IR 05000295/1989024

Insp Repts 50-295/89-24 & 50-304/89-22 on 890731-0829.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Confirmatory Measurements & Radiological Environ Monitoring Including Review of Open Items Audits & Appraisals

ML20247E956
Person / Time
Site:	Zion  File:ZionSolutions icon.png
Issue date:	09/08/1989
From:	Januska A, Schumacher M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20247E952	List: IR 05000295/1989024 ML20247E947
References
50-295-89-24, 50-304-89-22, NUDOCS 8909180053
Download: ML20247E956 (10)

Text

&. . .g, y = , ,

, ,

n . , . y lO , 4

'

.'- ', NO f $f , >

$% /a - ' '

fyf"%f&: '; n,

.

.

. / 1 M, M.@ k* '

,

>

'

m ,

@

Wyp, ~ig', ,7

'

fs N / >

"

U;Sl' NUCLEAR REGULATORY' COMMISSIO '

'

aM '* , .REGI0N III e

m

?. -[

M[J eRephts"No.'50-.295/89024(DRSS);L50-30V89022(DRSS), '

.

> ~ .; ' v . , .

.

&y-K f. DocketfNosM 50-295;:50-304-

' Licenses No. DPR-39;;DPR-48-

,

e ,

e

.

"

'

.O Commonwealth' Edison Company

'" > Lii:ensee:

< . A

+ Post Office'Boxe767- ~

LChicago,JIL1 60690 U ,

i, ,. . . .

-

<

, . . .

, .

.

. .

l:i *m . Facility,Name:.12 ion Nuclear Generating Station,.-' Units 1.and 2 '

x

[, iInspection . At: ;ZionLSitE,Z'on'IL'60099 i

'

y 94 ,

InspectionCon~ddctedi ' July;31.through August 29, 1989~

, ,

YM./m+alw[

, .

y,h3-p

. Inspectors: A.'G. Janusk , gg 1 ,

,

-

Date M.-C.LSchumacher (August 3-4)

~

, L Date

gg

_

,

e' r ,

.

s

>

Approved lBy: M. C.'Schumacher,~ Chief y Radiological Controls and-

'

"

.

. Date

' ~

. Chemistry Section y

Inspection SummaryL N '

Inspection on July 31 E through August 29,' 1989 (Reports No. 50-295/89024(DRSS);.

. No. 50-304/89022(DR55)) , ..

.c

,'

Areas-Inspected: . Routine., ' announced inspectiori of confirmatory measurements 'and H 1 radiological e6vironmental monitoring including: . ireview of open items-(IP 92701);

f L: _ 2 audits and appraisals; changes in. organization, equipment, facilities and

. instrumentation;' implementation of.the quality assurance and confirmatory

. measurements program;' post-accident sample analyses; implementation of the

.

" radiological environmental monitoring program;(REMP) and implementation of p the^REMP quality assurance program (IP 84750).

i fResults: Laboratory quality assurance' was generally good. The post-accident

'

sampling system is,being' exercised during the collection of routine primary H . coolant-sample .

Confirmatory measurement resultsideclined since the last ,

iinspection with:a pervasive negative bias in all the media analyze p, No violations'or-deviations were identifie e

,

8909180053 890908 FDR ADOCK0500g a

L

,

-

c m- -- _

.

,

..- 4 DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted P. Bragado, Engineering Assistant W. Devaney, Chemistry Technician C.-Doil, Chemist

, **D. Hemmerle, Lead Chemist

• T. Joyce, Station Manager

.G. Kassner, Lead HP-Operations /ALARA-

• K. Miedlar, Chemist

+R -Mika, Health Physics Supervisor

M. Petersen,- Regulatory Assurance

• T. Rieck, Technical Superintendent

• C. Schultz, QC Supervisor

• T. Vandevort, QA Supervisor P. Zwilling, Chemistry Supervisor

.

• R.'Leemon, Resident Inspector, NRC

• Present at the' Exit Meeting on August 4,'198 + Telephone conversation on August 10, 198 Telephone conversation on August 29, 198 . Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings (IP 92701) (Closed) Open Item (50-295/88004-01; 50-304/88005-01): Licensee to (1). determine if Br-82 was an anomaly and apply a correction factor if appropriate and (2) implement a counting technique that wil accurately quantify activity on charcoal regardless of the nuclide deposition. The licensee currently applies a correction factor of 1.25 to Br-82 when quantified on charcoal. The licensee plans to l' test a counting technique where the charcoal adsorber is rotated in front of the' detector during analysis. If the test results are favorable i.e., LLDs can be achieved without significantly increasing count times etc., the new geometry will be put into us (Closed) Open Item (50-295/88004-02; 50-304/88005-02): Licensee to review the Post Accident Radionuclides Analysis Portable System (PARAPS) library contents, correct mistakes, and reduce the number of energy lines to assure that nuclides are not misse The inspector examined the revised PARAPS library printout and noted that it had been reviewed and edite . Changes in Organization, Equipment, Facilities, and Instrumentation (IP 84750)

The management structure of the Chemistry Section was changed to conform l

to the Chemistry and Health Physics split which took place on January 1, l 1989. The Chemistry and the Health Physics Sections are each headed by l a Supervisor who report to the Technical Superintendent. The Chemistry Technicians (cts), currently 16 plus 4 in training are under the direction of a Chem Forema The Foreman and the Lead Chemist report to the Chemistry Superviso Technician training involves 16 weeks of

l L

g g . , y , -- - - - - - - - - - - -

~

EfjJ }&

'

1  ;+' ,

p 9 e; y, y- .,. ,

',

[ [f h;; y , ,

W ,' - yn general. studies. and 5! weeks of site specific.information. - Two weeks >

f

'

• ,,Lof.; continuing. training are~given annually. . Requali fication: for: all "A" ~

7n x cts will be required annually;beginning'in.1991. During the inspection f  : Health Physics personnel.were incthe process of relocating to the Turbiner 1 ',

building. '

"

l'.4- A m

[ ', No violations or1 deviations were identified, p -

L Confirmatory Measurement (IP 84750)

M .a. ,!Sampl6L Split

'

.Sixfsamples (containment air particulate,' containment charcoal,

'

'

crud filter, gas, reactor coolant and liquid) were analyzed for

'

. gamma. emitting isotopes-by the licensee and in the. Region III Mobile. Laboratory on site. Comparisons' were made on combinations of the licensee's four normally used count room ~ detectors and the Post Accident-Radionuclides Analysis Portable System (PARAPS).

~, ,

.Results of.the sample comparisons are given in Table 1;ithe-comparison criteria are given in Attachment 1. The licensee

. achieved 89 agreements out of 100 comparison .

.

Liquid waste, charcoal 1 filter and crud.(primary coolant' filter)

sample 2 analyses resulted in all agreements. A portion of the-liquid waitetsample,will;be analyzed for gross.. alpha,. gross j '~ beta, H-3,tSr-89, Sr-90,, and iFe-55 by the licensee and the resultssreportedito Region III for comparison with an analysis by the.NRC Reference Laboratory cn:a spl.it of the sample (0 pen

~ ' ~

'Iteni 50-295/89024 .01; 50-304/89022-01). -

'

A containment' air pasticulaie sample analyzed resulted in a

> disagreement for Cs-134 on"both Detectors 1 and 3. No reason

. could be:found for these disagreements. A orimary coolant filter-(CRUD) was then analyzed using the same efficiency file resulting, in alll agreements which included Cs-134'on both detector .

-Xe-133'in of'f gas was:in disagreement on Detector.4 but was in agreement on Detector 3. No reason for the disagreement could be determined.

_

A primary sample analyzed resulted in a disagreement for 1-133 on Detector 1 and disagreements for I-131, I-135, and Cs-138 on Detector 2. The inspector noted that except for I-134.all of the results were biased low. A second sample,' analyzed on the same detectors resulted in a disagreement for Na-24, Rb-88, and Cs-138

. on Detector 1 and a' disagreement for Cs-138 on Detector 2. The 4 4 results of the second sample were biased high except for two nuclide . A third sample split with particular care being paid to the dilution resulted in all. agreements. In examining the results of all three samples, it appears that improper dilution of the samples contributed to the disagreements. In addition, the overall results show that

.approximately 75% of the agreements for all samples were biased lo ,

!

q

,

AZ___________ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _

.

.

, :

The licenseehas initiated an investigation of this proble Calibration standards, ordered in anticipation of the normal routine calibration, are expected to be received in October. The licensee stated that calibration of the system will begin in November, after a scheduled outage is ove Audits The inspectors reviewed Audits QAA-22-89-02, QAA-22-89-10, 22-88-11, and P-88-001 related to aspects of. radiochemistry and environmental monitoring. The audits, although compliance. based, did. place considerable emphasis on observing performance and appear to be a useful tool for management oversight. Responses to the audit findings are diligently tracked to completion via an efficient computer based syste The auditor qualifications met pro forma l QA requirements, but in general, were not up to peer review depth audits in chemistry or environmental monitoring. Audit quality and auditor credibility would be enhanced by providing training and retraining similar to'that given to technicians working in-these areas. These observations were made at the exit intervie Quality Assurance The inspectors reviewed the radioactivity measurements laboratory quality. assurance program including physical facilities and laboratory operations. Housekeeping was generally good; laboratory and counting room work space was adequate. Chemistry Technicians were observed and evaluated on sample acquisition, preparation, analysis and general laboratory practices. They followed proper laboratory procedures and took appropriate precautions when handling radioactive materials; however, it appears that sample preparation which required dilution was not done accurately and resulted in unnecessary disagreements'in the split sample analyse The licensee participates in an intercomparison cross-check program with an outside vendor. The inspectors examined the fourth quar "

1988 results to date and found few disagreement Daily implementation of the instrument quality control program was examined. Tests were run as required and the results hand plotted on trend charts.for the noncomputer based equipment. The inspector discussed trend plotting and stressed the necessity of complete record No violations .or deviations were identified 5. Post Accident' Sampling (IP 84750)

The inspectors discussed the Post Accident Sampling System (PASS) and its operation with the licensee. A reactor coolant sample is collected daily for radiochemical analysis using the accident mode. Chlorine and pH inline monitors are checked weekly using standards introduced into the syste .

_ _ . _ . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

'

.

. ..

Various chemical and radiochemical analyses are performed on a fixed schedule from both the regular and post accident mode. The inspector saw data of quarterly analyses performed to verify the liquid dilution valve siz No violations or deviations were identifie . Radi logical Environmental Monitoring Program (REMP) (IP 84750)

The inspectors reviewed the 1988 Annual Environmental Report. The Report appeared to comply with the REMP requirements. All required samples were collected and analyzed except as noted in the resor The results do not indicate any significant contribution to tie environment due to plant operation. The inspector noted that there appears to be no day-to-day station involvement in the operation of the REMP or in the review of monthly results; such involvement appears desirable. This matter was discussed at the exit meetin flo violations of deviations were identifie . Deviation Report 22-1-89-90 On the third shift on July 26, 1989 a Radiation Technician noticed that iodine cartridges being used in nadeco air samplers were a different color than previously used cartridges (gray) and later on the same shift the technician and a Rediation Protection Foreman noted that the part numbers were different. They discussed their findings with a Chemistry Technician who brought it to the attention of a Chemist on July 27, 198 The manufacturer (SAI) was contacted and informed the licensee that original cartridges have a collection efficiency of 95% but that the replacement cartridges have a collection efficiency of 77%. No one was aware that a change had been made. The licensee noted that both replacement (blue) and original (gray) cartridges were stored in the same location in the warehouse and verified that CP100 cartridges were ordered and BG300s were sent. The inspector saw evidence to this effec The blue cartridges then in use were changed out and the remainder removed from the warehouse. A manufacturer representative admitted that the wrong matcrial had been shipped. An inventory indicated that approximately 80 replacement units had been used since the first removal from the warehouse (June 7, 1989), after the shipment had been received. The licensee investigated the use of the BG300s to see if any were used for personnel respiratory determination and found that only five blue units had been used for this purpose. Of the five, only three indicated activity and were less than 25% of MPC using the ratio of the sums of all iodines after a correction factor of 1.233 was applied. The licensee is assuming that all iodine cartridges used in the plant during this per'od were BG300s and will adjust all analytical results accordingl . Open Items Open items are matters which have been discussed with the licensee, which will be reviewed further by the inspectors, and which involve some action on the part of the NRC or licensee, or both. An open item disclosed during the inspection is discussed in Section ,

_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ._

n .

1'

J ' :( . :

l.

'

n Exit Interview -

The scope and findings of the inspection were reviewed with licensee

. representatives (Section 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on

' August 4, 1989. The inspectors discussed the following in detail: the evidence of a bias in the samples.a'nalyzed retraining for auditors and foremen

. the Deviation Report concerning the. iodine cartridges 'the absence'of anyone on site with a detailed. knowledge of:the REMP 9' During the exit interview, the inspectors . discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed by the inspectors during .the inspection. Licensee representatives did not identify any such documents or processes as proprietar '

Attachments:

1. ' Table 1, Radiological Interlaboratory Split: Sample Results, 3rd Quarter 1989 Attachment l, Criteria for Comparing Radiological Measurements

o

___-__-_ _ - _ _ - _

_ _ , _ _ --

.

.

'

'

,

TABLE 1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM FACILITY: ZION DATE: 3RD QUARTER OF 1989 SAMPLE NUCLIDE NRC VAL. NRC ER LIC. VA LIC. ERR. RATIO RESOL. RESULT

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ = - - - - = _ - _ _ _ _ _ --______________________________________________

PANT NA-24 4.OOE-12 1.20E-12 5.10E-12 7.30E-13 1.28 A FILTER I-131 5.80E-12 3.50E-13 5.20E-12 5.30E-13 0.90 1 A b 6T I I-133 2.50E-11 1.20E-12 2.10E-11 2.OOE-12 0.84 2 A MO-99 3.10E-12 2.10E-13 2.30E-12 2.30E-13 0.74 1 A CS-134 7.10E-12 4.10E-13 5.20E-12 4.OOE-13 0.73 1 D CS-137 9.20E-12 S.30E-13 7.80E-12 8.20E-13 0.85 1 A CHAR BR-82 6.60E-11 3.10E-12 6.40E-11 2.50E-12 0.97 2 A FILTER I-131 2.OOE-10 2.60E-12 2.OOE-10 1.30E-11 1.00 7 A b6TE I-133 S.20E-10 6.10E-12 S.20E-10 4.20E-11 1.00 8 A I-135 S.SOE-10 5.10E-11 4.20E-10 1.90E-11 0.72 1 A PART I-131 5.80E-12 3."OE-13 5.30E-12 5.60E-13 0.91 1 A FILTER I-133 2.50E-11 .20E-12 2.20E-11 2.20E-12 0.88 2 A lb673 CS-134 7.10E-12 4.10E-13 4.90E-12 3.90E-13 0.69 1 D CS-137 9.20E-12 5.30E-13 7.90E-12 8.40E-13 O.86 1 A MD-99 3.10E-12 2.10E-13 2.OOE-12 2.40E-13 0.65 1 A LIQUID CO-58 3.50E-06 2.10E-07 3.20E-06 2.80E-07 0.91 1 A WASTE CO-60 3.10E-06 2.OOE-07 3.OOE-06 2.OOE-07 0.97 1 A 1 Ei' d NB-95 5.3OE-07 1.20E-07 3.60E-07 6.OOE-08 0.68 A CHAR BR-82 6.40E-11 2.70E-12 5.10E-11 2.OOE-12 0.80 2 A FILTER I-131 2.OOE-10 2.60E-12 2.10E-10 1.30E -11 1.05 7 A b 6T L I-133 5.10E-10 5.40E-12 5.10E-10 4.20E-11 1.00 9 A I-135 5.70E-10 3.60E-11 3.90E-10 1.90E-11 0.68 1 A LIQUID CO-58 3.50E-06 3.50E-07 3.20E-06 1.30E-07 0.91 1 A WASTE CO-60 2.90E-06 2.20E-07 3.OOE-06 1.30E-07 1.03 1 A

?aes PRIMARY NA-24 1.20E-02 1.20E-04 1.OOE-02 9.OOE-04 0.83 10 A

'b 6T I I-132 2.60E-03 8.80E-05 2.40E-03 2.10E-04 0.92 2 A I-133 1.30E-03 4.3OE-05 8.90E-04 1.40E-04 0.68 3 D I-134 4.40E-03 1.90E-04 3.BOE-03 5.70E-04 O.86 2 A I-135 2.60E-03 1.80E-04 2.10E-03 4.3OE-04 0.81 1 A CS-138 5.50E-03 6.10E-04 5.10E-03 1.20E-03 0.93 A

_ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _

_

, _ _ .

. .

SAMPLE NUCLIDE NRC VAL. NRC ER LIC. VAL. .LIC. ERR. RATIO RESOL. RESULT

_ __-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CHAR BR-82 6.40E-11 2.70E-12 5.50E-11 2.40E-12 0.86 2 A FILTER I-131 2.OOE-10 2.60E-12 1.90E-10 2.10E-12 0.95 7 A PO RS I-133 5.10E-10 5.40E-12 4.60E-10 4.30E-12 0.90 9 A I-135 5.70E-10 3.60E-11 4.20E-10 2.60E-11 0.74 1 A PRIMARY NA-24 1.10E-02 1.20E-04 1.10E-02 1.OOE-03 1.00 9 A luert I-131 2.OOE-04 5.10E-05 0.OOE+OO O.OOE+00 D l I-132 2.60E-03 7.40E-05 2.20E-03 2.OOE-04 0.85 3 A I

I-133 1.30E-03 4.40E-05 1.20E-03 1.50E-04 0.92 2 A I-134 4.40E-03 2.30E-04 4.40E-03 6.70E-04 1.00 1 A I-135 2.40E-03 2.OOE-04 1.3OE-03 4.70E-04 0.54 1 D CS-138 6.60E-03 6.20E-04 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 1 D l

OFF GAS KR-85 1.10E-03 8.OOE-05 1.30E-03 1.20E-04 1.18 1 A 9b673 XE-131M 9.20E-05 5.60E-06 8.70E-05 9.30E-06 0.95 1 A XE-133. 1.70E-03 4.40E-06 1.50E-03 1.30E-04 0.88 38 A XE-133M 6.50E-06 1.30E-06 5.60E-06 1.OOE-06 0.86 A XE-135 2.10E-06 2.20E-07 1.90E-06 2.OOE-07 0.90 A PRIMARY NA-24 1.20E-03 2.OOE-04 2.40E-03 3.50E-04 2.00 A D 6f t I-131 3.OOE-03 3.10E-04 3.20E-03 4.10E-04 1.07 A I-132 2.30E-02 3.40E-04 2.50E-02 1.20E-03 1.09 6 A I-133 1.60E-02 2.80E-04 1.80E-02 1.60E-03 1.13 5 A I-134 4.OOE-02 6.OOE-04 4.10E-02 1.70E-03 1.03 6 A I-135 2.80E-02 1.10E-03 2.90E-02 1.60E-03 1.04 2 A RB-88 4.40E-02 2.90E-03 5.90E-02 7.40E-03 1.34 1 A RB-89 1.30E-02 1.40E-03 1.50E-02 2.40E-04 1.15 A CS-138 4.50E-02 8.60E-04 5.90E-02 3.50E-03 1.31 5 D CRUD NA-24 3.3OE-03 2.OOE-03 3.30E-03 2.90E-04 1.00 A FILTER CO-58 8.80E-04 4.90E-05 8.OOE-04 7.60E-04 0.91 1 A g er i CD-60 2.40E-04 3.40E-05 2.20E-04 2.80E-05 0.92 A ZR-95 2.90E-04 4.90E-05 2.50E-04 3.70E-05 0.86 A ZR-97 3.10E-04 4.50E-05 2.10E-04 3.40E-05 0.68 A NB-95 2.50E-04 3.60E-05 2.40E-04 3.OOE-05 0.96 A CS-134 1.10E-04 2.10E-05 9.40E-05 1.40E-06 0.85 A BA-139 3.OOE-02 7.20E-03 1.80E-02 2.90E-03 0.60 A OFF GAS KR-85 1.10E-03 1.40E-04 1.30E-03 1.3OE-04 1.18 A b 6T 4 XE-131M 1.10E-04 9.50E-06 7.60E-05 8.OOE-06 0.69 1 XE-133 2.OOE-03 6.80E-06 1.60E-03 1.40E-04 0.80 29 XE-133M 7.OOE-06 1.90E-06 5.10E-06 7.70E-07 0.73 A XE-135 2.20E-06 2.40E-07 1.50E-06 1.60E-07 0.68 A CRUD NA-24 3.30E-03 2.OOE-03 3.70E-03 3.3OE-04 1.12 A FILTER CO-58 8.80E-04 4.90E-05 8.40E-04 8.10E-05 0.95 1 A CO-60 2.40E-04 3.40E-05 1.70E-04 3.20E-05 0.71 A b GT3 ZR-95 2.90E-04 4.906-05 2.30E-04 4.OOE-05 0.79 A ZR-97 3.10E-04 4.50E-OS 2.90E-04 5.90E-05 0.94 A NB-95 2.50E-04 3.60E-05 2.80E-04 3.40E-05 1.12 A

.

2-

.

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ -

_ _ ___ __ - _

.

,-

,

,.

SAMPLE NUCLIDE NRC VAL. NRC ER LIC. VAL. LIC.ECR. RATIO RESOL. RESULT

________________________________._____.._______________________________________

CS-134 1.10E-04 2.10E-05 7.20E-05 1.40E-05 0.65 A PRIMARY NA-24 5.50E-04 1.40E-04 0.OOE+00 0.OOE+00 D 16T a I-131 2.40E-03 2.10E-04 2.70E-03 3.40E-04 1.13 1 A I-132 2.30E-02 3.40E-04 2.60E-02 1.40E-03 1.13 6 A I-133 1.50E-02 2.60E-04 1.80E-02 1.60E-03 1.20 5 A I-134 3.90E-02 6.10E-04 3.90E-02 1.70E-03 1.00 6 A I-135 2.60E-02 1.10E-03 2.80E-02 1.40E-02 1.08 2 A RB-88 5.40E-02 4.40E-03 9.60E-02 1.3OE-02 1.78 1 D RB-89 1.20E-02 2.OOE-03 1.70E-02 3.60E-03 1.42 A CS-138 4.70E-02 1.10E-03 6.40E-02 3.90E-03 1.36 4 D BA-139 3.OOE-03 8.20E-04 4.80E-03 9.20E-03 1.60 A

. PRIMARY NA-24 1.OOE-03 1.60E-04 5.80E-04 1.90E-04 0.58 A b 6T e I-131 2.90E-03 2.40E-04 2.50E-03 3.OOE-04 0.86 1 A I-132 2.40E-02 3.70E-04 2.20E-02 1.10E-03 0.92 6 A I-133 1.70E-02 2.50E-04 1.60E-02 1.40E-03 0.94 6 A I-134 4.10E-02 8.70E-04 3.60E-02 1.90E-03 0.88 4 A I-135 2.70E-02 9.30E-04 2.50E-02 1.30E-03 0.93 2 A CS-138 5.70E-02 1.9CE-03 5.OOE-02 3.70E-33 0.88 3 A PRIMARY NA-24 1.10E-03 1.20E-04 1.50E-03 0.OOE+00 1.36 A 73 67 t I-131 3.20E-03 2.70E-04 2.70E-03 3.10E-04 0.84 1 A I-132 2.50E-02 3.90E-04 2.20E-02 1.50E-03 0.88 6 A I-133 1.60E-02 2.40E-04 1.70E-02 1.50E-03 1.06 6 A I-134 4.10E-02 9.80E-04 4.OOE-02 2.20E-03 0.98 4 A I-135 2.80E-02 1.OOE-03 2.70E-02 1.40E-03 0.96 2 A RB-88 3.50E-01 3.OOE-02 2.3OE-01 3.70E-02 0.66 1 CS-138 5.60E-02 2.10E-03 5.40E-02 4.20E-03 0.96 2 A T TEST RESULTS:

A= AGREEMENT D= DISAGREEMENT l

l l

-3-

_ - _ - _ -

. - . . .

, . ,

l

.  : .

I ATTACHMENT 1 CRITERIA FOR COMPARING ANALYTICAL MEASUREMENTS This attachment 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 these criteria, the judgment limits are variable in relation to the com-parison of the NRC's value to its associated one sigma uncertainty. As that ratio, referred to in this program as " Resolution", increases, the acceptability of a licensee's measurement should be more selective. Conversely, poorer '

agreement should be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases. The values in the ratio criteria may be rounded to fewer significant figures to maintain statistical consistency with the number of significant figures reported by the NRC Reference Laboratory, unless such rounding will result in a narrowed category of acceptanc RESOLUTION RATIO = LICENSEE VALUE/NRC REFERENCE VALUE Agreement

<3 No Comparison 23 and <4 .5 2,4 and <8 .0 2 and <16 .67 2,16 and <51 0.75 - 1.33 251 and <200 0.80 - 1.25 2200 0.85 - 1.18 Some discrepancies may result from the use of different equipment, techniques, and for some specific nuclides. These may be factored into the acceptance criteria and identified on the data sheet.

- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _