IR 05000275/1985033

Insp Repts 50-275/85-33 & 50-323/85-31 on 851028-1101.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Action on Previous Insp Findings,Followup on Allegation RV-85-A-0056, External & Internal Exposure & Procedures 83724 & 83725

ML17083B666
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon
Issue date:	11/18/1985
From:	Hooker C, Yuhas G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML17083B665	List: IR 05000275/1985033 ML17083B664
References
50-275-85-33, 50-323-85-31, NUDOCS 8512090467
Download: ML17083B666 (14)

Text

U. S.

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION V

Report Nos. 50-275/85-33 and 50-323/85-31'ocket Nos.

50-275 and 50-323 License Nos.

DPR-80 and DPR-81 Licensee: Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Scale Street Room 1435 San Francisco, California 94106 Facility Name:

Diablo Canyon Units 1 and

Inspection at:

San Luis Obispo County, California Inspection conducted:

October 28 through November 1, 1985 Inspector:

C. A. Hooker, Radiation Specialist Approved by:

DP G. P.

as, Chief Facilit s Radiological Protection Section

//

p'ateSigned Da e

igned

~Summar Ins ection on October 28 throu h November

1985 (Re ort Nos. 50-275/85-33 and 50-323/85-31)

Areas Ins ected:

Routine unannounced inspection of licensee action on previous inspection findings; follow-up on allegation RV-85-A-0056; external exposure; and internal exposure.

Xnspection procedures 83724 and 83725 were covered.

The inspection involved 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> onsite by one NRC inspector.

Results:

No violations or deviations were identified in the five areas inspected.

8512090467 851118 PDR ADDCK 05000275

PDR

',4,

I'

I

)l

!

alai h

44

.4 I"

pl

l yf 4 4 t

l I

4

L

t.

'll h

I p

I l

l V 4 l

h

W

DETAILS 1.

Persons Contacted A.

PG&E Personnel

+R.

C. Thornberry, Plant Manager

<J.

M. Gisclon, Assistant Plant Manager, Technical Services

• J. A. Sexton, Manager, Operations Department

+T. J. Martin, Manager, Training

+D. A. Taggart, Acting Director, Quality Support, QA

+L. F.

Womack, Manager, Engineering Department J.

V. Boots, Manager, Chemistry and Radiation Protection

+R. P. Powers,Senior Chemistry and Radiation Engineer

• T. L. Grebel, Senior Regulatory Compliance Engineer

,+R. Weinberg, PG&E News Service H.

W. Fong,,Chemistry an'd Radiation Protection Engineer

'.~Fahey-Benson,,

Ghemigtry and Radiation Protection Engineer

- A. I. Dame, Seni'or Training Instructor l

il B.

,

NRC Resident Xns'ct'or I

• M. M. Mendonca, Senior Resident Inspector

+T. J; Polich; Resident Inspector I

+Denote's those present at the, exit interview on November 1,

1985.

In addition to the individuals identified above, the inspector met and held discussions with other members of the licensee's and contractor's staff.

l 2.

Licensee Action on. Previous Ins ection Findin s (Closed)

0 en Item (85-23-16):

Inspection Report No. 50-275/85-23 identified that the licensee had not established procedures for assessment of personnel exposures resulting from skin contaminations.

This inspection disclosed that such procedures have been incorporated in procedure RCP G-4 "Personnel Decontamination and Evaluation", Revision 3, 9/12/85.

This matter is closed (85-23-16).

(Closed)

0 en Item (85-30-01):

This open item involved the licensee's ability to maintain positive control of keys at the Chemistry and Radiation Protection (C&RP) Foreman level for entries into very high radiation areas.

This inspection disclosed that the licensee's procedure RCP G-12, "Entry Into Very High Radiation Areas Greater Than 100 Rem/Hour",

and memos; "Control of Very High Radiation Area Keys", dated October 28, 1985; and "Implementation of New Very High Radiation Area Key Control Log", dated October 31, 1985 are administratively sufficient for the licensee to maintain positive control of keys for entries into these areas.

This matter is closed (85-30-01).

h ~

>>

h>>f

>>

>>>>)C(

Ill,

>>

1>>

I I

~

',I P" ff)fP

<<

~ gy>> (

~ f(f g

' )""(

'<<A g-'PWCA

~ ~>

~ <<(P

~

I

>,)

h)",

[>>>>>>>>

~ ~ C'> "If l))l J ft

> g'

I'1>

I-ll

~

>>P

> (>>, <<)>>>>>I>>)>> (g>>>>, j P(>> fl'g>)p" I<<( '>><<'(I)

> J

>>>>yg P$ g>>)V

')>Pg),

ff ( ( )<<,

l f<<>>

hlh>>W>1 I'f>>)>>)g )

f >)'

<<5>>

(f) kQ>>)'J J 1(< '>> f)

~> f

"'

>> I )

I>>r

<<8'((>> (

~-

'

f

~,F.,

~)

I

f').. <<Gf".><i.h<<cf>)'i>>>>".>>Ih r >I>h>><<> l

) (n )

f>>')

If +if>>" =)'

i"

) )f<<q <<>>>

)r )t)j'>>h'~ ') )"

>><>l>><<F'<<, f'.ll

'P)

'.)fthm l(L P,f

'r

<<(

) ()>>) ~

I lt, Q()g )>> I (p Jr

'>>ll

~,

'

Pr)frf'))

f)

)")l<< I'", I,')()" )i<<>>,

">

'

l )')

<<

lyly 4> f

~ v<<t "(1 1 ~ I rr)'4

<<I<<

">> Il

~

P

~ >>

P>>"

~ ('I I g>>)

~

II II

)

,)> <<;t'".,"" "'"

fi1:

II 1 >)

b,.:

r,

• >>>) <<

>>

.h ~

'(') ~

)f )

~

<<Jp )

~

- 1 <<()>>)

I>] ~

>

<<

,

r

) )'g '()'h

~ rf"V0 t t

>>>>1>>

>f'I<<

g k)

I (>><<(P).

~ >

'r h I

'

f>>

)>>()

~,

>ft) ll

V h

I")(~ VI I,*<<>>'h, (ji>)..1<<,'

()

))><

> )( ) "'">1 >I; P>>))' I I".'<< .>>g $ )(Sr ~,I' ~ I ~ 3. Alle ation Followu (Closed) Alle ation Number RV-85-A-0056 On August 30, 1985, Region V received an anonymous allegation which specified, in part, that a certain PG&E management individual had entered the Radiological Controlled Area (RCA) without logging in or receiving any dosimetry. The alleger's concern was examined during the inspection through personnel interviews and review of licensee documents. The allegation stemmed from an occurrence in the access area to, the RCA on May 7, 1985, when a management individual entered the RCA check out area through the egress portal, without logging in or receiving a self reading pocket dosimet'er. Based on discussion with the individual, he had, in'advertently entered the RCA checkout area, did not have any intention on going beyond the checkout area, and was wearing his TLD badge. The CHIRP log book for May 7, 1985, noted the occurrence and stated that this individ'ual was, counseled at the time of the incident, surveyed himself, and exited tPe RCA. This appeared 'to be an isolated incident of minor safety significanc'e, did not appear to be a willfulact, and prompt corrective action was taken by the licensee. The inspector had no further questions wit'h respect to this matter. No violations or, deviations were identified. f External Ex osure The inspector examined licensee records', observed workers in the RCA, and performed independent radiation measurements to determine the licensee's compliance with NRC requirements. A. Procedures Examined The following selected procedures were examined for implementation of the licensee's external radiation exposure control program: NPAP C-200 RCS-1 RCS-3 RCS-4 RCS-8 RCP G-2 RCP G-4 RCP G-5 RCP G-7 RCP G-12 RCP D-1 RCP D-2 RCP D-9 Radiation Protection Pro rams; External Radiation Dose Control; Personnel Contamination Control; Control of Access; Re ortin and Recordkee in Personnel External Dosimetr and Control; Personnel Decontamination and Evaluation; Control of Access for Radiation Protection Pur oses; Radiation and Contamination Surve s; Entr Into Ver Hi h Radiation Areas Greater Than 100 Rem/Hour; External Dosimetr Re uirements and Records; Continuous Covera e; and TLD/Film Bad e Issue and Control. Procedure RCP G-4, "Personnel Decontamination and Evaluation", Revision 3, dated 9/12/85, has been amended to include methodology for assessing the radiation dose to the skin, whole body, and ( >>5') 5 ~ ) r55 r III I\\ r H ) ~44 H'I )Q I rw ff) ~ )1). j 'If >>ffw... r,- rf,)5~ )5 r"f$ f, -,.;! ,5 ) rr,',p', ') 'k '- )>> rr,F Pl"'t. ') 8 '"'lit <<, frf~r tr>> Qgr ))35 '5 >+K)a ) 'I" '>> .,5 ~ 5I ft<"",fff5 0')Ww) > Er ') Id>>>>itftf lr) 5'r). ') +>>r Irrr 3". ' 55, ' I 1)r r e Ir) r " cga 'fjt il ltlg',"'"" I)f rj[>> >>H)lt >4 55 <<1 w ' I' ~ )) ~ "~'>.".'f:, O'< Wrr <J g>> Jl ~," rWrr)) ', .HJ 5'5 ',rLI)F, lJ <<Bw,gf;5>> ~,i I >> ~ " " )ff ' ")>>'")>> fr 8 )>>r i>>lf',.), ) ~ <)- ' , . '~ I')") ) ~ '"" I>> 4,< Wf <<)" 'H) ') "4 ~ 5 "P) ) ')f>>I ""*4'wrl H. >>.) ' '5>> I 5, ~ I)g(5'wr Cr l'... 'I r w," lfffr +'5" 5rf" '5>> f) fbr h 55, ~ II 'w ff" 505 rrr)>>" ~ ~ It>> r t I )55>> I y w '>>i)'f >> r C If' II' ll 'III '5')5/ ~ <<~ ) 'w>> ' ~ ~ extremities of individuals due to personnel contamination. A review of personnel contamination reports for 1985, showed that personnel contaminations (skin and personal clothing combined) had been generated, excluding those determined to be from natural radon activity. None of the contaminations,were noted to be of a level that would require a dose assessment; however, this procedure should be of value for future use. B. D~osimetz The inspector verified that several personnel files contained the individual's exposure history and/or termination reports as required. The inspector also noted that the licensee uses a computerized daily exposure tracking system that adds each individual's monthly TLD badge reading and pocket ion chamber readings to provide a daily exposure tracking report. The inspector also noted that the licensee TLD processing service has received accreditation by the National Voluntary Laboratory Accreditation Program. The licensee also conducts a monthly testing and evaluation program of the TLD processing service using their own gamma irradiated TLDs. The licensee plans to expand this program to include neutron exposures. C.: During tours of the licensee's facility no instances of incorrect dosimeter placement or failure to utilize pocket dosimeters in accordance with Radiation Work Permits were observed. The licensee's dosimetry program "was found to be consistent with licensee implementing procedure RCP G-2 "Personnel External ,Dosimetry and,Control". Administrative and'adiolo ical Controls U 'The, inspector made an~ entry into Unit 1 at 75X power for the purpose of observing radiological controls during the calibration of pressure and 'level gauges on accumulator 1-3. The work was being performed under a Special Work Permit (SWP) No. 85-0760, specific for the job. The inspector noted that the containment entry and radiological controls specified on the SWP were. in accordance with licensee procedures; The inspector made confirmatory and independent measurements with a portable survey instrument S/N 837 due for calibration on ll/19/85. The licensee's survey meter readings were in agreement'ith readings obtained by the inspector. During the containment entry and tours in the Auxiliary Building the inspector observed that all radiation areas were posted as required by CFR Part 20. Licensee access and posting controls for high radiation areas were noted to be consistent with Technical Specification 6.12 and procedure RCS-4 "Control of Access". No violations or deviations were identified. 5. Internal Ex osure I l.,'F)'f ~ li > '~>+Cf ') <<f(fff)'- i ti> a) ~J> (~<<C I "'I ()fh'"" > 'l}~} )(I ' . )ff f <<I, ) I')<<a: '>I(~a>> Zc>c 1 N)r.r > a<< ff; li',() (>;7 "fili>>c}tI}' ) >>JI, i ~ c)c>c J'f,>>, l ~ h ))ff II>) ) > I 'I ,) i.'lr>JJI ., >>!C a ),J >I '<<> ) > ) I llc!IQ 'l <<) h ,af f ~ J ) p f rfa)>> ' I C<< f>) 'II >> ) > 'g F c C ~ a'I a r> f)ah'Jf I ' ar, <<g) >r ) I)I 'I)l. I O'h >C a ~cf) >aa I > a> a ~ ' f i fI')"> ii >. J a()tr a>a),' h l'> h>a a>>'" ' ' ) I'-a.r c)(fl >r> ~<<a>))J ~ >> f ) fq~ ia I <<Jf1 ') rfa <<> 'C> f "I ' c>> ~ I ">>TI '> g a'I' a~c> g(( I ~ -cafe)a) t' }>l hh' f>, >, '>I! = ~ a,-<<FJ>f( f(>"J f ~ f ) f yr,p g>'.1 " ) f;'I> ~ r> }>> >..., "'>' " ~f" I,')I)i cf',a>> ) <<)l~ >'g ), " a,c)c'tf > )gc<< ~ ac>'l'I > .ia) ) I( 'll ) f il > I Mgr --, > f> r c(:)I'J JJ '.f <<I!>(J a) ( f I) Fa)a "" II>I I I, p I<< f>> ' I> ',Sti )) >If l 'I () >$ J ).

I c)fg "fc f >"j5"1)) ) ))I'>,)(, 'hl 'I 'f>J I'I 'f . 'r "fff << ~ a >$rc << ','c'Ig>> >I,'>I" >'>> if c IJ j r f,())),> f, f c)I(>J >'} ri ), i', hf \\ [ II" )r) ( ) f ) >I'";I >I I ' f>r> f(a > f >,')'r>f) I Cl > a ', c f >. -, ~, f'...')",.') I'",cj " r)>> )., >>(ff>.>J;I ~ }f cfg( > ')q,I ff0 > rh h') ff c " if) h (Ij)J.J';r>>Q ch,f ') >c)r, >c r (1 'i ic'r 'I ~'~'>F 'f jfff J >> f'Jfcc) >c ' " Qa)al('>> ' c 'f '>('IJ fa>)) c>5>) '""! <<I';>I') .>>>.)k)I )I >'j I "c) >>I" r > IJ "t"'J'(t CI>>/a<<> f 'a'f'> J> Iic) hhh= f) ii ('>h r)ab I p" f) " >I ~ '>>i' ,.> "')i f " ~ ') ')>> L '>cia Crc)',c '. I )>> 'i" ~ ' I) f!ffO.) '>'I >>= ) > I) I ) " f ~ f > f-)fthm I=),a- ) ) q(> c ,i>~ >~} a)ff'>'a) j>I )c ~ >Iaf >I h ) a(I af }a (a l ) > ac(ah I!ct r,"h ~ ' > Ff g) C*)F'i'c(J fJc) '> <<a ~ ) T a}f ' >h() f )h ', >'TI) a>> p ha a, f, I "hr<<;,I,, >>Cc' r>>f f >}J <<JI> J

• fl'

) >Jc> f) a I>l'C '( f l>J; ) r) ) ',a r>cp ~ > j ">'}>>" Jl >r.Jra t if ~f>>h I f ) ) )ac,>>h F<<a ~ " 'Q ), c f)a}r, ." j l <<> " "))"' I ) )hhI' '") '> (J,f(" I'()>" " ") I'* ~ ) f,r>aa ~,l >f >>3 a>>>>> )fi> ~ I c>>" a 'I The inspector examined licensee xecords, conducted interviews of workers, observed'workers in radiologically controlled areas, and inspected equipment and systems, used for respiratory protection controls. A. Procedures Examined The following selected'rocedures were examined for implementation of the licensee's internal radiation exposure control program: NPAP C-200 RCS-2 RCS-4 RCS-5 RCS-8 RCP G-3 RCP G-5 RCP G-7 RCP G-8 RCP G-9 RCP G-10 'RCP G-13 RCP D-4 RCP D-6 RCP S-1 Radiation Protection Pro rams; Internal Dose Control; Control of Access; Medical; Re ortin and Recordkee in ; Personnel Internal Ex osure Control; Control of Access For Radiation Protection Puz oses; Radiation and Contamination Surve s; Sam lin and Measurement of Airborne Radioactivit Use of Res irator E ui ment For Protection A ainst Airborne Radioactive Materials; Use of Constant Flow Air Line Res irator at Diablo Can on Power Plant; Containment Entr Res irator Protection E ui ment Cleanin and Ins ection at Diablo Can on Power Plant; 0 eration of D natech Res irator Fit Test S stem; and Plant Airborne Radioactivit Surveillance. B. Assessin Individual Intakes of Radioactive Materials The licensee evaluates individual exposures to airborne radioactive materials and maintains a seven day MPC hour total. This system includes 2 and 10 MPC hour exposures. MPC hour exposures were computer calculated based on air sample data and entry and exit times from airborne entry logs maintained at the RCA. The licensee had a daily computer printout that displays each individual's accumulated MPC hours and remaining MPC hours available for the current quarter. The licensee evaluations of individual's intakes of radioactive materials were examined. No intakes greater than 40 MPC hours for a 7 day period were identified. C. The licensee used a "guickie" whole body counter for routine whole body counts. A bed type scanning whole body counter, supplied by a contractor, was maintained onsite as a backup. The licensee had no occasion to have urine or fecal analyses performed. The licensee has a contract for performing such analyses when needed. I Res irator Protection E ui ment Procedure RCP G-9 "Use of Respiratory Equipment for Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Materials", identified the types of respir'ators used by the licensee. Respiratory equipment provided a <<?) (" "'5() ) >1) '">5() fejr ) Tf) I a a ~ rt') )I '. y}> " <<I3"r)I br,"4 1(<<)')h)P)f,'l>l rt I'ats 5 ~ (hr) W<< ~ "i 'g 'e C ~, ~) 3 I << ~ I 5 )(y ft y wc>a3(w I 4 <<)Q <<ll I) 3 >j<<a (<<) ) ~ ~ W ch t>>g ( ' .5

• " 4 '"

~ '>" ahcg 5O')f w V "'""." " > I)),'II I "y<<(> 3'i yi Q ) 'i 1'l w)f '" )=h if ,,3 54) .c'<< '.y',,,<<y<<h, ")" 5('Jf'". '( ': J ~,[,) ""C,C,V,". <<r; i }',")r,ff )Car ~ w,hi,>T) f lg rf h r l gf I<< ~ ~1'ljw ll <<4 r

• ))

e I'If ) " rhty'e 3 Tl I')w fr) ) 5>>'I ~j "w cw )r>> ~ fh>I lah T i 5,"4 .y > <<)(I 'I li ~ )$ >> cjr } It, ly ~,? '}'>> W I " )hl >> ,)<

> ~ I <<PT f >h I' c<<er <a ~ 34 I a << ~ >>, W ~ } ~ f "'Wf' ~ 4' Ch Thf )* wp, h fbi f>> 3 y) >> <j Tcl 41 5>> " lifM Ca>> 'tf'gO%3 fw;4 } e I c f) ~f Ilia weft>> IT <<pw )I" "'1 I<< ~ s* <<, 'l w 1 'hr'5 h> )153< "5 ) 'V()(fC,"" i fc.. 5( X )yi ~ Wa'5'3')ff '1'"5 ~ >,r15) f, a I')') ) "ffh 'f:3'".'. }r...'>> ~f)3 a ~ ~ ) ~ Trk)hef 5 tI() << "<<h ~ "!))P3. 15> awj'!)f >>h.r.h>>PT ',W)) Ij W<<il, fr)f-.f ~ g.' PT i i ~ ~ i0 4) <<,cp ~ f c,~<<c<<IP f If 4<< } f)ff' ~ ". f f> ) ~ I QI) I Pl,l, Jl h ' Tfff,ff -ts ~ Wh yg h)th l,h? ~ Iiw I 4) tl f Wffgf, rl I il w) ) fi >>w, w' c,c) '<< f 5 ff} c) ~ w " *; " ", ) 4;-) 'f(h j? .5. ) Cjj(wr) fc'r?(fg ff ) '," ) li5)c) jr>j "'II ' . I T "<< hr) ') 'slj *3 gfcl"'p ', ', ' ) jl 13')='>>r '3 f ~ we C <<() I y 4 4 I 1,'.I C'>> ' cf w,c-l ~ for emergency use is inventoried and inspected monthly. Maintenance and repair of respiratory equipment was performed by qualified individuals. The licensee maintains three high pressure filling stations for breathing air cylinders. The main supply system is located outside at the South East Butress area and consists of two high pressure air compressors, nine high pressure air receiver storage tanks, and a filling station for breathing air cylinders. This system also supplies breathing air to a filling station located in the Unit Auxiliary Building hallway on the 85 ft. level and the 140 ft. - level. Each filling'station is equipped to fill12 air cylinders each. The'nspector observed that this system was equipped with an air purifier package, high temperature alarm, and a CO monitor that shuts down the compressors on a high CO level. 1l M The licensee's plant service air is the normal supply of breathing air'-for air line resp'irator use. The inspector was informed that ,"" this system has not been used for-such purposes since the start of plant operations. The inspector noted that this system was also connected to 'the','instrument air systems with 2 backup compressors. Each of these systems were equipped with after coolers, filters, and dryers. The 'licensee's use of this system'will be through a portabl'e airline "distribution and CO/0 monitor panel to ensure that Grade D air quality is provided to workers when supplied air is used in conjunction with res'paratory protection. The panel contains a HEPA filter,'CO/02 monitors with remote alarms, pressure regulator, and a backup air supply from two 30-minute breathing air cylinders. The system can supply six workers with an air flow of 4-6 cfm. Currently the li'censee has one unit and plans to have another five units completed prior to the first refueling outage. The licensee was aware of problems that have occurred at other facilities using plant service air for respiratory protection. The licensee plans on taking all necessary precaution to ensure that Grade D quality air is supplied to workers for respiratory protection purposes. D. ualifications, Trainin and Fittin The inspector examined personnel files and noted that medical approval was obtained prior to using respiratory protection equipment and annually thereafter. Each individual is given 3 hours3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> of formal classroom training and provided with a user training manual prior to having a quantitative fit test for each type of respirator to be used by the worker. The licensee issues a respirator fit card that identifies the type of respirator the individual is qualified to use, due date of the next fit test, date of next required medical exam, and date for refresher training. Respirators are only issued to those individuals who present a valid card. No violations or deviations were identifie r ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <<<<>> IA I,. AV n A I >>>> e V." S,C r "4 "' I i, I I n -,,I 4 4) I e Alrgl >> In<< e I (>>lU' 4 ~ n )<<( Iy yl,>>' ) ( ), 'l/('I Fr) Q I ~ I>> e e I n" () gnl ' ' n <<'<<) <<r)f rr'>> gg ', n ~el!g( ' ) I <<Anl f > ) $)>>'ll I

, e,r)<<r (f y>>e, )

') )-1 >> i ~ li n I I V I ') 'ly I ~ n<<,)) 4 A,n AL)*') '" 'Pr <<Inn ay I ' V'.'e Q<< > n < "",.n,"J,i r (00 3( <<(gn 'f't n>>'Ll 4rg.r <<.e l3e, ~ n nV ly ~ el", e',) +4 ) ~ <<, MI: v'>>," 'e( f) yn>> ' )( >e n(r' >> l,r ')pe 'y py i >>(4 I ~ ft e 4 I, " I ~ ) g) ~ II )'f g ','" '4 (n II gCn ).'r<<g A1~ I, Y ~en ,eg '<< 'I n &e 4 re n "s ~,,i. r ">>r, ~ (nn) A AI I ,I 4 '>>ry,l/ SJ I n n << r (n << g >>P ) e f I I n<<) >>S t 'lt I <<4 n ng.J 'I '", r(-4 ~ ',n. I ' A, n jl 4>>) Al 6. Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on November 1, 1985. The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized. The licensee was informed that no violations or deviations were identifie ~ t t S t t ~ )i>,( lI t'I, 't " II ~ ( I t 'y ()v fl'II ~ ~ItI. 0 )! ~l) ,~() tel l p I I'~