IR 05000317/1985031: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML20138L983
| number = ML20199F357
| issue date = 12/12/1985
| issue date = 03/20/1986
| title = Safety Insp Repts 50-317/85-31 & 50-318/85-26 on 851118-22. No Violation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Radiation Protection Program During Outage,Including External Dosimetry Training
| title = Ack Receipt of 860113 Ltr Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-317/85-31 & 50-318/85-26 & of Plans Re Resolution of Open Items Concerning Control Room Habitability
| author name = Clemons P, Shanbaky M
| author name = Martin T
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
| addressee name =  
| addressee name = Tiernan J
| addressee affiliation =  
| addressee affiliation = BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
| docket = 05000317, 05000318
| docket = 05000317, 05000318
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = 50-317-85-31, 50-318-85-26, NUDOCS 8512200158
| document report number = NUDOCS 8603280171
| package number = ML20138L974
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO UTILITY, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS
| page count = 2
| page count = 7
}}
}}


Line 19: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:v
{{#Wiki_filter:-
.
  .
V U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
==REGION I==
Report No /85-31 50-318/85-26 Docket No License Nos. OPR-53  Priority --
Category C DPR-69 Licensee: Baltimore Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Facility Name: Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Lusby, Maryland Inspection Conducted: November 18-22, 1985 Inspector:    /2//$bT P. Clemons, Radiation Specialist ' date Approved by: kL dM b  t t(itj h5 M. Shanbaky, Chief /  date PWR Radiation Safety Section Inspection Summary: Inspection on November 18-22, 1985 (Report Nos. 50-317/
85-31 and 50-318/85-26).


Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced safety inspection of the Radiation Pro-tection Program during the outage including: external dosimetry training, respiratory protection, exposure control, surveys, procedures, posting and labeling, and outstanding items. The inspection involved 31 hours onsite by one regionally based inspecto Results: No violations were identified during the course of this inspectio PDR ADOCK 050 g 7
  ,
,
MAR 2 01986 Docket Nos. 50-317  License Nos. DPR-53 50-318    DPR-69 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company ATTN: Mr. J. A. Tiernan Vice President Nuclear Energy P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Gentlemen:
G
Subject: Combined inspection 50-317/85-31 and 50-318/85-26
! This refers to your letter dated January 13, 1986, in response to our letter dated December 13, 198 Thank you for informing us of your plans regarding the resolution of open items related to control room habitabilit Your cooperation with us is appreciate


  ~. . -  . _ .
Sincerely, OS31sn1 SI-- :c 9f:
..
    , V/ /'
o s art n, Directo Division of Radiation Sa y and Safeguards CC:
M. Bowman, General Supervisor, Technical Services Engineering  :
Thomas Magette, Administrator, Nuclear Evaluations  l Public Document Room (PDR)    l Local Public Document Room (LPOR)    l Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC)  i NRC Resident Inspector    !
State of Maryland (2)    l l
  .
  .
DETAILS 1.0 Persons Contacted 1.1 Licensee Personnel N. Millis, General Supervisor - Radiation Safety J. Carlson, Assistant General Supervisor - Radiation Safety P. Rizzo, Supervisor - Technical Training L. Smialek, Senior Plant Health Physicist W. Putman, Senior Quality Assurance Auditor E. Roach, Quality Assurance Specialist 1.2 NRC Personnel
R603280171 860320   I PDR ADOCK 05000317 O PDR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY RL CC 85-31/26 - 0001. /12/86  s l l
  ~ Foley, Senior Resident Inspector D. Trimble, Resident Inspector Other licensee personnel were contacted and interviewed during the inspectio .0 Purpose The purpose of this routine safety inspection was to review the perfor-mance of the licensee's radiation protection program during the 1985 refueling outage with respect to the following elements:
* external dosimetry program;
* training of outage personnel;  -
a respiratory protection program; e exposure control;
* surveys;   _
* procedures; and
  * posting and labelin ,
3.0 Licensee Action on Previous Findings (Closed) Violation (317/85-20-01 and 318/84-20-01) Failed to adhere to the criteria of Appendix B, Part 50. The inspector reviewed the corrective action specified in the licensee's response dated October 26, 1984. The corrective action appeared to be adequat .0 External Dosimetry Program The licensee's external dosimetry program was reviewed with respect to the criteria contained in 10 CFR 20, " Standards For Protection Against Radiation."    i
      !
l
'
l l
l
  -. _ _ -.  ,- ,


  .
  . .. . - . -_ .  . . _ _ . -  -- ._
  .
  ..            ,
J Baltimore Gas and Electric'
Company    2
:
bec:
Region I Docket Room (with concurrences).


The licensee's implementation of the external dosimetry program was evaluated by the following methods:
! DRP Section Chief M. McBride, RI, Pilgrim T. Kenny, SRI, Salem D..Jaffe, LPM, NRR
* Interviews of the Dosimetry Supervisor and staff;
* Review of dosimetry records of selected personne Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie The following was noted:
* The external dosimetry program was adequate and effectiv * The licensee's dosimetry group was well staffe * The licensee's External Dosimetry Program is NVLAP certified. This certification demonstrates an acceptable level of minimum performance in evaluating personnel radiation exposure .0 Surveys The licensee's survey program was reviewed against criteria contained in ,
10 CFR 20.201, " Surveys".
 
The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by discussion with the Radiation Controis-Ops Supervisor and by reviewing appropriate radiological survey record The licensee's records indicate that the surveys taken throughout the Controlled Area are adequat Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie .0 Posting and Labeling
,
,
The licensee's program for area posting and control was reviewed against the criteria in 10 CFR 20.203, " Caution signs, labels, signals and Controls".
.
!
i i
i,


The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined from a tour of the Controlled Areas and from discussions with the staff members.
b
:
.i i
! RI:DRS
  *
  ~~ RI:DRS Y
    .RI:DRSS Dragoun/mm  Shan Bellam /8/86  34 % /86 3//7 /86 . 0FFICIAL RECORD  RL CC 85-31/26 COPY- 0002, /12/86
:
J
, . . . _ . . . . -__ . . _ , . . . , _ . . , . _ - - . . . . . _ . . - , , _ ~ . _ . , . . _ , . _ = . . . . . . . . _ . . . . ,


        -
.o ,
,. .-
'
'
Throughout all of the areas inspected, posting and labeling were more than adequat Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
i l
_ - - - . _ _ _ _ _-
.
.
7.0 Respiratory Protection Program The Itcensee's respiratory protection program was reviewed with respect to the criteria contained in 10 CFR 20.103, " Exposure of individuals to concentrations of radioactive materials in air in restricted areas".
The implementation of the licensee's respiratory protection program during the outage was evaluated by:
* interviews of the personnel responsible for various aspects of the program;
* reviewing records that indicated that breathing air had been sampled and analyzed to assure Grade D qualit Procedures for implementing the respiratory protection program appeared
.to be adequat Within the scope of this review, no violations 'iere identifie .0 Procedures The adequacy and effectiveness of the licensee's procedures were reviewed against the criteria contained in Technical Specification 6.8, "Proce-dures", and Technical Specification 6.11, " Radiation Protection Program".
Procedures reviewed included:
* RSP 1-117, " Selection, Issuance And Wearing Of Respiratory Protection Devices Used At Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant",
* RSP 2-306, " Operation And Maintenance Of The. Containment And Plant Breathing Systems",
* RSP 2-301, " Respiratory Protection Device Maintenance",
  .
* RSP 3-201, " Personnel Dosimetry",
* RSP 3-202, "Special Dosimetry".
Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie ' Training The licensee's training program was reviewed against criteria contained in 10 CFR 19.12, " Instructions to Workers" and ANSI N18.1, 1971, " Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel".
,.
  .
  .
.
The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by discussion with a Training Instructor, and by review of documentatio The lesson plans used in providing training for the Contractor Health Physics Technicians appeared to be more than adequat Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie .0 Exposure Control The licensee's external exposure control program was reviewed against cri-teria contained in 10 CFR 20.202, " Personnel monitoring". The licensee's program for controlling personnel exposure and maintaining exposure ALARA during the 1985 Refueling Outage was evaluated by:
* Interviews of the ALARA and Radiation Control Supervisors and selected members of their staff;
* Review of procedure RSP-106, "Special Work Permit"; and
*
Review of activities and documentation associated with nozzle dam installation and remova ,
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified:
* The inspector determined that 15-20 licensee employees participated in the nozzle dam operations during this outage. The licensee's exposure records indicated that this job was accomplished with the expenditure of 9.9 man-rem. This represents a significant reduction in exposure in performing this job. According to the Radiation Control - ALARA Supervisor, the lowest exposure received in doing this job, prior to this outage, was 47 man-re The licensee is to.be commended for the tremendous effort that resulted in this significant reduction in exposur Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie .0 Control Room Habitability Combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-317/85-27 and 50-318/85-25 provided the results of a review of Control Room Habitability at the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Station, Units 1 and Since the issuance of this inspection report, additional findings relative to the acceptability of Control Room Habitability at Calvert Cliffs have been identified by the NRR Review Group. These additional findings are stated below along with NRC requested actio ,  _ .
..
      '
.
Additional Findings-(a) Leakage was measured (1000-2000 cfm) through the isolation dampers with the system in the recirculation mode and flow (10-25% of rated flow) was measured through the charcoal absorber unit when it was
,
isolated. (317/85-31-01)
The licensee should provide the following:
   *
   *
the results'of the current evaluation to establish total inleakage rate for the Control Room envelope, and a
BALTIMORE g    GAS AND ELECTRIC CHARLES CENTER P. O. BOX 1475 * BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21203 JOSEPH A.TIERNAN Vect PatstDENT NucLEAn ENERGY January 13, 1986 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission  ~ Docket No Region I    50-318 631 Park Avenue    License No DPR-53 King of Prussia, PA 19406    DPR-69 ATTENTION: Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Director Division of Radiation Safety & Safeguards Gentlemen:
the date as to when the identified deficiencies will be correcte (b) Missing screws and bolts were evident and, as a consequence, ducting seam leakage was note Additionally, several holes were found at stress points on the fabric expansion joint It was stated that inspection and repair of this system was needed to minimize inleak-age during an accident. (317/85-27-01 and 318/85-25-01)
This refers to Inspection Report 50-317/85-31, 50-318/85-26; which identified apparent deficiencies in the area of Control Room Habitability. We have conducted a thorough review of the findings and have worked with Mr. P. Clemons of your office previously in this are Enclosure (1) to this letter is a written statement in reply to those findings noted in your lette Based on the information provided in Enclosure (1), we request you reevaluate the appropriate findings. Should you have further questions regarding this reply, we will be pleased to discuss them with yo Very truly yours, 3AT/SRC/gla Enclosure cc: D. A. Brune, Esquire G. F. Trowbridge, Esquire D. H. Jaffe, NRC T. Foley, NRC    '
The licensee should provide the following:
i j
  * status of maintenance deficiencies that have been corrected,
    ' - t q qm /
  * results of the evaluation of the walkdown of effected duct work, and
    - Obuju%a (vavu  l q Q .
  * the date when all activities including identified deficiencies will be correcte (c) Technical Specification 4.7.6.1.e.2 requires both isolation valves of each outside air intake to close on a control room high radiation test signal. At Calvert Cliffs, only the butterfly damper on each intake closes on high radiation signal. (317/85-31-02)
        )
The licensee should provide the following:
l e
  * corrective actions to be taken, and a
the date when the deficiencies will be correcte .0 Exit Interview The inspector met with the personnel denoted in Section 1 at the conclu-sion of the inspection on November 22, 1985. The scope and findings of-the inspection were discussed at that tim The licensee was given a copy of the NRR findings of the Control Room Habitability Study that was performed in September, 1985. A copy of the material provided to the licensee is attached to this inspection repor No other written material was provided to the license . - _  - -
    -- ._ - . . -- - . -.-


v
__ - . _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
  .
  .. .
.
  -
Attachment to Combined Inspection Report 50-317/85-31; 50-318/85-26 Control Room Habitability Findings
. . - -
  *
  *
Leakage was measured (1000-2000 cfm) through the isolation dampers with the system in the recirculation mod *
  -
Flow (10-25% of rated flow) was measured through the charcoal absorber unit when it was isolate * The licensee representative knowledgeable about the control room HVAC system was from BG&E headquarters. His understanding of the system and its mode of operation differed from the manner in which the system operate *
.~ .
Missing screws and bolts were evident and, as a consequence, ducting seam leakage was noted. Additionally, several holes were found at stress points on the fabric expansion joint * Technical Specification 4.7.6.1.e.2 requires both_ isolation valves of each outside air intake to close on a control room high radiation test signal. At Calvert Cliffs, only the butterfly damper on each intake closes on high radiation signa * The location where equipment temperature was monitored to show conformance with Technical Specification 4.7.6.1.a was not near such equipment but on a control room wal *
t ENCLOSURE (1)
The manner in which the control room HVAC system is operated and its configuration is quite different from that which would be concluded from Calvert Cliffs III.D.3.4 submitta * Laboratory testing of charcoal should be at 30 C rather than 130 C consistent with ASTM D3803-1979 and the allowable penetration for this test should be 1% in accordance with Table 2 of Regulatory Guide 1.5 *- The cooling load for the control room is 116.5 tons. The capacity-of the safety grade system is 96 tons. After a series of cooling problems in 1980 a new non-safety grade system was added to handle control room cooling during normal operation. The adequacy of the revised HVAC system has not been analyze * The 19 cfm of inleakeage used by the licensee in the III.D. analysis has never been verifie *
REPLY TO APPENDII A OF IEtC INSPECTION REPORT 50-317/8 5L31; S0-318/85-26 FINDING 317/8 5L31-01 We plan to measure the isolation damper and access door leakage rates, in addition to estimating the leakage rate in the duct
The leak rate assumed in the III.D.3.4 evaluation was based upon factory test data and anticipated performance of the butterfly and louvered damper The actual performance of the dampers shows substantially greater leakag .
  . work outside the Control Room envelope . A total inleakage rate  l will then be estimated and, if necessary, used in a new dose calculation for Control Room Operator We will provide the  i results of the inleakage determination and dose calculation by  l February 1,198 We will determine any appropriate corrective action, if
;  necessary, when deficiencies are note FINDING 317/8 5L27-01; 318/8 542 5L01    l The following maintenance deficiencies have been corrected:
oCracked panels in the air handling unit have been repaired (welded),
oAir leaks at the cooling coil penetrations have been sealed, and oLatches on duct windows have been replace In addition to the missing screws and bolts, and holes at stress l points on the fabric expansion joints, the following deficiencies were noted during the walkdown of affected ductwork:
oCrack in a panel for #12' Air Handling Unit, and oMissing plugs in test penetration holes in the
  '
ductwor These deficiencies will be corrected by April 1, '198 ;  FINDING 317/8 5631-02 Licensee Event Report 8 5-014 (Unit 1) documented specific issues  ;
in this findin The -louvered dampers were repaired and shut o '
a Control Room high radiation signa The following corrective actions were taken:
oBroken blade brackets were replaced, oDamper linkages were adjusted, and oA sampling of similar dampers were inspecte We intend to evaluate the isolation capability of the louvered dampers by measuring the leakage through these dampers in the recirculation mode with the butterfly dampers open. This evaluation should be completed by April 1, 198 <
}}
}}

Revision as of 19:31, 19 November 2020

Ack Receipt of 860113 Ltr Informing NRC of Steps Taken to Correct Violations Noted in Insp Repts 50-317/85-31 & 50-318/85-26 & of Plans Re Resolution of Open Items Concerning Control Room Habitability
ML20199F357
Person / Time
Site: Calvert Cliffs  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 03/20/1986
From: Martin T
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To: Tiernan J
BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
References
NUDOCS 8603280171
Download: ML20199F357 (2)


Text

-

.

,

MAR 2 01986 Docket Nos. 50-317 License Nos. DPR-53 50-318 DPR-69 Baltimore Gas and Electric Company ATTN: Mr. J. A. Tiernan Vice President Nuclear Energy P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Gentlemen:

Subject: Combined inspection 50-317/85-31 and 50-318/85-26

! This refers to your letter dated January 13, 1986, in response to our letter dated December 13, 198 Thank you for informing us of your plans regarding the resolution of open items related to control room habitabilit Your cooperation with us is appreciate

Sincerely, OS31sn1 SI-- :c 9f:

, V/ /'

o s art n, Directo Division of Radiation Sa y and Safeguards CC:

M. Bowman, General Supervisor, Technical Services Engineering  :

Thomas Magette, Administrator, Nuclear Evaluations l Public Document Room (PDR) l Local Public Document Room (LPOR) l Nuclear Safety Information Center (NSIC) i NRC Resident Inspector  !

State of Maryland (2) l l

.

R603280171 860320 I PDR ADOCK 05000317 O PDR OFFICIAL RECORD COPY RL CC 85-31/26 - 0001. /12/86 s l l

. .. . - . -_ . . . _ _ . - -- ._

.. ,

J Baltimore Gas and Electric'

Company 2

bec:

Region I Docket Room (with concurrences).

! DRP Section Chief M. McBride, RI, Pilgrim T. Kenny, SRI, Salem D..Jaffe, LPM, NRR

,

.

!

i i

i,

b

.i i

! RI:DRS

~~ RI:DRS Y

.RI:DRSS Dragoun/mm Shan Bellam /8/86 34 % /86 3//7 /86 . 0FFICIAL RECORD RL CC 85-31/26 COPY- 0002, /12/86

J

, . . . _ . . . . -__ . . _ , . . . , _ . . , . _ - - . . . . . _ . . - , , _ ~ . _ . , . . _ , . _ = . . . . . . . . _ . . . . ,

-

.o ,

,. .-

'

.

BALTIMORE g GAS AND ELECTRIC CHARLES CENTER P. O. BOX 1475 * BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21203 JOSEPH A.TIERNAN Vect PatstDENT NucLEAn ENERGY January 13, 1986 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ~ Docket No Region I 50-318 631 Park Avenue License No DPR-53 King of Prussia, PA 19406 DPR-69 ATTENTION: Mr. Thomas T. Martin, Director Division of Radiation Safety & Safeguards Gentlemen:

This refers to Inspection Report 50-317/85-31, 50-318/85-26; which identified apparent deficiencies in the area of Control Room Habitability. We have conducted a thorough review of the findings and have worked with Mr. P. Clemons of your office previously in this are Enclosure (1) to this letter is a written statement in reply to those findings noted in your lette Based on the information provided in Enclosure (1), we request you reevaluate the appropriate findings. Should you have further questions regarding this reply, we will be pleased to discuss them with yo Very truly yours, 3AT/SRC/gla Enclosure cc: D. A. Brune, Esquire G. F. Trowbridge, Esquire D. H. Jaffe, NRC T. Foley, NRC '

i j

' - t q qm /

- Obuju%a (vavu l q Q .

)

l e

__ - . _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _

.. .

-

. . - -

-

.~ .

t ENCLOSURE (1)

REPLY TO APPENDII A OF IEtC INSPECTION REPORT 50-317/8 5L31; S0-318/85-26 FINDING 317/8 5L31-01 We plan to measure the isolation damper and access door leakage rates, in addition to estimating the leakage rate in the duct

. work outside the Control Room envelope . A total inleakage rate l will then be estimated and, if necessary, used in a new dose calculation for Control Room Operator We will provide the i results of the inleakage determination and dose calculation by l February 1,198 We will determine any appropriate corrective action, if

necessary, when deficiencies are note FINDING 317/8 5L27-01; 318/8 542 5L01 l The following maintenance deficiencies have been corrected

oCracked panels in the air handling unit have been repaired (welded),

oAir leaks at the cooling coil penetrations have been sealed, and oLatches on duct windows have been replace In addition to the missing screws and bolts, and holes at stress l points on the fabric expansion joints, the following deficiencies were noted during the walkdown of affected ductwork:

oCrack in a panel for #12' Air Handling Unit, and oMissing plugs in test penetration holes in the

'

ductwor These deficiencies will be corrected by April 1, '198 ; FINDING 317/8 5631-02 Licensee Event Report 8 5-014 (Unit 1) documented specific issues  ;

in this findin The -louvered dampers were repaired and shut o '

a Control Room high radiation signa The following corrective actions were taken:

oBroken blade brackets were replaced, oDamper linkages were adjusted, and oA sampling of similar dampers were inspecte We intend to evaluate the isolation capability of the louvered dampers by measuring the leakage through these dampers in the recirculation mode with the butterfly dampers open. This evaluation should be completed by April 1, 198 <