IR 05000358/1978023

IE Inspec Rept#50-358/78-23 on 781010-13 During Which No Items of Noncompliance Were Noted.Major Areas Inspected Incl:Radiat Protec,Initial Training,Refresher Training, Procedures,Facil,Instru & Equip

ML20147E172
Person / Time
Site:	Zimmer
Issue date:	11/17/1978
From:	Davis A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20147E165	List: IR 05000358/1978023 IR 05000358/1978024
References
50-358-78-24, NUDOCS 7812210005
Download: ML20147E172 (9)

Text

'O

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COWISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

REGION III

Report No. 50-358/78-24 Docket No. 50-358 License No. CPPR-88 Licensee: Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company 139 East 4th Street Cincinnati, OH 45201 Facility Name: Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station i

Inspection At: Wm. H. Zimmer Site, Moscow, OH j Inspection Conducted: October 10-13, 1978  !

a

/(//V/77

,

Inspector: h.C.Schumacher ,

Approved By:

t/g.c -

W. 'L. Fis er, Chief II [/V/7[(

'

Fuel Facility Projects and j Radiation Support Section Inspection Summary Inspection on October 10-13, 1978 (Report No. 50-358/78-24)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced initial preoperational inspection for radiation protection, including a review of organization, initial training, refresher training, procedures, facility, instruments and equipment, and respiratory protection program. The inspection involved 30 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspecto Results: No items of noncompliance were identified in any of the seven i areas inspecte j i

!

t l

i

78122109o5 m

-- , _ _ . _ . - . . .

- - _ _

.

'

.

DETAILS Persons Contacted

• R. Schott, Plant Superintendent

• P. King, Assistant Plant Superintendent

• L. Erickson, Radiation / Chemistry Supervisor

.

G. Appel, Chemist

,

R. Price, Acting Training Supervisor, (General Physics Corp.)

• J. Wald, Quality Engineer General This inspection began at approximptely 11:00 a.m. on October 10, 1978. Initial discussions relating to the planned scope of the inspection were held with the plant superintendent and the radi-ation/ chemistry supervisor.In the af ternoon, a tour was made in company with's licensee representative of selected plant areas, including radiationfehemistry laboratories, access control facilities, the radwaste building, laundry, and instrument calibration _ f acilit The presence of concentrated waste line valves in the concentrated waste tank room, an expected high radiation area, was noted. The licensee representative stated that this problem had been recognized and that the lines will be extended to remove the valves from the -

roo . Organization Theradiation/chemistryorganizgfionremainsbasicallyunchanged from that described previously.- Personnel changes include the addition of four new technicians, the resignation of one and the pro-motion of several to technician and senior technician. Currently, the total complement is 13, comprised of 4 senior technicians, 5 technicians and 4 junior technician The licensee is still recruiting to f111 the FSAR projected complement of 14. Of the 9 technicians and senior technicians, 5 have had 6 to 8 years of  !

previous nuclear experience. By fuel loading, all are expected to meet the requirements of ANSI N18.1-197 Responsibilities and authority vested in the radiation / chemistry organization with respect to radiation protection, chemistry and radiochemistry,and radwaste management appear to be adequately defined in the following station administrative procedures:

1/ RIII Inspection Report No. 50-358/77-1 L - - - . _ , - .-, - _ . , -

,

\

.

.

.

CR.S AD.01, " Chemical / Radiochemical Program," Revision 0, May 16, 197 RO. SAD.01, "Radwaste Management' Program," Revision 00, May 19, 197 RP. SAD.01, " Radiation Protection Program," Revision 00, May 11, 197 The responsibility of the station superintendent with regard to enforcement of the Radiation Protection Programuis defined in i station administrative procedure QA. SAD.01, "Qus11ty Assurance,"

Revision'00, July 12, 197 Intradepartmental audits are provided for.in the above referenced-administrative directive The foremen's duties include review of completed technician work including data sheet The chemist will review laboratory data sheets and licensee representatives stated

-

that a procedure is being drafted to define quality assurance cudit responsibilities of the' radiation / chemistry supervisor. The quality engineer has responsibility to conduct quality assurance audit under the jurisdiction of the station superintenden Licensee procedure RC.RPP.2.11, "TLD QC," when approved, will .

provide for periodic audit of the TLD contractor by means of

" spiked" dosimeters. Procedure RC.RPP.2061, " Calibration and Leak Test of Direct Reading Dosimeters," describes a testing program that appears to meet Regulatory Guide . Training The station's commitment to training is given in FSAR Chapter 13 and in station administrative procedure TR. SAD.01, " Station Training Program." With regard to radiation protection, all employees (including temporary workers) are required to receive an initial orientation to satisfy 10 CFR 19, and annual refresher training; respiratory training with annual refresher will be given before recpirators are worn. Plant personnel who will enter controlled areas will'also be given a Radiation Protection Manual Course expected by licensee representatives to involve about 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />. Plant technicians will also receive Nuclear Power Plant Fundamentals (NPPF), unless waived, and on the job training (0JT)

appropriate to their specialt ,

-3-

. .,. _ , _ , _ . _ _. _ .. ,_,_,_ . ., ,

R

.

.

At the time of'the inspection, the Radiation Protection Manual Course had been approved and the first offering was planned for l November 1978. The initial radiation protection orientation, i part of a course now designated as "ZPS-1 orientation" is still being developed. The planned first offering of this course is about 3 to 4 months before fuel loading. The annua)Jrefresher training will be essentially the same with some additional emnhasis on current topics such as changes in regulatory require-aents and procedures, and review of event reports. The respirator training course-had not been developed although a 2-hour videotaped course had been purchase 6 and will probably be used for radiation /

chemistry technician training, j The licensee's plans, as judged by the inspector from review of 1 completed licensee procedures and discussions with licensee repre- !

sentatives, appear to meet or exceed his commitments for radiation j protection trainin ,

A training folder has been established for each station employee to document all t: 11ning received. A summary matrix showing training status at the station was also established. The inspec-tcr reviewed the folders for all radiation / chemistry department employee These records indicated a rather intensive training program for the technicians has been in effect since 197 Included have been formal courses in radiation protection, chemistry and nuclear power plant fundamentals as well as training sessions considered as part of the on-the-job tra Most of these offeringshavebeendescribedpreviouslyjpin but new training sessions, largely relating to various aspects of the radwaste system, have been offered since. In addition, some courses and training sessions offered earlier have been or will be repeated for more recently hired technician During the previous inspection of this area,3/ the licensee indi-cated plans for observation of radiation / chemistry technicians at an operating BW Since then, 2 foremen and 4 technicians have participated in 6 weeks of on-the-job training at the Monticello plant. During the current inspection, 2 more technicians were sent to Monticello to work 4 weeks during a refueling outag Review of the training folder for the radiation / chemistry supervisor indicated a' discrepancy from some of the training specified in FSAR Table 13.3-2. Specifically, the courses labeled Dresden Technology and On-site Training (balance of plant) were not received. Licensee 2/ RIII Inspection Report No. 50-358/78-0 / Ibi .

- _ . _ . _ _- . . _ . _ _ _ . _ . _ . .-

_.. _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ ._ -_ .

,

a

.,

representatives indicated that the material had been. covered in -

other training such as Zimmer Technology and in work during con-struction, inspection, procedure preparation,etc. They stated that this matter would be resolved with licensin . Procedures The inspector reviewed the status of radiation / chemistry department ,

procedures. A licensee representative stated that 50% of the 120 raditition protection procedures, 60% of the 158 chemistry procedures and 40% of the 24'radwaste procedures had at least reached the status of typed draft.- Approximately 40 of the radiation protec-tion procedures had been completed and received final approva ~

The following procedures, reviewed and discussed with licensee representatives, appeared to be consistent with regulatory require-i ments and without significant problems, RC.RPP.1.011 (not approved), "ALARA Program."

RC.RPP.1.012 (10/11/78), " Access Control - Radiation Control Areas."

RC.RPP.1.014 (8/23/78), " Eating, Drinking and Smoking Control."

-

RC.RPP.1.015 (8/23/78), "Use of Step Off Pads."

.RC.RPP.1.022 (not approved), " Regular Radiation Work Permits."

RC.RPP.1.030 (8/30/78), " Receipt:of Radioactive Material."

RC.RPP.1.031 (9/5/78), " Operation of the Eber11ne PRM-4A and PRM-6 Count Rate Meters."

RC.RPP.1.032 (8/10/78), " Ope.ation of- the Eber11ne PMP-4E Portal '

Monitor."

RC.RPP.1.033 (9/25/78), "Use of RAD-TAD Radiation Chirper."

RC.RPP.1.211 (9/18/78), " Radiation Exposure Records and Reports."

RC.RPP.I.300 (8/5/78), "Use of Direct Reading Dosimeters."

RC.RPP.2.061 (1/3/78), " Calibration and Leak Test of Direct-Reading Dosimeters."

RC.RPP.2.073 (9/13/78), " Calibration of the Technical. Associates Model PDR-1B Alarming Dosimeter."

RC.RPP. 3.060 (8/10/78), " Radiation Survey Techniques."

RC.RPP.3.111 (6/22/78), " Contamination Survey Techniques Personnel."

.RC.RPP.7.067 (6/23/78), " Operation of the Eberline RM-14."

RC.RPP. 7.076 (9/26/78), "Use of the RO-2 and RO-2A .lon Chamber Survey Instruments."

RC.RPP.4.077 (10/11/78), "Use of Eberline 6112 Teletector."

RC.RPP.5.076 (8/18/78), " Calibration of Eberline R0-2 and R0-2A Ion Chambers."

-5-i

- , .,,.m - . _ . ~ . - . - - _ .w.-_-.-- .. - . _ . . - . , _ . , _ _ , . - - . . , _ . . _ , - , . , - - _ . - . _ . _ _ _ . . _ , - . _ _ _ . . - . - . . - _ _ _ . ,

T

.

• RC.RPP.5.255 (9/11/78),." Radiation Protection Instrument Calibration and Maintenance Records."

RC.RPP.6.022 (7/13/78), " Storage and Use of Sealed and Unsealed Radioactive Check Sources."

RC.RPP.6.111 (9/19/78) "Use of the Victoreen Condenser R-Meter."

RC.RPP.6.160 (9/19/78), " Calibration of the Eberline Model 1000B Camma Calibrator."

The licensee agreed to review and modify as appropriate the fol- )

lowing procedure RC.RPP.G.010 (8/30/78), " Inventory, Control and Leak Testing of Licensed By-Product Material."

The annual reporting requirement for wipe tests showing greater than 0.005 pCi given in section 5.3.4 of this procedure conflicts with the 5-day reporting requirement in License Condition 13A of LPM License No. 34-07251-0 RC.RPP.6.060 (10/9/78), "Use of the Eberline Model 1000 B Gamma !

Calibrator."  !

Monitoring precautions for persons using the calibrator will be added to insure detection of unexpected dose rate condition RC.RPP.6.211 (8/23/78), " Calibration of Victoreen Condenser R-Metet." l Requirements will be added to require that measurements on a known l calibration source be made before and after the meter is sent offsite for calibratio . Facilities The inspector reviewed licensee facilities designated for radiation /

chemistry activities including laboratories, counting room, cali-bration facility, decontamination facilities, offices and access !

control area They appeared to meet or exceed FSAR commitment I Construction of the new access control / technician office area on !

the 546' level adjacent to the turbine operating floor was in }

progress. An Eberline Model 1000B, Multiple Source Calibrator with 8 cesium 137 sources had been setup in the calibration room ou auxiliary building level 473'. Both the room and the calibrator were under key control by the radiatica/ chemistry superviso !

7. Instruments and Equipment The inspector inventoried instruments and equipment onsite for l comparison with the FSAR commitment j

!

!

-6-

!

!

l

. _ . _ . __ _ . _ . . .._ _ . . ,

t

. Personnel Dosimeters

- Approximately 350 self-reading dosimeters described in section 12.3.3.1.2 of'the FSAR have been received, leak tested, and accuracy tested consistent with Regulatory Guide The primary dosimeter will be a monthly issued, vendor supplied TL The calenda quarter has been established (3 month intervals beginning January 1) and storage and issue locations have been selected. Procedures incorporating a quality assurance program, including audit of the TLD vendor, are i either completed or in draft. A TLD reader has been acquired and the licensee plans to use it to develop an in-house capability and to make periodic comparisons with. vendor results by reading an extra chip in the vender supplied TLD badge. Methods for. personal neutron dosimetry are still.under consideration. The guidance of. Regulatory Guide 8.14 was discussed with licensee representative Portable Instruments The licensee's inventory of portable survey instruments appears-to meet'the commitment in section 12.3.2.3.4 of the FSA Calibrations of these-instruments was in progress at the time of this inspectio The 10 low volume air samplers specified in section 12.3.2. ,

of the FSAR have been received. The 6 high volume samplers also specified have not. A licensee representative stated that the efficiency of these samplers is questionable and the FSAR may be revise The inspector noted an apparent discrepancy between FSAR section 12.2.4.1 which describes 2 portable constant air monitors (CAM's) for particulate and noble gas monitoring and FSAR section 12.3.2.3.3 which specifies 5 portable CAM's (2 for particulates, 2 for particulate plus iodine, and 1 for noble gas). A licensee representative stated that current plans are to have 4 CAM's: 2 for particulates (currently onsite), 1 for particulate plus iodine plus noble gas (on order).,

and I for particulate plus noble gas (on order). He stated that the discrepancy with the FSAR would be resolved.

. -7- e l

-- ,- -.wA - ..-,7 .- ,r,e -n-, -ve w s- r .v,-,++ w =e -w, - s e ,e w. -.-wow---v'm+. -,-wir,-- r-- -w,www -*.nw- +w- e--r--<wa-'T m rw w e ^6 '

p---m--*tir--c& e-

- .

.

.

e Fixed Instrumentation Installation of the fixed monitoring instrumentation, consisting of 43 area monitors (FSAR section 12.1.4), 5 constant' air monitors with air particulate and fodine' capability. (section 12.2.4.1) and a fixed air sampling system with 26 sample points (section 12.2.4.2) has not been completed. It will be reviewe at a later tim A second shielded end window GM detector with scaler'for the counting room (section 12.3.2.2.3) has not been receive Other Safety Equipment Review of such' items as hood air velocities, glove box vacuums, and emergency showers will be reviewed after air balancing and/or ir.sta11ation has been complete . Respiratory Protection Program The inspector discussed the respiratory protection program with licensee representatives. . Assurance was given that the require-ments of 10 CFR 20.103 and Regulatory Guide 8.15 will be addressed )

in the procedures which are being develope It was indicated that most of the plant staff have already received medical examinations that include a vital capacity test given by a company physician. However, notifications from the physician indicating clearance to wear respirators has not been received by the radiation / chemistry supervisor onsit !

This area will be reviewed during subsequent inspection . Exit Interview l

The inspection results were discussed with Mr. J. Schott and others

'

(Paragraph 1) at the close of the inspectio The inspector noted significant progress in the radiation protection i program and estimated a reasonable probability of its being ready ,

for a July 1979 fuel loadin In particular he noted: (a) good !

progress in radiation / chemistry personnel recruitment and training, including the work / training experience being obtained at an operating BWR; (b) good radiation / chemistry department facilities which meet or exceed FSAR requirements; (c) presence on site of most required

. l-8-

I

<

,

w ,. - ---..,--m, , , - . . ~ . . , . . , . , , - . . - - . . . , . . , , ,.y., . . _ . . -

.- . . .

.

.c sampling and mor.itoring instruments; (d) progress in the development of radiation protection training programs for general station per-sonnel including temporary workers; and (e) generclly satisfactory radiation protection procedures approved and reviewed by the inspector thus far. He emphasized that this review mainly covered the radi-ation protection program and did not include radwaste responsibilities of the departmen These would be covered in subsequent inspection The inspector noted a discrepancy between the scheduled and FSAR specified training for the radiation / chemistry supervisor, the need for a station policy governing decontamination responsibilitie=,

'

and.the apparent failure to receive notification onsite of x : ! c;i clearances to wear respirators. He also acknowledged. good'J awareness on the part of station staff in the planned removal .d

- valves from the concentrated waste tank roo The licensee acknowledged these comments noting that the training discrepancy would-be resolved, that a station policy addressing decontamination responsibility was being formulated, and that the matter of medical clearances would be pursued. He also stated that recruiting is continuing to add 3 cr 4 more radiation /

chemistry technician P q --

.w-- w ge-- e e-- ~ .w-, -- se , - . wr m v~,~e w e. . v v- ->-me- -,o,eo e .ne-o,+e- - v,,-w-~~.ew-w., ,-----,---~~,a

.

w ~-me- me n-,vn--en om e