IR 05000333/1993015
| ML20046B096 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | FitzPatrick  |
| Issue date: | 07/21/1993 |
| From: | Joseph Furia, Pasciak W, Randolph Ragland NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20046B094 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-333-93-15, NUDOCS 9308030093 | |
| Download: ML20046B096 (6) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
,
Report No.
50-333/93-15
,
Docket No.
50-333
'
License No.
DPR-59 Licensee:
New ' York Power Authority Post Office Box 41 Lycomine. New York 13093 Facility Name:
James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant i
Inspection At:
Lycoming. New York Inspection Conducted:
July 12-16.1993
-
Inspector:
\\
- 3-
-c r ~
'/~/f-77
$
J.' I uria, Senior Radiation Specialist, date Facilities Radiation Protection Section (FRPS),
Facilities Radiological Safety and Safeguards i
Branch (FRSSB), Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards (DRSS)
Maddtk 0 N h url 0,
, - a -9 >
R! Raglanff, Radiatiot() Specialist, FRPS, FRSSB, DRSS date 1M-(qO 'em c k
7-Z 1-9 3 Approved by:
W. Pasciak, Chief, FRPS, FRSSB, DRSS date Areas Insucctsd: Announced inspection of the radiation protection program including:
management organization, radiation protection during normal operations, ALARA, work control, RWPs and implementation of the above programs.
Results: Continuing improvement in inaintaining doses as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), plant radiological housekeeping, control of work in radiological areas and Radiation Work Procedures (RWP) was noted. Continued excellent performance in Quality Assurarce audits and surveillances in the radiation protection area was also observed.
9300030093 930722 PDR ADOCK 05000333 G
.
_
._
.
.
_ q
'
-..
.
DETAILS 1.
Personnel Contacted
.
'
1.1 Licensee Personnel
- R. Barrett, General Manager - Operations
- T. Bergene, ALARA Supervisor M. Colomb, General Manager - Support Services R. Eastman Planner s
,
- B. Gorman, Environmental Supervisor
- W. Hamblin, Chemistry Supervisor J. Heddy, Senior Nuclear Licensing Engineer
-
- D. Lindsey, General Manager - Maintenance
- J. McCarty, Senior Quality Engineer
.
A. McKeen, Radiological and Environmental Services Manager
- M. McMahon, Health Physics General Supervisor i
- E. Mulcahey, Senior Technical Advisor, Operational Review Group P. Policastro, Radiation Protection Supervisor
- H. Salmon, Resident Manager
- J. Solini, Radiological Engineering General Supervisor J. Solowski, Radiation Protection Supervisor A. Stark, Radiation Technician - ALARA
'
- G. Tasick, Quality Assurance Manager
.!
A. Young, Decontamination and Shipping Supervisor
- A. Zaremba, Manager, Operational Review / Licensing Group 1.2 NRC Personnel
,
)
W. Cook, Senior Resident Inspector
- N. McNamara, Radiation Specialist
- L. Peluso, Radiation Specialist
- J. Tappert, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present a; the exit interview on July 16, 1993.
2.
Radiation Protection Procram Since the last inspection in this area, the licensee's Radiological and Environmental
,
Services (RES) Manager, who served as the Radiation Protection Manager in accordance with plant Technical Specification 6.3.1, left the licensee's employment.
The licensee named the Chemistry General Supervisor to serve as RES Manager and to serve as Radiation Protection Manager. An analysis of the qualifications of this o
individual to serve as Radiation Protection manager was undertaken by the licensee, and the results of that analysis was reviewed by the inspectors. The individual
selected by the licensee was required to meet or exceed the qualification criteria
'
I
.
.
H
,
i
specified in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.8 (September 1975) and American National Standards Institute (ANSI) standard N18.1-1975, in accordance with Plant Technical Specification 6.3.1. The individual selected by the licensee was determined to meet-
>
or exceed all requirements for the position.
I
2.1 Radiological Ooerations
)
During this inspection, the plant operated at or near 100% power. Work activities in radiological areas consisted of routine maintenance activities, as
scheduled by the licensee through its central planning (see Section 2.2), and two potentially radiologically significant work activities. The inspectors observed these two activities on several occasions throughout the inspection.
The first significant activity observed was the beginnings of a spent fuel pool clean-up, which will involve the removal of local power range monitor strings, control rod blades, filters and other miscellaneous irradiated hardware.
Following completion of this activity, the licensee will be adding additional
.,
spent fuel storage racks to the spent fuel pool. Five liners ofirradiated hardware were expected to be packaged during this activity. During this
"
inspection, activities being conducted involved dose profiling the items to be -
removed from the pool, and the placement of additional dose rate monitoring instruments near the pool, together with source checking of existing radiation a
monitoring instrumentation.
Licensee radiological controls and ALARA planning for this first part of the evolution were determined to be excellent. The RPP-1, Rev 10, " Refuel Floor i
Radiation Protection Coverage" was the principle document utilized by the radiation protection technicians on the refuel floor. ALARA Review 93-028,
" Spent Fuel Pool Cleanup" was written to support this phase of the work, despite the low total dose projection of 0.760 Person-rem for th!.s phase of the work. Included in the ALARA review were controls and responses for sudden dose rate changes in the fuel pool area and for hot particle control. Additional documents utilized for this activity included Temporary Operating Procedure i
148, Rev 0, " Dose Profiling of Irradiated Hardware and Miscellaneous Components in the Spent Fuel Pool" and a " Reference Guide for Refueling Tools and Miscellaneous Equipment".
The second significant work activity involved the transfer of waste sludge into the spent resin tank. This activity was conducted to take sludge lanced from the hot well into 5-gallon pails, and sluice it into the spent resin tank for future transfer into a liner for final waste processing. The licensee's health physics staff provided a detailed pre-job briefing to all members of the work crew, and work was monitored and controlled by health physics and ALARA technicians, together with the Decon and Shipping and one of the Radiation Protection
.
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
-.
.
'
.
.
i Supervisors. Pails had contact dose rate readings ranging from 300 millirem per hour (mR/hr) to 8000 mR/hr. The licensee attempted to sluice a lower
activity pail first (one with a contact dose rate of 300 mR/hr), in order to ensure the activity would work as planned, then intended to do the high dose rate pails next, in order to reduce general area dose rates in the work area.
During the sluicing operation on the first pail, the sluice line continued to clog-due to miscellaneous debris found in the sludge, and the health physics technicians monitoring the work, in consultation with the workers, decided to r
terminate this activity, rather than risk greater worker exposures. This work was determined to be well planned and controlled, and the decision to termina!e the job was viewed as being appropriate.
Tours of the radiologically controlled areas (RCA) indicated generally f
improved radiological housekeeping throughout the plant. Only a few minor
.
discrepancies were noted, most of which had to do with inadequate radiation area postings, especially outside the north wall of the radwaste building, where the postings were subject to high winds. Also at the time of this inspection, the licensee initiated a new Radiological Work Permit Procedure (RPP-4),
which involved the utilization of a new computerized access control system for entry into the RCA. This system was adapted from one utilized at the Indian l
Point Unit 3 facility, and along with aiding radiation workers in gaining access to the RCA, also provided for easier extraction of pertinent data, especially for
,
use by the ALARA Supervisor.
i
.2.2 ALARA
.
The licensee established a goal of not more than 220 Person-Rem exposure for 1993, including dose to be expended during a maintenance outage scheduled
]
for September. Through the end of June, the licensee's total dose was running
'
8 Person-Rem under projxtions. In addition, the licensee had esta'olished a J
goal of not more than 25 personnel contaminations for the year. The first contamination event for the year did not occur until July 14th.
The licensee has continued to utilize an extensive planning system to help maintain occupational exposures ALARA. Planning for both normal operatu;s and outages was performed with extensive ALARA commitment.
ALARA planners were assigned to work both with the major departments, j
such as Operations and Maintenance, and with the Central Planning Group. In i
addition, at the corporate level, ALARA has been included in the design j
'
modification process. The licensee prepared an "ALARA Design Manual" for use in engineering plant modifications, and a corporate Radiological Engineer reviews all plant modification packages for ALARA initiatives. The success
'
,
d i
.. -
.
.
.
.,
.
.
i of theses ALARA initiatives will continue to be assessed during future inspections, especially as the radiological challenges to the plant increase with continued operations, and during outages.
2.3 Assurance of Ouality The licensee's program for assurance of quality in the radiation protection area involved the conduct of Quality Assurance Audits, Surveillance Reports, and most recently the inclusion of Radiological Incident Reports (RIR) into the plant Deviation / Event Report (DER) system. As part of this inspection, a l
review of the following licensee Audits and Surveillance Reports, conducted since July 1992, was conducted:
Audit 784, September 15,1992, " Radiation Area Posting" Audit 794, December 17,19922, " Radiation Work Permit Procedure" j
Audit 806, May 17,1993, " Process Control Program" Audit 809, May 28,1993, " Regulatory Guide 1.21"
-l Surveillance Report (SR) 1578, "RES Tracking System" SR 1580, "10 CFR 61.55 Analysis" l
SR 1584, " Review of Documentation of radwaste Shipment" SR 1597, " Rail Shipment of Auxiliary Boiler" SR 1609, " Respirator Leak Testing" SR 1612, "ALARA Review Initiation Process" SR 1616, "PCP-Related Valve Line-Up" SR 1625, " Shipment Inspection on Shipment 04-93-020" SR 1632, "In-Place Filter Testing" All audits were conducted by a team of professionals, including at least one member who was a technical specialist in the area being reviewed. Significant licensee response, such as the institution of the computerized access system in response to the Adverse Ouality Condition Reports (AQCRs) generated in
Audit 794, to audit report findings and recommendations has been observed.
.
.
-
_
__
.
.
.
At the time of this inspection, a surveillance of supervisory control of work activities in the RCA was being conducted. In response to ari LER in the mid-1030s, the licensee committed to having greater supervisory presence in the RCA, and that these activities were to be documented. The licensee was conducting this surveillance to assure that this commitment was being met, and to find improved ways of performing this important activity. The results of this surveillance will be reviewed during the next inspection in this area.
The licensee recently incorporated its RIR action tracking and investigation N.
system into its DER system. Discussions with the licensee and a demonstration of the DER systems capabilities demonstrated that this new system provided significant improvement to the licensee. Further inspection in this area will be conducted if additional radiological events of significance occur.
3.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with the licensee representatives denoted in Section 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on July 16, 1993. The inspector summarized the purpose, scope and findings of the inspection. The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings.
!
t
,
'
,
!
l