E910-05-039, Final Status Survey Report for Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation Saxton Steam Generating Station Structural Surfaces Discharge Tunnel Transition Area SS23, SS25

Final Status Survey Report for Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation Saxton Steam Generating Station Structural Surfaces Discharge Tunnel Transition Area SS23, SS25

ML052090247
Person / Time
Site:	Saxton File:GPU Nuclear icon.png
Issue date:	07/31/2005
From:	GPU Nuclear Corp
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
E910-05-039
Download: ML052090247 (67)

Text

7./

I Final Status Survey Report For Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation Saxton Steam Generating Station Structural Surfaces Discharge Tunnel Transition Area SS23, SS25 m -

I fol in I

0 1I mwPw i- II !. ,!e fj.U

,gg u* #6 8338

- *4!. A At I.

7~1r 4.-~

.5 0J --Ow .

Prepared by GPU Nuclear, Inc.

July 2005

Table Of Contents Executive Summary

1.0 Purpose and Scope

2.0 Survey Area Description 3.0 Operating History 3.1 Plant Operations 3.2 Survey Area Remediation Status 4.0 Site Release Criteria 5.0 Final Status Survey Design / DQO Process 6.0 Final Status Survey Results 6.1 Summary for Survey Unit SS23-1 6.2 Summary for Survey Unit SS23-2 6.3 Summary for Survey Unit SS25-1 6.4 Summary for Survey Unit SS25-2 7.0 Data Assessment 7.1 Assessment Criteria 7.2 Summary of Overall Results 7.3 Survey Variations 7.4 Quality Control Measurements 8.0 Final Survey Conclusions 9.0 References 10.0 Appendices i

Executive Summarv This report presents the results and conclusions of the final status survey (FSS) of the Class 1 and 2 structural surfaces and exposed rock/soil of the Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation (SNEC) facility designated as SS23-1, SS23-2, SS25-1, and SS25-2. This FSS includes surveys of residual structural surfaces (e.g. concrete) and residual steel in the Discharge Tunnel Transition Area of the Saxton Steam Generating Station of the SNEC site and was conducted in the summer of 2004.

The FSS was performed in accordance with the SNEC License Termination Plan (LTP). The Discharge Tunnel Transition Area survey area was divided into four survey units. Three units consisted of relatively flat residual structural surfaces and the fourth was an open steel grate. Data was collected from each survey unit in accordance with the specific survey design data collection requirements. The following is a summary of the measurements performed:

1) Direct Gas Flow Proportional Counter (GFPC) and Nal detector scans of all of four survey units covering about 70 % of the actual surface area.

2) Eighty two fixed point static GFPC measurements.

3) Thirty five fixed point Nal measurements.

4) Three steel scrape samples analyzed by gamma spectroscopy

5) One soil sample analyzed by gamma spectroscopy The collected FSS survey data demonstrate that the 154 square meters of the SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area meets the radiological release criteria for unrestricted use specified in IOCFR20.1402. Therefore GPU Nuclear, Inc.

concludes that the area meets the NRC requirements and may be released for unrestricted use.

1 of 22

1.0 Purpose and Scope

This report presents the results and conclusions of the final status survey of the residual structural surfaces in the SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area (four survey units designated SS23-1, SS23-2, SS25-1, and SS25-2) west of the SNEC facility. It provides the information required by 10CFR50.82(a)(11) and the SNEC license termination plan (LTP) to demonstrate that this area meets the radiological criteria for unrestricted use specified in 10CFR20.1402.

This report describes the radiological data collected in two Class 1 and two Class 2 survey units of residual structural concrete and steel surfaces and exposed rock/soil in the SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area. This report only addresses the FSS performed on this specific area . The format of this report follows the guidance contained in reference 9.2.

2.0 Survey Area Description The SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area is Class 1 and 2 impacted structural surface and exposed rock/soil located underground to the west of the SNEC facility. The area is the connection point between the spray pumps and the discharge tunnel. The survey unit encompasses about 154 square meters of concrete and steel. Because the classification varies spatially and because of the different surfaces in the area, the survey area has been divided into four survey units. Layout of the survey area and individual units are shown in Attachment 1 of Appendix A and Attachment 1 of Appendix B. The four survey units are discussed below. The individual survey unit designations are derived from table 5-2 of the SNEC LTP (reference 9.3).

Survey unit SS23-1 is a Class 2 residual concrete surface in the SSGS Discharge tunnel entrance from the spray pumps area. It consists of the concrete surfaces of the walls in the tunnel entrance area. The survey unit is approximately 66 square meters. Appendix A contains drawings showing the layout of the survey unit.

Survey unit SS23-2 is a Class 2 rock/soil surface in the SSGS Discharge tunnel entrance from the spray pumps area. It consists of the exposed rock and soil of the floor area in the tunnel entrance area. The survey unit is approximately 31 square meters. Appendix A contains drawings showing the layout of the survey unit.

Survey unit SS25-1 is a Class 1 residual concrete surface in the SSGS Discharge tunnel entrance from the spray pumps area. It consists of the concrete surface in the discharge to spray pump transition area in the discharge tunnel.

2 of 22

The survey unit is approximately 41 square meters. Appendix B contains drawings showing the layout of the survey unit.

Survey unit SS25-2 is a Class 1 residual steel surface in the SSGS Discharge tunnel entrance from the spray pumps area. It consists of a steel gate in the discharge to spray pump transition area in the discharge tunnel. A portion of the gate was in its withdrawal well and was not accessible. The survey unit is the accessible portion of the gate and is approximately 16 square meters. Appendix B contains drawings showing the layout of the survey unit.

3.0 Operating History 3.1 Plant Operation The Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation (SNEC) facility included a pressurized water reactor (PWR), which was licensed to operate at 23.5 megawatts thermal (23.5 MWTh). The reactor, containment vessel and support buildings have all been removed. The facility is owned by the Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation and is licensed by GPU Nuclear, Inc. The SNEC facility is maintained under a Title 10 Part 50 license and associated Technical Specifications. In 1972, the license was amended to possess but not operate the SNEC reactor.

The facility was built from 1960 to 1962 and operated from 1962 to 1972 primarily as a research and training reactor. Steam from the SNEC reactor was directed to the adjacent Saxton Steam Generating Station (SSGS) to generate electricity.

Other shared systems also introduced SNEC activity into the SSGS and the main SNEC liquid discharge entered the SSGS discharge tunnel. After shutdown in 1972, the SNEC facility was placed in a condition equivalent to the current SAFSTOR status. Since then, it has been maintained in a monitored condition.

The fuel was removed in 1972 and shipped to a (now DOE) facility at Savannah River, SC, who is now the owner of the fuel. As a result of this, neither SNEC nor GPU Nuclear, Inc. has any further responsibility for the spent fuel from the SNEC facility. The building and structures that supported reactor operation were partially decontaminated by 1974. The SSGS was dismantled circa 1974.

In the late 1980s and through the 1990s, additional decontamination and disassembly of the containment vessel and support buildings and final equipment and large component removal was completed. Final decontamination and dismantlement of the reactor support structures and buildings was completed in 1992. Large component structures, pressurizer, steam generator, and reactor vessel were removed in late 1998. Containment vessel removal (to below grade) and backfill was completed in late 2003. Currently, decontamination, disassembly and demolition of the SNEC facility buildings and equipment has been completed and the facility is in the process of Final Status Survey for unrestricted release and license termination.

3 of 22

3.2 Survey Area Remediation Status The Discharge Tunnel Transition Area had the potential for contamination as a result of shared water systems which introduced contamination into the SSGS and the discharge tunnel. The area is connected to the discharge tunnel. No remediation was performed, but materials that would interfere with survey were removed.

4.0 Site Release Criteria The site release criteria applied to the structural surface areas of the SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area correspond to the radiological dose criteria for unrestricted use per 10CFR20.1402. The dose criteria is met "if the residual radioactivity that is distinguishable from background radiation results in a Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) to an average member of the critical group that does not exceed 25 mrem/yr, including that from groundwater sources of drinking water, and that the residual radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA)".

Levels of residual radioactivity that correspond to the allowable dose to meet the site or survey unit release criteria for structural surfaces were derived by analyses using a building re-use scenario. The dose modeling for this scenario is explained in the SNEC LTP (reference 9.3). The derived concentration guideline levels (DCGL) shown in Table 5-1 of the SNEC LTP form the basis for satisfying the site release criteria.

Residual radioactivity sample results for the surfaces were used to calculate a surrogate Cs137 DCGL. The adjusted surrogate DCGL was developed using the methodology described in the SNEC LTP section 5.2.3.2.3 based on nuclide specific DCGLs from Table 5-1 of the LTP.

An adjustment was made to the surrogate Cs137 DCGL to address the de-listed radionuclides as described in the LTP section 6.2.2.3. SNEC has instituted an administrative limit of 75% of the DCGL for all measurement results. The de-listed radionuclides are conservatively accounted for in this 25% reduction since the de-listed radionuclides were only 4.7% of the dose contribution. These adjustment factors are discussed in section 6 of the SNEC LTP.

5.0 Final Status Survey Design and DQO The SNEC calculation providing the design of the survey for these survey units is provided in Appendices A and B. Scan measurements were conducted over approximately 100% of the surface of the Class I survey units. Scan coverage of the two Class 2 survey units was approximately 30% and 100%. Scans were 4 of 22

conducted using a hand-held Gas Flow Proportional Counter (GFPC) and / or Nal detector.

The number of fixed measurement points was determined by using the COMPASS computer program (reference 9.5, attachment 5 of appendix A and attachment 6 of appendix B). These points were located on survey maps using the Visual Sample Plan program (reference 9.6, attachment 6 of appendix A and attachment 7 of appendix B). Measurements were collected with the GFPC using a long fixed count at each point.

The survey design uses a surrogate Cs137/gross beta effective DCGL developed from radionuclide mix analyses from samples collected before the Final Status Survey in the vicinity of the survey unit. The mix was based on radionuclide mix data (including the hard-to-detects listed in Table 5-1 of the LTP) from the discharge tunnel (attachment 4 of appendix B).

Cs137, Co6O, Am241, Ni63, Pu238, and Pu239 were positively detected in one or more of these samples and are accounted for in the adjusted surrogate DCGL.

The following table (Table 5.0-1) presents the Data Quality Objectives (DQO) and other relevant design information from the survey design packages.

5 of 22

Table 5.0 DQO/Design DQO/Design SS23-1, SS23-2 SS25-1, SS25-2 Parameter SNEC Design CaIc. # E900-04-017 E900-04-015 MARSSIM Classification 2 1 Survey Unit Area (m 2 ) 66, 31 41,16 Statistical Test WRS WRS Type 1 decision error (a) 0.05 0.05 Type 2 decision error (1) 0.1 0.1 LBGR (cpm) 500 350 2 45.4 Estimated r (dpm/IOOcm ) 34.5 Relative Shift (A/a) 2.7 1.6 Number of static points 13, 9 60, 35 DCGLw (Cs137 8807 8807 2

dpm/1OOcm )

75% Admin Limit (Cs137 6605 6605 dpm/100crh2)

DCGLw (Cs137 ncpm) 593 424 GFPC Action Level (cpm) 300 net 500 GFPC gross Nal 200 net 350 gross Nal 2644 GFPC Scan MDC (dpm/1OOcm 2) 1817 3717 Nal-steel SNEC Survey Request # SR165 SR158 Scan Survey Instrument L2350-1 wI 44-10 L2350-1 w/43-681, 6.0 Final Status Survey Results The following sections provide the survey summary results for each survey unit as required by the respective design. Summary data was taken from references 9.9 and 9.10 which are filed in the SNEC history files.

6.1 Survey Unit SS23-1 6.1.1 Scan survey Scan measurements were made in SS23-1 using a hand-held GFPC detector with an MDCscan of 1817 dpm/1OOcm2 (table 3 on page 3 of appendix A). The scan action level was 500 net cpm (table 4 on page 3 of appendix A).The adjusted surrogate Cs137 gross beta DCGLw for this survey unit was 8807 dpm/1 OOcm 2 and the 75% administrative limit was 6605 dpm/1 OOcm 2 (attachment 6 of 22

4-5 of appendix B). No fixed point number adjustment was needed in this case because the MDCscan was below the 75% administrative limit.

Of the 66 square meters of this survey unit scanning was conducted on 20 square meters of the surface. Therefore 30 percent of the survey unit was scanned which is consistent with coverage requirement for Class 2 survey units.

All 43-68 GFPC scans were less than the 500 net cpm action level.

6.1.2 Fixed point measurements Thirteen random start systematic fixed point measurement locations were defined for the survey unit. Each fixed point was measured with the 43-68 GFPC detector. Based on a conservative relative shift of about 2.7 a minimum of 9 fixed points were required.

None of the design fixed point measurements in SS23-1 had results in excess of the action level of 593 net cpm for the GFPC measurements. The table below (Table 6.1-1) shows the gross beta GFPC results for each fixed point measurement, along with the mean, standard deviation and range of the fixed point measurement data.

The standard deviation of the GFPC measurements collected from the survey unit was greater than the variability assumed in the survey design. If the observed variability and an LBGR of 50% of the DCGL are used, then 10 measurements would be the minimum required. Since thirteen measurements were taken, the assessment of variability, relative shift, and number of fixed point measurements required is consistent between the survey design and the survey results. Based on this, no changes to the survey design or additional measurements are required.

7 of 22

Table 6.1 Fixed point results for SS23-1 Point Unshielded Number GFPC cpm 8 813*

9 266 10 271 C 274 D 240 E 338 F 395 G 300 H 271 I 319 J 286 K 312 L 406 Mean 345 Std Dev 149 Min 240 Max 813

• the shielded value at point 1 was 363 cpm, for a net of 450 (less than the action level of 593) 6.2 Survey Unit SS23-2 6.2.1 Scan survey Scan measurements were made in SS23-2 using a hand-held GFPC detector with an MDCscan of 1817 dpm/1OOcm 2 (table 3 on page 3 of appendix A). The scan action level was 500 net cpm (table 4 on page 3 of appendix A).The adjusted surrogate Csl.37 gross beta DCGLw for this survey unit was 8807 dpm/1 00cm 2 and the 75% administrative limit was 6605 dpm/1 00cm 2 (attachment 4-5 of appendix B). No fixed point number adjustment was needed in this case because the MDCscan was below the 75% administrative limit.

Scan measurements were made in SS23-2 using a hand-held Nal detector with an MDCscan of 2.8 pCi/g (table 5 on page 3 of appendix A). The scan action level was 300 gross cpm (section 2.2.3 on page 3 of appendix A).The adjusted surrogate Cs137 DCGLw for this survey unit was 6.52 pCi/g and the 75%

administrative limit was 4.89 pCi/g (table 6 on page 4 of appendix A). No fixed point number adjustment was needed in this case because the MDCscan was below the 75% administrative limit.

8 of 22

Of the 31 square meters of this survey unit Nal scanning was conducted on all 31 square meters of the surface. Therefore 100 percent of the survey unit was scanned which is consistent with coverage requirement for Class 2 survey units.

About 2 square meters were also scanned with the GFPC. All 43-68 GFPC scans were less than the 500 net cpm action level. One area greater than the 300 gross cpm action level was found with the Nal scans. This area was bounded to be about 6 square meters. The rest of the survey unit was less then the 300 gross cpm action level for the Nal scans.

6.2.2 Fixed point measurements Nine random start systematic fixed point measurement locations were defined for the survey unit. Each fixed point was measured with the 43-68 GFPC detector.

Based on a conservative relative shift of about 2.7 a minimum of 8 fixed points were required.

None of the design fixed point measurements in SS23-2 had results in excess of the action level of 593 net cpm for the GFPC measurements. The table below (Table 6.2-1) shows the gross beta GFPC results for each fixed point measurement, along with the mean, standard deviation and range of the fixed point measurement data. Several points (1 through 4) had gross unshielded readings above the 593 net cpm action level. However, in each case, the net counts per minute was less than the action level.

The standard deviation of the GFPC measurements collected from the survey unit was greater than the variability assumed in the survey design. Other design choices (increased type 2 decision error and/or an LBGR of 50% of the DCGL) are used, then 9 or fewer measurements would be the minimum required. The assessment of variability, relative shift, and number of fixed point measurements required is acceptable between the survey design and the survey results. Based on this, no changes to the survey design or additional measurements are required.

9 of 22

Table 6.2 Fixed point results for SS23-2 Point Unshielded Number GFPC cpm 1 787 2 667 3 728 4 691 5 588 6 369 7 500 A 333 B 388 Mean 561 Std Dev 170 Min 333 Max 787 6.2.3 Elevated measurement comparison Nal scanning in SS23-2 identified one location where the scan result exceeded the 300 gross cpm scan action level. Actual scan results were 363 gross cpm with a bounded area of about 6 square meters. Inorder to assess the alarm point a soil sample was collected at the location of the alarm point. The result is shown in table 6.2-2 below. Since the activity was less than the DCGL, no elevated measurement comparison test is required.

Table 6.2 Alarm point soil sample results for SS23-2 Location Cs137 pCi/g I SS23-2 AP I <0. 1 6.2.4 Survey assessment Use of the 43-68 GFPC detector for fixed point measurements was not intended in the initial design concept, and it was expected that soil / rock samples would be collected at the fixed point locations. Despite not having the random fixed point soil samples, there is reasonable assurance that the survey unit meets release criteria for several reasons: 1)the residual material had large rock content that could be appropriately surveyed by a GFPC, 2)The Nal scans show that the area is generally well below the DCGLw, 3) Final pre-FSS soil samples from the area and the FSS alarm point sample are all much less than the DCGLw. Although not a random layout of sample points and thus not fully 10 of 22

conforming to MARSSIM requirements, six FSS quality (QC, chain-of-custody, etc.) soil samples were collected at alarm points during a final pre-FSS survey as part of the survey reported in reference 9.11. In addition, one soil sample was collected as a result of a Nal scan alarm during the FSS survey as discussed above. Table 6.2-3 below shows the results of these soil samples. Although there are not as many samples and they are not randomly placed as expected by MARSSIM, there is strong evidence that the survey unit passes.

Table 6.2 Soil sample results for SS23-2 Location Cs1l7 SS23-2 API <0.1 SR155 AP1 <0.1 SR155 AP2 <0.1 SR155 AP3 <0.1 SR155 AP4 <0.13 SR155 AP5 <0.14 SR155 AP6 <0.12 6.3 Survey Unit SS25-1 6.3.1 Scan survey Scan measurements were made in SS25-1 using a hand-held GFPC detector with an MDCscan of 2644 dpm/100cm 2 (table 3 on page 3 of appendix B). The scan action level was 350 net cpm (section 2.1.5 on page 3 of appendix B).The adjusted surrogate Cs137 gross beta DCGLw for this survey unit was 8807 dpm/1 00cm2 and the 75% administrative limit was 6605 dpm/1 00cm 2 (attachment 4-5 of appendix B). No fixed point number adjustment was needed in this case because the MDCscan was below the 75% administrative limit.

Scan measurements were made in SS25-1 using a hand-held Nal detector with an MDCscan of 2.7 pCi/g (table 4 on page 3 of appendix B). The scan action level was 200 gross cpm (section 2.2.3 on page 3 of appendix B).The adjusted surrogate Cs137 DCGLw for this survey unit was 6.52 pCi/g and the 75%

administrative limit was 4.89 pCi/g (attachment 4-6 of appendix B). No fixed point number adjustment was needed in this case because the MDCscan was below the 75% administrative limit.

Of the 41 square meters of this survey unit scanning was conducted on all 41 square meters of the surface. All of the surface was scanned with the GFPC and about 40 of the 41 square meters were scanned using the Nal detector.

Therefore 100 percent of this Class 1 survey unit was scanned. All 43-68 GFPC 11 of 22

scans were less than the 350 net cpm action level and all Nal scans were less than the 200 gross cpm action level.

6.3.2 Fixed point measurements Sixty random start systematic fixed point measurement locations were defined for the survey unit. Each fixed point was measured with the 43-68 GFPC detector.

Based on the relative shift of about 1.6 a minimum of 13 fixed points were required. Additional sample points were defined to increase sample density based on engineering judgment.

None of the design fixed point measurements in SS25-1 had results in excess of the action level of 424 net cpm for the GFPC measurements. The table below (Table 6.3-1) shows the gross beta GFPC results for each fixed point measurement, along with the mean, standard deviation and range of the sixty fixed point measurement results combined. Three measurements of the ceiling that were above 424 gross cpm as listed in the table below were each less than the action level in net cpm with the shielded reading at the measurement point subtracted.

The standard deviation of the GFPC measurements collected from the survey unit was higher than the variability assumed in the survey design. If the observed variability is used with a less conservative LBGR (e.g. 50% of the DCGLw) a relative shift higher than that used for the design would result. In addition, the number of sample points collected (60) was larger than the minimum based on the relative shift used in the design (13). Therefore, the assessment of variability, relative shift, and number of fixed point measurements required is consistent between the survey design and the survey results. Based on this, no changes to the survey design or additional measurements are required.

12 of 22

Table 6.3 Fixed point results for SS25-1 Point Unshielded Unshielded Unshielded Unshielded GFPC cpm GFPC cpm GFPC cpm GFPC cpm Floor Ceiling North wall South wall 1 316 286 250 237 2 289 429 193 294 3 281 356 234 226 4 302 477 230 248 5 321 408 203 211 6 317 469 213 238 7 228 346 243 251 8 210 376 236 264 9 214 473 256 244 10 192 382 191 216 11 193 250 261 251 12 208 343 335 211 13 196 371 256 299 14 340 430 342 356 15 308 390 334 325 Mean (a1160) 289 Std Dev 77.1 Min 191 Max 477 6.4 Survey Unit SS25-2 6.4.1 Scan survey Scan measurements were made in SS25-2 using a hand-held Nal detector with an MDCscan of 3717 dpm/1OOcm 2 (table 4 on page 3 of appendix B). The scan action level was 200 gross cpm (section 2.2.3 on page 3 of appendix B).The adjusted surrogate Cs137 beta DCGLw for this survey unit was 8807 dpm/1 00cm2 and the 75% administrative limit was 6605 dpm/1 00cm2 (attachment 4-5 of appendix B). No fixed point number adjustment was needed in this case because the MDCscan was below the 75% administrative limit.

Of the 16 square meters of this survey unit scanning was conducted on all 16 square meters of the surface. Therefore 100 percent of the Class 1 survey unit was scanned. All Nal scans were less than the 200 gross cpm action level.

6.4.2 Fixed point measurements 13 of 22

Thirty five biased fixed point measurement locations were defined for the survey unit which provided static measurements on most of the surface. Because of the high biased coverage fraction, no random points were defined. Each fixed point was measured with the 43-10 Nal detector.

No action level was pre-defined for the design fixed point measurements in SS25-2. The table below (Table 6.4-1) shows the Nal results for each fixed point measurement, along with the mean, standard deviation and range of the fixed point measurement data. Measurement points 9 and 10 were subsequently sampled for investigation. Static measurements were taken after the scrape samples. These were lower than the initial results and are shown as '9 post' and

'10 post' in table 6.4-1. These are not included in the statistics in the table.

14 of 22

Table 6.4 Fixed point results for SS25-2 Point Nal cpm Number 1 84 2 84 3 80 4 84 5 73 6 71 7 71 8 186 9 229 10 208 11 176 12 137 13 168 14 150 15 78 16 75 17 62 18 57 19 75 20 62 21 72 22 61 23 50 24 46 25 47 26 40 27 54 28 57 29 45 30 35 31 38 32 43 33 43 34 48 35 81 Mean 84.9 Std dev 51.7 Min 35 Max 229 9 post 127 10 post 149 15 of 22

Two Nal fixed point measurements exceeded the scan action level. Scrape samples were collected from these two points, along with a sample from a third point for reference. The table below (table 6.4-2 shows the results of the samples.

Table 6.4 Fixed point scrape results for SS25-2 Sample Location I Csl37 pCi/gI SS25-2 9 1 45.11 I SS25-2 10 i 40.8 SS25-2 26 3.5 6.4.3 Elevated measurement comparison Because of the limited scrape sample data and the unique nature of the survey unit, a special calculation assessment was performed on the elevated sample results to determine if the survey unit meets release requirements. This assessment is provided as appendix C. This assessment indicates that after removal of the material by sampling, the residual activity meets release requirements with a maximum residual activity at any fixed measurement location of 78% of the release limit (attachment 4-2 of appendix C).

An elevated measurement comparison test can also be performed on the initial static measurement data based on the summary in attachment 4-1 of appendix C. the survey unit average is 1319 dpm /100 cm2 with a Cs137 75%

administrative limit of 6605 dpm/1 00cm 2. The survey unit average is therefore 0.2 of the 75% administrative limit including the single elevated point at FP9. Since the survey unit is about 16 square meters, each static point represent about 0.5 square meters. Using the minimum area factor for 1 square meter for Cs1 37 of 11.2 gives a value of 0.01 for the elevated area [ (6771-1319)/6605/11.2) for a total emc test value of 0.21 for the survey unit.

Based on the special assessment in appendix C and the elevated measurement comparison test above, the survey unit passes the emc test ('equation 8-2' is <1) meets unrestricted release criteria.

7.0 Data Assessment 7.1 Assessment Criteria The final status survey data has been reviewed to verify authenticity, appropriate documentation, quality, and technical acceptability. The review criteria for data acceptability are:

.16 of 22

1) The instruments used to collect the data were capable of detecting the radiation of the radionuclide of interest at or below the investigation levels.

2) The calibration of the instruments used to collect the data was current and radioactive sources used for calibration were traceable to recognized standards or calibration organizations.

3) Instrument response was checked before and, when required, after instrument use each day data was collected.

4) Survey team personnel were properly trained in the applicable survey techniques and training was documented.

5) The MDCs and the assumptions used to develop them were appropriate for the instruments and the survey methods used to collect the data.

6) The survey methods used to collect the data were appropriate for the media and types of radiation being measured.

7) Special instrument methods used to collect data were applied as warranted by survey conditions, and were documented in accordance with an approved site Survey Request procedure.

8) The custody of samples that were sent for off-site analysis were tracked from the point of collection until final results were provided.

9) The final status survey data consists of qualified measurement results representative of current facility status and were collected in accordance with the applicable survey design package.

If a discrepancy existed where one or more criteria were not met, the discrepancy was reviewed and corrective action taken (as appropriate) in accordance with site procedures.

The statistical test does not need to be performed for this final status survey since the data clearly show that the survey unit meets the release criteria because all fixed point measurements in the survey units are less than or equal to the DCGLw.

7.2 Summary of Overall Results SS23-1 had no alarm points during GFPC scan surveys of approximately 30% of the surface. Scan MDCs were adequate. Thirteen fixed point GFPC measurements were all less than the DCGLw. Scan fraction and number of fixed point measurements meets LTP and MARSSIM requirements.

17 of 22

SS23-2 had one alarm point during Nal scanning of about 100% of the surface and no alarm points during additional GFPC scan surveys of approximately 6.5%

of the surface. A soil sample at the alarm point was less than the DCGL. Scan MDCs were adequate. Nine fixed point GFPC measurements were all less than the DCGLw. Scan fraction and number of fixed point measurements meets LTP and MARSSIM requirements. Soil samples should have been collected from the survey unit at the fixed point locations but were not. Seven soil samples from the survey unit are available which are all less than detectable concentrations. These soil samples are six in depth samples, which is appropriate for samples collected from well below the surface grade in the entrance pit.

SS25-1 had no alarm points during GFPC scan surveys of 100% of the surface.

Additional Nal scan surveys of 98% of the surface also had no alarm points.

Scan MDCs were adequate. Sixty fixed point GFPC measurements were all less than the DCGLw. Scan fraction and number of fixed point measurements meets LTP and MARSSIM requirements.

SS25-2 had no alarm points during Nal scan surveys of approximately 100% of the accessible surface. Scan MDCs were adequate. Thirty five biased fixed point Nal measurements were performed covering nearly 100% of the accessible surface. Two of the static points exceeded the scan action level and were sampled. Measurements after sampling showed the majority of the activity was removed by sampling. Elevated measurement comparison tests show that the initial sample results meet release requirements. Scan fraction and number of fixed point measurements meets LTP and MARSSIM requirements.

7.3 Survey Variations (Design, survey request, LTP) 7.3.1 Approximately 1.2 square meters of SS25-1 was inaccessible to the 44-10 Nal survey.

7.3.2 Soil samples were not collected from the fixed point locations in SS23-2 but GFPC fixed point measurements were collected instead.

7.4 QC comparisons 7.4.1 Scan surveys Numerous areas were rescanned as QC duplicates with the hand-held detectors.

The QC hand-held GFPC and Nal rescans did not identify any activity above alarm points and so are in agreement with the primary scans because the conclusion that the survey area passes is supported by both the initial and QC 18 of 22

results (reference 9.8). GFPC QC scans were conducted on 6.15 m2 of the survey area, which represents about 9.8 percent of the 63 m2 originally scanned by GFPC. Nal QC scans were conducted on 6.9 m2 of the survey area, which represents about 7.9 percent of the 87 m2 originally scanned by Nal. These each exceed the minimum 5% required.

7.4.2 Fixed Point measurements Two fixed point measurements from SS23-1 and three from SS25-1 received QC duplicate GFPC measurements. These duplicates had good agreement as shown in the table below (Table 7.4-1) because the conclusion that the survey area passes is supported by both the initial and QC results (reference 9.8). Five QC splits out of 82 measurements represents 6.1 percent of the fixed point measurements. Two fixed point measurements from SS25-2 received QC duplicate Nal measurements. These duplicates had good agreement as shown in the table below (Table 7.4-1) because the conclusion that the survey area passes is supported by both the initial and QC results (reference 9.8). Two QC splits out of 35 measurements represents 5.7 percent of the fixed point measurements. These both exceed the 5%minimum criterion.

Table 7.4-1 Discharge Tunnel Transition Area Fixed Point QC Duplicate cornparison Fixed Point Result (cpm) QC Result (cpm)

GFPC SS23-1 C 274 256 GFPC SS23-1 F 395 356 GFPC SS25-1 346 242 Ceiling 7 GFPC SS25-1 213 161 N Wall 6 GFPC SS25-1 248 157 SWall 4 Nal SS25-2 73 77 Nal SS25-2 62 86 One SS25-2 scrape sample of the fixed point locations received a duplicate. This duplicate had good agreement as shown in the table below (Table 7.4-2) because the conclusion that the survey area passes is supported by both the initial and QC results (reference 9.8). One QC split out of 3 measurements represents 33 percent of the scrape samples. This exceeds the 5% minimum criterion.

19 of 22

Table 7.4-2 Discharge Tunnel Transition Area Scrape QC Duplicate comparison Fixed Point Result QC Result (pCilg) I (pCi9g I GFPC 5S25-2 9 45.1 1 37.6 7.4.3 Elevated measurements One alarm point from SS23-2 had a QC duplicate scan measurement and a split QC measurement of the investigative soil sample. These duplicates had good agreement as shown in the tables below (Table 7.4-3 and 7.4-4) because the conclusion that the survey area passes is supported by both the initial and QC results (reference 9.8). One QC split out of 1 measurement of the scan and the soil sample each represents 100 percent of the measurements. This exceeds the 5% minimum criterion.

Table 7.4-3 Discharge Tunnel Transition Area AP Scan QC Duplicate comparison Point Result (cpm) QC Result (cpm)

SS23-2 AP1 363 332 Table 7.4-2 Discharge Tunnel Transition Area AP Soil Sample QC Duplicate comparison Point Result QC Result (pCig) (pCilg)

SS23-2 AP1 <0.1 <0.1 8.0 Final Survey Conclusions The Structural Surfaces-of the SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area survey units SS23-1 SS23-2, SS25-1, and SS25-2 final status survey was performed in accordance with the SNEC LTP, site procedures, design calculations, and Survey Request requirements. FSS data was collected to meet and/or exceed the quantity specified or required for each survey unit design. The survey data for each survey unit meets the following conditions:

1) The average residual radioactivity on the surfaces is less than the derived surrogate DCGLw in all of the survey units.

2) All measurements were less than the DCGLw in three of the survey units and an elevated measurement test of SS25-2 shows that the unit meets the emc test and therefore passes the release criteria.

20 of 22

3) SS23-2 did not have random soil samples or a sufficient number of soil samples collected for a soil survey area to be a full MARSSIM design. The area contained large rock surfaces amenable to the GFPC measurements that were performed and soil samples that are available show that there is reasonable assurance that the survey unit meets the release criteria.

These conditions satisfy the release criteria established in the SNEC LTP and the radiological criteria for unrestricted use given in IOCFR20.1402.

Therefore it is concluded that the SNEC Structural Surface Areas of the SSGS Discharge Tunnel Transition Area designated SS23-1, SS23-2, SS25-1, and SS25-2 are suitable for unrestricted release.

21 of 22

9.0 References 9.1 SNEC Facility Site area grid map Drawing number SNECRM-020 9.2 SNEC procedure E900-ADM-4500.60 "Final Status Survey Report" 9.3 SNEC License Termination Plan 9.4 NUREG 1575 'Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual" (MARSSIM), revision 1 August 2000 9.5 COMPASS computer program, Version 1.0.0, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education 9.6 VISUAL SAMPLE PLAN computer program, Version 3.0, Battelle Memorial Institute 9.7 SNEC procedure E900-IMP-4500.59, "Final Site Survey Planning and DOn 9.8 SNEC procedure E900-IMP-4520.04, "Survey Methodology to Support SNEC License Termination" 9.9 SNEC Survey Request (SR) # SR1 58 9.10 SNEC Survey Request (SR) # SR165 9.11 SNEC Survey Request (SR) # SR155 10.0 Appendices Appendix A - SNEC Calculation E900-04-017 -"Upper Spray Pump Area

& DT Entrance - Survey Design" (9 pages plus numerous attachments)

Appendix B - SNEC Calculation E900-04-015 -"Spray Pump Pit -

Survey Design" (10 pages plus numerous attachments)

Appendix C - SNEC Calculation E900-04-020 - "Assessment of Survey Results for Transition Area Steel Gate" (6 pages plus numerous attachments) 22 of 22

Appendix A Spray Pump Pit and Discharge Tunnel Survey Design

SNEC CALCULATION COVER SHEET CALCULATION DESCRIPTION Calculation Number Revision Number Effectgwe Da)e Page Number E900-04-017 0 ,/3 I/1 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design Question 1 - Is this calculation defined as 'in QA Scope"? Refer to definition 3.5. Yes 0 No a Question 2 - Is this calculation defined as a 'Design Calculation'? Refer to definitions 3.2 and 3.3. Yes 0 No a Question 3 - Does the calculation have the potential to affect an SSC as described in the USAR? Yes a No 0 NOTES: If a Yes' answer is obtained for Question 1, the calculation must meet the requirements of the SNEC Facility Decommissioning Quality Assurance Plan. If a Yes answer is obtained for Question 2, the Calculation Originator's Immediate supervisor should not review the calculation as the Technical Reviewer. If a "YES' answer is obtained for Question 3, SNEC Management approval is required to Implement the calculation. Calculations that do not have the potential to affect SSC's may be implemented by the TR.

DESCRIPTION OF REVISION APPROVAL SIGNATURES Calculation Originator B. Eroseyl Date Technical Reviewer P. Donnachie! Date r 3 o/

Additional Review A. Paynterl \ Date Additional Review Date SNEC Management Approval Date

SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 Page 2 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this calculation is to develop a survey design for the upper Spray Pump building and the Discharge Tunnel entrance area. These survey units are listed in Table 1 and are shown in Attachments 1-1 to 1-2.

Table 1,Survey Unit Information Survey Units Location Material Types Area Classification Area (mA2)

SS9-2 Spray Pump Bldg. Floor at El. 795' Concrete 2 30.2 SS11-1 Walls of Spray Pump Bldg. To El. -802' Concrete 2 59.7 SS11-2 Walls of Spray Pump Bldg. Above El. -802' Concrete 3 58.2 SS23-1 Entrance to Discharge Tunnel Concrete 2 65.9 SS23-2 Entrance to Discharge Tunnel Soil/Stone 2 31 2.0

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS The following information should be used to develop a survey request for this survey design:

2.1 GFPC Scanning Criteria 2.1.1 A gas flow proportional counter (GFPC) shall be used in the beta detection mode for the initial scan survey work on all concrete surfaces (Ludlum 2350-1 with a 43-68B probe).

2.1.2 All GFPC instruments used shall demonstrate an efficiency (et) at or above 23.9%

(value used for planning). Detector efficiency factors are presented in the following Table.

Table 2, GFPC Detection Efficiency Results Used for Planning Material Type El Ci. St (as %)* I ECF %Cs-137 Resulting counts/disintegration l Concrete 0.478 0.5 23.9% 0.31 0.982 0.0728

• Typical SNEC GFPC detector efficiency factors (as of 7/1/04) are provided in Attachment 2-1.

NOTE 1: Total efficiency should not be less than et value for any instrument used during this survey effort.

NOTE 2: ECF is efficiency correction factor.

2.1.3 An efficiency correction factor (ECF) is applied to compensate for efficiency loss over rough surface areas based on Reference 3.1 criteria and Attachment 3-1. An applicable ECF has been determined for both survey areas listed in Table 2. This value corrects detection efficiency based on the average depth of the worst rough surface area in either location. Use of this factor for all concrete surfaces will underestimate the detection efficiency for the majority of surfaces in these two areas.

2.1.4 The amount of detectable beta emitter is dependent on the amount of Cs-137 present in the radionuclide mix. From Reference 3.2 the mix is determined to be 98.2% Cs-137. No other radionuclides are credited with providing any additional (detectable) beta emissions.

A ll SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 Page 3 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design Table 3, Summary Of GFPC Scanning Parameters Area or Structure Material Type Scan Speed Surface to Detector Face Minimum Coverage' MDCscan 0.9' per sec SS9-2, SS11-1. SS23-1 Concrete (2.2 cm/sec) Contact 25% 1,817 dpml100 cm2 0.9. per sec SS11-2 Concrete (2.2 cm/sec) Contact 10% 1,817 dpml1 O cm 2 Table 4, Summary Of GFPC Action Levels Area or Structure First Phase (gcpm) DCGLw (ncpm)

All Concrete 500 593 2.1.5 The action levels during first phase scanning is provided above. If this level is reached, the surveyor should stop and perform a count of at least 1/2 minute duration to identify the actual second phase count rate from the elevated area. If the second phase count rate is equal to or greater than the DCGLw cpm, the area must be identified, bounded and documented to include an area estimate.

2.2 Na! Scannina Criteria 2.2.1 A 2" by 2" diameter Nal detector with a Cs-137 window setting shall be used for gamma scanning these survey units IAW Table 5 parameters.

2.2.2 The conversion factor for Nal survey instruments used shall not be less than 208,302 cpm/mR/h (see Attachment 2-1 for current Nal instrument conversion factors as of 7-1-04).

Table 5, Summary Of Scanning Parameters Instrument Type Material Used Area or Structure Type Scan Speed Surface to Detector Face Coverage MDCscan' 10" per sec 100% of Nal (2'by 2"Cs- accessible 137 Window) SS23-2 Soil/Stone (25 cm/see) 4' (5.08 cm) surfaces 2 - 2.84 pCig

'See Attachment 4-1 to 4-4 for calculation results using an assumed 100-200 cpm background values and MicroShield output for modeled survey areas. The soil model assumes a 6- thick source term and Is -56.4 cm in diameter with a density of loose lime stone (-213 of 3 g/cc = 2 glcc).

2.2.3 The action level during first phase scanning using a Nal instrument is 300 gross cym. If this level is reached, the surveyor should stop and perform a count of at least 15 seconds duration to identify the actual count rate of the elevated area.

2.2.4 Based on Nal scanning work, sample areas IAW the following criteria:

2.2.4.1 When an area is confirmed to be above the action level sited in Section 2.2.3, the location should be marked for sampling (see Section 2.5) These areas shall be bounded and documented.

?- SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 l Page 4 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design 2.3 DCGLw Values The following Table shows the DCGLw values that were used to plan surveys in these areas. Soil volumetric DCGLw values are used as a planning tool.

Areas above the action level should be sampled to determine the actual concentration and fraction of Table 6 values.

Table 6, Summary Of DCGLw Values Surface DCGLw (dpm/100 cm) Volumetric DCGLw (pCUg)

GA = 8,968 (6,726 A.L.) 6.52 (4.89 A.L.) for Cs-137 DCGLw values from Reference 3.2.

A.L = the administrative limit 2.4 Fixed Point GFPC Static Measurements 2.4.1 The minimum required number of static survey points for each area is provided in Table 7 (see Attachment 5-1 to 5-10 for the calculations yielding the minimum No.

of random start systematic grid survey points - Compass output, Reference 3.3).

Table 7, Minimum No. Random Start Systematic Grid Survey Points (GFPC)

Survey Units Location Static Points SS9-2 Spray Pump Bldg. Floor at El. 795' 9 SS11-1 Walls of Spray Pump Bldg. to El. -802' 9 SSI 1-2 Walls of Spray Pump Bldg. Above El. -802' 9 SS23-1 Entrance to Discharge Tunnel - Concrete 9 SS23-2 Entrance to Discharge Tunnel - Stone/Soil 8 See Attachment 6-1 to 6-2 for locations of fixed point measurements.

2.4.2 VSP (Reference 3.4) is used to plot all measurement points on Attachment 6-1 and 6-2. The actual number of random start systematically spaced measurement points may be greater than that required by the Compass computer code because of any of the following:

• placement of the initial random starting point (edge effects),

• odd shaped diagrams, and/or

• coverage concerns 2.5 Sampling of Soil/Loose Stone 2.6.1 Obtain a sample volume lAW Reference 3.5.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 SNEC Calculation No. 6900-02-028, GFPC Instrument Efficiency Loss Study.

3.2 SNEC Calculation No. E900-04-015, Spray Pump Pit - Survey Design 3.3 Compass Computer Program, Version 1.0.0, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education.

Ap m SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 Page 5 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design 3.4 Visual Sample Plan, Version 2.0 (or greater), Copyright 2002, Battelle Memorial Institute.

3.5 SNEC Procedure E900-IMP-4520.04, "Survey Methodology to Support SNEC License Termination".

3.6 ISO 7503-1, Evaluation of Surface Contamination, Part 1: Beta-emitters (maximum beta energy greater than 0.15 MeV) and alpha-emitters, 1988.

3.7 Plan SNEC Facility License Termination Plan.

3.8 SNEC Procedure E900-IMP-4520.06, 'Survey Unit Inspection in Support of FSS Design".

3.9 SNEC Procedure E900-IMP-4500.59, uFinal Site Survey Planning and DQA".

3.10 MicroShield, Computer Radiation Shielding Code, Version 5.05-00121, Grove Engineering.

3.11 NUREG-1507, "Minimum Detectable Concentrations With Typical Radiation Survey Instruments for Various Contaminants and Field Conditions," June 1998.

3.12 NUREG-1575, "Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual", August, 2000.

3.13 Microsoft Excel 97, Microsoft Corporation Inc., SR-2, 1985-1997.

4.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND BASIC DATA 4.1 Remediation History Since the Spray Pump moved water from the Discharge Tunnel, the same radionuclide mix is assumed for this area as was used inside the Discharge Tunnel. The Discharge Tunnel access area has been used during remediation efforts in the Discharge Tunnel. No remediation was necessary in either of these areas, but materials that could hinder survey work were removed prior to performing these surveys. Some potential safety issues with regard to collapsing loose stone side walls exist in the Discharge Tunnel access area and thus only the accessible exposed stone wall surfaces will be surveyed.

4.2 Cs-137's detection efficiency has been checked by SNEC personnel using ISO standard 7503-1 methodology (Reference 3.6). The SNEC facility uses a conservatively low GFPC efficiency as input to the survey design process.

4.3 Survey unit variability (GFPC only) used to plan the number of fixed point measurement locations is shown on Attachment 7-1 and 7-2. Attachment 8-1 is the Williamsburg concrete background results. From the SNEC LTP (Reference 3.7), the off-site background soil samples yielded a mean concentration for Cs-137 of 0.28 +/- 0.39 pCilg. This background values variability was used as input to the Compass computer program.

4.4 A GFPC detector stand-off distance of -2.1" is assumed for all survey areas. This value is used to compensate for rough surfaces in each survey unit. These survey units were inspected IAW Reference 3.8. A copy of portions of the SNEC facility post-remediation inspection reports are included (see Attachment 9-1 to 9-8). Surface defects (gouges, cracks, etc.), are present within these survey units, yielding a efficiency correction factor (ECF). Thus the average concentration of the source term will be overestimated for all surfaces (GFPC only).

4.5 The detectors physical probe area is 126 cm2, and the instrument is calibrated to the same source area for Cs-137. The gross activity DCGLw is taken to be 6,726 dpm/100 cm2 x (126

Ma"SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 l Page 6 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design cm2 physical probe area/100 cm2) = 8,475 x (0.982 disintegration of Cs-137/ disintegration in mix) x ci (0.478) x Es (0.5) x 0.31 (distance factor) which yields -617 net cpm above background (Compass calculates 593 ncpm as the gross beta DCGLw). The 0.0728 count per disintegration counting efficiency considers only the Cs-1 37 contaminant present in the sample material matrix, and is calculated by: zi (0.478) x cs (0.5) x 0.982 disintegration of Cs-137/disintegration in mix x 0.31 (efficiency correction factor due to distance from surface) = 0.0728 cts/disintegration.

4.6 A MicroShield soil slab model was used to develop Nal scan MDC value for the soil/stone in the Discharge Tunnel access area (see Attachment 4-1). The model is a 6" thick slab of soil/stone 56.4 cm in diameter with a density of 2 g/cc model assumes that the majority of the activity resides in no more than the first 6 inches of exposed materials. The modeled concentration used was 1 pCi/g Cs-137. Then the concentration of Cs-137 in the model is 2.0 g/cc x 1 pCi/g = 2.OE-06 uCi/cc of Cs-137. The calculated MDCscan is shown in Table 5.

4.7 The results of the MicroShield modeling indicate that an exposure rate of approximately 2.41E-04 mR/h is obtained at a distance of 5" (4" inches from the face of the detector).

Exposure rate is measured to the center of the detector and therefore the air gap is taken to be 4".

4.8 The majority of the structural surface area is concrete. GFPC measurements of structural concrete are compared to concrete background values (see Williamsburg concrete background values - Attachment 8-1).

4.9 The scan MDC calculation is determined based on a 1.38 index of sensitivity at a 95%

correct detection probability and 60% false positive rate. In all cases, the scan MDC is less than the gross and volumetric activity DCGLw values for these survey units. A surveyor efficiency factor of 0.5 is assumed.

4.10 No special area characteristics including any additional residual radioactivity (not previously noted during characterization) have been identified in these survey units.

4.11 No special measurements are included for this survey design.

4.12 The applicable SNEC site radionuclides and their associated DCGLw values are listed on Exhibit 1 of this calculation.

4.13 The survey design checklist is listed in Exhibit 2.

4.14 Area factors are not applicable for Class 2 and 3 areas.

4.15 The decision errors and other Data Quality Objectives for this survey design are listed within Attachment 5-1 through 5-10, and are justified lAW Reference 3.9 criteria.

4.16 Analysis results (MDA requirements, etc.) will be lAW Reference 3.5 criteria.

5.0 CALCULATIONS 5.1 All complex calculations are performed internal to applicable computer codes or within an Excel spreadsheet previously identified.

E m~ SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 Page 7 of 9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design 6.0 APPENDICES 6.1 Attachment 1-1 to 1-2, diagrams of Spray Pump and Discharge Tunnel areas.

6.2 Attachment 2-1, is typical calibration information for Nal and GFPC detection systems used at the SNEC facility as of 7-1-04.

6.3 Attachment 3-1, is a calculation result for determining efficiency loss for a GFPC detector as a function of distance from a calibration source.

6.4 Attachment 4-1 to 4-4, is the MicroShield output and MDCscan calculation results for a Nal detector.

6.4.1 Attachment 4-5 and 4-6, are the GFPC MDCscan results.

6.5 Attachment 5-1 to 5-10, are Compass output results for all areas.

6.6 Attachment 6-1 to 6-2, are the random start, systematic grid diagrams for GFPC fixed point survey locations.

6.7 Attachment 7-1 and 7-2, are the GFPC variability measurements from these survey units.

6.8 Attachment 8-1, is the Williamsburg background measurements of concrete using a GFPC instrument (an non-impacted area).

6.9 Attachment 9-1 to 9-8, are sections of survey unit inspection reports for the Spray Pump and Discharge Tunnel areas.

SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-017 0 Page 8 of 9 Subject -

Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design Exhibit I SNEC Facility Individual DCGL Values (a) 25 mremly Limit 4 mremly Goal 25 mremly Limit (All Pathways) (Drinking Water)

Radionuclide Surface Area Open Land Areas Open Land Areas (b)

(dpm/IOOcm 2 ) (Surface & Subsurface) (Surface & Subsurface)

(pCilg) (pCilg)

Am-241 2.7E+01 9.9 2.3 C-14 3.7E+06 2 5.4 Co-60 7.1 E+03 3.5 67 Cs-137 2.8E+04 6.6 397 Eu-152 1.3E+04 10.1 1440 H-3 1.2E+08 132 31.1 Ni-63 1.8E+06 747 1.9E+04 Pu-238 3.OE+01 1.8 0.41 Pu-239 2.8E+01 1.6 0.37 Pu-241 8.8E+02 86 19.8 Sr-90 8.7E+03 1.2 0.61 NOTES:

(a)While drinking water DCGLs will be used by SNEC to meet the drinking water 4 mremly goal, only the DCGL values that constitute the 25 mremly regulatory limit will be controlled under this LTP and the NRC's approving license amendment (b) Listed values are from the subsurface model. These values are the most conservative values between the two models (i.e.,

surface & subsurface).

any SNEC CALCULATION SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-04-1 7 0 Page9of9 Subject Upper Spray Pump Area & DT Entrance - Survey Design Exhibit 2 Survey Design Checklist (From Reference 3.7)

Calculation No. l CluaoNo E900-04-017 SS9-1 & SSI1-1, SS11-2, S523-1 & SS23-2 Status Reviewer ITEM REVIEW FOCUS (Circle One) Initials & Date I Hs srvy esgn alultin umerbeen assigned and is a survey design summary ,?\/

Has a v ddescription provided?

2 Are drawings/diagrams adequate for the subject area (drawings should have compass e NIA

_______headings)?

3 Are boundaries properly identified and is the survey area classification clearly indicated? esNIA 4 Has the survey area(s) been property divided into survey units IAW EXHIBIT 10 (YesNIA 5 Are physical characteristics of the area/location or system documented? es IA i 6 Is a remediation effectiveness discussion induded? esi) 7 Have characterization survey and/or sampling results been converted to units that are comparable to applicable DCGL values? .5V Nl " ?ii 8 Is survey and/or sampling data that was used for determining survey unit variance included? es NIA i 9 Is a description of the background reference areas (or materials) and their survey and/or e N/A E j 1 sampling results included along with a justification for their selection? N/A 10 Are applicable survey and/or sampling data that was used to determine variability included? ( es N/A N /A 11 WVill the condition of the survey area have an impact on the survey design, and has the probable impact been considered in the design?

Yes, es_

___/__

/

A

/

Has any special area characteristic including any additional residual radioactivity (not 12 previously noted during characterization) been identified along with its impact on survey Yes(J) design? _ _ _

13 Are all necessary supporting calculations and/or site procedures referenced or included? (Fe N/A 1 14 Has an effective DCGLw been identified for the survey unit(s)? S)N/A ifkh/

15 Was the appropriate DCGLac Included in the survey design calculation? )N/AYes,N/A 16 Has the statistical tests that will be used to evaluate the data been identified? YeN/A 17 Has an elevated measurement comparison been performed (Class 1 Area)? Yes ) illd 18 Has the decision error levels been identified and are the necessary justifications provided? ( ) N/A 19 Has scan instrumentation been identified along with the assigned scanning methodology? YesN/A 8g 20 Has the scan rate been identified, and is the MDCscan adequate for the survey design?

21 Are special measurements e.g., in-situ gamma-ray spectroscopy required under this design, Yes, N/A and isthe survey methodology, and evaluation methods described?

22 Is survey instrumentation calibration data Included and are detection sensitivities adequate? Y 23 Have the assigned sample and/or measurement locations been clearly identified on a diagram / A7I or CAD drawing of the survey area(s) along with their coordinates? NA / ' /°o 24 Are investigation levels and administrative limits adequate, and are any associated actions ( A\

2 Ar in e tg to le es a dclearly indicated? ( ~ P N/A gj 0 25 For sample analysis, have the required MDA values been determined.? Yes(@9 )/

26 Has any special sampling methodology been identified otherthan provided in Reference 6.3? Yes, N/A ( t NOTE-. a nOu of this fnrm or n shall ha in-ed within the sirveu ---

-ompleted

,ivant -e-.in calculation

- -11 _. _. ...... ...- "..

SPRAY PUMP ROOM, 795' El & ABOVE SS9-2, SS11-1 & SS11-2 North Wall A

B D B

South Wall A B I I 0 85

-I -

C D 795' El Floor West Wall East Wall A1TACHMU T.C

ENTRANCE TO DISCHARGE TUNNEL SS23-1 &SS23-2 E

C B B

tAL C0 D X IL~ D A

Some of this area is not accessible ATTACHMENT 1. -2

2350 INSTRUMENT AND PROBE EFFICIENCY CHART 7/01/04 (Typical 2" by 2" Nal (Cs-137 W)Conversion Factors)

Inst.# Cal Due AP-# Probe l Cal Due cpmlmR/h 98625 l5/18/05 __ R )l 211680 Pkl;_ 5/1805 214.SS2 98647 5/JI8/05 G &Y 211667 Pk 5118/05 218.807 1294231 5il8/05 P&Y 211687PPk 5/1 8/05 2213.53 9 117573 51/18105 O&Y _2l1674Pk 5/18/05 212.173 i __ _ I __ __

117566 4/9/05 G&R 185852 Pk 4/13/05 209.862 126183 11/19/04 B&R _ 206280 Pk 12/12/04 190,907 I I __

1206283 Pk I

129429 11/3/04 Y&W 10/31/04 l 177185 126198 1 1/03/04 IZ&W _ 19602 1 Pk 5/25/05 209.194 126172 J 6/07/05 G&W _ 1960222l 6/07/05 r208.302 129440 l 4/09/0 5 O&W __ 210938 Pk 4/14/05 205.603 120588 6/08/05 B&W 185844 Pk 6/09/05 216.654 95361 6/25/05 P&W 02568S6 2/8o 11.799 2350 INSTRUMENT AND PROBE EFFICIENCY CHART 7/01/04 (Typical 43-68 Beta Efficiency Factors)

Diflc:rcnt InstimlenLProbe Cal. Duic Cesitll Oii i s mcllt%lt111(

- to it )

INST 43-68 PROBE 44-10 PROBE INST # C/D PROBE CAD PROBE C/D BETA ALPHA EFF EFF 79037 04105105 122014 04/23/05 --

____57. N/A 126188 1/27/05 099186 1/27/05 = 28.2% N/A 126218 01/08/05 095080 01/09/05 27.9% N/A

IInn . I x Cs-1 37 Efficiency Loss with Distante From Source 1.0 C

0 L-0.8 1-----

Data: DatalLoss Model: ExpDecayl ChiA2 = 0.0 0018 yO xO Al ti 0.03536 0

1.00693 1.61706

+0

+/-0.02118

+/-0.01 809

+/- 0.07558

>11 v

0.6 C.

v a _ Fit = yO+A1 e^(-(x-xO)l) 0.4

., it 0.2 i.

a 1 2 TI I 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Inches from 150 cm2 Source ATTACHMENT .2-

-R

MicroShield v5.05 (5.05-00121)

GPU Nuclear Page :1 File Ref:

DOS File: DTEA.MS5 Date:

Run Date: August 30, 2004 By:

Run Time: 10:21:06 AM Checked:_

Duration : 00:00:01 Case

Title:

StonelSoil

Description:

Density 2 glcc, 6" Cylinder @ 5" from Surface Y Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions Height 15.24 cm 6.0 in Radius 28.21 cm 11.1 in Dose Points X Y z

1. 1 0cm1 27.94 cm 0 cm 0.0 inI 11.0 in 0.0 in Shields Shield Name Dimension Material Density Source 3 2325.091 in Concrete 2 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input Grouping Method : Actual Photon Energies Nuclide curies becquerels IuCi/cm 3 Bq/cm 3 Ba-137m 7.2088e-008 2.6673e+003 1.8920e-006 7.0004e-002 Cs-1 37 7.6203e-008 2.8195e+003 2.00OOe-006 7.4000e-002 Buildup The material reference is : Source Integration Parameters Radial 40 Circumferential 40 Y Direction (axial) 40 Results Energy Activitv Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate MeV Dhotons/sec MeV/cm 2 lsec MeV/cm 2 /sec mR/hr mR/hr No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0318 5.522e+01 6.81 1e-06 8.245e-06 5.673e-08 6.868e-08 0.0322 1.019e+02 1.31 Oe-05 1.595e-05 1.054e-07 1.284e-07 0.0364 3.707e+01 7.262e-06 9.488e-06 4.126e-08 5.391e-08 0.6616 2.400e+03 6.601e-02 1.243e-01 1.280e-04 2.41 Oe-04 TOTALS: 2.594e+03 6.604e-02 1.244e-01 1.282e-04 2.413e-04 ATTACHMENT I _+/--

Nal Scan MDC Calculation - DTEA Nal Scan MDC Calculation b :- 100 p := 0.5 HS _,;56 _ .- I SR'.- d25-- 138

. .L.- ,- .- I Conv := 208.302 ... .. A.,

- I .,

-t ':_.5. 7." tl _.'tZ;4 z 0*R*

0 i = 2.256 ObservationInterval (seconds) bi :(b-O i) 1 60 MDCR i:= (d-g). 60 M.-C...

., ..,. .1 6 -

MDRi~--.71.i168 -.I': net counts per minute:

MDCRi MDCR surveyor MDCRsIreyor

. :s

=10.647-

e. or_..._.._.. 2 ._....._:.

net counts per minute A AT%

lVILJ CR surveyor MDER :=

Conv MDER-_ 0.4J 64< =-,!_

MDER MDC Scan-MS output I 1 0 MDC'an 2.05 pCi/g 13)>c 8PP 804 p)3gpc.)q

-I,-

8/30/2004 4 of 5 ATTACHMEM1LL.- 2-

Nal Scan MDC Calculation - DTEA Na/ Scan MDC Calculation b := 200 p := 0.5 HS f--~-56.4 SR, -=25 38 Conv := 208.302 o._pu .. . 0**- --;:i.

2 F iffdI s # 1-4 ~r A 0 i = 2.256 ObservationInterval (seconds)

(b O i) 60 MDCRi:= (d-. )- 60 Oi MDCR i---100.6.. 4. 7 ,..

net counts per minute..

MDCRi MDCR surveyor

- 4.3 p

MDCRse .JL..surveyor7. 142.336.i " c- net counts per minute MDCR surveyor MVUJLI:. =-

Conv MDE-0.683 [LR/h MDER MDC scan :=

MS outputfl 10 3 MDC sI -2i;3 pCi/g QS-132*7

.. ,;. scan...t.,

8/30/2004 4 of 5 ATTACHMENM f - 3

Nal Scan MDC Calculation - DTEA where:

b = backgroundin counts perminute bi = backgroundcounts in observation interval Conv = Na! manufacturersreportedresponse to energy of contaminant (cpm/uR/h) d = index ofsensitivity (Table 6.5 MARSSIM), 1.38 = 95% of correct detection's, 60%false positives HSd = hot spot diameter (in centimeters)

MDCSC,,, = Minimum Detectable Concentrationfor scanning (pCi/g)

MDCRj = Minimum Detectable Count Rate (ncpm)

MDCR,e,,,wyr = MDCR; correctedby human performancefactor (ncpm)

MDER = Minimum Detectable Exposure Rate (uR/h)

MSo,,,w = MicroShield output exposure ratefor I pCi/g of contaminant (mPA)

O0= obervationInterval (seconds) p = humanperformancefactor SR = scan rate in centimetersper second

, '; . 1.I I 8/30/2004 5 of 5 ATTACHMENT +f----

Beta Scan Measurement MDC Calculation Concrete Surface in Upper SPR & DTEA

e. :=.78 S:=.5-.31-.982 06 te=r0. _:100 7 e .4s . . ....... .....

Wd

,:-.7*

ObservationInterval (seconds)

Sr _ j_ ; ObservationInterval (seconds)

(b.ob) b1= 60 i g-"0.0728 ,

.eE =-.

b = 20.4 Counts in observationInterval C:= _- 1A (iAes ) 4 C = 19.438 MDCR i := (d.4 F> )

- -.9 net counts per minute MDCRJ+I-b =.399. 44 gross counts per minute MDCR i

=23.4 net counts per minute in observation interval

°i A1DCscan:=CMDCR i M{DCscan = 1.817 dpmper 100 cm2 WARSSDIMPqw 633 r 6.43 Eq u 6.9 a 6.jW. an NLUREG-1 5071.hs 6.13 ID6-17 3 /30/2004 ATTACHMENT q .

where:

b = backgroundcounts perminute bi = backgroundcounts in observation interval p = humanperformancefactor Wd = detector width in centimeters Sr = scan rate in centimetersper second d = index ofsensitivity (Table 6.5 MARSSIM), 1.38 = 95% of correctdetection's, 60%false positives MDCSCan = Minimum Detectable Concentrationforscanning (dpm/100 squarecentimeters)

C = constantused to convert MDCR to MDC z, =instrumentefficiency (counts/emission) a, =sourceefficiency (emissions/disintegration)

A instrumentphysicalprobearea(in square centimeters)

MARSt P2gs6-3S i 643 ud NUREG-O17.

Ecp-- 64A 6-104 Pgsa6-1b ID6.17 4 8/3/2DO4 ATTACHMENT T -

'L# Building Surface Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: Upper Spray Pump Bldg.

Planner(s): BHB Survey Unit Name: Spray Pump Bldg. Floor @ El. 785' 5sq9-z 4 :2, o Comments:

Area (m2 ): 30 Classification: 2 Selected Test WRS Estimated Sigma (cpm): 34.5 DCGL (cpm): 593 Sample Size (N/2): 9 LBGR (cpm): 500 Estimated Conc. (cpm): 17 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power 1.00 Beta: 0.100 Prospective Power Curve

_ I to Zle 0.9 ND c 0.8

- 0.6 01 40.6 0.,

V0.h Cn 0.5

_ 0.4 c

• s 03 (60 S-tO 0 100 200 300 400 Soo 600 X00 Net Beta (pm)

- Power - DCGL - - Estimated Power

- LBGR I-beta COMPASS v1.0.0 C826/2004 Page 1 ATrACHMENT(.*-2-!

Building Surface Survey Plan Contaminant Summary !559 805-j-DCGLw Contaminant (dpm/100 cm')

Gross Activity 6,726 Beta Instrumentation Summary Gross Beta DCGLw (dpml1 00 cm2): 6,726 Total Efficiency: 0.07 Gross Beta DCGLw (cpm): 593 ID Type Mode Area (cm2) 26 GFPC Beta 126 Contaminant Energy' Fraction' Inst. Eff. Surf. Eff. Total Eff.

Gross Activity 187.87 1.0000 0.48 0.15 0.0728

' Average beta energy (keV) [NMA indicates alpha emission]

'Activty fraction Gross Survey Unit Mean (cpm): 323

• 34 (1-sigma)

Count Time (min): 1 Number of Average Standard MDC Material BKG Counts (cpm) Deviation (cpm) (dpml100 cm2)

Concrete 31 306 34.5 956 COMPASS v1.0.0 8126/2004 Page 2 ATTACHMENT L -c

',J Building SurFace Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: Upper Spray Pump Bldg.

Planner(s): BHB Survey Unit Name: Walls of Spray Pump Bldg. to El. -802' Comments: SS11-1 Area (m2 ): 60 Classification: 2 Selected Test WRS Estimated Sigma (cpm): 34.5 DCGL (cpm): 593 Sample Size (N/2): 9 LBGR (cpm): 500 Estimated Conc. (cpm): 17 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power. 1.00 Beta: 0.100 Prospective Power Curve

_ I

_ 09 t 0.8  ! .1- :I _

I- 0.7 GD e 0.6

- _ _ _ I

_ 0.4 II C 03 E

e' 02 E 0.1 O-. i _

0 100 2010 300 400 S00 600 700 Net Beta (cpm)

- Power - DCGL - - Estimated Power

- LBGR K I-beta COMPASS v1.0.0 O82612004 Page 1 ATTACHMENT - 3

Building Surface Survey Plan Contaminant Summary S~YJ-I ,iA DCGLw Contaminant (dpm/100 cm2)

Gross Activity 6,726 Beta Instrumentation Summary Gross Beta DCGLw (dpmt100 cm2): 6.726 Total Efficiency: 0.07 Gross Beta DCGLw (cpm): 593 ID Type Mode Area (cm7) 26 GFPC Beta 126 Contaminant Energy' Fraction 2 Inst Eff. Surf. Eff. Total EKf.

Gross Activity 187.87 1.0000 0.48 0.15 0.0728 1

Average beta energy (keV) [N/A indicates alpha emission]

2Activity fraction Gross Survey Unit Mean (cpm): 323

• 34 (1 -sigma)

Count ime (min): 1 Number of Average Standard MDC Material BKG Counts (cpm) Deviation (cpm) (dpml100 cmj)

Concrete 31 306 34.5 956 COMPASS v1.0.0 8/2612004 Page 2 ArTACHMENT 5' -i+/- .

'vJ Building Surface Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: Upper Spray Pump Bldg.

Planner(s): BHB Survey Unit Name: Walls of Spray Pump Bldg. Above El. -802' Comments: SS11-2 Area (m2 ): 58 Classification: 3 Selected Test: WRS Estimated Sigma (cpm): 34.5 DCGL (cpm): 593 Sample Size (N/2): 9 LBGR (cpm): 500 Estimated Conc. (cpm): 17 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power 1.00 Beta: 0.100 Prospective Power Curve

- os V 0.8 .-I ZI at-_ __ I

-0.7  !

• I 0.5

0.6

= 0.4

.i

' 0.2 O~

.iIv _ I__ _ I__ _ I__

-0 t 0.1 I t 9 1 9 3-I - 4 4 4 0 100 200 300 400 SOO 600 700 Net Beta (cpm)

- Power - DCGL - - Estimated Power

- LBGR

• 1-beta COMPASS v1.0.0 812612004 Page 1 ATTACHMENT S -

Building Surface Survey Plan Contaminant Summary ._

7- A%,

..~..

DCGLw ea/ls/oy Contaminant (dpml100 cm2)

Gross Activity 6,726 Beta Instrumentation Summary Gross Beta DCGLw (dpm/1 00 cm2): 6,726 Total Efficiency: 0.07 Gross Beta DCGLw (cpm): 593 ID Type Mode Area (cm')

26 GFPC Beta 126 Contaminant Energy' Fraction2 Inst Eff. Surf. Eff. Total Eff.

Gross Activity 187.87 1.0000 0.48 0.15 0.0728

' Average beta energy (keV) (NIA indicates alpha emission]

2 Activity fraction Gross Survey Unit Mean (cpm): 323+/- 34 (1-sigma)

Count Time (min): 1 Number of Average Standard MDC Material BKG Counts (cpm) Deviation (cpm) (dpm/100 cm')

Concrete 31 306 34.5 956 COMPASS v1.0.0 8/2612004 Page 2 ATTACHMENT . 6

'qj/ Building Surface Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: DT Entrance Planner(s): BHB Survey Unit Name: Entrance to Discharge Tunnel - Concrete Comments: SS23-1 Area (m2): 66 Classification: 2 Selected Test: WRS Estimated Sigma (cpm): 34.5 DCGL (cpm): 593 Sample Size (N/2): 9 LBGR (cpm): 500 Estimated Conc. (cpm): -35 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power. 1.00 Beta: 0.100 Prospective PowYer Curve Wp.

o-_

A -

I- -

Z-I

- 0

-100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 Net Beta (cpm)

Power - DCGL I - Estimated Power LBGR

• 1-beta vl.0.0 812612004 COMPASS v1.0.0 COMPASS 8AnL.2004 Page 1 ATTACHMENT o ~-_ r21

Mj/ Building Surface Survey Plan Contaminant Summary 2s DCGLw AsJ2 JOY Contaminant (dpm/100 cm')

Gross Activity 6,726 Beta Instrumentation Summary Gross Beta DCGLw (dpm/100 cm'): 6,726 Total Efficiency: 0.07 Gross Beta DCGLw (cpm): 593 ID Type Mode Area (cm')

27 GFPC Beta 126 Contaminant Energy' Fraction2 Inst. Eff. Surf. Eff. Total Eff.

Gross Activity 187.87 1.0000 0.48 0.15 0.0728

'Average beta energy (keV) [WA indicates alpha emission]

'Activity fraction Gross Survey Unit Mean (cpm): 271

• 29 (1-sigma)

Count Time (min): 1 Number of Average Standard MDC Material BKG Counts (cpm) Deviation (cpm) (dpml100 cm')

Concrete 31 306 34.5 956 COMPASS v1.0.0 812612004 Page 2 ATTACH MENTL5

• St

Surface Soil Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: Entrance to Discharge Tunnel - Stone/Soil Planner(s): BHB Survey Unit Name: Entrance to Discharge Tunnel - Stone/Soil Comments: SS23-2 Area (m2): 31 Classification: 2 Selected Test: WRS Estimated Sigma (pCi/g): 0.39 DCGL (pCi/g): 4.89 Sample Size (N/2): 8 LBGR (pCi/g): 3.75 Estimated Conc. (pCi/g): 0 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power. 1 Beta: 0.100 Prospective Power Curve

_ 1 I I I I) - IN

.,e 09 A..

_ 0.8 II I 1 I1 A10 ~IrlI 1

C

- 0.7 4

11 r I t 0.6 ll 11 11I

05 1 1 1 1 \11

_ 0.4 - :11I1L - -

T H1 I 11 t~I

= 03 4l l 1_1 7,1-

.; 0.2

- 7 1 7 6I E 0.1 O.

0 1 2 3 4 S 6 Soil Concentration (pCi/g), not including backgrnund

- Power - DCGL - - Estimated Power

- LBGR

• l-beta COMPASS v1.0.0 8126/2004 Page 1 ANTACHMENT S___ - _ _

Surface Soil Survey Plan Contaminant Summary DCGLw Inferred Modified DCGLw Scan MDC Contaminant (pCig) Contaminant Ratio (pCilg) (pCIg)

Cs-1 37 4.89 NMA N/A NMA N/A Survey Unit Estimate Reference Area Estimate (Mean +/- 1-Sigma) (Mean +/- 1-Sigma)

Contaminant (pCWg) (pCVg)

Cs-137 0.28 +/- 0.39 0.28 i 0.39 812612004 Page 2 COMPASS vl.O.0 COMPASS vI.0.0 8/26/2004 Page 2 ATTACHMN S . 10

SPRAY PUMP ROOM, 795' El & ABOVE

_ _94, 8 9M 53.

OS.'fy _

SS9-2, SS11-1 & SS11-2 Xth 85, i Ji I K L I0 North Wall A

Eli Li B

South Wall 1- sr, , 1 sa '

A B -4 XF2 24-4 3 Os 7A85 81 85, C D 795' El Floor West Wall East Wall ATTACHM ENT_ . -

ENTRANCE TO DISCHARGE TUNNEL SS23-1 & SS23-2 A 2 66" -- 103"'-8e-r-j 1 'K F"L

-78"-

89" 89" 74' 17V 197- He E C B B

6 48j 104" 3 1 i--

C F> ~ 7C; 2ni ] S

+427"27 C 18 D D Some of this area is A not accessible 59 65" 2 A

ATTACHMENT_-__*__L.

SPRAY PUMP BLDG. 795' El. FLOOR & ABOVE - CONCRETE Instrument 126188 Lane/Graham SR-108 FSS-491 BHB No. Location Date Time Detector Counts Count Time (sec) Mode Designator Shielded Unshielded 4 SS9 FP1S 3/31/2004 13:47 1 2.56E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.56E+02l 5 SS9 FP1U 3/3112004 13:48 1 3.43E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 3.43E+02 6 SS9 FP2S 3/31/2004 14:03 1 2.61E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.61 E+02 7 SS9 FP2U 3/31/2004 14:05 1 3.36E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 3.36E+02 8 SS9 FP3S 3/31/2004 14:07 1 2.60E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.60E+02 10 SS9 FP3U 3131/2004 14:10 1 3.78E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 3.78E+02 11 SS9 FP4S 3131/2004 14:12 1 2.55E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.55E+02 12 SS9 FP4U 313112004 14:15 1 3.64E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 3.64E+02 13 SS9 FP5S 3131/2004 14:17 1 2.60E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.60E+02 14 SS9 FP5U 3/3112004 14:19 1 3.34E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.34E+02 15 SS11 FP6S 3/31/2D04 14:21 1 2.07E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.07E+02 16 SS11 FP6U 3/3112004 14:24 1 3.07E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ _ 3.07E+02 17 SS11 FP7S 313112004 14 26 1 2.08E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.08E+02 18 SS11 FP7U 3/3112004 14:27 1 2.85E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.85E+02 19 SS11 FPaS 3/3112004 14:29 1 2.10E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.1OE+02 20 SS11 FP8U 3/3112004 14:31 1 3.05E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.05E402 21 SS11 FP9S 3/3112004 14:32 1 2.07E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.07E+02 22 SS11 FPSU 3/3112004 14:34 1 2.75E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ 2.75E+02 23 SS9 FP10S 3/31/2004 14:36 1 1.95E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.95E+02 24 SS9 FP10U 3/3112004 14:37 1 3.00E+02 60 SCL Unshielded I 3.OOE+02 Minimum *1.95E+02 2.75E+02 Maximumrn 2.61E+02 3.78E+02 Mean = 2.32E+02 3.23E+02 Slgma = 2.83E+01 3.38E+01 ATTACHMENT2Zq- 2...

ENTRANCE TO DISCHARGE TUNNEL CONCRETE 37122N21 Instrument 126188 BH4008 FSS-912 BHB No. Location Date Time Detector Counts Count Time (sec) Mode Designator Shielded Unshielded 2 SS23 EW1S 8112/2004 10:56 1 1.99E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.99E+02 3 SS23 EW1U 8/1212004 10:58 1 2.56E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 2.56E+02 4 SS23EW2S 8112/2004 11:00 1 2.23E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.23E+02 5 SS23EW2U 8/12/2004 11:01 1 3.06E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 3.06E+02 6 SS23EW3S 8/12/2004 11:03 1 1.89E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.89E+02 7 SS23EW3U 8/12/2004 11:04 1 2.61E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.61E+02 8 SS23EW4S 8/12/2004 11:06 1 1.86E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.86E+02 9 SS23EW4U 8/1212004 11:07 1 2.53E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 2.53E+02 10 SS23EW5S 8/1212004 11:08 1 2.05E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.05E+02 11 SS23EW5U 8112/2004 11:12 1 2.40E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 2.40E+02 15 SS23EW6S 8/12/2004 11:21 1 2.06E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.06E+02 16 SS23EW6U 8/12/2004 11:23 1 2.23E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 2.23E+02 17 SS23EW7S 8/12/2004 11:24 1 2.08E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.08E+02 18 SS23EW7U 8/1212004 11:26 1 2.38E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 2.38E+02 19 SS23EW8S 8/12/2004 11:28 1 1.92E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.92E+02 20 SS23EW8U 8/12/2004 11:29 1 2.52E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B2.52E+02 24 SS23SWIS 8/12/2004 13:02 1 1.73E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.73E+02 25 SS23SWlU 8/12/2004 13:03 1 2.31E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.31E+02 26 SS23SW2S 8112/2004 13:04 1 2.13E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.13E+02 27 SS23SW2U 8112/2004 13:06 1 2.50E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.50E+02 28 SS23SW3S 8/1212004 13:08 1 2.04E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.04E.02 29 SS23SW3U 8/12/2004 13:09 1 2.50E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ 2.50E+02 30 SS23SW4S 8/1212004 13:10 1 1.98E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.98E+02 31 SS23SW4U 8/12/2004 13:12 1 2.70E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.70E+02 32 SS23SW5S 8/1212004 13:13 1 1.97E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.97E+02 33 SS23SW5U 811212004 13:14 1 2.87E+02 60 SCL Unshielded B 2.87E+02 34 SS23SW6S 8/12/2004 13:16 1 1.95E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.95E+02 35 SS23SW6U 8/12/2004 13:17 1 2.81E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.81E+02 36 SS23SW7S 8/1212004 13:18 1 2.19E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.19E+02 37 SS23SW7U 8/1212004 13:19 1 2.73E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.73E+02 38 SS23SW8S 8/12/2004 13:22 1 2.07E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.07E+021 39 SS23SW8U 8/12/2004 13:23 1 2.79E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.79E+02 40 SS23SW9S 8/12/2004 13:24 1 2.14E+02 60 SCL Shielded I 2.14E+02 41 SS23SW9U 8/12/2004 13:26 1 2.54E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.54E+02 42 SS23SW10S 8/12/2004 13:27 1 2.18E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.18E+02 43 SS235W10U 8/12/2004 13:28 1 2.88E+02 60 SCL Unshielded i 2.88E+02 47 SS23WW1S 8/12/2004 13:39 1 1.88E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.88E+02 48 SS23WW1U 8/12/2004 13:40 1 2.75E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.75E+02 49 SS23WW2S 8/1212004 13:41 1 2.04E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.04E+02 50 SS23WW2U 8/1212004 13:43 1 3.03E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.03E+02 51 SS23WW35 8/12/2004 13:44 1 2.60E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.60E+02 52 SS23WW3U 8/12/2004 13:45 1 3.29E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.29E+02 53 SS23WW4S 8/12/2004 13:47 1 2.80E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.80E+02 54 SS23WW4U 8/12/2004 13:48 1 3.12E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.12E+02 55 SS23WW5S 8112/2004 13:49 1 2.26E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.26E+02 _

56 SS23WW5U 8/1212004 13:51 1 3.13E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.13E+02 57 SS23WW6S 8/12/2004 13:52 1 2.55E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.55E+02 58 SS23WW6U 8/12/2004 13:53 1 2.95E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.95E+02 63 SS-23 NW1S 8/16/2004 9:02 1 1.83E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.83E+02 64 SS-23 NW1U 8/16/2004 9:04 1 2.32E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.32E+02 65 SS-23 NW2S 8/16/2004 9:06 1 1.87E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.87E+02 66 SS-23 NW2U1 _ 8/1612004 9:07 1 2.76E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.76E+02 67 SS-23 NW3S 8/16/2004 9:08 1 2.06E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.06E+02 68 SS-23 NW3U 8/1612004 9:10 1 2.91E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.91 E+02 69 SS-23 NW4S 8/16/2004 9:11 1 2.01E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.01E+02 70 SS-23 NW4U 8/16/2004 9:13 1 2.29E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.29E+02 71 SS-23 NW5S 8/16/2004 9:14 1 2.44E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.44E+02 72 SS-23 NW5U 8/16/2004 9:15 1 3.20E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.20E+02 73 SS-23 NW6S 8/16/2004 9:17 1 2.14E+02 60 SCL Shielded 12.14E+02 74 SS-23 NW6U 8/16/2004 9:18 1 2.77E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 1 2.77E+02 Minimum > 1.73E+02 2.23E+02 Maximum = 2.80E+02 3.29E+02 Mean [2.tOE+02 2.71E+02 Sigma 2.39E+01 2.91E+01 ATTACHMEN q - 2.

Williamsburg Concrete Background Measurements 37122N21 Instrument 95348 RLM6220 Time Detector Counts Count Time (sec) Mode DesIgnator FSS-001 BHB 0 BKGND 1/4/2002 8:52 1 7.26E+03 1800 SCL Inital Background p I Source Check 114/2002 9:07 1 1.79E+05 60 SCL Source p 2 BKGND 114/2002 10:05 2 4.40E+01 1800 SCL Inital Background a coicrt..c ) l, °,

14 SourceCheck 114/2002 10:39 2 1.51E+05 60 SCL Source (I Shielded Unshielded 15 CON AtS 114t2002 13:00 1 2.78E402 60 SCL Shielded 2.78E.02 ..

16 CON AtU 11412002 13:02 1 3.88E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.88E402 17 CON A2S 1/4/2002 13:20 1 2.39E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.39E+02 18 CON A2U 1t412002 13:21 1 2.22E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.22E+02 19 CON A3S 1J4/2002 13:28 1 2.39E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.39E.02 20 CON A3U 1/412002 13:30 1 2.62E102 60 SCL Unshielded 2.62E+02 21 CON A4S 1/4/2002 13:36 1 2.45E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.45E.02 22 CON A4U 1/4/2002 13:38 1 2.71 E02 60 SCL Unshielded n 2.71 E.02 23 CON A5S 1/4/2002 13:58 1 2.00E+02 60 SCL Shielded . 2.OOE+02 24 CON A5U 11412002 14:00 1 2.82E+02 S0 SCL Unshielded a 2.82E+02 25 CON ASS 1/4/2002 14:03 1 1.84E+02 60 SCL Shielded p -1.84E+02 26 CON A6U 1/4/2002 14:05 1 3.10E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ 3.1OE+02 27 CON A7S 11/42002 14:09 1 1.98E+02 60 SCL Shielded _ 1.98E.02 28 CON A7U 1/412002 14:10 1 3.15E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ 3.1SE02 29 CON ASS 1/412002 14:19 1 2.34E+02 60 SCL Shielded 0 2.34E.02 30 CON ASS 1/412002 14:22 1 2.31 E+02 60 SCL Shielded _ 2.31 E+02 31 CON ABU 1/4/2002 14:24 1 2.88E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 1 2.88E+02 32 CON A9S 1/412002 14:31 1 2.65E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.65E+02 33 CON A9U 1/4/2002 14:33 1 2.89E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ 2.89E+02 34 CON At0S 1/412002 14:42 1 2.46E+02 60 SCL Shielded _ 2.46E.02 I _____

35 CON A1OU 114/2002 14:43 1 3.16E+02 60 SCL Unshielded p 3.16E.02 36 CONAI1S 1/4/2002 15:10 1 1.95E+02 60 SCL Shielded 0 1.95E+02_____

37 CON A11U 1/42002 15:12 1 2.94E+02 60 SCL Unshielded P 2.!4E+02 38 CON A12S 1/4/2002 15:13 1 2.21E+02 60 SCL Shielded _ 2.21 E+02 39 CON A12U 1/4/2002 15:14 1 2.84E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.84E+02 40 CON A13S 1/412002 15:23 1 1.74E+02 60 SCL Shielded 0 1.74E+02 _____

41 CON A13U 1/4/2002 15:24 1 2.94E+02 60 SCL Unshided _ 2.94E+02 42 CON A14S 1/4/2002 15:25 1 1.96E+02 60 SCL Shielded _ 1,96E.02 ____

43 CON A14U 1/412002 15:26 1 3.33E+02 60 SCL Unshielded I 3.33E+02 44 CON A15S 1/412002 15:28 1 2.16E+02 60 SCL Shielded 0 2.16E+02_____

45 CON A15U 1/4/2002 15:29 1 3.45E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _ _____ 3.45E.02 46 CON A16S 1/4/2002 15:30 1 1.83E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.63E+02_____

47 CON A16U 1/4/2002 15:31 1 3.13E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.13E*02 48 CON A17S 1/4/2002 15:33 1 1.82E+02 60 SCL Shielded q 1.82E+02 ____

49 CON A17U 1/4/2002 15:34 1 3.22E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _____3.22E+02 50 CON A18 1/4/2002 15:35 1 1.84E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.84E+02 51 CON A18U 1/4W2002 15:36 1 324E+02 60 SCL Unshielded J 324E+02 52 CON A195 1/4/2002 15:37 1 1.91E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.91 E.02 53 CON Al91U 1/4/2002 15:39 1 3.07E.02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.07E+D2 54 CON A205 1/4/2002 15:40 1 1.94E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.94E+02 55 CON A20U 1/4/2002 15:41 1 3.33E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.33E+02 56 CON A215 1/42002 15:57 1 223E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.23E.02 __ ___

57 CON A21U 1/4/2002 15:58 1 2.92E+02 60 SCL Unshielded __

_ __ 2.92E.02 58 CON A22S 1/4/202 15:59 1 1.72E+02 60 SCL Shielded 0 1.72E+02 _____

59 CON A22U 1/4/2002 16:00 1 2.80E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 2.80E.02 60 CON A23S 1/4/202 16:01 1 1.94E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.94E+02 61 CON A23U 1/4/2002 16:02 1 329E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.29E+02 62 CON A24S 14/2002 16:04 1 1.87E+02 60 SCL Shielded q 1.87E+02 63 CON A24U 1/412002 16:05 1 3.48E+02 60 SCL Unshielded __

_ _ 3.48E.02 64 CON A25S 1/4/2002 16:06 1 2.07E+02 60 SCL Shielded l0 2.07E.02 65 CON A25U 1/4/2002 16:07 1 3.72E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.72E+02 66 CON A26S 114/202 16:09 1 2.09E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.09E.02 67 CON A26U 114/2002 16:10 1 326E+02 60 SCL Unshielded 3.26E+02 68 CON A278 1/4/2002 16:11 1 2.07E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.07E+02 -~~ ' ,;:---'Ww.-.M 69 CON A27U 1/4/2002 16:12 1 3.30E+02 60 SCL Unshielded f 3.30E+02 70 CON A28S 1/4/2002 16:14 1 2.30E+02 60 SCL Shielded fi 2.30E+02 71 CON A28U 1/412002 16:15 1 3.06E+02 60 SCL Unshielded A 3.06E+02 72 CON A29S 11412002 16:20 1 2.13E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.13E402 73 CON A29U 1/412002 16:21 1 2.58E+02 60 SCL Unshielded A 2B5E+02 74 CON A30S 114/2002 16:24 1 2.33E+02 60 SCL Shielded 2.33E+02 75 CON A30U 11412002 16:25 1 2.89E+02 60 SCL Unshielded _____2m89E+02 76 CON A318 1/412002 16:28 1 1.84E+02 60 SCL Shielded 1.84E402 *...

77 CON A31U 114/2002 16:29 1 2.63E+02 60 SCL Unshielded p .. 2.63E.02

- Source Check 1/412002 17:27 1 1.70E+05 60 SCL - _

Minimum= j1.72E+02 Maximum= 2-78E402 J2.22E+02 3.88E+02 Mean= 2.11E402 3.0E2 Slama = 2.69E+01 I 3.45E+01 ATTACHMENL.A../. .

Exhibit I Survey Unit Inspectlon Check Sheet ORIGINAL 1P U Jr INISNECTION Survey Unit # SS23-1/2 Survey Unit Location I Discharge Tunnel Access Area - Floor and Walls Date l 8125/04 Time 1300 Inspection Team Members D. Sarge

'2-:UREUN"PNPECTIOSCE Inspection Requirements (Check the appropriate Yes/No answer.) Yes No N/A

1. Have sufficient surveys (I.e., post remediation, characterization, etc.) been obtained for the survey unit? X

2. Do the surveys (from Question 1)demonstrate that the survey unit will most likely pass the FSS? X

3. Isthe physical work (i.e., remediation &housekeeping) inor around the survey unit complete? X

4. Have all tools, non-permanent equipment, and material not needed to perform the FSS been removed? X

5. Are the survey surfaces relatively tree of loose debris (i.e., dirt, concrete dust, metal filings, etc.)? X

6. Are the survey surfaces relatively tree of liquids (i.e.. water, moisture, oil, etc.)? X

7. Are the survey surfaces free of all paint, which has the potential to shield radiation? X

8. Have the Surface Measurement Test Areas (SMTA) been established? (Refer to Exhibit 2 for Instructions.) X

9. Have the Surface Measurement Test Areas (SMTA) data been collected? (Refer to Exhibit 2 for instructions.) X

10. Are the survey surfaces easily accessible? (No scaffolding, high reach, etc. is needed to perform the FSS) X

11. Is righting adequate to perform the FSS? X

12. Is the area Industrially safe to perform the FSS? (Evaluate potential fall & trip hazards, confined spaces, etc.) X

13. Have photographs been taken showing the overall condition of the area? X

14. Have all unsatisfactory conditions been resolved? X NOTE: If a No answer is obtained above, the Inspector should immediately correct the problem or initiate corrective actions through the responsible site department, as applicable. Document actions taken and/orjustfications in the Comments section below. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

Comments:

Response to Question #3: Miscellaneous rope, supplies, sock filters, trash, herculite remains in area.

Response to Question #4: Scaffolding, 'A' Frame hoist, stairway remain in area.

4, Survey Unit Inspector (print/sign) I David Sarge / frfiii l Date l 8/25/04 Survey Designer(print/sign) 1 ., (OSV / , Date l 2 ATTACHME1NT.._q -_

ORIGINAL EXHIBIT 3 Surface Measurement Test Area (SMTA) Data Sheet SMTA Number

-;6,'tf%: ilr> <!v SMTA-SS23-2-1 A;

ECTIOW DESCRIPTIONW l Survey Unit Number SS23-2 I3W (iff SMTA Location Discharge Tunnel Access Area - South Wall Survey Unit Inspector D.Sarge Date 8/25/04 Time l 1245 Z SECTION I' 2- CALIPER INFORMAtION-'&S'-PERSONNELN;VVi Et ,* m Caliper Manufacturer I Mitotoyo Caliper Model Number I CD-6" CS Caliper Serial Number l 763893 l Calibration Due Date (as applicable) N/A Rad Con Technician I D.Sarge as a, Date l 8/25/04 Time I 1245 SurveyUnitInspectorApproval I D.Sargel Date 8/25/04 Sgi;,",,1CSlECTION 3--'MFASUREMNTRrSULTS, SMTA Grid Map & Measurement Results in Units of mm I1e .1_:A Coamment rb tinsen Results in Mnue Blocks BelOW)

I I Concrete surfaces throughout the survey unit were formed in the same fashion and exhibit similar surface characteristics. Therefore these readings are representative of the typical range of concrete surfaces to be surveyed during FSS.

Average Measurement - 3.3 mm Additional Measurements Required ATTACHMENT 9. .

C. ,, . ' U EXHIBIT 3 i.+/-.&'

Surface Measurement Test Area (SMTA) Data Sheet

-1:=

. =SECT.ION,':.',-',DESCR.lO.Nfts i >iMM SMTA Number SMTA-SS23-1-1 Survey Unit Number SS23-1 SMTA Location IDischarge Tunnel Access Area - Pillar Survey Unit Inspector I D.Sarge Date 8/25/04 Time 1300

-ti . ION CALIPER INFORMATION !& tERSdN NEL1-NVIOLVEDŽ;

ECTJON2-Caliper Manufacturer Mitotoyo l Caliper Model Number l CD-6 CS Caliper Serial Number l 763893 Calibration Due Date (as applicable) N/A Rad Con Technician I D.Sarge , , Date 8/25/04 Time l 1245 Survey Unit Inspector Approval D.Sarge / Date 8/25/04 ItENTSECTION EI"U!S,, P .:"iAUREENTR; SMTA Grid Map & Measurement Results in Units of mm C

,,AA AE21 A/:J IAAF!. DAI A ....

kIIsR MUIU1s iF] VViiiie DIUCK5 beIUw)

.. I Comments

• Readings taken with caliper without the use of plastic grid template in various surfaces throughout the pillar.

• Eleven readings obtained throughout concrete surfaces, as follows (inmm): 16, 10,15, 27,42, 35, 1.5, 2.0, 14, 12, and 28.

Average depth: 18.4 mm.

Average Measurement - mm Additional Measurements Required ATTACHMENT 9

• 3

GYIIGLAL EXHIBIT 3 Surface Measurement Test Area (SMTA) Data Sheet

\t_; RI ~G '",1,J'1 EL SMTA Number SMTA-SS23-2-2 SurveyUnitNumber l SS23-2 SMTA Location Discharge Tunnel Access Area - West Wall -North Side Survey Unit Inspector D. Sarge lDate 8/25/04 Time 1215 t(-1E-tS CTlON2-2CALIPER &NFORMATION&

PERSONNELIlNVOLVED -'=t: @

Caliper Manufacturer Caliper Model Numberjl Caliper Serial Number l Calibration Due Date (as applicable)

RadConTechnician I D.Sarge 7 Date 8/25/04 Time 1215 Survey Unit Inspector Approval D. Sarge I l Date 8/25/04 go. ETIONA~, URgMEW,,RESULTS!1 SMTA Grid Map & Measurement Results in Units of mm Comments (Insert Results in White Blocks Below)

I 0 Readings taken with a tape measure using a detector template to simulate actual radiation survey distances.

• Ten readings obtained throughout concrete surfaces, as follows (in inches): 2.0, 2.5, 2.0, 1.25, 1.0, 1.0, 0.75, 1.25, 2.0, 1.25 Average depth = 1.5 inches.

• Concrete has imbedded metal.

Average Measurement - mm Additional Measurements Required A1TACHMENT '7 . £-

EXHIBIT 3 Surface Measuremnent Test Area (SMTA) Data Sheet ORIGINAL

~;? ',m.' -'s'SECTION ;1'-DESCRIPTION s SMTA Number SMTA-SS23-2-3 Survey Unit Number SS23-2 SMTA Location Discharge Tunnel Access Area - West Wall -South Side Survey Unit Inspector D. Sarge Date 8/25/04 Time 1200

-YK$b #eS YECTITION:2 CALIPER INFORMATION & PERSbNNEL INVOLVED  ;

Caliper Manufacturer Caliper Model Number Caliper Serial Number Calibration Due Date (as applicable)

Rad Con Technician 1.Sarge D A / Date 8/25104 Time 1200 Survey Unit Inspector Approval D. Sarge I Date 8/25/04 W~~SECT.N,.3.,, EASU#RE! ENS ESULTS 5 X 1$

SMTA Grid Map & Measurement Results in Units of mm (Insert Results in White Blocks Below) Comments

• Readings taken with a tape measure using a detector template to simulate actual radiation survey distances.

• Twelve readings obtained throughout concrete surfaces, as follows (in inches):

2.5, 2.0, 2.25, 2.0, 2.0, 1.75, 2.25, 3.0, 1.0, 1.75 2.0, 2.25. Average depth = 2.1 inches.

• Concrete has imbedded metal.

Average Measurement - mm Additional Measurements Required ATTACHMENT -&!5

is. - -, I Exhibit I Survey Unit Inspection Check Sheet SECTION i - SURVEY UNIT INSPECTION DESCRIPTION .

SurveyUnit# SS9-1,SS10,SS11 Survey Unit Location Spray Pump Pit Floor, Walls Below & Above 795' SuvyUi 5-,51,S1 uvyUi oa Io el Date 7/29/04 Time 0800 Inspection Team Members D. Sarge SECTION 2 - SURVEY UNIT INSPECTION SCOPE .

Inspection Requirements (Check the appropriate Yes/No answer.) Yes No N/A

1. Have sufficient surveys (i.e., post remediation, characterization, etc.) been obtained for the survey unit? X

2. Do the surveys (from Question 1)demonstrate that the survey unit will most likely pass the FSS? X

3. Is the physical work (i.e., remediation & housekeeping) In or around the survey unit complete? X

4. Have all tools, non-permanent equipment, and material not needed to perform the FSS been removed? X

5. Are the survey surfaces relatively free of loose debris (i.e., dirt, concrete dust, metal filings, etc.)? X

6. Are the survey surfaces relatively free of liquids (i.e., water, moisture, oil, etc.)? X

7. Are the survey surfaces free of all paint, which has the potential to shield radiation? X

8. Have the Surface Measurement Test Areas (SMTA) been established? (Refer to Exhibit 2 for Instructions.) X

9. Have the Surface Measurement Test Areas (SMTA) data been collected? (Refer to Exhibit 2 for instructions.) X

10. Are the survey surfaces easily accessible? (No scaffolding, high reach, etc. is needed to perform the FSS) X

11. Isfighting adequate to perform the FSS? X

12. Isthe area Industrially safe to perform the FSS? (Evaluate potential fall & trip hazards, confined spaces, etc.) X

13. Have photographs been taken showing the overall condition of the area? X

14. Have all unsatisfactory conditions been resolved? X NOTE: If a 'No answer is obtained above, the Inspector should immediately correct the problem or initiate corrective actions through the responsible site department, as applicable. Document actions taken andlor justifications in the 'Comments section below. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

Comments:

Survey Unit inspector (print/sign) D. Sarge / Date 7/29/04 Survey Designer (print/sign) I 3 V SLh / Ad , l Date l / 3/o/m ATTACHMEN 1 7Z *6 .

• Z. -

I , . _- -

EXHIBIT 3 Surface Measurement Test Area (SMTA) Data Sheet SECTION 1 - DESCRIPTION .  ;..

SMTA Number SMTA-SS11-1 Survey Unit Number SS1 1 SMTA Location Spray Pump House Floor Survey Unit Inspector D. Sarge Date 7/29/04 Time 0800 SECTION 2 - CALIPER INFORMATION & PERSONNEL INVOLVED.

Caliper Manufacturer Mitotoyo l Caliper Model Number CD-6* CS Caliper Serial Number 7,63893 Calibration Due Date (as applicable) N/A Rad Con Technician D. Sarge Date 7/29/04 Time 0800 Survey Unit Inspector Approval D.( arge/ Date 0800

- . . SECTION 3 MEASUREMENT RESULTS . . .\ -

SMTA Grid Map & Measurement Results in Units of mm Comments (Insert Results in White Blocks Below) 1 7 13 19 25 31

• Floor surfaces indicate similar depth irregularity 0 01 0.6 04 37 44 similar to these readings.

2 8 i4 20 6 32

• Two ground straps for equipment protrude from floor surface. These areas will pose survey 1.0 32 10 19 103 17.3 obstructions. Notified D & D to remove exposed

.3 9 15 21 27 33 wires.

0.9 1.0 3.0 6.3 0.9 16.2

.4 1o 16 22 28 34 1.2 09 1.5 1.1 10.0 0.9 6 11 17 23 29 25 1.4 1.0 2.6 1.0 1.0 05 6 12 18 24 30 36 4.6 7.1 5.9 6.2 4.0 0.6 Average Measurement - 3.5 mm Additional Measurements Required

1) Pump Pedestal has been chiseled causing surface irregularities:

10 depth readings using a tape measure were obtained throughout surface. Results ranged from 0.4 - 2.0 inches with an average of 1 inch.

2) Drain Trough is cut across outside edge of floor:

Trough is approx. 3 inches wide and varies in depth between 1.375 to 1.75 inches deep.

3) Core Bores Holes are present in floor.

Three 3-inch holes vary in depth between 4.75 to 6.5 inches. One 4-inch hole is approx. 5.5 inches deep.

ATTACHMa1T___9_!__iT-

• £4 EXHIBIT 3 Surface Measurement Test Area (SMTA) Data Sheet SECTION 1 - DESCRIPTION SMTA Number SMTA-SS11-2 Survey Unit Number SS11 SMTA Location Spray Pump House West Wall (Southwest comer)

Survey Unit Inspector D. Sarge Date l 7/29/04 Time 0815 SECTION 2- CALIPER INFORMATION & PERSONNEL INVOLVED :i Caliper Manufacturer Mitotoyo Caliper Model Number CD-6 CS Caliper Serial Number 763893 Calibration Due Date (as applicable) N/A Rad Con Technician D. Sarge Date 7/29/04 Time l 0815 Survey Unit Inspector Approval D. Sarge / Date 0815 SECTION 3- EASUREMENT RESULTS . .

SMTA Grid Map & Measurement Results in Units of mm Comments (Insert Results in White Blocks Below) Comments 1 7 13 19 25 31

• Wall surfaces indicate similar depth irregularity 13 2.6 1.1 0.6 4.1 0.7 similar to these readings.

. :2 8 14 20 26 32

• Steel BoltslMounting Brackets are protruding from the wall in various areas.

1.0 4.8 0.5 0.6 1.4 1.0 3 9 15 21 27 33

• Pump Discharge Line (30-inch diameter) indicates surface flaking.

7.2 15.6 0.3 03 2.6 3.6 4- 10 16 22 28 34 5.7 25.4 1.3 0.8 4.6 0.3 6 11 17 23 29 25 11.6 15.4 3.0 2.3 7.5 0 6 12 18 -24 30 36 11.3 11.1 8.8 2.6 12.5 1.2 Average Measurement - 4.9 mm Additional Measurements Required ATTACHM ' .- 8