IR 05000289/1977017
| ML19291B652 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1977 |
| From: | Paperiello C, Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19291B644 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-289-77-17, 50-320-77-21, NUDOCS 7911110053 | |
| Download: ML19291B652 (11) | |
Text
.
(
(
'
'
"
~
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
_
.
0FFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
...
.
G'
%p g 2le
$g# cts #
Region I
'Q
'""""'
- '#~ s #*$p#
77-17
.-
- v.#
Report No.
77-21 m
~
50-289 S#
==.
.
Docket No.
50-320
=+
-
-
DPR-50 C
License No.
CPPR-66 Priority Category a
--
Licensee:
uown14 t n rdf ern rn by D.
O. 9ny 547 lj;il+~
_.-.-
Qendinc. Dennev1vsn{2 10Ang
--
-[
Facility Name:
Three Mile T-1=nd 1 and ?
Inspection at:
Middletown, Pennsylvania
- g Inspection conducted
- May 31-June 2,1977 iT@5Ei
,
d D
-
^
Inspectors:
/
M Dr.jta'r1 J. Paperiello, Radiation date signed
=,
3pecialist
......
=,,-
' ~ " = " =
cate signed
.
cate signed
~
p_
-
Approved by:
M%
S[/f
"""
J. P./Sfohr, Chief, Environmental
'cate ' signed
& Special Projects Section,
~
FF?J!S Branch
=
==.-
Inscection Summary:
Inscection on May 31-June 2,1977 (Recort No. 50-299/77-17; 50-320/77-21)
-
Areas insoected: Routine, unannounced inspection of quality control witn respect to chemical and radiochemical measurements using the Region I mobile laboratory and laboratory assistance provided by ERDA's Idaho Health Services
=""
Laboratory. The inspection included reviews of the following areas: quality
==.-
control of analytical measurements; perfonnance of radiological analyses on
"=5E split effluent and spike samples; selected effluent monitoring and laboratory
.. _. _ -
measurement equipment and systems; airborne tritium measurements; management
_.;._[
controls on effluent systems; and internal audits of the above areas. The azzaa inspection involved 21 inspector hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
~..'._ II.
Results: Of the six areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
.;.jp
... _.
G
..
_
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
1532 248 Region I Form 12 ( *** ' #P""
7)
gg11.110ME.3
_. _. _.
...
,. f
.....
._...
g
..
.
.
..
.
,
- ::::- - ::
..
j.i
'
DETAILS
,g
+
.
- .;;,.=;;;u
"
1.
Persons Contacted Princioal Licensee Emolovees is.N
- Mr. James O'Hanlon, Unit 1 Superintendent
.. ;.E
-
- Mr. Richard Dubiel, Radiochemistry and Heatlh Physics Supervisor
~ ~ ~ '
- Mr. J. Gary Reed, Unit 1 Chemist Mr. W. W. Cotter', Supervisor, Quality Control s
Mr. Fred Huwe, Staff Health Physicist
~
d-Mr. Kenneth Fredrick, Staff Chemist
_
The inspector also interviewed several other if censee employees
during the course of the inspection. These included chemistry and
' ~ ~ ~
x.
radiation protection personnel.
- denotes those present at the exit interview.
E 2.
Licensee Action on previous Insoection Findinos
~ " ~
(Closed) Unresolved Item (289/76-16): Addition of acid to sampling
-
container.
In a previous independent measurements inspection, a discrepancy in results was resolved by the addition of acid to a licuid effluent sample. During this inspection, the licensee's procedure No.1972, "prepa. ation of a Mixed Carrier. Solution," was
==
reviewed. This procedure provides for the addition of both acid and stable carriers to liquid samples. The inspector reviewed the results of gamma analyses on composite samples and their individual
=
components and found no evidence of plate-out. This item is considered resolved.
=. 7 (Closed) Unresolved Item (289/76-16) Radioactive gas analysis.
~
In a previous independent measurements inspection, the licensee's
~~~
measurement of Xe-133 was a factor of 3-5 times higher than the NRC
+
measurement made by both the Region I mobile laboratory and the NRC
.+
referency laboratory, the Idaho Health Services Laboratory. Since
-
then, the licensee has calibrated a new detector. During this
-
inspection, the licensee's results were in agreement or possible
.==s
.
agreement for this analysis. This ites is considered resolved.
__.
,
M
.e
1582 249
i
.. i.
......
- - - - -
e.
- s
..
c C
.
-
-
,'
=. -
.:..;
3.
Licensee's Internal Audits
.,_q -
.;.;
The inspector questioned licensee representatives regarding the
- . "
-
conduct of any internal audits of the chemistry, radiochemistry, and effluent release areas in the past year. The inspector re-
,
viewed 18 audits conducted by the onsite surveillance group in the
" ~ ~ ' =
past year of specific activities in the above areas. The inspector
...
noted that: the above audits had been conducted as required by technical specifications; appropriate checklists were used to assure deficiencies and deviations in the program were recognized and identified; corrective and followup actions on identified deficien-
.#
.
= = = " "
cies were taken; and documented results we e communicated to manage-
. ment for review.
In the above audits, the licensee had identified v-three items which required corrective action.
Corrective action had been completed on all items. The inspector had no further
=
questions in this area.
_
'
.
4.
Quality Control of Analytical Measurements
_,.Ea
~"=
a.
Manacement Control The inspector reviewed the licensee's supervisory organization
in the chemistry area and noted that there had been changes in job assignments in this area sim:e the last independent measure-ments inspection due to promotions. The inspector determined that the present delegation of authority was consistent with the requirements of Section 5.1 of the Environmental Technical
~
Specifications.
"~
The inspector reviewed a number of licensee release permits in order to verify the adequacy of the licensee's management
~ ~ ~ ~
_.
control system for radioactive effluents. The inspector noted that licensee procedures 1629 und 1631 were applicable to
==
liquid and gaseous releases.
Release permits were used as
.. _ = _
.
required by these procedures. Sufficient information was
~n supplied to management on these forms to ensure that compliance
_
with technical specification limits with respect to radio-
-
~~
active effluents could be maintained. The inspector had no
=
additional questions in this area.
=
==
..Z
.;b?^5.
-. 3
?.b55
- :::-- - =
-m T:
g 1582 250
L 4.
"
r,
.....
q;
....
.
V
.
.
(
(
'
.
.
,
~
ll,1j b.
Laboratory Ouality Control Procram
=
'
The inspector reviewed the licensee's laboratory quality control program. The licensee's radiological program is
._
-.=
described in the following procedures:
]
No.1970 (Revision 2), " Standardization of Analytical
--
Procedures;"
=.:-.:::~.:
No.1971 (Revision 1), " Split / Spiked Sample Program;"
,
--
..... ; &
-
No.1973 (Revision 0), " Verification of Sample Rep-
- - - -
--
resentativeness and Accuracy - Effluents."
- 2b The above procedures provided for the periodic calibration and
-
=
operation check of nuclear and non-nuclear laboratory instru-mentation and the preparation of spiked, split, and duplicate
&
quality control samples.
.T The licensee's non-radiological chemistry quality control program is described in part in several procedures as follows:
No.1800.4 (Revision 0), " Chemistry Inventory;"
--
No 1810.1 (Revision 0), " NPDES Permit Chemistry Require-
.. _...
--
ment;" and,
'7,..
quality control calibration and blank checks in several
--
chemical procedures.
--
=--
These procedures provide specifications for the quality of laboratory reagents, the use of standards and reagent blanks for e--:
each analysis where applicable, and the splitting of certain
~~"
samples with the General Public Utilities system laboratory.
They also provide for a yearly inspection of the TMI laboratory by personnel from the system laboratory to review analytical procedures.
_
-
.
The inspector identified no items of noncompliance during the
,
review of this program.
,
.. _f =,
-
- !*********
=
- _=
=-
..
. - -
.. -..
..
.
,,
1562 251 r
......
ee-s (
(
..
,. ;
.
.
.........
.
c.
Imolementation of Laboratory Ouality Control Procram
-
.
[ll
".d"?
The inspector reviewed the implementation of the laboratory quality control program. The inspector reviewed selected
-
instrument logs and laboratory records to verify that the
~~7"-
required quality control checks had been made as required
- "";
by the licensee's internal procedures. No items of C" '"-~
noncompliance were identified.
5.
Confirmatory Measurements a.
Samole Solittino
.j-Several radioactive samples were split for purposes of
-
intercomparison. These samples included a reactor coolant
- . _.
sample, a gas decay tank sample, and a spent fuel pool
~~Z sample as a substitute for a liquid effluent waste tank
.Z sample which was not available. Since activity could not
- ._q }.!ll be detected on the licensee's particulate and charcoal
"-
filters by the NRC, filters prepared by the NRC reference laboratory, the Idaho Health Services Laboratory (IHSL) were presented to the licensee for analysis.
-r The verification test samples were analyzed by (1) the licensee
-
using his normal method and equipment and (2) NRC:I using the NRC Mobile Laboratory at the site. A split verification
..........
test liquid effluent sample was rent to IHSL for analyses Ef;;.:
requiring wet chemistry.
Results for these anlayses (i.e.,
= " = " " -
gross beta, Sr-89 and Sr-90, and tritium) will be ccmpared and reported when available at a later date.
...
b.
Samole Results
Joint analyses of the verification test samples with subsequent comparison confirms the licensee's capability to measure radioactive material in actual effluent samples. The results
=
- . z of the intercomparisons made are presented in Table 1.
The criteria for comparing analytical measurements are enclosed
~=
as Attachment 1.
The inspector noted that of the 19 measure-
_ Mi..
mants compared,16 were in agreement and 3 in possible agree-
..=
ment. The inspector had no questions in this area.
l~ji
..; N
-
.: :
'
O 1562 252
-
.. -..
.... -
_
.....
. m;.
"
... _.
...
S (
k
,
.
~'
---
~
6.
Ef" fluent Monitors - Unit 2 (77-21-01 )
The inspector reviewed the continuous effluent monitoring system a
calibration data. The inspector noted'that the system used'off-
_ __ _ i;;
line detectors; the calibration was performed using a number of
~~ 7.?
radioactive isotopes in order to determine the sensitivity as a
.. Mf WW function of energy; the standards used were either NBS standards
-
or traceable to NBS; actual spiked liquids, gases, filter papers.
~ ~ ~
and charcoal cartridges were placed into the detectors; and efficiency calibration curves were generated.
......
The inspectr-inspected the facility and noted that several of f
the systems had not been installed. The licensee's representative if stated that installation is due to be completed about September 1, n
1977.
The inspector reviewed the ifcensee's procedure 2105-1.12 (Revi-sion 2) " Radiation Monitoring System Setpoints" and noted that r
it was incomplete. The licensee's representative stated that it E
was incomplete since they had not received their radiological m
technical specifications from the NRC and as a result could not
establish setpoints based on technical specification limits.
~~
The inspector stated that the above area was open pending comple-tion of the procedure and complete installa*. ion of the effluent monitoring system. These areas will be inspected during a subse-quent inspection.
==
7.
Effluent Procedures - Unit 2 (77-21-021
The inspector determined that most of the procedures required to perform effluent and chemical analyses for Unit 1 would also
=
be used for Unit 2.
The liquid waste treatment system will be a
="
common system. Unit 2 will have its own gas sampling and release procedures and its own release permits. The licensee's representa-
'=
tive stated that these procedures are incomplete pending receipt of
radiological technical specifications.
The inspector stated that the above area is open pending completion of the procedures and that it will be inspected during a subsequent
+=
inspection.
.
2=g
- =-
>....
_
-
- . :..
.e...
'
.f:.'
...
.
..,..
....
s
.
(
k
..
..
.
.
.
8.
Airborne Tritium Releases (77-17-01)
[. ~
In the licensee's semi-annual effluent report for the last two
~ ~'I-
.
quarters of 1976, the licensee reported' airborne tritium releases disEI of 608 and 104 curies respectively.
Liquid releas.es of tritium during this period were 55.6 and 90.2 curies respectively. Al-
=-
r though these releases were only a small fraction of applicable limits the airborne releases were higher than usually observed
.c
around similar facilities. The inspector reviewed the licensee's
...cc
.
analytical procedure in this area, laboratory analytical records
.
for 1977, and release records for 1976. The measurements were
.
..^
discussed with several of the licensee's representatives. Two
- ..;
potential problem areas were noted. On several occassions, cal-
'_
.:....
culational errors were made on the analytical data in 1977.
These errors were conservative, resulted in calculated values higher than
..c..
actual releases, and were only a very small factor of the total
=
.c.;
releases.
The major source of the reported releases are the plant
.;:.c...
monthly for tritium. The licensee samples airborne effluents using
.,7 vents which are required by technical specification to be sampled
-
a standard bubbler technique. This procedure allows the collection
_....
of a small amount of noble gas. Since the licensee counts a portion
~.
of the water from the bubbler directly on a liquid scintillation
-
G counter, the method suffers from interference from dissolved noble gases. This interferent.a would make release levels appear higher than they actually were and therefore introduce a conservative
_,,,--- ;;
error.
The licensee stated that the analytical procedure and possible steps to either reduce or correct for noble gas interference would be evaluated. These steps include either distillation of the sample prior to counting, simple boiling of the sample prior to counting to drive off noble gas, or interference corrections based on counts in higher energy channels above the tritium channel on the liquid scintillation counter.
..
~~
The inspector stated that this item would be considered unresolved pending completion of the licensee's evaluation and any appropriate
.. _....,
corrective action.
- .-.:
_
..
'
....
- .#.7
.
z...
.
een-...-ei.
h 1532 254 L
..
. -.
.
.
(
-
.
.
-
i
'~~.
p C.....
L 9.
Unresolved Items i5s
-
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is
- '
required in order to ascertain whether.they are acceptable items,
=
items of noncompliance, or deviations. Unresolved items dis-
=l. p."'"'
closed during the inspection are discussed in Paragraph 8.
- [g;l g;;
10.
Exit Interview
- .,y.-
=rrE The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Para-
' " ~ ~ ~ "
graph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on June 2,1977.
The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection n.
and the findings. With regard to the unresolved item, the licensee
' ' '
stated that the matter would be evaluated. The licensee stat.ed that
--
the data frem the analyses that, vere to be performed on the split
- .,. ;.
sample would be made available when completed.
'~~:lpg,
~
- +;=
' ' " ~.
..
O
.
,
- r:::
r*"*'
- '
N[*-...
.....
~"'
.. _..
.
. - - _,
>ee..<
~...-.. i
- -- :~I-
.....
....-
r-15 8 2 n r-M G
..
.
'W
..
q
O O
- 6 TABLE 1
-
.
THI 1 - VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON Results in uCl/cc m
Reactor Cool-I-131 (1.46 + 0.02) E-2 (1.24 + 0.02) E-2 Agreement O
ant I-133 (2.5410.05)E-2 (2.51 10.04) E-2 Agreement
. m~
'
Cs-134 (1.84 1 0.04) E-2 (1.97 1 0.03) E-2 Agreement Cs-137 (2.11 + 0.03) E-2 (2.17 + 0.03) E-2 Agreement Na-24 (3.98 I 0.02) E-1 (4.15 T 0.02) E-1 Agreement t!
Spent Fuel Cs-137 (2.596 1 0.013) E-3 (2.0010.02)E-3
'
Possible Agreement A Pool Cs-134 (2.40 1 0.02) E-3 (2.01 1 0.02) E-3 Agreement
.g C0-58 (1,091 10.002) E-2 (1.12 1 0.004) E-2 Agreement Co-60 (2.20 1 0.05) E-4 (2.1810.09) E-4 Agreement Ag-llQn (3.83+0.10)E-4 (2.95 + 0.118) E-4 Agreement
-
~
Hn-54 (9.8 1 0.3) E-5 (8.72 1 0.716) E-5 Agreement
- .:
Gas Decay Xe-133 (0.9610.01) E-2 (1.64 i ?) E-2 (Not.a Itcensee Tank (bulb)
counting geometry)
...
Xe-133 (1.17 + 0.03) E-2(a)
~
~ ' -
(shell vial)
~
(1.08 + 0.05) E-2 Agreement Xe-133
--
(1.54 i.001) E-2 Possible Agreement B r'
(Hartnellt Beaker)
(a) Not an NRC counting geometry. The 14cc vial geometry, which is an NRC geometry, was used when counting the licensee's 7cc vial. There is a small systematic error in the value.
"!.
Comparisons are made against the NRC's bulb results wl;tch is a well calibrated geometry.
Ln CO N
N Ln Os T
"i n"
."
gjy j;
- gg !!
- ![
pj
'
,.
....
hf!
e*
{*
f*
'
- '
,
.
e e
e
-
i TABLE 1 (continued)
.
SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON Results in uCf Spike Filter Sb-125 4.5+0.1)E-2 f5.21 + 0.05 E-2 Agreement Paper S-6 Cs-134 6.0 I 0.3) E-2 d4.8/70.04 E-2 Agreement a
Ag-110m 2.6 T 0.1) E-2 fl.97 7 0.08 E-2 Agreement
'
'
Na-22 1.11 1 0.04) E-2 (0.99610.019)E-2 Agreenent
&
-
-
Spike Char '
Da-133 (7.61 + 0.01) E-2 (6.16 + 0.63) E-2 Possible Agreement A
-
-
coal Filter
.
Il-4
.
i ;,-
,
S ll Da-133 (4.86 1 0.02) E-2 (4.22 1 0.02) E-2 Agreement i
- ;,
.
I
,
-%.
,
e.
l l
-
-
un CO N
N Ln
,
"!!
- !'
'
..
..
.
...:i..
iiii m S!! n.n
,n,
.I !} l ll
.
,3 i
- .
iiiij !' ; jj!j[ '
'
(jj lg{j
-
-
o
- o
,
i e
s
-
.
.
Attach =ent 1
-
.
Criteria for Cc= caring'Analvtical Measurements
-
'
This attach =ent provides criteria for co= paring results of capability tests and verification measurements. The criteria.are based on an
..-...a e=pirical relationship which ce=bine's prior experierice and the accuracy i,[,[,[
needs of this progra=.
-
-"
-
In these criteria, the judgement li=its are variable in relation to the
= = =. =..
- =.u==.a.
comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution",
a=.
increases the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement =ust be censidered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
,
,
... ". '.. '
LICENSEE VALUE
~~~
- " -
E-RATIO = NRC REFERINCE VALUE Possible Possible
,,,,,, _,,,
.
Resolutien Agr eement Arr e e=ent A Agree =ent 3
-.
==-
.=w.
<3 0. 4.- 2. 5 0.3 - 3.0 No Cc=parison tg
-
.
4-7 0.5 - 2.0 0.4
.2.5-0.3 - 3.0
51 - 200
. 0.6 - 1.66 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 8 - 15 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.66 0.5 - 2.0 0.80 - 1.25
'O.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:
- - t_;._
,
'
Cam:.a Spectremetry where principal ga==a energy used for identification is greater than 250 Kev.
=rg-
=--
Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
"3" criteria are applied to the folleving analyses:
Ca=ma Spectremetry where pr1ncipal ga==a energy used for identificatien
~
is less than 250 Kev..
z.=.
89Sr and 90Sr Deter =1 nations.
_ _ _ = -..
.
""".s.
...._
Gross 3 eta where sa=ples are counted on the same date using the sa=e
~ LJa ;
reference nuclide.
M.
=.4Q
- 4 -
=
O
....
=
1532 258
...
'* -
.,.
. g..
.
..
' o :.
.
_
7