IR 05000254/1981006

IE Insp Repts 50-254/81-06 & 50-265/81-06 on 810408-0515. Noncompliance Noted:Failure to Follow Procedures Re Fire Barrier Penetrations

ML19350E796
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	06/05/1981
From:	Chrissotimos N, Dupont S, Reimann F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML19350E782	List: IR 05000254/1981006 ML19350E786 ML19350E789
References
50-254-81-06, 50-254-81-6, 50-265-81-06, 50-265-81-6, NUDOCS 8106230529
Download: ML19350E796 (8)

Text

--

.

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION h

0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION III

g i

i Reports No. 50-254/81-06; 50-265/81-06 l

Docket Nos. 50-254; 50-265 Licenses No. DPR-29; DPR-30

'

Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690

.

Facility Name: Qued-Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2

Inspection At: Quad-Cities Site, Cordova, IL Inspection Conducted: April 8, 1981, through May 15, 1981

!

~

h Inspect s: N J.Cyrissotimos x,<

s,/f4/

g

.]

f

')

.

$v'

sf

,

- anwp -

. DuPont Ew c-

/94/

.

g

• l

-

.

,

Approved y:

W. Reimann, Acting Chief

, ~ w (~/9P/

Reactor Projects Section 1C

'

.,

Inspection Summary Inspection on April 8 through May 15, 1981 (Reports No. 50-254/81-06;

'

'30-265/81-06)

Areas Inspected: Licensee action on previous ins;ection findings, operation-

'

al safety verification, monthly maintenance observation, monthly surveillance observation, licensee event reports followup, IE Circular followup, IE Infor-mation Notice followup, Surveillance, NUREG 0737 requirements followup, independent inspection, media contacts, and emerger.cy drills. The inspection involved a total of 271 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors including 26 inspector-hours onsite during off-shifts.

Results: Of the 12 areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in 11 areas; one item of noncompliance was identified in one area - failure to follow procedures, Paragraph 6.

'

810623o52?

.

.

.

.

.

.

_

-.

-

e

-

.

DETAILS 1.

Persons Contacted l

• N. Kalivianakis, Superintendent T. Tamlyn, Assistant Superintendent Operations D. Bax, Assistant Superintendent Maintenance

L. Gerner, Assistant Superintendent for Administration

• J. Heilman, Quality Assurance, Operations

,

• R. Flessner, Technical Staff Supervisor The inspector also interviewed several other licensee employees, in-i cluding shift engineers and foremen, reactor operators, technical staff

. personnel and quality control personnel.

l

• Denotes those present at the exit interview on May 15, 1981.

-

,

2.

Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Inspection item Paragraph 10 (Inspection Report 50-254/80-01; j

50-265/80-02): The inspector verified that Item 3 of the subject bulletin had been completed. Response to Item 4 has been transmitted to NRC and will be evaluated for its adequacy.

No iteca of noncotpliance were identified.

'

'

3.

Operational Safety Verification The inspector observed control room operations, reviewed applicable logs and conducted discussions with control room operators during the month of April 1981. The inspector verified the operability of selected emergency systems, reviewed tagout records and 'erified v

~

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 April 1981, the inspector walked down the accessible portions of the Unit 1 RHR Service Water and Unit 2 system valves contained in-side the Drywell, and Core Spray Valves 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.

No items of noncompliance were identified.

-2-

.

. - -, -

.. -,

-

,---7

..,

,- - -, --, - -,-

r---s-

,-,-- -

-

,

_

_

_ _ _ _ _ _

..

.

-

.

'

.

4.

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, regulatory guides and industry codes or standards and in conformance with technical specifications.

The following items were considered during this review:

the limiting 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 l

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 c?ntrols were implemented.

.

Work requests were reviewed to determine status of outstanding jobs and to assura that priority is assigned to safety related equipment maintenance which may affect system performance.

The following maintenance activities were observed / reviewed:

.

Q07397 - Unit 1, IRM Channel No. 15 - Reviewed Q07624 - Unit 1, RHR Valve 1001-18B - Reviewed Q11969 - Unit 1, RCIC Steam Line High DP Switch - Reviewed

-

Q12065 - Unit 1, RCIC Valve 1301-35 - Reviewed Unit 1, RHR Pump Repairs - Observed Q11274 - Unit 1/2, 480 volt Breaker S/N 024 - Reviewed Unit 2, Disassembly of Electromatic Reliefs - Observed Unit 2, Recirculation Pump Seal Repair - Observed Unit 2, Thermocouple Repairs on Safety Valves - Observed Following Completion of maintenance on the Unit 1 RCIC Steam Line High DP Switch and the Unit 1 RCIC Valve 1301-35, the inspector verified that these systems had been returned to service properly.

No items of noncompliance were identified.

5.

Monthly Surveillance Observation The inspector observed technical specifications required surveillance testing on the Units 1 and 2 Fire Suppression Valve Inspection and Unit 1 RCIC pump and valve opezability and verified that testing was performed

in accordance with adequate procedures, that test instrumentation was

'

calibrated, that limiting conditions fer operation were met, that removal and restoration of the affected components were accomplished, that test results conformed with technical spccifications and procedure require-ments and were reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during tLe testing were

,

properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management personnel.

The inspector also witnessed portions of the following test activities.

'

Units 1 and 2 ISI Vibration Testing of the RHR Service Water Pumps and-3-

-

...

___

_

_ _ _.

.....

_. _ _

_ _ _.

.

.

!

.

,

the Unit 1 Diesel Cooling Water Pumps, Unit 2 Diesel Surveillance, RPS Surveillance and the Offgas Monitoring Surveillance.

No items of noncompliance were identified.

6.

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 ac-tion was accomplished, and corrective action to prevent recurrence had been accomplished in accordance with technical specifications.

Unit 1:

R0 81-7, dated March 13, 1981, during normal operation, Breaker for Recirculation Pump Discharge Valve Motor tripped in excess of limits.

R0 81-08, dated April 7, 1981, a spurious High Steam Flow Signal caused the RCIC Automatic Isolation Valves to trip.

Unit 2:

R0 81-5, dated February 24, 1981, during Steam Line High Flow RCIC Isolation Surveillance, Valve closed in excess of limits.

R0.81-6, dated March 12, 1981, differential Pressure between the D/W and Suppression Chamber was lost when the Isolation Pressure Suppression System was isolated.

R0 81-7, dated March 22, 1981, during surveillance, MSIV failed to initiate a half scram.

R0 81-8, dated March 26, 1981, during surveillance, two Instrument Cable Riser's Fire Penetrations were not sealed.

,

In regards to R0 81-8, while conducting a routine inspection on March 26, 1981, the licensee discovered two 4 inch fire barrier penetrations not sealed in the floor between the cable spreading tunnel and the turbine building. Upon discovery, the licensee established a fire watch. The cause was determined te be substation construction personnel not follow-i the procedure which was used to make the penetrations on November 10, 1:

.

This is contrary to Technical Specifications 3.12.F.1. in that two pene-cration fire barriers into the cable spreading tunnel were not intact, and it is considered an item of noncompliance.

As a result of the review, the inspector has no further concerns and therefore no further response to this noncompliance is required.

Except as described, no other items of noncompliance were identified.

-4-

._

-

,

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

.-

.

.

.

.

.

~7.

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 81-05, dated March 31, 1981, Self-aligning Rod End Bushings for Pipe Supports.

,

IE Circular 81-03, dated March 2, 1981, Inoperable Seismic Monitoring Instrumentation.

IE Circular 81-02, dated February 9,1981, Performance of NRC-Licensed Individuals While on Duty.

.

IE Circular 81-01, dated January 23, 1981, Design Problems Involving Indicating Pushbutton Switches Manufactured by Honeywell Incorporated.

No items of noncompliance were identified.

8.

IE Information Notice Followup For the IE Information Notices listed below, the inspector verified that the information notice was received by the licensee management, that a review'for applicability was performed, and t, hat if the informat, ion notice were applicable to the facility, appropriate actions were taken or were scheduled to be taken.

IE Information Notice 80-12, dated March 31, 1981, Guidance on Order issued January 9, 1981, regarding Automatic Cont al Red insertion on Low Control Air Pressure.

IE Information Notice 81-11, dated March 30, 1981, Alternate Rod Insertion for BWR Scram Represents a Potential Path for Loss of Primary Coolant.

IE Information Notice 81-10, dated March 25, 1981, Inadvertant Containment Spray Due to Personnel Error.

IE Information Notice 81-09, dated March 26, 1981, Degradation of Residual Heat Removal (RHR) System.

IE Information Notice 81-08, dated March 20, 1981, Repetitive Failures of'

Limitorque Operator SNB-4 Motor-to-Shaft Key.

"

IE Information Notice 81-07, dated March 16, 1981, Potential Problem with Water-Soluble Purge Dam Materials Used During Inert Gas Welding.

IE Information Notice 81-06, dated March 11, 1981, Failure of ITE Model K-600 Circuit Breaker.

IE Information Notice 81-05, dated March 13, 1981, Degraded DC System at Palisades.

-5-

.

.-.

.

-

-

- _ -

. - _,

... -

-_

. _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _

"

g;

-

.

IE 'Information ' Notice 81-04, dated February 27, 1981, Cracking in Main Steam Lines.

IE Information Notice 81-03, ' dated February 12, 1981, checklist for Licensees Making Notifications of Significant Events in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.72.

IE Information Notice 81-01, dated January 16, 1981, Possible Failures of General Electric Type HFA Relays.

No items of noncompliance tere identified.

9.

Surveillance The inspector observed technical specifications required surveillance testing (other than calibrstions and checks) on the Unit I and 2 Auto-matic Air Pump Systems and Unit 1 RCIC Pump and valve operability and verified that testing was performed in accordance with technically adequate procedures, that results were in conformance with technical specifications and procedure requirements and were reviewed by per-sonnel other than the individual directing the test, and that any deficiencies identified during testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management personnel. The following surveil-lance performed between December 1980, and April 1981, were reviewed:

Unit 1 QOS-200-1 QTS-1300-1 QIS-4 QIS-16

.

.

QOS-250-1 QFP-100-3 QIS-7 QIS-19

.

Q0S-1300-1 QFP-100-4 QIS-10 QIS-22

.

QOS-5670-1 QAP-500-8 QIS-13 QIS-25 QIS-31 QIS-32 QIS-35 QIS-36 QIS-37 QIS-39 QIS-49 QIS-5"

.

QIS-4100-4

.

Unit 2 QOS-1600-4 QAP-500-8 QIS-19 QIS-43 QOS-6900-1 QIS-4 QIS-22 QIS-54 QOS-6600-1 QIS-7 QIS-25 QIS-55 QOS-6600-3 QIS-10 QIS-29 QIS-4100-4 QFP-100-3 QIS-13 QIS-34 QFP-100-4 QIS-16 QIS-37 No items of noncompliance were identified.

10.

Followup on Nureg-0737 Requirements II.B.4.

Training For Mitigating Core Damage The licensee has stated that the earliest possible date for completion of instructor training is scheduled to be completed by July 1981. Expected completion of operator training is October 1, 1981.

-6-

-

.

-.

m

~

-

.,.y. > :

'

.

J

'

,

II.F.1.2.

Accident Monitorina Design details will not'be available for NRC Review until

. June 30,11981; however, installation should be_ achieved by

,

January 1, = 1982.

II.K.3.16.

Reduction of Challenses and Failures of Relief Valves The required study was provided by the BWR Owners Group. Commonwealth Edison's conclusion is that the stuck open relief valve event probabili-

,

ty for Quad-Cities is below ten percent of the reference plant event probability and complies with the acceptance criteria provided in the

,

Owners Group response.

The Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation will evaluate the response.

II.K.3.18.

ADS Actuation Modification The required study was submitted by the BWR Owners Group, D. B. Waters letter to D. G. Eisenhut, dated March 31, 1981.

No deviations were identified.

.

11.

Independent Inspection i

The inspector reviewed the licensee's monthly performance report of

Units 1 and 2 for the month of c.pril 1981.

,

Areas covered by the report were' amendments to Technical Specifications, summary of corrective maintenance performed on Safety Related Equipment, Licensee Event Reports, Operating Data Tabulations, and refueling in-

,

'

formation. The report was reviewed for compliance with Technical

Specifications 6.6.A.3.

No items of noncompliance were identified.

12.

Media Contacts On April 7,1981, the Senior Resident Inspector was interviewed by the local ABC-TV Station.

,

The interview dealt with a report isrued by NRC concerning a possible problem with respect to the isolation capabilities of the Scram System and operation of the Emerr,ency Core Cooling Systems for Scram Discharge Volume Pipe Break situations.

-

13. Emergency Drills The inspectors observed the GSEP drills conducted by the licensee on April 23 and May.5, 1981.

Activities observed were:

1.

Communications between the controlling centers.

.

-7-

.

-

-.. _., _.. _ _ _.. -, _ _ _... - _ _ -. _ _ _. - _ _. _. _

-

-

___-

,;-

..

2.

Activation of the Technical Support Center and the Operations Support Center.

3.-

Assembly and accountability of site personnel.

-

4.

Training of Rad-Chem technicians on the inplant coolant sample method during a reactor emergency.

No major weaknesses were identified during the drills.

14. Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)

throughout the month and at the conclusion of the inspection on May 15,

-

1981, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection activities.

The licensee acknowledged the inspectors comments.

o e

e e

.

.

8-

-