ML20055E301
| ML20055E301 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre, Rancho Seco  |
| Issue date: | 02/03/1988 |
| From: | Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Murley T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055C206 | List:
|
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9007110270 | |
| Download: ML20055E301 (5) | |
Text
2%
- 1 m
- [
MEMORANDUM FOR:' T2 E; Murley, Director '.
Office of Nuclear Reactor. Regulation
.FROM:
J. B. Martin, Regional Administrator
SUBJECT:
RANCHO SECO CRITICAL ITEMS REPORT FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 12, 1988-JANUARY 29, 1988 4
,1 Enclosed is; the latest critical items' report for Rancho Seco. Some progress on existing issues was apparent in this period.
By_ separate'
~
memorandum an outline of the power ascension inspection program has been:
prepared and-is being sent under separate cover. -
1
.1 a
J. B. Martin, H
i Regional. Administrator-
Enclosure:
- 1. Status Report on Rancho Seco 1
'cc w/ Enclosure
[
J. M. Taylor, DEDO F. Miraglia L. Shao D. Crutchfield.
J..Sniezek J
'bec w/ Enclosure-
.G. Holahan
. J. Partlow-Region V Rancho Seco Project _ Staff G. Knighton G. Kalman R. Bevan I
m
/
LMi ler:jb RZim an DKir h 02/ /88 02/l/88 02/p88 02/7f88 ST COPY,1-EST COPY,
UEST COPY,
REQUEST COPY I
ES / NO V
YE
/ N0 YE
/ NO
. YES / N0 U
U
,r
/
4 f n y w a * *,g u
<,002110270 9006 er-on c' m'wn
3 1
q"w
[ f.
+
M'
~
ENCLOSURE RANCHO SECO STATUS REPORT FOR THE PERIOD JANUARY 12-JANUARY 29.-1988
'1.0' New Critical items Requiring Attention None 2.0' Critical Items Previously Discussed'and Still Open AugmentedPost-RestartInspectionofRanchoSeco(SecondMentionofthisItem)
Planning for enhanced. inspection coverage at Rancho Seco during the power ascension: test program continued. The first draft plan provides for-periods of enhanced coverage for two to three weeks commencing shor_tly before initial criticality, and for additional one week increments at each-
' major change in power level plateaus (40, 60,.75, and 92 % power). A team leader for the entire effort.(J. Crews) and some of the team members:have been identified. The scope and duration of the inspection, and commitments for team members remain to be finalized. Initial discussions:with NRR and.
the EDO offices have been made to solicit: suggestions and. resources for-this effort, Action:- Region V, to complete the inspection planning for this coverage.
NRR' and DE00R0 to assist in providing NRR and regional inspectors resources as discussed.
InadequateOperationalPreparation(FifthMentionofthis' Item)
The pressurizer h' eater event, the diesel generator motoring event, and
- observations by the Operational. Readiness Review team inspection all-indicate that the long' duration of the outage has necessitated a period of refamiliarization for the operators with fundamental safe operating; practices. SMUD. management has recognized this weakness'and taken~ measures as late as December to guard against future incidents.
' The NRC must remain skeptical that the fundamental operating princioles for 1 safe operation' are adequately instilled at Rancho Seco. Continued close
' monitoring of all testing is essential to. ensure the _ latest changes are.
- effective.
" Action: Region V, to observe SMUD's control of testing and operations
. closely in the next few weeks. NRR, to complete the Operational Safety-Team Inspection when the licensee is more ready to restart.
Control Room HVAC Review (Eighth Mention of this Item)
A team inspection to evaluate the design and testing of this system was conducted in November, 1997.
The results were inconclusive because the system was not ready for inspection. A tentative date for reinspection of 1
,y
[.,
/o g
. February 4 ~ and-5,- 1988 has~ been selected, contingent on the operability'of.
- the system..
Action: NRR,'to conduct an inspection prior to plant heatup, _with Region V-
- participation, when the system is declared to be operable.
Material Control' and Procurement Practices (Sixth Mention of this Item)
A procurement inspection was conducted January 4-14, 1988. This inspection was organized because inspections have indicated potentially significant problems exist-in this area. The team identified some weaknesses in SMUD's programs for identifying whether or not an identical replacement part had been procured, the so-called "like-for-like" issue.
. Several examples of improper replacement of safety related components with parts which were superficially identical.. but were in fact different in certain critical respects _were identified. This and other weaknesses identified by the team are discussed in a letter from NRR to the: licensee.
SMUD is-. expected to submit its corrective action plan in _ response to the inspection findings by February 1.
The= licensee's corrective action plan will be evaluated by NRR and Region V.
in the next two weeks. A determination of whether or not the licensee's short term procurement corrective actions for restart are adequate will be made at that time.
- ACTION: Region V and NRR, to assess whether the licensee's corrective
~ action program in this m a is' adequate to permit restart.
Radiological-Protection (Sixth Mention of this Item)
SMUD has submitted a significant revision of the radiological effluent technical specifications and related documents-(0DCM, System Evaluation).
After much discussion, the final revision was submitted January 13, 1988, and is being reviewed'by NRR.
On December 23,.1987, Region V issued a 10CFR 50.54f letter to-SMUD requesting SMUD to review their position regarding the management perscnnel who may have _been involved in the liquid. effluent issue who remain.in' management positions at'SMUD. SMUD responded in a letter dated January 25,
- 1988..
The SMUD response indicated a clear understanding of the factors which lead to liquid effluent releases becoming an issue.
SMUD reported that those personnel.previously involved with this issue are either no longer employed at Rancho Seco or will be reassigned, prior to restart, to positions in which they have no line management responsibilities.
Action: NRR. to complete its review of the RETS and related document submittals discussed above.
1
,,m__
mm__
__-m-. - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ ' - - - - - ' - - - - - - - - - - - - " - - - - - - - - - " - - " ' - - - - - - ^ ~ - - - - ' " - - ^ ' - - - ~ ~ - - ' ' ^ ~ ~ - - -
I >
t
.,,;. i.;
.n G
y t
v i +
InspectionOpenItems-Resolution'(SixthMentionofth'isitem)_
F Considerable progress has been made in this period in resolving a relatively large number of inspection open items. As of January 27, 1988,'-
f 118 items remain open. Prior to a restart recommendation, it is planned
)
to~ reduced the list to approximately 80 items.
Each of.the items remaining
,on the-list has been reviewed once, and will be reviewed again by a Region V board to ensure they are appropriate to remain open until post-restart.
SMUD has provided a revised schedule for resolution or deferral of.
l inspection open items.' Region V continues to review these dispositions as they are provided.
Action:: Region V, to resolve all significant inspection open items prior to plant restart.
..j L
Technical Specification Improvement Program (Sixth Mention of this Item) -
[
No Change in Status l
This item, concerning the issuance and implementation of technical
-specification : improvements has been identified by SMUD (Amendment 164) and by the staff (SER Item 4.9). This item rema_ ins open pending issuance of the:
amendment, and verification that.SMUD-has implemented it.-
q Action: NRR, to' issue the amendment. Region V, to verify that the procedural changes made.by SMUD implement ~the technical specification.
l TestingProgram(EighthMentionofthisItem)-
~
k
^0n. September 10, 1987, SMUD: submitted.the first detailed description of its~
restart test program. Region V completed and documented-its review of the:
j program in Inspection Report'87-30. Two: omissions in the: program were
. identified, and were corrected by:.SMUD.in this. period.' This review will be.
i documented in Inspection Report 87-44. Written confinnation' that NRR'has.
i L
no additional comments has been received from the NRR contractor.and is ;
L expected to be forwarded from NRR to Region V.
i-Remote. shutdown panel testing has recently'been added to the required test'-
program by-NRR following the Operational Readiness Team Inspection.'The scope and' extent of the. testing to be required is under review by NRR. SMUD has submitted a proposal to perform this testing prior to restart, 3
g t
L Action: NRR, to complete review of the SMUD submittal on remote shutdown
[
panel testing. Region V to provide comments on the same submittal.-
3.0 Critical Items Closed in this Perio,d None L
L u
m
-i l.j
~
])
o -
j 1-4.0 Plant' Status The reactor' has'been shutdown and cooled own 'since December 26, 1985. The 1
- licensee expects.to restart in early March, 1988.
As.of 8:00 A. M. on February 1, 1988, the plant was maintained lat approximately 100 degrees' Fahrenheit, 180 psig, with a pressurizer bubble.
The_ decay heat system was-providing reactor coolant system flow and heat
- removal, i
-i L
The major work in this period was the observation of diesel engine
'l structural modifications and testing.
L-5.0 Current Inspect %n Status l
Current inspection: items include review of the loss of offsite' power testing preparations, diesel vibration testing, and closure of inspection:
open items.
6.0 NRC Staff Status During the Period
- )
Three NRC resident inspectors, one: project inspector, and one section-chief monitored Rancho Seco activities exclusively-during this repor.t period. Two contractors are:also-assisting the augmented staff with test review and-.
j follow-up on' inspection ~open issues until mid February, t
l'
\\
r
.j s
.$ g 1
t
)
N-I >$ [
I
.d;
- i l
Y
[5 U
h
. m
- --