IR 05000338/1982003
| ML20041F794 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | North Anna  |
| Issue date: | 02/19/1982 |
| From: | Barr K, Franklin L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20041F785 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-338-82-03, 50-338-82-3, 50-339-82-03, 50-339-82-3, NUDOCS 8203170421 | |
| Download: ML20041F794 (6) | |
Text
nt:
UNITED STATES o,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
L'
I REGION li
o 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
-
.....
Report Nos. 50-338/82-03 and 50-339/82-03 Licensee:
Virginia Electric and hwer Company Richmond, VA 23261 Facility Name:
North Anna Docket Nos. 50-338 and 50-339 License Nos. NPF-4 and NPF-7 Inspection at North Anna site near Mineral, Virginia
[w 7 ~~ %
~
,2 - / 4 - 82 Inspector:
<3 L. A. Franklin Oate Signed
m J // 9 8 L-Approved by:
K. P. Bar, Section Chief 06te7 Signed Technical Inspection Branch Engineering and Technical Inspection Division SUMMARY Inspection on February 1-5, 1982 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 33 inspector-hours on site in the areas of training, personnel qualifications, posting and control, instrumentation, quality control, respiratory program, and licensee action on previous inspection findings.
Results Of the seven areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8203170421 820224 PDR ADOCK 05000338 c
PDR L..
.
..
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- W. R. Cartwright, Station Manager
- A. L. Hogg, Jr., Manager, Quality Assurance
- A. H. Stafford, Supervisor Health Physics
- M. E. Fellows, Staff Assistant to the Station Manager
- F. P. Miller, Supervisor, Quality Control
'J. A. Hanson, Jr., Superintendent, Technical Services M. L. Johnson, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor S. R. Tipsword, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor C. D. Bradley, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor R. R. Irwin, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor S. W. Montgomery, Nuclear Training Coordinator C. R. Swope, Quality Control Engineer:
Other licensee employees contacted included four technicians and four office personnel.
.
NRC Resident Inspector
- *D. F. Johnson, Senior Resident
- M. B. Shymlock, Resident
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview t
The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 5, 1982, with
,[
those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The station manager acknowledged three areas of concern discussed during this interview.
The inspector noted that plant housekeeping and cooperation between the Health
,
Physics Department and plant management appears excellent.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
>
t (Closed) Violation (50-338/81-16-02, 50-339/81-13-020) - This violation
!
concerned radiation protection procedures not being reviewed by the Station Nuclear Safety Operating Committee (SNSOC) and approved by _the station manager as required by technical specifications.
Health Physics Administrative Procedures Four and Five were revised and approved
- '
September 16, 1981. The revisions were examined by the inspector and appear adequate. The inspector had no further questions.
.
!
,
L
,
.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
!
5.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspector Identified Items and Bulletins (Closed)-50-339/80-BU-03 - Loss of charcoal from standard type II, 2-inch tray adsorber cells.
The licensee responded _to this bulletin, by.
memorandum, on March 21, 1980. The inspector reviewed the memorandum and had no further questions.
(Closed) 50-338/80-BU-10, 50-339/80-BU-10 - Contamination of nonradioactive systems and resulting potential for unmonitored, uncontrolled release of l
radioactivity to the environment. The licensee responded to this bulletin,
'
by memorandum, on July 7, 1980. The inspector reviewed the memorandum and had no further questions.
(Closed) 50-338/80-21-03, 50-339/80-22-03 - Failure to have.a-retraining
,
program for health physics technicians.
Administrative.'rocedure 12.3,.
titled " Health Physics Technician Development Programs" was revised December 21, 1981.
The inspector reviewed this procedural change and discussed these changes with the _ licensee's training staff and the health physics supervisor. The inspector had no further questions.
(Closed) 50-338/80-21-07, 50-339/80-22-0 - Perform correlation stu'dy of_ TLD versus packet dosimeter results. A program for the correlation of TLD and pucket dosimeter results has been developed in conjunction with the computer based personnel radiation exposure (PREMS) and is now operational. The inspector had no further questions.
-
(Closed) 50-338/80-21-08, 50-339/80-22-08 - Evaluation of skin doses.
The corporate staff health physicist completed a TLD response test in conjunction with the University of Michigan, concerning Xenon 133 irradiation.
Dose factors have been developed to calculate submersion doses. The inspector examined this procedure and had no further questio.ns.
(Closed) 50-338/80-21-14, 50-339/80-22-14 - Review of plant systems to ider.tify unplanned release points. This item is closed in conjunction with 80-BU-10.
(Closed) 50-338/8021-15, 50-339/80-22-15 - Establishment of a formal ALARA program. The licensee has completed the establishment of the ALARA program.
An ALARA Manual, dated December 23, 1981 is now formally a part of licensee procedures. ALARA committees have been_ formed and implementation of this program was started January 1, 1982.
The inspector had no further questions.
(Closed)
50-339/79-CI-21
-
Prevention of unplanned releases of radioactivity. This item is closed in conjunction with 80-BU-10.
-..
-. - -
-
.
-- - - - - -. -
-...
.. - -
,.
-. - -
,
--
.
(0 pen) 50-338/80-21-20, 50-339/80-22-20 - Determination of sample hood face velocities. The licensee responded to this item by a records search which produced documentation showing sample hood face velocities as of April and May of 1977.
The licensee has initiated a routine program calling for yearly change out of filters for sample hoods. The inspector stated that
, under certain conditions flow could be restricted to the point that the system would not be adequate and requested the licensee reexamine this item.
This item will remain open.
6.
Personnel Qualifications Licensee Technical Specification 6.3.1 states that each member of the facility staff shall meet or exceed ANSI N18. 1-1971 with regard to the minimum qualifications for comparable positions.
The inspector reviewed resumes for staf f members of the radiation control group who have been newly assigned since the last inspection. Three technicians had been reassigned as senior health physics, technicians and one senior health physics technician had been reassigned to the position of assistant health physics supervisor. These personnel appear to meet or exceed requirements.
7.
Instrumentation a.
The inspector reviewed the supply, calibration, alarm set points, and operability of selected portable survey instruments.
During the inspection survey instruments in use at the health physics laboratory, radwaste, and exits from various areas, were found to have current calibrations and appeared to be !n good operating condition. Alarm set points, including friskers, appeared to be proper and in keeping with licensee procedures.
b.
One area of concern noted by the inspector was what appeared to be a lack of instruments capable of properly determing Beta radiation. The licensee informed the inspector that this deficiency had been noted, and in addition to the purchase of instruments, a procedure is nearly ready for implementation that will require routine Beta measurements.
The inspector had no further questions.
8.
Posting and Control a.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's posting and control of radiation areas, high radiation areas, airborne radioactivity areas, contamination areas, radioactive material areas, and the labeling of radioactive material during tours of the plant.
No violations or deviations were observed.
b.
The inspector reviewed licensee radiation work pernits currently in effect.
Survey records that were pertinent to t';ese radiation work permits were also examined and appear adequate. Personnel working on these permits were selected at random and training records, NRC-4 forms, etc., were examined. The records appeared to be in good order.
The inspector had no further questions.
m-
--
.
.
c.
During the course of this inspection, control procedures. pertaining specifically to radiation work permits and multiple badging were examined. The inspector noted that no guidance regarding issuance of extremity TLD's was found in these procedures. The Health Physics Supervisor explained that this was at the discretion of the individual writing the necessary requirements-on these permits.
The inspector felt that under certain circumstances this could cause ' inadequate badging and would look at this item in more detail during a subsequent inspection 82-03-01.
d.
Records of leak tests, for radioactive sources, performed during 1981 were examined and appeared adequate. The inspector had no further questions.
e.
The posting of notices, as required by 10 CFR 19.11, was examined by the inspector and appears to meet the requirements.
9.
Training a.
The inspector selectively reviewed the training records of radiation control personnel and maintenance personnel.
These records included, basic radiation safety training, retraining, and respiratory protection training. The records appeared to be in good order. and the training appears adequate to cover the requirements of 10 CFR 19, and Appendix A to Regulatory Guide 8.13 concerning exposure to radiation during pregnancies.
b.
In discussions with licensee representatives it was determined that training is provided to all personnel involved with steam generator repair work however this has not been documented training.
The inspector advised that this training be fully documented. A licensee representative' agreed and stated that this would be done.
10.. Respiratory Protection Program
.
a.
By review of records, observation by the inspector, and discussions with licensee ' representatives the inspector evaluated the respiratory protection program for compliance with 10 CFR 20.103, Regulatory Guide 8.15, NUREG 0041, and plant procedures. Technical Specification 6.11 requires that procedures for ' personnel radiation protection be consistent with the requirement of 10 CFR 20 and be maintained and adhered to for all operations involving personnel radiation exposure.
Records of air samples, bioassays, MPC-hours, medical evaluations, training, and respirator maintenance and fit tests were selectively -
reviewed and in most cases appeared to be adequate.
b.
One area of concern was noted in this program.
Four breathing air cylinders were found to be beyond the five year limitation for hydrostatic test as required by NUREG-0041. In the worst case two m
,
_
,.
.
cylinders were nine months overdue.
This is not a violation of technical specifications, however in the inspectors view these cylinders should be tested within the five year time frame. The Health Physics Supervisor stated that he would see that this is done (82-03-02).
c.
One additional area of this program concerned the inspector. Supplied air respirators are not in use at this facility due to an unsatisfactory source of breathing air. A plant modification will be completed in the near future which will allow use of supplied air and at that time breathing air manifold maintenance records will be required (82-03-03).
11. Quality Control The inspector reviewed that portion of the licensee's Quality Control Program that relates to the Health Physics Department. The program requires a general audit annually, and in addition, monthly surveillance inspections are made in various areas. A system for tracking deficiencies is a part of this program and appears to be working very well. Audit Number N-81-05 was performed during the week of March 12, 1981. This audit was examined by the inspector and appeared adequate. The inspector had no further questions.
12.
Bulletins, Circulars and Notices a.
IE information Notice Number 81-26, Compilation of Health Physics Related Information Items was answered by a memorandum from the plant health physics supervisor to the plant engineering supervisor. this memorandum appears adequate. The inspector had no further questions.
t