ML20137E591
| ML20137E591 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1985 |
| From: | Holtzman R, Oestmann M, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137E588 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-254-85-23, 50-265-85-26, NUDOCS 8508230284 | |
| Download: ML20137E591 (10) | |
See also: IR 05000254/1985023
Text
'
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
Reports No. 50-254/85023(DRSS); 50-265/85026(DRSS)
Docket Nos. 50-254; 50-265
Licensee:
Commonwealth Edison Company
Post Office Box 767
Chicago, IL 60690
Facility Name: . Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station, Units 1 and 2
Inspection At:
Quad Cities Site,' Cordova, IL
Inspection Conducted: July 15-19, 1985
7ll. lllthcw
/MW
Inspectors:
M. J. Oestmann
Date
Y3f$[
>
B
o
Dpte /
'
Approved By:
M. C. Schumacher, Chief
////'
.
'
Independent Measurements and
Date
Environmental Protection Section
Inspection Summary
Inspection on July 15-19, 1985 (Report Nos. 50-254/85023(DRSS);
l
50-265/85026(DRSS)) .
l
Areas Inspected:
Routine, announced inspection of confirmatory measurements.
l
The Region III mobile laboratory was onsite to analyze radioactive samples
i
collected and split with the licensee for comparison. The inspectors also
reviewed licensee actions on previously identified findings.
The inspection-
involved 62 inspector-hours onsite by two NRC inspectors.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
8508230284 850814
DR
ADOCK 05000254
'
.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
IT. K. Tamlyn, Services Superintendent, QCNPS
IB. R. Strub, Regulatory Assurance Administrator, QCNPS
1N. D. Griser,-Senior Quality Assurance Inspector, QCNPS
J. Wethington, Quality Assurance Inspector, QCNPS ~
t 2J. E. Sirovy, Rad / Chemistry Supervisor, QCNPS
1 2P. A. Behrens, Lead Chemist, QCNPS
R. Hebeler, Laboratory Foreman, QCNPS
D. Fraser, Radiation Chemistry Technician (RCT), QCNPS
1Present at plant exit interview on July 18, 1985.
2Present during telephone conversation on July 31, 1985.
2.
Licensee Actions on Previous Inspection Findings
a.
(Closed) Open Item (50-254/84-10-02; 50-265/84-09-03):
Licensee
agreed to recalibrate his gas geometry for effluent samples. The
licensee recalibrated the 4.7-liter gas Marinelli geometry in
September 1984 with a vendor-supplied gas standard.
In the present
inspection, confirmatory measurements comparisons were performed
with this geometry.
The results were satisfactory; seven available
gamma-ray spectral lines for the off gas sample showed close agree-
ment between the two sets of measurements (see Table 2).
b.
(Closed) Open Item (50-254/85006-01; 50-265/85006-01):
Licensee
to analyze a liquid sample for Sr-89, Sr-90, H-3, Fe-55 and gross
beta for comparison purposes.
The analyses performed by the
licensee and his contractor showed agreement (Table 1) for Fe-55,
The Sr-89 results were in disagreement
owing, probably, to the approximate four month delay between sample
collection and submittal for analysis to the contractor.
The
results of a followup split sample taken during this inspection will
be submitted by the licensee and will be reviewed for this analysis
(Section 4).
c.
(0 pen) Open Item (50-254/85006-02; 50-265/85006-02):
Training of
licensee personnel in water chemistry control.
A training program
in water chemistry for BWR's is being developed by the licensee's
Braidwood Production Training Center, but it has not been presented
to the licensee's corporate and plant management and technical staff
in accordance with NSD Directive S-17, dated October 5, 1984. This
item will remain open, pending completion of this training.
d.
(0 pen) Open Item (50-254/85006-03; 50-265/85006-03):
Licensee to
revise chemistry procedures to meet the commitments in the licensee's
water chemistry control program.
The inspector reviewed drafts of
2
_
.
several different chemical procedures that were revised to reflect
the requirements of the licensee's NSD Directive S-17, referred to
in Sec. tion 2c.
They are going through a formal review process.
This item will remain open, pending licensee approval of the revised
chemistry procedures.
e.
(0 pen) Open Item (50-254/85006-04; 50-265/85006-04):
Full imple-
mentation of the licensee's water chemistry control program.
The
licensee has established.an internal working group on BWR water
chemistry control program to identify specific plant modifications
needed and to assign responsibilities for water chemistry improve-
ment modifications in. order to carry out NSD Directive S-17.
Several meetings of the working group have been held during the
Spring of 1985.
Lists of plant modificatior.s are being prepared and
an action plan for implementing each modification is being developed.
,
This item will remain open, pending full implementation of changes
and plant modifications to assure that corrosion effects are kept to
a minimum in accordance with NSD Directive S-17.
f.
(0 pen) Open Item (50-254/85006-05; 50-265/85006-05):
Counting room
control charts should include daily results to observe trends on
counter reliability. The licensee had agreed in the previous
inspection to develop procedures to plot daily results of counting
check sources and background on the control charts to make possible
the more timely observation of trends in the results.
This activity
has been implemented for the alpha-beta counters, but not for the
liquid scintillation counter and gamma detectors.
This item will
remain open until completion of the project.
g.
(0 pen) Open Item (50-254/85006-06; 50-265/85006-06):
Licensee plans
to upgrade the process instrumentation to meet the chemistry analysis
requirements and to perform comparisons of laboratory and plant
instrumentation for consistency of values.
The inspectors discussed
with licensee representatives the plan the licensee has made to
upgrade the plant in-line process monitors to measure continuous
chemical parameters in various plant components and systems.
Three
vendors have been selected to investigate necessary changes and
additions to the plant's sample panels needed to meet the require-
ments of the licensee's NSD Directive S-17.
The vendors are to
present recommendations with detailed specifications to the licensee
on changes to the existing sample panels and the addition of new
in-line monitors by September 1985.
After licensee approval of the
recommendations, the licensee will implement the changes and
addition to the plant's sampling systems.
This item will remain
open, pending completion of the changes and additions to process
instrumentation to continuously measure chemical parameters.
h.
(0 pen) Open Item (50-254/85006-07; 50-265/85006-07):
Licensee to
modify radwaste shipping procedures to incorporate current practices
and 10 CFR 61 and 10 CFR 20.311 requirements.
The inspectors
discussed with licensee representatives the status of the development
3
.
of a computer program designed to prompt the user on all aspects
of radwaste shipments.
This computer program is being developed by
Impell, a licensee contractor, but no progress report was available
at the time of the inspection.
This item will remain open, pending
completion of; development and implementation of the Waste Track
program with appropriate modifications to the radwaste procedures to
incorporate the requirements of 10 CFR 61 and 10 CFR 20.311.
3.
Management Controls
The inspectors reviewed personnel changes in Chemistry group.
P. Behrens
-is the new Lead Chemist.
He received a B.S. degree in chemical engineering
in 1976; his qualifications meet the requirements of ANSI /ANS 3.1-1978.
Two Group Coordinator positions have been established.
The Coordinators
are supervised by the Lead Chemist.
The Unit Chemistry Coordinator has
three chemists and one chemistry engineering assistant reporting to him.
The Auxiliary / Support System Coordinator has two chemists and the
chemistry laboratory foreman reporting to him.
A new chemist has
recently been hired in each of the two groups.
Each chemist has a
.
Bachelor of Science degree in chemistry.
Laboratory assignments of the
Radiation Chemistry Technicians (RCTs) are made by the laboratory foreman.
No violations or deviations were identified.
4.
Confirmatory Sample Analysis
Comparative analyses were performed by both the licensee in his laboratory
and the. inspectors using the NRC mobile laboratory for various samples:
actual and spiked air particulate filters, a chiarcoal adsorber cartridge,
primary reactor coolant, liquid waste from the river discharge tank (RDT),
and off gas.
The licensee's samples were counted on two detectors located
in the counting room except for the RDT sample which was counted on the
emergency backup system near the TSC.
Results of these analyses are
prese.nted in Table 2.
The comparison criteria are given in Attachment 1.
A split of the liquid waste sample from the RDT was sent to the NRC
Reference Laboratory, the Radiological Environmental Sciences Laboratory.
The licensee agreed to determine the concentrations of H-3, Fe-55, Sr-89,
Sr-90 and gross beta and to report the results to Region III (0 pen
Item 50-254/85023-01; 50-265/85026-01).
Comparison of these results will
be included in an addendum to this report.
,
'he licensee achieved 34 agreements in 35 comparisons.
Poor peak
resolution precluded comparisons of Zn-65 in the reactor coolant sample.
The disagreement, Ce-141, on the~ air particulate filter, arose from the
licensee's failure to detect the small 145-Kev peak in an area of the
spectrum showing high background.
The value obtained by the NRC
represented an effluent release concentration approximately two orders
of magnitude below the lower limit of detection (IE-11 uCi/ml) specified
in Technical Specification 4.8.A.1.
4
-
.
.
In the off gas sample analyzed, one difficulty was noted.
Originally the
initial Xe-135 value presented by the licensee was in disagreement with
the NRC'value.
This was caused by the analyst using the value from a
secondary peak.
He had missed the more accurate value derived from the
primary peak because it had been placed in the Class 3 category by the
Automated Analytical Instrumentation System (AAIS).
This latter, more
correct value was allowed in the final comparison with the AAIS.
This
~
item was discussed with the licensee representatives who agreed to
provide more thorough review of the data in future analyses.
No violations or deviations were identified.
5.
Sample Collection and Handling Practices
The inspector observed several instances of poor practices by RCTs during
the collection and handling of radioactive samples for the confirmatory
measurements.
They included poor planning for preventing the spread of
possible contamination during collection of the river discharge tank
liquid waste sample in a gallon bottle provided by the inspector.
Because of the awkward setup for collecting this sample, the outside of
the bottle became inadvertently contaminated during the sample collection
4
step.
The RCT did not have readily available paper towels to dry the
~
outside of the bottle.
He did obtain paper towels to dry the bottle and
a plastic bag to contain the bottle as suggested by the inspector prior
to carrying the bottle through the plant to the hot laboratory.
In the
laboratory, the RCT placed the bottle in a fume hood where a previous
worker had not cleaned up the material spilled on the work area.
This
area was eventually cleaned up by the RCT.
The RCT was. intending to use an obviously impure concentrated acid to add
to the sample bottle until the inspector recommended a new acid solution
should be used. These problems are indicative of lack of experience of
the RCTs which is further reinforced by the duty cycle in which the tour
of duty in the laboratory is.short (about 1. week), while the lead time
between tours is long (about 8-12 weeks).
This item was discussed in the
exit interview.
6.
Exit Interview
The inspectors met with licensee representatives denoted in Section 1
at the conclusion of the inspection on July 19, 1985, and discussed the
scope and findings of the inspection.
The licensee agreed to include
discussion of proper sample handling practices in the September 1985 RCT
retraining course.
In further discussion of this matter by telephone on
July 31, 1985, the lead chemist stated the matter had been discussed with
the RCT involved, that he and the laboratory foreman would be conducting
spot-checks of sample handling practices and laboratory cleanliness, and
that a work request to install a sampling sink for the River Discharge
Tank had been submitted.
5
i
_
_ . _ _ _
_ ___
_ _ _ . _ .
__._ _ _ -
_
___
.
The inspectors discussed the likely . informational content of the inspection
report with regard to documentation processes reviewed by the inspectors
during the inspection.
Licensee representatives did not identify any
such documents / processes as proprietary.
. Attachments:
~
1.
Table 1 Confirmatory Measurements
Program, First Quarter of 1985
2.
Table II Confirmatory Measurements.-
Program, Third Quarter.of 1985
3.
Attachment,-Criteria, for Comparing
Analytical Measurements
6
.
.
.
.
TABLE'1
-U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
<
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
,
FACILITY: QUAD CITIES
FOR THE 1 QUARTER OF.1985
NRC---
LICENSEE----
LICENSEE:NRC----
SAMPLE ~
ISOTOPE RESULT
ERROR
RESULT
ERROR
RATIO
T
SPLIT SA FE-55-
6.6E-07
6.OE-08
6.OE-07
0.OE-01
9.1E-01
1.1E 01
A
1.9E-03
3.OE-05
1.8E-03
0.OE-01
9.2E-01
6.4E 01
A
SR-89
1.5E-07
1.3E-OS
<[6.OE-08
0.OE-01
3.9E-01, 1.2E 01
D
3.1E-OS
5.OE-09
5.9E-08
0.OE-01
1.9E 00
6.2E 00
A
GROSS B 3.7E-06
1.3E-07
3.4E-06
0.OE-01
9.1E-01
2.9E 01
A
e
.T TEST RESULTS:
A= AGREEMENT
D= DISAGREEMENT
'" o= CRITERIA RELAXED
N=NO COMPARISON
.:
.
s
.
m
,
.
.
.
TABLE 2
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
F(,C I L I TY: QUAD CITIES
FOR lHE 3 OUARTER'OF .1985
NRC-------
LICENSEE----
---LICENSEE:NRC----
SAMPLE
ISOTOPE RESULT
ERROR
RESULT
ERROR
RATIO
T
OFF GAS
KR-85M
1.8E-05
2.1E-07
1.7E-05
0.OE-01
9.5E-01
8.7E 01
A
KR-87
5.5E-05
7.3F-07
5.6E-05
O.OE-01
1.OE 00
7.SE 01
A
KR-88
4.SE-05
6.SE-07
4.6E-05
O.OE-01
9.6E-01
7.4E 01
A
'
2.GE-05
3.6E-07
2.7E-05
0.0E-01
9.6E-01
7.8E 01
A
XE-135
8.4E-05
3.7E-07
8.4E-05
O.OE-01
9.9E-01
2.3E O2
A
XE-135M '2.2E-04
8.5E-06
2.0E-04
0.0E-01
9.2E-01
2.6E 01
A
5.1E-04
1.9E-054 5.SE-04
0.OE-01
1.1E 00
2.7E 01
A
L WASTE
3.SE-07
8.6E-08
2.SE-07
0.OE-01
7.4E-01
4.4E 00
A
CO-58
1.9E-07
6.OE-08
1.7E-07
0.OE-01
9.1E-01
3.1E 00
A
6.0E-06
2.0E-07
5.OE-06
0.0E-01
8.3E-01
3.0E 01
A
-
1.7E-06
1.1E-07
1.5E-06
0.OE-01
8.9E-01
1.SE 01
A
s
P FILTER SR-91
1.6E-03
9.5E-05
1.4E-03
0.0E-01
9.0E-01
1.6E 01
A
BA-140
1.2E-03
4.OE-05
1.2E-03
O.OE-01
1.OE 00
2.9E 01
A
LA-140
9.5E-04
3.1E-05
7.6E-04
0.0E-01
S.OE-01
3.1E 01
A
CE-141
2.7E-05
3.OE-06
O.OE-01
O.OE-01
O.OE-01
5.4E 00
D
'2.OE-04
S.2E-06
1.7E-04
0.OE-01
S.5E-01
2.4E 01
A
I-133
6.4E-04
2.OE-05
5.9E-04
0.OE-01
9.2E-01
3.1E 01
A
C FILTER I-131
2.2E-03
2.8E-05
2.5E-03
0.0E-01
1.1E 00
7.7E 01
A
I-133
3.6E-03
5.7E-05
4.3E-03
0.OE-01
1.2E 00
6.2E 01
A
PRIMARY
NA-24
7.1E-03
2.3E-04
7.9E-03
0.OE-01
1.1E 00
3.1E 01
A
CR-51
3.1E-03
2.OE-04
3.SE-03
0.OE-01
1.1E 00
1.6E 01
A
7.9E-05,
2.3E-05
9.7E-05
0.0E-01
1.2E 00
3.5E 00
A
CO-58
2.7E-04
3.6E-05
1.6E-04
O.OE-01
5.9E-01
7.SE 00
A
3.5E-04
3.1E-05
4.OE-04
0.0E-01
1.1E 00
1.1E 01
A
ZN-65
1.3E-04
5.7E-05
O.OE-01
O.OE-01
O.OE-01
2.4E 00
N
AS-76
4.6E-04
7.7E-05
6.7E-04
0.0E-01
1.5E 00
6.0E 00
A
2.SE-04
2.9E-05
3.SE-04
O.OE-01
1.2E 00
9.9E 00
A
I-133
4.0E-03
1.OE-04
4.6E-03
0.0E-01
1.1E 00
3.8E 01
A
.
T TEST RESULTS:
A= AGREEMENT
D= DISAGREEMENT
- = CRITERIA RELAXED
N=NO COMPARISON
f'
l
l
^.
l
.
l
l
TABLE 2
U.S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
FACILITY: QUAD CITIES
FOR THE 3 QUARTER-OF 1985
NRC--------
LICENSEE----
---LICENSEE:NRC----
SAMPLE
ISOTOPE RESULT
ERROR
RESULT
ERROR
RATIO
T
PRIMARY
SR-91
5.5E-03
7.4E-04
5.9E-03
0.OE-01
1.1E 00
7.4E'00
A
1.OE-03
1.SE-04
1.1E-03
0.OE-01
1.1E 00
5.6E 00
A
BA-140
4.9E-04
7.7E-05
5.4E-04
O.OE-01
1.1E 00
6.4E 00
A
LA-140
3.7E-04
4.4E-05
3.4E-04
0.OE-01
9.2E-01
8.5E 00
A
F SPIKED MN-54
1.5E-02
6.9E-04
1.3E-02
O.OE-01
8.SE-01
2.2E 01
A
2.7E-O'2
3.6E-04
2.5E-02
0.OE-01
9.2E-01
7 6E 01
A
3
CS -137
1.6E-02
3.7E-04
1.3E-02
O.OE-01
8.2E-01
4.3E 01
A
CE-144
3.5E-02
9.OE-04
3.2E-02
0.OE-01
9.3E-01
3.9E 01
A
,
b -T TEST RESULTS:
'
!
A= AGREEMENT
\\
l
D= DISAGREEMENT
o= CRITERIA RELAXED
N=NO COMP,ARISON
1
1
l
.
.
l
l
'
.
t
,
!
l
,
-
.
- - - ,
,- . - - . ,,, .
-.
. - . . ,
, . - - . , , .
.-- . - . - -
.
..,
l
.
-
..
ATTACHMENT 1
CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS
.
This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests
and verification measurements.
The criteria are based on an empirical
relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs ot this
program.
-
,
In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the com-
parison of the NRC's value to its associated one sigma uncertainty. As that
ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution", increases, the acceptability
of a licensee's measurement should be more selective.
Conversely, poorer
agreement should be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The
values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to' fewer s.ignificant figures to
maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported
by the NRC Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed
category of acceptance.
.
5
R_ESOLUTION
RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE
Agreement
.
.
<3
No Comparison
jt3 and
<4
-0.4
2.5
-
2,4 and
<8
0.5 - 2.0
_8
and
<16
0.6 -
1.67
>
>16 and
<51
0.75 -
1.33
.
251 and
<200
0.80 -
1.25
_E200
0.85 -
1.18
Some discrepancies may result from the use of different equipment, techniques,
and for some specific nuclides. These may be factored into the acceptance
criteria and identified on the data sheet.