Text

Insp Repts 50-348/88-10 & 50-364/88-10 on 880328-0511. Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Liquid & Gaseous Radwaste Mgt,Effluent Monitoring & Followup on Unresolved Item
	ML20154P600
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	05/19/1988
From:	Adamovitz S, Kahle J; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20154P588	List: ML20154P583; ML20154P590; ML20154P600;
References
	50-348-88-10, 50-364-88-10, NUDOCS 8806030391
	Download: ML20154P600 (14)
	v • d • e

-.

_

._ ._

,_

a 4 Kid -

UNITED STATES

o ' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '

& REGION il ,

'h - 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W. I

!

t' ' ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323

\*****/ MAY 2 01988

.

Report Nos.: 50 348/88-10, 50-364/88-10 .l

License'e: Alabama Power Company'

600 North 18th Street- '

Birmingham, AL 35291-0400

Docket Nos.: 50-348 50-364 License Nos.: NPF-2, HPF-8 I

Facility Name: Farley 1 and 2

Inspection Co eted: March 28 - May 11, 1988

Inspecto - -

/S.

-

d~ b (f 9 //7

Date/Signe'd

'. A ovitz_

Approved by: Mh(ok

J. B; Kahle, Section'Chie"

c,

Date SigrWd /

9//)

.;

Divi ion of Radiation Safety and Safeguards

l

SUMMARY

Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of

liquid and gaseous radiosctive waste management, effluent monitoring, and

followup on an unresolved item.

Results: One violation was identified - failure to make detector specific

attenuation corrections for solid calibration geometries used to determine the -

,

isotopic activities in gaseous effluents. l

t

!

I

L

$

i

l

I

8806030391 OG0520 i

PDR ADOCK 05000348 I

Q DCD

P

-.

' '

. ,

.

P

REPORT DETAILS <

!

1. Persons Contacted

Licensee Employees

W. Bayne, Chemistry and Environmental Supervisor

T. Burr, Data Control Technician '.

J. Daiter, Plant Instructor

S. Fulmer, Supervisor, Safety Auditing and Engineering Review Group

D. Grissette, Environmental and Emergency Planning Supervisor

R. Hill, Operations Manager

D. Hostetter, Plant Instructor

L. Huey, System Performance Engineer

M. Mitchell, Health Physics Supervisor

D. Morey, Assistant General Manager - Operations

V. Murphy, SAER Auditor

W. Shipman, Assistant General Manager - Support .

R. Wood, Plant Chemist

J. Woodard, General Manager

NRC Resident inspectors

W. Bradford ,

W. Miller ;

Attended exit interview j

2. Exit Interview

'

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on April 1, 1988, with

those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the

areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. No

dissenting coments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not

identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the

inspector during this inspection. The inspector contacted the licensee

via telephone on April 18, 20, 26 and 28, 1988, to gain further information

concerning gaseous calibration crosscheck studies. The licensee was

cc,ntacted May 11, 1988, and informed that failure to make detector

specific attenuation corrections for solid calibration geometries used to

determine the isotopic activities in gaseous effluents was considered a

violation (Paragraph 3),

3. Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (92701)

(Closed) Unresolved item (URI) 50-348, 364/87-18-01: Validation studies

of 1 liter and 4 liter Marinelli gaseous calibration.

In Inspection Report Nos. 50-348/83-08, 50-364/83-06, an Inspector

Followup Item (IFI) was identified because results of the confirmatory

i

!

>

.

' * '

. .

.

2

measurements for Xe-133 and Xe-135 concentrations' from waste decay tanks

were not'in agreement. The disagreements were attributed to the fact

that the licensee's calibration technique used a polymer matrix having a

significantly higher density than gas. This resulted in the attenuation

of low energy photons and a lower counting efficiency causing over

reporting of noble gases (42 to 81 percent). The licensee agreed, at that

time, to recalibrate using gas standards.

In Inspection Report Nos. 50-348/85-27, 50-364/85-27, validation studies

of gas geometries were discussed. A

completed only for the 12 cc (14 ml) vial pparently, validation

geometry. studies

The IFI were

was closed

and a new IFI (50-348/85-27-01, 50-364/85-27-01) was opened regarding

conducting additional studies for larger volume geometries, a 100 cc gas

bomb and a 4 liter gas Marinelli.

In Inspection Report Hos. 50-348/87-18, 50-364/87-18, the results of the

gaseous calibration crosschecks for i liter and 4 liter Marinelli

geometries conducted in March 1986 and April 1987, were reviewed. A known

amount of a gas standard containing Xe-133, Xe-127 and Kr-85 was counted

on the licensee's detector systems using the 1 liter and 4 liter counting

geometries. The 1 liter and 4 liter counting geometries had been

calibrated with the polymer matrix spiked with nine mixed gamma isotopes.

The ratios of the "counted" results to the "known " spike values were

calculated and compared for the 1986 and 1987 studies. The 1987 study

results showed a much higher bias than the 1986 results. The

IFI 50-348/87-18, 50-364/87-18 was closed and escalated to an unresolved -

item (URI 50-348/87-18-01,50-364/87-18-01). The licensee representatives

agreed to conduct further crosschecks in order to evaluate the

differences.

During this inspection, a review of the licensee's evaluation showed that l

a study conducted in September 1987, closely agreed with the April 1987 :

study. The data from a study ccnducted in September 1985 also showed I

comparable data. The reason that the March 1986 data did not correlate '

with the September 1985, April 1987 and September 1987 data was unclear l

but it was possibly due to gas transfer techniques or errors. From the

September 1987 study, the ratios of the "counted" to "known" activities

for the 1 liter Marinelli ranged from 0.84 to 1.45. The range for the

4 liter Marinelli was 0.86 to 1.73.

As a result of these studies the licensee discontinued the use of the

4 liter Marinelli geometry. For the 1 liter Marinelli, the licensee

discounted the Xe-127 data because of the complex suming corrections

needed for the Xe-127 gama photons. An average of the 4 detectors for

the counting results were compared to the known gas values for Xe-135 and

Kr-85. Since the average value of the 4 detectors was within in

20 percent of the known valve the licensee accepted the method for

measuring and reporting gas samples.

1

- - ~

'

y ^ '- ~

,

. . >

<

'

c)

.

-3 >

'

l

Previous reported results using the 4 liter Marinelli, possibly high by as

much as 63 per;ent, were not corrected because gaseous releases from the

plant were only a small fraction of regulatory limits.

A comparative suninary ' of the ratios of the "counted" results to the I

"known" values for the September 1987 study is presented in Attachment'1.

The licensee's evaluation averaged the results of the 4 detectors for each-

of the the isotopes. Averaging the.results was misleading with. regard to g

the accuracy of an individual detector and did not represent .a true

overall accuracy of the counting system. Also, there was no basis for J

disregarding the Xe-127 isotopic results because of the complex ~ summary

'

,

corrections needed for the Xe-127 gamma photons.

] Even though most results for gas counting were biased high, the purpose of

detection equipment calibration was to minimize errors and to provide for

the most accurate and- reliable quantitative measurements possible.

Consequently, the attenuation of gamma photons in ,the solid polymer l

matrix should have been considered in the calibration of the detector

systems for counting gases and correction factors should not have been

.

averaged among detectors. This would have resulted in inaccurate

1

measurementsinthenob}egaseouseffluents.

The licensee was informed via telephone on May 11, 1988, that this would

be considered a violation; fa'ilure to make adequate surveys (50-348,

364/88-10-01).

4. ChangestoEquipmentandProcedures(84723,#84724)

i a. Within the review areas of this inspection, no changes to liquid or

gaseous effluent treatment or effluent monitoring systems had been '

made since the previous inspection.

b. Technical Specification 6.8.1 requires the licensee to establish, '

i

implement, and maintain procedures covering areas such as liquid and '

gaseous radwaste management, radiological! process and effluent

instrumentation, the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and the Process

Control Program. All procedures listed had been reviewed and

approved by appropriate plant management, as provided in the

i Technical Specification.

~

e (1) FNP-0-RCP-25 Radiation Control and Protection Precedure,

,

Rev. 25, March 3, 1988

Appendix A: Sampling Radiolo

Accident (RCS/RHR, PZR, VCT) gical Streams Durhg a Radiological

Appendix B: Sampling Effluent Streams During a Radiological

i

Accident (Containment and Plant Vent Stack)

4

i ,

i

,

m -

y -

o -

h-l 5 #

.

,p!

, O; .

,

, t:

9 .

?

j ;

.>i' .

t'

y'

,,,

/f,\"1

.

4

'

-

A

'

>> Appendix E: Preparation of ' Reactor ~ Coolant Samples fcr

Radiological and Chemical , Analysis During a Radiological

'

Accident

'

!. .

o !

. (2) 'fNP-1-RCh-252, Radiation Monitoring System Setpoints,. Rev.?l6, i

.S- May 19, 1987 / l,'

/% '

FNP-0-RCP-269,

7 f.

Isotopic

<

Calibradiun of Offline Radiogas

51, i

Monitors

i

(3)

RE0012, RE0013, RE0015, and RE0022, Rev. 7 February 18; 1988

, (4) FNP-0-RCP-270. Isotopic Calibration of the Plant Vent dtack ;

Monitor RE0014, Rev. 2, February ?N, 1988

,

t. + ,

(5) FNP-0-RCP-271, Isotopic Calibration of Monitors REOCN,.RE0011,

RE0021, Rev. 7 February 18, 1988 ,jc .l

(6) FNP-0-RCP-27T, Isotopic Calibration of the Eberline. Remote l

Detector Assemblies RE0015B C, RE0060A-D and RE0066A-F, Rev. 8, !

F February 24, 1988 j

(7) FNP-1-RCP-601, Sam $1'ing the Reactor Coolant System, Rev.12;

January 1, 1988 c / t

i

'

(8) FNP-0-RCP-706. ' Caseous Waste Relea:n Program, Rev. 10,

+

February 15, 'IS88 ,

\ l

4 ;' \

(9) FNP-l' STP-710. Waste Monitor

-

'

Tank Surveillance, Rev. 5, December '

22, 1987 ,

'

(10) FNP-1-STP-728, Plant Vent Stack Surveillance, Rev. 5,

Decemtar 22, 1987 ,

'

(11) FNP-1-STP-750, Waste Gas Decay Tank Curie Content Determination,

Rev. 6. December 17, 1987

(12) FhP-2-STP-759 Implementation of,sthe liquid Waste Release

g Program, Rev. O, August 1, 1986

,l

'

' Not ,qiolations or deviations were identified. '

5. Audits and' Appraisals (84723, 84724)

TechMcal Specifica. tion 6.5.2.8 requires audits of the radiological 4

effluent program and the resups thereof at least once per 12 months, the l

Offa ce Dose Calculation Manual and implementing procedures at least once !

-

per 24 months, and the Process Control Program and implementing procedures ,

, at least once per 24 months. Techaical Specification 6 ?. 3 designates the ;

'

Safety Audit and Engineering Group as being responsible for audit ,

j requiremchts, j

i , ,

\ ,

1

7 i

1

'

N

-

a

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. ,

.

, ,

.

5

,

The inspector reviewed the following audits:

Counting Room Activities, conducted January 28-March 19, 1987

Environmental Monitoring, Radiological- and Nonradiological

(SAER-AP-05, Group 1) conducted February 23-April 10,1987 {

-

Of."site Dose Calculation Manual (Spot Audit, SAER-WP-21), conducted

August 3-September 14,.1987

Audit reports contained detailed summaries of program noncompliances,

deficiencies and comments. Each noncompliance item was assigned a

corrective action number for tracking purposes. Followup actions and

projected conyletion dates were also identified, and item close-out

required subsequent evaluations by the Safety Auditing and Engineering

Group.

No violations or deviations were identified.

6. Semiannual Effluent Release Reports (84723, 84724)

{

Technical Specification 6.9.1.8 requires the licensee to submit within

60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year, routine radioactive

effluent release reports covering tSe operation of the unit during the

previous six months of operation.

The inspector reviewed the Semiannual Radiological Release Reports for the

periods July 1 through pecember 31, 1986, January 1 through June 30, 1987,

and July 1 through December 31, 1987. Th' effluent release data

summarized in Attachment 2 was obtained from current and previous

Sed annual Effluent Release Reports.

.re were five abnormal releases during the calendar year 1987, three

liquid releases and two gaseous releases. The inspector reviewed plant

incident reports and radiocheniistry incident reports concerning these

releases. The gaseous releases occurred on Unit 2 and totalled

8.7 E-6 Ci. These monitored, planned releases were caused by steam

generator pressure pulse cleaning and steam generator helium leak testing.

The abnormal liquid releases occurred on Unit 1 and a total of 8.65 E-5 Ci

were released. Two of the releases were due to recurrent leaks from

penetrations in the Refueling Water Stnrage Tank barrier, and estimated

voirmes released were 20 gallons and 2.4 gallons respectively. The third

abnormal release was caused by a leak in the pumping equipment on the

Reactor Makeup Water Storage Tank and a total of 0.5 gallons was

calculated to have been spilled into the vard drain. Incident reports

(RCIR 1-87-017, RCIR 1-87-024, and IR 1-87 42) documented the licensee's

followup actions, which included details of sampling and cleanup

activities, identification and quantification of the isotopic releases,

and calculation of , robable dosee. The licensee's assessments of these

releases indicated all isotopic concentrations were less than 10 CFR 20,

Appendix B limits.

. . _ . . --

. . .

, ,

a

. 6

No violations or deviations were identified.

7. Testing of Air Cleaning Filtration Systems (84724)

Technical Specificaticns 3.7.7. 3.7.8, and 3.9.14 provide requirements for

the testing of charcoal adsorber sample retention efficiency for methyl

iodide and for in-place -leak testing of HEPA filtration and charcoal

adsorption sections of exhaust and atmosphere cleanup filtration systems.

The inspector discussed system maintenance and testing with cognizant

licensee representatives and reviewed selected records pertaining to

system testing. A Filter Testing Log provided summary data for laboratory

charcoal efficiency tests for iodine retention, HEPA in-place filter leak

test, freon in-place charcoal Led penetration test, and design flow check.

The inspector reviewed portions of the Filter Testing Log 1978-1988

including:

Penetration Room Unit 1, Trains A and B

Containment Purge Unit 1

Penetration Room Unit 2, Trains A and B

Containment Purge Unit 2

Shared Control Room Pressurization, Trains A and B

Shared Control Room Recirculation, Trains A and B

Shared Control Room

No violations or deviations were identified.

8. Reactor Coolant and Secondary Water Chemistry (84723)

Technical Specificatior. Table 4.4-4 specifies sampling and analysis

frequencies of coolant analyses for gross radioactivity dose equivalent i

1-131, radiochemical E-Bar determination, and isotopic analyses for I-131,

'

I-133, and I-135.

Technical Specification Table 3.4-2 specifies the maximum coolant

concentration limits for dissolved oxygen, chloride, and fluoride when the

coolant temperature is above 250*F. Sampling frequencies are specified in

Technical Specification Table 4.4-3.

The inspector discussed analytical methods and reviewed selected portions

of plant chemistry records including:

a. Reactor Coolant System Plots l

Unit 1 November 1986 - February 1988

Unit 2, May 1986 - Octotar 1987, December 1987 - January 1988

Parameters that were plotted included:

"

-

- .- - --- . - .-

'

.

.,, .

,

.

7 ,

Gross Activity.(Beta / Gamma), Power

Dose Equivalent lodine, 1-131, 1-133 '

lodines (I-132, 1-134, 1-135)

Xenons(Xe-133,Xe-135,Xe-138)

-Cesiums(Cs-138,Cs-137,Cs-134)

1-131/I-133 Ratio

b. Secondary Water System Plots for Units 1 and 2. January 1987 -

February 1988

Systems and' parameters that were tracked included:

Steam Generator (SG) Blow Down

SG Cation Conductivity

SG Specific Conductivity

SG Silica

Condenser Hotwell Cation Conductivity

Condensate Pump Discharge Dissolved Oxygen

The inspector verified that analyses were conducted at the required

internals, that isotopic activities were within the required limits and

that the necessary documents were maintained.

No violations or deviations were identified.

9. Radicactive Liquid Wastes and Liquid Effluent Treatment Systems (84723)

Technical Specifications 3.11.1.1, 3.11.1.2, and 3.11.1.3 establish limits

for concentrations of radioactive materials in liquid effluents, require

the liquid effluent treatment system to be operable, and require the use

of the liquid effluent treatment system under certain conditions.

The facility was c;uipped with two waste monitor tanks per unit. Prior to !

discharge, each tank was analyzed for gamma-isotopic, and tritium activity '

was determined from the tank's previous month's composite sample. l

Discussions with licensee representatives indicated the frequency for !

liquid releases was typically one to two tanks per day. l

1

The inspector reviewed selected liquid release. permits for Units 1 and 2 i

covering the period January 1987 to March 1988. The permits were examined i

for content and completeness. The inspector also verified that the

{

records required by Technical Specification 6.10 were maintained in terms '

of frequency and content.

Technical Specification 3.11.1.2 requires the licensee to limit the dose

or dose commitment to an individual from radicactive materials in liquid

effluent releases to:

a. During any calendar quarter to less than or equal to 1.5 mrem to the :l

total body and to less tian er equi.1 to 5 mrem to any organ, and i

I

o

. . . , ~ . . _. .

.- . . . _ _ _ _ _ . - . ,

. _ _ . . _ _ .

. . .

,

.

8.

b. During any calendar year to less than or equal to 3 mrem to the total

body and to less than or equal to 3 mrem to the total bory and to

less than or equal to 10 mrem to any organ.

The inspector reviewed the ODCM, ' selected release permits, and dose

calculation records, and ' verified the' requirements of Technical

Specification 3.11.1.2 were met.

-No violations or deviations were identified.

10. Radioactive Gaseous Wastes and Gaseuds Effluent Treatment Systems (84724)

Technical Specifications 3.11.2.1 through 3.11.2.6 define the operating

requirements, radioactive gaseous effluent ~ release limits,- and'

surveillance requirements for the gaseous radwaste treatment systems.

The licensee maintained continuous gaseous release permits for the plant

vent stack, containment purge, and the steam jet air ejector'(SJAE), and

issued release permits for the waste gas riecay tanks (WGDT) when required.

The facility was equipped with eight waste gas decay tanks per unit, and a

licensee representative estimated approximately 20 tank releases per unit

-

per year. Each tank's curie content was determined weekly by gamma

isotopic analysis if the tank had had a gaseous addition during the past

seven days. The chemists checked Daily Wster Reports for increased tank

-

pressure and the Operation's Log to determine.if additions had been made

to the tanks. The continuous gaseous release-permits were updated weekly

and a new permit was issued monthly. Analytical requirements for the

continuous permits included iodines and particulates on weekly samples and

~

noble gases and tritium on monthly grab samples. :

The inspector reviewed selected portions of the following records: ,

1

a. Waste Gas Decay Tanks Release l'ermits

WGDT #4 Unit i 1/15/88

WGDT #8 Unit-1 1/16/88

WGDT #2 Unit 1 1/29/88 l

WGDT #8 Unit 2 2/15/88

b. Continuous Gaseous Waste Release Permits for the Plant Vent Stack,

Condenser SJAE, and the Containment Purge

Unit 1 May 19, 1987

Unit 2 May 21, 1987

Unit i December 2, 1986 ,

Unit 2 December 4, 1986 )

c. Continuous Release Analytical Data Packs Units 1 and 2

January - December 1987

_- - , . , _ _ . . . . _ -

_ . _ _ ._ __ . _ _ _

_ .

. . .

, ,

m

'

9

d. Weekly Analysis Documents for WGDTs

January - December 1987

No violations or deviations were identified.

11. Radioactive Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Monitoring (84723, 84724)

Technical Specifications 3.3.3.10 and 3.3.3.11 define the operating ind

surveillance requirements for monitoring radioactive liquid and gaseous i

effluent streams. The inspector and :he licensee toured selected effluent '

l

monitoring locations and sampling stations and verified Control Room strip

charts and direct read-outs were operational. The inspector also reviewed I

selected portions of the following radiation monitor calibrations and work l

authorizations- -

I

a. RE-14 Plant Vent Stack I

1

Unit 1 July 29, 1986 I

Unit 2 October 28, 1987, December 31, 1987, January 4, 1988

b. RE-15A Condenser Air Ejector

Unit 1 August 21, 1987

Unit 2 January 14, 1988

c. RE-18 Inline Westinghouse Liquid Radiation Monitor

Unit 1 October 14, 1987

Unit 2 January 12, 1988

'

d. RE-21 Vent Stack Air Particulate

Unit 1 January 9, 1988

Unit 2 November 26, 1986

e. RE-22 Vent Stack Radiogas Monitor

Unit i January 30, 1987

Unit 2 August 17, 1988

f. RE-23B Steam Generator Blowdown

Unit 1 January 11,. 1987

Unit 2 January 28, 1988

No violations or deviations were identified.

. . . - . - . . . -

. . .

, ,

.

10

12. Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (84723, 84724)

The inspector discussed the Farley ODCM with licensee-representatives and

determined that no changes 'had been made to the dose calculation

methodology since the last inspection (87-01, January 12-16,1987). The

annual Land Use Survey had been conducted during July '1987 to meet the

requirements of Technical Specifications 3.12.2 and 4.12.2.

No violations or~ deviation; were identified.

13. Post-Accident Sampling System (PASS) (84723)

Technical Specification 6.8.3.d requires the licensee to have the

installed capability of sampling and analyzing plant fluids and gases in

the event of an accident.

The inspector, accompanied by a licensee representatives, toured the

Units 1 and 2 PASS facilities and discussed system operation and

maintenance. -The local PASS panels were used routinely every 48 hours5.555556e-4 days 0.0133 hours 7.936508e-5 weeks 1.8264e-5 months for

sampling dissolved _ gas from the reactor coolant, and maintenance

procedures were performed every six months. The inspector discussed PASS

traini1g with plant instructors and noted that training was required every

six moaths for all count room technicians. This training was often

performt.d in conjunction with the routine six-month's maintenance. The

NRC inspector determined that the PASS systems were utilized and

maintained sufficiently in order to reasonably assure operability and

worker familiarity during accident use.

No violations or deviations were identified.

14. Gaseous Release Incidents Review (84724) l

l

The inspector reviewed two incidents concerning gaseous releases which 1

occurred when licensee personnel were attempting to sample the Unit 1 ,

volume control tank (VCT) gas space. The incidents occurred on March 25, l

1988 14:19 and March 26, 1988 07:50, respectively. The March 25 event

occurred as a chemist was taking a VCT gas sample in the Unit 1 primary

sample room, when the R-14 monitor (Plant Vent Stack - High Range) and che !

R-22 monitor (Vent Gas - Low Range) went into high alarm. The VCT gas !

sampling apparatus in the Unit 1 sample room consisted of the required '

sampling lines, valves, and a permanently installed metal gas canister, i

The' chemist had followed the routine procedure - made the necessary valve !

line-up, purged the gas through the sampling lines and canister for the

specified time, isolated the canister, and then vented the excess pressure

from the canister into a fume hood which vented to the plant stack. At

this point, the plant stack monitors went into high alarm. The licensee

checked gas pressure on the volume control tank and the waste gas decay

tanks and verified that the tank pressures had not changed. Health

Physics personnel had determined that the source of the gas leak was from

, the Unit 1 primary sample room. The licensee had considered that one

possible cause of the stack monitors pegging was due to the technician

\

__ ._.

*

. '.

.

11

venting the sample' canister too quickly. The sampling procedure was

subsequently changed to emphasize cracking the canister purge valve slowly

in order to prevent a monitor spike. The inspector. reviewed the incident

report (IR 1-88-93), observed a "simulated" sampling in the Unit 1 sample

room, and checked the.R-14 monitor strip charts-in'the Control Room. A-

peak indicating high activity was noted on the strip chart which

corresponded to the time of the VCT gas sampling; however other samplings

of the VCT gas caused little or no fluctuation on the R-14 strip chart.

The second incident occurred on March 26, 1988, within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months of the

first. The licensee was again attempting to sample the Unit i VCT gas.

The sampling system was in continuous purge, and as the technician closed

the VCT sample route isolation valve, the RE-14 and RE-32 (next elevation

area radiation monitor) went into high alarm. Unlike the first event, the

RE-14 monitor alarmed prior to venting the sample canister. The licensee

checked all pertinent sample lines and valves and found a slight "weeping"

in one valve, the VCT isolation valve, HS-3117. The licensee had

investigated the possibility that there were other events that caused the

RE-32 area radiation monitor to alarm but had found none. It was also

noted that between these two events, two gas samol' had been obtained on

the night shif t with no problems.

In reviewing the plant incident reports (IR 1-88-93 and IR 1-88-94) the

inspector noted that the offsite dose calculation had been performed and

that the calculated dose rates were below reporting levels. As of the end

of this inspection, the causes of these events were still under

investigation by the licensee.

No violations or deviations were identified.

l

-* * *-

.ww- ye3 -e-v T- + y - - - - or- +f T= - -9t- t + v y-Fg-e s-%=g 7 t'

. . . . ~ .- .~ - . . . - . -

' ' '

. ,

.

ATTACHMENT 1

Ratio: Counted Activity /Known Activity

4 Liter Geometry

- Sample Detector Detector - Detector- - Detector

Isotope- Number U1MCA1 U1MCA2 U2MCA1 U2MCA2 Average

Xe-133 0853 1.36 0.86 1.25 0.98 1.12

Xe-133 0854 1.38 0.86 1.27 0.98 1.12

Xe-133 0855 1.40 0.86 1.25 0.98 1.13

Xe-127 0853 1.60 1.72 1.61 1.62 1.~ 63

Xe-127 0854 1,59 1.69 1.61 1,57 1,61

Xe-127 0855 .1.60 1.73 1.61 1.59 1,64

Kr-85 0853 1.35 1.36 1.33 1.33 1.35-

Kr-85 0854 1.36 1.35 1.37 1.33 1.35 l

Kr-85 0855 1.34 1.39 1.36 1.33 1.35 4

l

1 Liter Geomety

]

!

Sample Detector Detector Detector Detector I

Isotope Number U1MCA1 U1MCA2 U2MCA1 U2MCA2 Average

Xe-133 0853 1.19 0.85 1.11 0.91 1.01

Xe-133 0854 1.18 0.84 1.13 0.90 -1.01

Xe-133 0855 1.22 0.84 1.13 0.91 1.03

Xe-127 0853 1.34 1.47 1.28 1.24 1.33 d

Xe-127 0854 1.32 1.45 1.31- 1.25 1.33 l

Xe-127 0855 1.37 1.45 1.32 1.29 1.37

'

Kr-85 0853 1.18 1.21 1.13 1.09 1.15

Kr-85 0854 1.19 1.19 1.17 - 1.09 1.15

Kr-85 0855 1.22 1.20 1.17 1.11 1.16

l

-..y- . --r. - ,

y , . . . _ . - - > , , , , . - , ,,, ,.. ,,- ,,,,, n , -,,,,,g_.-- v.--,.,w,ne- . ,-..,e-w,esnysv,v- ww ,w-w r y m s, -

. . , - . ... - . . . . . . . . . . .. . . --. . . - - . . . .

'

. .,

,. ,.,

.

ATTACHMENT'2

. Table -' Effluent Release Summary of

Farley Units'1 and 2

Liquids-(curies)

Calendar Fission and

Year Activation Products' ' Tritium

1985 7.08 E-2 1.11'E+3

1986 1.85 E-1 l.34 E+3

1987 9.72 E-2 1.14 E+3

Gases (curies)

Calendar- Fission and

Year Activation Products Iodine Tritium.

1985- 2.37 E+3 5.84 E-3 4.70 E+2

1986 3.12 E+3 2.02 E-3- 2.15 E+2

1987 2.02 E+3' 4.04 E-4 1.51 E+2

l

<

1

. . . I

i

1

.

. _ . . _ _ - , . _ . ._ . _ . . , . . . . - _ _ - - . - - . _ _ . _ . . . _ . . . -- _. . . . , . -

ML20154P600

Text

Navigation menu

Search