IR 05000317/1985005
| ML20129F708 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 05/20/1985 |
| From: | Clemons P, Shanbaky M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129F701 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-317-85-05, 50-317-85-5, 50-318-85-05, 50-318-85-5, NUDOCS 8506070021 | |
| Download: ML20129F708 (5) | |
Text
r
!
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
50-317/85-05 Report Nos. 50-318/85-05 50-317 Docket Nos.
50-318 DPR-53 License Nos. DPR-69 Priority Category C
Licensee:
Baltimore Gas ano Electric P.O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Facility Name:
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At:
Lusby, Maryland Inspection Conducted: March 26-29, 1985 Inspectors: d N
P. Clemons, Radiation Specialist da'te
'
~
/
N2O f
Approved by: M M.~Shanbakf, Chief,f9RRadiationSafety
'date Section, Emergency Preparedness and Radiation Protection Branch Inspection Summary: Inspection March 26-29, 1985 (Report Nos. 50-317/85-05 and 50-318/85-05)
AreasInspectg:
Routine, unannounced preoutage safety inspection of the Radiation Protection Program including:
training and qualification of contractor personnel, planning and preparation, enhanced radiation worker-training, posting and labeling, low-level waste storage facility and outstanding items. This inspection involved 28 inspector hours on site by one
- egionally-based inspector.
Results: No violations were identified.
g7@
.
-
L __
,
-
.
'
.
Details 1.0 Persons Contacted 1.1 Licensee Personnel L. Russell, Plant Superintendent D. Latham, General Supervisor - Planning and Support N. Millis, General Supervisor - Radiation Safety J. Forgette, Supervisor Emergency Planning R. Wenderlich, Supervisor - Operations Quality Assurance Auditing Unit E. Farrell, Engineer, Plant Maintenance Department J. Carlson, Assistant General Supervisor - Radiation Safety L. Smialek,-Senior Plant Health Physicist 1.2 NRC Personnel T. Foley, Senior Resident Inspector D. Trimble, Resident Inspector Other licensee employees were contacted and interviewed during this inspection.
2.0 Purpose The purpose of this routine pre-outage inspection was to review the licensee's radiation protection activities with respect to the following elements:
Review of enhanced training of licensee personnel;
--
--
Review of training and qualifications of contractor personnel; Review of planning and preparat. ion;
--
Review of posting and labeling;
--
Review of low level waste storage facility; and
--
Review of outstanding items.
--
3.0 Status of Previously Identified Items
.
(Closed) Violation (317/84-32-01)
Failed to follow procedures.
The inspector reviewed the corrective action taken as stated in the licensees letter dated February 28, 1985, and the corrective action appeared to be adequate.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (317/84-32-03) Technicians did not attend makeup presentation.
The Inspector determined that the technicians attended the makeup presentation in December 1984 and January 1985.
_
.,
n
-
,
.,,.
. - -..
-,.
I
'
.
'
.
Z 4.0 Enhanced Radiation Worker Training The licensee's training program was reviewed against criteria contained in 10 CFR 19.12, " Instructions to Workers," and ANSI N18.1, 1971, and
" Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel."
The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by discussion with the General Supervisor - Radiation Safety and by auditing a specific training session.
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified.
The inspector determined that the Radiation Safety Section had developed an Enhanced Radiation Worker Training Program. The purpose of the p'rogram is to expand the General Orientation Training with emphasis on the needs of specific work groups in preparing for and covering an outage.
The training was conducted during March 1985.
About 800 licensee employees participated.
Each training session lasted about four hours.
The Topics addressed included: Dosimetry, Materials Processing, Radiation Control Operations, and Radiation Control, ALARA.
Each topic-was presented by the responsible Radiation Control Supervisor.
The licensee is to be commended for this effort.
Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
5.
Selection, Training and Qualification of Contractor Personnel The licensee's selection, qualification, and training of Contractor personnel for this outage were reviewed against criteria contained in 10 CFR 19.12, " Instructions to Workers" and ANSI 18.1 - 1971, " Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant Personnel".
The licensee performance relative to these criteria was determined by discussion with the Assistant General Supervisor Radiation Safety,
-
Radiation Control Supervisors, Training Representatives and by reviewing documents.
Within the scope of this review, the following was identified.
The licensee intends to employ about ninety contractor employees in the Radiation Safety group.
About forty of the contractors will be Senior Technicians, about thirty will be Junior Technicians and the remainder will be laborers. The licensee does not plan to use any contractors in a supervisory position.
At the time of this inspection, all contractor radiation safety personnel were not onsite.
The inspector reviewed documents that indicated about twenty contractors had successfully completed the licensee's qualification requirements.
__
.
.
-
.
The inspector also reviewed resumes to determine the qualifications of the contractors.
It was noted that Radiation Control Supervisors were interviewing contractor personnel to determine their qualifications, and in at least two instances contractor personnel had been downgraded to Junior Technicians.
Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
6.
Planning and Preparation The licensee's efforts in advanced planning and preparation for the up outage were reviewea against the criteria contained in
CFR 20.201,
" Surveys",
Information Relevant To Ensuring That Occupational Radiation Exposures At Nuclear Power Stations Will Be As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable", and Regulatory Guide 8.10
" Operating Philosophy For Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposures As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable."
The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined by discussions with the Outage Coordinator, the Radiation Control ALARA Supervisor and by reviewing documents. The major tasks reviewed included:
a.
Entries into No. 11 steam generator primary side to install, remove and repair nozzle dam equipment.
b.
Modify Rx pressure vessel head for reactor vessel level monitor system (RVLMS).
c.
Relocate pressurizer spray valves to top of pressurizer house.
d.
Replace No. 11A Reactor coolant pump seal.
It is readily apparent that the Radiation Control ALARA group has been extensively involved in the outage planning and preparation.
Within the scope of this review, no violations were identified.
7.
Posting and Labeling The licensee's program for area posting and control was reviewed against the criteria in 10 CFR 20.203, " Caution signs, labels, signals and control s."
The licensee's performance relative to these criteria was determined from a tour of the Controlled Areas and from discussions with staff members.
Within the scope of thi. review, no violations were identified.
I l
,
!
.
.'
8.
Low Level Waste Storage Facility The licensee has constructed and is in the process of activating a Materials Processing Facility.
Many operations are planned for this facility including laundry operation, low level radioactive waste sorting and compaction, respirator maintenance and repair, the storage of low level compactable and noncompactable material in 55 gallon drums and 4x4x8 metal boxes. A licensee representative stated that the low level waste storage facility has a storage capacity for generated waste for up to five years.
The licensee does not intend to store spent resin in this facility because of the potential radiation problems. Another facility is planned to store this type of waste. Money has been budgeted for this facility, but the facility is in the conceptual stage at this time.
9.0 On Site Burial of Nonradioactive Waste According to a licensee representative, the State of Maryland has authorized the licensee to dispose of nonradiological waste in its land-fill operation at Lusby, Maryland. The licensee's records indicate that four land burials of nonradiological waste has occurred in recent months. The inspector reviewed these records, and the procedure governing this operation.
The inspector asked to see a copy of the document authorizing the land fill operation by the State of Maryland.
The licensee representative could not locate a copy of this authorization at the Lusby site by the conclusion of the inspection.
This item was first noted during inspection 317/84-19-02, therefore it will remain open and will be addressed again in a separate inspection.
10.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with Itcensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1)
at the conclusion of the inspection on March 29, 1985.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection, and the inspection findings.
__