|
|
Line 16: |
Line 16: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:TECHNICAL REPORT TITLE PAGE Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at YNPS Title YA-REPT-00-003-05 Technical Report Number Approvals (Print & Sign Name) | | {{#Wiki_filter:TECHNICAL REPORT TITLE PAGE Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at YNPS Title YA-REPT-00-003-05 Technical Report Number Approvals (Print & Sign Name) |
| Preparer: J. Hummer (Signature on file) | | Preparer: J. Hummer (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05 Reviewer: J. Bisson (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05 Approver (Cognizant Manager): D.C. Smith (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05 |
| Date: 01-18-05 Reviewer: J. Bisson (Signature on file) | |
| Date: 01-18-05 Approver (Cognizant Manager): D.C. Smith (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05 | |
|
| |
|
| TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page ----------------------..-------...-- 1 Table of Contents -------------------------.---- 2 Executive Summary -.-------------------------...-. 3 Introduction -------------------------------.. 3 Discussion ------------------------------.-... 3 Calculation ----------------------------..---. 5 Conclusions -------------------------------.. 6 References -----------------------------...--. 6 Attachment 1 -------------------------.--...--- 7 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 2 of 7 Executive Summary In addition to the requirement to limit the dose from residual, plant-relate d radioactivity in soil to members of the critical group to 25 mrem in any year, the License Termination Plan (LTP) requires an evaluation demonstrat ing that these levels are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). If compliance with the ALARA criterion cannot be demonstrated, remediation of the soil is required, even though this would further reduce the ot herwise acceptable exposure to the critical group to levels below those required. | | TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page ..... 1 Table of Contents . 2 Executive Summary ..... 3 Introduction .. 3 Discussion .... 3 Calculation ... 5 Conclusions .. 6 References .... 6 .... 7 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 2 of 7 |
| This report is intended to provide a generic ALARA review to bound the conditions under which no further remediation is necessary for soils. Calculations were performed using LTP equations and conservative assumptions. The conclusion is that it is not cost-beneficial to remediate soil in which the levels of residual, plant-related radioactivity ar e below LTP release criteria. The State of Massachusetts requirement limits dose to 10 mrem/year. Remediation below this level would be even less practical.
| | |
| Introduction Section 4.3.1 of the LTP [1] states that a generic ALARA evaluati on for soils will be developed to determine if the clean up of soils beyond the DCGLs will be cost-beneficial for YNPS. Appendix 4A of the LTP [1] provides an equation and default values for this calculation. This process will be followed, assuming that the soil is at the DCGL and using conservative estimates of costs, distances and ot her inputs that the worksheet requires. The equation will calculate an action level (AL) that represents the ratio of concentration to the DCGL that would be cost-beneficial to remediate.
| | Executive Summary In addition to the requirement to limit the dose from residual, plant-related radioactivity in soil to members of the critical group to 25 mrem in any year, the License Termination Plan (LTP) requires an evaluation demonstrating that these levels are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). If compliance with the ALARA criterion cannot be demonstrated, remediation of the soil is required, even though this would further reduce the otherwise acceptable exposure to the critical group to levels below those required. This report is intended to provide a generic ALARA review to bound the conditions under which no further remediation is necessary for soils. Calculations were performed using LTP equations and conservative assumptions. The conclusion is that it is not cost-beneficial to remediate soil in which the levels of residual, plant-related radioactivity are below LTP release criteria. |
| If that ratio is greater than 1, remediation is not cost-beneficial. This calculation is meant to apply to areas of any MARSSIM class and an y size. In a Class 1 area, where values of residual contamination may exceed the DCGL W in limited areas, the mean concentration may never exceed the DCGL W. Since it is assumed that the entire volume of soil removed is at DCGL W, the assumed mean will be at DCGL W. Therefore, the assumed case will be bounding.
| | The State of Massachusetts requirement limits dose to 10 mrem/year. Remediation below this level would be even less practical. |
| Discussion The total cost (Cost T) will be calculated using LTP equation B-2 (from Appendix 4, section 4.A.1.1 of the LTP[1]):
| | Introduction Section 4.3.1 of the LTP [1] states that a generic ALARA evaluation for soils will be developed to determine if the clean up of soils beyond the DCGLs will be cost-beneficial for YNPS. Appendix 4A of the LTP [1] provides an equation and default values for this calculation. This process will be followed, assuming that the soil is at the DCGL and using conservative estimates of costs, distances and other inputs that the worksheet requires. The equation will calculate an action level (AL) that represents the ratio of concentration to the DCGL that would be cost-beneficial to remediate. If that ratio is greater than 1, remediation is not cost-beneficial. |
| Cost T = Cost R + Cost WD + Cost ACC + Cost TF + Cost WDose + Cost PDose These terms are defined and thei r values calculated as follows: Cost of performing remediation work (Cost R): Initially it will be assumed that the job is big enough to require earthmoving equipment. At a minimum, this would be either an excavator or a loader and truck.
| | This calculation is meant to apply to areas of any MARSSIM class and any size. In a Class 1 area, where values of residual contamination may exceed the DCGLW in limited areas, the mean concentration may never exceed the DCGLW. Since it is assumed that the entire volume of soil removed is at DCGLW, the assumed mean will be at DCGLW. Therefore, the assumed case will be bounding. |
| This turns out not to be a c onstraint, as explained later. To come up with a conservative scenario, the cost of remediating one square meter from a larger project is calculated. Any smaller job by, itself, would have planning and administration costs that would be dominant. Factors contributing to Cost R are identified in Attachment 1. The initial estimate for Cost R is based on a job to YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 3 of 7 remediate 2000 square meters of soil, but to make it comparable to the other costs, that value is adjusted to reflect the cost of 1 square meter. The adjusted value of Cost R is $7.32 to remediate 1 square meter of soil. Rounding down to the dollar, Cost R = $7 Note: The value of Cost R calculated above bounds the cost of a smaller excavation, e.g., one that doesn't require earthmoving equipment. For example, two workers who take an hour to dig up some soil and bring it back in wheelbarrow, with no work order or other formal planning, would cost the project about $100 in labor costs (assuming the cost to the project is $50/hr). So, the c onstraint that this only applie s to jobs big enough to require earthmoving equipment can be removed. | | Discussion The total cost (CostT) will be calculated using LTP equation B-2 (from Appendix 4, section 4.A.1.1 of the LTP[1]): |
| Cost of waste disposal (Cost WD): As above, it will be assumed that one square meter of surface soil is to be remediated. Surface soil is considered to be the top 15 cm. The estimated waste volume will therefore be 15 cm times the area of 1 m | | CostT = CostR + CostWD + CostACC + CostTF + CostWDose + CostPDose These terms are defined and their values calculated as follows: |
| : 2. This comes to 0.15 m | | Cost of performing remediation work (CostR): |
| : 3. The current cost of waste disposal for radiologically contaminated soil is $19 per cubic foot [2]. This includes burial fees and shipping. Since 1 ft 3 equals .0283 m 3, this comes to $100.70 to dispose of the assumed volume. Rounding down to the dollar, Cost WD = $100 Cost of workplace accident (CostACC): Cost ACC = ($3,000,000)x(4.2E-8/h)x(Time to perform remediation) ... (Equation 4A-4, LTP[1]) $3,000,000 is the monetary value of a fatality equivalent to $2000 per person-rem. 4.2E-8 is the workplace fatality rate, in fatalities per hour worked. For a 1 square meter excavation, this would not be more than a few person-hours. (Assume Time = 2 hr) ($3,000,000) x (4.2E-8/h) x (2 h) = $0.25 Rounding down to the dollar, Cost ACC = $0 Cost of traffic fatality (Cost TF): Cost TF = ($3,000,000)x(3.8E-8/km)x(Volume)x(Distance)/(Volume/shipment) - (Equation 4A-5, LTP[1].) Round trip distance from YNPS to Memphis, TN: 2550 km/shipment - (from Yahoo Maps) Waste volume per shipment: 13.6 m 3/shpmt - (default in LTP [1], section 4.A.1.1 and consistent with YNSD shipping agent's [3] figure of 500 ft 3 or 14 m 3) ($3,000,000)x(3.8E-8/km)x(0.15 m 3)(2550 km/shpmt)/(13.6 m 3/shpmt) = $3.21 Rounding down to the dollar, Cost TF = $3 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 4 of 7 Cost of worker dose (Cost WDose): CostWDose = ($2000/person-rem)x(Worker dose rate)x(Time) - (Equation 4A-6, LTP[1]). Dose rates would be insignificant. (Assume dose rate = 0.1 mrem/h = 1E-4 rem/h) ($2000/person-rem) x (1E-4 rem/h) x (2 h) = $0.40 Rounding down to the dollar, Cost WDose = $0 Cost of Dose to the Public (CostPDose): Cost DP is assumed to be no more than the Cost WD. Assumed Cost PDose = $0 Total Cost T: Cost T = Cost R + Cost WD + Cost ACC + Cost TF + Cost WDose + Cost PDose Cost T = $110 Calculation ALARA Action Level (AL):
| | * Initially it will be assumed that the job is big enough to require earthmoving equipment. At a minimum, this would be either an excavator or a loader and truck. |
| Nr T W e r xAF PD Cost DCGL Conc AL)(1025.02000$ (LTP [1], Equation 4A.1) where: Cost T has been calculated above $2000 is the monetary value of one person-rem (Section 4A.1, LTP[1]) F = removable fraction = 1 - (most conservative possible) 0.025 is the annual dose in rem to an average member of critical group from residual radioactivity (This is the LTP[1] limit, state of Massachusetts limit is 0.010, which would make the reme diation less practical.) r = monetary discount rate = 0.03
| | This turns out not to be a constraint, as explained later. |
| /y - (Table 4A-1, LTP [1]) N = Number of years over which the co llective dose is ca lculated = 1000 y - (Table 4A-1, LTP [1]) PD = Population density for th e critical group = 0.0004 people/m 2 - (Table 4A-1, LTP [1]) A = Area being evaluated = 1 m 2 Most conservative nuclide of concern is that with the longest half-life, Tc-99, with a half-life of 2.13E5 years (Table 2-6, LTP[1]) and a decay constant () of 3.254E-6 y-1 (Note: With the values for other vari ables used for this calculation, the 1-e- term equals 1 for any value of . Therefore, the smallest AL, which is the most conservative, will occur when , in the top of the equation, is smallest.)
| | * To come up with a conservative scenario, the cost of remediating one square meter from a larger project is calculated. Any smaller job by, itself, would have planning and administration costs that would be dominant. Factors contributing to CostR are identified in Attachment 1. The initial estimate for CostR is based on a job to YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 3 of 7 |
| | |
| | remediate 2000 square meters of soil, but to make it comparable to the other costs, that value is adjusted to reflect the cost of 1 square meter. |
| | * The adjusted value of CostR is $7.32 to remediate 1 square meter of soil. |
| | * Rounding down to the dollar, CostR = $7 Note: The value of CostR calculated above bounds the cost of a smaller excavation, e.g., |
| | one that doesnt require earthmoving equipment. For example, two workers who take an hour to dig up some soil and bring it back in wheelbarrow, with no work order or other formal planning, would cost the project about $100 in labor costs (assuming the cost to the project is $50/hr). So, the constraint that this only applies to jobs big enough to require earthmoving equipment can be removed. |
| | Cost of waste disposal (CostWD): |
| | * As above, it will be assumed that one square meter of surface soil is to be remediated. Surface soil is considered to be the top 15 cm. The estimated waste volume will therefore be 15 cm times the area of 1 m2. This comes to 0.15 m3. |
| | * The current cost of waste disposal for radiologically contaminated soil is $19 per cubic foot [2]. This includes burial fees and shipping. |
| | * Since 1 ft3 equals .0283 m3, this comes to $100.70 to dispose of the assumed volume. |
| | * Rounding down to the dollar, CostWD = $100 Cost of workplace accident (CostACC): |
| | * CostACC = ($3,000,000)x(4.2E-8/h)x(Time to perform remediation) ... (Equation 4A-4, LTP[1]) |
| | * $3,000,000 is the monetary value of a fatality equivalent to $2000 per person-rem. |
| | * 4.2E-8 is the workplace fatality rate, in fatalities per hour worked. |
| | * For a 1 square meter excavation, this would not be more than a few person-hours. |
| | (Assume Time = 2 hr) |
| | * ($3,000,000) x (4.2E-8/h) x (2 h) = $0.25 |
| | * Rounding down to the dollar, CostACC = $0 Cost of traffic fatality (CostTF): |
| | * CostTF = ($3,000,000)x(3.8E-8/km)x(Volume)x(Distance)/(Volume/shipment) |
| | (Equation 4A-5, LTP[1].) |
| | * Round trip distance from YNPS to Memphis, TN: 2550 km/shipment (from Yahoo Maps) |
| | * Waste volume per shipment: 13.6 m3/shpmt (default in LTP [1], section 4.A.1.1 and consistent with YNSD shipping agents [3] figure of 500 ft3 or 14 m3) |
| | * ($3,000,000)x(3.8E-8/km)x(0.15 m3)(2550 km/shpmt)/(13.6 m3/shpmt) = $3.21 |
| | * Rounding down to the dollar, CostTF = $3 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 4 of 7 |
| | |
| | Cost of worker dose (CostWDose): |
| | * CostWDose = ($2000/person-rem)x(Worker dose rate)x(Time) (Equation 4A-6, LTP[1]). |
| | * Dose rates would be insignificant. (Assume dose rate = 0.1 mrem/h = 1E-4 rem/h) |
| | * ($2000/person-rem) x (1E-4 rem/h) x (2 h) = $0.40 |
| | * Rounding down to the dollar, CostWDose = $0 Cost of Dose to the Public (CostPDose): |
| | * CostDP is assumed to be no more than the CostWD. |
| | * Assumed CostPDose = $0 Total CostT: |
| | * CostT = CostR + CostWD + CostACC + CostTF + CostWDose + CostPDose |
| | * CostT = $110 Calculation ALARA Action Level (AL): |
| | Conc CostT r+ |
| | AL = = x (LTP [1], Equation 4A.1) |
| | DCGLW $2000 x PD x 0.025 x F x A 1 e ( r + ) N where: |
| | * CostT has been calculated above |
| | * $2000 is the monetary value of one person-rem (Section 4A.1, LTP[1]) |
| | * F = removable fraction = 1 (most conservative possible) |
| | * 0.025 is the annual dose in rem to an average member of critical group from residual radioactivity (This is the LTP[1] limit, state of Massachusetts limit is 0.010, which would make the remediation less practical.) |
| | * r = monetary discount rate = 0.03/y (Table 4A-1, LTP [1]) |
| | * N = Number of years over which the collective dose is calculated = 1000 y (Table 4A-1, LTP [1]) |
| | * PD = Population density for the critical group = 0.0004 people/m2 (Table 4A-1, LTP [1]) |
| | * A = Area being evaluated = 1 m2 |
| | * Most conservative nuclide of concern is that with the longest half-life, Tc-99, with a half-life of 2.13E5 years (Table 2-6, LTP[1]) and a decay constant () of 3.254E-6 y-1 (Note: With the values for other variables used for this calculation, the 1-e term equals 1 for any value of . Therefore, the smallest AL, which is the most conservative, will occur when , in the top of the equation, is smallest.) |
| Applying these values to the equation: | | Applying these values to the equation: |
| YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 5 of 7 1000)6254.303.0(16254.303.011025.00004.02000$110$E e E AL AL = 165 If Tc-99 were at DCGL: Sum of DCGL Fractions = 1 Since AL is greater than the Sum of DCGL Fractions, remediation is not cost-beneficial. In fact, remediation would not be cost-beneficial unless the concentration of any LTP nuclide in soil were at least 165 times the DCGL. | | YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 5 of 7 |
| | |
| | $110 0.03 + 3.254 E 6 AL = x |
| | $2000 x 0.0004 x 0.025 x 1x 1 1 e ( 0.03+3.254 E 6 )1000 AL = 165 If Tc-99 were at DCGL: |
| | * Sum of DCGL Fractions = 1 Since AL is greater than the Sum of DCGL Fractions, remediation is not cost-beneficial. In fact, remediation would not be cost-beneficial unless the concentration of any LTP nuclide in soil were at least 165 times the DCGL. |
| Conclusions Based upon the results of this ALARA evaluation, it is not cost-beneficial to remediate soil in which the levels of residual, plant-related radioactivity are below LTP release criteria. | | Conclusions Based upon the results of this ALARA evaluation, it is not cost-beneficial to remediate soil in which the levels of residual, plant-related radioactivity are below LTP release criteria. |
| References | | References |
| : 1. YNPS License Termination Plan 2. Interview with Rod Dee, Contracts Administrator, 1/13/05. 3. Interview with Don Maffei, YNSP Shipping Agent, 1/11/05. | | : 1. YNPS License Termination Plan |
| YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 6 of 7 Attachment 1 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 7 of 7}} | | : 2. Interview with Rod Dee, Contracts Administrator, 1/13/05. |
| | : 3. Interview with Don Maffei, YNSP Shipping Agent, 1/11/05. |
| | YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 6 of 7 |
| | |
| | Attachment 1 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 7 of 7}} |
|
---|
Category:Report
MONTHYEARML16043A3752016-01-25025 January 2016 Yankee ISFSI - Revision 3 to the Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report ML15051A3712015-02-0404 February 2015 Yankee Atomic Electric Company - Yankee Rowe Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation - 10 CFR 95.57(b) Log for January 2015 ML14069A1842014-02-25025 February 2014 Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation, Revision 2, Post-Shutdown Decommissioning Activities Report ML13028A1222013-01-14014 January 2013 Yankee Atomic Electric Company - Report of 10 CFR 72.48 Changes, Tests and Experiments ML11166A1242011-06-0808 June 2011 Response to Second Request (Part 2) for Additional Information for Application for NRC Consent to Indirect License Transfer/Threshold Determination - Merger of Northeast Utilities and Nstar ML0907001352009-02-23023 February 2009 10 CFR 72.48 Evaluation Biennial Summary Report for 2007/2008 ML0906804082009-02-19019 February 2009 Yankee Atomic Electric Company (Yaec) - 10CFR50.59 Evaluation Biennial Summary Report for 2007 and 2008 ML0715203992007-05-30030 May 2007 Fy 2007 Final Fee Rule Workpapers ML0703204732006-12-12012 December 2006 Licensee Response, Dated 12/12/2006, to NRC Comments on Yankee Final Status Survey Reports, NOL-03, NOL-06, OOL-10, OOL-11, and OOL-18 ML0633204422006-10-27027 October 2006 YA-REPT-00-018-06, Estimated Doses from Inhalation, Ingestion and Remote Exposure from Residual Discrete Particles at Yankee Nuclear Power Station Following NRC License Termination. ML0629700392006-10-0606 October 2006 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Control Point Portable Instrument Accountability Form ML0629700362006-10-0606 October 2006 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves, Figures 1 OOL-07-01 Through 15 OOL-07-03 ML0629700692006-10-0505 October 2006 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Attachment B Data Quality Assessment Plots and Curves, Figures 1 NOL-05-01 Through 10 NOL-05-02 ML0701602732006-08-0909 August 2006 Yankee Nuclear Power Station Final Status Survey Reports, YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00 & YNS-FSS-OOL15-00, for Survey Areas OMB-06 & OOL-15 ML0629300872006-06-12012 June 2006 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Evaluation Comparison Worksheet ML0600403082005-12-0808 December 2005 Response to Request for Final Status Survey-Related Procedures ML0615303932005-12-0202 December 2005 In-Process Inspection Survey Results for the Turbine Building Slab Area at the Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe, Massachusetts (Docket No. 50-29; Rfta No. 05-008) ML0701601132005-11-0909 November 2005 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix a, Final Status Survey Planning Worksheets. ML0701601242005-11-0909 November 2005 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix D, Generic ALARA Evaluation Comparison Worksheet. ML0629700622005-11-0404 November 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Use of In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Perform Elevated Measurement Comparisons in Support of Final Status Surveys, YA-REPT-00-018-05 ML0627803832005-11-0404 November 2005 YA-REPT-00-018-05, Rev 0, Use of In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Perform Elevated Measurement Comparisons in Support of Final Status Surveys. ML0531202752005-10-31031 October 2005 Yankee Atomic Electric Company Request for Approval of Revised Proposed Procedures in Accordance with 10 CFR 20.2002 ML0615303832005-10-12012 October 2005 In-Process Inspection Survey Results for the Reactor Support Structure Concrete Base and Inside Open Land Areas at the Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Rowe, Massachusetts (Docket No. 50-29; Rfta No. 05-008) ML0702304712005-10-11011 October 2005 Appendix D, YA-REPT-00-018-05, Rev . 0, Use of In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Perform Elevated Measurement Comparisons in Support of Final Status Surveys. ML0630705032005-08-26026 August 2005 Yankee - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Evaluation Comparison Worksheet. ML0716601052005-06-17017 June 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station Site Closure Project Amended Phase III - Remedial Action Plan/Phase IV - Remedy Implementation Plan ML0525004532005-06-0101 June 2005 Yankee Atomic Electric Company In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis Reports; Use of Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Support Final Status Surveys for Compliance with License Termination Criteria ML0525004512005-05-0909 May 2005 Yankee Atomic Electric Company In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis Reports; Use of Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Evaluate Bulk Materials for Compliance with License Termination Criteria ML0513704122005-05-0505 May 2005 Errata for Report of Continuing Hydrogeologic Investigations in 2004 ML0511501762005-04-14014 April 2005 YA-REPT-00-010-05, Report of Continuing Hydrogeologic Investigations in 2004. ML0704304972005-03-22022 March 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station Revised Beneficial Use Determination for Structures ML0632104992005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0631201422005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Stations, Technical Report, YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0633402622005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0633502172005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Report YNPS-FSS-OOL-04-00, Final Status Survey Report for Survey Area OOL-04, Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0631201082005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0630705022005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee - Technical Report YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0630600562005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Technical Report YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0629901572005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0629700582005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0634804382005-01-18018 January 2005 Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-005, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0634804112005-01-18018 January 2005 Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0629700302005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0629300852005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0701604912005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Final Status Survey Report, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0700305502005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear, Final Status Survey Report, Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0700305272005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Final Status Survey Report, Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0701601202005-01-18018 January 2005 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix C, YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0634806042005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0435700142004-12-10010 December 2004 Ynps Technical Report - Use of Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Evaluate Bulk Materials for Compliance with License Termination Criteria 2016-01-25
[Table view] Category:Technical
MONTHYEARML0703204732006-12-12012 December 2006 Licensee Response, Dated 12/12/2006, to NRC Comments on Yankee Final Status Survey Reports, NOL-03, NOL-06, OOL-10, OOL-11, and OOL-18 ML0633204422006-10-27027 October 2006 YA-REPT-00-018-06, Estimated Doses from Inhalation, Ingestion and Remote Exposure from Residual Discrete Particles at Yankee Nuclear Power Station Following NRC License Termination. ML0701602732006-08-0909 August 2006 Yankee Nuclear Power Station Final Status Survey Reports, YNPS-FSS-OMB06-00 & YNS-FSS-OOL15-00, for Survey Areas OMB-06 & OOL-15 ML0701601242005-11-0909 November 2005 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix D, Generic ALARA Evaluation Comparison Worksheet. ML0701601132005-11-0909 November 2005 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix a, Final Status Survey Planning Worksheets. ML0629700622005-11-0404 November 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Use of In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Perform Elevated Measurement Comparisons in Support of Final Status Surveys, YA-REPT-00-018-05 ML0627803832005-11-0404 November 2005 YA-REPT-00-018-05, Rev 0, Use of In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Perform Elevated Measurement Comparisons in Support of Final Status Surveys. ML0702304712005-10-11011 October 2005 Appendix D, YA-REPT-00-018-05, Rev . 0, Use of In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Perform Elevated Measurement Comparisons in Support of Final Status Surveys. ML0525004532005-06-0101 June 2005 Yankee Atomic Electric Company In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis Reports; Use of Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Support Final Status Surveys for Compliance with License Termination Criteria ML0525004512005-05-0909 May 2005 Yankee Atomic Electric Company In-Situ Gamma Spectrum Analysis Reports; Use of Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Evaluate Bulk Materials for Compliance with License Termination Criteria ML0511501762005-04-14014 April 2005 YA-REPT-00-010-05, Report of Continuing Hydrogeologic Investigations in 2004. ML0704304972005-03-22022 March 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station Revised Beneficial Use Determination for Structures ML0631201082005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0633502172005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Report YNPS-FSS-OOL-04-00, Final Status Survey Report for Survey Area OOL-04, Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0633402622005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0632104992005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0634804112005-01-18018 January 2005 Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0631201422005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Stations, Technical Report, YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0630705022005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee - Technical Report YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0630600562005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Technical Report YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0629901572005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0629700582005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0634806042005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0634804382005-01-18018 January 2005 Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-005, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0629700302005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0629300852005-01-18018 January 2005 YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0701604912005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Final Status Survey Report, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps, Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-003-05 ML0701601202005-01-18018 January 2005 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix C, YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps. ML0700305502005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Nuclear, Final Status Survey Report, Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0700305272005-01-18018 January 2005 Yankee Final Status Survey Report, Appendix C - YA-REPT-00-003-05, Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at Ynps ML0435700142004-12-10010 December 2004 Ynps Technical Report - Use of Gamma Spectrum Analysis to Evaluate Bulk Materials for Compliance with License Termination Criteria ML0630705002004-10-17017 October 2004 Yankee - Technical Report, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe ML0700305282004-10-13013 October 2004 Yankee Final Status Survey Report, Appendix D - ALARA Evaluations, OOL-08 ML0627803792004-10-0707 October 2004 YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0629901302004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0 ML0631201052004-10-0707 October 2004 YA-REPT-00-015-04, Revision 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0631201412004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Nuclear Power Stations, Technical Report, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev. 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0632104972004-10-0707 October 2004 YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0633402592004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Nuclear Power Station, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculation in Support of the Final Status Survey, YA-REPT-00-015-04 ML0634804102004-10-0707 October 2004 Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0 Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0701601162004-10-0707 October 2004 YNPS-FSS-OOL-03-00, Appendix B, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0634806032004-10-0707 October 2004 YA-REPT-00-015-04, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculation in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe ML0634806222004-10-0707 October 2004 YA-REPT-00-015-04, Revision 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe ML0700305262004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Final Status Survey Report, Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe ML0700305492004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Nuclear, Final Status Survey Report, Appendix B - YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe ML0702302652004-10-0707 October 2004 Appendix B, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev. 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0702304292004-10-0707 October 2004 Appendix B, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev. 0, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe. ML0629700572004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Revision 0 ML0629700212004-10-0707 October 2004 Yankee Nuclear Power Station - Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of the Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe, YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 0 ML0629300842004-10-0707 October 2004 YA-REPT-00-015-04, Rev 00, Instrument Efficiency Determination for Use in Minimum Detectable Concentration Calculations in Support of Final Status Survey at Yankee Rowe 2006-08-09
[Table view] |
Text
TECHNICAL REPORT TITLE PAGE Generic ALARA Review for Final Status Survey of Soil at YNPS Title YA-REPT-00-003-05 Technical Report Number Approvals (Print & Sign Name)
Preparer: J. Hummer (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05 Reviewer: J. Bisson (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05 Approver (Cognizant Manager): D.C. Smith (Signature on file) Date: 01-18-05
TABLE OF CONTENTS Title Page ..... 1 Table of Contents . 2 Executive Summary ..... 3 Introduction .. 3 Discussion .... 3 Calculation ... 5 Conclusions .. 6 References .... 6 .... 7 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 2 of 7
Executive Summary In addition to the requirement to limit the dose from residual, plant-related radioactivity in soil to members of the critical group to 25 mrem in any year, the License Termination Plan (LTP) requires an evaluation demonstrating that these levels are as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA). If compliance with the ALARA criterion cannot be demonstrated, remediation of the soil is required, even though this would further reduce the otherwise acceptable exposure to the critical group to levels below those required. This report is intended to provide a generic ALARA review to bound the conditions under which no further remediation is necessary for soils. Calculations were performed using LTP equations and conservative assumptions. The conclusion is that it is not cost-beneficial to remediate soil in which the levels of residual, plant-related radioactivity are below LTP release criteria.
The State of Massachusetts requirement limits dose to 10 mrem/year. Remediation below this level would be even less practical.
Introduction Section 4.3.1 of the LTP [1] states that a generic ALARA evaluation for soils will be developed to determine if the clean up of soils beyond the DCGLs will be cost-beneficial for YNPS. Appendix 4A of the LTP [1] provides an equation and default values for this calculation. This process will be followed, assuming that the soil is at the DCGL and using conservative estimates of costs, distances and other inputs that the worksheet requires. The equation will calculate an action level (AL) that represents the ratio of concentration to the DCGL that would be cost-beneficial to remediate. If that ratio is greater than 1, remediation is not cost-beneficial.
This calculation is meant to apply to areas of any MARSSIM class and any size. In a Class 1 area, where values of residual contamination may exceed the DCGLW in limited areas, the mean concentration may never exceed the DCGLW. Since it is assumed that the entire volume of soil removed is at DCGLW, the assumed mean will be at DCGLW. Therefore, the assumed case will be bounding.
Discussion The total cost (CostT) will be calculated using LTP equation B-2 (from Appendix 4, section 4.A.1.1 of the LTP[1]):
CostT = CostR + CostWD + CostACC + CostTF + CostWDose + CostPDose These terms are defined and their values calculated as follows:
Cost of performing remediation work (CostR):
- Initially it will be assumed that the job is big enough to require earthmoving equipment. At a minimum, this would be either an excavator or a loader and truck.
This turns out not to be a constraint, as explained later.
- To come up with a conservative scenario, the cost of remediating one square meter from a larger project is calculated. Any smaller job by, itself, would have planning and administration costs that would be dominant. Factors contributing to CostR are identified in Attachment 1. The initial estimate for CostR is based on a job to YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 3 of 7
remediate 2000 square meters of soil, but to make it comparable to the other costs, that value is adjusted to reflect the cost of 1 square meter.
- The adjusted value of CostR is $7.32 to remediate 1 square meter of soil.
- Rounding down to the dollar, CostR = $7 Note: The value of CostR calculated above bounds the cost of a smaller excavation, e.g.,
one that doesnt require earthmoving equipment. For example, two workers who take an hour to dig up some soil and bring it back in wheelbarrow, with no work order or other formal planning, would cost the project about $100 in labor costs (assuming the cost to the project is $50/hr). So, the constraint that this only applies to jobs big enough to require earthmoving equipment can be removed.
Cost of waste disposal (CostWD):
- As above, it will be assumed that one square meter of surface soil is to be remediated. Surface soil is considered to be the top 15 cm. The estimated waste volume will therefore be 15 cm times the area of 1 m2. This comes to 0.15 m3.
- The current cost of waste disposal for radiologically contaminated soil is $19 per cubic foot [2]. This includes burial fees and shipping.
- Since 1 ft3 equals .0283 m3, this comes to $100.70 to dispose of the assumed volume.
- Rounding down to the dollar, CostWD = $100 Cost of workplace accident (CostACC):
- CostACC = ($3,000,000)x(4.2E-8/h)x(Time to perform remediation) ... (Equation 4A-4, LTP[1])
- $3,000,000 is the monetary value of a fatality equivalent to $2000 per person-rem.
- 4.2E-8 is the workplace fatality rate, in fatalities per hour worked.
- For a 1 square meter excavation, this would not be more than a few person-hours.
(Assume Time = 2 hr)
- ($3,000,000) x (4.2E-8/h) x (2 h) = $0.25
- Rounding down to the dollar, CostACC = $0 Cost of traffic fatality (CostTF):
- CostTF = ($3,000,000)x(3.8E-8/km)x(Volume)x(Distance)/(Volume/shipment)
(Equation 4A-5, LTP[1].)
- Round trip distance from YNPS to Memphis, TN: 2550 km/shipment (from Yahoo Maps)
- Waste volume per shipment: 13.6 m3/shpmt (default in LTP [1], section 4.A.1.1 and consistent with YNSD shipping agents [3] figure of 500 ft3 or 14 m3)
- ($3,000,000)x(3.8E-8/km)x(0.15 m3)(2550 km/shpmt)/(13.6 m3/shpmt) = $3.21
- Rounding down to the dollar, CostTF = $3 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 4 of 7
Cost of worker dose (CostWDose):
- CostWDose = ($2000/person-rem)x(Worker dose rate)x(Time) (Equation 4A-6, LTP[1]).
- Dose rates would be insignificant. (Assume dose rate = 0.1 mrem/h = 1E-4 rem/h)
- ($2000/person-rem) x (1E-4 rem/h) x (2 h) = $0.40
- Rounding down to the dollar, CostWDose = $0 Cost of Dose to the Public (CostPDose):
- CostDP is assumed to be no more than the CostWD.
- Assumed CostPDose = $0 Total CostT:
- CostT = CostR + CostWD + CostACC + CostTF + CostWDose + CostPDose
- CostT = $110 Calculation ALARA Action Level (AL):
Conc CostT r+
AL = = x (LTP [1], Equation 4A.1)
DCGLW $2000 x PD x 0.025 x F x A 1 e ( r + ) N where:
- CostT has been calculated above
- $2000 is the monetary value of one person-rem (Section 4A.1, LTP[1])
- F = removable fraction = 1 (most conservative possible)
- 0.025 is the annual dose in rem to an average member of critical group from residual radioactivity (This is the LTP[1] limit, state of Massachusetts limit is 0.010, which would make the remediation less practical.)
- r = monetary discount rate = 0.03/y (Table 4A-1, LTP [1])
- N = Number of years over which the collective dose is calculated = 1000 y (Table 4A-1, LTP [1])
- PD = Population density for the critical group = 0.0004 people/m2 (Table 4A-1, LTP [1])
- A = Area being evaluated = 1 m2
- Most conservative nuclide of concern is that with the longest half-life, Tc-99, with a half-life of 2.13E5 years (Table 2-6, LTP[1]) and a decay constant () of 3.254E-6 y-1 (Note: With the values for other variables used for this calculation, the 1-e term equals 1 for any value of . Therefore, the smallest AL, which is the most conservative, will occur when , in the top of the equation, is smallest.)
Applying these values to the equation:
YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 5 of 7
$110 0.03 + 3.254 E 6 AL = x
$2000 x 0.0004 x 0.025 x 1x 1 1 e ( 0.03+3.254 E 6 )1000 AL = 165 If Tc-99 were at DCGL:
- Sum of DCGL Fractions = 1 Since AL is greater than the Sum of DCGL Fractions, remediation is not cost-beneficial. In fact, remediation would not be cost-beneficial unless the concentration of any LTP nuclide in soil were at least 165 times the DCGL.
Conclusions Based upon the results of this ALARA evaluation, it is not cost-beneficial to remediate soil in which the levels of residual, plant-related radioactivity are below LTP release criteria.
References
- 1. YNPS License Termination Plan
- 2. Interview with Rod Dee, Contracts Administrator, 1/13/05.
- 3. Interview with Don Maffei, YNSP Shipping Agent, 1/11/05.
YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 6 of 7
Attachment 1 YA-REPT-00-003-05 Page 7 of 7