IR 05000010/1979017
| ML19254D271 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1979 |
| From: | Barker J, Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19254D261 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-010-79-17, 50-10-79-17, 50-237-79-20, 50-249-79-18, NUDOCS 7910230262 | |
| Download: ML19254D271 (8) | |
Text
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-10/79-17; 50-237/79-20; 50-249/79-18 Docket No. 50-10; 50-237; 50-249 License No. DPR-2, DPR-19, DPR-25 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2 and 3 Inspection At: Dresden Site, Morris, IL Inspection Conducted: August 1-31, 1979
&fA 1.n r-A 13f7')
Inspector:
J. L. B r f..-
Wlhwn r,L-Approved By:
R. L. Spt'ssard, Chief 9)/ 3f79 Reactor Projects Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on August 1-31, 1979 (Report No. 50-10/79-17; 50-237/79-20; 50-249/79-18)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced resident inspection of maintenance activities; plant operations; physical protection - security organization, physical barriers, access control (identification, authorization, badging, search, and escorting), and communications; review and followup on licensee event reports; surveillance of safety related systems / components required by technical specifications; radioactive waste systems - operations; IE Bulletin followup; and outstanding inspection items followup. The inspection involved 117 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Ry ults: Of the eleven areas inspected, there were no items of noncompliance identified in ten areas. There was one item of noncompliance (Infraction -
Failure to follow procedures - Paragraph 8) identified in one area.
1196 062 023 0 7 91
.
'
'
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- B. Stephenson, Station Sr rintendent
- R. Ragan, Operations Asto t<nt Superintendent J. Eeingenburg, Maintenance Assistant Superintendent
- B. Shelton, Administrative Se: s ices and Support Assistant Superintendent
- D. Farrar, Technical Staff Supervisor C. Sargent, Unit 1 Operating Engineer
- J. Wujciga, Ur.it 2 Operating Engineer M. Wright, Unit 3 Operating Engineer E. Budzichowski, Unit Support Operating Engineer D. Adarn, Waste Systems Engineer J. Parry, Rad-Chem Supervisor B. Sanders, Station Security Administrator
- E. Wilmere, QA Coordinator The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other licensee employees, including members of the technical and engineering staffs, reactor and auxiliary operators, shift engineers and foremen, elec-trical, mechanical and instrument personnel, and contract security personnel.
- Denotes those attending one or more exit interviews conducted on August 10, 17, 24 and 31, 1979.
2.
Maintenance The inspector, through direct observations and record review, veri-fied that reactivity control and power distribution, instrumentation, ECCS, and plant electrical power systems maintenance activities were conducted in accordance with established procedures and Technical Specifications; verified that required administrative approvals were obtained prior to initiating work; verified that maintenance activ-ities were accomplished using approved and technically adequate procedures; verified that the activities were inspected in accordance with the provisions of licensee's requirements; verified that the activities included functional testing and calibration as necessary prior to returning the component or system to an operating status; verified that quality control records were available; verified that activities were accomplished by qualified personnel; verified that radiological controls were established for worker protection, including minimizing personnel exposure; verified that materials or components used were certified as required by plant procedures; verified that QC hold points, plant status and safety controls, and tagging oper-ations appeared adequate; and verified that associated limiting
"f 1196 063-2-
.
'
conditions for operation were met in accordance with Technical
'
Specifications.
The inspector observed maintenance in progress concerning the following work requests:
(1) Unit 2 - WR 1183, Safety related piping - conformance check, WR 1213, Anchor bolt inspection and repair, WR 1329, Diesel generator alarm panel, and WR 1428, SRM channel 22 and (2) Unit 3 - WR 1413, 3A SBLC pump packing. The inspector reviewed the following completed work packages:
(1) Unit 2 - WR 1024, Core spray valve 1402-16 and WR 1026, 2A target rock valve flange and (2) Unit 3 - WR 958, 3D CCSW pump and WR 1376, 3A SBLC pump.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Plant Operations The inspector reviewed the plant operations including examinations of control room log books, routine patrol sheets, shift engineer log book, equipment outage logs, special operating orders, and jumper and tagout logs for the month of August 1979. The inspector observed plant operations during four offshifts during the month of August 1979.
The inspector also made visual observations of the routine surveillance and functional tests in progress during the period.
This review was conducted to verify that facility operations were in conformance with the requirements established under Technical Speci-fications, 10 CFR, and Administrative Procedures.
A review of the licensee's deviation reports for the period was conducted to verify that no violations of the licensee's Technical Specifications were made. The inspector conducted a tour of Units 1, 2 and 3 reactor buildings and turbine buildings throughout the period and noted that the monitoring instrumentation was recorded as required, radiation controls were properly established, fluid leaks and pipe vibrations were minimal, seismic restraint oil levels appeared adequate, equip-ment caution and hold cards agreed with control room records, plant housekeeping conditions / cleanliness were adequate, and fire hazards were minimal. The inspector observed shift turnovers to verify that plant and component status and problem areas were being turned over to relieving shift personnel. The inspector observed sampling and cbemical analysis of water chemistry samples to verify that water chemistry was being maintained in accordance with Technical Specifications.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Physical Protection - Security Organization The inspector verified by observation and personnel interview (once during each operating shift) that at least one full time member of 1196 064-3-
.
.
'
the security organization who has the authority to direct the physical security activities of the security organization was onsite at all times; verified by observation that the security organization war properly manned for all shifts; and verified by observation that senbers of the security organization were capable of performing their assigned tasks. There were no weapons qualifications conducted during this monthly inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Physical Protection - Physical Barriers The inspector verified that certain aspects of the physical barriers and isolation zones conformed to regulatory requirements and commit-ments in the physical security plan (PSP); that gates in the protected area were closed and locked if not attended; that doors in vital area barriers were closed and locked if not attended; and that isolation zones were free of visual obstructions and objects that could aid an intruder in penetrating the protected area.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Physical Protection - Access Control (Identification, Authorization, Badging, Search, and Escorting)
The inspector verified that all persons and packages were identified and authorization checked prior to entry into the protected area (PA), all vehicles were properly authorized prior to entry into a PA, all persons authorized in the PA were issued and displayed identification badges, records of access authorized conformed to the PSP, and all personnel in vital areas were authorized access; verified that all persons, packages, and vehicles were searched in accordance to regulatory requirements, the PSP, and security procedures; verified that persons authorized escorted access were accompanied by an escort when within a PA or vital area; verified that vehicles autho-rized escorted access were accompanied by an escort when within the PA; and verified by review of the licensee's authorization document that the escort observed above was authorized to perform the escort function.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Physical Protection Communications The inspector verified by observation (during each operating shift)
that communications checks were conducted satisfactorily at the beginning of and at other prescribed time (s) during the security personnel work shift and that all fixed and roving posts, and each member of the response team successfully communicate from their
)}hb bhb-4-
.
~
remote location; and verified that equipment was operated consistent
.
with requirements in the PSP and security procedures.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
Review and Followup on Licensee Event Reports Through direct observations, discussions with licensee personnel, and review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to determine that reportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence had been accomp.ished in accordance with Technical Specifications.
Unit 1 LER 79-02, Offgas monitor tripped in excess of Technical Specifi-cation limits.
Regarding LER 79-02, an offsite review upgraded a station deviation report to a 30 day reportable event based on the fact that the exact trip point was unknown since upon initial calibration check the off-gas monitor tripped at greater than 100%. The inspector reviewed the calibration data for the three months prior to August 28, 1978 and determined that although the monitor tripped at greater than
.196 Ci/sec (equivalent to 100% on the monitor), the Technical Specification limit of.56 Ci/sec was probably not exceeded. Elec-tronic instrument drift of the magnitude necessary to exceed the Technical Specifications limit was not observed during the data review and therefore, was considered to be unlikely.
Unit 2 LER 79-10, Loss of secondary containment integrity - refuel floor blowout panel blowout.
LER 79-24, Unit 2 diesel generator failed to start.
LER 79-43, "A" floor drain sample radioactivity concentration exceeded Technical Specification limits.
LER 79-46, Nitrogen tank level allowed to fall below Technical dpecification limits.
Regarding LER 79-10, the inspector will review any modification to the ventilation control system when the engineering evaluation is completed and the modification is installed. This is outstanding inspection item 237/79-20-01.
1196 066-5-
'
Regarding LER 79-24, the inspector determined that the air lines on the air start motor were installed reversed.
Th. inspector determined that the insta11acion of these air lines should c. ave been within the qualifications of the maintenance person involved without being specifically delineated in the maintenance procedure. The licensee has none-the-less revised the procedure to include a diagram for air line routing which should preclude the recurrence of such future carelessness.
Regarding LER 79-46, the inspector determined that DOP 1600-6, Rev.
8, " Nitrogen Inerting of Primary Containment with Reactor Building Ventilation System," requires the operator to stop inerting when the level in the nitrogen tank reaches 60 inches.
On July 7, 1979, while inerting Unit 2 drywell, the level was allowed to drop to 55 inches before inerting was stopped. This is contrary to Technical Specification 6.2.A.1 requiring adherence to procedures and is ccnsidered an item of noncompliance. The licensee's corrective action to prevent recurrence is as follows:
(1) Lower the alarm setpoint from 100 inches to 80 inches to increase the significance of the alarm, (2) Revise the procedure to make inerting past 60 inches a management decision based on whether containment oxygen concentration is above or below the Technical Specification limit of 4% oxygen, and (3) Evaluate the feasibility of placing a remote level indication for nitrogen tank level in the control room. The inspector is convinced that the corrective action should prevent recurrence and has no further questions on the matter; however, he will review the corrective action implementation during a future inspection.
(237/79-20-02). Therefore, no response to this item is required.
Unit 3 LER 79-16, Main steam line high flow switch (DPIS 3-261-26) tt: 7ed in excess of Techaical Specification limits.
Except as previously described, no items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
Surveillance of Safety Related Systems / Components Required by Technical Specifications The inspector observed Technical Specifications required surveillance testing (other than calibrations and checks) on the low pressure coolant injection, high pressure coolant injection, core spray, standby liquid control, standby gs; treatment, control rod drive, and reactor protection systems and verified that testing was per-formed in accordance with technically adequate procedures, that test results were in conformance with Technical Specifications and procedure requirements and were reviewed by personnel other than the individual 1196 067-6-
.
i directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate manage-roent personnel.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
10.
Radioactive Waste Sjstems - Operations The inspector verified through record review that all effluent releases which occurred during the month of July 1979, were properly documented, that timely approvals of the releases were obtained, and that required sampling had been accomplished. He also observed the preparation for and release of liquid laundry waste on August 9, 1979, and verified that the release was accom-plished in accordance with epproved procedures.
No items of noncompliance wcre identified.
11.
IE Bulletin Follovup For the IE Bulletins listed below the inspector verified that the written response wat within the time pericd stated in the bulletin, that the written respons< included the information required to be reported, that the written response included adequate corrective action commitments based on information presented in the hulletin and the licensee's response, that licensee management forwarded copies of the written response to the appropriate onsite manage-ment representatives, that information discussed in the licensee's written response was accurate, and that corrective action taken by the licensee was as described in the written response.
IEB 77-08, Assurance of Safety and Safeguards during an Emergency-Locking Systems.
IEB 78-01, Flammable Contact-Arm Retainers in GE CR120A Relays.
IEB 78-14, Deterioration of Buna-N Componcats in ASCO Solenoids.
Regarding IEB 78-01, all safety related retainers have been replaced on those relays on Unit 2.
Unit 3 retainers will be replaced during the March 1980 refueling outage.
The inspector will review the replacement during the March 1980 outage.
(249/79-18-01)
.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
12.
Outstanding Inspection Items Followup Regarding the pipe whip and impingement protection modifications to U0it 3 HPCI system referenced in the letter from B. B. Stephenson l
b bbO
_7_
-
.
to J. G. Keppler dated March 30, 1978, the inspect - reviewed the
'
modifications and determined they were in accordance with commit-ments made and the licensee's procedures.
Regarding the modifications to the diesel generator air start systems for Unit 2, 3 and 2/3 diesel generators, the inspector reviewed the licensee's modifications and determined they were in accordance with the licensee's procedures.
Regarding outstanding item 237/79-13-07 and 249/79-11-07, the inspec-tor determined that a direct line communication system to IE head-quarters and the Region III office has been installed, and the licensee has implemented procedures for emergency use of the system.
This item is closed.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
13.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on August 10, 17, 24 and 31, 1979 and summarized the scope and findings of that weeks' inspection activities.
The licensee acknowl-edged this information including the item of noncompliance discussed in paragraph 8.
1196 069 j
_g.