IR 05000317/1987008
| ML20215K474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 04/30/1987 |
| From: | Davidson B, Pasciak W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215K447 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-317-87-08, 50-317-87-8, 50-318-87-09, 50-318-87-9, NUDOCS 8705110213 | |
| Download: ML20215K474 (5) | |
Text
.
_
_
_.
.
.
t U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report Nos.
50-317/87-08 50-318/87-09 Docket Nos.
50-317 50-318
.
License Nos.
DPR-53 Priority
-
Category C
DPR-69 Licensee: Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Lusby, Maryland Facility Name: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Inspection At:
Lusby, Maryland Inspection Conducted: March 30 - April 3, 1987
,
'
Inspectors:
f NY B4rry S(;T, vidson Rad tion S alist date Approved by:
j
'l 63 6Wh 30 [(7 Walter J. Pasc'i k, Chief
.
dats jf I
Effluents Rac tion Protection Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on March 30-April 3, 1987 (Combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-317/87-08 and 50-318/87-09)
Routine, unannounced inspection of the liquid and gaseous radioactive effluents control program.
~ Areas Inspected: Areas reviewed included radioactive effluent releases, records and reports of radioactive effluents, testing of air cleaning systems, effluent monitor calibrations, procedures, and audits.
Results: Of the areas inspected, one violation of NRC requirements was I
identified in one area; it met the mitigative tests described in 10 CFR 2, Appendix C, Section V.A., for licensee identified violations.
!
i i
,
8705110213 870501 PDR ADOCK 05000317 G
PDR i
--
.
._
.
.
Details 1.
Individualr Contacted Licensee employees
- M. G. Polak, Senior Engineer - Primary Systems
- C. W. Main, Engineer - Primary Systems
- P. T. Crinigan, General Supervisor, Chemistry
- J. S. Lagiewski, Quality Assurance Auditor
- R. E. Bodin, Supervisor, Quality Control
,
- S. R. Cowne, Senior Engineer, Licensing
- J. R. Lemons, Plant Manager S. Hutson, Plant Chemistry Supervisor W. Cartwright, Chemistry Engineer E. Roach, Lead Quality Assurance Auditor J. Szynkowik, Principal Chemistry Technican
- Denotes those individuals present at the exit interview on April 3, 1987 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Severity IV (50-317/86-05-01; 50-318/86-05-01):
Failure to take two carbon samples. The inspector reviewed air cleaning system records
,
'
including the analyses of carbon absorbant samples and noted that the required number of samples were evaluated.
(Closed) Severity V (50-317/86-05-03; 50-318/86-05-03):
Failure to have procedures for the stand-up whole body counter. This item was withdrawn in a letter to the licensee dated June 13, 1986. The inspector also reviewed RCP-3-304, Chest and Abdomen Measurements for Internal
,
Contamination, Rev. 2, and determined that it provided appropriate guidance for the bioassay unit.
3.
Chemistry The licensees radiochemistry program was reviewed through discussions with chemistry personnel, review of applicable procedures and radioactive effluent release data and permits.
Procedures were established and implemented for liquid and gaseous wastes and reactor coolant as required by the Technical Specifications with the following exception:
On March 1, 1987, following a Unit 2 reactor trip, a primary sample, taken to comply with Technical Specification 3.4.8, Table 4.4-4
,
[
resulted in the I-131 Iodine Dose Equivalent (IDE) value at time 0200 in excess of the one microcurie per gram limit for modes 3 and 4.
A-four hour sampling regimen is required until the value was within specification.
Further samples were made at 0430 and 0730 as l
!
!
t l
-
_ _ _ _ __.
___
_
_
.
.
.
.
required and the IDE value remained high. Contrary to the four hour sampling requirement, the next sample was not conducted until 1555 at which time the value for IDE was within specifications.
The root cause was inadequate shift turnover.
- The missed samples were reported to the Plant Operations Safety Review Committee (PORSC) in a memo dated March 13, 1987 from the Supervisor - Plant Chemistry.
The inspector reviewed this information and determined that it met the criteria in 10 CFR 2 Appendix C.V. A for mitigating issuance of a notice of violation since 1.
It was identified by the license; 2.
It fits Severity Level IV a V; 3.
It was reported; if required; 4.
It was corrected and measures to prevent recurrence were initiated in a timely manner; and 5.
It was not a violation that could reasonably be expected to have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action for a previous violation.
The inspector discussed the reportability requirements with the senior resident inspector and the licensing project manager, NRR, for applicability to 10 CFR 50.73.
The inspector reviewed procedures for conducting releases of radioactive effluents and liquid and gaseous wasti elease permits.
Procedures were well stated and provided detail to pr te proper performance.
The inspector reviewed release information and performed a spot check on the calculated doses as a verification, using the equations and site specific factors in the offsite dose calculation manual.
There were no concerns in this area.
With regard to vendor supplied analyses of Sr-89 and Sr-90, the inspector noted that the licensee exhibits positive controls of vendor activities through a spiked and split sample QC program and possession of the vendor's procedure. The inspector reviewed the QC data and stated that splitting samples which were in LLD range had little useful information and that the licensee might consider spikes of the actual composites.
The licensee is presently spiking-de-ionized water as a QC check.
By spiking an actual sample the evaluation would be more rigorous and more closely indicate performance capability using a mat. ix containing other isotopes and chemicals that would make radioanalytical measurements and chemical separations more difficult.
The licensee was receptive to this recommendation.
[
,
__.
. -. - -. -
.-.
__.
_
. -
-
_______
_ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
___
.
.
,.
4.
Audits The inspector reviewed audits germane to the radioactive effluents control program and found them comprehensive and technically complete.
Minor recommendations and findings which were found by QA audit personnel were resolved-in a timely manner. During the course of this inspection an audit was in progress in the chemistry area (87-06) to be completed in May 1987.
The inspector reviewed the audits performed on the vendor performing strontium analyses for the chemistry department. This vendor also performs analyses for difficult to measure radionuclides used in waste characterization criteria in 10 CFR 61. With respect to the vendor QA audits, the inspector noted that these tended to be geared towards the criteria in 10 CFR 50, Appendix B and did not evidence the level of technical scrutiny found in the inhouse chemistry audits. The inspector discussed the importance of technical familiarity in the area and the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 1.146 and ANSI N 45.2.23-1978 regarding technical training of auditors or the use of technical specialists to assist in audits.
There were no further questions in this area. No violations were found.
5.
Radiation Monitoring System The inspector reviewed the gaseous and liquid radioactive effluent radiation monitoring system with respect to Technical Specification requirements for calibration and functional / channel checks. The inspector reviewed selected procedures and accompanying records for calibration and surveillance activities and found them satisfactory. The inspector also reviewed operations records for source checks and found that they met the frequency requirements.
The inspector noted that the licensee notified NRC On March 2, 1987 of the fact that the Plant Vent Wide Range Gas Monitor (WRGM) was declared inoperable on February 1,1987. Also the paper drive of the plant vent particulate channel (1-R1-5414), out of service since August 1985, was recently returned to service. The WRGM original calibration data was deemed insufficient and restoration was timely.
The inspector noted that alternative sampling techniques were being used.
No violations were found.
6.
Testing of Air Cleaning Systems The inspector reviewed the licensee's air filtration system testing with regard to the Technical Specifications requirements. The inspector noted that scheduling of surveillances ensured that frequency requirements were met. Test results were reviewed for both common and separate systems for
_
.
.
..
Units One and Two' and it was noted that the required number of charcoal samples were taken and forwarded to a contractor for analysis. The licensee has sub-mitted a Technical Specifications change to NRR to clarify the number of charcoal samples to be made. In addition a' change in test conditions will be ' instituted to-reflect appropriate conditions (30* C, 95% RH). The inspector noted that the licensee tested samples in the proposed conditions and degraded performance was noted. The licensee is preparing to change out the old charcoal adsorber beds.
There were no concerns in this area. No violations or deviations were found.
7.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives, denoted in Section 1.0, at the conclusion of the inspection on April 3, 1987.
The inspector summarized.the purpose and scope of the inspection and inspection findings.
,
!
I i
i i
l l
l l