IR 05000029/1997001

Insp Rept 50-029/97-01 on 970301-31.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Facility Operations

ML20141J456
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	05/16/1997
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141J451	List: IR 05000029/1997001 ML20141J446
References
50-029-97-01, 50-29-97-1, NUDOCS 9705280100
Download: ML20141J456 (16)

Text

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

~ ,

S

-

l U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  !

REGION 1 l

i

,

Docket N i License N DPR-03 ,

i

!

Report N /97-01 ,

!

!

Licensee: Yankee Atomic Electric Company i

Facility Name: Yankee Nuclear Power Station i

!

I Location: Rowe, Massachusetts

.

I Dates: March 1 - 31,1997 l

!

Inspectors: J. Nick, Region i Radiation Specialist .

'

G. Smith, Region l Senior Physical Security inspector J. Jang, Region i Senior Effluents / Environmental Specialist Approved By: J. White, Chief, Radiation Safety Branch Division of Reactor Safety

l l

!

i

"

9705280100 970516 PDR ADOCK 05000029 G PDR ,

..

4 -

Report Details 01 Summary of Facility Operations On October 12,1995, the Commission served Memorandum and Order CLI-95-14 to Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC) concerning activities at the Yankee Nuclear Power Station (NPS) in Rowe, Massachusetts. The Order states, in part, that "the NRC's approval of the Yankee NPS Decommissioning Plan cannot be accorded further legal effect, pending an ladjudicatory] hearing opportunity," and, that in accordance with the pre-1993 interpretation of the decommissioning regulations, "the Commission -

expects YAEC not to conduct any further ' major' dismantling or decommissioning activities until final approval of its [ decommissioning] plan after completion of the hearing process." Subsequently, the Commission issued an Order (CL1-96-9), dated October 18,1996, which granted YAEC's Motion for Summary Disposition in a hearing j convened to determine whether the decommissioning plan should be approved. Since :

YAEC had originally. submitted the decommissioning plan before tha Commission 1 amended its decommissioning regulations, and the decommissioning plan was approved l by the NRC in February 1995, YAEC had been given approval to conduct +

decommissioning activities at the Yankee site per a letter from the NRC (reference i correspondence, dated October 28,1996, from Mr. Morton Fairtile to Mr. James Kay). {

!

Based upon issuance of the Order and correspondence, the inspectors observed l YAEC's activities during routine inspections on March 6 through 13,1997. The .i inspectors verified by observation, documentation review, and/or discussions with l responsible or involved plant staff, the activities on the current work schedule and the ]

- actual activities being conducted at the site. No major safety concerns were identified ;

1 by the inspectors and appropriate radiological and industrial safety practices were !

observed for those jobs in-progres l l

02 Operations -

O2.1. Facility Tours The inspectors toured radiological controlled areas (RCAs) within the vapor  ;

containment. The inspectors noted operating air sampling equipment in various area ]

Personnel dosimetry was worn by all workers in the area. . Workers had removed most of the' mechanical and electrical components (duct-work, conduit,' cables, and fan units)

outside the bioshield, in the vapor containment. Workers were in the process of removing structural, mechanical and electrical components from the steam generator and pressurizer cubicles. The inspectors observed that high radiation area (HRA) and locked high radiation area (LHRA) controls were satisfactory. All areas were posted, barricaded, ar.4 locked as required by NRC regulations and Technical Specification ,

The posting and labelling of radioactive material were satisfactory. Very good j radiological controls were provided by health physics technician coverage for i jobs / activities in RCA !

!

!

!

!

.

.

The inspectors toured most of the RCAs outside the vapor containment including the primary auxiliary building (PAB), the service building, the radioactive waste processing (compactor) building, the potentially contaminated area (PCA) storage building (a storage / staging area for potentially contaminated equipment and materials), and the PCA warehouse attached to the radwaste processing building. Other electrical and mechanical systems removal was continuing in the Primary Auxiliary Building (PAB),

Workers were decontaminating the ion exchange pit floor and walls. All radiation areas (ras) and HRAs were posted and barricaded as required. Locked HRAs were maintained locked with appropriate warning signs. Housekeeping in contaminated areas was good, but some areas presented a challenge for continued vigilance due to the type of work being performed in the areas. Contamination control was evident by the use of " step-off pads", personnel monitoring equipment (friskers), and contaminated area postings at the boundaries. Posting and labelling of radioactive materials was inconsistent and required immediate correction by the licensee's staf No significant safety or NRC regulatory concerns were noted by the inspector I O2.2 Current Activitieg '

Mechanical and structural components were being removed from the steam generator cubicles in the vapor containment. The remaining portion of the main coolant piping had been removed except for the piping that penetrated the walls into the reactor vessel area. Electrical work was being performed to direct temporary power and isolate l buildings for further dismantlement. Asbestos abatement work was nearing completion l on the secondary side in the turbine building. Abatement was completed in the old radwaste evaporator system and work was beginning to disassemble the system l components. Secondary and support systems removal was continuing in the turbine building. Renovations of the main gatehouse were complete. The licensee had moved the control room functions to the gatehouse to consolidate activities in one building with the security functions in early 199 Other work planned for early 1997 included completion of the items mentioned above, l removal of any remaining main coolant piping, removal of the feed and bleed heat exchanger form the vapor containment, removal of structural steel outside the auxiliary building, further decontamination of the ion exchange pit (including removal of contaminated concrete), and removal of the old radwaste evaporator system. The final site survey project was stated to begin in 199 R1 Plant Support - Radiological Protection and Chemistry (RP&C) Controls R1.1 External Exoosure Control Insoection Scooe (831001 The inspectors reviewed the controls for external radiation exposure through observation of work activities, tours of the facility, interviews with personnel, and a review of licensee document ,

e

.

.

3 Observations and Findinas The inspectors observed the various work activities throughout the facility during the period of this inspection. Personnel in the RCA were observed wearing their assigned thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) and pocket ion chamber (PIC) dosimeter. The dose totals for each individual were tallied on each workday and reports were available for review by personnel. Plant management periodically reviewed the status of wcrkers in the respective department As stated in Section O2.1 of this Report, controls for radiation areas and high radiation areas were appropriate throughout the facility. Radiation work permits (RWPs) and a computerized access control system were also used to control workers' radiation exposure. The inspector reviewed selected RWPs written for various work activities and concluded that they contained appropriate requirements including administrative dose limits, protective clothing, and special monitoring or dosimetry, Conclusions Controls for external radiation were very good including controls used during the various work activities. No violations of NRC regulations or safety concerns were identifie R1.2 Internal Exoosure Control insoection Scoce (83100)

The inspectors reviewed the controls for internal radiation exposure through !

observation of work activities, tours of the facili:y, interviews with personnel and a review of licensee document Observations and Findinas l

The inspectors observed air sampling equipment in the various areas of the facility during work activities. The equipment was positioned to provide representative sampling of the breathing air in areas occupied by workers, in addition, air handling and filtration equipment was used in areas with potential airborne radioactivit The inspectors reviewed the results from internal dose assignments and determined that the dose assigned through air sampling and bioassay were very small when compared to the total dose assignmen Conclusions The licensee had provided good controls for internal radiation exposure including air sampling and bioassay for dose assessment. No violations of NRC regulations and no safety concerns were note .

.

R1.3 Control of Radioactive Materials and Contamination, Survevs and Monitorina l l Inspection Scoce (83100)

The inspectors reviewed the controls for radioachve materials and contamination, i surveys and monitoring through observation o' work activities, tours of the facility, i interviews with personnel and a review of licensee document l I Observations and Findinas l l

The inspectors verified that there was an adequate supply of radiation survey and monitoring equipment. All equipment chec' <d by the inspector was operable and l within the current calibration period. Portal monitors and frisking instruments were l located throughout the facility for use by workers as they left radioactive materials I areas or contaminated areas. Current radiological surveys of various work locations were reviewed by the inspector. The surveys contained detailed information regarding dose rates and hazards in the work areas. Surveys were posted at the main control l point for the RCA and at the vapor containment. Appropriate licensee management I personnel had reviewed the radiological survey Radiological housekeeping was good throughout the plant with appropriate controls established to minimize the spread of contamination. However, as noted in section l O2.1 of this Report, some areas presented more of a challenge to the licensee's etaff ;

due to changing conditions and ongoing work. These areas (mainly in the lower PAB) l required continued vigilance by the licensee's staff to maintain the areas in accordance with the licensee management's expectations and to effectively control radioactive contamination. Posting of radioactive material areas and labelling of radioactive materials was appropriate, but some containers were not labelled consistently. Some container labelling was brought to the attention of licensee representatives by the inspectors. These problems were immediately corrected by the licensee's staf Conclusions The licensee provided very good controls for radioactive materials and contamination, surveys and monitoring during decommissioning work activities. No violations or

,

significant safety concerns were identifie R1.4 Maintainina Occupational Radiation Exposures ALARA Insoection Scope (83100)

Through interviews with personnel and review of several documents, the inspectors l examined the program to maintain personnel exposures ALAR l

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

i, b

.

j'.

a i

p

'

5 L '!

}- Observations and Findino '

-i i

j.

b

'

The personnel working at the Rowe site received a total radiation exposure of approximately 95 person-rem during the period from January 1,1996 through l December 31,1996, as measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and pocket  ;

ion chambers (PICS). The highest total dose assignment to an individual at the' site was ,

1.564 rem during 1996. This is much below the NRC total annual dose limit to an i occupational worker of 5.0 rem. The total dose to personnel for decommissioning and i dismantlement activities at the Yankee Rowe site, including support work, for the j

,

period from 1993 through December 1996 was approximately 457 person-re .;

!

l The total radiation exposure for all site workers was approximately 33 person-rem  :

during the period from January 1,'1997 through March 10,1997, as measured by i L, 'thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs) and pocket ion chambers (PICS). The highest )

l total' dose assignment to an individual at the site was 1.495 rem during the same l period.' l Conclusions The licensee continued to maintain an very good program for maintaining occupational radiation exposures ALARA. Effective ALARA initiatives were implemented for the'

_

i reactor vessel removal project and other activities. -Total. occupational radiation l exposure to workers at the Yankee site for 1996 was about the same as the projected 'l total for the yea R1.5 - Imo'lementation of the Radioactive Liauid and Gaseous Effluent Control Proarams and the Radioloaical Environmental Monitorina Prooram (REMP) Insoection Scope (84750-01 for Effluents and 84750-02 for the REMP)

The inspection consisted of: (1) touring radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent pathways and process faci!ities; (2) reviewing of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent release permits; (3) touring environmental sampling stations; and (4) reviewing the-meteorological monitoring program, i Observations and Findinas The inspector toured selected radioactive liquid and gas processing facilities and

.

equipment including the vapor container (VC) and the radioactive liquid evaporation system. All equipment was considered by the licensee to be operable at the time of the tou i

l

!

l i

'

.. __ _ _ _ _ _ i

.

.

During the review of selected radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent discharge permits,

' the inspectors deteri, ined that the discharge permits were complete and met the Technical Specificatic n/Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (TS/ODCM) requirements for sampling and analyses at the frequencies and lower limits of detection established in the TS/ODCM. The inspectors also noted that the licensee performed trending analyses for tritium effluent releases. The inspector noted that tritium activities of the Sherman Spring (Sampling Station No. WG-12) were near the natural background level (1995 mean value: 150 pCi/l).

The inspector examined selected sampling stations to determine whether samples were being obtained from the locations designated in the ODCM and whether air samplers were operable and calibrated. The sampling stations included air samplers for particulates, milk, and thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) stations for measurements of direct ambient radiation. All air-sampling equipment at the selected locations was operational at the time of the inspection. The above environmental sampling media were available at the locations designated in the ODCM, and TLDs were also placed at locations designated in the ODC r The inspector reviewed the 1996 and 1997 calibration results of wind speed, wind direction, and delta temperature for the primary and secondary meteorological monitoring towers.. All reviewed calibration results were within the licensee's defined acceptance criteri b

' Conclusions Based on the above review, the inspectors concluded that the licensee maintained and effectively implemented the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent control programs

"

and the REM "

R2 Status of RP&C Facilities and Equipment R2.0 Radioactive Material Shioments i Insoection Scope (86750)

The inspectors reviewed licensee records and interviewed personnel to determine the scope ci radioactive material shipments from the Yankee Rowe sit l

l l

l l

!

i

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

.

.

7 Observations and Findinos l

The next page of this report contains a listing of radioactive material shipments that .

were sent from the Yankee facility to the waste processing or disposal facilities during the period from May 1,1996 through March 10,1997. The licensee was continuing to use vendors for volume reduction and decontamination of radioactive materials. The total radioactivity content for all shipments during this period to vendors was ,

approximately 6.8 Curies and to disposal facilities was approximately 131 Curie Various other radioactive material shipments were made from the facility including contaminated protective clothing for laundering and radioactive samples for laboratory analysi Date Container Contents shipment Destination Activity (Curles)

5/8/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal / lead SEG, oak Ridge, TN 0.037 5/15/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal / wood SEG 0.048 5/30/96 Metal Box Contam. Reactor Head FW Hake, Memphis, TN O.664 6/19i96 Cargo van / metal box Contam. metal / lead / DAW SEG O.048 6/20/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal / DAW SEG O.043

'

7/2/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal / asbestos SEG O.074 i

7/16/96 Cargo vans (2) Contam. metal / DAW SEG O.056 7/24/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam, metal /ele u.S. Ecology, oak Ridge, 0.005 motors TN 7/30/96 Cargo Vans (2) DAW / lead / resins SEG o.158 l

8/7/96 Cargo Vans (2) Sntam, metal / wood SEG O.106 8/7/96 Cargo Van / metal box . cam. metal / lead SEG 0.052 8/13/96 Cargo Van / metal box Contam metal SEG O.022 8/28/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam, metal / DAW SEG 0.035 9/4/96 Steel boxes (4) Contam. metal / oil SEG O.001 l

!

9/11/96 Cargo Van / Metal box Contam. metal SEG 0.043 9/18/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal SEG 0.028 I

9/25/96 Cargo Van / Metal box Contam. metal / DAW SEG O.015 l 10/02/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal US Ecology 0.003 10/10/96 Metal boxes (8) DAW CNSI, Barnwell, SC O.072 j 10/28/96 Cask (14-215) DAW CNSI 0.991

10/30/96 Metal drums / boxes Evaporator bottoms /D AW CNSI O.542 11/6/96 Cask (8120B) Filters CNSI 9 /25/96 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal / wood SEG O.044

)

l

!

!

l

-

.

5 12/5/96 Cargo Van / Metal box Contam, metal SEG 0.064 12/11/96 Cargo Van / Metal box Contam. metal US Ecology 0.001 12/19/96 Cargo Van / Metal box Contam. metal / DAW SEG 0.033 1/10/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) Manufacturing Scitances 0.085 ,

Corp., Oak Ridge, TN 1/21/97 Cask (14-215) Activated metal CNSI O.250 l

1/15/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) FW Hake 0.599 1/17/97 Cargo Van Contam, metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor O.175

1/23/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor .067 1/31/97 Cargo Van Contam metal (pipe) FW Hake 0.894 ;

!

2/5/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor O.104 f

!

1/30/97 Cask (14-215) Activated metal CNSI 2.150 l

1/31/97 Cargo Vans (2) DAW SEG 0.025

{

2/6/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor .164

'

2/11/97 Cask (14-195) Activated metal CNSI 2 /13/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) FW Hake 1.357 ,

!

2/15/97 Cargo Van Contam metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor .218 2/26/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor .051 -

'

2/21/97 Cask (14-195) Activated metal CNSI 1 l 2/20/97 Cargo Vans (2) Contam. metal / DAW SEG 0.059 3/5/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) FW Hake 1.307 i l

3/7/97 Cargo Vans (2) Contam metal FW Hake 0.051 3/10/97 Cargo Van Contam. metal (pipe) Man. Sciences Cor .124 Conclusions The licensee had shipped a significant quantity of radioactive materials to vendors and disposal fecilitieS. Licensee records were well maintained and no safety concerns or violations of regulations were note l

- . - --_ . .. -.-.~.- - . . -- - - - - . - - - - . - . - . . . ~ -

. . . .

!

,

L

.~

}-

!'

R2.1 Calibration of Effluent Radiation Monitorina Svstems (RMS)

.

s

'

4 Insoection Scone (84750-01) l

The inspector reviewed the most recent calibration results for the following two  !

"

l effluent RMS. The inspector conducted interviews with licensee, Radiation Protection

! and I&C staf ' o Liquid Radwaste/ Auxiliary Service Water Effluent Line Monitor -

j- o Primary Vent Stack Noble Gas Monitor  ;

j --

Observations and Findinas i- l 3 The I&C Department and the Radiation Protection Department Staff had the j l responsibility to perform electronic and radiological calibrations, respectively, for the l

- above radiation monitors. . All reviewed calibration results were within the licensee's i

'.

acceptance criteria. The inspector also noted that the licensee had tracking system for

.

!

comparing the current calibration results to the previous results. The calibration efforts i

'

were well done and exceeded the quality specifications detailed by the applicable t - regulatory reqc.a.nent ;

. i

Conclusions i-i- Based on the above reviews, the inspector determined that the licensee's performance

!- and achievements, relative to calibration results and its tracking of the RMS, were very j good for maintaining good reliability of the syste R3- RP&C Procedures and Documentation l~

i i R3.1 Radioactive Effluent Release Procedures and the REMP ]

.  : Insoection Scone (84750-01 and 84750-02)

. The inspector reviewed the following selected licensee's procedures and Annual j Effluent Report to determine whether the licensee could implement the radioactive liquid l and gaseous effluent control programs and the REMP effectively

I l

o OP-9246 Radioactive Liquid Releases; and i

.

e OP-9247 Sampling, Measuring, and Reporting Radioactive Airborne Releases; ,

o OP-6606 Totalizing Gas Flow Meter Calibration Check; and i

e OP-4150 Vendor Calibration and/or Maintenance of the Meteorological Data Gathering System Instrumentatio ,

inspection of the ODCM consisted of: (1) review of setpoint calculation methodologies;

'

(2) review of selected parameters for calculating projected doses; and (3) review of 4 radioactive liquid and gaseous discharge pathway _ _ _ . _ .

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

-

i j..

,

[ 10 The inspector also reviewed the 1995 Annual REMP Report and the 1996 Semiannual Effluent Reports, b. Observations and Findinas The inspector determined that the reviewed effluent control and REMP procedures were !

sufficiently detailed to facilitate performance of all necessary step '

This report provided data indicating total released radioactivity for liquid and gaseous effluents. This annual report also summarized the assessment of the projected .

maximum individual and population doses resulting from routine radioactive airborne 2 and liquid effluents. Projected doses to the maximum individual were well below the TS limits (e.g.,4.68E-4 mrem for whole body in 1995). I l

The inspector reviewed the licensee's ODCM, Revision 12, effective on February 7, i 1997. The ODCM described the sampling and analysis programs, which formed the bases for the quantification of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent concentrations and the subsequent calculation of projected doses to the public. All necessary parameters, such as effluent radiation monitor setpoint calculation methodologies, site specific dilution factors, and dose factors, were sufficiently described in the ODCM or otherwise derived from Regulatory Guide 1.109, as necessar j l

The inspector determined that there were no anomalous measurements, omissions or l adverse trends in the 1995 Annual REMP Report and raw data for the 1996. The ,

inspector also determined that the licensee met TS requirement for the Semiannual l Effluent Report c. Conclusions Based on the above reviews, the inspector determined that the licensee effectively implemented the TS requirements for the Radioactive Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Control Programs and the REM l R6 RP&C Organization and Administration a. Insoection Scope (84750-01 and 84750-02)

The inspector reviewed the organization and administration of the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent control programs and the REMP, and discussed with the licensee changes made since the last inspection, conducted in October 199 .

. . . . . __ _ _ _ . _ _ _ .. _ . .

I

...

11  ! Observations and Findinas The implementation of the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent cont vi programs and ;

the REMP are performed by the on-site staff (Chemistry, Radiation Preaction, l&C, and ;

Operations) and the Corporate staff (Dose assessment Group and the Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory). The inspector discussed with the licens'. t representative and determined that the licensee did not change the responsibility sin je the last inspectio I Conclusions ,

,

The inspector determined that the licensee was adequately staffed to perform radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent control program and the REM .

R7 Quality Assurance (QA) in RP&C Activities l

!

R7.1 Radiation Protection Audits and Aooraisals Insoection Scope (83100)  ;

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's programs and systems for auditing and appraising the program for control of radiation and radioactive materials through examination of records and interviews with licensee personne . Observations and Findinas l

There had been no new audits of the radiation protection program since the last inspection; however, the inspectors noted a recent audit of the final status survey program. Appropriate and timely corrective actions had been taken by the licensee's l staff for the minor deficiencies and weaknesses that were identified during the audits ,

l performed by the quality assurance grou The quality assurance group was continuing to perform surveillance of radiological work L activities and waste shipments. The inspectors reviewed surveillance report regarding various radiological work activities. The surveillance reports indicated that the implementation of the radiation protection program was satisfactory.

I The licensee maintained a problem identification / resolution system for radiological occurrences. The inspector reviewed the only radiological occurrence report generated

,

'

in 1997. The report documented a problem with personnel who were potentia:ly oating or smoking in radiologically controlled areas of the facility. The inspector found that the licensee had taken appropriate and timely corrective actions to prevent recurrence of this proble In addition, the inspector reviewed the licensee's self-appraisal of radiological occurrences and contamination events from the fourth calendar quarter of 1996. The

radiological occurrences (2) were identified as minor safety significance and isolated events caused by non-conformance to the licensee's procedures by separate worker , - - - .. _ - - _ .. _ _ _ _ -_ _ . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ .

.

i.

.

!

n.

[- ,

i

The inspector found that the review was a good tool to identify potential trends in j occurrences, but these latest incidents did not constitute a trend or programmatic '  ;

j problem. The licensee's corrective actions in both cases were appropriate and timely, i similarly, the review of personnel contamination events was an appropriate tool to _

l identify adverse trends in the number and types of events. The licensee reported that ,

l the number of contamination events was decreasing over a long time period (one to

two years). The licensee representatives stated that they would continue to apply

! corrective actions to reduce.the number of event ! , '

Dnclusions The inspectors concluded that the audit, self assessment, and corrective action [

l programs were continuing to identify problem areas and improve the quality of the j radiation protection program. No violations were identified in this area. .  !

l

R7.2 REMP Audits and Anoraisals '{ . inspection Scoce (84750-01s and 84750-02) j

. l The inspection consisted of review of the 1995 and 1996 audits and review of the .!

licensee's programs for quality assurance (QA) and quality control (OC) of analytical j measurements for the REMP samples to determine whether the licensee had adequate control with respect to sampling, analyzing, and evaluating data for the implementation jl of the REM ] Observations and Findinas The inspector noted that the 1995 and 1996 audit were thorough and were conducted by individuals with backgrounds in chemistry, effluents, and the REM The 1995 audit team identified one findir,g and three observation, while the 1996 audit team identified two findings and four observations. The findings or observations were not safety rett.ted. The responses to these finding and observations were completed in a timely manner. The inspector noted that the scope and technical depth of the audits j were excellent in assessing the Effluents and the REM !

l The. QA/QC program for analyses of REMP samples is conducted by the licensee, the  !

Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory (YAEL). The QC program consists of j measurements of blind duplicate, spike, and split samples. The YAEL published QC j report quarterly, semiannually, and annually. The inspector reviewed the QC data for i intra /interlaboratory comparisons listed in the semiannual QC report and noted that the l QC data were within the YAEL's acceptance criteria. When discrepancies were found, -)

the responsible licensee consults the YAEL personnel and reasons for the discrepancies j were investigated and resolved. The inspector also noted that the YAEL emphasized i the importance of the QA/QC for the measurement laborator ~

,

l l l

'

I

,

--- ,. . - .

.

.

13 Conclusions Based on the above reviews, the inspectors determined that the licensee met the QA ,

audit requirements. The YAEL's OA/QC programs were noteworth .

R8 Miscellaneous issues R8.1 Review of Updated Final Safety Analysis Reoort (UFSAR) Commitments '

A recent discovery of a licensee operating their facility in a manner contrary to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) description highlighted the need for a -

special focused review that compares plant practices, precedures and/or parameters to the UFSAR descriptio While performing the inspections discussed in this report, the inspector reviewed the ;

'

applicable portions of the UFSAR that related to the areas inspected. The inspector verified that the UFSAR wording was consistent with the observed plant practices, ;

procedures, and/or parameter J

.

S1 Conduct of Security and Safeguards Activities Scope J Determine if the licensee's' security program, as implemented, met the licensee's commitments and NRC regulatory requirement Observations and Findinas On February 5,1997, the licensee relocated the security alarm station. The new alarm station included a new alarm console and new computer software. During pre-operational testing, the licensee determined that the new computer software could not reliably process incoming alarms and, when more than one alarm was received, the i alarm logging function would not work properly. After several unsuccessful attempts I by the vendor to correct the problem, the licensee purchased a new computer program ;

from a different vendor. The vendor selected for the new computer software is the l same vendor that developed the computer software that is being used by the 1 operations department to monitor operational parameters. That software has proven to ,

be reliable. The new security alarm software is scheduled to be onsite by the end of j March and in pre-operational testing by mid-April 199 j As a result of unreliability of the existing security alarm processing software, the licensee has implemented compensatory measures specified in the NP.C-approved security plan (the plan) for an inoperative alarm system. The inspector reviewed the Plan, observed operation of the alarm station and the compensatory measures, as implemented, and interviewed security personnel, i

, _ .

_ . _ . _ . , . _ _ . __ . _ . . _ - _ _ . ._ ___ __ _ .

L  !

b* ,

l '! Conclusions '

l The inspector determined that the compensatory measures were in accordance with the ,

Plan and considered effective. Security personnel interviewed were found to possess the requisite knowledge to carry out their assigned duties, i

'

X1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspectors met with the licensee representatives denoted below at the conclusion ,

l of the on-site inspection on March 13,1997. The inspectors summarized the purpose, scope, and findings of the inspection. A telephone conversation was held with the i licensee representative denoted below to summarize the scope 'and findings for the inspection period. The licensee representatives acknowledged the inspection findings.-

t PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED

Licensee ,

'G. Babineau, Radiation Protection and Chemistry Manager  !

• W. Blackadar, Radiation Protection Engineer  ;

H. Breite, YNSD, Lead Engineer

• W. Cox, YNSD, Radiation Protection Engineer j

• R. Durfey, Senior Engineer / Maintenance and Construction j

'

'N. Fetherston, Maintenance and Construction Manager

'R. Greenfeld, Radiation Protection Engineer /ALAHA Program *

. R. Grippardi, YAEC, Quality Assurance Supervisor 1

1. • K. Heider, Site Manager

'S. Litchfield, Health and Safety Supervisor

• R. Mellor, YNSD Decommissioning Manager (via telephone)

S. Mullet, Radiation Protection Technician

'A. Trudeau, Quality Services Group Senior Engineer

• M. Vandale, Radiation Protection Senior Engineer

• B. Wood,' Assistant Site Manger F. Williams, Plant Supervisor

• Denotes those individuals participating in the exit briefing held on March 13,199 # Denotes those individuals participating in the exit briefing for the entire inspection period held via telecon on Apri! 9.199 l l

I

!

!

. . ,

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

J

.

i

!

.

!

15-i INSPECTION PROCEDURE USED i i

IP 83100: Occupational Radiation Exposure During Decommissioning i'

IP 86750: Solid Radwaste Management and Transportation IP 84750: Effluent and Environmental Monitoring l IP 81700: Physical Security Program for Power Reactors i

,

ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

"

Opened

NONE

!

Closed i i  !

4 NONE

,

Discussed '

- .j

7

'

-NONE l

,

,

[

.

!

i

I

-