IR 05000443/1989018
| ML19354D602 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 12/15/1989 |
| From: | Bores R, Jang J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19354D601 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-443-89-18, NUDOCS 8912280203 | |
| Download: ML19354D602 (8) | |
Text
.
..
"
..
i-
[
,
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
REGION I
t Report No.
50-443/89-18 Docket No.
50-443
!
l License No. NPF-56 i
Licensee:
Public Service of New Hampshire P.O. Box 330 Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Facility Name:
Seabrook Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Inspection at:
Seabrook, New Hampshire Inspection Conducted: November 27 - December 1, 1989 Inspector:
MM I/Y b/b
'
f.C.Jang,SeniorRadiatichSpecialist, date j
Effluents Radiation Protection Section, l
,
Facilities Radiological Safety and l
'
Safeguards Branch, Division of Radiation i
,
l Safety and Safeguards Approved by:
[7 #p/
Mw 19d s/ff j
. R. J. Scres, Chief Ef date i
ProtectionSectIon,fluentsRadiation Facilities Radio-logical Safety and Safeguards Branch, Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
J Inspection Summary: Inspection of November 27 - December 1, 1989 (Inspection Report No. 50-443789 78)
L Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced startup inspection of the gaseous and
'
liquid effluent control and radiological environmental monitoring programs including management controls, calibration of effluent and process monitors, ventilation systems,f the above programs.ODCM, meteorological monitoring, environme and implementation o
'
Results: Within the areas inspected, no violations were identified. The licensee was implementing effective gaseous and liquid effluent control and radiological environmental monitoring programs that met the requirements of the Technical Specifications for startup and operations.
8912280203 891218 PDR ADOCK 05000443 i
Q PDC l
l
e q
,
..
.
-
..
l
!
g
.
.
'
DETAILS 1.0 Individuals Contacted
-
'
l.1 Principal Licensee Personnel
,
L
s
- W. Diprofio, Assistant Station Manager
'
i'
J. Gallagher Chemistry Supervisor-
!
D.Iseman,IICSu>ervisor
!
- D. Kochman Healti Physicist, Nuclear Services
- J. Kwasnik,, hemistry/ Health Physics Manager Principal Health Physicist, Nuclear Services
>
- W. Leland C
- J.Linville,ChemistryDepartmentSupervisor
,
L
B. McCalister, System Engineer
)
i i
- D. Moody, Station Manager
'
W. Moore, System Engineer
- D. Perkins, Licensing Engineer D. Robinson, Counting Room Foreman, Chemistry Department
- J. Warnock, Nuclear Quality Manager S. Westin, System Engineer
,
1.2 NRC Personnel i
- A. Cerne, Senior Resident inspector
- Denotes those individuals present at the exit meeting on December 1,
,
The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees, j
2.0 Purpose The purpose of this startup inspection was to review the licensee's ability
'to control and quantify radioactive liquids, gases, and particulates, and
'
to conduct the radiological environmental monitoring program during normal and emergency operations.
3.0 Review of Previously Identified items (Closed) Inspector Followup Item The acceptance criteria for duplicate samples should be obtain(443/86-38-01)ed from the contractor laboratory.
The licensee obtained and documented the acceptance criteria.
This item is
,
closed.
-(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (443/86-38 02) Verify the computer code, ENVTLD, used for the environmental TLD program.
The inspector reviewed Procedure HD0961.08, " Dosimetry System Calibration", and QC TLD data processed using the ENVTLD code. -The analytical results were within the licensee's acceptance criteria, and the ENVTLD code has been validated.
This item is close i;.
.
f
..
'
calibrated for the photon counter (443/86-38-03) region and the frequency counter re (Closed) Inspector Followup Item TLD reader should be The inspector reviewed the calibration results for both counter regions and the calibration results were acceptable. This item is closed.
4.0 Liquid and Gaseous Effluent Controls 4.1 Assignment of Responsibility The inspector reviewed the organization for administration of the effluent controls. The effluent control programs are administered by the Chemistry Department. The Chemistry Department Supervisor reports to the Chem /HP Manager who reports to the Seabrook Station Manager.
Calibration of effluent and process monitors is performed by the I&C Department.
Maintenance of the effluent and process monitors is performed by the Chemistry Department. The inspector noted that the licensee has sufficient staffing in these areas to perform these operations effectively.
4.2 Audits The inspector reviewed the results of quality assurance audits documented in Audit Report Numbers 87-A10-02 and 89-A10-02.
These audits covered the areas of the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM), gaseous release permits, and liquid release permits.
The inspector noted that the audits were performed by qualified auditors and appeared to be thorough assessments of the effluent controls program.
The audits identified few findings; none of safety significance.
The licensee responded to these findings promptly. The inspector also noted that the licensee was using a tracking system for the open items.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
4.3 Plant Tour The inspector examined the liquid and gaseous effluent / process systems including holdup tanks effluent / process monitoring systems, air cleaning systems, and the conta}nment enclosure. All systems were installed as described in the FSAR.
During the plant tour, the inspector was informed that one of the 3rimary drain tanks (a part of the liquid processing system) collapsed on lovember 21, 1989. The inspector examined the collapsed tank.
The licensee had installed two primary drain tanks as described in the FSAR. The inspector noted that(one tank for each unit)d an " Event the licensee establishe Evaluation Team" immediately to evaluate the tank collapse event.
The preliminary evaluation results indicated that the cause of the collapse was a result of a lack of vacuum protection from the nitrogen supply (imoroperly aligned valves).
The inspector reviewed Section 9.3.5.2 of the
FSAk and Procedure 0S0004.01, " Primary Drain Tank Degasifier Operation",
l
-
.
.
'
-
,,
i j
for the possible utilization of the uncollapsed tank for the startup and
,
o>erations of Unit 1.
Based on the above review, the inspector determined t1at this event should not affect the startup or operation of Unit 1, because the other primary drain tank could be used for Unit 1.
4.4 Liquid Effluent Controls
,
The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures to determine the implementation of the following Technical Specification (TS) requirements.
o TS 3 4.11.1.1, "Li uid Effluents, Concentration" o TS 3 4.11.1.2, "Li uid Effluents, Dose" o TS 3 4.11.1.3, "Li uid Radwaste Treatment System"
,
o TS 3 4.11.4 "Liqu d Holdup Tanks" o TS 6.13, "Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM)"
The inspector reviewed selected liquid discharge permits including associated procedures, analytical data, and dose assessment results.
The inspector noted that the licensee analyzed grab samples of the liquid radwaste before the releases were initiated. All discharge permits were completed as required by the Technical Specifications and plant procedures.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
4.5 Gaseous Effluent Controls The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures to determine the implementation of the following Technical Specifications (TS).
o TS 3 4.11.2.1, " Gaseous Effluents, Dose Rate"
,
o TS 3 4.11.2.2, " Dose Noble Gases" o TS 3 4.11.2.3, " Dose-Iodine-131, Iodine-133, Tritium, and Radioactive Material in Particulate Form" oTS3/4.11.2.4,"GaseousRadwasteTreatmentS{ stem" o TS 3/4.11.2.5, " Explosive Gas Mixture System o TS 6.13 "Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (0DCM)"
The inspector supplied simulated gaseous release data to the licensee on
-
which to perform the dose commitment calculations because there were no gaseous release permits to date with which to verify the ODCM requirements.
The licensee performed the dose calculations in accordance with the ODCM and associated procedures.
4.6 Calibration of Effluent and Process Monitors The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures and the most recent calibration results to determine the implementation of the Technical Specification requirements for the following monitor i l
.
.
~
.
,
o Containment Ventilation On-Line Purge Monitor o Plant Vent Wide-Range Gas Monitors o Main Steam Line Radiation Monitors o Steam Generator Blowdown Discharge Monitors o Liquid Effluent Monitor including flow rate calibration o Gaseous Waste Processing System
o Turbine Building Sumps Effluent Monitor o Primary Component Cooling Water Radiation Monitor The inspector noted that all calibration results for the above monitors were within the licensee's acceptance criteria.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
4.7 Ventilation Systems The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures to determine the implementation of the following Technical Specification requirements.
o TS 3 4.6.5, " Containment Enclosure Emergency Air Cleanup System"
oTS34.9.lE,"ControlRoomEmergencyVentilationSystem"" Fuel Storage Building Eme o TS 3 4.7.6 The inspector also reviewed the following air cleaning systems which are not required by the Technical Specifications.
o Primary Auxiliary Building o Containment Air Handling The inspector reviewed the most recent test results, except for the containment enclosure emergency air cleanup system and control room emergency ventilation system, because these test results were previously test results included air flow capacity, visual inspection,) pressure drop, reviewed by the NRC (See Inspection Report No. 50-443/88-83.
The reviewed
I
,
l in-place tests for HEPA and charcoal beds, and laboratory tests.
The licensee had not yet received the most recent laboratory test results, i
because the licensee performed the tests during the second week of November, 1989.
The licensee was informed by telephone by the contractor laboratory during this inspection that all test results were within the i
!
Technical Specification requirements. The inspector reviewed the previous
'
laboratory test results and found them to be acceptable within the Technical Specification requirements. The other test results reviewed by the inspector were within the Technical Specification requirements. The
,
l inspector had no further questions in this area.
l.
5.0 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)
5.1 Management Controls The inspector reviewed the licensee's management controls for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) including an assignment of responsibility and program audit.
-
5.1.1 Assjonment of Responsibility ss The inspector reviewed the organization for administration of the REMP and discussed with the licensee any changes made since the last inspection in June, 1986.
The ins >ector determined that the REMP remains the same as it was at the time of tie last inspection in this area.
5.1.2 Audit The inspector reviewed the quality assurance (QA)it covered the areas of audit results (Audit Number 89-A10 02, dated June 26, 1989). This aud the REMP, Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), and plant effluent controls. The inspector noted that there were few audit findings in the areas of REMP and ODCM; none of safety significance.
The licensee responded to these findings promptly and the responses were accepted by the audit group. The inspector also noted that the audit was performed by qualified auditors, was thorough and of sufficient technical depth to assess the REMP. The inspector had no further questions in this area.
The inspector also reviewed the audit results of the contractor laboratory (Yankee Atomic Environmental Laboratory) conducted in 1987, 1988, and 1989.
The audits covered the stated objectives and were thorough.
The audit-identified followup items were noteworthy and the responses to ther)
items were good.
No problems were noted in this area.
5.2 Licensee Program for Quality Control of Analytical Measurement The inspector reviewed the licensee's p og' ram for quality control of analytical measurements for the radiolo ical analyses of environmental media includin he EPA Cross-Check Program.
These dataIndicated,gthelicensee'suseof with few exceptions agreement between EPA spiked sample reported results and the contractor;s results.
Where discrepancies were found, reasons for the differences were investigated and satisfactorily resolved. Based on these reviews the inspector determined that the licensee was implementing the quality assurance program effectively.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
5.3 Implementation of the REMP 5.3.1 Direct Observation The inspector examined sampling stations including air samplers for iodines and particulates, milk sampling locations, and TLD stations for the measurement of direct radiation.
All air sampling equipment at the stations was operational at the time of the inspection.
Milk samples
.a)peared to be available at the sampling locations, and TLDs were placed at t1e designated monitoring station,
o o
.
!
5.3.2 Review of Annual Reports
,
The inspector reviewed the annual report for 1988.
This report provided thorough summaries of the environmental sampling and analyses. During the
,
Use Census were reported separately.pector noted TLD results and the Land review of the annual report, the ins i
The inspector discussed with the licensee the annual report format. The inspector found that the licensee had already decided that in the future the TLD data and the Land Use Census
'
would be included in the annual report.
The inspector discussed with the licensee broad leaf vegetation sam ling and analyses for iodine because this is a good technique to identif the iodine deposition on the ground. The licensee stated that this metiod will be reviewed and incorporated,his area,if warranted, in the future. The inspector i
had no further questions in t i
5.3.3 Review of REMP Procedures The inspector reviewed the procedures (called the Environmental Compliance Manual) as part of the review of the implementation of the REMP.
This Environmental Compliance Manual was divided into the following sections.
o Radiological Environmental Sampling of Air Particulates and Radioiodine o Environmental Monitoring of Direct Radiation o Radiolo ical Environmental Sampling of Groundwater o Radiolo ical Environmental Sampling of Food Crops and Vegetation o Radiolo ical Environmental Sampling of Milk o Land Us Census Performance o REMP Surveillance Schedules o REMP Quality Assurance Plan o Calibration of Environmental Air Samplers The inspector also reviewed the calibration results for air samplers and found all the calibration results were within the licensee's acceptance criteria.
Based on the above review, the inspector determined that the licensee had excellent procedures to implement the REMP.
No violations were identified.
j 5.3.4 Environmental Dosimetry l
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Direct Radiation Monitoring i
Network is operated by the NRC Region I to provide continuous measurement l-of the ambient radiation levels around each of the commercial nuclear power I
plants throughout the United States.
Each site is monitored by arranging l
concentric rings extending to about five miles from(TLD) stations in two approximately 30 to 50 thermoluminescent dosimeter I
the power plant.
The monitoring results are published quarterly in NUREG-0837 supplements.
,
..
.
e
!
One of the pur>oses of this NRC program is to serve as a basis of compt ison wit 1 similar programs conducted by individual utilities which operate nuclear power plants, in general, several NRC TLD stations are collocated with several of each licensee's TLD stations. During this inspection, the ins >ector noted that the licensee had compared the licensee's data witi the NRC's data for the collocated TLDs (five collocated TLD stations). The inspector reviewed these comparison data, and noted that although there are some minor differences between the
'
licensee's and NRC's results, they are generally in good agreement.
,
6.0 Meteorological Monitoring
'
The inspector reviewed Procedure IX0654.500, " Meteorological System Calibration", and the most recent calibration results for wind speed, wind i
direction temperature, and delta-temperature. The I&C Department has responsibility to calibrate the meteorological instrumentation.
The calibrations were performed quarterly and all calibration results were within the licensee's acceptance criteria.
During the review of the meteorological monitoring system, the inspector noted that the licensee did not at present have a backup meteorological backup system installation.pector was informed of the current status of the monitoring system.
The ins The licensee's Document Number 89-0035 contained all evaluations (10 CFR 50.59. Independent Review, and design was approved on) September 1for the backup system. The inspector noted th Interdiscipline Review 1989 and the implementation of the systemwasapprovedonOctober2,1989. The inspector was also informed that the field work would be completed by the end of 1989 and the backup meteorological monitoring system would be o>erational by the end of January, 1990. The inspector stated that tie calibration of the backup system would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection. No violations were identified.
7.0 Conclusion In the program areas of effluent controls and REMP, the licensee is ready for startup and operations.
8.0 Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Section 1.1) at the conclusion of the inspection on December 1, 1989.
The ins summarized the purpose, scope, and findings of the inspection.pector l