IR 05000348/1987016
| ML20235Y994 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 07/15/1987 |
| From: | Collins T, Hosey C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235Y988 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-87-16, 50-364-87-16, NUDOCS 8707270139 | |
| Download: ML20235Y994 (9) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_ - - _ _ - _ - _ - - - --- l
p80f00 UNITED STATES [[C. - o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMisslON ~' REGION ll n,
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
G - f ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323 Ei %,**v /
.. JUL 2 01987 Report Nos.: 50-348/87-16 and 50-364/87-16 Licensee: Alabama Fower Company 600 North 18th Street Birmingham, AL 35291-0400 Docket Nos.: 50-348 and 50-364 License Nos.: NPF-2 and NPF-8 Facility Name: Farley 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: une 29 - July 2, 1987 7 !/I!f 7 Inspector: T. R. Collins Date Signed Accompanying Personnel: R. B. Shortridge !N 7W 7bf[[7 Approved by: C. M. Ho~sey, Sectiol Chief Date Signed Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of organization and management of the health physics program, training and qualifications of the facility staff, external exposure control and personal dosimetry, the program to maintain exposures as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA), internal exposure controls, surveys monitoring' and control of radioactive material, inspector followup itns, and previous enforcement issues.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
8707270139 870720 PDR ADOCh 05000348 G PDR
_- __ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ i . e REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. N. Morey, Assistant General Manager - Operations
- C. D. Nesbitt, Technical Manager
- M. W. Mitchell, Health Physics and Radwaste Supervisor
- W. R. Bayne, Chemistry and Environmental Supervisor
- P. E. Farnsworth, Radwaste Supervisor
- 0. M. Graves,1:ealth Physics Sector Supervisor
- G. P. Crone, Sector Supervisor - Training
- B. P. Patton, Plant Health Physicist
- J. K. Osterholt7, Supervisor - Safety Audit and Engineering
- J. M. Walden, Safety Audit and Engineering Review G. W. Bouler, Health Physics Foreman A. W. Morrow, Radwaste Specialist P. Pollan, ALARA Specialist J. F. Bouillion, Dosimetry Foreman Other licensee employees contacted included five technicians, three mechanics, three security force members and three office personnel.
NRC Resident Inspector
- W. H. Bradford
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on July 2,1987, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
The inspector discussed with licensee management the areas that were inspected during the inspection.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Closed) Violation (50-348/86-26-01 and 50-364/86-26-01): Failure to clearly identify a box of snubbers as radioactive material as required by 10 CFR 71.5(a) and 49 CFR 173.425(b).
The inspector reviewed the . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -
- licensee's response dated February 26, 1987, and verified that the corrective action specified in the response had been implemented.
(Closed) Violation (50-348/86-26-02 and 50-364/86-26-02): Transfer of radioactive material to an unauthorized recipient as described by 10 CFR 30.41(a).
The inspector reviewed the licensee's response dated February 26, 1987, and verified that the corrective action specified in the response had been implemented.
4.
OrganizationandManagementControls(83722) a.
Organization The licensee is required by Technical Specification (TS) 6.2 to implement the plant organization specified in Technical Specification Figures 6.2-2.
The responsibilities, authorities, and other management controls were further outlined in Chapters 12 and 13 of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR). Technical Specification 6.2 also specified the members of the Plant Operations Review Committee (PORC) and outlined the functions and responsibilities to be assigned to the Health Physics Group Supervisor and radiation protection responsibilities to be assigned to line management.
The inspector reviewed the plant organization with the Health Physics and Radwaste Supervisor to determine the degree of support received from managemer,t outside the Health Physics Department.
It appeared that the support required to maintain and improve the radiation control program and solid waste management program was in place.
o.
Staffing Technical Specification 6.3 specifies minimum plant staffing.
FSAR Chapters 12 and 13 also outline further details on staffing.
The inspector discussed authorized staffing icvels versus current staffing levels with the Health Physics and Radwaste Supervisor. Due to the low attrition rate, staffing appeared to be adequate and consistent with authorized levels. Currently, staffing consists of a manager, two supervisors, one health physicist, five foremen, two waste and decon foremen, four specialist technicians and twenty-three technicians. Twenty of the twenty-three technicians are qualified as senior technicians in accordance with ANSI N18.1-1971.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Training and Qualification l Continuing Training Technical Specification section 6.4.1 Mates that a retraining and replacement training program for the facility staff shall be in accordance with ANSI N18.1-1971.
Paragraph 5 of AN5; 18.1 states that a training I
_ _ _ _ _ __ a
. program shall: be established which maintains the proficiency of the operating organization through periodic training exercises, instruction periods; and reviews.
A review. of continuing training records revealed that attendance was satisfactory and the schedule for 1987 was complete. The courses for the first'three training cycles are as follows: CYCLE I ' HP-502 Plant Systems Review CYCLE II HP-505 Mitigating Core Damage I-HP-504 Procedures, Tech Specs and Industry Event Review HP-501 Health Physics Retraining (Procedures and Supervision Topics) l HP-001 Job Related Administrative Procedures CYCLE III HP-503 Radiation Monitoring Team Training (Including Field Practical Factors) The resume of a person recently promoted to senior technician was reviewed to determine if the individual met the ASNI N18.1-1971 requirements for senior technician.
No discrepancies were noted.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
External Occupational Dose Control and Personal Dosimetry (83724) ' a.
Use of Dosimeters and Controls The licensee was required by 10 CFR 19.13, 20.101, 20.102, 20.104, 20.201(b), 20.202, 20.401, 20.403, 20.405, 20.407, and 20.408 to maintain workers' doses below specified levels and keep records of and make reports of doses. The licensee was required by 10 CFR 20.203 and Technical Specification 6.12 to post and control access to plant areas.
FSAR Chapter 12 also contained commitments regarding dosimetry and dose control.
During observation of work in the plant, the inspector observed the wearing of thermoluminescent dosimeters (TLDs)'and pocket dosimeters by workers. The inspector discussed the assignment and use of dosimeters with licensee representatives.
During plant tours, the inspector observed the posting of areas i _____._.___.____.________________ ____ _ j
- _ - _ _ _ L i . l
. i and made independent measurements of dose to assure proper postings.
The inspector also reviewed and discussed administrative controls used by the licensee to ensure exposure limits were not exceeded.
The use of multi-badging was reviewed and the implementation of these co..trols, especially during outages was reviewed as well.
b.
Dosimetry Results The inspector reviewed dosimetry records for the first half of 1987.
The review revealed that no individual has exceeded the 1,100 mrem administrative control or 1,250 mrem quarterly -exposure limits for this period of time.
c.
Planning and Preparation for Outages The inspector reviewed the actions the licensee takes to ensure that there are sufficient equipment and personnel onsite to support an outage.
Temporary personnel are brought on board one to two weeks before an outage to be properly trained and oriented to plant specific procedures and requirements.
Typical manning for a refueling outage would be a total of 70 technicians, 50 seniors and 20 juniors with 10-12 deconners and 15 people to assist in supporting balance of plant operations, such as the decontamination laundry or whole body counter and respirator fit test facility.
The next scheduled outage is a refueling outage in October 1987.
d.
Personnel Contamination Through records review and discussion with licensee representatives, it was noted that there had been 29 personnel contaminations (skin and clothing) through June of 1987.
The effective cause of the low number of personnel contaminations is increased use of glove bags and containments and reduction in square footage of contaminated areas.
Currently, all personnel contaminations are documented when greater than 1000 dpm is detected.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Program for Monitoring Exposures As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) (83728) The licensee is required by 10 CFR 20.1(c) to make every effort to maintain occupational exposure to radiation as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA).
The recommended elements of the ALARA program are contained in Regulatory Guide 8.8, Information Relevant to Ensuring that Occupational Radiation Exposure at Nuclear Power Stations will be ALARA, and Regulatory Guide 8.10, Operating Philosophy for Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposures ALARA.
l l
_ _.
__ ______-__a
--_ _ _ I'
- 5
. i a.
New ALARA Initiatives The licensee is reviewing a program to reduce cobalt-60 plateout in primary plant piping.
Currently, the plant operates using a pH of 6.7 to 6-9.
To reduce the source term, the plant is discussing changing pH to 7.3 to 7.5.
If approved, a postulated reduction in radiation levels in the steam generators would be approximately 50 percent.
Other initiatives such as reduction of stellite contained in components is being discussed to reduce source term and out-of-core activity.
b.
ALARA Goals The inspector reviewed the licensee's ALARA goals for 1987, which revealed that 533 man-rem is the goal for 1987.
To date (6/30/87), 151 man-rem has been expended with 398 allotted for the refueling outage planned for October 1987.
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Control of Radioactive Materials and Contamination, Surveys, and Monitoring (83726) 10 CFR 20.201 requires each licensee to make or cause to be made such surveys as (1) may )be necessary for the licensee to comply with the regulations, and (2 are reasonable under circumstances to evaluate the extent of radiation hazards that may be present.
a.
Procedures The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures for the control of radioactive materials and determined that there had been no change which adversely affected the program.
b.
Frisking During tours of the plant, the inspector observed the exit of workers and movement of material from contamination control to clean areas to determine if proper frisking was performed by workers and that proper direct and removable contamination surveys were performed on materials.
c.
Surveys During plant tours, the inspector observed the use of survey instruments by plant staff and compared plant survey results of surveys made by the inspector using NRC equipment.
The inspector examined the calibration stickers on radiation protection equipment in use by the licensee staff.
_------_______-a
_- I- . '
- l The inspector reviewed selected routine survey results for the second quarter for 1987 and discussed these with the licensee representative.
Documentation of routine surveys and the review process to ensure routines were performed as required.
d.
Radiation Work Permits (RWPs) The inspector reviewed RWPs to determine if adequate controls were specified and adequate ALARA considerations had been made.
The inspector specifically reviewed RWPs 0-87-0172, Install a Ladder / Platform at Each Recycle Holdup Tank Manway, and 1-87-0017, Operation and Maintenance of the Laundry.
The radiological controls specified on the RWPs were adequate for the protection of personnel.
e.
Contamination Control The inspector discussed with the health physics group supervisor the total area contaminated within the bounds of the radiologically controlled area (RCA). The inspector was informed that 16,010 ft2 or 13.68 percent of the RCA was controlled as contaminated.
The goal for 1987 was to reduce the area to 13 percent of the RCA.
Since this has almost been achieved, a new goal of 10 percent or 10,015 ft2 has been established.
No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Internal Exposure Control and Assessment (83725) The licensee is required by 10 CFR 20.103, 20.201(b), 20.401, 20.403, and 20.405 to control uptakes of radioactive material, assess such uptakes, and keep records of and make reports of such uptakes.
FSAR Chapter 12 also includes commitments regarding internal exposure control and assessment, a.
Control Measures During plant tours, the inspector observed the use of temporary ventilation systems, containment enclosures, and respirators.
The inspector discussed the use of this equipment with the Health Physics and Radwaste Supervisors.
The inspector reviewed respiratory procedures and records for several workers assigned to work RWP No. 1-87-0017, Operations and Maintenance of Decontamination Laundry.
The individuals were qualified to wear respirators and had the supporting records.
The irspector determined that the licensee's program for medically qualifying personnel to wear respiratory equipment was at an interval of at least every twelve months as required by 10 CFR 20.103(c)(2).
_________-____ -
_ - - -. - - - - - - _ _ - -. _ _.. -- - - _ - - - - _ - - - - - . .
- b.
Uptake Assessment The inspector observed operation of the whole body counter.
The inspector also reviewed the results of the analysis performed for selected positive counts during 1987.
The inspector also reviewed the maximum permissible concentration (MPC) hour log for the first half of 1987.
The station did not have anyone exceed five percent of a maximum permissible body burden or 40 MPC hours in a week.
No violations or deviations were identified.
10. Solid Waste (84722) The inspector discussed the program for minimizing solid radioactive waste with the Health Physics and Radwaste Supervisor. The discussion revealed that for the first 6 months of 1987, the licensee made 14 solid radioactive waste shipments totaling 8,175 ft3 and containing 21.38 curies. Currently the licensee has 2,800 ft3 of solid radioactive waste awaiting shipment.
The inspector toured the new Radioactive Waste Solidification Facility (RWSF) with the Health Physics and Radwaste Supervisor.
Dur'ng the tour of the RWSF, the inspector noted that the licensee had temporarily installed hoses between the RWSF and the refueling water storage tank (RWST) adjacent to the RWSF.
These hoses were installed to pump water from the berm around the RWST to the RWSF.
In discussion with the licensee representatives, the inspector was informed that this temporary modification had been previously recognized as a potential unmonitored release path for low level radioactivity.
The licensee has submitted a plant change request (PCR) for a permanent modification to be installed to perform this function.
The inspector informed licensee representatives that priority should be taken on this PCR to prevent a potential unmonitored release.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's concern and stated that this item would be reviewed for priority.
i No violations or deviations were identified.
11.
Audits The licensee is required by Technical Specification Section 6.5 to perform audits of radiological controls and chemistry operations.
The inspector reviewed an audit dated September 1986, the responses to the audit, and the status of selective corrective actions resulting from the audit.
The inspector discussed the results of the audit with licensee representatives and determined that prompt corrective actions had been taken to correct the deficiencies.
_ - - - _ _ _ _
-_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ - a g . No violations or deviations were identified.
12.
Inspector Followup Items (IFIs) (Closed) IFI (50-348/87-06-01 and 50-364/87-06-01) Licensee procedures do not address radiation response checks acceptance criteria for the containment high range monitors. The inspector reviewed and verified that the licensee had incorporated appropriate radiation checks of the containment high radiation monitors in RCP-272, Isotopic Calibration of Containment High Range Area Monitors.
(Closed) IFI (50-348/87-06-02 and 50-364/87-06-02) Verify that the high range containment radiation monitors for Unit 2 have been properly installed.
The inspector reviewed appropriate calibration records for both high range containment radiation monitors RE-27A and RE-278.
The inspector, also, interviewed two licensee personnel (Health Physics Technician and Instrument and Control Technician) who were assigned the responsibility for source calibration and electronic calibration fo these monitors.
The inspector concluded after interview of these personnel that the containment high range radiation monitors RE-27A and RE-27B were properly installed. The inspector had no further questions.
(Closed) IFI (50-348/87-06-03 and 50-364/87-06-03) Licensee procedures do not clearly define the licensee's training program for inplant radioiodine air sampling program.
The inspector reviewed and verified that the licensee has revised their Radiation Monitoring Team Training Program, dated May 1987 to incorporate appropriate training for inplant radiciodine air sampling. The inspector had no further questions.
l I
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - }}