ML20092F268
| ML20092F268 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 02/07/1992 |
| From: | Deloach R PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF NEW HAMPSHIRE |
| To: | Healey J ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092F271 | List: |
| References | |
| NYE-92-005, NYE-92-5, NUDOCS 9202190225 | |
| Download: ML20092F268 (17) | |
Text
N$w Hampshiro Yankee NYE 92005 February 7,1992 Mr. John Healey United States EPA, Region 1 (WCC)
John F. Kennedy Federal Building Boston, MA 02203
References:
(a) NPDES Permit No. NH0020338 (b) EPA Lettee dated January 9, 1992, D. A. Fierra, Director, Water Management ision, to T. C. Feigenbaum S ubject: Response to Request for Information
Dear Mr. Healey:
In a letter dated January 9,1992 [ Reference (b)], the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) requested written information from New Hampshire Yankee (NHY) regarding the September 30, 1991 release of radionuclides from Seabrook Station to the Atlantic Ocean. Pursuant to Section 308 of the Clean Water Act, Enclosure 1 provides NHY's response to the EPA's specific requests for information.
As stated in the Enclosure, NHY has identified and quantified the radionuclides released as a result of the September 30, 1991 event and all subsequent decontamination activities. At no time during or after this event were any radionuclides released to the Atlantic Ocean in excess of the limits stipulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Seabrook Station Operating License. Additionally, at no time were any radionuclides
- leased to the Browns River. During and after this event, NHY undertook conservatise measures to ensure impact on the environment was minimized. It is noted that an NRC inspection at Seabrook Station subsequent to September 30, 1991, documents N H Y's compliance with NRC regulations regarding radioactive release limits. The NRC also concluded that there was no negative impact on the environment or to the public health and safety as a result of this event.
If you have any questions regarding the enclosed respont.e, or should you wish to meet with NHY to further discuss the enclosed information, please contact Mr. James M. Peschel, Regulatory Compliance Manager, at (603) 474 9521, extension 3772.
Very truly yours,
, ,3r r.-
kR. Jeb f N2bkA DeLoach l '1 b i Executive Director -
Engineering and Licensing JES New Hampshire Yankee Division of PuL!ic Service Company of New Hampshire j P.O. Box 300
- Seabrook, NH 03874
- Telephone (603) 474 9521 l 9202190225 920207 PDR
- ADOCK 05000443 PDR
3 .5' .
Environmental. Protection Agency February 7,1992
.. A t t e n tion: . -Mr. Healy - ,
Page two '
- cc
- Mr. Jeffrey Andrews State of New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services 6 Hazen Drive Concord,- NH 03301-6527 Mr. Edward K. McSweeney Chief. Wastewater Management Branch United States Environmental Protection. Agency John F. Kennedy Duilding '
Boston, MA 02203 Mr. Ted E. -Landry Permit Compliance Section United States Environmental Protection Agency
. John F.- Kennedy Building Boston, MA -02203 Mr. Ted C. Feigenbaum
' President and Chief Executive Officer
- New Hampshire Yankee:
- P.O.- Box ' 300 -
Seabrook, - NH 03874 Document Control Desk Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC '20555 Mr. Thomas T,- Martin
- Regional : Administrator U.- Sc Nuclear Regulatory Commission R egion ' t .
475- Allendale Road ,
King of Prussia, PA 19406 .
.Mr. Gordon E. Edison,- Sr Project Manager Project Directorate I-3
- Division of_ Reactor Projects U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Wa'shington, DC : 20555 -
2 Mr. Noel Dudley
- NRC. Senior: Resident Inspector P.O. Box 1149 Seabrook, NH .03874 -
- . . . . . __ . - . _ . . _ . . . . .a...- . . . . , _ . . . , _ . - _ _ . _ - _ . - - , _ _ _ . _ , - . . _ . ... _ _- _ - . _ , _ -
~ - . - -- - -
RESPONSE TO EPA REOUEST FOR INFORMATION In a letter dated January 9,1992, the United States Environmental Protection Agency
-(EPA) requested information from New Hampshire Yankee (NHY) regarding _the September
.30. 1991 monitored but unplanned ~ release cf radioactivity from Seabrook Station to the
- Atlantic Ocean. The following provides the EPA's specific questions and NHY's responses.
Omtien No.1 Specify the type (s) of radioactive pollutants (s) discharged into the Atlantic Ocean, or other receiving waters, from NHY's outfalls at the Seabrook power plant as a result of the above identified problems that took place on or around September 30, 1991. In specifying the type (s) of radioactive pollutants discharged, NilY should also identify whether such pollutant (s) are considered to be' source, byproduct or special nuclear cuaterials under the Atomic Energy Aet, or some other type of radioactive material.
Resnonse No.1 Table I lists the types of radionuclides that were discharged into the Atlantic Ocean (Outfall 001) as a result of the September 30, 1991 event and all subsequent decontamination activities; No radionucildes were released to the Browns River or any other receiving waters as a result of this event or any of the clean up activities. The radionuclides listed in Table 1 are all byproduct materials. 10 CFR 20.3 defines byproduct materials as any radioactive material (except special nuclear material) yielded in or made radioactive by exposure to the radiation incident to the process of producing or utilizing special nuclear material. Source materials are defined as uranium or thorium, or any combination thereof. ';pecial nuclear materials are defined as' plutonium, uranium 233, uraniom enriched in the isotope 233 or in the isotope 235. No source materials or special nuclear matericls were released as a result of this event.
Question No. 2 As to the radioactive pollutants identified 'in No, I above, specTy the amounts and concentrations of each_ type of radioactive pollutant discharged on or around September 30, 1991 as a result of the above. identified problems that took place on that date. Include in your response any monitoring data that may have been collected documenting such. amounts.
or concentrations of radioactive pollutants.
Restionse No. 2 Table 1 provides the total number of Curies (Ci) of radionuclides that were released to the- Atlantic Ocean (Outfall 001) during the event on September 30, 1991, and the amounts that were released during subsequent decontamination activities conducted in October, November and December 1991, . Tables 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 provide the same information for each of the individual release paths to the Circulating Water System and hence the Atlantic
' Ocean. Specifically, Table 2 contains the total amount of radionuclides released through the Waste = Test Tanks; Table 3 for the Steam Generator Blowdown Holdup Sump, Table .4 for 1
, _ . - ._, _ _ _ . , - ~ . , . - . - _ . . . _ . . _ , . _ . - - _ . _ . - . . , ~ _ _ , ,
_ ~ - . . . . - ~ - - . ~ -- _ - - . . . _ -
. i the Turbine Buiiding Sump; Table 5 for the D'emineralized _ Water Storage Tanks; and Table 6 for the Oil / Water Separator Vault No. 2, The sum of the amounts of radionuclides presented in Tables 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 are the total amounts presented in Table 1.
Table 7 provides _the average concentrations of radionuclides (microcuries/ml) that were released to the Atlantic Ocean (Outfall 001) during the esent on September 30, 1991, 1 and = during the subsequent decontamination activities. The average radionuclide concentrations presented in Table 7 were obtained by dividing the total amount of each radionuclide that was released during the subject period by the total volume of water ,
discharged through the Circulating Water System for the same period. It should be noted. '
howeser, that the concentrations presented in Table 7 are mathematical averages of the total release for the period, and that individual batch releases during the same period each had specific concentrations. For example, concentrations of certain radionuclides may have been higher when a specific system was flushed or when a hold up tank was drained, and lower when these activities were not being performed. Notwithstanding this, as described below, at all times during this event, and during the subsequent decontamination activities, NHY was j in full compliance with the radionuclide concentration limits stipulated by the Nuclear ;
Regulatory Commission.
The radionuclides released via the above stated flow paths were measured by extensive sampling and analysis at each specific location. During the period of September 30 through
- December 12, 1991, it is estimated that oser 500 samples were analyzed for radionuclide
- content. The sampling data are maintained in a coded format on magnetic computer tape at Seabrook Station. Due to the voluminous nature and coded format of the subject data, hard copies are not provided with this response. This data is available for review at Seabrook Station.
Question No. 3 As to the types of radioactive pollutants identified in No. I above, specify which. il
.any,. of such pollutants are subject to regulation by the Nuclear Regulatory Commisdon (NRC). If any such NRC regulation applies, specify the discharge limitations imposed on that pollutant by the 'NRC and -the legal basis for such limitations. Also provide copies of any applicable license (s) issued by the NRC to NHY through which such limitations are imposed.
Response No 3 All of the radionuclides identified in Response No. I above, are subject to regulation .
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The Seabrook Station Unit No. t Facility Operating License (NPF-86h contains as Appendix A thereto the Seabrook Station Technical Specifications: Technical Specification 3.11.1.1 contains the Limiting Conditions for Operation regarding the concentration of radioactive liquid effluents. This specification states that the concentration of radioactive materials released in liquid effluents at the point of discharge frcrn the multiport diffusers in the Atlantic Ocean (Outfall 001) shall be limited to those concentrations specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2 for-radionuclides = other than dissolved or entrained noble gases. For dissolved or entrained noble gases, Technical Specification 3.11.1.1 states that the concentration shall be limited to 2 x 104 microcuries/mi total activity. This latter concentration limit is not applicable since 2
9 no noble gases ~were released as part of this event. A copy of _ the Seabrook Station Unit _!
No.1 Facility Operating License (NPF 86), and applicable excerpts from the Seabrook Station -
Technical' Specifications are included _ as Attachment A.
The radienuclide' concentration limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20. Appendix Bi Tabi:
11, Column 2J have been listed on Table 7. As stated'above Tabic 7 contains the average concentrations of' radionuclides released during the September 30, 1991 c e nt, and the averages during each month of the' decontamination process. . Comparison _ of each of these ,
av'erage effluent radionuclide concentrations with those of the limits stated in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, demonstrate that the liquid effluent releases resulting from this event w'ere in full compliance-with, and in all cases were several orders of magnitude lower than the radionuclide concentration limits stipulated by the NRC.
The Seabrook Station Technical Specifications also contain dose limits pertaining _to radioactive liquid effluent releases. . Technical Specification 3.11.1.2 states that the dose or '
dose commitment to a member of the public from radioactive materials in liquid effluents released to unrestricted areas (i.e., areas outside the site boundary) shall be limited 1) during any/ calendar quarter to less than or equal to 1.5 mrems to the whole body and to less than or equal to 5 mrems to any organ; and, 2) during any calendar year to less than j
or equal to 3 mrems.to the whole body and to less than or equal to 10 mrems to any organ.
The cumulative dose contributions from liquid effluents for calendar quarters and calendar- '
years are determined in accordance with the methodology and parameters contained in the l Seabrook Station Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, which has been reviewed and approved by the: NRC.
Table 8 provides the cumulative doses frorn liquid releases that hypothetically could '
have been received by a member of the public in unrestricted areas on September 30, 1991_-
and during the months of October, November and December 1991. This table provides both the - total body dose and- the - maximum - organ dose. Table 8 also provides the same information for the fourth quarter of 1991 and for calendar year 1991. These calculated:-
cumulative doses are all less than one one thousandth of the dose limits mandated by the NRC and Technical' Specification 3.11.1.2.
_ The NRC performed an assessment of the September 30, 1991 event in inspection 91 29, This assessment,- which is documented in NRC lospection Report 9129 (Attachment B - hereto), specifically included- the offsite effects from this event. In Section 3,1 of this report, the NRC noted that they- had reviewed NHY's results of sampling analyses and radiological dose _- assessment. The NRC: stated that all measurement results for -liquid -
effluent sarapies including storm drain water, settling basin water, Browns River water, and ocean water were all less than the lower limits of detection. The NRC also reviewed NHYS dose assessment _ as of the time _of inspection and stated that _ the projected doses were less than one percent of the monthly Tech wal Specification limits. -
Based on-the review of NE,'s radiation measurement techniques, analytical results, and actions, the NRC determined that: 1) NHY: bas an excellent capability to accurately measure . gamma emitters; 2) _N H Y's actions to _ monitor the possible leakage to the environrnent was excellent - and 3) NHY has the capability to perform the necessary radiological dose assessment. The NRC concluded that there was= no negative impact on the environment or to the public health and safety as a result of this event.
3
x <
Ouestion No, 4 Describe;in detail.-the events that caused the discharges of radioactive pollutants to the Atlantic Ocean, and -any other receiving waters, on or around September 30, 1991.
Include in_this description an explanation of why the radioactive pollutants were discharged to the _ Atlantic Ocean or other receiving waters and a description'of any treatment which the contaminated water received prior to discharge.
Resnonse No.- 4 The following provides a description of the September 30, 1991 event and subsequent decontamination activities, and a summary of pertinent plant conditions at th > time of the event.
A. Description of the Event On Monday, September 30,1991 at 1830 the Control Room was notified that the Demineralized Water (DM) System was potentially contaminated. Two workers who had been cleaning in the Radiologically Controlled Area (RCA) using water drawn from the emergency -
shower station at the north end of the Primary Auxiliary Building (PAB), had come to the '
Health Physics control point where they were determined to be contaminated. One worker was contaminated on his shoes ~ and hands while the other worker was contaminated on his shoes and clothes. ' Health Physics surveys indicated that the bucket of water was reading
-8 mR/hr and the shower head was reading 10 mR/hr.
The Demineralized Water System had been contaminated by reactor coolant at the letdown radiation monitor skid (RM SKID 88). Specifically, the contamination flow path was .
the _ Letdown Gross Activity Monitor (RM 6520) purge line. This purge line normally provides a DM backflush of the radiation detectors following any build up of radioactl<ity '
on the detectors. Confirmation that this flow path was the source of contamination was provided by the 12 mR/hr. reading at the DM supply line to the Letdown Radiation Monitor.
This was the highest reading - found -on the DM System. it was discovered that the DM isolation valve (DM V 301) to RM SKID 88 was in the open position. This manual isolation valve was*immediately closed on September 30,1991 at-2000i
- Two conditions must occur to allow the aforementioned contamination flow path to be established; First, DM manual isolation valve DM V 301 has t'o be open,-and-second, reverse- flow has to occur past solenoid valve RM RV-6520 2. _ Solenoid valve-RM RV 6520 2,' which is located:on the RM SKID 88, is normally closed in a deenergized state and prevents DM from entering the Reactor Coolant System (RCS). As to the first condition necessary to_ establish this flow path, it was determined that DM manual isolation valve
- DM-V 301_ was placed in the open position during the restoration of a tagout on September 18, 1991; The tagging restoration was performed following maintenance on the Chemical and Volume Control System (CVCS) letdown line radiation monitor. The tagging restoration sheet was completed' solely by : reference to valve position information contained in a computerized tagging database. At this time the database was under development,-and not
. intended to be used to determine system restoration- valve position. The appropriate valve
~ lineup procedure should have been used to determine correct valve position.
4
As stated _ above,' the second condition necessary to establish the contamination flow path was - reverse- flow pact solenoid valve RM RV 6520 2. In order to- determine the conditions that would allow flow past this solenoid valve, the NHY IAC Department tested two-identical solenoid ~ valves to' determine the -amount of reverse differential pressure that-would cause the valve to open. The maximum differential pressure was. l.1 psi. Therefore, for reverse flow to occur _ either the RCS pressure has to increase above the DM System
- header pressure or the DM System pressure has to be lower than the RCS fluid pressure.
The pressure downstream of CS PCV 7493 (pressure control valve to the skid) was subsequently measured to be 88 psi with a flow of 7.8 gpm with the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) and RCS letdown system in the configuration described in the initiating conditions described in Section B below. The DM System pressure at DM V 301, with the DM pumps throttled to 60 psi discharge pressure, was calculated to be 54 psig. This supports the conclusion that reverse flow was caused by a decrease in DM system pressure below the RCS letdown fluid pressure.
Utilizing the above data the possible RCS letdown flow into DM System was calculated for the event. Based on a _DM System pressure of 60 psig, measured at DM PI 3445, a letdown flow of 3.1 gpm into the DM System and 4.7 gpm into the Volume Control Tank (VCT) was calculated for the event. This resulted in a calculated total flow of 1116 gallons of letdown into the DM System. This value corresponds to the volume of RCS that was lost during this event as estimated by make up volume and a comparison of VCT and Pressurizer level changes during the 6 hout time frame.
1 1
B. Initiatine Conditions The following provides a summary of the pertinent plant conditions at the time of this event:
i- -
Mode 5 (Cold Shutdown), RCS pressure 250 psig, RCS Temperature 170*F Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Train B in service Charging and letdown are shutdown Feed and bleed on-Secondary Component Cooling Water (SCCW) in progress On September 28,'1991 at 1830, Centrifugal Charging Pump CS P 2B is placed in service with the RHR system providing RCS letdown. In this configuration the RHR system takes a suction on the RCS and supplies letdown flow to the Chemical .and Volume Control System. The charging pump takes a suction on the Volume Control Tank (VCT) and discharges back to the RCS.
On September _ 30, 1991, one of the plant tasks was to refill the A and C steam generators. This task' was completed by the use of the Startup Feedwater Purnp FW-P 113 by taking a suction on. the Condensate Storage Tank (CST) and discharging to
- the steam generators. ' At 1050 the DM System was aligned to refill the CST to compensate for _ the steam generator fill. This was accomplished by ~ throttling DM V 517 and maintaining 60 psig on~ DM PI 3445. This fill lineup was continued until 1616 when it was secured.
S
- u. . _ . _ _ _ _ .. _ . _ _ _ _ ___.... _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - _ _ .-
- -. . . . . . . . -. - - -. - - - . - . - - . . - - - - - . - . ~
.e .
At 1223 the' Turbine ' Building sump radiation monitor went into alert and at 1228-it went into alarm. - The monitor reading at this point was 4,53 x 410 Si/ml. The abnormal procedure was. catered and a sample of the Turbine Building sump was
.taken. The chemistry results identified no detectable activity in the Turbine Building-sump; The abnormal procedure was exited and the Technical Specification ACTION statement was entered to allow the radiation monitor to be inspected. At this time Chemistry began monitoring the Turbine Building sump by taking grab samples.
At 1830 the Control Room was notified by Health Physics of potential Dh1 System contamination.
i At 1915 the Turbine Building sump radiation monitor went into alarm again. At 1925 Chemistry reported a Turbine Building sump sample of 2.83 x 10 41/ml. The j radiation monitor setpoints were adjusted to reflect the radioactivity analysis of the sampla taken from the sump. This allowed the Turbine Building sump pumps to be run.
During the time period that the Steam Generators were being filled, the DM . fstem pressure was 60 psig with the letdown fluid pressure at 88 psig. This was sufficient '
differential pressure to provide motive force to contaminate the DM System back to the Turbine Building.
C. Effluent Treatment and Discharges All-discharges of radionuclides on September 30, 1991, and during decontamination activities which continued until December 14, 1991, were made to the Atlaatic Ocean (Outfall 001) via the Circulating Water System. No radionuclides were discharged to the Browns
. River (Outfall 002), or the Sewage Treatment Facility (Outfall 021). The EPA release points that directed radionuclides to the Atlantic Ocean included Oil / Water Separator Vault No.
2 (Outfall 023), Oil / Water Separator Vault No.1 (Turbine Building Sump; Outfall 022), and i_ the Steam Generator Blowdown Recovery Regeneration Sump and the Liquid Waste System (Outfall 025). These discharges are further defined in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) as follows:
l ODCM Release Point EPA Pathway i
! . Oil! Water Separator Vault No. 2 023 to 001 Turbine Building Sump 022 to 001 Demineralized Water Storage Tank No. 2 (>01 Steam Generator Blowdown Waste _ Holdup Sump 025 to 001 I Waste Test Tank 025 to 001 l
The source of radioactivity and the treatment provided for eacu of these specific pathways is described below.
6
_ - _ ~ . _ - - _ _ - - _ _ , ,_ -
.~ . - . - - . - - - . . - - - - ~ , - . - ~ - - - . - . - _
1 4
. 1, Oil / Water Separator Vault No. 2 (Outfall 021)
Oil / Water Separator Vault' No. 2 receives influent from drains in the Auxiliary Boiler Room.
This influent was contaminated by the Dht header and by flushing operations conducted during cleanup activities. The effluent from Oil / Water Separator Vault No. 2 was redirected ;
to the Turbine Building ' Sump and discharged through Oil / Water Separator Vault No. I ;
(Outfall 022). which incorporates an in line radiation monitor. At the direction of NHY management all efflu:nt in this flow path was limited to a maximum concentration of I x 10
Si/ml. Effluent exhibiting activity above this limit was_ redirected to the Liquid Radioactive '
Waste' System for further treatment and release through the Waste Test Tanks-(Outfall 025).
- 2. Turbine Building Sump (Outfall 022)
The Turbine Building Sump receives influent from secondary plant drains. This infl~nt was contaminated ' by the Dht header and by flushing operations conducted dutieg cleanup activities. The Turbine Building Sump had also received some influent from Oil / Water Separator Vault No. 2 (Outfall 023) as a result of this event and the subsequent '
decontamination activities. The effluent - from the _ Turbine Building Sump was released .
through Oil / Water Separator Vault No.1 (Outfall 022) unless activity exceeded 1 x 10' 41/ml, at which point it.was diverted to the Liquid Radioactive Waste System far further treatment and release through the Waste Test Tanks (Outfall 025).
3._ Demineralized Water Storage Tanks (Outfall 025)
The Demineralized Water Storage Tanks received coniaminated influent directly from the Dhl System header. Due to the volume of water in these tanks (445,000 gallons), and the ability +
to isolate these tanks from the Dh! System without affecting system operations, a vendor skid was utilized to reduce tank activity from 1 x 10 to 1 x 104 41/ml p'ior to release to the Circulating Water System (Outfall 001).
- 4. Steam' Generator Blowdown Waste Holdup Sump (Outfall 025)
Steam Generator Blowdown Waste Holdup Sump received contaminated influent when the DNt System headers in.the Primary Auxiliary Building were flushed. Effluent from the Steam Generator Blowdown Waste Holdup Sump was continuously monitored by an in line radiation monitor and was released to the Circulating Water System (Outfall 001).
- 5. Waste Test Tanks (Outfall 025) -
The Waste Test Tanks received contaminated influent when the Dh! System headers in the Primary Auxiliary Building were flushed. Flow from the Turbine Building Sump was also redirected to the Waste Test Tanks when the activity _ was greater than .1 x 10 'Silmt.
These flou were in addition to those received during normal plant operation. . Effluent from the s 'aste Test, Tanks-was treated before entering the tanks by a Chem Nuclear skid that employed both filtration and ion exchange. Effluent from'the Waste Test Tanks also passed.
a continuous radiation monitor and was discharged to__the Circulating Water System (Outfall 001).
In addition to the in plant discharge radiation monitoring activities discussed above.
NHY couservatively had Yankee Atomic Electric Company analyze ocean water samples taken
- 7 l:
E l
l
{' - ,- - , , - - - . , . - - - - . , ~ .-,. - . - ,. _ .. , - - _.- . ~ - . . . _ _ . . _ . . . _ . . - -
. . . . - - - -.- . . -.-------g_.-.-.-.---. - --
l j
I i
near th'e offshore discharge diffuser nozzles. This analysis did not identify-any detectable radioactivity in the ocean above what is normal and expected from natural background.
There are a total of four. discharge .flowpaths that have rhel potential to discharge j effluent into the Browns-River (Outfall 002). These flowpaths, which include the Sewage
~
i Treatment Facility (Octfall 021), Stormwater Runoff, Oil / Water Separator Vault No. 3 '
(Outfall 024),'and . Chemical Cleaning (Outfall 026), are all directed to the Settling Basin
. prior to discharge to'the Browns River. Of these four flowpaths only the Stormwater Runoff had the potential to become contaminated by the DM System. The Sewage Treatment Facility is supplied by the Potable Water Sptem, the Chemical Cleaning System has not >ct been utilized during power operation, and Oil / Water Separator Vault Number 3 . receives influent from systems supplied by t! e Potable Water Systern. Specifically, Oil / Water l
Separator Vault Number 3 receives influent from the Auxiliary Boiler Fuel Oil Storage Tank area, the Fire Pump House Day Tank area, and the Fire Pump House drainage trench.
Sample analysis of wa'er from Oil / Water Separator Vault Number 3, during this event and the subsequent decontamination activities, indicated that no contamination was received from these sources, '
On October 10, 1991, NHY took an additional conservative measure by diverting the '
Unit 1 Protected Area stormwater system flow to the Circulating Water System via a temporary pump and hoses, As stated abose, the normal flowpath for this stormwater flow is to the Settling Basin. This bypass was implemented to ensure that the Settling Basin ,
would continue to remain contamination free by isolating it from any potential sources of slightly contaminated DM water within the Unit 1 Protected Area. The Unit 1 Protected ,
Area stormwater was also periodically sampled to ensure that NRC radionuclide limits were not exceeded,. - The EPA was informed about the aforementioned bypass via teleconference on' October -11,1991 and via letter on October 18,1991 (NYE 91021).
NHY also analyzed effluent samples from the Settling Basin and the results indicated that radionuclide concentrations were less than the lower limits of detection. This confirmed that Oil / Water Separator Vault Number 3, as well as the other flowpaths that discharge jnto the Settling Basin did not receive any contaminated flow, and hence no radionuclides were
' directed to the Browns River. NHY also had Yankee Atomic Electric Company analpe samples from the Browns River as an additional conservative measure to ensure that no radionuclides were discharged to that flow - path. The results show no evidence of radioactivity.in the Browns River.
8
TABLE 1 TOTAL AMOUNT OF RADIONUCLIDES RELEASED TO THE ATLANTIC OCEAN g '
l
-ACTIVITIES IN '
l SEPTEMBER 30 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
- h CURIES 1991 1991 1991- 1991 [_
+- _
q l ANTIMONY-124 ND 8.39E-04 4.64E-05 ND
- l ANTIMONY-125. ! ND 4.44E-03 8.00E-04 ND CESIUH 137 'ND ND 6.85E-05 ND !
COBALT-57 6.64E-06 ND ND ND COBALT-58 5.13E-03 6-78E-02
. 8.05E-03 1.74E-03 4
COBALT-60 1.46E-04 1.84E-03 6.04E-04 1.87E-04 l IRON-55 5.99E-05 ND 1.64E-03 4.81E-04 IRON-59 ND 2.59E-04 2.82E-04 1.82E-06 f MANOANESE-54 [ 9.72E-05 3.60E-03 1.05E-04 2.92E-05 W a
NIOBIUM-95 ND 3.67E-05 2.53E-05 ND I!
TRITIUM 7,58E-03 3.15E+01 1.16E+01 2.46E+00 l l ND = NONE DETECTABLE
- 12/1 THROUGH 12/12 NOTE: 8.39E-04 = .000839
TABLE 2 PADI0NUCLIDES RELEASED FROM THE WASTE TEST TANKS ACTIVITIES IN SEPTEMBER 30
~~m OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
- i CURIES 1991 1991 1991 1991 j!
y - a; ANTIMONY-124 l NR 8.39E-04 4.64E-05 ND q ANTIMONY-125 l NR 4.44E-03 8.00E-04 ND s;
-CESIUM-137 l NR ND ND ND j COBALT-57 NR ND ND !
f ND COEALT-58 I NR 5.87E-03 1.laE-03 1.33E-04 l l COBALT-60 NR 1.61E-04 1.15E-04 1.72E-05 f IRON-55 l NR ND 1.45E-03 3.89E-04 IRON-50 NR 5.26E-C5 2.82E-04 1.82E-06 $
MANGANESE-54 NR 2.42E-03 5.43E-05 3.68E 06 ;
NIOBIUH-95 l NR ND 2.53E-05 ND TRITIUM NR 2.90E+01 1.06E+01 1.97E+00 l q TABLE 3 RADIONUCLIDES RELEASED FROM THE STEAM GENERATCR Boll)UP SLHP ACTIVITIES IN l SEPTEMBER 30 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
- J CURIES 1991 1991 1991 1991 l d
ANTIMONY-124 NR ND ND ND ANTIMONY-125 NR ND- ND ND CESIUM-137 NR ND ND ND m
j COBALT-57 NR ND ND ND i COBALT-58 il NR 2.88E-03 7.19E-05 9.48E-06 1 f
COBALT-60 S.69E-05 i
l l NR ND ND i i i i IRON-55 f NR ND 1.89E-04 9.19E-05 ;!
l IRON-59 { NR ND ND ND !
l MANGANESE-54 l NR 3.63E-05 ND ND l NI0BIUM-95 NR ND ND ND d TRITIUM NR 2.40E+00 9,81E-01 l 4.78E-01 j L'
l.
I ND = NONE DETECTABLE NR = NO RELEASE
- 12/1 THROUGH 12/12-
TABLE 4 RADIONUCLIDES RELEASED FROM THE TURBINE BUILDING SLHP 1
ACTIVITIES IN- SEPTEriBER 30 OCTOBER- NOVEMBER- DECEMBER * #
CURIES 1991 1991 1991 1991 ;,
-ANTIMONY-124 l ND ND ND ND j!
k ANTIM01,Y- 12 5 ND ND ND ND ll 4
CESIUM 137 ND ND 6.85E-05 ND '
COBALT-57 6.64E-06 ND ND ND j COBALT-58 2.19E-03 5.72E-02 5.21E-03 7.88E-04 COBALT-60 5.42E-05 1.52E-03 4.89E-04 5.27E-05
]4 il E
IRON-55 2.10E-05 ND ND ND Jl IRON-59 ND 2.06E-04 ND ND l
MANGANESE-54 2.42E-05 1.07E-03 l 2.54E-05 1.40E 05 !l NICBILH-95 ND 3.67E-05 ND ND ;
TRITIUM 3.86E-03 1.10E-01 ND 1.11E-02 3
TABLE 5 RADIONUCLIDES RELEASED FROM THE DEMIN'3tALIZED WATER STORAGE TANKS 9
ACTIVITIES IN SEPTDiBER 30 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
- 1 CURIES 1991 1991 1991 1991
, . l ANTIMONY-124 NR NR NR ND h
, ANTIMONY-125 NR NR NR ND i CESIUM-137 NR NR NR ND I
-COBALT-57 NR NR NR ND ,
COBALT-58 NR NR NR 5,18E-04 h l -
1 NR NR NR 4.34E-05 ii
{ COBALT-60 '
I l, IRON-55 { NR NR NR ND
]
l IRON-59 NR NR NR ND f
- i. ! MANGANESE-54 NR NR NR 1.15E-05 l NIOBIUM-95 l NR NR NR ND k TR1rIUM } NR NR NR 1.95E-03 ll ND = NONE DETECTABLE NR = NO RELEASE l
- 12/1 THROUGH 12/12 L
1 l
T.BLE 6 RADIONUCLIDES RELEASED FROM OIL / WATER SEPARATOR VAULT NO. 2
-ACTIVITIES IN SEPTDiBER 30. OCTOBER NI ' EMBER DECDiBER* O CURIES- -1991 1991 .,91 1991 ij 3
ANTIMONY-124 ND ND ND ND (
l ANTIMONY-125 } ND ND ND ND ll CESIUM-137 l ND ND ND ND . ?)
COBALT-57 l ND ND ND ND y COBALT-58 2.94E-03 1,81E-03 1.62E-03 2.8BE-04 [
COBALT-60 9.22E-05 "
39E-05 ND 7.3BE-05 q g IRON-55 3.89E-05 ND ND ND <
t IRON-59 ND ND ND ND l MANGANESE-54 7,30E-05 7.16E 05 2.52E-05 ND !
NIOBIUM-95 l ND ND ND ND l
- TRITIUM. 3.72E-03 ND ND ND j ND = NONE DETECTABLE
- 12/1 THROUGH=12/12 t
l I~
.. ,_ - . _ . . . - , - - _ , . _ . _ . ._ . . _ . . . _ _ , .. - _ , _ . . . . . . . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ , , . . _ _ _ _ _ _ , . . _ _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ - _ . . _ . . _
TABLE 7 AVERAGE CONCENTRATIONS OF RADIONUCLIDES x n_n ACTIVITIES IN ! SEPTEMBER 30 OCTOBER NOVEMBER DECEMBER
- 10CFR20 i MICROCURIES/mi l 1991 1991 1991 1991 APPENDIX B j
-j ._ 4 --.__.--___..,s!
f ANTIM0!!Y-124 }. NR 1.30E-11 6.94E-13 l ND 2E-05 j 4
f,, ANTIMONY-125
]-
NR j
+
6.87E-11 :
1.20E-11 !
ND 1E-04 !
l} CESIUM-137 i
- [ ND ! ND 1.02E-12 l ND 4 2E-05 .;
COBALT-57 ( 6.49E-12 ND ND l ND l 4E-04 COBALT-58 l 5.01E-09 1.04E-09 1.20E-10 ; 6.50E 11 9E-05 COBALT-60 1.43E-10 2.84E-11 9.03E-12 6.98E-12 3E-05
, IRON-55 5.85E-11 ND 2.45E-11 1.79E-11 8E-04 [j IRON-59 h ND 4.00E-12 4.21E-12 6.79E-14 l 5E-05 )
MANGANESE-54 9.51E-11 5.57E-11 1.57E-12 1.09E-12 1E-04 NIOBIUM-95 ND 5.68E-13 3.78E-13 ND 1E-04 l TRITIUM l 7.41E-09 l 4.87E-07 1.72E-07 9.18E-08 j 3E-03 L _u >
ND = NONE DETECTABLE NR = NO RELEASE
- 12/1 THROUGH 32/12
TABLE 8 CUMULATIVE DOSES FROM LIQUID RELEASES i
TOTAL BODY MAX ORGAN PERIOD DOSE (mrem) DJSE (mrem)
SEPT. 30. 1991 4.92E-05 2.19E-04 h d il OCTOBER 1991 l
4.03E-04 1.69E 03 ti i!
il NOVEHBER 1991 1.16E 5.52E-04 !
H- ;
DECEMBER 1991 4.16E-05 2.04E-04 l ,
4TH QUARTER 1991 l DOSE TOTALS 5.61E-04 2.45E-03 l 1991 ANNUAL !
TOTALS 9.56E-04 4.47E-03 f L
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION 3.11.1.2 LIMITS QUARTERLY: TOTAL BODY DOSE: 1.5 mrem MAX ORGAN DOSE: 5.0 mrem Y EARLY: TOTAL BODY DOSE: 3.0 mrem MAX ORGAN DOSE: 10.0 mrem i
l-1 i
l I
l
.-.7. .
r 1
i 1
f d
R t
i 4
i ATTACHMENT A TO NYE 92005
)
lI k
)
]
+
.p t
G 9 '
,f
' f i 8 s a I
?l. :
I_ - .
k e
t-hb 5
5
}
i 6
e f
LT, ?
i .
l>.
t l
i r,k M
+ _ .m ' -
'"N"W' e -mer%.mwsy-yi.,,[e g g, , ,- ,,_ - < - -ma-ww-6++. ..=mm.%#ry.. mw,,,,, ,,, .
N
- Pv9he yTG=" w ch w ypg w -g. 9, g_.
+* *
,. UNITED STATES
.['*
t,
, (
j i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION n AssiNoToN. 0, c. 20sss
%' /
w PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, ET AL.*
DOCKET NO. 50-443 SEABROOK STATION, UNIT NO. 1 FACILITY OPERATING LICLNSE License No. KFF-86
- 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Comissien) has found that:
A. The application for a license filed by Public Service Company of New Hampshire, acting for itself and as egent and representative of the 11 other utilities listed below and hereafter referred to as licensees, complies with the standards and reovirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Comission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter 1, and all required notifications to other agencies er bodies have been duly made; B. Construction of the Seabrook Station, Unit No.1 (the facility) has been substantially completed in conformity with Constructinn Permit No. CPPR-135 and the application, as amended, the provisions of the
. Act, and the regulations of the Comission; W C. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, as amended, the provisions of the Act, and the regulations of the Comission (except as exempted from compliance in Section 2.0 below);
There is reasonable assurance: (i) that the activities authorized D.
by this operating license can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public and (ii) that such activities will be corducted in compliance with the Comission's regulations- set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I (except as exempted from compliance in Section2.Dbelow),
E. Public Service Company of New Hampshire is technically qualified to engage in the activities authorized by this license in accordance with the Comission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I;
- Public Service Company of New Hampshire is authorized to act as agent for the: Canal Electric Company, Connecticut Light and Power Company, EUA Power Corporation, Hudson Light & Power Department Massachusetts Municipal Wholesale Montaup Electric Company, New England Power Company, New Electric Hampshire CompanyIc Electr Cooperative, Inc., Taunton Municipal Lighting Plant, The United Illuminating Company, and Vermont Electr;c Generation and Transmission
, Cooperative, Inc., and has exclusive responsibility and control over the
.. physical construction, operation and maintenance of the facility.
,,r. [f t ) , '
,_ f r . m.. a lw - .: 4 -u t a ,
2 o
$4 F. The licensees have satisfied the applicable provisions of 10 CFR 140, " Financial Protection Requirements and indemnity Agreements," of the Comission's regulations; G. The issuance of this license will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety n' the public; H. After weighing the environmental, economical, technical, and other benefits of the facility against environmental and other costs and considering available alternatives, the issuance of Facility Operating License No. NPF-86 subject to the conditions for protection of the environment set forth in the Environmental Protection Plan attached as Appendix B, is in accordance with 10 CFR S1 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied; and
- 1. The receipt, possession, and use of source, byproduct, and special nuclear material as authorized by this license will be in accordance with the Comission's regulations in 10 CFR 30, a0, and 70.
- 2. Pased on the foregoing findings-and the Commission's Memorandum and Order, CL1-90-03 (March 1, 1990), facility Operatina License No. NPF-67 is supersed'd
- -by Facility Service Operating Company License No.
of New Hampshire, NPF-86,(whleh et al. istohereby the licensees), read asissued to Public
($) follows:
A. This license applies to the Seabrook Station, Unit 1, a pressurized water nyclear reactor and associated equipment (the facility), owntc' by the licensees. The facility is located in Seabrook Township, Rockingham County, on the southeast coast of the State of New Hampshire, and is described in the licensees' " Final Safety Analysis Report," as supplemented and amended, and in the licensees' Environmental Report, as supplemented and amended.
B. Subject to the conditions and requirements incorporated herein, the Comission hereby licenses:
(1) Public Service Company of New Hampshire (PSNH), pursuant to Section 103 of the Act and 10 CFR 50, to possess, use and operate the facility at the designated location in Rockingham County, New Hampshire, in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in this license; (2) The licensees to possess the facility at the designated location in Rockingham County, New Hampshire, in accordance with the procedures and limitations set forth in this license; i
{
- 3-T.'.
,g (3) PSNH, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR 70, to receive, possess, and use at any time special nucleer material as reactor fuel, in accordance with the limitations for storace and amounts required for reactor operation, as described in the Final Safety Aralysis Repert, as supplemented and arended;-
(4) PSNH, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR 30, a0, and 70, to recetse, possess, and use at any time any byproduct, source, and special nuclear material es sealed neutron sources for reactor startup, sealed sources for reactor instrumentation ar.d radiation renitoring ecuipment calibration, and as-fission detectors in amounts as required; (5) PSNH, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR 30, 40, ano 70, to receive, possess, and use in amounts as required any bypreduct, source, or special nuclear materiel without restriction to chemical or physical form, for sample analysis or instrument calibration or associated with radioactive apparatus or components; and (6) PSNH, pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR 30, 40, and 70, to possess, but not separate, such byproduct and special nuclear materials as may be produced by the operation of the facility authorized herein.
- C. This license shall be deemed to contain and is subject to the conditions specified in the Comission's regulations set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and to the rules, regulations, and orders of the Commission now or hereafter in effect; and is subject to the additional conditiers specified or incorporated below:
(1) Maximum Power Level PSNH is authorized to operate the facility at reactor core power levels not in excess of 3411 megawatts thermal (100% of ratedpower).
(2) Technical Specifications and Environmental Protection Plan '
The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A N the Environmental Protection Plan contained in Appendix B, both of
-which are attached hereto, are hereby incorporated-into this license. PSNH shall operate the facility in accordance with th Technical Specifications and the Environmental Protection Plan.
g- v-,, -g , ,,-,- ,n --,,,we v. ase-. v -,
,mm.-,.-y-vm.7,-,.,w.m,e,- , , . - + - - -,,..,--ev.rmv w. w3- _. .., , . . . ,,e. n 1,.
4
/p
~ts (3) HumanFactorsEnoineering(Section18,SSER7)*
Before startup following the first refueling outage, l'SNF stell resolve the following remaining Safety Parareter Display System issues:
(a) Perform system availability calculations including Reactor Vessel.tevel Indication System and Radiation Data Management System and provide a report to the staff. -
(b) Perform system lead test under heavily loaded plant conditiert and provide a report of the evaluation to the staff. '
s
- 0. Exemptions
! PSNH is exempted from the Section III.D.2(b)(ii) containment airlock testing requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50, because of the special circumstances described in Section 6.2.6 of SER Supplerient 5 and authorized by 10 CFR 50.12(a)(2)(ii) and (iii) (51 FR 37684 October 23,1086).
NRC Materials License No. SNM-1963, issued December 19, 1985, granted an exemption pursuant to 10 CFR 70.24 with respect to requirements p#g4 for cHticality alarms. PSNH is hereby exempted from provisions of 10 CFR 70.24 insofar as this section applies to the storage and handling of new fuel assemblies in the new fuel storage vault, spent l fuel pool (when dry), and shipping containers.
These exemptions, authori:ed by law, will not present ca undue rish to the public health and safety and are consistent with the common defense and security. These exemptions are hereby granted pursuant to 10 CFR e
50.12. With the granting of these exemptions, the facility will operate, to the extent authorized herein, in conformity with the application, as i amended, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of L the Comission.
E. Physical Security PSNH shall fully implement and maintain in effect all provisions of the physical security, guard training and cualification, and l safeguards continancy plans, previous 1, approved by the Comission
! and all ame % K < and revisions to such plans made pursuant to the authcrity of IP s h 50.90 and 10 CFR 50.54(p) including amendments and revisions m.ar r atsuant to provisions of the Miscellaneous
- The parenthetical rotation denotes the section of the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) and/or its supplements (SSER) wherein the license condition is discussed.
5o c.
h Arrendments and Search Recuirements of 10 CFR 73.55. The plans which contain Safeguards Information erotected under 10 CFR 73.21, are entitled: "Seabrook Station Physical Security Plan," with revisions se5mitted through June 9, 1988; "Seabrook Station Security Training and Qualification Plan," with revisions sutriitted through November 4,1987; and "Seabrook Statinr Safeguards Cnntinger.cy Plan,"
with revisions submitted through Pay 19, 1987. Changes rade in accordance with 10 CFR 73.55 shall be irplemented in accordarce with the schedule set forth therein.
F. Fire Protection pSNH shall implement and maintain in effact all provisions of the approved fire protection program as described in the Final Safety Analysis Report, the Fire Protection Program Report, and the fire Protecticn of Safe Shutdown Capability Report for the facility, as supplementea and amended, and as approved in the Safety Evaluation Report, dated March 1983; Supplement 4, dated May 1986; Supplettent 5, dated June 1986 Supplement 6. dated October 1986; Supplement 7 dated October 1987; and Supplement 8 dated May 1989 subject to the followirg provisions: PSNH may nake changes to the approved fire protection program without prior approval of the Commission, only if those changes would not adversely affect the ability to a:hieve and meintain safe shutdown in the event of a fire.
@ G. Reporting to the Comission Except as otherwise provided in the Technical Specifications or Environmental Protection Plan, PSHH shall report any violations of the requirements contained in Section 2.C of this license in the following manner: Initial notification shall be made within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> to the NRC Operations Center via the Emergency Notification System, with written followup within 30 days in accordance with the procedures described in 10 CFR Part 50.73(b), (c), and (e).
H. Financial Protectic,n The licensees shall have and maintain financial protection of such type and in such amounts as the Commission shall require in accordance with Section 170 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, to cover public liability claims.
l l
l i
4
-n.~ , . -. ..,v-..,__. , _ , n
u -,.
- )I'
, l. Effective Date and Expiration This license is effective as the date of issuance and shall expire at midnight on October 17, 20?f.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
Thomas E. Purley, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attachments / Appendices:
- 1. AppendixA-TechnicalSpecifications(NUREG-1386)
- 2. Appendix B - Environmental Protection Plan Date of Issuance: MAR 151990
- a. ::..
si',
i..