ML17180A975
| ML17180A975 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 10/21/1994 |
| From: | Wright G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Jamila Perry COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17180A976 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9410260084 | |
| Download: ML17180A975 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000237/1994016
Text
Commonwealth Edison Company
ATTN:
Mr. J. Stephen Perry
Vice President
BWR Operations
Executive Towers West III
1400 Opus Place, Suite 300
Downers Grove, IL
60515
Dear Mr. Perry:
October 21, 1994
This refers to the system based instrumentation and control inspection (SBICI)
conducted by Mr. D. S. Butler and others of this office from August 15 through
September 16, 1994.
The inspection included a review of activities authorized
for your Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3. This inspection
focused on the design and configuration of selected instrumentation and
control systems and components.
We discussed our inspection findings with
Mr. E. D. Eenigenburg and others of your staff at the conclusion of the
inspection on September 16, 1994.
Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report.
The team
assessed the design, implementation, and engineering and technical support
(E&TS) relative to selected instrumentation and control (I&C) systems.
The
inspectors selectively reviewed the setpoint program, design calculations,
relevant procedures, representative records, installed equipment, and
interviewed engineering and technical support staff.
The team considered the design and operation of the I&C systems reviewed and
I&C engineering technical support to be adequate.
The team identified several
positive attributes. The most notable was that the recent setpoint
methodology used was technically sound and reflected current industry
practices.
The team identified weaknesses in I&C design control, specifically setpoint
calculations.
In addition, the team noted that efforts in ensuring the proper
integration of design, construction and system engineering in the I&C area
appeared minimal.
Ownership of I&C systems, including system design, was not
well defined due to ineffective communication and weak interaction between the
various engineering departments.
One noticeable consequence of this lack of
integration was the observed slow progression from program conception to
implementation of engineering initiatives. For example, engineering was slow
in identifying and correcting performance problems with the Yarway level
switches.
In addition, following the exit meeting, it was brought to the
team's attention that Dresden's instrument and control mechanics (IMs) had
altered safety related air line routings during field installations. The IMs
did not notify engineering about the changes.
The failure to follow approved
installation drawings could have resulted in safety related equipment failure.
This concern is under review by the resident staff.
r*
~..,,,-
.. i r. .-i .-.
...... v..., . .._.c.:_,
\\
9410260084 941021
ADDCK 05000237
G
Pu6;,._1c..--1£01
Addressees -
Lette~ Dated
October 21, 1994
cc w/encls: J. C. Brons, Vice President
Nuclear Support
T. Nauman, Acting Station Manager
Unit 1
E. 0. Eenigenburg, Station
Manager, Unit 2
R. Bax, Station Manager
Unit 3
P. Holland, Regulatory Assurance
Supervisor
D. Farrar, Nuclear Regulatory
Services Manager
Richard Hubbard
Nathan Schloss, Economist
Office of the Attorney General
State Liaison Officer
Chairman, Illinois Commerce
Commission
Distribution:
Docket File w/encl
PUBLIC IE-01 w/encl
OC/LFDCB w/encl
DRP w/encl
RI II PRR w/encl
RI, Dresden, LaSalle,
Quad Cities w/encl
LPM, NRR w/encl
J. S. Perry
2
October 21, 1994
During this inspection, certain of your activities were in violation of NRC
requirements, as specified in the enclosed Notice. This violation is of
concern because two examples of inadequate post modification testing (PMT)
were identified. The first example involved unverified PMT acceptance
criteria that was not based on applicable design documents.
The second
example involved a testing method that failed to detect other relay contact
success paths (parallel contacts) during testing.
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions
specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response.
In your
response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional
actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this
Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future
inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is
necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.
We also
request that you respond in writtng to inspection followup items
237/249/94016-01, -04, -05, -06, and -07 in this report.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of
this letter, its enclosures, and your response to this letter will be placed
in the NRC Public Document Room.
The respenses directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not
subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincerely,
/s/ D. S. Butlei (for)
G. C. Wright, Chief
Engineering Branch
Docket No. 50-237
Docket No. 50-249
Enclosures:
2.
Inspection Reports
No. 50-237/94016(DRS);
No. 50-249/94016(DRS)
See Attached Addressees
SEE ATTACHED CONCURRENCES
DOCUMENT NAME:
G:DRE94016.DRS
T
ive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: 'C = Copy without attachmentjenclosure 'E" = Copy with attachment/enclosure N" = No copy
E
RIII :DRS
RI II :DRS
RIII:DRS
RIII :DRP
Butler kjc
Winter
Gardner
Hiland
10/ /94
10/ /94
10/ /94
10/d-1 /94
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
-----
--
J. S. Perry
2
October 21, 1994
You are required to respond to this letter and should follow the instructions
specified in the enclosed Notice when preparing your response.
In your
response, you should document the specific actions taken and any additional
actions you plan to prevent recurrence. After reviewing your response to this
Notice, including your proposed corrective actions and the results of future
inspections, the NRC will determine whether further NRC enforcement action is
necessary to ensure compliance with NRC regulatory requirements.
We also
request that you respond in writing to inspection followup items
237/249/94016-01, -04, -05, -06, and -07 in this report.
Following the exit meeting, it was brought to the team's attention that
Dresden's instrument and control mechanics (IMs) had altered safety related
air line routings during field installations. The IMs did not notify
engineering about the changes.
The failure to follow approved installation
drawings could result in safety related equipment failure. This concern is
under review by the resident staff.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of
this letter, its enclosures, and your response to this letter will be placed
in the NRC Public Document Room.
The responses directed by this letter and the accompanying Notice are not
subject to the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as
required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.
Docket No. 50-237
Docket No. 50-249
Sincerely,
G. C. Wright, Chief
Engineering Branch
Enclosures:
1.
2.
Inspection Reports
No. 50-237/94016(DRS);
No. 50-249/94016(DRS)
See Attached Addressees
DOCUMENT NAME:
G:DRE94016.DRS
TJ
ive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C' = Copy without attachment/enclosure "E' = Copy with attachment/enclosure "N' = No copy
RIII:DRS
RIII:DRS
II RIII :DRS
RIII:DRP
RIII :DRS
Butler kjc
Winter "'RW
Gardner /A I'
Hiland
Wri ht
10/[M/94
10/.Zo/94
10/tu/94
10/ /94
10/ /94
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
-----------