IR 05000220/1985025
| ML18038A124 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1986 |
| From: | Nimitz R, Shanbaky M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18038A123 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-220-85-25, 50-410-85-47, NUDOCS 8602030192 | |
| Download: ML18038A124 (34) | |
Text
QS.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report Nos.
50-220/85-25 50-410/85-47 Docket Nos.
50-220 50-410 License Nos.
DPR-63 CPPR-112 Priori ty Category C,.
B Licensee:
Nia ara Mohawk Power Cor oration 300 Erie Boulevard, West S racuse, New York 13202 Facility Name:
Nine Mile Point Unit 1 and
Inspection At:
Osweoo, New York Inspection Conducted:
December 16-20, 1985 Inspectors:
P,L.
R.
L. Nimitz, Senior Ra ation Specialist date signed Approved by:
M. Snanbaky, C ief Faci ties Radiological Protecti n Section da e si ned Ins ection Summar
Ins ection conducted December 16-20 1985.
Combined Reoort No. 50-220/85-25; 50-410/85-47 Areas Ins ected:
Routine, announced radiological controls inspection of Unit
and Unit 2.
The inspection of Unit 1 covered personnel training and qualifi-cation; preparation and planning for the outage; surveillance testing of effluent monitoring instrumentation; and radiological controls for control rod blade cutting.
The inspection of Unit 2 covered:
organization and staffing; personnel training and qualification; Radiological Controls Program establish-ment; General Employee Training; fuel receipt; preoperational testing; and facilities and equipment.
The inspection by one region-based inspector involved 13 inspector-hours onsite for Unit-1 and 23 inspector hours onsite for Unit 2.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
The licensee has not completed preoperational testing of effluents monitoring, radwaste, and safety related ventilation systems at Unit 2.
Additional licensee attention is needed in the area of Training and Retraining of Radiological Controls Personnel at Unit 1 and Unit 2.
B602030i92 860i '9 PDR ADQCH, 05000220
1
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted 1.
~Ill fl h
- J. Aldrich, Operations Superintendent, Unit
- R. Abbott, Station Superintendent, Unit 2
- E. Leach, Superintendent, Chemistry and Radiation Protection Management
- T. Egan, Nuclear Compliance and Verification Engineer
"D. Barcomb, Supervisor Radiation Protection, Unit 2
- T. Irving, ALARA Coordinator
"T. Kurtz, Instrument Support Supervisor
- J. Blasciak, Chemistry Supervisor, Unit
A. Ross, Chemistry Supervisor, Unit 2
- P. Volza, Supervisor, Radiological Support
"R. Gerbig, Radiation Protection Supervisor, Unit
D. Wilcox, Supervisor, Maintenance Training W. Thomson, Chemistry and Health Physics Training Supervisor 0. Henderson, Unit 2 Radwaste Supervisor 1.2 Stone and Webster A. George, Start-up, HVAC F. Jensen, Start-up, Instrumentation 1.3 NRC S.
Hudson, Senior Resident, Nine Mile
'.
Gramm, Senior Resident, Nine Mile 2
"C. Walters, Resident, Nine Mile
- Denotes those individuals attending the exit meeting on December 20, 1985.
The inspectot also contacted other personnel.
2.0 Pur ose of Ins ection The purpose of this routine announced Radiological Controls Inspection was to review the following program elements:
Unit 1 and Unit 2
~
Radiological Controls Personnel Training and gualification Progra e
Unit
~
Preparation and Planning for the Unit 1 Outage
~
Surveillance Testing of Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation
~
Radiological Controls for Control Rod Blade Cutting Unit Process and Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation, HVAC System a t P
ssing Systems, and
'quipment Radw s
e roce
~
Facilities and 3.0 Previous Findin s Review
~
Radiological Controls Organization and Staffing
~
General Employee Training
~
Radiological Controls Program Establishment
~
Radiological Controls for Fuel Receipt
~
Preoperational Testing of:
3.1 3.2 3.3 (Open) Follow-up Item (50-410/85-20-01)
NRC to review licensee preoperational testing of Liquid Radioactive Waste Processing Systems.
Except for floor drains, the preoperational testing of the system has not commenced (See Section 13).
(Open)
Follow-up Item (50-410/85-20-02)
NRC to review licensee preoperational testing of the solid Radioactive Waste Processing System.
The preoperational testing of the system has not commenced (See Section 13).
(Open)
Follow-up Item (50-410/85-20-03)
NRC to review licensee preoperational testing of safety related ventilation systems testing.
The licensee has not commenced testing of these systems (See Sec-tion 13).
3.4 3.5 (Open)
Follow-up Item (50-410/85-32-09)
NRC to review licensee program for performance of Unit 2 shield surveys.
This matter is discussed in section 12 of this report.
(Open)
Follow-up item ( 50-410/85-20-04)
NRC to review preoperational testing and calibration of process and effluent monitors.
The licensee has not commenced preoperational testing of the monitors (See Section 13).
I
~
i
3.6 (Open)
Follow-up Item (50-410/85-20-05)
Licensee to establish program to verify effluent monitors can collect representative samples.
Licensee is currently reviewing this matter.
(See Section 13).
3.7 (Open) Follow-up Item (50-410/85-20-07)
Licensee to review and address deficiencies identified in Radiological Controls and Rad-waste Personnel Training and Retraining Program.
The licensee has initiated action to address the concerns identified in Inspection 50-410/85-20 (See Section 4).
4.0 Radiolo ical Controls Personnel Trainin ualifications and Retrainin Unit 1 and
The inspector reviewed selected aspects of the licensee's Radiological Controls Personnel Training, gualification and Retraining Program with respect to criteria contained in the following:
~
Technical Specification 6.4, "Training", and
~
ANSI N 18. 1, 1972, "Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel."
The following matters were reviewed:
~
the adequacy and effectiveness of the licensee's program for training radiological controls personnel in procedure changes and new procedures,
~
the adequacy of the licensee's qualification program for qualifying personnel participating in '"on-the-job" training (i.e. Practical Factors Training),
and establishment, adequacy, and implementation of the Radiological Controls Personnel Retraining Program.
The evaluation of the licensee's program was based on review of documen-tation and discussions with personnel
~Findin s
Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
However, the following matters needing licensee attention were identified:
~
Establish a uniform methodology for evaluation of the effectiveness of the program for training personnel in new procedures and procedure
I C
changes (i~. required reading program).
The licensee has provided for timely 'reading of the material but no program/methodology to determine its effectiveness has been established.
~
Establish uniform methodology/criteria for evaluation of the capabi-lities of individuals completing the "On-the-Job" Training Program and the effectiveness of the Program itself.
Currently no uniform methodology/criteria has been established to evaluate the capabi-lities of individuals completing the program or the adequacy and effectiveness of the program itself.
The licensee is attempting to develop such methodology.
~
Establish a defined long term Radiological Controls Personnel Retraining Program.
The program should clearly identify minimum required retraining topics.
Within the scope of the inspection, the following positive attribute was identified:
The licensee, through his Required Reading Program, is providing continuing Training of Radiological Controls Personnel.
Information such as recent industry events and regulatory issues are provided to radiological controls personnel, including technicians for their information and review.
S.O General Em lo ee Trainin Unit 2 The inspector discussed the General Employee Training Program for Unit 2 personnel with cognizant licensee personnel.
The purpose of this discussion was to determine the following:
~
that the licensee has performed a review of the current General Employee Training Program to ensure it provides adequate training for Unit 2 personnel,
.
~
that required revisions (as appropriate)
to the current General Employee Training Program have been identified and that action is underway to incorporate the revisions and train and qualify Unit 2 personnel.
~Findin s
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified:
~
The licensee has reviewed the General Employee Training Program and has identified some ch'anges to be made to the program for Unit 2 personnel (primarily location of assembly areas).
~
The licenseWhas not yet revised the program and trained Unit 2 personnel in the changes.
The licensee should provide training and qualification of Unit 2 personnel in the modified General Employee Training Program prior to initial fuel load of Unit 2.
This matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspec-tion (50-410/85-47-01)
.
6.0 Plannin and Pre aration for the Unit 1 Outa e
The licensee's planning and preparation for the Unit 1 outage were reviewed.
The following matters were reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel.
~
Organization and staffing of the site Radiological Controls Organi-zation to minimize impact on Unit 2 radiological control activities.
~
The training and qualification of contractor radiological controls personnel brought on board to augment the current staff.
~
The adequacy of ALARA Planning for outage work.
~
The obtaining of additional supplies to support outage activities.
The evaluation of the licensed performance was based on discussions with licensee personnel.
~Findin s
Within the scope of the review, the following positive attributes were identified:
The licensee has reviewed the organization and staffing needs to support the upcoming Unit 1 outage (March 1986).
The organization and staffing is not yet finalized.
The licensee will ensure that adequate numbers of trained and qualified radiological controls personnel are available to support combined Unit 2 activities and Unit 1 outage activities.
The licensee is currently establishing a defined program for training and qualification of temporary and contractor radiological controls personnel.
The licensee is performing effective ALARA Planning and Preparation for the outage.
Cost benefit analyses are being used where appropriate.
The licensee has augmented his ALARA staff to provide for additional ALARA assistance during the outage.
The licensee has obtained a partial under-vessel mock-up for training personnel in Control Rod Drive (CRD) removal activitie ~
The licensee sent a number of individuals to General Electric to.be trained in Dry Tube change-out techniques.
~
The licensee is ordering additional equipment to support Unit
outage work including:
radiation survey instruments, airborne radioactivity samplers, and portable high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration systems.
Based on the above review, the licensee is performing adequate planning and preparation for the Unit 1 outage.
No unacceptable conditions or activities were identified.
7.0 Surveillance Testin of Effluent Honitorin Instrumentation Unit
The inspector reviewed the surveillance testing of Unit 1 Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation.
The review was with respect to criteria contained in the following:
~
Technical Specification 3/4.6. 14, "Radioactive Effluent Instrumen-tation",
and
~
Technical Specification 3/4.6.15, "Radioactive Effluents".
~Findin s
Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
The following positive attribute was noted:
~
The licensee performed a review of the implementation of Amendment
¹66 to the Unit 1 Technical Specifications (September 1985).
Amend-ment ¹66 required implementation of Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications (RETS).
The purpose of the review was to ensure implementation,and identify any potential violations needing correc-tive actions.
The licensee identified a number of problems and initiated corrective actions for identified problems.
Within the scope of this review the following matters needing licensee attention were identified:
(The majority of the items were identified by the licensee in his audit prior to the inspector's identification of them.)
~
Procedures have not been established to implement Radiological Effluent Technical Specification (RETS) for liquid effluent releases.
The appropriate procedures should be established prior to liquid effluent releases'his was identified in the licensee audi Note:
.
The 1iaensee has not made any liquid releases under the RETS.
The liquid release line from Unit 1 is locked closed.
The licensee will establish and implement procedures for implementation of RETS for liquid releases prior to any liquid release (50-220/85-25-01).
~
Evaluate the energy calibration of the liquid effluent monitor.
It is not clear that the nuclides used provide for energy calibration over the range of energies encountered by the detector.
The licensee is in the process of installing a
new liquid effluent monitor.
The licensee will evaluate the energy calibration of the monitor prior to liquid effluent release (50-220/85-25-02).
~
Evaluate the alarm set-point for the Emergency Condenser (EC)
Effluent Monitor.
This was identified by the licensee.
The licensee performed a preliminary evaluation of the alarm set point for the EC Effluent Monitor.
The evaluation indicated that the alarm set-point may be acceptable.
The licensee is performing an indepth evaluation of the set-point.
The evaluation of the set-point will be completed by January 15, 1986.
The alarms will be reset (as necessary)
at that time (50-220/85-25-03).
~
Establish procedures for quantifying releases from the EC Effluent release path.
(Addressed by licensee findings relative to alarm set point.)
The licensee is currently establishing procedures for quantifying releases from the EC.
The procedures will be established by February 28, 1986 (50-220/85-25-04).
~
Evaluate and revise (as necessary)
the calibration of the Emergency Condenser (EC) Effluent Monitor. It is not clear that the RETS Technical Specification energy and range calibration requirements have been implemented.
The licensee is currently evaluating the adequacy of the calibration of EC Effluent Monitor.
The evaluation will be completed by January 15, 1986.
Procedure revisions, as necessary, will be completed by February 28, 1986 (50-220/85-25-05).
, 8.0 Radiolo ical Controls for Control Rod Blade Cuttin Unit
The inspector reviewed the adequacy and implementation of radiological controls for Control Rod Blade Cuttin The following ma~ers were reviewed:
training and qualification of personnel establishment and adherance to appropriate procedures posting, barricading and access control radiological surveys Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
The following matter needing licensee attention was identified:
~
establish a mechanism to ensure personnel are informed/trained (as appropriate)
in procedure changes associated with the Control Rod Blade cutting work.
Licensee representatives indicated that a change will be made to appro-priate administrative procedures to address this concern.
In the interim, the licensee will require a technical review of procedure changes for the control rod blade work and a re-issue of the associated procedures.
This will ensure that changes are properly reviewed and all appropriate per-sonnel are aware of the changes.
The licensee's action on this matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-220/85-Z5-06).
This matter was brought to the NRC Resident's attention.
9.0 Fuel Recei t Unit 2 The inspector'reviewed the implementation and adequacy of radiological controls for fuel receipt with respect to criteria contained in the following:
SNM License No.
1895, dated November 27, 1985, Procedure S-RTP-1, Revision 3, "Radiation Survey Procedures for Receiving New Fuel",
Procedures N2-FHP-Z, Revision 1, "Initial Core Receipt - General Description",
Procedure N2-FHP-7, Revision 0, "Onsite Receiving Inspection of Fuel Bundles",
Procedure No. N2-FHP-8, Revision 0,
"New Fuel Bundle Channel Inspection, Cleaning and Movement",
Procedure No. N2-FHP-5, Revision 0, "Truck Unloading and Transfer to Reactor Building Elevation 353'-10",
Procedure No. N2-FHP-6, Revision 1,
"Movement of Containers and Fuel or Reactor Building Elevation 353'-10" ",
~
Procedure SJP-1, Revision 5, "Access and Radiological Control",
~
Procedure S-RTP-52B, Operation and Calibration of Eberline R0-2,"
Revision 0,
~
Procedure No. N2-FHP-9, Revision 0,
"Movement and Storage of Fuel after Inspection",
~
Procedure No. S-CRIP-4, Revision 0, "Operation and Calibration of BC-4 Beta Counter",
~
Procedure No. S-CRIP-6, Revision 0, "Operation and Calibration of Nuclear Measurements corporation Model PC-5 Proportional Counter",
and
~
Procedure No. S-RTP-46, Revision 2, "Operation and Calibration of the 'Vamp'rea Monitor."
The review was performed to determine if:
~
radiological controls requirements of the SNM license were imple-mented personnel associated with fuel receipt, inspection, and movement were properly trained and qualified appropriate radiological controls procedures were established and implemented fuel handling areas were properly posted and barricaded (as appropriate)
appropriate, calibrated radiation and contamination survey instrumentation was used
~
proper personnel monitoring was provided The evaluation of the licensee's performance was based on:
~
observation of on-going fuel receipt activities
~
review of instrument calibration records and other documents
~
discussions with personnel Within the scope of this review, the licensee was found to be implementing generally acceptable radiological controls for fuel receipt and inspection activitie P
The fo>lowing ma~rs needing licensee attention were identified:
~
Personnel were found not to be uniformly implementing procedure guidance for plotting smear counting instrument source check data on control charts.
The instruments were operating within control chart acceptance limits.
The licensee immediately corrected this situation.
~
Refueling floor radiological posting had been changed without supervisory approval.
The refuel floor posting was replaced with original posting.
Personnel were informed not to change posting.
~
The licensee was not using self-absorption factors in his methodology for quantifying alpha radioactivity contained on smear sample wipes, consequently, it was not apparent that alpha contamination results were accurate.
The licensee immediately initiated action to review his methodology for quantifying alpha contamination and evaluate the accuracy of his alpha contamination survey results.
Note 1:
The licensee's smear results were backed-up by concurrent beta-gamma results of the same smear samples.
No beta-gamma contamination was identified.
The beta-gamma results provide an indication that no excessive alpha contamination was present.
The licensee'
actions on this matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
(50-220/85-25-07).
Note 2:
This problem also appears to exist in the licensee's alpha airborne radioactivity sampling program.
The licensee has initiated action to review his routine alpha airborne radioactivity measurements program.
This matter will be reviewed in conjunction with Follow-Item (50-220/85-25-07).
The licensee plans to have the problems associated with his alpha monitoring program resolved by the start of Unit 1 outage (March 7, 1986)).
The following positive attribute was noted:
~
The licensee established a defined training program to provide training of personnel performing Unit 2 fuel handling activities.
The training program included appropriate Radiological Controls Topic.
Facilities and E
i ment Unit 2 The inspector reviewed selected aspects of the licensee's Unit 2 facilities and equipment.
The purpose of the review was to determine the following:
~
that Radiological Controls facilities described in the Final Safety Analysis Report ( FSAR) were in place.
~
that Radiological Controls Equipment (e.g.
portable survey instru-mentation)
described in the FSAR was inplace and operable.
Time limitations prevented the inspector from completing the review of this area.
However, based on discussions with the licensee personnel, the following was noted:
~
Appropriate licensee Unit 2 Radiological Controls personnel were aware of FSAR commitments relative to facilities and equipment.
~
The licensee was readily able to provide the status of the following equipment for Unit 2:
counting room instrumentation portable radiological survey instrumentation personnel monitoring equipment other equipment (e.g. air samplers, whole body counters, gamma area monitors)
Inspector Review indicated the equipment ordered and/or received exceeded FSAR commitments.
The licensee should ensure that all Radiological Controls facilities and equipment described in the FSAR and necessary to support fuel load, and start-up, and routine plant operations are ir. place and operable.
The licensee's facilities and equipment will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-410/85-47-02).
11.
Radiolo ical Controls Pro ram Establishment Unit 2 The inspector met with appropriate Unit and Site Radiological Controls personnel to discuss and review the establishment of the Unit 2 Radiological Controls Program.
The following areas were discussed and selectively reviewed:
~
Radiological Controls Organization and Staffing
~
Radiological Controls Personnel Training and Retraining Program
~,
Radiation, Airborne Radioactivity, and Contamination Surveillance Program
~
External Exposure Control Program
~
Internal Exposure Control Program
~
ALARA Program
~
Access Control Program
~
Respiratory Protection Program
~
Radioactive and Contaminated Material Control Program.
The purpose of this review was to determine the following:
The licensee's Radiological Controls personnel are establishing and implementing Radiological Controls Program procedures consistent with appropriate reactor operations milestones (dates)
established by the licensee.
The licensee is properly training and qualifying Radiological Controls personnel for Unit 2 activities.
~Findin s
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified:
~
The licensee has established and is implementing the above program elements at his Nine Mile Unit 1 facility
~
The licensee has or is currently approving the procedures for each of the above program areas for use in Unit 2.
A separate Radiological Survey program is being established for Unit 2.
~
The Radiological Controls personnel assigned to Unit 2 have been or are being provided training in appropriate procedures.
Training received by personnel in Unit 1 procedures is, in the majority of areas, directly applicable to Unit 2 Radiological Controls activities.
The following matters needing licensee attention were identified:
Establish and implement the high radiation area access control program (including Key Control) for Unit 2.
This should be in place prior to fuel load.
Fully establish Radiological Surveillance program for Unit 2.
This program should be in place prior to fuel loa ~
Establish-a%borne radioactivity sampling and analysis program and procedures for Unit 2.
This program should be in-place prior to fuel load.
~
Complete the training and qualification of Unit 2 Radiological Controls personnel.
This should be complete prior to fuel load.
The establishment of the licensee's Radiological Control Program for Unit 2 will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
(50-410/85-47-03).
12.
Shield Surve s
Unit 2 The inspector reviewed the licensee's preparation and planning for performance of plant shield surveys.
The purpose of this review was to determine if the licensee has established an acceptable program for performance of shield surveys and resolution of identified problems.
The evaluation of the licensee's performance in this area was based on discussions with personnel and a review of the draft shield survey procedure.
~Findin n
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified:
~
The licensee has established a draft shield survey procedure.
The licensee had contacted facilities to ensure appropriate survey points were included in the procedure.
Within the scope of this review, the following matter needing licensee attention was identified:
~
Establish effective methodology/controls for timely resolution of unacceptable or out of limits survey results.'ithin the scope of this review the following item for improvement was identified:
~
Establish a program to perform shield surveys during initial transfer of irradiated fuel at Unit 2.
The program should ensure the identification and timely resolution of shield design and access control concerns during initial irradiated fuel movemen e l
13.
Preo erational -TeStin Unit 2 The inspector reviewed the licensee's preoperational testing of the following systems:
area, process and effluent radiation monitoring systems; safety related ventilation systems; liquid radwaste systems; gaseous radwaste system; and solid radwaste system.
The review was with respect to criteria contained in the following:
Final Safety Analysis Report ( FSAR), Chapter 14, "Initial Tests Program;"
~
Regulatory Guide 1.68, November 1978, "Preoperational and Initial Start-up Test Program for Water Cooled Power Reactors";
and
~
Applicable licensee administrative procedures.
The following matters were reviewed:
status of construction, release, and/or turnover of systems; status of start-up test procedure establishment; status of testing; and adequacy of test procedures.
The evaluation of licensee performance in the above areas was based on:
~
review of procedures; and
~
discussions with cognizant licensee representatives.
13. 1 Process and Effluent Radiation Monitorin S stems Unit 2 Documents Reviewed General Final Safety Analysis Report, (FSAR) Section 11.5, "Radiation Monitoring Systems;"
FSAR, Section 12.3, "Radiation Protection Design Features";
ANSi N42. 18-1980,
"Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring Radioactivity in Effluents;"
ANSI N13. 1-1969,
"Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities;" and
~,
FSAR, &Ection 12.3.4,
"Area Radiation and Airborne Radioactivity Monitoring Instrumentati on."
Findin<is Within the scope of this review the following was identified:
~
The licensee has not initiated preoperational testing of the process and effluent monitoring program
~
The licensee has established draft surveillance procedures to implement Unit 2 Technical Specification requirements (draft).
The following matter needs licensee attention:
~
complete preoperational and surveillance testing of process and effluent monitors prior to fuel load
~
establish a program to:
Walkdown and verify the sampling points of process and effluent monitors verify the capabilities of applicable monitors (e.g. effluent monitors) to collect representative samples verify the capability of the drywell monitors to perform the Technical Specification leak detection capabilities.
13.2 Solid and Li uid Waste S stems Documents Reviewed Final Safety Analysis Report ( FSAR) Section 11.2, "Solid Waste Management";
Final Safety Analysis Report ( FSAR), Section 11.3, "Liquid Waste Management Systems";
ANSI/ANS-55. 1, 1979, "Solid Radioactive Waste Processing System for Light Water Cooled Reactor Plants";
and ANSI/ANS-55.3, 1976, "Boiling Wastes Reactor Liquid Waste Processing Systems;"
~Findin s
Except for verification of/and testing of floor drains, preopera-tional testing has not been initiated on the Liquid or Solid Radia-tion Waste Syste p,
13.3 Safet Related Ventilation S stems Control Room and Standb Gas Treatment nit 2 Documents Reviewed
~
Final Safety Analysis Report, Section 6.4 "Habitability Systems",
~
Final Safety Analysis Report, Section 6,5, "Fission Product Removal and Control Systems",
~
Unit 2 Technical Specifications (draft),
and
~
Procedure N2-POT-53-,1,
"Control Building HVAC, Revision 0.
The evaluation of the licensee's performance in the area was based on discussions with personnel and review of procedures.
~Findin s
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified:
~
The licensee has not initiated preoperational testing of safety related ventilation systems.
~
The licensee has not established procedures to perform Technical Specification surveillance testing of safety related ventilation systems.
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in section 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on (December 20, 1985.
The inspector summarized the'purpose, scope and findings of the inspection.
No written material was provided to the licensee by the inspecto