ML18116A164
| ML18116A164 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1979 |
| From: | Ashenden M, Brownlee V, Kellogg P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18116A153 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-79-08, 50-280-79-8, 50-281-79-09, 50-281-79-9, NUDOCS 7907190078 | |
| Download: ML18116A164 (11) | |
See also: IR 05000280/1979008
Text
.*
/
Report Nos.
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
50-280/79-08 and 50-281/79-09
Licensee: Virginia Electric and Power Company
Post Office Box 26666
Richmond, Virginia 23261
Facility Name:
Surry, Units 1 and 2
Docket Nos.
50-280 and 50-281
License Nos.
Inspection at Surry Site near Richmond, Virginia
Inspectors: ~~
V. L. Brownlee
~UMMARY
Inspection on February 13-16, 1979
Areas Inspected
Date Signed
,-Date Signed
<-(/74/-,c;
Date Signed
This routine, unannounced inspection involved 54 inspector-hours onsite in
the areas of procurement, steam generator replacement QA program, independent
inspection effort.
Results
Of the three areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations
were identified in one area; three apparent items of noncompliance were found
in two areas (deficiency - failure to maintain records-Detail 6.b; infraction-
failure to provide identification and control of materials, parts and
components-Detail 5; deficiency-failure to provide care of items in storage-
Detail 6.c and 6.h).
- - --- . ...,,.,...-~...,.. .*. -- ---- ----- -* **-* ---~ .. - .. -- --*- -----~ *------ .. _,..,. .*. ., ___ ****--*------- ---.-
... --~ .. --*- . -***~ ----.....--~- ......... ~ --- . -- -~ . ~-- -*
.
1 *
'
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
- R.
- J.
- W.
- E.
- J.
- E.
- T.
- T.
- Y.
- J.
- P.
- A.
- J.
- F.
- C.
- R.
- R.
- W.
- B.
- M.
- J.
L. Baldwin, Supervisor, Administrative Services
Bolin, Engineering Technician
W. Cameron, System Superintendent, Technical Services
P. DeWandel, Staff Assistant
Reiland, Engineering Technician
J. Hronec, Safety/Security Coordinator
J. Kenny, Outage Coordinator
P. Mangum, Resident Engineer, Project Control
W. Martin, Jr., Supervisor, QA
P. Nottingham, Assistant H.P. Supervisor
L. Parrish, SGRP Manager
Pickworth, Senior Engineering Technician, Q/C
L. Rentz, Resident Q/C Engineer
W. Rhodes, Resident Engineer, Construction
F. Saunders, Superintendent, Maintenance
M. Smith, H.P. Supervisor
L. Stewart, Station Manager
R. Sylvia, Director, Nuclear Operations
Terrier, System Fire Protection Engineer
L. Wilson, Superintendent, OPS
Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included
two construction craftsmen, two technicians, two engineers and six
office personnel.
Other Organizations
- M. Randolph, Stone and Webster
NRC Resident Inspector
- D. J. Burke
- Attended exit interview .
, .
~ .
, ~-*~, ___ 1,_"if---~--*' ' .. .._._,, .. ~*----*'"~ .. '"****--.~x-*--*-'-*..,.._ -**___...,.~.,_.. . ......_..._.._. *--- '**-
l * *~
11
. '
~ .
\\
l . *
2.
-2-
Exit Interview
The inspection scope and findings of this inspection were summarized on
February 16, 1979, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
The licensee acknowledged the findings of this inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items
5.
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to
determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or
deviations.
New unresolved items identified during this inspection are
discussed in Paragraph 6.d.
Independent Inspection Effort
The inspectors performed a walk-through inspection of the operating
plant and steam generator repair project warehousing and laydown yards.
Additionally, the inspectors inspected the storage conditions of the two
lower steam generator sections that have arrived on-site and the automated
welder qualification area.
During the walk-through inspection of the west end of the operating
plant warehouse, the inspectors identified large amounts of materials,
components and parts that were not part of the warehouse inventory
stock. These items consisted in part of spare control rod drive mechanisms,
current transformers, large and small motors, stainless steel pipe
fittings and elbows, etc.
The licensee informed the inspectors that
these items were not a part of warehouse stock and they belonged to the
maintenance department.
The inspectors discussed the practice of storing uncontrolled material,
parts and components in a fashion where they could be inadvertently
introduced into a safety-relat~d system without proper identification,
qualification and traceability as required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,
Criterion VIII, which requires measures be established for the identifi-
cation and control of materials, parts and components.
The Accepted
Quality Assurance Program, Section 17.2.8 requires replacement parts,
materials and components be identified to allow control.
This failure to provide identification and control of materials, parts
and components is an item of noncompliance (280/79-08-01 and 281/79-09-01).
..,_. __ ,~ ,.~_,..___
-
~ -
- ---
- -* -
- "*
-
-
,r -r** ,* -~-
-
, *
-
, ~- .,..__
-~
.-- ,...,,__- **-*
'" ..
.. - *-**-- _._.._**---- *.' -*-** *---- _.._.... ____ ~--~-* ___ . _____ ., ___ ___... ______ ~--- _- ----- -
~ . '~ . .
-3-
6.
Procurement
References:
a)
VEPCO Nuclear Power Station Quality Assurance Manual
(NPSQAM), Section 4, "Procurement Document Control",
Revision 2, January 24, 1978
a.
b)
NPSQAM, Section 7, "Control of Purchased Material,
Equipment and Services", Revision 2, February 21,
1978
c)
NPSQAM, Section 8, "Identification and Control of
Materials, Parts and Components", Revision 2, January 24,
1978
d)
NPSQAM, Section 13, "Handling, Storage and Shipping",
~evision 2, May 11, 1978
e)
NPSQAM, Section 16, "Corrective Action", Revision 8,
March 30, 1978
Inspection Items
The inspectors reviewed the procurement area to verify that the
procurement documents used in the purchase of components and material
from selected safety-related systems included proper approval,
quality control inspection requirements and quality record require-
ments.
Components were selected from the reactor coolant, safety
injection and electrical distribution systems.
The specific items
selected were:
(1)
Safety Injection Pump Shaft Bushings, Purchase Order No. 54605
(6/1/78)
(2) Retainer Rings for Shaft Sleeve and Bushing, Purchase Order
No. 53920 (5/23/78)
(3)
Stainless Steel Pipe ..Plugs, Purchase Order No. 21980, Stock
No. 3865544
(4)
(5)
(6)
Safety Injection System Motor Operated Valve, Purchase Order
No. 52096 (4/27/78) A)
Reactor Coolant\\Pum~s (C) Seal Assembly, Purchase Order No.
49773 (10/3/78) 1/'
Reactor Coolant)*System Valve Diaphragm, Purchase Order No.
93127 (1/12/77) ;
.... '
'-, .... ~' '...-....~-.*"- ----- -"*-~'---*w--'---~ *~----* **-*--*-.. ---' .
-
- - -..,-
_,, * -
~ .. ~ - L--' ~. ~ ------* -*--*--*-**"' --- *---*-- ** - * * - * '*-*
... f
P.
r
" '
,*.
I
~
\\
i
- !
- ,*
\\
l
.*
' '
I
\\.
b.
-4-
(7) Reactor Coolant Pump (B) Seal Assembly, Purchase Order No.
27982 (4/2/74)
(8) Safety Injection Pump Seal, Purchase Order 59607 (7/19/78)
(9) Maintenance Report Nos. 1804, 91540, 2801300122 and 1801300123
For the items selected with the exception of item.a.(9) above, the
inspectors verified that documentary evidence was available on-site
to support their conformance to procurement requirements.
In
reviewing activities to assure that these items were inspected upon
delivery and that they were handled in accordance with established
controls in addition to being supplied by an approved vendor, the
inspectors reviewed the warehouse and related activities.
The inspectors identified two items of noncompliance with respect
to traceability of materials, storage and care of materials and
equipment in storage.
These are documented in paragraphs 6.b and
6.c and 6.h combined below. Additionally, one unresolved item and
three items were identified with respect to tape materials, local
purchases, review and placing under the QA program certain expendable/
consumables, and review of spare parts, materials and components
inventory to determine which items require level A storage. These
are documented in paragraphs 6.d, 6.e, 6 .. f and 6.g below.
Material Traceability, Record Failure
The inspectors selected the below listed maintenance reports from
three safety-related systems to verify technical and quality assurance
requirements of purchased documents and the traceability of the
materials to approved vendors. The method of selection was random
from a computer listing of completed maintenance during the year
1978.
MR Number
Component
Parts Used
2807051512
Sl Pump
2807301525
Sl Pump
Seal
1806120743
MOV1860A
Pipe Plug
1805160900
MOV1869B
Valve
1804191250
RC Pump
Seal
1804191251
RC Pump
Seals
1805191355
RC Pump
- 1804191540
Diesel Gen
Valve
- 2801300122
Diesel Gen
Valve
- 2801300123
Diesel Gen
Valve
- __
...... _____
___,,q;.,: -----~-~-----------------------,.,
_______ ................ "'r- .......... ---*** ,.. .... ~ ..... ---..-*...-*~-~---. .,..,,,, ..... ., __ ,,_ .. "",*~ *--... r--r ........... .* *.* , .. -
..... ***---'-*~---* __ .....___._ *---~.-.....-.... ---~ ........ _,.. __ -*-- -**-- --**--
..
-s-
The inspectors were informed that the maintenance record system
computer printout would provide a listing of the parts and materials
used to complete maintenance reports and provide the traceability
back to the purchase documents. It was noted that the computer did
not provide any data requested. The traceability of the parts used
had to be accomplished by manual means and took over two days to
provide the inspectors with the required documentation of parts
used on seven of the ten maintenance reports listed above.
The
records of parts used in completing maintenance reports indicated
by asterisks above could not be provided the inspectors.
The
inspectors verified by direct observation that three relief valves
had been installed of a type different than originally installed.
It was further verified that the valves had the same settings as
the original valves.
The Station Manager was contacted and was
notified that no records could be found on the valves. Therefore a
safety evaluation would be required to consider the valves in
question.
The safety evaluation was conducted on February 20, 1979 and the
valves were found to be acceptable and documentation of this review
is available at the Surry Power Station.
This matter of failure to maintain records of activities affecting
quality is an item of noncompliance (280/79-08-02) and 381/79-09-02).
c.
Failure to Establish a Maintenance Program for Items
in Storage
d.
The inspectors noted that there existed no program for the care of
items in storage in that motors were not tested for insulation
resistance and also rotating equipment in storage was not being
rotated as required by ANSI N-45.2-2, Section 6.4.2. This example
of a failure to establish controlling procedures is combined with a simil
failure documented in Paragraph 6.h and collectively constitutes an
item of noncompliance (280/79-08-03 and 281/79-09-03).
Gummed Labels and Tape
The inspectors observed that stores personnel were affixing gummed
labels to stainless steel fittings with a transparent tape.
The
inspectors asked if the labels and the tape met the requirements of
ANSI N.45.2.2, Appendix A3.S.2.
The licensee stated that a study
would be conducted to determine if the tape and labels contain less
than 0.10 percent by wejght of halogen and sulfur. Until such time
as a study is conducted to determine the quality of the gummed
labels and tape this item is unresolved (280/79-08-04 and
281/79-09-04).
- -***--- --,-~ --*-.. *--.-----*-*-------*-******-**--* -~---" --~** - ....* ..,~-.. ---.. ,.....,*-----*--**-*---*---------
--*--.:. ---~-* -------**-*-~ * - ... ,, ... _ * *-*** * * * --
~ r*'"-"*. *
.
.
.
-. ':""7 :- -
~-~~.-- _ .. _j___ --*-*- --* -
. ---** -----*---*-**---'---- _ ..... -**.
/
-6-
e.
Expendables/Consumables
During the IE inspection of procurement activities at the North
Anna site, see IE Report 338/79-08, it was identified that expen-
dables/consumables were not under the licensee's current QA program.
The licensee committed to and is actively engaged in activities to
review expendable/consumable items for both the North Anna and
Surry sites to determine which items would effect safety-related
functions of safety-related systems, structures and components.
The items requiring special controls, as determined by the review,
will be placed under the QA program controls to the degree required
to ensure that safety is not degraded.
Until the review has been completed and controls have been implemented,
this item is designated (280/79-08-05 and 281/79-09-05).
£.
Level A Storage
g.
During . the inspection, the inspectors noted that only a small
number of electronic cards had been designated as requiring level A
storage .
Both North Anna and Surry Power Station are committed to the same
QA program requirements relative to storage of materials, parts and
components.
The inspectors noted that there is considerable incon-
sistency between the storage program implemented at North Anna and
the program at Surry regarding the materials, components and equipment
requiring level A storage.
It was further determined that the
licensee had not completed a meaningful review of stocked items to
determine level A storage requirements. The licensee committed to
perform a review of stocked items to determine which items will
require level A storage conditions. A target date of July 1, 1979
to prepare the level A storage list and January 1, 1980 for full
program implementation.
Until the review has been completed and the storage program
implemented, this item is designated (280/79-08-06 and 281/79-09-06).
Local Purchase Order Book and Change Orders
During the IE inspection of procurement activities at the North
Anna site, see IE Report 338/79-08, it was identified that there
existed no administrative controls to assure that Category I items
could not be locally purchased without proper technical and QA
review.
The licensee c9mmitted to and is actively engaged in
activities to develop both short-term and long-term controlling
measures for both North Anna and Surry to prevent local procurement
of Category I items without proper technical and QA review.
, 1---- *- **-*** .. --*-- ---.. ---.* * -
--.. .. --1**---* *-** .... ~-*rv:-- -----~-- -- _____ ,.i. *
" ***.** ._-.* - .* -----
.... ------* --*
.-'* .*
.*
- _ .. '.1_-1. ~-*
.. -.
__ .,. ... ~--... ~
-~,~~-:'> ~' ... ._ .-'
... ~- .-.. ~>-.... - -'"~ ...... _.,..,.. _____ .,_ ***-* ~--- -
- *~ t **
!,
i . . ,
'
7.
h.
-7-
Until these measures have been established and implemented, this
item is designated (280/79-08-07 and 281/79-09-07).
Pipe Capping
During the inspection of warehousing and storage, the inspectors
identified that capping of pipe ends at the operating plant ware-
house, steam generator repair project (SGRP) warehouse and laydown
yards was not being accomplished as required by the controlling
standard (ANSI N45.2.2-1972) and NPSQAM Section 13, Paragraph 5.5.2(3).
Additionally, the inspectors determined that inspections in this
area had not been performed as required by NPSQAM Section 13,
Paragraph 5.2.5. This matter was discussed with warehouse, station
and SGRP QC and management personnel.
VEPCO concurred with the
findings and committed to look into the matter at the exit interview.
This failure to cap pipes and perform the required inspections is
identified as an item of noncompliance (280/79-08-03 and 281/79-09-03).
This item is combined with a noncompliance item documented in
Paragraph 6.c.
Steam Generator Replacement Project (SGRP)
References:
a)
NPSQAM, Section lS, "Organization", Revision No. O,
June 16, 1978
b)
NPSQAM, Section 3S, "Design Control", ~evision O,
June 16, 1978
c)
d)
NPSQAM, Section 6S, "Document Control", Revision O,
June 16, 1978
NPSQAM, Section 15S, "Nonconforming Materials, Parts
and Components", Revision No. 0, June 16, 1978
e)
NPSQAM, Section 16S, "Corrective Action", Revision
No. 0, June ... 16, 1978
f)
NPSQAM, Section 17S, "Quality Assurance Records",
Revision No. O, June 16, 1978
g)
NPSQAM,
Section 18S,
"Audi ts", Revision No. 0,
June 16, 1978
b)
Project Operating Procedure 2.8.2, "Drawing Management",
Revision No. 2, December 18, 1978
-. ~ .*
- .
.
, _ ___ J
-*--*---~~*~-----* *-~-- ... -~---.. ---. --~---,.-~,. ---
'
.. . .
-~
\\ ,,
-8-
i)
Project Operating Procedure 2. 8. 3, "Records Management",
Revision No. 1, July 25, 1978
j)
Project Operating Procedure 2.8.3.1, Revision No. 3,
January 1, 1979
The inspector identified two items with respect to record storage and
design control. These are documented in paragraphs 7. b and 7. c. During
this inspection, items 280/79-06-01 and 281/79-06-01 were closed. This
is identified in paragraph 7.b.
a.
General
b.
The purpose of this inspection was to perform a follow-up inspection
of IE Reports 50-280/79-06 and 50-281/79-06 regarding the SGRP QA
program manual review and the present degree of implementation of
that program consistent with construction in progress. The inspectors
performed a walk-through inspection of facilities provided for the
support of SGRP activities, held numerous discussions with responsible
VEPCO/S&W/QA/QC/Daniel Construction Company (DCC) and craft personnel,
and reviewed controlling procedures .
Review of QA Program
The inspectors performed follow-up inspection efforts with regard
to item (280/79-06-01 and 281/79-06-01).
VEPCO has determined that
the VEPCO nonconformance report will be the mechanism to provide
nonconformance report control, corrective action control, and
written notification requirements of significant conditions by all
contractors and VEPCO personnel associated with the SGRP.
The
VEPCO Resident QC Supervisor has developed an audit schedule and
the implementation of that audit schedule will commence on February 20,
1979.
VEPCO has reviewed and accepted those applicable portions of
the DCC QC manual which are required to control that work which is
presently in progress.
The VEPCO Resident QC Group has presently
assigned two engineers and four technicians with additional personnel
to be added as needed. The.inspectors reviewed the training records
of five of the Resident QC Group personnel. The inspectors reviewed
the area of record retention and maintenance.
The present record
storage facilities as shown to the inspectors do not meet ANSI 45.2.9
requirements.
Discussions with Records management personnel and
SGRP QC personnel confirm that duplicate record storage facilities
will be utilized to meet ANSI N45.2.9 requirements.
Controlling
procedures are presently in process of completion.
VEPCO anticipates that final procedures will be completed and
issued by February 28, 1979 and full implementation will be
accomplished by March 15, 1979.
Until the final procedures are
.,,_,y...,~ ..... s."' . -~r-- -~~---.- .. --- .... -- -* .-..- '-~**- .... ,--*-*
. .. .
'-
\\
-9-
completed and issued and full implementation of those procedures
has been completed, this item is designated (280/79-08-08 and
281/79-09-08).
Items 280/79-06-0l and 281/79-06-01 are closed.
c.
QA Program Implementation
(1)
QA Manual-Document Control
The inspectors selected VEPCO NPS QA manuals located in the
VEPCO Resident QC office, Record Management office, and
Engineers offices and verified that the procedures were current.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
(2)
Organizational/Functional Alignment
The inspectors verified that the SGRP organizational/functional
alignment was manned as described in the VEPCO NPSQA Manual.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
(3)
Audits
(4)
The inspectors verified that an audit schedule of SGRP
activities has been established and qualified personnel are
available to perform the scheduled audits.
No items of
noncompliance or deviations were identified.
Design Control
The inspectors held discussions with responsible engineers, QC
personnel, records management personnel and construction
personnel to determine that project-originated design control
activities were being accomplished in accordance with established
controlling procedures. The inspectors selected field changes
to ETA's 20010 and 40027 to verify that the design change was
within the authority ""Of the project, the design change was
checked, the proper approvals were received, and distribution
was in accordance with the controlling procedures. During the
inspection, it was noted that the present controlling project
operating procedure~ did not describe how the present system
is functioning wiS,lv.tegard to the sequence of required signatures,
logging and dist.rilfution of field changes.
VEPCO had found
that the field ~l),ange system as initially implemented was
cumbersome and h¥d to control; therefore, changes were being
implemented to mdke the system workable. The inspector verified
that the system Has functioning as verbally described and that
the controlling'~rocedures were being revised.
The licensee
>>.
. -**:--:_-_ *:.:---~.--:".
Ill . ~*
- _ ...... -* . .,. ***--~--- ---- ~-. --*----*
-10-
committed to having the procedure change accepted and issued
by February 23, 1979 and fully implemented by March 2, 1979.
This is identified as item (280/79-08-09 and 281/79-09-09).
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
~==*~**
-- .. *-*--*--*-** . -*-* *------------***- -- ***-** ... ~, ..
J