IR 05000416/1988027
| ML20245A326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Grand Gulf  |
| Issue date: | 04/17/1989 |
| From: | Dan Collins NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Cottle W SYSTEM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8904250146 | |
| Download: ML20245A326 (4) | |
Text
hhlAt
..'p; APR 1 7 1989
'
-
System Energy Resources, Inc.
ATTN: Mr. W. T. Cottle, Vice President Nuclear' Operations P. O. Box 23054 Jackson, MS 39205 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
DOCKET NO. 50-416, CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT RESULTS, SUPPLEMENT TO NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 88-27 i
As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were sent on January 9, 1989, to your Grand Gulf f acility for selected
{
radiochemical analyses.
We are in receipt of your analytical results i
transmitted to us by your letter dated March 14, 1989 and the following comparison of your results to the known values are presented in Enclosure 1 for your information.
The acceptance criteria for the comparisons are listed in Enclosure 2.
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 facility.
These results and any results from previous years pertaining to these analyses will be discussed at future NRC inspections.
Sincerely, Cr44cl4it'XiE7 n.11CoEins Douglas M. Collins, Chief Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards
Enclosures:
1.
Confirmatory Measurement Comparisons J
2.
Criteria for Comparing
,
Analytical Measurements
'
cc w/encls:
(See page 2)
l 8904250146 890417 PDR ADOCK 05000416 i (
Q PDC T.2o(o )
_
_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
. _ _
_
_.
_
_
__
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _, _
..
g.*-
System Energy Resources, Inc.
cc w/encis:
T. H. Cloninger, Vice President, Nuclear Engineering and Support C. R. Hutchinson, GGNS General Manager J. G. Cesare, Director, Nuclear Licensing R. T. Lally, Manager of Quality Assurance Middle South Utilities System Services, Inc.
R. B. McGehee, Esquire Wise, Carter, Child, Steen and Caraway N. S. Reynolds, Esquire Bishop, Cook, Purcell & Reynolds R. W. Jackson, Project Engineer State of Mississippi bec w/encls:
NRC Resident Inspector L. Kintner, NRR RII RII RII SAdamovitz:tm JKahle FCantrell 4/ /89 4/ /89 4/j7/89
n li lli i
llllI4 I
a
.
P
-<
._
-
- _ -
. v
.
no tt s
nn ee ir mm a
ee p
ee m
rr
-
.
o gg C
)
C R
N
/ee S
s
E n
S oe Y
ic
L ti A
aL N
R(
A 9
99
R S,
D2 NAYR 9A 8U N
RA SJ
_
_
FN
_.
OO n
_
o E
ST i
R NN t
U OA u
S SL l
_
O P. P l
o L
s C
AR e
N PA R
EF
- -
EU EE RG
)
SD t
U m
2. i.
AN C/
EA Ri 0O
_
MR NC 1i G
u 82 Y
l
.
OO
TF A
M R
I F
N OC e1 eL 56 sm
- -
n/
EE ei
cC
u iL[
epo
t
o
- -
s rr i
_
I t
.
.
..
i
..
.
l l
ENCLOSURE 2
Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements This enclosure provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and i
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 judgement 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 a
program as " Resolution"2 As Resolution increases, the range of acceptable differences between the NRC and licensee values should be more restrictive.
Conversely, poorer agreement between NRC and licensee values must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.
j For comparison purposes, a ratio 2 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 below.
Values outside of the agreement ratios for a selected nuclide are considered in disagreement.
' Resolution = NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide Associated Uncertainty for the Value 2 Comparison Ratio =
Licensee Value NRC Reference Value TABLE 1 CONFIRMATORY Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolution vs. Comparison Ratio Comparison Ratio For Resolution Agreement
<4 0.4 - 2.5 4-7 0.5 - 0.2 8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25
>200 0.85 - 1.18 l
_ _ - _ _ _ - _ -