IR 05000254/1980001
| ML19309C457 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1980 |
| From: | Chrissotimos N, Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309C450 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-80-01, 50-254-80-1, 50-265-80-02, 50-265-80-2, NUDOCS 8004080625 | |
| Download: ML19309C457 (7) | |
Text
.. 4 O
U.S. NUCLEAR' REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-254/80-01; 50-265/80-02 Docket No. 50-254; 50-265 License No. DPR-29; DPR-30 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: Quad-Cities, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Cordova, IL Inspection Conducted: January 2, 1980 - February 1, 1980
W.( 4 m,,..-,c
'
.
/a inspector:
N. J. Chr/ssotimos -
<1/.h / lt
.k9e 1 r-r,[
Approved by: R.L.Sfessar+d, Chief
.1/2r/77
.-
,
Projects Section 1-1
'
Inspection Summary Inspection on January 2, 1980 - February 1, 1980 (Report No. 50-254/80-01; 50-265/80-02 Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced resident inspection of licensee actionL on previou. inspection findings, maintenance, plant operations, physical protection-sect.rity organization; physical barriers; access control (identification, authorization, badging, search, and escorting);
and communications, review and followup on licensee event reports, review and followup on IE Bulletins, surveillance of core power distribution limits, and thermal power evaluation. The inspection involved 175 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the 12 areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance were identified.
i l
t
- ""O
-
...
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
- N. Kalivianakis, Superintendent T. Tamlyn, Assistant Superintendent Operations K. Graesser, Assistant Superintendent Administrative D. Bax, Assistant Superintendent Maintenance
- L.
Gerner, Technical Staff Supervisor G. Conschack, Senior Operating Engineer
- J. Ileilman, Quality Assurance, Operations
.
'
The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees, in-cluding shift engineers and foremen, reactor operators, technical staff personnel and quality control personnel.
- Denores those present at the exit interview on February 1, 1980.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) OII 77-1 (Inspection Report 50-254/77-5; 50-265/77-6):
Followup on AIR 4-77-1.
The inspector verified that this Action Item Request had been completed.
(Closed) 011 77-7 (Inspection Report 50-254/77-10; 50-265/77-10):
Safety Evaluation for Relief Valve Modification. The inspector verified that the evaluation had been completed and that the modi-fication would not affect valve operation.
(Closed) OII 77-8 (Inspection Report 50-254/77-19; 50-265/77-18):
Replacement of Relays in Accordance with IEB 76-02.
The inspector verified that all relays had been replaced.
(Closed) OII 77-12 (Inspection Report 50-254/77-23; 50-265/77-22):
Construction of New Records Building. The inspector verified the completion of the records building structure.
3.
Maintenance Station maintenance activities of safety related systems and compo-nents were reviewed to ascertain that they are conducted in accord-ance with approvcJ procedures, regulatory guides and industry codes or standards and in conformance with Technical Specifications re-quirements.
The following items were considered during this review:
the limiting conditions for operations were met while components or systems were removed from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiating the work; maintenance activities were accomplished using approved procedures; maintenance activities were inspected as applicable; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior to-2-
.
...
returning components or systems to an operating status; quality i
control records were maintained for maintenance activities; and maintenance activities were accomplished by qualified personnel.
The inspector observed maintenance in progress concerr.ing the fol-lowing work: Target Rock Relief Valve Maintenance, Cleaning of Drywell Head, and Replacement of 105X Relays in Safety Related Breakers.
The inspector reviewed the following completed work packages:
WR-02023, RHR Shutdown Cooling Valve WR-02175, Refuel Bridge WR-02211, Drywell Purge Valve WR-02646, Feedwater Check Valve WR-02940, Vacuum Breaker Valve WR-08805, Electronic Relief Valve WR-02859, RCIC Pipe Snubber WR-03069, U2 Reactor Building Fuel Pool Monitor WR-02938, Torus to Reactor Building Vacuum Breaker WR-02967, SBGT Charcoal Absorber No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
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 January, 1980. The inspector ob-terved plant operations during five offshifts during the month of January, 1980. 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 Specifications, 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 and 2 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 chemical analysis of water chemistry samples to verify that water chemistry was being maintained in accordance with Technical Specifi-cations.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
-3-l
,-
.
.
5.
Physical Protection - Security Organization The inspector verified by observation and personnel interview that at least one full time member of the security organization who has the authority to direct the physical security activities of the security organization was onsite at all times; verified by observa-tion that the security organization was properly manned for all shifts; and verified by observation that members of the security organization were capable of performing their assigned tasks. There were no weapons qualifications conducted during this monthly inspec-tion.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
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.
7.
Physical Protection - Access Control (Identification, Authorization,
-
Badging, Search, and Escorting)
l 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; veri-fied that all persons, packages, and vehicles were searched in accordance to regulatory requirements, the PSP, and security proce-dures; verified that persons authorized escorted access were accom-panied by an escort when within a PA or vital area; verified that vehicles authorized escorted access were accompanied by an escort when within the PA; and verified by review of the licensee's authori-zation document that the escort observed above was authorized to perform the escort function.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
8.
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 l-4-
i
!
'
, -
- -..
,
,.
- ---
.e member of the response team successfully communicate from their i
remote location; and verified that equipment was operated consistent with requirements in the PSP and security procedures.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
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 accomplished in accordance with Technical Speci-fications.
Unit 1 R0-79-36, dated November 15, 1979, SBGT Freon Test exceeded limits R0-79-37, dated November 16, 1979, 1/2 Diesel Generator Starting Air Supply Valve closed R0-79-38, dated November 18, 1974, ECCS Setpoints Found to be Less Conservative than limits R0-79-42, dated December 14, 1979, MSIV Closure Timing exceeded limits Unit 2 R0-79-28, dated December 5, 1979, RCIC High Temperature Switches Tripped in Excess of Technical Specifications R0-79-29, dated December 6, 1979, Oxygen Analyzer Valve failed to close No items of noncompliance vr.c identified.
10.
IE Bulletin Followup For the IE Bulletins listed below the inspector verified that the written response was within the time period stated in the bulletin, that the written response included the information required to be reported, that the written response included adequate corrective action commitments based on information presentation in the bulletin and the-licensee's response, that licensee management forwarded copies of the written response to the appropriate onsite management 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.
-5-
-
..
'
IEB 79-26, Boron Loss From BWR Control Blades.
'
The licensee stated that the requirements of items 3 and 4 will be responded to in accordance with requirements. The inspector will followup on this matter during future inspections.
(254/80-01-01; i
265/80-02-01)
'
IEB-79-28, Possible Malfunction of NAMCO Model EA180 Limit Switches at Elevated Temperatures.
No NAMCO Model EA180 Limit Switches are installed in safety related systems or are planned for future installation.
IEB-80-01, Operability of ADS Valve Pneumatic Supply.
The inspector entered the Unit Two drywell to inspect the target rock relief valve for seismic qualification and to witness a leak test of the affected check valve.
The licensee has committed to modify the air supply line prior to Unit Two startup and during the next refueling outage for Unit One.
The licensee has submitted a Technical Specification change to allow Unit One to continue operation through its current fuel cycle. NRR has agreed to the Technical Specification change based on the sub-mittad analysis which justifies continued operation.
The inspector will followup on this matter during future inspections.
(254/80-01-02; 265/80-02-02)
No items of noncompliance were identified.
11.
Surveillance of Core Power Distribution Limits The inspector verified through examination of P-1 print outs obtained
'
on January 3, 1980 that linear heat generation rates (LHGR) were within Technical Specifications limits and that if core maximum peaking factors were above design value total peaking factors for that class of fuel, APRM setpoint adjustments would be made by the amount specified in Technical Specification; and verified by exami-nation of the OD-6, " Thermal Data in a Specified Bundle," associated with the P-1 selected above that minimum critical power ratio (MCPR)
and average planar linear heat generation rate (APLHGR) were with Technical Specifications limits.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
12.
Thermal Power Evaluation The inspector reviewed the results of the licensee's core thermal
power evaluation for Unit I which were obtained on January 15, 1980 f
J-6-
.
.
_
_
-
,
.. -.. --. -
_
_ _.
. _ _.. _ -
-
.
_- _.
.
.
,
and verified the technical adequacy of the evaluations and results
,
t
,
!
{
and that the frequency of evaluations was as prescribed by the facility's Technical Specifications.
,
No items of noncompliance were identified.
i 13.
Exit Interview
>
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph I
j 1) throughout the month and at the conclusion of the inspection on r
February 1, 1980 and summarized the scope and findings of the.inspec-
-
'
tion activities. The licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments.
r
\\
\\
I
!
t
!
a i
I
!
i
.
!
f l
!
<
i I
!
'
'
.
s
.
!
l i
i.
i f
I
<
>
l
'
'
-7-
i
._
.
-,. -..
..
.. -. -..
- -
.., - -. - - - - -,
.,
,,.
.
-
--
.