IR 05000348/1993007
| ML20036B195 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Farley  |
| Issue date: | 05/05/1993 |
| From: | Decker T, Mcneill N NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20036B191 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-348-93-07, 50-348-93-7, 50-364-93-07, 50-364-93-7, NUDOCS 9305180288 | |
| Download: ML20036B195 (11) | |
Text
'
.
,
,
,
[
l'g -
UNITED STATES y
j,,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
RE GION 18 O
}
$
101 MAe41ETTA STREET, N.W.
$
'
- j'
ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323
,
%,**Y /
MY 0 7 @q
Report Nos: 50-348/93-07 and 50-364/93-07 Licensee: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street Birmingham, AL 35291-0400 Docket Nos.:
50-348 and 50-364 License Nos.: NPF-2 and NPF-8 Facility Name:
Farley 1 and 2 Inspection Condu ted: April 5-9, 1993 Inspector:
b M '9 )
N.~G. jcNdill'
_
.
Date Signed P
'
Approved by I///&cE/i G
X3 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 the organization of the Chemistry / Environmental Department and the Radwaste Unit (including personnel training and qualification), plant water chemistry, process and effluent monitors, the Semiannual Effluent Release Report, the Radiological Environmental Operating Report, Radiological Waste Handling, Non-
' i Radiological Chemistry parameters, Meteorological Tower data, Audits conducted
!
by the Licensee, Quality Control and Interlaboratory Comparison Programs, and i
Previous Inspection findings.
Results:
l The licensee's organization of it's Chemistry Department and radioactive
.
'
material processing and shipping units satisfied Technical Specification (TS)
and Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) requirements (Paragraph 2).
i
,
Plant water chemistry was maintained well within limits specified by the TSs l
(Paragraph 3).
!
Training and Qualification Records for personnel in the Chemistry and Health Physics-Radwaste area were adequate to meet TS requirements (Paragraph 4).
!
l
I
!
9305180288 930507 PDR ADOCK 05000348 G
PDR j
l
_
l
C
.
.
.
?
I r
The Radiochemistry Counting Room was participating in interlaboratory cross j
check programs and the equipment was well maintained (Paragraph 5).
i The licensee had submitted an Annual Radiological Environmental Operating
,
Report which detailed minimal impact on the environment surrounding the Farley i
Nuclear Plant (Paragraph 6).
l
The Meteorological Tower equipment was operable and maintained according to l
TSs (Paragraph 7).
.i i
The Semiannual Effluent Release Report was reviewed by the. inspector and l
showed data comparable with past reports and was well within TSs (Paragraph 8).
l The licensee was performing program audits in compliance with TSs
(Paragraph 9).
!
i Radiological Waste handling was observed and trends in Solid Waste shipments l
were reviewed and found to be within TSs and licensee guidelines for reducing l
the volume of wastes (Paragraph 10).
+
f i
!
!
!
i:i
!
.
I
!
!
I
!
i l
!
f i
!
l
i
'i i
- - -
-.
- - -..
-- -- -- -- -- --- ------ - - ---. -
-
-
- - -
,
.
.
.
,
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted i
Licensee Employees j
i
'*W. Bayne, Safety Audit and Engineering Review (SAER) Auditor-
!
- 0. Graves, Radwaste Supervisor
.;
- R. Hamm, Engineer, Chemistry and Environmental t'
R. Hill, General Manager - Nuclear Plant J. Kale, Superintendent, Chemistry and Environmental
- R. Livingston, Environmental Supervisor N. McGilvray, Nuclear Specialist I
!
- M. Mitchell, HP Superintendent
-!
- C. Nesbitt, Manager Operations J. Osterholtz, Technical Manager
- L. Stinson, Assistant General Manager of Operations G. Terry, Safety Audit and Engineering Review (SAER) Auditor
- M. Willis, Chemistry Foreman
- R. Wood, Chemistry Supervisor i
i Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, operators, technicians, and administrative personnel.
i Nuclear Regulatory Commission
!
!
- G. Maxwell, Senior Resident Inspector
.I i
- Attended exit interview l
I
'
Acronyms and Initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the l
last paragraph.
j
!
Organization (84750 and 86750)
Technical Specification (TS) 6.2 describes the licensee's organization.
l i
The inspector reviewed the licensee's organization, staffing levels, and lines of authority as they related to the Chemistry Department and Radioactive Waste Group to verify that the licensee had not made organizational changes which would adversely affect the ability to l
control radiation exposures or radiondive material.
l t
The inspector concluded that no major changes had occurred in the
!
respective groups that would adversely affect their ability to perform
!
their assigned tasks.
l No violations or deviations were identified.
.l e
$
!
'
.- -
,
..
.,.
- -.
-w
.
.
.
i
3.
Plant Water Chemistry (84750)
,
TS 3.4.8 specifies that the concentrations of dissolved oxygen (D0),
l chloride, and fluoride in the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) be maintained i
below 0.10 parts per million (ppm), 0.15 ppm, and 0.15 ppm,
respectively. TS 3.4.9 specifies that the specific activity of the
!
primary coolant be limited to less than or equal to 1.0 microcurie / gram
_
(uCi/g) dose equivalent iodine (DEI).
l l
These parameters are related to corrosion resistance and fuel integrity.
l The oxygen parameter is based on maintaining levels sufficiently low to prevent general and localized corrosion. The chloride and fluoride
parameters are. based on providing protection from halide stress
!
corrosion. The activity parameter is based on minimizing personnel
_
radiation exposure during operation and maintenance.
!
Pursuant to these requirements, the inspector reviewed tabular daily
'
i summaries which correlated reactor power output to chloride, fluoride, and dissolved oxygen concentrations of the reactor coolant for the period of July 1, 1992 through December 31, 1992 and determined that the
,
parameters were maintained well below TS limits. Ty,ical values for D0, I
chloride, and fluoride were less than 10 parts per billion (ppb), less
!
'
than 20 ppb, and -less than 9 ppb, respectively, for both units. Dose
!
Equivalent Iodine (DEI) were typical for past years with values well
j within TS guidelines. The DEI values for Unit 1 averaged
'
9.5 E-3 uCi/ gram. The DEI value for Unit 2 which have consistently been
lower than Unit I averaged 4.0 E-4 uCi/ gram.
l
"
!
The inspector concluded that the Plant Water Chemistry was being
!
maintained well within the TS requirements.
j l
]
No violations or deviations were identified.
t 4.
Training and Qualification (84750, 86750)
l l
TS 6.4.1 requires the licensee to maintain a training program for the l
'
plant staff to assure that the minimum education and experience
- l requirements of Section 5.5 of ANSI N18.1-1971 and Appendix A of l
10 CFR 55 and the supplemental requirements specified in Sections A and
!
C of Enclosure 1 of the March 28, 1980 NRC letter to all licensees are
!
"
met before a person can be considered to be qualified to perform his
!
duties independently. The program shall include familiarization with j
'
the relevant operational experience.
j
'
i The inspector interviewed the licensee's Technical Training Supervisor
about the Training / Qualification Program in general and more
_
specifically in the area of Chemistry.
Basically, a new trainee must
proceed through a 21-week two-part initial program composed of
!
i classroom / laboratory work, conducted in the Farley Nuclear Plant (FNP) _
Training Center whereby technical knowledge is acquired and basic skills i
developed through exercises based upon tasks performed in the plant, and -
i an "On-The-Job" (OTJ) period during which the trainee is required to l
l f
r i
-
.
..
.
.
-..
..
-
~
.
.
I i
i i
perform selected tasks under close supervision. A Qualification Record-l (QR) is established for tF' trainee during the OTJ period and is used to
-!
document and guide his performance. Upon completion of this program,
!
the individuals may independently perform tasks for which he is l
qualified.
For the qualified technician who performs tasks
'
independently, there is a retraining program designed to maintain a base level of knowledge by reviewing various applicable topics as well as
.
providing updated information. Three cycles of retraining, each of 32-l hour duration, are planned annually. Five classes with ten to twel_ve
}
employees in attendance present required topics (such as job-related i
procedures, industry events, core damage mitigation etc.) and requested
!
topics (such as new/ modified tasks, a system review, etc.).
l
.
The inspector randomly selected the names of several chemistry technicians and reviewed their respective QRs to assure that the training records were being accurately maintained.
No irregularities
,
!
were identified and the inspector concluded that training documentation was good.
The inspector concluded that the Training Program was well structured to j
provide a pool of well-trained Environmental and Chemistry (E&C)
i technicians, as well as HP and Radwaste Handling personnel.
l
!
No violations or deviations were identified.
r 5.
Radiochemistry Count Room and Quality Control (84750)
l
!
To evaluate the licensee's analytical capability to make consistently l
accurate radioactivity measurements, the inspector examined the Unit i j
Count Room.
It was equipped with a liquid scintillator system, an i
alpha / beta counter, two high purity germanium (HPGe) detectors, and two i
proportional counters.
j i
The inspector reviewed records for the systems to verify compliance and
!
assess quality. The inspector reviewed the background and response
!
check log for the liquid scintillation counter. Quenched and unquenched tritium sources were utilized. All counts were within the three-sigma j
band. The counter was standardized every three months and the l
electronics were calibrated annually. Background and response checks for the alpha / beta counter were reviewed. Am-241 was utilized for the alpha counts while Sr-90 was utilized for the beta counts. The
!
'
inspector noted that several alpha counts fell outside the three-sigma band. When this occurred, a recount was made.
In each instance, the recount was within the three-sigma band. The counter was standardized
every three months. The inspector also reviewed the background and
~
response check log for the proportional counters. A Pu-239 source was
!
utilized for an alpha check while a Sr-90 source was utilized for the
!
beta check.
Standardization of the counters'was done overy three j
months. The inspector also reviewed the calibration records for the HPGe detectors. They were calibrated annually for forty-one different geometries.
Count Room personnel were familiar with the operation and
,
capabilities of all Count Room instrumentation.
,
,
!
.i
!
.-.
,
.
.
.
The inspector concluded that the Count Room 'and its associated instrumentation was well maintained and adequate for its intended purpose.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report (84750)
TS 6.9.1.6 requires that the Annual Radiological Environmental Oper0 ting Report be submitted prior to May 1 of the year following the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. TS 6.9.1.6 al.so states format and content requirements for the Annual Radiological'
Environmental Operating Report.
The Farley Nuclear Plant Environmental Monitoring Program is designed to detect the effects, if any, of plant operation on environmental radiation levels by monitoring airborne, waterborne, ingestion, and direct radiation pathways in the area surrounding the plant site.
Indicator sampling stations are located where detection of the radiological effects of the plant's operation would be most likely, where the samples collected should provide a significant indication of potential dose to man, and where an adequate comparison of predicted radiological levels might be made with measured levels. Control stations are located where radiological levels are not expected to be significantly influenced by plant operation, i.e., at background locations.
An environmental impact assessment of plant operation is made from the radiological measurements at the sampling stations.
The inspector concluded that the licensee had a good program in place to detect the effects of radiological effluents, direct radiation, etc. due to plant operations and that those operations had caused minimum impact to the environment and virtually no dose to the general public.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7.
Meteorological Tower and Instrumentation (86750)
TS 3/4.3.3.4 states operability and surveillance requirements of the meteorological monitoring system.
Requirements are implemented by Procedure FNP-ENV-17, Revision 17, issued April 9,1991.
l The inspector and an Environmental Technician inspected the Primary and l'
Secondary Meteorological Towers associated instrument buildings, including equipment and logbooks, to verify TS compliance and to evaluate instrument operability. The inspector noted that both towers
,
were located such that there would be no interference with the flow of air. The Primary Tower was 150 feet tall with instrument packages at the 35-and 50-foot levels. Calibrations were done on a semi-annual basis for both towers. The Chemistry and Environmental Group performed checks three times per week.
The primary system had three channels for the vertical temperature differential, which was used to determine the air stability index.
.
.
t
!
!
l
i
!
Wind speed and horizontal wind direction were measured at each level.
!
Temperature and dew point were measured at the 35-foot level. A solar
)
radiation measuring instrument was located on a platform near the l
Primary Tower. A rain gauge was located near the instrument building i
and was observed to be in good operating order. The inspector noted l
that they were operating properly. A mercury barometer was mounted on i
the interior wall of the primary tower's instrument building. The j
inspector noted that the Maintenance Work Request (MAR) 213751 had been i
initiated on November 18, 1991, to repair a bad sensor in the bi-vane j
wind direction indicator at the 150-foot level.
j
!
The Secondary Tower served as a battup to the Primary Tower.
It was 10 j
meters tall with detectors at a single level.
This tower was equipped
with a system for horizontal and vertical components as well as wind speed and ambient temperature.
A review of calibration records indicated that this tower, as well as the Primary Tower, had been
calibrated within the guidelines specified by the TSs.
l l
The inspector went to the Control Room and observed the panel on which l
two recorders indicated wind speed and direction at the 35-and 150-foot
!
levels as well as the temperature difference between the two levels.
l
!
From examination of the above addressed systems, the inspector
!
determined that the meteorological measurement system was capable of j
fulfilling its required functions.
i The inspector reviewed selected calibration records and maintenance i
records of the past several years of both the Pritary and Secondary
!
Meteorological Towers to verify TS compliance and/or identify chronic problems. No irregularities were noted by the inspector.
>
The inspector concluded that the Meteorological Towers and their l
associated instrumentation were well-maintained and satisfied the TS i
requirements.
l
!
No violations or deviations were identified.
8.
Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Report (84750)
l i
TS 6.9.1.8 requires the licensee to submit a Semiannual Radiological l
Environmental Release Report within the specified time periods covering
)
the operation of the facility during the previous six months of
!
operation.
TS 6.9.1.9 identifies the requirements for the content and
format of the report.
The inspector reviewed the reports for the first j
half and second half of 1992 to verify TS compliance. These data are
summarized below for the respective entire calendar years.
t
!
i i
l i
i
!
.
.
.
Radioactive Effluent Release Summary Farley, Units 1 and 2 1990 1991 1992 Abnormal Releases Gaseous
2
Liquid
0
Activity Released (curies)
a.
Liquid 1.
Fission and Activation Products 1.58E-1 4.05E-1 1.77E-1 2.
Tritium 1.41E+3 8.24E+2 8.18E+2 l
b.
Gaseous l
1.
Fissicie and Activation Gases 8.82E+1 4.64E+2 2.67E+1 2.
Particulates and Iodines 3.15E-6 1.62E-3 4.66E-5 l
3.
Tritium 8.75E+1 1.39E+2 3.51E+1 (
i An unplanned release was noted in the Gaseous Release Program. This event occurred on Unit 2 during Quarter 3 in that a continuous sample was not obtained on the Unit 2 Containment Purge the week of August 22.
due to a defective pump switch.
,
!
Two unplanned releases were noted in the Liquid Waste Release Program.
One occurred on Unit 2 during the 3rd quarter in that five waste Monitor
!
tank releases were performed based on data from a gamma spectroscopy l
system with a faulty' energy calibration (see Inspection Report 92-32).
!
The second occurred on Unit I during the 4th quarter in that the
'!
December 10th Turbine Building Sump daily sample was missed due to an i
inoperable auto-sampler, j
No changes to the Process Control Program (PCP) were made during the reporting period.
The inspector concluded that the Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Report satisfied the requirements of the TSs.
I No violations or deviations were identified.
j 9.
Audits (84750 and 86750)
TS 6.5.2.8 specifies the types and frequencies of audits to be conducted under the direction of the Manger-Safety Audit and Engineering Review
[
(SAER). The inspector reviewed audits conducted during the past year by
SAER within the scope of this report.
In order to evaluate compliance
,
with the TSs and assess. quality of the licensee's program, the inspector i
reviewed the following audits:
!
!
'
-
._, -, _ _ _. _.
.
.
.
.
Onsite Environmental Monitoring Program, SAER-WP-01, Appendices A
-
and D (Section I) - November 1 1992 thru February 5, 1993 Surveillance Testing, Chemistry SAER-WP-34, Appendices B and C -
-
April 1 1992 thru June 4, 1992 Radioactive Waste Management, SAER WP-31, Appendices A and B -
-
August 1, 1992 thru November 2, 1992 Environmental Monitoring - Surveillance Testing Program, SAER-WP-
-
01, Appendices B, C, and D - February 1 thru April 1, 1992 Chemistry, SAER-WP-06, Appendix A - June I thru October 2, 1992
-
The audits were found to be well planned and documented and included several findings of procedural noncompliance which were being tracked or that had been closed out. A corrective action audit was undertaken every six months by the SAER Group.
Findings were closed out formally at that time or left open. The inspector noted that the comments and recommendations were detailed and would aid the implementation or adequate corrective actions.
The inspector verified that the audit program was conducted in accordance with the TSs.
The inspector concluded that the audit process was capable of identifying programmatic weaknesses and making recommendations for corrective actions.
No violations or deviations were identified.
10.
Radwaste Processing and Transportation (86750)
10 CFR 71.5(a) requires that each licensee who transfers licensed material outside of the confines of its plant or other place of use, or who delivers licensed material to a carrier for transport, shall comply with the applicable requirements of the regulations appropriate to the mode of transport of the Department of Transportation (DOT) in 49 CFR Parts 170 through 189.
Pursuant to these requirements, the inspector reviewed the licensee's activities affiliated with these requirements, to determine whether the licensee effectively processes, packages, stores, and ships radioactive solid materials.
The licensee's program for the packaging and transportation of radioactive materials, including solid radwaste, was conducted by the Radioactive Waste Group within the Health Physics Department.
Radwaste was processed and packaged by the Radwaste Group, including compacting contaminated material, loading shipments, and preparing shipping documentatio.Q
.
.
.
.
-
-;
The following table summarizes solid radwaste shipments for the previous few years..These shipments typically include spent resins, filter sludges, dry compressible waste, and contaminated equipment.
t l
Farley Solid Radwaste Shipments l
,
1990 1991 1992 Number of Shipments 52-
'78 108 j
!
Number of Irradiated Fuel j
Shipments
0
j
-
r
]
Volume (cubic meters)
150.9 150.0 239.1 l
"
C Activity (curies)
294.2 1036.6 2148.7 l
t
The license's higher number of shipments and the increased volume
!
subsequently produced was due to a concerted effort on the part the
Farley facility to ship as much possible, prior to an anticipated
!
closure of the Barnwell burial site. Overall the trends reflected past
!
a performance by the licensee in this area, which had been found to be j
'
L within administrative and industry guidelines.
'
i The inspector concluded that the Radwaste Group was stable, staf fed with l
competent personnel, and executed its responsibilities in a professional
!
.
i-manner.
l
<
r No violations or deviations were identified.
!
l
-
.
l
.
f 11.
Exit Interview
'
The inspection scope and results were summarized on April 9,1993, with
!
those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.
The inspector described the
I
areas inspected end discussed the inspection results, including likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents
!
and/or processes reviewed during the inspection. The licensee did not identify any such documents or processes as proprietary. Dissenting l
'
comments were not received from the licensee.
.j l
10.
Acronyms and Initialisms l
'
!
ANSI - American National Standards Institute, Inc.
i
.
C&E - Chemistry and Environmental j
CFR - Code of Federal Regulations j
Ci - curie
DEI - Dose Equivalent Iodine
!
-
DO - Dissolved Oxygen
)
,
DOT - Department of Transportation
!
,
FNP - Farley Nuclear Plant
!
J j
FSAR - Final Sufety Analysis Report
- .
HP - Health Physics l
1-
!
-
i
--
_.
-
-.
- -. -
.-
.
.
.
,
9-mg - milligram NRC - Nuclear Regulatory Commission ODCM - Off-site Dose Calculation Manual ppm - parts per million QR - Qualification Records RCS - Reactor Coolant System REMP - Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program
-
TS - Technical Specification uti - micro-Curie (1.0E-6 Ci)
!
i
!
l
!
!
!
t
!
[
L
..
.
r t
!
!
!
-
!
- f e
!
!
,
i
I
!
.
w
--
e
-