IR 05000280/1979064
| ML18139A099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Surry  |
| Issue date: | 01/02/1980 |
| From: | Ewald S, Gibson A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18139A095 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-280-79-64, 50-281-79-84, NUDOCS 8003310445 | |
| Download: ML18139A099 (5) | |
Text
e e
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-280/79-64 and 50-281/79-84 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and Power Company Richmond, Virginia 23261 Facility Name:
Surry Power Station Docket Nos. 50-280 and 50-281 License Nos. DPR-32 and DPR-37 Inspection at Williamsburg, Virginia Inspector: __....:S~~~~$~~--------------
S. C. Ew,ry Ii. A_,..,_
Approved by:
ft+/- f~w ~-----~
A. F. Gibson, Section Chief; FFMS Branch SUMMARY Inspection on November 27-30, 1979 Areas Inspected at~ Signed 1/1-/go Date Signed This routine, unannounced inspection involved 34 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of shipments of radioactive materials and facility tour Results Of the 2 areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in 1 area; 1 apparent item of noncompliance was found in 1 area (Infraction - High Radiation Area Lock inadequate to prevent unauthorized access (280/79-64-01 and 281/79-84-01) Paragraph 9).
gOOSS10
~~~
1'+,tl;
- e DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- W. L. Stewart, Station Manager
- J. L. Wilson, Superintendent Operations
- T. A. Peebles, Superintendent Technical Services
- R. M. Smith, Supervisor, Health Physics
- F. L. Rente, Resident QC Engineer
- M. P. Tower, Corporate QC Engineer
-
Other licensee employees contacted included 12 technicians and 2 operator NRC Resident Inspector
- D. J. Burke
- Attended exit interview Exit Interview The* inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 30, 1979, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. Items discussed included one item of noncompliance regarding the adequacy of locks on high radiation gate Licensee representatives stated they felt the lock problem was not in noncompliance in that a deliberate effort to defeat the lock was required to open the gate. The inspector also discussed the Quality Assurance Program as applied to radioactive material shipments. In telephone conversations with the plant manager on December 12, the inspector stated the item concerning the QA program would be unresolve.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspecte.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or deviations*.
New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response September 27, 1979, to Bulletin 79-19, "Packaging of Low Level Radioactive Waste for Transport and Burial". The report addressed* all items requested by the Bulleti The inspector verified the following items had been implemented as reporte *
--
- *... _. *****.. :,
e e-2-(1)
DOT and NRC regulations are onsit (2)
A current copy of.burial facility license requirements are onsit (3)
An assistant supervisor Health Physics has been designated to supervise radwaste shipment (4)
Training pro~rams are being upgraded to provide more coverage of topics relating to radwaste shipment The inspector reviewed Quality Assurance Audit Report No. 579-16, completed October 9, 1979, conducted as requested by the Bulleti The audit identified one minor problem in that no formal retraining program for heal th physics technicians in solid waste had been develope The Health Physics Supervisor stated this training function was being built into the HP technician step training progra During the course of the inspection, the inspector requested several solid waste packages be opened and the contents examined to check for potential discrepancie The inspector and health physics staff opened eight 55-gallon drums of solidified (concrete) liquid wast The eight drums were selected by the inspector from approximately SO such drums ready for shipmen All drums examined appeared to be fully cured with no free liquid. Four 55-gallon durms of compacted solid waste were opened and the contents examine No liquids or other discrepant materials were foun The inspector also examined the contents of'one 128 ft 3 plywood container of contaminated solid materials ready for shipmen The inspector had no questions relative to the contents of any examined package * Discrepancy Reports The inspector reviewed three Radioactive Waste Shipment Discrepancy Reports forwarded to the NRC by the State of South Carolina. All three reports involve shipment that arrived at the burial facility with free standing wate Two of the shipments involved less than type A quantities in 55-gallon drum In one instance, a drum was reported to have approximately 15 inches of water inside and in the other instance, one gallon of water was reportedly found in the ship-ping cask that had been_ used for shielding purpose Additional controls to preclude simiilr evenU are discussed in Paragraph The third discrepancy report is--discussed belo On July 16, 1979, a used seal water injection filter in a sealed contain~r with an estimated 10 curies of mixed corrosion product activity, was loaded into a certified Type B shipping cas The cask arrived at the burial site on July 17, 1979, with a reported one gallon of water in the shipping cas The inspector discussed this shipment with licensee representatives and reviewed shipping documents maintained onsit Since the shipment exceeded Type A quantities (3 curies of Category HI isotopes), an approved Type B shipping cask was C
e e-3-necessary and 10 CFR 71.51 requires the various conditions listed in the cask Certificate of Compliance be followe Included in these requirements for use of the particular cask involved, is the condition that the cask, for other than neutron sources, be delivered to the carrier dry. The inspector discussed this shipment with representatives of South Carolina and was able to obtain no additional information on the shipment. The shipping papers, prepared by licensee health physics staff, include a hand written statement that the shipment was loaded to Specification of the Certificate of Complianc In addition, the shipping papers were reviewed by Station quality control personnel and found acceptable. Discussions with the health physics te~hnician involved added no further information in that recalling details of a shipment that occurred over 4 months ago was difficul These discrepanices were reported to the licensee in a letter from representatives of the State of South Carolina dated October 23, 197 The licensee responded, in a letter dated November 12, discussing,....:, ::
problem and improvements and precautions taken to preclude future similar item In addition, a followup QC inspection on November 26, 1979, was performed verifying implementation of items discussed in the respons These added procedural controls are discussed in Paragraph.
Procedures The inspector reviewed the following three revised procedures relating to the shipment of radioactive material HP-3.9-4, Packaging and Shipment of Radioactive Waste HP-3.9-5, Estimating Radioactivity in High Level Containers HP-3.9-6, Solidification of Contaminated Liquids All procedures were approved. November 8, 197 The inspector had no questions on the above procedure The inspector noted Procedure HP-3.9-4 includes signoff sheets for items referenced iµ appropriate Certificates of Compliance for casks used to ship Type B quantitie In addition to the procedures and formal controls, additional controls were being developed and implemented. Included in these are requirements that health physics technicians inspect and close all 55-gallon drums of solidified waste to assure no free standing water is present. When the drum is sealed, the technician involved will sign the top of the dru Quality Assurance 10 CFR 71.51 requires licensees to have a written Quality Assurance Program for Type B shipments meeting the criteria listed in 10 CFR 71 Appendix This program was required to be submitted to NRC for approval prior to
r *-*
.. s
~-~----c.--------....
e e-4-January 1, J97 The inspector discussed this requirement with licensee representatives and requested a copy of the submitted program for revie Licensee representatives stated the program they had been using was supplied by a vendo The inspector reviewed the vendor program and requested licensee representatives to verify this program was the document submitted
. for NRC approva Investigation by licensee representatives revealed VEPCO, in a letter to the NRC dated September 11, 1978, had committed to applying their QA program developed to meet 10 CFR SO Appendix B criteria to the shipment of radioactive materials. 10 CFR 71.Sl(d) states an approved QA program satisfying 10 CFR SO Appendix B which is established, maintained and executed with regard to transport packages meets the requirements of 10 CFR 71.Sl(a).
The inspector expressed concern that station QC staff was apparently unaware the "Topical Report - Quality Assurance Program Operations Phase, VEP-1-3A" was to be applied to shipments of radioactive material Because of this confusion the inspector questioned whether the approved QA program had been fully executed with regard.to transportation of radioactive materia The inspector stated this item would be considered unresolved (280/79-64-02 and 281/79-84-02) pending further inspectio.
Facility Tours During the inspection, the inspector toured various portions of the facility and the radiation controlled are During a tour of the 2'
elevation of the Auxiliary Building on November 27, the inspector noted new locking mechanisms had been installed in High Radiation Gates to various cubicle The inspector examined High Radiation Gates on the 2' elevation and identified two problem The first problem was Gate No.Shad been bent back approximately 10 degrees over the top half of the gate. Discussions with health physics repre-sentatives revealed this damage had been previously identified and reporte In addition, a report had been submitted identifying a problem with the lock itself. The lock mechanism was defective to the extent that it was not possible to open t_he lock from the inside. The inspector was told by licensee representatives that Gate No.Shad been repaired as of November 30, 197 The second problem involved the installation of a new lock on Gate No. This gate controls access to the boric acid filters and the seal water injection filters. It was possible for the inspector to open the gate by sticking a finger up behind a cover plate and pushing the spring loaded latch bac This was also possible on Gate No. S, discussed abov Cover plates on other gates on 2' elevation prevented this means of defeating the loc Technical Specification 6.4.B.1.b requires areas with radiation levels exceeding lOOOmrem/hr be locked to prevent unauthorized acces A review of recent survey records revealed general area radiation levels of 2000 mrem/hr inside Gate No. 7 on November 26. The inspector stated that the lock, as installed, was not adequate to prevent unauthorized entry and was, therefore, in noncompliance (280/79-64-01 and 281/79-84-01) with Technical Specification 6.4.B.1.b.,