IR 05000528/1986022
| ML17300A324 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 08/06/1986 |
| From: | North H, Yuhas G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17300A323 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-528-86-22, 50-529-86-22, 50-530-86-16, IEIN-86-023, IEIN-86-23, NUDOCS 8608120271 | |
| Download: ML17300A324 (30) | |
Text
8608120271 860807
', PDR ADOCK 05000528
',8 PDR U. S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report Nos.
Docket Nos.
License Nos.
Licensee:
50-528/86-22, 50-529/86-22, and 50-530/86-16 50-528, 50-529, and 50-530 NPF 41, NPF 46, and CPPR 143 Arizona Public Service Company P. 0.
Box 21666 Phoenix, Arizona 85836 Facility Name:
Palo Verde Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2, and
Inspection at:
Palo Verde Site - Wintersburg, Arizona Inspection Conducted:
June 23-27 and July 7-11, 1986, and telephone call on July 16, 1986 Inspected by:
H. S. North, Senior Radiation Specialist ate Signed G. P. Yuhas, hief Facilities Radiological Protection Section D te Signed
~Summar Ins ection durin the eriod of June 23-27 and Jul 7-11, 1986, and a tele hone call on Jul 16, 1986 (Re ort No. 50-528 86-22, 50-529 86-22, and 50-530 86-16)
Areas Ins ected:
Routine unannounced inspection of licensee action on previous inspection findings, radiation protection, plant chemistry, and radwaste organization and management controls, Unit 2 Radiation Protection-Startup, Unit 2 Radwaste-Startup, Unit 3 radiation monitoring systems, Unit 3 gaseous radwaste system, Unit 3 liquids and liquid wastes, Unit 3 solid waste, facilities and equipment Units 1, 2, and 3, internal exposure control, Unit
Containment Atmosphere Monitor RU-l, review of licensee's reports, followup on IE Information Notices and facility tours.
Inspection procedures 83522, 83722, 83521, 84521, 83527, 83727, 84522, 84523, 84524, 92701, and 92702 were addressed during the inspection.
Results:
In the fourteen areas examined, no violations or deviations were identified.
One unresolved item relating to the operability of the containment atmosphere monitor was identifie ~
P
"() 'I <<lf ( '.P')
"". '.3'I >'fC; ),'
.'PP a (>>
f, (
Jt t
-
I,P P)
I'(
<<g f <<()((' I.
):.') (>>( I
'(f"3 4P f(<<IP f
'0 P tP'
)'ll
)
y,
~ >>
'l f
I;()
'P)"
XPR
~ ); (.O( l
)f(",.
u
"f(>>
'~(1'I
)
)
",P}l P '9
">>.
P(
P (4)Ijt~
)Pf P
)(>>(>> f
~ I'fP)(l, ) g ( )
(,*P (
>>)
I (K
'Jl,") Pg('
')
(
P
<)')
XP)
Pll }
P t ((
JK)
c (P P ~(
~
',I P ~>>f'I') ft
'
I(.fr,((
,.f 1 t e')PEl)f '
)Pl'I 4 I",l(P
'g>>P,
}>>,>>f
'
)!I(P(>>
'(
P, f lI"(P",f
' ()p ('>>
(.'., ",')f'('-f>> "
If ll P
(4 f!P
"~
If -
(-
ffP) l I
'PP
<<
".I 'f ~
~.'~ (()
(,P
~ >>r b>> f i )'>
>>()P "(>>
ffi P nP <<iP>> )~
t
})PII fll '
'
PI Al(
I I
Ilt t (jPII t
l!I',
f()
'(
v(f): "(I()'P)
.'
)PrP
""~ >>
"Ir~ '
~.',P)C,)P>>f
"ffh 0 (>'f ' 'O')
f)fl'( "I')>> )
) 'f(r"P'>> f (>>) "f5
<<)
",g-Of ((j" h PP )
IP(r II (P
).
I f (P(!2 (>>Pf
>>
'I
>>
P,"P
~.'g
',(.'("
ll'
J ((lA=
'll. (,'P,
~ 'PP1J>>>>" l'>>
P
")"r<<<,>>
f)ra
, ~.
PP(>.'if f)}')
'>>
PPf",,.(f'f'= (
ffg:lgfK'.~ = ' '
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- E. E. Van Brunt, Jr., Executive Vice President
+L. Brown, Radiation Protection and Chemistry Manager
- B. Cederquist, Chemical Services Manager G. Perkins, Radiological Services Manager
- C. Russo, Quality Audits and Monitoring Manager
+T. Shriver, Compliance Manager
- L. Souza, Assistant Director Corporate QA/QC
- G. Voboril, Lead Radiation Monitoring Systems Engineer
>>Denotes attendance at the July ll, 1986, exit interview.
In addition to the individuals identified above, the inspector met and held discussions with other members of the licensee's staff and contractor employees.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findin s a ~
(0 en) Enforcement (50-528/85-22-01)
Licensee's action with respect to the preparation and approval of three of the four procedures discussed in IE Inspection Report No.
50-528/86-06 had been completed.
Procedure No. 7N412.01.00, Revision 2, Procedure for Plant Chan es, was approved effective June 18, 1986.
The procedure appeared to satisfy the licensee's commitment to apply the procedure review process to changes in "design criteria" and design intent.
Procedure No. 7N412.02.00, Revision 2, Plant Chan e
Re uest (PCR),
was approved effective June 18, 1986.
The procedure appeared to satisfy the licensee's commitment for, the application of the procedures for the formal review process for plant changes to changes in "design criteria", or desig'n intent.
C Procedure No. 5N404.03.00,'evision 1,
Re ulator Corres ondence Control, was approved, effective June 23, '1986.
The procedure addressed methods and responsibilities for, control of correspondence with regulatory agencies.
i, The, procedure 'identified minimum correspondence review requirements and'signatory authority.
The procedure appears" to,implement',the licensee's commitment to a more rigorous and formalized process for r'eview of'ubmittals to NRC.
Procedure No. IN202.08.00, Revision'B, Task Force Utilization, was in draft status at the time,'of the inspection.
The draft procedure provided for "formal" task forces.'when,
"...deemed necessary by responsible management to address problems or issues that require stringent controls over activities and/or documentation."
Task forces or committees relating to activities of a less critical nature were not included within'he'scope of this draft procedure',
however, adherence to the elements of the proceduxe was recommende b".) 3 I I
~
h If>
F I
))N ~ 44.;
I4 I
lFN) y'I I
.
-1
)2~ 'I
ii 'fh tf)'g
).km'. N.!
) II",h 3 (f I
-.
'iflP
, 4(
2,1
-')F.N')
'I
, Nl'I f)'fN 4 II.NI > f)f'4>
f)rp
, f I lhh Nil
~ 'U'
I<<'
"/ah 41" ff
"
'4
"
$
NIf I Ng f, f Ufkg)N 44 ]g
l
~
'4
))
'rff if
)
'f UIFNF)'
'f.i,
I)"4'
." f I. P',',1 NPQ," I'fh Ihf
<<'4)'
l,ff
)PN I 4 'h (fNI )
N
'in b '
I
'"'fnf'g gf)
PNI'I I iif ) I'4 I"'
"44~1 PNI(
fi ')rd
'If(f4
~ )fh""
~ Ih h
I
"
I,'2 iihh,'4 3 "if ) l"4 N
2 ~'22')IN'22)
)
~ 2=)/1.
FINN)l,p
>
)NI',
43 )
21 'I
2 I
"2 21) ~
I Ip a,. )) f.f.,'
i"
~
!
2) 2:2 pp U
I)')
~ 21
SNN'I )'~
N 12)'lIf)IP Uf 4
4 jfh P fit)F'
((2
..
If h N)'fN.>> 'f
~ 4
~ 2' 'n
.,')
hfQO h<'!
I(
g.)4)g
.44<( tf I '
"'"'
)
h, g(4 I'4'
~
ff'I.
'
~ IFP h, NN I:.'" 2'2 )
2 'N
<< I'1 g4 8rrflhr
,rrhr'h~g)off I,I FI'
~ 1
) ) " 9'.f'I))".> g:ft'N).)f)fI O'IN I
'1 I
fh hr,')fJ f
'I fl")44 4) f P a~
'
42.1 'PI) kh'f 1)
Ui fh ')
l h NI"'
3 4 N.
f~DL'Pf-)
" "'f f<)')
h34)')F) 4(P,N
. ','4') fal,".
l)iif'2
. f)hr'fO, f 2 '>>
i "f'1 i:II I'X
',Nf N
Nf 4,'
fI )1>>
'.
I ~,
42 P.
f f ~ 'I2)n )
I II ".
'Pg) e <<, $ 'tr~
I>>)
k If
'C)
) 'I'l
",')
'f
'/kg fi, 0 3-2
~
h N
"
N
.fIQ...
,fg I p
)
N pin 3 NN
,f.f)
'f>>
'l
~
f' ", if N
I
~ I 2 Ih ~
>
~ 4) '<4,<FI
") 4',grj f 4)N f()
Ifhr fI f I!4'I Fl 2 'fh
fJ,'fI'ff
.
I
4
'.1"g'
f'1"",
2, k
The procedure relating to Task Forces will be reviewed following approval.
b.
(Closed)
Followu (50-528/86-08-07)
F By memorandum, D. Brown and G. Perkins, dated April I, 1986, subject:
Radioiodine De osition in Effluent RMS Sam le Lines, the licensee committed to evaluate plateout of iodines using multiple samples and equipment capable of measuring and evaluating elemental iodine, Iz, hypoiodious iodine, HOI, and total iodine.
This matter is considered closed.
c.
(Closed)
Followu (50-528/86-13-01)
and (Closed)
Unresolved Item (50-528 86-13-02)
Audit No.86-014, Process Control Pro ram (Radioactive Waste in the issuance of 6 Corrective Action Requests (CARs).
The
initial draft CARs were issued as
CARs incorporating the initial findings.
At the time of the inspection responses to 5 of the CARs had been reviewed and accepted.
The response to one CAR, on which action was not complete, had been submitted.
An independent review by the Corporate Health Physics/Chemistry staff established that radioactive waste shipment 85-SH-37 was acceptably, if over conservatively, classified.
These matters are considered closed.
d.
(Closed)
Followu (50-528/84-13-04)
Inspection Report No. 50-528/84-31 verified that a padlock was installed on the chain fall used to remove shield plugs giving access to, the fuel transfer tube bellows.
The presence of the padlock was reverified and administrative control of the padlock key, vested in the Unit 1 Radiation Protection Supervisor, was verified.
This matter is considered closed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Radiation Protection, Plant Chemistr
, and Radwaste:
Or anization and Mana ement Controls Units 1, 2, and
Certain aspects of this topic were addressed in Inspection Report Nos.
50-528/86-13, 50-529/86-13, and 50-530/86-10, Occu ational Ex osure Durin Extended Outa es.
The organizational structure remained unchanged from that previously described (Inspection Report Nos. 50-528/84-31, 50-529/84-25, and 50-530/84-17) with the exception that the Water Reclamation Facility was no longer part of the Technical Support group.
A staff proposed manpower budget of 300 for the Radiation Protection and Chemistry group was under consideration.,
The budget would not provide for Unit contractor personnel when'ull staffing was achieved.
The earlier description of the organization did not include the Radiation Protection Support group, of 19 (proposed 39),, which was responsible for the dosimetry, instrument calibration, respiratory prote'ction, and effluent programs.
l
).,
>>tr
"IJ
lre>>>>
s)<<e
'
ei v~
T
l
~
}Jll }>>),')j, >>
','- s?'elT>>
v>>ll() t 1)
')I w
~ IV 3>> 1. e)
l)e}'. r,
~
<>>
v< t<<J
)f f it
~
<<ece>>o (T>>,",
I)
'I
'>>
w<<>>etjft w ) ',
i t>>
(, f}A.)
I ) l Ig ff ]) )te)
e wr)
<<
A l)re P>>,I,
>>,
tr
)
rtl r
'I
} >>.t<>>
el<<
1>> t
)ITV I
1 ) It I lt Ife
'<>>1 if f
~ 1)
l"e
>>
Ijgt, 11 w r~(
e
<><<} }
I
}e,<<" =
~ eegf'f<<
~
It >>,
<<4
~ If VI')
ff e',
-e<<crt} g I
l<>r I
p>>
')'"
.
>>ii',
>>
.Ii ')
J f )T Il I
3 ~
1'
I
'lti(3
. Iil
} A )r'(t
)')4 })e r
,f!)ll
>>>>i
))
$ j Jet)<f,<<>>
~ J y) r,,*
'l<<J I'l
)'egt e,>>IVT)
tl I,
tl
,'fl )F AJi 1 } 1,<<>> ~l '}'1
'LV
~
<<)I
.
P" w <<,"
~
'l
>>
eje(r
) )"
) 'l 'I>>'j lt'
w e i 1
'1 1 l f 't>>wp 'l ~
1 t l>>. It>>>>3 AI'1 wl,
'
'Tre ))'I')
1)
IVVI f <e>>
I'tt)"
,<< ~ Vl (3(>>=r j
'<
l )
l ge.),
P 1 )f, i"Q ltjI,.(}<
<<
f (
'i f ', 1( ',Ot)
e >e>>f;'1,'lf,," k')'t<<e)ll )'} l,;1 )
g," ':J;,,')"">>l'L,
} "'>>'gl);
)'
")
'
l, 'ff'),
)
ev()] J>>> <i'11~ ',1,,
A<<f[,,
cA
"'1f.
wfr<<)
<
)<<}<<1 li
"'
't<<tee>>
fl.'g",)';,, '}ll
I>>i,l ( ei,,,
ve <<0 ~,fte
)fw)'<<
tr>>te<'
'
e f
"
l r)
'1
'
',.
'<<i vt
'<<
~ wlf't
>>
q'
if')
-)
f f"
w>>
e r) g,[J
)
1>> et<<v>>g*>>
T<<e1 V()jt <
lf I. '1 ti l
t I,
'I
'lt I.) ~
~
>>
"',
>>
1,
"Vit
Contractor operation in the areas of waste segregation, compaction using a super compactor, and laundry operation was assumed at the proposed staffing level.
The proposed staffing budget was awaiting review by the Engineering and Operations (E&0) Committee composed of Palo Verde owner representatives.
The Manager of Radiation Protection and Chemistry had adequate responsibility, authority, and management support to ensure effective control of radiation, radioactive materials and plant chemistry.
Additional topics in this area with respect to Unit 3 will be addressed during subsequent inspections (50-530/86-16-04).
Training, qualifications and work experience during the Unit 1 outage, was discussed with personnel assigned to" Unit 1 including six Utility Worker/Deconers (two with acting Leadman experience)
and two foremen.
The individuals had completed the required training including respiratory protection and SCBA.
In addition, all had participat'ed in specialized training in decontamination techniques using fluorescent powder.
Discussion of work practices during the outage establishe'd that, during the first 8-10 days of the outage,, Deconers were kept in protective clothing and plastic suits for a full shift.
Subsequently, management directed that duty tours in ~full protective 'clothing and plastic suits were to be limited to one hour.
Those individuals interviewed stated that when necessary, individuals were permitted to leave, the work or standby areas.
In cases where~respirators were>used, individuals were permitted to leave the work area when'they, indicated discomfort.
Several workers noted that leadmen were attentive,to workers'ppearance and apparent well being and, on occasion.,
dire'cted workers to leave the area although no request for relief had been made."
In,response to questioning, some ~orkers noted'hat a1though meal breaks had been missed occasionally due to the need to comp'lete a,,'specific task, i,t had not been a routine occurrence.
Discussion established that good rapport existed between the Radiation Protection, including ALARA, staffs and the utility worker group.
During standby periods, the workers either waited with the radiation protection technician in low exposure rate areas in containment
'r left the containment.
The only expressed concerns related to a lack of understanding of the need for fire watch tours which were part of the assigned tasks for this work group.
Discussion of possible inconsistencies between training in the use of protective clothing (PC)
and on the job guidance from radiation protection technicians established that certain minor differences existed.
One example was that rubber gloves were to be worn over the PC cuff vs. worn inside when multiple rubber gloves were worn so that
"clean" rubber gloves were available to assist in removal of contaminated PCs.
The variations appeared to be the difference between generic instruction and job specific guidance related to the use of PCs.
Approximately 20X of all Unit 1 UtilityWorkers and 100X of the Deconers were interviewed.
Those individuals interviewed appeared to be well qualified and trained and highly motivated.
No violations or deviations were identifie c>,
~
=Oct I
~
a '>>>>>>'
f.
F'rh"
>>
<<fp Fwpr'7
&
I( F t
>>..i ).)
I
>>5
I 9 ~
")"i Ir
'
"F)>>i>>'
h Q
"
I ll l
1 >>'
)
~)yl l>>
l itI
~
kp
>>
N Wtv, I
v'
.W<<9<<549)p.,
P
'
p F
9
'1
.
'F I
I
>>5
>>
p h
p h
~ wpwr (
'7 I
C>>>>
-jc ~ Q>>>>
'5>>P P il, >>>>
"9)Ji
&
c., r Il
~
>>
'yi r'I 5'
>>p ty
~"
y v
>5'I
~
w hj<<
'r w-91>> )"
jft>>,
(ir ',)i>Irp d
r rp p
~ v',
thi
p & '(f.>c>
rv>>p N
l p
j>>
1 lt, I,
p ppwp
&
wQ
'v>> )
IF F
I F>> Ig p
\\ )
N (1 I 4>>
- h)>>c c)
t
,,
c
, 9,- 4,)w ->>
>>c ", )
'
!hh, 9>>,
.Jrv
>>
'(>
r, p
~
5'>> 'f>>)w I>>
1,,'
'
i (57h
):
"
>>'))('" "I',pt F) i,-
>>
5 4',')
")>e'"p.>>>>>i
-
w5."i
~ 799>>)>f-N
~
g 1 h>> *<<,
) )>>I NF >>egg'
I r
Bpvprw
"p'5", l'>,'>>~
9>>'fi(P (F)
'
5>>>>, l) pw"'P
'
.
"
'1 4)
~
"" '
l>>th.
V I
I 9<<)
)
7&pwh 9
.
)I')B'
I
>>
(
<<)
'
F)h
I" tp
.i, ~ ~ rt
)f "s>>j15I,
<<wrpy
'>>.'
'
J
w>>i 1 J>>()59>>>>&>>7r "(
">> ) ')
ll II<< 'r>>j J>>
fIrJJ" (,jir wr,'I, I'
~,
',
"<<(p)prf cjwpc
>>v )->> y, p
f
>
p>
w
. 'p'4
95 y
j ()'>
I>>
'
1'>>r'p-li'l'
)p,h
>>W 1 hjr,lyr(t W
'
y Wl
,Fvt,hr
)1 qr 1,
>>
"
'
lfh II"I'-~" 1>>)>>'I(p
)4,,=,
>>(w<<>>F)(p
) ~
N
'4>>
~ II
>>
I,J I
'
4 ~
( w, l.>>gl lr Ir t'>>>
'I Q py)h )'9),',
fv I
B 4'F(
>>49.w '
~ 955th
~4, r 9(P 4>>
h 't F>>5 4 j
>
l '>>,
l>>>>>>>>P,
)I F>>ll I'i
>>
1 Pc>>WC)
rp 99 p')
"9r)>>'>>
wf
.
<>>m)j 1pp
"
~, I1 9>>>
~ p yyp>>
!harp 1 ",
tlr I'
J p>>VI 4)
q rp Fpl 7 N
I B>>
v I,v ill Jpg
1 Ir
,>>,r>>cl F>>N jr F.
W)>>'"
~ <<fty "t)'3,'
V)'5'('hj'>>>91 I
1>> )9 I
t h
>>
I
~()('Fp)i)(41
>>
rf(0., 'I ')
J
'"(4)f
"ppp "'p,>
F il i
c ll
')'",
'I
>>
)'p
~ ) FP l I'tl'
ll IFQB lh
t 4.
Unit 2 Radiation Protection-Startu FSAR Sections 14.2.1.1.4 Phase III Testin Init No violations or deviations were'identified.
ial Criticalit and Low Power Ph sics Testin
, and 14.2.1.1.5, Phase IV Testin Power Ascension Tests, refer to CESSAR Sections 14.2.12.4.1, Low Power Biolo ical Shield Surve Test, and 14.2.12.5.10, Biolo ical Shield Surve Test, which specify that surveys will be conducted at plateaus of 565 F, 20, 50, 80, and 100K power levels.
The official test copy,
PA-2ZZ01, Revision 0, Biolo ical Shield Surve
, and supporting documents including the signature list, Test Log, Test Exception Log, Test Exception Reports, and Reference List were reviewed and discussed with the responsible representative of the Radiation Protection staff.
The surveys had been completed and documented through the 50Z power plateau.
The test identified a total of 459 points for survey measurement.
Of this total, 141 points had been deleted, some in connection with the Unit 1 survey and others as a result of Unit 1 test findings.
The Unit 2 surveys had identified no test exceptions.
The techniques for performing surveys were discussed and.no discrepancies were identified.
The documentation of the results of the surveys'was clear, unambiguous and professional.
The results of the completed test',
through the 100% power plateau, and the review by the Test Results Review Group will be examined during a subsequent inspection (50-529/86-22-01).
0 5.
Unit 2 Radwaste-Startu I
Chemical and Radiochemical Tests Results of tests performed pursuant to CESSAR 14.2.7.1, Re ulator Guide 1.68, Prep erational and Initial Startu Test Pro rams for Water-Cooled Power Reactors, including CESSAR specified tests were reviewed including:
14.2.12.3.5 - Postcore Reactor and Secondar Water Chemistr Data 14.2.12.5.5 Reactor Coolant and Secondar Chemistr and Radiochemistr Test Table 14.2-2 Power Ascension Test Documents examined included:
74HF-2SS01, Revision 0, Post-Core HFT Chemistr Test 74PA-2SS01, Revision 0, RCS and Secondar Chemistr and Radiochemistr Test Data for the following plateaus had been documented:
Precritical ('F) 195, 252, 280, 340, 450, 498.75, and 565.68 Post Critical (X Power)
9E-3, 3.5, 10, and 19.24
I f)
WOO wr
" )w f)NON I
I
): ",
)" WV'?)
)T p hf
)
I
~)"
'l
',,ra f
- ~
WONN)'> p~ ffr)
f
"')
wn,"f I'" w" 'w
')
o
)
N
.I I
Ih
) wof",w 9',w'wywfw),
w I, I
~,ww1 I
),=
r '>> fg l'
'I INW)h I,,
n)
Iff)., ",,"
I"
~
I I II Iff??,W I'l W
II)n
~ fr(W h W
fffCg'I f
W, W
Nf'"
)
I
~
Wf
,r I i
I'
3 I I r 9 r Plir w
w I
lf )
)
$
I I )I
'vi'l?
I
') )
g)
w
)
$W, OW)
Ll r Iit )
r I
N f O
)
g OO i I hl
$
ff I
I
)
kl I
')
W g" f)WN W
~ f,'I N
WII I
O If OI
"
~
?
III f
I S,?
e,f
~
~
Ifnh f).W
. il
)I II"I r IfW N w )r
)
Wf Irr )
W, Offf
'.'
Ilf'l Ngn h'f'n I
"
W I
'
'
Wh'
i W?
nf
'>>I II 'W'
X wh W
Reactor coolant system chemistry data for 'the period January 1, 1986, through May 31, 1986, was examined.
Technical S ecifications Licensee's chemistry and radiochemistry analytical results were examined for compliance with the requirements of Technical Specifications:
3.4.6 Reactor Coolant System Chemistry; 3.4.7 Reactor Coolant System Specific Activity; for the period January 1 through May 31, 1986.
The licensee had implemented procedures addressing Technical Specifications, 3.11.1.3, Li uid Holdu Tanks, and 3.11.2.6, Gas Surveillance Test, and 75ST-1GROl, Revision 1, Waste Gas Deca Tank Curie Content Surveillance, provided for testing the inservice tank contents once per seven days when additions to a tank were being made.
With respect to Waste Gas Decay Tank contents, the test frequency is increased to once per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> with tank contents at greater than 1/2 of 170,000 curies (Xe-133). It was verified that programs addressing Technical Specifications:
3.11. Secondar S stem Li uid Waste Dischar es to Onsite Eva oration Ponds Concentration; 3.11.1.2 Radioactive Effluents Dose; 3.11. Gaseous Effluents Dose Rate; 3.11.2.2 Dose Noble Gases; 3.11.2.3 Dose Iodine-131, Iodine-133, Tritium, and Radionuclides in Particulate Form; and 3.11. Gaseous Radwaste Treatment previously addressed with respect to Unit 1 in IE Inspection Report No.
50-528/86-06 were in place and functioning.
Com arison of Effluent Monitor Readin s A ainst Known Effluent Concentrations As noted in I&E Inspection Report No. 50-528/86-06, a program was in place, however, insufficient operating experience had been gained to permit comparison.
This matter will be examined during a subsequent inspection (50-529/86-22-02).
Waste S stems The licensee identified the following problems with respect to the waste systems:
l
.
)
I
">>fat p f(>>,
h'
I h
f>>)>>r
=h e ar " + r f.'
a <<r a a)(>>.',
. ()lit
~ f'
r>>>>
Ij fl
r>>'f ')
ra
~
>>
h r
$ I, f
)
~
I
.
>>featr)
) t ~
~ )
.
Sa.) ) )f 'l I
)
ll
"'1 tf h
'"
,",I<< i Ita
<< Tf I'>>
'
r f f>>r <<
<<)3
~.'",', >>,',)."
f h"
"".
". a
)')
lI3 V
I
"
l )t C<<r )frr
~ ','
g a'e e
a lh 'R'J I
f Jfahh+r I'
~ )
~ a) f)t
"r. I.
>>, f)ffl i
'I 'l I
r jp e
lf r
~
, V) R,h)
>>VA>>
g),)
ar, fa')
a l)f
'I I
>>I>>all)j I
'<< '
ef<<
t If It r a ><<a t
)'
I)9faTf
"'
)
Jr>>
)R v a III t,.If t
'" ~
')
I f
~
I ) 'h<<
ft ra<<,
r lite lf
>> <<4
) r It a
)>>I
>>
I I
<<a'l )'
I
<<)f a)
lh rr
.;,.>>)f.., ')'.a tj a')f'",) ,
tj
')>> v L't a h," l I',
a'
R tl
'
r I r
., S~t)
-Js'>>IV: ~
r
~
~
f l r)
-
I)<<(
'
,II') ')>>
R II'f <<)f ft)'.m rg e
>>V t
4 sl,l i
h )
I r I
.
II ff r'll rr
)ah'
a II T
') ~)g>> lj tf
'>> j',.IP)s 4 t
<<
If a" sl
'Ihf
'
It V
<<
'fll ill'ff,
'I
$
t
'EE<<ffa)r')
I I'e lt~
r R)
$
t
~)I,,)
h
,<<l(
lf>>1<<) )
I e'=C" ah "
R
,()'I
li
.'f lt =*,
Gaseous No problems identified, all modifications complete, system operable.
Solid The system had not been placed in operation.
Operating experience will be examined during a subsequent inspection (50-529/86-22-03).
~Lt uid The licensee identified problems with the liquid waste evaporator bottoms density recorder and with high vibration in the Radwaste Building ventilation unit.
The boric acid evaporator was reported to be operating properly.
No problems were identified in connection wi.th the liquid waste system.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Unit 3 Radiation Monitorin S stems (RMS)
FSAR Section 11.5, Process and Effluent Radiolo ical Monitorin and Sam lin S stems, identifies the type and location of the various area, process and effluent monitors.
The installation of the following monitors identified in FSAR Table 11.5-1 at locations specified in FSAR Figure 11.5 was verified:
Title Steam Generator Blowdown
~Ta No.
3-J-SQN-RU-4 and
Auxiliary Building Upper Level Ventilation Exhaust r
Waste Gas Decay Tank 3-J-SQN-RU-10 3-J-SQN-RU-12 Radwaste Building Ventilation Exhaust Filter Inlet r
Waste Gas Area Combined Ventilation Exhaust..
Operating Level Area
.3-J-SQN-RU-14
,3-J-SQN-RU-15 3-J-SQN-RE-16 Control Room Area'ew Fuel Area 3-J-SQN-RU-18 3-J<<SQN-RU-19 Radiochemistry Laboratory Area 3-J-SQN-RU-23 Sample Room Area 3-J-SQN-RU-26
)iiiiJl
)l
, >>t
.~ ~t) ) 1, I >>
tl f'<<7 I
I'1 ) ~
1>>ll f)11
. f13 f) >i)l I
I I>>) tf >>QI lfit r
F
, l'1 ffl)7
)$
g()
f Pl)','f>>t) f,~)
> t'I )))IF>>>>i,
'
f))
~l t>>I\\
., )I
'ft)f>><<
"A" Control Room Ventilation Intake
"B" Control Room Ventilation Intake
"A" Fuel Pool Area Condenser Vacuum Pump/Gland Seal Exhaust Low Range High Range 3-J-SQN-RU-29 3-J-SQN-RU-30 3-J-SQN-RU-31 3-J-SQN-RE-141 3-J-SQN-RE-142 Plant Vent Monitors Low Range High Range 3-J-SQN-RE-143 3-J-SQN-RE-144 Fuel Building Ventilation Exhaust Monitors Low Range High Range 3-J-SQN-RE-145 (Tag not visible)
PersonneL IARM West Auxiliary 120'evel 3-J-SQN-RE-154A Personnel IARM East Auxiliary 120'evel 3-J-SQN-RE-154B Personnel IARM Control Room Level 140'-J-SQN-RE-154C Penetration IARM West Auxiliary 120'evel 3-J-SQN-RE-157C Penetration IARM East Auxiliary 120'evel 3-J-SQN-RE-158A Penetration IARM West Auxiliary 140'evel 3-J-SQN-RE-158B The preoperational testing of the RMS had not started.
Testing and calibration will be performed by the operating organization with review by the Test Results Review Group.
Installation of additional monitors and completion of testing and calibration will be performed during subsequent inspections (50-530/86-16-07).
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Unit 3 Gaseous Waste S stem Tours and examination of the gaseous waste system verified that the components identified in FSAR"Table 11.3-1,, Gaseous Radwaste S stem Process E ui ment Descri tion, had;been installed as depicted in FSAR Figure 1.2-7, General Arran ement Plans, Between'l." 140'" and El.
200'".
The hydrogen/oxygen analyzer 'referenced in FSAR Section 9.3.2 had been installe r>>
r)-:)h>>>>
r') r>><<a>>>>"
'l
- 4')>>>>
r>>*I, ~
3 9j>>>>
) qrff>>>>)I fir)"" >> )'<< ~ f
'fI"'lf f )(ff
>>
r ~
r>>(l
>> off>>)'r>> 'I>>rlf>>r
'fr)
)r>> r '" I>>
>>
~
~
>>>r i<<j
>,t 'ffl>>>>
w I't* rl
>>
) I'I)'I 'I,"
-I r>>l'w; I'
j gr)I>>>>
" >><<) J
>>I)
, rl,n,f
) ) r'"tr yQ -,
I r'r)<<>>
l lr>>>>
l,fr h
" "'f"'IJ'""'
>>
~)fI rlr3 r (I)
0>>,f>> ')
t>> "I >>
) ~ >>
l>>>>
l
, (f,
>>rp) lr
'J I
I l
r I ~
'
'f "(I'I J h>>
f
>> 'fgf 'I
'r)
l>>II
" )
<<'I",
)!)>>;I'.r<)
'>>f Ir)r)
)
- ")>>
rf) ) ') 'r h ()
<<)>>
I 'f r
T'7 'f '
'"r>> )*
'>>"(r
) (, I >>err I>,lfr,'
<<>>'i>>.,',r t')lf">>'w>>
.IJ'>>0 f "r ->> ')
') ')
',,IJ<<
~
II >> I')
)
'
'1'l rg>> f P)I r,
~ I
f<>w>>=>>r)ff (r I, gr(
>>
h Q
'W rr( M>>>>rg>>
I lhj. f
'f
',
)
'>>r>> ),I ff f>>
.()<<f lf h
r'r
~)
)I)
~ 'I 4f
The preoperational test program had not been started at the time of the inspection.
The test program will be conducted by the operations group.
Test results will be reviewed by the Test Results Review Group.
Procedures related to gaseous waste have been reviewed and identified in IE Inspection Reports No. 50-528/84-31 and 86-08.
The licensee intends to use procedures common to Units 1 and 2 in the operation of Unit 3.
Additional topics in this area will be examined during subsequent inspections (50-530/86-16-05).
No violations or deviations were identified.
Unit 3 - Li uids and Li uid Wastes Tours and examination of the liquid waste system verified that the components identified in FSAR Table ll'.2-1, Li uid Radwaste S stem (LRS)
E ui ment Descri tions, had been installed as depicted in FSAR Figures 1.2-4 (El. 40 -0 and El'; 100'-0"), 1.2-5 (El. 100'-0"), 1.'2-6 (El.
120'-0 and El 140'-0),
and 1.2-7 (El 140r-0" and El 200'-0"), General Arran ement Plans.
It appeared that adequate provisions had, been provided to control leakage, overflow, and spillage.
Preoperational testing had not started.
Testing will be performed by the operations staff.
Test results will be reviewed by the Test Results Revie~ Group.
The licensee plans to implement, the LRS programs, plans,
'and procedures presently in use at Units 1 and 2 at Unit 3.
Additional topics in this area will be examined during subsequent inspections (50-530/86-16-06).
No violations or deviations were identified.
Unit 3 - Solid Waste Tours and examination of the solid radwaste system, verified that the components identified in FSAR Table 11.4-3, SRS E ui ment Descri tion, had been installed as depicted in FSAR Figure 1.2-5, General Arran ement Plans at El. 100'-0". It was noted that the Radwaste Baler,,identified in FSAR Section 11.4.2.2, had been relocated from the position indicated in FSAR Figure 1.2-5 to the shielded enclosure identified as the 55 Gal.
Drum Stor.
area of the Radwaste Building.
The radwaste baler (Compactor) vent was not connected to the building ventilation exhaust system (50-530/86-16-01).,
The facility appeared to provide adequate shielding for operating personnel.
Preoperational testing had not started at the time of the inspection.
Testing will be performed by the
,operating staff.
Results of testing will be reviewed by the Test Results Review Group.
Procedures related to solid waste, radioactive material control and transportation have been reviewed and identified in IE Inspection Reports Nos. 50-528/83-12, 50-528/85-09, and 50-528/86-13.'he procedures will be those presently in use at Units 1 and 2.
Additional topics in this area will be examined during subsequent inspections (50-530/86-16-03).
No violations or deviations were identifie ff f
<.
>><<vr'.i "
<<)
ff'I
'
'>>, lff )
'4 f,f y" KV>>fh
<<>> ') Ill
'
1-1"'O'),'
l
'>> I
"'
>>I "fj h ~,tl Vl 1<<>>
)Pt
)1 I'hi< 'f
>
K )
if<<<
r<<
t S')K'9 l"
'fh 'I<<I'
'htf 1 f it h
g 1 ) J Ihg 1*'I'h
.,>>
"rh, I) )g>>)j ht
~
jfj
)1> 1 "3 ih i
ff>, )
1 i,',,1 1"'
P Q
J.> g[K
~
hffh f
<<i i
~
)
1, g<<
lfghhlmf
~ 11<<g f ) )hhv"
71>>1
"'Ki
,f(
~
fj
~ f>,
>>,l'
t'i
>h,i Pl>> t'" I*
I 'f 1 I (l
If
<<'11<<tg')
r
'
>>1
I
>>'f
~
lf ff>>K
'"o ') )
)')< j fmm<) th F I
'>>PK'
> i,
>'q,t, 1 "
Jjf('p PV't 1,
)f /~if<<ff
~ I
> jf 'fffh hi g'Ifhh I li Km 1> j If
)
hh
=ftf
'
l
",
1<<
~,<1 ff 1<
<<1 a
Pf 1,1 I ff '> '
h')
'I"ljkfml'1',
') '
V
~
fgh,
'>> K',
'
K>> ~
fs)j)/ LKJI
k
<<1<<
)'I',i'~P t '3)
~
I I
>
ff
'"
ha Kh<<PP.
~ i'K>>
W>>1'I'l
<<
'h
> ~l, <<
I
'
-h Kf
>>
,
<<
""I)
)
1>4<< m.fl'l
)I
>>1
~
'
~,Xl,
-~
1<11)1
<<>>
P.IP
'
>'1
> 11
) ".
s,g <<1
'" ~lf
>'
,i h<<h Kli
"
Facilities and E ui ment Units 1 and
No changes in facilities had adversely affected the radiation protection program.
The licensee had developed a portable access control/change facility for use at the 100 foot elevation containment personnel access hatch (Inspection Report No. 50-528/86-08).
Licensee representative commented that deficiencies in the arrangement of the 140 foot elevation access control area had been identified.
Possible changes in this area were under consideration.
Unit 3 The facilities located on the 140 foot elevation were toured and found to be 'consistent with the description provided in FSAR Section'12.5.4.3, Facilities Related to Radiation Protection, and Figure 1.2-7, General Arran ement Plans Between El. 140'-0" and El., 200'"-0".
A shielded, portable instrument calibration facility and separate portable instrument maintenance and repair facility had been equipped and placed in service near Unit 1.
This facility will provide calibrated instruments to Unit 3 when required.
The inspector verified that the supply, type and range of portable instruments available exceeded those identified in FSAR Section 12.5.2.2.2, Portable Radiation Detection Instrumentation.
The availability of the types and supply of the instrumentation described in FSAR Section 12.5.2.2.3, Personnel Monitorin Instruments, was confirmed.
The facilities provide sufficient office space for the radiation protection staff, records, and technical literature.
Additional topics in this area will be addressed during subsequent inspections (50-530/86-16-02).
No violations or deviations were identified.
Internal Ex osure Control Inspection Report Nos. 50-528/86-13, 529/86-13, and 50-530/86-10 noted that the licensee had installed two new whole body counting systems.
The systems had not been placed in service pending completion of procedures and instrument calibration.
The licensee reported that the systems had been placed in service following completion of the procedures and calibration.
Procedures 75RP-9XCZ4, Canberra Whole Bod Countin S stem Calibration, Revision 0, and 75RP-9ZZ08, Canberra Whole Bod Countin S stem 0 eration, Revision 4, were reviewed.
The licensee also reported the installation of an uninterruptible, stabilized power supply for both the whole body counting systems and the TLD laboratory equipment.
No violations or deviations were identifie )
h h
h
'I<<
t g
ll (
1 I"I,xg'1 II hilh ) Jb, I
I
(
'> >; "3'p g ~ )
~ (
~,.>>>'
f r."',;
'f
~
mh h
I "b'>> )R ir"
) t<<
i 4<<
(>".',:r f ">'( (t t'f >~gb>t
~ ) I'i'i'r
) g
,
(
'(
1 (p )
I,
.I ijt,t ibm 1,
'I
~ it
') >,
'I'g'p't.
) 'I:,t t f ")
'g
> ) '"
I)>>
'
)>~3 r.rr) $ gq ):,',
" ', 'R,g'),,'>", g )" ),,') f '.(',). )'g p
'p('.g g ~- g
)
<
t "B" >
gi>>,g bt
)p m
h(), '.(> Rh',
) Q<<(g i
I
'*
1, lr
) ) $
i I
<<h)
>E>>'>
f) ),
" -"l>,'
. l,j bg ) )ik>'L>>)g g>>(f>>,
p R
"'J I VI
~ ') ')
I i
tg I I(
1 t'<<,
I>, g, ir(f (,'1 h,l!)
=
- (
~ f ',
')
'
>.lrJ g >, >Q "g ),
<<Ittm~wgg
".f f'.>>y(
) )'gt, ),)g R
",g h
R
, h,kh,t
~ >> I i i
~
k t.k ~.. ~ ".
i
> It>>(r'tl)gil>>
1, g<<>>
~
g,
>>
i> (
'()gl I
p
. '
L>> 'rb
>> '>
II
>>,ii,k'>f >>Ig "(
iB RI
.
I, gtp I>>
>>k)g)
I'I 1 '(
"
Phb Pgtb
~
P 'i i
'( tg l g)!'<< ',
g fggJ fg)phr R
,Ic<<gr-,) 'i m)gbr >g
)
I, i
(1
.i ) iti
'I
<<.("
Ik m=
'"
h 'V r>g>>1
"- m, ','>>,
g
<<)
t) >Rgb--m>
m(>> r R
k.');
.I<<.'g4 g(>f t h tiittf it <<)I (p I>g tg)
(i3I'g h
pt))tf, t><<g f"() g
,
p m<<R>> )i" i,tb
'
k'm, I <<>>> ( 11 "'P t<
t.
>>,')
J r
R )"
h
',
.Eli(<<,I hii 1 g>
)I R f'>> (>>
) )
'('>>( (,t)tt(
'i )
i ()g i> (
I" hhh ~>>itik)(
,j~
t p
g '",t -gcigi)i)
pgpi,(f i,'
>m I
h it,, I g
i 1'<<t) )
t> y>>, ~
>h h 1 'I Pr'(tl t hlr)h
'1>>)((
i I)
i )
I I
(gal
"
'
~)Ere<<<<J" i(
I >>g,~ 't,l I
<<t
>>*,>>
, 'i j
h
'>>'f>>
'I I" it>>
'<<
".
I
.'
I
'
" 'F."I (',I g>>m'p
.E(gD",t
",
gf'>'g
'" ).
".'>> 1>()I (
",bg
'
g'thg) )g
"
<<
.'g)
'pm>>> '
'k g P,)
t>>))>>t(f 'i m)'"k
)h'
I
<<1 ~ ll,ati I'~if. h
"r) g'gt>'.2 '
g
~ kg'
g Jt') ib>>'
'
gl g(;h
'(
I
)
(it "I g 1>, '
(",
'
i<<.,'>>') ) g, bm
> i
>>
i V>>h'p'
<< 'I,".
"
>>R.>i'<> 'gh)>> ',b )mp
~ )
g>>
'I
")
'f((ggr h 'itp ')<<i <<"
g'~
'I fmf
"g "t>3>')'
I
"
i r
h
4
'"
f'gf(>>
hl h(p h" ) '(
~
I b( ll Ri I",,) gi'I mtI': ),'gl Sg
)'>
'
>
I
.1(()if,'g i
i, mt p
mt '> Rf. I '>>
p g
m
gth!tp
~"
I h
I Unit 1 Containment Atmos here Monitor-RU-1 On June 24, 1986, the Senior Resident Inspector became aware of a licensee concern related to the calibration of the subject Unit
monitor.
Subsequent discussion with licensee personnel and review of documents established that the particulate and iodine channels of the monitor indicated concentrations of radioactive materials approximately three orders of magnitude less than those identified through grab sampling.
The gas channel was apparently unaffected.
Technical Specification 3.3.3.1, Radiation Monitorin Instruction, states:
"The radiation monitoring instrumentation channels shown in Table 3.3-6 shall be OPERABLE with their alarm/trip setpoints within the specified limits."
Table 3.3-6 requires that the particulate and gaseous channels of Containment Building Atmosphere monitor RU-1 be operable in modes 1, 2, 3, and 4 and for the particulate monitor to have a measurement range of'0E-9 to 10E-4 pCi/cc with an alarm/trip setpoint of < 2.3 E-6 pCi/cc Cs-137.
The Action Statement notes that Specifications 3.0.3 and 3.0.4 are not applicable.
The applicable Action Statements require that the licensee comply with the action requirements of Specification 3.4.5.1, Reactor Coolant S stem (RCS) Leaka e Detection S stem, and for process monitors (RU-l), place a movable air monitor in-line.
The licensee had established that the problem with RU-1 was apparently an incorrect calibration factor and that, until corrected, the movable air monitor, required by the action statement, would suffer from the same fault as RU-1.
The two monitors were of the same design except for the mobility aspect.
Technical Specification 3.4.5.1, RCS Leaka e Detection S stem, requires that the containment atmosphere, particulate and gaseous monitoring systems be operable in modes 1, 2, 3, and 4.
Specifications 3.0.3 and 3.0.4 are applicable.
Monitor RU-1 and its homologues are state-of-the-art systems which incorporate a microprocessor near the detector and a minicomputer in the control room.
The particulate system utilizes a filter paper which is moved in step wise fashion at a preselected rate.
The instrument can display counts per minute, the function used to count vendor supplied calibration sources, as well as units of concentration (pCi/cc).
In operation, the particulate monitor counts a collected sample for 3 seconds, terminates the count for 7 seconds during which a regression analysis is performed on previous counts and computes a rate of change and then repeats the cycle.
The syst: em can display not only the present calculated concentration but the average concentration for 24 previous
minute, 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> or 1 day periods.
The present system does not have the capability to produce a permanent record.
The CRACS which was to provide that capability was found to be incapable of operation.
Following the licensee's identification of the problem, the licensee, in consultation with th'e vendor, determined that the" firmware supplied with the system microprocessor; was of a 'later generation than the documentation supplied with the system.
The firmware utilized an
lit I')
rf f
'D kQ DI
,,')
pt
r r
,,l 1 ft>>
f I'-
1)",
>> <<r)4 $
i,
>> g rt
ti)
r, ft>> r it
"
"ti ii '
4>>fpt 4>>j't
,,Ptr 4)r tr
'ff
!J.
1,
>>I I
'tlI jl m""ft If 1
4 D>>1 F
tt
'1
"lift r,
t T't lj I
~
"-l<t)l
)4 4,>> "JA>>4
~.54>><J
, il lj 31)
lt'I 4 t f
>>1
~ p 44)
p p
JJ')5'"fp
'IJ..
I <Lfft)
D )f,,, I,,
'f f!',Itll 4ff;<J Ip
"
"
<fan
'D0
'f )'
tt ~
t XII 4)'f Jf)f) if 1 I', )4 'f I f),
r p
~
ff(>>p-.-">>p It
)
'4 '()
't ti
"f ) >>r
'
Itt ~
>> ft'.>>ftp,ii ll>>
I 4'4IJ>>'<rf'i>>
'i.t>> )
III'if 'It>>
p>>) fr
4 I'"
4] 44,4>>l<
I ",'1
~p~'l(I t
.If'l,lf
)4
~ 4
<
1 J>>I,I II
)ttf 1)
I 'J tf
'
f r()='fr>>
tt) t
"jl>>
Dp) f)'r
>>i 't tt))t
'" (l f) '>>J"p" p"
- II s
J) f."
r>>D I );
'
~ 1'I ) "
<<
~4, 1;
4'
'>> 4 t tft I
i
','"
<<,Jl '>>
~ (1) '.
r 4J pjt l1
'I t.'
)
r3
~
'
~ 1 Pp 4 1<
<<'D(44,
),>> II(1 Ijft IttDJ>>
1 lt'4, Ii fp 44)P Ipp tr 4r
~ >>
I>>
lLI 4 4'p>>f>>DJ)>>
'(r
)
~
I<
i
") pi,,<<f i,pg)J'f3,.f'
t
<A," ")f'J()w'Ijff.l J lipf J
) F>>rt fil)
~
r>>>> f l)>>t 1 )
I 4)
1 fp),
t I 4>>
)Qtf
) tf t Ifft f
(1 )
ti I Ill>>
pr>>, (), l t
4 t)t't
.
~
'
g IJ 1 4 I
'I 'll
,J 4)>> 'tf) rr)rf, f
, lp tt gftp y
>>jf I
'f I!K.,
t 14) ~ '>>
t
< II,' 1
~
i >> )<>>J t
'tt<II I ')
I lt>>t 1 II II rf,i 1 ',tjlt, 71,,
p>>,1, ttll,
'0 tj 4)
lt '"f 'p>>
~
I g
I 7),'$ f )
tfyk ~ft<<s
)
l ( J fff 4 tt, r p
<<4'I i
47 )47
~ 114'
<(
f, ti~(4, 1 p p
~
ff P
")') ')f
%V 1,
>r) I,, <,
~
~ 1<g
.It )1
'"
4 )'.)"
"l I
'I r,gffr J
'it,)II f(f)
,
~ f <<)gf 1 tliv,p'4,,
f/ '>>
t','7 t>>'4 f ) )
V
internal system flow meter to determine flow and an installed CFM to cc/sec conversion factor while the documentation indicated that a
calibration factor which incorporated a value for flow conversion from CPM to cc/sec was required.
As a result, the installed calibration factor included the reciprocal of the flow conversion factor of approximately 1.4E-3.
Concern related to the performance of RU-1 and RU-143, the moveable air monitor, was initially documented in a Radiation Protection Support group originated PVNGS Work Re uest 8091035, dated May 30, 1985.
The Problem displayed discrepancies in detector count rates (CPM) between their microprocessors and the mini-computer CRT.
While observing the particulate channels for these monitors, count rates consistent with cal.
data (10-100 CPM) were noticed locally at the monitors.
However, the mini-computer CRT indicated count rates ranging from E-1 to E-8 CPM....This results in errors of several orders of magnitude in the indicated concentrations and makes such data unreliable and suspect."
F A June 4,
1985, company correspondence letter, PVNGS-LGP-M85-99, titled, Particulate Channel on RU-001 Declared Ino erable, prepared in response to the concerns expressed in Work Request 8091035, addressed the algorithm used by the monitoring system and discussions with the manufacturer and concluded:
"The detector has been verified to operate satisfactorily by the performance of the I&C surveillance test procedure which actuates the check source and verifies that the count rate increases by at least a decade.
Radiation Protection has demonstrated that the activity level of containment (As) is less than the minimum detectable by this radiation monitor and is close to Zero.
Therefore, radiation levels and count rates on the minicomputer of Zero (O.OOE-Ol)
or very low values (X.XXE-16) are indicative of the activity in containment at this time and should be considered acceptable and the radiation monitor should be considered operable."
i Engineering Evaluation'Request (EER), number 85-SQ-144, originated by the Radiation Protection Support, group on November 12, 1985, referenced the previous documentation and raised four questions under the following heading:
I
"Research the software applied in all particulate and iodine channels and determine the following:
"A.
Are the units used in the software for the radiation level conversion factor the same for both particulate and iodine channels'
"B.
In what units must'this conversion factor be entered to establish the correct relationship betw'een cpm and activity concentration (pCi/cc)2
"C.
How do the microprocessors receive flow information as applied in the software description and does the software apply a conversion factor to convert scfm to cc/sec?
~ I~
hf
't*
i llc II
)
<<II)
"I')
uv I
.
~ F
- II h')') f,
)Sh)
'cuvh'
i I"ll C
lvtr FFV
">>'Q)
i 'f'Ill Yu cf)
)u I; ))
rr'"F
"c I i)
~ '>>l) )
f CI)}p<<3>>'()>>
vhrf)
i>>1 fi
)'
)ivv,ri Ff<<)>
m 131
.f u 'I'lrh ),}, j Ilr<<l)~ li
~t, F il;I f f bt-r-
<<)>>
u tr}r lv
-'."Fhd)>>>>,, "c f >>
<<.u CI<<)."
r
'>
'
" '.:.))J>> )>>
Cil F
i '<<IIIH
~,
CC I
)i)I'),
ih
~
h ) rr)f 1)'
~
) 3 )ff
>> j
)
)
lh (
'
)
)Q
)v=-
rcii<<i* hi)f 1>>f c>>
I
'>>
',
1 '>>lu Q
c"
}
.i I rc pf)F)cfi)
'
Ii)
h)'
r) 'h>>
Yf'f I
h ) 'I I"I,,'CY I r, C
r )'N.'1 ff},'"',1 r uiih
~
~
t I
.
t I'tc)FP c c,i
.I f
>>
i')
I>>jI
.p)
i
',vi>>f..
)
)ffc) 3
~
il h F v
ii I}'h'lt>>>>',),j )fan ),u
">>"'..
'""f 1
.')
'
'
I j f'
'
-
>>
i",.f>> utv>>')tt,, )
et<>)
'j,'Irr)ra
'
't<<t <<4)')r),'. t,,
~ 1 c fr
~ I
'} "
rlr)
I C',
F
~
I I i a
II>>F)
.f
~ j-I i;i ll
'
~
C ff Y
~
~~
~ ')r;j)
v-if)
~ fhvff rtc"
'I
<<
'>>f) ivy
~
Y l I }">>1'l F f i<<)t c
h Il 'uf)J
)I( '(
'f.".",Y) u'>> ',
>>
f 3$f))E
')<<YY ">>'
f i )i rv YA >> "'r>>;"
I')
'hh) '.3>>) I) )
F~
C)'if- ~ ('
F 1) ~,,
u ) ',<<WII".f
<< f.c'< 'f, r) f I ) j u )c,
)c a f,,
h uiv)<<h )
civu1 f).I )>>rr ),r.
>>u,i) f
- )'>>>>ffcu t i )huff,v,
)) t'",~} ii>
g,3
rf~Fi," <<>> i ', "")',
c
>>C>> <<ch'<<)
ll rrh) l jtc','>><<l )
c>>I fcu ~ 'h ~ ~ )
h fv j
'c I)
r>>)~
Ihr)l( '>>,
h>>
kcrh) y I
)>>1>>I Jf)
Y I
I 1 u
-
>> f
)tc P>>f c>> )
r> ),I'f r>>
>>i>>
'-) " '
1 <<}
n" vlf
~ vu} "<<
I I
f" i 1)f Y
') f>> 'll') '>> j
'I,"),J'<<)
r>>u.vfh".,c)>>
)a>>A
<i Y
.1,,
t<<>>r I
iffi
'" tf
',
>> )'>>I'fr)
1)
f)~F
)
i 1 )
".'fl)
r tru i
<<g c
)1" Cr I)
, ~
f>>
V
"D. If units for these conversions factors are not consistent with data base "displays, change these displays to reflect the correct units for these parameters.
This has a direct bearing on the validity of RU-1's particulate channel indi'cation, 'which is one of three mechanisms used in -primary coolant 'leak detection per Tech. Specs."
The EER noted that the concerns and questions raised were applicable to all three Units.
The response to EER 85-SQ-144, dated June 12, 1986, noted that:
A.
B.
The algorithm for both the particulate and iodine channels was the same.
For the old scope monitors (RU-1, 8, 13, 14, and 51) the proper units were SCFM and that the conversion factor in the software CFM C.
For the new scope monitors (RU-141, 143, and 145) the, value for flow was input by a flow transmitter and the conversion of SCFM to cc/sec was performed by the installed firmware.
D.
The displays were verified to be correct.
Because of concerns related to the performance of RU-1, the licensee had been collecting and analyzing containment atmosphere grab samples.
Early in Unit 1 operation containment activities were significantly below the lower level of the operating range (10E-9 pCi/cc) of RU-1..
Beginning in January 1986, short lived noble gas daughter nuclides, Rb-88 and Cs-138, appeared in increasing concentrations in grab samples:
Sam le Date Selected Exam les
/
CS-138 Ci/cc January 30, 1986 February 2,
1986 February 16, 1986 February 25, 1986 March 3, 1986 1.08E-8 1.80E-7 2.03E<<7 1.04E-7 1.57E-7 6.78E-10
,2.16E-9 1.35E-9 1.11E-9 1.09E-9 During the period April 15 through June 28, 1986, no activity was identified in the Unit 2 containment.
Since permanent records of the Unit 1 RU-1 values were not maintained, no comparison of discrepancies between instrument readout and analytical results was possible.
However, discussions with licensee representatives established that the indicated values were several orders of magnitude below the value determined by grab samplin r I
'
a D~ ~)n '
(1 r",'<< lvfrf 4 >,1 lli hp
.('<<j 'I,)
4'5 1",[jwt
p,t Err '")
>.
)
ftj$ )y
"v r tr<< ', l,l'(
irt"<<DE P 1(
)
i 4 ')
I
(
~
<<4
$
luff Q J
'4
'( <<,,I y () Jr" >
I ~
y v Pw(v
)
4 fr>>t
"f $
")
() 4'wl(
(l
.(<<~4 a
I>>
<<r 1 l v>>(f
<<).
'
g t'
"
',
1)
t')(f rl
'"',,
a'al 4
'Vt " ') ~ l,,l
>4 )w
,1 t, )rf
)
a) C<<>>
<<> Xf
)(4',ll>>
1 I" I, '.
I(
)
"4 (t p 4)
'~(I"
= ',
l p',
I
>>>>
<<, "lt, f/'P t
~(,
(1+
, ))4)r ) 4<<t w(ay ( I 1'
l P 'r Wf)(
)
P
"J',,
~
.'<<(5
-,I, a
<<,p
'I tv
1
~
4 <<t Vt!(>> l
~ 4(
Wlytj f, f))
r')
PP'
- W
)"i 1 j
')vf a
1'll
>>
'jar, I
rp,
~ )
f()vlf l(lt I.(
l,at>>
"'
1)
" l P<<t>>
v
,V W ~
8 p,a)$ j. ),,')
"
)
"r'
l,'. 'R
',t(,');k)f j>>
~)>>l
).'wr (
qr v
~
a
)('1 va, v l (<< ~
$
>> 1 ~
( 'I p,",P Ir
li
>>,4(
'1, 1,<<r<<1
' '
I'
~l"'[>> V 4 '>>
fir" vr~ 'I vt
f Pw'fval'rt a)
(rj rra,(
w P)
)(
~ r4>>
"1(-
a
~ ~,~Df.,
I I
.
<<1'fg
')P r'ffwa
- t--f I
Wt($
f (
I'l,l I
I - <<,,144
)
'"1
">>
L t f l
Jrrra I
1 )
',
~
lt 1 lt
0 The licensee was continuing the inquiry into this matter at the conclusion of the inspection and during the telephone discussion of July 16, 1986.
The specific topics being addressed included:
A.
Was monitor RU-1 operable, as defined in Technical Specifications 4.3.3.1 and 4.4.5.1 (i.e., had a valid calibration been performed)?
B.
Would RU-1 have been able to satisfactorily detect RCS leakage and alarm at the correct setpoint (pCi/cc) in spite of the fact that the indicated concentration values were 'several orders of magnitude below the apparent real concentration.
The resolution of this issue appears to rest on whether the monitor alarms on the basis of concentration (pCi/cc) or rate of change in detected activity.
'I C.
Status of compliance with Technical Specifications 3.3.3.1 and 3.4.5.1 in view of the "resolution 'of questions 1. and 2.
In view of the complexities related to'his issue and questions which remained unanswered at the time of"the inspection, this matter is considered unresolved.
i(50-528/86-22-01)
13.
Unresolved Items n
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required in order to ascertain whether they axe acceptable items, open items, deviations or violations.
The licensee's timely Semiannual 0 eratin Re ort Radioactive Effluents - Jul 1,
1985 through December 31, 1985 for Unit 1 was reviewed.
No errors or anomalous data were, identified.
No violations or deviations were identified.
15.
Followu on IE Information Notices The licensee provided a copy of a memorandum addressed to all Radiation Protection Supervisors/Leads/Techs dated May 14, 1986, addressing IE Information Notice No. 86-23, Excessive Skin Ex osures Due to Contamination with Hot Particles.
A copy of the Notice, licensee guidance on proper response to the discovery of hot particle personnel contaminations and a review of the hot cobalt-60 particle found at Palo Verde Unit 1 (see IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-528/86-13, 50-529/86-13, 50-529/86-10)
were included with the memorandum being circulated.
No violations or deviations were identified.
16.
Tours During the inspection tours of the Unit 1, 2, and 3 auxiliary, control and~radwaste buildings and Unit 3 turbine and containment buildings were conducted.
In addition, the portable instrument maintenance facility was toured.
The Unit 1 fuel transfer tube bellows shield plug removal chai'n
a
>> lf'I 4>> )
'>>JC 4!
I, j)'I.', ), )
Pl 4 IJ
'I 4
)
I JC) I CW')
~
I
< ) )
~'lr
~
f
'
1 I'fry~ 44,)
'I Ij Jj J)R'.
CII I 4
~ >>
) f )
)))*'>
p f
4 p
- I(
4*
4 f()"<<I
<<454
<< ~ Jl 44 II IJ J)j, R'),f )
W i
"
)rl
~
>>
p
~,<<I I
4C<<
~)I'
)lp f
fi",'"I I
I CC
<<')'
~
~
~
' ) ) '
') )'
f'
4 I
f l J
". )'.JP
'I)
'
'
I I,I'
}
f')R a
)J R
R -l 1lff>>*cR
<<,JC ')
~ )c)"
t. III 4 II'lrc 4 'IfIj
~ >>C "V~r) 4<<J
'4
~3.,) ) J I '
f)IP'9
"
'
',
CCI)
4'))
J f +
J"":4 ',J 3)JO'; g.),,>>
't ')5)'I"'!7J
>>II >>gg,f Cp)
~ *-
ICCI Jl ", 4>>,/pl'
II>>
4 fp Jf)
C>>4
'4 j<>p 4
>>f)g
)"'g CRI f>>JI
) I
"'
~ f 'CJCi 4 ~ )
P PCCC P
),
~,
,'J'4>>,
1"
"' 'J>>
'r<<.J<f, 4.',
I Ij
~ 'Ilr
R
H 44
~ I'
)
""
',
. ICCJ
~4
<<)').'I
'fr) 4 t
Ig
'<<)
f,gpss fr,fj
~
r.
,41.4 EI J
~ ir'>>"
f>>"
L
)
<<Rp<<')
I ~
'VR
eOZ*
'p C
a I>> ~4J )
~~>>Jfij I
II I)
II fl f>>')III,;I ') llf 4 *f
>>
'I
'
lr
jj~ "'A
~
C
~ 7 Cf
.7>>j>> ',) 4
<<)'
J 7 444 L I
~
'
~ ff
,)4
~ l<< '. >>!4 ('>>'>>4)
I)p
'J
'I p
. CC>>>>
p<J 'f)
f>>)
~'7
>>>".>>II
)
)7
~ ICC
- '.
<<
) I'4 I' fr i, I r '",l.0
~
<<Ill
t 4
~
l "...J" C '
i) 1I
",'") CR'f'),'f,iP,r.)f'~;,'4
',",,. ")f
'pal'>>
R
"- J" f3 ')
".Rp
'), "7
!I'S 'P...I
'
'"
P
"
7>>.
fall was verified locked.
Confirmatory surveys were performed in Units
and 2 using an ion chamber survey instrument, NRC-015844, due for calibration August 15, 1986.
The tours disclosed that the housekeeping in Unit 1 was not of the, quality observed in Unit 2.
In'ddition, the tours of Unit;3 disclosed what appeared to be a complete absence of the graffiti frequently found in facilities at the end of the construction phase.
No violations or deviations were identified.
17.
Exit Interview The scope and findings of the inspection were discussed with the individuals denoted in report'section 1.
The inspector informed the licensee with respect to the operability question of'nit 1 Containment Atmosphere Monitor RU-1 (report section 12) that there appeared to be a
violation of the requirements of Technical Specification 3.4.5.1, Reactor Coolant Leaka e Detection S stems.
Subsequent telephone discussion with the licensee, representatives on July,16, 1986, disclosed that the licensee was continuing an inquiry into the operability aspects of monitor RU-1 as well as compliance with'echnical Specifications 3.3.3.1 and 3.4.5.1.
It was concluded that this matter should be considered unresolved.'he licensee was subsequently info'rmed of this decision by telephon ~
<< ~ g
~ tt
<<
~('f
-)
>>,>>() (
I p
I
>
~ ~
<<.
,)
I
"'-=)
'
f h P
'
- I.f.'I)<<>
<< II, J I >').(
<<)lf.
> <<f'> '
f.5f)'.
.ffd 3()
")')~."> '.<<)':
)') -lf,')
) )lf'f'33(fi, -Shgf
~'()
a~
<<>
<<>()
f)
<<I II
<<) if)1 ~i'f<<)
I<< "h>
l '
(> (<<
>
) ', ()
'I'h
)') ht
<<)<<lf,
<<
f tf
<<><<II<< f
'
f) ')
"
)>).'
,(I
<<)<<
ftt f<<<<
ti fj
.'f.)!.;.(),
~ <<I" r,)~
)
h(f
<<>)
)l)hf
'>>I
)
'0 ) 'I <<
"1 gi <<() 3 ")",k',0,
<< tt (f 1 3<)
~'f)J')
I'I(
)i> g "'
I"gap
~
)" >
<<Jfh <<I)'I
) it
'
Ct)
I
> <<I'j')
.I )g
]
)
I<< I'I>>
'<<
- f f '
") )..<<(*>>
,> -. r
~
)'( ',( f(()3'( )-~" - 'f.>>
., )
.,
"., ')ffk') '>> ;
c~c' ',
)'> 'f (I)'hff"'() j '<<ll<<<<'"
.
")>>','
6('
9 '>';<<
. t "tj)<<"'>'+ ff~
)1'
til h
)
<<,J:
'>) ~
t
= '<<(> )
L
~'
I f
) f( )".'f "') '"
<3 k.>X((>>'X'>>I ')
)h ')
f
<<I',f
'<<
'
', f>,'<<El{(fl'
)I('
~<<lP
'
'I() Ij;.f!)I>(
t,f<<)t'~( ) ()
Il 'I
<<() >
"., )A
<< I <<
~
I
~ f'>'<<<
'
l'it>
k')I I<
'
)f'fl " ') (
) a "
+
'
f f)()
<<)<<((h[((g,> ",i h )offP
~ ($ g
<<)<<
~ >tt!f<<yi)> hP'~,!h) f, I <<)
<< t)af
)
> 1><<<<)
<<f<<t "'. >
g<<).t.')
)(.-.gb
<<)8', 'I ~T, ~)
-".) ( Jf off >> I-<<",>l>>
I fe"
.,< )*
i
))la.h'~~, f
~ ~(f)'<.<<)X), ~f,'(:1 fr(!),
"a>h e~
)>>
.i a0':
N r:<"> 8')
>)'<<'('/ ".'<<>>f>f,- "'I)')
"f'
'"
'
-'3
"
',100~'~'
~
<<
I f)I ")f.tii j <<0wf f,f >>
"><<h,
'
'h)h(ji f i'>
<<.<i".t~
'.) fht )
f<) b
'> (>>'( )<<f )ling<<)'.((ff" 8851 h'>> ">0 Q f
))V
. 'L>> <<") > S)l
>)') f'> ~t
'"'l'I<<'jj
"'
f
<<j
)J'<<g"g