ML061320224: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
StriderTol Bot change
StriderTol Bot change
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:John White - Telephone Conversation.doc                                       Page 1 From:           "Axelson, William L" <WAxelso entergy.com>
{{#Wiki_filter:John White - Telephone Conversation.doc Page 1 From:  
To:             <JRW1 @nrc.gov>
"Axelson, William L" <WAxelso entergy.com>
Date:           3/2/06 4:56PM
To:  
<JRW1 @nrc.gov>
Date:
3/2/06 4:56PM


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Telephone Conversation.doc
Telephone Conversation.doc
              <<Telephone Conversation.doc>>
<<Telephone Conversation.doc>>
Fyi--MW-i 11 sample may not have been IAW protocol??
Fyi--MW-i 11 sample may not have been IAW protocol??
CC:             "Mayer, Don" <DMayerl @entergy.com>
CC:  
N\Nq3
"Mayer, Don" <DMayerl @entergy.com>
N\\Nq3


IJohn White - TEXT.htm                                                       Paqe 1 1
IJohn White - TEXT.htm Paqe 1 1
                <<Telephone Conversation.doc>>
<<Telephone Conversation.doc>>
Fyi--MW-1i1 sample may not have been IAW protocol??
Fyi--MW-1i1 sample may not have been IAW protocol??


Pacie 11 John F[John White F
F John White - TeleDhone Conversation.doc Pacie 1 1
Telep~hone Conversation.doc White - TeleDhone L_-
[John White - Telep~hone Conversation.doc Page 1 L_-
Conversation.doc                                                                        Page 1 Telephone Conversation 3/2/06 Dr. Michael Kitto (518-486-1476)
F Telephone Conversation 3/2/06 Dr. Michael Kitto (518-486-1476)
NY State Department of Health Jim Furfaro
NY State Department of Health Jim Furfaro


==Subject:==
==Subject:==
Sr-90 Result from MW- 111 The following is a summary of my conversation with Dr. Kittle of the DOH.
Sr-90 Result from MW-111 The following is a summary of my conversation with Dr. Kittle of the DOH.
                        - The NYSDOH uses an analytical method similar to the EPA method for Sr-90 analyses in drinking water (EPA-600/4-80-032 method 905). It also appears very similar to the U.S. DOE EML HASL 300 method (SR-03-RC). Based on our conversation it appears very sound and well documented. It includes various techniques for removing interfering ions (e.g., separations). Dr. Kittle will send me a copy of their procedure. The Y-90 is counted on a low level background gas proportional counter.
- The NYSDOH uses an analytical method similar to the EPA method for Sr-90 analyses in drinking water (EPA-600/4-80-032 method 905). It also appears very similar to the U.S. DOE EML HASL 300 method (SR-03-RC). Based on our conversation it appears very sound and well documented. It includes various techniques for removing interfering ions (e.g., separations). Dr. Kittle will send me a copy of their procedure. The Y-90 is counted on a low level background gas proportional counter.
                        -The Sr-90 result was reported as 3+/-2pCill The error, 2 pCi/l, is a 2 sigma total uncertainty. It includes the counting error and error associated with the analytical process (preparation and counting).
-The Sr-90 result was reported as 3+/-2pCill The error, 2 pCi/l, is a 2 sigma total uncertainty. It includes the counting error and error associated with the analytical process (preparation and counting).
                        - The DOH's detection limit for a 1 liter water sample for Sr-90 is about 0.7 pCi/l.
- The DOH's detection limit for a 1 liter water sample for Sr-90 is about 0.7 pCi/l.
However, the sample analyzed was less than 1 liter. The detection limit for the sample was probably close to about 2 pCi/l.
However, the sample analyzed was less than 1 liter. The detection limit for the sample was probably close to about 2 pCi/l.
                        -To narrow this down further, I asked Dr. Kitto what the background on his low level gas proportional counter is. He said about l cpm. He checked the Sr-90 results for me. The sample was counted three separate times (approximately a day apart). The count time was 50 minutes for each count. The gross count rate for the Sr-90 sample was about 1.2 -
-To narrow this down further, I asked Dr. Kitto what the background on his low level gas proportional counter is. He said about l cpm. He checked the Sr-90 results for me. The sample was counted three separate times (approximately a day apart). The count time was 50 minutes for each count. The gross count rate for the Sr-90 sample was about 1.2 -
1.4 cpm. It was very low; however, Sr-90 was present.
1.4 cpm. It was very low; however, Sr-90 was present.
In summary, it appears that Sr-90 was present in this sample but at a very low level. The value is slightly above the detection limit.}}
In summary, it appears that Sr-90 was present in this sample but at a very low level. The value is slightly above the detection limit.}}

Latest revision as of 09:01, 15 January 2025

E-mail from W. Axelson of Entergy to J. White of USNRC, Regarding Telephone Conversation.Doc
ML061320224
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  
Issue date: 03/02/2006
From: Axelson W
Entergy Nuclear Operations
To: Jason White
NRC/FSME
References
FOIA/PA-2006-0140
Download: ML061320224 (3)


Text

John White - Telephone Conversation.doc Page 1 From:

"Axelson, William L" <WAxelso entergy.com>

To:

<JRW1 @nrc.gov>

Date:

3/2/06 4:56PM

Subject:

Telephone Conversation.doc

<<Telephone Conversation.doc>>

Fyi--MW-i 11 sample may not have been IAW protocol??

CC:

"Mayer, Don" <DMayerl @entergy.com>

N\\Nq3

IJohn White - TEXT.htm Paqe 1 1

<<Telephone Conversation.doc>>

Fyi--MW-1i1 sample may not have been IAW protocol??

F John White - TeleDhone Conversation.doc Pacie 1 1

[John White - Telep~hone Conversation.doc Page 1 L_-

F Telephone Conversation 3/2/06 Dr. Michael Kitto (518-486-1476)

NY State Department of Health Jim Furfaro

Subject:

Sr-90 Result from MW-111 The following is a summary of my conversation with Dr. Kittle of the DOH.

- The NYSDOH uses an analytical method similar to the EPA method for Sr-90 analyses in drinking water (EPA-600/4-80-032 method 905). It also appears very similar to the U.S. DOE EML HASL 300 method (SR-03-RC). Based on our conversation it appears very sound and well documented. It includes various techniques for removing interfering ions (e.g., separations). Dr. Kittle will send me a copy of their procedure. The Y-90 is counted on a low level background gas proportional counter.

-The Sr-90 result was reported as 3+/-2pCill The error, 2 pCi/l, is a 2 sigma total uncertainty. It includes the counting error and error associated with the analytical process (preparation and counting).

- The DOH's detection limit for a 1 liter water sample for Sr-90 is about 0.7 pCi/l.

However, the sample analyzed was less than 1 liter. The detection limit for the sample was probably close to about 2 pCi/l.

-To narrow this down further, I asked Dr. Kitto what the background on his low level gas proportional counter is. He said about l cpm. He checked the Sr-90 results for me. The sample was counted three separate times (approximately a day apart). The count time was 50 minutes for each count. The gross count rate for the Sr-90 sample was about 1.2 -

1.4 cpm. It was very low; however, Sr-90 was present.

In summary, it appears that Sr-90 was present in this sample but at a very low level. The value is slightly above the detection limit.