IR 05000312/1990008
| ML20043H815 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 06/08/1990 |
| From: | Tenbrook W, Wenslawski F NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20043H808 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-90-08, 50-312-90-8, NUDOCS 9006260478 | |
| Download: ML20043H815 (9) | |
Text
q j
- '
l
.
'
-
,
.
..
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report No. 50-312/90-08 License No. DPR-54
Licensee:
Sacramento Municipal Utility District P. O. Box 15830 j
Sacramento, California 95813 Facility Name:. Rancho Seco Nuclear Generating Station Inspection at:. Clay Station, California Inspection Conducted:
May 8-11 and 30, 1990 i
Inspected by: //G # M s-6 - 90
'
W.
. JenBrook, Radiation Specialist Date Signed Approved by:
.[
4 /Tho
'
.;
F. A.~Wenslawski, Chief Dat'e 51gned
'
Facilities Radiological Protection Section
,
Summary:
Areas: Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection of radiation protection organization and management, gaseous radwaste systems,. solid wastes, plant tours, and followup items.
Inspection procedures 30703, 83722, 83726, 84722, 84724 and 92701 were used, s
Results:- Licensee staff. levels in radiation protection and radwaste have remained stable since the previous inspection (Section 3).
Disposition of contaminated material stored ~onsite had initiated and was proceeding on schedule (Section 4).
Surveillances for certain air filtration ~ systems not 5) quired operable during the defueled condition had been suspended (Section re Control of radioactive material and contamination in controlled areas had a
.
improved during the inspection period, but extensive areas of contamination
'
-
remained (Section 6).
One violation of radiological posting requirements was
- identified (Section6).
i o
i 9006260478 900608 PDR ADOCK 05000312 O
_
__
__
o I
T
- .
'..
-
q,
DETAILS
,
1.
Persons ContactAd:
Licensee M. Bua,k, Nuclear Chemistry ManagerManager, Radiation Protection and Eme J. Clar
,
3Coleman, Supervisor,NuclearQuality Field, Surveillance Supervisor, Technical Services D. Gardiner, Radwaste Superintendent
"
F. Kellie, Supervisor, Nuclear Quality
.
P. Lavely, Nuclear Licensing Supervisor
!
P. Lydon Nuclear Plant Manager W. Partridge,RadiochemistrySpecialist
_
E. Ronningen, Radiological Effluents Specialist J. Shetler, Deputy Assistant General Manager, Nuclear j
The individuals noted above attended the exit meeting on Ma 10, 1990.
I The inspector also contacted other members of the licensee'ys staff-during
the inspection, and discussed additional findings with the licensing i
department on May 11, 1990, j
2.
Followup (92701)
Open Item 89-12-02 (Closed):
This item concerned operation of the I
"
ventilation air sampler at the Interim Onsite Storage Building (IOSB)
inconsistent with calibration methods.
The inspector verified that the primary and alternate samplers were no longer operated in parallel and thatprocedureRP.309.IV.06,Rev.3,"IOSBuildingExhaustMonitoring System (R-15106)," had been changed to prevint parallel operation and to provide for. proper calibration of the local alternate sampler.
This item is closed.
,
This item concerned inappropriate 89-18-05 (Clond:ls and g"reases -in Administrative Unresolved Item release criteria for sediment G oi
,
Procedure RSAP-0222.
Procedure CAP-0006, Chemistry Frequencies, Ranges and Limits," had superseded RSAP-0222.
The inspector verified that CAP-0006, Attachments K1 and K2, contained appropriate sensitivities for monitoring of sedimentsLand non-aqueous material, based on Technical Specification (TS) Table 4.26-1 lower limits of detection (LLD).
The inspector also examined a selection of' analyses performed for sediments and oils prior to the procedure change.
The LLDs employed for these
!
analyses were consistent with the Attachment K LLDs, indicating no
-
plant-related activity.had been released.
Based on the analyses
'
performed consistent with TS Table 4.26-1 LLDs, and the incorporation of those limits in CAP-0006, this item is considered acceptable and closed.
Open Item 90-01-03 (Closed):
This item concerned the attempted removal of a contaminated fiber-board tube from the restricted area.
The licensee had completed an investigation of this matter under Potential Deviation from Quality report (PDQ) #90-0016.
The tube had been removed
>
._
_
s
,
,.
E
!
.
o
..
..
.
j from a drum during a survey and improperly removed from the work area before the survey was completed.
Three drums, including one that had
.
,
containedthesubjecttube,werealsoimproperlysurveyedandreleasedto
a.non-controlled area for storage while containing low' level
>
contamination in oily residues.
The drums were recovered and workers were counseled as to proper procedures for release of potentially contaminated' material.
The licensee's investigation successfully identified radiolo contaminated tube.gical problems other than the immediate matter of the The inspector had no further questions in this
,
matter.
"
Open Item 90-02-01 (Closed):
This item concerned the licensee's Effluent
-
and ' Water Management Action Plan.
The licensee had elected to close the Action Plan based on com)1etion of a substantial number of Plan items and the defueled status of tie plant.
The inspector reviewed the status of
<
the Plan items.
The following items remained:
,
o Secondary system sample line reroutes: The current impact of deferral of sample line rerouting was not significant, given that
,
local sampling was employed and long-term dry layup was proposed for secondary systems, o
Condensate storage tank overflow reroute with contaminated and non-contamiliated sump segrecation-in tank farm:
These tasks dealt
,
I
.
particularly with volume recuction of water loads by segregation of contaminated water from non-contaminated water.
With tie secondary system in dry layup, no significant unanticipated secondary system
!
water flows to tant farm sumps were anticipated, o
Additional waste water demineralization treatment capacity:
This task addressed decontamination of water after primary-to-secondary leakage during normal operation.
Demineralizers had been purchased-for additional secondary water treatment capacity; however, given
' that significant arimary to secondary contamination was not at issue during extended slutdown, the demineralizers were not installed.
w The licensee-stated these commitments were deferred, and would remain on l
their Commitment Tracking System.
The inspector concluded these items
~
would be.significant to a potential restart, but deferral would not significantly restrict the licensee's water management capabilities
.
.during defueled status.
This item is closed.-
Information Notice IN-90-08 (Closed):
This Information Notice concerned
hazards from krypton-85 from decayed fuel.
The inspector verified
receipt and disposition of the Notice by the licensee.
The Notice was
,.
evaluated by the Radiation Protection and' Emergency Planning Department (RP/EP), noting that emergency action levels had been revised with an
,
. emphasis on krypton.
This item is closed.
p
,
,
t Open Item 90-04-01(0 pen):
This item concerned a capability test sample for radiochemical analysis.
The test sample was brought onsite by the inspector and submitted to the licensee for analysis.
The results will be compared during a subsequent inspection.
,
'
,
. Ib p
< <,.
.m>
_
_
-
- - - -
-
-,
,
P
,
s 7,
s
'.
Open-Item 90-04-02 (Closed):. This item concerned an intercomparison of
~
'
gamma emitter activity in environmental sediments.
The sediments were obtained from Clay Creek at the effluent release point and on private property west of the site.
The NRC and licensee compared those
..
radionuclides with activity greater than the recuired LLD and with less-than 25% statistical uncertainty at one standarc deviation.
The results t
are presented below.
Y,
,
Sediment at Effluent Release Point (RMS 0.3M0)
NRC Licensee
.NRC Random Ratio:
Agreement Result Result Uncertainty Licensee /NRC Range Analyte. (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)
Cs-137- '4.51E+02 4.50E+02 4.90E+00
0.80-1.25 l
The Cs-137 analyses of this sample agreed well.
The licensee and NRC
....
l-also identified Co-60 below the required lower limit of detection, but with high uncertainty.
j-SedimentfromClayCreek(RMS0.7N0)
,
l L
NRC Licensee NRC Random Ratio:
Agreement L
Result Result Uncertainty Licensee /NRC Range L
Analyte (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg) (pCi/kg)
5 37 2.59E+02 1.93E+02 7.70E+00 1.34 0.75-1,33 The analyses for Cs-137 disagreed.
However, the NRC analysis was.
considerably more sensitive than that required resulting in a narrow agreementrangeformeasurementsneartherequIred180pCi/kglowerlimit of detection.
Under these circumstances, this disagreement was considered resolved.
!
The NRC and licensee analyses of sediment samples agreed.
The activity in' environmental sediments had significantly decreased when compared to l-independent NRC measurements documented in NUREG/CR-4286, " Evaluation of Radioactive Liquid Efffuent Released from Rancho Seco Nuclear Power
-
Plant."
'
3.
Organization (83722)
The inspector held discussions with radiation protection personnel and
-
,
reviewed organizational documents to determine the status of the radiation protection organization.' The number of radiation protection i
technicians had remained constant at approximately 14 to 16 technicians, three technicians on each of five shifts.
Change three to the facility
Emergency Plan, effective June 1, 1990, would allow a reduction-in-force to ten technicians.
The licensee anticipated that their technician staff
,
R would be reduced to ten persons by July, 1990.
The addition of the
.
-
-
.
,
,.,
'
.
emergency plannin was discussed in g organization to the radiation protection department'
inspection report 50-312/90-06.
The radwaste staff had remained constant.
Three senior radiation-
'
)totection technicians and nine radwaste handlers / laborers had been
)udgeted in the radwaste department until decommisioning.
The licensee anticipated that one of two radwaste supervisors would leave-during June, 1990.
The licensee's staffing and organization met requirements, and had remained largely unchanged since the previous inspection.
4.
Solid Wastes (84722)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's management of solid wastes in trailers and cargo vans by direct observation, interviews with personnel
.and reviews of documents.
During the inspection, the licensee was conducting an inventory and-sequestering of radwaste and supplies in five trailers and twenty-five cargo vans.
The licensee had constructed a facility at the radwaste barrel farm containing loading docks for the, vans, step off pads, office, dress-out areas, high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filtration and personnel contamination monitoring.
Cargo vans were moved to the loading dock area, the contents inventoried, surveyed, sorted and finally redistributed to the vans or radwaste storage boxes.
The licensee had
_
_ completed a safety evaluation under 10 CFR 50.59 for this activity.
-Inventory of seventeen cargo vans had been completed and their contents
,
redistributed consistent with vehicle weight requirements.
The inventory had resulted in six cargo vans containing equipment to<be retained,-nine cargo vans of material for shipment, and two empty-vans.
The licensee was. meeting their schedule to ship waste and salvagable material by t
. August, 1990.
Upon completion of the trailer and van inventory,.the licensee intended to procure contracted services to broker reusable material, such as
,
scaffolding, to other licensed facilities.
Also, the contractor would-
,
provide supercompaction services for miscellaneous radwaste removed from
-
the vans.
The-licensee's program for management of solid waste had improved with-the initiation of the contaminated tools and scaffold material action plan.
5.
Gaseous Waste Systems (84724)
,.
l The inspector reviewed the following surveillances for gaseous radwaste systems:
SP 86, " Auxiliary / Spent Fuel Building (SFB) System Surveillance"
,
l SP 88, "SFB Exhaust Ventilation System Verification" p
L
-.
.
. -
.
v
,
c
.
5-
.
-.
.
..
,
,
.
"
SP'620, " Reactor Building Purge Exhaust Filter Test - Special" SP 621, " Reactor Building Purge 18 Month Filter Test" SP 622 "Special Reactor Building Purge 720 !!our Surveillance" SP 625d/B, "18 Month Auxiliary /SFB Filter Test"
,
SP 627A/B, " Auxiliary /SFB 720 Hour Charcoal Test" The inspector verified that the reactor building purge exhaust filtration system had been maintained operable during all times when containment'
integrit Surveillance Procedure SP622,yhadbeenrequiredperTS3.6and3.13.Special Reactor Building Purge 72 suspended after January 11, 1990, following the defuelirlg completed on December 8,1989, and after containment integrity was no longer required.
Suspension of SP 622 had rendered the reactor building purge exhaust filtration system inoperable, as the ventilation fan breaker records
'
s indicated the system nad been run in excess of 900 hours0.0104 days <br />0.25 hours <br />0.00149 weeks <br />3.4245e-4 months <br /> since the last performance of SP 622.
The inspector verified that the auxiliary and spent fuel building filter systems had been maintained operable prior to 90 days after reactor shutdown as required by TS 3.13.2 and 4.12.
Correspondence from the Assistan{GeneralManager, Nuclear,totheNRCProjectManager, dated December 4, 1989, describing technicci specifications applicable in th'e defueled condition stated-that the licensee's ultimate intent was to maintaintheauxillary/SFBventilationsystem" functional'butnot
~.
operable" following the decay of spent fuel beyond the 30 and 90; days specified in TS 3.13 and 4.12.
y
Surveillance p(Auxiliary /SFB)," for the A and B train systems, had been-rocedures SP 627A and SP 6278, "720 Hour Charcoal
'
Surveillance suspended after January 11, 1990 and October 27 1989, respectively.
Fan s
breakerrecordsindicatedthattheAtrainventIlationfanhadbeen'
oaerated in excess of 900 hours0.0104 days <br />0.25 hours <br />0.00149 weeks <br />3.4245e-4 months <br /> since the last surveillance, rendering
.
the A train inoperable.
'
'
The B train had been maintained operable, having" Auxiliary /SFB.Emergenc since the prior SP 6278 surveillance.
SP 625B, p-Filter System Loop B 18 Month Surveillance," had been performed witmn
,
the last 18 months, and had remained on the master surveillance schedule as due September, 1990.
The inspector noted the prudence of retaining surveillance SP 625, as it included flow rate measurements to assure that potential releases are properly drawn into the exhaust system and-
,
,
monitored consistent with the bases of TS 4.12.
L The licensee's programs for surveillance of air cleaning systems had been L
reduced.
Under the reduced program the surveillance and operability-of
l filtrationsystemstodatewasconsIstentwithrequirementsapplicable y'
during the defueled condition.
l
!
L 6.
Control of Radioactive Materials and Contamination; Surveys and L
' Monitoring (83726)
The inspector toured radiologically controlled areas of the auxiliary building, spent fuel building, tank farm and Interim Onsite Storage
!
<
,
-
_.
.
.
.
.-
,
.
.
- -
- .
'
Building (1058):during-the~ inspection,whichincludedatourbythe inspector and NRC management on May 30, 1990.
The inspector conducted-independent measurements of radiation dose rates-using an ion chamber
survey instrument, serial number 4042, due for calibration October 16, 1990.
The inspector observed the following:
i o
Personnel in controlled areas wore proper dosimetry and conducted.
themselves in accordance with radiation protection procedures and radiation work permits.
o Housekeeping was fair.
During the week of May 8-11, 1990, bags of
,
debris and waste were accumulating in various areas of the. auxiliary
building, particularly near the grade level-hot machine shop..
During a tour on May 30, 1990, the inspector observed that the accumulated bags had been largely removed, and overall. housekeeping i
had improved.
t-o In many cases, contaminated areas extended well beyond floor berms
-
installed around potentially contaminated equipment.
For example, the east and west decay heat removal pump rooms were contaminated:
beyond equipment berms, with a' step-off pad and contaminated area posting at the entrance door to the west decay heat pump room.
During:the week of May 8-11, 1990, the west and north walkways adjoining the spent fuel pool had been contaminated by recent fuel pool work.
On May 30, 1990, this area had been decontaminated.
The radiation protection manager reiterated the licensee's intent to decontaminate floor area at a rate of approximately 5% per year.
During a tour of the Interim Onsite Storage Building on May 8,ll-up 1990, o
the inspector surveyed the dry active waste warehouse.
The ro
>
t L
door between the truck bay and the warehouse area was barricaded
'
with a radiological caution )osting stating " Radioactive Material Storage Area-Radiation Work )ermit Required-Dose Rate 1-50 mR/hr."
A Higi Radiation Area was properly posted in the southeast corner of the warehouse.
Dose rates in areas between the Radioactive Material r
Storage Area barricade and the posted High Radiation Area ranged from less than one mR/hr to greater than 50 mR/hr.
10 CFR 20.202(b)(2) states, in part, that a " Radiation Area means i
any area...in which there exists radiation at such levels that a excess of 5 millirem..."y could receive in any one hour a dose in major portion of the bod i
L
.
L 10 CFR 20.203(b) states that "each Radiation Area shall be
'
conspicuously posted with a sign or silns bearing the radiation caution symbol and the words: Caution.adiation Area."
l Contrary to the above, radiation dose rates in areas of the dry active waste warehouse exceeded 5 millirem per hour, and no
"
Radiation Area posting was provided.
l The licensee immediately posted the barricade as a Radiation Area.
l The inspector verified that other doors to the warehouse were l
l l
'
=
.
-
.
..
.
.
.
.
.. -_
-6 7.
-
,
.
e'
' +.
properly posted.
Interviews with radwaste personnel indicated that
the barricade posting had been defaced by forki;ft equipment during
,
work on May.4 1990, and apparently had not been properly replaced.
'
Thiswas-confIrmedbythelicenseesinvestigation'underPDQ90-173.
..,
The licensee took prompt corrective action to correct and investigate the violation.
The radiological caution posting contained information on potential dose rates-in the warehouse area.
As this violation would normally be classified as Severity Level V and the licensee's corrective action was appropriate, the violatiom
is not cited because the criteria in Section V.A of the Enforcement.
c Policy were satisfied (NCV 50-312/90-08-01, Closed),
"
The licensee's control of radioactive materials and contamination,.as
'
C observed during facility tours, had improved during the inspection t
period.
7.
Exit Meeting (30703)
The inspector met with licensee management on May 10, 1990, to discuss
- '
thescopeandfindingsoftheinspection.
The' licensee acknowledged the inspector's observations regarding organization and staffing, but cautioned that their projected budgets and planning for the. radiation.
protection and-radwaste programs.were not to be construed as regulatory
>
commitments.
The inspector stated th6t he did not construe the
,
licensee's plans as commitments, but as'information on the status of the facility.
The inspector also described the violation of radiological posting requirements.
.
'f
'
-
.
l.
l
,,
--
.
.--
-
..
..
.. _
-
-
_-
..
-
_ _
_
,
I
..
. *
- -
.
.
,
.
Enclosure
~ Criteria for Acceptino the' Licensee's Measurements
Resolution-Ratio i
<4 No comparison
'
7 0. 5 2.0
-
-
'
15 0.6
-
1.66
-
50 0.75 -
'1.33
-;
-
- -
200 0.80 -
1.25 200 0.85 -
1.18 Comparison 1.
Divide each NRC result by its associated uncertainty to obtain the resolution.
(Note:
For purposes of this procedure, the uncertainty is
,
-defined-as the relative standard deviation, one sigma, of the NRC result
,
L as calculated from counting statistics.)
-
,
I
.
2.
. Divide each licensee result by the corresponding NRC result to obtain
!
' '
the ratio-(licensee result /NRC).
3.
The licensee's measurement is in agreement if the value of-the ratio
'
falls within the limits shown in the preceding table for the corresponding resolution.
v
.
}
i
. s b
f l'
l L
L
,-
.
-
.
-
. A.
---
m