IR 05000327/1993046

Insp Repts 50-327/93-46 & 50-328/93-46 on 930913-17.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Radioactive Effluents,Radiological Environ Monitoring & post-accident Sampling Sys

ML20058Q015
Person / Time
Site:	Sequoyah
Issue date:	10/15/1993
From:	Decker T, David Jones NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20058Q007	List: IR 05000327/1993046 ML20058Q004
References
50-327-93-46, 50-328-93-46, NUDOCS 9310260041
Download: ML20058Q015 (9)

Text

_ - _ _ .___ .

,

"

,.

i UNITED STATES

./ n au% #. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

, N : REGloN H 4[ g 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W., SUITE 2900

~ 7,, ' y ATLANTA, GEORGIA 303234199

%,***++gf 007 15 1933

'

' Report Nos.: 50'-327/93-46 and 50-328/93-46 Licensee: Tennessee ~ Valley Authority 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Docket' Nos. : 50-327 and 50-328 License Nos.: DPR-77 and DPR-79-Facility _Name: Sequoyah 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: September 13-17, 1993 Inspector: /C /b yLt-p /d//// 73 Date Signed D. W. Jps -

Approved by: j (2 0 /0/5~ ;

T. R. Decker, Chief Date Sfgned Radiological Effluents and Chemistry-Section Radiological Protection and Emergency Preparedness Branch p Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope:

This routine,' announced inspection was conducted in the areas of radioactive effluents, radiological environmental monitoring, and post-accident sampling system Resul ts:

. In the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.

,

The licensee had implemented and maintained an effective program to monitor and control liquid and gaseous radioactive effluents. The projected offsite doses resulting.from those' effluents were well within the limits specified in l the Technical Specifications and 40 CFR 190 (Paragraph 2).

The licensee's radiological environmental monitoring program was effectively

implemented. The program requirements for sampling, analysis, and reporting wer.e met. The program results for 1992 indicated that the radioactivity detected in the plant environs was primarily the result of fal. lout and natural background ^ radiation, and any activity which may be present as a result of plant; operations does not represent a significant contribution to the radiation exposure of_ members of the public (Paragraph 3).

9310260041 931015'

PDR ADOCK 05000327- PDR ~

g, , . .

, ,

-

q p

'

, . *

,

' '

Thelresults of the licensee's participation in.the EPA's interlaboratory .

p' crosscheck program indicated.that an effective quality assurance program'had been' maintained for analysis of L environmental samples (Paragraph 4),

u

"The . licensee continued to have reliability problems with the PASS but there

'

was a strong management commitment to resolve those problems (Paragraph 6).

F; I

y

%

p.(.

t

.

>-

-+

'

-l l

I

I

,

e i

-!

-__ -

..

'

lY

-

~

REPORT DETAILS Persons. Contacted L Licensee Employees-t*D. Adams, Program Manager,. Chemistry D. Amos, Nuclear Chemist, Chemistry J. Barker, Secondary Chemist, Chemistry t*L. Bryant, Manager, Maintenance

• N. Catron, Emergency Preparedness F t*E. Chandrasekaron, Project Manager, Corporate Chemistry

• R. Driscoll, Manager, Site Quality

.

t*R. Fenech', Site Vice President tT. Flippo, Manager, Site Support

.

t*C, Kent, Manager, Radiological. Control and Chemistry

<

.t*D. Lundy, Manager, Systems Engineering

• S. McCamy, ALARA Manager, Radiological Control t*K. Meade, Engineer,. Licensing J. Newton, . System ' Engineer, Technical Support

• J. Osborne, Manager, Environmental. Control tS. Poage, Manager, Audits.and Assessment

.

,

t*K. Powers, Plant Manager t*G. Rich, Manager, Corporate Nuclear Chemistry

• R. Richie, Manager, Chemistry Operations t*R.-Shell, Manager, Site Licensing t*L. Strickland, Manager, Process Chemistry G. Taylor, Radiochemical Analyst, Chemistry t*R. Thompson, Manager, Compliance Licensing

.

,

• J. Vincelli, Field Operations Manager, Radiological Control t*J. Ward, Manager, Engineering and Modifications t*C. Whittemore,' Licensing Engineer, Compliance tJ. Willis, Section Manager, Balance of Plant Other licensee employees. contacted included engineers, technicians, and administrative personne Nuclear Regulatory Commission ,

t*W. Holland, Senior Resident Ingector

_

S. Shaeffer, Resident Inspector tAttended entrance intervie * Attended exit intervie . = Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports (84750)

Technical Specifications (TSs) 6.9.1.8 for both units and section 5.2 of

~

,

' the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) described the reporting )

. schedule and content requirements for the Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports. The reports were required to be submitted within-60 days after January 1 and July 1 of each year covering the

. operation of the facility during the previous six months. Summaries of

l

_ .

,

, the quantities of radioactive liquid and gaseous effluents released from the facility and an annual assessment of the radiation doses due to those releases were. required to be included in the report The effluent data presented in Table 1 (attached) were compiled from the licensee's effluent release reports for the years 1990, 1991, and 199 The inspector reviewed the reports for the year 1992 and discussed their content and the data presented in Table 1 with the licensee. As shown in the table, the activity released as dissolved and entrained gases in the

. liquid effluents decreased during 1992. The licensee attributed that

. reduction to decreased leakage from contaminated systems, which was a result of more prompt maintenance'on those systems when leaks occurre The significant reduction in the amount of. activity released as fission and activation products in gaseous effluents was achieved by reducing the number of containment building purges. During power operations, purges were routinely performed prior to each containment building

- entry. Improved planning and scheduling of work reduced the frequency of containment building entries. Work in the containment building is now scheduled for the one day .of each week designated for building entr The licensee also indicated that the increased amount of tritium released in gaseous effluents was a result of more frequent changes in

'

power output from the reactors. The annual average per unit radiation doses from the liquid and gaseous effluents were less than I and 3 percent.of their respective annual limit The. reports for 1992 also indicated that there were no unplanned releases during that year but two effluent monitoring systems were inoperable for more than 30 days. The Unit 1 Essential Raw Cooling Water (ERCW) radiation monitors (1-RM-90-133/140) were inoperable from April 11, 1992 to July 12, 1992, due to a malfunction of the flow switch (0-FIS-90-133), for which a proper replacement was unavailable. The licensee indicated that compensatory sampling and analysis were j

. performed while the monitors were inoperable. During March 1992 all i shield building vent flow indicators for both units were declared !

inoperable following discovery of a miswired flow indicator. After I having failed a calibration test, the . flow instrumentation for the

' Unit 2 "B" Train Containment' Purge system was found to have mismatched

-

wiring between flow sensors and their associated transmitters. The flow I instrumentation consisted of four matched sets of sensors and l transmitters-but the sensors had not been wired to their matching l transmitters. Examination of all shield building flow instrumentation i revealed similar wiring mismatches on several other instrument !

Calibrations were performed before and after the wiring mismatches were l corrected in order to evaluate the impact of the wiring mismatches on offsite doses from gaseous effluents. The results of that evaluation indicated that the flow rates may have been slightly overstated but the l effect on offsite dose was minimal. The time required to examine the

- wiring for all shield building flow instrumentation and to correct the :

problems found exceeded 30 days. During the period in which the flow monitors were declared inoperable estimated flow rates provided by the licensee's Nuclear Engineering section were use ,

,

7, ,

m

Based on the above reviews, it was concluded that the licensee had implemented and maintained an effective program to monitor and control liquid and gaseous radioactive effluents. The projected offsite doses resulting from.those effluents were well within the limits specified in the TSs and 40 CFR 19 I No violations or deviations were identifie .- Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (84750)

TS 6.8.5 g for.both units required the licensee to implement a radiological environmental monitoring program as described in the ODC Sections 1/2.3:and 9.0 of the ODCM described the operational and surveillance requirements for the radiological environmental monitoring program. The sampling locations, types of samples or measurements, sampling frequency, types 'and frequency of sample analysis, reporting levels, and analytical lower limits'of detection (LLDs) were specifie TS 6.9.1.6 for both units ~and section 5.1 of the ODCM delineated the

requirements for_ submitting, the submittal dates, and the. content of the

.. Annual Radiologi. cal Environmental Operating Reports. The reports were L

required to be submitted prior to May 1 of each year and to provide an assessment of the observed impact on the environment resulting from plant operations 'during the previous calendar yea The inspector.. reviewed the licensee's 1992 Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report and discussed its content with the

, licensee. The report was submitted on April 27, 1993, and included the following: a description of the program, a summary and discussion of the

~

results for each' exposure pathway, analysis of trends and comparisons with previous years and preoperational studies, and an assessment of the impact on the environment resulting from plant operations. The report also-included the results of the Land Use Census and the results of the Interlaboratory Comparison Program required by TS 6.8.5 g for both units. .The following observations for. the various exposure pathways were produced by the licensee's evaluation of the 1992 environmental monitoring program data and documented in-the report or were noted by the inspector during the review of the repor * Airborne - The gross beta activity detected on particulate filters collected during 1992 was consistent with the levels found during previous years and was near or below the required LLD. Only naturally occurring radionuclides were detected by gamma spectroscopic analysis of the particulate filters. Iodine-131 was detected in one charcoal cartridge used for adsorbing iodine from the atmosphere but the concentration was below the required LL *

' Direct Radiation - A plot of qua'rterly exposures, as measured by thermoluminescent dosimeters, indicated a slightly decreasing trend since commencement of plant operations during 198 * Surface Water - Gross beta activity was detected in most surface water samples collected during 1992 but was near or below the-required.LLD. Tritium was detected in one sample and its 3 concentration was also less than the required LL * Ground Water - Only. naturally occurring radionuclides were identified in ground water samples collected during 199 .

.

[ ]

, c-

,,

. .

f. ~

p , 4

.

• Drinking Water _ Similar to surface water, gross beta activity and tritium were detected in drinking water samples but their concentrations were below their respective required LLD *- Shoreline Sediment - Cesium-137 was detected in shoreline sediment r samples at concentrations much lower than the required LLD. A plot of the ~ annual average cesium-137 in shoreline sediment exhibited a

,

decreasing trend since 198 F *- Milk - No iodine-131 activity was detected in.the milk samples

,

collected during 199 * Food Products - All radionuclides detected in food samples collected during 1992 were naturally occurrin To assess. the radiological impact resulting from plant operations the o licensee calculated radiation dose estimates due to radioactivity released in effluents and from radioactivity found in samples of environmental media. As indicated in the conclusion section of the report, the . radioactivity detected in the plant environs was primarily the. result of fallout and' natural background radiation, and any activity which may be present as a result of plant operations does not represent a significant contribution to the radiation exposure of members of the publi Based on the above reviews and discussions, it was concluded that the licensee had complied with the sampling, analytical and reporting program requirements and that the radiological environmental monitoring program was-effectively implemente No violations'or deviations were identifie . Environmental Monitoring Quality Assurance Program (84750)

TS 6.8.5.g.3 for both units and section 1/2.3.3 of the ODCM required the licensee _ to participate in 'an interlaboratory comparison program and to include a summary __of the program results_ in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. The licensee's report for 1992 provided a summary of the results from the licensee's participation in the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Studies (Crosscheck) Program. The report also c included descriptions of the various types of samples analyzed and the analyses performed, and an evaluation of the analytical results. A total of 20 samples were analyzed and statistical evaluation of the program

' data indicated that no EPA control limits had been exceede Based on the licensee's 'overall performance-in the EPA crosscheck ,

program it _was concluded that an effective quality assurance program had l

,

been maintained for analysis of environmental sample i No violations-or deviations were identifie l l

'

r _

-

.-.

i. .

5 State Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (84750)

The Division of Radiological Health, Tennessee Department of Environment and Conservation, by contract with the NRC, independently monitors the concentrations of radioactivity in the environs of the licensee's facility and provides an' annual report of their results. The inspector reviewed the report for 1992 and determined that the licensee's program data were consistent with the state's result No violations or deviations were identifie . Post-Accident Sampling Systems (84750)

TSs 6.8.5.e.for both units' required the licensee to establish, implement, and maintain' a program which would ensure the capability to

-

obtain and analyze samples of reactor coolant, radioactive iodines and particulates in plant gaseous effluents, and containment atmosphere under accident conditions. The program was required to include training of personnel, procedures for sampling and analysis, and provisions for maintenance of . sampling and analytical equipmen '

The licensee has had continuing problems with the reliability of the in-line measurement components of the post-accident sampling systems (PASS)

and with training of personnel to operate the PASS. During the inspection conducted on June 21-25,1993 (Reference Inspection Report Nos. 50-327/93-29 and 50-328/93-39), the licensee was requested to provide the NRC with specific information regarding actions being taken to. return the' PASS to an' operable condition, policy for timeliness of future repairs to the equipment, and training of personnel to operate the PASS. The information requested was provided in a letter from the licensee dated September 20, 1993. In that letter the licensee described the modifications being made to either enhance the operability of the PASS -or replace inoperable equipment. The schedule for completion of

-

those modifications was also provided. The letter also described the priority to be given to future repair work and indicated that only personnel who have received annual training and have demonstrated their capability to operate the equipment will be assigned responsibilities for PASS sampling. These issues will be further reviewed during subsequent inspections and the licensee's progress on the equipment modifications will be monitore ~

Section 14.1.4 of the licensee's Radiological Emergency Plan indicated that " drills shall be conducted each calendar year to collect and analyze inplant liquid and gaseous samples containing actual or simulated elevated levels, including use of the post-accident sampling system". During this inspection the Post-Accident Sampling Chem /Radcon Drill conducted on September 16, 1993, was observed by the inspecto .j Two'of the ' objectives of the drill, as stated in the drill briefing material, was to obtain and analyze an undiluted containment atmosphere i

. sample using the Unit l' PASS. The gaseous sample was obtained and i analyzed in the radiochemical laboratory. Although not specifically stated as an objective in the drill briefing material, the licensee i i

,

.

.s, -

%

'~

attempted to also obtain-and analyze a reactor coolant sample. Due to a leak. in'a sample line, the coolant sample was not taken but the process

of sampling and analysis was simulated. During the critique of the drill, the licensee discussed repeating the drill but no firm date was '

establishe Based on the above reviews and observations, it was concluded that the licensee. continued to have reliability problems with. the PASS but there was a strong management commitment to resolve those problem No violations or deviations were identifie . Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on September 17, 1993, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed above. The problems related to the PASS were discussed and licensee-management indicated that prior to restarting the_ reactors their PASS would be operable th> dissenting comments were received from the licensee.-Proprietary-information is not contained in this report.

. -

.-

$

j

!- )

i

.

'

u .

"

m

'

to' ,

. ,

, :( :.,

,

p

^7

-

Table 1

Effluent Release Summary for Sequoyah Units 1, and 2 Activity Released (curies)

E Liauid ' Ef fluents Gaseous Effluents Dissolved Fission and and Fission and

' Activation Entrained Activation-Year Products Tritium ' Gases Products Iodines Particulates Tritium 1990- 1.22 853 1.76 5617 1.97E-4 6.84E- ~ 1.52 1652 2.61 1417- -3.30E-4 5.94E-4 29 1992L 1.45 1443 0.32 208 5.66E-6 1.20E-4 50 Annual Doses (Average per Unit)

.Liauid Effluents Maximum Total Body Dose ' Percent of . Organ Dose Percent of Year- (Limit: 3 mrem) Limit (Limit: 10 mrem) Limit 1990 Unit 1 0.003 .006 0.03 Unit 2 0.003 .006 0.03 1991 Unit 1 0.020 .026 0.26

= Unit 2 0.020 .026 0.26

'1992 Unit l' O.01 .5 0.018 . Unit 2 0.015 .018 t Gaseous Effluents Maximum Organ Dose Air Dose [From' Iodine, Tritium, (Limits: Gamma 10. mrad, Percent of- and Particulates] Percent of Year Beta 20 mrad) Limit (Limit: 15 mrem) Limit

.1990 Unit 1 Gamma 0.21 .45E-3 0.03 Beta 0.55 Unit 2 Gamma 0.21 .45E-3 0.03 Beta 0.55 Unit-1 Gamma 0.06 .25E-2 0.08

' Beta 0.16 Unit 2 Gamma 0.06- .25E-2 0.08

~ Beta 0.16

' Unit 1 Gamma 0.02 .02E-2 0.13 Beta 0.02 Unit 2 Gamma 0.02 .02E-2 0.13 Beta 0.02 i l

,

V