Text

Insp Rept 50-382/85-17 on 850429-0503.Violation Noted: Failure to Establish Approved Alternate Sampling Procedure for PWR Gaseous Effluent Sys
	ML20126H441
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	06/11/1985
From:	Crossman W, Murray B, Nicholas J, Wise R; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20126H390	List: ML20126H385; ML20126H405; ML20126H441;
References
	50-382-85-17, NUDOCS 8506180346
	Download: ML20126H441 (22)
	v • d • e

- -_ . . _ _ - . - _ . - _ _

, , , ,

'

-

,

s

,

'

, ..

'5 j

'^

'

-

APPENDIX B-

,

U..S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

-

REGION IV-

l

. .. .

.,

l

1

- NRC Inspection Report: 50-382/85-17 License: NPF-38 1

l

Docket: 50-382 s

Licensee: Louisiana Power and Light Company (LP&L)

)

142 Delaronde Street

New Orleans, Louisiana 70174

1

Facility Name: Waterford Steam Electric Station, Unit 3 (Wat-3) '

Inspection A't: Taft', St. Charles Parish, Louisiana

Inspection Conducted: April 29-May 3,.1985

Inspectors: , E r[J/ [ff

y(/BlairNicholas,RadiationSpecialist Date

V Facilities Radiological Protection Section

-

Ruysf fIl Wise, Radiation Specialist

Skrtltr

Date

FWcilities Radiological Protection Section

Approved:' 1// M)/AAN

Blaine Murra9,':hief, F ilities Radiological

kN

Dhte

Protection Settion

..

. W."A. Crossihan7 Project Section B, Reactor

$ /

'

DaYe

Project Branch.1

'

.. ,

8506180346 850613

'

PDR ADOCK 05000382

O pop

-

.

(

'

r

'

_ __.___._.______.__.__m_

._ _ _ . ___ - _

.. .

L

-

- .

2-

/ ,

_ . ' Inspection Summan '

Inspection Conducted-April 29-May 3, 1985 (Report 50-382/85-17)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of the licensee's

- chemistry / radiochemistry program including organization, qualifications,

training, . administrative and analytical procedures, facilities and equipment,

~

quality assurance (QA) program for chemistry / radiochemistry activities,

'

radiochemistry confirmatory measurements, and whole body counting system

confirmatory measurements. The' inspection involved 88 inspector-hours onsite

<

by two NRC inspectors.

.

- Results: Within the eight areas inspected,.no violations were. identified in

'

. , . Y.

seven areas. One violation was identified in one area (failure to establish

- ^ sampling procedure, paragraph 6).

,

!

4

N'

i *

,

s , % -

) e 'g 4

s =

+-

4_g

- *p

A

&

v

4

k

%

' '

.--__-__.-._ - _ . . _ . . _ _ . - _ _ . - - . -

- ._ __

-.

-

, s

-

.

4 L

x %

-3-

DETAILS

1. Persons Contactad

LP&L

R. P. Barkhurst, Plant Manager - Nuclear

D. E. Adams, Chemistry / Radiochemistry Unit Coordir.ator - Nuclear Support

R. E. Allen, Chemistry Engineer

W. J. Baldwin, Senior QA Representative - Vendor Surveillance

C. E. Brannon, Chemistry Technician

K. L. Brewster, Licensing Engineer - Onsite

D. W. Delk, QA Representative - Operations

G. L. Dolese, Radiochemistry Supervisor

C. R. Hall, Health Physics Supervisor

C. B. Hawkins, Radiochemist

D. L. Hoel, Health Physics Supervisor

N..I. Huber, Health Physics Technical Specialist

D. C. Madere, Chemistry Technician

J. V. Messina, QA Representative - Operations-

D. A. McLaughlin, Engineering Technician - Nuclear Support

R. C. McLendon, Personnel Dosimetry Supervisor-

W. M. Morgan, QA Manager - Vendor

J. M. O'Hern, General Training Superintendent

R. G. Pittman, Senior QA Representative - Operations

P. V. Prasankumar, Technical Support Superintendent

*A. R. Roberts, QA Representative - Operations

~D. T. Simpson, Technical Training Superintendent

.

R. N. Whitman, Health Physics Specialist

J. Woods, Plant Quality Manager

4

Others r

G.'L'., Constable, NRC Senior Resident Inspector

T. A. Flippo. NRC Resident Inspector

W. B. Jones, NRC Inspector .

.

W. W. Walker, Health Physics Specialist, Consultant, Applied Radiological

Control

'

4

Denotes those present during the exit briefing on May 3,~1985. -

'

'The NRC inspectors also interviewed several other Wat-3 employees during

the inspection.

'

2. Open= Items Identified During This Inspection

Open items are matters that require further review and evaluation by the

NRC inspector or the licensee. Open items are used to document, track,.

and ensure adequate followup.on matters of concern to the NRC inspector.

,

'

, -

,

. - _ - -_-

.

-4-

Open Item Description Reference Paragraph

(382/8517-01) Chemistry / Radiochemistry 5

Technician Qualification

Training

'

(382/8517-03) Airborne Releases During 7

Reactor Coolant Sampling

(382/8517-04) Radiochemistry Confirmatory 9

Measurements

3. Chemistry / Radiochemistry Organization and Management Controls

The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's corporate and onsite

-

organizations and staffing regarding chemistry / radiochemistry activities

, to determine compliance with the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR)

i commitments and Technical Specification requirements.

The NRC inspectors reviewed the corporate and Wat-3 staff assignments and

management controls in regard to chemistry / radiochemistry responsibilities -

described in position descriptions and department procedures. The

licensee's corporate chemistry nuclear support organization was found to

be in agreement with the FSAR. The NRC inspectors reviewed the approved

position descriptions which had been revised to reflect the new

organizational structure.

The NRC inspectors reviewed the staffing of the onsite

chemistry / radiochemistry department and noted that the secondary chemistry

supervisor and three chemistry technicians had left LP&L employment during

the past year. At the time of this inspection, two of the chemistry

technician positions had been filled leaving one chemistry technician

position and the secondary chemistry supervisor position vacant. The

chemistry engineer was actively-recruiting to fill the staff vacancies.

The chemistry / radiochemistry department organizational structure and

'

staffing were determined to be in accordance with licensee commitments.

The NRC inspectors noted that the staff was working considerable overtime

.

(24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months per week) during startup activities and was using four contract

personnel to supplement the permanent chemistry / radiochemistry staff.

) No violations or deviations were identified.

4. Chemistry / Radiochemistry Personnel Qualifications

The NRC inspectors reviewed the qualifications of the corporate and onsite

chemistry / radiochemistry personnel to determine compliance with

ccmmitments in the FSAR and Technical Specification requirements. Based

on the review of chemistry / radiochemistry staff resumes, the NRC

inspectors determined that the education and experience backgrounds of the

present corporate and onsite chemistry / radiochemistry staff met or exceeded

the requirements committed to in the FSAR and Technical Specifications

with the exception of one newly assigned chemistry technician who is

presently undergoing qualification training.

No violations or deviations were identified. .

_. _

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

.. .

'

l

.

I

l

i

'

-5-

5. Chemistry / Radiochemistry personnel Training Program

'

The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's chemistry / radiochemistry

' training program to determine. compliance with FSAR commitments and

Technical Specification requirements.

The NRC inspectors discussed the training program for

chemistry / radiochemistry personnel with the technical training

superintendent and determined that the training department had written and

approved a chemistry technician training procedure. The chemistry

technician training course had been written, approved, and implemented.

The NRC inspectors reviewed the course lesson plans, student study guides,

and examinations for selected course topics. The NRC inspectors reviewed

the chemistry / radiochemistry staff individual training records maintained

by the nuclear training department and determined that all chemistry

technicians assigned to the chemistry department prior to January 1985,

had' completed the required courses presented in classroom lectures by the

nuclear training department.

i

i The NRC inspectors reviewed the chemistry / radiochemistry technician staff

1 and contractor technician qualification records maintained by the acting

chemistry training coordinator. It was noted that the licensee had not

established a training and qualification program for contract personnel. '

A review of the contractor qualification records indicated that most

secondary chemistry procedures had been waived and did not require a

1

demonstration of performance capability by the technician other than an

4

interview between the contract technician and the secondary chemistry

supervisor. The contract technicians had been qualified on selected

radiochemistry procedures as indicated by supervisor signoffs.

The review of the Wat-3 chemistry / radiochemistry technician staff

. qualification records indicated that none of the records had been

completely signed off by the appropriate supervisors and chemistry

engineer. The requalification records for 1984 had neither been completed

nor signed by the chemistry engineer. The chemistry technician

qualification records were being maintained by the chemistry department

and were not being made part of an individual's permanent training record

maintained on file by the nuclear training department. These items of

concern were discussed with the _ licensee during the exit interview on

May 3, 1985. The licensee acknowledged the NRC inspectors' concerns and

stated that they would evaluate the concerns.

This item is considered open (382/8517-01) pending evaluation of the NRC

inspectors' concerns by the licensee.

No violations or deviations were identified.

t

. - - , -, n ,---m .~n - - - , , -s

'

..

.

s

-6-

'

' *

6.~ . Chemistry / Radiochemistry Program

The.NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's chemistry / radiochemistry

+-

program to determine compliance with FSAR commitments and Technical- '

. Specification' requirements. A review of selected chemistry department

-

'

procedures and; analytical data indicated that the chemistry department had

established. administrative and analytical procedures to meet the

requirements of the FSAR and Technical Specifications.

'

The NRC inspectors witnessed the sampling of liquid effluent waste

tank "A" and observed no problems. The sampling of the reactor coolant

system was witnessed and the performance of reactor coolant sample

analyses for boron, chloride, lithium, pH, conductivity, dissolved oxygen,

'

dissolved hydrogen, tritium, gross beta / gamma, and gamma isotopes was -

inspected. - The procedures .for sampling and analyzing the reactor coolant

,

system were found satisfactory.

.

The NRC inspectors requested that a sample be collected from waste gas

holdup tank "B" for confirmatory n!easurements on April 30, 1985. Sampling

!

procedure CE-3-305, " Sampling of Ventilation and Gaseous Waste Management

Systems for Radioactive Effluents," Revision 1, December 28, 1983,

describes the sampling procedure. The procedure requires that samples

of waste gas decay tanks are to be taken from designated sample points on

the gas analyzer. ~ The NRC inspectors noted that the gas analyzer.had been

out of' service since March 22, 1985. A review of the gaseous waste

management log sheets for April 1985 showed that the in-service waste gas

decay tanks had been sampled every 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months each day to satisfy Technical

'

Specification 3.3.3.11 and surveillance requirement 4.3.3.11 for the waste

gas holdup system explosive gas monitoring system. The NRC inspectors

,

determined that in-service waste gas decay tank samples collected during

the month of April 1995 had been obtained from the respective gauges

associated with each waste gas decay tank, instead of.the gas analyzer,

without the use of an Spproved procedure. Technical Specification 6.8.1.a

requires ~that written procedures shall be established, implemented, and

maintained covering the activities referenced as applicable procedures

recommended in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.33, Revision 2, February 1978.

Appendix A, paragraph 7.c(2) addresses procedures for sampling and monitoring

of pressurized water reactor gaseous effluent systems.

The licensee's failure to establish an approved alternate sampling

procedure is considered an apparent violation of Technical

Specification 6.8.1.a. (382/8517-02)

.

.7. Facilities and Equipment

The NRC-inspectors inspected the secondary chemistry laboratory, secondary

chemistry sampling area, primary chemistry laboratory, primary chemistry _

sampling panel, and radiochemistry counting room. The-laboratories were

. equipped with the necessary chemicals, reagents, standards, labware, and

analytical instrumentation to perform the required analytical procedures.

. - , ,

-- . } ~

+

,

- F f

-

+

s. . --- -. . . . . .

9

.

-7-

The secondary chemistry and primary chemistry sampling panels were

operational and associated process analyzers calibrated and in-service.

The chemistry / radiochemistry facilities and analytical instrumentation

were found to be sufficient to perform routine chemistry / radiochemistry

analyses requirements to support plant operation. The NRC inspectors

noted that during the collection of the reactor coolant sample the area

radiation monitor in the sampling area went into an alarm status and that

radioactive gases were released into the primary sampling area and

surrounding area in the primary chemistry laboratory requiring health

physics monitoring. The NRC inspectors discussed this problem with the

licensee and was informed that the problem was being evaluated and that

corrective action to control the escape of radioactive gases during the

sampling of the reactor coolant system would be taken as soon as possible.

This item is considered open (382/8517-03) pending the licensee's evaluation

of the airborne releases.

No violations or deviations were identified.

8. QA Program

The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's QA organization and audit

program regarding chemistry / radiochemistry activities to determine

compliance with FSAR commitments, Technical Specification requirements,

and the QA Manual.

The NRC inspectors reviewed the QA department organization, selected QA

audit procedures, audit plans for 1985 and 1986, and QA auditor

assignments for operations QA. Audit reports generated from audits

performed during 1984 and 1985 in the areas of primary chemistry,

secondary and auxiliary chemistry, chemistry equipment calibration and

inventory control, PASS, and vendors supporting radiochemistry activities

were reviewed for scope to ensure thoroughness of program evaluation and

timely followup of identified deficiencies. The NRC inspectors found that

the audit plans and checklists were comprehensive and that the responses

and corrective actions to audit findings were satisfactory. It was noted

that the chemistry audits were being performed by QA staff members who

were trained and knowledgeable in chemistry / radiochemistry activities at a

nuclear power facility.

.

No violations or deviations were identified.

9. Analytical Measurements

a. Confirmatory Measurements

Confirmatory measurements were performed on the following samples in

the NRC Region IV mobile laboratory at Wat-3 during the inspection:

(1) Liquid Radwaste Effluent (Waste Tank "A")

(2) Containment Atmosphere

(3) Gaseous Radwaste Effluent (Waste Gas Decay Tank "B")

(4) Containment Charcoal Cartridge

- _ - - . - . - - . ..

-

.

,

-8-

'

(5) Reactor Coolant System Liquid

(6) Reactor Coolant System Gas

(7) Containment (Particulate, Iodine, Gas) Charcoal Cartridge

(8) Containment-(Particulate, Iodine, Gas) Particulate Filter

(9) Reactor Coolant System Tritium Sample

The confirmatory measurements test consisted of comparing

measurements made by the licensee and the NRC mobile laboratory. The

NRC's mobile' laboratory measurements are referenced to the National

Bureau of Standards (NBS) by laboratory intercomparisons.

Confirmatory measurements are made ~only for those nuclides identified

by the mobile laboratory as being present in concentrations greater

than >10 percent of the respective isotopic values for liquid and gas

concentrations as stated in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II.

Attachment 1 contains the criteria used to compare results.

b. Results

At the time of the inspection, the licensee had two high purity

germanium (HPG) detectors in the radiochemistry counting room and one

HPG detector.in the health physics counting room. All three

detectors are used for routine isotopic analysis of radioactive

samples to demonstrate compliance with Technical Specifications and

regulatory requirements. The HPG detectors labeled (1) and (2) are

located and maintained in the radiochemistry counting room and HPG

detector -labeled (3) is located and maintained in the health physics

.

counting room. All three detectors.were cross checked on selected

-counting geometries during this inspection. The' analytical results

from all three detectors were compared with the NRC results, as well

with each other. The licensee performed the tritium analysis on

their liquid scintillation counting system. The individual sample

analyses and comparison of analytical results of the confirmatory

measurements are tabulated in Attachment 2.

~The licensee's gamma ~ isotopic results from-the-listed' samples in

Attachment 2 showed 76 percent agreement with thelNRC analysis

results based on 67 agreement results out of 88 nuclides identified

and compared. The> licensee's tritium result on the reactor coolant

system sample was in. agreement with the NRC analysis" result. The

results of the confirmatory measurements were discussed'with the

licensee. . The NRC inspectors'noted that the expected percent agreement

for these types of confirmatory measurements would normally be

-

greater than 90 percent. Several factors may have contributed to the

lack of agreement by the licensee including instrument calibration,

'

lack of experience in performing isotopic analyses of actual reactor

-

effluents, use of wrong software parameters, and the lack of attention

. to performing comparative analyses within,a reasonable time frame

between analyses on the various detectors compared. The licensee

acknowledged-the NRCJinspectors' concerns and agreed to evaluate the

confirmatory measurement.results.

,

w

y , e~v5 -'r w

.

_g_

This item is considered open (382/8517-04) pending evaluation of the

NRC inspectors' concerns by the licensee.

To complete the confirmatory measurements inspection and provide

strontium nuclide analyses at activity levels which can be detected

and compared, the NRC inspectors have requested the NRC's reference

laboratory, Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory (RESL)

in Idaho Falls, Idaho, to send the licensee an unknown sample

prepared by RESL using known nuclide concentrations for analysis of

"Sr, 'Sr, tritium, and several gamma emitting nuclides. The

licensee is to analyze the sample and report the results. The

results of the comparisons will be reported in the next NRC

confirmatory measurements report.

No violations or deviations were identified.

10. Whole Body Counting System

The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's whole body counting system to

determine compliance with 10 CFR Part 20.103.

The NRC inspectors reviewed the licensee's program for operation,

calibration, and quality control of the whole body counting system and

found it satisfactory. The licensee had written and approved procedures

for the control and use of the whole body counting system. The licensee

had calibrated their system using sources of common nuclides found in

nuclear power facilities which represented various percentages of maximum

permissible organ burdens. The licensee's sources were traceable to the

NBS and were used in a polyethylene phantom supplied by the vendor of the

whole body counting system.

The NRC inspectors supplied the licensee with a whole body counting

phantom designed to conform to the " reference man" of the International

Commission on Radiological Protection - 23 to perform confirmatory

measurements in their chair style whole body counting system. The phantom

contained various configurations of radioactive sources traceable to the

NBS. The phantom and nuclides duplicated the organs and body burdens that

the licensee might encounter during normal operation. The confirmatory

measurements test consisted of comparing measurements made by the licensee

with the certified activities of the NRC standards positioned in the whole

body phantom. The tests included a body positioning verification test,

lung scan, thyroid scan, and combination of lung and thyroid implant and

scan. The tests required identification and quantitative analysis of

~

nuclide activities in the various body organs resulting in the

determination of percentage of maximum permissible body / organ burdens.

The results of the body positioning test and the comparison of the

analytical results of the confirmatory measurements against the standard

activities are tabulated in Attachment 3.

The licensee analyzed the nuclide activities positioned in the NRC phantom

to simulate inhalation as " mock iodine" in the thyroid and 2'Cs and 'Co

in the lungs. The NRC inspectors checked the licensee's accuracy of body

positioning in the whole body counting system and found the

reproducibility of measurements satisfactory. The results of the body

y --

e.

~

,. -v -

-

. , n .

-

. .c :.

'# -

,

p

.

< ,

, t , #;

"A *

-10-

,~. . . .

7

burden activity measurements taken resulted in several.NRC inspector

'

concerns regarding the licensee's whole body counting system. These

concerns included the following: ,

, a. The licensee's results for 5 percent through two body burdens of 80Co

in the right lung were nonconservative and approximately 50 percent

-

lower than the certified activities.of the NRC standards. (See

Tests (4), (5), (6), (7), and (8).)

b. The licensee was unable to routinely analyze activities greater than

one body burden of-soCo in the lungs using the whole body counting

'systeo software due to a severe energy gain shift induced by the high

count rate. The licensee's manual calculations produced results

,

approximately 40 percent lower than the certified activities of the

NRC standards. (See Test (8).)~

c. The licensee's results for 5 percent through two body burdens of

133Ba as mock fodine in the thyroid were nonconservative and

approximately 50 percent lower than the certified activities of the

NRC standards. (See_ Tests (9), (10), (11), (12), and (13).)

d. The licensee's results for mixed nuclides in the lungs and combined

lung and thyroid scans were all-in the range of approximately

40 percent to 70 percent icwer than the certified activities of the

NRC standards. (See Tests (14) - (19).)_

The licensee was informed of the analytical results of the confirmatory

measurements. The licensee acknowledged the NRC concerns and agreed to

evaluate the areas identified.

~

No violations or deviations were identified. <

11. Routine and Emergency Facilities for the NRC Mobile Laboratory

-The NRC inspectors discussed with the licensee the installation of support

electrical and telephone facilities for the NRC mobile laboratory both

onsite for routine inspections and at.the emergency operations facility

(EOF) at the Wat-3 training center during radiological incident response

activities. The NRC inspectors outlined the mobile laboratory's support

requirements as follows:

A

The parking location should be on a' level concrete slab in an area

~

a.

~

_ .

~

away from overhead electrical transmission lines.

b. Electrical power should be provided to the vehicle through'three

-

independent (nonground faulted) 115 volt 30 ampere circuits _ equipped

with twist-lock receptacles located within 50 feet of the parked -

, vehicle.

~

'

, c. Te1Nhonelineandmodularconnectionshouldbeprovidedatthe

. .p * vehicle parking site. >

~

.

E' &B** Y

N 'a

, < ~

'

, . - ..s , e- - *

.

9

.

-11-

The NRC inspectors discussed several onsite locations with the licensee

and indicated a preferred area on the east side of the reactor auxiliary

building near the east entrance in close proximity to the area occupied by

the mobile laboratory during this inspection. A suitable site on the east

side of the EOF was also discussed. The licensee stated that they would

investigate how the support requirements could be met at both the onsite

location and at the EOF and initiate proper installation of facilities as

soon as possible.

12. Exit Briefing

The NRC inspectors met with the licensee representatives and the NRC

resident inspectors identified in paragraph 1 of this report at the

conclusion of the inspection on May 3, 1985. The NRC inspectors

summarized the scope of the inspection and discussed the inspection

findings. The licensee committed to review the following:

a. The training program for chemistry / radiochemistry personnel,

b. The airborne releases associated with the collection of reactor

coolant samples, and

c. The low percent agreement for radiochemistry confirmatory

measurements.

-

. . . . _ . . . . . .. .. . . _ . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _ . . _._ ,

, . .

. e

,

.

ATTACHMENT 1

.

Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements i

The following are the criteria used in comparing the results of capability

tests and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical

relationship established through prior experience and this program's analytical

requirements. ';

In these criteria, the judgement limits vary in relation to the comparison of

the resolution. :

NRC VALUE

Resolution =

NRC UNCERTAINTY 3

LICENSEE VALUE

Ratio _

NRC VALUE l

Comparisons are made by first determining the resolution and then reading

across the same line to the corresponding ratio. The following table shows the

acceptance values.

,

RESOLUTION AGREEMENT RATIO

<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

The above criteria are applied to the following ahalyses:

(1) Gamma Spectrometry.

(2) Tritium analyses of liquid samples.

(3) Iodine on adsorbers.

1

(4) asSr and 80Sr determinations. I

(5) Gross Beta where samples are counted on the same date using the same

reference nuclide. ;

l

1

!

l

!

l

.

- '-

- t

._ .. _ .

. .

,

.

'

4 !

,

ATTACHMENT 2

'

CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS RESULTS

- 1. Liquid Radwasth Effluent (Waste Tank "A")

'

(Sampled 16:17 CDT, April 29, 1985)

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC '

Nuclide Det. (uCi/ml) -(uCi/ml) Ratio Decision

24Na- '(1) 5.77 + 0.15E-05 5.56 + 0.05E-05 1.04 Agreement

t -

(2) 5.88 + 0.09E-05 1.06 Agreement

(3) 5'.35 + 0.07E-05 0.96 Agreement

, ssCo (1) 1.40 + 0.49E-06 :1.19 + 0.11E-06 1.18 Agreement

(2) 1.2110.23E-06 1.02 Agreement

(3). 1.53 1 0.27E-06 1.29 Agreement

tatI (1) 4.90 + 0.09E-05 4.57 + 0.03E-05

-

.1.07 Agreement

-

(2): 4.5910.05E-05 1.00 . Agreement

,

(3) 4.51 + 0.05E-05 0.99 Agreement

,-

133I (1) 9.91 1 0.13E-05 8.31 1 0.04E-05 1.19 Disagreement

(2) 9.26 + 0.08E-05-

.

1.11 Agreement

(3) . 9.04 + 0.06E-05- 1.09 Agreement

135I (1) 2.74 1 0.27E-05 2.89 + 0.08E-05 0.95 Agreement l

,

'

(2)- 3.07 + 0.16E-05 1.06 Agreement

(3) 2.70 + 0.14E-05 0.93 Agreement

'-

144Ce (1) 4.11 +~0.21E-05 3.69.+ 0.10E-05

-

1.17' Agreement

(2) 4.62 + 0.21E-05 .1. 25 - Agreement

(3) 3.66 + 0.18E-05 0.99 ' . Agreement

.

187W 4 ('1) 4 70 + 0.24E-05" -4.06'+ 0.08E-05

-

1.16 LAgreement

(2) 5.0110.14E-05 1.23 Agreement

(3) 4.44 + 0.14E-05 '

1.09 Agreement

2. Containment Atmosphere

l -(Sampled 09:16 CDT, April 30, 1985)

,

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results >NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide-Det; '(uCi/cc) (uci/cc) Ratio Decision

. 41Ar- (1) ;No Result 1/ No Result ~2/

---

No Comparison

(2) 7.27 + 0.99E;07 ---

No Comparison

(3) 9.73~10.96E-07 ---

ik) Comparison

!

l

i

s

,

.

-

- . . - . - .

.

. :

-2-

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Det. (uCi/cc) (uCi/cc) Ratio Decision

85"Kr (1) 1.15 1 0.61E-07 0.81 1 0.15E-07 1.41 Agreement

(2) 1.02 1 0.16E-07 1.26 Agreement

(3) 0.82 1 0.18E-07 1.01 Agreement

13 axe (1) 1.41 1 0.02E-05 1.58 1 0.02E-05 0.89 Agreement

(2) 1.43 + 0.02E-05 . 0.91 Agreement

(3) 1.4810.03E-05 0.94 Agreement

'

133*Xe (1) No Result 3/ 3.77 + 0.96E-07

-

---

Disagreement

(2) No Result 3/ ---- Disagreement

(3) NoResult3/ ---

Disagreement

'

135Xe (1) 6.99 + 0.49E-07 6.72.1 O.26E-07 1.04 Agreement

(2) 7.30 1 0.38E-07 1.09 Agreement

(3) 7.18 + 0.37E-07 1.07 Agreement

1/ Activity had decayed to below the lower level of detectability at the

time of sample analysis.

2/ Isotopic peak was present in the spectral data; however, the gas

efficiency calibration used for the analysis did not include

efficiencies for gamma energies greater than 514 kev. Therefore, no

NRC analysis was made and no comparison.

3/ Nuclide_was not included in the isotope library routinely used for

analysis of this sample type.

3'. Gaseous Radwaste Effluent (Waste Gas Decay' Tank "B")

(Sampled 13:30 CDT, April 30, 1985)

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Det. (uCi/cc) (uCi/cc) Ratio Decision

131*Xe (1) Not Identified 1/ 3.80 + 1.60E-05

-

---

Disagreement

(2) NotIdentified1/ ---

Disagreement

183Xe (1) 6.20 + 0.01E-02 6.20 + 0.01E-02

-

1.00 Agreement

(2) 4.5510.01E-01 7.33 Disagreement2 j

183*Xe (1) 7.11 + 0.17E-04 6.94 + 0.13E-04

-

1.03 Agreement

(2) 4.9510.24E-03 7.14 . Disagreement2 j

,

.

, t

i g

-3-

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Det. (uCi/cc) (uCi/cc) Ratio Decision

13GXe (1) 2.75 + 0.13E-05 2.63 + 0.09E-05

-

1.05 Agreement

(2) 2.15 1 0.20E-04- 8.19 Disagreement 2f

,/ Licensee's peak identification program did not identify the nuclide at

1

a concentration greater than the lower level of detectability.

~

2/ Licensee used the wrong efficiency file when analyzing the spectral data.

_

'

4. Containment Charcoal Cartridge

(Sampled 09:16 CDT, April 30, 1985)

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Det. (uCi/cc) (uCi/cc) Ratio Decision

-l

1311' -(1)~ l'.89 + 0.09E-10 1.99 + 0.05E-10

~

0.95 Agreement

(2) .1.58i0.11E-10 0.79 Agreement

(3) 1.69 1 0.09E-10 -0.85. Agreement

'

183I (1) 1.56 1 0.10E-10 1.51 1 0.06E-10 1.03 Agreement

(2) 1.50 1 0.14E-10 0.99- Agreement

(3) 1.52 1.0.12E-10 .

1.01 Agreement

.

,

5. Reactor Coolant System Liquid

(Sampled 13:45 CDT, May,1, 1985)-

"

. s

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC.Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide:Det. (uCi/ml)~ .(uCi/ml)' Ratio Decision

,

24Na. (1)' .1.13 + 0.03E-02

_ 1.45 1 0.02E-02 0.78 Disagreement

c

>

(2) 9.61 1.0.36E-03 0.66 Disagreement

.

1 .

. ,

~

^

'

181I (1) 4.70 + 0.10E-03.

~

6.74 + 0.07E-03. 0.70 Disagreement:

(2) 4.28 1 0.16E-03 0.64 Disagreement

132I (1)- 7.19 1 0.46E-03 7.93 1 0.27E-03 0.91 ' Agreemeiit

-w

,,

.(2). 6.62 1 0.82E-03 0.83 Agreement

, 183I ~(1) ~ 2.20 1 0.02E-02 2.37 1.0.01E-02 0.93 Agre.ement I

~

' ( 2) .,

'

-1.90.1 0.03E-02 0.80 Agreement - '

-

,

_ ,

l

, ;-

,

1 .

.

3

-

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

-- .. . . -. . . _ - . .

., _

.- - - - - ..

.

a

t, 9' x

A

'Q

-4-

a

1

- '

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC '

Nuclide Det. (uCi/ml) (uCi/ml) Ratio Decision

135I> (1) . 1.97 + 0.07E-02 2.54 + 0.05E-02 0.78 Disagreedent

(2) 1.56 + 0.13E-02 0.61 < 0isagreement

i

t

'

'144Ce (1) 3.12 + 0.27E-03 3.51 + 0.18E-03

-

0.89 Agreement *

i

(2) . 2.97i0.59E-03 0.85 Agreement

' .

'

187W (1) 3.45 + 0.28E-03 4.84 + 0.18E-03

-

0.71 Disagreement j

(2) 3.1430.47E-03 0.65 Disagreement

.

6. Reactor Coolant System Gas

(Sampled 15:14 COT, May 1, 1985)

i

Wat-3 ' Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Det. (uCi/cc) (uCi/cc) Ratio Decision -

41Ar (1) 1.18 + 0.14E-02 No Result 1/ ---

No Comparison

,

(2) 1.67 + 0.31E-02 ---

No Comparison

'

'ss#Kr (1) 9.95 + 0.11E-02 9. 38 + 0. 08E-02

-

1.06 Agreement

(2) 8.92i0.13E-02 0.95 Agreeeent

.

87Kr (1) 1.29 + 0.02E-01 1.20 + 0.03E-01

-

1.08 Agreement

(2) Not 13entified 2/. .-

Disagreement

i

asKr (1) 2.26 + 0.03E-01 2.11 + 0.03E-01-

-

1.07' Agreement

,

(2) 2.07i0.05E-01 0.98 Agreement-

m

tas Xe (1) 2.07 + 0.37E-02 2'.02 + 0.23E-02

-

- 1. 02 : Agreement

,

(2) 1.8210.28E-02 0.90; Agreement

i 133Xe (1) 7.61 + 0.04E-01 7.28 + 0.03E-01 1.05 . Agreement

(2) 6.65 + 0.03E-01 0.91 Agreement

,

185"Xe '(1) 5.20 +~0.29E-02 Not Identified 2/ -

.--

No Comparison

(2) Not Identiffen 2/- ---

No Comparison

assXe (1)' 3.17 + 0.02E-01 3.04 + 0.01E-01 1.04 Agreement

,

(2) 3.09 + 0.02E-011 ;1.02 Agreement

, I :

<

b

s

k

'

,

-

4

, .

,

I

"

4

1. 5

= - + - , , - - , , v. , , , , - . . - - -.

,

. - -

-

.

'

E ..

' ~

-5-

.

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide' Det. (uCi/cc) (uCi/cc) Ratio Decision

138Xe (1). 1.24 1 0.09E-01 Not Identified-2/ ---

No Comparison

(2) Not-Identified 2/ ---

No Comparison

1/. Isotopic peak was present in the spectral data; however, the gas

i

efficiency calibration used for the analysis did not include

'

efficiencies for gamma energies greater;than 514 kev. Therefore, no

NRC analysis was=made and no compariso'nj

'

2/- Activityhaddecayedtobelowthelower[levelofdetectabilityatthe

~

-

time of sample analysis. '

.

'7 . Containment (Particulate,' Iodine, Gas) Charcoal Cartridge

(Sampled 10:20 CDT, May 1, 1985)

Wat-3 'Wat-3 Results 'NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

-Nuclide Det. (uCi/ sample) (uCi/ sample) Ratio Decision ,

2811 -(1) 6.30 1 0.03E-02 8.26 1 0.03E-02 0.76 Disagreement

-(2) 6.40 1 0.05E-02 0.77 Disagreement

s

(3) 6.26 1 0.02E-02 0.76 Disagreement

-

1331 (1) 3.39 + 0.05E-02 3.46 + 0.03E-02

-

0.98 Agreement

(2) 3.26l_0.08E-02 0.94 Agreement ~

(3) 3.13 1 0.02E-02- 0.90 Agreement

i .

8. Containment (Particulate, Iodine, Gas) Particulate Filter

(Sampled 10:20 CDT, May 1, 1985)

Wat-3 Wat-3 Results NRC Results Wat-3/NRC

4

NuclideLDet. (uCi/ sample) (uCi/ sample) Ratio Decision

24p3 (1) 4.38'+ 0.77E-04; 3.93 + 0.38E-04 1.11 ~ Agreement

(2) 3.75 1 0.54E-04 0.95' Agreement

,

(3) 6.27 1 0.77E-04 1.59 Agreement

99"Tc- (1) ~4.03 1 1.16E-04 2.95 1 0.42E-04 1.36 Agreemen't

(2)e 4.32 1 0.29E-04 1.46 Agreement

(3) 3.85 1 0.17E-04 1.30 Agreement

187y -(1) 4.94 0.82E-04 1.77: Agreement

2.79 1 0.57E-04-

(2). 13 22 1 0.83E-04~ 1.15 Agreement

(3)- 2.21 1 0.90E-04. 0.79 Agreement

.

4

,w --. ~ ,- - - ,, ----+---- - e,--- -

.

... .

- -

~,

a_ . ,

, .

"

. . ,

'

e.' j. . <

i

-'

_ -; ,

-

. ,; , .

'I, * 5

, n -6 -

_

~

,.

g .

,a - -

7 _

9i '

- Reactor-Coola~nt System Tritiumt Sampl'e +

~

. (Sampled 13:45-CDT, M,ay 1,_1985) ., , ....>

_

.,

-

, . ,- t . .

.

. .

Wat-3~Results NRC Results- Wat-3/NRC

M Nuclide s

(uCi/ml) ' (uCi/ml)

-

Ratio Decision

> .

-

. _,

<. 8H 3.25 1 0.01E-02 . 3. 48 1 0. 04E-02 0.93 Agreement

. .

y 9 y

,

% '

c

4

y ,

t.

?

w

J

Y k

-

.4

i

& - .

I

J

f

4

%' y

w

'

f

( \

%

2 s

, L

3 T

,

f Y* 2

>

v

Y

'

R

. _

,

rs

y ,

' T! 4

e . 1 -

% t

,

p % * --

-

.jkg

'~

* ' r

, fr - f_-

. . , ,

,

M * 4

,;. g,

j_I -y $

, :, ' 45 - -m-.s . ,_ .> . p , <.,

& i .. -

,

'

}_ ___ ,_ f , ~-

. < : - "~i. g.r* ' '

r.'

. . . . . _. -_ .

'

.- _

,

8

ATTACHMENT 3

,' W

HOLE BODY COUNTING SYSTEM CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS RESULTS

>

'1. ' Positioning V'erification Test

NRC Whole Body Phantom with 5 Percent Lung Burden Standard 114-1 in the

Right Mid Lung (Standardized August 27, 1984)

Tests (1), (2), and (3)

Wat-3 Result Wat-3 Result Wat-3 Result ' Standard

Nuclide Test (1) Test (2) Test (3) Average Deviation

1

60Co 0.266 0.255 0.303 0.275 0.025

i

2. ' Analytical Measurements

a. Lung Test

'

' Test (4) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 5 Percent Lung Burden

'

Standard 114-1 (Standardized August 27, 1984)

,

'

Wat-3 Result NRC Result -1/- Wat-3/NRC

,

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

, , .

.

c,s 80Co Rt. Mid Lung 0.283 0.500 0.57

-

.-

Test'(5)' .NRC Whole Body Phantom with 50 Percent Lung Burden

'

Standard 114-3 (Standardized August 27, 1984)

,

Wat-3 Result NRC Value ~2/ Wat-3/NRC -

'Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

60Co --- Rt. Mid Lung 2.554 5.00 0.51

,

Test (6) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 10 Percent Lung Burden

Standard 114-2 (Standardized August 27, 1984)

. Wat-3 Result NRC Value ~1/. Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide ' Organ (uCi)- (uCi) Ratio

60Co Rt. Mid Lung 0.560 1.000 0.56

.

. , , - .<--,,---.,~e.-- ..,.w.,- w--_- - . , - -. ~ . ,--e-,, , ,ew.--, * . * -~

_

s '

. < ~

,

1 - -

.

. , .

,

-, -2-

Test (7) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with One Lung Burden

Standard 114-4 (Standardized August 27, 1984)

'

Wat-3 Result NRC Value -1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

60Co Rt. Mid. Lung 4.493 10.00 0.45

Test (8) - NRC Whole' Body Phantom with Two Lung Burdens

Standard 114-5 (Standardized August 27, 1984)

Wat-3 Result NRC Value -1/ Wat-3/NRC '

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

GoCo Rt. Mid Lung 8.254 20.00 0.41

(manual calculation)

b. Thyroid Test

Test (9) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 5 Percent Thyroid Burden

Standard 118-1 (Standardized September 24, 1984)

Wat-3 Result NRC Value -1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

238Ba Left Thyroid 0.017 0.036 0.47

(mock iodine) Lobe

'

Test (10) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 10 Percent Thyroid Burden

Standard 118-2 (Standardized September 24, 1984)

Wat-3 Result NRC Value ~1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide. Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

133Ba Left Thyroid 0.055 0.070 0.79

,. (mock iodine) Lobe

-!

~

! '

-Test [(11) .NRC Whole Body Phantom with 50 Percent Thyroid Burden

- Standard 118-3 (Standardized September 24, 1984)

s

% =

Wat-3 Result Wat-3/NRCs

NRC Value -1/ '

S 'Nuclide ' Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio ,

.\ .a

'

-, 133Ba~ Left Thyroid 0.159 0.350 0.45

, (Mock iodine)' , Lobe .

.

L

a.- _-

.

i ,

, ?

.

- -3-

Test (12)'- NRC Whole Body Phantom with One Thyroid Burden

- Standard 118-3 (Standardized September 24, 1984).

Wat-3 Result- *

NRC Value ~1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

.

133Ba .Left Thy'roid 0.424 0.70 0.61

(mock iodine)- . Lobe .

' Test.(13) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with Two Lung Burdens

Standard 118-5 (Standardized September 24, 1984)

Wat-3 Result ~ 'NRCValue1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi)- (uCi) Ratio

138Ba Left Thyroid 0.85 1.40 0.61

.(mock iodine) Lobe

c. Lung Test (mixed isotopic standards)

Test (14) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 5 Percent Lung Burden

Standard 103-1-(Standardized January 5, 1984)

Wat-3 Result NRCValue1/ Wat-3/NRC-

Nuclide Organ .(uCi) (uCi) Ratio

137Cs

'

Rt. Mid Lung 0.903 1.570 0.51

60Co Rt. Mid Lung "0.275 0.502- 0.55

Test (15) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 10 Percent Lung Burden

Standard 103-3 (Standardized January 5, 1984)

'Wat-3 Result. NRC Value Wat-3/NRC

' Nuclide Organ (uCi) ~(uCi) ~ ~1/ Ratio

137Cs~ Rt. Mid Lung ,

--1.667 :3.130 0.53

80Co Rt. Mid Lung 0.476 1.000 0.48

>

a

M

7

h $

L a

t *

- _

.

_

.

?

'

-4-

d. Lung and Thyroid Scan

Test (16) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with Two Thyroid Burdens

Standard 118-5 in the Thyroid and 10 Percent Lung

Burden Standard 114-2 in the Lung

Wat-3 Result NRC Value ~1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) _ uCi)

( Ratio

183Ba Left Thyroid 0.535 1.40 0.38

80Co Rt. Mid Lung 0.517 1.00 0.52

Test (17) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with 5 Percent Thyroid Burden

Standard 118-1 in the Thyroid and 5 Percent Lung

Burden Standard 114-1 in the Lung

Wat-3 Result NRC Value -1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

183Ba left Thyroid 0.014 0.036 0.39

80Co Rt. Mid Lung- 0.274 0.50 0.55

Test (18) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with One Thyroid Burden

Standard 118-4 in the Thyroid and 5 Percent Lung

Burden Standard 114-1 in the Lung

Wat-3 Result NRC Value -1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

133Ba Left Thyroid 0.299 0.70 0.43

60Co Rt. Mid Lung 0.278 0.50 0.56

Test (19) - NRC Whole Body Phantom with One Thyroid Burden

Standard 118-4 in the Thyroid and 10 Percent Lung

Burden Standard 114-2 in the Lung

Wat-3 Result- NRC Value ~1/ Wat-3/NRC

Nuclide Organ (uCi) (uCi) Ratio

183Ba Left Thyroid 0.280 0.70 0.40

SOCo Rt. Mid, Lung 0.667 1.00 0.67

1/ NRC values were taken 'from the standard certificates supplies with the

,

standards as prepared by a commercial vendor and verified by the NRC's

reference laboratory,-RESL, in Idaho Falls, Idaho.

ML20126H441

Text

Navigation menu

Search