ML20108D537
| ML20108D537 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 12/10/1984 |
| From: | Boyer V PECO ENERGY CO., (FORMERLY PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8412130283 | |
| Download: ML20108D537 (43) | |
Text
--
PHILADELPHIA ELECTRIC COMPANY 2301 MARKET STREET P.O. BOX 8699 l
PHILADELPHI A. PA.19101 2isie4i.4soo
- v. s. onn ca;,v',c"l"l'"
December 10, 1984 Docket No. 50-277 Mr. John F. Stolz, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 44 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555
SUBJECT:
Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station - Unit 2 Piping Replacement Man-REM Estimates Dear Mr. Stolzt This letter is submitted as a follow-up to a telephone conference on October 22, 1984, between Mr. Gerald A. Gears, Peach Bottom NRC Project Manager, Mr. Michael Lamastra, NRC Radiation Assessment Branch, and W. M. Alden of Philadelphia Electric Company Licensing staff to provide information concerning unexpectedly high radiation levels in the reactor recirculation pumps following chemical decontamination of the recirculation system piping.
The attached report describes the circumstances and magnitudo of the high radiation levels and corrective actions considered and taken to maintain personnel exposure as low as reasonably achievable ( ALARA).
Since extraordinary measures were taken to ef fect a mechanical decontamination of the pumps, it is expected that approximately 70 man-rem will be expended in this decontamination effort.
The scope of the pipe replacement modifications has been increased as a result of inspections performed during the outage and will require additional man-rem exposure beyond the original estimates.
In April 1984, following refinement of the craft manhours required for the original scope of the work, it was estimated that 1,945 man-rom exposuro would be required.
P PDR fcP h
i Mr. John F. Stolz December 10, 1984 Page 2 i
pump instrumentation seals will require approximately 300 man-rem more than originally estimated.
If the exposures required for the pump decontamination, recirculation inlet safe ends and jet pump seal replacement are accounted against piping replacement, the total exposure to complete the modifications is estimated to be approximately 2,039 man-rem as indicated in the attached report.
Should you require further information or have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.
Very truly yours, Attachment cca J. H. Williams, Resident Inspector
1 DECONTAMINATION OF RECIRCULATION SYSTEM PUMPS AND VALVES
' INTRODUCTION i
In order to maintain personnel exposure as low as reasonable achievable (ALARA) during.the pipe installation phase, Philadelphia 1
Electric. Company contracted with its NSSS vendor to perform piping -
decontamination utilizing London Nuclear Ltd. CAN-DECON decontamination reagent.
Although the decontamination of the piping was effective, the decontamination of the recirculation pumps was
. not as effective as expected.
4.
The presence of high radiation levels in the recirculation pumps i
constitutes a special problem to effect further decontamination of i
the pump internals.
Decisions were made that dose reduction might i
be effected using other means, i.e., hydrolazing or air. injection into the pump cavity followed by. water flush.
Since the pipe modification project ALARA group was convinced that further dose 1
reductions were possible, special efforts were initiated in the interest of maintaining occupational exposure ALARA.
4 Chemical decontamination of the recirculation system piping was completed on August 8, 1984.
Work efforts during the balance of the month of August were directed at consolidating the radioactive crud from the outboard elbows and the valves.
This was accomplished by hydrolancing throJgh openings cut in the pipe and draining through the valve body and suction drains.
By the end of August 1984, the l
i p
4 suction and discharge elbows outboard of the valves, except for B suction, had been flushed of high, level crud, and the radiation
-levels in the work area, after installation of temporary shielding
- around the pumps and on piping hot spots, were low enough to allow installation of valve supports to accommodate removal of the elbows outboard of the valves.
The outboard elbows were removed during the first two weeks in September.
After removal of the elbows, i
hydrolancing through the valves was performed in order to flush the remaining crud out of the system and to allow work to be initiated on the pipes between the pumps and valves.
During the last two
_y weeks in September, the pipes between the pumps and valves were; removed, allowing direct acess to the pumps for-hydrolancing.
Radiation levels inside the pump were 200-300 R/hr and 4000-5000 mr/hr in the work aream around both pumps.
At the end of September, after several attempts to reduce the radiation levels on the
'B' recirculation pump by hydroblitz, radiation levels were 175-200 R/hr inside the pump and 30 R/hr at the pump suction cut.
i~
SURVEY DATA In order to measure the effectiveness of the chemical decontamination, contact dose rate measurements were taken on the piping system prior to and after chemical decontamination.
The post-decontamination surveys indicated an effective decontamination e
v e n -- - n a-w- -
4 n
,,m, - -
rn -,-
--n, e,
.-w,-.
--,,w.
,,-.,n-gn--,--w..,,,,r,,,,-r--n,n.---,y.,-w,,,r,-c.--,
. of the piping' system, but little or no decontamination of the zrecirculation pumps and valves.
Listed below are the pre and post-decontamination radiation levels associated with the recirculation pumps, valves and adjacent piping.
Surveys #144 (July 31,1984, pre-decontamination) and #180 (August 8, 1984, post-decontamination) show the following results for the six survey points in and around the pumps and valves.
(See Figure 1 for survey point locations):
~
e Surgey Point Pre-Decon Post-Decon Physical Location (mr/hr)
(mr/hr) 1 300 75 A discharge riser elbow 2
9000 8000**
A pump body 3
350 35 A suction riser elbow 4
200 30 B discharge riser elbow 5
14000 15000**
B pump body 6
230 30 B suction riser elbow durvey data for May 9, 1984 and August 8, 1984 show the following results for 12 survey points in and around the pumps and valves.
(See Figure 2 for survey point locations):
9 4
4
_4_
Survey
- Point, Pre-Decon Post-Decon Physical Location (mr/hr)
(mr/hr)
SP 229 42.9 A suction riser elbow A pump suction string section 6B 6P 334 26.5 A pump suction 7P 1617 1060'*
A pump body left 3590**
A pump body right 8P 9P 146 89.1 A discharge riser elbow bottom 10P 175 33.2 A discharge riser elbow top 1
llP 208 25.9 B suction riser elbow top 53.8 B suction riser elbow bottom l.
12P 13P 255 62.5 B pump suction string section 14P 793 1040**
B pump body left 15P 238 3150**
B pump body right 16P 187 19.1 B discharge riser elbow bottom As demonstrated above, all post-decontamination contact dose rates on the pipes adjacent to the pumps and valves were measured in tens of mr/hr, indicating expected decontamination af the pipe.
In contrast, the post-decontamination dose rates on the pump (indicated by **)
were still reading in thousands of mr/hr, indicating less than expected decontamination of the pumps.
Post-decontamination contact measurements were also made on the v lves, (See Figure 3, Survey #181) with contact dose rates
. l 4
-e v-wr
,n--
--.,,e
.-v
+ -,
m-
+e--
e y-r--r
--%w-my-
+-- - - -
5-reading 1 to 1.2 R/hr, indicating less than expected
~ decontamination of the valves.
The high radiation levels which remained at the pumps and valves caused high radiation levels in the working area at the 116' olevation.
Because of these high radiation levels, it was decided that support of the valves, placement of pump shielding, and the placement and alignment of the pipe cutting equipment should be performed with water in the lower part of the recirculation system to provide some shielding.
Surveys performed in late June and early July had indicated that water in 7
these pipes reduced the working area radiation levels by approximately 60 percent.
MECHANICAL DECONTAMINATION Two alternates for crud removal by agitation were considered since it was anticipated that the crud in the recirculation pumps would be as loosely adhered at Peach Bottom as it was at Monticello and access to each side of the pump could be obtained
- by using the chemical decontamination ports on the suction. sides of the pumps and opening the welded flange connections for the valve by pass on the discharge sides.
These alternatives were:
- 1. ) inject air through a decontamination fitting during the drain
- and flush operation with the air bubbles providing the agitation e
v-
+--,r1
-av,#.,
--we - rw =
5g.ir r---e=.
w--
~
,e-=w.-+
ev
+e--e+-,
e-+e e
rwa-e - en s
- ee e--varw ew m-r. w
- * =
rwme
=-=s---
~*
s,**:
ey<+-we er=
r
. e through a scrubbing action; 2) blind hydrolance the pump internals after the system was drained.
Because of concerns that hydrolance nozzles could become wedged i
in'the pump internals during blind hydrolancing and cause increased exposures rather than provide a solution to.the high dose rates, it was decided to perform the agitation via air injection.
A program was initiated to implement this alternative.
A procedure was~ prepared, equipment was obtained and installed, and final Plant Operations Review Committee approval for-the procedure was received on August 14th.
During 3
the intervening 6 days (August 8, 1984 to August 14, 1984) radiation levels at the pump and adjacent piping remained stable but high.
On August 10, 1984, a Senior Health Physics techncian dedicated to the pipe replacement project prepared detailed surveys of both pumps to establish radiation levels for shielding-and to' estimate the potential exposure expected during installation of valve supports, pipe cutting equipment, and pump shielding (See Figure 4, Survey #188).
The detailed surveys showed high radiation levels over the entire surface of the recirculation pump bowls, and also indicated high dose levels (4 to 6R/hr) on the bottom of the pump discharge pipe which had not i
been observed in this portion of the pipe on August 8, 1984.
Neither post-decontamination survey had fixed survey points on j
th,is portion of pipe.
i I
M L
Shortly after the detailed pump survey on August 10, 1984, approximately 800 of-the 10,000 gallons of water in the. system were drained through the decontamination connection.
Before the 1
drain was initiated, a flexib'1 plastic' tube was connected to the 4
vent.on. top of the A recirculation pump discharge to serve as a stand pipe to aid in monitoring the water level in the system.
j During the operation, it was observed that the water'in the plastic tube was " muddy", indicating large quantities of particulate in the fluid.
~ CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS Between August 10 and August 14, 1984, no other surveys at the level of the pumps and valves were documented.
During work efforts at the 116 ft, elevation, measurements were taken to
~
verify that the dose rates were stable.
The project procedures
~
do not req'uire documentation of this type of survey if radiation levels'are unchanged.
Under stable radiation conditions, detailed surveys are documented each week or when requested.
Personnel exposure experienced during the four days was consistent with ALARA reviews based on the-August 10 survey; that' is,?a working level dose rate of 225 to 275 mr/hr Between August 10 and August 13, a scaffold was erected below-the
'A' pump to support the cutting machine and the cutting machine was brought to the 116' level and placed on the
'A' pump suction i-i d
_,_m.
...,,__,..,.._mm.
.., -. ~.... _ _
1 pipe.
The radiation exposures experienced by the individuals involved with these operations were consistent with the exposure experienced by the Senior Health Physics technician who performed the detailed pump survey on August 10 and with estimates prepared for the ALARA review of these tasks; that is, an average exposure in the work area of 225 to 275 mr/hr.
Shortly before midnight, three individuals attempted to set the cutting machine on the A pump suction.
Their exposure was documented on the RWP and averaged less than 275 mr/hr for approximately 40 minutes of exposure.
Part of their work sequence was video taped and, the tape was examined for this evaluation.
Shortly after midnight, three other individuals returned to the pump to realign the machine.
The machine was set on the pipe, and an attempt was made to lift the machine up onto the pump suction.
The lift was impeded by a lip on the pump, and the pump was jarred by several attempts to lift the 1000 pound cutting machine.
These impacts may have caused the movement of the crud on the A pump; however, no comparable impact took place on the B pump.
Survey #191 prepared at 4:00 a.m. on August 14 (Figure 5) indicated that working area dose rates directly under the pumps had increased from 1000 mr/hr to a range of approximately 2000 to 4000 mr/hr.
F
)
.,,....,,-n--
,,,---w--n-,n-,-n,-
.~n,,
r-,,----
During the next 30 hours3.472222e-4 days <br />0.00833 hours <br />4.960317e-5 weeks <br />1.1415e-5 months <br />, (4:00 a.m. on August 14 to 10:00 a.m.
on August 15), dose levels on the pumps and adjacent pipes continued to change even though there were no external stimuli to
]
initiate the change.
Survey #191, taken at 4:00 a.m. on August 14, showed high radiation levels on the bottom on the A pump bowl (See Figure 5).
Survey #192, taken at 9:00 p.m.,
shows that the dose rates on the bottom of the discharge pipes adjacent to the pumps were approximately 5 R/hr (See Figure 6).
By 4:00 a.m. on-August 15, dose levels at the bottom of the pump suction elbow had risen to 70 and 110 R/hr on the B and A loop, respectively; the dose level on the A pump discharge had risen to 70 R/hr; and 1
work area dose levels had risen to between 600 and 4000 mr/hr on the A loop. ' Working level dose rates at the suction a.nd discharge valves remained relatively constant at 100 to 500 mr/hr (See Figure 7, Survey 1193).
Between noon and 11 p.m. on August 15, 1984, the recirculation J
system was drained and flushed several times and periodically agitated with short bursts of compressed air.
During the day, the radiation levels at the bottom of the pump suction elbow continued to increase as measured with a teletector.
At one point, the peak reading on the A pump reportedly reached 700 R/hr and on.the B pump,.the dose rate exceeded the 1000 R/hr maximum capacity of the teletector.
s t
4 4
,.y, y_,-,--,v.__-,..,,...,,_.y._..,,..,_.,_,..,_y,
.m..
. ~,,,,, _,,,,, - -
.-4
.m,,
,y...
---m____,..-.m.-,,
.,-,m_..._-,,
.. Late in the evening on the 15th, flushing of the system was terminated because the drain rates were slow.
A portion of the drain system (short length of fire hose on each loop), was found kinked and partially plugged.
The radiation levels on the drains were reading 50 to 350 R/hr (See Figure 8, Survey #200).
Flushing and draining operation were continued on August 16.
By early morning on August 17th, the lower part of the recirculation system had been drained and filled several times and the dose levels were stable.
The high radiation levels adjacent to the pumps, however, had not been reduced.
Large radiation sources were distributed from the bottom of the elbow on the suction riser to the bottom of the elbow on the discharge riser on both loops.
Figure 9, prepared on August 17th from Survey #206, is typical of the radiation levels observed on both loops.
l On August 17, 1984, it was decided to hydrolance the pipes to consolidate the high level deposits distributed throughout the i 1 piping at the 116 ft. elevation.
Two-inch holes were drilled into the suction and discharge pipes in both loops at the 139 ft.
elevation above the location of the high radiation levels.
After two. days of high pressure hydrolance through the two-inch holes, the high radiation sourco had been removed from the A discharge l
elbow but not from the other three elbows.
Four large windows we're subsequently cut-into the piping to allow flushing as well l
l
,y-,
.y.,
y.m.-
as'hydrolancing.
A 12-inch square window was cut into the A loop discharge elbow at the 129 ft. elevation'; 22-inch square windows were cut into the other three pipes at the 139 ft. elevation.
Crud was flushed through the body drains on the suction and discharge valves.
On August 22, the A recirculation pump discharge valve body drain was plugged with crud and had a radiation level 350 R/hr The drains were modified to allow draining and back flushing.
By August 23, it was determined that valves installed in the valve body drains constituted a crud trap and prevented adequate i
flushing.
These drains were removed and replaced with flexible plastic hoces.
By August 25, 12-inch windows were cut into the outboard suction and discharge elbows to allow direct flushing of the valves.
On August 29, after 12 days of hydrolance, much of the crud in the outboard elbows had been discharged through the drains.
Radiation levels on the valves were approximately equal to those which were existent on August 8 at the end of chemical decontamination (See Figures 3 and 10).
Therefore, work was initiated to shield the pumps, support the valves, and cut off the outside elbows adjacent to the suction and discharge valves.
During the first two weeks in September, the outboard elbows were removed which allowed direct access to hydrolaze the valves, the p'ipes between the valves and pumps, and the pump discharge.
On l
i l
i
. September 13, a survey was made inside the pump discharge with a teletector and radiation levels of 200-300 R/hr were observed.
During the last two weeks in September, the pipes between the
~
pumps and valves were removed, which allowed direct access to the pumps.
At the end of September, af ter several attempts to hydrolaze the 2
B' pump, radiation levels inside the pump were 175-200 R/hr and at the pump suction pipe cut were 30 r/hr.
POSTULATED CAUSE The most likely source of the increased levels of radiation in the pipes adjacent to the pumps is presumed to be radioactive deposits which existed in the pump internals (impeller and casing) and were subsequently dislodged during the activities on August 14 and 15.
It has been postulated that the 4
decontamination fluid was unable to completely dissolve these deposits, but did weaken or break the bonds which held them on the internal surfaces of the pump.
Subsequent soaking for six days in a very weak solution of decontamination fluid and demineralized water softened the deposits or weakened these bonds.
It is possible that the activity of the individuals working on the A pump may have caused th'e initial movement of the surface deposits, and the high level
-,.__-~------..,w.
,-w.<
~
.,7_._,_. -...._,.
. 4 deposits observed at the bottom of the pump suction elbow on August 15.
However, since no comparable activities took place on the B pump, the movement may have been solely caused by the j
i softening action and gravity.
The compressed air injected into the system on August 15 enhanced the movement of these radiactive deposits and distributed them throughout the horizontal pipes and the valves at the 116 ft. and 119 ft. elevations.
The high i
levels of radiation were the result of the redistribution of this
. radioactive material into a "less shielded" and " physically 1
- proximate" location in the piping system.
Pre-decontamination crud analysis of pipe (flange) film indicated about 16% chrome and 63% iron.
Process qualification testing confirmed solubility of this crud form with the London
- Nuclear CAN-DECON decontamination reagent.
This is supported by the 4
decontamination factors achieved on the pipe.
Post-decontamination crud analysis of samples obtained during hydrolance operations indicates a higher chrome (in the range of 46-62%) content than iron.
During laboratory testing, these high chrome samples were not soluble in CAN-DECON reagent.
More recent laboratory analysis was perforemd to affect a conclusion which would indicate that a two-step chemical decontamination process.(reduction followed by oxidation) may dissolve the high chrome crud deposits.
> For reasons currently unknown, oxides which formed on the pump surfaces are not similar to the oxides formed on the pipe surfaces.
Additional investigation is underway to gain insight into the differences between pipe and pump crud deposits.
CORRECTIVE ACTIONS Five options were considered in order to eliminate the radiation sources in the recirculation pumps to reduce area dose and maintain personnel exposure related to pipe installation As Low As Reasonably Achievable.
These options are listed below.
1.
Chemical Decontamination This option would utilize a decontamination reagent other then the -London Nuclear Ltd. reagent which was i
utilized successfully for pipe decontamination.
The reagent selection would be based on the analysis of known pump crud samples which.have been collected.
p t
1 I
2.
Removal of Pump Internals and Decontamination f
Removal of the pump internals provides direct access to the internal surfaces, grooves and crevices that can i.[
trap radioactive crud.
In addition to the decontamination of these areas, the wear ring, N
- - - +,
.a..
,n
- -n,n.
we-,n.--wn-
,-n,-,---,,,--,v.
,--.-.--,.-e.-..,.+---.,-.,en-,-
,,--m.,,.,--,--,,,-n..,
-..~--,-,e
~
1.
_ hydrostatic bearing, shaf t, and other parts of the pump internals can be inspected.
The pressure retaining parts of the pump can.also be inspected in accordance with ASME Section XI inservice inspection requirements.
3.
Replacement of the Puno Case and Internals
[
Replacement of the pump case and internals requires replacement of the entire pump including case, internals, coupling, and driver' mount with another unit minimizing interchangeability rework.
4.
Remote Crud Trap Cleanup Remote clean-up is a process by which an apparatus such as a water supply nozzle is inserted through the discharge nozzle of the pump.
The water nozzle would be guided by the pump case and the impeller, while it is supported by a flexible shaft.
The flush from the-apparatus could drain through the pump suction or discharge or be sipped by another close proximity vacuum sipper.
d
. 5.
Special Shielding Designs In order to continue the work without removal of the high radiation sources in the pumps, special shielding
.. could be installed in and around pump to reduce exposure.
Evaluation of the advantages, disadvantages and the ALARA impact of the options presented above resulted in the selection of Option 2, Removal of Pump Internals and Decontamination.
This option will be performed on both recirculation pumps.
The following work items are required for the decontamination:
o Removal of the pump-motor coupling spacer o
Motor removal o
Motor storage, o
Removal of the pump seal / coupling o
Removal of the motor mount o
Set-up of shielded cask to receive pump internals o
Removal of pump internals o
Perform hydrolazing and/or glass bead blasting as needed o
Decontamination of the internals o
Appropriate Inspections o
Reassembly of the pump and motor The hydrolazing and/or glass bead blasting will be performed utilizing a high pressure water source.
Hydrolazing or.high pressure glass bead blasting will be performed on the pump shaft and impeller by alternately lif ting and ' rotating the pump l'nternals in specified increments.
The shaft and impeller will
~
o g
be hoisted into a shielded. cask, for transport to the Unit 2 refuel floor for.further decontamination if. required.
With the pump shaft and impeller removed, the internal surfaces of the pump casing will be surveyed to determine the location of I
the radiation sources and to establish a baseline for assessment of the effectiveness of the decontamination.
The ultimate decontamination method to be utilized on the pump casing internals is dependent upon the results of these surveys.
Since direct access to the source areas will be available, there is a-high degree of assurance that this option will result in successful decontamination of the pump' internals.
All operations involved in this process will be performed with prior ALARA i '
review.
The water spray will be contained and the residue collected for disposal.
MAN-REM ESTIMATES The initial Man-REM estimate prior to start of the outage to complete piping replacement modifications was 1,810 Man-REM as i
submitted via letter, S. L. Daltroff, PECo, to J. F. Stolz, USNRC, on March 8, 1984.
Further refinement in the manhour estimates completed in mid-April, 1984, indicated at that time that a man-REM expenditure of 1,945 would be required to complete all pipe replacement modification work.
These estimates were based on the following scope of work:
4 1'
T
.+v..,
w.
~,,
...,,e,,~,,
A Original Scope o
complete replacement of recirculation system piping loops A and B o
replacement of Residual Heat Removal (RHR) system shutdown cooling suction and return piping inside containment replacement of a portion of the RHR head spray piping o
inside containment o
replacement of a portion of the reactor water cleanup.
(RWCU) piping outside containment replacement of.the RWCU containment penetration o
Expanded Scope As a result of indications discovered while performing additional weld inspections during the outage, the scope of work has been increased, since the time of the April man-REM estimates, to include the followint:
o replacement of two jet pump instrumentation seal reducers o
replacement of ten recirculation inlet riser safe ends
-Ju; ALARA milestone review of all pipe modification related tasks
- was completed following pipe removal to assess the accumulated
. man-REM exposure for the completed phases of the project.
t w
.=_
- After 26 weeks of outage time, the pipe replacement modifications have accumulated 870 man-REM in 32,550 radiation work permit (RWP) hours.
The April, 1984, man-REM estimate and the actual
)
man-REM exposure for the.three phases of the project completed to i
date is as follows:
April 1984 Estimated Actual Proiect Phase Man-REM Man-REM Exposure 1
I Pre-Decontamination 445 386.5 i
II Pipe Decontamination 38 40.4 III Pipe Removal 516 326.3 The actual exposures through the pipe removal phase are tracking t
f' at approximately 78% of the April exposure estimates.
i The April, 1984, man-REM estimates for project phases IV and V (Pipe Replacement and Restoration) were 887 man-REM and 59 man-
-REM, respectively.
The Pipe Replacement Phase of the project is 4
.being re-estimated due to the increased scope of work consisting of the replacement of two jet pump instrumentation seal reducers, l
the ten recirculation system inlet riser safe ends, and
{
installation phase modifications required because of deferral of l
work in the vicinity of the recirculation pumps.
Additionally, t,he man-REM exposure required for the unforeseen necessity of l
,... - _, _.... -__..~.... _ _. _. _ _ _. _.
. decontaminating the recirculation pumps will contribute to the projected man-REM to complete the piping modifications.
The estimated exposure to complete the Pipe Replacement and Restoration phases of the project are as follows:
April 1984 Current Estimate Estimate Proiect Phase Man-REM Man-REM IV Pipe Replacement 887 887 o
Pump Decontamination N/A 70 o
Jet Pump Instrumentation Seal N/A 80 o
Recirc Inlet Riser Safe Ends N/A' 190 o
Total (phase IV) 887 1227 V
Restoration 59 59 Both the April, 1984, estimate and current estimate are based on an area dose. rate of 150 mr/hr following pipe decontamination.
The accuracy of the current estimates for the Pipe Replacement and Restoration phases is dependent upon the results achieved in performing the recirculation pump decontamination described.
A comparison of the current estimates based on the increased scope of work, actual man-REM exposure tracked to date and the April, 1984, estimate is as follows:
(,
Estimate based on April 1984 Actual through Estimate Phase III completion Project Phase Man-REM Estimated Man-REM I
Pre-Decontamination 445 386.5**
II Piping Decontamiriation.
38 40.4**
III Pipe Removal 516 326.3**
IV Pipe Replacement 887 1227 V
Restoration 59 59 1945 2039.2
- Denotes actual dose expended.
Work is proceeding on decontamination of the pump with both impellers having been hydroblitzed and removed from the drywell.
At completion of decomtamination, performance of radiological surveys will indicate the effectiveness of the hydrolazing.
The surveys will be utilized to perform a re-estimate of the Pipe Replacement and Restoration phase man-REM exposure to complete the project.
t 9
.e
.A g
$.C Os-nouans arena gg a
@a Es
~
~
x A
O G,
'ss @
s Up
,E' o
wt s
zgk a
o@
9 l
8 a
=
4 5d 40 2
p.g g
g
- i.;uvia ;io. nd f g g gis Edb X.
ng g ;
o e @,
a s _t
- - m m e
D C q
't U----
m4gr nunau unu ~
ag ogg y
e* s e
i i
1_ o 9
{
X g.
.g g
g at g
\\
_NunL38 UHU _
g s
g;. -
~
g S@
_ 3DuVH3510 dVind g"
- r i
e as e:< >
- n
'@ El
)
cv aa s
a.
8 E
g a
8 R@
@o"
- rs 8
e EE c
z
@ t :'
s i
8 5 (
=g
=
~oions o,nd g
g oq5 x @ @x 6
/
g.u jj.
.x T* D A y f ridans unu l
3W D'J ij
Fis o es 1-.
. i-J 330 300'
'270 240 210 180 lis 0 120 00 GO
@,.. e I
l 3,,,
3...
3... o.,,,
O,,,
i I
I crd V
M-b*
0 M
17-SCf_- ~
l I
.. w
' w LOOP *A*
LO@
P U PA P ' A' P UfAl' 'U*
I I
I
~ ~l ves O
O
,,e o
< t&EENa/
y r,* 3 r
<8P j
o,lpp le a esp ll
' l4K o o!
' It.P
'lP CP o X o.
T9P
<tlp a M
oLAp j
.o o
so tat.
sip
- I
(
t I
e.,.
tq
Fi60ee 3A Ps Ars - fl ADI ATIO N-CO NT AMIN ATION - DI AG R AM $HE ET UNIT 2 b UNIT 3 ass s u os smiss
(
DOCTYPE 5 0 2 R.W.P. N O, N - a 8 T4 2 SURVEY NO.
/G' I v rr n s /
DATE.
P. - P. - M TIM E.
I4
- 2 T SURVEY BY.
AREA. U1 h/ V **A'll 18 6 '
4 ~$ - O /A1 4't A-8 AREA DIAGRAM. REMARKS E,L-'
Qf;elb, p g,4 lg1, g (QG. ~
' k:0 gno nr/re conFad ogf( 'O V*
foohr/t+ a. I6 "
mW 19hk
%Y s'
gu[
lk/ int refuf p
l
/
6oo kWes-G I6 3*c, hJ,,_
59 AN..
(
)%.9 L nN a< _ _
DN l\\
IE A l.6P///g.
' ~
co nf acf-gf 3Rlst I.S g/ng g ggr cwoet 2076-WA W4WGA.'4 200 000H)r Ch Ar99 e.suus /
300 poo %vh,,,
Y TMt-7. uj Ve1. Ro24 If4I b= SMEAR h= CONTACT R A0lAT10N REA0 LNG LEGEN0:
(DUPLICATE)
Ficoce se PB APS - R ADIATIO N-CONTAMIN ATIO N - DIAGRAM SHE ET ass rasos arfen UNIT 2 h. UNIT 3 O DOCTYPE 5 0 2 R.W.P. N O.
M -Ol-843 SURVEY NO.
/8/
DATE-R 8 - F14 TIME.
H2y SURVEY BY-lil77n #
AREA. hev we Il fit Malve 43Afi f 53 A G I4V2.
AREA DIAGRAM REMARKS
~ %sT*
514;e)Di3
/ /A A t m T, w
$%C -
43VALM A-8 gggcod
,s L,
,foow/MR G 8 p
/
N'k[s
l 1.2Nie c,rd gf M.5 l
7ao Mt/Wf & /8
a i
/
Ni v
8., -*
conh}d
/
Aconr Mc f.
- _Ch, ca.%4
\\
/
....._.-_..-.S
/_..__.. -
30b 3p.a.
- _ - - -.,,. - -... =.
i!lt I" tan.u L.et
__f g
L 3,.,*--
_t
\\y'l#l## # g 'l 24htt.
J c'auYC7 4 lwe 3
Hi
' * *^k coMoict go74
@A w4 rtv4y-ima-4ao Nrf, Top or L/4 LVt. ** iT Joe - Too wrA, "fA/N 0544
4024 154r LEGEN0:
- h. SMEAR ha CONTACT RAD,lATION READING (DUPLICATE)
Ficoes 4 A j
rat APS. II Alll A110N I;tlN 1/ idlid /. l ltiff III At; st a u i'il l i Uf.812 h UN113 s** 2 s sus sise 00C1YPf 502
(
Rw.r.u0._ e v i a vl 'g sURVfyNO.
_e./is/84 17dd suRvcysv LJ beJu Dart.
put.
k't i o Itn '
'A Q~f AREA.
^
y, p.
~
kw/E25'-
AREA DIAGRAM. REMARKS l.O
/w n n,as,2 p p@s. -
{,
i tz b s ' uas.a arns
.h<.
a m
.o i.c As i o.o I-I
,a 2,S 2.
S b*
7, o s. o ~5 3'*
- 1. C
- 1. f I.
y/
we~O m
a-(b
~'X3 2.-s o a ais-2p, y a9 cm,mu,
% h k s m.7 _. 3(
ma PmP-c w e~ h oF d J d <c.
t ooo-izoo p cy s+ M s
c a ae,-
O la c,... L. a u..e,
2 I
\\
,v.u... i.
- c. iy,,.
- z.. s. -s,
, n,,,
~
\\, f ^.
zi.Q Sl':*T'
...... !..,. \\
t h ;...,l\\.
I l
. wy.
..w{
.s LiGLNU.
.gg[Ag
- CONT ACT R A0lAfl0N READING
s Fic, oes A s Pt Ar5 - II A01 A110N-CONT AMINAll0N. tH At.st AM 5HI t T UNIT 30 l
so6 ssJes ::,en UNIT 2 00CTYFI $ 0 2 R.Wf.NO.I-O/- O6 3
$URVEY NO.
DATE-
,5 TIME -
l2
$URVEY BY-I MU AR(A.
Ilb I
f/ f EL d
O O(Ife ARE A DIAGRAM. R(MARKS
-1F(g
'"I' '
- c.. >-,-c L,x r
(
I l_ f
(
L0
. G.,. f..,
u <-~ m :..o'e
.y>eo <-
m a [e.m.
</.o 7.<M 3.o
/. >
o.
.c 2.(
I000 ~ DO
~
pe</usi >j 3, i. e ; 2. c.
f.o u cr O s
toA t.ft.
IP 4 } f @w(u J.
2 7
D i,> W #
- u c&.cri+>ha V
s g
Drs,m e rec.
w i. s 1g y
di ss
/45c o - /2C 6-1 o 4r/.f sGr%.
/
1 c
c), e.. q-m, Q s
,.,/,,-,.,. c,
rg.
.:,. t.,/ '
~
7 Np.Q,*
(,,.
b v
/
e gs vaw
(
i..,,/t.
D
bj'e. <,
,f
,4 9',,g.
j'
/.~;/
-7
.i :.p l /.
. "s e
i, k._fJdf A
l ' I(IIo s'sl, "ctao:
/\\-suem ry. comer.imrm mmt
FtcluRE EA I
- g.
'QN - CONTAMINATION - AIRBORNE SURVEY
( d..o....l'ines R A D I ATI
.I,..C.
uNii7 7 uNo.i..
~ n w n No _.;2 6'7 7 6
.sunvi y No
/4 /
NIlyM
'/
4_
llMt SOHyl y Hy.
fgj/[
DAM
... k -
b <,, a -
Aw.s.n....
auA
_. $oh,:M h62 ed.ex a.AsoN R A0,1,ATION.
',%1, % N1
()
g,p e a isita ns;l...s iis ni l
iis i A cAvuA v
i1 E M u.a n u.ii u,..n l unis
? - ' [.. $..
- 9.....
u,... L... DISL A NCI un A,....
s
- j.
- C..w-t ed m
Pqo o-'Y7'
/
l l.
l.d o, b:.
Scr.f
'2
.A cco.
os.n
/. 5 - v7,f
. *- "/
5' - l e "
y/
[
dd i/
_/
/
/
/
CONT AMINATION - J N:. I H UMI N I AIRBORNC.
str.l eiu'.u N i SF fil AL. NO
- ! ist AL NO..
I ilL I A.G amu.*. l Ass'..A SAMPLING tTEM g
opu suu....T d' uru. i t,0... -
Avi' NACL 3
f low s At(
pp n. s t i.
e
- .i Asei i
I
- . l.
..s.. r.... ~ s a :
l
.=.
,/
...i..
./
v kj'
........e
- 4 ISO T Ol'1 h
/,*s lg\\.)
l is i ~.
- ,./
l 1.i o
llo 1
[ REMARKS:
Fi6 uR.s. 5 a ruar$ - II A0lAT10N-CONT Ar.ilNA110N - DIAC R AM $16 U in.naos itses DOCTYPE 5 0 7 UNIT 7
. UNIT 3 O l
R.W.P.NO. 2 - Q '/' O 7 7b SURVEY NO.
/4/ !T b bO DATE-TIME -
SURVEY DY -
JA B
I fP A r rr AREA.
t
/ L W.O ARIA UtAGRAM H[ MARKS i
a
.. ' \\ c . '
(2 s o
(
. a2,~
c-c f
e
. C...-..
/
A ', ' ',,
e..
y t
l i.
i
/
4/
/
1 i
-~
i
, g:
1 i
p iaF h "D
I
..A.
W, <(3
.gg
,, r i....y.
y.&y;.m;,,,,V$WZZ,42+.2h.:-yi.;;>_;q.,,Ni.
L'A O.-l g i t I
,9)o uf k,
x i
h
.g -
Lh]
.s HA
~(
,ej, vu
- S s1Y j
)' Y.
t?)
LCC[NO:
SMEAn C CONTACT RA01Afl0N REA0 LNG (ORIGINAL)
e P I G,0 C E isC.
PuArs - II AulAll0N C0tJ1 Ar.ilN All0N - HI ACithf.154till Utill 7 L;]. UNil 3 0 ev m ee it,ea 00CTYP[ 6 0 7 R w r NO S~ Y# 0 lfc, SUHV(Y NO, l
b f f l[!3 O /Ob DATE T if.t t SURVEYDY. -f' AREA.
A.
2.e e i i-c Da
~'
I
}
AR( A DIAGRAM R[ MARKS
()6 @
f(\\IMb ON7 OY\\
L t. C' Ws a
\\
dDkktM- 'l O
(.).t ws p V 05 C
(t s s d' L O s'v k l\\ ' tc' CL L3 Ok l e.J.
15 3 > 10
epo 29, as
.I It<
N 30 ll k i
i f
~
r s
1
\\
l' f
M.
/
s
/~
x
\\7 g$< :/,.,
r.
- N i s
^
. ict o\\
N/ i
~
~
,0 t
~\\
i i
.-'IQ, q';
6fs\\
l
?.
8 l
..~.
b'SM[AR C CONT ACT RADIATION R[A0lt4G L L U L 'd D tRQl21NAll.
~
~i FIGues pN - CONTAMINATION - AIRBORNE Peres RADIATI VEY
,,q'l,7 78
- Ifn e UNil 2 UNil 3 f
$ n.,,,o 2 'M -o6 r7 susivt Y WI
/IE.
~~
TIME -
Ob DAff SURVEY DY -
_ t)2 D4h ris '
A-fd2 Ban 4Lp Awyz_
/
Am o.
fGaFl.&
M Astm
-r* u M //EA) % '
.YA 'O r_%
( l R ADI,ATION - gT ENT O
DETA GAMMA NEUTHONS TOTAL ITEM unAo/Hn Mnian un Eulun unf ufan DISTANCE TN"A.nkm.BeGm.<w n
aokms w2s ~ucr_J,1:
A
.ic.s; w. e t. & w no sow % sk swa am a
M mL
.h&molteadaMa-I l W.x>c ).un P.R G.w.oe.
AsA.AA as % so. 1 alp 'M sow /sw cos b it
~
4 x
j 4MINATION - INST RUMENT
\\
AIRBORNE - INSTRUMENT W
SE RI At. NO.
IT BETAoGAMMA ALPHA SAMPLING DPM/100 cm?
OPMil00 cm2 AVERACE FLOW R ATE COUNTER s,
,2 STOP -
3 F1 / MIN El F.
~d 4
~
l OKGO CPM NE 1 Cru l
l.l
~
COu NG TsuE NE T CPM >
g l
I le l l
r.
8 0 '*
5 H EFf v0t ISOTMES ti i'.
13
- 3 44 I
ii t,
@YM o/@ @
i Fis,urcs 7A
,O O
~7 _...
PBAPs ' RADIATION - CONTAMINATION ' AIRBORNE SUI
. NTv$c s"N* 'N UNIT 2[ UNIT 3 O R.W.P. N0-
-ol-M3 -
'.X. ;< ' -
?
O. 8d.
i:.
SURVEY f[0-
/M DATE -
II
'/
TIME - -
SURVEY DY -
Il d
- r-2 b /L0
///M4
- WNN's--.
l' ~
/
N
'd$Eh'
'E M,Ir-,c.. b m.,
R EASON -
l119 ir n kd -
1
'R ADI ATION - INSTRUMENT
- d360N,.
- d..h SE RI AI. NO. _ Rn7 A " h hSt/4,. i).g.f,1,.* yg"'
1 TEM 10 ETA "!.* GAMMA NCUTTOC uncu/nn l DISTANCE TOTAL.
' unAofunjy.unfan uneufwn
% Pckea.
\\ \\ In' ilDOW SO-4 'L HlA 50 ~ 6 #@?
,CieIJ 1
h n n iUn % lPa m ess 2
/JFYbW)-Ilo'% 4 l-isbF2'
/
~
}'
/;....:.C.
'-/
f'
)
3 s
/
f.s... s. agsiws.].
- /
,[
r.-
c
~
/
4
, o-
/
' wA W
/
/
.s
/
& S-MM..u/.,., M@,;%$lff.-
/
/
s
/
.~.5 '
4~~
. /.' h'n k% Q Vg !?.
/
1
/
/
8/
W
%wn :Maa m T
c'ONTAMINAi};ONb INSTRUMEt
' w..
j;wt FiBORNE'.'.. dRDM%.,'/8"gpr f,.
IN
,uiw S.ER.IA+C..N.s.cwwwg.
O w w :.
SERIA.QNp
.n.
~
jifi.i.$$
%{h $&.&_mh.!
~
5"* ?..
$$Nn"
- 4~,.S c.co p w.
(
j 7p -
- - gmg qtye granr _ ps</C renm couunn k/u
- M/
'0'F 2
I sToP - OMd ef3/ MIN-Er r.
4, /s 3'
3
' cnossc6uurs }
(
I j.g pq7 enco cru nei cru L IW
(?-
b 4
l oun)r,o,,,,-nc r,un l - I ZY l*I
/ 5/C-I q,
g j,_
s c
l '/y,<-
/
u /w
~
//o
/
s ueT cru 7
//e r
i m6 1
" 'c"3 7
r 32p 1I S WI c. io *
'/* M O' T/,
t j
sc^un cer.
vot.
s h, c.
it t.
isorores a
'o
.% {l on, J A~o 1
//,.tju
/f.
/-
u
. - [n fl nrn.Mm
- -l lI$.S.
" ' i'
'> F p
Y'I hm) lmof.a? -
y I 2.
'I..
'.i i i;,;at
% wa%n i z.
%w a
M 6)
G i v.,
.. m I.f
% h[kU.MW':.
'e.
EMAnksMiiij7&tgi&#MN#3!#MkmMW*
l fm []((_$
8 4 5l.9 y_,
.s..
zn l.- C.9..;;;.... ::
.>.v r.. a i,-
. 9_
.V l
[, 57 d'
f.6
,9
=
,o va
' q.
1
=g X
i *a *I g4 e
s },I g
I s
1 a
.:r 3
4j I;h,::~I_y c
i ! ;,j.i
.t T
1},
t s.t.
h 3 3
E
[
bi D
D 1 l iL
/v v
3 1 g
B 3 u>,-
F W.'.f,
~
&l 5
?.5 7
1 q
l 9'
1
\\
s
\\
c
'i ig (y
1;
- d. 2
.e 5
1,
.3
=
1 y
., t y
-s...
- E,4 '
,la -
E r
." s-i
.w..
5j-a g o
i.
- 9..
1
' 5.
Q.y -
}
pLk
%.,'J b.. '
'",.,1
. N.,
- y 5l t ~.
-\\
p-r s
.(
e j
. j7..
~}
s s.
'e 5
,5s 4.r
- .s.,.*
5 * '.'*
~
{,.
,, f.
- 2
~.
l
. r.t p
a \\f /
o-3
\\gg y a.
L,A;.
t.
l
.,,..%.:?.it &
l
.,.i.h.-
r:.,
.g'y.'
- h. g. '
.1 J
.t un g
k.
p-1 g
4 3
F I G u e. &
~1 c._
es Ars - R ADIATION-CONTAMINATIO N - DIAC R AM SHE ET los.e ses infen DOCTYPE 8 02 UNIT 2h. UNIT 3 C 4
.}, 4.;., s. " -
R.W.P. NO. $-O f-OMA SURVEY ND...[. N a
DATE. AA-18:i'<A4
. TIME.
OllI SURVEY 8Y.N@i,lNSorJ *
.v AREA 3 2 6 }td h tt) @ 3 Nf N M N
,'N
,:i.
..r..
Ti i.
!1(.
.._I-i.t.y i 1
AREA..DIA0ftA.M. R EMARKr..:
@- 14.+
i
,.;. t.
g..,,
. 9 -.j :
... J.
. g q.. :..
N,ih,.. _t..
i+_.t._.
.s l
i i
.. 3
. i ~.
l
.,_ q __. a s.
.ese.
i y %.o. Vgw3x i
.156.-M%hF', 'i_.
...-.i. W5a@M%'"s&%.ev 1,.S g)gg,g, Q l A.5 Ow::. p /
j g
g,.-DnA.'h...%...::;;:gdn'h.0 4) k"..
.M 1Tornf. f..
CC.W N#.
+
3;.
E 56.:
- y. - n ni v :~
N
- ;. jm
.y
.-4.
,Q-
.?.
..... r.w xa.
e,he.xbyy;l@U
. w ) n..
~-
c n
f?.*T.-
sw.s yw.a M M.MA
?
Mo % & a... L. '...
.W'...
~
"2. %.s % % E Ns/A',6d#.
~
4ohli%.%....
f
\\
- s 7:n..
. '...1
'N 3 - l.
.s
.M i h'W.?4 - -
-i
,. 1. ' =.'). -
i.,. i
.t 7
- i. '; p,7 4,. ;.
MirFg %, yr/, g,,',
.. c...i v4.,.
- e. ' t
. @
- es' - j.
L.
......e 3
...,..-}_..; t,,
3...v
,i
.a 4'
8%
% 6 V 1
.6.
s 1
.l 150-2. m.
- h,,
v ~
- x 4
10'/
(oY,w.
7%
2.lo *ba, n.a 7.5%.-
l%e.
2e/a 10h 4.0 kaa.
titL a 1
' A A.
C.. A.
f D C.D.U-Q$ctl r
~
W// M/; / r /. / / / > r./ A/ / r / s / t / / / / t w/h
...,. a_. ;-
...:.w
- s. --. L
...}_. 9.. a
.. 1._.j....p._I oe/ga
_.:-_ i 44 *%---(%.'e" );,..Ok.iA !
-. k W h -: l 3--
s
,. c+.
.,.._k
.d.h.
..j.. b--j -F-.;. t-...h
- lo it a.
4..*.. hf-
.~
A L.,et.
i
- I I
i P I, " i
,,I l'/He 5
i 1.EGEND:
..Jl.y.s-....h.. a h0N,T.A. c..T..RA.Dt.ATIREk.0l
....,> :.,,._..,,adu;W.7 '..
2... i,.
.v.
a :.v.
n
& %;. % ' %. h k % 5 h M s W L % % " M FX M M w M ~ ~ ~ -
' " ^ ~ ' ' ' '"
f\\GUR.E lD PB APs _ RADIATION-CONTAMINATION _ DIAGRAM SHEET UNIT 2 h. UNIT 3 O i
"8 8
3 8#8 8 DOCTYPE 5 02 fl.W.P. NO. 9 - (M - OS 4 3 SURVEY NO.
OOS SURVEv8Y.9 X 1 aw u AREA._9v2 T) b tit.' 9 2,c,,r 9,m 3 *%'
...__..__,.7,*
AREA DIA. G. RAM. R EMARKS.
i
- l.. i..
i e
i l
0 1
~ M.
-,4.
y s
..,. J g.
t
...s.
7 q%.
'n
.p g._._,....q...._._a. gg. p M.
,.s
- . 4....
- .,.gpi-
.. x _....
,..._i. g..g i.
9.3.s-.y -
.!.g. _
j
,.,l,
.**4.
,.e.. #.
- .f
.....,..._..'._qg
_"pE.c.gy.c..
Pum9 l
.g...
_.g.
ega
. g' q
s.,.7..$.
...x. _
2 e*
I 6.5% 'id/ 6Y
'- ):8%
h eq
/
h nt.
!. *.f.*
??
I g, w,.ea.1 TAW.G N HEAD t
. ~,
5:(..,1"H4M h9 h '
.s LEGEND:
h ;; ;.
Q h0NTACT,8 ADIATION READING
'.a s.2PWm.. '
' #4a5%o m.sMM
Fi c, ue.G 1 E PB APS - II ADIATION-CONTAMINATIO N - DI AC R AM SHEET
(
seedssoo infen 00CTYPI 5 0 2 UNIT 2h. UNIT 30 R.W.P. NO. 7 - O I - O$ 4'2, S'tRVEY NO.
/93 DATE 08-15-M TIM E.
A330 SURVEY BY.
OhE AREA._ T y 2 pfui lita' @ ltrier 3 m> "A" AREA OlAGRAM. REMARKS j
i 3
-4
.....~
- 4....
~
..J..
.i.
M6 CIRC bt49 8
8 4
..nn.
- s. a.
.... _ _ M.r' -
2
.....p.,.,
t.
a i
e
~
j 4
-4 4
1
.I lO%n.
2 R/gg,
@f 888 b N s'sp-
- plo,cfd*
1 YY V/// /// / / / / / / i / r/ A/ t / V / / / A / / 6 l'1L $ [ O'.
/ / flN/tl
.:N
,,5 i_..
G.r.4
.I i.w
(
6kHC-@l6' 20 89 6,;
.EiZcua) r 2%e.
S',
i LEGEN0:
- j. CONTACT RADIATION REA0 LNG
Fi6 orts s g * );
..t.
g8APs RADIATION - CON AM NATION YAIRBORNE SURVEY g
08,'!;lll;"<"
g unit 2@ - uNn 3 0 h
R.w.r.NO O- %- o6 3 7
\\d SURVEY NO.NO D
$! / b !E'!
TIME O *10 0 SURVEY BY-A/
DATE -
I hJb Dl c' k Cra-e v n e +
N AR E A -
r REASON C hr. n P
I b
R ADI ATION - gggT g
,7 8 ETA GAMMA NEUTHONS TOTAL lTEM MR AO/HR MR/HR M R E M/H R MR E M/HR DISTANCE i
F. rs Ho;e F 4iis\\
A s.sr.+/c.,
60 /C 4n
. 9fa c..:
,. # 3
/
2 cl, n i n
- 1. l.o _
3 5df
'S S A [
3 o
si il NO
/E6 /nX A.A
/r ao in /d 6" A f,c/,.'
4 F. <,._ t < s, F,11..
p<M, iNO
'l f +<.
/ /C -b
/
s A m,,3
\\, x.e _
nA 7(
sf O'# C #
fd I) 3eo l;. //pe,
,, A y o h fest /5 V ? b. lL 6
ll II I1 7
F., e bse n f (-
E
., A m.
a is roc -+<.
n Sr.c. %
n
.x.
/v v y-O d.s.<' (.
g 3 me, 3 acs c CONTAMINATION - INSTRUMENT AIRBORNE - INSTRUMENT g.
SERIAL NO.
/
\\
lTEM BETA + GAMMA ALPHA SAMPLlNG OPM/100 cm2 OPM/I00 cm2 AVERAGE IOI}
FL OW R ATE COUNTER
/a
\\
/
START -
1
\\
[
STOP NO FT3/ MIN
.b b-2 (if k
[
3 Gnos
\\.
/
d "b I. [
""G C'"
C"
.. /, '7 4
j.l I cOvuTINO,uc I JO
~ '
5, l
1CQ$ ;
l*
O O l.~~l 4 [gogfj l
{
l r,. i o **
8
,,, _ j sc4 en ger I.
9 J
\\
ISOTOPES g
/
n
'_/
\\
12
/
N ia V
N h
I5
\\
16
~
REMARKS: N OT/5- '.
(2, 4, ).e gq c mm (
. ! h L.
s
Fu s otee 9 A c...
PBAPs RADIATION - CONTAMINATION - AIRBORNE SURVEY s r ris6e utv tessi UNIT 2h - UNIT 3 [
na sc i v et s o
(
R.W P. NO. l O ' - O M SURVEY NO-MS D AT E - -
T " l'1 - D TIME _
003 o SURVEY BY -
/M A R E A..- 0-% 7. D C-W4 22.A.
A-t-6 d t <.a(L*.
s' % f 5 s
R E ASON -
<-w a sv 4-c_m n i-t's W 3 [P te T T D 6,.M AtMSH R ADI ATION - INSTR UMENT SE RI AL NO.
2.9 6'41 Anf 7 R 1 TEM DETA GAMMA net /TitONS TOTAL unAoinn untnn unE uinn unsu/un DISTANCE I
st,P -
A tu etenotArG-s /a ryH A Y S t= 6 4
a
/
2
[
a
\\
4
\\
1
/.._..
..o 5
6
[
.~
8, f
CONTAMINATION - INSTRUMENT SERIAL NO.
AIRBORNE - INSTRUMENT SE RI AL NO.
ITEM OETA+ GAMMA A HA SAMPLING opufioo,m Op ion,.:
AvEnAct FLOW R ATE UNTEn
[
j START -
p STOP -
F T3 MIN.
E F-
/
3
[
,.. g.. -... _.
/
l GnO$5 COUNTS l 4 i DK G O CPM NE 1 Cf'M g
-q-I 1I
,3
$ l
.F I
,l 8
6 g.
l.
l NET CPM l
..c..C't
\\,
y 2.
j 0,:
T, I
l.l
'l. r.. i o
SCALEn EFF.
....g 3
/
/
Isoroers 10 11
/
17 f --
13 f
1A.--../....-._...
- E g
8 l.
16 REMARKS: pot p, yt S y, p o 5 4 yt.T. d.nN TRO L. ' 6- - M ia s rn.4 /n G^t T-C' t r *n % /n a *n n
I
'~
f l
o 6
[
.T
~
.t k5
!. y ;
J K
>-f-+ -
t *-
A
>ggry
?
~((
c! >W%,i!
- v:6 i!
Pst
~
t v'.4 GFM c.
xmn+g4,a 2 y
,,* y4}f r
i s.: 5 Wp!
bM f
~
! I! !
i g" M.
~
J r.
v g., i @u
- a
.x 11 r
d J,
o C y
^
g
'}
l!!-
U o
n y
.g W
h&
y ki'".
4 g
.My u
t,
,,s b
.}
~
}
P f$
d c.L J
t
'$ d h58
'C E" s.\\& J Cfl d $1 sh i
~
V hlJ 4W
()
% c a, j 1
.m
< s
.J.
7 l1 q?>Elg :d mya g
e p
~.
n h
/-
OG 4.
W 0
ed 9
O M
c
%." m..
s d
,ON m
N E.
g b
o u,
.c p
..-g
' k 3
'V
+
~
T\\w
- c. n, e
lJ I
3 s
s 3
ii I _'g d h
4 2 t e
e s
31 a
.c:
O
.3 Y
- e i
t f!
p
.w u j
~
Ik
-- f
<a
.hy' lTf pp 3
y \\,
m~
j D
0 i
-O -I O
I rA i-l l 6
i h;
+$
g n
l g
3 8.A s s
7\\
E 14{
' G Gl 9
v
.,2 m
m s
V h
b e
cj I
)
0 S
4 3
0
$,C1'Jil y
i 3 5
?,
m
')
to i a al r
M S
3 0,'
N, 'N k
l m
1 4-3% i I
h.r f5 b
R 9 '1 s,u
.n WF A.j e
4
, 'F'K}.s gRji.
4m ;!y+
a y
- e I
's
- P
.x g. :
i s3yt P1 l
el s,.
a o
ra e
j a
'I e'
\\')
g i
y 3
u Y'!
3 S /
l l
0 i
b d
li
,o / s
- , Met a
j' Eg-
).
g Y
s IM
)..
A b
(*
1 !
i
.Oi s
o
{ y'
,, Q@ < %[
R I
.)
J.*
- y i;
dr~r' e
.jt
,1w\\
i j(
a y
t e
I I
4 13
(
3!
$ l l,,
-Q) -
e
. V t
3 \\'-
h J '*w( s-@#@
n 1
1 g
a,gt{,T--
'!4@3 )a E"3 3 @ y a /- m 1 g s 3 g \\3 4 '4 v 3 -I s.f@s4;jS. d 6 h k ig 'h 4A 9 vi W<b. DIN 1 g i 1 m 2 .5fj t ,p* cy p t.)'j <, e -}}