IR 05000266/1980013
| ML19337A464 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 08/15/1980 |
| From: | Essig T, Januska A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19337A463 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-266-80-13, 50-301-80-13, NUDOCS 8009290018 | |
| Download: ML19337A464 (4) | |
Text
. _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
I O
>V
,
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND EHFORCEMENT
REGION III
i Report No. 50-266/80-13; 50-301/80-13 Docket No. 50-266; 50-301 License No. DPR-24; DPR-27 Licensee: Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 West dichigan Avenue Milwauk.e, WI 53201 Facility Name:
Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Point Beach Site, Two Creeks, WI Inspection Conducted: July 17 and 22, 1980
.
.
Om Inspector:
A. G. JWiuska b -/ [- 8 0
,
'
E lT /C2
ApprovedB):
T.
I. Ess g, Chief
4 Environmental and Special
,
Projects Section Inspection on July 17 and 22. 1980 (Report No. 50-266/80-13; 50-301/80-13 Areas Inspected: Confirmatory Measurements including:
telephone discussion and closeout of results of a previous sample collection and the submission of spiked samples. The inspection involved 0 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
l 80092900lF
'
(
,
.
l
!
l.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted T. Slack, Nuclear Plant Specialist 2.
Results of Comparative Analyses Results of comparative analyses performed on split samples collected on October 24, 1979, and spike samples submitted on November 27, 1979, are shown in Table I.
The criteria for comparing measurement results are shown in Attachment 1.
For 19 sample comparisons, the licensee's results yielded 17 agreements or partial agreements.
The licensee failed to accurately quantify Cs-134 and Sb-125 in a liquid waste sample.
In examining his data, the licensee stated that the analysis for Cs-134 (605 kev) may have been influenced by interference with the peak of Sb-124 (603 kev) and possibly the peak of Ru-103 (610 kev). As the licensee reported 1.4 times more Sb-124 than did Radiation Enviromental Sciences Laboratory (RESL), NRC's reference laboratory, this assumption may be valid and some of the activity reported as Sb-124 may in fac*. have been Cs-134.
The Sb-125 analyis is complicated by the fact that there are Ba-La-140 subpeaks four channels on either side of the Sb-125 427 kev peak.
In addition, the licensee stated that due to the low level of radioactivity, this nuclide was not seen in the presence of Ba-La on the initial count and was only observed after the Ba-La had decayed sufficiently.
If the licensee's results were representative of releases during this period, he would have reported nonconservative results. Using RESL values reported for the comparison, and applying the ratios of 2.39 and 4.17 for Cs-134 and Sb-125, respectively, to the licensee's fourth quarter results reported in the Semiannual Monitoring Report - July 1979 through December 31, 1979, would only result in an increase of 0.5% in the semiannual liquid releases reported.
Attachments:
1.
Table 1, Confirratory Measurement Program, Point Beach 2.
Attachment 1, Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements-2-
.
.
.
TABLE I US NUCLEAR REGUL ATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION 4 ND E NF OR CE ME NT CONFIRMATORY ME ASUREMENTS PROGR AM FACILITY: POINT BEACH
-
l FOR THE 4 QUARTER OF 1979
__----NEC-------
---L I C E N SE E -----
---NR C : L ICE N S E E ----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT-ERROR RATIO RES T
<
CFF GAS XE 133 5 0E-04 2 0E-05 5 4E-04-1 7E-05 1 1E+00 2 5E+01 A
KR 85
'.1 E -0 3-1 5E-0 4 2 1 E -03 5 8E-04 1 0E+00 1 4E+01 A
,
L WASTE H 3 1.8E-01 1 0E-03 2 1E-01 6 0E-04 1 2E400 1 8E+02 A
CE 144 3 4E-05 4 8E-06 4 9E-05 1 3E-05 1a4E+00 7 1E+00 A
CR 51 5 0E-04 1 4E-04 5 8E-04 8 3E-05 1 2E+00 3 6E +00 A
'
Sv 113 6 2E -0 6 2 0E-06 2 1 E -06 3 5E -0 6 3 4E-01 3 1E +00 P
CS 134 2 1E-05 1 4E-06 8 8E -0 6 2 1 E -0 6 4 2E-01 1 5E+01 D
.C0 58 2.6E-03 7 5E-05 2 9E-03 4.0E-05 1 1E+00 3 5E+01 A
MN 54 1.3E-05 1 1E-06
' 2 2 E -0 5 4.3E-06 1 7E+00 1 2E+01 P
AG 110M 5 2E-05 T.34E -06 4 3E-05 3 7E-06 8 3E'01 2 2E +01 A
-
,
.
CO 60 6 3E-04 1 8E-05 7 1 E -04 2 2E-05 1 1E.00 3 5E +01 A
!
SB 124 3 6E-0 5 2 7E-06 5 2E-05 2 5E-0 5 1 4E+00 1 3E +01 A'
'
SB 125 2 0E-05 5 5E-06 4 8 E -0 6 2 7E-06 2 4E-01 3 6E+00 D
C S 137 1 9E-05 8 9E-07 2 8E-05 1 3E-05 1 5E+00 2 1E +01 P
C FILTER I 1 31 2 1E-05 1 2E-05 2 4E-05-9 0E-06 1 1 E+0D 1.7E+00 N
F: SPIKED CD 57 6 3E-04 2 0E-05 - 7 5E-04 3.DE-05,
1 2E+00 3 1 E +01 A
CS 134 1.4E-03 5 0E-05 1 5E-03 6,0 E-0 5 1 1E+00 2 8E +01 A
'
CS 137 4.tE-03 1 2E-04 4 8E-03 9 0E-05 1 2E+00 3 4E +01 A
CD 60 2 1 E-03 6 0E-05 2 2E-03 8 0E-05 1 0E*00 3 5E +01 A
C: SPIKED B A 133 9 3E+04 5 0E+03 1 2E +05 1 0E+03 1 3E+00 1 9E+01 A
T*7EST RESULTS:
A6 A G RE EP.E * T D=DISAGREl. MENT P=POSSI8LE AGREEMENT C=NO COMPARISON
.
I
s
-
__
.
ATTACIMENT 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 t :is program.
In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated
.
one sigma uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as (
I
" Resolution", increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement'should be con-sidered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
The values in the ratio
criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures to maintain I
statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported j
by the NRC Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptance. The acceptance category reported will be the narrowest into which the ratio fits for the resolution being used.
RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Agreement Agreement "A" Agreeable "B"
<3 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison
>3 and <4 d.4 2.5 0. 3
- 3.0 No Comparison
-
T4 and <8 0.5 3.0 2.0 0.4
- 2.5 0.3
-
-
T8 and <16 0.6 1.67 0.5
- 2.0 0.4
- 2.5
-
T16 and <51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6
- 1.67 0.5
- 2.0 T51 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6
- 1.67 l
[200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 j
l
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Camma spectrometry, where principal gamma energy used for identifi-cation is greater than 250 kev.
Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Camma spectrometry, where principal gamma energy used for identifi-cation is less than 250 kev.
Sr,-89 and Sr-9C determinations.
Gross beta, where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclide.
'
,
.
e
--
..
--
_ ---