IR 05000373/1980001
| ML19309B783 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 01/31/1980 |
| From: | Fisher W, Miller D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19309B781 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-80-01, 50-373-80-1, NUDOCS 8004070174 | |
| Download: ML19309B783 (4) | |
Text
,
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-373/80-01 Docket No. 50-373 License No. CPPR-99 Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company P.O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Name: LaSalle County Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection At: LaSalle Site, Seneca, Illinois Inspection Conducted: January 9-11 and 15, 1980 h. $ $4Yhb:'
Inspector:
D. E. Miller
/ /W/#O YA
.
Approved By:
W. L. Fisher, Chief
/ j[7// 8-0
/
Fuel Facility Projects and
'
Radiation Support Section Inspection Summary Inspection on January 9-11 and 15, 1980 (Report No. 50-373/80-01 Areas Inspected: Routine, announced preoperational inspection of the radiation protection and radwaste management programs, including radia-tion protection and chemistry procedures, facilities, and preoperational and systems demonstration test procedure review. The inspection involved 29 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
l
8 0u04 070
'
.
DETAILS
,
1.
Persons Contacted
- G. Diederich, Assistant Superintendent for Operations
- R. Bishop, Technical Staff Supervisor
- C Schroeder, Assistant Technical Staff Supervisor F. Lawless, Rad / Chem Supervisor G. Myrick, Health Physicist L. Berry, Nuclear Technician (Rad / Chem)
J. Williams, Test Engineer L. Shearer, Chemist
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
General This inspection, which began at 9:00 a.m. on January 9,1980, was conducted to examine progress made in development of radiation pro-tection, effluent control, instrument calibration, and preopera-tional and systems demonstration procedures, and construction of related facilities.
During the inspection, the inspector toured several areas under construction.
3.
Organization Since the last inspection (50-373/79-25), L. Berry has joined the
'
Rad / Chem organization as an Engineering Assistant / Nuclear Technician.
Qualification requirements for persons holding the positions Rad / Chem Supervisor and Chemist, listed in ANSI N.18.1, were not reviewed during this inspection, because of time limitations. This matter will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
4.
Rad / Chem Technician Qualifications In a previous inspection report (50-373/78-18), the inspector stated that some Rad / Chem Technicians apparently would not meet the quali-fication criteria listed in ANSI N.18.1 as required by FSAR Section 13.1.3.
Since that inspection, the licensee has requested and re-ceived an amendment to the FSAR which describes alternate qualifi-cation criteria for these technicians.
It now appears that these technicians will meet the amended criteria listed in FSAR Section 13.1.3.2, providing the licensee's training and administrative program assures compliance.
-2-c
r
..
5.
Radiation Protection Procedures
-
The inspector reviewed the following new or recently revised rad-iation protection procedures which appear to be compatible with regulatory requirements and FSAR commitments:
LRP-1130-1 Revision 1, Radiological Signs and Labels
.LRP-1210-1 Revision 1, Exposure Report on Termination LRP-1250-5 Revision 1, Film /TLD Badge Spike LRP-1250-8 Revision 3, Quality Test and Issue of Direct Reading Pocket Dosimeters
'
LRP-1310-10 Revision 2, Operation and Use of Respirator Fitting Test System-LRP-1340-5 Revision 0, Whole Body Counting Routine Operations LRP-1430-1 Revision 1, Unconditional Release LRP-1480-2 Revision 1, Contamination Surveys LRP-15'20-2 Revision 1, Offsite Shipment of Radioactive Materials The inspector also reviewed changes made to the procedures listed in section 3 of' inspection report 50-373/79-03 and has no further ques-tions concerning these procedures at this time.
6.
Preoperational Test and System Demonstration Procedures The inspector performed a cursory review of the following procedures:
SD-WX-101 Solid Radwaste SD-WE-101A Liquid Radwaste Equipment Drain Processing SD-WE-101B Floor Drain Processing SD-WE-101C Laundry Equipment and Floor Drain Processing SD-WE-101D Chemical Waste Processing PT-AR-101 Area Radiation Monitoring System-3-i
r
_ _ _ - - -
..
PT-CM-102 Post LOCA Primary Containment Monitoring PT-PR-101 Process Radiation Monitoring-This review was performed to determine if these procedures include the appropriate tests listed in sections K and L of Regulatory Guide 1,68 dated November 1973. No discrepancies were noted.
Representative detailed reviews will be performed during subsequent inspections.
During. review of PT-PR-101, the inspector noted that the sequence of test for several of the process and effluent monitors was not logical. This matter was discussed with the licensee, who stated that the procedure must be rewritten and that necessary changes would be made.
7.
Station Vent Monitor During a plant tour, including visual observation of process and effluent monitors being installed, the inspector noted that the sample piping leading to the station vent particulate and halogen filters contained potential particulate traps. These potential traps are a line size reducer, several fittings, and a small-radius bend before reaching the particulate filter.
The inspector asked the licensee for the design criteria for the vent sampling system isokinetic probe needed to establish opera-tional conditions for the system. The licensee stated that he is currently seeking this information.
8.
Exit Interview The. inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 15, 1980.
The following matters were discussed:
a.
The purpose and scope of the inspection.
b.
Anticipated inspection.senedule through fuel loading.
c.
The inspector stated that the station vent monitor sample piping contains potential particulate traps upstream of the particulate collector. _The licensee stated that an appropri-ate engineering review of the system would be conducted and necessary alterations made. (Paragraph 7)
.
-4-