IR 05000293/1988001

Insp Rept 50-293/88-01 on 880125-29.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Status of Previously Identified Items, Organization & Staffing,Control of Locked High Radiation Areas & Control of Hot Particles

ML20150B577
Person / Time
Site:	Pilgrim
Issue date:	03/03/1988
From:	Dragoun T, Shanbaky M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20150B565	List: IR 05000293/1988001 ML20150B562
References
TASK-2.B.3, TASK-2.F.1, TASK-TM 50-293-88-01, 50-293-88-1, IEB-80-10, IEIN-86-023, IEIN-86-23, IEIN-87-039, IEIN-87-39, NUDOCS 8803170065
Download: ML20150B577 (5)

Text

- _ _ . . . .

. . _ . . . -- ._ _ _ _ _ _

. I

! l l .( i

)

i i  !

1  :

,

i U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i

'

REGION I {

<

l Report No. 88-01 }

!

! Docket No, 50-293 i 1  ;

License No. DPR-63 Priority -- Category C l

!

Licensee

Boston Edison Company M/C Nuclear  !

'

800 Boylston Street i Boston, Massachusetts 02199 j

j Facility Name: Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station-f I Inspection At: Plymouth, Massachusetts j i Inspection Conducted: January 25-29, 1958

!  !

Inspectors: am- .2.[vh/  ;

T.'Dra p n g ior Radiation Specialist Tate j

'

!

fpproved by: //f'/. .7 3 ,

F. 'Shanbat7, Chief, Tac (lities Raciation date !

! Protection Section i

1

Inspection Sumary: Inspection on January 25-29, 1988 (Report No. 50-293/88-01)  !

} l l Areas Inspected: Routine, announced radiological controls inspection by one l

region based inspector. Areas reviewed included: status of previously j identified items; organization and staffing; control.of locked high radiation  ;

i areast control of not particles; disposition of excavated dir l

. >

f Results: No violations were observed.

i

! I

;

j t

'

!

I I 8803170065 880303  :

PDR ADOCK 05000293 'l

,

G PDR  !

!  !

i>

!;

'

____ ___ _________ _ __ _ _ _ __ _ _ _

_

.

i Details 1. Persons Contacted During the course of this routine inspection the following personnel were contacted or interviewed:-

1.1 Boston Edison Company R. Bird, Senior Vice Presidert - Nuclear l K. Highfill, Station Director L. Schmeling, Special Assistant to Senior VP R. Ledgett, Director of Special Projects J. Flannagan, Special Projects Assistant R. Barrett, Plant Manager E. Kraft, Plant Support Manager E. Ziemianski, Nuclear Training Manager B. Lunn, Senior Compliance Engineer F. Famulari, Quality Assurance Dep M. Desmond, Operations Quality Control C. Stephenson, Senior Compliance Engineer W. Hayes, Compliance Engineer B. Mcdonald, Senior ALARA Engineer L. Whittenburger, Rad Ups Support Group Leader K. hicholas, Technical Section P. Ilamilton, Compliance Group Leader J. Alexander, Operations Manager W. Zurliene, Radiological Technical Support Sr. Ld C. Gannon, Chief Radiological Engineer N. Brosee, Plant Maintentance Manager R. Whetsel, Compliance Engineer 1.2 NRC T. Martin, Director, Radiation Safety and Safeguards, Div. , RI C. Warren, Senior Resident Inspector J. Lyash, Resident Inspector T. Kim, Resident Inspector 2. Purpose l

The purpose of this inspection was to review the licensee's radiation protection program with respect to the following elements:

,

Status of Previously Identified Items 1

Control of Locked High-Radiation Areas l l

!

l

.- , .

.

p

Hot Particle Program Organization and Staffing

Disposal of Excavated Dirt 3.0 Status of Previously Identiiied Items (Closed) Inspector Follow Item (85-07-04) NRC to review licensee improvements in the quality assurance program for dosimetry. Two cases of unexplained high TLD results occurred in 1984. An inves-tigation concluded that these anomolies resulted from issuance of badges containing unannealed chips. Further investigation revealed 8 additional cases of anomolous results. The licensee attributed these problems to the use of "QA" chip by the TLD processor. The licensee subsequently switched to the Yankee Atomic Electric Company (YAEC)

for TLD processing services. To prevent recurrence of the problems, the operating practices and procedures of the YAEC were audited to ensure that all badges were properly annealed and that anomolous chip results were reported and investigated. Furthennore, the licensee conducted inter-laboratory comparisons and verified the accuracy of exposures reported by the YAE .2 (Closed) Unresolved Item (85-13-06) NRC to complete a review of licensee safety evaluation for new waste compacting facility. The licensee evaluated the impact of a fire in the low level waste compacting facility and concluded that the limits for offsite re-leases are met. The licensee's control of potential release paths during routine operations appear adequat .3 (Closed) Insptctor Follow Item (85-22-03) Review action on IE Bulletin 80-10 program. During inspection 86-16 the inspector found the 4censee's action relative to IEB 80-10 to be adequate. However, a watch engineer was unaware of his responsibilities when a non-radioactive system becomes contaminated. The licensee has reviewad the appropriate policies with all watch engineer .4 (Closed) Inspector Follow Item (85-27-10) pH analysis: The NRC previously approved the licensee's post accident coolant sampling program specified in NUREG G737 Item 11.B.3. An evaluation by the licensee indicates that pH analysis would not enhance the post accident core damage assessment. However, an undiluted post accident i coolant sample will be stored in case additional analyses (such as

'

pH) are warrante l 3.5 (Closed) Inspection Follow Item (85-27-27) Range Specificatio In 1982, the NRC approved the licensee's provisions to satisfy NUREG 0737 Item II.F.1. The licensee's analysis of the noble gas effluent nonitoring capability was based on the design basis accident for Pilgrim Station rather than generic accident scenario suggested by NUREG 0737. This analysis was rerun in late 1986 and verified the I acceptability of the noble gas monitor ~

l l

_ . . - . _ _ -._..._- , ,

. . -

.

Y

3.6 (Closed) Inspector Follow Item (85-27-30) Sample measurement. The licensee installed sampling systems for the main stack reactor building vent and turbine building vent to sample for radioactive iodines and particulates under post accident conditions. Sampling and analytical techniques are described in procedures 5.7.3.3, 5.7.3.4 and 5.7. .7 (Closed)InspectorFollowItem(85-27-31) Perform time and motion study. A licensee study concluded that exposures to technician are within General Desigr, Criterion 19 for operation of effluent sampling during a design basis acciden .8 (Closed) Inspector Follow Item (85-27-34) Representative samplin The licensee revised the procedure _for sanpling the reactor building vent to account for reduced flow conditions when the vent is diverted to Standby Gas Treatment System under accident condition .0 Control of Locked High Radiation Areas The licensee's program for the control of locked high radiation areas was reviewed with respect to criteria contained in:

Technical Specification 6.13, High Radiation Area, 10 CFR 20.203 Caution signs, labels, signals and controls, Station Procedure 6.1-022 Issue, use and Temination of Radiation Work Pemits (RWPs),

Station Procedure 6.1-012 Access to High Radiation Area The licensee's perfomance relative to these criteria was determined from:

a tour of accessible doors on locked high and high high radiation areas, interviews with supervisors and technicians, Attendance at a High Radiation Area Control Task Force meeting, review of RWPs for locked area Wi'.hin the scope of this review, no violations were observe The inspector noted that of the three protective measures allowed by a Technical Specification 6.13, the licensee usually relies on HP technican 1 escort for workers entering high radiation areas. This coverage is varied j from line of sight to periodic coverag l The licensee has had a persistent problem with these areas being found ,

unlocked after work is completed. To resolve this issue, a multidisci- ,

plinary task force was fomed on January 19, 1988. Early indications are I that the performance of this task force has been very good. Licensee !

action on this matter will be reviewed in a future inspectio '

i

,

a

l i

l I

.l l

5.0 Hot Particle Program The NRC had advised all licensees of hot particle concerns in Infonnation Notices 86-23 and 87-39. The Pilgrim Station action relative to these concerns was determined from discussions vith the Technical Support Group Leader and HP technicians and review of selected documents and lesson plan The licensee has identified areas in the plant with "specks" (hot particles), instituted speck survey technique, improved protective clothing and trained workers and technicians regarding specks. Large areas within the plant have been decontaminated and released for unrestricted use. The inspector determined that these actions are appropriate. The licensee is continuing to develop additional controls and to formalize the program. This matter will be reviewed in a future inspectio .0 Organization and Staffing The training and experience required for the facility staff is specified by Technical Specification 6.3. ANSI Standard N18.1-1971 aml Regulatory Guide 1.8. This area was reviewed during Inspection 87-40 and found to be acceptable. In the interim, a major reorganization of the nuclear organization occurred. In addition, the licensee advised that shifts of responsibilities within the Radiological Controls group were under consideration. The inspector reviewed these proposed changes with respect to the training and experience requirements cited above and advised the licensee that certain changes would possibly be in violation of these requirements. This matter will be reviewed again in a future inspectio .0 Disposal of Excavated Dirt For the past few years nodifications and improvements to plant safety systems has required soil to be excavated on site. The licensee sampled and analyzed the soil for radioactivity using sensitive techniques. Soil with activity above background was placed in a fenced area on site. The inspector toured the area with licensee representatives and took radiation level readings using a "micro-R" survey meter. No radiation level above background was detected. The licensee stated that an analysis indicated that the dirt did not present any radiological health hazard. The inspector stated that all analysis should be completed in the near future and decisions made regarding the disposition of the dirt if required. The

) licensee stated that this would be done. This matter will be reviewed in a future inspectio .0 Exit Meeting The inspector met with the personnel denoted in Section 1 at the conclusion c, the inspection on January 29, 1988. The scope and findings of the in-spection were discussed at that tim .- - _ . - , ,