IR 05000254/1980012
| ML19347B451 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 08/18/1980 |
| From: | Chrissotimos N, Dupont S, Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347B446 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-80-12, 50-265-80-15, NUDOCS 8010150090 | |
| Download: ML19347B451 (11) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
. - _ _ -.
.
-
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION
.
REGION III
Report No.
50-254/80-12; 50-265/80-15 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 Nuclear Power Station, Units I and 2 Inspection At:
Quad Cities Site, Cordova, Illinois Inspection Conducted:
June 6 thru July 18, 1980
i
,
Inspectors:
N. J. Chrissotimos
['/8'80
'
MS *s"
,
S. G. DuPont b/8IO
'
'. f..
> w -2-x S 7l/ f/ b l
Approved By:
. L. Sped'sard, Chief
/
Projects Section 1 l
Inspection Summary l
Inspection on June 6 thru July 18, 1980 (Report No. 50-254/80-12; 50-265/80-15)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection consisting of opera-tional safety verification, maintenance observation, licensee event report followup, IE Bulletin followup, Plant trips, Procedure Verifi-8 01015 c m0
-...
-
....
.,-
.-
-
..
-
.. -.... - -
-
1!o i
4
I
i cation, Followup on Headquarters Requests and independent inspection.
!
The inspection involved a total of 180 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC
l inspectors including 40 inspector-hours onsite during offshifts.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
4 k
,
u
'
<
!
Y
&
i
!
i i
-
i i
l l
i
!
!
4 k
i k
!
I
,
k i
,
!.
2-
-
,
,
i
i
.-,
.x
.
-
,)"~
' -.
,,y.-,.,,.4
.,
,.,. _,_,. ____ _ _ _ _ _._m
...
,..m
.-_ _, --...,,-,,_,,_.
-
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
,
- N. Kalivianakis, Superintendent T. Tamlyn, Assistant Superintendent Operations I
L. Gerner, Assistant Superintendent Administrative D. Bax, Assistant Superintendent Maintenance
- R. Flessner, Technical Staff Supervisor G. Conschlack, Senior Operating Engineer
- J.
Heilman, Quality Assurance, Operations The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees, including shift engineers and foremen, reactor operators and tech-
,
nical staff personnel.
I
- Denotes those present at the exit interview on July 18, 1980.
2.
Operational Safety Verification The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the month of June and July,1980. The inspector verified the opera-bility of selected emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and verified proper return to service of affected components. Tours of Units 1 and 2 reactor buildings and turbine buildings were conducted to observe plant equipment conditions, including potential fire hazards, fluid leaks, and excessive vibrations and to verify that maintenance requests had been initiated for equipment in need of maintenance. The inspector by observation and direct interview verified that the physical security plan was being implemented in accordance with the station security plan.
The inspector observed plant housekeeping / cleanliness conditions and verified implementation of radiation protection controls. During the month of June, 1980, the inspector walked down the accessible por-tions of the Units 1 and 2 CRD and RCIC systems to verify opera-bility. The inspector also witnessed portions of the radioactive waste system controls associated with radwaste shipments and barreling.
These reviews and observations were conducted to verify that facility operations were in conformance with the requirements established under technical specifications, 10 CFR, and admin-istrative procedures.
-3-l l
r l
,
_
_
.-
-
i
,
.
While conducting interviews with licensed operators, the inspector j
determined that information provided to the operators concerning modifications was not presented to them in a timely manner. The licensee has committed to provide this information in a more timely The inspector will review this item in future inspections.
manner.
(254/80-12-01; 265/80-13-01)
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
3.
Monthly Maintenance Observation Station maintenance activities of safety related systems and com-ponents listed below were observed / reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted in accordance with approved procedures, regulatory guides and industry codes or standards and in conformance with technical specifications.
The following items were considered during this review: The limit-ing conditions for operation were met while components or systems were removed from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiating the work; activities were accomplished using approved procedures and were inspected as applicable; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior to returning components or systems to service; quality control records were maintained; activities were accomplished by qualified personnel; parts and materials used were properly certi-fied; radiological controls were implemented; and, fire prevention controls were implemented.
Work requests were reviewed to determine status of outstanding jobs and to assure that priority is assigned to safety related equipment maintenance which may affect system performance.
The following maintenance activities were observed / reviewed:
Unit 2 Q04968 IRM CH17 Detector Unit 2 Q04875 CRD Friction Test & Instrument Response Unit 2 Q04866 CRD Replace Drive Seals Unit 1 & 2 QO3638 CRD Rebuild Following completion of maintenance on the Unit I and Unit 2 HPCI, the inspector verified that these systems had been returned to ser-vice properly.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
-4-
-...,
__ _ _ -.. _ _.
.
.
4.
Licensee Event Reports Followup 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 pre-vent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with technical specifications.
Unit 1 R0-80-15/03L dated May 11, 1980, Relief valve, (1-203-3B) failed to open during surveillance due to a dirty contact on the valve opera-tor hold-in coil switch.
20-80-11/03L dated April 29, 1980, Main feed breaker tripped to MCC 19-1.
The inspector determined that these cubicle type breakers are not tested prior to installation. The licensee has committed to establish a preventive maintenance and testing program for these cubicle breakers.
Unit 2 RO 80-10/03L dated May 17, 1980, MSIV (AO-2-203-1C and 2D) exceeded Technical Specifications during closing timing surveillance.
R0 80-13/03L dated April 28, LPCI MOV failed (M0 2-1001-36A) to close during surveillance testing.
R0 80-15/03L dated June 4, 1980, Leak found on HPCI steam supply line. The leak did not impair the functional capabilities of the HPCI system. The licensee removed HPCI from service to initiate imm-ediate repairs and returned the system to service in 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
5.
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 md 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-
.
.
l l
.
IEB 80-06 dated March 13, 1980. Engineered Safety Feature (ESF)
reset controls. The office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will evaluate the adequacy of the licensee's response per a Task Inter-face Agreement with the Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
IEB 79-27 dated November 30, 1979, Loss of Non-class 1-E Instru-mentation and Control Power System Bus during operation. The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will evaluate the adequacy of the licensee's response per a Task Interface Agreement with the Office of Inspection and Enforcement.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
I
!
6.
Plant Trips Following the plant trip on June 20, 1980 of Unit I the inspector
!
ascertained the status of the reactor and safety systems by observa-tion of control room indicators and discussions with licensee per-l sonnel concerning plant parameters, emergency system status and reactor coolant chemistry. The inspector verified the establishment
of proper communications and reviewed the corrective actions taken l
by the licensee.
All systems responded as expected, and the plant was returned to operation on June 20, 1980.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
l l
7.
Inspection and Review of Licensee Response to IE Bulletin 80-17 (TI 2515/39)
l l
The inspector by direct observation and procedural and data review verified the following IE Bulletin 80-17 items:
Item 1 The inspector observed the licensee's verification that no significant amount of residual water was present in the 3DV by performing a heat trace of the vol-ume. During the test, the vent and drain valves were also verified to operate correctly. The vent and drain lines were verified to be free of obstruction by perfor-mance of a dynamic air test.
(
Item 2 The licensee performed two scrams, one manual and one automatic on Units 1 and 2.
The inspector witnessed one manual scram of Unit-1 from the contrcl room and the manual scram of Unit-2 from both the reactor building and the control room.
!
I (
-6-
.
..
.
.
<
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's temporary procedures and data. Twenty two control rod scram insertion times were reviewed by the inspector. A multi-pen recorder was used during both the manual and automatic scrams to record the rod insertion times.
Item 2d The inspector witnessed the draining of Unit 2 SDV and reviewed the data from Unit 1.
The licensee reported in a letter to the Director of Region III dated July 11, 1980, inconsistent data and a explanation of the data, including the results, events and effects of the phenomena. This inconsistency has no adverse safety affects. This data is currently being reviewed by CECO engineering.
Items 2b, Data was reviewed by the inspector for both units.
2e, 2f, 2g, 2j Item 2k The inspector by discussion and review with the licensee verified that the scram data was compared with all attain-able data of previous scrams.
Item 3 The inspector observed the verification of the vent valve opening on Unit 2 and review of data on Unit 1.
Item 4 The inspector reviewed the licensee's recommended proce-dure changes for compliance with IE Bulletin 80-17.
The inspec-tor also interviewed various operators for training on the proposed procedure changes. Further reviews will be conducted by the inspector after the completion of the licensee's training program.
(254/80-12-02;
'
265/80-15-02).
Item 5 The inspector reviewed the licensee's temporary procedure and daily unit logs for compliance with IE Bulletin 80-17.
Item 6 The inspector reviewed the licensee's response of IE Bulletin 80-17 dated July 11, 1980 and verified complete-ness except for item 6.c which will be reviewed in a future inspection. (254/80-12-03; 265/80-15-03)
Item 7 The inspector reviewed portions of the licensee's response dated July 14, and July 18, 1980, addressing the ATWS without recirculation pump trip (RPT). Complete review will be conducted in a future inspection. (254/80-12-04; 265/80-15-04)
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
-7-
-
,
r..
_
_
_ _.
!
<.
i
.
\\
..
8.
Inspection and Review of Licensee Response to IE Bulletin 80-17, i
Supplements 1 and 2
The inspector verified that the licensee is conducting daily monitoring
of water level in the Scram Discharge Volume. All other items of Supple-l ment I will be reviewed by the inspector upon completion of the licensee's j
implementation of Supplement 1.
(254/80-12-05; 265/80-15-05) The inspec-i tor verified that the licensee completed the requirements of Supplement 2 by modification of the vent system to assure a positive atmospheric vent exists.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
i
,
l 9.
Facility Procedures i
The inspector verified the following procedures were adequate and j
a.
consistent with Technical Specifications. The areas reviewed were
General Plant Operating Procedures, Safety-Related Systems (including i
j startup, shutdown, operation, and abnormal conditions), procedures i
for emergencies and significant events and Administrative Pro-I cedures.
1.
Administrative procedures:
}
i Procedure Control
QAP 1100-1R5 QAP 1100-2R2 QAP 1100-3R6 QAP 1100-4R3
QAP 1100-7R7 QAP 1100-8R1 Onsite Review QAP 1400-1R3 QAP 1400-2R3 QAP 1400-4R4 i
Escort Controls QAP 1900-4R2 QAP 1900-3R8 QAP 1900-7R4 i
2.
General Plant Operating Procedures QGP 2-4R7 QGA-2R3 QOP 800-1R1 QGA-9R1
QAP 500-7R2 l
3.
Safety-Related Systems (startup, shutdown, operating and abnormal conditions)
-8-
,
_
v,-
-~e-
' * '-
- wu
.s-w a-m
.
.
Standby Liquid Control QOP 1100-1R2 QOP 1100-2R2 QOP 1100-3R1 QOP 1100-4R1 QGA-17 R4 Automatic Reactor Scram signal present with no resulting scram (ATWS Event)
Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS)
QOP 100-5R7 QOP 1400-1R2 QOP 2300-3R7 QOP 2300-1R4 Main Steam QOP 250-1R1 QOP 250-2R1 Nuclear Instrumentation QOP 700-1R1 QOP 700-3R1 QOP 700-5R2 QOP 700-2R1 QOP 700-4R2 QOP 700-6R2 Make Up System QOP 4300-1R3 QOP 4300-2R2 QOP 4300-3R2 Radwaste Building Heating and Ventilation QOP 5700-2R4 QOP 5750-3R2 QOP 5700-3R1 4.
Procedures for Emergencies and other Significant Events Loss of Instrument Air QOA 4600-1R1 Q0A 4700-1R3 QOA'4700-2R3 QOA 4700-3R3
!
Loss of Containment Integrity QOA 1600-2R2 QOA 1600-3R1 QOA 1600-4R1 QOA 1600-5R1 Plant Fires QOA 4100-1R1 Q0A 4100-2R1 QAP 1170-3R2 Loss of Feedwater QOA 3200-1R2 QGA-18R2 QOA 3300-1R1 Turbine and Generator trips QGA-10R5 QGA-11R6-9-
.
.
!
b.
The following maintenance procedures and checklists associated
-
with the Nuclear Instruments were reviewed.
QTS 1311-1R6 QTS 1311-3R1 QTS 1311-4R2 QTS 1311-S7R1 QTS 1512-1R5 QMP 600-1R1 QMP 600-2R2 QMP 600-3R1 QMP 600-4R2 QMP 600-SR2 QMP 600-6R1 QMP 600-SIR 4 QMP 600-S2R1 QMP 600-S3R1 The following temporary procedures were reviewed for compliance c.
with Technical Specifications and Licensee policy requirements.
1355:
Verification that control rod drive system lines are not blocked.
1357:
Verification that Unit I and 2 scram volume vent lines are operational.
1358:
j
!
d.
The following procedure changes were reviewed relative to Technical Specification revisions, Inspection and Enforcement Bulletins and compliance with 10 CFR 50.59(a) requirements.
QMP 100-3R3 QOP 2300-3R7 QMP 100-7R3 QOP 2300-IR4 QMP 600-2R2 QOP 1000-5R7 QMP 600-4R2 QOP 1400-1R2 QMP 600-5R2 QOP 1100-1R2 QMP 600-6R1 QOP 1100-3R1 QMP 600-SIR 4 QOP 1100-2R2 QMP 600-S2R1 QOP 1100-4R1 QMP 600-S3R1 QOP 700-1R1 QOP 700-4R2 QOP 700-2R1 QOP 700-5R2 QOP 700-3R1 QOP 700-6R2 No items of noncompliance were identified.
10.
Headquarters Requests The inspector interviewed the licensee's training staff and instructor personnel. The instructors interviewed had teaching responsibilities in the araas of systems, transients, integrated plant operations and simulator training. These instructors currently possess SRO licenses.
j No items of noncompliance were identified.
- 10 -
..
-
..
_
-
_-
N
.
i
!'
11.
Independent Inspection s
The inspector attended a meeting in regards to the new ISI and IST Programs. Representatives from CECO, NRR and NRC contractors were j
present. Discussions were held to clarify positions and institute changes as necessary. The program is to become effective approxi-
j mately October 1, 1980.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
I 12.
Atomic Scfety and Licensing Board heeting j
The inspectors attended an ASLB meeting on June 26, 1980 in Peoria, j
Proceedings concerning the license of Nuclear Engineering Ccmpany, Inc. to operate the waste disposal site at Sheffield,
!
Illinois were discussed. Another pre-trial hearing vill be con-ducted when further judiciary matters are resolved.
14.
Exit-Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-
.
l graph 1) throughout the month and at the conclusion of the inspec-i tion on July 18, 1980 and summarized the scope end findings of the inspection activities. The licensee acknowledged the inspectors j
comments.
l
!
,
V i
.
)
,
i l
- 11 -
-