IR 05000335/1980018
| ML17208A940 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 07/14/1980 |
| From: | Cunningham A, Jenkins G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17208A939 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-335-80-18, NUDOCS 8008270331 | |
| Download: ML17208A940 (6) | |
Text
~8 RECIj
~4
Cy 0O I
cAo
+w*w+
UNITEDSTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTN.W., SUITE 3100 ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30303 Report No. 50-335/80-18 Licensee:
Flordia Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33101
'Facility Name:
St. Lucie Plant Docket No. 50-335 License No. DPR-67 Inspection at St.
Lu Inspect r:
A. L.
C Approved by,'.
R.
e Pl nt near Ft. Pierce, FL, Jensen ham ns, Section Chief FFMS Branch i/ice~
Date Sign d
7/
Date igned SUMMARY Inspection on June 17-23, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine unannounced inspection involved 36 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of management controls; environmental surveillance program; reporting requirement.
Results Of the three areas inspected no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
1'0 0 82 7033,)
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees-J. H. Barrow, Operating Superintendent-R. P. Frechette, Chemistry Supervisor N. G. Roos, Quality Control Engineer
"A. W. Bailey, Quality Assurance Supervisor
" G. M. Vaux, Quality Control Supervisor Other Organizations
- "J. O'ara, St. Iucie Project Coordinator (Applied Biology Inc.)
- "D. I,. Webster, Quality Assurance Manager (Applied Biology Inc.)
<<"Attended exit interview at St. Lucie Plant
--"Attended exit interview at Applied Biology, Inc.
2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on June 20, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
On June 23, 1980, inspection was concluded at the licensee's contractor, Applied Biology, Inc. Inspection included a detailed review of the contractor's procedures and quality assurance program employed to assure implementation of St. Lucie non"radio-logical environmental monitoring program as defined in Appendix B Technical Specifications to Facility licensee DPR-67.
Inspection findings were also discussed with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Findings There were no previous inspection findings.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Management Controls a
~
Management and adminstrative controls assuring implementation of Environmental Technical Specifications defined in Appendix B to Facility License DPR-67 are detailed in Section 5.0 of the subject specifications.
Included in this Section are requirements for development and use of detailed written procedures for implementing program requirements,
review and audit of environmental programs and program management, routine and nonroutine reporting requirement Appendix B Technical Specifications 5.5.1 requires preparation and use of detailed written procedures for all activities'nvolved in imple-menting the subject environmental specifications.
The specification further requires that procedures include sampling, data recording and storage, instrument calibration, measurements and analyses.
Inspection included the following:
(1) review and discussion of licensee procedures for implementing aquatic thermal, chemical and physicochemical surveil-lance requirements defined in Sections 2.1, 2.2 and 3.1.A of the subject specifications; (2) analytical quality control for thermal, chemical and physiochemical parameters; (3) aquatic biological procedures and respective analytical quality control for program parameters defined in Sections 3.1.B and 4.1 of the specifications.
Thermal and chemical (including pH, heavy metals and residual chlorine) monitoring of the plant circulating water system was conducted by licensee plant site personnel.
Inspection of the procedures and review o'f the respec-tive analytical quality control program for the above abiotic parameters disclosed that they were consistent with technical specification requirements cited above.
There were no questions regarding this item.
The biological program defined in Technical Specifications 3.1.B and 4.1, which include synoptic water quality monitoring, plankton, benthos, macrophytes, nekton, and entrainment, were conducted by a licensee contractor.
Inspection disclosed that the respective procedures and analytical quality control program assuring implementation of biological monitoring requirements were consistent with the criteria defined in Technical Specification 5.5.1 referenced above.
There were no questions regarding this item.
Appendix B Technical Specification 5.3.4 requires periodic audits concerning implementation of the Environmental Technical Specifica-tions as provided for in the licensee's Quality Assurance Manual.
Inspection included a detailed review of Quality Assurance Audit Report No.
QAS-ENV-79-1.
Inspection also included a detailed review of the quality assurance program and annual audit implemented by the licensee's contractor who conducted the biological monitoring defined in Appendix B Technical Specifications 3.1.B and 4.1 respectively.
Inspection of licensee Audit Report No. QAS-ENV-79-1 disclosed (although licensee auditors identified no adverse findings) that the scope of the audit report did not define the audit paramaters or items audited in the case of St.
Lucie Unit 1.
The inspector later reviewed and discussed with a licensee representative the St.
Iucie audit checklist and determined that, although the scope of the subject report was ill defined, the audit was comprehensive and consistent with Technical Specification requirements.
There were no further questions regarding this item.
Inspection of the licensee contractor, referenced in paragraph 2,
disclosed that the contractor had developed a quality assurance program, including annual management and program audits.
An audit of the St.
Lucie biological monitoring program was conducted October 8-22, 197 The subject audit addressed the'following items:
(1) program manage-ment; (2) monitoring procedures and analytical quality control for assigned program parameters; (3) biological sampling; (4)
sample shipment and inventory; (5) data retrieval, reduction, correlation and storage; (6) instrument calibration and standardi,zation; (7) annual nonradiological environmental monitoring report.
Inspection disclosed that the contractor's quality assurance program appeared adequate to assure that all biological program parameters were implemented as required by Appendix B Technical Specifications.
There were no questions regarding this item.
6.
Environmental Monitoring Program Status Appendix B. Technical Specifications 3.1.B.
and 4.1 require determination of the effects of plant operation on plankton, nekton, and'enthic popula-tions in the Atlantic Ocean near the plant circulating water discharge.
Inspection included a detailed review of field records, data and reports compiled by a lciensee contractor during the period August 1, 1979 - May 31, 1980, for the following biological parameters:
benthos, phytopplankton, zooplankton, macrophytes, nekton, and entrainment.
Inspection disclosed that all surveillance commitments and associated synoptic water quality analyses, including nutrient analyses of plankton samples, were implemented as required.
Inspection of records and data summaries for the period August 1, 1979 through May 31, 1980, also disclosed that environmental monitoring programs required by the Limiting Conditions for Operation defined in Appendix B. Technical Specifications 2.0 (plant circulating water temperatures, delta-T, pH and residual chlorine) were implemented as required.
There were no questions regarding this item.
7.
Reporting Requirement a
~
Appendix B Technical Specification 5.6.l.a defines the requirements for the Annual Non-Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report (AEMR).
The subject report is required to include the following:
(1)
summaries and interpretations of the results of nonradiological environ-mental monitoring and surveillance defined in Sections 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 of the specifications; (2) comparison with preoperational studies, operational controls 'as appropriate),
and previous environmental surveillance, reports, and assessment of any observed impacts of plant operation on the environment.
Detection of harmful effects or evidence of irreversible damages requires provision of an analysis of the problem and proposed course of action to (a alleviate same.
Inspection included a detailed review of the AEMR for the period ending December 31, 1979, and conparison of data therein with respective field and laboratory data compiled during that period.
Inspection disclosed that the subject repo'rt is consistent with all criteria defined in Appendix B
Technical Specification 5.6.1.2.
b.
Appendix B Technical Specification 5.6.2.a defines the requirements for non-routine reports addressing nonradiological incidents, occurences, unusual or important events which generate actual or potential environ-
-4-pa>
mental impact from plant operation or that exhibits high public, or potential public interest concerning environmental impact from plant operation.
Inspection included a review of nonroutine reports for the period August 1, 1979 through June 23, 1980.
Reportable Occurrences 335-B-79-03, 335-B-79-04 and 335-B-79-05 which occurred on August 8, 1979, November 13, 1979 and December 10, 1979, regectively, involved displacement and/or loss of the recording thermographs in the plant ocean intake and discharge areas.
Inspection disclosed that the subject occurrences were reported as required and that appropriate corrective actions were implemented as required.
These items were closed out.
There were no further questions regarding this ite II ~
J e
0