IR 05000254/1980019
| ML19343A880 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 10/08/1980 |
| From: | Chrissotimes N, Dupont S, Spessard R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343A877 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-80-19, 50-265-80-21, NUDOCS 8011240098 | |
| Download: ML19343A880 (13) | |
Text
_,
.
_
.__
(-
\\_/*
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Reports No. 50-254/80-19; 50-265/80-21 Docket Nos. 50-254; 50-265 Licenses No. DPR-29; DPR-30 Liceasee: Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767
Chicago, IL 60690
Facility Name: Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 & 2 Inspection At: Quad-Cities Site, Cordova, IL
.
Inspection Conducted: July 21 thru August 29, 1980
,
'
..
,
Inspectors:
N. J. Chrissotimos
~
.. / lt
'
-
p
.
..
S. G. DuPont
- '.. - /,
-
.
'
'_
..,. '.,.-
,-
.
%
. o s, s i, i.
,".
.
Approved By:
R. L. Spessard, Chief
- e
'. ' '
Reactor Projects Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on July 21 thru August 29, 1980 (Reports No. 50-254/80-19; 50-265-80-21)
Areas Inspected: Routine, Unannounced Resident Inspection of Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings, Maintenance Observation, Surveillance Obser-vation, Operational Safety Verification, Calibration, Quality Assurance Program Organization and Administration, Review of Plant Operations, Fire Protection, Participation in NRR/ Licensee Meeting, Review of Periodic and Special Reports, Followup on Part 21 Report, Participation in Inservice Inspection Meeting, Licensee Event Report Followup, IE Circular Followup, IE Bulletin Followup, Followup on Regional Requests, Media Contacts and inoffice review of the Unit 2 Reactor Building Integrated Leah Rate Test Report of March 12, 1980. The inspection involved a total of 252 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors including 35 inspector-hours onsite during offshifts.
Results: Of the 18 areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in 16 areas; three items of noncompliance were identified in two areas (infrac-tion - failure to follow procedures paragraph 5, infraction - failure to follow procedures, paragraph 5, deficiency - failure to follow procedures, paragraph 15).
801124 Odd
,
'
.-
_.
-
-
._.
-
.
.
.
'
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- N. Kalivianakis, Superintendent T. Tamlyn, Assistant Superintendent Operations
- L.
Gerner, Assistant Superintendent Administrative D. Bax, Assistant Superintendent Maintenance R. Flessner, Technical Staff Supervisor G. Conschlack, Senior Operating En ineer s
- J. Heilman, Quality Assurance, Operations The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees, includt.e, shift engineers and foreman, reactor operators, Technical staff and Quality Control personnel.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview on August 29, 1980.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Noncompliance (50-254/80-04; 50-265/80-05):
Exceeding 2*F per hour limit while using plant diffusers. NRR has issued a Technical Specification change which specifies this requirement need not be met during changes in the mode of condenser cooling.
(Closed) Noncompliance (50-254/80-16):
Insufficient Procedures to physically account for inventory The licensee has revised the pro-cedures and a container to hold physical inventory will be provided.
The inspector has no further tonc rns in this area.
No other concerns were identified.
3.
Monthly Maintenance Observation Station maintenance activities of safety related systems and components listed below were observed / reviewed to ascertain that they were conducted in accordance with approved procedures, cegulatory guides and industry codes or standards and in conformance with technical specifications.
The following items were considered during this review:
the limiting conditions fc,r operati:n 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 certified; radiological controls were implemented; and, fire prevention controls were implemented.
l-2-l
.
-
~ _.
..
.
.. -
.
.-.
- _ _ - -
.-
_. - _.
.
.
..
!
t
'
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:
-
WR Q6475 - Unit 1, Reactor Water Level Indicator WR Q06443-Unit 1, Terue Level Indicator
'
WR Q06307-Unit 1, Main Steam Line Rad Monitor Following completion of maintenance on the Unit 1 Torus Level Indicator
i and the Unit 2 HPCI, the inspector verified that these systems had been
returned to service properly.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Monthly Surveillance Observation The inspector observed technical specifications required sur7eillance testing on the Main Steam Line High Flow and Main Steam Line Hi Radiation Scram portions of the Reactor Protection System and verified that testing was performed in accordance with adequate procedures, that
'
test instrumentation was calibrated, that limiting conditions for opera-tion were met, that removal and restoration of the affected components acce accomplished, that test results conformed with technical specifica-tions and procedure requirements and were reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies
identified during the testing were properly reviewed and resolved by
appropriate management personnel.
J
.
The inspector also witnessed portions of the following test activities:
Shared Diesel Generator Surveillance and Unit 2 HPCI valve operability.
i
!
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Operational Safety Verification
.,
The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the
,
month of August, 1980. Tne inspector verified the operability 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.
i i
i-3-
,
.-
-_
v
,,
--
--
.
. - -,
y
, - - -,
--
, - - -
.
.
The inspector observed plant housekeeping / cleanliness conditions and verified implementation of radiation protection controls. During the month of August, the inspector walked down the accessible portions of the Unit 1 HPCI and Unit 2 RHR systems to verify operability. 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 administrative procedures.
During review of the Unit 1 control room logs on August 18, 1980, the inspector read an entry which stated that the RCIC controller had been 2cund in the manual position. The controller was discovered by a licensed operator in training at 7:00 a.m. on August 18, 1980.
Upon further investigation the inspector determined that the controller apparently had not been returned to its correct position following surveillance on the morning of August 17, 1980 at 4:30 a.m.
Step 3 of procedure QOS 1300-2 requires that the RCIC controller be returned to normal status (automatic) following surveillance.
Failure to return the controller to its normal operating configuration following a surveillance test is contrary to procedures and is considered an item of noncompliance.
If called upon to initiate automatically the RCIC system would have operated at a reduced flow controlled by the position of the controller manual setpoint potentiometer. The misposition-ing of this controller was discovered at 7:00 a.m.
During the 26.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> that the controller was in the off normal position, a minimum of seven control room panel check should have completed.
Step C-5 of QOS-005-2, Normal Control Room Inspection and Shif t Turnover Partel Checks states that the RCIC controller is to be in the Automatic Position. Failure to recognize the mispositioning of the controller for three shift turnovers is contrary to procedures and is considered an item of noncompliance.
Except as described, no other items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Review of Units 1 and 2 Calibrations The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for Units 1 and 2 calibrations to determine whether the calibration of components and equipment associated with safety-related systems and/or functions both, identified and not identified, in the Technical Specifications as requiring calibration at a specific frequency are calibrated. The review consisted of verifying the frequency of calibration, acceptance values, detailed stepwise instructions and review of procedures used to calibrate the components. The technical content and component trip points were adequate. The inspector also verified that calibration standards being used are traceable to independent testing organizations.
-
-
._.
-
.
The following records for April, May and June, 1980 were reviewed:
High Reactor Pressure QIS-5 High Drywell Pressure QIS-8 Low Reactor Water Level QIS-10 Low Low Reactor Water Level QIS-11 2/3 Core Height QIS-12 Low Pressure ECCS Discharge Volume QIS-37 Loss of EHC Fluid Pressure QIS-39 Turbine First Stage Low Pressure QIS-55 Condenser low Vacuum QIS.19 Main Steam Line High Flow QIS-21 Main Steam Line Low Pressure QIS-20 Core Spray Differential Pressure QIS-24 Torus Pressure QIS-32 Radwaste Effluent QIS-33 Reactor Bldg Vent Duct QIS-34 Reactor Bldg Fuel Pool QIS-35 SJAE offgas QIS-36 Chimney Gas Monitor QIS-38 Main Steam Line Hi Rad QIS-31 Procedures and check sheets listed below were reviewed for applicable Technical Specifications and appropriate precautions.
Calibration and Functional Tests Check Sheets QIS 5-1R1 QIS 5-2R1 QIS 5-SIR 2 QIS 8-1R2 QIS 8-2R2 QIS 3-SIR 4 QIS 10-1R2 QIS 10-2R1 QIS 10-SIR 4 QIS 11-1R2 QIS 11-2R1 QIS 11-SIR 5 QIS 12-1R2 QIS 12-2R1 QIS 12-SIR 2 QIS 19-1R2 QIS 19-2R2 QIS 19-3R2 QIS 19-4R2 QIS 19-SIR 5 QIS 20-1R1 QIS 20-2R1 QIS 20-SIR 3 QIS 21-1R1 QIS 21-2R1 QIS 21-SIR 2 QIS 24-1R2 QIS 24-2R2 QIS 24-SIRA QIS 31-1R4 QIS 31-2R1 QIS 31-SIR 4 QIS 32-1R1 QIS 32-SIR 2 QIS 33-1R1 QIS 33-2R1 QIS 33-SIR 4 QIS 34-1R4 QIS 34-2R3 QIS 34-SIR 4 QIS 35-1R2 QIS 35-2R3 QIS 35-SIR 1 QIS 36-1R2 QIS 36-2R1 QIS 36-SIR 2 QIS 38-1R1 QIS 38-2R1 QIS 38-SIRI QIS 39-1R1 QIS 39-2R1 QIS 39-51R4 QIS 55-1R2 QIS 55-2R2 QIS 55-SIR 3 The inspector witnessed the following calibrations and functional tests.
-5-
_ _.. _
_ _..
._
_ _. _.._
.
_ _
_ _ _
_ _.
_
__
. _..
_
j l
.
,
<
.
i Main Steam Line High Flow APRM Downscale Rod Block Main Steam Line High Rad Scram.
,
,
The inspector reviewed the provisions for calibration frequency, storage,
!
and control of the following measuring and test equipment.
,
Ashcroft Models 1082A 1082AC 1082AS
.
I Wallace Tiernan 62A-2C-0120
!
J 62A-2A-0500 i
<
<
4 Heise C-12 (four gauges)
!
CMM (four gauges)
C1
-
No items of noncompliance were identified.
}
7.
Review'of Quality Assurance Program
The inspector conducted a review of the licensee's Quality Assurance program to ascertain that implementation of the program with regards j
to 10 CFR 50, Appendix B requirements were adequate. Also familiariza-tion of changes and revisions of the Qualitf Aasurance program were i
discussed with licensee personnel. The onsite audits and surveillances were also reviewed.
No items of noncompliance'were identified.
l 8.
Organization and Administration l
The inspector verified that changes in the organizational structure
and. assignments had bcen reported to the NRC through the licensee's QA program and verified that persons assigned to new or different positions in the licensee's organization since the last inspection of
this area satisfy qualifications identified in the technical specifi-cations, the licensee's QA program, and applicable national standards.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
i 9.
Review of Plant Operations During the months of February thru August, 1980, the inspector reviewed the following activities:
-
(
-6-t
--
~
~---c..
-e.-.
-nn e
--,-,,,, --
n--s,_,
_ _.,..,,.,. _, _.,, _, _,,. _.,,,,.
,,, _ _., _, _, _, _ _, _, _ _ _, _,
-~ _
..
- _ _ _ - -
_.
.-- --
._.
.
.
.
.
.
i
'
a.
Procurement
!
The inspector reviewed procurement and storage activities to
'
l ascertain whether.the purchase of components, materials and l
supplies used for safety related functions, is in conformance with the licensee's approved QA program and implementing pro-
'
I cedures; non-conforming items are segregated and marked accord-
'
!
ingly; applicable preventive maintenance is performed; house-keeping and environmental requirements are met; and, limited r
shelf-life items are controlled.
The following components were inspected:
!
Hanger Repair Materials Control Rod Drive Repair Kits Local Power Range Detectors y
b.
Review and Audits e
On August 12, 1980, the inspector sat in on a.safet - review committee meeting. The inspector verified that provisions of
technical specifications dealing with membership, review process, frequency, and qualifications were met.
The inspector also
,
verified that decisions made were reflected in the meeting
i minutes and that corrective actions proposed were taken.
jt On August 12, 1980, the inspector witnessed an audit conducted by the licensee's offsite audit team and verified conformance with technical specifications and QA procedures.
c.
Training The inspector attended two of the licensee's operator requali-fication lecture series and verified that lesson plan objectives were met and that training was in accordance with the approved operator requalification program schedule and o'ajectives.
i The inspector verified by direct questioning of two new, two existing, and one temporary employee that administrative controls
and procedures, radiological health and safety, industrial safety,
!
controlled access and security procedures, emergency plan, and
!
quality assurance training were provided as required by the
licensee's technical specifications; verified by direct question-j ing of one craftsmen and one technician that on-the-job training, formal technical training commensurate with job classification,
'
and fire fighting training were provided.
.
!'
The following. lectures, seminars and drills were attended by the
{
inspector.
i I
A
- -
!
I'
l
!
_. -. -,
_..
.,
,,..,. _. _
.
-
. _.. _ _ _
_ _ _.. _,.,.,,,,., _
-..
.
-
..
- - _..
.
.-.
_
.-
.
.
.
e (1) A semitar conducted by the licensee on the use of the Sygnetron
'
securit y badges and system. The seminar was attended by depart-ment he rds and staff.
(2) The inspectors attended a training session and communication drill
'
by the licensee on the Generating Station Emergency Plan GESP j
Present were staff SR0's and department heads.
The session covered the various communication systems used during
'
an event and their relationship to state and local Federal Agencies.
l Also discussed was the organization of onsite centers, the Operation Support Center (OSC) and the Technical Support Center (TSC). The i
drill consisted of organizing and testing of the communication systems of the TSC.
(3) On August 28, 1980, the inspector attended a licensee lecture and
!
walkdown of the Fire Protection System given to plant employees.
!
(4) Environmental Protection j
The inspector verified the installation and operability of 14 sampling (monitoring) station (s) and associated equipment and
' reviewed records for completeness and accuracy.
,
i
'
(5) Security i
The inspec;or observed that 10 in-dividuals achieved acceptable
scores during the conduct of weapons arJ physical fitness tests.
,
a
The inspector visited Jane Lamb Hospital and verified that the agency is familiar with their role in the emergency plan. The
inspector also observed an emergency drill and vecified that the licensee has a program for correcting identified discrepencies
and that equipment disrupted was returned to its proper location after the drill.
'
No items of noncompliance were identified.
-
t 10.
Fire Protection i
In accordance with the fire protection evaluation "NRC Staff Positions" the inspector verified that:
Fire protection is.provided over MCC's 18-3 and 28-3 (item 7).
-
Curbs are provided around drywell air pack units (item 14).
-
Fire detection is provided for full cable tray area at elevation
-
595 of Rx building (item 18).
A class "A" fire door is provided between HPCI rooms (item 21).
-
-8-
. _.. _
_
_
-
_.
_
_
.
_ _.. _
._.
-
.
. _
.
_
_ _ _ _
_
.
.
.
.
Unit 2 hydrogen seal oil deluge station was relocated (item 32).
-
Fire detection is provided over cable trays and penetrations on
'
the turbine building mezzanine (item 35).
Fire detection is provided in the condenser bay area (item 38).
-
Fire detection is provided on the Turbine Building Ground Floor
--
i (item 40).
Sprinklers are provided in the Unit 2 Turbine Building Trackway
-
(item 43).
An oil storage area is provided in the Crib House (item 48).
-
Fire pumps have a separate feed to the underground loop with
-
isolation valves in all feeds to the uaderground loop (item 49).
The bus duct penetrations for the unit aux and reserve aux trans-
-
formers are protected by water spray (item 62).
No items of noncompliance were identified.
11.
Participation in NRR/ Licensee Meeting On July 31, 1980 the Senior Resident tnspector attended a meeting held between the NRC and Commonwealth Edison Company. The objective of the meeting was to obtain an in-depth understanding of the as-built scram discharge volume (SDV) and its piping including the vent and drain valve arrangements and also including the instrument volume (s)
'
in order to be in a position to review licensee recommend:tions for changes to the scram system to improve its operability and reliabilicy.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
12.
Review of Periodic and Special Reports The inspector reviewed Quad-Cities Station, Unit 2 summary startup test report for reload Number 4 (cycle 5).
The inspector determined that the report was technically adequate and met the applicable Technical Specifications.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
13.
Followup on Part 21 Report (Reference IE Report 50-254/80-04 and 50-265/80-06 Paragraph 10).
The inspector verified that Ruskin Manufacturing Representatives have been to the station and repaired the affected dampers to satisfy the requirements of their letter to the licensee dated March 17, 1980.
No iteca of noncompliance were identified.
14.
Inservice Inspection Meeting On August.27, 1980 the inspector attended the licensee's inservice inspection meeting. Participants included contractors and Hartford-9-
.
.
-
Boiler inspectors. Topics discussed were scope of job, procedures and scheduling.
No items of noncomp. ince were identified.
15.
Licensee Event Reports Followup Through dire (
raervations, discussions with licensee personnel, and review of records, the following event reports were reviewed to deter-mine that reportability requirements were fulfilled, immediate corrective action was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with technical specifications.
Unit 1 R0 80-16, datea June 21, 1980, Main Steam Isolation Valve 1-203-2C failed to clos <s during testing on June 21 and July 3, 1980. The cause of both occu-rences was an improper adjustment of the exhaust restrictor on the pilot valve which blocked the exhaust flow port resulting in a pneumatic lock on the pilot valve which prevented the MSIV from closing during surveillance. The improper adjustment was caused by an operator mistaking the exhaust restrictor for the timing bypass valve.
This event is contrary to Technical Specification 6.2.a.6, in that maintenance was performed without a detailed written procedure.
Prior to the conclusion of this inspection the licensee revised the surveillance procedure to include slow timing testing of the MSIV's, which would indicate any improper adjastment of the exhaust restrictor prior to return t1 Je rvice. A detaileu er*tten procedure was also initiated to prevent improper adjustments.
The licensee's corrective and preventive actions have been reviewed and are adequate. Therefore, no written response to this noncompli-ance is required.
R0 80-09, dated April 10, 1980, MO Valve 1001-36B Tripped While Opening.
Unit 2 R0 80-14, dated June 23, 1980, Oil leak on the discharge line of HPCI Emergency Oil Pump during surveillance testing. The cause was deter-mined to be cracked threads on a pipe nipple. The HPCI system was taken out of service, and an orderly shutdown initiated, per Technical Specifications. The defective pipe nipple was cutout and rethreaded, and HPCI system was returned to service 35 minutes later.
R0 79-42, dated December 14, 1979, MSIV Closure Timing Exceeded Limits During Surveillance.
l t
!
Except as described, no other items of concompliance were identified.
l
- 10 -
--.
--
.
.
16.
IE Circular Followup For the IE Circulars listed below, the inspector verified that the Circular was received by the licensee management, that a review for applicability was performed, and that if the circular were applicable to the facility, appropriate corrective actions were taken or were scheduled to be taken.
IE Circular 79-13, dated July 13, 1979, Replacement of Diesel Fire Pump Contacts. The inspector verified that the licensee's Diesel Fire Pump contact circuitry is of a uf' ent design than described.
IE Circular 80-14, dated June 24, 1980, Radioactive Contamination of Plant Demineralized Water System and Resultant Internal Contamination of Personnel. The licensee has reviewed Administrative Procedures and Systems to preclude the misuse of the Demineralized Water System.
Signs are also posted to prevent use of demineralized water for drinking.
IE Circular, 80-16 dated June 27, 1980, Operational Deficiencies in Rosemount Model 510DU Trip Units and Model 1152 Pressure Transmitters.
The inspector verified that the licensee does not utilize these type transmitters.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
17.
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 bulle-tin 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.
IEB 80-17 supplement No. 2, dated July 22, 1180, Failures Revealed by Testing Subsequent to Failure of Control Rods to Insert During a Scram at a BWR.
The inspector reviewed the final documentation package (licensee letter to Mr. J. G. Keppler dated July 28, 1980).
No further concerns were identified.
IEB 80-07, dated April 4, 1980, BWR Jet Pump Assembly Failure.
The inspector verified that the described action was accomplished by the licensee.
- 11 -
--
-
..
-
.
-
.
.
'
.
IEB 80-09, dated April 17, 1980, Hydramotor Actuator Deficiencies.
'
The inspector verified that the licensee does not utilize these type hydramotors.
i IEB 80-14, dated June 12, 1980, Degradation of BWR Scram Discharge
-
Volume Capability.
IEB 80 16, dated July 27, 1980, Potential Misapplication of Rosemount Inc. Models 1151 and 1152 Pressure Transmitters with either "A" or
"D" Output Codes. The only application of transmitters is in a new system which is not.yet in service. The licensee will replace the affected transmitters prior to placing the system in service.
IES 80-15, dated une 18, 1980, Possible Loss of Emergency Notification System with Loss of Offsite Power. The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will evaluate the licensee's response for technical adequacy.
i No items of noncompliance were identified.
-
18.
Regional Request on Followup of IEB 80-06 The inspector reviewed the licensee's response for QCNPS Units 1 and 2,
,
and Dresden Units 1*, 2 and 3.
The following procedures were reviewed:
i Dresden DOS 6600-5R5: 4KV Bus Undervoltage and ECCS Integrated Functional Test i
for the 2(3) Diesel Generator.
DIS 250 -4R2: Automatic Depressurization Logic Test.
DIS 1400-5R2: Core Spray Logic Test.
DIS 1600-4R1: Drywell High Pressure.
DIS 2300-4R2: HPCI Logic Test.
Quad-Cit.ts-QOS 650-2R5:
4KV Bus Undervoltage Functional Test QIS 14-2R1:
Low Rx Pressure 325 psi RHR/ Core Spray Permissive Functional Test QIS 24-2R2:
Core Spray Header Differential Pressure Functional Test QIS 21-2R1:
Main Steam Line High Flow Functional Test QIS 7-2R1:
Main Steam Line High Flow Functional Test QIS 27-1R2:
Drywell Pressure Functional Test QIS 27-1R2:
HPCI Turbine Area High Temperature Isolation-
,
QIS 23-2R1:
Core Spray Pump Discharge Pressure Functional Test
- The licensee has delayed his response for Unit 1 pending completion of a current long term outage.
.
Also reviewed were Quad-Cities Emergency Core Cooling System Logic Surveillance Procedures MS-700:
l
- 12 -
-
.~
_
_.
-
.
-.
.
.. - - -
.
_,_
_-
- - - -
.
.
QMS 700-1R7, Automatic Blowdown Logic Test QMS 700-2R7, LPCI Logic Test QMS 700-3R5, RCIC Logic Test QMS 700-4RG, HPCI Logic Test QMS 700-5R4, Core Spray Logic Test The inspector has determined from the procedure review and discussion with licensee personnel at both stations that the written response was acco ;te.
The Office of NRR will evaluate the adequacy of the licenoee's response per a task interface agreement with the Office of I&E.
No items of noncompliance wer' identified.
19.
Media Contacts On July 21, 1980 the Senior Resident inspector was the guest of the ABC local weekday magazine. The program involved a brief introductory portion with the remaining part consisting of the inspector responding to phone in questions from the public.
In general the questions centered around plant safety and environmental impact on the area.
20.
In-Office Review of Type A Test Report An inspector conducted an inoffice review of the report submitted to the NRC entitled " Reactor Building Integrated Leak Rate Test, Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit 2, March 9-12,1980" and determined that the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J have been met and that the data is consistent with the Technical Specifications.
No items of noncempliance or deviations were identified.
21.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
throughout the month and at the conclusion of the inspection on August 29, 1980 and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection activities.
The licensee acknowledged the inspectors comments.
- 13 -
,