ML20210C351
| ML20210C351 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Hatch  |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1987 |
| From: | Brownlee V NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | John Miller GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702090371 | |
| Download: ML20210C351 (6) | |
See also: IR 05000321/1986021
Text
-
,
.
,
Georgia Power Company
ATTN: Mr. J. H. Miller, Jr.
President
P. O. Box 4545
Atlanta, GA 30302
Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
DOCKET N05. 50-321 AND 50-366, CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT RESULTS
SUPPLEMENT TO INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-321/86-21 AND 50-366/86-21
As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were
sent on September 22, 1986, to your facility for selected radiochemical analyses.
We are in receipt of your analytical results transmitted to us by your letter
dated November 24, 1986, and 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 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 sh.:uld 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 3
Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosures:
1.
Confirmatory Measurement
Comparisons
2.
Criteria for Comparing
Analytical Measurements
cc w/encls:
(See page 2)
8702090371 e70106
ADOCK 05000321
Q
v
y
,
,
,
Alabama Power Company
2
cc w/ enc 1:
J. P. O'Reilly, Senior Vice President
Nuclear Operations
J. T. Beckham, Vice President, Plant Hatch
H. C. Nix, Site Operations General
Manager
A. Fraser, Acting Site QA Supervisor
L. Gucwa, Manager, Nuclear Safety
and Licensing
B. C. Arnold, Chemistry Supervisor
bcc w/ enc 1:
NRC Resident Inspector
Hugh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary
Document Control Desk
State of Georgia
RII
RII
RII
RII
SAdamovitz
JKahle
DCollins
e Algnatonis
12/ /86
12/ /86
12/ /86
12/ /86
F
),
.:
. JAN 0 A 1987
Gy rgia Power Company
MITN: Mr. J. H. Miller, Jr.
President
P. O. Box 4545
Atlanta, GA 30302
Gentlemen:
y
SUBJECT: DOCKET NOS. 50-348 AND 50-364, CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT RESULTS
SUPPLEMENT TO INSPECTION REPORT NOS. 50-321/86-21 AND 50-366/86-21
As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were
sent on September 22, 1986, to your facility for selected radiochemical analyses.
We are in receipt of your analytical results transmitted to us by your letter
dated November 24, 1986, and 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 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 3
Division of Reactor Projects
Enclosures:
- 1.
Confirmatory Measurement
Comparisons
2.
Criteria for Comparing
Analytical Measurements
cc w/encls:
(Seepage 2)
I \\
zgot
I~..
-
'
- .
- .
%
,
'
Alabama Power Company
2
cg w/ encl:
t(. P. O'Reilly, Senior Vice President
uclear Operations
T. Beckham, Vice President, Plant H&tch
-
. C. Nix, Site Operations General
, , Manager
%. Fraser, Acting Site QA Supervisor
W. Gucwa, Manager, Nuclear Safety
lI.andLicensing
C. Arnold, Chemistry Supervisor
bec w/ encl:
MCResidentInspector
t%gh S. Jordan, Executive Secretary
Document Control Desk
State of Georgia
r
!
.
RII
RII
RI
RII
DCollins*\\<g9 FCantrell
SAdamovitz
JKahle
1$/5/86 i
12/ /90
4E P /86'
.
- ,e -f,
t/s/ 2 7
f 'n
. .
.
.
.
. . .
.
. . .
.
..
.
. . .
.
e
, . .
.3'
,
ENCLOSUftE 1
-)
CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT COMPARIS006S OF FE-55 ANALYSIS
FOR HATCH NUCLEAR PLANT ON SEPTEM8ER 22, 1986
Ratio
Licensee
. MRC
yp_a ri son
C
Samste ID
fuCi/onit) '
fuCi/ unit)
Resolution
(Licensee /NRC)
2. f4 E-5
2.60 i .05 E-5
52
0.92
Agreement
Fc-55
2.3 E-5
1.93 i .084 E-5
48
1.19
Agreement
Sr-89
2.5 E-5
3.27 i .10 E-5
33
.76
Ag reement
S r-90
3.3 E-6
3.09 i .12 E-6
26
1.07
Agreement
4
-
- -
-
.
.
.
.
. ..
I
l ,U,
.
. _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ - _ - . _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _
_
- .. .+
'
,y
ENCLOSURE 2.
Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements
This enclosure provides criteria for comparing results of capability tests and
verif' cation measurements.
The criteria are based on an empirical relationship
which combines prior experience and the accuracy needs of this program.
In these 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, 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.
For comparison purposes, a ratio of the licensee value to the NRC value for each
r
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.
" Resolution = NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide
'
Associated Uncertainty for the Value
' Comparison Ratio =
Licensee Value
NRC Reference Value
Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria
Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio
Comparison Ratio
..
for
Resolution
Agreement
<4
0.4 - 2.5
4-7
0.5 - 0.2
8 - 15
0.6 - 1.66
16 - 50
0.75 - 1.33
51 - 200
0.80 - 1.25
>200
0.85 - 1.18