IR 05000254/1985001
| ML20138B749 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 09/30/1985 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20138B738 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-85-01, 50-254-85-1, 50-265-85-01, 50-265-85-1, NUDOCS 8603250148 | |
| Download: ML20138B749 (8) | |
Text
.
.
..
.
.
.. _
'
.
i SALP 5 APPENDIX
,
i SALP BOARD REPORT
!
J U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMISSION
i
REGION III
,
l
)
SYSTEMATIC ASSESSMENT OF LICENSEE PERFORMANCE
'
50-254/85001; 50-265/85001
Inspection Report
Commonwealth Edison Company
Name of Licensee
i
Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station
l
Name of Facility
June 1, 1984 through September 30, 1985
Assessment Period
i
i
D
E
a
t
.
.
..
.
.
- _ _________________
-
.
Quad Cities Nuclear Plant
Meeting Summary
The findings and conclusions of the SALP Board are documented in Reports
No. 50-254/85001, and No. 50-265/85001. They were discussed with the
licensee on January 10, 1986, at the Region III office in Glen Ellyn,
Illinois. The licensee's regulatory performance was presented in each
functional area. Overall performance and performance in each functional
area was found to be acceptable. The performance rating improved in the
area of Plant Operations. While the performance rating in the area of
Surveillance and Inservice Testing declined based on the number and nature
of the violations identified, there was not a declining trend noted. The
licensee continues to have a high level of performance in the areas of
Radiation Protection, Emergency Preparedness, Security, Refueling, and
Licensing activities.
While this meeting was primarily a discussion between the licensee and the
NRC, it was open to members of the public as observers.
The following licensee and NRC personnel were in attendance on January 10,
1986.
Commonwealth Edison Company
B. J. Thomas, Executive Vice President
Cc,rdell Reed, Vice President of Nuclear Operations
N. Wandke, Assistant Vice President
D. Galle, Division Vice President and General Manager of Nuclear Stations
D. Farrar, Director of Nuclear Licensing
B. Stephenson, Manager of Production
W. Worden, BWR Operations Manager
N. Kalivianakis, Plant Manager, Quad Cities
D. Scott, Plant Manager, Dresden
G. Plim1, Plant Manager, Zion
L. Gerner, Superintendent, Regulatory Assurance
J. Bitel, Operations QA Manager
W. Shewski, Manager Quality Assurance
P. LeBlond, Licensing Administrator, Zion
M. Turbak, Operating Plant Licensing Director
C. Schultz, Assistant Technical Staff Supervisor, Zion
M. Kooi, Compliance Coordinator, Quad Cities
F. Palmer, Manager, Nuclear Safety
S. Trubatch, Legal Department
J. Wojnarowski, Licensing Administrator, Dresden and Quad Cities
Milwaukee Sentinel
Q. Dadisman, Reporter
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
J. G. Keppler, Regional Administrator
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
- -
-
_
_
_
.
_
._.
. _
.
i
A. B. Davis, Deputy Regional Administrator
C. E. Norelius, Director, Division of Reactor Projects
J. A. Hind, Director, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
N. J. Chrissotimos, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 2
W. D. Shafer, Chief, Emergetcy Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch
G. C. Wright, Chief, Reactor Projects Section 2C
,
D. C. Boyd, Chief, Reactor frojects Section 2A
A. D. Mcrrongiello, Resident Inspector, Quad Cities
A. L. Madison, Senior Resident Inspector, Quad Cities
J. N. Kish, Resident Inspector, Zion
L. E. Kanter, Resident Inspector, Zion
E. A. Hare, Resident Inspector Dresden
l
T. Tongue, Senior Resident Inspector, Braidwood
S. Stasek, Resident Inspector, Dresden
L. G. McGregor, Senior Resident Inspector, Dresden
R. Lickus, State Liaison Officer
R. W. Defayette, Project Manager, Section 2D
R. B. Landsman, Project Manager, Section 2C
]
NRC Headquarters
S. Varga, Director, PWR Project Directorate No. 3
J. Norris, NRR Project Manager, lion
R. Bevan, NRR Project Manager, Quad Cities
R. Gilbert, NRR Project Manager, Dresden
i
i
f
i
j
j
!
i
[
'
T
l
.
- -
- - - -
. _ _. _ -
_
_
... _ _
.-
.
_
.
_
,
'
.
e
ERRATA SHEET
i
l
i
j
Facility:
Quad Cities Station
}
SALP Report No:
50-254/85001; 50-265/85001
1
1
i
Page
Line
Now Reads
should Read
1
26-27 outage for the work to be
outage,
j
performed.
!
Basis for
Change:
The words "for the work to be performed" were inadvertently
added during final typing.
They were not intended to be
l
there.
Table 1 five table numbers were
see errata sheet
incorrect
,
Basis for
!
Change:
Five numbers were inadvertently typed wrong.
I
.
!
!
!
!
l
i
I
I
i
i
i
i
l
I
!
i
.
.
adequately stated and generally understood. The licensee's
actions in response to NRC initiatives indicated they understood
the issues and their reviews were generally timely, thorough,
with technically sound conservative solutions.
Records and
calculations were found to be generally complete, well
maintained, and available. The records also indicate that
equipment and material certifications were current a d complete,
and personnel were properly trained and certified.
le approach
used to evaluate and analyze piping systems and s
orts was
generally conservative, technically sound, and
rough. Audits
were generally complete, timely, and thcrough.
]bservations
indicate personnel have an adequate understa
ng of work
practices and that procedures were adhered
Discussions with
.
personnel indicated they were knowledgeab
in their job.
As with all plants, the licensee wa r uired to complete
environmental qualifications by N
er 30, 1985.
The
licensee aggressively worked to
ete Environmental
Qualification Modifications on
ired equipment.
Several
small planned outages were ac
ished in order to comply with
the dead line. All work was
formed in a thorough and
professional manner and m
ment maintained effective control
throughout the process.4
As noted earlier, U
conducted a major maintenance and
refueling outage at
beginning of the refueling outage for
the work to be p f
ed.
There was evidence of prior planning
and daily mana
meetings were conducted to ensure proper
priorization
esolution of issues. Maintenance activities
generally were
ceptable. However, the resident inspectors
identified s
ral concerns with modification which led to the
special ins ction and violation discussed earlier.
)
Unit 2
o underwent a major maintenance and refueling outage
durin
he assessment perica.
There was consistent evidence of
prio planning and assignment of priorities. As with Unit 1,
dai
management meetings were held to ensure that activities
w e properly controlled and to ensure timely resciution to all
technical issues. Adequate staffing levels were maintained to
minimize the amount of overtime required.
Contrary to Unit 1,
maintenance activities were well controlled and no modification
concerns were identified indicating the licensee learned from
j
the experience and improved its performance. The quality of
work performed is evidenced by the smooth return to operation
'
(ahead of schedule) and the continued uninterrupted operation
of Unit 2 throughout the remainder of the assessment period.
,
.
.
adequately stated and generally understood.
The licensee's
actions in response to NRC initiatives indicated they understood
the issues and their reviews were generally timely, thorough,
with technically sound conservative solutions.
Records and
calculations were found to be generally complete, well
maintained, and available.
The records also indicate that
equipment and material certifications were current and complete,
and personnel were properly trained and certified.
The approach
used to evaluate and analyze piping systems and supports was
generally conservative, technically sound, and thorough.
Audits
were generally complete, timely, and thorough. Observations
indicate personnel have an adequate understanding of work
practices and that procedures were adhered to.
Discussions with
personnel indicated they were knowledgeable in their job.
As with all plants, the licensee was required to complete
environmental qualifications by November 30, 1985.
The licensee
aggressively worked to complete Environmental Qualification
Modifications on required equipment.
Several small planned
outages were accomplished in order to comply with the dead line.
All work was performed in a thorough and professional manner and
management maintained effective control throughout the process.
As noted earlier, Unit 1 conducted a major maintenance and
refueling outage at the beginning of the refueling outage.
There was evidence of prior planning and daily management
meetings were conducted to ensure proper priorization and
resolution of issues. Maintenance activities generally were
acceptable.
However, the resident inspectors identified
several concerns with modification which led to the special
inspection and violation discussed earlier.
Unit 2 also underwent a major maintenance and refueling outage
during the asse. ment period.
There was consistent evidence of
prior planning and assignment of priorities.
As with Unit 1,
daily management meetings were held to ensure that activities
were properly coat. rolled and to ensure timely resolution to all
technical issues.
Adequate staffing levels were' maintained to
minimize the amount of overtime required.
Contrary to Unit 1,
maintenance activities were well controlled and no modification
concerns were identified indicating the licensee learned from
the experience and improved its performance.
The quality of
work performed is evidenced by the smooth return to operation
(ahead of schedule) and the continued uninterrupted operation
of Unit 2 throughout the remainder of the assessment period.
,
'
-
-.
\\
.
.
.
,
D.
Inspection Activities
An Operational Team Inspection was conducted by Region III on
September 24-28, 1984 to assess overall licensee performance and
provide an indepth assessment of selected areas including
operations. The inspectors found the operations staff to be an
effective operating organization.
FEMA issued a report addressing the emergency exercise, which
concluded that an adequate level of offsite radiologi
prepared-
ness had been demonstrated to protect the public in
e event of a
radiological accident at the Quad Cities Nuclear P.
er Station.
Violation data for Quad Cities is presented ir
ble I which
includes inspection reports 84008 through 85
for Unit 1 and
84007 through 85029 for Unit 2.
TABLE 1
i
INSPECTION ACTIVITY A
ORCEMENT
-
No. o V lations in Each Severity Level
Functional
Unit 2
Site
Areas
IV V
III
IV V
III IV V
T/
A.
Plant Operations
1
1
B.
Radiological Controls
1
1
C.
Maintenance /Modificati
1
D.
Surveillance and
Inservice Test g
1
4
4
E.
Fire Protectio
1
F.
Emergency
eparedness
1
G.
Securit
1
H.
Refueling
I.
Quality Programs and
Administrative Controls
2
2
2
J.
Licensing Activities
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
TOTALS
3
1
6 10
6 10
[I
.-
.
..
B.
Inspection Activities
An Operational Team Inspection was. conducted by Region III on
September 24-28, 1984 to asses's overall licensee performance and
provide an indepth assessment of selected areas including
operations.
The inspectors found the operations staff to be an
effective operating organization.
i
FEMA issued a report addressing the emergency exercise, which
concluded that an adequate level of offsite radiological prepared-
ness had been demonstrated to protect the public in the event of a
t
radiological accident at the Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station.
,
l
Violation data for Quad Cities is presented in Table 1 which
!
includes inspection reports 84008 through 85026 for Unit 1 and
84007 through 85029 for Unit 2.
,
TABLE 1
INSPECTION ACTIVITY AND ENFORCEMENT
No. of Violations in Each Severity Level
Functional
Unit 1
Unit 2
Site
Areas
III
IV V
III
IV V
III
IV V
A.
Plant Operations
1
1
1
j
B.
Radiological Controls
1
1
C.
Maintenance / Modifications
1
(
!
D.
Surveillance and
.
Inservice Testing
1
4
4
E.
Fire Protection
1
l
F.
1
[
l
G.
Security
1
!
H.
Refueling
I.
Quality Programs and
i
Administrative Controls
2
2
2
J.
Licensing Activities
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
_
[
TOTALS
3
1
5 10
6 10
,
i
!
[
!
-
?
-
.
-