IR 05000280/1988030
| ML18153B526 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 08/25/1988 |
| From: | Blake J, Economos N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18153B524 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-88-30, 50-281-88-30, IEB-83-06, IEB-83-6, NUDOCS 8810120224 | |
| Download: ML18153B526 (6) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-280/88-30 and 50-281/88-30 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, VA 23261 Docket Nos.:
50-280 and 50-281 License Nos.: DPR-32 and DPR-37 Facility Name:
Surry 1 and 2 Scope:
Results:
SUMMARY This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of licensee action on previous enforcement matters, inspector followup items and IE Bulletin Prograrrmatic weaknesses were identified in the inservice testing of valves in that a failure to test a safety relief valve during the 1985 refueling outage went undetected ~ntil it was identified via the NRC audit; a subsequent deviation report issued on February 23, 1988, was only partially completed and therefore went unreviewed by SNSOC; opportunities to test the valve since the finding were missed and no effort was made to evaluate the valve's capability to perfonn its intended function until after the NRC raised the issue following t~e finding on August 2, 198 Within the areas inspected, one violation was identified:
Failure to Perform Inservice Test as Required by ASME Code Section XI, IWV-3511 ( Paragraph 4).
8810120224 880929 PDR ADOCK 05000280 G
PNU
-_.;-:::
- REPORT DETAILS Licensee Employees Contacted
- D. J. Fortown, Supervisor, Corporate !SI Programs D. Grady, Supervisor, Nondestructive Testing
- E. S. Grecheck, Assistant Station Manager
- M.A. Griffin, Licensing
- A. McNeill, Supervisor, IS!
- J. W. Organ, Superintendent Maintenance Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, technicians, and office personne *Attended exit interview Licensee Action On Previous Enforcement Matters Units 1 and 2 (Closed) Unresolved Item (URI) 280,281/85-06-01:
Technical Specification (TS) Requirements for Photographs as !SI on Records This item was identified when the inspector of record (inspector), for the subject report, asked the licensee to describe the method used to implement TS 6.5.B.7 which specifies retention of records of inservice inspectto The inspector's specific concern was with regard to the apparent requirement of the TS that the licensee have and retain photographic records of !S At the time, the licensee indicated that their position with regard to this*
requirement was that they were not required to take photographs of ISI, but should they do so, they would retain the The Performance and Test Supervisor stated that they_ did not currently take any photographs of ISI, although it had been a practice in the past. The inspector was concerned that there may have been another reasons for inclusion of the above requirement in the TS and that it may have been intended to impose requirements for preparation as well as retention of photographic record By memorandum to the Commission, dated Ma~ch 30, 1988, the licensee requested a change to the Surry TS 6.5.B.7 to read as follows: -
" Records relative to the following it~ms shall be retained for the life of the plan Primary records of inservice inspections performed pursuant to Section XI of the ASME Code, as required by 10 CFR 50.55a, and primary records of inservice inspections performed pursuant to these Technical Specifications. If radiographs are taken or if photographs of scope traces (ultrasonic examination) or surface examination indications are taken, the radiographs and photographs shall be retained for the life of the plant *
- This TS change/amendment was approved and appeared as such in the Federal Register Volume 53, No. 96, May 18, 1988."
(Closed) URI 280,281/87-30-03:
!ST Pump Instrument Range This item was identified when the inspector of record for the subject report determined that the licensee's documented program for pump testing, contained no provisions to assure that full-scale range of each instrument would be three times the reference value or less as required by IWP-4120
, of ASME Code Section X By revision to applicable Procedure PT-40 Periodic Test Instrument Calibration dated October 20, 1987, the licensee has addressed the subject matte The inspector conducted a tour around the Station's safeguards areas to observe selected instruments and thereby verified that this requirement has been implemente (Closed) Violation 280,281/87-30-02:
Failure to Follow Document Control Procedure The licensee's letter of response dated November 25, 1987, revised Document Control ~rocedure SUADM-ADM-18 and records of audits performed by Records Management personnel in the subject area, have been reviewed and determined acceptable by Region II staf The inspector held discussions with cognizant licensee* personnel and discussed planned and completed corrective actions as stated in the letter of respons The inspector concluded that the licensee had determined the full extent of the subject violation, performed the necessary follow-up actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of the unsatisfactory records storage conditions. The corrective actions identified in the letters of response have been implemente ( Closed) Violation 280,281/87-21-06:
Inspection Report No. 87*-11 Vendor Findings The licensee's letter *Of response dated October 16, 1987, and procedures were reviewed and determined acceptable by Region II staf.1 Rev. 9:
NDDS-MN-08~ Rev. 1:
QADI(E)-2.3, Rev. 0:
QADI(E)-2.1, Rev. 0:
VEPCO Written Practice for Certification of Nondestructive Examination Personnel Supplier Evaluation and Selection Procurement Source Eval~ation and Audit
.
.
Requirements for Auditing of QA Pr_ograms The inspector held discussions with cognizant _licensee personnel and discussed planned and completed corrective actions as stated in the letter of respons The inspector concluded that the licensee had determined the full extent of the subject noncompliance, performed the necessary followup actions to correct the present conditions and developed the necessary corrective actions to preclude recurrence of the unsatisfactory records storage condition The corrective actions identified in the letters of response have been implemente.
NRC Bulletins (NRCB)
(Closed) !EB No. 83-06:
11Nonconformirig Materials Supplied by Tube-Line Corporation Facilities at Long Island City, New York; Houston, Texas; and Carol Stream, Illinois," Units 1 and 2 The inspector reviewed the licensee's supplemental response to IEB 83-06, dated January 27, 198 This additional information was provided in order to allay concerns raised by the NRC inspector as documented in Report No. 280,281/87-2 The submittal described actions taken by VEPCO to provide the requested additional verification of material acceptability for the wrought carbon steel pipe fittings that were made to SA-234 specifica.tio A typical, 90° elbow, fitting was removed from a two inch section of the bl ow-down line and forwarded to Babcock and Wilcox for analysi Also, VEPCO described other engineering and QA Programs to be used for resolution of material nonconformance issues such as those identified under the General Concerns sections of the subject bulleti (Closed) NRCB 88-02:
Rapidly Propagating -Fatigue Cracks in Steam Generator Tubes By review of NRCB 88-02, the licensee has concluded that subject bulletin does not apply to the Surry Steam generators as they are Westinghouse Model Series 51 The tube support plates in this model are made of ASME-SA-240 type 405 Stainless Steel materia By memorandum addressed to the Superintendent of Technical Services, the !SI cognizant engineer indicated that eddy current inspection of Unit 1 11B 11 and 11 CII Steam Generators showed that none of the examined tubes required pluggin.
Inspector Followup Items (IF!)
(Closed) !FI 280,281/88-17-0l:
Identification and Traceability of *
- Penetrame~ers
-
By Requisition Number 1259-00694, the licensee has ordered a set of stainless steel penetrameters produced per specification ASTM~E142 to be used when radiographing safety-related weld The penetrameters will be
- serialized for identification and control purposes as discussed in subject repor *
(Closed) IF! 280, 281/88-17-02:
Replacement Cool er Part 21 Compliance Statement The licensee presented signed copies of certification of conformance for the subject containment recirculation spray coolers certifying that they complied with the applicable specification, NUS-2082, Containment Recirculation Spray Coolers Surry Power Station Units 1 and In that, Section 6.4 of the Specification requires compliance with 10 CFR part 21, this item is considered close (Closed) I FI 280,281/88-21-01:
Independent Second Interpretation of Radiographic Film By Revision of Applicable Procedure No. NDE-RT-1 Radiographic Examination, the licensee has addressed the inspector's concern on the subject matte Section 2.3.3 of Revision 2 to subject procedure states in part that radiographs for nuclear safety-related components shall receive a double review *** by qualified Level II or III examiners, one of which will be a VEPCO employe (Closed) !FI 280,281/87-30-05:
Unavailable Valve Records This item was identified because the licensee could not retrieve inservice test records during the time of the inspection documented in subject repor The valves for which records were requested were:
1-IA-983, 2-IA-864, 2-RV-2209 and 1-RV-125 In providing the requested records during this inspection, the licensee indicated that the record search disclosed the last test for relief Valve 2-RV-2209, which was scheduled to be performed during the 1985 refueling outage was inadvertently missed and, therefore, was rescheduled for the next refueling outag The inspector's review of the data package provided the following disclosures:
On August 27, 1985, Work Order No. 9533 was issued to perform the inservice test in accordance with Procedure PT-12.2; however, on August 28, 1985*, the work order was voided and reviewed by QA on October 7, 198 The licensee could not explain the purpose for voiding the work order which appears to be the reason for missing the inservice test. After establishing that the inservice test had been missed, the licensee issued Deviation Report No. *s2-88-0099, dated February 23, 1988, indicating that..the missed test was discovered via an NRC inspection and that this was a violation of an administrative procedure and ASME Code Section XI.* Deviation reports are _issued in accordance with Administrative Procedure SUADM-0-12:
Operation Department Notification December 14, 198 Section 5.3 Processing-Deviations Reports of this procedure requires that "all devi~tion reports, shall be presented to the SMSOC for their* review-and concurrence with corrective actions ~ompleted or planned in a timely manner following the receipt -of the response from the assigned individua The Chairman of SNSOC shall designate which planned actions are to be entered in the Commitment Tracking System."
However, the deviation report provided to this inspector for review
was a single page document which made no reference to or had any evidence of a SNSOC review or designated planned actions.*. as required by the aforementioned procedur A discussion with the cognizant engineer disclosed that a portion of the deviation report was missing and could not be locate One explanation given was that the missing sec ti on of the report may have been misfiled and, therefore, irretrievable at this tim Through further discussions with the cognizant engineer and station management, the inspecto concluded that the SNSOC never received the subject deviation report and, therefore, no action was taken as required by the above mentioned procedur Further, in response to questioning, the inspector ascertained that the licensee had taken no steps to evaluate the ability of the let down system to perform its intended function under accident conditions as required without the relief valve being operabl The inspector stated that the 2-RV-2209 valve would have to be considered inoperable s i nee no i nservi ce test has been performed to verify operational readiness as required by the Cod On August 3, 1988, licensee personnel informed the inspector that such an evaluation would be forthcoming but was not available at the close of this inspectio Finally, the inspector noted that the valve in quest ion could have and probably should have been tested during either of the two forced outage earlier this yea This matter was discussed in detail with the licensee's site management who indicated that a problem of late responses was identified by their own QA audit teams. Therefore, this matter is closed as an inspector followup item and is being identified as a violation of ASME Code Section XI, IWV-351 Failure to perform inservice tests to verify operational readiness of valves, whose function is required for safety, in accordance with ASME B&PV Code Section XI, is a violation of the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55a(g)(4)(ii).
This violation will be identified as 50-280, *
281/88-30-01, "Failure to Perform Inservice Tests as Required by the ASME Code." Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on August 5, 1988, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed the inspection finding listed belo *
(Open) Violation 280,281/88-30-01:
Failure to Perform Inservice Test As Required by ASME Code Section XI, IWV-3511 (Paragraph 4).
Dissenting comments were not received from the license Proprietary information is not contained in this report.