IR 05000335/1991020
| ML17223B407 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 11/19/1991 |
| From: | Robert Carrion, Volk T NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17223B406 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-335-91-20, 50-389-91-20, NUDOCS 9201170190 | |
| Download: ML17223B407 (12) | |
Text
~pS Argy, (4 fpo nC O~
/yn +i*.w+
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MAIIIETTASTREET, N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323 Ooyg~ ~g Report Nos:
50-335/91-20 and 50-389/91-20 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company 9250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33102 Docket Nos.:
50-335 and 50-389 License Nos.:
DPR-67 and NPF-16 Facility Name:
St. Lucie 1 and
Inspection Conducted:
ctober 15-18, 1991 Inspector:
4 ~ W CC/M>~
R. P.-Carrion g / /g cg/
Date Signed Accompanied by:
T. R. Volk
,/7 !/... zg.
Approved-by:
T. R. Decker, Chief Radiological Effluents and Chemistry Section Radiological Protection and Emergency Preparedness Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
/~
/~i
~r/
Da e Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was conducted in the areas of confirmatory measurements, plant,water chemistry, and contaminated soil.
Results:
The confirmatory measurement comparison showed good agreement between the results of the licensee and the NRC mobile lab.
However, two disagreements were identified.
The licensee had established a good Count Room radiochemical analysis program.
(Paragraph 2)
Plant water chemistry was maintained well within Technical Specification (TS) limits.
(Paragraph 3).
Contaminated soil was not a problem on site.
(Paragraph 4)
9201170190 911121-PORE ADOCK 05000335 f,i PDR
e
REPORT DETAILS 1 ~
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- J,
- R.
- R.
D.
- J
- K.
J 0
- L~
- H.
- DE B.
- DE Breen, Licensing Engineer Cox,- Chemistry Effluents Supervisor F. Englmeier, Site Quality Manager Faulkner, Primary Chemistry Supervisor E. Geiger, Vice President of Nuclear Assurance N. Harris, Senior Vice President Holt, Licensing Engineer Leblanc, Chemistry Technician Mercer, Health Physics Technical Supervisor A. Sager, Plant Vice President Somers, Radioactive Waste Supervisor M. Wolf, Site Engineering Supervisor Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included technicians and administrative personnel.,
Nuclear, Regulatory Commission
- M. Scott, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview 2 ~
Confirmatory Measurements (84750)
CFR 20.201(b)
requires the licensee to perform surveys as necessary to evaluate the extent of radiation hazards.
To evaluate the licensee's analytical capability to make consistently accurate radioactivity measurements, the following samples were analyzed for radionuclide concentrations by the licensee and the NRC Region II mobile laboratory:
reactor coolant, liquid radwaste, and noble gases (which were collected by the licensee)
and an NRC-spiked particulate filter and an NRC-spiked charcoal cartridge.
The purpose of these comparative measurements was to verify the licensee's capability to accurately detect and identify gamma emitting radionuclides and to quantify their concentrations.
The licensee analyzed all of the samples in the Chemistry Count Room, which was equipped with two High Purity Germanium (HpGe)
gamma spectroscopy detectors with a Nuclear Data ND 9900 analysis system.
(Detector g1 was not in service and was being replaced by a new unit.)
Detector g2 was a Princeton Gamma Tech, Inc.
(PGT)
1982, Model g IGC 1020, with an efficiency of 12.5%.
Detector g3 was an EG&G 23-P-65WB, serial f39283-78, with an efficiency of 10%.
Both in-service detectors were used to count all samples.
The inspector reviewed selected portions
of Chemistry Procedure C-48C, Rev.
2, entitled "Operation of the Nuclear Data (ND) 9900 Computer Based Counting System,"
approved on March 3, 1990.
The procedure provided instruction for the calibration of the detectors and the determination of radionuclide activities of samples based on their gamma emissions.
The inspector reviewed control charts and calibration curves and found them to be current and sufficient.
The inspector reviewed selected portions of Chemistry Operating Procedures C-70, Rev.
23, entitled "Processing Aerated Liquid Wastes,"
approved on August 30, 1990 and
.C-72, Rev.
28, entitled "Processing Gaseous Waste,"
approved on August 8, 1990.
The portions reviewed included sampling instructions and were adequate for the intended purpose.
The source of the liquid waste sample was the A Waste Storage Tank (WST)
and the source of the noble gases sample was the Waste Gas Decay Tank.
The inspector observed a
licensee technician obtain the rea'ctor coolant, liquid waste, and noble gas samples and noted that the procedures were followed closely by the technician as he completed his duties.
Proper sampling techniques and health physics practices were utilized.
Attachment 1 provides a comparison of the licensee's results to the NRC's results for each sample.
Attachment 2 provides the criteria for assessing the agreement between the analytical results.
As indicated in Attachment 1, the results were generally in agreement for the samples analyzed.
However, there were two isotopes of disagreement, one each in the Liquid Radwaste sample and the'aste Gas Decay Tank sample.
In the case of the I-133 in the Liquid Radwaste sample, the disagreement was not given much credibility because the agreement with I-133 in the Reactor Coolant was so close.
The most likely reason for the apparent disagreement was the presence of short-lived radioisotopes with energies of approximately the same as those of I-133 and the inability of the NRC mobile lab to identify them.
In the case of the Kr-85m in the Waste Gas Decay Tank, there was no other sample 'containing this isotope for comparison.
However, the presence of short-lived isotopes with energies of approximately the same as those of the Kr-85m was suspected.
Before the disagreement could be resolved, either by recounting the sample or by using manual techhiques to resolve energy peaks, the computer system of the NRC mobile lab malfunctioned and efforts to restore it were unsuccessful.
From the observations made during this inspection, the inspector concluded that the licensee demonstrated that.
a good Count Room radiochemical analysis program was in place.
No violations.or deviations were identifie ~
Plant Water Chemistry (84750)
TS 3.4.7 specifies the limits within which the reactor
'oolant system must be maintained for dissolved oxygen (DO),
chloride, and fluoride.
TS 3.4.8 specifies the limits for the specific activity of the reactor coolant.
These parameters are related to corrosion resistance and fuel integrity.
Pursuant to the TS requirements,'he inspector reviewed tabular summaries which correlated reactor power output to chloride, fluoride, and dissolved oxygen concentrations, as well as specific activity and dose equivalent iodine of the reactor coolant for the period of July 1; 1991 through September 30, 1991, for both units.
All.of the -reviewed parameters satisfied the TS requirements.
No violations of deviations were identified.
~ '4
~
Contaminated Soil (84750),
The inspector discussed the issue of contaminated soil with
'the Radioactive Waste Supervisor to determine on-site quantities, activity levels and associated isotopic characterization, contamination sources, and plans for dealing with it.
Basically, the only contaminated soil on site is that which resulted from pump/valve leaks, spilled resin, spent sandblasting grit (which may contain oxides of activation products removed during the process),
etc.
An estimated 500-1000 cubic feet of this material was stored in B-25 boxes and 55-gallon drums awaiting analysis and eventual shipping for disposal if found to be contaminated.
Activity levels of soil on site ranged from less than Lower Limits of Detection (LLD) to approximately 1.0E-5 micro-Curies per gram (uCi/g).
5.
No violations or deviations were identified.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on October 18, 1991', with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed the inspection results, including likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents and/or processes reviewed during the inspection.
The licensee did not'identify any such
~ documents or processes as proprietary.
Dissenting comments were not received from the license ATTACHMENT 1 COMPARISON OF NRC AND ST.
LUCIE ANALYTICALRESULTS October 15-18, 1991 Type of Sample:
Reactor Coolant Sample Container:
NRC St Lucie 50 ml bottle 50 ml bottle Radio-Licensee's nuclide Value NRC Value Reso-lution Compar-Ratio ison Detector g2 I-131 I-132 I-133 I-135 1.,04E-2 (1. 01 +/- 0. 02) E-2 4.26E-2 (4.46 +/- 0.04)E-2 4.14E-2 (4.06 +/- 0.02)E-2 5 '9E-2 (5.12 +/-
0 '0)E-2
112 203
1.03 0.96 1.02 0.99 Agree Agree Agree Agree Detector g3 I-131 1.09E-2 (1.01 +/- 0.02)E-2 I-132 4.28E-2 (4.46 +/- 0.04)E-2 I-133 3.98E-2 (4.-06 +/- 0.02)E-2 I-135 4.98E-2 (5.12 +/- 0.10)E-2 Type of Sample:
Liquid Radwaste (Waste
112.
203
1. 08 0.96 0.98 0.97 Tank, Split)
Agree Agree Agree Agree Sample Container:
NRC 1000 ml liquid marinelli St Lucie 1000 ml liquid marinelli Radio-Licensee's nuclide Value NRC Value Reso-lution Ratio Compar-ison Detector g2 Co-60 I-131 I-133 1.91E-5 1.31E-5 2.33E-5 (1.95 +/- 0.05)E-5
(1.33 +/- 0.03)E-5
(3'3 +/- 0.04) E-5
0.98 0.98 0.74 Agree Agree Disagree Detector g3 Co-60 I-131 I-133 1. 85E-5 1.30E-5 2.29E-5 (1.95 +/- 0.05)E-5
(1.33 +/- 0.03)E-5
'(3.13 +/- 0.04)E-5
0.95 Agree 0.98 Agree 0.73 Disagree
Attachment
Type of Sample:.Waste Gas Decay Tank Sample Container:
NRC St Lucie 30 cc glass bulb 30 cc glass bulb Radio-Licensee's nuclide Value Detector k2 NRC Value Reso-lution Compar-Ratio ison Kr-85m Kr-85 Xe-133m Xe-133 Xe-135 4.74E-4 2. 18E-2 6.92E-3 3.17E-1 2 ~ 02E-2 (1. 03 (2. 09 (6 ~ 26 (3.20 (1. 85
+/- 0.02)E-3
+/- 0. 10) E-2
+/- 0. 10) E-3
+/- 0. 01) E-,1
+/- 0.01)E-2
21
320 185 0'6 1'4 1'0 0'9 1'9 Disagree Agree Agree Agree Agree Detector k3 Kr-85m Kr-85 Xe-133m Xe-133 Xe-135 4.58E-4 2.61E-2 7.20E-3 3.14E-1 2 ~ OOE-2 (1'3 +/- 0 '2) E-3 (2.09 +/- 0.10)E-2 (6.26 +/- 0
~ 10) E-.3 (3. 20 +/- 0. 01) E-1 (1'5 +/- 0 '1)E-2
21
320 185 0.44 1.25 1.15 0.98 F 08 Disagree Agree Agree Agree.
Agree Type of Sample:
Part Radio-Licensee's nuclide
'Value iculat'e Filter (NRC
'RC Value Spike)
Reso-lution Ratio Compar-'son Detector g2 Co-60 Sr-85 Cd-109 Sn-113 Ce-139 Hg-203 Co-57 Y-88 Cs-137 2.86E-2 7.41E-3 1.19E-'1 1.28E-2 3.97E-3 2.73E-3 4.57E-3 2.50E-2 2.54E-2 (2.73 (8. 06 (1. 25 (1.21 (3. 93 (2.76 (4. 31 (2.42 (2.45
+/- 0. 05) E-2
+/- 0.19)E-3
+/- 0 '2)E-1
+/- 0.02)E-2
+/- 0. 10) E-3
+/- 0. 12) E-3
+/- 0. 09) E-3
+/- 0. 05) E-2
+/- 0. 04) E-2
42
60
23
48
~
1.05 0,92 0.95 1.06 1.01 0.99 1.06 1.03 1. 04 Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Detector g3 Co-60 Sr-85 Cd-109 Sn-113 Ce-139 Hg-203 Co-57 Y-88 Cs-137 2.88E-2 8.10E-3 1.24E-1 1.26E-2 3.87E-3 2.84E-3 4.56E-3 2.47E-2 2.47E-2 (2. 73 (8. 06 (1.25 (1.21 (3.93 (2.76 (4.31 (2.42 (2.45
+/- 0.05)E-2
+/- 0- 19) E-3
+/- 0. 02) E-1-
+/- 0 '2)E-2
+/- 0. 10) E-3
+/- 0. 12) E-3
+/.- 0. 09) E-3
+/- 0. 05) E-2
+/- 0. 04) E-2
42
60
23
48
1 ~ 05 1.00 0.99 1.04 0'8 1.03 1.06 1.02
=1. 01 Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree
Attachment
Type of: Sample:
Charcoal Cartridge (NRC spike)
Radio-Licensee's nuclide Value Detector I2 a
NRC Value Reso-lution
'ompar-'atio icon Co-60 Cd-109 Sn-113 Ce-139 Am-241 Co-57 Y-88 Cs-137 5. 76E-2 4.93E-1 1.21E-2 7.75E-3 6.05E-2 1.08E-2 1.68E-2 4.81E-2 (4.87 (5. 14 (1. 19 (7. 44 (6.06 (9. 99 (1. 68 (4. 87
+/-.
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
0. 06) E-2 0. 05) E-1 0.03)E-2 0. 14) E-3 0. 07) E-2 0. 13) E-,3 0. 04) E-2 0. 05) E-2
103
53
77
97 1. 18 0.96 1.02 1.04
'1. 00 1.08 1.00 0.99 Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree
'Agree Detector g3 Co-60 Cd-109 Sn-113 Ce-139 Am-241 Co-57 Y-88 Cs-137 4 ~ 86E-2 4.88E-1 1.25E-2 7.17E-3 6.49E-2 1.06E-2 1.69E-2 4.82E-2 (4. 87.
(5. 14 (1. 19 (7
~ 44 (6. 06 (9. 99 (1. 68 (4. 8,7
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
+/-
0. 06) E-2 0. 05) E-1 0. 03) E-2 0. 14) E-3 0.07)E-2
~ 13) E-3
~ 04) E-2 0. 05) E-2
'1
- 103
53
77
97 F 00 0.95 1'. 05 0'6 1.07 1.06 1'00
'0. 99 Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree Agree
,Agree
ATTACHMENT 2 CRITERIA FOR COMPARISONS OF ANALYTICALMEASUREMENTS This attachment provides criteria for the comparison of results of analytical radioactivity measurements.
These
'criteria are based 'n empirical relationships which combine prior experience in comparing radioactivity analyses,-
the measurement of the statistically random process of radioactive emission, and the accuracy needs of this program.
In these criteria, the
"Comparison Ratio Limits"~ denoting agreement or disagreement between licensee and NRC results are variable.
This variability is a function of the ratio of the NRC's analytical value relative to its associated statistical and analytical uncertainty, referred to in this program as "Resolution"~.
For comparison purposes, a ratio between the licensee's analytical value and the NRC's analytical value is computed for each radionuclide,present in a given sample.
The computed ratios are then evaluated for agreement or disagreement based on "Resolution."
The corresponding values for "Resolution" and the
"Comparison Ratio Limits" are listed= in the Table below.
Ratio values which are either above or below the "Comparison Ratio Limits" are considered to be in disagreement, while ratio values within or encompassed by the "Comparison Ratio Limits" are 'considered to be in agreement.
TABLE Resolution NRC Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolution vs.
Comparison Ratio Limits h
Comparison Ratio Limits for A reement 4-7 8 -. 15 16 - 50 51 " 200
)200 0.4 - 2.5 0.5 - 2.0
'. 0.6 - 1.66 0.75 - 1.33
" 0.80 - 1.25 0.85 - 1.18
~Comparison Ratio = Licensee Value NRC Reference Value
~Resolution
=
NRC Reference Value Associated Uncertainty
r.