ML20086T127

Forwards Results of Chemical Analysis Techniques Performed on Std Test Matrix Solution as Required by NUREG-0737,Action Item II.B.3,per Util .Response to Criterion 10 of Draft SER Complete

ML20086T127
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	02/29/1984
From:	Hukill H GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:	Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.B.3, TASK-TM 5211-84-2055, NUDOCS 8403060160
Download: ML20086T127 (5)

Text

_ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ _ ___ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

d GPU Nuclear Corporation ggigg{ Post Office Box 480 Route 441 South Middietown, Pennsylvania 17057-0191 717 944 7621 TELEX 84 2386 Writer's Direct Dial Nurnber:

February 29, 1984 5211-84-2055 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attn: J. F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of Licensing U. S. Nucler Regulatory Commission

~

Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Sir:

Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (TMI-1)

Operating License No. DPR-50 Docket No. 50-289 Post Accident Sampling (NUREG 0737 II.B.3)

In accordance with GPUN letter 5211-83-328 of November 22, 1983, enclosed is Table 1 which provides the results of 'IMI-1 chemical analysis techniques performed on a standard test matrix solution as required by NUREG 0737.

Also attached, is a letter from NUS indicating the constituents of the test matrix.

Two samples were analyzed representing the standard test matrix and a matrix containing sodium hydroxide that would be p.esent following activation of the Reactor Building Spray Systems. The analyses were performed after they were diluted by the amount prescribed in the post accident sampling analysis procedure (1004.33) and the results were corrected by the dilution factor.

The chloride analyses were performed in our corporate laboratory in Reading, Pa. using equipment similar to that which would be brought to the site to provide a chloride analysis within 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> of deciding to take the sample.

Chloride analysis capabilities will be confirmed subsequent to permanent installation of an auto sampler and auto controller at the TMI-l site. Boron analyses were performed by the mannitol titration method.

This completes our response to criterion 10 of your letter of July 13, 1983 (Draft SER).

Sincerely, 8403060160 840229 PDR ADCCK 05000289 '

. D. I kill Director, TMI-l llDil:MRK:vj f Enclosurm cc: J. Van Vliet A 0 E26 R. Conte f7 F GPU Nuclear Corporation is a subsidiary of the General Public Utilities Corporation Ifa!

I TABLE I NON CAUSTIC MATRIX CAUSTIC MATRIX PH BORON CHLORIDE PH BORON CHLORIDE PPM PPM PPM PPM Certified Result 5.5 1860 10 9.2 1858 10 (1) TMI-1 5.2 1767 9 8.7 1765 9 Accuracy to to to to to to Commitment 5.8 1953 11 9.7 1951 11 Location &Date TMI-1 12-28-84 5.67 - -

9.26 - -

TMI-1 01-30-84 5.71 1835 (2) -

9.24 1861 (2) -

Reading 2-14-84 - -

10 - -

10 NOTES: (1) TMI-1 Accuracy Commitments: (Boron =25 to 1000 ppm + 50 ppm; 1000 to 6000 ppm + 5%), (Chloride = 0.1 to 0.5 ppm + 0.05 ppm; 0.5 to 20.0 ppm + 10%), (pH = 5 to 9 + 0.3, all other ranges + 0.5)

(2) Analyzed by standard Mannitol Boron Procedure using a 1:100 Matrix to demineralized water dilution.

9

..v . - - , - . - , - - - - . + . - . - - - . - . - . - - -

e

~' t NUS

==

==-

CSD-84-65 February 17, 1984 Project No. 6039.01 Mr. E. Fuhrer GPU Nuclear Corporation P.O. Box 480 Middletown, Pennsylvania 17057

SUBJECT:

P.O. TC-005821, Post-Accident Matrix Solutions

Dear Mr. Fuhrer:

On November 14, 1983 post-accident matrix solutions were delivered to Three Mile Island by G. Burns of NUS. A follow-up letter dated November 23, 1983 listed the concentrations of anions and cations in these solutions. The boron concentration in these solutions was reported as 2000 ppm (B).

As a result of a problem with our supplier of pure boron oxide, this value was in error. We have performed an analysis of the actual solutions delivered to you in our laboratory and the corrected boron concentrations are as follows:

Caustic Solution: Result 1 1865 Result 2 1854 Result 3 1854 Average 1858 ppm (B)

Non-Caustic Solution: Result 1 1860 Result 2 1860 Result 3 1860 Average 1860 ppm (B)

I have enclosed a revised copy of the Table listing the concentrations

-f cations and anions.

n

4

/ CSD-84-65 Mr. E. Fuhrer GPU Nuclear Corporation February 17, 1984 - Page Two NUS sincerely regrets any inconvenience to you as a result of the incorrect boron concentrations listed in our original letter.

Please feel free to contact me if you have any further questions, i Very truly yours, e>-A

/y:m

. A-  :.

G.d. Burns Principal Chemist GDB/pam enclosure 4

i P

NUS CORPORATION

. ~ . . - -

s TABLE I PPM Na+

MATRIX I- Cs+ Ba+2 La+3 Ce+4 C1~ B Li+ NO3 - NIf4+ K* Ac- (as Na0H) pH NON-CAUSTIC 40 250 10 5.0 5.0 10 1860 2.0 5.0 2.9 150 20 0 5.5 CAUSTIC 40 250 10 5.0 5.0 10 - 1858 2.0 5.0 2.9 150 20 2066 9.2

_ . . - .. ._. I i

i i

1 l i

1

_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _