ML20236F989

Forwards List of Allegations Re Surveillance Review.Requests Results of Review & Disposition within 30 Days of Receipt of Ltr

ML20236F989
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	10/28/1987
From:	Norelius C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Edelman M CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO.
References
NUDOCS 8711020363
Download: ML20236F989 (4)

Text

_- - _ - - _ _ - - - -.

3 i

.c owc-

,ip - .,

.4 l a OCT 81987 ,

' Docket No. 50-440 .

The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company-ATTN: Mr. Murray.R. Edelman Vice President Nuclear. Group.

Post Office Box 5000 Cleveland, OH 44101 Gentlemen:

Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company and the NRC have each recently received

. allegations regarding~ surveillance review, and we are requesting the.results of your review of those concerns. Enclosed for your reference is the . list of allegations. We request that the results 'of your review *and disposition of this matter be submitted to Region III with'a 30 days of receipt of this l letter. Documentation supporting your results should be maintained onsite for' audit by. Region III.

Your cooperation with us is appreciated. Should you have any questions

--with regard to this matter, please call Mr. R. C. Knop (312) 790-5547.

Region III's tracking number for this matter is RIII-87-A-136.

Sincerely, S % % y.

,P  % n k. ;r. ..J, , cm sicmtyW'C. Esponyims Charles E. Norelius, Director  !

Division of Reactor Projects

Enclosure:

Allegation See Attached Distribution I

! 8711020363 871029 i

! PDR ADOCK 05000440 P PDR i

6 Y' v\

~

l '

Yd)

M cCor c ger/mnj K ey us I i 10 U. ic{kY l0 ') *lv*)t , m\1SW s

, s.:

31., -

-/;

i >

y'

The Cleveland Electric Illuminating =2 Company M 28 M-

Distribution. l

- cc'w/o enclosure:

F.,R. Stead,' Manager,' Perry

, " Plant Technical Department-( M. 'O. _Lyster; Manager, Perry Plant

. . Operations Department' Ms. E.'M. Buzzelli, General

, Supervising Engineer, Licensing and~ Compliance Section .

.. DCD/DCB. (RIDS) ,

Licensing Fee Manag~ement Branch-Harold W. Kohn', Ohio-EPA.

-. Terry J. Lodge,'Esq'. .

-i

- James W. Harris,' State of Ohio. .

i Robert M; Quillin,'Ohi_o~ t i Department of Health State'of. Ohio,.Public t

Utilities Commission b'cc w/ enclosure: .

l K.'Connoughton, SRI-Per.ry l r - -q

'l

-6 3 '

'L 3

.g

. I

i. 1

(

4

v.

[! -4

• h g W, x

- ENCLOSURE ALLEGATION REGARDING SURVEILLANCE REVIEW CONCERNS- 4

1. When SVI "AS FOUND" data values exceed " Technical Specification Allowable

, . Values", no documented. evaluation is made to determine the following with respect to limiting Safety System Settings (10 CFR 50.36):

a. The approximate duration of operation outside the LCO.

' b '. . -If Safetyilimits were exceeded. .[

A c .= . Impact on: routine operations during the period of operation .outside - 1' the licensed. condition.

ld.. Environmental impact, in the case of-flow transmitters monitoring s l

release rates.

e.- Possible deportability. ]q f.v. - Equipment / Performance rel'iability with respec't to application and.

manufacturer.

j '

, .r. . .

u 1 g. What steps are taken to prove operability of remaining channels? -

m J

e -

2.- Currently the means of identifying repetitive failures of systems and  !

4 components, controlled under SVI, for trending purposes-'is inadequate. _

a. PPMIS only identified equipment failures when "AS LEFT" values are j not achieved, y

. q b-. -Trending of excessive drift is not evaluated because the "AS FOUND" 1

-data is never evaluated or documented on PPMIS where it'could be l sorted by.MPL and manufacturer.

3. Instrument file folders are unco'ntrolled and designated as "For Information l Only/ Reference Only" -( '

a. The file folders are not subject _to audit or review and because i of this there is no consistency in the mnner that the data is i

retain'ed.

.b. . The file folders contain the only real history of work performed i on a given instrument because PPMIS only deals with the "AS '

LEFT" status and-is not detailed enough to do any trending.

cc Data sheets of instruments under the control of a surveillance procedures.are not 1dentified. _ This 'could possibly allow someone to use a. generic procedure with a wider tolerance to calibrate a SVI controlled instrument in response to a work request.

i l

__ _ _ _ _ l

3

r r; 11:.

s a 1

'.u.! : ,

)

y, :!n:

f d;- Instrument file folders do not maintain consistent records of design 1

-engineering documents to reflect the required setpoint, calibration'

. engineering units, calculation changes / engineering approvals, .

engineering valve data sheets for. positioner calibrations and l= documents' reflecting component replacement data per DCP's.

-(Refer,toreplacementofthe~N27-F0010andF0110 positioner.

replacement.).

' c.

e. .0ld' spec' sheets are not marked as superseded.or removed from file folders allowing. for. the possibility of an _ instrument to be calibrated.to the wrong values.

,.,I,'

.j I J _

-l 1

i

, j

]

s

• ee N

• y $44a Q $ .

1 h

4 2

t.,

1 1

2 I

.