ensure that maintenance activities do not result in unauthor-

6

ized system changes which could result in system degradation.

'

s

-

1

8

._

_

, , , _

__

_

_ - - _ .

O

O

Sacramento Municipal Utility

-3-

SEP 5

1980

District.

Corrective Action System

A strong corrective action system is an important indicator of a good manage-

ment control system.

Your program provided a means for getting problems to

management, but management action to respond to the problem and ensure correc-

tion is not timely.

,

Non-Licensed Training

Management failed to provide adequate overview to ensure the implementation of

the non-licensed training program.

Management of Fire Prevention / Protection

While some refinement of the licensee's program appears necessary, the major

concern identified involves the training and retraining of the Fire Bridage.

Corporate management did not have an overview function in this area.

The lack

of overview appears to be the prime reason that Fire Brigade training was not

,

adequately implemented, that personnel were assigned to the brigade without

pretraining, and that the brigade members themselves thought the trair.ing that

did exist was ineffective.

As a result of these conclusions you are requested to inform this office

within thirty (30) days of receirt of this report the actions you have taken

or plan to take to improve the mangement controls in the seven areas identi-

fied as poor.

In accordance with Section 2.790(d) of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2,

Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, your facility security procedures are

exempt from disclosure; therefore, the pertinent section of the inspection

report, Appendix

'A', will not be placed in the Public Document Room and will

receive limited distribution.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice", Part 2,

1

Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed

inspection report W il be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.

If this

report contains any information that you or your contractor believes to be

proprietary, it is necessary that you make a written application within twenty

(20) days to this office to withhold such information from public disclosure.

Any such application must include a full statement of the reasons for which it

is claimed that the information is proprietary, and should be prepared so that

,

'

proprietary information identified in the application is contained in a

separate part of the document.

If we do not hear from you in this regard

within the specified period, the report will be placed in the Public Document

t

Room.

.

e

. _ _ _ -

.-

_

..

.

.

- - - _ - _ _ _

o

o

,

,

.

.

Sacramento Municipal Utility

-4-

SEP 5

1980

~

District

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, we will be glad to

discuss them with you.

,

Sincerely,

1

i

~- - ,~, ,

a

Victor St

, Jr[d

l, .

Director

'

Office of nspection

and Enforcement

.

Enclosure:

"

IE Inspection Report

No. 50-312/80-15

(Supplement)

i

,

'g.

.i

i

5

.

,

,- * ..

--

, , . . - , -

m

e

- -