ML18086A964

Responds to NRC 810313 Ltr Re Violations Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-272/80-28.Corrective Actions:Personnel Exposure Estimates Revised & Evaluation of Possible Beta & Alpha Emitter Intakes Completed

ML18086A964
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	08/21/1981
From:	SCHNEIDER F W Public Service Enterprise Group
To:	GRIER B H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
Shared Package
ML18086A963	List: ML18086A964
References
NUDOCS 8110090237
Download: ML18086A964 (4)

See also: IR 05000272/1980028

Text

Frederick

W. Schneider

Vice President

Public Service Electric and Gas Company 80 Park Plaza Newark, N.J. 07101 201/430-7373 Production

• August 21, 1981 Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director Off ice of Inspection

and Enforcement

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

Region.I 631 Park Avenue King of Prussia, Pa. 19406 Dear Mr. Grier: NRC INSPECTION

50-272/80-28

UNIT NO. 1 SALEM GENERATING

STATION Our letter of March 13, 1981, responded

to Inspection

No. 50-272/80-28.

We are now providing

supplemental

information, as requested,which

is based upon further analyses, investigations, and changes implemented

following

the inspection.

• rnspe*ctio*n

Report Details F'ue'l' Tra*nsfe*r*

Tube Event Personnel

Intake Estimates

• c5*0'-272/80-'28-0l).

of your report states: The licensee has indicated

an intake evaluation

is to be submitted

to the Director, Region I. This evaluation

will include evaluation

ef possible beta and alpha emitter intakes which are not readily detected by whole body counting.

An evaluation

for possible beta and alpha emitter intakes which are not readily detected by whole body counting has been completed.

The evaluation, which consisted

of an examination

of analyses J!>erf,ormed

on primary coolant samples and resin samples of primary coolant derriineralizers, indicated

that intake exposure due to alpha and beta emitters, which are not readily detected by whole body counting, would result in insignificant

doses to the personnel

involved in the event. In addition, all previous station gross alpha analyses of air samples and liquid rad waste samples have been undetectable.

We will continue to examine and quantify the alpha and beta emitters for possible dose contribution

to workers . Any s*ignificant

differences

between our find in gs and those that might result from this

review will be reported to your office. ,/8110090237

810929\ ADOCK

I

• Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

-2-8/21/81 Fuel Trans*fer

Tube Event Personnel

Radiation

Exposure (50-272/80'-'28-02)

of your report states: The licensee is to submit personnel

exposure estimates

in a. report to the Director, Region I. Re*spohse:

The personnel

exposure estimates

have been revised. The dose commitments

to their skin, eyes, GI-tract, and lungs are summarized

below. Details on the methodology

and assumptions

are available

at the Salem Station. As*s i'gned no*s*e* Commitments

Individual

A Individual

Dose to Skin (mrad) 830 830 Dose to Eyes (mrad) 30 30 Assigned MPC Hours 14 8 13 Week Dose to Lung (mrem) 28 13 1 Year Dose to Lung (mrem} 54 25 50 Year Dose to Lung (mreml 61 28 13 Week Dose to GI-Tract (mrem} 23 30 1 Year Dose to GI-Tract Cmrem) 41 55 50 Year Dose to GI-Tract (mrem} 46 62 (50-272/80'-28-10)

bf your report states: Licensee's

representatives

indicated .action will be taken to ensure that the equivalent

to Form 5 will reflect incomplete

previous history for those individuals

who do not have an

date exposure history. *Re*st>on:se:

The station's

equivalent

of Form NRC-5 has been revised to reflec't incomplete

previous history for those individuals

who do not have an*up-to-date

exposure history. * (5'0'-272/80:-2s-111

o*f your report states:

radiation

protection

representatives

indicated

all contractor

resumes will be required to be written in a manner to provide a concise time break down versus function which had been performed

• B

• Mr. Boyce H. Grier, Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

-3-8/21/81 Response:

All contractor

resumes are reviewed upon arrival of contractor

on site. This review assures that the individual

meets the time and experience

requirements

for which he was hired.

of your report states: Licensee representatives

indicated

action will be taken to ensure routine entry permits will not be used.for entries into areas with significant

radiological

hazard potential

and the control of access sign in forms. Response:

A review of Procedure

PD 15.1.013, "REP and EREP Usage", which ensures routine entry permits will not be

for entries into areas with significant

radiological

hazard potential, has*been completed.

Your report suggests REP No. 0541, "Routine Surveys, Valving and Inspection

for HP, Chemistry

Operations, and Station QA", was used for routine as well as non-routine

entries. This REP had specific requirements

for survey points outside the biological

shield. It also had specific requirements

for entries inside the biological

shield where workers were required to be accompanied

oy' a heal th physics technician.

The title of this REP may-have been misleading

but the functional

role of REP was correct. At Salem, an EREP is used for routine entries. Normally, REP/EREP Access Sign-in forms are utilized at the control points. As noted in your report, inspector

discussions

with the* entry party personnel

did indicate that the individuals

had signed i.n and out, however, the sign-in form apparently

had been misplaced.

This occurrence

is considered

to be an isolated case and present controls are adequate.

The REP rooin supervisor

has Been made aware of the continued

need for control of access si:gn-in forms. Sincerely, cc D.trector, Off,i;ce of :i:nspection

and Enforcement

Nuclear Regulatory

Commission

Wash;tngton, DC. 20555

IA * STATE OF NEW JERSEY SS: COUNTY OF ESSEX COUNTY OF ESSEX FREDERICK

w. SCHNEIDER, being duly sworn according

to law deposes and says: I am a Vice President

of Public Service Electric and Gas Company, and as such, I find the matters set forth in our response dated August 21, 1981 to the NRC's inspection

report 50-272/80-28

are true to the best of my knowledge, information

and belief. ;FREDERICK

W. SCHNEIDER

Subscril5ed

and sworn to before me th+/-s.JtfYA-day , 1981 Jersey My Commission

expires on (flet.0 /91'-:J'