Text

IE Insp Rept 50-312/82-40 on 821103-19.No Noncompliance Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Design Changes & Mods,Licensee Action in Response to IE Bulletins & Circulars & Previous Insp Findings & Independent Insp Effort
	ML20028C885
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	12/28/1982
From:	Johnson P, Morrill P, Thomas Young; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20028C876	List: ML20028C874; ML20028C885;
References
	50-312-82-40, IEB-81-03, IEB-81-3, NUDOCS 8301140265
	Download: ML20028C885 (5)
	v • d • e

_

<

,

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSN

REGION V

Report No. 50-312/82-40

Docket No. 50-312

License No. DPR-54

Safeguards Group

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)

l

Inspection conducted: November 3-5, 9-10, and 18-19, 1982

/2

Y!87

Inspectors:

P. Mor 'll,' Reactor Inspector (November 3-5 only)

Date 61gned

,,

(hQ4,u-

%/w

Date Signed

P. Joh

n, Reactor Inspector

/8

Y

'

Approved by: Tolbert Young, Jr

Chief, e cto Projects

Dat'e Signed

ranch No. 1

Section No. 2, Re otor Pro e ysp

Sunmary:

Inspection between November 3 and 19, 1982 (Report No. 50-312/82-40)

Routine, unannounced inspection of design changes and modifications,

Areas Inspected:

licensee actions in response to IE Bulletins and Circulars and previous inspection

findings, and independent inspection effort. The inspection activities involved

59 inspector-hours by two regionally based inspectors.

Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

b

O!$o$$ 2

PDR

I

l

{

~ {j

'M

N

{

e,

,

-

~+

c

-

'

.

. . _ .

g

-

s .

s

,

g,

(

V

+t

,

'

_

.3 '

f '

' -

'

,l

"

.

,

'(

-

4

DETAILS ^

' >

a

,

-

'

9

t ,<

E!

,

'*

_

l'.

Persons Contacted '

'

f

-

,

.

'

'l

R.- Rodriguez,' Mana'ger of Nuclear Operations

'

r*#R.~ Calombo Technical, Assistant

m

Wh!tney, Engineering-and' Quality Control Supervisor.

'

R. Miller, Chemistry and Radiation Supervisor

.

G.' Coward, Supervisor,. Nuclear Maintenance

1. D. Blachly, Supervisor, Nuclear Operations:

T. Perry, Onsite Quality Assurance Supervisor

s

~* W. Spencer, Assistant Operations Supervisor

.

The' inspectors also talked with;other' licensee personnel, including .

engineers, document control personnel, and quality; assurance engineers ~.

,

Denotes those attending exit interview on November 5,1982.-

Denotes those attending exit interview on November 19, 1982.

.

2.

Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings

,

.(Closed) (80-35-01) MSRC QA Audit Program.. The insp'ector examine.d

' Quality Control Inspection (QCI) No. 2 "SMUD Nuclear Operations Quality -

Assurance Audit Program" and thereby confirmed that the licensee's audit-

program now includes special processes, inspections, preventative

-maintenance, document control,-records, and configuration control.

(Closed) (80-24-01) TA Procedure 19 not in conformance with Technical Specification 6.5.2.E.A.

The inspector examined Quality Assurance

Procedure QAP-19 " System Auditing", Revision 8, dated June 15, 1982. The

inspector verified that this procedure required audits of licensee conformance

to the Technical Specification and License Conditions at least once per year.

-

3.

Design Chanaes and Modificatian_s_

The licensee's design change program was inspected to verify conformance to

the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 Technical Specifications, the Quality

Assurance Program, and related procedures issued by the licensee.

Selected

design change records were examined for required review and approval,

compliance with established procedures, issuance of as-built drawings

and procedure revisions (where appropriate), and evaluation of

post-modification. test ~results. The following design changes and

i

related-documents were examined during the review.

Engineering Change Notice '(ECN) A3438, resupport of RCP lube oil

-

collection system.

,

ECN, A3483, Remote jog control for DHR system valves SFV-25003 and

-

SFV-25004.

,

.

..

'

,

e

'

t

,,

>

J

'

[,

p

m,3 -

-

t:-

.

q

-

,

'

,

.

,

, -

.

-'

. .

~

,

-2-

ECN A3504..Reconfig ration of transmission lines at Rancho Seco.

-

ECN A4016B, Rerouting of auxiliary feedwater supply lines to

-

.new external AFW header.

' Quality Assurance Procedure (QAP) No. 2, Revision 8, Design Review.

-

Quality Control Instruction (QCI) No. 5, Revision 7,1 Design Review

-

and Processing of 50.59 changes.

Procedure ECP 1, Revision 4, Rancho Seco Configuration Control

-

Procedure.

10 CFR 50.59 Review Log.

-

ECN Log.

-

Selected plant drawings.

-

The inspector also examined actions taken by.the licensee in response

to commitments identified in paragraph 2 of IE Inspection Report

No. 81-37. Revision 4 to ECP-1 had been issued, and the backlog of

ECNs had been essentially eliminated.

Procedures had been revised to

provide for issuance of revised (" yellow") plant drawings prior to

placing a modified system into service. These commitments were

considered by the inspector to have been resolved.

Although yellow (temporary) plant drawings were being-issued prior to

placing modified systems into service, a backlog was apparent in getting

these drafted into permanent drawing revisions.

The licensee stated

that drafting personnel were heavily involved in TMI modifications

for the forthcoming refueling outage, and expected that they would catch

up on the drafting backlog after that time.

The inspector also made the following observations:

-

Criteria used by the Engineering and Quality Control Supervisor

in determining whether an ECN requires a 50.59 review should be

defined in pertinent procedures.

(82-40-01)

~ Incomplete closed ~50.59 review files (maintained in the QA vault)

'

-

. ere found in some' instances (copies of ECNs not included, although

w

they were available in the Site Document Control Center).

-

A sumary of the. safety evaluation was not provided for 50.59

,

changes reported in the April and May 1982 monthly reports. The

l

licensee comitted to. provide additional information by

December M,1982, as required by 10 CFR 50.59(b). (82-40-02)

A review of the ECN' log showed the backlog of design changes in progress

to be relatively small. Only a few ECNs had been under review for more

than a year.

l

No violations or deviations were identified.

i

- - - - - -

- - - - .

.

, _ _ _ _ ,

_.

,

.,

,

-

. .

.

_

.

-

_

__

.

_ _

~

_

4

-

,

. , ,

.

T'

,

l .' ~

'_

'

-)

'

.

,

. .

,

. ,

'

.

..

~,

-3-

'

-

,

4' .

IE' Bulletins and Circulars

'

The inspector verified the licensee had= received'all of'the applicable

<

.IE Bulletins and Circulars. An examination of records and discussions

with, licensee representatives verified appropriate action as follows:

'

.

..

,

.

-IE Bulletin 81-03, Flow Blockage of Cooling' Water to Safety System .

. Components by Asiatic Clam and Mussel (Closed). The inspector detennined .

that the licensee had revised surveillance Procedure SP 212.01A, Revision 7,

to require a yearly check of plant water intake-screens for evidence of

clams and muscles. This completes the' licensee's comittments described

.;

.in' inspection reports 50-312/82-22 and 82-27.

-

_

IE Circular 79-05, Moisture Leakage in Stranded Wire Connectors '(Closed).

t

'

-The inspector observed that the licensee had-detennined that this issue

was.not a problem at Rancho Seco as documented in a SMUD memo, Dieterich-

to Colombo, dated July.7, 1980. The. inspector was also informed by

-

licensee representatives that environmental qualification of cables and

-

terminations would be looked at as part of the continuing work to address

IE Bulletin 79-01.

,

j

IE Circular'80-10e Failure to Maintain Environmenta1' Qualification of

5

Equipment (Closed?. .The inspector examined SMUD Memos (Raasch to

Rodriguez and Rodriguez to Raasch, both dated May 5, 1980).as well as

,

SMUD Meeting Minutes on'"79-01B Preventative Maintenance and Qualified

s

'

Life" held on October 29,1982.' Based on these meeting minutes and the

~/*

,

<

-

aforementioned memos the inspector verified that the licensee was

'

"

'

developing a list of safety related components and associated requirements.

.

, ,

'

Licensee representatives stated that this list should be' finished by .

-

,

-

Mid-1983 and would subsequently be used by the plant staff to incorporate-- . .

_

specific requirements for maintenance of environmental qualification into "

-

,

1

'

2-

appropriate maintenance procedures.

7-

<

.

-

.

-

Licensee personnel referred the inspector to Technical Specification. 6._14.1

'

which specifies that Rancho'Seco is required to achieve compliance >with

'

ti

. ,

NUREG-0588 " Interim Staff Position on Environmenal Qualification of '

'

. , -

Safety-Related Electrical Equipment" by June 30, 1982. Licensee personnel

also referenced 10 CFR 50.49 (47FR28363) which suspends.this requirement -

r

i

g

until the final rule on qualification of electrical, equipment. is published.

" ' '

f'

The inspector concluded that the licensee was taking appropriate action

.-

a

-

on IE Circular 80-10.

-

,

o

<

,

% ;. .

IE Circular 8S15, Loss of RCP Cooling and Natural Circulation'Cooldown

,

'

(Closed).

The inspector examined-the licensee's file related to thist

circular and discussed items 4.and 5 of the circular with licensee

'

!-

L

management. The licensee representatives _ stated that they recognize

'

the problem of lack of redundancy in the component cooling water system

L

and explained their plans to improve the reliability of the component

cooling water system. The licensee representatives also discussed the-

means available to monitor reactor vessel head temperature with the

inspector. The inspector concluded that the licensee's personnel were

i

aware of the concerns stated in the circular and were taking appropriate

actions.

F,

.

I

E

Al-

s-~ .. i n

.r

- , , _ . - .

. - .

, * . , _ .

,,-,,,._,,%.,..

..___,-,...,__,.,_m

..._m.,a

-s

. . - , . - - - - - -

ev

t--

,.- - ==

g_

4

,

,.

[ '"

'

.

,

. , ,

<

~

.

y

.

,

l

$

fe

_

s

.N

_

.

J '.

-4-

,.

.-

,

>

-

y

a

,

j

+

y

,

f

.g

.

,

IE Circular'81-05. Self-Aligning Rod End' Bushings for Pipe Supports -

{

~

'

3

s

1

- (Closed). .The inspector examined the licensee's file regarding this-

,; F - -

/

,

g

circular. 'The inspector observed that the SMUD memo dated April l6,1981,.

4 '.

!

- -

,

Raasch to Keilman', requested the mechanical engineering group to detemine

'

,

-

,,

3, ,

if the subject pipe support rod end bushings were used at Rancho Seco. .

,

m

w.

wU

This was followed on' April 9,1981~ with a SMUD memo, Rodriguez' to Raasch, . ; , 4

-

^

'

,

~

r

'

which; requested SMUD Generation Engineeing to get Bechtel to make the:

>

e

,,'s

above determination. On April 20,~ 1981 a SMUD Memo, Raasch to. Rodriguez,;s

,

+

requested a check to see if any relevant, reportable occurances had taken ',,

-

,

place and if so, what action was comitted to the NRC. The ~1nspector

.,

'

discussed'this item with licensee representatives at the site who stated

>

that no'related reportable occurance had occurred and that surveillance

procedure SP201.10A requires snubbers and shock absorbers to be visually

inspected. The inspector verified the licensee's staff's statements by

<

examining procedure SP201.10A (Revision 8) and visually inspecting a

'

,

.*

sample of fifteen sway and/or support truts to verify the construction

of the bushings of these devices at Rancho Seco.

Based on these'examina-

<tions the i_nspector concluded that the licensee was adequately. aware of

the concern addressed in Circular 81-05 and because of the absence of

a discernable prcblem, the licensee's actions were appropriate.

IE Circular 81-12. Inadequate' Periodic' Test Procedure of PWR Protection

- System (Closed). The inspector examined.a SMUD Memo, Linkhart to Columbo,

dated July 30, 1981 which documented the SMUD closure of this concern.~.

The inspector verif.ied the. memo's assertions by examining the licensee's

'

surveillance test procedures for " Reactor Protection System Trips,"-

'

I-108A through D,.and Maintenance Procedure EM175. The inspector

concluded that the licensee's existing procedures adequately test each

trip function.

No violations or. deviations were identified.

6

5.

Exit Interview

The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted-in paragraph 1)

on November 5 and 19,1982. The inspection findings were discussed, as set

forth in paragraphs 2-through 4.

In response to inspector comments, a

management representative stated that additional information regarding

certain completed plant modifications would be provided by December 15,

1982 (paragraph 3).

I,*

1

-

a

~f

.

1

-

4

<

'

,

..

j

,

I

' *

A

ML20028C885

Text

Navigation menu

Search