ML061450407

E-mail from Boland to Riemer Et. Al. Tritium Sampling at Dresden

ML061450407
Person / Time
Site:	Dresden
Issue date:	02/21/2006
From:	Boland A NRC/RGN-III
To:	Matthew Mitchell, Kenneth Riemer, Ring M, Satorius M NRC/RGN-III
References
FOIA/PA-2006-0130
Download: ML061450407 (1)

Text

FAnnie Boland - Re: Fwd: Tritium sampling at Dresden Pg From: Anne Boland To: Kenneth Riemer; Mark Mitchell; Mark Ring; Mark Satorius Date: 2/21/06 9:30AM

Subject:

Re: Fwd: Tritium sampling at Dresden Orth is arranging this with the license.

Anne T. Boland, Deputy Director Division of Reactor Safety NRC Region III 630-829-9701

>>> Mark Satorius 02/21/2006 6:40:24 AM >>>

i agree - but there may be a need to have split samples captured to perform some verification of the licensee's testing. anne?

>>> Mark Ring 02/16/06 5:31 PM >>>

Folks, Desiree observed the licensee's daily sampling for wells E-3, E-5, DSP-1 16, DSP-1 24, & E-8. The licensee's staff followed their procedures, used good practices, and counted the samples in their scintillation counter machine. The technicians performed I activity ata time to ensure no cross-contamination of samples. Everything seemed to be properly performed and well controlled. Please use the attached drawings and sample sheets to understand the following: The licensee makes daily samples of a varying number of wells, usually around 12-15. They sample 7 specific ones near the leakage source each time and vary the additional wells to check different areas of the plant. Those are E-3 (near the leakage source), DSP-131 and DSP-1 32 (plant outfall wells to ensure nothing is getting off site), DSP-140 (tracking the 2004 plume going NE), DSP-1 16 (tracking the 2004 plume going SE), T-6 (tracking the 2004 plume going NW) and sewer K (this was where the 2004 plume was initially detected).

K has not shown any observable trend, so it was not sampled today and the licensee plans to substitute a different well for the sewer K. Note: the residue from the 2004 CST/HPCI line leakage is still in the ground at the site. As the site receives rainfall or doesn't, the 2004 plume can be detected in different wells near the original excavation. When you look at the tables, you'll see some wells spike up and then drop off.

The licensee considers these to be due to the 2004 plume changing with rainfall. Unless there is a driving reason, I don't see value in having the residents observe additional licensee sampling. If we need to continue resident observation, please let me know. AIII I have for now.

-Mark CC: Daneira Melendez-Colon; Desiree Smith; Karen Gladden; Liliana Ramadan; Mina Sheikh; Steven Orth; Steven West; Wayne Slawinski