IR 05000321/1982007
| ML20053B433 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 03/26/1982 |
| From: | Barr K, Franklin L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053B410 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-321-82-07, 50-321-82-7, 50-366-82-07, 50-366-82-7, NUDOCS 8205280398 | |
| Download: ML20053B433 (6) | |
Text
i
'
.
.
'
'
ft:ci,,
- 4; UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
g e
REGION 11 g*****g[
101 MARIETTA ST,, N.W., SUITE 3100 o
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-321/82-07 and 50-366/82-07 Licensee:
Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30303 Facility Name:
E. I. Hatch Docket Nos. 50-321 and 50-366 License Nos. DPR-57, NPF-5 Inspection at Hatch site near Baxley, Georgia Inspector:
(
~[
3- /M-OZ L. A. Franklipfl Date Signed Sk 2-Approved by:
m K. Bar/,' Sectio 6Tfiief pate' Signed Technical Inspection Branch
-
Division of Engineering and Technical Programs SUMMARY Inspection on February 22-26, 1982 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 34 inspector-hours on site in the areas of radioactive waste systems, transportation activities, instrumentation, and onsite radwaste storage.
Results Of the 4 areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified in three areas; one violation was found in one area.
8205280378*
.
.
.
,
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- C, T. Jones, Assistant Plant Manager
- C. R. Miles, Jr., Quality Assurance Field Supervisor
- C. E. Belfiower, Quality Assurance Site Supervisor
- P. E. Fornel, Jr., Quality Assurance Assistant Site Supervisor
- W. H. Rogers, Superintendent - Health Physics
- S. B. Tipps, Superintendent - Regulatory Compliance
- R. C. Hand, Laboratory Supervisor A. Cancer, Laboratory Foreman R. Anderson, Laboratory Foreman L. Boyles, Instrument and Calibration Foreman I. Kochery, Health Physicist W. P. Wagner, Quality Assurance Field Representative
Other licensee employees contacted included five technicians and four office Personnel.
NRC Resident Inspector
- R. Rogers
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 26, 1982, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The assistant plant manager acknowledged the violation. The inspector noted the marked improvement in the Unit I radwaste building in the areas of housekeeping and posting.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Violation 50-321/80-27-22.
This item concerned the failure to perform a safety evaluation in conjunction with the use of lead shielding.
A procedure is now in use that specifically requires a documented safety evaluation prior to shielding installation and, thror3, the use of main-tenance request forms and tracking, shielding is removed when no longer required. The inspector had no further questions.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
-_ _.
.__
.-
. _ _ _ _., _. _ _ - - _
.
.
.
i 5.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspector Identified Items (Closed) IFI 50-321/78-15-04. This item concerned the heater rating of the standby gas treatment train. The rated heater capacity was less than what was called for in the technical specifications.
A modification has been completed and the heater capacity is now in excess of the capacity expressed
'
in technical specifications. The inspector had no further questions.
(Closed) IFI 50-321/80-27-28.
This item concerned the possibility of
)
airborne radioactivity giving a false background level for the whole body
,
counter and for counting room equipment. This equipment has been moved to the administration 'ouilding. The inspector had no further questions.
(Closed) IFI 50-321 50-306/81-07-02.
This item concerned the lack of a procedure for operation of a compressor used to fill a pressurized sample container. Licensee procedure HNP-7409 has been issued and is in use. The inspector reviewed this procedure and had no further questions.
(Closed) IFI 50-321 50-366/81-07-06.
This item concerned the tracking of tritium in groundwater samples in twelve wells.
Sampling records appear thorough in this continuing program.
The inspector had no further quest-ions.
(Closed) 50-321 50-366/81-07-08.
This item concerned the installation of power receptacles to accommodate the NRC mobile laboratory. A designated area was selected by the senior NRC resident inspector and power receptacles have been installed. The inspector had no further questions.
(Closed) 50-321/81-10-06.
This item concerned the failure to determine transport groups I and II isotopes for radwaste shipments.
An outside contractor has completed a strontium analysis and licensee procedure HNP-8016 has been revised.
The inspector reviewed the revised procedure and sample analysis and had no further questions.
6.
Transportation Activities a.
The inspector reviewed a Qt. lity Assurance Audit performed between October 12, 1981 and November 18,1981 ( Audit Number 81-RWC-2). This audit was a review of the following areas.
(1) Surveillance Requirements (2) Sampling Requirements (3) Solid Waste Shipment Controls (4) Radwaste Drum Controls (5) Procedure Data Reviews (6) Corrective Actions
-
.
..
.
Two items were identified by the licensee during this audit that required resolution.
Dual tracking of deficiencies is accomplished through tracking of items by the QA staff and by the regulatory com-pliance staff.
Followup appears to be good.
The inspector had no further questions.
b.
By review of records, observations and discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector reviewed the plant's solid radicactive waste processing and disposal program. The licensee, at the request of the inspector, opened two drums of dewatered resin.
The inspector verified that the drums contained no free-standing water.
The inspector performed independent radiation measurements on a trailer loaded with solid radioactive waste that the licensee was preparing for shipment to a licensed burial facility.
Radiation levels on the trailer did not exceed the limits specified by 49 CFR 173.393(j). The inspector selectively reviewed shipping records for radioactive material shipped out during 1981. The review of these records showed no apparent deviation or violaticns.
The inspector had no further questions.
7.
Radioactive Waste Systems and Instrumentation a.
Radioactive Effluents Report Environmental Technical Specification 5.7.1.b requires that a report on the radioactive discharge released from the site during the previous six months of operation shall be submitted to the NRC. An inspector reviewed the plants Semi annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for the period of January 1981 through June 1981 and discussed the repcrt with a licensee representative. The inspector had no further questions concerning the report.
b.
Reactor Coolant Water Quality Through discussions with a licensee representative and review of records for 1981, the inspector verified that sampling and analysis
,
'
frequency and the resultant data appeared to meet the requirements of l
Technical Specifications 3/4.6F (Unit 1) and 3/4.4.4 and 3/4.4.5
(Ur.it 2).
c.
Environmental Technical Specification 2.1.1 requires that the opera-bility of the automatic isolation valve in the liquid radioactive waste
'
discharge be demonstrated quarterly.
The inspector reviewed the quarterly operability check records for the period of March 1981 through December 1981.
The checks appear to have been performed in accordance with the Environmental Technical Specifications.
d.
Environmental Technical specifications 2.1.2.f and 2.1.4.d require that liquid and gaseous ef fluent monitors, respectively, be calibrated at least quarterly and functionally tested monthly. An inspector reviewed the calibrations of the Unit 1 liquid discharge radiation monitor,
_
_
_
_ _ _.
.
.
..
.
Unit 2 reactor building radiation monitor, the Unit I recombiner building radiation monitor and the stack monitor performed in 1981.
The calibrations were performed at the required frequency or more often and appear to have met the Environmental Technical Specification
!
requirements. An inspector reviewed the functional test records for the Unit I recombiner building vent radiation monitor for the period of
,
March 1981 through December.1981.
The inspector had no further-questions.
e.
onmental Technical Specifications 2.1.4 specified the sampling and monitoring requirements for radioactive material in gaseous effluents.
An inspector selectively reviewed Gaseous Waste Release Permits for 1981 and discussed the records with licensee representatives. _ The frequency, type of analysis, concentrations and total radioactivity released apparently met the requirements of the Technical Specifica-tions.
From January 28, 1982, to February 4, 1982, the stack sampler pump was out of service.
Grab samples, as required by technical specification 2.1.4, were taken and analyzed daily. The inspector had no further questions.
f.
Licensee Procedure HNP-7650 requires that all data and results gener-ated at the plant site are reviewed in a timely manner by a laboratory foreman or supervisor knowledgeable in the area of analysis and system measured.
Investigations and corrective actions of recognized defi-ciencies should be documented on a Follow Up Report form with attach-ments as necessary to the data sheet or in the remarks on the data sheet.
Environmental Technical Specification 5.6 requires detailed written procedures, including applicable check lists and instructions, shall be prepared and 'followed for all activities involved in implementing the environmental technical specifications.
Licensee Procedure HNP-7650 requires all data and results generated at the plant site be reviewed in a timely manner.
,
The inspector noted that in a large number of instances this review is not being performed as required. The variations noted ranged from sixteen days-to one year. The one year instance appeared to be an isolated case. How-ever, many examples were noted in which approximately two months transpired before this review was performed.
This is a violation (50-321, 366/82-07-01).
During discussions with licensee representatives concerning. this violation it was stated that "the purpose of this review was only to be sure that the paperwork was correct prior to these forms reaching the document control department." The inspector informed licensee representatives that this review was required to be certain, in a timely manner, that the calcu-lations performed were correct.
c I
, -.. -, _ - - _ _ -
-.,.-,_,,,c.
.,,,,, _. _,,. _,,,. _......,.., _. _
,,,_.,_..m._.
_., _ _ _., _. _ _.,, _,, _, - - -, _..
.
.
.
..
8.
On Site Storage of Radioactive Waste The licensee has a new facility, recently contructed, for short t?rm onsite storage and for waste separation.
A safety evaluation was performed for this building and appears to be in keeping with the existing licenses.
Operations are just beginning in this facility and licensee expectations include a radwaste volume reduction of greater than 50"..
The inspector toured this facility and examined licensee procedures for operations, examined airborne monitoring capabilities, etc.
The inspector had no further questions at this time.
9.
Plant Tour The inspector toured the Units I and II reactor buildings, radwaste buildings, and outside areas. A marked improvement was noted in the Unit I radwaste building since the last inspection. This change is in the areas of housekeeping and posting. No violations or deviations were noted during tours of these various areas.
i
!
1