IR 05000155/1985017

Insp Rept 50-155/85-17 on 850909-12.No Noncompliance or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Confirmatory Measurements Program,Qc of Analytical Measurements & Licensee Actions on Previously Identified Findings

ML20133G585
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	10/07/1985
From:	Januska A, Rozak S, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20133G570	List: IR 05000155/1985017 ML20133G568
References
50-155-85-17, NUDOCS 8510160038
Download: ML20133G585 (7)

Text

. . . . . . . - -. .- _ - . - ~ _ . - _ - _ . - - - - - _ . - - - _ - -

,

-

.

4 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

!

REGION III

f i

i Report No. 50-155/85017(DRSS)

,

Docket No. 50-155 License No. DRP-6

!

!

Licensee: Consumers Power Company

212 West Michigan Avenue i Jackson, MI 49201 i

.l Facility Name: Big Rock Point Nuclear Plant

.

Inspection At: Big Rock Point Site, Charlevoix, MI Inspection Conducted: September 9-12, 1985

$ ma IL<r.-

Inspectors: A.G.Jhnuska ##!?/Bf i Date T, Sp l

S. Rozak 40/? (i C

, Date 41/.E$w'WNLv

,

, ,,, i

, -

Approved By: M. C. Schumacher, Chief Radiological Effluents and Date

Chemistry Section i

Inspection Summary

!

l Inspection on September 9-12, 1985 (Report No. 50-155/85017(DRSS))

! Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of (1) the confirmatory j measurements program including collection, analysis and comparison of results

!

~

of samples split with the licensee and analyzed onsite using the RIII Mobile Laboratory, (2) quality control of analytical measurements, and (3) licensee actions on previously identified findings. The inspection involved 5 , inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.

l Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.

l l

$h G

'IoS W@

l

.

i i

[

, _ . _ _ _ - . _ . _ __ _ . _ . . _ _ _

.

.

DETAILS

!

i Persons Contacted

• L. Monshor, QA Superintendent

• R. Alexander, Technical Engineer j *J. Beer, Chemistry and Radiation Protection Superintendent i *R. Burdette, Senior Health Physicist R. Bearss, Chemistry and Radiation Protection Senior Technician i

'

• Denotes those present at exit interviews.

' Licensee Action On Previous Inspection Findings

(0 pen) Open Item (50-155/84006-02)

Recalibrate charcoal geometries by September 1, 1984. The licensee recalibrated his gamma spectroscopy systems by the required date ard again after acquiring i 4 a new standard. The sample split analyses performed during the i inspection again resulted in disagreer ents (Section 3). This item will remain open until the licensee recalibrates these systems using an appropriate geometry and results are verified.

{ (Closed) Violation (50-155/85006-01): Failure to conduct a quality control program as required by 10 CFR 20.311(d)(3). (Closed) Open

'.

Item (50-155/85006-02): Modify radwaste shipping procedures to incorporate requirements of 10 CFR 20.311 and 10 CFR 61 before the next radwaste shipment. The inspector reviewed Revision 16 (August 8, 1985) and Revision 17 (August 26, 1985) of Procedure RM-53, Radioactive Material Shipment, and verified that Quality Control involvement, including management review and s10 nature, is required in the revised procedur The revised procedure also contains adequate references to 10 CFR 61.55 and 56 and includes

'

classification tables patterned after 10 CFR 61.55. Licensee records confirmed that no waste shipments had been made prior to these

revisions, (Closed) Open Item (50-155/85006-03): Analyze a liquid sample for gross beta, H-3, Sr-89 and Sr-90 and report results to RII , Comparative results are presented in Table 1 along with those obtained during this inspection, and comparison criteria are outlined in Attachment 1.

t i ,

!

i 2  ;

.

_ _ _ _ , . - - . _ - . - - _ - . _ - . . _ ~ . . _ __ _ , _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ . ,_. ,, _ _ _ __-- - ,

.

3. Confirmatory Measurements Sample Split Five samples (air particulate filter, charcoal filter, dirty waste receiver tank, gas sample, and reactor coolant) were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes by the licensee and in the Region III mobile laboratory onsite. Comparison of results of samples split during the inspection and beta results of a sample split during a previous inspection, listed in Table 1, resulted in 30 agreements and two disagreements. Comparative criteria are defined in Attachment The test criterion for Sr-90 in liquid waste was relaxed to account for errors introduced in radiochemistry required to prepare the sample for counting. The test criterion for Xe-133 in gas was relaxed because the nonuniform thickness between the bottoms of glass sample vials produces different attenuation of the 81 key energy lin Pursuant to a disagreement determined during a previous inspection, the licensee had recalibrated with a newly acquired face loaded charcoal standard. However, the current comparison gave disagreements in this media owing apparently to differences in activity distribution between the actual sample and the standard. The inspectors demonstrated a more

" rugged" analytical technique that compensates for uncertainties in activity distribution within the sample. When the licensee performed a test calibration and analysis using this technique the results were in agreement with those of Region III. The licensee agreed to investigate various analytical techniques and adopt one which will assure reliable results. In the interim, the licensee will use a 1.25 correction factor determined in this compariso No violations were identified in this are . QA/QC of Analytical Measurements The inspector reviewed daily instrument performance tests for count room equipment. The review indicated that for select periods examined, tests were run on the prescribed frequency, entries were proper with out of control tests noted. The tests for the most part are for a 60 cycle test, source and backgroun No violations were identified in this are , : ..

.._ _ _ _ __ . . _ . . . - . . ___ - _.

.

-

.

- Exit Interview l The inspectors reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection with

! licensee representatives (Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection

on September 12, 1985. Emphasis was placed on selecting a geometry for the charcoal media which represents an actual sample whose iodine

distribution may vary with conditions. Until a new calibration is performed, the licensee agreed to apply a factor of 1.25 to adsorber

results.

i During the exit interview, the inspectors discussed the likely 4 informational content of the inspection repor Licensee representatives did not indicate that they felt it contained proprietary informatio Attachments: Table 1, Confirmatory Measurements Program

Results, 3rd Quarter 1985 Attachment 1, Criteria for

Comparing Analytical l Measurements i

I i

i i

I i

i

.

J

!

.

4-

,

L

- . -- -.

. -

l f

TABLE I

l U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

-

CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM FACILITY: BIG ROCK FOR THE 3 OUARTER OF 1985

---

NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICEN5EE:NRC----

SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T l l

L WASTE BETA 4.6E-05 2.OE-06 6.OE-05 9.7E-06 1.3E 00 2.3E 01 A i A H-3 5.6E-04 8.0E-06 6.1E-04 1.1E-06 1.1E 00 7.1E 01 SR-89 8.OE-08 4.OE-OS 1.2E-07 1.2E-OS 1.5E 00 2.OE 00 N I

SR-90 5.8E-07 3.0E-08 3.5E-07 5.0E-09 6.0E-01 1.9E 01 A+

) OFF GAS XE-133 2.2E-02 3.5E-05 2.6E-02 6.4E-05 1.2E 00 6.4E O2 A4 A

)

I XE-133M 5.1E-04 1.2E-05 6.7E-04 2.3E-05 1.3E 00 4.0E 01 l

!

XE-135 1.5E-04 2.4E-06 1.7E-04 4.4E-06 1.2E 00 6.OE 01 A ,

l

, C FILTER BR-82 1.9E-03 9.9E-05 1.7E-03 6.8E-05 9.1E-01 1.9E 01 A )

I-131 1.1E-01 3.2E-04 9.1E-02 3.1E-04 8.OE-01 3.5E O2 D i I-133 1.1E-02 1.5E-04 8.7E-03 1.2E-04 7.9E-01 7.2E 01 D i

! P FILTER CR-51 7.1E-04 7.6E-05 9.OE-04 1.3E-04 1.3E 00 9.3E 00 A I

CS-137 5.OE-04 2.3E-05 5.1E-04 3.4E-05 1.OE 00 2.2E 01 A l CS-134 2.2E-04 1.7E-05 2.2E-04 2.3E-05 9.9E-01 1.3E 01 A I BA-140 7.1E-04 6.4E-05 5.9E-04 7.7E-05 8.3E-01 1.1E 01 A LA-140 7.9E-04 3.8E-05 6.8E-04 5.4E-05 8.6E-01 2.1E 01 A CO-60 2.OE-04 3.7E-05 1.6E-04 2.2E-05 7.9E-01 5.4E 00 A MN-54 5.7E-05 1.9E-05 8.4E-05 1.7E-05 1.5E 00 3.1E 00 A L WASTE I-131 8.7E-06 5.6E-07 8.7E-06 4.9E-07 9.9E-01 1.6E 01 A CS-137 2.7E-04 1.6E-06 2.5E-04 1.7E-06 9.4E-01 1.7E O2 A l CS-134 1.2E-05 5.2E-07 1.2E-05 6.4E-07 1.OE 00 2.3E 01 A MN-54 2.4E-05 6.7E-07 2.3E-05 6.5E-07 9.6E-01 3.5E 01 A CO-60 6.2E-05 1.0E-06 6.4E-05 1.1E-06 1.OE 00 6.1E 01 A I I

PRfMARY CO-58 1.1E-04 1.OE-05 1.1E-04 6.9E-06 1.OE 00 1.1E 01 A ZN-65 4.5E-04 2.3E-05 3.6E-04 2.1E-05 7.9E-01 2.OE 01 A )

I-131 8.6E-05 9.6E-06 7.2E-05 7.3E-06 8.4E-01 8.9E 00 A l I-132 4.9E-04 1.8E-05 5.4E-04 1.4E-05 1.1E 00 2.8E 01 A l SR-92 2.1E-05 4.8E-06 1.2E-05 2.9E-06 5.7E-01 4.3E 00 A T TEST RESULTS:

A= AGREEMENT

, D= DISAGREEMENT j *= CRITERIA RELAXED

!

N=NO COMPARISON l l

.,---~; ,_ , - - _ - - - , -

. .

TABLE I U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

- CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM FACILITY: BIG ROCK FOR THE 3 OUARTER OF 1985

---

NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE:NRC----

SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T PRIMARY MO-99 1.6E-03 1.2E-05 1.6E-03 1.1E-05 1.OE 00 1.3E O2 A CS-134 3.5E-04 1.3E-05 3.5E-04 1.2E-05 9.8E-01 2.8E 01 A CS-136 5.8E-05 8.3E-06 6.3E-05 6.1E-06 1.1E 00 7.OE 00 A CS-137 3.9E-04 1.4E-05 4.0E-04 1.1E-05 1.0E 00 2.8E 01 A CO-60 5.2E-04 1.SE-05 5.3E-04 1.6E-05 1.OE 00 2.9E 01 A MN-54 9.9E-04 1.SE-05 9.4E-04 1.8E-05 9.5E-01 5.4E 01 A T TEST RESULTS:

A= AGREEMENT D= DISAGREEMENT

+= CRITERIA RELAXED N=NO COMPARISON

. .

ATTACHMENT 1 ,

CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ArdLYTICAL MEASUREMENTS

.

_This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements. The critaria are based on an empirical relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this progra In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the com-parison of the NRC's value to its associated one sigma uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution", increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement should be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures to maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported by the NRC Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptanc RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Agreement

.

! <3 No Comparison 23 and <4 .5

,;t,4 and <8 .0 23 and <16 .67

,_16

> and <51 0.75 - 1.33 251 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 l

2200 0.85 - 1.18 Some discrepancies may result from the use of different equipment, techniques, and for some specific nuclides. These may be factored into the acceptance criteria and identified on the data sheet.

t l

t