IR 05000382/1993009
| ML20035F299 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Waterford  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1993 |
| From: | Murray B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035F297 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-382-93-09, 50-382-93-9, NUDOCS 9304210128 | |
| Download: ML20035F299 (20) | |
Text
.
.
APPENDIX U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report:
50-382/93-09 Operating License: NPF-38 Licensee:
Entergy Operations, Inc.
P.O. Box B Killona, Louisiana 70066 Facility Name: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 Inspection At: Waterford-3 Site, Killona, St. Charles Parish, Louisiana Inspection Conducted: March 29 through April 2, 1993 Inspector:
J. B. Nicholas, Ph.D., Senior Radiation Specialist Facilities Inspection Programs Section Approved:
ft(),
Il/d@f
/
'
Blaine Murfay,fChi~ef, F ilities Inspection Date 1 (
Programs Section Inspection Summary Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of the liquid and gaseous radioactive waste management programs including organization and management controls, training and qualifications, quality assurance, radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent systems, radioactive effluent monitoring, reports of radioactive effluents, and air cleaning systems.
Results:
The radioactive waste effluent management pngram was being properly
implemented (Section 1.1).
The radiation protection department organizational structure and
staffing met requirements (Section 1.1).
The radiation protection department had experienced a very lcw turnover
.
of technical personnel (Section 1.1).
Excellent training programs had been implemented for personnel l
responsible for performing radioactive waste effluent activities i
(Section 2.1).
i I
I
!
t 9304210*28 930415 PDR ADOCK 05000382 O
)
.
.
-2-A satisfactory number of personnel had been trained and qualified to-
perform radioactive waste effluent activities (Section 2.1).
A good quality assurance audit program of the radioactive waste effluent
program and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual had been implemented (Section 3.1).
Only two quality assurance surveillances of the radioactive waste
effluent program were performed during 1990-1992 (Section 3.1).
Quality assurance audits had been performed of the contractors used to
perform radioactive waste analyses (Section 3.1).
An excellent liquid and gaseous radioactive waste effluent program was
being implemented (Sections 4.1 and 5.1)..
A good testing and calibration program had been established for the
radioactive waste effluent instrumentation and radiation monitors (Sections 4.1 and 5.1).
Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports were submitted in a -
timely manner and contained all the required information in the proper format (Section 6.1).
Reactor coolant chemistry data did not indicate excessive chemical or
radioactivity which would have caused an adverse affect on the liquid radioactive waste effluents (Section 7.1).
A good program had been established for testing the safety-related air
cleaning systems (Section 8.1).
l l
Attachments:
!
i Attachment 1 - Persons Contacted and Exit Meeting
Attachment 2 - Summation of all Liquid Effluent Releases
-;
i Attachment 3 - Summation of all Airborne Effluent Releases
Attachment 4 - Maximum Annual Doses from Gaseous and Liquid
Effluent Releases Attachment 5 - Liquid Effluent Release Summary
Attachment 6 - Gaseous Effluent Release Summary
- -..-.-...
I
.
l-3-DETAILS 1 ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT CONTROLS (84750)
The inspector reviewed the organization and staffing regarding the radioactive waste effluent program to determine agreement with commitments in Chapter 13 l
of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical Specification 6.2.
1.1 Discussion The inspector verified that the organizational structure of the radiation protection department, which is responsible for the implementation of the radioactive waste effluent program, was as defined in the Updated Safety
'
Analysis Report and Technical Specifications.
It was noted that the radiation protection department was reorganized effective January 1, 1993. This reorganization formed seven functional areas each headed by a health physics foreman who reported directly to the radiation protection superintendent. As in the past, the functional area responsible for implementing the radioactive waste effluent program was the health physics counting room. Therefore, the recent reorganization of the radiation protection department had very little impact on the performance of the radioactive waste effluent program.
Management control procedures were reviewed for the assignment of l
responsibilities for the management and implementation of the radioactive waste effluent program. The radiation protection department was assigned the responsibility for preparing radioactive waste release permits, evaluating the radioactive waste effluent releases, calculating the radiation doses resulting from the releases to the environment, and maintaining the radioactive waste effluent release data. The inspector determined that the duties and responsibilities of the radiation protection department specified in the procedures were being implemented. A group of seven health physics counting room technicians staffing five rotational shifts were directly responsible for collecting and analyzing radioactive waste effluent samples and preparing the l
effluent release permits. The inspector interviewed several of the health
!
physics counting room technicians and determined that they were familiar with
!
the requirements of the radioactive waste effluent program and maintained a high level of performance.
l The inspector reviewed the staffing of the radiation protection department and determined it be adequate and in accordance with licensee commitments.
There i
had been a very low turnover of personnel within the radiation protection department.
l l
l
- - - -
..
....... -
._
--
..
-
-
.
.-
t
.
-
i r
!
-4-
]
)
'
1.2 Conclusions i
The radiation protection department organizational structure and staffing. met i
Technical Specification requirements. The radioactive waste effluent
management program was being implemented in accordance with station j
procedures. The radiation protection department had experienced a very low
!
l turnover of personnel during the past 2 years.
2 TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS (84750)
\\
The inspector reviewed the training and qualification programs.for the health (
physics counting room technicians and nuclear auxiliary operators responsible
l for implementing the radioactive waste effluent program to determine agreement
-;
l with commitments in Chapter 13 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and l
compliance with the requirements in Technical Specification 6.4.
(
'
2.1 Discussion The inspector reviewed the training programs for the health physics counting l
room technicians and the nuclear auxiliary operators including a review of
!
course descriptions, selected lesson plans, personnel training records, and l
qualification cards.
It was determined that the licensee's training programs l
l were being implemented in accordance with station procedures.
The inspector reviewed individual staff computerized training records and
)
qualification cards for selected health physics counting room technicians and j
nuclear auxiliary operators responsible for performing radioactive waste
effluent program activities.
Based on the review, it was verified that the
seven health physics technicians presently assigned to the health physics
!
counting room and responsible for performing radioactive waste effluent i
program activities had completed the required training to perform their l
assigned duties, and that the 16 nuclear auxiliary operators who were assigned i
to perform radioactive waste effluent program Rctivities were trained and qualified as level A nuclear auxiliary building operators.
{
l l
2.2 Conclusions q
The licensee had implemented excellent accredited radiation protection i
department and nuclear auxiliary operator training programs. Twenty-three health physics technicians were qualified to perform independent sampling,
'
analyses, and processing of radioactive waste effluent release permits to meet Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements. Sixteen nuclear auxiliary.
operators were qualified as radwaste operators. The radiation protection department and operations department had adequate, well qualified staffs to meet shift staffing requirements.
1
_.
-.
--
.
.
-
.
.
.-- -
.
,
(.
- - - -
.
_
'
[
.
l
-
,
!
,
-5-l r
!
i 3 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM (84750)_
j The inspector reviewed the quality assurance audit and surveillance programs
!
regarding the radiocctive waste effluent program activities to determine '
!
agreement with commitments in Chapters 13 and 17 of the Updated Safety l
Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical i
-
Specification 6.5.2.8.
3.1 Discussion The inspector reviewed the quality assurance audit schedules for 1992, 1993, l
and 1994; audit plans and checklists; and the qualifications of the quality
t l
assurance auditors and technical specialists who performed the audits of the i
health physics training and qualification program, process and effluent i
radiation monitors, and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. -The review of the
!
quality assurance audit schedules indicated that Audit SA-XX-022.1,.
!
" Radiological Environmental Monitoring /Offsite Dose Calculation Manual," was l
being split into two audits beginning in November 1993. Audit SA-XX-022.1 l
will continue to audit the radiological environmental monitoring program while
Audit SA-XX-002.1 will focus on the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual
,
,
l activities. This audit schedule change will enable the auditors to perform a i
l more concentrated audit of each of these areas.
The audit schedules were in j
l compliance with the Technical Specification audit frequency requirements.
j
!
Reports of quality assurance audits performed during 1992 and thus far in 1993
of the areas related to the performance of the radioactive waste effluent-l program were reviewed for scope, thoroughness of program evaluation, and
i timely followup of identified deficiencies. The audits were performed in accordance with quality assurance procedures and schedules by qualified
,
auditors and technical specialists. The reviewed audits of the health physics j
l training and qualification program, process and-effluent radiation monitors,
'
and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual were of good quality and satisfactory to evaluate the licensee's performance in implementing the radioactive waste
'
effluent program and meeting the' Technical Specification and Offsite Dose e
Calculation Manual requirements.
'
Quality Assurance Audit SA-92-003.1, " Performance, Training, and Qualification," conducted during the time period May 8 through June 11, 1992,
!
reviewed, in part, the training and qualification programs and training
,
I documentation for the chemistry, health physics, and radwaste departments.
l The audit verified that the required training for these departments was being performed and documented in accordance with nuclear training department
'
procedures.
No audit findings were identified in these department training programs.
i l
Quality Assurance Audit SA-92-18C.1, " Health Physics Instruments, Process and
'
Area Monitors," conducted August 3-31, 1992, reviewed the maintenance, j
l testing, calibration, and alarm setpoints of the process and effluent
radiation monitors.
The audit scope was satisfactory to evaluate the
,
licensee's performance of required performance checks and calibrations of the
!
l l
l l
!
!
l l
-
t
__
'
l
.
-6-effluent radiation monitors. However, the audit did not include the maintenance, performance checks, and calibrations of the health physics counting room analytical instruments used to analyze radioactive waste
,
effluent samples as was performed in the 1990 Quality Assurance Audit SA-90-18C.I. Two audit findings were identified which dealt with high alarm setpoints for the in-plant airborne particulate-iodine-gas monitors and the required performance of technical reviews whenever an instrument calibration "as-found" value was out of tolerance by greater than 20 percent.
These audit findings were documented in Quality Notices QA-92-088 and QA-92-90 and were in the process of being closed.
Quality Assurance Audit SA-93-022.1, " Radiological Environmental Monitoring /0ffsite Dose Calculation Manual," conducted during the time period January 13 through February 12, 1993, reviewed, in part, the doses from gaseous and liquid effluents released to the environment. The doses reported in the Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports met all Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.
The inspector reviewed the two quality assurance surveillances performed during the time period January 1990 through February 1993 in the areas related to the performance of the radioactive waste effluent program. Quality Assurance Surveillance QS-90-024, " Quality Assurance Surveillance of Radioactive Effluent Release," was performed in December 1990 and monitored health physics personnel preparing a radioactive waste effluent release permit l
and performing the required sampling, analyses, and pre-release calculations
,
for a liquid waste batch release of a boric acid condensate tank. There were l
no findings or observations identified.
Quality Assurance Surveillance QS-92-001, " Quality Assurance Surveillance of the Radiation
Monitoring System to Verify Proper Setpoints for the Gaseous and Liquid
,
Effluent Monitors," was performed in February 1992 and included the
)
verification of high alarm and alert alarm setpoints installed in the gaseous and liquid effluent radiation monitors.
All of the gaseous and liquid effluent radiation monitors alarm setpoints that were verified were set to I
values equal to or less than the values specified in Health Physics Procedure HP-001-235, " Calculation and Adjustment of Radiation Monitoring Setpoints." There were no findings or observations identified.
It was noted i
that no quality assurance surveillances of radioactive waste effluent program activities were performed during 1991 and none had been performed since the previous NRC inspection of this area conducted in June 1992.
The inspector observed that the licensee had performed only two quality assurance surveillances related to the radioactive waste effluents program during the past 3 years and neither of these quality assurance surveillances were performed during 1991. However, the inspector did not identify any specific decline in the licensee's performance of the radioactive waste effluent program. The inspector's observation was discussed with the licensee during the inspection and at the exit meeting conducted on April 2, 1993. The i
licensee stated that they would evaluate the inspector's observation involving the frequency of the quality assurance surveillances conducted of the
'
radioactive waste effluent program.
!
,
l
.
-
._.
_
_ _ -
. J
.
.
-7-The inspector noted that the operations support assessment department was dissolved effective July 1, 1992. The previous program assessment responsibilities performed by the operations support assessment-department had been divided among other departments, such as, quality assurance, licensing, and engineering.
The licensee was using a contractor laboratory to perform Technical Specification required radiochemistry analyses on radioactive waste effluent composite samples. The licensee was also using a contractor to perform in-place filter testing and laboratory charcoal adsorber analyses on the station's safety-related air cleaning systems. The licensee had used an audit of the contractor radiochemistry laboratory performed by a Virginia Power quality assurance audit team during the time period December 2-4, 1991, and had used an audit of the air cleaning systems filter testing contractor performed by a Nuclear Procurement Issues Committee audit team during the time period September 17-20, 1991, to evaluate the performance of the contractors to perform their respective functions and to retain their current status on the licensee's qualified suppliers list. The inspector reviewed these audits performed on the two contractors and determined that the audits were satisfactory to evaluate the contractors' abilities to perform their respective Technical Specification required analyses and surveillance activities. The inspector verified that the licensee had also performed annual evaluations of the contractors' programs as required to retain their current status on the licensee's qualified suppliers list.
3.2 Conclusions Quality assurance audits of the radioactive waste effluent program and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual had been performed as required. These audits were technically comprehensive and provided good program evaluation and management oversight. A limited number of quality assurance surveillances which monitored radioactive waste effluent program activities had been performed.
The licensee indicated during the e.xit meeting that the quality assurance surveillance program of the radioactive waste effluent program would be evaluated. Audits and evaluations of the contractors used to perform radioactive waste effluent program Technical Specification radiochemistry surveillance analyses and safety-related air cleaning systems' surveillance testing had been performed as required to retain the contractors' current status on the licensee's qualified suppliers list.
4 LIQUID RADIOACTIVE WASTE EFFLUENTS (84750)
The inspector reviewed the liquid radioactive waste effluent program including liquid waste processing, liquid waste sampling and analyses, procedures for control and release of radioactive liquid waste effluents, surveillance tests, and liquid effluent instrumentation and radiation monitor tests and calibrations to determine agreement with commitments in Chapter 11 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical Specifications 6.8.1, 6.8.4.f, and 6.14; and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Sections 5.3, 5.5, and 5.6.1; and Tables 5.3-1 and 5.6- __
..
__
_ _ _ _ _ _ _.. __
__
-
.
.
. _
_
t
{
!
,
t-8-
{
4.1 Discussion
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's implementation of the radioactive waste i
effluent program and Offsite. Dose Calculation Manual to ensure compliance with
sampling and analyses requirements, analyses sensitivities, analytical
!
results, surveillance tests, radwaste operations procedures, offsite dose results from radioactive liquid effluents, and operational tests and j
calibrations of equipment and radiation monitors associated with the
!
radioactive liquid waste processing systems.
l r
The inspector reviewed selected procedures governing the release of liquid i
radioactive waste effluents.
Ihese procedures provided for the following:
!
recirculation and sampling of the radioactive liquid waste; chemical and i
radionuclide analyses of the radioactive liquid waste prior to release; j
calculation of effluent release rate, effluent radiation monitor setpoints, i
projected offsite radionuclide concentrations, and offsite doses prior to
'
release; and recording of dilution parameters, and verification of effluent
discharge flow rates and effluent volume discharged during the release.
The inspector accompanied and observed health physics personnel collect a l
radioactive waste liquid sample from Waste Condensate Tank B on March 30,
1993, analyze the sample, and prepare the radioactive waste liquid. release i
permit. The inspector accompanied and observed nuclear auxiliary operators
'
perform the radioactive waste liquid release. All aspects of the radioactive waste liquid release were performed in accordance with approved procedures.
l
!
The inspector reviewed a representative number of batch radioactive waste
!
liquid release permits for the period January 1 through December 31, 1992.
It
!
was determined that the processing, sampling, and analyses of radioactive l
waste liquid effluent and the approval and performance of batch liquid i
.adioactive waste discharges were conducted in accordance with Offsite Dose i
Calculation Manual requirements. Quantities of radionuclides released in the i
liquid effluents were within the limits specified in the Offsite Dose j
Calculation Manual. Offsite doses were calculated according to the Offsite j
Dose Calculation Manual and were within the required limits.
The inspector
!
verified that the licensee was performing the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual j
required analyses on composite samples of batch radioactive liquid releases
for gross alpha, strontium-89, strontium-90, and iron-55. The inspector j
observed a health physics technician composite the radioactive batch waste
liquid release samples for March 1993 in preparation for sending the composite
'
sample to a contract laboratory to be analyzed as required.
The inspector determined that no design modifications had been made to the liquid radioactive waste management systems during 1992.
The inspector reviewed liquid radioactive waste process and effluent radiation monitor source check, channel check, functional test, and calibration records.
All records reviewed indicated that the radioactive liquid effluent monitoring instrumentation was being maintained, tested, and calibrated properly in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.
i u
__
.
!
-9-l 4.2 Conclusions l
l The licensee was implementing a liquid radioactive waste effluent program in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.
The quantities of radionuclides released in the liquid radioactive waste effluents were within the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits.
Offsite doses to the environment from the liquid radioactive waste effluents had been calculated using Offsite Dose Calculation Manual methodologies, and the dose results were within Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits.
The licensee had not made any major equipment or design modifications to the
,
radioactive liquid waste management systems during 1992.
Liquid radioactive waste effluent instrumentation and radiation monitors were being tested and calibrated in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.
5 GASEOUS RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE EFFLUENTS (84750)
The inspector reviewed the gaseous radioactive waste effluent program including gaseous waste processing, gaseous waste sampling and analyses, procedures for the control and release of gaseous waste effluents, and gaseous effluent radiation monitors to determine agreement with commitments in Chapter 11 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical Specifications 6.8.1, 6.8.4.f, and 6.14; and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Sections 5.4, 5.5, and 5.6.2; and Tables 5.4-1 and 5.6-4.
5.1 Discussion The inspector reviewed the licensee's implementation of the radioactive waste effluent program and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual to ensure compliance with sampling and analyses requirements, analyses sensitivities, analytical results, surveillance tests, radwaste operations procedures, offsite dose results from radioactive gaseous effluents, and operational tests and calibrations of equipment and radiation monitors associated with the radioactive gaseous waste processing systems.
The inspector reviewed selected procedures governing the continuous and batch releases of gaseous radioactive waste effluents. These procedures provided for the sampling and analysis of the radioactive gaseous waste effluents, calculation of effluent release rate, calculation of projected offsite radionuclide concentrations and doses, and calculation and verification of ga,eous effluent radiation monitor setpoints prior to release; recording of dilution parameters during the release; and verification of effluent discharge flow rates and effluent volume discharged.
The inspector reviewed selected gaseous waste release permits which included plant stack and fuel handling building ventilation exhaust continuous releases and batch releases from waste gas decay tanks and containment purges for the period January 1 through December 31, 1992.
It was determined that the sampling, analyses, and discharge of the radioactive gaseous effluents and the approval of the radioactive gaseous waste batch releases were conducted in
i
.
l l
!
l l-10-l l
accordance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements. Quantities of gaseous and particulate radionuclides released were within the limits
,
'
specified in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. Offsite doses had been calculated according to Offsite Dose Calculation Manual methodologies and were
.
within required limits.
Particulate effluent composite sample analyses for (
gross alpha, strontium-89, and strontium-90 had been performed and met Offsite
l Dose Calculation Manual requirements. The inspector observed licensee i
personnel collect the weekly grab particulate and iodine samples from the I
plant stack radiation monitors. All aspects of the sampling process were performed in accordance with approved procedures.
Secondary gaseous release pathways were continuously monitored for radioactivity. Continuous sampling of the Hot Machine Shop Exhaust (AH-35),
Decontamination Shop Exhaust (AH-34), Reactor Auxiliary Building Heating and Ventilation Equipment Room Ventilation System Exhaust (E-41A and E-41B), and the Switchgear/ Cable Vault Area Ventilation System Exhaust (AH-25) was
,
maintained in order to demonstrate operability of installed treatment systems and to verify the integrity of barriers separating primary and secondary
!
.
ventilation systems. Sampling of these areas was limited to continuous particulate and iodine sampling and monthly grab noble gas sampling.
The radioactivity released via of these secondary ventilation pathways resulting from routine operations remained less than 1 percent of the annual Offsite
-
Dose Calculation Manual limits.
The inspector determined that no major equipment or design modifications had
!
been made to the radioactive gaseous waste management systems during 1992.
!
The inspector reviewed gaseous radioactive waste process and effluent
,
instrumentation and radiation monitor source check, channel check, functional test, and calibration records.
All records reviewed indicated that the instrumentation and effluent radiation monitors were being maintained, tested, and calibrated properly in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.
5.2 Conclusions The licensee was implementing a gaseous radioactive waste effluent program in accordance with the Technical Specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation
Manual. The quantities of radionuclides released in the gaseous radioactive waste effluents were within the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits.
Offsite doses to the environment from the gaseous radioactive waste effluents had been calculated using Offsite Dose Calculation Manual methodologies, and the dose results were within Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits.
Secondary gaseous release pathways were continuously monitored for radioactivity. The licensee had not made any major equipment or design modifications to the radioactive gaseous waste management systems during 1992.
Gaseous radioactive waste effluent instrumentation and radiation monitors were being tested and calibrated in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual
requirements.
--
..
--
-
. -. -. -. - -
. -
-. -..
_
- -..
. - -.. - _.
'
-11-
l 6 REPORT OF RADI0 ACTIVE EFFLUENTS (84750)
The inspector reviewed reports concerning radioactive waste systems and effluent releases to determine compliance with the requirements of 10 CFR
)
Part 50.36(a)(2), Technical Specifications 6.9.1.8 and 6.14, and the Offsite l
Dose Calculation Manual.
l 6.1 Discussion The inspector reviewed the Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports for the time periods January 1 through June 30, 1992, and July 1 through December 31, 1992. These reports were written in the format described in NRC r
Regulatory Guide 1.21, Revision 1, June 1974, and contained the information
!
required by the Technical Specifications and the Offsite Dose Calculation l
.
Manual.
During the time period January 1 through December 31, 1992, the I
licensee had performed 180 liquid batch releases and 6 gaseous batch releases.
The licensee reported one abnormal release during the time period reviewed.
On July 17, 1992, a liquid radioactive waste release was made from Waste
!
!
Condensate Tank A.
The effluent radiation monitor high alarm setpoint
!
associated with the release was incorrectly adjusted to a value that was ten
!
times higher than the calculated setpoint for the release. During the j
release, the monitored radioactivity concentration was verified to remain well
l below the correctly calculated setpoint.
The inspector reviewed the
.!
licensee's detailed description and followup actions concerning the abnormal
!
release and determined that the licensee had determined the root cause of the i
event and had taken appropriate corrective action. At no time were any
!
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual dose or release concentration limits exceeded.
Licensee Event Report 92-007 documented the abnormal release event. The
,
inspector verified that Licensee Event Report 92-007 was closed in NRC
!
Inspection Report 50-382/92-27. Effluent monitoring instrumentation had not i
been out of service in excess of Technical Specification requirements during
}
the time period reviewed. The inspector reviewed changes to the Process I
Control Program and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual made during the time period reviewed and found the changes well documented in the appropriate
,
Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports as required by the Technical i
Specifications. Summaries of the radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent j
releases and associated doses for 1990, 1991, and 1992 are presented in i
Attachments 2 through 6 to this inspection report.
6.2 Conclusions
i
"
The licensee had submitted their Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release i
Reports in a timely manner, and these reports contained all the required l
,
l information presented in the format described in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.21.
I
'
The abnormal radioactive liquid effluent release did not exceed any Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits. Changes to the Process Control Program and
'
the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual were properly documented.
i f
t i
i I
!
'
-_,
.-
- _
-
-
.
- - -
- - -
.. - ~
,-
, - -
. _ _. _ _
. _ _
_ __ _ _
...
._
_
- _ _
.
-. _ _
!
.
i-12-
7 REACTOR COOLANT CHEMISTRY (84750)
!
7.1 Discussion
The inspector reviewed the reactor coolant chemistry data for 1992 to
'
determine compliance with Technical Specification requirements. The review included an inspection of the recorded trends of the reactor coolant chemistry l
data. The records reviewed indicated that all required sampling and. analyses-j were performed at the frequencies required by the Technical Specifications, i
and that the analytical results did not indicate excessive chemicals or radioactivity which would have an adverse affect on the chemical. composition
or radioactivity concentration of the liquid waste effluents discharged from j
the plant.
!
!
7.2 Conclusions
!
!
Reactor coolant chemistry data was in compliance with Technical Specification i
requirements and did not indicate excessive chemicals or radioactivity which i
would have caused an adverse affect on the liquid radioactive waste effluents.
!
-
8 AIR CLEANING SYSTEMS (84750)
.
The inspector reviewed the safety-related air cleaning systems testing program j
to determine agreement with the commitments in Chapter 9 of the Updated Safety
'
Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical Specifications 4.6.6.1, 4.7.6, 4.7.7, and 4.9.12.
!
8.1 Discussion i
i The inspector reviewed selected procedures, surveillance tests, records, and i
test results for the maintenance and testing of the safety-related air.
i cleaning systems which contained high efficiency particulate air filters and
!
activated charcoal adsorbers. The inspector verified that the procedures and l
surveillance tests provided for the required periodic functional checking of
the safety-related air cleaning systems' components, evaluation of the high
!
efficiency particulate air filters and activated charcoal adsorbers, and the
replacement and in-place filter testing of the filter systems. The inspector
!
reviewed records and test results for the time period June 1992 through
!
February 1993 for the shield building ventilation system, control room air
!
conditioning system, controlled ventilation area system, and fuel handling
!
building ventilation system. The in-place filter testing and activated
charcoal laboratory tests were performed in accordance with approved i
procedures by a contract laboratory, and all test results were verified to be within Technical Specification limits. The inspector noted that the Technical
'
Specification requirement for testing the various air cleaning systems'
activated charcoal adsorber material after every 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of operation was l
being tracked by the control room and the system engineer on a work i
authorization issued monthly.
)
l
-
,
__-.
. _ -
_ - -
.-.
....
_ - -._,
,.... - -. _. _
_
.
'
.
'
}
,
!
'
!
i l
-13_
!
i
!
i 8.2 Conclusions The safety-related air cleaning and filter ventilation systems conformed to the commitments in the Updated Safety Analysis Report and met the Technical
'
Specification requirements. The safety-related air cleaning systems had been tested in accordance with Technical Specification requirements, and all test
results were within Technical Specification limits.
i
!
l
,
,
I l
l
'
l I
i b
i
<
f l
,
f
!
i
,
i
!
I
-,
,.. _ -. -
-.
...
.
ATTACHMENT 1 1 PERSONS CONTACTED 1.1 Licensee Personnel
- D. F. Packer, General Manager, Plant Operations
!
- R.
E. Allen, Security and General Support Manager l
P. A. Bertrand, Health Physics Technician D. F. Boan, Quality Assurance Auditor K. P. Boudreaux, Technical Specification Surveillance Coordinator M. J. Campo System Engineer D. K. Cassidy, Nuclear Auxiliary Operator
- M.
S. Ferri, Training Manager
- T. J. Gaudet, Operational Licensing Supervisor A. J. Harris, Control Room Supervisor
- G. L. Hood, Radiation Protection Engineer
- P. M. Kelly, Health Physics Foreman G. F. Koehler, Quality Assurance Support Supervisor
- D. A. Landeche, Radiation Protection Lead Supervisor
- T. R. Leonard, Technical Services Manager
- T. P. Lett, Health Physics Foreman
- A. S. Lockhart, Quality Assurance Manager D. C. Madere, Chemistry Superintendent D. W. Newman, Health Physics Training Instructor
- J. M. O'Hern, Operations Training Supervisor A. B. Pilutti, Health Physics Training Instructor S. Ramzy, Radiation Control Supervisor J. A. Ridgel, Radiation Protection Superintendent K. J. Rockwood, Health Physics Technician J. C. Ruffin, Health Physics Technician
- G. C. Scott, Licensing Engineer
- C. J. Thomas, Licensing Engineer T. W. Tullos, Reactor Operator
- D. W. Vince, Operations Superintendent D. R. Voisin, Nuclear Auxiliary Operator In addition to the personnel listed above, the inspector contacted other personnel during the inspection period.
- Denotes personnel that attended the exit meeting on April 2,1993.
2 EXIT MEETING An exit meeting was conducted on April 2, 1993.
During this meeting, the inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the report. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to, or reviewed by, the inspector during the inspectio.
-
.
.
.
- _
-
_.
.
.-
.
ATTACHMENT 2
+
StBMATION OF All LIQUID ErrLUENT RELEASES-1990
- 1991 QUARTER 1 QUARTER 2 OUARTER 3 00ARTER 4 QUARTER 1 QUARTER 2 QUARTER 3 QUARTER 4 1. Number of Batch Releases
27 100
60
37
2. Fission & Activation Products (Curies)
1.13 E-01 5.80 E-02 3.70 E-01 1.88 E-01 1.38 E-01 5.93 E-01 9.94 E-02 7.83 E-02 3. Tritium (Curies)
4.15 E+01 8.70 E+01 4.98 E+02 8.51 E+01 1.28 E+02 3.47 E+01 8.01 E+01 1.01 E+02 4. Dissolved & Entrained Noble Gases (Curies)
8.47 E-01 2.30 E+00 1.82 E+01 3.88 E+00 1.32 E+01 5.23 E-02 4.64 E-02 8.46 E-02 5. Vaste Volume Released (liters)
6.16 E+06 2.39 E+06 4.46 E+06 1.78 E+06 2,68 E+06 3.49 E+06 1.65 E+06 1.12 E+06 s
- I993 T 1992'
OUARTER 1 OVARTER 2 QUARTER 3 OUARTER 4 OUARTER 1 OVARTER 2 OVARTER 3 OUARTER 4 1. Number of Batch Releases
36
44 2. Fission & Activation Products (Curies)
2.13 E-01 9.94 E-02 4.72 E-01 5.29 E-01 3. Tritium (Curies)
1.73 E+02 1.22 E+02 1.75E+02 2.47 E+01 4. Dissolved & Entrained Noble Gases (Curtes)
5.71 E-02 2.32 E-01 1.51 E+00 1.54 E-02 5. Weste Volume Released (liters)
1.46 E+06 1.61 E+06 2.99 E+0S 1.88 E+06
., _ - _ _
_
.-.
...
- -
.
_.. _ - _,. - _ -, _, _ _. -, - - _
-., -., -. _ - _ _. _.. _, -. - - _
_ -_ _ -,_.-.--
.. -.
-
_
i e
.
,
I i
,
I i
.
1 I
I w
O en w
N
- ir l
O O
O.
O+
cr cr
+
e had taJ heJ 4es had w
>=
e--
-
N.
.
m u
@
an m
gr W
eC WC C.
.
D)
D
-
,
O O
N N
>
m O
4D w
.-e m
,
O O
O O
.
N
+
t e
+
E
-[
aae me.6 boa mad sad
&
M N
- @
K
,
eD.
Os.
.
M.
- C
9%
O D
O O
4D nD
nn O
l
...
,
wue
' gr)
g
f
.-
-
N o-o w
sn
-
N O
O O
O M
+
i
+
E
?
taJ and naJ h6J naJ taJ W
0-
!
K (D w
(D an gr et SD.
-
cp
@
eC N
D
-
.
D O
N N
- s Os
-
O
,
!
f e
e m
m an
.=
.=
O O
O O
M M
+
4
+
K see had see Lad sab sea baJ
&#':
W e-eC M
N es't 4D 9%
K
$
O w
=C w
-
w D
-
en.
-
N O
j w
O en N
.=
en
-
D f
p p
E i
M
=
m
.n an
-
w
-
in e
Q
.
O O
O O
O O
O O
%
w E
+
4
+
K
+
a a
+
w I
had 6aJ 448
&aJ ha.1 La#
&nJ
&aJ
&aJ
&me r
w
>-
e-f d
tr W
w N
m a
eD sD tD
'
.
w N
O.
G4
.
4D.
4D
af N
- C
D l
DO
-
-
e
-
-
O m
N
l O !E
<r
<
b p
a sq m
an an
.s m
e r%
sD e
'
O O
O O
O O
O O
b
E
+
+
g
+
t
+
Lad naJ haJ
&aJ baJ LaJ
&aJ haJ
&aJ W
f
<
e-b M
N
%D 9%
9%
W m
CD m
3D
- C s')
m.
-=.
O.
aC
r%.
en.
.
}
W
,
D
.
m N
tD
.f '
O M
4D 8%
Ch Os
-*)
'
O N
N
?
I
~
-~
L
.-
N m
an sD
.*
N
.s O
f%
N s
en C
O O
O O
O O
O.
Cr
+
+
E
+
+
t
+
i taJ SaJ
&aJ
&ab knJ haJ
- nad 44J w
taJ
9-W
)
N Os CD
N g
4D O
9%
w
,
eC
N.
- e.
4D.
O.
ED.
o.
CD.
D D
O
.*
,=
m
- %
w O
.--
N O
- e
-=
l l
'
N W
N
-
.
-
~
.
.
-
O O
O O
$y-:
O O
O O
w w
w w
w e -
cr
+
e e
+
a
+
e
+
w saa w
ta.J w
D.-
W
.-e
m ao an en g
er)
w
.N CD to.
=.
an.
eC (D.
N.
O.
W.
D O
N Os
=
==
(D O
e en er en Ch e
es- -
ae-in
@
- - G3 7 G)
C e-C e~
O Z L O
I L
3 f.* U-M^
-+J^
Z.a w U
em
.=
w
-
em
.e a
f D W
- )
-*= en
.mi o
M f
&
W-E*)
=
M l
=.* e
E s-e.*
e+4
=
-
E @
L e
os W
ee-W u
l ed e
s.
- A L
e A
'
e o m W
me L
en-e5
-
- a "O w
V e CD w
CD eC Uw V
O m e
O^
-e ID w
t>-
e6
-
e.o "C C
W
CD aC U C
S
u
U O m m
Oa e
W C
+J
=* sn 3 A E
W C +J a=
m 3 A E
e-o
w-an
.==3 L aa W
e+* Es e
MT e
&-
ed RA
MT eL*
u
L to W
== b OU e+
.*-6 wW eO U
.O as u
W eQ B
e W e
e~
M m&
- J
@ O ee 3 k >
en D ee 3 6-P
W
-
6.
OU e-
Z tr 4 EL ta- -
CL A t-Z ts.
L EA.
>-w 1J t-
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-4 sJ M
=
an eo N
f*)
et.
an
.,
,
.
.
,.. - _
- ~..
,a
'
_
-
.
-
_
.
.
_
_
_.
_
.
.
_
t'
't
,
i t,
.
.
s,
_
m si_
%%
%%
%
i
.
1 4
_
L
%%
%%
%
yL.,
1 9
.f,_
34
y f
,
_
.o
03
o_
1
1 1 s
_
.',. t,n.,
tn e
ec m c.,
r r,e.
e
,
P
. P.,
.
_
.-
.
_
(S
.
_
.
.
g~
t
.
_
S
.
E S
(*
.
A
_
_
f
-
_
l
_
[
_
_T :
.
.
R
_
a e;J
- -t,
.
T
- .t
,.,
.,
-
N E
i.
i
.
_
U n.
.
ny i.,
_
_
y,U, L
l-F
_
F r
, r r.,
,
E e.
e.
-
.
P P:
,-
D r
mm dd m
3 : :.,
mm dd m
.-
t t..
ee aa e
-
I t.
ee a a e
,
U
- .t
.
r r r r r
-
r r rr r
Q e
mm mm m
si, mm mm m
.
.s:
I l
T L
l Lg
00
.
00
p: ;:.
,ln
1 2
1 1 2
N D
4 i ;;
N a
n.
u p.
- u c.
.
E A
y
..
n.
.n'
-
M
-
_A.
A-.
.
SU
,n.
- n.
.
.
_
H O
_
-
E C
,
.
_
A G
.
-
_
T M
T O
_
R A
F
.
S E
.
S D
s
.
O
'
.
L
.
A
.
u
_
t pl
.
mm dd m
mm dd m
.
A
. e.
ee aa e
,
. 'e.,
ee aa e
_
M
, s c.
mm mm m
r r r r r
s.
r r r r r
e mm mm m
,e M
.D
.. D.
s
..
1 8
47
3
. '1 I
X
34
6
38
A
9
_
M 9:
1 2
9,
00
1
.
.
-
_
.
-
.
.
-
.
_
.
_
.
.
.
_
3, s
,
s
.
y y
a
a
.
d
d
.
-
_
1
-
s s
t se i
_
-
-
)
e
)
e s
e)
n
>
s e)
n
>
t
)
t se i
s t
)
n os d
s
_
n os d
n r
e D o o
e n
r e Do o
e
_
e e
u D
I v
e e
u O
I,dsi
.
v uyv l
r
.dsi uyv l
r l di f
ir neL ldi f
ir neL
_
f oL f
Ai 1 at f oL f
Ai 1 at fB(
E s(A
af fB(
E s(A
af E
a (
,ll E
a (
,l l
en sG a
- mua en sS a
- mua
_
dl a oemt u
a eucH dl a u
ma eucH iuh r el ae inii iuh r el ae inii
_
og og oemt tth tth
,
qWO sbGB di rt qWO sbGB di rt
-
i ao lorai iL GN a o orai L
_
_
.
_
I
- "i
-]
>i
l ji1" 4l
l
!
ii!
j?
!
4 s
!iI -
.
.
.
_
_
_
.
.
.
_
_
.
.
_
_
..i t,
t
,l t.e.
,e
-
_
_
i.
%%
%
.l L.
%%
6 L.
_
..
71
.f:
,fg
_
o
64
.._o.
AA AA A
-
- ;.
//
//
/
.
NN NN N
t
., t a.
.
n n
.
e
, e >...
c
.c.
r r
e
,e.
P
.P+
.
,
..
S
_
E S
_
A E
.
.
L E
R T
tr.
,.
N
.'t,;,.
.
i
.i.
.
K
.hg
. h,.
_
U
.t,.
.t
.
F F
r.
_r.
.
_
e E
. e
.. P,.
)
o I
P-mm dd m
=t
.
mm dd m
t D
'
.
n t-ee aa e
ee aa e
U r r r r r
i r r r r r
.i'..m ;.
mm mm m
i mm mm m
m.
Q c
I (
..i L
L
00
L
00
-
12
1
1
D
- .).
..l
.
N 3..
a.
e gn..
_
u.
T A
u
_
n N
S-s
. n.
n U
,A>
E O
s.A
'.
.
.
E M
SA H
G
-
-
C M
-
O A
R
.
T
-
F
_
T
0 A
-
-
LAUNN mm dd m
.
A-e ee aa e
.
.
.'
.e
.
r r r r r
l
. o mm mm m
wm
-
M s
o
_
.D D:
.
M
.
7 3
.
I
'. 2
68
- 3 AA AA A
.
X
. 9
//
//
/
A
..
M
00
0
NN NN N
_
._1
.1
_
_
..
.
.
-
.
.
.
.
,
s
,
s y
y
a
a
.
.
d
d
.
1
.
-
-
)
e
)
e t
)
t s e in
>
.
t s e in
>
_
s e)
s e)
.
.
s t
)
n es d
s n
os d
s t
n r
e D o o
e n
r e
D o o~
e e
e u
D T
v e
e u
D I
v
_
.d n eL l di f
ir si uyv l
.d si uyv l
r r
neL
_
l di f
i r f oL f
Ai 1 at f oL f
Ai 1 at f B(
E s(A
af f B(
E s(A
af E
a (
,ll E
a (
,ll en sGa
- mua en sG a
- mua oemt oemt u
a eucH dl a u
a eucH dl a nii og iuh r el a e it th iuh r el ae inii og tth
_
iqWO sbGB di rt iqWO sbGB di rt
_
ao or ai ao or ai
_
L GN I TP w L
GN I TP w
-
.
_
.
.
!
l i'
>
,
i j
.!-
j'
.jd l
'
- l'
I
,
J
- !.
_ _ _.. _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _. _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _
-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ - -. -. - _ - - _..._ _ _ _ - - - _ _ _ _
.
.
.
I i
!
ATTACHMENT 5
,
LIQUID ErritKMT RELEASE SupetARY
,
"
_.
.. 370TALS '
< TOTAL 55
' 10TALS J-
.
- PARAKTER; lFORRELEAK55 iF R RELEAE S...E lFM RELEAM 5i rgggggg 1MO "
ButING : Int -
- MSIING 1997'
Number of Batch Releases 190 176 180 t
Total Fission and Activation 7.290E-01 9.087E-01 1.313E+00 Products Released (Curies)
Total Tritium Released 7.116E+02 3.438E402 4.947E+02 (Curies)
i Total Dissolved and Entrained 2.525E+01 1.336E+01 1.815E+00 Gases Released (Curies)
f Total Gross Alpha Released 1.05E-06 2.16E-06 0.00E+00 (Curies)
,
Vaste Volume Released (liters)
1.48E+07 8.94E+06 7.94E+06 i
Total Whole Body Dose (mrem)
3.39E-01 7.27E-01 1.61E-01 Maximum Organ Dose (mrem)
4.67E-01 9.90E-01 2.18E-01 (croan)
(liver)
(liver)
(liver)
,
!
,
<
.
,
}
T
.
.
i l
l i
ATTACHMENT 6 GASIOUS (FRULMT RELEASE 5tM44RT
. 1,TOTR5 k..
. LTOTALSL....
X 10TR5"
~
':PMtMIETUI
.4BlmlM 1990 f nDIRI M 1991'-'
$F15t itELEAKSV
-
FOR RELEA5051
- FORltELEASE57 9OtstlM 1992'.
Number of Batch Releases
7
Total Fission and Activation 5.733E+03 L 156E+03 6.925E+02 Products Released (Curies)
~ Total lodine-131 Released 5.98BE-04 2.289E-03 1.759E-05 (Curies)
Total Particulates with Half 4.569E-05 4.324E-04 1.813E-05
'
Lives >B Days Released (Curies)
Total Gross Alpha Released 1.663E-04 1.964E-05 1.952E-05 (Curies)
Total Tritium Released 2.048E+02 4.376E+02 3.112E+02 (Curies)
Gama Air Dose (mrad)
1.01E+00 0.31E+00 0.67E+00 Beta Air Dose (mrad)
2.77E+00 0.88E+00-0.83E+00 t
Maximum Oraan Dese (mrem)
0,63E+00 1.86E+00 0.28E+00
.
'
<
4-1
-e
- + -+=-,., m
.
.
.
<-w--
1---=-----
w-e- -,. =
w+-w.--- - - - -- - -e.-
---
~-,,ev
- -
---e e+>---*-*e w-=-
w-v
--,++-,w,,.v
---ww.
--ev.w--.
+-w.
-.e-w---w-
--w--i,-
-i
.-r---
--w v
v,w w,-+-w-w..-mv,
.m-w~-w-ww,,
,r.