IR 05000397/1983026
| ML20024F531 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 06/22/1983 |
| From: | Book H, Wenslawski F, Yuhas G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20024F522 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-397-83-26, NUDOCS 8309090455 | |
| Download: ML20024F531 (6) | |
Text
,
_
_
.
-.
_
~.
-
,
t
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
,
,
REGION V
Report No. 50-397/83-26 Docket No. 50-397 License No. CPPR-93 Licensee: Washington Public Power Supply System (WPPSS)
P. O. Box 968 Richland, Washington 99352
,
Facility Name: Washington Nuclear Project No. 2 (WNP-2)
Inspection at: WNP-2 Site, Benton County, Washington
Inspection Conducted: June 3-9, 1983 Inspectors: G h Lkhs 6/ZL/93 G. P Yahas, Radia ion Sp cialist Date Signed 2/-
d/f~3
'
. Approved By:
F. A. Wenslawski, Chief Date Signed React r Radiation Protection Section 22-Approved By:
.
.
H. E. Book, Chief Date Signed Radiological Safety Branch
Summary:
.
Inspection on June 3-9, 1983 (Report No. 50-397/83-26)
,
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced preoperational inspection of the licensee's radioactive waste management systems, radiological environmental
'
monitoring, Land radiation protection programs. The inspection involved 47
- .
hours onsite..by one regionally based inspector.
Results:.0fkheareasinspected,noitemsofnoncompliancewereidentified.
+
f
'
._
i-
.
<
8309090455 830623
!
PDR ADOCK 05000397 L
G PDR
--
,
.
._
_
. _.. _
_
...
_ _.
_.
,.. _.. ___ _ _. _, _ _
., _ _ _
-
,
,
'
'
. :
.
,
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
,
'
- G.~K. Afflerbach,, Assistant Plant, Manager R. J. Barbee, Plant Engineering Supervisor
- L.
G. Berry, Health: Physics Supervisor
,
C. A. Cauthon, Planner Scheduler
'
L. F. Coleman, Chemical Process Engineer A. I. Davis, Radiochemist Y. E. Derrer,' Training Specialist-
.
- R. G. Graybeal, Health Physics / Chemistry Manager"
- D. E. Larson,; Manager Radiological Programs.
- J. D. Martin, Plant Manager,,
.
- J..F. Peters, Plant Administrative Manager-
.
J. K. Prince, Radiological Environmental Engineer
- W. E. Taylor, Manager Health and-Safety._ Programs M. S. Valdez, Health Physics Foreman L
-
- D. H. Walker, Plant Quality Assurance Manager
- Indicates th'ose individuals attending the exit. interview on June 9,1983.
'
'In addition to the-individuals noted above, the inspector met with and held discussions with other members of the licensee's staff.
2.
Radioactive Waste Management Systems This inspection had been scheduled to observe preoperational tests of-the standby gas treatment system, off-gas treatment system, technical support center heating and ventilation system, and the radwaste building and process sampling systems. On arrival, the inspector learned from the Planner Scheduler that preoperational test on those and several other radioactive waste treatment systems have been deferred until late July and August. The delays were attributed to incomplete construction and a lack of manpower to implement the preoperational testing program.
-Extensive tours of the facility were made on June 4 and 5, to observe the status of systems and equipment described in Chapters 11 and 12 of
.
.the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
Three observations were brought to the licensee's attention.
'
-
Airborne particulate and iodine sample holders for the Reactor Building vent on the 606' and 578' elevations are inaccessible without the use of temporary ladders.
- This matter will be. reviewed in a subsequent inspection (50-397/83-26-01).
-
<
{
,
.
The spent resin tank, chemical waste tanks, and concentrated waste
-
tanks appear to have dead legs which may develop into crud traps.
The licensee representative stated that this was intentional and that an ALARA review had been performed.
The inspector will examine the licensee's ALARA review in a subsequent inspection (50-397/83-26-02).
Accordion gates being' installed throughout the facility for control
-
of high radiation areas appear to have locking mechanisms which require a key to be opened from the inside.
This matter will be reviewed in a subsequent inspection (50-397/83-26-03).
3.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring The licensee has changed the organizational responsibilities for radiological environmental monitoring from that previously described in Inspection Report Nos. 50-397/82-20 and 50-397/82-30.
Effective July 1, 1983 the radiological environmental monitoring function will be a responsibility of the corporate Radiological Programs group. A Radiological Environmental Engineer recently hired by the Manager, Environmental Sciences and Engineering will be transferred to Radiological Programs. This individual will be fully responsible for implementing the program and will report directly to the Manager, Radiological Programs. Technical support, such as sample collection, will continue to be provided through the Environmental Science and Engineering group.
The inspector reviewed the resume of, and interviewed the Radiological Environmental Engineer.
Ms. Prince received a Masters of Science degree in Biology / Health Physics from Colorado State University and has participated in an impressive number of continuing education courses.
She has approximately ten years of occupational experience in radiological environmental monitoring with organizations including the states of Colorado and' Oregon and the U.S. Department of Energy.
Based
,
l on this review the inspector concluded Ms. Prince to be fully qualified l
to execute the assigned responsibility.
Several important aspects of the transition such as:
conversion of the 12 series Environmental Program Instructions to Radiological Programs
,
l Instructions, issuance of a new contract for environmental laboratory services, and resolution of internal and NRC inspection findings, are in progress.
i
!
l l
l i
l l
l.
.
In response to previous inspection findings involving environmental TLD records management the licensee has developed a new precedure, RPI-6.12,
" Control of Radiation Program Records." Manpower assigned to the dosimetry program was evaluated by the licensee and found to be marginal.
In view of overall resource limitation, other measures such as a second automatic reader, outside maintenance contract, and stream lined calibration procedures are being implemented rather than acquisition of additional employees at this time.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.
4.
Radiation Protection Programs Inspection of this area has been previously documented in Inspection Report No. 50-397/82-10..This inspection effort principally involved auditing the.16 hour1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> WNP-2 General Employee and Respiratory Protection training' programs presented on June 7 and 8,1983.
These courses are intended to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 19.12 and 10 CFR 20.103.
U.S.N.R.C.' Regulatory Guides:
8.13, Instruction Concerning Prenatal Radiation Exposure; 8.29, Instruction Concerning Risks From Occupational Radiation Exposure; 8.15, Acceptable Programs for Respiratory Protection; 8.27, Radiation Protection Training at Nuclear Power Plants; and 8.xx, Draft Standard Format and Content for Radiation Protection Program Descriptions for Nuclear Power Reactor Licensees were used as acceptance criteria.for this audit.
In addition to participating in these courses the following documents were reviewed:
-
WNP-2 General Employee Training
-
Instructor Guide For General Radiation Orientation, 80-RDT-0204-LP
-
Instructor Guide For General Radiation Orientation Short Course, 80-RPT-0802-LP Basic Respiratory Protection
-
Based on this review the licensee has corrected those deficiencies
'
previously identified and coded as 50-397/82-10-01.
l These courses were presented by a qualified, experienced individual. A l
formal, well organized, classroom environment was maintained. Training l
aids were appropriate and effectively utilized. Questions were answered and the class was not allowed to deviate from the scope of the course.
'
Written tests were required of all participants. All participants were required to dress out in protective clothing and enter and exit a
,
!
simulated controlled area. All individuals intending to wear an SCBA were required to don and use the device.
The program met the regulatory requirements with four minor exceptions that need to be addressed prior to issuance of an operating license.
l t
- -.
-
. _,
--
-
._.
.
.
The licensee has yet to finalize various radiation emergency
-
signals. Once finalized, all individuals frequenting the restricted area must be trained to recognize each signal.
Internal dose limits as stated in 10 CFR 20.103 were not clearly
-
presented.
An out-of-date copy of 10 CFR 19 is used as a handout. Either a
-
current copy should be used or the out-of-date copy should be so identified.
The location of bulletin boards designated by the licensee to meet
-
the requirements of 10 CFR 19.11 need to be identified.
Actions taken in response to these observations will be reviewed in a subsequent inspection (50-397/83-26-04).
The inspector brought to the licensee's attention four areas which should be considered for improvement.
A more comprehensive description of the ALARA program.
-
A better description of the Health Physics organization and
-
personnel.
More, plant specific description and operating reactors radiation
-
exposure history.
Some. discussion of actions required for an off scale or lost pocket
-
dosimeter are. necessary. This was omitted in the audited
" presentation.
During this inspection period the licensee was in the process of receiving the initial load of new fuel. The following procedures were reviewed in connection with this evolution.
Procedure No.
Title 6.2.2 New Fuel Movement From Contingency Storage to Refueling Floor 6.2.3 New Fuel Handling on the Refueling Floor 6.2.4 New Fuel Inspection 6.2.5 Fuel Channel Preparations, Inspection and Installation of New Fuel 11.2.8.1 Radiation Work Permit (RWP)
11.2.6.2 Use of Direct-Reading Pocket Dosimeters 11.2.13.1 Direct Area Radiation and Contamination Surveys
.
-
-
_._
..
._
-.
-
-
. - -
~5
.
.
On June 4, 1983 the inspector signed in on RWP 83-14 to observe handling of the'new fuel on the refueling ficor. The remote area monitors located near the' fuel storage pit were observed to be within their calibration frequency and operating properly. Appropriate portabic survey instruments' were present (RC-3, HP-260, PAC 4S) and within their calibration frequency.. The Health Physics Log Book was reviewed and the Health Physics Foreman present interviewed. The following observations were offered to the licensee representative for consideration.
~
One RWP for three widely separated work locations (Warehouse, Train
-
Bay, and Refueling Floor) will likely result in individuals failing to sign in or out.
Examples were noted for RWP 83-14.
- ', Use of pocket dosimeter dose tracking cards frequently result in a significant administrative work load to follow up on missed or erroneous entries.
-
Health Physics personnel were unaware of specific work instructions entered in the Health Physics Log Book and geometric efficiencies to be used with the PAC 4S.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
5.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on June 9, 1983. The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
'
The inspector stated that in his opinion the licensee had done a good job in developing the General Employee Training program.
l
.
k w
-
a
,
- - -. - - =. ~,, - -
w w
,
n
,
.m
, ---
-