IR 05000333/1978028
| ML19224C597 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 01/04/1979 |
| From: | Crocker H, Nimitz R, Plumlee K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19224C592 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-333-78-28, NUDOCS 7907030068 | |
| Download: ML19224C597 (16) | |
Text
.
U.S. flVCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
-
Region I Report No.
50-333/78-28 Docket No.
50-333 License No.
DPR-59 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Power Authority of i.he State of New York 10 Columbus Circle New York, New York 10019 Facility Name:
James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant Inspection at:
Scriba, New York Inspection conducted:
Dec m er 4-7, 19/8
/[
7[
Inspectors:
/
h
' K6rl E.
lumlee, Radiation Specialist date sfgned d c' -
e6 /
/khV kon'ald L. Nimitz, fMdiation Specialist (Intern)
/ d'aYe sirfned
__
.c
-
date signed Approved by
/
/c i}.
//u.jl77 Hiltiert 'W. Cro'cker, Act1Ti'g Chief, Radiation f /@ rte' signed Suppo: t Section, FF&MS Branch Irspection Summary:
Inspection on December 4-7,1978 (Report No. 50-333/78-28)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of the radioactive waste system operatior.s and of the radiation protection program including:
adherence to regulatory.fmits and design objectives for releases; monitoring and analyses of effluents; records and 'eports of radioactive effluents; effluent instrument trip settings, calibrations and tests; procedures; tests of containment air cleaning systems; tests and control of reactor coolant water quality; solid radioactive waste; bulletins; and, licensee event reviews and cor-rective actions.
The initial inspection and area examination was conducted during non-regular hours (10:00 p.m., December 4 to 2:30 a.m., December 5,1978).
This inspection involved 54 inspector-hours onsite by two NPC regional based inspectors.
272 343 Region I Form 12 7907 030068 (Rev. April 77)
Inspection Summary
Results: Of the ten areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in eight areas.
Seven items of noncompliance were identified in two areas (Infraction -
failure to adhere to procedures, Paragraph 5; Infraction - failure to maintain adequate respiratory protection procedures, Paragraph 6; Infraction - exceeded quarterly limit on gaseous release, Paragraph 8; two Deficiencies - posting 10 CFR 19.11 information, Paragraph 4; Deficiency - failure to control a procedure change, Paragraph 5.c; and Deficiency - labein.; of containers of radioactive materials, Paragraph 7.)
272 344
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted E. AbLott, Operations Superinten#nt P. Abbott, Station Shift Supervisor
- R. Burns, Superintendent of Radiological and Environnental Services (RES)
- V. Childs, Assistant to the Resident Mar Mer M. Cosgrove, Site Quality Assurance Engineer J. Flaherty, Instruments and Controls Foreman H. Keith, \\ssistant Instruments and Controls Supervisor
- J. Leonard, Resident Manager
- A. McKeen, Assistant to the Superintendent of RES
- E. Mulcahey, Radiation Protection and Radiochemistry Supervisor W. Sanborn, Station Shift Supervisor Several additional individuals were interviewed to determine whether they had their dosimeters, or what instructions or training they had recetted.
denotes presence at the exit interview, 3:15 p.m., December 7, 1978
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Noncompliance (333/78-21-01): A failure to adhere to an RWP condition and a failure to wear dosimeters in the restricted areas.
Revied of the licensee's corrective actions, ar.c observation of work practices throughout the faciliy did not identify any remaining prob-lems involving RPP adherence or wearing of dosimeters on this inspection.
(Closed) ?!oncompliance (333/78-21-02):
Control of access to high radiation areas.
Review of the licensee's corrective actions, and tours of the facility to check doors, gates, barricades and posting did not identify any remaining items of noncompliance on this in-sppction.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (333/78-21-03):
Licensee's control of temporary changes to procedures.
Review of this item identified a recent item of noncompliance (Paragraph 5).
(0 pen) Noncompliance (333/78-16-01):
Provision of continuously indi-cating dose rate devices to individuals permitted to enter high rJdia-tion areas.
Review of the corrective actions indicated that an earphone will be supplied to provide each of these individuals a continuous audible indication of the instrument count rate, and a proposed change to the Technical Specifications will be subtitt# that, when authorized, would re-define the dose rate device requirement.
The licensee expects to complate these actions during December,1978.
272 34f
(0 pen) Moncompliance (333/78-19-01; 333/78-12-02; and 333/78-05-06):
Securing of high radiation ared doors and gates.
The licent~s cor-rective action includes door closer installation and adjustw..cs which appear incomplete.
Door No. T-252-5 on the 252 foot ievel of the Turbine Building was found not to be closed tight enough to latch shut at 1:00 a.m., December 5,1978.
This door leads to the condenser bay wherein, with the reactor shutdown, the measured radiation dose rate was up to 350 mrem /hr.
3.
Circulars IE Circular 78-03 Packing greater than Type A quantities of Les Speci-fic Activity radioactive material for transport.
The licensee repre-sentative stated that a timely submission is planned pursuant to 10 CFR 71.51, by January 1,1979, of the description of the quality as-surance program for transport packages.
The licensee's implementation of the program will be reviewed on a sub-sequent routine inspection (333/78-28-01).
Examination of shipping records for the period December,197/ to December,1978, did not identify any failure to register as the user of a ccntainer, f ailure to retain copies of certificates of compliance, or items of noncompliance with the terms and conditions of any certi-ficata. Tne inspector had no further questions on this item.
Review nf Licensee's Posted Information to Wouars 10 CFR 19.11, " Posting of notices to workers," states in paragraph (a),
"Each licensee shall post current copies of the fo' lowing documents:
(1) the regulations in this part and in Part 20 of this chapter; (2)
the license, license conditions... ; and amendments thereto; (3)
the operating procedures... ; and, (4) any notice of violation in-volving radiological working conditions issud pursuant to Subpart B of Part 2 of this chapter, and any response from the licensee."
19.11 paragraph (b) states, "If posting of a document specified in (a)(1),
(2) or (3) of this sectic' is not practicable, the licensee may post a notice which describes the document and states where it may be examined."
19.ll(e) states, " Commission documents posted pursuant to paragraph (a)(4) of this section ~ hall be posted within 2 working days after receipt... ; the licensee response, if any, shall be posted within 2 working days after dispatch by the licensee.
Such documents shall remain posted for a minimum of 5 L king days..."
10 CFR 19.ll(d) states that documents, notices, or forms posted pursuant to this section shall appear in a sufficient number of places to permit individuals engaged in licensed activities to observe them on the way to or from any particular licensed activity location to which the document applies.
272 346
Part of the inspection effort was to review the licensee's compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR 19.11.
The inspector reviewed the official posted information, which is on two official controlled bulletin boards, one on the 272 foot elevation and the other on the 286 foot elevation of the Administration BuilJing.
Each bulletin board is on an access route to the controlleJ areas of the plant and to the reactor control room.
On December 6, 1978, the inspector observed and the licensee ~s representative acknowledged that no copy was posted of the l'censee's response dated December 1,1978, to a notice of violation invol fing radiological working conditions issued pursuant to 10 CFR 2.B in connection with Inspectior. No. 50-333/78-19.
Additional omissions were identified on the controlled bulletin board on the 286 foot ele.<ation, where there was no posted information pursuant to 10 CFR 19.ll(a) or (b).
The inspector identified the licensee's omission to post the above response within 2 working days after dispatch, and the omission to post required information on the 286 foot elevation bulletin board, as examples of noncompliance with the above requirements (333/78-28-02).
The licensee's representative promptly corrected the posted information and established a checklist to prevent any recurrence.
The inspector had no further questions on this matter.
5.
Procedures Technical Specification Section 6.11, " Radiation Protection Program" requires that procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared and adhered to for all plant operations, and that the procedures shall inclJde planning, preparation cnd training for operation and maintenance activities.
a.
Respirator Necative Pressure Testing
.
The " Radiation Protection Operating Procedures" in Section IIIB.3.5.3 "Use of Respirators - Facepiece Fit',ing and Testing" requires that each time a respirator is donned it should be checked for a proper fit, by sealing the inlet opening and inhaling to slightly collapse the facepwce.
272 3407
.
.ne inspectors observed, at 11:20 p.m. on December 4, 1978, that two workers who were required to wear half-mask respirators to perform work under RWP No. 9765 failed to perform the negative pressure test or any test of the respirator fit.
One individual stated that he had not been trained in negative pressure testing of the half-mask respirator fit and neither appeared to know how to perform the test.
The ir,spector identified the lack of training as noncompliance with the above requirement (333/78-28-03).
The regula+.ory requirements applicable to half-mask respirators are described in paragraph 6.
b.
Posting of Restricted Areas The " Radiation Protection Operating Procedures" in Section IIA. l.3 " Restricted Area" states:
" Restricted Area means any area to which access is controlled for the purpose of protection of individuals from exposure to radiation and radioactive materials.
Access points to restricted areas are posted with a sign bearing the radiation caution symbol and the words:
RESTRICTED AREA AUTHORIZED PERSvNNEL ONLY CAUTION RADI0 ACTIVE MATEPIALS From time to time, it may be necessary to establish a Restricted Area outside of a building for temporary storage of radioactive material (new fuel shipments, radioactive waste trucks, etc.)
The temporary area shall be properly posted."
The inspector observed on December 6,1978, that two temporary storage areas outside of buildings were not posted with the sign described above, and contained radioactive materials and posted radiation areas, up to 5 mrem /hr at the boundaries.
One area was near the railroad track into the reactor building, and the other was near the radwaste building truck bay.
The inspector identified this as noncrmpliance with the above requirement (333/78-28-03).
272 348
<
_
c.
Revised Procedures TS
.S(A) requires written procedures and administrative policies to be estab ished, implemented and maintained that meet or exceed the requirements and recommendations of Section 5, " Facility Administrative Policies and Procedures" of ANSI N18.7-1972 and Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, November, 1972.
ANSI Ni8.7-1972 in Section 5.1, " Rules of Practice", 5.1.2
" Procedure Adherence" and 5.5 " Temporary Procedures" require the establishment of written administrative policies to con-trol the issuance, review and approval of documents and change! or revisions to documents; adherence to written pro-ceduces and establishment of methods by which temporary changer to approved procedures can be made including the designation of a person or persons authorized to approve such changes; and require the review and approval of temporary procedures and temporary revisions to procedures by the manage-ment representative assigned apprcval authority.
Procedure No. 1.4 " Control of Plant Procedures" developed pursuant to the above requirements requires that plant procedures shall be controlled, distributed and maintained in accordance with the provisions of this procedure.
Section 7.3 " Revisions" and 7.4 "Temaorary Changes" require doce aentation of all revisions and changes to plar.t procedures using a Procedure Initiation / Revision Request Form.
Section 7.6 requires that a current effective copy of the Radiation Protection Operating Procedures shall be maintained in the Control Room.
On Inspection No. 333/78-21, paragraph 4, the inspector noted that the Radiation Protection Operating Procedures, Revision 0, June 12, 1978, which had PORC and also the Resident Manager's approval were being changed to update Section IIA.l.3.3 "High Radiation Area" following a change in Technical Specification 3ection 6.ll(A)2.
Cn this inspection, the inspector noted that the change was approved on November 17, 1978, as incorporated in Revision 1 of the above procedures.
The licensee representatives stated that no temporary change to this procedure was documented during the period July 1, 1973 to November 17, 1978, affecting Section IIA.1.3.3.
272 3419
Nevertheless, a memorandum issued to the RES technicians on October 16, 1978, cuntained the following instructions:
In areas where the dose rate is > 100 but < 1000 mrem /hr
~
a barricade must be placed.
The barricade must be a.
warning type such that inadvertent entries can not be made. Walls and locked doors are not required for these a rea s.
Instead, the use of stanchions and ropes will suffice but the rope must extend around the entire area even across step off pads.
It should be noted that we will maintain existing high radiation area gates in the closed and locked position to the extent possible.
In areas where dose rates are > 1000 mrem /hr either the area must be guarded or a wall and a locked door be provided to prevent unauthorized entries.
Review of the memora, m showed that it was signed by the Superintendent of RES and contradicted the approved Radiation Protection Operating Procedure, Revision 0, in Section IIA..l.3.3 "High Radiation Area" which requires locked gate control of access to areas where the radiation dose rate is greater than 100 mrem /hr.
The Superint -ient of RES stated that he intended the Technicians to adhere to.ne instructions in the memo and a pending the revision to tne Radiation Protection Operet ~
Procedures.
Technicians and intennediate personnel between the Technicians and the Superintendent level stated that they had in fact done as the Superintendent of RES directed them in this matter.
The inspector noted that although thc memorandum was clearly an instruction, it did not state that it superceded or changed the existing Radiation Protection Operating Procedures; did not appear to have been documented, reviewed and approved by PORC, or approved by the Resident Manager; and copies had not been dir:ributed to the holders of controlled copies of
.
'
Radiation Protection Operating Procedures or added to tne copy kept in the Control Room.
272 350
The inspector identifieo the issuance of the memorandum dated October 16, 1978 as noncompliance with requirements of TS 6.8(A) cnd ANSI N18.7-1972, Sections 5.1 and 5.5, and Procedure No. 1.4 (353/78-28-04).
6.
Respiratory P,rotection Program 10 CFR 20.103(c) " Exposure of individuals to concentrations of radioactiva materials in air in restricted areas" requires in part that:
When respiratory protective equipment is used to limit the inhalation of airborne radioactive material pursuant to paragraph (b)(2) of this section, the licensee may make allowance for such use ia astimating exposures of individuels to such materials provided that such equipment is used as stipulahd in Regulatory Guide 8.15,
" Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protection."
Section C.4
"Regubitory Position" of Regulatory Guide 8.15 requires the licensee to mair.tain and implement a respiratory protection program that in-cludes, as a minimum, the following items:
(partial list) c.
written procedures to ensure the adequate individual fitting of respirators, as well as such procedures to ensure the testing of respiratory protective equipment for operability imediately prior to each use.
Section C.7 of Reguldtory Guide 8.15 states, "Unless otherwise authorized by the Commission the licensee is not to assign pro-tection factors in excess of those specified in Table I.
Footnote d(2) to Table I states that the protection factors apply only for trained individuals wearing properly fitted respirators, and footnote f. to Table I states that the half-mask respirator is to be tested for fit with irritant smoke, prior to use, each time it is donned.
The previous review of the respiratory protection program (on In-spection No. 333/78-21, paragraph 10, September 25-28, 1978) in-dicated that the use of half-mask respirators would be continued but the licensee would not take credit for any respiratory protection factor for half-mask respirators.
Nevectheless, the licensee implemented Revision 1 of '.he Radiation Protection Operating Procedures on November 17, 1978, which states in Section IIIB " Respiratory Protection Program," Subsection 2.2
" Protection Factors for Respirators"; "the Table gives the various protection factors for respirato y protection factors used at 272 35@
.
JAFNPP." The referenced Table (iIIB.2.2-1) shows a protection factor of 10 for half-face masks.
A following Table (IIIB.3.2-1)
provides guidance for the issuance of respirators to users that is more conservative than Table IIIB 2.2-1 but does not state that credit is not to be taten for the protection factors stated in Table IIIB2.2-1. No issuance of respirators contrary to Table III B.3.2-1 guidance was identified.
The inspector noted that the "Padiation Protection Operating Pro-cedures" in Section III 3.5.3 "Use of Respirators - Facepiece Fit-ting and Testing" does not require the half-mask respirator to be tested for fit with irritant smoke, prior to use, each time it is donned, and that the users made no such test (Paragraph 5.a).
The inspector identified the above as noncompliance with require-ments of 10 CFR 20.103(c) and Sections C.4 and C.7 of Regulatory Guide 8.15 (333/78-28-05).
7.
Labelling of Containers o Radioactive Materials 10 CFR 20.203(f) requires, in part, that each container of radio-active material shall bear a durable, clearly visible label identi-fying the radioactive contents and the label shall bear the radiation caution symbol and the words " Caution, Radioactive Material" or
" Danger, Radioactive Material".
Part of the inspection effort was to review the licensee's compliance with the above requirement during tours of the facility.
The inspector identified the followicg containers of radioactive materials which were unattended, accessible to personnel, and contrary to the above requirements, did not bear the prescribed label. The licensee corrected these items promptly after they were identi fied.
272 35.
Measured Surface Mrem /hr Item (Contact)
location Day and Time 4 ft.X 8 ft. boxes *
up to 25 272 ft. elevation, 12/4/7811:10 p.m.
Reacto. Building 4 ft.X 8 ft. boxes *
up to 16 27? ft. elevation, 12/5/78 00:30 a.m.
Turbine Building 4 ft.X 10 ft. box **
up to 5 On ground, outdoors 12/5/7810:20 a.m.
8 55 gallon drums ***
up to 4 272 ft. elevation, 12/6/78 3:30 p.m.
Turbine Building
- Boxes of radioactive waste from the cleanup of the controlled area fol-lowing a refueling outage.
Shipping container for GE equipment, located near railroad track into Reactor Building.
Drums containing protective clotliing.
The inspector identified these as examples of noncompliance with the above requirement (333/78-28-06).
8.
Liquid and Gaseous Radioactive Effluent Releases a.
Gaseous Releases Environmental Technical Specification (ETS) 2.3.B.2 requires that-the airborne release rate of halogens and particulates with half-lives greater than eight days shall not exceed a rate Q in curies /sec of I-131 equivalent such that:
Qs Fitz + Qs NMP-1 + Qv Fitz
<1 2.6*10-6 2.3*10-6 8.9*10 -8 -
Where:
QsFitz =_ stack gas release rate Ci/sec FitzPatrick 272 353
.
.
..
Qs NMP-1 = stack gas release rate Ci/sec Nine Mile Point 1 Qv Fitz = vent gas release rate Ci/sec FitzPatrick ETS 2.3.B.3 requires that the release rate of gaseous activity shall not exceed 8 percent of the above 2.3.B.2 averaged over any calendar quarter, ETS 2.3.B.4 requires appropriate cor-rective action if the ETS 2.3.B.3 limit is exceeded and ETS 2.3.B.5 requires a written report to NRC within 30 days of exceeding 4 percent of the above 2.3.B.2, identifying the causes of activity and describing the proposed prcgram of action to reduce such release rates to the objectives.
Part of the inspection effort was to review the licensee release records and reports of gaseous effluent releases and to review compliance with the regula a ry requirements during the period including the fourth calenfar quarter of 1977 through November,1978.
The inspector noted that the release rai.e of gaseous activity aver:ged over the second calendar quarter of 1978 was greater than 5% of the above ETS 2.3.B.2 limit and, pursuant to the
-
requirements of ETS 2.3.B.5, the licensee had submitted a timely report identifying the causes of the activity and describing the proposed program of action to reduce such release rates to the objectives (LER 78-51).
Nevertheless, the release rate averaged over the third calendar quarter was nearly twice as great as during the second calendar quarter. The licensee had reported releasing in excess of 10%
of the ETS 2.3.B.2 limit during the third calendar quarter of 1978 (LER 78 85).
-
The inspector noted that the third calendar quarter release in excess of the ETS 2.3.B.3 limit was a reported item of noncom-pliance (333/78-28-06).
The review of LER 78-85 showed that the release rate w:s 2.75.
greater than the rate defined in ETS 2.3.B.3 and 6.75% greater than the rate defined in ETS 2.3.B.5.
The inspector observed that the corrective actions to correct the release rate appeared to be essentially comp'eted by the date of this it.spection.
2 7 2 3 5 3-
The inspector reviewed the licent-e records and reports in-cluding the serriannual gaseous effluent release reports for the period July i - December 31, 1977 and January 1 - June 30, 1978.
The inspector performed checks of sample data and records.
The inspector has no further questions on this item.
9, Liquid Radioactive Effluent Releases The inspector reviewed the licensee's records of waste sample analyses, waste liquid discharge permits, and release records for the period January 1,1978 through December 1,1978, to review compliance with the regulatory limits and with tha licensee's procedure PSP-4, " Waste Liquid Sampling and Analysis."
The inspector performed checks of sample data and records.
No errors were identified. No items of noncomplir.nce were identified.
10.
Solid and Solidified Waste The inspector reviewed the licentee's records of solid and solidified waste shipments, sample analyses, and also the semiannual summaries for the period January 1, 1978 through June 30, 1978. The inspector observed waste management during the inspection.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
11.
Review 3f Effluent Control Instrumentation Tests, Calibrations and Setnoints The tas W tor reviewed the records of surveillance tests, cali-brations ans' setpoints of the refuel area, reactor building, turbine buil 'ing and 'Naste building ventilation monitors, the main control room ventilation monitor, off-gas, liquid radwaste discharge, and mechanical vacuum pump isolation monitors during the period Ju ut"y 1 to November 30, 1978, to review complitnce with the alarm Lnd trip points required by TS 3.2-4.
The inspector reviewed the following calibration procedures to re-view the content and compliance with the Technical Specification requirements for frequency and calibration and for detection limits and setpoints.
272 356
.
le Procedure Number Channel Number
- Refuel Area Exhaust F-ISP-17 17RIS-456A/B Monitor Calibration
- Reactor Building Ex-F-ISP-18 17RIS-452A/B haust Monitor Cali-bra tion
- Turbine Building Ex-F-ISP-25 17RIS-431/2 haLst Monitor Cali-bration
- Rad Waste ~oilding F -ISP-26 17RIS-458A/B Exhaust Monitor Cali-bration
- Mechanical Vacuum F-ISP-64-1
-
Pump Isolation
- Reactor Building Ex-F-ISP-18 17RIS-452A/B haust Monitor Cali-bration
- Turbine Building Ex-F-ISP-25 17RIS-431/2 haust Monitor Cali-bration
- Rad Waste Building F-ISP-26 17RIS-458A/B Exhaust Monitor Cali-bration
- Mechanical Vacuum F-ISP-64-1
-
Pump Isolation
- Control Room Vent FRTP-28
-
Monitor Calibration 272 356
.
Procedure Date Completed
- " Liquid Radwaste Effluent Monitor 9/5/78 Simulated Automatic Actuation Test, #12J Data Sheet F-ST-12J
" Liquid Radwaste Effluent Monitor Automatic 7/22/78
-
Isolation Logic System Functional Test"
- 12I Data Sheet F-ST-12I No omission. errors or items of noncompliance were identified.
12.
Testi g of Containment Air Systems n
The inspector reviewed records c
'ests during 1978 o'.
the Standby Gas Treatment System to review con,siiance with the following require-ments:
- Technical Specification 3.7C/4.7B, Standby Gas Treatment System, Limiting Conditions for Operation / Surveillance Requirements.
- Technical Specification 3.7.C/4.7C, Secondary Containment, Limiting Conditions for Operation / Surveillance Requirements.
- ANSI N510-1975, " Testing of Nuclear Air Cleaning Systems."
- ANSI N45.2.6-1973, " Qualifications of Inspection, Examination and Testing Personnel for the Construction Phase of Nuclear Power Plants."
- 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, " Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants."
- Procedure #7A, " Standby Gas Treatment Manual Bypass Valve Operation, Heater DT, Fitter DP and Simulated Automatic Actuation Test."
The review did not identify any omissions of required periodic tests or any failures to comply with test criteria required by the Technical Specif-ications.
272 3567
The review of contractor test procedures did not identify any in-dication that the licenzee QA organization had reviewed the con-tractor-supplied services involved in filter and charcoal system tests. This item will be followed up on a subsequent routine in-spection in order to review compliance with requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B,.ection VII, "Cor trol of Purchased Material, Equip-ment and Services."
(333/78-28-07)
The inspector has no further questions on this item at this time.
13.
Reactor Coolant Water Quality The inspector reviewed records of reactor coolant system chemistry to review compliance with the requirements of Technical Specification 3.6.C Coolant Chemistry (Limiting Conditions for Operations) and Technical Specification 4.6.C Coolant Chemistry (Surveillance Re-quirements) for the period January 1, 1978 thru Jecember 6, 1978.
Technical Specification 3.6.C.3 states, "For reactor startup the maximum value for conductivity shall not exceed 10 umho/cm and the maximum chloride ion concentration shall not exceed 0.1 ppm, for the first 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> after placing the reactor in the power operating condition."
The licensee had identified an anomalous high (0.18 ppm) chloride analysis on December 5,1978, review of the licensee's planned Occurrence Report #78-141 did not identify any remainina problem.
The licensee subsequently reported this as LER 78-96.
Review of this submission did not identify any problems.
No items of noncompliance wer<_ identified.
14.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee's representatives (denoted in pa:agraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection, 3:15 p.m.,
December 7, 1978.
The i,.3pector reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection.
272 35%