IR 05000413/1986049
| ML20215F395 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Catawba  |
| Issue date: | 12/10/1986 |
| From: | Cooper W, Hosey C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20215F351 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-413-86-49, 50-414-86-52, NUDOCS 8612230381 | |
| Download: ML20215F395 (6) | |
Text
_
_ _ _
km n' tog UNITED STATES
/
fo NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[
REGION il p
y j
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
ATt.ANTA, GEORGIA 30323
%.....*
DEC 171986 t
Report Nos.: 50-413/86-49 and 50-414/86-52 Licensee:
Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.:
50-413 and 50-414 License Nos.: NPF-35.and NPF-52
,
Facility Name: Catawba 1 and 2 Inspection Co ucted:
ovember 17-21, 1986 f
Inspector O/
-e 12&B(a W. T. Coofer,
~
Date Signed Approved by: bk 12-[lo/fli W
C. M. Hossy, Sec ;1on Chief Date Signed Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection involved a review of the licensee's radiation protection program, including organization and management controls; external exposure control and personal dosimetry; internal exposure control and assessment; control of radioactive materials and contamination, surveys and monitoring and the licensee's program for maintaining exposures as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA).
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
8612230301 061217 PDR ADOCK 05000413 O
>
.
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J. W. Hampton, Plant Manager
- F. P. Schiffley, Licensing Engineer
- W. P. Deal, Station Health Physicist
- S. L. Cox, Technical Associate / Instructor
- M. A. Ruhe, Staff Health Physicist
- D. S. Lee, Staff Health Physicist
- F. N. Mack, Jr., Project Services Engineer
- J. W. Willis, Senior Quality Assurance Engineer
- W. H. Bradley, Quality Assurance - Catawba
- J. D. Munn, Quality Assurance - Catawba
- W. D. Cabe, Quality Assurance - Catawba
- A. E. Allum, Quality Assurance - Catawba G. Courtney, Staff Health Physics Coordinator J. Isaacson, Staff Health Physicist G. T. Moore, Health Physics Support Coordinator P. Macanulty, Training and Safety Coordinator C. Couch, Dose Records Control Supervisor F. Wilson, Respiratory / Instrument Calibration Supervisor C. Wray, Count Room and Environmental Supervisor R. Rivard, Surveillance and Control Section Supervisor L. Schlise, Surveillance and Control Section Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted included six technicians, three security force members, and five office personnel.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission K. VanDoorn, Senior Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 21, 1986, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
The inspector discussed a radiography incident with licensee management (Paragraph 5) and stated that because radiography at the facility was conducted under an NRC Agreement State license, the matter would be referred to the State of South Carolina.
Licensee management acknowledged the inspection findings and took no exceptions.
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio _.
_.
_
__.
.
.
.
.
.
.
l
'
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject not addressed in the inspection.
,
4..
Organization and Management Controls (83722)
-
The inspector reviewed the licensee's organization and lines of authority as they related to radiation protection and radioactive material control. The
,
inspector also reviewed the licensee's program for self identification of
weaknesses related to radiation protection and control of radioactive material.
,
At the time of the inspection, the licensee was in the process of reducing the size of the health physics (HP) staff after the most recent Unit I
refueling outage.
The licensee utilized rotating shifts such that the same HP and operations crews remained on shift together, which the licensee j
stated, promoted improved communications between the groups and provided consistency in day to day operations.
The licensee's Radiological Incident Investigation and Accountability (RIIA)
Report system at the facility appeared to be functioning well and was used j
to identify, document and track radiological safety concerns and problems.
!
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
5.
External Exposure Control and Personal Dosimetry (83724)
l 10 CFR 20.101 specifies the applicable radiation dose standards.
The
,
inspector reviewed computer printouts for the period October - November 1986 l
and verified that the radiation doses recorded for plant personnel were within the quarterly limits of 20.101.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's administrative exposure controls and i
determined that the administrative controls were designed to maintain
~
exposures ALARA.
The licensee required consecutively higher tiers of supervision to approve dose extensions with the plant manager having
approval authority for whole body exposures in excess of three rems during j
the calendar year.
Current dose status was disseminated on a daily basis with copies of the dose report posted near the security access portal. The
,
dose report was also forwarded to appropriate management for review of the
,
collective dose for the employees under their supervision.
!
The inspector reviewed selected records for multibadging performed during l
the Unit I refueling outage, during work on the steam generators, letdown heat exchangers and maintenance on the reactor vessel head seal ring.
A
'
j licensee representative stated that pocket dosimeters were placed at each thermoluminescent dosimeter location, and were evaluated by HP during the
'
l work evolution.
!
The inspector reviewed HP Procedure HP/0/8/1004/11, Investigation of Monthly
!
Dosimetry - TLD Correlation, and the results of selected correlations
!
i
--er--.
--,. - -,
y,--r--,-,-.,_
---,,~-%.,,._-,.....--,-,,---,,,.-y,,,~n,,,_-r----.------,-,,,..-_.-,,,-
-,-. - - - -.. -
-
.
required by the procedure. The inspector determined that the investigations were being conducted and documented as required.
The inspector reviewed RIIA Report Number 86-98 which documented a radiographer's unplanned external exposure during radiography operations in the Unit 1 containment on September 23, 1986.
The inspector stated that since the radiography was conducted under the State of South Carolina Byproduct Materials License, the incident would be referred to the State of
~
10 CFR 20.203 specifies the posting, labeling and control requirements for radiation areas, high radiation areas, airborne radioactivity areas and radioactive material.
Additional requirements for the control of high radiation areas were contained in Technical Specification 6.12.
During tours of the plant, the inspector reviewed the licensee's posting and control of radiation areas, high radiation areas, contamination areas, radioactive material areas and the labeling of radioactive material.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Internal Exposure Control and Assessment 10 CFR 20.103(a) establishes the limits for exposure of individuals to concentrations of radioactive materials in air in restricted areas.
This section also required that suitable measurements of concentrations of radioactive materials in air be performed to detect and evaluate the airborne radioactivity in restricted areas and that appropriate bioassays be performed to detect and assess individual intakes of radioactivity.
The inspector reviewed selected results of bioassays (whole body counts) and the licensee's assessment of individual intakes of radioactive material performed during the period September - October 1986.
10 CFR 20.103(b) requires the licensee to use process or other engineering controls, to the extent practicable, to limit concentrations of radioactive materials in air to levels below that specified in 10 CFR 20, Appendix B, Table 1, Column 1 or limit concentrations, when averaged over the number of hours in any week during which individuals were in the area, to less than 25 percent (%) of the specified concentrations.
The use of process and engineering controls to limit airborne radioactivity concentrations in the plant was discussed with licensee representatives and the use of a ventilated enclosure for maintenance on highly contaminated components was observed in the hot machine shop.
10 CFR 20.103(b) requires that when it is impracticable to apply process or engineering controls to limit concentrations of radioactive material in air below 25% of the concentrations specified in Appendix B Table 1, Column 1, other precautionary measures should be used to maintain the intake of radioactive material by any individual within seven consecutive days as far below 40 MPC-hours as is reasonably achievable.
Through discussions with licensee representatives, the inspector reviewed selected portions of the
- _ _ _ _ _ - - _ -. - - _ _
-
. - -
. -.
._
_
.
.
licensee's respiratory protection program, including the quality of breathing air, and the decontamination, repair and storage of respirators.
The inspector discussed medical qualifications of personnel prior to respirator use with licensee representatives. The inspector determined that medical qualifications were performed by an onsite medical staff at a minimum of 12 month intervals.
Respirator fit testing of individuals was performed by the training group using irritant smoke as the challenge agent.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Control of Radioactive Materials and Contamination, Surveys and Monitoring (83726)
The inspector reviewed the use of vacuum cleaners in the licensee's facility.
The vacuum cleaners were maintained under administrative control of HP and were stored in the auxiliary building.
Licensee representatives stated that most vacuum units were equipped with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter, which was built into the discharge side of the vacuum.
For those vacuum units not equipped with a HEPA filter, air samples were collected to ensure that airborne radioactive material areas were not created during the vacuum's use.
A licensee representative also stated that radiation surveys were performed on the exterior surface of the vacuum during and after use to ensure dose rates near the vacuum did not create unexpected radiation or high radiation areas.
During tours of the plant, the inspector observed the exit of workers and movement of materials from the radiation control area (RCA) to the clean areas to determine if proper frisking was performed by workers and that proper fixed and transferable contamination surveys were performed on materials.
The inspector reviewed records of skin contamination occurrences and resulting evaluations.
Records and discussions with licensee representatives indicated contamination had been promptly removed from the workers using routine washing techniques.
Subsequent whole body counts indicated no detectable internal deposition of radioactive material.
The inspector discussed routine contamination and dose rate survey scheduling with members of the licensee's HP staff. Completed surveys were reviewed by a HP shif t supervisor and were recorded in a data package as complete.
Licensee representatives stated that no routine surveys had bean missed.
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
As Low As Reasonably Achievable Program (83728)
10 CFR 20.1(c) states that persons engaged in activities under licenses issued by the NRC should make every reasonable effort to maintain radiation exposure as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). The recommended elements of an ALARA program were 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 Exposure ALARA.
During tours of the plant, the inspector interviewed licensee personnel on their knowledge of ALARA and the methods and techniques each individual used
,
to minimize his exposure.
Each individual appeared to have adequate knowledge of ALARA principles and methods.
The inspector discussed ALARA reviews for temporary shielding with the ALARA supervisor and selected members of the ALARA staff.
The inspector also discussed the process for determining that temporary shielding was required, the engineering review of shielding sites and controls over installation and removal of the shielding.
The inspector discussed the use of mock-ups with members of the ALARA group.
Licensee representatives stated that a mock-up of a steam generator channel head had been set up and used for training in the Unit 2 Turbine Building during the Unit I refueling outage.
No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Facility Statistics The collective dose for 1986 through October 31, 1986, was 269 man-rem as measured by TLD and pocket dosimeter.
Thrfu 21, 1986, the licensee had generated 6,282 cubic feet (ft ) gh November of solid radioactive wastes containing 12.75 curies of activ}ty.
The licensee had made eight waste shipments consisting of 4,508 f t of waste containing 1 The current waste inventory onsite was 540 ft}.25 curies of containing 0.2 activity.
curies of activity.
As of October 31, 1986, there were 70 personnel contaminations which was an approximate 50 percent increase from the same time frame in 1985. The licensee maintained 14,417 square feet of the plant as contaminated which was an approximate 40 percent increase from 1985. The increases noted in personnel contamination events and total plant contaminated areas were most probably due to the startup of the licensee's Unit 2 reactor and the licensee's first refueling outage on Unit 1 during 1986.
t
,..
.
,