ML073110351

EP-Rx 135A, Nasa, Survey Unit Release Record

ML073110351
Person / Time
Site:	Plum Brook
Issue date:	10/31/2007
From:	US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA)
To:	NRC/RGN-III/DNMS/DB
References
EP-Rx 135A
Download: ML073110351 (11)

Text

Survey Unit Release Record Design # EP-Rx 135A Revision # Original Page 1 of 3 Survey Unit #(s) Rx 135A

1) Embedded Pipe (EP) Survey Unit Rx 135A meets the definition of embedded pipe for Plum Brook Reactor Facility (PBRF).

2) EP Rx 135A is a Class 1, Group 2 survey unit as per the PBRF Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) and Technical Basis Document (TBDh06-004.

3) Surveys in EP Rx 135A were performed using a scintillation detector optimized to measure gamma energies representative of Co-60. Sample #EP2-5 &om Survey Request (SR)-13 was referenced for this decision.

4) Survey Instructions for this survey unit are incorporated into and performed in accordance with (IAW) the Babcock Services Incorporated (BSI)/LVS-002, Work Execution Package (WEP)05-006. Survey instructions described in this Description document constitute "Special Methods" and the survey design used in the acquisition of survey measurements.

5) Instrument efficiency determinations are developed in accordance with the BSIILVS-002, WEP 05-006, these determinations are appropriate for the types of radiation involved and the media being surveyed.

FSS Design # EP Rx 135A Revision # Original Page 2 of 3 Survey Unit: Rx 135A 1.0 History/Description 1.1 The subject pipe system is the 2" drain line on the -45' elevation.

1.2 EP Rx 135A consists of 2" diameter piping that is approximately 6 feet in length.

Survey Design Information 2.1 EP Rx 135A was surveyed IAW Procedure #BSI/LVS-002.

2.2 100% of the 2" ID pipe was accessible for survey. The accessible 2" ID pipe was surveyed by static measurement at one foot increments, for a total of 6 survey measurements.

2.3 Surface area for the 2" ID piping is 486 cm2for each foot of pi ing, 8

corresponding to a total 2" ID piping surface area of 2,919 cm (0.3 m2) for the entire length of (approximately 6') of 2" piping..

Survey Unit Measurement LocationsLData 3.1 Pipe interior radiological survey forms are provided in Attachment 2 of this release record.

Survey Unit Investigations/Results 4.1 None Data Assessment Results 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in the EPBuried Pipe (BP) Survey Report provided in Attachment 1.

5.2 All measurement results are less than the Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) for radionuclide specific EP that corresponds to the 1 rnremlyr dose goal established in Table 3-3 of the FSSP.

5.3 When implementing the Unity Rule, provided in Section 3.6.3 of the FSSP, and applying the Nuclide Fraction (NF), provided in TBD-06-004, the survey unit that is constituted by EP Rx 135A passes FSS.

5.4 Background was not subtracted fiom the survey measurements and the Elevated Measurement Comparison m) was not employed for this survey unit.

FSS Design#EPRx 135A Revision # Original Page 3 of 3 Survey Unit: Rx 135A 5.5 Statistical Summary Table Documentation of evaluations pertaining to compliance with the unrestricted use limit of 25 mrem/yr and dose contributions from Embedded Pipe and radionuclides contributing 10% in aggregate of the total dose for both structural scenarios and soils.

6.1 A review of the survey results has shown that the dose contribution for EP Rx 135A to be less than 1 mredyr. The dose contribution is estimated to be 0.077 mremlyr based on the average of the actual gross counts measured.

Attachments Attachment 1 - BSI EPBP Survey Report Attachment 2 - Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Attachment 3 - DQA Worksheet Attachment 4 -Disc containing RR for EP Rx 135A & Spreadsheet

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1 PAGE(S)

BSI EPIBP SURVEY REPORT DetectorSled # 44-62 212701M 21 CTIVITY VALUES NOT BACKGROUND CORRECTED RP Engineer I Date

EP Rx 135A 2" Pipe TBD 06404 Group 2

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 I PAGE(S)

BSULVSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 4 Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Date: 2- L - c, b, Time: S-Pipe ID#: L.%1~Y-h Pipe Diameter: (I Access Point Area:

Building: g Elevation: - r System: pi7. 2 ,k?&;,aP ~ - 4 2 ~

Type of Survey Investigation Characterization Final Survey )( Other J Gross C06O ,#"

Detector ID# / Sled ID# Y Y ~ L _d ~ l ~ 7 I~  ! /L/

Detector Cal Date: / / -( 7-0.3- Detector Cal Due Date: I ( - ( 7 - 0 d-Instrument: Instrument ID #:

Instrument Cal Date: /(-( 7-d5 Instrument Cal Due Date: //-/7-d6 From the Daily Pipe Survey Detector Control Form for the Selected Detector Background Value 9,-q cpm MDCKtatic [ti ~pm Efficiency Factor for Pipe Diameter 0 .o rn -Z, (fiom detector efficiency determination)

MDCstati, b 3b d~m/ cm2 Is the MDCsMcLceptable? No (if no, adjust sample count time and recalculate MDCKtBtic)

Comments: / & f t/ c 5 ~ 4 1 ~ .4 3 A/'&/ p L/A(L.L/L=

d Technician Signature - /3 ifi R &+VU P.

Pipe Interior Radiological Survey 1

Package Page 1 of s?

REFERENCE COPY Attachment 3, Page 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 1 PAGE(S)

DQA Check Sheet Design # Rx 135A Revision # Original Survey Unit # Rx 135A Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should be fully documented in the Sunmy U n l Release Record Yes No N,A

1. Have surveys been performed in accordance with survey instructions in the Survey Design? X

2. Is the instrumentation MDC for structure static measurements below the D C G h for Class 1 and 2 survey units, or below 0.5 DCGLWfor Class 3 survey units? X

3. Is the instrumentation MDC for embeddedburied piping static measurements below the D C G h ? X

4. Was the instrumentation MDC for structure scan measurements, soil scan measurements, and embeddedlburied piping scan measurements below the DCGLw,or, if not, was the need for additional X static measurements or soil samples addressed in the survey design?

5. Was the instrumentation MDC for volumetric measurements and smear analysis < 10% DCGLw ? X

6. Were the MDCs and assumptions used to develop them appropriatefor the instruments and techniques used to perform the survey3

7. Were the survey methods used to collect data proper for the types of radiation involved and for the X

media being surveyed?

8. Were "Special Methods" for data collection properly applied for the survey unit under review? X

9. Is the data set comprised of qualified measurement results collected in accordance with the survey X

design, which accurately reflects the radiological status of the facility3 Graphical Data Review

1. Has a posting plot been created? X

2. Has a histogram (or other frequency plot) been created? X Page 1 of 1

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC