ML20244B105

Forwards Maint Team Insp Rept 50-312/89-01 on 890123-0217 & Forwards Notice of Violation.Maint Process for Plant Improved Since Dec 1985 Shutdown & Shows Continuing Dedication of Resources to Improve Program

ML20244B105
Person / Time
Site:	Rancho Seco
Issue date:	03/27/1989
From:	Martin J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:	Firlit J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
Shared Package
ML20244B108	List: ML20244B105 ML20244B114 ML20244B116
References
NUDOCS 8904190009
Download: ML20244B105 (4)

See also: IR 05000312/1989001

Text

m.

, - yg* 1 p Mtv

.

~[f-

' 8 ~ O. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -

1  : ,E

g

REGION V

1450 MARIA LANE, SUITE 210

. WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNI A 94596

0,%*****,d

MAR 2 71989

Docket No. 50-312.

LSacramento Municipal Utility District ,

~

P. O. Box 15830'

Sacramento, California 95813-

~ Attention:- Mr'. ' Joseph F. Firlit

Chief Executive Officer, Nuclear

Gentlemen:

. Subject: NRC Inspection of Rancho Seco

This' refers to the maintenance team inspection conducted by Mr. A. D. Toth

and other members of our staff during January 23 through February 17, 1989. l

This inspection examined your activities as authorized by NRC License No.

.DPR-54. Discussions of our findings were held with you and other members of

your staff at the conclusion of the inspection'.

Areas examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed

inspection report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective

' examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with

personnel and observations:by the inspectors.

Inspection Overview

The purpose of this inspection was to determine the effectiveness of the

' total integrated maintenance process at Rancho Seco, to assure that all

components, systems, and structures of the facility are adequately maintained so

that they are available to pe,' form their intended functions. A primary focus

of the inspection was an assessment of the maintenance program as it related

to the January 31, 1989 Auxiliary _Feedwater System turbine overspeed event,

and your then-ongoing investigation activities to determine the root causes

of the' event.

Specific inspection emphasis was focused on the following objectives:

1.- Assess the effectiveness of the maintenance program in avoiding 1

challenges to safety systems from transients' initiated or made more

severe by equipment failures due to maintenance weaknesses.

2. Assess the effectiveness of quality verification organizations in

contributing to the identification, solution, and prevention of safety

significant technical problems and deficiencies in plant systems and

operations.

3. Assess the. effectiveness of problem identification and resolution

processes, including awareness and actions regarding industry

initiatives in equipment performance monitoring and preventive

maintenance.

41%h h $)

0

l __. I-. <

__ -

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

'

, ,

. N 2

.

l 4. Assess the status of corrective actions for self-assessment efforts in

the Maintenance area.

Overall Conclusions

The maintenance process for Rancho Seco has been improved since the December

1985 shutdown and shows a continuing dedication of resources to further

improve the program and its implementation. Substantial progress has been

made in the reduction of backlogs, and in addressing prior troublesome

maintenance issues, such as permanent. repairs of leaks in piping systems.

The team consensus was that the maintenance program at Rancho Seco is

adequately addressed and implementation is in place, but the program could be

strengthened, as discussed below. The team noted areas where you have been

proactive in establishing improvements in the maintenance program.

Your current maintenance self-assessment efforts appear both warranted and

productive in identifying additional needed program improvements. Continued

management emphasis is particularly needed to improve communications between,

and the involvement of, various organizational units when addressing

technical issues, and to improve attention to detail to avoid oversights and

omissions in technical work.

Programmatic Concerns Highlighted by this Inspection

As summarized below and discusseo in aetail in the attacnea report, the

inspection identified several findings associated with the systems inspected.

However, underlying each of the findings is one or more of the following

basic concerns:

1. Inadequate attention to detail in engineering analyses, generation of

work instructions, control of documents, ano consideration of industry

experience and initiatives.

2. Absence of involvement of some organizational units in the review and

performance of technical work, especially post-maintenance testing.

3. Weakness in communications between some organizational units, in the

review and performance of technical work.

Based on the results of this inspection, it appears that certain of your

activities were not conducted in full compliance with NRC requirements, as

set forth in the Notice of Violation enclosed herewith as Appenoix A. Your

response to this notice is to be submitteo in accordance witn the provisions

of 10 CFR 2.201, as stated in the Notice of Violation.

We would also appreciate your written comments on the programmatic concerns

identified above.

Cunpletion of our review of your activities relative to the January 31, 1989

overspeed event is pending. Our further actions relative to the event, if

any, will be addressed in future correspondence.

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

-_-_ _

'.

, .$

.6

I'

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosures

will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room. ,

.

The responses directed by this letter and the attached Notice are not subject

to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as

required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.

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

discuss them with you.-

Sin rely,

$$tfCfiff

. B. Martin

Regional Administrator

Enclosures:

1. Appendix A (Notice of Violation)

2. Inspection Report No. 50-312/89-01

cc w/ enclosures:

J. Vinquist, SMUD

S. L. Crunk, SMUD

-State of California

1

1

_ . - . _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _

'

V; .g ' _ ,. ,

,,

ly ca

.5:

v

_

,

_ MAR 2 71989

pp , bec w/ enclosures: ,

Project. Inspector! '

L Resident Inspector. ,

R. Nease. NRR-

G. Cook,1RV.. .

<

-

'B. Faulkenberry, R.V-

J.. Martin, RV

,

' docket file J

h iJ.-Roe,NRR/DLPQ:

DRS/RI- '

.

DRS/RIIE

DRS/RIII '

u DRS/RIV -

c A.:Toth, RV.

C..Ramsey, RV-

.W. Wagner, RV .

,

.C._Caldwell, RV

< C. Hooker;.RV ,

R.:Correia NRR/LHFB

G. Kalman, NRR/PD5-

D., Baxter, LINEL/EG&G '

bec w/o erclosure 2:

'J. Zollicoffer

'

=M.; Smith: A

..RE ION V/ dot

A..;D.~Toth

5

A'Richards

'

.

F ' Miller

(

D. F./ Kirsch A '. - hnson p1

V3/23/89p.~ S.4/89

3/ 89 3/pt/89 '3

.

/89

3/a7/19

.

EST/ COPY REQUEST COPY REQUEST Y REQUEST COPY

. .f((ES / :l NO oIYES JEQ)/ JEST NO C0PY-

YES / N0' 'YES / N0 'I YES -/ NO

- F A.-Chaff -(z T. ,W ting U

R t

.

< << 3/g /,89 T ; , , .

,

.<

/89'a

.

' '

REQUEST COPY: .REQUESToCOPY-

<

-

'

fYES4 '/% . ' - YESi: 1/. ' NO 4

t

' 'i

M .TO PDR

,

'

< '

i.

/ NO I-

t .

!

N j

'

, >

I

l

,

3#

{

k

- --

'

._N__'^..l-.-

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