Final Status Survey Report for Saxton Nuclear Experimental ...from radionuclide mix analyses from...

Final Status Survey Report

For

Saxton Nuclear Experimental CorporationSaxton Steam Generating Station

Structural Surfaces - CV Steam Tunnel SS22

m,�, � rn - 239 9

3131 � "� 31 � mu_�� '!¶�!L!�L-'-'�h�ii 93 13 II - � '�' AL�A

-mm I�"' I - ' -. -1 �� 'n B qt - -e,, ,,' ' . '. , _

Prepared by GPU Nuclear, Inc.

July 2005

Table Of Contents

Executive Summary

1.0 Purpose and Scope

2.0 Survey Area Description

3.0 Operating History3.1 Plant Operations3.2 Survey Area Remediation Status

4.0 Site Release Criteria

5.0 Final Status Survey Design / DQO Process

6.0 Final6.16.26.36.4

7.0 Data7.17.27.37.4

Status Survey ResultsSummary for Survey Unit SS22-1Summary for Survey Unit SS22-2Summary for Survey Unit SS22-3Summary for Survey Unit SS22-5

AssessmentAssessment CriteriaSummary of Overall ResultsSurvey VariationsQuality Control Measurements

8.0 Final Survey Conclusions

9.0 References

10.0 Appendices

i

Executive Summary

This report presents the results and conclusions of the final status survey (FSS)of the Class 1 structural surfaces of the Saxton Nuclear ExperimentalCorporation (SNEC) facility designated as SS22. This FSS includes surveys ofresidual structural surfaces (e.g. concrete and steel) in the Containment Vessel(CV)Steam Tunnel of the SNEC site and was conducted in the summer of 2004.

The FSS was performed in accordance with the SNEC License Termination Plan(LTP). The CV Steam Tunnel survey area was divided into four survey units.Three units consisted of relatively flat residual structural surfaces but did containsome uneven concrete and steel. The fourth survey unit consisted of remainingembedded unistrut. Data was collected from each survey unit in accordance withthe specific survey design data collection requirements. The following is asummary of the measurements performed:

1) Gas Flow Proportional Counter (GFPC) scans of concrete and steelsurfaces

2) Nal scans of concrete and steel surfaces3) Thirty nine GFPC static measurements4) Eighty-one Nal static measurements5) Sixty five smear samples

The collected FSS survey data demonstrate that the 91 square meters of the CVSteam Tunnel survey area meets the radiological release criteria for unrestricteduse specified in 10CFR20.1402. Therefore GPU Nuclear, Inc. concludes that thearea meets the NRC requirements and may be released for unrestricted use.

1 of 18

1.0 Purpose and Scope

This report presents the results and conclusions of the final status survey of theresidual structural surfaces in the CV Steam Tunnel west of the SNEC facility.The survey area consists of three mostly concrete surface survey unitsdesignated SS22-1, SS22-2, and SS22-3 and one unit designated SS22-5consisting of residual unistrut. Designation SS22-4 is not used. This reportprovides the information required by 10CFR50.82(a)(11) and the SNEC licensetermination plan (LTP) to demonstrate that this area meets the radiologicalcriteria for unrestricted use specified in IOCFR20.1402.

This report describes the radiological data collected in four Class 1 survey unitsof residual structural surface in the CV Steam Tunnel. This report only addressesthe FSS performed on this specific area. The format of this report follows theguidance contained in reference 9.2.

2.0 Survey Area Description

The CV Steam Tunnel is Class 1 impacted structural surface located belowgrade to the west of the SNEC facility. The survey area encompasses about 91square meters of concrete and steel including 6 square meters from about 70linear feet of unistrut. Because there are three distinct regions in the chambersplus the residual unistrut, the survey area has been divided into four survey units.The four survey units are discussed below. The individual survey unitdesignations are derived from table 5-2 of the SNEC LTP (reference 9.3).

Survey unit SS22-1 is a Class 1 residual concrete and steel surface in theremaining portion of the CV Steam Tunnel between the CV and the SaxtonSteam Generating Station (SSGS). It consists of the floor of the CV SteamTunnel - an underground room between the SSGS and the CV. The survey unitis approximately 21 square meters.

Survey unit SS22-2 is a Class 1 residual concrete and steel surface in theremaining portion of the CV Steam Tunnel between the CV and the SSGS. Itconsists of the walls of the CV Steam Tunnel - an underground room betweenthe SSGS and the CV. The survey unit is approximately 48 square meters.

Survey unit SS22-3 is a Class 1 residual concrete and steel surface in theremaining portion of the CV Steam Tunnel between the CV and the SSGS. Itconsists of the ceiling of the CV Steam Tunnel - an underground room betweenthe SSGS and the CV. The survey unit is approximately 16 square meters.

Survey unit SS22-5 is a Class I residual steel surface in the remaining portion ofthe CV Steam Tunnel between the CV and the SSGS. It consists of the residual

2 of 18

unistrut of the CV Steam Tunnel - an underground room between the SSGS andthe CV. Because of the unique nature of the unistrut, the survey unit is primarilydiscussed in linear feet of unistrut instead of square meters. The survey unit isapproximately 70 linear feet of unistrut and totals about 6 square meters.

3.0 Operating History

3.1 Plant Operation

The Saxton Nuclear Experimental Corporation (SNEC) facility included apressurized water reactor (PWR), which was licensed to operate at 23.5megawatts thermal (23.5 MWTh). The reactor, containment vessel and supportbuildings have all been removed. The facility is owned by the Saxton NuclearExperimental Corporation and is licensed by GPU Nuclear, Inc. The SNECfacility is maintained under a Title 10 Part 50 license and associated TechnicalSpecifications. In 1972, the license was amended to possess but not operate theSNEC reactor.

The facility was built from 1960 to 1962 and operated from 1962 to 1972 primarilyas a research and training reactor. Steam from the SNEC reactor was directed tothe adjacent Saxton Steam Generating Station (SSGS), through piping in the CVSteam Tunnel, to generate electricity. Other shared systems also introducedSNEC activity into the SSGS and the main SNEC discharge entered the SSGSdischarge tunnel. After shutdown in 1972, the SNEC facility was placed in acondition equivalent to the current SAFSTOR status. Since then, it has beenmaintained in a monitored condition. The fuel was removed in 1972 and shippedto a (now DOE) facility at Savannah River, SC, who is now the owner of the fuel.As a result of this, neither SNEC nor GPU Nuclear, Inc. has any furtherresponsibility for the spent fuel from the SNEC facility. The building andstructures that supported reactor operation were partially decontaminated by1974. The SSGS was dismantled circa 1974.

In the late 1980s and through the 1990s, additional decontamination anddisassembly of the containment vessel and support buildings and final equipmentand large component removal was completed. Final decontamination anddismantlement of the reactor support structures and buildings was completed in1992. Large component structures, pressurizer, steam generator, and reactorvessel were removed in late 1998. Containment vessel removal (to below grade)and backfill was completed in late 2003. Currently, decontamination, disassemblyand demolition of the SNEC facility buildings and equipment has beencompleted and the facility is in the process of Final Status Survey for unrestrictedrelease and license termination.

3.2 Survey Area Remediation Status

3 of 18

The CV Steam Tunnel had potential for contamination as a result of radioactiveliquid and steam systems that were present in the tunnel. Piping systems wereremoved circa 1974. Remediation included removal of piping and concretesurfaces. A large portion of the tunnel was completely removed, leaving a portionabout 36 feet long. Remediation was performed on this remaining portion toreduce the residual volumetric contamination. Following survey, the remainingportion of the tunnel was collapsed into itself.

4.0 Site Release Criteria

The site release criteria applied to the structural surface areas of the CV SteamTtunnel correspond to the radiological dose criteria for unrestricted use perIOCFR20.1402. The dose criteria is met 'if the residual radioactivity that isdistinguishable from background radiation results in a Total Effective DoseEquivalent (TEDE) to an average member of the critical group that does notexceed 25 mrem/yr, including that from groundwater sources of drinking water,and that the residual radioactivity has been reduced to levels that are as low asreasonably achievable (ALARA)".

Levels of residual radioactivity that correspond to the allowable dose to meet thesite or survey unit release criteria for structural surfaces were derived byanalyses using a building re-use scenario. The dose modeling for this scenario isexplained in the SNEC LTP (reference 9.3). The derived concentration guidelinelevels (DCGL) shown in Table 5-1 of the SNEC LTP form the basis for satisfyingthe site release criteria.

Residual radioactivity sample results for the surfaces were used to calculate asurrogate Cs137 DCGL. The adjusted surrogate DCGL was developed using themethodology described in the SNEC LTP section 5.2.3.2.3 based on nuclidespecific DCGLs from Table 5-1 of the LTP.

An adjustment was made to the surrogate Cs137 DCGL to address the de-listedradionuclides as described in the LTP section 6.2.2.3. SNEC has instituted anadministrative limit of 75% of the DCGL for all measurement results. The de-listed radionuclides are conservatively accounted for in this 25% reduction sincethe de-listed radionuclides were only 4.7% of the dose contribution. Theseadjustment factors are discussed in section 6 of the SNEC LTP.

5.0 Final Status Survey Design and DQO

The SNEC calculations providing the design of the survey for these survey unitsis provided in Appendices A and B. Scan coverage of the three Class 1 concretesurvey units covered approximately 100% of the available surfaces. Scans wereconducted using Gas Flow Proportional Counters (GFPC) and 2 inch by 2 inchNal detectors. The unistrut was surveyed by static measurements with 100%

4 of 18

coverage. The SNEC calculation providing an assessment of the results of theunistrut measurements is attached in Appendix C.

Fixed point measurements were performed with the GFPC in the three concretesurvey units and with Nal detectors on the unistrut.

The survey designs use a surrogate Cs137/gross beta effective DCGL developedfrom radionuclide mix analyses from samples collected before the Final StatusSurvey in the vicinity of the survey unit. The mix was based on radionuclide mixdata (including the hard-to-detects listed in Table 5-1 of the LTP) from the CV,CV Tunnel, and SSGS mezzanine (attachment 3 of appendix A).

Cs137, Co6Q, and Sr90 were positively detected in one or more of these samplesand are accounted for in the adjusted surrogate DCGL. The following table(Table 5.0-1) presents the Data Quality Objectives (DQO) and other relevantinformation from the survey design package.

5 of 18

Table 5.0-1 - DQO/D signDQO/Design Parameter* SS22-1, SS22-1, SS22-3 SS22-5

SNEC Design Caic. # E900-03-019 E900-04-004E900-04-012

MARSSIM Classification I 1

Survey Unit Area (m2) 21,48,16 6 M2, 70 linear feet

Statistical Test WRS WRS

Type 1 decision error (a) 0.05 0.05

Type 2 decision error () 0.10 0.10

LBGR (cpm) 1925 N/A*

Estimated a (cpm) 51 N/A

Relative Shift (A/a) 3.0 N/A

Number of static points'* 15,11,13 81

DCGLw (Cs137 27250 27250dpm/100cm2 )

75% Admin Limit (Cs137 20438 20438dpm/lOOcm

2)

75%Admin limit -static 2077 N/A(Cs137 cpm)

DCGLw (Cs137 pCi/g) 6.32 6.32

75%Admin Limit -scan 1100 (gross GFPC) N/A(cpm) 300 (gross Nal)

75% Admin Limit (pCi/gm) 4.74 4.74

Scan MDC (dpm/100cm2) 5838 (Nal), 1653 (GFPC) NIA*'*

Static MDC(dpm/JOOcm 2 ) N/A 2215

SNEC Survey Request# SR144 SR115

Scan Survey Instrument GFPC, Nal Nal

* Since the unistrut was 100% static measured, no statistical sampling parameters were requiredNumber of static points actually performed

* no Nal scans were performed under calculation 04-004.

6.0 Final Status Survey Results

The following sections provide the survey summary results for each survey unitas required by the respective design. Summary data was taken from references9.8 and 9.9 which are filed in the SNEC history files.

6.1 Survey Unit SS22-1

6 of 18

6.1.1 Scan survey

Scan measurements were made in SS22-1 using the GFPC with follow-up usingthe Nal detector. The GFPC had an MDCscan of 1653 dpm/1OOcm 2 (attachment8.4 of appendix A). The adjusted surrogate Cs137 beta DCGLw for this surveyunit was 27250 dpm/1OOcm 2 and the 75% administrative limit was 20438dpm/1OOcm 2 (Attachment 3-5 of appendix A).

Of the approximately 21 square meters of this survey unit, portions wereinaccessible for GFPC scanning for various reasons, particularly a small area ofsteel plate. Of the 21 square meters, all were scanned, except for about 0.4square meters that was inaccessible. About 20 square meters out of 21 werescanned with both the GFPC and with the Nal. Therefore about 95 percent of thesurvey unit was scanned and 100% of the accessible area.

All GFPC scan surveys indicated activity less than the action level of 1100 grosscpm. All Nal scan surveys indicated less than the action level of 300 gross cpm.

6.1.2 Fixed point measurements

Fifteen random start systematic fixed point measurement locations were definedfor the survey unit. Based on a conservative relative shift of about 3.0 a minimumof 8 fixed points were required.

None of the design fixed point measurements in SS22-1 had results in excess ofthe of 75% administrative limit of 2077 net cpm for the GFPC measurements.The table below (Table 6.1-1) shows the gross beta results for each fixed pointmeasurement, along with the mean, standard deviation and range of the fixedpoint measurement data.

Smears collected at the fixed point locations were all less than the MDC at <166dpm/1OOcm 2 for beta and <12.3 dpm/1OOcm 2 for alpha.

The standard deviation of the GFPC measurements collected from the surveyunit was less than the variability assumed in the survey design. Therefore, theassessment of variability, relative shift, and number of fixed point measurementsrequired is consistent between the survey design and the survey results. Basedon this, no changes to the survey design or additional measurements arerequired.

7 of 18

Table 6.1-1 - Fixed point results for SS22-1

Point GFPCNumber Unshielded

cpm1 . 3202 3523 3524 3745 3596 3787 2938 3509 34110 36511 32612 351 =13 34414 31815 339

Mean 344Std Dev 22.6

Min 293Max 378


6.2.1 Scan survey

Scan measurements were made in SS22-2 using the GFPC with follow-up usingthe Nal detector. The GFPC had an MDCscan of 1653 dpm/1OOcm 2 (attachment8.4 of appendix A). The adjusted surrogate Cs137 beta DCGLw for this surveyunit was 27250 dpm/1 OOcm 2 and the 75% administrative limit was 20438dpm/l100cm2 (Attachment 3-5 of appendix A).

Of the approximately 48 square meters of this survey unit, portions wereinaccessible for GFPC scanning because of wood posts holding the roof in place.Of the 48 square meters, all were scanned, except for about 1 square meter thatwas inaccessible. About 47 square meters out of 48 were scanned with both theGFPC and with the Nal. Therefore about 98 percent of the survey unit wasscanned and 100% of the accessible area.



8 of 18

Eleven random start systematic fixed point measurement locations were definedfor the survey unit. Based on a conservative relative shift of about 3.0 a minimumof 8 fixed points were required.


Smears collected at the fixed point locations were all less than the MDC at <169dpm/1 OOcm 2 for beta and <112 dpm/1 OOcm 2 for alpha.

The standard deviation of the GFPC measurements collected from the surveyunit was slightly larger than the variability assumed in the survey design.However, the LBGR used was conservative and was much higher than thetypical 50% of the DCGL recommended. The observed variability combined witha slightly reduced LBGR would still result in a relative shift of 3. Therefore, theassessment of variability, relative shift, and number of fixed point measurementsrequired is consistent between the survey design and the survey results. Basedon this, no changes to the survey design or additional measurements arerequired.



cpm1 2742 3213 3184 3625 3636 2147 3298 3939 362

10 40811 349


Min 214Max 408


6.3.1 Scan survey

9 of 18

Scan measurements were made in SS22-3 using the GFPC with follow-up usingthe Nal detector. The GFPC had an MDCscan of 1653 dpm/IOOcm2 (attachment8.4 of appendix A). The adjusted surrogate Cs137 beta DCGLw for this surveyunit was 27250 dpm/1 00cm2 and the 75% administrative limit was 20438dpm/1 00cm2 (Attachment 3-5 of appendix A).

Of the approximately 16 square meters of this survey unit, portions wereinaccessible for GFPC scanning because of the configuration of the end portionof the roof. Of the 16 square meters, all were scanned, except for about 1.9square meters that was inaccessible. About 14 square meters out of 16 werescanned with both the GFPC and with the Nal. Therefore about 88 percent of thesurvey unit was scanned and 100% of the accessible area.



Thirteen random start systematic fixed point measurement locations weredefined for the survey unit. Based on a conservative relative shift of about 3.0 aminimum of 8 fixed points were required.


Smears collected at the fixed point locations were all less than the MDC at <166dpm/1OOcm 2 for beta and <12.3 dpm/100cM 2 for alpha.

The standard deviation of the GFPC measurements collected from the surveyunit was less than the variability assumed in the survey design. Therefore, theassessment of variability, relative shift, and number of fixed point measurementsrequired is consistent between the survey design and the survey results. Basedon this, no changes to the survey design or additional measurements arerequired.

10 of 18



cpm1 3812 3493 3534 3725 3906 4127 4118 3629 39410 38811 40412 42513 440


Min 349Max 440


6.4.1 Scan survey

Survey unit SS22-5 consisted only of the 70 linear feet of unistrut. The unistrutreceived a static measurement every foot. Therefore, static measurements wereperformed on 100% of the unistrut in lieu of scanning.


Eighty one fixed point measurement locations were defined for the survey unit,one every foot along the unistrut. The design basis for the conversion factors forthe detector was based on a one foot long source area. Therefore, the unistrutreceived 100% static measurements.

There was no specific action level defined in the survey design for the unistrut, sothe results were specifically assessed (appendix C). The table below (Table 6.4-1) shows the Nal results for each fixed point measurement, along with the mean,standard deviation and range of the fixed point measurement data. Attachment 5of appendix C shows that the maximum static measurement was about 38% ofthe 75% administrative limit for surface contamination.

Twenty six smears collected on the unistrut were all less than the MDC at <169dpm/1 OOcm 2 for beta and <11 dpm/1 00cm2 for alpha.

11 of 18

Table 6.4-1 - Fixed point Nal results for SS22-5


cpm1 1202 1033 1064 1075 1256 1257 1088 1169 12710 11711 13912 12613 11814 11915 13516 13417 11618 11919 11420 13921 12222 11823 11024 11925 12626 10527 11028 15029 13230 13531 13032 15733 12734 13535 13036 12137 14338 15339 13640 14241 13042 13643 15544 129

12 of 18

Table 6.4-1 (continued) - Fixed point Nal results for SS22-5

45 12946 14847 14748 14249 15150 13551 13652 17253 15754 16655 14156 15057 17158 15059 14760 13161 12662 11763 12264 13965 14666 14367 15268 9769 10670 11071 9872 11573 9774 9775 10276 12877 11578 12179 12080 9881 93


Min 93Max 172

7.0 Data Assessment

7.1 Assessment Criteria

13 of 18

The final status survey data has been reviewed to verify authenticity, appropriatedocumentation, quality, and technical acceptability. The review criteria for dataacceptability are:

1) The instruments used to collect the data were capable of detecting theradiation of the radionuclide of interest at or below the investigation levels.

2) The calibration of the instruments used to collect the data was current andradioactive sources used for calibration were traceable to recognizedstandards or calibration organizations.

3) Instrument response was checked before and, when required, afterinstrument use each day data was collected.

4) Survey team personnel were properly trained in the applicable surveytechniques and training was documented.

5) The MDCs and the assumptions used to develop them were appropriatefor the instruments and the survey methods used to collect the data.

6) The survey methods used to collect the data were appropriate for themedia and types of radiation being measured.

7) Special instrument methods used to collect data were applied aswarranted by survey conditions, and were documented in accordance withan approved site Survey Request procedure.

8) The custody of samples that were sent for off-site analysis were trackedfrom the point of collection until final results were provided.

9) The final status survey data consists of qualified measurement resultsrepresentative of current facility status and were collected in accordancewith the applicable survey design package.

If a discrepancy existed where one or more criteria were not met, thediscrepancy was reviewed and corrective action taken (as appropriate) inaccordance with site procedures.

The statistical test does not need to be performed for this final status surveysince the data clearly show that the survey unit meets the release criteriabecause all measurements in the survey units are less than or equal to theDCGLw.

14 of 18

7.2 Summary of Overall Results

SS22-1 had no alarm points during scan surveys of approximately 100% of theaccessible surface. Scan MDCs were adequate. GFPC fixed pointmeasurements were all less than the action level. Scan fraction and number offixed point measurements meets LTP and MARSSIM requirements.



SS22-5 was surveyed using almost 100% static measurement coverage of theaccessible surface. An assessment of the results shows that all measurementswere below the 75% administrative limit. No scan surveys were performedbecause 100 percent static measurement eliminates the need for scanning.

7.3 Survey Variations (Design, survey request, LTP)

7.3.1 Approximately 0.4 square meters of SS22-1 could not be scan surveyeddue to interferences.

7.3.2 Approximately 1 square meter of SS22-2 could not be scan surveyed dueto interferences.

7.3.3 Approximately 1.9 square meters of SS22-3 could not be scan surveyeddue to interferences.

7.3.4 Static point SS22-1 #15 was relocated 2 inches due to surfaceconfiguration

7.3.5 Static point SS22-3 #7 was relocate 20 inches due to interferences.

7.4 QC comparisons

7.4.1 Scan surveys

Numerous areas were rescanned as QC duplicates. The QC rescans did notidentify any activity above alarm points and therefore are in agreement with theprimary scans because they both support the same conclusion, that the survey

15 of 18

unit passes. GFPC QC scans were conducted on 6 m2 of the survey area, whichrepresents about 7.4 percent of the 81 m2 originally scanned with the GFPC. Thisexceeds the minimum 5% required. Nal QC scans were also conducted on 6 m2

of the survey area, which also represents about 7.4 percent of the 81 m2

originally scanned with the Nal. This exceeds the minimum 5% required.

7.4.2 Fixed Point measurements

Several fixed point measurements were duplicated for QC purposes. The QCfixed point measurements did not identify any activity above alarm points andtherefore are in agreement with the primary result because they both support thesame conclusion, that the survey unit passes. GFPC QC fixed pointmeasurements were performed on 3 locations, which represent 7.7 percent ofthe 39 primary measurements. Table 7.4-1 below shows the GFPC comparison.Nal QC fixed point measurements were performed on 5 locations, whichrepresent 6.2 percent of the 81 primary measurements. Table 7.4-2 below showsthe Nal comparison. These exceed the minimum 5% required.

Table 7.4-1 - Fixed point GFPC QC

Point Initial QCNumber result cpm result cpm

SS22-1 10 365 362SS22-2 4 362 385

SS22-3 10 388 414

Table 7.4-2 - Fixed point Nal QC

Point Initial QCNumber result cpm result cpm

SS22-5 14 119 114SS22-5 35 130 132SS22-5 50 135 108SS22-5 74 97 110SS22-5 81 93 79

8.0 Final SurveV Conclusions

The Structural Surfaces of the CV Steam Tunnel survey units SS22-1, SS22-2,SS22-3, and SS22-5 final status survey was performed in accordance with theSNEC LTP, site procedures, design calculations, and Survey Requestrequirements. FSS data was collected to meet and/or exceed the quantityspecified or required for each survey unit design. The survey data for eachsurvey unit meets the following conditions:

16 of 18

1) The average residual radioactivity on the surfaces is less than the derivedsurrogate DCGLw in all of the survey units.

2) All measurements were less than the DCGLw in all four survey units.

3) A special assessment of residual volumetric activity in the unistrutdemonstrates that residual radioactivity is less than 38% of the 75%administrative limit.

These conditions satisfy the release criteria established in the SNEC LTPand the radiological criteria for unrestricted use given in IOCFR20.1402.Therefore it is concluded that the SNEC Structural Surface Areas of the CVSteam Tunnel designated SS22 are suitable for unrestricted release.

17 of 18

9.0 References

9.1 SNEC Facility Site area grid map Drawing number SNECRM-0209.2 SNEC procedure E900-ADM-4500.60 "Final Status Survey Report"9.3 SNEC License Termination Plan9.4 NUREG 1575 'Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation

Manual" (MARSSIM), revision 1 August 20009.5 COMPASS computer program, Version 1.0.0, Oak Ridge Institute for

Science and Education9.6 SNEC procedure E900-IMP-4500.59, 'Final Site Survey Planning and

DOQA"9.7 SNEC procedure E900-IMP-4520.04, 'Survey Methodology to Support

SNEC License Termination"9.8 SNEC Survey Request (SR) # SR1159.9 SNEC Survey Request (SR) # SR144

10.0 Appendices

Appendix A - SNEC Calculation E900-04-012 - "CV Tunnel & Topof Seal Chambers 1&2 Survey Design" (10 pages plus numerousattachments)

Appendix B - SNEC Calculation E900-04-004 - "CV Tunnel UnistrutSurvey Design" (9 pages plus numerous attachments)

Appendix C - SNEC Calculation E900-05-029 - "Assessment of CVTunnel Unistrut" (4 pages plus numerous attachments)

18 of 18

Final Status Survey Report for Saxton Nuclear Experimental ...from radionuclide mix analyses from...

Documents

Transcript of Final Status Survey Report for Saxton Nuclear Experimental ...from radionuclide mix analyses from...