ML19263C454
| ML19263C454 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 01/09/1979 |
| From: | Ewald S, Gibson A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19263C451 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-78-30, NUDOCS 7902220271 | |
| Download: ML19263C454 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000302/1978030
Text
.
k" "8 C og
UNITED sT ATr.s
o
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
g
REGloN 11
{
, y, (
g
* '
E
101 M ARIETT A sTREE T. N.W.
-
' IIE
[
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30303
o, ,
s, m.....f
Report No.:
50-302/78-30
Docket No.-
50-302
Licensee: Florida Power Corporation
Facility Name:
Crystal River, Unit Three
Inspection at:
Crystal River Site,
Crystal River, Florida
Inspection conducted:
December 11-15, 1978
Inspector:
S. C. Ewald
J
-
,
'!
/ /
Reviewed by:
f
.
b
A. F. Gibson, Chief
Date
Radiation Support Section
Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch
Inspection Summary
Inspection on December 11-15, 1978 (Report No. 50-302/78-30)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of liquid radioactive
effluents, semi-annual effluent report, radioactive effluent monitoring,
effluent procedures, liquid waste processing, licensee event reports,
and previously identified items.
The inspection involved 40 inspector-
hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the seven areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or
deviations were identified in six areas.
One apparent item of non-
compliance was identified in one area (deficiency-failure to review and
approve vendor liquid waste processing procedures paragraph 4).
7 9 0 2 2 2 0A7/4
.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-30
I-1
b "I
&-
DETAILS I
Prepared by:
_ Date
S. C. Ewald, Radiation Specialist
Radiation Support Section
'l91Fuel Facility and Materials
Safety Branch
Dates of Inspectio -
ec ber 11-15, 1978
h
7
Reviewed by:
(
N-
'
A. F. Gibson, Chief
Date
Radiation Support Section
Fuel Facility and Materials
Safety Branch
1.
Persons Contacted
G. P. Beatty, Jr., Nuclear Plant Manager
P. F. McKee, Technical Services Superintendent
- J. Cooper, Compliance Engineer
- J. R. Wright, Chemical and Radiation Protection Engineer
- G. H. Ruszala, Radwaste Management Supervisor
G. D. Perkins, Health Physics Supervisor
- R.
E. Fuller, Plant Engineer
G. M. Williams, Compliance Plant Engineer
- G. R. Westafer, Maintenance Superintendent
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action On Previous Inspection Findings
a.
(Closed) Open Item (77-22-04) Maintenance of Gaseous Release Records
The training program for chem-rad technicians discussed in RII
Reports 50-302/78-1 and 50-302/77-22 have been implemented. Training
sessions are recorded and the recordings maintained for those staff
members unable to attend a particular session. The inspector noted
the new computer codes for sample analysis, originally discussed as
one of the corrective measures with regard to missing records, is
being held up due to anticipated changes in effluert technical
specifications.
The various measures implemented by the licensee
apparently have been effective in controlling waste records. The
inspector had no further questions.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-30
1-2
b.
(Closed) Infraction (78-09-02) Security Guard Retraining
The inspector reviewed training records of four security guard
staff members requiring (biennial) radiation protection retraining.
The four guards received retraining in May 1978. The inspector had
no further questions.
.
c.
(0 pen) Open Item (78-22-03) Spent Fuel Pool Ventilation Monitor
Licensee representatives stated, based on their review, they intend
to provide the local ventilation monitor (RMA-4) with alarm trip
functions to isolate the spent fuel pool ventilation system separate
f rom the auxiliary building system.
3.
Unresolved Items
Unresolved items are matters about which more it. formation is required to
ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or
deviations.
(78-30-02) Radiation Monitor Interlock Operability
During the inspection, questions relative to radiation monitor interlock
operability were raised. This item is discussed further in paragraph 9.
(78-30-03) Quarterly Calibration of Radwaste Monitors
A review of radiation monitor calibration records indicate the quarterly
calibration due in July 1978, may not have been performed. This item is
discussed further in paragraph 8.
4.
Licensee Event Reports (LER's)
a.
(Closed) LER No. 78-25/04T:
This event involved an unplanned
release of radioactive gases via a valve associated with the
Miscellaneous Waste Evaporator.
Recent modifications to the waste
gas system (Unresolved Item 77-22-03) resulted in valve WDV-476
serving as isolation between the waste gas header and the vaste
evaporator room. The inspector examined the line downstream of the
valve and verified it had been permanently sealed. Licensee repre-
sentatives stated a similar problem existed with the Reactor Coolant
Evaporator and that line had also been capped off. The inspector
had no further questions.
b.
(Closed) LER No. 78-46/03L: This event involved the failure of a
capacitor in the Auxiliary Building Ventilation Monitor interlock
circuit. This item is discussed in detail in paragraph 9.
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-30
I-3
c.
(Closed) LER No. 78-47/03L:
This event involved the inoperability
of a gas chromatograph due to a failed column. The LER stated
spare columns would be ordered to avoid similar problems in the
future. Licensee representatives stated spare columns were ordered
in November and were due to be shipped by mid-December. The inspector
had no further questions.
d.
(Closed) LER No. 78-51/03L: This event involved a flow controller
being out of adjustment on the Reactor Building Air Sampler-Monitor.
The flow controller was promptly readjusted. The inspector discussed
the event with licensee representatives and had no questions.
5.
Procedures
a.
requires various procedures be
established, maintained, and implemented including those procedures
listed in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, November 1972.
Section 7 of Appendix A includes procedures for liquid, solid, and
gaseous waste sys ter:s .
Technical Specification 6.8.2 requires
those precedures specified in 6.8.1 be reviewed by the Plant Review
Committee (PRC) and approved by the Nuclear Plant Manager prior to
implementation.
b.
The inspector reviewed the following procedures, revised or
implemented since . January 1978, relating to radioactive ef fluents.
SP-443 (12/04/78), " Master Surveillance"
(02/16/78), " Radiation Monitoring Instrument Calibration"
(01/12/78), " Radiation Monitoring Instrument Functional Test"
CH-280L (05/18/78), " Radiation Monitoring System Operating Parameters"
CH-269 is currently being revised. The inspector stated the revised
procedure would be reviewed upon review and approval as per Technical
Specificaiton 6.8.2.
Specific comments relative to implementation
of the surveillance procedures are discussed in paragraph 8.
c.
" Radiation Monitoring System Operating Parameters",
provides the bases, administrative control, and quality control for
radiation monitor alarm setpoints.
Other documents referenced by
CH-280L are the Setpoint Logbook and OP-505, "Setpoint Changes"
A review of several follow-up reports (FUR) and Nonconforming
Operation Reports (NCOR) revealed three instances in the last two
months where the weekly setpoint check has identified improper
monitor setpoints.
The inspector verified all setpoints matched
the setpoint log on December 13.
The inspector discussed the
apparent failures to control setpoints as per procedures with
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-30
1-4
licensee representatives.
Licensee representatives acknowledged
the inspector's concerns relative to this item and the inspector
stated any corrective actions would be reviewed during future
inspections (78-30-05),
d.
Discussion with licem ee representatives revealed a vendor supplied
demineralization system had been in use since September for routine
processing of liquid radioactive waste. The inspector examined the
system and noted the use of reinforced flexible lines, verified
proper posting, labeling, and control of the area where the demin-
eralizers are used. The inspector questioned licensee representatives
whether the demineralizer system operating procedures had been
reviewed and approved as required by Technical Specification 6.8.2.
The Radwaste Management Supervisor stated the procedures were
available but had not hun treated as site prowdures.
The inspector discussed this item with licensee representatives and
stated that, even though the demineralizer system and its assocuted
procedures were supplied by a vendor, the licensee maintains authority
and responsibility for the system when operated on-site.
The
inspector stated that failure to review and approve the demineralizer
system prccedures was in noncompliante with Technical Specification 6.8.2
(78-30-01).
6.
Semi-Annual Effluent Report
The inspector reviewed the facility effluent report for the period
January through June 1978, for compliance with Technical Snecification
5.6.1 (content), and Technical Specification 2.4.1 and 2.4.2 (quarterly
and yearly release limits). No items of noncompliance were revealed.
7.
Liquid Releases
Technical Specification 2.4.1 details the various limits, monitoring and
sampling requirements for liquid effluents. The inspector reviewed 108
individual release records fer January, February, September, October,
and November, 1978 for compliance with instantaneous release rate and
concentration limits (2.4.1.A), single tank curie limits (2.4.1.G) and
sampling and analysis requirements (2.4.1.J, 2.4.1.K, and Table 2.4-1).
No items of noncompliance were revealed. The inspector also observed
the operation and recording of liquid activity and flow monitors required
by Technical Specifications 2.4.1.L, 2.4.1.M, and 2.4.1.P.
8.
Effluent Monitor Surveillance
a.
Technical Specifications 2.4.1.N
and 2.4.2.I
require quarterly
calibrations and monthly tests of liquid and gaseous monitors
respectively.
These requirements are implemented by facility
.
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-30
I-5
Surveillance Procedures (SP's) SP-701 (calibrations) and SP-335
(functional tests). The inspector reviewed current copies of these
procedures and had no questions.
b.
The inspector reviewed monthly test records for 1978.
The
inspector noted that frequently SP-335 reveals some problems with
one or more of the 43 monitors tested and the interlock tests
required by Specifications 2.4.1.E and 2.4.2.D.
The inspector had
some questions relative to documentation of maintenance or other
corrective action and full completion of SP-335.
The inspector
noted several SP-335 records had work request numbers handwritten
on the coversheet, but, due to a change in the work request numbering
sequence; these were difficult to trace. Licensee representatives
stated a new policy was being implemented to dccument corrective
action and completion of SP's.
The inspector discussed these plans
with licensee representatives and stated documentation relative to
SP-335 would be reviewed during subsequent inspections to evaluate
the ef fectiveness of licensee proposals (78-30-04).
c.
The inspector reviewed records of quarterly calibrations performed
as per SP-701.
Specific records reviewed were of calibrations
performed October 18, 1977, January 10, 1978, April 15, 1978, and
October 9, 1978. No records of SP-701 performed in July 1978, were
on file.
SP-443, Master Surveillance Log, records indicated the
calibration should have been performed July 7, 1978, and was signed
off en the SP-443 record sheet for that date. Licensee representatives
stated the master surveillance sign-of f may only indicate that
operatinns personnel notified chem-rad staf f that the calibrations
were due, not that they were completed.
Licensee representatives
stated they would conduct a reuiew to determine if SP-701 was
performed or not, and locate any relevant records. The inspector
stated this item would be unresolved pending the results of the
licensee's review (78-30-03).
9.
Radiation Monitor Interlocks
a.
On September 14, 1978, during performance of monthly tests (SP-335),
the Auxiliary Building Ventilation Monitor (RM-A2) interlocks
simulated high radiation alarm. The event
failed to respond to
a
was reported as per Technical Specification 6.9.1.9.b as LER 78-046/03L,
and was tracked on-site as Nonconforming Operation Report (NCOR)
No. 257. The cause of the interlock failure was tracea to a shorted
surge suppressor in the interlock electronics that blew a fuse.
The components were promptly replaced and the monitor tested and
declared operational on September 14.
. .
. . _ . . . .
.
.
,
RII Ept. h. 50-302/78-30
I-6
_
b.
The inspector discussed the LER and NCOR with licensee representatives
and expressed concern that the monitor interlocks mig,ht have been
inoperable for as long as a month since the means of detection was
the routine monthly test. The previous test was performed August 10,
_
1978, and the inspector examined RM-A2 strip chart recordings for
the period August 10 to September li and verified no releases that
-
might have resulted in alarm actuation apparently occurred while the
interlocks were potentially inoperable.
c.
The inspector reviewed monitor interlock schematics with licensee
representatives and determined the basic problem with the system is
that the alarm interlock relays are non fail-safe. The system was
designed this way to allow frequent (daily) source checks of various
.
radiation monitors without actuating the interlock functions by
installation of a bypass switch. Based on this review, discussion
with licensee representatives, and confirmatory tests performed by
the licensee, the inspector determined that should one of the
interlock relays f ail, the monitors alarm functions would be degraded
with no indication of any problem.
It should be noted that this
problem applies only to the alarm interlock functions (i.e. , audible
-
alarms, damper and valve closure). The monitor and monitor recorder
will remain functional.
d.
This design problem is common to all radiation monitors with alarm
interlock functions including the reactor purge monitor (a safety
system) and the liquid effluent monitor. Licensee representatives
implemented a Short Term Instruction to provide increased surveillance
while more permanent corrective action can be developed and implemented.
Licensee representatives stated a prompt review of the problem
would be performed and necessary corrective action to assure inter-
lock operability would be implemented. The inspector stated this
'
item would be unresolved (78-30-02) pending completion of recommended
corrective actions.
The inspector emphasized that even though
"
significant changes to the interlock electronics might be necessary,
~
prompt corrective action would be required. Licensee representatives
-
acknowledged the inspector's comments and agreed to keep the inspector
advised of progress on a solution of this item.
-
=
M
M
-
M
,
1
1
_ _ . . . .
.
_
RII Rpt. No. 50-302/78-30
I-7
10.
Exit Interview
At the conclusion of the inspection on December 15, 1978, the inspector
met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1). The inspector
summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
Items discussed
included one item of noncompliance and two new unresolved items. With
regard to the item of noncompliance (failure to review and approve
vendor system procedures - paragraph 5), licensee representatives stated
that they believed specification 6.8.2 was not intended to require
review and approval of vendor system procedures and stated they would
review the matter further. With regard to the unresolved item concerning
the radiation monitor interlocks (paragraph 9), licensee representatives
stated some type of prompt, possibly temporary, corrective action would
be developed during the following week.
The inspector requested he be
xept advised of licensee plans with respect to this item.