IR 05000311/1980015
| ML18085A213 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 09/17/1980 |
| From: | Clemons P, Knapp P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18085A212 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-311-80-15, NUDOCS 8011130060 | |
| Download: ML18085A213 (6) | |
Text
..
Report N U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I 50-311/80-,.@6 Docket N...;.._..;;...-.;;.. __ _
License N DPR-75 Priority ------
Category -------
c Licensee:
Public Service Electric & Gas Company 80 Park Place Newark, New Jersey 07101 Facility Nama:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 2 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection conducted:
August 12-15,. 1980 Inspectors:, llf'Clk?o_~... ~
P. Clemons, Radiation Specialist. Knapp, Chief, Radiati Support Section, FF&MS Branch Inspection Summary:
tiate signed date. signed date signed i-\\7-~
date signed Inspection on August 12~1s, 1980 (Report No.. 50-311/80-15)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection by one NRC regional based inspector of three startup tests. as required by Section 13.4 of the Final Safety Analysis Report. The tests required at various power levels are Chemistry and Radtochemistry, Radiation Monitoring and Shielding Evaluation, and Effluent Monitoring Systems._ This inspection was concerned with tests perfonned at low power (up to 5%).
In addition the inspector also reviewed items that were incomplete during pr.evious inspections. The inspection involved 22 inspector-hours. onsite by one. regional based NRC inspecto Results: Of the three areas inspected, the inspector observed that the required tests had been sati'sfactorily completed in two instances (Chemistry and Radio-chemistry and Radiation Monitoring and Shielding Evaluation) *. The inspector was infonned that the third test was expected to start during the week of October 1, 198 No items of noncompliance were identifie Region I Fann 12 (Rev. April 77)
8011130 o'o
- .
DETAILS Persons Contacted Mr. R. Cislo, Health Physics Supervisor Mr. J. Dziuba, Technican Nuclear Mr. W. Ferguson, Health Physics Supervisor Mr. E. Keating, Associate Engineer
- Mr. H. Lowe, Quality Assurance Engineer Mr. P. Mergen, Technical Supervisor, Performance Mr. L. Mi 11 er, Performance Engineer
Mr. T. Murkle, Engineering Technician Mr. R. Newman, Senior Operations Staff Supervisor Mr. J. O'Connor, REP Supervisor Mr:. T. Robbins, Instrumentation Supervisor Mr. R. Shult,. Administrative Assi.stant
- Mr. R *. Silverio, Assistant to the Plant Manager
- .ti:Mr. J. Stillman, Station. Quality Assurance Engine *Mr. R. Swetnam, Senior Performance Supervisor, Radiation Protection
- M T~ Vannoy, Technical Supervisor, Chemis.try
- denotes those present at the exit intervie.
licensee Action on Previous Inspection* Findings (Closed) Inspector Follow'."'up Item* (50-311/78-13-04}:
Resolve discrepancies*
in curnnt HP Procedur The fnspector reviewed the procedures cited in 78-13-04 and noted that they had been revised incorporating the* suggested change (Open) Inspector Follow-up Item (S0-31U78-13-05l:
Resolve the development o.f a Technician*Nuclear retraining progra The inspector reviewed docu-mentation that indicated that the Technicians-Nuclear had been retrained in 1979 and 1980*.
He also observed that a formalized retraining program had not been developed at the time of this inspectio He did review an outline of a proposed. formalized retraining program that hadbeen submitted by a consultant from* the University of Lowel The Senior Performance Super-visor-Radiation Protection stated that the retraining program should be fonnalized by December 198 (Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (50-311/78-52-01):
Verify radiation monitoring system is as described in FSA The inspector reviewed Amend-ment No. 43 to the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) which describes the existing. radiation monitoring syste (Closed) Inspector Follow-up.. Item (50-311/78-52*02):
Verify calibration. of..
radiation monitoring syste The inspector reviewed documentation that indicated that the entire rad.iation monitoring system had been calibrated as require..,..
,,.I
.:
i
(Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (50-311/78-5.2-03): Verify completed installation of all radw~te component ~03 indicated that a Hydrogen Manifold was undergoing constructio The inspector verified that the Hydrogen Manifold bad been installed at the time of this inspectio (Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item (50-311/78-52*04): Verify completion of all radwaste procedure The inspector verified that all procedures were complete since inspection 78-52, and he also observed that one procedure,
"PD-3.8~016,. Gaseous Radwaste Release Calculations", was in the 11approval chain" at the time of this inspection. This-procedure was being revised as a result of the special appraisal of the health physics prog.ram conducted by* the NRC during January 28-February 8, 198 (Open) Inspector FoHoW-up Item* {50*311/78-52-05): Verify-in-place testing of air cleaning. systems. The inspector reviewed documentation that indicated that the Air Cleaning Systems had been tested 11in*place 11 during March 197 At that time HEPA System No. 22 had a flow rate of 32,480 Cubic Feet per Minute (CFM) and HEPA System No. 23 had a flow rate of 31,697 CF Technical Specification Section 4.7. 7.1.b.4 states a system flow rate sha-11 be Zl:,4QQ, CFM !10% during system operatio The inspector also noted that the Air Cleaning Systems were tested agai.n around Auust 1, 198 At that time HEPA System No. 23 indicated a* flow rate of 15,321 CFM, again, this system was not within the technical specification requ*iremen All other systems were within the technical specification requirement.
Startup Test Program B *
Section 13.l of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) states, "A carefully conceived. and executed startup. testing program, under the control, responsi-bility,. and:. authority of PSE&G, will bs. implemented to accomplish a safet orderly; and.comprehensive startup. This* program wilT demonstrate that the plant operates* satisfactorily and presents no. danger to the health and safety of the public;.. u Table, 13.4 of the FSAR includes: the fo1Towing tests that the inspector attempted to verify had* been performed* at low power:
Test*
Condi.ti on
-
Objecti'ves Coments Chemistry Specific analyses To demonstate Ability to control and Radio-at low power and ability to con-water quality veri-chemistry 30%, 50%., 75% and~
trol water fied at each power Tests 100%. powe qualit leve Radiation Low power and To measure and Radiation levels Monitoring during power* esca-record radiation are verified to be arid Shield-lation at 30%, 70% levels in accessi-within the shielding i ng Ev al uati on 100%.
b 1 e areas of the*
design criteri plan *
Test Effluent Monitoring Systems Condition As early in power operation a possible and repeated after operation at 30%,
SOS, 75% and 100%
powe Objectives To verify calibra-tion of effluent monitors by lab analysis of radio-active waste sample (A)
Chemistry and Radiochemistry Tests Comments Verification of calibration of plant effluent monitor The inspector reviewed Startup Procedure No. 81.15, "Chemistry and Radiochemistry TestsJ* to determine what the test requirements wer Procedure No. 81.15 referenced the following Performance Department Chemistry Instructions to be used* for the various analyse These instructions were reviewed by the inspector:
P0-3.2.005, Chloride by Mercuric Nitrate Titration PD-3~2~008, Fluoride By Specific Ion Electrode PD*3.2.013, Dissolved Oxygen by Indi.go. Carmine PD-3.2.011, Atomic Absorption General Procedure PD-3.Z. 002, pft
.
.
PD-3.3.001,. 15 Minute and 7 day Degassed Gross Beta-Gama*
PD-3.3~003, Dose Equivalent Iodine by Spectroscopy PD*3.5.001, Sampling of the Reactor Coolant PD-3.5. 018, Steam Generator - Sampling, The acceptance criteria specifi"ed by Procedure No. 81.15* were as follows:
Acceptance Criteria Table I lists the analysis to be performed. at the various power levels on the reactor coolant system and the limits for acceptanc Table II lists the analysis to be performed at the various power levels on the steam generator blow-down and the limits f.ar acceptanc Table I Reactor Coolant Specifications Analysis Dissolved Oxygen Chloride Floruide Procedure Number PD-3.2.013 P0-3.2.005 PD-3.2.008 Acceptance Criteria
< 0.10 ppm
< 0.15 ppm 3: 0.15 ppm
AnaJysis pH Lithium Dose Equivalent I-131 Gross Beta-gamma
Procedure Number PD-3.2.002 PD-3.2.0ll PD-3.3.003 PD-3.3.001 Table II Acceptance Criteria 4.2 to 1.7 to 2.2 ppm
< 1. O uCi/gram N/A Steam Generator Specifications Analysis Dose Equ.ivalent I-131 Gross Beta-gamma Procedure Number P0-3.3.0.03 PD-3.3.001 Acceptance Criteria
< 0.10 uCi/gram N/A The inspector reviewed the test data far the tests performed. on August 3-5, 1980 at low power for the reactor coolant and* the four steam generators* associated with Unit II. The.data indicated that all of the required analyses had been performed and all were within the acceptance criteri No items of noncompliance were identifie (BJ. Radiation Monitoring and Shielding Evaluation The inspector reviewed Startup Procedure Ne~ 81.13, "Radiation Moni-toring and Shielding Evaluation" to determine what the objectives were and what were the acceptance criteri OBJECTIVES The* objecti.ves of the shielding test are:
1.1 To* obtain baseline radiation level data at 0, 30; 70 and 100%
reactor power operation by measuring. radiation levels at desired locations in the plan.2. To detect and identify localized high radiation levels and streaming to protect personnel from overexposure during plant power escala-tion and power operatio.3 Obtain radiation data necessary to correct or reduce localized high radiation 1eve1 s *
"I
.I
'J'::!. '
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Dose rates shall be considered acceptable if the measurements taken are wi.thin the levels designated by the Radiation Zone in which each dose point is locate Radiation Zones The radiation levels acceptable for each zone are as follows:
Zone Occupancy Dose Rate (mR/Hr)
-
Zone l Unlimited
<.25 Zone 2 Normal-continuous
.25-Z. 5 Zone 3 Periodic Z.5-15 Zone 4 Controlled 15-100 Zone 5 Controlled FlOO If any measured' areas exceed the calculated design levels by more than 50%; or if in the judgment of the Sponsor Engineer or the Health Physicist the radiation levels actually measured may be significantly reduced, a recommendation for such reduction methods will be mad Procedure No. 81.13 required that beta-gamma and neutron surveys be made: at specific, designated locations in Reactor Containment, the Auxiliary Building. the Fuel Handling Building and the Outside surface of the above buildings at grad The inspector reviewed survey data of surveys made in the above loca-tions on August 2, 1980 when the reactor was at Tow power and normal operating temperature and pressure. The.data indicated that all survey results were within the acceptance criteri No items of noncompliance were identifie (Cl Effluent Monitoring System Test These tests had not s-tarted at the time of this inspection*.
The inspector was told that the tests would not start until Unit II achieved criticality again, sometime around October l, 198 This requirement will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection. * (.80-15-01 l Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representat.i ves (denoted in paragraph lJ at the conclusion of the inspectio The inspector summarized the purpose; the so:>pe, and the findings as stated f n this report.