ML17083B728
| ML17083B728 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1986 |
| From: | Wenslawski F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Shiffer J PACIFIC GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17083B729 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8604250219 | |
| Download: ML17083B728 (20) | |
See also: IR 05000275/1986007
Text
Docket Nos. 50-275
and 50-323
Ppp g O )9)6
Pacific Gas
and Electric Company
77 Beale Street,
Room 1451
San Francisco,
California '4106
Attention:
Mr. J.
D. Shiffer, Vice President
Nuclear Power Generation
Gentlemen:
Subject:
NRC Inspection
This refers to the routine inspection
conducted
by Mr. K. Prendergast,
of this
office on March 3-7,
1986 of activities authorized by NRC License Nos.
and DPR-82,
and to the discussion of our findings held by Mr. Prendergast
with
Mr. T. Martin and other members of your staff at the conclusion of the
inspection.
Areas examined during this inspection are described in the enclosed
inspection
report.
Within these
areas,
the inspection consisted of selective
examinations of procedures
and representative
records,
interviews with
personnel,
and observations
by the inspector.
No violations of NRC requirements
or deficiencies
were identifed within the
scope of this'nspection.
In accordance
with 10 CFR 2.790(a),
a copy of this letter and the enclosure
will be placed in the NRC Public Document
Room.
Should you have
any questions
concerning this inspection,
we will be glad to
discuss
them with you.
Sincerely,
/
jjtfpfnat Signed
b'V
'A'cnsiaY/sM
rank A. Wenslawski,
Chief
and
Radiological Protection Branch
Enclosure:
Inspection Report Nos. 50-275/86-07
and 50-323/86-09
cc w/enclosure:
S. D. Skidmore,
PG&E; R.
C. Thornberry,
PG&E (Diablo Canyon)
P.
A. Crane, Jr.,
PG&E; D. Taggart,
PG&E (Diablo Canyon)
R. Weinberg,
PG&E (Diablo Canyon)
State of CA; Sandra Silver (enclosure
only)
bcc w/enclosure:
RSB/Document Control Desk (RIDS); Resident. Inspector;
Pxoject Inspector;
G. Cook; B. Faulkenberry;
J. Martin; D. Matthews,
EPB, IE
REGION V/do~~
Prendergast'V'yy
ys6
Fish
'enslawski
4/g /86
4//y/86
86042502i9
860410
- DOCK 05000275
6
1
I
Il I
II
fI'"
I
f
"{1
'll
lit
W
~III'I
'I
~ 1
I'
I
J
I li
ll,l
~
{
i
{
II
III
I
I{
J
h
il{
'I
W
1
"I
(
,
Persons
Contacted
DETAILS
PG&E Personnel
'"R.
C. Thornberry, Plant Manager
>'<J. V. Boots,
Manager,
Chemistry and Radiation Protection
(C&RP)
>R. P. Powers,
Senior
C&RP Engineer
>T. L. Grebel,
Senior Regulatory Compliance Engineer
D. D. Malone, Senior
I&C Engineer
H. M. Pong,
C&RP Engineer
D. Reed,
Supervising
I&C Technician
R. L. Johnson,
C&RP Foreman
J.
A. Hays,
C&RP Foreman
Contractors
C.
G. Rao, Startup Supervisor
(PTGC/Startup)
T. J. Polich, Acting Senior Resident Inspector
T. M. Ross,
Resident Inspector
M. L. Padovan,
Resident Inspector
<Denotes
those present at the exit briefing on March 7,
1986.
In addition to the individuals identified above,
the inspectors
met and
held discussions
with other members of the licensee's
and contractor's
staffs.
2.
Licensee Actions on Previous
Ins ection Findin s
(Closed) Followu
Radwaste-Startu
(50-323/86-03-03):
Item regarding the
examination of the final test results
and data analysis of tests
conducted during power ascension
to evaluate
system performance for
Unit 2.
Inspection Reports
50-323/85-39
and 50-323/86-03
described
and
documented
previous
NRC inspection findings in this area.
Review of test
results
and data analysis
are described, in paragraph
3 of this report.
(Closed) Followu
- Biolo ical Shield Surve
(50-323/86-03-04):
Item
regarding the examination of survey results during power ascension
to
determine the effectiveness 'of the licensee's
biological shield survey
program.
Review of,survey results
and confirmatory measurments
made by
the inspectors
are described in paragraph
4 of this report.
r,
(0 en)
0 en Items
50-275 86-03-02
and 50-,323/86-03-02):
Inspection
Report Nos. 50'-275/86-03
and 50-323/86-03 identified a concern with
respect to the licensee's
hot, chemistry laboratory exhaust being
a
separate
release point that was-,grab
sampled
once per quarter.
The
inspectors visually observed
the physical..location
'of the effluent ducts
and obtained
a copy,of the"1zcensee's
evaluation of radioactive
I4 I
lt~
IV
il
r
Ef
r
A.
a
d
I
discharges
from the hood.
This matter will be reviewed in a subsequent
inspection.
3.
Radwaste - Startu
(Unit 2)
NRC Inspection Report 50-323/85-39
documents
review of the licensee's
startup test procedures,
effluent monitoring, chemistry
and radio
chemistry controls.
Inspection Report (50-323/85-39)
also sta'ted that
certain requirements
for collection and completion of startup test data
had been deleted
from test procedures
TP 1.16, "Effluent and Effluent
Monitoring", and
TP 1.17,
"Chemical and Radioachemical
Analysis" which
had been included
as part of the startup test program for Unit l.
During this inspection,
the inspectors
reviewed selected
tests
and test
results to verify that required tests
were conducted, in accordance
with
test procedures
TP 1.16 and
TP 1.17.
From review of this test data
and
through discussions
held with licensee
representatives
the following
observations
were noted:
The licensee
had made procedural
changes
to reinstate
the deleted
test requirements for procedures
TP 1.16 and
TP 1.17.
The licensee
had placed
a high priority on making the boron
concentration
measurement,
system
(BCMS) and gross failed fuel
detection unit (GFFDU) for both Unit 1 and Unit 2 fully operational.
The
BCMS for Unit 2 was fully operational, with reactor'oolant
samples
and
BCMS readings indicating ( 10 ppm differences
as of
February .21,
1986.
The Unit
1
BCMS was undergoing calibration and
expected to be fully operational within a few weeks.
The
GFFDUs for
both units were actively being worked and are expected
to be
operational after electronic repairs.
Condensate
polisher decontamination factors
(DF) varied throughout
the power ascension
program.
This was
due to saltwater inleakage
through the main condenser.
Secondary
chemistry
was maintained by
the polishers
or corrective action taken per plant operating
procedures.
The DF factors for the reactor coolant chemical
and volume control
let down filters could not be adequately
established
due to the high
purity of reactor coolant water.
Tests to compare the off gas
and liquid process
radiation monitors
response
with radioactivity levels from waste stream
samples
were
not conclusive.
Sufficient activity was not available in the waste
streams
to provide good consistent
correlations with monitor
calibrations.
Licensee
representatives
>>were aware of the .need to perform
additional correlation studies
as noted in the remarks section of
startup test procedure
TP 1.16.
Procedure
CAP D-19, "Correlation of
Rad Monitors to Radioactivity," requires correlation studies
to be
performed on'a continuous basis.
By review of this procedure,
the
I
V 1th'
HI
It
h
~
I
I
F
\\I
V I'
V'
inspectors
determined that process
and effluent monitor correlations
would be adequately
evaluated when'ufficient activity is present.
Based
on this review, it was apparent that licensee
management
had been
responsive
to the
NRC concerns
(lack of formality and attention to detail
in the startup program) described in Inspection Report 50-323/85-39
and
had taken
a positive approach in evaluating
system performance.
t
Audits
The inspectors
reviewed
a quality assurance
audit conducted
December
16-20,
1985, Report No. 85312T, performed to verify that Diablo-
Canyon Power Plant
(DCPP)
had implemented
Chapter
14 of the FSAR "Initial
Tests
and Operations,"
during the power ascension
phase of startup
testing program.
The audit'included:
adequacy
and implementation of
startup test procedures;
surveillance test procedures;
operating
procedures;
personnel qualifications
and interviews with responsible
individuals.
No matters requiring issuance
of audit finding reports
(AFRs) or nonconformance
reports
(NCRs)'ere identified.
The audit
findings for the areas
audited were, that, with no exceptions,
DCPP had
been effectively implementing the procedures
required by Chapter
14 of
the FSAR.
Based
on review of this audit, the inspectors
noted that although the
audit covered the
same program area it'did not identify findings similiar
to those described in Inspection ReportiNo. 50-323/85-39.
No violations or deviations
were identified.
Biolo ical Shield Surve
The licensee
had completed
gamma
and neutron
dose rate measurements
at
the 4/,
18%,
30%, 50/ and 100/ power levels during power ascension.
Dose
rate measurements
were taken at prescribed
locations inside containment
and in areas
adjacent to the containment.
During this inspection,
the
licensee
had scheduled
25 specific locations,to
be resurveyed
inside of
the containment.
This resurvey
was made to resolve inconsistencies
noted
between
some of the
50% and
100% power readings.
On March 4,
1986, the
inspectors
observed
the
CHIRP technicians
performing the resurveys.
The
inspectors
made independent
gamma
and neutron radiation measurement
at
the
same
survey points in Unit 2 containment at 100/ power for the
purpose of verifying the licensee's
biological shield survey data.
The
independent
measurements
were
made using
NRC ion chamber
S/N 2691 due for
calibration April 15,
1986,
and neutron survey meter S/N NP 581701
due
for calibration April 26,
1986.
The inspectors
measurements
were in agreement with readings
obtained by
the licensee.
The location of the survey points were representative
of
access
pathways, penetration
areas
and strategic biological shields
on
the 140,
115 and
91 foot elevation levels.
The licensee's
preliminary review of the biological shield survey data,
conducted
by the General Office through the 50/ power level, concluded
der
that all surveyed
areas,
when extrapolated
to the maximum value at
100K
power, would meet the
FSAR radiation zone requirements.
Based
on the results of the reviews, observations
and independent
measurements,
the inspectors
determined that the licensee's
biological
shield survey program was conducted in accordance
with Chapter
14
commitments
and the recommendations
of RG 1.68 and ANSI/ANS 6.3.1-1980.
No problems with shielding effectiveness
were identified.
Documentation
of the licensee's final review of the biological shield survey data will
be examined in a subsequent
inspection
(50-323/86-08-01,
Open).
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Control of Radioactive Materials
and Contamination,
Surve
s and
Monitorin
(Units
1 and 2)
The inspectors
reviewed licensee audits,
selected
procedures,
records of
surveys,
records of use
and calibration of survey and monitoring
equipment,
airborne sampling records,
sealed
source inventory, leak test
results;
and conducted several facility tours to determine
the licensee's
compliance to
TS requirements,
licensee
procedures
and
recommendations
as outlined in various industry standards.
A.
Audits
Quality Assurance
(QA) Audit Report No. 85303T,
conducted
December
11>>19,
1985, to verify that Diablo Canyon Power Plant
(DCPP)
had implemented in-'plant controls for radiation protection
was examined.
The audit identified four deficiencies resulting in
AFRs Nos.85-568,
569~
570 and 571 requiring corrective action.
The
audit concluded with the exception of the four deficiencies,
had been effectively 'implementing the radiation protection program
for in-plant controls.
The audit findings,and conclusion were based
on;
a tour of DCPP Units
1 and
2 radiologically controlled area
(RCA); interviews w'ith~ C&RP management
personnel;
and review of
radiation work permits,
survey records," RCA access
records
and logs,
personnel
contamination records,
person'nel respiratory protection
documentation,
and records pertaining to testing of radiation
monitoring instrumentation.
No NCRs were issued.,
The probable
cause
and corrective actions
to each
AFR were also examined.
The
inspectors
noted that the AFRs were administrative in nature
and did
not involve any significant safety matters.
Based
on this
examination,
the inspectors
concluded that the response
to each
AFR
and corrective actions
taken appeared
appropriate.
The inspectors
also briefly interviewed
QA personnel
conducting
an
onsite audit covering radioactive effluent controls.
Based
on this
interview the inspectors
determined that the
QA personnel
were
qualified for the audit being performed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
r ~ "R
'>>
I
pl
V
H
tt
'I'V '>,]I /,,
h
H>>
R
r ",,-I, h>>.
I
H
8,5
R
>
<<
C
.
II
)Vl
h
tt
V
')V>frl)!Vh,'i
f,)r,l> h
I
I,I
1
r
I
r
,H)
I~
>>cv(
Jv
WV f
p
r QV>>II
ct,i
'ffr '
"Rq
)ffIlr'
'
, f'" I'I
rc
lc
g>>"
ll
I~
,I >>,
f()
I,
~
i>>'>'r
'
>r I'
i >>Rf
~ R Ifr
HVI i
c
', f'f:')pl'~<<V '~'>
I
I ':
Vrf"
<<a "f"
)I,
<<>~
> Cr'
j.)V
I
', .)),f",'..>. J
'
')i:R,
"P
.X
~ if.',
g.'V'V
>
k> 'I;
Hf
>>,
) g,
V
rfr>>R g
tt
'
pffft,
v>> I r't
r'l ht>) )'
g'P I
I f>r
) 'I
">> I t'V'>cl
fr) fc r)l I
R
>f) g
Rp
tlf,
f>
I't
>$
tflff
- fi> c
r(c) ~
> ",
)V
F)y,
V
R
f
"
ll
~ nfl H>r
)
H>>h
Hll
~
.
f!)
Rllvcll
V r
~ >
I
h
I
t)S
f;
'I
I>>>>" I
(f
H >>
V
r I 'f
IIt >
'H'I ".
<<)
r
>>.
SH
~ c
HH
v >> '
lfl,
f,>
y
F C>> I'l
"b
V.
VVfr
I "I
V
'H'
<<f
' '" "')
ih
~ >>3,',ftf f
- I ~
H
f'j "
'll
~ >)
~
t(
!)I)
l
i>'c
I
li
)' ', ~ H>>
<<V>>
'f
"jQ
B.
Surve
s
Air Sam lin
and Procedures
The following procedures
were reviewed for implementation of the
licensee's
radioactive materials radiation and contamination control
program:
NPAP C-200
"General Requirements for Radiation Protection
Programs"
RCS"1
RCS-2
RCS-6
RCS-7
RCP G-6
"External Radiation Dose Control"
"Personnel
Contamination Control"
"Control of Radioactive Materials"
"Surveys"
"Release
of Materials from Radiologically
Controlled Areas"
RCP G-7
RCP D-10
I
"Radiation and Contamination Surveys"
RCP G-8'Sampling
and Measurement of Airborne
Radioactivity"
II
4
,i l'Handling and Accountability of Radioactive
'ources",,
RCP S-1
"',
"Plant Airborne Radioactivity Surveillance"
'1
i,
1
RCP S-2
"Radiation Contamination
Survey Program"
The survey program
wa's discussed
with.C&RP personnel.
Routine
surveys
are performed
on
a scheduled
basis
and reviewed by the
C&RP
'oremen.
Survey maps were available for-essentially all plant areas
and were used to document radiation and contamination results.
Copies of completed current survey maps were posted inside of the
RCA for worker review.
Routine
and special surveys,
and air sample
results required for Special
Work Permits including containment
entries
were examined for the periods
November 18-30,
December
16-20,
1985,
and February 3-14,
1986.
Based
on this
examination it appeared
that radiation and contamination surveys,
and air sampling were performed
and results
documented
as required.
Personnel
contamination survey reports during the period January
1,
1986 to March 7,
1986 were examined.
No personnel
contaminations
requiring radiation dose evaluations
had occurred.
Contamination
levels were noted to be predominantly low.
The licensee's
goal is
less than three personnel
contaminations
per
10 thousand entries.
January
1986 and February
1986 ratios were 3.33 and 5.8 per
10 thousand entries respectively.
The inspectors
also observed that
the licensee
maintained
a graph of causes
of personnel
skin and
personnel
clothing contaminations
which will be used
as
an aid in
C&RP and general
employee training to minimize occurrences
for such
1/
0
I'
Pf
I
1
~
i,
k
I
'I
lk
contaminations.
It was noted that personnel
contaminations
were
promptly reviewed
and evaluated
by the licensee.
No violations or deviations
were identified.
Instrument Calibrations
and Calibration Facilit
The inspectors
discussed
the calibration program for portable
radiation and contamination survey. meters,
portable air samplers,
and portal monitors with the supervising
I&C technician.
The
inspectors
also reviewed calibration records of selected
surveying
and monitoring equipment
and the licensee's
computer master tracking
system data sheets (file 12) for tracking instrument calibrations.
The licensee
had dedicated
three
employees
to performing instrument
calibrations,
the
SI&CT and two I&C "technicians.'he
inspectors
were informed"and noted by records review that the licensee
evaluates
the past use of survey meter
and air samplers,
when found
to be out of calibration specifications
during recalibrations,
to
determine if there were any significant effects
on survey and air
sampling results.
The licensee maintained current calibration
certificates verifying that the flow meters
used to calibrate air
sample flows had been calibrated with equipment that is traceable
to
the National Bureau of Standards.-
Calibrated
survey meters
and air samplers
were maintained in a
separate
room at the entry to the
RCA, and all were noted to have
current calibration tags attached.
Tags indicating that the daily
instrument
response
test had been performed were also attached
to
the portable
survey meters.
The inspectors
conducted
response
tests
on several selected
portable ion chambers
that were ready for use.
The instruments
tested
were found to be operational
and responded
properly to the licensee's
check source located in the
same
room.
Survey meters in need of calibration or~repairs
were maintained in a
special cabinet in separate
location within the
RCA.
The inspectors
also performed
a response
test of the portal monitors
at'the security building exit area.
The test
was conducted
by using
a licensee
1 uCi Cesium-137
source
near the body and at normal
walking speed.
Each of the two monitors alarmed timely and were
sufficiently audible.
The inspectors
were directed by a security
person to remain in the area while he attempted
to notify C&RP staff
that a portal monitor had alarmed.
The inspectors
informed this
individual that they were inspecting
the portal monitors response
and were pleased
to note the security person took appropriate
action.
The inspectors
toured the shielded calibration facility containing
the licensee's
50 Ci Cesium-137
instrument calibration source.
The
calibration facility was posted
as required by
access
controls were consistent with TS 6-12,
and keys were
controlled as required by licensee
procedures.
With:the source
raised to the upper stop
and shutter
open,
the inspectors
made
radiation measurements
along the walk outside of the facility and
the above floor level directly over the source well.
No radiation
)nv
'av
""
III"
'I
lf
4
vf
fag vy"
f
4
l
4 fll
I'f)
[
"
I
4,
'I
ff rhf v.
'I
I'
'I
"I
L Cltlfv
" '." I)a.
fr la
p'i's'a'.,
a'a"
Qf ',a
.,
f3
a
l
taffafp 'n)
- ,4
-
4
lf If
I
v v
4
l
gafn g,
tv
Q
I< 'fifI
I 4
4
l
n. fli
';
4
"nCJV
a lv
t',It vll "-P
Ht ',Iilt~ a
hv
I ~ 9 ln4g"'
(tahlapnf vv~4'vna+avlla
I a"
'If
)'I
~ gvnt
4
I
l
vr
vv
l,
4
e f
n
at
I ij
n
vt fn
~ .alv
a
~
r
tv
hfv
v,
4
a 4.>
4,
L
~ qtf
ag
) ff II 4vn
I[
av
lrll
Vl
")
ah f
alv
an
$f
If
Ja
"f 4 al
v
4
4<< I
n a,
II lf'gaff
\\ I:
I
dff
~
4
vn
4
I"
Ifn
e
- l '
~
I
av a-r
I~
a
ll
vl, (ft ff
m,
vh
Ih>4 la
'
gad
4"r 3
tK
~ fl
I
4
vlf'
4
I
4 4,
t
nv
4
a ft,
v)4,
llf
f'
fe
I))
'
."j'; "a'"rff"lift
II
l,an'4
levels above that permitted for unrestricted
areas
were identified.
Radiation levels inside of the calibration facility with the source
exposed at the upper most position were not excessive.
The licensee
also uses
temporary shielding as necessary
to aid in exposure
control when performing instrument calibrations of the upper ranges.
The licensee
has nearly completed
a new instrument calibration and
repair
room located
on the
119 foot elevation level of the turbine
building.
Only low level activity sources will be used in this
area.
No violations or deviations
were identified.
D.
Sealed
Source Inventor
and Leak Tests
Semiannual
inventory and leak tests of radioactive
sealed
sources
were examined.
The master
and sealed
source inventory, source
usage,
and leak test results
are maintained in the
RCA by the
C&RP
Department.
Sealed
sources
used for various calibration work were
signed in and out when used.
Leak tests
were performed at the
six month frequency
as required by TS 3.7.8.
Technical Specification 3.7.8 expresses
limits for removable
contamination of
sealed
sources in units of microcurie.
The licensee's
radioactive
sealed
source leak test log sheet
recorded leak test results
by
using the words
',.'ok" or "satisfactory".
The raw data sheets
of
sealed
source wipe test results
were maintained in units of
dpm/100
cma.
'Based 'on" inspectors
comments,
licensee
agreed to make
the necessary
changes
and maintain leak test results in the
same
units noted in the,TS.
No violations or deviations
were identified.
During the inspection the inspectors
toured various areas of the
auxiliary and turbine buildings, including the hot chemistry
laboratory.
- The inspectors
made independent
measurements
using
NRC
ion chamber
S/N 2691
due for calibration on April 15,
1986.
Based
on these tours the following observations
were made:
On March 5,
1986, the inspectors
noted that about
one half of
the auxiliary operator
(AO) control board area located
on the
Unit
1 site at, the
85 foot level was roped off and posted
as
a
radiation area.
The source of radiation
was noted to be the moisture trap
located within the Hz gas analyzer control cabinet.
Through
discussions
with licensee
representatives,
and review of C&RP
log book No. 14137,
page-81B it was learned that on February 3,
1986,
a
C&RP technician
responded
to this area
due to an area
radiation monitor (RM-10) alarm.
The licensee identified the
source of radiation, properly posted
the area
and documented
the survey results
on report No. 01130.
Licensee
survey
results indicated radiation levels of, 200 mr/hr on the
1
MF
I
M
M
8
moisture trap surface,
45 mr/hr maximum on the side of the
cabinet,
19 mr/hr at
18 inches
from the cabinet
and
1 to
2 mr/hr in the middle of the room
(AO desk area).
The recorded
radiation level at, the detector
was 0.8 mr/hr, which is also
the alarm set point.
RM-10 was last calibrated
on December
11,
1985,
and functional checked
on February 22,
1986.
The inspectors
noted that the licensee
had wrapped
a lead
blanket around the moisture trap to lower the radiation levels
to reduce the
AOs exposures
who frequent the area.
Radiation
levels measured
by the inspectors
on two separate
occasions
indicated that radiation levels
can increase
by a factor of two
depending
on the automatically selected
system being sampled.
The lowest radiation levels measured
by the inspectors
were
observed to be
3 mr/hr at the surface of the control panel,
1.3 mr/hr at
18 inches
and 0.4 mr/hr at the nearest
AOs desk.
The highest levels were observed
to be
6 mr/hr at the surface
of the panel,
2.5 mr/hr at
18 inches
and 0.8 mr/hr at the
desk.,
The room was typically < 0.5 mr/hr, except the general
area within 4 to 6 feet of the control panel.
Figure 12.1-3 of the
FSAR classifies
the
AO control room as
a
Class
1 zone.
Class
1 denotes
high occupancy
zone for
radiation workers with dose rates less
than or equal to
1 mr/hr.
Based
on the dose rates
observed
by the inspectors
the area
around the control panel falls in the zone
2
classification
(< 2.5 mr/hr) which is controlled access
with
only periodic occupancy.
It was observed
on several
occasions
that the
room was only occasionally occupied.
The licensee
was
aware of this matter and were evaluating methods for lowering
the radiation levels in this
arear'he
inspectors
also noted that the detector for RM-10 appeared
to be partially shielded
from the radiation source
(Hz analyzer
moisture trap) by a lead battery in an emergency light mounted
on the wall nearby.
The inspectors
did not consider this to be
a serious
problem since
RH-10 gad alarmed respectively,
to the
alarm set point (0.8 mr/hr), which was also noted to be the
radiation level measured
at the detector by the
CHIRP Department
when it had alarmed.
In the Unit 2 penetration
room (100 foot elevation level),
a
portable
HEPA filtered exhaust
system
had been installed to
control airborne radioactive
gaseous activity releases
due to
leakage
from the pressurizer
steam
space
sample isolation valve
(9354B).
The
12 inch exhaust duct from the portable
system
was
being vented to an exhaust
opening in the spent fuel pump and
filter room via the entry door.
There are
no exhaust
system
openings in this, area,and air is normally exhausted
to the
upper and lower elevat!ion levels by plant design.
The
inspectors
also observed
that, this room was negative to the
outside yard area by checking air flow direction at the
screened
openings.
i
II
The licensee
became
aware that valve No.
9354B was leaking on
March 3,
1986,
when 'the constant air monitor on the
115 foot
elevation level alarmed.
Air sample results indicated that
only noble gas activity was being released.
At the exit, meeting,
the inspectors
expressed
concerns that the
licensee
had to take such measures
as to route exhaust ducting
through "doors to control airborne activity from this area.
The warning sign, "Caution this Automatic Equipment
May Start
at any Time," for the Unit 2 auxiliary building switch gear
supply fan (S-28)
room door had apparently
been blown off and
was lying on the nearby roof area.
This was brought to the,
licensee's
attention.
In addition to the above observations,
the inspector
observed that
all radiation areas
and high ra'diation areas
were posted
as required
and access
controls'ere
consistent with TS 6.12
and licensee procedures.
The inspectors
also conducted
wipe tests
from selected
step off pads of contaminated
controlled areas.
No
detectable
removal contamination
was identified using licensee
contamination survey meters.
No violations or deviations
were identified.
6.
Exit Interview
The inspectors
met with licensee
representatives
(denoted in paragraph
1)
at the conclusion of the inspection
on March 7,
1986.
The scope
and
findings of the inspection were summarized.
The licensee
was informed
that no violations or deviations
were identified.
P
g '(
I
'i
II
l
l
4 j
'I
g, 'I
I'
g4
i
it
l
I
l
1