IR 05000364/1981009
| ML20008G021 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 04/03/1981 |
| From: | Collins T, Hosey C, Troup G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20008G020 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-364-81-09, NUDOCS 8105120567 | |
| Download: ML20008G021 (4) | |
Text
O.
,
v pa as:g
N UNITED STATES N
$
- 't, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
$
E REGION 11
e 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100
'
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
.....
Report No. 50-364/81-09 Licensee: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street Birmingham, AL 35202 Facility Name:
Farley Unit 2 Docket No. 50-364 License No. NPF-8 Inspection at Farley Nucigar Plagt aear Ashford, Alabama Inspectors:
M r/fr/
G. L. Troup '
/
D' ate Signed ju Y3f81
.R Collin't '
~f Date Signed Approved by:
/[Ml O
/
Technical In$ct'ing Sec. ion Chief
'D/te / Signed C TM. Hosef,
'
snection Br nch Engineering and Techni al Inspection Division
' SUMMARY Inspected on March 17-19, 1981 l
Areas Inspected
l This routine, unannounced inspection involved 44 inspector-hours cnsite in the l
areas of radiation protection and radioactive waste inanagement including preop-erational testing; effit:ent control procedures; waste system rodifications and previously identified items.
Results
-
Of the areas inspected, no violations of NRC requirements or deviations were identified.
-
l
!
l 8.10512 05/a7
.
.
"
-
.
.
.
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- W. G. Hairston,. III, Plant Manager J. D. Woodard, Assistant Plant Manager
- D. E. Mansfield, Startup Superintendent K. S. Burr, Startup Supervisor
- M. W. Mitchell, Health Physics Sector Supervisor J. M. Walden, Waste and Effluent Sector Supervisor H. M. McClellan, Plant Engineer B. P. Patton, ALARA Health Physicist W. G. Grippentog, C&HP Foreman P. E. Farnsworth, C&HP Foreman Other Organizations
- J. N. Charlton, Lead Startup Engineer - Westinghouse L. J. Lindquist, Startup Engineer - Westinghouse R. D. Franklin, Startup Engineer - Westinghouse NRC Resident Inspector
- W. H. Bradford
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview Tne inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 19, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The status of preoperational tasting and the resolution of test deficiencies were also discussed.
'
'3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
-
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Preoperational Test Procedures i
a.
Section 14.1 of the FSAR describos the preoperational testing program, including development of the test program per Regulatory Guide 1.68, I
and review and approval requirements. FSAR Section 14.1.3 lists the l
-
-..,-
,.,
,
-
._.
-. -
-.....
--
-
.
.
.
preoperational tests and synopses of the objectives, prerequisites, test methods and acceptance criteria.
b.
The inspector reviewed nine completed preoperational test procedures.
The review included verification of proper review and approval of changes, review and approval of completed tests, identificat' ion and correction of deficiencies, or the appropriate approvals to accept deficiencies. Test procedures reviewed were:
(1) 069-5-023, " Waste Evaporator Preop"
-
(2) 068-3-002, " Calibration and Functional Test for Liquid Waste Control Valves" (3) 072-5-004, " Gaseous Radwaste Preop" (4) 079-3-002, " Westinghouse Radiation Monitoring System C&FT" (5) 079-3-003, "Victoreen Radiation Monitoring System C&FT" (6) 065-3-003, "HEPA and Charcoal Filter Testing" (7) 030-5-002, " Control Room Ventilation Preop" (8) 065-5-002, " Penetration Room Ventilation Preop" (9) 032-5-005, " Area Heating and Ventilating (Rad) Preop" c.
Procedure 065-3-003 was approved with an outstanding deficiency.
Although the removal efficiency of the containment purge charcoal adsorbers met the acceptance criteria, the calculated residence time was less than the design criteria. An engineering evaluation attributed this to a higher flow rate than the design value. A licensee manage-ment representative informed the inspector that the system would be tested again with the containment isolated to reduce the flow rate.
If the residence time is still unsatisfactory, steps will be taken to mechanically reduce the flow rate. Reduction of the flow rate should not affect previously measured efficiencies for the charcoal adsorbers.
d.
Procedure J32-5-005 had been approved by the Joint Test Group but had not been approved by the plant manager at the time it was reviewed.
One outs +1nding test deficiency remained to be resolved concerning the vibra'.an analysis of several fans.
A licensee management repre-sentative informed the inspector that the data had been submitted for an engineering evaluation.
6.
Shielding of Resin Sluice Line (80-18-04) (Closed)
.
This item was originally discussed in RII Report No. 50-364/80-18,- paragraph 7 and dealt with installation of shielding on the spent resin sluice line between Unit I and Unit 2 to reduce personnel exposures. During a tour of the facility the inspectors observed that lead brick shielding and a support structure had been installed for the line.
The inspectors had no further questions and informed licensee ma tagement that item 80-18-04 was closed.
.
.
.
.
.
.-.
-
.
.
..
. -
.
.-
-. - _
.
-_
_
_
.
-
-
..
.
.
,
,
,
'3
.
7.
Effluent Control Procedures (80-44-01) (Closed)-
This item was discussed in RII Report No. 50-364/80-44, paragraph 5 and dealt with the issuance of the effluent control procedures. Becat.a of the
"
difference in the Technical Specifications for the two units, separate -
procedures are required.
Procedure FNP-2-RCP-175, " Schedule Effluent
!
Monitoring and Counting Room Activities" was issued for Unit 2 on March 2, l
1981; the corresponding procedure, FNP-1-RCP-175, was issued on March 20, 1981.
An inspector informed licensee management that item 80-44-01 was closed based on the issuance of the two procedures.
8.
Radioactive Waste System Modifications a.
The licensee installed a supplemental filter /demineralizer system to the Unit 2 liquid radwaste system.
Review of the installation and operation was discussed in RII Report No. 50-364/81-02, paragraph'7.c.
!
b.
An inspector reviewed plant records and determined that the modifi-cation had been reviewed by the PORC as required by 10 CFR 50.59 and Technical Specifications 6.15, that it had been determined that the change could be made in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 and that an unreviewed safety question did not exist.
A licensee management
.
representative stated that the modification report would be included in the monthly Operating Report for March as required by Technical Specification 6.15.
The inspector stated that he had no further question:.
.
9.
Testing of Post-TMI Sampling System (80-44-03) (0 pen)
This item was originally discussed in RII Report No. 50-364/80-44, paragrapa
,
6.d. and dealt with preparation and performance of a test for the " post-TMI" sampling system after the primary and secondary sample systems had been tested.
An inspector reviewed test procedure 038-4-002, " Primary and Secondary Sample System Acceptance Test Following TMI and Other Required Modifications," and determined that the procedure included the apprrpriate requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.68 and was reviewed and approved as specified in FSAR Section 14.'1.
The inspector informed licensee management that he had no further questions on the procedure and that item 80-44-03 would remain open pending completion of the test during startup.
.
10.
Facility Tour During the inspection, the inspectors toured various areas in Unit 2 and observed the status of the facility and systems, provisions for radiological controls, operability of area and process radiation monitors, protection of filter / charcoal air cleaning systems and posting of areas. An inspector noted that Form NRC-3 was not posted at the access point for construction workers but was posted at the entrance to the Unit I radiation control area and in the control room. Construction workers entering through the
-
,-.-..-.---._-._-.-..-.._-._.,:-..
-.
-. -.. -
..
.
-
4
.
construction access point do not have access to the restricted area (radiation control area) but can enter the Unit 2 areas. A licensee repre-sentative had Form NRC-3 posted at the construction access point for information. The inspectors had no other questions.
11. Shielding of Fuel Transfer Tube a.
IE Bulletin 78-08, " Radiation Levels From Fuel Element Transfer Tubes" discussed an incident where two workers were overexposed due to high radiation levels around the fuel transfer tube during fuel movement at another plant.
During the Unit I refueling outage in 1979, high radiation levels were measured during the performance of a special radiation survey.
Shielding was subsequently installed around the tube. Special surveys performed during the Unit I refueling outage in 1980 showed that the shielding had been effective in reducing the radiation levels, b.
A licensee representative informed the inspector that the Unit 2 fuel transfer tube was shielded with.the same design as Unit 1.
However, a special radiation survey will be performed for Unit 2 during the first refueling outage to verify the adequacy of the shielding.
The inspector had no further questions at this time.
.
e
~,,,,, - - - -
--
, -,,