ML112840284: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
(4 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter: | {{#Wiki_filter:UNITED STATES | ||
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY | NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | ||
COMMISSION | REGION I | ||
REGION I 475 ALLENDALE | 475 ALLENDALE ROAD | ||
KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415 | |||
19406-1415 | October 11, 2011 | ||
October 11, 2011 License No. DPR-5 | Docket No. 05000003 License No. DPR-5 | ||
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION | Joseph E. Pollock | ||
REPORT NO. 05000003/201100B, ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC., BUCHANAN, NEW YORK SITE -CORRECTED | Site Vice President | ||
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. | |||
26,2011, the NRC issued inspection | 450 Broadway, GSB | ||
report, No. 05000003/201100B, documenting | P.O. Box 249 | ||
an NRC inspection | Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 | ||
of an examination | SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000003/201100B, ENTERGY NUCLEAR | ||
of your licensed activities | OPERATIONS, INC., BUCHANAN, NEW YORK SITE - CORRECTED COPY | ||
as they relate to radiation | Dear Mr. Pollock: | ||
safety and to compliance | On September 26,2011, the NRC issued inspection report, No. 05000003/201100B, | ||
with the Commission's | documenting an NRC inspection of an examination of your licensed activities as they relate to | ||
regulations | radiation safety and to compliance with the Commission's regulations and the license conditions. | ||
and the license conditions. | After the report was issued, errors were identified by your staff and reported to the NRC. The | ||
After the report was issued, errors were identified | errors were located in the 2nd paragraph of section B.b on page 5. Specifically, a comparison of | ||
by your staff and reported to the NRC. The errors were located in the | the groundwater data was not performed because the data for 2011 was not available during the | ||
of section B.b on page 5. Specifically, a comparison | inspection. The dates reviewed for the groundwater monitoring program, related to the North | ||
Curtain Drain (NCO) and the Sphere Foundation Drain (SFD) analytical sample results, were | |||
data was not performed | from January 2010 through December 2010. Also, the levels of tritium ranged from 13,500 | ||
because the data for 2011 was not available | picoCuries per Liter (pCi/L) to 3,340 pCi/L for the NCO, rather than 13,500 picoCuries per Liter | ||
during the inspection. | (pCi/L) to 3 pCi/L for the NCO. | ||
The dates reviewed for the groundwater | We have corrected this page and have enclosed the corrected copy of the page. Please replace | ||
monitoring | this page of the report with the enclosed page. | ||
program, related to the North Curtain Drain (NCO) and the Sphere Foundation | We apologize for any inconvenience or problems this error may have caused you. | ||
Drain (SFD) analytical | ~-' ~--v-v*- | ||
sample results, were from January 2010 through December 2010. Also, the levels of tritium ranged from 13,500 picoCuries | dith A. Joust:' Ch~ | ||
per Liter (pCi/L) to 3,340 pCi/L for the NCO, rather than 13,500 picoCuries | ecommissioning Branch | ||
per Liter (pCi/L) to 3 pCi/L for the NCO. We have corrected | Division of Nuclear Materials Safety | ||
this page and have enclosed the corrected | Enclosure: As Stated | ||
copy of the page. Please replace this page of the report with the enclosed page. We apologize | cc: | ||
for any inconvenience | Distribution via ListServ | ||
or problems this error may have caused you. | State of New York | ||
October 11, 2011 | |||
dith A. Joust:' ecommissioning | Docket No. 05000003 License No. DPR-5 | ||
Joseph E. Pollock | |||
Safety | Site Vice President | ||
Docket No. 05000003 | Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. | ||
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 | 450 Broadway, GSB | ||
P.O. Box 249 | |||
REPORT NO. 05000003/201100B, ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC., BUCHANAN, NEW YORK SITE -CORRECTED | Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 | ||
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000003/201100B, ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, | |||
26, 2011, the NRC issued inspection | INC., BUCHANAN, NEW YORK SITE - CORRECTED COpy | ||
report, No. 05000003/2011 | Dear Mr. Pollock: | ||
OOB, documenting | On September 26, 2011, the NRC issued inspection report, No. 05000003/2011 OOB, documenting an NRC | ||
an NRC inspection | inspection of an examination of your licensed activities as they relate to radiation safety and to compliance with | ||
of an examination | the Commission's regulations and the license conditions. | ||
of your licensed activities | After the report was issued, errors were identified by your staff and reported to the NRC. The errors were | ||
as they relate to radiation | located in the 2nd paragraph of section B.b on page 5. Specifically, a comparison of the groundwater data was | ||
safety and to compliance | not performed because the data for 2011 was not available during the inspection. The dates reviewed for the | ||
groundwater monitoring program, related to the North Curtain Drain (NCO) and the Sphere Foundation Drain | |||
regulations | (SFD) analytical sample results, were from January 2010 through December 2010. Also, the levels of tritium | ||
and the license conditions. | ranged from 13,500 picoCuries per Liter (pCilL) to 3,340 pCi/L for the NCO, rather than 13,500 picoCuries per | ||
After the report was issued, errors were identified | Liter (pCi/L) to 3 pCi/L for the NCO. | ||
by your staff and reported to the NRC. The errors were located in the | We have corrected this page and have enclosed the corrected copy of the page. Please replace this page of | ||
of section B.b on page 5. Specifically, a comparison | the report with the enclosed page. | ||
of the groundwater | We apologize for any inconvenience or problems this error may have caused you. | ||
data was not performed | Sincerely, | ||
because the data for 2011 was not available | Original signed by Judith A. Joustra | ||
during the inspection. | Judith A. Joustra, Chief | ||
The dates reviewed for the groundwater | Decommissioning Branch | ||
monitoring | Division of Nuclear Materials Safety | ||
program, related to the North Curtain Drain (NCO) and the Sphere Foundation | Enclosure: As Stated | ||
cc: | |||
sample results, were from January 2010 through December 2010. Also, the levels of tritium ranged from 13,500 picoCuries | Distribution via ListServ | ||
per Liter (pCilL) to 3,340 pCi/L for the NCO, rather than 13,500 picoCuries | State of New YorkDistribution w/encl: | ||
W. Dean, RA (R10RAMAIL RESOURCE) S. McCarver, DRP M. Ferdas, DNMS | |||
this page and have enclosed the corrected | D. Lew, ORA (R10RAMAIL RESOURCE) M. Jennerich, DRP L. Kauffman, DNMS | ||
copy of the page. Please replace this page of the report with the enclosed page. We apologize | D. Roberts, DRP (R1DRPMAIL RESOURCE) M. Catts, SRI B. Watson, FSME | ||
for any inconvenience | D. Ayres, DRP (R1DRPMAIL RESOURCE) A. Ayegbusi, RI S. Giebel, FSME | ||
or problems this error may have caused you. | C. Miller, DRS (R1DRSMAIL RESOURCE) P. Cataldo, SRI D. Hochmuth, DRP | ||
P. Wilson, DRS (R1DRSMAIL RESOURCE) M. Halter, RI RidsNrrPMlndianPoint Resource | |||
J. McHale, RI OEDO R. Lorson, DNMS RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 Resource | |||
M. Gray, DRP D. Collins, DNMS ROPreport Resource@nrc | |||
B. Bickett, DRP J. Joustra, DNMS | |||
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\WordDocs\Current\lnsp Letter\LDPR-5.2011 OOa.Corrected Copy. doc | |||
SUNSI Review Complete: LKauffman After declaring this document "An Official Agency Record" it will be released to the Public. | |||
= = = | |||
To receive a cop of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" Copy w/o attach/encl "E" Copy w/ attach/end "N" No copy ML 112840284 - Ltr; ML112840312 - Rpt | |||
OFFICE DNMS/RI | |||
LKauffman/lak* | |||
D. Ayres, DRP (R1DRPMAIL | IN DNMS/RI | ||
RESOURCE) | JJoustra.JAJ | ||
I I J | |||
RESOURCE) | NAME | ||
P. Wilson, DRS (R1DRSMAIL | DATE 09/30/11 10/11/11 | ||
RESOURCE) | |||
8.0 Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Programs | |||
a. Inspection Scope (IP 84750) | |||
The inspector evaluated the radioactive effluent control and the site radiological | |||
Resource@nrc | environmental monitoring programs. The evaluation included a review of the annual | ||
B. Bickett, DRP J. Joustra, DNMS DOCUMENT NAME: G:\WordDocs\Current\lnsp | radioactive effluent release report for 2010, the annual radiological environmental | ||
Letter\LDPR-5.2011 | operating report for 2010, and the associated analytical results for each program. The | ||
OOa.Corrected | inspection also included a review of the Unit 1 TS and the ODCM. The inspector | ||
Copy. doc SUNSI Review Complete: | reviewed the associated radioactive liquid release permits, the analytical sample results, | ||
LKauffman | and the projected doses to the public associated with the groundwater in-leakage into the | ||
After declaring | North Curtain Drain (NCO) and Sphere Foundation Drain (SFD) sumps. The inspector | ||
this document "An Official Agency Record" it will be released to the Public. To receive a cop of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" | also reviewed the gaseous effluent results, the projected doses to the public associated | ||
-Ltr; | with the stack vent, and the radiological environmental monitoring program, including the | ||
-Rpt OFFICE DNMS/RI IN DNMS/RI I I J NAME | analytical results associated with samples of shoreline sediment, fish, and water from | ||
January 2011 through August 2011. | |||
DATE 09/30/11 10/11/11 | b. Observations and Findings | ||
8.0 Effluent and Environmental | The annual effluent and environmental monitoring reports demonstrated that the | ||
Monitoring | calculated doses were well below regulatory dose criteria of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I. The | ||
radioactive liquid effluent release permits were completed in accordance with the ODCM. | |||
Scope (IP 84750) The inspector | From a review of the analytical data, the inspector verified that the projected doses to the | ||
evaluated | public from the liquid and gaseous effluent from Unit 1 were below TS limits and were | ||
the radioactive | performed in accordance with the ODCM and the Code of Federal Regulations | ||
effluent control and the site radiological | (10 CFR 50.36a) for maintaining doses to the public from radioactive effluents as low as | ||
environmental | is reasonably achievable. The inspector verified that the licensee collected and analyzed | ||
monitoring | the stack vent samples, NCO and SFD sump samples, and the liquid discharge monitor | ||
programs. | samples within the required frequencies and that the sample collection was conducted in | ||
The evaluation | accordance with applicable procedures. | ||
included a review of the annual radioactive | The inspector reviewed the analytical water sample results related to the groundwater | ||
effluent release report for 2010, the annual radiological | monitoring program, specifically the NCO and SFD analytical sample results from | ||
environmental | January 2010 through December 2010. The levels of tritium ranged from 13,500 | ||
operating | picoCuries per Liter (pCilL) to 3,340 pCilL for the NCO and from 642 pCilL to 480 pCi/L | ||
report for 2010, and the associated | for the SFD. The licensee informed the inspector that the levels of radioactivity appear to | ||
analytical | be trending downward. The inspector's review of this data confirmed the licensee's | ||
results for each program. The inspection | conclusion. | ||
also included a review of the Unit 1 TS and the ODCM. The inspector | The inspector reviewed the analytical results for shoreline sediment, fish, and water from | ||
reviewed the associated | January 2011 through August 2011 for the radiological environmental monitoring | ||
radioactive | program and noted that the results indicated that no significant radioactivity was | ||
liquid release permits, the analytical | identified in fish and the environment. | ||
sample results, and the projected | c. Conclusions | ||
doses to the public associated | The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls | ||
with the groundwater | program, the groundwater monitoring program, and the radiological monitoring program. | ||
in-leakage | No safety concerns or violations were identified. | ||
into the North Curtain | 5 | ||
Drain (NCO) and Sphere Foundation | |||
Drain (SFD) sumps. The inspector | |||
also reviewed the gaseous effluent results, the projected | |||
doses to the public associated | |||
with the stack vent, and the radiological | |||
environmental | |||
monitoring | |||
program, including | |||
results associated | |||
with samples of shoreline | |||
sediment, fish, and water from January 2011 through August 2011. b. Observations | |||
and Findings The annual effluent and environmental | |||
monitoring | |||
reports demonstrated | |||
that the calculated | |||
doses were well below regulatory | |||
dose criteria of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I. The radioactive | |||
liquid effluent release permits were completed | |||
in accordance | |||
with the ODCM. From a review of the analytical | |||
data, the inspector | |||
verified that the projected | |||
doses to the public from the liquid and gaseous effluent from Unit 1 were below TS limits and were performed | |||
in accordance | |||
with the ODCM and the Code of Federal Regulations | |||
(10 CFR 50.36a) for maintaining | |||
doses to the public from radioactive | |||
effluents | |||
as low as is reasonably | |||
achievable. | |||
The inspector | |||
verified that the licensee collected | |||
and analyzed the stack vent samples, NCO and SFD sump samples, and the liquid discharge | |||
and that the sample collection | |||
was conducted | |||
with applicable | |||
procedures. | |||
The inspector | |||
reviewed the analytical | |||
water sample results related to the groundwater | |||
monitoring | |||
program, specifically | |||
the NCO and SFD analytical | |||
sample results from January 2010 through December 2010. The levels of tritium ranged from 13,500 picoCuries | |||
per Liter (pCilL) to 3,340 pCilL for the NCO and from 642 pCilL to 480 pCi/L for the SFD. The licensee informed the inspector | |||
that the levels of radioactivity | |||
appear to be trending downward. | |||
The inspector's | |||
review of this data confirmed | |||
the licensee's | |||
conclusion. | |||
The inspector | |||
reviewed the analytical | |||
results for shoreline | |||
sediment, fish, and water from January 2011 through August 2011 for the radiological | |||
environmental | |||
monitoring | |||
program and noted that the results indicated | |||
that no significant | |||
radioactivity | |||
in fish and the environment. | |||
c. Conclusions | |||
The licensee effectively | |||
were identified. | |||
5 | |||
}} | }} |
Latest revision as of 20:48, 20 March 2020
ML112840284 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Indian Point |
Issue date: | 10/11/2011 |
From: | Joustra J Decommissioning Branch I |
To: | Joseph E Pollock Entergy Nuclear Operations |
References | |
IR-11-008 | |
Download: ML112840284 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000003/2011008
Text
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
475 ALLENDALE ROAD
KING OF PRUSSIA, PENNSYLVANIA 19406-1415
October 11, 2011
Docket No. 05000003 License No. DPR-5
Joseph E. Pollock
Site Vice President
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
450 Broadway, GSB
P.O. Box 249
Buchanan, NY 10511-0249
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000003/201100B, ENTERGY NUCLEAR
OPERATIONS, INC., BUCHANAN, NEW YORK SITE - CORRECTED COPY
Dear Mr. Pollock:
On September 26,2011, the NRC issued inspection report, No. 05000003/201100B,
documenting an NRC inspection of an examination of your licensed activities as they relate to
radiation safety and to compliance with the Commission's regulations and the license conditions.
After the report was issued, errors were identified by your staff and reported to the NRC. The
errors were located in the 2nd paragraph of section B.b on page 5. Specifically, a comparison of
the groundwater data was not performed because the data for 2011 was not available during the
inspection. The dates reviewed for the groundwater monitoring program, related to the North
Curtain Drain (NCO) and the Sphere Foundation Drain (SFD) analytical sample results, were
from January 2010 through December 2010. Also, the levels of tritium ranged from 13,500
picoCuries per Liter (pCi/L) to 3,340 pCi/L for the NCO, rather than 13,500 picoCuries per Liter
(pCi/L) to 3 pCi/L for the NCO.
We have corrected this page and have enclosed the corrected copy of the page. Please replace
this page of the report with the enclosed page.
We apologize for any inconvenience or problems this error may have caused you.
~-' ~--v-v*-
dith A. Joust:' Ch~
ecommissioning Branch
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety
Enclosure: As Stated
cc:
Distribution via ListServ
State of New York
October 11, 2011
Docket No. 05000003 License No. DPR-5
Joseph E. Pollock
Site Vice President
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
450 Broadway, GSB
P.O. Box 249
Buchanan, NY 10511-0249
SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000003/201100B, ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS,
INC., BUCHANAN, NEW YORK SITE - CORRECTED COpy
Dear Mr. Pollock:
On September 26, 2011, the NRC issued inspection report, No. 05000003/2011 OOB, documenting an NRC
inspection of an examination of your licensed activities as they relate to radiation safety and to compliance with
the Commission's regulations and the license conditions.
After the report was issued, errors were identified by your staff and reported to the NRC. The errors were
located in the 2nd paragraph of section B.b on page 5. Specifically, a comparison of the groundwater data was
not performed because the data for 2011 was not available during the inspection. The dates reviewed for the
groundwater monitoring program, related to the North Curtain Drain (NCO) and the Sphere Foundation Drain
(SFD) analytical sample results, were from January 2010 through December 2010. Also, the levels of tritium
ranged from 13,500 picoCuries per Liter (pCilL) to 3,340 pCi/L for the NCO, rather than 13,500 picoCuries per
Liter (pCi/L) to 3 pCi/L for the NCO.
We have corrected this page and have enclosed the corrected copy of the page. Please replace this page of
the report with the enclosed page.
We apologize for any inconvenience or problems this error may have caused you.
Sincerely,
Original signed by Judith A. Joustra
Judith A. Joustra, Chief
Decommissioning Branch
Division of Nuclear Materials Safety
Enclosure: As Stated
cc:
Distribution via ListServ
State of New YorkDistribution w/encl:
W. Dean, RA (R10RAMAIL RESOURCE) S. McCarver, DRP M. Ferdas, DNMS
D. Lew, ORA (R10RAMAIL RESOURCE) M. Jennerich, DRP L. Kauffman, DNMS
D. Roberts, DRP (R1DRPMAIL RESOURCE) M. Catts, SRI B. Watson, FSME
D. Ayres, DRP (R1DRPMAIL RESOURCE) A. Ayegbusi, RI S. Giebel, FSME
C. Miller, DRS (R1DRSMAIL RESOURCE) P. Cataldo, SRI D. Hochmuth, DRP
P. Wilson, DRS (R1DRSMAIL RESOURCE) M. Halter, RI RidsNrrPMlndianPoint Resource
J. McHale, RI OEDO R. Lorson, DNMS RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 Resource
M. Gray, DRP D. Collins, DNMS ROPreport Resource@nrc
B. Bickett, DRP J. Joustra, DNMS
DOCUMENT NAME: G:\WordDocs\Current\lnsp Letter\LDPR-5.2011 OOa.Corrected Copy. doc
SUNSI Review Complete: LKauffman After declaring this document "An Official Agency Record" it will be released to the Public.
=
To receive a cop of this document, Indicate in the box: "C" Copy w/o attach/encl "E" Copy w/ attach/end "N" No copy ML 112840284 - Ltr; ML112840312 - Rpt
OFFICE DNMS/RI
LKauffman/lak*
IN DNMS/RI
JJoustra.JAJ
I I J
NAME
DATE 09/30/11 10/11/11
8.0 Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Programs
a. Inspection Scope (IP 84750)
The inspector evaluated the radioactive effluent control and the site radiological
environmental monitoring programs. The evaluation included a review of the annual
radioactive effluent release report for 2010, the annual radiological environmental
operating report for 2010, and the associated analytical results for each program. The
inspection also included a review of the Unit 1 TS and the ODCM. The inspector
reviewed the associated radioactive liquid release permits, the analytical sample results,
and the projected doses to the public associated with the groundwater in-leakage into the
North Curtain Drain (NCO) and Sphere Foundation Drain (SFD) sumps. The inspector
also reviewed the gaseous effluent results, the projected doses to the public associated
with the stack vent, and the radiological environmental monitoring program, including the
analytical results associated with samples of shoreline sediment, fish, and water from
January 2011 through August 2011.
b. Observations and Findings
The annual effluent and environmental monitoring reports demonstrated that the
calculated doses were well below regulatory dose criteria of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I. The
radioactive liquid effluent release permits were completed in accordance with the ODCM.
From a review of the analytical data, the inspector verified that the projected doses to the
public from the liquid and gaseous effluent from Unit 1 were below TS limits and were
performed in accordance with the ODCM and the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR 50.36a) for maintaining doses to the public from radioactive effluents as low as
is reasonably achievable. The inspector verified that the licensee collected and analyzed
the stack vent samples, NCO and SFD sump samples, and the liquid discharge monitor
samples within the required frequencies and that the sample collection was conducted in
accordance with applicable procedures.
The inspector reviewed the analytical water sample results related to the groundwater
monitoring program, specifically the NCO and SFD analytical sample results from
January 2010 through December 2010. The levels of tritium ranged from 13,500
picoCuries per Liter (pCilL) to 3,340 pCilL for the NCO and from 642 pCilL to 480 pCi/L
for the SFD. The licensee informed the inspector that the levels of radioactivity appear to
be trending downward. The inspector's review of this data confirmed the licensee's
conclusion.
The inspector reviewed the analytical results for shoreline sediment, fish, and water from
January 2011 through August 2011 for the radiological environmental monitoring
program and noted that the results indicated that no significant radioactivity was
identified in fish and the environment.
c. Conclusions
The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls
program, the groundwater monitoring program, and the radiological monitoring program.
No safety concerns or violations were identified.
5