ML17179A987
| ML17179A987 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1993 |
| From: | Greenman E NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Delgeorge L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17179A988 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9307140024 | |
| Download: ML17179A987 (2) | |
See also: IR 05000237/1993017
Text
Docket No.
50-237; 50-249
Commonwealth Edison Company
ATTN:
L. 0. DelGeorge
JUL
8 1993
Vice President, Nuclear Oversight
and Regulatory Services
Executive Towers West III
1400 Opus Place, Suite 300
Downers Grove,
IL
60515
Dear Mr. DelGeorge:
This refers to the inspection conducted by A. M. Stone, M. Peck, J. D. Smith,
D. Liao, and V. P. Lougheed of this office, and by R. Zuffa of the Illinois
Department of Nuclear Safety, on May 6 through June 18, 1993.
The inspection
included a review of activities authorized for your Dresden Nuclear Station,
Units 2 and 3, facility.
At the conclusion of the inspection, the findings
were discussed with those members of your staff identified in the enclosed
report.
Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report.
Within
these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures
and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observation of
activities in progress.
During this inspection, weaknesses were noted in the area of engineering
support.
A poor containment inspection by a system engineer resulted in
additional dose for insulation removal.
Also, a system engineer did not
identify wired closed dampers during a separate drywell ventilation system
inspection.
That oversight resulted in a unit shutdown and additional dose.
A weakness in the implementation of your integrated reporting process was
identified.
Management expectations on personnel participation have not been
clearly communicated to the maintenance and operations departments.
The lack
of operations participation was identified in a previous inspection report.
Full cooperation by all personnel is necessary to ensure the identification
and resolution of conditions adverse to quality.
Please provide a discussion
on the resolution of the weaknesses and concerns identified above during the
next routine management meeting.
During this inspection, certain of your activities appeared to be in violation
of NRC requirements.
However, as described in paragraph 6.a. of the enclosed
inspection report, *the violation was categorized as Severity Level V and is
not being cited because the criteria specified in Section VII.B of the
"General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions,"
(Enforcement Policy, 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C}, were satisfied.
I
ii
'
9307140024 930708
ADOCK 05000237
G
. I
Com~onwealth Edison Company
2
JUL
8 1993
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of
this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC
Public Document Room.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Enclosure:
1.
Inspection Report
No.
50-237/93017(DRP);
No.
50-249/93017(DRP)
cc w/enclosure:
_
M. Lyster, Site Vice President,
G. Spedl, Station Manager
J. Shields, Regulatory Assurance
Supervisor
D. Farrar, Nuclear Regulatory Services
Manager
OC/LFDCB
Resident Inspectors, Dresden
LaSalle, Quad Cities, Clinton
R. Hubbard
J. McCaffrey, Chief, Public
Utilities Division
R. Newmann, Office of Public
Counsel, State of Illinois Center
Licensing Project Manager, NRR
State Liaison Officer
Chairman, Illinois Commerce Commission
H. J. Miller, RIII
T. 0. Martin, RIII
J. E. Dyer, NRR
E. J. Leeds, NRR
M. L. Jordan, RIII
C. D. Pederson, RIII
S. Stasek, SRI, Davis Besse
bee:
PUBLIC
Ytr.J
RII I
~lo~
R~I
- '
- >-q
A,.~
Hiland
Hausman
7/7 (A,J
1/f(1}
11~1(>,3
Sincerely,
~RIGIAAl SIGU.(D BY w, L rarma
- }-sf Edward G. Greenman, Director
l) Division of Reactor Projects
RII I
RIII
Wi'-~
~
rney
r~*1;*n
i(cr