IR 05000250/1979020
| ML17338B089 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1979 |
| From: | Jenkins G, Zavadoski R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Jenkins G |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17338B085 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-79-20, 50-251-79-21, NUDOCS 7909210165 | |
| Download: ML17338B089 (9) | |
Text
gp,S AEqy~
Cy
~ +i on 0 $g
++*++
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTAST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-250/79-20 and 50-251/79-20 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, Florida 33101 Facility Name:
Turkey Point Units 3 and
Docket Nos.
50-250 and 50-251 License Nos.
DPR-31 and DPR-41 Inspection at Turkey. Point site nea Homestead, Florida Inspector:
R.
W. Zava o i
ate Signed Approved y:
. R. Jen i s, A ting Section Chief, FFMS Branch 777 Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on June 11-15, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine unannounced inspection involved 34 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of external radiation exposure control, exposure review, surveys, radiation work permits, respiratory protection program, radioactive and contaminated material control, and posting and control.
Results Of the seven areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in six areas; one apparent item of noncompliance was found in one area (unrestricted area radiation levels, paragraph 10.c).
vsossxo /6'5
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
+H. E. Yaeger, Plant Manager
+H. F. Storey, Corporate Health Physicist
- P.
W. Hughes, Health Physics Supervisor R. L. Logsdon, Documentation Specialist
+R. J.
Spooner, Quality Assurance, Operations Supervisor T. Coleman, Health Physics Shift Supervisor J. Bates, Health Physics Shift Supervisor
+J. I,. Danek, Health Physics Training Supervisor J. Ferguson, Health Physics Administrative Assistant M. S. Peck, Health Physics Administrative Supervisor
+J.
A. Olsonoski, Quality Control
+J
~ E. Moore, Operations Superintendent D.
G. Whittser, Licensing Corporate B.
C. Kilpatrick, Assistant Superintendent Maintenance Other licensee employees contacted included six construction craftsmen,
technicians, four operators, and three mechanics.
+Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 15, 1979 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
The inspector summarized the scope of the inspection including the item of noncompliance concerning failure to control radiation levels in unrestricted areas (paragraph 10).
The plant manager acknowledged the item of noncompliance.
3.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
4.
Plant Tour a ~
During the course of the inspection, the inspector toured:
(1) the Unit 4 containment from the TIP (transverse incore probe)
room sump to the polar crane, (2) the auxiliary building including the two foot elevation, ten foot elevation pipe chase, residual heat removal pits, ground elevation cubicles, chemical volume control systems on the roof elevation, and (3)
the radwaste building. It was obvious to the inspector that considerable progress in cleanliness is still being made in each building as compared to past recent inspections (IE Report Nos.
50-250/78-11, 50-251/78-11, Details I, paragraph 4.c.;
50-250/78-21, 50-251/78-21, paragraph 9.c.y 50 250/78 26) 50 251/78 26)
paragraph 4; 50-250/78-29, 50-251/78-29, paragraph 10.a; and 50-250/79-10, 50-251/79-10, paragraph 5.a) by the same inspector.
- b.
The inspector, accompanied by licensee representatives toured the Unit 4 Containment Building.
Although the unit was in the last week of a major refueling, the amount of visible debris and extraneous material was noticeably small (IE Report No. 50-250/78-26, 50-251/78-26, paragraph 4.e).
Licensee representatives stated that'xtraneous material would be removed prior to power ascension and that those items left in containment would be securely tied down.
During the containment tour, the inspector noted that locked gates had been supplied around the regenerative heat exchanger (IE Report 50-250/78-26, 50-251/78-26, paragraphs 8.b.i and 8.b.ii, 50-250/79-10, 50-251/79-10, paragraph 5.f).
The inspector had no further questions or observations.
c ~
The inspector, accompanied by a representative toured the control room.
The inspector noted that many of the area radiation monitors had a
maximum reading of
Rem/hr.
The licensees representative stated that they were reviewing the instrument capabilities of the facility and would have some recommendations in the near future.
The inspector had no further questions or observations.
d.
The inspector, accompanied by a licensee representative, toured the two foot elevation in the auxiliary building and noted that the leak previously noted (IE Report 50-250/78-26, 50-251/78-26, paragraph '12 and 50-250/79-10, 50-251/79-10, paragraph 5.d) had been fixed and the cable trays were being replaced.
The inspector had no further questions or observations.
5.
External Radiation Exposure Control a
~
The inspector observed the wearing of TLD badges and pocket chambers by workers during tours of the RCA. The inspector discussed the control and monitoring of radiation exposure with operators, RPM and licensee representatives and had no further questions.
b.
The inspector asked licensee representatives how radiation exposures were maintained below the limits established in 10 CFR 20.101.
Licensee representatives stated that twice each working day the exposure of each individual working in the radiation controlled area (RCA) is updated with pocket dosimeter information obtained the preceding day.
The information is posted on the bulletin board near the change out area in the RCA. The information is presented by groups, e.g., health physics, instrumentation and control, maintenance, operations nuclear, electrical, visitors and sub-contractors.
In addition, the names of those individuals who are restricted from the RCA because they have reached an administrative limit are put on a restricted list and those who reach 80X of an administrative limit are put on an alert list.
The first administrative limit for people with completed NRC-4 forms is 2150 millirem.
Each supervisor is sent a
copy of the current exposures for each individual working for him so that he can uniformly
-3-c ~
distribute exposures over his work force (IE Report 50=250/78-26, 50-251/78-26, paragraph 10.c).
The inspector noted the posting of the current radiation exposure report in the RCA, noted workers consulting the list, noted foremen consulting the list, and had no further questions.
The inspector reviewed a training film which was prepared by the licensee for the health physics training of steam generator workers.
By a review of their records, the inspector ascertained that all the steam generator workers had received adequate health physics training.
The inspector also noted that a
steam generator mock up was on site and, according to licensee representatives, will be erected in the coming months.
The mock-up will be used to train steam generator workers in the mechanical aspects of their job prior to entry into a radiation area.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
d.
The inspector reviewed the exposure records of all the sub-contractors personnel involved in the anchor bolt inspections.
The inspector also surveyed selected areas where anchor bolt work was performed and found contact radiation readings of 250 millirem/hr in the auxiliary building and containment.
The inspector determined that the work was being performed within applicable guidelines and had no further questions.
e.
As of June ll, 1979, the total man-rem exposure for calendar year 1979 for the plant was 1,257 man-rem.
The Unit 3 refueling cost 681 man-rem.
The Unit 4 refueling cost 576 man-rem of which 134 man-rem was attribu-table to anchor-bolt inspections.
6.
Exposure Review The inspector examined computer printouts of individual whole body and skin exposures for 1979.
No limits of exposure as specified in 20 CFR 20.101(b)
were exceeded.
The licensee is required by 10 CFR 20.101(b)(3) to have on file a Form NRC-4 for each person who has exceeded the exposure limit of 10 CFR 20.101(a).
The inspector examined records of those individuals whose yearly exposures indicated a potential for quarterly exposures in excess of the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.101(a)
and verified that NRC-4 forms were included.
7.
Surveys a.
The licensee is required by
CFR 20.201(b) to perform such surveys as may be necessary to comply with regulations.
The inspector verified that surveys were being taken by the licensee and had no further questions.
b.
The licensee is required by
CFR 20.401(b)
to maintain records showing the results of thier surveys.
The inspector examined the surveys for the first five months of calendar year 1979 and had n'o further question.
Radiation Work Permits (RWPs)
The inspector selected RWPs posted at the entrance to the Radiation Control Area (RCA).
The inspector selected records from the file "Terminated RWPs" for the period March 22 through June 22, 1979.
The inspector observed a
Health Physics Shift Supervisor discussing with maintenance personnel the radiation safety requirements for specific work and issuing RWPs.
The inspector toured the auxiliary building, Unit 4 containment, and radwaste building and observed the implementation of RWP requirements for selected operations.
Procedure HP-l, Radiation Work Permit, requires that specified work be done in accordance with the conditions of an RWP.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were observed by the inspector.
9.
Respiratory Protection Program By review of records, observations, and discussions with licensee represen-tatives, an inspector evaluated the program for air sampling, bioassay, engineering controls, MPC-hour controls, respirator medical evaluation, training, fitting, operational testing, maintenance, issuance controls, and determined that the respiratory protection program appeared to be in compliance with 10 CFR 20.103.
10.
Radioactive and Contaminated Material Control The licensee is required by
CFR 20.203(f) to properly label containers of radioactive waste material.
The inspector observed numerous containers of radioactive waste material properly stored throughout the plant.
Each package was wrapped in double bags and labelled as required.
The inspector also observed containers labelled Radioactive LSA ready for shipment offsite.
No items of noncompliance were found and the inspector had no further questions.
ll. Posting and Control Posting The inspector observed the posting on bulletin boards throughout the plant of the notices and reports required by 10 CFR 19.11.
b.
Warning Signs The inspector toured the Radiation Control Area and observed the posting of warning signs and the locking of access points to certain areas.
The inspector took radiation level readings at selected locations to assure that areas were posted and locked as required by
CFR 20.203(c)(1)
and Technical Specification 6.13.1, respectively.
Co On June 13, 1979, the inspector, accompanied by a licensee representa-tive, noted that at the fence outside the restricted area near the Unit 4 containment radiation levels of 10 millirem/hr existed for longer than one half hour.
The cause of the radiation was debris and
-5-trash being removed from containment.
The inspector informed the licensee representative that a dose in excess of 2 millirem in any one hour in an unrestricted area was contrary to the requirements of 10 CFR 20.105(b)(1)
and was an item of noncompliance (79-20-01).
12.
Inadvertent Release of Liquid Radwastes On June ll, 1979, the B Monitor Tank overflowed due to improper valve lineup.
The overflow went to the Waste Holdup tank; the pipe size to the waste holdup tank was not sufficient to handle the amount of overflow.
As a result, some of the overflow backed up into the component cooling area and overflowed into the storm drain system.
Approximately 900 gallons of water were released to the storm drain system and thence to the discharge canal.
The concentration of radionuclides in the water released to the storm drain was 3.1 x 10 uc/cc for Co-60 and 3.2 x 10 uc/cc for Cs-137, which was well below the limits specified in 10 CFR 20 Appendix B Table II, Column 2.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were noted.
The inadver-tent release was covered in press notices and daily reports from the Region II office
e