statistics because there's a lot of activity there.
Then, that's fine.
The bottom segment, you could count it for days and you are not going
to get that good accounting statistics, but you are safe because you don't
really need it because there is very little activity in that part and when
you fold in the total
activity,
that error
is not very important.
problem is, we don't know what segment it comes from.
The
Only DRI knows this,
so we have to send the results to DRI and they look at their master log
book to see where it comes from, and they fold in all of the errors and
say,
"Ah ha.
This is fine," or “Ah ha, we need more counting on, say, a
10
middle sample somewhere," so they will get back to us and say (that's DRI,
11
it looks like ORI), DRI tells the lab to recount sample such and such, and
12
we'J] take that and recount it for a thousand minutes,
13
back to computer analysis, and follows through the flow diagram in the same
14
way.
15
Is that ok?" and they will say “yes" or "no."
16
are stored.
1?
Then we send another letter to DRI saying:
The
cesium
analysis
is
nice
in
18
always have that dirt, no matter what.
19
if you like.
20
that
it's
and then it goes
"This is our new value.
If it's okay, the samples
nondestructive.
You'l]
You can count it hundreds of times
The plutonium is different.
A word about turnaround time.
If we have 100 sites to be analyzed and
21
each site has four segments, that's four hundred samples to be analyzed for
22
cesium.
23
tor days for the cesium and if you add in an extra 50% for QA, duplicate
24
samples, split samples, whatever DRI wants to send in, plus some time for
.25
computer down-time, detector down-time, that gives you 150 detector days.
We can do essentially four a day per detector.
That's 100 detec-
A 1,000-minute count takes up an
26
Now you also have 1,000-minute counts.
2?
entire detector day effectively, and it's hard to know how many of these we
28
will need.
An initial estimate might be 20% of the samples may need to be
160