IR 05000280/1986006

Insp Repts 50-280/86-06 & 50-281/86-06 on 860226-28.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Radiological Environ Monitoring,Reporting & Inspector Followup Items

ML20138B519
Person / Time
Site:	Surry
Issue date:	03/17/1986
From:	Gloersen W, Stoddart P NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138B501	List: IR 05000280/1986006 ML20138B497
References
50-280-86-06, 50-280-86-6, 50-281-86-06, 50-281-86-6, NUDOCS 8603250091
Download: ML20138B519 (5)

Text

--_ - _ - _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _

an afou UNITED STATES

,

@\

[ #o f[ ,^

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION li k ( .M

'8

'

.

101 MARIETT A STREET. ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323 s, v .f

• • "*

HAR 19 W86  ;

Report Nos.: 50-280/86-06 and 50-281/86-06 i

Licensee: Virginia Electric and Power Company )

P. O. Box 26666 )

Richmond VA 23261 Docket No and 50-281 License Nos.: DPR-32 and DRP-37 Facility Name: Surry 3 and 2 I

Inspection Conducted: February 26-28, 1986 l Inspector: [4/ / c [g/S<w N+z 4 17 /'s W. B oerseh / Date Signed Approved by: /nde T Mad / 2 /VM7 P. G. Sto'ddart, Acting Section Chief Date Signed Radiological Effluents and Chemistry Section Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope: This routine, unannounced inspection entailed 27 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of radiological environmental monitoring, reporting, and previously identified inspector followup item Results: No violations or deviations were identifie l 8603250091 860319 PDR ADOCK 05000200 0 PDR

.

.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted

.

Licensee Emplohees

• F. Sanders, Station Manager

• L. Miller, Assistant Station Manager

• L. Benson, Assistant Station Manager

• F. Driscoll, Manager, Quality Assurance

• P. Sarver, Superintendent, Health Physics

• A. Garber, Opera +ional Health Physics

• F. Blount, Assistant Health Physics Supervisor

• D. Grady, Supervisor, Quality Assurance W. Craft, Licensing Coordinator B. Hilt, Health ohysics Trainee NRC Resident Inspectors

• J. Burke

• M. Davis

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on February 28, 1986, with those persons indicated in Fcragraph The inspector described the areas examined and discussed in detail tne inspection findings. One new inspector followup item was identified in the area of Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report improvaments (Paragraph 5.b.). Licensee representatives acknowledged the inspector's comments and expressed no contrary opinions. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the material provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Identified Inspector Followup Items (92701)

(Closed) IFI 50-280/84-32-03 and 50-281/84-32-03, Review missing data for 1983 Environmental Monitoring Report. The inspector reviewed the revised 1983 Annual Radiological Environmental operating report, dated December 17,

198 In the original report, results for various milk samples and river water samples were missing. At that time, the licensee was attempting to recover this data from the contractor. Additionally, the licensee had asked the contractor to reanalyze ~several samples. Attempts to recover all of the missing data from the contractor were unsuccessful. Most of the samples that were requested to be reanalyzed had either been lost, spoiled or the 1 radioactive material in the samples had decayed so that lower limits of detection could not be me In the revised Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report, the licensee included a comparative analysis of selected < . . - . . .- ._ .- -

!

!

u +

, . t

'

!

,

!

.

1983 environmental data to explain apparent anomalies in "the da'ta and to

determine if there was a basis to conclude that the anomaljes resulted from j station operation For the TLD data, that irdicated relatively high

exposure rates, the licensee compared the NRC, State, and VEPC0 (at ,~

i

'

collocated sites) results. NRC and State of Virginia data indicated normal readings. Comparisons with the State were also made for milk samples, precipitation samples, river water samples, and silt samples. This item is considered close , ,

. Audits (80721) , .

'

l Technical Specification 6.1.C.3 requires audits of station activities, including the radiological environmental monitoring program at least once t i per M months. -The inspector reviewed the following audit report:

j Quality Assurance Audit Report S85-20, ' Radiological Environmental Monitoring, June 12, 198 '

The inspector noted that the previous audit report of the radiological j environmental monitoring program was dated June 29, 1984. The inspector

discussed the findings of the audit with licensee personnel and reviewed the .

j actions taken by the licensee. The inspector noted that some corrective i actions were in progres I 1s No violations or deviations were identified, s 4 Rec rds and Reports (80721) 4 l The inspector reviewed the following environmental reports;and

! calibration records: '

i d

(1) 1985 Environmental Data Reports (from Teledyne Isotopes)

j including: '

• '

Weekly air samples-fodines and particulates

) Monthly milk samplesygamma and Sr-89, -90 analyses

Monthly river water samples

Quarterly well water samples

Bimonthly fish samples '

Quarterly direct radiation (TLD) results

j) s (2) Revised 1983 Annual Radiological Environ 7 ental Operating Report

'

(3) 1984 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report i

j (4) Quarterly calibration records for wind speed and wind direction i sensors for the primary meteorological tower: Janucry 22, 1985, i

April 25,1985, July 22,1985, October 24, 1985, an'd January'16, l 1986.

! l

j i

'

,

_ - _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _____.__ _ - - _ _ __- - -_- ___ ---_- - - - _-___- _- _ _ _ _ - -_ _ _- __ _ _-_. _ - -__ ___.- _ __ _ _ - .

.

(5) Quarterly calibration records for wind speed and wind direction sensors for the back-up meteorological tower: January 22, 1985, April 25, 1985, July 22, 1985, September 24, 1985, October 7, 1985, and January 16, 198 The inspector reviewed the 1984 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report for omissions, obvious mistakes, and anomalous measurement EPA cross check results were also reviewed. The inspector noted that the lower limit of detection (LLD) definition (see Appendix B, Synopsis of Analytical Procedures, 1984 Radiological Environmental Operating Report) was in error. The LLD defined in the 1984 Report was not the same as the LLD defined in Table 4.9-5 of the Technical Specification From discussions with the licensee and licensee's contractor and review of the contractor's analytical procedures, it appeared that the LLD was computed correctly, however the LLD was documented incorrectly in the environmental repor The LLD definition in the report emitted the decay factor in the denominator and incorrectly defined " delta t" as the length of time in minutes the sample was counted. The correct definition of " delta t" for environmental sa nples is the elapsed time between sample collection (or end of sample collection period) and time of counting. The licensee agreed to improve the documentation on determination of the LLD for gamma spectrometry of environmental samples in the next Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Repor Additionally, the inspector noted that the Environmental Report needed more detail in the areas of comparing surveillance activities for the report period with

preoperational studies, operational controls, and previous anvironmental surveillance reports. The licensee agreed to provide more of this detail in the next Annual Radiological Environmental -

Operating Report. To summarize, the correct LLD definition and the additional detail in the areas of comparing surveillance activities with preoperational studies, operational centrels, and previous environmental surveillance reports to be included in the next Annual Environmental Report was identified as an inspector followup item (IFI:

50-280/86-06-01 and 50-281/86-06 01).

One inspector followup item was identified and no apparent violations or deviations were identifie . Radiological Environmental Monitoring (80721)

'

The inspector reviewed the licensee's radiological environmental n'onitoring program as required by Technical Specification 3.1 The inspector noted in IE Inspection Report Nos. 50 280/84-3? and 50-281/84-32 that the licensee had changed contractors responsible for analyzing radiological environmental j data. The new contractor appeared to provide the licensee with an improved i service in that sample losses were minimized, sample analyses and reports i were timely, and lower limit of detection levels were rarely exceede l The inspector reviewed Surry Power Station Procedure HP-3.5.1 Radiological Environmental Sample Collection Program, April 1,1985 which incorporated l

- _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _

.

.

the environmental monitoring reqairements of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications. Additionally, the inspector reviewed Tables 4.9-4 and 4.9-5 of the Technical Specification The inspector noted that in Table 4.9-4 the reporting level for I-131 in water was listed as 2 pCi/ liter while in Table 4.9-5 the lower limit of detection (LLD) level was shown as 10 pCi/ lite It should be recognized that this discrepancy was identified in IE Inspection Report Nos. 50-280/84-32 and 50-281/84-32. It was stated in that report that the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRR) would consider a request from the licensee to change the reporting level for I-131 in water to 20 pC1/ liter if no drinking water pathway exist It should be pointed out that the required reporting level for I-131 if a drinking water pathway exists would still be 2 pCi/ lite Correspondingly, the LLD for I-131 in water is 1 pCi/ liter; however, if no drinking water pathway exists, a value of 15 pCi/ liter may be used. The licensee was made aware of NRR's guidanc The inspector reviewed selective environmental sample analysis results for the period between January 1985 - December 1985 (see Paragraph 5.a) and verified tnat the required samples were collected at the specified frequencies. Additionally, the inspector, accompanied by a licensee representative, examined approximately nine offsite environmental monitoring locations and verified the operation of five air sampling devices and the presence of thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) packets, including NRC-licensee collocated TLDs (where applicable). The tour in:luded a visit to a dairy farm where milk samples are normally obtained. The inspector verified by direct observation and record review that the primary and back-up meteorological stations sensors and readouts were operable and maintained. The inspector reviewed the quarterly calibration records for the wind speed and wind direction sensors for 1985 (see Paragraph 5.a).

Additionally, daily and weekly QA logbooks, located at .the primary meteorological monitoring station trailer, were reviewed. The licensee used strip chart recorders for recording wind speed, direction, temperature difference, and sigm No violations or deviations were identified.

l 1