ML20057D370
| ML20057D370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1993 |
| From: | Michael Kunowski, Mccormickbarge, Paul R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20057D361 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-440-93-17, NUDOCS 9310040153 | |
| Download: ML20057D370 (5) | |
See also: IR 05000440/1993017
Text
.
t
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
f
REGION III
'
Report No. 50-440/93017(DRSS)
'
Docket No. 50-440
License No. NPF-58
Licensee: Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company
10 Center Road
Perry, OH- 44081
Facility Name:
Perry Nuclear Power Plant,. Unit I
Inspection At:
Perry Site, Perry, Ohio
-
!
Inspection Conducted: August 23 - 27, 1993
l
Inspectors:
/7. M , /( e .
-22 ' 7)
W. A. Kunowski
Date
!
n A K w l' 4'n
7 .pd 1]
R. A. Paul
/
Date
Approved By: A. d NWN /m
7 W T]
J. W. McCormick-Bgrger, Chief
Date
Radiological Controls Section 1
!
'
Inspection Summary
Inspection on Auoust 23 - 27. 1993 (Inspection Report No. 50-440/93017(DRSS))
Areas Reviewed:
Routine, announced inspection of the radiation protection
program (Inspection Procedure (IP) 83750), the gaseous radioactive waste
~3
program (IP 84750), and the interim radioactive waste storage facility (IP 86750). An inspector was accompanied during the inspection of the interim
!
radioactive waste storage facility (IRSF) by a representative of the Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency.
,
Results:
In radiation protection, the licensee established a contamination
control task force to address a relatively high number of personal
contaminations in " clean" areas of the radiologically restricted area (Section
4).
Efforts in this area appeared adequate. One violation for a failure to
'
perform a surveillance of the charcoal adsorbers of two trains of- the FHB
ventilation exhaust system was identified (Section 5)
The licensee had begun
using the IRSF to sort and monitor " clean" trash to verify it was not
contaminated and to store contaminated equipment, protective clothing, and
soil. Two problems with the blades in the IRSF's shredder / compactor have been
1
attributed by the licensee to a failure of the vendor to supply blades meeting
the original specifications. This problem was expected to be resolved later.
'
this year, after which the licensee planned to begin processing contaminated
material (Section 6).
,
i
9310040153 930924
l
ADDCK 05000440
G
_
j
- _ _ _ - _ - _ - - _ ___ _-
-_-_
_
__
.
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
M. B. Bezilla, Operations Manager
N. L. Bonner, Director, Perry Nuclear Engineering Department
G. T. Cad, Supervisor, Contracts Modification Unit
K. P. Donovan, Manager, Licensing and Compliance Section (LCS)
C. R. Elberfeld, Operations Analyst, LCS
0. D. Hulbert, Quality Evaluator, Quality Assurance Section
W. R. Kanda, Manager, instrumentation and Control Section
A. H. Lambacher, Compliance Engineer. LCS
J. Messina, Shift Supervisor, Perry Operations Section
K. R. Pech, Director, Perry Nuclear Assurance Department
A. P. Pusateri, Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Lead, Systems
Engineering Section
C. Reiter, Plant Health Physicist
R. W. Schrauder, Director, Perry Nuclear Support Department
J. J. Traverso, Supervisor, Radiation Protection Section
F. Von Ahn, Manager, Systems Engineering Section
A. Vegel, NRC Resident Inspector
i
The individuals listed above attended the exit meeting on August 27,
1993.
The inspectors also contacted other licensee personnel during the
inspection.
2.
Audits and Appraisals (IP 83750)
An inspector reviewed several audits and surveillances related to
,
contamination control. They were fairly detailed and performance-based,
l
and were conducted by knowledgeable individuals.
Responses to findings
and observations appeared appropriate and timely.
Inspector
observations regarding the licensee's contamination control program are
discussed in Section 4.
No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
3.
Qualifications of Personnel (IP 83750)
i
l
As discussed in Inspection Report No. 50-440/93012(DRSS), the onsite
Corporate Health Physicist resigned recently.
This position was
subsequently filled with the individual who. functioned at Perry as a
radiological assessor. This individual'had an advanced science degree
and was a certified health physicist. The licensee also appointed the
former radiation protection manager at Davis-Besse to share the
corporate health physicist duties.
In addition to their duties as
corporate' health physicists, the two individuals will a' iso perform
radiological assessor activities. These appointments should strengthen
2
1
!
. . .
.
corporate support and oversight of the Perry radiological controls
program.
No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
4.
Contamination Control (IP 83750)
l
An inspector reviewed the ef forts of the licensee's contamination
control task force and the current contamination control program,
i
including personal contamination monitor sensitivities and skin dose
i
calculation methodology.
The task force was recently established in
response to a persistent problem with low-level personal contamination
events (PCEs), especially those occurring in areas of the radiologically
restricted area (RRA) not controlled as being contaminated.
The
inspector noted several items which could detract from the timely
resolution of the PCE problem, including lack of dedicated cleanup
crews; competing job responsibilities of the contamination control
coordinator; and lack of direct authority of the contamination control
,
coordinator over the cleanup crews. The inspector also noted that an
air conditioning problem in the licensee's tool decontamination facility
imposed a heat-stress stay time limitation on workers and presented less
than optimal work conditions for ensuring proper decontamination of
tool s .
Other aspects of the contamination control program appeared
adequate.
Results of the licensee's efforts to address the personal
contamination problem will be reviewed during future inspections.
The inspector also conducted a contamination wipe survey in the RRA.
Results were consistent with recent licensee surveys.
In a tour of the
machine shop used for contaminated equipment, the inspectors observed a
large number of contaminated items in storage and elevated dose rates in
several general access areas of the shop from stored contaminated
material.
Results of external exposure surveys conducted by the
inspectors were consistent with recent licensee surveys.
No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
5.
Gaseous Radioactive Waste Proaram (IP 84750)
i
i
An inspector reviewed results of surveillances conducted to demonstrate
operability of the FHB ventilation exhaust system, per technical
specifiwation (TS) 4.7.7.1.b and 4.7.7.1.c.
The three trains of this
system were required by TS 3.7.7.1 to be operable when irradiated fuel
was being handled in the FHB.
From a discussion with licensee personnel
and a review of the licensee's control room " Technical Specification
"
Rounds" sheets for August 1993, the inspector identified that on August
i
9, 1993, from 4:00 p.m. to 7:45 p.m., the licensee handled irradiated
'
fuel (during fuel sipping) in the FHB without meeting the surveillance
requirements of TS 4.7.7.1.c.
Specifically, representative carbon
samples of the charcoal absorbers in the "A"
and "B" trains had not been
taken and analyzed after 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of operatior, in accordance with
Regulatory Position C.6.a of Regulatory Guide 1.52, Revision 2, dated
-
March 1978, to verify charcoal effectiveness in removing methyl iodide.
!
3
i
k
.
'
.
1
-
,
At the time of the sipping, train "A"
had been in operation for 997
hours and train "B" had been in operation for 1445 hours0.0167 days <br />0.401 hours <br />0.00239 weeks <br />5.498225e-4 months <br />; train "C" had
i
only 85 hours9.837963e-4 days <br />0.0236 hours <br />1.405423e-4 weeks <br />3.23425e-5 months <br /> of operation. ' The failure to sample and analyze the
{
charcoal in the two trains after 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of operations was a violation
of TS 4.7.7.1.c (Violation No. 50-440/93017-Ol(DRSS)). The violation
was caused by personnel error in that control room personnel did not
-
take the action specified on the " Technical Specification Rounds" sheets
,
when the 720-hour limit was exceeded,
i
Unlike the control room and annulus exhaust systems which have.the same
.
720-hour limit, the limit on the FHB ventilation exhaust system applied
only when irradiated fuel is being handled, which was relatively
3
infrequently. This fact may have contributed to the personnel error
j
which caused this violation.
It also contributed to continued operation
.
of the "A"
and "B" trains after the fuel sipping. As of August 23, the
!
start of the inspection, the "A" train had accumulated 1049 hours0.0121 days <br />0.291 hours <br />0.00173 weeks <br />3.991445e-4 months <br /> of
operation and the "B" train had accumulated 1739 hours0.0201 days <br />0.483 hours <br />0.00288 weeks <br />6.616895e-4 months <br />.
Later during
the inspection, the inspector observed the sampling of the
"B"
train.
1
No problems were identified by the inspector during the sampling.
In
1993, except for this instance in August, the charcoal surveillance for
the FHB ventilation exhaust system was conducted at the appropriate 720-
!
hour frequency.
In 1992 and 1993, only one of numerous samples of
i
charcoal failed the laboratory test.
One violation of NRC requirements was identified.
i
!
6.
Interim Radioactive Waste Storaae Facility (IP 86750)
j
An inspector, accompanied by a representative of the State of Ohio
Environmental Protection Agency, inspected the radioactive waste
processing and storage-buildings of the Interim Radioactive Waste
!
Storage Facility (IRSF), including the roof of the storage building
l
where the ventilation system exhausts.
Since the previous inspection of
-
this area (Inspection Report No. 50-440/93012(DRSS)), zoning and fire
officials of Lake County issued a permanent " Certificate of Use and
.
!
Occupancy" for the IRSF, which allowed routine use of the structure.
i
During the inspection, the inspector noted that the licensee was using
1
the IRSF for sorting and surveying of potentially uncontaminated trash,
i
storage of contaminated and laundered protective clothing, storage of
';
contaminated equipment and oily rags, and storage of drums of slightly
'
contaminated soil and gravel. A survey of several containers of
j
radioactive material by the inspector identified one drum with a surface
dose rate reading of approximately 60 millirem (0.6 milliSieverts) per-
i
hour.- It was labelled as having a surface dose rate reading of 6
millirem (0.06 milliSieverts) per hour. The drum was subsequently
,
resurveyed and relabelled by the licensee.
Because the high dose rate
j
was restricted to a small area near the bottom of the drum, the
i
significance of the inaccurate survey or mislabelling was small;
however, greater attention to surveying and labelling of containers
'
stored in the IRSF is needed. This area will be reviewed during future
inspections.
I
4
)
i
I
i
. .
.- .
-
.
-
-
-
i
-
E
.
Discussions with the licensee indicated that there have been two
!
instances during pre-operational testing when the cutting blades of the
radioactive waste shredder / compactor have broken.
Examination'by
licensee representatives showed that the blades had not been
,
manufactured in accordance with the licensee's specifications. This
!
matter was being discussed further between the' licensee and the vendor
i
of the shredder / compactor. The licensee stated that sorting and
,
monitoring of contaminated waste, and possibly shredding and compacting
of waste, was scheduled to begin in mid-September.
No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
7.
Contaminated Silt from the Emeraency Service Water (ESW) Intake
Structure (IP 86750)
e
As discussed in a previous NRC report (No. 50-440/93012(DRSS)),the-
licensee had several thousand cubic feet of slightly contaminated silt
onsite from liquid radwaste backflow into the ESW forebay.
The
licensee's original schedule for removal and disposal of this material
'
listed June 1993, as an estimated start date for excavating and
!
packaging this material.
Because of an unexpected outage from March 26
to June 2, 1993, the start date was changed to mid-September 1993.
t
Licensee activities in this area will be reviewed during future
inspections.
j
No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
8.
Exit Meetina.
l
~!
The scope and findings of the inspection were reviewed with the licensee
(Section 1) on August 27, 1993, at the conclusion of the inspection.
i
Topics discussed included audits and appraisals (Section 2), the
,
staffing of the corporate health physicist position (Section 3), review
l
of licensee actions concerning the contamination control problem
!
(Section 4), the status of the IRSF (Section 6), and the violation of
the surveillance requirement for the FHB ventilation exhaust system-
(Section 5).
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's comments and did
i
not identify any material reviewed during the inspection as proprietary.
l
!
F
,
I
i
!
.
5
l
i
,
.
-
.
- -
->