Re: STATISTICAL FREE RELEASE RAD SURVEYING TECHNIQUES.

[jgbarnes@ix.netcom.com (JAMES BARNES)]

At the risk of sounding like one of those folks who hasn't come up to speed yet, 
I think statistical survey techniques make sense where the deposition of 
contaminant probably occurred as a result of a steady state process over a 
relative wide area.

I don't think it is appropriate where the deposition occurred as a result of 
process or behavior that is unpredictable in nature.  Thus random survey of a 
field or warehouse floor may make sense; random survey of a radioisotopes 
laboratory may not be appropriate as researchers have a habit of squirreling away 
things for posterity that one would only find with a 100% survey.

I would be interested in how one would describe areas where a statistical survey 
technique is appropriate and areas where it is definitely not appropriate.

Jim Barnes, CHP
RSO
Rockwell Aerospace; Rocketdyne Division
---------------------------------------

You wrote: 
>
>     Westinghouse Hanford Company's (WHC) material and equipment release 
>     procedure currently allows statistical release as a time saving 
>     technique.  It is not used very often because the technicians believe 
>     it is more complicated than just doing a 100% survey.  The procedure 
>     is based on Durham, J. S. and D. L. Gardner, "Contamination Surveys 
>     for Release of Material" which was presented at the 1994 HPS midyear 
>     meeting in Albany, NY.  Dr. Durham can be reached at (509) 373-0886 
>     for more information.  The statistics of this paper were based on 
>     Eger, E. J., "The Use of One-sided Tolerance Tests for Surveys During 
>     Decontamination and Decommissioning."
>     
>     WHC is also removing radiological postings from outdoor contamination 
>     areas based on statistical surveys.  This is not an unrestricted 
>     release because the land is in a controlled area but once unposted, 
>     the land could eventually be released.  This procedure is based on the 
>     above mention documents and the DOE Draft Environmental Implementation 
>     Guide for Radiological Survey Procedures, November 1992.  This 
>     document is very similar to the NRC NUREG/CR-5849, "Manual for 
>     Conducting Radiological Surveys in Support of License Termination," 
>     June 1992.  James Berger at (615) 531-3669 is the author of the NRC 
>     manual.  Federal agencies are interested in issuing one manual to 
>     cover release.  It will be called the Multiagency Manual for 
>     Environmental Radiological Surveys (MMERS).  My latest draft is
>     May 1994.  The NRC has just issued NUREG-1505, "A Nonparametric 
>     Statistical Methodology for the Design and Analysis of Final Status 
>     Decommissioning Surveys," August 1995.  It seems to represent the 
>     direction the agencies are going and is based on EPA 230-R-94-004, 
>     "Statistical Methods for Evaluating the Attainment of Cleanup 
>     Standards," Volume 3, December 1992.  This is based on the statistical 
>     work of Dr. Richard Gilbert of PNL.
>     
>     We believe that our procedure is good for finding big problems like 
>     spills or burial sites.  It is not good for finding small isolated 
>     contamination like animal feces that have been brought into the area.  
>     The procedure has been scrutinized by many reviewers.  The reviewers 
>     have a hard time with the statistics because it goes against their 
>     tradition of 100% survey for small items and I have a hard time 
>     getting them to take the time to read the above referenced documents 
>     and coming up to speed.
>     
>     I believe that the use of statistics is the only way to reasonably 
>     release large items/areas.  I am very interested in this subject and 
>     can be reached at (509) 376-8124 or David_B_Ottley@rl.gov.
>