IR 05000348/1985027

Discusses NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program Results Suppl to Insp Repts 50-348/85-27 & 50-364/85-27.Comparison of 860922 Spiked Liquid Samples W/Acceptance Criteria Encl. All Comparative Results in Agreement

ML20212F747
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	01/06/1987
From:	Verrelli D NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Mcdonald R ALABAMA POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8701120141
Download: ML20212F747 (4)

Text

'

t; JAN 0 61987 AJabama . . ;r Company MTTN: Mr. R. P. Mcdonald Senior Vice President P. O. Box 2641

' Birmingham, AL 35291

. Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: DOCKET NOS. 50-348 AND 50-364, CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT RESULTS SUPPLEMENT TO INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-348/85-27 AND 50-364/85-27 As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were sent on September 22, 1986, to your facility for selected radiochemical analyse We are in receipt of your analytical results transmitted to us -by your letter dated November 11, 1986, and subsequent to verification of your values as per our conversation by telephone on December 10, 1986, the following comparison of your results to the known values are presented in Enclosure 1 for your informatio The acceptance criteria for the comparisons are listed in Enclosure In our review of these data all comparative results were in agreement. These data should be reviewed in greater detail by cognizant staff members for any significant trends in the data among successive years in which samples have been analyzed by your facilit Any biases noted may be indicative of a programmatic weakness and your efforts should be expended in determining reasons for such biase These results and any results from previous years pertaining to these analyses will be discussed at future NRC inspection

Sincerely, David M. Verrelli, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects Enclosures:

1. Confirmatory Measurement Comparisons Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements cc w/encls: (Seepage 2)

h"$ DON 5 f

Q l\ r E ol

_

w u

' Alabama Power Company 2

-

w/encls:

. O. Whitt, Executive Vice President d' D. Woodard, General Manager -

, Juclear Plant W. G. Hairston, III, General Manager -

Nuclear Support M W. McGowan, Manager-Safety Audit and Engineering Review 6k' K. Osterholtz, Supervisor-Safety

, Judit and Engineering Review Y. E. Grissette, Counting Room Supervisor

1. ( R. Bayne, Chemistry and Environmental Supervisor bec w/encls:

INJtCResidentInspector d. Reeves, Project Manager, NRR Document Control Desk State of Alabama

.

RII RII RI RI L , M

?RhlN&[WM p22// SAdamovitz

/5 JKahle 12//3'86 D(;ollins IJ/g756 H ance

/g/M

/-2 # 9'

,

t/u/17

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

-

s e

ENCLOSURE 1 CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT COMPARISONS OF FE-55 ANALYSIS FOR FARLEY NUCLEAR PLANT ON SEPTEMBER 22, 1986 Licensee NRC Ratio Resolution itscensee/NRCl Compa ri sop C;mple ID (uCi/ unit) (uCi/ unit)

53 1.23 Agreement farley A 4.57 E-5 3.72 i .07 E-5 Ag reemen t 1.45 E-4 1.33 i .03 E-4 44 1.09 Farley 8 V

l l

l

1 i

l I

l i

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _-____-

.-

.

"

,

ENCLOSURE 2 Criteria for Comparing analytical Measurements This enclosure provides criteria 'or comparing results of capability tests and !

verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship l which comb'nes prior experience and the accuracy needs of this progra In these criteria, the judgetent limits denoting agreement or disagreement between licensee and NRC results are variable. This variability is a function of the NRC's value relative to its associated uncertainty, referred to in this program as " Resolution increases, the range of acceptable differences between the NRC and licensee values should be more restrictiv Conversely, poorer agreement between NRC and licensee values must be considered acceptable as the resolution decrease For comparison purposes, a ration of the licensee value to the NRC value for each individual nuclide is computed. This ratio is then evaluated for agreement based on the calculated resolution. The corresponding resolution and calculated ratios which denote agreement are listed in Table 1 belo Values outside of the agreement ratios for a selected nuclide are considered in disagreemen Resolution = NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide Associated Uncertainty for the Value 2 Comparison Ratio = Licensee Value NRC Reference Value Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio Comparison Ratio for Resolution Agreement

<4 0.4 - .5 - .6 - 1.66 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25

>200 0.85 - 1.18