IR 05000261/1988009
| ML14191A929 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Robinson  |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1988 |
| From: | Kahle J, Marston R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML14191A928 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-261-88-09, 50-261-88-9, BS, NUDOCS 8806060274 | |
| Download: ML14191A929 (10) | |
Text
pa REG4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTA STREET, ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30323 Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light Company P. 0. Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Docket No.:
50-261 License No.:
DPR-23 Facility Name:
H. B. Robinson Inspection Conducted:
May 2-6, 1988 Inspecter:
-R. Marston Dat Si ned Approved by:
.
J. B. ahle, Section Chief Da, e Sfgned Divison of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY
.
Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of liquid and gaseous radwaste processing and effluent Results:
No violations or deviations were identifie PER ADCK 05C)00261 1-1 DCD
REPORT DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- D. Barr, Quality Assurance Supervisor B. Christensen, Environmental Chemistry Foreman
- J. Carley, Director, Regulatory Compliance J. Eddy, Supervisor, Environmental & Chemistry
- S. Griggs, Aide-Regulatory Compliance
- J. Harrison, Project Specialist, Environmental & Chemistry
- F. Lowery, Manager-Operations-Nuclear
- R. Morgan, General Manager Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, security force members, and office personne NRC Resident Inspectors
- R. Latta, RI
- Attended exit interview 2. Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on May 6, 1988, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio. Audits (80721, 84723, 84724, 84725)
Technical Specification 6.5.3.2.d requires audits of plant activities including the conformance of facility operation to all provisions contained within the Technical Specifications and applicable license conditions at least once per twelve months, the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and the results thereof at least once per 12 months, the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (00CM) and implementing.procedures at least once per 24 months, the Process Control Program (PCP)
and implementing procedures at least once per 24 months, and the performance of activities required by the Quality Assurance Program to meet the
criteria of Regulatory Guide 4.15, December 1977 at least once per 12 month The inspector reviewed Audit QAA/0020-88-02, Environmental and Radiation Control (E&RC)
Program, conducted February 29 to March 9, 1988, by the CP&L Quality Assurance Department Areas covered in this audit include: Environmental and effluent monitoring; b. ALARA; Radiation respiratory protection; Process control; Chemistry; and f. Post Accident Sampling Syste No nonconformances were identified in this audi Status of nonconformance identified in previous audits was also discussed in this repor Plant QA/QC personnel also conducted surveillance of the program The surveillance included:
o QASR-87-012, Chemistry, conducted February 2-12, 198 Noted that chemistry determinations were done in accordance with procedure o QASR 87-018, Radiochemistry, conducted during February 198 Consisted of observation of personnel performing radiochemical analyses, using counting equipment, performing calibrations and performance checks, and performing data analysis, closed previously opened item o QASR 87-053, Environmental Monitoring, conducted during June 198 Scope covered air flommeter calibration, air samples calibration, calibration source traceability, environmental emergency kit inventory, sample collection and data storage, and land use census conducted on May 7, 198 o QASR 87-058, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, conducted July 198 Scope covered:
review of ODCM against Technical Specification requirements, review of equations used for effluent monitor setpoints, 10 CFR 50 doses, release calculations and projected doses, and compared RETS software with hard calculations using ODCM methodolog o QASR 87-072, Radiation Monitoring System, conducted during August 1987. This audit covered implementation of procedures requiring calibrations and source checks of radiation monitor The audits appeared to have been thorough and conducted in depth and that the Quality Assurance program was effectively implemente No violations or deviations were identifie *
5. Procedures (80721, 84723, 84724)
Technical Specification 6.5.1.1.1 requires that written procedures be established, implemented, and maintained covering in part:
o The applicable procedures recommended in Appendix "A" of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Rev. 2, February 1978; o
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program implementing procedures; o
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual implementing procedures; o
Process Control Program implementing procedure; and o
Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environmental monitorin The inspector reviewed a section of procedures which had been revised since the last inspection (Region II Report 50-261/87-21).
Procedures were reviewed in the areas of o
Radiochemistry (RCP);
o Environmental & Radiation Control (ERC);
o Chemistry Procedures.(CP);
Environmental Monitoring Procedures (EMP); and a
Engineering Surveillance Test Procedure (EST).
The procedures were written and maintained as part of the Plant Operating Manua No violations or deviations were identifie.
Radioactive Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Monitoring Instrumentation (84723, 84724, 84725)
Technical Specification 3.5.2, 3.5.3, and Technical Specification Tables 3.5-6 and 3.5-7 define the operating requirements for radioactive effluent monitoring and sampling of plant liquid and gaseous effluent stream Additionally, Technical Specifications 4.19.1, 4.19.2, and Technical Specification Tables 4.19-1 and 4.19-2 define requirements for liquid and gaseous effluent instrumentatio The inspector reviewed completed surveillance procedures and determined that the liquid and gaseous effluent monitors were calibrated at required intervals. The inspector also reviewed records of the monthly functional checks performed on the effluent monitor The inspector toured the Chemistry Laboratory and the Radio-chemistry count room. The Chemistry Laboratory was roomy and was divided into three bays with several workstations in each. The bays designated were for work with primary coolant, secondary coolant, and clean or environmental
- sample The count room was also clean and roomy and was equipped with three HPGe gamma spectroscopic detectors, two Tennelec LB 1000 proportional, counters, and one Packard TC 460C liquid scintillation syste The inspector reviewed calibration and functional test records for the count room systems and determined that required calibrations and checks had been done as specified in appropriate Radiochemistry Procedures. The inspector also reviewed the current Control Charts maintained for each syste The inspector also reviewed the RETS Notebook maintained in the count room. This book displayed the Radiochemistry surveillance requirements and frequencie No violations or deviations were identifie. Air Cleaning Systems (84724)
Technical Specification 3.15 defines requirements for operability of the control room filter system, which incorporates both HEPA filters and a charcoal absorber ban Technical Specification 4.15 specifies verification tests for the Control Room filter syste The inspector discussed the testing program with licensee representatives and reviewed appropriate Engineering Surveillance Test Procedure Licensee representatives stated that the only filter system tested since the previous inspection in this area (Region II Report 50-261/87-21)
was the Control Room Emergency Ventilation System, tested under EST-02 The inspector reviewed completed data sheets which showed that in-place filter and absorber testing had been completed in July 1987, and a methyl iodide retention lab test of the charcoal had been conducted in March 1988, and that required retention efficiencies had been me No violations or deviations were identifie.
Liquid Radwaste Effluents (84723)
Technical Specifications 3.9.1,.3.9.2, 3.16.1, and 3.16.2 define the operating requirements and radioactive effluent limits of the liquid radwaste treatment syste Technical Specification 4.10.1, 4.10.5 and Table 4.10-1 define the surveillance requirements for the syste The inspector discussed the system and processes with licensee representatives, and inspected the liquid radwaste processing components and effluent monitors during a tour of the plan The inspector also reviewed a selection of liquid radwaste release permits for the period from February 9 through April 1, 198 The permits appeared to be in compliance with Procedure EMP-023 and Technical Specification limit No violations or deviations were identifie. Gaseous Radwaste Effluents (84724)
Technical Specification 3.9.3, 3.9.4, 3.9.5, 3.16.3, 3.16.4, and 3.1 define the operating requirements and radioactive effluent limits of the gaseous radwaste treatment systems, including ventilation system Technical Specifications 4.10.2, 4.10.3, 4.10.4, 4.10.5, and Table 4.1 define the surveillance requirements for the syste The inspector discussed the systems and processes with licensee representatives, and inspected the gaseous radwaste processing components and effluent monitors during a tour of the plan The inspector also reviewed a selection of gaseous radwaste release permits for the period from August 12, 1987, through April 5, 1988. The permits appeared to be in compliance with Procedure EMP-022 and Technical Specification limit No violations or deviations were identifie.
Semiannual Effluent Report (84723, 84724)
Technical Specification 6.9.1.d requires the licensee to submit within January 1 and July 1 of each year, routine Radioactive Effluent Release Reports covering the operation of the unit during the previous six months of operatio The reports shall include a summary of the quantities of radioactive materials released from the unit as outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.21. Additionally, the reports that are submitted 60 days after January 1 of each year shall include an assessment of radiation doses due to the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent released from the station during the previous calendar yea The inspector reviewed the Semiannual Radiological Effluent Release Report for the period July 1 -
December 31, 198 The review included an examination of their liquid and gaseous effluent release data as well as dose estimate data. Selected data from this report and previous reports are presented in Attachment 1. The inspector noted that the quantities of radionuclides released in both liquid and gaseous form had increased over those released in 1986. The report indicated that an increased number of power transients occurred in the third quarter, resulting in greater effluent The report was transmitted within 60 days after the end of the reporting period and includes the elements as specified in Reg. Guide 1.2 According to the report, all effluents were within NRC and Technical Specification limit.
Confirmatory Measurements (84725)
As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were sent on November 5, 1987, to the licensee's facility for selected radiochemical analysi Licensee analytical results were received by Region II and compared to known values as presented in Attachment 2. The -acceptance criteria for the comparison are listed in
Attachment 3. The results of this comparison were discussed with licensee representatives during the inspectio In our review of the data all comparative results were in agreemen No comparison was made for Strontium-89 due to the extended time period between makeup of the solution and receipt and analysis by the license No violations or deviations were identifie.
Sanitary Sewage Slude (84723)
The inspector discussed sampling and analysis of sewage sludge with licensee representatives. The licensee had last sampled the two sewage processing systems used by the plant in February 1988. Analysis showed no radioactivity in the liquid effluents and one sample of the sludg Low levels of a natural radioactivity (Radium-226)
were found in the other sample of sludg No violations or deviations were identifie ATTACHMENT 1 ROBINSON NUCLEAR STATION SEMIANNUAL EFFLUENT RELEASE SUMMARY 1985-1987 Year 1985 1986 1987 No. Abnormal Releases a. Liquid
0
b. Gaseous
0
Liquid Waste Released (gallons)
3.54E+6 6.10E+6 2.18E+7 Activity Released (Curies)
a. Liquid 1. Fission Activation 2.43E-1 2.01E-1 2.32E+1 Products 2. Tritium 3.09E+2 3.42E+2 2.74E+2 3. Gross Alpha
0
b. Gaseous 1. Noble Gas 2.72E+3 6.59E+2 7.70E+2 Halogens 1.50E-2 1.07E-2 2.15E-2 3. Tritium 8.85E+1 9.66 1.39E+1 4. Gross Alpha
0
Dose Estimate (mrem)
a. Liquid Whole-body 2.46-2 6.64E-2 1.11E-1 b. Gaseous 1. Whole-body 3.73E-1 1.69E-1 8.37E-2 2. Thyroid 1.93E-1 3.45E-1 5.37E-1
ATTACHMENT 2 CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT COMPARISONS OF H-3, Sr-89, Sr-90, and Fe-55 ANALYSES FOR H. B. ROBINSON NUCLEAR PLANT ON NOVEMBER 1987 - JANUARY 1988 Isotope (vCi/ml)
(PCi/ml)
Resolution (Licensee/NRC) Comparison H-3 1.81E-5 1.98+/-0.04E-5
0.91 Agreement Fe-55 1.18E-5 1.21+/-0.02E-5
0.98 Agreement Sr-89 4.54E-5 2.71+/-0.08E-5
1.68 No comparison*
Sr-90 1.92E-6 2.45+/-0.10E-6
.24 0.78 Agreement
- No comparison was made for the Sr-89 due to the extended time period between makeup and analysi ATTACHMENT 3 CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS This enclosure provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this progra In these criteria, the judgement limits denoting agreement or disagreement between licensee and NRC results are variable. This variability is a function of the NRC's value relative to its associated uncertainty, referred to in this program as "Resolution"'
increase, the range of acceptable difference between the NRC and licensee values should be more restrictiv Conversely, poorer agreement between NRC and licensee values must be considered acceptable as the resolution decrease For comparison purposes, a ratio2 of the licensee value to the NRC value for each individual nuclide is compute This ratio is then evaluated for agreement based on the calculated resolution. The corresponding resolution and calculated ratios which denote agreement are listed in Table 1 belo Values outside of the agreement ratios for a selected nuclide are considered in disagreemen 'Resolution
=
NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide Associated Uncertainty for the Value 2Comparison Ratio
=
Licensee Value NRC Reference Value TABLE 1 Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio Comparison Ratio for Resolution Agreement
<4 0.4 -.5 -.6 -
1.66 16 -
0.75 -
1.33 51 -
200 0.80 -
1.25
>200 0.85 -
1.18