IR 05000254/1979003
| ML19289D800 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 01/29/1979 |
| From: | Shafer W, Whitt K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19289D797 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-79-03, 50-254-79-3, 50-265-79-03, 50-265-79-3, NUDOCS 7903140468 | |
| Download: ML19289D800 (6) | |
Text
.
,.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No.:
50-254/79-03; 50-265/79-03 Docket No.:
50-254; 50-256 License No.:
DPR-29, DPR-30 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company P. O. Box 767, Chicago, Illinois 60690 Facility Name: Quad Cities 1,2 Inspectio:. At: Cordova, Illinois Inspection Conducted: January 2-5, 1979-I
/,,5 h
'
/
Inspector:
'. D. Sha f e'r
{-Ab (Date)
Pe m c pp sal Branch
_]-
h /f lj,_ <yj (Date)
(, j, j. ;.
Inspection Summary Inspection on January 2-5, 1979 (Report No. 50-254/79-03; 50-265/79-03)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspectic', io review the licensee's surveillance test program during the time perl'
of June 1977 - June 1978.
The inspection involved 30 inspector-hours by one Performance Appraisal Branch Inspector.
Results No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
4 **$
03 1 q9
.
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted _
- N.
Kalivianakis, Plant Superintendent
- K.
Graesser, Administrative Assistant
- T. Tamlyn, Lead Operating Engineer
- L. Gerner, Technical Staff Supervisor
- R.
Flessner, Assistant Technical Staf f Supervisor
- J.
Heilman, QA Engineer, Operations The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees, including operating engineers, technical staff personnel and Quality Control Personnel.
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Surveillance Test Procram Review The inspector conducted a review of the licensee's surveillance test program to verify that the Technical Specifications surveillance tests performed by the licensee are covered by properly approved procedures; that these procedures included prerequisites, the identification of calibrated instrumentation used to conduct the surveillance, acceptance criteria, and operational checks prior to returning the equipment to service.
The inspector also verified for those tests selected, that test results were properly reviewed and were in conformance with the Technical Specifications and procedural requirements.
The following Technical Specifications tests were reviewed during the inspection. No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
-2-
.
.
.
.
Tech. Spec. #
hrv_eillance Requ irement
_
.Nipnher Samyled Findings TS 4.3.B.5 Functional test of RBM during limiting Y)O Clear control rod pattern TS 4.3.E Comparison of Critical rod configurations
Clear TS 4.3.B.2 CRD llousing Support Inspection
Clear TS 4.3.D Accumulator pressure and level alarms 300 Clear TS table 4.2.1, Reactor low pressure functional test
Clear Item 3 Table 4.2.1, llPCI steam line hi flow
Clear item 1 Table 4.2.1, Main steam isolation steam tunnel high
Clear temperature functional test Table 4.2.1, 11PCI steam line area hi temperature
Clear
,y Item 2 Table 4.2.1, Drywell pressure
Clear Item 2 Table 4.2.2 Drywell pressure - instrument check 210 Clear TS 4.6.C.I.a Reactor coolant sample - iodine 131-135 210 Clear TS 4.6.C.1.b Isotopic analysis
Clear TS 4.6.C.3.a Conductivity and chloride ion content 210 Clear Surveillance every 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> TS 4.6.C.3.b Conductivity and chloride sample during
See paragraph a.
startup TS 4.6.G.I.a&b
.le t pump integrity 157 Clear TS 4.6.I.3 Snubber inspection s
clear TS 4.5.A.4 RllR pump inoperable 210 Clear
.
.
Tech. Spec. #
Surveillance Requi rement Number Sampled Findings TS 4.5.B.3 Loss of one loop of containment cooling 210 Clear mode TS 4.5.D.l.a ADS survillance
See paragraph b.
TS 4.5.D.I.b Manual operation of each relief valve
Clear TS 4.7.A.3.a Pressure suppression chamber reactor building
Clear vacuum breakers TS 4.7.A.3.b Test vacuum breakers
Clear TS 4.7.A.I.a Torus water level 420 Clear TS 4.7.A.5 Primary containment oxygen concentration
Ocar TS 4.7.A.4 Containment suppression chamber /drywell
Clear vaccum breakers ay TS 4.9.A.I.a Manual start and load of Unit I diesel
Clear generator TS 4.9.A.I.b Diesel generator air compressor operability
Clear TS 4.9.A.I.c Diesel generator fuel oil transfer pump
See paragraph c.
operability TS 4.9.A.2 Status of 345 KV 1ines and switchgear 365 Clear TS 4.9.B.1 Station batteries 104 See paragraph d.
TS Table 4.2.1 RBM upscale and downscale
Clear TS 4.3.A.2 CRD exercise 9,670 Clear
.
.
.
The following concerns were identified:
a.
While reviewing the licensee's test data relating to the 4-hour sample of the reactor water during startup, the inspector noted 4 separate occasions when the records did not indicate that samples were being taken as required.
In discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector was informed that 4-hour samples of the reactor water are taken only when the steam rate is less than 100,000 pounds per hour and the reactor is in actual startup. The licensee representatives explained several plant conditions where they felt the 4-hour sampling requirement was not necessary. As a result of the licensee's explanations this item is considered unresolved and will be followed up by the regional inspector.
b.
During the review of Technical Specification 4.5.D.1, the simulated auto-initiation of the ADS pilot valves, the inspector determined that the licensee performs this surveillance requirement during refueling outages only. The surveillance frequency as identified in the Technical Specification requires a periodic test once every 6 months.
In discussions with licensee representatives, the inspec-tor was informed that the present Technical Specification frequency for this surveillance was a typographical error made when amendment 40 to the Technical Specifications was issued. The inspector re-viewed the previous Technical Specification frequency requirement prior to amendment 40 and determined that the frequency at that time was for each refueling outage.
The licensee requested a Tech-nical Specification change on October 25, 1977 and has received no written response from NRR to date.
The licensee also informed the inspector that relief from this 6-month frequency was given to the licensee via telecommunications.
Furthermore, the licensee immediately contacted the NRR office and reconfirmed NRR's position regarding this Technical Specification. The inspector informed the licensee that this Technical Specification require-ment frequency is an open item and will be followed up by the regional inspector.
c.
During the review of Technical Specification 4.9.A.I.c, diesel generator fuel oil transfer pump operability surveillance, the inspector determined that actual data taken to confirm operability of this pump was inadequate from June 1977 - November 1978.
-5-
.. -
,
.
In November, 1978, the licensee revised the surveillance data sheet to include what appears to be an adequate determination of operability. This item was identified and corrected by the licensee's review program and considered closed.
d.
During the review of Technical Specification 4.9.B.1, station batteries, the inspector noted the procedural requirements relating to specific gravity were not being implemented prior to November, 1977. At that time the licensee implemented a revised data sheet which clearly includes the proper review and action to be taken for the above noted concern. This item was identified and corrected by the licensee and is considered closed.
3.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 5, 1979. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection as identified in paragraph 2, item a, b, c, and d.
The licensee stated the following:
Regarding paragraph 2.a, a review of the surveillance requirement for reactor water smapling during startup will be made and a clear definition cf when the samples should be taken will be identified.
The inspector informed the licensee that the reactor water sampling requirement during startup is an unresolved item.
Regarding paragraph 2.b, the licensee stated that a Technical Specification change request will be resubmitted for Technical Specification 4.5.D.I.
During the interim the licensee intends to implement this surveillance requirement at each refueling as previously agreed to by NRR.
The inspector stated this concern is an open item and will be followed by the regional inspector.
-6-