IR 05000010/2007008
| ML072750502 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 10/02/2007 |
| From: | Louden P NRC/RGN-III/DNMS/DB |
| To: | Crane C Exelon Generation Co, Exelon Nuclear |
| References | |
| IR-07-008 | |
| Download: ML072750502 (9) | |
Text
October 2, 2007
Mr. Christopher President and Chief Nuclear Officer Exelon Nuclear Exelon Generation Company, LLC 4300 Winfield Road Warrenville, IL 60555 SUBJECT: NRC INSPECTION REPORT 050-00010/07-08 (DNMS) DRESDEN NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT 1
Dear Mr. Crane:
On September 20, 2007, the NRC completed inspection activities at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit 1. The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether the decommissioning activities were conducted safely and in accordance with NRC requirements. Specifically, during an onsite inspection on September 20, 2007, the inspector evaluated organization and management controls, decommissioning performance, and radioactive waste treatment. At the conclusion of the on-site inspection on September 20, 2007, the inspector discussed the inspection findings with members of your staff.
This inspection consisted of an examination of decommissioning activities at the Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations. Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the enclosed report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of a selective examination of procedures and representative records, and interviews with personnel.
Based on the results of this inspection, the NRC did not identify any violations.
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 NRC's document system (ADAMS). The NRC's document system is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html. We will gladly discuss any questions you may have regarding this inspection.
Sincerely,
/RA/ Patrick L. Louden, Chief Decommissioning Branch Docket No.50-010 License No. DPR-2
Enclosure:
Inspection Report 050-00010/07-08(DNMS)
REGION III==
Docket No. 50-00010 License No. DPR-2 Report No. 050-00010/07-08(DNMS)
Licensee: Exelon Nuclear Facility: Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit 1 Location: 6500 N. Dresden Road Morris, IL 60450 Dates: September 20, 2007 Inspector: William G. Snell, Senior Health Physicist Approved by: Patrick L. Louden, Chief Decommissioning Branch Division of Nuclear Materials Safety
Enclosure 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Dresden Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 NRC Inspection Report 050-00010/07-08(DNMS)
This routine decommissioning inspection included a review of the licensee's current performance related to decommissioning activities, management oversight of decommissioning activities, and radioactive waste management.
Organization, Management and Cost Controls The inspector concluded the licensee's decommissioning program continued to make progress towards SAFSTOR dormancy, although work was often delayed due to a higher priority provided to work activities on Units 2/3.
Decommissioning Performance and Status Review
The licensee was adequately maintaining the Unit 1 structures and components.
Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring The licensee is effectively locating radwaste and contaminated material associated with past Unit 1 decommissioning activities and shipping it offsite for disposal. The drain-down of the upper storage side of the SFP is completed and the licensee is adequately pursuing acquiring the necessary radiation protection support to complete the drain-down of the remaining water in the transfer side of the pool.
Enclosure 3 Report Details 1 1.0 Organization, Management and Cost Controls (36801)
1.1 Inspection Scope The inspectors reviewed the licensee's decommissioning program to verify that it was effective in progressing towards SAFSTOR dormancy.
1.2 Observations and Findings The licensee continued to manage activities associated with Unit 1 through two separate groups. Routine activities that were generally non-unit specific in content, such as periodic maintenance, radiation surveys, and surveillances, were completed by plant personnel assigned to Units 2/3. Work associated with achieving SAFSTOR dormancy for Unit 1 is assigned to several employees who were dedicated to Unit 1 activities. The licensee's objective is to place the Unit 1 systems, structures and components (SSCs) in a condition that will minimize the amount of maintenance and minimize the potential of degradation while in SAFSTOR for approximately 20 years. Procedure DDP-17, "SAFSTOR Preparation End State Determination," specifies the process for identifying and determining actions necessary to place SSCs in a condition appropriate for SAFSTOR. Because work on Units 2/3 is normally a higher priority due to their operational status, work on Unit 1 is often delayed until workers can be made available. None of the work deferred for Unit 1 resulted in delays to address issues related to safety. 1.3 Conclusion The inspector concluded the licensee's decommissioning program continued to make progress towards SAFSTOR dormancy, although work was often delayed due to a higher priority provided to work activities on Units 2/3.
2.0 Decommissioning Performance and Status Review (71801)
2.1 Inspection Scope The inspector conducted a site tour to assess conditions of Unit 1 structures and components.
2.2 Observations and Findings During site tours the inspectors noted that the material condition of facilities and equipment was being maintained and upgraded where appropriate. For example, portions of structures and fencing that were becoming rusty had been painted.
1 A List of acronyms used in the report is included at the end of the Report Details.
Enclosure 4In response to security related concerns, the licensee was going to demolish the Unit 1 Offgas Filter Building and the Unit 1 Crib House down to grade level. Unit 1 personnel would manage this activity that was scheduled to be completed before the end of calendar year 2007.
2.3 Conclusion The licensee was adequately maintaining the Unit 1 structures and components.
3.0 Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring (84750)
3.1 Inspection Scope The inspectors reviewed the licensee's handling of radwaste left over from past Unit 1 decommissioning activities and the processing of liquid radioactive waste associated with Unit 1.
3.2 Observations and Findings The licensee has continued to look for and find radwaste and contaminated material associated with past Unit 1 decommissioning activities that was never removed from the site. To the extent practicable, as this waste is located, it is shipped offsite for disposal. During the inspection the inspector observed a sea-land shipping container containing old Unit 1 waste being moved to load onto a flatbed truck for shipment to a waste disposal facility.
The processing and disposing of water from the Unit 1 Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) was stopped in late 2005 to replace the turbine building drain tank pumps and to refurbish the associated electrical breakers. This work was completed in late 2006, which allowed SFP drain down to continue. The SFP water is gradually being processed and transferred to the Units 2/3 radwaste system. This work has been slow due to the need to obtain radiation protection support from Units 2/3. The SFP has two parts, an upper area where the used fuel was stored, and a deeper adjacent area where fuel was transferred to the reactor vessel. Currently the water in the SFP has been drained to just below the level of the floor of the upper storage side, but the transfer side of the pool still contains about 110,000 gallons of water that must be processed. The licensee indicated that they were pursing obtaining a commitment from Units 2/3 for radiation protection support to get the pool drain-down completed. Once the SFP is drained, the filtration equipment will be moved to the Chem-Cleaning Building to begin processing the water in the T102 Tank.
The inspector reviewed the radiation survey data for the floor of the upper storage side of the SFP. Dose rates were observed to be low, averaging around 3 to 6 millirem per hour at one foot from the floor. Some of the epoxy that had been painted onto the walls prior to draining to reduce the potential for airborne contamination was peeling. The licensee was working with the vendor who had supplied the paint so that the reason for the peeling could be determined and the problem areas repaired.
Enclosure 5 3.3 Conclusion The licensee is effectively locating radwaste and contaminated material associated with past Unit 1 decommissioning activities and shipping it offsite for disposal. The drain-down of the upper storage side of the SFP is completed and the licensee is adequately pursuing acquiring the necessary radiation protection support to complete the drain-down of the remaining water in the transfer side of the pool.
4.0 Exit Meeting Summary The inspectors presented the inspection results to licensee management at the conclusion of the onsite inspection on September 20, 2007. The licensee acknowledged the findings presented.
ATTACHMENT: SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION Attachment SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee *J. Panozzo, Unit 1 Project Manager *R. Christensen, Senior Project Manager *J. Griffin, Regulatory Assurance Specialist
- Indicates presence at the exit meeting held on September 20, 2007.
INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED IP 36801 Organization, Management & Cost Controls IP 71801 Decommissioning Performance and Status Review IP 84750 Radioactive Waste Treatment, and Effluent and Environmental Monitoring ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED
Opened None Closed None
Discussed None LIST OF ACRONYMS USED CFR Code of Federal Regulations NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission SAFSTOR Safe Storage Condition SFP Spent Fuel Pool
DOCUMENTS REVIEWED
Documents used during the inspection were specifically identified in the Report Details, above.