IR 05000010/1980015
| ML19340B463 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 10/14/1980 |
| From: | Connaughton K, Grant W, Januska A, Jordan M, Oestmann M, Paperiello C, Paul R, Reimann F, Spessard R, Tongue T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19340B460 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-010-80-15, 50-10-80-15, 50-237-80-18, 50-249-80-22, NUDOCS 8011110034 | |
| Download: ML19340B463 (9) | |
Text
.-_.
..
.
_
-
O
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR RIGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Reports Nc. 50-10/80-15; 50-237/80-18; 50-249/80-22 Docket Nos. 50-10; 50-237; 50-249 Licenses No. DPR-2; DPR-19; DPR-25 Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Ccimpany P. O. Box 767 Chicago, IL 60690 i
Facility Name: Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Units 1, 2 & 3 Inspection At: Dresden Site, Merris, IL Inspection Conduc ed: Se ember 5-17, 1980 e A'7F be:E-f.
Inspectory:
F. W. Reimann
/6 ~/C' 'I.,'
- '
l br[g
/C -/d id
-
j#/Me m
,.
/ '.' ~/ T A.
anuska /
,3
~
'
/c//~
{
o
/
$. ;I' Y i %
l'
f
!E$# g(
.
C. Paperiello
.d
'.Connaugpton A -/C -d h& d~
4.' Jordan
/O--/O-80
'
us%d ID II W. Grant
- f.:2..stc
'
}
-
%
(TM. Oe'stman
/[--/
/I'
$01114 0 O3d
!
..
.
.
.
_ _ _ _ _.... _.. _. _
_
_. _.
_
_
. _ _ _ _ _ _...
-.
- _ _. _
.-
,
P
',s "; )
/.
/T
.Y aoacq(
_
,
- -
Approved By:
R. L. Spess d, Chief
/t /2/ j 7 Projects Section 1
,
Inspection Summary Inspection on September 5-17, 1980 (Reports No. 50-10/80-15; 50-237/80-18;
'
,
50-249/80-22)-
)
Areas Inspected: Special, unannounced inspection of circumstances pertaining
to allegations made by unidentified individuals to a Chicago' newspaper that s
!
300,000 to 400,000 gallons of water contaminated with low levels of radio-
!
isotopes had been released to the environment over a period of one to two
,
months prior to September 5,1980; including a review of methods of account-
,
"
ing for inventories of contaminated water; special and routine envircamental
'
sample results; independent inspection of potential release flow paths; programs to detect leakage from the station; and, the collection and analysis
.,
of independent environmental samples. The inspection involved 79 inspector-
!
hours onsite by nine NRC inspectors including 11.5 inspector-hours onsite
during off-shifts.
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identified.
Although it could not j
be determined whether a large volume of water did or did not escape from the station, there was no detectable threat to the health and safety of the public, i
l
4
.I j
F k
,
d
?
I
)
- 2 --
i
_
.. -
,m.
._ _,. _
,. _ _, _ _ _ - _.
-.
.
..
~_ _--...., _. -. _. _
.
i
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- C. Reed, Vice President
- D. Scott, Station Superintendent
- R. Ragan, Operations Assistant Superintendent
- D. Farrar, Administrative Services and Support Assistant Superintendent
- C. Sargent, Unit 1 Operating Engineer
- B. Pietryga, Shift Control Room Engineer G. Myrick, Rad Chem Supervisor D. Adam, Waste Systems Engineer The inspectors also interviewed other licensee employees, including members of the technical support, operation, and engineering staffs; and shift engineers and foremen.
- Denotes those attending one or more exit interviews conducted at
!
'
Dresden on September 9, and September 17, 1980 held at the Regional Office in Glen Ellyn, 11linois.
,
-
2.
Followup on Significant Occurrence The inspectors were informed of an apparent water inven' tory loss
'
a.
that occurred from about mid July through this report period which has created considerable news media interest.
Licensee actions in response to this occurrence were observed by interviewing station personnel, accumulating and evaluating data, attending licensee meetings, and performing independent inspections for conditions which may be significant.
,
b.
On September 4 1980, the licensee determined that the 2B LPCI Heat Exchanger was leaking suppression pool water to the service water system at a rate of one to two gallons per minute. The licensee determined that the leak had existed for approximately
ten days, based on makeup water requirements to the suppression
,
.
pool. The licensee determined that a total volume of approxi-mately 70,000 gallons may have leaked via this flow path, with
'
an activity of approximately 5x10-5 pCi/1. No activity was detected in the service water discharge, probably because the low radioactivity content of suppression water was undetectable following dilution in the service water. The leaking heat exchanger was immediately isolated and repaired. The remaining 3 station LPCI heat exchangers were checked for leakage and found to be free of leaks.
c.
On September 12, 1980, the licensee completed efforts to identify potential sources of leakage. Efforts and results are identified in paragraph 3 of this report. No abnormal water release paths i
I I-3-
,
- - - -
...,
, - - - -
- -., -
-,
-~
.-n
-. -.
- - -
- -, - -
.
'
or sources of leakage to the environment were identified. The licensee concluded efforts to identify obvious leaks and concen-trated his efforts on long-term and analytical efforts to account
'
for the apparent inventory loss.
These efforts are identified as licensee commitments in Paragraph 3 of this report.
d.
An initial exit interview was held on September 9,1980, at which time the licensee committed to develop a detailed chronology of events and corrective actions taken in regard to this event, including planned actions and analysis to determine if water had been released, and to provide more accurate detection and
'
inventory techniques to preclude future occurrences of unidenti-fied leakage concerns.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Meeting With Licensee on September 17, 1980 A meeting was held between licensee corporate management, Dresden Station Management, and representatives of the Region III Office of the Director, Reactor Operations and Nuclear Support Branch, and Fuel Facilities and Material Safeguards Branch on September 17, 1980.
The meeting was to review the status of licensee investigations into alleged water leaks to the environment and to establish a future course of action in regard to this event.
NRC RIII Representatives J. G. Keppler, Director R. L. Spessard, Chief, Projects Section 1 F. W. Reimann, Project Inspector R. A. Paul, Radiation Specialist W. L. Fisher, Chief, Fuel Facility Projects and Radiation Support Section T. M. Tongue, Resident Inspector M. Jordan, Resident Inspector Commonwealth Edison Company Representatives C. Reed, Vice President D. Ferrar, Administrative Services and Support Assistant Superintendent C. Sargent, Unit 1 Operating Engineer B. Pietryga, Shift Control Room Engineer a.
Status of Licensee Investigation The licensee presented a chonology of events and indications which resulted in concerns that a leak could have existed during the period of time in question, including a trend of the total volume of water contained in 24 station storage tanks, plotted as a function of time, from January, 1979 to present.
It is this-4-
_
.
plot which initially aroused suspicions that water could be escaping. Also presented was a synopsis of actions taken by the licensee to determine whether or not leakage had or was occurring, including:
(1) A walkdown and visual examination of all piping and equipment which could be involved in a monitored or unmonitored water release (results negative).
(2) Leak checks of all station piping which is buried except for fcur piping runs which could not be checked without shuting down the units, and which would result in obvious evidence of leakage (results negative).
(3) Verification of valve lineups and system walkdowns to identify piping which could result in unmonitored releases (negative results).
(4) Special and routine samples taken to detect leakage had it occurred (negative results).
(5) Monitoring various piping runs that do not have suitable flow instrumentation to determine water usage using ultrasonic flow measurement equipment (results negative-method of questionable usefulness).
(6) Recalibration of level instruments for tanks which collect and store types of water of concern (results negative).
(7) Ongoing efforts to refine and increase the accuracy of existing water inventory techniques (results negative).
Licensee's Action Plan b.
The licensee committed to the following actions intended to determine whether a leak did or did not occur, and to aid in identifying future leaks should they occur.
(1) The existing inventory of water storage will be continued and improved to increase its accuracy.
(2) The licensee will develop, for trial use, an inventory of total station water. This inventory will address water in use by station processes (including the fuel pools, suppression pools, etc.) in addition to the water in storage and treatment addressed by the existing inventory.
Initial shakedown of this method should begin by September 15, 1980.
(3) The licensee will initiate a study of station evaporative losses by a consultant. The study will begin as soon as-5-
.
.
-
.
.
-.
-
.-
.
- -
.
.
.
the consultant's proposal is approved, hopefully by the week
'
of September.15, 1980.
(4) -The licensee will conduct a walkdown of systems to identify
,
potential leak paths, points at which water could be released
,.
by a saboteur, configurations which differ from existing l
documentation, and other conditions which may be significant.
]
This effort has largely been completed for main piping runs.
i Continuing efforts will concentrate on " lower tier" systems, i
including drain collection, vents, crossties, and similar piping runs.
(5) The licensee will review the existing program for locking
!
valves and identify other valves which should be included.
(6) The licensee will conduct awareness training of individualE
~
involved in the operation of the station, j
(7) The licensee will evaluate the feasibility of drilling a
well to tap the uppermost aquifer at a point close to the l
station, and which is likely to provide early identification l
of seepage from under the station to provide early warning of contamination of.the aquifer.
,
(8) The licensee will develop a means to provide for more timely I
detection of leakage from LPCI Heat Exchangers, since signifi-l cant leakage could occur from them during certain postulated post accident conditions.
,
(9) The licensee will more closely monitor condensate storage tank makeup requirements to determine if excessive water is being used by the steam power cycle.
..
(10) The licensee committed to continue to closely monitor the activ tties of construction crews at the site to provide assuraace that their activities do not result in unplanned releases.
(11) The licensee will submit a followup report covering accom-
-plishments and.results of the above commitments to the
'
Director of Region III.
(10/80-15-01; 237/80-18-01; 249/80-22-01)
!
!
!
t-
-6-
_. _. - - - _
_
_
_ _., -, - _ _
,
Section I
-)
..,,
q. g
,2-Prepared by -. A.~piul, Radiation Specialist p
ML Reviewed by h. L.
'isher, Fuel Facility Project and Radiation Support Section Verification of Licensee Sampling Program An inspector reviewed the station's various water treatment systems and the licensee's sampling of unmonitored release paths related to the suspected water inventory loss. Records of water samples taken from the following areas were also reviewed: Waste Water Treatment Facility, station discharge, storm sewers and manholes at various locations, LPCI heat exchangers and units 1, 2, 3 composite sampling stations.
Based on this review it appears that all water released into the condenser cooling water discharge caiials was below Technical Specification limits.
No items of no6 compliance or deviations were identified.
4
,
- 7-
.-_ _
.
-
-
..
-. _
.- -
-
-
,,
Section II
~)
C. J. Paperiello, Acting' Chief, Envionmental[p'/ /
Prepared by.
Protection and Special Projects Section Reviewed by A. B. Davis, Chief, Fuel Facility and g(' M Materials Safety Branch On September 5,1980, inspectors from the Environmental and Special Projects Section as well as the Regional Mobile Laboratory were dispatched to the Dresden site. Personnel were directed to obtain water samples from prede-termined locations to be split between the Region III Mobile Laboratory
.
- which was at the' site, and the Occupational Health and Safety Division of Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). The samples, counted at the site, were taken to determine if any immediate Health and Safety problem existed.
ANL results were to provide a more sensitive determination of any concen-tration of radioactivity present. The following results were obtained:
Sample ANL Results RIII Results
'i River
< SE-09 ici/ml
< 6E-07 pCi/ml Unit 1 Discharge Canal
Unit 2 & 3 Discharge
< 5E-09 iCi/ml K6E-07jiCi/ml Canal Sewer Outflow
< SE-09 pCi/ml
.6E-07 pCi/ml
Domestic Water-1200 foot 4 SE-09jiCi/ml x6E-07 JiCi/ml well
'
Unit 2 LPCI Service Water Cs-137 3.1 E-06 iCi/ml 4.4 E-06 yiCi/ml J
Unit 2 LPCI Service Water Mn-54 2.2 E-05 pCi/ml 2.5 E-05jici/ml
'
,
Unit 2 LPCI Service Water Co-60 1.46 E-04y:Ci/ml 1.24 E-04yCi/ml Several nearby residents requested that their wells be tested and petitioned
,
the NRC that this be done.
On. September 6,1980, a sample from a 160 foot
deep well in the Dresden area was collected, and on September 8, 1980, a
request was received from a number of Dresden area residents that their wells a
be tested. On September 12, 1980, a sample from a 300 foot deep well was
!
collected. Wells in this area take water from one of three aquifers. These
aquifers are located at depths of approximately 90-150 feet, 250-350 feet and j
greater than 1000 feet. The following results were obtained:
Concentration (pCi/1)
Alpha Beta Tri tium 160 foot well ( 0.1 6.8 1 0.6 e100
,
300 foot well 6.3 t'0.8 17.1 1 1.1
<100
>
- . g _
.
r
. --,.,
-
-
,,, - - - -
,, -
..
-
,n.
- -, - - ~
, -,
--
.-
_
_. -..
_
_
_. _ _
.
..
_
-
_
,
These are' considered to be normal levels of radioactivity in well water
'
samples. The alpha and beta activities are probably due to Ra-226 known
'
to exist in these aquifers at these levels. The results for the deepest
.
aquifer is presented by the data for the onsite domestic water well.
i
Although no' activity due to the Dresden Nuclear Station was detected in these well water samples, this gives no assurance that activity might not appear in the future if there has been an actual release of contaminated water to the ground. Ground water can take several months to move from
'
under the plant te a well several miles away.
If the lost water cannot be
,
accounted for, a well monitoring should be added to the licensee's environ-
mental monitoring program, r
i Although no items of noncompliance were identified, the monitoring of ground water is an open item.
(10/80-15-02, 237/80-18-02, 249/80-22-02)
,
'Y
.
- .
d f
d
4 b-9-
.
,
,. -
,r
-.,,
,
,m.
-
, - -.. -
, -,,
._-
, -.
,y4