ML19263B318
| ML19263B318 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07001113 |
| Issue date: | 11/16/1978 |
| From: | Jennifer Davis, Gibson A, Troup G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19263B307 | List: |
| References | |
| 70-1113-78-19, NUDOCS 7901180029 | |
| Download: ML19263B318 (7) | |
Text
UNITED STATES
- 8 8 0,
0 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o,
REGION ll
[
-3 f, 101 M ARIETT A sT REET. N.W.
5 g
ATLANTA.GEORc1 A 30303
[
p%,'..../
Report No.
70-1113/78-19 Docket No.
70-1113 Licensee:
General Electric Company P. O. Box 780 Wilmington, North Carolina 28401 Facility Name: Wilmington Nuclear Fuel Plant Inspection at:
Wilmington, North Carolina Inspection conducted:
October 17-20, 1978 Inspectors:
J. II. Davis 1
I G. L. Troup
\\
j y,
,b I,D I
~
i'MI*'
I /
Reviewed by:
Date A. F. Gibson, Chief Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Inspection Summary Inspection on October 17-20, 1978 (Report No. 70-1113/78-19)
Areas Inspected:
- Routine, unannounced inspection covering radiation protection procedures; internal exposure control; external exposure control-posting, labeling and control; instruments and equipment; notifications and reports; and surveys. The inspection involved 53 inspector-hours onsite by two hTC inspectors.
' Results: Of the seven areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in six areas.
One apparent item of noncom-pliance was identified in one area [ infraction (78-19-01) - failure to conduct a survey to evaluate potential airborne radioactivity hazard -
paragraph 2
}.
790118009 (
RIl Rpt. No. 70-1113/78-19 I-1 etM A [7A DETAILS 1 Prepared by:
J.H//] avis,RadiationSpecialist Date Radittion Support Section Fuel Fa no Materials Safutv Branch
/
&o
~ !!/p/,y G. L. Troup, Rad 4ation Specialist
'Date Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch Dates of Inspection etc er 17-20, 1978 2f bl h
7-Reviewed by:
x A. F. Gibson, Chief Date Radiation Support Section Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Branch 1.
Persons Contacted
- E. A. Lees, Manager, Quality Assurance
- J. E. Bergman, Manager, Fuel Manufacturing
- P. J. VonHermann, Manager, Fuel Process Technology
- C. E. Cliche, Manager, Fuel Fabrication Operations
- W. J. Hendry, Manager, Regulatory Compliance
- L. J. Kuba, Manager, Materials Operation
- B. F. Bentley, Manager, Fuel Chemical Operations
- L. E. Short, Manager, Fuel Support Projects
- J. A. Mohrbacher, Manager, Nuclear Safety Engineering
- A. L. Kaplan, Manager, Licensing and Compliance Audits T. R. Crawford, Manager, Powder Production Unit
- G. W. McKenzie, Manager, Manufacturing Engineering fuels W. B. Smalley, Senior Environmental Engineer
- C. E. Powers, Nuclear Safety Engineer
- E. M. Rollins, Nuclear Safety Engineer
- G. M. Bowman, Nuclear Safety Engineer
- W. C. Peters, Nuclear Safety Engineer
- W. B. Haverty, Compliance Auditor R. Torres, Radiation Protection Supervisor R. Keenan, Radiation Protection Supervisor D. Barbour, Radiation Protection Supervisor The inspectors also interviewed five other licensee personnel.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (70-1113/77-11/3) Determination of airborne radioactivity levels during operation of the press used for straight-ening pellet boats in REDCAP.
Discussion with licensee representatives
RII Rpt. No. 70-1113/78-19 I-2 and examination of licensee internal memoranda dated September 4, 1978; September 22, 1978; September 26, 1978; and October 19, 1978, revealed that responsible licensee representatives had reviewed the pellet boat straightener operation and the associated airborne radioactivity data and had decided that the operation of the press would be discontinued.
Licensee management confirmed the memorandum dated September 19, 1976, which stated that a Nuclear Safety Engineering evaluation would be performed prior to returning this particular equipment to service.
The inspector had no further questions regarding this item.
(0 pen) Noncompliance Item (70-1113/78-14/ Item A) Failure to survey to evaluate potential airborne hazards associated with welding con-taminated equipment.
Discussion with licensee representatives and examination of selected licensee records revealed that the licensee had taken several steps in an attempt to prevent recurrence of this type of noncompliance.
The records showed that steps undertaken included issuance of a temporary operating instruction (T01 #PCB107) on September 18, 1978, which addressed Radiation Protection Unit support prior to starting certain scheduled maintenance activities; a memo-randum dated September 25, 1978, which further delineated the referenced scheduled maintenance activities; and'a training session involving the affected individuals on September 27, 1978.
However, during the plant tour on October 17, 1978, an inspector observed a licensee employee welding a piece of contaminated equipment in the controlled area near the hoods located above the pellet presses. Apparently no survey had been performed to evaluate the associated airborne hazard.
The inspector inf ormed a licensee representative that it appeared that corrective actions had not been entirely effective and that this would be con-sidered a repeat item of noncompliance (78-19-01).
Licensee representa-tives stated that long-term corrective action should be achieved by development of a Job Hazards Analysis (JHA) which included radiation safety precautions. The JHA was to be implemented by November 18, 1978.
The inspector examined a draft of the JHA and noted the require-ment that affected employees sign a statement of understanding of the JHA prior to performing the specified tasks.
The inspector emphasized that this aspect of the corrective action, which had been stated in the licensee's response to the Notice of Violation, appeared to strengthen the program but the most important element of the corrective action appeared to be the effective training of the affected individuals.
Licensee representatives stated that additional training would be conducted in this area.
3.
Unresolved Items No unresolved items were disclosed during this inspection.
RIl Rpt. No. 70-1113/78-19 I-3 4.
Radiation Protection Procedures An inspector examined several procedures pertaining to radiation a.
safety from the licensee's Practices and Procedures series (P/P) and Nuclear Safety Instruction series (NSI).
The inspector also reviewed the content of changes made to three P/P's during calendar year 1978 and determined that the changes were consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR 20.
The procedures which were reviewed appeared to be consistent with license conditions and had been periodically reviewed as required by the license conditions.
b.
In reviewing P/P 40-22, " Respiratory Protection Program" and NSI 0-1.0, " Respiratory Protection - Training and Fitting" the inspector noted that both procedures discuss the use of air-fed suits.
NUREG-0041, " Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Materials", paragraph 5.1.3 discusses the use of air-fed suits and states that when air-fed suits are used, a second individual shall be stationed so as to provide emergency assistance to the individual in the suit in case of failure of the air supply. The inspector noted that neither the P/P nor NSI includes such a requirement for the use of air-fed hoods.
A licensee representative acknowledged this and stated that both procedures would be reviewed and appropriate changes made
[78-10-02].
5.
Instruments and Equipment Examination of calibration records for January-October 1978 for selected survey instruments revealed that the instruments had been calibrated at least annually as required by license conditions.
Observations made by the inspector during plant tours on October 17 and 19, 1978 verified that selected radiation protection instrumentation in use and available for use was operable and within the calibration period specified by license conditions.
6.
External Exposure Control Examination of records of results from the licensee's personnel dosimetry program for the second quarter 1978 revealed that neutron exposures of 10 rem had been reported by the vendor for two licensee employees.
A licensee representative telephoned the vendor and stated that he was informed that the reported exposure had been a misprint and that vendor records showed the neutron exposure to be minimal for the affected individuals. A preliminary report for the third quarter 1978 was also examined.
Apparently no overexposures had occurred during these periods.
Discussions with licensee representatives, occupa-tionally exposed employees, and observations made by the inspector revealed that personnel dosimetry was furnished as required by 10 CFR 20.202 and 10 CFR 20.401(a).
RII Rpt. No. 70-1113/78-19 I-4 7.
Internal Exposure Control a.
Air Sampling (1) Air sample results for selected areas were reviewed for October 11 and October 16, 1978, along with the weekly summaries for October 1978.
An inspector also observed air samplers in various work areas and verified that they were operating. The inspector noted that one sampler appeared to be operating intermittently, a licensee representative stated that this sampler was to be repaired or replaced due to the erratic performance.
(2) The inspector discussed with licensee representatives the status of the installation of a live-time air sampling system and fixed station air samplers. The inspector also examined drawings of the planned lay-out of the system and possible effects of the additional discharge volume on existing discharge samplers. A licensee representative informed the inspector that the system installation was in progress but would not be operable until the first quarter, 1979, due to modifications of the electronics packages.
b.
Bioassay An inspector examined selected in-vivo counting and urinalysis results for October 1978.
Discussions with licensee represen-tatives and examination of the records revealed that no indi-viduals were found to have lung burdens above the licensee's limit and no overexposures to airborne uranium had occurred.
The licensee's bioassay program appeared to be conducted in accordance with the license conditions.
c.
Respiratory Protection Program An inspector discussed with licensee representatives respiratory protective devices used in the vaporization area of the facility.
Respiratory protection was sometimes necessary in this area because of leaks of uranium hexaflouride, according to licensee representatives.
Licensee representatives stated that this potential problem had been recognized and that the licensee had been involved in discussions with a respiratory protective devices vendor and NIOSH regarding the lack of device specifically approved for uranium hexaflouride airborne areas (with the concommitant problem of hydroflouric acid vapors).
Licensee representatives stated that the vendor had informed them that NIOSH approval had been requested for certain devices to be used in such areas.
Licensee representatives further discussed with the inspectors
RIl Rpt. No. 70-1113/78-19 I-5 other aspects of this potential problem. They emphasized that self-contained breathing devices were not practical due to the nature of the tasks performed in this work area; that NUREG 0041
" Manual of Respiratory Protection Against Airborne Radioactive Materials" states that air-line respirators shall not be used in atmospheres immediately dangerous to life or health; and that bioassay results for the personnel working in the vaporization area indicated that the respiratory protective devices currently in use had prevented significant uptakes of uranium compounds. An inspector verified by examination of selected urinalysis records for January 1977 to September 1978 that apparently no overexposures to airborne uranium had occurred in this area.
Based on these discussions and the bioassay results it appears appropriate that the licensee continue to use the type of protective devices in use over this period of time and to continue to carefully evaluate bicassays at least at the current frequency.
Actions taken in regards to this potential problem and bioassay results obtained for personnel working in the vaporization area will be examined during future inspections (78-19-03).
Although no protection factor was taken for half-face respirators (see paragraph 2), the inspector expressed concern to licensee representatives regarding the practice of wearing the respirators suspended by the strap around the worker's neck with the potential for contaminating the inside of the facepeice and the subsequent donning of the respirator with no determination of contamination inside the facepiece.
A licensee representative stated that spot-check contamination surveys made by radiation protection personnel indicated that no significant health and safety hazard existed as a result of this practice.
An inspector acknowledged the licensee representative's comment and had no further questions regarding the respiratory protection program.
8.
Posting, Labeling and Control a.
Posting and Labeling Observations made by the inspectors during tours of the facility on October 17, 18, and 19, 1978, revealed that notices were posted, areas were posted, and containers were labeled as requiied by regulations.
b.
Contamination Control and Surveys Examination of contarination control survey records for July-October 16, 1978, revealed that weekly surveys had been made in the controlled area as required by license conditions. Other contamination control surveys had been performed at frequencies
Rll Rpt. No. 70-1113/78-19 I-6 established by licensee procedures.
Selected records examined by an inspector showed that areas found to be above action levels had been cleaned up and resurveyed as required by licensee procedures.
The inspector discussed with licensee representatives potential contamination problems and the merits of better housekeeping near the hot machine shop foreman's station and exit, and on the UPS mezzanine.
9.
Notification and Reports Discussion with licensee representatives and examination by inspector of planned computer program modifications revealed that plans were underway to improve the timeliness of notifications of terminated employees as required by 10 CFR 20.409 (78-19-04).
The licensee had furnished a semiannual effluent report to the NRC for the first six months of 1978 as required by 10 CFR 70.59.
10.
Bulletins and CircularsBulletin 78-07 " Protection Afforded by Air-Line Respirators and Supplied Air Hoods" The licensee's response to NRC stated that a supplied air hood was used in the decontamination facility.
Dis-cussions with licensee representatives revealed that a protection factor of five hundred (500) was claimed for this device.
An inspector confirmed that the device had an effective Bureau of Mines approval, which will expire March 31, 1980 (Closed).
11.
Exit Interview The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) on October 20, 1978, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.