ML070160270

Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Submittal of YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00 and YNS-FSS-OOL-15-00, Final Status Survey Report.

ML070160270
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	08/09/2006
From:	Jeffery Lynch Yankee Atomic Electric Co
To:	Document Control Desk, NRC/FSME
References
BYR-06-066 YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00, YNS-FSS-OOL15-00
Download: ML070160270 (64)

Text

YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY 49 Yankee Road, Rowe, Massachusetts 01367 Augst 9, 2006 YAN KE BYR 2006-066 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555-001

References:

(a) License No. DPR-3 (Docket No. 50-29)

(b) BYR 2004-133, Submittal of Revision 1 to the Yankee Nuclear Power Station's License Termination Plan (c) Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Issuance of Amendment 158 Re: License Termination Plan

Subject:

Submittal of YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00 and YNS-FSS-OOL15-00, the Final Status Survey Reports for Survey Areas OMB-06 and OOL-15, Respectively

Dear Madam/Sir:

This letter submits YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00, Final Status Survey Report for OMB-06, and YNPS-FSS-OOL15-00, Final Status Survey Report for OOL-15. These reports were written in accordance with Section 5 of the YNPS License Termination Plan, "Final Status Survey Plan," and are consistent with the guidance provided in the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM).

We trust that this information is satisfactory; however if you should have any questions or require any additional information, please contact Alice Carson at (301) 916-3995 or the undersigned at (413)-424-2261.

Sincerely, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY Joseph' Lch Regulatory Affairs Manager

Enclosure:

2 hard copies of YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00 and YNPS-FSS-OOL15-00 plus CDs

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission BYR 2006-066, Page 2 cc (w/o encl): S. Collins, NRC Region I Administrator Marie Miller, Chief, Decommissioning Branch, NRC Region I J. Kottan, Region I D.. Everhart, Region I J. Hickman, NRC Project Manager M. Rosenstein, US Environmental Protection Agency, Region 1 R. Walker, Director, MA DPH W. Perlman, Executive Committee Chair, FRCOG T.W. Hutcheson, Chair, Franklin Regional Planning Board L. Dunlavy, Executive Director, FRCOG P. Sloan, Directory of Planning & Development, FRCOG cc (w/ encl) D. Howland, Regional Engineer, MA DEP M. Whalen, MA DPH D. Katz, CAN Jonathan Block, CAN

Yankee Nuclear Plant Station Final Status Survey Report For OOL-15 Yankee Atomic Electric Company

YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FINAL STATUS SURVEY REPORT REPORT NO.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-00 Prepared by: ~9j Date: 7-13-0:1t6 cýael D. nhac a iological Engineer A

Reviewed by: i V V Date: I- Ia-0-00r, (hristopher C(\ssi rSS Radiological Engineer Approved by:

'79

...-*-. * * (2 Date: .7Xi o/ ,

Martin Ayickson, FSS-l6ag-er

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-00 Section Table of Contents Page 1.0 EX EC UT IV E SU M M A RY ........................................................................................................................... I 1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF SURVEY A REA AND U NITS ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 D ATES OF SURVEY ..................................................................................................................................... l 1.3 N UM BER AND T YPES OF M EASUREM ENTS C OLLECTED ........................................................................... l 1.4 SUM M ARY OF SURVEY R ESULTS .................................. ...................................................................... .2 1.5 C ONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 FSS PRO G RA M O V ER V IEW .................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 SURVEY PLANNING .................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 SURVEY D ESIGN ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 SURVEY IMPLEM ENTATION ....................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 SURVEY D ATA A SSESSM ENT ...................................................................................................................... 3 2.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL MEASURES .............................................................. 3 3.0 SU R V EY A R EA IN FO R M A T IO N ...................................................................................................... 4 3.1 SURVEY A REA D ESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................... 4 3.2 H ISTORY OF SURVEY A REA ....................................................................................................................... 4 3.3 D IVISION OF SURVEY A REA INTO SURVEY U NITS ................................................................................ 4 4.0 SU RV EY U N IT IN FO RM A T ION ............................................................................................................... 4 4.1

SUMMARY

OF RADIOLOGICAL DATA SINCE HISTORICAL SITE ASSESSMENT (HSA) ........................ 4 4.1.1 Chronology and Description of Surveys Since HSA ....................................................................... 4 4.1.2 RadionuclideSelection andB asis ................................................................................................. 4 4.1.3 Scoping & Characterization................................................................................................................. 5 4.2 BASIS FOR C LASSIFICATION ...................................................................................................................... 5 4.3 R EM EDIAL A CTIONS AND FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................ 6 4.4 U NIQUE FEATURES OF SURVEY U NIT ................................................................................................ 6 4.5 ALARA PRACTICES AND EVALUATIONS ................................................... 6 5.0 SURVEY UNIT FINAL STATUS SURVEY ......................................................................................... 6 5.1 SURVEY PLANNING .................................................................................................................................... 6 5.1.1 FinalStatus Survey Plan and A ssociated DQOs ............................................................................. 6 5.1.2 Deviationsfrom the FSS Plan as W ritten in the L TP .................................................................... 7 5.1.3 D C GL Selection and Use ...................................................................................................................... 7 5.1.4 M easurements ....................................................................................................................................... 8 5.2 SURVEY IM PLEM ENTATION A CTIVITIES ............................................................................................... 8 5.3 SURVEILLANCE SURVEYS .......................................................................................................................... 8 5.3.1 PeriodicSurveillance Surveys ..................................................................................................... 8 5.3.2 Resurvey s............................................................................................................................................... 9 5.3.3 Investigations ........................................................................................................................................ 9 5.4 SURVEY R ESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 9 5.5 D ATA Q UALITY A SSESSM ENT .................................................................................................................. 10 6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL ..................................................................... 10 6.1 INSTRUM ENT Q C C HECKS ...................................................................................................................... 10 6.2 SPLIT SAM PLES AND R ECOUNTS ............................................................................................................. 10 6.3 SELF-A SSESSM ENTS ................................................................................................................................. 10 7.0 C O N C LU SIO N ............................................................................................................................................ 11 i

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-00 Table List of Tables Page TABLE 1 SURVEY AREA OOL-15 DESIGN PARAMETERS ........................................................................................... 7 T ABLE 2 SO ILDCGL VALU ES ....................................................................................................................................... 7 TABLE 3 FSS ACTIVITY

SUMMARY

FOR OOL- 15 SURVEY UNITS ............................................................................. 8 TABLE 4 D IRECT M EASUREM ENT SUM MARY ................................................................................................................. 9 List of Appendices Appendix A - YNPS-FSSP-OOL-15, "FinalStatus Survey Planning Worksheets Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-0 15-04, "InstrumentEfficiency Determinationfor Use in Minimum Detectable ConcentrationCalculationsin Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe" Appendix C - ALARA Evaluations, OOL-I 5 List of Attachments Attachment A - Maps and Posting Plots Attachment B - Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Attachment C - Instrument QC Records (In the electronic version, every Table of Contents, Figures,Appendices and Attachments, as well as every mention of a Table, Figure,Appendix or Attachment is a hyperlink to the actual location or document.)

ii

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-00 List of Abbreviations and Acronyms AL Action Level ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable c/dc/d ................ Counts per Disintegration DCGL........ Derived Concentration Guideline Level DCGLEMC ............ DCGL for small areas of elevated activity DCGLw...... DCGL for average concentration over a wide area, used with statistical tests D Q O .................... Data Quality Objectives EMC Elevated Measurement Comparison ETD Easy-to-Detect FSS Final Status Survey FSSP Final Status Survey Plan GPS Global Positioning System Ho Null Hypothesis HSA Historical Site Assessment HTD Hard-to-Detect ISOCS ....... In-situ Object Counting System LBGR Lower Bound of the Grey Region LTP License Termination Plan MARSSIM Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual MDA Minimum Detectable Activity MDC Minimum Detectable Concentration PAB Primary Auxiliary Building QAPP Quality Assurance Project Plan QC Quality Control RCA Radiological Controlled Area RP Radiation Protection R SS ...................... Reactor Support Structure SFP Spent Fuel Pool VC Vapor Container VCC Vertical Concrete Cask VSP Visual Sample Plan YNPS Yankee Nuclear Power Station hi

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-00 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

A Final Status Survey (FSS) was performed of Survey Area OOL-15 in accordance with Yankee Nuclear Power Station's (YNPS) License Termination Plan (LTP). This FSS was conducted as an open land area FSS with soil DCGLs.

1.1 Identification of Survey Area and Units 2

Survey Area OOL-15 consists of a Class 3 open land area, approximately 4,704 m (49,686 ft2) in size, located northeast of the plant site. The property is owned by Trans-Canada and extends north from the Trans-Canada!YAEC property line (i.e.,

the boundary between Survey Areas OOL-08 and OOL-15) to the Sherman Reservoir shore. Survey Area OOL-15 was established as a buffer zone to Survey Area OOL-13. There are no sub-surface systems or plant structures within area OOL-1 5. The area was not accessible by vehicle traffic, nor was it used for storing radioactive material or for processing/packaging radioactive waste. Survey Area OOL-15 consists of one Survey Unit, OOL-15-01.

1.2 Dates of Survey The FSS of the OOL-15 Survey Area was performed between November 8 th, 2004, and November 1 6 th, 2004. The Data Quality Assessment (DQA) of OOL-15 was completed on February 21s', 2005.

1.3 Number and Types of Measurements Collected Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) was developed for this Survey Unit in accordance with YNPS LTP and FSS procedures using the MARSSIM protocol. The planning and design of the survey plan employed the Data Quality Objective (DQO) process, ensuring that the type, quantity and quality of data gathered was appropriate for the decision-making process and that the resultant decisions were technically sound and defensible. A total of 15 direct measurements (soil samples) were taken, providing data for the non-parametric testing of the Survey Area. In addition to the direct samples, biased hand-held survey instrument scans were performed over 45m 2 of the Survey Area.

I

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 1.4 Summary of Survey Results Following the survey, the data were reviewed against the survey design to confirm completeness and consistency, to verify that the results were valid, to ensure that the survey plan objectives were met and to verify Survey Unit classification. No areas of elevated activity were identified based upon the results of the surface scans. Fixed point surveys indicated none of the measurements exceeded the DCGLw, depicted in Attachment B, negating the need for statistical analysis via WRS or Sign Test. A retrospective power curve was generated and demonstrated that an adequate number of samples were collected to support the Data Quality Objectives. Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) (that the Survey Unit exceeds the release criteria) is rejected.

1.5 Conclusions Based upon the analysis of the data acquired for the FSS, OOL-1 5 meets the release requirements set forth in the YNPS LTP. The Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) to the average member of the critical group does not exceed 25 mrem/yr, including that from groundwater. I OCFR20 Subpart E ALARA requirements have been met as well as the site release criteria for the administrative level DCGLs that ensure that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health's 10 mrem/yr limit will also be met.

2.0 FSS PROGRAM OVERVIEW 2.1 Survey Planning The YNPS FSS Program employs a strategic planning approach for conducting final status surveys with the ultimate objective to demonstrate compliance with the DCGLs, in accordance with the YNPS LTP. The DQO process is used as a planning technique to ensure that the type, quantity, and quality of data gathered is appropriate for the decision-making process and that the resultant decisions are technically sound and defensible. Other key planning measures are the review of historical data for the Survey Unit and the use of peer review for plan development.

2.2 Survey Design In designing the FSS, the questions to be answered are: "Does the residual radioactivity, if present in the Survey Unit, exceed the LTP release criteria?" and "Is the potential dose from this radioactivity ALARA?" In order to answer these questions, the radionuclides present in the Survey Area must be identified, and the Survey Units classified. Survey Units are classified with respect to the potential for contamination: the greater the potential for contamination, the more stringent the classification and the more rigorous the survey.

2

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 The survey design additionally includes the number, type and locations of fixed measurements/samples (as well as any judgmental assessments required), scanning requirements, and instrumentation selection with the required sensitivities or detection levels. DCGLs are developed relative to the surface/material of the Survey Unit and are used to determine the minimum sensitivity required for the survey.

Determining the acceptable decision error rates, the lower bound of the gray region (LBGR), statistical test selection and the calculation of the standard deviation and relative shift allows for the development of a prospective power curve plotting the probability of the Survey Unit passing FSS.

2.3 Survey Implementation Once the planning and development has been completed, the implementation phase of the FSS program begins. Upon completion of remediation and final characterization activities, a final walk down of the Survey Unit is performed. If the unit is determined to be acceptable (i.e. physical condition of the unit is suitable for FSS), it is turned over to the FSS team, and FSS isolation and control measures are established. After the Survey Unit isolation and controls are in place, sample points are identified for the fixed measurements/samples, using Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates whenever possible, consistent with the Massachusetts State Plane System, and the area scan locations areas identified. Data is collected and any required investigations are performed.

2.4 Survey Data Assessment The final stage of the FSS program involves assessment of the data collected to ensure the validity of the results, to demonstrate achievement of the survey plan objectives, and to validate Survey Unit classification. During this phase, the DQOs and survey design are reviewed for consistency between DQO output, sampling design and other data collection documents. A preliminary data review is conducted to include: checking for problems or anomalies, calculation of statistical quantities and preparation of graphical representations for data comparison. Statistical tests are performed, if required, and the assumptions for the tests are verified. Conclusions are then drawn from the data, and any deficiencies or recommendations for improvement are documented.

2.5 Quality Assurance and Quality Control Measures YNPS FSS activities are implemented and performed under approved procedures, and the YNPS Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) assures plans, procedures and instructions have been followed during the course of FSS, as well as providing guidance for implementing quality control measures specified in the YNPS LTP.

3

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 3.0 SURVEY AREA INFORMATION 3.1 Survey Area Description 2

Survey Area OOL-1 5 consists of a Class 3 open land area, approximately 4,704 m (49,686 ft2) in size, located northeast of the plant site. The property formerly owned by US Gen and is currently owned by Trans-Canada, extends north from the Trans-Canada/YAEC property line (i.e., the boundary between Survey Areas OOL-08 and OOL-15) to the Sherman Reservoir shore. (See maps in Attachment A) Survey Area OOL-15 was established as a buffer zone to Survey Area OOL-13. OOL-15-01 contains old railroad ties, and an old firing range. There are no sub-surface systems or plant structures in this Survey Unit. The area beyond Wheeler Brook is overgrown with typical vegetative overgrowth surrounding the Yankee site including fallen trees, brush, and rocks.

3.2 History of Survey Area The area was not accessible by vehicle traffic, nor was it used for storing radioactive material or for processing/packaging radioactive waste.

3.3 Division of Survey Area into Survey Units Survey Area OOL-15 consists of a single Survey Unit, OOL-15-01.

4.0 SURVEY UNIT INFORMATION 4.1 Summary of Radiological Data Since Historical Site Assessment (HSA) 4.1.1 Chronology and Description of Surveys Since HSA No surveys were performed between the HSA and the FSS.

4.1.2 Radionuclide Selection and Basis During the initial DQO process, Cs-137 was identified as the radiological nuclide of concern. Characterization survey data from adjacent Survey Units indicated no other LTP-specified radionuclides warrant consideration in the OOL-15 Survey Area, however, the soil samples were evaluated for all LTP listed nuclides.

4

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 4.1.3 Scoping & Characterization The available characterization data for Survey Area OOL- 15 consists of 4 soil samples collected between June 1993 and July 1998. No plant-related nuclides of significant quantity were identified in 4 characterization soil samples.

The gamma analyses of the 4 characterization soil samples were insufficient for planning the FSS for OOL-15-01 because they did not identify any representative plant-related radioactivity and failed to support development of the statistical quantities needed for FSS planning.

Consequently, additional characterization of Survey Area OOL-15-01 was an objective for this survey. The design of the plan incorporated the FSS DQO process in accordance with procedure DP-8856 to facilitate subsequent FSS for OOL-15. That approach allowed the characterization data collected under this plan to be accepted and used as FSS data since all LTP survey design requirements were met and the collected data satisfied all LTP release criteria.

Because Survey Area OOL- 15 is similar in nature and in distance from the plant site as is Survey Unit OOL-08-01 (it is also contiguous to Survey Unit OOL-08-01), the radiological characterization data from OOL-08-01 (approximately 70 characterization soil samples) was used here to plan the additional characterization of OOL-15. Based on OOL-08-01 characterization data, the radionuclide-of-concern for Survey Unit OOL-15-01 was Cs-137, which has both plant-related and non-plant related origins in environmental media, making it necessary to consider background Cs-137. The assumed representative nuclide mix for Survey Unit OOL-15-01 is one that includes naturally occurring gamma-emitting radionuclides, such as Ac-228, Bi-212, Bi-214, K-40, and Pb-212, plus Cs-137 as the only probable LTP-listed nuclide.

4.2 Basis for Classification There are no sub-surface systems or plant structures within area OOL-15. The area was not accessible by vehicle traffic, nor was it used for storing radioactive material or for processing/packaging radioactive waste. Based upon the radiological condition of this Survey Area identified in the operating history and as a result of the decommissioning activities performed to date, Survey Area OOL-15 is identified as a Class 3 Area.

5

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 4.3 Remedial Actions and Further Investigations No further investigations or remediation were required for Survey Area OOL-15.

4.4 Unique Features of Survey Unit OOL-15-01 contains old railroad ties, and an old firing range. There are no plant buildings or structures in this Survey Unit. The area beyond Wheeler Brook is overgrown with typical vegetative overgrowth surrounding the Yankee site including fallen trees, brush, and rocks.

4.5 ALARA Practices and Evaluations An ALARA evaluation was developed for the OOL-15 Survey Area which concluded that additional remediation was not warranted. This evaluation is found in Appendix C.

5.0 SURVEY UNIT FINAL STATUS SURVEY 5.1 Survey Planning 5.1.1 Final Status Survey Plan and Associated DQOs The FSS for OOL-15 Survey Area was planned and developed in accordance with the LTP using the DQO process. Form DPF-8856.1, found in YNPS Procedure 8856, "Preparationof Survey Plans," was used to provide guidance and consistency during development of the FSS Plan.

The FSS Plan can be found in Appendix A. The DQO process allows for systematic planning and is specifically designed to address problems that require a decision to be made in a complex survey design and, in turn, provides alternative actions.

The DQO process was used to develop an integrated survey plan providing the Survey Unit identification, sample size, selected analytical techniques, survey instrumentation, and scan coverage. The WRS Test was specified for non-parametric statistical testing for this Survey Unit due to the presence of Cs- 137; however the Sign Test was used to develop the design parameters, in the event that the Sign Test was to be used. The design parameters developed are presented in Table 1.

6

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 Table 1 Survey Area OOL-15 Design Parameters Survey Unit Design Parameter Value Bask. j, OOL-15-01 Survey Unit Area 4704 m2 Class 3, Soil, No Restrictions Number of Direct 15 (calculated) U. (Type I) = 0.05 Measurements (Based on Sign test) 3 (Type II) = 0.05 Total: 15 (statistical) 7: 0.6

+1 Biased Relative Shift: 2.5 DCGLw: 3 LBGR: 1.5 Direct Measurement Investigation Level > 50% DCGLw Class 3 Area, LTP Scanning Coverage Requirements Judgmental Class 3 Soil Area, LTP SPA-3 Scan Investigation Level > Background Class 3 Area: > DCGLw or > MDC 5.1.2 Deviations from the FSS Plan as Written in the LTP The FSSP design was performed to the criteria of the LTP; therefore, no LTP deviations with potential impact to this Survey Area need to be evaluated.

5.1.3 DCGL Selection and Use For the final evaluation of the OOL-1 5 Survey Area and throughout this report, the administrative acceptance criterion of 8.73 mr/yr has been set for Soil LTP-listed radionuclides.

Table 2 Soil DCGL Values SSoil 8.7 Soil 8.73 Nuclide mr/yr ~Nuclide mr/yr Co-60 1.4E+00 H-3 1.3E+02 Nb-94 2.5E+00 C-14 1.9E+00 Ag-108m 2.5E+00 Fe-55 1.OE+04 Sb-125 1.1E+01 Ni-63 2.8E+02 Cs-1 34 1.7E+00 Sr-90 6.OE-01 Cs-1 37 3.OE+00 Tc-99 5.OE+00 Eu-152 3.6E+00 Pu-238 1.2E+01 Eu-154 3.3E+00 Pu-239 1.1E+01 Eu-1 55 1.4E+02 Pu-241 3.4E+02 Am-241 1.OE+01 Cm-243 1.1E+01 7

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 5.1.4 Measurements Error tolerances and characterization sample population statistics drove the selection of the number of fixed point measurements. 15 measurements were needed in the event the Sign test may have been used.

In addition to the 15 statistical measurements, 1 biased, 2 duplicate and 2 split samples were collected.

The direct sampling was developed with random points. Sample measurement locations are provided in Attachment A.

5.2 Survey Implementation Activities Table 3 provides a summary of daily activities performed during the Final Status Survey of Survey Units in OOL-15.

Table 3 FSS Activity Summary for OOL-15 Survey Units

Survey Unit Date Activity OOL-15-01 11-08-04 Performed walk-down of Survey Unit, established Isolation and Controls 11-09-04 Performed Job Hazard Analysis, and Unit Classification 11-09-04 Performed Sample Quantity Calculations, established DQOs 11-10-04 Generated FFS Sample Plans 11-15-04 Initiated Scans, and Static measurements.

02-21-05 DQA Completed, FSS Complete 5.3 Surveillance Surveys 5.3.1 Periodic Surveillance Surveys Upon completion of the FSS of Survey Area OOL-15, the Survey Area was placed into the program for periodic surveillance surveys on a quarterly basis in accordance with YNPS procedure DP-8860, "Area Surveillance Following Final Status Survey." These surveys provide assurance that areas with successful FSS remain unchanged until license termination.

Note: This unit has had surveillance surveys performed, which confirmed that that the area has remained unchanged.

8

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 5.3.2 Resurveys No resurveys were required for this Survey Unit due to surveillance surveys.

5.3.3 Investigations No additional investigations were required for this Survey Unit due to surveillance surveys.

5.4 Survey Results The 15 soil samples that were taken in accordance with the Data Quality Objectives indicated that the Survey Unit had no measurements that exceeded the DCGLw. A retrospective power curve was generated (Attachment B) and demonstrated that an adequate number of samples was collected to support the Data Quality Objectives.

Therefore, the null hypothesis (Ho) (that the Survey Units exceeds the release criteria) is rejected.

Table 4 D Summary OOL-15-01-001-F 3.14E-01 OOL- 15-01-002-F 4.89E-02 OOL-15-01-003-F 4.36E-01 OOL- 15-01-004-F 1.42E-02 OOL-15-01-005-F 1.27E-01 OOL- 15-01-006-F 2.22E-01 OOL- 15-01-007-F 3.29E-02 OOL- 15-01-008-F 2.42E-02 OOL- 15-01-009-F 4.14E-02 OOL-15-01-010-F 1.63E-01 OOL-15-01-011-F 7.74E-02 OOL-15-01-012-F 5.64E-01 OOL-15-01-013-F 5.64E-01 OOL- 15-01-014-F 3.70E-01 OOL-15-01-015-F 4.50E-01 Average 2.30E-01 Standard Deviation 2.03E-01 9

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01 5.5 Data Quality Assessment The Data Quality Assessment phase is the part of the FSS where survey design and data are reviewed for completeness and consistency, ensuring the validity of the results, verifying that the survey plan objectives were met, and validating the classification of the Survey Unit.

The sample design and the data acquired were reviewed and found to be in accordance with applicable YNPS procedures DP-8861, "Data Quality Assessment";

DP-8856, "Preparationof Survey Plans"; DP-8853, "Determination of the Number and Locations of FSS Samples and Measurements"; DP-8857, "Statistical Tests";

DP-8865, "Computer Determination of the Number of FSS Samples and Measurements" and DP-8852, "Final Status Survey Quality Assurance Project Plan".

The Wilcoxon Rank Sum test was initially selected based on Cs-137 being the radionuclide-of-concern, which has both plant-related and non-plant related origins in environmental media due to fallout, making it necessary to consider background Cs-137. However, 15 FSS soil samples were collected in randomly selected locations in the event that a later decision would be made to apply the Sign test.

Neither test was required due to the fact that the results were less than the DCGLw.

The Data Quality Assessment power curves, frequency and scatter plots are found in Attachment B.

6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL 6.1 Instrument QC Checks Operation of the E-600 w/SPA-3 was in accordance with DP-8535,"Setup and Operation of the Eberline E-600 Digital Survey Instrument," with QC checks preformed in accordance with DP-8540, "Operation and Source Checks of Portable Friskers." Instrument response checks were performed prior to and after use for the E-600 w/SPA-3. All instrumentation involved with the FSS of OOL-15 satisfied the above criteria for the survey. QC records are found in Attachment C.

6.2 Split Samples and Recounts Two recounts and two split 'QC" samples were gathered and within tolerable limits in accordance with DP-8864,"Split Sample Assessment for FinalStatus Survey".

6.3 Self-Assessments No self-assessments were performed during the FSS of OOL-15.

10

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-15-01

7.0 CONCLUSION

The FSS of OOL-15 has been performed in accordance with YNPS LTP and applicable FSS procedures. Assessment of the sample data, depicted in Attachment B, has indicated that none of the measurements exceeded the DCGLw. A retrospective power curve was generated and demonstrated that an adequate number of samples was collected to support the Data Quality Objectives. Therefore, the null hypothesis (H0 ) is rejected. OOL-15 meets the objectives of the Final Status Survey.

Based upon the evaluation of the data acquired for the FSS, OOL- 15 meets the release requirements set forth in the YNPS LTP. The Total Effective Dose Equivalent (TEDE) to the average member of the critical group does not exceed 25 mrem/yr, including that from groundwater. IOCFR20 Subpart E ALARA requirements have been met as well as the site release criteria for the administrative level DCGLs that ensure that the Massachusetts Department of Public Health's 10 mrem/yr limit will also be met.

List of Appendices Appendix A - YNPS-FSSP-OOL-I 5, "FinalStatus Survey PlanningWorksheets Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-0 15-04, "Instrument Efficiency Determinationfor Use in Minimum Detectable ConcentrationCalculationsin Support of the FinalStatus Survey at Yankee Rowe" Appendix C - ALARA Evaluations, OOL-1 5 List of Attachments Attachment A - Maps and Posting Plots Attachment B - Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Attachment C - Instrument QC Records (In the electronic version, every Table of Contents, Figures,Appendices and Attachments, as well as every mention of a Table, Figure, Appendix or Attachment is a hyperlink to the actual location or document.)

11

Final Status Survey Planning Worksheet Page 1 of 5 GENERAL SECTION Survey Area #: OOL-15 Survey Unit #: 01 Survey Unit Name: US Gen - Sherman Reservoir East Shoreline FSSP Number: YNPS-FSSP-00L15-01-00 PREPARATION FOR FSS ACTIVITIES Check marks in the boxes below signify affirmative responses and completion of the action.

1.1 Files have been established for survey unit FSS records. Z 1.2 ALARA review has been completed for the survey unit. Rl 1.3 The survey unit has been turned over for final status survey. I]

1.4 An initial DP-8854 walkdown has been performed and a copy of the completed Survey Unit Walkdown Evaluation is in the survey area file. 9 1.5 Activities conducted within area since turnover for FSS have been reviewed. 0 Based on reviewed information, subsequent walkdown: I] not warranted El warranted If warranted, subsequent walkdown has been performed and documented per DP-8854. El OR The basis has been provided to and accepted by the FSS Project Manager for not performing a subsequent walkdown. El 1.6 A final classification has been performed. [2 Classification: CLASS 1 El CLASS 2 El CLASS 3 ZA DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES (DQO) 1.0 Statement of problem:

Survey Area OOL- 15 consists of an open land area, approximately 4,704 m2 (49,686 ft) in size, located northeast of the plant site. The property is owned by US Gen and extends north from the US Gen/YAEC property line (i.e., the boundary between Survey Areas OOL-08 and OOL-15) to the Sherman Reservoir shore. Survey Area OOL-15 was established as a buffer zone to Survey Area OOL-13. There are no sub-surface systems or plant structures within area OOL-15. The area was not accessible by vehicle traffic, nor was it used for storing radioactive material or for processing/packaging radioactive waste. Only one survey unit, Survey Unit OOL-15-01, has been established for OOL-15. The problem at hand is to demonstrate that the years of plant operation did not result in an accumulation of plant-related radioactivity that exceeds LTP release criteria.

The planning team for this effort consists of the FSS Project Manager, FSS Radiological Engineer, FSS Field Supervisor, and FSS Technicians. The FSS Radiological Engineer will make primary decisions with the concurrence of the FSS Project Manager.

2.0 Identify the decision:

Does residual plant-related radioactivity, if present in the survey unit, exceed LTP release criteria? Alternative actions that may be implemented in this effort are investigations.

3.0 Identify the inputs to the decision:

Sample media: soil Types of measurements: soil samples and judgmental scans.

Applicable DCGL: 3.0 pCi Cs-137 per g soil (10-mrem/y DCGL).

Radionuclide-of-concern:Cs-137 The available characterization data for Survey Area OOL-15 consists of 4 soil samples collected between June 1993 and DPF-8856.1 Rev. Original YNPS-FSSP-OOL15-01 -00 Page 1of 5

July 1998. Other than a single Cs- 134 hit, no plant-related nuclides were identified in 4 characterization soil samples.

Note: The Cs-134 hit was a small fraction (< 5 %) of the 10-mrem/y DCGL for Cs- 134 concentration in soil - no other plant-related nuclide was identified in that particular characterization sample (in historical waste analyses Cs-134 concentrations were generally 2-3 orders of magnitude below other prominent plant-related nuclides such as Co-60 and Cs-137). Cs-134 was not detected in soil samples that were collected nearby, just inside the boundary of OOL-08-01 (open land contiguous to OOL-15-01). It is not believed that the Cs-134 hit qualifies Cs-134 as a "representative" nuclide-of-concern for Survey Area OOL- 15. However, characterization soil samples from OOL- 15 will be analyzed for all of the LTP-listed gamma-emitting nuclides, including Cs-I134.

The gamma analyses of the 4 characterization soil samples are insufficient for planning the FSS for OOL- 15-01 because they do not identify any representative plant-related radioactivity and fail to support development of the statistical quantities needed for FSS planning. Consequently, additional characterization of Survey Area OOL-15-01 is an objective for this survey. The design of this plan incorporates the FSS Data Quality Objective (DQO) process in accordance with procedure DP-8856 to facilitate subsequent FSS for OOL-15. This approach allows the characterization data collected under this plan to be accepted and used as FSS data as long as all LTP survey design requirements are met and the collected data satisfy all LTP release criteria.

Because Survey Area OOL-15 is similar in nature and in distance from the plant site as is Survey Unit OOL-08-01 (and it is also contiguous to Survey Unit OOL-08-01), the radiological characterization data from OOL-08-01 (approximately 70 characterization soil samples) are used here to plan the additional characterization of OOL-15. Based on OOL-08-01 characterization data, the radionuclide-of-concern for Survey Unit OOL-15-01 is Cs-137, which has both plant-related and non-plant related origins in environmental media, making it necessary to consider background Cs-137. The assumed representative nuclide mix for Survey Unit OOL-15-01 is one that includes naturally occurring gamma-emitting radionuclides, such as Ac-228, Bi-212, Bi-214, K-40, and Pb-212, plus Cs-137 as the only probable LTP-listed nuclide.

This mix consists of radionuclides that would contribute to a SPA-3 scan reading.

Note: A revised plan will be developed for the FSS of OOL-15-01 if the characterization data collected under this survey plan identifies a representative nuclide mix that differs significantly from the assumed mix.

Note: The characterization data for Survey Unit OOL-08-01 did not include analyses for hard-to-detect (HTD) nuclides such as Sr-90, C-14, and transuranics (TRUs). However, the gamma analysis did not detect Am-241 in any of the characterization soil samples, suggesting that TRUs were not present. HTD beta-emitting nuclides and TRUs will be included in the assessment for Survey Unit OOL- 15-01. At least 5% of the characterization soil samples collected during this survey will be sent to an independent laboratory for complete analyses (gamma-emitters, HTD beta-emitters, and TRUs).

Average Cs-137 concentration(from OOL-08-01 characterization data): 0.94 pCi/g Standarddeviation (a): 0.60 pCi/g SurrogateDCGL: N/A Investigation Level for soil samples: >2.31 pCi Cs-137 per g. This is 50% of the 10-mrem/y DCGL (i.e., 1.5 pCi/g) plus the decay-adjusted average Cs-137 background in the reference area (i.e., 0.81 pCi/g). Additionally, any other LTP-listed nuclide identified at a concentration greater than 50% of its 10-mrem/y DCGL will be cause for an investigation.

InvestigationLevel for scan: >background using an audible signal.

Expected background range for SPA-3 scan: 8,000 cpm to 15,000 cpm, depending on the presence of rock and boulders in the immediate vicinity of the measurement location.

Radionuclidesfor analysis: All LTP-listed nuclides with the focus on Cs-137.

MDCsfor gamma analysis of soil samples: 10 - 50% of the 10-mrem/y DCGL = 0.3 - 1.5 pCi Cs137 per g

= 0.25 - 1.3 pCi Ag-108m per g

= 0.14 - 0.7 pCi Co-60 per g

= 0.17 - 0.86 pCi Cs-134 per g

= 1.1 - 5.5 pCi Sb-125 perg

= 1000 - 5200 pCi Fe-55 per g

= 0.25 - 1.3 pCi Nb-94 per g

= 0.35 - 1.7pCi Eu-152 per g

= 0.33 - 1.7 pCi Eu-154 per g

= 14 - 70 pCi Eu-155 per g MDCsfor analyses of HTD nuclides: 10 - 50% of the 10-mrem/y DCGL = 0.059 - 0.29 pCi Sr-90 per g DPF-8856.1 Rev. Original YNPS-FSSP-OOLI 5-01 -00 Page 2 of 5

= 13 - 64 pCi H-3 per g

-0.19 - 0.96 pCi C-14 per g 140 pCi Ni-63 per g

- 0.48 - 2.4 pCi Tc-99 per g

-1.1 - 5.7 pCi Pu238 per g

= 1.0 - 5.2 pCi Pu-239 per g 170 pCi Pu-214 per g

- 1.0 - 5.2 pCi Am-241 per g

- 1.1 - 5.5 pCi Cm-243 per g Note: The desired MDCs in the laboratory analyses of FSS soil samples will be the 10% DCGL values. If those values cannot be achieved, the 50% DCGL values must be achieved in the laboratory analyses of the FSS soil samples. The MDC values listed above will also be transmitted to the outside laboratory as an attachment to the chain-of-custody form accompanying the FSS soil samples.

Scan coverage: SPA-3 scans will be performed over an approximate lm by Im area surrounding each soil sample. Three biased scans will also be performed in the area lying between Wheeler Brook and the boundary to OOL-13. Each of these scans will cover an area approximately 10 m 2 in size (1 m in width and 10 m in length). These locations were selected because they are the closest points in Survey Unit OOL-15-01 to on-going plant decommissioning activities.

MDCR for SPA-3: The accompanying Table 1 provides MDCR values by various background levels.

MDC(fDCGL)for SPA-3 scans: The accompanying Table 1 provides MDC values by various background levels.

QC checks and measurements: QC checks for the SPA-3 will be performed in accordance with DP-8540. Two QC split samples will be collected (Note: this exceeds the LTP requirement). QC recounts for 2 soil samples will be performed by the YNPS Chemistry Lab.

4.0 Define the boundaries of the survey:

Boundaries of OOL-15-01 are as shown on the attached map. Sherman Reservoir shoreline defines the northern boundary. The US Gen owned non-impacted property defines the east boundary. The US Gen/YAEC property line (i.e.,

the boundary line between Survey Areas OOL- 15 and OOL-08) defines the southern boundary. Survey Area OOL- 13 defines the western boundary. There are no plant-related structures present in OOL-15. The survey will be performed under normal (fall) weather conditions and in daylight hours (allowing adequate daylight time for ingress and egress).

5.0 Develop a decision rule:

(a) If all the characterization sample data show that the soil concentrations of all plant-related nuclides and the sum of the fraction of these nuclides are below the 10-mrem/y DCGLs, accept the data as FSS data and reject the null hypothesis (i.e., Survey Unit OOL-15-01 meets the release criteria).

(b) If an action level(s) is exceeded, then perform an investigation survey.

(c) If the average concentration of any LTP-listed nuclide exceeds the DCGL or the sum of the fractions exceeds one, then accept the null hypothesis (i.e., Survey Unit OOL-15-01 fails to meet the release criteria).

Note: Alternate actions beyond investigations are not expected to be necessary within this survey unit.

6.0 Specify tolerable limits on decision errors:

Null hypothesis: Residual plant-related radioactivity in Survey Unit OOL-15-01 exceeds the release criteria.

Probabilityof type I error: 0.05 Probabilityof type II error: 0.05 LBGR: 3.0 pCi/g - 2= 1.5 pCi/g 7.0 Optimize Design:

Type of statistical test: WRS Test R1 Sign Test E Note: 15 FSS soil samples will be collected in randomly selected locations, accounting for locations that cannot be sampled, in the event that a later decision is made to apply the Sign test.

Cs-137 is present in background due to fallout - Cs-137 in reference area: 0.97 pCi/g +/- 0.404 pCi/g. Decay-adjustment (8 y: 10/96 to 10/04) of the average background Cs-137: 0.81 pCi/g Basis including backgroundreference location (if WRS test is specified): YA-REPT-00-006-03 DPF-8856.1 Rev. Original YNPS-FSSP-OOL15-01 -00 Page 3 of 5

Number samples (perDP-8853): 15. Refer to the completed DPF-8853.1 in the survey package file.

Biasedsamples: One, at the location of characterization sample OGO02-020 (69) - the location of the sample in which the Cs- 134 hit occurred.

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS

1. Collect 15 random and lbiased 1-liter characterization soil samples in accordance with DP-8120, using sampling equipment as stated in DP-8120. Two of the 15 soil samples will be QC split samples.

2. Soil sample designation:

(a) Random soil sample designations: OOL-15-01-001-F through OOL-15-01-015-F corresponding to characterization samples collected at locations 001 through 015.

(b) 2 QC split sample designations: OOL-15-01-005-F-S and OOL-15-01-010-F-S, collected at sample locations 005 and 010, respectively. The results will be compared in accordance with DP-8864.

Note: Samples OOL-15-01-005-F-S and OOL-15-01-010-F-S will be sent to the off-site laboratory as collected from the field (i.e., without drying) for H-3 analysis. These samples will also be analyzed for gamma-emitters, HTD beta-emitters, and TRUs.

Note: Soil samples OOL-15-01-001-F and OOL-15-01-002-F will be QC recounts performed by the YNPS Chemistry Lab and the results will be compared in accordance with DP-8864.

(c) Biased soil sample designation: OOL- 15-01-016-F-B.

3. All soil samples will be received and prepared in accordance with DP-8813.

4. Chain of Custody form will be used in accordance with DP-8123 for all soil samples sent to an off-site laboratory. The required MDCs for the analyses performed by the off-site laboratory will be communicated to the Lab via an attachment to the Chain-of-Custody form.

5. The measurement locations have been identified using GPS in accordance with DP-8859. Each location is marked with a flag. The FSS Radiological Engineer or FSS Field Supervisor will guide the FSS Technicians to the sample locations.

6. Survey instrument: Operation of the E-600 w/SPA-3 will be in accordance with DP-8535, with QC checks performed in accordance with DP-8540. The instrument response checks shall be performed before issue and after use.

7. The job hazards associated with this survey are addressed in the accompanying JHA for OOL-15-01.

8. All personnel participating in this survey shall be trained in accordance with DP-8868.

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

1. FSS Technicians will perform scans by moving the SPA-3 detector at a speed *<0.5 m/s, keeping the probe at a distance of less than 3 inches from the ground surface, and following a serpentine pattern that includes at least 3 passes across each square meter. When scanning and walking, a slow pace (i.e., 1 step per second) shall be used. Scanning will be performed in the rate-meter mode with the audible feature on. Surveyors will listen for upscale readings, to which they will respond by slowing down or stopping the probe to distinguish between random fluctuations in the background and greater than background readings. Location(s) where detectable-above-background scan readings are found will be investigated.

A first level investigation may be done with the SPA-3/E-600 to determine if the observed increase in the scan measurement is due to the presence of rocks and boulders. SPA-3 scans performed in non-impacted areas have shown that rock formations accounted for increased count rates. If it can be demonstrated that the presence of rocks and boulders is the cause of an increased count rate during a SPA-3 scan, record that finding form DPF-8856.2. If it is demonstrated that the rocks and boulders do not account for an above background SPA-3 measurement, a soil sample will be collected at the point of the highest SPA-3 reading in the scanned area. Detailed descriptions of investigation actions will be recorded on form DPF-8856.2 and the location of the above background scan and sample will be recorded on the survey map. The location description must include sufficient detail to revisit the spot at a later time. If a soil sample is collected during the first level investigation, the sample designation will consist of the measurement location code plus the letter "I" (for investigation). For example, if a soil sample is collected during a first level investigation at measurement location 001, it will be designated OOL-15-01-001-F-I. If the investigation calls for more than I sample, sequentially number the investigation samples as "Il", "12", etc.

DPF-8856.1 Rev. Original YNPS-FSSP-OOLI 5-01 -00 Page 4 of 5

The ISFSI is not expected to have an influence on scans performed in Survey Unit OOL- 15-01. However, if the ambient background count rate at start of the scan is >11,000 cprn, reduce the scan speed to 0.25 m/s (approximately 10 inches/s) and perform the scan as described above.

Note: If scan speeds of < 0.5 m/s become required, then the FSS Field Supervisor shall monitor and time scan speeds for at least 50% of such scanned areas.

2. YNPS Chemistry will analyze all soil samples for gamma-emitting radionuclides, except samples OOL- 15-01-005-F-S and OOL-15-01-010-F-S. If any of the gamma analyses show that the Cs-137 concentration is greater than 2.3 pCi/g, an investigation survey will be conducted at that sample location.

3. Soil samples OOL-15-01-005-F-S and OOL-15-01-010-F-S will be sent directly to the off-site laboratory. These samples will be analyzed for H-3, gamma-emitting nuclides, HTD beta-emitting nuclides, and TRUs. Ensure that the lid to the 1-liter marinelli container for each sample is secured to prevent loss of moisture during shipping.

4. On-site and off-site analyses of the FSS samples shall achieve the required MDC values stated in Section 3 of this plan.

The required MDCs will be communicated to the laboratory using an attachment to the Chain-of-Custody form NOTIFICATION POINTS QA notification point(s) (y/n) y Specify: (1) Date/time of the initial pre-survey briefing, (2) Date/time of conmmncement of soil -mnlina(3) Dat/tie me of first soil scan (4)*al'itetime of' hi3baed soil scan m en~Qurments IV07) ) zElP:> - Iiz FSI point(s) (y/n) n Specify:

Prepared by Date F a iological Engineer Reviewed by "

• tT 1., AA Date I( 6/0 FSS adiological Engineer Approved by T-r D. SM $eci" M ,i ao Date j ul, 111,m 1 FSS Project Manager DPF-8856.1 Rev. Original YNPS-FSSP-OOLI 5-01-00 Page 5 of 5

TECHNICAL REPORT TITLE PAGE 0

Copy Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe Title YA-REPT-00-015-04 REV. 0 Technical Report Number Approval 7 .\ (Print & Sign N*ane)

Preparer: JLc+/-ýL t JI . ý ý Date: 10-- q - Dq Reviewk:%Ou'.0A Date: eO 04-Approver (Co nizant Manager): (",*&4.. Date: 16 /7/0 g YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0

/

Page 1 of 26

/

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1.0 Executive Summary: ........................................................................................ 4 2.0

Introduction:

................................................................................................... 4 3.0 Calibration Sources: ........... ..................................................... 4 4.0 Efficiency Determination: ............................................. ................................. 6 4.1 Alpha and Beta Instrument Efficiency (si): ........................................................ 6 4.2 Source to Detector Distance Considerations: ................................................... 7 4.2.1 Methodology ............................................................................... 7 4.3 Source (or Surface) Efficiency (as) Determination: ............................................ 8 5.0 Instrument Conversion. Factor (E) (Instrument Efficiency for Scanning): ............................ 9 6.0 Applying Efficiency Corrections Based on the Effects of Field Conditions for Total Efficiency:... 9 7.0

Conclusion:

.................................................................................................. 10 8.0

References:

....................................................... 11 Tables Table 3.1 Nuclides and Major Radiations: Approximate Energies ....................................... 5 Table 4.1 Instrument Efficiencies (si) .......................................................................... 7 Table 4.2 Source to Detector Distance Effects on Instrument Efficiencies for a- 03Emitters ........... 8 Table 4.3 Source Efficiencies as listed in ISO 1703-1: .................................................... 8 Table 5.1 Energy Response and Efficiency for Photon Emitting Isotopes: ............................ 9 Appendix APPENDIX A MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Co-60 ...................... '. 12 APPENDIX B Microsoft Excel Co-60 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 13 APPENDIX C MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Nb-94 ................... 14 APPENDIX D Microsoft Excel Nb-94 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 15 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 2 of 26

APPENDIX E MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan- 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Ag-108m ................. 16 APPENDIX F Microsoft Excel Ag-I 08m Calculation Sheet ............................................. 17 APPENDIX G MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan -28 cm radius l pCi/cm3 Sb-125 ................... 18 APPENDIX H Microsoft Excel Sb- 125 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 19 APPENDIX I MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Cs-134 ................... 20 APPENDIX J Microsoft Excel Cs- 134 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 21 APPENDIX K MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan- 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Cs-I 37 ................... 22 APPENDIX L Microsoft Excel Cs-137 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 23 MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan -28 cm radius lpCi/crn3 Cs-137 APPENDIX M ............ '24 APPENDIX N Microsoft Excel Cs-137 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 25 APPENDIX 0 Calculated Energy Response ................................................................ 26 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 3 of 26

1.0 Executive Summary:

The minimum detectable concentration (MDC) of the field survey instrumentation is an important factor affecting the quality of the final status survey (FSS). The efficiency of an instrument inversely impacts the MDC value. The objective of this report is to determine the instrument and source efficiency values used to calculate MDC. Several factors were considered when determining these efficiencies and are discussed in the body of this report. Instrument efficiencies (si), and source efficiencies (Fs), for alpha beta detection equipment under various field conditions, and instrument conversion factors (Ei), for gamma scanning detectors were determined and the results are provided herein.

2.0

Introduction:

Before performing Final Status Surveys of building surfaces and land areas, the minimum detectable concentration (MDC) must be calculated to establish the instrument sensitivity. Table 5.4 of the License Termination Plan (LTP) [8.6] lists the available instrumentation and nominal detection sensitivities; however for the purposes of this basis document, efficiencies for the 100cm 2 gas proportional and the 2"x2" NaI (TI) detectors will be determined. Efficiencies for the other instrumentation listed in the LTP shall be determined on an as needed basis. The 100 cm2 gas propoitional probe will be used to perform surveys (i.e. fixed point measurements). A 2" x2" Na! (Ti) detector will be used to perform gamma surveys (i.e., surface scans) of portions of land areas and possibly supplemental structural scans at the Yankee Rowe site. Although surface scans and fixed point measurements can be performed using the same instrumentation, the calculated MDCs will be quite different. MDC is dependent on many factors and may include but is not limited to:

"instrument efficiency "background

• integration time

• surface type "source to detector geometry "source efficiency A significant factor in determining an instrument MDC is the total efficiency, which is dependent on the instrument efficiency, the source efficiency and the type and energy of the radiation. MDC values are inversely affected by efficiency, as efficiencies increase, MDC values will decrease. Accounting for both the instrument and source components of the total efficiency provides for a more accurate assessment of surface activity.

3.0 Calibration Sources:

For accurate measurement of surface activity it is desirable that the field instrumentation be calibrated with source standards similar to the type and energy of the anticipated contamination. The nuclides listed in Table 3.1 illustrate the nuclides found in soil and building surface area DCGL results that are listed in the LTP.

Instrument response varies with incident radiations and energies; therefore, instrumentation selection for field surveys must be modeled on the expected surface activity. For the purposes of this report, isotopes with max beta energies less than that of C- 14 (0.158 MeV) will be considered difficult to detect (reference table 3.1). The detectability of radionuclides with max beta energies less than 0.1.58 MeV, utilizing gas proportional detectors, will be negligible at typical source to detector distances of approximately 0.5 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 4 of 26

• inches. The source to detector distance of 1.27 cm (0.5 inches) is the distance to the detector with the attached standoff (DP-8534 "Operation and Source Checks of Proportional Friskers")[8.5]. Table 3.1 provides a summary of the LTP radionuclides and their detectability using Radiological Health Handbook

[8.4] data.

Table 3.1 Nuclides and Major Radiations: Approximate Energies (Reference 8.4)

Nuclide a Energy Ep., (MeV) Average Photon Energy (MeV) a Detectable 13 Detectable y (MeV) Ep wl Gas wI Gas Detectable (mev) Proportional Proportional w/ Nal 2x2" H-3 0.018 0.005 C-14 0.158 0.049 Fe-55 0.23 (0.004%)

bremsstrahlung Co-60 0.314 0.094 1.173 (100%), 1.332 (100%)

Ni-63 0.056 0.017 Sr-90 0.544 0.200 '4 2.245 (Y-90) 0.931 Nb-94 0.50 0.156 0.702 (100%), 0.871 -

(100%)

Tc-99 0.295 0.085 Ag- 1.65 (Ag- 0.624 0.434 (0.45%), 0.511 108m 108) (Ag- (0.56%)

108) 0.615 (0.18%), 0.632 (1.7%)

Sb-125 0.612 0.084 0.6, 0.25, 0.41, 0.46, "

• 0.68, 0.77, 0.92,1.10, 1.34 Cs-134 1.453 0.152 0.57 (23%), 0.605 (98%)

• 0.796 (99%), 1.038 (10.%)

1.168 (1.9%), 1.365 (3.4%)

Cs-137 1.167 0.195 0.662 (85%) Ba-137m.X- --

rays Eu-152 1.840 0.288 0.122 (37%), 0.245 (8%) /

0.344 (27%), 0.779 (14%)

0.965 (15%), 1.087 (12%)

1.113 (14%). 1.408 (22%)

Eu-i54 1.850 (10%) 0.228 Eu-155 0.247 0.044 0.087 (32%), 0.105 (20%)

Pu-238 5.50 (72%) 0.099 (8E-3%)

5.46 (28%) 0.150 (1E-3%)

0.77 (5E-5%)

Pu-239 5.16 (88%) 0.039 (0.007%), 0.052 5.11 (11%) (0.20%), 0.129 (0.005%)...

Pu-241 4.90 0.021 0.005 0.145 (1.6E-4%)

(0.0019%)

4.85 (0.0003%)

Am-241 5.49 (85%) 0.060 (36%), 0.101 5.44 (13%) (0.04%)...

Cm-243 6.06 (6%) 0.209 (4%), 0.228 (12%), /

5.99 (6%) 0.278 (14%)

5.79 (73%)

5.74

_ (11.5%)__

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 5 of 26

NUREG-1507 and ISO 7503-1 provide guidance for selecting calibration sources and their use in determining total efficiency. It is common practice to calibrate instrument efficiency for a single beta energy; however the energy of this reference source should not be significantly greater than the beta energy of the lowest energy to be measured.

Tc-99 (0.295 MeV max) and Th-230 (4.68 MeV at 76% and 4.62 MeV at 24%) have been selected as the beta and alpha calibration standards respectively, because their energies conservatively approximate the beta and alpha energies of the plant specific radionuclides.

4.0 Efficiency Determination:

Typically, using the instrument 47t efficiency exclusively provides a good approximation of surface activity. Using these means for calculating the efficiency often results in an under estimate of activity levels in the field. Applying both the instrument 2n efficiency and the surface efficiency components to determine the total efficiency allows for a more accurate measurement due to consideration of the actual characteristics of the source surfaces. ISO 7503-1 [8.2] recommends that the total surface activity be calculated using:

Rs+B - RB where:

A. is the total surface activity in dpm/cm 2, Rs+B is the gross count rate of the measurement in cpm, RB is the background count rate in cpm, e, is the instrument or detector 27c efficiency Esis the efficiency of the source W is the area of the detector window (cmr2) 4.1 Alpha and Beta Instrument Efficiency (qi):

Instrument efficiency (qj) reflects instrument characteristics and counting geometry, such as source construction, activity distribution, source area, particles incident on the detector per unit time and therefore source to detector geometry. Theoretically the maximum value of 9i is 1.0, assuming all the emissions from the source are 27 and that all emissions from the source are detected. The ISO 7503-1 methodology for determining the instrument efficiency is similar to the historical 4n approach; however the detector response, in cpm, is divided by the 27t surface emission rate of the calibration source. The instrument efficiency is calculated by dividing the net count rate by the 27r surface emission rate (q 20)

(includes absorption in detector window, source detector geometry). The instrument efficiency is expressed in ISO 7503-1 by:

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 6 of 26

RS+B - RB q2,r where:

Rs+B is the gross count rate of the measurement in cpm, RB is the background count rate in cpm, q 2a is the 27c surface emission rate in reciprocal seconds Note that both the 27c surface emission rate and the source activity are usually stated on the certification sheet provided by the calibration Source manufacturer and certified as National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) traceable. Table 4.1 depicts instrument efficiencies that have been determined during calibration using the 27t surface emission rate of the source.

Table 4.1 Instrument Efficiencies (6i)

Source Emission Active Area of Effective Area 100 cm 2 Gas Proportional Source (cm 2) of Detector HP-100 Instrument Efficiency (gi)

I (Contact)

.8 15.2 100 cm 2 0.4148 Tc-99 Th-230 a 15.2 100 cm 2 0.5545 4.2 Source to Detector Distance Considerations:

A major factor affecting instrument efficiency is source to detector distance. Consideration must be given to this distance when selecting accurate instrument efficiency. The distance from the source to the detector shall to be as close as practicable to geometric conditions that exist in the field. A range of source to detector distances has been chosen, taking into account site specific survey conditions. In an effort to minimize the error associated with geometry, instrument efficiencies have been determined for source to detector distances representative of those survey distances expected in the field. The results shown in Table 4.2 illustrate the imposing reduction in detector response with increased distance from the source. Typically this source to detector distance will be 0.5 inches for fixed point measurements and 0.5 inches for scan surveys on flat surfaces, however they may differ for other surfaces. Table 4.2 makes provisions for the selection of source to detector distances for field survey conditions of up to 2 inches. If surface conditions dictate the placement of the detector at distances greater than 2 inches instrument efficiencies will be determined on an as needed basis.

4.2.1 Methodology

The practical application of choosing the proper instrument efficiency may be determined by averaging the surface variation (peaks and valleys narrower than the length of the detector) and adding 0.5 inches, the spacing that should be maintained between the detector and the highest peaks of the surface. Select the source to detector distance from Table 4.2 that best reflects this pre-determined geometry.

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 7 of 26

Table 4.2 Source to Detector Distance Effects on Instrument Efficiencies for a- Emitters Source to Detector Instrument Efficiency (Ci)

Distance (cm)

Tc-99 Th-230 Distributed Distributed Contact 0.4148 0.5545 1.27 (0.5 in) 0.2413 0.1764 2.54 (1 in) 0.1490 0.0265 5.08 (2 in) 0.0784 0.0002 4.3 Source (or Surface) Efficiency (Cs) Determination:

Source efficiency (s), reflects the physical characteristics of the surface and any surface coatings. The source efficiency is the ratio between the number of particles emerging from surface and the total number of particles released within the source. The source efficiency accounts for attenuation and backscatter. E, is nominally 0.5 (no self-absorption/attenuation, no backscatter)-backscatter increases the value, self-absorption decreases the value. Source efficiencies may either be derived experimentally or simply selected from the guidance contained in ISO 7503-1. ISO 7503-1 takes a conservative approach by recommending the use of factors to correct for alpha and beta self-absorption/attenuation when determining surface activity. However, this approach may prove to be too conservative for radionuclides with max beta energies that are marginally lower than 0.400 MeV, such as Co-60 with a O3max of 0.314 MeV. In this situation, it may be more appropriate to determine the source efficiency by considering the energies of other beta emitting radionuclides. Using this approach it is possible to determine weighted average source efficiency. For example, a source efficiency of 0.375 may be calculated based on a 50/50 mix of Co-60 and Cs-137. The source efficiencies for Co-60 and Cs-137 are 0.25 and 0.5 respectively, since the radionuclide fraction for Co-60 and Cs-137 is 50% for each, the weighted average source efficiency for the mix may be calculated in the following manner:

(0.25X0.5)+ (0.5Xo.5) = 0.375 Table 4.3 lists guidance on source efficiencies from ISO 7503-1.

Table 4.3 Source Efficiencies as listed in ISO 7503-1

> 0.400 MeVm~a < 0.400 MeVmax Beta emitters es= 0.5 s = 0.25 Alpha emitters s,= 0.25 ss = 0.25 It should be noted that source efficiency is not typically addressed for gamma detectors as the value is effectively unity.

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 8 of 26

5.0 Instrument Conversion Factor (E) ( Instrument Efficiency for Scanning):

Separate modeling analysis (Microshield TM ) was conducted using the common gamma emitters with a concentration of 1 pCi/g of uniformly distributed contamination throughout the volume. MicroShield is a comprehensive photon/gamma ray shielding and dose assessment program, which is widely used throughout the radiological safety community. An activity concentration of 1 pCi/g for the nuclides was entered as the source term. The radial dimension of the cylindrical source was 28 cm, the depth was 15 cm, and the dose point above the surface was 10 cm with a soil density of 1.6 g/cm 3 . The instrument efficiency when scanning, Ei, is the product of the modeled exposure rate (MicroShieldTM) in mRhf-/pCi/g for and the energy response factor in cpm/mR/hr as derived from the energy response curve provided by Eberline Instruments (Appendix 0). Table 5.1 demonstrates the derived efficiencies for the major gamma emitting isotopes listed in Table 3.1.

TABLE 5.1 Energy Response and Efficiency for Photon Emitting Isotopes Isotope Calculations for Ei Ei See appendix A through L (cpm/pCi/g)

Co-60 See Appendix Aand B 379 Nb-94 See Appendix C and D 416 Ag-I 08m See Appendix E and F 637 Sb-125 See Appendix G and H 210 Cs-134 See Appendix I and i 506 Cs-137 See AppendixK and L 188 Eu-152 See Appendix M and N 344 When performing gamma scan measurements on soil surfaces the effective source to detector geometry is as close as is reasonably possible (less than 3 inches).

6.0 Applying Efficiency Corrections Based on the Effects of Field Conditions for Total Efficiency:

The total efficiency for any given condition can now be calculated from the product of the instrument efficiency si and the source efficiency 8s.

Stot = Si X Es The following example illustrates the process of determining total efficiency. For this example we will assume the following:

• Surface activity readings need to be made in the Primary Auxiliary Building (PAB) on the concrete wall surfaces using the E-600 and C-100 gas proportional detector.

• Data obtained from characterization results from the PAB indicate the presence of beta emitters with energies greater than 0.400 Mev.

• The source (activity on wall) to detector distance is 1.27 cm (0.5 in detector stand off). To calculate the total efficiency, stt, refer to Table 4.2 "Source to Detector Distance Effects on Instrument Efficiencies for a- 03Emitters" to obtain the appropriate qi value.

• Contamination on all surfaces is distributed relative to the effective detector area.

YA-REPT-00-0 15-04 Rev. 0 Page 9 of 26

• When performing fixed point measurements with gas proportional instrumentation the effective source to detector geometry is representative of the calibrated geometries listed in Table 4.2 "Source to Detector Distance Effects. on Instrument Efficiencies for a- 03Emitters".

"Corrections for temperature and pressure are not substantial.

In this example, the value for Si is 0.2413 as depicted in Table 4.2 "Source to Detector Distance Effects on Instrument Efficiencies for a- j3 Emitters". The &svalue of 0.5 is chosen refer to Table 4.3 "Source Efficiencies as listed in ISO 7503-1". Therefore the total efficiency for this condition becomes tot = si x es = 0.2413 x 0.5 = 0.121 or 12.1%.

7.0

Conclusion:

Field conditions may significantly influence the usefulness of a survey instrument. When applying the instrument and source efficiencies in MDC calculations, field conditions must be considered. Tables have been constructed to assist in the selection of appropriate instrument and source efficiencies. Table 4.2 "Source to Detector Distance Effects on Instrument Efficiencies for a-03 Emitters" lists instrument efficiencies (zi) at Various source to detector distances for alpha and beta emitters. The appropriate gi value should be applied, accounting for the field condition, i.e. the relation between the detector and the surface to be measured.

Source efficiencies shall be selected from Table 4.3 "Source Efficiencies as listed in ISO 7503-1". This table lists conservative e, values that correct for self-absorption and attenuation of surface activity.

Table 5.1 "Energy Response and Efficiency for Photon Emitting Isotopes" lists Ei values that apply to scanning MDC calculations. The MicroshieldTM model code was used to determine instrument efficiency assuming contamination conditions and detector geometry cited in section 5.6.2.4.4 "MDCs for Gamma Scans of Land Areas" of the License Termination Plan [8.6].

Detector and source conditions equivalent to those modeled herein may directly apply to the results of this report.

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 10 of 26

8.0 References 8.1 NUREG-1507, "Minimum Detectable Concentrations with Typical Radiation Survey Instruments for Various Contaminants and Field Conditions," 1998 8.2 ISO 7503-1, "Evaluation of Surface Contamination - Part I: Beta Emitters and Alpha Emitters," 1988-08-01.

8.3 ISO 8769, "Reference Sources for the Calibration of Surface Contamination Monitors-Beta-emitters (maximum beta energy greater 0.15MeV) and Alpha-emitters," 1988-06-15.

8.4 "Radiological Health Handbook," Revised Edition 1970.

8.5 DP-8534, "Operation and source Checks of Portable Friskers".

8.6 Yankee Nuclear Plant Site License Termination Plan, Rev.0, November 2003.

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 11 of 26

APPENDIX A MicroShieid v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Co-60.ms6 Date Run Date September 10, 2004 By Run Time 8:56:50 AM.

Checked Duration 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA3-EFF-Co-60

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Co-60 Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

Dose Points A X Y z

1. 1 0 cm 25 cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 In 0.0 in x

Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density 3

Source 3.69e+04 cm Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input : Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies Nuclide curies becquerels pCi/cm3 Bq/cm 3 Co-60 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00OOe-006 3.7000e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20 Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cm 2/sec MeV/cm 2 /sec mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.6938 2.230e-01 9.055e-06 1.590e-05 1.748e-08 3.070e-08 1.1732 1.367e+03 1.098e-01 1.669e-01 1.962e-04 2.982e-04 1.3325 1.367e+03 1.293e-01 1.904e-01 2.244e-04 3.303e-04 Totals 2.734e+03 2.391e-01 3.573e-01 4.205e-04 6.286e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 12 of 26

APPENDIX B YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 13 of 26

APPENDIX C MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Nb-94.ms6 Date Run Date September 16, 2004 By Run Time 3:22:38 PM Checked Duration 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA3-EFF-Nb-94

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Nb-94 Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

Dose Points A X Y z

1. 1 0 cm 25 cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density 3

Source 3.69e+04 cm Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies Nuclide curies becquerels pJCl/cm 3 Bq/cm3 Nb-94 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00OOe-006 3.7000e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20 Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results

. Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cmz/sec MeV/cm 2 /sec mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0023 9.067e-02 1.391e-10 1.430e-10 1.86le-10 1.913e-10 0.0174 4.834e-01 8.762e-09 9.129e-09 4.729e-10 4.927e-10 0.0175 9.260e-01 1.719e-08 1.792e-08 9.104e-10 9.491e-10 0.0196 2.720e-01 7.924e-09 8.356e-09 2.925e-10 3.085e-10 0.7026 1.367e+03 5.643e-02 9.872e-02 1.088e-04 1.904e-04 0.8711 1.367e+03 7.464e-02 1.22Be-01 1.405e-04 2.312e-04 Totals 2.736e+03 1.311e-01 2.216e-01 2.493e-04 4.216e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 14 of 26

APPENDIX D YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 15 of 26

APPENDIX E MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Ag-108m.ms6 Date Run Date September 16, 2004 By Run Time 3:30:40 PM Checked Duration 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA3-EFF-Ag-108m

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Ag-108m Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

Dose Points Y A X Y z

1. 1 0 cm 25 cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density Source 3.69e+04 cm 3 Concrete .1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies 3

Nuclide curies becquerels pCi/cm Bq/cm3 Ag-108m 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00OOe-006 3.7000e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20 Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV MeV/cm 2 /sec MeV/cm2/sec mR/hr mR/hr Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0028 6.580e+01 1.252e-07 1.287e-07 1.351e-07 1.388e-07 0.003 7.853e+00 1.568e-08 1.612e-08 1.612e-08 1.657e-08 0.021 2.491e+02 9.534e-06 1.015e-05 2.824e-07 3.007e-07 0.0212 4.727e+02 1.862e-05 1.985e-05 5.389e-07 5.744e-07 0.022 7.024e+00 3.202e-07 3.434e-07 8.233e-09 8.831e-09 0.0222 1.330e+01 6.251e-07 6.714e-07 1.568e-08 1.685e-08 0.0238 1.501e+02 9.273e-06 1.010e-05 1.863e-07 2.029e-07 0.0249 4.289e+00 3.145e-07 3.464e-07 5.492e-09 6.050e-09 0.0304 2.902e-04 4.431e-11 5.248e-11 4.230e-13 5.010e-13 0.0792 9.687e+01 2.008e-04 4.802e-04 3.190e-07 7.629e-07 0.4339 1.229e+03 2.705e-02 5.514e-02 5.294e-05 1.079e-04 0.6144 1.236e+03 4.282e-02 7.808e-02 8.347e-05 1.522e-04 0.7229 1.237e+03 5.300e-02 9. 194e-02 1.019e-04 1.768e-04 Totals 4.768e+03 1.231e-01 2.257e-01 2.398e-04 4.389e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 16 of 26

APPENDIX F YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 17 of 26

APPENDIX G MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 ,

File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Sb- 125.ms6 Date Run Date  : September 16. 2004 By Run Time :3:34:07 PM Checked Duration  : 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA3-EFF-Sb-125

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius IpCi/cm3 Sb-125 Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

Dose Points A X Y z

1. I 0 cm 25 crm Oem 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in Shields Shield N Dimension Material Dcensily 9

Souoce 3.6 e+04 cn9 Concrete 1.6 Air Gop Air 0.00)22 Source Input . Grouping Method - Actual Photon Enurics 0

Nudide curies Becquercls pCi/cm 8q/cm'

• 3.6945e-008 Sb-125 1.3670e+003 I.O000c-006 3.70OOe-002 Buildup : The malerinl recrercnceis- Source Integration Paramelers Radial 20 Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) I0 Results Fluence Rate Fluenee Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/em2/SeC MeV/emllsee mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0038 6.762e+01 1.708e-07 1.756e-07 1.388e-07 1.427e-07 0.0272 1.748e+02 1.785e-05 2.020e-05 2.376e-07 2.689e-07 0.0275 3.262e+02 3.453e-05 3.922e-05 4.461 e-07 5.067e-07 0.031 1.132e+02 1.857e-05 2.22 1e-05 1.670e-07 1.997e-07 0.0355 5.693e+01 1.492e-05 1.91 8e-05 9.090e-08 1.169e-07 0.117 3.568e+00 1.380c-05 3.715e-05 2.146e-08 5.778e-08 0.159 9.531le-01 5.634e-06 1.499e-05 9.416e-09 2.5o5e-08 0.1726 2.478e-s00 1.634e-05 4.295e-05 2.787e-08 7.326e-08 0.1763 9.422e+0 1 6.392e-04 1.674e-03 1.096e-06 2.870e-06 0.2041 4.4 1Cet00 3.630"-5 9.230e-05 6.435e-08 1.636e-07 0.2081 3.324e-a00 2.805e-05 7. 103e-05 4.994e-08 1.264e-07 0.2279 1.796e+00 1.708e-05 4.229e-05 3.098e-08 7.670e-08 0.321 5.701 e+00 8.474e-05 1.899e-04 1.620e-07 3.632e-07 0.3804 2.045e4-01 3.792e-04 8.052e-04 7.364e-07 1.564e-06 0.408 2.486e+00 5.05 1 -O5 1.049e-04 9.853e.08 2.047e-07 0.4279 4.009e+02 8.668e-03 1.774e-02 1.695e-05 3.470e-05 0.4435 4.130e-400 9.356e-05 1.994e-04 1.832e-07 3.709e-07 0.4634 1.415~e+02 3.395e-03 6.78 1e-03 6.658e-06 1.330e-05 0.6006 2.430e+02 8.1 74e-03 .501 e-02 1.595e-05 2.930e-05 0.6066 6.864e+0 I 2.340e-03 4.283e-03 4.564e-06 8.355e-06 0.6359 1.548e+02 5.609e-03 1.012e-02 1.091e-05 1.967e-05 0.6714 2.478e+0 I 9.640c-04 1.71 Oe-03 1.867e-06 3.311 e.06 Totals 1.916e+03 3.060e-02 5.901e-02 6.046e-05 1.158e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 18 of 26

APPENDIX H YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 19 of 26

APPENDIX I MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Cs-134.ms6 Date Run Date September 16, 2004 By Run Time 3:39:09 PM Checked Duration 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA3-EFF-Cs-134

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Cs-134 Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

Dose Points v1 Y A X z

1. 1 0 cm 25 cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density Source 3.69e+04 cm 3 Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies 3

Nuclide curies becquerels pCi/cm Bq/cm 3 Cs- 134 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00O0e-006 3.70O0e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20 Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Fluence 2Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cm /sec MeV/cm 2 /sec MeV Photons/sac mR/hr mR/hr No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0045 1.222e+00 3.658e-09 3.760e-09 2.507e-09 2.577e-09 0.0318 2.931e+00 5.271e-07 6.386e-07 4.391e-09 5.320e-09 0.0322 5.407e+00 1.014e-06 1.236e-06 8.157e-09 9.943e-09 0.0364 1.968e+00 5.611e-07 7.321e-07 3.188e-09 4.160e-09 0.2769 4.839e-01 5.931e-06 1.391e-05 1.113e-08 2.610e-08 0.4753 1.996e+01 4.950e-04 9.808e-04 9.712e-07 1.924e-06 0.5632 1.146e+02 3.545e-03 6.648e-03 6.940e-06 1.302e-05 0.5693 2.109e+02 6.619e-03 1.237e-02 1.295e-05 2.421e-05 0.6047 1.334e+03 4.529e-02 8.300e-02 8.836e-05 1.619e-04 0.7958 1.167e+03 5.668e-02 9.564e-02 1.079e-04 1.820e-04 0.8019 1.193e+02 5.852e-03 9.853e-03 1.113e-05 1.874e-05 1.0386 1.367e+01 9.377e-04 1.472e-03 1.717e-06 2.696e-06 1.1679 2.461e+01 1.964e-03 2.990e-03 3.514e-06 5.349e-06 1.3652 4.156e+01 4.055e-03 5.936e-03 6.993e-06 1.024e-05 Totals 3.058e+03 1.254e-01 2.189e-0O 2.405e-04 4.202e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 20 of 26

A PPPFNTDTY T YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 21 of 26

APPENDIX K MicroShieAr v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Cs- 137.ms6 Date Run Date September 10, 2004 By Run Time 8:52:18 AM Checked Duration 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA3-EFF-Cs-137

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28 cm radius lpCi/cm3 Cs-137 and Daughters Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

Dose Points V A X Y z

1. 1 0cm 25cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density Source 3.69e+04 cm 3 Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies Nuclide curies becquerels PCi/cm 3 Bq/cm3 Ba-137m 3.4950e-008 1.2932e+003 9.4600e-007 3.5002e-002 Cs-137 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00OOe-006 3.7000e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20 Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cm 2 /sec MeV/cm 2 /sec mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0045 1.342e+01 4.020e-08 4.133e-08 2.755e-08 2.833e-08 0.0318 2.677e+01 4.815e-06 5.834e-06 4.011e-08 4.860e-08 0.0322 4.939e+01 9.260e-06 1.129e-05 7.452e-08 9.084e-08 0.0364 1.797e+01 5.126e-06 6.688e-06 2.912e-08 3.800e-08 0.6616 1.164e+03 4.442e-02 7.913e-02 8.61 le-05 1.534e-04 Totals 1.271e+03 4.444e-02 7.915e-02 8.628e-05 1.536e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 22 of 26

APPENDIX L YA-REPT-00-0 15-04 Rev. 0 Page 23 of 26

APPENDIX M MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1

..File Ref DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Eu-152.ms6

ýDate Run Date October 7, 2004 :By Run Time 11:25:11 AM Checked Duration 00:00:00 Case

Title:

SPA-3-EFF-Eu-152

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28cm radius 1 pCI/cm3 Eu-152 Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields Source Dimensions:

Height 15.0 cm (5.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (11.0 in)

..i .................

Dose Points y A x Y z

1. 1 0 cm 25 cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 In 0.0 In Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density 3

Source 3.69e+04 cm Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0,00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Standard Indices Number of Groups: 25 Lower Energy Cutoff: 0.015 Photons < 0.015 : Included Library . Grove Nuclide curies becquerels P Ci/cma sq/cms Eu-152 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00DOe-006 3.7000e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20 YCircumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Exposure Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cm2/sec MeV/cm /sec 2

mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No With Buildup Buildup 0.015 2.077e+02 2.087e-06 2.146e-06 1.790e-07 1.841e-07 0.04 8.088e+02 3.13le-04 4.33le-04 1.385e-06 1.916e-06 0.05 2.022e+02 1.507e-04 2.467e-04 4.014e-07 6.572e-07 0.1 3.887e+02 1.189e-03 3.118e-03 1.819e-06 4.770e-06 0.2 1.024e+02 8.207e-04 2.097e-03 1.448e-06 3.700e-06 0.3 3.696e+02 5.029e-03 1.151e-02 9.540e-06 2.184e-05 0.4 8.590e+01 1.701e-03 3.555e-03 3.314e-06 6.926e-06 0.5 7.711e+00 2.043e-04 3.984e-04 4.010e-07 7.819e-07 0.6 5.797e+01 1.948e-03 3.579e-03 3.802e-06 6.985e-06 0.8 2.434e+02 1.190e-02 2.005e-02 2.263e-05 3.813e-05 1.0 5.849e+02 3.820e-02 6.058e-02 7.042e-05 1.117e-04 1.5 3.171e+02 3.490e-02 4.999e-02 5.871e-05 8.41le-05 Totals 3.376e+03 9.635e-02 1.556e-01 1.740e-04 2.817e-04 YA-REPT-00-0 15-04 Rev. 0 Page 24 of 26

APPENDIX N YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 25 of 26

APPENDIX 0 Calculated Energy Response (Eberline Instruments)

CPM/mR/h 100000000: 11 I . I i iI i -

I 4-.b- YTI -'= -g4g--

I I I I-III-In UH]

t 10000000:

I .. I i I I . . .

IS7 E

IN 1000000: I N I

- - I I -

• ,= l -H r 1--

IO0OOC 1U lUi I LU I ENERGY (key)

YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 26 of 26

ALARA Analysis Worksheet Survey Area: C)CL " Survey Unit: 40 A. Estimation of Total Cost (COStT)

1. Cost of performing remediation work (CostR ) 2. f,,rs*ov, -L- zI. 0* 6s -0

• 6 -r,,t.JýI,-*, ,. *. $ z.oo0

2. Cost of waste disposal (CostwD) = (2.a) *(2.b) 1 * -4. J.C ,*(

, $b1 .

a. estimated waste volume o0ISv* m3 I k-A V* o, j.1'j c* /S2t

b. cost of waste disposal a'ly/7 $/ma

3. Cost of workplace accident (COStAcc) = $3,000,000 person" ' 4.2x10" h-' *(3.a) $ ,

a. time to perform remediation action _ _ person-hours

4. Cost of traffic fatality (CostTrF)

{$3,000,000" 3.8xi0s8 km- (2.a)- (4.a)}/(4.b) $ 5-, II

a. total distance traveled per shipment -11a-0 km 4. E-c 1L) 3

b. waste volume per shipment 13.(. i 3, if unknown, use 13.6m as a default value

5. Cost of worker dose (Costwm5 ,) = $2,000 per person-rem *(5.a) - (5.b) $

a. worker TEDE 1, I. rem/h (sctistsst*.ec 44- /vore,/y i-c7L) /

0 b. remediation exposure time q' person-hour Cost-r. $ L./,8 B. Survey Unit Radiological Information Radionuclide Average Concentration Relative Fraction' Half-Life (y) Decay Constantb (Y-1)

2. Cs 13"1 a. 3.W___

___ /____ b. 1.0 c. ,3_,,.1_7 d. o, o 2_3

2. a. b. C. d.

3. a. b. c. d.

4. a. b. c. d.

5. a. b. C. d.

6. a. b. c. d.

7. a. b. c. d.

8. a. b. c. d.

Total Concentration: 3 *WV-44 Relative fraction = average concentration divided by the total concentration.

b Decay constant = 0.693 divided by half-life.

DPF-8867.1 Original Page 1 of 3

. C. Calculation of ALARA Action Level (AL)

1. Removable fraction for remediation action being evaluated Monetary discount rate 0. 03 y'3 2.

3. Number of years over which the collective dose is calculated /000 y 2

4. Population density for the critical group 0, 00o0 people/m

5. VCy. _____1__

2

-It OH1 ,M~

14 4 toj  %.$'nrctxre-'1{wIs ;5 1.Cev C

6. AL for each radionuclide-of-interest:

a. AL= {CostT/($200 0 C.4A 0.025- C.I C.5)} {(C.2 +B.l.d)/(l -e-(C 2+B.I'd) C. 3} {B.L.b}= ,_ -32

b. AL = {Costr/($ 2 00 0 C.4 0.025 - C.1

• C.5)) {(C.2 + B.2.d)/(l1-e" C 2+B.2.d) C.3) {B.2.b} =

c. AL = {CostT/($20 0 0 C.4

• 0.025 C.I C.5)} {(C.2 + B.3.d)/(l-e"-C 2 +B3 'd)C3 {B.3.b} =

2 4 3

d. AL= {CostT/($2000 C.4 0.025 C.1 C.5)} {(C.2 +B.4.d)/(1-e"(C +B' d)-C } {B.4.b} =

5 3

e. AL= {CostT/($ 2 0 0 0 C.4A 0.025 C.1 C.5)} {(C.2 +B.5.d)/(l-e"(C.2B '.d)'C } {B.5.b} =

f. AL = {CostT/($200 0 C.4 0.025 C.A1 C.5)) {(C.2 + B.6.d)/(1 -e(c2+B'6d) {B.6.b} =

g. AL = {Costr/($2000 - C.4 0.025 C.1 C.5)} {(C.2 + B.7.d)/(1-eC.2+B7d) C 3} {B.7.b) =

h. AL = {CostT/($ 2 00 0 - C.4 0.025 C C. C.5)) {(C.2 + B.8.d)/(1-e<C. 2+B'8d)'C.3 } {B.8.b) =

7 .............................................................................. Sum of ALs (= ALARA A L)== _ 3 7 D. ALARA Evaluation Radionuclide DCGL DCGL Fraction'

2. 1____32_ a _ ,_____

il. b. (B.I.a)/(D. .a)= 1,0

2. a. b. (B.2.a)/(D.3.a) =

3. a. b. (B.3.a)/(D.4.a) =

4. a. b. (B.4.a)/(D.5.a) =

5. a. b. (B.5.a)/(D.6.a) =

6. a. b. (B.7.a)/(D.7.a) =

7. a. b. (B.8.a)/(D.8.a) =

8. a. b. (B.9.a)/(D.9.a) =

9 ........................................................................... Sum of DCG L Fractions = I' a DCGL fraction = average residual concentration in survey unit (from Section B) divided by the DCGL.

10. Comparison of the sum of the DCGL fractions (D.9) to ALARA AL (C.7):

Check one: Sum of the DCGL Fractions < ALARA AL V," Sum of the DCGL Fractions > ALARA AL DPF-8867.1 Original Page 2 of 3

/

1~

0 11. Decision Criteria: If the sum of the DCGL fractions < AL, then additional remediation is not cost beneficial. If the sum of the DCGL fractions > AL, then additional remediation is cost beneficial.

Check one: Additional remediation IS NOT cost beneficial Additional remediation IS cost beneficial __

Prepared by Date lo - /Ia-.-oL FSS Radiological Engineer Reviewed by Date t/

DPF-8867.1 Original Page 3 of 3

OOL-15 Attachment A Maps Attachment A - Maps and Posting Plots List of Figures Figure Page FIGURE 1 OOL-15 RELATIVE TO STRUCTURES ......................................................... ....................... 2 FIGURE 2 OO L 01 POSTING PLOT ............................................................................................................................ 3 I

OOL- 15 Attachment A Maps Figure 1 OOL-15 Relative to Structures 2

OOL-15 Attachmont A Maps Figure 2 OOL-15-O1 Posting Plot 3

OOL-15 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves List of Figures Figure Page FIGURE 1OOL-15-01 PROSPECTIVE POWER CURVE ...................................................... ............................. 2 FIGURE 2 OOL- 15-01 RETROSPECTrVE POWER CURVE ........................................ 2 FIGURE 3 OOL-1 5-01 Cs-i 37 RESULTS BYRANK ......................................................................................... 3 FIGURE 4 OOL-15-01 CS-137 FREQUENCY PLOT .............. .. ........................................... 4 FIGURE 5 OOL-15-01 CS-137 QUINTILE PLOT .............................................................................................. 5 FIGURE 600 L-15-01 Cs-137 SCATTERPLOT ............................... . . ............................................ 5 I

OO-15 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 1 OOL-15-01 Prospective Power Curve DecisionE*rrers -- Rpred Sam Size Suv"e Uzri ID. V%* Bobz ea: SauVeyUV& lS Ra 1k F7s-137 ja05 J~st-CG(L r w.S Test 0 3 9812a r6v LBG 11.5 Wa-2.5 r.0 tt the Suvey Ut Passes C__ck 0ap1wher on

- *the gaph to

---

udaftethe

- powe curw as -- -- gnewrv parmet~

a4 values 0,2 TeL) 0.0 True Swe Uak Omaeatmrate (peret of I)CGIL) E~k Prow Figure 2 OOL-15-01 Retrospective Power Curve DecimF*b De- Requd Su* Sin z

StmUnitID, Radiril FCs-137 Sta iAlTet-

r. sipTent 1 AW ot-,_.

005 Bda:~v*

-05= 1 4 41

- CWRS Test 04 i3 Dma 13027 Cdfcal Value: _ __

PrObfty ht the Suvey ust Passes IT FR T11 TI' ITT 1.0T anywhere on the graph to

,qpdateth pow crve usn newly paramoa Un - - - - - - - - - - -

values nn '

11 3 7 9 MZ1=01%110% 110W True Survey Ust Coace"Ifta (ercest of DC1 L) 2

OOL-15 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 3 OOL-15-01 Cs-l37 Results by Rank Sample Type: Soil DCGL Based on: 8.73 rnrem/nyT 10% DCGL MDC. (pCi/g): 0.30 DCGL (pCi/g): 3.02 L7000 MOAO 0.6=0 g 0.4000

-M -

5 01000 4

Q00000

-0.1000 Rai* of AuthIt~yConconlratlon (lowest to t~htwu)

Time Corrected Activity Critical Level Act MDC Sample Name WDCGL Qua] Code OO1,- 15-01-004-F 1.4213-t02 3.99E,-002 5.83E-002 0.000 UA 001.O-15-01-008-F 2.42F4)(12 3.8213-002 5.43li-002 0.000 UA OOL- 15-01-007-F 3.29r-00-1 4.1713-002 5.8213-002 0.000 UA 001.- 15-01-009-F 4. 14E4)02 4.91 F-W02 6.82E-(02 0.000 UA OOL-15-01-002-F 4.8913-002 4.211E-002 5.64E-002 0.016 A OOL-I 5-O1-0l I-F 7.,74134)02 6.2,E-002 6.91 E-002 0.026 A 001,-15-01-005-F 1.27E-001 8.9213

-- 002 8.77F-002 0.042 A 0OL- 15-0 1-0 10-F 1.63E-001 6.6313-002 6.7911-002 0.054 A OOL-1 5-M)-006-F 2.22E-)01 9.163,-002 8.25E-0)2 0.074 A 0OL- 15-01 -001-F 3.1 4E-001 7.80E-002 6.30E-002 0.104 A OOL- 15-01-014-F 3.70F-001 8.5413-002 7.40E-002 0.123 A OOL-15-01-003-F 4.36E-001 1.15E-001 7.44E-002 0.144 A 001-15-01-015-17 4.50F.-00 1.12F-001 7.88-3-002 0.149 A OOL- 15-01-012-F 5.64F.-00 1.8113-001 1.47E-001 0.187 A OOL-15-011-013-F 5.64E-00Il 1.55E-001 1.13E-001 0.187 A 0ual Codes Statistical Values for Result Paae:

O(ginial Activity < Lc - U If Nuclide Natural -+ Mean: 0.2299 Median: 0.1628 Result <Action Level -A Standard Dev: 0.2027 Standard Dev as %of Mean: 18.16 Actual MDC > I10a DCG L MDC

• Minimum value: 0.014 Maximuni value: 0.564 3

OOL-15 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 4 OOL-15-01 Cs-137 Frequency Plot 5.0 4.0 r

C 3.0 U.

2.0 1.0 0.0

< MDC 0.1609- 0.244 0.3279 - 0.4114 0.4949 and higher 0.0774 - 0.1609 0.2444 - 0.3279 0.4114- 0.4949 Bin Observation Observation Bin Frequencey Frequencey

< MDC 5 33%

0.0774 - 0.1609 2 13%

0.1609 - 0.2444 2 13 %

0.2444 - 0.3279 1 7 %

0.3279 - 0.4114 1 7 %

0.4114 - 0.4949 2 13 %

0.4949 and higher 2 13 %

Total: 15 100%

4

OOL-15 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 5 OOL-15-01 Cs-137 Quintile Plot 0.6 0.5 I 0.4 0.3 002 0,1 0

3.3 10.0 12.5 167 23.3 25 30,0 36.7 43.3 500 56.7 633 70.0 75 76.7 83.3 875 90O0 967 PWrCN -tpac

• Results Median ------ 50% Box . 75% Box Figure 6 OOL-15-01 Cs-137 Scatter Plot 35 y =3.0 3

.25 y- 1.5 15 I

S#: 0.2t 0 & - & 4b 0 Sample Numbr Cs-137 -Action Level .... Mean -DCGL 5

~umon

~ Typ at",

t Ca1~<,

Due ~

-7 e 4Aý1 S

ý3 - 3- 'I I V V

l , ,r' j 4 .

77 Al

PORTABLE/GA-MA FRIS'-i IURCE CHECK FORM Meter Detector Detector 2:77 Source Net Net Type Type Number ID Acceptance Acceptance.

Criteria Criteria

- 20% + 20%

• PRE USE CHECKS POST USE CHECKS Date Time Audible Alarm BKG SRC Net Int Date Time Audible Alarm BKG SRC Net Int Check Check Counts Counts Counts Check Check Counts Counts Counts 1..34~ t3S~

I.A C 9 o 12-cc 8 r, go 7 8ooL 7'A Io~~IN21 j7g Lt3~ ~6ZC9 M-12-0 1 - 277147/ oA4__.& Ioon Zgn700o 2____<-7*- _0_

0___--71 Z69Oe0 2z7eJ0 DLoo o4-o- ki*A I LO?0o 38 9co2 27.8) )Ddd

____o.*q_ ___- -. *o 21c-.o Z.*,3,o j* t2'-(oi 1 __ 8O910 Z.B~ooo 27. &o 7>,,J

'oo* l*oe*3oo 28Lg-ooo 27TZZo *4 io-z.] ____ __ ____ - B ZS-'~ao 7*go j)*

ro~zL-bq C50 I(40 "0*9b 2B5c°,2878o ZIY.aI t1.7 ,A5-o 10*_ 7',

j.IIFe,4, 10 9 (6-900. ,, 2*76j500 6 D fbzt- L.1 0 -5 68 28?~ ow 21-757cc D I.D~-2(. 6LX~t 2M 0 2~~o~o 65^0

-8 71o~2!I~i~ (i JA2~%Z'o~2J'~ ~Awe (0-oZ5 073o AlA lt-o 3Aor2SD1oo ,

• iJ.2L,,* 12q6o  !ý Lt,90 2__RZooc,, '2 7 7sq2 D

. 7o-

_____A 2~oooo '1300~

o Z'2.,06017-*3-40 d __ _

[oc. Z8 Z 271o .b I-(

"I_T40____ _____~o

-___. [W___

At__ W RP'Supervisor Review:

DPF-8504.5 COPY Rev. 16

.9 )

9

/~ I Ou' 71

PORTABLE!GAI-iA FRIS'B, IURCE CHECK FORM Meter 5,04 -3 Z77 '2-22zz?2 Detector Detector Source Type Type Net Net Number ID Acceptance Acceptance.

Criteria Criteria

- 20% + 20% -

PRE USE CHECKS POST USE CHECKS Date Time Audible Alarm BXG SRC Net Int Date Time Audible Alarm BKG SRC Net Check Check Counts Counts Counts Int Check Check Counts Counts Counts i t3.I71A 2z t wn. F7 Z8Lfo DW I0-'8-o/Iooo Z-'7,9 (z Did 10-12-Co4  % - 7& 0 2 2--77/4o Iz 04- 4E 4 1.

o-botq 07(o iŽocqc,2r",o Dt i-,'9-o J4A- (Oqo 2_7eo27,8)0o .*d il-OM* Ioi6 - - _ 0 1 o 2.iloon 2,o3'o  ! *q 12, 0 - 8 _-_

0 6 DiZ l16I1-oA 070o __ __ 1 29-5C,1 27qY2 _1>J~ )0U 07, e85-0 31o c3-,Si 5-0 -L 67 -0 1 9 bo 2-10 SOCOO -d :o 1LL5 __-R- -r co t,2- 150Q 6800o 28 q opo 27S*-o2)ov+ tow-e 1o.EqdLLo - ___.~ -- 7Ascooo ___7b_ _NJ

[D -2z-O 07c 10 8-s i 3-n3 en zqqio Dt~A )6-91 1630 ý3 - -450296,> 772 ~

____-a Z37 4o 7_8_ to 2---7'a e~t ýear t'3 ' ~2A' g/. 2Rgzt.4_ 2-3-760 bLI

&713~ ~A 6-)( R.-ooo 2~I) 14 IW-~ O ~ J IA 7t lZO Z/a $~~~

S0'73o !Sr fI4#L.p> qo Wqoo S!OAL h IIzLo , 51Z'-io 1(-70 2$'Z-0o ~27Y830 LI t.dI (-,107o (r ,h*.,,,

0 j- ..qoc 6q jI-'- 2, 2BkZb~oo 7,7q83 _ __

-7 k.o~Tho- jqI 2i1OO

'23-0 28860L 4 _______ __ 7 RP Supervisor Review:

DPF-8504.5 Rev. 16

.Copy

.9 ) )