IR 05000219/1982023
| ML20028B569 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 11/10/1982 |
| From: | Bores R, Todd Jackson, Jang J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028B563 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-82-23, NUDOCS 8212030037 | |
| Download: ML20028B569 (11) | |
Text
.
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-219/82-23 Docket No. 50-219 License No. DPR-16 Priority Category C
--
Licensee: GPU Nuclear Corporation Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road Morristown, New Jersey 07960 Facility Name: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS)
Inspection At: Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, Forked River, N.J.
Inspection Conducted:
September 14-17, 1982 Inspectors:
/
\\
vt4 -
/ / ~' b C. Jang, lladi on Specialist date Al W
// - S - Sc2 T.' J. Jpsy Radiation Specialist date 1/
Approved by: [ d - d -
~ N [g C
//-/0 -e2 R. J. Bores, Chief, Independent date Measurements and Environmental Protection Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on September 14-17, 1982 (Report Number 50-219/82-23 Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of environmental monitoring programs for operations at OCNGS, including: the management controls for these programs; the licensee's program for quality control of analytical measurements; implementation of the environmental monitoring programs -
radiological; implementation of the environmental monitoring programs -
biological / ecological; and nonradiological effluent release rates and limits.
The inspection involved 56 direct inspector-hours by two regionally-based NRC inspectors.
Results: Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were iden-tified in three areas. Two items of noncompliance were identified i;i two areas (Detail 5.a, failure to follow air particulate sampling schedule; and Detail 7.a, failure to calibrate the entire thermal monitoring system).
8212030037 821118 PDR ADOCK 05000219 G
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Individuals Contacted
- D. Cafaro, Manager, Oyster Creek Environmental Control
- J. Carroll, Deputy Director, Oyster Creek
- P. Fiedler, Vice President and Director, Oyster Creek J. Hascek, I&C Group Supervisor D. Jones, Plant Engineering Electrical Instrument Supervisor
- M. Laggart, Licensing Supervisor, Oyster Creek R. Markcwski, Site Audit Manager
- S. Molello, Manager - Radiological Programs
- D. Moore, Environmental Licensing, Oyster Creek
- C. Tracey, Manager - QA
- J. Vouglitois, Manager - Biological Programs T. Washburn, Environmental Scientist D. Weigle, Environmental Scientist
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Infraction (219/80-30-01):
Failure to follow written QA Proce-dure. The inspector reviewed and verified the corrective actions regard-ing the implementation of Procedure No. 4008. The inspector also re-viewed Audit S-0C-81-17 and noted that responses to findings were provid-ed as required. The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(See Detail 3.6)
(Closed) Follow-up Item (219/80-30-02):
Implementation of acceptable QC Program for Environmental Data-Radiological.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's QC program for radiological environmental monitoring programs.
The acceptance criteria for the replicate analyses and follow-up actions to resolve identified discrepancies were established in this program.
The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(See Detail 4.a)
(Closed) Deviation (219/80-30-03):
Environmental Air Sampler inlet design. The inspector toured air sampling stations and verified the modification of the air sampler inlet design.
The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(See Detail 5.a)
(Closed) Follow-up Item (219/80-30-04):
Environmental Air Sampling System Modifications. During the last inspection of this area the gas meters were not compensated for ambient temperature fluctuations. The gas maters were calibrated at 60 F.
The inspector verified that tempera-ture compensated gas meters were installed.
The inspector stated that this item is, therefore, closed.
(Closed) Follow-up Item (219/80-30-05): Revision of Environmental Soil Sampling Procedure. The inspector reviewed Procedure 1203.5, Rev. 1, August 3, 1981, "REMP Soil Sample Collection", and noted that a standard
.
.
.
depth (2 inches) and area (1 ft ) for soil sampling were incorporated.
The. inspector stated that this item is closed.
(Closed) Follow-up Item (80-30-06):
Evaluation of Impingement Sampling Apparatus Efficiency. The inspector reviewed " Progress Report of Ecolog-ical Studies at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station", dated September 1980 - August 1981. The inspector noted that a study to evaluate the efficiency of the impingement pit sampling was conducted from mid-December, 1980 to March, 1981. The results of the efficiency study and conclusions were reported. The inspector stated that this item is, therefore, closed.
(Closed) Follow-up Item (80-30-07):
Statistical analyses omitted from
"1980 - Ecological Studies Report" due to short study period - expected to be included in 1981 report. The inspector reviewed " Progress Report of Ecological Studies at Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station," for September 1980 to August 1981, and noted that statistical analyses were included. The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(Closed) Deficiency (219/80-30-08):
Failure to meet required sensor accuracy with both thermal monitoring sensors. The inspector reviewed System Description #299-79-01, Oyster Creek Nucler-Generating Station Circulating Water Temperature Monitoring System ar.c noted that require-ments of the Technical Specifications (Section 2.1 of the OCETS) were
,
accomplished. The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(0 pen) Follow-up Item (219/80-30-09): Corrective actions to ensure operability of plant dilution pumps.
The inspector reviewed a letter dated September 3, 1981 regarding the dilution pump improvement program and discussed with the licensee the current status of the dilution pump improvement program. The inspector noted that the overall dilution pump system upgrade is scheduled for completion by August 1983. The inspector stated that this item will remain open until the corrective action is completed.
(0 pen)
Infraction (219/80-30-10):
Procedures inadequate to prevent failure to operate plant dilution pumps as required, to describe alternate temperature monitoring methods, and to provide calibration of control room meteorological recorders. The inspector reviewed the actions as described by the licensee in a letter dated February 26, 1981 to the NRC.
In addition, 1.
The inspector reviewed Procedure No. 1210.12, Revision 0, dated January 8, 1981, "0CETS - Monitoring Equipment Requirements for LCOs", and noted that this procedure described thermal monitoring requirements of the OCETS.
This item is therefore closed.
2.
The inspector also reviewed Procedure No. 324, Rev. 7, dated January 25, 1982, and noted that this revision contains further guidance on when dilution pumps must be operated. This item is therefore i
closed.
i T
.
.
3.
The inspector reviewed Procedure No. 112.1, Rev. 13, dated May 5, 1982, and determined that the control room meteorological recorder is still not calibrated as part of the meteorological system (See Detail 5). This item therefore remains open.
(Closed) Infraction (219/80-30-11):
Failure to maintain wind direction sensor accuracy within specifications and to calibrate control room meteorological recorders on a semiannual basis as required. The inspec-tor examined the licensee's meteorological monitoring program and re-viewed the calibration results of wind direction, wind speed, and delta T.
The inspector noted that the accuracy of the wind direction sensor was within 5" and that independent electrical calibration of the control room meteorological recorders was performed about monthly. The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(See Detail 7)
(Closed) Unresolved Item (219/80-30-12):
Failure to maintain control room chart recorders.
During the last inspection, the control room meteorological recorder did not correspond with the correct time, and temperature readouts as a function of time could not be read accurately due to the low recorder speed, two inches per 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br />.
The inspector verified corrective actions regarding the control room meteorological recorder speed and maintenance. The corrective actions were acceptable.
The inspector stated that this item is closed.
(Closed) Infraction (219/80-30-13):
Failure to perform monthly cali-bration and weekly channel and alarm checks of thermal monitoring system.
The inspector reviewed monthly calibration data from October 5, 1979 to July 19, 1982 and weekly calibration data for channel and alarm checks from December 8, 1979 to August 7, 1982. The monthly calibration and weekly channel and alarm checks were performed as required. The inspec-
>
tor stated that this item is closed.
3.
Management Controls a.
Organization The inspector reviewed the licensee's management controls for the
environmental monitoring programs. The licensee stated that the General Public Utilities Nuclear Group (GPUNG) has assumed respon-sibility for operation of those parts of the environmental monitor-ing programs not directly related to operation of the plant, as described in Amendment No. 50 to the ETS, dated September 15, 1930.
Under this organization, environmental monitoring programs at Oyster Creek are performed by the Environmental Controls Department.
Environmental Controls is divided into two program areas. The biological studies are conducted by the Biological Program Group, and all other environmental programs including radiological monitor-ing and meteorological monitoring by the Radiological Programs Group.
Each of these two groups consists of a manager and three or more scientists.
The respective managers of these groups report to the Oyster Creek Manager of Environmental Controls, who supervises
.
O
all environmental monitoring programs at the site. This individual then reports to the GPUNG Manager of Environmental Controls, who reports to the GPUNG Director of Radiological and Environmental Controls.
.
The inspector determined that organizational changes of the environ-mental programs management did not result in a decrease in the level of management controls from the previous program, b.
Licensee Audits The inspector reviewed 1981 audit report, Audit S-0C-81-17:
" Environmental Monitoring", performed by the Oyster Creek Site Audit Group. The inspector noted that corrective actions had been made and accepted on identified audit findings as required. The inspec-tor also noted that the next audit of Environmental Monitoring was scheduled during October 1982.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
4.
Licensee Program for Quality Control of Analytical Measurements a.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)
The inspector discussed.with the licensee the quality control (QC)
program for analytical measurements, and also reviewed " Outline of Quality Assurance Program for Oyster Creek REMP". The inspector noted that the REMP QC program had been improved since last in-spection and now included:
(1) interlaboratory comparisons for the primary and the secondary contracted laboratories, (2) acceptance criteria of QC data, (3) followup actions required to correct identified deficiencies, (4) contractor laboratories audits and followups, (5) review of contracted laboratories' analytical procedures, and (6) review of contracted laboratories' QA reports.
The inspector reviewed results of duplicate samples analyzed by the primary and the secondary contracted laboratories, and noted that
>
followup actions were initiated for anomalous results as required.
The inspector noted that the licensee audit (Audit No. 0-0C-81-08)
and followup (Audit No. 0-COM-82-03) of the primary contractor radioanalytical laboratory (Radiation Management Corporation) were performed on September 10, 1981 and March 31, 1982, respectivel.
.
The licensee stated that the current QC program did not include the comparative analysis of any spiked samples due to the lack of the appropriate facility for preparing spikes on site. However, the licensee reviewed the contracted laboratories QA reports including EPA cross-check program results. The inspector also reviewed the contracted laboratory QA report, RMC-QA-82-05.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area at this time, b.
Biological / Ecological The inspector discussed with the licensee the biological QA program including the activities of the licensee's contractor, Ecological Analysts, Inc. (EA). The inspector reviewed QA audit for EA, File
- 143 dated July 1,1982, and also reviewed selected EA sampling schedules. The inspector reviewed EA Report JCP91I, " Quality Assurance Procedures Manual for the Oyster Creek Project". The licensee stated that EA also performs periodic QC checks on species identification and confirmatory recounts on sample collections.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
5.
Implementation of the Environmental Monitoring - Radiological a.
Direct Observations The inspector examined selected air sampling and direct radiation measurement stations on September 16, 1982. The inspector noted that the air sampler was removed from the Station No. I without the knowledge of the REMP Manager. The licensee investigated this incident immediately after the REMP Manager learned of this during the above inspection trip. The inspector also examined several documents related to this event.
The inspector noted that the job
,
i order for replacement of the blown fuse on the air sampler at the Station No. I was issued by the REMP Manager on September 10, 1982.
The air sampler was checked by the plant electrician and removed
,
from Station 1 for repair on September 14, 1982. The air sampler l
was replaced at 2:00 p.m., September 16, 1982. The inspector noted l
that the air sampler at Station No. I had malfunctioned at 4:12 l
a.m., September 6, 1982 and this was discovered by the REMP person-j nel on September 10, 1982. The inspector also reviewed sampling
logs for 1981 and noted that the air particulates were collected from December 7, 1981 to December 30, 1981 a period of three weeks l
at air sampling Stations No. 2, No. 3, and A.
!
Section 4.6.B(3) of Appendix A to the Provisional Operating License No. DPR-16 requires that the environmental program described in Section B.II.6 of Amendment 65 to the Application for the Reactor Operating License shall be conducted. Table B-II-1 of Amendment 65 to the Operating License requires that airborne particulates be collected from five specified locations every two weeks and analyzed l
l l
<
O.
for gross beta activity. The inspector stated that failure to collect the environmental air particulate samples at Station Nos. 1, 2, 3, and A as required was an item of noncompliance (219/82-23-01).
The inspector discussed with the licensee the apparent split respon-sibilities of various plant departments for sample collection, station maintenance, etc., which led to the above incident.
The licensee stated that this situation would be reviewed and appropri-ate actions taken. This item will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (219/82-23-02).
During the last inspection (219/80-30), two items were identified as either a deviation or followup in this area.
The inspector verified the licensee's corrective actions during this inspection.
The previous findings and subsequent corrective actions were as follows:
(1) the air sampler inlet tubing has a 90 turn through which the inlet air passed before reaching the particulate filter and iodine collector. This sample inlet tubing could have selec-tively removed particulates from the air stream. The licensee installed new inlet tubes to avoid this problem, and (2) the air sample volume was measured by gas volume meters and these gas volume meters did not compensate for ambient tempera-ture fluctuations. The vacuum gauges used to compensate for pressure drop across the sample filters were not regularly calibrated. The licensee installed temperature compensated gas volume meters and also maintained calibration of the vacuum gauges used to correct the air sample volumes.
The inspector determined that the corrective actions were adequate.
The inspector also discussed with the licensee sample collection schedules for rain water, weil water, surface water, vegetation, and soil samples. The inspector reviewed sampling logs for 1982. The inspector had no further questions in this area.
b.
Meteorology The inspector noted that three items of noncompliance were iden-tified in this area during the previous inspection:
failure to include control room meteorological recorders as part of calibration of the meteorological monitoring system (219/80-30-10), failure to maintain wind direction sensor accuracy within specifications (15 )
and to calibrate control room meteorological recorders on a semian-nual basis as required (219/80-30-11), and failure to maintain control room chart recorders (219/80-30-12).
The inspector reviewed the licensee's corrective actions in this area.
The inspector noted that the old meteorological tower (previously used as a calibration reference point) was no longer used.
Instead, the mid point of the stack was used as a wind direction calibration reference direction point (113 ).
The inspector reviewed the new calibration results
,
..
.
and noted that the accuracy of the wind direction sensor was within 15*.
The inspector verified corrective actions regarding the control room chart recorder time / speed and maintenance. The inspec-tor also reviewed the calibration of the control room meteorological recorders and noted that independent electrical calibrations were performed more frequently than required by Procedure No. 112.1. The inspector noted that the calibrations were performed on separate components of the meteorological monitoring system, but not on the entire integrated system including the control room chart recorders.
Therefore, the output of the meteorological data on the control room chart recorders was potentially not reliable. These recorders would be the plant operators' source of meteorological data in the early stages of an emergency and it is therefore important that recorder data be accurate and reliable. The inspector stated that this noncompliance was identified during a previous inspection in this area and this item therefore remains open (219/80-30-10).
The inspector noted that Section 3.3, "Onsite Meteorological Moni-toring", had been deleted from the OCETS by Amendment No. 56. After discussing this situation with the NRC Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) it was determined that Section 3.3 had been deleted from the OCETS inadvertently. This was discussed with the licensee and it was agreed that the licensee would submit to NRR a request for an additional. amendment which will reinstate the provisions of Section 3.3.
The inspector stated that this submittal will be reviewed when received, and will be followed up during a future inspection of this area (219/82-23-03).
c.
Review of Reports The inspector reviewed Semiannual Effluent Release Reports 1981-2 (June 1981 through November 1981) and 1982-1 (December 1981 through June 1982).
The inspector noted that direct radiation measurements data were expressed in terms of exposure per exposure period.
The exposure period was noted to be a variable unit of time.
The inspector noticed that this item was discussed with the licensee during the previous inspection. The licensee stated that the reporting units would be re-evaluated.
The inspector also noted that the radium-226 activity in the precipitation samples was measured and was reported as 34.0 pCi/l of radium-226 for one sampling station out of 5 stations during the first quarter of 1982.
This anomalous result was not discussed in the " Analysis of Data" section of the report. The inspector stated that the interpretation of anomalous results, reporting units, and reporting format would be re-examined during a subsequent inspection (50-219/82-23-04).
No items of noncompliance were identified in this are r
_.
..
d.
Review of Procedur_es The inspector reviewed the following procedures:
(1) 1201.3, Revision 2, May 15, 1978, REMP - Performance of Surveys (2) 1203.1, Revision 1, May 16, 1979, REMP - Radiogas Sample Col-lection and Treatment (3) 1203.2, Revision 2, July 18, 1978, REMP - Air Sample Collection
'
and Treatment (4) 1203.3, Revisian 0, August 15, 1977, REMP - Rainwater Sample Collection and Treatment (5) 1203.5, Revision 1, August 3, 1981, REMP - Soil Sample Col-lection (6) 1205.2, Revision 1, May 16, 1979, Review and Maintenance of REMP Sample Analysis Reports.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
6.
Implementation of the Environmental Monitoring Programs - Biologi-
.
cal / Ecological a.
Direct Observations The inspector observed the licensee's contractor collecting impinge-ment and entrainment samples. The inspector noted that the sampling was performed in accordance with approved procedures. The inspector also discussed with the licensee the' scope of the monitoring pro-gram.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
b.
Review of Reports The inspector reviewed the following reports as part of this in-spection:
(1) Annual Environmental Operating Report for 1980 (2) Progress Report of Ecological Studies at OCNGS, September, 1979
- August 1980 (3) Progress Report of Ecological Studies at OCNGS, September 1980
- August 1981
_.
-
. -
-_
-
-_
e
.,
,
(4) Annual Report on Study of Woodborer Populations in Relation to the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station (OCNGS), December 1, 1980 - November 30, 1981 (5) Progress Report for the 28th Quarter on Study of Woodborer Populations in Relation to the OCNGS, February 21, 1982 - May 20, 1982 (6) Progress Report for the 29th Quarter on Study of Weodborer Populations in Relation to the OCNGS, May 21, 1982 - August 20, 1982 The inspector noted that statistical analyses were not included in 1980 Ecological Studies Report due to the short study period, and this had resulted in a follow up item in the previous inspection (219/80-30-07). The inspector reviewed Progress Report of Ecologi-cal studies at OCNGS, from September 1980 to August 1981, and noted that statistical analyses were included.
The inspector identified no items of noncompliance with regard to the above reports.
7.
Nonradioactive Effluent Release Rates and Limits a.
Thermal Monitoring System The inspector discussed with the licensee the thermal monitoring system and the system capabilities. The inspector noted that during inspection 50-219/80-30, backup thermal sensors were not operable as required (219/80-30-08). The inspector verified that the licensee had taken corrective actions regarding this item and that redundant sensors were now in use as required.
The inspector noted that the calibration of the thermal monitoring system was performed excluding sensors. Monitoring Requirements of Section 2.0 of the Oyster Creek Environments Technical Specifica-tions (OCETS) requires instrument calibration. The definition of the calibration is defined in Section 1.0 of the OCETS as follows:
"An instrument or device calibration shall be the adjustment, as necessary, of the output such that it responds, with the necessary range and accuracy, to known values of the parameter which the instrument sensor, or device monitors.
The calibration shall encompass all aspects of the circuit, including the sensor, indicat-ing control features, alarm, and/or trip functions."
The inspector stated that failure to calibrate the integrated thermal monitoring system, including the sensors, is an item of noncompliance with the above requirements.
(219/82-23-05)
,.
..
,
b.
Chemical Releases The inspector reviewed the chemical release records from the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station during 1979 and 1980.
No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
8.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives denoted in Detail 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on September 17, 1982.
The inspector summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and inspection findings, including each item of noncompliance.
.
... -
_