IR 05000293/1981017
| ML20031F829 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 09/14/1981 |
| From: | Bores R, Hansell J, Kottan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031F821 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-293-81-17, NUDOCS 8110200462 | |
| Download: ML20031F829 (10) | |
Text
<
-
-
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-293/81-17 Docket No.
50-293 Category C
License No.
DPR-35 Priority
--
Licensee:
Boston Edison Company 800 Boylston Street Boston, Massachusetts 02199 Facility Name:
Pilgrim Station Inspection at:
Plymouth, Massachusetts Inspection conducted:
July 27-31,1981 Inspectors: 1Mk
[d 9-WW
~
'
J. J. Kottan,~ Radiation Specialist date signed J. B. Hansell Radiation Specialist (Co-op)
date signed
9' -/ / 8 /
Approved by:
R. J. Bores,' Chief, Independent Reasurements date signed and Environmental Protection Section, EP&PS Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on July 27-31, 1981 (Report No. 50-293/81-17)
Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's chemical and radiochemical measurements program using the NRC:I Mobile Laboratory and laboratory assistance provided by DOE Radiological and Environmental Services Laboratory. Areas reviewed included: program for quality control of analytical measurements, audit results, performance on radiological analyses of split actual effluent samples. The inspection involved 58 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC regional based inspectors.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
B110200462 811002 PDR ADOCK 05000293 G
PDR Region I Form 12 (Rev. April 77)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _
___
. _
=
,
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Individuals Contacted
- R. D. Machon, Nuclear Operations Manager
- P. D. Smith, Chief Technical Engineer
- R. A. Smith, Senior Chemical Engineer
- J. Smallwood, Chemical Engineer D. Trudeau, Chief Radiological Engineer E. Rush, Senior QA Engineer V. Stagliola, Senior QC Engineer The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees including members of the chemistry and health physics staffs.
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (79-05-01): Tritium Measurement Disagreement.
The results comparison of two samples taken during a previous inspection (79-05) indicated that the tritium measurements were in agreement.
See paragraph 5 and Table I.
3.
Laboratory QC Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for the quality control of analytical measurements and noted that the licensee's laboratory QC program is detailed in p ocedure 7.10.1, Radiochemistry Laboratory Quality Control, and prc.edure 7.10.2, Quality Control of Counting Room Instruments. The inspector reviewed daily source e.nd background checks and counter control charts as required by the above procedures for 1980 and 1981 to date.
The inspector also reviewed the results of spiked radiochemical samples sent to the licensee's contract-laboratory. The inspector discussed various aspects of laboratory QC
,
l with the licensee. The inspector had no further questions in this area. No items of noncompliance were identified.
4.
Audit Results The inspect;r reviewed QA Audit No. 81-14 which was conducted on June 14-18, 1981 by the licensee's QA department. The_ audit covered the licensee's chemistry program and included the area of effluent control.
In addition, the inspector also reviewed QA Audit No. 80-20 which was conducted on June 30, 1980 and covered the licensee's cor. tract-laboratory used for effluent analysts. The inspector had no further questions in this area. No iteme of noncompliance were identified.
_ _ _ _
~
.
.
.
5.
Confirmatory Measurements During this inspection actual liquid and airborne effluent samples were split between the licensee and NRC:I for the purpose of inter-comparison. The effluent samples were analyzed by the licensee using his normal methods and equipment, and the NRC using the NRC:I Mobile Laboratory. Joint analysis of actual effluent samples determines the licensee's capability to measure radioactivity in effluent samples.
,
In addition a liquid effluent sample was sent to the NRC reference labroatory, Department of Energy, Radiological and Environmental Servi es Laboratory (RESL) for analyses requiring wet chemistry. The anal to be performed on the sample are:
gross. ;ha and gross beta. These results will be compared with the i
licensee's results when received at a later date and will be documented in a subsequent inspection report.
The results of an effluent sample split between the licensee and NRC:I
!
during a previoo-inspection on July 25-27, 1979 (Inspection Report 79-05) were also compared during this inspection.
,
i A routine health physics air sample which was analyzed by the licensea's health physics personnel using the health physics gamma ray spectroscopy system was also compared.
The results of the sample raeasurements comparison indicated that all of the measurements were in agraement or possible agreement under the criteria used for comparing results.
(See Attachment 1) The results of the comparisons are listed in Table I.
6.
Health Physics Measurements The inspector reviewed the calibration and QC data for the licensee's computer based gamma ray spectroscopy system used by the health physics personnel.
In addition, a routine health physics air semple was split between the licensee and the flRC:I for comparison.
(See Paragraph 5 and Table I). No items of noncompliance were identified in this area.
7.
Exit Interview The inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on July 30, 1981. The inspector summarized the purpose and scope of the inspection and the inspection findings.
The licensee agrced to perform the analyses listed in Paragraph 5 and report the results to NRC.
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ - - _
-
TABLE 1
.
.
PILGRIM VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
.
.
SAMPLE IS0 TOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARIS0N RESULTS IN MICR0 CURIES PER MILLILITE_R Reactor Coolant H-3 (9.0610.02)E-3 (9.44+0.94)E-3 Agreement
-
0800 hrs 7-25-79
"B" Misc. Waste Co-60 (1.1710.03)E-4 (1,0510.01)E-4 Agreement Tank 1545 hrs P-32 (2.3+0.4)E-7 7-25-79
-
<7E-7 no comparison gross beta (1.2410.05)E-3 (2.37_+0.03)E-3 Possible Agreement
,
gross alpha (3.310,5)E-8
<4E-7 no comparison Sr-89 (1.210.2)E-6 (6 11.5)E-7 Agreement Sr-90 (4.910.2)E-6 (4.810.1)E-6 Agreement H-3 (2.9610.02)E-3 (2.8710.49)E-3 Agreement Fe-55 (2.3710.02)E-4 (2.510.1)E-4 Agreement Cs-134 (1.3510.04)E-4 (1.3210.01)E-4 Agreement Cs-137 (9.910.3)E-4 (9.7710.01)E-4 Agreement Co-58 (1.310,4)E-6 (1.1810.60)E-6 Agreement Mn-54 (1.3910.06)E-5 (1.2010.04)E-5 Agreement
.. =-
_
.
.
e
<
TABLE 1
'
PILGRIM VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE IS0 TOPE NRC VALUE
~ LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON j
RESULTR IN TOTAL MICR0 CURIES Main Stack I-1 31 (2.6310.04)E-2 (3.25f,3.6%)E-2 Agreement Charcoal Cartridge 1'
1000 hrs I-133 (4.17f0.06)E-2 (4.71f,3.7%)E-2 Agreement 7-28-81 I-135 (2.07f,0.13)E-2 (2.51f,15.6%)E-2 Agreement f
Main Stack I-131 (1.2+0.3)E-4 (2.531,40.6%)E-4 Possible Agreement Particulate Filter
-
1000 hrs Ba-140 (8.210.2)E-3 (9.451,3.8%)E-3 Agreement
!
7-28-81
.
'
L O
1
- - -
.
.
TABLE 1
'
.
PILGRIM VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON RESULTS IN MICR0 CURIES PER MILLILITER
"B" Chem Na-24 (1.82ip.09)E-5 (1.351,28%)E-5 Possible Agreement Waste Tank 1400 hrs.
Cr-51 (4.lfp.4)E-5 (3.911,21%)E-5 Agreement 7-28-81 Mn-54 (2.86fp.09)E-5 (2. 511,5.2%)E-5 Agreement Co-58 (3.16fp.07)E-5 (2.651,5.9%)E-5 Agreement Co-60 (2.411p.02)E-4 (2.46fp.92%)E-4 Agreemen*
Mo-99 (4.71p.4)E-5 (3.67125%)E-5 Agreement Np-239 (3.4+0.3)E-5 (3.76+7.7%)E-5 Agreement Sr-91 (1.39fp.04)E-4 (1.661,17%)E-4 Agreement I-131 (2.47+0.07)E-5 (2.43+4.8%)E-5 Agreement I-133 (1.02719010)E-4 (1.081,2.7%)E-4 Agreement Cs-134 (3.34fp.07)E-5 (3.391.3.3%)E-5 Agreement Cs-137 (2.340fp.016)E-4 (2.59fp.7%)E-4 Agreenent Ba-140 (1.56fp.03)E-4 (1.611,3.3%)E-4 Agreement
_ _..
.
.
._
..
_
_
_ _ - _...-_
_
_-
. _ _
_ - - -
-
.
.
,
.
TABLE 1
'
.
]
' PILGRIM VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC'VALUE-
' LICENSEE VALUE COMPARIS0N
!
'RESULTS IN MICR0 CURIES ~PER' MILLILITER i
Offgas Kr-85m (9.3+0.7)E-3
-
!
0802 hrs
-
(8.87+6.5%)E-3 Agreement l
7-29-81 Kr-88 (2.910.2)E-2 (2.51113.1%)E-2 Agreement j
Xe-133 (1.2010.09)E-2 (1.41814.7%)E-2 Agreement Xe-135 (4.6410.09)E-2 (4.5711.1%)E-2 Agreement
R actor Building Xe-135 (2.910.3)E-7 (3.3113%)E-7 Agreement
-
Vent
'
1000 hrs.
7-30-81
i
,
I
,
t
'
i
_._
,
.
.
'
,
TA,BLE 1
PILGRIM VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
.,
SAMPLE IS0 TOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARIS0N RESULTS'IN MICR0 CURIES'PER MILLILITER i-Reactor Coolant I-131 (5.3fp.6)E-4 (5.051,23%)E-4 Agreement 0815 hrs 7-29-81 I-132 (1.62+0.03)E-2 (1.70+4.3%)E-2 Agreement I-133 (6.00fp.10)E-3 (4.7914.1%)E-3 Agreement
,
I-134 (5.02ip.13)E-2 (5.30il7.6%)E-2 Agreement I-135 (1.60ip.05)E-2 (1.5313.9%)E-2 Agreement Sr-91 (3.719 3)E-3 (4.4418.4%)E-3 Agreement Sr-92 (1.32ip.03)E-2 (1.4212.7%)E-2 Agreement Na-24 (1.23+p.09)E-3 (1.2218.1 %)E-3 Agreement Cr-51 (6.21p.4)E-3 (4.16119.5%)E-3 Possible Agreement Co-58 (1,02ip.08)E-3 (1.1117.7%)E-3 Agreement Np-239 (2. gip.3)E-3 (3.17110%)E-3 Agreement
- -
...
-. -. -
-
,
.
TABLE 1
~PILGRI!i, VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
' SAMPLE IS0 TOPE NRC'VALUE
~ L_ICENSEE VALUE
~COMPARIS0N
'RESULTS I'N MICR0 CURIES PER MILLILITER Health Physics Co-60
.(3.110.2)E-9 (3.181?)E-9 Agreement-Air Sample (Rad Waste-Cs-137 (6.711.3)E-10 (8.9517)E-10 Agreement Clean Waste Pump Room)
1345 hrs.
.7-30-81
.
._.
_
_
.
,.
-.
.
>
.
. -
,
,
Attachment 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 this program.
In these criteria, the judgement limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution",
increases the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more l
selective.
Conversely, poorer agreement.must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
LICENSEE VALUE
!
RATIO = NRC REFERENCE VALUE
!
Possible Possible 4-Resolution Agreement Agreement A Agreement B
,
-
.
,
<3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison 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:
r Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 Kev.
i Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
!
!
Iodine on absorbers
!
"B" criteria are applied to the-following analyses:
i Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification
,
is less than 250 Kev.
t 89Sr and 90Sr Detenninations.
.
Gross Beta where samples are counted on the sam 2 data using the same reference nuclide.-
i
.
.m
.-.
m
.
...
.
.
-