ML022130431
| ML022130431 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 07/30/2002 |
| From: | Bellamy R NRC/RGN-I/DNMS/DLB |
| To: | Price J, Danni Smith Dominion Nuclear Connecticut |
| References | |
| +adjud/rulemjr200506, EA-02-014 IR-02-010 | |
| Download: ML022130431 (23) | |
See also: IR 05000245/2002010
Text
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
475 ALLENDALE ROAD
KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415
July 30, 2002
Docket No. 05000245 License No. DPR-21
Mr. J. Alan Price, Vice President
Nuclear Technical Services
c/o David A. Smith, Manager-Regulatory Affairs
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
Millstone Power Station
Rope Ferry Road
Waterford, CT 06385
SUBJECT: INSPECTION 05000245/2002010, DOMINION NUCLEAR CONNECTICUT, INC.,
MILLSTONE POWER STATION UNIT 1, WATERFORD, CONNECTICUT
Dear Mr. Price:
On July 5, 2002, the NRC completed an inspection at your Millstone Unit 1 facility. The
enclosed report presents the results of this inspection.
During the four month period covered by this inspection, you conducted limited
decommissioning activities at Millstone Unit 1 in a safe manner and maintained appropriate
focus on the safe storage of fuel in the spent fuel pool.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790, a copy of this letter, its enclosure, and your response (if you
choose to provide one) will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) and will be
accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm.html. To the extent
possible, your response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards
information so that it can be placed in the PDR without redaction.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Ronald R. Bellamy, Chief
Decommissioning and Laboratory Branch
Enclosure: Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
J. Alan Price 2
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
cc:
D. A. Christian, Senior Vice President - Nuclear Operations and Chief Nuclear Officer
W. R. Matthews, Vice President and Senior Nuclear Executive
P. J. Parulis, Manager, Nuclear Oversight
D. A. Smith, Manager, Regulatory Affairs
L. M. Cuoco, Senior Nuclear Counsel
State of Connecticut SLO Designee
First Selectmen, Town of Waterford
D. Katz, Citizens Awareness Network (CAN)
R. Bassilakis, CAN
J. M. Block, Attorney, CAN
G. Winslow, Citizens Regulatory Commission (CRC)
E. Woollacott, Co-Chair, NEAC
P. Rathbun, MIDAC
State of South Carolina
State of Washington
State of California
J. Alan Price 3
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
Distribution (w/encl 1):
SECY
CA
OEMAIL
OEWEB
W. Travers, EDO
W. Kane, DEDR
F. Congel, OE
C. Paperiello, DEDMRS
A. Hodgdon, OGC
D. Dambly, OGC
L. Chandler, OGC
T. Bergman, OEDO
M. Virgilio, NMSS
D. Cool, NMSS
M. Weber, NMSS
K. Ramsey, NMSS
J. Greeves, NMSS
T. Essig, NMSS
M. Williams, NMSS
J. Kennedy, NMSS
S. Collins, NRR
J. Johnson, NRR
S. Dembek, NRR
J. Hickman, NRR
V. Nerses, NRR
T. Frye, NRR
Enforcement Coordinators
RII, RIII, RIV
B. Beecher, OPA
H. Bell, OIG
P. Lohaus, OSTP
G. Caputo, OI
L. Tremper, OC
J. Wiggins, RI
G. Pangburn, RI
D. Screnci, PAO-RI
N. Sheehan, PAO-RI
B. Fewell, RI
D. Holody, RI
G. Matakas, RI
NRC Resident Inspector
J. Alan Price 4
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
DOCUMENT NAME: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: C = Copy w/o attach/encl E = Copy w/ attach/encl N = No copy
OFFICE DNMS/RI N DNMS/RI DNMS/RI
NAME Tjackson TJJ Rbellamy RRB1 Gpangburn FMC
DATE 7/30/02 7/30/02 7/30/02
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
INSPECTION REPORT
Inspection No. 05000245/2002010
Docket No. 05000245
License No. DPR-21
Licensee: Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
Location: Millstone Power Station, Unit 1
Rope Ferry Road
Waterford, CT 06385
Inspection Dates: March 18 - July 5, 2002
Inspector: Todd Jackson, CHP, Health Physicist
Approved By: Ronald R. Bellamy, Chief
Decommissioning and Laboratory Branch
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety
Document Name: C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Dominion Nuclear Connecticut, Inc.
NRC Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
This integrated inspection included aspects of licensee operations and plant support during
decommissioning activities. The report covers a four-month period of announced inspections
by one regional inspector. No violations were identified.
Operations
The inspector concluded that the Corrective Action Program was effective in identifying and
tracking issues for resolution. Unit 1 issues and concerns were incorporated into the Millstone
Station program, although database design limitations made searches for Unit 1 related issues
and corrective actions somewhat difficult. No safety concerns were identified. (O1.1)
An unresolved item (URI) was identified in 1997 concerning spent fuel pool cleanliness. The
licensees actions are adequately addressing the concerns regarding raised fuel bundles,
controlling fuel bundle movements within the Unit 1 SFP, and there are no longer any relevant
concerns regarding operational impacts from foreign material entrained within fuel assemblies.
The issues in unresolved item 50-245/97-01-01 have been resolved or rendered irrelevant by
the decision to decommission Millstone 1, and URI 97-01-01 is therefore closed. (URI 97-01-
01) (O1.3)
Maintenance
The licensee was adequately addressing the maintenance rule. No safety concerns were
identified. (M1)
Engineering
Safety reviews related to engineering work activities were in progress for planned major
activities. The licensees project organization and management were beginning detailed
planning for the work, scheduled for later in 2002. No safety concerns were identified. (E1)
Plant Support
Unit 1 Radiation Protection (RP) activities had been successfully integrated back into the
Millstone Station RP programs. RP surveys were appropriate for the level of work being
performed at Unit 1, and RP was involved in planning of work to drain water from the Unit 1
reactor vessel, a significant upcoming work activity. The licensee responded adequately to,
and was investigating the discovery of, a small 90Sr source not listed in the site radioactive
materials inventory. The licensee had completed accounting for non-fuel special nuclear
material at Unit 1, in response to a recommendation of the Fuel Rod Accountability Project.
(R1.1)
Airborne effluent releases of radioactive material were significantly less than allowable release
limits. There were no liquid effluents from Unit 1 during this inspection period. (R1.2)
ii Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
Unit 1 radioactive waste shipments were completed in accordance with Millstone procedures.
No safety concerns were identified. (R1.3)
iii Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REPORT DETAILS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
I. Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
O1 Conduct of Operations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
O1.1 General Comments (71801) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
O1.2 Corrective Action Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
O1.3 (Closed) Unresolved Item 1997-001-01: Spent Fuel Issues . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
II. Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
M1 Conduct of Maintenance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
III. Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
E1 Conduct of Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
IV. Plant Support . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
R1 Radiation Protection & Chemistry (RP&C) Controls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
R1.1 Radiation Protection Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
R1.2 Radwaste Processing and Effluent Monitoring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
R1.3 Solid Radioactive Waste Management . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
V. Management Meetings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
X1 Exit Meeting Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
iv Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
REPORT DETAILS
I. Operations
O1 Conduct of Operations
O1.1 General Comments (71801)
The licensee made significant progress at re-integrating Unit 1 back into the Millstone
Station site organization and programs. Physically, much of the actions taken to
separate Unit 1, such as the erecting of fences and other barriers, had been completely
reversed. Some of the work to make Unit 1 cold and dark had also been reversed.
For example, electrical power to installed lighting had been disconnected and temporary
lighting strung throughout many of the buildings. Recent work had restored adequate
permanent plant lighting to areas where licensee personnel routinely enter for work or
operator rounds. Unit 2 Operations had taken over responsibility for Unit 1 facilities.
Additionally, in late 2001 the Unit 1 Central Monitoring Station (CMS) had been closed
down and the monitoring computers and programmable logic controllers for Unit 1
moved into the Unit 2 control room. Organizational units dedicated to Unit 1, such as
engineering and licensing, had also been fully integrated back into the Millstone Station
organization.
O1.2 Corrective Action Program
a. Inspection Scope (40801)
The inspector reviewed the corrective action program implementation and results
applicable to Unit 1.
b. Observations and Findings
The inspector noted that the corrective action program (CAP) for Millstone Unit 1 is
integrated into the CAP for all of Millstone Power Station. A set of 20 procedures
implements the CAP, with the top-tier program description contained within Master
Manual MP-16-MMM (Rev. 4, effective 9/6/01). The inspector reviewed selected
program procedures and observed that the written program scope descriptions did not
specifically include references to Unit 1. The licensee pointed out that the references to
Unit 2 and to common systems in the procedures covered Unit 1 because Unit 2
Operations now had operational responsibility for Unit 1, and Unit 1 facilities and
equipment were also covered by the definition of common systems. The inspector
noted similar scoping terminology in the CAP 2001 Trend Report for Millstone Station,
which indicated that the report contained ...an analysis of Millstone Unit 2, Unit 3, and
common condition reports initiated during 2001. The licensee stated that all condition
reports (CRs) addressing Unit 1 issues were included in the analysis documented in the
report.
The licensee described the structure of the computer database used to document CRs
and track resulting work assignments to final closure. The database system was
Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
designed for Units 2 and 3 at Millstone when Unit 1 was being managed by a contractor
as an independent decommissioning project, separate from Units 2 and 3. As a result,
the database data entry page does not permit a CR to be identified as specific to Unit 1,
as it does for Units 2 or 3. Unit 1 CRs therefore must be coded as either Unit 2" or as
common in the database data field. The licensee stated that CAP program guidance,
while not written, provided that CRs for Unit 1 should be written including Unit 1" or Unit
One in the title, thus enabling the database to be searched for Unit 1 related CRs by
searching the title or text fields for references to Unit 1. The inspector observed that
Unit 1 activities and issues were included in the CAP, however some CRs for Unit 1
issues did not include references to Unit 1 in the title and therefore were more difficult to
identify when the CAP/CR database was searched.
The inspector reviewed the status of recommended corrective actions from the
licensees Root Cause Analysis Report for the Millstone missing fuel rods. The
corrective actions were described in the licensees Fuel Rod Accountability Project
(FRAP) report and in NRC Inspection Report 50-245/2000-013. As a result of the
previous corrective action recommendation to perform a physical verification of non-fuel
Special Nuclear Materials (SNM) in the spent fuel pool (SFP), during April 2002 the
licensee initiated two CRs due to conditions encountered while performing the inventory
in the SFP. Details of the SNM verification activities are discussed in paragraph R.1.1.b
of this inspection report.
c. Conclusions
The inspector concluded that the CAP was effective in identifying and tracking issues for
resolution. Unit 1 issues and concerns were incorporated into the Millstone Station
program, although database design limitations made searches for Unit 1 related issues
and corrective actions somewhat difficult. No safety concerns were identified.
O1.3 (Closed) Unresolved Item 1997-001-01: Spent Fuel Issues
a. Inspection Scope (40801)
The inspector reviewed licensee actions and documentation addressing issues related
to the unresolved item (URI).
b. Observations and Findings
The licensee had begun work on several activities planned for the Unit 1 SFP, including
fully seating those fuel assemblies with mechanical interferences. In 1997, the licensee
had committed to inspect fuel assemblies from below for foreign material prior to
reloading the core, to restrict movement of fuel bundles in the SFP until resolution of the
raised bundles issue, and to clean up the SFP, including removal of debris and various
used components prior to refueling outage 16. In Inspection Report 50-245/97-01, NRC
opened an unresolved item (URI 50-245/97-01-01) regarding degraded conditions in the
SFP and concerns about these unseated fuel assemblies, specifically that the conditions
within the SFP could impact future fuel integrity because of entrained foreign material.
2 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
The licensee subsequently decided to decommission Unit 1, and therefore outage 16
and any core reload did not occur.
The focus of the URI was on foreign material exclusion (FME) from the core during
reactor operations. The NRC Inspection Report referenced a root cause analysis the
licensee was planning to perform regarding FME problems in the Unit 1 SFP. In August
1997, the licensee had determined that an adequate root cause evaluation addressing
previous FME corrective action effectiveness had already been performed, dated March
1995 and documented as part of ACR 03428. Since then, operational concerns from
foreign material in spent fuel assemblies have become irrelevant due to the
decommissioning status of Millstone 1. Significant clean up of the SFP has also
occurred since the URI was opened, and the licensee has adequately maintained
controls over movement of fuel bundles due to the raised bundles presenting a fuel
storage configuration different than the original design of the storage racks.
Additionally, the criticality concerns from raised fuel bundles in the racks had been
analyzed by the licensee and documented in Engineering Record Correspondence NE-
97-F-023, 25202-ER-97-0021, dated January 29, 1997. Procedure EN 1067,
Supplemental Procedure for Inventory and Control of Special Nuclear Material, Rev. 3,
includes a restriction that no fuel assembly will be moved until it is confirmed that the
proposed movement is bound by a previous evaluation, or an evaluation of the proposed
movement is performed.
c. Conclusions
The licensees actions are adequately addressing the concerns regarding raised fuel
bundles, controlling fuel bundle movements within the Unit 1 SFP, and there are no
longer any relevant concerns regarding operational impacts from FME. The issues in
the URI have been resolved or rendered irrelevant by the decision to decommission
Millstone 1. This item is therefore closed. (URI 97-01-01)
II. Maintenance
M1 Conduct of Maintenance
a. Inspection Scope (62801)
The inspector reviewed the licensees program to implement the maintenance rule (10
CFR 50.65) for Unit 1.
b. Observations and Findings
The inspectors discussed with responsible licensee staff the maintenance rule program
being implemented for Unit 1. The maintenance rule applies to the licensees
monitoring of performance or condition of Unit 1 structures, systems, and components
(SSCs) associated with the storage, control, and maintenance of spent fuel in a safe
condition. The following documents were reviewed as part of the inspection:
Minutes of the expert panel meeting conducted on January 16, 2002.
3 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
Proposed draft of revision 3 to the Unit 1 Maintenance Rule Unit Basis
Document.
Procedure DEC 1510, Unit 1 Decommissioning Maintenance Rule Program,
Rev. 1 and proposed rev. 2.
Procedure DEC 1510.01, Scoping, Importance Ranking, and Performance
Criteria Assignment Using an Expert Panel Within the Maintenance Rule
Program During Decommissioning of Unit 1, Rev. 1 and proposed rev. 2.
Procedure DEC 1510.02, Guidelines for the Unit 1 Decommissioning
Maintenance Rule Program Implementation, Rev. 1 and proposed rev. 2.
Millstone Station Maintenance Rule Program (a)(3) Periodic Assessment Report,
covering Unit 1 for the period June 2000 through August 2001.
The licensee had determined that 12 systems at Unit 1 were within the scope of the
maintenance rule, with three of these (fuel pool liner, fuel storage racks, and the reactor
building structure which support the SFP) remaining as the only nuclear safety-related
SSCs. These are all passive structures and components, with their condition monitored
to implement the maintenance rule program. The licensee does not monitor
performance nor track availability because these are passive SSCs that are not
removed from service for maintenance. Maintenance work at Unit 1 was being
performed as necessary to maintain important equipment, with a minimal backlog of
scheduled activities.
c. Conclusions
The licensee was adequately addressing the maintenance rule. No safety concerns
were identified.
III. Engineering
E1 Conduct of Engineering
a. Inspection Scope (37801)
The inspector reviewed current engineering projects and planning for upcoming work
related to Unit 1 decommissioning.
b. Observations and Findings
Licensee staff described the following planning and engineering work in progress:
Re-seat the unseated fuel assemblies in the SFP
Move fuel assemblies within the Holtec racks to a 3 out of 4" rack position
configuration in which the Boraflex neutron absorber material is neither credited
nor necessary for reactivity control
Remove/dispose of irradiated hardware taking up some of the rack locations.
(Disposal is dependent on the burial site permitting resumption of irradiated
hardware disposals)
4 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
Remove the top fuel guide rack from the reactor pressure vessel (RPV). This
will remove the greater than Class C radioactive material currently in the reactor
vessel, which will be stored in the SFP.
Drain the water now filling the RPV. Process the water as necessary for
discharge.
Cover the remaining RPV hardware with shielding material to control radiation
levels on the refueling floor.
Engineering work was at an early stage, with evaluations in progress. The licensee had
recently approved performance of the work, enabling planning to go beyond the
preliminary stage. Contractors were expected to visit the site during summer 2002, with
most work expected to occur following the fall 2002 Unit 3 refueling outage.
c. Conclusion
Safety reviews related to engineering work activities were in progress for planned major
activities. The licensees project organization and management were beginning detailed
planning for the work. No safety concerns were identified.
IV. Plant Support
R1 Radiation Protection & Chemistry (RP&C) Controls
R1.1 Radiation Protection Program
a. Inspection Scope (83750)
The inspector reviewed the radiation protection program implementation at Unit 1.
b. Observations and Findings
Unit 1 radiation protection (RP) responsibilities have been integrated into the Millstone
Station site organization. Routine surveys and other activities are performed by Station
RP personnel assigned to Unit 1. Workloads have been minimal, with planning
beginning for draining of the RPV and removal of greater than class C radioactive
materials for storage in the spent fuel pool. RP was appropriately involved in the
planning of the RPV draindown project.
The licensee had discovered a radiation detector containing a radioactive 90Sr source
stored in the former Unit 1 maintenance shop area. It was not expected that any
radioactive sources remained in Unit 1 areas following an inventory search during 1999-
2000 of installed process instrumentation to identify and remove all sources. The 90Sr
source was not listed in the licensees radioactive source inventory, and the licensee
determined that it should have been included in the inventory per Station procedures.
The licensee initiated CR 02-06144 to document the issue and ensure adequate
corrective action.
5 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
The inspector also reviewed the licensees efforts to inventory and account for SNM
contained in IRMs in the SFP. As part of the corrective actions identified during the
licensees Millstone 1 Fuel Rod Accountability Project (FRAP), which investigated the
two spent fuel rods missing from the Unit 1 SFP, it was recommended as part of the
corrective action to confirm the non-fuel SNM inventory at Millstone 1. The IRMs, which
are nuclear instrumentation detectors, contain small quantities of SNM and are therefore
carried as part of the licensees inventory. Records indicated that three IRMs were
located in a basket on the east wall of the SFP. On April 3, 2002, the licensee was
unable to examine the contents of a basket in the SFP believed to contain the IRMs due
to interference from filters in the basket which obscured its contents. Removal of the
filter materials was subsequently performed on April 15 and 16, 2002, and the contents
of the basket examined. No IRMs were identified among the materials in the basket,
and additional containers in the SFP were then searched. The IRMs were located in the
second container examined, also on the east wall of the SFP, thus verifying the non-fuel
SNM in the SFP and completing the FRAP corrective action item 00010931-37. Non-
fuel SNM was handled or observed directly and accounted for except for the monitors
which remain installed within the Unit 1 reactor vessel. The licensee stated these
remaining 42 detectors are inaccessible and no work has been performed which would
have moved or impacted the detectors since they were installed.
Following verification of the IRMs in the SFP, the licensee transferred the three IRMs
into another storage container and transferred the container to a different SNM Item
Control Area, the Unit 1 Traversing Incore Probe (TIP) room, for long term storage. The
inspector observed the tamper-sealed storage cabinet within the locked TIP room.
CR-02-05771, Unit 1: SNM (3 IRMs) were moved prior to completing MTFs, was
initiated to assure corrective action. Documentation of this SNM transfer was captured
on the pertinent work order.
c. Conclusions
Unit 1 RP activities had been successfully integrated back into the Millstone Station RP
programs. RP surveys were appropriate for the level of work being performed at Unit 1,
and RP was involved in planning of work to drain water from the Unit 1 reactor vessel, a
significant upcoming work activity. The licensee responded adequately to, and was
investigating discovery of a small 90Sr source not listed in the site radioactive materials
inventory. The licensee had completed accounting for non-fuel SNM at Unit 1, in
response to a recommendation of the FRAP.
6 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
R1.2 Radwaste Processing and Effluent Monitoring
a. Inspection Scope (84750)
The inspector reviewed the processing and monitoring of gaseous and liquid effluents.
b. Observations and Findings
There were no liquid effluents from Unit 1 during this inspection period. Liquids that
collect in the Unit 1 containment sumps are pumped into a holding tank and evaporated
as a batch, with vapor exhausted into the balance of plant (BOP) ventilation exhaust, a
monitored release pathway. Prior to operation of the evaporator to process a batch, the
holding tank is sampled and analyzed for tritium and gamma emitting radionuclides.
The inspector observed the evaporator, which was operating at the time of the
inspection. The inspector also noted the operator aid posted on the Unit 1 monitoring
computer display, located in the Unit 2 control room, used to alert operators that the
evaporator was in operation.
The SFP island and BOP ventilation exhaust systems are both continuously sampled for
particulates, Particulate filters are changed and analyzed every two weeks on the SFP
island exhaust system, and the BOP filters are changed and analyzed at least twice per
month in accordance with Millstone procedures. The SFP island system is also sampled
and analyzed for tritium at least monthly.
The inspector reviewed the results of analyses of effluent samples collected from
October 2001 through May 2002. All sample analysis results were very low values, with
most reported as less than the minimum detectable activity. As of April 8, 2002 (the
most recent cumulative calculation), the licensee determined using the Radiological
Environmental Monitoring Offsite Dose Calculation Manual that the Unit 1 discharges of
gaseous radioactivity were equivalent to maximum offsite doses that were 0.002% of the
7.5 mrem quarterly limit and 0.001% of the 15 mrem annual limit for 2002.
c. Conclusions
Releases of radioactive material were significantly less than allowable release limits. No
safety concerns were identified by the inspector.
R1.3 Solid Radioactive Waste Management
a. Inspection Scope (86750)
The inspector reviewed the management of solid radwaste related to Unit 1 through
discussions with responsible personnel and review of records.
b. Observations and Findings
The inspector reviewed document packages for selected shipments of radioactive waste
from Unit 1 during the period January 2001 through June 2002. Document packages
7 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
were complete and included mobile crane lift plans, waste package inspection results,
truck inspections, state transportation permits, waste characterization data, truck
radiation surveys, and individual package radiation surveys. The inspector also
reviewed selected documentation of waste shipped to processors and records of
subsequent shipments from the processor to the disposal site. In 2001, there were 53
such shipments, with 13 more during 2002 (through May 20). The processor provided
the licensee with detailed records of radioactive material received, processed, stored,
and disposed.
The inspector observed activities on the refueling floor related to removal of control rod
blades from the spent fuel pool and placement into shipping containers for disposal. A
seavan container wrapped in plastic was staged near the SFP to enable loading of
control rod blades after removal from the SFP.
Following the licensees investigation and NRC inspection of the spent fuel missing from
Unit 1 (Inspection Report 05000245/2001013), the State of South Carolina (SC) had
imposed limitations on the type of radioactive waste that the Barnwell disposal site could
accept from Millstone. The restriction was imposed pending acceptable corrective
actions by the licensee to satisfy SC that only acceptable types of waste (with assurance
that no spent fuel rods or fragments are included) would be sent for disposal from
Millstone. During this inspection period, the licensee met with representatives of SC to
discuss corrective actions taken and what the State required to enable lifting of the
restrictions on Millstone shipments for disposal. The licensee continued to work toward
satisfying the concerns of SC and stated that the meetings were productive. The
licensee plans to take action to resolve SC concerns as soon as possible to enable
resumption of waste shipments.
c. Conclusions
Unit 1 radioactive waste shipments were completed in accordance with Millstone
procedures. No safety concerns were identified.
V. Management Meetings
X1 Exit Meeting Summary
The inspectors met with licensee management representatives following each site visit during
the inspection period and discussed the results of the inspection. The licensee acknowledged
the findings presented.
8 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
Licensee
D. Meekhoff, Supervisor, Operations Support
R. Griffin, Manager, Radiation Protection and Chemistry
J. E. Laine, Supervisor, Radiation Protection
P. Tulba, Supervisor, Waste Services
G. Holtz, Health Physicist, Radiation Protection and Chemistry
T. Petit, Project Manager, Engineering
P. Quinlan, Senior Engineer, Nuclear Projects
F. A. Perry, Radiation Protection
D. Reagan, Radiation Protection
P. Willoughby, Licensing
M. Jaworsky, Licensing
W. Eakin - Manager, Station Effluents and Environmental Monitoring Group
W. Gorman, Supervisor, Unit 3 I & C
B. Robinson, Radiation Protection
H. McKenney, Supervisor, Reactor Engineering
V. Wessling, Supervisor, Corrective Actions
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED
36801 Organization, Management, and Cost Controls at Permanently Shutdown
Reactors
37801 Safety Reviews, Design Changes and Mods
40801 Self-Assessments, Auditing, and Corrective action
62801 Maintenance and Surveillance at PSRs
71801 Decommissioning Performance and Status at Permanently Shutdown Reactors
83750 Occupational Radiation Exposure
84750 Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring
86750 Solid Radwaste Management and Transportation
9 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd
ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened
None
Closed
URI 97-001-01 Spent Fuel Pool Cleanliness
Discussed
URI 97-001-01 Spent Fuel Pool Cleanliness
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED
BOP Balance of Plant
CAP Corrective Action Program
CMS Central Monitoring Station
CR Condition Reports
FME Foreign Material Exclusion
FRAP Fuel Rod Accountability Project
IRM Intermediate Range Monitor
RP Radiation Protection
SFP Spent Fuel Pool
SFPI Spent Fuel Pool Island
SSC Structures, Systems and Components
URI Unresolved Item
10 Inspection Report No. 05000245/2002010
C:\ORPCheckout\FileNET\ML022130431.wpd