IR 05000302/1993003
| ML20034F097 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1993 |
| From: | Decker T, Mcneil N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034F092 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-302-93-03, 50-302-93-3, NUDOCS 9303020271 | |
| Download: ML20034F097 (10) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:* i
DG -{ ' UNITED STATES
- o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COPAMISSION M
'
[ E.
. REGION 11 ' .$~ .j 101 M ARIETTA STREET, N.W.
- ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323
"?g A* o / FEB i 21993
, Report No.: 50-302/93-03 , Licensee: Florida Power. Corporation ! 3201 34th Street, South ' St. Petersburg, FL 33733 Docket No.: 50-302 License No.: DPR-72 Facility Name: Crystal River 3 Inspection Con ucted: January 11-15, 1993 Inspector: Ab feb.U, H % , ' N. G. Mcffe ' l l " Date Signed 4[N'!f3 Approved by: w T. R. Decker, Chief Date Signed Radiological. Effluents and Chemistry Section
Radiological Protection and Emergency Preparedness Branch-Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of program- . organization, the Post Accident Sampling System, effluent monitors, the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, liquid and gaseous effluent releases, the Radioactive Waste handling-facilities, changes to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, and the chemistry equipment and facilities. The ' inspector also closed out a Violation and Deviation from a previous inspection.
Results: The licensee had not made any changes to their organization which would adversely affect the ability to control radiation exposures or radioactive material (Paragraph 2).
The Post Accident Sampling System was reviewed for operability at the present-time as well as an indepth analysis of the planned improvements scheduled for 1993. The system was operable and appeared capable of fulfilling sampling requirements under accident conditions (Paragraph 3).
9303020271 930212 PDR ADOCK 05000302 G.
PDR ,
__ _ __ _ _ ____ . The Annual Radiological Environmental Operatilig Report (ARE0R) for 1991 was-reviewed and the first three quarters of the 1992, ARE0R were compared against - the Florida Office of Radiation Control's Radiological Surveillance of the Crystal River site report.
No significant environmental effects attributable to the Unit 3 operation were detected (Paragraph 4).
Liquid Batch and Gaseous Continuous Release permits were examined for previous releases during 1992, and a continuous gaseous release from beginning to completion was observed indepth to assure these activities were performed in a j manner which would not exceed the limits of 10 CFR 20 (Paragraph 5).
Radioactive Waste Handling and Transportation areas were toured and activities related to the ' processing, sorting, and the offsite shipment of radiological wastes were reviewed.
The facilities appeared adequate to fulfill Technical l Specification requirements for radiological waste handling (Paragraph 6).
The Counting Room and the Chemistry Laboratories were inspected and the types of equipment utilized for specific parameters analyzed.by the Chemistry , organization were recorded. The equipment was well maintained and utilized ! for the required analyses (Paragraph 7).
' Changes which were made to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual to include several Technical Specifications in the Methodologies Section were reviewed and found to present no significant changes to the methodologies or calculations previously used (Paragraph 8).
Violation 50-302/92-15-01, which was concerned with an incorrect 24-hour emergency response telephone number, was closed out after a review of the adequacy of the corrective measures taken by the licensee as well as actual testing of the emergency telephone number as listed on a current shipment (Paragraph 9.a).
Deviation 50-302/ 92-15-02, which wa~s concerned with a failure to calibrate mid and high range post-accident flow monitors, was closed after completing an indepth review of the measures taken by the licensee to implement a routine calibration schedule (Paragraph 9.b).
e_-- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ __
. - . - ~ - , - _.
- )
i ,
. ! . REPORT DETAILS- , , 1.
Persons Contacted' ' Licensee Employees I
- G. Clymer, Manager, Nuclear Waste P. Ezell, Environmental. Chemistry
> >
- E, Froats, Manager, Nuclear Compliance
.J
- B. Hickle, Director, Nuclear Plant Operations S.-Johnson, Manager, Chemistry and Radiation Protection
- T. Lehman, Manager, Nuclear Chemistry
, D. McCullough, Supervisor, Radiochemistry , P. McKee, Director,- Quality Programs
- B. McLaughlin, Nuclear Regulatory. Specialist
!
- W. Rossfield, Manager, Site Nuclear Services
- R. Widell, Director, Nuclear Operations _ Site Support D. Wilder, Manager, Radiation Protection l
Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, technicians, and administrative staff
- Attended Exit Interview i
- Acronyms and Initialisms used throughout this report are listed.in the
' last paragraph.' 2.
' Organization (84750) Technical Specification. (TS) 6.2.1 describes the licensee's - organization.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's. organization, staffing levels, and , lines of authority as they related to radiation protection and radioactive material control'to verify that the' licensee had not made > organizational changes which would adversely affect the. ability to.
control radiation exposures or radioactive material.
' The inspector determined that there had not.been any significant changes- ' l in the Nuclear Chemistry, Nuclear Waste, or Nuclear Protection ' Organizations in 1992. There had been some personnel shifts due to l~ promotions, etc., but none that should impact the program adversely.
! Based on this review, the inspector determined that the licensee had not made any changes to the organization which would adversely affect the' ability to control radiation exposures or radioactive material.
No violations or deviations were identified.
?! . t ' ' ,. I- _ _ .. ... >
. _ -. .. _ >. _ .. . . .. / ' , , ' 2' . 3.
Post' Accident Sampling System (PASS) (84750).
NUREG-0737,. Criterion 2a provides specifications for the establishment of onsite radiological analysis capabilities -to provide quantification - of noble gases, iodines, and non-volatile' radionuclides in the reactor coolant system (RCS) and containment atmosphere. TS.6.17.1 requires that procedures.be established, implemented and maintained-to obtain and analyze, under accident conditions, reactor coolant and containment- ) atmosphere samples; and radioactive iodines and particulates in plant ~ gaseous. effluents. The PASS should provide these capabilities, and should enable the licensee to obtain information critical to'the efforts to assess and control the course and effects of an accident.
Pursuant to'these specifications,.the inspector' reviewed portions of ! selected procedures for the. operation, maintenance, and testing of the PASS, and discussed system operation, performance testing, and analytical capabilities of the PASS with the licensee.
. Based on this review, the ins.pector determined that the training the technicians received on the PASS met the' licensee's commitment to the NRC for NUREG-0737 required training.
No violations or deviations were' identified.
4.
Annual Radiological Enviror. mental Operating Report (84750).
. ' TS 6.9.1.5.c requires the submittal of a routine -Radiological' Environmental Operating Report. This report _ summarizes the results of p the Radiological Environmental Surveillance Program; which measures ' ' accumulation of radioactivity in the. environment and determines whether- .the radioactivity detected is due to the~ operation of the Unit'3 at- . ! Crystal River. This program also assesses the doses to the offsite population due to plant operation Pursuant to these requirements, the inspector reviewed this report'for.
1991, and reviewed the data relative to the first three quarters of
~ 1992. This data was corrpared with the Radiological Surveillance of Florida Power Corporation's Crystal River Site as supplied by the State of Florida Department af Health and Rehabilitative Services, Office of Radiation Control. The. inspector also reviewed the performance of the.
State of Florida in the Environmental Protection Agency's - Interlaboratory Cross-Check Program.
[ . Examination of these records showed no abnormal elevated levels of ' > ' radioactivity in their analyses performed. There were no unusually numerous missing samples or other anomalous ' data in the previous -year.. ' The data appeared to fulfill the requirements of the TSs and supported the statement that Crystal River Unit 3's operation had had minimal.
. impact 'on the surrounding environment. In summary, no significant > r G 'li. i. -.. .. .,
- .
. . , ,. .
. ___ _ ,_ , ..$ ! r . . -3 , . radiological consequences attributable to the operation of the' site in l 1991, and for the first three quarters of 1992, were noted from ' airborne, waterborne, aquatic,. ingestion,:or direct exposure pathways,
No violations or deviations were identified.
[ 5.
Liquid and Gaseous Releases and Permits (84750) ' TS 3.3.3.8 requires that radioactive liquid effluent monitoring - instrumentation channels shall be operable with. their alarm / trip setpoints set to ensure that the' concentrations of radioactive material released to unrestricted areas shall be'less than or equal to the
concent' rations specified_ in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, , Column 2 for radionuclides other than dissolved or entrained noble- , gases. The setpoints shall be determined. in accordance with the Offsite ' Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).
TS 3.3.3.9 requires that radioactive gaseous effluent monitoring , instrumentation channels shall be operable with the effluent release isolation alarm / trip setpoints set to ensure that the dose rate at or beyond the site boundary, due to radioactive materials released in .; gaseous effluents shall be limited as followsi
r Noble gases: less than or equal to 500 millirem (mrem) per year ' - total body and less than or equal to 3000 mrem per year to the -
skin.
! Iodine-131, tritium, and radioactive particulates with half-lives- ! - of greater than eight days: less than or equal to 1500 mrem perL ! year to any organ.
l . The setpoints shall be determined in accordance with the ODCM.
q The radioactive liquid and gaseous instrumentation is provided to , monitor and control the releases of radioactive materials in effluents during actual or potential releases. The setpoints should be set to r ensure that the alarm / trip will occur prior to exceeding the limits of
10 CFR 20.
j TS 4.11.2.1.2 details the methods for determining dose rates due to.
> radioactive materials including noble gases which are outlined in Table 4.11-2.
The table also lists the frequency of sampling, analysis frequency, and Lower Limits of Detection-(LLD), which are to be used for batch and continuous-releases.
> The inspector reviewed the ODCM calculations and effluent alarm / trip i setpoints as they applied to an actual continuous gaseous release. The inspector reviewed several Release Permits conducted during the later part of 1992. The Permits were reviewed for completeness and whether j the requirements of the TS had been met.
In all cases examined, the i Permits appeared to meet those guidelines.
, ! .
r, s .- w
, . .i , . .
. The inspector also observed all the steps involved in Continuous Gaseous Release No. 930005.020.058.G which concerned the Auxiliary Building Vent Radiation Monitor A2G. The review included an examination of procedures-which included: . Surveillance Procedure SP-735 " Gaseous Radwaste Release, - Auxiliary Building-Continuous Mode" , Chem / Rad Instruction No. CH-349 " Sampling the Auxiliary Building - Exhaust Duct Gas Monitor (RM-A2)" t ' Chem \\ Rad Instruction No. CH-269 " Gaseous Radiological Waste - Evaluation" In all phases of the Permit, including the performance of the technicians involved, the requirements of the TSs were met. Based on this selective review, the inspector determined that radioactive effluent monitoring instrumentation channels were operable,: and the setpoint methodology presented in the ODCM was structured to prevent-releases of effluents which would exceed the limits of 10 CFR 20. The inspector also determined that TS requirements relative 'to batch _ and - ; continuous releases were also being observed and addressed in the methodologies examined.
> No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Radiological Waste Handling and Transportation (86750) , TS 3.7.13.2 outlines the purposes of.the Liquid Radwaste Treatment , System to control discharges to Unrestricted Areas. The -TS also states provisions for operability of monitors and mentions uses of.the Process-
Control Program (PCP) for verification.
, TS 3.7.13.3 outlines in a similar manner to the above, requirements - relative to gaseous effluents.
TS 3.7.13.4 states the requirements for the solid radwaste program to be , ' used in accordance with the PCP to process wet radioactive wastes to meet shipping and burial ground requirements.
' To familiarize the-inspector with the operations of the Crystal River Unit 3 Radwaste Handling facilities and understand'the operations of these programs, the facilities were toured. This included the sorting-areas, the resin-dewatering equipment, the laundering equipment, and the transportation facilities. The facilities appeared adequate to ' accomplish the required tasks.
The inspector also reviewed monthly reports which summarize trends in the amounts generated of: hazardous wastes, oil and radionuclides, and solid wastes. Solid wastes included: compacted waste drums, Low Specific Activity (LSA) boxes, Secondary and Primary Resins, solidified waste drums, filters, and miscellaneous wastes. Trends are also noted for ,
> _ . _.
._ - , . .? ' . . F
. < solid wastes shipped offsite for either burial or. reprocessing.
Bar graphs and charts supplied by the Nuclear Waste Manager indicate that < Crystal River Unit' 3 is trending downward and is Lat or below projected ~ goals and guidelines, i No violations or deviations were identified., i 7.
Chemistry Equipment and Facilities (84750) l 10 CFR 20.201(b) requires the licensee to perform surveys as i necessary to evaluate the extent of radiation hazards.
This area was inspected to determine whether the licensee was adequately - equipped to perform these surveys and measurements to' monitor the quality of the reactor coolant to ensure long-term. integrity of the reactor pressure boundaries and minimize out-of-core radiation field buildup.
Pursuant to this requiremer t the chemistry analytical laboratories and counting room were inspected and the equipment noted. The analytical - capabilities of the equipment and the use of each type for each specific ~; parameter was recorded.
The Primary Annex laboratory, the Primary Chemistry laboratory, and the Counting Room were examined. These laboratories. are located:on the 95 foot level of the Auxiliary Building. The Salt-Leak. Room and the Secondary Sample Room, which are located in the Turbine Building were also examined. Several sampling stations, which have both1 grab sampling and on-line sampling capabilities, were also inspected.
In all of the listed areas the equipment appeared to be well. maintained, calibrated, and sufficient fo the required analyses.
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (84750) The Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM) establishes the requirements for the Radioactive Effluent a1d Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP). This. manual includes the methods and parameters for the calculation of offsite doses resulting from radioactive gaseous and . liquid effluents. These calculations are performed to verify that the ." concentrations of effluents to the unrestricted area, and the resultant doses at the site boundary or to the maximum exposed member of the ' public, will not exceed the applicable regulatory limits.
The inspector reviewed the lice 1see's radioactive waste effluent dose calculations to determine the effect of incorporation of TSs 3/4.11.1 and 3/4.11.2 into the methodologies for the calculations' involved. The . ' - ,- ! , "
incorporation encomp sses the original TSs and appears-to offer no substantial-deviation from their intent. The ODCM outlines the TSs in - it's methodologies section and are essentially unchanged in the present form.
9.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701) a.
(Closed) Violation 50-302/92-15-01: Incorrect Emergency Response Telephone Number on a Shipping Manifest During inspections conducted June 1-5 and July 27-31, 1992, a violation was cited by an inspector of the Radiological Effluents.
and Chemistry Section in Inspection Report No. 92-15. The violation was concerned with an incorrect 24-hour emergency telephone number on radioactive waste shipping papers. A concern-was noted in that this incorrect number could result in unacceptable delays in making knowledgeable persons available who could provide emergency information to personnel responding to an incident involving the material..in transport.
During the inspection conducted January 11-15, 1993,- there were no shipments carrying radioactive materials offsite. However, several-previous shipping manifests for shipments were reviewed in detail.
The inspector also discussed with the Nuclear Waste' Manager those - measures which had been taken to provide an' adequate telephone number on the shipping manifests for subsequent material-shipments. The Nuclear Waste Manager discussed the new Emergency Contact number which is stamped on the manifests in red. This number connects the caller to the Control Room and the Nuclear: Shift Supervisor. This number is manned at all times and the Supervisor can answer questions concerning all shipments in transit.
? - The inspector reviewed Radioactive Shipment and Verification Record No. 93-02 in particular. This: shipment contained chemistry samples (Radioactive Material, limited Quantity, no label required) which were being sent to Babcock and Wilcox Co. in Lynchburg, VA. Although the shipcaent was already complete, the inspector called the Emergency Contact Number listed on the < manifest.
The inspector was immediately connected with the Control Room and the Shift Supervisor. The supervisor was able to look up the shipment number and answer questions about the material.
Based upon the conversation with the Nuclear Waste Manager and the actual testing of the listed emergency telephone number on a shipping manifest, it appeared that the licensee had taken appropriate measure to address the concerns noted in Vi01ation 50-302/92-15-0 ' . L
7 . b.
(Closed) Deviation 50-302/92-15-02: Failure to Calibrate Mid and - High Range Post-Accident flow Monitors During the aforementioned inspections of June 1-5, and July 27-31, t 1992, Deviation 50-302/92-15-01 was identified. The deviation was concerned with the failure to perform recalibration checks on the
mid and high range flow monitors of the PASS.
, i The inspector reviewed Problem Report PR-92-0081 relative to
possible failed components in the RM-Al/RM-A2 mid and high range flow detecting string. The Problem Report outlined a new test method which included a new flow meter (to verify nitrogen flow ! through the RM flow string) and a new test configuration. The i flow monitors appear to adequately measure flow through the detectors and well maintained through frequent (monthly)
calibrations The licensee committed to continue troubleshooting and make further revisions to the Procedure.No. CH-402 " Laboratory Chemistry Instrumentation and. Analytical Quality Control Scheduling Program." The procedure outlines the frequency , (monthly) for completion of the PASS Functional Checks.
Based upon the revisions to the PASS scheduled frequency for , functional' testing, as well as the replacement of the flow elements, the concerns cited in the Deviation appear to have been addressed.
10.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on January 15, 1993, ) with those persons-indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
Licensee ' representatives acknowledged the inspector's comments and no dissenting ) comments were received.
! . Violation 50-302/92-15-01, which was concerned with an incorrect 24-hour l emergency response telephone number, was closed out after a review of corrective measures taken by the licensee as well as actual testing of ) the emergency telephone number as listed on a shipment (Paragraph 9.a), i Deviation 50-302/ 92-15-02, which was concerned with a failure to calibrate mid and high range post-accident flow monitors, was closed
after a indepth review of the measures taken by the licensee to j implement a routine calibration schedule was completed (Paragraph 9.b).
11.
Acronyms and Initialisms AREOR Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report LLD Lower Limit of Detection LSA Low Specific Activity j mrem millirem i NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.. - . -- _.
- - - - -- --. .- .-. .
.. .. ... - - _ _ - _ _ _ -. . .
.. ODCM Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. PASS Post Accident Sampling System PCP Process' Control Program RCS Reactor roolant System j REMP Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program RM Radiation Monitor TS Technical Specifications j
e }}