IR 05000255/1991016
| ML18057B267 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1991 |
| From: | House J, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18057B266 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-255-91-16, NUDOCS 9109180004 | |
| Download: ML18057B267 (7) | |
Text
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Report No. 50-255/91016(DRSS)
Docket No. 50-255 Licensee:
Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, MI 49201 Facility Name:
Palisades Nuclear Generating Plant Inspection At:
Palisades Site, Covert, MI Inspection Conducted:
August 19-23, 1991 (Onsite)
Inspector: ~
J.E. House Approved By:
M. C. Schumacher, Chief Radiological Controls and Chemistry Section Inspection Summary License No. DPR-20 fu/1- ?'!
ate i--11-9/
Date Inspection on August 19-23, 1991 (Report No. 50-255/91016(DRSS))
Areas Inspected:
Routine announced inspection of radiological chemistry..
including confirmatory measurements, quality assurance, and audits (IP 84750);
review of an open item (IP 92701); and the radiological environmental monitoring program (REMP) (IP 84750).
Results:
Results of the radiological confirmatory measurement program were very good as were interlaboratory crosscheck result Laboratory quality assurance was goo Licensee management of the REMP has improved and it appeared to be operating satisfactoril No violations or deviations were identified.
9109180004 9l0911 PDr:
.i-\\DOCI\\
0~*000255 G
- DETAILS Persons Contacted 1o. Andersen, Performance Assessment, CPCo 1P. Donnelly, Director, Safety and Licensing, CPCo iJ. Hagar, Supervisor, Radioactive Material Control, CPCo 1o. Hice, Superintendent, Chemistry, CPCo 1L. Kenaga, Health Physicist, CPCo J. Kuemin, Licensing, CPCo iT. Neal, Radioactive Material Control Administrator, CPCo 1J. Paver, Radiochemistry Supervisor, CPCo R. Rice, Operations Manager, CPCo 1w. Roberts, Staff Licensing Engineer, CPCo The inspector also interviewed other licensee personnel in the course of the inspectio *
1oenotes those present at the plant exit interview on August 23, 199.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Open Item No. (50-255/90022-2):
Licensee to improve management of the REMP including increased oversight of the REMP contractor, perform quarterly field inspections of the air sampling stations and replace leaking fittings on air sampler Licensee personnel have implemented a quarterly inspection of the air sampling stations which includes a check of the meter serial number, equipment calibration due date, leak testing of the filter train and overall operating conditio The licensee has improved the oversight of contractor activities through upgraded record keeping and has replaced the fittings on all air sampling stations with stainless steel component No air inleakage was detected by the inspector during a tour of selected station.
Radiological Confirmatory Measurements (IP 84750)
Five samples (primary coolant, primary coolant crud filter, containment air charcoal, offgas, and liquid waste) were analyzed for gamma emitting nuclides by the licensee and in the Region III Mobile Laboratory on sit Comparisons were made with combinations of the licensee's three chemistry detector As the licensee's most recent air particulate and charcoal filters had no detectable activity, the primary coolant crud filter was substituted for the air particulate filter and a containment air charcoal filter was substituted for the stack charcoal filte Results of the confirmatory measurements were very achieved 49 agreements out of 49 comparisons; four be made due to poor counting statistics (Table 1).
are given in Attachment goo The licensee comparisons could not Comparison criteria A portion of a liquid waste sample will be analyzed for gross beta, H-3, Sr-89 and Sr-90 by the licensee and the results reported to Region III for
- comparison with an analysis by the NRC Reference Laboratory on a split of the sample (Open Item 50-255/91016-1).
No violations or deviations were identifie.
Quality Assurance (IP 84750) The inspector revie'r'1ed the radiochemistry laboratory quality assurance program including physical facilities~ laboratory operations and selected procedure Control charts are maintained for each detector with warning and control limits set at +2 and +3 standard deviations respectivel The licensee participates 1n a radiochemistry interlaboratory cross-check program with an outside vendo The results for the past two years were very good with only one disag_reement (Tritium) note A trend chart of'dose equivalent I-131 in primary coolant for the past three years indicated that levels were well within the T/S limi The inspector reviewed a selected E-BAR determination which appeared adequat No violations of deviations were identifie Audits (IP 84750)
The inspector reviewed Audit Report No: QA-91-20, conducted July 22-26, 1991, of the *chemistry area including laboratory QA, bulk chemical control, co.rrosion control, chemistry data trending and software contro The audit was sufficiently detailed and appeared to be performance oriente Actions on previous findings reviewed by the audit team appeared to be adequat No violations or deviations were identifie.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP)(IP 84750)
The inspector reviewed the REMP, inc?uding the 1990 Annual Environmental Report, toured air sampling stations and reviewed selected procedure The Annual REMP Report appeared to comply with T/S requirement All of the required samples were collected and analyzed, except as npted in the report. * The results do not indicate a significant contribution to the environment due to plant operatio The air samplers observed were operating satisfactorily, both with respect to vacuum and flo Deficiencies noted in the previous report (Section 2)
had been corrected. Filter information was properly documented and the quarterly review of the air samplers had been performe Overall, the REMP appeared to be operating satisfactoril No violations or deviations were identifie.
Open I terns Open items are matters which have been discussed with the licensee, which will be reviewed further by the inspector, and which involve some action
- on the part of the NRC or licensee, or bot An open item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Section Exit Interview The scope and findings of the inspection were ~eviewed with licensee representatives (Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on August 23, 199 The inspector discussed the results of the confirmatory measurement program, observations of the quality control program and improvements in the REM 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 inspectio Licensee representatives did not identify any such documents or processes proprietar Attachments:
1. Table 1, Confirmatory Measurements Program Results, Third Quarter, 1991 Attachment 1, Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements (Radiological)
TABLE 1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
FACILITY:
PALISADES FOR THE 3RD QUARTER OF 1991 SAMPLE NUCLIDE NRC VAL. NRC ER LIC.VA LIG.ER RATIO RESOL. RESULT RCS I-131 6.26E-03 2.39E-04 5.85E-03 1.63E-04 0.93 2 A DET #2 I-132 2.83E-02 3.lBE-04 2.75E-02 2.60E-04 0.97 8 A I-133 2.82E-02 2.59E-04 2.59E-02 2.lOE-04 0.92 10 A I-134 4.53E-02 6.99E-04 4.lOE-02 8.lOE-04 0.91 6 A I-135 3.96E-02 9.74E-04 3.49E-02 8.30E-02 0.88 4 A RB-88 1.. 27E-Ol 1. 06E-02 1.14E-Ol 9.90E-03 0.90 1 A Y-88 2.07E-03 1. 73E-04 1. 90E-03 1.65E-04 0.92 1 A NB-95 9.26E-04 1.57E-04 8;27E-04 1. 24E-04 0.89 A RU-106 2.35E-02 1. 84E-03 2. 26E.,..02 1. 33E-02 0.96 1 CS-138 5.03E-02 1. 62E-03 4.67E-02 9.SOE-04 0.93 31. 0 A
BA-139 3.82E-03 8.47E-04 2.88E-03 4.86E-04 0.75 A CE-139 4.64E-04 1. 03E-04 5.00E-04 8.40E-05 1. 08 A NA-24 2.79E-02 3.68E-04 2.59E-02 2.70E-04 0.93 7 A CS-137 5.25E-04 1.46E-04 6.09E-04 1.22E-04 1.16 N RCS NA-24 2.90E-02 5.60E-04 2.62E-02 6.40E-04 0. 90*
51. 8 A
DET.#1 I..:.131 6.35E-03 1. 17E-04 5.84E-03 1.25E-04 0.92 5 A I-133 2.97E-02 3.10E-04 2.69E-02 3.50E-04 0.91 9 A I-135 4.39E-02 3.58E-03 3.68E-02 3.79E-03 0.84 1 *A M0-99 6.14E-04 5.27E-05 4.97E-04 6.67E-05 0.81 11. 7 A
CS-134 5.05E-04 4.15E-05 4.34E-04 4.SOE-05 0.86 1 A CS-137 9.25E-04 7.02E-05 6.17E-04 7.65E-05 0.67 1 A RCS NA-24'
2.90E-02 5.60E-04 2.67E-02 5.80E-04 0.92 51. 8 DET.#3 I-131 6.35E-03 1.17E-04 5.75E-03 1. 06E-04 0.91 5 A I-133 2.97E-02 3.lOE-04 2.67E-02 3.00E-04 0.90 9 A I-135 4.39E-02 3.58E-03 3.67E-02 3.19E-03 0.84 1 A M0-99 6.14E-04 5.27E-05 5.09E-04 2.70E-05 0.83 11. 7 A
CS-134 5.05E-04 4.15E-05 4.04E-04 4.57E-05 0.80 1 A CS-137 9.25E-04 7.02E-05 7.34E-04 7:33E-05 0.79 1 A
SAMPLE NUCLIDE NRC VAL. NRC ER LIC.VA LIC.ER RATIO RESOL. RESULT
RCS CRUD NA-24 3.20E-05 FILTER CR-51 1.15E-04 DET.#1 C0-58 1. 19E-04 C0-60 5.59E-06 I-131 5.09E-06 I-133 2.12E-05 ZR-95 4.95E-06 ZR-97 7.67E-06 NB-95 4.69E-06 M0-99 2.17E-06 TE-132 2.43E-06 CS-134 2.46E-06 CS-137 3.7~E-06 CHARCOAL I-131 6.30E-10 FILTER I-133 4.86E-10 DET #3 RADWASTE C0-60 1.38E-06 DET #1 CS-137 1. 62E-06 DWASTE C0-60 l.38E-06 T #2 CS-137 1. 62E-06 OFF-GAS KR-85 1.47E-03 DET.#2 KR-85M l.21E-05 COUNT #2 XE-131M 5.50E-04 XE-133 1. 55E-02 XE-133M 8.09E-05 XE-135 9.65E-05 TEST RESULTS:
A=AGREEMENT
...
D=DISAGREEMENT
- =CRITERIA RELAXED N=NO COMPARISON 2.39E-06 5.63E-06 1.82E-06 5.92E-07 5.38E-07 1. 82E-06 7.87E-07 1.23E-06 5.07E-07 1. 68E-07 4.09E-07 6.59E-07 5.19E-07 9.lSE-11 1. 51E-10 9,48E-Q8 9.19E-08 9.48E-08 9.19E-08 3.91E-04 2.50E-06 4.70E-05 4.23E-05 1. 25E-05 3.23E-06 3.92E-05 2.56E-06 1. 22 1 A 1.21E-04 5.50E-06 1. 05 2 A l.43E-04 2.lOE-06 1. 20 6 A 4.58E-06 6.37E-07 0.82 A 5.55E-06 6.36E-07 1. 09 A 2.59E-05 2.lOE-06 1.22 11. 6 A
5.40E-06 9.95E-07 1. 09 A 8.16E-06 1. 32E-06 1. 06 A 5.83E-06 7.76E-07 1. 24 A 3.51E-06 3.58E-07 1. 62 1 A 1. 48E-06 3.,76E-07 0.61 A 3.37E-06 7.63E-07 1. 37 N 5.14E-06 6.68E-07 1. 36 A 6.20E-10 4.87E-11 0.98 A 1.83E-10 6.06E-11 0.38 N 1. 36E-06 1. 98E-07 0.99 1 A 1. 65E-06 1.55E-07 1.02 1 A 1.38E-06 1.14E-07 1. 00 1 A 1. 54E-06 1. 35E-07 0.95 1 A 2.08E-03 2.23E-04 1. 41 N 9.97E-06 1. 19E-06 0.82 A 4.73E-04 2.85E-05 0.86 11. 7 A
l.54E-02 4.00E-05 0.99 36 A 8.60E-05 6.77E-06 1.06 A 9. 17E-05 2.09E""06 0.95 2 A
ATTACHMENT 1 CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measurement The criteria 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 comparison of the NRC's value to its associated one sigma uncertaint As that ratio, referred to in this program as "Resolution", increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selectiv Conversely, poorer agreement should be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures reported by the NRC Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptanc RESOLUTION
<4 4 -
8 -
16 -
51 - 200 200 -
RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Agreement NO COMPARISON 0.5 -.6 - 1.66 0.75 - 1.33 0.80 - 1.25 0.85 - 1.18 Some discrepancies may result from the use of different equipment, techniques, and for some specific nuclide These may be factored into the acceptance criteria and identified on the data sheet.