IR 05000334/1982031
| ML20028F155 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1983 |
| From: | Jang J, Kottan J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20028F152 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-334-82-31, NUDOCS 8301310192 | |
| Download: ML20028F155 (8) | |
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND E11FORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-334/82-31 i
Docket No.
50-334 Category C
License No.
DPR-66 Priority
--
Licensee: Duquesne Light Company 435 Sixth Avenue Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 Facility Name: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1 Inspection at:
Shippingport, Pennsylvania Inspection conducted:
December, 14-17, 1982 Inspectors:
.
b//h
-- M ~
J.
.' Jang, Radiati Specialist date d4k
/-/1-83 Approved by:
/
-
-
J. J. Kottan, Acting Chief, Effluents date Radiation Protection Section, Radiological Protection Branch Inspection Summary: Inspection December 14 - 17, 1982 (Report No. 50-334/82-31)
Area Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of the licensee's chemical and radiochemical measurements program using NRC:I Mobile Radiological Measure-ments Laboratory and laboratory assistance provided by DOE Radiological and Environmental Service Laboratory. Areas reviewed included: program for quality control of analytical measurements, audit results, performance on radiological analyses of split actual effluent samples, and effluent control procedures. The inspection involved 36 inspector-hours onsite by one NRC regionally based inspector.
Results: Of the four areas inspected, no items of noncompliance were identi-fied in areas.
8301310192 830117 PDR ADOCK 05000334 g
-
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Individuals Contacted Principal Licensee Employees J. Clark, Radiation Control Foreman W. Lacey, Plant Superintendent
- V. Linnenbom, Radiochemical Analysis Coordinator
- F. Lipchick, Senior Compliance Engineer A. Mizia, Senior QA Engineer E. Schnell, Radiation Control Supervisor
- J. Wenkhous, Reactor Control Chemist The inspector also interviewed other licensee employees, including members of the chemistry and health physics staffs.
- Denotes those present at exit interview.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (Closed) Follow-up Item (334/81-22-01):
Efficiency calibration on the SAM-2 Single Channel Analyzer. The inspector reviewed and verified the l
the implementation of Procedure RIP 5.13; SAM-2/RD-22, I-131 Counting =
System". The efficiency calibration was performed as required.
l l
(Closed) Noncompliance (334/81-22-02):
Failure to follow gas sampling procedure (RM 6.6).
The inspector verified the corrective actions regarding the waste gas sampling. A technician called the control room to obtain the waste gas decay tank pressure as required by Procedure RM 6.6.
i
.
.
1 3.
Laboratory QC Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for the quality control of analytical measurements. The inspector noted that the licensee's BVPS-CM Chapter 9, Conduct of Operation, Part-C covers quality control for both reactor coolant chemistry analyses and radiological analyses of effluent samples. The licensee's effluent radiological analyses QC program con-
sists of inter-laboratory comparisons. The licensee participates in the EPA cross check program as a part of the laboratory QC program.
Also, the operating procedures for the various counting instruments specify daily background and source checks and where applicable, gain checks.
The inspector discussed Regulatory Guide 4.15, Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and the Environment, and laboratory quality control in this general area with the licensee.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
'
4.
Audit Results
l The inspector determined that the licensee's chemistry and effluent monitoring programs were on the Quality Assurance Division audit list.
l The inspector reviewed Audit No. BV-1-82-07 dated February 25-26, 1982.
l The inspector had no further questions in this area.
No items of noncompliance were identified.
5.
Confirmatory Measurements During the inspection, actual liquid, airborne particulates and charcoal and gaseous efflucent samples were split between the licensee and NRC:I l
for the purpose of intercomparison. The effluent samples were analyzed
!
by the licensee using the licensee's normal methods and equipment, and by l
the NRC using tb-NR(cI Mobile Radiological Measurements Laboratory.
l I
.
.
Joint analyses of actual effluent samples are used to determine the licensee's capability to measure radioactivity in effluent samples.
In addition, a liquid effluent sample was sent to the NRC reference laboratory, Department of Energy, Radiological and Environmental Services Laboratory (RESL), for analyses requiring wet chemistry. The analyses to be performed on the samples are:
Sr-89, Sr-90, gross alpha, gross beta and tritium. The results when received at a later date will be docu, rented in a subsequent inspection report. During a previous inspection (August 1981) the licensee sent a liquid effluent sample to RESL for Sr-89, Sr-90, gross alpha, gross beta, and tritium comparisons but the sample was lost.
Therefore, comparisons were not made during this inspection.
The results of the sample measurement intercomparisons indicated that all of the measurements were in agreement under the criteria used for com-paring results.
(See Attachment 1) The results of the comparisons a ~
listed in Table I.
l The inspector determined from discussions with the licensee that iodine activity in charcoal is routinely determined by counting only the inlet side of the charcoal cartridge and using a homogenecus geometry. The licensee counted both sides of the charcoal cartridge during this inspec-tion and averaged the results. The licensee determined that the iodine was collected on the surface of charcoal cartridge. The inspector noted that the measurement of the iodine activity on the charcoal cartridge would be in a conservative direction using a homogeneous geometry and would not have resulted in the licensee exceeding any effluent release limits. However, the licensee stated that this area would be examined and appropriate action would be taken. The inspector stated that this item would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-334/82-31-01).
l
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _.
._
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_-
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
.
6.
Records and Procedures The inspector reviewed daily background and source check log books of counting instruments for 1982. These instruments were the liquid scintil-lation counter, gas-flow proportional counter, Ge(Li) detector system, NaI well detector, and SAM-2.
The inspector had no further questions in this area.
The inspector reviewed BVPS-CM Chapter 5, Radiochemistry Procedures,
" Iodine", and Chapter 6, Part 3, Chemical Solution, Solution No. 211,
" Iodine".
The inspector noted that the licensee had been using a radio-chemical speparation method for iodine analyses in the reactor coolant water to meet Section 3.4.8 of the Technical Specifications requirement for iodine concentration in reactor coolant.
The inspector noted that the iodine carrier solution (Solution No. 211) was yellowish instead of colorless.
The inspector stated that the reducing agent (NaHS0 ) did not
~
to keep the iodide form (I ) in the carrier solution. The efore,' iodine chemical yields were decreased due to the low iodide ccocentration in the carrier solution and resulted in higher iodine activities in reactor coolant samples. The inspector noted that the determination of I-131 dose equivalent in a reactor coolant sample would be in a conservative direc-tion and would not exceed the Technical Specifications requirement. The licensee made a new iodine carrier solution during this inspection. The licensee stated that the iodine carrier solution would be examined fre-quently, and the procedure would be changed if necessary. The inspector stated that this item will be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-334/82-31-02).
The reactor coolant sample split during this inspection was counted directly by the licensee using a gamma spectrometry method and the result was in agreement as listed in Table 1.
_. _ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ __j
.
.
_ _. _. - _. _
. _ -
_
,
i
.
.
I
i
7.
Exit Interview
The inspector met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1)
I at the conclusion of the inspection on December 17, 1982. -The inspector I
summarized the purpose and scope.of the inspection and the inspector findings.
The licensee agreed to perform the analyses listed in Paragraph 5 and
.
report the results to the NRC.
i i
i
!
i l
!
!
.
,
j
!
1
,
l l
- --
_-
.-
. _ _ _ - _ _. _ -, -- _. - -
.
_
.
. ~...
.. _ _ _. - -..., _. _ __
a TABLE 1
.
SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMP /RISON RESULTS IN MICROCURIES PER MILLILITER Reactor 1-131 (9.0 1 0.2) E-3 (1.1 0.3) E-2 Ag reemen t Coolant 12-14-82 I-133 (2.00 1 0.04) E-2 (2.66 1 0.06) E-2 Ag reemen t 1038 hr I-135 (3.3 1 0.4) E-2 (3.5 1 0.2) E-2 Ag reement Liquid Co-60 (1.4 1 0.2) E-6 (1.02 1 0.12) E-6 Ag reement Radwaste LW-TK-5B l-131 (3.0 1 0.8) E-7 (3.9 1 1.0) E-7 Ag reement 12-14-82 Cs-137 (3.4 1 0.9) F-7 (5.1 i O.7) E-7 Ag reement 1400 hr Waste cas Xe-131m (4.3 1 0.6) E-3 (3.8 1 0.3) E-3 Ag reement CW-TK-18 12-15-82 Xe-133 (8.26 1 0.05) E-2 (1.032 1 0.003) E-1 Ag reement 0940 hr SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON RESULTS IN MICROCURIES PER SAMPLE Cha rcoa l I-131 (1.13 1 0.12) L-4 (1.3 1 0.2) E-4 Ag reement 12-15-02 0025 hr Pa rt icu l a te Co-60 (1.00 1 0.14) E-4 (1.5 1 0.2) E-4 Ag reement ritter 12-15-82 0025 hr
.
.
.
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 it associated uncertainty. As that radio, referred to in this program as " Resolution",
increases the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer agreement must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
LICENSEE VALUE RATIO = NRC REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Resolution Agreement Agreement A Aareement B
'3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Co.mparison 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 8200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33
"A" Criteria are applid to the following analyses:
Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is greater than 250 kev.
Tritium analyses of liquid samples.
Iodine on adsorbers
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification 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.