ML20155D410: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot insert) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change) |
||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Adams | |||
| number = ML20155D410 | |||
| issue date = 05/31/1988 | |||
| title = Insp Rept 50-483/88-08 on 880502-06.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Confirmatory Measurements & Radiological Environ Monitoring Programs, Including Plant Chemistry,Organization & Mgt Control | |||
| author name = Bocanegra R, Januska A, Schumacher M | |||
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) | |||
| addressee name = | |||
| addressee affiliation = | |||
| docket = 05000483 | |||
| license number = | |||
| contact person = | |||
| document report number = 50-483-88-08, 50-483-88-8, NUDOCS 8806150161 | |||
| package number = ML20155D407 | |||
| document type = INSPECTION REPORT, NRC-GENERATED, INSPECTION REPORT, UTILITY, TEXT-INSPECTION & AUDIT & I&E CIRCULARS | |||
| page count = 10 | |||
}} | |||
See also: [[see also::IR 05000483/1988008]] | |||
=Text= | |||
{{#Wiki_filter:. | |||
.s - | |||
>s | |||
. . . | |||
. | |||
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | |||
REGION III | |||
- | |||
. Report No. 50-483/88008(DRSS) | |||
Occket No. 50-483 License No.- NPF-30 | |||
Licensee: Union Electric Company | |||
Post Office Box 149 | |||
St. Louis, MO 63166 | |||
Facility Name: Callaway Plant, Unit 1 | |||
8 | |||
Inspection At: Callaway Site, Steedman,' Missouri | |||
Inspection Conducted: May 2-6, 1988 | |||
hA, a,w s/n . | |||
Inspector: inuska 0-29-88 | |||
Date r | |||
- | |||
Accompanied By: R.'Bocanegra 7/!gy | |||
Date | |||
f,b:h/~J/uu' | |||
. | |||
Approved By: M.~ Schumacher, Chief 'MF | |||
Radiological Effluents Date | |||
and Chemistr/ Section | |||
Inspection | |||
f Summary | |||
Inspection on May 2-6,1988 (Report No. 50-483/88008(ORSS)) | |||
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of confirmatory measurements, : | |||
and Radiological Environmental Monitoring programs including: plant chemistry L | |||
' | |||
organization, management controls,-trainin and qualifications (IP 83722, | |||
83723); quality assurance and confirmatory measurements for in plant | |||
, | |||
radiochemical analysis (IP 84725); and radiological environmental monitoring | |||
' | |||
(IP 80721). Collection of collocated thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) | |||
measurement resuits (TI 2500/22, IP 80721) was performed and the licensee's | |||
. action on an open item was reviewed. | |||
Results: Management attention to detail in radiological measurements has | |||
resulted in an cverall strong program; however, timeliness in completing | |||
calibration confirmation tests and inspector-observed poor laboratory ' | |||
. practices need to be addresse d . No viol ations or' deviations were | |||
identified during this inspection. | |||
;. . | |||
. | |||
; | |||
'J | |||
8806150161 880531 | |||
PDR .ADOCK 05000483 | |||
.0- .nnn - _ - , | |||
" | |||
. - . - .- . . , . . - . , . _ . . .-. .. .. . | |||
. . . . . ~ . - - | |||
i | |||
- | |||
> | |||
. . | |||
- | |||
. . . | |||
. | |||
OETAILS | |||
1. Persons Contacted | |||
*W. R. Robinson, Assistant Plant Manager | |||
*D. R. Bromwell, QA Engineer | |||
*J. C. Gearhart, Superintendent, QA Operations Support | |||
*C. Graham, Supervisor, Health Physics Technical Support | |||
*F. J. Forck, QA Scientist | |||
*J. R. Peevy, Assistant Manager, Technical Services | |||
*C.' A. Riggs, Supervisor, Chemistry | |||
*R. 'R. Roselius, Superintendent, Health Physics | |||
*E. M. Thornton, QA Engineering Evaluator | |||
*M._A. Trusty, Acting Counting Room Foreman | |||
J. D. Nurrenbern, Health Physicist | |||
G. Clark, Senior Rad / Chem Technician | |||
R. Seitz, Rad / Chem Technician | |||
L. Godley, Rad / Chem Technician | |||
P. Bell, Chemist | |||
*B. H. Little, NRC Senior Resident Inspector | |||
, | |||
* Denotes those present at the exit meeting. | |||
2. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings | |||
(Closed) Open item (483/87016-01): Licensee to complete changes in'the | |||
QA/QC program. QC ch rt limits to be modified, boron QC charts and | |||
control sample results tabulated by July 25, 1987. The licensee has | |||
revised procedures to address the concerns in this open item. The | |||
licensea now determines the standard deviation (s.d.) and the upper | |||
and lower warning and control levels every six months using a minimum | |||
of 15 current data points for key parameters defined in CDP-ZZ-00700. | |||
Perfortince check data for each key parameter is recorded on a "Control | |||
Chart D:ta Sheet." The boron control chart data indicated that the | |||
six months update of the s.d. and control and warning levels had been | |||
performed. The licensee now uses independent sources to check stability | |||
of standards by assuring that, as a minimum, different lot numbers for | |||
calibration standards and control standards are used. There has been no | |||
change in the status of obtaining a computer for tabulation and analysis | |||
of data. | |||
3. Management Controls and Organization (IP 83722, 83723) | |||
The inspectors reviewed the management controls and organdzation cf the | |||
Health Physics Technical Support (n?T5) Group. The group is headed by | |||
a HPTS Supervisor who reports to the Health Physics Superintendent who | |||
in turn reports to the Assistant Manager Technical Services. The HPTS | |||
2 | |||
._ __ _ | |||
7 | |||
1 | |||
4 | |||
. . . | |||
> | |||
Supervisor supervises a Rad / Chem Foreman who in turn supervises 11 Rad / Chem | |||
Technicians (RCT) and their activities in the laboratory and counting room. | |||
During this inspection an RCT was appointed Acting Rad / Chem Foreman during | |||
the absence of the Rad / Chem Foreman. Since the inspection in May 1986 | |||
(Report No. 86014) one RCT has lef t Union Electric Company, one has | |||
j transferred, and two have been promoted to another group. Three | |||
I experienced RCTs have transferred into the group leaving the group with a | |||
I net. loss of one RCT. The licensee has eliminated this vacant RCT position. | |||
No violations or devfations were identified. | |||
4. Confirmatory Measurements (IP 84725) | |||
a. Quality Assurance | |||
The inspectors reviewed the radioactivity measurements laboratory | |||
quality assurance program including the ohysical facilities, | |||
latuatory operations, and procedines. Pertinent laboratory and | |||
counting room operating procedures found in Health Physics Department | |||
Procedures (HDP) and Health Physics Technical Procedures (hip) were | |||
reviewed for technical content by the inspectors. Procedures reviewed | |||
included Count Room Quality Control Program (HOP-ZZ-04700), Calibration | |||
of Intrinsic Germanium Detectors (HTP-ZZ-04538), Count Room Analytic | |||
and Quality Control Calculations and Methods (HTP-ZZ-06020), and | |||
Operation of the Gamma Spectroscopy Counting System (HTP-ZZ-04537). | |||
The inspectors also reviewed Quality Control records and related | |||
supporting documentation. Documents inspected included results for | |||
. | |||
germanium detector calibratier. and efficiency tables. The inspectors | |||
also verifitd that calibrations for release geometries had been | |||
confirmed semiannually per HTP-ZZ-04538 4.8. However, the insp -tors | |||
expressed concern to the licensee that the latest confirmation tests | |||
of detector calibrations performed in January 1988 had not been closed | |||
~ | |||
out. Charcoal and planchette geometry confirmation tests showed some | |||
inconsistencies that had not been resolved by the licensee. The | |||
licensee will giva priority to completing the last confirmation tests | |||
and will initiat9 a change in p"ocedure to require completion of | |||
future confirmation tests within a reasonable length of time. | |||
' | |||
The licensee participates in a quarterly intercomparison crosscheck | |||
program with an outside vendor. Some of these samples are forwarded | |||
to the licensee's contract laboratory f or Sr-89, Sr-90, and Fe-55 | |||
analyses. A review of the fourto quarter 1986 results for these | |||
specific analyses showed the t.ontract laboratory achieved one out | |||
. of three agreements. A licasee assessment (UOTH-87-154) of the | |||
ccatract laboratory's past perferniance resulted in a new laboratory | |||
being selected for future analyses. The 1987 intercomparison | |||
results showed a marked improvement. Crosscheck program results | |||
for in-house gamma-ray analysi t for tM rd quarter 1986, first | |||
quarter 1987, and first quarter 1988, were reviewed. The results | |||
were centrally good with some minor disagreements. | |||
3 | |||
- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - | |||
_. | |||
. | |||
. . . | |||
Daily QC charts for the germanium detectors were inspected. he | |||
Health Physicist responsible for interpreting and evaluating the | |||
charts was interviewed by an inspector and appeared to be competent | |||
and knowledgeable in this area. Rad / Chem Technicians were observed | |||
and evaluated on sample acquisition and preparation, and general | |||
laboratory practices. One technician was observed pouring low level | |||
radioactive liquid into a container without wearing gloves. The | |||
licensee acknowledged the inspectors' concern and agreed to discuss | |||
the laboratory practices with Rad Chem personnel, | |||
b. Sample Split | |||
Six samples (air particulate, charcoal absorber, charcoal spike, | |||
reactor coolant, liquid waste and gas) were analyzed for gamma | |||
emitting isotopes by the licensee and in the Region III mobile | |||
laboratory on site. Comparisons were made on combinations of | |||
the licensee's four normally used count room detectors and on | |||
a back up system in the E0F. Results of the sample comparisons | |||
are given in Table 1; comparison criteria are given in Attachment 1. | |||
The licensee achieved 87 agreements out of 89 comoarisons. | |||
A containment air particulate, a liquid waste monitor tank, a reactor | |||
coolant and a gas sample yielded all agreements. The licensee agreed | |||
to analyze or have a portion of the liquid sample analyzed for gross | |||
alpha, gross beta, H-3, Sr-89, Sr-90 and Fe-55 and report the results | |||
to Region III (0 pen _ Item 50-483/88008-01). | |||
A containment charcoal absorber yielded a disagreement on Detector 2 | |||
and on the E0F detector for Br-82. In addition to the disagreement, | |||
the iodine comparisons, although agreements, were biased low. A | |||
spiked charcoal absorber was analyzed as an unknown on Detector 2 | |||
and by the inspectors resulting in all agreements. The inspectors | |||
then demonstrated to the licensee that activity distribution on the | |||
sample and the calibration standard were not the same which caused | |||
the low bias in the analyses. The licensee was cautioned of the | |||
potential for under reporting halogen fission products in samples | |||
collected under abnormal conditions. The licensee acknow' edged | |||
the inspectors comments. | |||
. | |||
c. Audits | |||
The inspectors reviewed several surveillance reports and audit recorts | |||
related to radiochemistry. There were no findings made relating r.c | |||
confirmatory measurements. The inspector also noted the high qunity | |||
of the surveillance reports and, in particular, the technical qtality | |||
of "Surveillance of EBAR" performed in January 1988. | |||
No violations or deviations were noted. | |||
4 | |||
_ . - - - - - | |||
_ | |||
.- .-. . -.- | |||
. _ . - _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ -__ __ __ . _ - _ ____ .-__ ._ _ -_ _____. | |||
_.__ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - | |||
.p | |||
. . | |||
5. Environmental Protection (IP 80721) | |||
The inspectors reviewed the radiological portion of the licensee's "Annual | |||
Environmental Operating Report" for 1986 and 1987. The levels of | |||
radioactivity in the samples collected around the plant were generally | |||
consistent with previous data. There appears to be no evidence that the | |||
plant operation has had any significant environmental impact. | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
6. ~ Collocated TLD Verification (TI 25000/22, IP 80721) | |||
The inspectors exar,1,cd ten locations where licensee and NRC dosimetet s | |||
were thought to be collocated. Eight of the locations appeared close | |||
enough in distarce and azimuth to be so regarded. NRC TLD Stations | |||
Nos. 8 and 27 were not collocated with Licensee's Stations Nos. 47 | |||
and 15, respectively. | |||
No violations or deviations were identified. | |||
7. 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. An open item disclosed during | |||
the inspection is discussed in Section 4b. | |||
8. Exit Meeting | |||
The inspectors met with licensee representatives' denoted in Section 1 | |||
at the conclusion of the inspection on May 6, 1988. The scope of the | |||
inspection and findings were discussed. | |||
During the inspection the inspectors discussed the likely informational | |||
content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes | |||
reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection. Licensee represen- | |||
tatives did not identify any such documents or procedures as proprietary. | |||
Attachments: | |||
, | |||
1. Attachment 1, Criteria for | |||
Comparing Analytical | |||
Measurements | |||
, 2. Table 1, Confirmatory Measurements | |||
2 | |||
Program Results, 1st Quarter 1988 | |||
. | |||
J | |||
5 . | |||
. | |||
m -- 4 - - - - -< -- -e -y--. e . --- --.w- ,-ei, ,ir.-y, ,,,-c,-,-v_ g:-_m---y -- | |||
-y-- g.- =.<w-g- - ------ | |||
e | |||
- | |||
. . | |||
, | |||
. | |||
; | |||
-ATTACHMENT 1 | |||
CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS | |||
This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tes.ts | |||
and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical | |||
relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this | |||
program. | |||
In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the com- | |||
parison of the NRC's value to its associated one signa uncertainty. As that | |||
ratio, referred to in this program as "Resolution", increases, the acceptability | |||
cf 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 significant figures to | |||
maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported | |||
by the NRC Reference Laboratory, ualess such rounding will result in a narrowed | |||
category of acceptance. | |||
RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE | |||
Agreement | |||
. | |||
<3 No Comparison | |||
2;3 and <4 0.4 - | |||
2.5 , | |||
2,4 and <8 0.5 - | |||
2.0 | |||
jd) and <16 0.6 - | |||
1.67 | |||
2J6and <51 0.75 - 1.33 | |||
251 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 | |||
.g200 0.85 - 1.18 | |||
Some discrepancies may result from the use of different equipment, technique?, | |||
and for some specific nuclides. These may be factored into the acceptance | |||
criteria and identified on the data sheet. | |||
. | |||
4 | |||
- - | |||
-+ | |||
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . . _ _ _ - _ | |||
' | |||
. | |||
- - | |||
,- . | |||
, | |||
, , | |||
, | |||
TABLE 1 | |||
U S NUCLEAR RFGULATORY COMMISSION | |||
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT | |||
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM | |||
FACILITY: CALLAWAY | |||
FOR THE 2 OUARTER OF 1993 | |||
------NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE:NRC---- | |||
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT EPROR RATIO RES T | |||
PRIMARY NA-24 1.2E-03 4.6E-05 1.2E-03 5.0E-05 9.7E-01 2.6E 01 A | |||
b6Tl CR-51 4.0E-03 3.5E-04 3.4E-03 2.9E-04 3.7E-01 1.!E 01 A | |||
MN-54 5.1E-04 4.0E-05 6.0E-04 3.8E-05 1.2E 00 1.3E 01 A | |||
CO-58 4.0E-03 6.2E-05 3.5E-03 6.!E-05 8.7E-01 6.5E 01 A | |||
CO-60 3.4E-04 2.9E-05 3.2E-04 2.8E-05 9.3E-01 1.2E 01 A | |||
I-131 5.7E-03 6.6E-05 5.GE-03 6.4E-05 1.0E 00 8.6E 01 A | |||
I-132 4.5E-03 7.4E-05 4.4E-03 7.3E-05 9.8E-01 6.0E 01 A | |||
I-133 1.!E-02 7.9E-05 1.!E-02 0.3E-05 9.9E-01 1,4E 02 A | |||
I-135 4.9E-03 1.6E-04 4.8E-03 1.7E-04 9.8E-01 3.1E 01 A | |||
CS-137 5.3E-04 3.8E-05 4.7E-04 3.4E-05 S.7E-01 1.4E 01 A | |||
P FILTER CR-51 6.8E-12 6.8E-13 6.8E-12 3.5E-13 1.0E 00 1.0E 01 A | |||
MN-54 5.7E-13 6.8E-14 5.4F-13 4.5E-14 9.5E-01 0.4E 00 A | |||
b6f4 1.1E 00 3.2E 01 A | |||
CO-58 6.0E-12 1.9E-13 6.3E-12 1.3E-13 | |||
CO-60 6.2E-13 6.8E-14 5.9E-13 5.3E-14 9.6E-01 9.1E 00 A | |||
I-131 6.4E-13 6.9E-14 4.7E-13 0.0E-01 7.3E-01 9.2E 00 A | |||
ZR-95 7.0E-13 1.2E-13 5.3E-13 6.6E-14 7.5E-01 5.9E 00 A | |||
NB-95 6.1E-13 8.4E-14 6.0E-13 4.7E-14 9.9E-01 7.3E 00 A | |||
MO-99 1.7E-12 4.7E-13 1,5E-12 3.1E-14 9.3E-01 3.5E 00 A | |||
CS-134 4.6E-13 1.2E-13 2.7E-13 4.3E-14 5.9E-01 3.9E 00 A | |||
CS-137 1.2E-12 1.2E-13 9.2E-13 6.0E-14 8.0E-01 9.9E 00 A | |||
CE-144 6.8E-13 6.7E-1; 7.2E-13 1.3E-13 1.0E 00 1.0E 01 A , | |||
HF-181 3.3E-13 9.5E-14 2.4E-13 0.0E-01 7.3E-01 3.5E CO A | |||
. PRIMARY NA-24 1.2E-03 4.4E-05 1.2E-03 3.4E-05 9.8E-01 2.7E 01 A | |||
l CR-51 3.1E-03 3.3E-04 3.8E-03 2.0E-04 1.2E 00 9.4E 00 A | |||
b 67'3 3.9E-05 7.9E-01 1.7E 01 A | |||
MN-54 8.3E-04 4.8E-05 6.5E-04 | |||
CO-58 3.9E-03 6.0E-05 4.0E-03 5.0E-05 1.0E 00 6.5E 01 A | |||
CO-60 3.9E-04 2.8E-05 3.0E-04 2.3E-05 7.7E-01 1.4E 01 A | |||
- | |||
I-131 5.8E-03 6.8E-05 5.9E-03 5.5E-05 1.0E 00 8.5E 01 A | |||
I-132 4.4E-03 6.3E-05 4.6E-03 5.6E-05 1.0E 00 6.9E 01 A | |||
I-133 1.1E-02 7.8E-05 1.2E-02 7.0E-05 1.0E 00 1.4E 02 A | |||
T TEST RESULTS: | |||
' | |||
AoAGREEMENT i | |||
D: DISAGREEMENT | |||
ocCRITERIA RELAXED | |||
N:NO COMPARISON | |||
- | |||
. | |||
. | |||
* | |||
4 | |||
* | |||
. | |||
TABLE 1 | |||
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION | |||
OFFICE OF INSFECTION AND ENFORC.EMENT | |||
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM | |||
FACILITY CALLAWAY | |||
FOR THE 2 OUARTER OF 1930 | |||
------NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEEINRC---- | |||
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO REG T | |||
PRIMARY I-135 5.3E-03 1.7E-04 5.1E-03 1.4E-04 ?.5E-01 3.1E 01 A | |||
D6r 3 cour.CS-134 1. ' +E-04 3.0E-05 1.3E-04 2.5E-05 5.3E-01 4.6E 00 A | |||
CS-137 5.4E-04 3.8E-05- 5.3E-04 2.7E-05 9.9E-01 1.4E 01- A , | |||
P-FILTER CR-51 6.8E-12 6.8E-13 6.4E-12 3.5E-13 9.5E-01 1.0E 01 A | |||
14r CO-58 6.0E-12 1.9E-13 5.7E-12 1.2E-13 9.5E-01 3.2E 01 A | |||
MN-54 5.7E-13 6.8E-14 6.0E-13 5.2E-14 1.0E 00 8.4E 00 A | |||
CO-60 6.2E-13 6.8E-14 5.7E-13 5.3E-14 9.3E-01 9.1E 00 A | |||
I-131 6.4E-13 6.9E-14 6.0E-13 0.0E-01 c.4E-01 9.2E 00 A | |||
ZR-95 7.0E-13 1.2E-13 6.5E-13 7.5E-14 9.3E-01 5.9E 00 A | |||
NB-95 6.1E-13 8.4E-14 5.8E-13 5.oE-14 C.5E-01 7.3E 00 A | |||
MO-99 1.7E-12 4.7E-13 1.5E-12 3.2E-14 9.3E-01 3.5E 00 A | |||
CS-134 4.6E-13 1.2E-13 2.8E-13 4.4E-14 6,2E-01 3.9E 00 A | |||
CS-137 1.2E-12 1.2E-13 9.4E-13 6.3E-14 8.1E-01 9.9E 00 A | |||
' | |||
CE-144 6.8E-13 6.7E-14 6.2E-13 1.3E-13 9.0E-01 1.0E 01 A | |||
HF-181 3.3E-13 9.5E-14 1.5E-13 0.0E-01 4.4E-01 3.5E 00 A | |||
C FILTER BR-82 1.3E-11 4.8E-13 8.5E-12 2.1E-13 6.8E-01 2.6E 01 D | |||
I-131 5.5E-11 6.8E-13 4.9E-11 3.3E-13 9.0E-01 8. E 01 A | |||
barA I-133 3.4E-12 3.!E-13 2.9E-12 1.!E-13 8.7E-01 1.1E 01 A | |||
L WASTE CR-51 2.2E-05 2.1E-06 2.7E-05 1.3E-06 1.2E 00 1.1E 01 A | |||
gop MN-54 5.9E-06 3.1E-07 5.5E-06 1.2E-07 9.3E-01 1.9E 01 A | |||
FE-59 1.2E-06 2.7E-07 1.4E-06 1.7E-07 1.2E 00 4.3E 00 A | |||
CO-58 3.!E-05 3.8E-07 2.8E-05 2.0E-07 9.2E-01 0.!E 01 A | |||
CO-60 2.1E-06 1.5E-07 2.2E-06 9.5E-08 1.0E 00 1.4E 01 A | |||
W-187 1.6E-06 7.7E-07 2.3E-06 3,0E-07 1.4E 00 2.1E 00 A > | |||
I-131 1.0E-04 6.0E-07 9.8E-05 3.2E-07 9.5E-01 1.7E 02 A | |||
I-132 1.3E-05 8.2E-07 1.2E-05 3. 4 E-07 9. 2E- 01 1.6E 01 A | |||
I-133 1.3E-04 6.9E-07 1.2E-04 3.5E-07 9.3E-01 1.9E 02 A | |||
I-135- 4.!E-05 1.3E-06 3.9E-05 7.3E-07 9,4E-01 3.1E 01 A | |||
CS-134 4.1E-06 3.2E-07 3.9E-06 1.3E-07 9.4E-01 1.3E 01 A | |||
4 | |||
T TEST RESULTS | |||
AoAGREEMENT | |||
' | |||
DoDISAGREEMENT | |||
CaCRITERIA RELAXED | |||
N:NO COMoARISON | |||
2- | |||
_ . _ | |||
* | |||
. .' ., . | |||
. . . | |||
. | |||
, | |||
' | |||
TABLE 1 | |||
U S NUCLEAR PEGlLATORY COMMISSION , | |||
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT | |||
CONFIRMATORY NEASUREMENTS PROGRAM | |||
FACILITY: CALLAWAY | |||
FOR THE 2 OUAPTER OF 1909 | |||
------NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEEINRC---- | |||
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERRCR RATIO RES T | |||
'L WASTE CS-136 2.GE-06 2.2E-07 2.8E-06 1.2E-07 1.0E 00 1.3E 01 A | |||
2.9E-07 1.5E-05 1.5E-07 9.4E-01 5.6E 01 A | |||
- 6c5 Cour CS-137 1.6E-05 | |||
C FILTER BR-82 1,3F-11 4.8E-13 8.3E-12 2.1E-13 6.6E-01 2.6E 01 D | |||
yor I-131 5.5E-!! 6.8E-13 4.6E-11 3.0E-13 0.3E-01 8.1E 01 A | |||
I-133 3.4E-12 3.1E-13 2.6E-12 1.2E-13 7.8E-01 1.1E 01 A | |||
OFF GAS XE-133 7.8E-04 1.5E-05 7.7E-04 1.4E-06 1.0E 00 5,3E 01 A | |||
9pcra XE-135 1.8E-05 2.1E-06 1.7E-05 1.3E-07 9.1E-01 8.7E 00 A | |||
C SPIKED CO-57 9.2E-03 1.7E-04 9.7E-03 9.4E-05 1.1E 00 5.4E 01 A | |||
16TA CO-60 2.0E-02 5.8E-04 1.9E-02 3.3E-04 9.9E-01 3.4E 01 A | |||
HG-203 6.3E-03 2.5E-04 6.6E-03 1.2E-04 1.0E 00 :2. LE 01 A | |||
Y-88 2.'1E-02 6.5E-04 2.1E-02 3.2E-04 1.0E OD 3.2E 01 A - | |||
CD-109 5.2E-01 6.4E-03 5.5E-01 3.5E-03 1.1E 00 8.1E 01 A | |||
SN-113 1.3E-02 3.9E-04 1.4E-02 2.1E-04 1.1E 00 3.3E 01 A | |||
CS-137 1.8E-02 5.5E-04 2.0E-02 2.7E-04 1.1E 00 3.3E 01 A | |||
CE-139 7.3E-03 2.0E-04 7.6E-03 9.8E-05 1.0E 00 3.6E 01 A | |||
.OFF GAS XE-133 7.6E-04 1.4E-05 7.8E-04 1.2E-06 1.0E 00 5.4E 01 A | |||
g e73 XE-135 1.4E-05 1.7E-06 1.7E-05 1.2E-07 1.2E 00 8.4E 00 A | |||
L WASTE NA-24 1.0E-05 3.2E-07 1.0E-05 1.9E-07 1.0E 00 3.2E 01 A | |||
t er 4 CR-51 2.7E-05 2.0E-06 2.8E-05 1.6E-06 1.0E 00 1.3E 01 A | |||
MN-54 5.4E-06 2.6E-07 4.2E-06 1.4E-07 7.SE-01 2.1E 01 A | |||
CO-58 3.0E-05 4.1E-07 2.9E-05 2.6E-07 9.6E-01 7.4E 01 A | |||
CO-60 2.0E-06 2.2E-07 2.3E-06 1.1E-07 1.1E 00 9.#E 00 A | |||
U-187 2.4E-06 6.BE-07 3.1E-06 0.0E-01 1.3E 00 3.3E 00 A | |||
I-131 1.0E-04 6.3E-07 1.0E-04 3.7E-07 9.9E-01 1.7E 02 A | |||
I-132 1.3E-05 3.5E-07 1.3E-05 1.9E-07 9.9E-01 3.8E 01 A | |||
I-133 1.3E-04 6.5E-07 1.3E-04 4.1E-05 9.7E-01 2.0E 02 A | |||
I-135 3.9E-05 1.2E-06 4.0E-05 7.2E-07 1.0E 00 3.2E 01 A | |||
i | |||
T TEST RESULTSt | |||
, AnAGREEMENT | |||
! DsDISAGREEMENT | |||
l osCRITERIA RELAXED | |||
i NsNO COMPARISON | |||
i | |||
-3- | |||
' | |||
- | |||
. _ _. . . | |||
, | |||
-. | |||
- 3 .. , | |||
.. ..e-- . | |||
, | |||
. | |||
TABLE 1 | |||
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION , | |||
, | |||
OFFICE OF~ INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT ~ | |||
CONF!RMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM | |||
; FACILITY: CALLAWAY | |||
I FOR THE 2 GUARTER OF 1908 | |||
y ------NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE 1NRC---- | |||
' SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO REG T | |||
L WASTE CS-134 4.0E-06 2.5E-07 3.9E-06 1.7E-05 1.0E 00 1.6E 01 A | |||
gg7 k ofS-136 3.4E-06 2.4E-07 3.2E-06 1.6E-07 9.3E-01 1.4E 01 A | |||
CS-137 1.SE-05 3.2E-07 1.6E-05 1.9E-07 1.OE 00 4.7E 01 A , | |||
T TEST RESULTS - | |||
AoAGREEMENT | |||
beDISAGREEMENT - | |||
i | |||
1 c= CRITERIA RELAXED' | |||
NANO' COMPARISON , | |||
. | |||
J | |||
l | |||
-4- [ | |||
. . . . . . . _- . . . .. -- | |||
}} |
Latest revision as of 08:36, 21 December 2021
ML20155D410 | |
Person / Time | |
---|---|
Site: | Callaway |
Issue date: | 05/31/1988 |
From: | Bocanegra R, Januska A, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
To: | |
Shared Package | |
ML20155D407 | List: |
References | |
50-483-88-08, 50-483-88-8, NUDOCS 8806150161 | |
Download: ML20155D410 (10) | |
See also: IR 05000483/1988008
Text
.
.s -
>s
. . .
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION III
-
. Report No. 50-483/88008(DRSS)
Occket No. 50-483 License No.- NPF-30
Licensee: Union Electric Company
Post Office Box 149
St. Louis, MO 63166
Facility Name: Callaway Plant, Unit 1
8
Inspection At: Callaway Site, Steedman,' Missouri
Inspection Conducted: May 2-6, 1988
hA, a,w s/n .
Inspector: inuska 0-29-88
Date r
-
Accompanied By: R.'Bocanegra 7/!gy
Date
f,b:h/~J/uu'
.
Approved By: M.~ Schumacher, Chief 'MF
Radiological Effluents Date
and Chemistr/ Section
Inspection
f Summary
Inspection on May 2-6,1988 (Report No. 50-483/88008(ORSS))
Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of confirmatory measurements, :
and Radiological Environmental Monitoring programs including: plant chemistry L
'
organization, management controls,-trainin and qualifications (IP 83722,
83723); quality assurance and confirmatory measurements for in plant
,
radiochemical analysis (IP 84725); and radiological environmental monitoring
'
(IP 80721). Collection of collocated thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD)
measurement resuits (TI 2500/22, IP 80721) was performed and the licensee's
. action on an open item was reviewed.
Results: Management attention to detail in radiological measurements has
resulted in an cverall strong program; however, timeliness in completing
calibration confirmation tests and inspector-observed poor laboratory '
. practices need to be addresse d . No viol ations or' deviations were
identified during this inspection.
- . .
.
'J
8806150161 880531
PDR .ADOCK 05000483
.0- .nnn - _ - ,
"
. - . - .- . . , . . - . , . _ . . .-. .. .. .
. . . . . ~ . - -
i
-
>
. .
-
. . .
.
OETAILS
1. Persons Contacted
- W. R. Robinson, Assistant Plant Manager
- D. R. Bromwell, QA Engineer
- J. C. Gearhart, Superintendent, QA Operations Support
- C. Graham, Supervisor, Health Physics Technical Support
- F. J. Forck, QA Scientist
- J. R. Peevy, Assistant Manager, Technical Services
- C.' A. Riggs, Supervisor, Chemistry
- R. 'R. Roselius, Superintendent, Health Physics
- E. M. Thornton, QA Engineering Evaluator
- M._A. Trusty, Acting Counting Room Foreman
J. D. Nurrenbern, Health Physicist
G. Clark, Senior Rad / Chem Technician
R. Seitz, Rad / Chem Technician
L. Godley, Rad / Chem Technician
P. Bell, Chemist
- B. H. Little, NRC Senior Resident Inspector
,
- Denotes those present at the exit meeting.
2. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
(Closed) Open item (483/87016-01): Licensee to complete changes in'the
QA/QC program. QC ch rt limits to be modified, boron QC charts and
control sample results tabulated by July 25, 1987. The licensee has
revised procedures to address the concerns in this open item. The
licensea now determines the standard deviation (s.d.) and the upper
and lower warning and control levels every six months using a minimum
of 15 current data points for key parameters defined in CDP-ZZ-00700.
Perfortince check data for each key parameter is recorded on a "Control
Chart D:ta Sheet." The boron control chart data indicated that the
six months update of the s.d. and control and warning levels had been
performed. The licensee now uses independent sources to check stability
of standards by assuring that, as a minimum, different lot numbers for
calibration standards and control standards are used. There has been no
change in the status of obtaining a computer for tabulation and analysis
of data.
3. Management Controls and Organization (IP 83722, 83723)
The inspectors reviewed the management controls and organdzation cf the
Health Physics Technical Support (n?T5) Group. The group is headed by
a HPTS Supervisor who reports to the Health Physics Superintendent who
in turn reports to the Assistant Manager Technical Services. The HPTS
2
._ __ _
7
1
4
. . .
>
Supervisor supervises a Rad / Chem Foreman who in turn supervises 11 Rad / Chem
Technicians (RCT) and their activities in the laboratory and counting room.
During this inspection an RCT was appointed Acting Rad / Chem Foreman during
the absence of the Rad / Chem Foreman. Since the inspection in May 1986
(Report No. 86014) one RCT has lef t Union Electric Company, one has
j transferred, and two have been promoted to another group. Three
I experienced RCTs have transferred into the group leaving the group with a
I net. loss of one RCT. The licensee has eliminated this vacant RCT position.
No violations or devfations were identified.
4. Confirmatory Measurements (IP 84725)
a. Quality Assurance
The inspectors reviewed the radioactivity measurements laboratory
quality assurance program including the ohysical facilities,
latuatory operations, and procedines. Pertinent laboratory and
counting room operating procedures found in Health Physics Department
Procedures (HDP) and Health Physics Technical Procedures (hip) were
reviewed for technical content by the inspectors. Procedures reviewed
included Count Room Quality Control Program (HOP-ZZ-04700), Calibration
of Intrinsic Germanium Detectors (HTP-ZZ-04538), Count Room Analytic
and Quality Control Calculations and Methods (HTP-ZZ-06020), and
Operation of the Gamma Spectroscopy Counting System (HTP-ZZ-04537).
The inspectors also reviewed Quality Control records and related
supporting documentation. Documents inspected included results for
.
germanium detector calibratier. and efficiency tables. The inspectors
also verifitd that calibrations for release geometries had been
confirmed semiannually per HTP-ZZ-04538 4.8. However, the insp -tors
expressed concern to the licensee that the latest confirmation tests
of detector calibrations performed in January 1988 had not been closed
~
out. Charcoal and planchette geometry confirmation tests showed some
inconsistencies that had not been resolved by the licensee. The
licensee will giva priority to completing the last confirmation tests
and will initiat9 a change in p"ocedure to require completion of
future confirmation tests within a reasonable length of time.
'
The licensee participates in a quarterly intercomparison crosscheck
program with an outside vendor. Some of these samples are forwarded
to the licensee's contract laboratory f or Sr-89, Sr-90, and Fe-55
analyses. A review of the fourto quarter 1986 results for these
specific analyses showed the t.ontract laboratory achieved one out
. of three agreements. A licasee assessment (UOTH-87-154) of the
ccatract laboratory's past perferniance resulted in a new laboratory
being selected for future analyses. The 1987 intercomparison
results showed a marked improvement. Crosscheck program results
for in-house gamma-ray analysi t for tM rd quarter 1986, first
quarter 1987, and first quarter 1988, were reviewed. The results
were centrally good with some minor disagreements.
3
- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
_.
.
. . .
Daily QC charts for the germanium detectors were inspected. he
Health Physicist responsible for interpreting and evaluating the
charts was interviewed by an inspector and appeared to be competent
and knowledgeable in this area. Rad / Chem Technicians were observed
and evaluated on sample acquisition and preparation, and general
laboratory practices. One technician was observed pouring low level
radioactive liquid into a container without wearing gloves. The
licensee acknowledged the inspectors' concern and agreed to discuss
the laboratory practices with Rad Chem personnel,
b. Sample Split
Six samples (air particulate, charcoal absorber, charcoal spike,
reactor coolant, liquid waste and gas) were analyzed for gamma
emitting isotopes by the licensee and in the Region III mobile
laboratory on site. Comparisons were made on combinations of
the licensee's four normally used count room detectors and on
a back up system in the E0F. Results of the sample comparisons
are given in Table 1; comparison criteria are given in Attachment 1.
The licensee achieved 87 agreements out of 89 comoarisons.
A containment air particulate, a liquid waste monitor tank, a reactor
coolant and a gas sample yielded all agreements. The licensee agreed
to analyze or have a portion of the liquid sample analyzed for gross
alpha, gross beta, H-3, Sr-89, Sr-90 and Fe-55 and report the results
to Region III (0 pen _ Item 50-483/88008-01).
A containment charcoal absorber yielded a disagreement on Detector 2
and on the E0F detector for Br-82. In addition to the disagreement,
the iodine comparisons, although agreements, were biased low. A
spiked charcoal absorber was analyzed as an unknown on Detector 2
and by the inspectors resulting in all agreements. The inspectors
then demonstrated to the licensee that activity distribution on the
sample and the calibration standard were not the same which caused
the low bias in the analyses. The licensee was cautioned of the
potential for under reporting halogen fission products in samples
collected under abnormal conditions. The licensee acknow' edged
the inspectors comments.
.
c. Audits
The inspectors reviewed several surveillance reports and audit recorts
related to radiochemistry. There were no findings made relating r.c
confirmatory measurements. The inspector also noted the high qunity
of the surveillance reports and, in particular, the technical qtality
of "Surveillance of EBAR" performed in January 1988.
No violations or deviations were noted.
4
_ . - - - - -
_
.- .-. . -.-
. _ . - _ - _ - _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ -__ __ __ . _ - _ ____ .-__ ._ _ -_ _____.
_.__ _ _ _ _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ -
.p
. .
5. Environmental Protection (IP 80721)
The inspectors reviewed the radiological portion of the licensee's "Annual
Environmental Operating Report" for 1986 and 1987. The levels of
radioactivity in the samples collected around the plant were generally
consistent with previous data. There appears to be no evidence that the
plant operation has had any significant environmental impact.
No violations or deviations were identified.
6. ~ Collocated TLD Verification (TI 25000/22, IP 80721)
The inspectors exar,1,cd ten locations where licensee and NRC dosimetet s
were thought to be collocated. Eight of the locations appeared close
enough in distarce and azimuth to be so regarded. NRC TLD Stations
Nos. 8 and 27 were not collocated with Licensee's Stations Nos. 47
and 15, respectively.
No violations or deviations were identified.
7. 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. An open item disclosed during
the inspection is discussed in Section 4b.
8. Exit Meeting
The inspectors met with licensee representatives' denoted in Section 1
at the conclusion of the inspection on May 6, 1988. The scope of the
inspection and findings were discussed.
During the inspection the inspectors discussed the likely informational
content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes
reviewed by the inspectors during the inspection. Licensee represen-
tatives did not identify any such documents or procedures as proprietary.
Attachments:
,
1. Attachment 1, Criteria for
Comparing Analytical
Measurements
, 2. Table 1, Confirmatory Measurements
2
Program Results, 1st Quarter 1988
.
J
5 .
.
m -- 4 - - - - -< -- -e -y--. e . --- --.w- ,-ei, ,ir.-y, ,,,-c,-,-v_ g:-_m---y --
-y-- g.- =.<w-g- - ------
e
-
. .
,
.
-ATTACHMENT 1
CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS
This attachment provides criteria for comparing results of capability tes.ts
and verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical
relationship which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this
program.
In these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the com-
parison of the NRC's value to its associated one signa uncertainty. As that
ratio, referred to in this program as "Resolution", increases, the acceptability
cf 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 significant figures to
maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported
by the NRC Reference Laboratory, ualess such rounding will result in a narrowed
category of acceptance.
RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE
Agreement
.
<3 No Comparison
2;3 and <4 0.4 -
2.5 ,
2,4 and <8 0.5 -
2.0
jd) and <16 0.6 -
1.67
2J6and <51 0.75 - 1.33
251 and <200 0.80 - 1.25
.g200 0.85 - 1.18
Some discrepancies may result from the use of different equipment, technique?,
and for some specific nuclides. These may be factored into the acceptance
criteria and identified on the data sheet.
.
4
- -
-+
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ . . _ _ _ - _
'
.
- -
,- .
,
, ,
,
TABLE 1
U S NUCLEAR RFGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
FACILITY: CALLAWAY
FOR THE 2 OUARTER OF 1993
NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE:NRC----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT EPROR RATIO RES T
PRIMARY NA-24 1.2E-03 4.6E-05 1.2E-03 5.0E-05 9.7E-01 2.6E 01 A
b6Tl CR-51 4.0E-03 3.5E-04 3.4E-03 2.9E-04 3.7E-01 1.!E 01 A
MN-54 5.1E-04 4.0E-05 6.0E-04 3.8E-05 1.2E 00 1.3E 01 A
CO-58 4.0E-03 6.2E-05 3.5E-03 6.!E-05 8.7E-01 6.5E 01 A
CO-60 3.4E-04 2.9E-05 3.2E-04 2.8E-05 9.3E-01 1.2E 01 A
I-131 5.7E-03 6.6E-05 5.GE-03 6.4E-05 1.0E 00 8.6E 01 A
I-132 4.5E-03 7.4E-05 4.4E-03 7.3E-05 9.8E-01 6.0E 01 A
I-133 1.!E-02 7.9E-05 1.!E-02 0.3E-05 9.9E-01 1,4E 02 A
I-135 4.9E-03 1.6E-04 4.8E-03 1.7E-04 9.8E-01 3.1E 01 A
CS-137 5.3E-04 3.8E-05 4.7E-04 3.4E-05 S.7E-01 1.4E 01 A
P FILTER CR-51 6.8E-12 6.8E-13 6.8E-12 3.5E-13 1.0E 00 1.0E 01 A
MN-54 5.7E-13 6.8E-14 5.4F-13 4.5E-14 9.5E-01 0.4E 00 A
b6f4 1.1E 00 3.2E 01 A
CO-58 6.0E-12 1.9E-13 6.3E-12 1.3E-13
CO-60 6.2E-13 6.8E-14 5.9E-13 5.3E-14 9.6E-01 9.1E 00 A
I-131 6.4E-13 6.9E-14 4.7E-13 0.0E-01 7.3E-01 9.2E 00 A
ZR-95 7.0E-13 1.2E-13 5.3E-13 6.6E-14 7.5E-01 5.9E 00 A
NB-95 6.1E-13 8.4E-14 6.0E-13 4.7E-14 9.9E-01 7.3E 00 A
MO-99 1.7E-12 4.7E-13 1,5E-12 3.1E-14 9.3E-01 3.5E 00 A
CS-134 4.6E-13 1.2E-13 2.7E-13 4.3E-14 5.9E-01 3.9E 00 A
CS-137 1.2E-12 1.2E-13 9.2E-13 6.0E-14 8.0E-01 9.9E 00 A
CE-144 6.8E-13 6.7E-1; 7.2E-13 1.3E-13 1.0E 00 1.0E 01 A ,
HF-181 3.3E-13 9.5E-14 2.4E-13 0.0E-01 7.3E-01 3.5E CO A
. PRIMARY NA-24 1.2E-03 4.4E-05 1.2E-03 3.4E-05 9.8E-01 2.7E 01 A
l CR-51 3.1E-03 3.3E-04 3.8E-03 2.0E-04 1.2E 00 9.4E 00 A
b 67'3 3.9E-05 7.9E-01 1.7E 01 A
MN-54 8.3E-04 4.8E-05 6.5E-04
CO-58 3.9E-03 6.0E-05 4.0E-03 5.0E-05 1.0E 00 6.5E 01 A
CO-60 3.9E-04 2.8E-05 3.0E-04 2.3E-05 7.7E-01 1.4E 01 A
-
I-131 5.8E-03 6.8E-05 5.9E-03 5.5E-05 1.0E 00 8.5E 01 A
I-132 4.4E-03 6.3E-05 4.6E-03 5.6E-05 1.0E 00 6.9E 01 A
I-133 1.1E-02 7.8E-05 1.2E-02 7.0E-05 1.0E 00 1.4E 02 A
T TEST RESULTS:
'
AoAGREEMENT i
D: DISAGREEMENT
ocCRITERIA RELAXED
N:NO COMPARISON
-
.
.
4
.
TABLE 1
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
OFFICE OF INSFECTION AND ENFORC.EMENT
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
FACILITY CALLAWAY
FOR THE 2 OUARTER OF 1930
NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEEINRC----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO REG T
PRIMARY I-135 5.3E-03 1.7E-04 5.1E-03 1.4E-04 ?.5E-01 3.1E 01 A
D6r 3 cour.CS-134 1. ' +E-04 3.0E-05 1.3E-04 2.5E-05 5.3E-01 4.6E 00 A
CS-137 5.4E-04 3.8E-05- 5.3E-04 2.7E-05 9.9E-01 1.4E 01- A ,
P-FILTER CR-51 6.8E-12 6.8E-13 6.4E-12 3.5E-13 9.5E-01 1.0E 01 A
14r CO-58 6.0E-12 1.9E-13 5.7E-12 1.2E-13 9.5E-01 3.2E 01 A
MN-54 5.7E-13 6.8E-14 6.0E-13 5.2E-14 1.0E 00 8.4E 00 A
CO-60 6.2E-13 6.8E-14 5.7E-13 5.3E-14 9.3E-01 9.1E 00 A
I-131 6.4E-13 6.9E-14 6.0E-13 0.0E-01 c.4E-01 9.2E 00 A
ZR-95 7.0E-13 1.2E-13 6.5E-13 7.5E-14 9.3E-01 5.9E 00 A
NB-95 6.1E-13 8.4E-14 5.8E-13 5.oE-14 C.5E-01 7.3E 00 A
MO-99 1.7E-12 4.7E-13 1.5E-12 3.2E-14 9.3E-01 3.5E 00 A
CS-134 4.6E-13 1.2E-13 2.8E-13 4.4E-14 6,2E-01 3.9E 00 A
CS-137 1.2E-12 1.2E-13 9.4E-13 6.3E-14 8.1E-01 9.9E 00 A
'
CE-144 6.8E-13 6.7E-14 6.2E-13 1.3E-13 9.0E-01 1.0E 01 A
HF-181 3.3E-13 9.5E-14 1.5E-13 0.0E-01 4.4E-01 3.5E 00 A
C FILTER BR-82 1.3E-11 4.8E-13 8.5E-12 2.1E-13 6.8E-01 2.6E 01 D
I-131 5.5E-11 6.8E-13 4.9E-11 3.3E-13 9.0E-01 8. E 01 A
barA I-133 3.4E-12 3.!E-13 2.9E-12 1.!E-13 8.7E-01 1.1E 01 A
L WASTE CR-51 2.2E-05 2.1E-06 2.7E-05 1.3E-06 1.2E 00 1.1E 01 A
gop MN-54 5.9E-06 3.1E-07 5.5E-06 1.2E-07 9.3E-01 1.9E 01 A
FE-59 1.2E-06 2.7E-07 1.4E-06 1.7E-07 1.2E 00 4.3E 00 A
CO-58 3.!E-05 3.8E-07 2.8E-05 2.0E-07 9.2E-01 0.!E 01 A
CO-60 2.1E-06 1.5E-07 2.2E-06 9.5E-08 1.0E 00 1.4E 01 A
W-187 1.6E-06 7.7E-07 2.3E-06 3,0E-07 1.4E 00 2.1E 00 A >
I-131 1.0E-04 6.0E-07 9.8E-05 3.2E-07 9.5E-01 1.7E 02 A
I-132 1.3E-05 8.2E-07 1.2E-05 3. 4 E-07 9. 2E- 01 1.6E 01 A
I-133 1.3E-04 6.9E-07 1.2E-04 3.5E-07 9.3E-01 1.9E 02 A
I-135- 4.!E-05 1.3E-06 3.9E-05 7.3E-07 9,4E-01 3.1E 01 A
CS-134 4.1E-06 3.2E-07 3.9E-06 1.3E-07 9.4E-01 1.3E 01 A
4
T TEST RESULTS
AoAGREEMENT
'
DoDISAGREEMENT
CaCRITERIA RELAXED
N:NO COMoARISON
2-
_ . _
. .' ., .
. . .
.
,
'
TABLE 1
U S NUCLEAR PEGlLATORY COMMISSION ,
OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT
CONFIRMATORY NEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
FACILITY: CALLAWAY
FOR THE 2 OUAPTER OF 1909
NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEEINRC----
SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERRCR RATIO RES T
'L WASTE CS-136 2.GE-06 2.2E-07 2.8E-06 1.2E-07 1.0E 00 1.3E 01 A
2.9E-07 1.5E-05 1.5E-07 9.4E-01 5.6E 01 A
- 6c5 Cour CS-137 1.6E-05
C FILTER BR-82 1,3F-11 4.8E-13 8.3E-12 2.1E-13 6.6E-01 2.6E 01 D
yor I-131 5.5E-!! 6.8E-13 4.6E-11 3.0E-13 0.3E-01 8.1E 01 A
I-133 3.4E-12 3.1E-13 2.6E-12 1.2E-13 7.8E-01 1.1E 01 A
OFF GAS XE-133 7.8E-04 1.5E-05 7.7E-04 1.4E-06 1.0E 00 5,3E 01 A
9pcra XE-135 1.8E-05 2.1E-06 1.7E-05 1.3E-07 9.1E-01 8.7E 00 A
C SPIKED CO-57 9.2E-03 1.7E-04 9.7E-03 9.4E-05 1.1E 00 5.4E 01 A
16TA CO-60 2.0E-02 5.8E-04 1.9E-02 3.3E-04 9.9E-01 3.4E 01 A
HG-203 6.3E-03 2.5E-04 6.6E-03 1.2E-04 1.0E 00 :2. LE 01 A
Y-88 2.'1E-02 6.5E-04 2.1E-02 3.2E-04 1.0E OD 3.2E 01 A -
CD-109 5.2E-01 6.4E-03 5.5E-01 3.5E-03 1.1E 00 8.1E 01 A
SN-113 1.3E-02 3.9E-04 1.4E-02 2.1E-04 1.1E 00 3.3E 01 A
CS-137 1.8E-02 5.5E-04 2.0E-02 2.7E-04 1.1E 00 3.3E 01 A
CE-139 7.3E-03 2.0E-04 7.6E-03 9.8E-05 1.0E 00 3.6E 01 A
.OFF GAS XE-133 7.6E-04 1.4E-05 7.8E-04 1.2E-06 1.0E 00 5.4E 01 A
g e73 XE-135 1.4E-05 1.7E-06 1.7E-05 1.2E-07 1.2E 00 8.4E 00 A
L WASTE NA-24 1.0E-05 3.2E-07 1.0E-05 1.9E-07 1.0E 00 3.2E 01 A
t er 4 CR-51 2.7E-05 2.0E-06 2.8E-05 1.6E-06 1.0E 00 1.3E 01 A
MN-54 5.4E-06 2.6E-07 4.2E-06 1.4E-07 7.SE-01 2.1E 01 A
CO-58 3.0E-05 4.1E-07 2.9E-05 2.6E-07 9.6E-01 7.4E 01 A
CO-60 2.0E-06 2.2E-07 2.3E-06 1.1E-07 1.1E 00 9.#E 00 A
U-187 2.4E-06 6.BE-07 3.1E-06 0.0E-01 1.3E 00 3.3E 00 A
I-131 1.0E-04 6.3E-07 1.0E-04 3.7E-07 9.9E-01 1.7E 02 A
I-132 1.3E-05 3.5E-07 1.3E-05 1.9E-07 9.9E-01 3.8E 01 A
I-133 1.3E-04 6.5E-07 1.3E-04 4.1E-05 9.7E-01 2.0E 02 A
I-135 3.9E-05 1.2E-06 4.0E-05 7.2E-07 1.0E 00 3.2E 01 A
i
T TEST RESULTSt
, AnAGREEMENT
! DsDISAGREEMENT
l osCRITERIA RELAXED
i NsNO COMPARISON
i
-3-
'
-
. _ _. . .
,
-.
- 3 .. ,
.. ..e-- .
,
.
TABLE 1
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,
,
OFFICE OF~ INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT ~
CONF!RMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM
- FACILITY
- CALLAWAY
I FOR THE 2 GUARTER OF 1908
y ------NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE 1NRC----
' SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO REG T
L WASTE CS-134 4.0E-06 2.5E-07 3.9E-06 1.7E-05 1.0E 00 1.6E 01 A
gg7 k ofS-136 3.4E-06 2.4E-07 3.2E-06 1.6E-07 9.3E-01 1.4E 01 A
CS-137 1.SE-05 3.2E-07 1.6E-05 1.9E-07 1.OE 00 4.7E 01 A ,
T TEST RESULTS -
AoAGREEMENT
beDISAGREEMENT -
i
1 c= CRITERIA RELAXED'
NANO' COMPARISON ,
.
J
l
-4- [
. . . . . . . _- . . . .. --