ML043640234

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Maine Yankee Final Status Survey Release Record FR-0111 Yard West Excavations Survey Unit 3
ML043640234
Person / Time
Site: Maine Yankee
Issue date: 12/22/2004
From: Donna Anderson, Dockins L N, Pillsbury G
Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co
To:
NRC/FSME
References
MN-04-060, RA-04-118 FR-0111-03, Rev 0
Download: ML043640234 (26)
v • d • e


Text

MAINE YANKEE FINAL STATUS SURVEY RELEASE RECORD FR-0 GIl YARD WEST EXCAVATIONS SURVEY UNIT 3 Prepared By: ch. I cw ox- Date: /A/17/64 FSS Engineer -Signature i). AWkERSf Printed Name Reviewed By: __ _ Date: t ?/7 (o4 FSSt pecialist

-Signature Printed Name Reviewed By: I j x Date: /2- 12o (0 4 Independent Review -Signature end X'nature Printed Name Approved By: Date: -/Z/ZA FSS, MOP -Signature rP-ri n. ted Nme , Printed Name MAINE YANKEE FINAL STATUS SURVEY RELEASE RECORD FR-01 11 YARD WEST EXCAVATIONS SURVEY UNIT 3 A. SURVEY UNIT DESCRIPTION FR 0111 Yard West Excavations Survey Unit 3 consisted of a 564.1 m 2 elongated excavation that extended along the former Spray Building foundation and Personnel Hatch slab into the area commonly known as the "alleyway" (overlapping portions of survey area FR 01 10 Survey Units 1, 2, and 5) within the Restricted Area back yard. The survey unit was located at coordinates 407,475 N and 623,850 E using Maine State Coordinate System (West Zone)NAD 1927. It was bounded on the east by the former Service Building footprint, on the south by FR 0111 Survey Units 4 and 7, on the west by FR 0111 Survey Unit 4, and on the north by concrete foundation left from the former Spray Building and Personnel Hatch. The location of the survey unit in relation to the Containment Building and the surrounding FR 0111 survey units is shown on Map FROI I IU3-SITE (Attachment 1).The excavation was created as a result of the removal of contaminated sub-surface soil from locations S121 and S122 as identified in Characterization Package CR 5000. Demolition and removal of all or a portion of the following systems and foundations contributed to the size of the excavation:

  • Piping systems that exited the south side of the Spray Building* Demineralized Water Storage Tank (DWST) concrete foundation to 3-ft. below grade* Entire Gas House concrete foundation
  • Portions of the storm drain system* Primary Component Cooling (PCC)/Secondary Component Cooling (SCC) piping and other miscellaneous yard piping.The remaining excavation was generally 3 meters (10 ft.) below grade with two deep holes that fell 7.6 meters (25 ft) below the normal elevation.

The survey unit was approximately 10 meters wide and 40 meters in length. The survey unit dimensions are illustrated on map FRO1 I IU3-06.FR- I 11-03, Revision 0 Page 2 of 26 B. SURVEY UNIT DESIGN INFORMATION Survey Unit 3 met the LTP Revision 3 definition for a Class I survey unit. The survey unit design parameters are shown in Table 1. Given an adjusted relative shift of 3.0, it was determined that 14 direct measurements were required for the Sign Test. Because the measurement locations were based on a systematic square grid with a random start point, the N=14 design led to a survey unit map with 19 locations.

The direct point locations are illustrated on map FRO I1 1 U3-05 (Attachment 1). Direct measurements consisting of soil, rock, ledge or concrete samples were collected from required locations and analyzed with laboratory gamma spectroscopy instrumentation.

In accordance with the LTP, scans covering 100% of the 564.1 m 2 area were required for the Class I survey unit. This was accomplished by use of an in sits gamma spectroscopy detector configured at a 3-meter distance from the surface to obtain overlapping 28-M 2 fields of view. Locations of the 35 survey scans are shown on map FROI I IU3-03.Additional ISOCS scans were performed in the following geometries to ensure all terrain levels within the survey unit were scanned:* ISOCS scans were performed on the concrete foundation of the former Spray Building and Personnel Hatch and ledge along the north boundary of the survey unit. A total of 21 horizontal gamma scans were performed using the 90-degree collimator at a distance of 2 meters from the concrete/ledge surface to obtain overlapping 12 m 2 fields of view.Locations of horizontal scans are provided on map FROI1 1 IU3-04 (Attachment 1).* ISOCS scans were performed 9 inches from the 4 PCC/SCC pipe ends located in the Spray Building wall using a 90-degree collimator.

Locations of the scans are provided on map FRO 1 IU3-04 (Attachment 1).* Two ISOCS scans were performed on holes left by the demolition and removal of the yard pipes. The gamma scans were performed at a distance of 9 feet from the excavated floor using the 180-degree collimator.

Locations of the vertical scans are provided on map FRO I I IU3-02 (Attachment 1).The combination of all ISOCS scans conservatively ensured 100% scan coverage of all exposed surfaces within Survey Unit 3. The survey instruments used are listed by model and serial number in Attachment 2 (Table 2-1). Scan MDCs are also listed in Attachment 2 (Table 2-2) and are compared to the DCGL, the investigation level, and the DCGLENIC.

As shown in this table, the scan MDC is less than the scan investigation level, thus providing high confidence (95% or higher) that an elevated area would be detected in the scanning process. Further, since the investigation level was always less than the design DCGLEMC, no EMC sample size adjustment was necessary.

FR-0I 11-03, Revision 0 Page 3 of 26 TABLE 1 SURVEY UNIT DESIGN PARAMETERS Survey Unit Design Criteria Basis Area 564.1 mn2 Class 1, < 2,000 m2 Based on an adjusted LBGR of 2.18 Number of Direct pCi/g, sigmal of 0.07 pCi/g, and a Measurements Required relative shift of 3.0.Type I = Type II = 0.05 Sample Area 40.29 mn 564.1 m' / 14 = 40.29 m'Sample Grid Spacing 6.34 m (40.29)'Scan Grid Area ISOCS scan at 3-meters Reference 6 Area Factor 1.5 Class I Area, LTP Table 6-12 Scan Area 564.1 m 2Class I Area -100%1.0 pCi/g Cs-137 ISOCS investigation levels with 0.36 pCi/g Co-60 detector at 3-meter height Scan Investigation Level (Reference

6) l 2.2 poi/g Cs 137 ISOCS investigation levels with 028 pCi/g Co- 60 detector at 2-meter height 0.8 pi/g o-60(Reference 6)2.39 pCi/g Cs-137 R_ _ _ _ 0.86 pCi/g Co-60 -__ Reference 4 3.58 pCi/g Cs-137 DCGL x Area Factor for Class I Design DCGLEN~c 1.29 pCi/g Co-60 survey unit, per LTP Section 5.6.3 C. SURVEY RESULTS A total of 19 direct measurements were performed in Survey Unit 3. The results are presented in Table 2. All direct measurements were below the DCGL.ISOCS gamma scans were performed at 62 locations using various geometries discussed in Section B. The gamma scans were performed for a sufficient count time to achieve a Minimum Detectable Activity of approximately 25% of the DCGL. Four gamma scans identified potentially elevated activity above the Co-60 investigation level. One location that exceeded the investigation level used an ISOCS scan at 3 meters from the surface. A second location occurred on vertical concrete surface with the ISOCS detector configured at a distance of 2 meters. Two additional locations were identified during the ISOCS scan of the pipes. The subsequent investigation evaluation work is discussed in the following section.Based on post-remediation sample standard deviation.

FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 4 of 26 TABLE 2 DIRECT MEASUREMENTS Cs-137 Uncertainty Co-60 Uncertainta Unitized Samle Number (pCi/g) (pCilg) (pci/g) (pcilg) Rule FR 0111031 SOO I 1.80E-01 3.1 OE-02 4.13E-02 1.73E-02 1.23E-0O FR 01 1 031 S002 < 3.73E-02 1.29E-01 2.06E-02 1.66E-Ol FR 011103 1S003 < 5.43E-02 9.87E-02 2.66E-02 1.37E-0l FR 0111031S004 7.62E-02 2.24E-02 5.40E-02 2.60E-02 9.46E-02 FR 0111031 S005 < 3.87E-02 < 4.19E-02 6.49E-02 FR 011031 S006 < 4.24E-02 < 4.53 E-02 7.04E-02 FR 0111031 S007 < 3.8 1 E-02 < 3.86E-02 6.08E-02 FR 0111031SOO8

< 3.93E-02 < 4.74E-02 7.16E-02 FR 0111031S009

< 5.74E-02 < 6.29E-02 9.72E-02 FR 0111031SO10 3.54E-02 2.03E-02 1.55E-01 2.38E-02 I.95E-0I FR0 11031SO1 < 4.52E-02 < 4.94E-02 7.64E-02 FRO0 11031S012 4.48E-02 2.36E-02 4.29E-02 1.93E-02 6.87E-02 FR 011103 1S013 5.34E-02 2.91E-02 2.44E-01 3.20E-02 3.06E-OI FR 0111031S014

< 6.16E-02 < 6.46E-02 l.OlE-Ol FR 011 1031S015 < 4.19E-02 6.70E-02 2.03E-02 9.55E-02 FR 01 11031S016

< 5.52E-02.

< 6.48E-02 9.84E-02 FR 0111031SO17

< 4.79E-02 < 5.21 E-02 8.06E-02 FR 011031 S018 < 4.25E-02 < 5.07E-02 7.67E-02 FR 0111031SOI9

< 7.20E-02 < 7.43E-02 1.17E-0l Mean 5.60E-02 7.49E-02 1.11E-Ol Median 4.52E-02 5.40E-02 9.55E-02 Standard Deviation 3.21E-02 5.13E-02 5.91E-02 Range 3.54E-02 to 1.80E-01 3.86E-02 to 2.44E-01 6.08E-02 to 3.06E-O1"<" indicates MDA value. Bold indicates positive detection value.D. SURVEY UNIT INVESTIGATIONS PERFORMED AND RESULTS The scan process identified four locations of potentially elevated activity.

An investigation was performned for two locations using survey investigation package XR 01 11-03. At location S035, ISOCS amma scans were performed at 0.7 meters to obtain non overlapping fields of view of 1.5 m, thus dividing the original 28 m 2 field of view into 14 gamma scans.Locations of the in situ scans are provided on map XRO 1 I 1 U3-03 (Attachment 1). Co-60 activity exceeding the investigation level of 0.36 pCi/g was identified in 3 of the 14 scans.The original scan grid was remediated and a post-remediation gamma scan was performed at 3 meters (28 m 2 field of view). Results of the post-remediation scan were less than the investigation level and are provided in Table 3-1 (Attachment 3).FR-0I 11-03, Revision 0 Page 5 of 26 At location C009, the original 12 m 2 field of view identified as containing potentially elevated activity was also re-scanned at a distance of 0.7 m. A total of 7 non-overlapping gamma scans were performed.

dividing the area into 1.5 m 2 scans. Locations of the in suit scans are provided on map XR0I I 1U3-04 (Attachment 1). Only I scan identified activity above the investigation level. The area was remediated and a post-remediation ISOCS scan was performed for the original area at 2 meters (12 m 2 field of viewv). Results of the post-remediation scan were less than the investigation level and are provided in Table 3-l (Attachment 3).Four PCC/SCC pipe ends within the survey area were scanned with the ISOCS at a distance of 9 inches from each pipe to obtain 0.87 m 2 fields of view. Gamma scans identified activity levels above the investigation criteria in two of the pipes. No investigations were performed.

However, the gamma analyses were compared against the EMC Unity value. Results of the evaluation are provided in Table 3-1 (Attachment 3).E. SURVEY UNIT DATA ASSESSMENT An analysis of the direct sample measurement results, including the mean, median, standard deviation, and sample result range, is provided in Table 2. Of the 19 soil/rock/ledge/concrete samples collected, 5 identified Cs-1 37 activity below the DCGL value of 2.39 pCi/g while 8 samples identified Co-60 activity below the DCGL value of 0.86 pCi/g. All other values were below the MDA. Identified sample activities or Minimum Detectable Activities are listed in Table 2. The mean and median activities were less than the DCGL for both Co-60 and Cs-137. The highest reported value for Cs-137 wvas less than 10% of the DCGL. Four ISOCS scan measurements were identified as exceeding the investigation level and were evaluated in Attachment 3 (Table 3-1). The measurements were compared against the EMC criteria and determined to be 38.9% of unity, passing the EMC test.For illustrative purposes, as indicated in LTP Section 5.9.3, a simplified general retrospective dose estimate can be calculated from the average residual contamination level by subtracting the mean fallout Cs-137 value (0.19 pCi/g)2 for disturbed soil from the survey unit sample mean activity.

This yields a negative number which is equivalent to 0.0 mrem/y. Since there is no background value for Co-60, the annual dose contribution from this radionuclide would equate to an annual dose rate of 0.49 mrem/year 3.However, for purposes of demonstrating compliance with the radiological criteria for license termination and the enhanced State criteria, background activity was not subtracted from the sample analysis activity values.2 See Attachment E to Maine Yankee Procedure PMP 6.7.8 (Reference 5).3 This annual dose equivalent is based on LTP Table 6-11 which shows the RA contaminated soil contribution (for soils contaminated at the DCGL) to be 5.63 mrem/y. Therefore, the annual dose rate would equate to (0.0749)Annual Dose Rate = 5.63 x = 0.49 mrem I y 0.86 /FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 6 of 26 F. ADDITIONAL DATA EVALUATION Attachment 4 provides additional data evaluation associated with this Survey Unit, including relevant statistical information.

Based on survey unit direct measurement data, this attachment provides the Sign Test Summary, Quantile Plot, Histogram, and Retrospective Power Curve.1. The Sign Test Summary provides an overall summary of design input (Table 1) and resulting calculated values used to determine the required number (N) of direct measurements (per LTP Section 5.4.2). The Sign Test Summary is a separate statistical analysis that also calculates the mean, median, and standard deviation of the direct measurements.

The critical value and the result of the Sign Test are provided in the Sign Test Summary table, as well as a listing of the key release criteria.

All of the key criteria were found acceptable with the exception that the standard deviation exceeded the design sigma.The measurements were evaluated against the EMC criteria and found to be acceptable.

No additional samples wvere required.2. The Quantile Plot was generated from the unity value data listed in Table 2. The data set and plot are consistent with expectations for a Class I survey unit. All of the measurements are well below the DCGL of 2.39 pCi/g Cs-1 37 and 0.86 pCi/g Co-60 for land inside the restricted area.3. A Histogram Plot was also developed based on the unity values. This plot shows a log-normal distribution.

4. A Retrospective Power Curve was constructed, based on FSS results. The curve showvs that this survey unit having a mean residual activity at a small fraction of the DCGL has a high probability

("powver")

of meeting the release criteria.

Thus, it can be concluded that the direct measurement data support rejection of the null hypothesis, providing high confidence that the survey unit satisfied the release criteria and that the data quality objectives were met.G. CHANGES IN INITIAL SURVEY UNIT ASSUMPTIONS ON EXTENT OF RESIDUAL ACTIVITY The survey wvas designed as a Class I land survey area; the FSS results were consistent with that classification.

The direct measurement sample standard deviation was greater than the design sigma. A sufficient number of sample measurements were taken and no additional measurements were required due to the powver of the Sign Test and the small change in sigma.II. LTP CHANGES SUBSEQUENT TO SURVEY UNIT FSS The FSS of Survey Unit 3 was designed, performed and evaluated in mid 2004. The design was performed to the criteria of the LTP Revision 3 (References 2 and 4). No subsequent LTP changes with potential impact to this survey unit need to be evaluated.

FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 7 of 26

1. CONCLUSION The FSS of this survey unit was designed based on the LTP designation as a Class I area.The survey design parameters are presented in Table 1. The required number of direct measurements was determined for the Sign Test in accordance with the LTP. As presented in Table 2, all direct measurements were less than the DCGLs of 2.39 pCi/g Cs-137 and 0.86 pCi/g Co-60.A Sign Test Summary analysis demonstrated that the Sign Test criteria were satisfied.

The direct measurement sigma was greater than that used for design, but relative shift using the actual sigma still exceeds 3, thus indicating that a sufficient number of samples wvas taken.The Retrospective Power Curve shown in Attachment 4 confirmed that sufficient samples were taken to support rejection of the null hypothesis, providing high confidence that the survey unit satisfied the release criteria and the data quality objectives were met. Attachment 4 also revealed that direct measurement data represented essentially a log-normal distribution.

The scan survey design for this survey unit was developed in accordance with the LTP Revision 3 Addenda (Reference

1) with significant aspects of the design discussed in Section B and Table 1. ISOCS scans identified four locations where potentially elevated activity exceeded the scan investigation level on Table 2-2. Attachment 3 shows the elevated areas identified and provides the results of the investigation actions. Two of the four areas were remediated and re-scanned.

The post-remediation scans were less than the investigation

.levels. Two elevated ISOCS measurements of pipe ends in the survey unit were evaluated and determined to pass the EMC unity rule.It is concluded that FR 0111 Survey Unit 3 meets the release criteria of IOCFR20.1402 and the State of Maine enhanced criteria.J. REFERENCES

1. Maine Yankee License Termination Plan, Revision 3, October 15, 2002 and Addenda provided by Maine Yankee letter to the NRC, MN-02-06 1, dated November 26, 2002 2. NRC letter to Maine Yankee, dated February 28, 2003 3. Maine Yankee letter to the NRC, MN-03-049, dated September 11, 2003 (LTP Supplement to LTP Revision 3)4. Issuance of License Amendment No. 170, NRC letter to Maine Yankee, dated February 18, 2004 5. Maine Yankee Procedure PMP 6.7.8, FSS Data Processing and Reporting, Attachment E, Approach for Dealing With Background Radioactivity for Maine Yankee Final Status Surveys 6. Maine Yankee Calculation EC-003-04 FR-O1 11-03, Revision 0 Page 8 of 26 Attachment I Survey Unit Maps FR-O I 1 1-03, Revision 0 Page 9 of 26 Main Yankee Decomn-issioning Team I Maine Yankee Decommissioning Project Survey Map Map ID# FRO 1 1 1 U 3-SITE Survey Type: -Characterizalion Turnover i Final Stafus Survey Survey Area Name: Site Locator Prepared By. Larry N. Dockins Date: 12/13/04 C. .0 0 M 00 M FR-O1 11-03, Revision 0 Page 10 of 26 I-Maimn Yankee Maine Yankee Decommissioning Project Survey Map Map ID# FRO 1 1 U3-06 Decom m ission g eq nm __ _ ._ -_ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ -_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Survey Type: Characterization

.Turnover

  • Final Status Survey Survey Area Name: Dimensions Ref. Map ,Prepared By. Larry N. Dockins Date: 6/24/04 0 0 0 3 o ,4.25ma 4 3 ao 0.....a 0........' ......4* .X .* e 1 ~3m 3*.8I,\. c\5rn-.1 I '. I'd;' ' ;'X'A's'S'u

'.'>'X's.a, \X\, \ \ ., .. %d.x !, .so ! *\ >; \*¢ ;*-*%**;**

is ;** ....He FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 11 of 26 0 40m Maine Yankee Maine Yankee Decommissioning Project Survey Map Map ID# FROl 11 U3-05 Survey Tyme: Characterization Turnover Final Status Survey SurveyArea Name: Directs -Volumetrics

-__ _ _ PreparedBy:

Larry N. Dockins Date: 6/24/04 0 30m s0SO 1 6 X ,,t, 0 S uv 'we ,mX[ 1'\\\4\::0.;E~i,X 1 \I ,iV g An"\e el \0Szo-8; A h \!iL_ t\ i\\ (~~~~SOOT D p )l-1a 1/l(091 Maine Yankee Maine Yankee Decommissioning Project Survey Map Map ID# FROl 1 1 U3-03 Decommissioning Teem._ -__ .,_SurveyType:

Characterization Turnover 3 Final Status Survey SurveyAreaNome:

Area Scans -ISOCS ,Prepared By: Larry N. Dockins Date: 6/24/04 i FR-O1 11-03, Revision 0 Page 13 of 26 I I , _ I ;I. iI ! ; .I I I A L 1 1 ! .I l l l I I I I I I I I no I --I0 bum I MKaO nwkae I Maine Yankee Decommissioning PrVect Survey Map MrID FRO111U3-04 xnynsnwy wan Dj9Ypo " E Cha-octaftan I1 TumaV w* ud SIM &xw Il St-vw Areoaja: Concrete Scans -ISOCS.Prpomd or. Larry N. Dockins Do*:_6/24/04 FR-01 11-03. Revision 0 Page 14 of 26 I'.1ll I MI I1I I-I r-T l 1T1 gi I I lIII I I l I I I lII I I I I I I----..........a ._ ..L .I~ =_

  • J I I ..I I .I .I W I a 0 bum Mahoeankw I Maine Yay&Siav ". [ c$..blo:1o

[ 1 Twar thee Decommissioning Project Survey Map Ams 'FROM 11 U3-02* RrSta9.m l&aW Su rvoveA&i N. Spray Building Holes hrpard v Larry N. Dockins Dow: 6/24/04'N W 4n_1 .'El II I I l0 ft.I I Maine Yankee Decommlss-r qng Team Survey Type: Characterization Afaine Yankee Decommissioning Project Survey Map Mop ID# XRQ1 l lU3-03 Turnover

  • Final Status Survey Survey Area Narne: Area Scans -ISOCS Prepared By: Larry N. Dockins Date: 6/28/04 i!...I FR-O1 11-03, Revision 0 Page 16 of 26! ' .' I' I I 1 I I i I I I g l , I I ! ! I I 1 1 l I I I I I I I I I 50m jectSurveyMap l lo XRO1lIU3-SI#YQAMOaN=irw:

Concrete Scans -ISOCS iPmpamder:

Larry N. Dockins Dabt: 6/28/04 I I X00 XRO111 03 1 S___GSX__-

/ r/XRO1 1 1 Location Number 001 th ru 007 FR-OI I 1-03, Revision 0 Page 17 of 26.... ....... -.-........

.......50m Attachment 2 Survey Unit Instrumentation FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 18 of 26 TABLE 2-1 INSTRUMENT INFORMATION ISOCS Detectors (Field Measurements)

Detector Number MDC (pCi/g)7722 0.25 to 0.8 IIPGe Detcctors (Laboratory Analysis)Detector Number MDC (pCi/g)FSS1 0.03 to 0.07 FSS2 0.03 to 0.07 DET2 0.05 to 0.07 DET3 0.05 to 0.08 TABLE 2-2 INSTRUMENT SCAN MDC, DCGL, INVESTIGATION LEVEL AND DCGLENIC Detector Instrument Comments ISOCS ISOCS Scan MDC 0.25 to 0.8 pCi/g 0.4 to 0.8 pCi/g < 50% DCGL (soil, concrete, ledge) (pipe interior)Approved DCGL for land DCGL 2.39 pCi/g Cs-137 2.39 pCi/g Cs-137 areas inside the 0.86 pCi/g Co-60 0.86 pCi/g Co-60 Restricted Area, (Reference 4)Investigation Level 1.0 pCilg Cs-137 (IOS r)0.36 pCi/g Co-60 N/A (ISOCS @ 3 m) (Reference

6) N/A Investigation-Leveli 2.2 pCi/g Cs-137 2.2 pCi/g Cs-137 (ISOCS @ 2 m) 0.8 pCi/g Co-60 0.8 pCi/g Co-60 (Reference
6) (Reference 6)lDD3.58 pCi/g Cs-137 3.58 pCi/g Cs-137 Cla x Area Factor for Design DCGLENIc 3.28 pCilg Co 137 3.58 pCi/g Cso137 Class I survey unit, per 1.29p~ig C-60 1.29p~ig C-60 LTP Section 5.6.3 FR-0 11-03, Revision 0 Page 19 of 26 Attachment 3 Investigation Table FR-OI 11-03, Revision 0 Page 20 of 26 TABLE 3-1 INVESTIGATION TABLE INITIAL SURVEY INVESTIGATION RESULTS l Investigation Scan Value Elevated Post- Post- ued Grid Setpoint ScnVle Area in Area DCGLEMC Remediation Remediation Value of pCi/g pCi/g rni Factor Unity AF Scan Co-60 Scan Cs- 137 Unity_ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _pCi/g pCi/g Rule _ _ _ _ _0.8 pCi/g 3.76E-01 + 25.29%C009 Co-60 Co-60 12 2.4 2.4 1.82E-01 + <3.57E-01 3.61E-01 < DCGL 2.2 pCi/g <3.39E-01 Cs-137 39.11%C s-13 7__ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _0.36 pCi/g 4.53E-01 + 25.85%S035 Co-60 Co-60 28 1.7 1.7 2.23E-01 + <2.50E-0I 3.64E-01 < DCGL 1.0 pCi/g <3.68E-01 Cs-137 29.61%Cs-137 0.8 pCi/g 1.25E+00 + 19.07%Co-60 Co-60 1 12 12 N/A N/A I.78E+00 1.40E-0 I POOl 2.2 pCi/g 7.95E-01 + 45.35%Cs-137 Cs-137 0.8 pCi/g 1.24E+00 + 19.45%P002 Co-60 Co-60 l 12 12 N/A N/A 1.77E+00 1.38E-0I 2.2 pCi/g <7.87E-01 Cs-137_ _ _ _ _ _ _ C s- 137 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _Co-60 Mean Cs-137 Mean pCi/g pCi/g 7.49E-02 5.60E-02 l.I I E-0 I 1.1 IE-01 EMC Unity Sum 3.89E-0 I NOTES 1. "<" indicates MDA value. Bold indicates positive detection value.2. The ISOCS scan results for C009 were below the investigation level for 2 meters. However, the scan was investigated and therefore is being included for completeness.
3. The DCGLEMC Unity Value was calculated by subtracting the survey unit mean from the sample results. The survey unit mean was calculated using the data shown in Table 2.FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 21 of 26 Attachment 4 Statistical Data FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 22 of 26 Survey Package FROIII Unit 3 UNITY Soil Sign Test Summary ,,-. -:-,JEvitlon' nput Val ues -' Comernts min'Survey Package: FRO111 Yard West Excavations Survey Unit: 03 Evaluator:

DA DCGLw: 1.OOE+00 Unity DCGL.,: 1.50E+00 AF x Unity LBGR: 9.12E-01 91% of DCGL Sigma: 2.90E-02 Unitized (0.07 pCilg /2.39 pCi/g)Type I error: 0.05 Type II error: 0.05 Nuclide: UNITY Soil Type: N/A;;; lCalculat Valu i I } ? 'Z.<: 1.645 Z.: a 1.645 Sign p: 0.99865 Calculated Relative Shift: 3.0 Relative Shift Used: 3.0 Uses 3.0 if Relative Shift is >3 N-Value: 11 N-Value+20%:

14 Number of Samples: 19 Median: 9.55E-02 Mean: 1.11E-01 Net Sample Standard Deviation:

5.91 E-02 Total Standard Deviation:

5.91 E-02 Sum of samples and reference Maximum: 3.06E-01;hiiki -I t 2-,;-'Sig Tes esls,(,,^, Ad ; ,. sCornment'>:Add~,+'.@;

Adjusted N Value:l 19 S+ Value:l 19 Critical Value:l 13 Sign test results: , Pass nt-e ',S-t'itfacflon'<

Cornm-en 'Sufficient samples collected:

Pass Maximum value <DCGL,: Pass Median value <DCGL.: Pass Mean value <DCGL,: Pass Maximum value <DCGL,,c:

Pass Total Standard Deviation

<=Sigma: Investigate Criteria comparison results: Investigate Total SD does not affect sample size The survey unit passes all conditions:l Investigate Survey Unit Passes FROI 1 I-SU3-SoilSign-UNITY.xAs 12/20104 7:25 AM FR-O 11-03, Revision 0 Page 23 of 26 FR-0111 SU-3 Quantile Plot 0.35 0.3 CT-0 b~j W-.o ~0% f 0'To a)N*._U>-*H 4".0.25 0.2 0.15 0.1* t -.....7 Activity[- Median (unitized)

I (unitized)

I 0.05 0 0 25 50 75 100 Percent One-Sample T-Test Report Page/Date/Time 2 12/17/04 9:45:36 AM Database Variable C2 Plots Section Histogram of FR-01 II. SU-3 14.V)co 11-E C/) -oa 7-.0 z 4 C'.. i: .--, , t-,,,............._ ..0.050 0.125 0.200 0.275 Activity (unitized) 0.350 FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 25 of 26 One-Sample T-Test Power Analysis Page/Date/Time 2 12/17/04 9:46:31 AM Chart Section Retrospective Power Curve 1.0 -.... .. -..---- -.-- ...0.8-. -------0.6-. ..0 0.4- -...-0.2.- ---. -----U.u _0.1 0.3 0.5 0.7 0.9 Survey Unit Mean (unitized)

FR-01 11-03, Revision 0 Page 26 of 26

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML043640234&oldid=1377154"