IR 05000213/1993018
| ML20057G310 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1993 |
| From: | Bores R, Peluso L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20057G309 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-213-93-18, NUDOCS 9310210274 | |
| Download: ML20057G310 (8) | |
Text
,
-
-,
,
- g, <
- w Yk
~
(_:qs >
'
,'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
'
- "
REGION I
L
<
[ Report No.~
150-213/93-18
.
$ ! Docket Nd.
50-213
_
L License'No.
DPR-6L
'
'
y
.
[
' Licensee:
Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company
!!
P.O. Box 270 Hanford. Connecticut 06141-0270
,,
,
L Facility Name:
iHaddam Neck' Station
- ,
l~
Inspection At:
Northeast Utilities Service Company. Berlin. CT: Production Operation Services Laboratory.f Middletown. CT: and the Haddam Neck Station.
E'
East Haddam. Connecticut
&
Inspection' Conductedi
- September 27 - 30; 1993 JInspector; su dt-1/kr A>/n/es
- Laurie Peluso, Radiation Specialist Ifate'
Effloents Radiation Pmtection Section (ERPS)
Facilities Radiological Safety and
,
= Safeguards Branch (FRSSB)..
- Approved by:
-
/O'7~I3
-
obert J res, Chief, ERPS, FRSSB,
_
Date
~
Division Radiation Safety and Safeguards (DRSS)
- Areas' Inspected:1? Announced safety. inspection of the Radiological Environmental Monitoring
~
-
- Program (REMP) including: management' controls, quality assurance audits, meteorological monitoring program,Lquality control program for analytical measurements, and
-
1. implementation of the above programs and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).
= Results:iWithin the areas inspected,~ the lic~ensee continued to maintain an excellent REMP.
.
,
?The responsible individuals'were knowledgeable with respect to implementation of the above t+
pmgramsDNo safety concerns or violations of NRC requirements were identified.
t c
'3
< ADOCK-L05000213 M 02102746931012 -
d a)P w,
.
w.
-
g aa-x
,
m n..
a.
"
h PETAILS
,
11.0-Individuals Contacted T
1.1 l Northeast Utilities Service Company (NUSCOL Berlin. CT
- R. Crandall, Supervisor Radiological Engineering
- W.'Eakin, Senior Engineer, RAB
..
- C. Flory, Senior Scientist RAB
~
,
- 'R. Schmidt,' Manager Radiological Assessment Branch t
S. Torf, Engineer, Radiation Pmtection Section 1.2 Production Operation Services Laboratory (POSLL Middletown. CT N. Corsi, Environmental Technician B.12ffins, Environmental Technician R Marchinkoski, Environmental Technician, Meteomlogical Monitoring G. Mattel, Supervisor-P. Staehly, Engineer, Environmental Monitoring R. Waggoner, Environmental Technician
>
1.3 Nuclear Regulhtorv Commission (NRC)
p W. Raymond, Senior Resident Inspector
- Denotes those individuals present at exit interview on October 1,1993.
Other licensee personnel were also contacted or interviewed during this i
' inspection.
2.0 Pumose The purpose of this mspection 'was to verify the licensee's capability to implement the
,
- Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) and the Meteorological Monitoring Pmgram (MMP) according to Technical Specifications (TS), the Radiological Environmental Monitoring and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (REMODCM),~ and appropriate procedures during normal and emergency operations.
ch.
3.0 ;
Management Contmis a
' The Senior Engineer in the Radiological Engineering Section (RES) of the
'
. Radiological Assessment Branch (RAB) in NUSCO was responsible for the REMP.
. The envimnmental technicians of the Production Operations Service Laboratory
~ (POSL) collected environmental sample media and prepared them for routine analyses. Routine analyses were performed by the licensee's primary contractor
.
-
laboratory, Teledyne Isotopes. The sample analysis results are returned to the Senior
,.
!
Engineer who reviewed and compiled the results into the annual REMP report.
y
p: '
b
_
iu
_
y A'
,
,.
.
...
.
\\
3.1 Organization The inspector reviewed the organization and administration of the REMP and
'
discussed with the licensee any changes since the last inspection conducted in March 1992. There have been no significant changes in the overj ht of ihe g
iC
' REMP since the pmvious inspection.
3.2
. Ouality Assumnce Audits The inspector reviewed the following Quality Assurance Audits for the REMP as part of the evaluation of the implementation of the TS mquirements.
f
- Nuclear Review Board (NRB) Audit No. A25082
- Internal Audits: RAB and POSL
"
- Contractor Audit: Teledyne Isotopes-
. The inspector reviewed the REMP ponion of the NRB audit which was performed during July and August,1993 and completed August 5,1993. The
,
complete audit repon, had not yet been issued. The NRB audit included the annual Land Use Census and Interlaboratory comparison program, required by the REMODCM. Them were several recommendations. none of safety significance. The NRB audit was of sufGeient technical depth to assess this portion of the REMP. The inspector reviewed the revised audit schedule and plan and noted that the REMP audit was scheduled according to the fmquency specified in the Technical Specifications and the scope of the audit plan was appropriate for the REMP.
,
The internal and contractor audits were performed by members of the RAB
'
using the appropriate audit procedures. The scope and technical depth of the audits were sufGeiently detailed to probe for programmatic and procedural weaknesses and changes. There were some Hndings, none of safety significance.
' 3.3 Annual Repon
,
L The inspector reviewed the Annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring
Program Repon for 1992, as well as selected analytical data for 1993. The mport provided a' comprehensive summary of the analytical results of the
'
REMP around the Haddam Neck site and met the REMODCM reporting requirements. The reviewed results indicated that all samples wem collected P
and analyzed as required by the REMODCM. No obvious omissions or anomalous data wem identified.
,:
i
- '
i l
h
p,
,
--
'
.
.
%
.
'
'
.
. 4.0 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Pmgram h
4.1 Dimet Observations i
.
. The inspector examined selected sampling stations to determine whether
<
- f '
samples were being obtained fmm the locations designated in the REMODCM
- ,
and whether air samplers were operable and calibrated. These sampling
^ stations included air samplers for particulates and airborne iodines, the composite water sampling station, a milk and vegetation sampling stations, and
'
a number of thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) stations for measumment of
,
L direct ambient radiation. ~ All examined air sampling equipment and the
l composite water sampler wem operational at the time of the inspection. The.
TLDs were placed at the designated locations as specified in the REMODCM.
>
Milk and vegetation samples are available at locations specified in the l
,
REMODCM.
[
l 4.2 Review of the REMP Pmeedures-
'
The inspector reviewed a number of procedums as part of the evaluation of the implementation of the REMP in accordance with TS and the REMODCM.
The reviewed pmcedures provided the required direction and guidance for -
implementing an effective REMP.
In addition to the procedure review, the inspector reviewed the calibration results of the volume meters for the air samplers. The calibrations were performed as scheduled and results were within the licensee's acceptance criteria.
Based on the above procedure review and discussions with the licensee
'
representatives, the inspector' determined that the licensee followed the
.;
. appropriate procedures, had a good understanding of the environmental l
monitoring program, and had implemented an excellent REMP.
,
4.3 Environmental Dosimetry Program Comparison b
The results of the' NRC TLD Direct Radiation Monitoring Network am
.
L published quarterly in NUREG-0837. This network provides continuous measurements of the ambient radiation levels around 72 nuclear power plant b
. sites thmughout the United States. Each site is monitored by approximately 30
to 50 TLD stations in two concentric rings extending to about five miles fmm
(y the nuclear power plant.
,
e a
F
.1
-
~p
]
g.
.
-
w
<
u
'
..
.
One purpose of this network is to provide a means of comparing the results of
- licensee direct radiation monitoring programs conducted around individual L
nuclear power plants with that of the nationwide NRC program. Therefore, several NRC TLDs are collocated with selected licensee TLD stations. The
' NRC employs the Panasonic Model UD-801 TLD that consists of two elements oflithium borate activated with copper and two elements of calcium sulfate F
activated with thulium. The two calcium sulfate elements are used to E
determine the environmental exposure level during normal operations. The licensee currently places two glass bulb type environmental TLDs at each
4
- specified monitoring location. The TLDs consist of calcium fluoride elements activated with manganese. Nine NRC TLDs (one at each collocated station)
I are collocated with licensee TLDs at the I!addam Neck site.
V~
' During this inspection, the inspector compared the monitoring results of the l
,
l collocated TLDs for 1992 and the first half of 1993. For both the NRC and i
the licensee,' the results are provided in Table 1 as the cet exposure i the random uncertainty expressed as one standard deviation. The licensee's results were generated averaging the monthly data over the quarter, calculating the associated standard deviation, and converting the results to a 90-day standard quarter.
t Table 1 also includes the NRC " historical average" data for each location as a basis for comparing the quarterly NRC results to those measured previously; these historical averages also provide a means of comparison with the licensee l
data. The historical averages shown here are the same as reported in
'
NUREG-0837, Vol.13, No. 2, for these collocated stations. The data begm in 1983 and include the data through the first quarter of 1993. The reported c
values are the mean i one standard deviation for all quarters for which net
'
data were available. The relatively small standard deviations for the historical
'
!?
averages indicate that the NRC results have remained consistent over the ten-
,
year period.
..
..
The licensee's quarterly results during 1992 were generally sightly lower than those of the NRC. This difference may be due to different dosimeter types,
'
different transit doses, differences in time of field exposure, and specific TLD i
location variations. With the above uncertainties and variabilities considered, the results of the two sets of TLDs are in good comparison.
The inspector noted that the licensee tracks, trends, and reviews the TLD results, including those of the NRC-collocated TLDs.
k
'
Based on the above review, the inspector determined that the licensee j
continued to maintain a very good environmental dosimetry program.
!
!
!
i
i
!
yn
~
-
R
,
]
g
i
~
-1'
.
~
.,
5.0 '
Ouality ' Assurance and Ouality Control for Analytical Measurements
,
The inspector reviewed the licensee's quality assurance (QA) and quality control (QC)
.
programs to determine whether the licensee had adequate control of sampling, i
,
i
- analyzing, and evaluating data'for the implementation of the REMP.
,
The quality contml pmgram for the analysis _of environmental samples included split
/'
and spike samples, and was conducted by POSL. Split and spike samples were
.,
prepared by POSL and provided to the primary contractor for analysis; ' split samples were also sent to the QC contractor laboratory, Yankee Atomic Envimnmental L
. Laboratory. The results were generally in agreement with the known values, with g
some exceptions. Reasons for the disagreements wem investigated and in most cases
F
' wem msolved. One case which the licensee continued to examine were disagreements r
..of the primary contractor's analysis for gmss-beta activity on spiked air paniculate
!
i
- filters. The msults continued to exhibit a negative bias relative to the spiked value.
!
- The licensee intended to investigate.the spiking technique, and the calibration technique of the primary contractor laboratory. Spiked air paniculate filters will also i
.
.. be submitted to the QC contractor for analysis and comparison. The licensee i
continued to develop an in-house analytical capability to check the filters prior to
- sending them to the contractors. The licensee also intended to send filters to the
- Haddam Neck chemistry depanment for analysis. The licensee intended to closely
-
track this case and the results will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection. The
~
inspector noted that the results of tl e milk samples spiked with strontium-89 have
impmved since the primary; contractor intmduced a different analytical method. The licensee continued to monitor these results closely.
The inspector noted that both laboratories panicipated in the EPA cross-check
[
pmgram, required by Technical Specifications, and conducted internal QC prugmms;
$
the msults of each of the pmgrams were in agreement, with few e.xceptions.
t l
The inspector noted that the lic_ensee continued to maintain an effective quality i
assurance program to ensure that the REMP sample results were thoroughly reviewed.
s Results that appear suspect were recounted and reviewed.
x Based on the above reviews and discussions with the licensee, the inspector
detemtined that the licensee had excellent QA and QC programs.
,
!
6.0; Meteorological hfonitoring Procram afMP)
,
The inspector reviewed the licensee's MMP to determine whether the instrumentation j
!
- and equipment were operable, calibrated, and maintained. Members of the POSL conducted surveillances, calibrations, and maintenance of the meteorological
,
instmmentation and equipment at the main and backup towers. Calibrations were
performed quanerly, more frequent than the semi-annual technical Specification
!
requirement. The inspector reviewed the most recent calibration results and noted j
,;
l i
+,
.,.,
-
-
- - ----
-
,
.
,..
.
s
'
- ..
'~
_ that the calibrations were performed as scheduled and the results were within the
.,
. licensee's defined acceptance criteria. The inspector compared the wind speed, wind direction, and delta temperature outputs of the main and backup towers to the outputs-in the control room. The results were in good agreement.
Based on the above inspector observations, record review and discussions with the licensee representatives, the inspector determined that the licensee continued to implement an excellent MMP.
..
. 7.0 Exit Interview
..
The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in Section 1.1 of this
.
inspection report at the conclusion of ti.e inspection on September 30,1993. The inspector summarized the purpose, scope, and findings of the inspection. The licensee acknowledged the inspection findings.
K
-
F-
!:
e
?
.
o
'_
E-IA -
-.
._
-
_
-. _
.
_3
,
--,.--
.,.
.
,. -
m
-
.- -
.-:,..
,,.
-
-
_
,
_
,
,
,
-
,
.-
,
7. r;
/..
w
'
Td>1e 1 -
<
, EnvironmentalTLD Alonitoring Results (mR/ quarter) for 1992 and first half 1993*
Comparisonof NRC TLDs Collocated with Haddam NeckTLDs g1 g
-
1st quarter -
2nd cuam 3ni auerter
4th unarter ~
Ist euerter
' 2nd quarter ILRC Averere**
NRC 4 18.310.8.-
20.1 t 0.8 173 i 0.7 19.510.8 j 17.4 i 0.7 19.1 i 0.7 17.6 i 1.6 HN 43 16.610.2-16.7 i 0.5
'17310.5 16.710.6--
15.610.9'
17.1 i 0.8 NRC'7c 18.2 0.8.
'I8.310.7
.17.3 i 0.7 '
18.4 i 0.8.
'17.210.7.
17.9 i 0.7 17.5 i 1.9 f fN. ' 7 :
14.310.1 13.510.6
- 13.9 i 0.6 13.510.7:
' 13.6 i 0.6 -
13.7 i 0.7
- NRC12 17.910.8'
17.9 i 0.7 ~
17.1 i 0.7-
- I8.1 i O.8 -
16.5 i 0.6 17.8 i 0.7 17.1 i 1.5 IIN 3 14.7'i 0.5-
-14310.8 13.8 0.2
'13.810.5 13.310.4 14310.4-NRC22-18.010.8 17.I i 0.7
- 17.7 i 0.7 17.5 i 0.8 16.6 i 0.6 17.8 0.7 16.7 i 1.9 11N 8"
17.5 i 0.6 :
. 17.7 i 0.6 -
17.9 i 0.4'
17.4 i 0.8 15.9 i 0.7 17.9 i 0.7 NRC 24 14.710.7 17.110.7 N.C.
17.610.8 14.210.6-16 3 i 0.6 -
15.7 1.5 IIN 12 14.110.2'.
14.1 i 0.5 13.610.7 13.9 i 0.5 13.810.9 14.2 i 0.8-NRC 30 -
16.6 i 0.7 17.6 i 0.7 16.510.7 18.010.8-15.8 i 0.6 16.6 0.7 16.0 i 1.7 IIN 9 15.010.1 14.8 i 0.4 14.8 i 0.1.
14.5 0.4 13.8 0.8 14.8 i 0.5 NRC 32.
'19.010.8.-
20.010.8 19.2 i 0.8 20.2 i 0.9 19.0 i 0.7.
18.9 i 0.7 19.011.7 IIN 10 17.7 i 0.4 17.810.5 17.610.4 18.0 103 17.6 i 1.1 17.7 i 0.5 NRC 35 16.510.7 19.010.7..
17.210.7 18.9 0.8 15.1 i 0.6 17.5 i 0.7 16.7 2. 1.7 IIN 14 17.7 i 0.3 17.9 i 0 3 18.0 i 0.5 17.411.0 16.2 i 1.5 18.5 i 0.9
.1 NRC 40 17.4 i 0.8 18.2 i 0.7 16.7 i 0.7 I8.210.8 16.2 i 0.6 17.2 i 0.7
_18.1 t 1.4 ilN 11 18.4103 17.9 i 0.6-18.2 i 0.2 17.6 i 0.6 16.6 i 1.0 17.9 i 0.9 All data are shown as the net result i i standard deviation for the random uncertainties.
- All net resuhs are in milliroectgens (mR) and are normalized to a 90-day quarter.'
- NRC historical average from 1983 (1st quarter) through 1993 (1st qusrter).-
NC = no comparison because data are not available (due to missing or damaged TLD)
!
.
.
O
~?
.
,
'
i
,