ML080670215

Plum Brook Reactor Facility (Pbrf) Survey Unit Release Record EP-SAN 13

ML080670215
Person / Time
Site:	Plum Brook
Issue date:	03/05/2008
From:	US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA), John H. Glenn Research Ctr at Lewis Field
To:	NRC/RGN-III
References
EP-SAN 13
Download: ML080670215 (12)

Text

Survey Unit Release Record Design # I EP-SAN 13 1 Revision # I Original ( Page 1 of 3 Survey Unit #(s) I $AN 13 1) Embedded Pipe (EP) Survey Unit SAN 13 meets the definition of embedded pipe for Plum Brook Reactor Facility (PBRF). 2) EP SAN 13 is a Class 1, Group 3.2 survey unit as per the PBRF Final Status Survey Plan (FSSP) and Technical Basis Document (TF3D)-06-004.

3) Surveys in EP SAN 13 were performed using a scintillation detector optimized to measure gamma energies representative of Cs-137. Sample #EP 3-8 from Survey Request (SR)-13 was referenced for this decision.

Description

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 document constitute "Special Methods" and the survey design used in the acquisition of survey measurements.

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

Approval Signatures I Date: FS SIC haracterization Engineer FSSICharacterization Manager FSS Design # EP SAN 13 Revisi on # Original Page 2 of 3 Survey Unit: SAN 13 1.0 History/Description 1.1 The subject pipe system is a 4" drain line which received influents from the decontamination room and contaminated showers during plant operations. The influents were transf erred through the SAN 13 piping to the -15' RB hot sump.

1.2 EP SAN 13 is approximatel y 13 feet in length.

2.0 Survey

Design Information 2.1 EP SAN 13 was surveyed IAW Procedure #BSI/LVS-002.

2.2 100% of the 4" ID pipe was accessible for survey. The accessible 4" ID pipe was surveyed by static measurement at one foot increments, for a total of 13 survey measurements.

2.3 Surface

area for the 4" ID piping is 973 cm 2 for each foot of piping, corresponding to a total 4" ID piping surface area of 12649 cm 2 (1.3 m 2) for the entire accessible length of (13') of 4" piping.

3.0 Survey

Unit Measurement Locations/Data 3.1 Pipe interior radiological survey forms are provided in Attachment 2 of this release record.

4.0 Survey

Unit Investigations/Results 4.1 None 5.0 Data Assessment Results 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in the EP/Buried Pipe (BP) Survey Report provided in Attachment 1.

5.2 All measurement results are less than the Derived Concentration Guideline Level (DCGL) for radionuclide specif ic EP that corresponds to the 1 mrem/yr 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 Frac tion (NF), provided in TBD-06-004, the survey unit that is constituted by EP SAN 13 passes FSS.

5.4 Background

was not subtracted from the survey measurements and the Elevated Measurement Comparison (EMC) was not employed for the accessible portion of this survey unit.

5.5 The instrument/detector used for this survey was >12 months and <15 months from it's calibration date. Procedure #BSI/LVS-002, Step 4.3.2 allows use of instrument/detectors within this periodicity. The detector was maintained in service for this survey due to a limited window of schedule opportunity to accomplish the survey of SAN 13, and limited

availability of 1" X 1" scintillation detectors with which to accomplish the survey.

FSS Design # EP SAN 13 Revisi on # Original Page 3 of 3 Survey Unit: SAN 13

5.6 Statistical

Summary Table Statistical Parameter 4" Pipe Total Number of Survey Measurements 13 Number of Measurements >MDC 13 Number of Measurements Above 50% of DCGL 0 Number of Measurements Above DCGL 0 Mean 0.003 Median 0.003 Standard Deviation 0.001 Maximum 0.004 Minimum 0.002 6.0 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 aggregat e of the total dose for both structural scenarios and soils.

6.1 A review of the survey results has sh own that the dose contribution for the accessible portion of EP SAN 13 to be less than 1 mrem/yr. The dose contribution is estimated to be 0.003 mrem/yr based on the average of the

actual gross counts.

7.0 Attachments

Attachment 1 - BSI EP/BP Survey Report Attachment 2 -Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Attachment 3 - DQA Worksheet Attachment 4 -Disc containing RR for EP SAN 13 & Spreadsheet

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1 2 PAGES BSI EPlBP SURVEY REPORT LUES NOT BACKGROUND CORRECTED RP Engineer I Date EP SAN 13 4" Pipe TBD 06-004 Group 3.2Measurement #gcpmncpm Cs-137 activity (total dpm)

Cs-137 activity (dpm/100cm2)

Co-60 activity (dpm/100cm2)

Eu-152 activity (dpm/100cm2)

Eu-154 activity (dpm/100cm2)

Nb-94 activity (dpm/100cm2)

Ag-108m activity (dpm/100cm2)

Unity1161630,189 3,103 340 - 22 - - 0.0022262649,057 5,042 552 - 35 - - 0.0043202037,736 3,879 425 - 27 - - 0.0034181833,962 3,491 382 - 25 - - 0.0035191935,849 3,685 404 - 26 - - 0.0036222241,509 4,267 467 - 30 - - 0.0037282852,830 5,430 595 - 38 - - 0.0048181833,962 3,491 382 - 25 - - 0.0039191935,849 3,685 404 - 26 - - 0.00310191935,849 3,685 404 - 26 - - 0.00311222241,509 4,267 467 - 30 - - 0.00312222241,509 4,267 467 - 30 - - 0.00313272750,943 5,236 574 - 37 - - 0.004 MEAN 0.003 MEDIAN 0.003 STD DEV 0.001 MAX 0.004 MIN 0.002 1 of 1 SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 2 PAGES SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 1 PAGE

- BSILVSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 5 Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Date: -1 7- 0 Tie: 1047 d 13 I/ Pipe ID#: &+ Pipe Diameter:

Access Point Area: Building:

Elevation: -Idf System: Type of Survey Investigation Characterization Final Survey Other )< Gross Co60 cs 25- Detector ID# I Sled ID# A0 1 1 Lo/ Detector Cal Date: /-11-0 7 Detector Cal Due Date:

I-//- t7 R Instrument:

zi36v - 1 Instrument ID #: Instrument Cal Date: /-I/-@ 7 Instrument Cal Due Date: From the Daily Pipe Survey Detector Control Form for the Selected Detector Background Value

8. I cpm MDCRsm 14 CPm Efficiency Factor for Pipe Diameter 8 . p O V d3 (from detector efficiency determination)

MDCsat,c Zt!~q & dpd 1 OU cm2 Is the MDCaBn, acceptable?

NO (if no, adjust sample count time and recalculate MDC%,a Comments:

Technician Signature Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Package Page 1 of hment 3, Page 1

- Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form (Continuation Form)

-. BSI/LVSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 5 Date: 1-1 7- D Pipe ID#: 3&J4 a Pipe Diameter: Access Point Area:

Building:

Elevation:

System: 2- z- Package Page - of - Attachment 3, Page 2 I DQA Check Sheet I I Design # I EP SAN 13 I Revision # / Original I I I Survey Unit # I EP SAN 13 I Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should be fully documented in the Survey Unit Release Record 1. Have surveys been performed in accordance with survey instructions in the Survey Design? 2 Is the ~nstr~mentat,on MDC for structure statlc measurements be ow the DCGLw for Class 1 and 2 Jn ts, or be ow 0 5 DCGLx for Class 3 survey un~ts? -. . . . .. . . . -. . . . - . . - . 1 3. Is the instrumentation MDC for embeddedlburied piping static measurements below the DCGLw ? 1 4. Was the instrumentation MDC for structure scan measurements.

soil scan measurements.

and I embeddedlbuned piping scan measurements below the DCGLw or, if not, was the need for additional static measurements or soil sam~les addressed in the survev desian?

5. Was the instrumentation MDC for volumetric measurements and smear analysis < 10% DCGLw ? 6. Were the MDCs and assumptions used to develop them appropriate for the instruments and techniques used to perform the survey?

7. Were the survey methods used to collect data proper for the types of radiation involved and for the media being surveyed?

8. Were "S~ecial Methods" for data collection

~rooerlv aDDlied for the survev unit under review?

Yes 9 1s the data set conipr~sed of qual~fieo rneas~rement resuns wllecteo .n accordance wlth the survey I I I deslan whlch accuratelv reflects the radlo oa cal status of the faol tv? I I Graphical Data Review

4. Is the result of the Elevated Measurements Test < 1.0? 5. Is the result of the statistical test (S+ for Sign Test or W, for WRS Test) the critical value? 1. Has a posting plot been created?

2. Has a histogram (or other frequency plot) been created?

3. Have other graphical data tools been created to assist in analyzing the data? - - 2. Is the mean of the sample data

< DCGLw? 3. If elevated areas have been identified by scans andlor sampling, is the average activity in each elevated area c DCGLEMC (Class I), < DCGLw (Class 2). or <05 DCGLw (Class 3)? I Comments:

X X X Data Analysis 1. Are all sam~le measurements below the DCGLw (Class 1 & 21. or 0.5 DCGLw (Class 3)? I X I X X FSSlCharacterization Engineer (printlsign)

Page 1 of 1 FSSI Characterization Manager (printlsign)

Form CS-09R 1 Rev0 I & L3 @&/&,&?dd Date Date SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC