ML20031B158

Criticality Safety Analysis for Poisoned Quarantine/Radwaste Tank Sys

ML20031B158
Person / Time
Site:	07001113
Issue date:	07/22/1981
From:	Hu L, Taylor J GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML20031B157	List: ML20031B156 ML20031B158 ML20031B159
References
NUDOCS 8109300426
Download: ML20031B158 (19)

Text

.

as y;.

i, G EN E R A L f-) E LE CTRIC -

rirector - ONMSS 4

September 8,l1981 1

r

• ATTACHMENT 1 CRITICALITY SAFETY ANALYSIS FOR POISON QUARANTINE TANK SYSTEM L. C. Hu, Senior Nuclear Safety Engineer July 14, 1981 C; M. Vaughan

bmw 3

PDR-y

p 7: -

~.m

s g "l Q, p ? -

[

~

..f'

- NSE-16 6-813.- 7/14 /81 '

9,y

'^

-c, l

}

-4

+s

.o in

' ;' 2.

,. ; 1 ~ - ; *'

.;.f

~

f

.-f r

b) I y

-CRITICALITY: SAFETY ANALYSIS-

.k f

FOR POISONED QUARAhTII.E/RADWASTE TANK SYSTEM c

l' r

7 Performed by:

C.

Date

/M /fg/

b

/

L.

C.

Hu Sr. Nuclear Safety Engineer M Date [u,d.r 21 / 9 r i Verified by:

/

6.

T. Taplor T 7

ed

/

Sr. Nuclear Safety Engineer Wilmington Manufacturing Department

' General Electric Company Wilmington, North Carolina-e f

a

,,r

...,..y,.,.-.,,,,n-,

,,,.-,,,,er v

t a-e 'r e

• • • w-**-%%v y

x

}

f-I.

INTRODUCTION The existing quarantine slab tanks in the FMO radwaste area were fabricated with nominal inside widths ranging from 5 1/2" to 5 7/8".

In order to ensure criticality safety under the worst case conditions, the slab tank system is being retlofitted with external neutron poison panels installed on both sides of each' slab tank.

The poison panels have been fabricated with 20 mil nominal thick-ness cadmium sheets and 1" thick polyethylene plate tightly f'.ted

-in an air-tight 16 GA stainless steel box.

Each poison panel sub-assembly will consist of twelve panels, six panels on each side of the tank, and will be installed such that the cadmium side of each panel will face the slab tank with the polyethylene side away from the tank.

In this configuration, almost c11 neut rons leaking through the cadmium will be either lost from the system or thermalized by the polyethylene and eventually absorbed by the cadmium upon return.

II.

SUMMARY

The poisoned slab tank system has been demonstrated to be criti-cally safe for slab tanks with nominal tank wid-hs of 5 7/8" when used to store fuel mixtures containing full density UO, at 1. 0 ",

enrichment in U-235 and optimum water moderation (i.e. 0.25 ccight fractor water). Preliminary calculations have establi-hed 0.25 weight fraction water to be the optimal moderation conditions. k---

p-~-c EM -

s wi y

-l 9%

- t ?

5 LThe1 expected value'of1K effective plus three standard ~ deviations

-cg "

Lcalculated by'the'GEMER Monte. Carlo Code (Reference 1)~.after

~

. adjustment 1 for 'the 1. 73% Kgggscode bias, is 0. 9'360 for 5. 7/8" slabitanks,.shich.is less~than the 0.97 limit for K-effective.

y

+

When.the K-effective calculations were performed over a range o'f? larger. tank widths,~ it was established-that the cadmium 1

. poisoned slab tank syst'em would.be critically safe for a maximum.

tank width of 6 3/8".

III. METHODS

'This criticality safety. analysis has been performed with the GEMER Monte Carlo Code' (Reference 1). using the cross section sets pro-

-cessed-from the-ENDF/B-IV library.

These cross section sets are prepared in:190 broad group and resonance parameter formats except

~

for the thermal scattering in water which is represented by the Haywood; Kernel.:obtained from the ENDF/B-IV library.

.These cross

. sections are identical to those used in the MERIT Monte Carlo Code which hos been used extensively in MID criticality analyses.

A brief description of the GEMER code validation and its bias

" determination is presented in Appendix A.

The: fuel mixture use'l in the analysis is theoretical density UO Pl"8 2

0~.25 weight fraction of water with the U-235 enrichment taken to be 4.0%.

This' fuel mixture represents the highest fuel enrichment found

in the plant process lines and is at optimal moderat ion conditions.

~ '

d m

=

n,

~

w x

~

~

~ * '

Of. >IVhDARANTINE TANK: ASSEMdLY DESCRIPTION AND GEOMT.TRY MODEL

.. j Thi quarantine. tank' assembly co'nsists of.14' slab' tanks.

Each tank is 120' feet.- long and 10. feet high with a nominal width of. 5.5 - inches.

<Each-. tank is set:in an 18 inch-thick-cavity _between 10' inch' thick.

= co' ncrete" separating l slabs.- A detailed description of the quarantine

{ tank; assembly 1is provided'in the attached technical report, entitled L

.'The ; Quarantine Tank' Poisoning Proj ect" (Reference 2).

'The geometry model us'ed'in the GEMER Monte Carlo calculations are

.shown in-Figure:1.

The slab tank system was modeled as an infinite array'.of slab tanks with 12" of water reflector.on the top and c

116" o'f concrete reflector on the bottom and on both ends.

The following. tolerances on the dimensions of the poisoned slab tank' geometry have been-conservatively incorporated into the calculational model:

A.

The slab tank walls are modeled as 0.875 times the nominal (thickness.

.B.

The cadmium sheets are assumed to be 15 mil thick; e.g.,

20 mil nomina) thickness minus the 5 mil tolerance.

C.

The thi('aiess of polyethylene plates is taken to be 1" minus

-the 1/16" tolerance.

In addition, a thin water film was conservatively assumed to t

exist'on the slab tank walls to simulate the event of tank water overf1 wing.

Other structural supports and bracings

are conservatively omitted from the model.

x 3

~'

- - W%

~

'7.

.i.'

N.)

1 I '

g.

/

T-i

.ir fN REFLECTING BOUNDARY Q

.X = 0'0 CM i.,

1 3

um 3

"IN IN FUEL MIXTURE.

. -~ 5 S -

m

~.

. ~,

p.

m C

5

- -{ - - - -

- 6.985

1. I"I#

-SS-304 TANK WALL

- 7.124

~

eImlm VATER FILM ON TANK WALL 8

o' 5

-10 934 o.

- OO

- t -- - - -

0 W#

m mim SS-304 POISON PANEL COVER Ni

~ -. ; -.:

11.078 m

o8oio CADMIUM SHEET

~

. ~ I ~._;~ ~_.-

m n

sin;w

c

-11.129 n

N a

O O

g g

1 _, __,

" - -- PO LY ETHYLENE P LATE - - - -

'9 12.399-x m

'w m m w

a w

~.

-13.510' g

m:c'm SS-304 POISON PANEL CC'/ER m

y

-13.655 2

r O

n I

i m_

O r

i i

n l

H m

O V01D r

O

-<-i-l

~,s;m, 1_

w w

e Iw

.i 1

I i

i I

i 22.860 I

CONCRETE SLAB i

m w

~

~i~

w w wl 1

1 "s c

-n i

I mz s

I m

-33.560 REFLECTING BOUNDARY b

- l l

l 1

I i

e i

~ ~

w m

C4 to N

O m O m LO

• P P

N O

O c

O m o e m o e

O O

3

+

_j

m-.

y p.

- V.

[RESULTSOFANALYSIS The GEMER Monte Carlo calculations were run with 55 generations of 500, neutrons each.

The first five generations were shipped d

before starting output processing.

Table 1 gave the results of the GEMER calculations tabulated for slab tank widths varying

'from 5 1/2" to 6 5/8" with cadmium sheet thickness at both 15 mils and 20 mils.

A plot of K valu s versus slab tank width is presented in eff Figure 2.

The GEMER input listing for the case of 5 7/8" tank width and 15 mil cadmium is included in Appendix B.

\\

' k.

J

I 1

i7 TABLE 1 --RESULTS OF GEMER MONTE C/;'d CALCULATIONS FOR TIIE POISONED QUARANTINE SLAB T'sNK SYSTEM WEIGIIT SLAB-TANK CADMIUM FRACTION OF TilICKNESS TilICKNES5 ENRICHMENT WATER IN EFF * #

(INCilES)

(INCHES)

(NT% U-235)

FUEL MIXTURE I;

5 - 1/2 0.015 4.0 0.25 0.8557 + 0.0059 5 - 7/8 0.015 4.0 0.25 0.8924 + 0.0057 5 - 7/8 0.020 4.0 0.25 0.9030 + 0.0057 6 - 1/4 0.020 4.0 0.25 0.9278 + 0.0048 6-5/8 0.020 4.0 0.25 0.9476 + 0.0062 6-5/8 0.015 4.0 0.25 0.9469 + 0.0057 t

L..

,m

+

~-

~

s

-_4r.

=-

-H.m, ", + F '

. r

__a._-.-__,...

1.

YN,;..r(-

,F_w..

l'H r_

' M

-M

-t A - :

-.y.--

4 4 n

_.__a...__

i r_- e -. _,_,__

e

i

_t_ -

p'_._

. FIGURE.2 - K VS SLAB TANK WlCTH

', ' LL '.

' L; ^'

a q_

EFF

p!

7,,,

4 7-j H. 4 y.a p.g_-.3.. _q.2.p-

_7_..

7

,, 1

...~

9

r. r-r

,o r

-. - m t-t-

, i e t-m-t--

m r cw r;,:

r, r

t.

b r

M rr--& r -tT ~ ~ M~,;--

t 1.00

- _p _u o4

.:_ u _ :

2; w_a 2A w

.a 2J. u..a

_ i ' J,,, !

t w_..;

,v_,,a,L__ u.__, L._w a _ u..

.x s

..;g q.

4...+c_

- T7

. - i 4

o 5

r 4.

b 4 i_ i

. 4 <

+..r

. e.

_,.4 4.-

- rr~7,

,a J,-+...

1

, t l J f.i..-i. :

m,_-

.s......:

3

, ;, 7--:--hl-

,4---}-+ - -+ r j

,, - + i r4, ;$

-t

, ;..u;_;a_u__a w@ _".v

_..a.m.

r-M v

3.

9

_.__ p1--F' '

!!l

+

mu_

u%

t

- i -

-H-F'-

. w i:lli,...!!

l.,

a:ii i

t t F'F', i- ',,. ". -t._.,_: ' _,, +, - c ---- l '%

a t.

m 1

i i.

.u_.

..I

.- i i

-e s

4 5

g

,8 i ; -l LM._.p }_t ;. ; p.L. _L y,..:,.Lp_.u.v. s,- tw

_ v_u _2_._

1 i i

4 e

,/

a._ u _ u,

,_L -

+a

_ w =.+

1 L__.2_.~

i +

g_

y 7

7<b'r-...~.__7_-"."w~~~__~~.

,W -WM01 SAFETY' LiMI p ~ ; i ~~"' _ _.. ; m,

m_

-...y

,f \\.97_

a,... -

,...... _.,. -t;._.,.._, __.

_--6 i.

+, -

.u~.

c l

g g'. w 1.

.t p_H : i

. y._u >

_,_s,.._-.._.77_._

g._ ; - r_a a,

.-._w.._._

,1

. i,

a 4

-t

.t

_. _,_.-,_ _ 4._

-_.42.:

. _ _ -. v.

, r,.

~.~_.4w_,.,_.

4

' i *_

g_

7r E l

g i j 44

.?_

t I

g

?

9

---.-.,_. X - ~:' 2.' a~ 9 a' '-'-'"_;~~.".u-- _-"7_.

_.7___.-

- t-95 -

u_ L___q -

w4 g_.o

'2' w __.u._.,2. n_

2_.-...2._. _._____. _w. u v_

_- _-(& _-

_.- H_

i

- r 42 I _ ia <__ 4 - -

a t,.__

t

,t_ _.,.._,.

-. a

.r

..?

s i

h

,~. _. -.

g _-.

2

,,_- _ ~-

91,p,. m _2.g w

^

p 2-.4.._

ga _. c u___a

_q x

1. .. + -,,,

.._.~_._.a,_m.._

..... _ _. +. ~. _.. _. _.,

.g_

.._.,.~.-_..,,,___,7___.

,-s--

p

.-e-.-~.

~..

_3-

_. - 4 l

m,

. 93 4

u._ _._ u _._.........

u._u E

_. (

..__..._._t..._._4.

~, _.

g 3

1_-.

. 4

, 3.92 '. r L.J n.J _

p._. L_

n_ p 9r. ___L{. t 4 J d. _ !_.... _... _ _...;._i,_.__-__._:_.. __;

e

~

w

,.2._

s m

r._s m _.

_. y. _ -. _.

g___.

7,

!_+_._,

j

_ _ _ _. - F. "..- +

7.,.. -~._ m

_- * "., _._"-_.__- _.- "__. -~~-- _"_--......;

3 wl

q -._ { H.

H -.,... i

._.__p

-_ _ q _..w 2,, _. _ _,,..

-,._m_..._.-.,___..

9) m

4..

_. u - wa..

=.:

_.4.w v..

_,p_

, _;_._.. _. _. _. ~ _. _ _

._.x,--.,

, s

-....i

,g.

~.

.. i__._

~

_._... g<, _..,.

._ 4 a, _ m

.m.

r--

-.. '-, - ~., - ' - -.. _,. _. _.

~..-'_u___

.e

- - - ~

4 90 p

.,. 3 2.2 p_2.___. p..

.y._

.. w _..u y_%.-_

r._

_ _a i

p..._ j_ _._.. )_,_p,.m.g _.. _.9 y

._ q i ' p_:_

y.._

i

,.__..-_,,..-_p._.f

._._1__

., r,-._-* M-

'~'_7.. T.-r '

- - -i'...-.--

_ _ '__._-- + *....--. - _ '.--

. t

--' r t

.89:

F

+ g_.y

. _ ____.._.:_...~,

l

_.y

.p

.g_.

. _._....,=_ _.. _'. _..

i

m. _.~ _.

m. n...... _..

_ a.._ _ a _ -. _.n..

i

.88 F ~ _

t' ' ' *. _ _ '.

'.~g~~'~~

_ _~..,~ I

~~

_.. ~ ~.

~~

2

.{.

m-

._.~._o._._._.._...

i r

o 5

t

..J 4 -.

_3 3

f

\\.,

l.

i-

• ~

.87

~ ~ ~ _..._

~ _ '. =.. _ _ _ ~ ~.., _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _. _ _

2 l.

_4

.q 1

_.a

,...2.

p F-i

~. 8 6., _.

i e

4

_.,...4.

1

.w

_ i

~

^

m

. -. ~. _ ~. _.. _ _. <. ~.. ~. _ _. _...... _

___y"-

i.

.m

_e.

j

.g

.m

[.-

A

...-.s b

i 2

a

,,,g

. 8 5 '........ _.

~ '

. ' ~ ~ -. - -.-.. r l

q t

j-.

-y 4.~

x

~

LL_

y,

..,. _,. _. _. _ ~ _ _ _.,..... _ _.

. ~. - - _ _. _

.r..,

.o

.m

.n

.s c

+

- a.., Y -..., _. - -. - _. _

m.

L 4 6

u

_ _q!

~.. _....

g a...a H.._...__...._

l

%,.q._

.. _., -,. ~. _. -.

5.1/2"-55/8"53/4"57/8"6"61/8"61" 6 3/8" 6)" 6 5/8" L

~

' ??

k '

• W j)%

1 g-Ry - VI. = CONCLUSIONS'

- wf-4TheLresults plotted:inLFigurel2 demonstrates that the poisoned slab-tankfsystemLwill be critically s'afe for slab tank. width less L than - 6 i3/8'.',1since - the maximum Keff + 30-+ Bias.= 0.966 which is 11c srchan: thcl 0.97 safety limit.

The' expected'Keff Lval,ue for slab (j

tank systems 1with 5 7/8" wide tanks has been calculated to be 70.9360_ and is far.belo.w the 0.97' limit.

'The effectiof the cadmium thickness on the K value has'bcen egg ifound;to bc(insignificant whenithe cadmium thickness is reduced

- from-20 mils 1to 15' mils'as indicated in Table l'where the com-t

_ parable Keff. values.are about one' standard deviation apart.

This:is due to the fact that-the extremely high thermal neutron

absorption' cross section of cadmium has made.it practically a

" black" absorber even at a reduced thickness.

_VII'.

REFERENCES ~

.1.

GEMER-Users Manual,'"GEMER - A Monte Carlo Neutron Transport Code with Enhanced Geometry and Cross Section Modeling l

Capabilities',', J. Genser, ~ W. C. Peters, J. L. Ridihalgh,1981.

2.

Technical Report,~" Quarantine-Tank Poisoning Project",

R. V.. Eberle, Wilmington Manu facturing Department, General L

Electric Company, July 1,:1981.

3.-

" Determination of Bias and Uncertainty for the GEMER Monte Carlo' Code", W. C. Peters, Wilmington Manufacturing Department,

c.

l General. Electric Company, June 19, 1981.

i o.

i

~

-i L _9 3

)

.T e'

_ l w

3..m' iI.

y:

9

~AFPENDIX A t

-n

,,g V(

I

'GEMER MONTE CARLO CODE VALIDATION

~An extensive effort to. validate the GEMER Monte Carlo Code for use in criticality safety analyses at the Wilmington Manufacturing D.epartment was made by W.

C. Peters of the Nuclear Safety Engineering Unit (Reference 3).

The validation consisted of a set of benchmark calcula-tions performed with GEMER for 120 different critical experiments in-volving uranium metal er compounds with a significant range in the degree of enrichment, moderation, reficction and geometrical form.

Also included in these benchmark calculations were 16 critical experiments involving cadmium.

The results of the GEMER benchmark calculations were extracted from Reference 1 and are summarized in Table 1A, 1A and 3A.

The essential finding has been that GEMER can be used over the full range of uranium enrichments (depleted to fully enriched) without regard to geometry, degree of heterogeneity (but heterogeneous systems must be modelled explicitly), degree of reflection or type of moderation.

The degree of moderation as evidenced by the H/U-235 atomic ratio in the fuel has been determined to be a significant factor.

Therefore, the biases and uncertainties in the biases are reported as a function of the H/U -235 ratio.

An additional statistical analysis was also performed of the benchmark calculation cata for only the critical experiments involving cadmium.

The summary statistics is presented in Table 4A.

Based on these statistical data, the total bias of the GEMER code when used for calcula-tions containing cadmium has been determined as follows:

Total Bias =

Bias + (3 x Standard Deviation)

(1.00 - 0.99185)

(3 x 0.00305)

+

=

0.0173 AK

1. I*73t K

=

eff eff N

Ki wo.

g g; -

b< j,M..i'M

.:c.

y s-

. $wp ' 1

'If;(the complete' set.-of 120. benchmarking' calculations were used foritheltotal bi'as determination, a' smaller bias would have theen abtained for-~.the sameLrange:of H/U-235' ratio (the fuel-mixture in the " slab - tank. analysis has a-II/U-235' ratio of 200),, that is,.

4.-

TotaliBias'= 0.005 + (3 x.0.002) = 0.011 6-Keff

Therefore, it is conservative to derive the tot'al bias of GEMER-codeifor' cadmium applications _ based;only on the set of 16 bench -

l marking:. calculations involving cadmium.

t

}

I N

~. '-

{g;p

- y,;-?

.. +

5 r.

M..

,' _7 wcu n i

W" r

. 33'

[>

h'

' ' iTABLE 1A:

? VALIDATED-CROSS'SECTION SETS

~

4

=

1

' MATERIAL' MATERIAL ID g.,

g illydrogen 1

Nitrogen -114 7

Boron

^10

-10 Boron all' 11'

~

' Carbon -.12-12 6

q;.

-Silicon

~14 0rygen'- 16; 16 Potassium 19

- Calcium 20 Titanium-

'22 1

Sodium

.23.

23 Chromium-24 Iron 26 Nickel 28 Cadmium 48 r.

Manganese -;155 55 j.

' Lead 82-

[:

Magnesiuin 112 Aluminum 131~

-Copper-291 Zirc 2.

401

' Chlorine.

1149 Fluorine 1309-I Sulphur-1316 Molybdenum 1321 U-234 2341 U-235 2351 U-236 2361 U-238 2381 LCII 7/16/81 E

,l C:

a c

f)

TABLE 2A:

AREAS OF APPLICABILITY OF GDIER MONTE CARLO CODE

\\p FISSILE MATERIAL:

U-235 as metal or in compounds with other materials.

ENRICllMENT:

Depleted (0.22%) to fully enriched (97%)

MODERATORS:

Water, plastic paraffin RANGES OF MODERATION:

0 1 H/U-235 5 500 500 i H/U-235 1 1000 1000 1 H/b-235 5 2000 REFLECTORS:

None, water, concrete, metals, lead, uranium, etc.

,OTHER MATERIALS:

See Table 7A (Cross Sections)

HETEROGEhdITY:

No special requirements.

TEMPERATURE:

O C - 40 C (room temperature)

GEOMETRY:

Single units, lattices, arrays

• See Table 3A for applicable biases and uncertainty i

1.CII 7/15/81 L

md y

,a f

TABLE 3A:

ESTIMATES OF BIAS AND UNCERTAINTY FOR GEMER BENCIIMARKS II/U - 235 RATIO K-EFFECTIVE BIAS SIGMA (BIAS) 0 0.010

+ 0.001 50 0.006

+ 0.001 100 0.003

+ 0.001 250

- 0.0

_ 0.002

+

500

- 0.010

+ 0.002 1000

- 0.015

+ 0.005 1500

- 0.007

+ 0.0075 2000 0.003

+ 0.010

• A positive bias value indicates over-prediction of Kggp by-the code, whereas a negative value indicates underprediction of K No bias correction will be appliedforoverpre8Ntioncases for added conservatism.

LCll 7/15/81 J

3

!?h

~ TABLE 4A:

SUM 5fARY STATISTICS ON GENER BENCilMARKS WITil CADMIUM c

NO. OF VARIABLE OBSERVATIONS MEAN VARIANCE STD. DEV.

II/U-235 16 317.15625 6375.29729 79.84546 K

16 0.99185 0.00001 0.00305 ggg

'C0dFF.'0F STD. ERROR 67% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL VARIABLE VARIATION ON MEAN LOWER LIMIT UPPER LIMIT

'/U-235 25.17543 19.96136 297.06041 337.25209 K

0.30754 0.00076 3.99108 0.99262 off t'

LCII 7/15/81 k

._ )

Y

<e

~

1,u S-s

. 9 9'

p e:

0 j

}.

i V

1 1

h h

t i

i 4

4 i

o 4

s d

1 0

1, j

APPENDIX B 4

i i

i I

e I

s r-5 L

i i

I-u.

.-J

LAPPENDIX B - SAMPLE GEMER CODE INPUT V ",.

-'C

. FtO 80!30NED ELF.$ Tf.NK 15 PIL LADM!UM - 5.W75 1 HICK fliHh e 4 '( LifRICH e

55 500 $ 0 0 0 10 0 293 23 7 4 293 0 0 U(4102+.2'WF-H2O 2151 2.12773t-04 23h1 5.04265E-03 16 3.67593E-02 1 S.24YbvC-e2 a 293 0 0. TYPE 304S5 12 3.1691k-04

?4 1 64/1E-02 55 1.7321L-03 26 ~6.0360E-02 20 6.tS34E-03 14 1 6940E-03 t 293 0 0 C4CMIUM 43 4.4006E-02 7 2v3 0 0' f0LTETHYLENE 1

7.9030E-02 12 3.9520E-02 2 273 0 0 WATER FILM 16 4.6360E-04 1

'8. 2721 E -0 4 -

10 293 0 0 CONCRETE 1 3 50E-03 12 2.02E-07

-1A 1.55E-Of 20 1.11E-0.

14 1.70E-03 112 1.96E-03 26 1.93E-04 171 5.56E-04 19 4.03E-05 Os 1 63E-05 2 273 0 0 WATER 14 3.3433E-02 1

6.6364E-02 t[PW GE0n 23 19 to 1 5 1 0 0 0

• 1.0

-1 0 00

-1.0 0.0 00 00E TY7 L 1

f:cBotD 1 1 7306 -3.7306 152.4 -152.4 121 92 -121.Y2 1640 5 1OX TIFE 2

CUkUID 1 3./306 -3.7306 152.4 -152.4 2.54 -2.54 1650 5 PGr TYPE 3

CUbulp 2

.0695

.0695 lb2.4 -152 4 121.92 -121.92 1680.5 tor TfFE 4

f:Ubulb 2

.0695

.06*5 152 4 -152.4 2 54 -2.54 1640.5 r.n X TYFE 5

CUSUID 5

1.905 -1.Y05 152.4 -1*s2.4 121 92 -1**1.?2 1680 5 P0X TYPE 6

Ctf B 0 !D 5

1.905 -1.905 152.4 -152.4 2 54 -2.54 1680.5 1:O r itFE 7

CUEOID 2

.072

.072 152.4 -152.4 121.Y2 -121.92 1660.5 Par TyFE Q

(UP01D 0

.072

.072 152.4 -152.4 2.54 -2.54 1640 5 PON T Y F'E S

CUBUID 3

.0191

.0191 152.4 -152.4 121 92 -121.92 1660.5 E VI'01 D 0

.0255

.0255 152 4 -152.4 121.92 -121.92 1640.5 POV YYFE 10 tut 01D 0

.0255

.02!5 152.4 -152.4 2.54 -2.54 1640.5 1.d s TYPE 11 t.vt 01 D 4

.635

.635 152.4 -152.4 121.'2 -121.92 1640.5 P0X TYPE 12 rVPUID 0

./35

.635 152.4 -152.4 2 54 -2.54 1640.5 00X TYFE 13 rotutb 4.5555

.5555 152,4 -152.4 121.92 -121.v2 1640.5

'MX TYPE 14 1:U1n10 0

.5555

.5555 152.4 -152.4 2.54 -2 54 1640.5 but TYFE 15 001011 2.5555

.5555 152.4 -152 4 2.54 -2 54 1640.5 BON "8~

16 00140 0

4.3644 -4.3644 152.4 -152.4 121 92 -121.92 16*0.5 T f, X '

f. E 17 Cutt ID 0

4.3644 -4.3644 152.4 -152.4 2 54 -2.54 1660.5 10Y Tff E 1H C t't 0 ! D 6

6.35 -6.35 152 4 -152.4 121.92 -121.Y2 1660.5 fey TiFE 19 cut 0ID 6 4 35 -6.35 152.4 -152.4 2.54 -2.54 1660.5 Ci4 E F1 Y 0

17. 7 /t -17.7795 152.4 -152 4 132.03 -132.09 1640.5 1.UPU10.

6 17.7791 -17.7795 IL2.4 -152.4 132.0^ -172.7' 1Aab.5 (IIPoln 7

17.?791 -17.7795 152.* -1's2 4 162.56 -172.72 1686.5 (UIUlb 6 17.779! -17.7795 193.04 -152.4 162.56 -1/2.7?

1680.5 21 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 55 1 0 4 2, 1 1 1 1 1 3 10 3221 1 1 1 4 4 10 4 22 1 1 1 1 55 1 0 A 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 *; 3

~t. 1 1 1 4 4 106 3 3 1 1 1 1 55 1 o a4 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0) 4 4 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 084 4 1 1 1 1 55 1 0 to 5 5 1 1 1 1 1 31 0 9C 5 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 0 to 5 51 1 1 1 *i 5 1 o

. 6 6 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 11 a 6 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 0 12 o 6 1 1 1 1551 0

. 7 71 1 1 1 1 1 10 15 7 / 1 1 1 1 23 1 0 1377 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 0 s4 7 7 1 1 1 1 55 1 0 a881 1 1 1 131 0783 9 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 0 n8% 1 1 1 1 55 10 17 9 y 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 to 9 9 1 1 1 1 4 4 1 0 17 9 9 1 1 1 1 5510 19 12 10 1 1 1 1 1 3 10 19 10 10 1 1 1 1 4 4 10 19 10 to 1 1 1 1551 1 END 0&0*t

--_m, a--,

,y<-

jng

,.,.y.,,.

' GENER AL([) ELECTRIC Director -'ONMSS i.

Esktember 8, 1981 y

ATTACHMENT 2 TECHNICAL REPORT, QUARANTINE /RADWASTE TANK POISONING PROJECT i

R.

V. Eberle, Process Engineer July 1, 1981 r

c I.

C. M. Vaughan-

bmw

..