ML20151Y516

Forwards Comparisons & Acceptance Criteria Re 851105 Submittal of Selected Radiochem Analyses of Spiked Liquid Samples Sent on 850705,per NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program.Results Acceptable

ML20151Y516
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	01/15/1986
From:	Brownlee V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Tucker H DUKE POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8602120728
Download: ML20151Y516 (3)

Text

_

JAN 151996 Duke Power Company

/ ATTN: Mr. H. B. Tucker, Vice President Nuclear Production Department 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Gentlemen:

SUBJECT:

CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS RESULTS DOCKET NOS. 50-269, 50-270, AND 50-287 As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were sent on July 5, 1985, to your Oconee facility for selected radiochemical analyses.

We are 'in receipt of your analytical results transmitted t us by your letter dated November 5, 1985. Subsequent to verification of your values as per our conversation by telephone on December 30, 1985, the following comparison of your results to the known values are presented in Enclosure 1 for your infsrmation.

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. Any biases noted may be indicative of a programmatic weakness and your efforts should be expended in determining reasons for such biases.

These results and any results from previous years pertaining to these analyses will be discussed at future NRC inspections.

Sincerely, Virgil L. Brownlee, Chief Reactor Projects Branch 2 Division of Reactor Projects

Enclosures:

1. Confirmatory Measurements Comparisons *

2. Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements cc w/encis:

f.S.Tuckman,StationManager bec w/encis:

g NRC Resident Inspector vs. Nicolaras, NRR Document Control Desk l State of South Carolina RII RII RII .RII ,

GKuzo WCline DCollins HDance @ <

1/ /86 1/ /86 1/ /86 1/ /86 g 9602120720 060115

/86_' '

PDR ADOCK 05000269 p PbR _

l \ 1scs

f

{_NCLOSURF 1 CONF 1RMATORY MLASUREMINT COMPARISONS OF H-3, fE-55, SR-89, AND SR-90 ANAL YSIS FOR OCONIE NUCL f AR PLANT FOR JULY 5, 1985. SlHULATED l_lQUID WASTE SAMPLE l

l 8soLope Licensee NRC ResoIution Ratio Compa r i son (uCi/ unit) (uCi/ unit) (l.icensee/NHC)

H-3 2.210.2 E-5 2.26t0.05 E-5 45 0.91 Agreement Fe-55 8.111.5 E-6 7.8810.16 E-6 49 1.03 Ag reemen t Sr-89 7.7tl.1 E-5 9.50f0.28 E-5 3 ts 0.81 Ag reement Sr-90 9.6tO.1 E-6 1.0r410.04 E-5 26 0.92 A9reement i

l l

l i

f l

l l 0

[ -

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"1 .

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.

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 nuclides are considered in disagreement.

NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide 2

Resolution = Associated Uncertainty for the Value Licensee Value 2 Comparison Ratio = NRC Reference Value t

TABLE 1 - Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio Comparison Ratio for Resolution Agreement

<4 0.4. - 2.5 4-7 0.5. - 2.0 8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 I 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25

>200 0.85 - 1.18 9

F