ML070160522

Yankee Nuclear Power Station Final Status Survey Report, YNPS-FSS-OOL-16

ML070160522
Person / Time
Site:	Yankee Rowe
Issue date:	09/18/2006
From:	Jeffery Lynch Yankee Atomic Electric Co
To:	Document Control Desk, NRC/FSME
References
BYR 2004-133, BYR-2006-081 YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00
Download: ML070160522 (69)

Text

YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY Telephone (413) 424-5261 49 Yankee Road, Rowe, Massachusetts 01367 IY'A4NKE E September 18, 2006 BYR 2006-08 1 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-OOL16-00, the Final Status Survey Report for Survey Areas OOL- 16

Dear Madam/Sir:

This letter submits YNPS-FSS-OOL16-00, Final Status Survey Report for OOL-16. This report was written in accordance with Section 5 of the YNPS License Termination Plan, "Final Status Survey Plan," and is 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.

Sincerely, YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY Joseph R. Lynch Regulatory Affairs Manager

Enclosure:

YNPS-FSS-OOL16-00 (2 hard copies plus CDs)

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission BYR 2006-081, 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

-Jt:Hil-fnT-NRC ojb-ct--Maff-ger--

E. Waterman, 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 on CD) 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-16 Yankee Atomic Electric Company

YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER STATION FINAL STATUS SURVEY REPORT REPORT NO.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 Prepared by: Date: 9-/s- 0,6 Michael D. R nnhack, FSS Radiological Engineer Reviewed by: - Date: c/l Z/0(o Robert TP*F--kSadiological Engineer Approved by: , -- Date:

Marti !Erickson, 1SS Manager

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 Section Table of Contents Page 1.0 EX EC UT IV E SUM M A RY ........................................................................................................................... I 1.1 IDENTIFICATION OF SURVEY A REA AND U NITS ........................................................................................ 1 1.2 DATES(S) OF SURVEY ................................................................................................................................. 1 1.3 N UM BER AND TYPES OF M EASUREM ENTS C OLLECTED ........................................................................... 1 1.4 SUM MARY OF SURVEY R ESULTS ............................................................................................................... 2

1.5 CONCLUSION

S ............................................................................................................................................ 2 2.0 FSS PRO G RA M O V ERV IEW .................................................................................................................... 2 2.1 SURVEY PLANNING .................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2 SURVEY D ESIGN ......................................................................................................................................... 2 2.3 SURVEY IM PLEM ENTATION ....................................................................................................................... 3 2.4 SURVEY DATA A SSESSM ENT ...................................................................................................................... 3 2.5 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL M EASURES .............................................................. 3 3.0 SUR V EY A R EA IN FO R M A TIO 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 UNITS ............................................................................... 4 4.0 SU RV EY U N IT IN FO RM A T IO N ............................................................................................................... 4 4.1

SUMMARY

OF RADIOLOGICAL DATA SINCE HISTORICAL SITE ASSESSMENT (HSA) ........................ 4 4.1.1 Chronology and Descriptionof Surveys Since HSA ....................................................................... 4 4.1.2 RadionuclideSelection andBasis .................................................................................................... 4 4.1.3 Scoping & Characterization................................................................................................................. 4 4.2 BASIS FOR C LASSIFICATION ...................................................................................................................... 5 4.3 R EM EDIAL A CTIONS AND FURTHER INVESTIGATIONS ........................................................................ 5 4.4 U NIQUE FEATURES OF SURVEY A REA ................................................................................................ 5 4.5 A LA RA PRACTICES AND EVALUATIONS ............................................................................................. 5 5.0 SU R V EY U N IT FIN A L STA TU S SU RV EY .............................................................................................. 5 5.1 SURVEY PLANNING .................................................................................................................................... 5 5.1.1 FinalStatus Survey Plan and Associated DQOs ............................................................................. 5 5.1.2 Deviationsfrom the FSS Plan as W ritten in the L TP .................................................................... 6 5.1.3 D CGL Selection and Use ...................................................................................................................... 7 5.1.4 M easurements ....................................................................................................................................... 7 5.2 SURVEY IM PLEM ENTATION A CTIVITIES ............................................................................................... 8 5.3 SURVEILLANCE SURVEYS .......................................................................................................................... 8 5.3.1 PeriodicSurveillance Surveys ..................................................................................................... 8 5 .3 .2 Resur v ey s ............................................................................................................................................... 8 5.3.3 Investigations........................................................................................................................................ 8 5.4 SURVEY R ESULTS ....................................................................................................................................... 9 5.5 D ATA Q UALITY A SSESSM ENT .................................................................................................................... 9 6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE AND QUALITY CONTROL .................................................................... 10 60 6.1 INSTRUM ENT Q C C HECKS .......................................................................................................................

6.2 SPLIT SAM PLES AND R ECOUNTS ............................................................................................ ................. 10 6.3 SELF-A SSESSM ENTS ................................................................................................................................. 10 7.0 CO N C LUSIO N ............................................................................................................................................ !1

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 Table List of Tables Page T A BLE 1 D A TE O F SU RV EY S ........................................................................................................................................... 1 TABLE 2 SURVEY AREA OOL- 16 DESIGN PARAMETERS ........................................................................................... 6 T A BLE 3 SO IL D CG L V ALU ES ........................................................................................................................................ 7 TABLE 4 FSS ACTIVITY

SUMMARY

FOR OOL- 16 SURVEY UNITS ............................................................................. 8 TABLE 5 DIRECT M EASUREM ENT SUM MARY ................................................................................................................. 9 List of Appendices Appendix A - YNPS-FSSP-OOL-16, "FinalStatus Survey Planning Worksheets Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-0 15-04, "InstrumentEfficiency Determinationfor Use in Minimum Detectable ConcentrationCalculationsin Support of the FinalStatus Survey at Yankee Rowe" Appendix C - ALARA Evaluations, OOL-1 6 List of Attachments Attachment A - Maps and Posting Plots Attachment B - Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Attachment C - Instrument QC Records Attachment D - ORTEC Direct Measurement Data (In the electronic version, every Table of Contents, Figures,Appendices and Attachments, as ivell as every mention of a Figure, Appendix or Attachment is a hyperlink to the actual location or document.)

ii

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 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 DEC ............

Data Quality Objectives ETCD .................

Elevated Measurement Comparison ETDI 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 Q C ....................... Quality Control RCA Radiological Controlled Area RP Radiation Protection RSS Reactor Support Structure SFP......... Spent Fuel Pool VC.......... Vapor Container VCC Vertical Concrete Cask VSP Visual Sample Plan YNPS Yankee Nuclear Power Station iii

Report No. YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 1.0 EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

A Final Status Survey (FSS) was performed of Survey Area OOL-16 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 Survey Unit OOL-16 consists of a single unit, OOL-16-01, known as the Furlon House Lot, approximately 2,342.4 m2 of surface area. Survey Unit OOL-16-01 is entirely bounded by non-impacted YAEC-owned property. The only subsurface structure that traverses or connects within OOL-16-01 is the sanitary sewer system that services the Furlon House. Survey Unit OOL-16-01 contains soil that was excavated during the construction activities of the YNPS site. Because site excavated soils were deposited, low levels of radioactivity may minimally impact this area.

OOL-16-01 was never part of the RCA, did not contain any radioactive systems and no decommissioning activities were performed in this area; therefore it meets the criteria for a Class 3 survey unit.

1.2 Dates(s) of Survey Table I Date of Surveys Survey Start Survey End DQA Survey Unit Date Date Date OOL-16-01 7/13/2006 7/25/2006 7/27/2006 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 20 systematic direct measurement measurements were taken in the Survey Unit, providing data for the non-parametric testing of the Survey Area. In addition to the direct measurement samples, hand-held survey instrument scans were performed over 80 m2 of the Survey Area.

1

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 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. Direct measurement surveys indicated that none of the systematic measurements exceeded the DCGLw, depicted in Attachment B. Retrospective power curves were 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 evaluation of the data acquired for the FSS, OOL-16 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. 10CFR20 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 Units 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.

The survey design additionally includes the number, type and locations of direct measurements/samples (as well as any judgmental assessments required), scanning 2

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL- 16-00 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, grid points are identified for the direct measurements/samples, using Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates whenever possible, consistent with the Massachusetts State Plane System, and the area scan grid is 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-16-00 3.0 SURVEY AREA INFORMATION 3.1 Survey Area Description Survey Area OOL-16 consists of a single unit, OOL-16-01, known as the Furlon House Lot, approximately 2,342.4 m 2 of surface area. Survey Unit OOL-16-01 is entirely bounded by non-impacted YAEC-owned property. The only subsurface structure that traverses or connects within OOL-16-01 is the sanitary sewer system that services the Furlon House.

3.2 History of Survey Area Survey Unit OOL-16-01 contains soil that was excavated during the construction activities of the YNPS site. Because site excavated soils were deposited, low levels of radioactivity may minimally impact this area. OOL-16-01 was never part of the RCA, did not contain any radioactive systems and no decommissioning activities were performed in this area, however some roll off containers were staged in this area.

3.3 Division of Survey Area into Survey Units OOL-16 has a single Survey Unit, OOL-16-01 which is a Class 3 Survey Unit.

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 The final status survey of OOL-16-01 was performed between the dates of 7-13-06 and 7-25-06.

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 indicated no other LTP-specified radionuclides warrant consideration in the OOL-16 Survey Area, however, the soil samples for this Survey Area were evaluated for all LTP listed nuclides.

4.1.3 Scoping & Characterization 4

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 The characterization data in the HSA was not sufficient to support FSS planning. Two characterization soil samples were collected from this Survey Unit. The results were consistent with historical use information in that no plant-related radionuclide was identified in either sample.

Survey Unit OOL-18-01, the Monroe Hill Lot, was utilized in the same manner as OOL-16-01, as a staging area for shipments. 13 additional characterization samples were collected from OOL-18-01 to support this FSS. All FSS soil samples collected in OOL-16 were analyzed for the LTP-listed gamma-emitting radionuclides, and 5% of the FSS soil samples were sent to an independent laboratory for complete analyses (HTD nuclides and TRUs).

4.2 Basis for Classification 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-I 6 is identified as a Class 3 Area.

4.3 Remedial Actions and Further Investigations No remedial actions or investigations were performed.

4.4 Unique Features of Survey Area Survey Area OOL-16 has no unique features; it is an open land area containing soils.

4.5 ALARA Practices and Evaluations An ALARA evaluation was developed for OOL-16-01 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-16 Survey Unit 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.

5

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 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 Sign Test was specified for non-parametric statistical testing for this Survey Unit, if required. The design parameters developed are presented below.

Table 2 Survey Area OOL-16 Design Parameters "Survey -Design Parameter 7' I.u k 'Basis AUhit - ~ 6 OOL Survey Unit Area 2342 m2 Class 3, Soil, no restrictions 01 Number of Direct Measurements 15 (calculated) cc (Type l) = 0.05

+ 5 (added) 03 (Type II) = 0.0'5 Total: 20 (7: 0.0327 Relative Shift: 2 DCGLw: 3 LBGR: 2.9346 Critical Value 14 for Sign test. (20/2)+(1.645/2)*Square Root (20)

Gridded Sample Area Size Factor Class 3: N/A No grid in Class 3 area Sample Grid Spacing: No Grid No grid in Class 3 area, random locations Direct Measurement Investigation Level > 50% DCGLw Class 3 Area: > 50% DCGLw Scanning Coverage Requirements Judgmental Class 3 Soil Area: Judgmental Scan Investigation Level > Background Class 3 Area: Detectable over background 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.

6

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 5.1.3 DCGL Selection and Use For the final evaluation of the OOL-1 6 Survey Area and throughout this report, the administrative acceptance criterion of 8.73 mRem/yr has been set for Soil LTP-listed radionuclides.

Table 3 Soil DCGL Values Soil 373 SoilCt.73~

Nuclide m r/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-137 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 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 needed, 5 additional samples were added to the statistical measurements, no biased, I recount, and 2 split samples were also collected.

The direct measurement sampling locations were selected with a random pattern and a random starting point. Sample measurement locations are provided in Attachment A.

7

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 5.2 Survey Implementation Activities The Table below provides a summary of daily activities performed during the Final Status Survey of Survey Units in OOL-16.

Table 4 FSS Activity Summary for OOL-16 Survey Units ey I nit. .Sari Date . Activity, OOL-16-01 5-22-06 Performed walk-down of Survey Unit 7-13-06 Established Isolation and Controls 7-13-06 Performed Job Hazard Analysis 7-13-06 Performed Unit Classification 7-13-06 Performed Sample Quantity Calculations, established DQOs 7-13-06 Generated FFS Sample Plans 7-13-06 to 7-25-06 Initiated Scans, and Direct measurements.

7-27-06 Performed DQA, FSS Complete 5.3 Surveillance Surveys 5.3.1 Periodic Surveillance Surveys Upon completion of the FSS of Survey Area OOL-16, the Survey Unit 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.

5.3.2 Resurveys No resurvey was performed.

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

8

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 5.4 Survey Results Direct measurement surveys indicated that OOL-16-01 had no measurements that exceeded the DCGLw, depicted in Attachment B. Retrospective power curves were generated and demonstrated that an adequate number of samples were collected to support the Data Quality Objectives. Therefore, the null hypothesis (H0 ) (that the Survey Units exceeds the release criteria) is rejected.

Table 5 Direct Measurement Summary Sample Description Activity (SOF)

OOL-16-01-001-F 5.14E-02 OOL-16-01-002-F 6.74E-02 OOL-16-01-003-F 7.56E-02 OOL-16-01-004-F 5.84E-02 OOL-16-01-005-F 3.82E-02 OOL-1 6-01-006-F 3.67E-02 OOL-16-01-007-F 2.43E-02 OOL-16-01-008-F 3.07E-02 OOL-1 6-01-009-F 4.65E-02 OOL-1 6-01 -01 0-F 2.81 E-02 OOL-1 6-01-011 -F 8.71 E-02 OOL-16-01-012-F 1.67E-02 OOL-16-01-013-F 4.65E-02 OOL-1 6-01-014-F 4.01 E-02 OOL-1 6-01-015-F 3.89E-02 OOL-16-01-016-F 1.15E-01 OOL-16-01-017-F 5.02E-02 OOL-1 6-01-018-F 4.17E-02 OOL-16-01-019-F 3.56E-02 OOL-16-01-020-F 5.02E-02 F Maximum Sum of Fractions 1.15E-01 Standard Deviation 2.31 E-02 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.

A data set review was performed on OOL-16-01. The data range was within three standard deviations and exhibited a normal variance about the arithmetic mean. The 9

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 frequency plot exhibited a Poisson distribution with the exception of one data point skewed slightly high; however this data point was a small fraction of the DCGLw and a review of the posting plot did not clearly reveal any systematic spatial trends.

The quantile plot displayed some asymmetry in the lower quartile due to the number of lower values present. The power function, shown by the retrospective power curve, was adequate to pass the FSS of the Survey Unit and the retrospective standard deviation was approximately equal the prospective standard deviation. The data set verified the assumptions of the statistical test.

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 Data Quality Assessment power curves, scatter, quantile and frequency plots are found in Attachment B. Posting Plots are found in Attachment A.

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-16 satisfied the above criteria for the survey. QC records are found in Attachment C.

6.2 Split Samples and Recounts One recount 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-16.

10

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL- 16-00

7.0 CONCLUSION

The FSS of OOL-16 has been performed in accordance with YNPS LTP and applicable FSS procedures. Evaluation of the direct measurement data has shown none of the systematic direct measurements exceeded the DCGLw, depicted in Attachment B.

Retrospective power curves were generated and demonstrated that an adequate number of samples were collected to support the Data Quality Objectives. Therefore, the null hypothesis (H0 ) is rejected.

OOL-16 meets the objectives of the Final Status Survey.

Based upon the evaluation of the data acquired for the FSS, OOL-16 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.

11

Report No.: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-00 List of Appendices Appendix A - YNPS-FSSP-OOL-16, "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- 16 List of Attachments Attachment A - Maps and Posting Plots Attachment B - Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Attachment C - Instrument QC Records Attachment D - ORTEC Direct Measurement Data (In the electronic version, every Table of Contents, Figures,Appendices and Attachments, as well as every mention of a Figure, Appendix or Attachment is a hyperlink to the actuallocation or document.)

12

inal Status Survey Planning Worksheet Page I of 7 GENERAL SECTION Survey Area No.: OOL- 16 Survey Unit No.: 01 Survey Unit Name: Furlon House Lot FSSP Number: YNPS-FSSP-OOL-16-01-01 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. 2 1.2 ALARA review has been completed for the survey unit. 9 Refer to YA-REPT-00-003-05 1.3 The survey unit has been turned over for final status survey. El 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. 0 1.5 Activities conducted within area since turnover for FSS have been reviewed. Dl Based on reviewed information, subsequent walkdown: 0 not warranted El warranted If warranted, subsequent walkdown has been performed and documented per DP-8854. Dl 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. El

1.7 Classification

CLASS 1 El CLASS 2 El CLASS 3 0 DATA QUALITY OBJECTIVES (DQO) 1.0 State the problem:

Survey Unit OOL-16-01 consists of the Furlon House Lot, approximately 2342.4 m2 in surface area.

Survey Unit OOL-16-01 is entirely bounded by non-impacted YAEC-owned property. The only subsurface structure that traverses or connects within OOL-16-01 is the sanitary sewer system that services the Furlon House. Survey Unit OOL-16-01 contains soil that was excavated during the construction activities of the YNPS site. Because site excavated soils were deposited, low levels of radioactivity may minimally impact this area. OOL-16-01 was never part of the RCA, did not contain any radioactive systems and no decommissioning activities were performed in this area; therefore it meets the criteria for a Class 3 survey unit. 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 the 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 the release criteria?

Alternative actions may include no action, investigation, resurvey, remediation and reclassification.

3.0 Identify the inputs to the decision:

DPF-8856.1 Page 1 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL- 16-01-01

[ Sample media: Isoil Types of measurements: Soil samples and gamma scans 3

Radionuclides-of-concern: Cs' 7 The characterization data in the HSA is not sufficient to support FSS planning. Two characterization soil samples were collected from this relatively small survey unit. The results were consistent with historical use information in that no plant-related radionuclide was identified in either sample. The characterization samples were not analyzed for hard-to-detect (HTD) nuclides such as H3, Sr9°, and TRUs. However, given that the gamma analysis did not identify any plant-related radioactivity, plant-related HTD nuclides are not expected to be present in absence of plant-related gamma-emitters, which were historical more abundant in all the plant waste streams. Survey Unit OOL-I 8-01 Monroe Hill Lot was utilized to store Low-level Rad Waste containers in the same manner as OOL-16-01; therefore 13 additional characterization samples from OOL-18 taken on 6/5/06 were used to support this plan. Nevertheless, all FSS soil samples will be analyzed for the LTP-listed gamma-emitting radionuclides, and at least 5% of the FSS soil samples will be sent to an independent laboratory for complete analyses (I-ITD nuclides and TRUs).

Applicable DCGL: The DCGLs applied under this survey plan correspond to annual doses of 8.73 mrem/y (the 10-mrem/y DCGL adjusted for the dose contributions from sub-surface concrete structures and tritium in ground water).

DCGL Nuclide DCGL DCGL Nuclide (pCi/g) (pCi/g) Nuclide (pCi/g)

Co 1.4E+00 -TEu'- 3.6E+00 Sr9° 6.OE-01 Nb94 2.5E+00 Eu 154 3.3E+00 TcY 5.OE+00 Ag'08m 2.5E+00 Eu - 1.4E+02 PU233 1.2E+0 I Sb-!) 1.]E+01 H3 1.3E+02 Pu2391240 1.1E+01 Cs*34 1.7E+00 C14 1.9E+00 PU241 3.4E+02 Cs137 3.OE+00 Fe5 10OE+04 Am 24)* OE+01 Ni 2.8E+02 CM241124 1.LE+01 The presence of all LTP-listed radionuclides (gamma-emitters, HTD beta-emitters, and TRUs) in the soil will be evaluated under this survey plan. The YNPS Chemistry Dept. will analyze each FSS soil sample for all LTP-listed gamma-emitting nuclides, except Cm- 3n44. In addition, 5% of FSS soil samples will be sent to an independent laboratory for analyses of gamma-emitters, HTD beta-emitting radionuclides, and alpha-emitting radionuclides, which will include Cm24312 44.

Survey Design / Release Criteria Classification: Class 3 Average Cs13 7 concentration: 0.0293 pCi/g Standarddeviation Cs637 (r): 0.0327 pCi/g DCGL: 3.0 pCi/g SurrogateDCGL." N/A (a surrogate DCGL will not be used)

LBGR: 2.9346 (Initial LBGR: 1.5)

Number of Samples 15 (calculated) + 5 (added), for a total of 20 samples. (+ 2 QC)

Survey Unit Area: 2342.4m2 DPF-8856.1 Page 2 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL-16-01 -01

GridArea (A/N)." No grid.

Investigation Level for soil * >DCGLw for any LTP listed nuclide.

samples:

• Sum of DCGL fractions>l.0.

Scan Coverage: Ž10% of the surface area using SPA-3.

SPA-3 Gamma Scan SPA-3 scans will be performed over an approximate Im by Im area Coverage: surrounding each soil sample. At least three judgmental SPA-3 scans will be performed in Survey Unit OOL-I 6-01, each of which will cover an area of approximately 10 m2 (Im in width and 10m in length). These scans will be performed in the parking lot area in the approximate location shown on the attached map.

InvestigationLevel for SPA-3 Reproducible indication above background using SPA-3 and audible Scans: discrimination. The expected background range for SPA-3 scans is between 4,000 cpm and 10,000 cpm.

Radionuclidesfor analysis: All LTP nuclides with the focus on Cs' 37 .

MDCs for gamma analysis of Nuclide 10% - 50% of DCGL (pCi/O) soil samples: 60 Co 1.4E-0t - 7.OE-01 Nb 94 2.5E 1.3E+00 Ag 0 8'1 2.5E 1.3E+00 Sb' 25 l. 1E+00 - 5.6E+00 Cs134 1.7E 8.7E-01 Cs137 3.OE L.SE+00 Eu' 52 3.6E 1.8E+00 Eu154 3.3E-0l - 1.7E+00 Eu1 55 1.4E+-0I - 6.9E+01 The desired MDCs in the laboratory analyses of FSS soil samples will be the 10% DCGL values. If it is impractical to achieve those, the 50%

DCGL values must be achieved in the laboratory analyses of the FSS soil samples.

MDCs for HTD nuclide: Nuclide 10% - 50% DCGL (pCi/g)

H34 1.3E+0I - 6.4E+01 C' 1.9E 9.7E-01 Fe 55 1.OE+03 - 5.I1 E+03 Ni 63 2.8E+01 - 1.4E+02 Sr 90 6.OE 3.OE-0I Tc 99 5.OE 2.5E+00 Pu 238 1.2E+00 - 5.8E+00 Pu 239 1.1E+00 - 5.3E+00 Pu2 4 1 3.4E+01 - 1.7E+02 Am 241 L.OE+00 - 5.1E+00 Cm 243 1.I E+00 - 5.6E+00 The MDC values for difficult to detect nuclides will be conveyed to the outside laboratory via the sample chain-of-custody form DPF-8823.1 which will accompany the soil samples.

MDCR for SPA-3: The accompanying MCDR/MDC table in Attachment I provides MDCR values by various background levels.

MDC(/DCGL)for SPA-3 The accompanying MCDR/MDC table in Attachment I provides MDC scans: values, as a fraction of DCGL, by various background levels.

Note: Any radiation levels detected above background in a Class 3 survey unit should be investigated. A Class 3 survey unit is expected to DPF-8856.1 Page 3 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL-t 6-01-01

have minimal contamination and not expected to have any hot spots.

MARSSIM recommends scanning in a Class 3 survey unit be performed to verify proper classification. Scan MDC is not tied to the DCGLw in a Class 3 survey area and therefore scanning to levels above background is a measure of due-diligence on the appropriateness of the classification.

(http://www.orau.gov/ddsc/expert/answers/marssim.htm question/answer dated 2/4/2003)

QC checks and measurements:

• QC checks for the Leica GPS will be performed in accordance with DP-8859.

• QC checks for the SPA-3 will be performed in accordance with DP-8504.

• Two QC split sample will be collected (note: this exceeds the DP-8852 requirements).

• YNPS Chemistry Lab will perform a QC Recount on at least one soil sample in accordance with DP-8852 requirements.

4.0 Define the boundaries of the survey:

Boundaries of Survey Unit OOL-16-01 are as shown on the attached map. The Furlon House Parking Lot is bounded on the east side by Monroe Hill Road, Lord Brook to the west and a wooded area to the north. The Furlon House footprint occupies the southwestern corner of the survey unit.

The survey will be performed under appropriate weather conditions (as defined by instrumentation limitations and human tolerance). Surveys may be performed on any shift of work.

5.0 Develop a decision rule:

Upon review of the FSS data collected under this survey plan:

(a) If all the sample data show that the soil concentrations of LTP-listed nuclides are below the 8.73 mrem/year DCGLs and the sum of fractions of LTP-listed nuclides are below unity, then reject the null hypothesis (i.e., Survey Unit OOL-I 6-01 meets the release criteria).

(b) If the investigation levels are exceeded, then perform an investigation survey.

(c) If the average concentration of any LTP-listed nuclide exceeds its respective DCGLW or the average sum of fractions of LTP-listed nuclides exceeds unity, then accept the null hypothesis (i.e., Survey Unit OOL-1 6-01 fails to meet the release criteria).

Note: Alternate actions include investigations, reclassification, remediation and resurvey.

6.0 SpeciI tolerable limits on decision errors:

j .....

Null hypothesis: Residual plant-related radioactivity in Survey Unit OOL- 16-01 exceeds the release criteria.

Probabilityof type I error: 0.05 Probabilityof type I error: 0.05 LBGR: The applicable soil (8.73-mrem/y) DCGL + 2 LBGR = 2.9346 (Initial LBGR: 1.5) 7.0 Optimize Design:

DPF-8856.1 Page 4 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL-16-01-01

Type of statistical test: WRS Test E Sign Test l] (background will not be subtracted)

Number and Location of Samples: 20 soil samples will be collected in randomly selected locations (refer to accompanying DPF-8853. I).

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS I. Where possible, measurement locations will be identified using GPS in accordance with DP-8859. Each location will be marked to assist in identifying the location. Any locations that are not suitable for soil sampling will be relocated to the nearest suitable location and documented in the field log in accordance with DP-8856.

2. Soil samples will be collected in accordance with DP-8120.

3. Chain-of-Custody forms 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.

4. All soil samples will be received and prepared in accordance with DP-8813. Note: Split samples to be sent to an off-site lab will not be dried prior to counting on site or shipping.

5. 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-8504. The instrument response checks shall be performed before issue and after use.

6. All SPA-3 scans will be performed with the audible feature activated. FSS Technicians 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.

7. The job hazards associated with the survey described in this package are addressed in the accompanying Job Hazard Assessment (JHA) for OOL- 16-01.

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

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS I. All designated measurement locations will be identified by GPS per DP-8859 or by use of reference points and tape measure, as necessary. If a designated sample location is obstructed for any reason, the FSS Radiological Engineer or the FSS Field Supervisor will select an alternate location in accordance with DP-8856. A detailed description of the alternate location will be recorded on form DPF-8856.2, the survey unit map will be annotated appropriately, and the alternate location will be conspicuously marked to facilitate re-visiting to identify and record the coordinates with GPS in accordance with DP-8859 or by measurement from a known reference point when GPS is not available.

2. Sample Requirements:

Collect 20 random 1-liter soil samples in accordance with DP-8120. Two of the 20 random soil samples will be analyzed as a QC split sample to fulfill the QC requirement of DP-8852. The same QC split samples will also be analyzed for Hard-to-Detect nuclides in accordance with section 5.6.3.2.1 of the LTP and DP-8856.

3. Soil Sample Designations:

FSS soil samples: OOL-16-01-001-F through OOL-16-01-020-F correspondingto FSS sample locations 001 through 020.

Biased soil samples: None.

QC split samples: OOL-16-01-008-F-S and OOL-16-01-017-F-S to be designated as QC DPF-8856.1 Page 5 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL- 16-01-01

split samples.

oared in accordance with DP-8864.

4. Sample Analysis:

• Gamma analysis will be performed on all soil samples. If any of the gamma analyses show that an investigation level has been exceeded an investigation survey will be conducted at that sample location as directed in specific instruction # 6.

" YNPS Chemistry will analyze OOL-16-0O-001-F through OOL-16-01-020-F for gamma-emitting nuclides.

• YNPS Chemistry will analyze OOL-16-01-008-F-S and OOL-16-01-017-F-S for gamma-emitting nuclides prior to being sent to the off-site laboratory. These samples will be analyzed for gamma-emitting nuclides and HTDs as collected from the field (i.e. without drying) at the off-site laboratory.

Ensure that the lid to the I-liter Marinelli container is secured and sealed with electrical tape to prevent loss of moisture during shipping.

" YNPS Chemistry will analyze OOL-16-0l-006-F as a sample recount. The recounted sample will possess the naming convention OOL-l 6-0O-006-F-RC.

" On-site gamma analysis of the FSS samples shall achieve the MDC values stated in the DQO section of this plan. The MDCs will be communicated to the laboratory using an attachment to the Chain-of-Custody form.

5. If the results of any FSS sample (statistical points) analysis exceed an investigation level, perform a first level investigation as follows:

Note: Detailed descriptions of investigation actions shall be recorded in the daily survey journal (DPF-8856.2).

" Scan a 1-meter radius footprint around the sample location with a SPA-3 in rate-meter mode moving the detector at a speed of 0.25m or less per second, keeping the probe at a distance of approximately 3" from the surface and following a serpentine path that includes at least 3 passes across each square meter. The area of scan should be increased as necessary to bound any areas of elevated activity identified.

" Mark the boundaries around any detected elevated areas in the soil and identify the boundaries on a survey map. Measure the total area of each outlined area in square centimeters.

• Mark the location of the highest identified activity for each of the elevated areas in the soil and on the survey map.

• At each of the highest identified activity areas:

" Perform and record a 1-minute scaler mode SPA-3 measurement. Designate the reading as "OOL-16-01-xxx-F-SC-I" where "xxx" continues sequentially from the last number assigned to an FSS measurement.

• Obtain a soil sample at the location. Designate the sample as "OOL-1 6-01 -xxx-F-I" where "xxx" continues sequentially from the last number assigned to an FSS measurement.

" Perform and record a post sample I-minute SPA-3 measurement. Designate the reading as described above.

DPF-8856.1 Page 6 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL-1 6-01-01

6. If the results of an scan exceed an investigation level, perform a first level investigation as follows:

Note: Detailed descriptions of investigation actions shall be recorded in the daily survey journal (DPF-8856.2).

a Scan the footprint with a SPA-3 in rate-meter mode moving the detector at a speed of 0.25m or less per second, keeping the probe at a distance of approximately 3" from the surface and following a serpentine path that includes at least 3 passes across each square meter.

• Mark the boundaries around any detected elevated areas in the soil and identify the boundaries on a survey map. Measure the total area of each outlined area in square centimeters.

• Mark the location of the highest identified activity for each of the elevated areas in the soil and on the survey map.

• At each of the highest identified activity areas:

a Perform and record a 1-minute scaler mode SPA-3 measurement. Designate the reading as "OOL-l16-01-xxx-F-SC-1" where "xxx" continues sequentially from the last number assigned to an FSS measurement.

• Obtain a soil sample at the location. Designate the sample as "OOL-16-01-xxx-F-1" where "xxx" continues sequentially from the last number assigned to an FSS measurement.

• Perform and record a post sample 1-minute SPA-3 measurement. Designate the reading as described above.

NOTIFICATION POINTS None.

IJTt Prepared by**ý 7 Date "7 /130(, _

Reviewed by %F Ma gineer Date_2_1 -.

FSS Ra joical ýEngineer Approved by_ N01i Date 7 /,W ,,r

/ - /

AtSS Project'Manager DPF-8856.1 Page 7 of 7 YNPS-FSSP-OOL- 16-01-01

YNPS-FSSP-OOL-1 6-01-00 Attachment 1 SPA-3 Scan Tables Max Background BKG(cpm) MDCR MDC(fDCGL) 4,000 639 1.13E+00 5,000 715 1.27E+00 6,000 783 1.39E+00 7,000 845 1.50E+00 8,000 904 1.60E+00 9,000 959 1.70E+00 10,000 1,011 1.79E+00 11,000 1,060 1.88E+00 12,000 1,107 1.96E+00 13,000 1,152 2.04E+00 14,000 1,196 2.12E+00 15,000 1,238 2.19E+00 16,000 1,278 2.27E+00 17,000 1,318 2.34E+00 18,000 1,356 2.40E+00 19,000 1,393 2.47E+00 20,000 1,429 2.53E+00 21,000 1,464 2.60E+00 22,000 1,499 2.66E+00 23,000 1,533 2.72E+00 24,000 1,565 2.78E+00 25,000 1,598 2.83E+00 26,000 1,629 2.89E+00 27,000 1,660 2.94E+00 28,000 1,691 3.OOE+00 30,000 1,750 3.1OE+00 32,000 1,808 3.21E+00 34,000 1,863 3.30E+00 36,000 1,917 3.40E+00 38,000 1,970 3.49E+00 40,000 2,021 3.58E+00

YNPS-FSSP-OOL-1 6-01-00 Attachment 2 DCGL MDC Table Cs-137 3.OE+00 3.OE-01 1.5E+00 ETD Eu-152 3.6E+00 3.6E-01 1.8E+00 ETD Eu-154 3.3E+00 3.3E-01 1.7E+00 ETD Eu-155 1.4E+02 1.4E+01 6.9E+01 ETD Am-241 1.O0f+01 1.OE+00 5.1E+00 ETD H-3 1.3E+02 1.,E+01 6.4E+01i HTD C-14 1.9E+00 1.9E-01 9.7E-01 HTD Fe-55 1.OE+04 1.OE+03 5.1E+03 HTD Ni-63 2.8E+02 2.8E+01. 1.4E+02 HTD Sr-90 6.OE-01 6.OE-02 3.OE-01 HTD Tc-99 5.OE+00 5.OE-01 2.5E+00 HTD Pu-238 1.2E+01 1.2E+00 5.8E+00 HTD Pu-239 1.1E+01 1.IE+00 5.3E+00 HTD Pu-241 3.4E+02 3.4E+01 1.7E+02 HTD Cm-243 1.IE+01 " 1.1E+00 5.6E+00 HTD

TECHNICAL REPORT TITLE PAGE 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 Approvalry\ (Print & Sign N ane)

Preparer: L-----L

'. Date: / Io. ,

Review Date: Al/04-l Approver (CIO nizant Manager): (I-*. Date: 16 /7/0 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0

/

Page 1 of 26

/

J

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 (i): ................................................... 6 4.2 Source to Detector Distance Considerations: ................................................... 7 4.2.1 M ethodology ................................................................................. 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 C onclusion: .................................................................................. .............. 10 8.0 R eferences: .................................................................................................... 11 0 Tables Table 3.1 Nuclides and Major Radiations: Approximate Energies ......................................... 5 Table 4.1 Instrument Efficiencies (ei) ......................................................................... 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-108m Calculation Sheet ............................................. 17 APPENDIX G MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan- 28 cm radius 1pCi/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-i137 ................... 22 APPENDIX L Microsoft Excel Cs- 137 Calculation Sheet ............................................. 23 MicroShield, SPA-3 Soil scan- 28 cm radius lpCi/cmi3 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 (6,), 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" Nal (TI) detectors will be determined. Efficiencies for the other instrumentation listed in the LTP shall be determined on an as needed basis. The 100 cm 2 gas proportional probe will be used to perform surveys (i.e. fixed point measurements). A 2" x2" NaI (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-00-0 15-04 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 Maor Radiations: Approximate Energies (Reference 8.4)

Nuclide a Energy Ep., (MeV) Average Photon Energy (MeV) a Detectable P3Detectable y (MeV) EP wl Gas w/ Gas Detectable (MeV) Proportional Proportional wI 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 0.066 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 4 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-1 34 1.453 0.152 0.57 (23%), 0.605 (98%)

0.796 (99%), 1.038 (1.0%)

1.168 (1.9%), 1.365

. , (3.4%)

Cs-1 37 1.167 0.195 0.662 (85%) Ba-1 37m X- /

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

0.344 (27%),.0.779 (14%)

0.965 (15%), 1.087 (12%)

1.113 (14%), 1.408 (22%)

Eu-i 54 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 '4 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 47r 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 27c 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, ej is the instrument or detector 27c efficiency F-is the efficiency of the source W is the area of the detector window (cm 2) 4.1 Alpha and Beta Instrument Efficiency (Qe):

Instrument efficiency (qi) 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 si is 1.0, assuming all the emissions from the source are 27c and that all emissions from the source are detected. The ISO 7503-1 methodology for determining the instrument efficiency is similar to the historical 47r approach; however the detector response, in cpm, is divided by the 2z surface emission rate of the calibration source. The instrument efficiency is calculated by dividing the net count rate by the 2z surface emission rate (q 2,)

(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 q2z*

where:

Rs+B is the gross count rate of the measurement in cpm, RB is the background count rate in cpm, q 2,is the 27c surface emission rate in reciprocal seconds Note that both the 27n 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 27c surface emission rate of the source.

Table 4.1 Instrument Efficiencies (9i)

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

I _ _(Contact)

Tc-99 15.2 100 cm 2 0.4148 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- 13Emitters Source to Detector Instrument Efficiency (81 )

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 (8s), 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. Es 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:

(0.25Xo.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 MeVma < 0.400 MeVma I Beta emitters e,= 0.5 s = 0.25 Alpha emitters cs = 0.25 F = 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):

U Separate modeling analysis (MicroshieldTM) was conducted using the common gamma emitters with a concentration of I 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 I 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 mRhr'/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 E, 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-108m See Appendix E and F 637 Sb-125 See Appendix G and H 210 Cs- 134 See Appendix I and J 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.

~tot = Ei X FS 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-i100 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, Satt, 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-00-015-04 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 ca- P3Emitters".

"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 ct- PEmitters". 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 stot = si x E, = 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 (si) at *various source to detector distances for alpha and beta emitters. The appropriate Ej 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 s, 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 D~tectable 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 MicroShield 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 Y #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 Nuclide curies becquerels PCi/cm 3 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 0 *!ii 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 1pCi/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 3

Material Density Source 3.69e+04 cm Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies Nuclide curies becquerels PCi/cma 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 2 MeV/cm /sec 2

MeV/cm /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 1.228e-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 A X Y z

1. 1 0 cm 25 cm 0 cm 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in L=l 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 Activity Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy MeV/cm 2/sec MeV/cmz/sec MeV Photons/sec mR/hr mR/hr 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 1.23le-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-1 25.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 l pCi/cm3 Sb-125 Geometry: 8 - Cylinder Volume - End Shields SourceDimcnsions:

Height , 5.0cm (S.9 in)

Radius 28.0 cm (I1.0 in)

DosePoints A X Y z

1. I 0 cm 25 cm 0cm 0.0 in 9.8 in 0.0 in Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density Source 3.69e,04 C& Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input : Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies Nuclide curies aecquerels pCi/cm- 8qlcm' 9

Sb-125 3.6 45e.-008 1.3670c+003 1.0000e-006 3.7000e.002 Buildup: The material reference is - Source integration Pararneters Radial 20 Circutmferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Energy Activity Fluence Rate Fluence Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate MeV/cml/sec MeV/cml/scc mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup With Buildup 0.0038 6.762e+01I 1.708c-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 9 1.132e+02 1.857e-05 2.22 1e-05 1.670e-07 1. 97c-07 0.0355 5.693e+0 I 1.492e-05 1.91 8e-05 9.090e-08 I. 169c-07 0.117 3.568c+00 1.380"5O 3.715e-05 2.146e-08 5.778e-08 0.159 9.53 le-Ol 5.634e-06 1.499e-05 9.416e-09 2.505L-08 0.1726 2.478e+00 1.634e-05 4.295e-05 2.787e-08 7.326e-08 0.1763 9.423e+01 6.392e-04 1.674e-03 1.096c-06 2.870e-06 0.2041 4.41Oe+00 3.630e-05 9.230e-05 6.435e-08 1.636e-07 0.2081 3.324e+00 2.805e-05 7.103e-05 4.994e-08 1.264e-07 0.2279 1.796e+00 1.708L-05 4.229e-05 3.098e-08 7.670e-08 0.32 I 5.701 e+00 8.474e-05 1.899e-04 1.620e-07 3.632e-07 0.3804 2.045e40 I 3.792e-04 8.052e-04 7.364e-07 1.564c-06 0.408 2.486e+00 5.05 1le-05 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+00 9..356e-05 1.894e-04 1.832e-07 3.709e-07 0.4634 1.415~e+02 3.395e-03 6.78 le-03 6.658e-06 1.330e-05 0.6006 2.430e+02 8.174e-03 1.501e-02 1.595e-05 2.930e-05 0.6066 6.864t+0 I 2.340e-03 4.283e-03 4.564e-06 8.355e-06 0.6359 1.548c+02 5.609e-03 1.012,.-02 1.091e-05 1.967e-05 0.6714 2.478e+01 9.640e-04 1.710e-03 1.867e-06 3.311 e-06 Totals 1.9] 6e+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-00-01 5-04 Rev. 0 Page 19 of 26

APPENDIX I MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 liIe 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 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 3

Material Density Source 3.69e+04 cm Concrete 1.6 Air Gap Air 0.00122 Source Input: Grouping Method - Actual Photon Energies 3

Nuclide curies becquerels pCi/cm Bq/cma Cs-134 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 2Rate Exposure Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cm 2 /sec MeV/cm /sec mR/hr mR/hr MeV Photons/sec No Buildup With Buildup No Buildup Wih 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-01 2.405e-04 4.202e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 20 of 26

APPENDIX J 0

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

APPENDIX K MicroShier 46.02 (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 1pCi/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 A X Y z Y

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 ICi/cm Bq/cm3 Ba-137m 3.4950e-008 1.2932e+003 9.4600e-007 3.S002e-002 Cs-137 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.0000e-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 2 MeV/cm /sec mR/hr mR/hr MeV/cmz/sec 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 8.611e-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-00-015-04 Rev. 0 Page 23 of 26

APPENDIX M MicroShield v6.02 (6.02-00253)

Page :1 * .F~iIe Ref' DOS File :SPA3-EFF-Eu-152.ms6 Date Run Date October 7, 2004 Run Time 11:25:11 AM Checked Duration 0 0 :0 0 :0 0 ......- .... ..... - --- ------

Case

Title:

SPA-3-EFF-Eu-152

Description:

SPA-3 Soil scan - 28cm radius 1 pCl/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)

Dose Points A x Y z

1. 1 0 crr 25 cm 0 cm 0.01 n 9.8 In 0.0 In Shields Shield N Dimension Material Density Source 3.69e+04 cm3 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 Ubrary: Grove 3

Nuclide curies becquerels IzCI/cm Bq/cm3 Eu-152 3.6945e-008 1.3670e+003 1.00O0e-006 3.7000e-002 Buildup : The material reference is - Source Integration Parameters Radial 20

'Circumferential 10 Y Direction (axial) 10 Results Exposure Fluence 2Rate Fluence Rate Rate Exposure Rate Energy Activity MeV/cm /sec 2 mR/hr MeV/cm /sec 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 3.13 1e-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 S.02ge-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 7.711le+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 3.171le+02 3.490e-02 4.999e-02 5.871e-05 8.411e-05 Totals 3.376e+03 9.635e-02 1.556e-01 1.740e-04 2.817e-04 YA-REPT-00-015-04 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)

'CPMImR/h 100000000

n

5. 1. Iii I Itii zf 11F I~

• 1 I I 10000000 E -rn-I-I-rn A

E,/

I N

1000000:

I I II A lII I I I xI f l 1OQOOC 10 UU 1UuO MW00 ENERGY (kev)

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

Generic ALARA Evaluation Comparison Worksheet Survey Area: OOL-16 Survey Unit: 01 Reference Generic ALARA Evaluation No.: YA-REPT-00-003-05 Applicable Generic ALARA AL: 165 Radionuclide Average Concentration DCGL fraction DCGL 1 Cs-137 0.0293 3 9.77E-03 2 0 3

4 Z(fraction DCGL): 9.77E-03 If the F(fraction DCGL) < the generic ALARA AL, then the generic ALARA evaluation is applicable to the survey unit.

Check one:

X Generic ALARA AL IS satisfied.

-Generic ALARA AL IS NOT satisfied.

Prepared by: Nancy Tozzie kv, Date: 7/13/2006 FSSRadiologiodlEngineerý7 V(ýý'*-

Reviewed by: 1'fA--+ f-, 2,V'_ Date:7/,*

FSS Project Monager/Radiation Protection Manager DPF-8867.1

OOL- 16 Attachment A Maps Attachment A - Maps and Posting Plots List of Figures FiL-ure Paae FIGURE 1 OOL- 16 RELATIVE TO STRUCTURES ............................................ ............................................. 2 FIGURE 2 OOL-16-01 SOF POSTING PLOT .............................................................................................................. 3 I

OOL-16 Attachment A Maps Figure 1 OOL-16 Relative to Structures 2

OOL-16 Attachment A Maps Figure 2 OOL-16-O1 SOF Posting Plot 3

OOL-16 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves List of Figures Figure Page FIGURE 1 OOL-16-01 PROSPECTIVE POWER CURVE ..................................................................................... 2 FIGURE 2 00L-16-01 RETROSPECTIVE POWER CURVE ................................................................................. 2 FIGURE 3 OOL- 16-01 SUM OF FRACTIONS SCATTER PLOT ............................................................................ 3 FIGURE 4 00L- 16-01 SUM OF FRACTIONS QUANTILE PLOT .......................................................................... 3 FIGURE 5 00L- 16-01 SUM OF FRACTIONS FREQUENCY PLOT ...................................................................... 4 The LBGR on the Power Curves have been adjusted to demonstrate the actual power of the survey.

I

OOL-16 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 1 OOL-16-01 Prospective Power Curve Decision Eror Required Sample Sie Survey Unit ID: &lha Beta: surneyUnit 2 0 Radionuclkrd C-s-137 Stafisfca1 Test' 10.05 i 1110 r- SipnTest 12CGL 13.0 WRS Test 0~ 13. 0 002 -~m Crifcal Valuc: LBGR r2.-955 Ala- 1.38 kma F032714 Probability that th Survey Unit Passes C~k 1.0 a,-ywkerv on the graph to 0.8 ---

---

udate the power Mwve 0.6 uans~g newtv entered parameter 0.4 values 0.2

. .1-4-.4-.1.. -4 4 .. .-- . . .- - .-

0.0

-. j,- + -~L-~ -~z-- 4 ......4~. ~j ~. ~

• i~

EWtProgam.

True Survey Unit Concenttoien (percent of DCGL)

Figure 2 OOL-16-01 Retrospective Power Curve Decision ErrorSt.

Survey Unt ID: -Required Sample Size

~Jpha Beta: Survey Unit: 20 Radirmuide: ICs- 137 -Stafstal Test-

r. Sign Test VRU117j: 10.05 Zj DCGL F30 - r WRS Test

.J 3.0 sigma. Critcal Value: LBGR 12.943 A/0 - 1.39 F -041 - j14 Probability that the Survey Unit Passes Chek 1.0 anywhere on the graph to 0.8 uipdate the power curve 0.6 using newly entered parameter 1.4 values 112 110

- - 10I' 1 i t Exi Program True Survey Unit Coneentratlen (percent of DCGL) 2

OOL-16 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 3 OOL-16-01Sum of Fractions Scatter Plot OOL-16-01 Sample Results Scatter Plot DCGLw= I SOF 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 0.14 0.12 -- -------------------------------------------------------------- 0.12 0.1 0

0.08 0.06 .0.05 0.04 0.02 0

-0.02----------------------------------------------------- - - - - -. 0.02

-0.04 1 0 Activity - Average -- +3StDev -- -3StDov?

Figure 4 OOL-16-01 Sum of Fractions Quantile Plot OOl-CLIGl 6.iWb.FlM I Qartilbb Pk*

0.14 0.12 0.1 0.080 I Il o [Ar.----------i--.-*- - 75h ec -P

• .* I0.4 010 o.cp 0 ,

o io 23 30 40 50 &J 70 8) 90 190 I:eror/ile

• I° 1lbsunr mm - -- 751 ~~~e....-S~ etetl 3

OOL-16 Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves Figure 5 OOL-16-01 Sum of Fractions Frequency Plot O01-1G-01 Frequency Pict 6

5 3- II 12 II z

I III I 1 I I 0.02 0.03 0.04 II I

0.05 I

0.06 0.08 I

0.09 0.1 0.11 I

0.12 Bin Upper Erd Value (SOF) 4

Daily Survey Journal Page 1 of_

Survey Area Unit No.: 0 C) . -'" (, -- SurveyDate: TJ3." C3 ¢,e Survey Plan #: V`?S-S - co L-G , q~-

Supervisor: b.*,. Crew: .

Instruments:

....... Modiel:

Serial #: 1 -

Cal. Due.

4 Pre-op source : Sat. 0Sat.O Post-op source .:_s.-Enate: Sat.o Date: Sat.0 Date:

TIME NOTES FOR SURVEY DATE

_____ .czk(3 Q4c."

k N*(

Completed b ae kr FS ield Supervisor Reviewed by Date

/r 76d adi o al Engineer DPF-8856.2 Rev. 5 Page 1 of 2

Daily Survey Journal Page 1 of I Survey Area OOL-16 Survey Area Name: 01 Survey Date: 7/25/06 No.:

of Survey Unit No. and Name: YNPS-FSS-OOL-16-01-OW-m- *s*oG Supervisor: John McChesney Crew: Steve Pennock, Mike Maxwell, Mike Sweet InstrumentsPre-op source Sat. Pre-op source Sat. [ Pre-op source Sat. Z Post-op source Sat. X0] Post-op source Sat [] Date Post-op source Sat. [] Date I TIME NOTES FOR SURVEY DATE 07:00 Briefed crew on area requirements.

07:30 Mike Sweet in the area to GPS soil sample locations. Excavator is being moved out of the area.

09:15 Mike Maxwell and Steve Pennock in the area to collect soil samples complete Scans.

13:00 Mike Maxwell called and part of the northern scan area is inexesssable, advised To scan in the general area to a point that we confident that we have done 2 meters by 20 meters.

14:10 OOL- 16-01 is complete Completed by Date -- ,/0 6L6-6

'KY

• FSS Field Supervisor Reviewed by Date jq ct lo ngmeer

/- -  ?ýý 6P ý--

DPF-8856.2 Rev. 5 Page 2 of 2

015-F-SC I f x torm MiKE MAXWELL 7YFAc 7 /7,' l'eJ 0 7/2 0/N F0013-F-SC O c 4*.2 mpi~r~n O s,/e 020-F-SC S£WVE P~'NIOcN

-At~f-, 5 >Q

/ 07 12 5/0ý/, 0 012-F-SC 0 rF-4PC0 0 Zj? 0910,716,,.Du 007-F-SC 5PAt-3 051y74.p, /Z/(yIO4p 0 K

010-F-SC Err. z 5 3eptnpi/r LInsh/e~de j ]oos-F-SC ALL Scq4N LOcATroA,5 SHowED NO REP9RDvc4ELf COuITS OVEg AREA BKGD4S.

PER PROBE" SckJLJZD ARE4 tm V(iorn rufl$S, o19-F-SC

<Ie4c -4,-r he"' Z +o 3;Q 9 ov-. 6o,.Fac,. 1 018-F-SC 009-F-OK80D. CoO#5 T F/1*AI& WiSýr Level reajnjsshg;n ALL, cpin -) -

A"zI-dtSrRumewr B -4*fRu

-r c-(,Oo a, Ot-q "'

MEIT E -(00 _*: OZ 4.W %P 5',

6-

Locatio s...

x-F (S) (RCO)[\.

0 -7

.. ...o-,/ .,-/11,A ii 7-0

& 15-F-S ,C 0014 TdITAL-2-o-3JOn-e 1910qI) IOZo T-7-hflVqI`LLi' 013 ibm /oi01r

ý* SC p 2'~- ci,'i'v L.' wl 007m*l A 6 ?,93-010,51 AO'7--F-SC 1OWSC

-F-SC

/,,"

OOL Map current as of FSS Sample Locations May 23, 2006 Based on Random Start 20 sample locations Map Revison #: 0 Area size: 2342.4 mz

COIN-M-OL POIN-T PORTARLE TX_~T2MM ACCOUNTABIZZTY FORM Znsr~ntType Batt Ca~ ~ oa~n and/or Date and Tech Date atndj7.

& TRC or DUS I Dae / easeoem s T+/-ze out same Time In SL^ej Aa 17zL ISMAYoTU /? L, 7 i.5;L 4;7 a-'00 0 /6-5(4L-7-o4 RP Supervisor Review (1)

"') If any post-use source check failures occur, ensure that the condition is documented by a Condition Report.

DPF-8504.1 Rev. 17 COpy

PORTABLE/GAIJMA FRrI. .- SOURCE CHECK FORM Meter Detector Detector Source IS 7Y8 Type Type Net Net 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 Check Alarm BKG SRC Net Int Check Counts Counts Counts Check Check Icounts Counts Counts 5h-F--. &)~LL~A~ -VD6 ýsio 'ýF 0 q l

/-P SYOT- q6& 0~oOc~3Og

___ OO0h frI 5__10 P'ORP 2

vQ'5 oSd)

__ Sk __ OJ F)- ~

Z3,3' 10 V k'_ _ __ _ _ _ _ __ _ _

)' 54S7 0( *v 41'(- -51bo ;2 (- 7-)4~ ____z _____

woolq~)

7-~(o~' ~,(~i,/0 o7w :9 (.90qo 5A#T 14_[!1-_ 57__

__ __ __6

?~~c'~ ~ gr A.- qf IzOWOO asofpo W>__ __ ______

2.7- f 'C' ao5 ' 5A I-& - W5_ t M O~ Wc j5 Ls 1 7O

- _ _ _ C

_ _ _ _ _I L V 5I ~! ze - . RA O N I RP Supervisor Review:

(I) ,W w ao-*

(1) If any post-use source check failures Condition Report. occur, ensure that the condition is documented by a DPF-8504.5 uev. 17

(

cOPY (

0 PORTABLE/GAMMA &,T-. - SOURCE CHECK FORM S?- _- 1 " *o io- 7,0.C 30 iG 16, 4' Meter Detector Detector Source Net Net Type Type Number ID Acceptance Acceptance Criteria Criteria

- 20% + 20%

PRE USE CHECKS POST USE CHECKS Date Time Audible Alarm BKG SC Net mnt Date Time Audible Alarm BKG SRC Net Int Check check counts Co~u~nts counts Check Check Counts Counts Counts 7-3AoAo~q dlA a-o~ 0 S oX70) 7(%O CAt6 t(2y 15-~'50 5.,-V1 40 .5500 ý25yo ' 2417oL) L

-18'0

• 7-4.4 aftL. OW &U2b -J two~ G~ b -Y3 L/-c iZAit-26(' 1P7 77-tisL* '5 ~ -f0 7-z~-o S4 lo'ýi 9?Woco7s*6a A___6 j

.7. IP6 o do0 5 All~ ?JA Alf(, 22oe

______ 1__ SAL__ -t____ICO.ý4o ______~o

• -. {~6 o4 (4o?S160 5frf 1OI~

_ ___ A~ _______ _ -

2_j

~o&

'20-~o~1- ~0o"b #I{Oc 9,A-oo  ;.6 -_z~~ g--.Z RP Supervisor Review: Ai'"io-Aý (1) 01,~ '4t'v 6\ML71

"* If any post-use source check failures occur, ensure that the condition is documented by.a Condition Report.

DPF-8504.5 Rev. 17 copy

(