IR 05000312/1985024
| ML20134J561 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1985 |
| From: | Hamada G, Yuhas G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20134J554 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-312-85-24, NUDOCS 8508290408 | |
| Download: ML20134J561 (5) | |
Text
e
,. --
,
_
~
_
v.
.,
.
.U.
S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
,
REGION V
,
>
'
p
- Report No.
50-312/85-24.
'
W-
~ Docket No.
50-312'
i License No.
-DPR-54
.
,Sacfamento Municipal Utility District
' Licensee:
'
P."0. Box,15830
. Sacramento, California 95813'
,
'
-Facility Name:
Rancho'Seco Nuclear Generating (Station
~
-
Inspection at:
Herald, California; Inspection conducted:
July 22-25, 1985, Inspectori
- C@ kh _
/?,.n '
1$/t&Jgg
'
'
,
G. H mada,fRadiponLaboratorySpecialist Date Signed-
,
,
. Approved By:
bhO a6 _
11/t8/sh"
-
-
G.-Yuh s, hief Dat'e Signed Faciliti Radiological Protection Section
/
Summary:
'
'
,
-Onsite Inspection of. July 22-25, 1985 (Report No. 50-312/85-24)
Areas Inspected: This was a'. routine, announced, confirmat'ory measurements inspection involving the Region V Mobile Laboratory. A. total of 56 onsite
,
in'spection hours were expended by two inspectors.
>This inspection involved activities covered in inspection procedure 84725'.
'Results:. No items of noncompliance were identified in the areas inspected.
.
.,
&
s
.w.i n
f QN:
(
.-
'
0508290400'85d814 PDR ADOCK 05000312
O PDR
.
s
---r--
-
s-
+ - -
+.=r-,,
w e-T,
+9---y
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
.
,
i:
"q
.
'
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
- R. Colombo, Regulatory Compliance Supervisor
- G. Coward, Plant Superintendent
- S. Crunk, Regulatory Ccrliance
- J. Jewett, Site QA Supervisor
-*D. J.'Kearl, Chemical and Radiation Protection Technician
- F. Kellie, Chemical and Radiation Protection Superintendent
- S.:Manofsky, Senior Chemical and Radiation Protection Assistant
- W. A. Wilson, Senior Chemical and Radiation Protection Assistant l'
. * Denotes personnel present at exit interview.
2.
Discussion This inspection was conducted to complete inspection procedure 84725 as well as to determine the status of unresolved items identified during the previous inspection (Inspection Report 50-312/84-30).
During the previous inspection, it was determined that one of the areas needing improvement was Rancho Seco's ability to accurately measure charcoal cartridge samples. The licensee had indicated that new charcoal cartridge calibrations would be performed with new standards.
In the interim since.the last inspection, new calibrations were performed for several different geometries including charcoal cartridge. However, because the reactor was in a shut-dosm mode during the current inspection, certain sample categories, like charcoal cartridge, could not be used for lack of activity to measure.
It was necessary, therefore, to substitute NRC's charcoal cartridge calibration standard for the charcoal cartridge test. The results below indicate adequate agreement, and thus confirms the validity of.the new calibrations.
Table 1 NRC Charcoal Cartridge Standard
' Rancho Seco NRC Ratio
- Agreement
Nuclide uCi uCi RS/NRC Range-Co-57 3.93 E-3 3.21 E-3 1.22 0.60-1.66 p..
Co-60 2.27 E-2 1.80 E-2 1.26 0.75-1.33
- ' '
Cd-109 9.99 E-2 7.99 E-2 1.25 0.75-1.33 Cs-137'
1.68 E-2 1.59 E-2 1.06 0.80-1.25
-
- See enclosure for explanation of agreement-criteria.
p,,
-
-
b
_-
-,
."
.'
-
.,
.
Table 2 Decay HeatIRemoval Liquid Sample Rancho Seco NRC Ratio Agreement
'
Nuclide uCi/ml uCi/ml RS/NRC Range Co-58 14.04 E-3 4.17 E-3 0.97 0.85-1.18
.Co-60 J1.35 E-3 1.27 E-3.
1.06 0.80-1.25 Ag-110M 5.83 E-4 o4.72.E-4 1.24 0.80-1.25 Cs-134'
2.54 E-3
~2.28 E-3 1.11 0.80-1.25 Cs-137
- 3.04 E-3/
~.12 E-3 0.97 0.85-1.18
Table 2 lists the nu$lides identified in reactor coolant (decay heat removal system). This sample category was measured to test the ability of the peak' analysis software program to separate, identify and quantify all peaks found in the sample. Apparent anomalies were detected in several earlier measurements (Report Nos. 50-312/84-03 and 50-312/84-30)
which pointed to the peak analysis software, and in particular the user designated parameters, as a potential source of the problem. Although the above results indicate adequate agreement for this particular sample,.
<
the peak program must continue to be scrutinized by the licensee until
,
the issue is more fully understood or until it has been established that the problems encountered earlier are not recurring problems.
Table 3 Waste Gas Decay Tank Ra'ncho Seco NRC NRC (4 L Marinelli) (1 L Marinelli)
(30 cc Bulb)
Ratio Agreement Nuclide uCi/cc uCi/cc uCi/cc-RS/NRC Range Kr-85 1.20 E-3 1.68 E-3 1.32 E-3 0.91 0.60-1.66 Xe-131M 2,12 E-5 2.87 E-5 3.18 E-5 0.67 0.50-2.00 Table 3 lists the results obtained for a waste gas decay tank split
' sample. Because of the. prolonged outage, only the longer-lived fission gases, Kr-85 and Xe-131M could be detected.
It can be seen that the results fall within ghe agreement. range.
Table 4 Serum. Vial-Gas Standard Rancho Seco'(5 cc Vial)
NRC (15 cc Vial).
Nuclide uCi/cc uCi/cc Kr-85 1.91 E O 2.40 E O Xe-133 1.90 E-1 2.69 E-1
.
. -
- - - - -
. - - - -
- - -.
- -
. - - - - -
- -
%
.
_,
,
,
-
-
- - - - - -
- - - - -
- - - - - - -
---
~,
e, yy N.w ey 0;'
-
.
,.
x
<
. r
"
.t s
,
^
' _
i 1 -,-
y
-
3 3, ~ 4
-
- -
,
-
~
x y
-
,
x 3:3,
-
,
,o
.
>
.
_
f Sw, ' ' '
i Tablel E4 listsithe certificate valuesLfor Rancho'Seco's 5~ce serum vial
'
[ 94{
' gas. calibration standardiagainst NRC's. measured 7 values for this standard.
,
v 't
-
3Because NRCis not calibrated for a!5 scc serum vial geometry,'NRC's.15;cc i
g
,
P
f',
serum vial' calibration. parameters;were used to quantify the:results.-
'Y
-
rThis comparison'was made on;the assumption that these two" geometries were
'
- y
. - Jthe.5:cc.-serum vial' calibration.
ItLwas' expected that because of :the
'
- close enough to provide usefuliinformation for' assessing'the' validity of M
.
,
f.
~
.
. larger and;1ess efficient geometry (with consequent' larger efficiancy.
~
-
L~M
'
" factor).:used by.the NRC,~ the NRC results.would be larger than the:
'
F
" *- i
' certificate value, and indeed this is ;the case. When allowanceLis made
.
,
.
cforathe; geometry 1 difference, the agreement is. reasonably good. The
'
C
' 4 intent of this test.was to determine the accuracy of.the transfer of the.
'
-
gas standard into the' serum. vial which is usually the weakest link in..the f
- ~
' calibration procedure.
-
,
Another issue brought tolthe licensee's attention during the'pievious
-
.
'
,
>
- inspection involved quantification of:the-radioactivity-content in'
'
<
-9-
- reactor coolant. This is normally done by collecting pressurized reactor a
' coolant in a pressure bomb, depressurizing and. stripping the' gases from:
'
_
.the : liquid and measuring ~ each fraction? separately. The gaseous and=
'
"' '
~1iquid activities are summed after correcting for volume differences to
~
1.
'
obtain;theitotal activity.per gram of reactor coola'nt..0ften,'the
'
' gaseous : activity remaining in the liquid :is negligible and' can be s
,
g
-
-ignored.fRanchoSeco'sgasstripp(ggprocedure,.however,has
'
occasionally-left as much~as 50' percent of.the gaseous activity in the.
+
H~
- 1iquid. -This situation requiresJthat all gaseous activity in the. liquid
y-J,' '
~
. fraction-be quantifie'd and, included in the total. -The licensee in~dicated.
"
~
?that this in-fact was being done and recently; this' requirement-was
.
-
V
'
y formalized.into a; written procedu'e.
r
..
_~
/All unresolved items identified in the previous report (Report No.
.
...
.
?,J,
' '50-312/84-30) have been resolied and open; item No. 84-30-01 is closed.
,
p, f 's.
'
'
t.i':
,"
.,
,y
, I3.
Exit Interview ??:-
Y,#"
i
!
,
. 4
..
.
..
Inspection findings were discusse'd:withglicen'see' personnel indicated in'
- _
, -
paragraph 1.
,
,.
- <..
,
'
"
,
,,
<
_
,
'
%
p 'o
- p - '
(' f C-f
' " '
r i
e
_t
,
P-
.
l
- p
.
<
,
,
.
',
'u, I
,
ll lT "
-
y-u y+
4.-
.
r
~
.
.
. '
Y
+
S
,
J t
.t
't
.
.
-
.
,
.
.
<
'"
'
%
'
Q
~
p
..,' '
-
e I r
_
,
-
t
- r
-
4
,
. "
.
-
.c C
D Enclosure Criteria' for Accepting the Licensee's Measurements Resolution Ratio
<4 0.4
- '
2.5
.4
-
0.5
-
2.0 8 - - 15 0.6 1.66
-
50 0.75 -
1.33
-
51 - 200 0.80 1.25
-
200 0.85 -
1.18 Comparison 1.
Divide each NRC result by its associated uncertainty to obtain the resolution.
(Note: For purposes of this procedure, the uncertainty is defined as the relative standard deviation, one sigma, of the NRC result as calculated from counting statistics.)
2.
Divide each licensee result by the corresponding NRC result to obtain the ratio (licensee result /NRC).
3.
The licensee's measurement is in agreement if the value of the ratio falls within the limits shown in the preceding table for the corresponding resolution.
.
e l
I
-
s
-..
g
-
,a e
-.
,
, - - - - -,.