IR 05000269/1978020
| ML15223A304 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oconee  |
| Issue date: | 10/18/1978 |
| From: | Gibson A, Hosey C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML15223A296 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-269-78-20, 50-270-78-20, 50-287-78-21, NUDOCS 7812040339 | |
| Download: ML15223A304 (6) | |
Text
pjk REs4q UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CREGION II 5101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos.:
50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-287/78-21 Docket Nos.:
50-269, 50-270 and 50-287 License Nos.:
DPR-38, DPR-47 and DPR-55 Licensee:
Duke Power Company P. 0. Box 2178 422 South Church Street Charlotte, North Carolina 28242 Facility Name: Oconee Nuclear Station Inspection at:
Oconee site, Seneca, South Carolina Inspection conducted:
September 11-15 1978 Inspector:
C. M. Hosey Reviewed by:
/
kR)
A. F. Gibson, Chief Date Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on September 11-15, 1978 (Report Nos. 50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-278/78-21)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of previously identified items, radiation protection program associated with the refueling outage of Unit 1 and the station's radioactive waste management program. The inspection involved 39 inspector-hours on site by one NRC inspecto Results:
Of the ten areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in nine areas. An apparent item of noncompliance was found in one area (Infraction - Failure to keep entrance to high radiation area locked (269/270/78-20-01; 287/78-21, paragraph 9).
7 8 12040339
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-287/78-21 I-1 DETAILS I Prepared by:C^,'
/' li'7 C. s y, Radlation Specialist Dat Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspectio :
ept ber 11-15, 1978 Reviewed by:
A. F. ibson, Chief Dat Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Individuals Contacted
- J. E. Smith, Station Manager
- R. M. Koehler, Superintendent of Technical Services
- C. T. Yongue, Station Health Physicist
- L. A. Blue, Health Physicist S. R. Newcomb, Junior Health Physicist J. Owens, Health Physics Supervisor D. L. Davidson, Health Physics Supervisor W. Morgan, Unit I Shift Supervisor L. Evans, Assistant Shift Supervisor L. Benge, Chemist T. Alexander, Health Physics Supervisor W. Stengel, Health Physics Technician
- R. T. Bond, Technical Services Supervisor R. Futrell, Health Physicist (Corporate Office)
- R. J. Brackett, Station Senior Quality Assurance Engineer
- Denotes those attending exit intervie.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Open)
Unresolved Item (73-12-01):
Correlation of Radiation Monitors and Lab Result The inspector reviewed plant procedure HP/0/B/1000/60/F "Procedure for Correlation of Effluent RIA Monitors and Area Gaseous RIA Monitors" and Oconee Nuclear Station Directive 3. (TS)
"Radiation Monitor Responsibilities".
The correlation of radiation monitors and laboratory results for the month of August, 1978, were reviewed for monitors RIA 33, 34, 37, 38 and 4 In the most part, good correlation has been obtained for RIA-33, however, on three occasions the actual RIA reading was significantly less than the lower limit of the expected rang A licensee representative stated that the cause of the low readings would be investigate Good
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-287/78-21 1-2 correlation has been obtained for RIA's 34, 37, 38 and 4 Radiation Monitor setpoints for RIA-40 were reviewed in.Procedure PT/0/A/230/01
"Radiation Monitor Check".
The inspector observed the control room readout of RIA-40 (Unit No. 1) and verified that the "High" and "Alert" setpoints had been properly set as specified in PT/0/A/230/0 In reviewing PT/0/A/230/01, the inspector noted that the graphs used to convert RIA readout (cpm) to actual radioactive concentration (pCi/ml)
were not marked with a
procedure change number, thus making it impossible to know whether or not the latest graph was in us A licensee representative stated that in the future graphs would be identified with the appropriate change numbe The inspector stated that the item would remain open pending review of correlation data for other RIA.
Radiation Protection Procedures The inspector reviewed plant procedures OP/0/A/1506/I
"Fuel and Component Handling,"
OP/1/A/1503/1
"Preparation for Refueling," and
- OP/0/A/1502/07
"Refueling Procedure" and various RWPs associated with major maintenance in the reactor building of Unit # During a tour of the Unit N Reactor Building on September 11, 1978, the inspector verified that the radiation protection requirements contained in the procedures and RWP's were being complied wit The inspector also verified that the requirements for refueling contained in TS 3.8.1, 3.8.5, 3.8.6, 3.8.10, 3.8.11 and 3.8.12 were being complied wit.
Contamination Control During a tour of the Unit No. 1 reactor building on September 11, 1978, and the spent fuel and auxiliary building on September 12, 1978, poor housekeeping was noted by the inspector in the following areas: Unit 1 Seal Supply Filter Room Unit 2 Letdown Storage Tank Unit 3 Concentrated Boric Acid Storage Tank Room (lay down area) Unit 1 and 2 Waste Evaporator Control Panel Unit 1 and 2 High Pressure Injection Pump Area In these areas, anti-contamination clothing, tools and equipment, poly sheeting and bags, removed insulation, paper, etc.,
were scattered over the floo The inspector expressed concern that in some cases the poor housekeeping may be a potential fire hazard and in all cases will result in compounding the problem of decontamination of the areas, thus increasing the amount of radiation exposure receive A licensee representative stated that increased effort would be made to control housekeepin RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-287/78-21 1-3 Advanced Planning and Preparation A licensee representative stated that 29 contract health physics technicians from Rad Services, Inc. and 9 health physics technicians (trainees)
from Houston Power and Light C are available to augment the health physics staff for Unit 1 refueling and maintenanc Recent refueling and maintenance on Unit 3 have provided special training necessary for Unit 1 activities. A licensee representative stated that the increased need for contamination control supplies and equipment, anti contamination clothing, etc. had been anticipated and the necessary supplies and equipment were available for us The inspector reviewed the qualifications of the contract health physics technicians. They all apparently meet the training and experience requirements established by-the licensee (two years experience in specialty and one year technical training in addition to experience).
6. Training By review of records and attending the licensee's Restricted Area Orientation Basic Health Physics Training, the inspector verified that the contract health physics technicians added for the Unit I outage were provided the information required by 10 CFR 19.1 Satisfactory completion of the orientation course is required prior to obtaining unrestricted access to the Radiation Control Are.
Exposure Control The inspector reviewed the "Radiation Exposure Control" printout for September 13, 197 Four individuals had exceeded the licensee's administrative exposure control limits for the quarte However, extensions had been approved for each individual prior to exceeding the administrative limi The inspector verified that radiation exposure history records (Form NRC-4) were on file for each individual who had exceeded 1250 mrem for the calendar quarte The inspector reviewed Duke Power Company memo dated September 5, 1978, entitled "ALARA Program, Personnel Radiation Exposures/Job Exposures Estimates, Unit 1 Refueling/Maintenance Outage, end of Fourth Core Cycle."
This memo estimates the exposure for the outage to be 193.250 person-rem and establishes a goal for the outage of 173.920 person-rem. During a review of Duke Power
RII Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-287/78-21 1-4 Company memo dated September 20, 1977, entitled "Personnel Radiation Exposure, Unit 1 Refueling/Maintenance Outage, Third Core Cycle, Job Exposure Estimates Vs-Actual Exposures," it was noted that during the Unit 1 refueling/maintenance outage, third core cycle, the actual exposure (224.535 person-rem) exceeded the estimate (172.869 person-rem) by approximately 30% and the actual exposure exceeded the estimate for nine out of the 20 major jobs performed. Exposure estimates have already been exceeded on two major jobs during the current outage (CRDM and Stator Work
- actual exposure exceeds estimates by 218%; Inservice Inspection -
actual exposure exceeds estimate by 170%).
The inspector expressed concern that if the trend continues, the exposure estimates for the current outage will be exceede The inspector commented that increased effort is necessary to keep radiation exposure ALAR.
Respiratory Protection Program By review of records, observations and discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector evaluated the program for air sampling, bioassay, engineering controls, MPC-hour controls, medical qualification to wear a respirator, training, maintenance, issuance controls, and determined that the respiratory protection program appeared to be in compliance with 10 CFR 20.10.
Posting and Control The inspector reviewed the licensee's posting and control of radiation areas, high radiation areas, airborne radioactivity areas, contamination areas and radioactive material areas during tours of the Unit 1 Reactor Building, Spent Fuel Building, Unit 1 Turbine Building, and Auxiliary Buildin During a tour of the Auxiliary Building on September 11, 1978, the door to Room 378A (South Stairway - Unit 3) was found to be unlocked. The door was posted with a High Radiation Area sign. Highest radiation levels in area was approximately 2 rem/hr on contact with the Unit 3 vent pipin Positive control over access to the area was not in effec A licensee representative stated that the lock would be modified to prevent a recurrenc The inspector stated that failure to maintain the access to the High Radiation Area locked, except during periods when access to the area is required, is in noncompliance (269/270/78-20-01; 287/78-21-01) with 10 CFR 20.203(c).
This is a repeat item of noncomplianc Also during the tour, the door to Room 218, Spent Fuel Pool Cooler Room - Units 1 and 2, was found opened and unattende The door was posted with a High Radiation Area sig Several individuals were observed working in the roo The
RH Rpt. Nos. 50-269/78-20, 50-270/78-20 and 50-287/78-21 1-5 inspector remained at the door approximately one minute before the worker exited the area and locked the doo A radiation survey performed by a licensee representative indicated the highest radiation level in this room was approximately 25 mr/h The inspector expressed concern that the notice posted on the door that required the door to be kept locked except for entry was ignore The inspector commented that the individual who checks out a key to a high radiation area should be held personally responsible for controlling access to the are A licensee representative acknowledged the inspector's commen.
Surveys The inspector reviewed records of radiation, contamination, and airborne radioactivity surveys performed in the Unit 1 Reactor Building between September 3, 1978 and September 13, 1978,, discussed the survey results with licensee representatives and observed the work in several active work areas to verify that the licensee was following the regulatory requirements in 10 CFR 20.201b and 10 CFR 20.401 The inspector had no further questions concerning survey.
Test of Reactor Coolant Water Quality Through discussions with a licensee representative and review of records, the inspector verified that sample and analysis frequency and resultant data appeared to meet all technical specification requirements related to reactor coolant and the secondary syste.
Exit Interview The inspector met with management representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
on September 15, 1978, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspectio Items discussed included the one item of noncompliance.