IR 05000171/2010007: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Line 18: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Docket No. License No. Inspection No. Licensee:
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Facility:
Location:
Inspection Dates: Inspector:
Approved By: U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION I INSPECTION REPORT 05000171 DPR-12 05000171/2010007 Exelon Generation Company, LLC Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 1 1848 Lay Road Delta, Pennsylvania 17314-9032 August 9-12,2010 Laurie A. Kauffman Health Physicist Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Judith A. Joustra, Chief Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety EXECUTIVE


=SUMMARY=
==REGION I==
Exelon Generation  
INSPECTION REPORT Docket N License N DPR-12 Inspection N /2010007 Licensee:  Exelon Generation Company, LLC Facility:  Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 1 Location:  1848 Lay Road Delta, Pennsylvania 17314-9032 Inspection Dates: August 9-12,2010 Inspector: Laurie A. Kauffman Health Physicist Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Approved By: Judith A. Joustra, Chief Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety


Company, LLC Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Unit 1 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000171/2010007 A routine announced safety inspection was conducted on August 9-12, 2010, at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 1 by a Region I inspector.
=EXECUTIVE SUMMARY=
Exelon Generation Company, LLC


The scope of the inspection included an evaluation of the organization and management oversight; implementation of safety reviews, design changes and modifications programs; implementation of the self-assessment and corrective action programs; implementation of long-term safe storage (SAFSTOR)program; implementation of the maintenance and surveillance program; implementation of the occupational radiation exposure program; and implementation of the Effluent, Environmental Monitoring and Radioactive Waste and Transportation programs associated with Unit 1 while in SAFSTOR status. Within the scope of this inspection, no safety concerns or violations were identified.
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Unit 1 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000171/2010007 A routine announced safety inspection was conducted on August 9-12, 2010, at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 1 by a Region I inspector. The scope of the inspection included an evaluation of the organization and management oversight; implementation of safety reviews, design changes and modifications programs; implementation of the self-assessment and corrective action programs; implementation of long-term safe storage (SAFSTOR) program; implementation of the maintenance and surveillance program; implementation of the occupational radiation exposure program; and implementation of the Effluent, Environmental Monitoring and Radioactive Waste and Transportation programs associated with Unit 1 while in SAFSTOR status. Within the scope of this inspection, no safety concerns or violations were identified. A brief summary of each area inspected is described below.


A brief summary of each area inspected is described below. Organization and Management Oversight The licensee's organization and management oversight was adequate to support Unit 1 activities.
Organization and Management Oversight The licensee's organization and management oversight was adequate to support Unit 1 activities. The roles and responsibilities for the Unit 1 activities were consistent with the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program and the Technical Specifications (TS).


The roles and responsibilities for the Unit 1 activities were consistent with the PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program and the Technical Specifications (TS). Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications The licensee conducted the safety review and engineering design change screening in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements.
Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications The licensee conducted the safety review and engineering design change screening in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements.


Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Programs The licensee maintained an adequate self-assessment program and effectively utilized the established corrective action program to self-identify, evaluate, and correct issues and problems.
Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Programs The licensee maintained an adequate self-assessment program and effectively utilized the established corrective action program to self-identify, evaluate, and correct issues and problems.
Line 39: Line 36:
Issue reports were properly prioritized and corrective actions were tracked in accordance with approved procedures.
Issue reports were properly prioritized and corrective actions were tracked in accordance with approved procedures.


SAFSTOR No dismantlement or decommissioning activities were performed since the previous inspection, conducted in April 2009. Maintenance and Surveillance The licensee effectively implemented the preventive maintenance and surveillance program and associated procedures to maintain the Unit 1 facility and monitor ground water leakage into the containment sump in accordance with TS requirements.
SAFSTOR No dismantlement or decommissioning activities were performed since the previous inspection, conducted in April 2009.


ii Occupational Radiation Exposure The licensee provided adequate controls to limit exposures of workers to external sources of radiation.
Maintenance and Surveillance The licensee effectively implemented the preventive maintenance and surveillance program and associated procedures to maintain the Unit 1 facility and monitor ground water leakage into the containment sump in accordance with TS requirements.


Posting and labeling of radioactive materials and radiation areas complied with regulatory requirements.
ii


Radiological controls and dose estimates associated with Unit 1 activities were effective to achieve dose goals. Implementation and oversight of the SAFSTOR program was effective for the storage of radioactive material.
Occupational Radiation Exposure The licensee provided adequate controls to limit exposures of workers to external sources of radiation. Posting and labeling of radioactive materials and radiation areas complied with regulatory requirements. Radiological controls and dose estimates associated with Unit 1 activities were effective to achieve dose goals. Implementation and oversight of the SAFSTOR program was effective for the storage of radioactive material.


Effluent, Environmental Monitoring and Radioactive Waste and Transportation The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls program, the ground water monitoring program related to Unit 1, the radiological monitoring program, and the radioactive waste management and transportation programs.
Effluent, Environmental Monitoring and Radioactive Waste and Transportation The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls program, the ground water monitoring program related to Unit 1, the radiological monitoring program, and the radioactive waste management and transportation programs.
Line 52: Line 49:


=REPORT DETAILS=
=REPORT DETAILS=
1.0 Background The Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, (PBAPS) Unit 1 (Unit 1) is a high temperature gas-cooled demonstration power reactor that operated from February 1966 until October 31, 1974, and has been permanently shut down and in safe storage (SAFSTOR)since that time. All fuel has been removed from the reactor and shipped to an offsite facility.


The spent fuel pool has been drained and decontaminated, and all radioactive liquids have been removed. 2.0 Organization and Management Oversight
1.0 Background The Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, (PBAPS) Unit 1 (Unit 1) is a high temperature gas-cooled demonstration power reactor that operated from February 1966 until October 31, 1974, and has been permanently shut down and in safe storage (SAFSTOR)since that time. All fuel has been removed from the reactor and shipped to an offsite facility. The spent fuel pool has been drained and decontaminated, and all radioactive liquids have been removed.
 
2.0 Organization and Management Oversight


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
(Inspection Procedure (IP) 36801) The inspector evaluated the licensee's organization regarding management oversight of SAFSTOR responsibilities for Unit 1, required by Technical Specifications (TS) 2.1 (a). The TS 2.1(a) stipulates that the Peach Bottom Plant Manager maintain the responsibility for administration of all Unit 1 functions.
(Inspection Procedure (IP) 36801)
The inspector evaluated the licensee's organization regarding management oversight of SAFSTOR responsibilities for Unit 1, required by Technical Specifications (TS) 2.1 (a).


The inspector also reviewed the licensee's procedure LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program regarding the roles and responsibilities for the operation, maintenance and control of Unit 1. The inspector discussed organization, management and/or staffing responsibilities as outlined in the TS and the LS-PB-800 procedure.
The TS 2.1(a) stipulates that the Peach Bottom Plant Manager maintain the responsibility for administration of all Unit 1 functions. The inspector also reviewed the licensee's procedure LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program regarding the roles and responsibilities for the operation, maintenance and control of Unit 1. The inspector discussed organization, management and/or staffing responsibilities as outlined in the TS and the LS-PB-800 procedure.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
The licensee made no organization changes since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009. The inspector verified that procedure LS-PB-800 and associated implementing procedures were consistent with the TS. The procedure defines roles and assigns responsibility for the operation, maintenance and control of Unit 1. Implementation of the TS and the LS-PB-800 procedure was adequate.
The licensee made no organization changes since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009. The inspector verified that procedure LS-PB-800 and associated implementing procedures were consistent with the TS. The procedure defines roles and assigns responsibility for the operation, maintenance and control of Unit 1.
 
Implementation of the TS and the LS-PB-800 procedure was adequate.


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee's organization and management oversight were adequate to support Unit 1 activities.
The licensee's organization and management oversight were adequate to support Unit 1 activities. The roles and responsibilities for the Unit 1 activities were consistent with the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program and the Technical Specifications (TS). No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
The roles and responsibilities for the Unit 1 activities were consistent with the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program and the Technical Specifications (TS). No findings of safety significance were identified.


3.0 Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications
3.0 Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
(lP 37801) The inspector reviewed the Unit 1 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Revision 5 (UFSAR), procedure LS-AA-104, Exelon 50.59 Review Process, and conducted interviews with engineering and licensing personnel to evaluate any plant modifications since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009. 1 Enclosure
(lP 37801)
The inspector reviewed the Unit 1 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Revision 5 (UFSAR), procedure LS-AA-104, Exelon 50.59 Review Process, and conducted interviews with engineering and licensing personnel to evaluate any plant modifications since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
Line 78: Line 78:


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee conducted the safety review and engineering design change screening in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements.
The licensee conducted the safety review and engineering design change screening in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements. No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
No findings of safety significance were identified.


4.0 Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Programs
4.0 Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Programs


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
(IP 40801) The inspector reviewed the self-assessment regarding the SAFSTOR activities at Unit 1. The inspector also reviewed elements of the corrective action program (CAP) for the identification, evaluation, and resolution of problems.
(IP 40801)
The inspector reviewed the self-assessment regarding the SAFSTOR activities at Unit 1.


The inspector reviewed the procedure, LS-AA-125, Corrective Action Program (CAP), reviewed selected issue reports (IRs) from August 2009 through August 12, 2010, relative to Unit 1 issues, including monitoring for potential water intrusion into the containment vessel.
The inspector also reviewed elements of the corrective action program (CAP) for the identification, evaluation, and resolution of problems. The inspector reviewed the procedure, LS-AA-125, Corrective Action Program (CAP), reviewed selected issue reports (IRs) from August 2009 through August 12, 2010, relative to Unit 1 issues, including monitoring for potential water intrusion into the containment vessel.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
The self-assessment of the Unit 1 SAFSTOR program was conducted May 10-21,2010 using the procedure, LS-AA-126-1005, Check-In Self-Assessments, Revision 4. The self-assessment was conducted to assess whether Unit 1 facility maintenance, monitoring, and safety programs were effective at maintaining public health and safety, and environmental safety, while the plant remains in a SAFSTOR condition.
The self-assessment of the Unit 1 SAFSTOR program was conducted May 10-21,2010 using the procedure, LS-AA-126-1005, Check-In Self-Assessments, Revision 4. The self-assessment was conducted to assess whether Unit 1 facility maintenance, monitoring, and safety programs were effective at maintaining public health and safety, and environmental safety, while the plant remains in a SAFSTOR condition. The self-assessment included an evaluation of the previous NRC-identified non-cited violations, the water intrusion evaluation, the FSAR, the TS, and associated procedures. The licensee's self-assessment was thorough and sufficiently detailed to identify strengths and weaknesses related to the Unit 1 facility.


The assessment included an evaluation of the previous NRC-identified non-cited violations, the water intrusion evaluation, the FSAR, the TS, and associated procedures.
Regarding the CAP, the priority for addressing issue reports and implementation of corrective actions was adequate and based upon safety significance. Corrective actions were implemented to address identified issues, and were being tracked to closure using the licensee's corrective action program.
 
The licensee's self-assessment was thorough and sufficiently detailed to identify strengths and weaknesses related to the Unit 1 facility.
 
Regarding the CAP, the priority for addressing issue reports and implementation of corrective actions was adequate and based upon safety significance.
 
Corrective actions were implemented to address identified issues, and were being tracked to closure using the licensee's corrective action program.


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee maintained an adequate self-assessment program and effectively utilized the established corrective action program to self-identify, evaluate, and correct issues and problems.
The licensee maintained an adequate self-assessment program and effectively utilized the established corrective action program to self-identify, evaluate, and correct issues and problems. The IRs were properly prioritized and the corrective actions were tracked in accordance with approved procedures. No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
The IRs were properly prioritized and the corrective actions were tracked in accordance with approved procedures.
 
No findings of safety significance were identified.


5.0 SAFSTOR
5.0 SAFSTOR


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
(lp 71801) The inspector reviewed the licensee's current decommissioning status with respect to the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program procedure and the TS.
(lp 71801)
The inspector reviewed the licensee's current decommissioning status with respect to the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program procedure and the TS.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
Unit 1 is currently in the SAFSTOR condition.
Unit 1 is currently in the SAFSTOR condition. The licensee informed the inspector that they plan to actively decommission Unit 1 in conjunction with the decommissioning of Unit 2 and Unit 3 after those Units have been permanently shutdown.
 
The licensee informed the inspector that they plan to actively decommission Unit 1 in conjunction with the decommissioning of Unit 2 and Unit 3 after those Units have been permanently shutdown.


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
Line 123: Line 111:


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
(lP 62801) The inspector evaluated the maintenance and surveillance program related to the implementation of the semi-annual surveillance test (ST), ST-H-099-960-2, Unit 1 Exclusion Area Semi-Annual Inspection, Revision 17. The inspector selected portions of the ST to ensure that the licensee verifies that the Unit 1 exclusion area barriers and personnel access doors to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building are locked and intact (TS 2.1.b.1);
(lP 62801)
verifies that water accumulation in the containment sump is less than 500 gallons (TS 2.1.b.9.), and assesses the material condition of the Unit 1 facility (TS 2.3.b.1), including the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building.
The inspector evaluated the maintenance and surveillance program related to the implementation of the semi-annual surveillance test (ST), ST-H-099-960-2, Unit 1 Exclusion Area Semi-Annual Inspection, Revision 17. The inspector selected portions of the ST to ensure that the licensee verifies that the Unit 1 exclusion area barriers and personnel access doors to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building are locked and intact (TS 2.1.b.1); verifies that water accumulation in the containment sump is less than 500 gallons (TS 2.1.b.9.), and assesses the material condition of the Unit 1 facility (TS 2.3.b.1), including the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
The inspector observed the licensee conduct visual inspections to assess the material condition of the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel building.
The inspector observed the licensee conduct visual inspections to assess the material condition of the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel building. The inspector observed that the Unit 1 exclusion area barriers and personnel access doors to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building are locked and intact. The inspector observed the licensee check for water intrusion and verify that the accumulation of water in the containment sump was less than 500 gallons. During the plant tour on August 10, 2010, there was approximately five gallons of ground water in the containment sump. Also during the plant tour, the inspector discussed with the chemistry manager the licensee's procedure for quarterly monitoring of ground water intrusion into the containment sump. The licensee indicated that if any water is observed in the sump, it is manually pumped into a 55-gallon drum. The licensee pumps, processes, and discharges the water through the Unit 2 radioactive waste processing system using the radioactive discharge procedure, ST-C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. The inspector reviewed and assessed the completed ST records from January 2010 to August 12, 2010 and determined that the license implemented its maintenance and surveillance program according to the ST and the applicable TS requirements.
 
The inspector observed that the Unit 1 exclusion area barriers and personnel access doors to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building are locked and intact. The inspector observed the licensee check for water intrusion and verify that the accumulation of water in the containment sump was less than 500 gallons. During the plant tour on August 10, 2010, there was approximately five gallons of ground water in the containment sump. Also during the plant tour, the inspector discussed with the chemistry manager the licensee's procedure for quarterly monitoring of ground water intrusion into the containment sump. The licensee indicated that if any water is observed in the sump, it is manually pumped into a 55-gallon drum. The licensee pumps, processes, and discharges the water through the Unit 2 radioactive waste processing system using the radioactive discharge procedure, 3 Enclosure ST-C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. The inspector reviewed and assessed the completed ST records from January 2010 to August 12, 2010 and determined that the license implemented its maintenance and surveillance program according to the ST and the applicable TS requirements.


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee effectively implemented the preventive maintenance and surveillance program and associated procedures to maintain the Unit 1 facility and monitor ground water leakage into the containment sump in accordance with TS requirements.
The licensee effectively implemented the preventive maintenance and surveillance program and associated procedures to maintain the Unit 1 facility and monitor ground water leakage into the containment sump in accordance with TS requirements. No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
No findings of safety significance were identified.


7.0 Occupational Radiation Exposure
7.0 Occupational Radiation Exposure


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
liP 83750) The inspector evaluated implementation of the occupational exposure program to determine the licensee's capability to monitor and control radiation exposure to employees, and to determine the adequacy of the radiation protection program. The inspector also evaluated the radiation protection program related to the implementation of the semi-annual ST, ST-H-099-960-2, "Unit 1 Exclusion Area Semi-Annual Inspection, Revision 17 and associated records from January 2010 to August 12, 2010.
liP 83750)
The inspector evaluated implementation of the occupational exposure program to determine the licensee's capability to monitor and control radiation exposure to employees, and to determine the adequacy of the radiation protection program. The inspector also evaluated the radiation protection program related to the implementation of the semi-annual ST, ST-H-099-960-2, "Unit 1 Exclusion Area Semi-Annual Inspection, Revision 17 and associated records from January 2010 to August 12, 2010.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
The radiologically controlled areas were appropriately posted and labeled for radioactive material.
The radiologically controlled areas were appropriately posted and labeled for radioactive material. Radiological postings were readily visible, well-maintained, and reflected radiological conditions. The radiological survey maps and related information maintained at the Unit 1 access point were current. The radiation work permits (RWP) were commensurate with the radiological significance of the tasks and included the appropriate exposure control measures for the safe implementation of the activities. The RWP dose totals were below the dose goal totals for 2009 and January 2010 through June 2010. The inspector observed the licensee implement the exclusion area ST, which included the performance of radiation survey measurements, surface contamination surveys, and air particulate samples in the containment vessel. The inspector assessed radiation worker practices, radiological postings and barriers, and access controls to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building. The inspector determined that the licensee had verified that the radiation levels in the containment vessel, the spent fuel pool building and the radioactive waste building were less than 0.2 millirem per hour (mrem/hr), and that smearable contamination levels were less than 1000 disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters (1000 dpm/100 cm 2 ) for beta and gamma radiation.
 
Radiological postings were readily visible, well-maintained, and reflected radiological conditions.
 
The radiological survey maps and related information maintained at the Unit 1 access point were current. The radiation work permits (RWP) were commensurate with the radiological significance of the tasks and included the appropriate exposure control measures for the safe implementation of the activities.
 
The RWP dose totals were below the dose goal totals for 2009 and January 2010 through June 2010. The inspector observed the licensee implement the exclusion area ST, which included the performance of radiation survey measurements, surface contamination surveys, and air particulate samples in the containment vessel. The inspector assessed radiation worker practices, radiological postings and barriers, and access controls to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building.
 
The inspector determined that the licensee had verified that the radiation levels in the containment vessel, the spent fuel pool building and the radioactive waste building were less than 0.2 millirem per hour (mrem/hr), and that smearable contamination levels were less than 1000 disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters (1000 dpm/100 cm 2) for beta and gamma radiation.


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee provided adequate controls to limit exposures of workers to external sources of radiation.
The licensee provided adequate controls to limit exposures of workers to external sources of radiation. Posting and labeling of radioactive materials and radiation areas complied with regulatory requirements. Radiological controls and dose estimates associated with Unit 1 activities were effective to achieve dose goals. Implementation and oversight of the SAFSTOR program was effective for the storage of radioactive material. No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
Posting and labeling of radioactive materials and radiation areas complied with regulatory requirements.
 
Radiological controls and dose estimates associated with Unit 1 activities were effective to achieve dose goals. Implementation and oversight of the SAFSTOR program was effective for the storage of radioactive material.
 
No findings of safety significance were identified.


8.0 Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Programs
8.0 Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Programs


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
liP 84750) The inspector evaluated the radioactive effluent control and the site radiological environmental monitoring programs.
liP 84750)
 
The inspector evaluated the radioactive effluent control and the site radiological environmental monitoring programs. The evaluation included a review of the annual PBAPS Unit 1 Decommissioning Status Report for 2009. dated May 7, 2010, required by TS 2.4.a. The inspector reviewed the radioactive liquid release permits, the analytical sample results, and the projected doses to the public associated with the ground water in-leakage into the containment sump. The inspector also evaluated the ground water monitoring program and the radiological environmental monitoring program, including the analytical results associated with samples of shoreline sediment, fish, and water from January 2010 through June 2010. The inspector verified that the licensee complied with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I.
The evaluation included a review of the annual PBAPS Unit 1 Decommissioning Status Report for 2009. dated May 7, 2010, required by TS 2.4.a. The inspector reviewed the radioactive liquid release permits, the analytical sample results, and the projected doses to the public associated with the ground water in-leakage into the containment sump. The inspector also evaluated the ground water monitoring program and the radiological environmental monitoring program, including the analytical results associated with samples of shoreline sediment, fish, and water from January 2010 through June 2010. The inspector verified that the licensee complied with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
The annual report contained a summary of the status of the Unit 1 facility, including radiation survey results, quantities of radioactive effluents released, results of water analyses from the containment vessel, and performance of security and surveillance measures.
The annual report contained a summary of the status of the Unit 1 facility, including radiation survey results, quantities of radioactive effluents released, results of water analyses from the containment vessel, and performance of security and surveillance measures. The inspector determined that the annual report met the reporting requirements of TS 2.4.a.


The inspector determined that the annual report met the reporting requirements of TS 2.4.a. The radioactive liquid effluent release permits were completed according to TS 2.1.b.7 and the radioactive discharge procedure, ST -C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. From a review of the analytical data, the inspector verified that the projected doses to the public were well below TS limits and were performed in accordance with the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.36a) for maintaining doses to the public from radioactive effluents as low as is reasonably achievable.
The radioactive liquid effluent release permits were completed according to TS 2.1.b.7 and the radioactive discharge procedure, ST -C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. From a review of the analytical data, the inspector verified that the projected doses to the public were well below TS limits and were performed in accordance with the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.36a) for maintaining doses to the public from radioactive effluents as low as is reasonably achievable.


During the period August 2009 through August 2010, the licensee removed water from the containment sump using procedure, RW-PB-900, Revision 0, Movement of Water Containing Tritium from Unit 1 Exclusion Area to PBAPS Radwaste System. The licensee pumped the water from the sump into drums and transferred the drums to the Unit 2 radioactive waste building.
During the period August 2009 through August 2010, the licensee removed water from the containment sump using procedure, RW-PB-900, Revision 0, Movement of Water Containing Tritium from Unit 1 Exclusion Area to PBAPS Radwaste System. The licensee pumped the water from the sump into drums and transferred the drums to the Unit 2 radioactive waste building. The licensee processed this water through the Unit 2 radioactive waste processing system and discharged it in batch releases using procedure, ST -C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. The inspector reviewed the licensee's liquid radwaste discharge permits and determined that the licensee followed the required procedure. The licensee used the appropriate dilution volumes and flows and ensured that the water would be discharged according to the applicable 10 CFR Part 20 and Part 50 requirements. The inspector verified that the total effective dose equivalent to the public as a result of this effluent release was a small fraction of the applicable limit in 10 CFR Part 20.


The licensee processed this water through the Unit 2 radioactive waste processing system and discharged it in batch releases using procedure, ST -C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. The inspector reviewed the licensee's liquid radwaste discharge permits and determined that the licensee followed the required procedure.
The inspector reviewed the radiological analytical results of water sampled from the monitoring wells near Unit 1 during August 12, 2009 through August 12, 2010. The inspector determined that the samples were collected according to procedure, CY-PB-170-4160, Station RGPP Controlled Sample Point Parameters and were analyzed by a contract laboratory. The well water sample results were less than the lower limit of detection (200 pCi/L) for tritium. The analytical results of the monitoring well water samples indicate that the regulatory liquid release limit for tritium, as specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, was not exceeded. Also based on the analytical results, the inspector verified that the total effective dose equivalent to the public was below the regulatory limit of 0.1 rem in one year.


The licensee used the appropriate dilution volumes and flows and ensured that the water would be discharged according to the applicable 10 CFR Part 20 and Part 50 requirements.
The analytical results for shoreline sediment, fish, and water from January 2010 through June 201 o for the radiological environmental monitoring program indicated that no significant radioactivity was identified in fish and the environment.


The inspector verified that the total effective dose equivalent to the public as a result of this effluent release was a small fraction of the applicable limit in 10 CFR Part 20. 5 Enclosure The inspector reviewed the radiological analytical results of water sampled from the monitoring wells near Unit 1 during August 12, 2009 through August 12, 2010. The inspector determined that the samples were collected according to procedure, CY-PB-170-4160, Station RGPP Controlled Sample Point Parameters and were analyzed by a contract laboratory.
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls program, the ground water monitoring program, and the radiological monitoring program.


The well water sample results were less than the lower limit of detection (200 pCi/L) for tritium. The analytical results of the monitoring well water samples indicate that the regulatory liquid release limit for tritium, as specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, was not exceeded.
No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
Also based on the analytical results, the inspector verified that the total effective dose equivalent to the public was below the regulatory limit of 0.1 rem in one year. The analytical results for shoreline sediment, fish, and water from January 2010 through June 201 o for the radiological environmental monitoring program indicated that no significant radioactivity was identified in fish and the environment.
 
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls program, the ground water monitoring program, and the radiological monitoring program. No findings of safety significance were identified.


9.0 Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation of Radioactive Materials
9.0 Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation of Radioactive Materials


====a. Inspection Scope====
====a. Inspection Scope====
(IP 86750) The inspector evaluated the radioactive waste management and transportation programs to determine if there had been any radioactive waste shipments from the Unit 1 facility for offsite disposal.
(IP 86750)
The inspector evaluated the radioactive waste management and transportation programs to determine if there had been any radioactive waste shipments from the Unit 1 facility for offsite disposal.


====b. Observations and Findings====
====b. Observations and Findings====
The inspector reviewed the shipping logs and contamination survey results from August 2009 through August 12, 2010 and interviewed the radioactive waste supervisor.
The inspector reviewed the shipping logs and contamination survey results from August 2009 through August 12, 2010 and interviewed the radioactive waste supervisor. The results indicated that the smearable contamination levels were less than 1,000 dpml 100cm2 for beta and gamma radiation. Based on these results, the licensee did not generate radioactive waste and therefore, did not ship radioactive waste from the Unit 1 facility for offsite disposal.
 
The results indicated that the smearable contamination levels were less than 1,000 dpml 100cm 2 for beta and gamma radiation.
 
Based on these results, the licensee did not generate radioactive waste and therefore, did not ship radioactive waste from the Unit 1 facility for offsite disposal.


====c. Conclusions====
====c. Conclusions====
The licensee effectively implemented the radioactive waste management and transportation programs.
The licensee effectively implemented the radioactive waste management and transportation programs. No findings of safety significance were identified.
 
No findings of safety significance were identified.


Exit Meeting Summary On August 12, 2010, the inspector presented the inspection results to Garey Stathes, Plant Manager, and other members of the licensee's staff. Mr. Stathes acknowledged the inspection findings.
===Exit Meeting Summary===


The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection.
On August 12, 2010, the inspector presented the inspection results to Garey Stathes, Plant Manager, and other members of the licensee's staff. Mr. Stathes acknowledged the inspection findings. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection.


A-1  
A-1


=SUPPLEMENTAL
=SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION=
INFORMATION=


PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED
Licensee  
Licensee
: [[contact::J. Armstrong]], Regulatory
: [[contact::J. Armstrong]], Regulatory Affairs Manager
Affairs Manager  
: [[contact::A. Czyzewics]], Chemistry Engineer
: [[contact::A. Czyzewics]], Chemistry
: [[contact::D. Foss]], Senior Regulatory Affairs Engineer
Engineer  
: [[contact::D. Hines]], Radiation Protection Supervisor
: [[contact::D. Foss]], Senior Regulatory
: [[contact::R. Holmes]], Radiation Protection Manager
Affairs Engineer  
: [[contact::C. Howell]], Mechanical Design Engineer
: [[contact::D. Hines]], Radiation
: [[contact::L. Lucas]], Chemistry Manager
Protection
: [[contact::H. McCrory]], Radiation Protection Technical Support Manager
Supervisor  
: [[contact::T. McDonald]], Radiation Protection Technician
: [[contact::R. Holmes]], Radiation
: [[contact::S. Minnick]], Nuclear Oversight Manager
Protection
: [[contact::M. Moonitz]], Radiation Protection Technician
Manager  
: [[contact::R. Poteet]], Radiation Protection Technician
: [[contact::C. Howell]], Mechanical
: [[contact::M. Ross]], Radwaste and Environmental Supervisor
Design Engineer  
: [[contact::F. Saponaro]], FIN Team
: [[contact::L. Lucas]], Chemistry
: [[contact::K. Shelly]], Maintenance
Manager  
: [[contact::R. Smith]], Regulatory Affairs Engineer
: [[contact::H. McCrory]], Radiation
: [[contact::G. Stathes]], Plant Manager
Protection
: [[contact::G. Swayne]], Enercon, Chemistry contractor
Technical
: [[contact::F. Young]], Maintenance
Support Manager  
: [[contact::J. Zellers]], FIN Team
: [[contact::T. McDonald]], Radiation
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED
Protection
36801   Organization, Management, and Cost Controls at Permanently Shutdown Reactors
Technician  
37801   Safety Reviews and Design Changes
: [[contact::S. Minnick]], Nuclear Oversight
40801   Self Assessment and Corrective Action
Manager  
2801  Maintenance and Surveillance at Permanently Shutdown Reactors
: [[contact::M. Moonitz]], Radiation
71801   Decommissioning Performance and Status Reviews
Protection
83750   Occupational Radiation Exposure
Technician  
84750   Radioactive Waste Treatment and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring
: [[contact::R. Poteet]], Radiation
86750   Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation
Protection
 
Technician  
: [[contact::M. Ross]], Radwaste and Environmental
Supervisor  
: [[contact::F. Saponaro]], FIN Team  
: [[contact::K. Shelly]], Maintenance  
: [[contact::R. Smith]], Regulatory
Affairs Engineer  
: [[contact::G. Stathes]], Plant Manager  
: [[contact::G. Swayne]], Enercon, Chemistry
contractor  
: [[contact::F. Young]], Maintenance  
: [[contact::J. Zellers]], FIN Team INSPECTION
PROCEDURES
USED 36801 Organization, Management, and Cost Controls at Permanently
Shutdown Reactors 37801 Safety Reviews and Design Changes 40801 Self Assessment
and Corrective
Action 62801 Maintenance
and Surveillance
at Permanently
Shutdown Reactors 71801 Decommissioning
Performance
and Status Reviews 83750 Occupational
Radiation
Exposure 84750 Radioactive
Waste Treatment
and Effluent and Environmental
Monitoring
86750 Solid Radioactive
Waste Management
and Transportation
ITEMS OPEN, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
ITEMS OPEN, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened, Closed and Discussed  
Opened, Closed and Discussed - None
-None ADAMS AIR CAP CFR FIN Team IP IR NRC PBAPS pCilL RWP SAFSTOR ST TS U1 U2 UFSAR LIST OF ACRONYMS USED Agencywide
LIST OF ACRONYMS USED
Documents
ADAMS        Agencywide Documents and Management Access System
and Management
AIR          Action Request
Access System Action Request Corrective
CAP          Corrective Action Program
Action Program Code of Federal Regulations
CFR          Code of Federal Regulations
Fix-it-Now
FIN Team    Fix-it-Now Team
Team Inspection
IP          Inspection Procedure
Procedure
IR          Issue Report
Issue Report Nuclear Regulatory
NRC          Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Commission
PBAPS        Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station picoCuries
pCilL        picoCuries per liter
per liter radiological
RWP          radiological work permit
work permit safe storage Surveillance
SAFSTOR      safe storage
Test Technical
ST          Surveillance Test
Specifications
TS          Technical Specifications
Unit 1 Unit 2 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report Attachment
U1          Unit 1
U2          Unit 2
UFSAR        Updated Final Safety Analysis Report
Attachment
}}
}}

Revision as of 14:50, 13 November 2019

IR 05000171-10-007, on 08/09 - 08/12/10, Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 1, Delta, PA (Report)
ML102450061
Person / Time
Site: Peach Bottom Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 09/01/2010
From: Joustra J
Decommissioning Branch I
To:
Exelon Generation Co
References
IR-10-007
Download: ML102450061 (12)
v • d • e


Text

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

INSPECTION REPORT Docket N License N DPR-12 Inspection N /2010007 Licensee: Exelon Generation Company, LLC Facility: Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, Unit 1 Location: 1848 Lay Road Delta, Pennsylvania 17314-9032 Inspection Dates: August 9-12,2010 Inspector: Laurie A. Kauffman Health Physicist Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety Approved By: Judith A. Joustra, Chief Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Exelon Generation Company, LLC

Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station (PBAPS), Unit 1 NRC Inspection Report No. 05000171/2010007 A routine announced safety inspection was conducted on August 9-12, 2010, at Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Unit 1 by a Region I inspector. The scope of the inspection included an evaluation of the organization and management oversight; implementation of safety reviews, design changes and modifications programs; implementation of the self-assessment and corrective action programs; implementation of long-term safe storage (SAFSTOR) program; implementation of the maintenance and surveillance program; implementation of the occupational radiation exposure program; and implementation of the Effluent, Environmental Monitoring and Radioactive Waste and Transportation programs associated with Unit 1 while in SAFSTOR status. Within the scope of this inspection, no safety concerns or violations were identified. A brief summary of each area inspected is described below.

Organization and Management Oversight The licensee's organization and management oversight was adequate to support Unit 1 activities. The roles and responsibilities for the Unit 1 activities were consistent with the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program and the Technical Specifications (TS).

Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications The licensee conducted the safety review and engineering design change screening in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements.

Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Programs The licensee maintained an adequate self-assessment program and effectively utilized the established corrective action program to self-identify, evaluate, and correct issues and problems.

Issue reports were properly prioritized and corrective actions were tracked in accordance with approved procedures.

SAFSTOR No dismantlement or decommissioning activities were performed since the previous inspection, conducted in April 2009.

Maintenance and Surveillance The licensee effectively implemented the preventive maintenance and surveillance program and associated procedures to maintain the Unit 1 facility and monitor ground water leakage into the containment sump in accordance with TS requirements.

ii

Occupational Radiation Exposure The licensee provided adequate controls to limit exposures of workers to external sources of radiation. Posting and labeling of radioactive materials and radiation areas complied with regulatory requirements. Radiological controls and dose estimates associated with Unit 1 activities were effective to achieve dose goals. Implementation and oversight of the SAFSTOR program was effective for the storage of radioactive material.

Effluent, Environmental Monitoring and Radioactive Waste and Transportation The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls program, the ground water monitoring program related to Unit 1, the radiological monitoring program, and the radioactive waste management and transportation programs.

J11

REPORT DETAILS

1.0 Background The Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station, (PBAPS) Unit 1 (Unit 1) is a high temperature gas-cooled demonstration power reactor that operated from February 1966 until October 31, 1974, and has been permanently shut down and in safe storage (SAFSTOR)since that time. All fuel has been removed from the reactor and shipped to an offsite facility. The spent fuel pool has been drained and decontaminated, and all radioactive liquids have been removed.

2.0 Organization and Management Oversight

a. Inspection Scope

(Inspection Procedure (IP) 36801)

The inspector evaluated the licensee's organization regarding management oversight of SAFSTOR responsibilities for Unit 1, required by Technical Specifications (TS) 2.1 (a).

The TS 2.1(a) stipulates that the Peach Bottom Plant Manager maintain the responsibility for administration of all Unit 1 functions. The inspector also reviewed the licensee's procedure LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program regarding the roles and responsibilities for the operation, maintenance and control of Unit 1. The inspector discussed organization, management and/or staffing responsibilities as outlined in the TS and the LS-PB-800 procedure.

b. Observations and Findings

The licensee made no organization changes since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009. The inspector verified that procedure LS-PB-800 and associated implementing procedures were consistent with the TS. The procedure defines roles and assigns responsibility for the operation, maintenance and control of Unit 1.

Implementation of the TS and the LS-PB-800 procedure was adequate.

c. Conclusions

The licensee's organization and management oversight were adequate to support Unit 1 activities. The roles and responsibilities for the Unit 1 activities were consistent with the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program and the Technical Specifications (TS). No findings of safety significance were identified.

3.0 Safety Reviews, Design Changes, and Modifications

a. Inspection Scope

(lP 37801)

The inspector reviewed the Unit 1 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Revision 5 (UFSAR), procedure LS-AA-104, Exelon 50.59 Review Process, and conducted interviews with engineering and licensing personnel to evaluate any plant modifications since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009.

b. Observations and Findings

There were no plant modifications since the previous inspection conducted in August 2009. There are no structures, systems, or components in Unit 1 that perform a safety function because of the non-operating and defueled status of the plant.

c. Conclusions

The licensee conducted the safety review and engineering design change screening in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59 requirements. No findings of safety significance were identified.

4.0 Self-Assessment and Corrective Action Programs

a. Inspection Scope

(IP 40801)

The inspector reviewed the self-assessment regarding the SAFSTOR activities at Unit 1.

The inspector also reviewed elements of the corrective action program (CAP) for the identification, evaluation, and resolution of problems. The inspector reviewed the procedure, LS-AA-125, Corrective Action Program (CAP), reviewed selected issue reports (IRs) from August 2009 through August 12, 2010, relative to Unit 1 issues, including monitoring for potential water intrusion into the containment vessel.

b. Observations and Findings

The self-assessment of the Unit 1 SAFSTOR program was conducted May 10-21,2010 using the procedure, LS-AA-126-1005, Check-In Self-Assessments, Revision 4. The self-assessment was conducted to assess whether Unit 1 facility maintenance, monitoring, and safety programs were effective at maintaining public health and safety, and environmental safety, while the plant remains in a SAFSTOR condition. The self-assessment included an evaluation of the previous NRC-identified non-cited violations, the water intrusion evaluation, the FSAR, the TS, and associated procedures. The licensee's self-assessment was thorough and sufficiently detailed to identify strengths and weaknesses related to the Unit 1 facility.

Regarding the CAP, the priority for addressing issue reports and implementation of corrective actions was adequate and based upon safety significance. Corrective actions were implemented to address identified issues, and were being tracked to closure using the licensee's corrective action program.

c. Conclusions

The licensee maintained an adequate self-assessment program and effectively utilized the established corrective action program to self-identify, evaluate, and correct issues and problems. The IRs were properly prioritized and the corrective actions were tracked in accordance with approved procedures. No findings of safety significance were identified.

5.0 SAFSTOR

a. Inspection Scope

(lp 71801)

The inspector reviewed the licensee's current decommissioning status with respect to the LS-PB-800, Unit 1 Process Control Program procedure and the TS.

b. Observations and Findings

Unit 1 is currently in the SAFSTOR condition. The licensee informed the inspector that they plan to actively decommission Unit 1 in conjunction with the decommissioning of Unit 2 and Unit 3 after those Units have been permanently shutdown.

c. Conclusions

No dismantlement or decommissioning activities were performed since the previous inspection, conducted in April 2009. No findings of safety significance were identified.

6.0 Maintenance and Surveillance

a. Inspection Scope

(lP 62801)

The inspector evaluated the maintenance and surveillance program related to the implementation of the semi-annual surveillance test (ST), ST-H-099-960-2, Unit 1 Exclusion Area Semi-Annual Inspection, Revision 17. The inspector selected portions of the ST to ensure that the licensee verifies that the Unit 1 exclusion area barriers and personnel access doors to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building are locked and intact (TS 2.1.b.1); verifies that water accumulation in the containment sump is less than 500 gallons (TS 2.1.b.9.), and assesses the material condition of the Unit 1 facility (TS 2.3.b.1), including the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building.

b. Observations and Findings

The inspector observed the licensee conduct visual inspections to assess the material condition of the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel building. The inspector observed that the Unit 1 exclusion area barriers and personnel access doors to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building are locked and intact. The inspector observed the licensee check for water intrusion and verify that the accumulation of water in the containment sump was less than 500 gallons. During the plant tour on August 10, 2010, there was approximately five gallons of ground water in the containment sump. Also during the plant tour, the inspector discussed with the chemistry manager the licensee's procedure for quarterly monitoring of ground water intrusion into the containment sump. The licensee indicated that if any water is observed in the sump, it is manually pumped into a 55-gallon drum. The licensee pumps, processes, and discharges the water through the Unit 2 radioactive waste processing system using the radioactive discharge procedure, ST-C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. The inspector reviewed and assessed the completed ST records from January 2010 to August 12, 2010 and determined that the license implemented its maintenance and surveillance program according to the ST and the applicable TS requirements.

c. Conclusions

The licensee effectively implemented the preventive maintenance and surveillance program and associated procedures to maintain the Unit 1 facility and monitor ground water leakage into the containment sump in accordance with TS requirements. No findings of safety significance were identified.

7.0 Occupational Radiation Exposure

a. Inspection Scope

liP 83750)

The inspector evaluated implementation of the occupational exposure program to determine the licensee's capability to monitor and control radiation exposure to employees, and to determine the adequacy of the radiation protection program. The inspector also evaluated the radiation protection program related to the implementation of the semi-annual ST, ST-H-099-960-2, "Unit 1 Exclusion Area Semi-Annual Inspection, Revision 17 and associated records from January 2010 to August 12, 2010.

b. Observations and Findings

The radiologically controlled areas were appropriately posted and labeled for radioactive material. Radiological postings were readily visible, well-maintained, and reflected radiological conditions. The radiological survey maps and related information maintained at the Unit 1 access point were current. The radiation work permits (RWP) were commensurate with the radiological significance of the tasks and included the appropriate exposure control measures for the safe implementation of the activities. The RWP dose totals were below the dose goal totals for 2009 and January 2010 through June 2010. The inspector observed the licensee implement the exclusion area ST, which included the performance of radiation survey measurements, surface contamination surveys, and air particulate samples in the containment vessel. The inspector assessed radiation worker practices, radiological postings and barriers, and access controls to the containment vessel, the radioactive waste building, and the spent fuel pool building. The inspector determined that the licensee had verified that the radiation levels in the containment vessel, the spent fuel pool building and the radioactive waste building were less than 0.2 millirem per hour (mrem/hr), and that smearable contamination levels were less than 1000 disintegrations per minute per 100 square centimeters (1000 dpm/100 cm 2 ) for beta and gamma radiation.

c. Conclusions

The licensee provided adequate controls to limit exposures of workers to external sources of radiation. Posting and labeling of radioactive materials and radiation areas complied with regulatory requirements. Radiological controls and dose estimates associated with Unit 1 activities were effective to achieve dose goals. Implementation and oversight of the SAFSTOR program was effective for the storage of radioactive material. No findings of safety significance were identified.

8.0 Effluent and Environmental Monitoring Programs

a. Inspection Scope

liP 84750)

The inspector evaluated the radioactive effluent control and the site radiological environmental monitoring programs. The evaluation included a review of the annual PBAPS Unit 1 Decommissioning Status Report for 2009. dated May 7, 2010, required by TS 2.4.a. The inspector reviewed the radioactive liquid release permits, the analytical sample results, and the projected doses to the public associated with the ground water in-leakage into the containment sump. The inspector also evaluated the ground water monitoring program and the radiological environmental monitoring program, including the analytical results associated with samples of shoreline sediment, fish, and water from January 2010 through June 2010. The inspector verified that the licensee complied with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, and 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I.

b. Observations and Findings

The annual report contained a summary of the status of the Unit 1 facility, including radiation survey results, quantities of radioactive effluents released, results of water analyses from the containment vessel, and performance of security and surveillance measures. The inspector determined that the annual report met the reporting requirements of TS 2.4.a.

The radioactive liquid effluent release permits were completed according to TS 2.1.b.7 and the radioactive discharge procedure, ST -C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. From a review of the analytical data, the inspector verified that the projected doses to the public were well below TS limits and were performed in accordance with the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR 50.36a) for maintaining doses to the public from radioactive effluents as low as is reasonably achievable.

During the period August 2009 through August 2010, the licensee removed water from the containment sump using procedure, RW-PB-900, Revision 0, Movement of Water Containing Tritium from Unit 1 Exclusion Area to PBAPS Radwaste System. The licensee pumped the water from the sump into drums and transferred the drums to the Unit 2 radioactive waste building. The licensee processed this water through the Unit 2 radioactive waste processing system and discharged it in batch releases using procedure, ST -C-095-805-2, Liquid Radwaste Discharge, Revision 13. The inspector reviewed the licensee's liquid radwaste discharge permits and determined that the licensee followed the required procedure. The licensee used the appropriate dilution volumes and flows and ensured that the water would be discharged according to the applicable 10 CFR Part 20 and Part 50 requirements. The inspector verified that the total effective dose equivalent to the public as a result of this effluent release was a small fraction of the applicable limit in 10 CFR Part 20.

The inspector reviewed the radiological analytical results of water sampled from the monitoring wells near Unit 1 during August 12, 2009 through August 12, 2010. The inspector determined that the samples were collected according to procedure, CY-PB-170-4160, Station RGPP Controlled Sample Point Parameters and were analyzed by a contract laboratory. The well water sample results were less than the lower limit of detection (200 pCi/L) for tritium. The analytical results of the monitoring well water samples indicate that the regulatory liquid release limit for tritium, as specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table 2, Column 2, was not exceeded. Also based on the analytical results, the inspector verified that the total effective dose equivalent to the public was below the regulatory limit of 0.1 rem in one year.

The analytical results for shoreline sediment, fish, and water from January 2010 through June 201 o for the radiological environmental monitoring program indicated that no significant radioactivity was identified in fish and the environment.

c. Conclusions

The licensee effectively implemented and maintained the radioactive effluent controls program, the ground water monitoring program, and the radiological monitoring program.

No findings of safety significance were identified.

9.0 Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation of Radioactive Materials

a. Inspection Scope

(IP 86750)

The inspector evaluated the radioactive waste management and transportation programs to determine if there had been any radioactive waste shipments from the Unit 1 facility for offsite disposal.

b. Observations and Findings

The inspector reviewed the shipping logs and contamination survey results from August 2009 through August 12, 2010 and interviewed the radioactive waste supervisor. The results indicated that the smearable contamination levels were less than 1,000 dpml 100cm2 for beta and gamma radiation. Based on these results, the licensee did not generate radioactive waste and therefore, did not ship radioactive waste from the Unit 1 facility for offsite disposal.

c. Conclusions

The licensee effectively implemented the radioactive waste management and transportation programs. No findings of safety significance were identified.

Exit Meeting Summary

On August 12, 2010, the inspector presented the inspection results to Garey Stathes, Plant Manager, and other members of the licensee's staff. Mr. Stathes acknowledged the inspection findings. The inspectors confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection.

A-1

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION

PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED

Licensee

J. Armstrong, Regulatory Affairs Manager
A. Czyzewics, Chemistry Engineer
D. Foss, Senior Regulatory Affairs Engineer
D. Hines, Radiation Protection Supervisor
R. Holmes, Radiation Protection Manager
C. Howell, Mechanical Design Engineer
L. Lucas, Chemistry Manager
H. McCrory, Radiation Protection Technical Support Manager
T. McDonald, Radiation Protection Technician
S. Minnick, Nuclear Oversight Manager
M. Moonitz, Radiation Protection Technician
R. Poteet, Radiation Protection Technician
M. Ross, Radwaste and Environmental Supervisor
F. Saponaro, FIN Team
K. Shelly, Maintenance
R. Smith, Regulatory Affairs Engineer
G. Stathes, Plant Manager
G. Swayne, Enercon, Chemistry contractor
F. Young, Maintenance
J. Zellers, FIN Team

INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED

36801 Organization, Management, and Cost Controls at Permanently Shutdown Reactors

37801 Safety Reviews and Design Changes

40801 Self Assessment and Corrective Action

2801 Maintenance and Surveillance at Permanently Shutdown Reactors

71801 Decommissioning Performance and Status Reviews

83750 Occupational Radiation Exposure

84750 Radioactive Waste Treatment and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring

86750 Solid Radioactive Waste Management and Transportation

ITEMS OPEN, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED

Opened, Closed and Discussed - None

LIST OF ACRONYMS USED

ADAMS Agencywide Documents and Management Access System

AIR Action Request

CAP Corrective Action Program

CFR Code of Federal Regulations

FIN Team Fix-it-Now Team

IP Inspection Procedure

IR Issue Report

NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission

PBAPS Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station

pCilL picoCuries per liter

RWP radiological work permit

SAFSTOR safe storage

ST Surveillance Test

TS Technical Specifications

U1 Unit 1

U2 Unit 2

UFSAR Updated Final Safety Analysis Report

Attachment

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=IR_05000171/2010007&oldid=2128290"