IR 05000302/1977002
| ML19208D532 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 02/07/1977 |
| From: | Jape F, Robert Lewis, Troup G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208D528 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-77-02, 50-302-77-2, NUDOCS 7909280555 | |
| Download: ML19208D532 (18) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. .
,. .
. .. .
. [[p macuq'o, UNITID STATES f . NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
, o _ vi,I #.. $ REGION il
23a PE ACHTH E E STH E ET. N.W. SUITE CIS
e \\'q 3 J s.;.wj ATLANTA. G EORGI A 30303
- $
IE Inspection Report No. 50-302/77-2 Licensec: Florida Power Corporation Lf U.! h) ! Q) 3201 34th Street, South r:.r - P. O. Box 14042, Mail Stop C-4 - -lj f f b f f h.f !) , St. Per tsburg, Florida 33733 b U L U (Uj j y {; i Facility Nane: Crystal River 3 D:cket No.: 50-302 License No.: DPR-72 Category: B2 Location: Crystal Rive.r, Florida Type of License: B&W, PWR, 2452 Mvt Type of Inspection: Routine, Announced (January 10-14, 1977) Routine, Unannounced (January 11-14, 1977) Dates of-Inspection: January 10-14, 1977 . Dates of Previous Inspection: January 6-7, 1977 Principal Inspector: F. Jape, Reactor Inspector Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Reacter Operations and Nuclear Support Branch (Janu ny 1& l4, 1977) Accompanying Inspector: C. L. Troup, Radiation Inspector Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety braach (January 11-14, 1977) Other Accompanyinr. P rsonnel: None Prepared By: /[Og _ --' ['
~/
F. Jape, Reactor Ins;p tor [<R _ _ _ _ __ Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Date Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch (January 0 14 1977) Reviewed By.
. j_
t-r-27 77 i R. C. Lewis, Chief
Reactor Projects Section No. 2 Da e / Reactor Operations nad Nuc1 car Support Branch 1053 023 7009280 5 6 6 t
' . . . .. - . , Lf;( (' V') ' j D IE Rpt.140 50-302/77-2-2- - ','iMlf70[]"Ul,O[ l il , i t; s d-UL O L.] SUMMARY OF FINDII;CS I.
Enforcement Mn tters _ Deficiency - Failure to l!aintain Procedure Revision Records Current Contrary to 10 CFR 50; Appendix B, Criterion VI, "Docu-at Control " and Technical Specification 6.8, " Procedures,"'the revision record for the control room copy of OP-209, OP-402, CP-114 and CP-115 are not naintained current an delineated in AI-400.
(Details I, para-graph 3) II.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Enforcenent Matters Inf raction - Failure to Evaluate Examination Data Licensee's response dated January 4,1977, has been received.
Followup on this iten vill be conducted on a future inspection.
III.
lieu Unresolved Itcas 77-2/1 Plant Review Comittee Review of plant review coraittee operations resulted in the following unresolved issues: (a) method for desig-nnting alternate api,ointnents, (b) use of -telephone f or i I members not physically present at a cecting, yet being included in the q rum, and (c) lack of complete agreement of charter delineated in AI-300 vith Technical Specification 6.5.1.6.
(Details I, paragraph 4) I 77-2/2 Modification At.nroval Record Review of four codification approval records revenled that all four did not require testing after installation.
(Details 1, paragraph 5) 77-2/3 Ecg paent Status and C]e.rance Records Plant equipment status as displayed on the visual board in the control center is not being maintained up-to-date and the equipment r ' earance logbook index is not naintained up-to-date.
(Details I, paragraph 6) 1053 024
[ . . . i o l :, l 1 i ni, Ir' . (u (v; (7 ej IE Rp t. No. 50-302/77-2 - 3-- r q -_/ J J 1 J !A; _rd 77-2/4 Survey Records for Radiocctive Sources Licensee was unable to locate records of the periodic Icak teuts of radioactiic sources as required by by-product naterial license 05'-0768-02.
(Details II, para-graph 2) , IV.
Status of Previously_ Identified Unresolved Itens 76-24/1 Faclity Records Followup revealed that the record retention progran has not been revised to incorporate all of the record require-nents of Technical Specification 6.10.
To date, it appears that records required to be retained by the TS are available.
Licensee canagement co= nit ted to an early revision of the aduinistrative procedure for collecting, storing and controlling records.
76-19/6 Evaluation of Sampling' Media Collection Efficiencies The licensee has completed the evaluation of tne redia collection efficiencies and the required codifications of the saaplers. This'iten is closed.
(Details II, paragraph 3) V.
Unusual _0ccurrences None VI.
Other SignJficant_ Finding Initial Criticality Cryatal River 3 achieved initial criticality at 084? hours on January 14, 1977. All rods were withdrawn, except Croap 7, which was positioned at 75% withdrawn.
Eoron concentration at critical was 1390 ppu.
The corrected predicted critical value was 1434 ppa.
(Detaf.ts I, paragraph 7) , 1053 025
. . . , L . "[2 ll l I( OI Id Rpt. }io. %%302/77-2 4_ l .s . i t v UL -l J.J J JL iLa V11.
Lt.agement Intervicu A unnagtcent intervicu van held Janu: ry 13, 1977, with C.
I'. I.en tty, Jr. and on January 14, 1977, with G. P. Beatty, Jr. and.J. Alberdi.
The inspection findings, which included the deficiency invols. ng procedure revision records, the new unresolved ite=s and witnessing of initial criticality, were discussed.
- . = @ O 1053 026 .
.. . . . . . IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 I-1 M Dn' AILS I Prepared by: k/'d/ LL / P. Jape, Reactor Innpect r Date Revctor.Proj ects See tion io.
F unctor Operatieur and Nuclear Support Branch Dates of Insp'er tion: January 30-14, 1977 s<) ) . Reviewed by: b- [_b e 7~7'77 i. C. Lewis, Chie' Date k Reactor Projects Section No.
'
Reactor Operationn and Nuclear > Support Branch
1.
Individuals Contacted I p[i [ ! O 1 t , Florld'a Power Corporation (FPC) ld,(J;, ilj .l ' , ,,... < -
J. Alberdi - Project Manager ^ p}: ' j ; ' R ' j f-l ' ' ' i ,- n- .- i,r G. P. Beatty, Jr. - Nuclear Flant Superintendent ' J. C.11obbs, Jr. - FSnager Generation Testing ' ,l' O ;,,._.. ' ^ ~ " " " " -, ' D. W. Pedrick, IV - Conpliance Engineer - . T. C. Lutkehaus - Maintenance Engineer , i T. H. Mayble - Nuclear Shift Supervisor - W. H. Herbert, III - Nuclear Shif t Supervhor H. E. Reeder - Nuclear Shift Supervisor R. A. Parker - Chief Nuclear Operator I W. W. Surrency - Chief Nuclear Operator R. R. Henderson - Chief Nuclear Operator l D. A. Morrison - Nuclear Operator E. R. Sesso=. - Nuclear Operator R. L. Skipper - Nuclear Operator T. N. Mount - Nuclear Operator
G. P. Hebb - Assistant Nuclear Operator J. F. Ucilunn - Assistant Nuclear Operator W. E. Keaper - Assistant Nuclear Operator R. N. Stuart - Assistant Euclear Operator J. Schuyler - Testing Superintendent G. Walker - Manager Field Testing f Babcock and Wilc_o_x Cor.:pany__(B 6W) J. Kelly - Shif t Tecting Superintendent J. Bohart - Startup Test Engineet E. Logan - Si te Operations Manager 1053 027 .
. . . . . .. ., . . IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 1-2 .
s - l d,, tj Q [[ G,(h) t ;g j ig [. <; l} f i ~ ]1 Volt - i , ,- [ i g,.g . E. Childress - Startup Tect Engineer C. Phelps - Systc:a Test Engineer 2.
_ Status of Facility Completion ? Status of facility completion was reported in Inspection F2 port 50-302/76-24. Followup was continued during this inspection r,d the five remaining itens have been satisfactorily coupicted as follows: -a.
TP 150-3--Poc t Accident H Purge Test - the acceptance criterin
have been revised and the test results are nw acceptabic.
b.
TP 60>36-Reactor Build 1:.3 Cooling - Retest cot:pleted during plant heatup. Test results were within acceptance criteria, TP 1.60-7-Reactor Cavity Cooling - Retest completed with accept-c.
able test results.
d.
TP 267-5-CRD Cooling Functional - Flow balancing ccejleted with satisfactory results.
TP 302-3 and - 3 - Incore Systen - Testing of all cable con-c.
nectors completed with satisfactory results.
With the satisfactory resolution of the above five itcas, which were also identified in paragraph A of Attachaent 1 to kaendment 1 of Operating License do. DPR-72, peruission to proceed to or. rational mode 2 vas authorized by letter to FFC frua NRC dated January 12, 1977.
3.
Document Control A cample of four proceduren, located in the control center was selected for review to deternine if administrctive controls to maintain procedures current were functioning properly.
The adainis-trative controls are descr * bed in AI-400, " Plant Operating Quality Assurance Ha wal Control Document," which 11:plements criterion VI of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 and FSAR Section 1.7.6.7, " Operations Q?, Program." The review revealed that revision records are not rain-tained current.
Failure to raiutain the revision record current ir a deficiency.
, 1053 028
- .
. - ] ' ' T ' rp'} l lp[ . IE Ppt. No. 50-302/77-2 I-3 ihjJ i'u-,i.Ill;!l1 ! _ _ s.J o uu o m _ J Inn procedures revleued cud deficien' itens cre dencribed bnlou: a.
_0P-209 Plant Cooldcem l A temporary change made on December 13, 1976, to change a limit in Step 6.2.8 from 750 psig to 725 psig. Technical Specification 6.8.3 c. requires teuporary chceges to be revieved by the PEC and approved by the Nuclear Plant Superintendent within 14 days..The revision record does not accurately reficct the action required by TS.
The revision record also does'not reflect the follusing changes made to the procedure: i l 1.
Steps 4.14 and 4.15 vere changed to require red tags for .
the HPl Valves.
' 2.
Step 6.2.12 was changed to require red tags for the CFV 5 and 6.
- 3.
Step 6.2.17.1 was added to cover the los range control added to the pressurizer power operated relief valve.
4.
Step 7.2.13 was changed to require MIV 23 thru 26 to be closed.
b.
OP_-402 Makeup and Purification Syste, - A teaporary change was rade on Deccaber 27, 1976, to Revislov 7, yet revicion record shows the date of this change as October 27, 1976.
Page 32c was added to the procedure but was not annotated in the body of the procedure, CP-114 Procedure.for_ Control of perranent,Madjficatioun, c.
Temporary Modificatio_ns_, and Deviations Revision 4, dated October 21, 1976, has been nade to the procedur(,but the revision record does not reficct this change.
' d.
_CP-ll5 In-Plor.c E_qu iynent CIcarance an1 Switchf rq Orders Revision 12, dated October 28, 1976, has been tude to the procedure, but the revision record does not reflect thic change.
1053 029
. - . . . . IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 I-4 Lf E i h'j ( Q G', 7 F lT ; l. l{ t t -( \\, p 1 -
- g-j i
t .J b4j J d b Ub [8.i b 4.
Finnt Reviw Comittee P3r.nt Revf w Cc::.ait t ee, (PnC), :-inuten of seven recent rectings were re.leved for agrecuent with the requirements of TS 6.5.1.
In addition tbc PRC charter, as delineated in AI-300, " Plant Rwieu Cccaittee Charter," van ec: pared with TS 6.5.1.
Four problcu areas, described below, were identified as in; 77-2/1.
The problen creas nre as follcus: . a.
Alternate Appointment In necting 76-53 and 76-54 an alternate meeber was in attendance to fulfill the quorum requirement of the TS.
The use of an alternate is peruitted by U but the appointuent is required to be in writing by the PRC chaircan.
The ninutes indicated the appointu ent nerely by stating "(alternate)" af ter the persons na=c.
b.
Members in Attendance Via Telephey In meeting 76-54 one of the quorua etnbers van in telephone contact during the neeting.
Occasional use of telephone contact is acceptabic.
Section 4 of tha PRC charter doas not restrict the use of tdlephene contact to occasional us.ge.
c.
PRC Reszonnibilities and Authorities Pnc responsibilities and authorities presented in AI-300 are not in complete agrecuent with TS 6.5.1.6, 6.5.1.7 and 6.5.1.8.
The dif f erences are stnanarized helew: 1.
Itcu 1. in part 6.0 of AI-300 requires PRC recomacaded changcn to the plant security plan and inpleaenting procedures to be subaitted to the Nuclear Plant Superin-tendent.
TS 6.5.1.6 1. require: these recur,enaattons to be submitted to the chairrum of the Nuclear General Review Co_nittee (liGRC). 2.
Iten c. in part 7.0 of AI-300 requires notificat ion to the Director - Power Production for specified issues. TS 6.5.1.7 c. requires these notifications to be suhaitted to the Manager - Nuclear Operations.
. 1053 030
t . D] ! U . . fOMA - O [: ' l f[O R ] O f IE Ept. No. 50-302/77-2 I-5 !; I g Lj u J N' j O' u! l. t ! J'l O _ 3.
Itca 8.1 of AI-300 requires copics of PRC ninutes to bc pro /Ided to the Director - Po, r Production. IS 0.5.1.8 , requires a copy of t'. PRC minutes to be submitted to the Manager - Euclear Operations, d.
Une of Revicu Consideration Form , Part 9.0 of AI-300 der,cribes the use of a Nevicu Considerr.tica Forn, FCF, and implies that if all PRC members accept the ite: vithout question, the review responsibility is considered c c.aple t e. No further actic,n in taken except to enter the item in the minutes of the next PRC neeting.
The inspector statcd that this method does not appear to be consistent with TS requireocats and the guidance of ANSI N18.7.
Use of a RCF to prepare for a PRC necting is acceptable, but each itcs cuct be brought up during the meeting for open dictussion.
Oth e tvise PRC responsibility cannot be considered complete.
The taeven PRC necting ninutes reviewed were the follcuing: Number Date of Meeting 76-50 11/30/76 and 12/2/76 76-51 12/9/76 76-52 12/16/76 , 76--53 12/21/76 76--54 12/23/76 76-55 12/30/76 77-1 01/06/77 Ihiring each of these r stings, TS requircaents for PRC couperi-tien, oceting frequeni quortua and subjects on the agende , were found acceptable Licensee tunegenent stated that the , four probler areas um J be revicued and adjustments cade to confo m with TS.
Follouup to be done on future inspections.
5.
Modificatloa Approv :1 Record The approval records f or three nodifications were exanined to verify conforuance with 10 CFR 50.59, Criterion III of Ap'pendb; E to CFR 50, the licensee's administrative controls and the guidance of Section 5 of ANSI N18.7.
Within the areas inspected, a discrepancy van identified involving checkout ano testing follcuing ccapletion of work.
1053 031
l ... . . riy ' fi j gr30,l;3,mc _ . IE Ept. lio. 50-302/77-2 I-6 l . ' - u a - m _; Planned tenting is indicated cm the !!odification Approval Record, " }!AR. The three IL*.R's cacnnined $ndicated that no testing ven required.
This itm van diccussed with licensee canagment who agreed to reviru the testing requircnentu.
This itea was identified as unr solved ite=2 77-2/2.
, Conformance with other regulations van found acceptabic.
. 6.
Equipuent Statun r:nd Clearance Records The use of the control center status board and the equipment clearance log index to indicate equipaent status were reviewed to verify conforrance with Criterion XIV of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50 and the licensee's adainintrative controls.
The plant vna in code 5 at the tire of the review.
The control center status board did not appear to be complete and the clearance log index indicated taore outstanding orders than were actually in Thic discrepancy was identified as Unresolved Itea 77-2/3.
use.
Licensee canagesent stated a review of plant status indicators would be conducted and appropriate adjustuents rude to satisfy regulations.
7.
Initin) Criticality Crystal River 3 reached initial critical at 0S12 hours on Januar y 14, 1977. Test procedure 710-1, "Zero pever Physics test," was follow:d to ponition the control rods and debarate to criticality.
Critical occurred with all rok vit.hdrawn, exc ep t Group 7 which was at 75% vithdrat i.
Boroa concent ration at critical was 1390 ppa.
Initial criticality was predicle? to occur at a boron concentration of 3521 ppa..The procedure describes action to take if criticality dfd not occur an predicted.
'Ihd s cc tion var followed. A review of the original prediction reveal O that incorrect data v2re uned in the calculation.
The corrected prediction was det ermined to be 1434 is. There were no discrcpencies identified by the inspector.during the approach to initial criticality.
The specific items vitnessed by the inspector are sur.=arized below.
1053 032 .
. ~, - - . ,- y JJ s W; IE Ppt. No. 50-302/77-2 I-7 j l] { k {t ' i'i l,;l u l{y.. ; U d, ;u Lu u " L Prior to precceding to operational mode 2 (otartup) the testing c.
in Section A of Attaciment 1 to kiendment 1 of License DPR-72 vas verifici as catinf etorily co.:pleted.
(Sce paragraph 1 of Detniin I-of thic report for coditional detailc.)
b.
The two nodiuri thiosulfate addition valves in the tank dis-charge Ifne were verified to be locked closed an required by ite-2.c. (4) of Amendnent 1 of License DPR-72, issued December 30, 1976.
c.
Prior to entering code 2 the licensee met the applicable Technical Specification requirements of Section 3/4, Limiting Conditions for Operation and.Surve111 Luce and Section 6.2, Organization.
d.
Special conditions required for initial criticality were verified or follo's: 1.
Sc'.ler tiaers were connected to the source range nucicar instrto"ntation and responded with approximately 5 counts , per second.
2.
The high flux trip serpofut had been reset to trip at 5% full power.
3.
The B&W reactincter ' connected to the interutdfable range nuclea. instru: eno channel.
c.
The approvcc test procedt.. e van used to provide an organized nethod to attain initial criticality The count rate and . dilut.f on data were recorded an ' the resultant inverre t ultipli-- cation plots were developed.
f.
Prior to deboration and duriua dilution the collection and analysis of reactor coolant saeples were observed.
g.
Technien1 Support personnel and opt ator t.;tions were observed to be responnive and timely. All personnel involved with the initial criticality were observed to be attentise and cooperative.
The achievement of initial critienlity, was in egreem nt with the cocu l tuent in Section 13.4.7 of the FSAR.
1053 033 .
- . . . . d E' " )2
IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 1-8 fL lI { ! , Q) d:_, _ 'UO b hu C J 3 0.
Hydraulic SnyhkriI_Sf;0tt_ G1nas 1.cakage Follouup ca the replacerent prograu of leaky cigh. glassen on hydraulic nubberu revealed that all safety-r<1ated snubbers have been repaired, tested and re--insralled. The inspector examined a sample of the re-installed snubber.
None had evidence of oil leakage. This item is closed.
. G / i . e 1053 034
. - mfin fRR - - - n e' w d u ' - .. m cw!: ca c c m!j l. l !' < IE Ept. ho. 50-302/77-2 11-1 y10i_wo, uia .sNA 2!7 DETAILS 11 Prepared by: d' OW ,.
- '
G. L. Troep, Rafiation Specialist Date , , . Radiation Support Sec t. ion ,. Fuel Facility and Haterials Safety Branch Dates of Inspection: J uary 11-14, 1977 . . Reviewed by: _ [GM/ U/7 A. F. Gibson, Chief Date Radiation Support Stm ion . - Fuel Facility and ILterials Safety Branch 1.
Individunis Contacted J. Alberdi - Project M2 nager C. P. Beatty, Jr. - Nu:1 car Plant Superintendent P. F. McKee - Assistant Nuclear Plant Superintendent J. R. Wright - Cheulstry and h diation Protection Engineer J. L. Harrison - Assistant Chealstry and Radiation Protection Engineer C. D. Perkins Health Physics' Supervisor T. C. Luttehaus - Maintenance Engineer C. R. Westafer - Technical Support Engineer K. O. Voge) - Computer and Controls Engineer W. R. Klein - Reactor Engineer D. W. Pedrick, IV - Compliance Engineer R. E. Fuller - Plant Engineer l W. A. Crocs - Plant Engineer
J. C. liobb s, Jr. - Manage c, Generation Testing G. E. Ruscala - Tet.t Engineer 5 Chem R :d Technicians 2 Coupliance Xuditors 2.
Survey Records For Sen] r d Radioactive Source 1_(77-2/Q a.
By product naterial license 09-07603-0'. condition 13. A(1) requires that scaled cources containing greater,than 100 nicrocuries of activity be tested for leakage Sr.3/or con- , tanination at intecvals not tc, exceed six twnths. License if)S3 n35
.
- '
. \\ . . . . . u u x uu o c-ff . f' { " Ir p t. No. 50-302/77-2 II-2 2 i b bb U !I p .g condition 13.B. requires that records of the leak tests be retained for inspection by tha Ccenission. This license was " ' applicable to radics:ctive sources in the possession of the licenmec prior to the insuance of operating license DPR-72.
b.
The inspector asked a licensee representative for the test . records for the nost recent source leak tests. After review-ing the work schedule, the licensee representative established the date of the test but vac unable to locate the test records.
Liccasce anagement acknowledged that the records should on file and stated that a reviev of the files vould be Inde to , locate the leak test records.
3.
Evaluation of Saxplindedia CoIIccrion Efficiencies (75-19/6) This iten was origin,lly discussed in IE Report No. 50-302/75-19, a.
Details III, paragraph 4 and dealt with the need to establish the collection ef ficiencies for sample collection raedia, especially charcoal cartridges.
In IE Report No. 50-302/76-22, Details II, paragraph 3 it was noted that todification unuld , be accompusneu one four sarplers at environecntal release i vu points to increase the residente tice of the flo; through the nedia and thus increase the sampling efficiency.
' b.
The inspector observed the modification of the sarple tedia collectors for the four sanplers at the environuet.tal release points and verified that the nodification hM i,ecu comp 1.c ted.
This nodification i cluded the installation of control valves and flow neters to regulate the flow through the charcoal cartridges to provide adequate residence tine while raintain-ing isokinetic flow in the carple lines.
The inspector discussed with a licensee represer c.
tive the status of the proceduret for the analysis of gaseous release and the inclusloa of t' efficiencies for the cedia in the equ tionr for analytical work. A liemsee reprosenta Eve inforned the inspector that cheaistry procedure CH-269, " Caseous Radwaute Evaluation," had b2en prepared and approved The procedure specifies . the flow rate settings and collection efficiencies for the various sarplers.
. d.
Based on cocpletion of the codifications . - , and incorporation of the efficiencies in the chemistry procedure, the inspector ' advised licensee canagement that this itea was considered ., closed.
1053 036
. . - - = . .: . ' [MhhM (Ui !! P) _ IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 II-3 }}1 } I$ 9U ll C O I l' l' E,J
- dJ L i o -. 1J 4.
Variation of Filter Systens for FSAR Statenents 'This f.teu ves originally discussed in IE Report No. 50-302/76-3, n.
D.:tnilo II, parcgraph 4, and dealt with deviations froa FSAR Teble 9-15 for filter housingn.
In IE Report No. 50-302/76-17, Details 1, paragraph 4, it was noted that three of the four itens of apparent deviation were resolved but th it the differ-ential pressure indication for control ccepicx filters had not been lesolved.
b.
The inspector revicued the status of the installation of the differential pressure indicator with cognizant licensee persennel, including lastallation, testing and alignment. A licensee representative advised the inspector that the install-ation was corpleted and that the aliancent and testing was co=plete. The licensee representative also discussed the problets encountered during the alignment and testing and methods used to resolve these problens.
- The inspector observed the indicator and verified that c.
the ' label plat'e had been changed to reflect the prt.,er function.
Based on the review and dis' scions, the inspector inforced . licensee nanagement that he.ud no further questions and that this iten was considered closed.
- 5.
Reactor Coolant Cheulstry Technical Specifica tions Section 3.4.7 specifien the limits for chlorides, fluorides and dissolved oxygen in the reactor coolant systeu. Technical Specifications Table 4.4.-3 specifies the ninitun frequency for analysea to verify corplitace with Section 3.4.7.
The inspector revicued the chemistry logs for the period January 3-13, 1977, and verified that narples were collected within the ninicun required frequency e...d that the results were within the linits of Section 3.4. 7.
The inspector had no further question at %is tine.
6.
Postiny,_and Control of the Radiation Cont rol Area On January 14 the resctor plaat vent critical for the first tite.
During the period of the approach to criticality, the inupector toured the radiatica control area and observed the posting and controls which had been established.
Items checked included the establis aent and control of the radiation control area boundary 1053 037
. . ..
, ~
' j d Ci s i 'l o oi,n [r e I , <-, p' [(j[f_}. l j IE 1:pt. No. 5% ~'02/77-2 II-4 { {! ' J ; } i ;. ;. ,lin i l' a ,3) ;ts- - an] c>ntrol point, personnel dosinetry requirerento for entry and fratry logs, pe cting of the area as a radiation area and'estab-M shaent of radi.tica work peruits for entry into tha renctor building. The inspector also observed licensee personnel con-ducti.g radiation and contacination curveys in cccorrbnce with routine work practices prior to achieving criticality. The inspector had no, questions at this time.
, 7.
Caseous Vaste System Modification This iten ucs originally discussed in IE Report No.
a.
50-302/76-14, Details I, paragraph 4, end dealt with a . nodification which was to be cade to the gaseous vaste systc= to install a pressure reducing valve upstreau of conitor RM11 to pre imt overpressurization of the monitor during discharges.
In IE Report No. 50-302/76-24, Details III, paragraph 6 it was noted that a teeporary reducing valve had been installed but that the valve had been installed between the flow ucter and the flow control valve. A licensee repre-sentative had advised the inspector that an engineering change notice had been issued to relocate the valve.
b.
The inspector observed the gascous vaste systen and noted that tne pressure reducing valve had been relocated upstreau of che flow neter so that discharges can be controlled at cot:stant pressure. A licensce representative inforced the in'spector that the teuporary valve van installed in the new position but that it would be replaced when the fina) valve is received.
c.
The inspector noted that the flow neter (FE--19) is graduated based on gan flow at attor.pheric pressure whereas the actual flov vill he at 10 psig as controllel by the pressure reducing valve. A licensee representative acknowledge this condition and inforrud the inspector that a correction factor had been established to correct the flow rate and that this factor was being incorporated into the appropriate procedure. The inspector had no further questions.
8.
Status of Previevaly Identified Iten The following facilities, systeras and funct ional areat were re-viewed by the in e ctor.
These iter,s were previously discussed in ,.
IE Reports as insoupicte.
.. 1053 038 .
.. - .. 3) . . pM -
. !,0;!a!lm o r, mo o n,. p, i r u l 1: In\\ . s u a l-s i
. i
. '1L ml _l.1, !_, IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 11-5
- n~
m . . Dischar gs fron thy _Layndry Su p a.
. _ As noted in IE R2 port No. 50-3r.: /76-24, Details III, para-graph 7. s revision to OP-407, Liquid Waste Disposal Systea, had been issued to itplement adwinistrative control to peredt ' - discharges fron the su=p.
The inspector reviewed t%. proce-dure c'..ange and verified that it had been reviewed and approved in accordance with the licensee's procedures. The inspector . also observed that ti.e controls vare in effect during a dis-charge from the sump and had no further questions.
,
b.
Vaste Solidification This ites was originally discussed in IE Report No. 50-307/76-17, Details I,. paragraph 5.a. and dealt with the need to estrhlish procedures to control the solidification of vaste to as: e that the vaste can be shipped as solid vaste with no free lig 'd in accordance with 49 CFR 173.393. A licensee represent tive informed the inspector that the operating paraceters for the solidification of vaste and tht supporting procedures had not-been established, and that a contractor would perforu any necessary solidification until the plant solidf 'ication systea is operable.
. c.
Decontanination Room The inspector observed that the decontamination tanks and ultrasonic cleaucr had been received and vere in the roon but were not connected. A licensee representative informed the inspector that no specific schedule lad been entablished to complete the installation but that it w;uld be coaplcted as needed by plant operntions. The licensee representative also advised the inspector that temporary services could be pro-vided as necessary if the une of roon were required prior to the final insta11r. tion of the equipment. This provides the plant with both tenpc;ary and permanent decontt:.Inntion facilities, d.
Doors for High Radiat iott Areas This iten was originally discussed in IE P.ep6'rt No. 50-302//6-22, Details II, paragraph 5 and dealt with the installation of doors (barriers) at the entrance to potential high radiation areas which appeared to be in conflict with 10 CFR 20.203(c)(2) in 1053 039 .
' . ( .- - , . - , - - - Ef ! O'! 0 ) - 'I;} .s - , db
- i f.3 f.
' . i i ' IE Rpt. No. 50-302/77-2 II-6 (h Ub b 1 b t_'u i.' O LQ - that the door could not be opened by a person inside of the area when tie door is locked. The inspector chnerved the ' - deers installed inside of the reactor buildfug and noted that the door locks had been codified to pernit exit iro= the area in a locked condition. The inspector also observed that the doors, to potential high radiation areas in the auxiliary - building were betra replaced with doort; which ecct the re-quirenents of 10 CFR 20.
Two doors in the reactor building require further nodification to prevent someone fre being abic to open the door froa the outside without a key; licensee unnagenent inforced the inspector that the necessa y cutterials for tha modifica ton were being fabricated and would be installed when plant condition permitted.
' . d' 1053 040
0 }}