IR 05000003/1974012
| ML20049J779 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1974 |
| From: | Everett R, Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20049J778 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-003-74-12, 50-247-74-13, 50-286-74-17, 50-3-74-12, NUDOCS 8203260045 | |
| Download: ML20049J779 (13) | |
Text
'
-
a
......
'
..
,
.
.
~*
r
.
'
.
U. S. ATC:!IC ENERGY CC:2:ISSIO
'
DIRECT 01'sTE OF RECUIATORY OPERATIONS
REGION I
50-3/74-12 50-3 RO Inspec tion Report No:
50-247/74-13 50-286/74-17 Docket No:
50-247
,
50-287 Licensce:
Consolidated Edison Conpany of New York, Inc.
License No:
Di.s.,., e,. g a-26 s
-
CPPR-6 4 Irving Place Priority:
New York, New York 10003 Category:
C,C6B Locat' ion:
Indian Point nuclear Generating Station (IP)
,
Buchanan, New York 10511
,
Typ'c of Licensce:
PWRS,615, 2758, 3025 Mut
.
Type of Inspection:
Routine, Announced (Independent Measurements)
Datet, of Inspection:
September 16-20,'1974 Dates of Previous Inspection:
Augtist 20-22 (Unit 1),
July 16-18 (Unit 2)
September 4, 19.74 (Unit 3)
b
/ %,4
/ d - 2/ Y U Reporting Inspector e
R. J. Everett, Radiation Specialist Date Accorpanyi.ig Inspectc.rs:
None Date
'
Date
.
Date
.
,
.
Date
.
,
Other Accompanying Personnel:
None Date Revicued By:
/
[(l ]
J. P. Sto
,/ SeniorEnvirontendalScientist 0203260045 741008 05000003
{DRADOCK PDR
"
.
' '
,
e
'i
-
-
.
,
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
'
Enforcement Action None Licensee Action on Previousiv Identified Enforcement Action (Independent Measurer.ents)
l None i
Design Changes
!
None i
Abnormal Occurrences None Other Significant Findings This report summarizes the licensee's performance on capability and verification test samples.
Through December. 1972, the licensee's
,
performance on verification samples uas 50% agreement, 9% possible agreement and 41% disagreement.
From December, 1972 to July, 1974, his performance was 56% agreement, 7% possible agreement and 37% dis-agreement. The licensee has completed the analysis of two capability test samples which resulted in agreement on the filter sample and r
disagreement on the iodine charcoal cartridge.
(Details, Para-graphs 4, 6)
,
'
Unresolved Items None Nbnagement Interview
-
-
On September 20, 1974, following the inspection, a meeting was held in the office of Mr. W. Stein, Manager, Nuclear Power Generation l
Department.
The following individuals were in attendance:
Mr. R. J. Everett, Radiation Specialist, 'AEC, RO:I
[
.
Mr. W. Stein, Manager, Nuclear Generation Department, IP
' Mr. R. W. Van Wyck, Manager, Nuclear Services, IP Mr. J. Kelly, Director, Chemistry, IP
,
Mr. G. Wasilenko, Manager, Engineering QA, IP f
Mr. W. Ferreira, Station QA Engineer, IP
,
I l
!
.,
_ _.
-
_
.
.-
.
_
_ __
-
-2-
.
.
.
ti -
-
\\
-'
During the meeting the follouing items were discussed:
.
'
,.
A.
Verification Test Results (Units 1, 2)
.
-
.
1.
Cross Beta and Tritium Analyses Tha licensee stated that a detailed review would be made of their gross beta and tritium analysis procedures and equipment in an effort to improve comparisons with the AEC reference laboratory.
.
'
(Details, Paragraph 4)
l 2.
Strontium Analyses The licensee stated that action would be taken with the con-tracting laboratory to investigate the instances of disagree-ment with the reference laboratory.
(Details, Paragraph 4)
'
.
3.
Gas Samuling and Analyses The licensee stated that gas sa=pling procedures would be i
reviewed and improved as a first step in correcting discrep-ancies in gas analysis with the reference laboratory.
The inspector stated that the gas sampling area was not enclosed or ventilated tn prevent possible exposure.
The licensee stated
that this situation would be investigated and action taken to
'
eliminate possible exposures at this location.
(Details, Para-graph 4)
'
B.
Capability Test Results (IP - Unit 3)
The licensee stated that the discrepancy on the charcoal sample would be corrected by adjustment of the calibration value to fit the charcoal geometry.
(Details, Paragraph 6)
C.
Charcoal Cartridge Efficiency (All Units)
.
The licensee stated that additional documentaEion would be collected in order to support the licensee's choice of charcoal cartridge for iodine atmospheres at the site.
(Details, Paragraph 7)
.
D.
Laboratory QA/QC Program (All Units)
,
The licensee stated that the all chemistry procedures would be
'ompleted in October, 1974, and the number of replicate and control analyscs would be specified and included in each procedure.
(Details, Paragraph 8)
.
.
t
.
-
__
. -
--
-
-._ -.
'
'
.
.
.
t'
,
i
.
.
DETAILS
,
s.
1.
Persons Contacted
{
Mr. U. Stein, Ibnager, Nuclear Cencration Department,
!
IP
'
Mr. R. W. Van Wyck, >bnager, Nuclear Services, IP Mr. J. Kelly, Director, Chemistry, IP Mr. Roger Koah, Chemistry Supervisor, IP Mr. Steven Profeta, Chemistry-Supervisor, IP
'
Mr. Joe Higgins, General Chemistry Supervisor, IP
,
l 2.
_Ceneral l
!
The inspection consisted of a review of the licensee's analytical performance on capability test standards submitted by RO:I personnel and verification samples taken by R0:I representatives under the AEC's Independent Measurements Program.
These samples test the
!
t licensee 's capability to measure radioactive material in test standards similar to actual radioactive effluents and in actual effluent samples taken at the facility.
The test standards and effluent measurements made by IHSL and by RO:I personnel are referenced directly to the National Bureau of Standards by laboratory i
intercomparisons.
'
'
>
3.
Results of Verification Test Samples (Units 1, 2)
The Independent Measurements Program was initiated at the IP facility in 1971.
Since that time, approximately 28 samples have been split at the facility by RO:1 personnel or RO:I representatives.
The licensee's performance through December,1972, based upon present criteria *, was 50% agreement,
,
9% possible agreement and 41% disagreement.
'
More recent data, i
,.
-
the same performance, 56% agreement,from December, 1972 to Ju 7% possible agreement and 37% disagreement.
j-The licensee is supported in his analytical program by Teledyne, Inc. of Westuood, New Jersey.
Most of the results reported by the licensee are those of the contracting laboratory.
The types of samples tested and the results of measurements were:
i
I
See Attachment 1 to this report for a description of the criteria used to evaluate differences between analytical results.
'(
.
.
-.
_
- -.
~-
.
-4-
.
,
^
' I
.
.
Type of Sample: Liquid, Laundry Easte, March 14, l'973
-
Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Licensee's Measure-Radionuclide AEC Reference Measurement ment Cs-137 2.25+.03 E-4 2.3f,1.4 E-4 Cs-134 1.64+.03 E-4 1.9+1.3 E-4 Co-58 8.9f,.8 E-6 9.41,1.6 E-6 Mn-54 3.8+.6 E-6 3.9+.7 E-6 Co-60 1.15f,.08 E-5 6.3[1.0E-6 Sb-124 1.1+.1 E-5 9.0+1.2 E-6
<2X10-8 1.7[.3 E-8 Not Acceptable H-3
<2X10-6 5.6+ 1 E-4 gross beta 3.411.03 E-4 Not reported
,
SR-89 6.51 2 E-7 4.71,.8 E-8 Type of Sample: Gas, Blanket. 1350 hours0.0156 days <br />0.375 hours <br />0.00223 weeks <br />5.13675e-4 months <br />, 3brch 14, 1973 Not Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee 's Measurement Kr-85 3.21 04 E-1 9.51J E-2 Type of Sample: Gas, Decay, 1255 hours0.0145 days <br />0.349 hours <br />0.00208 weeks <br />4.775275e-4 months <br />, September 11, 1973 Not Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee's Measurement Xe-133 8.73f,.03 E-3 5.58f,.3 E-3
,,
>
.
b I
.
1
,
-
-
-5-
.
.,
,
.
ts'
-
Type of Sample: Licuid, Radwaste,1?45 hours5.208333e-4 days <br />0.0125 hours <br />7.440476e-5 weeks <br />1.71225e-5 months <br />, September 11~, 197 3
_
Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurerent Licensee 's 3feasurerent H-3 1.961 02 E-2 1.491,? E-2 I-131 2.571,.09 E-4 1.8f? E-4 Co-58 3.64+.01 E-3 4.19+7 E-3 Mn-54 4.707.04 E-4 4.42T? E-4 Co-60 1.72[.03E-4 1.91[?E-4 j
Not Acceptable Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee's Measurecent Gross Beta 5.911 06 E-4 Not reported SR-89 5.0l+.05 E-6 9.5+? E-7 Sr-90 4.3+C'5 E-8 1.4I? E-8 l
Fe-59 5.5[.4 E-5 Not reported
~
Zn-65 1.11.2 E-5 Not reported La-140 7.81,.6 E-6 Not reported Type of Sample: Ga_s, 1415 hours0.0164 days <br />0.393 hours <br />0.00234 weeks <br />5.384075e-4 months <br />. January 4, 1974 Not Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee's Measurerent KR-85
1.0+.2 E-3 5.221,.3 E-8 Type of Sample: Liquid, Radeaste, January 4,1974 Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter
.
Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee's Measurerent
,
<1X10-8 3.91,.7 E-9 Co-58 3.21+.01 E-3 2.8+.5 E-3 Mn-54 3.9+['3 E-5 3.6I.6 E-5 Co-60 3.691,.06 E-4 3.1[.5 E-4
!
l
-
l
'
l
.
..,
,
. _..
.. - - -
.
,. -.. _,
-@-
~.
s
.
.
...
Not Acceptable
'
Radionuclide AEC Measurerent
_ Licensee 's Measurement Gross Beta 7.481 06 E-4 2.09t? E-3 H-3 1.83+ 02 E-3 2.6+.4 E-3 SR-89
3.61 2 E-7
<560-9 Type of Sample: Liquid, Radwaste. Januarv 4,1974 Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee 's Measurement Gross Beta 2.88+.05 E-6 3.37+7 E-6 H-3 5.577.01 E-3 5.4+T9 E-4 SR-89
<4X10-8
<5X10-9 SR-90
<2X10-8 2.11 4 E-9 Cs-134 1.0+.1 E-6 9.8+1.7 E-7 l
Cs-137 1.8+.1 E-6 1.9+.3 E-6 l
~
Mn-54 2.21 5 E-7 1.81 3 E-7 Not.^.ccc:tchic Radionuclide AEC Measurerent Licensee 's Measurerent Co-60 8.21 9 E-7 2.51 4 E-7 Type of Sample: Gas,1440 hours0.0167 days <br />0.4 hours <br />0.00238 weeks <br />5.4792e-4 months <br />. March 20, 1974
.
Not Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee' Measurement Xe-133 1.61 1 E-4 1.131 06 E-5
,
l l
l r
.
.
a
.
.
.
-
-.
-
.-
-
_.
-
-.
-7-
.
"
.
- '
'
t
.
.
Type of Sample: Gas, Large recay Tank. 1515 hours0.0175 days <br />0.421 hours <br />0.0025 weeks <br />5.764575e-4 months <br />, March 20, 1974
..
Acceptable Results in units of microcuries ner milliliter Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee 's !feasurerent Xe-133 Sil E-5 2.42+.12 E-5 Type of Sample: Cas, 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br />, July 11, 1974 Not Acceptable Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee's Measurecent Xe-133 1.131 05 E-2 4.211 2 E-1 Type of Sample: Liouid, Radt:aste ' nit 2, 1415 hours0.0164 days <br />0.393 hours <br />0.00234 weeks <br />5.384075e-4 months <br />. July 11, 1974
Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per nilliliter
.
Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee 's Measurerent SR-89 7.81 4 E-7 8.711.5 E-7 I-131 6.521 08 E-4 6.611.1 E 4
Cs-134 5.11 2 E-6 Cs-137 4.131 05 E-5.
4.3+.7 E-6 3.81 6 E-5 Co-58 1.91 04 E-5 1.81 3 E-5 Cs-136 5.11 2 E-6 3.7t.6 E-6 Mn-54 4.9+.2 E-6 4.2+.7 E-6 Co-60 4.11 2 E-6 3.41 6 E-6 Not Acceptable Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee 's Measurerent Gross Beta 1.53+.03 E-4 3.8+.6 E-5
~
H-3 1.44+.01 E-2 Not reported
.-
<7X10-9 6.211.0 E-8 Zr-95 1.71 3 E-6 3.14+7 E-5
.
Q
.
-
r.
---,
r-
-
,~
e.
em-,c-
,--
-e-n-
'w-
!
N
'
'
-
.
.
l'
Type of Sample:
Licuid, Radwaste, Unit one. 1440 hours0.0167 days <br />0.4 hours <br />0.00238 weeks <br />5.4792e-4 months <br />, Julv
11, 1974 Acceptable Results in units of microcurics per m_illiliter
,
-
_Radionuclide AEC Measurement d
_ Licensee 's "eacur Gross Beta 4.8+.1 E-5 Sr-89
<2XI'0-8 4.6+.8 E-3 i
Cs-134
<4Xi'0-8 1.34+.03 E-5 Cs-137 4.85+.05 E-5 1.21 2 E-5 Mn-54 l
1.51 2 E-6 4.4+.7 E-5 1.0+.2 E-6
_Not Acceptable Radionuclide AEC Measurement i
_ Licensee's Measurerent H-3 8.98+.02 E-2 SR-90 Co-60 1.11 4 E-8 Not reported
!
1.51 03 E-5 4.5+.8 E-8 3.11 5 E-6 Type of Sample: Charcoal filter, July 11, 1974 Not Acceptable Results in units of microcuries Radionuclide AEC Measurement Licensee's "easure e-I-131 2.821 09 E-3 1.22+.05 E-3 4.
_ Corrective Action
.
The inspector stated that the licensee's gross beta and triti The licensee stated that a detailed review be m um
.
in an effort to identify areas needing improvement.
ocedures The licensee stated that with regard to strontium analyses strontium analyses are performed by a contracting laboratory
, since all
-
should be taken with them to improve their techniques in order
'
, action agreement with the reference laboratory.
"
an
.
t
.
P
.
- * -
- _.,
,
_
- _,
, _.
,
___ _
-10-s
.,
s
.
,
,s
,
.
s
,
'
i
.
' ' '
...
.
.
,
's
,
,
l
!
-
-
,
<
Type of Sample: Standard charcoal c:Mtridge,refe'rencedate September 18, 19 4
't.
(:
s Not Acceptable Result.:'in units of nicrocuries
.,
-
p.
,s
,
s s
Radionuclide AFC Miesurecet*t iLicense's Measurement
/ O
'.
n, x
t t.
5.291 12 E-3 1-131 (Ba-133) Z
~1.12104 E-2 1-131 (Ba-133) H 2.36+.06 E-2 5.781 13 E-3 e
/
_s s
.
.
6.
Corrective Action
,
\\,
t (
,'x'
.
'
t
-
,
gg
'
\\ i The inspector stated that the lice'nsee's perfirmance on the^
'.
particulate filter indicated'un ac'ceptable calibrat. ion for the flat plate geometry. The inspect,or noted that/the licensee used a
,
Ge (Li) detector for the analysis and manual, graphical methods to quantitate each gamma photopeak.
The licensch will automate his gamma spectrometer in the near future as previcMly'discussid.
The inspector purs'ued the discrepancy beweIn the fidense\\
"
e and the
'
reference laboratory on the standard charcoal sample.2 and found that IP used a branching r2 tic nf.600 vhile 'IHSL undd.623.
'
The Correcting for this difference still did.not allou agreccent.
remaining error waS. thought to be in applying calibration data for j
a flat plate gear tirg,tS the charcoal samples. - The licensae ;,
stated he would institutC a geometry correction f on t!nese type samples.
The adeqt.ai.y of dhe change will be verifiedin future samples prior tc OL tht' Unit,3.
.-
I '~.
,
(
-
-
s
..
,'
The inspector stated lth,2t additiodll capability tes't samples would
'
be mailed to them f rom IHSL and the results of ecs'sarecatit's would be
.'*
d reported in a later inspection report. report.
g i
t l'
'
A
7.
Charcoal Cartriden Cc ilection Ef ficiency o
.j o\\ ]
.
s
.
,
Theinspectornoted-thed$cumentationpresentedbythelicensee N
the selection of the' Scott-4235-1C chdri: Mal cartridg'e
,y to support The 1rspector stated'tdet
\\
/'
for sampling of all iodine species.
inasmuch as individual vendor products /' var [y considerably it.dt! cir
]
'
properies and collecti on'ef ficiencies,.supportative data specil2e i
"
to the Scott Cartridge voidd be n'ecedsary.
The licensee agreed'to submitScottCartridges[thtttestiUgand]toobtaincompleteeinfor-
'
mation from the manuf actur'erl
~[
l
-
-
t
$- '
s
,;,
N
,-
- ,
s
,
'
<
j
/
'
)
i
>
^
r l
l,
,
t
-
-
1 ;
s s
'
'
.'
',
,
,?
"
,,f y
s
,; 1\\
\\
.
,
,
.
>
.'O
,
,
'
' y isG
.
,
,
-
,
'
r j
,
(
,. - _.
,
3 -
-
-l..
,T,
,
-KE-
'
%
,
- .
,
.
,
\\
.,
,
8.
Laboratory OA/0C Procran
,
-
.
The inspector reviewed the staff and administrative controls that
-
have been instituted by IP management to effect a Quality Control Program in the r.adiochemistry area.
Typical radiochemical pro-cedures were reviewed as to necessary QA content.
The chemistry unit has received at least one audit from the IP QA staff and monthly reports are submitted on progress toward full implementation of the chemistry QA Program.
The licensee repcrted that the com-pletion of five more procedures would complete their effort on written procedures for each chemical test.
The inspector reviewed typical procedures and traced the path of a typical sample through the analysis scheme, noting pertinent QA/QC input.
The inspector asked the licensee to describe the essential elements of his QA/QC Program in the chemistry area.
The licensee stated that each chemical operation la covered by a written procedure; each individual is trained in the proper use of the procedure; any control or replicate analyses associated with a particular procedure are authorized by a chemistry supervisor; supervisory review of all analytical results by a chemistry supervisor; and all instrument
,
calibrations are based upon primary pedig eed standards.
The inspector stated that the procedures reviewed did not specify the number of replicates or the frequency of use of control samples.
The licensee stated that thesc QC tools are not specified in individual procedures but are ordered by the chemical supervisor.
.
,
The inspector noted infrequent use of replicate and control samples throughout the chemistry area.
.
The inspector noted the QA/QC Program the licensee had instituted
'
_
with the contracting laboratory and had no further questions.
/,
s
,
,
.
-
,
t t
A M
i 3 t
~t y
%
.
~:
s e
u
~
t
l l
l I
_
'
,
i
.
.
_
_,
-
-
,
-
-
.
. _ _..
.
.
.
..-
"
...
.
,
.-
,
h Mtac1rwnt 1 p*
Criteria f or Cmnar ino.. Ang)yt ica l re,nurenents This attachcent providen criteria for co:parinp, re'sults of capability
,
'
tests and verification reasure: entn.
The criteria are based on an
'
empirical relatien:: hip which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this pregram In these criteria, the judgenent linits are variable in relation to the comparison of the AEC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated uncertainty.
As that ratio, referred to in this progran as " Resolution", increases the acceptability of a licensec's measure-
ment should be nore selective.
Conversely, poorer agreement must bc
,
considered acceptabic as the resolution decreases.
}
LICEMSEE VALUE i.
RATIO-AEC REFER.i.SCE VALUE l
i Possible Possible r
,
-Acrec=ent B
!
Resolution Agreement Agreement A t
<3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Co parison 4-7 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0
,
i (
8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5
\\
16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.66 U.S - 2.0 t
51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.66
,
>200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 I
'
"A" criteria are applied to the follcwing analyses:
h I
,
Gartma Spectrometry where principal gaena energy used for identifi-
.
cation is greater than 250 Kev.
I
!
j Tritiun analyses of liquid samples.
.
l r
E
"B" criteria are applied to the follouing analyscs:
!
,
I canna si:ccerometry where pelucipal W. a cacrgy used fc-identifi-
cation is less than 250 Kev.
,
r Sf>b r :tud '. 0.2 : De t e rninti ti can.
i
.
.
^
Gr.
i.e t.' ae re san". l e: are es.unted i ' the ".
d:t te it';inc t he
[
si."
3...rie.
i:o l.de.
i
t i
!
h
.
'
i s
,
.
.
l i
..
,. _... _
.,
__ -
-. _ -.
._
_
,