ML20198R265
| ML20198R265 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Iowa |
| Issue date: | 01/06/1999 |
| From: | DUKE ENGINEERING & SERVICES |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20198R218 | List: |
| References | |
| 00752.F02.A01, 00752.F02.A01-R00, 752.F2.A1, 752.F2.A1-R, NUDOCS 9901080139 | |
| Download: ML20198R265 (87) | |
Text
_ _ , _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ' - " - - - - - ' ' - ' ' ' - ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' -
_ 4
'Y
~
. . . ,s .
,.,i
- h
~
y usi s yy en:: eq -
,plQ lll
, - ,%a s , s f hdp U N
?yww'
,1 ,my v' y
~;,[,
z e
~
- Q ^% % A- _'a% ? {f0 -.t-, .
- :
Characters. ze t. on R(;?f~d[f{?
~
g;,$)yj n_a~nttheJo ,==nWR a ,u GN,_E2 e n
Je d$d $wa: State:Univen.lg7-*4p e @;
HD Rd TFiI 3i$7 l5 qL ! ,.
k hkh h m) HER 7 0 2 ? L i n c Af f 4E " . ,
g g _gghk n ; ;;g%gg ~$gAg BR;IS9$'gg%q
,4 p HyGj gp y4f 9 0t %s y m i.l Q j' 1g wg:
4 10 -
ri' du; D g-:n 3 44fMy4 J agg
.:pWR~
n p up 319 3 pge Whi ($ y&q R,gg a?chf
-m a m mq Mn 4 %u %o "Q. dd Qi[y x ( Rf%$ a d%
cr&q
"$w i
98!jQ4 - MJNd ~, ? %g k
<g4
- N - N ~ N ~ "
NY 2r ~f (Ng y yn QWN%g ag f: gg gdh5i!%y;MW
' ' 'me :w f4%.'nnq'Lt,n~j hh m%. + :
~'
.,r,
' E
- 'y ;-y y ;
( a. .m yo; "a
t f
[NY .k -~-
,_.g 4 L .yn?3 y bQQ;.:9 ;
- f;N Q7:',, ,
{; j g
~l e
- , ?'
~.
}p,- y.
+ =qj g
~
r,y -
j gg+ ,g n m m ys had e
9901000139 990106 PDR ADOCK 05000116i
- {Mg&Duke SerFlCeS~ Engineering up-P PDR i' A Mc0 %"1
e-Y w %
c w,
,: ,t Iga Character *xat*on Repoet
~
/,
1% L w m.
for ,
the
~ ~ ~ , _
Cl ; y 20,,~wg;<g08
.,;$ y g 3 q.
MIowa St; ate Univers ty11:Or:,%
y .' ;
,4
. nh ,9 ygesp..
,, . ~ _; : - # '
4 m. .94 si- R ; , t;j 4
- f. + -
. .~ s a'.e *' f - -
T U T R H O Itb an c M.M't' i+M dV
.+
._ a-m n m , +
a q 4 ? y ,
l
_u s a.a s e o .g,.,. ' y y s -
Qin , d;3 M.~M aa i
"4:
- Mh,'
v w; p:s n
=
kN
%g }p)+;,
4 ..- !f:5, ' h.:
O tg[--$ y<T f y"' @ p; pp p I ~ ,I -
Q' HA 51Ris q(O ErjW EG4 !?$ , f lig t@; ut;f @ WW ip ' _
y.
m
< l ; t.
5),. h,.) . % l@
iMO 4 Mx 9s '
R
> U.uM.
e s .g m, 5;i: ik> '
$?...
. ' ~?' ;' : "
Cx0Nm: LR l;))[g[ CA ud ?k L- -""""~"L'
,, s e; i t. k 'li
- 'a f ,M_3; fM ;- Wllb J g ., -
a N. ,,
~
(l%l 4 v: , -> m.,
-~. ?-
14J ^ <
,Jmom au~ w-"] ..
gj
_e'
'qV : '. ?'Y. y l,
3' g&L ;+ xy 74, -
-(pgf ;g;., :_su ; 'n .
a> .-
":=:a.i f .'.,-
} ,,s ,
K* h .v..
9.ww -b f:?_W r_
i p.
vs+phij ,_
f
.,:s +
ik 1
^
< . A r{ ,
- 4. s %. * $
.4 UY W ..
- - ~r y ,
M; g ,,
,, ?[Q@' i;p4 -
lH:'p 7}
id@!1.
,,,~7if,', '% ,
4 jQ ,.
g{e}pp . , , h *~ ,
4 9901080139 990106 L"% Duke Engineering P
PDR ADOCK 05000116 L & SerVICOS.
PDR A 0+ Ewaampv
. D Duinw Engineering
. EdD Serviscs.
- A N"%W CHARACTERIZATION REPORT FOR THE IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY UTR-10 REACTOR January 1999 Prepared by Duke Engineering & Services Bolton, MA Docuners Na (Xn52.R)2.A01 Rev.O
L D Duke Engineering
[ (UU Services.
A D*5=e Cay =w TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
. .. ...... .. . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...............1
[ 1.1 Facility Description. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............I 1.2 Historical Data Review..... ... ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......3
( 2.0 RADIOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION SURVEY OVERVIEW. ....... ..............4 2.1 Scope of the Characterization Survey... .. .. . ......... ... .....................4 2.2 Initial Area Classification .. ...... ... .. .. .. ........ . . .. . .. . 4 7 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
L 2.3 Survey Unit Designation . .. . .. .. . .. ..... . . .. . . .. .............................4 2.4 Survey Location Des 3 nation ... .... ........ . ... . . .. .... . . ... .. ... ..............6 2.4.1 Referenee Coordinate System.. .... . ....................................6
{ 2.4.2 Survey Location Codes...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....6 3.0 SAMPLING OBJECTIVES ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .............8
[' 3.I Sampling Purpose ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................................8 3.2 S urvey Methodology .. . . .. . .. . .. . ... . . . . . . .. . ... .. . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . . ...........................8
[ 4.0 S AM PLING APPRO AC H . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................9 4.1 Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4.2 Measurement Frequencies ... . ....... .. ... . . ....... . ... . .... . . .....9
{
4.2.1 Scan s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...................................... ...............9 4.2.2 Total Surface Contamination . ..... . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................10 4.2.3 Exposure Rates. .. .. .. ...... .. .... . . .. . . ...................................I1
{
4.2.4 Removable Surface Contamination....... ....... .. ........ .................. .. . . ..12 4.2.5 Bulk Materials. ...... .......................................................13 4.3 Sample Shipments .. ....... ....... .. . ......... ... .... ......................................I3
[ 4.4 Procedure References . . . .. ... . ...... ........ .. .... ........... . . . . .................13 5.0 D ATA AN ALYS IS METHO DS .. . .. .. . . . . . .. . . . . . ... . . . . . .. .. . . . . .. ... .. . . . .. . . .. . . . .. . . . .. . .. ... 14
[
5.I Background Determination.. . ....... .......... ..... ..... .. ..... .... ... .................14 5.2 Minimum Detectable Concentration Determination..... . .... . .......... ..... . . ......14
[ 6.0 Q U ALITY AS S U RANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 7.0 RES ULTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . ........................ .......................17
{ 7.1 Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) Determination... .... .. .. . . . ...17 7.2 B ackground Determination . . . .. ... ... . . .... . ... . . .. . . . . . . .. . .. . . . .. .. . . . ... . . . .. . .. . . . ... .. . 17 7.3 Survey Unit Results Summary......... .. . . .. ...........................................18
[
7.3.1 CBA01............................................................. . . . . . . . . . 19 7.3.1.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination . . ............ ... ... 22 '
I 7.3.1.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination . ...
t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... 22 ,
s 7.3.1.3 Removable Surface Contamination ......... . ........ . .. .... . .. . . 23 7.3.2 CB A02. . . ................................................................. . 24 f 7.3.2.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination. .. . . ............26
[
t Damment No. 00752.F02.A01 i Rev.O t
lD Duke Engineering WOuServic s.
A D* E=ry %=9 TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 7.3.2.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination . .. ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 7.3.2.3 Removable Surface Contamination. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27 7.3.3 CBA03............................................. .................28 7.3.3.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination . .. ... . . . . . . 30 7.3.3.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination ...... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 7.3.3.3 Removable Surface Contamination.. . . . . . . . . . . .... 31 7.3.4 CB A04 . . . .. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................32 7.3.4.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Centamination .. . . . . .. . . . . 34 7.3.4.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination . . . . . . . . . . .. .34 7.3.4.3 Removable Surface Contamination. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 7.3.5 CB A05.. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........................35 7.3.5.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination .. .. ... . ..... .. .. . 38 7.3.5.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination. . . . . ...............38 7.3.5.3 Removable Surface Contamination. .. ... . ... . ........39 7.3.6 NELO 1... .............. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................40 7.3.6.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination . . .................42 7.3.6.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination .. . ...... . . .. .. . . . . ... 42 7.3.6.3 Removable Surface Contamination .. ....... . .. . . .............43 7.3.7 N ELO2.......... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................44 7.3.7.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination . . . ... ..... ... . .. . 46 7.3.7.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination .. . .... .. .. . .. . . .. . 46 7.3.7.3 Removable Surface Contamination .. .. .... . ... . .. ....... . . . 47 7.3.8 NELO3..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48 7.3.8.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination.. .. .............50 7.3.8.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination . .. .................50 7.3.8.3 Removable Surface Contamination .. . . .... . .... .. ... . . . .51 7.3.9 VSIO1........................................................................52 7.3.10 Fuel Storage Pit . . . . ......... ........ . ...... . . . . .........................52 7.3.10.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination . .. . . . . . . . . . 54 7.3.10.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination. ........ .. . .. . 54 7.3.10.3 Removable Surface Contamination . .. . .. . .... ..... .. . . . 54 7.4 Average Exposure Rate levels.... .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .... . 55 7.5 Elevated Measurement Summary...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. . . 5 9 7.6 Bulk Material Radionuclide Inventory. .. .. . .. . . . . . . ...............61 7.7 Quality Assurance Samples.. ... . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 61 7.8 Hazardous Materials Characterization Results. . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . . 61
8.0 CONCLUSION
S .... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 64 l 8.1 CB A01. ... .. .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 l 8.2 CB A02. .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ... . . . . . . . 64
! 8.3 CB A03 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. .. . ... . . 64 8.4 CB A04. . .... .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 8.5 CB A05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 66 Docunas No. 00752.F02.A01 jj Rev.O
B Duke Engineering EdO Services.
Adde %cmy y TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 8.6 NELO1. . . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 8.7 NELO2. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. 66 8.8 NELO3....................................................... . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 8.9 VS I01. . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 8.10 Fuel Storage Pit... ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 8.1I Hazardous Materials.... . . .. . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 9.0 INPUTS TO THE FINAL STATUS SURVEY DESIGN..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 9.1 Final Status Survey Unit Classification... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 9.2 Demonstrating Compliance with Dose-Based Regulation... . ................70 9.2.I D CG Ls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .70 9.2.2 Final Status Survey Design Inputs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 9.2.2.1 Relative Shift. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ................71 9.2.2.2 Estimated Sample Size.. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 72 9.2.2.3 Background Reference Areas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..........73 10.0 DOC U M ENTATIO N . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 7 10.1 Field Log Book... ... ... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............77 10.2 Instmment Calibration and Quality Control.. . .. ............................77 10.3 Training Records. . . .... .... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........................77
- 10.4 Personnel Exposure Records . ...... ......... . .. .... ..... .. . ....................77 11.0 REFE REN CES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. 78 l
i l
l I
i r
l i
i i
Dacunx::a No. 00752.IU2.A01 iij Rev.O
D Duke Engineering CO Services.
t ADerBuer am LIST OF FIGURES l Figure 1. Facility Layout .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. 2 l Figure 2. CBA01/ Reactor Room Floors and Lower Walls . .. ..... . . . . . .................20 Figure 3. CBA01/ Process Pit... .. ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .....................21 Figure 4. CB A01 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data.... . . . .. . .... . . ... ... .. . 22 Figure 5. CB A01 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data . . ...... ..... .. . .. . ...... .... .... ..... . . . 22 Figure 6. CBA01 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination... . .. . . .... .. 23 Figure 7. CBA01 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination.... . . .. ... ... 23 Figure 8. CB A02/ Reactor Room Upper Walls / Ceiling.. ... ... ... . ...... ... .. ...... .. .. . . . 25 Figure 9. CB A02 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data. ... . . ......................26 Figure 10. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data. .... . ... .. ........................26 l Figure 11. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination... . . . . . . . . 27 Figure 12. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination...... . .. .. . 27 Figure 13. CBA03/ Miscellaneous Equipment.. . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .................29 Figure 14. CB A03 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data. .. ..... ..... ..... . . . . . . . . 30 Figure 15. CB A03 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data . . . ... .. .... . . . . . . . . . .........30 Figure 16. CBA03 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination.... ..........31 Figure 17. CBA03 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination.. ... .. . . 31 Figure 18. CB A04/ Reactor Internal Surfaces......... ... .. ................ . .. .. . .. . . . . .... . 33 Figure 19. CBA04 Gross Count Rate Results for Beta /GammaTSC Data.. ... ... ... .. ..... . .. 34 Figure 20. CBA04 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination.... ..... ...... .. 35 Figure 21. CBA04 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination.... .. ....... ... 35 Figure 22. CB A05/ Reactor Housing External Surfaces ... . .. . ...... .... .... ........... . . . . .. 36 Figure 23. CB A05/ Shield Tank .. ... .. ..... ... ......... ... . . ...............................37 Figure 24. CBA05 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data. ......... .. . . ...... ... ... .. ..38 Figare 25. CB A05 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data . ....... .... .. ... . ... ... . . .........38 Figure 26. CBA05 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination.... ... . . ... .. 39 Figure 27. CB A05 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination.. . .............39 Figure 28. NELO1/ Basement level . ... . ... ... .. ... ..... .... .......................................41 Figure 29. NEL01 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data........ ... . . ... .. . ..............42 Figure 30. NELO1 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data.. . . .. .. ...... ..... .... ..... ... . ... . . .. .. 42 Figure 31. NEL01 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination .. .... . ........... 43 Figure 32. NEIAl Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination . .... . ...... .. . 43 Figure 33. NELO2/ Level 1. .... . .... . ... ..... . . .. .. . .....................................45 Figure 34. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data..... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . 46 Figure 35. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data.. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .........46 Figure 36. 'NELO2 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination . .. . . . . . . . 47 Figure 37. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination.. . . . . . . . . . 47 Figure 38. NELO3/Le vel 2 . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 9 l
Figure 39. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data... .... .......... ... . . . . . . .50 Figure 40. NEIA3 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data... ......... .. .. .. .. . . . . . . .............50 l Figure 41. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Deta Removable Surface Contamination . . . . . . . .. .. 51 Figure 42. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination.. . . .. . 51 I
Docunent No. 00752.f02.A01 iy Rev.O
B Duke Engineering EdG Serviscs.
A DkTmvCamay LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure 43. Fuel Storage Pit .. ..... ..... .. ......... .. . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. .. .. ... .. 53 Figure 44. Fuel Storage Pit Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data. .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . 54 Figure 45. Fuel Storage Pit Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination. ... . 55 Figure 46. Fuel Storge Pit Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination .. .. . 55 i Figure 47.
Figure 48.
Average Exposure Rates - Basement Level . ... . . ..
Average Exposure Rates - Level 1....... .. ... . . .
.. . 56
.57 Figure 49. Average Exposure Rates - i.evel 2.. .. . .... .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . .58 I Figure 50.
Figure 51.
Reactor Activation Profile - Plan View.... .. . .. .... . . . . .. .
CB A0l Gross Count Rate Summary (by material) . . . . . . . . . . . .... ..
.. .. . . 65 ,
. . .... 73 j Figure 52. CB A02 Gross Count Rate Result Summary (by material).. ...... . . 74 I
Figure 53. CB A05 Gross Count Rate Summary (by material) . ... . ... ..... . . . . . . .. . . . 74 Figure 54. NEL01 Average Ccant Rate Results (by material).. . .. . ... . . .... . .. . 75 Figure 55. NEL Survey Units Average Count Rate Result..... . .. .. . ... . . . . . .. 75 I
I I
I I
I I
\
l Document No. 00752.f02.A01 y Rev.0
[
Ku>O Services. Duke Engineering Adder-w%
LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Characterization Survey Unit Classification and Description ....... ... . . .. . . .. .... ... 5 Table 2. Survey Location Code Index...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......7 Table 3. Nuclear Engineering 12boratory Characterization Instmmentation.. ... .... .. ...... . . 9 Table 4. S can S urvey S ummary .. . . . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Table 5. Total Surface Contamination Measurement Summary...... .. ... ... . . ....... .. .... . . 12 Table 6. Survey Area Background Determination (Beta-Gamma TSC) ... ..... . . . . . . . . . . . .. I 8 Table 7. VSIOI Survey Location Descriptions and Results .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............52 Table 8. Elevated Local Area Background levels. .. . .... . ........... ... .. . ................59 Table 9. Elevated Measurement Summary *........ .. .... ... .. ............. ... . ...................60 Table 10. Bulk Material Sample Results. . . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 61 Table i1. Final Status Survey Unit Designations and Classifications.... .... .. .... .......69 Table 12. Bulk Material Composite Sample 10 CFR Part 61 Analytical Results Summary.. . . 70 Trole 13. ISU Site-Specific DCGLs.. .. ........................................................71 ;
Table 14. Calculated Relative Shifts......... ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72 Table 15. Estimated Survey Unit Sample Sizes... . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......72 Table 16. Background Reference Area Material Groups.. .. ... ....... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .76 i
Docenent No. 00752.H)2.A01 vi Rev.0
) EdO Service,s.. a. a., ,,,
ADhEnny W LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix A Characterization Work Plan Originals . . . . .. . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .. A-1 Appendix B Field Instmment Calibration Records . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ..................B-1 Appendix C Source and Background Response Determination Sheets ... . ................C-1 Appendix D Beta / Gamma Scaler Measurement Raw Data.. . . . . . . . . . . . . ..............D-1 Appendix E Alpha Scaler Measerement Raw Data .... ... .. ....... . . .....................E-1 Appendix F Exposure Rate Raw Data.... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . F- 1 j Appendix G Field Scan Raw Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. ............G-1 Appendix H 10 CFR Part 61 Analysis Results.... .. ... .. ........ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... H- 1 Appendix 1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination Reduced Data.. ....... . . .. . . . . . . . . . I- 1 Appendix J Alpha Total Surface Contamination Reduced Data.. . ... . . .. . .. . . .. .. ..J-l Appendix K Beta Removable Surface Contamination Data. ... .. . . ... . . . . . . . . . . . ... K-1 Appendix L Alpha Removable Surface Contamination Data..... . ......................L-1 Appendix M Field Log Book Records... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...........M-1 Appendix N Personnel Training Records .... ... .. . .. ....... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. N-1 Appendix 0 Personnel Exposure Records .. .. . . . . ... .... ....................O-1 Appendix P Hazardous Materials.. ..... . .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................P-1 l
1 1
I l
I f
Daniment No. 00752.F02.A01 vii Rev.O f
L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
A Duke Engineering MGADaB=a Servicas.c avay
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Duke Engineering and Services, Inc. (DE&S) performed a characterization of the Iowa State
{ University's (ISU) Universal Training Reactor (UTR-10) Nuclear Engineering Laboratory.
This characterization was initiated in July 1998 and completed in September 1998.
Characterization survey data was collected in the Fuel Storage Pit in July 1998 to allow for the
{ storage of fuel during the characterization phase, thus allowing access to the n: actor core and minimizing personnel exposures.
[
This characterization / sampling plan (Ref. 2) was developed using the Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM) which provides detailed guidance for
[ planning, implementing, and evaluating environmental and facility radiological surveys conducted to demonstrate compliance with a dose- or risk-based regulation.
[ 1.1 Facility Description The Nuclear Engineering Laboratory is located on the west edge of the main campus
( of ISU, in Ames, Iowa. The facility is a two-story, three-level building of brick constmetion built in 1934 by the U.S. Depanment of Agriculture and deeded to the University in 1946.
The building floor space is divided between four levels: the basement (west side only),
the ground floor (which includes the central bay), the first floor (west side only) and the second floor which surrounds the central bay. The central bay is approximately 34 feet high and has a floor area of 37 feet by 56 feet, of which a space approximately 37 p feet by 38 feet is allocated to the reactor room. The reactor room houses the reactor t which is enclosed in a concrete biological shield, the Process Pit, the Fuel Storage Pit, and a five-ton bridge crane. See Figure 1 for the facility layout.
[ The ISU UTR-10 is a reactor of the Argonaut type which used uranium enriched to 19.75% in U-235 in a graphite reflected, water moderated core. The reactor was installed in 1959 on the ground floor level, central bay area, of the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory. In 1991 the reactor fuel was changed from the original high-enrichment uranium to low-enrichment uranium. Reactor control was achieved with four window-shade type Boral control rods. Heat from fission was removed from the primary coolant by a 34,000 BTU /hr shell-and-tube heat exchanger that utilized city water for a heat sink. The reactor was designed to be inherently safe and automatically shut down on a loss of AC power or if parameters imponant to safety were exceeded.
The enclosure surrounding the reactor facility includes the central section of the building defined by the interior walls of offices, laboratories, and corridors.
D(uman Nn 00752.F02.A01 Page 1 of 78 Rev.0 T
A Duke Engineering EdO Services.
Avaamm Figure 1. Facility Layout E
Nuclear Engineering Laboratory lowa State University, Ames, Iowa Bosement First Floor
[Tist6fl
=a . .
,. #....... % 3 . _ _ _
h iM
~
- . nh C 1
l NEL-Ol l . o o u . ,- - . - . _
/
n -- .
. . ,) i 5 --
0 I
g _
- -- . . i-e r w.
m ,d I
~
} Tm? l
'lI Eg Second Floor Central Boy Area 5 Ton Proceu g INEt43] Crone p
4 11ll11111llll jE I I f
/
~
McEnfj u
, 4 ceAEil .
~
Fuel cm.n Storo ( \ U /
N h IcaA-02( g IcBA41]
a y
I d -
i 1 compartment yw H~
I o ......,. _ ., _ ~ . r. ya ...,a m,,
i I
b Duke Engineering l EdQ Services.
A DaTmyCaymy The reactor is provided with multiple experiment facilities as follows: (1) Beam Ports, (2)
Thermal Column, (3) Shield Tank, (4) Intemal Reflector, (5) Rabbit Tube, and (6) Radiation Cavity.
l 1.2 Historical Data Review Routine radiological survey data collected by ISU in 1997 and 1998 indicate dose rates in the central general areas of the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory (all 3 elevations) and on the reactor floor (including the Process Pit) are not greater than background 2
and removable contamination was less than 200 dpm/100 cm (beta / gamma).
Selected excerpts from health physics notes indicate core radiation levels as follows:
Using an ion chamber on 11/19/87 e Maximum exposure rates were 6 mR/hr ( /y) along sides of the wall above steel structures e Remaining exposure rates were in the range of 3 mR/hr ( ly) to 4 mR/hr ( /y)
The most recent exposure rate data collected (on 9/13/98) at the reactor housing area prior to implementation of the characterization was as follows:
- 0.5 mR/hr 1 meter above core surface j e 2.0 mR/hr on average 4" above top of graphite
- 3.0 mR/hr maximum (between two of th' antrol rod housings) j e 8.0 mR/hr 3 feet into core tanks (below tt j of graphite) I e 6.0 mR/hr at surface of the bottom of one of the shutdown closures A review of audits conducted by the Atomic Energy Commission and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission indicate there were no instances of unusual events which caused any area to become contaminated.
Interviews with ISU personnel, and a review ofISU records, indicate there have been no known instances of contaminating events, no areas ever posted as a " Contaminated Area," and no instances of airborne contamination, with the exception of short-lived noble gases, l
t l
Docunrnt No. 00752.f02.A01 Page 3 of 78 Rev, O
1 B Duke Engineering EdQ Services.
A Ne amp an,*,
2.0 RADIOLOGICAL CHARACTERIZATION SURVEY OVERVIEW l
2.1 Scope of the Characterization Survey The characterization survey included all surfaces and stmetures located within the i
Nuclear Engineering 12boratory. Areas that were initially defined "potentially l contaminated" received the highest frequency of survey. The external surfaces of equipment and systems located on the reactor floor (including the 5-ton bridge crane, Control Panel, and Process Pit equipment) were surveyed as part of this l chara terization. Smears collected from the accessible internal surfaces of equipment and systems (Dilution Tank, Reactor Room Floor Drains, and Dump Tank) were also assessed during the characterization survey.
I 2.2 Initial Area Classification The level of survey coverage can be tailored based on the potential presence of contamination. To provide an overall planning basis for the characterization survey, l
the facility was initially subdivided into Class 1, Class 2 or Class 3 areas, using the following criteria:
l
- Class 1: Areas that have, or had prior to remediation, a potential for radioactive contamination (based on site operating history) or known contamination (based on previous radiological surveys).
- Class 2: These areas have, or had prior to remediation, a potential for radioactive contamination or known contamination, but are not expected to exceed the Derived Concentration Guideline I.evels (DCGl.)',
- Class 3 Any impacted areas that are not expected to contain any residual radioactivity, or are expected to contain levels of residual radioactivity at a small fraction of the DCGL. , based on site operating history and previous radiological surveys.
Class 1 areas have the greatest potential for contamination and, therefore, receive the l highest degree of survey effort, followed by Class 2 and then Class 3 areas.
2.3 Survey Unit Designation To facilitate survey daign and ensure that the number of survey data points for a specific site was relatively uniformly distributed among areas of similar contamination
- potential, the facility was divided into survey units that share a common history or l other characteristics, or were naturally distinguishable from other portions of the l
facility. The characterization survey unit classifications are shown in Table 1.
nmparanctnc test (DCGL.) : A test based on relauvely few assumpums about the exact form tithe underlymg probabdity distributions of the neasurements. As a cmhequence, nmparmnrtnc tests are generally valid for a fairly broad class of distnbuums.
I Docunros No. 00752.R)2.A01 Page 4 of 78 Rev.0 l
l
>._ Ed 1
Q Servar.s.
ADateEaaEF0898"J Table 1. Charactere , tion Survey Unit Classification and Description Nuclear Engineering Laboratory - Basement 2
Survey Unit # Survey Unit Dewription Surface Area (m ) Classification I NEL01 Floors and Lower Walls (including the basement sump) 556 3 Nuclear Engineering Laboratory - First Floor Survey Unit # Survey Unit Description Surface Area (m*) Classification NELO2 Floors and Lower Walls 1396 3 Nuclear Engineering Laboratory - Second Floor 2
Survey Unit # Survey Unit Description Surface Area (m ) Classification I NELO3 Floors and Lower Walls 1467 3 Central Bay Area - Reactor Room I Survey Unit # Survey Unit Description 2 Surface Area (m ) Classification CBA01 Floors and Lower Walls 240 2 (including Process Pit and sump)
CBA02 Upper Walls and Ceiling 770 3 I CBA03 Equipment (Bridge Crane, Extemal Surfaces of Systenu, etc.)
N/A 3 Central Bay Area - Reactor Housing I Survey Unit # Survey Unit Description Surface Area (m') Classification CBA04 Reactor Housing Intemal Surfaces <100 1 I CBA05 Reactor Housing Extemal Surfaces <100 1 Various Systems Interiors I Survey Unit # Survey Unit Description 2 Surface Area (m ) Classification VS101 Interior Surfaces of Various Systems N/A 3 I Fuel Storage Pit Interior Surfaces of Fuel Storage Pit < 100 N/A ll r
Docunen Na 00752.fv2.A01 Page 5 of 78 Rev.0 m
m Duke Engineering Edu Services.
ADaleEaac cm,,
2.4 Survey Location Designation Survey locations were clearly identified to provide a method of referencing survey results to survey unit locations. A reference coordinate system (gridding) was utilized to delineate Class 1 and Class 2 survey units into uniform subdivisions for survey ,
design and measurement control purposes, and to identify survey locations. Class 3 structural survey units and Class 1 and 2 equipment survey units were not gridded.
Survey locations were indicated on stmetural surfaces by the use of self-adhesive labels, temporary markers, or equivalent methods.
2.4.1 Reference Coordinate System A reference coordinate system was established to facilitate selection of j measurement locations and to provide a mechanism for referencing a measurement to a specific location so that the same survey point can be relocated. The survey reference coordinate system consisted of a grid of intersecting lines, referenced to a fixed site location or benchmark. For the purposes of this characterization survey the lines were arranged in a perpendicular pattem, dividing the survey unit into squares of equal area. The general guidelines utilized for gridding the survey units were as follows:
- Each designated survey unit was gridded independently, having its own reference point or point of origin.
- The survey unit was gridded as a whole, regardless of surfaces with contrasting material background values.
- Class 1 and Class 2 structures were gridded using i by I meter grids. i The walls of these stmetums were only gridded to a height of 2 meters i above the floor. I i
e Grid blocks were marked within an accuracy of 15% of the specified dimension. The remnant area at the end of a gridded row was incorporated into the last full grid block, provided that the area of the j resultant grid block did not exceed the area of the specified grid size by more than 25%. 4 1
2.4.2 Survey Location Codes ;
In instances where the survey unit was gridded, the survey locations were marked in a systematic fashion (i.e., evenly spaced throughout the survey !
unit). For non-gridded survey units, the survey locations were generally I designated prior to the survey, and were selected at biased locations where the potential for contamination is most likely and/or evenly distributed throughout the survey unit.
Document No. 00752.R)2.A01 Page 6 of 78 Rev.O
D Duke C"ngineering Ed O Servl3cs ANwEaazyCavae A unique identifier code (survey location code) was established for each survey measurement location. For gridded survey units, the centers of the grid blocks served to designate the initial survey locations prior to the survey. The survey location code was composed of a 12 character alpita numeric character string. For the purpose of this characterization survey, bar codes were utilized to designate the survey location code. A bar code was generated for each designated survey location using Table 2 as guidance.
Table 2. Survey Location Code Index I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 x x n n n x x x x n a a Survey Unit I.D. Survey Unit Cmle Survey Unit Survey Type Cale Survey Material Survey Puint Classificaths Cmle Code (Per survey Unit A = Fhur A = Class 1 A = Final status A = Bare Concrete (Nuntered i Classtficatum and B = lower Walls B = Class 2 B = Backgnxux! B = Pamled Cturrete sequenually) l Descnpuun list) C = Upper Walls C = Class 3 C = Cluractenzation C = Bare Bkrk D = Ceilmg D = Pamted Bkrk E = Eqwpnent E = Bare Brick F = Fkxr/ Lower Walls F = Painted Brick G = Upper Walls /Ceilmg G = Genenc H = systemlaterur H = Ceramic Tile J = Ptrettain K = other l
l I
Docunent No. 00752.R)2.A01 Page 7 of 78 Rev.O
I B Duke Engineering Eda Services.
ADa5mpO9my 3.0 SAMPLING OBJECTIVES I The objective of this characterization survey was to determine the nature and extent of radiological contamination present in the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory in order to provide input to the final status survey (FSS) design and support remediation efforts.
3.1 Sampling Purpose The purposes of providing input to the FSS design include: (1) estimating the projected radiological status at the time of FSS, in terms of radionuclides present, concentration ranges and variances, spatial distribution, etc., (2) evaluatir>g potential reference areas to be used for background measurements, if necessary, (3) reevaluating the initial classification of survey units, (4) selecting instrumentation based on the necessary Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDC's), and (5) establishing . cite-specific DCGL's.
3.2 Survey Methodology I DE&S performed several types of measurements with various radiation detection instruments in order to access a broad spectrum of potential contaminants. The instmmentation was capable of monitoring for alpha and beta surface contamination and gamma exposure rate levels. Smearr, were also collected in selected locations to assess gross alpha and beta surface contamination.
I A small number of additional samples were collected at areas of elevated activity identified during the survey. These samples wem submitted for gamma spectroscopy analysis to allow for the identification of gamma-emitting radionuclides.
Bulk material samples (concrete, metal shavings, etc.) were obtained from within the reactor core to support 10 CFR Part 61 required waste classifications and to determine site-specific DCGLs.' The determination of DCGLs is based on the comparison of the detectable radionuclide fraction and ratios ofindividual radionuclide fractions to their respective guideline values.
I I
I 2 l
A derived. ra&anuchde-speceric acuvity concentration withan s *ecy unst arrespahng to the release criterun 'ne DCGL is based on the spatial l
distnbutum of the contananant and hence is derived dfierently L
- a maparanetric statistical test asui the Elevated Measurenent Conparison.
DCGL's are derived from activity /dse relationship dmnigh vm .s . expmure pathway scenanos l Document No. 00712.P02.A01 Page 8 of 78 Rev.O
I b Duke Engineering EdO Services.
ADdeEnquGmysny 4.0 SAMPLING APPROACH I The characterization survey identified those portions of the facility that have been affected by site activities and are potentially contaminated by reactor related activities. The survey also identified the portions of the facility that have not been affected by these activities. A series of measurements were performed in each survey unit. Surveys of building surfaces and stmetums included surface scanning, total surface contamination measurements, exposum rate measurements, and sample collection (e.g., smears and bulk material).
4.1 Instrumentation Both field survey instrumentation and analytical laboratory equipment were selected I based on their detection capabilities for the expected contaminants and their quantities.
The instruments were calibrated in a 4n geometry. The efficiency determinations are included in Appendix B. DE&S utilized the instruments shown in Table 3 to perform the characterization survey of the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory.
Table 3. Nuclear Engineering Laboratory Characterization Instrumentation lastrument/ Detector Type Description Measurement Type (s)
Eberline E-600 Data Logger Electronic Storage of Data 2
Eberline SHP-100 100 cm sealed-gas proportional detector Beta scan Ludlum 43-37 435 cm' sealed-gas proportional detector Beta surface contamination Alpha surface contamination 2
Eberline SHP-360 15.5 cm GM detector Beta-gamma scan Beta-gamma surface contamination Eberline SHP-300 Pressurized GM Gamma exposure rate I Low Background Gas Flow Proportional Detector Alpha and Beta activity on smear samples Laboratory Analysis Gamma Spectroscopy Gamma-emitting radionuclide identification Laboratory Analysis I and activity quantification on smear & bulk material samples Alpha Spectroscopy Alpha and low energy beta radionuclide I
Laboratory Analysis Liquid Scintillation identification and activity quantification.
4.2 Measurement Frequencies 4.2.1 Scans To serve as a qualitative indicator of areas of elevated activity, surface contamination scan surveys were performed prior to the collection of any removable activity samples or performing total surface contamination I
Document No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 9 of 78 Rev.O
I B Duke Engineering EdG Servirs. l ADnieEnaryConyany i measurements. The building surfaces and structures were scanned for beta-gamma activity using the SHP-100, 43-37, or SHP-360 (depending on accessibility) and performed in accordance with DES-HPS-100, Radiological Surveys. Utilized scan speeds were one to two ine'nes per second for the SHP-100 and four to six inches per second for the 43-37. The two types of scanning plans were systematic and biased (or judgmental) plans. The type scanning plan used was dependant on the classification of the survey unit. For the purposes of this characterization survey all Class I and Class 2 survey units employed the systematic scanning plan. All Class 3 survey units employed the biased scanning plan. A scan survey was performed in each survey unit as described in Table 4.
Table 4. Scan Survey Summary Survey Unit Class Surface Plan Scan Frequency 2
I.D. Area (m )
NEL01 3 556 Biased 100% floor surface scan NELO2 3 1396 Biased 100% floor surface scan NELO3 3 1467 Biased 100% floor surfxe scan CBA01 2 240 Systematic 100% floor surfxe scan (
50% lower walls scan (accessible surfaces), including every other grid CBA02 3 770 Biased 10% accessible surfaces scan CBA03 3 N/A Biased 10% accessible surface scan CBA04 1 <100 Systematic 100% accessible surfaces scan CBA05 1 <100 Systematic 100% accessible surfres scan I
VS101 3 N/A Biased No scans due to inaccessibihty Fuel Storage I < 100 Systematic 100% accessible surface scan Pit Notes:
- 1) Scan surveys were performed in the ratemeter mode.
- 2) Measurement results were logged into the E-600.
- 3) Areas of elevated activity identified during the scan were recorded on the survey map and physically marked on the surface with a temporary marter.
4.2.2 Total Surface Contamination Total surface contamination (TSC) measurements for a given survey location were not collected until the scan survey for that location had been performed.
One-minute scaler measurements were collected at predetermined locations and at any areas of elevated activity identified during the scan survey. For Docunem Na 00752.Rd.A01 Page 10 of 78 Rev.0
D Duke Engineering Ed O Servincs.,
A D
- Eu e O v =y Class I and Class 2 survey units, TSC measurements were obtained in a systematic fashion i.e., evenly spaced throughout the survey unit. For Class 3 survey units TSC measurements were selected at biased locations where the potersial for contamination is most likely (floor surfaces), and were evenly distributed throughout the survey unit. Beta / gamma and alpha TSC measurements were collected in all survey units, with the exception of VS101 (due to inaccessibility). All TSC measurements were collected in accordance with DES-HPS-100, Radiological Surveys. The frequency and type of TSC measurements, along with any additional instructions, are summarized in Table 5.
4.2.3 Exposure Rates A number of exposure rate (ER) measurements were obtained in all sun'ey units regardless of the classification. All exposure rate measurements were collected in accordance with DES-HPS-100, Radiological Surveys. The frequency and locations of exposure rate measurements was as follows: 1 i
e Class le 1 ER measurement at each TSC location. (minimum 1 per !
2 each I m )
1 e Class 2: 1 ER measurement at the center of every fourth grid block.
(minimum 1 per each 4 m')
e Class 3: 1 ER measurement at each TSC location. (minimum of 30 per survey unit). ER measurement were not performed on the intemal surfaces of systems (VS101) e FuelStorage Pitt i ER at each TSC location.
All exposure rate measurements were taken in the scaler mode and all count times were one-minute. Each scaler measurement was electronically logged into the E-600.
l i
Docunut No. 00752.W2.A01 Page 1I of 78 Rev.O i
I D Duke Engineering i Cd& Servicas.
A DuirEnsgyCanyssy Table 5. Total Surface Contamination Measurement Summary Survey initial Surface Plan Summary Total #
- . 3 Unit 1.D. Class. Area (m ) per Type NElA1 3 556 Biased / 30 ty and a TSC measurements 30 Systematic NELO2 3 1396 Biased / 30 ty and a TSC nwasurements 30
- Systematic NELO3 3 1467 Biased / 30 tyand a TSC measurements 30 Systematic CBA01 2 240 Systematic 1 tyTSC measurement and Ia TSC at i17 /y 1
the center of every other grid block and 120 a at each area of elevated activity identified during the scan CBA02 3 770 Biased / 30 ty and a TSC measurements 30 Systematic CBA03 3 N/A Biased / 1 tyand a TSC measurements at each 25 Systematic equipment location CBA04 1 <100 Systematic 1 tyand a 13C measurement at the 20 center of exh grid block and at each area of elevated activity identified during the 2
scan. (Minimum of 1 per each im area) l CBA05 1 <140 Systematic 1 tyTSC measurement and la TSC at 140 the center of each grid block VS101 3 N/A Biased N/A N/A Fuel N/A < 100 Biased / 32 /y and a TSC measurements 32 Storage Pit Systematic AdditionalInstructions:
- 1) All TSC measurements collected in scaler mode and all count times were one-minute.
- 2) Each scaler measurement was electronically logged into the E-600.
- 3) All measurement locations were recorded on the appropriate sun'ey map.
4.2.4 Removable Surface Contamination I A minimum of one smear sample was collected at each TSC location.
Additionally, QC trip blank smear samples were submitted at the frequency specified in Section 6.0, Quality Assurance. Smear samples for a given survey location were not collected until the scan survey and TSC measurements for that location were performed. Smear samples were uniquely identified using
.I Ducunent No. 00752 mt.A01 Page 12 of 78 Rev.O i
-. . . _ - .. .- _ .= .- .
I b Duke Engineering EdQ Services ADermanowny the survey location code. All smear samples were collected in accordance with DES-HPS-200, Bulk AfaterialSampling.
4.2.5 Bulk Materials Bulk material samples were obtained to provide input to the waste stream classification during the D&D phase and to determine site-specific Derived Concentration Guideline Levels (DCGLs). The identifica' ion of radionuclides of concem was accomplished via 10 CFR part 61 analyres (with the exception I of the lead sample, which was analyzed with gamma-spectroscopy only).
One composite bulk material sample was collected for each major material I type identified (i.e., concrete, lead, graphite, steel, and aluminum) inside the teactor housing. The sample locations targeted areas of high activation based on a review of axial and radial fiux history and scan data collected during the characterization survey.
All bulk material samples were collected in accordance with DES-HPS-200, ,
Bulk Afaterial Sampling. The samples were obtained by the use of a drill l and/or file. '
4.3 Sample Shipments l Smears and bulk material samples were packaged and prepared for shipping in accordance with the ISU Radiatios Safety Afanualand cormsponding procedures. A DE&S chain of custody form per DES-HPS-200, Bulk Afaterial Sampling, was completed prior to shipment.
4.4 Procedure References The characterization survey and all associated activities were performed in accordance with the characterization / sample plan (Appendix A) and the following DE&S and ISU procedures:
- DES-HPS-100, Radiological Surveys
- DES-HPS-200, Bulk AfaterialSampling i e DES HPS-400, Operation and Calibration of the E-600 Portable Radiation Detection System
- ISU Radiation Safety Afanual Docunent No. 00752.R)2.A01 Page 13 of 78 Rev.O
I B Duke Cngineering EnFG Serviscs.
ADeama my., c 5.0 DATA ANALYSIS METHODS I
j 5.1 Background Determination The entire ISU Nuclear Engineering Laboratory was classified as " impacted" during characterization phase in order to perform a thorough and accurate assessment of the radiological status of the facility. This method is consistent with the MARSSIM I recommendation that the characterization survey is the most comprehensive of all the survey types and produces the most number of measurements. However, because the j
i use of the "non-impacted" classification was not employed during the characterization phase, site-specific background reference areas were not available for use in non-parametric statistical tests.
Section 4.5 of MARSSIM states that "In some situations a reference area may be associated with the survey unit being evaluated, but is not potentially contaminated by site activities." Based on this philosophy, a survey unit-specific average background level was determined by calculating a series of trimmed-mean values for the data collected in each respective survey unit. By calculating a trimmed mean value, the influence of outliers in the data set, including potentially elevated measurements, was reduced. This " average background" value was subtracted from each data point to determine a net count rate. :
I 5.2 Minimum Detectable Concentration Determination )
The Minimum Detectable Concentrations (MDCs) for the scan and surface contamination measurements were determined using the following equations:
Surface Scan MDCR MDCR = si * (60/i) (1) where:
si = d'*(b i)uz d' = 1.38 (95% correct detections,60% false positive rate) i = observation interval bi = average number of background counts in an interval TSC Direct MDC I t R ,gp 4 MDC= 3 + 3.29) ts (2)
(ET)(Is )
Docunent No. orR52.R2.A01 Page 14 of 78 Res. O
b Duke Engineering Ed G Serv 5 cs.
A MTmqty Cmye, I where:
R6 t,
=
=
background counting rate sample counting time (1 minute)
I t.
er
=
=
background counting time (1 minute) total efficiency (c/d) 5.3 Surface Activity Calculation The total surface contamination actiwaes were calculated with the following equation:
A=s (3)
A (ET)(100) where:
2 As = surface activity (dpm/100 cm )
I Rs+a Ra er
=
=
=
gross count rate (cpm) background count rate (cpm) total 4n efficiency (c/ dis)*
A = probe area (cm )
2 I
Source efficiency, es, is negligible for maximum beta energies, Ep > 0.4 MeV, which is the assumed measured radionuclide type for this survey (e.g. Co-60, Cs-137) (Reference 4).
I I
I Docuners No. 00752.M2.401 Page 15 of 78 Rev.0
D Duke Engineering EdQ Serviscs.
A DM=cW 6.0 QUALITY ASSURANCE I The general requirements for Quality Control as defined in the DE&S Survey Quality Assurance Project Program Plan (Reference 2) were applied during the ISU characterization.
Field surveys were defined as Quality Category II and laboratory analytical data were defined as Quality Category I (Reference 5). Specific Quality Assurance and Quality Control (QA/QC) requirements are listed below:
- Instrumentation was maintained and operated in accordance with DES-HPS-400, I Operation and Calibration of the E-600 Portable Radiation Detection System, and vendor technical manuals. These documents provide specific instmetions on quality control to be followed when using the E-600 data logger and detectors.
- Smear and bulk material samples were obtained in accordance with DES-HPS-200, Bulk Material Sampling, which also provides the requirements for maintaining chain-of-custody of all collected samples.
Note: ISU required that a QC replicate smear be obtained, adjacent to the original I smear location, at a frequency of 1 per each 10 surey locations (10%) for independent analysis. In addition, ISU required that one additional graphite bulk material sample be obtained for independent anaiy.;is I
- Trip blank smear samples were obtained at a frequency of 5% (one field blank per 20 samples) to provide an indication of cross contamination between samples. These trip blank samples were handled in the same manner as other regular samples (e.g.,
numbered with the batch of smears prior to the survey and carried along during the survey) except that they were not swiped against any surface.
- Trip blank smears were identified for use by the analytical laboratory in establishing i media-specific background values.
I
- All records pertinent to the project were maintained by the DE&S Project Manager and DE&S Characterization Manager.
I l
Docunra No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 16 of 78 Rev.O
- - - - e-- -
D Duke Engineering EdPQ Serviccs.
A D* Sue Gav=ay 7.0 RESULTS The instrumentation data collected with the E-600 for beta surface contamination, alpha surface contamination, exposure rates, and scans are presented in Appendices D, E, F, and G, respectively. The data summaries and graphical representations are presented in the following sections.
7.1 Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) Determination The Derived Concentration Guideline I.evels (DCGLs) for the ISU facility were derived using USNRC Model D and D, Version 1.0. For gross activity DCGL, the equation is summarized below: ,
I F
Gross Activity DCGL = (4) f' f f.
+ 2
+,,,,,,
DCGL, DCGL 2 DCGL, 1 i
where:
F = Detectable radionuclide fraction
- f. = Fraction of radionuclide n detected in sample l
DCGL, = DCGL for radionuclide n from D and D model A composite smear sample collected from inside the reactor core tanks was utilized to derive the structural surface DCGLs for the ISU facility.(This sample location was considered representative of contamination that could occur on structural surfaces based on the assumption that primary coolant water is tiiB most likely source contamination. This assumption was supported by the fact that the only contamination identified during the characterization (outside of the Fuel Storage Pit) was located in the Process Pit Sump, directly under a coolant water sample tap.
However, due to the fact that no detectable activity was identified on the filters, the most conservative DCGL value, calculated for steel, was applied to the filters.
The data and roults pertaining to the DCGL determination are provided in Section 9.2.1.
7.2 Background Determination The results of the trimmed mean background determination is presented in Table 6.
The ideal scenario (i.e., no outliers in data set) is observed when the mean value of the data set is approximately equal to the trimmed mean data. This trend was exhibited for all the survey units assessed. The survey measurements that were collected from or adjacent to areas where known radioactive sources are stored (Rm.101, Rm. 201, source safe) are presented in the Elevated Measurement Summary (Section 7.5).
Dxunera Na 00752.fD2.A01 Page 17 of 78 Rev.O
i B Duke Engineering EdQServizcs ADdeSugyGuyemy These data points were not included in this assessment due to the high location area background influences that would skew the tme " background" value.
l Table 6. Survey Area Background Determination (Beta-Gamma TSC) l Survey Unit Materlsl(s) 'a Mesa 10 % 20 % 30 % Applied (cym) Trimmed Trimmed Trimmed BKG Mean Mean Mesa (cpm)
(cpm) (cpm) (cpm)
CBA01 Bare Concrete 112 185 172 171 171 171 l Painted Concrete j Painted Block 1 Generic Bare Brick 9 313 313 313 319 313 CBA02 Generic 15 193 193 193 192 192 Bare Brick 12 375 375 375 375 375 CBA03 Generic 18* 138 138 138 137 137 CBA05 Painted Concrete 137 190 190 189 189 189 Generic 4 164 164 164 164 164 NEL01 Bare Concrete 21 206 206 205 205 205 Painted Concrete 2* 175 175 175 175 175 Generic 4 148 148 148 148 M8 Porcelain 1 287 287 287 287 -
NELO2 Bare Concrete 15* 198 198 198 195 195 Generic 10* 148 148 143 143 143 NELO3 Bare Concrete 15* 205 205 206 207 205 Generic 12* 151 151 148 148 148
- Outliers that are attributed to local area background interferences are not included in this assessment.
7.3 Survey Unit Results Summary-The characterization survey results for each survey unit are summarized graphically l in the following sections. The individual measurement results for Beta / Gamma Total i Surface Contamination, Alpha Total Surface Contamination and Beta and Alpha l Removable Surface Contamination are presented in Appendices I, J, K, and L,
! respectively.
i Dawies No 00752.F02.A0t Page 18 of 78 Rev.0
D Duke Engineering EdOServices.
ADer%cm 7.3.1 CBA01 CBA01 was designated as a Class 2 area that included the floors and lower walls of the Reactor Room, including the Process Pit and Sump. The maps designating the reference grid system and each location are provided below.
l Dawent Na 00752.R2.A01 Page 19 of 78 Rev.O
4 .A A4 a 4. a. 4- +-eJe--4 m_h . 4l.4 4 .wa u-Aa, _ .-_.ani 4 A_ a # #-4.4_m. .m A an._mEche n_ m.A. J a 4-ea 2 k .-me 2&4 av,maa._ L A .
I I I gI I
- 4 b I!!!kNI l l!lil lIlill!iill!iill lli .
b 5
E 9 E ! $ 8 5 I E ! E E
- . s e e- ,e f s e e v , 2 f 5 5 @ ! E ! E E E E E ! ! ! ! ! g =
E I E E E I E ! ! ! ! ! 8 ! B 2 !
l fO l o E E x i d6 1 s a a a a a J ! !
8 t *g a E s s s a p++ NH a a a a ! o
$ g E E x 5 5 'V '
= =3=:-L 3 2 B E 5 x I O I i a a !
l l g j A A ~iF -2
---s-r-r-N
-s A
=
=s=:-r a ! B 6 a n i a a aa a] s a e4 I i 1 1 I I i ! 5 5 L--$- 5 5 5 5 i ! !
I' R i g a 5 6 8 B I $ 5 3 !
i E = E B L i X i E i 4,5 i ! I I iL, 5 I i a 3 ii,! !
! ! !P' E E ! B ! si-' ! s ! E s s"
! B ! E ! ! ! ! ! ! ! B E E E i f I i
a
. S 6
- at e
! [t f ,t ;h. ,
0 v
e R
29 s e n a
e i e wws w# ww w& s ma R
-. CAg _
n
.a n
e o
n w c.
e
. glA a
u . .
c 4nr a .
p o . - .
m . r . n n. n n mw a, a ,. s-e n ==
t E e n.o o
__ = Cwm s
o pn. D D :
c p -
ar a n E m a.
a
'Iiw a u emf O A w N A
= o.w c c W a A m u
res.
t m e r c.su m~sn n I
M N A T c. u m
i m u 'a
.e n L u a ces .
a . = _ r O I
c orI 5E E
= n t__a cm a a e o n
wM m c
a rm - m_t m T
st = w a neI e .I E A a d i h c. m . == .
E a m . == =CauA 3
Wnl u mc ErJ Wa **
c rm am o am t
3 m
M u.MM um n e
c a
m t
i P
s s
e 8 c 7 o f _
r o P
1
/ P 2 1 A e 0 .M g _
A aY a _
B iT v - P _
C rM e
sU lm m m 3 aS e sN r ie0 r1 u
g e1
= A i = Z .
F rIR vM eC ki s 4 3 2 I o A u n 2 2 n I I ni oRA H
C g
i n m 3
D 2
u r -
e ..
e.
n is w ge r e nc' Ei v=ya= -
1 0
A.
erC r 2
U kee m a
f.
2 5
usE 7 0
0 damA N a
i v -
mD t
o D
I B Duke Engineering Ed O Servl3cs.
AMleSmvOv"y 7.3.1.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 4.
I Figure 4. CBA01 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data I 50
& 40 -- 5 %
$30 " h $
g20- g 3 E'~
o _
- :E: 3 $ m;_;_,_,_
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 More Measured Value(dpm/100 cm')
7.3.1.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination I The results for each alpha TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 5. The results were calculated assuming an alpha background of zero.
Figure 5. CBA01 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data 80 70 --
x 00 -- s$o
" 50 -- 96!!
40 --
I { 30 -- va
- 20 - (W
'~
M : II: fd ,lM : m ,
I 5 10 15 20 25 30 Mye MeasuredValue(dpmf100cnf)
I Dcuunent No. 00752.82.A01 Page 22 of 78 Rev.O
D Duke Engineering EdO Services.
A D er % p G = r ay 7.3.1.3 Removable Surface Contamination The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 6 and 7, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, wen:
included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta removable surface contamination is 31 dpm/100 cm2 . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface contamination is 3.5 dpm/100 cm2, Figure 6. CBA01 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination 70 60 --
y g 50 -.
40 g;)
p g 30 --
& 20 .
0 ' ' ' "*' '
l l
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm*)
Figure 7. CBA01 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 60
- 5 l 40 -- %
5 $
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 Mye Measured Value(dpmf100cm")
Docurnent No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 23 of 78 Rev.0 1
l
- i l
l D Duke Engineering i Ed G Servlaas., 1 ADe r-e cm ,y l
7.3.2 CBA02 i
CBA02 was designated as a Class 3 area that included the upper walls and ceiling of the Reactor Room. The maps designating the reference grid system and each location are provided in Figure 8.
i i
t l
i l
l i '
i I
l t
l l
l l
r t
l l
1 Dmunerm No. 00752.R)2.A01 Page 24 of 78 Rev.O i
I~
l
- u tr tt ts 3 g
l l llr upb I i e
} . 1 , ; , ,
d?- I !f f f l l f 1 1 llfil 11ll1ll l81ll 1 1 1l l l,1lll
, 12l1 i ! l i i i a l l 5
$ 88 58 8a8 a 88 -
b O wad ma A O
b hl f **
m
--~
i
] g a __
% 8 __ __
$ g 8 = 0 --
8 0 = [ 5 =.
J 8 -
~~
g _
o cr-
)
I a __
" S f: p 5 3 e ]
= lij 00 OON 00 I j
! E 5 3 5 88 5 858 Bi 88 I <
a L !
Ba !
l e! !
O Duke Engineering KOU Services. 1 AD*% Cavae 7.3.2.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 9.
1 Figure 9. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data 10
& 8- - -
E 6-- ,
- s cr 4-- - ,,
~
2--
0 : ;M: , : : :
- l l l
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 8001000 More MeasuredValue(dpnV100cnf) 7.3.2.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination The results for each alpha TSC measurement is provided graphically in Figure 10. The results were calculated assuming an alpha background of zero.
I Figure 10. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data 6
g - -
4-- W '
[2- $
I .. -
0 : : l l :
5 10 15 20 25 30 Moro usasured value(dpnvioocm')
I Docunrnt No 00752.F02.A01 Page 26 of 78 nev. o
b Duke Cng!aseering
, Ed& Serviscs.
ADdeSugyCapsny
, 7.3.2.3 Removable Surface Contamination 1
, The results for beta and alpha removable surface I
- contamination are presented in Figures 11 and 12, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were
)
j included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta I 2
removable surface contamination is 34 dpm/100 cm . The
. minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
I' contamination is 3.3 dpm/100 cm ,
ii I i Figure 11. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination l l
25 4
20 --
4 c 15 --
8 , l l [ 10 -- '
$ 5-- y 0 : : : : !
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 More 1
N_p.ig: All values < MDC.
Figure 12. CBA02 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 20 i I
- 15 --
E 10--
2 w 5-0 :
, : l l
)
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 More Measured Value(dryn/100 cm*) l Docuners No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 27 of 78 Rev. 0
I B Duke Engineering EdG Serviscs.
ADar-p%
7.3.3 CBA03 CBA01 was designated as a Class 2 area that included the floors and lower j walls of the Reactor Room, including the Process Pit and Sump. The mt.p designating the reference grid system and each location is shown in Figure 13.
l-l 1
1 1
l I
(
l I
Docunna Na 00752.F02.A01 Page 28 of 78 nev.o
M Duke Engineering Giraservices Awer e amp.y c Figure 13. CBA03/ Miscellaneous Equipment nie. :; -as a s.re Nf24110N SURVEY MAP man lown Susa usuurneir ill11l11111lll -
a 2s - , - -
eao 022 h Caseui agr Ares 023 814 i
- ~ . -
- B m -- %
,,;g m-O -m%w
,,mo .
[ ]" [] ==v = - e
=
/> -- m g ,l i
S mcmasecome: canassecs
/ <-oi24n a=flusan a=.c =
a mi C
.c msr .c mrmiaom ec _=_ mon ame_ mon n u amaca m .e 4,, \ O /., --m i- .<
[ ] % []
a= w mc.a w n
,e i asynce_m g
mm W l
u u mrunaLTTPE m w ooom N is.wuisino n
' niiabVm n oc 9El m =d f waan L 3 0 = -
womses Dxunent No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 29 of 78 Rev.o
B Duke Engineering
( CdG Services.
ADarmp%
f 7.3.3.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 14.
Figure 14. CBA03 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data I
& 10 5 5
{ 5 5--
- 6 0 : ; lE: : ; E : E ; "" l l
- ts Measured Value(c5mN00cm')
7.3.3.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination The results for each alpha TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 15. The results were calculated assuming
{ an alpha background of zero.
Figure 15. CBA03 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data
{
f 10
> 8-6--
{
t Ij:: N1 11 e , ,
F 0 10 20 30 More
( Measured Value(dpmN00 cm')
{
l r
Docunra Na 00752.F02.A01 Page 30 of 78 a, 0
l A Duke Engineering
! C#G Serwtcs.
l AD*T=c % 1 I
7.3.3.3 Removable Surface Contamination i The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 16 and 17, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta 2
removable surface contamination is 34 dpm/100 cm . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface contamination is 3.3 dpm/100 cm2, i
Figure 16. CBA03 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination 15 1
g10-m <
[5-- l u-0 : : ,
g: ,
l
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 Nbre Measured Value(dpmf100cm')
Figure 17. CBA03 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 15 10-f 7
, s
{ 5- h 0 : l "" l l l l l
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 More Measured Value(WOOcrrh l
l l
Docuhners Na 00752.Rr.!.A01 Page 31 of 78 Rev.O
I Bk Duke Engineering l EdG Servirs. '
ADhEnw W 7.3.4 CBA04 CBA04 was designated as a Class I area that included the intemal surfaces of the reactor housing, including the core equipment and graphite. All field measurement data presented for CBA04 represent gross values and were collected to provide a qualitative indication of the area extent of activation and contamination. A direct comparison between the gross count rate data
! collected from CBA04 to data collected from other survey areas is not appropriate because the CBA04 surveys were performed with the 20' cable, thus reducing instmment efficiency for the SHP-100. The removable contamination results represent net values.
iE The map designating the reference grid system and each location is shown in I
,5 Figure 18.
I I
'I I
I I
!I l
{
I Documers No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 32 of 78 Rev.O
AM araservices AndrEmeGuys, i i
Figure 18. CBA04/ Reactor Internal Surfaces Duke F-j- _ _ Q & Services CEUtACTTRIZATION SUWEY MAP
.nojects sm!: '
no sen.unh ier LorATION/jos DN 016 015 hI .
, , mAmswwcAnowa- cam _
i
=Amee whe.md .
i auu m e m s r n , ,,,t.m ew memncm0N #:
O- sumeuwrrwe NN Graphen air oss esa col esa os, iocanow m canswwx l
_ uw=Lmc== es esime ,
suuracr masA: 4# '
ano un ee ewsmatm ce nocmou come ceasecc am MYLocATioN#1 ggg43g maraca m e.w i M SE W ;
ete oro osa O O ao. ,,, ,,3 , , , , i iocmow coas-ammytocmow es l M #
Ll amose <
,ws.aom incanow cone.
maweviacmm es maraca m e oss en ammiiin v m
019 030 sown sas. LA*erwer nummedi W w besmans Sam. O.rmenartemuan Survey r wiau anwenn a i Docunran No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 33 of 78 Rev.0 i
D Duke Engineering EnFG Servims.
A D derano c =y y 7.3.4.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The gross results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement is provided graphically in Figure 19.
Figure 19. CHA04 Gross Count Rate Results for Beta / Gamma TSC Data 14000 12000 -
10000 I c-count ecc0 Immi-Rate (cpm) 6000 4000 IIII__..I._
2000 IIIIIIIIIIII O , , , , ,, ,
,',',8,', ,
,I
- a = ~ a a =
- t a Survey Location 7.3.4.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination No gross alpha counts were detected for CBA04. The 20' cable was utilized for the survey, thus decreasing the instmment efficiency. However, the 10 CFR Part 61 analyses results indicate that alpha contamination is not present in the reactor cavity or surrounding materials.
7.3.4.3 Removable Surface Contamination The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 20 and 21, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta removable surface contamination is 25 dpm/100 cm2 . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
contamination is 3.3 dpm/100 cm ,
Documu Na 00752.m2.A01 Page 34 of 78 nev. 0
m Duke Engineering EdOServices A DhTmp%
Figure 20. CBA04 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination 25 x 20 -- .
15 --
{ 10 --
{j.
- u. 5-- VU E
(% !!%~
0 : : - : : ;
O 50 100 150 200 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
Figure 21. CBA04 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 20 15--
5 10-- 1 u.
5-- N 3
0 : : : : l l
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 More Measured Value(@r#100cm')
l 7.3.5 CBA05 CBA05 was designated as a Class 1 area that included the external surfaces of the reactor housing, including the shield tank. The maps designating the reference grid system and each location are shown in Figures 22 and 23.
(
r mra Na 00752.RM.A01 Page 35 of 78 nev.o
q Duke Engineering
. #G Serviccs.
A M 5=c W Figure 22. CBA05/ Reactor Housing External Surfaces Duke Engineering & Services CHARACTERI7ATION SURVEY MAP mancrisns:
con on2 a3 inwa seman unheristy LOCATION /Jue DESOW"T10ft e>4 on c:2 Pl=. t 004 025 ote osy OS 063 o42 a2 ou o.4 e42 0o5 026 e47 cet Ogo e62 cel o2a AIIFA M4ME: Ru Hanstg External ons att one e; on osi o4o oss
! me oEwTecmow e.
[a 5o,4h oor cas o., om cm oso on, eis a.2 _,,
. . . o,i . gy .,, ., o,. .i, -m-es, em oss on oso one oss esa sure ecmou es ooian on,ies es,4,o one,19tigt ois mma m er~.
oio asi es2 o,4 oss em on os7 one gg ,
mumatTwe: %
oil 032 052 0,, o90 c54 035 oi4
~
Tank 5EY LOCATION el 9F 50ilD,2. loo _-l0) leo sol 'U'r_dCE AnEA:
Buu g !
_ raris2r w '
lo2 MEEMLTvFE. I mcAmN cooe nos sure LOcxnow es mwn m w muo mze W on en ;
? -
o
~~ ~
esa ois
=
ei nto, m T-* w swe-.
O r -ima R-I Lhusmera No. 00752.W2.A01 Page 36 of 78 nev. o
, 4
/ 5 .
m
l 1J,II l ;i
- l m o.
a JI Me ww m e ww ww Nw . Bis Sd We
.. IR E
a c C 8 D m
t,
- s. 's u a
P n M e
m M e 8" s c
u ki _
Ne 4_c tw A e ,
M T s o d e
1, e n n n n te c m se e
. na *n o e e w e n o e o h
E s e cu s m e *s s m n
- n n i
s oj T
s let I w r a w C Cs c o
o M cenoe e a n mm mn e s
T c ewm n
f t
e r
r_
n e se s
i T
L m aE E m o o c
t m m o
c m Mr m a
e c r
N n a m a n a n e vo z
n s t s.
m a s uh s s v r o e oi lo m t u
n n a
m A
t o
u , n a
e m Naa em n
mm M o
m m m s m s u
n Nmssu e e un aaa o na m m N e e s u
s i
e.
s k
n a
T P m d l
e 5M A
3 4
1 4
4 8
i h eY C 5 7
iE 3 f o
S ff V 1 i
/
5 eR 7 0 SU 7 ,
3 e
A a S 2 t
1 ,
g B gN a C in0 P r1 91 .
. e1 l .
3 cA n
2 i Z I
e s 2 e s r n R 4 M M i s
t i
l i
In 7
3 e F E 1 S 1 f 1 l
. t u
g T i keC s 3 5 f l
. 4 2 0 M F uA I4 3 1
1 3
i a
i t
i 1
(
2 3
1 I DR i
A H 6 .
. C l l n M
f n
i Mg 2 1
i n
n 1
a.
i .
r 0 4 n e
1 i e
n.
M ge is ncs y m
Eiyvn a -
i o
R Y erC kem y
r a
- A.
2 B
f.
2 aSi s
i b
t e
u 5
7 0
0 VaDA N s
o u
Dd o
[ m D
- ' j llI
B Duke Engineering EdOServiscs A Deru,cmys, 7.3.5.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 24.
Figure 24. CBA05 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data 60
- ~~
!k
{ 20 -- k 0 : : "; ; : : : E: :
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 More p Measured Value(dpmf100 cm')
I 7.3.5.2 Alpha TotalSurface Contamination The results for each alpha TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 25. The results were calculated assuming an alpha background of zero.
Figure 25. CBA05 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data I 60 -
I 50 -- p/
40 - [f 5 30 -- J.!
20 -- [h; g:y
' ~~ b N a M M n , gg I 5 10 1G 20 25 30 More
- > Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
E E
n L Docunas Na 00752.f02.A01 Page 38 of 78 nev.o I
D Duke Engineering I EdQ Servicas.
A D* E=a %
7.3.5.3 Removable Surface Contamination The results for beta and alpha removable surface
{ contamination are presented in Figures 26 and 27, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta removable surface contamination is 25 dpm/100 cm2 . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
contamination is 3.0 dpm/100 cm ,
(
Figure 26. CBA05 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination f
{
- 60 --
( 40 -- r i i F
- u. 20 -- ,, , s 0 """ ' - "
l l : l l l
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 More f Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
l Figure 27. CNA(d Friquency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 80 60 --
l $ 40 --
20 --
.g
{N O .'
{ .-
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
l' Dtx;unent No.00752R)2.A01 Page 39 of 78 Rev.0
l B Duke Engineering EdG Servirs.
A Dh5my%
7.3,6 NEL01 NEL01 was designated as a Class 3 area that included the basement level of the ISU Nuclear Engineering Laboratory, including the Dilution Tank and Sump. The map designating the reference grid system and each location is shown in Figure 28.
Document No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 40 or78 a,,, o
o.,
e g
tr M~
M~
3d'#
8 7
WW 9 1WW 0 e n
- ,g e e 1 0 18 u m
a +
l 0
3 r
s n 0 s
n A o 3 B
n a U . i sn 1
0 C 4 lo IO c
. te 0 d n
9 2 r ia 6
L re Mba tt L E
D L
E
) n o 6 P t 7 ro 0 G
m a
0, 8
0 P
a p
a 0
2 1
m_
0 4 0 0 T 0 r
u #
- C O N N 1 1 1 -
B O # # #
T:
l E
r
/
t ME%
S eO m
am D
B
/ J M
A C
M O
I T
A C
I F
I T
N
" eCh e N oI O oT N O A
N E
D D
C N
E P
Y T
a: N D O o A C C N O T
I M
M Y
T e
o om c O NO N
O A
s A
W E_E m L W - "*CN@ELN* &I T O E O E E Ef D
I A
E O
i T
A E L
Y Z E D A
E A u
g O
A l
E G
oL nY AE el l
e ChN Wm u
R P ' W O
( B I
U D
U E
C W
D TR B
G i
P C N MvWI WK a D
u i
G Ne BM_uC IN U c p
m Mm_-
v e
L t
n 8 e 7 m f o
e s 1 a
w B
/
1 0
P A
4 e
a P
g L sM e
E c m N 8
iM r
v eR 2 SU r
u e &S m r gN a a n a u u g inO i
F r
e iw7G gI a o m nR m
u EE T keC uA m DR A 7
2 0
a 1 a m e m
u g H C e _
g G n
,l i l' '
i 6 l
w O r 3 i
4 t l r 0 ,
, 0 y e
4 2 10 E
e.
0 g, , O J
w hB mr n. s 5 4
t O
)
fO is so 1
0 lg #
ge, T
=
= # ,
i r
nc.
Ei,
- m ~ ,
1 0
vio
,ke- e er A.
2 W .
usra 2
5
- 7
- 0 r 0 DaA D ,
N 2
a 7
F MM D t
7 lll
D Duke Engineering EnFG Serviscs.
ADa5my%
7.3.6.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 29.
Figure 29. NEL01 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data 15 h 10 --
g ,
5-g 0 '
- N: : Ol l l l"
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 800 1000 More Measured Value(dpm/100 cm')
7.3.6.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination The results for each alpha TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 30. The results were calculated assuming an alpha background of zero.
Figure 30. NEL01 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data 12 10 -- y-8 8-- p
~~
k 4--
i 3 i i: ti)
- u. 9g " 'i g;
/ , e i ,
5 10 15 20 25 30 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
l t
l Dawra No. 0W52.m2.A01 Page 42 of 78 rev.o
Duke En GServl::gineering
- s.
AD*E=v W 7.3.6.3 Removable Surface Contamination I The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 31 and 32, respectively, All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta 2
removable surface contamination is 41 dpm/100 cm . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
contamination is 4.2 dpm/100 cm ,
Figure 31. NEL61 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination 20 p 15 -- E E
o 10 -
I [
- u. 5--
f f 50 I
0 : , i l ,
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 More
- Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
Figure 32. NEL01 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 15 _
g &
I g 10 --
K;
{
u.
5--
O ; ; : . :
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 More Measured Value(dpm/100 cm')
I numm No. an52E2.A01 Page 43 of 78 Rev.0
1 i
E Duke Engineering EdQ Servbcs.
A D*T=c %
7.3.7 NELO2 I NELO2 was designated as a Class 3 area that included level 1 of the ISU i Nuclear Engineering Laboratory, outside of the Reactor Room. The map I designating the reference grid system and each location is shown in Figure 33.
I I
i l
I I :
I Ducunent No. 00752.M2.A01 Page 44 of 78 nev. 0
- . . m
A ^w 5A -G,--W- A k- 4=~ -.e-= ,enu--e b r.uA au- -n._-O A e a e m &Mr- a BA,-----u, Ls.% A B,4J '----J + 1 e l C
i y, , , ,, 11 '
)
" 3 ! $ ;i{ !'l I
s l .
a z
I I.
3 is i d1 O 0!I 10iil 8i l hill Niii! '
5 \
5 d %
?
- = n a a .l i ge ; i e e $g 5 E , W. -
- A
$3 g i _
a _a sjj-
[ , c lO I
g _
. f 2 0
N ,,,,, ,
Io E j ======= _
5 ~~' IE C _ . _ _
8 A@ _I_ \' j 3 E I, EE EE EE I sa O . . 2
- --' 3 : .u . E .~
g 3 m_ -s I
J I
lI I
i Al ,
i Ea! 1 f
4 a
B Duke Engineering EdG Services.
A M B=c W 7.3.7.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 34 Figure 34. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data 20 h15-- g
$ 10 --
f5-~ h@ll": "; 'g 0 , , , ,d ; ;
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 8001000 More Measured value(dpnv100 cm')
7.3.7.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination l The results for each alpha TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 35. The results wem calculated assuming ,
an alpha background of zero.
Figure 35. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data 20 D 15 -
10 --
5--
0 : : l l l 10 20 30 40 50 More Measured Value(dpm/100 cm')
Danuners No. 00752.IU2.A01 Page 46 of 78 Rev. o
13 Duke Engineering LDQServices.
A M Eaan Gaysay 7.3.7.3 Removable Surface Contamination The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 36 and 37, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were included in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta 2
removable surface contamination is 32 dpm/100 cm . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
contamination is 3.3 dpm/100 cm ,
Figure 36. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination l
30
, 25 --
@ 20 -- gj
$ 15 -- D l
[ 10 -- kk i 5 -
h$
0 l l l l l
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm') l Figure 37. NELO2 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 20 D 15 -- -
10 -- 1 5 -
0 l l M ~
l l l l l
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
Docunent No. 00752.R)2. A01 Page 47 of 78 Rev.o
D Duke Engineering I EdG Services.
A D e a m eon,uny 7.3.8 NELO3 j NELO3 was designated as a Class 3 area that included level 2 of the ISU Nuclear Engineering Laboratory, outside of the Reactor Room. The map designating the reference grid system and each location is shown in Figure 38.
{
{
[
f
{
f
{
(
{
l i
Doconus No 00752.IU2.A01 Pnge 48 of 78 nev.o
suke s'n gineering saservices.
A DerEme O=y=w Figure 38. NELO3/ Level 2 DukeF ^ Q & Services CHARACITRIZATION SURVEY MAP PelapcTtsrTE lowe $ esse UnherWty I eli I N1)De nserusmaet Nudeur EM Lab-2nd Floor ihn 201 Ilm 2f 6 AaEAIDENRPICATION F M g
010 Ot2 @ 015
" AaEA NnME: Second Floor i flhill5 lbn 204 00g 013 014 MAPitMNT1RCATION
- NELO3 009 --__ ===::g i i 111111 1
- M 214 NMM MATUML TYPE: Smre Concrees MM (OCATION CODE Itm 213 kANEY LOCXE10N M OS4.0Bl45A07A0s.cIl414 Consit 017A38432.83MM Lab co? I i i Ott ano ssrs W
- emTuunLTyplE Generic 020 lbn 212 g ESNEY LOCATION M an1 m em9.000A15416 els419A234125.029.030 ftm 206 021 WID M #
g i i i i MATimenLTYPE:
(DCATION CODE:
_ 005 . gg,,y goc,yian n Itm 207 I-< lim 21I k88 LACE _ ASEA #
0= -
034 MAnnunt TYPE: t LOCATION CODE.
oo. I sen 2io uaWEY LOCATION M b 200 027 026 i g gm W
_ . auO ma w j lbn 209 W Itm 209 E N a "' 5$ On a - - - - .
l lll1111 1 ---- e ;
i I
Form DE5IPS1001 [
aerasus I .
Dtrunrsa Na 00752.IU2.A01 Page 49 of 78 Rev.0 a
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ __m__ _ _ ________m___ _ - - _ _ . . ___ _ - . _ _ _ _ ____-_
l B Duke Engineering
( CdG Services.,
AD*fime %
7.3.8.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement are provided graphically in Figure 39.
Figure 39. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data
{
[ x 15 o
@10--
. :s 5 7 5--
E O : : : : : : "l=l :E
[ -800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 000 8001000 Mye
-va.89wim=6 f 7.3.8.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination j The results for each alpha TSC measurement are provided t graphically in Figure 40. The results were calculated assuming an alpha background of zero.
Figure 40. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Alpha TSC Data
{
10
>. 8 --
{
6-
[4--
f u. 2- ggpH
-"~--
~^"
0 : -"- l -- : l l 10 20 30 40 50 More
{
Measured Value(dpmf100 cm')
{
l
/
Docunera No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 50 of 78 nev.o r
A Duke Engineering EdO Servicas.
A D
- fim e %
7.3.8.3 Removable Surface Contamination The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 41 and 42, respectively.
All values, including those that were less than the MDC, were inch.Jed in the plot. The minimum MDC value for beta removable surface contamination is 32 dpm/100 cm2 . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
contamination is 3.3 dpm/100 cm ,
Figure 41. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination 15 N
l c 10 -
E l g 5-- i e
t!':g:g I ,
0 : : l l l -10 -5 0 5 10 15 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
l Figure 42. NELO3 Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 1
20 ,
I i '" --
s 10 -
3
( m p!
g 5- g m i 0 : : : : l l l
-3 -2 -1 0 1 2 3 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
ocaum No. m752.IU2.A01 Page5Iof78 nev.o
B Duke Engrineeringt EdG Servicas.
A Dh&wgW 7.3.9 VSI01 VSI01 was designated as a Class 3 ama that included the internal surfaces of various system components, including the Dump Tank and the Dilution Tank.
Direct measurements were not collected in this survey area .due to I inaccessibility. The survey location descriptions and removable surface contamination results are presented in Table 7.
Table 7. VSI01 Survey Location Descriptions and Results Removable Contamination Results (dpm/100 cm')
Survey Location Description Beta MDC Alpha MDC 001 Shield Tank Drain -4.5 39 1.3 4.0 002 Dump Tank 13.0 39 -0.2 4.0 003 Dilution Tank N. Outlet 1.0 39 -1.71 4.0 004 Dilution Tank S. Inlet -4.3 39 -0.86 4.0 005 Dilution Tank N. Outlet -7.1 39 -1.71 , 4.0 006 Rm.101 Car Fan Screen 1.0 39 -0.2 4.0 007 Rm.101 Car Fan Screen 7.0 39 0.4 4.0 008 NELO2 N. Manhole -1.5 39 0.4 4.0 l 009 Dilution Tank S. Outlet -7.4 39 1.3 4.0 010* Dilution Tank Sediment N/A N/A N/A N/A 011* NELO2 East Entrance N/A N/A N/A N/A
- Bulk material samples taken only.
7.3.10 Fuel Storage Pit The Fuel Storage Pit was designated as a Class 3 araa that included 12 vel 2 of J the ISU Nuclear Engineering Laboratory, outside of the Reactor Room. The
_ map designating the reference grid system and each location is shown in Figure 43.
i L Dixmnent No. 00752.f02.A01 Page 52 of 78 nev.o
sum uma sus mas mas uma sus .. num aus uma amm - sem amm num num- ums D Duke Engineering EduServices.
A M Eaetr W Figure 43. Fuel Storage Pit t
N l
@@@@ ^
@@@@ s
@3 3 3 c 3G 3 8 ll o
1 3 5 7 9 11 13 15 17 19 21 23 25 27 29 31 1.
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 l
A B C D Daantiers No. 00752R12.A01 Page 53 of 78 nev.o
B Duke Engineering EdOServices ADersaw c=y y 7.3.10.1 Beta / Gamma Total Surface Contamination The results for each beta / gamma TSC measurement is provided graphically in Figure 44.
Figure 44. Fuel Storage Pit Frequency Plot for Beta / Gamma TSC Data 15 W T 510 ~
- s j T E S-- S 0 "; : : : :U: ";":
-800 -600 -400 -200 0 200 400 600 8001000 More Measured Value(dpmf100 cm')
7.3.10.2 Alpha Total Surface Contamination Six of sixteen locations resulted in alpha count rates less than 2 cpm. Therefore, the results were not plotted. The use of the 20' cable for the Fuel Storage Pit survey greatly decreased the instrument efficiency, which contributed to the fact that Jie alpha count rate distributions observed in the other survey units were not reproduced.
7.3.10.3 Removable Surface Contamination The results for beta and alpha removable surface contamination are presented in Figures 45 and 46, respectively.
All values, including tho:e that were less than the MDC, wem included in the plot. 'The minimum MDC value for beta removable surface contamination is 32 dpm/100 cm2 . The minimum MDC value for alpha removable surface 2
contamination is 3.3 dpm/100 cm ,
Docunent No. 00752.702.A01 Page 54 of 78 Rev.0
B Duke Engineering \
EdG Servizcs.
Amtm,%
Figure 45. Fuel Storage Pit Frequency Plot for Beta Removable Surface Contamination m
40
{ 30 --
@ 20 --
F 10 -- 4 0 , , ; l :
-20 -10 0 10 20 30 More Measured Value (dpm/100 cm')
l Figure 46. Fuel Storage Pit Frequency Plot for Alpha Removable Surface Contamination 20 h 15 --
$ 10 --
p '
5- 'g I 0 '
-1 0 1 2 3 More Meastred Value (dpm/100 cm')
l 7.4 Average Exposure Rate Levels 1
The average area exposure rates in micro-roentgen per hour ( R/hr) are shown for each level of the Nuclear Engineering l2boratory on Figures 47,48, and 49. In areas L adjacent to Rooms 101 and 201, which serve as radioactive materials storage areas for the ISU EH&S Depanment, elevated exposure rates were observed Slightly elevated exposure rates were detected in the southwest stairwell and in an area above the east b side of the Reactor Room. The remainder of the facility produced average exposure rates consistent with the outdoor levels near the facility, which ranged from 12 to 26 pR/hr.
Document No. 00752R)2.Ao: Page 55 of 78 Rev.0
b Duke Engineering \
[ EdO Servincs.
A D*EaapOayaw
[
Figure 47. Average Exposure Rates - Basement Level (NEL01)
[
me, % te. n-m
[
14
[ l TlII l __
e
[ ,
I3 2
" "3 i o o a
~
I
- o 13
[ F< m , ,,
r: -
[
I.
[ -
. J . .
.. L-
~ I
[ .
_ p_
t Ag Arne E amse 9 Raras M/hr)
[
( O Storage Areas on First and Second Floors
[-
E Docunrin No. 00752.f02.A01 Page 56 of 78 nev. o a.
D Duke Engineering EdOServl3cs A D*fiueOvas Figure 48. Average Exposure Rates - Level 1 (NELO2)
~
( k=a sas u. vers,
{ w % Lan . im %,
l 0
( m: =: :o. .=u o--
ll1llll111ll1 D
[
_ A ".
{ _
l l 11 I )
( --
o I
I. , e w. -
i
[
L l r
[
TuI Illil m Average Aree Exposure Races (ufWr)
(
{
h Storage Areas on First and Second Floors I
Docunna No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 57 cf 78 Rev.0
M Duke Engineering EdGServiscs ADar-no osy ,
Figure 49. Average Exposure Rates - Level 2 (NELO3)
OMa.ww I
[
mI ftM 201 l Red. Mat.
15 % 28 15 45 g
{ i4 )' m :-- -
DECK i
16 aM 20s 15 16 22 m upp o is 15
]19 16 13
'5 l $ ~ i4 is
[l l2 llllll I O Storage Areas on First and Second Floors i
Dxument Na 00752.f02.A01 Page 58 of 78 Rev.0
R Duke Engineering inFGServ!rs.
LokB=c%
7.5 Elevated Measurement Summary The characterization survey indicates that the remaining residual radioactivity is limited to the activated materials in the reactor containment structure. A small area 2
(~ 200 cm ) of elevated activity (~ 9000 dpm/100 cm 2) was also detected on the concrete floor of the Process Pit near a water sample tap.
Elevated exposure rate levels were observed in and adjacent to the following areas, Room 101 (Suberitical Lab), Room 201 (EH&S radiation material storage area), and Reactor Room floor source safe. The elevated exposure rates in these areas are attributed to the stored radiation sources and are not due to contamination from reactor operations. A summary of the observed elevated exposure rate levels in and adjacent to these areas is provided in Table 8.
Table 8. Elevated Local Area Background Levels Observed Average Exposure Beta / Gamma TSC Area Description Survey Unit / Location Rate (ILR/hr) Count Rate (com)
Room 101 (Suberitical Lab) NELO2 009 - 010 490 3000-3500 Hallway west of Room 101 NELO2 007 27 370 Hallway south of Room 101 NELO2 008 54 430 Room i14 (east of Ronm 101) NELO2 014 32 550 Level 2 EHS Office Area (above NEth3 015 28 450 Room 101)
Room 201 (EHS Rad. Material NELO3 012 45 670 Area)
Hallway south of Room 201 NEIA3 013 27 460 (above Room 101)
Rx. Compartment Rad. Material CBA03 018 27 1270 Storage Safe All of the " elevated" measurements, with the exception of location 224 in CBA01 (Process Pit) and CB A04 (Reactor Intemals), are attributed to this increased local area background.
Table 9 provides a summary of the " elevated" measurements that are represented by the histograms presented in Section 7.0. A measurement was termed " elevated" if it l was observed as extending beyond the upper tail of the normal distribution (i.e. any l measurement in excess of the normal " background" distribution). This provided a more conservative and appropriate comparison than direct comparison of each measurement to the DCGL, due to the fact that all measurements outside of CBA04 and the Fuel Storage Pit, with the exception of Process Pit location 224, were well below the DCGL.
I l
Docunent No 00752.F02.A01 Page 59 of 78 Rev.O i
A Duko Engineerin3 EdQ Serviccs.
ADulwEnngy Carney Table 9. Elevated Measurement Summary
- TSC Result Removalele Result (dpm/100 cm2) (dpm/100 cm2)
Local Area
Background
Survey Unit Location Description $/r n** $/y a Influence?
CBA01 182 West Wall - near 908 0 < MDC < MDC Yes Source Safe 209 North Wall - 1007 6 < MDC < MDC Yes south of Rm.101 224 Process Pit Floor 8614 6 88 < MDC NO CBA03 018 Source Safe 7979 10 < MDC < MDC Yes t
020 Mezzanine - 1169 6 < MDC < MDC Yes above Rm.101 022 Mezzanine - 1655 0 < MDC < MDC Yes above Rm.101 NEL01 029 liallway, directly 7552 15 < MDC < MDC Yes west of Rm.101 NELO2 007 Itallway, directly 1559 0 < MDC < MDC Yes west of Rm.101 008 liallway, directly 1662 17 < MDC < MDC Yes south of Rm.101 009 Rm.101 20.035 36 < MDC < MDC Yes 010 Rm.101 23,204 0 < MDC < MDC Yes 014 Rm. I14, directly 2434 56 < MDC < MDC Yes east of Rm.101 NELO3 012 Rm. 201, Rad. 3282 45 < MDC < MDC Yes Material Storage 013 Hallway south of 1810 16 < MDC < MDC Yes Rm. 201 (above Rm.101) 015 Ells Office Area 2183 9 < MDC < MDC Yes (above Rm.101)
Fuel Storage 10 of 16 Pits 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 1000 - 0-2 9-48 3-1I NO Pit SilP-360 8,10,11,12,13, 4400 Results
- TaNe 9 does not include CB A04.
" Calculated assummg an alpha twigrwnd cizern Document Na 00752.M2.Aoi Page 60 of 78 Rev.0
au AD* sue mc ,my The Alpha TSC results were calculated assuming a background of zero. However, radon concentrations within a structure are subject to significant spatial and temporal variations. Thus, it is difficult to assign a single background value to apply to a given set of alpha measurements. With the exception of the Fuel Storage Pit, no removable alpha contamination was detected. However, due to the fact that the 10 CFR Part 61 analysis results did not indicate the presence of alpha activity in the reactor structure, I and that the removable contamination samples collected throughout the ISU facility did not indicate alpha activity existed outside of the Fuel Storage Pit, alpha activity is not considered a concern at ISU. Thus, the low and varying alpha counts detected I throughout the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory are attributed to natural fluctuations in radon concentrations.
7.6 Bulk Material Radionuclide Inventory I The 10 CFR Part 61 analysis results for each sampled material are summarized in Table 10. The raw data is provided as Appendix H.
Table 10. Bulk Material Sample Results Sample Identitled Concentration (pCl/g) Detectable Fraction (F)
Description Radionuclides Composite Smear Sample
- N/A N/A Rx. Graphite
- N/A N/A I Rx Concrete H-3, Fe-59, Co-60, Eu-152 2.81E03 0.88 Rx. Steel Co-60, 2n-65 8.28E02 1.00 Rx. Aluminum
- N/A N/A
- Below MDC.
! 7.7 Quality Assurance Samples No detectable activity was identified in the quality assurance trip blank samples. The j data for these samples is included in Appendices K and L 7.8 Hazardous Materials Characterization Results As a part of the characertization process for the decommissioning of the UTR-10 reactor, ISU conducted work to determine what hazardous materials exist in the reactor facility. The results of the characterization work (Reference 6) are summarized below as well as the plarmed actions for remedial action. Three areas of contamination of concern were identified and characterized. These were:
i
' Dmunem Na 00752.rO2.A01 Page 61 of 78 Rev.O r-
D Duke Engineering EdQ Servirs.
A D* 5=p G= paw
- I a . Pipe insulation bearing Asbestos Containing Material (ACM).
. Izad contained in paint.
. PCBs contained in paint.
]
~
Facility drawings indicated that the reactor core drain pipe was lagged with insulation.
The insulation installed in 1959, contained asbestos. The pipe is located under the
~
concrete floor and the insulation had not been tested as part of the university's asbestos abatement program.
The concrete over a portion of the pipe was removed exposing the pipe and insulation.
A sample of the insulation was collected and analyzed. The insulation tested positive
~
for asbestos (non-friable). ISU has decided to remove the pipe along with the ACM ;
during D&D activities. The pipe and asbestos will be disposed of by ISU as part ofits l E ongoing asbestos abatement program.
I It was suspected that some of the older paint in the reactor room might contain lead.
A Niton XL-309 spectrum analyzer was used to test the paint for lead content. The paint in all likely areas throughout the reactor room was tested in situ. Positive results I
j were obtained from the paint on the steel mezzanine and stairs on the north end of the l reactor room. These components are located immediately outside of and over the
_ reactor room and will be removed in the early stages of the reactor D&D. Mechanical methods will be used to cut section that cannot be disassembled. The components will be disposed of according to applicable state and federal regulations, u
Three composite samples of paint chips were collected to determine if there were any PCBs contained in the paint. The three samples were collected from 1) the paint on the reactor room floor and wall,2) the paint on the reactor structure, and 3) the paint on the mezzanine and old stairs. The identified PCB was PCB-1260 in all three, with
~
concentrations of 60,380 pg/kg; 1,621 pg/kg;; and 8,957 g/kg, respectively. Only the sample from the reactor room exceeds the 50,000 pg/kg limit.
~
Following the positive indications from the composite test, five more samples were taken in .a attempt to tetter define where the PCB containing paint was located. The five samples were collected from various locations on the floor and walls of the reactor room. The identified PCB was PCB-1260 in all samples. The results are as follows:
. Reactor room floor by southeast drain: 47.3 ppm E . West wall by fuel pit: 24.5 ppm
. South cinder block wall: 8.7 ppm r . Reactor room floor by control console: 57.9 ppm L . Fuel pit cover: 24.5 rpm
{ The second analysis showed that the paint on'the walls contained less than 50 ppm PCB-1260. The floor samples, however, were again above 50 ppm.
Docunent No. 0075Li02.A01 Page 62 of 78 Rev.O i
. - - - - . . - - . - . ~ . . - . - . . ._ - - - - . . - - . . - - - . - . - . . - . . - - .
i D Duke Engineering
- E*O Serviscs.
}
ADaBowW i To prevent the PCB laden paint from entering the waste stream, ISU will remove the
- ' paint from the floor prior to commencing the reactor decommissioning. The waste generated during the process will be collected in barrels and disposed of following applicable state and federal regulations.
I i
i i
j i
i 1
4 I
I 1
I !
i I
Docuarn No. 00752.M2.A01 Page 63 of 78 Rev.0 :
l
t 1 m Duke Engineering EdO Services.
l A D* E=c % l
8.0 CONCLUSION
S l i
8.1 CBA01 i
1 All of the survey data collected in CB A01 is well below the DCGL, with the exception l of Process Pit location 224. DE&S recommends that this area, which is limited to '
2 approximately 200 cm , be remediated during the D&D phase.
The Process Pit will be designated a single Class I survey unit for Final Status Survey, due to the fact that a measurement exceeding DCGL was identified. The remaining portion of CBA01 should be reclassified as a Class 3 area for Final Status Survey.
l 8.2 CBA02 No areas of activity in excess of background were identified in CBA02. Therefore, I CBA02 should remain a Class 3 area for Final Status Survey. l I
8.3 CBA03 The elevated measurements in excess of background that were observed in CBA03 were attributed to local area background influences (Section 7.5). Thus, the l equipment included in the characterization survey should be classified as Class 3.
! However, due to the limited amount of equipment available for survey, CBA03 will be eliminated as a single survey unit and the remaining equipment will be incorporated into the appropriate structural survey unit.
8.4 CBA04 Figure 19 indicates that the count rates decrease axially from the core center. Thus, as expected, the areas of highest activation are nearest the core centerline. Additional contact exposure rate readings collected on the east Beam Port Plug and the Central Thermal Column Stringer indicate that the area of activation extends radially to an area approximately 40" x 34" from the core centerline (Figure 50). These areas, and any additional areas of elevated activity identified during the Remedial Action Support Surveys, will be remediated during the D&D phase. CBA04 will remain as a Class 1 area for Final Status S irvey.
Docunra No. 00752R)2.A01 Page 64 of 78 Rev.O I
Eb Duke Engineering EdO Servizcs.
l ADermaryCav=y l
Figure 50. Reactor Activation Profile - Plan View I
ww%
a , = =.m.
i I l r
I s 1
__0.01
. N j
/
f%.<n x \
/ e \
" : 4 :
c.02 95
\ /
j l ~ s' N ' '
1
/ l I l W amm (= Mr) l Docunna No. 00752.R2.A01 Page 65 of 78 Rev.0 l
l l
D Duke Engineering Edu Services.
A N *B = c G w =y j 8.5 CBA05 l
No areas of elevated activity attributed to reactor operations or contamination were identified in CBA05. Therefore, the area should be reclassified as a Class 3 survey unit for Final Status Survey. This classification may be reevaluated during the Remedial Action Suppon Survey if there is an indication that isolation controls may have failed during the D&D phase, thus causing a potential for contamination of the j reactor housing external surfaces. l l l 8.6 NEL01 l
1 No areas of elevated activity attributed to reactor operations or contamination were l identified in NEL01. Furthermore, reactor operations did not impxt the radiological status of this survey unit. However, because significant system component removal will occur in or adjacent to this area during the D&D phase, this survey unit will be included in the scope of Final Status Survey. The Class 3 designation will remain.
8.7 NELO2 l
l No areas of elevated activity attributed to reactor operations or contamination were '
identified in NELO2. Room 101, which contains several sealed sources that will or have been transferred to the ISU Material License, exhibits a high local area background exposure rate level. Interferences from the high background levels in this area were observed in areas adjacent to this room. However, these high background levels are not attributed to reactor-generated contamination.
Although NELO2 is an area that has not been impacted by reactor operations, it will be included in the scope of Final Status Survey due to the potential for the spread of contamination during the D&D phase by personnel. This potential is considered minimal due to the fact that stringent isolation controls will be implemented during D&D. Therefore, NEIA2 will remain a Class 3 area.
8.8 NELO3 No areas of elevated activity attributed to reactor operations or contamination were l identified in NELO3. Funhermore, NELO3 is physically isolated from the Reactor Room. However, due to the minimal potemial for the spread of contamination during the D&D phase, NELO3 will remain in the scope of the Final Status Survey as a Class 3 area.
i l Docunent No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 66 of 78 Rev.0 l
l t
m Duke Engineering EdO Services.
A D arsm e c ,my '
l 8.9 VSI01 No detectable removable contamination was observed in the various system components included in VSI01. In addition, gamma spectroscopy results indicate that no radioactivity was detected in the samples collected from the Dilution Tank and from the NELO2 east entrance floor drain. The minimal data collected indicates that these system components, including the Dump Tank, Dilution Tank, and Shield Tank Floor Drain, are not radioactively contaminated.
VSI01 will not be included in the scope of Final Status Survey because all system components associated with the reactor are scheduled for removal during the D&D phase.
8.10 Fuel Storage Pit The Total Surface Contamination data for gross beta / gamma activity indicates that areas of elevated activity at or near the DCGL may exist, due to the fact that ten of the 2
36 measurements collected exceed 1000 dpm/100 cm . However, all ten of these measurements were collected with the SHP-360 probe, which has a physical probe ,
2 area of 15.5 cm . The small physical probe area, paired with the relatively low l instrument efficiency, biases the resulting net values high. All sixteen of the direct beta / gamma measurements collected with the 100 square-centimeter SHP-100 probe 2
resulted in net values < 300 dpm/100 cm . Therefore, these areas of high count rates are most likely instrument-dependent. Minimal counts wem detected during the alpha Total Surface Contamination survey. However, the 20' cable was utilized for this survey, decreasing the instrument efficiency.
Detectable removable contamination was observed in the Fuel Storage Pit, with 2 2 maximum values of 48.1 dpm/100 cm for beta activity and 11.1 dpm/100 cm for alpha activity.
This area is classified as Class 2 for the purpose of Final Status Survey.
Since the measured alpha activity is much below the DCGL for alpha (100 dpm/100 2
cm ), the Fuel Storage Pit will not be considered an alpha affected area. The characterization data indicates that there has been no fuel failure. Hence, it is inferred that the measured alpha is due to tramp uranium resulting from the manufacturing process of fuel.
l 8.11 Hazardous Materials l
As discussed in Section 7.8, asbestos (in pipe insulation), and lead and PCBs (in paint) were determined to be the only hazardous materials present in the reactor room.
l Document No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 67 of 78 Rev.0 l
B Duke Engineering I Edu Serviscs.
ADdesueycuy-y The asbestos is non-friable and the plans call for the removal of pipes and the ACM as a part of the ISU's ongoing asbestos abatement program. The presence oflead and
( PCBs in the paint is limited. Only one sample exceeded 50 ppm for PCBs. The i
reactor room area where this PCB contaminated paint is located is free of radioxtive contamination. ISU plans to remove the paint prior to the reactor decommissioning in j accordance with the state and federal regulations.
(
l l
I I
(
l L
Docunent No. 00752.fD2. A01 Page 68 of 78 Rev.0
D Duke Engineering EdOServices.
A DubeSnaryCanymoy 9.0 INPUTS TO THE FINAL STATUS SURVEY DESIGN l
I The primary objectives of the Final Status Survey, as described in Section 2.4.6 of MARSSIM (Reference 1), are the following ,
e select / verify survey unit classification ;
I e demonstrate that the potential dose or risk f om residual contamination is below the release criterion for each survey unit e demonstrate that the potential dose or risk from small area of elevated activity is below the release criterion for each survey unit l The data collected during the Characterization phase provide input into designing an optimal Final Status Survey for the ISU facility.
9.1 Final Status Survey Unit Classification Section 8.0 provides a synopsis of the findings obtained during the characterintion survey, including the basis for the Final Status Survey clasrficaticn of each survey unit. A summary of the classifications is provided in Table 11.
Table 11. Final Status Survey Unit Designations and Classifications Characterization Characterization Survey Final Status Survey Final Status Survey Survey Unit Designation Unit Classification Survey Unit Designation Classification CBA01 Class 2 CBA01 Class 3 CBA01 - Process Pit Class 2 PP001 Class 1 CBA02 Class 3 CBA02 Class 3
~
CBA03 Class 3 N/A N/A CBA04 Class 1 CBA04 Class 1 CBA05 Class 3 CBA05 Class 3 NEIAl Class 3 NEIAI Class 3 NELO2 Class 3 NELO2 Class 3 !
NELO3 Class 3 NEIA3 Class 3 Fuel Storage Pit Class 2 FP001 Class 2 g Equipment survey locations originally included in CBA03, Miscellaneous Equipment, E will be incorporated into the Final Status Survey of the associated stmetural survey units.
l Dawem No. 00752.M2.A01 Page 69 of 78 Rev.O
D Duke Engineering 1 EdO Servirs.
I A DeerEmegyCapesy 9.2 Demonstrating Compliance with Dose-Based Regulation I Duke Engineering & Services will demonstrate that radiation and radioactive contamination levels at ISU have been reduced to levels satisfying the criteria l established for unrestricted use. Final compliance with this criteria will be performed with the use of the U.S. NRC model D and D, Version 1.0. The following section describes the DCGLs that will be used to screen individual measurement values, and
- inputs into the statistical design of the Final Status Survey.
9.2.1 DCGLs i
The DCGLs utilized to screen individual measurement values are based on the l results of radioanalytical data as input into D and D. ISU site-specific DCGLs
! are established by adjusting the generic limits to account for Hard-to-Detect Radionuclides (HTDN) that are not detectable with typical survey l instmmentation.
Section 7.1 provides the equations utilized to calculate these site-specific
) DCGLs. Table 12 provides a summary of the bulk material sample Part 61 analysis results and the calculated HTDN ratios utilized to calculate the l DCGLs. The corresponding DCGLs for each material are shown in Table 13.0.
l Table 12. Bulk Material Composite Sample 10 CFR Part 61 Analytical Results Summary Sample Identified ISU F,/L, Identified ISU F,/L, Description Detectable Radionuclide. (Fraction / HTDNs Radionuclide- (Fraction /
Radionuclides specific D and Limit) specific D and Limit)
D Limit D Limit l (dpm/100 (dpm/100 2
l cm') cm )
l Composite None N/A N/A None N/A N/A l= Smear Sample Rx. Graphite None N/A N/A None N/A N/A ll l3 Rx. Concrete Co-60 Eu-- 152 7,040 12,700 4.09E-05 3.76E-05 H-3 Fe-55 1.23E+08 t.10E+04 9.76E-10 2.06E-07 l Fe-59 88,300 1.30E-06 l Rx. Steel Co-60 7,040 4.36E-05 Zn-65 48,100 1.44E-05 i
Rx. Aluminum None N/A N/A None N/A N/A I
I I
Ixcunent No. 00752.F02.A01 Page 70 of 78 Rev.0
D Duke Engineering COGServices A DuleEasty cmp'ay Table 13. ISU Site-Specific DCGLs Material Total surface contamination DCGL (dpm/100 cm 2)
Structural Surfaces 5.3E03 Reactor Graphite 5.3E03 Reactor Steel 5.3E03 Rextor Aluminum 5.3E03
[ Reactor Concrete 1.lE04 1
(Activated Portions)
Alpha 1.0E02 9.2.2 Final Status Survey Design Inputs The MARSSIM encourages the use of the flexibility in designing a site-specific Final Status Survey, and presents alternate statistical methods in Section 2.6.1. DE&S intends to employ an altemate method described in this section, which is to perform a direct comparison of each measurement result to ti c DCGLw. A degree of conservatism is built into this method, given that l
an elevated measurement criterion (DCOLeuc) will not be utilized. DE&S believes that this type of conservatism is warranted, especially at a facility where a low potential for residual contamination exists. The overall result in implementing this As-Low-As-Reasonably-Achievable (ALARA) method is reduced risk to a building occupant following license termination.
The use of this type of comparison must be supported by the collection of an adequate numbei of measurements. The inputs ta Gis decision are described l in the following sections.
9.2.2.1 Relative Shift The relative shift, A/a, must be calculated in order to determine the sample size for each survey unit. This value is f calculated by dividing the estimated survey unit standard deviation, o, into the shift (A = DCGLw - LBGR). The MARSSIM recommended values of Type I error (ct), Type 11 error ( ), and L.BGR were utilized in designing the Final Status Survey. The calculated relative shift for each survey unit is presented in Table 15.
f f
Docuent No. 00752.M2.A01 Page 71 of 78 Rev.0
l B Duke Engineering
( CdQ Servirs.
A Dde rampCmyssy f Table 14. Calculated Relative Shifts Survey Unit LBGR* A a No (dpm/100 cm2) (dpm/100 cm2) (dpm/100 cm2)
{
CBA01 2645 2645 270 9.8 f CBA02 2645 2645 250 10.6 CBA04 2645 2645 *" N/A
( CBA05 2645 2645 250 10.6 NELot 2645 2645 200 13.2 NELO2 2643 2645 600 4.4 NELO3 2645 2645 550 4.8 PP001 2645 2645 200 13.2 FP001 2645 2645 1236** 2.1
- LBGR calculated as 0.S*DCOL, as reconmended by MARSSIM.
- Conservative esunt J outliers included.
- Results not included. see sectum 7.3.4. CB A04.
f 9.2.2.2 Estimated Sample Size
[ The estimated sample sizes for each survey unit were L
determined with Table 5.3 in the MARSSIM.
Table 15. Estimated Survey Unit Sample Sizes
{
Survey Unit Type i Error (a) Type II Error (p) No Estimated Sample Size (N/2)
CBA01 0.05 0.05 9.8 10 CBA02 0.05 0.05 10.6 10 CBA04 0.05 0.05 2.1
- 13 CBA05 0.05 0.05 10.6 10 NELOI 0.05 0.05 13.2 10 NELD2 0.05 0.05 4.4 10 NELD3 0.05 0.05 4.8 10 PP001 0.05 0.05 13.2 10 FP001 0.05 0.05 2.1 13 Docunent No 00752.F02.A01 Page 72 of 78 Rev.0
D Duke Engineering EduServices.
ADaEmyCaymy 9.2.2.3 Background Reference Areas The background reference areas for each survey unit will be selected from an area within each respective survey unit.
Radionuclide-specific measurements (e.g. in situ gamma spectroscopy) will be performed in the areas where background reference measurements are performed, thus assuring that the area is free of reactor-related contamination.
The use of an area within the survey unit for a background reference minimizes the variation among material-specific backgrounds and local area backgrounds, thus minimizes the error incurred from these variations.
The following figures provide information on the material-specific variations in background for the individual survey units.
Figure 51. CBA01 Gross Count Rate Summary (by material)
CBA01 Data Raoutts(by material) k#
3E y + Bare Concrete e 300 j250 "
mGeneric
- 200 m . Painted Concrete 150 E E =
- f. e Painted Block o 100 g 50 X Bare Brick g0 , ,
1 Dawnent No.00752.f02.A01 Page 73 of 78 Rev.0
!~~
kl.)b Duke Engineering OServi:cs.
l ADeampc.p, t
Figure 52. CBA02 Gross Count Rate Result Summary (by material) l l
l 450 l
l E 400
- n. o l S# ..
l IE a: 250 + Bare Bair,k l 3200 [ E Generic
$150 i 51M j 50 0 , ,
Figure 53. CBA05 Gross Count Rate Summary (by material) 250 y ..
.&200 g ..
2 ll j 150 "
+ Painted Concrete li g 100 E Generic O
50 0 . ,
l l
i I
Docurners Na 00732R)2.A01 Page 74 of 78 Rev.0 l
l~) Duke Engineering I kUQServices.
A Mb=nCaves Figure 54. NEL01 Average Count Rate Results (by material) 350 300 g o
250 , , ,
4 BareConcrete d6 m 200 mGeneric E 150 x c Pdried Concrete
$ 100 X Porcelsn E
[
&5 0 , ,
f Figure 55. NEL Survey Units Average Count Rate Result (by material)
- - 250
[ E "
T '>
,o, 200 y ;; + NELO3 - BC S ..
E NELO2 - BC E lE U
X
.t NELO1 - BC 5 100 X NELO3- Gen
{
$ + NELO2- Gen E G NELO1 - Gen 0 , , ,
I i
I Ixxunna No. 00752.M2.A01 Page 75 of 78 nev. o
I B Duke Engineering EdOServiscs A DuhtEnaxyCmpany l
l A summary of the conclusions reached from assessing Figures !
51 to 55 are previded in Table 16.
1 Table 16. Background Reference Area Material Groups Survey Unit Background Reference Area Material Groups CBA01 Bare Concrete Painted Concrete 1 Painted Block Generic i
Bare Brick l
CBA02 Bare Brick Generic CBA05 Painted Conciete I Generic j I
NEL01 Bare Concrete !
NELO2 NELO3 Painted Concrete I Note: CBA04 will be evaluated folk wing deamtussitzung.
Note: CB A03 will be incorporated into structural survey uruts.
Generic l
l I
Docunent Na 00752.f02.A01 Page 76 of 78 Rev.O
B Duk3 En Ineerin3 EdQ Services.
ADA dnayW 10.0 DOCUMENTATION 10.1 Field Log Book A project log book and a field log book were maintained to serve as a reference document for all activities performed at the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory facility.
The log books are an integral part of the permanent project file and will be maintained as specified in approved DE&S record management procedures. Information documented on survey forms, maps, or in the E-600 data logger were not included in the field log book. The log book records are included as Appendix M.
10.2 Instrument Calibration and Quality Control The field survey instrument calibration records and source check data are included as Appendices B and C, respectively.
10.3 Training Records The field personnel training records are included as Appendix N.
10.4 Personnel Exposure Records No exposures to ionizing radiation were recorded during the characterization phase.
The dosimetry report for the thermoluminescent detectors (TLD) results are presented in Appendix 0.
Dammera Na 00752.R)2.A01 Page 77 of 78 Rev.O
M Duke Engineering EdD Servirs.
ADh5my %
11.0 REFERENCES
- 1. NUREG-1575, EPA 402-R-97-016, " Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (M ARSSIM)," December 1997.
I 2. Duke Engineering & Services Environmental Health and Safety Department Engineering Procedure DES-HPS-600 Survey, " Quality Assurance Project Plan," September 11,1998.
- 3. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Termination of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Reactors," Regulatory Guide 1.86, June 1974.
- 4. International Organization for Standardization (ISO).1988. " Evaluation of Surface Contamination - Part 1: Beta Emitters and Alpha Emitters." 1S0-7503-1 (first edition), ISO, I Geneva, Switzerland.
- 5. Memorandum from J. Devgun to W. Riethle, "ISU Characterization Plan," September 11, I 1998.
- 6. Ietter from S. Wendt to M. Granus, "ISU's Characterization of Potentially Hazardous I Materials," December 21,1998.
I I
I I
I I
l Dmums Na 00752.m2.A01 Page 78 of 78 ney. 0 m
.