ML073330661

EP-CRT-2, Nasa, Survey Unit Release Record

ML073330661
Person / Time
Site:	Plum Brook  File:National Aeronautics and Space Administration icon.png
Issue date:	11/15/2007
From:	US National Aeronautics & Space Admin (NASA)
To:	NRC/RGN-III/DNMS/DB
References
EP-CRT-2
Download: ML073330661 (12)

Text

Description

2) EP CRT-2 is a Chis 1, Group 1 survey unit as pw the PBW Find Status Survey Plan (FSSP) and Technical Basis Document (TBD).O6-00$.

3) Suweys in EF CRT-2 were perfamed using a scitltilIatian detector optimized to m e a m gamma energies representative of Co-60. Sample #EP 3-9 from Suwey Request @)-I3 was referenced for this decision.

4) Survey instructions for this survey unit are incorporated into md performed in accordance with (IAW) the Babcock Services Inmrpmted @SI)/LVS-002, Work Execution Package W P )05-006. Survey instrudons described in this 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 BSVLVS-002, WEP 05-006, these determinations are appropriate for the types of radiation invoIved and the media being surveyed.

FSS Design # EP CRT-2 Survey Unit: CRT-2 1.0 History/Description 1.1 The subject pipe system is a 2.5" diameter penetration located on the CRT plate within the Sub Pile Room. The system access point is located on the

-34' el. of the Rx building.

1.2 EP CRT-2 consists of 2.5" diameter piping that is approximately 3 feet in length-Suvey Design Wmation 2.1 EF CRT-2 was surveyed 3AW Procedure #BSYLVS-002.

2.2 I 00% of the piping was accessible far survey. The accessible pipe was surveyed by static measurement at one foot increments, fbr a total of3 survey measurements.

2.3 The total surface area for the piping system is approximately 1,824 cm2 (0.2 m2) for the entire length of (3') of piping.

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

Survey Unit Investigationdltesults 4.1 None Data Assessment hits 5.1 Data assessment results are provided in the EP/Burisd P i p ('BPI Survey Report provided in Attachment 1.

5.2 All measurement results are less than the Derived Concentration Guideline h

l W G L ) fbr radionuclide specific EP that corresponds to the 1 mrem/yr dose god established in Tabk 3-3 ofthe FSSP.

5.3 WhenimplementingtheUnityRde,provjdedinSwtioa3.6.3ofthe FSSP, and applying the Nuclide Fraction 0, provided in TBD-06-004, the survey Gt that is constituted by EP CRT-2 passes FSS.

5 -4 Background was not subtracted f2om the survey measurements and the Elevated Measurement Comparison (EMC) was not employed h r this survey unit.

Revision # Original Page 2 of 3

5.5 Statistical Summary Table

- 1 FSS Design # EP CRT-2 DrPcumentation of evaluations pertaining to compliance with the utlrestricEed we limit of 25 mrem'yr and dose contributions from Embedded Pipe and radiomclides contributing 1Wh in agpgate of &e total dose fbr both strtldurd scenarios and soils.

6.1 A review of the survey results has shown that the duse contribution for EP CRT-2 to be less than 1 medyr. The dose contribution is estimated to be 0.055 nrremlyr based on the amage of the &gross m t s m e a d.

Attachments - BST WISP Survey Report Athdmmt 2 - Pipe Interior Radiologid Survey Form

• ent 3 - DQ A Worksheet -Disc containing RR for EP CRT-2 & Spreadsheet Total Number of Survey Meauments Number of Measurements >MM:

Survey Unit: CRT-2 Revision f W n a l 3

1 Page3 of3 N u m k of MwuremwrtS A b w 50% af DCGt Number of Measurnants Abve DCGL Mean Median 0

0 0.-

0.01 78 Standard Deviation Maximum Minimum 0.0687 0.1 338 0.01 7 9

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 1 z PAGE(S)

BS1 EPIBP SURVEY REPORT R

P W

1 W

EP CUT-2 2.5" Pipe TBD 061004 Group 1 E

Cod0 sctivlty Go40 aetivlty Cs-331 ncMiy Eu-162 aetlvlty Eu154 actlvlty N W ael;lv#y unyr 1

6 6

18,182 2,m 119 2,837 754 87 21 0.018 2

3 4

45 4

45 4

12,121 130,364 MIN 1,303 22,428 0.012 t

79 889 ST0 D N MAX 1,891 21,274 0.009 0.134 503 5,855 58 054 MEAN MEDIAN 0.054 0.018 14 156 0.012 0.134

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 2 z PAGE(@

BSVLVSPipeCrawler-002 Revision 5 Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Form Date:

-. 1 0 -2q - D7 Time:

\\ 0 0

PipeID#:- GkT %

Pipe Diameter:

' 2.5

~cces~Poiot Area: &b ftL Building:

cd Elevation:

- 39 '

System:

(>+~+-&4,'

r v-,

Type of Survey Investigation Characterization Final Sumey %

Other 3

/

Gross CaGO d Cs Detector Cal Date:

1-1 1-07 Detector Cal Due Date:

\\ - \\ \\ - ~ g -

instrument:

2-3 SO -1 Instrument ID #:

S9Osq Instnunent Cal Date:

\\ -\\\\-b-)

Instrument Cai Due Date: b S.

From the Dslily'Pipe Survey Detector Control Form for the Selected Detector Background Value 3,q cpm mcbiatic

\\ D

~m Efficiency Factor for Pipe Diameter 0.0 0 0 3 3 (from detector efficiency determination)

MDGbcic Is the MDC,,h, acceptable?

(if no, adjust sample count time and recalculate MDCRsla,ic)

~ o m e n t s : fir+ ILbor\\

7, 1 u o Technician Signature K~+J?-

Pipe Interior Radiological Survey Package Page 1 of &

REFERENCE COPY a, Page 1

REFERENCE COPY 0

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 3 j

PAGE@)

DQA Check Sheet Design #

EP CRT-2 Revision #

Originat Survey Unit #

E P-CRT-2 Preliminary Data Review' Answers to the following questions should ba fully documented in the Survey Unit Yes No N,A Retease Record

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 DCGLw for Class ? and 2 survey units, or below 0.5 DGGh fw Class 3 survey units?

X

3.

Is the instrumenCstion MDC for embeddedlburied piping static measurements below h e D C G h ?

X

4.

Was the instrumentatiin MDC for structure scan measurements, soil scan measurements, and embeddedhuried piping scan measurements below the D%,

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 volumelric measurements and smear analysis < 10% D C G h ?

X

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 colled data proper for the types of radiation i n v o M and for the media being surveyed?

X

8. Were "Special Methods" for data mllectlon properly applied for the survey unit under r w i M X

g.

Is the data set comprised of qualified rn~surement results collected in accordance with the survey design, which accurately reflects the radiological status of the facility?

X I. Has a posting plot been created?

X

2.

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

3. Have other graphical data tools been created to assist in analyzing the data?

X Data Analysis

1.

Are all sample measurwnents below the D C G h (Class 1 & 2), or 0.5 D C G h (Class 3)1 X --

2.

Is the mean of the sample data < DCGLw?

3.

If elevated areas have been identified by scans andlor sampling, is the average aetivtty in each elevated area i D C G h (Class I), < D C G h (Class 2), or 10.5 DCGLw (Class 3)?

X

4.

Is the result d the Elevated Measurements Test < 1.0?

X

5. Is the result of the statistical test (S+ for Sign Test or Wr for WRS Test) 2 the critical value?

X Cammerib:

CS-0912 Page 1 of I

SECTION 7 ATTACHMENT 4 1 DISC