IR 05000410/1986017
| ML17055B752 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Nine Mile Point  |
| Issue date: | 05/29/1986 |
| From: | Kottan J, Kramaric M, Pasciak W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17055B751 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-410-86-17, IEC-77-10, IEC-79-21, IEC-81-09, IEC-81-9, IEIN-79-09, IEIN-79-9, IEIN-82-32, IEIN-82-43, IEIN-82-49, IEIN-83-14, NUDOCS 8606110031 | |
| Download: ML17055B752 (14) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-410/86-17 Docket No.
50-410 License No.
CPPR-112 Priority Category B
Licensee:
Nia ara Mohawk Power Cor oration 300 Erie Boulevard West S racuse New York 13202 Facility Name:
Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Inspection At:
Scriba New York Inspection Conducted:
A ril 28-Ma
1986 Inspectors:
J. J.
Kot an, adiation Laboratory Sp i
E.
K c,
Ra iation Specialist Approved by:
W. J Pasciak, Chief, Effluents Radiation Protection Section dat
<</zz/Ic date dat Ins ection Summar
Ins ection conducted on A ril 28-Ma
1986.
Ins ection Re ort No. 50-410/86-17 Areas Ins ected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the radiochemistry area, liquid radioactive waste area, and gaseous radioactive waste arear'he inspection covered:
Status of previously identified items, licensee action on Bulletins and Circulars, process and effluent radiation monitors, radioactive waste systems, facilities and equipment, training and qualifications, and procedures.
Results:
No violations or deviations wer e identified.
I P8~0611OOa1 B~OSS0 PDR ADOCK 05000410 PDR
V
~
K DETAILS
. Individuals Contacted Princi al Licensee Em lo ees
- R. Abbott, Station Superintendent
"E. Leach, Superintendent Chemistry/Radiation Mgt.
~J. Duell, Supervisor Chemistry and Radiation Protection
~0. Henderson, Supervisor Radwaste Operations
- A. Ross, Unit Supervisor Chemistry
"W. Hansen, Operations QA
- J. Dominei, Operations, QA
"T. Lee, Special Projects
- I. Weakley, Special Projects D. Barcomb, Unit Supervisor Radiation Protection Stone and Webster F. Jensen, Start-up
~
Status of Previousl Identified Items (Open)
Follow-up Item (410/85-20-01):
Complete review of liquid radwaste pre-operational testing.
Pre-operational testing of the liquid radwaste system is not yet complete.
The inspector reviewed the the completed liquid radwaste pre-op test procedure, N2-POT-40-1.
(Open)
Follow-up Item (410/85-20-03):
Complete review of HVAC, gaseous waste system testing.
The pre-operational tests in these areas have not yet been performed.
(Open)
Follow-up Item (410/85-20-05):
Review verification that process and effluent monitors can collect representative samples.
The verification has not yet been completed by the licensee.
(Open)
Follow-up Item (410/85-20-07):
Review of open items in areas of radwaste operator training and H.
P. tech training.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Unit 2 radioactive waste operations On-The-Job Training (OJT) Manual.
The OJT training covers five areas:
liquid waste system, solid waste system, LWS computer, waste handling procedures, and administration.
Areas of H.
P. technician training have yet to be re-viewed and therefore this item remains open.
(Open)
Follow-up Item (410-85-20/09):
Complete review of organization and staffing of radiological controls group.
The review of the organization and staffing of the chemistry group has been completed.
However, the review of other areas of the radiological controls group has not been completed and, therefore, this item remains ope (Open) Follow-up Item (410/85-32-02):
Review of licensee response to NRC bulletins and circulars.
Licensee actions on a number of bulletins and circulars were reviewed.
Action on additional bulletins and circulars has yet to be taken, completed, or reviewed.
This item remains open.
See Section 3.
(Open) Follow-up Item (410/85-32-05):
Review GEMS testing.
The licensee has not yet performed the pre-operational test of the GEMS.
The test is scheduled for the latter part of May, 1986.
(Open) Follow-up Item (410/85-32-06):
Review calibration of DRMS.
The licensee has not performed the pre-operational test of the ORMS.
The test is scheduled for the latter part of May, 1986.
3.
Licensee Action Bulletins and Circulars The licensee has received NRC Bulletins, Circulars, and Information Notices and has initiated action (as appropriate)
to address the matters described in the Bulletins, Circulars, and Information Notices.
The licensee's action on the following Circulars, and Information Notices was reviewed.
Ci'rcular No. 79-21 "Prevention of Unplanned Releases of Radioactivity".
The licensee's plant design address this circular.
Tank overflows are directed to floor and equipment drains which go to radwaste, no tanks are located outdoors, drip pans are installed where appropriate, and potential spill areas have raised thresholds.
Also the Unit 1 to Unit 2 radwaste crossties will not be completed until the Unit 2 radwaste system is complete, pre-operation tested, and Unit 2 is licensed.
Circular No. 81-09 "Containment Effluent Water that Bypasses Radioactivity Monitor".
In 1982, the licensee performed a system evaTuation and determined that Unit 2 contains no system which will bypass a radioactivity monitor.
In 1986, the licensee performed another review and noted that there have been no system changes which alter the results of the 1982 evaluation.
Circular No. 77-10
"Vacuum Conditions Resulting in Damage to Liquid Process Tanks".
The licensee uses a system of procedures and administrative controls when draining tanks to prevent damage.
In addition, since all tanks are located indoors any unplanned radioactive release from a damaged tank would be detected by the process or effluent radiation monitoring systems.
Information Notice No. 82-32 "Contamination of Reactor Coolant System by Organic Cleaning Solvents".
The licensee performs a total organic carbqn (TOC) analysis on samples of processed water prior to transfer to the condensate systems.
This is addressed in chemistry surveillance procedure N2-CSP-lf
~
Information Notice 83-14 "Oewatered Spent Ion-Exchange Resin Susceptibility to Exothermic Chemical Reaction".
The licensee has a
procedure, AP-7. 1, for controlling organic reagents used on site but does not have a procedure for controlling oxidizing agents which can cause the exothermic reaction.
~
Information Notice 79-09 "Spill of Radioactivity Contaminated Resin".
The licensee uses a trailer mounted resin solidification system supplied by a vendor.
The system is used indoors, however, and any resin spills will be directed to radwaste.
Also a function test of the vendor supplied unit is par t of pre-operational test 41-2.
~
Information Notice 82-43 "Deficiencies in LWR Air Filtration/Ven-tilation Systems".
The licensee's action in this area addressed only filtration systems containing charcoal and did not address other HEPA filter systems.
~
Information Notice 82-49 "Correction for Sample Conditions for Air and Gas Monitoring".
The licensee's effluent radiation monitoring system uses mass flow measuring devices rather than rotameters.
The inspector stated that with the exception of Information Notices 83-14 and 82-43, the licensee's action on the other notices and circulars was satisfactory and would be considered closed.
4.
Process and Effluent Radiation Monitors The inspector toured the facility and examined the liquid and gaseous process and effluent radiation monitors.
Pre-operational testing of the radiation monitors is scheduled for the end of May, 1986.
The inspector reviewed the preliminary tests and pre-operational tests for the radiation monitoring systems.
The inspector also reviewed the effluent and process radiation monitor documentation supplied to the licensee by the vendor.
This included system overviews, software descriptions, and calibration data.
The reviews were conducted with respect to Final Safety Analysis report (FSAR) Section 11.5, Radiation Monitoring Systems, and ANSI N13. 1-1969, Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities.
The inspector stated that this area would. again be reviewed during a subsequent inspection after completion of the preliminary and pre-operational testing of the systems.
Previously identified follow-up items 410/85-32-05, and 410/85-32-06 will therefore, remain open.
5.
Radioactive Waste S stems The inspector toured the liquid radioactive waste system, the offgas system and the standby gas treatment system.
The tours were conducted to compare the as built systems with the descriptions in the applicable sections of the FSAR Sections 11.2 and 11.3.
The as built systems matched the descriptions in the FSAR.
Pre-operational testing of the above
systems has not been completed.
The inspector reviewed selected parts of the liquid radwaste interim operating procedure, N2-IOP-40.
The inspector also reviewed pre-operational procedure N2-POT-40-1 for the liquid radwaste system.
The pre-operational test results of the above systems will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection.
Follow up items 410/85-20-01 and 410/85-20-03 which address pre-operational testing of the above systems will remain open.
Facilities and E ui ment The inspector toured the chemistry facilities including the counting room, various in-plant sampling systems, and the Gaseous Effluent Monitoring System (GEMS)
sample points and control panel.
The inspector noted that the Unit 1 chemistry laboratory will be shared by Unit 1 and 2 and is accessible to Unit 2 via a tunnel.
All preparatory radiochemistry and non-radiological chemistry analyses will be performed in this laboratory.
The Unit 2 counting room contains a computer based gamma spectroscopy system with two germanium detectors, a gas flow proportional counter, a beta scintillation counter, computer terminals, printers, and a plotter.
The counting room also houses the GEMS control panel.
The GEMS consists of three germanium detectors specifically dedicated for particulate filter, iodine cartridge, and noble gas analysis.
The GEMS will be routinely used for effluent monitoring and also has post-accident sampling capability.
Two GEMS systems are installed:
one for the stack effluents, and one for the radwaste/reactor building vent effluents.
At the present time the licensee had returned one of the counting room germanium detectors to the manufacturer for replacement.
The licensee had experienced resolution problems with the detector and chose replacement rather than repair.
The other counting room detector was installed and operable but had not yet been calibrated for all of the counting geometries.
The inspector reviewed the efficiency calibrations performed by the licensee and noted that the efficiency curves were generated by the computer printer.
The inspector discussed with the licensee the value in plotting the curves by hand since the printer is not capable of the resolution required.
The inspector, also discussed the licensee's plans for calibration of the GEMS.
The GEMS is initially calibrated by the manufacturer using NBS traceable sources.
The licensee verifies this calibration by fitting the manufacturer's curve through a two point check.
The inspector stated that this is an acceptable method for the noble gases but the licensee could improve their calibration verification for the particulate and iodine cartridge by using more than two points, The licensee could place NBS traceable calibration standards in the GEMS and verify the 'manufacturer'
curve with as many as ten points.
The inspector stated that the calibra-tion of the counting room and the GEMS detectors would be reviewed in a future inspection.
At that time the inspector will submit spiked samples to the licensee for radiological analysis.
(50-410/86-17-01)
7.
Trainin and ualifications The inspector reviewed selected training and qualification records for members of the Unit 2 chemistry staff.
This review was performed with respect to Regulatory Guide 1.8.
"Personnel Selection and Training" and ANSI/ANS 3. 1-1981, "Selection, Qualification, and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants."
Within the scope of this review, all of the personnel reviewed appear to meet the ANSI requirements with respect to education and experience.
The chemistry supervisor and assistant both have B.S. degrees.
Also many of the technicians have B.S degrees.
The normal progression for technician advancement is from Technician A to Technician B to Technician C.
The minimum total time required for this progression is 3~~ years.
In addition, an individual may progress to Chief Technician after completing 2 years as Technician C.
The inspector noted that many of the Unit 2 staff have been performing comparable functions while working at Unit 1.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
8.
Procedures The inspector reviewed the following draft Unit 2 procedures:
N2-CSP-1 Reactor Chemistry Surveillance at Unit 2 N2-CSP-4 Liquid Radioactive Waste Chemistry Surveillance at Unit Unit 2.
N2-CSP-4 Gamma Spectrometry at Unit 2 N2-CSP-15 Chemistry Quality Assurance at Unit 2 The inspector also reviewed the following approved site procedures:
S;SP-1 Liquid Grab Sample-Sample Station, Rev.
2, July 1982 S-SP-2 Liquid Grab Sample-Local Sample Point, Rev.
3, February 1984 The licensee has written greater than 90% of the procedures applicable to Unit 2, which are prefixed N2.
Although many procedures are written, none have been reviewed and approved by the appropriate station management.
In addition several approved Unit 1 procedures have been in-corporated as site procedures, prefixed S, and are applicable to both units.
The inspector discussed the procedures reviewed with the licensee.
Specifically the following concerns were addressed during the discussion:
S-SP-1 and S-SP-2 indicate sample purge times of 15 minutes and 5-10 minutes, respectively.
The inspector queried the licensee regarding the determination of the sample purge times.
The licensee explained that the purge times were determined by ex-perience, rather than calculations using actual sample line
/
/
Jl'
~
~
r l
dimensions.
The inspector discussed the importance of obtaining a representative sample and the licensee stated that calcula-tions will be performed to evaluate the sample purge times.
N2-CSP-4 instructs the analyst to estimate the activity of Fe-55, Sr-89, and Sr-90 based on the Co-60 activity identified by gamma spectrometry analysis.
However the ratios recommended for the estimate are not consistent with values provided in the FSAR.
The inspector discussed this matter with the licensee and the licensee stated he will investigate the basis of the ratios recommended in the procedure.
N2-CRP-4 details that the following routine system checks be performed for each germanium detector:
background, source, and energy calibration.
The procedure does not specify the frequency for performing these checks and does not identify the conditions under which these values indicate the system to be out of control.
The inspector also noted that this procedure dictates the use of solid standards for gas geometry efficiency calibrations.
The inspector discussed with the licensee the availability of commercially available mixed gamma emitting gas calibration standards.
The licensee stated that further consid-eration will be given to the items discussed.
The inspector stated that the review and approval of procedures would be an inspector followup item (50-410/86-17-02).
The inspector also discussed with the licensee the laboratory guality Assurance program addressed in N2-CSP-15.
The procedure does not outline the development, use, and limits for quality control charts.
In addition the procedure does not address inter and intralaboratory comparisons, the documentation and verification of software, or audits.
The inspector dis-cussed with the licensee Regulatory Guide 4. 15, "guality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment" and the "guality Assurance of Chemical Measurements" (NBS).
The licensee stated that efforts would be made to improve the guality Assurance program.
These efforts may include adopting the Unit
(juality Assurance Program as a site procedure.
The inspector stated that the development and implementation of a guality Assurance program for effluent monitoring is required by Technical Specification 6.8. 1.
The inspector stated that this area would be reviewed in a future inspection (50-410/86-17-03).
~
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in Section
at the conclusion of the inspection on May 1, 1986.
The inspector summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the inspectio P I