IR 05000409/1981017
| ML20010J166 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1981 |
| From: | Januska A, Rozak S, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20010J148 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-409-81-17, NUDOCS 8109290656 | |
| Download: ML20010J166 (8) | |
Text
_
-
.'
t U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
REGION III
'
Report No. 50-409/81-17 Docket No. 50-409 License No. DPR-45 Licensee: Dairyland Power Cooperative 2615 East Avenue - South Lacrosse, WI 54601 Facility Name:
Lacrosse Boiling Water Reactor LACBWR Site, Genoa, WI
'1
' '
Inspection Conducted: August 24-28, 1981
'
h. b.
- w.us hW Inspectors: A.G.J(tuska
/B[6 /
h.,b ws Y w -
S.Rozb
'7/I///'
'p/
k !!C W
'b'
Approved By:
M. C. Schumacher, Chief,
'Mff///
Independent Measurements and Environmental Protection Section Inspection Summary:
Inspection on August 24-28, 1981 (Report No. 50-409/81-17)
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of (1) Environmental Protection Program including review of program results, inspection of selected sampling stations; and (2) Confirmatory Measurements including discussion of previous sample results, collection of samples, analysis onsite with the NRC Region III Measurements Van, and discussion of results.
The inspection involved 65 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results: No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
.
8109290656 810921
^
DR ADOCK 05000409:
_ _.
.
.
.
,.
DETAILS
,
1.
Persons Contacted
.
- R. Shimshak, Plant Superintendent J. Parkyn, Asst. Plant Superintendent
- P. Shafer, Radiation Protection Engineer
- B. Zibung, Health and Safety Supervisor F. Schroeder, Senior Health Physics Technician R. Wardlow, Senior Health Physics Technician M. Holmes, Health Physics Technician F. Fredricks, Health Physics Technician D. Flottmeyer, I & M Technician
- W. Forney, RIII Resident Inspector
- M. Branch, RIII Resident Inspector
- Denotes those present at the exit interview.
2.
Sample Comparison in the Confirmatory Measurements Program The inspection consisted cf comparing the results of analyses of
'
samples of the licensee's effluents to assure that he is capable of accurately quantifying releases in order to comply with Technical Specifications or legal limits. Results of comparative gamma analyses for effluent samples collected during a previous inspection, and for those samples collected during this inspection and analyzed by the Region III Van are shown in Table I and Table II respectively, and the comparison criteria in Attachment 1.
Analyses requiring beta counting (tritium, strontium and gross beta) will be completed by the licensee and reported later.
a.
August, 1980 Split The samples discussed below were collected during a previous inspection and analyzed by the Radiological Environmental Sciences Laboratory, the NRC's Reference Laboratory.
Liquid, particulate and charcoal samples were analyze 3.
The particulate filter
results were less than the lower limit of detectability for he
nuclides identified and therefore are not compared in Table I.
Six of nine comparisons met the established criteria for agreement.
The licensee failed to accurately quantify gross beta (factor of three high) and Sr-90 (factor of three low) in a liquid sample; and I-131 (factor of three low) on a charcoal adsorber (Section 2b).
-
The Sr-90 analytical results have been a continuing problem and previous inspections have not identified the reason for the non-conservative reporting.
If the results were representative of releases during the sampling period, the licensee would not have exceeded his Technical Specifications. Although no limits were exceeded, the inspectors discussed the importance of accurate-2-
.,
-
-
.-
-. -.
-..
-.
-
..
.
.
.
.
reporting for this and other nuclides. As a result of discussions
,
with the licensee, he agreed to apply a factor of three (the average of previous underreporting) to Sr-90 results beginning with January 1,1980 and until such time as the problew is resolved and a solution is implemented, and review all factors involved in his analyses in order to obtain accurate results. On September 9, the inspector was informed by the licensee that the separation procedure had been changed to one developed by RESL. Arrangements have been made with RESL to supply a spiked liquid sample to the licensee to test this new procedure.
b.
August, 1981 Split Collected liquid, gas, particulate and charcoal samples were analyzed by the licensee and by NRC inspectors using the Region III Mobile Laboratory.
In addition, an NBS traceable spiked air particulate filter and an NBS traceable spiked charcoal cartridge were analyzed by the licensee at the request of the inspector.
Thirteen of sixteen onsite comparisons met the established criteria for agreement or possible agreement. The three disagreements were I-131 on a collected charcoal adsorber and Xe-133 and Kr-85m in a collected offgas sample.
,
The licensee's I-131 results for a collected charcoal cartridge were nonconservative (low) both in this comparison and in the 1980 comparison (Section 2a). However, his analyses of the spiked cartridge furnished by the inspector was conservative in
the I-131 energy range. This variance suggests that the licensee's charcoal standard does not approximate the deposition on the
'
collected cartridge. Moreover, his counting procedure does not attempt to compensate for a deposition anomaly by a technique such as rotating the cartridge during counting.
- The licensee agreed to recalibrate his charcoal adsorber geometry using fresh NBS traceable material and a counting technique that compensates for nuclide deposition. This will be used as an interim basis while making a study to determine a best permanent calibration / counting procedure. The interim procedure will be implemented within 30 days and the final procedure within 90 days of the receipt of fresh source material.
The licensee was conservative (high) by a factor of about 1.6 in his analysis of Xe-133 and Kr-85m in a collected offgas sample.
The reason appears to be the licensee's failure to apply self absorption correction factors to correct from his liquid calibra-tion standard to gas.
When this was taken into account, the
~
disagreements improved to possible agreements. The licensee agreed to recalibrate his gas geometry including the incorporation of self absorption factors within 30 days of the receipt of fresh source material.
-3-
-
.
.
.
.
An overall review of t;.a licensee's results suggests skewed
.
efficiency curves in the low energy region. This was seen in the licensee's results for Xe-133 (81 kev) and Kr-85m (151 kev)
in gas and for Co-57 (122 kev) on the spiked filter and charcoal samples. The licensee agreed to complete a redetermination of energy efficiency curves for all his counting geometries within 45 days of receipt of fresh source material.
When these recalibrations are completed, spiked samples will be sent to the licensee for analysis.
As the licensee's commitments are met and he determines that the system problems have been corrected, Region III will supply or
arrange for spiked samples to be sent to the site for analyses and further comparisons which will be reported later.
3.
Radiological Environmental Monitoring Thelicensee'sEnviro97entalMonitoringProgramremainsthesameas described previously.- The inspectors reviewed the July 1 through December 31, 1980 portion of the 1980 LACBWR Environmental Monitoring Report. The only positive result for I-131 in milk appeared to be properly characterized as resulting from bomb testing by the Peoples Republic of China.
The inspectors visited selected environmental sample stations.
Equip-I ment was operating properly.
It was noted by the inspectors that the thermoluminescent (TLD) package at location 6, the entrance to a trailer court, was inside of the metal housing. The possibility of not quantifying low energy nuclides during a release.was discussed with the licensee. He stated that this TLD is so located because of previous. instances of theft when they have been mcunted external to the housing. The licensee further stated that backup TLDs are located on residences in the trailer court. The inspectors have no further questions regarding this matter.
.
The inspectors reviewed an item identified by the Resident Inspectors, namely, the calibration of the environmental air sample flow meters.
The licensee has a flow meter with an NBS traceable calibration which was used to calibrate a field calibrator which in turn is used to calibrate the air sample flow meters. Although the flow meters were i
calibrated in May, 1981, and a correction factor-placed in the calibra-tion book, these factors were not being applied to the air flows used
I in calculating environmental concentrations. With the exception of this correction factor, the remainder of data and calculations used to determine environmental concentrations were correct. The licensee agreed to revise his procedures to ensure use of the correction factor
~
and to train the Health Physics Technicians in its use.
,
,
1/ I&E Inspection Report 50-409/80-08
.
P-4-
.
.
.
.
.
i 4.
Exit Interview
,
The inspectors met with licensee representatives (denoted in Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of this inspection on August 28, 1981. 'The inspectors summarized the scope of the inspection and the findings.
The licensee acknowledged the inspectors' findings and agreed to:
Review all factors involved in the Sr-90 analyses and apply a a.
factor to the results until a solution to the problem is imple-mented, b.
Recalibrate all GeLi system geometries with fresh NBS traceable source material, c.
Implement an interim counting technique for charcoal adsorbers while investigating an appropriate permanent procedure, d.
Ensure the use of air flow correction factors through appropriate procedure revision and technician training, e.
Report the results of spike samples submitted to test the new calibrations and of the liquid split for gross beta, tritium and strontium to Region III.
Attachments:
1.
Attachment 1, Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements 2.
Table I, Confirmatory Measurements Program Results, 3rd Qtr. 1980 3.
Table II, Confirmatory Measurements Program Results, 3rd Qtr. 1981
-
-5-
F
,-
.
>
.
.
ATTACHMENT 1
.
CRITERIA FOR CnMPARING 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 judgment limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Leboratory'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 agree =ent should 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 inte which the ratio fits for the resolution being used.
RESOLUTION RKi10 = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible Agreement Agreenent "A" Agreeable "B"
<3 No Comparison No Comparison No Comparison 2.5 0. 3
- 3.0 No Comparison
>3 and <4 0.4
-
T4 and <8 0.5 -
2. 0 0.4
- 2.5 0.3 3.0
-
T8 and <16 0.6 2.5 1,67 0.5 2.0 0.4
-
-
-
T16 and <51 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 1.67 0.5 2.0
-
-
551 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - * 33 0.6 1.67
-
.
T200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 1.33 1.25 0.75
-
-
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma spectrometry, where principal gamma energy used for identifi-cation is greater than 250 kev.
T'r'Itium analyses of liquid samples.
'
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Gamma spectrometry, where principal ganna energy used for identifi-cation,e less than 250 kev.
i
-
Sr-89 and Sr-90 determinations.
Cross beta, where samples are counted on the same date using the same reference nuclide.
.
.
<
b
.
-
.
.
.
"
,
.
TAHLE 'l U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COM'd 3SI ON
'
0FFICE OF INSPtCTION AND ENF ORCEMENT CONFIRMATORY ME(SUREMENTS PROGRAM
-
FACILITYI LACbWR FOR THE 3 QUARTER OF 1980
NRC-------
---LICENSEE-----
--- Lac (A/5 L t- ! dP6---
SAMPLL ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T
L dASTE H3 8.1E-03 4.0E-05 8.1E-03 0.0 1.0E+00 2.0E+02 A
SR 90
'4.9E-07 3.0E-08 1.3E-07 5.6E-08 2.7E-01 1.6E+01
BETA-1.2E-04 4.0E-06 3.5E-04 0.0 2.9E+00 3.0E+01
CE 144 7.4E-06 1.2E-06 8.4E-06 0.0 1.1E+00 6.2E+00 A-CS 134 6.2E-06 3.5E-07 6.9E-06 0.0 1.1E+00 1.8E+01 A
CS 137 2.5E-05 8.6E-07 2.9E-05 0.0 1.2E+00 2.9E+01 A
CO 58 1.2E-05 5 8E-0T 1.5E-05 0.0 1.2E+00 2.1E+01 A
CO 60 8.5E'-05 2.5E-06 9,0E-05 0.0 1.1E+00 3.4E+01 A
C FILTER I 131 3.3E-03 1 7 -04 1.1E-03
3.3E-01 1.9E+01 C
.
T TL51 RESULTS AeAbHLEMENT D=015 AGREEMENT PcPOSSIBLE AGREEMENT N2ND COMPARISON
.
9 e
-
-
._._--.._-
. -..
.
- - - - - - -
..
.
.
.
.
T AbLE IE U $ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM FACILITYt LACBWR FOR THE 3 QUARTER OF 1981
NRC-------
---LICENSEE-----
---Licr4Cf62 9 Ate---
SAMPLL ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T
OFF GAS XE 133 1.1E-02 4.5E-05 1.8E-02 4.0E-05 1.6E+00 2.4E+02
XE 133M 5.0E-04 5.2E-05 9.0E-04 4.6E-05 1.8E+00 9.6E+00 P
AE 135 3.7E-02 7.2E-05 4.7E-02 4.9t-05 1.3E+00 5.1E+02 P
KR BbH 2.8E-03 3.1E-05 4.8E-03 2.9E-05 1.7E+00 9.0E+01
KR 87 2.1E-03 4 5E-04 2.1E-03 2.5E-04 1.0E+00 4.7E+00 A
nR 88 5.3E-03 1 5E-04 7.8E-03 1.4E-04 1.5E+00 3.5E+01 P
L cab 1E CO 60 2.5E-05 5 7E-07 2.3E-05 2.8E-07 9.2E-01 4.4E+01 A
CS 137 1.6E-05 3 2E-07 1 8E-05 2.3E-07 1.1E+00 5.0E+01 A
CS 134 2 8E-06 2 3E-07 2 2E-06 9.8E-08 7.9E-01 1.2E+01 A
P FILTEH BA 140 1 2E-03 5 2E-05 1.0E-03 2.7E-05 8.3E-01 2.3E+01 A
C FILLER 1 131 1.7E-03 3.0E-05 1.2E-03 2.3E-05 7.1E-01 5.7E+01
1 133 2 6E-03 4.4E-04 1 3E-03 4.4E-05 5.0E-01 5.9E+00 P
F SPIKED CO 57 4.4E+03 5 0E+01 6.1E+03 0.0 1.4E*00 8.8E*01 P
CS 137 2.5E+04 3.0E+02 3.0E+04 0.0 1.2E+00 8.3E+01 A
CO 60 3.9E+04 4.0E+02 4.8E+04 0.0 1.2E+00 9.8E+01 A
AM 24l 2.6E+03 3.0E+01 2.9E+03 0.0 1.1E+00 8.7E+01 A
.
i TEST RESULTS:
,
'
acAGHtEMENT DoD15 AGREEMENT PnPOSSIBLE AGREEMENT NONO COMPARISON
.
O S
,