IR 05000334/1980015
| ML19337B033 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 07/28/1980 |
| From: | Bores R, Todd Jackson NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19337B015 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-334-80-15, NUDOCS 8010010224 | |
| Download: ML19337B033 (10) | |
Text
_ _ -.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
__ _ _ _ _
.'
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No. 50-334/80-15 Docket No. 50-334 C
License No. DPR-66 Priority Category
--
Licensee:
Duquesne Light Company (DLC)
435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Facility Name:
Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS) Unit 1 Inspection at:
BVPS Site, Shippingport, Pennsylvania 15219 Inspection conducted:
June 2-6, 1980 Inspectors:
, AC 9.2 / 8e
,
Th ackson, Radiation Specialist
/ date signed
,
date signed date signed Approved by:
7hP/fd R. J. Bor45', Chief. Environmental and Special date signed Projects Section, FF&MS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on June 2'-6, 1980 (Report No. 50-344/80-15)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of environmental monitoring programs for operations at BVPS Unit 1 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 nonradioactive effluent release rates and limits.
This inspection involved 40 inspector-hours of direct inspection effort by one regionally-based inspector.
Results : Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified in four areas: one item of noncompliance (Infraction - Failure to have complete discharge temperature monitoring system calibration procedure - paragraph 5.a)
was found in one area.
j Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
8010010.%29
l
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- H. P. Williams, Chief Engineer, DLCo
- R. E. Conrad Environmental Coordinator, DLCo
- J. W. Wenkhouse, Reactor Control Chemist, DLCo
'
- F. J. Lipchick, Compliance Engineer, DLCo
- L. K. Hutchinson, Audit Coordinator, DLCo
- J. Forney, Instrument Engineer, DLCo
-
- G. Beatty, QA Engineer, DLCo A. J. Mizia, QA Engineer, DLCo A. Matijak, Instrument Maintenance Foreman, DLCo J. F. Rathke, Instrument Engineer, DLCo H. Mulcahy, Field Sampler, Teledyne Isotopes
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Finjings (Closed) Unresolved Item (334/78-01-03) Environmental TLD Performance.
The inspector reviewed studies made by Teledyne Isotopes and submitted to the licensee on October 27, 1978.
The inspector noted that these studies detailed the performance of Teledyne's TLD program as described in Regulatory Guide 4.13 and ANSI N545-1975, with the exception of energy response of dosimeters enclosed in their cases.
The inspector reviewed a Teledyne letter answering a DLCo audit which stated that studies of energy response of encased dosimeters were being done and results would be forwarded when available.
The inspector stated that based on the results of this performance evaluation this item is closed (Details 5.c).
3.
Management Controls a.
Assignment of Responsibility The inspector reviewed the organization and administration of the environmental monitorina programs with respect to changes made since the last inspection of this area.
The licensee stated that the environmental monitoring programs are now the responsibility of the Environmental Coordinator who reports to the Superintendent - Licensing and Compliance.
This Superintendent reports to the Director of Nuclear Operations,who in turn reports to the DLCo General Superintenden.
.
.
b.
Contracted Services The inspector reviewed the licensee's contracted services with respect to the sampling and analysis of the required environmental media including the radiological, aquatic and terrestrial monitoring programs.
Radiological sampling and analyses have been performed by Teledyne Isotopes, Inc. since the last inspection in this area (334/78-01), and this is continuing in 1980.
The licensee stated that the biological and ecological studies and meteorological monitoring programs are currently contracted to NUS Corporation, and were contracted to NUS during 1979.
During 1978 NUS performed the same services with the exception of aqut?.ic programs, performed by NALCO, and terrestrial programs, performed by Equitable Environmental Health.
c.
Program Review and Audits The inspector discussed with the licensee procedures for program review and audits.
The licensee stated that the performance of the radiological and biological environmental surveillance programs was revicwed and evaluated on a continuous basis.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's documentation of this area and observed that these programs were reviewed in a timely manner; sampling equipment and frequencies were checked; inadequacies in the program were flagged; management was informed of identified inadequacies and corrective
.
actions taken.
The inspector reviewed the following licensee audits.
Audit No.
Date Audit Area 79-2-E May 18, 1979 Teledyne Isotopes Lab 79-2.1-E July 10-11, 1979 NUS Field Operetions 79-2.2-E July 17,1979 NUS Lab 79-2.3-E August 14, 1979 Teledyne Field Operations 79-5-E September 10-12, 1979 BVPS Effluent Program
.
!
{
t l
.
The inspector noted that these audits were performed in accordance with written procedures.
w No items of non;ompliance were identified.
4.
Licensee Program for Quality Control of Analytical Measurements The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for quality control (QC) of analytical measurements as related to the radiological analysis of environmental media. The QC program included split, spiked and duplicate samples covering the primary media and type of analyses required by the Environmental Technical Specifications (ETS).
The inspector discussed with the licensee the criteria applied to QC data to determine acceptance / rejection of the data, and follow-up of any rejected analytical data.
The inspector noted that Bettis lab, acting as a QC lab for DLCo, performed a statistical evaluation of QC data for the licensee but that the licensee did not have a procedure for performing their own analysis of QC data.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Imalementation of the Environmental Monitoring Program
-
Radiological a.
Review of Reports The inspector reviewed the licensee's annual radiological monitoring reports for the period January 1, 1978 through December 31, 1979.
The inspector verified that the reports were submitted to the NRC on the required schedule and included the required analytical data.
The inspector noted that anomalous measurements observed during 1978 and 1979 were evaluated and reported.
b.
Air Sampling and Analyses The inspector examined by direct observation six of the environmental monitoring locations including direct gamma radiation and air sampling stations.
The inspector verified that the examined stations were located and sampled as require._.
.
.
.
.
The inspector discussed maintenance and calibration of air samplers with the licensee.
The licensee stated that air samplers are checked twice weekly and replaced with spare units as needed.
The licensee stated that air flow dry gas meters are calibrated at 18 nonth intervals.
The inspector verified that calibrations were performed as specified
,
by procedures.
The inspector reviewed Licensee Event Report (LER) No. 78-026/04T concerning gross beta activity in air samples during March 1978, which i
the licensee attributed to Chinese nuclear weapons. testing, and noted
-
that this was reported as required.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
c.
Direct Radiation The inspector discussed with the licensee the environmental TLD program.
The inspector determined from data review and discussion with the
!
licensee that the TLDs were collected and read as required by Table 3.2.1 of the ETS.
The inspector reviewed the direct environmental radiation monitoring results for 1978 and 1979.
The inspector discussed with the licensee the basis for rejection of the first and second quarter 1978 DLCo contractor (Teledyne Isotcpes) TLD data as anomalous and invalid.
The licensee stated that based on the additional QC TLDs, Annual TLDs, and Pressurized Ion Chamber data it was concluded that these anomalous results were rat attributable to radiation exposure in the field.
The licensee stated that no unusual releases occurred during the period in question.
The inspector reviewed the anomalous data and the licensee's Semi-Annual Effluent Release Reports for July-December 1977 and for 1978 describing actual gaseous releases from the plant.
The licensee stated that TLDs from an additional contractor were placed during the third and fourth quarters of 1978, and that the investigation of the 1978 TLD data was continuing.
The licensee
'
stated that this investigation will include a report on comparison of TLD results between labs.
The inspector stated that the cumpleted investigation would be re-examined during a subsequent inspection in this area (50-334/80-15-01).
The inspector discussed with the licensee the TLD handling procedures.
The inspector reviewed a series of Teledyne Isotopes studies of TLD performance, based on Regulatory Guide 14.3, covering the following areas:
Title Stody Date Dose - Response Relationship ti ga 4/7/78 0-200 mR for the 25% CaSO :Dy Cssimeter
>
.
.__
_
_ -. _
.--
.
.
.
Uniformity Test 2/3/78 Reproducibility Test 4/20/78 Light Dependence Test 4/28/78 Moisture Dependence Test 4/28/78 Dependence of Exposure Interpretation 4/28/78 on the Field Cycle Test Self-Irradiation Test 5/1/78 Can a Pair of 25% CaS0a:Dy Dosimeters 5/15/78 Detect a 1mR Dose Diffdrence at 7mR and a 3 mR Difference at 21 mR?
Directional Dependence Test 7/18/78 The inspector noted that during DLCo Audit No. 79-2-E of the Teledyne Lab it was determined that the Teledyne Energy Response study had been performed with unpackaged dosimeters not loaded into cases.
DLCo commented that a true test of dosimeter energy response required in situ conditions which include dosimeters in cases.
Teledyne's response to this comment in 1979 was that new dosimeter housings had been introduced which could satisfy the energy response criteria of Regulatory
-
Guide 4.13 and that a report would be submitted to DLCo when available.
The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
2.
Milk Sampling and Analyses The inspector reviewed the milk sampling and analyses program for 1978-1979.
'ihe inspector verified that the milk samples were collected and analyzed as required.
The inspector reviewed a sample of the raw analytical data and verified that the minimum detection limits (MDL)
for Sr-89, Sr-90, and I-131 were met.
i i
.
__
.
.
- The inspector reviewed LER No. 78-029/04T concerning two milk samples in April 1978 that exceeded the I-131 reporting level, which the licensee attributed to Chinese nuclear weapons testing, and noted that this was reported as required.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
e.
Other Environmental Media The inspector reviewed the licensee's sampling and analytical results for other environmental media including soil, sediment, vegetation, food crops, fish, and surface and drinking water.
Surface water concentrations of tritium at Station No. 2 (near BVPS Station discharge) exceeded reporting levels during the first and second quarters of 1978, and the first and fourth quarters of 1979.
The inspector noted that these levels were reported as required to the NRC by the licensee as LERs Nos. 78-035/04T, 78-044/04T, 79-Oll/04T, and 80-006/04T.
The licensee stated that all of the reported tritium levels were detected at the Ohio River location nearest the plant discharge.
The licensee stated that this location is more representative of the plant effluent and it is not representative of environmental level s.
The inspector noted that the detected tritium levels were significantly less than that listed in Appendix B, Table II of 10 CFR 20.
The inspector reviewed LER 79-012/04T concerning the gross beta level of a monthly Ohio River water composite from Station No. 3, located upriver of the BVPS discharge, which exceeded the reporting levels.
The licensee stated that this beta activity was due to naturally occurring radioactivity.
The inspector determined that this information was reported to the NRC as required.
The inspector determined that other media were sampled and analyzed as required by Table 3.2-1 of the ETS.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
6.
Implementation of the Environmental Monitoring Program
- Biological / Ecological The inspector discussed with the licensee the aquatic and terrestrial studies ccnducted during 1978 - 1979.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's biological / ecological reports for 1977 and 1978 and verified that the reports were submitted as required and included the required informatio __
_ _ _ - _ _ _ _
_
_ _ _ _
,
.
.
l The inspector discussed with the licensee the use of an incorrect sampling location for Station 3 during the first eight months of 1978, reported to the NRC as LER 78-052/04T. The inspector reviewed an evaluation of the overall program effects of this error submitted to the licensee by Hazleton Envir: ental Services. The inspector determined through records review and discussions with the licensee that all other biological samples were collected and analyzed as required. The inspector had no further questions in this area at this time.
7.
Nonradioactive Effluent Release Rates and Limits a.
Thermal Releases The inspector reviewed selected discharge temperature records from
-
1979.
The inspector discussed with the licensee calibration of the cooling tower blowdown discharge temperature monitoring system.
The inspector determined that the current calibration procedure, Maintenance Surveillance Procedure (MSP) 31.01
" Cooling Tower Blowdown Temperature Channel Test / Calibration, Rev.1", requiring quarterly calibrations,
.
does not include calibration of the cooling tower blowdown discharge
'
temperature resistance temperature detector (RTD), which is the temperature sensing component of the system.
The inspector determined that the cooling tower blowdown discharge RTD had last been calibrated when installed on May 2,1975.
The inspector also determined that the backup discharge temperature monitoring system which monitors the condenser cooling water inlet, as specified in Section 3.1.1 of the ETS is calibrated according to procedure MSP 31.03
" Condenser Inlet Temperature Channel Test / Calibration, Rev: 4" which also omits calibration of system RTDs.
The inspector noted that these calibration procedures specify a voltage check of RTD output using a decade box but do not contain procedures for determining actual temperature response of the RTDs and the associated monitoring systems against known temperatures.
The inspector stated that failure to have complete calibration procedures for the cooling tower blowdown discharge temperature monitoring systems is an item of noncompliance with regulatury requirements (50-334/80-15-02).
.
__
. - _ _
_
..
....
.
b.
Chemical Sump Neutralization and Discharge pH The inspector examined the liquid waste neutralizing system at the chemical waste sump.
The licensee stated that the chemical sump is currently neutralized in the manual mode as per Special Operating Orders Nos. 78-1 and 78-2.
The inspector determined through review of records and discussion with the licensee that the sump pH sensor calibration was checked against weekly grab samples during 1979.
The inspector discussed with the licensee LERs Nos. 78-009/04T, 78-034/04T, and 78-047/04T, which discussed chemical sump releases which exceeded ETS pH discharge limits.
The licensee stated that as described in these LERs the pH sensor is regularly cleaned and that automatic actuation of the sump discharge cut-off valve is periodically tested by filling the pH sensor chamber with known solutions of pH above or
,
below the cut-off valve alarm set points.
The inspector had no further j
questions at this time.
c.
Chlorine Monitoring The inspector discussed with the licensee the operation of the plant chlorination system and associated continuous chlorine monitors.
The licensee stated that when chlorination is being done it is for a maximum period of 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> 45 minutes.
The inspector reviewed calibration of the continuous chlorine monitors and noted that calibrations were performed quarterly and as specified in MSP 32.01
" Condenser Discharge
.
Chlorine Monitor Channel Test and Calibration, Rev. 3" which specifies use of standard solutions of chlorine for sensor calibration.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
d.
Chemical Inventory
.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's chemical inventories for 1978 and 1979.
The licensee stated that sodium sulfate, sodium chloride, and boric acid releases during 1978 and sodium sulfate releases during 1979 significantly exceeded the estimated release amounts.
The inspector reviewed the evaluations of these impacts contained as Appendices B, C, and D, to the 1978 Annual Environmental Report, Non-radiological, Vol. No. 1.
The inspector had no further questions in this are....
.
.
e.
Corrosion Inhibitors The inspector reviewed the discharge records for hexavalent chromium since the previous inspection in this area and noted that all reviewed releases contained < 0.05 mg/l of hexavalent chromium.
8.
Meteorology The inspector examined the meteorological monitoring system at the tower and at the control room. The inspector noted that the meteorological instrumentation was in an operable condition at the time of the inspection.
The inspector discussed with the licensee the calibration of the meteorological instrumentation.
The inspector noted that the licensee had been cited in NRC inspection report 50-334/80-05 for failure to have reviewed and approved the calibration procedures in use.
The licensee stated that this procedure is currently under review and provided the inspector with a copy of this procedure for review. The inspector noted that the next calibration of the meteorological instrumentation was scheduled for early June,1980, and the licensee stated that the calibration procedures would be reviewed and
]
approved prior to calibration.
The inspector stated that this item would
!
re-examined during a subsequent inspection.
9.
Licensee Event Reports The inspector reviewed the following additional LERs:
78-015/04L 79-001/04T 78-033/04L 80-013/04T 78-058/04T No items of noncompliance were identified.
10.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in paragraph 1 at the conclusion of the inspection on June 6,1980 at the BVPS - Unit 1 site.
The inspector summarized the purpose and the scope of the inspection and the inspection findings, including the item of noncompliance.