IR 05000344/1993005
| ML20035F828 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Trojan File:Portland General Electric icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/02/1993 |
| From: | Coolentz L, Reese J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035F824 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-344-93-05, 50-344-93-5, NUDOCS 9304220314 | |
| Download: ML20035F828 (6) | |
Text
-.
.
.
.-.
..
-..
.
-.
.
. - -
. _ _ _ _ _.
.
t
g
..
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION V
Report:
50-344/93-05 License:
NPF-1 Licensee:
Portland General Electric Company-121 SW Salmon Street Portland, Oregon 97204 Facility:
Trojan Nuclear Plant Inspection location:
Rainier, Oregon-Inspection duration:
March 8 -
993 Inspected by:
[
4fz/43 entz, Se~
Radiation Specialist Date' Signed
.
4-fz./q3 Approved by:
h
/
.J mes 1. Reese, Chipf
.
Date Signed Fa i
- ies Radiological Protection Branch Summary
Areas Insoected: Routine, unannounced inspection of followup items, solid radioactive waste storage, processing, classification, and di_sposal, and transportation of radioactive materials.
Inspection Procedures 92702, 84750, and 86750 were used.
Results: The licensee was continuing.to make adjustments 'in staffing,
. procedures, and programs, in keeping with plans for long-term plant shutdown.
The licensee's programs for management and transportation of radioactive material and radioactive waste, in the aspects reviewed,- were maintaining an adequate level of performance.
Progress had been made in processing and dispositioning accumulated items of. low-level radioactive waste.
No i
violations or deviations were identified.
l.
.-
i l
l l
9304220314 930402 PDR ADOCK 05000344 G-PDR
,
~
.-
-.
.
.
.
.
.
-
,
.,
DETAILS
-
1.
Persons Contacted Licensee J. Benjamin, Manager, Quality Controls A. Bowman, Supervisor, Radiation Protection (RP) Technicians
_.
- M. Featherston, Engineer, Nuclear Compliance j
- G. Huey, Acting Manager, RP Technical Support
!
L. Larson, Engineer, Radwaste
- R. Machon, General Manager, Trojan Nuclear Plant
.
!
- T. Meek, Manager, Personnel Protection
~!
D. Nordstrom, Manager, Nuclear Oversight
l
- G. Rich, Manager, Chemistry
!
W. Robinson, Vice President, Nuclear
- T. Walt, General Manager, Technical Functions
- J. Westvold, Supervisor, Quality Audits
,
- W. Williams, Manager, Nuclear Compliance j
i
i Other
!
- J. Melfi, Resident Inspector, NRC-
,
- V. Sarte, Resident Inspector, ODOE
,
I (*)-Denotes those individuals who attended the exit meeting on March 11,
!
1993. The inspector met and held discussions with additional members of l
the licensee's staff.during the inspection.
l l
I 2.
Eo_11owuo of Items of Non-Comoliance (92702)
a.
Item 50-344/93-02-01 (Closed): This non-cited violation involved l
the failure to meet the required lower limit of detection (LLD) for iodine-131 in milk samples, due to changes in analysis methods made
'
by the offsite vendor laboratory. The licensee had revised the vendor contract for clarity on requirements for meeting technical specification (TS) LLDs. No other instances of failure to meet TS-i required LLDs were observed..The inspector had no further questions in this matter.
b.
Item 50-344/93-02-02 (Closed): This violation involved the failure to accurately post-an area in the Radwaste Storage Building as a
In addition to properly posting the area 'and l
retraining RP technicians on the circumstances of the violation, the
_
licensee had set up a shielded high radiation area in the Radwaste i
Building for storage of material with radiation levels greater than i
100 millirsm per hour on contact.
The inspector verified the licensee's corrective actions.. During i
extensive tours of the licensee's facility, no~. additional examples j-of this problem were observed. The inspector had no further questions in this matter.
h
!
!
I-I
-
-
.
__, _ _. _ _
._
.-
.
.-.
-
-
.
-
- -
.
. '
~
.
l
-
l 3.
Transportation and Manacement of Solid Radioactive Waste (84750 & 86750)
The inspector examined this program area by facility tours, observation of work in progress, interviews with cognizant personnel, and reviews of
,
licensee procedures, records, reports, and calculations. Observations were made regarding the Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report,
,
solid radwaste storage and processing, radwaste classification, and
'
transportation of radioactive materials.
Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Report (SARERR)
a.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's SARERR for July - December
1992, submitted in accordance with TS 6.9.1.5.4.
Several items were
!
of note:
(1) Gaseous and liquid effluent releases-for the period continued
!
to be a small fraction of the~ TS-specified limits.
(2) -Three unplanned releases had occurred during the reporting
~;
period, the first two due to problems with the' chemical volume control system demineralizer vessel and the third due to a l
primary-to-secondary steam generator tube leak. All three
'
releases had been monitored, and all three had been well below
,
TS-specified instantaneous release limits.
(3) On August 20, 1992, design modifications to the Auxiliary Building process effluent radiation monitor (PERM 2) had been completed, correcting sampling system deficiencies identified in february 1988.
I The SARERR had been improved by changes made to the licensee's
'
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM), the ODCM implementing procedure, and the licensee's computer codes used for calculating offsite doses. No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
,
b.
Solid Radwaste Storaae and Processina
,
The inspector reviewed the licensee's current storage, processing,
and plans for disposal of low-level solid radioactive waste. During tours of the facility, particular attention was given.to posting, labeling, and RP controls associated with storage and processing of
!
solid radwaste. The following items were noted:
,
.(1) Posting, labeling,. surveys, and other RP controls, in the j
aspects noted, appeared adequate in controlling-access to areas-of radiological hazard. On February 24, 1992, the licensee had
g
discovered four locations on the Auxiliary building 61-foot elevation where radiation signs had been improperly posted.
The licensee had concluded that the radiation sign inserts had been deliberately misplaced, and had initiated a security.
inv.estigation. The investigation failed to reveal the person responsible for misplacing the sign inserts, and no additional
- ,
..
-
-
--
._
- -- - -,.
-
.
_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
o
.
-
,
-
instances of this problem were subsequently observed.
(2) The licensee was making preparations to transfer spent resin from the spent resin storage tank (SRST) for subsequent dewatering, drying, shipment, and burial in polyethylene high-
'
integrity containers (HICs). Minor difficulties had been experienced with recirculating the SRST, but a pre-transfer sample had been obtained and sent offsite for analysis.
(3) Liner #9 contained a resin backflush filter from October 1980.
The licensee had experienced difficulty in dispositioning the liner, since the filter (determined to be Class C waste) had been concrete-encapsulated in a carbon steel liner (versus a HIC). The licensee had recently obtained a variance to dispose of the liner at the Richland, Washington disposal site.
(4) Considerable efforts were being made to process, classify, and disposition -accumulated radwaste items, including old spent l
filters, filter sludge, empty contaminated shields, and fuel pellet cleanup equipment. The licensee's radwaste group was actively working to survey and dispose of all remaining low-level radioactive material no longer designated for possible re-use, such as old repair tools and dated outage equipment.
For items that could not be readily dispositioned, the licensee was evaluating locations for long-term storage.
The licensee's performance in this area was improving, as resolution was being achieved for several long-standing radwaste matters.
No
.
problems were noted with radwaste storage or processing. No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
c.
Radwaste Classification The inspector reviewed the licensee's current classification methods for internal consistency, and for adherence to the requirements of 10 CFR 20.311, 61.55, and 61.56. A detailed review was given to specific waste streams, including clean and dirty waste filters, primary filters, and dry active waste.
No significant variations were noted from previous years.
In addition, calculations were reviewed for det1rmining inferential scaling factors based on 1991 and 1992 samples. The following points were noted:
!
(1) Waste characterization assumptions were clearly defined in the calculation inputs.
Sampling of the various streams had been performed in a consistent manner, with yearly offsite analysis.
(2) Sample data was compared with that of previous years, and in
,
general showed little variation.
Increases were seen in the ratios of tritium and carbon-14 detected by offsite analysis, and were dealt with conservatively in establishing the new scaling factors.
l i
!
l
f
.
-
.
.
(3)
In the instances reviewed, waste stream characterization had been accurately performed for specific waste shipments (see Section 3.d, below).
Scaling factors and classification methods had been consistently applied.
The licensee's program for characterization and classification of radwaste prepared for disposal was consistent and accurate to the extent practicable. No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
d.
Transportation of Radioactive Materials -
The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for transportation of l
radioactive materials for consistency with internal licensee procedures, and for compliance with 10 CFR 20.311, 30.41(c), 71.5,
'
71.101(c), and 49 CFR 170 - 189. The following observations were noted:
(1) The licensee had made 11 shipments of radioactive material in 1993, including steam generator equipment, laundry, samples, and waste for processing and/or disposal.
In each case, verification had been obtained of the receiver's authorization prior to shipment. Copies of the waste processing and disposal
,
site licenses were maintained in the files of the licensee's radwaste group.
!
(2)
For shipments of waste, the inspector verified the accuracy of l
the shipping papers for waste characterization and description, radionuclide identity and quantity, and waste volume. No discrepancies were noted.
(3) Shipping papers appeared complete in all cases reviewed, including shipment manifests, bills of lading, driver instructions, certificates of compliance, and radiation surveys.
(4) The inspector reviewed a March 2, 1993, letter the licensee had received from the vendor used for radwaste segregation and processing. The letter stated that the vendor had received a citation from the Department of Transportation for the licensee's failure to note certain shipments including fissile radioactive material as " Fissile Exempt."
The inspector noted that a recent licensee audit (AP-693) had identified this concern, as it related to Shipments 92-02, 92-07, and 92-22. The audit had correctly identified that
" Fissile Exempt" had been required on these shipping papers, in accordance with 49 CFR 172.203(d)(vi)(A). The radwaste group had corrected the deficiency by issuing a temporary change.-
notice (TCH 92-651) to RP Procedure RPMP-1.
No subsequent instances of this problem had been identified.
.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _
'
.
. <
,
'
The licensee's performance in this area appeared adequate in meeting stated safety objectives. No violations of NRC requirements were identified.
l 4.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with the individuals designated in Section I at the exit meeting held on March 11, 1993. The scope and findings of the inspection were summarized. The licensee acknowledged the inspector's observations.
,
i
!
I l
'
,
I i
'
.
l
\\
l i
j
.
i
)
l
!
l
..