ML051950087

Calculation E900-05-023, Rev 0, Miscellaneous Chain Link MA9 - Survey Design.

ML051950087
Person / Time
Site:	Saxton File:GPU Nuclear icon.png
Issue date:	04/18/2005
From:	Cooper W, Paynter A, Tritch T GPU Nuclear Corp
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML051950082	List: E910-05-023, Submittal of Final Status Survey Report for Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation Fences MA9 ML051950087 ML051950089
References
E900-05-023, Rev 0
Download: ML051950087 (34)

Text

Appendix A (pages 1 to 10)

SNEC CALCULATION COVER SHEET CALCULATION DESCRIPTION Calculation Number Revision Number Effective Date Page Number E900-05-023 0 Y41g /RS 1 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chain Link Fences MA9- Survey Design Question I - Is this calculation defined as 'In OA Scope? Refer to definition 3.5. Yes 0 No 9 Question 2- Is this calculation defined as a Design Calculation'? Refer to definitions 3.2 and 3.3. Yes 0 No I NOTES: If a 'Yes' answer is obtained for Question 1.the calculation must meet the requirements di the SNEC Facility Deconmissioning 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.

DESCRIPTION OF REVISION APPROVAL SIGNATURES

, :.~. ., . . .

S;<NECCALCULATION SHEET calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 0 Page2ofl1 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this calculation is to develop a survey design for the miscellaneous chain link fences MA9 survey area throughout the Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation open land areas. The fences total approximately 1000 linear meters.

1.2 No classification for the fences is provided in the SNEC LTP (Reference 3.5) and the survey of remaining fences is a unique survey, not a soil or concrete surface as expected in the MARSSIM process (Reference 3.12). Because of the unique character of the fences, little or no residual contamination is expected.

1.3 Although MARSSIM does not address such unique surveys as open chain fencing, the survey will be designed to MARSSIM to the extent practicable.

1.4 The fences will be divided into two survey units, with those in and around class I areas surveyed as class 2 (10% to 50% scan) as MA9-1 and those in class 2 and 3 areas surveyed as class 3 (1% to 10% scan) as survey unit MA9-2. See Attachment 1-1 for general layout of the fencing.

1.5 Because of the unique character of this survey, static measurements will be in the center of randomly selected sections of fence, selected by grid. Random grid placement would place all of the survey points at the same (but random) height anyway since the survey unit is effectively one continuous strip.

2.0

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS The following information should be used to develop a survey request for this survey unit. The effective DCGLw value is listed below. This value is derived from previously approved derived values from Reference 3.15. This data source is used because of the presence of significant portions of fencing in the OL1 and OL2 areas, and the assumption that variability throughout the site is best represented by the activity from the site compound area. The US NRC has reviewed and concurred with the methodology used to derive these values. See Attachment 2-1 and Reference 3.9.

Table 1, DCGLw Values Gross Activity DcGLw (dpmn/00 cm',

26445 (19834 A.L.)

NOTE: A.L. Is the site Administrative Limit (75% of effective DCGLw) 2.1 Survey Design 2.1.1 Scanning of the chain link fence shall be performed using a L2350 with 43-68B large area gas flow proportional counter calibrated to Cs-137 (see typical calibration information on Attachment 3-1).

2.1.2 The instrument conversion factor/efficiency (Et) shall not be less than that assumed on Attachment 4-1 as 23.9% - Cs-137 (Ei*Es).

2.1.3 Other instruments of the type specified in Section 2.1.1 above may be used during the final status survey (FSS), but must demonstrate detection efficiencies at or above the value listed in Section 2.1.2 above.

;'KSNECACALCU ION.AH: 'X Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 0 Page 3 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design 2.1.4 An area correction factor (ACF) is applied in place of the usual efficiency correction factor (ECF) to compensate for the limited actual surface area of the chain link.

2.1.4.1 The actual area covered by the link is slightly more then 10% (see Attachment 5). In order to account for this, the surface area factor of 0.1 is applied as the ACF.

2.1.4.2 Some geometry effects are present, but the distances are reasonably uniform and the absolute efficiency should be higher with metal substrate than for concrete. Since these two effects are contradictory, no account is taken of them in this design for simplicity.

2.1.4.3The 0.1 ACF is very conservative. Since the standing fence is essentially equivalent to a standing wall, the dose effects of activity on the wire of the fence at any distance greater than an inch or two from the fence is entirely equivalent to the same activity uniformly distributed over the same area. In addition, residence times would be lower for a fence than a building re-use scenario. Therefore, the application of a 0.1 area factor to the detector geometry essentially introduces a conservatism factor of at least 10 into the survey when compared to a standing wall dose model.

2.1.5 The fraction of detectable beta emitting activity affects the efficiency and is determined by the nuclide mix. The mix beta fraction is determined to be 60% based on Reference 3.15. Because the adjusted DCGLw used is based only on the modified Cs-137 DCGLw, the mix percentage is not applied to the adjusted surrogate DCGLw. The gross activity DCGLw, which would include all the low energy activity and would require mix percentage adjustment is considerable higher, at 44434 dpm 100cm2. The Cs-1 37 adjusted surrogate activity already accounts for the beta yield of the mix.

Table 2, GFPC Detection Efficiency Results Used for Planning Material Type I El I Es Et(as %) ACF Adjusted efficiency Concrete l .478 l .5 23.9 0.1 2.39%

Table 3, Surface Scanning Parameters for Misc. Chain Link Fence MDCscan Scan Speed Maximum Distance from Surface DCGLw  % Coverage (dpm/1OOcm 2), (cm/sec) Action Level 11966 10 V (gap between detector face & > 600 ncpm varies surface)

See Attachment 2.1 and 4.1 for calculations' 2.1.6 This MDCscan is based on an assumed rounded value at the upper end of the observed background range, 500 cpm background. This produces a slightly higher

E.SNEC CALCULATION.SHEET. ..

Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 0 Page 4 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design MDCscan result, which demonstrates that the MDCscan is still less than the adjusted DCGLw at the upper end of expected background. Most backgrounds are lower than this assumed value, with an average of about 300 cpm.

2.1.7 On 4/7/05 open window and shielded GFPC measurements were obtained directly from the fences in numerous locations. This data (Attachment 8-2) is used for the variability assessment for the COMPASS determination of sample requirements (Attachment 8-1). If local backgrounds exceed the background count rate assumed for the MDCscan (-500cpm - see Attachment 4-1) contact the cognizant SR coordinator.

2.1.8 The scan DCGLw Action Level listed in Table 3 does not include background. The DCGLw action level is based on fixed measurement and does not include 'human performance factors' or 'index of sensitivity' factors (see Reference 3.12).

2.1.9 If a count rate greater than the UDCGLw action level' of Table 3 is encountered during the scanning process, the surveyor should stop and locate the boundary of the elevated area, and then perform a 'second phase' fixed point count of at least 30 seconds duration. If the second phase result equals or exceeds the uDCGLw action" level noted in Table 3, the surveyor should then mark the elevated area with appropriate marking methods and document the count rate observed and an estimate of the affected area 2.1.9.1 Class 3 fencing (MA9-2) should be scanned to include between 1% and up to 10% surface coverage at a scan rate of about 10 cm per second. Fencing in approximately 70 grids is included in the class 3 portion which equates to about 1400 square meters of fence area and about 140 square meters of actual surface area. Class 3 structure survey units may be as large as 10,000 square meters per Table 5-5 of the SNEC LTP (Reference 3.5). Ten grids in the class 3 area are selected for survey based on random numbers derived from an Excel spreadsheet as listed in Attachment 6-3. This would greatly exceed the needed 1% minimum coverage.

2.1.9.2 Class 2 fencing (MA9-1) should be scanned to include between 10% and up to 50% surface coverage at a scan rate of about 10 cm per second. Fencing in approximately 30 grids is included in the class 2 portion which equates to about 600 square meters of fence area and about 60 square meters of actual surface area. Class 2 structure survey units may be as large as 1000 square meters per Table 5-5 of the SNEC LTP (Reference 3.5). Eleven grids are selected for survey. Ten grids in the class 2 area are selected based on random numbers derived from an Excel spreadsheet. An additional grid, AX123 is a biased selection due to the personnel gate in the fence and its proximity to the RWDF. Attachment 6-2 lists the class 2 fence grids selected for scanning. These eleven selections would greatly exceed the needed 10%

minimum coverage.

2.1.9.3 The surface of the fence toward the higher classification land areas is required to be scanned. See Attachment 1-1 for grid layout for the survey unit. Areas that cannot be accessed should be clearly noted along with the reason for not completing the scan in that area.

7( S NNEC CALCULATION SHEE Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 0 Page 5 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design 2.1.9.4 The full length and height of fences within each defined grid are to be scan surveyed. The vertical and horizontal support poles should also be surveyed.

Because of the different geometry for the poles, the MDCscan and AL are very conservative for the poles. Do not attempt to scan barbed wire or other sharp projections.

2.1.9.5 Some gas flow proportional counters can be sensitive to sunlight. This depends on the condition of the mylar. Care should be taken to minimize sunlight effects. If an AL is measured but sunlight response is suspected or possible, it can be confirmed that the AL is or is not a result of sunlight by placing a small, previously surveyed, clean backplate (e.g. 1 square foot piece of plywood) behind the fence to reduce sunlight effects.

2.1.10 The minimum number of fixed measurement sampling points (N+20%) indicated by the COMPASS computer program (Reference 3.3) is 11 for the aggregate survey unit (see COMPASS output on Attachment 7-1 to 7-3). Fixed point measurements should be lAW Section 2.2. The MDCscan (fence) is below the effective administrative DCGLwc,. 137 (11966 DPM/1 00cm2 MDCscan @500cpm bkg < 19834 DPM/100cm2 AL).

2.1.11 MARSSIM specifies that sample point determination in Class 3 areas can be a simple random selection process. MARSSIM recommends a random systematic grid layout arrangement for class 2 survey point selection. Due to the unique nature of this survey, a simple random survey point selection process is used here for the class 2 survey as well because of the simple linear layout of the fences. Therefore Excel (Reference 3.13) is used to produce random numbers (see Attachment 6-1).

These numbers are used to select grids for scanning. See Attachment 6-2 and 6-3 for sampling point locations.

2.1.12 An additional biased grid fixed point in the class 2 MA9-1 area is selected. Grid AX123 is a biased selection due to the personnel gate in the fence and its proximity to the RWDF.

2.1.13 Some sampling points may need to be adjusted to accommodate obstructions within the survey area. Contact the SR coordinator to report any difficulties encountered when laying out systematic grid sampling points.

2.1.14 When an obstruction is encountered that will not allow collection of a sample, contact the cognizant SR coordinatorfor permission to delete the sampling point.

NOTE If remediation actions are taken as a result of this survey, this survey design must be revised or re-written entirely since it is based on a class 2 and 3 survey units.

2.2 Measure fixed point and elevated areas(s) lAW SNEC procedure E900-IMP-4520.04 sec 4.3.3 (Reference 3.2) and the following.

2.2.1 Clearly mark, identify and document all sample locations.

SNECCALCULATIONSHEET.......

Calculation Number j Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 . 0 Page 6 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design 2.2.2 Second phase scan any location that is above the second phase action level cited in Table 3.

3.0 REFERENCES

3.1 SNEC Calculation number 6900-02-028, "GFPC Instrument Efficiency Loss Study" 3.2 SNEC Procedure E900-IMP-4520.04, "Survey Methodology to Support SNEC License Termination".

3.3 COMPASS Computer Program, Version 1.0.0, Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education.

3.4 Visual Sample Plan, Version 3.0, Copyright 2004, Battelle Memorial Institute.

3.5 SNEC Facility License Termination Plan.

3.6 SNEC Procedure E900-1MP-4500.59, "Final Site Survey Planning and DQA".

3.7 SNEC survey GFPC measurements on fences 417105 3.8 GPU Nuclear, SNEC Facility, "Site Area Grid Map", SNECRM-020, Sheet 1, Rev 4,1/18/05.

3.9 SNEC Calculation No. E900-03-012, Effective DCGL Worksheet Verification.

3.10 SNEC calculation 6900-02-028 "GFPC Instrument Efficiency Loss Study" 3.11 SNEC Procedure E900-IMP-4520.06, "Survey Unit Inspection in Support of FSS Design".

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

3.13 Microsoft Excel 97, Microsoft Corporation Inc., SR-1 and SR-2, 1985-1997.

3.14 (left intentionally blank) 3.15 SNEC Calculation E900-04-005 "CV Yard Survey Design - North West Side of CV" 4.0 ASSUMPTIONS AND BASIC DATA 4.1 The COMPASS computer program is used to calculate the required number of random start systematic samples to be taken in the survey unit (Reference 3.3). COMPASS calculation of the DCGL equivalent cpm does not appear to use the full 126 cm2 of the detector. The COMPASS value can be duplicated if only 100cm 2 is used. See Attachment 4-1 for the DCGLeq calculation used.

4.2 Survey unit specific shielded measurements were obtained on 417/05. These are used as the initial estimate of variability. These results are shown on Attachment 8-1 and 8-2.

4.3 The MARSSIM Sign Test (Reference 3.12) will be applicable for this survey design. No background subtraction will be performed under this criteria during the DQA phase.

4.4 The required points chosen by COMPASS are assigned to grids based on the sequential listing of fence grids as shown in Attachment 6.

__5 Paz

'SN EC CALCULATIONSHEE-T Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 0 Page 7 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design 4.5 Reference 3.5 and 3.6 were used as guidance during the survey design development phase.

4.6 Background has been measured in the area, and ranges from about 125 cpm to about 450 cpm (Reference 3.7) with an average of about 300 cpm.

4.7 The determination of the physical extent of this area is based on the drawing Reference 3.8.

4.8 Remediation History There has been no known remediation of the remaining chain link fences. Some of the fences were installed since decommissioning began.

4.9 This survey design uses Cs-137 as a surrogate for all SNEC facility related radionuclides in the survey unit. The effective DCGLw is the Cs-137 DCGLw from the SNEC LTP (28000 dpm/1OOcm 2) adjusted (lowered) to compensate for the presence (or potential presence) of other SNEC related radionuclides. In addition, an administrative limit (75%) has been set that further lowers the permissible Cs-137 concentration to an effective surrogate DCGLw for this survey area.

The sample database used to determine the effective radionuclide mix for the fences is based on the OLI and OL2 areas and has been drawn from samples that were assayed at off-site laboratories. This nuclide mix is copied from Reference 3.15.

The GFPC detector scan MDC calculation is determined based on a 10 cm/sec scan rate, a 1.38 index of sensitivity (95% correct detection probability and 60% false positive) and a detector sensitivity (Et) of 23.9% cpm/dpm for Cs-137. The expected range of background values varies from about 125 cpm to -450 cpm with average about 300 cpm, but the design assumes (for MDCscan assessment) that background may be as high as 500 cpm.

4.10 The survey unit described in this survey design was inspected. A copy of the fence specific portion of the SNEC facility post-remediation inspection report (Reference 3.11) is included

.as Attachment 9-1.

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

4.12 The decision error for this survey design is 0.05 for the cx value and 0.1 for the J value.

4.13 Although this survey is not one of the "Special measurements" as described in the SNEC LTP this is a non-standard survey since it is not the typical soil or concrete. Unique assumptions and design requirements are included, with the intent that the design be as consistent with a standard MARSSIM survey as practicable.

4.14 No additional sampling will be performed IAW this survey design beyond that described herein.

4.15 SNEC site radionuclides and their individual DCGLw values are listed on Exhibit I of this calculation based on Table 5-1 of Reference 3.5.

4.16 The survey design checklist is listed in Exhibit 2.

4.17 Area factors are shown as part of COMPASS output (see Attachment 7-1) and are based on the Cs-1 37 area factors from the SNEC LTP.

4 SNEC CALCULATION SHEET, -,-'

Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 0 I Page 8 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design 5.0 CALCULATIONS 5.1 All calculations are performed internal to applicable computer codes or within an Excel (Reference 3.13) spreadsheet.

6.0 APPENDICES 6.1 Attachment 1-1, is a diagram of survey area.

6.2 Attachment 2-1 is the DCGLw calculation logic for the survey unit from Reference 3.15.

6.3 Attachment 3-1, is a copy of the calibration data from typical GFPC radiation detection instrumentation that will be used in this survey area.

6.4 Attachment 4-1, is the MDCscan calculation sheet for open chain link in dpm/1 00cm 2.

6.5 Attachment 5-1 and 5-2, is a review of the impact of the 'open weave' of the fence and derivation of the ECF 6.6 Attachment 6-1 to 6-3, show the randomly picked scan locations (random numbers from Excel) and reference coordinates for the survey unit areas.

6.7 Attachment 7-1 through 7-4, are COMPASS output for the survey unit showing the number of sampling points in the survey unit, area factors, and prospective power.

6.8 Attachment 8-1, is the summary of the surface variability results for the 4/7/05 survey data in the survey unit. Attachment 8-2 is a listing of the background measurements from the 4/7/05 survey.

6.9 Attachment 9-1, is the results of the inspection report for the fencing i

SEC CALCULATiON SHEET Calculation Number Revision Number Page Number E900-05-023 l 0 Page 9 of 10 Subject Miscellaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design Exhibit I SNEC Facility Individual Radionuclide DCGL Values (a) 25 mrem/y Limit 4 mremly Goal 25 mrem/y Limit (All Pathways) (Drinking Water)

Radionuclide Surface Area Open Land Areas Open Land Areas lb)

(dpm/100cm2 ) (Surface & Subsurface) (Surface & Subsurface)

(pCl/g) (pci/g)

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-1 37 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 3.0E+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 mrerily goal, only the DCGL values that constitute the 25 mrem/y regulatory lmit 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).

, ,'.^.'Cabculatii

. ,, .., E9004

. Subject,

. .,Miscel llaneous Chin Link Fences MA9 - Survey Design Exhibit 2 Survey Desiarn Checklist Calculation No. Location Codes

._E90D 0S-023 Miscellaneous Chain Link Fences MA9 ITMRVEWFCSStatus Reviewer ITEM REVIEW FOCUS (Circle One) Initals'& Date I Has a survey design calculation number been assigned and Is a survey design summary es NA description provided?

2 Are drawings/diagrams adequate for the subject area (drawings should have compass > 1 .1 headings)? WA V~

3 Are boundaries properly identified and is the survey area classification dearly Indicated? Y N/A 4 Has the survey area(s) been properly divided Into survey units lAW EXHIBIT 10 N/A

5. - Are physical characteristics of the areaflocation or system documented? - NA 6 Is a remediation effectiveness discussion Included? ees. A Have characterization survey and/or sampling results been converted to units that are comparable to applicable DCGL values?

8 Is survey and/or sampling data that was used for determining survey unit variance Included? Y */AT). A 9 Is a description or the background reference areas (or materials) and their survey and/or & A-I sampling results Included along with a lustificaton for their selection? \ Pt F 10 Are applicable survey and/or sampling data that was used to determine variability included? Y A P 11 Will the condition of the survey area have an Impact on the survey design, and has the G ) W I probable Impact been considered In the design? _____ T74__ PI Has any special area characteristic Including any additional residual radioactivity (not i\

12 previously noted during characterization) been Identified along with its impact on survey YesQW design? ________

13 Are all necessary supporting calculations and/or site procedures referenced or Included? W/A 3I /1Y I I P

14 Has an effective DCGLw been Identfied for the survey uni(s)? WA of, 7

15 Was the appropriate DCGLfjJ, included In the survey design calculation? Yes, 16 Has the statistical tests that will be used to evaluate the data been identified? , N/A I

17 Has an elevated measurement comparison been performed (Class I Area)? Yes, 0 16 Has the decision error levels been identified and are the necessary Justifications provided? s A r 11-19 Has scan instrumentation been Identified along with the assigned scanning methodology? At/t)i PF 20 Has the scan rate been identified, and is the MDCscan adequate for the survey design? es A 01 P

21 Are special measurements e.g., In-situ gamma-ray spectroscopy required under this design.nds 0.

and is the survey methodology, and evaluation methods described? 0 22 Is survey Instrumentation calibration data included and are detection sensitivities adequate? WA 23 Have the assigned sample and/or measurement locations been clearly Identified on a diagram Yes A e or CAD drawing of the survey area(s) along with their coordinates? oes NIA 7M17 444 P 24 Are investigation levels and administrative limits adequate, and are any associated actions 11 clearly Indicated? a PI 25 For sample analysis, have the required MDA values been determined.? , Yes, 5

26 Has any special sampling methodology been Identified other than provided in Reference 6.3? Yes, A ~ i NOTE: a copy of this completed form or equivalent, shall be included within the survey design calculation.

5 ori o//a re/Xe e>4 / /M/o- (zoL e Iaj} fits

/- )r ofi derostT.Kr, 'ji9 C n

Appendix A (attachments 1-1 to 6-3) o o

• B o o 0 0 0 0 0 0

+#87 10--\ 5 ° \ °/ ° o o 0 0 O 0. 0

-1k s4 i \ \7:

t88. #89 B \F  ! ° ° \\° 6 .>5 dt ,t K t ^ 4 I#8 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 #89 o

.,, 4 2  ?#>#4#

M4 ,",< I , -2 0 c 02'wvug _$o0 o

.. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '

0 0 0 000 . . t 0 0 0 00 0 0 /0 0 -0 0 L.1 d0 0 d0 a 0 7

L_ 10 n^i 4i5 AU-122. ° 1- oX o 28ot o O.

=t t ELO 2 E4 6

. -O O O O O 9 0 0* 0 0 o o @~~~' 0 o/

'o z;& ,42. ~ i&TRAHACKAE0R

/;0 O 0OOOOO~

0) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 . 0 0 0; UNOROROUNO STRUTURES LAYoUrANtiLOCATION

.- 1. g i. 0 0 o 0 0 0 NCSVERIFiD 0 0 o._4 C.

01 C,

0 0 1:

Ib-*8 g .0

,1 0 0

0 0

0 0

0 a 0 0

0 0

0 0 0

0 dAREA 0

0 01 0

0 0

o

_ %- PROP, _m oO 4tw C 0~r 0 0s 0 O

0Di:

Vo 0~~t O

r.

O O

O O

O O 0A-2 0

.0 0 10a0 0 #0 0 .

0 0 a;

0000 0 0 oL 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 AL-144'C 0.0 0 0 0 0 0o o I

1. 76

Effective DCGL Calculator for Cs-137 (dpml100 cmA2) I Gross Activity DCGLw II Gross Activity Administrative Limit 44434 IdpmiiOO cm^2 33325 idpm100 cmA2 25.0 mrem/y TEDE Umit Cs-137 Limit Cs4137 Administrative Limit SAMPLE NO(s)= ICV YARD SOIL & BOULDER SAMPLES I 26445 dpm/100 cm^2 19834 Idpm/100 cmA2 SNEC AL 75%

/

Sample Input Individual Limits Allowed dpmlIO Beta dpm/1OO Alpha dpml100 Isolope (pCI/g, uCI, eic.)  % ofTotal (dpm/lOO cmA2) . cmA2 mrem/y TEDE cm^2 cmA2 I Am-241 lIl 0.000% 27 0.00 0.00 NIA 0.00 Am-241 2 C-14 0.000% 3,700,000 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A C-14 3 Co-60 6.25E-03 0,443% 7,100 196.87 0.69 196.87 N/A Co-60 4 Cs-137 8.40E-01 - 59.515% 28,000 26444.68 23.61 26444.7 N/A Cs-137 8 Eu-152 0.000% 13,000 0.00 0.00 0.00 N/A Eu-152 6 H-3 5.57E-01 39.500% 120,000,000 17551.45 0.00 Not Detectable N/A H-3

.7 Nl-6i . 0.000% 1,800,000 0.00 0.00 Not Detectable N/A NI-63 a3Pu-238 . 0.000% 30 0.00 0.00 NIA 0.00 Pu-238-

. 9 P11-239 0.000% 28 0.00 0.00 N/A 0.00 Pu-239 la Pu-241 - - 0.000%

• 880 0.00 0.00 Not Detectable N/A PU-241 II Sr-90 7.64E-03 0.542% 8,700 240.75 0.69 240.75 NIA' Sr-90

. 1 4 . + I I

• 100.000% K 44434 25.0 26882. . ..

I -

' .MAxirnum Permissible dpm/I1O cm^2 m~

cD =

o C) 0 0 6 SD C.n r%

2350 INSTRUMENT AND PROBE EFFKIENCY CHART 7/01/04 (Typicai 43-68 Beta Efficiency Factors) l Dirrril~ itstruill7Vnt/ProbcCai'Due l '>nn X s Ii;nmlwnl. I l'ln11VU, Iowl, INST l. 43-68 'PROBE 44-10 PROBE BETA ALPHA INST # CID iPROBE C/D PROBE CGDi 790{37 104/05/05 122014 04/23105 _5. __ N/IA

_ l_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _._ . 1: _ _ _ _ _

1261881 1!27/05 099186 1/27/05 28.2% N/A

_ _ I' _

126218 l01/08105 I0_0

{95080

_ __ I 01/09/05 l____ :__-

27.9%/

l N/A Attachment 3-i E900-05-023

GFPC Scan MDC Calculation I MDCscan= 11966 dpm/100cm2 '

6= background in counts per minute bi = background counts in observation interval Ei - GFPC Detectorl meter calibrated response in cpm/dpm Es = Source efficiency.emissions / disintegration Et = Net detector efficiency d = Index of sensitivity from MARSSIM Table 6.5 based on 95% detection, 60% false positive p = human performance adjustment factor - unitless SR = Scanning movement rate in centimeters per second MDCscan = MinimumDetectable Concentration for scanning in dpm/1O00cm2 C= Constant to convert MDCR to MDC Wd = Detector width in cm A= area of probe in cm2 Oi = Observation Interval in seconds DCGLeq = Net count rate equivalent to the Adjusted DCGL ECF = Efficiency correction factors (surface roughness)

AL = Action level, DCGLeq adjusted for d and p b= 500 cpm p 0.5 Wd= 8.8 cm SR= m c10 d= 1.38 DCGL= r 19834 dpm/lO0cm2 Ei= 0.478 cpmldpm Es= 0.500 A= 126 cm 2 ECF= 0.1 Es*Ei= 0.239 Et Wd = 0.88 = Oi (sec) b'Oi = 7.3 = bi (counts)

SR. 60 (se~cmin) 1 46.96 =C Ei*Es*ECF*A/1 00^sqrt(p) d*sart(bi)60 = 255 =MDCRi (net cpm)' MDCRi+b- 755 = gross cpm at MDCRi

-Oi MDCRiC= 11966 MDCscan in'dpm/100cm2 DCGL*Ei*EsECF*A - 597 DCGLeq cpm 100 Attachment 4-1 E900-05-023

General Arrangement 68 survey of Chain Link Fence r - - - _ - - - - - - -

IFenceldetector Arrangement 1 Mxmum coverage X r _ _ _ -. _ -_ -

-- I I _

I I I-I I. ..n *I I

P

• U * -

• UI*

- I -

.I I

I I

I.-

I I Ii I

I I

I i U

II

=

I a 1:

I Z_________

I I

.1 I 3.

I.. I

.1 I I I I

• I I I I

____= l L. i .I.

• 1 -.---

I I

iI . .

I. . ... _. ._, *I I

m 1

Fencedgeietarrangement IMinimum coverage I. . _ . . . _

I Attachment 5-1 E900-05-023

Efficiency Assessment 68 survey of Chain Link Fence Fence wire is 1/8 inch diameter Fence links are 2 1/4 inches apart center to center Given that links are actually diagonally arranged Horizontal and vertical refer to the axes of the detectors Given probe is about 8.8 cm wide(from MOCcalc sheet).

For 126 cm2 must be 14.3 cm long (12618.8=14.3)

Depending on probe/fence alignment, probe will cover more or less of the fence links as shown in Attachment 5-1 Minimum coverage:

Probe covers 2 links horizontally, with 8.8 cm span covers I link vertically withI4.3 cm span link is 1/8 inch diameter = .3 cm area covered is sum of horizontal and vertical spans times width of link 2

so 2 horizontal links times 8.8 cm span times .3 cm thick = 5.28 cm 2

and 1 vertcal link times 14.3 cm span times .3 cm thick = 4.29 cm Add the two together. Total = 9.6 cm2 Similarly for Maximum coverage:

probe covers 3 horizontal links, 8.8 cm span probe covers 2 vertical links 14.3 cm span link is 1/8 inch diameter = .3 cm horizontal 3

• 8.8 0.3 7.92 cm2 vertical 2

• 14.3 0.3 = 8.58 cm2 Total = 16.5 cm2 Average = (16.5+9.6)/2 = 13.05 cm2

% detector coverage (ACF) 13/126= 10.A%

ACF= area correction factor - see section 2.1.4 in text Attachment 5-2 E900-05-023

Chain Link Fences Random numbers for class 2 scans and fixed point Scan Sample Z2 7 6 8 7 13 12 15 18 16 19 22 20 23 26 24 27 27 29 28 29 Random'numbers for class 3 scans and fixed point Scan Sample 4 4 6 10 22 15 23 21 33 28 35 35 49 45 51 47 55 49 61 64 67 Attachment 6-1 E900-05-023

. ._ --.-- ~- . _ .- -- .-----

MA9-1 Class 2 Chain Link Fences Survey Location Selection GRID SCAN SAMPLE 1 AV123 21 AW123 'Yes 3 AX123 Biased Biased 4 AY123 5 AZ123 6 BA123 Yes 7[ BB124 Yes Yes 8 BC125 Yes 9 BD126 10 BE126 11 BE127 121 BF129 Yes -

131 BF130 Yes 14 BF131

• 151 BD128 Yes, 161 BC128 Yes 17 BB128 18 BA128 Yes 19 BA129 Yes 20 BA130 Yes 21 AZI30 22 AY130. Yes 23 AY131 Yes 24 AY132 . Yes 25 AY133 26 AY134 Yes l 27 AY135 Yes Yes 28 .AT121 Yes 29j AU120 Yes -Yes 30 AV120 Yes = random point I grid Attachment 6-2 Biased = judgemental selected point fgrid E900-05-023 L _ ...

MA9-2 Class 3 Chain Link Fences Survey Location Selection GRID SCAN SAMPLE GRID <SCAN SAMPLE I SF132 36 *AL140 2 BF133 , 37 AL139 3 BF134 38 .AL138 41 BF135 Yes I Yes 39 AL137 5 BF136 40 AL136 61 BF137 Yes l 41 AL135 7 BF138 42 AL134 8 BE138 43. AL133 9 BD139 44 ...AL132 101 BD140 . Yes 451 ALI31. . Yes 11 BC140 46 .ALI30 I

12 BC141 471 AL129 Yes 13 B8141 48. AL128 14 BB142 491 .AL.127 Yes I Yes 15[ BA142 Yes '50..AL126 16 BA143 51.l: AL125. .Yes.

17 AZ143 52 ALl 24 18 AZ144 53 AL123 19 AY144 54. AL122 20 AX144 551 -AM122. Yes I 2i AW144 Yes 56 AN122 22 AV144 Yes 57 A0122 23 AU144. Yes 58 AP122 24 AT144 59 AQ121 25 AS144 60 AR121 26 AR144 611 AS121 Yes 27 AQ144 62 ,AT120 281 AP144 Yes 63 AY136 29 A0144 6 441AY137 YesI 30 AN144 65 ,AX137 31 AM144 66 . .BA137 32 AL144 671 BB137. Yes I 331 AL143. Yes 68 BC137

34. AL142 . 69 BD137 35 AL141 Yes Yes 70. BE137 Yes = random point I grid Attachment 6-3 E900-05-023

Appendix A (attachments 7-1 to 9-1)

Site Report Site Summary Site Name: Fences Plannerqs): WJCooper Contaminant Summary NOTE: Surface sail DCGLw units are pCVg.

Building surface DCGLw units are dpm/100 cm'.

Screening Contaminant Type DCGLw Value Used? Area (m2) Area Factor Cs-137 Building Surface 19,834 No 36 25 1.2 16 1.5 9 2.2 4 3.7 1 11.2 Attachment 7-1

,205 - - -Pag-

. .u PounAet .4.u^ ^ Page I tslUriA:>51. Y1.U.U .4J1=005 - .

Z- Building Surface Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: Fences Planner(s): WJCooper Survey Unit Name: Fences Class 2 1 ,

?ll' Yb 5r Comments:

Area (m ):

2 600 Classification: 2 Selected Test: Sign Estimated Sigma (cpm): 77 DCGL (cpm): 500 Sample Size (N): 11 LBGR (cpm): 300 Estimated Conc. (cpm): 11 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power. 1.00 Beta: 0.100 Prospective Power Curve

- 1 I _

I.

W.

tI 0.8

$-050.7

• P 0..5 I ___ ___ ___ ___

' 0.6 I_______ ________

I ________ _________ _________ _________

_0.4 t' 0.2 t ________ _________ _________ __________

boa

.F 03 I-...'_ _

I-.

= 0.1 co 0 100 200 300 400 sON NetBett(cpin)

- Power - DCGL - - Estimated Power

_ I.BGR *' I-beta Attachment 7-2 L~UM-'R~V U PA..n.re ... ^ ^

41 21200-

-411212005

- a- no n -

Page I COUMPASS V1.0.U

. .; Calf,': -- : . .-

IELj.i Building Surface Survey Plan Survey Plan Summary Site: Fences Planner(s): WJCooper Survey Unit Name: Fences Class 3 nAf1 -S V,, f7c, f Comments:

Area (m2): 1,400 Classification: 3 Selected Test Sign Estimated Sigma (cpm): 77 DCGL (cpm): 500 Sample Size (N): 11 LBGR (cpm): 275 Estimated Conc. (cpm): 0 Alpha: 0.050 Estimated Power 1.00 Beta: 0.100 Prospective Power Curve

• fi OS

_ 0.8 Ca W 0.7 c 0.

A

!: 05

_t0.60.4 A

.=' 0.3 0.4 s 0.1 O

0 100 200 300 400 SOO 600 Net Betz (gpin)

- Power - DCGL .- - Estimated Power

- LBGR

• 1-beta Attachment 7-3 COMPASS vI.0.0 411=DO5 w o=ann5

- w -%nr fq

Building Surface Survey Plan Contaminant Summary DCGLw Contaminant (dpm/t00 cm')

Cs-137 19.834 Beta Instrumentation Summary Gross Beta DCGLw (dpml100 cm'): 19,834 Total Effciency. 0.02 Gross Beta DCGLw (cpm): 500 ID Type -Mode Area (cm')

3 GFPC Beta 126 Contaminant Energy' Fraction' Inst. Eff. Surf. Eff. Total Eff.

Cs-137 187.87 1.0000 024 0.10 0.0239

'Avrage beta energy (key) [WA indicates alpha emission]

'Activity fraction Gross Survey Unit Mean (cpm): 313 i 77 (1-sigma)

Count Tine (min): 1 Number of Average Standard MDC Material . BKG Counts (cpm) Deviation (copm) (dpmli cm')

Fence 1 313 0 3.384

f52E£ Attachment 7-4 COMPASS v1.D.0.g 4J12t2005

-E-900.- 5-02-3-- Page 2

Background / shielded GFPC values for fence survey collected 417105 322 306 274 280 339 302 368 462 418 305 345 367 396 360 316 287 185 254 129 243 129 Min 462 Max 313 Averag 77 Std Dev Attachment 8-1 E90005.023

04/12/2085 09:53 8146352317 SNEC FACILITY RADCON PAGE 01

'0RIGH'AL 0 N.rt..

3EFNC IS 417O05 13:221 1 322 60 SCL 4lE FNC 1 U 4m7O05 13:231 1§ 372 60 SCL 5 E FNC 2 S I 417105 '13:241 11 30_1 -BO SCL 6E FNC 2 U _ 1 4/05 13:26 3581 60 SCL I 3S 1 4FNC 13:27 1 2741 8SC L IS 8 E FNC 3 417/05 13:28 1 342 60 SCL I 91E FNC 4 S 4/7t05 13:32 1 .280 60 SCL  !

10 E FNC 4 U 4/7/05 13:33 1 343 60 SCL 11 EFNC5S 4/7/05 13:39 1 339 60 SCL 12 FNC 5 U 417105 . 13:40 1 395 60 SCL 13 E FNC 6 S 4/7/05 13:41 1 302 6O SCL 14 EFNC 6 U 417/05 13:43 1 395 60 SCL 15EFNC 7S 417/05 13:44 11 368 60 SCL 16E FNC 7 U 417/05 13:45 1 .417 601SCL 171E FNC 8 S 4/7/051 13:48 1 4621 BOSCL I 181E FNC 8 U 4/7JO/5 13:49 1 449 601SCL _

19 E FNC 9 S 4/7/051 13:51i 1 4181 60SCL 201E FNC 9 U 4/71051 13:52 1 5121 601SCL _

21 S FNC1O S - 417/051 14:081 1 . 3051 60 SCL I 22 S FNC10 U 4/71051 14:09L 1 3651 80 SCL j 23 S FNC11 S l4mo51 14:11l 1 3451 60 SCL I 24 S FNC1 U 417/051 14:12 11 4431 60 SCL. _ _--

25 S FNC12 S I47/05 14:20 tl 367 601SCL _ _ _

26 S FNC12 U 47/105 14:22 1 457 60 SCL I 27 S FNC13 S . 417105 14:23 1 396 60lSCL I 28 SFNC13 U 417105 14:24 1 425 60lSCL _

291S FNC14 S 4/7/051 14:28 1 360 601SCL I 30 S FNC14 U 1 4/7/05 14:291 11 444 60 SCL I 31NE FNC15 S 417/05 15.211 11 316 . 60SCL I 32 NE FNC15 U 4/7/05 15:22 11 551i 60 SCL 33 NE FNC16 S W4m/5 15:241 ii 287 60 SCL 34 NE FNC16 U 4/7/051 15:25I 1 4051 60 SCL t-35lNE FNC17 S 417105 15:26 .11 185; 60;SCL I 36lNE FNC17 U . 417O5 15:28 11 4401 60jSCL _j_--

37 NE FNC1 8S 417/05 15:30! 11 2541 -. . 60lSCL I 38lNE FNC18 U 4f7/05 15:31 1 4051 601SCL _I 39 NE FNC19 S 417/051 15:321 1I 129 60lSCL 41 NE FNC19 U 4/7/05 15:351 11 4231 60 SCL I 42 NE FNC20 S 4/7/05 15:381 1I 2431 601SCL I 43 NE FNC20 U 4/7/05 15:391 1I 3921 601SCL I Ea a S South. NE NOrth Et FNC = F.n: U-UrUshbidad S Shieldad Page 2 of 2 Attachment 8-2 E900-05-023

. . 4,

, , - - , " . 11 . ;l I I.... .. . ... .. .

Exhlbitt 1~1 Survey Unit Inspection Check Sheet AL I,;.,Ii

a. .' h' - :,','

i SECT ON i-SURVEY UNIT. IN'SPECTION ,.

DECRlITION .--;.-.',","l" .' 5- . ....

A Survey Uni # Survey Unit Location First Energy/Penelec Fence lines Date 4/13105 -Time l 1545 [Inspection Team Members R. Shepherd, K Lane 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 remediatlon, 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., remedlation & housekeeping) In or around the survey unit complete? X

4. Have al 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 (.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 estabrished? (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. Isneeded to perform the FSS) X

11. Is fightng 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 overail 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 appilcable. Document actions taken and/or Justifications In the Comments section below. Attach additional sheets as necessary.

Comments:

Response to Question 1:

A portion of fence line adjacent to Class I areas had static GFPC survey performed and all open land fence line areas had characterization surveys.

Response to Question 3,4, 5:

Fence lines will need to be de-weeded prior to FSS. Additionally, shaipstmisc. items attached to fences Will have to be removed prior to FSS. Notified L Shamenek.

Response to Question 10:

Some areas around east fence have been excavated below grade making personnel access to perform FSS difficult. Recommend scaffold or other access aid. Notified .L. Shamenek.

Response to Question 12:

Fence line perimeter requires general housekeeping. Tripping/Safety hazards present on ground. Notified L Shamenek.

Survey Unit Inspector (printisign) I Ray Shepherd/

Survey Designer (print/sign) l W111//06,

. . L .

i, , .. - .. . I

1. .,:: I: : 0..' ' - ..

Appendix B to AppOndix D

'I2J DQA Building Surface Report Assessment Summary Site: Fences Planner(s): WJCooper Survey Unit Name: Fences Class 2 Report Number:

Survey Unit Measurements: .

Reference Area Measurements: 0 Test Performed: Sign Test Result: Not Performed Judgmental Areas: o EMC Result: Not Performed Assessment

Conclusion:

Reject Null Hypothesis(Survey Unit PASSES)

Retrospective Power Curve 09

~ 0.8

.-. 0.7. .5 0.7 v:*C 0.6

- - - -rI - -- -

IF 0.5 ----- -

O.4 - -

i-w -

SC0.3 r-0.2 4-,

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 NetBeta (cpjm)

-. - Prospective Power Ul I-beta - Actual Power

- LBGR - - Esthinated Power

- DCGL --- Retrospective Power Appendix B MA9

.1 .g 20 1 COMPASS v. 0.

..M. S v1.0.0 618=5 Page I

DQA Building Sufface- Report Survey Unit Data NOTE: Type = IS' indicates survey measurement Type = 'R' indicates reference measurement Measurement Material _ .

Type Gross Beta (cpm)

I Fence S - 396 2 Fence S 341 3 Fence S 541.

4 Fence S 363 5 Fence S 417 6 Fence S 332 7 Fence S 278 8 Fence *S 346 9 Fence S . 355 10 Fence S 342 11 Fence S 402 Basic Statistical Quantities Summary Statistic Survey Unit Background DQO Results Sample Number 11 NIA N=11 2 11.0 Mean (dpm/l1O0 cm ) 2,417.03 N/A Median (dpm/100 cmn) 1.666.67 NIA NIA Std Dev (dpmIlDo cm2) 2,672.76 NIA . 77 High Value (dpm/100 cm2) 9,047.62 N/A N/A Low Value (dpm/100 cm') -1.388.89 NIA NtA Appendix B MA9

^^

Kasrszre..s

%.UMF~bbV1.0.U 61812005 Page 2

...  :) . ...

DQA Building Surface <Report Assessment Summary- .

Site: Fences Planner(s): WJCooper Survey Unit Name: Fences Class 3 Report Number Survey Unit Measurements: 11 Reference Area Measurements: 0 Test Performed: Sign Test Result: Not Performed Judgmental Areas: o EMC Result Not Performed Assessment

Conclusion:

Reject Null Hypothesis (Survey Unit PASSES)

Retrospective Power Curve 1 - -c VI r -o09

- - p.

C

, 0.8

• 1 L 0.7 1 - -

0.6

• m0.5

- -A----

i. 0.3

- - -*4 r-A 0.2 I-

-. 1-- - _________

0-~01

.0 100 200 300 400 Soo 600 Net Beta (cpmn)

-.- Prospeive'Power K I-beta - - Actual Power

- LRG ~ ~Esthated Power

-~ DCGL -v - Retrospective Power Appendix C MA9 COMPASS vr1.0.0 Page I

.. . i .. ..

DQA Building Surface Report Survey Unit Data NOTE: Type = "S' indicates survey measurement.

Type = IR' indicates reference measurement Measurement Material Type Gross Beta (cpm) _

1 Fence S 271 2 Fence S 300 3 Fence S 275 4 Fence S 292 5 Fence S 298 6 Fence S 326 7 Fence S 317 8 Fence S 348 9 Fence S 358 10 Fence S 348 11 Fence S .. 339 Basic Statistical Quantities Summary Statistic Survey Unit . Background DQO Results Sample Number 11 . NIA N=11 Mean (dpm/100 cm2) 104.62 NIA .0 Median (dpmn100 cm 2

) 158.73 N/A NIA StdDev(dpml100 cm2) 1,210.32 N/A 77 High Value (dpmI100l c) . 1,785.71 NIA N/A Low Value (dprnl10 c02) -1,666.67 NIA NIA Appendix C MA9 COMPASS v1.0.0 MSW2005 Pag 2 Page