ML20155H166
| ML20155H166 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Three Mile Island  |
| Issue date: | 10/11/1988 |
| From: | Harner K, Hofstetter K E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS & CO., INC., GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20155H117 | List: |
| References | |
| OLA, NUDOCS 8810180291 | |
| Download: ML20155H166 (31) | |
Text
I s
i detober 11, 1988 t
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION I
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
) '
GPU' NUCLEAR CORPORATION ) Docket No. 50-320-OLA
) (Disposal of Accident-(Three Mile Island Nucler.r ) Generated Water)
Station, Unit 2) )
I i
LICENSEE'S TESTIMONY OF KERRY L. HARNER AND DR. KENNETH J. HOFSTETTER ON SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS OF THE AGW (CONTENTIONS 3 and 4b) 2 i
I 0810100291 081011
, PDR ADOCK 05000320 0 PDR 4 - -,___-_ - - - _ _ , . _ - . - - , , , - - . - -. ,_,..,,,,,,y, _ _ ,mm.,.. ,-_m.,__.. cm.,,,,-._,.-y,. _ . , . . - , - , - - , , , , , - _ - ~ - - . . , - - - , - - - - , .
4-
'Q.1 Please state your names.
A.1 (KLH) Kerry L. Harner.
(KJH) Kenneth J. Hofstetter.
Q.2 Mr. Harner, by whom are you employed, and what is your position?
A.2 (KLH) I am employed by GPU Nuclear Corporation
("GPUN") at Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 ("TMI-2")
as Radiological Chemistry Manager.
Q.3 Dr. Hofstetter, by whom are you smployed, and what is your position?
A.3 (KJH) I am employed by E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co.
as a research staff chemist in the Environmental Technology Divi-sion of the Savannah River Laboratory.
Q.4 Mr. Harner, please summarize your professional qualifi-cations and experience relevant to this testimony.
A.4 (KLH) I have a B.S. degree in Chemistry, and I am a licensed Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator. Since 1974, I have
, been employed by GPUN (and its predecessor Metropolitan Edison Company) in a variety of positions involving plant chemistry at TMI-1 and TMI-2. At the present time, my responsibilities in-
- clude providing chemical and radiochemical technical expertise to all TMI-2 projects supporting defueling, plant operations, radwaste processing, and accident-generated water ("AGW") dispos-al. A ccmplete statement of my professional qualifications is appended as Attachment 1 to this testimony.
e 9
Q.5 Dr. Hofstetter, please summarize your professional qualifications and experience relevant to this testimony.
A.5 (KJH) I have an A.B. degree, and a Ph.D. degree in Chemistry from Purdue University. From 1967 to 1969, I did post-doctoral research in the Chemistry Department at Texas A & M Uni-versity. I was an Assistant Professor teaching undergraduate ,
courses in general and physical chemistry, and graduate courses [
in radiochemistry and nuclear chemistry, for five years at the l University of Kentucky. From 1974 to 1980, I was a l l
Radiochemistry l' servisor for the Allied-General Nuclear Services {
I nuclear fuel reprocessing plant at Barnwell, South Carolina.
[
From 1980 to November, 1987, I was employed by GPUN in radiochemistry support positions at TMI-2. As Supervisor of Radiochemistry, I set up and managed the radiochemistry la-boratories to support the decontamination and defueling of TMI-2.
I developed most of the radiochemical analysis procedures in use at TMI-2. As Radiochemical Engineering Supervisor, I provided technical direction for all liquid radwaste processing opera-tions, including SDS, EPICOR and RCS processing. I monitored the chemistry status of the plant, overviewed operations of the Chem-iutry Department, and provided engineering support for chemistry l and sampling activities associated with all recovery projects. I i also coordinated off-site analyses and reviewed all the results of such analyses. My present position with Savannah River La-boratories involves the development of equipment to monitor tritium at environmental levels for the Department of Energy.
A complete statement of my professional qualifications is appended as Attachment 2 to this testimony.
Q.6 What is the purpose of your testimony?
A.6 (KLH, KJH) The principal purpose of our testimony is to respond to the sub-issue identified for hearing as to whether the tritium content of the AGW has been accurately determined.
While addressing this issue, we will respond to related Joint In-tervenor statements of material facts under Contention 3, and to the single issue left under Contention 4(b).
Q.7 How is your testimony organized?
A.7 (KLH, KJH) First, we give GPUN's current estimate of the tritium content of the AGW and explain the basis for GPUN's estimate. Second, we explain why GPUN is confident that its sam-pling data is representative of the entire body of water. Third, we discuss the various sources of data on the AGW. Fourth, we will address the questions presented by the Joint Intervenors concerning the procedures followed during the sampling and analy-sia of the AGW.
Q.8 What is GPUN's estimate of the amount of tritium in the AGW?
A.8 (KLH) It is estimated that the AGW contains no more than 1,020 curies of tritium, which represents an everage concen-tration of 1.2E-1 uCi/ml in the projected 2.3 million gallons of AGW.
l l
l 1
- , - --.--,---,--,---,---.-,,----c.. , - , . , , , , , - - , -
Q.9 How was the figure of 1,020 curies of tritium derived?
A.9 (KLH) While the AGW is in a number of storage loca-tions, approximately 73 percent of the AGW.is in only four loca-tions. During the preparation of GPUN's July 1986 Report, the most recent sample data from 25 bodies of water was used and the f
concentration of each body of wster was then multiplied by ite corresponding tank volume to yield the amount of tritium present in each tank. The total inventories of tritium in each tank were then added to obtain the total curies of tritium in the AGW. The j result was a total of 1,180 curies of tritium in the AGW. .
Correcting the data in the July 1986 Report to October, 1988, for radioactive decay, a conservative total tritium curie content of 1,020 is estimated. This estimate is conservative be-cause reductions for normal evaporative losses have not been in-cluded. Table 1 contains a summary of the data presented in the July 1986 Report correctea for radioactive decay. The 1.9 mil-lion gallons of AGW present at that time has also been increased to a projected 2.3 million gallons, the maximum quantity of AGW estimated to be processed through the evaporator.
In addition to this 1986 sampling effort, GPUN has since an-alyzed about 5,000 routine samples of the AGW, including measure-ments of tritium which confirm the 1986 data. In conjunction with the routine samples analyzed by the GPUN laboratory, period-ic independent Quality Control analyses are also performed. The QC techniques include round robin, blind, duplicate, replicate,
-S-
spiked and split samples. In this way, the accuracy and preci-sion of the entire analytical process is verified frequently. In addition, a sample was analyzed independently by GPUN's chemistry department and by the U.S. Department of Energy's Radiological and Environmental Sciences Laboratory ("RESL"), Idaho Falls, Idaho, on behalf of the NRC. This analysis, as discussed further below, is consistent with the GPUN data.
Q.10 The Joint Intervenors assert in Material Statement of Fact 4(xii), under Contention 3, that the alleged changing source term of the AGW is particularly relevant to tritium. As an exam-ple, the Joint Intervenors state that Licensee relied on data from PEIS (1981) and EGG-PBS-6798 to get 3,161 curies and 4,231 curies, respectively, while TPO/TMI-043 Rev 6 (1986) shows that the cover inventory of tritium at the time of the accident was 8,794 curies. Given the above data, what conclusions do you draw with respect to the tritium source term?
A.lO (KJH) There are many computational methods available in the literature which attempt to model what might occur at the time of a reactor accident having failed fuel exposed to its cooling medium or the atmosphere. Each uses a set of assumptions i
to define the accident. Assumptions are made defining core con-l ditions, plant configuration, responses to the event and dure-tion. As would be expected, each estimate is different due to l
the assumptions made and computational method utilized.
i i
l l
l L____
l Two of the early estimates of the tritium source term at the time of the IMI-2 accident are 8,794 curies (TPO/TMI-043, Rev. 6, Data Report - Radioactive Waste Management Summary Review) and 4,231 curies (EGG-PBS-6798, TMI-2 Isotopic Inventory Calcula-tions). Both of these estimates are based on postulated condi-tions.
Another type of estimate of the TMI-2 accident tritium scurce term can be made by making an accurate inventory based on actual conditions at a particular point in time. Again, a calcu-lation is needed to combine the various input data to a single number. A tritium source term of 2,910 curies (NUREG-0683, PEIS, 1981) was based on limited sample data and source volumes in September, 1980. The GPUN tritium source term of approximately 1,180 curies, reported in July 1986, was based on much more sam-pie data and source volumes from early 1986. The quantity of tritium in the AGW continues to decrease through radioactive decay and evaporative losses.
The estimated upper-bound tritium source term of 1,020 curies, presented by GPUN in July 1986, and by the NRC in Table 2.2, NUREG-0683, Supp. 2, is a projection to October 1, 1988, taking into account only radioactive decay. Since tritium is not t produced in the fuel after the fissioning process has stopped, !
there has been no tritium added since Merch, 1979. The amount of ,
tritium present continues to decrease through radioactive decay, while some is released to the atmosphere through normal b b
f m- - - , - . , _ , . , . - , . , . . - . , , _ . - , . _ ,
t 4
evaporation. Therefore, the tritium source term estimate of 1,020 curies, which is not corrected for evaporative losses, is a realistic and upper-bound value based on actual laboratory ana-lytical results and storage location volumes of virtually all of the AG'd at TMI-2.
Q.ll Joint Intervenors' Material Statement of Fact 4(iv) under Contention 3 asserts that it is difficult to acquire an accurate assessment of the tritium concentration of water. Can you comment on the Joint Intervenors' assertion?
A.11 (KJH) Yes. As a general matter, I would like to potAt out that determining the concentration of any element in a liquid sample is an intricate process. Tritium analyses are par-ticularly difficult since tritium emits only very low energy beta >
particles. When determining tritium concentrations in liquids, two mejor interferences are (1) the presence of other beta emit-ting radionuclides in the sample and (2) the variations in counting efficiencies caused by chemical impurities in the sam-pie. Both of these interferences are addressed in TMI-2 Chemis-try Procedure 4212-CHM-3Ol3.81, which was used to analyze all tritium samples taken by GPUN.
The presence of other radionuclides which also emit beta particles (and/or gamma rays) can give a falsely high indication of the amount of tritium present in a sample. Therefore, Chemis-try Procedure 4212-CHM-3013.81 provides methods to remove the in-terfering radicnuclides using various methods -- filtration, ion exchange, or flocculation.
The second major interference comes from the presence of ,
chemical impurities either in the scintillation cocktail or the water sample itself which can produce a falsely low indication of the amount of tritium present in the sample. Chemistry Procedure 4212-CHM-3013.81 provides two methods which control these chemi-cal interferences. Ascorbic acid is added to the sample to react with any organic material and minimize its sffect on the detec-tion efficiency. The other technique requires the addition of a known amount of tritium to a second aliquot of the same sample.
This spiked aliquot is used to determine the exact counting effi-ciency for the detector in the sample matrix. Once this is known, the tritium concentration of the unspiked sample can be .
determined accurately.
Q.12 The NRC assumes that the average concentrations of radionuclides as shown in Table 2.2, of NUREG-06d3, Supp. 2 can be reasonably considered a maxim'um. The Joint Intervenors con-tend in Material Statements of Fact 4(viii) and 4(x) under Con-tontion 3 that this assumption is invalid, citing as an example the average concentration of tricium in Table 2.2 as 1.3E-1 i uC1/ml, while the Technical Specification for Processed Water Disposal lists the tritium concentration in PWST-2 as 2.1 uCi/ml.
This is also the enly issue remaining under Contention 4(b). i i Please assess the Joint Intervenors' assertion.
A.12 (KLH) I do not cgree with the Joint Intervenors' as- ,
sertion.
1 t
- -~. _ ,_
=
?
First, the values for radionuclides listed in Table 2.2 of NUREG-0683, Supp. 2 are reasonable projections of concentrations expected so exist in the influent to the evaporator. I have com-pared the projections of concentration for processed water in Table 2.2 against the RESL analyses of SDS and/or EPICOR II pro-cessed water in PWST-2 on February 24, 1987. The actual analyti-cal results for PWST-2 processed water were lower than the pro-jections of Table 2.2 for all radionuclides except tritium. This demonstrates that the data from Table 2.2 is a reasonable esti-mate which can be used for dose calculations. Since the concen-tration of tritium is not reduced by water processing, the final concentration in each storage location after processing can be no greater than the tritium influent concentration. Therefore, de-pending on which of these locations is being processed, the tritium concentration will vary. The average tritium concentra-tion is then a mathematical calculation and must be done in place of the capability to undertake a physical mixing cf the entire AGW volume in a single, homogeneous batch.
Second, the tritium concentrations at issue cannot be com-pared directly to each other. The values are a mixture of actual sample results, as well as estimates calculated using averaged numbers, actual numbers and other input at various points in time. The tritium value of 1.3E-1 uCi/ml was a mathematical pro-jection of the average tritium concentration of all the AGW on October 1, 1988, and was based on 2.1 million gallons of AGW.
The tritium value of 2.3E-1 uCi/ml was an actual analytical re-sult obtained by GPUN for a PWST-2 sample (GPUN sample number 86-15668) on October 27, 1986. It was also the result obtained for a tritium analysis performed for a sample of PWST-2 (GPUN sample number 86-17062) on November 21, 1986.
The tritium value of 2.1 uCi/ml was an error on page 43, t step 7.3 of a CPUN document titled, "Technical Specification for Processed Water Disposal for GPU Nuclear Corporation Three Mile Island - Unit 2 Nuclear Power Plant". This document is a bid specification sent to vendors and provides information necessary for them to evaluate the *ask ar.d return a proposal for construc-tion. No sample from TMI-2 ever contained tritium as high as 2.1 uCi/ml. My check of the lab results shows that the correct value for the sample in question is 2.3E-1 uCi/ml.
Q.13 Joint Intervenors' Material Statement of Fact 4(11) under Contention 3 observes that tables 2-3 and 2-4 in the July 1986 Report list 25 sources of waste water in storage at TMI with the total radioactivity in each. The concentration of tritium in f the different sources was, according to the Joint Intervenors, highly variable. Is GPUN confident that its sampling data is representative of the entire body of water?
A.13 (KJH) It is important to undecstand why there are variat',ons in the raitoactive concentrations of water in dif-ferent locations. At the time of the TMI-2 accident, some of the projected 2.3 million gallons of AGW was already on site supporting various plant operations (i.e., Bleed Hold Up, Reactor Coolant System ("RCS"), Borated Water Storage Tank ("BWST"), Mis-cellaneous Waste Hold Up). The water in these tanks had very low i to no concentrations of radionuclides.
The vast majority of the radionuclides now present in the i i
AGW came from the failed fuel via the water of the RCS through the Pressure Operated Relief Valve / Reactor Coolant ("RC") Drain Tank or through the RC letdown / purification pathway. In addi-tion, the recovery of TMI-2 has been a complex task with many t jobs proceeding in parallel. Most tasks have required water, j
] '
from small volumes for hands-on decontamination and operation of l
- the chemistry laboratory to very large volumes used for shielding in the Spent Fuel Pools (SFP-A and SFP-B) or stored for emergency use as in the BWST. Through these uses and processing, varying amounts of the highly radioactive water of the RCS found its way into tanks, sumps, piping and the Reactor Building ("RB") base-i ment. This commingling of RCS water with the listed storage lo-cations over the years has produced batches of water which are not identical in contaminant concentrations. Therefore, as in the case of tritium, the quantity or concentration of radionuclides in each storage location is dependent on the amount }
of original RCS water contained with pre-accident water or post-accident water additions. The tritium concentration of PWST-2, ;
r for example, is higher than the average AGW tritium concentra-tion. This is because the tank contains mostly processed water 1
t
- - - - - _ , . _ , . , , ~ , , - _ _ _ - ,
from the RB basement, which leaked directly from the RCS at the time of the accident. Thus, it contained very high concentra-tions of radionuclides.
Q.14 Joint Intervenors' Material Statements of Fact 4(vi) and (vii) under Contention 3 state that the analyses of the PWST-2 samples by RESL for the NRC and by GPUN gave differing re-sults for Co-60, Cs-137, and Sr-90, and that neither detected C-14, whereas an analysis by Westinghcose found C-14 at a concen-tration of 3.0E-4, greater than the average concentration listed in Table 2.2 of NUREG-0683, Supp. 2, by a factor of three. Why is there a difference in the sample results for Co-60, Cs-137, and Sr-907 A.14 (KLH) A sample of PWST-2 was obtained on February 23, 1987 (GPUN sample number 87-02569). A portion of the sample was transferred to the NRC for analysis b'] their contracted laborato-ry, RESL. A comparison of the GPUN data and the RESL data can be done on positive (greater than LLD) results for individual radionuclides. One method for comparison is outlined in the NRC "Inspection and Enforcement Manual," Inspection Procedure 84725.
This method is used to evaluate a licensee's analytical capabili-ty to make consistently accurate radioactivity measurements. The licensee's measurement is compared to a NRC or RESL measurement and a determination is made whether the two values are close enough to be in agreement. The "agreement" criteria are based on an empirical relationship which combines prior experience and the l
accuracy needs of the program. Applying the procedure to the specific GPUN and RESL data for the PWST-2 sample yields the fol-l loving results:
GPUN RESL Radionuclide Value (uCi/ml) Value (uCi/ml) Acreemeni Tritium (1.9 0.05) E-1 (1.9 0.03) E-1 Yes Cobalt-60 (2.8 1 0.7) E-7 (3.2 1 0.5) E-7 Yes Cesium-137 (7.0 1 0.3) E-6 (8.0 0.2) E-6 Yes Strontium-90 (5.8 1 0.2) E-5 (2.55 : 0.07)E-5 No The differei.ces observed between these two sets of data for tritium, co-60 and Cs-137 are not major and, in fact, are within the range of normal differences observed when comparing radiochemistry data from two separate laboratories in accordance with NRC standards.
The difference between the GPUN data and RESL data for Sr-90 results from the procedures used by the two laboratories. GPUN uses either a 72-hour or a rapid method to analyze for Sr-90 in liquid samples. GPUN quality control data for the liquid Sr-90 analysis has shown the 72-hour method to be more accurate than the rapid method; however, both are inherently conservative. The 72-hour analysis results average 40% higher than the actual, while the rapid method results average 100% higher than the actu-al concentrations at the 1E-4 uCi/mi Sr-90 level, when compared to standards or the results of split samples reported by off-site laboratories using more traditional methods.
4 .
j
< In addition, the Sr-90 analyses performed by RESL occurred ,
1 two to four weeks after the sample was obtained. During the in- )
tervening period, particulate in the sample could have settled out to the bottom or could have attached itself to the surfaces of the sample container. These processes would cause an aliquot of the sample to be lower in concentration. To preclude this potential problem, GPUN boils the sample to release Sr-90 which i
i may be bound to particulate matter.
i I also would like to point out that the environmental impact analysis in the PEIS was not calculated from these single sample -
i analytical results. The average or "hase case" data was conser- ,
vatively calculated from many sample results and assumptions made i
from knowledge of a long history of water processing through the l
SDS and EPICOR II Systems.
Q.15 Why are the analyses for C-14 at variance with one an-other?
I A.15 (KJH) The C-14 concentrations at issue vary because
' the values are a mixture of actaal sample results, averaged num-l bers and estimates or projections calculated from various input.
The C-14 value of 3.0E-4 uCi/ml is an actual sample result obtained from a PWST-2 sample (GPUN sample number 85-16198) ana-lyzed by Westinghouse. The sample date is December 23, 1985.
The C-14 value of (2.OE-7 uCi/mi is an actual sample result obtained from a PWST-2 sample (GPUN cample number 87-02569) ana-lyzed by RESL. The sample date is February 24, 1987. The C-14
-15
value of 1.OE-4 uCi/ml found in Table 2.2 of NUREG-0683, Supp. 2, is a calculated estimate based on operational experience of SDS and EPICOR II Systems and on the average of four processed water analyses performed by Westinghouse in early 1986. A calculated projection of concentration for the total volume is not the same as an actual sample result of a single portion of water. The C-14 values listed vary, but the NRC and GPUN appropriately have used the 1.OE-4 Wentinghouse average concentration for dose esti-l mates, even though RESL measured a much lower value.
1 Q.16 In Material Statement of Fact 4(11) under Contention 3, the Joint Intervenors argue that the NRC's sampling of the AGW is inadequate because the NRC took a 4 liter sample from a tank which contains one-fifth of the AGW. *s the NRC analyzed a rep-resentative sample of water available r evaporation?
A.16 (KLH) Yes. In February, 1987, the water in the PWST-2 was sampled. The sample of PWST-2 was divided between the NRC and GPUN. All of the PWST water has undergone treatment through EPICOR II or through SDS and EPICOR II. Similar pro-cessing has been given or will be given to the ACW. Whils some variations in concentrations of radionuclidos occar among batches of AGW processed through SDS and EPICOR I L.; . erage concer' trations resulting from this processing have ..t.; ooen signifi-
[
cantly different. Therefore, the PWST-2 water is representative of the TMI-2 water available for evaporation, and it has been evaluated by the NRC Staff.
1 1
l
l Q.17 Joint Interenors' Material Statements of Fact 4(iii) and (iv) claim that procedures presented in ASTM Method 3370 and l 1
4212-CHM-3013.81, p. 5.0, 6.1.7 were not followed when the AGW was sampled in February, 1987. Are the Joint Intervenors' asser-tions correct? ,
A.17 (KLH) No. In Februtry, 1987, a sample was removed I a
i from the recirculation flow path of PWST-2 in accordance with ,
i TMI-2 Chemistry Procedute 4212-CHM-3011.05, Rev. 0 (5/23/84) en-titled, "Sample Procedure." This procedure explains how one ob- 3 1
taino a r presentetive sarple from a plant system. The procedure
- does not concern analysis or testing of the water. It is used [
simply te obtain a bottle full of water from a well-mixed larger i volume, i Step 2.4 of 4212-CHM-3011.05, Section 2.0, Refereneen, in-i
followed and incorpurated into 4212-CHM-3011.05. ;
L THI-2 Chemistry Procedure 4212-CHM-30)3.81, entitled "Deter- !
! mination of Tritium By Liquid Scintillation Counting," provides a
- instructions on how to determine the tritium concentration of the >
sample. The then current version of this procedure was followed I i
1 by GPUN when the PWST-2 sample was transported to the laboratory [
! I for analysis.
l Q,18 T14 Toint Intervenors have stated in Material State- l I
l ment of Fact a... ;nder fortention 3 that Chemistry Procedure l
! 4212-CHM-301?, 'E O. ~ - (10/27/87) is an updated version i !
) -
r l
i !
I i r
. n,--, _.-r.-. . - - , , - , - - _ . , - _ . - - - . - . , - . - - , - - - - - , - - - .
of Chemistry Procedure 4212-CHM-3011.05, Rev. 0 (5/23/83). Is the Joint Intervenors' statement correct?
A.18 (KLH) No. Chemistry Procedure 4212-CHM-3013.81 is not an updated version of 4212-CHM-3011.05. They are distinct procedures that give directions for two entirely different tasks.
Chemistry Procedure 4212-CHM-3021.05 explains how a liquid sample is drawn from a plant system. Chemistry Procedure 4212-CHM-3013.81 provides step-by-step instructions which must be followed to produce an accurate and reproduceable determination of the tritium concentration in a given aliquot of sample, 1
1 4- m r -, -
- . , , - _ , . _ --,,_n: _ .---g - .-- . -..
l Table 1 TRITIUM SOURCE TERMS Volume H-3 f Tank Description Gallons Ci RCS Reactor Coolant System 67,286 2.64E+01 l PWST-1 Processed Water Storage 109,081 1.07E+02 -
PWST-2 Processed Water Storage 480,134 4.39E+02 !
CO-T-IA Condensate Storage 101,518 1.86E+01 WDL-T-9A Evap. Cond. Test Tank 5,610 2.03E+00 RDL-T-9B Evap. Cond. Test Tank 2,231 8.07E-01 CC-T-1 EPICOR II Off-Spec 20,500 8.72E+00 ,
CC-T-2 EPIC 09 II Clean 16,887 4.78E+00 l SFP-3 Spent Fuel Pool "B" 241,698 3.56E+01 l SDS-T-1A SDS Monitor 373 9.29E-02
WDL-T-1A RC Bleed Holdup 3,810 1.06E+00 ,
WDL-T-1B RC Bleed Holdup 4,420 1.88E+00 -
WDL-T-1C RC Bleed Holdup 57,116 3.12E+01 ,
BWST Borated Water Storage 458,915 9.91E+01 !
WDL-T-8A Neutralizer 8,675 2.55E+00 l WDL-T-8B Neutralizer 8,605 1.91E+00 WDL-T-2 Miscellaneous Waste Holdup 3,712 8.38E-01 WDL-T-11A Contaminated Drains 1,931 1.33E-04 WDL-T-11B Contaminated Drains 820 3.76E-05 Chem Cleaning Bldg Sump 1,680 2.47E-01 l Auxiliary Bldg Sump 5,917 2.46E+00 i Reactor Bldg Basement 43,082 3.49E+00 l SFP-A Spent Fuel Pool "A" 205,234 1.75E+02 I Deep End of Transfer Canel 58,685 5.77E+01 !
Additional Water to Proces- 391,000 i sing
- Total for Disposition 2,299,417 Ci = 1,020 {
l Average Concentration uci/mi = 1.2E-1 !
t i
- Projections other data taken from July 1986 report. l
?
ATTACH.' TENT 1
((ME: KERRY L. MARNER ADDRESS: P.O. Box 480 Middletown, PA 17057 TELEPHONE: 717-948-8709 EMPLOYMENT HISTORY:
CURRENT TITLE: Radiological Chemistry Manager DEPT./ LOC.: Site noerations - THI-2 SUPERVISOR: Dave B ;chanan, Manager, Recovery Engineering Provide Chemical and adiochemical technical expertise to all projects supporting Defueling, Plant Operations, Radwaste pro-cessing, accident gen rated water disposal and Post Defueling Monitored Storage. ,
1/82 - 1/88 - Manager, Plant Chemistry - Planned, directed and managed the activities of technical and supervisory personnel in implementing the plant chemistry program. This included training, quality control, labor relations, department administration, chemistry analyses, ra-diochemical analyses, and research and develop- ,
ment activities.
Special activities: Managed all laboratory support for recovery from microbiological fouling during defueling activities.
7/79 - 1/82 - Chemistry Supervisor - Organized and directed ;
the efforts of the TMI-2 chemistry department t including Chemists, Sample Coordinators and Chemistry Foremen.
7/76 - 7/79 - Chemistry Foreman - Supervised bargaining unit chemistry technicisns and laboratory activities ,
for plant start-up and commercial operation.
Provided system / chemistry operat!onal guidance and expertise for plant operations.
Special activities: Corrected and improved the condensate polisher performance through equip-ment modifications and special procedures.
7/75 - 7/76 - Chemist - Responsible for review and analysis of chemistry results performed at THI-1.
KERRY HARNER Page 2 1/74 - 7/75 - Chemistry T:ennician - member of the Met Ed bargaining unit responsible for performing ana-lytical chemistry for startup and operation of THI-1.
EDUCATION:
B.S. Chemistry Major - Lebanon Valley College - 1974 Certificate in Management - Messiah College (AMA) - 1984 Wastewater Picat Operators Training - Commonwealth of Peansylvania - 1978 Company Sponsored Courses: Manager Development Program Basic Supervisory Development Progr Leadership Effectiveness Training Decision Analysis Kepner Tregoe Problem Solving Radiochemistry Course for Superviso (B&W)
Labor Relations Training for Supervisors Seminars in Labor Relations, Qualit Control Time Management, Franklin Institute Senn Delaney Managing for Productivity :
Situational Leadership Laboratory Quality Assurance /Qualit Control Practices (NUS)
Managing Differences and Agreements j
PROFF.SSIONAL MEMBERSHIPS:
Member American Nuclear Society Licensed Wastewater Treatment Plant Operator PUBLICAT ONS:
Use of H 02 2 As A Biocide In Spent Fuel Pool At Three Mile Island -
Unit 2 October 1987 K. J. Hofstetter, K. L. Harner n _. _ _ _ _ _ _
KERRY HARNER Page 3 Chemistry Support For Submerged Demineralizer System Operation at Three Mile Island, September 1981. K. J. Hofstetter, C. Hitz, K. L.
Harner, P. S. Stoner, G. E. Chevalier, H. E. Collins, P. Grahn, W. F.
Pitila Condensate Polishing Experience at Three Mile Island - Unit 2, October 1979. K. L. Harner, K. H. Frederick.
l
ATTACS!ENT ;
Maan seemeth J. sofstetter office Address: 5. I. auPont de Nemours & Co., Inc.
Savannah River Laboratory Building 735-A
- Aiken, SC ;?t04 Education
- A.B. 1942 Augastana College Rock Island, IL 61245 Ph.D. 1967 Purdue University Lafayette, IN 47907 ausloveemt 51 story:
Postdoctoral Research Department of Chemistry Associate 1947-1969 Cyclotrom Institute Texas A4N University Cc11ege station, TX 77043 Assistant Professor of Department of Chemistry Chemistry 1969-1974 University of Reatucky Lgaington, RY 40506 Radiochemistry supervisor Allied-General Nuclear services 1974-1980 Analytical services Department Barnwell, sc 29413 4
Radiochemical Engineering GPU Nuclear Corporation supervisor 1980-1987 Three Mile Island Nucigar station Middletown, PA 17057 Research Staff Chemist E. 1. duPont de Nemours & Co. ;
1987-present Environmental Technology Div.
Savannah River Laboratory Aiken, SC 29808 society Aemberships and Professional Activities:
Member, American Nuclear society Member, American Chemical Society Member, Alpha chi Sigma j Member, ACs speakers Tour, 1971-1974 General Program Chairman, NUCL Div., National ACs useting, 1972 Member, GPU Nuclear speakers Bureau, 1981-1987 secretary, Central Pa. Chapter AMs, 1944-1985 Consultant, IAEA, Plutonium safeguards, 1985-1986 W .
$ +. ., ,
-w--ww w -- . --y, - - ,-
Previous Job Responsibilities:
University of Kentucky - Taught undergraduate courses in General Chemistry and Physical Chemistry and graduate courses in Radiochemistry and Nuclear Chemistry. Directed graduate research in nuclear spectroscopy, reaction mechanisms, and charged particle induced X-ray fluorescence. Grants received from Research Corporation and National Science Foundation for research programs. Member of UNI 3OR consortium at ORNL.
Allied-Ger. oral Nuclear Services - Set up radiochemistry laboratories to support nuclear fuel reprocessing. Ordered, setup, and calibrated equipment; devised methods, operating procedures, and QC program for performing analyses. Developed in-line specialized radiation instrumentation for monitoring the process. Developed plutonium seasurement system for near-real-time SNM accountability. Directed environmental analyses of samples from Chen-Nuclear Systems, Inc. on a contract basis.
Designed sampling systems for domineralizer system at TMI-2.
GPU Nuclear Corporation - As supervisor of Radiochemistry, set up radiochemistry laboratories to support decontamination and defueling of TMI-2. Devised methods, operating and calibration procedures, QC program and trained technicians. Supervised staff of chemists and technicians. As Radiochemical Engineering Supervisor, provided technical direction for all liquid radwaste processing operations, including SDS, EPICOR, RCS processing, etc. This included scheduling, prioritizing, and monitoring all radwaste processing and transfer operations to ensure regulatory compliance. Monitored chemistry status of plant and overviewed operations of Chemistry Department. Provided engineering support for chemistry and sampling activities associated with all recovery projects. Directed scientists from BPNL in DOE special analysis laboratories and reviewed all off-site analysis results.
Savannah River Laboratory - Conducting basic and applied research in environmental sciences. In charge of mobile amergency response laboratory for monitoring atmospheric and terrestrial radioactive contamination. Developing instruments to measure atmospheric particulates, gases, transuranics, tritium, C-14, I-129, etc. at environmental levels in the field. Developing on-line process instrumentation for monitoring aqueous tritium releases to the environment.
Publications:
Has presented more than 50 papers at professional meetings and has authored more than 30 papers in the scientific literature.
List of publications available upon request.
6 Papers Presented at Professional Meetings:
180 Re and 182,,,
- 1. "New Isotope 180 0s and the Decay of ,
with P. J. Daly, Bull. Am. Phys. Soc., 11, 68 (1966).
101 Re", with P.
- 2. "Decay of New 101 0s Isomers to Levels in J. Daly, BAPS, 11, 825 (1966).
- 3. "A 2- Two-Quasi-Particle State in 180W" , with P. J. Daly, International Conference on Nuclear Structure, Toyoko, Sept 1987.
- 4. "Ge(Li) Coincidence Spectroscopy of 186 0s Levels". with T. T. Sugihara, BAPS, 13, 1468 (1968).
189 0s Fopulated in the Decay of 189 Re", with
- 5. "Levels in R. J. Schroader, BAPS, 17, 674 (1972).
3 4 12
- 6. "A Comparison of He, He and C induced Nuclear Reaction Cross Sections on Heavy Mass Nuclei at Excitation Energies up to 100 Mov", with J. D. Stickler, BAPS, 17, 685 (1972).
- 7. "Comparison of 3 He, 4
He and 12 C Induced Nuclear Reactions in Heavy Mass Targets at Medium Excitation Energies", with J. D.
Stickler, Bull. Am. Chem. Soc., 40 (1972).
- 8. "On-Line Study of Short-Lived Activities for A=115", with UNISOR Consortium, APS Meeting, Winston-Salem, November 1673.
- 9. "Positrons from A-115 and A=116 Mass chains", with UNISOR Consortium, BAPS, 19, No. 4, 452 (19'J4).
189 Hg",
- 10. "Coexistence of Spnerical and Deformed Shapes in with UNISOR Consortium, BAPS, 19, No. 4, 578 (1974).
190 T1", with UNISOR Consortium, BAPS, 19, No.
- 11. "Decay of 4, 578 (1974).
189 Hg and 190 Au", with UNISOR Consortium, DAPS,
- 12. "Decay of 19, No. 4, 578 (1974).
- 13. "On-Line Study of Short-Lived Activities for A=115", with UNISOR Consortium, BAPS, 19, No. 5, 691 (1974).
- 14. "Confirmation of a New Thallius Isotope of Mass 189",
with UNISOR Consortium, BAPS, 19, No. 5, 699 (19'4).
190,191,192 T1", with UNISOR
- 15. "Positron Decay of Consortium, BAPS, 19, No. 6, 1019 (1974).
- 16. "On-Line Measurement of Total and Isotopic Plutonium Huff, R.
concentrations by Ganna-Ray Spectroscopy", with G. A.
Prindle, 21st Conference on Gunnick, J. E. Evans and A. L.
Analytical Chemistry in Energy Technology, G,atlinburg, October 1977.
- 17. "Application of on-Line Alpha Monitors to Process Streams with G. M. Tucker, J. H.
at the Barnwell Nuclear ruel Plant",
Gray and G. A. Huff, ACS Meeting, Anaheim, March 1978,
- 18. "Non-Destructive Assay of Leached Hulls for Undissolved Reactor ruel", with B. C. Henderson, J. H. Gray and G. A.
Huff, ANS Meeting, Williamsburg, May 1978.
- 19. "On-Line Radiation Monitoring Program at a Nuclear ruel Reprocessing Plant", with W. B. Stroube, 8. C. Henderson and G.
A. Huff, Trans. Am. Nucl. Soc., 30, 272 (1978),
- 20. "Application of On-Line Plutonium Isotopic Concentration with G. A. Huff, Monitors at a Nuclear ruelPrindle, Reprocessing Plant", Joint Chemical Congress of the ACS R. Gunnick, and A. L.
and the Chemical Society of Japan, Honolulu, Ag:;il 1979.
- 21. "On-Line Monitoring of Low Level Plutonium Concentrations Huff, 23rd Conference on Analytical with T. V. Rebagay and G. A.
Chemistry in Energy Technology, Gatlinburg, October 1979,
- 22. "On-Line Monitoring of Plutonium in Mixed Uranium- Huff, Fourth Plutonium Solutions", with T. V. Rebagay, and G. A.
Int. Conf. on Nuclear Methods in Environmental and Energy Research, Columbia, MO, April 1980.
- 23. "An Automated on-Line Plutonium Concentration Monitor for Rebagay Process Control and Safeguards Applications", with T. V.
and G. A. Huff, 1981 Pittsburg Conference and Exposition on 1981.
Analytical Chemistry and Spectroscopy, Atlantic City, March
- 24. "Chemistry Support for rubmerged Deminerali:er System K. L. Harner, Operation at 'hree Mile Island", with C. G. Hit:,
H. E. Collins, P. Grahn and W.
T.
P. S. Stoner, G. Chevalier, Pitka, 25th conference on Analytical Chemistry in Energy Technology, Gatlinburg, October 1981.
Three Mile "Treataent of contaminated Waste Watt 25.
Island", 1982 Water ?ollution Control Association of Pennsylvania, Pittsburg, March 1982.
- 26. "Submerged Demineralizer System Design, operation and Eichfeld, Results", with C. G. Hitz, T. D. Lookabilland S. G.
Int. Joint topical Meeting (ANS-CNA) on Decontamination of Nuclear racilities, Vol. 2, 5-81, Sept 1982.
. l l
- 27. "TMI-2 Containment Susp Cleanup using the Submerged Dominera113er System", with C. G. H 1 '; t , 1982 Annual Meeting of Am. Inst. of Chem. Eng., Los Angeles, November 1982.
- 28. "Zeolite Processing of the TMI-2 Reactor Building Sump and Reactor Coolant System", with C. G. Hitz, TANS, 43, 146 (1982).
- 29. "The use of the Submerged Domineralizer System at Three Mile Island", with C. G. Hitz, Separation Science and Technology conference, Gatlinburg, June 1983.
- 30. "Surface Characterization of Leadscrews Taken from the TMI-2 Reactor Vessel", with !!. Lowenschuss and V. F. Baston, 26th conference on Analytical Chemistry in Energy Technology, Knoxville, October 1983.
- 31. "Adherent Activity on TMI-2 Leadscrew", with V. F.
Baston and H. Lowenschuss, TANS, 45, 278 (1983).
- 32. "Experimental Examinations of TMI-2 Debris Samples Indicate Absence of Pygophoric characteristics", with W. E.
Austin, V. F. Baston and D. E. Owen, TANS, 46, 482 (1984).
- 33. "Decontamination Barrier on TMI-2 Leadscrew", with v. r.
Baston, G. M. Bain, G. O. Hayner, TANS, 46, 384 (1984).
- 34. "Radiation Effects on Resins and Zeolites at Three Mile P. J. Grant and G. J. Quinn, Island Unit 2", with J. K. Reilly, ASTM Symposium on Effects of Radiation on Materials, Williamsburg, June 1984.
- 35. "Long Ters Appearance Rate of Radionuclides in the TMI-2 Coolant", with V. F. Baston, TANS, 47, 111 (1984).
- 36. "Initial Examination of Decontamination BarrierHayner, en TMI Leadscrews", with V. F. Baston, G. M. Bain and G. O.
National Association of Corrosion Engineers Symposium, Boston March 1985.
- 37. "TMI-2 Water Chemistry", with V. F. Baston, ACS Symposium on TMI-2, Miami, May 1985.
- 38. "Adherent Activity on TMI-2 Internal Surfaces", with v.
F. Haston, ACS Symposium on TMI-2, Miami, May 1985.
- 39. "Operation of Water and Surface cleanup Systems", with C.
G. Hitz, ACS Symposium on TMI-2, Miami, May 1985.
- 40. "Cleanup of TMI-2 Domineralizer Resins", with W. D. Bond, L. J. King, J. B. Knauer, and J. E. Thompson, ACS Symposium on
' TMI-2, Miati, May 1985.
e
- m
i 1
l
- 41. "A Comparison of TMI-2 and Laboratory Results for Cesium Activity Retained on Reactor Material Surfaces", with V. F.
Raston, G. M. Bain and R. M. Elrick, ANS Winter Meeting, San Francisco, November 1985.
- 42. "TMI-2 Accident Water Cleanup Operations", with C. G.
Hitz, AIChE Meeting, Seattle, August 1985.
- 43. "Cesium Retention on Reactor Material Surfaces, Summary of Accident and Test Data", with V. F. Baston, G. M. Sain and R.
M. Elrick, Am. Inst. for Metal. Eng and Soc. of Metals, New Orleans, March 1986.
- 44. "Post-Accident TMI-2 Decontamination and Defueling", with
- v. r. Baston, Symposium on Chemical Phenomena Associated with Radioactivity Releases during Severe Nuclear Plant Accidents, National ACS Meeting, Anaheim, September 1986.
- 45. "TMI-2 Reactor Coolant System Radionuclide Accumulation Rates", with v. F. Baston, Symposium on Chemical Phenomena Associated with Radioactivity Releases during Severe Nuclear Plant Accidents, National ACS Meeting Anaheim, September 1986.
- 46. "10CTR61 Radionuclide correlations from TMI-2", with C.
P. Deltete, and P. J. Robinson, Waste Management-87, Tuscon, March 1987.
- 47. "Microorganisms, rilters and Water Clarity at TMI-2",
J with L. E. Ratonak, Waste Management-87, Tuscon, March 1987.
- 48. "Green Grows the Monster at TMI-2", with J. H. Hicks, B&W Water Chemistry Symposium, Lynchburg, April 1987.
- 49. "TMI-2 In-Vessel Hydraulic Systems Utilize High Water and High Boron Content Fluids", with V. F. Baston, L. A. Hofman and R. E. Gallagher, ANS Summer Meeting, Dallas, June 1987.
- 50. "TMI-2 RCS Activity and Solids Loading from Aggressive Defueling Techniques", with V. F. Baston, ANS Summer Meeting, Dallas, June 1987.
- 51. "Resolution of TMI-2 Reactor Vessel Water Clarity Problem", EPRI Radwaste Managemant Seminar, Boulder, July 1987.
- 52. "10CrR61 Isotopic Correlations at TMI-2", EPRI Radwaste Management Seminar, Boulder, July 1987.
- 53. "Identification and control of Microorganisms at Three Mile Island Unit-2", with B. S. Ausmus, Topical Meeting on TM!.-2 Accident: Materials Behavior and Plant Recovery Technology, Washington D.C., November 1988.
l
l
(
1 1
Papers Published in Scientific Journalst j
- 1. "DecayPropertiesofygutrog8gefic{ggtOsmiuf8fndRhenium g
Isotopes. I. Decay Modes of Re, Re, Os and Os", with P. J. Daly, Physical Review, 152, 1050 (1966).
- 2. "Determination of Copper Alloys by rast Heutron Activation", with P. J. Daly and P. Schmidt-Bleek, J. Chem. Ed. -,
44, 412 (1967).
- 3. "Decay Properties of Neutron Deficient Ossium and Rh9nium Isotopes. II. The A-180 Decay Chain", with P. J. Daly, Phys.
Rev., 1F'. 1000 (1967).
195m Ir", with 2.
- 4. "The Decay of 19S Ir and J. Daly, Nuclear Physics, A106, 382 (1967).
97 Nb", with T. T. Sugihara,
- 5. "The Decay of 97P.u, 97ZR and Nuclear Physics, A140, 658 (1970).
101 Re",
- 6. "The Level Structure of 181 W from the Decay of with P. J. Daly, K. Ahlgren and R. Hochel, Nuclear Physics, A161, 177 (1971).
189 0s populated in the Decay of
{g9 "Levels in Re", Zeitschrift fur Physik, 261, 143 (1973).
$85 Re(p,2n)
"The Level structure of 184o , gro,184 It Decay and In-Beam Spectroscopy", with R. Hochel and P. J. Daly, Nuclear Physics, A211, 165 (1973).
- 9. "Effect of St ong Rotation-Particle Coupling of the Energy Levels o Applicationto{8Jw-Quas{ggeticleSystemswithPossible It and It", with G. T. Emery, R. Hochel and P. J. Daly, Nuclear Physics, A211, 189 (1973).
100 0s as Populated from the Decay of 15.8hr "Levels in
{h6 Ir", with T. T. Sugihara and D. S. Brenner, Phys. Rev., C8, No. 6, 2442 (1973).
4
- 11. "Comparison of 3 He , He , and l C-Induced Nuclear Reactions in Heavy Mass Targets at Medium Excitation Energies. I.
Experimontal Cross sections", with J. D. Stickler, Phys. Rev.,
C9, 1064 (1974).
- 12. "Comparison of 3 He , He , and 12 C-Induced Nuclear Reactions in Heavy Mass Targets at Medium Excita 7n Energies.
II. Reaction Model Calculations", with J. D. Sticaler, Phys.
Rev., C9, 1072 (1974).
- 13. 116 "On-Line Mass Separator with UNISOR Consortium, Investigation Phys. Rev.,ofC13, New1601 Isotope 2.9 (1976).
see I ,
- 14. "On-Line Measurement of Total and Isotopic Plutonium Concentre.tions by Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy", with G. A. Huff, R.
Gunnick, J. E. Evana and A. L. Prindle, Analytical Chemistry in Nuclear ruel Reprocessing, ed. W. S. Lyon, Pr.incetoni Science ;
Press, pp 266-274, (1978).
- 15. "Application of on-Line Alpha Monitors to Process Streams in a Nuclear ruel Reprocessing Plant", with G. M. Tucker, R. P.
Kenmerlin, J. H. Gray and G. A. Huff, Nuclear Safeguards Analysis, D.C., pp ed. E. A. Makkila, ACS Symposium Series 79, Washington 124-143, (1978).
- 16. "Non-Destructive Assay of Leached Hulls in a Nuclear ruel Reprocessing Plant", Analytical Measurement Methods for duelear Materials Safeguards, ed. H. T. Yolken and J. E. Bullard, National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 528, (1978).
- 17. "On-Line Monitoring of Low-Level Plutonium Concentrations", with T. V. Rebagay and G. A. Huff, Radioelement Analysis, Progress and Problems, ed. W. S. Lyon, Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, pp 281-292, (1980),
- 18. "on-Line Radiation Monitoring Program at a Nuclear ruel-Reprocessing Plant", with W. B. Stroube, 8. C. Henderson and G.
A. Huff, Nuclear Technology, 49, No. 3, 443, (1980).
- 19. "On-Line Monitoring of Plutonium in Mixed Uranium-Plutonium Solutions", with T. V. Rebagay and G. A. Huff, Analytical Chemistry, 54, No. 1, 8, (1981).
- 20. "Chemistry support for Submerged Domineralizer System operation at Three Mile Island", with C. G. Hitz, K. L. Harner, Chevalier, H. E. Collins, P. Grahr. and W. F.
P. S. Stoner, G. S. Lyon, Pitka, Analytical Chemistry in Energy Technology, ed. W.
Ann Arbor Science, Ann Arbor, pp 301-322, (1982).
- 21. "The Use of the Submerged Demineralizer System at Three Mile Island", with C. G. Hitz, Separation Science and Technology, 18, No. 14&l5, 1747, (1983).
- 22. "Radionuclide Analysis Taken During Primary Coolant Decontamination at ThreeHitz, Mile Island Indicate General V. F. Baston and A. P.
Circulation", with C. G.
Malinauskas, Nuclear Technology, 63, No. 3, 461, (1983).
- 23. "Surface Characterization of Leadscrews Taken fram the TMI-2 Reactor vessel", with H. Lowenschuss and V. F. Baston, Analytical Spectroscopy, ed. W. S. Lyon, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 293, (1984).
- 24. "Circulation within the Primary System at TMI-2 with Lowered Coolant Level and at Atmospheric conditions", with V. F.
Baston and A. P. Malinauskas, Nuclear Technology, 69, No. 3, 308, (1985).
l l
l
- 25. "Water Chemistry", with V. r. Baston, The Three Mile l Island Accident: Diagnosis and Prognosis, ed. L. M. Toth, ACS symposium series 293, Washington D.C., 108, (1986).
- 26. "Adherent Activity on Internal surfaces", with V. F.
Baston, The Three Mile Island Accident: Diagnosis and Prognosis, ed. L. M. Toth, ACS Symposium Series 293, Washington D.C., 124, (1986).
- 27. "Water Cleanup System", with C. G. Hits, The Three Mile Island Accident: Diagnosis and Prognosis, ed. L. M. Toth, ACS symposium series 293, Washington D.C., 228, (1986).
- 28. "Cleanup of Domineralizer Resins", with W. D. Bond, L. J.
Ring, J. B. Knauer and J. D. Thompson, The Three Mile Island Accident: Diagnosis and Prognosis, ed. L. M. Toth, ACS Symposium Series 293, Washington D.C., 250, (1986).
- 29. "Antimony Telluride Formation Hypothesized from Reactor Coolant system sample Data", with V. F. Baston, Nuclear Technology Letters, 73, No. 1, 125, (1986).
- 30. "Post-Accident TMI-2 Decontamination and Defueling", with V. F. Baston, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Report NUREG/CP-0078, 4-37 (June 1987).
- 31. "TMI-2 Reactor Coolant System Radionuclide Accumulation Rates", with V. F. Baston, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Report NUREG/CP-0078, 4-53 (June 1987).
- 32. "A Comparison of Measured Radionuclide Release Rates from i Three Mile Island Unit 2 Core Debris for Different oxygen Chemical Potentials", with V. F. Baston and R. F. Ryan, Nuclear Technology 76, 377 (1987).
- 33. "Characterization of Reaction Gases and Aerosols from Underwater Plasma Arc Cutting Demonstration Tosts", with V. F.
Baston and R. Karuhn, Nuclear Technology (in press).
- 34. "Characterization of Suspended Particles in TMI-2 Reactor
- Coolant Samples", with R. Akamine and V. r. Baston, Nuclear Technology (in press).
- 35. "The Identification and control of Mteroorganisms at Three Mile Island Unit-2", with B. S. Ausmus, Nuclear Technology (to be published)
. . . _ _ _ . _ , - . _ ._ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _. - -- - -_.