ML073330379

EP-VD-1, Nasa, Survey Unit Release Record

ML073330379
Person / Time
Site:	Plum Brook  File:National Aeronautics and Space Administration icon.png
Issue date:	11/15/2007
From:	US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA)
To:	NRC/RGN-III/DNMS/DB
References
EP-VD-1
Download: ML073330379 (12)

Text

Description Survey Unit Release Record D&gn #

Swmey Unit Ws)

Work Execution Package (WEPI 05-006, Swvey instructions described in this document constitute "Special Medhods" and the survey design used in the acquisition of survey measurements.

5 ) Ifistnlroent efficiency determinations are deweloped in wcordanoe with the BSVLVS-002, WEP 05-006, these detamhations are appropriate for the types of radiation involved and the media being purveyed.

P-VD-1 VD-1

1) Embedded Pipe (EP) Survey Unit VD-I meets the definition of embedded pipe fur Plum Brook Reactor Facility (PRRF).

2) @ VD-I is w C h s I, Group 1 w e y unit as per the PBRF Find Status Survey Plan @SSP) and Techlliwd Basis Document ~

D

~

3) Surveys in EP -1 were paformed using a scintillation detector optimized to measure gamma energies r e p r e s d v e of Co-60. Sample #EP 3-9 h m S w e y Request (SR)-13 was referenced for this decision.

4) Survey htmctions for this survey unit are incorporated into and performed in a m r h with (LAW) the Bab&

Services Incorporated (BS1)ILVS-002, Revision #

Original Page 1 of 3

I FSS Design # EP VD-1 Revision # Original Page 2 of 3 Survey Unit: VD-1 1.0 History/Description I. 1 The subject pipe system is a 1" US hot leg drain below the cavity vasel.

The system access point is located on the -3 1' el. of the Rx building I. 2 EP VD-1 consists of 1 " diameter pip-that is appmrrimteb 6 feet in l e e 2,0 Survey Design Mbrmatbn 2.1 EP VD-1 was suweyed TAW Procedure #BSULVS002.

2.2 1000/o of the piping was m i b l e for survey. The accessible pipe was surveyed by static measurement at o m fbot incremmtq for a total of 6 w e y measurements.

2.3 The total d a c e area for the piping system is approximately 730 cm2 (0.1 m2) for the entire length of (6') of piping.

3.0 Survey Unit Measurement ~c&onslData 3.1 Pipe interior radiological suwey firms are provided in Attachment 2 of this release record.

4.0 Swvey Unit ZnvestigationdResuIts 4.1 None 5.0 Data Assessment Results 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in the EPIsluied Pipe (BP) Swvey Repart provided in Attachment 1.

5.2 All measurement r d t s are less than the Derived Concentration Guideline Level WGL) for rdiormclide specific EP that corresponds t~ the 1 fwemlyr dose goal established in Table 3-3 of the F SSP.

5 -3 When implementing the Unity Rule, provided in Section 3.6.3 of the FS SP, and applying the Nu~Iide Fraction @IF), provided in TBDdSWM, the survey unit that is constituted by EP VD-I passes FSS.

5.4 Background was not subtracted hta the m e y memuemem and the Elwed Measurement Comparison @MC) was not employed for this survey unit.

FSS Design # EP VD-1 Revision f Original Page 3 of 3 Survey unit: VD-1 5.5 Statistical Summary Table D o m a t i o n of evsrluations pertahing to compliance with the wmstricted use limit of 25 &

aad dose h b u t i o n s from Embedded Pipe rtnd radionuclides contributing 10% in -gate of the total dose for botb structural s c d w and mils.

6.1 A review oftfie survey d t s has shown that the dose cormtribution for EP VD-1 to be less I naremly. The dose d b u t i o n is d m t e d to be 0.162 mxm& based on the average of tbe aearal gross counts memmd.

7.0

~tt&&&

Athhnmt 1 - BSI IEPlgP S q

Report Aetachment 2 -Pipe Interior Wiological Survey Form Attach& 3 - DQA Worksheet -Disc mntahhg RR kr EP VD-I & Spreadsheet

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1 r

PAGE@)

BSI EPIBP SURVEY REPORT Pipe ID 8uwey Date 8-m HP-DGGL-8.8 LUES NOT BACKGROUND CORRECTED EP VD.1 290d-07 73:43 1"

241 EHE 8urwy Locaaion 2MO-1 #

Potoctor-k k d o r Emalancy rpl*ra-by--~@

Cavity V m l US trot leg dmm. 3 1 el.

FD 1.5MOW7hsled 0.00W1 243

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 z PAGE(S)

- B SnvSPipeCrdw1er-002 Revision 5 Pipe Interior Radiological Sun-ey Form Date:

\\b-m-oJ Ti,m e :

1 3 4 3 Pipe ID#: VQ -'\\

Pipe Di meter:

1

Access Point Area:

- 5 h9 Building:

L\\l Elevation:

System:

Type o f Survey Investigation Characterization

~inal survey &

other Gross Co60 4,

Cs DetectorIDBlSledID#

h / \\, S U ( / 00*)3

/ du ~d 9-w. ~ 7 Detector Cal Date:

DelectorCdDueDate: 7, I?-06, Instrument :

A350 - 1 Instrument ID f:

ab3qLp Instrument Cal Date:

9 - \\4-()7 Instrument Cal Due Date: 7 - IY - 08 From the Daily Pipe Survey Detector Control Form for the Selected Detector

~ackground Value

% % cpm M

D

~

~

~

~

~

~

~

13.a C P

~

Eficia~cyFactorforPipeDimeter 4,00971 (bm detector efficiency determination)

Is the MDCstatic acceptable?

NO (if no, adjust sample count time and recalculate MDLT&J C0~pmen.t~:

\\.jccan SW~,%

Technician Signature Pipe hteyior Radiological Survey Package Page 1 of 2, Attachment. 3, Page 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 r

PAGE(S)

4 DQA Check Sheet Design #

EP VD-1 Revision #

Original Survey Unit #

EP VD-I Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should be fully documented in the Survey Unit Release Record Yes No NIA

1. Have surveys been performed in accordance with survey instructions in the Survey Design?

X

2.

Is the instrumentation MDC for structum static measurements below the DCGh for Class 1 and 2 survey units, or below 0.5 D C G h for Class 3 survey units?

X

3.

Is the instrumentation MDC for embsddedmuried piping static measurements below the DCGLvv ?

X

4. Was the instrumentation MDC for m d u r e scan measurements, soil scan measurements, and ernbeddedlburied piping scan measurements below the DCGh or, if not, was the need for additional X

static measurements or soil samples addressed in the survey design?

5. W a s the instrumentation MDC for volumetric measurements and smear analysis < 10% DCGLW 7 X

6. Were the MDCs and assumptions used to develop them appropriate for the instruments and techniques used to perform the survey?

7. Were the survey methods used to collect data proper for the types of radiation invotved and for the media being surveyed?

X

8.

Were 'Special Methodsn for data collection properly applied for the survey unit under review?

X

9.

Is the data set comprised of qualified measurement results collected in accordance with the survey design, which accurately reflects the radiological status ofthe facility3 X

Graphical Data Review

1.

Has a posting plat been created?

X

2.

Has a histwrem (or other frequency plot) been created?

X Page 1 of 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC