ML20197J641
| ML20197J641 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 05/02/1986 |
| From: | Nauman D SOUTH CAROLINA ELECTRIC & GAS CO. |
| To: | Grace J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8605200113 | |
| Download: ML20197J641 (2) | |
Text
,
bMO S
Electric & Gas Company Dan n
umtxa.
29218 Nuclear Operations SCE&G
- ~ ~'
May 2, 1986 i WJ
- 5 S x-c 3
Dr. J. Nelson Grace Regional Administrator U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region II, Suite 2900 101 Marietta Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30323
SUBJECT:
Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station Docket No. 50/395 Operating License No. NPF-12 Response to Notice of Violation NRC Inspection Report 86-07
Dear Dr. Grace:
Attached is South Carolina Electric and Gas Company's response for the violation as addressed in Enclosure 1 of HRC Inspection Report 86-07.
If there are any questions, please call us at your c venience.
Ve
- yours, I
au n HID: DAN / led Attachment pc:
- 0. W. Dixon, Jr./T. C. Nichols, Jr.
C. L. Ligon (NSRC)
E. H. Crews, Jr.
R. M. Campbell E. C. Roberts K. E. Nodland J. G. Connelly, Jr.
R. A. Stough W. A. Williams, Jr.
G. O. Percival Group Managers R. L. Prevatte
- 0. S. Bradham J. B. Knotts, Jr.
D. R. Moore I&E Washington C. A. Price NPCF W. T. Frady File 8605200113 860502 PDR ADOCK 050003 5 G
j
ENCLOSURE 1 RESPONSE TO VIOLATION 395/86-07-01 I.
ADMISSION OR DENIAL 0F THE ALLEGE 0 VIOLATION South Carolina Electric and Gas Company (SCE&G) is in agreement with the alleged violation.
II.
REASON FOR THE VIOLATION The information provided within the modification package for performing work and inspection activities, although adequate, was somewhat confusing. This confusion was attributed to the fact that the modification was the plant's initial installation of a different type fire barrier material, and the modification package provided a number of application techniques. As a result, it was difficult for the personnel implementing and inspecting the activity to distinguish those applicable to the specific work being performed relative to cable tray 3088.
Prior to installation, calculations were performed to assure seismic considerations were acceptable; however, during installation, the lead engineer received information via " Network" that vendor supplied information, relative to the thermo-lag's published weight, could be incorrect. A nonconformance document was initiated by the lead engineer to determine the maximum weight of the thermo-lag and to assure that the additional weight would not impair the structural integrity and/or seismic function of the cable tray.
III.
CORRECTIVE STEPS TAKEN AND RESULTS ACHIEVED Detailed installation sketches were developed and incorporated into the work packages. Maximum material weights were determined and calculations reanalyzed verifying that the additional weight did not impair the structural integrity and/or seismic function of the cable tray.
Based on this information, a QC inspection procedure was developed and the thermo-lag installation on cable tray 3088 was re-inspected. As a result, existing deficiencies that had not been previously noted were identified, documented and corrected.
IV.
CORRECTIVE ACTION TAKEN TO AVOID FURTHER VIOLATION Virgil C. Summer Nuclear Station procedures SAP-133, Design Control / Implementation, and A-NQCP-5, Nuclear Quality Control Inspection, are in the process of being revised to require that the implementing organizations review major, first-time or unique work scopes to insure installation and inspection requirements are adequately defined or encompassed in station procedures.
If required, revisions to work instructions and/or generation of additional inspection requirements will result from these reviews.
In addition, fire barrier material will be weighed during receipt inspection to assure material weight requirements are met.
V.
DATE OF FULL COMPLIANCE The procedures will be revised and implemented by July 30, 1986.