IR 05000369/1986001
| ML20214D261 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 02/13/1986 |
| From: | Cline W, Gloersen W, Kuzo G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20214D234 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-86-01, 50-369-86-1, 50-370-86-01, 50-370-86-1, NUDOCS 8603050066 | |
| Download: ML20214D261 (9) | |
Text
-
- i
.
g#gpcic
- o, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
UNITED STATES
["
$
REGION 11 g*
j 101 MARlETTA STREET, N.W.
- -
ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30*i23
\\u**/
FEB 141996 Report Nos.:
50-369/86-01 and 50-370/86-01 Licensee: Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.:
50-369 and 50-370 License Nos.: NPF-9 and NPF-17 Facility Name: McGuire 1 and 2 l
Inspection Conducted: Janu 21-2 1986 Inspecto s:_.
M i
Kuzo Date igned
.
!
8. GToe W Date Sig'ned Approved b.
_
sg
'
Da'te S gned h. E. Cl i ne, S ec'tterii ChTe f Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 63 inspector-hours at the site in the areas of gaseous and liquid radwaste systems, radiological effluent j
l accountability, reactor coolant and secondary water Technical Specification j
'
Requirements, and review of selected inspector followup items.
'
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
i
!
8603050066 060214 DR ADOCK 05000369 PDR
!
__
_
. - _.
_
_
. _ _ _.. __ _. _ _
_ _ _ _ _. _ _
_ _,
-
i.
,
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- T. L. McConnell, Station Manager D. J. Rains, Superintendent of Maintenance
- B. H. Hamilton, Superintendent of Technical Services
- N. McCraw, Compliance Engineer
- R. L. Gill, Licensing, General Office
- J. Day, Licensing, General Office
- W. Haller, Technical Services, General Office
- R. A. Johansen, Test Engineer Surveillance
- R. P. Michael, Station Chemist
- W. F. Byrum, Health physics Coordinator
- P. W. Roberson, Associate Engineer, Performance T. J. Wall, Radwaste Chemistry Coordinator C. D. Martinec, Junior Health Physicist M. J. Geer, Health Physicist, Corporate G. Singletary, Associate Engineer G. Ward, Chemistry M. Hollis, Chemistry R. Biswas, Chemistry, Corporate Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, and office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
- W. T. Orders
- R. Pierson
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on January 24, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed a potential unresolved item (Paragraph 6)
regarding Semiannual Effluent Report details.
Licensee representatives acknowledged the inspector's comments. On January 30, 1986, NRC Region II personnel notified the licensee representatives by telephone that the unresolved item concerning required details of tne Semiannual Effluent Release Reports would be considered an inspector followup item.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspection.
-
.
-
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (92702)
a.
(0 pen) URI 50-369/84-07-04, Licensee Exposure Review of Pass Panel Due to Design Change:
This item was not reviewed during the inspection.
b.
(0 pen) URI 50-369/84-07-05, Review Data to Determine Operability of Containment Atmosphere Pass Panel.
This item was not reviewed during the inspection.
c.
(0 pen) VIO 50-370/84-07-06, Reactor Coolant PASS Did Not Meet
,
NUREG-0737 Criteria:
This item was not reviewed during the inspection.
d.
(Closed) VIO 50-369/85-11-01, Failure to Follow Radwaste Operating Procedure OP/0/B/6200/12 which Resulted in Resin Release Out of Unit 1 Vent Stack:
The inspectors reviewed revised procedure OP/0/86200/32, Radwaste Procedure for Nuclear Solid Waste (WS) System Disposal
,
Operation, Revision 14, September 12, 1985 and discussed changes.
'
l Completed design changes and procedures appeared adequate to preclude
subsequent releases.
The inspectors also reviewed LER 85-09 which described environmental sampling, monitoring and offsite dose analyses i
l performed for an evaluation of impact as a result of the resin release.
All results were adequate.
d.
(0 pen) DEV 50-369/85-39-01, 50-370/85-40-01, Failure t: Conduct Air aerosol Uniformity Mixing Tests as Required by FSAR Commitments for the Control Room Ventilation Systems: The inspectors informed licensee representatives that their response to the Notice of Deviation, dated January 1986, had been received by the Regional Office.
Cognizant licensee representatives were notified that the response was being
.
evaluated and that a request for a supplemental response to include I
additional information would be requested by the NRC Region II office.
4.
Audits (84723, 84724)
i Technical Specification (T3) 6.5.2.9 states audits of unit activities shall
be performed under the cognizance of the Nuclear Safety Review Board (NSRB)
encompassing conformance of unit operation to provisions contained within
'
the TS's and applicable license conditions at least once per 12 months; the
.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and the results thereof at
least once per 12 months; the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and implementing procedure at least once per 24 months; and the performance of activities required by the Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environmental monitoring at least once per 12 months.
The inspectors reviewed the following audit reports.
(a) NP-84-8(MC) Departmental Audit, Technical Services and Operations Activities, 5/7-18/84.
(b) NP-85-5(MC) Departmental Audit, Technical Services and Operations Activities and Environmental Monitoring, 3/11-26/85.
- - - -
- - -
-
-
-
..
,
(c) NP-85-12(MC) Departmental Audit, Technical Services and Health Physics, 6/17-27/85.
The inspectors noted that the radiological radwaste effluent program areas were audited against applicable sections of the Technical Specifications, approved plant operating procedures and manuals, and Duke Guide 4.15.
No significant adverse findings were noted in the audit reports.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Procedures (84723, 84724)
a.
Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires written procedures to be established.
implemented and maintained covering the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix "A" of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Rev. 2, February 1978; Offsite Dose Calculation Manual implementation; and the Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environmental nonitoring. The inspectors reviewed selected portions of the following procedures:
(1) OP/0/B/6200/32 Radwaste Procedure for the Nuclear Solid Waste (WS)
System Disposal Operation, Rev. 14, 9/12/85.
(2) PT/1/A/4450/09B Spent Fuel Ventilation System Performance Test, 11/7/80.
(3) PT/0/A/4450/17 Safety-Related Filter System Run Time Monitoring, 10/6/83.
(4) PT/0/A/4450/01 In place Test of HEPA and Charcoal Absorber Filters, 8.17/81.
(5) PT/0/A/4450/12 Nuclear Air Cleaning System Air Flow Measurement, 4/6/81.
(6) PT/0/A/4450/15 Nuclear Air Cleaning System Visual Inspection, 7/6/81.
(7) PT/0/B/4600/23 Fuel Cycle Dose Calculations, Rev. O, 12/30/85.
(8) PT/0/B/4600/25 Cumulative Of fsite Dose From Liquid and Gaseous Effluents, 12/30/85.
(9) MNS Liquid and Gaseous Radwaste Computer Program, User Documentation, January 1984.
No violations or deviations were identified.
- -
-
-
-
.
_
.
8=
,
6.
Records and Reports (84723, 84725)
a.
The inspectors reviewed selected portions of the following records:
(1) Liquid Waste Permits for July 1985 to January 1986 for the following effluent process streams:
a.
Waste Monitor Tanks b.
Containment Vent Unit condensate Drain Tank c.
Turbine Building Sump (2) Gaseous Waste Permits for October 1985 to January 1986 for the following effluent process streams:
a.
Waste Gas Decay Tanks b.
Containment Purges (3) Reactor Coolant Parameter Trend Records (Units 1 & 2) for June 1985 to January 1986, including:
Percent Power, Reactor Coolant
.
Gross Activity and Tritium, Dose Equivalent I-131 ratio, Chloride,
'
Fluoride, and Dissolved Oxygen.
(4) Ventilation Test Performance Results for Auxiliary Building, Fuel
,
Pool, and Control Room Ventilation Systems (Unit 1 & 2)
l November 1984 to December 1985 including:
a.
Laboratory Carbon Absorber Sample Test Results b.
In place Filter Testing (HEPA & Carbon Absorber)
(5)
Effluent Monitor Calibrations from October 1984 to November 1985 including:
a.
Liquid Waste Effluent Monitor (EMP-49)
b.
Liquid Waste Effluent Flow Monitor
'
c.
Waste Gas Radiation Monitor (EMP-50)
'
d.
Waste Gas Flow Monitor e.
Unit Vent System Noble Gas Activity Monitor (EMF-36)
f.
Unit Vent System Flow Rate Monitor g.
Containment Purge System Noble Gas Activity Monitor (EMF-39).
(6) Semiannual Effluent Release Reports For 1982, 1983, 1984, and first half of 1985.
(7)
Incident Investigation Report No. 1-85-56 Results of the record review were discussed with cognizant licensee representatives as noted in Paragraphs 6.b
.e.
b.
TS 3.4.8 states that the specific activity of the reactor coolant shall be limited to less than or equal to 1.0 microcurie per gram Dose l
Equivalent I-131. The inspector noted that following a Unit I reactor
!
I
.
trip on November 2, 1985 Dose Equivalent I-131 of 1.1 uC1/g was reported. The inspectors reviewed Incident Report 1-85-56, which was issued to meet the required TS action statement. All required action and reporting requirements were met and the evaluation of the event appeared adequate.
c.
TS 6.9.1.7 states routine Radioactive Effluent Release Reports covering the operation of the unit during the previous six months of operation shall be submitted within 60 days af ter January 1 and July 1 or each year.
The reports shall include a summary of the quantities of radioactive materials released from the unit as outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.21.
The reports to be submitted 60 days af ter January 1 of each year shall also include an assessment of radiation doses to the likely most exposed Member Of The Public from reactor releases and other nearby uranium fuel sources, ir,cludi ng doses from primary effluent pathways and direct radiation, for the previous calendar year to show conformance with 40 CFR Part 190, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations.
The inspector reviewed Semiannual Effluent Report, liquid and gaseous release and dose estimate data with cognizant licensee representatives.
Selected data are presented in Table 1.
The inspector noted that radionuclide quantities released and the annual dose estimates did not follow any significant trends from 1982 to 1984.
The inspector questioned the licensee's ability to show conformance with 40 CFR Part 190. The inspectors noted that 10 CFR Part 50 limits maximum dose estimates to 3 mrem total body and 10 mrem to any organ from liquids, and an annual air dose to 10 mrad from gamma radiation and 20 mrad for beta radiation. 40 CFR Part 190 requires the dose equivalent from all fuel cycle sources not to exceed 25 mrem wholebody, 75 mrem thyroid, and 25 mrem to any other organ. Licensee representatives stated that procedural requirements outlined in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (00CM) and which are used to meet the intent of 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix I would prevent exceeding 40 CFR 190 limits.
The inspector stated that the Semiannual Effluent Report issued 60 days after January 1 of each year should include the calculated doses for the maximum exposed individual from all sources.
The inspector informed licensee that the indirect methodology to show conformance with 10 CFR 190 would be considered an unresolved item pending review by NRC Region II Management. The inspectors informed licensee representatives i
by telephone on January 30, 1986, that a calculated value, instead of compliance to 10 CFR Part 50 Appendix I limits, would directly show I
compliance to 40 CFR 190.
The inspectors noted that the assessment i
should list all assumptions made and reference the appropriate methodology in the ODCM.
The inspectors also discussed with licensee representatives reporting requirements for the Semiannual Effluent Release report as specified by TS and Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.21.
The inspectors noted that RG 1.21 specifies that the term, not detected, should not be used in the reports. The inspector noted that the effluent reports list 0.00 E0 to
.--.
.
.
-
-
._
- _ _
__
.
._.
__
_ --__.
,.
7 denote valves below detection limits. The inspector informed licensee
>
representatives that the Regional position is that (1) whenever a nuclide is detected in an effluent sample, it will be reported, even if the analysis is below TS limits and (2) whenever an analysis for a nuclide yields a less than number, that less than number will not be use in quantifying the release nor in calculating doses from the effluents. However, a reference to a range of detection limits, i.e.,
the less than number, will be presented within the report.
The inspectors informed licensee representatives that proposed changes to the semiannual effluent release reports to clearly meet the intent of 40 CRF Part 190 and provide detection limit capabilities would be
,
considered and inspector followup item and would be reviewed during a
-
subsequent inspection (50-369/86-01-01, 50-370/86-01-01).
i d.
TS 4.7.7.c requires testing of a representative carbon sample for the auxiliary building ventilation system to meet the criteria of regulatory Position C.6.a of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2,
^
march 1978.
The inspectors noted that the Unit 1 Auxiliary Building Ventilation System had been operated continuously since the resin bead expulsion incident described in Paragraph 3 (Item 50-369/85-11-01).
,
Tne inspectors noted that carbon testing was performed after 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of system operation as required, i
e.
The inspectors discussed a letter dated November 29, 1985 from B. J. Youngblood, Director, PWR Project Directorate #4, Division of PWR Licensing A, NRR, NRC to H. B. Tucker, Duke Power Company, regarding concerns involving testing of the Auxiliary Building Ventilation System. In particular, the letter detailed concerns noting that i
temperatures at which the carbon absorber samples are tested at may be
,
inappropriately high. TS 3/4.4.7.7 for McGuire Units 1 & 2, specify a l
laboratory test temperature of 80 C for the Auxiliary Building
'
Ventilation System.
Recent studies have demonstrated that testing at
this temperature for air cleaning systems which are not expected to be subject to elevated temperatures will result in erroneous indicators of charcoal methyl iodide retention capability. The letter indicated that
,
effort was underway to standardize on a test temperature of 30 C for such systems. The inspector reviewed the licensee's response to this concern as documented in memorandum to file, dated January 17, 1986, Meeting on NRC Ventilation Testing Concerns, 1/16/86.
Licensee representatives indicated that a study to consider adopting the new test condition recommended by NRC NRR will begin. Adoption of the new
,
test conditions would include revision of the appropriate TS's.
No violations or deviations were identified.
i 7.
Review of Proposed Technical Specification Changes (84723, 84724)
The inspectors discussed proposed Technical Specification changes with cognizant licensee technical staff which were detailed in a letter dated December 13, 1985, from H. B. Tucker, Duke Power Company, to i
L
.
__.
.
_
-
.=
.
,
Mr. H. R. Denton, Director, NRR, NRC.
The changes discussed were as follows:
'
a.
Changes to primary coolant iodine spikes reporting requirements and actions required if iodine activity limits are exceeded for 800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br />.
!
The proposed changes represent NRC policy as detailed in Generic Letter
'
85-19.
The inspectors had no questions regarding this item.
b.
Changes to Reactor Coolant System isotopic sampling technique. Table 4.4-4 required quantitative gamma spectroscopy analysis of gases within
'
the reactor coolant.
Procedures entailed collection of a reactor coolant sample, degassing the sample, and separate analyses of gas a
i liquid phases. Degassing was necessary to obtain a constant geometry l
required for quantitative gas analyses following removal of the sample from the pressurized system.
The licensee had developed sampling technology which allows the reactor coolant sample to be collected and a
maintained under pressure thus resulting in reproducible geometry j
needed for quantitative gamma spectroscopy analyses. In addition, the i
new methodology significantly reduces exposures to technician as a
'
result of lessened handling and manipulation of reactor coolant
!
samples. Frm a review of preliminary development data provided by the j
71censee, the inspectors noted that precision of the methodology was
better at lower coolant activity levels.
In addition, the inspector suggested that the licensee compare efficiency curves for the sampling device between a liquid and gaseous radionuclide source.
Licensee
representatives agreed to evaluate the inspectors' comments.
!
8.
Inspector Followup Items (92701)
a.
(0 pen)
50-369/85-11-02, 50-370/83-52-01 IFI:
Development of a
Surveillance and Testing Program for the Nonsafety Grade Air Filtration l
Systems: This item was not reviewed during the inspection.
<
b.
(Closed) 50-370/85-14-01:
Development of a More Accurate Method of
,
Estimating Total Error Associated with the Measurement of Radioactive Materials in Effluents as Reported in the Semiannual Report:
The inspector reviewed the methodology for effluent measurement error estimation as detailed in the most recent semiannual Effluent Release
Reports, First Half 1985.
The licensee has provided a estimated percentage error for liquid and gaseous effluent data based on individual error estimates for flow rate devices, counting measurements, and sample preparation.
The total estimated error was i
calculated to be 23'4.
-
.
c.
(Open) 50-369/85-19-01, 50-370/83-52-02: Modification of Radiological Environmental Monitoring procedures to Include More Formal Means to l
Review Anomalous Data and to Revise Sample Collection Procedure:
This l
item was not reviewed during this inspection, t
.
,
s
.
TABtf 1 McGu i re Nuc Iea r F ! ant - Sea ia notia I_Lif I pe_r1L Re Iea se Summa ry,__19$2_-19M Year 1982 1983 1984 1985*
No. Abnormal Releases Liquid NA" O
O O
.
Caseous NA O
0 Batch Releases (No)
Liquid NA 6.32 E+2 1.05 [+3 5.64 E+2 Gaseous NA 3.35 E+2 6.63 E+2 3.08 E+2 Activity Released a.
Liquid lCi)
Cross f.75 EtO 3.74 E+0 3.02 E+0 7.19 E-I H-3 1.60 E+2 2.98 E+2 6.47 E+2 4.03 E+2 b.
Gaseous (Ci)
Noble Gas 1.65 [+3 3.20 E+1 4.56 E+3 1.70 E+3 etalogen 3.52 E-4 3.28 E-3 2.43 E-2 1.30 E-2 H-3 3.85 E+0 4.54 E+0 2.95 E+1 2.25 E+1 Dose Estimate (area)
a.
Liquid whole-body 8.70 E-2 2.20 E-1 1.82 E-1 9.66 E-2 b.
Caseous W. ole-body 1.02 E+0 2.56 [+0 3.96 E0 1,53 [+0 Skin 1.79 E+0 7.18 E+0 4.47 EO 3.49 E+0 Includes only January to June reportin9 interval for 1985
tinplanned gas release later half of 1985 - 12Ci WCOT va lve problem
- NA - Not Available