ML20148H725
| ML20148H725 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 03/10/1988 |
| From: | Dan Collins NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Head G GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8803300070 | |
| Download: ML20148H725 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000424/1987064
Text
P
'
$flL&W
.
,
MAR 101988
Georgia Power Company
ATTN:
V.r. George F. Head
Senior Vice Dresident-
Nuclear Operations
P. O. Box 4545
Atlanta, GA 30302
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
DOCKET NO. 50-424, CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT RESULTS,
SUPPLEMENT TO INSPECTION REPORT N0. 50-424/87-64
As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples
were sent on November 5,
1987, to your Vogtle facility for selected
radiochemical analyses.
We are in receipt of your analytical results
transmitted to us by your letter dated February 12, 1988, and subsequent to
verification of your values as per our conversation by telephone on fiarch 1,
1988, 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 your 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,
Douglas M. Collins, Chief
Radiological Protection Branch
Division of Radiation Safety
and Safeguards
Enclosures:
1.
Confirmatory Measurement Comparisons
2.
Criteria for Comparing Analytical
Measurements
cc w/encis:
(See page 2)
8803300070 880310
ADOCK 05000424
0
.C Eca.
F
,, .
Georgia Power Company-
2
cq w/encis:
'
9'. D. Rice, Vice President, Project
' Director
p W. Hayes, Vogtle Quality-
Assurance Manager
(G( Bockhold, Jr. , General Mar.ager,
Nuclear Operations
M Gucwa, Manager, Nuclear Safety
and Licensing
g A. Bailey, Project Licensing
Manager
g W. Churchill, Esq., Shaw,
fittman, Potts and Trowbridge
W. Kirkland, III, Counsel,
Office of the Consumer's Utility
Council
(p'. Feig, Georgians Against
Nuclear Energy
b c w/encis:
S
LE.f Reis, 0GC
W. Hopkins, NRR
M. Sinkule, RII
D y Technical Assistant
WC Resident Inspector
Dv.:ument Control Desk
"State of Georgia
RII
RII
RII ,y
>kV J
abl(e
MSip/88
kule
oorsen
f
3/f/88
3/7/88
3/4
ll
!
.~
-_
. . _ _ .
..*
."
ENCLOSURE 1
Conri rmatory Measurement Compa ri sons of' H-3,
for Vogtle Nuclear Plant, November 5, 1987
Licensee
NRC
tio
Isotope
Lupi/mi )
(uCi/mi1
Hesolut193
LLi',ensee/NRC)
Compa ri son
2.1 E-5
2.0310.084 E-5
52
1.01
Ag reement
f2
1.02
Ag reement
1.3 E-5
1.27 1 0.03 E-5
4
$r-90
2.2 E-6
2.57 i O.10 E-6
26
0.86
Ag reement
NOTE: Due to the extended decay time for the isotope Sr-89, the analytical resu l ts we re no t compa red.
- v
.
.
-
p- -
,
.
.
ENCLOSURE 2
Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements
This enclosure provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and
verification measurements. The criteria are based on an empirical relationship
which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
In this 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. As the ratio of the
NRC value to its associated uncertainty, referred to in this program as
"Resolution"2 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.
2
For comparison purposes, a ratio
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.
NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide
2 Resolution = Associated Uncertainty for the Value
Licensee Value
2 Comparison Ratio n NRC Reference Value
TABLE 1
Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria
Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio
i
Comparison Ratio
for
Resolution
Agreement
< 4
0'.4
- 2.5
4-
7
0.5 - 2.0
8-
15
0.6 - 1.66
!
16 - 0
0.75 - 1.33
'
51 - 200
0.80 - 1.25
>200
0.85 - 1.18