Text

Insp Repts 50-295/85-30 & 50-304/85-31 on 850820-23 & 27-28. Violation Noted:Failure to Implement Written Procedure Zcp 531-7, Performance Test for Eberline Model SAC-4 Scintillation Alpha Counter
	ML20133D762
Person / Time
Site:	Zion File:ZionSolutions icon.png
Issue date:	09/27/1985
From:	Januska A, Schumacher M; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20133D733	List: ML20133D729; ML20133D739; ML20133D762;
References
	50-295-85-30, 50-304-85-31, NUDOCS 8510090171
	Download: ML20133D762 (8)
	v • d • e

-- --

.

. . - - . - -= .-

'

.

U.i. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Report No. 50-295/85030(DRSS); 50-304/85031(DRSS)

Docket No. 50-295; 50-304 License No. DRP-39; DRP-48

Licensee: Commonwealth Edison Company

Post Office Box 767 -

Chicago, IL 60690

Facility Name: Zion Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2

Inspection At: Zion Site, Zion, IL

Inspection Conducted: August 20-23, 27 and 28, 1985

Inspector:

$1' /./

A. G. Januska

~

Y gg-

Date

Approved By:

%v. A ~/~

M. C. Schumacher, Chief N f~

Independent Measurements Date

and Environmental

Inspection Summary

Inspection on August 20-23, 27 and 28, 1985 (Report No. 50-295/85030(DRSS);

50-295/85031(DRSS))

Areas Inspected: Routine, unannounced inspection of (1) Confirmatory Measure-

ments Program including sample split and onsite analysis with the Region III

Mobile Laboratory; review of the licensee's laboratory practices and quality

control; and internal audits; and (2) review of open items identified during

previous inspections. The inspection involved 51.5 inspector-hours onsite by

one NRC inspector.

Results: One apparent violation was identified (Severity Level V, Supplement

I violation - failure to implement a written procedure - Section 5).

i

!

! 8510090171 850927

4 PDR ADOCK 05000295

i G PDR

l

_.

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

- -- - -- - - . . - .- --.. - -.

,

$

.

1

4

,

i

DETAILS

,

, 1. Persons Contacted

l *K. Graesser, Station Manager

i *T. Rieck, Superintendent, Services

I *W. Kurth, Assistant Superintendent, Services

>

W. Stone, QA Supervisor

! *J. Ballard, QC Supervisor

j *C. Doil, Chemist *

*F. Swan, Chemist

G. Trzyna, Rad-Chemistry Supervisor

i.

"

D. Hemmerle, Chemist

R. Acker, Lead Chemist

K. Kelly, Rad / Chem Tech

V. iiilliams, Health Physicist

i G. Plim1, Superintendent, Production

j * Denotes those present at exit interview.

1

] 2. Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings

i a. (Closed) Open Item (50-295/83018-05; 50-304/83019-05): Issue

i corrections to the 1982 and 1983 semi-annual effluent reports.

.

i

Errata sheets containing corrections of percent of Technical

Specifications limit previously reported, and proper reporting of

j Ag-110m were reviewed and appear to address discrepancies.

I b. (Closed) Open Item (50-295/84005-01; 50-304/85005-01): Revise

QP-13-52 and ZAP-13-52-8 to reflect appropriate 10 CFR 61 and

'

10 CFR 20 waste disposal requirements. Both procedures were

reviewed. ZAP-13-52-8 was revised to include (1) reference to

i 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 61, (2) confirmation of receipt of shipments,

'

(3) shipping papers, (4) classification, (5) marking of package,

j etc. Although QP-13-52 has not been revised to specifically reflect

l Parts 20 and 61 requirements it contains QA checklists applicable

! to all radioactive materials shipments. As ZAP-13-52-8 is the

controlling procedure fr.t shipment of radioactive material, the

item is considered closed.

c. (Closed) Open Item (50-295/84016-02; 50-304/84016-02): Install

-

positive stops on the doors of hoods 4 and 5 to increase the face

I velocity to a minimum of 100 feet per minute. During a tour of the

, radiochemistry laboratory the inspector noted that all hoods now have

l positive stops at which point the hood face velocity is approximately

100 feet per minute and permanently mounted anemometers in each face

l opening.

I

i d. (Closed) Open Item (50-295/84016-03; 50-304/84016-03): Count lake

l discharge sample for H-3, Sr-89, St-90 and gross beta and report

l results to RIII. Comparative results are presented in Table 2 and

I comparison criteria are outlined in Attachment 1.

!

2

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

.

3. Confirmatory Measurements Sample Split

Six samples (an air particulate filter, a charcoal filter, a lake

discharge tank, an equipment drain analysis tank, a waste gas decay tank

and a reactor coolant sample) were analyzed for gamma emitting isotopes

by the licensee and in the Region III mobile laboratory onsite. All

samples were counted by chemistry personnel on their Detector 2 and,

additionally, the charcoal adsorber, lake discharge tank and equipment

drain analysis tank were counted on Detector 3. Results of the sample

comparisons are listed in Table 1. All comparisons (49) were agreements.

In addition to these nuclide coroarisons the inspector compared the result

of the licensee's dose equivalent iodine on the reactor coolant sample.

It compared favorably with the result obtained from the NRC analyses.

The licensee agreed to analyze a portion of the lake discharge sample for

gross beta, H-3, Sr-89 and Sr-90 and report the results to Region III.

(0 pen Item 50-295/85030-01; 50-304/85031-01)

No violations were identified in this area.

4. Audits

The inspector reviewed QA 22-85-04 Radiochemical and Chemical Control,

QA 22-85-16 Radiochemical Instruments and Procedures and QA 22-85-20

Radioactive Waste and Non-Waste Shipment and Releases. All audited areas

appear to be satisfactory.

The qualification of auditors was reviewed. The inspector verified that

the above audits were conducted by qualified auditors. Either the Lead

Auditor or Auditor must be qualified in the area audited. The Corporate

Quality Assurance Department maintains a QA Department Auditor Qualification

Matrix of 50 audit areas. Qualification is achieved by formal training

provided by either the Production Training Center or consultants. The

QA Supervisor (Zion Station) also provides training / retraining on the QA

Manual and Station Procedures. Formal tests are given at the completion

of a training unit. This ongoing training program should benefit the

licensee in being able to demonstrate quality in various areas.

No violations were identified in this area.

5. QA/QC of Analytical Measurements

The inspector reviewed daily instrument performance tests and calibrations

of gamma spectroscopy equipment, liquid scintillation counters, gross

alpha / beta counters and an alpha scintillation counter. The review

indicated that for the first seven months of 1985, performance tests

for the operating SAC-4 were beyond the range specified in Table 81,

" Performance Test Log for the Eberline Model SAC-4 Scintillation Alpha

Counter" on 13 occasions, 7 of which were in June 1985. Further, a review

of Foreman Turnover Log sheets for June 1985 gave no evidence that the

l instrument was taken out of service and that chemistry supervision was

3

!

t

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

.

notified as required. This appears to be a violation of procedure ,

ZCP 531-7 " Performance Test for the Eberline Model SAC-4 Scintillation

Alpha Counter," and thereby, with Technical Specification Section 6.2.8

which requires that Radiation Control Procedures shall be adhered to

'

(Violation 50-295/85030-02; 50-304/85031-02).

!

'

The licensee's procedure for the SAC-4 does not require management review

l of the QC test data. Proper review and followup would have led to timely

'

correction of the observed problem. The same weakness (lack of required

,

management review) also exists for the licensee's two liquid scintillation

i counters (LSC). Inspector review of LSC performance log sheets noted

that incorrect background and range criteria had been listed on the heading

i of these sheets. However, the performance data indicated satisfactory

! counter operation. These weaknesses Mgether with the advantage of trend

plotting performance test data were discussed with licensee representatives

j who indicated that appropriate procedure revisions would be forthcoming. .

r !

'

l Calibration data reviewed was current and complete. Gamma spectroscopy

calibrations were examined for consistency between detectors. Although

no efficiency curves are drawn, the licensee stated that consistency for

'

recent calibrations has been tested although not procedurally required.

Methods of comparing like geometries between detectors and all geometries

by detector, and proceduralizing these methods were discussed with the ;

licensee, who acknowledged the comments.

!

,

6. Exit Interview

The inspector reviewed the scope and findings of the inspection with

1

licensee representatives (Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection

on August 28, 1985. The inspector discussed the apparent violation

identified during the inspection.

l The QA/QC program was also discussed and comments made by the inspector !

i were acknowledged.

.

l During the exit interview, the inspector discussed the likely informational

i

content of the inspection report. Licensee representatives did not

j consider the proposed content as proprietary.

Attachments: !

1. Table 1, Confirmatory Measurements Program

l

i Results, 3rd Quarter 1985

l 2. Table 2, Confirmatory Measurements Program

! Results, 3rd Quarter 1984

3. Attachment 1, Criteria for Comparing

,

Analytical Measurements.

!

,

I

i

4

.-__

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

_

.

TAE*LE 1

U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM

FACILITY: ZION

FOR THE 3 QUARTER OF 19G5

NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE:NRC----

SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T

C FILTER BR-82 2.7E-03 9.7E-05 2.3E-03 0.OE-01 S.6E-01 2.OE 01 A

b 6T 2. I-131 6.2E-03 1.0E-04 7.5E-03 0.0E-01 1.2E 00 6.1E 01 A

I-133 6.SE-03 1.4E-04 7.4E-03 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 4.SE 01 A

I-135 1.1E-03 1.6E-04 1.1E-03 0.0E-01 9.9E-01 6.7E 00 A

L WASTE CO-58 1.2E-06 1.2E-07 1.1E-06 0.OE-01 9.6E-01 9.6E 00 A

'b c7 2. CO-60 3.5E-06 2.3E-07 4.8E-06 0.0E-01 1.4E 00 1.6E 01 A

CS-137 4.4E-07 7.0E-08 4.9E-07 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 6.3E 00 A

P FILTER NA-24 2.1E-08 2.3E-09 1.6E-0G 0.0E-01 7.5E-01 9.1E 00 A

I-131 6.3E-09 G.OE-10 6.2E-09 0.0E-01 9.9E-01 7.OE 00 A

I-133 1.9E-0G 1.2E-0? 2.2E-0G O.0E-01 1.2E 00 1.6E 01 A

CS-134 6.7E-08 1.SE-09 6.2E-09 0.OE-01 9.3E-01 3.6E 01 A

CS-137 9.2E-08 '2.3E-09 8.7E-08 0.0E-01 9.5E-01 4.0E 01 A

L WASTE C0-58 1.2E-06 1.2E-07 7.2E-07 0.OE-01 6.2E-01 9.5E 00 A

ter 3 CO-60 3.5E-06 2.3E-07 5.5E-06 0.0E-01 1.6E 00 1.6E 01 A

OFF GAS AR-41 1.5E-06 7.5E-07 1.6E-06 0.OE-01 1.0E 00 2.0E 00 N

KR-85 3.3E-03 1.5E-04 3.4E-03 0.0E-01 1.0E 00 2.1E 01 A

KR-85M 2.2E-05 7.3E-07 2.2E-05 0.0E-01 9.9E-01 3.0E 01 A

KR-88 1.7E-05 1.3E-06 1.9E-05 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 1.3E 01 A

XE-133M 9.9E-05 4.4E-06 1.OE-04 0.OE-01 1.OE 00 2.3E 01 A

XE-135 3.0E-04 1.9E-06 2.4E-04 0.0E-01 8.0E-01 1.5E 02 A

XE-133 1.SE-02 1.7E-05 1.SE-02 0.OE-01 9.9E-01 9.1E 02 A

XE-131M 8.5E-05 1.7E-05 1.4E-04 0.0E-01 1.6E 00 5.1E 00 A

L WASTE MN-54 1.4E-04 1.1E-05 1.2E-04 0.0E-01 8.7E-01 1.2E 01 A

b 67 .1 CO-57 2.3E-05 3. GE -06 2.2E-05 0.0E-01 9.6E-01 6.1E 00 A

CO-58 1.6E-03 1.9E-05 1.5E-03 0.0E-01 9.6E-01 C.4E 01 A

CO-60 6.5E-03 3.?E-05 6.4E-03 0.0E-01 9.9E-01 1.7E 02 A

ZR-95 6.6E-05 1.6E-05 9.6E-05 0.0E-01 l.?E 00 4.2E 00 A

T TEST RESULTS:

fi= AGREEMENT

D= DISAGREEMENT

j += CRITERIA RELAXED

i

N=NG COMPARISON

l

,

i

. . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _

,

r-

-

!

TABLE 1

U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT

CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM

FACILITY: ZION

FOR THE 3 QUARTER OF 1985

NRC------- ----LICENSEE---- ---LICENSEE:NRC----

SAMPLE ISOTOPE RESULT ERROR RESULT ERROR RATIO RES T

L WASTE NB-95 2.3E-04 1.2E-05 2.4E-04 0.0E-01 1.0E 00 2.0E 01 A

CS-134 2.4E-04 1.2E-05 2.4E-04 0.OE-01 1.OE 00 2.1E 01 A

CS-137 2.7E-04 9.7E-06 2.3E-04 0.OE-01 8.7E-01 2.7E 01 A

AG-110M 1.GE-04 8.2E-06 1.7E-04 0.0E-01 9.4E-01 2.2E 01 A

C FILTER ER-82 2.7E-03 9.7E-05 2.4E-03 0.0E-01 9.OE-01 2.SE 01 A

2 er a I-131 6.2E-03 1.0s-04 6.9E-03 0.0E-01 1.le 00 6.ie 01 A

I-133 6.5E-03 1.4E-04 7.4E-03 0.OE-01 1.IE 00 4.SE 01 A

I-135 1.1E-03 1.6E-04 1.4E-03 0.0E-01 1.3E 00 6.7E 00 A

L WASTE MN-54 1.4E-04 1.1E-05 1.5E-04 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 1.2E 01 A

bcT3 CO-58 1.6E-03 1.9E-05 1.6E-03 0.0E-01 1.0E 00 8.4E 01 A

CO-60 6.SE-03 3.9E-05 6.9E-03 0.OE-01 1.IE 00 1.7E 02 A

ZR-95 6.6E-05 1.6E-05 7.2E-05 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 4.2E 00 A

NB-95 2.3E-04 1.2E-05 2.6E-04 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 2.OE 01 A

CS-134 2.4E-04 1.2E-05 2.2E-04 0.0E-01 9.3E-01 2.1E 01 A

CS-137 2.7E-04 9.7E-06 2.3E-04 0.OE-01 8.7E-01 2.7E 01 A

AG-110M 1.GE-04 8.2E-06 1.9E-04 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 2.2E 01 A

PPIMARY NA-24 1.5E-02 2.7E-04 1.SE-02 0.OE-01 9.7E-01 5.7E 01 A

I-131 2.3E-03 1.2E-04 3.0E-03 0.0E-01 1.3E 00 1.9E 01 A

I-132 2.6E-02 3.3E-04 2.7E-02 0.OE-01 1.0E 00 8.0E 01 A

I-133 1.7E-02 2.7E-04 1.9E-02 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 6.5E 01 A

I-134 4.4E-02 9.6E-04 4.9E-02 0.0E-01 1.1E 00 4.5E 01 A

CS-137 4.0E-04 4.9E-05 5.0E-04 0.0E-01 1.3E 00 8.1E 00 A

CS-138 4.7E-02 3.0E-03 4.2E-02 0.0E-01 9.OE-01 1.6E 01 A

T TEST RESULTS:

A= AGREEMENT

D= DISAGREEMENT

+:= CRITERIA RELAXED

N=NO COMPARISON

I

i

.

r --w - -- , -- r, -, n., ,. - - - - . , , ,. - - - , , , - - - - - - - - - . , , - - --

..,-,--n.,-__-m_-n--n- _ , - nmn_, , - - - - , - . - . _ ,

.

TABLE 2

U S NUCLEAR PEGULATOPY COMMISSION

OFCICE OF INSPECTICtl AND ENPOPCEMENT

CONFIPMATORY MEASUFEMENTS PPOGPAM

FACILITY: C ICil

FOR THE 3 CUARTEP OF 1494

NPC------- ----LICF_NSEE---- ---LICEti?EE: NPC----

9 AMPLE ISOTOPE FE5 ULT EPPCP PE5 ULT ERPOP FATIO PES T

L UASTE H-3 1.?E-02 1.OE-04 1.IE-02 0.OE-01 8.SE-01 1.3E 02 A

EET- :..GE-05 1.4E-06 3.ZE-05 0.OE-01 S.2E-01 2.SE 01 A

SP-90 1.1E-03 7.0E-04 49.2E-08 0.0E-01 7.5E 00 1.6E 00 N

99 i0 2.OE-00 4.OE-Oc (:.7E-09 0.OE-01 8.5E 00 5.OE-01 N

T TEST FE9ULTS:

A=AGPEEMErJT

D=019AGFEEMENT

+=CP!TERIA FELA ED

N=r10 ccMPARIso:1

!

i

,

l

.

r N

.

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 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 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 significant 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.

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

jt8 and <16 0.6 -

1.67

2.16 and <51 0.75 - 1.33

251 and <200 0.80 - 1.25

2200 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.

l

k

ML20133D762

Text

Navigation menu

Search