IR 05000266/1981006
| ML19347F425 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Point Beach  |
| Issue date: | 04/13/1981 |
| From: | Hind J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | Burstein S WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19347F426 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105190251 | |
| Download: ML19347F425 (2) | |
Text
f
.
'
ft
/ /
v i
je terg 8,7 jo UNITED STATES
<
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.,.,
g
"
,-
g
.r REGION 111
e 799 ROOSEVELT ROAD e
GLEN ELLYN, ILLINOIS 60137
.....
APR 131981 Q
fl Uk Docket No. 50-266 mbt 14190I* I$
_
Docket No. 50-301 Eh giguoes
'
Wisconsin Electric Power Company
~
'
ATTN:
Mr. Sol Burstein
'/*g Executive Vice President Power Plants 231 West Michigan Milwaukee, WI 53201 Gentlemen:
This refers to the routine inspection conducted by Mr. A. G. Januska and Ms. N. A. Nicholson of this office on March 25-27, 1981, of activities at Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, authorized by NRC Operating Licenses No. DPR-24 and No. DPR-27 and to the discussion of our findings with Mr. J. Zach and others of your staff at the conclusion of the inspection.
The enclosed copy of our inspection report identifies areas examined during the inspection. Within these areas the inspection' consisted of a selective examination of split sample spectral data.
Independent measurements were made using the hTC Region III Measurements Van at the site.
No items of noncompliance with NRC requirements were identified during the course of this inspection.
In accordance with Section 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," Part 2, Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, a copy of this letter and the enclosed inspection report will be placed in the NRC's Public Document Room, except as follows.
If this report contains information that you or your contractors believe to be proprietary, you must apply in writing to this office, within twenty-five days of the date of this letter, to withhold such information from public disclosure. The application must include a full statement of the reasons for which the information is considered proprietary, and should be prepared so that proprietary information identified in the application is contained in an enclosure to the application.
\\
8105190
__
.
-
1.
o Wisconsin Electric Power Company-2-APR 13198]
,
We will gladly discuss any. questions you have concerning this inspection.
Sincerely, 6)
. A. Hind, Acting Director, Division of Emergency Preparedness and Operational Support
Enclosure:
IE Inspection Report No. 50-266/81-06 and No. 50-301/81-05
REGION III==
Report No. 50-266/81-06; 50-301/81-05 Docket No. S'4-266; 50-301 License No. DPR-24; DPR-27 Licensee: ' Wisconsin Electric Power Company 231 West Michigan Avenue Milwaukee, WI 53201 Facility Name: Point Beach Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 Inspection At: Point Beach Site, Two Creeks, WI Inspection Conducted: March 25-27, 1981 h. b
& we wY
'*!B 8 Inspectors:
A. G.
nuska p,kk~?2p N. A. Nicholson
/
}f. h ^ bJ
/*[#
Approved by:
M. C. Schumacher, Acting Chief Independent Measurements and Environmental Protection Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection March 25-27, 1981, (Report Nos. 50-266/81-06; 50-301/81-05)
Areas Inspected: Announced inspection of confirmatory measurements including collection of samples, analysis onsite with the RIII Measure-ments Van and discussion of results.
The inspection involved thirty-two inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified during the inspection.
sac 51'
.
-
-
- -
.
-
-
-
.- - -. - _
.
...
- ..
'
e
'
>>
fc DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- J. Zach, Superintendent, Technical Services
- R. Link, Superintendent, Engineering Quality and Regulatory
- P. Skramstad, Radiochemist T. Slack, Nuclear Plant Specialist M. Pockat, Radiochemical Technician
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
'
.
2.
Results.of Comparative Analyses
.
.
l Results of comparative analyses performed on samples split and analyzed in.the Region III Measurements Van onsite during this
inspection, as shown in Table I, were reviewed with the licensee.
l The criteria for comparing measurement results are given in-Attachment 1.
For eight sample comparisons, the licensee's results yielded eight agreements or possible agreements. Radioactivity levels in the licensee's airborne release pathway were so low astto preclude l
comparison. A comparison'was attempted using an' air sample collected in containment. Only the air particulate results'could be compared because Region III is not currently-calibrated for the-
,
'
larger size charcoal'adsorber used by the licensee to collect the i
. containment. sample. A radioiodine comparison using-a Region III spiked adsorber was not possible because'the-licensee is not cali-
,
brated for a face loaded adsorber.
l
'
Only one nuclide was present in the liquid sample collected. The licensee will be supplied a spiked l' quid sample and-agreed to submit the results to Region III.
Comparison of these results will be reported to the licensee as an addendum to this inspection report.
3.
Exit Interview:
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (Denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion'of this inspection on March 27, 1981. The in-spectors summarized the scope and findings of the' inspection. The l
licensee agreed to analyze a spiked liquid sample and report the results l-to Region III for subsequent comparison.
i Attachments:
1.
Attachment 1, Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements 2.
Table I, Confirmatory Measurements Program Results,1st Quarter,1981
,
?
-2-I
.
p TAHLE I tl 5 NUCLEAL PEGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT CONFIRMATORY MEAStlPEMENTS PROGRAM FACILITY: POINT BEACH FOR THE 1 OUARTED OF 1981
NRC-------
---LICENSEE-----
--a NRC : L I CEN3EE----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE DESULT FRPOP PFSULT EPROR RATIO RES T
.
OFF GAS XE 133 4.1E-05 1.4E-06 4.8E-05 0.0 1.2E+00 2.9E+01 A'
KR 85 1.6E-03 1 6E-04 1.2E-03 0.0 7.5E-01 1.0E+01 A
P FILTER NA 24 8.9E-05 1.0E-05 1.1F-04 0.0 1.2E+00 8.9E+00 A
I 131 3.0E-04 9.2E-06 4.1E-04 0.0 1.4E+00 3.3E+01 p
I 132 4.7E-04 2.1E-05 4.3E-04 0.0 9.1E-01 2.2E+01 A
I 133 1.0E-03 1.6E-05 1.1E-03 0.0 1.1E+00 6.2E+01 A
I 135 1.PF-03 6.0E-05 1.2E-03 0.0 1.0E+00 2.0E+01 A
CS 137 3.5E-05 7.6E-06 5.7E-05 0.0 1.6E+00
- .6E+00 A
T TEST oESULTS:
A=AGRECuENT DnDISAnoEFMENT PnPOSSIBLE-AGREEMENT NANO COMDARISON
,
.-
.
-
c
.
.
ATTACHMENT 1 p
CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and verification measuremer.ts.
The criteria are based on an
-
empirical 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 one sigma uncertainty. 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 sheuld be con-sidered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures to maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported 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.
-
,
2.0 0.4
- 2.5 0.3
- 3.0
>4 and <8 0.5
-
I8 and <16 0.6 1.67 0.5
- 2.0 0.4 2.5
-
-
2.0 T16 and <51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 1.67 0.5
-
-
T51 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6
- 1.67
[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 identifi-
,
!
cation is greater than 250 kev.
Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma spectrometry, where principal gamma energy used for identifi-cation 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.
.
, -, - - - - -
-,,
--
-
. -.
,
..,,
.
. _.. +..
--,.
-. + -. -, -,.
.