IR 05000317/1993001
| ML20127K351 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1993 |
| From: | Holmes S, Jang J, Mark Miller NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127K280 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-317-93-01, 50-317-93-1, 50-318-93-01, 50-318-93-1, NUDOCS 9301260103 | |
| Download: ML20127K351 (8) | |
Text
f
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COhih11SSION
REGION I
Repon Nos.
50-317/93-01 and 50 318/93-01 Docket Nos.
50-317 and 50-318 License Nos.
DPD53 and DPR-69 Licensee:
Ilattimore Gas and_Illectric Company P.O. Box 1475 13altimore. h1aryland 2J203 Facility Name:
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant. Units 1 and 2 Inspection at:
LuShy, hfaryland Inspection Conducted:
JAn_trtry 4-8. 1903 Inspectors:
M. ]$<M't--
/~/G'73 Jason C. Jang, Sr. Ral!% tion Specialist, Effluent date Radiation Protection Section (ERPS), Facilities RadNion Safety and Safeguards Branch (FRS&SB)
,rf$ W
//s/W Y
Stephen W. Holmes, Radiation Specialist
"date ERPS, FRS&SB Approved by:
/--AS-f S hfarie T. hiiller, Chief, ERPS, FRS&SB, Division date of Radiation Safety and Safeguards (DRSS)
Areas Inspected: Announced safety inspection of the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent control programs including: management controls, calibration of efnuent radiation monitors, air cleaning systems, ODCh!, and implementation of the above program.
Results: Within the areas inspected, the licensee implemented very good ef0uents programs.
The excellent knowledge of the Chemistry Department staff and management support to the programs were notewonhy. Improved communications between the responsible individuals in suppon of the effluent control programs were also observed.
9301260103 930115 PDR ADOCK 05000317 G
L
-
a
!
.
f
.
PETAILS 1.0 Individuals Contasicd 1,1 Licensee Personnel G. Barley, Chemist
- R. Conatser, Chemist P. Crinigan, General Supervisor - Chemistry
C. Cmse, Plant General Manager
C. Earls,' Chemistry Programs Supervisor R. Gmdle, Compliance Engineer
- i
W. Herring, Sr. Technician, Test Equipment S. Hillier, E&C Engineer
R. Kraft, Chemical Analyst G. Pavis, Director, Strategic Engineering-
D. Ross, Test Equipment Supervisor S. Sanders, Plant Chemistry Supervisor J. Snyder, Engineer, E&C
R. Sydnor, Principal Engineer, E&C
>
L Tucker, General Supervisor - Plant Engineering
'
L. Wenger, Compliance
S. Winter, As:istant General Supervisor, Instmment Maintenance (U-1)
J. Wood, Quality Audits, Quality Assurance
i J. Wynn, System Engineer C. Yoder, Senior Engineer, Strategic Engineering
1.2 NRC F. Lyon, Resident Inspector
.
M. Miller, Chief, Effluent Radiation Protection Section, Region I
l-
Denotes those individuals present at the exit meeting on January 8,1993. The i
inspector also interviewed other licensee employees during this inspection.
2.0 Pumose The purpose of this inspection was to review the licensee's ability to control and l
quantify effluent radioactive liquids, gases, and particulates during normal and emergency operations.
.
,.
.
-
_
-
,
_.
..
.
..
.-
.
m
.
.
c
3.0-Management Controls 3.1
- Program Changes There were no significant changes in the licensee's radioactive liquid and.
gaseous effluent control programs since the previous inspections conducted in December 1991 and May 1992. The Chemistry Department has the
,
responsibility to conduct the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent control programs and to implement the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM).
3.2 Review of Semiannual Ef0uent P;p_qwi The inspector reviewed the se aiannual radioactive effluent release reports for 1991 and the Orst half 1997. These repons provided total released radioactivity for liquid and gaseous effluents. These repons also contained any changes to the ODCM as necessary. There were no obvious anomalous measurements, omissions or trends.
3.3 Management Sunnon The inspector conducted interviews with licensee management and system engineers to assess their understanding and support of the radioactive effluent control programs, t
The inspector discussed with the Chemistry Department supervisors the
!
imponance of the effluent control prognuns, and noted that the responsible supervisors had excellent knowledge in the following areas:
,
(1)
radioactive liquid and gaseous efnuent controls, I
(2)
efnuent Radiation Monitoring System (RMS),
(3)
quanti 0 cation of the liquid and gaseous effluent n: leases using the L
RMS,
(4)
ODCM requirements, and
'
(5)
protection of the public health and the environment, i
The inspector also _ interviewed supponing groups staff (management and; I
system engineers for the RMS and the Air Cleaning Systems) for the ef0uent l-control programs. _ During these discussions and observations, the inspector noted that the responsible management and engineers provided strong support
,_
j to the effluent control programs and demonstrated excellent communications-l with the Chemistry Department staff.
l
'
.
_.,
,
.
.
_
. _..
_ _ ~, _ _ _ _ _. _.. _ _
_
-
_ _ _ _ -. _ _
. _ _ _
._
_ _ _ _
.
.
>
Based on the above interviews, the inspector determined that the licensee management demonstrated not only excellent knowledge in the effluent control programs but also excellent inter / intra-depanment communications.
4.0 Audh
'
The inspector reviewed the 1992 audit (Audit Number: 92-17) conducted by the Quality Assurance (QA) Depanment for the Radioactive Liquid and Gaseous Effinent Surveillance Programs and implementation of the ODCM. The QA audit identified one Gnding and three recommendations for the effluent control programs. The technical depth of the Gnding and recommendations were verv relevant towards
enhancement of the efGuent program. The Chemistry Depanment responded to these items with corrective actions and in a timely manner. The inspector discussed with the licensee the corrective actions which were very good. The QA Depanment used a tracking system to follow the corrective actions.
Based on the review of the above audit and interviews with the Chemistry Department staff, the inspector detennined that the scope and technical depth of the audit were very good to assess the effluent control programs, and responses to the items were
.
also very good.
'
5.0 Imolementation of the Effluent Control Programs The inspector reviewed the licensee's implementation of the Radioactive Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Control Programs through discussicas with licensee personnel, review of selective radioactive liquid and gaseous release permits, and review of the-following procedures:
o CP-601, Liquid Radioactive Waste Release Permit o CP-604-1, Radioactive Gaseous Waste Permits o CP-212, Specifications and Surveillance Radioactive Liquid Waste
[
o CP-213, SpeciGcations and Surveillance Radioactive Gaseous Waste-l The inspector determined that the above procedures were sufficiently detailed to effectively control effluent releases. The inspector also determined that the reviewed discharge permits were complete and met the requirements for sampling and analyses
.
at the specified frequencies and lower limits of detection established in the Technical L
Specifications (TS). The inspector also observed that the Chemistry Depanment had i
good communications with the Operations Department staff.
.
l
!
-
,
-
-
.-.
-
.. -. -
. -. -
-,
--
-
-
ll
,.
Calculations of projected doses to the public are required by the TS prior to releasing any radioactive materials through liquid or airborne pathways. The reviewed permits were completed and included the dose projection calculations required by the TS (See Inspection Report Nos. 50-317/92-14 and 50-318/92-14 for details).
6.0 Review of the ODCM During the previous inspection conducted April 27-May 1,1992, the inspector reviewed a draft upgrade of the ODCM and noted that the site specinc parameters were listed. The inspector also noted that the draft upgrade ODCM contained more information (i.e., specific parameters) to conduct better radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent control programs than the existing Revision 1. This new draft ODCM was ready for revicw and approval by the Plant Operations and Safety Review Committee (POSRC) as required by the TS.
During this inspection, the inspector reviewed the upgrade ODCM. The ODCM was approved by POSRC on July 1,1992 cnd by the Plant Manager on July 27,1992.
Based on the review of the new ODCM, the inspector determined that the licensee had the methodology to conduct an excellent effluent control programs.
Radi tion Monitoring Systems (RMS)
7.0 a
7.1 Calibration of Effluent RMS The inspector reviewed the most recent calibration test results for the following effluent RMS to determine the implementation of the Technical SpeciGeation requirements.-
o Liquid Radwaste Effluent Monitor (Common)
o Steam Generator Blowdown Radiation Monitors (Units 1 & 2)
o Waste Gas Discharge Radiation Monitor (Common)
All reviewed calibrations were performed at the required frequencies and results were within the licensee's acceptance criteria.
During a previous inspection conducted in December 1991, the inspector reviewed the primary calibration and transfer source calibration results for the liquid effluent radiation monitoring system. Calibration techniques and results were excellent (See Inspection Report Nos. 50-317/91-31 and 50-318/92-31 for details). During this inspection, the inspector reviewed the primary calibration
Y
and transfer source calibration results for the following RMS.
o Steam Generator Discharge (Units 1 & 2)
o Waste Gas Discharge (Common)
o Main Vent Noblu Das Monitors (Units 1 & 2)
o Wide Range Noble Gas Monitors (Units 1 & 2)
The inspector noted that the calibration techniques and results for the primary calibrations and transfer source calibrations were also excellent.
The inspector noted that the licensee was upgrading all ef0uent RMS calibration procedures. The inspector reviewed selected upgrade calibration procedures and determined that the upgraded calibration procederes incorporated appropriate calibration techniques, with the exception of plateau checks (Sec Inspection Report Nos. 50-317/92-31 and 50-318/92-31 for details). The licensee will complete the procedure upgrades in the near future, llased on the above reviews, the inspector determined that the licensee has an effective calibration program for the effluent RMS.
7.2 IJpgrading Status of Efnuent RMS During the previous inspections conducted in November 1989, October 1990, and Deceniber 1991, the inspector reviewed the licensee's short-term projects (improvement of calibration techniques and the primary calibrations for efauent RMS) and long-term projects (replacement or upgrade of the existing efnuent RMS) to upgrade the RMS.
During this inspection, the inspector reviewed the status of both projects. The short-term projects will be completed in the near future. The Strategic Engineering Department has the responsibility to perform the long-term projects. The inspector reviewed the long-term project plan submitted by the Strategic Engineer, " Project Plan, Radiation Monitoring System Upgrade Scoping Task, Estimate #410091029," dated May 28,1992. The long-term projects contained four major tasks: (1) System Definition Process, (2) Goals and Guidelines Process, (3) Technical Options Phase, and (4) Cost-effective Analysis for RMS Upgrading and/or installation of New RMS. The inspector also discussul with the responsible engineers the progress of the long-term projects. By the end of 1993, senior management will determine the final options, either upgrading old RMS or installing new RMS, based on the cost-effective analysi _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _
_
_
_
._
.k
s
.
.
Based on the review of the long-term projects document and discussions with the responsible individuals, the inspector determined that the licensee was pursuing the long-term projects vigorously and with proper direction. The inspector stated that the closure of the short-term projects and the progress of the long-term projects will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
8.0 Air Cleanine Systems The inspector reviewed the licensee's most recent smveillance test results to determined the implementation of the Technical Specifications for the (1) Control Room Emergency Air Supply Systems, (2) Spent Fuel Handling Building, (3)
Penetration Room Exhaust System, (4) Containment Building, and (5) ECCS Pump Room Exhaust System. The inspec'.or reviewed the most recent test results of the following inspections and surveillance for the above air cleaning systems, o Visual Inspections o In-Place HEPA Leak Tests o In-Place Charcoal Leak Tects o Pressure Drop Tests o System Air Flow Rate Tests o Laboratory Tests for the Iodine Collection Efficiencies The inspector also observed the system air flow test perfo mance for the spent fuel
handling building during this inspection. The air flow test failed, indicating there were potential air leaks around the dampers or other components. The licensee performed another air flow test after adjustment of the dampers, but it failed again.
The licensee re-adjusted the damper position and performed the third system air flow test. The test result was within the Technical Specification acceptance criteria.
During the review of the laboratory test results for the iodine collection efficiencies,
)
the inspector noted that iodine collection efficiencies for several systems were decreased. The licensee suspected that the decreasing iodine collection efficiency was due to high humidity in the air cleaning systems. The licensee had replaced charcoal and retested to meet the Technical Specification requirements. The licensee stated that the testing frequency will be increased from 18 months to as needed to meet the Technical Specification requirements. The inspector stated that the testing frequency and results will be reviewed during subsequent inspections.
Based on the above observation and reviews, the inspector determined that the licensee was implementing Technical Specification requirements.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _. _ _
__
_
_
o
.
.
.
7.0 lisilitucDiint The insivetor inet with the licensee representatives denoted in Section 1.1 of this inspection report at the conclusion of the inspection on January 8,1993 at the Calven Cliffs site. The inspector sununarized the puqiose, scope, and findings of the inspection.
l i