ML20198C172

Forwards Insp Repts 50-254/91-11 & 50-265/91-07 on 910401-0510 & Notices of Violation & Deviation

ML20198C172
Person / Time
Site:	Quad Cities
Issue date:	06/24/1991
From:	Miller H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	Reed C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
Shared Package
ML20198C177	List: IR 05000254/1991011 ML20198C172 ML20198C194 ML20198C207
References
NUDOCS 9106280166
Download: ML20198C172 (4)

See also: IR 05000254/1991011

Text

_

, .

.

..

%

'

y .

JUN 2 4 1991

l

Docket No. 50-254

Docket No. 50-265

Commonwealth Edison Company

ATTN: Mr. Cordell Reed

Senior Vice President

1400 Opus Place - Suite 300 l

Downers Grove, IL 60515  ;

'

Dear Mr. Reed:

This refers to the special electrical distribution system functional

inspection (EDSFI) conducted by_ Mr. D. Butler and others of this office on

April 1 through May 10, 1991. The inspection evaluated activities at the Quad

Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2, authorized by NFC Operating

License No. DPR-29 and No. DPR-30. We discussed our inspection findings with

Mr. N. Kalivianakis and others of your staff at the conclusion of the

inspection on May 10, 1991.

'The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies the areas examined i

during the inspection. The team assessed the design, implernentation, and

'

engineering technical support relative to the electrical distribution system.

The inspection consisted of a selective review of design calculations,

relevant procedures, representative records, installed equipment, and

interviews with engineering and technical support (E&TS) staff.

While the tea did not identify any electrical distribution system (EDS)

equipment that would be unable to perform its intended safety function, a

number of weaknesses were identified in system design ar.d supporting

engineering activities. Many of the weaknesses resulted from initial design

- decisions and may not be regulatory compliance issues: however, some reflect

upon recent engineering efforts. Weaknesses include the sparsity of design

basis information, including selected areas such as cable ampacity, degraded

voltage relay settings, and diesel generator loading conditions. These

weaknesses made it difficult for the team to draw conclusions as to the

functionality of the EDS and can hamper ongoing engineering activities. Other

weaknesses include the use of unjustified or nonconservative assumptions and

incorrect references in EDS calculations; the lack of :. comprehensive

maintenance program for 250Vdc and 480Vac motor control centers (MCCs); the

potential for fault currents to exceed the interrupting capacity of 250Vdc and

4kV breakers; the lack of breaker / fuse coordination at all voltage levels; and

the lack of seismic qualification for the diesel generator fuel supplies and

generator output bus ducts. The team noted several strengths. Examples

include the materiel condition of equipment, plant cleanliness in areas

housing electrical equipment, and the experience and technical competence of

the engineering and plant staff that interfaced with the team.

bk $O0bk N p

pC/

. .- -

_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ .

,

. ',

,

.1

Commonwealth Edison Company 2 mg; "li

The team noted that the licensee plans to initiate an Updated Safety Analysis

Report (USAR) rebaseline program to provide personnel with an improved

understanding of the Quad Cities design and licensing basis. We consider this

to be an important effort as it will address, in part, identified weaknesses

relating to the sparsity of key design basis documentation.

During this inspection, we noted that certain of your activities were in

violation of NRC requirements or had deviated fror, the Quad Cities Final

Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), as specified in the enclosed Notices. A

written response is required. In addition, the report addresses a number of

unresolved and open items. We request that you also address each of these

items along with your reply to the violations and deviation identified in the

enclosed Notices.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of

this letter, the enclosure, 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 06-511.

We will gladly discuss any questions you have concerning this inspection.

Sincerely,

La  %. < _ 3 ,

H. J. Miller, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

Enclosures:

1. Notice of Violation

2. Notice of Deviation

3. Inspection Reports No.

50-254/910ll(DRS); and

50-265/91007(DRS)

See Attached Distribution

'Sc=& F%'M00 5 undCorWBG ?%G

RIllf& f Rf h T b TI Rill

] RII)

Dm (

Butler /lc i Gardner Burgess Ring Martin Miller

6/24 / 91 6/ /91 6/ /91 6/ /91 6/ /91 [/91

6)d

__ _____- _ _____ ___ -

. . ~ . . - - . .-. .-. . .

....

-

r

. ',

Commonwealth Edison Company 2 JUN: 4 1991

The team noted that the licensee plans to initiate an Updated Safety Analysis

Report (USAR) rebaseline program to provide personnel with an improved

understanding of the Quad Cities design and licensing basis. We consider this

to be an important effort as it will address, in part, identified weaknesses

relating to the sparsity of key design basis documentation.

During this inspection, we noted that certain of your activities were in

violation of NRC requirements or had deviated from the Quad Cities Final

Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), as specified in the enclosed Notices. A

written response is required. In addition, the report addresses a number of

unresolved and open items. We request that you also address each of these

items along with your reply to the violations and deviation identified in the

enclosed Notices.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations, a copy of

this letter. the enclosure, 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.

, Sincerely,

l

>

'

H. J. Miller, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

Enclosures:

1. Notice of Violation

2. Notice of Deviation

3. Inspection Reports No.

50-254/91011(DRS); and

50-265/91007(DRS)

See Attached Distribution

-m

RIIIfp+ RI RIII RIII RIII

W

II

9 93 RNW & 7 V

Butle~r/lc Gardner Burgess Ring Martin @

M iller

!

6/21/91 6/M/91 6/J!/91 6/11/91 6/p/91 6/u/91

_ ._

. - . _ , _ .- .

.

.

.

'.

,

'

,

Commonwealth Edison Company 3

d'dS A 4 USI

Distribution

cc w/ enclosures:

D. Galle, Vice President

BWR Operations

T. Kovach, Nuclear

Licensing Manager

R. L. Bax, Station Manager

DCD/DCB (RIDS)

OC/LFCDB

Resident Inspector, LaSalle,

Dresden, Quad Cities

Richard Hubbard

J. W. McCaffrey, Chief, Public

Utilities Division

Robert Newmann, Asst. Director

State of Illinois

L. Olshan, LPM, NRR

E. Imbro, Chief, Special Inspection

Branch

1

.-

. _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .-