IR 05000219/1978032
| ML19274D464 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 12/19/1978 |
| From: | Gloski D, Kottan J, Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19274D460 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-219-78-32, NUDOCS 7902010201 | |
| Download: ML19274D464 (8) | |
Text
_ _. _ _
_ _ _ ___ _ _._ _.
-
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-219/78-32
,
Dacket No.
50-219 License No.
DPR-16 Priority Category C
--
-
Licensee:
Jersey Central Power and Licht Company Madison Avenue at Punch Bowl Road Morristown, New Jersey 07960 Facility Name:
Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station Inspection at:
Forked River, New Jersey Inspection conducted: November 14-16, 1978
/
/ghp Inspectors:
m J.[K6ttanIfladiationSpecialist cate signed D. M. Gloski. Co-Op date signed L. K. Cohen, Health Physicist, IE:HQ date signed Approved by:
/
/9 S
s J. P. S,toffr, Chief, Environmental and date signed Special Projects Section, FF&MS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on November 14-10, 1978 (Report No. 50-219/78-32)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's chemical and radiochemical measurements program using NRC:I Mobile Radiological Measure-ments Laboratory and laboratory assistance provided by DOE Radiological and Environmental Services Laboratory.
Areas reviewed included: program for
-
quality control of analytical measurements; audit results; performance on radiological analyses of split actual offluent samples; and, effluent control records and procedures. The inspection involved 22 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC regional based inspector.
Results:
Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
..
,
Region I Form 12 7902010A6/
(Pav. April 77)
_..
-
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Principal Licensee Employees
- J. T. Carroll, Station Superintendent
- K. O. Fickeissen, Technical Engineer
- J. R. Pelrine, Chemical Supervisor C. B. Kanta, Group Chemical Superviso" M. J. Atkins, Engineer I/ Nuclear D. Weigle, Engineering Associate 3/ Nuclear The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees including members of the chemistry and health physics staffs.
denotes tnose present at the exit interview
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (77-20-01):
Gross alpha self absorption.
The inspector noted the licensee had constructed a gross alpha self absorption correction curve and incorporated this curve into his counting procedures.
This item is closed.
3.
Laboratory OC Proaram The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for the quality control of aral3 tical measurements.
The inspector noted that the licensee had written 13 procedures covering laboratory analytical quality control.
The inspector noted, however, that the licensee was not implementir.2 all of the procedural requirements.
The inspector de-termined thet the licensee was performing daily source ano background checks, that his Ge(Li) multichannel analyzer system was calibrated using NBS standards, that samples were split with an outside laboratory in 1977, and that periodic training and retraining of chemistry per-sonnel had been conducted.
The inspector discussed laboratory QC with the licensee.
The inspector also discussed various aspects of NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment.
The inspector noted the licensee had no regulatory requirements in the area of laboratory QC and, therefore, the inspector had no further questions in this area.
No items of noncompliance were identifie.
4.
Audit Results The inspector determined that the licensee's effluent monitoring and chemistry program were on the corporate QA audit list. The inspector reviewed Audit No. 77-14, dated September 22, 1977, and also the replies to items identified during this audit. The in-spector also reviewed the results of Audit 78-26, dated November 7, 1978.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
No items of nonccmpliance were identified.
5.
Confirmatory Measurements During the inspection, actual liquid and gaseous effluent samples were split between the licensee and NRC:I for the purpose of inter-comparison. The effluent samples were analyzed by '.he licensee using his normal methods and equipment, and the ARC using the NRC:I Mobile Radiological Measurements Laboratory.
Joint analyses of actual ef-fluent samples determine the licensee'n capability to measure radio-activity in effluent samples.
In addition, a liquid effluent sample was sent to the NRC reference laboratory, Department of Energy, Radiological and Environmental Services Laboratory (RESL), for analyses requiring wet chemistry.
The analyses to be performed on the sample are:
Sr-89, Sr-90, gross alpha, gross beta and tritium.
These results will be compared with the licensee's results when received at a later date, and will be documented in a subsequent inspection report.
The results of the sample measurements compare.d, indicated that all of the measurements were in agreement, or possible agreement, under the criteria used for comparing resuits.
(See Attachment 1) The results of the comparision are listed in Table I.
6.
Records and Procedures The inspector reviewed the following records and procedures:
a.
Gaseous effluent analysis data (January,1978 to October,1978)
b.
Liquid effluent analysis data (January,1978 to October,1978)
c.
Counter calibration and check records (January,1978 to October, 1978)
.
d.
Laboratory QC sample analysis (2nd and 4th quarters 1977)
e.
The following procedures:
(1) 803.46 Collection of Stack Gas Sample for Analysis of Noble Gases (2) 804.6 Liquid Radwaste Composite (3) 804.23 Process Liquid Radiation Monitor Calibration (4) 804.27 Stack and Offgas Monitor Calibration (5) 805.3 Chloride Ion (6) 812.10 Liquid Radioactive Waste Control Limits and Corrective Actions (7) 812.12 Stack Gaseous Effluent Control Limits and Corrective Actions (8) 812.13 Stack Particulate and Halogen Effluents Control Limits and Corrective Actions (9) 818.16 Radioactive Liquid Waste Analysis and Release Permit Form 7.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on November 16, 1978.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the inspection findings.
The licensee agreed to perform the analyses listed in paragraph 5 and report the results to the NR.
TABLE 1 Oyster Creek Verification Test Results SAMPLE IS0 TOPE fjRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARIS0N RESULTS IN MICR0 CURIES PER MILLILITER WST "B" Cs-137 2.95 1 0.59E-6 2.49 1 0.28E-6 Agreement 1015 hrs 11/16/78 Co-60 5.40 1 0.27E-6 4.94 1 0.30E-6 Agreement Mn-54 2.84 1 0.57E-6 1.96 1 0.29E-6 Agreement Reactor Water Ce-144 3.13 1 0.21E-4 4.01 1 0.56E-4 Agreement 0845 hrs 11/16/78 Ce-141 9.18 1 0.47E-5 1.36 1 0.14E-4 Possible Agreement Ru-103 1.67 1 0.09E-4 2.37 1 0.19E-4 Possible Agreement Co-58 9.39 1 0.55E-5 1.36 1 0.23E-4 Possible Agreement Fe-59 2.24 1 0.17E-4 2.88 1 0.29E-4 Agreement Mn-54 1.95 1 0.02E-3 2.23 1 0.04E-3 Agreement Co-60 4.28 1 0.05E-3 5.27 1 0.04E-3 Agreement Sb-124 9.24 1 0.47E-5 1.04 1 0.03E-4 Agreement Zr-95 2.04 1 0.14E-4 3.11 1 0.31E-4 Agreement
.
TABLE 1 Oyster Creek Verification Test Results SAMPLE _
IS0 TOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARIS0N RESULTS IN TOTAL MICR0 CURIES Stack Particulat.e ts-137 4.49 1 0.49E-4 6.57 1 0.80E-4 Agreement Filter 0727 hrs Co-60 2.42 1 0.24E-3 2. 36 10.13E-3 Agreement 11/14/78 Stack Charcoal I-131 7.54 1 1.49E-4 9.21 i 1.01E-4 Agreement Cartridge 0727 hrs 11/14/78
.
.
TABLE 1 Oyster Creek Verification Test Results SAMPLE ENERGY (kev)
NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARIS0N RESULTS IN GAMMAS PER MINUTE
....C Simulated
3.15 + 0.17ES 352,132 Agreement Off Gas Sample *
303 1.74 + 0.11ES 129,825 Agreement 346 2.89 + 0.17E6 2,274,747 Agreement 356 5.19 + 0.34E5 432,000
, Agreement 779 1.39 + 0.09E6 1,140,256 Agreement 964 1.56 + 0.09E6 1,331,613 Agreement 1408 2.21 + 0.17E6 2,041,117 Agreement
- At the time of the inspection, the licensee's facility was shut down for refueling, and, therefore, no offgas sample was available.
An NRC simulated offgas sample was given to the licensee.
The results for the various photo peaks in the spectrum were compared in gammas per minute emitted from the sample.
.
.~~
.
.
Attachment 1 Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurements.
The criteria are based on an empirical relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
In these criteria, the judgement limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated 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 must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
LICENSEE VALUE RATIO = NRC' REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Resolution Agreement Agreement A Agreement B
<3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison 4-7 0.5 - 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 0.6 - 1.66
>200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 Kev.
Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
Iodine on absorbers
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 Kev.
89Sr and 90Sr Determinations.
Gross Beta where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclide.