IR 05000259/1979044
| ML19305C210 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 01/31/1980 |
| From: | Jenkins G, Montgomery D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305C172 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-259-79-44, 50-260-79-44, 50-296-79-44, NUDOCS 8003260175 | |
| Download: ML19305C210 (8) | |
Text
.
.
/
'o UNITED STATES (3 (,/ E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
.
g
,e REGION 11 o,
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3106
%
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos.
50-259/79-44, 50-260/79-44 and 50-296/79-44 Licensee:
Tennessee Valley Authority 500A Chestnut Street Chattanooga, Tennessee 37401 Facility Name:
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant 1, 2 and 3 License Nos.
,
-
Inspection at Browns Ferry Site Near Decatur, Alabama Inspector:
J 8 JN>but.s
/ /3//<fo D. M. Montgomety Ddte Signed
Accompanying Pers n 3.
P. C. McPhail
! 3[ N Approved by:
-
ett w
.
G. R. 'I ins,'Section Chief, FF6MS Branch Date Signed
.
SUMMARY Inspection on December 17-20, 1979 Areas Inspected L
This routine, announced inspection involved 30 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of confirmatory measurements including: review of radiochemical instrument calibration and quality control; review of radiochemical procedures; and compari-son of results of the analyses of split samples analyzed by the licensee and the NRC RII Mobile Laboratory.
Results E
Of the 3 73reas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in 2 areas; 1 item of noncompliance was found in 1 area (Deficiency - failure to perform annual efficiency and activity checks for Ge(Li) counting systems (259/79-44-01, 260/79-44-01 and 296/79-44-01) Paragraph 6.b.
i l
.
.
,
8003200 /f
.
..-
-
_
.
.
.
f.
.
.
>
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
-
Licensee Employees H. Abercrombie, Plant Superintendent
- A. Clement, Chemistry Supervisor v.
- .f
- W. C. Thomison, Assistant Results Supervisor L. Mellen, Chemical Engineer
D. Mims, Chemical Engineer
.
- G. Bugg, Health Physics Supervisor
- J. L. Harness, Assistant Plant Superintendent
,
Other licensee employees contactr
'a.cluded 5 technicians.
NRC Resident Inspectors R. Sullivan
- J.
Chase
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interview
.
The inspection scope and findings were sur.marized on December 20, 1979, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
The item of noncom-pliance was discussed and acknowledged by the licensee representatve.
.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings i.
Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Laboratory Quality control Program The inspector re lewed the licensee's quality control program for radio-chemical measurements in the following areas:
Assignment of Responsibility and Authority to Manage and Conduct the a.
QC Program
[
The radiochemistry laboratory instrument quality control program is
'
detailed in Section 500 of the BFNP Radiochemical Manual. The'overall responsibility to insure that the QC requirements are carried out is assigned to the Chemistry Supervisor.
Specific shift responsibilities are assigned to the lead chemical laboratory analyst on each shift.
.
..
D
$-
g....e,._________
_ _. -. - - -. _
. _._ _
--
,
- - - - -.
~
f.
. _ _
.
.
-2-
.
b.
Provisions for Audits / Inspections The inspector noted that there are no requirements for audits or inspections by the Chemistry Supervisor. Technical Specification 6.2.C requires audits of plant operation by the Office of Power
Quality Assurance and Audit Staff, but there are no specific audit requirements for the analytical measurements program.
c.
Methods for Assuring Deficiencies and Deviations in the Program are Recognized, Identified, and Corrected.
The inspector noted that specific quality control procedures for instruments are contained in Section 500 of the BFNP Radiochemical Laboratory Manual. These procedures specify performance tests, acceptance criteria, and corrective action.
d.
Requirements for Purchased or Contract Services The inspector noted that there are no quality control requirements for
purchased or contracted laboratory services.
6.
Review of Radiochemical Procedures The in'spector reviewed the following procedures and had no furti.er questions:
.
a.
RLM 1437, "Radwaste Liquid Analysis Batch Release Procedure," Rev.
9/6/78.
b.
RLM 1130A, " Isotopic Analysis Procedure for Reactor Wtter Using Ge(Li)
Detectors, Rev. 9/6/78.
c.
RL 1111.1, " Iodine Separation," Rev. 9/6/78
-
d.
RL 937, " Tritium Analysis using Liquid Samples," Rev. 9/6/78.
7.
Review of Instrument Records and Logs
.
a.
The inspector reviewed the following records:
,
(1) Manual Gas - 2po. donal Counter Daily Quality Control Record (October, 1979 - December, 1979).
(2) Canberra Ge(Li)-Quality Control Record for Individual and Series Samples (October, 1979 - December, 1979).
,
?
(3) Ortec Ge(Li) Quality Control Record for Individual and Series Samples.
(October, 1979 - December, 1979).
(4) Canberra Ge(Li) Quality Control Record - Annual or Any Dectable
Change (February,1977 - December,1979).
'
With the exception of the quality control records for the Ge(Li)
detectors as discussed in paragraph 7b, the inspector haq po further guppfions.
'
.
,_ _
m _..
... - -.
_.
.
_.
-
-
-
_
h
._
._w__
i
.
_i _.... ~ _. _ _ _ _
-.. _. ~.
..
.
.
-3-
-(5) Ortec Ge(Li) Quality Control Record Annual or Any Detectable Change (February, 1977 - December, 1979).
b.
The inspector noted that Section 500 of BFNP Radiochemical Laboratory Manual requires an annual check of activity and efficiency factors for the Ge(Li) gamma spectroscopy systems. A review of the records showed that no efficiency and activity checks had been performed during the period from February, 1977 to December, 1979. The inspector informed licensee respresentatives that this constituted an item of noncompliance with Technical Specification 6.3.A.6 that requires detailed written procedures be prepared, approved, and adhered to (259/79-44-01, 260/79-44-01, 296/79-44-01). Licensee representatives indicated that the deficiency would be corrected and that the annual requirement would probably be eliminated. On December 21, 1979, the inspector informed a licensee representative that deletion of the annual require-ment for_ checking efficiency and activity factors would not be a satisfactory corrective action. The inspector informed the licensee representative that any corrective action should conform with the TVA
,
Operational Quality Assurance Manual for Measuring and Test Equipment and the NRC Regulatory Guide 4.15, " Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs". The licensee representative indicated that the above would be considered in their response for corrective action.
.
c.
The inspector noted that the instrument quality control program for the low background gas proportional counter did not include a periodic voltage plateau check which is an industry accepted practice for.this instrument. Licensee representatives agreed to review the quality control procedures for this instruraent. This item will be considered
"
open and reviewed during a ubsequent inspection (259/79-44-02, 260/79-44-02 and 296/79-44 u2).
B.
Confirmatory Measurements Liquid and gaseous effluent samples were collected and split with the licensee for analysis by gamma spectroscopy during the inspection.
Samples included the following:
floor drain storage tank (before treatment),
!
offgas stack sample, charcoal cartridge, and particulate filter. The sample from the floor drain storage L.~nk was collected in lieu of an actual liquid effluent sample since the activity levels in the liquid effluent samples were too low for a valid comparison. The particulate filter
,
l activity was also too low for a valid comparison so a spiked filter was i
submitted to the licensee for analysis. A sample from the floor drain l
storage tank was also sent to the NRC contrats 3r for H-3, Sr-89, and Sr-90 analyses. The inspector requested that the 1.sensee perform these analyses
,
and submit the results to NRC RII; the licensee representative agreed to do
!
so.
The comparison of the licensee and NRC gamma spectroscopy results are given in Table I with the acceptance criteria in Attachment 1.
The results f
showed agreement or possible agreement for all radionuclides except for Sb-122 and Np-239 in the floor drain storage tank liquid sample. The licensee value for Sb-122 was significantly lower than the NRC value. The licensee analysis failed to identify Np-239. A review of the licensee
~
>
=
-
,,
[
.
.
.
-4-analysis indicated that the computer program in use did not resolve the low energy Np-239 gamma ray peak from adjacent low energy peaks and the background subtraction for the Sb-122 gamma ray peak was not correct. The existing software also underestimates the uncertainty in the measurements due to the use of the wrong algorithm in the computer program. The inspector also noted that the background spectra contained Co-60 photopeaks and no background corrections were being made. This may result in overestimation of the Co-60 concentration in low-level samples. A licensee representative agreed to review the gamma ray analysis software and determine if it can be updated to correct the above problems (259/79-44-03, 260/79-44-03, and 296/79-44-03).
9.
Use of Inoperative Personnel Monitors The inspector noted that an inoperable hand and foot counter for personnel monitoring was located at the entrance to the radiochemistry laboratory and was not tagged as inoperable. Another operable portable survey meter was available and operational but the inspector observed that a licensee employee used the inoperable counter and left the controlled area. The inspector informed the Health Physics supervisor and corrective action was taken. A licensee representative indicated that there is no procedure requiring inoperable personnel monitors to be tagged. A licensee representative agreed to implement a procedure. that requires inoperable personnel monitors to be tagg-d (259/79-44-04, 260/79-44-04, and 296/79-44-04).
.
.
- -...
.
-,.. -... -
.
.
,_.
.
.
.
A_t t a c hmen t 1,
t C t. ! T!. i: 1."
IM Ot! PAR U:C A?:AQTICAL f r J,S"EOir.NTS, This attarirent pravides crit eria for conparing results of capability testa and verification ntasurer.cnts.
The criteria are based on an e.pirical relationship which combines prier experience and the accuracy needs of t his program.
In there crit eria, the judgmfat limit are variable in relation to the conparison of the NRC Reference I.aboratory's value to its asc.ociated unecrtainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution",
increaser., t he :.cceptability of a licensee's measurement should be mere selective. Conversely, poorer agree ent must be considered acceptable a;. the resolution decreases.
L1CI:NSI:!: VA1.U E kATit)
=-
NRC Rr.n.R1/;C!: V Al.l. E
.
Possible Possible Re solu t '.on Aereerent Acreenent A Acreement L
<3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparisen 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:
h Camma Spect ometry where pr inc ipal gam.i energy used for identification is greate, than 250 Kev.
Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
!
G<uma Spectrometry where principal gamo.: onergy used for identification is less than 250 Kev.
"Sr and 'Sr Deterninations.
Cross Beta where sampics are nunted on the same date using the same t
reference nuclide.
.
be.
J JUl)b[
A
'
P D
D**D
=>
s
,
i:
!
'
TABLE 1
- 1
.
'
j.
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Comparison
- '
.
Concentration; pCi/cc Ratio l
SAMPLE ISOTOPE BFNP NRC BFNP/NRC Comparison i
i
!
se Offgas Unit 3 Kr 6.2E(-4)
5.4+0.2E(-4).
1.15
. Agreement
{.
Xe 5.1E(-4)
6.2+0.2E(-4)
Dec. 18, 1979
_
0.82 Agreement
'7 Kr 1.3E(-3)
1.510.1E(-3)
0.87 Agreement'
- .
f 1seXe 1.9E(-2)
1.9+0.1E(-2)
1.0 Agreement I85"Xe 3.4E(-3)
3.910.1E(-3)
0.87 Agreement i
"lAr 2.7E(-4)
2. 9,10. 2E(-4)
0.93 Agreement
,
Charcoal Cartridge I
6.73E(-3)
7. 7 7+0. 08E(-3)
0.87 f.greement (,
18I December 19, 1979 I
9.98E(-4)
1.123 05E(-4)
0.89 Agreement k
188 i
Floor Drain
Tc 1.48E(-5)
1.6110.01E(-5)
0.92 Agreement-I
Storage Tank Cr 3.12E(-5)
2.82+0.06E(-5)
1.11 Agreement j
181 December 18, 1979
4.29E(-6)
4.733 09E(-6)
0.91 Agreement
!
!33 1 1.05E(-5)
9.8210.1E(-6)
1.07 Agreement
,
122 Sb 7.4E(-7)
1.3410.08E(-6)
.55 Agreement
!
>
137Cs 5.55E(-6)
7.110.1E(-6)
.78 Agreement
I8"Cs 5.21E(-6)
6. 4,f0. IE (-6)
.81 Agreement seCo 1.71E(-6)
.i69 09E(-6)
.79 Agreement 5"Mn 1.01E(-6)
1. 210.1E (-6)
.86 Agreement i.
>
852n 1.57E(-5)
1.6210.04E(-5)
.97 Agreement l
88 Co 4.10E(-6)
3.83 1E(-6)
1.07 Agreement Na 9.22E(-5)
1.0010.01E(-4)
.92 Agreement f
Np Not Detected 1.2+0.1E-6)
No Comparison f
239
,
,
-
.
,
'
i a t e
.
e ??e e
- -9
t
- ._, ? *- ^-
.
-
..
.
_
_.
-
_
-
,
+-
t.
,
TABLE 1 i!
Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Comparison l.
Concentration; pCi/cc Ratio
- '
SAMPLE ISOTOPE PFNP' *
NRC BFNP/NRC Codfarison
,
i 187 Spiked Particulate Cs 3.8E(-3)
4.06+0.12E(-3)
.94 Agreement
[
Filter, A-63 13"Cs 9.88E(-4)
1.40+0.05E(-3)
.71 Agreement
{
80 Co 2.23E(-3)
2.13+0.06E(-3)
1.05 Possible Agreement
{
57Co 5.69E(-3)
6.3_+0.2E(-4)
.90 Agreement i:
h-
!-
,
i:
,
f t
h
i
,
oI.
- '
'
.;
,
,
4
,p..
-
O
$
q eg-f
%
-
--
_,.o
-
,
--
- - -
-
--
~
- - - -