Regulatory Guide 4.15: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot change)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML071790506
| number = ML003739945
| issue date = 07/01/2007
| issue date = 02/28/1979
| title = Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Inception Through Normal Operations to License Termination) - Effluent Streams and the Environment
| title = Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and Environment
| author name =  
| author name =  
| author affiliation = NRC/RES
| author affiliation = NRC/RES
Line 9: Line 9:
| docket =  
| docket =  
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person = Ridgely JN RES 415-6555
| contact person =  
| case reference number = DG-4010
| document report number = Reg Guide 4.15, Rev 1
| document report number = RG-4.015, Rev 2
| package number = ML071790495
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| page count = 28
| page count = 11
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:1 Special terms used in this guide are marked in SMALL CAPITALS the first time they are used, and are defined in the glossary provided in this regulatory guide.
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
 
Revision I
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issues regulatory guides to describe and make available to the public methods that the NRC staff considers acceptable for use in implementing specific parts of the agencys regulations, techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and data that the staff need in reviewing applications for permits and licenses.  Regulatory guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required.  Methods and solutions that differ from those set forth in regulatory guides will be deemed acceptable if they provide a basis for the findings required for the issuance or continuance of a permit or license by the Commission.
February 1979 W) REGULATORY GUIDE  
 
OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
This guide was issued after consideration of comments received from the public.
REGULATORY GUIDE 4.15 QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAMS  
 
(NORMAL OPERATIONS) -
Regulatory guides are issued in 10 broad divisions:  1, Power Reactors; 2, Research and Test Reactors; 3, Fuels and Materials Facilities; 4, Environmental and Siting; 5, Materials and Plant Protection; 6, Products; 7, Transportation; 8, Occupational Health;
9, Antitrust and Financial Review; and 10, General.
 
Electronic copies of this guide and other recently issued guides are available through the NRCs public Web site under the Regulatory Guides document collection of the NRCs Electronic Reading Room at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/ and through the NRCs Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html, under Accession No. ML071790506.
 
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  
July 2007 Revision 2 REGULATORY GUIDE
OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH
REGULATORY GUIDE 4.15 (Draft was issued as DG-4010, dated November 2006)
QUALITY ASSURANCE
FOR RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAMS
(INCEPTION THROUGH NORMAL OPERATIONS
TO LICENSE TERMINATION)  
EFFLUENT STREAMS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
EFFLUENT STREAMS AND THE ENVIRONMENT
A.


==A. INTRODUCTION==
INTRODUCTION  
This regulatory guide describes a method that the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
This guide describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff for designing a program to as sure the quality of the results of measurements of radioactive materials in the effluents and the environment outside of nuclear facilities during normal operations.
considers acceptable for use in designing and implementing programs to ensure the quality of the results of measurements of radioactive materials in the effluents from, and environment outside of, facilities that process, use, or store radioactive materials during all phases of the facilitys life cycle.


QUALITY ASSURANCE1 (QA) is a fundamental expectation of Title 10, Energy, of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) for items and activities that are relied on to protect the health and safety of the public and the environment.
The. NRC regulations that require the control of releases of radioactive materials from nuclear facilities, that require the measurements of ra dioactive materials in the effluents and envi K ronment outside of these facilities, that require quality assurance programs and establish quality assurance requirements for certain fa cilities, or that authorize license conditions not otherwise authorized in the regulations are as follows:
"Section 20.106, "Radioactivity in Effluents to
"\\Unrestricted Areas,"
of
10 CFR  
Part 20,
tA
tdards for Protection Against Radiation,"
des that a licensee shall not release to an unre'atricted area radioactive materials in con centrations that exceed limits specified in
10 CFR Part 20 or as otherwise authorized in a license issued by the Commission.


This guide specifically applies to facilities for which NRC regulations require routine monitoring of radioactive effluents to the environment, and particularly those facilities licensed under the following regulations:
Section
*
20.201,  
10 CFR Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities (Ref. 1)
"Surveys," of 10 CFR Part 20 further requires that a licensee conduct surveys, including measurements of levels of radiation or concentrations of radioactive materials, as necessary to demonstrate compliance with the regulations in 10 CFR Part 20.
*
10 CFR Part 52, Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants (Ref. 2)


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 2
Paragraph (c) of Section 20.1, "Purpose," of  
*
10 CFR Part 20 states that every reasonable effort should be made by NRC licensees to maintain radiation exposure, and releases of radioactive materials in effluents to unrestrict ed areas, as far below the limits specified in Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.
10 CFR Part 61, Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste (Ref. 3)
*
10 CFR Part 72, Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste (Ref. 4)
*
10 CFR Part 76, Certification of Gaseous Diffusion Plants (Ref. 5)
The guide also may apply to other facilities licensed by the NRC, for which the agency may impose specific license conditions for effluent or environmental monitoring, as deemed necessary to ensure the health and safety of the public and the environment, including those licensed under the following regulations:
*
10 CFR Part 30, Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material (Ref. 6)
*
10 CFR Part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material (Ref. 7)
*
10 CFR Part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material (Ref. 8)
Finally, radiological standards for occupational workers and members of the public are codified in 10 CFR Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation (Ref. 9).
Although the specific regulations provide the actual requirements, the following presents an overview of applicable NRC regulations addressing limits on radioactive effluents, environmental levels of radioactivity, requirements for effluent and environmental monitoring, and associated QA.


In accordance with 10 CFR 20.1301, Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public, the TOTAL EFFECTIVE DOSE EQUIVALENT (TEDE) to individual members of the public from licensed operation must not exceed 1 milliSIEVERT [1 mSv, or 100 milliREM (mrem)] per year. Uranium fuel cycle facilities (excluding transportation and disposal) also must comply with the provisions that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) established in 40 CFR Part 190, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations (Ref. 10).  In addition, 10 CFR 20.1101(d) requires licensees (other than those subject to 10 CFR 50.34a, Design Objectives for Equipment to Control Releases of Radioactive Material in Effluents  Nuclear Power Reactors, discussed below) to restrict releases of airborne radioactive materials so that the highest individual dose to the public will not exceed 0.1 mSv (10 mrem)
USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES
per year.
Regulatory Guides are issued to deicibe and make available to the public methods acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of tn Commission's regulations, to delnst technlques used by the staff in evslu sting specific problems or poeulsted accidents, or to provide guidance to epplcents. Regulatory Guides are not substltutes for regulations, and com
=iInce wIth them is not requied. Methods end solutions different from those est out in the guides win be acceptable if they provide a bemb for the findings reluisite to the isuance or continuance of a permit or lice by the Comnission.


In addition, under 10 CFR 20.1101(b), licensees must apply AS LOW AS REASONABLY ACHIEVABLE
Comments snd suggestions for improver ntsin these guides ar enouragd at eol times, and guides wiN be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and to rflect now informatron or xporience. This guide wss revised as a result Of substantive comments received from the public end additional steff review.
(ALARA) concepts to doses to occupational workers and members of the general public.  In accordance with 10 CFR 20.1302, Compliance with Dose Limits for Individual Members of the Public, licensees must survey radiation levels to demonstrate compliance with the dose limits, and 10 CFR 20.1101, Radiation Protection Programs, requires licensees to develop, document, and implement radiation protection programs commensurate with the scope and extent of licensed activities and sufficient to ensure compliance with the provisions of 10 CFR Part 20 (Ref. 9).
In 10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E, Radiological Criteria for License Termination, the NRC provides the radiological criteria for license termination under unrestricted and restricted use scenario


====s. The NRC====
Part 20 as is reasonably achievable, taking into account the state of technology and the economics of improvements in relation to public health and safety and to the utilization of atomic energy in the public interest.
considers a site acceptable for unrestricted use if the residual radioactivity that is distinguishable from background radiation does not exceed 25 mrem/year (0.25mSv/year) TEDE to an average member of the critical group, including contributions from groundwater sources.  A site can be released under restricted use if the residual radioactivity that is distinguishable from background dose not exceed a yearly dose of
25 mrem (0.25mSv) TEDE with site use restrictions in place.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 3 For nuclear power reactors, 10 CFR 50.34a and 10 CFR 50.36a, Technical Specifications on Effluents from Nuclear Power Reactors, require ALARA concepts for operations to maintain releases of radioactive materials in effluents consistent with the guidelines of Appendix I, Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents, to
Section 30.34, "Terms and Conditions of Li censes," of 10 CFR Part 30, "Rules of General Applicability to Licensing of Byproduct Mate rial," provides that the Commission may incor porate in any byproduct material license such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate or necessary in order to protect health.
10 CFR Part 50.  Licensees must also establish appropriate SURVEILLANCE and monitoring programs to provide QA with respect to (1) areas of equipment operation and (2) data on the quantities or concentrations of radionuclides released in liquid and gaseous effluents.  These programs will help to ensure accurate projection of the levels of radiation and radioactive materials found in the environment.


Section III.B of Appendix I addresses requirements concerning estimates of radioactive iodine in water and food pathways if land use changes occur after plant construction.
Section 40.41, "Terms and Conditions of Li censes,"
of  
10 CFR Part 40,
"Licensing of Source Material," provides that the Commission may incorporate in any source material license such terms and conditions as it deems appro priate or necessary to protect health.


The regulations in 10 CFR 30.34, Byproduct Material, 10 CFR 40.41, Source Material,
Section 50.50,  
10 CFR 50.50, Production and Utilization Facilities, and 10 CFR 70.32, Special Nuclear Material, provide that the NRC may incorporate in any governed license such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate or necessary to protect health.
"Issuance of Licenses and Construction Permits," of 10 CFR Part 50, "Li censing of Production and Utilization Facil ities," provides that each operating license for a nuclear power plant issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will contain such condi tions and limitations as the Commission deems appropriate and necessary.


For land disposal of radioactive waste, 10 CFR 61.53, Environmental Monitoring, requires measurements and observations to be made and recorded to provide data to evaluate potential health and environmental impacts, including long-term effects, as well as the need for mitigating measures.  The monitoring system must be capable of providing early warning of releases of radionuclides from the disposal site.  A postclosure monitoring program is also required to detect the release of radionuclides.
Section 70.32,
"Conditions of Licenses," of
10 CFR Part 70,  
"Special Nuclear Material,"
provides that the Commission may incorporate such terms and conditions as it deems appro priate or necessary to protect health.


According to 10 CFR 70.59, Effluent Monitoring Reporting Requirements, licensees authorized to possess and use special nuclear materials for processing and fuel fabrication, scrap recovery, conversion of uranium hexafluoride, or in a uranium enrichment facility shall report to the NRC the quantity of each of the principal radionuclides released to unrestricted areas in liquid and gaseous effluents, and other information as the Commission may require to estimate maximum potential annual radiation doses to the public resulting from effluent releases.
Section IV.B
of Appendix I,  
"Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Con ditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable' for Radio active Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents," to 10 CFR Part 50,  
"Licensing of Production and Utilization Facil ities," requires that licensees establish an ap- Comment should be sent to the Secretary of the Commison, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 2015. Attentio: Docketing aGr Service Branch.


Appendix A, General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, to 10 CFR Part 50 includes several applicable general design criteria (GDC) affecting nuclear power plant designs.  GDC 60, Control of Releases of Radioactive Materials to the Environment, requires suitable means to control the release of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents.  GDC 64, Monitoring Radioactivity Releases, requires means for monitoring effluent discharge paths and the plant environs for radioactivity that may be released from normal operations, including anticipated operational occurrences, and from postulated accidents.  GDC 1, Quality Standards and Records, requires the establishment of a QA program for those structures, systems, and components that are important to safety to provide adequate assurance that they will satisfactorily perform their safety functions.  Appendix B, Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants, to 10 CFR Part 50 establishes the QA requirements for power plants.
The gukles are issued in the following ten brood divisiio:


The requirements in 10 CFR 72.104, Criteria for Radioactive Material in Effluent and Direct Radiation from an ISFSI [Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation] or MRS [Monitored Retrievable Storage], mandate operational restrictions for maintaining effluents and direct radiation levels in accordance with ALARA concepts, with limits so as not to exceed annual DOSE EQUIVALENTS of .25 mSv
===1. Power Reactors ===
(25 mrem) to the whole body, 0.75 mSv (75 mrem) to the thyroid, and 0.25 mSv (25 mrem) to any other critical organ of any real individual beyond the controlled area.


For gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment facilities, 10 CFR 76.87, Technical Safety Requirements, requires licensees to establish technical safety requirements with procedures and equipment
===6. Products ===
2. Research and Tert Reactor


2 While not specific to QA, other regulatory guides that address measurements of radioactive materials in effluents and the environment include the following:
===7. Transportation ===
*
3. Fuels and Materials Facilities B. Occupational oe-lfth
Regulatory Guide 1.21, Measuring, Evaluating, and Reporting Radioactivity in Solid Wastes and Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants (Ref. 13)
4. Environmental and Siting
*
9. Antitrust end Financial Review
Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants (Ref. 14)
5. Materials and Plant Protection
*
10. General Requests for single copies of issued guides (which may be reproduced) or for placement on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 2066., Attention:
Regulatory Guide 4.14, Radiological Effluent and Environmental Monitoring at Uranium Mills (Ref. 15)
Director, Division of Technical Information and Document Control.
*
Regulatory Guide 4.16, Monitoring and Reporting Radioactivity in Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Nuclear Fuel Processing and Fabrication Plants and Uranium Hexafluoride Production Plants (Ref. 16)
Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 4 to address (among other things) building and process ventilation and off-gassing, radioactive waste management, and environmental protection. In addition, 10 CFR 76.93, Quality Assurance, requires a QA program satisfying the applicable provisions of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) standard  QA-1-1994, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities (with Addenda) (Ref. 11).
Generic Letter 79065 (Ref. 12), regarding the NRCs Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Radiological Environmental Monitoring, provides guidance on the appropriate type of, and location for, sampling and monitoring the environment surrounding nuclear power plants.


This regulatory guide presents more complete and extensive guidance on QA for facilities where radiological effluent or environmental monitoring is required by NRC regulations.2  However, this guidance does not address all topics and elements that a facilitys QA program may require (such as requirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50 for nuclear power plants or 10 CFR 76.93 for gaseous diffusion uranium enrichment facilities).
propriate surveillance and monitoring program to provide data on quantities of radioactive material released in liquid and gaseous efflu ents and to provide data on measurable levels of radiation and radioactive materials in the environment.
The NRC issues regulatory guides to describe to the public methods that the staff considers acceptable for use in implementing specific parts of the agencys regulations, to explain techniques that the staff uses in evaluating specific problems or postulated accidents, and to provide guidance to applicants.


Regulatory guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with regulatory guides is not required.
Section III.B of Appendix I
to
10 CFR Part 50 provides certain effluent and environmental monitoring requirements with respect to radioactive iodine if estimates of exposure are made on the basis of existing conditions and if potential changes in land and water usage and food pathways could result in exposures in excess of the guidelines of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 5
General Design Criterion 60, "Control of re leases of radioactive materials to the environ ment," of Appendix A,
"General Design Cri teria for Nuclear Power Plants,"
to 10 CFR
Part 50
requires that nuclear power plant designs provide means to control suitably the release of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents. General Design Criterion 64,
"Monitoring radioactivity releases," of Appen dix A to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that nuclear power plant designs provide means for monitor ing effluent discharge paths and the plant environs for radioactivity that may be released from normal operations, including anticipated operational occurrences, and from postulated accidents.


==B. DISCUSSION==
General Design Criterion 1, "Quality stand ards and records," of Appendix A to 10 CFR
As used in the context of this guide, QA comprises all those planned and systematic actions that are necessary to provide adequate confidence in the ASSESSMENT of monitoring result
Part 50 requires that a quality assurance pro gram be established for those structures, sys tems, and components of a nuclear power plant that are important to safety in order to provide adequate assurance that they will satisfactorily perform their safety functions.


====s. QUALITY CONTROL====
Appendix B, "Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50 establishes quality assurance requirements for the design, con struction, and operation of those structures, systems, and components of these facilities that prevent or mitigate the consequences of postu lated accidents that could cause undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
(QC) comprises those QA actions that provide a means to measure and control the characteristics of measurement equipment and processes to meet established standards; QA includes QC.  This guide makes no further effort to distinguish those elements that may be considered QC from those composing QA.


Quality assurance is necessary to ensure that all radiological and nonradiological measurements that support the radiological monitoring program are reasonably valid and of a defined quality.  These programs are needed (1) to identify deficiencies in the sampling and measurement processes and report them to those responsible for these operations so that licensees may take CORRECTIVE ACTION and (2) to obtain some measure of confidence in the results of the monitoring programs to assure the regulatory agencies and the public that the results are valid.  All steps of the monitoring process should involve QA
The need of quality assurance is implicit in all requirements for effluent and environmental monitoring, and this need has been widely recognized.
(e.g., sampling, shipment of SAMPLES, receipt of samples in the laboratory, preparation of samples, radiological measurements, data reduction, data evaluation, and reporting of the measurement and monitoring results) .
An effective overall management system for quality must precede the design of a QA program.  A
document by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO/IEC 17025-2005, Ref. 17) is available for use by laboratories in developing their management system for quality, administrative, and technical operations. Once a quality management system is in place, a DIRECTED PLANNING PROCESS can be used to define the data objectives for the specific monitoring program.  The DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVE (DQO)
process (EPA QA/G-4-2006, Ref. 18) provides one example of how to develop and define acceptance and performance criteria for a sample collection, measurement, and data analysis progra


====m. The QUALITY====
Regulatory Guide 1.21,
ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP), which documents how data will be collected, assessed, and analyzed, can form the basis of a QA program (EPA QA/G-5-2002, Ref. 19). The QAPP provides a blueprint of where, when, why, and how a particular project will achieve data of the type and quality needed and expected.
"Measur ing, Evaluating, and Reporting Radioactivity in Solid Wastes and Releases of Radioactive Mate rials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants;"
Regulatory Guide 4.1, "Programs for Monitor ing Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants;" Regulatory Guide 4.8, "Envi ronmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants;"
and Regulatory Guide 4.14,  
"Measuring, Evaluating, and Reporting Radio activity in Releases of Radioactive Material in Liquid and Airborne Effluents From Uranium Mills,"
all give some guidance on means for assuring the quality of the measurements of ra dioactive materials in effluents and the envi ronment outside of nuclear facilities. More com plete and extensive guidance on this subject is provided in this document for nuclear power reactor facilities and for other facilities for which radiological monitoring is required by the NRC.


NUREG-1576, Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols Manual (Ref. 20,
This guidance does not identify separately the activities that are within the scope of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50. How ever, this guidance is intended to be consist ent with the requirements of Appendixes A and B to 10 CFR Part 50 in that quality assurance requirements should be consistent with the importance of the activity. For the monitoring of production and utilization facilities that is within the scope of Appendix B to 10 CFR
hereafter referred to as MARLAP), contains guidance for developing DQOs for risk-informed decisions, and their consequent MEASUREMENT QUALITY OBJECTIVES (MQOs), in the context of radiochemical analyses of environmental samples. The same methodology can be applied in other environmental monitoring contexts.  An example of a key MQO is the REQUIRED METHOD UNCERTAINTY at a specified radiation dose or radionuclide concentration.  The specific dose may be a fractional amount of a radiation dose limit.  The specific concentration may be a fractional amount of an effluent release or environmental radionuclide concentration.  For either case, the fractional amount of the limit should be sufficiently small so that a licensee may take reasonable operational actions before the limit is exceede
Part 50, other regulatory guides that provide guidance on meeting the quality assurance re quirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50
should also be consulted.


====d. MARLAP====
B.
recommends a PERFORMANCE-BASED APPROACH for selecting methods used to analyze samples or measure dose rates that meet the MQOs.  Under this approach, the licensees QA program should incorporate the initial (project METHOD VALIDATION) and continued [internal and external PERFORMANCE EVALUATION (PE)
PROGRAMS] assessment of a methods capability to meet the MQO specifications.  Process-radiation monitoring equipment and instrumentation need to have the desired sensitivity to provide both real-time and data-trend values that can correlate to the actual measurements of process streams before release.  The radiological environmental measurements program may be used to confirm the adequacy of the process- monitoring equipment.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 6
DISCUSSION 1 As used in the context of this guide, quality assurance comprises all those planned and sys tematic actions that are necessary to provide adequate confidence in the results of a mon itoring program, and quality control comprises those qualit assurance actions that provide a means to control and measure the character istics of measurement equipment and processes to established requirements; therefore, quality assurance includes quality control.


==C. REGULATORY POSITION==
To assure that radiological monitoring meas urements are reasonably valid, organizations performing these measurements have found it necessary to establish quality assuraice pro grams.
The QA program of each organization performing radiological effluent or environmental monitoring of nuclear facilities using, processing, or storing radioactive materials during all phases of the facilitys life cycle should be documented by written policies and procedures.  Licensees should have sufficient RECORDS of program conduct and performance to demonstrate program adherence.  In addition to its own program, a licensee should require any contractor or subcontractor performing support program activities (e.g., sampling, analysis, evaluations, and records) retain records sufficient for the licensee to develop and maintain a QA program covering the applicable program elements.


The following presents the QA program elements that should be developed and implemented to ensure the quality of data/results for radiological effluent and environmental monitoring programs.
These programs are needed for the following reasons:
(1) to identify deficiencies in the sampling and measurement processes to those responsible for these operations so that corrective action can be taken, and (2)
to I
obtain some measure of confidence in the results of the monitoring programs in order to assure the regulatory agencies and the public that the results are valid.


1.
Existing published guidance on specific qual ity assurance actions that are applicable to ra diological monitoring is limited and, in general, is restricted to quality control practices for radioanalytical laboratories (Refs.


Organizational Structure and Responsibilities of Managerial and Operational Personnel The structure of the organization as it relates to the management and operation of the monitoring programs, including QA policy and functions, should be defined and documented.  The authorities, duties, and responsibilities of the positions within this organization, down to the first-line supervisory level, should be described.  This should include responsibilities for review and approval of written procedures and the preparation, review, and evaluation of monitoring data and reports.
1-5). How ever, quality assurance should be applied to all steps of the monitoring process, which may include sampling, shipment of samples, receipt of samples in the laboratory, preparation of samples, measurement of radioactivity, data reduction, date evaluation, and reporting of the monitoring results.


Persons and organizations performing QA functions should have sufficient authority and organizational freedom to identify quality problems; to initiate, recommend, or provide solutions; and to verify implementation of solutions. Reporting should be at a management level that is independent of activity performance, costs, and schedule.
'Definitions of special terms used in this guide are given in the giossary on page 4.15-10.


Section 2.1.1 of ANSI/ASQC E4-1994 (Ref. 21) and Section 5.2.1 of ANSI N42.23-2003 (Ref. 22)
4.15-2
provide additional guidance on management structure and organizational responsibilities for radiological effluent and environmental monitoring programs.


2.
The scope of this guide is limited to the ele ments of a quality assurance program, which is a planned, systematic, and documented pro gram that includes quality control. Guidance on principles and good practice in the monitoring process itself and guidance on activities that can affect the quality of the monitoring results (e.g., design of facilities and equipment) are outside the scope of this guide. However, some references are provided to documents that do provide some guidance in these areas.


Specification of Qualifications of Personnel The qualifications of individuals needed to carry out assigned radiological monitoring functions should be defined and documented (e.g., as in a job description).  Individuals with responsibility for performing quality-related activities should be trained and qualified in the principles and techniques of the activities to be performed. These individuals should maintain proficiency by retraining, reexamining, and recertifying or by periodic performance reviews, as appropriate.  Continual training should be conducted as needed to ensure that personnel maintain awareness of events and issues that could affect the quality of program performance.
The citation of these references does not constitute an endorsement of all of the guidance in these documents by the NRC staff. Rather, these references are provided as sources of informa tion to aid the licensee and the licensee's con tractors in developing and maintaining a
monitoring program.


Section 2.3.1 of ANSI/ASQC E4-1994 (Ref. 21) provides additional guidance and criteria for developing personnel training and qualification specifications for radiological effluent and environmental monitoring programs.
Every organization actually performing efflu ent and environmental monitoring, whether an NRC
licensee or the licensee's contractor, should include the quality assurance program elements presented'in this guide.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 7
C.
3.


Operating Procedures and Instructions Monitoring programs should have written procedures for all activities that generate data, such as dose calculations and measurements, sample collection, sample management and CHAIN OF CUSTODY,
REGULATORY
sample preparation and analysis, data reduction and recording, data assessment and reporting, and final sample disposal.  Procedures are also needed for addressing support functions, such as operation of process monitors, training, preparation of QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLES, collection of meteorological data, corrective actions, AUDITS, and records.  Individuals satisfying the qualifications described in Section C.2 of this regulatory guide should write, review, and revise these procedures.
POSITION
The quality assurance program of each organization performing effluent or environ mental monitoring of nuclear facilities for nor mal operations should be documented by written policies and procedures and records.


Instructions, procedures, or schedules should be prepared for the functions associated with the QA
These documents should include the elements given in this section.
program, such as the following:
*
ancillary laboratory functions (including cleaning of glassware, contamination control, and storage of standards and chemicals)
*
CALIBRATION and QC of instrumentation (including range of activity, range of energy, and frequency of calibration)
*
internal QC and external PE programs (including frequency, types, acceptance criteria for the laboratory PERFORMANCE TESTING samples, and individual analyst qualifications)
*
timetable for VERIFICATION and VALIDATION (V&V) of data Chapters 9, 11, and 12 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) provide guidance on the radioanalytical laboratory activities for which procedures are used.  MARLAP Chapters 12 - 16 provide technical information that can be used to write or revise procedures.  Section 5.4 of ISO/IEC 17025-2005 (Ref. 17) provides additional guidance regarding the content and quality aspects of procedure and method technical content.


Section 2.5.2 of ANSI/ASQC E4-1994 (Ref. 21) identifies procedures that should be documented and may need control.
In addition to its own program, a licensee should require any contractor or subcontractor performing monitoring activities for the li censee to provide a quality assurance program and to routinely provide program data summaries (sufficiently detailed to permit on going quality 'assurance program evaluation by the licensee) consistent with the provisions of this guide, as follows:
1. Organizational Structure and Responsibilities of Managerial and Operational Personnel The structure of the organization as it re lates to the management and operation of the monitoring program(s),
including quality as surance policy and functions, should be pre sented. The authorities, duties, and responsi bilities of the positions within this organization down to the first-line supervisory level should be described. This should include responsibil ities for review and approval of written proce dures and for the preparation, review, and evaluation of monitoring data and reports.


4.
Persons and organizations performing quality assurance functions should have sufficient authority and organizational freedom to identify quality problems; to initiate, recommend, or provide solutions; and to verify implementation of solutions.


Records licensees should maintain a system that produces unequivocal, accurate records that document all monitoring activitiesLicensees should maintain records of implementation or ongoing activities, such as the following:
2. Specification of Qualifications of Personnel The qualifications of individuals performing radiological monitoring to carry out their assigned functions should be specified and documented (e.g., as in a job description).   
*
An indoctrination and orientation program, appropriate to the size and complexity of the organization and to the activities performed, I
procedure revision
should provide that (a)
*
personnel performing quality-related activities are trained and quali fied in the principles and techniques of the ac tivities performed, (b)
personnel training and qualification records
persoiinel are made aware of the nature and goals of the quality assurance program, and (c) proficiency of per sonnel who perform activities affecting quality is maintained by. retraining, reexamining, and recertifying or by periodic performance re views, as appropriate.
*
analytical results
*
audits
*
corrective actions
*
intermediate activities or calculations (as may be needed to validate or substantiate final results)
*
records of tracking and control (chain of custody) throughout all processes from sample collection through analysis and reporting of results, including unique identifiers, descriptions, sources, dates/times, packaging/preparation/shipping, and required analyses
*
field logs with sufficient information describing environmental conditions and recording related information and data documenting the nature of the sample and where and how it was taken
*
laboratory notebooks recording related information and data, observations of analysts, and laboratory or other conditions potentially affecting the measurement process
*
electronic data collection and algorithms and QA documentation
*
calculations (including data reduction, analysis, and verification)


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 8
3. Operating Procedures and Instructions Written procedures should be prepared, re viewed, and approved for activities involved in carrying out the monitoring program, including sample collection; packaging, shipment, and receipt of samples for offsite analysis; prepa ration and analysis of samples; maintenance, storage, and use of radioactivity reference standards; calibration and checks of radiation and radioactivity measurement systems; and reduction, evaluation, and reporting of data.
*
QC records for radiation monitoring equipment, including the results of RADIOACTIVE SOURCE
checks, calibrations, INSTRUMEN


==T. BACKGROUND==
Individuals who review and approve these pro cedures should be knowledgeable in the sub jects of the procedures.
determinations, and maintenance activities affecting equipment performance
*
notifications to qualified staff that procedural changes affecting data quality have been made
*
QC records for laboratory counting systems and support instrumentation and equipment, including calibrations, maintenance or repair, QC sample results, and traceability of standards used for instrument calibration Records should be legible and identifiable, retained in predetermined locations, and protected against damage, deterioration, or loss.  Records should be maintained in a format that is easily retrievable.


If the media for storage is electronic (as opposed to paper or microfilm/fiche), the licensee should maintain the equipment necessary to read and present the data in an uncorrupted form.  The document retention system should allow reconstruction of all activities associated with the generation of analytical results. The licensee should establish a retention time for records consistent with licensing conditions and in accordance with the licensees overall QA program.
Guidance on principles and good practice in many of these activities is presented in NRC
regulatory guides (Refs. 6-9) and other publi cations (Refs.


Section 2.5 of ANSI/ASQC E4-1994 (Ref. 21) provides guidance on specific types of documents that should be maintained, while Basic Requirement 17 of ASME NQA-1-1994 (Ref. 11) details the administrative criteria that should be considered for inclusion in a program for records and their retention.
2-5, 10-35). In addition to these publications, Scientific Committee 18A of the NCRP has prepared NCRP Report 58, "A Hand book of Radioactivity Measurements Proce dures," (Ref. 36) that is a revision of NCRP
Report 28, NBS Handbook 80,  
"A
Manual of Radioactivity Procedures."
4. Records The records necessary to document the ac tivities performed in the monitoring program should be specified in the quality assurance program.


Section 4.13 of ISO/IEC 17025-2005 (Ref. 17) also provides guidance on the control of record
One key aspect of quality control is maintain ing the ability to track and control a sample in its progress through the sequence of monitor ing processes.


====s. Chapters====
Records to accomplish this should cover the following processes: field and inplant collection of samples for subsequent analysis, including sample description; sample receipt and laboratory identification coding;
4 and 11 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) discuss documents that should be retained as records. Nuclear Information and Records Management Association (NIRMA) TG11-1998 (Ref. 23), TG15-1998 (Ref. 24), TG16-1998 (Ref. 25), and TG21-1998 (Ref. 26) provide additional information addressing issues in developing and maintaining electronic records programs.
sample preparation and radiochemical process ing (e.g., laboratory notebooks); radioactivity measurements of samples, instrument back grounds, and analytical blanks;
and data reduction and verification.


5.
4.15-3


Quality Control in Environmental Sampling Sampling of solids, liquids, and gases involves the measurement of sample masses, flow rates, or volumes.  The ACCURACY of the instruments or containers used for this purpose should be determined and checked regularly to ensure that sampling performance criteria remain within the limits specified by the MQOs.  The results of mass, flow rate, or volume calibrations and associated UNCERTAINTIES should be recorded.  The frequency of these calibrations should be specified and should be consistent with the DQOs of the measurement program.  The collection efficiencies of the sampling equipment used should be documented; often such documentation is available from the manufacturer.  HPS/ANSI N13.1-1999 (Ref. 27) provides guidance on QA and QC for air sampling instruments.  Chapter 19 of MARLAP
Quality control records for laboratory counting systems should include the results of measurements of radioactive check sources, calibration sources, backgrounds, and blanks.
(Ref. 20) discusses measurement uncertainties in general and volume and mass measurements in particular.


Sampling or measurements should be performed using equipment and methods that yield a result that is representative of the population in the particular environmental media.  FIELD DUPLICATES are co-located spatially or temporally and should be collected periodically to check REPRODUCIBILITY.
Records relating to overall laboratory per formance should include the results of analysis of quality control samples such as analytical blanks, duplicates, interlaboratory cross-check samples and other quality control analyses; use of standards (radioactivity) to prepare working standards; preparation and standardization of carrier solutions; and calibration of analytical balances.


Chapter 10 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) discusses the field and sampling issues that affect laboratory measurements, including packaging, shipping, and storage of samples.
Additional records that are needed should in clude the calibration of inline radiation detec tion equipment, air samplers, and thermo luminescence dosimetry systems; verification and documentation of computer programs;
qualifications of personnel;
and results of audits.


Some individual environmental samples are collected simply to confirm that radioactivity levels are below a specified (small) fraction of an established concentration limit. In those cases, the MINIMUM
The minimum period of retention of the rec ords should be specified. For nuclear power plants, requirements for record retention are  
DETECTABLE CONCENTRATION of the method used should be below that specified fraction of the limit.
-given in the plant technical specifications. In general, for other types of facilities, only the final results of the monitoring programs need be retained for the life of the facility.


Chapter 20 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) discusses detection limits, while Appendix C to MARLAP covers the relationship between the desired fraction of the limit that is important to detect and the uncertainty of the measurement method. In some cases, a series of measurement results will be averaged for comparison with BACKGROUND LEVELS or a regulatory limit.  For such measurements, an appropriate MQO would be the MINIMUM QUANTIFIABLE CONCENTRATION (see Chapter 20 of MARLAP).
5. Quality Control in Sampling (Including Pack aging, Shipping, and Storage of Samples)
Continuous sampling of liquids and gases in volves the measurement of sample flow rates and/or sample volumes. The accuracy of the devices used for this purpose should be deter mined on a regularly scheduled basis, and ad justments should be made as needed to bring the performance of the devices within specified limits. The reslits of these calibrations should be recorded. The frequency of these calibra tions should be specified and should be based on the required accuracy, purpose, degree of usage, stability characteristics, and other con ditions affecting the measurement. Procedures for continuous sampling should use methods that are designed to ensure that the sample is representative of the material volumes sampled.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 9 For an isolated, well-mixed population, a single sample or measurement may be sufficient.  It is more common, however, for spatial or temporal variations to exist.  In that case, the frequency of sampling and number of samples and locations will depend on the level of variability and amount of radioactivity (compared with an established risk-informed limit).  NUREG-1575, Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (Ref. 28, hereafter referred to as MARSSIM), discusses the effect that such variability has on the number of samples that may be appropriate for SURVEYS.  In general, the DQO
The collection efficiencies of the samplers used should be documented; usually such documen tation is available from manufacturers of the sampling equipment.
process may be used together with specific statistical designs (EPA QA/G-9S-2006, Ref. 29) to optimize the sampling.  Continuous sampling or integrated measurements may be used to mitigate temporal variability.


Part 1, Sections II-11 and II-12, of ASME NQA-1-1994 (Ref. 11) discuss test control and control of measuring and test equipment.  Part II, Subpart 2.20, of ASME NQA-1-1994 discusses QA standards for subsurface investigations for nuclear power plants.
Procedures for grab samples should include steps designed to ensure that the sample is representative of the material sampled.


6.
Rep licate grab samples should be taken periodically to determine the reproducibility of sampling.


Quality Control in the Radioanalytical Laboratory The output of the directed planning process includes DQOs that encompass both sampling and analysis activities for a project or program.  From the DQOs, a set of MQOs are developed for radioanalytical measurements (see Chapter 3 of MARLAP, Ref. 20).  In a performance-based approach, MQOs are critical criteria used for the selection and validation of analytical methods and protocols (see Regulatory Position 8, below) and subsequently form the basis for the ongoing and final evaluation of the analytical data.  The type, frequency of, and evaluation criteria for QC samples are developed during the directed planning process and are incorporated into ANALYTICAL PROTOCOL SPECIFICATIONS (APSs) for a project (see Chapter 3 of MARLAP, Ref. 20).
Procedures for sampling, packaging, ship ping, and storage of samples should be designed to maintain the integrity of the sample from time of collection to time of analysis.
Chapter 18 of MARLAP provides guidance on monitoring key laboratory PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS to determine whether a laboratorys measurement processes are in control.  The chapter also provides information on likely causes of excursions for selected laboratory performance indicators, such as chemical yield, instrument background, and QC samples.  Appendix C to MARLAP provides the rationale and guidance for developing MQOs for select method performance characteristics and gives guidance on developing criteria for QC samples.


Performance criteria for radioanalytical measurements should be selected to provide a management tool for tracking and trending performance and to identify precursors to nonconforming conditions.
Aqueous samples may present a particular problem in this regard, and one of the most severe problems has been encountered with aqueous samples of radioactive wastes from operating nuclear reactors (Ref. 23). 
Guidance on the principles and practice of sampling in environmental monitoring is pro vided in several publications (Refs.


Laboratories should satisfy program-specific criteria for all measurement processes, including necessary levels of PRECISION, acceptable BIAS, and applicable detection levels.
2,
4, 5,
21, 23-31, 33, 35, 37). In addition, workers at the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) have published the results of a survey of informa tion on sampling, sample handling, and long term storage for environmental materials (Ref. 15). Some guidance on the principles and practice of air sampling is provided in Refer ences 17,  
19,  
24, 28-31,
33. Guidance on the principles and practice of water sampling is provided in numerous publications (Refs.


6.1 Calibration and Quality Control of Instruments, Measuring Devices, and Test Equipment Instruments, devices, and test equipment used for measuring radioactivity should be operated, calibrated, and maintained to ensure that analytical specifications are met. All equipment should be operated, calibrated, and maintained in adherence to any applicable standards and methods and as specified in the laboratorys quality manual and standard operating procedures. Instrument configurations during calibration should match those used for subsequent analytical measurements of samples.
13,
14, 25-27, 35, 37). 
6. Quality Control in the Radioanalytical Laboratory
6.1 Radionuclide Reference Standards-Use for Calibration of Radiation Measurements Systems Reference standards are used to determine counting efficiencies for specific radionuclides or, in the case of gamma-ray-spectrometry systems, to determine counting efficiency .as a function of gamma-ray energy. A counting effi ciency value is used to convert a sample count ing rate to the decay rate of a radionuclide or to a radionuclide concentration.


Calibrations of instruments should be made using CERTIFIED REFERENCE MATERIALS of known and documented value and stated uncertainty and should be traceable to a national standards body, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the United State
Guidance on the calibration and usage of germanium de tectors for measurement of gamma-ray emission rates of radionuclides has been prepared as an ANSI
standard (Ref. 38).
For converting gamma-ray emission rates to nuclear decay rates, two reports from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Refs. 39 and 40) provide useful compilations of gamma-ray intensities and other nuclear decay data for radionuclides in routine releases from nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The data from Reference 40 are included in NCRP
Report 58 (Ref. 36). 
Radionuclide standards that have been certified by NBS or standards that have been obtained from suppliers who participate in measurement assurance activities with NBS 2 1
2Satisfactory measurement assurance interactions between source suppliers and NBS involve two basic mechanisms: (1)
The supplier submits a calibrated radioactivity source (pref erably selected from a batch or prepared series of sources) to NBS
for confirmation that the supplier's calibration value agrees with NBS results within certain specified limits or (2)
NBS provides calibrated radioactivity sources of undisclosed activity (test samples) to a supplier who is able to make activity or emission-rate measurements on the source that agree within certain specified limits with the measurements of NBS. For the routine production of commercial radioactivity standards, the first mechanism is preferable to the second but is not always feasible. These two mechanisms are used both in Measurements Assurance Programs (MAPs) with key laboratories and in other measurement assurance activities.


====s. CALIBRATION SOURCES====
"Two key laboratory source suppliers participate in MAPs with NBS and use both of the two basic mechanisms: (1) The NRC
should be prepared in a manner that provides comparability to TEST SOURCES with respect to source geometry, positioning relative to the detector, source composition, and distribution of the test-source material within a container or on a source mount (see Section 15.2 of MARLAP, Ref. 20).
reference laboratory for the Confirmatory Measurements Pro gram (for effluent monitoring) of the NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement and (2) The EPA Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, which prepares and
4.15-4


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 10
should be used when such standards are avail able.
The frequency of calibrations should be consistent with the stability and performance of the instrument.  Complete system calibration should be performed before initial use or following system maintenance, repair, or any other changes in environment or operating conditions that could affect performance (ASTM D7282-2006, Ref. 30).  In addition, Sections 15.2 and 15.3 of MARLAP (Ref. 20)
present general guidance regarding calibrations of instruments.  Chapter 15 of MARLAP also presents guidance specific to calibrations of different instrumentation types.


The continuing validity of calibrations should be checked periodically as specified in a laboratorys quality manual (see Chapter 18 of MARLAP, Ref. 20).  Quality control checks of radioanalytical instrument calibration parameters, such as detector response or energy and resolution calibrations for spectrometers, should be performed by measuring the response of each radiation detection system to appropriate CHECK SOURCES.  Instrument QC frequencies are generally performed daily for systems used continually or before use for those systems periodically employed, but frequencies may vary by instrument type.  Instrument QC checks should meet predefined acceptance criteria for the respective calibration parameter and should ensure that conditions have not significantly changed since initial calibration (ASTM
In these measurement assurance activ ities, the supplier's calibration value should agree with the NBS value within the overall uncertainty stated by the supplier in its certi fication of the same batch of sources (when these are sampled for measurement by NBS) or in its certification of similar sources.
D7282-2006, Ref. 30).
Instrument-calibration QC check results should be tracked, trended, and compared with predetermined ranges of acceptable performance.  For example, if a monitors response to a daily check source showed a trend that may lead to a condition outside of established acceptance criteria, a calibration may be needed to reestablish acceptable operation.  Section 18.5 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) and ASTM D7282-
2006 (Ref. 30) discuss radioanalytical instrument-calibration QC parameters.


Additional method-specific quality controls (e.g., chemical yield, spectral quality, resolution) may apply to certain methods and should be tracked and trended using control or tolerance charts to identify conditions that could be adverse to quality.
An "International Directory of Certified Ra dioactive Materials" has been published by the International Atomic Energy Agency (Ref. 41).
Acceptable standards for certain natural ra dionuclides may be prepared from commercially available high-purity chemicals. For example, potassium-40 standards for gross beta-particle measurements or gamma-ray spectrometry may be prepared gravimetrically from dried reagent-grade potassium chloride.


The laboratory quality manual and standard operating procedures should address the use, calibration, maintenance, and QC of all nonradiological instruments, measuring devices, and test equipment used for measuring or quantifying other necessary data (e.g., sample masses or volumes, temperatures).  All measurement and test equipment should be calibrated before use and adjusted to maintain accuracy within established limits.  Quality control checks should be performed at specified frequencies and should verify that instruments are operating to specified performance levels.
The details of the preparation of working standards from certified standard solutions should be recorded.


Nonradiological instruments, measurement, and test equipment should be operated according to manufacturers instructions, according to established standards, or as specified in the laboratory quality manual and procedures.  Section 18.6.7 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) provides guidance on control, calibration, and maintenance of calibration of apparatus used for mass and volume measurements.  ISO/IEC 17025-
The working standard should be prepared in the same form as the un known samples, or close approximation thereto.
2005 (Ref. 17) provides general guidance on establishing quality controls for nonradiological instruments.


Items that do not conform to specified criteria should be controlled to prevent inadvertent use.  These items should be tracked through the corrective action program.
Efficiency calibrations should be checked periodically (typically monthly to yearly) with standard sources.


Careful control of contamination and routine monitoring of instrument background are integral parts of a measurement QC program.  Determination of the background counting rate should be performed on a regular, predefined frequency for systems in routine use and should ensure that analytical specifications for applicable programs can be met.  Instrument backgrounds used to determine a net count rate should replicate actual sample measurement conditions as closely as possible (i.e., using appropriate sample containers and geometries).
In addition, these checks should be made whenever the need is in dicated, such as when a significant change in the measurement system is detected by routine measurements with a check source.


3 Note that this list does not include field duplicate samples that are part of the QC requirement for sampling.
6.2 Performance Checks of Radiation Measurement Systems Determination of the background counting rate and the response of each radiation detec tion system to appropriate check sources should be performed on a scheduled basis for systems in routine use. The results of these measurements should be recorded in a log and plotted on a
control chart.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 11 Section 18.5.1 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) provides guidance on measurement and control of instrument backgrounds.  Section 18.3 and Attachment 18A of MARLAP contain guidance on the statistical evaluation of performance indicators and on using control and tolerance charts.
Appropriate distributes calibrated radioactivity standards primarily to lab oratories involved in radiological environmental monitoring.


Sections 10-13 and 20-25 of ASTM D7282-2006 (Ref. 30) and Section A.5.2 of ANSI N42.23-
Additionally, seven major radiopharmaceutical manufacturers (some of which supply radioactivity standards commercially)  
2003 (Ref. 22) provide additional guidance on instrument response source checks, background checks, and the use of control charts.  ASTM MNL 7A-2002 (Ref. 31) provides guidance on setting up and using control charts.
participate in a MAP organized by the Atomic Industrial Forum and NBS. In this MAP, NBS distributes standards as test sam ples to the manufacturer (second mechanism) and receives cer tified samples from the manufacturer for verification by NBS
(first mechanism).
Measurement assurance interactions that use the first me chanism are available via special NBS calibration service


6.2 Internal Quality Control Samples and Analysis The use of QC samples should be an integral element of a laboratory QA program.  Chapter 18 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) defines the different types of laboratory QC samples and provides guidance on evaluation techniques for QC samples.  The laboratory should have as part of the normal operational sample load the following QC samples:3
====s. NBS ====
*
will, on request and for a fee, perform calibrations of repre sentative samples of standards provided by the supplier for NBS confirmation of the supplier's reported values, Calibration services are available for a large variety of radionuclides pro vided certain requirements (as to sample stability and suitable activity range) are met. Measurement assurance interactions that use the second mechanism are available via the issuance of test standards by NBS. For a nominal charge (beyond the price of the standard),
BLANK
NBS
*
radioactivity Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) can be purchased as test sources of undis closed activity that can be used to demonstrate agreement.
MATRIX SPIKE
*
LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE
*
LABORATORY DUPLICATE
Analysis of QC samples should be performed as a part of the routine operation of a laboratory to verify that laboratory operations are consistent with applicable specifications.  The QC program should specify the type of and minimum frequency for processing QC samples.  For example, this frequency may be defined as a minimum percentage of the total number of samples analyzed, a certain number per operational time interval (e.g., once per shift) or per sample batch, or a licensee-specified frequency based on laboratory-specific parameters. As part of its QC program, the laboratory may prepare and analyze BLIND SAMPLES, provided the individuals responsible for preparing the samples are not directly responsible for conducting the laboratory analysis. For example, the laboratorys assigned QC specialist may have the responsibility for preparing and submitting blind samples (blank, duplicate, laboratory control sample, and matrix spike).  Blind samples are used primarily as a tool for evaluating the performance of individuals rather than as part of the laboratory QC load.


Acceptability of QC sample results should be evaluated based on criteria from the QC program, which include specific equations based on METHOD UNCERTAINTY.  Chapters 7 and 18 of MARLAP
within certain specified limits, between the source supplier's measurements and those of NBS. A Report of Test (for the first mechanism) or a Report of Measurement (second mechanism),
(Ref. 20) provide guidance on the evaluation of QC samples.
containing both the source supplier's and NBS values, is issued by NBS to document the source supplier's participation in the measurement assurance activity.


Quality control sample results should be tracked, trended, and compared with predetermined ranges of acceptable performance to identify conditions that are in, or may lead to, nonconformance with program specifications.  Such conditions should be tracked through the corrective action program.
investigative and corrective action should be taken when the measurement value falls outside the predetermined control value.


6.3 Performance Evaluation Program (Interlaboratory Comparison)
A check source for determining changes in counting rate or counting efficiency should be of sufficient radiochemical purity to allow correction for decay but need not have an accurately known disintegration rate, i.e.,  
Participation in an external PE program is an important independent check on the accuracy, possible bias, and precision of some radioanalytical or measurement methods used in a radiological monitoring program.  Internal and contract radioanalytical laboratories used in the monitoring program should participate in one or more applicable PE programs that are administered by organizations that have an active measurement assurance (traceability) program with NIST (ANSI N42.22-1995, Ref. 32). Chapter
need not be a standard source.


4 Frequencies should be appropriate to the instrument under consideration and may be dictated by license conditions.
For systems in which samples are changed manually, check sources are usually measured daily.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 12
For systems with automatic sample changers, it may be more convenient to include the check source within each batch of samples and thus obtain a measurement of this source within each counting cycle. For proportional counter systems,- the plateau(s) or response(s)  
5 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) recommends incorporating the criteria for a radioanalytical laboratory to participate in a PE program into the statement of work for services. Several external PE programs administered by government agencies or commercial radioactive-source suppliers are available for radionuclides and matrices germane to radiological monitoring programs.  The PE program should provide fundamental sample types (e.g., solid, liquid, gas) and radionuclides (e.g., alpha-, beta-, and gamma- emitting nuclides) of interest at the facility.  When available, laboratories should analyze samples as offered by a PE program on a frequency stipulated by the monitoring programs QA criteria, with all types of samples and analyses repeated at least biennially.  Chapter 18 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) provides information on organizations that administer PE programs.
to the check source(s) should be checked after each gas change.


Acceptable performance criteria for results of performance-testing samples should be established that are consistent with the MQOs for the radiological monitoring project or program. For certain monitoring activities, the acceptance criteria of the PE program may be satisfactory.  The performance in a PE program should be tracked and trended as one of the performance indicators for the laboratory and evaluated as part of the corrective action program.
Background measurements should be made frequently, usually daily or before each use, to ensure that levels are within the expected range. For systems with automatic sample changers, background meas urements should be included within each meas urement cycle.


7.
For alpha- and gamma-ray-spectrometry sys tems, energy-calibration sources (i.e.,
a source containing a radionuclide, or mixture of radionuclides, emitting two or more alpha or gamma rays of known energies) are counted to determine the relationship between channel number and alpha- or gamma-ray energy. The frequency of these energy calibration checks depends on the stability of the system but usually is in the range of daily to weekly. The results of these measurements should be recorded and compared to predetermined limits in order to determine whether or not system gain and zero level need adjustment.


Quality Control for Radioactive Effluent Monitoring Systems
Adjustments should be made as necessary.
7.1 Radioactive Effluent Process Monitors An initial, primary radiation monitor calibration that meets the specifications of ANSI N42.18-
2004 (Ref. 33), should be performed with radioactive sources traceable to a national standards body (such as NIST).  Calibrations should be repeated periodically using (1) STANDARD REFERENCE MATERIALS or (2)
certified reference materials that can be directly traced to the initial, primary calibration.  Complete system calibration  including electronics, detector, and any support functions (such as alarm, display, and recording devices)  should be performed at a frequency that ensures system reliability and accuracy or after repair or maintenance that may affect instrument calibration.  Unless otherwise specified in license requirements, the licensee should verify and validate the complete effluent monitoring system every 12 months.  This frequency may be extended to longer time periods coinciding with facility maintenance schedules, such as refueling for nuclear power plants, if the licensee has verified proper system operation through established system reliability and more frequent source checks and functional checks.


Detectors should be response-checked periodically4 for continuous effluent release points (e.g., ventilation systems and secondary water systems) and before release for batch discharges (e.g., primary boundary or containment purges and liquid waste tank releases).  Licensees should ensure that check sources are of sufficient radiochemical purity so that the activity of the source may be corrected for decay to the date of measurement. These check sources need not be traceable to a national standards body (e.g., NIST).  Whenever practicable, check sources should be an integral part of the monitoring system and should be remotely actuated.  The functionality of isolation or alarm functions should be verified periodically, preferably by use of a radiation source.
Additional checks needed for spectrometry systems are the energy resolution of the system and the count rate (or counting efficiency) of a check source. These should be determined periodically (usually weekly to monthly for energy resolution and daily to weekly for count rate)
and after system cnanges, such as power failures or repairs, to determine if there has been any significant change in the system.


Trends of process radiation monitor readings versus total radionuclide concentrations in the monitored release path should be performed routinely.  These trends should be based on the results of analyses for specific radionuclides in samples taken from the release path that will yield a monitor response.  Deviations in the trend may occur if concentrations or the mixture of radionuclides changed significantly (for example, during a fuel cycle in which significant fuel defects exist).  The licensee should define the monitor-response parameter for all radiation monitors.  The monitor-response constant should be adjusted to maintain this correlation between effluent radionuclide concentration and monitor response.
The results of these measurements should be recorded.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 13
6.3 Analysis of Quality Control Samples The analysis of quality control samples pro vides a means to determine the precision and accuracy of the monitoring processes and in cludes both intralaboratory and interlaboratory measurements.
7.2 Flow Monitoring Instrumentation Continuous sampling of liquids and gases involves the measurement of sample flow rates and/or sample volumes.  The accuracy and associated uncertainty of the devices used for this purpose should be determined on a regularly scheduled basis, and adjustments should be made as needed to bring the performance of the devices within specified limits.  The results of these calibrations should be recorded.


The frequency of these calibrations should be specified and should be based on the necessary accuracy, purpose, degree of usage, stability characteristics, and other conditions affecting the measurement.
The analysis of replicate samples (containing significant detectable activity)
provides a
means to determine precision; the analysis of
4.15-5


Any flow-rate measuring devices associated with the system should be calibrated to determine actual flow rates at the conditions of temperature and pressure under which the system will operate.  These flow rate devices should be recalibrated annually, but the frequency may be extended to that established for the radiation detector system, provided sufficient operating experience exists and an accelerated measurement check frequency gives sufficient data to ensure reliable performance.
samples containing known concentrations of radionuclides provides a means to determine accuracy.


Flow measuring devices should be checked periodically on an established frequency, considering the variability of the instrument, and recalibrated when established control limits are exceeded.  HPS/ANSI
The analysis of laboratory blanks provides a
N13.1-1999 (Ref. 27) provides additional guidance on QA and QC measures for the use, maintenance, and calibration of airborne sampling instrumentation. ANSI N42.18-2004 (Ref. 33) provides additional guidance on the calibration of liquid flow monitors.
means to detect and measure radioactive contamination of analytical samples, a common source of error in. radiochemical analysis of low-levw:1 samples. The analysis of analytical blanks also provides information on the adequacy of background subtraction, particularly for environmental samples.


7.3 Grab Sampling of Effluent Process Streams Whenever practicable, effluent releases should be batch-controlled and released when the volume to be released has been mixed sufficiently to ensure uniform concentration.  Sampling and analysis for each batch should be performed, and release conditions set, before release.  A certain percentage of all batch releases should have field duplicates taken either before or during the release to assess the reproducibility of sampling and the effectiveness of the mixing process before release.  Where possible, samples that are spatially or temporally separated should be collected periodically to verify representativeness.
The fraction of the analytical effort needed for the analysis of quality conti-ol samples depends to a large extent on (1) the mixture of sample types in a particular laboratory in a particular time period and (2)
the history of performance of that laboratory in the analysis pf quality control samples.


For continuous-effluent discharges, composite samplers should be employed.  However, periodic grab samples may be used when composite sampling of a continuous discharge point is not feasible.  When grab samples are collected instead of composite samples, licensees should design the sampling program to sample at the time, location, and frequency that ensures each sample is representative of the radioactive materials released.
However, for environmental laboratories, it is found that at least 5%, and typically 10%, of the analytical load should consist of quality control samples.


7.4 General Quality Control Considerations The QC plan should address the following items:
6.3.1 Intralaboratory Analyses Replicate samples, usually duplicates, should be analyzed routinely. These replicates should be prepared from samples that are as homo geneous as possible, such as well-stirred or mixed liquids (water or milk)
*
and solids (dried, ground, or screened soil, sediment, or vegetation;
Sampling should be performed using calibrated instruments and equipment when taking a composite sample.
or the ash of these materials). 
These samples may be replicates of monitoring program samples, replicates of reference test materials, or both. The size and other physical and chemical characteristics of the replicate samples should be similar to those of single samples analyzed routinely.


*
The analysis of the replicate samples as blind replicates is desirable but is not practicable for all laboratories or for all types of samples. For example, in small laboratories it may not be practicable to prevent the analysts from being aware that particular samples are replicates of one another.
Collection efficiencies based on the physical configuration of the sampling point and the type of collector should be documented. Vendor-supplied data may be used where adequate documentation exists to ensure the reliability and accuracy of data.


*
Obtaining true replicates of all types of samples also is not practicable. For example, obtaining replicate samples of airborne mate rials usually is not practicable on a routine basis because it requires either a separate sampling system or splitting a single sample (e.g., cutting a filter in half). Use of replicate samplers usually is not economically feasible and splitting of samples results in replicates that do not represent the usual sample size or measurement configuration (counting geometry)
Volumes of tanks and containers should be established during initial installation and should be verified again following any physical changes that could alter the system configuration.
for direct measurement.


5 Replicate samples may be prepared by removing separate ALIQUANTS from the same grab sample.
However, simulated samples of airborne materials may be prepared in replicate and submitted for analysis as unknowns.


6 The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE) Standard 1063, IEEE Standard for Software User Documentation (Ref. 35); EPA Directive 2185, Good Automated Laboratory Practices (Ref. 36); Subpart 2.7 of ASME NQA-1-1994 (Ref. 11); Regulatory Guide 1.168, Verification, Validation, Reviews, and Audits for Digital Computer Software Used Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants (Ref. 37); and Section 8 of ANSI N42.14-1999, Calibration and Use of Germanium Spectrometers for the Measurement of Gamma-Ray Emission Rates of Radionuclides (Ref. 38), also provide guidelines on software V&V.
Analysis of intralaboratory blank and spiked samples is an important part of each environ mental laboratory's quality control program. To check for contamination from reagents and other sources, known analytical blank samples should be included frequently in groups of un known environmental samples that are analyzed radiochemically.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 14
Spiked and blank samples should be submitted for analysis as unknowns to provide an intralaboratory basis for estimat ing the accuracy of the analytical results.
*
The frequency of duplicates and REPLICATES5 should be established based on time (for continuous discharges) or number of batches (for batch discharges).
*
Sample integrity should be maintained through chain of custody procedures.


Procedures for continuous sampling should use methods that are designed to ensure that the sample is representative of the volumes being discharged.
These blanks and spikes may include blind replicates.


8.
6.3.2 Interlaboratory Analyses Analysis of effluent and environmental sam ples split with one or more independent labora tories is an important part of the quality as surance program because it provides a means to detect errors that might not be detected by intralaboratory measurements alone.


Verification and Validation The V&V of certain aspects and support activities of the radiological measurement process or monitoring program are essential to the QA program.  These aspects and activities include data and computer software V&V and project method validation.
When possible, these independent laboratories should be those whose measurements are traceable to NBS.


Project method validation is the demonstration that a method (radioanalytical or radiation measurement) using performance-based method selection is capable of providing analytical results to meet a projects MQOs and any other criteria in the analytical protocol specification (APS).  Acceptable method validation is necessary before the radiological analysis of samples or the taking of measurements in a monitoring program.  Chapter 6 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) presents detailed guidance on project method validation for radioanalytical methods.  In addition, Section 5.2.7 of ANSI N42.23-2003 (Ref. 22) and Section 5.4.5 of ISO/IEC 17025-2005 (Ref. 17) provide limited guidance for radioanalytical method validation.
3 Analysis of split field samples, such as sam ples of milk, water, soil or sediment, and vegetation, is particularly important in envi ronmental monitoring programs to provide an independent test of the ability to measure radionuclides at the very low concentrations present in most environmental samples.


Chapter 8 of MARLAP (Ref. 20) gives detailed guidance and applicable tools for the radioanalytical data V&V evaluation process as well as information for developing a data V&V plan, determining acceptable criteria and tests, and applying data qualifiers for radioanalytical data validation, as related to MQOs.  EPA QA/G-8-2002 (Ref. 34) provides guidance for nonradioanalytical data V&V.
The NRC Office of Inspection and Enforce ment conducts a Confirmatory Measurements Program for laboratories of licensees that meas ure nuclear reactor effluents. The analyses of liquid waste holdup tank samples, gas samples, charcoal cartridges, and stack particulate filters are included in this program.


Computer programs used in the implementation of the radiological environmental monitoring program should be documented, verified, and validated before initial routine use and after each modification of the program. As described in Section 5.4.3.2 of MARLAP (Ref. 20), the laboratorys quality manual should include the criteria for computer software V&V and documentation.  The software data reduction and reporting functions should be verified to perform as expected.6
The results of the licensee's measurements of sam ples split with the NRC are compared to those of an NRC reference laboratory whose measure ments are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. Thus the results of this comparison provide to the NRC an objective measure of the accuracy of the licensee's analyses.
9.


Assessments and Audits Assessments, audits, and surveillances are elements used to evaluate the initial and ongoing effectiveness of the QA program to monitor and control the quality of a radiological monitoring program.
Laboratories of licensees or their contractors that perform environmental measurements should participate in the EPA's Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Stud ies (Cross-check)
Program, or an equivalent program. This participation should include all of the determinations (sample medium/radionu clide combinations) that are both offered by EPA and included in the licensee's environ mental monitoring program. Participation in the EPA program provides an objective measure of the accuracy of the analyses because the EPA
measurements are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. If the mean result of a cross-check analysis exceeds the control limit as defined by EPA (Ref. 42), an investigation should be made to determine the reason for this deviation and corrective action should be taken
3NBS and NRC staffs recognize the need for a clearer defini tion of the term "traceability" as it applies Lo radiation and radioactivity measurements. These staffs are working together to develop such a  
statement, which will be published separately.


Management having responsibility in the area being reviewed should document and review the results of these activities. Assessments that are independent of the day-to-day operations should be performed routinely, including management surveillance, peer reviews, and READINESS REVIEWS for new or revised systems and methods.  Key performance indicators should be tracked and trended, with periodic management reporting.  The QA program or project plan should outline the scope, frequency, and schedule of assessments, audits, and surveillances.  A plan should be developed for each assessment audit or
4.15-6


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 15 surveillance for each area of the monitoring program being evaluated.  A report of these activities should be generated according to the outline, format, and content established in the plan.
as necessary.


Only qualified QA staff (see Regulatory Position 2, above), supported as needed by experts in the technical areas under evaluation, should conduct assessments, audits, and surveillances.  (See ASME
Similarly, an investigation and any necessary corrective action should take place if the "normalized range," as calculated by EPA, exceeds the control limit, as defined by EPA.
NQA-1-1994, Supplement 2S, Ref. 11.)  Deficiencies, areas for improvement, and observations noted should be incorporated into the corrective action program and tracked.  Section 18 of ASME NQA-1-1994 (Ref. 11) and Section 4.10 of ISO/IEC 17025-2005 (Ref. 17) provide guidance on establishing and conducting an audit program.


When the monitoring program will depend upon the services of a radioanalytical laboratory, prior onsite audits of the laboratory may be conducted to ensure that the laboratory is capable of fulfilling the project criteria in accordance with the APS (including MQOs) outlined in a statement of work (MARLAP
A series of results that is within the control limits but that exhibits a trend toward these limits may indicate a need for an investi gat.ion to determine the reason for the trend.
Chapter 5 and Appendix E). The ongoing evaluation of the laboratorys QUALITY SYSTEM and operations is accomplished through onsite audits and desk audits.  These audits are focused more on whether the laboratory is meeting project or program specifications than whether the laboratory has the capability to meet monitoring program or project criteria.  Chapter 7 of MARLAP provides guidance and statistical tests to determine whether a laboratory is meeting the MQOs, especially the REQUIRED METHOD UNCERTAINTY.


Section 5.2.10 of ANSI N42.23-2003 provides additional guidance for radioanalytical laboratory assessments.
6.4 Computational Checks Procedures for the computation of the con centration of radioactive materials should in clude the independent verification of a sub stantial fraction of the results of the computa tion by a person other than the one performing the original computation. For computer calcula tions, the input data should be verified by a knowledgeable individual. All computer pro grams should be documented and verified before initial routine use and after each modifi cation of the program. The verification process should include verification, by a knowledgeable individual, of the algorithm used and test runs in which the output of the computer computa tion for given input can be compared to "true"
values that are known or determined independ ently of the computer calculation. Documenta tion of the program should include a descrip tion of the algorithm and, if possible, a
current listing of the program. Guidelines for the documentation of digital computer programs are given in ANSI N413-1974 (Ref. 43). 
7. Quality Control for Continuous Effluent Monitoring Systems Guidance on specification apd performance of onsite instrumentation for continuously mon itoring radioactivity in effluents is given in ANSI N13.10-1974 (Ref. 18).
The specified frequency of calibration for a particular system should be based on con siderations of the nature and stability of that system. For nuclear power plants, specific re quirements for calibrations and checks of par ticular effluent monitoring systems usually are included in the technical specifications for the plant.


Audits of the QA programs of contractors providing materials, supplies, or services affecting the quality of the laboratorys operations should be performed periodically (Section 4.6 of ISO/IEC 17025-
Initial calibration of each measuring system should be performed using one or more of the reference standards that are certified by the National Bureau of Standards or standards that have been obtained from suppliers that partici pate in measurement assurance activities with NBS
2005, Ref. 17).
(see 'footnote
10.
2).
These radionuclide standards should permit calibrating the system over its intended range of energy and rate capabilities. For nuclear power plants, sources that have been related to this initial calibration should be used to check this initial calibration at least once per 18 months (normally during refueling outages).
Periodic correlations should be made during operation to relate monitor readings to the concentrations and/or release rates of radio active material in the monitored release path.


Preventive and Corrective Actions Integral components of a QA program include identifying areas for improvement, defining performance or programmatic deficiencies, and initiating appropriate corrective or preventive actions.  The QA program for radiological effluent and environmental monitoring programs should contain both a continuous-improvement program and a program for implementing corrective actions when conditions adverse to quality have been identified.  In addition, needed improvements and potential sources of nonconformance should be identified and reported as part of a preventive action initiative of the continuous-improvement program (ISO/IEC 17025-2005, Sections 4.10-4.12)  for example, a condition- reporting program.  Investigations should be initiated for degrading conditions, and corrective actions should be taken when conditions fall outside quality or regulatory acceptance criteria.  For conditions that are adverse to quality, the corrective action process includes the following basic elements:
These correlations should be based on the results of analyses for' specific radionuclides in grab samples from the release path.
*
identification and documentation
*
classification
*
cause analysis
*
corrections
*
followup
*
closure Findings and corrective actions should be documented, tracked, and reported to management.


Followup reviews should be performed to verify the effectiveness and adequacy of the corrective actions.
Any flow-rate measuring devices associated with the system should be calibrated to deter mine actual flow rates at the conditions of temperature and pressure under which the system will be operated.


Section 2.10 of ANSI/ASQC E4-1994 (Ref. 21) provides specifications and guidelines for developing the process, programs, and procedures necessary to detect and correct items of nonconformance and for implementing continuous quality improvement.
These flow rate devices should be recalibrated periodically.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 16 When conducting an audit or surveillance of laboratory services, a prime area of review should be the effectiveness of the laboratorys corrective action program (Section 7.4.2 of MARLAP, Ref. 20).
Whenever practicable, a check source that is actuated remotely should be installed for in tegrity checks of the detector and the asso ciated electrical system.
Section 4.11 of ISO/IEC 17025-2005 (Ref. 17) provides general guidance on preventive and corrective action programs for laboratories.  Annex C of ANSI N42.23-2003 (Ref. 22) provides additional guidance that should be considered in developing a corrective action program, including root cause analysis for radioanalytical services.


==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
8. Review and Analysis of Data Procedures for review and analysis of data should be developed. These procedures should cover examination of data from actual samples and from quality-control activities for reason ableness and consistency.
The purpose of this section is to provide information to licensees regarding the NRC staffs plans for using this regulatory guide. No backfit is intended or approved in connection with its issuance.


Non-nuclear power reactor applicants and licensees may continue to use Revision 1 of Regulatory Guide 4.15, dated February 1979, or may adopt other procedures or practices that reflect generally accepted standards for ensuring quality in environmental data collected for effluent monitoring purposes.  Except in those cases in which a nuclear power reactor applicant or licensee proposes or has previously established an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the NRCs regulations, the methods and practices described in this guide will be used in evaluating QA practices for environmental radiological monitoring programs.
These reviews should be performed on a timely basis. General criteria for recognizing deficiencies in data should be established.


7 Certain terms included in this glossary are not used in the main body of this regulatory guide, but are included because they are used within other definitions.
Provisions should be made for investigation and correction of recognized deficiencies and for documentation of these actions.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 17 GLOSSARY7 accuracyThe closeness of a measured result to the true value of the quantity being measured.
9. Audits Planned and periodic audits should be made to verify implementation of the quality assur ance program. The audits should be performed by individuals qualified in radiochemistry and monitoring techniques who do not have direct responsibilities in the areas being audited.


Various recognized authorities have given the word accuracy different technical definitions, expressed in terms of bias and imprecision.  Following the Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols (MARLAP) Manual (Ref. 20), the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) avoids all of these technical definitions and uses the term accuracy in its common, ordinary sense, which is consistent with the definition established by the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) in the International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology (Ref. 39).
Audit results should be documented and re viewed by management having responsibility in the area audited. Followup action, including reaudit of deficient areas, should be taken where indicated.
aliquantA representative portion of a homogeneous SAMPLE removed for the purpose of analysis or other chemical treatment.  The quantity removed is not an evenly divisible part of the whole sample.  An aliquot, by contrast, is an evenly divisible part of the whole.


analyteSee TARGET ANALYTE.
D.


analytical protocol specification (APS)The output of a DIRECTED PLANNING PROCESS that contains the projects analytical data needs and criteria in an organized, concise form.  The level of specificity in the APS should be limited to those criteria that are considered essential to meeting the projects analytical data criteria to allow the laboratory the flexibility of selecting the protocols or methods that meet the analytical criteria.
IMPLEMENTATION
The purpose of this section is to provide in formation to applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide.


as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA)As low as is reasonably achievable taking into account the state of the technology and the economics of improvements in relation to benefits to the public health and safety and other societal and socioeconomic considerations, and in relation to the use of atomic energy in the public interest [10 CFR 50.34a(a)].
Except in those cases in which the applicant or licensee proposes an acceptable alternative method, the staff will use the methods de scribed herein in evaluating an applicant's or licensee's capability for and performance in complying with specified portions of the Com mission's regulations after March 30, 1979.
assessmentA planned and documented activity performed to determine whether various elements within a quality management system are effective in achieving stated quality objectives (ANSI N42.23-
2003, Ref. 22).
auditA planned and documented activity performed to determine by investigation, examination, or evaluation of objective evidence the adequacy of, and CONFORMANCE with, established procedures, instructions, drawings, and other applicable documents as well as the effectiveness of implementation.  An audit should not be confused with surveillance or inspection activities performed for the sole purpose of process control or product acceptance (after ANSI N42.23-2003, Ref. 22).
background, instrumentRadiation detected by an instrument when no SOURCE is present.  The background radiation that is detected may come from radionuclides in the materials of construction of the detector, its housing, its electronics, and the building as well as the environment and natural radiation.


background levelA term that usually refers to the presence of radioactivity or radiation in the environment.  From an analytical perspective, the presence of background radioactivity in samples
If an applicant or licensee wishes to use the method described in this regulatory guide on or before March 30, 1979, the pertinent portions of the application or the licensee's performance will be evaluated on the basis of this guide.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 18 needs to be considered when clarifying the radioanalytical aspects of the decision or study question.  Many radionuclides are present in measurable quantities in the environment.
4.15-7


bias (of a measurement process)A persistent deviation of the mean measured result from the true or accepted reference value of the quantity being measured, which does not vary if a measurement is repeated.
REFERENCES
1. Section 6. 2,
"Validation of Analyses,"
Chapter 6,
"Validity of Results," Methods of Radiochemical Analysis, World Health Organiza tion, Geneva, 1966.


blank (analytical or method)A SAMPLE that is assumed to be essentially free of the TARGET ANALYTE
2. "Analytical Quality Control Methods," Envi ronmental Radioactivity Surveillance Guide, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Report, ORP/SID 72-2, June 1972.
(the unknown), that is carried through the radiochemical preparation, analysis, mounting, and measurement process in the same manner as a routine sample of a given matrix.


blind sampleA SAMPLE with a concentration not known to the analyst. Blind samples are used to assess analytical performance.  A double-blind sample is a sample whose concentration and identity as a sample is known to the submitter, but not to the analyst.  The analyst should treat the double-blind sample as a routine sample, so it is important that the double-blind sample is identical in appearance to routine samples.
3. Environmental Radiation Measurements, Re port of NCRP SC-35, NCRP Report No.


calibrationThe set of operations that establish, under specified conditions, the relationship between values indicated by a measuring instrument or measuring system, or values represented by a material measure, and the corresponding known value of a parameter of interest.
50,  
1976.


calibration sourceA prepared SOURCE, made from a CERTIFIED REFERENCE MATERIAL OR STANDARD
4. L. G.
REFERENCE MATERIAL, that is used for calibrating instruments.


certified reference materialA reference material, accompanied by a certificate, with one or more property values certified by a procedure that establishes its traceability to an accurate realization of the unit in which the property values are expressed, and for which each certified value is accompanied by an UNCERTAINTY at a stated level of confidence (ISO Guide 30, Ref. 40). See STANDARD REFERENCE MATERIAL.
Kanipe, Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Radioanalytical Laboratories, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-600/7-77-088, August 1977.


chain of custodyProcedures that provide the means to trace the possession and handling of a sample from collection to data reporting.
5. J.M. Mullins, C. Blincoe, J.C. Daly, et al.,
"Radiochemistry," Chapter 17, pp. 1007
1031, Quality Assurance Practices for Health Laboratories, Stanley L.


check sourceA material used to validate the operability of a radiation measurement device, sometimes used for instrument quality control.  See TEST SOURCE and SOURCE, RADIOACTIVE.
Inhorn 7'editor, American Public Health Association, 1978.


condition adverse to quality an all-inclusive term used in reference to any of the following:  failures, malfunctions, deficiencies, defective items, and nonconformances. A significant condition adverse to quality is one which, if uncorrected, could have a serious effect on safety or operability.
6. Regulatory Guide 1.21, "Measuring, Eval uating, and Reporting Radioactivity in Solid Wastes and Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants."
7. Regulatory Guide 4.5, "Measurements of Radionuclides in the Environment-Sampling and Analyses of Plutonium in Soil."
8. Regulatory Guide 4.6, "Measurements of Radionuclides in the Environment-Strontium-89 and Strontium-90 Analyses."
9. Regulatory Guide 4.13,  
"Performance, Testing, and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications."
10.


conformanceAn affirmative indication or judgment that a product or service has met the criteria of the relevant specifications, contract, or regulation; also the state of meeting the criteria (ANSI/ASQC
HASL Procedures Manual, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration Report, HASL-300, 1972 (updated annually).
E4-1994, Ref. 21).
11.
corrective actionsThose measures taken to prevent, rectify, or eliminate conditions adverse to quality or detected nonconformities and  as necessary  to preclude repetition of those conditions.


data quality objective (DQO)Qualitative and quantitative statements that clarify the study objectives, define the most appropriate type of data to collect, determine the most appropriate conditions from which to collect the data, and specify tolerable limits on decision error rates. Because DQOs will be used to establish the quality and quantity of data needed to support decisions, they should
A Guide for Environmental Radiological Surveillance at ERDA Installations, Energy Re:
search and Development Administration Report, ERDA 77-24, March 1977.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 19 encompass the total UNCERTAINTY resulting from all data collection activities, including analytical and sampling activities.
12. Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical Meth ods, U.S.


directed planning processA systematic framework focused on defining the data needed to support an informed decision for a specific project.  Directed planning provides a logic for setting well- defined, achievable objectives and developing a cost-effective, technically sound sampling and analysis design that balances the data users tolerance for UNCERTAINTY in the decision process and the available resources for obtaining data to support a decision. Directed planning helps to eliminate unnecessary, poor, or inadequate sampling and analysis designs.
Environmental Protection Agency Report, EPA-680/4-75-001. February 1975.


dose equivalentQuantity that expresses all radiations on a common scale for calculating the effective absorbed dose.  This quantity is the product of absorbed dose (GRAYS (Gy) or rads) multiplied by a quality factor and any other modifying factors (MARSSIM, Ref. 28).  The quality factor adjusts the absorbed dose because not all types of ionizing radiation create the same effect on human tissue.
13. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Thirteenth Edition, American Public Health Association, 1975.


For example, a dose equivalent of one SIEVERT (Sv) requires 1 Gy of beta or gamma radiation, but only 0.05 Gy of alpha radiation or 0.1 Gy of neutron radiation.  Because the sievert is a large unit, radiation doses often are expressed in milliSIEVERTS (mSv).  See TOTAL EFFECTIVE DOSE
14. Handbook for Samplin and Sample Pres ervation of Water and Wastewater, U.S. Envi- ronmental Protection Agency Report, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Mon itoring Support Laboratory, EPA-600/4-76-049, September 1976.
EQUIVALENT.


duplicate, fieldTwo samples of the same material, collected at the same location at the same time and under the same conditions, which are used to verify representativeness of the sampled material.
15. E.J. Maienthal and D.A. Becker, "A Sur vey on Current Literature on Sampling, Sample Handling, and Long-Term Storage for Environ mental Materials,"
Interface
5
(#4),
49-62
(1976).
Also available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.


duplicate, laboratoryTwo ALIQUANTS of a SAMPLE, which are prepared and analyzed separately as part of the same batch, used in the laboratory to measure the overall PRECISION of the sample measurement process, beginning with laboratory subsampling of a field SAMPLE.
Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, as NBS Tech nical Note #929, October 1976, C 13.46:929, S/N 003-003-01694-2.


field duplicateSee DUPLICATE, FIELD.
16. Tritium Measurement Techniques, Report of NCRP SC-36, NCRP Report No. 47, 1976.


graded approachA process of basing the level of management controls applied to an item or work on the intended use of the results and the degree of confidence needed in the quality of the results.
17. "Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities," ANSI N13.1
1969.


The NRC follows a graded approach to project planning and QUALITY ASSURANCE because of the diversity of environmental data collection activities. This diversity in the type of project and the data to be collected impacts the content and extent of the detail to be presented in the project planning documents.
18. "Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring Radioactivity in Effluents," ANSI N13.10-1974.


gray (Gy)The International System of Units (SI) unit for absorbed radiation dose.  One Gy is 1 joule of energy absorbed per kilogram of matter, equal to 100 RAD.  See SIEVERT.
19. Air .Smlng Instruments for Evaluation of Atmospheric Conaminants Fourth Edition, American Conference of Industrial Hygienists,  
1972.


laboratory control sampleA standard material of known composition or an artificial SAMPLE (created by fortification of a clean material similar in nature to the sample), which is prepared and analyzed in the same manner as the sample.  In an ideal situation, the result of an analysis of the laboratory control sample should be equivalent to (give 100 percent of) the TARGET ANALYTE concentration or activity known to be present in the fortified sample or standard material.  The result normally is expressed as percent recovery.  See also QUALITY CONTROL SAMPLE.
20. Users' Guide for Radioactivity Standards, Subcommittee on Radiochemistry and Subcom mittee on the Use of Radioactivity Standards, Committee on Nuclear Science, National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council Report, NAS-NS-3115, February 1974.


laboratory duplicateSee DUPLICATE, LABORATORY.
21. Environmental Impact Monitoring for Nu clear Power Plants, Source Book of Monitorinig Methods, Vol. 1, Atomic Induastrial Forum Re port, AIF/NESP-004, February 1975.


matrix spikeSee SPIKE.
22. Instrumentation for Environmental Monitor ing: Radiation, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Report, LBL-1, Vol. 3, First Ed.,
May 1972;
First update, February 1973; Second update, October 1973.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 20
23. C.W. Sill, "Problems in Sample Treatment in Trace Analysis," National Bureau of Stand ards Special Publication 4-22, Accuracy in Trace Analysis:
measurement quality objective (MQO)The analytical data criteria of the DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES,
Samplin, Sampl Handling, and Analysis, pp. 463-490, August 1976.
which are project- or program-specific and can be quantitative or qualitative. These analytical data criteria serve as measurement performance criteria or objectives of the analytical process.


MARLAP (Ref. 20) refers to these performance objectives as MQOs.  Examples of quantitative MQOs include statements of required analyte detectability and the UNCERTAINTY of the analytical protocol at a specified radionuclide concentration, such as the action level.  Examples of qualitative MQOs include statements of the required specificity of the analytical protocol (e.g., the ability to analyze for the radionuclide of interest (or TARGET ANALYTE) given the presence of interferences).
24. "General Principles for Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials," International Standard, ISO-2889, 1975.
method uncertaintyReference to the predicted UNCERTAINTY of the result that would be measured if the method were applied to a hypothetical laboratory SAMPLE with a specified analyte concentration.


Although individual measurement uncertainties will vary from one measured result to another, the REQUIRED METHOD UNCERTAINTY is a target value for the individual measurement uncertainties and is an estimate of uncertainty before the sample is actually measured. See also UNCERTAINTY and REQUIRED METHOD UNCERTAINTY.
Manual of Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EP--625/6-74-003, U.S.


method validationThe demonstration that the method selected for the analysis of a particular analyte in a given matrix is capable of providing analytical results to meet the projects MEASUREMENT
Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Technology Transfer, Washington, D.C. 20460,
QUALITY OBJECTIVES and any other criteria in the ANALYTICAL PROTOCOL SPECIFICATIONS.
1974.


Compare with data and software VALIDATION.
4.15-8


minimum detectable concentrationThe minimum detectable value of the analyte concentration in a sample.  The smallest (true) value of the net state variable that gives a specified probability that the value of the response variable will exceed its critical value (i.e., that the material analyzed is not blank).
26. "Standard Practices for Sampling Water,"
minimum quantifiable concentrationMinimum quantifiable value of the analyte concentration, defined as the smallest concentration of analyte whose presence in a laboratory SAMPLE ensures that the relative standard deviation of the measurement does not exceed a specified value, usually 10
Method D 3370-76, Annual Book of ASTM Stand ards (Part 31),  
percent.
Water, American Society for Tthing and MaterhW, Philadelphia, PA, 1977.


nonconformancea deficiency in characteristic, documentation, or procedure that renders the quality of an item or activity unacceptable or indeterminate performance-based approachDefinition of the analytical data needs and criteria of a project in terms of measurable goals during the planning phase of a project.  In a performance-based approach, the project-specific data objectives that are determined during a DIRECTED PLANNING PROCESS serve as measurement performance criteria for selections and decisions regarding the conduct of the laboratory analyses. The project-specific analytical data objectives are also used for the initial, ongoing, and final evaluation of the laboratorys performance and the laboratory data.  In method selection, a performance-based approach is the process wherein a validated method is selected based on a demonstrated capability to meet defined quality and laboratory performance criteria.
27. Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for Measuring the Qu'ty of Surace Waters and Effluients, EPA- 670/473S-001, Ofice -o Re search and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, July 1973.


performance evaluation (PE) programA laboratorys participation in an internal or external program of analyzing performance-testing samples appropriate for the analytes and matrices under consideration (i.e., PE program traceable to a national standards body, such as the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in the United States). Reference-material samples used to evaluate the performance of the laboratory are called performance-evaluation or performance-testing samples or materials. See CERTIFIED REFERENCE MATERIAL and STANDARD
28. G.G. Eadie and D.E. Bernhardt, "Sampling and Data Reporting Considerations for Air borne Particulate Activity,"
REFERENCE MATERIAL.
U.S.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 21 performance indicatorInstrument- or protocol-related parameter routinely monitored to assess the laboratorys estimate of controls such as chemical yield, instrument background, UNCERTAINTY,
Environ mental Protection Agency Technical Note ORP/LV-76-9, December, 1976.
PRECISION, and BIAS.  See BACKGROUND, INSTRUMENT.


performance testingSee PERFORMANCE EVALUATION PROGRAM.
29. A.J. Breslin, "Guidance for Air Sampling at Nuclear Facilities," U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration Report HASL
312, November 1976.


precisionThe closeness of agreement between independent test results obtained by applying the experimental procedure under stipulated conditions. Conversely, imprecision is the variation of the results in a set of REPLICATE measurements.  Precision may be expressed as the standard deviation (IUPAC, Ref. 41).
30. "Reference Method for the Determination of Suspended Particulates in the Atmosphere (High. Volume Method),"
quality assurance (QA)An integrated system of management activities involving planning, implementation, assessment, reporting, and quality improvement to ensure that a process, item, or service is of the type and quality needed and expected. Quality assurance includes QUALITY
Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Sys tems, Vo-ui If-Amb-ient Air Specific Methods, e-tion 2, U.S.
CONTROL.


quality assurance project plan (QAPP)A formal document describing in detail the necessary QUALITY
Envir-a-ent-I
ASSURANCE, QUALITY CONTROL, and other technical activities that must be implemented to ensure that the results of the work performed will satisfy the stated performance criteria.  The QA project plan describes policy, organization, and functional activities and the DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES
Protection Agency Report EPA-600/4-77-027a, May 1977.
and measures necessary to achieve adequate data for use in selecting the appropriate remedy.


quality control (QC)The overall system of technical activities that measures the attributes and performance of a process, item, or service against defined standards to verify that they meet the stated objectives established by the project; operational techniques and activities that are used to fulfill objectives for quality.  This system of activities and checks is used to ensure that measurement systems are maintained within prescribed limits, providing protection against out-of- control conditions and ensuring that the results are of acceptable quality.
31. E.D. Harward (editor), Program Report:
Workshop on Methods for Measuring Radiation In and Around ranium iills, report based on presentations made at the workshop held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, May 23-26,
1977.


quality control (QC) sampleAn uncontaminated SAMPLE matrix spiked with known amounts of analytes from a source independent of the calibration standards.
Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., August 1977.


quality systemA structured and documented management system describing the policies, objectives, principles, organizational authority, responsibilities, accountability, and implementation plan of an organization for ensuring quality in its work processes, products (items), and services.  The quality system provides the framework for planning, implementing, and assessing the work performed by an organization and for carrying out required QUALITY ASSURANCE and QUALITY CONTROL
32. Measurement of Low-Level Radioactivity, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Report 22, June 1,  
activities (ANSI/ASQC E4-1994, Ref. 21).
1972.
readiness reviewThe formal process of performing a written or verbal assessment of key attributes of a program or project measured against defined minimum criteria, standards, or quality metrics before initiation of activities under that project or program.


recordA retrievable document that furnishes objective evidence of the quality of products, services, or activities and that has been verified and authenticated as technically complete and correct.
33. American Public Health Association Inter society Committee on Methods of Air Sampling and Analysis, Morris Katz (editor), Methods of Air Sampling and Analysis, Second Edition, American Public Health Association, 1977.


remThe common unit for the effective or equivalent dose of radiation received by a living organism, equal to the actual dose (in rads) multiplied by a factor representing the danger of the radiation.
34. L.H.


Rem is an abbreviation for roentgen equivalent man, meaning that it measures the biological effects of ionizing radiation in humans.  One rem is equal to 0.01 Sv. See SIEVERT and DOSE EQUIVALENT.
Ziegler and H.M.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 22 replicatesTwo or more ALIQUANTS of a homogenous SAMPLE whose independent measurements are used to determine the PRECISION of laboratory preparation and analytical procedures.
Hunt, Quality Control for Environmental Measurements Gamma-Ray Spectrometry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-660/7-77-14, December 1977.


reproducibilityThe closeness of the agreement between the results of measurements of the same parameter carried out under changed conditions of measurement. A valid statement of reproducibility depends upon specification of the conditions changed. The changed conditions may include principle of measurement, method of measurement, observer (or analyst), measuring instrument, reference standard, location, conditions of use, and time.  Reproducibility may be expressed quantitatively in terms of the dispersion characteristics of the results. Results are usually understood to be corrected results.
35. L.L. Thatcher, V.J. Janzer, and K.W.


required method uncertainty (uMR)METHOD UNCERTAINTY at a specified concentration. This is a key MEASUREMENT QUALITY OBJECTIVE.
Edwards,
"Methods for the Determination of Radioactive Substances in Water and Fluvial Sediments,"
Chapter A5, Book B (Laboratory Analysis)  
of Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States. Geological Survey, 1977. Chapter A5 is available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govern ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, Stock Number 024-001-02928-6.


sample(1) A portion of material selected from a larger quantity of material, or (2) a set of individual samples or measurements drawn from a population whose properties are studied to gain information about the entire population.
36. A Handbook of Radioactivity Measurements Proceduires, Rep6ot of NCRP SC-18A,  
NCR
Report No. 58, 1978.


sievert (Sv)The Systme International (SI) unit for the effective dose of radiation received by a living organism. This unit represents the actual dose received (GRAYS in SI or rads in traditional units)
37..P.E.
times a factor that is larger for more dangerous forms of radiation. One Sv is 100 REM. Radiation doses are often measured in mSv.  An effective dose of 1 Sv requires 1 GRAY of beta or gamma radiation, but only 0.05 Gy of alpha radiation or 0.1 Gy of neutron radiation.


source, radioactiveA quantity of material configured for radiation measurement.
Shelley, Sampling of Water and Wastewater, U.S.


spikeA known amount of TARGET ANALYTE added to the environmental sample to establish whether the method or procedure is appropriate for the analysis of the particular matrix and how the TARGET
Environmental -TF-ec,-i-i Agency Report EPA-600/4-77-039, August
ANALYTE responds when the environmental sample is prepared and measured, thereby estimating the bias introduced by the sample matrix.  Also termed MATRIX SPIKE.
1977.


standard reference materialA CERTIFIED REFERENCE MATERIAL issued by NIST in the United States.
38. "Calibration and Usage of Germanium De tectors for Measurement of Gamma-Ray Emission Rates of Radionuclides," ANSI N42.14-1978.


NIST certifies a standard reference material for specific chemical or physical properties and issues it with a certificate that reports the results of the characterization and indicates the intended use of the material.
39. D.C.


surveillanceContinual or frequent monitoring and verification of the status of an activity and the analysis of records to ensure that specified requirements are being fulfilled. A surveillance is less extensive and more frequent than an AUDIT and concentrates on a single item or activity.
Kocher (editor),
Nuclear Dec Data for Radionuclides Occurring in Routine R-lases from Nuclear Fel Ccle -- aciFtie Ua-kRidge N-ationVa-lab o ry-hror eort ORNL/
NUREG/TM-102, August 1977
40. M.J. Martin (editor), Nuclear Decay Data for Selected Radionuclides, OakRidge aiton
-iabo(atory Report ORNL-5114, March 1976.


surveyA systematic evaluation and documentation of radiological measurements with a correctly calibrated instrument or instruments that meet the sensitivity required by the objective of the evaluation.
41. International Directory of Certified Radio active Materials, Internatioa Atomic En--ergy Agency Report, STI/PUB/398, 1975.


target analyteA radionuclide on the list of radionuclides of interest or a radionuclide of concern for a project.
42.
 
test sourceThe final radioanalytical processing product or matrix (e.g., precipitate, solution, filter) that is introduced into a measurement instrument.  A test source is prepared from laboratory sample material for the purpose of determining its radioactive constituents.  See CALIBRATION SOURCE,
CHECK SOURCE, and SOURCE, RADIOACTIVE.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 23 total effective dose equivalent (TEDE)The sum of the effective dose equivalent (for external exposure)
and the committed effective dose equivalent (for internal exposure), expressed in units of Sv or rem (MARSSIM, Ref. 28).  See DOSE EQUIVALENT.
 
uncertaintyA parameter, usually associated with the result of a measurement, that characterizes the dispersion of the values that could reasonably be attributed to the measurement of interest (Chapter 19 of MARLAP, Ref. 20).
validation(1) Data validation, the evaluation of data to determine the presence or absence of an analyte and to establish the UNCERTAINTY of the measurement process for contaminants of concern.  Data validation qualifies the usability of each datum (after interpreting the impacts of exceptions identified during data VERIFICATION) by comparing the data produced with the MEASUREMENT
QUALITY OBJECTIVES and any other analytical process criteria contained in the ANALYTICAL
PROTOCOL SPECIFICATIONS developed in the planning process.  (2) Software validation, the confirmation by examination and provision of objective evidence that the particular criteria for a specific intended use are fulfilled.  Validation for a system is the set of activities ensuring and gaining confidence that the system is able to accomplish its intended use, goals, and objectives (ISO/IEC 15288-2002, Ref. 42).
verification(1) Data verification, a process that ensures that laboratory conditions and operations were compliant with the statement of work, sampling and analysis plan, and QUALITY ASSURANCE
PROJECT PLAN and that identifies problems, if present, that should be investigated during data validation.  Data verification compares the material delivered by the laboratory to these criteria (compliance) and checks for consistency and comparability of the data throughout the data package and for completeness of the results to ensure that all necessary documentation is available.  (2)
Software verification, the confirmation by examination and provision of objective evidence that specified criteria have been fulfilled.  A set of activities compares a system life cycle product against the necessary characteristics for that product.  The system life cycle products may include, but are not limited to, specified criteria, design description, and the system itself (ISO/IEC 15288-
2002, Ref. 42).
 
8 All NRC regulations listed herein are available electronically through the Public Electronic Reading Room on the NRCs public Web site, at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/cfr/.  Copies are also available for inspection or copying for a fee from the NRCs Public Document Room at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD;
the PDRs mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555; telephone (301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4209;
fax (301) 415-3548; email PDR@nrc.gov.
 
9 This regulation is available electronically through the U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys public Web site, at http://www.epa.gov/epacfr40/chapt-I.info/.
10
Purchase information is available through the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Web site at http://catalog.asme.org/Codes/PrintBook/NQA1_1994_Quality_Assurance.cfm.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 24 REFERENCES
1.
 
10 CFR Part 50, Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
2.
 
10 CFR Part 52, Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
3.
 
10 CFR Part 61, Licensing Requirements for Land Disposal of Radioactive Waste, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
4.
 
10 CFR Part 72, Licensing Requirements for the Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
5.
 
10 CFR Part 76, Certification of Gaseous Diffusion Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
6.
 
10 CFR Part 30, Rules of General Applicability to Domestic Licensing of Byproduct Material, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
7.
 
10 CFR Part 40, Domestic Licensing of Source Material, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
8.
 
10 CFR Part 70, Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
9.
 
10 CFR Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.8
10.
 
40 CFR Part 190, Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.9
11.
 
ASME NQA-1-1994, Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Facilities (with Addenda), American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, NY, 1994.10
 
11 Generic Letter 79065 is available electronically through the NRCs public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/
doc-collections/gen-comm/gen-letters/1979/gl79065.html.
 
12 All regulatory guides listed herein were published by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission or its predecessor, the U.S. Atomic Energy Commission.  Most are available electronically through the Electronic Reading Room on the NRCs public Web site, at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/reg-guides/.  Active guides may be purchased from the National Technical Information Service (NTIS).  Details may be obtained by contacting NTIS at
5285 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161, online at http://www.ntis.gov, by telephone at (800) 553-NTIS
(6847) or (703) 605-6000, or by fax to (703) 605-6900.  Copies are also available for inspection or copying for a fee from the NRCs Public Document Room (PDR), which is located at 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland; the PDRs mailing address is USNRC PDR, Washington, DC 20555-0001.  The PDR can also be reached by telephone at
(301) 415-4737 or (800) 397-4209, by fax at (301) 415-3548, and by email to PDR@nrc.gov.
 
13 Copies of all ISO publications cited in this document may be purchased from ISO in Geneva, Switzerland.
 
Purchase information is available through the ISO Web site at http://www.iso.org/iso/en/ISOOnline.frontpage.
 
14 Copies of all EPA quality system publications are available for download free of charge from the EPA public Web site at http://www.epa.gov/quality/qa_docs.html.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 25
12.
 
Generic Letter 79065, Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position on Radiological Environmental Monitoring, Revision 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC,
November 27, 1979.11
13.
 
Regulatory Guide 1.21, Measuring, Evaluating, and Reporting Radioactivity in Solid Wastes and Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.12
14.


Regulatory Guide 4.1, Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.12
Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercparison Studies Program, FY
15.
1977, EPA-6
4-7-001, J---ury 1977.


Regulatory Guide 4.14, Radiological Effluent and Environmental Monitoring at Uranium Mills, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.12
43. "Guidelines for the Documentation of Digital Computer Programs," ANSI N413-1974.
16.


Regulatory Guide 4.16, Monitoring and Reporting Radioactivity in Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Nuclear Fuel Processing and Fabrication Plants and Uranium Hexafluoride Production Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.12
4.15-9
17.


ISO/IEC 17025-2005, General Requirements for the Competence of Testing and Calibration Laboratories, International Standards Organization/International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, Switzerland, May 2005, Correction 1, August 2006.13
GLOSSARY
18.
Accuracy-a qualitative concept in the statis tical treatment of measurement data used to de scribe the agreement between the central tendency of a set of numbers and their correct value (or the accepted reference value). It is also used to describe the agreement between an individual value and the correct value (or the accepted reference value). 
Analytical Blank (Sample)-ideally, a sample having all of the constituents of the unknown sample except those to be determined. In ra dioanalytical practice, the term often refers to the radiochemical processing of carrier(s) or tracers without the sample matrix material.


EPA QA/G-4-2006, Guidance on Systematic Planning Using the Data Quality Objectives Process, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA 240/B-06/001, February 2006.14
"Blind" Replicate (Sample)-replicate samples that are not identified as replicates to the, per sons performing the analysis.
19.


EPA QA/G-5-2002, Guidance for Quality Assurance Project Plans, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/240/R-02/009, December 2002.14
Calibration-the process of determining the numerical relationship between the observed output of a measurement system and the value, based on reference standards, of the charac teristics being measured.
20.


NUREG-1576 (MARLAP), Multi-Agency Radiological Laboratory Analytical Protocols Manual, Volumes 1-3, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Energy, Department of Defense, Department of Homeland Security, National
Calibration Source-any radioactive source that is used for calibration of a measurement system.


15 Copies are available electronically through NRCs public Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/
Check Source (or instrument check source or performance check source)-a radioactive source used to determine if the detector and all elec tronic components of the system are operating correctly.
nuregs/staff/sr1576/ and from EPAs public Web site at http://www.epa.gov/radiation/marlap/links.htm.


16 Copies of all ANSI publications cited in this document may be purchased from the American National Standards Institute, 1819 L Street, NW, 6th floor, Washington, DC 20036.  Purchase information is available through the ANSI
Instrument Background-the response of the instrument in the absence of a radioactive sam ple or other radioactive source.
Web site at http://webstore.ansi.org/ansidocstore/default.asp.


17 Copies of all NIRMA Technical Guidance documents cited herein may be purchased from the Nuclear Information and Records Management Association, Inc., 10 Almas Road, Windham, NH; telephone (603) 432-6476;
Precision-a qualitative concept in the statis tical treatment of measurement data used to describe the dispersion of a set of numbers with respect to its central tendency.
fax (603) 432-3024; see the NIRMA Web site at http://www.nirma.org/member/publications.htm.


18 Copies of this standard are available for purchase from the HPS Web site at http://hps.org/hpssc/n13standards.html.
Quality Assurance (QA)-the planned and systematic actions that are necessary to pro vide adequate confidence in the results of a monitoring program.


Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 26 Institute of Standards and Technology, U.S. Geological Survey, and Food and Drug Administration, Washington, DC, July 2004.15
Quality Control (QC)-those quality assurance actions that provide a means to control and measure the characteristics of measurement equipment and processes to established re quirements.
21.


ANSI/ASQC E4-1994, Specifications and Guidelines for Quality Systems for Environmental Data Collection and Environmental Technology Programs, American National Standards Institute/American Society for Quality Control, New York, NY, 1994.16
Thus, quality assurance includes quality control.
22.


ANSI N42.23-2003, Measurement and Associated Instrumentation Quality Assurance for Radioassay Laboratories, American National Standards Institute, New York, NY, 2003.16
Reference Test Material-a large batch of homogeneous material from which aliquots may be taken for interlaboratory comparisons or for internal use by the laboratory. The material must be uniform but need not be standardized.
23.


NIRMA TG11, Authentication of Records and Media, Nuclear Information and Records Management Association, Inc., Windham, NH, 1998.17
Spiked Sample-a sample to which a known amount of radioactive material has been added.
24.


NIRMA TG15, Management of Electronic Records, Nuclear Information and Records Management Association, Inc., Windham, NH, 1998.17
Generally, spiked samples are submitted as unknowns to the analysts.
25.


NIRMA TG16, Software Configuration Management and Quality Assurance, Nuclear Information and Records Management Association, Inc., Windham, NH, 1998.17
Split §Saple-a homogeneous sample that is divided into parts, each of which is analyzed independently by separate laboratory organi zations.
26.


NIRMA TG21, Electronic Records Protection and Restoration, Nuclear Information and Records Management Association, Inc., Windham, NH, 1998.17
Standard (radioactive)
27.
Source-a radioactive source having an accurately known radionu clide content and radioactive decay rate or rate of particle or photon emission.


HPS/ANSI N13.1-1999, Sampling and Monitoring Releases of Airborne Radioactive Substances from the Stacks and Ducts of Nuclear Facilities, Health Physics Society (HPS), McLean, VA,
4.15-10
1999.18
28.
 
NUREG-1575 (MARSSIM), Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual, Revision 1 (EPA 402-R-97-016 Revision 1, DOE/EH-0624 Revision 1), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Environmental Protection Agency, Department of Energy, Washington, DC,
August 2000.15
29.
 
EPA QA/G-9S-2006, Data Quality Assessment:  Statistical Tools for Practitioners, U.S.
 
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/240/B-06/003, February 2006.14
 
19 Copies of all ASTM standards cited herein may be purchased from ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, P.O. Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959; see the ASTM International Web-based standards search tool at http://www.astm.org/cgi-bin/SoftCart.exe/NEWSITE_JAVASCRIPT/index.shtml?L+mystore+qkyo3147+117461063.
 
20
Copies of this standard are available for purchase from the IEEE Web site at http://standards.ieee.org/db/status/index.shtml.
 
21 Copies of this directive are available electronically from the EPAs public Web site at http://www.epa.gov/irmpoli8/archived/irm_galp/.
Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 27
30.
 
ASTM D7282-2006, New Standard Practice for Setup, Calibration, and Quality Control of Instruments Used for Radioactivity Measurements, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2006.19
31.
 
ASTM MNL 7A-2002, Manual on Presentation of Data and Control Chart Analysis, 7th Edition, American Society for Testing and Materials, West Conshohocken, PA, 2002.19
32.
 
ANSI N42.22-1995, Traceability of Radioactive Sources to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and Associated Instrument Quality Control, American National Standards Institute, New York, NY, 1995 (R2002).16
33.
 
ANSI N42.18-2004, American National Standard Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring Radioactivity in Effluents, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc., New York, NY, 1980 (R2004).16
34.
 
EPA QA/G-8-2002, Guidance on Environmental Data Verification and Data Validation, U.S.
 
Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, EPA/240/R-02/004, November 2002.14
35.
 
IEEE 1063, IEEE Standard for Software User Documentation, Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. (IEEE), Piscataway, New Jersey, December 2001.20
36.
 
EPA Directive 2185, Good Automated Laboratory Practices, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Office of Information Resources Management, 1995.21
37.
 
Regulatory Guide 1.168, Verification, Validation, Reviews, and Audits for Digital Computer Software Used in Safety Systems of Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.12
38.
 
ANSI N42.14-1999, Calibration and Use of Germanium Spectrometers for the Measurement of Gamma-Ray Emission Rates of Radionuclides, American National Standards Institute, New York, NY, 1999.16
39.
 
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), International Vocabulary of Basic and General Terms in Metrology, 2nd Edition, Geneva, Switzerland, 1993.13
40.
 
ISO Guide 30, Terms and Definitions Used in Connection with Reference Materials, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1992.13
 
22 Copies are available electronically through the IUPAC public Web site at http://www.iupac.org/publications/pac/1994/6612/index.html.
 
Rev. 2 of RG 4.15, Page 28
41.
 
International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC), Nomenclature for Radioanalytical Chemistry, Pure and Applied Chemistry, 66:12, pp. 2513-2526, 1994.22
42.


ISO/IEC 15288-2002, System Engineering  System Life Cycle Processes, International Organization for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2002.13}}
UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
WASHINGTON. D.C. 2M81 FIRST-CLASS MAIL
POSTAGE & FEES Pt U.SN NC
WASH 0 C
PERMIT No SJj OFFICIAL BUSINESS
PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $3D0}}


{{RG-Nav}}
{{RG-Nav}}

Latest revision as of 02:08, 17 January 2025

Quality Assurance for Radiological Monitoring Programs (Normal Operations) - Effluent Streams and Environment
ML003739945
Person / Time
Issue date: 02/28/1979
From:
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To:
References
Reg Guide 4.15, Rev 1
Download: ML003739945 (11)


U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Revision I

February 1979 W) REGULATORY GUIDE

OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORY GUIDE 4.15 QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAMS

(NORMAL OPERATIONS) -

EFFLUENT STREAMS AND THE ENVIRONMENT

A.

INTRODUCTION

This guide describes a method acceptable to the NRC staff for designing a program to as sure the quality of the results of measurements of radioactive materials in the effluents and the environment outside of nuclear facilities during normal operations.

The. NRC regulations that require the control of releases of radioactive materials from nuclear facilities, that require the measurements of ra dioactive materials in the effluents and envi K ronment outside of these facilities, that require quality assurance programs and establish quality assurance requirements for certain fa cilities, or that authorize license conditions not otherwise authorized in the regulations are as follows:

"Section 20.106, "Radioactivity in Effluents to

"\\Unrestricted Areas,"

of

10 CFR

Part 20,

tA

tdards for Protection Against Radiation,"

des that a licensee shall not release to an unre'atricted area radioactive materials in con centrations that exceed limits specified in

10 CFR Part 20 or as otherwise authorized in a license issued by the Commission.

Section

20.201,

"Surveys," of 10 CFR Part 20 further requires that a licensee conduct surveys, including measurements of levels of radiation or concentrations of radioactive materials, as necessary to demonstrate compliance with the regulations in 10 CFR Part 20.

Paragraph (c) of Section 20.1, "Purpose," of

10 CFR Part 20 states that every reasonable effort should be made by NRC licensees to maintain radiation exposure, and releases of radioactive materials in effluents to unrestrict ed areas, as far below the limits specified in Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.

USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES

Regulatory Guides are issued to deicibe and make available to the public methods acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of tn Commission's regulations, to delnst technlques used by the staff in evslu sting specific problems or poeulsted accidents, or to provide guidance to epplcents. Regulatory Guides are not substltutes for regulations, and com

=iInce wIth them is not requied. Methods end solutions different from those est out in the guides win be acceptable if they provide a bemb for the findings reluisite to the isuance or continuance of a permit or lice by the Comnission.

Comments snd suggestions for improver ntsin these guides ar enouragd at eol times, and guides wiN be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and to rflect now informatron or xporience. This guide wss revised as a result Of substantive comments received from the public end additional steff review.

Part 20 as is reasonably achievable, taking into account the state of technology and the economics of improvements in relation to public health and safety and to the utilization of atomic energy in the public interest.

Section 30.34, "Terms and Conditions of Li censes," of 10 CFR Part 30, "Rules of General Applicability to Licensing of Byproduct Mate rial," provides that the Commission may incor porate in any byproduct material license such terms and conditions as it deems appropriate or necessary in order to protect health.

Section 40.41, "Terms and Conditions of Li censes,"

of

10 CFR Part 40,

"Licensing of Source Material," provides that the Commission may incorporate in any source material license such terms and conditions as it deems appro priate or necessary to protect health.

Section 50.50,

"Issuance of Licenses and Construction Permits," of 10 CFR Part 50, "Li censing of Production and Utilization Facil ities," provides that each operating license for a nuclear power plant issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission will contain such condi tions and limitations as the Commission deems appropriate and necessary.

Section 70.32,

"Conditions of Licenses," of

10 CFR Part 70,

"Special Nuclear Material,"

provides that the Commission may incorporate such terms and conditions as it deems appro priate or necessary to protect health.

Section IV.B

of Appendix I,

"Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Con ditions for Operation to Meet the Criterion 'As Low As Is Reasonably Achievable' for Radio active Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Effluents," to 10 CFR Part 50,

"Licensing of Production and Utilization Facil ities," requires that licensees establish an ap- Comment should be sent to the Secretary of the Commison, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 2015. Attentio: Docketing aGr Service Branch.

The gukles are issued in the following ten brood divisiio:

1. Power Reactors

6. Products

2. Research and Tert Reactor

7. Transportation

3. Fuels and Materials Facilities B. Occupational oe-lfth

4. Environmental and Siting

9. Antitrust end Financial Review

5. Materials and Plant Protection

10. General Requests for single copies of issued guides (which may be reproduced) or for placement on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D.C. 2066., Attention:

Director, Division of Technical Information and Document Control.

propriate surveillance and monitoring program to provide data on quantities of radioactive material released in liquid and gaseous efflu ents and to provide data on measurable levels of radiation and radioactive materials in the environment.

Section III.B of Appendix I

to

10 CFR Part 50 provides certain effluent and environmental monitoring requirements with respect to radioactive iodine if estimates of exposure are made on the basis of existing conditions and if potential changes in land and water usage and food pathways could result in exposures in excess of the guidelines of Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.

General Design Criterion 60, "Control of re leases of radioactive materials to the environ ment," of Appendix A,

"General Design Cri teria for Nuclear Power Plants,"

to 10 CFR

Part 50

requires that nuclear power plant designs provide means to control suitably the release of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents. General Design Criterion 64,

"Monitoring radioactivity releases," of Appen dix A to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that nuclear power plant designs provide means for monitor ing effluent discharge paths and the plant environs for radioactivity that may be released from normal operations, including anticipated operational occurrences, and from postulated accidents.

General Design Criterion 1, "Quality stand ards and records," of Appendix A to 10 CFR

Part 50 requires that a quality assurance pro gram be established for those structures, sys tems, and components of a nuclear power plant that are important to safety in order to provide adequate assurance that they will satisfactorily perform their safety functions.

Appendix B, "Quality Assurance Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants and Fuel Reprocessing Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50 establishes quality assurance requirements for the design, con struction, and operation of those structures, systems, and components of these facilities that prevent or mitigate the consequences of postu lated accidents that could cause undue risk to the health and safety of the public.

The need of quality assurance is implicit in all requirements for effluent and environmental monitoring, and this need has been widely recognized.

Regulatory Guide 1.21,

"Measur ing, Evaluating, and Reporting Radioactivity in Solid Wastes and Releases of Radioactive Mate rials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants;"

Regulatory Guide 4.1, "Programs for Monitor ing Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Power Plants;" Regulatory Guide 4.8, "Envi ronmental Technical Specifications for Nuclear Power Plants;"

and Regulatory Guide 4.14,

"Measuring, Evaluating, and Reporting Radio activity in Releases of Radioactive Material in Liquid and Airborne Effluents From Uranium Mills,"

all give some guidance on means for assuring the quality of the measurements of ra dioactive materials in effluents and the envi ronment outside of nuclear facilities. More com plete and extensive guidance on this subject is provided in this document for nuclear power reactor facilities and for other facilities for which radiological monitoring is required by the NRC.

This guidance does not identify separately the activities that are within the scope of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50. How ever, this guidance is intended to be consist ent with the requirements of Appendixes A and B to 10 CFR Part 50 in that quality assurance requirements should be consistent with the importance of the activity. For the monitoring of production and utilization facilities that is within the scope of Appendix B to 10 CFR

Part 50, other regulatory guides that provide guidance on meeting the quality assurance re quirements of Appendix B to 10 CFR Part 50

should also be consulted.

B.

DISCUSSION 1 As used in the context of this guide, quality assurance comprises all those planned and sys tematic actions that are necessary to provide adequate confidence in the results of a mon itoring program, and quality control comprises those qualit assurance actions that provide a means to control and measure the character istics of measurement equipment and processes to established requirements; therefore, quality assurance includes quality control.

To assure that radiological monitoring meas urements are reasonably valid, organizations performing these measurements have found it necessary to establish quality assuraice pro grams.

These programs are needed for the following reasons:

(1) to identify deficiencies in the sampling and measurement processes to those responsible for these operations so that corrective action can be taken, and (2)

to I

obtain some measure of confidence in the results of the monitoring programs in order to assure the regulatory agencies and the public that the results are valid.

Existing published guidance on specific qual ity assurance actions that are applicable to ra diological monitoring is limited and, in general, is restricted to quality control practices for radioanalytical laboratories (Refs.

1-5). How ever, quality assurance should be applied to all steps of the monitoring process, which may include sampling, shipment of samples, receipt of samples in the laboratory, preparation of samples, measurement of radioactivity, data reduction, date evaluation, and reporting of the monitoring results.

'Definitions of special terms used in this guide are given in the giossary on page 4.15-10.

4.15-2

The scope of this guide is limited to the ele ments of a quality assurance program, which is a planned, systematic, and documented pro gram that includes quality control. Guidance on principles and good practice in the monitoring process itself and guidance on activities that can affect the quality of the monitoring results (e.g., design of facilities and equipment) are outside the scope of this guide. However, some references are provided to documents that do provide some guidance in these areas.

The citation of these references does not constitute an endorsement of all of the guidance in these documents by the NRC staff. Rather, these references are provided as sources of informa tion to aid the licensee and the licensee's con tractors in developing and maintaining a

monitoring program.

Every organization actually performing efflu ent and environmental monitoring, whether an NRC

licensee or the licensee's contractor, should include the quality assurance program elements presented'in this guide.

C.

REGULATORY

POSITION

The quality assurance program of each organization performing effluent or environ mental monitoring of nuclear facilities for nor mal operations should be documented by written policies and procedures and records.

These documents should include the elements given in this section.

In addition to its own program, a licensee should require any contractor or subcontractor performing monitoring activities for the li censee to provide a quality assurance program and to routinely provide program data summaries (sufficiently detailed to permit on going quality 'assurance program evaluation by the licensee) consistent with the provisions of this guide, as follows:

1. Organizational Structure and Responsibilities of Managerial and Operational Personnel The structure of the organization as it re lates to the management and operation of the monitoring program(s),

including quality as surance policy and functions, should be pre sented. The authorities, duties, and responsi bilities of the positions within this organization down to the first-line supervisory level should be described. This should include responsibil ities for review and approval of written proce dures and for the preparation, review, and evaluation of monitoring data and reports.

Persons and organizations performing quality assurance functions should have sufficient authority and organizational freedom to identify quality problems; to initiate, recommend, or provide solutions; and to verify implementation of solutions.

2. Specification of Qualifications of Personnel The qualifications of individuals performing radiological monitoring to carry out their assigned functions should be specified and documented (e.g., as in a job description).

An indoctrination and orientation program, appropriate to the size and complexity of the organization and to the activities performed, I

should provide that (a)

personnel performing quality-related activities are trained and quali fied in the principles and techniques of the ac tivities performed, (b)

persoiinel are made aware of the nature and goals of the quality assurance program, and (c) proficiency of per sonnel who perform activities affecting quality is maintained by. retraining, reexamining, and recertifying or by periodic performance re views, as appropriate.

3. Operating Procedures and Instructions Written procedures should be prepared, re viewed, and approved for activities involved in carrying out the monitoring program, including sample collection; packaging, shipment, and receipt of samples for offsite analysis; prepa ration and analysis of samples; maintenance, storage, and use of radioactivity reference standards; calibration and checks of radiation and radioactivity measurement systems; and reduction, evaluation, and reporting of data.

Individuals who review and approve these pro cedures should be knowledgeable in the sub jects of the procedures.

Guidance on principles and good practice in many of these activities is presented in NRC

regulatory guides (Refs. 6-9) and other publi cations (Refs.

2-5, 10-35). In addition to these publications, Scientific Committee 18A of the NCRP has prepared NCRP Report 58, "A Hand book of Radioactivity Measurements Proce dures," (Ref. 36) that is a revision of NCRP

Report 28, NBS Handbook 80,

"A

Manual of Radioactivity Procedures."

4. Records The records necessary to document the ac tivities performed in the monitoring program should be specified in the quality assurance program.

One key aspect of quality control is maintain ing the ability to track and control a sample in its progress through the sequence of monitor ing processes.

Records to accomplish this should cover the following processes: field and inplant collection of samples for subsequent analysis, including sample description; sample receipt and laboratory identification coding;

sample preparation and radiochemical process ing (e.g., laboratory notebooks); radioactivity measurements of samples, instrument back grounds, and analytical blanks;

and data reduction and verification.

4.15-3

Quality control records for laboratory counting systems should include the results of measurements of radioactive check sources, calibration sources, backgrounds, and blanks.

Records relating to overall laboratory per formance should include the results of analysis of quality control samples such as analytical blanks, duplicates, interlaboratory cross-check samples and other quality control analyses; use of standards (radioactivity) to prepare working standards; preparation and standardization of carrier solutions; and calibration of analytical balances.

Additional records that are needed should in clude the calibration of inline radiation detec tion equipment, air samplers, and thermo luminescence dosimetry systems; verification and documentation of computer programs;

qualifications of personnel;

and results of audits.

The minimum period of retention of the rec ords should be specified. For nuclear power plants, requirements for record retention are

-given in the plant technical specifications. In general, for other types of facilities, only the final results of the monitoring programs need be retained for the life of the facility.

5. Quality Control in Sampling (Including Pack aging, Shipping, and Storage of Samples)

Continuous sampling of liquids and gases in volves the measurement of sample flow rates and/or sample volumes. The accuracy of the devices used for this purpose should be deter mined on a regularly scheduled basis, and ad justments should be made as needed to bring the performance of the devices within specified limits. The reslits of these calibrations should be recorded. The frequency of these calibra tions should be specified and should be based on the required accuracy, purpose, degree of usage, stability characteristics, and other con ditions affecting the measurement. Procedures for continuous sampling should use methods that are designed to ensure that the sample is representative of the material volumes sampled.

The collection efficiencies of the samplers used should be documented; usually such documen tation is available from manufacturers of the sampling equipment.

Procedures for grab samples should include steps designed to ensure that the sample is representative of the material sampled.

Rep licate grab samples should be taken periodically to determine the reproducibility of sampling.

Procedures for sampling, packaging, ship ping, and storage of samples should be designed to maintain the integrity of the sample from time of collection to time of analysis.

Aqueous samples may present a particular problem in this regard, and one of the most severe problems has been encountered with aqueous samples of radioactive wastes from operating nuclear reactors (Ref. 23).

Guidance on the principles and practice of sampling in environmental monitoring is pro vided in several publications (Refs.

2,

4, 5,

21, 23-31, 33, 35, 37). In addition, workers at the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) have published the results of a survey of informa tion on sampling, sample handling, and long term storage for environmental materials (Ref. 15). Some guidance on the principles and practice of air sampling is provided in Refer ences 17,

19,

24, 28-31,

33. Guidance on the principles and practice of water sampling is provided in numerous publications (Refs.

13,

14, 25-27, 35, 37).

6. Quality Control in the Radioanalytical Laboratory

6.1 Radionuclide Reference Standards-Use for Calibration of Radiation Measurements Systems Reference standards are used to determine counting efficiencies for specific radionuclides or, in the case of gamma-ray-spectrometry systems, to determine counting efficiency .as a function of gamma-ray energy. A counting effi ciency value is used to convert a sample count ing rate to the decay rate of a radionuclide or to a radionuclide concentration.

Guidance on the calibration and usage of germanium de tectors for measurement of gamma-ray emission rates of radionuclides has been prepared as an ANSI

standard (Ref. 38).

For converting gamma-ray emission rates to nuclear decay rates, two reports from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (Refs. 39 and 40) provide useful compilations of gamma-ray intensities and other nuclear decay data for radionuclides in routine releases from nuclear fuel cycle facilities. The data from Reference 40 are included in NCRP

Report 58 (Ref. 36).

Radionuclide standards that have been certified by NBS or standards that have been obtained from suppliers who participate in measurement assurance activities with NBS 2 1

2Satisfactory measurement assurance interactions between source suppliers and NBS involve two basic mechanisms: (1)

The supplier submits a calibrated radioactivity source (pref erably selected from a batch or prepared series of sources) to NBS

for confirmation that the supplier's calibration value agrees with NBS results within certain specified limits or (2)

NBS provides calibrated radioactivity sources of undisclosed activity (test samples) to a supplier who is able to make activity or emission-rate measurements on the source that agree within certain specified limits with the measurements of NBS. For the routine production of commercial radioactivity standards, the first mechanism is preferable to the second but is not always feasible. These two mechanisms are used both in Measurements Assurance Programs (MAPs) with key laboratories and in other measurement assurance activities.

"Two key laboratory source suppliers participate in MAPs with NBS and use both of the two basic mechanisms: (1) The NRC

reference laboratory for the Confirmatory Measurements Pro gram (for effluent monitoring) of the NRC Office of Inspection and Enforcement and (2) The EPA Environmental Monitoring and Support Laboratory in Las Vegas, which prepares and

4.15-4

should be used when such standards are avail able.

In these measurement assurance activ ities, the supplier's calibration value should agree with the NBS value within the overall uncertainty stated by the supplier in its certi fication of the same batch of sources (when these are sampled for measurement by NBS) or in its certification of similar sources.

An "International Directory of Certified Ra dioactive Materials" has been published by the International Atomic Energy Agency (Ref. 41).

Acceptable standards for certain natural ra dionuclides may be prepared from commercially available high-purity chemicals. For example, potassium-40 standards for gross beta-particle measurements or gamma-ray spectrometry may be prepared gravimetrically from dried reagent-grade potassium chloride.

The details of the preparation of working standards from certified standard solutions should be recorded.

The working standard should be prepared in the same form as the un known samples, or close approximation thereto.

Efficiency calibrations should be checked periodically (typically monthly to yearly) with standard sources.

In addition, these checks should be made whenever the need is in dicated, such as when a significant change in the measurement system is detected by routine measurements with a check source.

6.2 Performance Checks of Radiation Measurement Systems Determination of the background counting rate and the response of each radiation detec tion system to appropriate check sources should be performed on a scheduled basis for systems in routine use. The results of these measurements should be recorded in a log and plotted on a

control chart.

Appropriate distributes calibrated radioactivity standards primarily to lab oratories involved in radiological environmental monitoring.

Additionally, seven major radiopharmaceutical manufacturers (some of which supply radioactivity standards commercially)

participate in a MAP organized by the Atomic Industrial Forum and NBS. In this MAP, NBS distributes standards as test sam ples to the manufacturer (second mechanism) and receives cer tified samples from the manufacturer for verification by NBS

(first mechanism).

Measurement assurance interactions that use the first me chanism are available via special NBS calibration service

s. NBS

will, on request and for a fee, perform calibrations of repre sentative samples of standards provided by the supplier for NBS confirmation of the supplier's reported values, Calibration services are available for a large variety of radionuclides pro vided certain requirements (as to sample stability and suitable activity range) are met. Measurement assurance interactions that use the second mechanism are available via the issuance of test standards by NBS. For a nominal charge (beyond the price of the standard),

NBS

radioactivity Standard Reference Materials (SRMs) can be purchased as test sources of undis closed activity that can be used to demonstrate agreement.

within certain specified limits, between the source supplier's measurements and those of NBS. A Report of Test (for the first mechanism) or a Report of Measurement (second mechanism),

containing both the source supplier's and NBS values, is issued by NBS to document the source supplier's participation in the measurement assurance activity.

investigative and corrective action should be taken when the measurement value falls outside the predetermined control value.

A check source for determining changes in counting rate or counting efficiency should be of sufficient radiochemical purity to allow correction for decay but need not have an accurately known disintegration rate, i.e.,

need not be a standard source.

For systems in which samples are changed manually, check sources are usually measured daily.

For systems with automatic sample changers, it may be more convenient to include the check source within each batch of samples and thus obtain a measurement of this source within each counting cycle. For proportional counter systems,- the plateau(s) or response(s)

to the check source(s) should be checked after each gas change.

Background measurements should be made frequently, usually daily or before each use, to ensure that levels are within the expected range. For systems with automatic sample changers, background meas urements should be included within each meas urement cycle.

For alpha- and gamma-ray-spectrometry sys tems, energy-calibration sources (i.e.,

a source containing a radionuclide, or mixture of radionuclides, emitting two or more alpha or gamma rays of known energies) are counted to determine the relationship between channel number and alpha- or gamma-ray energy. The frequency of these energy calibration checks depends on the stability of the system but usually is in the range of daily to weekly. The results of these measurements should be recorded and compared to predetermined limits in order to determine whether or not system gain and zero level need adjustment.

Adjustments should be made as necessary.

Additional checks needed for spectrometry systems are the energy resolution of the system and the count rate (or counting efficiency) of a check source. These should be determined periodically (usually weekly to monthly for energy resolution and daily to weekly for count rate)

and after system cnanges, such as power failures or repairs, to determine if there has been any significant change in the system.

The results of these measurements should be recorded.

6.3 Analysis of Quality Control Samples The analysis of quality control samples pro vides a means to determine the precision and accuracy of the monitoring processes and in cludes both intralaboratory and interlaboratory measurements.

The analysis of replicate samples (containing significant detectable activity)

provides a

means to determine precision; the analysis of

4.15-5

samples containing known concentrations of radionuclides provides a means to determine accuracy.

The analysis of laboratory blanks provides a

means to detect and measure radioactive contamination of analytical samples, a common source of error in. radiochemical analysis of low-levw:1 samples. The analysis of analytical blanks also provides information on the adequacy of background subtraction, particularly for environmental samples.

The fraction of the analytical effort needed for the analysis of quality conti-ol samples depends to a large extent on (1) the mixture of sample types in a particular laboratory in a particular time period and (2)

the history of performance of that laboratory in the analysis pf quality control samples.

However, for environmental laboratories, it is found that at least 5%, and typically 10%, of the analytical load should consist of quality control samples.

6.3.1 Intralaboratory Analyses Replicate samples, usually duplicates, should be analyzed routinely. These replicates should be prepared from samples that are as homo geneous as possible, such as well-stirred or mixed liquids (water or milk)

and solids (dried, ground, or screened soil, sediment, or vegetation;

or the ash of these materials).

These samples may be replicates of monitoring program samples, replicates of reference test materials, or both. The size and other physical and chemical characteristics of the replicate samples should be similar to those of single samples analyzed routinely.

The analysis of the replicate samples as blind replicates is desirable but is not practicable for all laboratories or for all types of samples. For example, in small laboratories it may not be practicable to prevent the analysts from being aware that particular samples are replicates of one another.

Obtaining true replicates of all types of samples also is not practicable. For example, obtaining replicate samples of airborne mate rials usually is not practicable on a routine basis because it requires either a separate sampling system or splitting a single sample (e.g., cutting a filter in half). Use of replicate samplers usually is not economically feasible and splitting of samples results in replicates that do not represent the usual sample size or measurement configuration (counting geometry)

for direct measurement.

However, simulated samples of airborne materials may be prepared in replicate and submitted for analysis as unknowns.

Analysis of intralaboratory blank and spiked samples is an important part of each environ mental laboratory's quality control program. To check for contamination from reagents and other sources, known analytical blank samples should be included frequently in groups of un known environmental samples that are analyzed radiochemically.

Spiked and blank samples should be submitted for analysis as unknowns to provide an intralaboratory basis for estimat ing the accuracy of the analytical results.

These blanks and spikes may include blind replicates.

6.3.2 Interlaboratory Analyses Analysis of effluent and environmental sam ples split with one or more independent labora tories is an important part of the quality as surance program because it provides a means to detect errors that might not be detected by intralaboratory measurements alone.

When possible, these independent laboratories should be those whose measurements are traceable to NBS.

3 Analysis of split field samples, such as sam ples of milk, water, soil or sediment, and vegetation, is particularly important in envi ronmental monitoring programs to provide an independent test of the ability to measure radionuclides at the very low concentrations present in most environmental samples.

The NRC Office of Inspection and Enforce ment conducts a Confirmatory Measurements Program for laboratories of licensees that meas ure nuclear reactor effluents. The analyses of liquid waste holdup tank samples, gas samples, charcoal cartridges, and stack particulate filters are included in this program.

The results of the licensee's measurements of sam ples split with the NRC are compared to those of an NRC reference laboratory whose measure ments are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. Thus the results of this comparison provide to the NRC an objective measure of the accuracy of the licensee's analyses.

Laboratories of licensees or their contractors that perform environmental measurements should participate in the EPA's Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercomparison Stud ies (Cross-check)

Program, or an equivalent program. This participation should include all of the determinations (sample medium/radionu clide combinations) that are both offered by EPA and included in the licensee's environ mental monitoring program. Participation in the EPA program provides an objective measure of the accuracy of the analyses because the EPA

measurements are traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. If the mean result of a cross-check analysis exceeds the control limit as defined by EPA (Ref. 42), an investigation should be made to determine the reason for this deviation and corrective action should be taken

3NBS and NRC staffs recognize the need for a clearer defini tion of the term "traceability" as it applies Lo radiation and radioactivity measurements. These staffs are working together to develop such a

statement, which will be published separately.

4.15-6

as necessary.

Similarly, an investigation and any necessary corrective action should take place if the "normalized range," as calculated by EPA, exceeds the control limit, as defined by EPA.

A series of results that is within the control limits but that exhibits a trend toward these limits may indicate a need for an investi gat.ion to determine the reason for the trend.

6.4 Computational Checks Procedures for the computation of the con centration of radioactive materials should in clude the independent verification of a sub stantial fraction of the results of the computa tion by a person other than the one performing the original computation. For computer calcula tions, the input data should be verified by a knowledgeable individual. All computer pro grams should be documented and verified before initial routine use and after each modifi cation of the program. The verification process should include verification, by a knowledgeable individual, of the algorithm used and test runs in which the output of the computer computa tion for given input can be compared to "true"

values that are known or determined independ ently of the computer calculation. Documenta tion of the program should include a descrip tion of the algorithm and, if possible, a

current listing of the program. Guidelines for the documentation of digital computer programs are given in ANSI N413-1974 (Ref. 43).

7. Quality Control for Continuous Effluent Monitoring Systems Guidance on specification apd performance of onsite instrumentation for continuously mon itoring radioactivity in effluents is given in ANSI N13.10-1974 (Ref. 18).

The specified frequency of calibration for a particular system should be based on con siderations of the nature and stability of that system. For nuclear power plants, specific re quirements for calibrations and checks of par ticular effluent monitoring systems usually are included in the technical specifications for the plant.

Initial calibration of each measuring system should be performed using one or more of the reference standards that are certified by the National Bureau of Standards or standards that have been obtained from suppliers that partici pate in measurement assurance activities with NBS

(see 'footnote

2).

These radionuclide standards should permit calibrating the system over its intended range of energy and rate capabilities. For nuclear power plants, sources that have been related to this initial calibration should be used to check this initial calibration at least once per 18 months (normally during refueling outages).

Periodic correlations should be made during operation to relate monitor readings to the concentrations and/or release rates of radio active material in the monitored release path.

These correlations should be based on the results of analyses for' specific radionuclides in grab samples from the release path.

Any flow-rate measuring devices associated with the system should be calibrated to deter mine actual flow rates at the conditions of temperature and pressure under which the system will be operated.

These flow rate devices should be recalibrated periodically.

Whenever practicable, a check source that is actuated remotely should be installed for in tegrity checks of the detector and the asso ciated electrical system.

8. Review and Analysis of Data Procedures for review and analysis of data should be developed. These procedures should cover examination of data from actual samples and from quality-control activities for reason ableness and consistency.

These reviews should be performed on a timely basis. General criteria for recognizing deficiencies in data should be established.

Provisions should be made for investigation and correction of recognized deficiencies and for documentation of these actions.

9. Audits Planned and periodic audits should be made to verify implementation of the quality assur ance program. The audits should be performed by individuals qualified in radiochemistry and monitoring techniques who do not have direct responsibilities in the areas being audited.

Audit results should be documented and re viewed by management having responsibility in the area audited. Followup action, including reaudit of deficient areas, should be taken where indicated.

D.

IMPLEMENTATION

The purpose of this section is to provide in formation to applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide.

Except in those cases in which the applicant or licensee proposes an acceptable alternative method, the staff will use the methods de scribed herein in evaluating an applicant's or licensee's capability for and performance in complying with specified portions of the Com mission's regulations after March 30, 1979.

If an applicant or licensee wishes to use the method described in this regulatory guide on or before March 30, 1979, the pertinent portions of the application or the licensee's performance will be evaluated on the basis of this guide.

4.15-7

REFERENCES

1. Section 6. 2,

"Validation of Analyses,"

Chapter 6,

"Validity of Results," Methods of Radiochemical Analysis, World Health Organiza tion, Geneva, 1966.

2. "Analytical Quality Control Methods," Envi ronmental Radioactivity Surveillance Guide, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency Report, ORP/SID 72-2, June 1972.

3. Environmental Radiation Measurements, Re port of NCRP SC-35, NCRP Report No.

50,

1976.

4. L. G.

Kanipe, Handbook for Analytical Quality Control in Radioanalytical Laboratories, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-600/7-77-088, August 1977.

5. J.M. Mullins, C. Blincoe, J.C. Daly, et al.,

"Radiochemistry," Chapter 17, pp. 1007

1031, Quality Assurance Practices for Health Laboratories, Stanley L.

Inhorn 7'editor, American Public Health Association, 1978.

6. Regulatory Guide 1.21, "Measuring, Eval uating, and Reporting Radioactivity in Solid Wastes and Releases of Radioactive Materials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Plants."

7. Regulatory Guide 4.5, "Measurements of Radionuclides in the Environment-Sampling and Analyses of Plutonium in Soil."

8. Regulatory Guide 4.6, "Measurements of Radionuclides in the Environment-Strontium-89 and Strontium-90 Analyses."

9. Regulatory Guide 4.13,

"Performance, Testing, and Procedural Specifications for Thermoluminescence Dosimetry: Environmental Applications."

10.

HASL Procedures Manual, U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration Report, HASL-300, 1972 (updated annually).

11.

A Guide for Environmental Radiological Surveillance at ERDA Installations, Energy Re:

search and Development Administration Report, ERDA 77-24, March 1977.

12. Handbook of Radiochemical Analytical Meth ods, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency Report, EPA-680/4-75-001. February 1975.

13. Standard Methods for the Examination of Water and Wastewater, Thirteenth Edition, American Public Health Association, 1975.

14. Handbook for Samplin and Sample Pres ervation of Water and Wastewater, U.S. Envi- ronmental Protection Agency Report, Office of Research and Development, Environmental Mon itoring Support Laboratory, EPA-600/4-76-049, September 1976.

15. E.J. Maienthal and D.A. Becker, "A Sur vey on Current Literature on Sampling, Sample Handling, and Long-Term Storage for Environ mental Materials,"

Interface

5

(#4),

49-62

(1976).

Also available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S.

Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, as NBS Tech nical Note #929, October 1976, C 13.46:929, S/N 003-003-01694-2.

16. Tritium Measurement Techniques, Report of NCRP SC-36, NCRP Report No. 47, 1976.

17. "Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities," ANSI N13.1

1969Property "ANSI code" (as page type) with input value "ANSI N13.1</br></br>1969" contains invalid characters or is incomplete and therefore can cause unexpected results during a query or annotation process..

18. "Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring Radioactivity in Effluents," ANSI N13.10-1974.

19. Air .Smlng Instruments for Evaluation of Atmospheric Conaminants Fourth Edition, American Conference of Industrial Hygienists,

1972.

20. Users' Guide for Radioactivity Standards, Subcommittee on Radiochemistry and Subcom mittee on the Use of Radioactivity Standards, Committee on Nuclear Science, National Academy of Sciences-National Research Council Report, NAS-NS-3115, February 1974.

21. Environmental Impact Monitoring for Nu clear Power Plants, Source Book of Monitorinig Methods, Vol. 1, Atomic Induastrial Forum Re port, AIF/NESP-004, February 1975.

22. Instrumentation for Environmental Monitor ing: Radiation, Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory Report, LBL-1, Vol. 3, First Ed.,

May 1972;

First update, February 1973; Second update, October 1973.

23. C.W. Sill, "Problems in Sample Treatment in Trace Analysis," National Bureau of Stand ards Special Publication 4-22, Accuracy in Trace Analysis:

Samplin, Sampl Handling, and Analysis, pp. 463-490, August 1976.

24. "General Principles for Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials," International Standard, ISO-2889, 1975.

Manual of Methods for Chemical Analysis of Water and Wastes, EP--625/6-74-003, U.S.

Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Technology Transfer, Washington, D.C. 20460,

1974.

4.15-8

26. "Standard Practices for Sampling Water,"

Method D 3370-76, Annual Book of ASTM Stand ards (Part 31),

Water, American Society for Tthing and MaterhW, Philadelphia, PA, 1977.

27. Biological Field and Laboratory Methods for Measuring the Qu'ty of Surace Waters and Effluients, EPA- 670/473S-001, Ofice -o Re search and Development, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, July 1973.

28. G.G. Eadie and D.E. Bernhardt, "Sampling and Data Reporting Considerations for Air borne Particulate Activity,"

U.S.

Environ mental Protection Agency Technical Note ORP/LV-76-9, December, 1976.

29. A.J. Breslin, "Guidance for Air Sampling at Nuclear Facilities," U.S. Energy Research and Development Administration Report HASL

312, November 1976.

30. "Reference Method for the Determination of Suspended Particulates in the Atmosphere (High. Volume Method),"

Quality Assurance Handbook for Air Pollution Measurement Sys tems, Vo-ui If-Amb-ient Air Specific Methods, e-tion 2, U.S.

Envir-a-ent-I

Protection Agency Report EPA-600/4-77-027a, May 1977.

31. E.D. Harward (editor), Program Report:

Workshop on Methods for Measuring Radiation In and Around ranium iills, report based on presentations made at the workshop held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, May 23-26,

1977.

Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc., August 1977.

32. Measurement of Low-Level Radioactivity, International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements (ICRU) Report 22, June 1,

1972.

33. American Public Health Association Inter society Committee on Methods of Air Sampling and Analysis, Morris Katz (editor), Methods of Air Sampling and Analysis, Second Edition, American Public Health Association, 1977.

34. L.H.

Ziegler and H.M.

Hunt, Quality Control for Environmental Measurements Gamma-Ray Spectrometry, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Report EPA-660/7-77-14, December 1977.

35. L.L. Thatcher, V.J. Janzer, and K.W.

Edwards,

"Methods for the Determination of Radioactive Substances in Water and Fluvial Sediments,"

Chapter A5, Book B (Laboratory Analysis)

of Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United States. Geological Survey, 1977. Chapter A5 is available from the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Govern ment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402, Stock Number 024-001-02928-6.

36. A Handbook of Radioactivity Measurements Proceduires, Rep6ot of NCRP SC-18A,

NCR

Report No. 58, 1978.

37..P.E.

Shelley, Sampling of Water and Wastewater, U.S.

Environmental -TF-ec,-i-i Agency Report EPA-600/4-77-039, August

1977.

38. "Calibration and Usage of Germanium De tectors for Measurement of Gamma-Ray Emission Rates of Radionuclides," ANSI N42.14-1978.

39. D.C.

Kocher (editor),

Nuclear Dec Data for Radionuclides Occurring in Routine R-lases from Nuclear Fel Ccle -- aciFtie Ua-kRidge N-ationVa-lab o ry-hror eort ORNL/

NUREG/TM-102, August 1977

40. M.J. Martin (editor), Nuclear Decay Data for Selected Radionuclides, OakRidge aiton

-iabo(atory Report ORNL-5114, March 1976.

41. International Directory of Certified Radio active Materials, Internatioa Atomic En--ergy Agency Report, STI/PUB/398, 1975.

42.

Environmental Radioactivity Laboratory Intercparison Studies Program, FY

1977, EPA-6

4-7-001, J---ury 1977.

43. "Guidelines for the Documentation of Digital Computer Programs," ANSI N413-1974.

4.15-9

GLOSSARY

Accuracy-a qualitative concept in the statis tical treatment of measurement data used to de scribe the agreement between the central tendency of a set of numbers and their correct value (or the accepted reference value). It is also used to describe the agreement between an individual value and the correct value (or the accepted reference value).

Analytical Blank (Sample)-ideally, a sample having all of the constituents of the unknown sample except those to be determined. In ra dioanalytical practice, the term often refers to the radiochemical processing of carrier(s) or tracers without the sample matrix material.

"Blind" Replicate (Sample)-replicate samples that are not identified as replicates to the, per sons performing the analysis.

Calibration-the process of determining the numerical relationship between the observed output of a measurement system and the value, based on reference standards, of the charac teristics being measured.

Calibration Source-any radioactive source that is used for calibration of a measurement system.

Check Source (or instrument check source or performance check source)-a radioactive source used to determine if the detector and all elec tronic components of the system are operating correctly.

Instrument Background-the response of the instrument in the absence of a radioactive sam ple or other radioactive source.

Precision-a qualitative concept in the statis tical treatment of measurement data used to describe the dispersion of a set of numbers with respect to its central tendency.

Quality Assurance (QA)-the planned and systematic actions that are necessary to pro vide adequate confidence in the results of a monitoring program.

Quality Control (QC)-those quality assurance actions that provide a means to control and measure the characteristics of measurement equipment and processes to established re quirements.

Thus, quality assurance includes quality control.

Reference Test Material-a large batch of homogeneous material from which aliquots may be taken for interlaboratory comparisons or for internal use by the laboratory. The material must be uniform but need not be standardized.

Spiked Sample-a sample to which a known amount of radioactive material has been added.

Generally, spiked samples are submitted as unknowns to the analysts.

Split §Saple-a homogeneous sample that is divided into parts, each of which is analyzed independently by separate laboratory organi zations.

Standard (radioactive)

Source-a radioactive source having an accurately known radionu clide content and radioactive decay rate or rate of particle or photon emission.

4.15-10

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON. D.C. 2M81 FIRST-CLASS MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES Pt U.SN NC

WASH 0 C

PERMIT No SJj OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE. $3D0