IR 05000293/1990012

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Insp Rept 50-293/90-12 on 900416-20.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Radiological Controls During Outage, Including Status of Previously Identified Items, Organization & Staffing & Control of Outage Work
ML20043A230
Person / Time
Site: Pilgrim
Issue date: 05/04/1990
From: Dragoun T, Pasciak W
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20043A229 List:
References
50-293-90-12, NUDOCS 9005210043
Download: ML20043A230 (5)


Text

g

,

m y

,

,

.

_

'*-

-

,

i U. S NUCLEAR. REGULATORY COMMISSIONf

-

REGION:I Report No~.

90-12^

Docket No.

50-293 License;No.

DPR-63

. Priority Category C

-

Licensee:

Boston Edison Company M/C Nuclear 800 Boylston Street-

. Boston, Massachusetts 02199

[

-Facility Name: Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

'

Inspection At:- Plymouth, Massachusetts-

'iq Inspection Conducted: April-16-20,-1990-

'

f Inspectors:

sc%

9 62 '

T.~ Drag g Senior Radiation Specialist

'date-j

J

IF

Approved by:

As o~ -:7 a.

u W. Pisciak, ChieT, Facilities Radiation da

.j Protection Section

-

-g-f Inspection Summary:

Inspection on April 16-20, 1990 (Report'No; 90-12)

-

.

.

Areas Inspected:

Routine, unannounced-inspection of radiological _ controls

'

during an outage by one region-based inspector. Areas ' reviewed included:

status of previously identified items;. organization and-staffing; control of

outage work; and ALARA.

j l

Results: No violations were observed.

!

-}

,

ln

.I

!

>

9005210043 90G510

'

h PDR ADOCK 05000293 t

Q PDC

'

a d

f P

f

.h

' s:

,..

.

5

,

DETAILS-

1.0 Persons Contacted l

1.11 Boston Edison Company-

.[

. *K. Highfill,'V. P. Nuclear Operations and. Station Director

.

,

  • F Famulari, QA Dept. Manager.

'

  • D Long, Plant Support Dept ~. Manager

..

.

  • Rl-Fairbank, Nuclear Engineering' Dept. Manager-(Acting)

,

  • D. Eng',-Planning:and Outage Dept. Manager
  • N. Dimascio, RadiationiProtection. Manager.
  • B. Eldredgen Radiological As'sessor-

^

,

  • B. Lunn, Senior Compliance Engineer:

.

-

. i

.B; Mcdonald, Radiological Ops, Support' Division Manager

.1

<

.

J. Posselt. Senior ALARA Engineer

..

R. Deacy. Safeguards and Security. Division Manager

. ;

1.2 NRC'

i

  • J. Mcdonald, Senior Resident Inspector C. Carpenter, Resident' Inspector

,

W. Olsen,; Resident Inspector.

,

  • Attended the Exit Interview onLApril"20, 1990.

!

'

2.0 Purpose

,

The purpose of this' routine radiation safety inspection was to. review the following-program elements:

-Status of Previously. Identified Items'

-Organization and Staffing-Control of Outage Work-ALARA

,

,

3.0. Previously Identified' Items 3.1 (0 pen) Viol"ation (89-10-01) A condenser bay door, controlled as a

. Locked High Radiation Area (LHRA) was found unlocked and unattended. ' Licensee ' corrective action as' described in a letter dated.

December 26,1989 (Boston Edison Company Letter.89-181) is complete.

and satisfactory. However, the inspector advised the licensee that additional' action wastrequired to ensure that door hardware and mechanisms were functioning properly. The' licensee stated that a preventative maintenance plan for controlled doors included LHRA

,

doors will-be implemented in June. 1990.

This matter remains open and will be reviewed-in a future inspection.

L l

L L

-

.

.

-

-

-

'

,

'

.

,

.

..

'

zNw -

y

- /:

'3

...g

--

og

_3s-

-

->

- 3.2 (C16 sed) Unresolved Item (89-13-01)-the licensee to evaluate

'

effectiveness of worker training in preventing unauthorized entry

,

into high radiation areas. The inspector determined that the current

'

training is adequate.

l

,

-'4.0 Organization and Staffing j

't The organization and staffing in the Radiological Controis Department was_-

'.;

reviewed relative to the criteria in-Technical Specifications 6.2:

't Organization, 6.3 Facility.. Staff. Qualifications, and ANSI N18.1-1971:

" Selection and Training of Personnel for Nuclear Power Plants."

Performance was determined through interviews with selected managers'and.

>

review of selected records.

,

W1 thin.the scope of this review,:no_ violations were-ob' served. 'The current-

,

organization is fully staffed with_ qualified: personnel. A11Lopenings'were

~

filled by promotions of permanent-personnel. The staff _ size-'is adequate-

~

to support normal plant operations and outages.

However, thereais'no-corporate HP staff in'the current' organization.- Since corporate' staffs'

normally assist with program improvements, sitt management decided.to.

'?

place program changes on-hold for the last ew months and devote full-attention.to theLspring-outage. -This contributed to good performance-during the' outage. 'As the result of effective use,ofcthe 35 permanent.

radiation: protection < technicians combined with good' work planning, only 9 i

,

contractor technicians were hired for outage support.

,

i; 5.0 Control of Outage-Work l

The radiological'controis-implemented by the licensee!for outage work were

reviewed with respect to criteria contained in'10 CFR 19 " Notices,

Instructions, and' Reports to Workers"fand 10.CFR 20 " Standards-for i

L Protection Against Radiation".

Performance was determined from:

-Observation of work planning meetings.

.

.

-Review of selected radiation work permits in use in-the field.

l-Observation of worker briefings.

-i-Interviews with selected personnel.

Within the scope of this review, no violations were. observed.

Several strengths and improvements were-noted during this. outage including the following:

i; The licensee implemented a centralized Outage Control Center in the.

I administration building conference room.

The Center was manned around the clock and was the' focal point for all decisions affecting work.

Shift turnover meetings (every'12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />) were. held in-this room and included an overall status of scheduled and actual work. Corporate staff

i

'f

-,

!

.

.

i

.

._.

_

_

-

&

,

'

~

,

,

,,

,.

,

,

+

...

's

p.

and others were tied into each meeting via'a conferenceJtelephone-

'

network. The inspector noted that the radiological outage controls appeared to be strict..Only work ~ authorized by the Center as shown on the l

Maintenance Work Plan was performed. LSimilarly,- the. status of work in.

.,

progress was accurately reported.

This represents.a significant

'

improvement in preplanning, scheduling and controllof work.

Several state of the art items of equipment:were introduced during the _

.

i outage. Two'new computer controlled."portacount"Ldevices were used to fit-

<

test workers for respirator u:,e.c A digital alarming dosimeter. (ALNOR)

!

r I

.was issued to alliworkers entering the drywell. ~ These devices-provide'

,

audible alarms at preset. doses:and dose rates.

Sensitive new portal

monitors (Eberline PM-7) were installed.at' the main and contractor '

i personnel exit gates. Thesi provide:a final l check for' contamination as-personnel leave the site.

,

A'new Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Personnel.' Radiation Exposure _ Policy

(Nuclear Policy: C.3.11) was ~1ntroduced'that set administrative exposure i

limits for workers at 750. mrem per quarter 'and 1500 mrem per year. The

~

Radiation Protection Manager stated that'only;twoLinstances-occurred

"

during the outage that required approval to exceed.the. quarterly limit.

These limits are well below the regulatory criteria set by the ~NRC..

A daily exposure report was issued 'during the. outage. 1Th%.information allowed management to_ quickly detect adverse trends : eMnough this'

"

initiative was somewhat impacted by the unreliability-of the computer t

system used to produce the report. Management stated that; efforts to debug the computer _ hardware and software'are continuing.

>

The inspector noted inconsistencies in radiation._ protection procedures-such as the radiation work permit L and Locked High Radiation-Area procedures. The licensee's QA organization had also-identified procedure weaknesses in Audit 89-51 and issued Defic.iency Report-(DR).#1884.

The

'

licensee stated that management is aware of these' weaknesses.and-has

draf ted revisions for several' radiation protection procedures.

In addition, all radiation protection procedures will be reviewed and--

>

upgraded by September 1990.

Completion of.this project _wil_1 be reviewed

.in a future inspection.

'!

-

6.0 ALARA

'

Licensee efforts to maintain personnel exposures As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) during the outage were determined from:

-A review of the October Mini-Outage ALARA Report.

-March-April Outage interim status reports provided by the ALARA'

group.

-Interviews with selected personnel and a review of selected records.

I h

+

(

- - - - - - - - - - - -

..

,

,,

.

-

}-

g

-

,

-o

,

,

c

,

.,

s*

.

,

,

5; i

,

Within the scope of-this review, the. inspector determined that the

,

licensee's ALARA performance continuesito show excellent improvement.,

The;1989 cumulativc e posure of 211 man-rem ranked Pilgrim as the fifth-x

.'

lowest-among the A vnestic BWR plants. The 1990- gJa1 is 185. man-rem,';of

.

which 73 man-rem is tlocated to the o~utage.

This compares favorably:

M with the:BWR industry; average of'about 400 man-rem.

'

-

a Continued improvement and refinement of the ALARA program was' demonstrated

';

-

during work ~on the Reactor Water; Clean-up:(RWCU) heat exchangers (Hx).

In'

'

May 1989 the "A'!-RWCV-Hx was repaired,; resulting in a' 6.42 man-rem.

exposure.

In the; current' outage, both the "B".and "C" had similar repairs

!

completed at a total-of 4.5' man-rem, a' reduction of a factor of 3 in the

' !

exposure. -The inspector'also noted.that closed circuit TV monitors'were

.

>

being installed in theiRWCU-Hx room.

This eliminates-the:need for.

.

,

operator-entries to inspect the equipment, thereby reducing; routine j

.

operations exposu.res.

'

' Efforts underway to'further reduce exposures include:

E

-

-training of personnel and use of hydrolazing equipmentito clean contaminated. floor drains and tanks. to reduce' general area: radiation

,

levels.

-Implementation of a central control pointJtoLcontrol all: personnel l l

'

-access to the radiologically controlled areas. :This will, become J

L operational'in June' 1990 for-a 6 month trial period...

...

,

"

l-

-Replacement of:the spent resin storage tank in the'radwaste building.

i with.a closed v'essel. 'This one million dollar project will enhance-i the safety-of' spent resin transfers and reduce-.radwaste operator-

't exposures.

-Completion of the design' and fabrication of a portable, co111 mated

detector to identify and characterize " hot-spots" in plant systems.

These hot spots will then be eliminated.

The inspector had no further questions.

7.0 Exit Interview

'

. The inspector met with the personnel denoted in Section"l'.0 at the completion of this inspection on April 20,' 1990

.The scope and findings li were presented at'that time.