IR 05000293/1988015
| ML20153F096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 04/27/1988 |
| From: | Jang J, Pasciak W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153F091 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-88-15, NUDOCS 8805100234 | |
| Download: ML20153F096 (8) | |
Text
.
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-293/88-15 Docket No. 50-293 License No. DPR-63 Category C
Licensee: Boston Edison Company 800 Boylston Street Boston, Massachusetts 02199 Facility Name:
Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Inspection At:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Inspection Conducted: April 4-8, 1988 Inspectors:
ddDL N@
d 7'[7
,
J. C/ Jan iationSppialist date Approved by:
/O *,
O e.
-
Y U
W.J.{gionSection,FRSSB,DRSS a sciak, Chief, Effluents Radiation
/ date /
Prote
'
Inspection Sumay:
Inspection on April 4-8, 1938 (Inspection Report No.
50 293/88-15 Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's radwaste I
systems:
liquid radwaste system (FSAR 9.2), solid raswaste system (FSAR 9.3),
and gaseous radwaste system (FSAR 9.4).
Areas reviewed included: Previously identified items and Safety Evaluations required by 10 CFR S0.59.
Results: No violations were identified.
,
,
b
!
8805100234 880504 ADOCK0500g3 PDR
,
.
.
.
_
.
_
. __
.
.
.
.
,
,
e f
.
?
Details E
1.
Individuals Contacted i'
- R. Anderson, Plant Manager I
- R. Canhias, Chief Chemical Engineer l
- W. Clancy, System Engineer Division Manager
'
'
C. Grevenitz, Senior Chemical Engineer
!
- P. Hamilton, Compliance Division Manager l
K. Highfill, Station Director
.
- M. Lenhart, Regulatory Affairs B. Lunn, Senior Compliance Engineer
- P. Mastrangelo, Chief Operations Engineer
- J. Moylan, Technical Specialist
'
M. Perito, Senior Systems Engineer
- R. Purdy, Radwaste. Supervisor
- J. Quinn, Senior QA Engineer J. Seery, Technical Section Manager A. Shatas, Chemistry Supervisor
"V Stagliola, Senior Technical Engineer
- R. Whetsel, Senior Compliance Engineer Other licensee personnel were contacted or interviewed.
"Denotes attendance at exit meeting on April 8, 1988.
2.
Scope of the Inspection
)
This inspection reviewed the licensee's radwaste systems:
liquid l
radwaste system (FSAR 9.2), solid radwaste system (FSAR 9.3), gaseous i
!
radwaste system (FSAR 9.4). and process radiation monitoring (FSAR i
l 7.12). This inspection also reviewed safety evaluations required by 10 CFR 50.59 and management controls in the radwaste areas.
3.
previously Identifled Items (Closed) Violation (50-293/87-35-01):
Failure to properly tuantify radionuclides contained in radioactive waste shipment.
The licensee's actions (as described in the licensee's letter dated December 30,1987)
were reviewed. The licensee's corrective actions were acceptable.
(Closed) Violation (50-293/87-35-02):
Failure to properly identify a radionuc'.ide (Fe-55) contained in radioactive shipment No. 86-34. The licensee's corrective actions, as desc.'ibed in the licensee's letter dated Decober 30, 1987, were reviewed.
Procedures 6.9-160, 6.9-200, and 6.9-193 we e revised to include Fe-55 in the calculations and on the shipping pioers. The licensee's corrective actions were acceptabl..
-.
.
. _.
.
..
.
.
b
.
4.
Organization and Management Controls
The inspector reviewed the licensee's current organization chart which was approved in March 1988 including responsibilitie's and qualifications
in the areas of radwaste systems.
Sections of Technical, Operations, and i
Radiological have responsibilities to process liquid, gaseous, and solid 1-radwaste systems including radwaste shipments.
These Section Managers report to appropriate Plant Department Managers who, in turn, report to
,
the Site Director.
The following position des:riptions were reviewed to determine if the
scope of responsibility and lines of authority were clearly defined:
Chief Operating Engineer
Chief Technical Engineer
Chief Radiological Engineer j
'
Senior Supervising Radiological Engineer
- Senior Technical Engineer, and
Senior Radwaste Engineer The inspector determined that the position descriptions defined responsibilities, qualifications, and authorities clearly.
Based on the above review, it appeared that all sections (Technical, Operations, Radiological) had adequate staff to operate liquid, solid, i
and gaseous radwaste systems.
!
5.
Liquid Radwaste System
!
5.1 Facilities The inspector toured limited liquid radwaste facilities including the Radwaste Control Room to determine whether the components and installation of the liquid waste system were as described in the
i FSAR and to determine whether instrumentation and equipment to sample and handle radioactive liquids under normal conditions were
-
adequate and operational.
The evaporator (or concentrator) was inoperable since 1975 and the
evaporator and associated components were removed in 1985.
i
Liquid sampling stations were easily accessible and properly ventilated.
Conductivity and tank level indicators in the Radwaste
<
Control Room were operable.
i i
. -
-
.
.
-.
-.
.' '
i
.
!
!
!
l
l f
5.2 Preoperational Test Results The inspector reviewed the following preoperational test procedures
and results:
[
t
.Preoperational Test No. ISB; Clean Radwaste System,
-
,
March 28, 1972 i
Preoperational Test No. ISC; Chemical Radwaste System,
-
May 23, 1972
.
Preoperational Test No. ISD; Miscellaneous Radwaste System, l
-
April 6, 1972
i The preoperational test of the Clean Radwaste System was to
.
demonstrate the operability of the system including: (1) clean waste j
receiver tanks and associated process pumps, (2) flatbed filters and
associated precoat and transfer pumps, (3) radwaste demineralizer,
,
(4) treated water hold-up tanks and associated transfer pumps for i
j liquid discharges, and (5) radioactive solid waste container level
,
l control.
The preoperational test of the Chemical Radwaste System was to i
demonstrate the operability of the system including: (1) all valves,
!
(2) chemical waste receiver tanks and process pumps, (3) chemical
!
waste filters, (4) radwaste metering pumps, and (4) monitor tank i
heater control and tank line heater control.
,
The preoperational test of the Miscellaneous Radwaste System was intended to demonstrate the operability of the Miscellaneous Waste i
Drain Tank and associated level controls and Miscellaneous Waste
,
Drain Tank Pump.
I Based on the above review, the inspector determined that the licensee performed all test items as required by the procedures, j
5.3 Liquid Effluent Monitoring l
The inspector reviewed the liquid effluent monitoring system against I
surveillance requirements (liquid radwaste discharge permit) to determine the operability of the monitor. The inspector noted that the background counts of the effluent monitor was predetermined, 4,000 counts per second (CPS), but the "HI ALARM" and "HI HI ALARM / TRIP" settings were used calculated CPS values as required by the CDCM.
The inspector reviewed the liquid radwaste discharge permit No.
88-57, dated March 30, 1988.
The inspector noted that the radwaste effluent monitor settings were 4,000 CPS for background, 7,000 CPS for "HI ALARM", and 10,000 CPS for "HI HI ALARM / TRIP". The inspector discussed with the itcensee the high background.
The i
f
-
-
-
-
-
-
- -
-
- -
-
- - - -
-.
-
- -
-
.
- - - - -
-
- -
-
.
-
..
,'
.
.
-
-
licensee stated that the high background was due to shine dose from the surrounding components. -The inspector examined the monitoring
.
panel in the main control room and determined that 4,000 CPS was
'
reasonable minimum ambient background levels for the location.
'
,
(range; 4,000 CPS - 4,600 CPS)
The inspector calculat'ed the minimum detectable activity (MDA) of the monttor using the background level (4,000 CPS) and the conversion factor (9.86 E6 CPS /uC1/cc). The'MDA of the effluent monitor was.
-4.06 E-4 uti/cc.
The inspector also noted that setting of the alarm points on the monitoring panel in the control room could be
+
difficult due to high background and the 7-decade logarithm scale (See Table 7.12-1 of the FSAR). The settings between background level and "HI ALARM" were close and could result in false alarms.
Section 7.12.6.3 of the FSAR described, in part, that the detector l
is located in a shielded sampler that is located in a section of the
radwaste discharge header to minimize background radiatic'i.
The
'
inspector stated that the monitor should be relocated to meet the i,
FSAR commitment. The licensee agreed to review and either change
the location of the monitor to be consistent with the FSAR, or
'
change the FSAR to be consistent with the monitor.
The inspector i
stated that the corrective actions will be reviewed in a future
inspection (50-293/88-15-01).
6.
Solid Radwaste System
!
The inspector reviewed the following preoperational test procedures and
!
results:
,
Acceptance Test No. ISA; Solid Radwaste System, May 25, 1972, i
-
j Acceptance Test No. ISB; Solid Radwaste System - Spent Resin Storage
-
and Transfer System, May 5, 1972.
The acceptance tests of the Solid Radwaste System were intended to I
demonstrate the operability of the system including:
(1)
instrumentation and valves,
,
i (2) cleanup sludge storage tank instrumentation and cleanup sludge
-
'
transfer pump control, (3)
floc recycle tank instrumentation and inlet valve control,
<
a (4) solid waste filter level instrumentation and floc recycle tank
.
outlet valve control, (5) solids recovery recycle system and discharge valve control,
,
. - -
-
- -. - -
- -
- -
-
.
.
. -
- - -
.
.
.
-
.
. - -.
..
.
- -
.
.-.. _ _ - -, _.
-
- - -.
-
~
.'
-
.
(6) cationic and anionic polyelectrolyte addition system, (7) backwash receiving tank (T-208) instrumentation and valve control, and (8)
system performance.
The acceptance teses of the Spent Resin Storage and Transfer System were intended to demonstrate the operability of the le al indicator, all mechanical and electrical equipment, and all val.ss and piping.
Based on the above review, the inspector determined that the licensee performed all tests as required by the procedures and verified the level indicators, instrurrentation, and alarm function as des'gned.
7.
Gaseous Radwaste System 7.1 Facilities
The inspector toured the gaseous radwaste system facilities including the recombiner room, offgas radiation monitor area, offgas sampling station, mechanical vacuum pump room, and augmented offgas room to determine whether the components and instailation of the gaseous radwaste system were as described in the FSAR.
There systems were found to be installed as indicated in the FSAR.
7.2 Augmented Offgas System The inspector reviewed the test procedure and test results for.the Augmented Offgas System, during this inspection (Preoperational Test No. 6498-007-74, January 6, 1975).
The inspector also reviewed the delay time calculation and decontamination factors for the Augmented Offgas System (performed in April 1976).
The inspector reviewed the Safety Evaluation Reports required by 10 CFR 50.59:
Safety Evaluation No. 1581; Replacement of Augmented Offgas
-
System valves, S-8-1 and A0-3/12, and addition of butterfly valve upstream of A0-3712, September 30, 1983.
i Safety Evaluation No. 2254; Restoration of selected components
-
in the Augmented Offgas System, November 24, 1987.
7.3 Process Radiation Monitoring The inspector reviewed several process radiation monitoring systems including calibrations of the Main Stack Radiation Monitoring System and the Reactor Building Exhaust Vent Radiation Monitoring System.
,
.
- - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- - - -
- - -
-
--
- - - - - - -
-
- - -
-
-
'
'
,
.
.
-
Within the scope of this review, no violations were found.
7,4 Testing of Ventilation Systems The licensee was not able to retrieve preoperational airflow capacity test results for the Standby Gas Treatment System (SOGT)
and for the Control Room. The inspector, therefore, reviewed the most recent measurement data for the SBGT and for the control room:
Procedure No. 8.7.2.6 Rev. 12, SBGT System Operability,
-
January 28, 1987 Procedure No. 8.7.2.7 Rev. 8, Measure Flow and Pressure Drop
-
across Control Room Environnental System, January 27, 1987.
Through review of these procedures it was determined that air flow capacity test results met Technical Specificatiens requirements, 4000
,
CFM for the SBGT and 1000 CFM for the control room.
The licensee uses the Pitot tube and manometer to measure air velocity (fpm) in the duct and then cniculates velocity pressure (VP) in inches of water using the following equation:
.
,
V=4005 4F where; V= Velocity, fpm VP= Velocity Pressure, inches of water The licensee calculates flow rate (cfm) and then uses a graph (CRHEAFS; FLOW vs. Differential Pressure) to find the region to allow the operation.
This graph has two regions, an unacceptable region and an acceptable region. The data sheet (8.7.2.7 A-1) does not contain enough information to evaluate technical justifications.
The inspector stated that the following information should be listed
'
in the data sheet for technical evaluations:
(1) air temperature and barometric pressure to ensure the validity of the above equation which is applicable only at standard air conditions (70 F and 29.92" Hg).
(2) air velocity measurement results using the Pitot tube to evaluate the uniform flow in the duct and measurement errors (e.g; 15% measurement errcr at 600 fpm), and (3) cross-sectional area of duct at the air velocity measurement location.
i The licensee initiated the corrective actions during this inspection.
The inspecto had no further questions in this area at the time of this inspection.
,-
A s
._
.. _.
-_
_.
,
'
'
~
,
.
.
8.
Review of the FSAR The inspector found that there were conflicts between FSAR commitments t.nd current practice during this inspection. The inspector also noted that these conflicts were due to administrative processes rather than technical evaluations.
The inspector reviewed Safety Evalution No. 1874 which involved a change to the FSAR per 10 CFR 50.71(e) and was reportable under 10 CFR 50.59(b). The radwaste concentrator was abandoned in place in accordance with PDC 76-113 and associated Safety Evaluation No. 413.
The Safety Evaluation No. 1874 (PDC 85-45, dated September 25,1985) proposed.
removal of the radwaste concentrator and associated mechanical and electrical components.
This Safety Evaluation was performed and a change of the FSAR was recommended on October 9, 1985.
The Preliminary FSAR Revision was prepared and attached to the Safety Evaluation on October 9, 1985.
The Operations Review Committee (ORC) reviewed the revision and signed it on October 16,1985 (ORC Meeting Number 85-105).
The inspector noted that the implementation of this PDC 85-45 has been suspended. The licensee was not able to find the reasons at the time of this inspection.
,
Section 9.3.4.2 of the FSAR, Radwaste Disposal System for Reactor Cleanup Sludge, Revision 4 - July 1984, was reviewed.
The inspector found some inconsistancies in this section.
The inspector noted that PDC 82-18 was
'
prepared in 1982 but it was not approved by the Licensing Group as of April 8, 1988. Therefore, the conflict commitments in the FSAR are still remaining.
The inspector stated that the updating Sections 9.2 and 9.3 of the FSAR will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-293/88-15-02). The inspector, however, noted that in regard to safety these items do not have a significant impact.
l 9.
Exit Interview
,
The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Detail 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on April 8, 1988. The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection and the findings, i
i
-
,.
A s