ML080670218

Plum Brook Reactor Facility, Survey Unit Release Record Embedded Pipe (EP) San 12

ML080670218
Person / Time
Site:	Plum Brook
Issue date:	03/05/2008
From:	Wood D US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA), John H. Glenn Research Ctr at Lewis Field
To:	NRC/RGN-III
References
EP-SAN-12
Download: ML080670218 (12)

Text

Survey Unit Release Record Design # EP-SAN 12 Revision # Original Page 1 of 3 Suwey Unit #(s) SAN 12

1) Embedded Pipe (EP) Survey Unit SAN 12 meets the definition of embedded pipe for Plum Brook Reactor Facility (PBRF).

2) EP SAN 12 is a Class 1, Group 3.2 survey unit as per the PBRF Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) and Technical Basis Document (TBD)-06-004.

3) Surveys in EP SAN 12 were performed using a scintillation detector optimized to measure gamma energies representative of Cs-137. Sample #EP 3-8 fiom Survey Request (SR)-13 was referenced for this decision.

4) Survey Instructions for this survey unit are incorporated into and performed in accordance with (IAW) the Babcock Services Incorporated (BSI)/LVS-002, Work Execution Package (WEP)05-006. Survey instructions described in this Description document constitute "Special Methods" and the survey design used in the acquisition of survey measurements.

5) Instrument efficiency determinations are developed in accordance with the BSILVS-002, WEP 05-006, these determinations are appropriate for the types of radiation involved and the media being surveyed.

FSSICharacterization Engineer FSSICharacterization Manager

FSS Design # EP SAN 12 Revision # Original Page 2 of 3 Survey Unit: SAN 12 1.0 History/Description 1.1 The subject pipe system is a 4 drain line which received influents from the decontamination room and contaminated showers during plant operations. The influents were transferred through the SAN 12 piping to the -15 RB hot sump.

1.2 EP SAN 12 is approximately 16 feet in length.

2.0 Survey Design Information 2.1 EP SAN 12 was surveyed IAW Procedure #BSI/LVS-002.

2.2 100% of the 4 ID pipe was accessible for survey. The accessible 4 ID pipe was surveyed by static measurement at one foot increments, for a total of 16 survey measurements.

2.3 Surface area for the 4 ID piping is 973 cm2 for each foot of piping, corresponding to a total 4 ID piping surface area of 15568 cm2 (1.6 m2) for the entire accessible length of (16) of 4 piping.

3.0 Survey Unit Measurement Locations/Data 3.1 Pipe interior radiological survey forms are provided in Attachment 2 of this release record.

4.0 Survey Unit Investigations/Results 4.1 None 5.0 Data Assessment Results 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in the EP/Buried Pipe (BP) Survey Report provided in Attachment 1.

5.2 All measurement results are less than the Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) for radionuclide specific EP that corresponds to the 1 mrem/yr 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 (NF), provided in TBD-06-004, the survey unit that is constituted by EP SAN 12 passes FSS.

5.4 Background was not subtracted from the survey measurements and the Elevated Measurement Comparison (EMC) was not employed for the accessible portion of this survey unit.

5.5 The instrument/detector used for this survey was >12 months and <15 months from its calibration date. Procedure #BSI/LVS-002, Step 4.3.2 allows use of instrument/detectors within this periodicity. The detector was maintained in service for this survey due to a limited window of schedule opportunity to accomplish the survey of SAN 12, and limited availability of 1 X 1 scintillation detectors with which to accomplish the survey

FSS Design # EP SAN 12 Revision # Original Page 3 of 3 Survey Unit: SAN 12 5.6 Statistical Summary Table Statistical Parameter 4 Pipe Total Number of Survey Measurements 16 Number of Measurements >MDC 13 Number of Measurements Above 50% of DCGL 0 Number of Measurements Above DCGL 0 Mean 0.003 Median 0.002 Standard Deviation 0.001 Maximum 0.005 Minimum 0.001 6.0 Documentation of evaluations pertaining to compliance with the unrestricted use limit of 25 mrem/yr and dose contributions from Embedded Pipe and radionuclides contributing 10% in aggregate of the total dose for both structural scenarios and soils.

6.1 A review of the survey results has shown that the dose contribution for the accessible portion of EP SAN 12 to be less than 1 mrem/yr. The dose contribution is estimated to be 0.003 mrem/yr based on the average of the actual gross counts.

7.0 Attachments Attachment 1 - BSI EP/BP Survey Report Attachment 2 -Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Attachment 3 - DQA Worksheet Attachment 4 -Disc containing RR for EP SAN 12 & Spreadsheet

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1 2 PAGES

EP SAN 12 4" Pipe TBD 06-004 Group 3.2 Measurement #

Cs-137 activity Cs-137 activity Co-60 activity Eu-152 activity Eu-154 activity Nb-94 activity Ag-108m activity gcpm ncpm (total dpm) (dpm/100cm2) (dpm/100cm2) (dpm/100cm2) (dpm/100cm2) (dpm/100cm2) (dpm/100cm2)

Unity 1 20 20 37,736 3,879 425 - 27 - - 0.003 2 33 33 62,264 6,400 701 - 45 - - 0.005 3 21 21 39,623 4,073 446 - 29 - - 0.003 4 17 17 32,075 3,297 361 - 23 - - 0.002 5 16 16 30,189 3,103 340 - 22 - - 0.002 6 15 15 28,302 2,909 319 - 20 - - 0.002 7 21 21 39,623 4,073 446 - 29 - - 0.003 8 9 9 16,981 1,745 191 - 12 - - 0.001 9 10 10 18,868 1,939 212 - 14 - - 0.001 10 12 12 22,642 2,327 255 - 16 - - 0.002 11 18 18 33,962 3,491 382 - 25 - - 0.003 12 17 17 32,075 3,297 361 - 23 - - 0.002 13 16 16 30,189 3,103 340 - 22 - - 0.002 14 21 21 39,623 4,073 446 - 29 - - 0.003 15 20 20 37,736 3,879 425 - 27 - - 0.003 16 20 20 37,736 3,879 425 - 27 - - 0.003 MEAN 0.003 MEDIAN 0.002 STD DEV 0.001 MAX 0.005 MIN 0.001 1 of 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 2 PAGES

- BSIILVSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 5 Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Date: /-/7-pe Tie: /P3O Pipe ID#: 6&d1Z Pipe Diameter: 4 '1 Access Point Area: /? 6 ' 1 5 '

Building: .d& Elevation: -/d ' System: ,4073 & 9 / h )

Type of Survey Investigation Characterization -Final Survey )< Other  ;>\

Gross C06O cs3-Detector ID# / Sled ID# LW\ 1 1 P I Detector Cal Date: - -

I 1I 07 Detector Cal Due Date: I-JI-v~ 1 Instrument: 33313- Instrument ID #: 184 DB J Instrument Cal Date: - - / 7 Instrument Cal Due Date: )-I/ -~ ' 8 From the Daily Pipe Survey Detector Control Form for the Selected Detector Background Value 8. I cpm MDC%atic 19 cpm Efficiency Factor for Pipe Diameter 0 , O -3 (from detector efficiency determination)

MDCstatic z(0q 8- dpmi id D cm2 Is the MDCsuticacceptable?

Comments:

a No (if no, adjust sample count time and recalculate M D C b J Technician Signature Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Package Page 1 ofL Attachment 3, Page I

BSWSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 5 Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form (Continuation Form)

Date: 1 0 & /

Pipe El#:

Building:

d 1Z Pipe Diameter:

Elevation:

4

-/ 5

" Access Point Area

System:

-/d

1. 4#-Jwfk n/

Package Page 2of - 7-Attachment 3, Page 2 REFERENCE COP

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 1 PAGE

I DQA Check Sheet I I Design # 1 EP SAN 12 1 Revision # I Original I I 1 Survey Unit # 1 EP SAN 12 I Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should be fully documented in the Survey Unit Yes No N,A 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 A

survey units, or below 0.5 DCGLw for Class 3 survey units?

3. Is the instrumentation MDC for embeddedlburied ~ i ~ i static n a measurements below the DCGLw ? 1 x 1

4. Was the instrumentation MDC for structure scan measurements, soil scan measurements, and embedded~b~r~ed p pang scan measuremenk below the DCGLM or if 1101 was the need for add~t~onal Statlc rneasJrements. or - so samples addressed In the survey deslgn?

5. Was the instrumentation MDC for volumetric measurements and smear analysis c 10% DCGLw ?

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 beina surveved?

1 8. Were "Special Methods" for data collection properly applied for the survey unit under review? 1 x 1 I 1 I

I 9

design, which accurately reflects the rad.ological. -

Is the data set comprised of qualified measurement resdtts collected in accordance wltn tne suvey status of the facility?

Graphical Data Review

.... .. . - I 1 1. Has a posting plot been created? 1 I 1 x 1 1 2. Has a histogram (or other frequency plot) been created? 1 I 1 x 1 1 3. Have other graphical data tools been created to assist in analyzing the data? 1 I 1 x 1 1 Data Analysis I 1 1. Are all sam~lemeasurements below the DCGLw (Class 1 & 2). or 0.5 DCGLw (Class 3)? I X I I 1

2. Is the mean of the sample data < DCGLw? X

3. If elevated areas have been identified by scans andlor sampling, is the average activity in each X elevated area c DCGLEMC (Class I ) , < DCGLw (Class 2), or c0.5 DCGLw (Class 3)?

4. is the result of the Elevated Measurements Test < 1.O? X 1 5. Is the result of the statistical test (S+ for Sign Test or W, for WRS Test), the critical value? 1 I 1 x 1 I

Comments:

FSSICharacterization Engineer (prinVsign)

I FSSl CharacterizationManager (printlsign)

Page 1 of 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC