IR 05000361/2006014
| ML062890441 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | San Onofre  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/2006 |
| From: | Shannon M Plant Support Branch Region IV |
| To: | Rosenblum R Southern California Edison Co |
| References | |
| IR-06-014 | |
| Download: ML062890441 (18) | |
Text
October 16, 2006Richard Senior Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Southern California Edison Company San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station
P.O. Box 128 San Clemente, CA 92674-0128SUBJECT:SAN ONOFRE NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - NRC RADIATIONSAFETY TEAM INSPECTION REPORT 05000361/2006014;
Dear Mr. Rosenblum:
On September 15, 2006, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) completed aninspection at your San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3 facility. The enclosedreport documents the inspection findings, which were discussed at the conclusion of the inspection with Mr. A. Scherer, Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs, and other members of your staff.The inspection examined activities conducted under your license as they relate to safety andcompliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and with the conditions of your license.
The team reviewed selected procedures and records, observed activities, and interviewed personnel. Specifically, the team evaluated the inspection areas within the Radiation ProtectionStrategic Performance Area that are scheduled for review every two years. These areas are:*Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation
- Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems
- Radioactive Material Processing and Transportation
- Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and Radioactive Material ControlProgram On the basis of the results of this inspection, no findings of significance were identified.
Southern California Edison Company-2-In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, itsenclosure, and your response (if any) will be made available electronically for public inspectionin the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) com ponentof 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).
Sincerely,
/RA/Michael P. Shannon, ChiefPlant Support Branch Division of Reactor SafetyDockets: 50-361 50-362 Licenses: NPF-10 NPF-15
Enclosure:
NRC Inspection Report 05000361/2006014; 5000362/2006014 w/attachment: Supplemental Information
REGION IV Dockets:50-361, 50-362Licenses:NPF-10, NPF-15 Report:05000361/2006014 and 5000362/2006014 Licensee:Southern California Edison Co. (SCE)
Facility:San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Units 2 and 3Location:5000 S. Pacific Coast Hwy. San Clemente, California Dates:September 11-15, 2006 Inspectors:Larry Ricketson, P.E., Senior Health Physicist, Plant Support Branch Louis Carson II, Senior Health Physicist, Plant Support Branch Gilbert Guerra, Health Physicist, Plant Support Branch Donald Stearns, Health Physicist, Plant Support BranchApproved By:Michael P. Shannon, Chief, Plant Support BranchDivision of Reactor Safety Enclosure-2-
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
IR05000361/2006014, 05000362/2006014; 09/11/06 - 09/15/06; San Onofre NuclearGenerating Station, Units 2 & 3 ; Radiation Safety TeamThe report covered a five-day period of inspection on site by a team of four region-based healthphysics inspectors. A.
NRC-Identified and Self-Revealing Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
B.Licensee Identified Violations
None
Enclosure-3-
REPORT DETAILS
2.RADIATION SAFETY Cornerstones: Occupational Radiation Safety [OS] and Public Radiation Safety [PS]2OS3Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation and Protective Equipment (71121.03)
a. Inspection Scope
This area was inspected to determine the accuracy and operability of radiation monitoringinstruments that are used for the protection of occupational workers and the adequacy ofthe program to provide self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) to workers. The team used the requirements in 10 CFR Part 20 and the licensee's procedures required by technical specifications as criteria for determining compliance. The team interviewed licensee personnel and reviewed:*Calibration of area radiation monitors associated with transient high and very highradiation areas and post-accident monitors used for remote emergency assessment*Calibration of portable radiation detection instrumentation, electronic alarmingdosimetry, and continuous air monitors used for job coverage *Calibration of whole body counting equipment and radiation detection instrumentsutilized for personnel and material release from the radiologically controlled area *Self-assessments, audits, and Licensee Event Reports
- Corrective action program reports since the last inspection
- Licensee action in cases of repetitive deficiencies or significant individualdeficiencies*Calibration expiration and source response check currency on radiation detectioninstruments staged for use *The licensee's capability for refilling and transporting SCBA air bottles to and fromthe control room and operations support center during emergency conditions, status of SCBA staged and ready for use in the plant and associated surveillancerecords, and personnel qualification and training *Qualification documentation for onsite personnel designated to performmaintenance on the vendor-designated vital components, and the vital component maintenance records for SCBA units The inspectors completed 9 of the required 9 samples.
-4-
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.2PS1Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems (71122.01)
a. Inspection Scope
This area was inspected to ensure that the gaseous and liquid effluent processingsystems are maintained so that radiological releases are properly mitigated, monitored,and evaluated with respect to public exposure. The team used the requirements in 10 CFR Part 20, 10 CFR Part 50 Appendices A and I, the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, and the licensee's procedures required by technical specifications as criteria for determining compliance. The team interviewed licensee personnel and reviewed: *Radiological effluent release reports since the last inspection, changes to theOffsite Dose Calculation Manual, radiation monitor setpoint calculation methodology, anomalous sampling results, effluent radiological occurrence performance indicator incidents, program for identifying contaminated spills andleakage and the licensee's process for control and assessment, self-assessments, audits, and licensee event reports *Gaseous and liquid release system component configurations *Routine processing, sample collection, sample analysis, and release of radioactivegaseous effluent; and radioactive liquid and gaseous effluent release permits and dose projections to members of the public *Abnormal releases
- The licensee's understanding of the location and construction of undergroundpipes and tanks and storage pools that contain radioactive contaminated liquids;the technical bases for onsite monitoring, the licensee's capabilities of detectingspills or leaks and identifying groundwater radiological contamination both on siteand beyond the owner-controlled area *Changes made by the licensee to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, the liquidor gaseous radioactive wast e system design, procedures, or operation since thelast inspection *Monthly, quarterly, and annual dose calculations
- Surveillance test results involving air cleaning systems and stack or vent flow rates*Instrument calibrations of discharge effluent radiation monitors and flowmeasurement devices, effluent monitori ng system modifications, effluent radiationmonitor alarm setpoint values, and counting room instrumentation calibration and quality control
-5-*Interlaboratory comparison program results *Licensee event reports, special reports, audits, self-assessments and correctiveaction reports performed since the last inspection The inspector completed 11 of the required 11 samples.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.2PS2Radioactive Material Processing and Transportation (71122.02)
a. Inspection Scope
This area was inspected to verify that the licensee's radioactive material processing andtransportation program complies with the requirements of 10 CFR Parts 20, 61, and 71 and Department of Transportation regulations contained in 49 CFR Parts 171-180. The team interviewed licensee personnel and reviewed:*The radioactive waste system description, recent radiological effluent releasereports, and the scope of the licensee's audit program *Liquid and solid radioactive waste processing systems configurations, the statusand control of any radioactive waste process equipment that is not operational or is abandoned in place, changes made to the radioactive waste processi ng systemssince the last inspection, and current processes for transferring radioactive waste resin and sludge discharges*Radio-chemical sample analysis results for radioactive waste streams and use ofscaling factors and calculations to account for difficult-to-measure radionuclides *Shipment packaging, surveying, labeling, marking, placarding, vehicle checking,driver instructing, and disposal manifesting *Shipping records for non-excepted package shipments
- Licensee event reports, special reports, audits, state agency reports,self-assessments and corrective action reports performed since the last inspection The inspectors completed 6 of the required 6 samples.
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.
-6-2PS3Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) and Radioactive Material ControlProgram (71122.03)
a. Inspection Scope
This area was inspected to ensure that the REMP verifies the impact of radioactiveeffluent releases to the environment and sufficiently validates the integrity of theradioactive gaseous and liquid effluent release program; and that the licensee's surveys and controls are adequate to prevent the inadvertent release of licensed materials into the public domain. The team used the requirements in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix I of 10 CFR Part 50, the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual, and the licensee's procedures required by technical specifications as criteria for determining compliance. The team interviewed licensee personnel and reviewed: *Annual environmental monitoring reports and licensee event reports
- Selected air sampling and thermoluminescence dosimeter monitoring stations
- Collection and preparation of environmental samples
- Operability, calibration, and maintenance of meteorological instruments *Each event documented in the Annual Environmental Monitoring Report whichinvolved a missed sample, inoperable sampler, lost thermoluminescence dosimeter, or anomalous measurement *Significant changes made by the licensee to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manualas the result of changes to the land census or sampler station modifications since the last inspection *Calibration and maintenance records for air samplers, composite water samplers,and environmental sample radiation measurement instrumentation, quality controlprogram, interlaboratory comparison program results, and vendor audits *Locations where the licensee monitors potentially contaminated material leavingthe radiological controlled area [or controlled access area] and the methods usedfor control, survey, and release from these areas *Type of radiation monitoring instrumentation used to monitor items released,survey and release criteria of potentially contaminated material, radiation detection sensitivities, procedural guidance, and material release records *Licensee event reports, special reports, audits, self-assessments and correctiveaction reports performed since the last inspection The inspectors completed 10 of the required 10 samples.
-7-
b. Findings
No findings of significance were identified.4.OTHER ACTIVITIES 4OA2Problem Identification and Resolution
a. Inspection Scope
The team evaluated the effectiveness of the licensee's problem identification andresolution process with respect to the following inspection areas:*Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation (Section 2OS3)
- Radioactive Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Treatment and Monitoring Systems (Section 2PS1)*Radioactive Material Processing and Transportation (Section 2PS2)
- Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program and Radioactive Material ControlProgram (Section 2PS3)
a. Findings and Observations
No findings of significance were identified.4OA6Management MeetingsExit Meeting SummaryOn September 15, 2006, the team presented the inspection results to Mr. A. Scherer,Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs, and other members of the staff who acknowledged the findings. The team confirmed that proprietary information was not provided or examined during the inspection.ATTACHMENT:
SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
KEY POINTS OF CONTACT
Licensee
- B. Ashbrook, Manager, Environmental Protection
- K. Belford, Health Physics
- M. Chandler, Technical Specialist
- D. Dick, Effluent Supervisor, Chemistry
- P. Elliott, Supervisor, Health Physics
- M. Farmer, Health Physics
- A. Gray, General Foreman, Radioactive Materials Control Group
- N. Hansen, Environmental Technical Specialist
- C. Hays, Supervisor, Computer Engineering
- M. Hunter, Auditor
- J. Hurlocker, Supervisor, Shipping/Receiving/REMS
- M. Johnson, Manager, Environmental
- M. Lewis, Supervisor, Health Physics
- F. Liu, Maintenance Engineering
- A. Scherer, Manager, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs
- J. Scott, Health Physics Engineer, Nuclear Regulatory Affairs
- L. Villalobos, Technician, Health Physics
- D. Wert, Technician, Health Physics
NRC
- C. Osterholtz, Senior Resident Inspector
LIST OF ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened
NoneOpened and Closed During this InspectionNone
LIST OF DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
Section 2OS3:
- Radiation Monitoring Instrumentation and Protective EquipmentCorrective Action Documents