IR 05000280/1986032
| ML18149A462 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 12/11/1986 |
| From: | Blumberg N, Conlon T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18149A461 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-86-32, 50-281-86-32, NUDOCS 8612220382 | |
| Download: ML18149A462 (12) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 Marietta Street Atlanta, Georgia 30323 Report No /86-32 and 50-281/86-32 Docket No and 50-281 Licensee:
Virginia Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Surry, VA Inspection Conducted:
October 20-24, 1986 Inspector:
License No DPR-32 and 37 Approved by:d~.~
T.E. Conl6n, Chief, Plant Systems Section Division of Reactor Safety, Region 2 Inspection Summary:
Scope:
Routine, unannounced inspection of electrical and instrument maintenance activities, maintenance program, and repetitive maintenance and failure trending analysi Results: One unresolved item -waf;l_=-identifie,.---===~~-------~
8612220382 861216 PDR ADOCK 05000280 G
- Persons Contacted Licensee Employees DETAILS S. Anderson, Engineering Technician E. Brennen, Supervisor, Mechanical Maintenance
- W. Craft, Licensing Coordinator E. Ferreira, Assistant Instrument Supervisor
- W. Grady, Supervisor Quality
- E. Grecheck, Superintendent of Technical Services
- M. Haduck, Electrical Supervisor H. Kibler, Supervisor, Planning and Support Services L. Lobo, Senior Engineer
- J. Logan, Supervisor, Engineering H. Mtller, Assistant Station Manager (Nuclear Support & Licensing)
- J. Patrick, Superintendent, Maintenance W. Patterson, Human Performance and Evaluation System J. Roberts, Daily Maintenance Planner
- R. Saunders, Station Manager R. Thornsberry, Daily Planning Supervisor U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- W. Holland, Senior Resident Inspector
- Attended Exit Interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on October 24, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the license The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters Open* items identified in previous NRC inspections were discussed with licensee representatives; however, there was not sufficient information available to close the items during this inspectio *
- Unresolved Items An unresolved item is a matter about which more information is required to determine whether it is acceptable or may involve a violation or deviatio One unresolved item was identified during this inspection which concerned maintenance program procedures issued by a memorandum and is discussed further in paragraph 5.2.1. Similar programs are established as Maintenance Department administrative procedure In addition, the predictive maintenance program is not incorporated in the Surry Station administrative procedure for preventive and predictive maintenanc Other items are discussed in the report concerning the effectiveness of maintenance failure trending and analysi The program in place appears to be only partially effective; however, inspection results did not indicate sufficient inadequacy to be in non-compliance with ANSI N 18.7 *
.Inspector concerns were addressed to the license.
Maintenance Programs 5.1 Scope The inspector reviewed the licensee I s corrective and preventive maintenance program for conformance to regulatory requirements, industry guides and standards, and the Technical Specification The inspector also examined trending and information review program Emphasis on this review was placed on electrical and instrument maintenance although some mechanical maintenance activities were also reviewe In addition, certain plant engineering activities were reviewed as they related to plant maintenanc Review of electrical maintenance, instrument and control (I&C) maintenance practices, planning and scheduling, and plant engineering interfaces was conducte Program procedures and documents which were reviewed are listed in Attachment 1 to this repor The maintenance program
. was reviewed for the following attributes:
All maintenance is controlled by a work order system; There is appropriate planning and scheduling of maintenance activities; Procedures are used for corrective and preventive maintenance activities; There is QA overview of safety related maintenance; A program has been established and implemented for tracking and trending repetitive maintenance actions to determine root cause;
Systems have been established to evaluate problems identified at other facilities and described by NRC IE Information Notices and other external reports to determine impact on maintenance activities; and, Station commitment tracking systems effectively assure that formal commitments by the maintenance or I&C groups are accomplishe.2 Findings 5.2.1 Maintenance Program The inspector held discussions with the electrical maintenance supervisor and planning and scheduling personne In addition, a sampling of maintenance work orders were reviewe Plant deficiencies are identified by a work request ta The work request information is placed in a computer system from which a work order is generate The planner is responsible for making up the completed work package for the shop foreman which includes the work order, radiation work permit (if required),
procedure, and material.
No violations were observed and the system appeared to be working effectivel The inspector discussed several instances of repetitive failures at Surry with the Maintenance Department supervisor, concerning mechanisms by which repetitive maintenance problems could be identified, tracked, and root causes determine The Electrical Maintenance Supervisor showed the inspector a memorandum issued February 12, 1986 which established the following special maintenance programs:
(1)
Systematic maintenance action recovery program, (2)
Weekly walkdown, (3)
Station upgrade program for piping and valves, (4)
Repetitive maintenance program, and (5)
Five year planned corrective maintenance program (predictive maintenance).
The electrical maintenance tracking list included nine repetitive problem areas currently being tracked. Although this system was in use, its currency was not clea Dates, that
problem areas were identified, were not give Nor was it clear as to how problems were identified or how frequently maintenance activities were reviewed to identify new areas. There had been a change to the February *12, 1986 memorandum changing the program slightl Neither the electrical or mechanical supervisors were using this chang The inspector noted that the memorandum was, in effect, a procedure which established additional maintenance program Section 5.1.1 of the program discusses a vibration analysis program for predictive maintenance which is already in effec An oil analysis program has also been established but has not been procedural i ze Si nee SUADM-M-30, 11 Planned Maintenance System Manual", identifies predictive maintenance as a 11later
activity, the currently active program would be appropriate to include in this procedure and/or in MDAP 1s as appropriat The licensee concurred with the inspector's concern and stated that they would incorporate these programs into appropriate procedure This item is unresolved pending this licensee action (50-280/86-32-01}, 50-281/86-32-01).
In addition, the licensee agreed to review the effectiveness of the trending program and its relationship to SUADM-LR-07, 11Failure Trending and Analysis of Safety Related Equipment
which is controlled by Plant Engineering staff. This program is discussed in a subsequent findin.2.2 Maintenance Trending Plant engineering has established a procedure SUADM-LR-07,
"Failure Analysis of Safety Related Equipment
- The intent of this procedure is to provide a mechanism by which component failures and corrective actions can be evaluated; adverse trends identified; and actions taken to correct repetitive problems and determine their root caus This is the licensee I s formal system for such trending (as opposed to the informal system established by maintenance discussed earlier) which generates a quarterly management repor The inspector reviewed the most recent quarterly report issued October 14, 198 Although the report listed and categorized maintenance activities, it did not appear to provide a useful trending analysis of repetitive problems or their root causes~
Discussions with the managers in both the Maintenance and I&C Departments indicated that, although the reports were read, they were not perceived as providing useful information for trendin The Maintenance Department's establishment of its own repetitive maintenance program is indicative of the lack of usefulness of component failure repor *
SUADM-LR-07 requires that the failure mechanism (the 11why
) be annotated on the completed work orde Very often these entries are marked as not applicabl Unless this information is properly entered on the work order, the Component Failure Report's effectiveness is reduce The results of this inspection were inconclusive as to the licensee's ability to meet ANSI N 18.7 -
1976 criteria concerning the evaluation of repetitive malfunctions. Although programs are in place, they appear to be only partially effectiv The inspector identified the following areas to plant management which may improve the failure trending and analysis program:
Ensure failure mechanism and modes are properly entered on the work orde Coordinate maintenance and engineering trending effort Determine whether or not the two current systems work togethe Improve the quarterly component failure report to make it a more useful documen The licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments; however, no specific commitments were made concerning the trending progra.2.3 IE Information Notices The inspector selected a sampling of 1985 and 1986 Information Notices which appeared to be applicable to Surry Station and which specifically may have to be resolved by the Maintenance or Technical Services Departments (which contains I&C) The Information Notices selected are listed in Attachment 2 to this repor Each Notice had been pl aced on the 1 i censee' s commitment tracking system (CTS) and is then reviewed for applicability to Surry Statio A 11Station Commitment Assignment/Response Form
(SCARF) is issued to the applicable plant section(s) for evaluatio If action is required by a specific section a commitment is made on the SCAR This commitment is reviewed by the Site Nuclear Safety Operations Committee for adequacy and
<trao!<edbY the CT SCARF's are usually held open until all work required by the commitment is complete Overdue commitments are brought to management attention.
- The inspector reviewed those SCARF I s sent to Maintenance or Technical Services for evaluation It appeared that all evaluations were properly made or resolve There were still numerous open commitments for recent IEIN 1s; however, they were being appropriately tracked by the CT The CTS appears to be working wel There was sufficient management attention to assure that the commitment is not overlooke In order to integrate and evaluate various sources of infor-mation, a procedure - SUADM-LR-03, 110perating Experience Review (OER)
11 had been establishe The procedure was developed to provide the necessary guidance for the screening, evaluation and dissemination of operating experience occurring in the nuclear industry and to define station and corporate interface The procedure states that the safety engineering staff is responsible for the screening, evaluation, and dissemination of the f o 11 owing; External SER 1s, External O&MR I s, NRC I&E Information Notices, Virginia Power Human Performance Evaluation System (HPES)
reports, Virginia Power Equipment Failure Summary Report A special OER screening form had been establishe It appears that this procedure was intended to provide a centralized screening of problems and safety concerns both internal and external to the statio Commitments made as a result of this screening were to be pl aced on the CT Based on the inspector 1s discussion with engineering personnel and review of screening records, this system also appears to be ineffective in its inten Only reviews of SER 1s and a few Virginia Power, North Anna Station, LER 1s were being accomplished per this procedur Personnel interviewed did not know whether LER 1 s included both Surry and North Anna LER 1s nor did they know what Virginia Power equipment failure summary reports were (apparently they are the failure and trending reports defined by SUADM-LR-07).
The inspector noted that most i terns covered by this procedure had their own internal evaluative mechanisms and procedures and problems identified were placed on the CTS as required *
The licensee acknowledged the inspector 1s comments; however, no commitments were made concerning this procedur Inspection results showed the program in pl ace to be only partially effective, although there was not sufficient inadequacy to be in non-complaince with ANSI 1 *
ATTACHMENT 1 50-280/86-32 50-281/86-32 PROCEDURES AND DOCUMENTS REVIEWED Station Administrative Procedures SUADM-ENG-01 Engineering Work Requests SUADM-ENG-04 Setpoint Changers SUADM-ENG-05 Classification of Systems Components and Structures SUADM-LR-03 Operating Experience Review Staff (SES)
SUADM-LR-04 Nuclear Plant Reliability Data System SUADM-LR-06 Commitment Tracking System (CTS)
SUADM-LR-07 Failure Analysis of Safety Related Equipment SUADM-LR-08 Licensee Event Report System SUADM-LR-09 10 CFR 21 Reporting Staff (SES)
SUADM-LR-10 Human Performance and Eva 1 uati on System SUADM-LR-11 Station SOER Processing SUADM-M-10 Work Planning and Tracking System SUADM-M-11 Work Request System SUADM-M-12 Work Order Planning SUADM-M-13 Emergency Work Order Preparation SUADM-M-14 Work Order Scheduling SUADM-M-15 Work Order Completion-1-October 2, 1986 February 27, 1986 August 12, 1986 August 21, 1986 September 11, 1986 May 27, 1986 July 3, 1986 June 3, 1986 June 10, 1986 February 27, 1986 September 4, 1986 August 2, 1984 October 24, 1985 February 19, 1985 January 10, 1985 July 16, 1985 January 10, 1985
SUADM-M-16 SUADM-M-24 SUADM-M-30 SUADM-0-1 SUADM-0-06 SUADM-0-13 SUADM-0-14 SUADM-0-22 SUADM-0-25 SUADM-QA-01 SUADM-SP-02 ATTACHMENT 1 Operation of the Maintenance Department Test Equipment Planned Maintenance System Manual Minimum Frequencies for Checks Calibration and Tests of Instrument Channels Conduct of Operations Operation, Maintenance and Tagging Instrumentation and Controls Calibration of Test Equipment Instrument Department Preventive Maintenance Program Quality Control Inspection and Nonconformance Reports Quality Maintenance Team Maintenance Department Administrative Procedure MDAP-1 Required Reading -
Administrative Procedure MDAP-3 Commitment Training MDAP-5 Employee Training MDAP-13 Procedure Training-2-February 27, 1986 June 20, 1985 March 13, 1986 May 27, 1982 March 20, 1985 September 23; 1986 September 30, 1982 August 21, 1986 June 6, 1985 January 7, 1986 February 13, 1986 July 1, 1986 September 5, 1985 September 6, 1985 August 20, 1985
ATTACHMENT 1 Maintenance Program Memorandum Section 4 Repetitive Maintenance Program Section 5.1.1 Vibration Analysis Program (Predictive Maintenance)
Miscellaneous Documents Memorandum -
Quality Maintenance Team Training Memorandum -
Component Failures Quarterly Report - January/June 1986 Memorandum -
Industry Experience NPRDS Failure Reports-3-October 20, 1986 October 14, 1986 October 20, 1986
86-81 86-73 86-66 86-65 86-62 86-57 86-56 86-52 86-50 86-37 86-29 86-19 86-14 86-09 86-07 86-05 ATTACHMENT 2 50-280/86-32 50-281/86-32 IE Information Notices Reviewed Broken Inner-External Closure Springs on Atwood and Morril Main Steam Isolation Valves Recent Emergency Diesel Generator Problems Potential for Failure of Replacement AC Coils Supplied By The.
Westinghouse Electric Corporation For Use In Class IE Motor Starters and Contractors Malfunctions of ITT Barton Model 580 Series Switches During Requalification Testing Potential Problems in Westinghouse Molded Case Circuit Breakers Equipped With A Shunt Tripp Operating Problems with Solenoid Operated Valves at Nuclear Power Plants Reliability of Main Steam Safety Valves Conductor Insulation Degradation On Foxboro Model E Controller Inadequate Testing to Detect Failures of Safety Related Pneumatic Components or Systems Degradation of Station Batteries Effects of Changing Valve Motor - Operator Switch Settings Reactor coolant Pump Shaft Failure at Crystal River PWR Auxiliary Feedwater Pump Turbine Control Problems Failure of Check and Stop Check Valves Subjected to Low Flow Conditions Lack of Detailed Instruction and Inadequate Observance of Precautions During Maintenance and Testing of Diesel Generator Woodward Governors Main Steam Safety Valve Test Failure and Ring Setting Adjustments-1-
86-01 85-98 85-93 85-91 85-90 85-89 85-75 85-74 85-73 85-68 85-67 ATTACHMENT 2 Failure of Main Feedwater*check Valve Causes Loss of Feedwater System Integrity and Water Hammer Damage Missing Jumpers From Westinghouse Reactor Protection System Cards For The Overpower Delta Temperature Trip Function Westinghouse Type OS Circuit Breakers, Potential Failure of Electric Closing Feature Because of Broken Spring Release Latch Lever Load Sequences for Emergency Diesel Generators Use of Sealing Compounds In An Operating system Potential Loss of Solid-State Instrumentation Following Failure of Control Room Cooling Improperly Installed Instrumentation, Inadequate Quality Control and Inadequate Post Modification Testing Station Battery Problems Emergency Diesel Generator Control Circuit Logic Design Error Diesel Generator Failure At Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Station Valve-Shaft-To-Actuator Key May Fall Out of Place When Mounted Below Horizontal Axis-2-