IR 05000456/1990004
| ML20011F027 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Braidwood  |
| Issue date: | 02/13/1990 |
| From: | Holtzman R, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20011F025 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-456-90-04, 50-456-90-4, 50-457-90-04, 50-457-90-4, NUDOCS 9002230479 | |
| Download: ML20011F027 (12) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, n
f O {gg[qr g, q;5 X d J" ' ( Q
.
- s , , - A< i -
?,. - 3, ' s
Ng . .g , t .y g ^- , ,
< + ' x , x;.: . , , q , >
- . ;,
, , m ,,.. , , ,. ~ 1 X '] . % m4 - V.S.D NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION' ' - -, ' . . l_
? 1< REGION:III
' w-
- o %
p ., - . o n - - g.w , ..r s-s , .
? s Report No's.~ 50-456/90004(DRSS); 50 457/90004(DRSS) n - [ f, +- , ~ .$ y . ,,
- -
Docket.Nos.'60-456@0-457 i lLicenseNos.NPF-72iNPF-77" \\
" + '
v y ,._ - -y , nM
- Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company J ' i T,5 , X % . Post Office Box 767 _ - 3; ' ~ Chicago,:IL 60690 . , ./, ;n
.. , ( ideiiit9 Name:- } Braidwood Station', Units 1 and 2 ,
' ,'C$ ' I
- a s m
. . y ' u,c~ A' < - , , . kd; \\' Inspection,Ati Braidwood: Site,Bracevjlle,'IL -. J - - -- . f,~ a
p .. - . .
'
C Wi. ' ' . Ini,pe'ctioni Conducted: " January 16-19, 1990 (On-site) AW 4r ~ January 23 and 30,,1990 (Telephone ~ , Sd '
gg3 9 ' , conversations)'
Q - , [[., , M Me#M&M N g, ' g , . , "% " g ,y ;nspector:s,R.
B. Holtzman yI s pate - ' x. .,n , ,,
'
'
..< j
g
M< N Oi e , "
' ' ~ Approved Byi M. C..SchumacherJ Chief ' ,
Radiological Controls ana-Date ?
/ ' li2 ' ' L hemistry Section= C
, m , , , g/
. ', ix ... i e - , Q "'
- In'spection
- t'Ary .: nW '. f . ^
.:. ,.. 'Inspectic a nuary 16-19,--23 and730, 1990 iReportNos. 50-456/90004(DRSS)L ~
'
- 50-457/900 e, aS)):
. .. ~ ' , , < { AreassInspected: Routine, announced Linspection;of: !(1) the che'mistry program, ' I , ssL including procedures, organization, and training;(IP 79701);3(2); primary and" ',
' !. L - secondary systems water quality control programs (IP 79701);D(3) quality ' ,
l v+ -' assurance / quality control program:in the laboratory (IP 79701); and:
-(4).nonradiological confirmatory measurements (IP 79701);. f ", , Results: TheJ11censee has an extensive water quality contr'ol program.that.
aW - : conforms to:the EPRI Steam Generator Owners and. Primary Systems Guidelines.
< - lThets. team generator (S/G) blowdown-had low levels of chloride and Elfate
, e
,Ywhi'ch were well' within the EPRI^ guidelines,. showing that the relatively new - ' rocess~ instrumentation' included an.
' reactor systems.were cleaned up.= :The
..s 9002230479 900213 s PDR ADDCK 05000456 G PNU ~ c ' s, . y, , . ~ .p $ I - I ... . - (, - , - .w
. , . , ' t. g ,; + .l-+ " , , . . DETAILS ' 1. Persons Coritacted - )w .. . 2 ' R. E. Querio; Station Mahager, Braidwood Station (BWD) D. E. O'Brien,? Technical Superintendent, BWD R. L. Kofron, Production Superintendent, BWD s , - J. R. Petro, Chemistry Supervisor, BWD-2,2W. E. Lloyd, Chemistry Staff BWD t - D. J. Miller, Regulatory Assurance Supervisor, BWD p, Holland, Regulatory Assurance, BWD E. W. Carroll, Rep.'latory Assurance, BWD , . - R. : D. Kyrouac, NQ) Superintendent, Ceco 'J. M.= Watson, NQP Engineer;' Ceco G._ Vickery, Chemist, BWD - ' -p M. Holmes, Chemist, BWD-1 T. E. Taylor, Resident Inspector, NRC- ' s 2Present at the Exit Meeting on January 19, 1990. 2Telep,hore conversations. held on. January 23 and 30, 1990. . , , C .The inspectors also interviewed other licensee personnel in various departments in the course of the inspection.. _ 2. ' Licensee Action on Previous 7.nspection Findings. a ,
a; (Closed) Open Item Nos.(50-456/89004-01; 50-457/89004-01): The ' s,
- l
' licensee split and analyzed a spiked sample of secondary system ' . ,'L, ', water spiked with anions and reported the results for. comparison c > - with those of Brookhaven National Laboratory'(BNL). The results ses for fluoride, chloride and sulfate are presented ' ~ of the analy' Split Cold Chemistry Sample" and the acceptance n; :.1 < ' ' , in Table 1 ' < . criteria in Attachment 1l All three analyses'were in agreement.j ' ti. '(Closed) Open item Nos. (50-456/89004-02; 50-457/89004-02):'
< The licensee to improve the cilica and ion chromatographic-(IC)
-- > in. procedures. The laboratory modified the spectrophotometric procedure for ' analysis of; silica by implementing the use of a - h. 4 - , 5-cm cell for improved precision and accuracy at low concentrations s , .% (50 parts per billion (ppb)). The performance check standard is ' currently 30 ppb aiid t5e lower limit of quantitation is set at ' ' 5 ppb silica. The reliability of the analytical systems was
improved by reducing the uncertainties due to contamination of _ the dilution water. Water blanks from both deionizing water - systems are analyzed daily for various analytes, including fluoride, ~ ~ chloride, sulfate and sodium.- This appears to have eliminated the bias experienced in the chloride confirmatory measurements during s the previous' inspection.2 . -1 Region.III Inspection Report Nos. (50-456/89004; 50/89004)
1 I %: ' . .~ ~ - - - -, - ,
% . . . ' ', , e , u. . .- - ' ' c._ (0 pen) Open Its Nos. (50-456/88026-02; 50-457/88026-02): Licensee
. ' to provide a typort on the effects of the secondary system chemistry
' ' excursion on the steam generators. The licensee did a complete' , oe eddy-current examination of the'S/G tubes in Unit I during the % p recent outage.. Licensee representatives stated that no apparent i4 damage was observed. Similar tests will be done during the upcoming [" refueling outage for Unit 2. The NRC Resident Inspectors will ! ,( review the results of these tests. ' 3. Management Controls, Oraanization, ana Training (IP 79701) n .
L'- The management structure of the Chemistry Department was modified i . somewhat since the previous inspection in this area,2,and the . _ -
'l organization appears to have stabilized. The Department is headed by-i .the Chemistry Supervisor (former title; the Assistant Rad-Chem Supervisor), b who_now has one year of experience in this position. The Lead Chemist and .l ' ' L three Laboratory Supervisors report to him and four chemists / chemical L engineers and four Chemistry Engineering Assistants report to the Lead l Chemist, Currently 13 of the 21 Chemistry Technicians (CT) are qualified.
' , I, as technicians under ANSI N18.1, 1971. A licensee representative stated i that, due to the likely_ loss of the more experienced cts to transfers to ! , other positions in the company, the experience level of the cts is not ' likely to increase. This results in the midnight shift being manned-
only by the.more junior cts (not ANSI qualified). The problem has >
,
been alleviated by having a chemistry staff member on duty at all times. , . , .. The division of the technicians into chemistry and health physics i technicians appears to have'resulted in improved technician proficiency, - y and laboratore continuity. No violations or deviations were identified. , -[ - I [" ; 4, Water Chemistry Control Program (IP 797C1)- ' '
.. > l', Primary system chemistry is controlled by procedure BwCP PD-1, _ e , ? ,s "Braidwood Station Primary Chemistry Program," Revision'2,._ August 23, '
, 1988..It appears to be consistent with' Technical Specifications (T/S)
,4 < U and Westinghouse Criteria and Specification, 1985. The nH is controlled, by a coordinated lithium-boron program to minimize solubility of the . c , .
F protective magnetite coating on.the reactor vessel. 'Use of enriched ' , (99.9%) Li-7 minimizes tritium production in reactor coolant; , ' The secondary system water chemistry control program is' based Lon the: I iE corporate directive N0D-CY.1, "PWR Secondary Water Chemistry Control
>:- r> . Program," Revision'2, July 24, 1989 and implemented in BwCP PD-4, ' + o 't ~"Braidwood Station Secondary Water Chemistry Program," Revision 6, @h ' . ,. December 15,1989. This document commits the licensee to and-is , consistent with the EPRI S/G Owners Group Guidelines; Approval of ' , , waiver to the guidelines has been expanded to include the Nuclear i L Stations Duty Officer.
- .
21 bid. - , , L w,' s . .
, l2 Y-a . , y:, , -- n - - - - - - L 1 4 ' - ., , ,
'
- .;
. . - . ~ ' , ,
q
s- . . r ~ o .In-line process monitors provide data' for secondary water systems, ' ' including condensate, feedwater and main steam. The insP: mentation e , is being-upgraded.' It is tracked by strip chart recorde On the panels- ! - . and Autograph' 800 Dataloggers located in the laboratory; area. The data ! ~ ," are sampled, processed and archived on a computer; they can then be - ,, easily retrieved and'proces;ed, as desired. :This system is being further _ a , , . ^ updated with' improved data processing and expanded storage facilities < ' -(Anatel PC-compatible Hewlett-Packard system). The plant has antin-line , - o < . f Dionex lon Chromatograph on the steam generator blowdown (S/G BD) for - j ' , continuous monitoring of chemistry parameters; a similar system is ready. .- for connection to the secondary system sample panel.-' . i , . b, -, ' ' . < - ,s <- > , The licensee studied the hideout return on both units to estimale the _." ' hl, removal of S/G sludge contaminants, includ$ng rhloride,; sulfate, calcium, f, , , f M,, magnesium, sodium and silica. They found that'the older Model D-4 S/Gs in ' Unit I had more hideout than those of the more recent Model D-5 S/Gs ine ' . < , , ,J Unit 2. The chloride-inventory could be estimated from the 4-hour power, >> , hold, but the time was not long enough for cleanup. The licensoe
- '
> I concluded that no chloride from the September 1988 chemistry e m rsion ' _ y , ' , from the demineralizer exhaustion.was evident in the hideout. " - ', " ' The Makeup Denineralizer system monitoring instrumentation and controls [ ' have been upgraded. Automatic isolation valves on the inlet and outlets i .of the process train stop the' flow of water, e.g., from a vendor
, demineralizer, when high conductivity levels are detected. External ' > sources of demineralized water are also processed and controlled through. l . this system to prevent the: introduction of impure water into the plant. - The water chemistry parameters are monitored daily by Chemistry and-Operations. Monthly, reports are'also submitted to upper management with ,' i monthly and yearly trend charts of significant parameters, including bar i-charts that show the' effects of the various chemistry parameters on the ! - i- , INP0 Chemistry Performance Index (CPI). An extensive set of trend charts ' ' ' for. water quality is maintained by the laboratory with daily. data. A review of. selected data for the' previous year showed that plant water e s quality has improved, i.e., decreased cation conductivity, sulfate -
and-chloride, over that for the previous inspection.8 In Unit 1,-- ' ' over 1989, the various chemistry parameters, including su1 fate, chloride, .,e and conductivity improved, and the CPI was in the highest (best)' quartile r just prior to the refueling outage in August 1989. Unit' 2 showed similar improvements. However,.the inspector noted a concern that the long-term trend charts were based'only on monthly averages, so that short excursions and their occurrence over the long-term were not easily apparent. A. , i licensee representative agreed to implement detailed long-term charts _; t, on the significant parameters, including those for chloride, sulfate, c ' 7. ' conductivity and dissolved oxygen in the secondary system and lithium,- " ~~ -boron and chloride in the RCS. , . With the improvement of the water quality, the plant presently operates the condensate polishers only at startup. A licensee repretentative 8 Ibid. , 4 da .y , ~ r ,f . j e
.; , , ' p .' . y . @ ' '
A ' 'O s . "[, ' stated that water quality was actually improved; sulfate concentrations .
- <,s decreased, and the probability of chemistry excursions due to polisher s
bed breakthrough is reduced. p,
- 4 The water quality control programs appear to be satisfactory and well ruri.
No violations'or deviations were identified. ., >, . 5. Implementation of the Chemistry Program (IP 79701) The inspector reviewed the chemistry programs, ind ed*3g phyr.ical r facilities and laboratory operations. Housekeeping was good and bench Q,,; space was adequate for the' analyses performed. The 1c.boratorios were well i_ equipped. xThe cold laboratory was made a radiologicM(y controlled area to better integrate the hot and cold laboratary operations. {The kboratory L' has four. PC computer-controlled Dionex AI 400 lon Chmutographt,' used for-C ~ <.
. both anion and cation analyses. A Perkin-Elmer Mode 5100 Iwshn Ef feet - L ~ . Atomic Absorption Spectrophotometer (AAS) has been intalled mid will > p' replace the P'E Model 5000 furnace AAS after the procedum are' developed. L A computer database for chemistry parameter and QC rnults ht. just become operational. A hardcopy printed record is produced periodicil'ily as a ", , permanent record. While more development is;to be doni, it oppears to be- ' working well. The_ laboratory has also developed a computor based system - - g for control ~ (Chembase) of all laboratory chemicais it produces a e , >. . control number, directions for reagent preparation, preparbtion.and ~ ' ' expiration dates, and a standard label with the labontory' nbmber.in a? , , I .barcode. Security is maintained by the use of keycanh Lo; produce.an , t 's ' electronic signature for each authorized user. ' ~ . .. ' <, L Overall, the laboratory appeared to b'e adequate for the pmper operation f , ~ off the plant and to be operating satisfactorily. <t q] , , . -' No violations or deviations were identified. L, 3, ' ,.3 . e ,, , y ' i 6. Nonradiological Confirmatory Measureinents (IP 79701) ' ' , .The! nspector submitted chemistry samples to the-licensee for analysis
i i
! - - as part of a program to evaluate the laboratory's capabilities-to monitor nonradiological chemistry parameters in various plant systems with respect t " . to various Technical Specification and other regulatory and administrative. requirements. These samples had been prepared, standardized, and.
- s[
. periodically reanalyzed (to check for stability) for the NRC.by the Safety and' Environmental: Protection Division of Brookhaven National g" . Laboratory (BNL)..The samples were analyzed by the licensee using . . routine methods'and equipment. ' L'icensee personnel made one dilution of each sample as necessary to bring the concentrations within the ranges normally analyzed by the laboratory,
and run in triplicate in a manner similar to that of routine samples. . .The results are presented in Table 2 and the criteria'for agreement at the end'of the Table. These' criteria.are derived BNL results of the t
- .
present samples and the relative standard deviations (RSD) derived from ' m , . ? l m , C t $ , , , -, < c i'p, ' 1+ . _- p? D, '
- ,, . th'e results of the 1986 interlaboratory comparisons from the various l. plants in the study (Table 2.1, NUREG/CR-5422). The acceptance criteria were that the licensee's value should be within i 2 SD of the BNL value P" for agreement and between 2 and 3 SD for qualified agreement. , . The licensee determined the concentrations of nine analytes at three , ' concentrations each, including boron samples from two different series. All of.the results were.in_ agreement with those of BNL, except for the L ~high-level boron in the new series, which was a qualified agreement. t , " ' The results of the analyses were very good. Laboratory personnel '> , demonstrated a willingness to do these analyses. < . , p
. - , LNo' violations or deviations were identified. ' , I~ 7. Implementation of the QA/QC Program in the Laboratory (IP 79701) v E The inspectors reviewed the chemistry laboratory quality assurance / quality' ,L-control (QA/QC) program as specified by Nuclear Operations Chemistry Quality Control Program, Revision 5, September 1, 1989. The licensee ' e maintains statistically-based control charts on which the mean i 2 standard deviations (SD) are plotted. Independent controls are in use and these data are used in preparing control charts. The inspector expressed concerns-that the control limits on-the charts were calculated only infrequently, with the result that: limits did not represent the data well. However, ,, with the recent implementation of the computerized database that had .on-screen plotting capabilities for QC charts, licensee representatives ' agreed to determine these-limits more frequently (after the collection Lof about 100 or so points, depending on the frequency of analysis). Laboratory personnel agreed to do this after implementation of the hardcopy plotting system in less than two months. A' licensee tracking . item, AIR #456-225-90-00300 was implemented to follow this item, Progress in this will be followed in subsequent routine. chemistry r inspections. ' ' The licensee has implemented a QA/QC program for in-line instrumentation - L based on corporate N0D directive N00-CY.8, " Nuclear Operationc In-line Chemistry Instruments Quality Control Program," Revision.1, July 1, 1988, in which the various instruments are checked biweekly against either . standards or laboratory analyses. Control limits are based on the suggested INPO values of chemistry good practices. The values are not plotted, due partly to the large number of instruments in the program (over-150). The inspector's review of some of the results indicated that the' program was operating satisfactorily. . The licensee's interlaboratory comparison program is managed by the Ceco Technical Center for all stations. Data for 1989 showed the station . achieving about 89% agreement with some decline in the fourth quarter results due to problems with the AAS furnace analyses of the metals; o these. problems appear to have been corrected. The intralaboratory (CT) l comparison program is described by procedure BwCP PD-8, "Braidwood Station Chemistry Performance Evaluation Program," Revision 4, ' August 22, 1988. Technicians are required to be tested annually on , ' ' l ,v , , I I { j' ~ '
q 3; , , . , &q[. ' . ,
- .
.: p w , ?.; - , , p. k '*
' a variety.of analyses including those required by T/S. Statistically a derived acceptance criteria are based on the QC control chart limits p/ ' .(mean't 2 SD). The latest set offtests were done at the corporate . , ' . . Production Training Center in Braidwood, which has laboratory instrumentation identical to that.of the plant. In the tests in ~the ' ' < , - [. 1ast quarter of 1989, only one result was in disagreement. ;The'CT was ^ L retrained and the analysis done in the plant laboratory was;in agreement. , ' LA review of selected data showed technicians to be undergoing the ' . required testing. g Noviolationsor'dEviationswereidentified. , 8. Audits'and' Appraisals (IP 79701) ' s The inspector reviewed the most recent off-site audit of the chemistry E laboratory conducted from January 6-13, 1990, and the laboratory's subsequent response. The. audit had one finding, one observation and ~ two comments. The auditors appeared to address in adequate detail the . 'nonradiological chemistry quality assurance program. Items identi.fied in the audit appear to have been addressed in a timely manner. , The Braidwood office-of the corporate Nuclear Quality Programs (NQP) ' Department (formerly the QA Department) has instituted an " extended surveillance" program in which the auditors look at a group of surveillances for a few hours per day over the period of.a week or so. ' If done'several times a year, it may give a better picture of' the actual operations of the laboratory than.a single audit, it appears to be almost < equivalent to an audit and to be less intrusive on laboratory operations. , l The surveillance of June 28 - July 10,1989, QAS 20-89-065, was. detailed and covered several aspects of laboratory operations. - No violations or deviations were identified. - . e < , 9. Open Items - ~Open. items are matters which have been discussed with the licensee, which ' will be reviewed further by the inspector', and which involve some action on the part of the NRC or licensee, or both. 'No open items were disclosed-- , during the inspection. ' '~l0. -Exit Interview The. scope and findings of the inspection were reviewed with licensee representatives (Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on January 19, 1990. Subsequent telephone discussions were held with W. Lloyd on January 23 and 30, 1990, about the confirmatory measurements ' , results. The inspector discussed'the Open Items in Section'2 and the improvements in the quality control program. The computerized' plotting
of the QC charts will be done within two months'and be followed by the , licensee's tracking system under AIR #456-225-90-00300 and in subsequent -. routine chemistry inspections. The confirmatory measurements, while not- ,; complete at this time appeared to be very good. Licensee representatives noted modifications that longer-term trend charts will be made shortly. . ..g . , ,
. . . . . E .,,. A, o, .,.; ., , v. . -
- n
-< , . , . , - r- .,s
- ,.e :o. n
g , , . _ w , s _, u 4e y"k, : x* . ' '_ , ,, ,,t,,, - x p..
- .
r , , r m ,- _
- < , > $, i p .. During'the' exit interview,-the inspector discussed the'likely informational' -
, =,. , , ? .E .
e ~ > y ' content.of the inspection report with regard to documents.or processes- ' ' < , , reviewed by the inspector during the inspection. Licensee representatives-N4 - ','
j P 'did notiidentify, any such documents or, processes as proprietary. - l . - e - =,. . ' fff ~Attachmentse - R f 1. Table 1,: Cold Chemistry lInterlaboratory j ' ^ b .. - Test' Result $f March 1989. - ,; s
- 2.
Attachment 1,. Criteria for Comparing.- 'x AnalyticalMeasurements(Nonradiol_ogical)~ t s+ 3. -: Table 2,?Nonradiological Confirmatory Measurements' ! $ ' 'Results, January 16-30, 1990 . - ; i R, s' V , , t- <> . , '(Q 'y, . " .
^ * '- 0 as - , . s (j j. ' ~. x , k; rs n- , , ?. .t ' r { -,,. f. s' y . , , , ( E o Y j ) ! ' 'r Ki-.9. t , , , . 7.-(. , , '-7 : s* -l y , , ,
- ,, , '#" , . t lk4 i ' gr - j' j.. , >g4 3s 7. , . e ,- e , , ,. $ t
( 'bg {.1 f ( '2 ' " ' '- , r f 'p' k > + 4 - m $- -. +
' '
' / . , >* v . , cm ..... s - ~ i - ; 3+ g y -y.p ' ' ' ~ y. '. ,
, .,j , - 1 -
>
y . ' ' t Y, n l e ' < v 4. 3. X. , t . O. - , ., N i [Q /4", -
, , s . -: ( .
, , ' C ' _% ,
' < ;,. , , , , ~ J
- i i
e s , ' i , Ag: .; z -, g.
- 3 -
-( .a , ~~l '
- -
' . , - , .. I m ~ , , , . lj _
s ' ibbk'
. .e - - ..,. , - - 2m 'k- , ? i W! n , .. , [ 'k ',, - . ' . > , 'h ' ~ } c - , ,gn, , . > f t [ t e s
w f p , -' b U ^ ~ a 'x J - - ,
,4
- .7
. ec i ,- j -- )----- p Lh7 _ .J. , '.2 : Y '
- '
.'.N> s ,. c - . < = p ? , ' . ._ . NK.M:?;,w' / G " ~ ~ ~ M.] ' - <
- c.
- w , , - - , . . ' p ' ' ' 3., l:. ~ .. > , a '.
- .
,
' - ' y 3...: y - , , , n, - ., - - , , , , %- ; >x-s > TABLE 1 ~ - N <. Cold Chemistry Interlaboratory. Split Sample Results ' .c . , ' , - Braidwood Nuclear Power Station E "I March-1989- -ce ~ ' - " .' , .' ~ Analyte-Matrix * Analysg NRC Licensee: . Ratio- - Comparison - c
- ,
. Method . " - ,, . Y i SD' . X i SD Z i SD. .12 SD ' .
- . o
.. , 9- ' J ' ~ Concentration, ppb ' '* r , ,, . Fluoride Sec 10, 55.8 1 0.2-54.8'i 1.2.- 0.982 1 0.022 A ^ Chloride Sec IC 54.8 1 4.2- ~49.8 1 1.0 cs. - 0.909 i 0.072 A , . Sulfate-Sec L IC 53.5 i 1.~5 52.5 ' 2.0 0.981 1 0.046 'A ' - t a. ' ,;i - " ' s,a
- Matrix
- Secondary System water.
, , b. Analytical _ method:: > IC' lon Chromatatography ' a , .t w-c. Comparison:) , 7~ Al Agree,. . , D Disagree < i(See Attachment 1 for agreement criteria ) ' .. . a p v Li [ ?* T'. ' ' . - , s ,_ ' x < l , f ,
- s
. ')-u . . . k .t ._ k ~ ' - _ ,_' '"1 ' ;w - ' . t a 0. -- . 'f t ' '^ (f..', ,s , u, , , , , , a m - - , .. ., .[ y\\ , f. '% , 3 _ , . Ay < ' 4 a., y - .s ' 0,,, _st ', . ,
.w - ,' Igi
- (-
- . s $Y'j w' , -x ' + , + ' g, a p _s ,y
- '
A f i , 4 - " i .~ . 1 . . , -f,, a + . h. &, !L ' , . Y$ ' ~ ^ " ' ' ' '
' a _ - .
" . . ATTACHMENT 1 Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of the capability tests. The acceptance limits are based on the uncertainty (standard deviation) of the ratio of the licensee's mean value (X) to the NRC mean value (Y), where (1) Z = X/f is the ratio, and < (2) S is the uncertainty of the ratio determined from the pfopagationoftheuncertaintiesoflicensee'smeanvalue, S, and of the NRC's mean value, S.1 Thus, x y S'_S* b# Y~T*h,sothat z x s2D S=Z*)[S*2+1 (X2 y2) Z The results are considered to be in agreement when the bias in the ratio (absolute value of difference between unity and the ratio) is less than or equal to twice the uncertainty in the ratio, i.e. l 1-Z l i 2*Sz* 1. National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, A Handbook of Radioactivity Measurements Procedures, NCRP Report No. 58, Second Edition, 1985, Pages 322-326 (see Page 324). l I 4/6/87 l l l l l l p g y- - - - - - , . - .. g .m8 i r . , ^ ' )
- ...;
-. )
> l ch '; T .' + ' ' , ft. La ' ' ' .
f, x v } ." ' TABLE 2 ' < !-- Nonradiological Interlaboratory Test Results - t . ' ' ' f[p,1 , Braidwood Nuclear Generating Station, Units'1.and 2l - ' < , , January 16-30, 1990 '
< , , a. . , Vt 'w ... . . Resuli.5 ' ' ' b 'l ' Analyte Method! -Conca .. Ratio 8 Acceptance Rangest . .
c. 3
- g,f ' '
J .. 1.2sd i 3sd t " .. .. - . 3 h, , Ph ' .
, . , ' - Fluoride' IC 0.942 0.875-1.125 10.813-1.187~ A . ? , La " ^ p s, ~ 0.956-0.875-1.125 0.813-1.187 A ' - ~ ' " -; 1.026 0.875-1.125- 0.813-1;187. A ' ' p ~ ' Chloride IC 72. -1.003 0.917-1;081 0.879-1.121 'A x + ., ,, n- . . (
- , ' 6- 'O.950' O.917-1.081. O.879-1.121 A F 0.966 0.926-1.074 O.895-1.105 A , e - , , O . Sulfate' lIC 2-1.063 '0.895-1.105' O.842-1.158 A 4-0.989' O.895-1.105-0.868-1.132 A R: _ =8 (" -0.963 0.900-1.100 0.867-1.133. A < , p ~ , , , , Iron .AA/FL' 250- .0.974 10.904-1.096- 0.854-1.146' A' l = i- - 450 1.059 0.903-1.097 0.857-1.143 'A ' 7_- , 800 1.040 0.903-1.097 0.855-1.145 A ' e' g , Copper. 'AA/FL 250 0.961 0.904-1.095 0.859-1.141 A . E ~ 450 O.964 0.904-1.096- 0.857'1.-143' A - ' ' ~ t 800 0.987 0.904-1.096 '0.857-1.143 A' ' .r ,; .. b . Lithium-AA/FL 400-1.000 :0.859-1.141 0.788-1.212 A'
L 0.859 1.'141 0.788-1,212 A 900-1.034 L - 1900 1.032 0;868-1.142 0.787-1.213 A* ' L ' E Silica Spec 1.094 0.906-1.094 0'859-1.141~ ,A '- , . 0.918 0;909-1.091 0.860-1.136 A " -90 0.944 0.907-1.093 0.857-1.143 A' ' ' < , , h Bovoni Titr 1000 0.979 0.979-1.021 0.968-1.032 A
F (New _3000 1.003 ~0.979-1.021 -0.968-1.032J A " ' - JSeries)' '5000 0.971 0.979-l'.021 0.968-1.032. A* , iw' '" Boron ~Titr 1000 1.004 0.979-1".021 .0.968-1.032 A; t ~ (01d' '3000 .O.996 0.979-1,021 0.968-1,032 A LSeries)' ^5000-0.,996 0.979-1.021 0.968-1.032- 'A
, , p,,
m. .,. c ,, ~ .- Methods: Titrt - Titration, ., ' CL 1. . % '*. IC: - Ion Chromatography - x . Spec --UV/VIS Spectrophotometry / W , , - ' AA/FL ' Atomic absorption spectrophotometry (flame) ~ a;' .. gjn j- + i %g ' I ^ V .1
, , (ll(b {;;.,' ' v , , o. ~ . t- , ..g . < a ,, , - " ~ ' ' S ,[.. ,,...~...C, _.,,, .,. _ . . . s % ,,. _ ._ . m. ' W y A m, m w,, a,..
', - n y ' - - . .. we%+f .. 9. cy 1? . , ~ .< . . . ,/: + - ,-a l. . r - C W,%.
- me
' - s < , + , , -., ~ t c I
- L. *.f i _N + yj '
<4 . . , t f" [,u R ;: ~# --,. +', a(t .-w. (t w ^ n.. . , , l t ,. " - 2; cone:' Approximate concentration analyzed. g m a- ' ~ , . V, 3.... Ratio'of Li..censee mean value to NRC mean value.. , . , %- - m . . F;9..w ): 4.1-The.50 in the fifth and' sixth columns represents'the coefficient of,- ,*- '
- ,._
- ., . & > , I y; fd; . variation obtained from averaging licensee data from the preceding cycle - x ' j G9 4 (Table 2.1<of NUREG/cR-5244). The licensee value is considered.to be in b agreement-(A)'if it... falls within the i 2 SD range; a qualified agreement-l (. (A?)oif ittlies outside i 2 SD,..but within 13 SD; and:in disagreement (D) ~ -i E . if it is outside the 1 3 SD range. i o, . , - g.. K . - ' ' (.5 ( ' , ./ ~ ~l y
' r , . I '. } n f h ll' p
_ m ;j.5 , f ,..[ S i ' ' [ 7,- , r l't. .
- '
+ ., g , , , ' (:q .
-t .. , '. ', ' k }..) i
.. , y (' '+ i ' i
..y. > ! i > i - . ., .. , , '" . l o ' ' ', 3-q T 4, , , ' . . _
- ;
- -
'?-
,
!
di
/ j y "
- ; y , . t . .{
- : ,,x . j J-wg - - > - -.; , - , ,. , ' - g ( . > 'f 1. ' 's ; .- ,
, , h ~' l . n. . a <. < f 3..
- -
l,'. y > L ( l% 4.. . s' ,
lu y - '3 l JfL i" ' ' , ,;, s, / h. - - + . ' lr : .,
- r
,...g . , ia _ 'g. .T. t,k
A }- j - . - j. , -,... .,, . s i
.p R. M ' ;. J ,, e 14 ' d, ~ r , . j,Y7' - 3; . 4 > '_ ' dj n_[k, .._ L ,,
- _
.. ,,, _ _,[ _ _ , ,,. ( %; \\ ?n , ,
- J.U }}