IR 05000272/1990002
| ML18094B289 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 01/22/1990 |
| From: | Nimitz R, Pasciak W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18094B288 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-272-90-02, 50-272-90-2, 50-311-90-02, 50-311-90-2, NUDOCS 9002130098 | |
| Download: ML18094B289 (7) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
50-272/90-02
Public Service Electric and Gas Company P. 0. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Facility Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey Inspection Conducted:
January 8-12, 1990 Inspectors:
Specialist
/.
R. L.,Nimitz, Senior Radiation Approved by:
W. Pasciak, Chief, Facilities Radiation Protection Section
/
Inspection Summary:
Inspection conducted on January 8-12, 1990, (NRC Combined Inspection Report No. 50-272/90-02; 50-311/90-02).
'
\\
- _..!
- ~'
(/ t date Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced radiological controls inspection of the following:
organization and staffing, the licen?ee's actions on previous findings, ALARA, and outage plannin Results:
No violations wer*e identifie The licensee was found to be performing good ALARA planning for the upcoming outage.
- DETAILS
. 1.0 Persons Contacted
.
. Public Service Electric and Gas Company
- L. Miller, General Manager, Salem Operations
- D. Mohler, Radiation Protection/Chemistry Manager-Salem
- P. White, Technical Manager
- W. Schultz, Manager-Station QA-Salem
- J. Wray, Radiation Protection Engineer-Salem
- P. Eldreth, Nuclear Fire and Safety Manager-Salem
- J. Trejo, Manager-Radiation Protection and Chemistry Services
- J. Kotsch, Principal Engineer 1. 2 NRC T. Johnson, NRC Senior Resident Inspector
- Denotes those individuals attending the exit meeting on January 12, 199.0 Purpose and Scope of Inspection This inspection was a routine, unannounced radiological controls inspectio The following areas were reviewed:
- the licensee's actions on previous inspection findings
- organization and staffing
- audits and appraisals
- planning and preparation for the upcoming Unit 2 outage
- external exposure controls
- radiation and contamination material control The inspector's evaluation of the licensee's performance in the above areas was based on observations during plant tours, review of documentation and discussions with cognizant personne.0 Planning and Preparation The inspector reviewed the licensee's planning and preparation for the upcoming Unit 2 outag The following matters were reviewed:
- increased health physics staffing, including the station's method of providing supervisory control over contracted radiological controls personnel
- adequ~cy of the licensee's controls and monitoring of contractor work standards, equipment an-d practices
- early involvement of radiation protection group and knowledge of work to be performed
- plans for ALARA review of work packages, dose reduction methods, and radwaste reduction
- increased supplies, including clothing and temporary shielding
- use of lessons learned ~ram previous outages
~new initiatives Within the scope of the review, no violations were idehtifi~d. The following observations were made:
- The tice~see was closely examining each upcoming job for ALARA consideration *The licensee was establishing a draft*organization and staffing levels for the upcoming outag *The licen~ee was evaluating the adequacy of both consumable ~nd non-consumable supplies for the outag.
'
.
The inspector concluded the licensee was providing effective planning for the upcoming outag Inspector di~cussions with liceniee representatives indicated the licensee was aggressively pursuing new initiatives to.reduce exposure to radiation over the life of the facilit Some initiatives include:
- establishment of a temporary shielding program to allow for expedited analyses of pipe stress to support shielding
- installation of sub-micron filters in water clean-up systems to enhance clean-up capabilities
- use of zero-entry steam generator nozzle dams
- installation of long-lived lighting in high radiation areas
- use of a video system for job planning The inspector concluded the licensee was aggressively seeking new ways to reduce aggregate exposure at the facilit **
4.0 Organization, Staffing and Qualification The inspector reviewed the organization and staffing of the in-plant radiation protection organizatio The review was with respect to the following criteria:
- Technical Specification Section 6.2, Organization
- Technical Specification Section 6.3, Facility Staff Qualification
- Administrative Procedure (AP) No. 2, Revision 4, Station Organization
- Radiation Protection/~hemistry Department Procedure No. RP.104, Revision 1, Organization and Administration The inspector evaluated the licensee's performance in the area by discussing the organization and staffing with cognizant personnel and reviewing procedures and organization chart Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie The following was noted:
- The licensee has added three first time supervisors and a senior supervisor to the radiation protection organizatio These included one supervisor in the radioactive material control group, two supervisors in the ALARA group, and one senior supervisor in the ALARA grou *The licensee established a dedicated ALARA grou *The licensee revised and updated Procedure RP.104 to define the responsibilities of the new department organizatio *The licensee's new radiation protection supervisors meet the qualification requirements outlined in the Technical Specification The following was noted:
- Procedure AP No. 2 has not been updated to reflect the new radiation protection organizatio For example, the position and responsibi-1 ities of the Radiation Protection and Chemistry Manager are not depicted in the A The licensee was in the process of reviewing and updating-all administration procedures (APs).
- 5.0 Audits, Assessments and Corrective Actions The inspecto.r reviewed the licensee's audits and assessments of the radiation protection progra The inspector also reviewed the licensee's corrective actions for self-identified problems and for problems identified by the NRC in the NRC 1 s Systematic Assessment of Licensee Performance (SALP) for the period of January 1, 1988 through April 24, 198 The inspector evaluated the licensee's performance in the above areas by reviewing documents, by discussing the areas with cognizant personnel and by performing independent observation during plant tour Within the scope of the review, no violations were identifie The following was noted:
- The licensee was generally responsive to the concerns and areas for improvement identified in the SAL The inspector noted that the licensee established a new ALARA organization to enhance ALARA planning, established specific operability requirements for the post-accident sampling system to improve availability, and established a work standards-policy tp improve the work practices of personne The licensee also enhanced atten_tion t.o industrial safet * The inspector noted during a tour of the station, however, that continued management attention was needed in the area of housekeeping, ~aterial condition of the facility and industrial safet The licensee immediately initiated action to review these area Some areas of the plant were in need of improved housekeepin Also, personnel were observed not wearing hard hats and safety glasse * The inspector noted that the licensee was aggressively pursing the root cause and corrective actions of radiological occurrence reports (RORs).
These reports are used to dcicument concerns, incidents, or events of radiological significance and provide a means of tracking the occurrence to resolutio * The inspector reviewed ROR No.89-264 dated December 4, 198 This ROR involved workers entering the Unit 1 Reactor Containment without required integrating alarming dosimeter The inspector noted the licensee thoroughly investigated the events and indicated both short-term and long-term correction action for the event At the time of the inspection the licensee was in the process of imple-menting long-term correction action This matter is unresolved pending NRC review of the licensee's 16ng term corrective action (50-272/90~02-0l).
- The inspector noted that the licensee's corporate QA group performs an audit of the radiation protection program once every two year Also, the onsite surveillance group was performing limited QC surveillance of radiation protection activitie The inspector noted that although the licensee was now closely monitoring work practice standards of workers, there appeared to be limited surveillance of radiation protection activitie The licensee indicated that this matter would be reviewe.0 Plant Tours The inspector toured the station periodically during the inspectio The following matters were reviewed:
- posting, barricading and access control (as appropriate), to radiation, high radiation, and airborne radioactive areas
- posting, labeling, and control of radwaste and contaminated material epersonnel contamina~ion control, including personnel use of fr~~kers and portal monitors
- proper wearing of dosimetry by personnel
- efforts.to reduce the volume of contaminated trash including steps to minimize introduction of uncontaminated material into contamination areas
- housekeeping
- industrial safety practices The following observations were made and discussed with the licensee's personnel:
- The licensee was using drip collection funnels to route drips from leaking valves to a floor drai Although this served to prevent floor contamination, the licensee's program for installation of the drip collection funnels did not provide for a review by operations personnel to ensure the funnels did not inhibit valve operation The licensee's operations persorinel immediately toured the station, reviewed installed funnels and concluded that they would not hamper valve operatio The licensee indicated procedures would be reviewed to determine if procedure revisions to provide for a.review by operation personnel should be mad *
- The inspector reviewed personnel skin contamination reports for the last quarter of 1989 (October 1, 1989-December 31, 1989).
The inspector noted that 36 Radiological Occurrence Reports (RORs) were written for contamination events for the perio Of the 36, 30 involved individual contamination events while 6 were indicated as a contamination event involving Rubidium 8 The majority of the events did not have any apparent, predominant root caus However 6 RORs, involving 25 individuals, were written for Rubidium 88, and were attributed to equipment failure".
The licensee was unable to inform the inspector as to what equipment faile The licensee was examining the cause of the Rubidium 88 personnel contaminatio The licensee believed some of it ~as due to gasses evolving from floor drains during chemistry samples of the primary syste The licensee indicated the root causes for the Rubidium 88 personnel contamination events would be reviewe ~0 Exit Meeting The inspector met with licensee representative (denoted in Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 12, 199 The inspector summarized the pu~pose, scope and findings of the inspection.