IR 05000482/1993005
| ML20035B381 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 03/29/1993 |
| From: | Murray B NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20035B369 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-482-93-05, 50-482-93-5, NUDOCS 9304010260 | |
| Download: ML20035B381 (17) | |
Text
.
~
.
.
,
APPENDIX
,
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION IV
NRC Inspection Report:
50-482/93-05 Operating License: NPF-42 Licensee: Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation P.O. Box 411 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Facility Name: Wolf Creek Generating Station i
Inspection At: Wolf Creek Site, Coffey County, Kansas Inspection Conducted: March 1-5, 1993 Inspector:
J. B. Nicholas, Ph.D., Senior Radiation Specialist Facilities Inspection Programs Section
.
.
Approved:
/7Md
///)/l 6//4 h
j Blathf Nufraf,"Ch'idf, Fa ilities Inspection Date /
+
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 radiation monitoring -
i systems, reports of radioactive effluents, and air cleaning ventilation
.i
systems.
Results:
The radioactive waste effluent management program was properly
implemented (Section 1.1).
,
The chemistry department organizational structure and staffing met i
requirements (Section 1.1).
l The chemistry department had experienced a very low turnover of
$
technical personnel (Section 1.1).
i
,
!
!
!
!
!
-
.
9304010260 930329
'
r
!
PER ADCK:K 050<K)482 G
l
..
.
-
-2-
.
A satisfactory number of personnel were 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).
A good quality assurance surveillance of the radioactive gaseous waste
effluent program was completed (Section 3.1).
An excellent liquid and gaseous radioactive waste effluent program was
being implemented (Sections 4.1 and 5.1).
A new effluent management system computer program was being implemented
=
to generate radioactive waste effluent release permits and calculate the doses from the effluent releases (Section 4.1).
A good testing and calibration program had been established for the
radioactive waste effluent instrumentation and radiation monitors (Sections 4.1 and 5.1).
Two design modifications were made to the radioactive waste effluent
.
management systems (Section 6.1).
Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports were submitted in a
.
timely manner and contained all the required information in the proper format (Sections 6.1).
A good program had been established for testing the air cleaning systems
(Section 7.1).
Attachments:
Attachment 1 - Persons Contacted and Exit Meeting
Attachment 2 - Summation of all liquid Effluent Releases
.
Attachment 3 - Summation of all Airborne Effluent Releases e
Attachment 4 - Maximum Annual Doses from Gaseous and Liquid Effluent e
Releases
.
.
__
-
.
'
-
'.
.
,
!
-
t
-3-DETAILS
i
.
1 ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT CONTROLS (84750)
l The inspector reviewed the organization and staffing regarding the radioactive
!
waste effluent program to determine agreement with commitments in Chapter 13 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in
l 1.1 Discussion P
The inspector verified that the organizational structure of the chemistry
.
department, which is responsible for the implementation of the radioactive
!
waste effluent program, was as defined in the Updated Safety Analysis Report l
and Technical Specifications. Management control procedures were reviewed for
!
the assignment of responsibilities for the management and implementation of the radioactive waste effluent program. The chemistry department.was assigned the responsibility for preparing radioactive waste release permits, evaluating i
the radioactive waste effluent releases, calculating the radiation doses l
resulting from the releases to the environment, and maintaining radioactive i
waste effluent release data. The inspector determined that the duties and responsibilities of the chemistry department specified in the administrative
,
procedures were being implemented. Sixteen chemistry technicians manning l
three shifts were responsible for collecting and analyzing radioactive waste
effluent samples and preparing the effluent release permits. The inspector
interviewed several of the chemistry technicians and determined that they were
familiar with the requirements of the radioactive waste effluent program and i
maintained a high level of performance.
'
The inspector reviewed the staffing of the chemistry department and noted that since the previous NRC inspection of the radioactive waste effluent program conducted in August 1992 there had been no changes to the chemistry staff.
i The chemistry department had experienced a very low turnover of personnel
during the past 2 years. The chemistry department staffing was determined to i
be adequate and in accordance with licensee commitments.
l I
1.2 Conclusions i
The chemistry department organizational structure and staffing met the l
Technical Specification requirements. The radioactive waste effluent-
.;
management program was being implemented in accordance with station
!
procedures. During the past 2 years, the chemistry department had experienced
!
a very low turnover of technical personnel.
!
i 2 TRAINING AND QUALIFICATIONS (84750)
i The inspector reviewed the training and qualification programs for the
!
chemistry technicians responsible for implementing the radioactive waste
!
effluent program to determine agreement with commitments in Chapter 13 of the
?
l t
'
'.
'.
.
.
_4_
Updated Safety Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical Specifications 6.3 and 6.4.
2.1 Discussion The inspector reviewed the training program for the chemistry technicians including a review of selected personnel training records.
It was determined that the licensee's training program was being implemented in accordance with station procedures.
The inspector reviewed individual staff training records for the two most recently hired chemistry technicians.
Based on the review of the two individual chemistry technician training records selected, it was verified that one of the chemistry technicians had completed all of the required training to be shift qualified and perform all required tasks involved with performing radioactive waste effluent releases, and the other chemistry technician had only five requirements to complete to become shift qualified.
Seventeen chemistry technicians had completed the required training to perform their assigned radioactive waste effluent program activities.
2.2 Conclusions The licensee had implemented excellent accredited initial and continuing training programs for chemistry technicians.
Seventeen chemistry technicians were qualified to perform independent sampling, analyses, and processing of radioactive waste effluent release permits to meet Technical Specification and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements. The chemistry department had an adequate, well qualified staff.
3 QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM (84750)
The inspector reviewed the quality assurance audit and surveillance programs regarding the radioactive waste effluut program activities to determine agreement with commitments in Chapters 13 and 17 of the Updated Safety Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in_ Technical Specification 6.5.2.8.
3.1 Discussion The inspector reviewed the quality assurance biennial audit schedule, Revision 10, issued December 16, 1991. This schedule reflected a reorganization of audit topics in association with the development of the new Audit Planning Guide Manual. This Audit Planning Guide Manual replaced the former Essential Element Manual with a more performance-based outline of information to be used by the quality assurance auditors when preparing an audit plan. The current-biennial audit schedule indicated that the effluent and environmental monitoring programs audit (Audit Planning Guide No. 9) was to be performed annually, and that the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and implementing procedures audit (Audit Planning Guide No. 7) was to be performed biennially an the odd numbered years in conjunction with the performance of the effluent
.
'
.
-
'
-5-and environmental monitoring programs audit. This audit schedule was in compliance with the Technical Specification audit frequency requirements.
No audit of the radiological effluent and environmental monitoring programs had been performed since the previous NRC inspection of this area conducted in August 1992. The licensee performed an evaluation of their quality assurance surveillance activities in its 40 audit planning guide areas for the period 1985 through September 1992 and determined that there were 12 areas where.
quality assurance surveillance coverage was very minimal (< 1 surveillance per year since 1989). The licensee's evaluation indicated that the radioactive waste effluent and environmental monitoring programs was one of the areas requiring more frequent quality assurance surveillance coverage. Therefore, the licensee had just completed a quality assurance surveillance of the radioactive gaseous waste effluent program which included direct observation of the sampling and analysis of the radwaste building vent gases; exchange and analysis of the radwaste building vent particulate and iodine charcoal filters; preparation and processing of a radwaste building vent effluent release permit; sampling and analysis of a gas decay tank; calibration of the radwaste building vent radiation monitor particulate, iodine, and gas detectors; and the use of computer software to prepare the appropriate release permits.
This quality assurance surveillance was in direct response to an observation which was made during the previous NRC inspection which. stated that only one quality assurance surveillance had been performed during the past 8 years which was directly involved with the performance of radioactive waste liquid or gaseous effluent releases and the associated Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements. This observation was confirmed by the licensee's recent evaluation of-its quality assurance activities.
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 air cleaning systems. The licensee had used an audit of the l
contractor's radiochemistry laboratory performed by a Washington Public
Power Supply System quality assurance audit team on February 11-13, 1992, and l
had performed their own quality assurance audit of the air cleaning systems i
filter testing contractor on September 26-28, 1990, to evaluate the l
performance of each of the two contractors to perform their respective i
analytical functions and to retain their current status on the Wolf Creek Generating Station qualified suppliers list. The inspectors reviewed these -
'
audits performed on each of the two contractors and found the audits to be a
comprehensive and satisfactory to evaluate each of the contractor's abilities to perform their respective Technical Specification required analyses and
surveillance activities.
l l
3.2 Conclusions
,
Quality assurance audits of the radioactive waste effluent program and Offsite
Dose Calculation Manual had been performed as scheduled.
The licensee had just completed a quality assurance surveillance of the radioactive gaseous waste effluent program.
Prior to this, only one quality assurance
!
i
!
._
.
s,
.
,,
l
'
,
-6-surveillance had been performed during the past 8 years. Audits of the contractors used to perform radioactive waste effluent program Technical Specification required surveillance analyses had been performed as required to-retain the contractors current status on the licensee's qualified suppliers
'
,
list.
4 LIQUID RADI0 ACTIVE 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.e, and 6.14 and the Offsite Dose
Calculation Manual Sections 2.0 and 4.0 and Tables 2-1 and 2-3.
F 4.1 Discussion r
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 liquid effluents, and operational tests and calibrations of equipment and radiation monitors associated with the radioactive liquid waste processing systems.
The inspector reviewed selected procedures governing the release of liquid radioactive waste effluents. These procedures provided for the following:
_
recirculation and sampling of the radioactive liquid waste tanks; radionuclide j
analysis prior to release; calculation of effluent release rate, effluent
'
i radiation monitor setpoints, projected offsite radionuclide concentrations, and offsite doses prior to release;. recording of dilution parameters during
the release; and verifying effluent discharge flow rates and effluent volume discharged. The inspector witnessed licensee personnel collect a liquid' waste
'
sample from monitor tank THB07A on March 3,1993, analyze the sample, prepare the monitor tank release permit, perform the monitor tank release, and perform
.
the post-release calculations. All aspects of the monitor tank release were l
performed in accordance with approved procedures.
l
'
The inspector reviewed a representative number of batch radioactive waste liquid release permits for the period September _1 through February 28, 1992.
It was determined that the processing, sampling, and analyses of liquid radioactive waste effluents, and the approval and performance of batch liquid radioactive waste discharges were conducted in~accordance with Technical
,
Specification and Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements. Quantities of
!
radionuclides released in the liquid effluents were within the limits specified in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. Offsite doses were
,
calculated according to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and were within Technical Specification limits. The inspector verified that the licensee was
performing the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual required analyses on composite
{
.
.
.,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
-7-53mples of batch liquid radioactive releases for gross alpha, strontium-89, strontium-90, and iron-55.
The licensee had implemented a new effluent management system computer program to prepare radioactive waste effluent release permits and calculate the doses to the environment as a result of each effluent release as required by the Technical Specifications. The inspector reviewed the data that the licensee had generated to document and verify the performance of the new effluent
,
management system computer program to perform exactly like the previous liquid
"
radwaste/ gaseous radwaste computer program for computing effluent doses which had been verified against the NRC's PC Dose computer software program during a
,
previous NRC inspection. The licensee performed calculations on 8 liquid radioactive waste test cases and 8 gaseous radioactive waste test cases. The computed dose results were exactly the same using both computer programs.
l The licensee had made one equipment modification to the radioactive liquid
?
waste management system during 1992. This equipment modification removed obsolete reverse osmosis equipment which was no longer used and freed up space in the radwaste building to better utilize vendor supplied waste processing
!
equipment. The inspector reviewed the licensee's description of the equipment t
modification made during the time period reviewed and found that the
,
modification was properly documented in the appropriate Semiannual Radioactive
!
Effluent Release Report as required by the Technical Specifications.
The inspector reviewed liquid radioactive waste process and effluent radiation
!
monitor source check, channel check, analog channel operational test, and channel calibration records. All records reviewed indicated that the radioactive liquid effluent monitoring instrumentation was being properly maintained, tested, and calibrated in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation l
Manual requirements.
!
4.2 Conclusions
!
The licensee was implementing a liquid. radioactive waste effluent program in i
accordance with the Technical Specifications and Offsite Dose Calculation l
Manual. The quantities of radionuclides released in the liquid radioactive
waste effluents were within the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits.
t Offsite doses to the environment from the liquid radioactive waste effluents
'
were calculated using Offsite Dose Calculation Manual methodologies, and the dose results were within Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits. The licensee
had implemented a new effluent management system computer software program to i
generate radioactive waste effluent release permits and calculate the doses _ to
!
the environment resulting from the effluent releases. The licensee had made
'
one equipment modification to the radioactive liquid waste managempnt system during 1992.
Liquid radioactive waste effluent instrumentation and radiation
monitors were being tested and calibrated in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.
l l
t t
t
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
'
"
-8-5 GASEOUS RADI0 ACTIVE WASTE EFFLUENTS (84750)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's 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.e, and 6.14 and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Sections 3.0 and 4.0 and Tables 3-1 I
and 3-3.
5.1 Discussion j
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 release 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 gaseous 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 witnessed licensee personnel collect containment atmosphere samples using the containment radiat. ion monitor GT-RE-31 on
,
March 2, 1993, analyze the samples, prepare-the containment purge release permit, perform the containment purge release, and perform the post-release calculations. All aspects of the containment purge release were performed in accordance with approved procedures.
t The inspector reviewed selected gaseous waste release permits which included the unit vent and the radwaste building vent continuous releases and batch i
releases from waste gas decay tanks and containment vents and purges for the period September 1, 1992, through February 28, 1993.
It was determined that
- '
the sampling and analyses of the gaseous effluents.and the approval of the radioactive gaseous waste releases were conducted in accordance with Offsite
-
Dose Calculation Manual requirements. Quantities of gaseous and particulate i
!
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 Dose Calculation Manual
!
requirements.
t The inspector determined that no major equipment or design modifications had l
been made in the radioactive gaseous waste management systems during 1992.
j
!
l
, _.
_
.
.
'
,
.
.
-
t
,
'
_g_
.
'
The inspector reviewed gaseous radioactive waste process and effluent instrumentation and radiation monitor source check, channel check, analog channel operational test, and channel calibration records. All records
,
reviewed indicated that the radioactive gaseous effluent monitoring
instrumentation was being properly maintained, tested, and calibrated in
!
_
compliance with Offsite Oose Calculation Manual requirements.
.
5.2 Conclusions The licensee was implementing a gaseous radioactive waste effluent program _in accordance with the Technical Specifications and Offsite Dose Calculation j
Manual requirements. 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. The licensee had not made any major equipment or design modifications to the radioactive gaseous waste management system during 1992.
Gaseous radioactive waste effluent instrumentation and radiation monitors were being tested and calibrated in compliance with Offsite Dose Calculation Manual requirements.
6 REPORT OF RADI0 ACTIVE EFFLUENTS (84750)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's reports concerning radioactive waste systems and effluent releases to determine compliance with the requirements of
,
10 CFR Part 50.36(a)(2), Technical Specifications 6.9.1.7 and 6.14, and the
-
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.
6.1 Discussion
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports for the periods January 1 through June 30, 1992, and July 1 through
_'
December 31, 1992.
These reports were written in the format described in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.21, Revision 1, June 1974, and contained the information
'
required by the Technical Specifications and the Offsite Dose _ Calculation Manual. During the time period January 1 through December 31, 1992, the licensee had performed 88 liquid batch releases and 73 gaseous batch releases.
The licensee reported two unplanned, abnormal releases during the time period
!
'
reviewed. The first unplanned release was from Waste Gas Decay Tank 2 on March 3, 1992, and the second unplanned release was from Waste Gas Decay
,
Tank 4 on April 23, 1992. The inspector reviewed the licensee's descriptions and followup actions concerning each of the unplanned releases and determined j
that the licensee had determined the root cause of each of the events and had taken appropriate corrective actions.
Based on the licensee's evaluations of the two events, the root cause of each of the events was a failure of System-
-
Procedure SYS HA-22, " Waste Gas System Startup and Shutdown." The licensee J
changed the procedure to ensure that proper controls for operating the waste gas system were established.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's analyses and calculations of the radioactive material released and concluded that no radioactive discharge or dose limits had been exceeded. The inspector
.-.
-
\\
_
.
L
,
.
.
d
'
.
-10-I i
reviewed the licensee's change to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual,
'
Revision 9, which'was made during the time period reviewed and approved by the Plant Safety Review Committee with subsequent Director of Plant Operations i
approval on April 17, 1992.
Revision 9 was made to clarify the terms used to
{
calculate the lower limit of detection for the sample analyses by defining the
decay factors associated with time delays from the time of sampling to the
!
start time of sample analysis.
The details of the unplanned releases and the revision to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual were properly documented in
<
the appropriate Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Report as required by
the Technical Specifications.
Effluent monitoring instrumentation had not
been out of service in excess of Technical Specification requirements during
'
the time period reviewed. Two modifications were made to the radioactive waste treatment systems during the time period reviewed.
Plant Modification i
Request 03406, " Removal of Stock Equipment Company and Reverse Osmosis
!
Equipment," removed obsolete equipment which was no longer used and freed up
!
space in the radwaste building to better utilize vendor supplied waste processing equipment.
Plant Modification Request 03761, "Radwaste Storage
'
Modification," added a concrete slab near the radwaste building upon which a future radwaste storage facility will be constructed. A summary of the
!
radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent releases and associated doses for 1990, 1991, and 1992 are presented in Attachments 2 through 4 to this l
'
inspection report.
i 6.2 Conclusions l
The licensee had submitted their Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release
,
Reports in a timely manner, and these reports contained all the required information presented in the format described in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.21.
i The unplanned radioactivc releases did not exceed any Technical Specification limits. Two design modifications were made to the radioactive waste effluent i
management systems.
Revision 9 was made to the Offsite Dose Calculation
-
Manual.
,
7 AIR CLEANING SYSTEMS (84750)
The inspector reviewed the air cleaning ventilation system testing program to l
determine agreement with the commitments in Chapter 9 of the Updated Safety
Analysis Report and compliance with the requirements in Technical
,
,
Specifications 4.7.6, 4.7.7, and 4.9.13.
l
)
7.1 Discussion
!
The inspector reviewed the licensee's procedures, surveillance tests, and selected records and test results for maintenance and testing of the air cleaning ventilation systems which contain high efficiency particulate air
filters and. activated charcoal adsorbers. The. inspector verified that the
licensee's procedures and surveillance tests provided for the required periodic functional checking of the ventilation systems' components,
evaluation of the high efficiency particulate air filters and activated'
charcoal adsorbers, and the replacement and in-place filter testing of the I
filter systems. Since the previous NRC inspection of this area conducted in i
f i
i
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
>
'
-11-
,
August 1992, the inspector reviewed records for the period August 1992 through
'
February 1993 for the. fuel building emergency exhaust system and the control room ventilation system. During _that time period, no in-place filter testing
.
and activated charcoal laboratory tests had been performed. The inspector
,
noted that the Technical Specification. requirement for testing the various i
ventilation systems' activated charcoal adsorber material prior to 720 hours0.00833 days <br />0.2 hours <br />0.00119 weeks <br />2.7396e-4 months <br /> of operation following previous laboratory testing was being tracked by
+
Surveillance Test Procedure STS PE-056, " Filter Adsorber Unit Charcoal
,.
Adsorber Bed Run Time Tracking Log - Safety Related Units."
7.2 Conclusions
!
The air cleaning and filter ventilation systems conformed to the commitments
,
in the Updated Safety Analysis Report and Technical Specification requirements. The licensee's safety related ventilation systems had not been
tested since the prior NRC inspection of this area, i
!
L
t I
,
!
i
!
r r
t f
i
!
I
.
<
-
.
.
-
.
,
d
.
'
ATTACHMENT 1
<
1 PERSONS CONTACTED i
i 1.1 Licensee Personnel B. A. Copeland, Results Engineering
T. M. Damashek, Supervisor, Quality Assurance Surveillances
!
- M. E. Dingler, Manager, Nuclear Plant Engineering - Support
- T. F. East, Supervising Instructor, Chemistry
,
- R. D. Flannigan,-Manager, Nuclear Safety Engineering i
- D. E. Gerrelts, Manager, Instruments and Controls
' *R. C. Hagan, Vice President, Nuclear Assurance
- J. D. Hartley, Chemistry Training Instructor
,
- S. A. Henry, Supervisor, Chemistry T. J. Jensen, Chemistry Technician
- W. M. Lindsay, Manager, Quality Assurance R. L. Logsdon, Manager, Chemistry
,
i
- J. D. Lutz, Regulatory Compliance Engineer
- 0. L. Maynard, Vice President, Plant Operations
T. K. Metcalf, Chemistry Technician K. L. Miller, Instrumentation and Control
- K. J. Moles, Manager, Regulatory Services
- T. S. Morrill, Manager, Radiation Protection W. B. Norton, Manager, Technical Support R. B. Parker, Supervisor, Chemistry
- G. J. Pendergrass, Supervisor Engineer, Results Engineering M. D. Rabalais, Results Engineering
- C. C. Reekie,- Quality Assurance Auditor
- F. T. Rhodes, Vice President, Engineering and Technical Services
- T. L. Riley, Supervisor, Regulatory Compliance H. L. Stubby, Supervisor, Technical Training i
'
C. A. Swartzendruber, Technical Services
- J. A. Tarr, Regulatory Co'npliance Engineer
- J. D. Weeks, Manager, Operations S. G. Wideman, Supervisor, licensing M. G. Villiams, Manager, Plant Support 1.2 NRC Personnel
- G. A. Pick, Senior Resident Inspector
.
In addition to the personnel listed above, the inspector contacted other l
personnel during the inspection period.
i
- Denotes personnel that attended the exit meeting on March 5,1993.
!
2 EXIT MEETING An exit meeting was conducted on March 5, 1993. During this meeting, the inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the report. The licensee did not i
!
..
.
.
=
.
. -. -.
.
...
..
.
-..
.
+
.
.
,
.
.
i
,
,
-2-
!
identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to, or reviewed by, the inspector during the inspection.
,
i e
i
I I
!
,
^
i
!
(
!
i P
k i
i
!
l i
I
,
I i
.!
I b
.
!
,
t
. *
t I
-.,
!
- i I
,
'i
i
. !
$
i
' t I
f i
n
.
..
!
e s
.
.
.
ATTACHMENT 2
.
SWMATION OF Att LIQUID EFFLUENT RELE ASES 1990 1991 QUARTER 1 QUARTER 2 QUARTER 3 QUAP.TER 4 0'JARTER 1 QUARTER 2 OUARTER 3 04ARTER 4 1. Number of batch releases
26
14
23
52 2. Fission & Activation Products (Curies)
1.19 E-01 1.66 E-01 1.92 E-02 8.26 E-03 9.03 E-02 7.17 E-01 7.27 E-01 5.89 t'-01 3. Tritium (Curies)
2.93 E+02 2.21 E+01 1.14 E+02 1.61 E+02 1.25 E+02 3.57 E+02 1.B4 E+02 5.12 E+01 4. Dissolved &
Entrained Noble Gases (Curies)
l.32 E+01 6.47 E-03 6.53 E-05 1.40 E-02 4.74 E-03 8.07 E+00 6,87 E +00 6.66 E+00
'
5. Waste Volume Released (liters)
6.9; E+07 3.67 E+07 1.20 E+06 7.69 E+07 8.51 E+07 5.52 E+07 3.70 E+06 1.90 E+07 1992 1993
,
QUARTER 1 00ARTER 2 OUARTER 3 OUARTER 4 00ARTER 1 00ARTER 2 QUARTER 3 00ARTER 4 1. Number of batch releases
11
15 2. Fission & Activation Products (Curies)
1.19 E-01 3.23 E-02 E~.51 E-02 4.07 E-02 3. Tritium (Curies)
1.01 E+02 3.01 E+01 1.50 E+02 1.70 E+02
'
4. Dissolved &
Entratned Noble i
'
Gases (Curies)
8.36 E-03 3.21 E-04 1.63 E-02 1.37 E-01 5. Waste Volume j
Released (liters)
1.45 E+08 6.03 E+07 8.74 E+05 1.38 E+08 l
- -. - -. -.--. -. -
-..
-
-.-
.-. -- -
.. -. -... -. - -.. -
. -.
.
. -... -
......
.. -.. -
-
v
-
.
o w
-*
+
e s
s
.
e m
e
.,
. e
-
+
k*
!;
- -
i.:
=
-
.
e
3
6
4 R
+
-
-
0
0
+
R
-
E E
E E
E E
T T
e R
3
1 R
-
_
A
7
7 A
-
.
0
.
U g
_
2
3
4 O
+
,
.
+,
-
w
.
.-
2
7
3 m
0
0 R
-
-
+
R E
E E
E E
E g
T T
&
_
R
2
2 R
,
,
A
0
8 A
.,
4 U
m
2
2
2 O
-
e
,
9 g
y
-
ey
1 e
r
--
2
6
2 w
-
0
0 w
R
+
-
-
+
R
-
E E
E E
E E
i T
T m
e R
5
6 R
-
A
2
3 A
w e
U
U O
4
2
Q e
_
w
_
e
w
-
.
W M
v
.
!
0
0
0
0
S R
+
+
-
+
R
v
.
E F
E E
E E
E S
T T
-
-
-
A R
0
2 R
q A
-
1
A
E V
8 M
L E
2
0
4 O
R
+
-
T
-
M N
w
E
,
U
0
4
5
-
m T
0
0
0
. W L
U R
+
+
+
+
R
+
-
-
N E
E E
E E
E E
E E
e E
T
-
T E
R
0
0 R
7
t E
A
0
5 A
6
e M
N V
0
m R
O
3
0
0
4
0
-
O H
-
B e
C R
A I
P A
<
0
3
0
T l
1
0
0
0
T l
R
-
+
+
+
R
+
+
-
A E
E E
E E
E E
E E
A T
T FO R
0
7 R
0
-
-
A
0
4 A
0
N U
N U
O
O
2
0
2 O
2
9 e.-
.
I
9 u
a T
9 r
A
1 M
M
U
0
5
2
0
-
-
S
0
0
0
R
+
-
-
+
R
+
+
-
N
._
E E
E E
E E
E E
E-w T
T
-
R
8
R
0
.
A
2
3 A
0
4
-*
T U
U
e O
3
9 Q
5
4 s
.
m w
.
'
+
u t
s
5
0
2
0 s
I
0
0
0
-
u m
R
-
-
+
R
+
+
+
-
E E
E E
E E
E E
E
- w T
'
T R
6
' 6
R
0
e A
2
3 A
0
P
-
V
V
-
+e
.
O
9
6
O
1
0 s
e e
u-v
'
"
-
-
-)
+
f )
f s p-s-w e
l e w
n lai n
ai e
-
w o
Hr o
io H r it)
hC m
u u
w hC t )
a s
t (
)
as
t(
)
w v
s h
ve
i s
h i ie
iws ie c
ii
ws tr o
c
e w
t t r
-
y t
t r
-
y e
m m
a c u e
sa r
a c u e
sa a
n ed u
b AC in ed u
b AC i
t C
w t
C w
.
f
& (
d a8 (
f
& (
d a8 (
'
os s
o)
l os s
o)
l-w e
nt l s u>
m e
nt l s u>
m e
c u
'
rs oc e
c iu rs oc t
i s it
-
e u
s ea u
l
.
ea isd lari it e t
b e isd ar t e i
e P
b e ml i r oC ai i
ml iso t u r v s o t u r v ue r
ue r
oC at r
-
N r FP l
(
Pl
N r FP T (
PI T
e a
.
.
.
,
,
e
.
.
.
i
2
4
1
3
5 n
.
.
-
L
_
_
.
-
?
n
._
.
w
_
.
-
-
-
,
!
.
5.
.
.
.
%
%%
%
11
0 i
EE E
it
-
t
0
- -
-
E m
m
%
%
i i
%%
1 L
%%
9 l
51
37
1 f
4 3
9 fo
23
o
1 t
t n
n e
e c
c r
r e
e P
P S
E S
A E
L E
R T
N t
t E
i i
U n
n L
U U
F F
r r
E e
e P
P D
mm dd m
mm dd m
I t
ee a a e
it ee a a e
V r r r r r
r r rr r
im m
T
i mm mm m
i mm mm m
L L
00
L
00
$
12
1
1 N
D l
l N
a a
E A
u u
n n
M
n n
A A
H
E C
$
A A
G T
M T
G R
A F
S E
S O
D dd m
dd L
A aa e
aa U
r r r
r r N
mm m
mm NA mm
2 mm
m e
ee
0 e
ee
e M
s r e
- -
-
s r r
- -
r U
o mm EE E
o mm EE m
M D
I C
1 7
6 4 6
6
52 3,
X
33
2
A
9
72
M
O0
6
1
s s
es es
.t y
.t y
3 aa 3 aa 3l d 3l d 1 u 1 u
- cB
- c8 ei
)
ei s
)e)
s t
s e int >
s e)
int >
r s
t s e r
t
)
n os d as t
)
n cs d as n'
r e
D e ope n
r e
O o ape
.
e e
u D
l v
e e
u D
l v
uyv l
r
,di uyv r
,di l di lf i r nl l di f
ir nl f oL f
Ai 1 a -
f oL f
Ai 1 a-f B(
E s(A
f f B(
E s(A
f E
a (
,l E
a (
,l en sG a
- ma en sG a
- ma dl a u
na euh dl a u
na euh iuh r el a e ini iuh r el a e ini og cent og oemt th th iqWO sbGB di t iqWO sbGB dit a o ori a o ori L
GN l t w l
GN it w
-
'
=
,
u
.-
s e
/
-
e
-
m
.
-
~
r a
=
=
-
-
w w
-
%%
%
.
e
1
?
t
0 t
- -
-
i i
EE E
i im m
w L
%%
9 L
a 1 5
4 f
fo
41
o AA AA A
e
//
//
/
t t
NN NN N
n n
-
e e
e
-
c c
e r
r e
e e
e P
P w
=
.
e
-
oc w
w
e S
E S
w A
-
E e
L e
E su R
e t
g T
e N
t t
-
E i
i
.e U
n n
L U
U F
F r
r E
e e
)
t P
P n
mm dd m
mm dd m
%
D I
t ee aa e
i (
IQ'
it ee aa e
i rr r r r
'm o
J
=
r r r r r
m m
c i
mm mm m
i mm mm m
e L
L
00
l
00
4 D
l
1 2
1
1 v
l
-
w N
a a
e T
A u
u n
n-r N
$
n n
-
V A
A r
e E
tw v
E M
S
%
i A
w H
G e
-
C M
e O
y A
R
--
r v,
T
+
T s
v E
e A
S
O n
,
D e
+
L dd m
A aa e
-
a U
r r r
s s
N mm m
.
N
-
A mm
2 e
ee
0 e
.
M s
re
- -
-
s e
U o
mm EE E
o e
M D
D m
c
90
,-
I
1 1
AA AA A
w X
2 A
9
//
//
/
-
M
00
2
NN NN N
-
1
e w
m
=
w
-
e e
w
.
+
w s'
ses es
.t y
.t y
3 a a 3 aa 3ld 3l d 1 u 1 u
- c8
- c8
)
ei
)
ei w
s t
s e int >
s e)
int >
<
s e)
r s
t s e r
-
-
t
)
n os d as t
)
n os d as
-
n r
e D o ope n
r e
D o ope
.
e l di lu
.D l
v e
e u
D l
v e
e r
,di uyv l
r
,di w
uyv i r nl ldi f
i r nl f
f oL f
Ai 1 a -
f oL f
Ai 1 a-
.
fB(
E s(A
f fB(
E s(A
f u
E a
(
,l E
a (
,l e
en sG a
- ma en sG a
- ma oemt u
a euh dl a u
ma euh dl a
,
og oemt og ni iuh r el a e ini iuh r el a e ith th n
iqVO sbGB dit qW O sbGB dit e
ao ori i
a o ori
-
=
L GN t t w l
GN I t w
,
e
=
=
o
-
m m
-
,
i'
,
m