IR 05000309/1985035

Insp Rept 50-309/85-35 on 851202-06.No Violation Identified. Major Areas Inspected:Radiation Protection Activities, Including Training,Procedures,Respiratory Protection,Source Inventory & Leak Tests

ML20138R384
Person / Time
Site:	Maine Yankee
Issue date:	12/23/1985
From:	Clemons P, Shanbaky M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138R378	List: IR 05000309/1985035 ML20138R376
References
50-309-85-35, NUDOCS 8512310242
Download: ML20138R384 (5)

Text

.

-

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report N /85-35 Docket N License No. DPR-36 Priority -

Category C Licensee: Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company 83 Edison Drive August, Maine 04336 Facility Name: Maine Yankee Nuclear Generating Station Inspection At: Wiscassett, Maine Inspection Conducted: December 2-6, 1985 Inspector: [6km/ / 3 5

' Clemons, Radiation Specialist / da(e Approved by: \ ( M. Shanbilly, Chief, W V lb 11/2>/ P P

' date PWR, Radiation Safety Section Inspection-Summary: -

Inspection on December 2-6, 1985 (Report No. 50-309/85-35)

,

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the radiation protection activities including: training, procedures, respiratory protection, source inventory and leak tests, and instrument maintenance and calibration. This inspection involved 30 inspector hours on site by one regionally-based inspecto Results: No violations were identifie .,e pgA21888! Bih"$!'

G

,

,

..

DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted J. Garrity, Plant Manager E. Boulette, Technical Support Manager / Assistant Plant Manager L. Lawson, Quality Assurance Section Head P. Dostie, Lead Radiological Controls Specialist G. Pillsburg, Assistant to Manager, Technical Support Department S. Evans, Licensing Engineer Other licensee employees were contacted and interviewed during this inspectio . Purpose The purpose of this routine inspection was to review the licensee's radiation protection activities with respect to the following elements:

Review of training of licensee personnel;

Review of procedures;

Review of respiratory protection;

Review of instrument repair and calibration; and

Review of source inventory and leak test . Training l

The licensee's training program for Radiological Controls Technicians was reviewed against criteria contained in Technical Specification 5.4,

" Training" and licensae procedures. This review was conducted because it was determined during Inspection 309/85-31 that the Chemistry Technicians were not being retrained as required and this resulted in a violation i being issued. The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by interviewing the Radiological Controls Section Head, a Radiological Controls Foreman, members of the Training Department, and by reviewing appropriate documert Within the scope of this review, the_following was identifie Technical Specification 5.4, " Training" states "A retraining ... program for the facility staff shall be maintained under the direction of the Plant Manager and shall meet or exceed the requirements and recommen-dations of Section 5.5 of ANSI N18.1-1971. . ." Section 5.1 of Procedure No ' 9.200, " Radiological Controls Department Training Program" states _ Tne Radiological Controls Supervisor will annually l

, - -

__

l

.

3 l

l evaluate plant changes, past problem areas from audits and inspections, l areas of the Radiation Protection Program that need improvement and estab- i lish an annual continuing training program for the year".

Section 5.1 of Procedure No. 0-05-2, " Training Documentation System",

states "... that the Training Department files are the official Source of Training Documentation for personnel qualification, licensing, certif f-cations, audits and inspections".

Using the Training Department files, the inspector determined that only three Radiological Control Technicians were trained in health physics activities in February 1984, and only five technicians were trained in respiratory protection activities in February 1984. Further discussion with licensee personnel led to other records that indi ated that some of the technicians had received some train.ing in healt'n physics activities during the period of February - July 198 This lack of systematic training did not result in a violation because of Violation 309/85-31, but the Radiological Controls Section Head assured the inspector that all Technicians would receive training as required prior to the end of December 1985. This item will be reviewed in a subseouentinsoection(309/85-35-01). _

Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie . Procedures The adequacy and effectiveness of the licensee's procedures were reviewed against the criteria contained in Technical Specification 5.8, " Pro-cedures". The licensee's perf'ormance relative to these criteria was determined by discussion with Radiological Controls staff members, and by reviewing procedure Procedures reviewed included:

• Procedure No. 0-05-2, " Training Documentation System",

• Procedure No. 9.1.2, " Respiratory Protection Program",

• Procedure 9.1.5, " Radioactive Source Inventory and Leak Test",

• Procedure No. 9.1.20, " Bioassay Program",

• Procedure No. 9.306, " Calibration of the NNC Portal Monitor",

• Procedure No. 9.307, " Operation And Calibration Of The Eberline PIC-6A",

l * Procedure No 9.311, " Operation And Calibration Of The Eberline PAC-4S Alpha Counter",

!

l

-

. _

r

. -

.

,

• Procedure No. 9.313, " Operation And Calibration Of The Eberline RM-14 Radiation Monitor",

• Procedure No. 9.330, " Operation of the Robbins "RAF" Compressed Air Purification System".

The licensee's procedures appeared to be adequate for their intended purpos Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie . Source Inventory and Leak Test Radioactive source inventory and leak tests were reviewed against the criteria contained in Technical Specification 4.2 Table 4.2-1, "Surveill-ance Requirements", and Procedure No. 9.1.5, " Radioactive Source Inventory and Leak Test".

The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by:

discussions with a Radiological Control Foreman; Radiological Control Technicians; by reviewing appropriate documents: and by observatio The licensee's records indicated that source inventory was being performed monthly, and leak tests were performed every six months as require Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie . Respiratory Protection The adequacy and effectiveness of the licensee's respiratory protection program was reviewed against the criteria contained in 10 CFR 20.103,

" Exposure of individuals to concentrations of radioactive materials in air in restricted areas".

The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by interviewing a Radiological Controls Specialist, and by reviewing appro-priate document Within the scope of this review, the following was identifie The licensee is apparently considering taking credit for the respirator protection factors permitted by the regulations. The inspector deter-mined that the licensee's respiratory protection program was apparently approved by the Commission-in the Technical-Specification Section of the original' Maine Yankee operating licens Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.- . . .. .

-d 5 Instrument Maintenance and Calibration The licensee's program for the calibration and maintenance of portable instruments was reviewed against criteria contained in:

• 10 CFR 20.201, " Surveys";

• ' Reg Guide 8.6, " Standard Test Procedure for Geiger - Muller Counters";

• ANSI-N323, " Radiation Protection Instrumentation Test and Calibration"; and

• Licensee Operation and Calibration Procedure The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by discussions with Instrument and Control personnel, a Radiological Controls Specialist, a Radiological Controls Foreman, and by reviewing

appropriate record Within the scope of this review, no violations were identifie . Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)

at the conclusion of the inspection on December 6, 1985. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection, and the inspection findings. At no time during this inspection was written material provided-to the licensee by the inspecto .

f

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

.

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

-

, - - . - _ . . . _ ,