IR 05000416/1989006

Insp Rept 50-416/89-06 on 890221-24.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Radiation Protection for Unit Refueling Outage Scheduled for 890318

ML20247C703
Person / Time
Site:	Grand Gulf
Issue date:	03/13/1989
From:	Collins T, Potter J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20247C694	List: IR 05000416/1989006 ML20247C687
References
50-416-89-06, 50-416-89-6, IEIN-88-008, IEIN-88-032, IEIN-88-062, IEIN-88-063, IEIN-88-079, IEIN-88-32, IEIN-88-62, IEIN-88-63, IEIN-88-79, IEIN-88-8, NUDOCS 8903300244
Download: ML20247C703 (5)

Text

m - --

'

..

., p s@ 880ug-t UNITED STATES I*Y

.

[ [ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o, '2 REGION 11 g .,,,, 101 MARIETTA ST ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 MAR 141989 Report No.: 50-416/89-06 Licensee: System Energy Resources, In Jackson, MS 39205 Docket No.: 50-416 License No.: NPF-29 Facility Name: Grand Gulf Nuclear Station Inspection Conducted: . February 21-24, 1989 Inspector: 7 6 h I T. i Dat Signed Approved by:

.

Jf4 . Potter, Chief FatfSigned l Facilities Radiation Protection Section Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch Division of. Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY l

Scope This was a special, un6nnounced inspection in the area of radiation protection for the . Unit I refueling outage scheduled for March 18,198 Results Based on interviews with licensee management, supervision, and personnel from station departments and records review the inspector found: radiation protection preparations for the 1989 refueling outage to be adequate. The inspector observed that the radiation protection program continued to be effective and adequate management involvement was provided to support the

'

radiation protection program. No violations or deviations were identifie ,

I e9033002448$$$1 PDR ADOCK O pg G

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _

_ _ _ , _ - _ _ .

-

.

)

i

.

.

.

REPORT DETAILS 1 Persons Contacted Licensee Employees G. Bortz, ALARA Specialist B. Carr, Health Physics Shift Supervisor S. Cotton, Technical Assistant / Radiation Protection Manager i

,

• T. Hildebrandt, Chemistry / Radiation Protection Superintendent J. Hurst, Radiation Protection Supervisor /0perations 1

'

• G. Morrison, Acting Supervisor,. Radiological Services J. Summers, Compliance Coordinator-

• S. Tanner, Manager, Quality Services

.

• J. Yelverton, Manager, Plant Operations Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, maintenance, and office personne * Attended exit interview Occupational Exposure During Extended Outages (83750) Organization The licensee was required by Technical Specification (TS) 6.2 to implement the plant organization specified in Table 6.2.2-1. The i responsibilities, authorities, and other management controls were l further outlined in Chapters 12 and 13 of the FSA TS 6. specifies the members of the Plant Safety Review Committee (PSRC) and ,

outlined its functions and authorities. Regulatory Guide '

specifies certain functions and responsibilities to be assigned to the Radiation Protection Manager (Chemistry / Radiation Protection Superintendent) and radiation protection responsibilities to be assigned to line managemen The inspector reviewed recent changes to the plant organization, to determine their effect on plant radiological controls, by examining the resulting changes to administrative procedures and position descriptions and discussing the changes with the Manager of Plant Operations and the Chemistry / Radiation Protection Superintenden The inspector discussed with the Manager of Plant Operations, the Maintenance Manager, and the Chemistry / Radiation Protection Superintendent, the radiological control considerations involved in the upcoming refueling outage, including major tasks to be performed during this period. The inspector concluded that adequate planning and preparation had been performed during this period to evaluate the radiological hazards associated with these tasks.

l U

-

.

-.,

.

i L

.

The inspector discussed with the Manager of Plant Operations, and i

'

other licensee representatives, the system for prioritizing plant modification requests. The inspector reviewed selected modification requests for the upcoming refueling outage, and discussed with members of the engineering staff the bases for establishing priorities for specific request The inspector discussed with an operations shift foreman, a maintenance foreman, and a radiation protection foreman, the type, methods of, and degree of interaction between plant groups. The inspector discussed with the Chemistry / Radiation Protection Superintendent and selected radiation protection foremen, how frequently they toured the plant, radiation control areas (RCAs), and reviewed documentation of these tour ,

No violations or deviations were identifie b. Staffing TS 6.2.2 specifies minimum plant staffin FSAR Chapters 12 and 13 also outline further details on staffin The inspector discussed i authorized staffing levels vs. actual on-board staffing separately I with the Manager of Plant Operations and the Chemistry / Radiation j Protection Superintendent. The inspector examined shift staffing for !

the midnight shift February 22, 1989, to determine if it met minimum 1

,

criteria for radiation protection.

!

I No violations or deviations were identifie "

l

!

c. Control of Radioactive Materials and Contamination, Surveys, and Monitoring The licensee was required by 10 CFR 20.201(b), 20.403, and 20.401 to perform surveys to show compliance with regulatory limits and to maintain records of such surveys. Chapter 12 of the FSAR outlines i

survey methods and instrumentation. TS 6.8 requires the licensee to follow written procedures. Radiological control procedures further outlined survey methods and frequencie l l

The inspector observed, during plant tours, surveys being performed The inspector reviewed selected

,

by radiation protection staf i Radiation Work Permits (RWPs) during the inspection to determine if adequate controls were specified. The inspector discussed the

.

'

controls and monitoring with the radiation protection technician assigned and one worker for each tas The inspector performed independent radiation level surveys.

I During plant tours, the inspector observed radiation level and i contamination survey results outside selected cubicle The inspector performed independent radiation level surveys of selected

-

areas and compared them to licensee survey results. The-inspector l

'

C________

--

,v

'

~.

.

i

1

,

reviewed selected survey records for the month of February 1989, and discussed with licensee representatives methods used to disseminate i survey result The inspector also noted that only approximately 3.60% of the RCA was controlled as contaminated. At the same time, no new contamination controlled areas had been adde No violations or deviations were identifie d. Training and Qualifications The licensee was required by TS 6.4 to qualify radiation protection technicians in accordance with ANSI N 18.1, 197 The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for qualification of contract radiation protection technician The inspector also discussed the training and qualification program the licensee had provided, what limits had been placed on their activities, and control that should bc established for tasks that they would be qualified to perfor The inspector concluded that the licensee's contract radiation protection technicians training and qualification program was wc11 defined and comprehensive to ascertain qualifications of these personne No violations or deviations were identifie e. External Exposure Control and Personnel Dosimetry The inspector discussed the planning preparation for the upcoming refueling and maintenance outage with the Manager of Plant Operations and the Chemistry / Radiation Protection Superintendent. Specific areas discussed included increased staffing levels in the radiation protection program by contract radiation protection technicians, special training (mock-ups), additional equipment and supplies (PCM-l's, Portal Monitors), health physics (HP) involvement in outage planning, licensee control over contract HP technicians, dose reduction methods to be employed and radioactive waste reduction activitie The inspector concluded that the licensee has adequately evaluated, j procured, and ordered the necessary additional equipment, supplies, and contract HP personnel to support the upcoming refueling outag No violations or deviations were identified, f. As low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) Program 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 ALAR The recommended elements of an i

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ]

-

. .

.

,

t

4 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 Regulacry Guide 8.10, Operating Philosophy for Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposures ALAR The inspector discussed the ALARA goals and objectives for 1988 and 1989, with licensee representatives and reviewed the person-rem estimates and result The licensee's goal for 1988 was set at 160 person-rem, however, only 148 person-rem was expende The actual collective exposure for 1988 was significantly less than the

,

national average for a single unit Boiling Water Reactor (BWR).

The licensee has established a goal for 500 person-rem for 1989, af which 360 person-rem of that goal has been established for the upcoming refueling outage. Even though the increased goal for 1989 exceeds the actual exposure expended in 1988, the 500 person-rem goal for 1989.was still significantly below the national average for a single unit BW The inspector reviewed the ALARA evaluations for several major jobs to be performed during the upcoming refueling / maintenance outage to begin March 18, 1989. The outage is scheduled for 45 days with refueling operations targeted as critical pat The inspector concluded that it appeared that adequate ALARA reviews and evaluations have been performed for the tasks reviewed to maintain exposures ALAR No violations or deviations were identifie . IE Information Notice (IN) (92717)

The inspector determined that the following ins had been received by the licensee, reviewed for applicability, distributed to appropriate personnel ]

and that action as appropriate, was taken or scheduled: )

IN 88-08: Chemical Reactions with Radioactive Waste Solidification Agents 4 i

,

'

IN 88-32: Prompt Reporting to NRC of Significant Incident Involving l Radioactive Material i l

IN 88-62: Recent Findings Concerning Implementation of Quality Assurance Program by Suppliers of Transport Packages-IN 88-63: High Radiation Hazards from Irradiated Incore Detectors

! and Cables IN 88-79: Misuse of Flashing Lights for High Radiation Area Control

.

_ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _