IR 05000237/1987016
| ML17199Q348 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 06/24/1987 |
| From: | Azab B, Wright G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17199Q313 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-237-87-16, NUDOCS 8706300983 | |
| Download: ML17199Q348 (6) | |
Text
04****.4--.---. -----
---*
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Report No. 50-237/87016(DRS)
Docket No. 50-237 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name:
Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2 Inspection At:
Morris, Illinois Inspection Conducted:
May 19 through June 9, 1987
~j e W/Wf'1 ( P<-*
Inspector:/B. Aza~
Approved Inspection Summary License No. DPR-19 Date Date Inspection on May 19 through June 9, 1987 (Report No. 50-237/87016(DRS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine unannounced, safety inspection of surveillance of core power distribution limits (61702), calibration of nuclear instrumentation (61705), core thermal power evaluation (61706), determination of reactor shutdown margin (61707), nuclear instrumentation response and reactivity checks (72700), and control rod performance testing (72700).
Results:
No violations or deviations were identifie B?06300983 870624
~DR ADOCK 05000237 PDR
'. -*---~... ~-
..-~... ***** *'-*...
DETAILS Persons Contacted
- E. 0. Eenigenburg, Station Manager
- E. A. Armstrong, Technical Staff Supervisor
- K. M. Brennan, Regulatory Assurance
- J. D. Brunner, Assistant Superintendent, Technical Services
- M. A. Falcone, Assistant Lead Nuclear Engineer
- R. A. Flessner, Services Superintendent
- D. A. Kunzman, Quality Assurance Inspector
- M. Wagn~r~ Lead N~clear Engineer The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees, including members of th~ technical and operating staf *Denotes persons attending the exit meeting of June 9, 198.
Followup on Previous Inspection Findings (92701)
(Clo$ed) Open Item (50-237/84-24-02(DRS)):
Resolve deficiencies observed during the Unit 2 refueling activities in February 198 Four items were identified which required further review by the NRC and/or action on the part of the license The inspector verified through review of documentation that the following concerns have been adequately addressed by the licensee, and that proper controls'exist to prevent further problems in these area The temporary jumpers providing coincident source range and intermediate range scrams should be properly maintained during fuel movemen The jumpers are installed as part of the Refueling Prerequisites Checklist, DFP 800- Control during the installation is maintained in accordance with DAP 7-4, "Control of Temporary System Alterations.
Shiftly review of the Unit Jumper Log ensures that the appropriate licensee personnel are aware of the installed jumpers during fuel movemen Maintenance and calibration should be routinely performed on the Fuel Pool Temperature Recorder (TR-1040-2) in the Control Roo Recorders are normally on a six month surveillance schedule and calibration is controlled by the Instrument Maintenance Calibration Card System in accordance with DIP 010-8, 11Control of Instrument Maintenance Calibration Records.
A shiftly check of the Control Room recorders is performed to ensure proper inking and a sufficient paper suppl Specifically, the Fuel Pool Temperature (Point 11 on TR-1040-2) is recorded in the Unit Operator 1s Daily Surveillance Log (Appendix A).
This surveillance would further detect problems with the recorde...,,..... _.:__:;;_,__ *... -.. -......;._:... The cable carrying the refueling bridge crane refueling interlock signals should be adequately maintained.. The cable has been repaired and a cable swivel installed to prevent strain due to bridge movemen Refueling floor checks are routinely performed during the Unit 11B 11 Man Reactor Building Round These checks along with the normal checks during refueling activities would detect problems with the cabl Maintenance should be routinely performed on the Area Vent Monitor Recorder (TR2-1801-06) in the Control Roo Maintenance and calibration are controlled in the manner described in Paragraph abov *
The inspector has no further concerns regarding these item No violations or deviations were identifie.
Surveillance of Core Power Distribution Limits (61702)
The inspector reviewed a number of surveillances of thermal limits and core power distribution limit Procedure No. DTS 8235, 11 Nuclear Engineer 1s Checklist, 11 Revision 2, is used by the 1 icensee to periodically check plant parameters and acquire data above 10% rated core thermal powe The inspector reviewed a sample of the checklist completed in May, 1987 and verified that the data was properly recorded at the recommended frequency of about three times per wee *
The licensee performed and documented daily surveillances by using a series of procedures (DOS 500).
The inspector reviewed the following surveillances for May 18 through 24, 1987, and verified that the results and frequency of testing satisfied technical specifications, and that the data was properly recorded and reviewed:
DOS 500-6, 11 APRM Gain Adjustment, 11 Revision *
DOS 500-12, 11Unit 2(3) Operator 1s Surveillance of APRM Flow Bicised Scram and Rod Block Settings *(Mixed Core),
11 Revision *
DOS 500-13, 11 Unit 2(3) Operator 1s Surveillance of ECCS Limitations on Power Distribution (Mixed Core),
11 Revision *
DOS 500-14, 11Unit 2(3) Operator 1s Surveillance of Thermal-Hydraulic Limitations on the Core Power Distribution (Mixed Core),U Revision No violations or deviations were identifie * Calibration of Nuclear Instrumentation Systems (61705)
The inspector reviewed the following licensee's procedures and test results for calibration of nuclear instrumentation systems: DTS 8139, 11 APRM Ca_libration, 11 Revision The inspector reviewed the results from calibrations performed on April 29 and May 1, 1987, and verified that the APRMs were calibrated to read equal to or greater than the actual percent core thermal power, as require DTS 8236, "Whole Core LPRM Calibration (Mixed Core), 11 Revision 2, describes the method for calibrating the Local Power Range Monitors (LPRMs), and updating the LPRM Gain Adjustment Factors (GAFs).
The procedure instructed the nuclear engineers on how to obtain LPRM calibration currents and to give them to the instrument mechanics.
who would insert the new currents in accordance with Reference 4 of the procedur Reference 4 was DIS 700-20, 11 LPRM Amplifier Cali-bration11 which was deleted in 198 The inspector informed the licensee that DTS 8236 referenced a procedure that was deleted five years ag DTS 8236 was revised in November 1986, but the outdated reference was not changed in the revisio A revision to DTS 8236 was initiated on May 29, 1987, to reference the current Procedure, DIP 700-16, 11 LPRM Amplifier Gain Calibration."
OAP 9-3, "Procedure Review and Writing, 11 Revision 1, provides instructions for review of procedures and states that when procedures are revised the entire procedure will undergo a revie OAP 9-3 contains a checklist of guidelines to follow during a procedure review, and includes a check of the references to ensure they have.not been delete The lead nuclear engineer, who is responsible for the review of startup test procedures, was not familiar with the guidelines for procedural review stated in OAP 9-ANSI Standard 18.7 1972, Revision 1 requires procedure reviews be conducted on a periodic basi Dresden procedures are reviewed on varying cycle However, after any procedure revision, the clock on the review cycle is rese The inspector's concern is that if OAP 9-3 is not followed during p~ocedure revisions, proced~res can exist *indefinitely without a proper revie This is considered to be an unresolved item (237/87016-01) pending further review by the NR No violations or deviations were identifie.
Core Thermal Power Evaluation (61706)
The inspector reviewed DOS 500-5, "Dresden 2(3) Backup Heat Balance Data Acquisition Checklist, 11 Revision The procedure provides an offline method for performing a heat balance and calculating core thermal powe The inspector independently calculated a heat balance using the data from the DOS 500-5 performed on May 8, 1987 and obtained the same core thermal power as the license No violations or deviations were identifie '. Determination of Reactor Shutdown Margin (61707)
The inspector verified through procedure review and independent calculations that DTS 8134, 11 Units 2/3 Shutdown Margin Demonstration,
Revision 9, had been properly performed and the results complied with Technical Specification 4.3. No violations or deviations were identifie.
Nuclear Instrumentation Response and Reactivity Checks (72700)
The inspector reviewed the following licensee's procedures and test results concerning nuclear instrumentation response and reactivity checks: DTS 8135, 11 Source Range Monitor Performance, 11 Revision The inspector reviewed the results of the surveillances performed April 9 through May 4, 1987 and found them to be acceptabl The surveillance was performed properly and complied with Technical Specifications 3.2.C.2 and 3.3. DTS 8138, 11Nuclear Instrumentation Overlap Verification for Intermediate Range Monitors, 11 Revision The inspector verified that the procedure was performed correctly and overlap existed between SRM, IRM and APRM nuclear instrumentation system DTS 8154, 11Control Rod Following and LPRM Operability Verification,
Revision The inspector reviewed the procedure and results and identified one concern:
several bypassed LPRMs were documented in the surveillance to have had a response to rod movemen The nuclear engineer, who performed the test, indicated that he was documenting response from adjacent LPRMs and not those in bypas The bypassed LPRMs were retested when returned to service and exhibited the proper respons The inspector remarked to the licensee that the deviation from procedure might have been explained in the comment section to avoid confusio The inspector had no further concerns regarding this ite DTS 8141, 11 Unit 2(3) Initial *criticality Comparison, 11 Revision The inspector reviewed the results from the April 22, 1987
- calculation and verified that the resultant anomaly of 0.002%
delta K satisfied the Technical Specification 3.3.E limit of 1.0%
delta DTS 8137, 11Moderator Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity,
Revision The inspector reviewed data obtained on April 22, 1987 and verified that the procedure was performed and data recorded for at least three reference temperatures as specifie DTS 8630, 11 Reactivity Anomaly Check (Mixed Core), 11 Revision The inspector reviewed the procedure performed on May 26, 1987 and noted that the Keff was within the expected band as specified by the Core Management Organization and the licensee complied with Technical Specification 3. No vi,olations or deviations were identified. * Controi Rod Performance Testing (72700)
The inspector reviewed the following surveillances used for startup testing of the control rod drives and verified that the data was properly recorded and results were acceptable:
DTS 300-6, 11Control Rod Drive Friction Testing, 11 Revision *
DOS 300-4, 11Control Rod Drive Timing, 11 Revision *
DTS 300-10, 11Control Rod Drive Functional Scram Testing,
Revision *
DTS 300-2, 11Control Rod Drive Scram Testing and Scram Valve Timing Test, 11 Revision 1 The inspector noted that Control Rod E-9 had not been teste The licensee indicated that Control Rod E-9 was uncoupled and had been taken out of servic The inspector verified that the licensee complied with Technical Specification 3.3.8.1.b which requires that the control rod be declared inoperable, be fully inserted, and the directional control valves electrically disarme The licensee had attempted to recouple the control rod to its drive several times without succes The licensee stated that the uncoupled rod would be repaired during the next maintenance outag No violations or deviations were identifie.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters that require more information to ascertain whether the matters are acceptable items, violations or deviation An unresolved item disclosed during this inspection is included in Paragraph 4.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) on June 9, 198 The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection:
The licensee acknowledged the statements made by the inspector with respect to the unresolved item (denoted in Paragraph 4b).
The inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the inspection repor