IR 05000416/1985030

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Insp Rept 50-416/85-30 on 850812-16.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Radwaste Sys Startup Testing & Radiochemistry QC & Confirmatory Measures, Including Lab QC Program & Procedures & Instructions
ML20135F090
Person / Time
Site: Grand Gulf Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 08/30/1985
From: Gloersen W, Kuzo G, Stoddart P
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20135F081 List:
References
50-416-85-30, NUDOCS 8509170148
Download: ML20135F090 (16)


Text

{{#Wiki_filter:9 [p2 Mo o UNITED STATES 'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION .l' " ", ^ REGION 11

  1. '

h . 101 MARIETTA STREET, N.W.

  • ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

%.... / SEP 0 31985 - Report No.: 50-416/85-30 Licensee: Mississippi Power and Light Company Jackson, MS 39205 Docket No.: 50-416 License No.: NPF-29 Facility Name: Grand Gulf Inspection Conducted: August 12-16, 1985 Inspectors: bim,b.Ys 3D bd G8 G. B. KVzo {\\ Date Signed .f3

inn b h jf/A.td h9i b W. B. Gloersen 0 DateJSigned Accompanying Pers el: J. 4 Harris Approved by: - ddbY M 8 P.'G. SFoddart; Section Chief (Acting) Date Signed Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection involved 112-inspector-hours onsite in the areas of radwaste system startup testing, and radiochemistry quality control and confirmatory measurements including review of the laboratory quality control program; review of procedures and instructions; review of quality control records and logs; review of the counting room and chemistry laboratory facilities; results of split samples analyzed by the licensee and the NRC Region II Mobile Laboratory; whole-body counter measurements using a fission product phantom; and review of radwaste systems.

Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

h5000 -

F

. Mississippi Power and Light Company

cc w/ encl: 0. D. Kingsley, Vice President Nuclear Operations J. E. Cross, General Manager L. F. Dale, Director, Nuclear Licensing and Safety R. T. Lally, Manager of Quality Assurance Middle South Services, Inc.

R. B. McGehee, Esquire Wise, Carter, Child, Steen and Caraway N. S. Reynolds, Esquire Bishop, Liberman, Cook, Purcell & Reynolds R. W. Jackson, Project Engineer .

. - . .. . . .

. , REPORT DETAILS i 1.

Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

  • R. F. Rogers, Technical Assistant
  • C. R. Hutchinson, Manager, Plant Maintenance
  • J. V. Parrish, Chemistry Radiation Protectio.i Superintendent
  • P. B. Wedgeworth, Chemistry Specialist
  • A. N. Holbrook, Chemistry Supervisor

'

  • J. M. Lassetter, Chemistry Specialist
  • D. F. Cotton, Health Physicist

,

  • D. F. Mahoney, Senior Auditor
  • L. F. Daughtery, Compliance Superintendent
  • J. D. Bailey, Compliance Coordinator R. A. Fielder, Senior Radiochemist L. A. Hughes, Health Physicist

) Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, and office ' personnel.

NRC Resident Inspectors , i

  • R. C. Butcher
  • J. L. Caldwell
  • Attended exit interview 2.

Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 16, 1985, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above. Two inspector followup items

concerning improved procedural details (Paragraph 6.b.) and quality control checks far the whole-body counting system (Paragraph 9) were discussed.

Licensee management representative acknowledged the inspectors' comments and expressed no contrary opinions.

The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspection.

3.

Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (0 pen) 50-416/84-52-01: Inadequate information on deposition or loss of particulate and radiciodine aerosols in long sampling lines. This item was not reviewed during this inspection.

4.

Laboratory Quality Control Program (84725) The inspectors reviewed selected portions of the radiochemistry Quality Assurance (QA) program against Regulatory Guide 4.15, ' Quality Assurance for . - - . -. - - . - - - .

.

Radiological Monitoring Programs."

The inspectors noted that management organization and approved procedures for the radiochemistry and counting room QA program met the general guidance of Regulatory Guide 4.15.

No violations or deviations were identified.

5.

Audits (84725) Technical Specification 6.5.2.8 requires audits of unit activities to be performed under the cognizance of the Safety Review Committee (SRC) encompassing the radiological environmental monitoring prograra and the results thereof at least once per 12 months; the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and implementing procedures at least once per 24 months; and the performance of activities required by the Quality Assurance Program to meet the criteria of Regulatory Guide 4.15, February 1979, at least once per 12 months.

The inspectors reviewed the following audit reports: . a.

QA Audit Report MAR 84/0194, Unit 1, 12/5/84.

b.

QA Audit Report MAR 85/0004, Unit 1, 3/20/85.

c.

QA Audit Report MAR 85/0071, Unit 1, 7/17/85.

d.

QA Audit Report MAR 85/0084, Unit 1, 7/2/85.

e.

QA Audit Report MAR 85/0089, Unit 1, 8/8/85.

The inspectors discussed the audits and reviewed corrective actions taken by the licensee. The inspectors noted that, in general, corrective actions had been taken or were being followed systematically to resolve items of concern.

No violations or deviations were identified.

6.

Procedures (84725) a.

Techn cal Specification 6.8.1 requires written procedures to be i established implemented and maintained covering,the applicable procedures recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978; Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Program; and the Quality Assurance Program for effluent and environmental monitoring, using the guidance in Regulatory Guide 4.15, February 1979.

The inspectors reviewed the following precedures: (1) 06-CH-SD-17-SA-0020, Radwaste Building Ventilation Gaseous Monitor Calibration, Rev. 21, 4/11/84.

(2) 06-CH-1821-SU-0005, Reactor Coolant Startup Chemistry, Rev. 21, 7/8/85.

(3) 06-CH-1821-SA-0025, Reactor Coolant E-Bar Determination, Rev. 20, 5/10/85.

(4) 06-CH-1017-A-0021, Containment Building Ventilation Gaseous Monitor Calibration, Rev. 20, 4/12/84.

_ - - ,

. . i .

(5) 06-CH-1D17-A-0022, Turbine Building Ventilation Gaseous Monitor ' Calibration, Rev. 20, 4/10/84.

(6) 06-CH-1017-A-0024, Offgas Post Treatment Gaseous Monitor Calibration, Rev. 24, 5/1/85.

(7) 06-CH-IN64-M-0033, Offgas Post Treatment Exhaust Gaseous Isotopic, ' Rev. 25, 3/5/85.

(8) 08-S-02-32, Evaluation of In-Vivo Bioassay Results, Rev.

1, 12/31/84.

(9) 08-S-03-01, Qualification of Chemistry Program, Rev. 7, 7/14/84.

(10) 08-S-03-10, Chemistry Sampling Program, Rev. 4, 9/1/84.

(11) 08-S-03-15, Intralaboratory Monitoring Programs, Rev.1, 6/7/85.

(12) 08-S-03-20, Interlaboratory Monitoring Program, Rev. O, 3/13/82.

(13) 08-S-03-120, Germanium System Calibration Summary, Rev.

1, 1/13/84.

(14) 08-S-04-9, Obtaining Liquid Samples, Rev. 4, 1/29/85.

(15) 08-5-04-14, Sample Preparation and Counting, Rev. 3, 6/21/83.

(16) 08-S-04-200, Operation of Germanium Counting System, Rev.

2, 12/6/84.

(17) 08-S-04-206, Operation and Calibration Instruction for PCC11TIDS-3, Rev. 3, 12/6/84.

(18) 08-S-04-207, Operation of Tri-Carb 460C Liquid Scintillation, Rev.

4, 5/3/85.

(19) 08-S-04-626, Iron 55/59, Calibration and Analysis, Rev.

5, 5/20/85.

' (20) 08-S-04-633, Gross Alpha Determination, Rev. O, 3/13/81.

(21) 08-S-04-634, Liquid Tritium Samples, Rev. 3, 1/16/84.

(22) 08-S-04-648, Gaseous Tritium, Rev. 2, 4/5/84.

, (23) 08-S-04-651, Gaseous Isotopic Analysis, Rev. O, 6/24/82.

(24) 08-S-07-23, Operation and Calibration of the WBC-6000 Whole Body Counter, Rev. O, 7/30/85.

.. -

. --_ - -- .- -. - . __ .. - _ _. ~ . ?

, i

(25) 08-S-07-29, Operatior; and Calibration of the Tennelex LB5100, Rev. 2, 7/30/S3.

b.

The inspectors discussed results of the procedure review with cognizant l licensee representatives as noted below. The inspectors noted that the !, following areas should be evaluated: . (1) All procedures detailing use of the gamma spectroscopy systems l should list the appropriate limits and precautions for analyses, l e.g., dead time limits.

(2) Procedures detailing quantitative analyses should detail placement of samples, e.g., position of charcoal cartridge for gamma } spectroscopy analysis.

(3) Procedures detailing efficiency calibrations should ensure that

the most appropriate nuclide source for existing plant ! contaminants is utilized, e.g., efficiency calibration sources i used for proportional counting systems should be representative of

major plant beta emitting contaminants.

(4) Procedures to determine compliance with Lower Limit of Detection Technical Specifications for effluent measurements are needed.

I (5) Details of the procedures describing the intra-and interlabora-tory monitoring programs should be updated to reflect the current ! program.

i Licensee representatives egreed to evaluate these areas and review all j chemistry / radiochemistry procedures to improve the overall program.

The

inspectors informed licensee representatives that this evaluation of the chemistry and radiochemistry procedures would be considered an inspector i followup item and would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection ! (50-416/85-30-01).

7.

Records (84725) , a.

The inspectors reviewed selected portions of the.following records: (1) Gamma Spectroscopy System Detector Nos.1, 2, 3, and 4 Quality Control Logs for January - August 1985 including: " ! (a) Daily Centroid Check i (b) Daily Rosolution Check ! (c) Daily Efficiency Check ] (d) Weekly Background Check . !

(2) NMC PCTII Proportional Counter Nos. 4305 and 4306 Quality Control ! Records for January - August 1085 including: i i

, ., _ -,.. -, -,. _,. , _. _. - - .__..--_.~.-,._.-_--___~..._%~.,,m.

, ,m____,, ms - _ _ _,..-, _..,,._,-r.-m


~rm,-.,m,.

- .

. -

(a) Voltage Plateaus (b) Dead Time Curves (c) Chi Squared Test (d) Performance Check (e) Background Check (3) Tricarb 460C Quality Control Records and Calibration Data for H-3 and Fe-55 analyses for January - August 1985 including: (a) Quench Curves (b) Performance Checks (c) Background Checks (4) Annual Gamma Spectroscopy System Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 Efficiency Calibrations for the following geometries: 14cc Offgas Vial, 4300 cc Marinelli Beaker; Stainless Steel Planchet; 47 mm Millipore Filter; Face-loaded Charcoal Cartridge; One Dram Vial; 1 Liter Polybottle; I Liter Marinelli Beaker.

(5) Standard Radionuclide Source Certificates i (6) Interlaboratory Monitoring Results 1984 - August 1985.

(7) Chemistry and Radiochemistry Intralaboratory Monitoring Results, 1984 - 1985.

(8) 1984 - August 1985 Effluent Gas Sample Gamma Spectroscopy analyses for the following: (a) Turbine Building Vent (b) Offgas Pretreatment (c) Containment Vent Results of the record review were discussed with cognizant licensee representatives as noted in Paragraphs 7.b - c.

b.

The inspectors discussed H-3 analyses and results of previous inter-laboratory crosscheck determinations.

The inspectors noted that results for the NRC spiked sample and crosscheck results were biased low.

Licensee representatives informed the inspectors that they would evaluate this area and would make the proper corrections if needed.

c.

The inspectors reviewed gamma spectroscopy Gaseous Effluent Grab sample analyses to determine licensee compliance to approved procedures and Technical Specification Lower Limits of Detection (LLD) requirements for gaseous effluent sampling and analyses. The inspectors noted that LLD limits were attained for all samples analyzed.

No violations or deviations were identified.

. m - r --

- .

8.

Confirmatory Measurements (84725) a.

During the inspection, reactor coolant and selected liquid and gaseous plant effluent process streams were sampled and the resultant sample matrices analyzed for radionuclide concentrations using licensee and NRC Region II Laboratory gamma-ray spectroscopy systems. The purpose of these comparative measurements was to verify the licensee's capability to measure radionuclides accurately in various plant systems. Analyses were conducted utilizing as many of the licensee's gamma spectroscopy systems as practicable.

Sample types and counting geometries included the following: reactor coolant sample, dram vial; liquid waste, 1 liter marinelli beaker; pretreatment offgas, 14 cc vial; post treatment offgas (simulated), 4300 cc marinelli beaker.

Spiked particulate and charcoal cartridge sample types were provided for analyses in lieu of licensee samples which did not have sufficient levels of activity for analysis.

Comparisons of licensee and NRC results are listed in Table 1 with the acceptance criteria listed in Attachment 1.

All results were in agreement.

b.

The inspectors noted that the licensee was provided with a simulated liquid was:e sample by the NRC contract laboratory and was requested to complete radiochemical analyses for H-3, Fe-55, Sr-89 and Sr-90.

Comparison of licensee and NRC results are listed in Table 2 with the acceptance criteria listed in Attachment 1.

Results were in agreement for H-3, Sr-89, Sr-90 and in disagreement for Fe-55.

The inspectors noted that previous NRC Fe-55 capability tests (50-416/82-49) and licensee Fe-55 interlaboratory crosscheck results (Paragraph 7.a) were

in agreement.

Licensee representatives stated that another Fe-55 interlaboratory crosscheck analysis would be completed and the results monitored closely.

No violations or deviations were identified.

9.

Use of Fission Product Phantom for Checking Whole-body Counter Measurements (84725) During this inspection, the inspectors verified the licensee's capability to perform radiological bioassays using their whole-body counting system. A fission product phantom containing radioactive sources was provided to the licensee.

The phantom duplicated nuclide organ burdens that the licensee might encounter during normal operations.

The phantom was analyzed using the licensee's normal methods and equipment.

The licensee's whole-body cuunting system consisted of a standard chair geometry and Nuclear Data electronics coupled to three Nal detectors for the thyroid, lungs and lower torso. The inspectors reviewed licensee procedures for operating and calibrating the whole-body counting system (Paragraph 6.a).

Calibrations were conducted using vendor supplied block phantoms for the thyroid, lungs, and lower torso.

The licensee used individual Sn-113, Y-88, Co-60, Cs-137, and Ce-139 sources for calibration.

The inspectors reviewed cross check results, quarterly efficiency . . . . .. . . . . ... . . . . .

- --. .___. - - - -. - . i l

l calibrations, ano daily QA records including calibration checks conducted from January 2 to August 13, 1985.

The inspectors noted that the licensee did not have a program for the determination of the background counting rate

and/or response checks to monitor whole-body system operability.

Licensee representatives and the inspectors discussed the plotting of these data with ' the appropriate control limits to allow improved monitoring of system responses.

Licensee representatives agreed to evaluate this area.

The ' ' inspectors informed cognizant licensee representatives that this would be considered an inspector followup item and would be reviewed during a subsequent inspection (50-416/85-30-02).

. The results of the intercomparison are presented in Table 3.

The results were based on an average of five measurements. All licensee measurements, i calculated using vendor supplied software, were biased high, ranging from 8 - 74% above the known values.

Body burdens manually calculated using

licensee computational methods also were biased high, ranging from 18 to 107% above the known values.

Licensee representatives agreed to evaluate

the differences between the two computational methods, i i 10.

Radwaste System Startup (84521) a.

During this inspection, the inspectors reviewed initial chemical and radiochemical tests, reactor coolant water quality, effluent releases, and laboratory checks of effluert monitors in accordance with selected

i Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) commitments, licensee procedures, and/or Technical Specification requirements.

The reactor was at 90 - 100% power at the time, of the inspection and had been at that level for ,

approximately 60 days.

I < l b.

Section 14.2.10.2 of the FSAR describes the startup test program, l

specifically, the reactor coolant chemistry tests and radiation surveys i that are made at each principal test leyel during power ascension from approximately 25 to 100 percent of rated output. Section 14.2.12.3.1

of the FSAR describes the startup test procedure for the chemical and ' radiochemical tests.

Section 14.2.12.3.36 of the FSAR describes the j startup test procedures for the N64 offgas system.

The inspectors reviewed the test records and radiochemical 90 - 100%

power testing (No. 1-000-SU-01-6, Rev. 2) and the offgas system, Test l Condition 6 (No. 1-N64-SU-74-6, Rev. 1). The inspectors noted that all

the required tests had been completed; however, the final report

packages were in preparation at the time of this inspection. Records reviewed by the inspectors included test results for the chemical and radiochemical quality of the reactor feedwater, amount of radiolytic gas in steam, gaseous activities leaving the air ejectors, performance ! of filters and demineralizers, stack monitor calibration, and liquid

effluent line monitor calibrations, l Technical Specification Table 3.4.4-1 establishes the maximum reactor c.

coolant system chemistry limits for chlorides, conductivity, and pH.

i Sampling frequencies are specified in Technical Specification 4.4.4.

i l

.

. _.._.

-- - -. _.. - .

, Additionally, Technical Specification 3.4.5 requires the specific activity of the primary coolant to be limited to: ' (1) less than or equal to 0.2 microcuries per gram Dose Equivalent I-131, and (2) less than or equal to 100/E-bar microcuries per gram.

Technical Specification Table 4.4.5-1 specifies primary coolant sampling and analysis frequencies for gross beta and gamma activity deterrc,inations, isotopic analysis for Dose Equivalent I-131 concentra-tions, radiochemical E-bar determinations, isotopic analysis for iodine, and isotopic analysis for offgas samples including, at minimum, quantitative measurements for Xe-133, Xe-135, and Kr-88.

< ! The inspectors reviewed selected records and trend charts for the period January 1 to August 13, 1985, and verified that the required tests were performed at the specified frequencies.

In addition, the inspectors discussed E-bar determinations with the licensee.

The inspectors noted that the above parameters were within Technical Specification limits.

d.

Regulatory Guide 1.68, " Initial Test Programs for Water-Cooled Reactor Power Plants, requires tests to verify the response of installed process and effluent monitors by laboratory analyses of grab samples from process or effluent streams.

The inspectors discussed with licensee representatives comparisons of effluent readings against known effluent concentrations. The inspectors reviewed selected records for the turbine building vent, containment building vent, and liquid radwaste effluent line monitor comparisons covering the period January I to June 1985.

In addition to the above areas, the inspectors reviewed channel calibration records for the radioactive liquid and selected gaseous effluent monitoring instrumentation channels as required by Technical Specifications 4.3.7.11 and 4.3.7.12, respectively.

The inspectors verified that the required calibrations had been performed at the prescribed intervals.

e.

The liquid and gaseous radioactive waste processing, storage, and release systems are described in FSAR Sections 11.2 and 11.3.

Startup of the liquid and gaseous (offgas system) radwaste systems had been completed prior to this inspection.- The inspectors accompanied by a licensee representative, examined the liquid and gaseous radwaste facilities.

The inspectors reviewed radwaste system procedures for system startup and for routine operation.

System performance and evaluation during startup appeared to be in accordance.with FSAR ~ commitments and with established and approved plant procedures.

No violations or deviations were identified.

, L i.

, - y -- -.- -,, -m,-r, e

--- . -- -- . .

. , t , '- . [. F lv

t, TABLE 1 --

RESULTS'0F CAMMA SPECTROSCOPY CONFIRMATORY MEASUR[MENTS AT CRAND CULF NUCLEAR STATION - AUGUST 12-16, 1985 l ' C_0]iCENTRAT103 (uCi/cc) , RAIL 0 SAMPLE ISOTOPE LICENSEE NfLC (!ESot U T l0N L ICE NSE E/NR_Q COMPARISON - (1) Reactor Coolant C r-51 5.17-E-3 3.5811.14 E-3

1.14 Ag reemen t

! ' (Dram Vial) Mn-56 4.31 E-2 4.7110.10 E-2

0.92 Agreement 8.1910.17 E-3

0.76 Ag reement Tc-99m 3.20 E-3

, . (2) Reactor Coolant - C r-51 5. 0l4 E-3 3.5811.114 E-3

1. 14 1 Ag reement - (Dram Via I ) Mn-56-4. 214 E-2 4.7110.10 E-2 14 7 0.90 Ag reemen t ' Tc-99m 3.35 E-3 4.1910.17 E-3

0.80 Agreement l (4) Reactor Coolant C r-51 4.34 E-3 3.5811.14 E-3

1.21 Agreement (Dram Vial) Mn-56 4.16 E-2 4.7110.10 E-2

0.88 Ag reemeret . Tc-99m 3.16 E-3 4.1910.17 E-3 25-0.75 Ag reemen t < (1) Liquid Waste C r-51 7.61 E-4 9.3610.11 E-te

0.81 Ag reement (1 L Marinelli) Mn-54 4.41 E-5 4.2510.12 E-5

1.04 Ag reement ! , Mn-56 2.36 E-4 2.4710.02 E-4 124 0.96 Agreement ,

Co-58 3.87 E-5 3.5110.11 E-5

1.10 Agreement re-59 4.10 E-5 3.5410.24 E-5

1.16 Agreement , Co-60 2.00 E-5 2.0010.12 E-5

1.00 Ag reemen t I-131 6.01 E-6 5.8010.85 E-6

1.04 Ag reement (3) Liquid Waste 'Cr-51 7.83 E-4 9.3610.11 E-4

0.84 Ag reement (1 L Marinelli) Mn-54 4.79 E-5 4.2510.12 E-5

1.13 Ag reement i Mn-56 2.44 E-4 2.4710.02 E-4 124 0.99 Ag reement ! Co-58 4.14 E-5 3.5110.11 E-5

1.18 Agreement i re-59 4.33 E-5 3.5410.24 E-5

1.22 Ag reement Co-60 2.35 E-5 2.00fG.12 E-5

1.18 Ag reement 1-133 6.07 E-6-5.8010,85 E-6

1.05 Agreement (4) Liquid Waste C r-51 7.73 E-4 9.3610.11 E-14

0.82 Ag reement

(1 L Marinelli) Mn-54 4.40 E-5 4.2510.12 E-5

1.04 Agreement Mn-56 2.29 E-14 2.4710.02 E-14 1 284 0.93 Ag reement ' Co-58 3.63 E-5 3.5110.11 E-5

1.03 Ag reement Fe-59 4.11.E-5 3. 58410.11 E-5

1.16 Ag reement ' Co-60 2.14 E-5 2.0010.12 E-5

1.07 Agreement I-133 5.39 E-6 5.8010.85 E-6

0.93 Ag reement ' i .)

!

.. . . .-. , -. . -. _ -

_. _ _ _ _ _. -. _ _ _ _.. - _ - - . . JABLE 1 (cont'dj CONCENTRATION (uCi/cc) Rail 0 SAMPLE I SOTO PL LICENSEl _NJ1Q RESOLUTION LICENSEE /NRC COMPARISOff (1) Particulate Filter Co-60 9.21 E-3 1.0410.02 E-2

0.88 Agreement Cs-137 1.17 E-2 1.29t0.02 E-2

0.91 Agreement (2) Pa rticulate Filter Co-60 9.53 E-3 1.0410.02 E-2

0.92 Ag reement Cs-137 1.19 E-2 1.2910.02 E-2

0.92 Ag reement (3) Pa rticulate Filter Mn-54 3.69 E-3 4.3410.19 E-3

0.85 Ag reemen t Co-60 1.92 E-2 2.0610.03 E-2

0.93 Ag reemen t Cs-137 1.26 E-2 1.3010.02 E-2

0.97 Ag reemen t Ce-144 8.31 E-3 8.8510.30 E-3

0.94 Ag reemen t (4) Pa rticulate Fil ter Mn-54 4.16 E-3 4.3410.19 E-3

0.96 Ag reemen t Co-60 1.93 E-2 2.0610.03 E-2

0.94 Agreement Cs-137 1.25 E-2 1.3010.02 E-2

0.96 Agreement Co-144 8.31 E-3 8.8510.30 E-3

0.90 Agreement (1) Cha rcoa l Ca rtridge Ba-133 4.62 E-2 4.6510.04 E-2 116 0.99 Ag reemen t (Face Loaded) (3) Cha rcoa l Cartridge Ba-133 4.61 E-2 4.6510.04 E-2 116 0.99 Ag reemen t (Face Luaded) (2) Cha rcoa l Ca rt ri dge Co-57 8.81 E-4 9.5610.43 E-4

0.92 Ag reement ( Face Loaded) Co-60 2.16 E-2 2.0010.04 E-2

1.08 Ag reemen t Y-88 7.13 E-4 6.7510.90 E-4

1.06 Agreement Cd-109 5.19 E-2 5.2610.16 E-2

0.99 Ag reemen t Cs-137 2.21 E-2 2.1110.03 E-2

1.05 Agreement (4) Cha rcoa l Ca rt ri dge Co-57 1.00 E-3 9.5610.43 E-4

1.05 Agreement (Face Loaded) Co-60 2.12 E-2 2.0010.04 E-2

1.06 Ag reement Y-88 6.52 E-4 6.7510.90 E-4

0.96 Agreement Cd-109 4.64 E-2 5.2610.16 E-2

0.88 Ag reemen t Cs-137 2.31 E-2 2.1110.03 E-2

1.09 Ag reemen t (1) Off Cas K-87 3.41 E-6 3.8710.23 E-6

0.88 Agreement (4300 cc Marinelli) Xo-135m 9.76 E-6 8.7010.61 E-6

1.12 Agreement Xo-135 1.42 E-6 1.3310.04 E-6

1.07 Ag reemen t Xe-138 5.26 E-5 4. 3410.2 7 E-5

1.21 Agreement (2) Of f Ca s K-87 3.86 E-6 3.8710.23 E-6

1.00 Ag reement (4300 cc Marinelli) Xe-135m 1.04 E-5 8.7010.61 E-6

1.19 Ag reemen t Xe-135 1.52 E-6 1.3310.04 E-6

1.14 Agreement Xe-138 5.81 E-5 4.3410.27 E-5

1.33 Agreement ,

. . TAntE 1 f r' ant 'd ) CONCLNTRAT ION (uCi/cc) RATIO SAMPil ISOTOPE LLClNS[[ BRQ RL50LU(10N }Jg[MS([ggtQ GOMPARISON (1) Off Gas Pretreatment Kr-87 3.09 E-3 2.8110.11 E-3

1.10 Ag reemen t (14 cc Vial) Kr-88 1,49 E-3 1.6410.11 E-3

0.91 Agreement Xe-135m 8.02 E-3 7.1310.29 E-3

1.12 Ag reement Xe-135 1.34 E-3 1.3410.016 E-3

1.00 Agreement Xe-138 3.97 E-2 3.5410.10 E-2

1.12 Ag reemen t (2) Of f Gas Protreatment Kr-87 3.38 E-3 2.8110.11 E-3

1.20 Ag reement (14 cc Vial) Kr-88 1.63 E-3 1.6410.11 E-3

0.99 Agreement Xe-135m 8.50 E-3 7.1310.29 E-3

1.19 Ag reemen t Xe-135 1.55 E-3 1.3410.04 E-3

1.16 Ag reemen t Xe-138 3.38 E-2 3.5410.10 E-2

0.95 Ag reemen t (4) Off Gas Pretreatment Kr-87 3.18 E-3 2.8110.11 E-3

1.13 Agreement (14 cc Vial) K r-88 1.46 E-3 1.6410.11 E-3

0.89 Agreement Xe-135m 8.45 E-3 7.1310.29 E-3

1.18 Agreement Xe-135 1.47 E-3 1.3410.04 E-3

1.10 Agreement Xe-138 3.72 E-2 3.5410.10 E-2

1.05 Ag reemen t NO Not Detected NC Not Compared

(1) Analyzed Using Gamma Spectroscopy System No. 1 (2) Analyzed Using Gamma Spectroscopy System No. 2 (3) Analyzed Using Gamma Spectroscopy System No. 3 (4) Analyzed Using Gamma Spectroscopy System No. 4 i e e

- - - - - _ - -. _, _ _ - _ _._ _ . .

TABLE 2 RESULIS Of H-3, Fe-55, Sr-89, AND Sr-90 CONF IRMAIORY MEASUREMt NTS AT GRAND GULF NUCLEAR stall 0N - AUGUST 12-16", 1985 QQP(Q[NTRAT IO_rj (uCi/cc) RATIO Hr OLUlLON LLCLPjS[[LNRQ 90MPARlSQtj SAM _f(f J_S0_LOff LLCENSEE NRC J 2.8110.06 E-14 I7 0.87 Agreement Liquid Waste Simulated H-3 2.18 E-84

6

S r-89 5.60 E-6 5.8910.18 E-6

0.95 Ag reemen t Sr-90 9.38 E-7 1.0510.04 E-6

0.89 Ag reemen t Fe-55 1.814 E-14 1.2910.084 E 's

1. 14 3 Di sag reemen t

  • Sample From NRC Contract Laboratory Ma rch - April 1985

_ _ _ _ _ _ __ . - .. . -~ . . MULL 3 RESULTS OF WHOLE BODY COUNTER HEASURIMENTS USING A COMMERCIALLY AVAILABLE FISSION PRODUCT PHANIOM AT GRAND GULF NUCLLAR PLANT AUCUST 13, 1985 NucIide O rga n Licensee (1) HRC Ratto (nCI) (nCi) (Licensee /NRC) Mn-54 Lungs

25 1.16 Co-57 Lungs

42 1.74 l Co-60 Lungs 172 159 1.08 Cs-137 Lungs

84 1.17 1.

Licensee value represents the arithmetic mean or rive measurements, each measurement was counted for 300 seconos.

t

r . .. l Attachment 1 CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS i 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 - f of the NRC's value to its associated uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution", increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurements should be more selective.

Conversely, poorer agreement must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.

RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE i NRC REFERENCE VALUE ' Resolution Agreement ' <4 0.4 - 2.5 4-7 0.5 - 2.0 8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 16 - 50-0.75 - 1.33 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25 >200 0.85 - 1.18 , t

> f ' l i i i I , { ! t $ s, + a ---, -,,y--- r, r+~- ew--- .<w e ns - ---m, - -e,--r--~ -,,. - - -,-n -=-,n,, ., e-v n-w--,,,,,-.-,me-e n-we.

-n u m--~ ,, w n- ~ ,,w- =--c-ne }}