ML20034E481
Text
I' \\
I.
1,.
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REOIONV 1'150 MARIA LANE, SUITE 210 OA Rf'.C:'.IVtO WALNUT CREEK.CALIFORNIA 14511 fd!i, JiN 2~ PM 1: 55 JAN 19,~~
I*, l/
./ r." Jt1tJ : C( / Cf ~Lf J.M. CURRAN fS4020~GOOJ7 Southern California Edison Company 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Attention: Kr. C. B. McCarthy W'\\"
- I Vice President Advanced Engineering Gentlemen: 0 COH
Subject:
NRC Inspection - San Onofre Units 1, 2 -lnd 3 Thia refers to thet;~al in1pection conducted by Mr. G. P. Yuhas of this office on b;ceaber 27, 28, 1983 of activities authorized by IRC License Hos. DPR-13, NPF-10, NPF-15, and to the discussion of our findings held by Kr. Yuhas with Mr. J. G. Baynes a~d other aeabers 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 petsonnel, and observations by the inspector, No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified within the acop~ of this inspection.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2,790(a), a copy of this letter and the enclosures will be placed in the HRC Public Document RoOII WJ.less y~u notify this office, by telephone, within ten days of the date of this letter and submit written application to withhold infonaatio11. contdned therein vithin thirty days of the date of this ~etter. Such application must be consistent with the requirements of 2.790(b)(l).
RECEIVED FEB 011984 CDM Ii,...,.,.!,'.*,~**
,,.,,,,,~1'.*:/,.... ~~-
..i~.... ~....
RECEIVED JAN 24 i'3~..t C. ** McCARTHY
Solltbel'II'/ C*liforni* Edison Coapao.y 2
JAN 191984 Shouic1:jw... v~ ~y questions concero.iq tbia inspection, ve will be glad to di*cus.t~: vi th you..
Eoclotllre:
. I111iection Report No;.. so:..206Ja3:.21
- so:.361/13;.42
- 50~362/83-41 cc w/o encl
D. J. Fogarty, Executive Vice President Si.Dcerely,
- r. A, Wen1lawski, Chief Radioloaical Safety :Branch
- Nu.clear lnaineerina & Operations H.B. Ray, Vice President and Site Manager
U.S. NUCLEAR RIGULATORY COHKISSION REGION V leport Bo.
50*206/83-27, 50*361/83-42, 50*362/83*41 Docket Ho.
50-206 1 50-361 1 50*362 Liceoae Joa. DPR-13 1 JIPF*10 1 IPF*15 Safeauard1 Group~~-
Licensee:
Southern California Edison Company P. 0. Box 800 1 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770 Facility Name:
San Onofre Units la 21 and 3 Inspection at:
Sao Clemente, California Inspectors:
Approved by:
F. A. Wenslawski, Chief Radiological Safety Erancb Swaary:
Inspection on December 27 and 28 1 1983 (Report Nos. 50-206/83-27 1 50-361/83*42 1 50*362/83-41).
Areas Inspected: Special announced inspection to review the Unit 2 and 3 power ascension test program as applied to reactor coolant specific activity; followup on the licensee's actions involving ~be release of materials contaminated with low levels 0£ ra~ioactivity; and review of dosi.lletry files associated with a worker's expression of concern. The inspection involved 14 hours1.62037e-4 days <br />0.00389 hours <br />2.314815e-5 weeks <br />5.327e-6 months <br /> onsite by one regionally based inspector.
Results:
Of the areas inrpected no items of noncompliance were identified, ooe item involviog a 1978 ~pent fuel handling evolution remains unresolved (paragraph 4).
'l!I,,*,
DETAILS
. 1.
Persona Coot.acted
- J. Baynes, Station Manager
- D. Schone, lite Quality Assurance Manager
- P. Croy? Collpliance Manager
- J. Droste,.a.1i1t1nt Kanaaer Technical
- R. Gray, Health Physics Supervisor
- D. Duran, bdvaate Supervisor
- P. lina, Quality Assurance Supervisor
-t-J. Horteun, Cbe11iltry Sup~rviaor
- s. Jone,, Health Physics Foreaan E. Bennett, Quality A11urance
- R. Reiss, Quality Assurance
- H. Speer, Cotlpliance
- Indicates ~ae individuals attending the exit interview on Deceaber 28, 1983.
- 2.
Units 2/3 Power Ascension Test Program The licensee'* iaplementation of the COlllllitment presented in Section 14.2.12.92, "RCS Chemistry and Radio*Cbeabtry Test" of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) was reviewed.
Data collected pursuant to Special Chemistry Procedure SPC-002 and SPC-003, "Unit-2/3 Power Ascension Teat Program, Chemistry Support" were reviewed and discussed with the Cheaistry Supervisor.
The Boronoa.eter (21.E-0203) was successfully shown to provide reliable indication of reactor coolant boron concentration. The Process Radia~ion Monitor (2.RE-0202) proved to be unreliable and lacked quantitative correlation t.o reactor coolant specific activity.
T"~e licensee had responded to these problems by installation of new shielded cable in the instrument curcuit and develo~nt of an activity correlation based on Rb-88 to coapare the aonitor readout with laboratory analysis results.
The Unit 2 IIOdifiutions were expected to be complete by Jan,'.,ry 6, 1984.
The Unit 3 aonitor wes performin& aatisfactorly and trending reactor coolant activity.
The Unit 2 baseline full power reactor coolant gross specific activity was established at approximately 9E*l uCi/cc. This is consistent with the SE-1 uCi/cc predicted by the vendor.
The vendor considers activities in excess of 2.0 uCi/cc to be abnoraal.
Although Unit 3 full power testing bad not yet been coapleted, review of gross specific and dose equivalent iodine activity indicated auch higher levels than observed at Unit 2.
Since Decerber 22, 1983 dose equivalent iodine acttvitie, in exc~ss of 1.0 uCi/g bad been observed following power chan1e1.
Gross activities ~f 10 uCi/cc were 1110 observed. These activities ere within the Technic~l Specification liait (3.4.7), however, the licensee and Combustion Engineering are carefully evaluating the significance of tbese indic1~or1.
2
~
inapector di1cu11ed vitb the Health Phy1ic1 Supervi1or tbe iapact
- ab reactor coolant 1pecific activity will have on aaintenance activities 6lria& the January outaae, Tbe Health Phy1ic1 Supervi1or had evaluated tile potential effect, in tera, of plant 1pecific de1i1D and v11 aaking appropriate preparationa.
lo iteea of noncoapliance or deviationa were identified in thi1 area.
- 3.
Control of Radioactive Material TIie inapector aet vith licensee repre1entative1 to review t~e 1tatu1 of tlleir aurvey effort, at tbe lte11 (Report Jo. 50*206/83-20) and the iapleaentation of long tera corrective actiona associated with di1po1al of sewage 1ludge containing trace quantities of radioactive aaterial.
TIie Radwaate Supervisor atated that four te... of aix technicians and laborers are presently engaged in tbe aurvey effort, at the Ne11.
The
- apervi1or e1tiaated tbe effort ii 3()'1 coaplete. Be haa 1et J'ebruary 1984 11 a taraet date for completion. The January 15, 1984 e*aluation i1 on schedule according to tbe 1upervi1or. Since October 1983 the survey effort ha, identified approxiaately 50 itelll contaainated vith low levels of radioactive aaterial. lone of the iteaa discovered represented a 1ianificant radiation hazard.
la letters dated Septeaber 22, and October 1, 1982 the licensee advised JIIC that two 1hipaent1 of sewage slud3e froa an obsolete septic tank located within the Unit l restricted area vere allowed to leave the facility without an appropriate 1urvey. Saapling of tbe residual sludge in the tank and of t~e di1po1al facility confiraed that no RRC or atate radiation safety reaulations had been violated. Review of records indicated the licensee bad performed an evaluation of this situation and developed aeasures to prevent recurrence. These aea1ure1 included revision of Health Physics Procedure, S0-123-111-5.2.1, S0-123-III-S.ll.l, and S0-123-VII-8.2 to 111ure that 111 sewage sludge ia
- aapled, analyzed and di1posed of in accordance vith regulatory requirements. The licensee aade arranaeaents to duap future sewaae plant effluents into the San Dieao Metropolitan Sewaae Sy1te11. Records i;ldicate that on June l, 1983 the licensee discovered that a February 24, 1983 shipment of approxiaately 8,000 aallon, of 1ludie had been di7erted by the waste hauler (Consolidated Pumping Service) and duaped at t.he Bonsall Landfill rather than the authorized dumping station. The licensee reviewed this aatter, terminated their contract vith tbe waste bauler, and eorrectly concluded, that the trace radioactivity present was leas than the unconditional release liJlita for water expressed in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 2, and no report to MRC was required. The licenaee bas now established I forual agreement vith I.T. Corporation to assure that all sewage sludge will.be disposed of at the designated location.
lteview of I Deceaber 22, 1983,ewaae shipment indicated the licensee is fllpleaenting the established program.
lo items of noncompliance or deviations vere identified in this area.
- 4.
3 Worker lxpre11ion of Concern 0a October 5, 1983 a worker COlltacted an IRC reaid~nt inspector reaardina occvpatioa.al dose received durf.n& work perfonaed iD tbe spring of 1978.
TIie worker wanted to lmov if bb occupation.al upoaure could be re1ponaible for aedical problll!S ~ich 1ub1equ.entlJ developed. Baaed on dilcu11ion1 between tbe ~orker, aa BC ladiation Specialiat, and the tiae period since exposure, tn.t: *tter Val revievecl duriD& tbi1 iupection.
leview of tbe individual 1a do1illetry records ioc1icat.ed tbe licensee did aot record an eapoaure ill e¥ce1s of reavlatory.liait1. Peripheral record* iAdicate the individual vo*rbcl on a 1peot fuel cHk during February and March 1978.
The Health Phylic1 Shift Foreua'a Loa and Contaaia.ation/Injury Loa books were reviewed for tbe period of interest aad no indication of a peraonnrl contaain.atiOD iAcideat involving the iAdividual were recorded durini t~e aprioa of 1971. A Health Phy1ic1/Cheai1try Tecbnican inv~lved in the apring 1978 fuel *hipping activities waa contacted by tebplone and did not recall a contaaination incident involving the indi~idual Qr a condition vhen aianificant peraonnel exposure was likely to have occurred. Specific aurvey records for the period in question were not available durins the inspection.
Other individual* involved in the apecific work activities during the period in question also were not available durina the iupection.
This aatter will remain unresolved pending addition.al review (S0-206/83*27-0l).
S.
Unresolved Item Unresolved items are matters about which aore infonaation 1; ~equired in lrder to ascertain whether they are acceptable items, items of noncompliance, or deviations.
An unresolved itea is discussed in paragraph 4.
- 6.
hit Interview Thu inspector aet with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 28, 1983.
The inspector 1U11111arized the scope and finding, of the inspection.
lbe ioap~ctor atated that the Unit 3 high reactor coolant specific activity 11 of ccocern. The licensee stated that they are carefully evaluating tbe significance of this indicator with respect to fuel perfol'IDlnce.
.. 1,..i\\