ML20037C415
| ML20037C415 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1980 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20003A737 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-277-80-05, 50-277-80-11, 50-277-80-26, 50-277-80-5, 50-278-80-05, 50-278-80-11, 50-278-80-19, 50-278-80-5, NUDOCS 8102050837 | |
| Download: ML20037C415 (4) | |
Text
.
O APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Philadelphia Electric Company Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 Based on the results of NRC inspections conducted on March 1-31,1980, on April 25-May 19, 1980, and on July 24-28, 1980, it appears that certain of your activities were not conducted in full compliance with conditions of your NRC License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-56 as indicated below.
A.
The following items of nonccmpliance were identified in Inspection No.
50-277/80-05:50-278/80-05, conducted on March 1-31, 1980.
1.
Technical Specification 6.8, " Procedures", states in part:
"Wri tten procedures...shall be established, implemented, and maintained that meet the requirements of... Regulatory Guide 1.33 (November,1972).
....Each procedure...shall be reviewed by the PORC and approved by the Station Superintendent or his designated alternate...".
Resolatory Guide 1.33 (November,1972), Appendix A, Section G, references proce-dures for processing liquid radioactise waste.
Contrary to the above, on March 7, 1980, the licensee conducted opera-tions using the t'uel pool cooling system demineralizer as an alternate path to process liquid radioactive waste and no approved written procedures had been issued governing these operations.
This is an infraction applicable to DPR-44 and DPR-56.
2.
Technical Specification 6.8.1 states:
" Written procedures and adminis-trative policies shall be established, implemented, and maintained...".
Procedure FH-5, "New Fuel Inspection, Channeling and Placement in the Fuel Pool", revision 17, dated January 11, 1980, states in part, " Fuel i
Inspectors...shall perform the fuel inspection according to the fuel inspection plan Appendix B...shall initial the steps of the check-off lict corresponding to the part of the inspection performed by the fuel inspector...QC Inspector...shall sign the ' Fuel Bundle Site Inspection Sheet' (Appendix B, Attachment B)...after all other items are com-pleted...shall monitor the fuel inspection to ensure that it is per-formed properly."
Contrary to the above, during the period February 15 to February 26,-
1980, Procedure FH-5 was nu followed, in that:
eir
- 73?
j 4
)
Appendix A 2
13 Fuel Bundles which were to be channeled in used channels did not contain verification that the capscrew hole would accept a 5/16-18 UNC-B 1-1/18" capscrew to 1" depth (step 19B).
The Fuel Bundles were LJM 012, LJM 014, LJM 026, LJM 039, LJM 076 LJM 087, LJM 179, LJM 185, LJM 191, LJM 221, LJM 326, LJM 079, LJM 184.
4 Fuel Bundles which were to be channeled in new fuel channels did not contain verification that a maximum 0.314" gap existed between the fastener and channel for.100" thick channels machined to 0.080" (step 20). The fuel bundles involved were LJM 058, LJM 089, LJM 090, LJM 110.
This is an infraction applicable to DPR-44 and DPR-56.
3.
Technical Specification 6.11, " Radiation Protection Program" states in part, " Procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared consistent with requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be approved, maintained, and adhered to...".
Health Physics Procedure HP0/CO-10a, " Conduct in Controlled Areas -
Minimize Exposure", Revision 2, dated May 12,1978, states in part, "Always wear provided personnel dosimetry." Additionally, the appli-cable RWP required dosimetry.
(No. 3-94-0057)
Contrary to the above, on March 21, 1980, at about 2:45 PM, one indi-vidual working in controlled area under Radiation Work Permit (RWP)
No. 3-99-0057 in the turbine building 165 foot elevation was found not wearing his dosimetry.
This is an infraction applicable to DPR-44 and DPR-56.
B.
The following items of noncompliance were identified in Inspection No.
50-277/80-11:50-278-80-11, conducted. on April 25-May 19,1980.
1.
Technical Specification 6.11. " Radiation orotection Program", requires that procedures for personnel radiation protection shall be prepared consistent with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20 and shall be approved, maintained and adhered to for all operations involving personnel radia-l tion exposure.
_ In addition,10 CFR 20.103(c) states that when respiratory protective-equipment is used, the licensee may make allowance for ~such use in estimating exposures of individuals to such materials provided that.
such equipment is used as stipulated in Regulatory Guide 8.15.. Regu-latory Guide 8.15, Section C.4.c., requires " Written procedures to ensure.'..the tetting of respiratory protective equipment for operabi-lity immediately prior to each use."
~
Appendix A 3
Frocedure HP0/C09a, " Respiratory Training and Fitting", requires that individuals who wear respirators shall perform a negative pressure test prior to each use.
Contrary to the above, on April 24, 1980, during a tour of the access control to the torus, the inspector observed three individuals (as they suited up and donned respirators, as required by Radiation Work Permits), who failed to perform a negative pressure test, as required by Procedure HP0/C09a.
This is an infraction applicable to DPR-44.
2.
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion VI states in part, " Measures shall be established to control the issuance of documents, such as instruc-tions, procedures, and drawings, including changes thereto...these measures shall assure that documents...are distributed and used at locations where the activity is performed." The licensee's NRC accepted Quality Assurance Plan, Volume III, Section 2, Paragraph 6.1 states in part, " documents, including changes...are distributed to and used at the location where the prescribed activity is performed.."
Contrary to the above, current revisions of HP0/C09, " Respiratory Protection Program"; HP0/C09a, " Respiratory Training and Fitting";
and HP0/C09b, " Respiratory Protection Equipment and Selection and Use" were not in use during a tour of the respirator quality assur-ance and maintenance station on April 24, 1980..
This is an infraction applicable to DPR-44 and DPR-56.
3.
10 CFR 19.11(a) and (b) require that current copies of Part 19, Part 20, the license conditions, the documents incorporated into the license, the license amendments and the operating procedures shall be posted, or that a notice describing these documents and where they may be examined shall be posted.
10 CFR 19.11(c) requires that a -
Form NRC-3, " Notice to Employees", shall be posted.
Contrary to the above, a check of the single controlled bulletin board during site entry on April 22, 1980 found 10 CFR 19 not current, in that a Form AEC-3 instead of Form NRC-3 was posted.
This is a deficiency applicable to DPR-44 and DPR-56.
C.
The following items of noncompliance were identified in Inspection No.
50-277/80-26:50-278/80-19, ccnducted on July 24-28, 1980.
.----v-,-
- ,,,w.
..,+,,
_, ~-,...,.,
,,,,_m-,
,~
Appendix A 4
1.
Technical Specification 6.11 states, in part, that "Pmcedures for personnel radiation protection shall be... adhered to for all opera-tions involving personnel radiation exposure."
Paragraph 6.b of Health Physics Operations / Chemistry Operations Pro-cedure - 11. " Establishing and Posting Radiologically Controlled Areas", states, in part, that "A rad tape indication line or a warn-ing rope (or ribbon) is to be established to encompass the contami-nated area and/or items which exceed 500 dpm/100 cm2 or 500 cpm /ft2 with a HP-210 or 260 probe...and posted with signs which read Caution (or Danger) Contaminated Area."
Contrary to the above, an area exceeding the contamination levels stated in HP0/CO-11 Paragraph 6.b existed on the 135 foot elevation level of Reactor Building No. 2 on July 25, 1980 without the required posting sign.
This is a deficiency applicable to DPR-44.
2.-
Technical Specification 6.8.1 states, in part, that " Written proce-dures and administrative policies shall be established, implemented and maintained..."
Physical Protection Procedure No. I " Normal Admittance Procedure",
Revision 18, dated May 30, 1980 states, in part, "Section 2 Admittance The guard shall ensure that the... dosimetry is being issued to the correct person."
Contrary to the above, on July 28, 1980, an employee from the Bechtel Corporation was visually observed by the NRC inspector to be wearing an Eberline Thermoluminescent Dosimeter (TLD) formally assigned to a Peach Bottom Test Engineer.
Additionally, the Peach Bottom Test Engineer had worn the TLD assigned to the Bechtel employee.
This is a deficiency applicable to DPR-44.
l
Rep:rt Nos. 50-277/80-05 50-270/80-05 APPENDIX B NOTICE OF VIOLATION Philadelphia Electric Company Docket Nos. 50-277 50-278 Based on the results of an NRC inspection conducted on March 1-31,1980, it appears that one of your activities was not conducted in full compliance with conditions of your NRC License Nos. DPR-44 and DPR-55 as indicated below. This item is an infraction.
THESE PARAGRAPHS INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK, THEY CONTAINED 2.790 INFORMA-TION, NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE.
. _. -