ML20132B504
| ML20132B504 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 12/09/1996 |
| From: | Gibson A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Dennis Morey SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9612170266 | |
| Download: ML20132B504 (11) | |
See also: IR 05000348/1996010
Text
._
_ . _
. _
.. ..
.
_.__ __ ___ ____.___
,
i.
'
!
i'
j
.
'
l
December 9, 1996
'
Southern Nuclear Operating Company, Inc.
1
i
ATTN: Mr. D. N. Morey
1
i
Vice President
1.
P.O. Box 1295
i
Birmingham, AL 35201
SUBJECT:
MEETING SUMMARY:
INSPECTION REPORT 96 10 FINDINGS
-
,!
FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT
DOCKET NOS. 50 348, 50 364
!
Dear Mr. Morey:
This refers to the management meeting on November 4 1996, conducted at the
NRC Region II Office. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss findings
documented in Inspection Report (IR) 50 348, 50 364/96 10.
It is our opinion,
3
j
that this meeting was beneficial.
.
'
A List of Attendees and Handouts used by Southern Nuclear Operating Company
,
representatives during the discussions are enclosed.
Licensee representatives
d
discussed their evaluations, root causes and corrective actions regarding the
i
following Health Physics and Radiological Effluent program issues: containment
.
high range monitor (CHRM) electronic calibrations; personal dosimetry use:
!
radioactive material labeling: and liquid composite sample preservation.
Regarding the examples of configuration control violations, potential root
!
causes and status of corrective actions were reviewed and discussed for a
radiation monitor sample line and for additional discrepancies noted for plant
3
supports as documented in IR 50 348, 50 364/96 07 dated September 27,~1996.
!
The status of, and current initiatives within the Health Physics and the
[
Safety Audit and Engineering Review (SAER) programs were detailed.
f
i
During the discussions the licensee stated that identified violations
regarding liquid composite sample preservation, CHRH electronic calibrations,
.
'
and labeling of casks containing radioactive' materials did not appear to be
'
the result of a lack of attention to detail as documented in our letter
transmitting IR 50 348, 50-364/96 10, but to misunderstandings regarding the
l
adecuacy of the program elements in place. We agree that the reasons for the
,
CHRF calibration and labeling issues may be the result of misinterpretation of
'
program adequacy. However, our references to a lack of attention to detail
were intended to focus management and staff attention on finding the causes
and successfully correcting the aggregate weaknesses and violations
identified.
Licensee representatives discussed issues associated with the CHRH electronic
calibrations and requested that the NRC review the bases for dispositioning
the item as a violation rather than an Inspector Follow up Item. The
licensee's bases for their request and our supplemental review and final
disposition regarding this issue are provided in Enclosure 3.
We conclude
that this issue was properly identified as a violation.
h217EE!R !ssan
.
,-
48
p
1 0
,
dM5
w
_
. - - - .
4
.
SONOPC0, Inc.
2
In accordance with Section 2.790 of NRC's " Rules of Practice, "Part 2,
Title 10 Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosures
will be placed in the NRC Public Do::ument Room.
l
Should you have any questions cor.cerning this letter, please contact us.
!
Sincerely,
l
(Original signed by A. F. Gibson)
Albert F. Gibson, Director
,
Division of Radiation Safety
Docket Nos. 50 348, 50 364
License Nos. NPF-2, NPF 8
l
Enclosures: 1.
List of Attendees
2.
SNC Handouts
3.
Evaluation and Conclusion
Violation 96 10 02
I
cc w/ enc 1:
M. Stanford Blanton
M. J. Ajluni. Licensing
Balch and Bingham Law Firm
Services Manager, B 031
P. O. Box 306
Southern Nuclear Operating
1710 Sixth Avenue North
i
Company, Inc.
Birmingham, AL 35201
42 Inverness Center Parkway
Birmingham, AL 35242
Chairman
]
Houston County Commission
R. D. Hill, Jr.
P. O. Box 6406
General Manager, Farley Plant
Dothan, AL 36302
Southern Nuclear Operating
l
Company, Inc.
l
P. O. Box 470
Ashford, AL 36312
J. D. Woodard
Executive Vice President
Southern Nuclear Operating
l
Company, Inc.
P. O. Box 1295
Birmingham, AL 35201
l
State Health Officer
Alabama Department of Public Health
434 Monroe Street
Montgomery, AL 36130 1701
Distribution w/ enc 1:
(See page 3)
I
.. .
__
_
_
_ . -
_ _ . - _ _ _
.
.
.
SON 0PCO, Inc.
3
Distribution w/ encl:
J. Zimmerman, NRR
l
P. Skinner, RII
W. P. Kleinsorge, RII
f
M. E. Ernstes, RII
PUBLIC
NRC Resident Inspector
i
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
l
7388 N State Hwy 95
l
Columbia, AL 36319
l
i
i
i
l
l
l
l
- For pervious concurrence see attac
ge
i
orFICF
RII-ORS *
Rf f :0RS*
R
SIGNATijRE
NAME
GKuzo
KBarr
PSk nmr
DATE
12 /
/ 96
12 /
/%
12 /
h / 96
12 /
/%
12 /
/%
12 /
/%
9
COPY 7
YES
NO
YES
NO
[Eh
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
Uf11CIAL RECORD COPY
DOCUMENT NAME:\\ G#\\ DOCUMENT \\MiW UM.FNP
1 _
.._
_
_-
_ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ . . _
. _. __
.
. _ _ _ _ _ .
.
-
.
/
SONOPC0, Inc.
3
/
/
l
Distribution w/ encl:
'
W dT, NRR
T. 7 J ^4 M C"" A s
'/
P. Skinner, RII
W. P. Kleinsorge. RII
M. E. Ernstes, RII
PUBLIC
NRC Resident Inspector
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
7388 N State Hwy 95
l
Columbia, AL 36319
l
,
'
/
l
l
/
/
,/
'
/
i
'
/,/
1
/
l
/
l
t
OFFICE
Rff:0RS
Rf f r[5tS
Rif:0RP
$1GNATURE
l
[-
NANE
m za
/Kak if
PSkinner
DATE
12/i /%
2
/ 96
12 /
/ 96
12 /
/ 96
12 /
/ 96
12 /
/ 96
COPY?
kE[
N0
fES ) NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
Ott1CLM. RECORD COPY
UDCUMENT NAME G:\\ DOCUMENT \\MitcuM.FNP
i
!
..
. . . . . _ . . - - _ _
.
. . - _ - - .
_ .
.
,
,
l
l
LIST OF ATTENDEES
Southern Nuclear Operatino Comoany
J. Woodard Executive Vice President
D. Morey, Vice President
j
R. Hill, General Manager, FNP
S. Fulmer. Technical Manager, Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP)
'
D. Jones, Engineering Manager, Corporate
J. McGowen, Manager, Safety Auc'it and Engineering Review (SAER), FNP
i
G. Waymire, Superintendent, SAER FNP
l
Nuclear Reaulatory Commission
.
S. Ebneter, Regional Administrator
A. Gibson, Director, Division Reactor Safety (DRS)
j
K. Barr, Chief, Plant Support Branch (PSB), DRS
1
C. Casto, Chief. Engineering Branch, DRS
P. Skinner, Chief. Division of Reactor Projects (DRP), Branch 2
'
T. Ross, Senior Resident Inspector, FNP, DRP, Branch 2
G. Kuzo, Senior Radiation Specialist, PSB, DRS
l
j
i
$
I
Enclosure 1
i
.
_ . .
_ . .
_
_ _ . _ _ _
_ .
_ _ _ _ _ .
__
.
_ _ . . . _ _ _ _
__
. . _ . _
'
-
November 1996
'
-
.
' **N ,
K' .<
-
_
d-cic-3D
Nf
<
s-a-as
!
From Iso Drawing
) <
j
D-514771 Rev. O
n
'.
$
.
e
,
4
l
l8
'R
i
A
i
> s
-EBC-
.
s-e-23ys
x
.
!
> <
Z
'
> <
'
',,
.,
10"3 r6
t
'
j
,
s q,
l
ge
s
..
,
il
15
v
4
~
14 g
Vp
%
1
k
20 *
N,,
Yp
'
-
%
,,
s. ,,,.,.
3
.
x
.
\\
[
.l'
- x
s.
>.
- .,, .x
n
s
.
'
n
.
in
.
l I
bd
-
lb, .
[
Enclosure 2
-.
-- _.
-.
.
-
.
-.
.
..
-
November 1996
-
.
i
i
4-cac-3D
NJ#
'
i
s-a-337
i
From Iso Drawing
x
D-514771 Rev.1
.
e
ke
-
4
>
'
!
1-EBC-
-e-337
c
-
(
i
> s
L
d
31
.
,c
)
A
e
x
..
s
.
.
I
h
11
15
,
4
~
14 g
Vp
a
a
'El
'
th
s
Y
'
g
%
'
'
ny
' k. is.,,
3
i,
s
s
s.
Um-
,.
>.
wg
u
s
.
'
,
?
h
in
.
lf
bd
1.
.
.
Enclosure 2
-
-
-
-
-
-
- - -
-
. -
-.
- - . - . . . . .. .
. . .
- .
. . .
. . - . . . - -
. ~ - . . - . . . .
- - . . . .
_ - . - . . . - ~ . . . - . - - .
. .
.
'
.
i
<
1)*
1
,
1
e mese sev e
i " P Grh eH
mort ee&acGCR DEPARTietMT
===
-#
"'
- =^'= 1 21 l'-
a
I
g
execx ev * / *'
34Tu s
-
l
.
euoromsa
af1*AWA PTR. CO.
er omawn erw8N
oars 4"21 PF
{
'
emess os coere e -- 7.0.dFTP.222
new
i . a
a
4
6
s
'
i
i
,.,
FAILEY NUO. 3?A UNI? $1
MlS2.9////
-
a
!
'
ce N4 E ET E
. . . , , ., ,. . ! . *. : .4, Os1 6
x
. 1,o 2.
e mv>
,v
5
.'
..-
7.Y
'
. ..s
, ,
.,
!
y.
.cos
.-
.
.
- .
'
g
j
j
z=
. o z.t
,
l ' .. i . l 1;
.Q
3
. ..
!
_
x n n. wa. e
(n.__
-
b:
i,
%.;
'.
rn..ta u.s
\\
\\
.
s 3.sise 1:sbm.
w
-
\\
_ m
e = i'. 6 h'
I
1
z...+
q' -
,
@
2
'
,
Prow
as
@
o
vm
-
j
Crition.L
"-
o i, A y y , e w e gg , . 4 e.
3.,
-
y
s
.
,
t
1
L
@
@
g6
..
"h
9 h 4.e .
1 9
i
s
,
a
4
4
L
.
d
i
M- M
__
d
4
d.
i
._
"
+,- +1
~
,
4
v
_.
.,
.
1
.
,
s
,
~ ,
-
-
-
-
'
-
s o' A' ,
l
6
+-l
1
1 +
+
r
-
1 --l M
9.. ,.
-
--
t
.
<
'n
a
I
j
$F4*' O N * A A
j
i
l
'@
sec ou's-e-
,
As, am.T.
j
LACAMON Pt.AN
i
'**
l
inavsmate ame ocenarisses
l evam
l
tm t ens e e e . ant-r z. ct.tA Y (f1999 Ft CMA PnABEf R*PT*!f* 9F
l'IEEIP
ALL MAT E Rf AL A"wr*'T T em ##wt m
,
1
' / 9"w A" en h traal Stara O ' - 10 3 / &" ' am e
'
3
7
1/?"wA" Fa h staal 71 men. ' ' . & ' am e
y
1
1 / 9"w % 1 / 2 " f*2 + - tra I 91sts o ' . &'*f am e
j
A
1/9"wA" f** * - traal #1 m e n . S ' . 0" ' am e
g
1/Aa e2 u-2
L
A
1/A" "mm Ratta
1 1/2" ' m e
&
7
1 1/9" av i t n ds e
9" s c enara . Fie.
7fMi Oert en d1. ? 1/a"
1
OO
2fsm. Mvdem.nlte 9haer & Siamw Munnvenner. ' anne
!
1Wu dsid ~?inten Ear-swe=u"
he * * m e nrs Sate ne=
'
j
1 11/ l& " / *M . 7 /.
-
1
a
t.*, sat 4 s
61_
m es an se
1
wn. 4c"
2" seinenter.
1
a
,
1
&" Pima
No'.9 3/a"
E.7 1/a"
G=3/R"r6"r6"
,
I
I
12tsMic Astr'wt v SKETC"4 & EMCINEERING
j
BtREDLE L "AC
- '" . d '** * r* ' . _":*: r"""' '"' "
.
. ,. _-
gg
gg
j
3
non wassmau a=o omenarrows saa sastem a
-
=sv
t
_
i
g .s
M -~ : . ~
.
esp =:nw a wee sta at 3 * ' ' b "_ , *
esasta see ACW*1@
sugTCH ** e ' ' O b b
88V
i
...*
}
.
M
d
i
i
Enclosure 2
1
i
-
. . - .
-
_=
.
_.
-
.
l.
- ,
l
!
EVALUATION AND CONCLUSION
Violation 50-348, 50 364/96-10 02
!
l
On September 27, 1996, a Notice of Violation (Notice) was issued for five
l
violations identified during a NRC Inspection conducted August 12-16, and
August 26 30, 1996. The Southern Nuclear Operating Company (SNC) responded to
the Notice on October 25, 1996, and agreed to the stated violations. However,
,
during a November 4, 1996 Management Meeting, licensee representatives
requested that the bases for issuing a violation for failure to meet in situ
electronic calibration of the containment high range monitors (CHRMs) as
specified in NUREG 0737, Clarification of THI Action Plan Requirements. Table
II.F.1-3 be reviewed. The NRC evaluation and conclusions regarding the
licensee *s arguments are as follow:
Restatement of the Violation
10 CFR 50.54(h) requires, in part, the license to be subject to the provisions
of the Act now or hereafter in effect, and to all rules, regulations and
orders of the Commission.
By letter dated March 14, 1983, an Order to implement and maintain license
commitments for post-THI related items was issued. The Order referenced
commitments documented in letters dated April 16, 1982, and June 4, 1982,
issued in response to NRC Generic Letters 82 05 and 8210, and specified, in
part, that Three Mile Island (TMI) Action Item II.F.1 3 was complete.
NUREG 0737, Clarification of THI Action Plan Requirements. Table II.F.13
Containment High Range Monitor, ppecifies, in part, a monitor range of
1 Roentgen per hour (R/hr) to 10 R/hr, and that in situ calibration by
electronic signal substitution is acceptable for all iange decades above 10
R/hr.
Contrary to the above, as of August 12, 1996, the licensee failed to implement
and maintain the March 14, 1983 Order, in that, in situ special calibration by
electronic signal substitution for all range decades above 10 R/hr were not
conducted for the installed containment high range monitors.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
Summary of the Reasons for the Licensee's Reauest
During the November 4, 1996 Management Meeting, licensee representatives
requested the NRC staff to review the dispositioning of the CHRH electronic
calibration issue ds a violation. Based on current vendor calibration and
in plant surveillance activities, they believed the intent of their
l
commitments for the CHRMs referenced in their April 16, 1982, and June 4, 1982
letters was met.
l
The licensee stated that their current calibration was conducted in accordance
with the original vendor procedural guidance which met the intent of
'
NUREG 0737 requirements. The failure to conduct an electronic calibration at
each decade above 10 R/hr was based on a misinterpretation of the words " range
Enclosure 3
l
,
1-
2
decade"
in Table II.F.13 which, specifies, in part, in situ calibration by
electronic signal substitution is acceptable for all range decades above
l
10R/hr.
l
In addition, the licensee referenced two NRC documents which they believed
'
indicated confusion by other licensees implementing the CHRH special
l
electronic calibrations following initial publication of NUREG 0737. The
referenced corresaondence included an April 20, 1982 Memorandum from G. D.
Brown, Chief, Tec1nical Program Branch, Region IV to R. Mattson, Director,
Division of Systems Integration, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR),
!
which specified, in aart, that licensees identified difficulties in obtaining
{
pulse generators wit 1 the necessary range to perform full scale electronic
'
response tests of the electrical circuit. The second document referenced by
the licensee, an August 16, 1982 Memorandum from D. Eisenhut, Director
,
Division of Licensing, NRR, to Regional Administrators provided guidelines for
meeting the intent of CHRH monitor special calibrations as documented in Item
II.F.13 of NUREG 0737.
NRC Evaluation
The NRC staff has reviewed carefully the licensee's recuest and has concluded
that no significant supplemental information was proviced that had not been
considered previously in dispositioning the identified non-compliance.
The use of vendor calibrations to meet the special calibrations in NUREG 0737
Table II.F.1-3 is not acceptable. The guidance specifies that "the original
laboratory calibration is not an acceptable position due to the possible
differences after in situ installation."
Further, we do not agree that the April 20, 1982, and August 16, 1982
Memoranda, and the use of the original vendor procedure justify the licensee's
current misinterpretation in implementing the in situ electronic calibration.
NUREG 0737. II.F.1, Attachment 3. Containment High Range Radiation Monitor,
Changes to Previous Requirements and Guidance, Section (6) documented that
electronic calibration is acceptable for high dose rate ranges because such
methods are sufficient to provide acceptable accuracy. Also, the Special
Calibration details referenced in Table II.F.13 allowed use of electronic
signal substitution for each range decade above 10 R/hr in lieu of source
calibrations due to ALARA considerations. The April 20, 1982. Memorandum
documented, in part, that licensees were concerned with the necessity to
demonstrate periodically, that the detector properly responds to radiation
'
sources through the designated exposure rate range ([10 R/hr
10 E+07 R/hr]);
and that there were difficulties in obtaining adequate pulse generators to
aerform full scale electronic response tests. The August 16, 1982, Eisenhut
iemorandum reconfirmed that electronic checks by signal substitution using a
calibrated current source would be a satisfactory method of demonstrating that
i
the system electronics would res)ond to radiation fields over the range of
10 R/hr through 10 E+07 R/hr. T1e Memorandum also identified that Julse
generators were available to perform full scale response tests of t1e high
range radiation monitors' electrical circuits.
Further, changes in the
vendor's field calibration procedure in 1983, as referenced in Inspection
Report 50-348, 50 364/96-10, corroborated our finding of deficiencies in the
original procedures for meeting the intent of Table II.F.13.
Enclosure 3
1
. -
-.
-.
-
.
- _
-
.
.
3
!
l
Finally, the Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP) Standard Test Procedure (STP) used to
l
conduct the electronic calibration did not verify adequately, the linearity
l
and accuracy of the upper ranges for the installed equipment.
For example,
the data in FNP 1 STP 227.18A, dated October 16, 1995, only verified that the
'
system electronics responded withir, tolerance for an electronic pulse
representing approximately 1 E+3 R/hr for each of four separate switch
positions and for a pulse representing E+4 R/hr for the fifth switch position
associated with the readout module. The surveillance test, as conducted, did
l
not verify the linearity and accuracy of the installed equipment at the upper
ranges from E+5 through E+7 R/hr as intended in NUREG 0737. Table II.F.13
NRC Conclusion
For the above reasons, the NRC staff concludes that this issue was identified
properly as a violation for failure to implement and maintain the March 14,
1983, Order for the Containment High Range Monitor in situ special calibration
by electronic signal substitution for all range decades above 10 R/hr.
i
l
i
!
l
Enclosure 3