ML20212N940
| ML20212N940 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 08/13/1986 |
| From: | Zech G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | White S TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8609020082 | |
| Download: ML20212N940 (4) | |
Text
,
AUG I 31996 Tennessee Valley Authority ATTN: Mr. S. A. White Manager of Nuclear Power 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Gentlemen:
SUBJECT:
NOS. 50-259, 50-260, AND 50-296 As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were sent on May 8,1986, to your facility for selected radiochemical analyses. We are in receipt of your analytical results transmitted to us by your letter dated July 17, 1986. 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 this data, all comparative results were in agreement. This 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 trends noted riiay be indicative of 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, Gary G. Zech, Director TVA Projects
Enclosures:
1.
Confirmatory Measurement Comparisons 2.
Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements cc w/encls:
(See page 2) 1 8609020082 860813
~
PDR ADOCK 03000259 G
PDR ft;
A y [ S t-31 r.
' k '.', -.
Tennessee Val _ ley' Authority 2
s.
ccw/ancis': %
^ *x
- 44. P. Pomrehn,' Browns F'erry Nuclear
-x
.d.PlantSiteDirector,iger' L. Lewis, Plant Mar
[ManagersReviewGroup.
W. Whitt, Director Nuclear d L. Williams, Jr., Supervisor 0:ensing Section f."E. Rogers,ProjectEngineer m
bec w/enci s :
' J. N. Grace 10.;D. Walker tR;iR. Denton, NRR
&k'!L: Thompson, NRR
@ M.* Taylor, IE
&l B. Hayes,-OI cSg R. Connelly, DIA 3
.s t
3 s
- "4fRC Resident Inspector State of Alabama
- '2' Document Control Desk f
9
't h, I g
'eh Y
i
\\;
^
RII RII
,RII, RII RII og p:tt
$h
'l.
_@Stoddart DColCins AJofinson FCantrell Cline 4&W~.
JpGKuzo 8/1 /86 8/f//85 8/ 'l /86 3// /86 8/ / /86 8////86 C
k-t-
)
.).
ENCLOSURE 1 CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT COMPARISONS OF H-3, SR-89, AND SR-90 ANALYSES FOR BROWNS FERRY NUCLEAR PLANT, MAY 1986 isstope Licensee NRC Resolution Ratio Compa ri son (uCi/ unit)
(uCi/ unit)
(Licensee /NRC)
H-3 1.79 E-5 1.7810.03 E-5 59 1.00 Ag reement S r-89 2.23 E-5 2.2510.06 E-5 38 0.9P Ag reement S r-90 2.15 E-6 2.1310.08 E-6 27 1.01 Ag reement d
.e 4
1 I
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 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. 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 va.lue for each individual nuclide is computed. This ratio is then evaluated for agreement based on the calculated resolution. The c6rresponding resolution and calculated ratios which denote agreement are listed in Table 1 below.
Values outside of the ag'reement ratics for a selected nuclide are considered in disagreement.
NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide 2 Resolution =
Associated Uncertainty for the Value E J t,y Licensee Value 2 Comparison Ratio = NRC Reference Value TABLE 1 - Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio l'
I Comparison Ratio for Resolution Aoreement
<4 0.4 - 2.5 4-7 0.5 - 2.0 8 - 15 0.6 - 1.66 16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25
>200 0.85 - 1.18 f
i
^ -, - - -
-.---.-,n.
.., ~.,.., -..,. -
v,_,,,- n,-, - -, -.,,,, - -