Re: check sources

[High Plains Drifter <ddchaney@jps.net>]

Sandy, you lengthy response to the question (prior to my statements) was far
more detailed than the question needed.  So when I reviewed the responses to
that point and noticed that you gave all the technical instructions for use of
such a system and did include the necessity for a QC of some sort on the
response data I could hardly stop laughing, till my wife hit me upside the
head with a rolled up news paper.

As a practical matter, facilities without a central departure point for HP
Techs and instruments to work areas, and the facility is large, then all
instruments should have their own check source.  Then following the periodic
instrument calibration the instrument's response to the check source (could be
a Roy Coleman mantel) is obtained and the value noted on the instrument's
calibration tag.  The value, plus or minus 10-20 percent should be stated on
the instrument and instructions given as to when the instrument is considered
out of calibration.  I believe the above is in keeping with the
recommendations of the most current ANSI standard concerning portable
instrument calibration and use.

High Plains Drifter (Reincarnate)
ddchaney@jps.net
hdc@nrc.gov

Disclaimer: My opinions and thoughts expressed above are just that!  They are
mine and mine alone, and should not be taken as a reflection of the views of
the US NRC, US Government, or some other supervisory power.  However, if push
comes to shove and I am inspecting you then most likely my views will
prevail.  Some opinions are based on previously established physical
constants, teachings, or information catalogued at gatherings of nuclear
priests spewing their atomic mummeries.

 Hail to Hari Seldon and long live the Foundation.