IR 05000358/1979018
| ML19208D155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 08/15/1979 |
| From: | Greger L, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19208D153 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-358-79-18, NUDOCS 7909280055 | |
| Download: ML19208D155 (9) | |
Text
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGUL, TORY COMMISSION
~
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Report No. 50-358/79-18 Docket No. 50-358 License No. CPPR-88 Licensee: Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company 139 East 4th Street Cincinnati, OH 45201 Facility Name:
W. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station Inspection At:
W. H. Zimmer Site, Moscow, OH Inspection Conducted: July 9-12, 1979 b'
C. Schumacher W
/6/7k Inspector:
M.
b1[
'/k Approved By:
L. R. Greger, Acting ie Fuel Facility Projects and Radiation Support Section Inspection Summary Inspection on July 9-12, 1979 (Report No. 50-358/79-18)
_
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced, preoperatice.al inspection of radiation protection, including: organization, training, procedures, instruments and equipment, and facilities; preoperational inspection of liquid radwaste and solid radwaste systems including: monitoring, preoperational test procedures, and calibrations; gaseous radwaste system including:
preopera-tional tests, monitors, and calibrations. The inspcetion involved 36 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified in any of the areas inspected.
\\os\\2\\f 7009280 0 5 5
.
DETAILS
-
1.
Persons Contacted
- J.
Schott, Plant Superintendent
- D. Erickson, Radiation / Chemistry
- J. Wald, Quality Engineer G. Appel, Chemist
- P. King, Assistant Plant Superintendent
- M. Niswander, Health Physicist R. Price, Training Supervisor J. Baron, Systems Engineer J. Woeste, I&C Supervisor W. Brigman, I&C Foreman T. Van Natta, GE Startup Engineer C. Leach, Training Assistant F. Reck, Radiation / Chemistry Foreman R. Clark, Radiation / Chemistry Foreman M. Offerdahl, Radiation / Chemistry Foreman A. Mosbaugh, Engineer The inspector also contacted other licensee employees, including engineers, consultant personnel, and radiation chemistry technicians during the course of the inspection.
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
General The inspection began at 8:00 a.m. on July 9, 1979.
Following a brief meeting with the plant superintendent, the inspector met with the radiation / chemistry supervisor to outline his inrpection plans and to arrange for review materials and personnel '.nterviews. The bulk of the inspection was devoted to review and discussion of licensee progress in general employee and technician training, prep-aration of preoperational and operating procedures for radwaste systems, radiochemistry, and radiation protection.
Special emphasis was given to review of procedures for calibration of process and effluent monitors and to discussions of these with cognizant indi-viduals from the radiation / chemistry and instrument and control departments and from licensee contractor organizations. Tours were made of the reactor, radwaste, auxiliary, and turbine buildings to observe construction progress on selected systems and components and other matters of interest.
-2-1051 211
3.
Organization An assistant health physicist was hired in May 1979. His qualifi-cations include a BS in physics and 21/; years work as a technician at an operating nuclear power plant.
A senior technician was appointed as a third foreman; four technicians were promoted to senior technicians and one junior technician was appointed to technician. The current technician complement is 17 with 8 seniors, I technician, and 8 juniors.
Licensee representatives stated that the position of senior technician is defined to meet the responsible position requirements of ANSI N18.1.
It appears that all of the current senior technicians will meet these requirements by the currently planned fuel load date of January 1980.
4.
Training The radiation protection manual course developed at the station was presented (10 times between March 27 and May T ) to a total of 96 plant employees, mainly from the operations, r,iintenance, instrument and control, and radiation chemistry ('epartmen;s. Each presentation consieted of three consecutive days and a flaaL examination. The inspector's review of the lesson plans, teauhi:ig aids, and course materials indicated a well conceived and prese.ited course consisting of lectures by a former teacher, now a sen:.or liealth physics technician, interspersed with slides, filmstrips, and demonstrations. The class participated in the donning of protective clothing, use of survey instruments and identification of problems and poor practices illus-trated in slides. The examinations given at the end showed an overall average grade of about 96% but were, in the inspector's view, too easy to measure the effectiveness of the presentation. A licensee training representative stated that the examination was itself a teaching tool and was deliberately not made overly difficult.
The radiation protection portion of the ZPS-1 orientation course, consisting of videotapes prepared by a consultant with guidance from the licensee, was expected onsite for review the day following the inspection.
It will probably be presented to all station personnel shortly before fuel loading. The material will be reviewed during a future inspection. The respiratory training course has not been completed; course materials, including two hours of videotapes and handouts based on 10 CFR 20.103, Regulatory Guide 8.15, and NUREG-0041, were onsite.
Review of individual training folders for health physics technicians indicated training sessJ.ons were conducted on technical specifications, airborne activity calculations, radwaste systems, and access control and radiation protection for new fuel handling.
Additionally, a repeat of the 30 hour3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br /> radiation protection course was held for the-3-1051 214
- eight most recently hired junior technicians. The importance of such training was emphasized in discussions with licensee training and health physics personnel.
Individual on-the-job qualification cards were not reviewed.
The training records indicated the Radiation / Chemistry supervisor had completed the two week " Balance of Plant Systems" course.
Elimination of the FSAR required "Dresden Technology" course for the Radiation / Chemistry supervisor was proposed in Amendment 32 (to the FSAR), recently submitted by the licensee.
5.
Radiation Protection Procedures Review of selected radiation protection (RPP) and Chemistry (CRP)
procedures was performed onsite and in the office before this inspection. The following procedures were reviewed.
No significant discrepancies were identified.
RPP 2.009, Rev. 1 (May 1, 1979) " Issuing Personnel Dosimetry" RPP 3.211, Rev. 1 (March 8, 1979) " Gross Beta Determination" RPP 4.086, Rev. 0 (January 9, 1979) "Use of the PNC-4 Slow / Fast Neutron Counter" RPP 4.095, Rev. 0 (October 11, 1978) "Use of the Eberline PAC-4S Alpha Survey Meter" RPP 4.112, Rev. 0 (October 11, 19'J8) "Use of the Eberline LM-3 Laundry Monitor" RPP 5.295, Rev. 0 (July 11, 1978) " Radiation Protection Instrument Calibration and Maintenance Records" RPP 6.110, Rev. 0 (June 22, 1978) "Use of Eberline MP-1 Mini-Pulser" RPP 7.101, Rev. 1 (March 14,1979) "Use of Respiratory Protective Equipment" CRP 2.051, Rev. 0 (February 2, 1979) " Sampling of 003 Effluent Sanitary Sewer" CRP 2.062, Rev. 0 (February 12, 1979) " Moist Resin Sampling" CRP 3.006, Rev. 0 (March 30, 1979) " General Lab Techniques" CRP 3.073, Rev. 0 (March 14, 1979) " Resin Fines"
-4-105120
.
CRP 3.189, Rev. 0 (March 5, 1979) " Gross Beta by Evaporated Liquids"
-
The inspector reviewed and discussed with licensee personnel drafts of selected procedures, inciuding:
RPP 7.160 " Qualitative and Quantitative Respirator Face Piece Fitting" RPP 7.161 " Operational Checks of the FE560A Nacl Aerosol Test System" 6.
Facilities The odiation protection group has moved into a newly completed office in the turbine building (546' level). This area provides space for the assistant health physicist, foreman, technicians, survey and counting equipment (including a sodium iodide gamma spectrometer), and records. Dosimeter issue and normal access control will be handled at this location. Radiation protection and chemistry facilities are essentially complete and more than me-t.
FSAR commitments.
Two washers and dryers for protective clothing and a smal washer and dryer for personal clothing have been installed in e laundry.
Sorting tables for dirty and clean clothing have not yet been installed.
Laundry air sampling and ventilation requirements were discussed with a licensee representative. These matters will be examined further during a future inspection.
7.
Instruments and Equipment Acquisition of laboratory counting equipment, personnel dosimeters, portable survey instruments, portal monitors, hand and foot counters, area monitors, and air sampling equipment (fixed CAM's, portable CAM's, portable air samplers) appears complete. Area monitors are onsite but are not calibrated or installed. The six fixed constant air monitors are not yet installed but are undergoing checkout.
These monitors will read out both in the health physics office (546'
turbine building) and the control room and will alarm there as well as locally. The four CAM carts are also onsite and undergoing checkout.
Licensee representatives stated that piping changes were being made to eliminate 90 degree bends 12 the fixed manual air sampling system for selected cubicles and ducts in the reactor, radwaste, and turbine buildings. This system was not reviewed during this inspection.
8.
Respiratory Protection Program Except for review of a few related procedures (Paragraph 5) this area was not reviewed. The inspector indicated to licensee per-sonnel that the review would include a line by line comparison witit
}
-5-1051 21)
.
10 CFR 29.103 and Regulatory Guide 8.15 requirements. The inspector
-
was shown a policy statement on the use of respirators, signed by the Manager of the Production Department and included in the Radiation Protection Training Manual, which satisfied Regulatory Guide 8.15 requirements.
9.
Liquid and Solid Radwaste Systems Together with licensee representatives, the inspector examined selected portions of the liquid and solid radwaste systems. The equipment and floor drain systems were undergoing flushing pre-liminary to preoperational testing.
It *;as estimated that these The systemswouldbereadyforpreoperatior.a1testingbyggust.
inspector observed that the concentra;ed waste valves-had been removed from the concentrated waste cank room to an expected lower dose rate area on the floor below (513').
It was also noted that changes were being made to eliminite 90 degree bends in spent resin piping. Other changes noted were the installation of a radwaste sample hood on the 496' level o'. the radwaste building and the construction of shielding walls enclosing the valve gallery on the 513' level. The high radiation area potential of the sample hood was discussed with licensee representatives.
Installed filter demineralizers for floor and equipment drains were observed. Methods of changing the filter elements of these and similar, but expected higher activity, fuel pool and reactor cleanup filters were discussed with licensee personnel during the tour and at the exit interview. The need for examining this problem and for determining the need for, and availability of, remote handling tools while the system is cold was recognized by the licensee.
The inspector reviewed and commented on the following radwaste operating procedures:
RC AC/0H01, Rev. 0 (December 8, 1978) " Acid and Caustic Handling" RC CP01, Rev. 0 (September 1, 1978) " Condensate Polishing Demineral-izer System (CP)"
RC WE01, Rev. 0 (December 29, 1978) " Equipment Drain Collection System (WE)"
RC WF01, Rev. 0 (Decembe ' ~~~'~ " Floor Drain System (WF)"
RC WF03, Rev. 0 (November 20, 1978) " Floor and Equipment Drain System (Radwaste Filters)"
1/
RIII Report No. 358/78-24.
-6-
\\os\\
2 %
The inspector's comments on W01 and WO3 were acknowledged and will be factored into revisions which were being prepared.
The inspector also discussed with licensee representatives sne need for physical verification of tank volumes and pump flow rates for certain radwaste system components.
10.
Gaseous Radwaste System The inspector discussed airborne release pathways with licensee representatives.
The principal airborne release point will be the main vent with flow of about 400,000 cfm.
It will carry exhaust from the reactor, radwaste, turbine, and auxiliary buildings as well as the charcoal treated offgas and the untreated mechanical vacuum pump exhaust.
The vent will be monitored for noble gas, iodine, and particulates with provisions for noble gas sampling. Additional upstream moni-toring is provided for the turbine, reactor, and radwaste buildings and the offgas system.
A separate unmonitored vent is provided for the standby gas treat-ment system exhaust. At present there is no provision for moni-toring or sampling this exhaust. This matter will be reviewed further during a future inspection.
Separate venting is provided to the service building; provisions for sampling via an isokinetic probe will be provided according to licensee personnel.
11.
Process and Effluent Monitors The licensee discussed effluent and process monitor calibrations with representatives from the radiation chemistry and instrument and control departments and cognizant licensee consultants during the inspection and at the exit interview.
Calibration of monitors in accordance with approved station procedures is usually a prerequisite for preoperational testing; exceptions are found in the main vent monitor and the offgas post treatment monitor preoperational proce-dures which include the initial calibrations that relate monitor reading to gas concentration The need for establishing these relationships using source s.'
ngths adequate to encompass the dynamic range of the monitor:
nd energies adequate to explore energy dependence was emphasi,ed as was the need for careful documentation of cross calibration between solid sources and fluid sources.
In the course of these discussions, the inspector discussed his review of the following preoperational test procedures:
&
}Gbh $\\$
-7-
PO-PR-1, Rev. 0 (June 20, 1977), " Main Plant Stack Radiation Monitoring" PO-PR-1, Rev. 0 (February 28, 1979), "Offgas Pretreatment Monitoring System" PO-PR-3, Rev. 0 (February 28, 1979), "NJL Radiation Monitoring System" PO-PR-4, Rev. 0 (February 27, 1979), " Liquid Process Radiation Monitoring System" P0-PR-5, Rev. 0 (February 27, 1979), " Reactor Building Vent Radiatiot Monitoring Fuel Pool Vent Radiation Monitoring" These procedures were under revision (before approval by the plant manager); the ins,pector's comments are to be factored into these revisions. Among the understandings reached were the use of cobalt-60 solutions in addition to cesium-137 solutions for initial calibration of liquid monitors, the analysis of additional Marinelli beaker samples in the initial krypton-85 calibration of the gas effluent monitors, and preservation of the preoperational test apparatus so that the initial fluid calibrations can be repeated if necessary.
Routine surveillance test calibrations will be done under Instrument and Control Depart. ment procedures which will require Radiation /
Chemistry participation according to licensee representatives.
These procedures are still in preparation and will be reviewed later.
It is the inspector's understanding that for certain process monitors, these procedures will address initial calibration pre-requisites to the preoperational tests.
12.
Exit Interview The inspection results were discussed with Mr. Schott and others (Paragraph 1) at the close of the inspection.
The inspector noted that the radiation protection manual course appeared to be well done but that the examination was more what he would expect for an orientation course and was perhaps too easy for this coarse.
(Paragraph 4)
The inspector described his discussions with licensee personnel and his understandings related to process and effluent monitor calibrations.
He also indicated that the need for sampling and/or monitoring on the standby gas treatment vent would be pursued with NRR.
(Paragraph 10)
F-8-
\\
.
'
The need for considering filter /demineralizer changing procedures in the cold state was noted and acknowledged by the licensee.
(Paragraph 9)
-9-t 1051 224