IR 05000455/1985028

Safety Insp Rept 50-455/85-28 on 850916-1115.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Part 21 Repts, 10CFR50.55(e) Repts,Preoperational Test Witnessing & Reactor Coolant Hydrostatic Test Witnessing

ML20137H701
Person / Time
Site:	Byron
Issue date:	11/26/1985
From:	Forney W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20137H665	List: IR 05000455/1985028 ML20137H660
References
50-455-85-28, NUDOCS 8512020454
Download: ML20137H701 (5)

Text

. . - -

.

-

l

-

U.S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION III  !

,

Report No. 50-455/85028(DRP)

1 .

] Docket No. 50-455 License No. CPPR-131

'

Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 i Chicago, IL 60690

Facility Name: Byron Station, Unit 2

, Inspection At: Byron Station, Byron, IL j

Inspection Conducted: September 16 - November 15, 1985

.

i l ~

Inspectors: J. M. Hinds, J P. G. Brochman

'

J. A. Malloy i

t Approved By: L '. hie M2VM Reactor Projects __cti . lA Date Inspection Sunnary

Inspection on September 16 - November 15, 1985 (Report No. 50-455/85028(DRP))

l Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced safety inspection by the resident inspectors of 10 CFR 21 reports; 10 CFR 50.55(e) reports; pre-operational test witnessing; reactor coolant hydrostatic test witnessing; housekeeping /

. care and preservation of safety-related components; Class A lift records; allegations and 'other activities. The inspection consisted of 103 inspector-hours onsite by 3 NRC inspectors including 38 inspector-hours during off-shift Results: Of the seven areas inspected no violations or deviations were j identified, and no issues were identified which might indicate potential

'

public health and safety concerns.

!

.,

N i

l

!

.

I

'

8512O20454 851126 PDR ADOCK 05000455 O PDR

__ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . , _ . . . . _ _ _ . - _ _ _ . _ . _ _ , _ _ _ , , . _ _ _ - _ . _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ _ _ , . . . _ . _ _ _ _ , _

-. -. .. . ._ . . - . . . - _ _ . - _ . . _ . _ = . _. -.

.

-

,

! DETAILS

, Persons Contacted i Commonwealth Edison i

l *G. Sorensen, Project Construction Manager

E. Martin, Quality Assurance Superintendent

! *R. Klingler, Project Quality Control Supervisor

! *E. Falb, Unit 2 Testing Supervisor i R. Moravec, Lead Mechanical Engineer j J. Porter, Field Engineer

*J. Langan, Station Compliance i *E. Briette, Quality Assurance Engineer

T. McParlan, Unit 2 Test Engineer l

l The inspectors also contacted and interviewed other licensee and

contractor personnel during the course of this inspection.

!

d

• Denotes those present during the exit interview on November 15, 198 . Followup on 10 CFR Part 21 Reports (92716)

'

(Closed) Part 21 Report (455/84009-PP): Failure of General Electric Ferro-Resonant transformers in Westinghouse 7.5 KVA inverters. The inspector reviewed the licensee's response and verified that the l installed inverters had operated for greater than 6 months without a failure and that a high potential test was satisfactorily performed on spare inverters. This meets the requirements of the permanent corrective i action specified in Westinghouse Letter NS-EPR-2965 dated September 26, i 1984 to Mr. R. C. DeYoung, Director, Division of Inspection and Enforcemen l Follovup on 10 CFR Part 50.55(e) Reports (90712)

(0 pen) Part 50.55(e) Report (455/83003-EE): Reactor Coolant Pump, Steam

Generator, and Pressurizer Column and lateral supports not installed i within the tolerances specified in Sargent and Lundy Design Drawing -

l S-1105. The inspector reviewed the deficiencies documented in CECO NCRs

! -F-750 and F-803 and determined that the resolution described in NCRs

! F-750 and F-803 had only been completed for Byron Unit 1 and that the i remaining corrective action for Byron Unit 2 was transferred to NCR F-912 l and that the remaining corrective actions have not yet been completed.

Pre-Operational Test Witnessing (70441)

j The inspectors witnessed portions of the below listed pre-operational test procedure to verify that testing was conducted in accordance with approved procedures; that all test equipment was properly installed; that test data was collected and recorded properly; and that test problems

! were documented and test changes were processed in an approved manne >

,

t i 2

__

.

.

2.22.61 Diesel Generator No violations or deviations were identifie . Reactor Coolant System Hydrostatic Test Witnessing (704621 The inspector witnessed the performance of the cold hydrostatic test on the Reactor Coolant System and the high pressure portions of its support systems. The inspector verified prior to the performance of the test that the latest revision of the test procedure was available and in use,

, that joints were exposed for examination, that system lineups had been completed; that minimum piping temperature requirements were met, that calibrated pressure gages of the proper range were installed, that relief valves of proper setpoint and capacity were installed, that sufficient I

personnel were available to perform the test, and that all necessary support systems were capable of providing their specified functio The inspector verified during the performance of the test that interruptions of test "ere documented, that plant conditions necessary to re-enter the test were met, that hydrostatic pressure and time requirements were met and that leakage was directed away from inspection surface The inspector visually examined approximately 100 joints, connections and regions of high stress and also examined approximately 25 pumps and valves. The inspector verified that test data was recorded properly and that the performance of licensee personnel conducting the test I

demonstrated an understanding of assigned duties and responsibilitie No violations or deviations were identifie . Housekeeping / Care and preservation of Safety Related Components (71302)

The inspectors conducted plant tours of Unit 2 between September 16 and November 15, 1985. Areas of the Unit 2 plant observed during the tours included the containment, fuel handling and storage areas, auxiliary building areas including the Unit 2 portion of the control racm, and the

^

turbine building. Areas were inspected for work in progress, state of cleanliness, overall housekeeping, state of fire protection equipment and nethods being employed, and the care and preservation of safety-related components and equipment. The inspectors paid particular attention to areas identified to the licensee during the previous inspection period as requiring increased attention to establish and maintain levels of cleanliness commensurate with the current stage of Unit 2 canstructio The inspectors determined that licensee actions continued to ba effective in the previously identified area No violations or deviations were identified.

.

.

.

7. Review of Class A Lif ts of Reactor _Egujpmen_t (71302)

The inspectors reviewed the Nuclear Installation Services Company (NISCO)

records for Class A lifts of reactor equiptrent for the past 6 month Class A lifts were perfonred by NISCO on the reactor vessel head, the reactor vessel upper internals, the reactor vessel lower internals and missile shield barriers. The inspectors reviewed the process control sheets for these lifts and verified that the required quality control inspections had been completed on the rigging, that the load cell was inspected and that the weight of the component to be moved was identified and that each lift was completed satisfactorily. The inspectors also reviewed the calibration records for the load cell and the magnetic particle inspection of the crane hook and verified that they were within their required frequenc No violations or deviations were identifie . Ue (99014)

Licensee Acticns Concerning_Suspec_te_d_ Dru1,se Concern: On September 18. 1985, the licensee notified the Senior Resident Inspector of c concern received related to suspected drug use. This concern was received in the form of a phcne call from a kncwledgeable citizen to the Industrial Relations Supervisor at the CECO Corporate Offices in Chicago. The caller identified an employee at Byron Station whom the citizen had reason to believe may be using drugs. The employee named in this concern was a non-management, non-licensed administrative employee whose duties and assignments do not involve safety related work. The caller agreed to supply additional information as required to support CECO's investigation of the concer Findings: In keeping with the licensee's drug awareness program, the individual was relieved of all duties at the Byron Station, the individual's photo identification security badge and access key-card were revoked pending the outcome of an investigation, counseling and chemical testing for drugs. The individual was interviewed by senior Employee Assistance Program (EAP) and medical personne The individual initially refused to participate in the EA Following a second interview and discussion with the EAP coordinator the individual elected to join the EAP and participate in addiction treatmen A month later, an Erployer Conference attended by Byron Station managers, supervisors, union representative, the individual's attorney, and the individual, was held to review the individual's ,

progress towards recovery and it was determined that the individual should be returned to fit-for-duty status. The individual was also advised of a six month probationary status requiring participation in the treatment program as an cut-patient, counseling on a periodic basis with the EAP personnel and random spot check urinalysis testing for drug r l '

' *

.

I Based on the individual's acceptance of the terms of the probationary status the individual was readmitted to the site, rebadged and returned to full dut Failure on the part of the individual to complete the counseling l program, or pass a urinalysis tests would result in termination without further cause. This concern is considered closed, Allegation Followup In response to alleged drug and alcohol use in the parking lots and areas of the power plant received by the licensee on June 13, 1985, the licensee developed and implemented an action plan to investigate and disposition these allegatirns. The details of the NRC inspectors' investigation of the alleged drug and alcohol use are documented in I&E Inspections Reports 454/85025(DRP) and 455/85021(DRP).

A feature of the licensee's action plan included unannounced periodic random searches of the licensee's power plant property using narcotics detection trained dog teams. A search of this nature was conducted by Byron Security personnel and three drug detector dog teams. The dog teams were accompanied by representatives from Byron Station, CECO Security, Wackenhut Security, Union Stewards and the Ogle County Sheriff's Departmen The three dog teams conducted searches including contractor offices and storage; CECO receiving warehouse and offices; radwaste and service building; and employee parking lots. In all the areas searched, the dog teams did not discover any illegal drugs, substances, or paraphernalia. Therefore this allegation remains close No violations or deviations were identified.

l 9. ExitInterview(30/03)

The inspectors met with licensee representatives denoted in Paragraph 1 i

at the conclusion of the inspection on November 15, 1985. The inspectors summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the finding The inspectors also discussed the likely infornational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection. The licensee did not identify any such documents / processes as proprietary, l

,

5