IR 05000295/1990015
| ML20059H169 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/05/1990 |
| From: | Gill C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059H158 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-295-90-15, 50-304-90-17, NUDOCS 9009170024 | |
| Download: ML20059H169 (17) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:f &@f ?S %r a% !m @ >. D\\\\ >4 b y", *U n k w V :~ 4T ' ' ' A hu, a ' m f; f ' ' y > e> g.
w4 - ,
- .s ,: ~ M '!
N- " ' m ' [ f,6 y a, L ?M( y -- 'g, g . w ,,p - ; S , o- ' ' 1 3*.
s . N 'y
, , , 1,, ; .t %gd 5,,;g '~ ' ' - , .,,. + v y . !
%
n x < ' < , ~ qN F, yvw-a' a': _ ,
- ._
,p-
, 'O.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION' " Jv1 ' p{f eM y' . - +'. , ' . /w ' < , . {4f Q i, , p u,. t
y .ta ..v v REGION'III- %H i pi > <
,r e?. n
- .
a,w,w f m};
- ,;; w+.
. - , , , ~ , ~ + t ~ 'Ieportl No.3 50-295/90015(DRSSk50-304/90017(DRSS) y,i ' [ t r . n w , (i M:[d M [%!
M 4 O; i > Docket Noi 50-295';L50-304' , . License No. DPR-39;q ;PR-48 t %q. T ' ' ' <"
- s:
.,, t.. / m t . .. c .m M< D A[ _ y Q %gg sy3 ;Licensep: Commonwealth EdisonLCompany; ' , ~
- -
, /'Ii ~ 'g + 4 ' ,C.e% ? ? J N 3 ost Office Box?7671' P jsp S;W_p t ' 7-1 G J Chicago, IL'.60690 . <
, , p 4".i ' @PW ' > sche . ,y m N:npqV-n.
. n,... Ziorf Nu' lear' PowerTStation,L Units 2 and 2! ^!1M, . . e < g > g. Q" sj o M Facil,ity'Name: > Q ilq, e p p d,. .s A - 4- , . w, - . . ~. . . , , y,m n , M.- Inspectio.n At:gZion Station,' Zion,; Illinois %e, w. nr .. M et M( N ' ' + . .g , M,W4Ofi ; NM. u? ' Inspection Conducted:' July 46fthrough' August:8,:1990-, r w.
. . . ... c-y,3- , N jW , - , a n ,1 u. ~ '4b..-z .' .. . ' [ ;-
. '*, s y i f ,.j. ~ , p, ) L'./[" A, % ' , v ' @h'.i,w~. jInspecto.r:tf'C..LF Gill:/ .- ^f/rb %@ .
_'
- - , y y Date T C EF > { " ^ ,
- ,
. Qf M M ' ' J f y ' y ,
, Accompanying' Inspectors: ~ A. W. Markley., '~ %% &, .
.
.-4 .m ,, g CQ " @^ g l ' C. G. Jones.
gjps '
- em . '. ' my ,
' < , , N2/ ' Approved:By:, W.
e ef? . .. " '
j Radiological Controls and SDate.
4) [ ' ' fm
- Emer:gency' Preparedness Section
.
. gy. y gq < L .l n
' <1 i' N fInspectionSummary , v, q , , q . t , . . ., . . s " . A.
Inspection on July 16' through August 8,1990 (Reports No. 50-295/90015(DRSS);'. t ' u , %> No 50-304/90017(DRSS)). . ,,. . ., e - ,. . A Areac' Inspected: Routine, anno'uncedlinspecti~ n of the gaseous,, liquid :and ' . o t @ L solid radioactive wastecmanagement and; transportation programs; includingt,' <;
- j t organizational, management' controls'and training (IP 83750,84750),Jgaseous,
"- , dph Vradwastef(IP' 84750)',11guid radwute -(IP 84750),; solid'radwaste,Jradioactive' :. ' i d "' @, f n c M material;and radwaste shipping and transp'ortation activitiesL(IP 83750,184750).; ,. 9j 4 Also! reviewed were the status of'certain open items'(IP:92701), corrective' " , M$, '7 'acti6ns~ for previouslyLidentified violations. (IP 92702),'and an all'egatio . WW w regarding timpleinentation'of radiological controls (IP 99024)E QJ
- Results:' During this inspection,rone weakness was identified in' the' radio-l
=c d[N My J active waste management program and one weakness was identified in the:
. radiation' protection program.' In~the radioactive' waste management program, , " i,. generic' operability problems of radiation monitors and associated surveillance d Q" ' + implementation appear #to be weak and lack. management support (Section 9).
, V In thelradiation' protection program, recurrent breakdowns in high radiation , area' access'controlsscontinue despite implementation of corrective actions j ' wm ' (Section 13).. Additional. problems were identified in hot particle dose l 3, ' i , ~. -
+ Wy
" "?' L e , , ' hl EU "' <c e l 9009170024 900906 -
O PDR ADOCK 05000295" 1 -. ', %" G PNUR T$. ' a ~ x x w - x _ _ _ _ _ __ ____;.
_
}: y <; y
}' .~ n ~ v gyq
, , . , g.< i y > , m - m . - , , , ma ,, , ,, m'I '. '. > N-{[p h $-g,. c . - o u u e .- . , N k,, . 'li:9 '
- ,
/ ' f i e >x t , - - . m,. ( __
<,,- ..j q <,~ . ., f, [ h'O ,, u$, ,
> > e s ,, !' i:. Jf ( f ,y - ' M' y ;,1 j yp f i _ , . ' ' , ,
- w%_y,& f,
. d, y,..> . . .. > ' ^.
m a
y^ ' .
- -
~ g % 4 [/ V assessment methodologyL(Section 13)~and utilization of; system operating ? y Ny n_
, pW;f ~[procedu'res;(Sectionl3)h ... m ' ' ' 4p}a} g y, , . , , , - e _ One violation wa, s' identified (failure to control? access [th high' radiation.
, m .. sw . , , 3 s; V " I.
areas V Section.13).W Also,-the following four non-cited violationsLwere k'. , , . .* ,% s. identified-(failure to" evaluate radiological' hazards present-Section13; H < e .yi failure' to include required unpl.anned release information in~ a semiannual: .e .,@.g O[lKe 6c radioactive ~ eff1f intLrelease' report-Section'8; unapproved temporary changes 7to,a' procedure-Sections 9;jfailure-toLpost and barri:ade a contaminated o h') Y *f; n E c area-Section.14).
. n p l . , ,_ - , (; W s' ' < cxy n,s y a m.
u p ~~s , .. "' )*:N...y '[,'- .4^'
' ('.f < [M r + ', {
- a it.
f, % , .. ; ; i # is. ^[ 'I - - }[ yg % (<
. . +W j , < f,f* 3 )*. g., f ,
, p - i, o.
- , , > + v.
.t .. .....v r w, .,.., , - . f,s , Y - l. k . k.
% c p, h J, w-4 _ d',f j.,' V ^- c
J , t
p..
t QVQ ; }}g' ,(,
- .
r , ne w aze j y.. g 'g ,
- U, I.g, y (
o , i 'pi g ' . { g ,
,
- >
, . , a + < .:( .., 4 p, g;9tp q '+y ,r; % : s ; e$, y}..
- p cp
- r3 g =
' 7.. r, -, (. ,s , ,
A,- ,q, r.
- < .. -..-[$yf.s .v, . y u. g-. 4 ' ), e$. v l't ' lL \\ {
x ,, , ~ , .-( . n.
,
- -. A, , 9.. , , i s j,a-
- e i
, ,3 L t, 1- / ' n c 'z ' (, W' s s {v.' - ,
,t
- t
+ ,; , t * ,5
~Ki.
'. : L - 4- %s < - )' Ep d.~ A' t.
j 3
^, 3, s, a g
- v M. " f{.
', ) jk r.
'yp_ , ' ' ' " f Jt.f'- s .g, p.
.s ,; ,, d e, 1~~ "' i - j geS W g - s . (.N,. ;n i , m-ff{ < " AJv W p A e ,au ,d-1dp - ' ,. , 3r > 1m < ..r< , 1$ . . s,m y s a.
y y.33.
' ' qt' ,. m, p
, , , _
, ,. p y - w - o , ... s , , o d ]> . 'b k.
., : + . f* l k ' ilI
- N,f }3 V.;
,.t. < r, o - > r. g.h O fj ',' i , T,, A(,,p t_ : ' Q, ! +
> , avm y.
> , a ' > , . , -
- 2
s ,.p [ 4.
,, '
.,n r. t ,
- 1
'.I
- g . El s y i- ' ' j. I' - 3. r 4.
. 4 4 ,.. ? ;
,( -F I ., L} , i ^t%,_ .yt-. _ ' $ *. ^ a ,
- w c.,
s s { [ k'.
3
- js
Aj - ,
- )-
s + g 'h _'. f.l ', ~. r y + y.. *~ } e i ' .y < ~ I. ' !.._ Qm W q q . m, 33, j
u ,
, as , - ,l '
,
)]O
y . , ! , t . a, #w- : i '
s < ; p.r. ' '. .
s g g '. 5 } * }),.,' . . ); -} ' . g .,/ c.n . " "'y' . , -. ,
m .. . p . I.
l i ' ,..
f , ) ' J - J -"
, j
.n - l * _ t' %g . 4., -, ,
- v
. t. n i_ 5.
i V -
' 0' Y ' If,,,; p - , ', j ,
4 I i !. ,) , i ,. - - t - -. s ' , 7' &+ u'.s \\ rsPi- . ; n.' b, h > ,
sy.
? y ' y% b.h.} L' q ; t. ? l i ' ,,. , - [[d.ib i y f.
'Jl
- -( !
- ![6
'.
,. 3 s >Q, , i r g-
- 1
-'
., _t' , ' ' ) l .
' , Ns' I{, : , ,;' y 4 7.- . $
. a c.
~ g ' ? . >A __ ' ' h hh.,t. Nl/ ,' ! -
' , ,
' . ^ { I % - {<V f ' . l' N Mhf ff ;nf:fViq:p f :, ** ? l n: ll ' f % ' g ,m ?,u V .. + w n, m? - a ;:. ' ' =
3
- . p' - ., <. + + , .% u, q. . - , . .,...., g+ ! ( , % ,n A*
'
' x., 4 g,~ f a ,, , . m W, .. ;3 < L 't - f.
,.[ j' - , ',L , , , ' h,hj,[ D,'y8 y, y t ;hh; (j!, ' s s s c g , ' / '
y-Q '
wq , , , pm;,s 'f M M ,
, Vypf
- Q y
{qj; 'y at
, j M'l j f M un,. gr* - DETAILS S y. w ,M- %
4
o f, :4 y -f ;.
.-. . g r z , t - i ,- 4 ' m -- n --a n
"(K[ \\ t >^a u ' Jr < ". r u $. c l N ~ v % p' L; y J.. ,aQ "<
- y o
- gf-
,, f;4 "l;
- p *,L '
v , . Y h3 % v.
';.. g,, e . yg ,,,-l - - a ,, , , Q - < , M @mr m a:n n l. y.PersonsnContacted >~>
- i
=)' s :. " - i > \\ W ,e.. &
- ,9 2JH r
$ c) ~N) . o c c.
' 4' , ~$l ' p ; ' [ i%
- '
'
%g a @ (g4 . .j.
. 3 i ' *P.,Cantwelll,EAssistant Technical Staff Supervisor * ' < es 4 . s q f G 7 g 7,A. Fonner,; Nuclear Quali.ty. Programs-g' Lp
- R.!Cascarano',: Operating E'ngineer'
@i W.HV 2g #*G4 Geer,1Radwaste Planner.. t% - ( w~ + 9 M J#*DF Hemmerle,-Lead Chemist .. . - . , ^ - -@ % ;*R.TJohnsonn Assistant Sup'erintendent Maintenance
, , ' ' ~, %** % 4L Joyce, Zion Station. Manager 'MT ' a7 . #*GCKassner,LeadHealth3 Physicist-Oberatiions/ALARA' ' ' ' ' ' ii JW. Kurth, Production Superintendent '
- ~,
< - ,
. Y, L'*K."McEvo'y n Contamination Control < Coordinator.. e W' e.1
- R( Mikai Health'. Physics (Services l Supervisor
'9 ~ ' , ,
- RcPalatine,1 Lead health Physicist - Technical
' RE Pratt Scheduler /Plannera ' " . , , i, ( .#*T. Saksefski LRegulatoryl Assurance'. . s _ l ' s , > e y 9*C.? Schultz,QualityControlSupervisor
4
, u-s , - - .s.
c[ [,,;*3 afb 6ngiovanni, Resident [Inspec' tor' .,. m < - ,
%. .. .,, . . , .. 1The;insp'ctors also intervi.ewedLotherplicensee;and contractor l personnel! ' ' pi ,i e e g h+ A + p during'the; course of thetin~spection.
, , m', . , Yy ,,~ _ '\\l ' g.
, E .. A * u .
^ ^ + , f (y yJ V*Denbtes,those present at the' Exit Meeting on July 27,e1990., ? ,, nn w ,+ x A.
. i i <,x ,,,, y - . - - b cb , .. ..;p ~ 3: .1; 4 g - 2 t-y ' (" f #Denotss those contac'ted by;telep, hone 'during the. period July 30 throu0h . " ' _ft'L Augustc8, 1990, m '.
<T ' . C w T.
M .. y .,4
' " M O, 2i IGeneral+ V / , ,3 d ' - .
n _ . a g gy;. . -. ., . 'i , epw' 4Thislinspection~was. conducted 1to review aspects'of!the licensee's' ' Q3 J,,.dradwaste/ radioactive material shipping'and transportation-program and'
, ~ , 1 gaseous,; liquid?andisolid radwaste managementtprograms.1 Incicded?in.
pj $P. '. < 3!r- 'this; inspection'was:a follow-upiof outstanding itemsiin' thstareas 'of - j % fradiation~. protection and radioactive waste management and -al follow-up q f y) W" q W y requirements. "The';inspectionlincluded;f.ours of fa > , , , 3 ofcalleged. inadequate: implementation of.~ radiation; protection! ! ' ft i % &s jobservations of licenseeiactivities,,revies of-repres.entative. records !Q c , ) ?f T J /andidiscussions with~' licensee personnel H + * - . , & s ) 3 l % & '. f.
- &, %. '*
' ' '
- @w' t 1;3. N L1censee-Action'on Previous ~ Inspection Findings (IP 92701,'92702), '
T +U.
c H g.
, . g' '
W4 3^73o _y . , ,
Up.f ' ~(Closed)' Unresolved -Item,Nos; 5295/87037-01;' 304/87038-01: The verticah ' J4 pl Jdd M 'Ypipe chase areasyare subject to potential changes in radiological h' ?,4!
, The ve' ticalc pipe chassiareatsbr~vey' methods, frequenciesp -. ]4 % S t V conditions.
r W "- and'comprehensivenesslwere totbe reevaluated by the licensee. 'The L ' ' M ". i @ licensee!has're' vised procedure ZRP;1001-Irto: require (Type II RWP) work? ' .
Jh% o - - "?,f; b ' y }D ' area' dose rates to be' verified at-least once per
< Tke ol (radi' tion and contamination)Lat 1 east once per weekewhile wo 'ksis in ' a o progress.
Procedure ZRP,1520-2,has also been.; revised to require weeklyi
- bs a n *'
W ' <
' . . ', pfe ' ' ' . ! ~s ' 't n " gyy #( . j - '-
4 f,, f- , . ' ,j p*9 F , 'kN1
g g,1 ,- <g- , , g g_m A,e <g
@qy p imy,[v, y- - p, g;L p.a - < , g+ggw y > ? , , - , y
> , , . 4 sct y.
s
, a ... ,;:- s, k j}
' ' _-ll _ ] ,,. Q. }~ fq] 4s l 9'y [,
f; g 3 y f ,[ 3, , ~ u -
, , , &. ;, kh' l i k V ..
.9 3
- l
'\\f O ' ( *Ol-c ' s , , ' > > s < . w ' " ' g surveys of the7v6rtical pipe chase.. areas..The inspectors reviewed.thev M - >
' j%g . procedureichangesi nd the resdits' of vertical pipe chase surveys 1from; ' ' a V L .. March.to1 July 1990! no problems were noted.
J ' ' , y3.
W -
'm w e - , ' M[", (ClosediOhnItemNos.295/87d:s37-03: ~304/87038-03!'1Procedur'e S01-68,5 . , "
! Gaseous Waste _ System, was revised to implement corrective actions.that
.W n resulted from an event described in LER No. 295/86-001-00.and, Inspection -. ' + V' Reports No. 50-295/87037(DRSS); No. 50-304/87038(DRSS). The licensee- , s 'e committed to reevaluate whether<S01-68 should'be classified asta- _ '
- %
. . mandatory-in-hand procedure. 'The licensee determined that the body ~ . 'of' 501-68 did notomerit mandatory-in-hand characterization. ~ y
- .i
. , , .. = l ' " , . . .. ' The inspectors: reviewed the basis for this' decision and severall +, '
m
' additional. System Operating ~ Instructions.
These procedures govern;, 4 "P J . h.. the configuration, manipulation,and. operation of various_ plant W + .! V systems. The only portions of.these procedures that are; required.
"e l ,
- y~
to be classified as; mandatory-in-hand are the'a'ppendicestthat coveri' N " ' , .theybaseline' electrical and valve lineups.
Actual (system configuration - - i' ar.d manipulation to. support system operation 'is covered ine the, body. of;
the procedures. jThese procedures are technically complex, may be?, ( ' y'N
- infrequently-performed and the potential consequences of an error in
- "* their implementation could.be significant.
However,ithese are ,- 'i
"not" mandatory-in-hand procedures.
- l4
<
. Thismatterw'as'dihcussedattheexitmeeting'andwillbereviewed l . " W,; - further during a; future: inspection by the-resident inspectors. -(0 pen j! - J' e . Item 295/90015 01(DRP.)E304/90017-01(DRP))- ' - ' ,
hd i '(Closed)UnresoivedItemNo. 295/88025-03 and Open Item Nos. 295/88025-01 W" l +and 295/88025-04; ;The licensee committed to strengthen R-key controls q g (high radiation area access controls)' and-to' improve' the timelinessiof M [e._mh "p* 'Radiation 0ccurrence Report (ROR) closeout.
The licensee has' revised iS y U Proc ^edure's ZAP 5-51-7, ContainmentjAccess Control, and -ZAP-5-51-15, High, ' i
~ Radiation Area Access Control, to, establish exclusive-administrativej m. ' ' s a , /15 f." & ; control;of R-keys under thelRadiation Protection Department. The'keyi, t E N ,, g[Kih$.,;ccustodian (R-key receiver)' duties' are now specificallyLprescribed in
' ej m ZAPf5-51-15.
Containment keys can on19ibemused to open,the. respective / ^ 'fa s % LWMV!(containmentandno-otherlock..The licensee indicated that long term
l Qi M W @Wu l 1plansito improve accountability includeca provision <forMndividual locks 4 Ojfy ~ A,
., M with' unique k'eys for'each locked;high radiation arealin the plant.
The . g y, ' * dPD ' inspectors-reviewed the procedure changes and observed the issuance and
- 2 a
Iww return of's'everal R-keys;.no problems'were observed except as noted in ,%' U' " JM V L .Sectionl13.c.
~ " % ..
' e:nQr @g.. , s . ,x .q ' .u ,w n y w > . .W. A i .The inspectors reviewed RORs.for 1988,~1989 and 1990.
The li.censee has1 - , 'C , . ~ . , [hfbJG 1 -,', madel' pro ~cedure changes to improve'the timeliness," accountabilit .V'
- control of the.R0R" resolution process.
All 1988 RORs have-been closed l
. ., fout and only<two RORs for 1989 remain open.
Both of the 1989'R0Rs'. U /q gjfl, ; .;* appear to be inethe final stages;of closeout and were associated with . 't 1h.
Jthe time period prior to' procedure strengthening.
h a . .: , ,,; ] r M ' ?(Closed) Open Item No. 295/88025-02; The licensee committed to revise N [l ,, f q.M~ potential ' airborne radioactivity in the vicinity of the fuel transfer plant radiation protection procedures to ensure continuous monitoring ofa 3~ % . ~, . canal.on the 617' elevation during fuel transfer equipment work.
A new s w y i u..
< .. , ,,w a ' , ' W , ,- ' . ( :- ' ' . . ,,
J 56 %c% .X
- T" SW * sk ^2N
"Q> aq31g +$e4 " % h' L"?y.k. ~ QW ( M # b ' ' ' ' +
< Wp tJ Y' g. ' W AR
- @%
- w q %y .v<h~ . m g pa o m _ yy.y f '
A-A y'. p Q' "3'x n n : p 7' 3y "g t q %c y , M. M + 4, M' W l J b- '*,, ! "s
LW*# M " J e wha o y / x mu- ~ ~ s , , , &'f K Yk ? N- ~. h\\ Ls Y ~ ?j -:. -- - ,~ ~ '] Q ; s ~~.bsp
%=L ' -a QQe y V . 7 % d #8 h 'e ' <+ + s .
sgf4 Nfprocedure was written and' implemented,0ZRR?1120-4,' Radiological?Controlsi j p [j s + J 4 ; f W' h, %For Work 0ln: Transfer Canal; :The inspectors; reviewed theLprocedure and3 t: -
@;precordsLof _ precedure "and. continuous l air sampler us.esfor fue11transferp ' D dp,i s gygM ' N canal; work.;1 Implementation, ap~ pears to" be ' adequate,. v WP V , 74' +,,,9 J % gy N yb ~ > e _9 3- . 50 > #f_ _ . i
8 3WD < * i(Closed)-Open Item Noi 295/88011-05;: 304/88012-05M :The(licens,e,e s Mapt ' $ 3 W4,
- documentation :of< skin -dose ssessments did not inclhde assumptio'nc'
D Q' ' ' M m';n g used to determine theiduration of hot particle' exposure.1 Procedure' ' % f ZRP;1101-11l Skin Doss Equiyalent Determination-Fromt5 kin Contamina . g g@:x was revised toTrequire the, requisite information..Thefinspectors ,
- -
se'lectively? reviewed s_ kin dose assessments forfhot' particle exposures; . d g# ip&. ~ ' W' for.1989-and 1990.e' Implementation appears to be; adequate. E, ' ~ ' ' + _,, x, u - . - ' ,
u /qi~ g~ Wp J(Closed) Open Item Nos;i- - . 4. J- . ., , .. .., _ . . > y 295/89020-03; 304/89018;03: a Asla result:of . g v 4' unplanned releases-of. gaseous +adioactivity on May_ 8-9, 1989;'the _ " / , 3 -g A J . licensee committed to take extensive corrective actions to prevent J s gg w w - recurrence. _The inspectors reviewed procedure' changes,etraining-
- records,x documentation and conducted interviews;with each'of athe -
3 "f W . cognizant licensee; representatives to confirm iimplementat' ion of w' 4: 1 ~ ' . M,
- scommi,tments. qlmplementation ofacommitted corrective! actions appears
, ' - s pj ' f:, Lto(be; adequate.- ' ' ,y ,, , m,3 w ,
y, . . _ w w -, W . (Clos'ed)<0 pen Item'No. 295/89021-03; 304/89019-03:..,As a result of.
' 4 4,' * M an. administrative overexposure that occurred:on August 18, 1989, the, [ ~ ' .* 4- . licensee committed to to:takezextensive corrective action; This eventi - D
- [ Xis discussed in further detail in Section 13.of this report.' The 1i
[
. timp'lementationiof corrective actions.appearsito be adequate.
&- <lJ ' - w
s e
,, , , WY 4(Closed)1VioladonNos.- 295/89037-02; 304/89033-02:~ fFailure to' 'Y A "Y >
. 'E J < maintain.the intagrity.of a: radwaste shipping centainer. (violation of1 ' - ,. ,y %49)CFRL173.425 and-10 CFR.71.5).". Licensee corrective actions' outlined /
' ,
in theslicensee',s response dated.Apri1J11,;1990 were reviewed; no t o Lproblemsswere"noted? ' X , ' Q' 4s - '
, ~3 a
g' / r . , , 295/89037-03; 304/89033-03: Failure to meet, "w , , Glosed)Violatio'nNos.
. ,,, - %sJ
ta low-level radioactive. waste burialnsite license conditiontwhich prohibits' '
% 2-radwaste packages con _tainingffree-standing liquid (violationlof Technical . c WV 2 [' y'
- Specification 6.2.1 and'the requirements of Procedure'Noi ZAP 13-52-8).
WO Licensee corrective' actions outlined in the, licensee'sjesponse dated ' & N ,(April 11,1990.werereviewed;;no'problemswerenoted'i
A S (!A ' n u . W l 4S ? OSanization, Management" Controls and Trai'nina (IP-83750, 84750) f , . . v M4.
Thesinspdctors reviewed theclicensee's organizatio'n and management.6:
i - gQ [ controls 1forLthe radiation, protection, radwaste,ishipping'and trans %. , ,n
- L
- portation programs, includingi organizational structure, staffing,*
" ! ,"W delineation'oftauthority and management: techniques used to implement
g ' %,a t:he program and experience concerning self-identification.a'nd '
3 , A correction of program impleme' ' ation weaknesses.
t
i ' r ,,. , . 3g p ) Q[f
- )
, , _ ,
- Q V 'iThe" licensee has completed staffing the division of the radiation 1, W
' ^j protection and chemistry organizations.
Several new health physicists n- - . V^ j g have b'een added to both the technical and operations /ALARA groups.
l , Thel licensee has plans to add one' to two additional personnel to this e; 'q ' '? g bj y sy 9 <> w ., . , gj T A 1-y - i ' ~ ! . ,a~, %o
5 , z.
y , oh d h.y ' ki ' v' ap.
,
%i; .J 'V _ L '_ ' . . , $ ! ha , , j [ ' r g
g m y 9~,q q y m ym y. ,a y,, em uw t = w.
, w y' Gq.amy M, pW q ghf,a
- w ',.
4 L yn g U .g sw x.
yW ' > h I $$ hk hhh h $ n - flfg, o.r ( y l N J W 4 Q Q :' m( g-3, V PA$MfQ$ge ty ' A 4 nK s
A Nw , e m.
.v gy=,>g}iw ofy =;# - s.w n y.
, n ig yc : g - . _ l hf
P' +, ', p K.. - _ %C c 3~. ' % f'_ ,$ y r,p; , ; > r (; f,j: ;A ,- ,c ... ~ a . %. , y,... .t staffU AiContamination,ControlLCodrdinatorihas beeniadded to'
. M y,,,q g Q q - Q I I+ protection operations experience 4 nclud
r
- +
.Q , + y :~ v ,.., -e P pm %MnoPerations/ALARA gro'up. LThis individual (hss.sig - s d3f
- wW L]
Y tion U[M.[%.7. gj
i . , d E F aishift: radiation protectioniforeman N The licenseelhasfalso engagedi ,M ha p g py , A t d ' W d upg % des.< NewLand7 contract' personnel' meet;orLekceed the-qualifications ~4,' k @! f 4 k( k " f Q eq (rements 1isted(in ANSIiN18.1 -?1971 /h[*O iW4 K p
b Q&%a N f' W
't E " > ,3 V d ,. .. . W W %~ o N6cvjolationstorAdeviations'were identifiedL 4 D,j Q "'5., Gaseous' Radioactive' Wastes *(IP 84750)y/Mi alNO , l* %p tN0 ' O{f D 'l Je ' ' ' ., ,. hili,. yg V V s ,. m Y g)4 '. The,.. inspectors?revfeYedthe-licensee!sgaseouhrkd / te anagem nt'. - > -., Eprogram?includingt L changes :in equipment and procedures;1gaseoust ';"' ' "' radioactiv'e waste-effluents.for, compliance Wit $ regulatory < a . <y g cpg g 4cy Mj'iy requirements;< adequacy of required records. reports,.and notifications;;.
s WWd y# i f " ' 9 requirements; and experience concerning? identification and correction Of J ki p+f processtand effluent monitorsEfor compilanc,e withioperational" c, ~ r ' eP* y,uof. programmatic 1 weaknesses.. . , . a n , , ,
- .
y u . > y.
~ , ' ,The[inspeEtdrsresbwe selected:recordsSf,radibactive. gaseous I g y effluentireleases' andL[emiannual effluent reports for-19891and 19 EQy - V:t
s - , .y , to date, bThe'pathwaysisanpledjandJanalyses? performed appsarec to Ny $ p% comply withitechnica11 specification requirements.: < The;gasecus' f
"
, D Q.
effluent.pathwaysiand'the' sampling and monitoring program remained 5* ,_M ',p h ] Jessentially/89020(DRSS);.No.
g cas!discussednin Section~5'of Inspection' Reports; ~ o - C No',': 50a295 50-304/89018(DRSS). jIn 1989,.the plant: e
. "' -WL total gaseous 1 effluents l released consisted"of about%100,-~2.68"E-3," g 9, i i Tan'd 69.2. curie's/of noble 5 gas, radioiodine, and! trit um,!respectively; . d ^ , , E* ', & ,the corresponding: values for the;first. half.of 1999 were 62, 1J17 ' A -
"i E-3, and<12icuries,srespectivelyJ ' Gaseous mier.e(remained less %; 6> i,: . than*four percent"of:the annualoT/S limitsE 1; ,~ ,y - + . , d$e t 'Nosiolationsf or deviatiobs were identiified.
\\, [ " , - , , . .. . m' " v i,,- .. . . ,, , , ' N' _' . ,, '
k, MWs J6. o ' Liquid Radiodctive' Wa' te:(IP 84750); " ' ' i - s - , s W % ' - C[m L vThe, inspectors reviewed the licerisee4 liquidiradioabtiveN q M i[m .. 11jquid> radioactive waste-effluents foric7mp:liance:with1re ro 9 management program, includingt. changasvin; equipment 1and p q 9g gulatory
Ms L M , requireinentshadequacylof required crec'ordt, rep' orts,L and notifications;, -
3 9#, ippocess 'and effluent monitors: for' compliance with operatiunal . J C ', 3^ breduirements;'and;esperience'concerning i.dentification and. correction j a a W[I $ y-17 gof_prograrmaticweaknesses.
1 , w 3~. ', + .; v ~W ' (Trie inspectors r'eviewedis' elected recordseof radioactive liquid effluents.
- :
- .
j $~'.7 (released'and semiannual! effluent reports 1for 1989.and 1990.to date.
( "J oThe pathways sampledland analyses performed ' appeared <to comply!with- _ s An ,technicalfspecification, req 0irements.
The' l iquid, ef fluent. pathways, . ! m gb P Land 'the sampling' andLmonitoring program ~ remained essentially)as vS k g' ' / discussed in -Section 6 of Inspection Reports No. 50-295/89020(DRSS);. ' y . . ?' ,/ No.':50-304/89018(DRSS).
In 1989, the ; plant' total liquid effluent.
5^, l L4
- 1 releas'e consis'ted of about 3J30 curies total-activity'(excluding 1'
, ( _ g V.}rtrit~ium,- alpha, an.d dissolved noble gases) and 1050 curies;of tritium;; % fg%yD6)$ L . v' a
d s ms . ' ' % Nf i ' s ; S y y 3:,&, ?j y}kc q -
- ,, ~ v
> ' y w mww. d,ja',W%l. , - - , l\\ E, *RWW .' { i, q). s) j ? ,. p . m ggp
. ,
' ? ' e g ' d,[ . [ h k k k (l & w
hfh h% g g y $ ><, A &
- d
~ ' sm
x- > yv ; w - . . w . k s w ;h ;,. p ;. . . - g(yny
[M gb ; %* ;M $ th "cy %[W GR $Ly;[ Oe
r r y ,x w , q,b..c ( 'M kh ,
- g %Y M
'f N%, $; "!T. ' ;yV . 3 L'; _ , .; ' h j n i:
- . 4) h.Q - % [% a u, J Q L.Q a orrepponding< values?lfor the' fir'stihilf;of 1990 were-2.6:and;193? ,,, i $[ . ~ C ;' M e ies krespectively,4 Liq'uid releases remained less1than one percent % %& e m, % r! cup *theia'nnualfT/S111mit.2 The; inspectors also? selectively reviewed theW'Ni $ l [H 7 Miof
WW W W.%ddliquid. batch release' permit l program"and associated; documentation f6r , " pas M eleaies;-no significant' problems were n'otedu - < . , ,. - g.m e c ; '., c~% e ,. - p;m. a . . 'sc, ' w: , ~ .n y,, + u
3k, .p s .No? violations orJdeviations were identifiedp' os ', M W V
g 1 3 %l ))'LSolid Radioactive Waste'(IP 84750) s W, %: . WM.l ' nn , + s* - 'w , ,
3,<,g.
m- %G V..
y a n, ogy 3 r _ C. ~ gY * TThe' inspectors' reviewed theJ11censee's' solid' radioactive. waste management.
it J g" %. y.,T, y"programW including: fchanges f to equipment and procedures;' pros.essi
, gj %!", 3 and contrt,1 of solid wastes';1adequacyiof.requjred records;3 reports'and- _ f l ,* [* q 6; y ' notifications;'performanceLof process control ahdLqual, ion of programatic ity< assurance"
- l L :"Wllq' Hl. V
% ; programs.;' and experiencelin: identification land cot' rect ,l, . sa4 weaknesses.) a x. n#* Pmne .,
' wm e m s s - # y , , _,' < r y~ m < /d ', [
d.-1'., , yo '. Th'e;11cerisee's solid radioactlye'waskj\\e; program remains'y? essentially thel lm / + 7-
- ci 4-
'
<d - k '.
,, <w
M ' W,. V F sameasdescribedin-Sectiongof, Ins'pectionReport.50-295/89020(DRSS); -
_ ,,
'4 W 50-304/89018(DRSS) m The i'nspectors;reviesediselected'portionsfof.the " G,,!.
- ,
,' ", yE licenseefsJsolidLradioactive waste' generation,ashipment.and burial .&4 ' , av S"M __ , , records (fromtheperiodJuly71988thru4 December 1989.. Licensee! records ? , m ], , i jf W 'lindicated'that-approximately16;482;L4,753;fand;2,799 1ubic feet.ofs (' ? ^ radioactive waste for'each six months,trespectively, were shipped to A.; 34 a, Y s .d, w we:. , ~ resins;75,471' cub'icifeet)of'dewatered spent' bead Dj " M (h ' M y Q q,'Lburialfsitesk These radioactive' wastes consisted of 1,878 cubic feetiofb N sol 11dif.ied(spent' bead s t U 1 ; ? 4f resins; sand.6,685" cubic feet of dry. active. waste?(0AW)'. y "' b i*
y , y v.
K dA ' > ..
- .
w L .U, + , ,
- , &g N l
' IIN6iUiolati'onsfor deviations'were'iidentified, ' '
'e'
&,%: Ary p = w ' e n a v . . . ' " Mh28;[MEf flue'nt. Repoht's (IP 84750) M [% [ [ C7 , g ^
M; W. a
, c6 t ... 6. 5. .-
- :
^ NMMsbp%m e xTehhnical, Specification 6.6.1.'D requires,Jin~ pa' t, :that the Semiannual! " t_ 7 d - r M h)% ( ' 011guid effluents 1asfspecifie'd11nJRegul' Q (Radioactive Ef. fluent" Release Reportsiincluden the identificatio_naof - j, y - 2: M$ unpla'nned<r' ele'ases from the" site of radioactive mater:ialssinigaseous and' b a i, 9y %Q , u a "W .. ' &,.. ' B %, 4" y June)1974P Section* A 6 of' Appendix B to the afor,ementioned;regulatoryW 4 fguidelspecifiesothe'; identification of unplanned' gaseous and liquidL A & C N' f - , 4 4 + 4[l'
CreleaseshiThe~inspectorsidentifiedtwo'unplannedgaseousradioactive +. ' ! l b @M Inspe'ction Reports.No.,50-295/89020(DRSS);1No.K50-304/89018(DRSS)):but o4 q( .WO ~ 8-9, 1989 (see Section'10 of,,; ; ' F y B sffluintsLreleasis which occurred *on May.
" , ' , @r 0 % ""iwere"iiot" rep'orted'Inlthe'. Semiannual; Radioactive Effluent Release / Report a i i ' fpiMFa$TechnicalSpecification6.6.1.D;.howevertpursuant'tosSectionV.A.ofs fon. the: firstLhalf of?1989.? The' set are' two examples'of.a ~ violation of-N T - t y , d WO/*
u" Q& $ N
- Appendix C to'10 CFR Part 2Ea' Noticefof Violation Will not"be issued for
' ' t h t,1 this? isolated Severity' LeveUV violation because<.thellicensee-initiated ! - N g/ @y< b @i' W % 'approprihte: corrective:actiinibeforebthe' inspection ended. g On August 8, h! 11990,7 the:1icenseevi'nitiatedJaScorrective action program to report the 9, ' n W !f r : aboveiudplanned :effluen't release'siinia.nfaddendum to a future semiannual. i *, G $ $M* report.and.to preclude recurrence >ofJtheiviolation.
The licensee's
' ~ initiated /plahned cor' ective: actions ar'e deemed appropriate and adequate, j %3 f r h cW #v This" matter is closed. '(NCV 295/90015-02; 30d/90017-02) l n
- yy g;g j
> [ w% ' 4- .4 = One non-cited violation,w..,,ident'ified.
j ' ar j , w i '- ' , , , =M' + i . a r } ?f g .., &.. ' , ') i l-]+$jfh '& -,
' ' <
<q - , ! b.
,< . - ,
5
'
. m$. sr f 1dh * bL jf . g ________3,_s ,.
_ _ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, s- , e Y 'r
m a g.94 r m % . < 4.
.m..
Nhh, w & N,k,,w.-po w > g 4 v ,m
, ? %,[wh
i hh% ^d!j f
. . . . n'& ! .y ' < ! > ; ;)?s, fW u, .. ' w}y&e . . . , . d-W ' %, . " VM q % C ' 1( - ' .ay'*rv , . ' :s
i .c ww > ne ie ' ' , Y f - : l l.l S , k g?nJ A C9 d E'ffluent contro'1 and Mon korirl( Instrumenth.ioni(IP 84750): $ E ? 'Y> > $n ' N;n y.
. y y., . ~ ,.4
, , k .Thetinspectors selec'tively reviewed records;for 1989 and'1990ltosdate: Yt ', 7 ., .. pj;p;g p; e f. effluent, processL and~ area radiation mo'nitor surveillancesiand: o <W ' ca'11brations for compliance Sith technical-specifications'and procedura1{; c.. . . _. C ' $' ' ' "f. c
j i <
N 4 % requirements;for, operability, trip setpoints,1and functional testingh, . f tK ' o ~ e . - y, - -
- L
+ ,.y 8;a y_ , , ye ,%, f 1 - x . , .. - ,y; ,,. > M, " 'u o V a.)
Operability and Reliability-Problemst "1' ch < g " o
, w , ... , .s ,.. d .a + - . with 'many of the' process a. experience'~ generic operability, protilems c
- .
ja '. licensee'c'ontinues"toi . m ' ' , . ' nd effluent radiation monitorsi 3These Z - S w, ,>g . f ^ ' g problems 1have(been previously; identified in the:following inspectioni m.
y 1 y,
- reports:-
t L i
, > . . " - ' y-
,, . . _d gf , ' Report' . Report Date.
Description . . myg E7%y , , ' >> . , 4 8625/8625e 2/11/87' Inoperable: rad' monitors an'd - ' r' corders,; missed surveillances., ' ,?
e
, Qiy - NOV issued.
sr ' ' " ., - , ,. g n . e, ..... > w - . , M4%,,. 8722/8723-9/16/87 Inoperable rad monitors and % , & ("I @M l:M g C operability andireliability 4 P, s N ~ y missed'surveillcnce. - Gen 2ric;) "O , ..
- '
3? g;!.,- W L,z 1.. 9/27/88 Generic operability problems: problems.
'.,7 V(v.M,,3 y , , ,.,, e s g...> s +.
im; O y' y. A ' i. m
s# - ... . e,+ yi.
' -, /a d )w; q D , s8820/8820 ~'
u #}p Y 1 F' " CAdE f f
't ' Jwith.up'to-8 monitors.. JQ , , ,A p 3 Jinoperable'on a given~ day;- %b +1
M,s 7s v' d . , Generic operability problems-A' g d . T A < .
~ , (p y?;3;)QV' f 8918/8917-9/1/89 ': P@ .b .fg}gh [ A N and'
- andi persist.
. Q;FQ
a
8920/8918.
.8/1/89J % *4 , M' W j;d V "_' # impact?upon. plant. activities'and use:of. resourc % Rhdiation.-monito'r operabilith and reliability $ problems;adverselyD k, M ~ ,/, 2<d - u.
.a . . ' ' .eo - J ,y y" jnd [, c y.
the l'ast insppctio' iand ide~ntified as follows: examples are' delinea W dh V n M / 'P <
.. a n . . $ u(",c #M f&' LER~ "Date Description * MPry ,
n -
. .{, {ll 7, 'f y,g' V"l . . j f } 9/3/89 Missed surveillance,idue to ~ Ml ' R 3+ i % '4 w % 2-89-009- < %--
& '. personneb error (2LP084' monitor f" "1 ^ ', failed).1 W< > i , .b n .,. e ., . fi'/: +
a u Af 71 'l-89-027 112/14/891 Failuregto perform required.
, fgKWg
' Technical 3 Specification action
- < s , , 's>Z% l;j x
- g for a failed radiation monitor'.
$m due to. personnel error (IR-PR07'
- , jPA q* j A & B; inoperable).
, ,
u / w.
y 4 ' s .
s %~ t.
(1-90-005 2/1/90 Lake discharge tank release ' . y-m - h without second verification of ~
' ~* release calculations (ORT-PROS . . out of service), . > s _ . , + . + l e' l . ea., I' !. } h y@ 8, - , <wn, , -
< , n, ~ n
gy!. 3' p; i ~ i,l
A y (L .; p g .,y gl .; j. ; - ,U Q j ,
h y@h{?QK $$$ $ @%( %[ g} f N M
i 1M"hMh[4 W =, % UiW& ,a ,, Mfh hdh '
- h*[j]N 'yj i'
~ -m $h[M f1/ l ,- .(yh A3M ? ' a
, hk(p;'M I >' ~[ Ih 5 h , a., ' ' e - %f $ 1f90-0d7s *.' E2/27/90;, f - _ Clogged! sample 11'ineion.0RT-PR06, 'u/ ' @ ly 4' '*,aL Smissed' surveillance'(ORT-PRg6l ~ , ' S~ " n, +. w ' W
Ee inoperable) +. o '
. , . ;u, '>y '*an s , - u.
. , 4/21/90= , Incorrect surveillance:for " gfx n w -. < - - a .. . n g y/ t
< a,.q, .n , y 1.go.cogy a gn - t- "# 'S by
- 0RT-PR18B(outof< service).s
' , , t._ ,W ". .* ' ' ' @%; <% .. . _ a
11-90-010 L4/23/90),_ L 1 RIA-PR49 exceeded 4 30. day clock, i-. ., Me - w u.
, ~+ - T'he711censee'has niade some recent improvements to their maintenance , ' . , ' '
, M P i : 'l'3 of effluent / process radiation monitors N These include the-
l development of[a preventative / pre'-emptive _ maintenance. program; '* " ' , ,,. f 7' ,includ_ing. early rep 1_acement'of wear componentsa LThis has resulted A - s in the reduction of out-of-service monitors to 2-3 out-of-service il :. i , p@p + - - Monitoring' Display System (RMDS) modifications)i The licensee also- ,' onlany given day. (excludingout of service monitors for Radiation: Es
Q ,7g indicated thet another corrective action program wasibeing developed LY - < %,( toLaddress? sampling requirements for out-of-service: monitors.
W ' , &y . -. . .. .
- .
. M The licensee earlier, indicated that a, broad scope engineering
3, b i g' proposal to replace the' antiquated monitoring system with a new state-of-the-artsystemwas-beingassembled(seeInspectionReportse%'n ,, bS-f A :t NoL 50-295/88020(DRSS)';; No. - 50-304/88020(DRSS).: D0 ring this .
C@b < r f4, M . . inspecti.on, the licensee indicated that the decision.to' replace / +
improve the~ radiation monitoring system would be,made approximately v monitoring system problems, previous efforts to implement-Given the licensee's' h V * Laoyear from_now.- ., ix f-C . l' e ' %3% correctiye actions and the licensee's= acknowledgement ofiexpected- ,, p ;I Jj" continuing 4 problems, sit would1seem that licensee performance in ' ' .
- this area'has;been-and' remains weak--
.?
- a, g
. ~c.
~ m... . f - . ' v .,0 ,, , >, , g] @
s y gt b. ' unapprov~ed Temporary Procedure Change.- " C
- 6 s
a.
. .. ... m e.. -
N'
- r 4 During January 1989,, a'special procedure wasedraftedffor thi initial-
, '. i ' f, $ Emergency,0ff-Site Facility (EOF) PING radiation monitor (OR-AR19) %m i e 4" ' ~ ' calibration. This procedure was developedJby modifying an existing, oA WWT)a SPING calibrati,on' procedure'. SThis special. procedure,+IMSP-89-024c.' b p" ;#j 3 p o Instrumentm'aintenancepersonnel:performedthei(r received final! approval from the' station superintendent on @Q @ f, < '7-i , , j February 19J 1989.
' d.
' e< calibration"of1the EOF: PING monitorfduring April 1989.~ The-od c + 3V
%,dN _ 4 ~completioniof:this. procedure.was reviewed and, acknowledged'b,y f.' T~ '* ' , < n P f f 'f w signatuie onl April 25, 1989 and'Audust'18L1989, resp.ectively.' g-
i.R. o., n - ~v M '- " . m,l, w +- - <~ - nu pw yN d, JDuring the course o'f performing 'the E0F : PING calibration,jinstrument.
i w
< i a ! g@y * , a Q _J' errors in the section' identified as " Channel 5 Calibration"., PPen /.
- 1 9 j b; maintenance personnel discovered that there were minor procedure"
' b GW hgh ", A add Ank changes.were made,tVthe procedure which didi ot' alteKthe, (~ n intent of'the procedure; However," approval of thesa changes was? .. MMC '
not obtained as, required by" Technical Specification 1This is a '
- 4, ;Q,,
y, iM d > . fviolation;ofiTe'chnical Specification Section 6.2.'4., and'6.2.4.C; A 7- - , W The. licensee % as' notified of the situationLand acknowle'dg'ed'the
- '
ye.M j violationf Since this Severity. Level V violation appears to' be O @ g#'[i ' ' !an isolated incident, the violation is not being cited because the i - criteria specified !in Section V. A of the Enforcement Policy were ' f ny ,
- This matter is closed.
(NCV 295/90015-03; 304/90017-03) - satisfied.
, , Q',?
' ' n9 . , , 4j ' L , ,, - , ,
I (: ( % k hkW,h ' E T' E f# @ N' ' p.["Q) }{ Ij f ' h ,.Lfg q
w %p m . _
pm .s -.a'*.. , - (QWyds MS J ii d
, M.
W.d qq. y ;9%;WMW' vt -' .
. ~ 9J1' ' '
,2 y a& fan W ' % &~ ' , . t f ' - .~ < yqQy . ym: a -. - +. . n ' One'non-cited ~ violation;was; identified.T 4 ) {m =->+ q w h'CgQq ;10?i Air: Cleaning System (IP 84750) T 'i :, m J ' F.464 _ 6 wgj ' Ai^ ' . , < > - 3Qjjy b + w y,, . _ _ ,. pk tii K Thetinspectors' selectively; reviewed recentitesting result' records oft UVU c 4:% ' , < air;cleanings ystem filters;tincluding laboratoryianalyses for methyl ' ', ' s , (M, % riodide; removal efficiencies ofscharcoal adsorber samples and 1n placeg, ' ' '
fm penetration.(bypass;1eakage)itesting of HEPA.and.charc'oalyadsorber-V Li . st - Lfilters.' The tests; appeared to havelbeen conductedJin.accordance with; ' ce - ,
.iTechnicalfSpecificationrequirementsandyieldedresultswhichmet! ' N ' ,, &, -acceptance criteria forileakage'and iodine removal efficiencies.
> -
' %); ~,-
l . , ' - ' , , , , - No violations or deviations 1were identified.- -
' ~ ~ r e
m. m.
~11,1 Primary Coolant'Radiobhemistry (IP-84750)a d , ,
_ . . .. LTechnicaliheEificationJ3l3.6.a1 require's t' hat the specific,activit9~of-S
?.- ti f
4 ' JM ', theprimarycoolant?notlexceedonelmicrocurieofI-131doseequivalentP ' ' , , ' Ls .per grampexceptiunder:certain limiting conditions.ofl operation. :The ~i a - 4%, inspectors. selectively reviewed the:ilicensee's' primaryscoolant- ^
4 % gw
- radiochemistry. results' forfl988,1989,0andd990 to dateto. determine.,
/ '" m . ' , . . P' . acompliance with the Technical Specif,ication requirements for the I-131 , @y %) (dose' equivalent (DEI-131) concentration. cThe selectjve re' view'and $m e s.
b, sconcentrationifor th,e primary system; remained (less;thantthe~ applicable' _ ' Q discussion' with' licensee: personnel indicated 'tha.t the ~ DEI-131"
' > - , . y
MechnicalSpecificationilimit'throughoutcthejrevieW[periodLforbothunits-WR .' l - . y y, A..,
- .
, %,, .,
- 1N
, ry, No violations or deviations were identifie'd.
. d' t~ . ., t
- .
.i'
- b
/I i-; f.
s < , s s .,.. t ' 12.
Transportation'of. Radioactive Materials:and Radwaste;(IP 83750, 84750): Q n . ., " . c.. J s'. , ' .,. .< t - .. 9The~ inspectors reviewed theilicenseef s? transportation loffradio'activeo 'o., oWD,> l materials program, including:y adequacy and, implementation of written
- ygh sprocedures;: radioactive; niaterials' and radwaste. shipments for compliance ~ '-
y f.' ~, LwithL NRC' and 00T' regulations and the' licensee's quality assurance #
~ " i . program;. review of transportation incidents ~ involving, licensee shipments % / 3;
- (i.flany); adequacy?of required records,' reports, shipment docilments !and-i"
. , ,
notifications; and experience.concerning identification and correction of , WD' , programmatic weaknesses ~. j .x
. , , , , .d 4The jnhectors~ obs'ervedithe pdparations for,two radioactive waste ib' n . (shipments.
One; shipment was dewatered resin and the-second shipment i .t " y e @. $. c. r .. i r W g< J waistsolidified bead. resins.
Shipping l documentation,. radiological a hfhtib)W , / i surveysland' procedure' implementation were reviewed.
In'additi~n, t i.
' o
' the inspectors: selectively reviewed records <for~ pr'evious shipments pM(y% offbadioactive<materialssto. mat'e' rials ~, licensees and radioactive wa'ste M, f ff UQ i ' . '. c ' ' dipentstob'urialsites.
No problems were noted y - m a - - m W'No N olations and! deviations were identified.
y6q + qf ' p, ;! I.. , .. , @p @Mbg,A hjk) 'c ' ' v-
h
s qw (;
- ,;
- - ,, ,. , y [] &,ll;13.. External Exposure Control (IP 83750) . vf6
,l..,, 'ihlyl W' . + - s M,, c ' , , ., ' W}h~h.j; y; /The inspectors reviewed the licensee's external exposure control and ' M' A .. , h personal'dbsimetry, program, including: changesintheprogram,use,lt ,,
- "\\
a s.
> ll hJ o:;~' -
,
_,
,-
10 .
, , m qu Oj :JA_ v
- \\?
M 'J Z >- j' O . fM ff 9y <;i _ } - Y ' +
g wp - , ,. , j y f:, :, n ,w J . . - m c.- .: por , ',, <. Q ( ' ' ,
' _ ~ lof dosimetry toidetermine whether requirements were met, planning and s t > R ', . preparation for~ maintenance and refueling outage tasks including ALARA ' Q,,' l considerations: and required! records ( reports-and not4ficationsi - a.: Hot' Particle Dose Assessment \\ ' . The'. inspectors reviewed the methodology for performing hot particle > skin dose assessments. To account for the gamma component of skin-
exposure, the licensee-assumes that the gamma. component will;be two- ' s,' percent of the beta component and adds this to the beta: dose for,a-
total exposure.. This assumption may not be appropriate'in-all-cases.
yf This matter was discussed with the licensee.- The licensee personnel , X"" indicated they would reevaluate skin dose assessment methodology.
This will be reviewed further during a future inspection, < -(0penItem 295/90015-04);304/90017-04)! . i m..
- b.:
Administrative Overexposure $ D The inspectors' evaluated an administrative overexposure that.
, occurred on August 18,.1989 during replacement of proximity switches ' . , - in the' fuel transfer nnal.
Initial surveys of the transfer canal 9 '" ' taken on AugustL16,,1. 1 indi.cated. that general area dose rates in' the. vicinity ~of? the proximity switches and transfer cart 'were-in the ' ,
- range of 1 to 1.5 R/ hour ~ with a contact reading of 4 R/ hour.
Subsequent to the initial survey, fuel handling personnel operated the upender device, moved the transfer cart and returned the cart 'to its,former position.
,, N , Due to work-package problems, the job did not actually_ commence q < J until' August 18,-1989. Pre-job briefings were conducted between' , ?' ' radiation protection and electrical maintenance personnel to discuss.
'7' radiologica11 conditions and controls to be' implemented for the job.
Radiological coverage consisted of timekee)ing from the. top of the- < L transfericanal, the use of communications leadsets between radiation
- protection and electrical maintenance personnel a'nd air' sampling.-
j: y: Dose rate surveys immediately prior to job start 1were not performed.
' L", T.imekeeping was based upon August 16,-1989 survey results. Because 'ofcpotential for variations in the dose rate-~1evels and potential extremity exposure, the workers in the transfer canal were equipped ,f with digital alarming dosimetry that was capable of monitoring , y accumulated dose and maximum dose rate encountered.
.
Upon completion of the job, it was discovered that one worker's N alarming dosimetry was alarming and indicated.a dose of 832 mrem and-J ' , , A .a maximum dose rate of 5.7 R/ hour. TLD results indicated that this
,J< individual received a dose of 1,009 mrem to his left knee. This R individual was authorized to receive 500 mrem.
Followup surveys -) were p(erformed. hot spot) at the base of the bracket support for the transfe i A dose rate of 6 R/ hour was found in a localized
> area rail. Radiation protection personnel were unable to determine d q a .-
'
vi j .
t ',, Q W.qkW nW : : - > >0 m,, i ~r ,6 m.
m'
. ~ + ?>*> m q w,h; '
g 9. ;wd, #m" M O. "
F ,M~ . qn N e wg . y
- '
., % < % y, y ~1 g e , , . p { QQ, %; 4
- n
% K Q & a E;h$y g j fJ j y(L 4, yl Qr % > = pg m _gy -- .a< -( y, c %'. .' fy J T;. h ~,'l f' 7Ef My *_
- whether this fisld had been presentLduring' the, survey performed on fe%gn Agh(f y?$ ' Y,The licenseeiidentifi' d the' ~ro'o
- , 9 August (16 J1989Por'resulted. from the movementiof;the trahsfer; cart!<,T.
_ 'V ~ W 's .s' &L o i x7 % Q.k. W ' ? '
,,, e re;to-
- $[
<f ? . , n% . wk M 3 m veri.fy worki.ngiarea do'se; rates during4 thesjobs ' Contributing cau~ses S " " ? Q, ~ " :m g were'thelimpropeg placement.and utilization ^of/ electronic'ala.rming(' '7 , e 4dosimet . ~.,, A_ ,# ~ S.
- E 'in n.
" % , 7: g, _,,n,,ry.
s , o > y . , -3_ e . s_, - g,,v. ,. - w., <yo > . S,Md ,o en , {The-license committed.to implement the following, corrective actions:- .a , Y w .w ev + w.
y - u,1 x , , <, .. ., , . n,
- <
.., . .(1) stransfe'r ; canal worksDevelop a procedureithat governs' radiologich ,q % M 79, v6 TYW-f Tl r i '
. -- e-M ' g,s ~ g ey, ns ' 'y - - e, . , ,
h~ [(2) Improvemethodland techn.ologyxfor remde, dose monitobinge gn i ' < , - - , % ~. wwp n y w p . y. sm . . , , _.
QM _ - (3): i Requi r.e-the,p.r_esenceiof a radiati<on. protection _ technician:in s.. ~ m - - u mm , . u ' l~ (
' , E lc Jthe transfer canal to verify dose rates and' monitor exposure.
, %".
y A P - B;; y
- ,
[3 ~ ~ a p - ... , py[@ " A '(4);. Revise procedures to; ensure proper-dosimetry placement. * f,
, ,., . .M ,~w. .
.. w w.yq/ m' . v , v.
. TJgjN f J(5).]' Provide training.to radiation protection technicians'regarding5., , g:qa'. ," lessons learned;from this' event.'
- M
" A g . m - Y z a- , ' ,j m -
MM[ y /The inshectorsYreviewed t'he' adequacy 5and implementation of ic6rrective k, J o ' ~ , , , c #" ' actions'taken by the) licensee.
The licensee's;r w onse Sa's timelyp N y gW 1g g R$'
- 7'
and: corrective actions (appeared to be comprehensSe.
The imple " ' + q ,,, m30 m c, e Gmentation ofcimproved tremote ' monitoring > technology,and additional. -'
'
0 Tadministrative con'trols should prsclude recubrence 'of;this type, of a"'. a Mh
4 W ie-3 h, ' s '
- t sg
, .,cvent.
Q+
, <. > . q s su c y , CFR 20.201(b) requi' es th'at each dicensee' make' orL cause, to'be.
g4, y, r 1oF ,... > r , Wp%[$ N ' -made s'uchlurveys*as-(1) maylbe;necessary for"the licensee;to comply.
M s twith theiregulations in this/part,cand-(2) fare reasonable under the.
j ,
,- Tfh
- qi?hrcircumstancestoieValuate"the'extentuofaradiation hazards _.present.
.N j V *!Q Since'this event was' identified bplthe licensee,; response was .Y R@h 4u y, .e u rtimely 4corfective' actions wsre' adequate and the event does not ( * M O <
- Q jappear,tobe"recurrentipursuanttoSectionVGI.. of Appendix C3 b p (. @D W #.g \\jf j f to '10 CFR Part-2,
- a Notice of Violation'~will not be issued f
, . .. 1 % c. '( i M Ji this Severity Level IV violation. This matter is closed.' o i f i i.h (w. lI' p 4[II(NCV295/90015$5(304/90017-05)
- {% {d};
, f i ,
m n%
1 , ,
J le S cl @High Radiatiot Areas' (HRA); Barrier Incidents' l , _ _ &'% < g.mpp"s 4 ' f @ G p,M p j[Q y y; gn 'r - ,, XThe inspectors" reviewed thetlicensee's high. radiation area access V_ , O . A 7, control-program lfor conformance to 10;CFR:20.203 and station R kT O;q WDpW gi.
1_, { } 73P@p& $ N, [M~ HRAs
- This is a-significant difference from;the level of controls.
' ._ '3 procedures.
O ~ j 7b
- '0'
prescribed'in the Standard Technical Specifications.
The $ ' a , M%Q 4 ~ 'RadiationWork;Permitforaccesscontrol"toareasy100 mrem /hrI' Standardized Technical: Specification prescribe the;iisa of a.. 1 dl
,, Wp s ~ ' D @p r ' tand < 1,000~ mrem /hr.
Additional positive controls for areas _ Ti M . G 6 f V I,000 mrem /hr are also deliheated.' Access to HRAs is" ij ' hhhQ( c'ontrolled by two administrative control procedures, ZAP 5'-51-15 r] j " j " [m u[ , ak ' ~I v e h l A g.
, 4' *- ' ' l; WD ' '
' W ' * Vg n 'j .!Q s ' } L;D,.# , , '. @ _ u . M ;L Wp
v i , y , <! lfL ff , , , f } '
'
h [hhkhfhb lhh k , f [N[ '[&[ hkh ' .ny@%., ,m: > a t W. J @; aw x.p, 3; % q' ' e-w, < .~ ~m; ~ $,, , { ' ~9 ~ + % s 3a Nf. yhh? l ll,' l, ,? m A , . .
MMdyg f "h M NYf '
, ' M c n f W;nu. P N if . ... * 12 '. 11? fi (> 100Wrem/hhand 'ZAPf 5-51-16?(i 15; R/hr). : HRA ' key; (R-key); M@MW "j administrativer contro1 Tis: the exclusivelresponsibility; of;the. ;. [~ * M ~ %' %@NQ "G' m Ml.
I [ radiatio.nLpratectionLdepartment.JInaddition;a=TyptlII1 radiatiord R941 R 1"; Lwork' permittis" required for:all' R-keyxare'a entries andfaiR-key
^ ' g % controlledis! designated for each'HRALentry to be }esponsible for? a - kg"Q"% _' '
.1 i+ j <uponexitifromythe,!HRA,(R-keyarea)bTensuring proper key 1 co & & X'/0 6
- N
1.
=t
. w w g,; y~
- q g
' . ' - -
- y(ThssE'admInistNtivecontrolsareLthe? implementation (ofcorrective
' , ., 7 ,'e . (.y#h r (. ~ QF J actionsfthat!the? licensee committed't6 pe'rform"to. resolve NRC 4.4 y , ! - ,M concerns?with HRA barrier violationsand degradations. /Th'esefareJ < [ ' y * M M @?.discussedifn11nspection Reports No.'50-2
- j g $ f'~ g f (f 1 50-304/88025(DRSS)
p t .. dated: March 11.-1989.YThe licensee ~ com J e .. dpH J f dl ato implement procedural changes and;to"performfrequisite training; W Q.. K l . , - L R$g*pg y / [4: aforementioned. inspection report'.by July '1R &ggv, g ^ " e % qi1 /i 4 4fi ' y 3; y;, W3 ~ y%D J ' $pM ,j / Q ( ' - "! , , . hj s # Since the' implementation of correctivef actions (July ^1,1989),, a @ v j N . %. j * HRAibirrier violations and degradations have1 continued to; occur'.' 1 " W.qdj &q jff( 4 Y TThese' are delineated in the following Radiation-OccurrenceIRepor't'sg N M 4 L d 29 m y1 ? M j% W(R0Rs):$ 4 9, y? j ' 4 ieT ,L L Aly dLv , gav z> ..
r ^ > - > v .. ,W hn! a y A %yngg, %r, ROR - ., s,. , VO p a c <W /w p.e? My m . ~. Desc. iptiont Date ' i r ~ f. s[.4:gW 7, ' f.
-89055 & W 12.07-89' g s 'a p , , , , Failure to Lock'RadOaste Annex:R- .
- o
. , I N % 78 hf ~ 89056 6 1 12-15-89 ~ ' Q Unatten'ded,'BlockedOpenR-key l Door' ' '
p% 489057-Y 12-27-89 Unit 1 Containment' Personnel'. Hatch Unlocke'd PM h - 89055a" 12-29;89-R-kep'LeftUnattended ~ ' W .H MDKQ'f - Q >90006; 03-27-901 , Failure to lock Radwaste Annex 1 Door . . < M l.J i b ".90015 04-24490 V H Failure?to. Lock Horizontal Pipe Chase Door Oh Mfg /? Y M8 iMissingLockonRadWaste;AnnexiRollupl Door < "" 90017a
- 04-24-90 8.' ' i90023'- 105-03-901 ERadwaste" Annex Door <Left Op*en
'
- {, ',d ' u [90025) % 05-05-90 R-key Left in 28 RHR Door
W'9 $ a.
' i Y
- 05-06
- 90; RadwasteLAnnex Door Left Open
@90026T
k J.
! M m - . g,. ' 05-10,-90: 4RadwasteAnnex'Do,orileft'0 pen ? Eli 90027 x 9
'
2 w _ p y, : - . . g; ', ,, g, s
- lQ 7:
T f W 'y} fUli ' 'M The root:causesiof these events are.essentiallyfthe sametas thos'el . %, . * P) .. , e , _, js,. , ',
- ,
- o? R
' v identified;insIn'spection Reports No. 50-295/88025(DRSS);'50-304/88025I' Q pm *,m M,,' i(DRSS) OeSpEcifically,.these events occurred because;bf?failureTof " ' Md y Lpersonnel to' ensure that'highf radiationiarea ' doors are locked upon; ' exit, HRA doors blocked / propped 'open:and. left1 unattended, failure"to \\ '
- p% ( '
maintain;HRA locking mechanisms in an op'erable condition, and failure '1 ' , - - , g, 4 W M* ' i Sto maintain control of'HRA! keys.
The above delineated incidents are". - %/ R
- violationssof.High" Radiation < Area entry control requirements specified '
i 'in1AP45-51-15 and. Technical 1 Specification 6.2.1 which requires-p; T 1 m%' % . y-A
proceduraltadherence.
The licensees correct'ive' actions to' - @ o Xd < - s", preclude recurrence have not been effective 3totdate. l(Violation) &+, - ~s4 r, 295/90015-06; 304/90017-06).
' e J ,w y' ' . , . y" ..o, - It\\is important;to' note that the licensee has recognir that past ' ~ ' , , e Ja
- corrective actions have been ineffective.
These. actions,have ' g gJ b '* '. 1 -includedfstrengthening of. administrative controls (delineation;of . !b j Me individual and organization responsibilities, conduct of training it.
LV on HRA access control iequirements, the distribution of a management ' ' ! ', 4$f ?,
- memorandum (ZHPD-90-009) emphasizing the importance of HRA access.
, 4. 1,;- x A' r, ,
- ik';
j.5.; . 4 ' F nT W;Wp a N,M%[ [ ~, ~ f ' . , >,3 n nu a;, ,a \\ + + >QY;(' j Qg .o g , h 3- .. . ,.. , l "'
- ;) gr # ymn _ sg n 9 - s,,. n #- c' Mg/ yy, y@ m m: y~, . , , 9' 3 y > w> Ww . '. ~ < ~ ,. ~ w . s
o _ , 4;
. .
- E, Q iv y 7
- w =.
E-w.
. ,+ a - ' <> , . ,, .,, v @* . n, ' a
- M.
- s
.
s . .m . , ,
i + A.a ..
- ..
. V.
, e ~w _, o pf .q yW 9 %: a ?. ; Ai , w. g ao o ,;
,a -, , , y 3n s.m ~ 9, , . ,, x . -
9' , _ _ + / -z -,. - d s05. >-
- o
.. 1.
.. '0 ' kI/i [['[p.DhQ't, M T %D;
- s T control: and individual. counceling; and discip1linary. actions. ; The"Cl
.o
i, AW .. .J M N gdh4MY 2 Eindividual: locking > mechanisms with unique iocks; for_ each HRA:doore ,j
, ' N.z, nVY,Wh;[ 'pOde? violation [ one'no'n-dite'dMolation', 'and one o l[q - ~ + w a, ^ a
a . ,
, O - Lidentifiedts A 'y a t .: , ,' ' n , me ,- g ,.' ~<
o , . . f
- '
"
Plant ours (IP'83750 84750)i
,- ' n ck -.6 The inspectors performed sev'eral tours of radiologically contro11ed' j! v
- .
= . .. .. . . + .. . ., . , WJ
n M areas i These included;walkdowns_of fuel, auxiliary, turbineTand
M p.,j%C m 3, , ,RadiationworkersiaccesslandegressfromtheRCA: personnel: use s: j ' g7 .gradwaste buildingsP ThetinspectorsSobserved the~ following:T u , e < ,
- -
,,
- o, *
, h t 3); J (- g'y q#n.
' , r ' _a , ( on i i G q$ of -frisking stationsyand portaltmonitors were, acceptable.
- , , Q
> ~ ~. m . _, , _ a . . , Contamination monitoring,i portatile? survey area radiation mon'itoring : '
- o"
>- , ' g ,
-y w, ~ ' instrumentation in useAthroughoutlthe ; plant: cinstrumentation 4; ,
fobserveo had been receptly ; source checkedLand"had current? J , .y'. " r - . J F f scalibrations; assappropriate.
' ' '< , c - .c w w.
.x, y, + m
,.,;n, <m . 4.. 'The'setupsfortworadwasteshipmentsandth$ surveys',iplacarding? .
- y ]yi'
r*, , , fv p of. the transports vehicle', and shipment documentation; radiological-l > 1@ Q 3 controls and wastel; transfer wereLin accordance with' regulatory J "" J.g* 6 W requirements andlappro'ved station procedures.
W u W ;y; g $g[i - <t e, c,
- Posting.and4 labeling'forridiati.on,.high, radiation,,contaminatedhnd MM , . $ radioactive mater'ial storage areat: with the. exception discusse'd > * H ?P ' ' " [' % ?lbelow,postingfand;1abelingwereinfaccordancewithregulat l , ',
- requirements and approved station procedures.
" ' (, ' i f{ j ' ' , ); x , i n, n
.
a (2 4 U A~ ' s,TheEiris+pectorslidentifiedian unhosted and unbarricaded c6~ntaminatedlarea" t 'I t ... , LU g i S3 O .outside: ofithe "old" Ra'dwaste Drumming Room.,Two! step-off paris were
, l C e 4~ ' if M, afoundionLthe'fibor withoutJanytmarking!of boundaries (no roper orIrad J fi%
- T'
^ K j . taph). This?is 'a Lviolation of Technical. Specification 6;2.1 which? b e. 9 O f.
" requires, procedura1Jadhererice and the requirements of fprocedu' e?! ? .w [k 9 r ' 1/ f ZRP 1101"12,* Radiological ' Post,ings, Labels, Indicators and Their Use(F g1 j i, W , m Y 4 "which' req' ires radiation rope or radiation' tape to delineate all % a L' .f N i L u gQM ! ' l i@ ',U perimeters of a' radioactivity contaminated area.t The licensee:Was W t
d Y.Tnotified of the: situation: andsres'onded by< surveying the a'rea'iC lS ' n p d N.y, g, ?. # . question and postingithe area"as a contaminated area. JSinc'e this
e - m g j,E i ' Severity, Level :V violation < appear's' to be:an isolated" incident, the lN- ., M 'Vy% violation is' not _be'ing cited because,the' criteria specified"in' Sectioni j'yi ,
- TgAny M.A of the Enforcement Policy were satisfied. 'Thisimatter is closed.
y g ( g p {(NCV'295/90015-07P304/9001,7,07) pg u . ,, n s , e 7y x r >.>; e . , 5.wa,b % g0ne :non-cited violati:on was identified.
p q-a; ip s @.g , 2) .. ,s m , w t < , , ( y. 15V Allegation Follos-up (IP<99024, AMS No. Rill-90-A-0060)
+ g, ., - ! fI Dis' cussed below are.several specific anonymous allegations ~ (relating to ~ " " T the alleged inadequate implementation of the radiati6n protection ' program) which were evaluated during this l'nspection; The. evaluation !
- 4
^ consisted of record and' procedure reviews and interviews with;1icensee T and contractor 1 personnel.
E q ,:y a p
"
3 , , , o ,j E i -. ^h.
Q,G<g',
- J L
4 sh'r.' .,f 'i.
.M.
. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
h! bf YNl$ f r? l hW6 kff ? ll? k+l$l ;l
a f j NTbffgkh; hlw s'b( ~ l$w: p;;l,%yy h
q + > ,.a wO%e p" D
'^\\, ef - 4;" y >va - . m m , ',, . . W W wg y v >3 n i.. , ;. '^ W , . . p ++
- g
. p . J, ~, ' pp ., + "; < o ,, , , Qi W s "i Allegat' ion:< lUsing ~ hoses 1which NrialindontamiNated water on airrifn &l.
'
d ?s x %' Wuh t:mQMAI masksi; f. m.JiK * l ~~,v bb
- {
- .[Q
& -Y = V 3~ - - - " P /s C V
. & -( -
- s * '_ M
'a
' .. x,wS' .4 .y dN@$/)ff1%jfDiscu'9, . F %. /T{WG)df '% !.Q L % ,,,, . c, c. sio,niNInterviewsLwereiconducted withilic~ensee and contractor"' W - M > rad {ationiprotection :supervis'ionMquality control inspectorband NRC * M. M. ~ i^ % l *#ItLivasJtonfirmedifrom the-interviews' that some" air 311nes h'ad been foundt. res1de .4 - 'ln - P '
. % Mi MMiying onJthejfloor'in contaminatsd wate'r.il Hose ~ver fthe inspectors were; [D % i
$ % l W W./lbnableht6 confirm that hoses'which'wereJin# contaminated waterJwere useds VMy i
- NM dM MopairT11ne masksJln additionEthe ihspectors' reviewedtprocedure' a~,hi
' s radiation. occur.rencelreports,jcontaminationeventireportspadiationi y %dM N i count results.; These records 1were cros' D < 4
g%4 % P E D y ;workjpermitsland wh. ole bodyschecked::to identify ^potentialeinternal e VM-gA s , L J1may ha'ebresulted fro O the aljege_dfuse,of contaminatedfair lines, g hise j, % W q $p ' % % crossr omparison's of records;and event; reports \\did_notMidentifA any n Y f W N 4 v _ p c gyy7
- instancs.lin which theiuseioftajcontaminated air?line >resulted?inlan &' J 7i gg-
+
- intake of radioactive materia 1 Lor an external contaminationb wK"'%
if - y s C"; M i NRO, WC: i ~ }g 4 ' % Qd a
Fids .. . w
ding: ThisL allegation was,nht; substantiated.
' * $ [AllegationI'Contfa5tJPft hnidian'sareinotwearig esdi Srs:whied tkWl s[b Qf ' w . A.:cuttingpeopletout@f?lastics"(e.g.<, steam _generatorworkers)l, ' i - v Qf ~1 ' . %x 4 L
^ ' q.
- 6 3; W
% J
> ,DiscussionP Interviees1wefe coEducted with' licensee and contractor O# djWP ;t
jpQ, radiation 9totection s6perv'ision'i$qualitygcontrol insp6ctors and NRCh.
<Vb %
M W @9 % resident" inspectors; regarding the. failure to.useirespiratorsDwhileg ' - All~of/thepersons(interviewedstated.
..;
py gm * tcuttingipeople<out of; plastics.Ti ' BNT; M
- that1theytknewLof no violationtof,the gespirator.busegrequi,rement byathe; N,a,
, WA.jp is_ubject personnel? The inspectors wereLunableito conf =irm that; J uhv
g" 'g ' a contract HP, technicians didinotL wear: respirators while" cutting, people j 1j ~ g out;of0plasticsi(eig.,tsteam generator workers)2 fin addition M 1M. y i M i finspectors' reiiewed proceduresbradiation occurrence reports?pthe: Vy jp b
- "
~ contami , J N [ =t 1 <ination event? reports, radiationfwork permitsksurveysf a'nd'shole (body . " yF " % count results.4 These records;were cross, checked tolidentify. potential; "w , 'F6 . Tinternal z exposures'and contaminations that;may have resulted^ from;the
c
79% ~ . c lleged failure'totuse respirators,while cutting people out;of plastics.
bs ' a %.7... 9 The area where)HP personnelecutlworkers outtof plastics >was_ posted:ask
.;' s> ff ## '"Res'pirators(Required".AThese crossicomparisonsiof records did not f
~ s f " J;%v m identifytany; instance in"which an > intake of radioactive material?or . h <an~ external contami" nation,was~due;to5a-failureiof> personnel to use L i % Hrespirators while cutting' people out of plastics; Nor was a report;. J > J Jidentified.which indicatedithatlany person assigned toL cut workers.out " %._ t m% 'of plasticsthad failed tofadhere"to the re'spirator use requirement.
- , "a N ' ,s s mW c MR
, a1 % ,a w .; - + . Il@~ yp --Bf , This; allegation?was1not' substantiated.
The licensee's
f;. Finding: respiratory protection, prograf appears adequate to preclude exposure of' 'y' g pe, nf" f '
g personnel to radioactive; material;during : steam 7 generator maintenance +M ,
My q.
activities.
. a M "' q'y - , .
- p
, . - , e s + rs,
- bW<
Allegation: 3 Bagging, contaminated mate /1.als without surveying or M marking,thelbags with the contamination and dose readings (these bags - $q - -wereIin-the unit'2 containment)l r > t ? .' p 's , , , , i = < ' \\. sa
- ..
. > p ,
, 1.
W-,
,
- f
' i' , my .
, >4 , ' y; wk q x +
, , , '
, i . >j ' m'i@ /.
' a ! w , , , t 4., ,,. .L +1 . ' .
> ' y; p . . . > > , gp x > x , , , , ,e . , - >
,- h7 ' - .- f u - } g > $( , . . ,,
- <
l Discussio'n:1 ' Interviews were' conducted with licensee and contractor M,, . radiation protection supervision, quality: control' inspectors'.and NRC- ' ' . resident inspectors regarding the. failure to survey or mark bags.with M, the contamination and dose'~ readings. 'All of the~ persons interviewed.
stated that they knew of no procedural violations 'or a radiological
,
i, sincident due to:< inadequately marked bags.. The inspectors were unable
to. confirm that bagged radioactive materials-in the containment were not' surveyed or' marked with dose readings.. The inspectors did, however, j , confirm that contamination readings were not. required to be marked on ' ' ~ .. the bags. Zion. procedure ZRP:1001-1, Radiation Standards.. requires'in- >^ part that-radioactive materials-transported between controlled areas shallibe' clearly marked with radiation symbols and 'should contain any - f > & addition'al information necessary for radiation safety, such as:: ' description.of contents, activity in curies, date, dose equivalent i rates at contact or at specified distances. - The procedures do not-g require marking of contamination levels on the bag.' The: inspectors-s t reviewed procedures, radiation occurrence reports, contamination ~ event .j v reports, radiation work' permits, surveys and whole body count results.
'
These records were' cross checked to identify potential internal and.
. , ~external exposures and contaminations that may have resulted from the- -! , alleged failure,to survey or mark bags with contamination or dose: readings;-and to identify any procedural violations. These cross comparisons't .
of records.did. not identify any' instance in which an intake of radioactive ( _., . . material or an external contamination wt due to a failure to~ bag < e .
- contaminated materials'without. surveying or marking -the bags;- Hor were v
any' procedural violatio'ns identified.
%
- i
, Finding: The allegation regarding the failure to survey and mark -bags' ,. . of radioactive materials was substantiated with respect to contamination.
slevels...However, the licensee's procedures do not require the j . , t routine; marking ~of bags of radioactive materials with contamination ' , levels, and these. procedures are consistent with the requirements of
10 CFR!20,203(f). 'The allegation regarding the failure ~to survey-and.
A mark bags of-radioactive materials with dose readings was not substanti- .
- ated. :The licensee's program appears to be adequate to control;the
. o . '; , transfer of radioactive materials between controlled areas within the- ~ restricted' area and'to preclude inadvertent exposure of personnel:to-j-radioactive materials.
t ' These' allegations (AMS'No. RIII-90-A-0060) are closed.
I L16.. Exit. Interview (IP307W) The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Section 1) ' ' cat'the conclusion of the onsite inspection on July 27, 1990 and by a w; telephone through August 8, 1990. The inspectors summarized the scope " aJ * and' findings of the inspection. The inspectors also discussed the likely
informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents i and processes reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection. The
-licensee did not identify any such documents or processes as l i proprietary. The following matters were discussed specifically by the L inspectors: . i
, t --- - -. - -
hw# %w% wn % a m , " P, -.. ' - m.-, e _ y .3-y + + C,. n& 3,. V; % 4 v - .
- **
soba ,o . m a p p; %n w s bw, - - @sa a,&r. m ea s m gw+; vM'e -; g; 4;; y.
-4x w - < ~ - >,; , , m r.+ w + a.~:; %, 4<, t , u .. n~ v a . s n
. /v v.
, p, e s +
- 4
-,n4 . . ,. e v r;- y n w c,+ , . , . ~1., ghW:4ta em = < - t 6i . v Aw'W: v.
'~. + n+ 4W . + r ~ + 'y\\, 6r 4 cR .' qU- ?0-3
< L 4,.W:.ph.g&J < .4 ~' e.
% m s
. w s s e '4
4
- .
- % ? 'Y' Y.. @r ,%i, aa. ik ' +gY7 ' ww&~$e W ,,Y &- >+ < , u &qThe f{vehpparentiv,1$1atNns!. i ,. . .
- ah (Sections.'8[9'b,'13,b,~13.c,LandY'
[ h 3M Se' . . " M M, h,vy& " T s 4~;' o A14) a ! ' .,n., ' ' ' x i ' %' ~ ' ' " - ' is v. - mwc'
. , d b .: n .:
- m x
-+. .,< . i . '+' W sw : T X; w _ ; g.
L . rc , <Ac v w.
, . e ,~ < . s, e g$gp.
% -
- Inspector,concernsiregardingSystem'OperatingInstructionsnot'bei'ng 5y a-
.b.
Ww-designated as mandatory-in-hand proceduresh (Section 3; Open; Item NIV: , - J'1*' '
.. PYJ JNos.: 295/87037r03; 304/87038-03),1 ^
4 s , , - g O c m 4-yt , - , . , f.
.. - . , , ' g w.m , .. m: ._. ,.. m of.
yg,, 9<< s e, t The: apparent need.to' evaluate the adequacy of. he' current methodiof;' f' d ,t b M V J p: accounting for the: gamma component'of4 hot harticle skin; exposures r a Sect on 13.a)
W 2 ^ '+, n.
.,s
,,.f %,,. e
.gg m. 1,J # i
. , s u - -y, - . . >% , t5 < < ,.c~ y ^y. '-.. -a > i
t s. + 1 ., ~
- g?,
L
- ..
e i ,, a . s p' f"' ' E p '.. < r ' k ,-' ~ , 5) ,' W L 4, g 1' }f.' ? t '[.5- 'h L I . .,%.'
y .
,p' ' 3.. -; j %. h T_,.. : 't s ~;\\ JJ - * .9, ,.-...z,.* e 4, ; ).. , jqt a, <, ,,' ,. i,m e -. sa y , u\\ ') ' a v,- ,,4 +l , ' , p e? ' '
4 4* ee , s ' s "*' , r . '..**i '.1 ~ ,', _,, e yJg D '
- .,. 'if V >
- +. k'
' k T :h_ *M "
- ,,m,,
, t - ' A$?k4hn -> ;,, y m,..m . f - , 4. 2
- j [,m g: _.
g, . ,~ , .* &)W ,,,, ' ' ' % *'a 7 :%,
!. t
, , ,. m_3 -
- { r
- g i,) r
- ,,ts.
..y3 } N' e~ d {* - ' < -- ' g.4-9;-e r. y N- -. .e g s q J 4 - 'f l ,
. t}( E=* . > '
{j[ .: j.
@j q& < , , , + ' r w < 4,1 '> .d, .. << y Q M ../
, * , -, -
s . d- -3+ r e p ;, m,n g' e,
,. , 3, + s .N s s cg y.g %y - .7 - x ^ w .,., - ,e e
q !. xl 4,(h.
- l\\
> r ,b 4 p - 4; n, - j- ,
,e , y 1) y-kr ~ t 4, p i- = = : h-
n .. v' A.
, T ' L ,4 s.
,u, + k N,mg;M i )t i, @, F 4 l ?,, e> '..f$ % 'V [ - i ! T h, J '
< j - m 0.
i - . - car > u 4 ,3 'f; 7'. } : ;, ' M i 5 ' l , ^fM.
.
34- .en "
., p y' * ,$- . f d , i r '.15, . ' -
-, t
e . q; '? 3; p A -
- n'a,3 ;t g
- -
( ;O -. d . 6^ V 4' # ; ( .. ,3 , % . e o , p p(1,y. yv
- Q r
, r
_pa, f.. ~ -, ' .n p , . . A y( f Ol's )> a i 'i i
18-, - s$ , ' p g;,R. m y yi n-
- .
p . >y ' > pn p . , r
y1 v,qt n w., .. h. y w e i N.-y gg, y+ j ),1., , . g _,, e , .,~ a. ,,.' , % dn , ,. ' ' M' ' - [4 y i $. y03 g35 G" y ' ' '; 4s6 ; + , , @ $ ' N,1 p, m'" : M lg g :p y- <4; q '(, y.
,s> i ,, i ' ' + jyt4' , fpy -,.'f,g ; g i; j , c,, , j ' ,o t t h, g-.. - . s ' j \\ y, .a, o 6'
- ,
,' [ -. f ,
%. N ',g e -% i
A'- tj, j' ,..
6 g A i s , , , , ^ ' < p4 . tl ,',k,, , 7 ' %, x ,r '? ?y + [ r . O i, u %y -,.". *
-. , p4 i , ses % , , g li @1f . ' J .j , a, s , , M h?
- l 1
.', i . c p ' i " , . , - C'~ i,
'p ' . . s d ;e'ha n i,1 , , .
, < 4' ' * ,g' , _I[ ,i j ,..
. , f' .-. gI..., ' k.' I ' I
., ,i g,g\\. h 3l . Af ~ n
, y , ' ')c ja g ' >ei.
, , , h,.a.p,.,
l( + - , . .
O
J1c r us. ej ~s
4 -, , i r i 4[ . i h. ;, ' ' (lyn
.p;
S i
y , ,' sap he 'f e n ,i, .y ++ . i p < ,n, -
.m 3:
, '
,, g4 (
' a/l~tl j ,_ , ' g -- ' 4'l'.4 ': ,,
'
i~ kVa. % ,
a . j... _ ) k 'i ' y ,. .{94 - ', .. .+ Y ,A , .y> u v >r + < e,( s q'. . '7 $.. , 3,. - s ' '4 s
, , , ' ,ydi . .'j y lly ! t i , , km 1_ + '
i , q ' ' i (
3 ._
+ d
',
4 ,, Y '
't (
,., .?4 .Li, % i
' I . l. 8 _ .,
, '{ { ',y.
-- ) Jp[ W Jlg, 's ,., + t c t j ., s zy ,, , - # / j - Ar.
j
- 1 a ,
,4 , g__ ,{,,- b .8'.=.1
- t c
, , a-r - t >.
r (.k[ } g'$ ; ' [ II
~ j y ,*s? ' I ' * p* ,
- -' ; ['
- h+... ',
( kl 0'
+ . %.M p %('- g
y',. Gl } ' e y v -
. ~ 1' 9 . Q . L, Y g l , .
- .V i
, <> ~ y_.
}, - . N.
' ; ? , vg.
>+ 6I .,- =4, j O.>, X
.n . " ? . xe, L.
u,
- 17-
. , n x . , ,. '
+ _i % ( g.
s ) .
, s . i . hb , + h p+
i .r ,x.
-> -W < s er > }}