IR 05000254/2010007

IR 05000254-10-007 & 05000265-10-007, on 04/26/10 - 05/14/10 Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications

ML101540628
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	06/03/2010
From:	Robert Daley Engineering Branch 3
To:	Pardee C Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear
References
IR-10-007
Download: ML101540628 (16)

Text

une 3, 2010

SUBJECT:

QUAD CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION EVALUATION OF CHANGES, TESTS, OR EXPERIMENTS AND PERMANENT PLANT MODIFICATIONS BASELINE INSPECTION REPORT 05000254/2010007(DRS);

05000265/2010007(DRS)

Dear Mr. Pardee:

On May 14, 2010, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications inspection at your Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station. The enclosed inspection report documents the inspection results, which were discussed on May 14, 2010, with Mr. W. Beck and other members of your staff.

The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commissions rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.

The inspectors reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel.

Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records System (PARS) component of NRC's Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS), accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

/RA/

Robert C. Daley, Chief Engineering Branch 3 Division of Reactor Safety Docket No.50-254; 50-265 License No.DPR-29; DPR-30

Enclosure:

Inspection Report 05000254/2010007; 05000265/2010007 w/Attachment: Supplemental Information

REGION III==

Docket No: 50-254; 50-265 License No: DPR-29; DPR-30 Report No: 05000254/2010007 and 05000265/2010007(DRS)

Licensee: Exelon Nuclear Facility: Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Location: Cordova, IL Dates: April 26 through May 14, 2010 Inspectors: Z. Falevits, Senior Reactor Inspector (Lead)

J. Neurauter, Senior Reactor Inspector R. Winter, Reactor Inspector Approved by: Robert C. Daley, Chief Engineering Branch 3 Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000254/2010007, 05000265/2010007; 04/26/2010 - 05/14/2010; Quad Cities Nuclear

Power Station, Units 1 and 2; Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications.

This report covers a two-week announced baseline inspection on evaluations of changes, tests, or experiments and permanent plant modifications. The inspection was conducted by Region III based engineering inspectors. The significance of most findings is indicated by their color (Green, White, Yellow, Red) using Inspection Manual Chapter (IMC) 0609, Significance Determination Process (SDP). Findings for which the SDP does not apply may be Green or be assigned a severity level after NRC management review. The NRCs program for overseeing the safe operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, Reactor Oversight Process, Revision 4, dated December 2006.

NRC-Identified

and Self-Revealed Findings No violations of significance were identified.

Licensee-Identified Violations

No violations of significance were identified.

REPORT DETAILS

1R17 Evaluations of Changes, Tests, or Experiments and Permanent Plant Modifications

.1 Evaluation of Changes, Tests, or Experiments

a. Inspection Scope

From April 26, 2010 through May 14, 2010, the inspectors reviewed six safety evaluations performed pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 to determine if the evaluations were adequate and that prior NRC approval was obtained as appropriate. The inspectors also reviewed 18 screenings where licensee personnel had determined that a 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation was not necessary. The inspectors reviewed these documents to determine if:

• the changes, tests, or experiments performed were evaluated in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 and that sufficient documentation existed to confirm that a license amendment was not required;

• the safety issue requiring the change, tests, or experiment was resolved;

• the licensee conclusions for evaluations of changes, tests, or experiments were correct and consistent with 10 CFR 50.59; and

• the design and licensing basis documentation was updated to reflect the change.

The inspectors used, in part, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) 96-07, Guidelines for 10 CFR 50.59 Implementation, Revision 1, to determine acceptability of the completed evaluations and screenings. The NEI document was endorsed by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.187, Guidance for Implementation of 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests, and Experiments, dated November 2000. The inspectors also consulted Part 9900 of the NRC Inspection Manual, 10 CFR Guidance for 10 CFR 50.59, Changes, Tests, and Experiments.

This inspection constituted six samples of evaluations and 18 samples of changes as defined in IP 71111.17-04.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

.2 Permanent Plant Modifications

a. Inspection Scope

From April 26, 2010 through May 14, 2010, the inspectors reviewed 11 permanent plant modifications, including one equivalency evaluation that had been installed in the plant during the last three years. This review included in-plant walkdown inspections of portions of the Unit 2 250 volts direct current (VDC) battery foam spacer replacement modification; loss of excitation relay in emergency diesel generator (EDG) room panel 2251-10 modification; Diesel fire pumps at screen house modification; Turbine Building emergency lighting units; 480V switchgear RMS-9 trip unit modification; Turbine Building Adjustable Speed Drive (ASD) and Anticipated Transient Without Scram (ATWS)modification; and the ATWS electrical controls cabinet fuses and wiring as built configuration. The modifications were selected based upon risk-significance, safety significance, and complexity. The inspectors reviewed the modifications selected to determine if:

• the supporting design and licensing basis documentation was updated;

• the changes were in accordance with the specified design requirements;

• the procedures and training plans affected by the modification have been adequately updated;

• the test documentation as required by the applicable test programs has been updated; and

• post-modification testing adequately verified system operability and/or functionality.

The inspectors also used applicable industry standards to evaluate acceptability of the modifications. The list of modifications and other documents reviewed by the inspectors is included as an attachment to this report.

This inspection constituted eleven permanent plant modification samples as defined in IP 71111.17-04.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

4OA2 Identification and Resolution of Problems

.1 Routine Review of Condition Reports

a. Inspection Scope

From April 26, 2010 through May 14, 2010, the inspectors reviewed various corrective action process documents that identified or were related to 10 CFR 50.59 evaluations and permanent plant modifications. The inspectors reviewed these documents to evaluate the effectiveness of corrective actions related to permanent pant modifications and evaluations for changes, tests, or experiments issues. In addition, corrective action documents written on issues identified during the inspection were reviewed to verify adequate problem identification and incorporation of the problems into the corrective action system. The specific corrective action documents that were sampled and reviewed by the inspectors are listed in the Attachment to this report.

b. Findings

No findings of significance were identified.

4OA6 Meetings

.1 Exit Meeting Summary

On May 14, 2010, the inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. W. Beck and other members of the licensee staff. The licensee personnel acknowledged the inspection results presented and did not identify any proprietary content. The inspectors confirmed that all proprietary material reviewed during the inspection was returned to the licensee staff.

ATTACHMENT:

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Licensee

W. Beck, Regulatory Assurance Manager

K. Donovan, Maintenance Deputy Director

D. Collins, RP Manager

C. Alguire, SMDE/Acting SED

T. Peterson, Regulatory Assurance

R. Buttke, Design Engineering

B. Wehrman, Design Engineering

W. Schmidt, NOS

D. Collins, Design Engineering

M. Wagner, Regulatory Assurance

J. Bailey System Engineering

V. Ezugha, System Engineering

J. Taft, Design Engineering

Nuclear Regulatory Commission

J. McGhee, Senior Resident Inspector

E. Coffman, Reactor Engineer

LIST OF ITEMS

Opened, Closed, and Discussed

None Attachment