ML18139A987

Responds to NRC 801125 Ltr Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Repts 50-280/80-39 & 50-281/80-43.Corrective Actions:Maint Completed on Installed Pumps & Refueling Procedure Revised

ML18139A987
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	12/17/1980
From:	Sylvia B VIRGINIA POWER (VIRGINIA ELECTRIC & POWER CO.)
To:	James O'Reilly NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML18139A986	List: ML18139A987
References
971, NUDOCS 8101160696
Download: ML18139A987 (3)

See also: IR 05000280/1980039

Text

' * .. *.~ .. ;:~ ~-:. t r. * ** ;.1,1 -.* -VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER. COMPANY RICHMOND,VIRGIN.IA

23261 * r.: " Io . . J i.1 :_ ._. * '-: December 17, 1980 \: .. .... 00 Serial No. 971 NO/RMT:ms

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 Docket Nos. 50-280 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 DPR-37 Dear Mr. O'Reilly:

We have reviewed your letter of November 25, 1980 in reference

to the inspection

conducted

at Surry Power Station on September

2 through October 3, 1980 and reported in IE Inspection

Report Nos. 50-280/80-39

and 50-281/80-43.

Our responses

to the specific infractions

are attached.

We determined

that no proprietary

information

is contained

reports. Accordingly, the Virginia Electric and Power Company objection

to these inspection

reports being made a matter of disclosure.

have Attachment

cc: Mr. Steven A. Varga, Chief Operating

Reactors Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing

Very truly yours, ./,1 ,.!* '\/ / >;t .. ; /;i: .. B. R. Sylvia Manager -Nuclear Operations

and Maintenance

in the has no public

• * * SURRY POWER STATION RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF VIOLATION

REPORTED IN APPENDIX A OF IE REPORT 50-280/80-39

AND 50-281/80-43

Attachment

Page 1 NRC COMMENTS:

A. As required by 10 CFR 50.59 and Section 14 of the VEPCO NPS QA Manual, the licensee may make changes to the facility as described

in the FSAR, provided that records of these changes are maintained

and include a written safety evaluation

which determined

that the change does not involve an unreviewed

safety question.

In addition, Section 14 of the QA Manual requires the maintenance

of the Jumper Log Book and forms, listing the status of each installed

jumper or temporary

modification

for jumpers not installed

by an approved procedure.

Contrary to the above, on September

12, 1980 the inspector

observed that the Unit 2 Safeguards

Valve Pit Sump piping had been modified by the installation

of jumper hose on the piping valve 2-DA-43, and no record, safety evaluation, procedure, or jumper log entry for the installation

has been completed.

The jumper, with 2-DA-43 open, apparently

led to the inadvertent

diversion

of Unit 1 and 2 containment

sump water into the Unit 2 Safeguards

Building Valve Pit (basement), where several feet of radioactive

standing water was observed.

This is an infraction

and applies to Unit 2. RESPONSE:

The item is correct as stated. The jumper discussed

above is a hose from the discharge

of a temporary

sump pump. This was installed

due to failures of both installed

sump pumps. All water transfers

were within the enclosed building.

A jumper had been issued and implemented

in January of 1980 to accomplish

the job of pumping the valve pit. A new temporary

pump was installed

in September;

however, the jumper log was not amended. During reviews of the log it was assumed the jumper was installed

as originally

approved.

1. 2. 3. Corrective

steps which have been taken and the results achieved:

The out of date jumper lQg was terminated

and a new jumper log was issued to reflect the existing conditions.

The discharge

hose was moved to a floor drain which directs water to the Liquid Waste System. The standing water was pumped and processed.

Maintenance

has been completed

on the installed

pumps and the system returned to its proper configuration.

Corrective

steps which will be taken to avoid further non-compliance:

Operational

personnel

were instructed

as to the requirements

of jumpers . This includes proper notification, logging, and documentation.

The date when full compliance

will be achieved:

Full compliance

has been achieved.

NRC COMMENT: Attachment

Page 2 B. As required by Technical

Specification

3.10.A.l, the containment ment door (hatch) shall be properly closed during refueling

conditions.

Contrary to the above, on September

24, 1980 the inspector

observed that the Unit 1 containment

escape hatch was not installed

in the equipment

door and the blank metal flange installed

on the equipment

door to substitute

for the escape hatch was not properly sealed during refueling

operations.

This is an infraction

and applies to Unit 1. RESPONSE:

This is correct as stated. The intent of containment

integrity

is to lish a gas-tight

envelope during fuel movement operations.

The containment

was in a sub-atmospheric

condition

at all times with only exhaust ventilation

equipment

in operation.

1. Corrective

steps which have been taken and the results achieved:

When the situation

was identified, refueling

was stopped until the door was sealed temporarily

to establish

a gas-tight

seal. 2. Corrective

steps which will be taken to avoid further non-compliance:

A more permanent

sealing was installed

during a period when no fuel movement was in progress.

The refueling

procedure

has been revised to insure this hatch is properly sealed prior to fuel movement.

3. The date when full compliance

will be achieved:

Full compliance

has been achieved.