IR 05000295/1978024
| ML20150D645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/31/1978 |
| From: | Biden M, Boyd D, Knop R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20150D630 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-295-78-24, 50-304-78-24, NUDOCS 7812060236 | |
| Download: ML20150D645 (5) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
.
REGION III
~
-
Report No. 50-295/78-24;.50-304/78-24 Docket No. 50-295; 50-304 License No. DPR-39; DPR-48 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name:
Zion Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Zion Site, Zion. IL Inspection Conducted:
September 13-15, 20, 21, 27-29, and October 4 and 5, 1978 Y-~
Inspectors:
D. C. Boy
/8-3/~ 78 O~
10/27/76 M. D. Riden i'c 4 2 Approved By:
R. C. Ynop, Chief
/0!3/!7 Reactor Projects Section 1 Inspection Summary Inspection on September 13-15, 20, 21, 27-29, and October 4 and 5, 1978 (Report No. 50-295/78-24; 50-304/78-24)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspections in the following areas:
Review of plant operations; surveillance; refueling activities, Licensee Event Reports, and independent inspectio-affort. These inspections involved 130 manhours of inspection by t NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the five areas inspected no ems of noncompliance were found in four, and one item of noncomplian e was found in the area of conduct of operation.
(Details - Paragraph 2)
Y81206no3(o
.. -.
-
-
.
.
DETAILS
.
1.
Persons Contacted
--
- N. Wandke, Plant Superintendent
-
J. Leider, Assistant Plant Superintendent
- L.
Soth, Administrative Assistant
- C. Schumann, Operating Engineer E. Fuerst, Operating Engineer R. Ward, Operating Engineer
- J. Gilmore, Shift Engineer T. Boyce, Shift Engineer F. Pauli, Shift Engineer T. Flowers, Shift Engineer
- T.
Parker, Shift Foreman C. Schultz, Training Supervisor D. Walden, Fuel Handling Foreman J. LaFontaine, Fuel Handling Foreman
- R. Ungeran, Assistant Technical Staf f Supervisor
- P.
Kuhner, Quality Assurance Technician
- Denotes those present at the October 5, 1978 exit inte rview.
2.
Review of Plant Operations
The major portion of the inspection efforts, during this reporting period, were spent in this area. During each inspection day the control room operation and manning was examined on one or more occasions. Also, a partial plant tour was made during each inspec-tion day such that during this reporting period all accessible areas of the plant were inspected one or more times. This included two inspections inside the Unit 1 containment area during refueling operations.
The inspection included the review of control room, shift super-visor /shif t foreman, and miscellaneous logs and data sheets.
Adherence to procedures, work request implementation, tag out procedures, performance of surveillance test, alarm annunciator
<
response, and many other operational activities were also examined.
The housekeeping appearance of the plant is worthy of special mention.
In the past several months there has been a substantial improvement throughout the plant in the overall appearance, order-liness, and housekeeping. This attributed to several changes in-2-
.
- -
-
.
.-- -
-.
-. -.
._,
.. - -
-
-
-.
-
-. ---
e O
shift manpower structure and in procedure changes which more clearly delineate specific areas of housekeeping responsibility.
One item of NRC concern was identified during a review'of the events which led to taking a service water pump out of service without performing the required surveillance on the AC and DC sdandby power
~
,
supplies of the remaining two service water pumps.
On September 11, 1978, while Unit I was operating at 62 percent power, the IC service water pump breaker was taken out of service f or preventive maintenance inspection. The work request which authorized this work had been prepared and approved in advance of a scheduled refueling outage which was to begin on September 15, 1978. The conditions of this work request authorized the work to be done only during a reactor outage period. This failure to adhere to the conditions of the Work Request Authorization is contrary to station procedures ZQP-3-51-1 and QP 3-52 and is in nonconformance with Technical Specification 6.2.A.6.
The cause of this event is attributed to an incomplete review of the condit ions defined in the Work Request Authorization by both Operations and Maintenance personnel.
Station Management has reviewed this area of responsibility with all operations and maintenance personnel having authority and responsibility for proper review and implementation of these work request authorizations.
This matter is considered to be closed.
3.
Surveillance On September 15, 1978 the inspector witnessed the preparations for, and portions of the " loss of off site power" test which is performed at the start of each refueling outage. This surveillance test, which is conducted in accordance with approved Technical Staff Special Procedure 35 (TSS 35) provides the testing required to meet the intent of Technical Specification 4.15.1.B.3.a.
Basically, the test demonstrates that with all safeguards loads operating on normal power, that upon the loss of offsite power immediately followed by a safety injection signal, the diesel generators automatically start, the safeguards buses shed load and automatically resequence onto the buses the required loads within the proper time intervals.
This testing was performed for Unit 1 and included diesel gener-ators IA, IB, and 0, and safeguards buses 147, 148 and 149 The crew performing the test included operations and technical staff personnel. The activities were coordinated by the group-3-
~
_
_
_,_ -
._, _ _ _
_ _. -,
-_
.
,
i leader who was a member of the plant technical staff. All pertinent system components were instrumented through a brush recorder for verification of operability, sequence, and timing. Subsequent analysis of these records verified that the system functioned as designed.
--
-
No items of NRC concern were identified during this portion of the inspection.
4.
Refueling Activities a.
Pre-fuel Handling Activities An inspection was conducted to determine whether surveillance testing involving ref ueling equipment had been performed prior to fuel movement in the following areas:
Crane testing and refueling interlocks Technical Specification and ventilation requirements
'
Refueling machine operation and indexing Communications systems Cooling capability for stored fuel Refueling deck radiation monitors
,
No items of regulatory concern were found in these inspection areas.
b.
Fuel Handling Activities The licensee's refueling activities were examined by direct observation and found to be conducted as required by technical specifications and approved procedures with respect to:
Containment integrity Core monitoring Fuel shuffling and accountability Storage of core internals Housekeeping Shutdown margin requirements The inspector witnessed portions of the fuel movement while touring the control room, containment and fuel storage building to insure that the refueling crew, operators and supervisors met licensing requirements. A review was made of recommen-dations concerning damage to f uel assembly E07 grid strap No. 3.
Since the missing sections of the grid strap were l
i-4-
_
_
.
.
-
. _ _ _
_
.. _ _., _
__ _
F
i
- l
o i
considered to be from a clean break and that the envelope had l
been maintained, assembly F,07 was evaluated by the licensee and Westinghouse to be acceptable for reuse.
'
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
._
.
j 5.
Licensee Event Reports During this inspection period the inspector reviewed the deviation i
and reportable event files for both units. The specific Licensee
!
Event Reports (LER's) reviewed onsite were:
Unit 1 50-295/78-58, 59, 60, 61, 65, 66, 70, 72, 74, 78, 79, 80, 82, 84,
'
86, 87, 88, 89, 91, 92, 93, 94, 95 and 96.
Unit 2
,
50-304/78-51, 53, 54 and 59.
No items of NRC concern were identified with the above LER's.
.
6.
Independent Inspection Effort The inspector spent approximately 20 percent of the inspection time pursuing activities outside the defined inspection program. This included; the reexamination of key procedures, and verification of adherence to these procedures; reexamination of response to annun-ciators, and general annunciator attention; and an expanded work activity observation effort, including two refueling observations inside Unit I containment area.
No items of regulatory concern were identified.
7.
Exit Interview An exit interview was conducted on October 5, 1978, with Mr. Wandke and members of his staf f.
The subjects discussed included; the item of noncompliance and its resolution; the adequacy of corrective actions in the resolution of some Licensee Event Reports; refueling and maintenance activities; and overall plant performance.
-5-