ML063000493: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:-Fwd: FW: PEG Stakeholder E3i-WeeKly Well Heport .ae...Paale 1 i]' -From: Toi Date:  
{{#Wiki_filter:ýEugenp*cobev -Fwd: FW: PEG Stakeholder E3i-WeeKly Well Heport .ae...                     Paale 1 i]
          ' -From:               John White.,
Toi                 Diane Screhci; Eugene Cobey; James Noggle; Neil Sheehan Date:               Tue, Sep 19q, 2006 7:51 AM


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
John White., Diane Screhci; Eugene Cobey; James Noggle; Neil Sheehan Tue, Sep 19q, 2006 7:51 AM Fwd: FW: IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report Entergy had agree to provide sampling info to Westchester.
Fwd: FW: IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report Entergy had agree to provide sampling info to Westchester.
>>> "Kutzy, Paul" <pjk3@westchestergov.com>
              >>> "Kutzy, Paul" <pjk3@westchestergov.com> 09/18/2006 1:14 PM >>>
09/18/2006 1:14 PM >>>Patrick, Thanks again for your attention to this matter. The proposed report looks good with the following comments:-Each report should be annotated similar to your explanation in your 9-12-06 e-mail.-As discussed during our conference call, where samples are drawn from different levels there will be a separate report for each level as if each level represents a different well.-Each report should indicate the current sampling frequency or next tentative sampling date.-Well location should be categorized in each report and reports grouped accordingly, e.g. offsite, onsite perimeter, onsite interior, along river, relation to spent fuel rod pools, etc. You may have your own better convention.
Patrick, Thanks again for your attention to this matter. The proposed report looks good with the following comments:
Tim Rice had suggestions.
              -       Each report should be annotated similar to your explanation in your 9-12-06 e-mail.
-The reports should include a cover sheet which identifies, categorizes, and indicates status of, e.g. proposed, under construction, fully developed, etc., all monitoring wells.At what point would you recommend another conference call?Paul From: Donahue, Patrick J [mailto:PDonahu@entergy.coml Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:45 AM To: Timothy Rice; Larry Rosenmann; Kutzy, Paul; irwl @nrc.qov Cc: Mayer, Donald M; Adler, Joseph J.; Hollenbeck, Peter; Wilson, Daniel  
              -       As discussed during our conference call, where samples are drawn from different levels there will be a separate report for each level as if each level represents a different well.
              -       Each report should indicate the current sampling frequency or next tentative sampling date.
              -       Well location should be categorized in each report and reports grouped accordingly, e.g. offsite, onsite perimeter, onsite interior, along river, relation to spent fuel rod pools, etc. You may have your own better convention. Tim Rice had suggestions.
              -       The reports should include a cover sheet which identifies, categorizes, and indicates status of, e.g. proposed, under construction, fully developed, etc., all monitoring wells.
At what point would you recommend another conference call?
Paul From: Donahue, Patrick J [mailto:PDonahu@entergy.coml Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:45 AM To: Timothy Rice; Larry Rosenmann; Kutzy, Paul; irwl @nrc.qov Cc: Mayer, Donald M; Adler, Joseph J.; Hollenbeck, Peter; Wilson, Daniel


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report JLEug.&#xfd;n!&#xfd;_qq!j&#xfd;y  
IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report
-Fwd-._EW.
 
IPEG Stakeholder Bi-Weekly ell He Pagle 2 11-Fwd: FW: PEG Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report Paqe 211 Sirs, Attached please find the revised IPEC Groundwater Investigation Bi-Weekly Update. This nascent report was created in order to provide monitoring well data to the stakeholders in a manner that hopefully will assist the reader in understanding the monitoring well data both in both tabular form and graphically.
JLEug.&#xfd;n!&#xfd;_qq!j&#xfd;y - Fwd-._EW. IPEG Stakeholder Bi-Weekly           ell He                     Pagle 2 11
We are attempting to create a single report that all will find useful. Our intention is to update this report the Wednesday preceding the scheduled bi-weekly stakeholder call on Thursday.
                  - Fwd: FW: PEG Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report                           Paqe 211 Sirs, Attached please find the revised IPEC Groundwater Investigation Bi-Weekly Update. This nascent report was created in order to provide monitoring well data to the stakeholders in a manner that hopefully will assist the reader in understanding the monitoring well data both in both tabular form and graphically. We are attempting to create a single report that all will find useful. Our intention is to update this report the Wednesday preceding the scheduled bi-weekly stakeholder call on Thursday. This report will contain a data chart and data table of each wells particular data. The chart will more easily show data trends and how the data relates to the maximum concentration level (MCL). The data table will provide all sample results through present, including numerical result, associated sample error (standard dev), the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) and the ratio of result to MCL (fMCL). There will be two pages for each sample location. One page for Tritium results and one page for Strontium results.
This report will contain a data chart and data table of each wells particular data. The chart will more easily show data trends and how the data relates to the maximum concentration level (MCL). The data table will provide all sample results through present, including numerical result, associated sample error (standard dev), the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) and the ratio of result to MCL (fMCL). There will be two pages for each sample location.
Included are two examples of how a typical page will appear. The MW-34 chart shows how a well containing elevated concentrations of H3 would appear in addition to the identification of a trend in the data. Comparing this to MW-40 we see that wells close to background or having results less than the minimum detectable concentration will still have results plotted reflecting the 'non-detect' or background level of those results.
One page for Tritium results and one page for Strontium results.Included are two examples of how a typical page will appear. The MW-34 chart shows how a well containing elevated concentrations of H3 would appear in addition to the identification of a trend in the data. Comparing this to MW-40 we see that wells close to background or having results less than the minimum detectable concentration will still have results plotted reflecting the 'non-detect' or background level of those results.Please review these example pages and provide feedback, as necessary.
Please review these example pages and provide feedback, as necessary.
As for the tomorrow (Wednesday 9/13) we will provide the report in it's original state until such time as we can finalize this newer revision.Sincerely,<<MW-34 H-3 MCL.pdf>>  
As for the tomorrow (Wednesday 9/13) we will provide the report in it's original state until such time as we can finalize this newer revision.
<<MW-40 H-3 MCL.pdf>>Patrick Donahue Sr. HP/Chemistry Specialist Entergy Nuclear Northeast Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, Suite 3 Buchanan, NY 10511 pdonahu@entercqy.com (914) 736-8405 Voice (914) 734-6247 Fax This e-mail and any attachments thereto are intended only for the use by the addressee(s) named herein and contain proprietary and confidential information.
Sincerely,
If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited.
                <<MW-34 H-3 MCL.pdf>> <<MW-40 H-3 MCL.pdf>>
If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof.
Patrick Donahue Sr. HP/Chemistry Specialist Entergy Nuclear Northeast Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, Suite 3 Buchanan, NY 10511 pdonahu@entercqy.com (914) 736-8405 Voice (914) 734-6247 Fax This e-mail and any attachments thereto are intended only for the use by the addressee(s) named herein and contain proprietary and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof.
IEugene Cobey-Fwd:
 
FW: IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well.Report  
IEugene Cobey-Fwd: FW: IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well.Report .. Page 3 Trend Graph for Well: MW-34 Analyte Name: H-3 MCL Value: 20,000.00 Between Dates: 02/03/2006 and 06/26/2006 Standard Deviation
..Page 3 Trend Graph for Well: MW-34 Analyte Name: H-3 MCL Value: 20,000.00 Between Dates: 02/03/2006 and 06/26/2006 Standard Deviation
* 2 Sigma 2.40e+005 2.00e+005
* 2 Sigma 2.40e+005 2.00e+005 ,j 1.60e+005 U) 1.20e+005 8.00e+004 4.00e+004 0.00e+000 ft 2/3 3/3 4/3 5/3 6/3 Date Collected-U.Max Result
        ,j 1.60e+005 U)   1.20e+005 8.00e+004 4.00e+004 0.00e+000                                                                       ft 2/3               3/3           4/3                   5/3         6/3 Date Collected
* Max MDC ---MCL Value SampleName Sample Date/Time Result Standard Deviation MDC fMCL MW-34-(008) 02/03/2006  
                                                  -U.Max Result
/ 12:20 2.24E+005 1.80E+004 6.33E+002 1.12E+001 MW-34-(009) 02/07/2006  
* Max MDC --- MCL Value SampleName                 Sample Date/Time           Result             Standard Deviation     MDC       fMCL MW-34-(008)                 02/03/2006 / 12:20     2.24E+005                 1.80E+004     6.33E+002 1.12E+001 MW-34-(009)                 02/07/2006 / 15:15     1.74E+005                 1.59E+004     6.37E+002 8.69E+000 MW-34-(010)                 02/16/2006 / 13:55     1.99E+005                 1.70E+004     6.36E+002 9.96E+000 MW-34-(013)                 05/17/2006 / 13:15     3.64E+004                 3.68E+003     8.35E+002 1.82E+000 MW-34-(014)                 06/26/2006 / 10:20     1.05E+004                 5.68E+002       3.41 E+002 5.25E-001 Printed: 9-11-2006 / 11:51                                                                                     Page 1 of 1
/ 15:15 1.74E+005 1.59E+004 6.37E+002 8.69E+000 MW-34-(010) 02/16/2006  
 
/ 13:55 1.99E+005 1.70E+004 6.36E+002 9.96E+000 MW-34-(013) 05/17/2006  
Trend Graph for Well: MW-40 Analyte Name: H-3 MCL Value: 20,000.00 Between Dates: 02/09/2006 and 08/09/2006 Standard Deviation : 2 Sigma 2.00e+004 1.60e+004 1.20e+004 8.00e+003 4.00e+003 0.00e+000 2/9           3/9       4/9                 5/9                 6/9     7/9     8/9 Date Collected
/ 13:15 3.64E+004 3.68E+003 8.35E+002 1.82E+000 MW-34-(014) 06/26/2006  
                                                  -*-Max Result 0 Max MDC   --IMCL Value SampleName                 Sample Date/Time           Result             Standard Deviation     MDC     fMCL MW-40-(001)               02/09/2006 / 14:30       5.70E+001                 2.82E+002     4.73E+002 2.85E-003 MW-40-(002)               04/11/2006 / 18:15       1.40E+002                 2.74E+002     4.52E+002 7.OOE-003 MW-40-(003)               05/22/2006 / 10:00       1.77E+002                 2.70E+002     4.46E+002 8.85E-003 MW-40-(004)               06/20/2006 / 10:20       1.42E+002                 3.02E+002     4.99E+002 7.1OE-003 MW-40-(005)               07/05/2006 / 12:00       1.98E+002                 2.74E+002     4.52E+002 9.90E-003 MW-40-(006)               07/11/2006 / 11:55       2.26E+002                 2.74E+002     4.52E+002 1.13E-002 MW-40-(007)-S1             08/09/2006 / 10:35       1.04E+002                 2.70E+002     4.47E+002 5.20E-003 Printed: 9-11-2006 / 11:51                                                                                     Page 1 of 1}}
/ 10:20 1.05E+004 5.68E+002 3.41 E+002 5.25E-001 Printed: 9-11-2006  
/ 11:51 Page 1 of 1 Trend Graph for Well: MW-40 Analyte Name: H-3 MCL Value: 20,000.00 Between Dates: 02/09/2006 and 08/09/2006 Standard Deviation
: 2 Sigma 2.00e+004 1.60e+004 1.20e+004 8.00e+003 4.00e+003 0.00e+000 2/9 3/9 4/9 5/9 6/9 7/9 8/9 Date Collected-*-Max Result 0 Max MDC --IMCL Value SampleName Sample Date/Time Result Standard Deviation MDC fMCL MW-40-(001) 02/09/2006  
/ 14:30 5.70E+001 2.82E+002 4.73E+002 2.85E-003 MW-40-(002) 04/11/2006  
/ 18:15 1.40E+002 2.74E+002 4.52E+002 7.OOE-003 MW-40-(003) 05/22/2006  
/ 10:00 1.77E+002 2.70E+002 4.46E+002 8.85E-003 MW-40-(004) 06/20/2006  
/ 10:20 1.42E+002 3.02E+002 4.99E+002 7.1OE-003 MW-40-(005) 07/05/2006  
/ 12:00 1.98E+002 2.74E+002 4.52E+002 9.90E-003 MW-40-(006) 07/11/2006  
/ 11:55 2.26E+002 2.74E+002 4.52E+002 1.13E-002 MW-40-(007)-S1 08/09/2006  
/ 10:35 1.04E+002 2.70E+002 4.47E+002 5.20E-003 Printed: 9-11-2006  
/ 11:51 Page 1 of 1}}

Latest revision as of 13:39, 23 November 2019

E-mail from J. White of NRC, Regarding IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report
ML063000493
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 09/19/2006
From: Jason White
NRC Region 1
To: Cobey E, Noggle J, Diane Screnci, Neil Sheehan
Office of Public Affairs
References
FOIA/PA-2006-0314
Download: ML063000493 (5)


Text

ýEugenp*cobev -Fwd: FW: PEG Stakeholder E3i-WeeKly Well Heport .ae... Paale 1 i]

' -From: John White.,

Toi Diane Screhci; Eugene Cobey; James Noggle; Neil Sheehan Date: Tue, Sep 19q, 2006 7:51 AM

Subject:

Fwd: FW: IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report Entergy had agree to provide sampling info to Westchester.

>>> "Kutzy, Paul" <pjk3@westchestergov.com> 09/18/2006 1:14 PM >>>

Patrick, Thanks again for your attention to this matter. The proposed report looks good with the following comments:

- Each report should be annotated similar to your explanation in your 9-12-06 e-mail.

- As discussed during our conference call, where samples are drawn from different levels there will be a separate report for each level as if each level represents a different well.

- Each report should indicate the current sampling frequency or next tentative sampling date.

- Well location should be categorized in each report and reports grouped accordingly, e.g. offsite, onsite perimeter, onsite interior, along river, relation to spent fuel rod pools, etc. You may have your own better convention. Tim Rice had suggestions.

- The reports should include a cover sheet which identifies, categorizes, and indicates status of, e.g. proposed, under construction, fully developed, etc., all monitoring wells.

At what point would you recommend another conference call?

Paul From: Donahue, Patrick J [mailto:PDonahu@entergy.coml Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2006 11:45 AM To: Timothy Rice; Larry Rosenmann; Kutzy, Paul; irwl @nrc.qov Cc: Mayer, Donald M; Adler, Joseph J.; Hollenbeck, Peter; Wilson, Daniel

Subject:

IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report

JLEug.ýn!ý_qq!jýy - Fwd-._EW. IPEG Stakeholder Bi-Weekly ell He Pagle 2 11

- Fwd: FW: PEG Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well Report Paqe 211 Sirs, Attached please find the revised IPEC Groundwater Investigation Bi-Weekly Update. This nascent report was created in order to provide monitoring well data to the stakeholders in a manner that hopefully will assist the reader in understanding the monitoring well data both in both tabular form and graphically. We are attempting to create a single report that all will find useful. Our intention is to update this report the Wednesday preceding the scheduled bi-weekly stakeholder call on Thursday. This report will contain a data chart and data table of each wells particular data. The chart will more easily show data trends and how the data relates to the maximum concentration level (MCL). The data table will provide all sample results through present, including numerical result, associated sample error (standard dev), the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) and the ratio of result to MCL (fMCL). There will be two pages for each sample location. One page for Tritium results and one page for Strontium results.

Included are two examples of how a typical page will appear. The MW-34 chart shows how a well containing elevated concentrations of H3 would appear in addition to the identification of a trend in the data. Comparing this to MW-40 we see that wells close to background or having results less than the minimum detectable concentration will still have results plotted reflecting the 'non-detect' or background level of those results.

Please review these example pages and provide feedback, as necessary.

As for the tomorrow (Wednesday 9/13) we will provide the report in it's original state until such time as we can finalize this newer revision.

Sincerely,

<<MW-34 H-3 MCL.pdf>> <<MW-40 H-3 MCL.pdf>>

Patrick Donahue Sr. HP/Chemistry Specialist Entergy Nuclear Northeast Indian Point Energy Center 450 Broadway, Suite 3 Buchanan, NY 10511 pdonahu@entercqy.com (914) 736-8405 Voice (914) 734-6247 Fax This e-mail and any attachments thereto are intended only for the use by the addressee(s) named herein and contain proprietary and confidential information. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail, and any attachments thereto, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately notify me by telephone and permanently delete the original and any copy of any e-mail and any printout thereof.

IEugene Cobey-Fwd: FW: IPEC Stakeholder Bi-Weekly Well.Report .. Page 3 Trend Graph for Well: MW-34 Analyte Name: H-3 MCL Value: 20,000.00 Between Dates: 02/03/2006 and 06/26/2006 Standard Deviation

  • 2 Sigma 2.40e+005 2.00e+005

,j 1.60e+005 U) 1.20e+005 8.00e+004 4.00e+004 0.00e+000 ft 2/3 3/3 4/3 5/3 6/3 Date Collected

-U.Max Result

  • Max MDC --- MCL Value SampleName Sample Date/Time Result Standard Deviation MDC fMCL MW-34-(008) 02/03/2006 / 12:20 2.24E+005 1.80E+004 6.33E+002 1.12E+001 MW-34-(009) 02/07/2006 / 15:15 1.74E+005 1.59E+004 6.37E+002 8.69E+000 MW-34-(010) 02/16/2006 / 13:55 1.99E+005 1.70E+004 6.36E+002 9.96E+000 MW-34-(013) 05/17/2006 / 13:15 3.64E+004 3.68E+003 8.35E+002 1.82E+000 MW-34-(014) 06/26/2006 / 10:20 1.05E+004 5.68E+002 3.41 E+002 5.25E-001 Printed: 9-11-2006 / 11:51 Page 1 of 1

Trend Graph for Well: MW-40 Analyte Name: H-3 MCL Value: 20,000.00 Between Dates: 02/09/2006 and 08/09/2006 Standard Deviation : 2 Sigma 2.00e+004 1.60e+004 1.20e+004 8.00e+003 4.00e+003 0.00e+000 2/9 3/9 4/9 5/9 6/9 7/9 8/9 Date Collected

-*-Max Result 0 Max MDC --IMCL Value SampleName Sample Date/Time Result Standard Deviation MDC fMCL MW-40-(001) 02/09/2006 / 14:30 5.70E+001 2.82E+002 4.73E+002 2.85E-003 MW-40-(002) 04/11/2006 / 18:15 1.40E+002 2.74E+002 4.52E+002 7.OOE-003 MW-40-(003) 05/22/2006 / 10:00 1.77E+002 2.70E+002 4.46E+002 8.85E-003 MW-40-(004) 06/20/2006 / 10:20 1.42E+002 3.02E+002 4.99E+002 7.1OE-003 MW-40-(005) 07/05/2006 / 12:00 1.98E+002 2.74E+002 4.52E+002 9.90E-003 MW-40-(006) 07/11/2006 / 11:55 2.26E+002 2.74E+002 4.52E+002 1.13E-002 MW-40-(007)-S1 08/09/2006 / 10:35 1.04E+002 2.70E+002 4.47E+002 5.20E-003 Printed: 9-11-2006 / 11:51 Page 1 of 1