ML20134Q181
| ML20134Q181 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1985 |
| From: | Chaney H, Martin L, Murray B, Spitzberg D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134Q179 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-85-31, NUDOCS 8509090202 | |
| Download: ML20134Q181 (8) | |
See also: IR 05000482/1985031
Text
'
.
APPENDIX
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report:
50-482/85-31
Operating License: NPF-32
Docket:
50-482
I
Licensee:
Kansas Gas and Electric Company (KG&E)
P. O. Box 208
Wichita, Kansas 67201
Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS)
Inspection At: WCGS Site in Coffey County, Kansas
Inspection Conducted:
July 15-19, 1985
h
/
6
f
Inspectors:
% -
-
H. D. C M ey, Radiation Speciflist, Facilities
Date
'
Radiological Protection Sec'tf on
d[A,MthPA
Bh9/ar
'
D. B.'Spitzberg,/Ra4(atifn Specialist, Facilities
Date
Radiological Protectioh Section
Y'
8//3/8al~
Approved:
/
Bla'ine Murray, Chief, Facilities Radiological
Date
Protection Section
/
A7'
f/20/bl$
LT E Martin, C fef, Project Section A
p(te/
Reactor Proj ct Branch 2
8509090 y h h 82
A
G
W
_
,
I
.
.
,
-2-
'
i
,
/
Inspection Summary
Inspection Conducted July 15-19, 1985 (Report STN 50-482/85-31)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's radiation
protection (RP) program including:
organization and management controls, staff
training and qualifications, ALARA program, and reactor shielding radiation
surveys during reactor power ascension testing. During the inspection an
allegation regarding an unreported personnel overexposure was inspected. The
inspection involved 80 inspector-hours onsite by 2 NRC inspectors.
Results: Within the 4 areas inspected,.no violations or deviations were
identified.
The allegation was not substantiated.
\\ U.
t
a
_
- . _
_
-
.
.
-3-
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
KG&E
- G. Koester, Vice President Nuclear
- C. Mason, Director of Nuclear Operations
'*G. Boyer, Superintendent, Technical Support (STS)
- M. Nichols, Site Health Physicist (SHP)
- C. Brown, ALARA Coordinator
D. Erbe, Lieutenant of the Guard
- A. Freitag, WCGS Manager, Nuclear Power Engineering
- R. Hoyt, Emergency Planning Administrator
- J. Ives, Supervisor, Health Physics (HP)
B. Ketchum, Technical Staff Engineer, Corporate
- W..Lindsay, Supervisor, Quality Systems
- C. Patrick, Superintendent, Quality Evaluations
- K. Petersen, Licensing Engineer
G. Swartzendruber, Manager, Radiological Services, Corporate
R. Wollum, Instrument and Controls (I&C) Coordinator
Others
- J. Cummins, NRC Senior Resident Inspector
W. Allen, Health Physics Consultant
G. Bramlett, I&C Consultant
- R. Flannigan, Site Representative, Kansas City Power and Light
- E. Krucenski, Quali+,y Assurance Engineer, Bechtel
P. Nastick, Licensing Engineer, Bechtel
- Denotes those present during the exit interview.
The NRC inspectors also contacted other WCGS personnel including opera-
tions, administrative, contractor, and health physics personnel.
2.
RP Organization and Management Controls
'
The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's organization and management
controls for conduct of the WCGS radiation protection program to determine
compliance with the requirements of the facility Technical Specifications
(TS) NUREG-1104, and commitments contained in the Final' Safety Analysis
'
Report (FSAR).
,
The NRC inspectors reviewed the RP organization's operating procedures,
,
organizational interfaces (regarding RP and ALARA activity), level of
staffing, and audits /surveillances of RP activities.
The licensee was'
found to have a well structured and staffed RP group at both the KG&E
m.
_
, _ - - -
,
--
,
.
-4-
offices in Wichita, Kansas and at the WCGS site. The onsite RP organi-
zation agreed with Figure 6.2-2 (organization chart) of the TS. The NRC
inspectors reviewed the management policies (RP, respiratory protection,
and ALARA), QA audits (TE 50140-K052), QA surveillances, position descrip-
tion / responsibilities assignment (Administrative Procedures (ADM)01-009,
03-007,03-002, 03-050), deficiency identification system (ADM 03-006),
shift logs, RP group reading files, and observd RP group supervisor tours
and work activity reviews.
The NRC inspectors noted a strong corporate-
i
involvement in the support of onsite RP activities, especially in the area
of ALARA.
The licensee's audits and reviews (RP Plan Section 13.3 and QA
procedure (QAP) W18.6) were found to be thorough, and deficiencies were
being resolved in a timely manner.
.
The licensee's compliment of onsite RP personnel included the following:
Approximately 40 RP technicians (20 satisfy TS requirements for
fully qualified RP technicians).
6 supervisors (including the SHP)
8 utility helpers
4 clerks
The licensee is utilizing approximately 17 contracted RP technicians at
this time. The NRC inspectors discussed with licensee representatives the
increased work load that would be expected by the ALARA coordinator as the
plant advances to commercial operation.
The SHP was found to have recourse to the plant manager for items of
inmediate technical concern, and the RP staff had and was aware of their
authority to stop work that was not being conducted in a radiologically
safe manner.
The licensee's RP program implementing procedures were found to be in
accordance with station TS (Section 6.8, and 6.11) and administrative
instructions (ADM 07-101,03-001).
No violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Staff Training and Qualifications
The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's training and qualifications of
RP personnel and radiological workers to determine compliance with
TS Section 6.4, and 10 CFR Part 19.12 requirements, and the commitments
4
of the FSAR.
l
l
l
l
-
-
_
.
..
._
j
~
-
-5-
l
The NRC inspectors observed general employee (GET), radiation worker,
(RWT), and special radiation worker training activities including class
participation, handouts, suitability of facilities, and evaluation of
training.. The licensee's GET and RWT training appear to satisfy the
commitments of the FSAR (Section 13), the recommendations of industry
standard ANSI 3.1-1978, NRC Regulatory Guides 8.13, and 8.27, and the
requirements of the TS and 10 CFR Part 19.12.
The NRC inspector reviewed employee resumes position descriptions
(ADM 03-007), RP group training records, lesson plans, qualification
matrixes for the RP group, and training implementing procedures (ADM
03-800). The licensee was found to be revising all RP group training
'
programs to the guidance provided by'the Institute of Nuclear Power
Operations (INPO) for accreditation of their training program.
The NRC
inspectors discussed with the licensee the apparent need to increase the
current two man staff that is responsible for both development and imple-
mentation of the new training program later this year. The licensee
indicated that increased staffing had been addressed in the 1986/1987
budget for the RP group. The NRC inspectors noted that the Nuclear Training
Department was providing assistance to the RP group in developing the
]
specific task analysis and training objectives for the RP group.
The NRC inspectors determined that personnel qualifications and assignments
in the'RP group. satisfied the commitments made by the licensee to the NRC
and addressed in NRC Inspection Reports 50-482/84-34 and 84-54, and the
requirements of the TS regarding staff qualifications.
The NRC inspectors also reviewed QA assurance audits and surveillances of
RP staff, training,.and qualifications, and found the audits to be compre-
hensive.
The licensee's review and evaluation of contractor technicians
(HPH 08-003)'was found to also be comprehensive, involving knowledge
testing and practical demonstrations of abilities.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
ALARA Program
The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's ALARA program for compliance
with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20, licensee commitments in the
FSAR (Section 12), and the recommendations contained in NRC Regulatory
Guides 8.8 and 8.10.
The NRC inspector reviewed the licensee's ALARA program organization (on
and offsite), staffing, assignment of responsibilities (RP Plan, ADM 01-006,01-009, and 03-007), management ALARA policies (contained in the RP Plan),
implementing procedures (ADM 01-026,01-027, 03-050,03-101 and HPH 07-001
for onsite activities, and draft ALARA committee charter for the conduction
of KG&E ALARA committee activities),-staffing, and ALARA goals for opera-
tion of WCGS during the remainder of 1985. The NRC inspectors also.
.
5
-
,
,
.-.w,
.,
,
..
.
_.
.~ .
.
.
-6 -
.
reviewed the program for assuring that. facility design changes are provided
appropriate ALARA reviews. The NRC inspectors discussed with licensee
representatives-(corporate and site) the apparent lack of a full dialogue
between the RP group and the onsite nuclear engineering group concerning
resolution of plant modifications submitted as ALARA concerns.
The NRC
,
inspectors noted that several plant modification requests, submitted via
the ALARA problem report program (ADM 03-050), were rejected by the
onsite nuclear engineering group, af ter receiving proper evaluations
involving both engineering and scheduling considerations.
.
'
The responsibility for conducting the ALARA program at WCGS is assigned to
the ALARA coordinator in the RP group (ADM 03-007).
The NRC inspectors
accompanied and observed the ALARA coordinator in performance of his
duties, which at the time of this inspection did not involve a significant
amount of RWP review due to the low radiation dose rates associated with
low power testing. The NRC inspectors noted that even though there are
ALARA planners assigned within each major maintenance group (I&C,
mechanical, etc) these persons were not being fully utilized to set up work
operations for the ALARA coordinators final review, which places more
demands on the ALARA coordinators time.
Licensee representatives indicated
that as the plant moves toward commercial operation, the staffing and
4
resources of the ALARA coordinator will need to be improved.
The licensee's ALARA committee is a combination of corporate upper
management (radiological support, engineering, vice president nuclear
operations), and the WCGS SHP and the ALARA coordinator.
Several ALARA
<
committee meeting reports were reviewed.
The NRC inspectors reviewed the ALARA reviews concerning engineering
design changes that affected radiological conditions / systems. Long lead
time design changes are coordinated through the Wichita, Kansas home
office with the corporate engineering group and radiological assessment
group providing required ALARA reviews per home office instructions
(KP-RP 200, KI-RP 201.5). Those design changes that are generatad by the
onsite nuclear engineers or by the lead architect engineer (Bechtel) and
4
require expedient implementation are provided an ALARA review by the
Bechtel engineers using their ALARA review procedure (EDPI 3.16(B)-30).
The licensee's and Bechtel's engineering supervisors were interviewed and
found to possess suitable experience and knowledge of ALARA concepts.
,
The licensee had established radiation exposure and solid waste ALARA
j
goal for the remainder. of 1985 of 171 man-rem, and 9,636 cubic-feet of
i
disposable solid waste respectively.
No violations or_ deviations were' identified.
,
.-
,
~
.
_
_
.
_
_ _ _ ____ __.__ _ __ ______________ _ - _____ _ ____ _______
.
s
. . > -
'
,
,
-7-
.
(-
5.
Reactor'Startup Shielding Radiation Surveys
The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's conduct of reactor shielding
radiation surveys during reactor power ascension tests for compliance with
I
the RP requirements of the TSs and 10 CFR 20, and the commitments of the
FSAR.
The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's results of.the radiation
surveys conducted per reactor startup test SU 7-0016. The licensee had
performed both neutron and gamma radiation dose rate surveys inside of the
reactor containment and in areas adjacent to the containment. Surveys were
conducted prior to initial criticality and at reactor power levels of
approximately 3 and 50 percent.
During these test plateaus the licensee
had a contractor perform neutron energy spectrum studies for use in the
WCGS dosimetry program. The licensee's survey results did not show any
shielding deficiencies.
These surveys satisfied the FSAR commitments, and
the recommendations of NRC RG.1.68 and ANSI 6.3.1-1980. The licensee is
scheduled to complete 100 percent power plateau surveys by mid August
1985.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Licensee Event Report Followup
The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's actions.to resolve the many
spurious " spikes" in the control room. intake ventilation radiation monitor
(GK-RE-04) which caused actuation of a Control Room Ventilation Isolation
Signal (CRVIS).
The licensee determined that the General Atomics particulate, iodine and
gaseous airborne activity monitor (s) had a mismatch between the software
and hardware in units microprocessor that resulted in a 100_ times actual
radiation detector signal being generated on the gaseous channel. A
previous engineering evaluation based on similar problems at the Callaway
Plant (SNUPPS) concluded that a hardware modification was needed from the
vendor (General Atomics). The licensee has performed vendor directed
modifications to the GE-RE-04 unit microprocessor and to date-has not
i
experienced any further problems. These modifications will be also per-
formed on 14 other similar units at the WCGS.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Onsite Allegation Followup
The NRC inspectors reviewed an alleged 6 Rem exposure (whole body or
extremity-exposure was not ascertained) to an individual at WCGS as
r.eported tesephonically to the NRC Regional office. The purported over-
exposure was alleged to have been incurred on July 7, 1985,-inside the
reactor containment building (CMT) during work on a leaking / broken pipe.
&
'
-
.
.
w
t
1
- -
"
us
r
9
, e
'
-..m
.
_ _ _ _ _ . . . - .
_
_
_ -.
C*
.
.
-8-
,
The NRC inspectors determined the following facts by review of documents
and interviews with licensee personnel.
The containment hatch is chain locked with keys only in the
possession of security, health physics, and the shift supervisor. A
non-interlocking key card device registers entries made into
containment. Security procedures require security personnel to be
present for routine access to the containment building. The
containment hatch airlock also alarms at central security upon each
opening. Reviews of printouts of key card access entries to the
containment, and containment hatch alarms showed that there were no
entries into containment from 4:09 p.m., on July 6, 1985, to
4:56 a.m. , on July 8,1985.
Records for the period July 6-8, 1985, of all six active and inactive
RWPs that could have encompassed containment entries were inspected.
None of the six RWPs had sign-in entries made on July 7, 1985.
Of
these RWPs logged on July 6 or 8, the work involved either containment
surveys or hatch maintenance.
Results of personnel monitoring were reviewed and the highest
individual exposures recorded to date were less than 200 mrem. There
'
had also been no elevated personal ionization chamber results
recorded.
t
Based on the above findings, the allegation was not substantiated.
Interviews and records indicated that any work situation involving pipe
repair which had existed at WCGS did not provide a source sufficient for
such an exposure.
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Exit Interview.
The NRC inspectors met with the licensee's representatives denoted in
. paragraph 1,.and the'NRC resident inspector at the conclusion of the
. inspection on July ~9, 1985.' The NRC inspectors discussed the scope and
findings of the inspection, excluding the allegation investigation. The
licensee's. representatives expressed an interest in pursuing the staffing
~ needs in the onsite ALARA program with the inspectors.
.
.
-
-
-
-.