IR 05000266/1982006
| ML20050B477 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 03/12/1982 |
| From: | Greger L, Lovendale P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20050B474 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-82-06, 50-266-82-6, 50-301-82-06, 50-301-82-6, NUDOCS 8204050372 | |
| Download: ML20050B477 (10) | |
Text
l
--
.
,,
f U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-266/82-06(DETP); 50-301/82-06(DETP)
Docket Nos. 50-266; 50-301 Licenses No. DPR-24; DPR-27 Licensee: Visconsin Electric Power Company 231 West Michigan Milwaukee, WI 53201 Facility Name: Point Beach Nuc1 car Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Point Beach Site, 'n.ro Creeks, WI Inspection Conducted: February 22-26, 1982
_J[/2//J.
Inspector:
P. C. Lovendale D
Approved By:
L. R. Greger, Chief M1[OA Facilities Radiation Protection Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on February 22-26, 1982 (Reports No. 50-266/82-06(DETP)
50-301/82-06(DETP))
Areas ' spected: Routine, unannounced inspection of operational radiation protecti,n activities including: effluent control instrumentation; testing M air cleaning systems; reactor coolant water quality; licensee audits; radiation protection procedures; radiological qualification and training; exposure control; in plant radiation protection program; and ALARA program.
The inspector also reviewed thn licensee's actions taken in response to previous inspection findings and IE Circulars; the post-accident sampling system; and leakage of tritium into the subsoil drainage system. The inspection involved 41 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Rnsults: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
0204050372 820316 PDR ADOCK 05000266
-
O PDR
.. ~.
_t.
i M: i
'
ai f
,
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- G. A. Reed, Manager, Nuclear Operations
- J. J. Zach, General Superintendent
.
- R. E. Link, Superintendent, Engineering, Quality and Regulatory Services
- R. S. Bredvad, Health Physicist
- F. A. Zeman, Supervisor, Staff Services M. Moseman, Nuclear Plant Specialist T. L. Slack, Chemistry Lab Supervisor R._A. Neustadter, Nuclear Plant Specialist E. J. Manos, Nuclear Plant Fnecialist L. D. Ebstein, Health Physics Supervisor C. D. Bolle, Health Physics Supervisor E. Lipke, Corporate Health Physicist R. Bruno, Training Engineer
- W. G. Guldemond, Senior Resident Inspector, NRC
- R. L. lingue, Resident Inspector, NRC The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees and contractors including radiation control operators and radiochemical technicians.
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting.
2.
General This inspection, which began with a plant tour and visual observation of facilities and equipment, posting, labeling, and access controls at 8:00 a.m. nn February 22, 1982, was conducted to examine routine aspects of the radiation protection program during normal operations.
During this tour, the inspector used an NRC survey instrument (Xetex 305-D) to monitor selected areas throughout the plant. Measurements made were in agreement with posted survey data. Area postings, access controls, and housekeeping were very good.
Also, the inspector revieued licensee actions taken to identify the source of tritium in the plant subsoil drainage system and reviewed the licensee's post accident sampling system against NUREG-0737 requirements.
'
3.
Licensee Action o. Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (266/77-04-01; 301/77-04-01): Adequacy of airborne I-131 and particulate samples. This matter was resolved by the completion of off-line monitoring modifications to the auxiliary building vent, gas stripper vent, drumming area vent, and containment vents. No problems were noted.
i
J
..
l
.
i f
(Closed) Open Item (266/79-04-04; 301/79-03-04; 266/78-05-02; 301/78-05-02):
Implementation of procedure HPID 8 Radiation Moni-toring System Alarm Setpoint Guideline. Procedure HP 13.1.2 (formerly llPID 8) contains guidelines for making adjustments to radiation monitoring system alarm setpoints.
Implementation. of this procedure was reviewed; no further problems were noted.
,
(Closed) Open Item (301/78-08-01): Method to ensure that contract workers are whole body counted upon termination. Contractor super-visors are instructed by memorandum to ensure terminating workers contact the health physics office and arrange a whole body count.
This method appears effective.
(Closed) Open Item (266/78-18-01; 301/78-21-01): Additional refresher training in radiation protection procedures for auxiliary operators.
The licensee's auxiliary operator health physics retraining program is described in procedure TRNG 3.2.
The program includes formal classroom lectures, study times, quizzes, and a practical factors phase. The auxiliary operators must demonstrate their knowledge and ability ta perform each practical factor before it can be signed off by a health physics supervisor. This training was recently completed in January 1982. No further problems were noted.
(Closed) Open Item (266/78-18-02; 301/78-21-02): Annual audit of personal exposures under the cognizance of the Offsite Review Com-mittee (OSRC). The OSRC reviews the annual ALARA audit conducted by the corporate office Nuclear Engineering Section. The minutes of the OSRC meetings indicate that these reviews were conducted in
"
May 1979, November 1980, and December 1981. No further problems were noted.
(Closed) Open Item (266/78-18-03; 301/78-21-03): Concerns associated with the licensce's respiratory protection program including problems with procedure HP 2.6, Respiratory Protection, and annual medical qualification requirements. Procedure !!P 12.1, Respiratory Protection
,
Program, clarifies the requirements of IIP 2.6 and includes medical J
qualification requirements. No further problems were noted.
(Closed) Open Item (266/78-18-04; 301/78-21-04):
Inconsistent
{
usage of barriers and radiation work permits. These problems were not evident during this inspection.
(Closed) Open Item (266/79-04-02; 301/79-03-02): Alternative tritium sampling techniques for use during periods of low relative humidity.
Procedure !!PTP 8, Silica gel for Gascous Tritium Collection and Analysis, establishes a method for determination of tritium in air concentration during period of low relative humidity when dehumidi-fiers are ineffective. No further problems were noted.
(Closed) Open Item (266/79-04-05; 301/79-03-05): Adequacy of review of radioactive material shipping forms before a shipment leaves the
--___
.
.
site. Checkof f sheets are used for each shipment to ensure shipping requirements are adhered to.
Also, the nuclear engineer responsible for radioactive material shipments, reviews the final shipping papers before the shipment leaves the site. No further problems were noted.
(Closed) Open Item (266/79-04-06; 301/79-03-06): Evaluations to determine the quantities of Sr-89, Sr-90, and transuranic isotopes in shipments of radwaste. Procedure HPID 4, Strontium-89/90 and Transuranic Samples for Radioactive Material Characterization, provides for the collection of prime.ry coolant, spent fuel pit, resin, and evaporator bottems samples which are analyzed by a con-tractor for Sr-89 Sr-90, and transuranic laotopes. The results of these analyses are used to determine the quantities of these isotopes in radwaste shipments. No further problems were noted.
(Closed) Open Item (266/79-04-07; 301/79-03-07): Modifications to
,
the radwaste solification system requested as a result of an ALARA review. These modifications have been completed. No further problems were noted.
4.
Ef fluent Control Instrumentation The inspector reviewed records of radiation monitoring system (RMS)
calibrations and functional tests conducted to meet the requirements of Technical Specification 15.4.1.A.
Records for CY 1980 and 1981 were reviewed; no problems were noted.
The health physicist compares weekly grab sample results with RMS readings. The RMS readings are usually slightly higher than grab sample results, therefore, yielding slightly conservative effluent quantifications.
The RMS trip and alarm settings are checked monthly in accordance with procedure HP 13.1.1.
Changes in these setpoints are made in accordance with procedure HP 13.1.2.
Records of these checks for CY 1980 and 1981 were reviewed; no problems were noted.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Testing of Air Cleaning Systems In place filter tests and laboratory methyl iodide tests were performed on plant ventilation systems.during May and June 1981. The in-place testing included visual inspections of the filter installations, DOP testing of HEPA filters, and Frcon testing of charcoal adsorbers.
The ventilation systems tested include containment purge (Fila and B), control room emergency ventilation (F16), auxiliary building ventilation (F20, F21, F23, F25, F29), drumming area ventilation (F26), combined air ejector vent (F30), and containment recirculation (F32). Except for the DOP test of F20, all in-place tests indicated greater than 99 percent removal. The DOP test of F20 indicated only
,
I
. _ _ _ _
l
-
,
90 percent removal, apparently due to an improper seal. The seal was repaired, but no further in-place testing was conducted. Except for F21 and F30, all laboratory tests (methyl iodide) of charcoal samples indicated greater than 90 percent removal. The methyl iodide test of F21 and F30 indicated only 65 percent and 86 percent removal, respectively. Both filters were changed in August 1981, but no further in place testing was conducted.
l Except for the control room filters, in place testing is not conducted on filter systems following a filter change until the next annual test.
This is contrary to recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1.140, Design, Testing, and Maintenance Criteria for Normal Ventilation Exhaust System Air Filtration and Absorptica Units of Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants. This guide recommends in-place testing following filter re-placement to ensure an adequate seal. The item will be reviewed during a future inspection.
(266/82-06-01; 301/82-06-01)
The requirements of Technical Specification 15.3.12 regarding the control room emergency ventilation filters appear to have been met.
There are no technical specification requirements for testing the other filter systems. Ilowever, these systems are tested annually.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
6.
Reactor Coolant Water Quality The inspector reviewed selected licensee records to determine com-pliance with technical specification requirements for recetor coolant periodic tests, chemical control, and radioactivity control. Records from CY 1981 to date were reviewed; no problems were noted.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
7.
Licensco Audits The inspector reviewed licensee audits of the radiation protection program and correctivo measures for identified problems. The audits reviewed included: an INP0 audit conducted in August 1981; an ALARA audit conducted by the Nuclear Engineering Section (Corporate) in October 1981; and an audit of the whole body counting program conducted by the Health Physics Group in February 1982.
The licensee was generally responsive to identified problems and corrective actions appeared effective.
8.
Radiation Protection Procedures The inspector reviewed changes to the radiation protection procedures issued in CY 1981. The changes appear to be consistent with regulatory requirements and good health physics practices. No problems were noted.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
..
-
.
I 9.
Radiological Qualification / Training The inspector reviewzd recent changes to the Chemistry and Health Phys ics organization. The Superintendent, Chemistry and llealth Physics, resigned in December 1981. The Radiochemist was promoted to fill the vacancy. The Health Physicist is the designated Radiation Protection Manager (RPM). The current qualifications are listed below. No problems were noted.
Position Degree Plant Experience Supt. Chemistry & Health MS 4 years Physics licalth Physicist (RPM)
None 12 years Radiochemist Vacant iloalth Physics Supervisor None 10 years llealth Physics Supervisor None 8.5 years Nuclear Plant Specialist MS (UP)
3.5 years Nuclear Plant Specialist BS (llP)
1 year Nuclear Plant Engineer BS (Radwaste)
2.5 years Chemistry Lab Supervisor BS 11 years Nuclear Plant Specialist BS (Chem)
2 years In addition, two additional Nuclear Plant Specialist positions are open.
The inspector revised the licensce's new health physics retraining program for auxiliary operators and the training program for radio-chemical technicians. These programs are described in procedures TRNG 3.2 and TRNG 8.6.
Both programs appear to be quite comprehen-sive and include both formal classroom and on-the-job (practical factors) training. A comprehensive exam is administered at the end of the classroom phase. A minimum passing grade of 80 percent is required for satisfactory completion. No problems were noted.
)
_- __
. _ _ _ _ _ _ -
_ _ _
- _ _
_ _ _ _
--
i&,
F.
-
a
.
-
<
J
'
'
,
,
s
'
,,
s-:
.
10.
External Exposure Control
.
I ex The licenses recently (December 1981) changed TLD vendors. In the
-
near future, the licensee expects to be linked with.t,he vendor computer allowing direct access to exposure information.
It is not
,
clear whether the licensee will be capable of record changes. from -
their terminal. This matter will be reviewed further during a future inspection.
(266/82-06-04; 301/82-06-04)
s Several TLDs are sent to NBS each month for spiking and the$.sent to the vendor for evaluation. The most recent results showed agre' ament within plus or minus 3 to 5 percent.
-
,
, ;'
.
During a previous inspection it was noted that the licenbee's I
dosimeter totals usually exceeded TLD results by as much as a factor of eight.
Recently the licensee cha' ged.from rezeroing dosimeters n
daily to weekly. This change has eliminated inaccuracies resulting-
'
from reading the dosimeters at the 1o9 nad of the scale and errors introduced each time the dosimeter is rez -oed.
The licensee stated that one year ago about 80 percent of the TID to dosimeter comparisons required investigation because the dosimeter totals were considerably higher than the TLD resu;ts. Presently about 30 percent of the ccm c parisons require investigation and further improvements a4e expected.
No further problems were noted.
(301/81-12-01)
,,,
11.
Internal Exposure Control
'
i The licensee'sprogramforcontrolofinternalexposuresl Includes reduction of surface contaminaticn l'evels and use of engineering controls, protective clothing and equipment, survey infornation, and stay-time calculations. Whole body counting and urinalyses are used to supplement the routine monitoring program to ensure its effectiveness.
q Whole body counting data for April 1981 to date were reviewed. The
'
data indicated that two contractor employees exceeded the 40 HPC-hour control measure in October 1981. One worker received about 100 MPC-hours and the other received about 50 MPC-hours in the incident.
'
The activity was primarily Cs-137 and Cs-134, conservatively assumed
,
to be insoluble for the purpose of calbulating MPC clipurs.
The li-
~
,
censee stated that the exposures resulted fror a mJsunderstanding s between the workers and the radiatica control operator regarding tha
,
extent of work to be performed under an RVP. When the workers
-
returned from the job site, they were found to be. externally con-taminated. Nasal swab results indicated a possible/ uptake. BotS workers were whole body counted on October 26, 1981 and October 30, 1981.
Both workers then terminated employa.cnt ard further whole body counting at the site was not possible. During this inspection, the
.
licensee learned from the workers' employer th'at one worker had been
,
Inspection Report 50-301/81-12.
/
~
~
'.
-
,,
_.
_
-
_
_
- _
_
.-.
mem m a
,.__ _
m i
w
.
,
s I
whole body countec at~ah6ther fscility. The results confirmed that an exposure had.pc.curre 1, r' uling out the possibility o' f external contamination.
>
The licenses reinstructed both the workers and the radiation control operators conce:hing the need for effective communication regarding e
work fa controlled areas. Also, since other problems with this con-(trqitor's workers had occurred, the Health Phy.=icist increased the
'
a.meunt of direct health physics coverage afforded these workers. -
The licensee's corrective actions appeared appropriate.
N No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
..
'
'
32.
In-Plant _Radi_ation Protection Program
.,
a.
Surveys
,.
Thevinsp'eciar selectively reviewed radiation, contamination, and airbetne radioactivity surveys conducted to meet surveillance requirements and determine radiation work permit requirements.
No problems were noted.
b.
Posting and Access Controls
.
The inspector reviewed radiation, high radiation, and contamina-tion area postings within the plant controlled area. In addition to the postings required by 10 CFR 20.203, the licensee posts current dose rate and contamination levels at the entrance to controlled areas. These postings are updated weekly as a part of routine surveys. No problems were noted.
s c.
Release of Materials for Unrestr'icted Use The licensco's procedures for release of materials for unrestricted
~
use were reviewed. The 13censee's limits for rolesse of contamin-
'sted materials are tore restrictive than the minimum sensitivities given in IE Circular No. 81-07.
The licensee does not release materials for unrestricted use if any detectable activity is found using current state-of-the-art equipment and methods. No probleas.ere noted.
No items of noncompliance or dsvlations~were identified.
13.
ALARA Program The inspector reviewed the minutes of the monthly ALARA Committee meetings. lThese meetings are conducted monthly in accordance with procedure F3NP 8.2.1, Point Beach Nuclear Plant ALARA Program. Topics of discussion include design change rovdews, exposure trends, ALARA
suggestions, and unusual exposures. No problems were noted.
'
'
-
\\
e
'
,
,
_.._
_ _
l
.
.
'?[N
'
I
'( 3
[r j
.,
s
.
i 14,iTHI /etion Plan item !!.B.3.2. - Post Accident Sampling
._
l The inspector revi'sw she licensee's post accident sampling system q.i
!
sgeirst the requirements of NUREG-0737. It appears the required S;
samples could be collected and analyzed in the required three hours
'
I J witheut exceeding the design basis dose of 5 res whole body and
-;.
'
75 rem extremjty. Itowever,;1t appears that the limits of 10 CFR
-
20.101 would be exceeded. It was cstimated that 2.924 rem whole
,
.
body would be received by the individual collecting the sample
'
'
.
i duricg a Unit 2 (most limicing) accident. This 9stimata is based on a normal walking rate of 4 feet per second. After collecting
-
the r.rmple, the individual must transport it back to the chemistry
.
lab utilizing a cart that weighs greater than 300 pounds. Pulling
,
the cart would likely result in a lower valking rate and higher dose.
Tho licenses agreed to measure the time required to pull the cart back to the chemistry lab and recalculate the estimated dose. This
,
calculntion will be reviewed during a future inspection.
(266/82-06-03; 301/82-06 03)
It appears the licensee has set the requirements of NUREG-0737 con-
,
corning post accident sampling. This item is considered closed.
'
.
The licenseo stated that the present system would be replaced with an improved system (Yanken-type) later this year.
Installation of
-
<
the new system will be.se. viewed during a future inspection.
(266/82-06-02; 30*/82-06-02)
.
15. [ource of Tritium in the Subsoil Drainage System The inspector reviewed the licensee's actions taken to determine the s.
source of tritium found in the subsoil drainage system. As a result of this review, it was noted that several sample points had not been
'
-
checked since 1979. One point (designated "ce") indicated a tritium conenntration of 4E-3 microcuries per millilitor in February 1979.
This concentration was 100 times higher than any other point sampled.
At the timo, the licensee believed the source of this activity was decontamir.ation operations in the area of the drain system cleanout f
i (point "ct").
The cleanout was decontaninated but no followup sampling van conducted. A sample taken during this inspection indicated a tritium concentration of about IE-3 microcuries per milliliter. The nource of thie activity could not be readily dotormined, buti poss-ibilities include the blowdown avrporator cubicle and the spent fuel pool (both located close by). This matter including the need fo:
further sampling, was discussed during the exit meeting ar.d will be reviewnd during a future inspection.
(266/79 04 01; 301/71-03 01; 266/81 24 01; 301/31 25 01).
-
,
s
,
\\
-
-
-.
__
. - _
_
.-
-_
_ _ _
_ _ -.
-
. _ ~ -. _.
- _.
. _ _..
-
_
__
.-___
_
!.0
,
'
16. Exit Heetinx
.
.
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Section 1)
'
at the conclusion of the inspection on February 25, 1982. The in-spector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection. In
-
response to certain items discussed by the inspector, the licensee:
'.
a.
Stated that additional sampling of the subsoil drainage system
"
would be conducted including those sample points not sampled since 1979.
(Section 15)
b.
Stated that the source of activity found at point "ce" would
,
j
i be investigated.
(Section 15)
c.
Stated that an evaluation of the reactor coolant sample cart movement time and the accumulated dose for sample collection would be conducted.
'
.
l l
--
_
.
.
_
_