ML19209A450
| ML19209A450 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 09/20/1979 |
| From: | Vissing G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910040076 | |
| Download: ML19209A450 (6) | |
Text
-
s pa %,
f.
f,,
UNITED STATES y
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p
WASMNGTON, D. C. 20555 Septenber 20, 1979 Docket No. 50-346 LICENSEE: TOLEDO EDISON CCMPANY (TECO)
FACILITY: DAVIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNIT NO.1 (Davis-Besse 1)
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON AUGUST 15, 1979, TO DISCUSS THE APPENDIX I TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND THE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM A meeting was held in Bethesda, Maryland on August 15, 1979, with representatives of TECO and Applied Physical Technology to discuss TEC0's proposed Radio-logical Effluent Technical Specifications (TS) dated March 19, 1979, and the Davis-Besse 1 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (OCCM). A list of attendees is included in Enclosure 1.
Discussion Each item is discussed separately as follows:
1.
Liquid / Gaseous Effluent Monitoring and Channel Checks should be done "at all times" rather than during any releases.
TECO requested feedback from the staff on what is acceptable for surveillance of monitoring instrumentation. The instrumentation is only oparational when discharging effluents. The question is how or what type of TS is necessary to provide for a daily channel check.
2.
Why was service effluent line not included in Specification 3.3-15? FSAR and Interim TS indicate presence of monitor. Also, is there a component cooling water discharce line?
The service water effluent monitor was not included because the TS would imply that after 30 days if the monitor was not in service, the plant would need to shut down. The staff suggested that if such an event occurred, the licensee could request a license amendment which would temporarily extend the time.
This appeared to be unsatisfactory. The staff agreed to review this area on a generic basis. TEC0 would propose an alternative.
3.
Indicate if monitoring or sampling is done on turbine building floor drain sumps effluent.
Indicate if monitoring or sampling is done on condensate demineralizer backwash effluent line.
Yes, to botn concerns.
1089
'99 7910040076 P
4.
Do you have the followir.g alarm / trip setpoints' on your liquid / gaseous effluent monitors: circuit failure, downscale failure, instrument control not set in ooeratiro made.
The staff desires automatic isolatica with failure of instrumentation of liquid rad-waste and alarm with failure of other instrumentation. Davis-Besse 1 does not have these features. TEC0 will review the instrumentation and propose modifications.
5.
Since the FSAR indicates that there are redundant 02 analyzers in the waste cas system, whv do you list oniv one in Soecification 3.3-16 and 4.3-16?
TECO will list both 02 analyzers in the TS.
6.
The action for containment noble gas activity monitor (Spec. 3.3-16) should not be the same as the station vent stack.
It should be to susoend purce.
TECO's concern with respect to the above is that they would be required to suspend purge with entry into containment. They already have isolation of purge on high radiation. This will be verified.
7.
Table 4-11 should show sampling for releases from turbine building floor drains effluent and condensate demineralizer backwash effluent to be done when tne secondarv side levels exceed a credetermined value.
TECO will propose the TS as provided in Revision 2 of NUREG-0472. The turbine building floor drain effluent will not have a continuous release. Sampling will be done by grab sample every four hours when there is a release.
8.
The equation for LLO for building effluents should include a correction for decay, e Lat TECO indicated that this doesn't seem logical because the material in the tank is decaying at same rate as the sample, and therefore the sample will indicate the condition of the material in the tank at the same time as the sample is measured for its condition.
Frank Congel, DSE, will provide the rational for this requirement.
9.
Where is the reactor section on Uranium Fuel Cycle doses?
TECO has a problem in resolving this issue as it relates to 40 CFR 190. When that is resolved, they will provide a section in their TS.
Meeting Agenda Items 1.
No measurement on P-32 and Fe-55.
1039 200
s s
. TECO did not see a need for monitoring these isotopes on a continuous basis. It is a staff position that they should. TECO will instead, propose special studies on these isotopes.
2.
The TS for Dose for Liquid and Gaseous Releases should include Accendix I.
TECO concern is that the regulations (Appendix I) in this matter provide guidance and not a requirement. By providing limits in the TS, the guidance now becomes a requirement which, they believe, was not the intent of the regulations. The staff's position was that the limits should be a part of the TS. TECO will provide a response for the staff's consi-deration..
3.
The TS for LCO for operability should be as oiven in NUREG-0472.
TECO will provide a definition of operability in the ODCM.
4.
Need Section en Solid Waste; need pCP.
There appears to be a question of the acceptability of the of the Urea Formaldahide (UF) arocess for solidification of waste.
IE Bulletin 79-19 seems to impact on this. The details on this section will be worked out as soon as TECO can obtain some clarification on the impact of IE Bulletin 79-19.
Conclusions TECO will resubmit their proposed TS within 30 days.
e
/
1 Guy S. Vissing,' Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch f4 Division of Operating Reactors 1009
?01 APPENDIX I - DAVIS-BESSE 1 MEETING AUGUST 15, 1979 ATTENDANCE LIST
~
Toledo Edison Co.
pig; j
G. S. Vissing B. R. Beyer
~
Jce H. Osloond Jennifer Scott-Wasilk Frank Cardile Ted Myers W. C. Burke Ron Scott David Briden Acolied Physical Technology Bob Hearn David Walker Jersey Central Power & Licht Co.
J. Knubel 9
1089 '02
Items for Discussion Concerning Environmental Technical Specifications for Davis-Besse 1 1
Licuid/ Gaseous Efiluent Monitoring and Channel Checks should be done "at all times" rather than during only releases.
2.
Why was service water effluent line left off T. 3.3-15? FSAR and Interim Tech Specs indicate presence of monitor.
Also is there a component cooling water discharge line?
3.
Indicate if monitoring or sampling is done on turbine b1dg. floor drain sumps efflu.nt? Indicate if monitoring or sampling is done on condensate demin, backwash effluent line?
4.
Why was barated water storage tank left off T. 3.3-15?
5., Do ycu have the following alarm / trip setpoints en your liquid / gaseous effluent monitors: circuit failure?, dcwnscale failure?, instrument controls not set.
in'or. rate mode?
6.
Since the FSAR indicates that there are redundant 02 analyzers in the waste gas system, why do you list only cne in T. 3.3.16 and 4.3-16?
7.
The action for the centainment purge ncole gas activity nonitor (T. 3.3-16) snould not be the same as the station vent stack.
It snould be to suspend purge.
G.
Table 4.11-1 should shew sampiing for releases frem turbine bldg. floor drains effluent and condensate demin. backwash effluent to be done when Indary side levels exceed a predetermined value.
1039 2i'7-
2-9.
The egtn for LLD for bldg. effluents should include a correction for decay, e.lat.
- 10. Where is section on uranium fuel cycle doses?
Meetinc Acenda Items 1.
"easurement of P-32, Fe-55 The tech spec for Oose for liquids and gaseous releases should include 2.
Appendix I.
The tech spec for LCO for operability should be as given in NUREG-0472.
3.
4.
Need section on solid waste; need PCP.
1009 'O4
a 3
MEETIfG SUMP'ARY DISTRIBUTION ORBf4 L.
Mr. Lowell E. Roe Vice President, Facilities Development Toledo Edison Ccmpany L
Edison Plaza 300 Madison Avenue Toledo, Ohio 43652 I
Decka*- Cil e R. Reid MPrd V. Noonan L PDR P. Check ORS #4 Rdg G. Lainas NRR Rdg G. Knighton H. Denton Project Manager -GVissing E. G. Case OELD OI&E (3)
D. Eisenhut R. Ingram R. Vollmer R. Fraley, ACRS (16)
W. Russell Program Support Branch B. Grimes TERA T. J. Carter J. R. Buchanan A. Schwencer Meeting Summary File D. Ziemann NRC Participants T. Ippolito JH0sloond W. Gammill FCardile L. Shao WBurke i
J. Miller 1039 205
.