IR 05000309/1981011
| ML20041A199 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Maine Yankee |
| Issue date: | 01/18/1982 |
| From: | Knapp P, Plumlee K NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041A196 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-309-81-11, NUDOCS 8202190261 | |
| Download: ML20041A199 (12) | |
Text
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
.
Region I Report No. 50-309/81-11
.
Docket No. 50-309 License No. DPR-36 Priority Category C
--
Licensee:
Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 20 Turnpike Road Westborough, Massachusetts 01581 Facility Name:
Maine Yankee Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At:
Wiscassett, Maine Inspection Conducted:
April 14-17 and June 1-5, 1981 l
Inspectors:
, m f, t
/// $NA K.E.n Plumle~~R
'tTori Speciali st dat'e signed Approved By:
ch M
f - f fil P.J. Knapp, Chief ~ FacYlitiet Radiological date signed Protection Section, Technical Inspection Branch l
Inspection Summary:
!
Inspection on April 14-17 and June 1-5, 1981 (Report No. 50-309/81-11)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection by a regional based in-spector of radiation protection during refueling including:
procedures, advanced planning and preparation, training, exposure control, respiratory protection, posting, radioactive and contaminated material control, surveys, independent measurements, facility tours, and outstanding items.
This in-spection involved 60 hours6.944444e-4 days <br />0.0167 hours <br />9.920635e-5 weeks <br />2.283e-5 months <br /> onsite by one NRC regional based inspector.
l Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
820219026f. J20203 PDR ADOCK 5000309 G
. - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __-.__
.
..
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
' Maine Yankee Employees
- G. Cochrane, Radiological-Controls Supervisor F. Erskine, Radiological Controls Foreman
- G. Joseph, QA Coordinator
'**R. Lawton, Director of Operational QA
- G. Pillsbury, Assistant Radiological' Controls Supervisor J. Stevens, Chemistry Manager l
- D. Sturniolo, Assistant to the Plant Manager j
- E. Wood, Plant Manager:
Bartlett Company Employees D. Welch, Site Coordinator R. Bell, Senior HP Technician USNRC f
- P. Swetland, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those individuals present during an exit interview on April
'
17, 1981.
- Denotes those individuals present during the exit interview on June 5, 1981.
- Denotes those individuals present during the exit interviews on-April 17 and June 5, 1981.
2.
Licensee Action on Bulletins and Circulars (Closed) IE Bulletin (78-BU-08):
Review of fuel transfer tube radiation.
levels.
Previous documentation of this item was contained in a licensee letter to the Director, NRC Region I, dated August 4, 1978, and in Inspection Report Nos. 309/78-15 and 309/79-10. The documentation indicated that temporary shielding was placed at the fuel transfer tube to preclude the occurrence of high radiation' areas in any accessible-space during refueling operation.
- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
Review during this inspection verified that the temporary shielding was placed at the fuel transfer tube.
No exposure problems were identified.
The shielding, composed of loose concrete blocks (stacked up to 10 ft. high), was to be removed before resuming power operation.
The licensee representative stated that a safety evaluation would be needed to address concerns of possible damage to a safety system in the event of a seismic disturbance or reactor' accident that might topple the shielding.
It was the licensee's intent to use the shielding only during refueling, until the safety evaluation is complete.
During the exit interview the licensee representative committed to in-clude the installation, and also the subsequent removal, of the temporary shielding as routine procedural prerequisites for refueling, and for the subsequent resumption of power operation (81-11-01).
3.
Radiation Protection Procedures The inspection effort included verification that appropriate procedures were provided and followed during the refueling outage.
Technical Specification (TS) 5.8.1 requires, in part, that " Written procedures shall be established, implemented and maintained covering
...the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix "A" of Regulatory Guide 1.33, November,1972,...and refueling operations..."
TS 5.8.2 states that, "Each procedure of 5.8.1 above, and changes thereto, shall be reviewed by the PORC and approved by the Plant Superintendent prior to implementation and reviewed periodically as set forth in administrative procedures." Further, TS 5.11 states that, " Procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be approved, maintained and adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation exposure."
The inspector reviewed the following licensee procedures to ascertain that these specifications were met:
Procedure Revision Revision Number Number Date (Abbreviated) Title
!
HP 9.1.1
1/80 Plant Radiological Surveys HP 9.1.2
1/80 Respiratory Protection
,
Program HP 9.1.4
4/81 Use of Pr tective Clothing and Equi ment t
HP 9.1.6
3/81 Establishing and Posting Controlled Areas
_ _ _ _.. _ _ - _
-
.
.
1
'
HP 9.1.7
3/81 Area'and. Equipment-Decontamination HP 9.1.8
3/81 Monitoring for Personnel Contamination HP 9.1'.9
2/81 Personnel Decontamination Procedure
-
HP 9.1.10
5/80
' Radiation Work Permits HP.9.1.11
1/80 H.P. Procedure for Re--
fueling and Shutdowns
'HP 9.1.12
1/81~
Use of Personnel Monitoring Devices HP 9.1.13
9/80 Respirator Issuance and Field Testing
.HP 9.1.14
5/80 Receipt of Radioactive
~ Material HP 9.1.15 7-1/81 Shipment of Radioactive Material HP 9.1.17-
2/80 Processing Radioactive Solid Waste
,
HP 9.1.18
1/81 Receipt and Handling of New Fuel
,
HP 9.1.20
8/79 Bioassay Program HP 9.1.21
8/79 Respirator Fitting Program'
HP 9.1.22
4/80 MPC Hour Accountability Program HP 9.1.23
8/79 Respiratory Protection Training Program HP 9.1.24
8/79-
. Cleaning, Disinfection, Decon. and Storage of-Respirators HP 9.1.25
1/81 Respiratory Protection QA Program HP 9.1.26
10/80 Whole Body Counting HP 9.237.
3/80 Health Physics Department Training Program
.
.
The inspector also verified the adherence to the procedures by direct observation of work in progress, by interviews with personnel, and by reviews of appropriate records.-
Inspection of the licensee's procedures did not identify any items of noncompliance.
4.
Advanced Planning and Preparation a.
Increased Health Physics Staff The licensee representative stated that the following temporary employees were hired before or during the outage to assist with outage preparations and the increased work load during the outage:
2 Supervisors (Bartlett Co. employees)
22 Senior Health Physics Technicians (Bartlett Co. employees)
16 Junior Health Physics Technicians (Bartlett Co. employees)
5 Records clerks'(Bartlett Co. employees)
3 Graduate students.(University of Lowell)
1 TLD reader operator (Yankee Nuclear Services Division employee)-
The. inspector reviewed the resumes of 10 senior, health physics technicians to determine'that they had the qualifications required by the Technical Specifications, Section 5.3.1, and with ANSI N18.1, 1971, " Selection and Training of Nuclear. Power Plant Personnel." No items of noncompliance were identified.
The licensee representative stated that the day to day job assignments of the above individuals were based on their education, experience, site specific training, individual preferences, 'and the daily job requirements.
Only one of the above was authorized to approve radiation work permits.
The inspector contacted ten technicians, three clerks, and a graduate student, to informally verify their job assignments, site-specific training, educational background, and experience (see paragraph 5.c).
No discrepancies were identified.
b.
Mockups and Special Trainino and Equipment The licensee representative stated that a steam generator mockup was available. The inspector also noted that specially trained
_
.-
6
. personnel were contracted to perform steam generator tube eddy.
current tests, tube plugging, welding, and radiography.
In addition, remotely operated in-service inspection equipment and viewers were used.
The licensee also utilized hydrolasing equipment to reduce surface contamination levels.
Containments and air-cleaning systems were used to control the contamination resulting from cleaning, brushing, grinding and welding operations.
A TLD reader.and a trained operator were maintained onsite during
-
the outage to proside prompt availability of-dosimetry information.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
c.
Supplies and Equipment used for Radiation Protection The inspector toured the facility to review the availability and use of survey instruments, protective clothing, respirators l
(Paragraph 7), shielding, (Paragraph 2), decontamination materials,
'
and special equipment.
No survey instruments were identified as inoperative or overdue for calibration.
Further, the review indicated no apparent delays in obtaining instruments and equipment and no shortages during this inspection.
No' items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Training a.
Escorted Personnel Untrained personnel, such as short term visitors or new arrivals who had not yet completed their training for unescorted access, t
I were escorted in the controlled area.
These individuals were instructed to remain with their escort and to follow'his example and any instructions he gave. The licensee also used page system announcements, posted information, signs, local warning lights and alarms, and maintained an evacuation alarm system to inform all persennel of circumstances requiring action.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
General Employee Indoctrination Review of the general employee indoctrination, provided to comply.
with 10 CFR 19.12, indicated that qualified contract instructors
_ - -
_ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _
-
- .
m
were providing the training. The training included the use of a
' lesson plan, radiation protection manual, visual' aids,-video.
tapes, lecture sessions, a written examination, and was conducted by the Training Department.
The. inspector reviewed the training, and contacted 10-workers at various times during the inspection to verify their completion of indoctrination and the effecti eness of the training.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
c.
Contract' Health Physics Technician Training Review of procedure No. HP 9.237, " Health Physics Department Training Program", section 8.0 " Contractor-Technician Health Physics Training", and records of training conducted pursuant to the procedure, indicated that these personnel received the following training:
(1) General employee indoctrination (see above).
(2) Familiarization tour of the radiological control area (RCA).
(3) A review of HP procedures, policies and administrative limits.
(4) On-the-job training and evaluation.
The. inspector contacted ten temporary technicians during inspection tours and verified that their qualifications and training were-adequate for their actual job assignments, as found. The review of training records and resumes (Paragraph'4.a,) did not identify any inconsistencies with their subsequent assignments.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
d.
Licensee Employee Health Physics Technician Training The review of retraining checksheets indicated that routine re-training was curtailed during the refueling outage..However, the-licensee representative stated that the requirement of Procedure No. HP 9.237 will be met, i.e. to complete the review of each i
specified topic at least once every two years.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Exposure Control a.
ALARA Program Review during this outage included observation of the licensee's and individual worker's adherence to the ALARA progra..
..
The. inspector verified that:
(1) The ALARA program was included in each worker's indoctrination training; (2) Procedure No. HP 9.1.10, in section 7.2.5.2, required an ALARA review for every job having a potential to exceed a total of 5 man rem exposure;
-(3) ' Personnel dosimetry results were kept up to date during.the
~
outage, by the use of an on-site TLD reader;
_ 4) Shielding, ventilation / filtration systems, enclosure. and (
remote operated equipment were provided as needed; anu
.
-(5) Work areas were frequently decontaminated, and radwaste was not allowed to accumulate.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
b.
Personnel Dosimetry Practices The inspector reviewed the licensee's dosimetry practices to verify compliance with the requirements of-10 CFR 20.101, " Radiation dose standards..."; 10 CFR 20.102, " Determination'of prior dose"; 10 CFR 20.202, " Personnel Monitoring"; 10 CFR 20.401,
" Records of surveys, radiation monitoring, and disposal"; 10 CFR 20.408, " Reports of personnel monitoring on termination..."; 10 CFR 20.409, " Notifications and reports to individuals"; and 10 CFR 19.13(a), " Notification and reports to individuals." This review included:
Tours of the reactor building,' process auxiliary building,
-
fuel handling building, radwaste facilities, turbine building, and'the grounds within the inner security fence, to evaluate the dosimetry practices on several modifications, maintenance activities, in-service inspections, and waste handling operations.
Examination of 20;RWfs'to review the instructions for special
-
dosimetry;
-
Examination of the daily computer printout of dosimetry
records to identify any unusual parsonnel exposures;
-
Examination of the record files of ten individuals who had exceeded 1 1/4 rems during a calendar quarter to verify that
'
their Form NRC-4s were completed;
,
. -, -.
.. - - - -.
.
.
,
, - - -
___________ __-_____ ________
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__
_
. - _ _ _
_ _ _ _.
._
- _ _ _ _. _ _ _
_ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
-
' Examination of the record files of ten previously terminated individuals to verify that dosimetry reports were routinely-provided to the terminated workers and to1the NRC; and
Contacts with five. individuals who were terminating to
.
verify that written dosimetry estimates were routinely-
-provided on termination.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
7.
Respiratory Protection Protection a.
Internal Exposure Limits Observation of working conditions during this inspection, and re-view of records of work permits, air samples, contamination surveys, nasal swipes, skin contamination, and whole body counts did not identify any exposure to airborne radioactive materials in excess of 10 CFR 20.103 limits, b.
Engineering Controls The inspector verified that exposures to airborne radioactive materials were controlled in compliance with 10 CFR 20.103 by decontamination of the surfaces, use of plastic covers and tents to prevent spreading of contamination, and use of controlled ventilation systems to prevent exposures to unacceptable concentrations of airborne radioactive materials.
c.
Licensee Evaluations of Controls
.The inspector noted that the RWP records and the licensee evaluations indicated the selection of acceptable equipment, the use of authorized protection factors, and the ' application of preventive measures.
The inspector verified that internal exposures were evaluated in accordance with a written, approved procedure, HP 9.1.22.
d.
Respiratory Protection Training and Respirator Fitting and Testing The inspector verified that the physical ability determination, fitting, and training of personnel using respirators was documented and the applicable procedures, HP 9.1.2, 9.1.3, 9.1.13, 9.1.21, and 9.1.23 were fully implemented.
Observation of training and fitting did not identify any problems in the qualification of users of respirators.
.
..
...
..
.-...
..
.
.
.
_ _ - - -
'
,
.
e.
Respirator Use, Cleaning and Disinfection, and Maintenance The inspector: observed the conduct of each of the following activities to verify. it was conducted in compliance.with the requirements of Regulatory Guide 8.15 (RG-8.15), " Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protection."
Issue of respirators.
User's check of the respirator on receipt.
User's fit test of the respirator when donned.
Wearing of respirators on the job.
Removal of respirators on leaving the job.
Collection of respirators to be cleaned and reissued.
Cleaning, disinfection, and maintenance of respirators.
Storage of respirators.
The cleaning,. disinfection and maintenance of respirators was per-formed on a table near the control point for the reactor building airlock. The table was also used for records and miscellaneous purposes.
The licensee representative ~ stated that a dedicated facility was planned for respirator servicing and will'be available in time for the next scheduled refueling.
The inspector noted that the respirator facility will be routinely inspected before the next refueling.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
f.
Procedural Controls on Nonconforming Uses of Respirators The inspector verified that the procedures, in order to comply with RG 8.15, prohibit the following misuses of respirators:
Wearing of air purifying respirators in oxygen-deficient atmospheres.
Use of cannisters in atmospheres for which the cannisters are not approved.
Wearing of respirators over glasses, beards or articles of clothing that could interfere with the respirator seal.
.
_
_ _ _ _
___
_ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
,
..
No items of noncompliance were identified.
,
8.
Posting and Control'of Radiation Areas, Airborne Radioactivity Areas, and Contaninated Areas
.
.The inspector toured the facility to verify compliance with the require-ments of 10 CFR 20.203, " Caution signs, labels, signals, and controls."'
.
This tour involved the following:
Confirmatory surveys to verify the adequacy of the posted information,
-
container labels, and barricades, at several locations about the facility;
-
Verification of licensee adherence to procedure HP 9.1.6, "Estab-lishing and Posting Controlled Areas";
-
Checks of ten locked doors controlling entrances to High Radiation Areas; Review of the facility radiation monitors and air monitors having
-
remote readouts in the control room; and
-
Verification that the chemistry and radiation hoods and the RCS sample sink ventilation provided at least a face flow velocity of 100 fpm.
The inspector surveyed the outdoor areas, where containers of contaminated
'
materials and radioactive waste were stored.
The inspector noted that anyone standing outside the security fence could not reach any area, except near the discharge canal, where the radiation exposure rate exceeded 0.1 mrem /hr.
Near the discharge canal the exposure rate was as high as 0.5 mrem /hr due to a raarby Refueling Water Storage Tank. The security. fence and the barrier around the tank were properly posted.
The inspector. selected ten RWP's for verification that the RWP's were executed in compliance with procedure No. HP 9.1.10,'" Radiation Work Permits"; and that radiation surveys, air sampling, protective clothing, respiratory protection, dosimetry, and time limitation instructions entered thereon were consistent with the applicable procedures and the Maine Yankee Radiation Protection Manual.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
9.
Radioactive and Contaminated Material Control During the tours described above, the inspector verified by surveys
>
and observation that:
.
w
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
r e
' Radioactive and contaminated material was collected in properly
-
labelled containers; j
Used protective clothing, respirators, tools,. parts and radio-
-
active waste were systematically collected and routed to the appropriate disposition-such as shipment to an offsite laundry, respirator cleaning'and maintenance onsite, decontamination,;
storage, or preparation'for shipment offsite; Radioactive waste reduction program was implemented; and
-
Noncontaminated waste was maintained in separate recaptacles from
-
contaminated materials'and was surveyed to verify its proper dis-position upon release from the controlled areas.
The inspector observed the preparations for two shipments of radio-active. waste to a burial site,'and reviewed the QA records and shipping records.
It was noted that the licensee was preparing to revise'the procedures pertaining to the dewatering of spent resin to be consistent with recently imposed more restrictive burial site criteria. The licensee subsequently informed the inspector, during a telephone conversation on January 11, 1982, the procedural revisions were completed by August 31, 1981, and these specified a QA/QC-check of each container to assure the criteria were-met prior to shipment.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
10.
Exit Interviews
Exit interviews were conducted on April 17, 1981, and June 5,1981, with'the personnel denoted in Paragraph 1, to review the inspection findings.
On June 5,1981, the licensee representatives responded to certain findings with the following commitments:
a.
Radwaste shipments would not be made pending QA/QC verification that the dewatering procedure would meet the proposed burial site criteria (Paragraph 9); and b.
The placement and subsequent removal of temporary shielding at the spent fuel transfer tube during each refueling will be in-cluded in the appropriate routine procedures (Paragraph 2).
.
The inspector reviewed minor out-of-date information noted dur.ing the inspection of the indoctrination training and the respirator training video tapes.
In response, the licensee representative stated that the training tapes would be reviewed for consistency with current practice.
_ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ - - _