IR 05000413/1988026

Insp Repts 50-413/88-26 & 50-414/88-26 on 880801-05.No Violations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Qa & Confirmatory Measurements for in-plant Radiochemcial Analysis

ML20154E332
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	09/02/1988
From:	Adamovitz S, Bermudez H, Kahle J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20154E316	List: IR 05000413/1988026 ML20154E312
References
50-413-88-26, 50-414-88-26, NUDOCS 8809160290
Download: ML20154E332 (12)

Text

,.._

. _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

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

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

.

~

[/** ",%.

.

'k UNITED STATES

{

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION 11 t

o

\\e',,,e j[

"

101 MARIETTA ST., N.W.

ATLANTA. GEORGIA 30323 SEP06I!B Report Nos.:

50-413/88-26 and 50-414/88-25 Licensee:

Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte, NC 28242 Docket Nos.:

50-413 and 50-414 f.icense Nos.:

NPF-35 and NPF-52

.

'

Facility Name:

Catawba 1 and 2 i

Inspection Conducted: August 1-5, 1988 Inspectors:

1 nil 6 7/'/ M

[WS.g'.Ad v z Da~te Signed

.

'

E er.udez p ' ~ ~

Date Signed

__-

Accompanying Personnel:

T. Volk Approved by:

1. • -[

/bNk 9/t/B J. B~./Kahle, Section Chief Dat'e S'igned Div(fion of Radiatinn Safety and Safeguards SUMMARY Scope:

This routine, unar.nounced inspection was conducted in the areas of quality assurance and confirmatory measurements for in plant radiochemical analysis.

Results:

The inspectors noted significant improvements concerning count room activities as ccmpared to the previous confirmatory n'sasurements inspection conducted during December 1985. The inspectors concluded that the count room

quality assurance program was adequate to ensure accurate and reliable

,

analytical reau'Its. In the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were

!

identified.

l

!

I'

i l

'

i F

8809160290 GSO902 PDR ADOCK 05000413

PDC

-

.___.

_.

_

__

_-

. _ - _.

__-___ _

'

.

t

.

REPORi DETAILS 1.

Licensee Employees D. Bain, Chemistry Supervisor

• M. Cote, Compliance Specialist S. Hamilton, Health Physics Technician

• J.

Isaacson, Staff Scientist B. Kimwray, Health Physics Shift Supervisor G. Mode, Health Physics General Supervisor af. Owen, Station Manager

"R. Wardell, Superintendent Technical Services B. Wilson, Chemistry Specialist

• C. Wray, Health Physics Supervisor, Count Room / Environmental Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included technicians and administrative personnel.

NRC Resident Inspectors

• H. Lesser K. 'landoorn

• Attended exit interview 2.

Quality Assurance - Radioac'.1vity Measure.nents (84725)

'

The inspectors evaluated the licensee's Counting Room Quality Assurance Program against recommendations provided in Regulatory Guide 4.15,

"Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) -

Fffluent Streams and the Envi ronmer.t,"

issued in

'

February 1978.

a.

Organizational Structure, Responsibilities and Personnel The inspt; tors reviewed selected job descrf ntions, position analyses and position guides which described lines of authority, personnel duties and required qualifications regarding the counting of c

radioactive samples and the interpretation of results. By review of qualification records of selected personnel along the organizational structure, the inspectors determined that there was an adequate match between jcb requirements and the personnel filling respective positions.

b.

Operating Procedures The inspectors reviewed procedures which covered the following areas:

'

counting room equipment startup and maintenance, sample preparation,

,

operatton and calibration of the alpha / beta and gamma spectrometry

,

systems, and cross-check programs. The procedures delineated, among

,

,

,.

_

-

-

.--

-

__

-

--

.

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

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._

_ _ _ _

_

.__ _ _.._______

.

.

.

other areas, routine maintenance requirements, perform nce and background checks, calibration requirements, acceptance criteria and follow-up actions for results outside acceptable limits.

c.

Records The inspectors reviewed quality control records for laboratory counting systems dealing with efficiency checks, background checks, efficiency calibrations, verification of computer programs, cress-check programs, sample history and audits.

The inspectors determined that the licensee's capability to track and control a sample in its progress through the sequence of monitoring processes was adequate.

d.

Qu.slity Cor. trol in the Radioanalytical Laboratory The inspectors verified that the licensee's radionuclide standards used to datermine counting efficiencies were traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. Also, the standards were of the same form / geometry, or close approximations, to the unknown samples that were routinely counted.

The licensee performs intra-and inter-laboratory analyses of radioactive samples.

During i ntra-laborato ry comparisons, the licensee counts the same sample in all available systems to determine consistency within the systems. During inter-laboratory comparisons, the licensee's Generai Office provides samples obtained from a vendor with activit 'es unknown to counting room personnel.

Analyses of thest samples provide means to detect errors that might not be detected by intra-laboratory measurements alone.

!

No violations or deviations were identified.

3.

Audits and Reviews (84725)

Technical Specification (TS) 6.6.2.9 states that audits of unit activities shall be performed under the cognizance of tne Nuclear Safety Review Board (NSRB) encompassing:

the conformance of unit operation to provisions contained within the 15s and applicable licensi cotiditions at least once i

per 12 moriths; and the performance of ac+.tvities required by the Quality Assurance Program to meet the criteria of Regulatory Guide 4.15, December 1977, at least once ner 12 months.

The inspectors reviewed the following audits c d responses:

a.

Catawba Nuclear Station Radioanalysis Pr.agram Review by the System

.

Health Physics Unit of Nuclear Techniali Services conducted

'

'

June 23-26, 1987.

b.

QA Audit NP-88-07 (CN) Health Physics, Environmental, OLCM Activities, conducted March 28 - April 27, 1988.

'

.

- - - - - - -

...

, _.,

_

.y

__ _

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

_.

_

_.

.

.

.

c.

Departmental Audit NP-87-06 (CN) Health Physics and Environmental Group Activities, conducted March 30 - April 29, 1987.

The inspectors noted that the audits of laboratory activities utilized

Regulatory Guide 4.15 as a reference and basis for checklists.

Problem

!

areas identified by the audits were tracked and response due dates were established.

No tiolations or deviations were identified.

l 4.

Counting Facilities and Instrumentation (84725)

The inspectors toured the count room and discussed systems operation and maintenance with licensee representatives. One radioisotopic count room was utilized for all in-plant health physics and chemistry samples.

The station's Health Physics group was responsible for the operation of the count room and also participated in selected sample collection.

Instrumentation included five Tennelec Geiger counters for determining beta / gamma activities in plant smears; two Tennelec alpha / beta proportional counters for smear counting; two Beckman liquid scintillation counters for determining tritium concentrations in liquid samples; and six intrinsic germanium (IG) detectors for oamma isotopic analyses.

The

licensee had acquired two new IG detectors and a Nuclear Data Gente multichannel analyzer (MCA)/ terminal during 1987 These systems were in the process of being calibrated and phased into routine use.

The other four Ortec IG detectors were to be eventually connected to the Nuc'.sar Dats Genis MCA/ terminal.

The inspectors reviewed a series of records concernirig instrument performance checks, calibrations, and cross-check results.

Tile gamma spectroscopy systems were calibrated annually for all geometries. Counted standard activities were compared to certificate values and efficiencies were not changed if counted results were within 10*. of certificate values.

Gaseous calibrations were accomplished by utilizing a gaseous standard for energy efficiencies at less than 514 KaV and a solid standard for higher I

energy efficiencies.

Daily perform **ce checks for the gamma systems included source checks using a Cs

'7 standard and a background determination.

The alpha-beta proportivnal counters utilized Th-230 and

,

TC-99 for daily source checks. Voltage plateaus, efficiency calibrations, and cross talk oeterminations were performed quarterly or when operating parameters had changed. The licensee used Am-241 and Cs-134 standards for

'

the ef ficiency and voltage plateau calibrations. The inspectors noted that all efficiency data records, calibration source certificates and daily performance checks were easily accessible and well organized.

The count room participated in a cross-check program where vendor-supplied spiked samples of different geometries were analyzed quarterly to determine instrument accuracy. The licensee also performed weekly checks by counting one in plant sample on all detectors and comparing the

results.

i

L.

,

.

.

.

No violations or deviations were identified 5.

Confirmatory Measurements (84725)

!

During the inspection, reactor coolant and selected liquid and gaseous samples were sampled by the licensee and analyzed for isotopic

-

l concentrations using the licensee's gamma spectroscopy systems and the NRC Region II mobile laboratory.

The purpose of these comparative measurements was to verify the licensee's capability to accurately measure gamma emitting radionuclide cencentrations in various plant systems and effluent streams. Comparisons were made utilizing the licensee's Ortec (3 out of 4 operational) and Gente (2 out of 2 operational) gamma spectroscopy systems.

Sample types and counting geometries included the following:

reactor coolant system (RCS) sample 100 mi bottle; liquid waste tank - 1500 mi liquid Marinelli; containment gas - 1260cc Marinelli; and waste gas decay tank - 14cc gas vial. Spiked charcoal cartridge and particulate filter samples were provided in lieu of licensee samples which did not have sufficient activity for comparisons.

Comparisons of licensee and NRC results are listed in Attachment 1 with the acceptance criteria listed in Attachment 2.

Results were in agreement for all compared radionuclides in the liquid waste tank sample, the

charcoal cartridge, the particulate filter and the containment gas sample.

The reactor coolant sample showed agreement for all isotopes with the exception of Xe-133 on Ortec #1.

In reviewing the data for this sample, the inspectors noted that the ratio of licensee /NRC values for Xe-133 varied from 0.57 to 1.62 among detectors. However, Xe-133 ratios for the liquid waste sample did not show the same variance among detectors, and licensee /NRC ratios ranged from 0.99 to 1.17.

Based on this information the inspector; concluded that the difference in Xe-133 activity for the reactor coolant sample was due to the gaseous Xe-133 diffusion through the sample, changing the calibration geometry.

For the 14cc gas vial from the waste gas decay tank, isotopic xenon results were in disagreement for all detectors with the exception of Ortec

'

1. 2.

The inspectors noted that although both the NRC and the licensee utilized a 14cc gas vial, the shapes were different. The licensee's vial was tall and thin as compared to the NRC's; also the NRC's vial had a thicker base. Due to split sampling difficulties, both laboratories opted to count the licensee's sample vial.

The results showed a disagreement (reported in Attachment 1).

When the disagreements were found, the licensee attempted to collect a second sample and providt a split for the licensee's and NRC's vials. However, disagreements still existed.

After reviewing the licensee's calibratico methodology, the NRC inspectors determined that the gaseous cale s.sns had been performed correctly.

The disagreements were attribute geometry differences and/or trensfer difficulties during sample prepaios ons.

l The inspectors observed the sampling of the waste gas decay tank, the i

liquid waste tank, and the reactor coolant system (RCS).

In sampling the l

reactor coolant system in the "NM" laboratory, the inspectors noted that

,

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

. _ _ _ _ _ -

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

_ _ _

.

.

i

.

I

,

the technician had to raise the fume hood window above the maximum level indicated in order to manipulate some of the controls.

The inspectors

!

discussed this with licensee personnel who agreed to investigate the

matter. This matter will be followed as an inspector followup item (IFI),

'

IFI 50-413, 414/88-26-01.

No violations or deviations were identified.

6.

Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on August 5,1988, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1.

The inspectors described the a

areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results.

Proprietary information is not contained in this report.

,

,.

t

i

.

!

!

!

i I

T

!

I i

I i

__

.

.

l

. ;

,

ATTAQHMp4M

-

RESULTS DE CONFIRMATORY MEASUR[M[NTS AT CATAWBA NUCLEAR PLANT - AUGUST 1-15. 1928 j

QpNCENTRATION (uCl/UNITJ WPli J 50f 0P(

LICLNJ1L NjiG RESOLUTiful LICENSEE /NH_Q QOMPARISON (Ceometry)

1.

Reactor Coolant Sample (100 ml Bottle)

a.

Ortec #1 Na-24

?.88 [-3 4.58 1 0.22 E-3

0.8$

Agreement SN26-P-16TIA Fe ~33 2.23 [-3 3.93 1 0.30 E-3

0.57 Di sag reement Ev-135 2.62 E-3 2.26 1 0.18 E-3

1.16 Ag reement I-132 3.56 E-3 3.27 1 0.23 E-3

1.09 Agreement 1-133 2.23 E-3 2.33 1 0.12 E-3

0.96 Ag reement I-135 4.12 E-3 4.88 1 0.54 E-3

0.84 Ag reement b.

Ortec sp Na.24 4.82 E-3 4.58 1 0.22 L-3

1.05 Agreement Sh?4-P-94VC Xe-133 6.36 E-3 3.93 1 0.30 [-3

1.62 Ag reement Fe-135 3.41 E-3 2.26 1 0.18 E-3

1.51 Ag reement I-132 4.10 [-3 3.27 ! O.23 [-3

1.25 Agreement 3-133 2.23 E-1 2.33 1 0.12 E-3

0.96 Agreement I-135 4.76 E-3 4.88 1 0.54 E-3

0.98 Agreement c.

Ortec #3 Na-24 4.08 E-3 4.58 1 0.22 E-3

0.89 Agreement SN24-P-92Vt.

Xe-133

.t.76 E-3 3.93 1 0.30 E-3

1.21 Ag reement Xe-135 2.77 E-3 2.26 1 0.18 E-3

1.22 Ag reement 1-132 3.82 E-3 3.21 1 0.23 E-3

1.17 Ag reement 1-133 2.18 E-3 2.33 1 0.12 E-3

O_94 Ag reement 1-135 4.77 E-3 4.8f, ! 0.54 E-3

0.*8 Ag reemen t d.

Cenic #3 Na-24 4.68 E-3 4.58 1 0.22 E-3

1.02 Agreement SN26-P-k0lA F.e-133 3.40 E-3 3.93 1 0.30 E-3

0.86 Ag reement Xe-135 2.11 E-3 2.26 1 0.18 E-3

0.93 Ag reement 5-132 3.47 E-3 3.27 1 0.23 E-3

1.06 Agreement I-133 2.54 E-3 2.33 1 0.12 E-3

1.09 Ag reement 6-135 4.22 E-3 4.88 1 0.54 E-3

0.86 Agreement c.

Cenie #4 Na-24 4.8t6 E-3 4.58 i 0.22 E-3

1.06 Agreement SN27-A-080 Xe-133 2.43 E-3 3.93 1 0.30 E-3

0,62 Ag reement Xe-13$

2.21 E-3 2.26 1 0.18 E-3

0.98 Agreement 1-132 3.62 E-3 3.27 1 0.23 E-3

1.11 Agreement 1-133 2.43 E-3 2.33 1 0.12 E-3

1.04 Agreement 1-135 4.18 E-3 4.88 1 0.54 E-3

0.86 Ag reement l

l

.

. _. _ _ _ _

_ _..___ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _..

_ _.

_ _. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _ _

m

._m

.. ____ _..

.. -

_

.

.

Attactement 1, Page 2

.

,

QQNQ(N1 RATION ftsCl/.NI.JJ U

SAMELL ISOTOPl LICENSEE MlC R[$0L? TION LICENSCC/f4RC COMPARISON (Geonetry)

2.

Liquid Waste tank (1500 ml Liquid Marinelli)

a.

Ortec #1 Xe-133 2.83 E-5 2.64 i O.09 E-5

1.07 Ag reement Xe-135 8.59 E-6 8.66 1 0.27 E-6

0.99 Agreement Mn-54 2.08 E-5 2.12 ! O.05 E-5

0.98 Ag reement C0-58 2.30 E-5 2.36 2 0.05 [-5

0.91 Agreement Co-60 1.04 E-5 9.39 1 0.41 E-6

1.11 Ag reement I-131 1.19 E-5 1.13 1 0.04 E-5 1.05 Agreement

'

1-133 2.84 E-6 3.08 2 0.40 E-6 0.92 Agreement Cs-134 1.87 E-5 2.16 1 0.05 E-5

0.86 Ag reement Cs-137 3.14 E-5 3.55 1 0.06 E-5

0.88 Ag reement ts. Ortec #2 xe-133 2.62 E-5 2.64 1 0.09 E-5

0.99 Agreement Xe-135 7.90 E-6 8.66 1 0.27 E-6

0.91 Ag reement Mn-54 2.13 E-5 2.12 ? (J.05 E-5

1.00 Ag reement 00-58 2.38 E-5 2. 36 1 0.O's E-5

1.01 Agreement Co-t20 9.*>> [-6 9. 39 1 0. as t [-6

1.02 Agreement I-131 1.11 E-5 1.13 1 0.04 E-5

0.98 Agreemo it I-133 3.51 T-6 3.08 1 0.40 E-6

1. 11:

Ag reement C5-134 2.084 [-5 2.16 1 0.05 E-5

0.94 Agreement Cs-137 3.29 [-5 3.55 i O.06 E-5

0.93 Ag reement c.

Ortec #3 Xc-133 3.09 E-5 2.64 1 0.09 E-5

1.09 Ag reement Fe-135 8.49 E-6 8.66 2 0.27 E-6 3?

O.98 Agreement Mn-54 2.11 E-5 2.12 1 0.05 E-5

1.00 Ag reemen t 00-58 2.4fa E-5 2.36 2 0.d*> E-5

1.03 Ag reement Co-60 1.02 E-5 9.39 1 0.41 E-C

1.09 Ag reemen t 8-131 1.?6 E->

1.13 1 0.04 L *>

1 12 Agreement 5-133 3.32 E-6 3.08 2 0.40 0-6

1.08 Agreement Cs-134 2.08 [-5 2.16 1 0.05 E-5

0.96 Agreement Os-13T 3.23 E-5 3.55 1 0.06 E *>

0.91 Ag reement d.

Cenie #3 ye-133 3.09 E-5 2.64 1 0.09 [-5

1.17 Ag reement Xc-135 8.12 E-6 8.6610.27[-6

0.94 Ag reement Mn-Sta 2.20 E-5 2.12 ? C.05 [-5

1.04 Agreement C0-58 2.58 E-5 2.35 1 0.05 E-5

1.09 Ag reement 00-60 9.95 E-6 9.39 1 0.41 L-6

1.06 Ag reement 1-131 1.17 [-5 1.13 1 0,04 E-5

1.04 Ag reement f-133 3.19 [-6 3.08 1 0.40 E-6

1.04 Ag reement C5-134 2.04 E-5 2.16 1 0.05 E-5

0.9:4 Agreement Cs-131 3.42 E-5 3.55 1 0.06 E-5

0.96 Ag reement e.

Cenie #4 xe-133 2.92 E-5 2.64 1 0.09 E-5

1.11 Ag reement Xe-13*>

8.22 F-6 8.66 1 0.27 1-6

0.95 Agreement Mn-54 2.19 E-5 2.12 1 0.05 E-5

1.03 Agreement Co-58 2.45 E-5 2.36 1 0.05 E-5

1.04 Ag reement C0-60 1.0T L-5 9.39 1 0.41 E-6

1.14 Agreement 1-131 1.23 E-5 1.13 1 0.04 E-5

1.09 Ag reement 5-133 3.41 E-6 3.08 1 0.40 E-6

1 Agreement Cs-134 2.08 E-5 2.16 1 0.05 E-5

0.96 Ag reement Cs-137 3.32 [-5 3.55 t 0.06 E-$

0.94 Ag reement

c.

.. _ _ _ _ _. _

__.

_. _ _

.__

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

.__m

. _. _ _. _

.

m_.-

_ _ _

_ _ _ _ _ _ _

_ __ _

_

..

.

I

Attachment 1,

Page 3

.

Q0NCEN1 RAY IOPLLuqj/uMLD

$AMPM ISOTOPE ({CJN51L NHg RESOLUTioes LICENSEE /NRC COM.'AR 8 501:

(Geometry)

3.

Containment cas (1260 cc Marinetfi)

.

a.

Ortec #1 Ar-41 3.83 E-6 3.40 1 0.33 E-6 to 1.12 Agreement Xe-133 7.91 E-5 7.75 1 0.06 E-5 129 1.02 Agreement i

Fe-135 1.50 E-6 1. 82 1 0.0 7 E-6

0.82 Ag reement I

b.

Ortec #3 A r-41 3.9T E-6 3.40 1 0.33 E-6

1.17 Agreement Xe-13!

8.69 E-5 7.75 1 0.06 E->

129 1.12 Ag reement Xe-135 1.68 E-6 1.82 1 0.07 E-6

0.92 Agre-ment

'

c.

Genie #3 Ar-41 3.91 E-6 3.40 2 0.33 E-6

1.15 Agreement l

'

Xe-133 8.37 E-5 7.75 1 0.06 E-5 129 1.08 Agreement Xe-13's 1.57 E-6 1.82 1 0.0T E-6

0.86 Agreement Waste Gas Decay Tank A (14cc Cas Vial)

a.

Ortec #1 Er-85M 3.69 E-3 3.30 1 0.09 E-3

1.s2 Agreement kr-88 5.32 [-3 3.54 1 0.24 E-3

1.50 Ag reement Fe-133M 1.29 E-2 9.59 1 0.43 E-3

1.34 Disagreement Xe-133 7.70 E-1 5.98 1 0.01 E-1

>200 1.29 Di sag reement Me-135 3.86 E-2 3.03 1 0.02 [-2 152 1.2T D i sag reemen t b.

Ortcc #2 Mr-85M 3.66 E-3 3.30 1 0.09 E-3

1.11 Ag reement Kr-88 4.71 E-3 3.54 1 0.24 E-3

1.33 Agreement Xe-133M 1.22 [-2 9.59 1 0.43 L-3

1.27 Agreement Xe-133 6.76 E-1 5.98 2 4.01 E-1

>200 1.13 Agerement Xe-135 3.67 E-2 3.03 1 0.02 E-2 152 1.22 Ag reement c.

Ortec #3 Er-85M 3.78 E-3 3.30 1 0.69 E-3

1.14 Ag reement kr-88 5.18 E-3 3.54 1 0.24 E-3

1.46 Agreement Xe-133M 1.22 E-2 9.59 1 0.8a3 E-3

1.27 Ag reemen t Xe-133 T.68 [-1 5.98 1 0.01 E-1

>200 1.28 Di sag reement Xe-135 3.9ts [-2 3.03 1 0.02 E-2 152 1.30 Disagreement d.

Cenie #3 kr-85M 3.52 [-3 3.30 2 0.09 E-3

1.0T Agreement Kr-88 3.83 E-3 3.54 1 0.24 E-3

1.08 Ag reement Fe-133M 1.C'# E-2 9.59 1 0.43 E-3

1.14 Agreement Xe-133 7. 5 E-1 5.98 1 0.01 E-1

>200 1.24 Di sag reement Xe-135 3.4.3 E-2 3.03 1 0.02 [-2 152 1.13 Agreement

• >. Spiked ClearcoaI Cartridge a.

Ortec #1 Co-60 4.3G E-2 4.63 1 0.07 E-2

0. 9's Ag reement Cd-109 1.08 E-0 1.10 1 0.01 E-0 110 0.98 Ag reement Sr-113 1.79 E-2 1.89 1 0.93

63 0.95 Agreement Ce-139 1.01 E-2 1.15 1 0.02 E-2

0.88 Agreement Hg-203 4.21 E-3 3.90 1 0.16 E-3

1.08 Aareement Co-5T 1,72 t-2 1.88 1 0.02 E-2

0.91 Ag reement Y-88 2.83 E-2 3.13 1 0.06 E-2

0.90 Agruement Cs-137 4.13 E-2 4.49 1 0.05 E-2

0.92 Agreement

!

- _ _ - - -

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

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

. _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ ___

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

.

,

t

.

j

.

I a

t t

'

rC Jadaeaad audassada sn e ss a a d a d a u ss a a a a a aaaaaaaa e

cccccccc cccccccc cccccc:c cccccccc cccccccc b

I h

k k

g$'eoco oCCGyGtG

@@D4G@@c

0@@@@p00 t & b @ t c @ f.

t

&*

gggg g c g g a y g sa gy ggggg

4@bW@GGC

& G W e3 gggg g

6 66 6 6 66L 6 66C66 6 6

66666 6 6666 6 6C

66 666 omeece&& emeceece emempe&& cecomeee peemecee

'

44444444 44444444 44444444 44444444 44444444 t

t

,

b

%

NN-Nam @*

b. o N c @ @ c e@ @ C. @. c. C. @.

@ C.C.C.C. C.@.C.

C N@wcamco

@geC6@se

@ @ @ c. @. @. C. O.

w m@cc@mse

@ @ @ @ C. O. B. P.

w @ @ C. C. P. @.

w en

..

.

...

...

....

.

E CCC)wCCC C=CC*CCC CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC Ce****Ca w

-

Q I

.

i d

'

.

!

g

_

I

=

(CMN33Na 4CMN33Nm NNMC M3a l

D 40mN#3NC 4cmN33NC w

@"@bN@h@

@w4fN@@@ @"@nN@&h 4"ChN@hf N"bMs 4M@

g

w

w i

"

I NONNMNNN NONNMNNN NONNMNNN NCNNMNNN NMamMMNN

,

ee e e e e e e a a e e e e eee eee e i

w w w.e e e e eee e e e e e e e ee e e e Jwwww w w w '.a w w i w wwwwwwww I

wwwwwwww wwwwwwww h

NamN4N@A NamtsCN4e NamN@Nga N-MN4N@

@Ne#

1. A C. C. C. C. ". C. C. C.

C. C. C. C. e. C. C. C.

C. C. C. C. e. C. a. C.

C. C. C. C. ". C. C.

C. ". C. N.

. C. C.

• m C2 CoueCCCC C0000000 0000C000 CCCCCCCC CCCCCCCC

.

y

.

.

%E

..i.i.i.i.i.i.i..i.i.....,.i.i.i.i.i.,.i.i.i..i.i.i.i.i.i.i

.i.i.i.i.i.i.i.i g

M O O A C C M &-

MCoACOMO MC>AccMO MC@eceMS MooM#3A

,

@ a w a @ c. e d.

4.. c. @. c.. 3

@ *= a,. @. c. a 4

@ * c a @ C. a #.

. C. A.. @. M. M. C.

w

...,.

.

..

.

..

..

.

F 3=e=*m-ma a e=

• m-m#

4e* em-ma

1. wv eeema

1. N * N N a.- g C

-

l

i

!

MMMNN E.J P,' O N N M N N N NCNNMNNN NONMMNNN NONMMNNN N M "e e e a

• W e e e e eeee e e o eeeee e e e4 eo e e ee e ee e e e ee ee o E ne wwwwwwww wwww,www b' w w w w w w w ww.wwwwww w u= W w w w w w y

wa r t

Uw e

4m

+3N AC#'?cNa@

k @ N e k e= C @

kem43New bCwk@@MC

,

O M.

. C. C. ". v * B. 4 * *= N. O. C. @. @. N.

N.C.N C.@.N. N J.

". C. A C. N. 4. N, #.

• * @ N.@.#.M.a

-

.

..

.

.-

.

...

.

Uid de***2*N2 d *= w e= 2 *= N 4 dwe=7 mend 3**@MwNR QN*NNOwR t

L f

i r

)

I kJ

'

A em@m

>=

omem N

mem N

emem N

@me N

CC-m CCem N

m C emCN m CCam N

m A C e* m N m

@w MON O

enoc =

4e=w Aee 4 * = w A e c== w - -.=

cc*

c--eec

!

w.

!

o e eee e e ee e eoe e ee e e eee C V '.e e e@eced QV6peoed e o ee e eee e e ee e eee Q@MiGC4UtoVQ>Q

[

d 0V6peosd CV6@eQee QQMQZQ>Q 000U30>Q W O M Q 1 G >'1 UOMUIQ>Q

=

[

6

@

.".

t

,

w l

.

.

g

t

.9 es

.

l se3

!

e u.

.

e m

N se, m

X

WI

%

%

%

%

• * * * %

'

6C

[

da

.e.

.e.

Asa.

i

,.

3-i

& **

at O

a

.

VO

-

!.

a es

6 o

e C

C

o C

,

[

tM

!

-

j

.

.

.

.

Ez

.

.

e

V C

Ow

i a

[

}

.

w (

@

,

'

t l

l

!

-

- _ - _,., -, -

- _,, - - - - -. ~ -. - _ - - - - - - - _ _ -

,.

. -

.

. -

_ -

.

I

.

l

'

l Attectispent 1, Pege 5

.

QQNC(NIRAll0N foCt/tJai m

$AMft(

1501QPL Lf C[MM1 NRQ h(530 UILost (1CE_NSM E4RQ QOMPARI SOff (Geometry)

b.

Ortec #2 00-60 4.46 [-2 4.29 t C.06 [-2

1.04 Agreement Sr-85 2.4T [-3 2.03 1 0.17 [-3

1.22 Agreement

,

Cd-109 1.68 F-1 1.59 ! 0.03 [-1

1.06 Agreement

!

Sn-113 8.23 [-3 7.15 1 0.24 [-3

1.15 Agreement

-

Ce-139 2.83 [-3 2.63 1 0.09 [-3

1.08 Ag reement 00-51 4.89 t-3 e.34 1 0.09 E-3

1.13 Agreement Y-88 1.42 f-2 1.34 1 0.04 E-2

1.06 Agreement Cs-137 4.44 [-2 4.05 1 0.05 [-2

1.10 Agreement i

c.

Ortec #3 Co-60 4.34 E-2 4.29 ! 0.06 E-2 T2 1.0?

Agreement Sr-85 2.41 [-3 2.0310.17[-3

1.19 Agreement 04-109 1.16 E-1 1.59 1 0.03 [-1

1.11 Ag reemer *,

Sn-113 7.82 I-3 7.15 1 0.24 E-3

1.09 Agreement Ce-139 2.88 [-3 2.63 1 0.09 [-3

1.10 Agreement 00-57 4.65 [-3 4.34 1 0.09 [-3

1.0T Apeement Y-88 1,42 E-2 1.34 1 0.04 [-2

1.06 Ag reememt Cs-137 4.38 [-2 4.05 1 0.05 E-2

1.06 Agreement d.

Cense #3 00-60 4.11 [-2 4.29 1 0.06 [-2

0.96 A J reement Sr-85 2.19 [-s 2.03 1 0.1T [-3

1.08 Agreement 04-109 1.58 [-1 1.59 ! 0.c1 [-1

0.99 Agreement Sn-113 7.OT [-3 T.I'> ! 0.24 E-3

0.99 Ag reement Ce-139 2.51 [-3 2.63 1 0.09 E-3

0.95 Agreement Co-51 5.00 E-3 4.34 1 0.09 [-3

1.35 Agreement Y-88 1.23 [-2 1.34 i O.04 I-2

0.92 Agreement Cs-137 4.13 [-2 4.05 1 0.05 E-2

1.02 Agreement e.

Cen:e #4 Co-60 4.38 E-2 4.29 1 0.06 [-2

1.02 Agreemenat Sr-85 2.32 E-3 2.03 i O.17 E-3

1.14 Agreement Cd-109 1,67 I-1 1.59 1 0.03 [-1

1.05 Ag reement Sn-113 7.35 [-3 7.15 t 0.24 [-3

1.03 Agreement Ce-139 2.73 I-3 2.63 1 0.09 E-3

1.04 Agreement Co-ST 4.62 E-3 4.34 1 0.09 E-3

1.06 Ag reemesit Y-88 1.33 [-2 1.34 1 0.04 I-2

0.H Ag reement Cs-137 4.40 [-2 4.05 1 0.05 [-2

1.09 Ag reemerit

'

l

!

l L

--

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

,

-

.

~

.

..

ATTACHMENT 2 CRITER1A 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 program.

In these criteria, the judgement limits denoting agreement or disagreement between licensee and NRC results are variable. This variability is a functinn of the NRC's value relative to its associated uncertainty, referred to in this program as "Resolution"* increases, the range of acceptable differences between the NRC and licensee values should be more restrictive.

Conversely, poorer agreement between WRC and licensee values must be considered acceptable as the resolution decreases.

For comparison purposes, a ratic2 of the licensee value to the NRC value for each individual nuclide is computed. This ratio is then evaluated for agree-menc 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 ratio for a selected nuclide are considered in disagreement.

' Resolution = NRC Reference Value for a Particular Nuclide

Associated Uncertainty for the Value dComparison Ratio = Licensee Value NRC~heference Value

, TABLE 1 CONFIRMATORY MEASUREMENTS ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA RESOLUTION VS, COMPARISON RATIO

<4 0.4 - 2.5

0.5 - 2.0

-

0.6 - 1.66

-

16 - 50 0.75 - 1.33 51 - 200 0.80 - 1.25

>200 0.85 - 1.18

,