ML061320225

From kanterella
Revision as of 18:55, 27 October 2018 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
E-mail from J. White of Usnrc to Tbrice@Gw.Dec.State.Ny.Us; and Waxelso@Entergy.Com, Regarding Compilation of Sample Results
ML061320225
Person / Time
Site: Indian Point  Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 03/02/2006
From: White J R
Division of Reactor Safety I
To: Axelson W L, Rice T B
Entergy Nuclear Northeast, Entergy Nuclear Operations, State of NY, Dept of Environmental Conservation
References
FOIA/PA-2006-0140
Download: ML061320225 (8)
v • d • e


Text

lfJohn White -Compilation of samDle results Paae 1 d-,-H --- ------ ---From: To: Date:

Subject:

John White Tbrice@gw.dec.state.ny.us; Waxelso~entergy.com 3/2/06 5:19PM Compilation of sample results The attached is our compilation of the sample data. Please review to assure accuracy of the data presented.

We are planning to make the attach this table to the NRC inspection report.CC: James Kottan; James Noggle Ail John White -Indian Point Analytical Result Rev3.wpd I-~ PageI~ATTACHMENT 1 Indian Point Analytical Results Comparison Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Ucensee Result Compared to Resultl milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per milliliter Unit 1 Sphere Foundation Co-58 (-5+/-24)E-10

<8E-8 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with Drain Sump 10/19/2005 Co-60 (-8+/-23)E-10

<8E-8 Not Detected/No Comparison New York Cs-134 (-1.9+/-2.3)E-9

<1 E-7 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (9+/-22)E-10

<1 E-7 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (5.7+/-2.6)E-7 (8.53+/-?)E-7 Agreement Sr-90 (-0.2+/-1.2)E-9 Not Analyzed Not Detected/No Comparison Unit 1 West Spent Fuel Co-58 (-5+/-18)E-7

<2E-6 -Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with Pool Co-60 (2.98+/-0.35)E-5 (3.76+/-0.32)E-5 Agreement New York 10/20/2005 Cs-134 (2+/-14)E-7

<2E-6 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (6.74+/-0.22)E-3 (8.13+/-0.04)E-3 Agreement H-3 (4.18+/-0.72)E-4 (4.16+/-?)E-4' No Comparison (3.27+/-?)E-4 2 No Comparison Sr-90 (1.300+/-0.035)E-4 Not Analyzed No Comparison Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool Co-58 (3.46+/-0.16)E-4 (3.33+/-0.0.06)E-4 Agreement Sample not Split with 10/21/2005 Co-60 (7.95+/-0.28)E-4 (7.99+/-0.08)E-4 Agreement New York Cs-134 (8.57+/-0.31)E-4 (1.031+/-0.0.008)E-3 Agreement Cs-137 (1.319+/-0.046)E-3 (1.586+/-0.012)E-3 Agreement H-3 (2.929+/-0.083)E-2 (2.52+/-?)E-2 3 No Comparison Sr-90 (5.87+/-0.24)E-6 Not Analyzed No Comparison John White -Indian Point Analytical Result Rev3.wqd____ Page ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 2 of 7)Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per milliliter)

Unit 2 Spent Fuel Pool Co-58 (2.4+/-3.4)E-9

<5E-8 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with Wall Leak Co-60 (4.56+/-0.49)E-8

<8E-8 No Comparison New York 10/24/2005 Cs-134 (2.64+/-0.1 2)E-7 (3.6+/-0.8)E-7 Disagreement Cs-137 (4.88+/-0.15)E-6 (4.73+/-0.24)E-6 Agreement H-3 (2.208+/-0.047)E-2 (2.1 9+/-?)E-2 Agreement Sr-90 (3.70+/-0.12)E-7 Not Analyzed No Comparison Unit 1 North Curtain Drain Co-58 (-1.4+/-1 .8)E-9 Sample not Split with Composite Co-60 (0.0+/-2.1)E-9 New York 10/21/2005 Cs-134 (-6+/-19)E-10 Cs-137 (4.48+/-0.42)E-8 H-3 (1.425+/-0.053)E-5 Sr-90 (9.97+/-0.42)E-8 Not Analyzed No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58 (2.7+/-4.3)E-9

<5E-944 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with MW-11 Co-60 (3.5+/-3.1)E-9

<2E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison New York 9/29/2005 Cs-134 (-5+/-39)E-10

<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (-9+/-29)E-10

<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (2.168+/-0.028)E-4 (2.07+/-?)E-4 Agreement (2.1 16+/-0.008)E-44 Agreement Sr-90 (1.4+/-1 .2)2-9 Not Analyzed Not Detected/No ComParison

.- - ---- Jlo White Indian Point Analvical Result Rev3.wpd Paqe 31 ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 3 of 7)Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per l_ l milliliter)

Monitoring Well Co-58 (-7+/-23)E-10

<6E-8 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Sample not Split with MW-il1 Co-60 (1 .8+/-2.2)E-9

<4E-8 4 Not Detected/No Comparison New York 10/14/2005 Cs-134 (1 .9+/-2.2)E-9

<4E-8 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (-2.1i+/-3.6)E-9

<5E-8 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (7.29+/-0.41 )E-6 (6.82+/-?)E-6 Agreement Sr-90 (1.1+/-1.3)E-9 Not Analyzed Not Detected/No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58 (-1.5+/-3.7)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-38 Co-60 (0.3+/-3.3)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-134 (4.4+/-3.3)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (-0.7+/-3.0)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (7.4+/-1 .3)E-7 (9.8+/-2.9)E-7 4 Agreement (7.0+/-1 .2)E-7 Sr-90 (0.4+/-1.2)E-9

<1.25E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58 (-0.2+/-3.1)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-101 Co-60 (2.5t3.6)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-1 34 (1 .8+/-3.4)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (-1 .45.3)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (0.7+/-1.2)E-7 (2.7+/-2.8)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<5E-8 Sr-90 (0.2+/-1 .1)E-9 <1 .25E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comearison

'John White -Indian Point Analytical Result Rev3.wpd Page 4 ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 4 of 7)Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per I_ ._ ._ ! ._ _milliliter)

Monitoring Well Co-58 (1 .53.3)E-9

<4E-94 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-105 Co-60 (1 .5+/-3.3)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-134 (0.4+/-3.5)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (0.4+2.9)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (-0.1+/-1.2)E-7 (2.2+2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison (1.0+/-0.9)E-7 Sr-90 (-0.2+/-1.2)E-9

<1 .93E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comparison Monitoring Well Co-58 (1 .7+2.7)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison MW-107 Co-60 (-0.2+2.6)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/8/2005 Cs-134 (2.5+/-2.8)E-9

<5E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-1 37 (-1.1+/-2.4)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (1.3+/-1.2)E-7 (1.3+/-2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<5E-8 Sr-9o (0.8+/-1.2)E-9

<1.33E-8 6 Not Detected/No Comparison Lefarge Gypsum Co-58 (-2.8*3.2)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Plant Well #1 Co-60 (0.8+/-3.9)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison 1216/2005 Cs-134 (0.3+/-3.6)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (0.2+/-3.5)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (0.4+/-1.2)E-7 (0.8+/-2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<5E-8 Sr-90 (1.2+/-1.1)E-9

<1 .48E-8s Not Detected/No Comparison

~JLobhn Wte-Indian Point Analytil Result Rev3w d.Page 5 ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 5 of 7)Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per milliliter)

Lefarge Gypsum Co-58 (0.4+/-2.5)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Plant Well #3 Co-60 (0.3+/-3.1)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison 12/6/2005 Cs-1 34 (3.8+/-2.8)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison Cs-137 (-0.8+/-4.4)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison H-3 (0.2+/-1.2)E-7 (1.1+2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<5E-8 Sr-90 (0.1+/-1.0)E-9

<1.36E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comparison Trap Rock Quarry Co-58 (0.4+/-1.7)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<0.9E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60 (-0.1+/-2.1)E-9

<2E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<0.5E-9 Cs-134 (-0.4+/-1.8)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1 .2E-9 Cs-137 (0.6+/-1 .6)E-9 <2E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.1 E-9 H-3 (0.4+/-1.2)E-7

(-1.2+/-2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison (9+/-6)E-8 Sr-90 (0.9+/-1 .0)E-9 <2.07E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comparison

<4E-10 John White -Indian Point Analvtical Result Rev3.wpd Page 6 I ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 6 of 7)Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per milliliter Algonquin Outfall Co-58 (1.1+2.3)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.5E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60 (-0.5+2.2)E-9

<5E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.4E-9 Cs-134 (0.5+2.4)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.7E-9 Cs-1 37 (-1.6+2.2)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.5E-9 H-3 (0.3+/-1.2)E-7 (0.6+2.8)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<6E-8 Sr-90 (0.3+/-1.0)E-9

<2.07E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comparison (7+/-4)E-10 Fifth Street Well Co-58 (0.9+2.2)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1 .8E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60 (0.8+2.6)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.9E-9 Cs-134 (-0.1+/-2.1)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1 .9E-9 Cs-137 (-0.6+2.1)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1 .9E-9 H-3 (-0.7+/-1.2)E-7

(-0.7+2.7)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<6E-8 Sr-90 (0.4+/-1t.0)E-9

<1.26E-8s Not Detected/No Comparison (8+/-7)E-10 I oh Wit -Indian Point AnltclResult Rev3.wpd h ha R t we I ATTACHMENT 1 (Page 7 of 7)Sample ID Radionuclide NRC Result Indian Pt. Result Comparison State of New York (microCuries per (microCuries per (Licensee Result Compared to Result milliliter) milliliter)

NRC Result) (microCuries per.___ ... .milliliter)

Gypsum Plant Stream Co-58 (0.0+/-1.9)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<2E-9 11/30/2005 Co-60 (0.1+/-1.8)E-9

<4E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1 .7E-9 Cs-134 (0.1+2.1)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.9E-9 Cs-137 (-0.3+/-1.7)E-9

<3E-9 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<1.7E-9 H-3 (0.1+/-1.2)E-7 (0.6+2.8)E-7 4 Not Detected/No Comparison

<6E-8 Sr-90 (0.5+/-1.0)E-9

<1.52E-8 5 Not Detected/No Comparison (8+/-4)E-10 1 .Result from a sample taken on 09/08/2005.

Therefore, not a split sample, but presented for information only.2.Result from a sample taken on 09/29/2005.

Therefore, not a split sample, but presented for information only.3.Result from a sample taken on 10/10/2005.

Therefore, not a split sample, but presented for information only.4.1ndian Point offsite environmental laboratory result.5.1ndian Point offsite commercial contract laboratory result.Note: reported uncertainties for NRC and New York State represent the 95% confidence interval based on total propogated uncertainties.

Indian Point uncertainties represent the 95% confidence interval, based on counting uncertainty.

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML061320225&oldid=1149929"