Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning David A. Montt, CHP Sherman the resident bald eagle at Yankee Rowe Associate & Senior Health Physicist Dade Moeller and Associates, Inc. 1 Acton Place, Suite 201 Acton, Massachusetts 01720 1
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning YNPS History •Achieved Initial Criticality—1960 •Began Commercial Operation—1961 •Upgrade to 600 MWth—1963 •Decision to Cease Operations—2/1992 •Possession Only Status—8/1992 •Decommissioning Activities—1992 - 2006 •Fuel Movement to ISFSI (Begin)—6/2002 •Fuel Movement to ISFSI Completed—6/2003 •Decommissioning Complete---10/2006 •ISFSI & GW Monitoring Continue to Present 2
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • http://www.yankeerowe.com/decommis sioning_dismantle.html - web page for video of demolition progression from March 2003 to December 2003 3
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Optimization of Radiochemistry Lab Performance becomes a critical necessity. • Examples Follow and Include: • Developing a process to maintain effective control of effluents in a construction environment in a rapidly changing environment • Identifying the critical stakeholders/customers & work in advance. Know your current and future clients. • Identifying the analyses needed going forward, • Of those needed, identifying those that can most realistically be performed on site recognizing resource constraints (personnel, utilities and budget) 4
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Differences between Operating and Decommissioning Chemistry Needs – Operating • Union/Management Environment – can be contentious and inefficient by nature. • On site staff can be large – 10 to 25+ depending on number of units on site • Extensive Analytical capabilities, even with corporate lab capabilities. – Ion Analysis (Dionex analyzer, or equivalent) – Graphite Furnace (metals) – Atomic Absorption (metals) – Total Organic Compounds (TOC) – Gross Beta – Gamma spectroscopy optimized for operating plant radionuclide levels (plant operational levels) – Tritium, C-14, low energy beta analyses using liquid scintillation technology – Boron analyses by titration or automated instrument analyses – Sediment, – pH, – conductivity, – Oil and Grease 5
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning – Decommissioning • Union Essentially Non Entity; Workforce essentially becomes one. Contract workforce becomes more prominent. • Staff can be small – 2 to 5 depending on number of units on site • Limited Analytical capabilities solidify, and production and turnaround time becomes the driver. – Gamma spectroscopy optimized for operating plant radionuclide levels (focused environmental levels) – Tritium, C-14, low energy beta analyses using liquid scintillation technology – Sediment, – pH, – Conductivity – Oil & Grease 6
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Type of work that needs to be supported – Final Status Survey (FSS) • Structures • Soil/Biota • Surface water/storm water runoff • Surface Water/Sediment – Groundwater Monitoring • D&D operations can impact adversely – will increase your workload unexpectedly • Presents challenges requiring an effective interface with non radiological environmental – Unusual, one-of-a-kind operations (examples at end) – Effluents • Nature of Effluents changes over time • Easy to lose sight of important elements of program • Make sure program remains current with reality 7
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Likely Customers must be anticipated early on. Need to make Sure Radiochemistry is effectively integrated into all Scheduling. – FSS – Groundwater Group – Effluents Program – Remediation Group (sample analysis) – Non Radiological • Shipment of actual/potentially contaminated samples off site • Actual on site analyses (PCB and Screening Lab) – Unique Problem Solving Campaign Leaders – Construction personnel/contractors with little to no radiological background – Regulators – Other stakeholders (public) 8
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Likely and most cost effective analyses must be anticipated early on.. and justified. – Value of time savings for on site analyses vs. off site lab vendor • Time savings – analyses w/in 24 hours a + • Cost savings – minimum $100,000/day • Permits timely decision making • Timely response to unplanned events • Rapid control of situations involving Regulators 9
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Analyses typically selected may be obvious – Gamma Spectroscopy – Liquid Scintillation counting • Will be H 3 most likely, but may need to look as C 14 , and possibly others – Oil and Grease – pH, Sediment – Particle size analysis (0.5u, 1.0u, and up filters) – Boron titration (early on if primary water tank leaks during plant history – Look at on case by case basis; know your plant history 10
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Perhaps not so obvious – Want NIST Traceable calibration sources • Anticipate geometries and media needed • 13 gamma spectroscopy geometries – 4 liter M water, 4 Liter M soil, I liter M water, 1 liter M soil, LSC vial, Planchets w/filters and soil – Non Rad: 100 ml jar soil, 100 ml jar water/gel, 20 ml bottle PCB swipes, etc. • Want NIST Source in correct activity range – Environmental levels for Gamma Spectroscopy – Environmental levels for LSC (H 3 , C 14 , etc.) – May want NIST traceable check sources • Gamma scans of soil • Gamma spectroscopy of soil – Anticipate unusual Regulator special requests (total uranium, e.g.) 11
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • Understand Lab will move from historical facility to smaller temporary facility • Understand utilities cannot be taken for granted ( electricity, water, temp control, waste ) • Understand Lab waste will need to be dealt with and plan in advance • Production and results turnaround will be driver • Cannot sacrifice quality program, but can optimize it. • You will own and be held accountable for performance – take control early on before problems arise – have solution implemented. 12
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • FSS will be slow and clumsy early on. Will not last. Be ready. • Ground water will be similar • Understand elements of MARLAP of greatest value and incorporate early on. • Special projects – hard to anticipate all, stay plugged in by attending daily and special meetings • Effluents you will have full control of, So…. – integrate with Non-Rad Environmental early on, – update programs early on to ensure these are in place and work – long lead time especially with FSAR, QAPP, RECP, NPDES, TSCA – Liquid Effluents can be challenging if not addressed effectively early on – understand what you need & want to do. – Remediation Group will be closely tied to, or part of, HP – establish link early on in programs and people 13
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning EXAMPLE • FSS Sample Throughput Maximized – Initially, following movement of Chemistry Lab to a Trailer to support of the Primary Auxiliary Building (PAB) demolition, three HpGe’s were installed leaving a footprint for a 4 th. – Based on counting times necessary to meet DCGL’s (30 min/sample) and implementation of MARLAP protocols, a though put of 100 samples per day could be processed – Understanding the necessity to dry samples, the existing methodology created a bottleneck. 14
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 15
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 16
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 17
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 18
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 19
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 20
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 21
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning 22
Optimizing Radiochemistry Lab Performance in Decommissioning • FSS Sample Throughput Maximized (Cont.) – No one owned the Sample prep trailer at that point, so Chemistry took ownership realizing it needed to maintain full control to optimize sample throughput and control prioritization requirements of stakeholders. – 2 drying ovens capable of drying in open pans limited sample production to 70 samples in 24 hours. 2 additional ovens were procured as backup in the event of failures of the older ovens. – A method tried at Maine Yankee was tested and implemented at Yankee Atomic. – Samples were dried in plastic Marinellis in the ovens with the covers off at 130 degrees C. The melting limit was 150 degrees. Except for one occasion, this process worked well, permitting up to 112 samples to be prepped in a 24 hour period and meshed well with lab production capacity. 23
Recommend
More recommend
