ML18139A685
| ML18139A685 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 06/23/1980 |
| From: | Sylvia B VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.) |
| To: | James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18139A684 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8008280267 | |
| Download: ML18139A685 (4) | |
Text
.[
\\
'*,*/
l: SN RC RE r:; ! :, ~: *. :
!,"f'1 /.. PJTA VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY '
RICHMOND, VIBGIN IA 23261
- JUne 23, 1980 Mr. James P. O'Reilly, Director Office of Inspection and Enforcement U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Region II 101 Marietta Street, Suite 3100 Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Dear Mr. O'Reilly:
3 0 JUN 25 A 9 : O 2 Serial No. 509 NO/R}IT:smv Docket Nos. 50-280 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 DPR-37 We have reviewed your letter of May 27, 1980 in reference to the inspection conducted at Surry Power Station on April 7 through May 2, 1980 and reported in IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-280/80-19 and 50-281/80-19.
Our responses to the specific infractions are attached.
We have determined that no proprietary 'information is contained in the reports.
Accordingly, the Virginia Electric and Power Company has no objection to these inspection reports being made a matter of public disclosure.
R}IT/smv:SXl Attachment cc: Mr. Steven A. Varga, Chief NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Operating Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing Washington, D. C. 20555
,8008280~~7 Very truly yours,
/!f.~
Manager - Nuclear Operations and Maintenance
".,)
NRC COMMENT:
RESPONSE TO "NOTICE OF VIOLATION" REPORTED IN IE INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-280/80-19 A...~D 50-281/80-19 Attachment, Page I A.
As required by Technical Specification 6.4.A.4, detailed written proce-dures with appropriate check-off lists and instructions shall be provided for actions to be taken for specific and foreseen malfunctions of systems or components including alarms, primary system leaks and abnormal reac-tivity changes.
- Contrary to the above, detailed written procedures with appropriate check-off lists and instructions have not been provided as 0£ April 25, 1980, for actions to be taker! when certain installed radiation monitoring components malfunction.
Consequently, when the Unit 2 radiation monitor (RM-R...'1S-262). on the manipulator crane intermittently failed on April 21 and 22, 1980 during Unit 2 refueling, appropriate prompt corrective action was not taken _to correct the malfunction which was indicated by loss of the green fail/reset light and mR/hr meter indication.
Simil~rly, procedures do not exist for actions to be taken when flow or filter fault alarms occur on RM-GW-101 and R...'1-159, 160, 259 and 260.
This is an infraction *
'RESPONSE
':his violatiop is not correct as stated.
AP series 5.16 through 5.19 specify specific a~tiotls to be taken in the event of a malfunction of RMS-CW-101, 102, 201, 202, P.Y-5-VG-103, 104, 203, 204, R.'1.S-RMS-159, 160, 162, 259, 260 and 262.
Operation Instruction OI-1 is the procedure utilized to check lite avail-ability.
The training in this area will be emphasized during this year.
With the procedures in existance prior to the notification, no further action is necessary *
SUBJECT:
RESPONSE TO VIOLATIONS LISTED IN_IE INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-280/80-19 AND 50-281/80-19 Attachment, Page 2 NRC COMMENT:
B.
As required by Technical Specifications 6.4.A.2 and 6.4.D, the detailed
. written procedures with appropriate check-off lists for the calibration and testing of instruments, components, and systems involving nuclear safety shall be followed.
Contrary to the above, Unit 2 Containment Spray Chemical Addition Flow and LHSI Venturi Flow Verification Test, conducted on April. 15, 1980, to verify Design Change 77-9 modifications, was not properly followed or completed.
On April 15, and
- 16, 1980*, the following discrepancies were identified.
- 1.
The Initial Conditions of the test required that the Safety Injection and Containment Spray Systems were available for service per OP-7.1 and OP-7. 2, respectively.
_Valve alignment checklists OP-7.1 and 7.2 were not completed prior to the test.
As a result of this,. the LHSI pump 2-SI-P-lB was operated for some 30 minutes with the p~~p suction valve closed.
- 2.
Step 6. 1.1 of the test procecure required the RWST water pH to be bet~een 4.0 and 4.5; the actua: value was 5.4 and corrective action, deviations, or changes to the procedure were not made.
- 3.
Step 6. 2. 2 of the procedure i.s the first of several steps for CAT flow verification which were conducted but not signed and dated.
- 4.
Attachment IV to the procedure, which verified test instrumentation hock-ups and attachments, was not completed; none\\ of the several steps were signed off, al though the work was performed prior to conduct of the test.
- 5.
The 13 field changes to the test were unsigned_ and were not approved by a licensed SRO prior to L~plementation of the test.
This is an infraction.
RESPONSE
The infraction is correct as stated with the exception of Item 5.
SRO' s are not required to review field changes prior to implementation.
- 1.
Corrective Steps Taken The Containment Spray Chemical addition flow and LHSI venturi flow verification test were satisfactorily conducted *on April 30.
Flow and pressure parameters of 2-SI-P-lB have been verfied to be within
- 2.
- 3.
Attac~ment, Page 3 design tolerances and the pump is also scheduled for disassembly and inspection for-damage.
Emphasis will be placed on critical bearing tolerances.
Operators involved have beeri instructed on the in1por-tance of procedural compliance.
Corrective Action To Prevent Further Non-Compliance The above steps will avoid further non-compliance.
In addition, increased emphasis will be applied in SRO and RO retraining sessions on adherence to procedures, and proper documentation.
Date When Full Compliance Has Been Achieved Full compliance has been achieved.