IR 05000440/1980014
| ML19340C509 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 10/02/1980 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19340C507 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-440-80-14, 50-441-80-13, NUDOCS 8011170544 | |
| Download: ML19340C509 (1) | |
Text
.
'.,,
'd
'
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
Reports No. 50-440/80-14; 50-441/80-13 Docket Nos. 50-440; 50-441 Licenses No. CPPR-148; CPPR-149 Licensee: The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company P. O. Box 5000 Cleveland, OH 44101 Facility Name: Perry Nuclear Power Plar.t, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Perry Site, Lake County., OH l
Inspection Conducted: August 19-21, 1980 4.
.
,
Inspector:
M.
. Oest ann
/25 2- [ D
,
'
'
(f
-
Approved By:
C.
. Paperiello, Acting Chief M-
/7 Environmental and Special
/I Projects Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on-August 19-21, 1980 (Report No. 50-440/80-14; 50-441/80-13)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of environmental pro-tection and environmental monitoring programs for Units 1 and 2, including management controls;-review of documentation of environmental monitoring programs involving terrestrial, aquatic, and meteorological monitoring; and a site tour to verify compliance with construction permit requirements and other commitments. The inspection involved 18 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: Of the six areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in five areas; one deviation (failure to conduct noise surveys semiannually - Paragraph 6.a) was identified in one area.
8011170 5
-
_
-
_ _.
-
_ _ _ _
',
'.
DETAILS
.
1.
Persons Contacted
- B. Barkley, General Supervising Engineer, Nuclear Design Section
- W. Kacer, General Supervising Engineer, Construction Quality Section
- J. Kline, General Supervising Engineer, Nuclear Construction Section
- C. Banks, Senior Engineer, Nuclear Design Section
- R. Zucker, Associate Engineer, Nuclear Design Section S. Kensicki, Radiation Protection Engineer M. Takacs, Chemistry Supervisor J. Bontempo, Health Physics Supervisor
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
'
The inspector interviewed several other licensee personnel, including construction, operations, and office personnel during this inspection.
\\
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings x
(Closed) Open, Item (440/77-05; 441/77-05) Desirability of incorporating environmental ' data _in the semiannual reports. The previous Region III
,
report discussed the'desirabil_ity of including environmental data, particularly water quality data, in the semiannual report. The data
~
were available for review during the inspection at the plant. During this inspection, the inspector reviewed the monthly sampling and anal-ytical results of water quality and other environmental data in bi-monthly reports and annual reports from Nuclear Utilities Service Corporation (NUS) to the Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company (CEI)
for 1978 and 1979. No unusual results or trends were evident to indicate adverse impacts of plant construction on the environment.
The licensee is meeting all current regulatory requirements. This item-is considered to be closed.
3.
General This inspection consisted of an examination of the licensee's adminis-trative and procedural controls regarding the environmental monitoring programs and implementation of environmental protection practices to assure compliance with construction permit requirements.
Procedures, equipment, and program results were selectively examined. Management'
control-aspects, including organizational structure, delegation of responsibilities, and authorities were also reviewed.
The primary acceptance criteria used during this inspection were the licer.see's Construction Permit (CP) issued May 3, 1977, the licensee's Environmental Report - Construction Permit (ER-CP), and the NRC Final Environmental Statement (FES-CP).
i l
l
'
,
-2-
,
.
.
.
.
-
..
.
j
-
[ ',
4.
Environmental Program Management Management control for the Environmental Protection Program is under the Vice-President Engineering.
Implementation of this program is 2 -
under the responsibility of the Environmental Monitor who ' conducts weekly inspections of the site to verify compliance with environmental requirements.
The Environmental Monitor usually is able to resolve any problems by
contacting the appropriate Control Administrator; however, if necessarv he may contact the Contracts Manager.
If the problem is not resolved, the Monitor will contact the Environmental Engineer who may contact management in the Nuclear Engineering Department.
The licensee's contractor, NUS Corporation, is responsible for conduct of the ecological monitoring and the meteorological programs. The Environtental Monitor. keeps in close contact with the contractor to resolve any problems.
No apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
5.
Site Tour
.
.
The inspector, with a licensee representative, toured the site to
!
verify compliance with the Construction Permits (CP), the Environmental
Report, and the FES requirements. The inspector examined the following
'
for compliance with requirements.
.
a.
Dust control by sprinkling.
!
b.
Disposal of cleaning materials, oils, and other solids by trucking offsite.
c.
Erosion control along transmission right-of-ways.
d.
Screening of transmission line structures by woodlands and
'
topography.
Erosion control of land disposal area by reseeding.
]
e.
f.
Intake-discharge structure construction.
g.
Observation wells for water table elevations.
h.
Cooling tower construction.
i.
Barge slip and shoreline erosion along Lake Erie, j.
Sewage treatment plant and industrial waste lagoons.
k.
Concrete batch plant.
1.
Excavation of Fuel' Oil Storage Tank and pump hourt.
l m.
Service water pump house and emergency water pump house construction.
n.
Major Stream, Northwest and Minor Stream Control Dam.
o.
Warning systems for boaters via licensee communications system.
The. inspector discussed the status of construction activities related to environmental protection with licensee representatives. The licensee plans to install loudspeakers and sirens to warn boaters on Lake Erie for any potential accident at the plant, in accordance with
-
3'-
'
-
-
..
.4
-,,-,
-
g-
,,
p
--r f
-
, - -
,g e - 9
.
.
- ~
Section 3.F.(2) of the CP.
This item will be examined during a
'
future inspection. Work continues on the containment, auxiliary and turbine buildings, and other safety related buildings on site. All work on the cooling towers has been suspended indefinitely.
During the tour of the site, the inspector observed the general area around the barge slip along the Lake Erie shoreline and noted that this area was an eyesore eith rubbish and debris spread around near the barge slip area. The general condition of the area was discussed with licensee representatives. The barge slip has not been used for some time and the area has become disorderly and found in disarray and needs to be cleaned up.
This item will be examined during a subsequent inspection.
The inspector also observed severe erosion along the banks along the Lake Erie shoreline, particularly near the northeast area of the site by a relatively new parking lot.
Part of the parking lot, which was completed in 1979, had collapsed and had fallen in along the banks.
The licensee established a task force investigating the shoreline erosion and evaluating appropriate corrective action to take to re-solve this problem. This item will be examined in a future inspection.
No apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
However, significant problems pertaining to the barge slip area and shoreline erosion were noted as discussed above and will be examined in a subsequent inspection.
6.
Environmental Monitoring Programs and Surveys The -inspector examined selected reports and field logbooks of the environmental monitoring programs, and semiannual and bimonthly, and annual environmental reports from 1978, 1979 to date of this inspection.
a.
Noise Surveys The licensee has committed to conducting noise surveys during the night and day semiannually. The inspector reviewed reports in September 1973 and March 1979. The surveys were conducted by the plant substation Engineering Department and were approved by the Manager. The results of both surveys showed that the noise levels at the property line did exceed the 55 dBA (decibels-A weighted) level for a short distance, primarily from traffic n'ise from trucks and bulldozers. The licensee stated that according to the U. S. Department of Housing and Developmeat (HUD), a noise level of 65 dBA is acceptable as long as it is not exceeded for more than eight hours per day.
The inspector also determined that the noise surveys had not been continued semiannually since March 1979. This failure to conduct-4-
.
I t
the noise survey semiannually is a d iation from a commitment
made in correspondence with the NRC b.
Crane-Fly Orchid population Monitoring The inspector reviewed the monitoring reports for 1978 and 1979 and bimonthly reports for this period to date of this inspection, pertaining to determinations of populations of crane-fly orchids, Tipularia discolor, in each spring and late summer of each year during construction. The inspector ascertained that surveys were done in April, June, July, and August of 1978 and March, July, August, and November of 1979. The conclusion reached in these studies was that there was no apparent adverse impact of plant construction on the orchid populations.
c.
Raptor Monitoring The licensee conducts a raptor (birds of prey) monitoring program to determine the effect of construction activities on the raptor populations such as the loss of habitat. The inspector reviewed the 1978 and 1979 annual reports and the bimonthly and semiannual reports to determine that population counts were made each year.
The licensee concluded.that although the, raptor population had apparently not been seriously affected by construction activities, there has been a slight but gradual decline in populations since 1976 due apparently to changes in habitat from clearing of site areas for additional storage for equipment. The licensee's contractor recommends reclamation of these area after site com-pletion to restore foraging habitat. This item will be examined during a future inspection.
d.
Vegetation Monitoring The licensee monitors construction effects on vegetation by aerial color infrared photography and follow-up ground verification every six months. The inspector reviewed the 1978 and 1979 annual and bimonthly reports to the date of this inspection and determined that over 65 acres were reclassified. About 28 acres had been revegetated and 21 acres were abandoned fields among naturally growing vegetation.
During the tour of the site, the inspector observed the control of erosion of an earthwork disposal area in the northeast area i
of the site. The licensee was also conducting disposal of earth in two areas on the east end of the site. Seeding of these areas j
had been made. No problems were identified.
i 2/ Ibid.
.
-5-
.
L The licensee had also controlled erosion to the Major Stream,
Northwest, and Minor gpream sediment control dams as discussed in a previous report.-
The inspector visited these sites and reviewed reports concerning the erosion problem. The inspector has no further questions regarding this item.
e.
Aquatic Monitoring The inspector reviewed the physical and chemical parameters of the aquatic monitoring program conducted monthly. Measurements include pH, temperature, dissolved oxygen, total solids, dissolved solids, suspended solids, turbidity, oil and grease, biochemical demand, nitrates, phosphates, and bacteria. Attempts were made to sample for benthic macroinvertebrates but only a few samples have.been found during 1978 and 1979. The licensee has requested the NRC to phase out this aspect of the aquatic monitoring program.
The inspector also reviewed the results of wat r levels measured biweekly from two observation wells onsite. No significant changes in water table level of the site have been observed during 1979 to date of this inspection.
No apparent items of noncompliance were identified. One deviation was identified.
7.
Meteorological Monitoring The inspector observed the operation of the relocated meteorological tower. All equipment was found functioning properly. Calibrations are performed quarterly by the licensee contractor, NUS Corporation.
The inspector found current calibration stickers on each piece of equipment. The contractor performs daily checks of the equipment and recorders. The inspector also visited the remote terminet located in the Operations Trailer. This device has remote retrieval capabilities.
The system prints data every 15 minutes, averages the four 15 minutes data every hour and holds the data for three days for remote retrieval to the licensee contractor.
The inspector also reviewed the 1978 and 1979 meteorological annual reports and found that the recovery dr.ta exceeds 90 percent in compliance
,
with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23.
No apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
8.
Emergency Planning and Confirmatory reasurements i
Although no formal inspection in emergency planning and confirmatory measurements was performed,-the inspector informed the licensee on 3/ Ibid.
-6-
-
.
.
.t
.
i the general scope of these' kinds of inspections required to be done
prior of issuance of the Operating License to the licensee. No significant problems were noted.
9.
Exit Interview a
The inspector met with licensee representatives denoted in Paragraph I at the conclusion of the inspection on August 21, 1980. The-inspector discussed the scope and findings of the inspection. The licensee made-the following statements:
a.
They were aware of the need to clean up the debris in the barge slip area (Paragraph 5).
b.
They were in the process of studying erosion control along the Lake Erie shoreline (Paragraph 5).
c.
They were to check into continuation of noise surveys of the site (Paragraph 6.a).
!
I
,
a l
,
-7-
- -
.
.