ML20198P324
| ML20198P324 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1996 |
| From: | POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK (NEW YORK |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198P323 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9711070081 | |
| Download: ML20198P324 (8) | |
Text
_. __
Dock;t Numbers 50-03,50-247, tnd 50 286 Indian Point Numbers 1,2,3 License Numbers DPR 5, DPR 26, and DPR-64 IPN-97145 Attachment i 1
f
+
Enclosed are the corrected pages for indian Point's Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for 1996.
Revised pages include:
Appendix B, page B 1; Table B 1, page B-3; Table B-1a / B-1b, page B-4; Table B 15, page B-35.
m2 MA L%
R PDR-
APPENDIX B l
9.1 1996 Annual Radiclogical Environmental Monitoring Program Summary The results of the 1996 radiological environmental sampling program are presented in Tables B-2 through B-16. Table B 2 is a summary of the RETS samples and Table B-16 is a summa.f of the non-RETS samples. The format of these summary tables conforms to the reporting requirements of the RETS and NRC Regulatory Guide 4,8 (Reference 5). In addition, the data obtained from the analysis of all the individual RETS samples are provided in Tables B 3 through B-15.
REMP samples were analyzed by various counting methods as appropriate. The methods are: gross beta, gamma spectroscopy, liquid scintillation, and TLD processing. Gamma _
spectroscopy analysis (GSA) was peiformed for the following radionuclides: Be 7, K-40, Mn-$4, Co-58, Co-60, Fe-59,2n-65, Zr-95, Ru-103, Ru-106,1-131, Cs-134, Cs-137, Ba-140, Ce 141, Ce-144, Ra 226 and Th-228. Radiochemical (1-131) and tritium analyses were performec' for specific media and locations as required in the RETS.
B.2 L,and Use Censua in accordance with Sections 4.11.B of the Con Edison RETS and 2.8.A of the NYPA RETS, a land use census was conducted to identify the nearest milch enimal and the nearest residence. The results of the milch animal and land use censuses are presented in Tables B-17 and B 18, respectively. In lieu ofidentifying and sampling the nearest garden 2
of greater than 50m, at least three kinds of broad leaf vegetation were sampled on-site and at a designated control location (results are presented in Table B-14).
D.3 Eampling DesittiODS i
During 1996, emironmental sampling was performed for six media types required by RETS, five other media types and direct radiation. A total of 1302 samples ( 1266 RETS and 36 non-RETS) were scheduled. Of the scheduled samples,98% were collected and analyzed for the program. There were thirty-one samples not reported due to mechanical failure of the samp'ers, vandalism of the samples, or sample unavailability. Sampling deviations are summarized in Table B 1; discussions of the reasons for the deviations are provided in Table B-1a for air samples, fish and invertebrate samples, and B-lb for TLDs. The sampling program has safficient redundancy such that these deviations do not significantly affect the overall 1996 monitoring results.-
B-1 f
I L
L l
l l
l
... ~
-. - _ _ _. _ - _ ~ _ _ _. -. - -.. - - -.
.. ~..
l
.~
TABLEB.1 i
SUMMARY
OF SAMPLING DEVIATIONS 1996 N
n 4% "#n
' TOTAL, *
"" NUMSSR 0 *SAtruNG w
h j.fE E DIA ' 7p SCHEDULED 40PT:
SPPICVNCY EV, Wfr, g 8481PL58 f OSVIATIONS V.
%-Q can ;
g, 5
SEE TABLE PARTICULATES IN AIR 496 14 97 B-ia SEE TABLE CHARCOAL FILTER 496 14 97 B-ia SEE TABLE TLD 160 1
99 B-1b HUDSON RIVER WATER 24 0
100 DRINKING WATER 12 0
100 SHORELINE SOIL 10 0
100 BROAD LEAF 60 0
100 VEGETATION SEE TABLE FISH & INVERTEBRATES 8
2 75 B 1a
.,.a.
SUST0 FALSE
, +;:12061 -
P31?' s E 98,, '
m
~
a NON-RETS SAMPLES AQUATIC VEGETATION 8
0 100 HUDSON RIVER 18 0
100 SEDIMENT SOIL 2
0 100 PRECIPITATION 4
0 100 OUTFALL 4
0 100
.n~.,
'n <..
SUST0TALSJ
' ' 38.2 3 Joi 100: a
N.<-
.,-t*
,P e.
.3
- [. -,
OVERAl.L TOTALS
- 1302)
- 31; i987 1
TOTAL NUMBER OF ANALYSES REPORTED = 1271 B-3
TABLE B-ia / B 1b 1996 DEVIATIONS TABLE Bia o
STATION WEEK ENDING?
ggPROBLEM / RESOLUTION S mP!e inaccessable due to snow
- 22 LOVETT 1/10/96 accumulation.
abon road inamessaNe due to snow
- 93 LAKE COHASSET 1/10/96 accumulation.
adon road inaaessable due to snow
- 93 LAKE COHASSET 1/17/96 accumulation.
a n road inaaessade due to snow 093 LAKE COHASSET 1/23/96 accumulation.
tau n r ad inaxessaNe due to snow
- 93 LAKE COHASSET 1/30/96 accumulation.
Stadon road inaaessaW due to snoi
- 93 LAKE COHASSET 2/6/96 accumulation.
Station road inaccessable due to snow
- 93 LAKE COHASSET 2/13/96 accumulation.
adon road inaaessaNe due to snow
- 93 LAKE COHASSET 2/21/96 accumulation.
- 23 ROSETON CONTROL 6/17/96 Sample not available.
- 22 LOVETT 8/27/96 Low sample volume / No action.
- 22 LOVETT 9/4/96 meter / Volume meter replaced.
^
10/7/96 Erroneous sample data / No action.
H E
- 27 CROTON POINT 10/15/96 Low sample volume / No action.
- 22 LOVETT 10/15/96 Pump out of service / Replaced pump.
as mtler defective / Replaced gas
- 29 GRASSY POINT 10/22/96 meter.
TABLE B 1b ISTATIONY
[ QUARTER [
(PROBLEM / RESOLUTION:0 TLDs missing due to vandalism.
DR-28 1
Replaced TLDs.
I B-4
_. ~.... _ _..
TABLE B-15 CONCENTRATIONS OF GAMMA EMITTERS IN FISH AND INVERTEBRATE SAMPLES Results in Units of pCi/kg (wet) i 1 Sigma
- 23 - RO ' TON l
CONTROL **
ti.
PERCH
. EELS
-CATFISH tNUCLIDES.
10/09/96 10/09/96:
10/09/96 Mn-54
<17.2 cil.6
<13.6 Co-58
<22.4
<10.5
<14.5 Fe-59
<51.1
<26.9
<26.6 Co-60
<17.4
<9.87
<14.2 Zn-65
<45.5
<28.1
<30.3 Cs-134
<18.2
<11.9
<12.0 Cs-137
<19.7
<8.93
<10.7 Ra-226*
4801224 3471173 7971183 Ac/Th-228*
<74.1
<37.5
<51.5 Others
<CL
<CL
<CL Naturally Occurring l
Sample for week ending 6/17/96 was not available l
1 L
l B 35 I
l
Dock;t Numbers 50-03,50 247, tnd 50-286 Indian Point Numbers 1,2,3 License Numbers DPR 5, DPR 26, and DPR 64 l
IPN 97-145 1 Enclosed is a summary of our findings associated with the omission and actions taken or that are intended to be taken to preclude recurrence.
J
t i
IPN 97-145 Attachment ll Page 1 of 2 Abstract Quality Assurance (QA) Audit 97101 Identified that fish sampling Qd not meet the 4
sampling reautrements in the Radiological Environmental Technical Specifications (RETS). Table 2.71. A self assessment performed earlier this yearidentified fish sampling as an area for improvement. In f 996, the contractor successfully collected fish samples only one time at the control location. Other attempts for obtaining samples did not produce results. Indian Point 2 (IP2) and Indian Point 3 (IP3) did not recognize these sample deviations or report them as such in the 1996 Radiological Environmental Operating Report.
Description of Event Table 2.7-1 of the Indian Point 3 RETS designate!. P.e conduct of sampling for the Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) as follows: Number of Representative Samples and Sample Locations - two samples (Ib1, Ib2); I sample (Ib1) of each of 2 species commercially and/or recreationally important species of fish -
er inve,tebrate in the vicinity of the discharge when available; 1 sample (Ib2) of each of -
2 commercially and or recreationally important species (the same species as in Ib1 if available) from an area not influenced by plant discharge. Sampling and collection frequency sample in season, or semlannually if they are not seasonal.
RETS section 2.7.A states; with the REMP not being conducted as specified in Table 2.7-1, prepare and submit to the Commission, in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report, a description of the reasons for not conducting the program as required and the plans for preventing a recurrence.
During a OA Audit conducted by IP3, RES requested that this area be reviewed. IP3 concluded that we did not meet the sampling requirement and should have reported this in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. Therefore, we are i
submitting corrected pages for the 1996 Annual Operating Report.
Cause of Event The cause of the event was inadequate oversight. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between IP2 and IP3 requires that IP2 meet the requirements of IP3 RETS.
Due to wording differences between IP2 RETS and IP3 RETS, the fish contractor may meet IP2 requirements but fall short of meeting those for IP3. In this case, the oversight provided by IP2 did not adequately consider IP3 expectation for contractor sampling. IP3 oversight of IP2 was not adequate to recognize the deficiency in the sampling procase The contr etween Con Edison and Normandeau Associates reflects the needs of IP3 RETS. However, the contractor procedure is not specific to this contract. The procedure states minimum requirements for sampling that did not meet the needs of IP3 RETS.
I w
r-
,,n-e --.
,,.,,-,-s
IPN-97-145 Attachment il Page 2 of 2 Immediate Corrective Actions
- 2. IP3 conducted an extent of condition review for Radiological Environmental Opers'ing Reports from 1990. IP3 did not identify any other omission. However, there were two instances where a second species was not available at the control location.
Corrective Actions
- 1. Submit corrected pages for the 1996 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report recognizing a sample deviation due to fish / invertebrate unavailability by October 30,1997,
- 2. IP2 will ensure that the contractor (i.e., Normandeau Associates) procedures meet IP3 RETS. IP3 will revlew the contractor activities during the next self assessment of the REMP that will be done by May 1,1998.
- 4. Develop standardized matrix of RETS Implementation requirements for discussion at quarterly meetings between IP2 and IP3 to ensure the content is specific to the commitments agreed to and that we meet specific sample criteria. Process i
improvement to be in place by December 31,1997.
- 5. Perform effectiveness review of corrective actions taken for fish sampling deviation by October 15,1998.
Safety Significance The unobtainable controllocation sample does not change the conclusi:n in the 1996 Radiological Environmental Operating Report that IP3 operations did not result in any increased radiation levels or exposure to the public greater than environmental background levels. Sample unavailability is an acceptable deviation but must be reported to meet the specifications in IP3 RETS. The unavailable sample would have been from a control area (not influenced by plant discharges). We met the samp!!ng criteria during these periods for the indicator locations (influenced by plant discharges).
l I
- -