IR 05000029/1975011
| ML19343A546 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 09/24/1975 |
| From: | Everett R, Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19343A544 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-029-75-11, 50-29-75-11, NUDOCS 8011140587 | |
| Download: ML19343A546 (9) | |
Text
-r
-
-t
-
g
-
-
.
.
..
-
.
'
IE:I Form 12
-
Qan 75) (Rev)
U. S. NUCLEAR RECUL\\ TORY CCMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION MID E!.TCRCC!E TI
' REGION I IE Inspection Report No:
50-29/75-11 Docket No:
50-29 Licensee: - Yankee Atomic Electric Conrany License No:
DPR-3 20 Turnpike Road Priority:
-
k'estboro, Massachusetts 01581 Category:
C Safeguards Location:
Yankee Atonic Nuclear Pot,er Station (YAS)
Type of Licensee:
PL'R, 180 f.s'c Tyne of Inspection:
Independent Measurecents, Unannounced Dates of Inspection:
seetember 10-12. 1975 Dates of Previous Inspection:
Au m t 1 1 -11., lo75 Reporting Inspector:
- 7 :/ /Y 9!22/7s-
.
'
DATE R. J. Everett, Radiation Specialist Accompanying Inspectors:
DATE
.
wm
.%
. -.. -.
DATE
.
-. -
-.
DATE Other Accompanying Personnel:
' ~,.
DATE
.
h ;kU (
~
Reviewed By:
/
_
.,
~
t#
DATE'
J.P.[Stohr,SeniorEnvironmentalSc1entist
,,
.
801114o Sy p
A
&
.-. ; ~...-
... -.
-
.w___.__
.,.
,
.
.
-
.
,
d SUSC'.ARY OF FI!!DI:!GS
.
Enfor ement Action A.
Items of Noncompliance 1.
Violat'iens None 2.
Infractions None 3.
Deficiencies None
'
B.
Deviations None
,
Licensee Action of Previousiv Identified Enforcement Items (Independent Measurerents)
1.
The safety ite= identified in Inspection Report No. 50-29/74-13
,,
has been responded to in a licensee letter dated Dece=ber 9, 1974.
During the ctrrent inspection, a review of the licensee's corrective
-
action was found to be satisfactory.
Other Significant Findings A.
Current Findings 1.
General This report s"--'rizes the licensee's perfor=ance on verification test samples. Since the last inspection of October 22-25, 1974, the licensee's performance on four sa=ples was 1007. agree =ent or possible agreement.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
.
..
--.
L
.
-
-
.
-
,
'
'it,
.
.
.
.
.
-2-
'
.
2.
Acceptable Areas (No items of Noncompliance noted),
a.
Tritium measurement technique (liquids).
b.
Tritium " collection in main vent.
c.
Result of verification test sa=ples.
3.
Unresolved Items None
.
4.
Infractions and Deficiencies Identified by Licensee a.
Infractions None b.
Deficiencies
None B.
Status of Previousiv 2ecorted Unresolved Items (Independent "easurerents)
None Management Interview
~
.
The following individuals attended the canage=ent interview at the conclusion of the inspection.
Mr. R. J. Everett, Radiation Specialist, USNRC, Region I Nr. H. Autio, Plant Superintendent, YAS Mr. W. Jones, Assistant Plant Superintendent, YAS Mr. W. Billings, Supervisor Che=1stry and Health Physics, YAS Mr. L. Eozek, Quality Control and Audit Coordinator, YAS i
During the meeting the following items were discussed:
i A.
Verification Test Samples The inspector stated that the sa=ple results from the last inspecticn were acceptable and that the results of samples taken and. measured.
during the current inspection would be reported in a later supple-J mental report. The licensee stated that measure ents would be re-ported to IE:I within 60 days.
(Details, Paragraph 3)
+
- *-
--.
O
.
,.
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
.
-3-
.
B.
Analysis of Waste Licuids The licensaa stated that an analysis would be performed on the effluent-from several ion exhange separations in order to de-termine the identity and amounts of activity not absorbed.
(Details, Paragraph 4).
C.
Tritium Samoling in the > Sin Vent
.
The inspector noted the tenporary installation of a new tritum sampling ca:. ility at the main vent and had no further questions.
(Details, Paragraph 5).
,
D..
Cas Sampling at the t'aste Cas Surte Drum
.
The licensee stated that a suitable =enitor would be used when sampling _ gas from che surge drum as well as other locations in-
'
order to detect inadtercent leakage and that a requirement to this effect would be incorporated into the gas sampling procedures.
(Details, Paragraph 5).
E.
Laboratory OA/0C Provram The licensee stated that a laboratory QA imple:enting procedure would be written within 60 days and the program initiated by
January 1976.
(Details, Paragraph 6).
i
.
.
.
i
.
.#
.
...
.
,
f
.
.
r
--__ _
_
.. _. _.
_.
_. _ _ _ _
..
'
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
DETAIT>
.
1.
Persons Contacted Mr. H. Autio, Plant Superintendent, YAS Mr. W. Jones, Assistant Plant Superintendent, YAS Mr. W. Billings, Supervisor, Chemistry and Health Physics Mr. J. Gedutis, Technical Assistant, YAS hk R. Mellor, Che=ist, YAS Mr. T. Flanigan, Health Physics Supervisor, YAS 2.
General.
The inspection consisted of a review of the licensee's perfor=ance on verification test sa=ples collected by Region I personnel and analyzed by the NRC's reference laboratory, Idaho Health and Safety Laboratory, (IHSL) and the Region I Mobile Lab. These sa=ples test the licensee's capability to ceasure radioa:tive =aterial in actual effluent sa=ples.
Some test standards vera also sub=itted to YAS for analysis. The activity of the test standards and IHSL's
,
=easure=ents of their effluent samples are referenced to the National Bureau of Standards by laboratory interco=pariscns.
3.-
Results of Verification test Saroles S0nce the inspection of October 22-25, 1974, the licensee's per-for=ance on_four sa=ples_taken during that inspection was 85%
agrec=ent, 10% possible agree =ent and 5" disagree =ent*.
Sa=ples taken during the current inspection will be reported in a supple-mental inspection report.
The licensee stated that these sa ple results would be reported within 60 days. The sa=ples taken during the inspection and the analyses required are as follows:
1.
Liquid, waste hold-up tank - gross beta, critiu=, strontiu=
89, 90 and ga==a isotopic analysis.
2.
Gas, vaste surge drum - ga==a isotopic analysis 3.
Filter, particulate - gac=a isotopic analysis.
4.
Charcoal cartridge - gn==a isotopic analysis.
' * See Attach =ent 1 to this report for a description of the criteria used to evaluate differences between analytical results.
_
...
__.
.
.
-
-
,
i (i
!
.-
..
.
.
.
.
-5-
.
.
The types of samples tested prior to this inspection and the results of measurements were:
Types of Semple: Liquid, k'aste, 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br />, 10-23-74 Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per milliliter Radionuclide NRC Measurement Licensee Measurecent
_
Gross beta'
1.8 +.2 E-3 2.64 +.02 E-3 H-3 4.91]t.01E-2 5.655[.06E-2 SR-89 1.1 + E-6 1.4 +.1 E-6 SR-90 1.63[.1E-7 3.4 3[.6 E-7 (1)
Cs-134 7.4 +.2 E-4 7.79 f;.08 E-4 Cs-137 9.9 +.3 E-4 10.4 +.1 E-4 Co-58 2.7 I.1 E-4 2.71 +.1 E-4 1.35 &.04 E-3 1.52 I.02 E-3
Mn-54 Co-60 3.4 +I.1 E-4 3.75 I.08 E-4 Sb-124 1.9 I.4 E-5 3.14][1.4E-5 Type'of Sample: Gas, Surge Tank,15 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />, 10-23-74 Acceptable Results in units of microcuries per tilliliter Radionuclide NRC Measurement Licensee Measurement
.
Xr-133 3.35 I.1 E-4 3.82 + ? E-4 KR-85 1.72 +.09 E-3 1.87][?E-3 Type of Sample:
Filter, Particulate, 10-30-74 Acceptable Results in units of microcuries Radionuclide NRC Measurement Licensee Measurceent
,
Co-58 10.2 +.07 E-2 8.21 +.3 E-2 Co-60 6.083[.03E-1 5.363[,08E-1 Mn-54 7.6 +.07 E-2 6.1 +.2 E-2 Sb-124 4.9}[.2E-3 3.09 f;.2 E-3 (1)
(1) Possible Agreement
.
...
.-.
Is e
sn
+
$
i
.
..
.
.
..
.
,
'
-6-
'
!
Type of Sample:
Filter, Standard, reference date 1-28-74 Acceptable Ra,sulta in units of microcuries Radionuclide NRC Measurement Licensee Measurerent Cs-13't 4.55 +.1 E-3 4.9 +.04 E-3
'Co-60 8.33 I.1 E-3 1.0 I.01 E-2 Ce-144 5.14 +.1 E-2 5.7 +.04 E-2
,
The licensee stated that the critius procedure had been reviewed
and re-standardized and no other action was planned. The in-spector noted the tritium agreement on the rad waste sa=ple of October 23, 1974 and had no further questions.
4.
Compositing and Analysis of Rzd L*sste Lieuids The inspector noted the use of a mixed bed ion exchange resin (IRN-150) to absorb nuclides frca liquid vaste samples prior to measure =ent as a teans to collect and concentrate nuclides fres large volu=es of saeple. The inspector inquired as to the efficiency of this procedure, and variables that might effect the efficiency and whether any nuclides are preferentially passed by the resin. The licensee responded that the procedure is run at room temperature on clean samples (high conductivity) and
the efficiency, based upon a gross analysis of the effluent frca the resin, was fcund to be 90 - 95".
The licensee stated that an isotopic analysis would be perfor=ed en the effluent frc=
several ion exchange separations in order to identify the activities not absorbed. The inspector stated that the sa ples taken for comparison with the reference laboratory and analyzed by the ion exchange separatica would provide additional verifi-cation of the cathod. The inspector noted that the licensee prepares cceposite sacples for strontium, gross alpha and carbon - 14 while other activities are measured prior to re-lease. The inspector reviewed written procedure 0?-9246 which covers the co= positing and measurecent of rad waste samples and had no further questions other than those' addressed above.
5.
cas Sampling The inspector noted the te=porary installation of a new tritium sampling apparatus in the main vent capable of collecting both tritium gas and tritiated water vapor.
The licensee stated that permanent installation would take place upon cocpletion of work on a new monitoring system 'for the cain vent now being installed.
.
...
.-.
i
.
.
..
i
- -
j
'..
.
-
-7-
.
The inspector reviewed gas sampling procedures and observed the collection of a gas sample fron the waste gas surge dru=.
The sampling location is now inside the compressor roo= of the adjacent building and air is =oved continually with a exhaust fan in the roof.
Samples are taken nor= ally by the purge method using quick disconnect joints.
The licensee stated that two sample centainers are used: one 1000 cubic inch steel cylinder and another steel s=all vole =e container for direct _ censure =ents via a plastic. window. The licensee stated that their evaluation determined that gross leakage could be detected end flow valved off and therefore pressure reduction to 2-3 pst was not indicated.
The inspector stated that suitable monitoring equipment should be used during gas sampling at any location to detect inadvertent leakage The licensee stated that this would be done and this require-ment incorporated into procedures.
6.
Laboratorv OA/0C Procra=
The licensee described his efforts to control the quality of analyses perfor=ed by the station laboratory as well as those analyses contracted to other laboratories.
The inspector re-viewed the results of an internal audit and inquired as to action on the ite=s identified as discrepancies in the audit.
The licensee stated that action on these ite=s vas essentially
complete and another audit was scheduled for.Septe=ber 1973.
The inspector stated that while the QA activities described were acceptable they were infor=al in nature, incc=plete and not docu=ented as a cc=plete and sufficiently detailed progra=.
The licensee stated that a laboratory QA i=plementing procedure would be prepared within 60 days that would include all ele =ents of their progrs= and document a ce==it=ent to a certain program.
The inspector discussed with the licensee the QA controls normally found in a laboratoty perfor=ing icw level analyses and cited references where one could find the QA progra= of other laboratories.
The licensee stated that full inplementation of the progra= would take place in January 1976.
.
p
O m
g
f POOR ORIGINAL
i
-
.... -
-.".:
.-
,
,
.
'
.
.
Attachment 1
.
Criteria for Comparine Analytical Measurenents This attachment provides criteria for ecmparing results of capability tests'and verification ceasurc=ents. The criteria are. based on an empirical relationship which ce= bines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
,
In these criteria, the judgement limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the !!RC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated
~
uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this progrs= as " Resolution",
increases the acceptability of a licensee's ceasurement should be more selective.
Conversely, poorer agree =ent cust be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
.
.
LICENSEE VALUE RATIO = NRC REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Resolution Agreement Agreement A Agreeeent B
<3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison 4-7 0.2 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5
16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.66 0.5 - 2.0 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33
'O.6 - 1.66
>200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma Spectro =etry where principal ga==a energy used for identification is greater than 250 Kev.
.
Tritium analyses of liquid sa=ples.
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
-
Gamma Spectrocetry where principal ga=h,a energy used for identificatica is less than 250 Kev.
89Sr and 90Sr Determinations.
~
Gross Beta where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclide.
.
..
.
__.
e
-
'
S
,
-
,