IR 05000387/1990013
| ML20055G421 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 07/11/1990 |
| From: | Bores R, Jang J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055G419 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-90-13, 50-388-90-13, NUDOCS 9007230159 | |
| Download: ML20055G421 (6) | |
Text
.
__ _
_..
-__
.
__
.
__
_..
. --
)
&--
.
f...
k,\\
.
.,t'
l H
i l
- 1 U.S. NUCLEAR RBARA'IWY CDMISSION l
RH3IC21 I Report Nos. 50-387/90-13
,
50-388/90-13 Docket Nos.
50-387 and '50-388 License Nos. NPF-14 ard NPF-22 h-i
'
Licensee:
Pennsylvania Power and Light Ctmpany 2 North Ninth Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 o
Facility Name:. Susquehanna Steam Electric Station (
'
Inspection at: Berwick and Allentcs:. 'ennsylvania
,
,
Inspection Conducted: June 25-29, 1990 L
r be 7f//
inspector:
Jason'C. Jang,'Sr. Radiation Specialist dpte /
Effluents Radiation Protection Section' (IRPS)
L
"
approved dy-7/n/PW:
,
.
-
Hocert J. Boqqu, C211ef, mm, Facility date
-
'
Padiological%fety and Safeguards Branch
,
L
. Division of Radiation Safety and Safegtkuds I
l l
Inarwtion Sumnary: Inspection on June 25-29, 1990 (Inspection Report Numbers
'
3=
50-387/90-13 and 50-388/90-13)
Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection of the licensee's radiological L
envitusmandal monitoring a,nd radioactive effluant control ptwtmm,. including
,
l management u.=huls, calibration of effluent /g w monitors, offsite dose calculation manual,. air cleaning systems, meteorological monitorirg gwtmi,.
l-laboratory QA/QC, and implementation of the above programs.
L
-
L Results: Within the areas inspected, no violations were identified. Ihe l.
licensee is inplementing the above s wims effectively. Reorganization of the-Chemi Department appeared to enhance the ability to effectively conduct the
'
radica ve liquid and nawm effluent control swsmes.
L I:
,
!;
l..
9007230159 900712 P
L.
. DR ADOCK 05000387 O
PDC f
j,-
..
- - _ _ _.
a:
,
3, -.7.
. ' '.
.
T
'. ;
.
r n
O! t DEIAIls
'
1.0 Individuals Cbntacced -
1.1: Licenses Persalnel, Susquehanrn Station G. Baus Isc Pbruman
- D. Birukb er, Queaistry Supervisor J. Blackesles,-- Assistant A parations
- T. Dalplaz, Assistant Super Cutages
-*A. Dominguez, Senior Results Engineer, Operations A. Feldman, Radiodunnist L. Hunpf, Chemistry Foreman
- D. McGann, Compliance Engineer
- B. Phoads, Chemistry laboratory Supervisor 1.2 Envitu=== ital and Chemistry Group, Crisaata Office
+B. Carson, Health Physicist
+W. Hill, Health Physicist
+K. Shank, Supacvis::r, Envircramental and memistrj Group-1.3
_NRC PerwJnnel-
- J. Stair, Resident Inspector
+ Denotes those p-i.ait at the exit' interview on June-26,1990.-
- Denotes those pas w at the~ exit interview on June 29, 1990.
Other licensee employees were interviewed during this inspection.
'2.0 Purpose
-
The purpose of this routine inspection was to review the licensee's r y mu in the following areas.
o The licensee's ability to control and quantify effluent radioactive liquids, gases, and particulates, o The licensee's ability to inplement its radiological envitu.= Aal nonitoring program.
3.0' Audits The inspector reviewed the following Nuclear Quality Assurance (NCA) Audits of the Radiological Ehvisu===i".al Monitoring Program (REMP),' including the contractor laboratory and the Radioactive Effluent Control Program (RECP)
with respect to Techn[ cal Specification requirements.
i
,
j: _..
(
'
__
,
- ,.-
- -
..-. -.- -
. -
. - - -
- -.
-
.-
.
_
l
'
-
,-
,
.
,
.,
-
,
,
t
.
3'
!
)
I
l '
o N S #89-077, Radioactive Effluont Control Fwaiii, Septmenhar 11-25, 1989 jJ o N S #90-034, REMP, April 19-20, 1990
.
o N @ #90-015, RI!NP Otr tractor Imboratzy - (Controls for
~a L
Divizerunental Follution), Fettuary 15-16,- 1990
'
e
_
t
'Ihe inspector noted that the audits were performed by qualified auditors.
i nl
'Ihe inspector also noted that these audits appeared to cover the stated -
objectives and to be of aww11ent tedinical depth to aaaa== the
'
implementation of the REMP and RBCP. 'Ihese audits identified few findings;
significance. 'Ihe ir=ltens.
=** noted that the licensee was
none of saf system for the open No violations were identified.
'
using a t
'
ll 4.0 Idquid and naamm Effluent Controls l.
.
j'
4.1 Frwam Charges
'
'Ihere were ru significant changes in the licensee't.adioactive liquid
'and y=== effluent control programs since the previous inspection in August:1988. 'Ihe Chemistry Department had responsibility to conduct the liquid and Tamm effluent control programs.
H l
'Iha inspector, howsvar, noted that the licensee reorganized the
'
'
Own1atry Department on May 1,1990. 'Iherefore, the -ina=+w reviewed the new organization of the Chemistry Department and held
,
die-ions with the Ownintry Department staff to determine its
'
adequacy to conduct the liquid and Pamm effluent control programs.
- ;
.
'Ihe O=nistry Group was part of the Health Physics /Chenistry
'
Department prior to the rwwy ional tedinical staff and laboratory'Ihe Chemistry D
dzation.
in the of hiring achut (
.
tadini to minimize the use of contractor personnel. 'Ihe
'
dismistry Supervisor supervises three groups:
System,'
.
J dismistry Iaboratory, and Support. 'Ihe Supervisor
,
wrai.s to the Superintendent of P through the Assistant
o Superintendent of Plant. Raamd on the review of the organization and
'
di==aions with the staff, the-inspector determined that the.
.
reorganization did not reduce or change the responsibility for the
'
o
- radi=t.ive effluents control programs. 'Ihe reorganization appeared q-to enhance the ability.to acx1 duct the above r uf.a
. Manimf==nt.
.
. staff of the.Oiemistry Department appeared to be well qualified to conduct these programs effectively.
4.2 Review of Sanlanrmal Lv.aUs v
'Ihe ir==+e reviewed the semiannual radioactive effluent release i
1.s for 1988 and 1989. No obvious arvnalous measurements, omSicm or trends were noted. 'Ihese reports provided total released
reDeMvity for liquid ard Pamm effluents, including projected
. [
.o Lon exposure to the public. No violations were identified.
r
'
i
k i
. - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
- -. - - -.
- -
- -
- - - - -
-.. - - -
-
w"
-'
..
. -
7_ -. - -. - - -
~..
.
.
.-.
.-
. -.-
-
---
--
+
- . '
-
L
'
.
e
,,
l.
-
ns p.;p
..
q is
l 7.. a if;c
.O l,
l
'
c,
.
L
Jl I ~
,
- 4.3' Radioactive Limid and camarnia Effluent Controls
-
t:
l'
'Ihe inspector reviewed the licensee's radie=tive affluent release l-hul r - bres end also reviewed selected radir=rtive liquid and
L gaseous release pomits to detenmine the adequacy of inplementation of
,
'
the 'Itctinical Specifications and offsite Does calmlatico Manual
,
(CDO(). 'Ihe inspector noted that the licensee r wtwas for the1 l
e m
liquid and gaseous effluent controls were detailed and well written.
l
-'Ihm reviewed' liquid and rfamar==-release perinits met 'IDctinical:
Specifichtian requirenants for sanpling and analysis at the frequencies established.
i Based on the above review, the inspector detamined that the licensee was implementing Technical Specification requirunents effectively.,No-violations were identified.
4.4~ Calikration of Effluent /Prmana Radiation Manitors i
'Iha inspector reviewed the most recent onlikration results for the
,L-following affluent /ptw=== nonitore to determine the inplementaticm of
.
'
the 'Itchnical Spec,1fication requirueents.
,,
o Liquid Radweste Effluent Manitor o Service Water Effluent Manitor o RHR Service Water Radiation Monitors o Main Steam Line Monitors o Standby Gas Treatment. Vent Manitors
'
J-o Reactor Building Vent Monitors o 'Iurbine B241 ding Vent M:mitors -
,
'
,
- Ihe 18C Department had the responsibility.to perform e.lectronic j
calikrations and the Chemistry Department had the respcalsibility to
. perform radiological calikrations for the above monitors.
'Ihe-reviewed calibration results were within the licensee's acceptance
~
criteria. 'No violations were identified in this area.
'
4.5 Air cleaning Systems
'Ihe inspector reviewed the licensee's most recent surveillance test.
results to detarmine the inplementation of the Technical Specification :
requirenants. 'Ihe test results for the (1). control rocan emergency li autside air supply and'(2)' standby gas treatment system were.
reviewed.. For the systens, the inspector reviewed the results'
]'
of the following inspecticos and tests.
o Visual Inspections o In-Place HEPA Imak 'Ibsts o In-Place Charcoal I uk 'Ibsts
. o System Air Flow Ra< a 'Ibsts
"
o Pressure Decp Tests
o Tahnratory Tests for the Iodine Collection Efficiencies x
..
I bf
.4
,
,
.
.
-.
.
..
~
.
.
.
L
,s
.
.
'
.
-,
4 All reviewed test results were found to be within the licensee's acomptance criteria. Ramad on the above revjew, the inspector determined that the 13N was implementing the requirements fx the
,
- air cleaning systems ett
'.vely.
No violations a xe identified.
5.0 Radiological Envitu.- tal Monitxing Frv,ncuu (REMP)
5.1' Fx wt-uChanges There were no si floant ch. ancjes in the licensee's REMP since the.
previous i on conducted in July 1989 with the exception.of the
.
contractch* laboratory. Teledyne-Isotopes analyzed the REMP sanples frcan August 1984 to January 1990. -In January 1990, Controls of
,
Envisw u tal Pollution was assi the analytical responsibility for the REMP sanples with the on of the thernoluminescent doeimetry (TID) sup.cuu. -Licensee personnel conducted the environmental TLD program.
5.2 Direct Observation
'Ihe inspector 3xamined sanpling stations, includirq air sanplers for.
iodines and particulates, milk sanpling locations, TID stations, discharge and intake water composite sanpling stations, and vegetation sanpling stations. All air sanpling and conposite water sampling-aqur=arit at the selected stations was operational at the time of:this inspection. - Milk samples appeared to be available' at-the sanpling locations.. Vegetation samples also appeared to be available during growing =aameris.
TLDs were planed.at the designated martitoring stations as described in the 000(.
5.3 Review of Annual ~ Reports The inspector reviewed the Annual Radiological Envitusmural Report-for 1989. 'Ihis report provided a u.mp4si:usiive sununary of the results of the REMP around the 9==phanna Steam Electric Station and met the
'Ibchnical Specification reporting requir.mumutui. '1he also reviewed available-1990 anal cul data for the REMP dur this i'1spection. Reviewed anal cal data foor 1990 appeared to be rassonable and no ancanalcus data were identified..
f 5.4 Revlaw of REMP Prmachires k
'Ibe inspector reviewed Prmarhtre NSI-QA-2.3.1," Radiol Envitusmutal Monitoring Pru: mu'. 'Ihis - mcir:dare cons of (1)
Responsibilities, (2) Aam., ling and Peckag (3) Analysis, (4) Land
,
Use Census, armi' C5) Record Feeping. Raasri on the above review, the
- h irg+%- determ.ned that' the licenses had a good p < Mire with whidi to corduct the REMP. No violations were identified.
.
_
~w
- .y ' ^
(,
(
...<
,4=
..
[
.
5.5 Qaality 0:mtrol-Fmy for REMP
'Iha quality wiucl (QC) of analytical measurenants is conducted by the contractm laboratory, Centrols of Erwimmi-id.al Pollution (CEP).
CEP cipated in the EPA cross-check
+ -u. ' Ihe anal cal o
ta for the EPA cross-ctadts were tted by the o
laboratory.
'Iha inspector also reviewed the QC data (blind and split samples) and determined that the CEP laboratory performed an-acceptable QC v:p== for analytical maanwenants. - No violations were
'
identified in area.
6.0 Meteorological Monitorinf h w -u
'Ihe inspectx rwiewed the most recent meteorological instnanentation cali1 ration results for wind speed, wind direction, ions semiannually. All temperature, and delta tenparature. 'Ibe licensee parfanned these calitrat revleued calibration results were within the licensee's defined acceptance criteria. No violations were identified.
7.0 JExit Interview
'Ihe inspector met with licensee ry.eatatives, denoted in Sections 1.2 and 1.1 of this on top.aL, on June 26 ard June 29, 1990, respectively.
Ibe
= =marized the purpoco, scope, and findings of-
'
the inspection.
-
k ib -
'
!
+
k a, E,
a e
%