ML18136A259
| ML18136A259 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1979 |
| From: | Robert Lewis NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Proffitt W VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18136A260 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7912050623 | |
| Download: ML18136A259 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000280/1979059
Text
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
OCT 2 6 1979
cl~~~~
c£';; -o>g-o
,51'8 I
1n Reply Refer To:
RII:DJB
50-280/79-59
S0-281/79-78
Virginia Electric and Power Company
ATTN:
W. L. Proffitt
Senior Vice President, Power
P. 0. Box 26666
Richmond, VA 23261
Gentlemen:
This refers to the inspection conducted by D. J. Burke of . this office on
September 10-28, 1979, of activities authorized by NRC Operating License Nos.
DPR-32 and DPR-37 for the Surry facilities, and to the discussion of our findings
held with W. L. Stewart at the *conclusion of the inspection.
Areas examined during the inspection and our findings are discussed 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.
Within the scope of this inspection, no items of noncompliance were disclosed.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice", Part 2, Title
10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection
report will be placed in the NRC' s Public Document Room. If this report contains
any information that you (or your contractor) believe to be proprietary, it is
necessary that you make a written application within 20 days to this office to
withhold such information from public disclosure.
Any such application must
include a full statement of the reasons on the basis of which it is claimed that
the information is proprietary, and should be prepar~d so that proprietary
information identified in the application is contained in a separate part of the
document. If we do not hear from you in this regard within the specified period,
the report will be placed in the Public Document*Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, we will be glad to discuss
them with you.
Enclosure:
See Page 2
Sincerely,
- z.c. I
R. C. ~ng Chief
Reactor Operations and Nuclear
Support Branch
0
r-
'-~
OCT 2 6 197S
Virginia Electric and Power Company
-2-
Enclosure:
Inspection Report Nos. 50-280/79-59,
and 50-281/79-78
cc w/encl:
W. L. Stewart, Manager
P. 0. Box 315
Surry, VA
23883
\\. '
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
Report Nos. 50-280/79-59 and 50-281/79-78
Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company
Richmond, Virginia 23261
Facility Name:
Surry, Units 1 and 2
Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281
License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR..:37
Inspection at Surry
SUMMARY
Inspection on September 10-28, 1979
Areas Inspected
Dale Sj(gned
! 11hf/?2
Wte Signed
This routine inspection by the resident inspector involved 60 inspector-hours
onsite in the areas of plant operations and maintenance, including the Unit 2
steam generator replacement outage work, followup on previously identified items,
and plant security.
Results
Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Licensee Employees
2.
Virginia Electric and Power Company (VEPCO)
- W. L. Stewart, Station Man.ager
- J. L. Wilson, Superintendent, Operations
- T. A. Peebles, Superintendent, Technical Services
- R. F. Saunders, Superintendent, Maintenance
R. M. Smith, Supervisor, Health Physics
G. Kane, Operating Supervisor
- F. L. Rentz, Resident QC Engineer
- D. A. Ctristian, Engineering Supervisor
Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included control
room operators, shift supervisor, QC, engineering, HP, plant maintenance,
security, engineering, and administrative personnel.
- Attended exit interview
Management Interviews
The scope and findings were summarized on a weekly basis with those persons
indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Unit 2 Steam Generator Replacement Activities
The inspector reviewed certain U-2 SG replacement and associated activities
to verify that the activities were performed in accordance with the Steam
Generator Repair Program (SGRP) and applicable procedures.
The review included the following activities:
a.
b.
Inspection tours of the Unit 2 containment for cleanliness and
radiation control; appropriate work and radiation controls were being
implemented.
Observation of inspections and work being performed on the Unit 2 pipe
supports to satil:fy IE Bulletin 79-14.
- .. )I
)
-2-
Within the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were
identified.
6.
Unit 1 and 2 Operations and Maintenance
Unit 1 remains shutdown pending resolution of NRC questions regarding IE
Bulletin 79-14 (As-built piping s._y_stems verification).
The inspector
toured the Unit 1 and 2 control rooms and certai~ plant areas to verify
that the shutdown operations were in accordance with the Technical Speci-
fications and facility procedures.
Plant logs, maintenance .and records
were also reviewed.
Withi-0 the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance
were identified.
Spec~fic areas of inpsection included:
a.
In addition to verifying that a qualified ASCO solenoid operated pilot
valve (NP Series) was* installed on Unit 1 containment sump isolation
valve (TV-DA-lOOA), the inspector reviewed Design Change 79-522 testing
which verified sump isolation upon initiation of safety injection.
b.
Followup on LER 280/78-04, which addressed the temporary loss of
service water (SW) flow through charging pump intermediate seal cooler
1-SW-E-lB due to failure of the discharge gate valve.
Corrosion of
the valve stem permitted the.valve disc to drop and obstruct one train
of SW flow.
Following an engineering study (78-08), the licensee
replaced all 1 1/2 and 2 inch valves in the Unit 2 system with bronze
ball valves; Unit 1 valve replacement is scheduled to be completed
during the next major outage.
A successful hydrotest was performed on
the Unit 2 system following maintenance; however, on September 27,
1979, the inspector noted some leakage from valve 2-SW-129 flange.
-The licensee is taking corrective action on the apparent leak. Ler's
280/78~04 and 281/78-11 are closed.
c.
A walkdown of the plant high and low level liquid waste drain tank
went piping from the tanks to the process vent system, utilizing
FM-BOA and 90B prints.
No discrepancies were identified.
The inspec-
tor noted that the tanks lead open overflow piping to the local floor
drains in the auxiliary building tank rooms.
Licensee evaluation
determined that the systems which deliver liquids to the tanks would
be off-gassed and would not vent gases through the overflow lines.
d.
Review of the Unit 1 inside recirculation spray (IRS) pump and motor
testing following maintenance which included replacement of the lower
motor bearing.
After rebuilding, the IRS (1-RS-P-lA and lB) pump
motors were successfully tested at the North Anna facility for 8 and 5
hours respectively before reinstallation at Surry.
GE motors EHJ524018
(lA) and EHJ524019 (lB) were installed in Unit 1 and periodic test
e.
17.2 was performed to verify pump operability.
LER 280/79-09 remains
open pending conrrective action on Unit 2 .
Review of emergency procedures to verify that the reactor coolant
pumps are tripped upon initiation of high head safety injection caused
by low reactor coolant system pressure; the procedures have been
revised in accordance with IE Bulletin 79-0SC and 79-06C.
f.
g.
-3-
Review of Unit 1 Periodic Tests 17.1, Containment Spray System, PT
17.3, Containment Outside Recirculation Spray Pumps PT 18.1, Low Head
SI Test and Flushing of SS Piping and PT 38.8, Chemical Additon Tank
Sampling, performed between May and September, 1979, in accordance
with TS 4.5, 4.11, and 4.1.
No discrepancies were identified.
The
chemical additon tank sodium hydroxide concentration was between 19
and 22%, as required by PT ~~.8 (TS 18%).
Observation of certain anchor bolt inspections performed in Unit 1
containment in accordance with IE Bulletin 79-02.
7.
Plant Physical Protect~on
The inspector verified the following by observation:
a.
Gates and doors in protected and viatal area barriers were closed and
locked when not attended.
b.
Isolation zones described in the physical security plans were not
compromised or obstructed.
c.
Personnel were properly identified, searched, authorized, badged and
escorted as necessary for plant access control.