IR 05000271/1986024
| ML20212B916 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 12/18/1986 |
| From: | Cioffi J, Shanbaky M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20212B836 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-271-86-24, NUDOCS 8612290344 | |
| Download: ML20212B916 (5) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 86-24 Docket No.
50-271 License No. DPR-28 Category C Licensee: Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corporation RD 5, Box 169 Brattleboro, Vermont 05301 Facility Name: Vermont Yankee Inspection At: Vernon, Vermont Inspection Conducted: November 3-7, 1986 Inspectors-
, M4-M
/d -/fdG j
. A. Cioffi, Radiation Specialist date v
L Approved by:
-pr/ 5 /M
/z////f/
M.'M.
Shanbaky, Chief,4acilities
~date Radiation Protection Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection conducted on November 3-7, 1986 (Inspection Report No. 50-271/86-24).
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of radiological controls during plant operations, including: management oversight and control; control of radioactive material, surveys, posting, and labeling; instrument maintenance and calibration; internal and external exposure controls; and ALARA.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified in the review.
-
O
-
.
j
'
DETAILS 1.
. Persons Contacted F. Berger, QA Coordinator, VY
- R. Leach, Chemistry and HP Superintendent, VY D. Mack, Alara Coordinator, Mercury R. McCulloch, Assessment Coordinator, VY
- R. Morrissette, Plant Health Physicist, VY
- J. Pelletier, Plant Manager, VY
- D. Reid, Ops. Superintendent, VY
- Denotes attendance at the exit interview on November 7, 1986.
Other licensee and contractor personnel were contacted during this inspection.
2.
Purpose The purpose of this unannounced inspection was to review the licensee's radiation protection program during routine, non-outage conditions, with respect to the following elements:
-
Management Oversight and Controls;
-
Control of Radioactive Material, Surveys, Posting, and Labeling;
-
Instrument Maintenance and Calibration; Internal and External Exposure Controls; and
-
-
3.
Status of Previously Identified Items 3.1 (0 pen) 83-33-02 (Inspector Follow-up).
Review formalization of ALARA program. Details appear in paragraph 8.
3.2 (Closed) 85-39-05 (Inspector Followup).
Review licensee's appraisal of short term and long term corrective actions regarding violation 85-21-01.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's appraisal performed May 6-8, 1986 by the Radiation Protection Group of Yankee Atomic -
Framingham. The appraisal reviewed the licensee's corrective actions related to the TIP room incident to ensure that they were effectively implemented. The appraisal also identified some additional actions the licensee could take to minimize the possibility of another incident. This item is closed.
. _ _
-.._. - _
-
-.
.-.
...
.
-
.
4.-
Management Oversight and Control The licensee's management oversight and control of Health Physics activi-ties was evaluated by review of applicable procedures, management tracking of Health Physics Incident Reports, audits of the Health Physics program (numbers 85-03 and 86-03), and discussions with supervisory personnel.
Within the scope of this review, the licensee appeared to have adequate oversight and control of the Radiological Controls program. The plant
, _
Health Physicist actively oversees plant radiological surveillances and l
postings. The Health Physics Incident Report tracking system successfully identified minor training problems in the area of personnel contamination control in the first quarter of 1986, which were subsequently remedied in the second quarter. However, no annual ALARA station goals appeared to be established or formalized. There also was no evidence of a formally established system in place to review or critique work packages to deter-mine if the man-rem estimates were accurate.
The inspector noted that the licensee's response to audit number 85-03, performed November 21-25, 1985, was not timely. Two items remained to be resolved and were again identified during audit number 86-03, performed June 15-20, 1986. The inspector was unable to determine the status of audit open items because key personnel were not on-site at the time of the inspection. This area will be reviewed in a future inspection (86-24-01).
5.
Control of Radioactive Material, Surveys, Posting and Labeling The licensee's program for control of radioactive material, surveys, post-ings, and labeling was reviewed against criteria contained in regulatory requiremer.ts and the licensee's technical specifications.
The licensee's performance in this areas was evaluated by:
-
tours and measurements made by the inspector in the reactor and turbine buildings; review of procedures;
-
-
review of the procedures and RWP for stellite ball shipment to General Electric, and observations of ongoing work activities related to this activity;
-
observations and measurements made in the area of work in progress on the hangers of the insert / withdrawal lines of the CRDs; and
-
discussions with licensee and contractor personnel, Within the scope of this review, no violations or deviations were identi-fied. The licensee's survey program was fotnd to be thorough and complete. The licensee's program for posting and controlling radiation areas was in full compliance with the regulations. Areas were conspicu-ously posted with detailed radiological information to properly inform personnel of area radiological conditions.
-
,
.
.
-
-.
.-
.
.
.
6.
Survey Instrument Maintenance and Calibration The licensee's program for radiological survey instrument maintenance and calibration was reviewed with respect to criteria contained in applicable regulatory requirements and industry standards.
The licensee's program was evaluated by observations of equipment in stor-age, and in use in the plant, review of procedures, and discussions with licensee personnel.
There were no violations or deviations identified during this review. All instrumentation was in working order and in good repair. Procedtr es were technically accurate. Caliorations were found to be technically adequate and timely.
Internal and External Extosure Controls The licensee's program for internal and external exposure controls was reviewed against the applicable regulatory requirements and current indus-try practices.
The licensee's performance related to the above criteria was determined by:
-
review of internal and external exposure records for a selected number of individuals;
-
observations of dosimetry placement during routine plant activities;
-
observation of operability and placement of continuous air menitors throughout plant areas;
-
review of the whole body counter logs and control charts; review of applicable plant procedures for routine and job specific
-
air sampling requirements; and
-
discussions with various plant personnel.
Within the scope of this review, no violations or deviations were identi-fied. The licensee's program for internal and externt1 exposure control appeared adequate. However, the inspector observed that there was no technical oversight or review of the whole body counting results by a qualified Health Physicist with expertise in internal dosimetry. This conclusion was reached by the inspector during a reviev of the whole body counting log, which contained numerous instances of recounting workers because of positive peak identifications.
Discussions with the technician in charge of the whole body counter indicated that the procedure controlling the operation of the whole body counter on y required that individuals with positive whole body counts be recountad. No further investigation or evaluation was required or performed.
The inspector discussed the above findings with licensee management. The licensee indicated that a technical review of the whole body counting system and results would be performed to evaluate the whole body counting system's performance.
.
_
-
-
_
.
-
---
.
.
This area will be reviewed in a future inspection (86-24-02).
8.
ALARA Program The licensee's program for assuring that exposures will be maintained "As low As is Reasonably Achievable" was reviewed to' determine the licensee's progress in establishing a formal ALARA program which meets the guidance in NRC Regulatory Guide 8.8.
The licensee's program was assessed by interviews with licensee management, contractors and radiation workers; examinations of ongoing work packages; review of the final Recirculation Piping Replacement Project man-rem results review of planning and prepar-ation for the upcoming spent fuel pool work; and direct observation of work in progress.
Within the scope of this review, the following was found:
The NRC Health Physics Appraisal (Inspection 50-271/80-14) suggested that the licensee develop, document and implement a formal ALARA Program conforming to the guidance in Section C of Regulatory Guide 8.8.
During Ir.spection 50-271/83-33, the finding was again identified as Inspector Followup Item 50-271/83-33-02. Although a permanent ALARA coordinator position was established in June 1986, and an individual was designated to
fill this position, the individual was still involved with his prior duties as the Emergency Response Coordinator at the time of the inspec-tion. Three procedures for the implementation of the ALARA program were in draft form. The final analysis of the Recirculation Piping Replacement outage ALARA packages was still being reviewed and revised.
At the time of the inspection, no estimates had been performed,
-
and no preparation had been done for the upcoming spent fuel pool reracking project scheduled to begin this spring. The spent fuel pool reracking project is expected to take a number of months to complete with intermediate goals of removing and disposing of highly radioactive components and equipment.
The inspector discussed these findings with licensee management. The licensee indicated that the position of Emergency Response Coordinator took precedence over the ALARA Coordinator position at this time.
9.
Exit Interview
'
The inspector met with the licensee's representative (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on November 7, 1986. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and findings as described in this report.
__
_
_ _ __
.
-
.. _,. - _.
..
_,__
. _ - - _.
____
_