IR 05000409/1999002

Insp Rept 50-409/99-02 on 990726-28.No Violations Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Mgt & Control,Sf Safety & Radiological Safety

ML20210R938
Person / Time
Site:	La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png
Issue date:	08/13/1999
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20210R921	List: IR 05000409/1999002 ML20210R918
References
50-409-99-02, NUDOCS 9908170260
Download: ML20210R938 (9)

Text

. . . _

)

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGIONlli Docket No: 50-409 License No: DPR-45 Report No: 50-409/99002(DNMS)

Licensee: Dairyland Power Cooperative 3200 East Avenue South La Crosse, WI 54602 Facility: La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor Location: La Crosse Site, Genoa, Wisconsin Dates: July 26-28,1999 Inspectors: D. Nelson, M.S., Radiation Specialist P. Lee, Ph.D., CHP, Radiation Specialist Approved By: Bruce L. Jorgensen, Chief Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety

~

9908170260 990813 PDR ADOCK 05000409 G PDR

.

.

.

.

_

.

.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor NRC inspection Report 50-409/99002(DNMS)

This routine decommissioning / safe storage inspection covered aspects of licensee management and control, spent fuel safety, and radiological safet .

Overall, the licensee's performance during decommissioning activities was very goo All activities inspected were conducted in compliance with the Decommissioning Plan, the Quality Assurance Program, and the Technical Specification Facility Manaaement and Cr,atrol

.

Staffing at LACBWR continues to be stable with little if any tumove Soent Fuel Safety

.

Fuel Element Storage Well water level, chemistry, and cleanliness control programs appeared adequate to ensure the safe wet storage of the spent fue Radioloaical Safety

.

The Radiation Protection Program continued to be effective in implementing the requirements of the Decommissioning Plan, the Quality Assurance Program, and the Technical Specification .

The Transportation Program was effective in implementing the requirements of the transportation regulation ,

.

Housekeeping and the material condition of components throughout the facility were excellen .

Quality assurance oversight of an offsite laboratory had lapsed and needed to be establishe .- ,. --:

"

.

.L Report Details Summary of Plant Activities

,

Activities during the inspection period were limited to routine ongoing safe storage (SAFSTOR)

activities. There was some limited dismantlement of plant systems during the second quarter of

.1999. Plans for capping the Fuel Element Storage Well (FESW) retum line had not been complete . Facility Management and Control General The inspectors conducted reviews of ongoing activities in order to assess overall management and controls. Specific events and findings are detailed in the sections belo .2 (Open) LER 50-409/99-01(DNMS)

l The modification plan to cap the FESW return line had not been formally reviewed prior l to the inspection. Therefore, this License Event Report (LER) will remain open pending j

' '

NRC review of the approved modification package and cap installation.

l Oraanization. Manaaement. and Cost Controls at Permanentiv Shut Down Reactors t i l insoection Scooe (36801) I l The inspection evaluated whether the licensee's SAFSTOR organization, staffing, and

[ qualifications met the requirements of the Technical Specifications, the Quality

'

Assurance Program (QAP), and the Decommissioning Pla Observations and Findinas

The licensee's SAFSTOR organization has remained unchanged since the last inspection. The plant manager, the technical staff, members of the Operations Review Committee, and the Safety Review Committee remain unchanged from that inspectio Conclusions The licensee's SAFSTOR organization, staffing, and qualifications continued to meet the requirements of the QAP and the Decommissioning Pla .4 ' Self-Assessment. Auditina. and Corrective Action at Permanentiv Shutdown Reactors Inspection Scope (40801)

The inspectors reviewed the three Incident Reports (irs) and one Radiological Occurrence Report generated since the last inspection. The inspectors also reviewed a selection of Quality Assurance Audits performed since the same inspectio _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ __ _ _ _ __

. Observations and Findinas irs are used, in part, by the licensee to document deficiencies and to describe and track the actions taken to correct them. The inspectors noted that three irs had been generated since the last inspection. Those irs addressed the failure of the 1B Emergency Diesel Generator's 18 month test, the failure of the 18 Emergency Diesel Generator to start, and the tripping of several in house pumps when lightning struck the adjacent G3 generating plant. Since neither the 1B EDG or the pumps affected by the lightning strike were required to be operable by the Technical Speci'ications, these incidents were seen as having little or no safety significance. Based on the limited activities within the plant, the inspectors concluded that the small number of irs appeared to be appropriat There was one Radiological Occurrence Report (ROR) generated since the last inspection. The ROR reported that the resin transfer pump located in the radioactive waste building had leaked and some of the leakage had collected in the building's basement. During August 1999, the licensee planned to ship approximately 200 cubic feet of spent resin to the Bamwell site for disposal. In preparation for the shipment, the resin transfer pump, which had sat idle for a number of years, had been started and allowed to run for 18 hours2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br />. During the run, the operators failed to notice that the pump had leaked a few galions of liquid and some of the liquid had made its way onto the building's basement floor creating an unmonitored contamination are When asked about the incident, one of the operators indicated that the pump had been monitored during the 18 hour2.083333e-4 days <br />0.005 hours <br />2.97619e-5 weeks <br />6.849e-6 months <br /> run, but the leak had not been detected because of the heavy shielding around the pump. The inspectors noted during a tour of the building that the pump was indeed surrounded by lead bricks which would make it difficult to observe the pump leaking. The inspectors also noted that the basement was posted a

"High Radiation" area making it unlikely that anyone would have entered the basement without radiation protection staff knowledge and approval. Because there was little chance that someone would be inadvertently exposed to the contaminated liquid, the incident was seen by the inspectors as minor in nature with little or no safety significanc Again, the number of RORs was due in large part to the lack of activities within the plan The inspectors reviewed the 1998 audit of the Radiation Safety Program. The audit had adequate range and depth, and the auditors identified a number of Open Items and Nonconformances. Follow up by the auditors of previous audit findings were also performed and documented. No safety significant findings were identifie The inspectors noted there were no provisions to ensure the qualification of auditors identifying nonconformances and reviewing the corrective actions in the areas of specific technicalissues Conclusions The numoer of RORs and irs accurately reflected the level of activity in the plant during the fird quarter of 1999. The Radiation Safety Program audit review appeared to have

.

.. .

.

. . _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

_

p ,  ;

.

'

met the requirements and guidance in the Quality Assurance Plan. The licensee

~ agreed to look into the issue of selecting technically qualified auditors to control the quality of the audit .0 Spent Fuel Safety General The inspection verified the safe wet storage of spent fuel at LACBWR. Specific findings are detailed in the sections belo .2 Soent Fuel Pool Safety at Permanentiv Shutdown Reactors a.- - Insoection Scone (60801) -

The inspection evaluated the systems associated with the storage, control, and maintenance of spent fuel in a safe manne Observations and Findinas The inspectors reviewed the daily logs of water level observations, water chemistry, and gamma spectrum analyses. Results indicated that all parameters were within the limits specified in HSP-7.2, " Sampling of FESW." Conclusions The spent fuel pool water level, chemistry, and cleanliness control programs appeared adequate to ensure the safe wet storage of spent fue .0 Radiological Safety General The inspectors conducted reviews of ongoing activibec in order to assess the overall '

Radiation Protection (RP) Program. Specific findings are detailed in the sections belo .2 Occuoational Radiation Exoosure Inspection Scope (83750)

The inspection examined and evaluated aspects of the RP Program. Specific areas evaluated included extemal exposure control, radiological surveying, control of radioactive materials and contamination, and maintaining occupational exposure as-low- ;

I as-reasonably-achievable (ALARA). Observations and Findinas A review of the extemal dosimetry records for the first and second quarter of 1999 indicated that personnel exposures were well below 10 CFR 20 limits and accurately reflected the level of activity within the facility. Based on a review of air sampling results l

'

..

.

.in the Reactor and Turbine Building, and records of whole body counting for 1998 and 1999, the inspectors determined that there were no evidences of intemal exposures.

'

The inspectors reviewed a sampling of direct radiation survey results and smear sample results for the second quarter of 199 Station procedures require that direct radiation surveys be performed quarterly in all I accessible areas within restricted areas. The records of the second quarter results indicated that the licensee had complied with these requirements and exposure rates within the facility had not changed significantl Station procedures require that smear surveys be performed once a week in normally contamination-free areas of the restricted areas and once a month in identifed contaminated areas within restricted areas. The records of a sampling of the second quarter 1999 results indicated that the licensee had complied with these requirements and the spread of contamination had been contained and contamination levels within the frei!ity had been kept to a minimu Conclusions The licensee had complied with procedural requirements for conducting surveys and had been successful in controlling extemal exposures and containing the spread of contamination. Station dose accurately reflected the amount of work performed at LACBWR during 199 .3 Radioactive Waste Treatment. and Effluent and Environmental Monitorina Insoection Scope (84750)

The inspectors reviewed the analytical and QA/QC procedures for the onsite counting laboratory. The inspectors also evaluated the effluent monitoring systems to confirm the results of the 1998 Radioactive Effluent Report and the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Reports, Observations and Findinas The laboratory was equipped with a germanium detector, a gas proportional counter,-

and a liquid scintillation counter. The detection sensitivities of effluent monitoring were well below the limits as specified in 10 CFR 20 for effluent releases. The analytical results of effluent release were accurat Conclusions The analytical equipment, quality assurance, and analytical procedures were evaluated and found to be adequat l t i

E . . .

, Solid Radioactive Waste Manaaement and Transoortation of Radioactive Materials insoection Scone (86750)

The inspectors reviewed the shipping documents for the radioactive materials shipments made by LACBWR during the first quarter of 1999, b. - Observations and Findinos As the result of the continued limited dismantlement of the facility, approximately one Sea Van container of waste was generated during the first half of 1999. That container

- of waste was shipped to American Ecology on July 12,1999, for processing and eventual disposal.

~

L During the second quarter of 1999, the licensee also made two shipments of radioactive materials from the LACBWR facility. One shipment contained low activity air filters and water samples and the other shipment contained a sample of the plant's depleted resi The samples were shipped to an offsite laboratory for analyses. The shipments were !

l made without incident and the shipping documents indicated that the shipments had '

l been made in full compliance with the applicable NRC and Department of -

Transportation (DOT) requirement At the time of the inspection, the licensee was not providing a quality assurance oversight to assure the accuracy of the Part 61 isotopic analyses conducted by an off site laboratory. This lapse in quality assurance coverage was of concem to the inspector Conclusiong l Reviews of the shipping documents for the July 12,1999, waste shipment and the radioactive materials shipments made during the second quarter of 1999 indicated that the shipments had been made in compliance with NRC and DOT requirement The licensee agreed to establish quality assurance program coverage to assure the accuracy of the isotopic analyses performed by an offsite laborator ' Tours of the Facility Inspection Scope (83750 and 86750)

The inspectors toured the grounds immediately surrounding the facility as well as the !

reactor building, the turbine building, and the radioactive waste buildin Observations and Findinos Housekeeping in all of the buildings was excellent; all areas appeared to be clean and well maintained. Radiological controls and posting appeared to be in full compliance with procedural and regulatory requirement ,

7 l J

E .

p .-

i c. Conclusions No significant problems were noted during tours. The material condition of the equipment and components observed was excellen .0 Exit Meeting The inspectors presented the inspection results to members of the licensee's staff at the conclusion of the inspection on July 28,1999. The licensee acknowledged the findings as described in this report. The licensee did not identify any of the documents or processes reviewed by the inspectors as proprietary.

I l

'

i j

, , , . .

_--__

_ - _ _ ,

..

w PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED

• R. Christians, Plant Manager

• R. Cota, Training / Security Supervisor

• D. Egge, Quality Assurance

• J. Jiracek, Plant Maintenance

• M. Johnson, Tech Support Engineer

• L. Nelson, Health and Safety Supervisor

• Denotes those attending the exit meeting on July 28,199 The inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel in various departments in the course of the inspectio INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED IP 36801: Organization, Management and Cost Controls at Permanently Shut Down Reactors ~

IP 37801: Safety Reviews, Design Changes and Modifications at Permanently Shut Down Reactors IP 40801: ' Self-assessment, Auditing, Corrective Action IP 60710: Refueling Activities IP 83750:_ Occupational Radiation Exposure IP 84750; Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring IP 86750: Solid Radwaste Management and Transportation of Radwaste Materials DOCUMENTS REVIEWED Memorandum from Mike Johnson to the ORC, " Response to ORC-97-01, Assignment 1:

Corrective Action for LER 97-01 (Incident Report DPC 97-01, 'Less than Required A.C. Power Sources")," July 15,1998 HSP 7.2," Sampling of FESW" Direct Exposure Rate Surveys (July 1999)

Smear Survey Results (July 1999)

Shipping Documents for second quarter 1999

.

9-

)