Text

Forwards IE Insp Repts 50-010/78-30,50-237/78-27 & 50-249/78-28 on 781002-31.No Noncompliance Noted
	ML19289C323
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden
Issue date:	12/01/1978
From:	Fiorelli G; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Brian Lee; COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Shared Package
ML19289C324	List: IR 05000010/1978030; ML19289C323;
References
	NUDOCS 7901120018
	Download: ML19289C323 (2)
	v • d • e

r

l

.

8

d

%

UNITED STATES

c

pk

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

,

.

E

\\ g 1, j

R EGION 111

3

g

799 ROOSEVELT ROAD

[

GLEN ELLYN,6LLINotS 60137

%,

.....

Docket No. 50-10

Docket No. 50-237

DEC 01 a.78

Docket No. 50-249

CommLnwealth Edison Company

i

ATTN:

Mr. Byron Lee, Jr.

ggg

gg gocuMENT

Vice President

1

gqgggyPAGES

P.O. Box 767

i

'

Chicago, IL 60690

Gentlemen:

This refers to the inspection conducted by Mr. J. L. Barker, of

this office on October 2-31, 1978, of activities at Dresden

Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2 and 3, authorized by NRC

Operating Licenses No. DPR-2, No. DPR-19 and No. DPR-25 and to

the discussion of our findings with your staff at the conclusion

of the inspection.

The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas

examined during the inspection. Within these areas, the

inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures

and representative records, observations, and interviews with

personnel.

No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified

during the course of this inspection.

In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of

Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a

copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will

be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, except as follows.

If this report contains information that you or your contractors

believe to be proprietary, you must apply in writing to this

office, within twenty days of your receipt of this letter, to

withhold such information from public disclosure. The

application must include a full statement of the reasons for

which the information is considered proprietary, and should be

prepared so that proprietary information identified in the

application is contained in an enclosure to the application.

2 9 o n 2 o b(3

GL

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMEN1

.

PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS

-

1.

LICENSEE

2.

REGIONAL OFFICE

Co=monwealth Edison Company

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co==ission

Dresden Units 1, 2, 3

799 Roosevelt Rd.

Glen Ellyn, IL.

60137

Region III

3.

DOCRET h"JMBERS

4.

LICENSE hTM3ERS

5.

DATE OF INSPECTION

50-010, 50-237, 50-249

DPR-02, DPR-19, DPR-25

fg/75_p7/7f

6.

Within the scope of the inspection, no itees of nonco=pliance or deviation

'

were found.

7.

The following catters are prelitinary inspection findings:

,

8.

These preliminary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC Supervision /

ManagJment at the Region III Office and they will correspond with you

concerning any enforcement action.

h.

kJ

w

{

Nuc}f'arRegulatoryCo==issionInspector

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENPORCEMINT

.

PRELIMINARY INSPECTION FINDINGS

..

1.

LICENSEE

2.

REGIONAL OFFICE

Cocnonwealth Edison Company

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Dresden Units 1, 2, 3

799 Roosevelt Rd.

Glen Ellyn, IL.

60137

Region III

3.

DOCKET NUMBERS

4.

LICENSE NUMBERS

5.

DATE OF INSPECTION

j

jj ,_gjf

50-010, 50-237, 50-249

DPR-02, DPR-19, DPR-25

'{

6.

Within the scope of the inspection, no items of noncompliance or deviation

were found.

.

7.

The following matters are preliminary inspection findings:

8.

These preliminary inspection findings will be reviewed by NRC Supervision /

ManagJment at the Region III Office and they will correspond with you

concerning any enforcement action.

$:

f.hf

s

Nu(fearRegkatoryCommissionInspector

.

..

.

.. .'

'

.

-

) - l

.

- [. ..

. s ,,

.'

...s;

.!,.

., . ;

"

..

INCS

'

. . . ' ' . ., ' ,,PRELI'.'.INA?.T INS?ZC;;0N ?!SD

'

.,.,...'

i

,,

.,

.-

-

.. .'

.

4..

,;

s.

,

..

.

...

. .. ~

~

~~

.

..

-

.

." Il=. LICMC

'

2. REG;05AL OFFICE

.-

.

..

,

. . -

.

. .

.

'

.

. ." C aa awe.tm Ed;w,i C..p.y

. . .

U.S. Nucleur Regulatory Comission

'. s i

'

. P. o. Ps.,.

,s ]

, O.go.,ee o., .nspection & Enforcement, RII*^..'

,,

.

7p9 Roosevel: Ro.ad

!

l

. C 6.cr..p , Itt, s.os qo._-

,-

.

-

Glen Ellyn. IL- 60137

!

.

,

-

.

e

,

.

..

.

,

.

..

.

,

,,

.

. . . _ . . . . . ,

4.

LICESS: Rom:RS

5.

DAT2 OF INSPECTICN

',

3.

DOCKCT Nasta5

.

-

n-o c

@ ~.n r

o-M

_

.tra.2

o n.g c,

M:n~_ :

' ic/ $ .h l'if

, . ,

__

-

.

..

.

(/ 6. .! k'ithin the acopo ,of* the ' inspect' ion, no itens ,of noncompliance or , deviations

'

,,

,

,:

voro found.

.

,

'

i

.

-

/j.',7.. 'y'iThe foll.owing 'm. .at. ter.a..ar.e prol.'1mi..n.

.

,

.

ary.~. a..i.ns. p'a'e.tien./f.indings. '

I

.-

,

.

- .

.. .

e*,

. .

. .s . .

.v

..

.

. . . . . .

.

. . .

. ,

,

.

'

.

,.

l

.

,..

.*

.

..

.

,

.

,

'

-

.

-

..

...

.

-

,.

.

v.

.

. .

.,

.

.,

. ..

.

. . .

..

.

,

,,

.

,

.

,

.-

.

. .

.

,.

. , '

.

. .

, ,

.

'

e

_.-

.. .

,'

. , ,

.

,

.

.-

.

-

.

.-

.

.,

, , . . .

.

.-

.

. . . . .

. i.

,

.

..

.,

.

..

. . .

-

.

. .

.

,

.

,

.,

.~

.'

.

. . '

.

,

.

'

-

t.

i

. , .

.

,,

.

,

i

-

.

..-

..

.

-s

. ......:

'

.

'.

. . ' .

.

..

..s.

,.

. ...

.,

,

-

.

..

.

4.

..

.

. . . . . .i ,

..

,.

.

..

.

..

,

.-

,

.

a .

..

,,

.

..

.

.,

s.

e

,

-*

-

,

.

.,

.

-

.

,

. ' . .

'

-

,

.

,

-, . . . , .

i.

.\\

-

.

. .

"

-

'

.

.:

.

..

.

,

.

,

.

..

.

,

.

..

.

,

.

..

-

.

i

1.,

.

- .

-

.

..

.

,

t

h

I/ 8.,'These preliminary * inspection 'findind' oil 5erevieved by'NRC' Supervision /'. 't.

.

p

',

Manageacnt at the Rc!; ion III Offico and they vill corre'epond with you

- *-

!.

. . concerning any enforcement action. ,i,..

.,s.

.

. , .

,

-

' . '

.

..,*i..

!.

.

.. * ,.a.,'<

s. ..q..,

-

. ..

. . ,

.

-.

.

..

. - . , .

..

...

.,

, ;.. ' ,

, . . . . _ . .

. ..j &l

...

.

._

'

,.

l

. - :. .

.

,

' .

t.

.

,

.

..

"'..!,.-[ Nuffen: Regulatory Gor =isoien Inspecto)

.

,

's..'..,.,...'.., '. .; , ,' t

.

..

?.

.:..

.

,,

. , _ -

.

,

.

... ~

-

. .

- - - -

. . .

.

_ _ . .

.

,

.

<

.

.

.

..

.

..

.

ji . . .':;;/. ;6( ,,ratw.tse.p rusrac::ox rzmues*.

4,<

.

,

.'. e .

..'

.d

' '

.'

...

.

,

~ , . . . .

,

.

.,,,

.

. . . .

.

..

.

...

. . .

. ..

.,

.s .

.

_

... _

r [T.

LIcf.NSEE

l 2. REGIONAL OFFICE

-

<

..

.

..

.

-

.

.. ,

,

.

..

.

.,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission

. ' '

1

,

, . Ce eu.t +h Edison C.+n.t

'..

, ' ' ,

. P. o. P .,, 76 7

Office of Inspection & Enforcemente RIZI..'

l

,

'

. c6.ca p , I. sl. Gomo._. *

799 Roosevelt Rgad

-

.

<

.

,

Glen Ellyn, IL' 60137

.-

..

.-

,

.

..

.

.

. .

..

,

.

. - ,

' . , .

__

_

o..._...

_ _

__

5.

DATE OF INSPECTION

4.

LICENSE NUM E RS

3.

DOCKCT NUMDERS

.

' , '

ca.o e

a .n r

a .m

__

.pn.a

o n..is

we :

IC .' M h {

'

..s

.

..

.

@ 6..' Within the scope of* the ' inspect'ioi), no items of noncomplianca.'or deviations

'

j.-

t.voro found.

~ '

~

.'

. , ,

'

-

'

,

.

. . ,

.

,

-

.

'

C.'.7.,. .',iTha fo11.ovi..ng"n. .at..ter.s..ar,e prol'imi. .na'ry'.'.li.n.s. pa'o. tion..I.f..in.d.inis.s.'

.

'

l

/

..

. .s . .

.s-

..

.... ...

.

. . . .. . .

. ..,

.

er

.

,

.

,.

i

.

-

.

, . .

,

.

..

,

.

,

.

,

.

,

-

.

..

.

-

. . . ,

,

.

..

,.

,

..

.

..

-

.

e.

.

. ,

.,

.

'

.

p

' ' ,

.

...

s,.

. . .

.

s

.

,.

,

.

. , .

.

.-

.

,

e,.

.

. .

<

.

,.

.

,

.

-

..:

.

.,

.

,

..

,

'

t

.

-

,

.

',

.-

.

..

-

. , , . . ,

.

-

.

._

.

,

.

, . . . . .

. ' . -

' , . . .

.' - ..

.

,

.

,

,,

,

,.

,

.'.

.

, . =

.

,

'.

.

,

.

.,

.;. . ' -

,

. , , . .

-

.

..

t.

. ,>

-

i

.

,

.

..

i,..

, , ,

,,

,

.

t

~i, r ;

' ' . , , .

i!

..

,

.

.

.

...

.

.'. . ' * . . . ' . , . '

' ' '

.' i

,:.

. . . .

., .

.

, , . , , ,

l,-

.

..

,

,'.

.

-

c.

..

,

.

I

s, a

.

,

.

,

. . ,

. ..

. i.

.

, . .

.

. . . , -

.

. . .

.

.-

.

..

t.

.,

...

.

..

. . *

r

,-

~. ' t '.

,

.,

.

,

}

. n' .

'

.

'.

-

...v,*

..

...

. .

..

.

,

,,.

.

, . . .

...

.;.,.'

.

.i

.

..

.

,

-

.

-

.-

.

. , ,

.

,

-

s

..

.

-

.

..

.,

e

.

..

-

.

,

.

..

-

..

.

.,

.

o.

.

,

.

t

t..

'

.

. . . . . . . .

. . ..

C 8.'I. 'These preliminary'inspeetion 'f'ndings vf11 be' reviewed by *NRC 'Su'pervieton/'.'*.5

M.

.

Management at the Region III offico and they vill corre'opond with you

'

-

'

-

, , . .j.

'. . concerning any enf.orcement. action.'i.,../c,s.

-

.

-

..

. . . ~ . .

.

. ..

..

,.

. . .

. . . . . .

..

.

=

. ~ .

..

. '. '.i.y: :. : . . ;..;.. ':

, , . , '

_ . c). . , g .; .

r

'.

.-

-

. .

, . . . _ . .

.

,

.

. * .' ,q,' , Nyc' e nt Regula to ry Co::=in n i on In n p o c to r

,

'

. . . . -

.

,

..

at the beginning of and at other prescribed time (s) during

the security personnel work shif t and that all fixed and

roving posts, and each member of the response team

and

successfully communicate from their remote location;

verified that equipment was operated consistent with

requirements in the PSP and security procedures.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

Review of Periodic and Special Reports (J. L. Kohler)

10.

Integrated

The inspector reviewed the licensee's Containment

Leak rate Test (CILRT) report for Unit 3 dated August 28, 1978

the report included information required

and verified that

to be reported by NRC requirements and that test resu?.ts and/or

supportive infotaation discessed in the report were consistent

This

with design predictions and performance specifications.

review was conducted in office.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

11.

Exit Interview

The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted

in paragraph 1) on Friday of each week, October 6,13, 26

and 27, 1978, and summarized the scope and findings of that

week's inspection activities.

Attachment: Prelininary

Inspection Findings.

-6-

.'

.

.-

organization was onsite at all times; verified by observation

that the security organization was properly manned for all

shifts, and verified by observation that members of the

security organization were capable of performing their

assigned tasks. There was no weapons qualification conducted

during this monthly inspection.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

7.

Physical Protection - Physical Barriers

The inspector verified that certain aspects of the physical

barriers and isolation zones conform to regulatory requirements

and commitments in the physical security plan (PSP); that

rates in the protected area were closed and locked if not attended;

that doors in vital area barriers were closed and locked if not

attended; and that isolation zones were free of visual obstructions

and objects that could aid an intruder in penetrating the protected

area.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

8.

Physical Protection - Access Control (Identification,

Authorization, Badging, Search, and Escorting)

The inspector verified that all persons and packages were

identified and authorization checked prior to entry into

the protected area (PA), all vehicles were properly authorized

prior to entry into the protected area (PA), all persons authorized

in the PA were issued and displayed identification badges,

records of accese authorized conformed to the PSP, and all

personnel in vital areas were authorized access; verified

that all persons, packages, and vehicles were searched in

accordance with regulatory requirements, the PSP, and

security procedures; verified that persons authorized

escorted access were accompained by an escort when within

a PA or vital area; verified that vehicles authorized

escorted access were accompanied by an escort when within

the PA; and verified by review of the licensee's authorization

document that the escort observed above, was authorized to

perform the escort function.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

9.

Phvsical Protection - Communications

The inspector verified by observation (during each operating

shift) that communications checks were conducted satisfactorily

-5-

.

controls and procedures, radiological health and safety,

industrial safety, controlled access and security procedures,

emergency plan, and quality assurance training were provided as

required by the licensee's technical specifications; verified

by direct questioning of two craftsmen and two technicians

that on-the-job training, formal technical training commensurate

with job classification, and fire fighting training were

provided; and verified by direct questioning of one female

employee that female employees are provided instructions

concerning prenatal radiation exposure.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

5.

Licensed Operator Requalification Training

The requalification program was reviewed to ascertain whether

the licensed operator requalification training program is

effective and in conformance with regulatory requirements.

The inspector verified that an operator requalifications

training program has been established and includes preplanned

lectures, attendance documentation, and identification of

specific training aids to be used in lieu of an instructor;

that on-the-job training requirements have been specified

to include control manipulations, discussion / review of

changes in facility design, procedures, and license; and

that records of licensed individuals are maintained to

include completed course and yearly examinations, docu-

mentation cf required simulations of emergency and abnormal

conditions, results of supervisory evaluations and observations

of manipulations and simulations identified above documentation

of individual study, and documentation of accelerated requali-

fication training. The inspector attended two training lectures

and verified adequacy of the technical content of the presented

info rma tion.

There was no simulator training being conducted

during this inspection.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

6.

Physical Protection - Security Organization

The inspector verified by observation and personal interview

(once during each operating shift) that at least one full time

member of the security organization who has the authority to

direct the physical security activities of the security

-4-

.

..

protection, including minimizing personnel exposure;

verified that materials or components used were certified

as required by plant procedures; verified that QC hold points,

plant status and safety controls and tagging operations appeared

adequate; and verified that associated Limiting Conditions for

Operation were met in accordance with Technical Specifications.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identfied.

3.

Plant Operations

The inspector reviewed the plant operations including examinations

of control ;oow log books, routine patrol sheets, shift engineer

log book, equipment outage logs, special operating orders, and

jumper and tagout logs for the month of October,1978.

The inspector also made visual observations of the routine

surveillance and functional tests in progress during the

period. This review was conducted to verify that facility

operations were in conformance with the requirements established

under Technical Specifiestions, 10 CFR, and Administrative

Procedures. A review of the licensee's deviation reports for

the period was conducted to verify that no violations of the

licensee's Technical Specifications were made.

The inspector

conducted a tour of Units 1, 2 and 3 reactor buildings and

turbine buildings throughout the period and noted that the

monitoring instrumentation was recorded as required, radia-

tion controls were properly established, f]"id leaks and

pipe vibrations were minimal, seismic restraint oil levels

appeared adequate, equipment caution and hold cards agreed

with control room records, plant housekeeping conditions /

cleanliness were adequate, and fire hazards were minimal.

The inspector observed shift turnovers to verify that plant

and component status and problem areas were being turned over

to relieving shift personnel. The inspector verified that the

Unit 2 Standby Liquid Control System was lined up in accordance

with the operational conditions. The inspector observed

sampling and chemical analysis of water chemistry samples to

verify that water chemistry was being maintained in accordance

with Technical Specifications.

No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

4.

General Station Training

The inspector verified by direct questioning of two new,

two existing, and two temporary employees that administrative

-3-

.

..

DETAILS

1.

Persons Contacted

B. Stephenson, Station Superintendent

A.

Roberts, Assistant Superintendent

B.

Shelton, Assistant to the Station Superintendent

R. Ragan, Lead Operating Engineer

D.

Farrar Technical Staff Supervisor

E. Budzichowski, Unit 1 Opercting Engineer

J. Kolonowski, Unit 2 Operating Engineer

C. Sargent, Unit 3 Operating Engineer

D. Adam, Chemical and health Physics Engineer

W. Joyce, Training Supervisor

G. Reardanz, Quality Assurance Coordinator

R.

Stobert, Quality Assurance

D.

Schildgen, Quality Control

R. Kinsinger, Quality Assurance

B. Satnders, Security Administrator

The inspector also talked with and interviewed several other

licensee ecployees, including members of the technical and

engineering staffs, reactor and auxiliary operators, shift

engineers and forecen, training instructors, electrical,

cechanical and instrunent maintenance personnel, clerical

personnel and contract security personnel.

Denotes those attending one or core exit interviews conducted

on October 6, 13, 20 and 27, 1978.

2.

Maintenance

The inspector, through direct observation and record review,

verified that reactivity control, instrumentation, contain-

cent and plant and electrical systems maintenance were

conducted in accordance with established procedures t.id

Technical Specifications; verified that required administrative

approvals were obtained prior to initiating work; verified

that maintenance activities were accocplished using approved

and technically adequate procedures; verified that the

activities were inspected in accordance with the provisions

of licensee's require =ents; verified that activities included

functional testing and calibration as necessary prior to

returning the coeponent or system to an operating status;

verified that quality control records were available; verified

that activities were accomplished by qualified personnel;

verified that radiological controls were established for

-2-

ML19289C323

Text

Navigation menu

Search