IR 05000133/1986003
| ML20212A484 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Humboldt Bay |
| Issue date: | 12/08/1986 |
| From: | Hooker C, Yuhas G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212A459 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-133-86-03, 50-133-86-3, IEIN-86-020, IEIN-86-022, IEIN-86-023, IEIN-86-032, IEIN-86-042, IEIN-86-043, IEIN-86-044, IEIN-86-046, IEIN-86-086, IEIN-86-088, IEIN-86-20, IEIN-86-22, IEIN-86-23, IEIN-86-32, IEIN-86-42, IEIN-86-43, IEIN-86-44, IEIN-86-46, IEIN-86-86, IEIN-86-88, NUDOCS 8612240169 | |
| Download: ML20212A484 (10) | |
Text
I
.
N
,
f U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No.
50-133/86-03 Docket No.
50-133 License No.
DPR-7 Licensee:
Pacific ',as and Electric Company 77 Beale Street l
San Francisco, California 94106 l
l-Facility Name:
Humboldt Bay Power Plant Unit 3 l
Inspection at:
Eureka, California Inspection Conducted:
November 17-21, 1986 Inspector:
t'Lf.
/2-/5~[<f[
C. A. Hooker, Radiation Specialist Dat'e Signed Approved by:
6h khw 19./g/1f G.P.gdsas, Chief Date Signed FacilitNes Radiological Protection Section Summary:
Inspection on November 17-21, 1986 (Report No. 50-133/86-03)
Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection of a facility in extended shutdown (preparation for SAFSTOR).
Inspection of activities associated with the decommissioning process including:
actions on previous inspection findings; radiation protection organization and management; transportation; solid waste; external exposure; internal exposure; review of licensee reports; followup on IE Information Notices; and facility tours.
Inspection procedures addressed included 30703, 83722, 83724, 83725, 84722, 86721, 86700, 92701, and 90713.
Results: Of the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8612240169 861208 PDR ADOCK 05000133 O
_
--
- ,
,
-
..
3-
.
-
,
.
-
u-
,
- )n fj s'
s
,
,
,
,
W Q
'
[
.,..,
,
w 4 t
,
i
~
'
'
- >
DETAILS ~
'
+
,
,
,
' -
/
,
,
_
"
,
>
,
,
,
,
1.
' Persons Contacted
e
~
a.
-Pacific Gas and Electric Company (PG&E) Personnel.
R. T. Nelson, Plant Manager
- R. W. Grundhofer, Acting Plant Manager, Supervisor of Operations
- R. C. Parker, Senior Chemistry and Radiation Protection Engineer
'*D. A. Peterson,-Supervisor, Quality Control (QC) and Decommissioning Coordinator
- R.~M. Lund, Radiation Protection Monitor (RPM) Foreman
- R. E. Leach, Shift Foreman, Technical Advisor
.
_
- T. J. Williams, Environmental. Coordinator n
'
b.
Contractors R.'F. Decker, Radiological Engineer-(Chenrad Corporation)
- Denotes.those present at the exit interview on November 21,11986.
In addition to the individuals identified above, the inspector met-and held discussions with other members of the licensee's and
. contractor's staffs.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Followup (50-133/86-02-01).
Inspection Report No. 50-133/86-02 described the inspector's concerns regarding specification and verification of the minimum circulating water flow needed for dilution
-
when releasing radioactive liquids. The licensee had taken steps to
-
correct this matter and had made changes in the liquid radwaste discharge form to incorporate this information. This matter is considered closed.
-3.
Radiation Protection, Plant Chemistry and Radwaste; Organization and Management The licensee's organization and staffing in these areas has remained substantially unchanged since the last inspection in this area (50-344/85-04). On August 1, 1986, the previous plant manager (E. D.
Weeks) retired and this position was filled by R. T. Nelson, formally the Power Plant Engineer. The vacant Power Plant Engineer position will be filled on December 1, 1986, by an individual from PG&E's Diablo Canyon Power Plant (DCPP). The licensee continues to 'use contractor personnel j
to augment the radiation protection staff and assist in activit s in l
preparation for SAFSTOR. Based on near completion of radiologiul activities in preparation for SAFSTOR, the licensee does not plan on utilizing contractor personnel' after December 31, 1986.
In addition, the L
RPM foreman will be transferring to DCPP by February 1, 1987. The two on-site RPM technicians will report directly to the individual who is now
'
the environmental coordinator.
'
l No violations or deviations were identified, i
.
f
."
_-. --
.
.
4.
Audits Quality Assurance (QA) Audit Report No. 86189T was examined. The a.
audit was conducted September 8-12, 1986, at Humboldt Bay Power Plant (HBPP) to verify that procedures had been established and implemented for identification and control of materials, parts and components; nonconforming materials, parts, or components; Technical Specifications (TS) and provisions of operating license; special nuclear material; transportation and packaging of radioactive waste; and general employee and licensed operator training. The audit identified one deficiency that resulted in one audit finding report (AFR No.86-227). The audit also included four recommendations. No nonconformance reports (NCR) were issued.
The audit concluded with the exception of the one finding, HBPP had been effectively implementing their program for the areas audited. The inspector noted that the AFR was administrative in nature regarding the absence of a personnel access list designating specific plant personnel which are permitted access to safety-related equipment, and designation of a specific area for storage for safety-related equipment not in use. The inspector discussed the licensee's action with respect to the AFR and had no further questions.
b.
A QA audit report for an audit performed October 17-30, 1986, of HBPP's modifications, housekeeping and radiation protection program had not been issued as of this inspection. Through discussions with licensee representatives and review of the draft report, it appeared that~no items concerning si nificant safety issues were identified.
c.
QA Audit, Supplier Implementation Audit Report No. 86076S, was examined. The audit was conducted at General Electric-High Level Radwaste Services (GE-HLRS), San Jose, California, on July 8-9, 1986. The purpose of the audit was to determine if GE-HLRS were implementing an adequate QA program to provide spent fuel pool reactivity studies and design modifications for the HBPP. The audit identified four AFRs that were issued to GE-HLRS describing deficiencies identified in their QA program. The AFRs were administrative in nature involving records and documentation. Two of the AFRs were resolved prior to issuance of the report and no hCRs were issued. The audit determined that collectively the deficiencies did not impact on the quality of services and materials supplied by CE-HLRS. The audit also noted that the GE-HLRS would remain on the PG&E Qualified Suppliers List contingent upon satisfactory resolution of the AFRs.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Transportation of Radioactive Materials The inspector reviewed the licensee's radioactive material transportation program for compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Parts 20 and 71 and 49 CFR Parts 171 through 18. -...
-
-
- -.
.
,
,
,
.
'
..
-
-
,
^
'
a.
Audits and Inspections
,
QA audit related to transportation activities was discussed in paragraph 4 of:this report.
.
The inspector examined selected QC! Inspection Plans-(QCIP) of
.
i transportation activities developed pursuant to Nuclear Plant Administrative Procedure (NPAP) C-850, Quality Control' Surveillance and Inspection of Radioactive Material Waste Shipping at HBPP, for the period January 1, 1986, to November 18, 1986, as follows:
=*
No. 4 Shipment of Solidified and/or Dewatered Radioactive -
Waste (
No. 7 Shipment of Solidified Bead Resin Waste
No. 9 Radioactive Waste Shipment Manifest Tracking
No. 16 Certificate of Compliance NRC Licensed Shipping Casks
.
Based on review of the above QCIPs, it appeared that QC checklists
{
were properly filled out and completed for the appropriate shipment.
-
The use of the QC checklist appears to be an effective means,of ensuring that radioactive transportation activities are conducted properly.
No violations or deviations were identified.
b.'
Implementation
,
The inspector observed the preparation for dispatch of waste shipment Nos. 547 and 548. Shipment No. 547 consisted of 10 metal boxes of low specific activity (LSA) waste adequately secured to a flatbed trailer. Shipment No. 548 consisted of 5 metal boxes and 48 drums of LSA waste adequately blocked and braced in an enclosed trailer. Both shipments were shipped exclusive use and transport
. vehicles were noted to be properly placarded. Documents associated with the shipments were examined, including:
Instructions to the carrier for exclusive use shipment.
- Emergency _ procedures provided to-the driver.
- Certification to the State of Washington Department of Social
and Health Servi ~ces.
- Notification to U. S. Ecology.
Radioactive Waste Shipment and Disposal Manifest.
- Isotopic content calculation worksheets.
Bill of Ladin.m
i
<
<
.
,
.
Certification of Special Nuclear Material Contents.
- Pre-and post-vehicle inspection.
- Radioactive Shipment Checklist.
- -
In review of the above documents and others associated with these shipments, the inspector noted no items of concern.
The inspector also made independent radiation measurements on both-shipments (Nos. 547 and 548) using an NRC R0-2 portable ion chamber, S/N 897, due for calibration January 9, 1987. The readings obtained were consistent with licensee's readings and no inspector's concerns were identified.
Selected shipping packages for completed shipment Nos. 464, 479, 495, 503, 518, 538, 507, and 529 were also examined. No inspector's concerns were identified.
Based on the above observations and reviews, the inspector determined that the licensee was effectively implementing their radioactive materials transportation program. The licensee maintains an extensive QC program. The QC program had also been expanded to include Type A shipments. The inspector noted that as of January 1,1985, the licensee has shipped about 150 shipments of waste for disposal without incident.
Inspections conducted by the waste receiver have not identified any deficiencies. The licensee has estimated that only one shipment of LSA waste remains in preparation for SAFSTOR operations.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Solid Waste The inspector reviewed the licensee's radioactive solid waste program for compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR Parts 20 and 61, a.
Audits QA audit related to packaging of waste was discussed in paragraph 4 of this report.
The inspector examined selected QCIPs of solid radioactive waste activities developed pursuant to Procedure NPAP C-850 for the period January 1, 1986, to November 18, 1986, as follows:
No. 1 Test Solidification
No. 3 Full Scale Solidificatfun
No. 5 PCP Test Solidification of Bead Resin
No. 6 Full Scale Resin Solidification
__
.
y c -
--
l.f ~[I
.,. ;
.- '5
'.
"
'
,
s
.,,
.
.
'
t, en
!,
l l
,
,
-
,.
,
,
-,
-
-
- Based on ' review of the'above QCIPs,-it appeared that QC checklists
" were properly completed for the appropriate process. The QC involvement.in the solid waste program appeared to be extensive with'
-
appropriate check' and hold points and were well documented.'
,
No violations or deviations were identified.
b.-
C5anaes'
'
-
There have been no significant changes in the licensee's program since the last inspection of this area (50-133/85-04).. The licensee had completed waste solidification operations, and returned equipment to the waste processing vendor.
,
No violations or deviations were identified, c.
Implementation The inspector examined several topical reports prepared by the licensee to document the methodologies for estimating radionuclide concentrations for compliance with 10 CFR Part 61.
These reports were reviewed and approved by plant management.
.
The following documents of waste stream analysis were reviewed by the inspector:
Dirt and Asphalt
Suppression Chamber
Condenser Acid Cleaning
Activated / Contaminated Components
~
Concentrated Waste Tank
Spent Fuel Pool Filter
Spent Fuel Pool; Solid Components and Contaminated Materials
Disposal of Suppression Chamber Sediment
Pipe Tunnel and Condenser Piping Disposal
Base-Line Radionuclide Correlations for Shipping " Dry Active Waste" Based on review of the above documents, discussions with licensee representatives and reviews in paragraph 5 of this report, the inspector verified that the licensee classifies waste pursuant to 10 CFR 61.55; verifies that waste meets the characteristics of 10 CFR 61.56; and prepares a waste manifest and marks packages in accordance with 10 CFR 20.311.
--
. -
.
-
.-
.
.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Radiation Exposure Control a.
External Radiation Exposure The inspector reviewed selected records, held discussion with licensee representatives, and made observations to determine the licensee's compliance with 10 CFR Part 20 and the recommendations of various industry standards.
Vendor film badge reports for 1985 and January 1, 1986, through October 31, 1986, were examined. The highest official quarterly whole body gamma dose noted for any one individual was 1,120 mrem during the second quarter of 1986. The licensee maintained forms NRC-4 and the forms NRC-5 or equivalents as appropriate. For terminated employees, letters documenting exposures pursuant to 10 CFR 19.13 had been prepared and sent. The licensee evaluated film badge results against pocket ion chamber (PIC) tabulations. The licensee performed bi-monthly film and dosimeter correlation tests, and quarterly PIC response checks.
Personnel contamination survey reports during the period January 1,
1986, through November 20, 1986, were examined. No personnel contaminations requiring dose evaluations had occurred. The licensee had experienced 11 personnel contaminations during this period. Contamination levels were noted to be predominantly low.
The inspector noted whole body counts were given, as appropriate, to assess potential intakes of radioactive material.
The licensee had incorporated the recommendations provided in Revised NRC Form 439, Report of Terminating Individuals'
Occupational Exposure, dated July 1, 1986, in reference to Generic Letter No. 8 5-08, 10 CFR 20-408 Termination Reports - Format, dated May 23, 1985.
The inspector also examined incidents involving lost badges or finger rings and anomalous high film badge results.
Based on the examination of these documented incidents, it appeared that the licensee had properly evaluated, took appropriate action, and adequately documented each case.
No violations or deviations were identified.
b.
Internal Exposure Control Review of the licensee's airborne radioactive material exposure log sheets did not indicate any individual had received an intake of radioactive material which would exceed the 40-hour control measure requiring an evaluation pursuant to 10 CFR 20.102(b)(2). Whole body count data reviewed for several selected individuals indicated no results that would cause further evaluation _ _ _ _
._ ___ -___-_____
-
+-
,
,
.
,
Breathing air for respiratory protective devices is supplied from the licensee's service air system. The licensee performs an air
'
quality check weekly, and checks the system quarterly for radioactive materials. The licensee has not identified any problems that would inhibit the use of this system.
The inspector reviewed records verifying that the licensee conducts annual respirator fit tests and that medical exams are performed by a qualified physician. Respirators were only issued by Radiation Protection or a shift Foreman. A list noting personnel qualified to use respirators was maintained on the cabinet where respirators are issued from. A cross-check of personnel who have worn respirators during the past 6 months indicated that respirators only had been issued to individuals who were qualified to use them.
No violations or deviations were identified.
c.
Audits QA audit (No. 852737) related to this area was discussed in Inspection Report No. 50-133/86-01.
QA audit report for a 1986 QA audit of this area had not been issued at the time of this inspection. This was discussed in paragraph 4 of this report.
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Licensee Identified Problems NCR No. IIB 3-86-TC-N003 was examined and discussed with the licensee. The NCR concerned a failure to collect the stack particulate sample within the required sample time. TS Section VII.B.2. requires that the stack sample to be collected weekly with intervals not to exceed 200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br />.
This requirement became effective October 26, 1986. The sample was scheduled to be changed on October 18, 1986, and.was not changed until October 30, 1986, a sample duration of 213 hours0.00247 days <br />0.0592 hours <br />3.521825e-4 weeks <br />8.10465e-5 months <br />. The licensee had submitted a draft Licensee Event Report (LER) to the corporate office for review and ultimate submission to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(1)(B). The licensee's corrective actions to prevent recurrence was discussed. The inspector had no further questions regarding this matter.
Boral Fuel Storage Cans - Spent Fuel Pool (SFP)
During the month of October 1986, the licensee had loaded fuel assemblies into new Boral storage cans in preparation for SAFSTOR.
During a visual inspection of the Boral cans, af ter about two weeks of use in the SFP, the licensee observed some discoloration on the cans. On October 28, 1986, Boral can S/N 6-29726-1 was removed from the SFP and inspected.
The licensee observed dark stain areas on the surface of the can and what appeared to be a few surface blemishes (pitting). The can was shipped to the vendor representative (GE-Vallecitos) for analysis. The licensee
. _. _______ __ _ __ __ - _
+
'm
,
.
'
also observed through the SFP water that a few cans appeared as though they had blisters on them. On November 21, 1986, the inspector observed a conference call between the licensee and vendor representatives. The vendor informed the licensee that the dark stain on the can, they had inspected, appeared to have resulted from where the can came in contact
,
with the fuel rack. According to their analysis no loss of metal was evident. The vendor suspected that the discoloration was a normal reaction with aluminum in water. As a result of the discussion the vendor will visit HBPP on December 3, 1986, to further analyze the.
problem and check on what appeared to be blistering on some of the Boral cans. The licensee plans on removing two cans for further analysis.
Final resolution of this matter will be examined by the inspector during a subsequent inspection (50-133/86-03-01, Open).
Note:
The Plant Manager advised Region V on December 5,1986 that onsite inspection of the two cans found what appeared to be blisters were actually optical illusions caused by deposits of aluminum hydroxide.
9.
Reports The licensee's Semiannual Radioactive Release Report. for the period from January 1, 1986, through June 30, 1986, was reviewed in-office. This timely report was issued in accordance with TS.I.2.a and included a summary of the quantities of radioactive liquid, gaseous effluents and solid waste released from Unit 3 as outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.21.
No errors or anomalous data were identified (86-SA-02, Closed).
Annual Report - Environmental The licensee's Annual Report of environmental radiation for 1985 was reviewed in-office. This timely report addressed the annual radiological monitoring results of marine and terrestrial samples, air particulate samples, and direct radiation measurements. The results of the licensee's participation in the EPA's cross-check program and State cross-check program were also included in this report. The licensee observed no radiological impact on the environment from the plant. An apparent typographic error was noted for the lower limit of detection (LLD) value for airborne particulates on Table A-5 of the report. The licensee was contacted on November 26, 1986, and confirmed that the 100 pCi/l value was a typographical error and the correct LLD value should have been IE-2 pCi/1.
No other errors or anomalics were identified (86-AN-01, Closed).
No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
Information Notices The inspector verified that the licensee had received, reviewed and was taking or had completed action on IE Information Notices Nos. 86-20, 86-22, 86-23, 86-32, 86-42, 86-43, 86-44, 86-46, 86-86, and 86-88.
l No violations or deviations were identified.
I i
i
_____ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
'
.
11. Facility Tours
'
The inspector toured the radiologically controlled areas of Unit 3 making independent radiation measurements with an NRC R0-2 portable ion chamber, S/N 897, due for calibration January 9,1987. The inspector observed that all radiation areas and high radiation areas were posted as required by 10 CFR Part 20, and access controls were consistent with TS requirements and licensee procedures.
The inspector also cbserved that housekeeping was in good order
.throughout the plant.
No violations or deviations were identified.
12.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on November 21, 1986. The scope and
'
findings of the inspection were summarized.
I
l
,
- - _ - -.
.-.
_,,,.
,.-
_.~_
,-,r
,.__,.. _.,., __
r
-
.e_-~._
.__,_. - -. _._.,,, _