ML073330448

EP-IT-12, Nasa, Survey Unit Release Record

ML073330448
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-IT-12
Download: ML073330448 (12)

Text

Description Survey Unit Release Record Survey Unit #(a) documerrt constitute "Specid Methods" and the sumey design used in the acquisition of survey measurements.

5) hstmment &ciency determinations are developed in mrdamx with the BSULVS-OOZ, WEP 05-006, these determinations are appropriate for the types of radiation involvat and the media being surveyed.

EP-JT-12 IT-12

1) Embedded Pipe (EP) Survey Unit IT-12 meets the dekition of embedded pipe for Plum Brook Reactor Facility (PERF).

2) IT W-12 is a Class: 1, Group 1 s u ~ e y unit as per the PBRF Find Status Survey Plan (FSSP) and Techaid Basis Document (TBD>064M.

3 ) S w e y s in EP IT-12 were performad using a scintillation detector optinaid to measure gamma energies representative of Co-60. Sample #EP 3-9 fiom Survey Request (SR)- 13 was & e n d for this decision.

4) Survey hstmctions for this survey unit are inco&

into ornd pmfbrmed in accordance with @AW) the Bztbcock Sewics Incorporated (BSlwVS-002, Work Execution P a c b a (WEP)05-006. Survey instructions d d b e d in this M i 0 1 1 #

Original Page 1 of 3

FSS Me # EP IT-12 Revision # Original 1

Page 2 of3 survey unit: IT-12 1.0 Histo~/lkscription 1.1 The subject pipe system is a 4" diameter p e n w o n 1-z d j a to the CRT plate within the Sub Pile Room. The system access point is located on the -34' el. of the Rx building.

1.2 EP IT-12 consists of 4" dimeter piping that is qproxirnate!y 3 feet in 1-2.0 Survey Design faformation 2.1 EP IT-12 was surveyed IAW Procedure #BSVLVS-002.

2.2 1 00°?4 of the piping was accessible for survey. The accessible pipe was w e y e d by static measurement at one foot increments, fix a total of 3 sumy measurements.

2.3 The total surface area for the piping system is approximately 2,919 cm2 (0.3 mZ) for the entire length of (3') of piping.

Survey Unit Metisurement Locations/Data 3,l Pipe interior radiological survey forms rtre provided in Attachment 2 of this release record.

Survey Unit Investi~ionslResults~ts 4.1 None Data Assessment Results 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in tbe EPBuried Pipe (BP) Swvey Rqmr~ @ded in Attachment 1.

5.2 All measurement results are less than the Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCG'L) for radionuclide specific EP that corresponds to the 1 mrem/yr dose goal established in Table 3-3 of the FS SP.

5.3 WkenimplemehgtheUnityhle,providedinSe~ion3,6.3ofh FSSP, and applying the Nuclide Fraction 0, pruvided in T B D - W,

the survey unit that is consthted by W IT-12 passes FSS.

5.4 Backpud was not suhracted fiom the survey measurements and the Elevated Measurement Comparison @MC) was not employed for this m

y unit.

A

FSS Design # EP IT-12 Revision # 015ghd Page 3 of 3 S w e y Unit: m-12 Documentation devaluations pertab@ to complianm with the unrestricted use limit of 25 &yr and dose contributions b m Embaldad Pipe and radionuclides wnttibuting 10% in aggregate of the total dose for both structural

&os and soils.

6.1 A review of the aurvey results has shown that the dose codbution for EP IT-1 2 to be less than 1 d y r. The dose contribution is &mated to be 0.016 d y

r based on the average of the actual gross counts maswed.

Amchmms - BSI EPIBP Survey Report - Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form - DQA Worksheet -Disc d n

g RR for EF IT-I2 & Spreadsheet

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1

BSI EPIBP SURVEY REPORT DetectorSled #

I MGl LVS-11101 Survey Technician($)

LUES NOT BACKGROUND CORRECTED

EP IT-I2 4" Pipe TBD 08-004 Group i

I CI E E

g i

i Eu-164 activity ' N W & M y

/ Ag-i08m activity wpm ncpn i Cu4Pactivity UnHy m

i Q

Cog0 activity

{total dpm)

Cs-I37 activity : Eu-Mlactivity 8

2i 8

(dpm1100cm2) 3 8

8 I2 12 tdpmr100cm2) 1 (

d

~

l 0

~

)

. (dpm1100cm2) 1 I

( d p ~ n i r n r n ~ ( ~ ? 0 0 c m 2 )

0.014 0.014 0.020 07

$7 100 YM~N 1

16

$6 24 22,222 1

' 2,284 1 91 22,222 2,284 ;

91 i

1 I

L 2,167 2,167 3,250 33,333 j 3,426 p-p--

MEAN I 0.016 MAX -

576 576 864 136 0.020 0.014 MEDIAN j

0.014 ST0 DEV 1 0.004

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 Z

PAGE(S)

BSVLVSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 5 Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Date:

0 -1.q -U'l Time:

1 (. 07 Pipe ID#: 2 7 - ( '3, Pipe Diameter:

Y "

Access Point Area: &L P,

.fy?

Building:

L V Elevation:

- 3L,\\ /

System:

R ~ d K k & b - -

Type of Survey Investigation aracterization Final Sunrey )(

Olher J Gross CoGO Cs Detector ID# / Sled ID#

t Detector Cal Date:

1-1 1-03 Detector Cal Due Date:

I - ) - 0 b From the Daily Pipe Survey Detector Control Form for the Selected Detector Background Value 3 1 cpm m c k t a t i c 1 u C

P

~

EfficiencyFactorforPipeDimeter 0.00036 (fiorn detector efficiency determination)

M J X m i c 3 0 5 9 dpm/

\\P cm2 Is the MDC8htic acceptable?

No (if no, adjwe sample count time and recalculate M D C L J Comments:

LO n IDo%

Technician Signature R Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Package Page 1 of, Page 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 PAGE(S)

EP-IT-I2 Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should be fully documented in the Survey Unit Yes No WA Release Record

1.

Haw s u m been performed in accordanm with suwey instructions in the Survey Design?

X

2.

Is the instnrmenhtlon MDC for structure static measurements below the DCGb for Class 1 and 2 survey units, or below 0.5 DCGLw for Class 3 survey units7 X

3.

Is the instrumentation MDC for embeddedlburied piping static measurements below the DCGb 7 X

4.

Was the instrumentation MDC for structure scan measurements, soil scan measurements, and embeddrdlburied piping scan measurements below the D m

a or, if not, was the need for additional X

static measurements or soil samples addressed in the survey design?

5. Was the Instrumentation MDC for volurnetrlc measurements and smear analysis c 1096 DCGh?

X

8.

Were the MDCs and assumptions used to develop them appropriate fortbe instruments and techniques used to perfom the sutvefl

7. Were the survey methods u s 4 to collect data proper for the types of radiation involved and for the media bring surveyed?

X

8.

Were "Special Methods" fw data dlection properly applied for the survey unit under review7 X

9. Is the data set comprised of qualified measurement results collected in accordance with the survey design, which accurately r e f l e the radiolagial status of the facilily?

x Graphid Data Review

f. Has s posting plat been created?

X

2. Has a histogram (or other frequency plat) been created?

X

3.

Have other graphical data tools been created to assist in analyzing the data?

X Data Analysis

1. Are all sample measurements below the DCGLW (Class 1 & 2), or 0.5 D C G h (Class 3)?

X

2.

Is ttte mean of the sample data < ~

L w

?

X

3.

Ifelevated areas have been identified by scans and/or sampling, is the average activity in each elevated area c DCGLww: (Class 1), < OCGLw (Class 2), or c0.5 DCGLw (Class 3)?

X

4.

Is the result of the ElMed Measurements Test C 7.07 X

5.

Is the result of the statistical test (S+ for Sign Test or Wr for WR8 Test) 2 the critical value?

X CommeMs:

Page 1 of 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC