ML20040C010
| ML20040C010 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1979 |
| From: | Fortuna R, Foster L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML13319A635 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-81-313 NUDOCS 8201270164 | |
| Download: ML20040C010 (5) | |
Text
--
o > f;,
b.I E
INQUIRY INTO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA j??
EDISON'S SAN ONOFRE UNIT 1 STEAM GENERATOR SUPPORT PLATE CRACKING
~
DOCKET NO.:
50-206 i,
JUNE 1979 OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION pgipfo 64 810925 UDELL81-313 PDR
(
[
- =
INQUIRY INTO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON'S SAN ON0FRE UNIT 1 STEAM GENERATOR SUPPORT PLATE CRACKIhd PREDICATION AND SCOPE 9"
In a memorandum from E. G. Case, Acting Director, NRR, to E. Volgenau, Director, IE, dated April 5,1978 (Attachment 1) an inquiry was requested to determine if safety information regarding support plate cracking pre-
~~"
viously identified in the San Onofre steam generators had been withheld from the regulatory staff.
(The photographs in question are contained
...... =
in Attachment 1.)
{~'
?
The initial inquiry included the examination of de. aments and interviews
- .3 with personnel within and outside NRC.
This initial inquiry was per-L.
formed between April 12 and July 19, 1978, at XF.C Headquarters, the p3.:.
San Onofre site, corporate offices of EDS Nuclear, Incorporated, San Francisco, California, and Westinghouse (W) Nuclear Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, p:=::.
Subsequently, IE determined to extend the scope of this ing'uiry to
.I s5 examine all photographs (including negatives) taken during the 1976 and 1977 steam generator inspections by Southern California Edison (SCE) and h[ to compare the photographs taken to those submitted to NRR during both outages.
In conjunction with the examination of photographs, personnel associated r
with the inspections, including photographers, were interviewed at h[
Research Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and the SCE Corporate Office in Rosemead, California, o,n March 12 and 14, 1979.
Sunmary of Findings,
~==
. :55 The results of the interviews with personnel asscciated with the San Onofre
+:s steam generators (Attachment 2) did not conclusively establish that the 1976 W photographs, depicting the cracks in the flow slots of the lower
.=u3::
support plates, were or we're not shown at the January 1977 meeting with pigE NRR.
Some licensee and W personnel stated that photographs were shown p=p-and that cracks in the fTow slots were discussed; but, could not inde-f;.;
pendently support their statements that the photographs shown were the FF-1976 photographs in question. No documentation could be found to con-F firm that the 1976 photographs were shown at the January 1977 meeting with NRR.
However, one NRR staff member indicated that he had no reason to believe that SCE would purposefully withhold information, even though it was not clear to him that the specific photographs were shown.
.=3 Examination of approximately 196 photographs (plus negatives) and results of supplemental interviews indicate that:
(a) the licensee submitted in p+' -
=
e 9
~ - -,,..
=
2 its January 30, 1977 report to NRR a clear and representative sample of all photographs (based on photographic techniques available at that
~
.=
time) depicting the condition of the upper support plates and short g
bend radius tubes;_(b) the licensee did not submit photographs of the lower support plates taken by Mobile Inspection Service, Incorporated (MIS) or W in 1976 which depicted flow slot deformation and cracking; (c) tt.e 1Tcensee did not submit the lower support plate photographs in their January 30, 1977 report to NRR because the licensee belicved that it was not part of the work scope agreed to by NRR (although voluntarily analyzed in the text of its submittal and also covered by E's, VEPC0's, U?l's, and SCE's general inspection program for E steam generators without photographs); (d) the photographs shown to NRR in March 1978 (which were taken by W in 1976 and 1977) were a representa-tive sample of all those taken; Te) K received and reviewed a copy of the January 30, 1977 report prior to its submission to NRR; (f) E did
=:
not include..a set of the 1976 E lower support plate photographs in the January 30, 1977 SCE repo-t prior to submittal to NRR; (g) E did not
=
consider the flow slot deformation and cracking in the lower support plates as depicted in its 1976 photographs an unresolved safety item
=
since it had been previously analyzed for NRR by E for Sarry and Turkey Point steam generators (which were a part of a general E, );
VEPCO, FP&L, and SCE inspection program for steam generator tubes (h) y considered the flow slnt deformation ano cracking at Surry and Turkey Point more significant than at San Onofre; and (i) all pho.to-graphs and negatives examined appeared not to be altered.
. Documentation (Attachment'3) of meetings and correspondence between NRR and tho licensee retarding E steam generator tube support plate cracking phenomenon contained no statements that specifically made
=
reference to cracks in the San Onofre steam generator support plate l
j flow slots; however, flow slot cracks were addressed in documents concerning Surry and Turkey Point steam generators.
Conclusions An analysis of the documents in Attachment 3, the interviews in
--, and the photographs examined during the extended inquiry (March 1979) leads to the conclusion that SCE did not 7:=
intentionally withhold safety infortnation from the regulatory T._
staff.
l The interviews with NRR personnel and the examination of documents l
did not indicate that NRR had asked the licensee if the San Onofre steam generators had experienced flow slot cracking similar to that which had occurred in the Surry and Turkey Point steam generators.
I l
l
3 It is recommended that this inquiry be closed.
/
/
l (MvL t
R.' h. Fo~rtuns
' b. --
~
L. E. Foster Attativwnts:
As stated 9
_ar.-.-
A-s 14 a
u s
-,,,m-O 9
0 I...
.a m
e O
G e<
es p
i u r.:
1 I
l 72.'
i L
-- -...-~
.