IR 05000245/1982009
| ML20054J478 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Millstone  |
| Issue date: | 06/11/1982 |
| From: | Bores R, Kottan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054J475 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-245-82-09, 50-245-82-9, 50-336-82-02, 50-336-82-2, NUDOCS 8206290069 | |
| Download: ML20054J478 (8) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. . U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j Region I , 50-245/82-09 Report No.
50-336/82-02 50-245 Docket No.
50-336 DPR-21 C License No. DPR-65 Priority -- Category C Licensee: Northeast Nuclear Energy Company P.O. Box 270 ' Hartford, Connecticut 06101 Facility Name: Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2 Inspection at: Waterford, Connecticut Inspection conducted: April 26-29, 1982 A Inspectors: M,d h[[ lab - (,,-/B-- O L J. J. Kottan, Radiation Laboratory date signed Specialist Approved by:
@W 6 ~//-$2- 'R. J. Bores,sChief, Independent date signed Measurements and Environmental Protection Section Inspection Summary: Inspection on April 26-29, 1982 (Combined Inspection Report Nos. 50-245/82-09 and 50-336/82-02) Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's chemical and radiochemical measurements program using NRC:I Mobile Radiological Measurements Laboratory and laboratory assistance provided by DOE Radiological and Environmental Services Laboratory. Areas reviewed included: program for quality control of analytical measurements; audit results, and performance on radiological analyses-of split actual effluent samples. The inspection involved 34 inspector-hours on site by one NRC regionally based inspector.
Results: Of the three areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
., e20629oom s20614 PDR ADOCK 050o0245 g PM , . _ _.
. . DETAILS 1.
Individuals Contacted Principal Licensee Employees
- E.
C. Farrell, Station Services Superintendent
- A. G. Cheatham, Radiological Services Supervisor
- J. P. Kangley, Chemistry Supervisor R. H. Langer, Chemistry Foreman, Unit 2 D. Wilkens, Chemistry Foreman, Unit 1 J. R. Robertson, Chemist J. E. Laine, Health Physicist The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees including members of the chemistry and health physics staffs.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Laboratory QC Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for the quality control of analytical measurements. The licensee's QC program is detailed in Procedure CP 800/2800, " Chemistry Quality Assurance Program". This procedure includes equipment calibration, intralaboratory and interlaboratory comparisons, preparation of standard solutions, and vendor laboratory spike samples and duplicate samples.
The inspector reviewed the licensee's QC data for 1981 and 1982 to date and noted that the licensee was implementing the QC program. The inspector also reviewed the licensee's chemistry training program which is described in Procedure CP 800/2800 A, " Chemistry Department Training Program".
The training program consists of training in the areas of general chemistry, radiochemistry, chemistry procedures and plant systems through the use of formal lesson plan review, formal courses, observation of procedure performance, and written examinations.
The inspector reviewed training records and verified that the licensee was implementing the training program.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Audit Results The inspector determined that the licensee's chemistry, -radiochemistry and QC program were examined by an internal corporate audit..The inspector ^ reviewed Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (NNECo) QA Audit A58157 which was performed on January 18-29, 1982 and examined the licensee's Chemistry Department QC program. The inspector also reviewed the response to this audit, dated April 16, 1982.
In addition the inspector reviewed the Environmental Review Board Semi-Annual Audit Report - Winter 1981, dated February 2, 1982.
The inspector had no further questions in this are ____-. _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . .
4.
Confirmatory Measurements During this inspection actual liquid and airborne effluent samples were split between the licensee and NRC:I for the purpose of intercomparison.
The effluent samples were analyzed by the licensee using his normal methods and equipment, and the NRC using the NRC:RI Mobile Laboratory.
Joint analyses of actual effluent samples determine the licensee's capability to measure radioactivity 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, tritium, and gross alpha.
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 an effluent sample split between the licensee and NRC:I during a previous inspection on November 5-7, 1980 (Inspection Report 50-245/80-20,50-336/80-22) were also compared during this inspection.
The results of a routine health physics air particulate sample, charcoal cartridge sample, and gas sample, which were analyzed by the licensee's health physics personnel using the health physics gamma ray spectroscopy system, were also compared.
The results of the sample measurements comparison indicated that all of the measurements were in agreement or possible agreement under the criteria used for comparing results.
(See Attachment 1) The inspector reviewed the licensee's chemical and radiochemical analytical procedures and observed the sampling and analysis of actual samples. The charcoal cartridge, which was analyzed by the health physics personnel using their gamma ray spectroscopy system, resulted in an initial disagreement for the I-133 comparison.
The charcoal cartridge also contained short lived noble gases which interfered with the I-133 determination.
However, when the charcoal cartridge was recounted the following day, after decay of the interfering nuclides, the comparison result was in agreement. The inspector discussed the problem of interfering nuclides with the licensee.
The licensee stated that the computer program used in calculating multiplet photopeak areas would be reviewed so that the proper photopeak area would be used in calculating the I-133 activity. The inspector had no further questions in this area and no items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on April 29, 1982.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the inspection findings.
___-__ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
The licensee agreed to perform the analyses listed in Paragraph 4 and report the results to the NRC.
- -- _- _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. . TABLE 1 MILLSTONE 1 & 2 - VERIFICATION TESTS'RESULTS SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON Results in Microcuries per Milliliter Unit 2 Xe-133 (4.841 1 0.011) E-4 (5.051 0.013) E-4 Agreement "C" Waste Xe-131m (4.6 0.8) E-6 (3.4 0.6) E-6 Agreement Gas Decay Kr-85 (1.37 1 0.08) E-4 (1.25 1 0.09) E-4 Agreement Tank 1440 hrs Xe-133m (3.4 0.3) E-6 (3.9 0.2) E-6 Agreement 4-27-82 Unit 1 Xe-133 (2.7 0.2) E-3 (2.9 0.4) E-3 Agreement Offgas Xe-135 (4.46 0.04) E-2 (3.62 1 0.03) E-2 Agreement 1006 hrs.
Xe-135m (2.01 1 0.15) E-1 (1.97 1 0.03) E-1 Agreement 4-28-82 Xe-138 (9.5 0.5) E-1 (8.49 1 0.07) E-1 Agreement Kr-85m (6.3 0.2) E-3 (5.64 0.13) E-3 Agreement Kr-87 (3.82 1 0.08) E-2 (4.02 0.07) E-2 Agreement Kr-88 (2.40 t 0.06) E-2 (2.16 1 0.05) E-2 Agreement, Unit 1 Xe-133 (4.0 0.2) E-7 (4.6 0.5) E-7 Agreement Stack Gas 'Xe-135 (2.5 0.3) E-7 (3.0 1 0.2) E-7 Agreement 0955 hrs 4-28-82 Unit 1 I-131 (1.14 0.08) E-3 (1.06 0.07) E-3 Agreement Reactor Water I-132 (3.38 0.04) E-2 (3.77 0.03) E-2 . Agreement 0835 hrs I-133 (1.5 0.2) E-2 (1.397 0.013) E-2 Agreement 4-28-82 I-134 (1.20 0.04) E-1 (1.38 0.03) E-1 Agreement I-135 (3.87 0.08) E-2 (3.50 0.06) E-2-Agreement Aerated Co-58 (5.3 0.4) E-6 (5.2 0.3) E-6 Agreement Waste Co-60 (2.20 1 0.07) E-5 (2.65 0.07) E-5 Agreement Monitor Tank I-131 (3.48 0.06) E-5 (3.34 0.05) E-5 Agreement 1330 hrs I-133 (7.8 0.4) E-6 (7.5 1 0.6) E-6 Agreement 4-27-82 Cs-137 (1.8 0.2) E-6 (1.7 0.2) E-6 Agreement
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . TABLE I (continued) SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON Results in Microcuries per Milliliter Aerated gross S (1.12 0.05) E-5 (9.95 i ?) E-6 Agreement Waste H-3 (5.79 0.02) E-3 (5.95 ?) E-3 Agreement Monitor Tank Sr-89 (4 9) E-9 < 3 E-8 No comparison 1510 Sr-90 (1 2) E-9 < 7 E-9 No comparison 11-5-80 Health I-131 (4.0 0.4) E-10 (3.1 0.5) E-10 Agreement Physics I-132 (1.92 0.17) E-9 (1.16 0.09) E-9 Agreement Analysis I-133 (2.24 0.07) E-9 (1.10 0.06) E-9 Disagreement Charocoal
- (2.33 0.11) E-9 Agreement 1303 hrs I-135 (4.3 0.4) E-9 (2.3 0.2) E-9 Possible Agreement Health I-132 (1.2 0.4) E-9 (9.8 0.6) E-10 Agreement Physics I-133 (1.2 0.2) E-9 (1.45 0.08) E-9 Agreement Analysis I-135 (2.4 0.7) E-9 (1.6 0.2) E-9 Agreement Particulate Tc-99m (4.30 0.12) E-9 (4.78 0.06) E-9 Agreement Filter 1303 hrs 4-28-82
- NOTE: The sample was recounted the following day to allow for the decay of short-lived nuclides.
Health Kr-85 (1.14 0.08) E-4 (1.41 0.07) E-4 Agreement Physics Xe-133 (1.738 0.007) E-4 (1.550 0.012) E-4 Agreement Analysis Xe-133m (2.8 0.3) E-6 (2.0 0.2) E-6 Agreement Gaseous Xe-135 (4.52 0.08) E-6 (3.64 0.05) E-6 Agreement Sample 1040 hrs 4-29-82 Results in Total Microcuries Unit 1 I-131 (1.242 0.008) E-2 (1.504 0.013) E-2 Agreement Stack Charcoal I-133 (1.75 0.02) E-2 (2.07 0.02) E-2 Agreement 1305 hrs I-135 (7.7 1.4) E-3 (9.8 0.7) E-3 Agreement 4-26-82 . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. . TABLE I (Continued) SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON Results in Total Microcuries Unit 1 Stack Cr-51 (4.2 1 0.2) E-3 (5.0 i 0.2) E-3 Agreenent Particulate Mn-54 (1.7 1 0.2) E-3 (2.2 1 0.2) E-4 Agreement . Filter Co-58 (1.24 1 0.13) E-4 (1.0 1 0.2) E-4 Agreement 1305 hrs Co-60 (3.6 0.4) E-4 (5.2 0.4) E-4 Agreement 4-26-82 Sr-91 (4.9 0.6) E-3 (4.8 1 0.2) E-3 Agreement I-131 (1.55 0.03) E-3 (1.63 1 0.04) E-3 Agreement I-133 (3.38 0.07) (3.55 0.05) E-3' . Agreement Cs-137 (1.94 1 0.02) E-4 (2.0 0.2) E-4 Agreement-Ba-140 (6.22 1 0.13) E-3 (7.1 0.2) E-3 Agreement Mo-99 (6 2) E-4 (8 _2) E-4 Agreement
___ , . ( - l l
l l f Attachment 1
! l _C_riteria for_ Comp _aring Analytical Measurements This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests The criteria are based on an empirical and verification measurements.
relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution", uncertainty.
increases the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more Conversely, poorer agreement must be considered acceptable selective.
as the resolution decreases.
LICENSEE VALUE RATIO = NRC REFERENCE VALUE possible possible Resolution Agreement Agreeqent 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.
Sr-89 and Sr-90 determinations.
Gross beta where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclide.
- - - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ __ }}