IR 05000369/1980034
| ML19340E595 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 12/03/1980 |
| From: | Gibson A, Troup G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19340E594 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-80-34, NUDOCS 8101150017 | |
| Download: ML19340E595 (6) | |
Text
>3 FIGgD
o UNITED STATES O i"
. 2
-
auc'eaa aecu'aToav co==ission g.
r REGION il o,
[
101 MARIETTA sT., N.W., SGlTE 3100
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 303b '
Cg..... g'
'
Report No. 50-369/80-34 Licensee: McGuire Unit 1 Docket No. 50-369 License No. CPPR-83 Inspection at McGuire site near Cornelius, North Carolina Inspector:
_I A m
/
so i
G. L. Tro'up' f/j Dat4 Signed Approved by:
[
cL
-
12 l d Fit A. F. Gibson, S'ection Chief, FF&MS Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on November 3-6, 1980
~
Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 24-inspector-hours on site in the areas of radioactive waste management and radiation protection including radio-active effluent control, ALARA considerations, preoperational test results and followup on previously identified items.
Results Of the areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
l i
.
en
,
l l
0115 06n :
n
_.
_ _ - - -
_.
_
.
- -.
.
a l
i DETAILS l
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees M. D. McIntosh, Station Manager
- D. J. Rains, Superintendent of Mainteaance W. M. Sample, Projects and Licensing Engineer
T. J. Keane, Station Health Physiest R. P. Michael, Station Chemist R. M. Propst, Radwaste Chemistry Coordinator L. R. Kimray, Chemistry Coordinator
- P.
G. Huntley, Health Physics Supervisor G. Singletary, Associate Engineer D. Notes, Junior Engineer
- D.
B. Lampke, Junior Engineer
.
Other licensee employees contacted included five technicians.
Other Organizations
- G. A. Copp, Nuclear Engineer - Corporate Office
- L.
Bare, Engineer - Corporate Office
'
'
NRC Resident Inspector
- T. J. Donat M. J. Graham
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 6, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. Regarding several open items which were discussed, the inspector emphasized that the Technical Specifi-cations have requirements which apply to monitors, flow recorders, etc. and
~
that the items should be resolved before the Technical Specifications become controlling.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
-.
Not inspected.
f
.
'
.
~, -
--p---
,--
,
,
- - -
,_
, ---
,,
-Q
.
a-2-4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Radioactive Effluent Control a.
(0 pen) Flow Recorder on Effluent Line (79-12-11)
This item was originally discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50-369/79-12, paragraph 10.e and dealt with the need to install a flow recorder on the liquid effluent line to det-rmine the volume of waste released. A licensee representative informed the inspector that the transmitter and recorder are installed but there is a signal mismatch between the two instruments which limits the accuracy of the recorder; this is still being wor,ked on to obtain a resolution, b.
(Open) Liquid Waste Monitor Too Close to Isolation Valve (79-12-12)
and (0 pen) VCUDT Monitor too close to Isolation Valve (80-27-01)
These two items relate to a condition where the automatic isolation valve on the effluent line is too close to the in-line monitor to close in time to prevent the release of waste which is greater than the release specification. Licensee representatives discussed several proposals with the inspector but no final resolution has been reached.
The inspector emphasized that the Technical Specifications require that the monitors provide automatic termination of releases to ensure that limits are not exceeded and that it is doubtful that this can be achieved with the present configurations.
c.
(Open) Correction of FSAR on Liquid Discharge Points (78-41-01)
This item was originally discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50-369/78-41, paragraph 3 and dealt with FSAR Section 11.2.7, which states that "all liquid waste to be discharged to the environment flows through the radiation monitor following the waste monitor tanks".
Licensee representatives acknowledged that not all liquid waste flows through this particular monitor but does pass through a discharge monitor. A licensee representative stated that the FSAR would be corrected.
6.
ALARA Considerations a.
In RII Report Nos. 50-369/78-14 and 50-369/79-12 several concerns were identified relating to arrangement of demineralizers and associated
-
piping and other identified problems related to reducing occupational exposures.
In response to a meeting held on January 5,1979 between dated March 21, 1979 NRC officials and Duke Power Company, a letter, from Duke Power Company to Region II delineated responses to specific concerns relating to ALARA considerations of the demineralizer ar-rangement and associated piping. Several of the items were previously reviewed and discussed in RII Report Nos. 50-369/80-02, paragraph 3 and 50-369/80-21, paragraph 5.
w
.
o-3-b.
The inspector reviewed the corrective actions stated in the Duke Power Company letter, discussed changes made or being made with the cognizant supervisors and toured the various areas to observe the status of '.;te changes.
The following is a summary of the previously identitted ALARA Considerations.
(1)
(79-12-03) Spent Resin Sluice Pump (Open) - A licensee represent-ative informed the inspector that a design for the pump shielding had been prepared and had been submitted to Design Engineering for evaluation. No shielding has been installed.
(2)
(79-12-08) Activity Measurement Access in Hatch Covers (Closed)
The inspector observed that measurement access holes and shielded plugs had been provided in the hatch covers for demineralizers and filters. The inspector had no further questions.
(3)
(79-12-09) Shielding of Filter Housings (0 pen)
-A licensee representative informed the inspector that the shielding was being fabricated but was not yet installed; the inspector ob-served that no shielding was in place.
7.
Preoperational Test Results a.
The inspector reviewed six completed preoperational test procedures.
The review included verification of proper review and approval of changes, review and approval of the completed teac, identification and correction of identified deficiencies, completed results and retest as appropriate af ter deficiency correction or modification.
No discre-pancies were noted.
b.
Test procedures reviewed were:
(1) TP 0/B/1500/04
" Waste Gas Functional" (2) TP 0/B/1500/04
" Boron Recycle System Modification Functional Test" (3) TP 0/B/1500/09
" Waste System Modification Functional Test" (4) TP 1/B/1450/13
" Breathing Air Functional Test" (5) TP 1/B/1500/06-B
" Floor Drains Test" (6) TP 1/B/1500/06-C
" Sink Drains Test" 8.
Decontamination Facility a.
(Closed) Installation of Ultrasonic Sinks (80-02-05)
-
This item was originally discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50-369/80-02, paragraph 8 and dealt with the incomplete installation of the ultra-sonic decontamination sinks. The inspector observed that the piping for the sinks is installed to connect the sinks to the drain pump and filter but the pump discharge was not connected. A licensee repre-sentative informed the inspector that the drain pump discharge was not s
.
.
e-4-
"hard piped" to the drain but was flexible as to whether it went into a drain fitting or the main sink. After inspecting the installation, the inspecter stated that ne had no further questions and that item 80-02-03 wr s closed.
b.
(0 pen) Decontamination Room Sink Valve (80-12-01)
This item was originally discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50-369/80-12, paragraph 5 and dealt with the installation of a sink drain valve in an location inaccessible for both operation and maintenance. A licensee representative informed the inspector that a work request was approved on November 6 to replace both drain valves on the sink with a different
type of valve to improve flow through the drain and to relocate the valves so they are accessible for operation and maintenance.
The
,
'
inspector stated that this item would remain open and would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
9.
Radwaste Addition Facility a.
(0 pen) Exhaust Monitor Sample Lines (80-21-02)
This item was originally discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50-369/80-21,
,
'
paragraph 7.b and dealt with the unsatisfactory installation of sample lines due to numerous bends and long, horizontal runs. The inspector observed that the monitor had been relocated to reduce the length of piping. However, the sharp bends had not been removed. The inspector informed licensee management that this item remains open pending resolution of the bends in the sample line.
b.
(Closed) Pump Nameplate Data (80-21-03)
This itm was originally discussed in RII Rpt. No. 50369/80-21, parag:D n 7.c and dealt with a discrepancy between nameplate data for the auxiliary floor drain pump and the auxiliary waste evaporator feedpump and the data specified in FSAR Table 11.2.2-1.
The inspector reviewed the revised Table in Amendment 40 to the FSAR and compared it to the nameplate data.
The inspector informed licensee management that item 80-21-03 was closed.
10.
Verification of Representative Sampling (78-19-05)
This item was originally discussed in RII Report No. 50-369/78-19, paragraph 15.c and dealt with the verification of representative sampling
-
for the release of liquids and gases. The inspector reviewed the results of temporary chemistry procedure TC/1/B/9400/04, " Chemistry Procedure for the Determination of Recirculation Requirements for Representative Monitor Tank Sampling" and a memorandum to file dated September 18, 1980 entitled
,
" Determination of Purge Time to obtain a Repre a ntative Waste Gas Sample".
'
Based on the review of these documents and dis ussions with licensee representatives, the inspector informed licensee maaagement that he had no j
further questions and that open item 78-19-05 was close.d.
l l
,
, _..
,
.
--- - ------_ _ ---
e
>
.
-5-11.
Verification of Breathing Air Quality Section 5.2.4.1 of NUREG-0041, " Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Materials" states that breathing air should meet the requirements for Grade D air as a limit.
The inspector discussed the period testing of the breathing air system (VB) with licensee represent-atives; a licensee representative stated that chemistry procedure CP/0/B/8700/05,
" Chemistry Proceduce for Obtaining and Documenting Breathing Air Quality" was approved and breathing air quality had been confirmed. The inspector reviewed the test results for three separate tests; all results met the requirments for Grade D and Grade E air.
The inspector had no further questions.
.