IR 05000424/1986126
| ML20207J206 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 12/19/1986 |
| From: | Hosey C, Troup G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207J174 | List: |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737 50-424-86-126, NUDOCS 8701080338 | |
| Download: ML20207J206 (5) | |
Text
e.
-
m
.
.
p Rf4 UNIT ED STATES
/j 9'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
["
REGION 11 n
g j
101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- -
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
%,*****,e DEC 2 31986 Report Nos.: 50-424/86-126 Licensee: Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Docket Nos.: 50-424 License Nos.: CPPR-108 Facility Name:
Vogtle 1 Inspection C ducted: Dec er 1
, 1986 Inspec r. o //A \\
/2
0
.~ ~ Troup
/
~ /Dat( Sig ed Approved y,
\\
/:V SX C. M. Hosey, Sect W Chief fatpSigned Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of radiation protection and radioactive waste management including management controls, staffing, audits and appraisals, external exposure control, facilities and equipment, NUREG-0737 items and followup items from the Readiness Review Program.
,
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
<
k
(
%
.. _,
,
.
-
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- C. E. Bellflower, QA Site Manager (Operations)
- A. E. Desrosier, Health Physics Superintendent
- I. A. Kockery, Plant Engineering Supervisor (HP)
D. P. Potocik, Health Physics Supervisor R. L. Pickett, Laboratory Supervisor (Dosimetry)
- J. W. Daniel, Rad Waste Supervisor M. C. Seepe, Rad Waste Laboratory Supervisor P. A. Cure, Senior Health Physicist M. A. Biron, Senior Health Physicist Other licensee employees contacted included health physics specialists, foremen, and technicians.
Licensee Employees - General Office
- P. D. Rice, Vice President, Project Engineering S. E. Ewald, Manager, Radiological Safety D. M. Hopper, Radiological Safety Supervisor
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on December 5,1986, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings, including the two new inspector followup items. Licensee representatives acknowledged the findings and took no exceptions. No material provided to or reviewed by the inspector was identified as proprietary.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
4.
Readiness Review Followup Items During the review of Module 9A, Radiological Protection of the Vogtle Readiness Review Program, the implementation of several commitments was incomplete.
These were reviewed in Report 50-424/86-104 and were completed except for Commitments 1545 and 1546, which dealt with the reporting of violations of radiation work permits or radiation work rules. The inspector reviewed Procedure 00911-C, Radiological Deficiencies, Occurrences and Incidents, Rev. O, issued 11/15/86, and determined that this procedure met
..
.. _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
,
.
.
the commitments in the Readiness Review Program; the inspector had no further questions.
5.
Organization and Management Controls (83522)
a.
The inspector reviewed the present organization and staffing levels for the Health Physics group.
In addition to the plant staff, contractors are providing additional assistance.
Although vacancies exist at the supervisor and foreman level, the cognizant supervisor expressed confidence that the staff could adequately carry out the responsibilities.
The inspector determined that the current staffing and organization appeared adequate to support fuel loading and startup.
b.
An element of the health physics, chemistry, radwaste and transportation program is the conduct of audits and appraisals to evaluate performance.
Corporate Nuclear Operations 2-450 and Plant Procedure 40000-C, Conduct of Health Physics Operations, state that the Manager, Radiological Safety shall assess the site programs.
<
Additionally, the Quality Assurance-Operations conducts audits in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
The inspector discussed these audits with the cognizant supervisors and reviewed the methods used to assure prompt corrective actions are taken. The inspector also reviewed the Quality Assurance Audit schedule for 1987, and determined that the subject areas are included.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
External Exposure Controls (83524)
a.
The inspector reviewed the controls for exposures during emergencies, and the administrative controls for approving extensions of exposures above plant administrative limits during emergencies.
Procedure 91301-C, Rev. 2 Emergency Exposure Guidelines, establishes levels of exposure and designates individuals by position who can approve exposures above the normal NRC limits and up to the EPA guidelines.
The procedure designates the chain of ascension to the position of Emergency Director.
A person is designated so that on back shifts and weekends, emergency exposure authorizations can be approved.
The inspector had no further questions.
b.
The inspector also reviewed the range of personnel dosimetry devices to
monitor emergency exposures.
Self-reading dosimeters (SRDs) are calibrated and available onsite with maximum ranges of 20 Rem and 100 Rem.
In addition, the TLD badges have a normal upper limit of 500 Rem, but with special processing, will indicate exposure above 1,000 Rem.
This should provide adequate p?rsonnel monitoring under accident conditions. The inspector had no further questions.
No violations or deviations were identified.
,
-.
--
.--
. -. -. -
_
-
.
._
,
-
.
7.
Area Radiation Monitoring System (83626)
a.
FSAR Section 12.3.4 and Table 12.3.4-2 describe the Area Radiation Monitoring System and provide the location of the 15 monitors, including the Containment High Range Monitors. The inspector observed the installation of 11 of the monitors, and observed that the panels had the alarm and failure lights as described in the FSAR.
b.
Two of the monitors (ARE-0009A and ARE-00098) are specified for decontamination areas. Licensee representatives informed the inspector that the decontamination area will be relocated into another area formerly intended for drum storage.
The inspector stated that since the original design provided for area monitors in the decontamination area, at least one of the monitors should be relocated into the new area.
This -was acknowledged by licensee management representatives.
Until this can be accomplished, representatives stated that alternate methods of monitoring radiation levels could be provided, such as the use of portable area monitors. The inspector stated that this would ba l
a followup item for review during a subsequent inspection.
(50-424/86-126-01).
c.
The inspector discussed the status of calibration and setting of the alarms for the area monitors with licensee representatives.
At the time of the inspection, the electronics circuits were being checked and adjusted but the calibration of the monitors had not started.
The inspector informed licensee management that until the calibrations were complete, Inspection Followup Item 50-324/86-12-47 as it pertains to the area monitors remained open.
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Facilities and Equipment (83526, 83527)
a.
The instrument calibration facility is complete and functional.
The
I large (high range) calibrator has been installed and is functional to calibrate high range instruments, b.
A neutron source is available for use as a check source. The licensee sent several of the neutron instruments to the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) for calibration.
A licensee representative informed the inspector that at least two of the NBS calibrated instruments would be retained in the calibration facility as secondary standards to check
l instruments in use.
Other neutron instruments will be sent to a contractor facility for calibration in the future.
l c.
Health Physics has identified areas in the plant which can be used as satellite change areas.
Final designation of these areas is pending the review and approval by the Fire Protection Engineer.
,
.
f d.
Installation of the equipment decontamination equipment has not been completed.
The area (room) to be used has been changed.
Installation l
l
!
i L
.,
.
of the equipment was delayed until the security boundaries were changed to permit access to the room.
No violations or deviations were identified.
9.
Solid Radwaste (84522, 83523)
a.
10 CFR 20.311(d)(3) requires that any generating licensee who transfers radioactive waste to a land disposal facility shall conduct a quality control program to assure compliance with 10 CFR 61.55 and 61.56.
10 CFR 61.55 deals with waste classification while 61.56 addresses waste characteristics.
The licensee has approved procedures for activity determination, curie content determination, and packing and classification. A supervisory review and sign-off exists for the waste classification but a review or quality control review for waste characteristics does not exist, although the procedures contain requirements (or prohibitions) for the characteristics.
A licensee representative stated that the requirements for the quality control program would be incorporated into the applicable procedure.
The inspector stated that this item would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection, and would be identified as Inspector Followup Item 50-424/86-126-02.
b.
Training for radwaste operators on the requirements of 10 CFR 61, Burial Site Criteria and Transportation of Radioactive Materials, was conducted during the inspection.
Additionally, training on the WASTETRAK computer program was scheduled for the following week.
Alternate Radwaste Building (ARB) ystem has been installed in thebut parts o The temporary waste processing s c.
sampling station) have not been installed.
The inspector noted that the system includes a number of instruments which are important for process control, and asked licensee representatives about the calibration or test program for these instruments.
Licensee representatives stated that the instruments belonged to the supplier and it is the supplier's responsibility to maintain the instruments in accordance with his quality assurance program and approved topical l
report.
Subsequent to the inspection, the inspector discussed this with' representatives of the system supplier, who confirmed that the
calibration of the instruments was their: responsibility and would be l
carried out in accordance with the company quality assurance program.
'
The inspector had no further questions.
.
d.
The inspector reviewed the following procedures covering various l
operations associated with the alternate radwaste systems, and verified i
that the procedures were reviewed, approved, and issued.
1)
13275-C, Mobile Solidification, Rev. 0 2)
13276-C, Contaminated Oil Processing, Rev. 0 3)
13285-C, Spent Resin Processing, Rev. 0
,
!
-
,
m