ML20140J472
| ML20140J472 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/27/1986 |
| From: | Bicehouse H, Pasciak W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20140J454 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-86-04, 50-213-86-4, IEB-79-19, NUDOCS 8604040341 | |
| Download: ML20140J472 (14) | |
See also: IR 05000213/1986004
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-213/86-04
Docket No.
50-213
License No. DPR-61
Priority --
Category C
Licensee: Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company
P. O. Box 270
Hartford, Connecticut 06101
Facility Name: Haddam Neck Power Station
Inspection At:
Haddam Neck, Connecticut
l
Inspection Conducted: March 10-14, 1986
Inspectors:
Ao [
fe
.3 T7
[,
H.J. Bicehouse, Ra Wati&n Specialist
dat e
Approved by:
[A).
Mf[
3\\11
f(
iC Pasciak, Chief
.
~~
date
Effluents Radiation Protection Section
Inspection Summary:
Inspection March 10-14, 1986, (Report No. 50-213/86-04)
Areas Inspected:
Routine unannounced safety inspection by a regionally-based
inspector of the licensee's radioactive waste preparation, packaging'and
shipping program including: previously identified items, management controls,
quality assurance / quality control and implementation of the program.
Results:
Four apparent violations were identified (all relating to omissions
of Iron-55 in shipment documents) including failure to provide quantitative or
qualitative acceptance criteria (Detail 4.2), failure to indicate the radio-
nuclide identity, quantity and total activity on waste manifests (Detail 6.1),
improper certification on waste manifests (Detail 6.1), and failure to name
Iron-55 and include its activity on shipping papers (Detail 6.4).
B604040341 860327
DR
ADOCK O
23
_
.
.
DETAILS
,
1.0 Personnel Contacted
1.1 Licensee Personnel
- R. H. Graves, Station Superintendent
- J. E. Beauchamp, QA/QC Supervisor
- G. H. Bouchard, Station Services Superintendent
- H. Clow, Health Physics Supervisor
- R. E. Haight, Radioactive Material Handling Supervisor
- W. Heinig, Quality Assurance Engineering Specialist
- J. J. LaPlatney, Station Services Staff Assistant
Other licensee personnel were contacted or interviewed during this
inspection.
1.2 NRC Personnel
7
- P. D. Swetland, Senior Re~sident Inspector
- S. M. Pindale, Resident Inspector
4
- Attended the exit interview on March 14, 1986.
i
,
2.0~ Purpose
The purpose of this routine safety inspection was to review the
licensee's program with respect to the following areas:
=Previously Identified Items;
- Management Controls;
- Implementation of the Radwaste Preparation, Packaging and Shipping
Program.
i
3.0 Status of Previously Identified Items
3.1 (Closed) Unresolved (50-213/83-02-01) Audit not done. The annual
audit for radwaste shipments (Audit No. A-60197, "Radwaste Shipment")
~
was completed in November 1983. This item is closed.
3.2 (Closed) Violation (50-213/84-11-01) Failure to follow procedures.
The licensee's actions (as described in the letter from J. F. Opeka,
Vice President to T. T. Martin, NRC-Region I, dated 09/05/84) were
reviewed.
Receipt inspections of High Integrity Containers (HIC)
were performed on a sample of those containers reviewed during the
inspection. The licensee appeared to be implementing actions as
described in the licensee's letter.
This item is closed.
.
'
3
3.3 (Closed) Violation (50-213/84-11-02) Failure to conduct a QC Program
regarding 10 CFR 20.311(d)(3). The licensee's actions (described in
the 9/5/84 letter) were reviewed. Additional actions
(including hold points in waste processing procedures) have'been
implemented.
This item is closed.
3.4 (Closed) Deviation (50-213/84-11-03) Failure to document training
regarding IE Bulletin No. 79-19. Documentation of training on
radioactive waste shipping, packaging and transportation was
reviewed by the Resident. Inspector and appeared to be adequate. A
formal program (described in Detail 4.3) has been developed and
implemented. This item is closed.
3.5 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-01) Failure to adequately train
QC Inspectors. The licensee presented a course on radwaste
preparation, packaging and shipping requirements to QC inspectors in
December 1985. This item is closed.
3.5 (Closed). Followup Item (50-213/85-09-02) Failure to identify Package
14-170 as an unapproved package designation.
Licensee procedures
and records were reviewed to determine if corrective actions ensured
that shipping package designation corresponded to Certificate of
Compliance (CoC) designations prior to shipment. The licensee
appeared to have instituted adequate controls and quality control
checks to ensure that shipping documents accurately reflected proper
shipping container designations. This item is closed.
3.7 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-03) Lack of QC involvement in
10 CFR 61.55 and 61.56.
Licensee procedures and records related to
vendor-supplied radwaste solidification services were reviewed. QC
inspection hold points (at appropriate steps in the procedure) were
provided in the eight procedures reviewed and records indicated that
QC inspections were completed at those holdpoints. This item is
closed.
3.8 (Closed) Violation (50-213/85-09-04) Failure'to follow procedures
for receipt inspections and failure to review / approve procedures.
Actions described in the licensee's letter (dated July 26, 1985) were
reviewed. The licensee modified receipt procedures to ensure that
appropriate QC inspections were performed. Vendor procedures
governing operation and process control of radwaste solidification
units were reviewed and approved as controlled plant procedures.
Review of records related to receipt of vendor-supplied solidifica-
tion equipment showed that receipt inspections had been performed.
This item is closed.
.
'
4
3.9 (0 pen) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-04) QA Procedures will be revised
to reflect QA Topical Report. A draft corporate procedure, (i.e.
Nuclear Engineering and Operations Procedure 6.07, " Quality Assurance
and Quality Control in Station Radioactive Material Processing,
Classification Packaging and Transportation"), was reviewed and it
appeared to be generally adequate to address concerns raised in this
item.
However, the procedure had not been approved and implemented
at the time of the inspection. This item will remain open pending
final revision, approval and implementation of the' procedure.
3.10 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-06) Review QA monitoring
,
frequencies. The applications of QA monitoring procedures to the
radwaste transportation area were reviewed and discussed with the
licensee's QA organization.
The inspector noted that the frequency
of QA monitoring in the area had not increased. However, increased
QA surveillance activities were noted.
The licensee appeared to be
reviewing procedural adherence by the radwaste shipping and QC
groups on a more frequent basis (i.e. approximately once per
quarter). This item is closed.
3.11 (Closed) Followup. Item (50-213/85-09-07) Review RWTRG Report. The
licensee's Radioactive Waste Transportation Review Group (RWTRG)
Report, action items and their completion were reviewed. The
licensee appeared to have adopted suggested corrective actions in
the RWTRG Report.
This item is closed.
3.12 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-08) Review Administrative
Control Procedure (ACP) 1.2-13.5 for inclusion of correct sections
4
4
of Procedure RAP 6.3-5.
ACP 1.2-13.5, " Entry and Exit From Station
of Transporter for Nuclear By-Products Material (Rad Waste),"
Revision 10 (10/18/85) was reviewed and determined to contain
correct references to implementing procedures. This item is
closed.
3.13 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-09) Scaling factors were not
controlled.
Radiation Protection Procedure (RAP) 6.3-5,
" Radioactive Material Management," Revision 27 (12/26/85)
was reviewed to determine if scaling factors for difficult to
measure radionuclides from the licensee's vendor analysis of
radwaste streams had been included. Attachment W to the procedure
provided the 1985 scaling factors. This item is closed.
3.14 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-10) Licensee did not maintain
record of calculations.
In the licensee's letter (dated 7/26/85),
the licensee committed to maintaining a file for calculations utiliz-
ing dose rate to curie conversion factors. The licensee had
established a file containing memoranda from the licensee's corporate
Radiological Assessment Branch (RAB) providing dose rate to curie
conversion factors. However, the file did not contain the actual
-
- .
.
.
._-
- - _ . . .
.--
_,
.
'
5
calculations'for the radwaste shipments covered by the RAB memoranda
(see related item, Detail- 6.1).
This item is closed administra-
tively.
3.15 (Closed) Followup Item (50-213/85-09-11) Lack of administrative
,
controls to prevent' shipments. Surveillance Procedure (SUR) 5.6-14,
(" Sampling Guidelines for~10 CFR 61 Compliance, Revision 4, 3/6/86");
was reviewed. Guidance was provided in the surveillance procedure
to evoke recharacterization of waste streams if significant (i.e.
factor of 10 or more) changes in reactor coolant activity were noted.
This item is closed.
4.0 Management Controls
The licensee's management controls were reviewed to determine if clear
designations of responsibilities and controlled instructions were
provided for radwaste processing, packaging and shipping activities.
Criteria provided in the licensee's Technical Specifications, Updated
Final Safety Analysis Report and NRC Regulations were used in this review.
4.1 Organization
The organizational structure of the licensee's Radioactive Materials
Handling _(RMH) group was reviewed. The RMH group (in the Radiation
Protection Department) is supervised by the RMH Supervisor. The RMH
Supervisor reports to the Radiation Protection Supervisor who in
turn reports to the Health Physics Supervisor. The responsibilities
of the RMH group were clearly described in RAP 6.3-5 with regards to
receipt, use, storage, packaging, loading and shipping solid
radwaste.
Within the scope of this review, no violations were noted.
4.2 Procedures
The licensee's procedures for preparation, classification, packaging
and shipping radwastes were reviewed relative to criteria provided
in:
-
10 CFR 20.311, 71.5 and 71.12;
Technical Specification'6.8, " Procedures;"
-
-
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V, " Instructions, Procedures
and Drawings;"
-
NRC Regulatory Guide 1.33, " Quality Assurance Program
Requirements (Operation)";-and
,
.
'
6
-
ANSI N18.7-1976, " Administrative Controls and Quality Assurance
for The Operational Phase of Nuclear Power Plants."
The following procedures were reviewed for conformance to the
criteria above and discussed with the members of the RMH Group:
-
ACP 1.2-13.5, " Entry and Exit from Station of Transporter for
Nuclear By-Products Material (Rad Waste)", Revision 10
(10/18/85);
-
RAP 6.3-5, " Radioactive Material Management," Revision 27
(12/26/85);
-
RAP 6.3-9, "Use of USNRC Certified Radioactive Material
Packages," Revision 2 (10/24/85); and
-
SUR 5.6-14, " Sampling Guidelines for 10 CFR Part 61
Compliance," Revision 4,(3/16/86).
Within the scope of this review, the following violation was noted:
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion V requires, in part, that
procedures include appropriate quantitative or qualitative
acceptance criteria for determining that important activities have
been satisfactorily accomplished.
Contrary to this requirement, neither ACP 1.2-13.5 nor RAP 6.3-5
provides quantitative or qualitative acceptance criteria for
verification of the identity of the radionuclides and activity
levels (i.e. curie content) of the solid radwaste shipments.
Determining the identity of the radionuclides is an important
activity since the identification affects determination of the
acceptability of radwaste for disposal in shallow land burial sites
under 10 CFR 20.311 and 10 CFR 61 and the packaging and handling of
radwaste shipments under 10 CFR 71. Determining the curie content
of solid radwaste shipments is also an important activity since it,
too, affects the determination of the acceptability of the radwaste
and its packaging'and handling requirements.
(See related item in
Detail 6).
Failure to provide quantitative or qualitative
acceptance criteria for the verification of the identity and curie
content of radwaste shipments constitutes an apparent violation of 10 CFR 50, Appendix.B, Criterion V.
50-213/86-04-01
4.3 Indoctrination and Training
The licensee's indoctrination and training program related to solid
radwaste preparation, packaging and shipping activities was reviewed
relative to criteria and commitments provided in the following:
-
Technical Specification 6.3, " Facility Staff Qualifications;"
.
c
,
-
Technical Specification 6.4, " Training;"
-
ANSI N18.1-1971, " Selection and Training of Nuclear Power Plant
Personnel;"
-
Licensee's letter W. G. Counsil to B._ H. Grier (NRC Region I)
dated 9/17/79 in response to IE Bulletin No. 79-19,
" Packaging of Low-Level Radioactive Waste for Transport and
-Burial," (8/10/79); and
-
10 CFR 50, Appendix B, Criterion II, " Quality Assurance
Program."
The schedules, lesson plans and performance of the training was
reviewed for' selected members of the RMH Group and QC personnel.
The licensee provided training inhouse and vendor-supplied training
on alternate years for the personnel reviewed. Within the scope of
this review, no violations or deviations were noted.
5.0 _ Quality Assurance / Quality Control
The provisions of 10 CFR 71, Subpart H require the establishment of a QA
program for the packaging and transportation of radioactive materials. A
Commission approved QA program which satisfies the applicable criteria of
Appendix 8 to 10 CFR 50 and which is established, maintained and executed
with regard to transport packages is acceptable to meet the requirements
of 10 CFR 71, Subpart H.
The licensee elected to apply their currently
established 10 CFR 50, Appendix B, QA program to the packaging and
shipment of radioactive materials.
Specific QC requirements to assure compliance with 10 CFR 61.55 and 61.56
are mandated by 10 CFR 20.311 in addition to the general QC requirements
required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
A process control program for. waste
solidification is required by Technical Specification 6.18, " Radioactive
Waste Treatment Systems." The implementation of QA/QC activities to the
preparation, packaging and shipment of solid radwaste was reviewed.
5.1 Radwaste Generator QC Program
The licensee's performance in the conduct of a QC program under 10 CFR 20.311(d)(3) and Technical Specification 6.18 was determined by
review of procedures for preparing radwaste shipments, examination
of records related to shipments of dewatered resins, solidified
waste liquids and dewatered filters, independent determination of
waste classification under 10 CFR 61.55 for selected shipments and
discussions with the RMH Supervisor, members of the RMH Group staff,
solidification vendor representatives and the QA/QC supervisor.
Within the scope of this review, the following items were noted:
.
..
8
-
Samples from the licensee's dry active waste, resins, reactor
coolant, evaporator bottoms and filters were taken and sent to
a contractor for analysis.
Scaling factors for determining the
activities of difficult to measure radionuclides were
determined by the contractor and provided in annual reports.
-
The vendor's Process Control Program for solidification of waste
liquids was reviewed, incorporated into licensee's procedures
and implemented.
Specific Inspection Hold Points related to dewatering and/or
-
solidification were provided in controlled procedures.
5.2 QC Inspection Activities
The site QC organization provides inspections of radwaste
preparation, packaging and shipping activities. The following
procedures were reviewed for appropriate inspection hold points:
-
RAP 6.3-5, " Radioactive Material Management," Revision 27
(12/26/85);
-
RAP 6.3-9, "Use of USNRC Certified Radioactive Material
Packages," Revision 2 (10/24/85);
-
Vendor Procedure SS-001, " Process Control Program for NUSPSC
Radwaste solidification Systems," Revision I (8/16/85);
-
Vendor Procedure SS-008, " Operating Procedure for NUSPSC
Radwaste Solidification System No. 8921," Revision D (3/11/85);
-
Vendor Procedure SS-010, " System Setup / Removal Procedure for
NUSPSC Radwaste Solidification System No. 8921," Revision B
(10/3/84);
-
Vendor Procedure SS-013, " Operating Procedure for NUSPSC
Radwaste Solidification System No. 8901," Revision B (5/22/85);
-
Vendor Procedure SS-014, " Process Control Program for NUSPSC
Radwaste Solidification Systems - Class A, Unstable Wastes,"
Revision C (5/23/85);
-
Vendor Procedures SS-015, " System Setup / Removal Procedure for
NUSPSC Radwaste Solidification System No. 8901," Revision A
'
(2/12/85);
Vendor Procedure SS-022, " Operating Procedure for NUSPSC
-
Radwaste Solidification System No. 8807," Revision A
(11/16/85); and
1
-.
- _ _ _
.
.
9
Verdor Procedure SS-021, " System Setup / Removal Procedure for
--
NUSPSC Radwaste Solidification System No. 8807," Revision A
(11/16/85).
Representatives of the site QC organization were interviewed to-
determine the criteria by which successful completion of selected
Inspection Hold Points was determined. The inspector noted that
the site QC organization did not independently verify that the
identity and activities of the various radionuclides in the shipping
papers vere correct. The inspector also noted that peer review by
qualified members of the Radiation Protection staff of the
identities and activities of the shipped radionuclides wasn't
routinely completed.
5.3 QA Surveillance Activities
The site QA organization provides periodic surveillance of solid
radwaste preparation, packaging and shipping activities. As noted
in Detail 3.10, surveillance frequencies had been increased by the
licensee. However, QA surveillance activities did not include
independent verification of the identities and activities of the
radionuclides as presented in the shipping. papers.
5.4 Audits
The licensee's program for audits of radwaste . preparation,
classification, packaging and shipping activities was reviewed.
Audit No. A60221 "Radwaste Shipment at Connecticut Yankee Power
Station," (3/20 - 6/6/85) was reviewed. The audit was performed to
verify the station's implementation of 10 CFR 20, 61, 71 and 49 CFR
requirements. The audit was conducted by two QA auditors and a
qualified technical specialist. The inspector noted that audit
findings had been evaluated by licensee management (as required by 10 CFR 20.311(d)(3)).
The audit failed to note the problem with Iron-55
identification and quantification in shipping and waste manifests
(See Detail 6).
.6.0
Impiementation
During 1985-86, the licensee made 29 shipments of solid radwaste. Those
radwaste shipments were reviewed against criteria provided in:
10 CFR 20.311, 61.55 and 61.56;
-
-
-
49 CFR 170-189; and
Station Technical Specifications and Procedures.
-
--
..
10
The Itcansee reported that the Agreement State in which the radwaste
shipments were buried had not issued any violations or warnings for the
radwaste shipments received.
6.1 Vaste Generator Requirements
The following waste generator requirements were reviewed and
discussed with the licensee:
Waste Panifests under 10 CFR 20.311(d)(4) and 20.311(b) and (c);
-
Waste Classification under 10 CFR 20.311(d)(1);
-
Waste form and Characterization under 10 CFR 20.311(d)(1) and
-
Waste shipment labeling under 10 CFR 20.311(d)(2) and 10 CFR
-
61.55;
Tracking of waste shipments under 10 CFR 20.311(d), (e), (f)
-
and (b); and
Disposal site license conditions.
-
Within the scope of this review, the following violations were noted:
10 CFR 20.311(b)' requires, in part, that the manifest
-
accompanying radwaste shipments indicate as completely as
practicable the radionuclide identity and quantity and the
total radioactivity of the shipments.
Contrary to this requirement, the licensee failed to identify
the radionuclide Iron-55 and its activity on the following
radwaste shipment manifests:
Total Listed Activity
Shipment No.
Descript
(curies)
Date
W-85-1
Dewatered resin
3.332
3/5/85
W-85-2
Dewatered filters
7,599
5/14/85
W-85-3
Cewatered filters
19.18
5/28/85
W-85-5
Compacted dry
0.747
2/20/85
activ'e waste
W-85-8
Solidified ligulds
1.123
10/4/85
W-85-9
Dewatered resin
8.783
10/22/85
W-85-10
Compacted dry
0,6319
10/10/85
active waste
W-85-11
Solidified liquids
0.1161
8/28/85
W-85-12
Dewatered resins
134.49
9/18/85
W-85-13
Solidified liquids
3.978
10/4/85
W-85-15
Solidified liquids
1.460
10/25/85
W-85-18
Dewatered resin
16.061
12/30/85
.
'
11
Total Listed Activity
Shipment No.
Descript
(curies)
Date
~
W-85-19
Dewatered resin.
2.192
12/20/85
.W-86-5
Solidified liquid
0.2041
2/13/86
W-86-6
Solidified liquid
5.305
2/25/86
W-86-8
Solidified liquid
1.741
3/11/86
W-86-9
Solidified liquid
2.5793
3/13/86
W-86-11
Solidified liquid
0.6091
2/10/86
The licensee's vendor analyses of various radwaste streams within
the plant identified the presence of Iron-55 and provided the
following scaling factors relative to cobalt-60 activity:
Waste Stream Analysed
Iron-55/ Cobalt-60 ratio
Reactor coolant-liquid
1.4
Resin
1.9
Filter
6.7
Dry active waste
1.5
Evaporator bottoms
1.3
The licensee determines the percent isotopic composition for the
energetic gamma emitting radionuclides (e.g. cobalt-60) and a dose
rate to curie conversion factor for the waste shipment container
geometry based on gamma spectroscopic analysis and accepted computer
programs. Calculations-of the activity of hard-to-identify
radionuclides (e.g. Iron-55) are then made using the scaling factors
provided in the vendor's analytical report.
For example, licensee's
shipment no. W-85-12 contained 5.16%. cobalt-60 by gamma
spectroscopic analysis. The scaling factor for Iron-55 in dewatered
-
resins is 1.9.
The calculated total activity due to Iron-55 in the
shipment would be found by multiplying the shipment's total activity
by the fraction due to Cobalt-60 activity and the appropriate
scaling factor, vis. (0.0516) (134.49 curies) (1.9) = 13.18 curies
additional activity due to Iron-55. However, the licensee failed to
list Iron-55 as a constituent'of the shipments listed above and did
not conduct the calculations as shown above to determine the
activity due to Iron-55 in each shipment.
The inspector calculated the estimated activity due to Iron-55 in
each of shipments below:
Total Activity
Percent
Scaling Activity from
Shipment No.
(Curies)
Factor
Iron-55 (Curies)
W-85-1
3.332
71.5
1.9
4.52
W-85-2
7.599
11.0
6.7
5.60
W-85-3
19.18
13.3
6.7
17.09
W-85-5
0.747
24.1
1.5
0.27
o
.
'
12
Total Activity. Percent
Scaling Activity from
Shipment No.
(Curies)
Factor
Iron-55 (Curies)
l
W-85-8
1.123
47.98
1.3
0.70
W-85-9
8.783
8.30
1.9
1.38
W-85-10
0.6319
28.8
1.5
0.27
W-85-11
0.1161
2.72
1.3
0'.004
W-85-12
134.49
5.16
1.9
13.18
-W-85-13
3.978
57.27
1.3
2.96
W-85-15
1.460
12.03
1.3
0.22
W *5-13
16.061
0.294
1.9-
0.0897
W-85-19
2.192
0.691
1.9
0.0287
W-86-5
0.2041
21.03
1.3
0.0558
W-86-6
5.305
14.26
1.3
0.983
W-86-8
1.741
23.34
1.3
0.528
W-86-9
2.5793
27.57
1.3
0.924
W-86-11
0.6091
15.17
1.3
0.120
Since Iron-55 was not identified and its activity determined for
each shipment, the manifests accompanying each shipment contained
~
incorrect total activities for those shipments.
Failure to identify
Iron-55, determine its activity in each shipment and include the
radionuclide in the total radioactivity of.the shipment constitutes
an apparent violation of 10 CFR 20.311(b).
50-213/86-04-02
-
10 CFR 20.311(c) requires, in part, certification by the waste
generator that the transported materials are properly
described. Contrary to this requirement, the licensee
certified that each of the radwaste shipments above were
properly described when the identity of one of the
radionuclides was missing and the activity due to that
radionuclide was not identified and included in the total
activity of the transported materials.
Certification that each
of the waste shipments were' properly described when they were
not constitutes an apparent violation of 10 CFR 20.311(c).
50-213/86-04-03
6.2 Procurement and Selection of Packaging
The licensee's program for the selection of packages was reviewed
against the requirements of 10 CFR 71.12, " General License: NRC
Approved Package" and the Department of Transportation (00T)
requirements of.49 CFR 173, " Shippers - General Requirements for
Shipments and Packaging."
The licensee's performance relative to the criteria was determined
by interviews of the RMH Supervisor and members of his staff,
examinations of documents, procedures and shipping records and
observations during plant tours.
Within the scope of this review, no violations were noted.
.-
13
6.3 Preparation of Packages for Shipment
The licensee's program for preparing packages for shipment was
reviewed relative to the requirements of 49 CFR Parts 172 and 173,
10 CFR 71.87 and Technical Specifications.
The. licensee's performance relative to the criteria was determined
by interviews of the RMH Supervisor and members of his staff,
examination of procedures,~ shipping records and other documents, and
observations during plant tours of handling, storage and loading
areas and licensee preparations for shipment of a cask.
Within the scope of this review, the following item was noted:
On 9/11/85, the licensee was installing a high integr'ty
container (HIC) in the " Resin Pit" area and connecting lines to the
container for dewatering. An Auxiliary Operator, a Radwaste
Technician and a Health Physics Technician were assigned to the
operation working under Radiation Work Permit No. 8502183. The
" Resin Pit" area was a high radiation area with radiation fields
ranging from 100 millirem per. hour to 18,000 millirem per hour in
the work area. The fitting on the HIC for the dewatering leg was a
2 inch fitting while the line used for_the dewatering contained a lh
inch fitting. The Radwaste Technician was unable to make the
connections for the dewatering and remained in the high radiation
area attempting to connect the 2 inch fitting to the 1h inch line.
The low-range, (i.e. 0-200 millirem), dosimeter for the Radwaste
Technician was noted to be "offscale".
Examination of his high
range dosimeter indicated an exposure of approximately 950 millirems
during the Radwaste Technician's attempts to connect the dewatering
line.
The licensee's investigation and resolution of the problems
encountered during the entry were reviewed. This area will be
further reviewed during a subsequent inspection. 50-213/86-04-05
6.4 Delivery of Packages to Carriers
The licensee's program for delivering packages to carriers was
reviewed relative to criteria provided in:
-
10 CFR 71.5 (a) (1) (iii), " Placarding;"
-
10 CFR 71.5 (a) (1) (vi), " Shipping Manifests:d
10 CFR 71.5 (a) (1) (iv), "Public Highway - 49 CFR Part 177;"
-
and
licensee's Technical Specifications.and applicable procedures.
-
The licensee's performance relative to the criteria was determined
by review of shipping records for radwaste shipments in 1985-86,
discussions with cognizant licensee personnel and ubservation of
preparations for a radwaste shipment.
.
e
l
1
,
,
.
.
_
.
.
.
14
Within the scope of this review, the following apparent violation was
noted:
\\
-
10 CFR 71.5(a)(1)(vi) requires preparation of shipping papers
in accordance with 49 CFR 172, Subpart C.
49 CFR 172.203(d)(i)
requires the name of each radionuclide in the shipment and 49
CFR 172.203(d)(iii) requires the activity of each package in
the shipment be included in the shipping papers.
Contrary to the requirements, the licensee failed to include Iron-55
and the activity resulting from that radionuclide in the shipping
papers associated with the radwaste shipments in Detail 6.1.
Failure to name Iron-55 and include the activity due to that
radionuclide in the shipping papers associated with the radwaste
shipments in Detail 6.1 constitutes an apparent violation of 10 CFR 71.5 (a) (1) (vi). 50-213/86-04-04
7.0 Exit Interview
,
The inspector met with the licensee representativeshenojed,in
i
Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on Kirch 14,4986. The
inspector summarized the scope of the inspection and findings asu
,
\\
described in this report.
The licensee's representative acknowledged the findings r' elated to the
omission of Iron-55 in the waste manifests and shipping papers and
provided the following corrective actions in response to the finding:
-
Before the next radwaste shipment, the licensee will audit radwaste
shipments 1984-86 to determine which shipments had incorrect' waste
manifests and shipping papers due to the omisstor, of Iron-55.
,
.
-
Before the next radwaste shipment, the licensee will notify the DOT
and the State of South Carolina of the results of the audit.
-
Before the next radwaste shipment, the licensee will revise RAP
,
6.3-5 to include Iron-55 and to require an independent review of the
identities and activities associated with each shipment.
The licensee will provide corrected waste manifests and shipping
-
papers to the DOT and the State of South Carolina.
-
The' licensee will update the Semiannual Radioactive Effluent and
Waste Disposal Reports to include activities due to Iron-55.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the
licensee by the inspector. No information exempt from disclosure under
,
10 CFR 2.790 is discussed in this report.
_