IR 05000254/1989004

Insp Repts 50-254/89-04 & 50-265/89-04 on 890205-0401.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Plant Operations, Radiological Controls,Maint/Surveillance,Emergency Preparedness & Security

ML20244D365
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	04/13/1989
From:	Harrison J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20244D361	List: IR 05000254/1989004 ML20244D358
References
50-254-89-04, 50-254-89-4, 50-265-89-04, 50-265-89-4, NUDOCS 8904210308
Download: ML20244D365 (14)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:_____ _

. . . . . U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Reports No. 50-254/89004(DRP);50-265/89004(DRP) - Docket Nos. 50-254, 50-265 Licenses No. DPR-29; DPR-30 Licensee: Connonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Quad Cities Site, Cordova, IL Inspection Conducted: February 5 through April 1, 1989 Inspectors: R. L. Higgins A. D. Morrongiello D. E. Jones T. M. Ross J. H. Nei.ler

- cf Approved By: . Harrison, Chief . Reactor Projects Section IB Date Inspection Summary Inspection on February 5 through April 1, 1989 (Reports No. 50-254/89004(DRP); 50-265/89004(DRP)) A_reas Inspected: Routine, unannounced resident inspection of Plant Operations, Radiological Controls, Maintenance / Surveillance, Emergency Preparedness, Security, Engineering / Technical Support and Safety Assessment / Quality Verification. Additionally, the inspectors closed temporary instruction (TI) 2515/95 and reviewed TI 2515/100.

Results: During the inspection period the licensee performed an unplanned maintenance outage on Unit 2 after 116 consecutive days of operation to replace two defective electromatic relief valves and to perform other maintenance activities. All planned and unscheduled maintenance was completed ahead of schedule and there were no personnel contaminations associated with the outage.

Overall radiological control performance during the inspection period was good; however, control rod blade cutting activities in the fuel pool did generate some radioactive specks which caused a number of personnel contaminations.

Satisfactory performance continued to be made towards the completion of the reactor feedwater hydrogen addition and the control room heating and venti 10-tion modifications. A leak in the 2C, residual heat removal (RHR) service 89042103ce 890413 PDR ADOCK 05000254 G PNU

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

. - . . water pump discharge line was discovered during the inspection period which will' necessitate that a portion of the Unit 2 RHR service water piping be replaced. This modification will take 7 to 10 months, but'will'not adversely affect plant" operations.

For most of the inspection period both units were at or near full power with only two or three 'lluminated annunciators on either unit. At the end of the inspection period Unit I had operated at power for 114 consecutive days and Unit 2 had operated at power for 28 consecutive days.

, i

____ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - ._ ___ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ . . . .

, ,, . DETAILS 1.

Personnel Contacted

• R. Bax, Station Manager
• R. Robey, Services Superintendent-
• G. Spedl, Assistant Superintendent rf Technical Services
• T. Barber', Regulatory Assurance
• R. Hopkins, Quality Assurance
• Denotes those present at the exit interview on March 31, 1989.

The inspectors also contacted and interviewed other licensee and ' contractor personnel during the course of this inspection.

2.

Action on Previous Items (92701) a.

(Closed) Open Item 254/86013-02: Potential problems with unverified Limitorque weights used in seismic analysis.

This licensee was informed by Copes / Vulcan that valves supplied for use in the high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) system were not assigned the correct weights. The licensee's architect engineer (AE), Impell, performed a reanalysis based on the new information and concluded that additional pipe supports were required. The ' pipe supports were installed for both units on January 19, 1989.

This item should have been. closed in inspection report 254/88029.

b.

(Closed)OpenItem 254/84019-01: Provide More Legible Copies of Technical Specifications and Graphs.

The Unit 1 Technical Specifications have been completely retyped.

This version is much more legible. This item is considered closed.

c.

(Closed) Unresolved Items 254/88015-01(DRP);265/88015-01(DRP): Excessive Work Hours for Licensed Personnel.

> The licensee has revised the Shift Manning procedure, QAP 300-3, to require that the Assistant Superintendent of Operations approve any deviations from the work hour guidelines. The licensee has committed to abide by the guidelines at all times except for the most unusual and unforeseen situations. The licensee is in the process of increasing licensed operator staffing to minimize these situations. This item is considered closed.

d.

(Closed) Unresolved Item 265/88015-05: Unit 2 ECCS Initiation.

The licensee has revised the Equipment Out of Service procedure, QAP 300-14, to require that a specified sequence be used when taking equipment out of service and returning equipment to service.

I !

i l .. - - _ - _ - _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I

_ _-_ _ ___ ___ ___ - ___ _ _ -

. . . The licensee has also revised the Master Out of Service Checklist, , QAP 300-SS, to require the enumeration of the specific sequence by l which equipment is taken out of service and returned to service.

Maintenance and operations personnel have been trained on the new procedures.

This item is considered closed, e.

(Closed) Open Items 254/87002-02; 265/87002-01: Modification of RCIC.

The modification concerns arose over turbine bearing oil flooding problems. Since this modification was completed bearing flooding has not recurred.

f.

(Closed) Unresolved Items 254/87011-03(DRS);265/87011-03(DRS): linqualified Simplex Butyl Rubber Insulated Cables.

A review of the licensee's data justifying continued use of these cables was conducted by NRR and Region III. An NRC letter, dated February 1,1989, from H. J. Miller to Cordell Reed, concluded that the butyl rubber cables installed at Quad Cities were qualified for their specific application in accordance with the D0R guidelines.

An additional NRC concern regarding cable degradation reversion, though outside the scope of D0R guidelines, will be addressed by the licensee through an augmented cable surveillance program.

This item is considered closed.

g.

(Closed) Unresolved Items 254/87011-06(DRS);265/87011-06(DRS): Unqualified G.E. Butyl Rubber Insulated Cable.

See item 2.f. above.

h.

(Closed) Noncompliance 254/87002-01: Failure to Follow Procedure During Unit 1 Startup on December 9,1986.

The licensee's corrective actions have been adequate to prevent a recurrence of this problem.

This item is considered closed.

1.

(Closed) Unresolved Items 254/87011-01(DRS);265/87011-01(DRS): Unqualified Nylon Amp Butt Splices.

Upon further study this unresolved item was escalated and resulted in a Severity level III violation that was issued on October 20, 1988.

This item is considered closed.

Open Items listed below have been closed during this inspection period based on a directive by the Division Director, Division of Reactor Safety, Region III. Our decision to close these items is based on the length of time the item has been in existence and the recognition of limited safety significance.

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ . . n i . . . j.

(Closed)UnresolvedItems 254/83032-01; 265/83032-01: Adequacy of Testing Strut Pins and Subsequent Analysis Showing Acceptability Relative to Code Allowables, k.

(Closed) Open Items 254/86001-01;.265/86001-01: MSIV Servi'.e Manual.Needs Update.

1.

-(Closed) Open Items 154/86001-02; 265/86001-02: Review of MSIV.

Maintenance Programe - m.

(Closed) Unresolved Item 265/86009-01: Policy and Procedures for Verification of Implementation of QA Program Changes Needs to be Identified or Developed.- n.

(Closed) Open Item 254/85009-01: Administrative Instruction Not Written to Identify First Prog. Responsibilities - Tech Requirements Inadequate - No Trending Specified.- o.

(Closed) Unresolved Items 254/85031-01; 265/85033-01: Documentation of QAD Training Does Not Contain Supportive Evidence of the Subject Matter in Detail to Determine the Adequacy of Training.

p.

(Closed) Open Items 254/85009-04; 265/85010-04: Maximum Valve Stroke Times Have not Been Assigned For All Valves.

q.' (Closed) Open Items: 254/88007-01; 265/88008-01: Followup on Implementation of Scaffolding 50.59 Procedure.

r.

(Closed) LER 254/86022-LL: CAM Line Not Meeting Code Stress Allowa51es.

s.

(Closed) LER 254/86025-LL: Torus Attached Small Bore Piping Does Not Meet Code Allowable Limits Due to Design Error.

t.

(Closed).LER 254/87008-LL: IC RHRSW Pump Piping in Excess of Allowable Stress Due to Sheared Anchor Bolts - System Still Operable.

' l ' u.

(Closed) LER 254/87018-LL: IB Recirculation Motor Generator Field l Breaker Failure to Trip - Apparent Component Failure.

v.

(Closed) LER 265/88006-L1: Unit 2 Flued Head Anchors Don't Meet Design Requirements.

w.

(Closed) Open Items 254/87028-04; 265/87028-04: Computer Software for Snubber Functional Test Machine Was Not Verified in Accordance With CECO Q. P. 3-54.

x.

(Closed) Information Notice 254/88900-01: Followup on Information Notice 88-03: Cracks in Shroud Support Access Hole Cover Welds (BWRs).

w_ -_ -

- - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ ! i

- o-1 - . i . ' y.

(Closed) Noncompliance 254/85009-01: Administrative Instruction Not Written to Identify First Program Responsibilities - Tech Requirements Inadequate - No Trending Specified.

z.

(Closed) Open Item 254/87025-01: A.

Review Root Cause LER 87018.

B.

Review Corrective Actions of LER 87018.

aa.

(Closed)LER 254/86015-L1: Unit 1 Reactor Scram From SDV Hi Level While Switching RPS Due to Procedure Inadequacy.

3.

Plant Operations a.

Operational Safety Verification (71707) The inspectors, through direct observation, discussion. Sith licensee personnel, and review of applicable records an:. logs examined plant operations.

The inspectors verified that all activities were accomplished in a timely manrer using approved q procedures and drawings and were inspected / reviewed as applicable;

and that procedures, procedure revisions and routine reports were in accordance with Technical Specifications, regulatory gt. ides, and industry codes or standards. Additionally, the inspectors verified that approvals were obtained prior to initiating any work; activi-ties were accomplished by qualified personnel; the limiting conditions for operation were met during normal operation and W.De components or systems were removed from service; functional testing and/or calibrations were performed prior to returning components-or systems to service; and independent verification of equipment lineup and review of test results were accomplished.

Also verified were quality control records for being properly maintained and reviewed, parts, meterials and equipment for proper certification, calibration, storage, and or maintained as applicable; and adverse plant conditions including equipment malfunctions, potential fire hazards, radiological hazards, fluid leaks, excessive vibrations, and personnel errors. The inspectors' review ensured these issues were addressed in a timely manner with sufficient and proper corrective actions and reviewed by appropriate management personnel. The medical records of four licensed individuals including a nuclear station operator, a shift foreman, a shift control room engineer, and a shifs engineer, were reviewed for compliance with NRC medical requirements. No violations or deviations were noted.

b.

Engineered Safety Features System Walkdown (71710) During plant tours of Units 1 and 2, the inspectors walked down some of the accessible portions of the High Pressure Coolant Injection (HPCI) Systems, Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) Systems, Core Spray (CS) Systems, Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Systems, Standby Liquid Control (SLC) Systems, Standby Gas Treatment (SGT) Systems, Diesel Generators (EDG), and Station Batteries.

No violations or deviations were noted.

- - _ _ - _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ + .

c.

Summary of Operations l Unit 1 For the inspection period, Unit 1 operated either at full power, on Economic G9neration Control (EGC), or at reduced power in order to perform surveillance testing or in response to load dispatcher orders. As of the end of the inspection period the unit had been critical for 114 consecutive days.

Unit 2 Power was reduced on February 5,1989, to make a drywell entry in order to adjust the stroke time of a main steam isolation valve.

The reactor returned to full power operation the next day, Unit 2 operated at power until March 2,1989, when a shutdown occurred after 116 consecutive days of power operation to perform an unplanned outage to repair two defective electromatic relief valves.

Other maintenance completed included repair of a malfunctioning hydrogen detector, repair of a malfunctioning safety valve tailpipe temperature detector, repair of a malfunctioning electromatic relief valve tailpipe vacuum breaker, repair of several unisolable steam leaks, and pluggirq of a leaking main condenser tube. All planned maintenance acLivities were completed and the unit was returned to power operation on March 5,1989, , 12 hours ahead of schedule.

Power was reduced on March 23 and 27, 1989, to investigate and repair a faulty test circuit for the number 2 turbine stop valve.

On both occasions the unit returned to full power the next day.

For the remainder of the inspection period the unit operated either at full power, on EGC, or at reduced power in order to perform surveillance testing or in response to load dispatcher orders.

As of the end of the inspection period the unit had been critical for 28 consecutive days.

d.

Onsite Followup of Events At Operating Power Reactors (93702) ! (1) Unit 2 Reactor Shutdown During the early morning hours of March 2, 1989, the licensee noted indications of a possible leak in the drywell.

The l licensee began reducing power and de-inerting the drywell at 8:35 AM on March 2, 1989, in preparation for an entry at power. At 1:35 PM, with power below 40% and the de-inerting complete, the licensee entered the drywell and discovered a steam leak coming from a vacuum breaker on the C electromatic relief valve discharge piping.

Licensee personnel closed the vacuum breaker and stopped the leak.

Steam leaking from the vacuum breaker indicated that the C electromatic relief valve was leaking. The licensee also had evidence of an elevated temperature on the discharge piping of the D electromatic

_ - _ _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ __ _ - _ . - . . , . . relief valve, indicating that relief valve was also leaking.

The licensee therefore decided to shutdown and replace both the C and D electromatic relief valves. At 9:30 PM on March 2, , 1989, the Unit 2 main generator was disconnected from the ! electrical grid, and at 2:35 PM on March 3, 1989, Unit 2 l entered cold shutdown.

i (2) Unit 2 Reactor Startup At 4:05 AM on March 5, 1989, Unit 2 commenced control rod withdrawal to restart the reactor following a short unplanned maintenance outage which began on March 2, 1989. Reactor criticality occurred at 6:42 AM, and Unit 2 was connected to

the electrical grid at 2:45 PM on March 5, 1989. The resident l inspectors monitored portions of the reactor startup from the I control room.

j i 4.

Radiological Controls (71707) J a.

Radiation Protection Controls The licensee continued to demonstrate noteworthy performance in , the area of radiological controls, except for the number of

personnel contaminations which occurred during the last half of l February and the first few days of March. Most of these personnel l contaminations involved radioactive specks which were generated ' during activities on the refuel floor, principally the cutting of control rod blades and associated work. The licensee installed plugs in the refuel floor openings to prevent the spread of contaminated specks from the refuel floor to the rest of the reactor building. Additionally, the entire refuel floor was designated as a contaminated area when these work activities were in progress and the potential release of contaminated particles could occur. The number of personnel contaminations was then

significantly reduced for the remainder of March.

Personnel exposure was only slightly more than budgeted despite extensive unforeseen work ir the Unit 2 drywell to replace the electromatic relief valves and perform other maintenance activities.

This low personnel exposure is indicative of strong management support for the ALARA program.

No violations or deviations were noted.

b.

Chemistry Sampling Program During the inspection period the resident inspectors monitored the collection of water chemistry samples from the reactor recirculation and reactor water cleanup systems.

No violations or deviations were noted.

____

4- , , t.

. - . . . . . . ' 5.

Maintenance / Surveillance a.

MonthlyMaintenanceObservation(62703) Station maintenance _ activities of safety related and non-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 er systems were removed from service; approvals were obtained prior to initiating the work; and activities were accomplished using approved procedures and were inspected as. applicable. Additional items reviewed included verification that functional testing and/or i calibrations were performed prior to returning components or systems to service; quality control records were maintained; and activities . were accomplished by qualified personnel. Also, the inspectors ' verified that parts and materials used were properly certified; radiological controls were implemented; and fire irevention procedures were followed. Work requests were reviewed to determine the status of outstanding jobs and to assure that priority is assigned to safety related equipment maintenance which may affect systen performance.

Por' cions of the following activities were observed / reviewed: j (1) 1B Recirculation pump repair.

! (2)' Refurbishment of flued head anchors on Unit 1.

(3) Painting of the turbire building.

(4) RHR lagging replacement.

_ l (5) 4160 volt breaker refurbishment.

l y (6) Control rod drive accumulator replacement.

) l (7) Control rod drive scram inlet and outlet diaphragm l replacement.

i

(8) Installation of Raychem sleeves over nylon splices on Unit 2 HPCI instrumentation.. (9) Setting recirculation pump runout limits.

(10) Replacement of electromatic relief valves.

(11) Unit ~2 8 reactor building closed cooling water pump repair.

J (12) Replacement of defective traveling screens.

-{

, i . . . . . . . (13) Inspection of the 1 C circulating water pump seal, (14) Repai_r of a service air compressor.

The installation of the Raychem sleeves would have been improperly accomplished had not the licensee's Quality Control personnel , noticed that instrument technicians had only one Raychem sleeve to ! place over two splices. Thc work package did not clearly delineate I all the-requirements to accomplish this work activity.

Each splice

should have had its own Raychem sleeve in accordance with manufacture's instructions and the Quad Cities procedure. Quality control personnel stopped the job until the work package was revised, at .l which time the work was resumed. The work activity was then properly completed. While the performance of Quality Control was certainly noteworthy, the performance of the maintenance department was not. This appeared, however, to be an isolated case.

No violations or deviations were noted.

b.

Monthly Surveillance Observation (61726) The inspectors observed surveillance testing required by the Technical Specifications and verified that testing was performed in accordance with cdequate procedures, that test instrumentation was calibrated, and that limiting conditions for operation were met. Additionally, the inspectors observed / verified the removal and restoration of the affected components, and that test results conformed with Technical Specifications and procedure requirements.

Also, the inspectors verified that the results were reviewed by personnel other than the individual directing-the test and that any deficier.eies identified during the testing were properly reviewed and resolved by appropriate management personnel.

Portions of the following activities were observed / reviewed: (1) Control rod drive exercising.

(2) APRM heat balance.

(3) lurbine stop valve and control valve functional test and weekly surveillance.

{ ! (4) LLRT cn +.he Unit 2 personnel hatch.

l (5) Unit 2 RCIC quarterly surveillance.

. (6) Unit I reactor protection system electrical protection assemblies surveillance.

(7) Unit 2 C and d RHR service water pump surveillance.

(n) Unit 2 Diesel Generator Quarterly Surveillance.

(9) Control rod withdrawal and insertion timing.

_ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _

- _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _. _ c . ) - l . - I ' ... . . (10) ADS valve testing on Unit 2.

No violations or deviations were noted.

6.

Emergency Preparedness (82701 and 82301) During the inspection period the inspectors monitored the licensee's emergency preparedness drill and one of the licensee's emergency ] preparedness table top exercises. The inspectors also toured the Quad . Cities Technical Support Center (TSC) and the Emergency Operations , Facility (EOF).

No violations or deviations were noted.

7.

Security (71707) During the inspection period the inspectors toured the plant and the i Central Alarm Station to assure that security programs were being properly implemented. This inspection verified that security barriers were in place, security doors were operable, the security force was ' alert and morale was good, personnel correctly displayed their identification badges and visitors were being properly controlled.

No violations or deviations were noted.

8.

Engineering / Technical Support Installation and Testing of Modifications (37828) During the !nspection period the resident inspectors monitored several major plant modifications including: installation of reactor feedwater hydrogen-addition equipment and controls on both Units 1 and 2; and modification of the control room lighting and heating, ventilation, and air conditioning. Also, *ne inspectors monitored the installation of a temporary battery for bntt 2; and installation of new discharge piping for the Unit 2 RHR service water system. All modifications were being installed with minimal problems or disruption of plant activities.

No violations or deviations were noted.

9.

Safety Assessment / Quality Verification a.

Evaluation of Licensee Quality Assurance Program Implementation (35502) (1) Quality Assurance ' ! During the inspection period the Senior Resident Inspector accompanied licensee Quality Assurance (QA) personnel during portions of a licensee-conducted safety system functional inspection (SSFI) of the 1/2 diesel generator. The personnel performing the SSFI appeared knowledgeable and the SSFI appeared to be thorough. The resident inspectors attended i several weekly meetings, between plant and QA personnel, where

- - _ _ - - .

. . recent SSFI findings were communicated to the plant personnel and any required immediate corrective action could be initiated.

The meetings were business-like, and the findings discussed were relevant, accurate, and communicated to the station personnel in a professional manner.

(2) Quality Control During the inspection period the resident inspectors observed several activi % 3 by Quality Control (QC) inspectors of various maintenance activities. All QC inspections appeared to be performed thoroughly and competently.

In one instance the QC inspectors noted instrumentation technicians improperly installing Raychem sleeves. The quality control inspectors stopped the job and would not let it resume until the installation work package was correctly revised.

b.

In-Office Review of Written Reports of Nonroutine Events at Power ~ Reactor Facilities (90712) and Onsite Followup of Written Reports oThonroutine Events At Power Reactor Facilities (92700) During the inspection period the resident inspectors reviewed incidents such as scrams, ESF actuations and component failures, which occurred at other plants. The resident inspectors informed the licensee of the details of all events which potentially had applicability to components or activities at Quad Cities.

LER Review (1) (Closed) LER 265/88028, Revision 00: Reactor Building Ventilatica Isolation Due to Surveillance Test Performed While One Channel Already Downscale.

This item was discussed in Inspection Report 265/88029(DRP).

(2) (Closed) LER 265/88029, Revisions 00 and 01: Technical Specification Surveillar.ce Missed Due to Incomplete Technical Specification Change for Modification.

<

This item was discussed in Inspection Report 265/88029(DRP).

(3) (Closed) LER 265/88030, Revision 00: Missed Technical Specification Surveillance Due to an Inadequate Modification Program Implementation.

! This item was discussed in inspection Report 265/88029(DRP).

I c.

Temporary Instructions ) (1) (Closed) Temporary Instruction 2515/95, Inspection of.BWR Recirculation Pump Trip Multi-Plant Action Item C-02 (25595) j A regional inspector verified by review of as-built drawings (4E-1422 and 4E-6577F) and applicable surveillance procedures that the licensee has installed a reactor recirculation pump

_ - - - - _ - - -. - - )

_ ___ ____ _ _ Lr

. W.. , < , . . trip. This trip is actuated by either low reactor vessel water level or high reactor vessel dome pressure and is functional-according to Technical Specifications. This' item is' closed.

L (2) (0 pen)TemporaryInstruction 2515/100, Proper Receipt, Storage, and Handling of Emergency Diesel Generator (EDG) Fuel Oil (255100).

The resident inspectors performed an inspection of the required items in Temporary Instruction 2515/100, " Proper Receipt, Storage, and Handling of Emergency Diesel Generator Fuel 011."

All items were satisfactorily addressed by the licensee with the exception of the seismic qualification of class 1E equipment. The licensee is currently retrieving and compiling the related documentation. This item will remain open pending final NRC review.

d.

Information Meetings with Local Officials (94600) On March 21, 1989, the Senior Resident Inspector toured the local public document room in the Dixon, Illinois, public library.

No discrepancies were noted, e.

Evaluation of Licensee Self-Assessment Capability (40500) (1) Quality First During the inspection period the resident inspectors met with ! the supervisor of the licensee's Quality First organization to i discuss an investigation being performed by the Quality First organization at Quad Cities.

The investigation concerned an allegation that 3/8 inch lines in the reactor water sample system, a non-safety-related system, were welded to 1/2 inch valves without using reducing fittings. The welding code reouires that a minimum weld thickness be present to ensure that the weld junction will be satisfactory.

A system walkdown by Quality First personnel determined that this condition existed in 10 locations in the reactor water ) sample system. System walkdowns, document reviews, and ) interviews with some of the personnel involved demonstrated

that the reactor water sample system was the only system affected. The reactor water sample system was installed prior to 1981, and at that time modifications to non-safety related , systems did not receive the level of review that is currently i in use.

It could not bc determined why reducing fittings were not used.

' An analysis was performed by a licensee contractor that determined that the omission of reducing fittings did not i pose any system integrity or safety problems. The contractor determined that sufficient weld material was used to fill the

i )

- . -. .

. . . . i . gap between the outside diameter of the pipe and the inside diameter of the valve and to create a weld which satisfied the welding code thickness criteria. Hydrostatic tests performed after installation of the sample system were completed successfully, indicating that the system was structurally sound. Modifications on both safety-related and non-safety-related components are now performed in accordance with the QAP 1270 series of procedures which govern the conduct of modifications. At the time the non-safety-related reactor water sample system was modified, safety-related system modifications were under the QA program and were tightly controlled. The non-safety-related system modifications were not as tightly controlled. The current modification proceaures should ensure that errors similar to the omission of reducing f!ttings do not recur in the future.

The resident inspectors walked-down the reactor water sample system and reviewed the licensee's report to verify the completeness and accuracy of the Quality First investigation.

No errors or omissions were noted. A regional inspector l

reviewed the contractor's analysis and found it acceptable.

(2) On-Site Review Committee During the inspection period the Senior Resident Inspector attended On-Site Review Committee meetings on several occasions.

In each instance the committee was properly l staffed and scequately addressed the relevant issues.

On-Site Review Committee meetings which addressed the followii.g subjects were observed: (a) The retype of the Unit 1 Technical Specifications.

(b) Technical Specification required surveillance which were not performed during the specified interval.

(c) Concept design review of the screen wash strainer modification.

No violations or deviations were noted.

10. Management Meetings - Entrance and Exit Interviews (30703) The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) throughout the inspection period and at the conclusion of the inspection on March 31, 1989, and sunmarized the scope and findings of ' the inspection activities.

] The inspectors also discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the Inspectors during the inspection. The licensee did not identify any such documents / processes as proprietary.

l

- - - - - - - - ) }}