ML17317B220
| ML17317B220 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Cook  |
| Issue date: | 04/26/1979 |
| From: | Shaller D INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER CO. |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7905250352 | |
| Download: ML17317B220 (4) | |
Text
~y g
INDIANAD MICHIDANPDINER COMPANY DONALDC. COOK NUCLEAR PLANT P.O. Box 458, Bridgman, Michigan 49106 (616) 465-5901 Q 0 gz5 April 26, 1979 Mr. James G. Keppler, Regional Director Directorate of the Regulatory Operations Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137
Dear Mr. Keppler:
On March 28,
- 1979, we transmitted to you four (4) copies of the annual Radiological Environmental Monitoring Report for the Indiana and Michigan Power Company for 1978.
Ne have since then received from our contractor a revised page which would replace page 15 of that report.
Enclosed please find four (4) copies of the cover letter and replacement sheet.
Sincerely, D. V. Shaller Plant Manager
/al Enclosures (4) cc R.
$";. Jurgensen D.
C. Palmer
26 March 1979 Attached please find a corrected cover page for the tables that listed results of ma]or laboratory intercomparison
- programs, which were sent. to you in early March. After the mailing, we noticed that the first sen-tence in the paragraph discussing Gross Alpha and Gross Beta results was considerably garbled and didn't make much sense.
Please replace that page with this new one.
We apologize for the error and any inconvenience it may have caused.
Sincerely yours, EBERLTNE Kathy Kohl Administrative Mgr.
att KK/ca)
PLEASE REPLY TO: MIDWESTERN FACILITY. 245 ROOSEVELT ROAD, WEST CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60185 TELEPHONE (312) 231 9400 EBERLINE INSTRUMENTCORPORATION, PO. BOX 2108. SANTA FE.'NEW MEXICO87501 TELEPHONE (505) 471 3232. TWX910 985 0678
The attached tables list results of major laboratory intercomparison programs in which the Midwest Facility of Eberline Instrument Corporation participated during 1978 and for which comparison data were available by early February 1979.
In general the comparisons are in good agreement.
Exceptions are discussed below.
Ru-106 in Water we are investigating why we seldom are in good agreement on this nuclide.
We have been told that "almost no one" gets consistently good agreement on this measurement.
Cs-134 computer treatment of the 605 KeV 98% abundance peak has not been adequate to handle interference from background and other gammas in the same energy range resulting in data biased low for Cs-134.
We are now using the 795 (85%)
KeV peak as the main quantifying peak and intercomparison results have been very good.
Sr intercomparison results for this problem nuclide con-tinue to be inconsistent sometimes we are good and some-times bad.
Sometimes when comparisons are poor we can trace the reason and sometimes not. With few exceptions, we can get good agreement on water samples.
We continue to examine the problem.
Gross Al ha, Gross Beta EPA values for gross alpha and gross beta concentrations are calculated values based on the actual total amounts of all beta emitters added to the sample.
Since different energy emissions can have significantly different counting efficiencies, our values for both measurements may vary from EPA values even if the analysis is "good" depending on the nuclide mix in the sample.
Our gross beta concentrations are relative to Cs-137, and gross alpha to Pu-239.
Precise agreement with gross measurements is not required, and should not necessarily be expected unless the nuclides present are known, in which case the determination is no longer a gross measurement.
PLEASE REPLY To: MIDWESTERN FACILITY. 245 ROOSEVELT ROAD. WEST CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 60185 TELEPHONE (312) 231 9400 EBERLINE INSTRUMENT CORPORATION. PO BOX 2108, SANTA FE. NEW MEXICO 87501 TELEPHONE (505) 471 3232. TWX 910 985.0678