IR 05000255/1987016
| ML20235M654 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 07/08/1987 |
| From: | Januska A, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235M611 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-255-87-16, NUDOCS 8707170268 | |
| Download: ML20235M654 (10) | |
Text
.....
.
.......
...................
..
.
...
.
.
.
.
..
..
-
.
,
e i
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
i
REGION III
Report No. 50-255/87016(DRSS)
l Docket No. 50-255 License No. DPR-20 Licensee:
Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, MI 49201 i
l l
Facility Name:
Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant j
'
Inspection At:
Palisades Site, Covert, Michigan I
Inspection Conducted:
June 8-12, 1987 j
h. Y. m No n
Inspector:
A.G.Jhnuska
Date l
YO lll,Schumacher, Chief M.
7 Approved By:
,
Radiological Effluents Date i
and Chemistry Section i
Inspection Summary Inspection on June 8-12, 1987 (Report No. 50-255/87016(DRSS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of (1) the confirmatory measurements program including sampling, quality control of analytical measurements, and comparison of licensee analyses with those of the Region III Mobile Laboratory onsite, (2) the radiological environmental monitoring program and (3) an open item identified during a previous inspection.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
I i
8707.170260 8707(,0 DR ADDCK 05000y55 PDR
. _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ ___
_ _.
1
)
-
.
t I
DETAILS
!
1.
Persons Contacted
)
l
- J. Lewis, Technical Director i
- K. Haas, Reactor Engineering Superintendent
- W. Beckman, Radiological Services Manager
- D. Malone, Nuclear Licensing Analyst
- S. Pierce, Plant Chemist j
- R. McCaleb, Quality Assurance Director i
- J. Hager, Plant Laboratory Supervisor
)
- M. Grogan, RMC Supervisor
l
- C. Kozup, Technical Engineer i
T. Neal, Radiological Material Control Administrator l
C. Graffenius, Senior Chemistry Technician
!
A. Calloway, Senior Chemistry Technician
,
J. Quist, Technician Trainee j
- C. Anderson, Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at exit interview on June 12, 1987.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Open Item (50-255/86011-01):
Analyze a split sample for gamma l
emitters and a spiked sample for Sr-89, Sr-90 and gamma emitters and report the results to Region III.
Results of the analyses are compared in Table 2; the comparison criteria are presented in Attachment 1.
Gamma emitters in the spiked sample were in agreement; however, no comparisons for Sr-89 and Sr-90 were possible as the portion of the spiked sample submitted to the licensee's contractor for analysis was lost.
Analyses of the split sample resulted in conservative disagreements for Cs-134 and Cs-137 on one of the two count room detectors.
Since these analyses, the licensee has recalibrates these detectors which were tested during this inspection. The results are discussed in Section 3.
3.
Confirmatory Measurements Split Sample Comparisons Seven samples (air particulate, charcoal, gas, liquid, reactor coolant, spiked air particulate and spiked charcoal) were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes by the licensee and in the Region III Mobile Laboratory on site.
Results of the sample comparisons are listed in Table 1; comparison criteria are given in Attachment 1.
The licensee analyzed samples on both counting room detectors and on a low level counting room detector using geometries normally used for effluent measurements, in order to check backup gamma spectroscopy systems.
l l
1
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
-
.
l A safety injection refueling water sample ~and a gas sample analyzed resulted in all agreements on both detectors used.
The licensee agreed I
to have a portion of'the water sample analyzed for gross beta, tritium, ll Sr-89 and Sr-90 and report the results'to Region III (0 pen Item u
'
No. 50-255/87016-01).
After a stack air particulate sample was analyzed and found to have no nuclides, a primary coolant sample filter was analyzed as an air particulate sample.
Comparisons on two detectors
resulted in all agreements. A primary sample result indicated one.
disagreement, Ru-106.
Examination of the data revealed that the licensee used a library for identification and quantification which contained i
incorrect entries for Ru-106'and its parent Rh-106.
Other discrepancies
)
were noted.in the licensee's libraries.
The. licensee agreed to. review
and update his gamma spectroscopy libraries (0 pen Item No. 50-255/87016-02).
l A stack charcoal adsorber. analyzed on Detector 2 resulted in conservative.
disagreements for both I-131 and'I-133.
A chemistry drain tank cartridge
,
subsequently counted on Detector 3, the other count room detector,
!
resulted in a conservative disagreement for.I-131.
A spiked adsorbert analyzed by both the licensee and the inspector as an unknown (C SPIKED and C SP) resulted in all agreements on Detector 1 and six of seven.
disagreements on Detector 2.
As the spike was slightly different than the licensees standard used for calibration the' licensee requested that the
results of another actual sample be compared.
One disagreement, I-131 on
.]
Detectar 2 resulted.
The inspector reviewed data to determine the cause l
of the disagreements. A licensee representative stated that one of the standards used for calibration contains europium.
This nuclide has many energy lines and presents a summing problem when calibrating, as the licensee does, with the source very near the detector. _ Summing causes a loss of counts from photopeaks during calibration resulting in incorrect ~
(too low) efficiencies particularly at lower energies.
A spiked air j
particulate (same nominal calibration as charcoal) analyzed on Detectors.1
'
and 3 also showed disagreements for low energy lines from Co-57 (122 kev)
and Ce-139 (165 kev) on both detectors.
The licensee is in the process of replacing two of the detectors and has
)
purchased new standards to calibrate them and recalibrates the' remaining
'
detector.
The licensee agreed to calibrate Detector 2 within two' weeks after receipt of the standards and calibrate Detectors 1 and 3 by i
approximately mid-August (0 pen Item No. 50-255/87016-03).
The licensee-has entered into a cross check program with a vendor and will use supplied spikes to verify these calibrations.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
QA/QC of Analytical Measurements
The licensee's counting room quality control program remains. essentially
as described in a previous inspection with the exception that 1 Inspection Report No. 50-255/85025
.
!
- _ _ ___ _ - - - _ _ _ - _
.
.
i I
J calibrations are now performed annually.
The inspector reviewed daily instrument performance tests for the counting room and some of the radiochemistry equipment.
The program appears to be properly implemented with few minor exceptions.
The inspector noted that supervision reviews of performance test results are not performed consistently and that trend plots of performance tests are not made.
The inspector stressed that j
trend plots are an industry accepted practice and recognized as a
valuable tool in the control of analytical measurements.
The licensee's results of nonradiological crosscheck analyses with Nuclear Waste Water Treatment Corporation appeared satisfactory.
The licensee will be submitting his first set of radiological cross check
]
results to verify gamma spectroscopy calibrations and on a routine six j
month schedule starting in November.
q The inspector reviewed Audit QT-86-20 performed September 15-24, 1986 to determine chemistry compliance with selected sections of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
The audit stated that good progress had been made in
!
'
resolving deficiencies and reducing open issues.
No findings or observations related to the scope of this inspection were noted.
I No violations or deviations were identified.
'
)
5.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program j
The inspector performed a cursory review of the 1985 and 1986 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program reports.
All Technical Specifications sampling, analysis and sensitivity requirements were met except as noted and the Land Use Census performed as required.
There appears to be no evidence that the Plant operation has had any significant environmental impact.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6.
Open Items
!
l Open items are matters which have been discussed with the licensee, which I
will be reviewed by the inspector, and which involve some action on the i
part of the NRC or licensee or both.
Open items disclosed during the
]
inspection are discussed in Section 3.
7.
Exit Interview
The inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection
-
with licensee representatives (Section 1) at the conclusion of the
,
inspection on June 12, 1987.
Sample split disagreements were discussed-l in detail.
The inspectors also stressed trend plotting in the QC l
program.
The licensee acknowledged the inspector's remarks.
]
)
!
l y
- -. _ _ _ _ _ - _
_ _ - -
__ _-_____
l
-
.
During the exit interview, the inspector discussed the likely informational
content'of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the inspector during the inspection.
Licensee representatives did not identify any such documents or processes as proprietary.
Attachments-1.
Table 1, Confirmatory Measurements Program Results, 2nd Quarter 1987 2.
Table 2, Confirmatory Measurements
!
Program Results, 2nd Quarter 1986 3.
Attachment'1, Criteria for Comparing
'
Analytical Measurements
)
i
.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ - - _ _ _ -
"
...
-
..
.
-
..
....
-.
i
-
.
.
l l
l l
TABLE 1 l
'
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT l
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
~l FACILITY: PALISADES
,
FOR THE 2 QUARTER OF 1987
=
-NRC-------
LICENSEE----
---LICENSEE:NRC----
l SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T
L WASTE MN-54 3.5E-05 1.2E-06 3.6E-05 1.8E-06 1.OE 00 3.1E 01 A
g gy,
CO-58 1.7E-05 9.4E-07 2.OE-05 1.4E-06 1.2E 00 1.8E 01 A
CO-60 5.3E-04 2.6E-06 5.4E-04 4.1E-06 1.OE 00 2.OE O2 A
l CS-137 7.7E-06 7.1E-07 7.OE-06 1.2E-06 9.OE-01 *1.1E 01 A
l C FILTER I-131 1.6E-09 8.2E-11 2.8E-09 9.2E-11 1.8E 00 1.9E 01 D
1367 4 I-133 2.3E-09 1.4E-10 3.2E-09 1.2E-10 1.4E 00 1.6E 01 D
L WASTE MN-54 3.5E-05 1.2E-05 3.8E-05 1.6E-06 1.1E 00 3.1E 01 A
16T 3 CO-57 1.6E-06 3.2E-07 1.9E-06 3.5E-07 1.2E 00 4.9E 00 A
CO-58 1.7E-05 9.4E-07 1.5E-05 1.3E-06 8.8E-01 1.8E 01 A
CO-60 5.3E-04 2.6E-06 5.4E-04 4.1E-06 1.OE 00 2.OE O2 A
CS-137 7.7E-06 7.1E-07 1.1E-05 9.3E-07 1.5E 00 1.1E 01 A
NB-97 6.8E-06 9.5E-07 7.OE-06 8.9E-07 1.OE 00 7.2E 00 A
OFF GAS XE-131M 1.OE-03 9.1E-05 1.1E-03 1.OE-04 1.1E 00 1.2E 01 A
16TA XE-133 2.9E-02 9.8E-05 2.7E-02 1.OE-04 9.3E-01 2.9E O2 A
,
P FILTER CR-51 4.2E-04 2.7E-05 5.2E-04 2.3E-05 1.2E 00 1.6E 01 A
lb ET l CO-58 1.4E-04 4.9E-06 1.6E-04 4.1E-06 1.2E 00 2.8E 01 A
CO-60 1.3E-05 3.2E-06 1. 7 E--05 2.1E-06 1.3E 00 4.1E 00 A
NA-24 5.9E-05 5.2E-06 5.9E-05 3.9E-06 1.OE 00 1.1E 01 A
ZR-97 2.4E-05 4.9E-06 3.OE-05 2.9E-06 1.3E 00 5.OE 00 A
NB-97 3.1E-05 3.7E-06 3.9E-05 3.OE 06 1.2E 00 8.6E 00 A
TE-132 9.OE-06 2.OE-06 1.7E-05 1.7E-06 1.9E 00 4.5E 00 A
BA-139 3.8E-03 3.OE-04 4.5E-03 1.OE-04 1.2E 00 1.3E 01 A
OFF GAS XE-131M 1.OE-03 9.1E-05 1.2E-03 1.OE-04 1.2E 00 1.2E 01 A
BET 3 XE-133 2.9E-02 9.8E-05 2.9E-02 9.7E-05 1.OE 00 2.9E O2 A
P FILTER CR-51 4.2E-04 2.7E-05 5.2E-04 2.3E-05 1.2E 00 1.6E 01 A
CO-58 1.4E-04 4.9E-06 1.5E-04 4.1E-06 1.1E 00 2.8E 01 A
g g73 T TEST RESULTS:
A= AGREEMENT l
D= DISAGREEMENT
- = CRITERIA RELAXED N=NO COMPARISON
_ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ - _ - _ _
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_
_
. _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
-.
_.
- _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
-
TABLE 1 U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM FACILITY: PALISADES
'
FOR THE 2 QUARTER OF 1987
NRC-------
LICENSEE----
---LICENSEE:NRC----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T
-
P FILTER CD-60 1.3E-05 3.2E-06 1.2E-05 2.5E-06 9.4E-01 4.1E 00 A
'
NA-24 5.9E-05 5.2E-06 5.2E-05 3.5E-06 8.8E-01 1.1E 01 A
ZR-97 2.4E-05 4.9E-06 2.6E-05 3.OE-06 1.OE 00 5.OE 00 A
NB-97 3.1E-05 3.7E-06 2.9E-05 2.9E-06 9.3E-01 8.6E 00 A
TE-132 9.OE-06 2.OE-06 1.2E-05 1.6E-06 1.4E 00 4.5E 00 A
BA-139 3.8E-03 3.OE-04 4.7E-03 8.2E-05 1.2E 00 1.3E 01 A
<
C SPIKED CO-57 1.1E-02 1.6E-04 1.3E-02 6.7E-05 1.2E 00 6.8E 01 A
CO-60 1.6E-02 4.4E-04 1.7E-02 1.9E-04 1.1E 00 3.6E 01 A
g g7.,
HG-203 1.2E-03 1.2E-04 1.4E-03 4.7E-05 1.1E 00 1.OE 01 A
CD-109 5.5E-01 5.3E-03 6.3E-01 2.4E-03 1.2E 00 1.OE O2 A
SN-113 7.8E-03 3.1E-04 5.9E-03 7.8E-04 7.5E-01 2.5E 01 A
CS-137 2.6E-02 4.3E-04 3.OE-02 1.9E-04 1.1E 00 6.1E 01 A
CE-139 5.4E-03 1.4E-04 7.OE-03 5.6E-05 1.3E 00 3.8E 01 A
)
C FILTER I-131 1.3E-11 2.7E-13 1.8E-11 6.4E-14 1.4E 00 4.7E 01 D
> &T 3 C SP CO-57 1.1E-02 1.6E-04 2.OE-02 9.8E-05 1.9E 00 6.8E 01 D
.
CO-60 1.6E-02 4.4E-04 2.2E-02 2.3E-04 1.4E 00 3.6E 01 D
l 13674 HG-203 1.2E-03 1.2E-04 2.3E-03 7.1E-05 1.9E 00 1.OE 01 D
CD-109 5.5E-01 5.3E-03 7.9E-01 2.7E-03 1.5E 00 1.OE O2 D
SN-113 7.8E-03 3.1E-04 7.8E-03 1.2E-03 1.OE 00 2.5E 01 A
CS-137 2.6E-02 4.3E-04 4.5E-02 2.7E-04 1.7E 00 6.1E 01 D
j CE-139 5.4E-03 1.4E-04 1.1E-02 8.8E-05 2.OE 00 3.8E 01 D
-
PRIMARY NA-24 5.1E-02 7.5E-04 5.5E-02 1.1E-03 1.1E 00 6.8E 01 A
i ger 3 I-131 8.3E-02 7.5E-04 9.3E-02 8.6E-04 1.1E 00 1.1E O2 A
I-132 7.9E-02 7.6E-04 7.6E-02 1.OE-03 9.7E-01 1.OE O2 A
I-133 1.6E-01 7.8E-04 1.6E-01 1.1E-03 1.OE 00 2.OE O2 A
I-134 9.8E-02 1.6E-03 9.8E-02 2.7E-03 1.OE 00 6.OE 01 A
l I-135 1.1E-01 2.4E-03 1.1E-01 3.OE-03 9.9E-01 4.4E 01 A
l RB-108 6.1E-01 3.7E-02 6.7E-01 4.6E-02 1.1E 00 1.6E 01 A
i T TEST RESULTS:
!
A= AGREEMENT D= DISAGREEMENT
o= CRITERIA RELAXED N=NO COMPARISON l
l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-
.
-
TABLE 1 U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
,
,
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
,
FACILITY: PALISADES
/
FOR THE 2 QUARTER OF 1987
NRC-------
LICENSEE----
---LICENSEE:NRC----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T
PRIMARY RU-106 4.9E-02 3.8E-03 0.OE-01 0.OE-01 0.OE-01 1.3E 01 D
CS-138 1.4E-01 3.9E-03 1.6E-01 5.1E-03 1.1E 00 3.5E 01 A
BA-139 1.3E-02 2.1E-03 1.3E-02 2.3E-03 1.OE 00 6.2E 00 A
F SPIKED CO-57 1.1E-02 1.1E-04 1.4E-02 6.OE-05 1.3E 00 1.OE O2 D
CO-60 1.7E-02 3.5E-04 1.8E-02 1.7E-04 1.1E 00 5.OE 01 A
7)67 s HG-203 1.4E-03 8.9E-05 1.6E-03 4.4E-05 1.2E 00 1.5E 01 A
CD-109 5.7E-01 3.7E-03 6.1E-01 1.9E-03 1.1E 00 1.5E O2 A
SN-113 S.7E-03 2.3E-04 6.9E-03 8.OE-04 7.9E-01 3.7E 01 A
CS-137 3.OE-02 3.7E-04 3.3E-02 1.8E-04 1.1E 00 8.1E 01 A
CE-139 5.3E-03 9.1E-05 7.6E-03 5.1E-05 1.4E 00 5.8E 01 D
C FILTER I-131 6.8E-12 1.9E-13 7.3E-12 1.1E-13 1.1E 00 3.6E 01 A
'b 67 I-133 9.1E-13 1.7E-13 6.3E-13 4.1E-14 6.9E-01 5.4E 00 A
F SPIKED CO-57 1.1E-02 1.1E-04 1.7E-02 7.2E-05 1.5E 00 1,OE O2 D
lber A CO-60 1.7E-02 3.5E-04 1.6E-02 1.6E-04 9.1E-01 5.OE 01 A
HG-203 1.4E-03 8.9E-05 1.8E-03 4.9E-05 1.4E 00 1.5E 01 A
CD-109 5.7E-01 3.7E-03 6.OE-01 1.8E-03 1.OE 00 1.5E O2 A
SN-113 8.7E-03 2.3E-04 9.2E-03 9.OE-04 1.1E 00 3.7E 01 A
CS-137 3.OE-02 3.7E-04 3.3E-02 1.8E-04 1.1E 00 8.1E 01 A
CE-139 5.3E-03 9.1E-05 9.1E-03 6.5E-05 1.7E 00 5.8E 01 D
C FILTER I-131 6.8E-12 1.9E-13 1.OE-11 1.6E-13 1.5E 00 3.6E 01 D
~b 6 7 A I-133 9.1E-13 1.7E-13 1.OE-12 9.7E-14 1.1E 00 5.4E 00 A
T TEST RESULTS:
A= AGREEMENT D= DISAGREEMENT
- = CRITERIA RELAXED N=NO COMPARISON
. _
_ _ - -
.__ _ __
_ _ _ _ _ -
~
.
TABLE 2 U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
i st OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT 2[
<g CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM OE N'
FACILITY: PALISADES FOR THE 2 QUARTER OF 1986
.
NRC---
LICENSEE----
LICENSEEsNRC----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T
l L SPIKED CS-137 8.6E-05 2.6E-06 9.3E-05 4.7E-06 1.1E 00 3.3E 01 A
CO-60 7.7E-05 1.5E-06 7.4E-05 5.1E-06 9.7E-01 5.1E 01 A
MN-54 5.3E-05 1.1E-06 6.1E-05 4.9E-06 1.1E 00 4.BE 01 A
L WASTE CR-51 1.6E-05 2.2E-06 8.7E-06 4.8E-06 5.6E-01 7.!E 00 A
MN-54 4.5E-06 2.9E-07 4.0E-06 6.BE-07 8.9E-01 1.6E 01 A
CO-58 3.3E-05 4.4E-07 3.7E-05 1.4E-06 1.1E 00 7.5E 01 A
CO-60 2.0E-05 3.8E-07 1.8E-05 1.3E-06 9.OE-01 5.3E 01 A
CS-134 1.3E-05 4.0E-07 2.1E-05 1.OE-07 1.6E 00 3.2E 01 D
CS-137 3.6E-05 5.0E-09 5.8E-05 1.8E-06 1.6E 00 7.1E 03 D
L WASTE 2 MN-54 4.5E-06 2.9E-07 5.7E-06 6.3E-06 1.3E 00 1.6E 01 A
CO-58 3.3E-05 4.4E-07 3.1E-05 1.2E-06 9.4E-01 7.5E 01 A
CO-60 2.OE-05 3.8E-07 2.1E-05 1.3E-06 1.OE 00 5.3E 01 A
CS-134 1.3E-05 4.0E-07 1.5E-05 1.2E-06 1.2E 00 3.2E 01 A
CS-137 3.6E-05 5.0E-09 4.2E-05 1.7E-06 1.2E 00 7.1E 03 A
T TEST RESULTS:
A= AGREEMENT l
D= DISAGREEMENT o= CRITERIA RELAXED N=NO COMPARISON l
l
!
!
"
l l
l
.
l
_
__
_,..-
-
_
l
- - _ _ _ _ - _ - - -
_
_
.
.-
..
i
i ATTACHMENT 1
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 j
program.
l In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the comparison
of the NRC's.value to its associated one sigma ur. certainty.
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 i
ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures reported by the NRC i
Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of
'
acceptance.
RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Agreement
!
<4 0.4 - 2.5 4-
0.5 - 2.0 8-
0'. S - 1.66 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25-J 200 -
0.85 - 1.18 I
,
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.
.
..
.
_ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_ _ - _.
_
._
_-.
_