IR 05000244/1986019
| ML17251A886 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 12/03/1986 |
| From: | Pasciak W, Zibulsky H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17251A885 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-244-86-19, NUDOCS 8612100486 | |
| Download: ML17251A886 (10) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-244/86-19 Docket No.
50-244 License No.
DPR-18 Category C
Licensee:
Rochester Gas and Electric Cor
.
49 East Avenue Rochester New York 14649 Facility Name:
R.
E. Ginna Power Plant Inspection At:
Ontario New York Inspection Conducted:
November 4-6 1986 Inspectors:
H. Zibuls ist date Approved by:
M. J.
sciak, Chief, Effluents Radiation Protection Section, DRSS dat Ins ection Summar:
Ins ection on November 4-6 1986 Re ort No. 50-244/86-19 Areas Ins ected:
Routine, announced inspection of the nonradiological chem-istry program.
Areas reviewed included measurement control and analytical procedure evaluations.
Results:
No violations were identified.
86i2100486 86120 j oa roach osooozee 9 'DR L
J
1
DETAILS Individuals Contacted
"B. Snow, Superintendent, Nuclear Production
~S. Spector, Superintendent, Ginna Production
- D. Fi lkins, Manager, Health Physics and Chemistry
"B. Dahl, Plant Chemist
"D. Bryant, Operations QA Engineer
~J.
Bodine, Nuclear Assurance Manager
~C. Anderson, QA Manager
~S.
Adams, Reactor Engineer
"K. Nassauer, QC Supervisor
"J. Widay, Technical Manager A. Harhay, Chemistry Supervisor T. Meyer, Superintendent
"Denotes those present at the exit interview.
The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees including members of the chemistry staff.
Measurement Control Evaluation Verification of the licensee's measurement capabilities on actual plant water samples is done by splitting samples with the licensee and Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL).
The spent fuel tank was sampled for boron analysis and two feedwater system samples were taken for anion analyses and metal analyses.
One feedwater sample was spiked with a standard solution of fluoride, chloride and sulfate and the other feedwater sample was spiked with a standard solution of the metals.
The standard spike solutions were prepared by BNL for the NRC Region I.
On completion of the analyses by BNL and the licensee, an evaluation will be made (Inspector Follow-up Item 86-19-01).
Anal tica 1 Pr ocedures Eva1 uati on During the inspection, standard chemical solutions were submitted by the inspector to the licensee for analysis.
The standard solutions were pre-pared by BNL for the NRC Region I, and were analyzed by the licensee using normal methods and equipment.
The analysis of standards is used to verify the licensee's capability to monitor chemical parameters in various plant systems with respect to Technical Specification and other regulatory requirements.
In addition, the analysis of standards is used to evaluate the licensee's analytical procedures with respect to accuracy and precision.
The results of the standard measurements comparison indicated that eleven out of thirty measurements were in disagreement under the criteria used for comparing results (see Attachment 1).
~.)
The chloride and two boron disagreements were due to statistical evaluations.
The licensee's small uncertainty contributions caused the calculated disagreements.
The calibration curves used for the spectrophotometric analyses of hydrazine, ammonia and silica were not statistically fit, but were graphically. approximated.
When the curves were drawn using a linear regression fit, there were significant differences in the results.
The licensee will investigate these calibration differences and change their procedure if necessary.
The iron di sagreement could have been a sampling error or due to the methodology for establishing the calibration curve.
The licensee will investigate this.
The fluoride analysis identified a problem with the ion chromatograph.
The licensee will investigate this with the manufacturer.
The licensee was using two independent standard stock solutions for cali-bration and measurement control for all analytes.
The licensee cross checked and verified the quality of the standard solutions regularly.
4.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in para-graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on November 6,
1986, and summarized the scope and findings of the inspection.
At no time during this inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspecto r+
Ill
CAPABILITY TEST RESULTS R
E GI A POWER PLANT Chemical
~aarame er Analytica I Procedure NRC
~al ue Resul Lic.
Va lue s ln ars er Ratio
~Lio RRO bi I I ion b
~com ariaoo Chloride Sul fate Fluoride Copper I ron Sod lum lon Chromatography lon Chromatography lon Chromatography Graphite Furnace Graphite Furnace Graphite Furnace 24.1
+ 3.1 37.4
+ 1.2 40.3
+ 1.1 20.0 + 0.9 41.0 2 2.4 40.4 + 1.5 23.1
+ 0.5 43.5
+ 1.9 41.8
+ 1.4 4.7 + 0.24 9.7 + 0.49 14.5
+ 0.6 4.89 i 0.35 9.55 k 0.34 14.7 i 0.42 4.6
+ 0.5 9.2
+ 0.8 14.4 R 0.8 21.0 2 0,5 40.0 2 0 39.2 2 0.3 20.2 R 1.2 40.5 2 0 39.3 2 1.2 17.5 R.0.5 38 '
+ 0 37.2 2 0.6 4.9 + 0.3 9.6 + 0.35 15.4 2 0.8 4.9 R 0.17 10.73
+ 0.66 16.22 k 0.21 4.7 2 0.2 8.3 + 0.2 14.4 2 0.3 0.87 R 0.11 1.07 2 0.03 0.97
+ 0.03 1.0 0.99 R 0.06 0.97.i 0.05 0.76
+ 0.03 0.87
+ 0.04 0.89
+ 0.03 1.04
+ 0.08 0.99
+ 0.06 1.06
+ 0.07 1.0 1.12
+ 0.08 1.10
+ 0.03 1.02
+ 0.12 0.90
+ 0.08 1.0 Agreement Disagreement Agreement Agreement Agreement Agreement Disagreement Disagreement Disagreement Agreement Agreement Agreement Agreement Agreement Disagreement Agreement Agreement Agreement Hydrazine Spectrophotometry 22.3
+ 1.4 56.9 E 0.7 104
+
21.3 2 3.2 49.0
+ 0 99.3 2 4.2 0.96 + 0.16 0.86
+ 0.01 0.95 2 0.04 Agreement Disagreement Agreement Ammonia (as NH
)
Silica Spectrophotometry Spectrophotometry 87.6
+ 5.3 314
+ 26 938
+ 85 160 2 5 109
+ 7 54.3
+ 5.6 76.7 2 5.8 267 k 6 887 2 31 13624 90+3 4612 0.88
+ 0.09 0.85 4 0.07 0.95.+ 0.09 0.85
+ 0.04 0.83 + 0.06 0.85 l: 0.10 Agreement Disagreement Agreement Disagreement Disagreement Agreement Boron Titrimetric 985 i 10 2980
+ 50 4870 + 60 Resul s in arts er 1013
+ 6 2993
+ 13 4995 k 6 mi I I ion m
1.03
+ 0.01 1.0 1.03 + 0.01 Disagreement Agreement
~Disagreement
ATTACHMENT 1 CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICALMEASUREMENTS This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests.
In these criteria the judgement limits are based on the uncertainty of the ratio of the licensee's value to the NRC value.
The following steps are performed:
( 13 the ratio of the licensee's value to the NRC value is computed Licensee Value (ratio =
NRC Value
);
(2)
the uncertainty of the ratio is propagated.'f the absolute value of one minus the ratio is less than or equal to twice the ratio uncertainty, the results are in agreement.
($1-ratiQ s 2 uncertainty)
'= x, then Sz~
+ Sx* + Sy~
y
~Z
~x
~y
'(From: Bevington, P. R., Data Reduction and Error Analysis for the Physical Sciences, McGraw-Hi'll, New York, I'969)
Cl