IR 05000424/1987064

Ack Receipt of 880212 Submittal of Analytical Results of Spiked Liquid Samples,Per Insp Rept 50-424/87-64.Comparison of Results to Known Values & Acceptance Criteria of Comparisons Encl.All Comparative Results in Agreement

ML20148H725
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	03/10/1988
From:	Dan Collins NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Head G GEORGIA POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8803300070
Download: ML20148H725 (4)

Text

P '

.

,

$flL&W MAR 101988 Georgia Power Company ATTN: V.r. George F. Head Senior Vice Dresident-Nuclear Operations P. O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302 Gentlemen:

SUBJECT: DOCKET NO. 50-424, CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENT RESULTS, SUPPLEMENT TO INSPECTION REPORT N0. 50-424/87-64 As part of the NRC Confirmatory Measurements Program, spiked liquid samples were sent on November 5, 1987, to your Vogtle facility for selected radiochemical analyse We are in receipt of your analytical results transmitted to us by your letter dated February 12, 1988, and subsequent to verification of your values as per our conversation by telephone on fiarch 1, 1988, 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 In our review of these data all comparative results were in agreement. These data should be reviewed in greater detail by your cognizant staff members for any significant trends in the data among successive years in which samples have been analyzed by your facilit These results and any results from previous years pertaining to these analyses will be discussed at future NRC inspection

Sincerely, Douglas M. Collins, Chief Emergency Preparedness and Radiological Protection Branch Division of Radiation Safety and Safeguards Enclosures:

1. Confirmatory Measurement Comparisons Criteria for Comparing Analytical Measurements cc w/encis: (See page 2)

8803300070 880310 PDR ADOCK 05000424 0 PDR

.C Ec F ,, .

Georgia Power Company- 2 cq w/encis:

'

9'. D. Rice, Vice President, Project

' Director p W. Hayes, Vogtle Quality-Assurance Manager (G( Bockhold, Jr. , General Mar.ager, Nuclear Operations M Gucwa, Manager, Nuclear Safety and Licensing g A. Bailey, Project Licensing Manager g W. Churchill, Esq., Shaw, fittman, Potts and Trowbridge W. Kirkland, III, Counsel, Office of the Consumer's Utility Council (p'. Feig, Georgians Against Nuclear Energy bSc w/encis:

LE.f Reis, 0GC W. Hopkins, NRR M. Sinkule, RII D y Technical Assistant WC Resident Inspector Dv.:ument Control Desk

"State of Georgia RII RII RII ,y

>kV J oorsen f abl(e kule MSip/88 3/f/88 3/7/88 3/4 ll

!

.~ -_

. . _ _ .

..*

."

ENCLOSURE 1 Conri rmatory Measurement Compa ri sons of' H-3, Fe-55, and Sr-90 Ana lyses for Vogtle Nuclear Plant, November 5, 1987 Licensee NRC tio Isotope Lupi/mi ) (uCi/mi1 Hesolut193 LLi',ensee/NRC) Compa ri son H-3 2.1 E-5 2.0310.084 E-5 52 1.01 Ag reement Fe-55 1.3 E-5 1.27 1 0.03 E-5 f2 4 1.02 Ag reement

$r-90 2.2 E-6 2.57 i O.10 E-6 26 0.86 Ag reement NOTE: Due to the extended decay time for the isotope Sr-89, the analytical resu l ts we re no t compa re *

v

.

.

-

p- -

,

.

.

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 progra 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"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 decrease For comparison purposes, a ratio 2 of the licensee value to the NRC value for each individual nuclide is compute 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 disagreemen NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide

Resolution = Associated Uncertainty for the Value Licensee Value

Comparison Ratio n NRC Reference Value TABLE 1 Confirmatory Measurements Acceptance Criteria Resolutions vs. Comparison Ratio i Comparison Ratio for Resolution Agreement

< 4 0'.4 - .5 - .6 - 1.66

! 16 - 0 0.75 - 1.33

'

51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25

>200 0.85 - 1.18