ML12089A605: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
| issue date = 10/19/2009
| issue date = 10/19/2009
| title = Entergy Prefiled Hearing Exhibit ENT000343 - Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2 & 3 - NRC Inspection Reports Nos. 05000003/2009008; 05000247/2009008 and 05000286/2009008
| title = Entergy Prefiled Hearing Exhibit ENT000343 - Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2 & 3 - NRC Inspection Reports Nos. 05000003/2009008; 05000247/2009008 and 05000286/2009008
| author name = Roberts D J
| author name = Roberts D
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-I/DRS
| author affiliation = NRC/RGN-I/DRS
| addressee name = Pollock J
| addressee name = Pollock J
Line 16: Line 16:
| page count = 17
| page count = 17
}}
}}
See also: [[followed by::IR 05000003/2009008]]
See also: [[see also::IR 05000003/2009008]]


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:ENT000343  
{{#Wiki_filter:ENT000343  
Submitted:  March 29, 2012
Submitted:  March 29, 2012
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY  
UNITED STATES  
COMMISSION  
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  
REGION I Mr. Joseph Pollock Site Vice President  
REGION I  
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, GSB P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249  
Mr. Joseph Pollock  
4 7 5 ALLENDALE  
Site Vice President  
ROAD KING OF PR USSIA, PA 19406-1415  
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.  
October 19, 2009 SUBJECT: INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING  
Indian Point Energy Center  
UNITS 1 ,2 & 3 -NRC INSPECTION  
450 Broadway, GSB  
REPORT NOS. 05000003/2009008
P.O. Box 249  
; 05000247/2009008
Buchanan, NY 10511-0249  
; AND 05000286/2009008  
475 ALLENDALE ROAD
Dear Mr. Pollock: On September  
KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-1415  
4, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory  
October 19, 2009  
Commission (NRC) completed  
SUBJECT:  
an inspection  
INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNITS 1, 2 & 3 - NRC INSPECTION  
at Indian Point Nuclear Generating  
REPORT NOS. 05000003/2009008; 05000247/2009008; AND  
Units 1, 2, & 3. The enclosed report documents  
05000286/2009008  
the inspection  
Dear Mr. Pollock:  
results, which were discussed  
On September 4, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an
on August 19 and September  
inspection at Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2, & 3. The enclosed report documents  
4 , 2009 , with Mr. Don Mayer and other members of your staff. The purpose of this inspection  
the inspection results, which were discussed on August 19 and September 4, 2009, with Mr. Don  
was to assess the establishment, implementation, and maintenance  
Mayer and other members of your staff.  
of your Long-Term  
The purpose of this inspection was to assess the establishment, implementation, and  
G r oundwater
maintenance of your Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Program; review the circumstances  
Monitoring  
surrounding a previously identified occurrence involving the detection of tritated water in a Unit 3  
Program; review the circumstances  
storm drain system; review the performance of the site's Radiation Monitoring System; and  
surrounding  
inspect and assess your performance relative to radiological effluents monitoring and control.  
a prev i ously identified  
The inspection involved an examination of activities conducted under Entergy's license as  
occurrence  
related to safety and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the  
involving  
conditions of your license. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selected  
the detection  
examination of procedures and representative records, observations of activities, interviews with
of tritated water in a Unit 3 storm drain system; review the performance  
personnel, and independent assessment activities.  
of the site's Radiation  
Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified. Further, the  
Monitoring  
inspectors determined that Entergy's Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Program for the .lndian  
System; and inspect and assess your performance  
Point Energy Center was effectively implemented and maintained in a manner that provided  
r elative to radiological  
continued radiological monitoring of the groundwater conditions to confirm conformance with
effluents  
NRC regulatory requirements relative to the maintenance of public health and safety, and  
monitoring  
protection of the environment.  
and control. The inspection  
Since 2005, as approved by NRC's Executive Director of Operations, Region I conducted
involved an examination  
frequent and focused reviews of your groundwater investigation activities and long-term  
of activ i ties conducted  
monitoring program that exceeded the scope of NRC's normal baseline inspection program. As  
under Entergy's license as related to safety and compliance  
a result, we have developed confidence in your commitment and ability to continue effective  
with the Commission's  
monitoring and assessment of the on-site conditions to assure the maintenance of
rules and regulations  
 
and with the conditions  
J. Pollock  
of your license. Within these areas, the inspection  
2  
consisted  
public health and safety, protection of the environment, and conformance with NRC regulatory  
of a selected examination  
requirements. Our inspectors confirmed that the objectives specified in our deviation  
of procedures  
memorandum dated December 16,2008 (ML083590057) have been satisfied. However, we will  
and representative  
continue to monitor your performance in this area, and will re-assess the need for continued  
records, observations  
heightened inspection oversight during our end-of-cycle review of your CY 2009 perfonmance.  
of activities , interviews  
In accordance with 10 CFR2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its  
with personnel, and independent  
enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room  
assessment  
or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's document system  
activities.  
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-
Based on the results of this inspection , no findings of significance  
rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).  
were identified. Further, the inspectors  
J);W~
determined  
Darrell J. Roberts, Director  
that Entergy's Long-Term  
Division of Reactor Safety  
Groundwater  
Docket Nos:  
Monitoring  
50-003, 50-247, 50-286  
Program for the.lndian Point Energy Center was effectively  
License Nos: DPR-5, DPR-26, DPR-64  
implemented  
Enclosure:  
and maintained  
Inspection Report Nos. 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008,  
in a manner that provided continued  
05000286/2009008  
radiological  
w/Attachment: Supplemental Information  
monitoring  
cc w/encj: Distribution via ListServ  
of the groundwater  
 
conditions  
J. Pollock  
to confirm conformance  
2  
with NRC regulatory  
public health and safety, protection of the environment, and conformance with NRC regulatory  
requirements  
requirements. Our inspectors confirmed that the objectives specified in our deviation  
relative to the maintenance  
memorandum dated December 16, 2008 (ML083590057) have been satisfied. However, we will  
of public health and safety, and protection  
continue to monitor your performance in this area, and will re-assess the need for continued  
of the environment.  
heightened inspection oversight during our end-of-cycle review of your CY 2009 performance.  
Since 2005 , as approved by NRC's E x ecutive Director of Operations , Region I c onducted frequent and focused reviews of your groundwater  
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its  
investigation  
enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in. the NRC Public Document Room  
activities  
or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's document system  
and long-term  
(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at hllp:llwww.nrc.gov/reading-
monitoring  
rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).  
program that exceeded the scope of NRC's normal baseline inspection  
Sincerely,  
program. As a result, we have developed  
IRA by Peter R. Wilson forI  
confidence  
Darrell J. Roberts, Director  
i n your commitment  
Division of Reactor Safety  
and ability to continue effective  
Docket Nos:  
monitoring  
50-003, 50-247, 50-286  
and assessment  
License Nos: DPR-5, DPR-26, DPR-64  
of the on-s i te cond i tions to assure the maintenance  
Enclosure:  
of 
Inspection Report Nos. 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008,  
J. Pollock 2 public health and safety, protection  
05000286/2009008  
of the environment, and conformance  
w/Allachment: Supplemental Information  
with NRC regulatory  
cc w/encl: Distribution via ListServ  
requirements.  
Distribution w/encl: (via E-mail)  
Our inspectors  
S. Collins, RA (R10RAMAIL RESOURCE)  
confirmed  
that the objectives  
specified  
in our deviation  
memorandum  
dated December 16,2008 (ML083590057)  
have been satisfied.  
However, we will continue to monitor your performance  
in this area , and will re-assess  
the need for continued  
heightened  
inspection  
oversight  
during our end-of-cycle  
review of your CY 2009 perfonmance.  
In accordance  
with 10 CFR2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure  
will be available  
electronically  
for public inspection  
in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available  
Records (PARS) component  
of the NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible  
from the NRC Web site at  
rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic  
Reading Room).  
Darrell J. Roberts, Director Division of Reactor Safety Docket Nos: 50-003, 50-247, 50-286 License Nos: DPR-5, DPR-26, DPR-64 Enclosure:  
Inspection  
Report Nos. 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008, 05000286/2009008  
w/Attachment:  
Supplemental  
Information  
cc w/encj: Distribution  
via ListServ
J. Pollock 2 public health and safety , protection  
of the environment, and conformance  
with NRC regulatory  
requirements. Our inspectors  
confirmed  
that the objectives  
specified  
in our deviation  
memorandum  
dated December 16, 2008 (ML083590057)  
have been satisfied.  
However, we will continue to monitor your performance  
in this area, and will re-assess  
the need for continued  
heightened  
inspection  
oversight  
during our end-of-cycle  
review of your CY 2009 performance.  
In accordance  
with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure  
will be available  
electronically  
for public inspection  
in. the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available  
Records (PARS) component  
of the NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is access i ble from the NRC Web site at hllp: llwww.nrc.
rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic  
Reading Room). Sincerely, IRA by Peter R. Wilson forI Darrell J. Roberts, Director Divis i on of Reactor Safety Docket Nos: 50-003 , 50-247 , 50-286 License Nos: DPR-5, DPR-26, DPR-64 Enclosure:  
Inspection  
Report Nos. 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008, 05000286/2009008 w/Allachment:  
Supplemental  
Information  
cc w/encl: Distribution  
via ListServ Distribution  
w/encl: (via E-mail) S. Collins, RA (R10RAMAIL  
RESOURCE)  
M. Dapas, DRA (R10RAMAIL  
M. Dapas, DRA (R10RAMAIL  
RESOURCE)  
RESOURCE)  
Line 191: Line 120:
J. Clifford, DRP (R1DRPMAIL  
J. Clifford, DRP (R1DRPMAIL  
RESOURCE)  
RESOURCE)  
L. Trocine , Ri OEDO RIDSNRRPMINDIANPOINTRESOURCE  
L. Trocine, Ri OEDO  
B. Welling, DRP B. Bickell, DRP S. McCarver , DRP G. Malone , DRP , Senior Resident Inspector  
RIDSNRRPMINDIANPOINTRESOURCE  
-Indian Point 2 D. Hochmuth , DRP D. Bearde, DRP Region I Docket Room (w/concurrences)  
B. Welling, DRP  
ROPreport  
B. Bickell, DRP  
Resource D. Roberts , DRS P. Wilson, DRS J. White, DRS SUNSI Review Complete:  
S. McCarver, DRP  
JRW (Reviewer's  
G. Malone, DRP, Senior Resident Inspector  
Inrtials) OOCUMENT NA M E: G:I ORS I P la nt S upport B ranch 2 INoggl e II P 2009008 Re v1.do c After declaring  
- Indian Point 2  
thi s document Offi c ial Agency Rec o rd w it will be rel ea s e d to the Pub lic. To receive a copy of this document, Indicate in the box: "e" = C Opy without attachm en t/enclosure "E" = COpy with atta c hment/enclosur
D. Hochmuth, DRP  
e "N" = No CQP"y OFFICE RIIDRS I RES I RIIDRS I RIIDRP I RIIDRS I NAME JNoggle/JDN TNicholsonltjn  
D. Bearde, DRP  
JWhite/jrw'  
Region I Docket Room (w/concurrences)  
ehg BWeliinglBW  
ROPreport Resource
DRoberts/prw  
D. Roberts, DRS  
for (telecon)  
P. Wilson, DRS  
for' DATE 10/06/09 10/14/09 10/19/09 10/16/09 10/16/09  
J. White, DRS  
SUNSI Review Complete:  
JRW  
(Reviewer's Inrtials)  
OOCUMENT NAME: G:IORSIPlant Support Branch 2INoggleIIP2009008Rev1 .doc
After declaring this document ~An Official Agency Record w it will be released to the Public.  
To receive a copy of this document, Indicate in the box: "e" = COpy without attachment/enclosure "E" = COpy with attachment/enclosure "N" = No CQP"y  
OFFICE  
RIIDRS  
I  
RES  
I  
RIIDRS  
I  
RIIDRP  
I  
RIIDRS  
I  
NAME  
JNoggle/JDN  
TNicholsonltjn  
JWhite/jrw' ehg
BWeliinglBW  
DRoberts/prw for
(telecon)  
for'  
DATE  
10/06/09  
10/14/09  
10/19/09  
10/16/09  
10/16/09  
* see pnor concurrence  
* see pnor concurrence  
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY  
Docket Nos. License Nos. Report Nos. Licensee: Facility:  
 
Docket Nos.  
License Nos.  
Report Nos.  
Licensee:  
Facility:  
Location:  
Location:  
Dates: . Inspectors:  
Dates: .  
Approved by: U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY  
Inspectors:  
COMMISSION  
Approved by:  
REGION I 50-003 , 50-247 , 50-286 DPR-3, DPR-26, DPR-64 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008, and 05000286/2009008  
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  
REGION I  
50-003, 50-247, 50-286  
DPR-3, DPR-26, DPR-64  
05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008, and 05000286/2009008  
Entergy Nuclear Northeast  
Entergy Nuclear Northeast  
Indian Point Nuclear Generating  
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2, & 3  
Station Units 1, 2, & 3 295 Broadway Buchanan, NY 10511-0308  
295 Broadway  
Augusr18 , 2009 -September  
Buchanan, NY 10511-0308  
4, 2009 J. Noggle, Sr. Health Physicist, CHP, team leader T. Nicholson, Sr. Technical  
Augusr18, 2009 - September 4, 2009  
Advisor for Radionuclide  
J. Noggle, Sr. Health Physicist, CHP, team leader  
Transport  
T. Nicholson, Sr. Technical Advisor for Radionuclide Transport  
J. Williams , U.S. Geological  
J. Williams, U.S. Geological Survey, Troy, New York  
Survey , Troy , New York John R. White, Chief Plant Support Branch 2 Division of Reactor Safety Enclosure
John R. White, Chief  
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS IR 05000003/2009008, IR 05000247/2009008, IR 05000286/2009008;  
Plant Support Branch 2  
08/18/2009  
Division of Reactor Safety  
-9/04/2009;  
Enclosure  
Indian Point Nuclear Generating  
 
Station Units 1, 2 & 3; Other Activities  
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS  
-associated  
IR 05000003/2009008, IR 05000247/2009008, IR 05000286/2009008; 08/18/2009 - 9/04/2009;  
with ROP deviation  
Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2 & 3; Other Activities - associated with ROP  
memorandum, one PI&R sample, and radioactive  
deviation memorandum, one PI&R sample, and radioactive effluents baseline inspection.  
effluents  
No findings of significance were identified. The report covers the period from August 18 through  
baseline inspection.  
September 4, 2009, and discusses inspection activities conducted by a region-based inspector,  
No findings of significance  
and an inspection team comprised of representatives of Region I, NRC's Office of Research,  
were identified.  
and the U. S. Geological Survey. The inspection provided bases for the NRC to determine that
The report covers the period from August 18 through September  
Entergy had completed actions necessary to satisfy the objectives delineated in our deviation  
4, 2009, and discusses  
memorandum, "Request for Renewal of Deviation to the Action Matrix to Provide Heightened  
inspection  
NRC Oversight of the Onsite Groundwater Monitoring at the Indian Point Energy Center,"  
activities  
(ML083590057), dated December 16,2008. The NRC's program for overseeing the safe  
conducted  
operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, "Reactor  
by a region-based  
Oversight Process," Revision 4, dated December 2006.  
inspector, and an inspection  
ii  
team comprised  
Enclosure  
of representatives  
 
of Region I, NRC's Office of Research, and the U. S. Geological  
Report Details  
Survey. The inspection  
2.  
provided bases for the NRC to determine  
RADIATION SAFETY
that Entergy had completed  
Cornerstone: Public Radiation Safety (PS)  
actions necessary  
2PS1 Gaseous and Liguid Effluents (71122.01 - 3 samples)  
to satisfy the objectives  
a.  
delineated  
Inspection Scope
in our deviation  
1) The inspector reviewed the following documents to evaluate the effectiveness of the  
memorandum, "Request for Renewal of Deviation  
licensee's radioactive gaseous and liquid effluent control programs relative to the  
to the Action Matrix  
applicable regulatory requirements specified in the Technical Specifications and the  
to Provide Heightened  
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (TS/ODCM).  
NRC Oversight  
*  
of the Onsite Groundwater  
The 2007 and 2008 Radiological Annual Effluent Release Reports were  
Monitoring  
reviewed including independently assessing selected public dose calculations.  
at the Indian Point Energy Center," (ML083590057), dated December 16,2008. The NRC's program for overseeing  
There were no anomalous results reported in these two reports. The report  
the safe operation  
included discussion of current groundwater conditions and the result of required  
of commercial  
monitoring activities; and instances involving out-of-service radiation monitors or  
nuclear power reactors is described  
effluent release flow rate monitors were listed in the reports and these were  
in NUREG-1649, "Reactor Oversight  
evaluated during this inspection.  
Process," Revision 4, dated December 2006. ii Enclosure
*  
Report Details 2. RADIATION  
The current ODCM was reviewed, including technical justifications for any  
SAFETY Cornerstone:  
changes made since the previous revision.  
Public Radiation  
*  
Safety (PS) 2PS1 Gaseous and Liguid Effluents  
Applicable sections of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) were  
(71122.01 -3 samples) a. Inspection  
reviewed to verify the adequacy of system descriptions for gaseous radioactive  
Scope 1) The inspector  
waste and station ventilation systems.  
reviewed the following  
*  
documents  
The latest quality assurance audits of radioactive effluents and chemistry were
to evaluate the effectiveness  
reviewed, including Entergy's program for identifying, controlling and assessing  
of the licensee's  
potential contaminated spills and leakage.  
radioactive  
*  
gaseous and liquid effluent control programs relative to the applicable  
There were no measurable effluent releases to the environment based on off-site  
regulatory  
dose calculations, and there were no reported off-site environmental sample
requirements  
measurements identifying plant-related radioactive materials during the 2007 and  
specified  
2008 report period.  
in the Technical  
2) The inspector observed the following plant equipment and work activities to evaluate the  
Specifications  
effectiveness of the licensee's radioactive gaseous and liquid effluent control programs.  
and the Offsite Dose Calculation  
*  
Manual (TS/ODCM). * The 2007 and 2008 Radiological  
Walkdowns were performed of accessible gaseous and liquid release system  
Annual Effluent Release Reports were reviewed including  
components to review any recent changes or modifications; and to confirm the  
independently  
alignment, operation and material condition of the radioactive liquid and  
assessing  
gaseous effluent radiation monitoring systems (RMS) at Units 1, 2 and 3.  
selected public dose calculations.  
*  
There were no anomalous  
Observations were conducted of radioactive effluent related sampling and  
results reported in these two reports. The report included discussion  
associated laboratory measurement techniques.  
of current groundwater  
*  
conditions  
Procedural controls and selected radioactive gaseous and liquid effluent release  
and the result of required monitoring  
permits were reviewed to verify that radiation monitor alarm setpoint values and  
activities;  
releases were in agreement with Technical Specification and ODCM  
and instances  
involving  
out-of-service  
radiation  
monitors or effluent release flow  
rate monitors were listed in the reports and these were evaluated  
during this inspection.  
* The current ODCM was reviewed, including  
technical  
justifications  
for any changes made since the previous revision.  
* Applicable  
sections of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) were reviewed to verify the adequacy of system descriptions  
for gaseous radioactive  
waste and station ventilation  
systems. * The latest quality assurance  
audits of radioactive  
effluents  
and chemistry  
were reviewed, including  
Entergy's  
program for identifying , controlling  
and assessing  
potential  
contam i nated spills and leakage. * There were no measurable  
effluent releases to the environment  
based on off-site dose calculations , and there were no reported off-site environmental  
sample measurements  
i dentifying
plant-related  
radioactive  
materials  
during the 2007 and 2008 report period. 2) The inspector  
observed the following plant  
equipment  
and work activit i es to evaluate the effectiveness  
of the licensee's  
radioactive  
gaseous and liquid effluent control programs.  
* Walkdowns  
were performed  
of accessible  
gaseous and liquid release system components  
to review any recent changes or modifications
; and to confirm the alignment, operation  
and material condition  
of the radioactive  
liquid and gaseous effluent radiation  
monitoring  
systems (RMS) at Units 1, 2 and 3. * Observations  
were conducted  
of radioactive  
effluent related sampling and associated  
laboratory  
measurement  
techniques.  
* Procedural  
controls and selected radioactive  
gaseous and liquid effluent release permits were reviewed to verify that radiation  
monitor alarm setpoint values and releases were in agreement  
with Technical  
Specification  
and ODCM requirements.
Enclosure 
2 * Chemistry
logs, relative to out-of-service
radiation
monitoring
conditions, were reviewed to confirm the performance
of compensatory
sampling activities.
* Surveillance
tests of gaseous filtration
discharge
systems were reviewed to confirm operability
and ventilation
flow rates with respect to the assumed flow rates used in gaseous effluent release calculations.
* Entergy's
surveillance
program of non-radioactive
system interfaces
with radioactive
process systems was reviewed to confirm effective
monitoring
and control of potential
effluent discharge
paths to the environment.
* Radiation
monitoring
system and chemistry
laboratory
counting instrument
calibration
and quality control records were reviewed with respect to ODCM surveillance
requirements
to confirm the licensee's
ability identify and report detectable
radionuclides
in radioactive
measurement
results. 3) Radioactive
effluent control related corrective
action program activities
for 2007 through August 2009 were reviewed , including
the results of audits and the resolution
of issues identified
through the condition
report system. A comprehensive
review was conducted
of conditions
and occurrences
involving
out-of-service
radiation
monitoring
system components.
Section 40A2 pertains.
b. Findings and Observations
No findings of significance
were identified.
The following
table summarizes
the dose consequence
of radiological
effluent release in the period between 2007 and 2008. Table of Effluent Release calculated
dose and public dose limits for 2007 and 2008 Dose in Air Dose %of Air Dose %of liquid '10 of Liquid %of mrem/yr Whole limit Max Organ Limit Dose limit Dose limit Body WB MaxO 2007 Units 1&2 2.43E-3 0.016 2.43E-3 0.016 5.3 5E-4 0.018 1.3E-3 0.013 2008 Units 1&2 2.07E-3 0.014 2.67E-3 0.018 6.11E-4 0.020 1.47E-3 0.Q15 2007 Unit 3 3.BBE-3 0.026 3.BBE-3 0.026 3.2E-4 0.007 2.14E-4 0.002 2008 Unit 3 1.99E-3 0.013 1.99E-3 0.013 1.56E-4 0.005 2.B3E-4 0.003 2007 Groundwater
2.66E-4 0.009 9.94E-4 0.01 2008 Groundwater
2.86E-4 0.009 9.35E-4 0.009 4. OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA) 40A2 Identification
and Resolution
of Problems Cornerstone:
Public Radiation
Safety .1 Radioactive
Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment
and Monitoring
Systems a. Inspection
Scope (71122.01)
The inspector
reviewed approximately
one hundred corrective
action condition
reports, initiated
between january 2007 and August 2009, that were associated
with the gaseous, liquid, and groundwater
radioactive
effluents
program. The review was performed
to Enclosure 
3 verify that problems identified
by these condition
reports were properly characterized
in the licensee's
event reporting
system, causes were identified, and actions implemented
commensurate
the safety significance
of the matters. b. Findings and Observations
No findings of significance
were identified . . 2 Radioactive
Effluent Radiation
Monitor System (RMS) Maintenance
(71152 -1 sample) a. Inspection
Scope The inspectors
conducted
a review corrective
action program condition
reports associated
with out-of-service
radiation
monitoring
system equipment
that was identified
in the period between January 2007 and August 2009. Licensee personnel
having cognizance
of Radiation
Monitoring
System (RMS) performance
and activities
were interviewed, including
the RMS system engineer and senior chemistry
staff. "Radiation
Monitoring
System, Second Quarter 2009, Condition
Report Trend Review for Radiation. Monitoring
System Improvement
: dated September
2, 2009, was also reviewed.
b. Findings and Observations
No findings of Significance
were identified.
A large number of condition
reports associated
with the radiation
monitoring
system were initiated
during the past two years. Most of the condition
reports were associated
with interruption
of service of the RMS display consoles in both the Unit 2 and Unit 3 control rooms. While these temporary
display outages affected operators'
ability to poll individual
detector readout displays , they did not interfere
with control room annunciator
actuation
or actual detector operability. The cause of the Unit 3 display console issues was determined
to be related to excessive
temperature
in the RMS electronics cabinets
that affected certain control
room RMS display console components.
Short-term
corrective
actions included installing
permanent
air conditioning
to effect improved cooling of the RMS electronics
cabinets.
The cause of Unit 2 RMS display console service interruptions
continues
to be under review. Notwithstanding, Entergy is evaluating
replacing
the RMS display console equipment
in both control rooms to support station-wide
computer network access improvements.
Less frequently
occurring
RMS equipment
issues remain to be resolved, including
occurrences
involving
the R-56 detectors, which monitor the discharge
of waste sewage from Units 2 and 3. The location of these detectors
was determined
to be susceptible
to failure due to flooding , power spiking, and power outages. In such conditions, waste sewage is diverted to an on-site holding tank in order to conduct sampling prior to off-site release. Accordingly, there is no safety significance
to these RMS system failures.
The inspector
confirmed
that the licensee has implemented
appropriate
remedial actions for these occurrences, and has initiated
actions to improve the operating
environment
and detector function to reduce the out-of-service
time. Enclosure 
4 Entergy has identified
the Unit 2 RMS as an upgrade project in its Top Ten Action Plan for 2009. System engineering
activities
have been initiated
for this improvement
activity.
The inspector
determined
that the majority of identified
problems with the Unit 2 and Unit 3 radiation
monitoring
systems were not associated
with radiation
detector operability
or effluent release control functions.
For those instances
that resulted in out-of-service
conditions, the licensee implemented
appropriate
compensatory
measures as required by regulatory
requirements.  
requirements.  
The inspector
Enclosure
confirmed
 
that Entergy is engaged in RMS . improvement
2
activities, and has initiated
*
appropriate
Chemistry logs, relative to out-of-service radiation monitoring conditions, were
corrective
reviewed to confirm the performance of compensatory sampling activities.  
actions. 40A5 Other Activities
*
.1 Assessment
Surveillance tests of gaseous filtration discharge systems were reviewed to
of Licensee Performance
confirm operability and ventilation flow rates with respect to the assumed flow
Relative to Meeting the Objectives
rates used in gaseous effluent release calculations.  
of the December 16.2008 Memorandum
*
Reguesting
Entergy's surveillance program of non-radioactive system interfaces with
Deviation
radioactive process systems was reviewed to confirm effective monitoring and
from the Action Matrix Background:
control of potential effluent discharge paths to the environment.
On September
*
1, 2005, the NRC was informed by Entergy that cracks in a Unit 2 spent fuel pool wall had been discovered
Radiation monitoring system and chemistry laboratory counting instrument
during excavation
calibration and quality control records were reviewed with respect to ODCM
work inside the spent fuel pool building.  
surveillance requirements to confirm the licensee's ability identify and report  
Low levels of radioactive
detectable radionuclides in radioactive measurement results.  
contamination
3) Radioactive effluent control related corrective action program activities for 2007 through
were found in the vicinity.
August 2009 were reviewed, including the results of audits and the resolution of issues
Entergy's  
identified through the condition report system. A comprehensive review was conducted
initial investigation
of conditions and occurrences involving out-of-service radiation monitoring system  
of the issue revealed that groundwater
components. Section 40A2 pertains.  
in the vicinity was contaminated
b.  
with tritium. On September
Findings and Observations  
20, 2005, Region I initiated
No findings of significance were identified. The following table summarizes the dose
a special inspection
consequence of radiological effluent release in the period between 2007 and 2008.  
of this matter to examine the licensee's
Table of Effluent Release calculated dose and public dose limits for 2007 and 2008
performance
Dose in  
and determine
Air Dose
if the contaminated
%of  
groundwater
Air Dose
affected, or could affect, public health and safety. Subsequently, Entergy initiated
%of  
actions to perform a comprehensive
liquid
groundwater
'10 of  
site characterization, identify the sources, and effect mitigation
Liquid
and remediation
%of  
of the condition.
mrem/yr
The NRC special inspection
Whole
report, issued in March 2006, assessed Entergy's  
limit
performance, achievements, and plans for more extensive
Max Organ
site characterization, and reported that the groundwater
Limit
contamination
Dose
did not, nor was likely to, adversely
limit
affect public health and safety. In the report, and subsequent
Dose
public meetings, NRC indicated
limit  
that a final conclusion
Body
would be reached after Entergy completed
WB
its groundwater
MaxO
characterization
2007
initiative.  
Units 1&2
The NRC Region I continued
2.43E-3
inspection
0.016
and monitoring
2.43E-3  
of Entergy's
0.016
activities  
5.35E-4
in accordance
0.018
with successive
1.3E-3
approved deviation
0.013
to the normal Reactor Oversight
2008
Process for calendar years 2006 (ML053010404), 2007 (ML063480016), 2008 (ML073480290)
Units 1&2
and 2009 (ML083590057).
2.07E-3
During this period, the NRC staff closely monitored
0.014
Entergy's
2.67E-3
groundwater
0.018
characterization
6.11E-4
efforts, performed
0.020
independent
1.47E-3
inspections
0.Q15
and testing, and independently
2007
evaluated
Unit 3
radiological
3.BBE-3
and hydrological
0.026
conditions
3.BBE-3
affecting
0.026
groundwater
3.2E-4
onsite. Additionally, the NRC independently
0.007
verified groundwater
2.14E-4
releases by conducting
0.002
split monitoring
2008
well sampling with Entergy and the State of New York. On January 11, 2008, Entergy submitted
Unit 3  
the results of its comprehensive
1.99E-3
hydrogeologic
0.013
site characterization
1.99E-3
investigation (ML080320600), and included its plan for remediation
0.013
and long-term
1.56E-4
monitoring
0.005
of the on-site groundwater
2.B3E-4
conditions.
0.003
In its report, Entergy described
2007
the source of groundwater
contamination
to be from the Unit 1 and Unit 2 spent fuel pools. The NRC documented
its review of Entergy's
report in inspection
report 05000247 & 05000003/2007010
on May 13, 2008 (ML081340425).
In a subsequent
inspection
05000247/2008004 (ML08311 0566) dated November 6,2008, the NRC Enclosure 
5 confirmed
that Entergy's
conceptual
site model of the site, which included both the vadose zone and saturated
zone processes
and conditions, effectively
characterized
the onsite groundwater
plume behavior and radionuclide
transport. Evaluation
of radionuclide
concentrations
and pathway analyses indicated
that the groundwater
contamination
did not adversely
affect public health and safety. Detailed discussions
and analyses indicated
that the licensee's
plans for long-term
monitoring
of the site, relative to monitoring  
natural attenuation
of residual groundwater
contamination, were reasonable.
On November 3, 2008, Entergy completed
Unit 1 spent fuel pool system drainage and sludge removal activities, essentially
terminating
the source from that facility. Given the change in conditions, Entergy initiated
actions to establish
a new groundwater
contaminant
baseline in support of its long-term
monitoring
program. a. Inspection
Scope The most recently approved Memorandum
of Deviation, i.e., " Request for Renewal of Deviation
to the Action Matrix to Provide Heightened
NRC Oversight
of the Onsite Groundwater
Monitoring
at the Indian Point Energy Center," dated December 16, 2008 (ML083590057), identified
the following
objectives
to be addressed
in order to support resumption
of normal inspection
activities
in accordance
with the Reactor Oversight
Process: * Entergy has completed
sufficient
data collection
and assessment
to establish
a new groundwater
contaminant
baseline, now that the Unit 1 source term has been terminated.
* Entergy has determined
whether active leakage has been terminated
or continues
to persist in regard to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool; and has implemented
appropriate
monitoring
and control measures, as necessary.
* Entergy has established
and implemented
effluent control and environmental
monitoring
procedures
that provide reasonable
assurance
that the existing groundwater
conditions
will continue to be effectively
monitored
and assessed, that the procedures
will detect new or changed conditions
in a timely manner, and that the procedures
are sufficient
to monitor natural attenuation
of the Unit 1 and Unit 2 groundwater
contamination
plumes. The NRC team reviewed the licensee's
performance
and achievements
relative to the completion
of these objectives.  
b. Findings and Observations  
No findings of significance  
were identified.  
The inspectors
determined
that Entergy completed
the actions necessary
to satisfy the objectives
delineated
in the approved Memorandum
of Deviation, dated December 16, 2008, (ML083590057).
Notwithstanding, NRC will continue to monitor performance
in this area, and re-assess
the need for continued
heightened
inspection
oversight
as part of the CY 2009 end-of-cycle
performance
review of IPEC. Enclosure 
6 The following
pertains:
* Objective
1: Completion
of sufficient
data collection
and assessment
to establish
a new groundwater
contaminant
baseline, now that the Unit 1 source term has been terminated.
As a result of the defueling, drainage, and de-sludging
of the Unit 1 spent fuel pool system in the Fall of 2008, the groundwater
contamination
source term from the Unit 1 facility was terminated.  
The inspectors
confirmed
that Entergy's subsequent
data collection
and assessment
activities , associated
with the continual
monitoring
of the residual groundwater
contamination, would be sufficient
and effective
to establish
a new baseline relative to monitoring
the residual groundwater
condition
and subsequent
assessment
of dose consequence. As expected, the first and second-quarter
ground-water
sample results in 2009, collected
from Monitoring
Wells in the immediate
vicinity o f the Unit 1 spent fuel pool, indicated
an increase in Sr-90 groundwater
concentrations. As determined
from review of the licensee's
data and analysis, this increased
concentration
was the expected result of the volume of water that was necessary
to fill the spent fuel pool system to effect defueling.
Accordingly, Entergy's baseline data was predicated
on the existing groundwater
conditions
determined
from its continuing
analysis of collected
monitoring
data. Given that the original source of the contamination
associated
with leakage from the Unit 1. spent fuel pool system has been terminated , the residual groundwater
contamination
involving
Sr-90 is expected to naturally
attenuate
over time. The inspectors
confirmed
that the current groundwater
contaminant
concentrations
have not, nor are expected to, affect public health and safety; and the public radiological
dose consequence
is expected to continue to be a fraction of the NRC annual regulatory
limit affecting
liquid effluents.
The inspectors
confirmed
that cont i nual monitoring
of the migration
and attenuation
of the Unit 1 associated
groundwater
contamination
condition
is being performed
in accordance
with Entergy's
Long-Term Ground-Water
Monitoring
Program (LTGWMP).  
The inspectors
confirmed
that Entergy has established , implemented
and maintains
a long-term
ground-water
monitoring
program that has sufficient
in scope and implementation
requirements
to effectively
monitor and assess this condition. Accordingly, the intent of this objective
was considered
satisfied. * Objective
2: Determination
whether active leakage has been terminated
or continues
to persist in regard to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool , and that appropriate
monitoring
and control measures have been implemented , as necessary.  
Entergy has been actively engaged in analyzing
Monitoring
Well data associated
with the H-3 (tritium)
groundwater
contamination
condition
that resulted from previously
identified
leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool: Entergy's analysis indicated
an overall . decreaSing
trend in tritium concentration
in the groundwater
as a result of previous efforts to e x amine the condition
of the spent fuel pool and transfer canal liner , and effect repair , as necessary.  
Notwithstanding , as previously
reported , Entergy's
e x amination
of the spent fuel pool liner was necessarily
limited to only the accessible
surfaces.  
That is, only about 40 % of the total liner surfaces were accessible
for examination;
the remaining
surfaces were necessarily
inaccessible
due to the pro x imity of stored spent fuel that prevented
examination.  
Enclosure 
7 The inspectors
reviewed the licensee's
analysis derived from groundwater
monitoring
data, and confirmed
that there was no apparent indication
of any significant
large flux going active leakage. The inspectors
also reviewed the licensee's monitoring
well detect i on sensitivity
data , which supports that active leakage , if occurring , would likely not exceed 30 gallons per day (0.02 gpm). This sensitivity
analysis was based on comparison
of the tritium concentration
that is available
in the spent fuel pool and the actual tritium concentration
derived from samples collected
from relevant monitoring
wells in the near vicinity of the spent fuel pool. Additionally, the inspectors
reviewed licensee analysis and data from a long-term
tracer test that indicated
the potential
for slow, episodic trit i um migration
in the fractures
of the vadose zone that affect the mobility of contamina t ed groundwater
from the immediate
vicinity of the Unit 2 spent fuel pool to the water table. The licensee's analysis is supported
by the fact that fluorescine
dye, which was injected as part of the groundwater
characterization
study over two years ago, is still detectable
in certain nearby monitor i ng wells. The inspectors noted that
there were occasional
spikes and general variability
in some monitor i ng well tritium concentration
values that were not characteristic
of the e x pected attenuation
that would normally be expected at this time. Additionally , the licensee continued
to occasionally
collect a small quantity of water from the leak collection
box that was installed
on the Unit 2 spent fuel pool wall crack that was identified
in 2005. Accordingly, while there was no indication
of any significant
large flux active leakage, there was insufficient
basis to conclude that there is absolutely
no persistent
low flux leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, at this time. Notwithstanding , the inspectors
determined
that the licensee's sensitivity
analysis of groundwater
monitoring
data, relative to its ability to detect active leakage in e x cess of about 30 gallons per day , was reasonably
derived. Additionally , the inspectors
confirmed
that the current groundwater
conditions, even if there was persistent
low flux leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, has not, nor would be e x pected to, affect public health and safety; and the public radiological
dose consequence
would be expected to continue to be a fraction of the NRC annual regulatory
limit affecting
liquid effluents.  
The inspectors
confirmed
that continual
monitoring
of the mig r ation and attenuation
of the Un it 2 associated
groundwater
contamination
condition
was being performed
in accordance
with Entergy's Long-Term
Ground-Water Monitoring
Program; and that the program implemented
appropriate
monitoring
and control measures for this condition.  
The inspectors
confirmed
that Entergy has established, implemented
and maintained
a long-term
ground-water
monitoring
program that has sufficient
scope and implementation
requirements
to effectively
monitor and assess the present condition. Further, the licensee is considering
monitOring
in the vadose zone , in the vicinity of the Unit 2 facility , to assist in the detection
of large flu x releases. Accord i ngly , the intent of this objective
was considered
satisfied.  
* Objective
3: Establishment
and implementation
of effluent control and environmental
monitoring
procedures
that provide reasonable
assurance
that the e x isting groundwater
conditions
will continue to be effectively
monitored
and assessed, that t he procedures
will detect new or changed conditions
in a timely manner, and that the procedures
are sufficient
to monitor natural attenuation
of the Unit 1 and Unit2 groundwater
contamination
plumes. Enclosure 
8 The NRC has conducted several
inspections (August 2007, October 2008, and August 2009) of the licensee's
Long-Term
Ground-Water
Monitoring
Program. The inspectors
confirmed
that Entergy has established, implemented
and maintained
a Long-Term
Ground-Water
Monitoring
Program that was sufficient
in scope and implementation
requirements
to effectively
monitor and assess the existing contaminated
groundwater
conditions
affecting
the Indian Point Energy Center. During this inspection, the inspectors
examined the refurbishment
of the LaFarge No.2 Monitoring
Well (one of the principal off-site monitoring
wells) and confirmed
its acceptability
as a valid off-site monitoring
location.  
Additionally , the inspectors
verified that the administrative
controls, established
in the Long-Term
Groundwater  
Groundwater  
Monitoring
2.66E-4
Program, were sufficient
0.009
t9 provide assurance
9.94E-4
of review and appropriate
0.01
communication
2008
of activities
and changes that affect ground-water
monitoring
conditions;
and that the program included sufficient
sampling requirements
for storm drains and the Unit 1 foundation
drain systems. During this inspection, the inspectors
reviewed a March 25, 2009 instance involving
the licensee's
detection
of tritiated
water in the catch basin of a storm drain in the vicinity of Unit 3 , and in an adjacent shallow monitoring
well. The licensee conducted
an extensive
investigation
but was unable to find an explanation
for this one-time occurrence.
The inspectors
confirmed
that the occurrence
had no radiological
consequence
onsite or offsite; and no leakage was identified
from any Unit 3 component
containing
tritiated
water. However, the nature of the occurrence
indicated
uncertainty
in the ability of the existing Unit 3 monitoring
wells to detect potential
leakage from that facility.
While there was no current on-going leakage affecting
the groundwater
at Unit 3 , Entergy initiated
action to re-evaluate
the Unit 3 groundwater
monitoring
configuration (both vertically
and horizontally)
to determine
its effectiveness
in meeting the objectives
and recommendations
of the NEI "Industry
Groundwater  
Groundwater  
Protection
2.86E-4
Initiative-
0.009
Final Guidance Document, August 2007" (ML072600292
9.35E-4
and ML07261 0036); and amend the Term Groundwater
0.009
Monitoring  
4.
Program , as necessary.  
OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)
Notwithstanding, the inspectors
40A2 Identification and Resolution of Problems
confirmed
Cornerstone: Public Radiation Safety
that Entergy has established, implemented
.1
and maintained
Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems
a Long-Term
a.  
Ground-Water
Inspection Scope (71122.01)
Monitoring
The inspector reviewed approximately one hundred corrective action condition reports,
Program that has sufficient
initiated between january 2007 and August 2009, that were associated with the gaseous,  
scope and implementation
liquid, and groundwater radioactive effluents program. The review was performed to
requirements
Enclosure
to effectively
 
monitor and assess the existing* groundwater
3
conditions
verify that problems identified by these condition reports were properly characterized in
affecting
the licensee's event reporting system, causes were identified, and actions implemented
Indian Point Energy Center. Accordingly, the intent of this objective
commensurate the safety significance of the matters.
was considered
b.
satisfied . . 2 Groundwater
Findings and Observations
Sampling a. Inspection
No findings of significance were identified .
Scope During the licensee's
. 2
groundwater
Radioactive Effluent Radiation Monitor System (RMS) Maintenance (71152 - 1 sample)
investigation, over 1200 groundwater
a.  
samples were collected
Inspection Scope
and analyzed from the established
The inspectors conducted a review corrective action program condition reports
on-site monitoring
associated with out-of-service radiation monitoring system equipment that was identified
well network by the second quarter of 2009. The analytical
in the period between January 2007 and August 2009. Licensee personnel having
results provide the basis for assessing
cognizance of Radiation Monitoring System (RMS) performance and activities were
the extent of the groundwater
interviewed, including the RMS system engineer and senior chemistry staff. "Radiation
plume and for performing
Monitoring System, Second Quarter 2009, Condition Report Trend Review for Radiation .
calculations
Monitoring System Improvement: dated September 2, 2009, was also reviewed.  
of offsite doses to members of the public. In order to assess Entergy's
b.
performance
Findings and Observations
in this area, the NRC implemented
No findings of Significance were identified.
an independent
A large number of condition reports associated with the radiation monitoring system were
split sample collection
initiated during the past two years. Most of the condition reports were associated with
program with the licensee beginning
interruption of service of the RMS display consoles in both the Unit 2 and Unit 3 control
in September
rooms. While these temporary display outages affected operators' ability to poll
2005. The monitoring
individual detector readout displays, they did not interfere with control room annunciator
wells selected for independent
actuation or actual detector operability.
verification
The cause of the Unit 3 display console issues was determined to be related to
included the southem boundary wells and those wells bordering
excessive temperature in the RMS electronics cabinets that affected certain control room
the Hudson River that were used Enclosure 
RMS display console components. Short-term corrective actions included installing
9 in support of effluent release and dose assessment
permanent air conditioning to effect improved cooling of the RMS electronics cabinets.
calculations.  
The cause of Unit 2 RMS display console service interruptions continues to be under
Sample identity was assured by chain-of-custody
review. Notwithstanding, Entergy is evaluating replacing the RMS display console
procedures
equipment in both control rooms to support station-wide computer network access
that included sample collection
improvements.  
observation
Less frequently occurring RMS equipment issues remain to be resolved, including
by the NRC or a representative
occurrences involving the R-56 detectors, which monitor the discharge of waste sewage
of the NYS DEC. The NRC samples were analyzed by an independent
from Units 2 and 3. The location of these detectors was determined to be susceptible to
govemment
failure due to flooding, power spiking, and power outages. In such conditions, waste
laboratory
sewage is diverted to an on-site holding tank in order to conduct sampling prior to off-site
to ensure validation
release. Accordingly, there is no safety significance to these RMS system failures. The
of the licensee's
inspector confirmed that the licensee has implemented appropriate remedial actions for
groundwater
these occurrences, and has initiated actions to improve the operating environment and
contamination
detector function to reduce the out-of-service time.  
results and off-site environmental
Enclosure
sample radioactive
 
measurements.  
4
By the second quarter of 2009, over 300 split groundwater
Entergy has identified the Unit 2 RMS as an upgrade project in its Top Ten Action Plan
samples were obtained to provide an independent
for 2009. System engineering activities have been initiated for this improvement activity.  
check of Entergy's
The inspector determined that the majority of identified problems with the Unit 2 and Unit
analytical
3 radiation monitoring systems were not associated with radiation detector operability or
results and to independently
effluent release control functions. For those instances that resulted in out-of-service
verify if there was any detectable
conditions, the licensee implemented appropriate compensatory measures as required
migration
by regulatory requirements. The inspector confirmed that Entergy is engaged in RMS
of groundwater
. improvement activities, and has initiated appropriate corrective actions.
contaminants
40A5 Other Activities
offsite. These split samples represent
.1
over 1,200 analyses, primarily
Assessment of Licensee Performance Relative to Meeting the Objectives of the
for hydrogen-3 (tritium), strontium-90, nickel-63, and gamma-emitting
December 16.2008 Memorandum Reguesting Deviation from the Action Matrix
radionuclides
Background:
that characterized
On September 1, 2005, the NRC was informed by Entergy that cracks in a Unit 2 spent
the effluent releases. Analyses for other radionuclides
fuel pool wall had been discovered during excavation work inside the spent fuel pool
were performed, but none were detected.
building. Low levels of radioactive contamination were found in the vicinity. Entergy's
b. Findings and Assessment
initial investigation of the issue revealed that groundwater in the vicinity was
No findings of significance
contaminated with tritium. On September 20, 2005, Region I initiated a special inspection
were identified. In general, Entergy's
of this matter to examine the licensee's performance and determine if the contaminated
groundwater  
groundwater affected, or could affect, public health and safety. Subsequently, Entergy  
measurements
initiated actions to perform a comprehensive groundwater site characterization, identify
of radioactivity
the sources, and effect mitigation and remediation of the condition.
were of good quality and of sufficient
The NRC special inspection report, issued in March 2006, assessed Entergy's  
sensitivity
performance, achievements, and plans for more extensive site characterization, and
to assess radiological
reported that the groundwater contamination did not, nor was likely to, adversely affect
impact. The quality of Entergy's  
public health and safety. In the report, and subsequent public meetings, NRC indicated
measurements
that a final conclusion would be reached after Entergy completed its groundwater
were confirmed
characterization initiative.
by various split samples analyzed by the NRC. Of the over 1200 results that were reviewed, there were only a few sample disagreements
The NRC Region I continued inspection and monitoring of Entergy's activities in  
based on the statistical
accordance with successive approved deviation to the normal Reactor Oversight
comparison
Process for calendar years 2006 (ML053010404), 2007 (ML063480016), 2008
criteria specified
(ML073480290) and 2009 (ML083590057). During this period, the NRC staff closely
in NRC Inspection
monitored Entergy's groundwater characterization efforts, performed independent
Procedure
inspections and testing, and independently evaluated radiological and hydrological
84750, "Radioactive
conditions affecting groundwater onsite. Additionally, the NRC independently verified
Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental
groundwater releases by conducting split monitoring well sampling with Entergy and the
Monitoring." As a result of these few discrepancies, Entergy took corrective
State of New York.  
action to establish, implement, and maintain procedures
On January 11, 2008, Entergy submitted the results of its comprehensive hydrogeologic
to effect improved quality control and assurance
site characterization investigation (ML080320600), and included its plan for remediation
of sample analysis performed
and long-term monitoring of the on-site groundwater conditions. In its report, Entergy
by its own laboratory
described the source of groundwater contamination to be from the Unit 1 and Unit 2
and contract analytical
spent fuel pools. The NRC documented its review of Entergy's report in inspection report
laboratories.  
05000247 & 05000003/2007010 on May 13, 2008 (ML081340425). In a subsequent
During the past 3)1" years, the on-site groundwater  
inspection 05000247/2008004 (ML08311 0566) dated November 6,2008, the NRC
transport
Enclosure
pathway has been effectively
 
characterized
5
by the licensee, and a significant
confirmed that Entergy's conceptual site model of the site, which included both the
quantity of on-site groundwater  
vadose zone and saturated zone processes and conditions, effectively characterized the  
monitoring
onsite groundwater plume behavior and radionuclide transport. Evaluation of
data has been collected
radionuclide concentrations and pathway analyses indicated that the groundwater
and analyzed by Entergy. A representative
contamination did not adversely affect public health and safety. Detailed discussions
numbers of split samples have confirmed
and analyses indicated that the licensee's plans for long-term monitoring of the site,
the overall efficacy of the licensee's
relative to monitoring natural attenuation of residual groundwater contamination, were
analytical
reasonable.
capability.
On November 3, 2008, Entergy completed Unit 1 spent fuel pool system drainage and
As the site characterization
sludge removal activities, essentially terminating the source from that facility. Given the
was tested through pumping and tracer testing, the contaminant
change in conditions, Entergy initiated actions to establish a new groundwater
plume uncertainty
contaminant baseline in support of its long-term monitoring program.
has been significantly
a.
reduced. Given this accomplishment, and the NRC determination
Inspection Scope
that Entergy has demonstrated
The most recently approved Memorandum of Deviation, i.e., "Request for Renewal of
an effective
Deviation to the Action Matrix to Provide Heightened NRC Oversight of the Onsite
groundwater  
Groundwater Monitoring at the Indian Point Energy Center," dated December 16, 2008
sample quality control program, the NRC will discontinue  
(ML083590057), identified the following objectives to be addressed in order to support
any further split sampling activities.  
resumption of normal inspection activities in accordance with the Reactor Oversight
40A6 Meetings, including  
Process:
Exit .1 Exit Meeting Summary The inspectors  
*
presented  
Entergy has completed sufficient data collection and assessment to establish a
the inspection  
new groundwater contaminant baseline, now that the Unit 1 source term has
results to Mr. D. Mayer and other licensee and New York State representatives  
been terminated.
on August 19, 2009 and September  
*
4, 2009. The licensee acknowledged  
Entergy has determined whether active leakage has been terminated or
the findings presented.  
continues to persist in regard to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool; and has implemented
Based upon discussions  
appropriate monitoring and control measures, as necessary.
with the licensee, none of the information  
*
presented  
Entergy has established and implemented effluent control and environmental
at the exit meeting and included in this report was considered  
monitoring procedures that provide reasonable assurance that the existing
proprietary.  
groundwater conditions will continue to be effectively monitored and assessed,
Enclosure
that the procedures will detect new or changed conditions in a timely manner, and
that the procedures are sufficient to monitor natural attenuation of the Unit 1 and
Unit 2 groundwater contamination plumes.
The NRC team reviewed the licensee's performance and achievements relative to the
completion of these objectives.
b.
Findings and Observations
No findings of significance were identified.
The inspectors determined that Entergy completed the actions necessary to satisfy the
objectives delineated in the approved Memorandum of Deviation, dated December 16,
2008, (ML083590057). Notwithstanding, NRC will continue to monitor performance in
this area, and re-assess the need for continued heightened inspection oversight as part
of the CY 2009 end-of-cycle performance review of IPEC.
Enclosure
 
6
The following pertains:
*
Objective 1: Completion of sufficient data collection and assessment to establish
a new groundwater contaminant baseline, now that the Unit 1 source term has
been terminated.
As a result of the defueling, drainage, and de-sludging of the Unit 1 spent fuel pool
system in the Fall of 2008, the groundwater contamination source term from the Unit 1
facility was terminated. The inspectors confirmed that Entergy's subsequent data
collection and assessment activities, associated with the continual monitoring of the
residual groundwater contamination, would be sufficient and effective to establish a new
baseline relative to monitoring the residual groundwater condition and subsequent
assessment of dose consequence.
As expected, the first and second-quarter ground-water sample results in 2009, collected
from Monitoring Wells in the immediate vicinity of the Unit 1 spent fuel pool, indicated an
increase in Sr-90 groundwater concentrations. As determined from review of the
licensee's data and analysis, this increased concentration was the expected result of the
volume of water that was necessary to fill the spent fuel pool system to effect defueling.
Accordingly, Entergy's baseline data was predicated on the existing groundwater
conditions determined from its continuing analysis of collected monitoring data. Given
that the original source of the contamination associated with leakage from the Unit 1.
spent fuel pool system has been terminated, the residual groundwater contamination
involving Sr-90 is expected to naturally attenuate over time. The inspectors confirmed
that the current groundwater contaminant concentrations have not, nor are expected to,
affect public health and safety; and the public radiological dose consequence is
expected to continue to be a fraction of the NRC annual regulatory limit affecting liquid
effluents. The inspectors confirmed that continual monitoring of the migration and
attenuation of the Unit 1 associated groundwater contamination condition is being
performed in accordance with Entergy's Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program
(LTGWMP).
The inspectors confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented and maintains a
long-term ground-water monitoring program that has sufficient in scope and
implementation requirements to effectively monitor and assess this condition.
Accordingly, the intent of this objective was considered satisfied.
*
Objective 2: Determination whether active leakage has been terminated or
continues to persist in regard to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, and that appropriate
monitoring and control measures have been implemented, as necessary.
Entergy has been actively engaged in analyzing Monitoring Well data associated with the
H-3 (tritium) groundwater contamination condition that resulted from previously identified
leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool: Entergy's analysis indicated an overall .
decreaSing trend in tritium concentration in the groundwater as a result of previous
efforts to examine the condition of the spent fuel pool and transfer canal liner, and effect
repair, as necessary. Notwithstanding, as previously reported, Entergy's examination of
the spent fuel pool liner was necessarily limited to only the accessible surfaces. That is,
only about 40 % of the total liner surfaces were accessible for examination; the
remaining surfaces were necessarily inaccessible due to the proximity of stored spent
fuel that prevented examination.
Enclosure
 
7
The inspectors reviewed the licensee's analysis derived from groundwater monitoring
data, and confirmed that there was no apparent indication of any significant large flux on-
going active leakage. The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's monitoring well
detection sensitivity data, which supports that active leakage, if occurring, would likely
not exceed 30 gallons per day (0.02 gpm). This sensitivity analysis was based on
comparison of the tritium concentration that is available in the spent fuel pool and the
actual tritium concentration derived from samples collected from relevant monitoring
wells in the near vicinity of the spent fuel pool. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed
licensee analysis and data from a long-term tracer test that indicated the potential for
slow, episodic tritium migration in the fractures of the vadose zone that affect the mobility
of contaminated groundwater from the immediate vicinity of the Unit 2 spent fuel pool to
the water table. The licensee's analysis is supported by the fact that fluorescine dye,
which was injected as part of the groundwater characterization study over two years ago,
is still detectable in certain nearby monitoring wells.
The inspectors noted that there were occasional spikes and general variability in some
monitoring well tritium concentration values that were not characteristic of the expected
attenuation that would normally be expected at this time. Additionally, the licensee
continued to occasionally collect a small quantity of water from the leak collection box
that was installed on the Unit 2 spent fuel pool wall crack that was identified in 2005.
Accordingly, while there was no indication of any significant large flux active leakage,
there was insufficient basis to conclude that there is absolutely no persistent low flux
leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, at this time.
Notwithstanding, the inspectors determined that the licensee's sensitivity analysis of
groundwater monitoring data, relative to its ability to detect active leakage in excess of
about 30 gallons per day, was reasonably derived. Additionally, the inspectors
confirmed that the current groundwater conditions, even if there was persistent low flux
leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, has not, nor would be expected to, affect public
health and safety; and the public radiological dose consequence would be expected to
continue to be a fraction of the NRC annual regulatory limit affecting liquid effluents. The
inspectors confirmed that continual monitoring of the migration and attenuation of the
Unit 2 associated groundwater contamination condition was being performed in
accordance with Entergy's Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program; and that the
program implemented appropriate monitoring and control measures for this condition.
The inspectors confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented and maintained a
long-term ground-water monitoring program that has sufficient scope and
implementation requirements to effectively monitor and assess the present condition.
Further, the licensee is considering monitOring in the vadose zone, in the vicinity of the
Unit 2 facility, to assist in the detection of large flux releases. Accordingly, the intent of
this objective was considered satisfied.
*
Objective 3: Establishment and implementation of effluent control and
environmental monitoring procedures that provide reasonable assurance that the
existing groundwater conditions will continue to be effectively monitored and
assessed, that the procedures will detect new or changed conditions in a timely
manner, and that the procedures are sufficient to monitor natural attenuation of
the Unit 1 and Unit2 groundwater contamination plumes.
Enclosure
 
8
The NRC has conducted several inspections (August 2007, October 2008, and August
2009) of the licensee's Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program. The inspectors
confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented and maintained a Long-Term
Ground-Water Monitoring Program that was sufficient in scope and implementation
requirements to effectively monitor and assess the existing contaminated groundwater
conditions affecting the Indian Point Energy Center.
During this inspection, the inspectors examined the refurbishment of the LaFarge No.2
Monitoring Well (one of the principal off-site monitoring wells) and confirmed its
acceptability as a valid off-site monitoring location. Additionally, the inspectors verified
that the administrative controls, established in the Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring
Program, were sufficient t9 provide assurance of review and appropriate communication
of activities and changes that affect ground-water monitoring conditions; and that the
program included sufficient sampling requirements for storm drains and the Unit 1
foundation drain systems.
During this inspection, the inspectors reviewed a March 25, 2009 instance involving the
licensee's detection of tritiated water in the catch basin of a storm drain in the vicinity of
Unit 3, and in an adjacent shallow monitoring well. The licensee conducted an extensive
investigation but was unable to find an explanation for this one-time occurrence. The
inspectors confirmed that the occurrence had no radiological consequence onsite or
offsite; and no leakage was identified from any Unit 3 component containing tritiated
water. However, the nature of the occurrence indicated uncertainty in the ability of the
existing Unit 3 monitoring wells to detect potential leakage from that facility. While there
was no current on-going leakage affecting the groundwater at Unit 3, Entergy initiated
action to re-evaluate the Unit 3 groundwater monitoring configuration (both vertically and
horizontally) to determine its effectiveness in meeting the objectives and
recommendations of the NEI "Industry Groundwater Protection Initiative- Final Guidance
Document, August 2007" (ML072600292 and ML07261 0036); and amend the Long-
Term Groundwater Monitoring Program, as necessary.
Notwithstanding, the inspectors confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented
and maintained a Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program that has sufficient
scope and implementation requirements to effectively monitor and assess the existing *
groundwater conditions affecting Indian Point Energy Center. Accordingly, the intent of
this objective was considered satisfied .
. 2
Groundwater Sampling
a.
Inspection Scope
During the licensee's groundwater investigation, over 1200 groundwater samples were
collected and analyzed from the established on-site monitoring well network by the
second quarter of 2009. The analytical results provide the basis for assessing the extent
of the groundwater plume and for performing calculations of offsite doses to members of
the public. In order to assess Entergy's performance in this area, the NRC implemented
an independent split sample collection program with the licensee beginning in
September 2005. The monitoring wells selected for independent verification included
the southem boundary wells and those wells bordering the Hudson River that were used
Enclosure
 
9
in support of effluent release and dose assessment calculations. Sample identity was
assured by chain-of-custody procedures that included sample collection observation by
the NRC or a representative of the NYS DEC. The NRC samples were analyzed by an
independent govemment laboratory to ensure validation of the licensee's groundwater
contamination results and off-site environmental sample radioactive measurements.
By the second quarter of 2009, over 300 split groundwater samples were obtained to
provide an independent check of Entergy's analytical results and to independently verify
if there was any detectable migration of groundwater contaminants offsite. These split
samples represent over 1,200 analyses, primarily for hydrogen-3 (tritium), strontium-90,
nickel-63, and gamma-emitting radionuclides that characterized the effluent releases.
Analyses for other radionuclides were performed, but none were detected.
b.
Findings and Assessment
No findings of significance were identified.
In general, Entergy's groundwater measurements of radioactivity were of good quality
and of sufficient sensitivity to assess radiological impact. The quality of Entergy's
measurements were confirmed by various split samples analyzed by the NRC. Of the
over 1200 results that were reviewed, there were only a few sample disagreements
based on the statistical comparison criteria specified in NRC Inspection Procedure
84750, "Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring." As
a result of these few discrepancies, Entergy took corrective action to establish,
implement, and maintain procedures to effect improved quality control and assurance of
sample analysis performed by its own laboratory and contract analytical laboratories.
During the past 3)1" years, the on-site groundwater transport pathway has been
effectively characterized by the licensee, and a significant quantity of on-site groundwater
monitoring data has been collected and analyzed by Entergy. A representative numbers
of split samples have confirmed the overall efficacy of the licensee's analytical capability.
As the site characterization was tested through pumping and tracer testing, the
contaminant plume uncertainty has been significantly reduced. Given this
accomplishment, and the NRC determination that Entergy has demonstrated an effective
groundwater sample quality control program, the NRC will discontinue any further split  
sampling activities.  
40A6 Meetings, including Exit
.1  
Exit Meeting Summary  
The inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. D. Mayer and other licensee and  
New York State representatives on August 19, 2009 and September 4, 2009. The  
licensee acknowledged the findings presented. Based upon discussions with the  
licensee, none of the information presented at the exit meeting and included in this report  
was considered proprietary.  
Enclosure  
 
Licensee Personnel  
Licensee Personnel  
J. Pollock M. BaNenik P. Conroy D. Croulet P. Donahue C. English G. Hinrichs D. Loope T. Jones R. LaVera D. Mayer J. Michetti J. Peters D. Rusczyk S. Sandike J. Simpson R. Walpole A-1 ATTACHMENT  
J. Pollock  
SUPPLEMENTAL  
M. BaNenik  
INFORMATION  
P. Conroy  
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT Site Vice President  
D. Croulet  
Principal  
P. Donahue  
Engineer, GZA Geo EnVironmental, Inc. Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance  
C. English  
Licensing  
G. Hinrichs  
Engineer Chemistry  
D. Loope  
Specialist  
T. Jones  
Unit 1 Project Engineer Project Engineer Radiation  
R. LaVera  
Protection  
D. Mayer  
Superintendent  
J. Michetti  
Licensing  
J. Peters  
Engineer Radiological
D. Rusczyk  
Engineer Director, Special Projects RMS System Engineer Plant Chemist Environmental  
S. Sandike  
Assessment, GZA Chemistry  
J. Simpson  
ODCM Specialist  
R. Walpole  
Environmental  
A-1  
Assessment, GZA Manager, Licensing  
ATTACHMENT  
New York State Inspection  
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION  
ObseNers L. Rosenmann  
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT  
Engineering  
Site Vice President  
Geologist, New York State, Department  
Principal Engineer, GZA Geo EnVironmental, Inc.  
of Environmental  
Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance  
Licensing Engineer
Chemistry Specialist  
Unit 1 Project Engineer  
Project Engineer  
Radiation Protection Superintendent  
Licensing Engineer
Radiological Engineer  
Director, Special Projects  
RMS System Engineer  
Plant Chemist  
Environmental Assessment, GZA  
Chemistry ODCM Specialist  
Environmental Assessment, GZA  
Manager, Licensing  
New York State Inspection ObseNers
L. Rosenmann  
Engineering Geologist, New York State, Department of Environmental  
ConseNations  
ConseNations  
INSPECTION  
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED
PROCEDURES  
71122.01  
USED 71122.01 Radioactive  
Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems
Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment  
LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
and Monitoring  
Annual Radiological Effluent Release Reports - 2007 and 2008  
Systems LIST OF DOCUMENTS  
Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 2  
REVIEWED Annual Radiological  
O-CY-2730, Rev. 1, Airbome Radioactive Effluents  
Effluent Release Reports -2007 and 2008 Off-Site Dose Calculation  
O-CY-2740, Rev. 1, Liquid Radioactive Effluents  
Manual, Revision 2 O-CY-2730, Rev. 1, Airbome Radioactive  
IP-SMM-CY-001, Rev. 7, Radioactive Effluents Control Program  
Effluents  
IP-SMM-CY-110, Rev. 3, Radiological Groundwater Monitoring Program
O-CY-2740, Rev. 1, Liquid Radioactive  
2-CY-2625, Rev. 14, General Plant Systems Specifications and Frequencies  
Effluents  
3-CY-2325, Rev. 8, Radioactive Sampling Schedule  
IP-SMM-CY-001, Rev. 7, Radioactive  
2-S0P-5.2.4, Rev. 33, Calculation and Recording of Radioactive Gaseous Releases  
Effluents  
2-S0P-5.1.5, Rev. 34, Calculation and Recording of Radioactive Liquid Releases  
Control Program IP-SMM-CY-110, Rev. 3, Radiological  
3-S0P-WDS-014, Rev. 25, Liquid Waste Releases  
Groundwater  
Attachment  
Monitoring  
 
Program 2-CY-2625, Rev. 14, General Plant Systems Specifications  
A-2  
and Frequencies  
3-S0P-WDS-013, Rev. 25, Gaseous Waste Releases  
3-CY-2325, Rev. 8, Radioactive  
EN-RP-113, Response to Contaminated Spills/Leaks  
Sampling Schedule 2-S0P-5.2.4, Rev. 33, Calculation  
EN-CY-109, Sampling and Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Wells
and Recording  
EN-CY-108, Monitoring of Non-Radioactive Systems
of Radioactive  
"Industry Groundwater Protection Initiative  
Gaseous Releases 2-S0P-5.1.5, Rev. 34, Calculation  
- Final Guidance Document, August 2007" (ML072600292 and ML072610036)  
and Recording  
Unit 2 Liquid Release Permit No. 090016  
of Radioactive  
Unit 2 Gaseous Release Permit No. 090126  
Liquid Releases 3-S0P-WDS-014, Rev. 25, Liquid Waste Releases Attachment
Unit 3 Liquid Release Permit No. 090081  
A-2 3-S0P-WDS-013 , Rev. 25 , Gaseous Waste Releases EN-RP-113 , Response to Contaminated  
Unit 3 Gaseous Release Permit No. 090067  
Spills/Leaks  
Condition Reports:  
EN-CY-109, Sampling and Analysis of Groundwater  
CR-IP3-2007 -0803  
Monitoring  
CR-IP2-2009-2089  
Wells EN-CY-108, Monitoring  
CR-IP3-2009-3356  
of Non-Radioactive  
Systems " Industry Groundwater  
Protection  
Initiative  
-Final Guidance Document , August 2007" (ML072600292  
and ML072610036)  
Unit 2 Liquid Release Permit No. 090016 Unit 2 Gaseous Release Permit No. 090126 Unit 3 Liquid Release Permit No. 090081 Unit 3 Gaseous Release Permit No. 090067 Condition  
Reports: CR-IP3-2007 -0803 CR-IP2-2009
-2089 CR-IP3-2009-3356  
CR-IP2-2009-2528  
CR-IP2-2009-2528  
CR-IP2-2009-3307  
CR-IP2-2009-3307  
Line 1,320: Line 792:
CR-IP2-2009-2266  
CR-IP2-2009-2266  
CR-IP2-200S-1236  
CR-IP2-200S-1236  
CR-IP3-2007 -3860 CR-IP3-200S-1112  
CR-IP3-2007 -3860  
CR*IP3*200S*2915  
CR-IP3-200S-1112  
CR* IP3*200S*2915  
CR*IP3*200S*1042  
CR*IP3*200S*1042  
CR*IP2*200S*2767  
CR*IP2*200S*2767  
CR*IP2*200S*4136 CR*IP3*200S*2184  
CR*IP2*200S*4136  
CR*IP3*200S*2184  
CR*IP2*200S*3662  
CR*IP2*200S*3662  
CR*IP3*200S*2125  
CR*IP3*200S*2125  
CR*IP2 c 200S*4130  
CR*IP2c200S*4130  
CR*IP2*200S*4529  
CR*IP2*200S*4529  
CR*IP2-200S-4191  
CR*IP2-200S-4191  
CR-IP2-200S-456S  
CR-IP2-200S-456S  
CR-IP3-2007-0151  
CR-IP3-2007-0151  
CR-IP3-2007  
CR-IP3-2007 -2S99  
-2S99 CR-IP3-2007  
CR-IP3-2007 -2134  
-2134 CR-IP3-2007  
CR-IP3-2007 -3129  
-3129 CR-IP2-2008-4981  
CR-IP2-2008-4981  
 
CR-IP2-2008-5552  
CR-IP2-2008-5552  
CR-IP2-2009-0609  
CR-IP2-2009-0609  
Line 1,359: Line 831:
CR-IP2-2008-2581  
CR-IP2-2008-2581  
CR-IP3-2008-1218  
CR-IP3-2008-1218  
CR-IP3-2008-200  
CR-IP3-2008-200 1
1 CR-IP2-2008-3342  
CR-IP2-2008-3342  
CR-IP3-200S-1S99  
CR-IP3-200S-1S99  
CR-IP2-200S-4193  
CR-IP2-200S-4193  
Line 1,369: Line 841:
CR-IP3-2007-3367  
CR-IP3-2007-3367  
CR-IP3-2007-3061  
CR-IP3-2007-3061  
CR-IP3-2007  
CR-IP3-2007 -3075  
-3075 CR-IP2-2008-4S48  
CR-IP2-2008-4S48  
CR-IP2-200S-5055  
CR-IP2-200S-5055  
CR-IP3-2009-003S  
CR-IP3-2009-003S  
Line 1,377: Line 849:
CR-IP2-2009-1295  
CR-IP2-2009-1295  
CR-IP2-2009-2090  
CR-IP2-2009-2090  
CR-IP2-2009-2603  
CR-IP2-2009-2603  
CR-IP3-2009-320S  
CR-IP3-2009-320S  
CR-IP3-2007  
CR-IP3-2007 -3953  
-3953 CR-IP3-2007  
CR-IP3-2007 -41S3  
-41S3 CR-IP2-2007-5217  
CR-IP2-2007-5217  
CR-IP2-2008-1149  
CR-IP2-2008-1149  
CR-IP2-2008-0404  
CR-IP2-2008-0404  
Line 1,390: Line 861:
CR-IP2-2008-3154  
CR-IP2-2008-3154  
CR-IP3-2008-0194  
CR-IP3-2008-0194  
CR-IP2-2008-3526 CR-IP2-2008-2691  
CR-IP2-2008-3526  
CR-IP2-2008-2691  
CR-IP3-2009-00S0  
CR-IP3-2009-00S0  
CR-IP2-2008-2955  
CR-IP2-2008-2955  
Line 1,399: Line 871:
CR-IP3-2008-2296  
CR-IP3-2008-2296  
CR-IP3-2008-2294  
CR-IP3-2008-2294  
 
CR-IP3-2007-0005  
CR-IP3-2007
CR-I P3-2007 -27 48  
-0005 CR-I P3-2007 -27 48 CR-IP3-2007-2S70  
CR-IP3-2007-2S70  
CR-IP2-2008-1132  
CR-IP2-2008-1132  
CR-IP3-200S-2S62  
CR-IP3-200S-2S62  
CR-IP2-2009-0477  
CR-IP2-2009-0477  
CR-IP2-2009-01S4
CR-IP3-2009-0494
CR-IP3-2009-0591
Attachment


CR-IP2-2009
A-3  
-01S4 CR-IP3-2009-0494
NRC Groundwater Sample Result Documentation ICY 2009. 1st Quarter)  
 
ML090400502. ML090920949. ML090920932  
CR-IP3-2009-0591
FSAR  
Attachment 
GPM  
A-3 NRC Groundwater  
LTGWMP  
Sample Result Documentation  
NYS DEC  
ICY 2009. 1 s t Quarter) ML090400502.  
ODCM  
ML090920949.  
pCi/L  
ML090920932  
PI&R  
FSAR GPM LTGWMP NYS DEC ODCM pCi/L PI&R Rap LIST OF ACRONYMS USED Final Safety Analysis Report gallons per minute Long Term Ground-Water  
Rap  
Monitoring  
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED  
Program State of New York Department  
Final Safety Analysis Report  
of Environmental  
gallons per minute  
Conservation Offsite Dose  
Long Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program
Calculation  
State of New York Department of Environmental Conservation
Manual pico-Curies  
Offsite Dose Calculation Manual
per Liter Problem Identification  
pico-Curies per Liter  
and Resolution  
Problem Identification and Resolution  
Reactor Oversight  
Reactor Oversight Process
Process Attachment
Attachment
}}
}}

Latest revision as of 03:04, 12 January 2025

Entergy Prefiled Hearing Exhibit ENT000343 - Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2 & 3 - NRC Inspection Reports Nos. 05000003/2009008; 05000247/2009008 and 05000286/2009008
ML12089A605
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 10/19/2009
From: Darrell Roberts
Division of Reactor Safety I
To: Joseph E Pollock
Entergy Nuclear Operations, Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
SECY RAS
Shared Package
ML12089A599 List:
References
RAS 22132, ASLBP 07-858-03-LR-BD01, 50-247-LR, 50-286-LR IR-09-008
Download: ML12089A605 (17)


See also: IR 05000003/2009008

Text

ENT000343

Submitted: March 29, 2012

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Mr. Joseph Pollock

Site Vice President

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Indian Point Energy Center

450 Broadway, GSB

P.O. Box 249

Buchanan, NY 10511-0249

475 ALLENDALE ROAD

KING OF PRUSSIA, PA 19406-1415

October 19, 2009

SUBJECT:

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNITS 1, 2 & 3 - NRC INSPECTION

REPORT NOS. 05000003/2009008; 05000247/2009008; AND

05000286/2009008

Dear Mr. Pollock:

On September 4, 2009, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed an

inspection at Indian Point Nuclear Generating Units 1, 2, & 3. The enclosed report documents

the inspection results, which were discussed on August 19 and September 4, 2009, with Mr. Don

Mayer and other members of your staff.

The purpose of this inspection was to assess the establishment, implementation, and

maintenance of your Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Program; review the circumstances

surrounding a previously identified occurrence involving the detection of tritated water in a Unit 3

storm drain system; review the performance of the site's Radiation Monitoring System; and

inspect and assess your performance relative to radiological effluents monitoring and control.

The inspection involved an examination of activities conducted under Entergy's license as

related to safety and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the

conditions of your license. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selected

examination of procedures and representative records, observations of activities, interviews with

personnel, and independent assessment activities.

Based on the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified. Further, the

inspectors determined that Entergy's Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring Program for the .lndian

Point Energy Center was effectively implemented and maintained in a manner that provided

continued radiological monitoring of the groundwater conditions to confirm conformance with

NRC regulatory requirements relative to the maintenance of public health and safety, and

protection of the environment.

Since 2005, as approved by NRC's Executive Director of Operations, Region I conducted

frequent and focused reviews of your groundwater investigation activities and long-term

monitoring program that exceeded the scope of NRC's normal baseline inspection program. As

a result, we have developed confidence in your commitment and ability to continue effective

monitoring and assessment of the on-site conditions to assure the maintenance of

J. Pollock

2

public health and safety, protection of the environment, and conformance with NRC regulatory

requirements. Our inspectors confirmed that the objectives specified in our deviation

memorandum dated December 16,2008 (ML083590057) have been satisfied. However, we will

continue to monitor your performance in this area, and will re-assess the need for continued

heightened inspection oversight during our end-of-cycle review of your CY 2009 perfonmance.

In accordance with 10 CFR2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its

enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room

or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's document system

(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-

rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

J);W~

Darrell J. Roberts, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

Docket Nos: 50-003, 50-247, 50-286

License Nos: DPR-5, DPR-26, DPR-64

Enclosure:

Inspection Report Nos. 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008,

05000286/2009008

w/Attachment: Supplemental Information

cc w/encj: Distribution via ListServ

J. Pollock

2

public health and safety, protection of the environment, and conformance with NRC regulatory

requirements. Our inspectors confirmed that the objectives specified in our deviation

memorandum dated December 16, 2008 (ML083590057) have been satisfied. However, we will

continue to monitor your performance in this area, and will re-assess the need for continued

heightened inspection oversight during our end-of-cycle review of your CY 2009 performance.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its

enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in. the NRC Public Document Room

or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of the NRC's document system

(ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at hllp:llwww.nrc.gov/reading-

rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Sincerely,

IRA by Peter R. Wilson forI

Darrell J. Roberts, Director

Division of Reactor Safety

Docket Nos: 50-003, 50-247, 50-286

License Nos: DPR-5, DPR-26, DPR-64

Enclosure:

Inspection Report Nos. 05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008,

05000286/2009008

w/Allachment: Supplemental Information

cc w/encl: Distribution via ListServ

Distribution w/encl: (via E-mail)

S. Collins, RA (R10RAMAIL RESOURCE)

M. Dapas, DRA (R10RAMAIL

RESOURCE)

D. Lew, DRP (R1 DRPMAIL RESOURCE)

J. Clifford, DRP (R1DRPMAIL

RESOURCE)

L. Trocine, Ri OEDO

RIDSNRRPMINDIANPOINTRESOURCE

B. Welling, DRP

B. Bickell, DRP

S. McCarver, DRP

G. Malone, DRP, Senior Resident Inspector

- Indian Point 2

D. Hochmuth, DRP

D. Bearde, DRP

Region I Docket Room (w/concurrences)

ROPreport Resource

D. Roberts, DRS

P. Wilson, DRS

J. White, DRS

SUNSI Review Complete:

JRW

(Reviewer's Inrtials)

OOCUMENT NAME: G:IORSIPlant Support Branch 2INoggleIIP2009008Rev1 .doc

After declaring this document ~An Official Agency Record w it will be released to the Public.

To receive a copy of this document, Indicate in the box: "e" = COpy without attachment/enclosure "E" = COpy with attachment/enclosure "N" = No CQP"y

OFFICE

RIIDRS

I

RES

I

RIIDRS

I

RIIDRP

I

RIIDRS

I

NAME

JNoggle/JDN

TNicholsonltjn

JWhite/jrw' ehg

BWeliinglBW

DRoberts/prw for

(telecon)

for'

DATE

10/06/09

10/14/09

10/19/09

10/16/09

10/16/09

  • see pnor concurrence

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

Docket Nos.

License Nos.

Report Nos.

Licensee:

Facility:

Location:

Dates: .

Inspectors:

Approved by:

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I 50-003, 50-247, 50-286

DPR-3, DPR-26, DPR-64

05000003/2009008, 05000247/2009008, and 05000286/2009008

Entergy Nuclear Northeast

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2, & 3

295 Broadway

Buchanan, NY 10511-0308

Augusr18, 2009 - September 4, 2009

J. Noggle, Sr. Health Physicist, CHP, team leader

T. Nicholson, Sr. Technical Advisor for Radionuclide Transport

J. Williams, U.S. Geological Survey, Troy, New York

John R. White, Chief

Plant Support Branch 2

Division of Reactor Safety

Enclosure

SUMMARY OF FINDINGS

IR 05000003/2009008, IR 05000247/2009008, IR 05000286/2009008; 08/18/2009 - 9/04/2009;

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Station Units 1, 2 & 3; Other Activities - associated with ROP

deviation memorandum, one PI&R sample, and radioactive effluents baseline inspection.

No findings of significance were identified. The report covers the period from August 18 through

September 4, 2009, and discusses inspection activities conducted by a region-based inspector,

and an inspection team comprised of representatives of Region I, NRC's Office of Research,

and the U. S. Geological Survey. The inspection provided bases for the NRC to determine that

Entergy had completed actions necessary to satisfy the objectives delineated in our deviation

memorandum, "Request for Renewal of Deviation to the Action Matrix to Provide Heightened

NRC Oversight of the Onsite Groundwater Monitoring at the Indian Point Energy Center,"

(ML083590057), dated December 16,2008. The NRC's program for overseeing the safe

operation of commercial nuclear power reactors is described in NUREG-1649, "Reactor

Oversight Process," Revision 4, dated December 2006.

ii

Enclosure

Report Details

2.

RADIATION SAFETY

Cornerstone: Public Radiation Safety (PS)

2PS1 Gaseous and Liguid Effluents (71122.01 - 3 samples)

a.

Inspection Scope

1) The inspector reviewed the following documents to evaluate the effectiveness of the

licensee's radioactive gaseous and liquid effluent control programs relative to the

applicable regulatory requirements specified in the Technical Specifications and the

Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (TS/ODCM).

The 2007 and 2008 Radiological Annual Effluent Release Reports were

reviewed including independently assessing selected public dose calculations.

There were no anomalous results reported in these two reports. The report

included discussion of current groundwater conditions and the result of required

monitoring activities; and instances involving out-of-service radiation monitors or

effluent release flow rate monitors were listed in the reports and these were

evaluated during this inspection.

The current ODCM was reviewed, including technical justifications for any

changes made since the previous revision.

Applicable sections of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) were

reviewed to verify the adequacy of system descriptions for gaseous radioactive

waste and station ventilation systems.

The latest quality assurance audits of radioactive effluents and chemistry were

reviewed, including Entergy's program for identifying, controlling and assessing

potential contaminated spills and leakage.

There were no measurable effluent releases to the environment based on off-site

dose calculations, and there were no reported off-site environmental sample

measurements identifying plant-related radioactive materials during the 2007 and

2008 report period.

2) The inspector observed the following plant equipment and work activities to evaluate the

effectiveness of the licensee's radioactive gaseous and liquid effluent control programs.

Walkdowns were performed of accessible gaseous and liquid release system

components to review any recent changes or modifications; and to confirm the

alignment, operation and material condition of the radioactive liquid and

gaseous effluent radiation monitoring systems (RMS) at Units 1, 2 and 3.

Observations were conducted of radioactive effluent related sampling and

associated laboratory measurement techniques.

Procedural controls and selected radioactive gaseous and liquid effluent release

permits were reviewed to verify that radiation monitor alarm setpoint values and

releases were in agreement with Technical Specification and ODCM

requirements.

Enclosure

2

Chemistry logs, relative to out-of-service radiation monitoring conditions, were

reviewed to confirm the performance of compensatory sampling activities.

Surveillance tests of gaseous filtration discharge systems were reviewed to

confirm operability and ventilation flow rates with respect to the assumed flow

rates used in gaseous effluent release calculations.

Entergy's surveillance program of non-radioactive system interfaces with

radioactive process systems was reviewed to confirm effective monitoring and

control of potential effluent discharge paths to the environment.

Radiation monitoring system and chemistry laboratory counting instrument

calibration and quality control records were reviewed with respect to ODCM

surveillance requirements to confirm the licensee's ability identify and report

detectable radionuclides in radioactive measurement results.

3) Radioactive effluent control related corrective action program activities for 2007 through

August 2009 were reviewed, including the results of audits and the resolution of issues

identified through the condition report system. A comprehensive review was conducted

of conditions and occurrences involving out-of-service radiation monitoring system

components. Section 40A2 pertains.

b.

Findings and Observations

No findings of significance were identified. The following table summarizes the dose

consequence of radiological effluent release in the period between 2007 and 2008.

Table of Effluent Release calculated dose and public dose limits for 2007 and 2008

Dose in

Air Dose

%of

Air Dose

%of

liquid

'10 of

Liquid

%of

mrem/yr

Whole

limit

Max Organ

Limit

Dose

limit

Dose

limit

Body

WB

MaxO

2007

Units 1&2

2.43E-3

0.016

2.43E-3

0.016

5.35E-4

0.018

1.3E-3

0.013

2008

Units 1&2

2.07E-3

0.014

2.67E-3

0.018

6.11E-4

0.020

1.47E-3

0.Q15

2007

Unit 3

3.BBE-3

0.026

3.BBE-3

0.026

3.2E-4

0.007

2.14E-4

0.002

2008

Unit 3

1.99E-3

0.013

1.99E-3

0.013

1.56E-4

0.005

2.B3E-4

0.003

2007

Groundwater

2.66E-4

0.009

9.94E-4

0.01

2008

Groundwater

2.86E-4

0.009

9.35E-4

0.009

4.

OTHER ACTIVITIES (OA)

40A2 Identification and Resolution of Problems

Cornerstone: Public Radiation Safety

.1

Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems

a.

Inspection Scope (71122.01)

The inspector reviewed approximately one hundred corrective action condition reports,

initiated between january 2007 and August 2009, that were associated with the gaseous,

liquid, and groundwater radioactive effluents program. The review was performed to

Enclosure

3

verify that problems identified by these condition reports were properly characterized in

the licensee's event reporting system, causes were identified, and actions implemented

commensurate the safety significance of the matters.

b.

Findings and Observations

No findings of significance were identified .

. 2

Radioactive Effluent Radiation Monitor System (RMS) Maintenance (71152 - 1 sample)

a.

Inspection Scope

The inspectors conducted a review corrective action program condition reports

associated with out-of-service radiation monitoring system equipment that was identified

in the period between January 2007 and August 2009. Licensee personnel having

cognizance of Radiation Monitoring System (RMS) performance and activities were

interviewed, including the RMS system engineer and senior chemistry staff. "Radiation

Monitoring System, Second Quarter 2009, Condition Report Trend Review for Radiation .

Monitoring System Improvement: dated September 2, 2009, was also reviewed.

b.

Findings and Observations

No findings of Significance were identified.

A large number of condition reports associated with the radiation monitoring system were

initiated during the past two years. Most of the condition reports were associated with

interruption of service of the RMS display consoles in both the Unit 2 and Unit 3 control

rooms. While these temporary display outages affected operators' ability to poll

individual detector readout displays, they did not interfere with control room annunciator

actuation or actual detector operability.

The cause of the Unit 3 display console issues was determined to be related to

excessive temperature in the RMS electronics cabinets that affected certain control room

RMS display console components. Short-term corrective actions included installing

permanent air conditioning to effect improved cooling of the RMS electronics cabinets.

The cause of Unit 2 RMS display console service interruptions continues to be under

review. Notwithstanding, Entergy is evaluating replacing the RMS display console

equipment in both control rooms to support station-wide computer network access

improvements.

Less frequently occurring RMS equipment issues remain to be resolved, including

occurrences involving the R-56 detectors, which monitor the discharge of waste sewage

from Units 2 and 3. The location of these detectors was determined to be susceptible to

failure due to flooding, power spiking, and power outages. In such conditions, waste

sewage is diverted to an on-site holding tank in order to conduct sampling prior to off-site

release. Accordingly, there is no safety significance to these RMS system failures. The

inspector confirmed that the licensee has implemented appropriate remedial actions for

these occurrences, and has initiated actions to improve the operating environment and

detector function to reduce the out-of-service time.

Enclosure

4

Entergy has identified the Unit 2 RMS as an upgrade project in its Top Ten Action Plan

for 2009. System engineering activities have been initiated for this improvement activity.

The inspector determined that the majority of identified problems with the Unit 2 and Unit

3 radiation monitoring systems were not associated with radiation detector operability or

effluent release control functions. For those instances that resulted in out-of-service

conditions, the licensee implemented appropriate compensatory measures as required

by regulatory requirements. The inspector confirmed that Entergy is engaged in RMS

. improvement activities, and has initiated appropriate corrective actions.

40A5 Other Activities

.1

Assessment of Licensee Performance Relative to Meeting the Objectives of the

December 16.2008 Memorandum Reguesting Deviation from the Action Matrix

Background:

On September 1, 2005, the NRC was informed by Entergy that cracks in a Unit 2 spent

fuel pool wall had been discovered during excavation work inside the spent fuel pool

building. Low levels of radioactive contamination were found in the vicinity. Entergy's

initial investigation of the issue revealed that groundwater in the vicinity was

contaminated with tritium. On September 20, 2005, Region I initiated a special inspection

of this matter to examine the licensee's performance and determine if the contaminated

groundwater affected, or could affect, public health and safety. Subsequently, Entergy

initiated actions to perform a comprehensive groundwater site characterization, identify

the sources, and effect mitigation and remediation of the condition.

The NRC special inspection report, issued in March 2006, assessed Entergy's

performance, achievements, and plans for more extensive site characterization, and

reported that the groundwater contamination did not, nor was likely to, adversely affect

public health and safety. In the report, and subsequent public meetings, NRC indicated

that a final conclusion would be reached after Entergy completed its groundwater

characterization initiative.

The NRC Region I continued inspection and monitoring of Entergy's activities in

accordance with successive approved deviation to the normal Reactor Oversight

Process for calendar years 2006 (ML053010404), 2007 (ML063480016), 2008

(ML073480290) and 2009 (ML083590057). During this period, the NRC staff closely

monitored Entergy's groundwater characterization efforts, performed independent

inspections and testing, and independently evaluated radiological and hydrological

conditions affecting groundwater onsite. Additionally, the NRC independently verified

groundwater releases by conducting split monitoring well sampling with Entergy and the

State of New York.

On January 11, 2008, Entergy submitted the results of its comprehensive hydrogeologic

site characterization investigation (ML080320600), and included its plan for remediation

and long-term monitoring of the on-site groundwater conditions. In its report, Entergy

described the source of groundwater contamination to be from the Unit 1 and Unit 2

spent fuel pools. The NRC documented its review of Entergy's report in inspection report

05000247 & 05000003/2007010 on May 13, 2008 (ML081340425). In a subsequent

inspection 05000247/2008004 (ML08311 0566) dated November 6,2008, the NRC

Enclosure

5

confirmed that Entergy's conceptual site model of the site, which included both the

vadose zone and saturated zone processes and conditions, effectively characterized the

onsite groundwater plume behavior and radionuclide transport. Evaluation of

radionuclide concentrations and pathway analyses indicated that the groundwater

contamination did not adversely affect public health and safety. Detailed discussions

and analyses indicated that the licensee's plans for long-term monitoring of the site,

relative to monitoring natural attenuation of residual groundwater contamination, were

reasonable.

On November 3, 2008, Entergy completed Unit 1 spent fuel pool system drainage and

sludge removal activities, essentially terminating the source from that facility. Given the

change in conditions, Entergy initiated actions to establish a new groundwater

contaminant baseline in support of its long-term monitoring program.

a.

Inspection Scope

The most recently approved Memorandum of Deviation, i.e., "Request for Renewal of

Deviation to the Action Matrix to Provide Heightened NRC Oversight of the Onsite

Groundwater Monitoring at the Indian Point Energy Center," dated December 16, 2008

(ML083590057), identified the following objectives to be addressed in order to support

resumption of normal inspection activities in accordance with the Reactor Oversight

Process:

Entergy has completed sufficient data collection and assessment to establish a

new groundwater contaminant baseline, now that the Unit 1 source term has

been terminated.

Entergy has determined whether active leakage has been terminated or

continues to persist in regard to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool; and has implemented

appropriate monitoring and control measures, as necessary.

Entergy has established and implemented effluent control and environmental

monitoring procedures that provide reasonable assurance that the existing

groundwater conditions will continue to be effectively monitored and assessed,

that the procedures will detect new or changed conditions in a timely manner, and

that the procedures are sufficient to monitor natural attenuation of the Unit 1 and

Unit 2 groundwater contamination plumes.

The NRC team reviewed the licensee's performance and achievements relative to the

completion of these objectives.

b.

Findings and Observations

No findings of significance were identified.

The inspectors determined that Entergy completed the actions necessary to satisfy the

objectives delineated in the approved Memorandum of Deviation, dated December 16,

2008, (ML083590057). Notwithstanding, NRC will continue to monitor performance in

this area, and re-assess the need for continued heightened inspection oversight as part

of the CY 2009 end-of-cycle performance review of IPEC.

Enclosure

6

The following pertains:

Objective 1: Completion of sufficient data collection and assessment to establish

a new groundwater contaminant baseline, now that the Unit 1 source term has

been terminated.

As a result of the defueling, drainage, and de-sludging of the Unit 1 spent fuel pool

system in the Fall of 2008, the groundwater contamination source term from the Unit 1

facility was terminated. The inspectors confirmed that Entergy's subsequent data

collection and assessment activities, associated with the continual monitoring of the

residual groundwater contamination, would be sufficient and effective to establish a new

baseline relative to monitoring the residual groundwater condition and subsequent

assessment of dose consequence.

As expected, the first and second-quarter ground-water sample results in 2009, collected

from Monitoring Wells in the immediate vicinity of the Unit 1 spent fuel pool, indicated an

increase in Sr-90 groundwater concentrations. As determined from review of the

licensee's data and analysis, this increased concentration was the expected result of the

volume of water that was necessary to fill the spent fuel pool system to effect defueling.

Accordingly, Entergy's baseline data was predicated on the existing groundwater

conditions determined from its continuing analysis of collected monitoring data. Given

that the original source of the contamination associated with leakage from the Unit 1.

spent fuel pool system has been terminated, the residual groundwater contamination

involving Sr-90 is expected to naturally attenuate over time. The inspectors confirmed

that the current groundwater contaminant concentrations have not, nor are expected to,

affect public health and safety; and the public radiological dose consequence is

expected to continue to be a fraction of the NRC annual regulatory limit affecting liquid

effluents. The inspectors confirmed that continual monitoring of the migration and

attenuation of the Unit 1 associated groundwater contamination condition is being

performed in accordance with Entergy's Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program

(LTGWMP).

The inspectors confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented and maintains a

long-term ground-water monitoring program that has sufficient in scope and

implementation requirements to effectively monitor and assess this condition.

Accordingly, the intent of this objective was considered satisfied.

Objective 2: Determination whether active leakage has been terminated or

continues to persist in regard to the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, and that appropriate

monitoring and control measures have been implemented, as necessary.

Entergy has been actively engaged in analyzing Monitoring Well data associated with the

H-3 (tritium) groundwater contamination condition that resulted from previously identified

leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool: Entergy's analysis indicated an overall .

decreaSing trend in tritium concentration in the groundwater as a result of previous

efforts to examine the condition of the spent fuel pool and transfer canal liner, and effect

repair, as necessary. Notwithstanding, as previously reported, Entergy's examination of

the spent fuel pool liner was necessarily limited to only the accessible surfaces. That is,

only about 40 % of the total liner surfaces were accessible for examination; the

remaining surfaces were necessarily inaccessible due to the proximity of stored spent

fuel that prevented examination.

Enclosure

7

The inspectors reviewed the licensee's analysis derived from groundwater monitoring

data, and confirmed that there was no apparent indication of any significant large flux on-

going active leakage. The inspectors also reviewed the licensee's monitoring well

detection sensitivity data, which supports that active leakage, if occurring, would likely

not exceed 30 gallons per day (0.02 gpm). This sensitivity analysis was based on

comparison of the tritium concentration that is available in the spent fuel pool and the

actual tritium concentration derived from samples collected from relevant monitoring

wells in the near vicinity of the spent fuel pool. Additionally, the inspectors reviewed

licensee analysis and data from a long-term tracer test that indicated the potential for

slow, episodic tritium migration in the fractures of the vadose zone that affect the mobility

of contaminated groundwater from the immediate vicinity of the Unit 2 spent fuel pool to

the water table. The licensee's analysis is supported by the fact that fluorescine dye,

which was injected as part of the groundwater characterization study over two years ago,

is still detectable in certain nearby monitoring wells.

The inspectors noted that there were occasional spikes and general variability in some

monitoring well tritium concentration values that were not characteristic of the expected

attenuation that would normally be expected at this time. Additionally, the licensee

continued to occasionally collect a small quantity of water from the leak collection box

that was installed on the Unit 2 spent fuel pool wall crack that was identified in 2005.

Accordingly, while there was no indication of any significant large flux active leakage,

there was insufficient basis to conclude that there is absolutely no persistent low flux

leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, at this time.

Notwithstanding, the inspectors determined that the licensee's sensitivity analysis of

groundwater monitoring data, relative to its ability to detect active leakage in excess of

about 30 gallons per day, was reasonably derived. Additionally, the inspectors

confirmed that the current groundwater conditions, even if there was persistent low flux

leakage from the Unit 2 spent fuel pool, has not, nor would be expected to, affect public

health and safety; and the public radiological dose consequence would be expected to

continue to be a fraction of the NRC annual regulatory limit affecting liquid effluents. The

inspectors confirmed that continual monitoring of the migration and attenuation of the

Unit 2 associated groundwater contamination condition was being performed in

accordance with Entergy's Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program; and that the

program implemented appropriate monitoring and control measures for this condition.

The inspectors confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented and maintained a

long-term ground-water monitoring program that has sufficient scope and

implementation requirements to effectively monitor and assess the present condition.

Further, the licensee is considering monitOring in the vadose zone, in the vicinity of the

Unit 2 facility, to assist in the detection of large flux releases. Accordingly, the intent of

this objective was considered satisfied.

Objective 3: Establishment and implementation of effluent control and

environmental monitoring procedures that provide reasonable assurance that the

existing groundwater conditions will continue to be effectively monitored and

assessed, that the procedures will detect new or changed conditions in a timely

manner, and that the procedures are sufficient to monitor natural attenuation of

the Unit 1 and Unit2 groundwater contamination plumes.

Enclosure

8

The NRC has conducted several inspections (August 2007, October 2008, and August

2009) of the licensee's Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program. The inspectors

confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented and maintained a Long-Term

Ground-Water Monitoring Program that was sufficient in scope and implementation

requirements to effectively monitor and assess the existing contaminated groundwater

conditions affecting the Indian Point Energy Center.

During this inspection, the inspectors examined the refurbishment of the LaFarge No.2

Monitoring Well (one of the principal off-site monitoring wells) and confirmed its

acceptability as a valid off-site monitoring location. Additionally, the inspectors verified

that the administrative controls, established in the Long-Term Groundwater Monitoring

Program, were sufficient t9 provide assurance of review and appropriate communication

of activities and changes that affect ground-water monitoring conditions; and that the

program included sufficient sampling requirements for storm drains and the Unit 1

foundation drain systems.

During this inspection, the inspectors reviewed a March 25, 2009 instance involving the

licensee's detection of tritiated water in the catch basin of a storm drain in the vicinity of

Unit 3, and in an adjacent shallow monitoring well. The licensee conducted an extensive

investigation but was unable to find an explanation for this one-time occurrence. The

inspectors confirmed that the occurrence had no radiological consequence onsite or

offsite; and no leakage was identified from any Unit 3 component containing tritiated

water. However, the nature of the occurrence indicated uncertainty in the ability of the

existing Unit 3 monitoring wells to detect potential leakage from that facility. While there

was no current on-going leakage affecting the groundwater at Unit 3, Entergy initiated

action to re-evaluate the Unit 3 groundwater monitoring configuration (both vertically and

horizontally) to determine its effectiveness in meeting the objectives and

recommendations of the NEI "Industry Groundwater Protection Initiative- Final Guidance

Document, August 2007" (ML072600292 and ML07261 0036); and amend the Long-

Term Groundwater Monitoring Program, as necessary.

Notwithstanding, the inspectors confirmed that Entergy has established, implemented

and maintained a Long-Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program that has sufficient

scope and implementation requirements to effectively monitor and assess the existing *

groundwater conditions affecting Indian Point Energy Center. Accordingly, the intent of

this objective was considered satisfied .

. 2

Groundwater Sampling

a.

Inspection Scope

During the licensee's groundwater investigation, over 1200 groundwater samples were

collected and analyzed from the established on-site monitoring well network by the

second quarter of 2009. The analytical results provide the basis for assessing the extent

of the groundwater plume and for performing calculations of offsite doses to members of

the public. In order to assess Entergy's performance in this area, the NRC implemented

an independent split sample collection program with the licensee beginning in

September 2005. The monitoring wells selected for independent verification included

the southem boundary wells and those wells bordering the Hudson River that were used

Enclosure

9

in support of effluent release and dose assessment calculations. Sample identity was

assured by chain-of-custody procedures that included sample collection observation by

the NRC or a representative of the NYS DEC. The NRC samples were analyzed by an

independent govemment laboratory to ensure validation of the licensee's groundwater

contamination results and off-site environmental sample radioactive measurements.

By the second quarter of 2009, over 300 split groundwater samples were obtained to

provide an independent check of Entergy's analytical results and to independently verify

if there was any detectable migration of groundwater contaminants offsite. These split

samples represent over 1,200 analyses, primarily for hydrogen-3 (tritium), strontium-90,

nickel-63, and gamma-emitting radionuclides that characterized the effluent releases.

Analyses for other radionuclides were performed, but none were detected.

b.

Findings and Assessment

No findings of significance were identified.

In general, Entergy's groundwater measurements of radioactivity were of good quality

and of sufficient sensitivity to assess radiological impact. The quality of Entergy's

measurements were confirmed by various split samples analyzed by the NRC. Of the

over 1200 results that were reviewed, there were only a few sample disagreements

based on the statistical comparison criteria specified in NRC Inspection Procedure

84750, "Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring." As

a result of these few discrepancies, Entergy took corrective action to establish,

implement, and maintain procedures to effect improved quality control and assurance of

sample analysis performed by its own laboratory and contract analytical laboratories.

During the past 3)1" years, the on-site groundwater transport pathway has been

effectively characterized by the licensee, and a significant quantity of on-site groundwater

monitoring data has been collected and analyzed by Entergy. A representative numbers

of split samples have confirmed the overall efficacy of the licensee's analytical capability.

As the site characterization was tested through pumping and tracer testing, the

contaminant plume uncertainty has been significantly reduced. Given this

accomplishment, and the NRC determination that Entergy has demonstrated an effective

groundwater sample quality control program, the NRC will discontinue any further split

sampling activities.

40A6 Meetings, including Exit

.1

Exit Meeting Summary

The inspectors presented the inspection results to Mr. D. Mayer and other licensee and

New York State representatives on August 19, 2009 and September 4, 2009. The

licensee acknowledged the findings presented. Based upon discussions with the

licensee, none of the information presented at the exit meeting and included in this report

was considered proprietary.

Enclosure

Licensee Personnel

J. Pollock

M. BaNenik

P. Conroy

D. Croulet

P. Donahue

C. English

G. Hinrichs

D. Loope

T. Jones

R. LaVera

D. Mayer

J. Michetti

J. Peters

D. Rusczyk

S. Sandike

J. Simpson

R. Walpole

A-1

ATTACHMENT

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

KEY POINTS OF CONTACT

Site Vice President

Principal Engineer, GZA Geo EnVironmental, Inc.

Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance

Licensing Engineer

Chemistry Specialist

Unit 1 Project Engineer

Project Engineer

Radiation Protection Superintendent

Licensing Engineer

Radiological Engineer

Director, Special Projects

RMS System Engineer

Plant Chemist

Environmental Assessment, GZA

Chemistry ODCM Specialist

Environmental Assessment, GZA

Manager, Licensing

New York State Inspection ObseNers

L. Rosenmann

Engineering Geologist, New York State, Department of Environmental

ConseNations

INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED

71122.01

Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems

LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED

Annual Radiological Effluent Release Reports - 2007 and 2008

Off-Site Dose Calculation Manual, Revision 2

O-CY-2730, Rev. 1, Airbome Radioactive Effluents

O-CY-2740, Rev. 1, Liquid Radioactive Effluents

IP-SMM-CY-001, Rev. 7, Radioactive Effluents Control Program

IP-SMM-CY-110, Rev. 3, Radiological Groundwater Monitoring Program

2-CY-2625, Rev. 14, General Plant Systems Specifications and Frequencies

3-CY-2325, Rev. 8, Radioactive Sampling Schedule

2-S0P-5.2.4, Rev. 33, Calculation and Recording of Radioactive Gaseous Releases

2-S0P-5.1.5, Rev. 34, Calculation and Recording of Radioactive Liquid Releases

3-S0P-WDS-014, Rev. 25, Liquid Waste Releases

Attachment

A-2

3-S0P-WDS-013, Rev. 25, Gaseous Waste Releases

EN-RP-113, Response to Contaminated Spills/Leaks

EN-CY-109, Sampling and Analysis of Groundwater Monitoring Wells

EN-CY-108, Monitoring of Non-Radioactive Systems

"Industry Groundwater Protection Initiative

- Final Guidance Document, August 2007" (ML072600292 and ML072610036)

Unit 2 Liquid Release Permit No. 090016

Unit 2 Gaseous Release Permit No. 090126

Unit 3 Liquid Release Permit No. 090081

Unit 3 Gaseous Release Permit No. 090067

Condition Reports:

CR-IP3-2007 -0803

CR-IP2-2009-2089

CR-IP3-2009-3356

CR-IP2-2009-2528

CR-IP2-2009-3307

CR-IP3-2007-3954

CR-IP2-200S-0270

CR-IP2-200S-0375

CR-IP3-200S-071S

CR-IP2-200S-0377

CR-IP2-2009-2266

CR-IP2-200S-1236

CR-IP3-2007 -3860

CR-IP3-200S-1112

CR* IP3*200S*2915

CR*IP3*200S*1042

CR*IP2*200S*2767

CR*IP2*200S*4136

CR*IP3*200S*2184

CR*IP2*200S*3662

CR*IP3*200S*2125

CR*IP2c200S*4130

CR*IP2*200S*4529

CR*IP2-200S-4191

CR-IP2-200S-456S

CR-IP3-2007-0151

CR-IP3-2007 -2S99

CR-IP3-2007 -2134

CR-IP3-2007 -3129

CR-IP2-2008-4981

CR-IP2-2008-5552

CR-IP2-2009-0609

CR-IP2-2009-0565

CR-IP2-2009-223S

CR-IP2-2009-1334

CR-IP2-2009-2352

CR-IP3-2009-3201

CR-IP3-2009-3254

CR-IP2-2009-3306

CR-IP3-2007-3925

CR-IP2-2007-5226

CR-IP2-200S-0549

CR-IP2-200S-0960

CR-IP2-200S-0144

CR-IP3-200S-0569

CR-IP3-200S-0852

CR-IP3-2008-0942

CR-IP2-2008-2468

CR-IP3-2008-1215

CR-IP2-2008-2581

CR-IP3-2008-1218

CR-IP3-2008-200 1

CR-IP2-2008-3342

CR-IP3-200S-1S99

CR-IP2-200S-4193

CR-IP2-200S-4254

CR-IP2-200S-4337

CR-IP3-200S-2279

CR-IP3-2008-0624

CR-IP3-2007-3367

CR-IP3-2007-3061

CR-IP3-2007 -3075

CR-IP2-2008-4S48

CR-IP2-200S-5055

CR-IP3-2009-003S

CR-IP2-2009-1125

CR-IP2-2009-079S

CR-IP2-2009-1295

CR-IP2-2009-2090

CR-IP2-2009-2603

CR-IP3-2009-320S

CR-IP3-2007 -3953

CR-IP3-2007 -41S3

CR-IP2-2007-5217

CR-IP2-2008-1149

CR-IP2-2008-0404

CR-IP2-2008-0492

CR-IP3-2008-0S46

CR-IP2-2008-0179

CR-IP2-2008-3154

CR-IP3-2008-0194

CR-IP2-2008-3526

CR-IP2-2008-2691

CR-IP3-2009-00S0

CR-IP2-2008-2955

CR-IP2-2008-3492

CR-IP3-2008-1979

CR-IP2-2008-4108

CR-IP2-2008-4202

CR-IP3-2008-2296

CR-IP3-2008-2294

CR-IP3-2007-0005

CR-I P3-2007 -27 48

CR-IP3-2007-2S70

CR-IP2-2008-1132

CR-IP3-200S-2S62

CR-IP2-2009-0477

CR-IP2-2009-01S4

CR-IP3-2009-0494

CR-IP3-2009-0591

Attachment

A-3

NRC Groundwater Sample Result Documentation ICY 2009. 1st Quarter)

ML090400502. ML090920949. ML090920932

FSAR

GPM

LTGWMP

NYS DEC

ODCM

pCi/L

PI&R

Rap

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED

Final Safety Analysis Report

gallons per minute

Long Term Ground-Water Monitoring Program

State of New York Department of Environmental Conservation

Offsite Dose Calculation Manual

pico-Curies per Liter

Problem Identification and Resolution

Reactor Oversight Process

Attachment