IR 05000289/1977012
| ML19256D157 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1977 |
| From: | Knapp P, Plumlee K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19256D126 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-77-12, NUDOCS 7910170654 | |
| Download: ML19256D157 (7) | |
Text
'
-
.
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
~)
Region I Report No.
77-12 Docket No.
50-289 C
License No.
DPR-50 Priority Category Licensee:
Metropolitan Edison Company P.O. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Facility Name:
Three Mile Island 1 i
Inspection at:
Middletown, Pennsylvania
f Inspecti C onduct April 15 and 19,1977 N
n A
/
~
,
- Q n
% --
6 / /a h 7 Inspectors: _Karl E. Plumlee, Radiatioh Spec}alist
/date' sisned I
i g
date signed
!
i date signed
~r
,
!
Approved by:
b4
.
Wme
/77 Pettr J. Knapp, Chiefg4(adiation Support Q4te' signed i
]
Section, FF&MS Branch i
Inspection Summary:
Inspection on April 15 and 19,1977 (Report b. 50-289/77-12)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of health physics program during the refueling outage; advance planning and preparation; radiation pro-tection training; control of exposure; posting and control of access to re-stricted areas; control of radioactive and contaminated materials; and ade-quacy of surveys. The inspection involved 16 inspector-hours on-site by one NRC inspector.
Resul ts : Of the six areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were found in five areas; one item of noncompliance was identified involving failure to post a high radiation area around a container of radioactive waste.
(Paragraph 5.a)
'u 46 215 Region-I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
7910170
,
-.
..
-.. _.
-
.
.
-.
.
.
-
'
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted C. Adams, Shift Operating Foreman, Unit 2 J. Colitz, Superintendent, Unit 1
J. Deman, Radiation Protection Technician R. Dubiel, Acting Supervisor of Radiation Protection and Chemistry
J. Heverle, Security Supervisor
l F. Huwe, Radiation Protection Foreman G. Kunder, Supervisor 6f Operations, Unit 1
I R. McCann, Radiation Protection Foreman J. O'Hanlon, Engineer Senior Nuclear I
!
!
D. Pilsitz, Shift Operating Foreman, Unit 1 J. Smith, Foreman, Rad-Waste Operations
A. Tsaggaris, Assistant Director, Generation Training R. Van Stry, Administrator of Nuclear Training
,
P. Velez, Senior Radiation Protection Technician
!
!
- denotes those present at exit interview.
In addition to the above, the inspector interviewed ten TMI and contractor employees.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
!
(Closed) Noncompl f ance (289/76-26):
Failure to calibrate radia-tion survey instruments when due. The inspector found on this l
inspaction that there were no further overdue calibrations and
,
that the licensee has established an auditing) system to preclude
any recurrence of this problem.
(Paragraph 6
!
.
!
(Closed) Noncompliance (289/76-26): Transfer of byproduct mate-rial to an unautho,-i.ed recipient. The inspector found that this problem has not recurred and the licensee has established procedures to prevent recurrence of this problem.
(Paragraph 5.c)
3.
Licensee's Internal Audits The inspector reviewed the licensee's internal auditing of exposures to personnel; due dates for instrument calibrations; and, verifica-tion that recipients of planned shipments containing licensed mate-rials were authorized to review the material.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
{hh b
.
.
,
,
~h,
--
- ~.
,
.
..
!
!
\\j i
-
4.
Acceptable Areas The inspector reviewed the following items and no items of noncom-pliance were identified.:
a.
Radiation Protection Procedures: The inspector reviewed pro-cedures and radiation work permits that were used during the outage and found tnat adequate provision for radiation pro-tection appeared to be incorporated into these procedures and permits.
b.
Advanced Planning and Preparation for the Outage: The in-spector reviewed the licensee's preparations for the outage which included advance preparation and review of procedures for major jobs, familiarization of the maintenance supervisors and workmen with appropriate mockups and equipment and arrange-
,
ments for the increased work force and longer shifts during the outage.
The licensee preparations placed particular emphasis on the high exposure jobs (inservice inspection tests of the steam generator, the plugging of steam generator tubes (6), and
'
the replacement of a letdown cooling system heat exchanger).
c.
Conduct of Work During the Outage: The inspector toured the i
facility during a backshift and a dayshift to observe the workers use of specified protective clothing and equipment, and the workers adherence to prescribed stay times and work restrictions. No neglect of these requirements was identified.
j d.
Training: The inspector observed training being given to in-dividuals prior to their being permitted to enter the facility.
The inspector also reviewed records of training given to contract health physics personnel and other temp >rary workers required on-site during the outage.
Review of training records indicated that respiratory protection training was given to those personnel required to use such equipment.
1446 2 0
_-
--..
--.
...
.
..
-.
-_
.
.
-.
.
I i
n
'
'._ '
.
.
,
e.
Exposure Control, Surveys and Air Samples : The inspector observed the performance esf surveys and the collection of air samples; the wearing of dosimeters, protective clothing and equipment; and the issuance of radiation work permits.
The inspector reviewed the records of personnel exposures, the exposure authorizations, exposure histories, bicassays, in-vivo counting, personnel decontamination, radiation work permits, surveys and air sampling for the period March 1 to April 15, i
1977.
5.
Radioactive and Contaminated Material Control a.
Adherence to Procedure for Waste Disposal:
Procedure OP 1104-28 (Rev. 4 dated 11/22/76) " Solid Waste Disposal" states in Section
!
i
' 28.2.1.8 that prior to the start of any packaging operation, radiation warning signs, portable radiation monitors and roped off areas shall be utilized as required to restrict access of
,
personnel into areas which may be subject to high radiation t
'
l evel s.
.
The inspector identi?ied an area in the Auxiliary Building around a 50 cu. ft. container of solidified waste on April 15 j
e)
1977 that was not posted as a high radiation area, however, the
,
.
!
measured radiation level at 12 inches from the surface was 200 to 400 mr/hr, using the licensee's survey meter. The licensee
'
representative was questioned and he stated that the high radia-i tion area sign had been omitted. The inspector observed that i
j a radioactive contamination area sign and rope had been pro-vided but there was no visible warning of the high radiation
,
area.
The inspector stated that the apparent failure to complete the above procedural requirement resulted in an item of noncompliance with the requirement of 10 CFR 20.203(c) which states that each high radiation area shall be conspicuously posted with a sign or signs bearing the radiation caution symbol and the words
" CAUTION - HIGH RADIATION AREA".
The licensee representative promptly posted this area as a high radiation area.
1446 218
-
.
_
.
.
.
.--
.
.
b
.
b.
Other Areas: The inspector toured the facility and observed the packaging and control of contaminated equipment and tools, the management of discarded protective clothing and respirators, and the short-term and long-term storage facilities for scoffold-ing lumber, other equipment used during outages, and waste re-sulting from the outage.
The inspector made confirmatory measurements of radiation level::
and he also reviewed the licensee's survey records to check on the posting, labeling and control of access to contamination areas, radiation areas and high radiation areas.
No items of noncompliance were identified other than as described in Paragraph 5.a above.
'
c.
Transfer of Radioactive Materials: The inspector reviewed the
'
records of 44 shipments of radioactive equipment or material, released or received between January 1 and April 19, 1977. The inspector was informed that prior to the release of each ship-ment, a licensee representative checked the recipient's author-ization to receive and possess the shipment. The inspector re-viewed the files for confirmation that the licensee maintains
, -)
copies of licenses held by recipients of shipments leaving t
the facility.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Calibration of Radiation Survey Instruments The inspector checked a total of 25 survey instruments, friskers and portal monitors for calibration stickers and reviewed the records of periodic calibrations of the survey instruments.
The only problems found were as follows:
a.
Four survey instruments were found on the shelf with the bat-teries discharged (instruments left on when stored).
b.
The calibration procedure for the hand and foot monitors had not been finalized.
1446 2W'
-
-
.
.....
- e
.
O
-
.
The licensee representative removed the four survey instruments from the shelf pending battery. eplacement and satisfactory functional checks. The licensee representative stated that the procedures for the use of portable instruments require a battery check prior to each use.
The licensee representative stated that the present procedure for the hand and foot monitors was authorized for use, although it had not been completely reviewed and approved for formal issuance and completion was anticipated during 1977.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Te11porar dich Radiation Area Doors Inspection Report No. 289/76-17, Paragraph 5.b discussed the licen-see's plan to replace three temporary padlocked doors with metal doors and standard hardware.
During a review of this item, the licensee representative stated that this change will be made as soon as more pressing matters are
'
finished and manpower becomes available for this job.
t
,
8.
Comparison of TLD and Film Badge Dosimetry The licensee representative stated that a change from the use of film badges to use of TLD badges was still in progress.
The inspector reviewed the records of the TLD's and the film badges and found that both appeared to be acceptable. The period reviewed was for March and part of April,1977. Report Nos. 289/77-07, Para-graph 3 ; 289/77-01, Paragraph 5 and 289/76-22, Paragraph 7, reviewed the dosimetry prior to March,1977.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
1446 220
_
.
.
... -....
-.-
...
--
.
__..--
-
- -.
l
-
.
...
!
-
!
O,
.
a
.
..
,
9.
Borated Water Storage Tanks i
The licensee letter to Licensing dated September 18, 1973 stated that a design evaluation showed that the Borated Water Storage Tanks
,
(BWST's) for both Unit 1 and Unit 2 are designed to overflow only
.
into the respective liquid radwaste systems and in addition, there i
are high level sensors that will annunciate before overflow occurs to allow for corrective action to be taken. The licensee letter indicated that no unmonitored release could occur by BWST overflow.
Review on this inspection included tracing the design drawings of
'
the piping from the BWST to the miscellaneous radwaste storage tank
'
and a visual inspection of the overflow lines for Unit 1 and Unit
'
l 2.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
'
!
i 10. Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 19, 1977.
The inspector summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection
,
(
and the findings.
'
.
t
0
,