IR 05000289/1974031
| ML19256D391 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/13/1974 |
| From: | Knapp P, Meyer R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256D389 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-74-31, NUDOCS 7910180737 | |
| Download: ML19256D391 (8) | |
Text
.
- - -. - - -
--
-. _.
7:0: I r. :n 12
-
(Oct 74) (Ri'v)
,
'
U.S. ATO::IC F: rRCY C0:211SSION DIRI:CTORATE OF RT:CUL\\ TORY OPEPaTIO: S REGIO:: I 50-289/74-31 Docket No:
50-289 RO Inspectien Report No:
Licensec:
Metropolitan __ Edison Cor.p_any License No:J pg_3 P. O. Box 542 Priority:
Reading, Pa. 19603 Cat er,o ry :
C
__
'
Location:
Three Mile Island, Middletown, Pa.
Safeguards Group:
Type of Licennae:
Type of Inspection:
Special Inspection
Dates of Inspection:
_
Septc=ber 20 and October 7-9, 1974 Dates of Previous Inspection:
September 10-12, 1974 (
Q
,hy4p
_
//!/k.7('
Reporting Inspector:
(
_ r/.
R.J.Repr,Rscia/ionSpecialist Date None Accenpr.nying Inspectors:
Date
~
Date
--
__
Date Date Ot he r Ac cm :.r.;'--
P, nonnel:
None
.
_\\
Date
_
.
I ( 3 7 +#
\\ ^*-~~3 4-s.%
~
Rev i cated F.y. P 7.~KEa~pp,CTilcT,'~hei itIss?g
'
g Dat Radiation Protection Section 1453 280 P002 ORBNAL y o 1e 7 ~5 7 o
-
_
_...
-
_..
.
.... _
...
_ _ - - - -. - -... - - - -
-. -.
-- - :
.
.
.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS Enforcement Action A.
Violations 1.
Failure to calibrate radiation monitoring systems at the interval required by Technical Specifications 4, Table 4.1-1, Appendix A and 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 Appendix B.
(Details, Paragraphs 4a-d)
2.
Failure to continuously monitor a release from a vaste gas decay tank for iodi~he on September 28, 1974, due to an in-advertent removal from service,of the iodine monitor that is required to be in service by Technical Specificatien 2.3.2.A.2, Appendix B.
(See Item 3, Unusual occurrence Section)
B.
Safety Items None G
,~
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcement Action Not applicable Unusual Occurrences 1.
Unplanned gaseous releases from the auxiliary building via the plant vent as noted below:
a.
September 5, 6 and 7, 1974 as reported in licensee's letter to Directorate of Licensing, dated October 3, 1974.
(De tails,
Paragraphs 2a-1)
b.
October 6 and 8, 1974 as reported to the inspector at the site, followed by telegraphic reports to the Director, Regulatory Operations, Region 1 on October 7 and 9, 1974 respectively.
(Details, Paragraphs 2a-1)
2.
Radiation monitors not calibrated at the interval required by Technica.'. Specifications.
This was noted as an unresolved item during a previous inspection * and subsequently reported as a
- R0 Inspection Report 50-289/74-30 2bl
.
e
,
%
.e
.. w
. -. _. -.
_
.p
-
-
_3
.
K. Beale, Radiation Protection Supervisor W. Potts, Supervisor, Quality Control J. Seelinger, Supervisor Training M. Buring, Health Physicist D. Orlandi, Lead ISC Engineer S
?arter, Porter Gert: Consultants, Inc.
The following subjects were discussed:
A.
The inspector identified the violations and stated that he had reviewed corrective actions.
B.
The inspector reviewed b.is findings with respect to the unplanned releases. The licensee _ stated that corrective action and system problems review were continuing.
{ Details, Paragraphs 2a-1)
C.
The inspector discussed routine releases and others with respect to quarterly limits.
The licensee stated that they were following the trends.
(Details, Paragraph 3a)
D.
With respect to monitor surveillance testing the licensee stated that corrective and preventive actions would continue.
(Details, Paragraphs 4a-d)
..
a 1453 282 O
.
..
_.
e
.
_ _ _ _ - - -.
..
.
- -.
_ _.
.
..
'
-
-
.
, 3, DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted J. Herbein, Station Superintendent J. Colitz, Unit Superintendent G. Miller, Unit Superintendent K. Beale, Radiation Protection Supervisor V. Orlandi, Lead I6C Engineer D. Barry, Supervisor, IEC D. Weaver, Instrument Fore =an D. Good, Test Coordinator N. Williams, Engineer
,
D. Trout, Engineering Asnistant 2.
Gaseous Releases Unplanned releases of gaseous activities for the period from a.
September 5 through October 9, 17 4 via the plant vent are tabulated below.
TIME AVERAGE MAXIMUM DATE JROM-TO RELEASE RATE
_ RELEASE RATE *
2 3 4 3 9/5-9/6 7:50P to 9:00A 9.0X10 M sec 7.8X10 M /sec
3 9/6-9/7 7:00P to 3:30A 2.87X10 M /see 3.1X10 33 sec 3 v3/sec 5.17X10 M /see
'9/7 11:40A to 3:52P 2.73X10
3'3 10/6 1:45A to 4:15A 2.16X10 3 /see 2.98X103
3 /sec 3 3
3 10/6 8:15A to 11:15A 2.98X10 3 /sec 5.59X10
/see 4 3 10/8 10:09A to 12:45P 1.83X10 3 /sec 4.2X104 M /sec
Technical Specification Limit is 1.2X105 3 3 /see for gross gaseous activity except for halogans and particulates with half-lives longer than eight days.
b.
Analyses of grab gas sa=ples and source term (vent header) samples showed the releases to be noble gases, predominantly xenon-133 and 135 (97*') with the remainder being other noble gases.
No particulates with half-lives greater than eight days or halogens were released based on analyses of grab particulate sa=ples and the stack sampler particulate and charcoal filters.
Technical Specification limits were not exceeded during the releases, h
1453 283
.
--
-. -
.
.
.
.
.
-5-
-
,N The three releases of September 5-7, as determined by the c.
licensee, resulted from the loss of the loop seal on the Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator Feed Tank.
The causes for the loss of the loop seal on the first two releases were not immed-iately determined.
The loop seal loss on the third event was determined to be caused by a trip of the evaporator feed tank pump resulting in an overpressure of the loop seal.
The licensee's investigation and consultation with the Architect Engineer, determined that the blowing of the loop seal in the case of all three incidents was due to inadequate design, in that the as-built system is not capable af handling normal operating pressure ~ transients.
d.
Subsequent to the third release, the loop seal was plugged.
According to the licensee the loop seal will remain plugged until design modification of the loop seal has been completed, as recommended by the Plant Operations Review Committee.
The evaporator remains in service.
The relee.ses of October 6 resulted from an apparent overpressure e.
in the vent header relieving back through the Reactor Coolant e
Evaporator during startup of the evaporator after completion of a Change Modification.
The Change Modification (#145)
involved the replacement of the original vacuum pumps with vacuum pumps originally provided for the Unit 2 Reactor.
Reportedly the new pumps were an improved model.
Subsequent to the releases of October 6 it was determined that a diaphram valve on the discharge side of a vacuum pump was faulty.
The evaporator was secured and the diaphras valve was subsequently repaired.
f.
The release of October 8 resulted again from an apparent over-pressure in the vent header relieving back through the Reactor Coolant Evaporator. The evaporator was in a shutdown condition at the ti=e of the release; however, the evaporator feed tank vent was open to the vent header system.
One of the corrective actions taken by the licensee during the release was the closure of this vent which terminated the release.
A subsequent leak test of the evaporator showed a leak in the previously installed cap on the loop seal due to improper installation.
g.
The inspector's review of the licensee's evaluations of the releases showed that the source of the gaseous activities re-leased through the blown loop seals and evaporator leaks, was O
1453 284
_ _ _ _ __
_
.
.n
-
'
-6-k the vent header system.
This system is com=on to all of the liquid waste system and the various tanks and equipment vent to this system.
The Reactor Coolant Drain Tank (RCDT)
which vents to the system had a leaking safety relief valve which was venting gasses to the vent header, thus maintaining an activity inventory in the vent header.
It is suspected that pressure transients are occurring in the vent header which the system cannot effectively handle.
The licensee has init-iated a program to monitor the various evolutions and operating parameters of the total system for determination of system problems.
Repair of the relief valve on the RCDT is scheduled during the next shutdown.
-
h.
With respect to the release paths, all releases were confined to the auxiliary building with subsequent release through HEPA and charcoal filters to the plant vent.
During the inspector's review cf the circumstances of the releases it was noted that air samples taken during the releases showed that airborne radioactivity levels were elevated in areas of the auxiliary building adjacent to the equipment cubicles.
Subsequent to the October 8 release the licensee checked the air balance at the evaporator room which showed an air flow insufficient to effectively exhaust the cubicle air through the cubicle exhaust 9'
-
contributed to the air imbalance.
The licensee hss initiated duct.
The licensee determined that clogged inlet air filters a full scale review of the au::iliary building air flows and balance.
1.
A review of the licensee's evaluation of personnel exposures showed that involved individuals were not exposed to air con-centrations in excess of Appe, dix B, Table 1, 10 CFR 20 limits.
The licensee's evaluations were based on air samples taken during the releases and on source term calculations assuming that maximum possible concentrations existed determined from source term activity levels and conservative estimates of dilution and air removal rates.
3.
Planned Radioactive Releases Routine releases of gaseous and liquid waste for the period a.
from Septe=ber 1 through October 8, 1974 were reviewed.
Prior to September radioactivity levels were below detectable levels.
At this point in ti=e primary coolant activities began increasing O
1453 285
- - - _ _.
.
.,,
-
-
.
-
-7-
.
O'P
'
with subsequent buildup of fission gas (95"; xenon-133) in the waste gas system and a buildup of disso7 sed gas in the liquid waste. The review showed that all teleases made were within the Technical Specification limits with res)ect to individual relcases and quarterly release limits.
4.
Instrument Calibration During a previous inspection * irregularicies with respect to a.
radiation monitor calibration records were noted that indicated no effective calibrations had been accomplished within the time frame required by the technical specifications.
The inspector identifted this as an unresolved item.
Subsequent to the inspection licensee management reviewed the status of monitor calibrati'on and determined that the calibrations which are required quarterly by Technical Specifications 4,
,
Table 4.1-1 Appendix A and 2.3.1 and 2.3.2 Appendix B had not been accomplished.
This was reported by the licensee as an Abnormal Occurrence, by letter, to the Directorate of Licensing, dated Septe=ber 26, 1974. The cause was identified as inadequate procedure and administrative controls.
Corrective actions were identified and calibration was reported as being completed.
b.
A review of this event by the inspector during the current inspection showed that the licensee had implemented corrective actions and had completed monitor calibrations.
Calibration results were consistent with those obtained during the initial calibration of the =onitors, thus indicating operability during the interim period.
During the inspector's review of the circumstances it was noted c.
that the quarterly calibration had been scheduled and atte=pted utilizing Surveillance Procedure 1302.3.1.
The technicians per-forming the calibration experienced problems with procedure applicatien and were unable to complere the various steps of the procedure.
These were noted as exceptions on the first several monitors. At this point it was determined that the procedure was not adequate and an exception was noted for the entire test.
Subsequent to identification of the problem a satisfactory calibration of one gaseous and one liquid monitor was performed under the direction of the Lead Instrument &
Control Engineer employing the existing procedures with modi-fications taken from the original test procedure and appropriate equipment manuals.
Calibrations of all the monitors were G
'
- RO Inspection Report 50-289/74-30 1453 286
.
%
. _ -. - -.
...,
-8-
.
..
Gt3
.
...
subsequently performed using this revised procedure.
Pro-cedure use and change was accomplished by approved Temporary Change Notices.
A final procedure (Revision 3) was approved and issued.
d.
With respect to surveillance testing the licensee has estab-lished responsibility for reviewing schedules and test results and for early resolution of noted problems.
.
O O
1453 <,8/
-
.