IR 05000213/2006001
| ML061980469 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/14/2006 |
| From: | Mark Miller Decommissioning Branch I |
| To: | Norton W Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co |
| References | |
| IR-06-001 | |
| Download: ML061980469 (19) | |
Text
UNITED STATES uly 14, 2006
SUBJECT:
INSPECTION 05000213/2006001, CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY, EAST HAMPTON, CONNECTICUT SITE
Dear Mr. Norton:
The NRC has completed an inspection at your East Hampton, CT facility, which covered an inspection period that began on January 27, 2006, and concluded on June 15, 2006. The findings of the inspection were discussed with you and members of your staff upon the conclusion of our on site inspections on February 16, March 16, April 27, and May 11, and during a telephone conversation on July 10, 2006. The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.
Your independent spent fuel storage facility, quality assurance and corrective action, safety review, maintenance and surveillance, decommissioning activities, occupational exposure controls, radiological environmental monitoring, radioactive effluent controls, and solid radioactive waste treatment and transportation programs were inspected during this inspection period. The inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, observations made by the inspector, and independent direct radiation measurements made by the inspector. The inspection also included a review of prior transportation activities related to Temporary Instruction 2515/161, Treatment of Reactor Control Rod Drives in Type A Packages.
Within the scope of this inspection, no violations were identified. We determined that you maintained an effective program for decommissioning the site.
In accordance with Section 2.390 of the NRCs Rules and Practices, Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) and will be accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/NRC/ADAMS/index.html. No reply to this letter is required.
Sincerely,
/RA George Pangburn for MMiller/
Marie Miller, Chief Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Enclosure:
NRC Region I Inspection Report No. 05000213/2006001 cc w/encl:
K. Heider, Vice President M. Thomas, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer T. Smith, Executive Director of Business Operations R. Hoak, Decommissioning Manager M. Marston, Director, Project Support/Environmental Compliance Officer G. Van Noordennen, Director, Nuclear Safety/Regulatory Affairs (acting)
K. Smith, Communications Manager G. Garfield, General Council R. Bassilakis, Citizens Awareness Network J. Brooks, CT Attorney General Office T. Bondi, Town of Haddam E. Woollacott, NEAC H. Curley, CDAC State of Connecticut
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Connecticut Yankee
NRC Inspection Report No. 05000213/2006001 This integrated inspection includes aspects of decommissioning activities regarding dismantlement and decommissioning of the facility. The report covers a five-month period of announced safety inspections conducted by one regional inspector and contractor assistance provided by the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) Environmental Survey and Site Assessment Program (ESSAP). The report covers reviews and assessments of the the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) programs and of decommissioning operations related to the changes in organization, quality assurance and corrective action program, safety reviews, maintenance and surveillance program, decommissioning performance and status of activities, and plant support, including the radiation protection program, radiological environmental monitoring and radioactive effluent controls programs, and the solid radioactive waste treatment and transportation programs. The inspection also included a review of prior transportation activities related to Temporary Instruction 2515/161,
Treatment of Reactor Control Rod Drives in Type A Packages.
Facilities and Management Control The licensees organization and management was adequate to support ongoing decommissioning activities, and provide appropriate oversight of decommissioning activities.
The licensees safety review program for design changes and modifications was effectively conducted, managed, and controlled. The licensee conducted adequate safety reviews prior to major deconstruction activities and recent decommissioning activities did not involve an unreviewed safety question.
The licensee maintained an adequate audit program and corrective action program to identify and resolve issues. The audit report regarding the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) programs was thorough and sufficiently detailed to identify strengths and improvement areas.
The licensee maintained an effective radiological controls program regarding ISFSI operations.
Radiation dose and contamination levels were within the prescribed limits of the licensees procedures.
The licensee maintained an adequate maintenance and surveillance program for the safe operation of radiation monitoring and effluent control equipment and remaining equipment important to decommissioning activities.
Plant Support The licensee generally maintained an effective radiation control program to control and limit occupational radiation exposures.
ii
The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the Radioactive Effluent Control Program (RECP) and the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) in accordance with the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (REMODCM)requirements.
Decommissioning Performance and Status Reviews The licensee conducted decommissioning activities in accordance with the approved License Termination Plan (LTP) requirements.
The licensee effectively implemented sampling procedures and protocols to support the final status survey program.
Radioactive Waste Management The licensee effectively implemented the solid radioactive waste management and transportation programs.
Connecticut Yankee has been shutdown since 1996 and completed de-fueling activities in 2001. The inspector determined that (1) the licensee did not conduct refueling/de-fueling activities and (2) the licensee did not package and transport irradiated Control Rod Drive (CRD)mechanisms in DOT Specification 7A Type A packages during calendar year 2002 to present.
iii
REPORT DETAILS
1.0 Facilities and Management Control 1.1 Organization, Management, and Cost Controls
a. Inspection Scope
(Inspection Procedure (IP) 36801)
The scope of this inspection area was to evaluate recent decommissioning organization changes to determine the effectiveness of the Connecticut Yankee (CY) management oversight on waste management and overall decommissioning activities. The inspector assessed the effectiveness of management oversight through observations in the field, attendance at staffing meetings, and interviews with management and staff.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
During this inspection period, the inspector reviewed significant organization changes.
Effective February 13, 2006, the Director of Site Closure and Project Support was assigned to Yankee Rowe. The responsibilities of the Director of Site Closure and Project Support were assumed by the Manager of Regulatory Affairs, who will also maintain the role and responsibilities of Manager of Regulatory Affairs. In May 2006, the position of Director of Decommissioning was eliminated and the Waste Management organization was moved under the Executive Director of Business Operations. The inspector will review the effectiveness of this organization change during subsequent inspections.
c. Conclusion The licensees organization and management was adequate to support ongoing decommissioning activities, and provide appropriate oversight of decommissioning activities.
1.2 Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 37801)
The scope of this inspection area was to verify whether the licensees safety review program regarding dismantlement and demolition of components and structures was effectively conducted, managed, and controlled. The inspection scope included a verification of the program to determine whether the demolition activities involved unreviewed safety questions. The inspector reviewed the Haddam Neck Plant 10 CFR 50.59 Summary Report, dated January 19, 2006, and selected Work Plan and Inspection Records (WP&IRs) for the removal of systems and components from the Spent Fuel Building (SFB) and conducting characterization surveys, transfer tube radiation surveys, and concrete coring inside the containment structure. The structures and components reviewed were the Tubular Ultra Filtration (TUF) System (a filtration system that was temporarily installed to filter the spent fuel pool, prior to draining),ventilation ducts, floor drains, pumps and associated systems, the north wall of the spent fuel building, the north wall of the pool, and the spent fuel pool liner.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The licensee had not generated any 10 CFR 50.59 Safety Evaluation reports during the period of January-December 2005. The inspector verified that the licensees WP&IRs for the removal of systems and components from the SFB and for conducting radiological surveys of the transfer tube in containment did not involve an unreviewed safety question. The inspector also noted that the licensee incorporated physical safety reviews into the WP&IRs and reviewed the major deconstruction activities and safety concerns with workers prior to task implementation.
c. Conclusion The licensees safety review program for design changes and modifications was effectively conducted, managed, and controlled. The licensee conducted adequate safety reviews prior to major deconstruction activities and recent decommissioning activities did not involve an unreviewed safety question.
1.3 Self-Assessments, Auditing, and Corrective Action
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 40801)
The scope of this inspection area included an evaluation of the licensees Quality Assurance (QA) Program and the Corrective Action Program (CAP). The evaluation was to determine the licensees ability to identify, resolve, and prevent the recurrence of conditions and issues that degrade safety or the quality of decommissioning activities.
The inspection included a review of the most recent Quality Assurance Audit Report and selected condition reports (CRs) from January - May 2006. The CRs were selected randomly and by potential safety significance. The inspector evaluated the CRs based on the nature of the issue and the licensees ability to correctly characterize, disposition, and complete corrective actions.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The inspector reviewed Quality Assurance Audit CY-06-A02-01, dated April 24, 2006.
The audit scope was to review the programs regarding the operation of the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI). The audit included eleven inspection areas and resulted in no findings, eight deficiencies, two observations, and one strength. The auditors conducted a detailed and thorough review of the ISFSI programs, and where deficiencies were noted, condition reports were generated. The deficiencies were not safety related and were corrected by the ISFSI staff in a timely manner.
The inspector reviewed CR-06-0043, 700 paging system, to determine the licensees requirements to notify employees of an emergency. On February 7, 2006, the licensees plant paging system (700 paging system) was permanently disabled, as part of the licensees plan to maintain the decommissioning and dismantlement schedule.
Managers communicated implementation during a Supervisor Safety Meeting on the same day. Because all of the supervisors were not in attendance at the meeting, the communication was not completely conveyed. The inspector reviewed the emergency procedures and the Integrated Response Plan. The inspector noted that these procedures had been updated prior to de-energizing the plant paging system, and directed individuals to contact the Shift ISFSI Supervisor via phone or radio. In addition, radios were provided to supervisors and managers in the field, who would not have had access to the phones. The inspector determined that the plant paging system had been disconnected in a planned manner that provided adequate notice that the system was being de-energized and that an appropriate alternate communication capability was in place for emergency or first aid notifications.
In February 2006, the licensee discovered buried drums onsite that contained turbine blades with fixed radioactive contamination. The discovery was made during a scheduled excavation of the septic system located in the leach field in Survey Unit 9520-0002. The licensee generated CR 06-0066, Identification of Materials under 10 CFR 50.75(g)(1), and CR-06-0069, Crushed Drum and Parts of Other Drums found on South Peninsula. During this inspection period, the inspector noted that the licensee was conducting an investigation to identify the turbine blade type and determine when the blades were buried. In addition, the licensee expanded the investigation to include electromagnetic surveys to search for any metal material on the peninsula. The inspector noted that the licensee had identified a barrel with oily rags and a barrel with slightly contaminated material. Because the licensees investigation remains open, the inspector will review this issue during the next inspection period.
c. Conclusions
The licensee maintained an adequate audit program and CAP to identify and resolve issues. The audit report regarding the ISFSI programs was thorough and sufficiently detailed to identify strengths and improvement areas.
1.4 Operation of ISFSI
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 60855)
The scope of inspection area was to review the radiological controls on ISFSI operations. The inspector evaluated the effectiveness of the licensees plans and preparations for controlling radiological activities, by reviewing documents and interviewing selected individuals. Specific areas included, As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) reviews, Radiation Work Permits (RWPs), contamination, exposure, and airborne controls. The inspector reviewed ISFSI RWP, maintenance and surveillance records, cold weather operations records, and temperature logs to determine whether radiation dose and contamination levels were within the prescribed limits of the licensee procedures.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The inspector reviewed the RWP related to controlling radiological activities at the ISFSI. The inspector noted that the RWP was current and incorporated the necessary ALARA reviews regarding exposure and airborne controls. The inspector also reviewed the routine maintenance and surveillance records, cold weather operations records, and temperature logs from January through March 2006. The licensee implemented these activities according to the associated procedures. Maintenance and surveillances were conducted within the required frequencies and the results were within the prescribed acceptance criteria.
c. Conclusions
The licensee maintained an effective radiological controls program regarding ISFSI operations. Radiation dose and contamination levels were within the prescribed limits of the licensees procedures.
1.5 Maintenance and Surveillance
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 62801)
The scope of this inspection area consisted of an evaluation of the licensees Preventive Maintenance (PM) and Routine Surveillance Programs to verify the operation of radiation monitoring and effluent control equipment. The inspector reviewed the maintenance and surveillance procedures and inspection records for January through March 2006 for the effluent tank system, truck monitor, containment alternate ventilation system, and cold weather preparations for equipment related to safe operation of effluent monitoring and ventilation equipment, and the remaining equipment important to decommissioning activities.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
Preventive maintenance and routine surveillances were performed within frequencies specified in the procedures and results were within the acceptance criteria. Responsible staff were knowledgeable and generally maintained equipment according to procedures.
c. Conclusions
The licensee maintained an adequate maintenance and surveillance program for the safe operation of radiation monitoring and effluent control equipment and remaining equipment important to decommissioning activities.
2.0 Plant Support 2.1 Occupational Radiation Exposure
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 83750)
The scope of this inspection area included observations of radiation worker practices and radiological postings and boundaries. The inspector reviewed the licensees response following the self-identification of a small article being passed across an Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) boundary without a radiological survey and subsequent self-identification of three tools with fixed radioactive contamination outside the RCA. The inspector conducted field observations of Radiation Protection (RP)technicians performing radiological surveys of the systems and components in the SFB, the transfer tube in containment, the east trench, and selected areas on the peninsula.
The inspector reviewed the calibration and source check results for randomly selected survey instrumentation and portable air monitors.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
Overall, the RP program conducted adequate radiation protection surveys. However, on May 18, 2006, an RP technician observed a contract maintenance individual passing a small article, destined for the maintenance truck, across an RCA boundary without first requesting a radiological survey. The RP technician surveyed the item and determined that the item was not contaminated. The licensee then began to survey every tool and article in the maintenance truck. On May 23, 2006, upon completion of the survey, the licensee identified that three tools with low levels of fixed contamination were in the truck and that the truck was allowed to leave the site (for example, at the end of the day or at lunch) because the truck had not entered the RCA. On May 24, 2006, the licensee notified the NRC of an inadvertent release of radioactively contaminated material. Also, the licensee conducted a survey of the maintenance workers garage and home and detected no contamination. While the inspector observed generally good control of equipment and material exiting the RCA, the inspector noted that the licensee is continuing to evaluate the extent of condition regarding RCA boundary controls. The licensee is tracking this issue under their CAP. Because the licensees investigation remains open, the inspector will review this issue during the next inspection period. The calibration and source check results were within the acceptance criteria. Radiation worker practices were appropriate in contaminated areas. For example, radiation workers wore the appropriate protective clothing and lapel air samplers, and followed the RWP requirements.
c. Conclusions
The licensee generally maintained an effective radiation control program to control and limit occupational radiation exposures.
2.2 Radioactive Effluent Control Program (RECP) and Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 84750)
The scope of this inspection area included an evaluation of the RECP and the REMP.
The evaluation also included a review of the Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report for 2005, the Annual Environmental Monitoring Operating Report for 2005, and the associated analytical results for each program from January through April 2006.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The licensee completed the radioactive liquid effluent release permits and set the effluent radiation monitor alarm set-points according to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) and procedures. The calibration results for the liquid effluent radiation monitor were within the acceptance criteria. Sampling and analyses were conducted according to procedures. Discharge permits contained the appropriate information for the radioactive effluent discharges. The inspector reviewed the REMP and verified that the licensee collected and analyzed the samples within required frequencies, sample collection was conducted in accordance with REMP procedures, and the analytical results met the lower limits of detection.
c. Conclusions
The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the RECP and the REMP in accordance with the REMODCM requirements.
3.0 Decommissioning Performance and Status Reviews 3.1 Decommissioning Performance
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 71801)
The scope of this inspection area included site tours and discussions with the licensee to evaluate the status of decommissioning activities and to verify whether the licensee was conducting decommissioning activities in accordance with the License Termination Plan (LTP).
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The licensee surveyed and demolished most of the containment building, including most of the liner. Prior to demolition of the containment building the licensee collected and analyzed concrete core samples. The results were used to calculate Derived Concentration Guideline Levels (DCGLs) for the basement fill model, in compliance with the LTP. The licensee drained the spent fuel pool, surveyed and removed the liner, and demolished the north wall of the Spent Fuel Building. The licensee also collected concrete cores for basement fill model calculations. The inspector will review the results of the concrete cores when the results are available. The licensee demolished the yard crane and the cable vault and is shipping the debris from both structures to an approved waste facility, based on the radiation survey results. The licensee surveyed areas on the peninsula. The licensee removed underground utilities, the septic tank system, and the well pump houses. The licensee conducted remediation activities in these areas, as required.
c. Conclusions
The licensee conducted decommissioning activities in accordance with the approved LTP requirements.
3.2 Inspection of Final Status Surveys (FSS)
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 83801)
The inspector conducted an evaluation of survey units where the licensee had completed FSS, and observed the licensee collect sediment samples in survey units in the discharge canal where FSS had not yet been finalized. The inspector also reviewed the licensees chain of custody and sample storage areas for adequacy of procedure implementation and sample preservation.
The inspector and the NRCs contractor, Oak Ridge Institute of Science and Education (ORISE) performed independent confirmatory surveys of the East Mountain Side. The survey units were 9527-0001 through 9527-0004. The survey was performed on April 25 and 26, 2006. The inspector and ORISE reviewed the licensees sample plans, FSS Release Records, which included survey results. The ORISE surveys were performed in accordance with ORISE Survey Procedures and Quality Assurance Manuals. The surveys included gamma surface scans over 60-75% of accessible ground areas. Soil samples were collected from six biased locations within survey units 9527-0001 and 0527-0002, and five biased locations within the remaining survey units.
The inspector discussed the status of the surveys on the discharge canal and observed the licensees contractor collect a sediment sample from survey unit 9106-0003 (sample identification number 16) on April 26, 2006. The inspector also discussed the procedure with the contractor to determine the contractors extent of knowledge. The inspector reviewed the associated FFS Plan, dated April 24, 2006, to assess the adequacy of the sampling instructions.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
ORISE conducted surface gamma scans and collected soil samples in all four survey units. The soil samples were forwarded to the ORISE analytical laboratory. The results of the gamma scans and soil samples will be documented in the next inspection report.
The licensee was re-characterizing Survey Units (SU) 9106-0001 and 9106-0002 of the discharge canal. The initial characterization was incomplete because rip-rap, a rock material used for erosion control along the sides of the canal, made sampling difficult.
The licensee had recently removed, cleaned, and surveyed the rip-rap for possible future fill material. The licensees contractor was also in the process of collecting sediment samples from SU 9106-0003 in the discharge canal. The inspector noted that the contractor used and maintained the appropriate sampling equipment, was knowledgeable of field sample collection techniques, and the chain of custody was implemented according to procedure. The inspector noted that the samples were collected according to the contractors protocol, which was incorporated into the licensees FFS Plan, dated April 24, 2006. The inspector will review the sampling results when they become available and then sample number 16 will be forwarded to ORISE for independent analysis. The results will be compared and documented in the next inspection report.
The inspector noted that previously analyzed soil and sediment samples were stored in plastic bags and that some of the bags were torn. The contents of these samples were spilling out onto the shelves. This matter was discussed with the licensee and the licensee stated that this issue would be corrected. The inspector will re-examine this issue during the next inspection period.
c. Conclusions
The licensee effectively implemented sampling procedures and protocols to support the final status survey program.
4.0 Radioactive Waste Management 4.1 Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation
a. Inspection Scope
(IP 86750)
The scope of this inspection area included an evaluation of the Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation programs to determine whether the licensee properly processed, packaged, stored, and shipped radioactive materials. The inspector reviewed selected Low Specific Activity radioactive waste shipments from January through May 2006, including dry active waste and low-level radioactive demolition debris. The inspector observed the licensee conduct surveys and prepare shipments for transport.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
The selected radioactive waste shipment records included completed copies of Characterization Reports, Waste Manifest Shipping papers, Emergency Response Information, Survey Record Forms, and other documentation, such as shipment inspection plans and truck inspection records. The licensee met the applicable radiation protection and transportation requirements for the shipments reviewed.
c. Conclusions
The licensee effectively implemented the solid radioactive waste management and transportation programs.
4.2 Transportation of Reactor Control Rod Drives in Type A Packages
a. Inspection Scope
(Temporary Instruction (TI) 2515/161)
The scope of this inspection area was to obtain site specific data to determine if:
- (1) the licensee has/had undergone refueling/de-fueling activities during calendar year 2002 to present and
- (2) the licensee packaged and transported irradiated Control Rod Drive (CRD) mechanisms in DOT Specification 7A Type A packages.
The inspector reviewed the records for the licensees last shipments of any components related to CRD mechanisms. The shipment packages reviewed were 2001-97, 2001-124, 2001-125, 2001-137, 2001-136, dated April 10, 2001; May 31, 2001; May 31, 2001; June 27, 2001; and June 27, 2001, respectively.
b. Observations and Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
c. Conclusions
Connecticut Yankee has been shutdown since 1996 and completed de-fueling activities in 2001. The inspector determined that
- (1) the licensee did not conduct refueling/
de-fueling activities and
- (2) the licensee did not package and transport irradiated CRD mechanisms in DOT Specification 7A Type A packages during calendar year 2002 to present.
5.0 Exit Meeting The inspectors presented the inspection results to representatives of the licensees staff at the conclusion of onsite inspections on February 16, March 16, April 27, and May 11, 2006. On July 10, 2006, a summary of the inspection findings for the entire inspection period was presented to the licensee. Licensee representatives acknowledged the inspection findings. Although proprietary items were reviewed during the inspection, no proprietary information is presented in this report.
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
Licensee
- J. Arnold, Staff Assistant, Regulatory Affairs
- A. Barry, Nuclear Safety Engineer, Quality Assurance, Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Affairs
- S. Berger, Technical Support, Duratek
- P. Clark, Regulatory Affairs Engineer, Regulatory Affairs
- J. Fan, Manager, Project Support, Project Support and Engineering
- R. Haight, Waste Management Coordinator, Waste Management, Decommissioning
- R. Hoak, Decommissioning Manager
- R. Joshi, Regulatory Affairs Engineer, Regulatory Affairs
- M. Marston, Director, Project Support and Engineering
- J. McCarthy, Engineer, Site Closure, Project Support and Engineering
- R. McGrath, Site Closure, Technical Support Manager
- R. Mitchell, Manager, Operations/Maintenance/ISFSI
- C. Newsome, Engineer, Site Closure, Project Support and Engineering
- R. Porter, Waste Management Supervisor, Waste Management, Decommissioning
- T. Smith, Executive Director of Business Operations
- C. Young, Waste Management Engineer, Waste Management, Decommissioning
- G. vanNoordennen, Manager, Regulatory Affairs
State of Connecticut
- These individuals participated in the exit briefing held on July 10, 2006.
INSPECTION PROCEDURES AND TEMPORARY INSTRUCTION (TI) USED
36801 Organization, Management, and Cost Controls
37801 Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications
40801 Self-Assessment, auditing and Corrective Action
60855 Operation of Independent Spent Fuel Storage Facility (ISFSI)
2801 Maintenance and Surveillance
71801 Decommissioning Performance and Status Reviews
83750 Occupational Radiation Exposure
83801 Inspection of Final Status Surveys
84750 Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring
86750 Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation of Radioactive Materials
TI 2515/161 Transportation of Reactor Control Rod Drives in Type A Packages
ITEMS OPEN, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Items Opened:
None
Items Closed:
None
Items Discussed:
None
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED
ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable
CAP Corrective Action Program
CR Condition Reports
CRD Control Rod Drive
CY Connecticut Yankee
CYAPCO Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company
DCGL Derived Concentration Guideline Levels
ESSAP Environmental Survey and Site Assessment Program
FSS Final Status Survey
IP Inspection Procedure
ISFSI Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation
LTP License Termination Plan
ODCM Offsite Dose Calculation Manual
ORISE Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education
PM Preventive Maintenance
QAP Quality Assurance Program
RECP Radioactive Effluent Control Program
REMODCM Radiological Environmental Monitoring Offsite Dose Calculation Manual
REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program
RCA Radiologically Controlled Area
RP Radiation Protection
RWP Radiation Work Permit
SFB Spent Fuel Building
SU Survey Unit
TI Temporary Instruction
TUF Tubular Ultra Filtration
WP&IRs Work Plan and Inspection Records
Attachment