IR 05000003/1977012
| ML20042A055 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1977 |
| From: | Paperiello C, Stohr J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20042A052 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-003-77-12, 50-247-77-28, 50-286-77-27, 50-3-77-12, NUDOCS 8203230027 | |
| Download: ML20042A055 (4) | |
Text
'
77-12 Region I
77-28
/ Report tio.
77-27
,
50-03,
~
Docket flo. 50-247, 50-286 Dell-a License fio. DPR-26, DPP,-64 Priority Category C
--
Licensce:
_Concolidated Edison Comoany of flew York, Inc.
4 Irving Place flew York, tiew York 10003 Facility llame:
Indian Point fluclear Generating Units 1, 2, and 3 Inspection at:
ft/A Inspection conducted:
August 30, 1977
-
Inspectors:
/
9 !} 7,!~) ~)
m
. /aperieiid, Radiation Specialist C.
6tte si'gned
.
date signed date signed Approved by:
f!)
'/ -)
/
m J. P.
ohf, Chief, Environmental and
'ddte signed r
Spec' 1 Projects Section, FF&MS Branch
-
Insoection Summary:
.
.
nspection on August 30, 1977 (Combined Report flos. 50-03/77-12, 50-247/77-28, pd 50 _286/77-27)
reas Inspected:
This report contains the results of the split veriffcation
.
est sample taken during a previous inspection on March 7-9, 1977 (Combined aport tios. 50-03/77-02, 50-247/77-06, and 50-286/77-07).
Results on a spiked tandard are also compared.
1 site time.
The comparison of these results involved no
.;sults:
Within the area inspected, no items of noncompliance were identified.
egion I Fonn 12
"sev. April 77)
.
8203230027 770923 gDRADOCK05000
.
- ---
-
-
-
- -
-
.
,-
.
.
.
-
,
,
r l
DETAILS i
1.
Persons Contacted
.
Mr. Joseph Higgins, General Chemistry Supervisor, Coned 2.
Results of Confirmatory Measurements In a previous inspection conducted on March 7-9, 1977, Office of Inspection and Enforcement Combined Inspection Report Number 50-03/77-02; 50-247/77-05; and 50-286/77-07, a liquid effluent sample was split with the licensee.
Gamma analysis was performed onsite using the NRC mobile laboratory.
Those analyses requiring wet chemistry (i.e. gross beta, tritium, Sr-89 and Sr-90) were per-formed by the NRC reference laboratory, the Idaho Health Services
Laboratory (IHSL).
The results of these analyses are presented in this report.
In addition, a spiked gamma sample was supplied to the licensee by IHSL and the results for that sample are also presented here.
The results of the intercemparisons are presented in Table 1.
The criteria for comparing measurements are presented in Attachment 1.
No Sr-89 or Sr-90 results are presented in Table 1 since neither were detected by IHSL.
Of~the results presented in Table 1, all are in either agreement or possible agreement.
No items of non-compliance were identified in this area.
3.
Discussion of Results with Licensee Representative
'
These results were discussed with the General Chemistry Supervisor
.
,
in a telephone conversation on August 30, 1977.
I
.
-
'
.
.
.
,
I O
.
r
'.
.
.
.
TABLE 1
'
INDIAN POINT - VERIFICATION TEST RESULTS
,
SAMPLE ISOTOPE NRC VALUE LICENSEE VALUE COMPARISON
Results in uCi/cc Spiked Liquid Ce-144 (1.0310.06) E-2 (1.3710.06) E-2 Agreement
-
HSL-5 Cs-134 (1.19 + 0.06) E-3 (8.40 + 0.77) E-4 Possibir 'gre
-
10/28/76 CS-137 (3.7 1 0.1) E-3 (4.02 1 0.16) E-3 Agreemen t '
Co-60 (3.2 1 0.1) E-3 (3.92 1 0.42) E-3 Agreement
- 12 Laundry H-3 (2.49 1 0.06) E-5 (1.81 1 ?) E-5 Poss'ible Ag Tank Waste (1.85 + ?) E-5*
Possible Ag Gross Beta (1.58 1 0.03).E-5 (1.1 1 7) E-5 Possible Ag
-
- Licensee's contractor value.
s
.
e e
e
e
_ _.___ _ __ _ - _ _ _
.
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 pr'ior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
-
In these criteria, the judgement limits are variable in relation to the comparison of the NRC Reference Laboratory's value to its associated 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 must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
-
LICENSEE VALUE RATIO = NRC REFERENCE VALUE Possible Possible
.
Resolution Agreement Agreement A Agreement B E3 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 No Comparison
.
4-7 0.5 - 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 0.3 - 3.0 8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 0.5 -. 2.0 0.4 - 2.5 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 0 6 - 1.66 0.5 - 2.0 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33 0.6 - 1.66
>200 0.85 - 1.18 0.80 - 1.25 0.75 - 1.33
.
,
"A" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
Camma Spectrometry where principal gam =a energy used for identification is greater than 250 Kev.
Tritium analyses o'f liquid samples.
-
.
"B" criteria are applied to the following analyses:
~
Camma Spectrometry where principal gamma energy used for identification is less than 250 Kev..
89Sr and 90Sr Determinations.
Gross Beta where sampics are counted on the same date using the same refeter.cc nuclide.
,
.
e
.
e
.
h