IR 05000395/1981011
| ML20005B672 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Summer  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1981 |
| From: | Hosey C, Troup G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20005B669 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-395-81-11, NUDOCS 8107080538 | |
| Download: ML20005B672 (6) | |
Text
p ierg
7h UNITED STATES s
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
-
r REGION 11
"o,
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 o
.....
Report No. 50-395/81-11 Licensee:
South Carolina Electric and Gas Company Columbia, SC 29218 Facility Name:
Summer Unit 1 Docket No. 50-395 License No. CPPR-94 Inspection at Summer play npkinsville, SC Inspector:
[b t/
G. L. Troup '
'/
'Date Signed
[!//
/
Approved by:
^
C. M. Ho(ey)/Section Chief Date Sfgned Technical InspectionJ3 ranch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division SUMMARY Inspection on May 18-22, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 30 inspector-hours onsite in the l
areas of radiation protection and radioactive waste management including installation and functional testing of process and effluent monitors,
'
i installation of the solid radwaste system, health physics organization and staffing, health physics procedures, and waste system testing.
Results
!
l Of the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
I
!
IB107080538 810615 I PDR ADOCK 05000395
_O PDR
_
_
_ _
_ _ _ _ _
__ _ ___ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _,. _.. _ _ _ -_
-._ __ r
,
...
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- 0. S. Bradham, Station Manager L. A. Blue, Health Physics Supervisor K. Woodward, Assistant Operations Supervisor
~
- G. A. DiCorte, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor J. Orr, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor
- R. M. Fowlkes, Technical Services Coordinator
'
Other licensee employees contacted included three technicians, and two operators.
NRC Resident Inspector
- J. L. Skolds
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview Tha inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 22, 1981 with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. Regarding the installation of the liquid effluent monitors (paragraph 5), the Station Mar,ager stated that this would be reviewed with engineering to assure the monitors will function as required.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Process and Effluent Mon * tors a.
FSAR Section 11.4 describes the process and effluent radiological monitoring systems (liquid and gas). The inspector toured the facility and observed that all of the listed liquid and gaseous monitors were in place. Some of the monitors were not fully piped up; where possible the inspector verified that the monitors were connected with the proper process lines to fulfill their functio r-
!
r
...
b.
The inspector questioned the installation for rtonitors RM-L5 (liquid effluent monitor) and RM-L9 (liquid effluent monitor).
RM-L5 is installed with long sample-line runs; the response time for an out-of-specification release would not permit timely isolation of the release.
RM-L9, which is the final liquid discharge monitor, is located so close to the final isolation valve that within the time required for the sample to flow into the monitor chamber and the monitor to initiate closure of the isolation valve, a significant volume would be released.
The Technical Specification requires that the monitors initiate isolation of the discharge to prevent offsite release. A licensee management representative stated that this matter was being reviewed with engineering to assure that the monitors will prevent an out-of-specification release. The inspector stated that this item will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (81-11-01).
c.
The inspector also reviewed the monitor instrument panel in the control room. Each monitor (except RM-L8, Turbine Building Sump) has a readout panel, warning, high alarm, and failure window alarms.
Each alarm window is independent of other monitors so that there is no blockage of alarms if one monitor alarms. Monitor RM-L8 has a trouble alarm in the control room, which is in accordance with FSAR Section 11.4.2.
Three of the gaseous monitors (RM-A7, RM-A8, and RM-A12) are portable monitors and do not read out or alarm in the control room. The inspec-tor had no further questions on the monitor alarms.
d.
Monitors which were inspected were:
RM-L1 Primary Coolant Letdown Monitor RM-L2 A,8 Component Cooling Water Monitors RM-L3 Steam Generator Blowdown Monitor RM-L4 Spent Fuel Cooling Water Monitor RM-L5 Liquid Waste Effluent Monitor RM t6 Boron Recycle System Monitor RM-L7 Nuclear Slowdown Waste Effluent Monitor RM-L8 Turbine Building Sump Monitor
-
RM-L9 Liquid Waste Effluent Monitor RM-L10 Steam Generator Blowdown Discharge Monitor RM-Al Control Room Supply Air Monitor RM-A2 Reactor Building Atmosphere Monitor RM-A3 Main Plant Vent Exhaust Monitor RM-A4 Reactor Building Purge Exhaust Monitor RM-A5 A,B Auxiliary Building Exhaust Plenum Monitors RM-A6 Fuel Handling Building Exhaust Monitor RM-A7 Sample Room Monitor (portable)
RM-A9 Condenser Exhaust Monitor RM-A10 Waste Gas Discharge Monitor RM-All Auxiliary Building Vent Monitor
-
,
,.
...
A licensee representative informed the inspector that RM-A13, Main Plant Vent Exhaust High Range Monitor and RM-A14, Purge Exhaust High Range Monitor, have not been installed yet.
6.
Health Physics Organization and Staffing (80-33-01)
a.
In RII Report No. 50-395/80-33, paragraph 6, the organization and staffing of the health physics group was discussed.
A licensee representative had indicated that a reorganization proposal was being considered to increase the size of the staff and the number of supervisors.
b.
The inspector discussed the current staffing levels with the cognizant supervisor. At the time of the inspection the health physics organiza-tion contained 20 positions, of which five were supervisors.
A licensee representative informed the inspector that approval had not been received to add one more supervisor and six technicians.
A licensee management representative informed the inspector that the additional positions were awaiting approval. The inspected stated that item 80-33-01 would remain open.
c.
The inspector reviewed the experience and qualification of the health physics supervisor against the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.8 for the radiation protection manager.
The inspector determined that the incumbent will meet the requirements of the Reg. Guide prior to fuel loading; the inspector had no further questions.
7.
Health Physics Procedures A licensee representative discussed the status of various health physics procedures with the inspector. Numerous procedures w<sre previously prepared and approved but are being superseded because of changes in the organiza-tion, equipment and regulatory requirements. The licensee representatives I
stated that many of the new procedures have been written but none have been l
approved.
The inspector stated that the procedures need to be appro.ed as soon as possible so people can become familiar with them and they can be used in training; these comments were acknowledged.
8.
Solid Radwaste System Installation j
FSAR Section 11.5 describes the solid radwaste system installation and operation. FSAR Table 11.5-5 lists the major components in the system. The
,
l inspector toured the solid waste system area and verified that the major
,
components lists in Table 11.5-5 were installed and appeared to conform to the design parameters. The inspector noted that the system piping installa-
'
tion was not complete.
Completion of the system installation will be inspected later.
!
l
_ - -
..
...
9.
NRC-Approved Procedures Sections 6.13 ano 6.14 of " Draft Radiological Effluent Technical Specifi-cations for PWRs" (NUREG-0472) require, respectively, that the Process Control Program (PCP) for the solid waste system and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) for effluents shall be approved by the Commission prior to implementation. A licensee representative informed the inspector that both procedures were in preparation but had not been submitted to the NRC for approval. At the exit interview, the inspector stated that both of these procedures must be approved prior to startup and that they snould te submitted soon to permit the resolution of comments which impact on the plant schedule; this was acknowledged by licensee management.
10.
Contracted Services A licensee representative informed the inspector that contaminated laundry will be contracted offsite. Also, a contract for solid waste disposal at a licensed facility is required. The licensee representative stated that the contract specifications are being prepared but have not been sent out for bid. These services will be required after licensing.
11.
Preoperational Test Results a.
The inspector reviewed thirty completed Phase I preoperational test procedures.
The review included verification of proper review and approval of changes, review and approval of the completed test, identification and correction of identified deficiencies, completed results and retest as appropriate after deficiency correction or modification. No discrepancies were noted.
b.
Test Procedures reviewed were:
(1) WD-1, " Reactor Coclant Drain Tank Pump Functional Test" (2) WD-4, " Waste Evaporator Condensate Pump Functional Test" (3) ND-6, " Chemical Drain Tank Pump Functional Test" (4) WD-8, " Laundry and Hot Shower Tank and Pump Functional Test" (5) WX-1, " Excess Waste Holdup Tank Functional Test" (6)
WX-2, "Decon Pit Collection Tank Functional Test" (7) GH-05 H2, " Waste Gas Catalytic Recombiner B Hydro" (8) RG-01, " Radiation Monitor RM-G1 Functional Test" (9) RG-02, " Radiation Monitor RM-G2 Functional Test" (10) RG-03, " Radiation Monitor RM-G3 Functional Test" (11) RG-04, " Radiation Monitor RM-G4 Furctional Test" (12) RG-05, " Radiation Monitor RM-G5 Functional Test" (13) RG-09, " Radiation Monitor RM-G9 Functional Test" (14) RG-10, " Radiation Monitor RM-G10 Functional Test" (15) RG-11, " Radiation Monitor RM-Gil Functional Test" (16) RG-12, " Radiation Monitor RM-G12 Functional Test" l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
r-
.......
(17) RG-13, " Radiation Monitor RM-G13 Functional Test" (18) RG-14, " Radiation Monitor RM-G14 Functional Test" (19) RG-16, " Radiation Monitor RM-G16 Functional Test" (20) RL-01 HI, " Radiation Monitor RM-L1 HI Functional Test" (21) RL-02A, " Radiation Monitor RM-L2A Functional Test" (22) RL-02B, " Radiation Monitor RM-L2B Functional Test" (23) RL-03, " Radiation Monitor RM-L3 Functional Test" (24) RL-04, " Radiation Monitor RM-L4 Functional Test" (25) RL-05, " Radiation Monitor RM-L5 Functional Test" (26) RL-06, " Radiation Monitor RM-L6 Functional Test" (27) RL-07, " Radiation Monitor RM-L7 Functional Test" (28) RL-08, " Radiation Monitor RM-L8 Functional Test" (29) RL-09, " Radiation Monitor RM-L9 Functional Test" (30) RL-10, " Radiation Monitor RM-L10 Functional Test" c.
The radiation monitor functional tests checked alarms, failure alarm, check source operation, and, as appropriate, flow alarms. Verification of appropriate valve trips or diversion of flow on a high alarm signal were not checked. A licensee representative informed the inspector that these functions would be tested during the Phase II test of the monitoring system. The inspector had no questions at this time.
.