IR 05000155/1990003
| ML20006F645 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 02/13/1990 |
| From: | Michael Kunowski, Miller D, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20006F640 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-155-90-03, 50-155-90-3, NUDOCS 9002280258 | |
| Download: ML20006F645 (8) | |
Text
p_
,p=
ii
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
,
'
REGION III
,
m Report No. 50-155/90003(DRSS)
Docket No. 50-155 License No. DPR-6
" lj a..
-
Licensee:
Consumers Power Company 9i 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, MI 49201
,
' Facility Name:
Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant
"
Inspection At:
Charlevoix, Michigan
!
!
Inspection Conducted:
January 30 through February 2, 1990 Y// 9 Inspectors:
D. E. Miller
-
h8@ #
Senior Radiation Specialist Date f hbgM
'
Y l
M. A. Kunowski N MM" Radiation Specialist Date 7///bWIv Approved By:
M. C. Schumacher, Chief
Radiological Controls and Date
,
Chemistry Section
-
.
L Inspection Summary Inspection from January 30 through February 2.1990 (Report No. 50-155/90003(DRSS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the radiation protection and radioactive waste programs (Inspection Procedure (IP) 83750 and 84750) including,.
changes in the radiation protection staff; audits and appraisals; external and.
internal exposure control and assessment including ALARA considerations; control of radioactive material and contamination, surveys, and monitoring; transportation of radioactive waste (radwaste); and the liquid and gaseous radwaste programs.
l Also reviewed.were previous inspection findings (IP 92701).
Results:- The licensee's radiation protection and radwaste programs meet
.
regulatory requirements, and appear to be effective in protecting the health and safety of the public and plant workers.
l 90022802D8 900216 D
PDR ADOCK 05000153
[:(
l
PDC p
-
1'
1"
-
. _ _ ~
'
.-
.
4.
Changes in Staff (IP 83750 and 84750)
.
The inspectors reviewed major changes in the plant staff that could affect the radiation protection and radwaste programs. The senior health physicist has been assigned an additional responsibility to supervise the chemistry / health physics (C/HP) technicians when the technicians are performing chemistry duties.
The health physicist, with over 10 years experience at the plant, previously acted in this capacity.
In addition, the Radiation Protection Supervisor at Palisades has been appointed plant manager at Big Rock, effective February 1.
This individual has extensive experience in radiation protection and personnel supervision.
These changes should not detract from the licensee's radiation protection and radwaste programs.
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
5.
Audits and Appraisals (IP 83750 and 84750)
The inspectors reviewed results of two indepth audits and several less extensive surveillances of the radiation protection and radwaste programs conducted in 1989.
No major problems were identified during these oversight activities.
Several minor concerns were promptly addressed by plant staff.
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified by the NRC inspectors.
6.
External Exposure Control (IP 83750)
The inspectors reviewed aspects of the licensee's implementation of the external exposure control and personal dosimetry program, including ALARA considerations. No major problems were identified.
The station dose total for 1989 was 160 person-rem, compared to the goal of 240 person-rem and the 1988 total of 156 person-rem. The total for 1989 is low considering the extensive outage work on the turbine and on rewiring in the recirculation pump room.
For 1990, the licensee has estimated a total exposure of 175 person-rem, excluding the dose from additional work on the pump room wirings. The scope of the additional work, set for the fall 1990 refuel outage, had not yet been determined.
A-review of records and discussions with the licensee indicated that no regulatory or administrative overexposures occurred in 1989.
The (
inspectors also noted that improvements in the station's ALARA program
')
were continuing.
Independent dose rate measurements made by the inspectors during a tour of the plant indicated that postings for external exposure control were in accordance with regulatory requirements.
No deviations or violations were identified.
o
..
.
'
DETAILS
,
1.
Persons Contacted
+R. J. Alexander, Technical Engineer
+W. L. Beckman, Plant Manager
+J. L. Beer, Chemistry / Health Physics Superintendent 9R. L. Burdette, Senior Health Physicist
+T. W. Elward, Plant Manager R. J. Garrett, Chemistry / Heelth Physics Supervisor T. A. Hancock, General Engineer, Chemistry and Health Physics
+L. Monshor, Quality Assurance Superintendent J. Popa, Senior Maintenance Engineer
+T. F. Popa, ALARA Coordinator
+E. A. Plettner, NRC Senior Resident Inspector N. R. Williamsen, NRC Resident Inspector The inspectors also contacted other licensee personnel.
+Present at onsite exit meeting on February 2,1990.
9Present at telephone conversation on February 9,1990.
2.
General This inspection was conducted to review the radiation protection and radwaste programs.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous inspection findings (IP 92701)
(Closed)OpenItemNo. 155/88014-04:
Review initial energy efficiency curves and associated records maintained by_ the licensee for calibration of the liquid radwaste monitor. The licensee has been unable to locate records of the initial energy efficiency calibration of the monitor, and has agreed to re-calibrate the monitor with liquid radioactive sources or seek relief from the technical specification requirement for energy calibration.
This matter will be reviewed during a future inspection (0 pen Item No. 155/90003-01).
(Closed)ViolationNo. 155/89014-01:
Failure to properly label contaminated items stored in normally clean areas within the plant restricted area. The licensee revised the procedure on labeling items to clarify the requirements, and instructed plant staff on these requirements.
Tours of the plant by the inspectors during the current
)
inspection identified no problems with labeling of contaminated items.
(Closed)OpenItemNo. 155/89014-02: Review practice of not routinely using location-specific survey maps to display survey results. This practice apparently has not caused major problems, owing to the small size and simple design of the plant, and to a plant staff with many years of experience at the plant.
This matter will continue to be reviewed as part of the routine inspection program.
-
.
L t
..
7.
Internal Exposure Control and Assessment (IP 83750)'
'
I The inspectors reviewed aspects-of the licensee's internal exposure
'
control and assessment programs, including major changes to the programs, and identification and correction of program weaknesses.
The-programs, as previously described in Inspection Report No. 155/89014, have not changed significantly.
The licensee has, however, corrected sn administrative procedure weakness that was described in that report.
In addition, a recent audit by an industry group recommended that the licensee lower its body burden action level for Co-60 from 18 nanocuries to 10 nanocuries.
The licensee stated they will follow the recommendation.
A review of records and a discussion with licensee representatives
<
indicated that for 1989 no worker had been exposed to airborne
'
radioactivity approaching the 520 MPC-hour regulatory limit.
Several
uptakes of radioactive material occurred curing the outage and were documented by the licensee; however, discussions with the licensee and o
a review of records indicated the uptakes resulted from exposure to
,
less than the 40 MPC-hour regulatory control measure. A root cause common to these events is a failure to follow known radiation protection
,
practices. Additional attention by the licensee to this area is needed.
It will be reviewed at future inspections.
,
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
l-8.
Control of Radioactive Materials and Contamination. Surveys, and Monitoring (IP 87/50)
The inspectors reviewed portions of the licensee's program in this area. This review included record examina' ion, discussions with licensee representatives, tours of facilities, and independent radiation surveys.
No problems were identified.
The licensee has had noticeable success in their effort to reduce personal contaminations.
In 1988, during which the licensee began use of very sensitive automated whole-body friskers, the licensee reported 293 personal contaminations.
In 1989, the licensee reported 180 i
,
personal contaminations.
The reduction in 1989 is attributable to
'
several initiatives: increased emphasis on proper radworker practices in general employee training; radworker practice observation training was provided to most first-line supervisors; increased attention from the QA/QC groups; assignment of station janitors, who perform general decon and cleaning in the radiologically controlled areas (RCA), to the C/HP group; routinely scheduled cleaning of the RCA; increased use of stanchions and rope; and review of contamination events shortly after occurrence with the individual who was contaminated, their
- .
immediate supervisor, and a member of C/HP management.
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
9.
Gaseous Effluents (IP 84750)
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's gaseous radwaste effluent program, including: compliance of releases with regulatory requirements; adequacy
~
'
-
,
.w
,
.
,
['
of required records, reports, and notifications; and experience
.
'
concerning identification'and correction of programmatic weaknesses,
.
-The inspectors selectively reviewed records of radioactive effluent t
F sampling and analysis for 1989 and 1990 to date, and the semiannual
'
effluent _ report for the first six months of 1989.
The pathways I
sampled and analyses performed appear to comply with technical
specification requirements.
i L
Gases from the air ejector offgas system are monitored by both the air
L
. ejector offgas and stack monitors, after a 30-minute holdup, and are i
released from the stack. Gases from the gland seal condenser pass
'
through a 90-second holdup line before stack monitoring and subsequent
'
release.
Gases from the containment, radwaste area, turbine building, and service building are routed to the stack for monitoring and
,
release.
'
As discussed in-Inspection Report No. 50-155/88014, previous fuel cladding problems have been rectified; problem fuel has gradually been replaced with fuel of a new design and no leaking fuel is currently evident.
r During review of the semiannual effluent report, the inspectors noted that the word "none" was used for isotopes not teen above their lower limit' of detection (LLD). The guidance in Regulacy fluide 1.21 suggests other methods of presentation for isotopes that co/.d be i,
present but were not detected above their LLO. The licensee agreed to follow the regulatory guide for presenting isotopes in gaseous and liquid effluents in their effluent reports.
,
- '
The semiannual effluent reports for 1988 and the first half of 1989 indicated that approximately 80 curies of N-13 are *eleased in the i-gaseous ef fluents every six months. The activity listed in the
,
reports is a calculated value not a measured value. This isotope is a positron emitter with a half-life of about 10 minutes. The inspectors requested to review the licensee's-basis for the calculations but licensee could not readily locate the information.
The licensee agreed to conduct another_ search.
This matter will be reviewed at a future inspection (0 pen Item No. 155/90003-02).
,
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
10. Liquid Effluents (IP 84750, 92701)
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's liquid radwaste effluent
.
program, including:
determination whether liquid radwaste effluents were in accordance with regulatory requirements; adequacy of required
-
records, reports, and notifications; and experience concerning identification and correction of programmatic weaknesses.
Batch releases from various liquid waste tanks are diluted with the service water and the circulating water discharge before release to Lake Michigan.
Liquid effluent releases are composed primarily of
.
,
.
,,
, /
batch releases from chemical tanks and consist mostly of laundry water and liquid wastes generated from decontamination activities. Chemical tank effluents are norma 11,v processed by filtration only. Other liquid batch releases for water quality or inventory control are generally processed by demineralization and filtration.
The Inspectors selectively reviewed records of radioactive effluent sempling and analysis for 1989 and the semiannual effluent report for the first six months of 1989. The pathways sampled and analyses performed appear to comply with technical specification requirements.
Except as discussed below, release concentrations met technical specification requirements.
According to the licensee, and as recorded in Deviation Report number D-BRP-89-17., on June 20, 1989, a planned batch liquid radwaste discharge was begun without adequate dilution to maintain the release below unrestricted area maximum permissible concentrations (MPCs) at the lake es required by Technical Specification 13.1.2.1.
The auxiliary operator noted the error when he was filling out his log; the release was immediately terminated. The release, which lasted 20 minutes, was 465 gallons at about 1.3 times MPC. The auxiliary operator took appropriate actions to identify and terminate the release in compliance with Technical Specification statement 13.1.2.1.a.
The licensee's investigation determined that the event was caused by personnel error.
The appropriate persons were counselled, and greater detail was added to appropriate liquid release procedures.
The inspectors also reviewed the circumstances of a plugged and possibly cracked floor drain located between the cation and anion tanks.
In early 1989, the licensee discovered contaminated water pooled over the floor drain, which drains to the radwaste sump. The water was removed; however, a crack was discovered in the drain cup, and maintenance personnel indicated that they may have punctured the drain line further downstream of the drain cup at an elbow while attempting to unplug the drainline.
Because the licensee was unable to conclusively determine the integrity of the drain, they plugged it. Leakage from the cation and anion tanks is now handled by the only other drain in the room. This drain is located below the condensate demineralizers. The possibility of overloading the one open drain and flooding the room is a concern which should be addressed.
In a discussion after completion of the onsite inspection, the licensee indicated that the plugged floor drain would be repaired by March 1, 1990. This matter will be reviewed at a future inspection (0 pen item No. 155/90003-03).
The licensee recently received a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to remove sand and gravel from the plant's liquid radwaste discharge canal and dispose of it onshore.
Because it contains low-level radioactivity above natural background levels, the licensee submitted a request to the NRC in accordance with 10 CFR 20.302 to dispose of the material. This request is being reviewed in NRC headquarters.
___-_-
_ - - - _ _ -.__--- _ ____- _ _ _ _ _ _
- - -....
.
,
.
,
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
.
11.
Effluent Control Instrumentation (IP 84750)
The inspectors reviewed channel calibration metnobiogy and records of calibration and functional tests for selected rcdioactive liquid and gaseous system effluent monitors for 1989.
This included the air ejector offgas monitors and stack normal range noble gas monitor for the gaseous system and the liquid radwaste effluent monitor for the liquid system. Calibration of the liquid effluent monitor is further discussed in Section 3.
No significant problems other than as discussed in Section 3 were noted.
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
12.
Solid Radwaste and Transportation (IP 84750 and 83750)
The inspectors selectively reviewed the licensee's solid radioactive waste management program, including: general compliance with waste generator requirements in 10 CFR 20.311 and 61.55; overall performance of the process control and quality assurance programs; adequacy of required records, reports, and notifications; and experience concerning identification and correction of programmatic weaknesses.
Solid radwaste handling, compaction, and storage facilities are located in the radwaste building just outside the protected area.
The inspectors toured the facility, performed independent measurements, and discussed radwaste compaction with a licensee representative; no problems were noted.
High activity bead resin and filter media are dewatered by a vendor and shipped in high integrity containers (HICs).
HICs are stored in concrete vaults in the radwaste building pending shipment to a burial site.
10 CFR 61 waste classification is made using-the Wastetrak computer software program which uses the scaling factor methodology of AIF/NESP-027, " Methodologies for Classification of Low-Level Radioactive Wastes From Nuclear Power Plants," 1983. The scaling factors are updated by an ongoing actual waste stream analysis program.
As a result of an industry audit finding regarding the method of monitoring (i.e., using a beta-sensitive pancake probe) bags of dry active waste (DAW), the licensee discontinued surveying potentially clean material removed from radiologically controlled areas; all such waste is now disposed of as radioactive waste.
The licensee has no current plans to resume DAW segregation. DAW is compacted in 55 gallon drums or placed in large steel bins; most packaged DAW is sent to a licensed radwaste processor for further processing.
The inspectors selectively reviewed aspects of the licensee's transportation of radioactive material program including compliance with NRC and 00T requirements; no problems were noted.
There were no transportation incidents during 1989 and 1990 to date.
No deviations or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
..... -
-
_ _.. _..
-
..;..
'
.'
,.
13. Exit' Meeting (IP 30703)
.
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Section 1)
at the conclusion of the onsite inspection activities on February 2,1990, and summarized the scope and tentative findings of the inspection.
Specifically, the following items were discussed, a..The desirability of repairing the floor drain beneath the cation and anion tanks (Section 10).
b. -The licensee's intention to lower its action level for body burden evaluation (Section 7).
c.
The need for additional information on the basis for reporting N-13 in the Semiannual Effluent Reports (Section 9).
d.
Regulatory guidance concerning the use of "None" in the Semiannual Effluent Reports when isotopes are not detected above the LLD (Section 9).
,
8
r
!
o
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - _ _ - -
-