ML073330636
| ML073330636 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Plum Brook |
| Issue date: | 11/15/2007 |
| From: | US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA) |
| To: | NRC/RGN-III/DNMS/DB |
| References | |
| EP-CRT-6 | |
| Download: ML073330636 (12) | |
Text
Description Survey UN~
Release Record Dmign #
W-CRT4 Revision #
Original Page 1 of 3 Survey Unit #(s)
CRT-6
- 1) Embedded Pipe (EP) Survey Unit CRT4 meets the ddnition of embdkd pipe for Plum Brook War Facility (PBRF).
- 2) EP CRT-4 is a Cfass 1, Group '1. survey unit as per the PBRF Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) and Technid Basis Document (TBD)-OM304.
- 3) S w e y s in EP CRT-6 were p e r F o d using a schtiIMori deteaor optimized to m e a m gamma energies repmentative of Co.60. Sample #EP 3-9 from Survey Request (SR)-13 was referenced for this decision.
- 4) Survey Instructions for this m e y unit are incorparated into and performed in accordance with @AW) the Babmck Services Incorporated @Sl)/LVSc002, Work Execution Package (WEPI 05-006. Survey instmdom described in thia document constitute "Special Methods" and the survey design used in the acquisition of survey measurements.
- 5) Instrument efficiency detemhtions are developed in accordance with the BSULVS-002, WEP 05-06, these d
~
~
t i
~
n s
are appropriate for the types of rdhtion involved and the media being surveyed.
Approval Signatures FSSlCharacterb~t ion Engineer
FSS Design # EP CRTd Revision # Original Page 2 of 3 Survey Unit: CRTd 1.0 HistorylDescription 1.1 The subject pipe system is a 2.5" diameter penetration located on the CRT plate within the Sub Pile Room. The system access point is bcated on the
-34' el. of the Rx building.
1.2 EP CRT-6 consists of 2.5" diameter piping that is approximately 3 feet in length.
Survey Design Information 2.1 EPCRT-6wass~~~eydIAWPmcdure#BS~VS-002.
2.2 100% of the piping was accessible for survey. The accessible pipe was surveyed by static measurement at one foot increments, for a total of 3 survey measurements.
2.3 The total surface area for the piping system is approximately 1,824 cm2 (0.2 m2) for the entire Iength of (3') of piping.
Survey Unit Measurement h c a t i o d a t a
- 3. t Pipe interior radio~ogiml survey forms ace provided in Attachment 2 of this release record.
Survey Unit LnvestigationslResu hs 4.1 None Data Assessment Results 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in the EP/Buried Pipe @P) Survey Report provided in Attachment I.
5.2 All measurement results a e less than the Derived Concentration Guidehe Level (DCGL) for radionuclide specific EP that corresponds to the 1 mredyr dose goal established in Table 3-3 of the FSSP.
5.3 When implementing the Unity Rule, provided in Section 3.6.3 of the FSSP, and applying the Nuclide Fraction INF;), provided in IBD-06-004, the survey unit that is constituted by EP CRT-6 passes FS S.
5 -4 Background was not subtracted from the survey measurements and the Elevated Measurement Comparison (EMC) was not employed for this survey unit.
d 4
[ Survey Unit: CRT-6 5.5 S t a t h i d Summary Table Doczlmexltation of evalnations pertaining to compliance with the mnstricted use limit of 25 mremlyr md dose contributions Born Medded Pipe and radionuclides contributing 10% in qgqate of the total dose for both s#ructud
-0s and soils.
6.1 A review of the mey results has shown that the dose contribution for EP CRT-6 to be less than 1 m e d y r - The dose wntribution is estimated to be 0.032 mremlyr b a d on the average of the actual gross counts measured.
Attachments - BSI EPIBP S w e y Report - Pipe Intehior Radiological Survey Form - DQA Worbheet -Disc containing RR for EP CRT-6 & Spreadsheet Revision # Origind Page 3 of 3
SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1 z
PAGE(S)
BSl EPJBP SURVEY REPORT 1MGt LVS-lI no akd COMMENTS:
ACTRIIlYVALUES NOT BACKGROUND CORRECTED RP Enginesr I Date
/ I - / z - Q ~
EP CRT-6 2.5" Pipe TBD 06-Q04 Group t u
z 1
2 3
gcpm ncpm 1
\\
I -
- t 7---
STD DEV 1,418 59 1
3!
3 1 9,091 i
0.086 t
MIN i
Eu-162.Etiviiy 1,495 (W100cmZ) 377 i 44 I
__r__l_
Cs-137 activity (dWMOEmZ)
Go40 activity
( t d d p n )
1 0
i 01 291 29 1 87,879 I
Eu-164 activw 101 Co4O activity
( d W l 0 h 2 )
(dWq-1 0.000
, 0.086 10 i
14,453 Nb-94 activity 0.009 I
MEAN 1 0.032 i
WWqDkn4 573
( ~ P W ~ C W 7
Ag-%Mm activity Unity I
r -. m
- I 3,845 /
422
SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 L
PAGE(S)
Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Date:
\\
~
~
~
O
~
Time:
Pipe Dimeta:
- a. 5" Access Point Area:
L Kb Buildhg:
w Elevation:
- 34 '
System:
Type of Survey I~~vestigation Characterization Finalsurvey 6 Other J Gross
?%*L-JC-\\
- Ifl Cs Detector lD# I SI& ID#
Detector Cal Datc:
\\ \\
\\
07 Detector Cal Due Date:
\\ - 1\\ -06 Instn~rnen t :
'2350 - \\
Instrument ID #:
&?a?"!
Instrument Cd Date:
\\ - \\ \\ - b 7 Instrument Cal Due Date:
\\ - \\ \\ - 0 From the Daily Pipe Survey Detector ContmI Form for the Selected Detector Background Value 3 I 4 cpm MDCKtatic I U o m Efficiency Factor for f ipe Diameter 0.00033 (from detector efficiency determination)
M&atic
-2421 dpml 10g cm 2
Is the hDCnh~c acceptable? @
NO (if no, adjust sampie count time and recal~uIate MDCRsu,c) comments:
w q
A Technician Signature Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Package Page 1 of 5 REFERENCE COPY u, Page 1
SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 I
PAGE(S)
Page 1 of 1 PQA Check Sheet Design #
EP CRT-6 Revision #
Original Survey Unit #
EP-CRT-6 Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should be fully documented in the Survey Unit Release Record
- 1.
Have surveys been performed in accordance with survey instructions in the Survey Design?
- 2. Is the instrumentation MDC for structure static measurements below the DCGLw for Class 1 and 2 survey units, or below 0.5 DCGLW for Ctass 3 survey units?
- 3. Is the instrumentation MDC for embeddMburied piping static measurements below the D C G h ?
- 4.
Was the instrumentation MDC for structure scan measurements, sol scan measurements, and ernbeddedlburied piping scan measurements below the DCGLw, or, if not, was the need for additional static measurements or soil samples addressed in the survey design?
- 5.
Was the instrumentation MDC for votumetric measurements and smear analysis c 10% U C G h ?
- 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 involved and for the media being surveyed?
- 8. Were "Special MethodsM for data collection properly applied for the survey unit under review?
- 9.
Is the data set comprised of qualified measurement rsuks collected in accordance with the survey design, which accurately reflects the radiological status of the facility?
Yes X
X X
X X
Graphical Data Review No
- 1. Has a posting plot been created?
- 2. Has a histogram (or other frequency plot) been created?
- 3.
Have other graphical data tools been created to assist in analyzing the data?
NIA X
X X
X X
X Data Analysis
- 1. Are all sample measurements below the DCGLw (Class 1 & 21, or 0.5 DCGLw (Class 3)?
- 2. Is the mean of the sample data c DCGLw?
- 3. If elevated areas have been identified by scans andlor sampling, is the average actiwty in each elevated area c D C G L E ~
(Class I),
< DCGLw (Class 2), or ~0.5 DCGLw (Class 3)?
- 4.
Is the result of the Elevated Measurwnents Test c 1.O?
- 5. Is the result of the statistical test (S* for Sign Test or Wr for WRS Test) 5 the critiml value?
X X
X X
X Comments:
n FSSICharacterization Engineer (printlsign)
CS-0912 Date Date
/1-/2-~7 i/hfh7
SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC