IR 05000240/1976020

Letter Referring to 09/29 and 09/30/1976 IE Inspection Report 05000240/1976020 Regarding Refueling Activities - Dresden Unit 3

ML17252B141
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden, 05000240
Issue date:	10/20/1976
From:	Fiorelli G NRC/RGN-III
To:	Brian Lee Commonwealth Edison Co
References
IR 1976020
Download: ML17252B141 (7)

Text

. \\

UNITED STATES CENTRAL FILES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION 111 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 60137 OCT 2 o 1976

'

Commonwealth Edison Company ATTN:

Mr. Byron Lee, Jr.

.Vice President Docket No. 50-249/71'*'2.CJ P. O. Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. J. S. Creswell of this office on September 29-30, 1976, of activities at Dresden Nuclear* Power Station authorized by Licerise No. D.PR-25 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. Stephenson at the c6nclusion of the inspection~

• The.enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas

.examined during the inspection. * Within these areas, the

• inspecticm consisted of a selective.examination of procedures and representative records, observations, and interviews with personnel..

During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be.in noncompliance with NRC requirements,- as described under Enf~rcement Items in the.Summary of Findings secti~n

• of the enclosed inspection repor.

.

This notice is sent to you pursuant to the provisions of Section 2.201 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulation Section 2.201 requires you to submit to this office within twenty days of your receipt of this notice a.written statement or explanation in reply, including -for each item of noncornpl,iance: 0) corrective action taken and the results achieved; (2) corrective action to be taken to avoid further noncompliance; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieve Based on discussions with your representatives at the site, we understand that refueling surveillance procedures will be revised to include items detailed in the note to Paragraph 2.a of the ~eport Detail....

• . ~* :..

• 'i::'

.*.*:

• Commonwealth Edioo *Company-2-OCT 2 0-1976 In accordanc~.with Section 2. 790 of the NRC * s Rule.a of Pra¢t1ce *" 'Part 2, 'l:i tle 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this notice,* the enclosed inspection report, and your -* *

response to this notice will ba placed in the NRC's Pubiic Doc\\mlerit Room, except as follows. * If this report contains information that you or youi: contractors believe to be proprietary, you must apply in.writing to this office, within twenty days of your receipt of this notice, to withhold such information from public discloaure. The application must include a full otatement of tha reasons fo~ which the infor-mation is considered proprietary, and should be prepared so that pi'oprietary information identified in the application is.contained 1D an enclosure to the applicatio We ti7ill gladly discuss any questions,.Ou have concemiug thi iiiapectio Enclosure:

IE Inspection Report No. 050-249/76-20 c.c w / 8.nc.l s '

Mr. B. B. Stephenson Station Superintendent bee w/en.cl:

Central Files Reproduction Unit NRC 20b PDR Local PDR NSIC TIC

Sincerely yours,. -

. : :. : *. ~.. \\.,.. *..

,...

~ ~ *

• , ' * '.

• *

, *.. ' * ;

• .

• * I Csoto~ Fiorelli, <:hie£ Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch

.. *..

',.

• ,,

Anthony Roisman, Esq., Attorney

........

. ****..,*

-r* ***r I~

!.

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMEN REGION III Report of Operations Inspection IE Inspection Report No. 050-249/76-20 Licensee:

Commonwealth Edison Company P. O. Box 767

Chicago, Illinois 60690 Dresden. Nuclear Power Station Unit 3 Morris, Illinois Type of Licensee:

BWR (GE) 200 & 810 MWe Type of Inspection:

Rout.ine, Unannounced

<'*

Dates of Inspection:

1Septein~.er-'j~-30, li7~

J,>{ (./r.~**~ut J. S. Creswell Principal Inspector:

Accompanying Irn:;pectors:

None Other Accompanying Personnel:

None

~*~

Reviewed By:

W. S. ~f::ihief Nuclear Support Section

• --.*-****- ***--r..

,*.-.-~*,..-;***

...... - ____.._ __ _

License No. DPR-25 Category:

C

/"'.!

(*~ /u*. 1,-*,7~ /'

C/C.-

I 71 ?* ""'

(Date)'

..":"

.r.::.:'...,.

i*,-

. ' '

:~

. :.1

---

*--* -......-.--*------ -~--- -...

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Inspection Sununary An inspection was conducted on September 29 and 30, (7-6-20, Unit 3)

.regarding refueling activitie One item of noncompliance was identi-fied relating to failure to follow.a refueling proce~ur Enforcement Items

.Infraction Contrary to Technical Specification 6.2.A, procedure DFP 800-10 was not followed in reference to item F. 1. h{2) -which requires operability

. of "Hoist Loaded" indicator:

(Paragraph 2.a, Report Details)

Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Items None inspecte Other Significant Items Systems and Components

.:**

None * Facility Items (Plans and Procedures)

Non Managerial Items Non Noncompliance Identified and Corrected by Licensee Non Deviations Non *' Status of Previously Reported Unresolved Items Not reviewe r*

. I

. ~

Management Intei;:view The inspector conducted an exit interview with Mr. Stephenson and other members of his staff on September 30~ 197 The following ma_tters were discussed: The inspector stated that contrary to the requirements of proce-dt1re DFP 800-1:0, "Fuel Movements from the Reactor to the Spent *

Fuel Storage Pool,'-' the "Hoist Loaded" indicator was not lighting when the fuel assembly was moved from its rest position in the cor The inspector stated that this item const-ituted an infrac-tion since it entailed not following the procedure as required by Technical Specification 6. The inspector also questioned the licensee about the methods used to test the load cell which supplies the signal to the "Hoist Loaded" indicato (Paragraph 2.a, Report Details)

The inspector stated that he had observed that the fuel grapple was moved in a horizontal direction before the fuel was in full up positio Th!= inspector stated that there was a possiblity of fuel damage both in removing-the fuel from the core and in striking the "cattle chute" temporary shiel The licensee stated that.the reason the fuel was moved in this manner was becaµse of the amount of time save (Paragraph 2.b, Report Details)

The inspector stated that ~ccording to procedure DFPS00-11,

"Cattle Chute Installation and Removal," precautions are taken to not move the c,attle chute -over the open.r~actor cavit The inspector asked if similar precautions were taken in moving the chute over the spent fuel are The licensee stated they would furnish information about storage and movement of the chute to thi inspector after they had discussed it with the cogni~ant personne (Paragraph 2. c, Report Details)

Telephone conversations with the licen~ee subsequent to the inspection has revealed that the "cattle chute" is stored in the moisture-separator dryer pool and that movement is never over the reactor core or spent fuel storage poo n-*-

-* ' !

'

..I

---

*--~-----*H--~-*** *--- -

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted B. Stephenson, Plant Superintendent T. Watts, ~echnical Staff Supervisor

• . R~ -. Ragan, Operating Engineering, Unit 3 *

D. Gorman, NSO P. Kodat, NSO J. Almer, Unit Engineer D*. Simpson, Refueling Foreman J. Jarosi, Refueling Foreman R. Doty, A Fuel Handler L. DeCarlo, B Fuel Handler L. Person, A Fuel Handler

• T ~ Rausch, Engineer

• Review of Refueling Selected areas involving refueling were reviewed to evaluate the compliance to the Technical Specifications and refueling proce-dure The selected areas consisted of surveillance testing, procedure check lists, and* direct -observation of refuel*,ing opera-*

tion Evaluation included whether the work was performed by qualified personnel, procedures were beiri'g. followed,. and work performed was. properly documente The inspector directly obser.ved the movement of six fuel assemblies..

Master Refueling Procedure DFP 800 check list and* the following ancilliary procedures check lists were reviewed:

DOS 800-1 DOS 800-2 DOS 800-3 DOS 700-1 DOS 700-2 DOS 700-3 DOS 700-4 Refueling Interlock Check Blade Guide Inspection and Storage Source Range Instrument Response During Refueling SRM Inoperable Rod Block Test IRM Downscale Rod Block Functional Test SRM Detector Position Rod Block Functional Test IRM Detector Position Rod Block Functional Test

- 4 -

r:;-*-JC

. i. !

-

i

---

DOS 7'00-6 SRM Functional Tes:t Review* of the above checklist revealed no items of noncomplianc a~

During~ the* direct observation of refueling operations, the inspector stationed himself on the bridge of the fuel grappl While observing the lifting -of a fuel assembly out of its rest position in the core the inspector noted that as the grapple moved *upward the "Slack Cable" indicator went out but that the

"Hoist Loaded" light did not come o The inspector then as.ked _the refueling personnel if the light was operabl He was' told that. the load cell which generates the signal for the indicator-l:i:gh.ts was* calibrated in the Spent Fuel Storage pit and because of differences in depth between the storage pit and reactor core an erroneous signal was. generate The

~eftieii~g crew then disc~ssed the i>.rotS~rri*"~~-;;g* themseives and suspended operations~ The inspector asked the reason for the work stoppage and was informed that electricians had been called to correct the proble The time at which the work ceased and the inspector left the refueling floor was approx!-

.

mately 2: 30 p. m. September 29, 197 s*. As the inspector observed the fuel movements he noticed that

• the fuel-assemblies were not in the full up.p.osition.before the fuel grapple. bridge was moved horizontall The* grapple operator determined visually the vertical position of the fuel assembly by direct observation and by observing distances b.etween the telescoping sections of the retracting boo.

.

-.. "'.... :.

c. * *Prior to fuel movements the licensee had installed a. "Cattle Chute" temporary shield which prevents radiation streaming into the*drywell during.fuel movement This shield contains lead and the inspector was.told that it weighed approximately 12,.000* pound *subsequent telephone conver.saiions _with the licensee revealed that an Action Item'Request has been initiated to revise the refueling procedure to include a check of the grapple indicating light and hoist power interupt *under "Jam" conditions. *

- 5 -

• • -~'(

r*,

,. l

'