1 / 5

Testing of Dura-Solution at Comanche Peak

Comprehensive evaluation of Dura-Solution versus surfactant-based decontamination products at Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant, showcasing successful decontamination of reactor cavity equipment. Notable reduction in contamination levels achieved, leading to efficient and cost-effective decontamination processes with minimal radiation exposure. Impressive results validate the efficacy of Dura-Solution for nuclear facility maintenance.

pritchett
Download Presentation

Testing of Dura-Solution at Comanche Peak

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Testing of Dura-Solution at Comanche Peak Jim Pore 254-897-5339 JKPore@luminant.com • The following test results were performed and recorded by the Comanche Peak Radiation Protection Department for comparison and evaluation of decontamination products and methods. • Dura-Solution was compared to surfactant-based products currently in use in the RCA at Comanche Peak Nuclear Power Plant in the reactor cavity de-con evolution and spent fuel pit equipment.

  2. Dura-Solution Decontamination Test in Reactor Cavity at Comanche Peak -2RF08 • De-contamination of the Unit 2 RX vessel trough using • Dura-Solution • Cavity Work During 2RF08 • Normal Refueling • Guide Tube Pin Replacement Mod. • RX Vessel Trough De-con • § Water and crud was removed (vacuumed) from trough. • § Dura-Solution was introduced to trough. • § Trough and flange was scrubbed using scrub pads with handles. • § Trough and flange was rinsed with water and vacuumed to Lower • Internals Storage Area. (LISA). • LISA floor was afterward de-conned to 10Kdpm/100cm2 average. • Summary of Radiological significance • Initial survey 100 to 700 mRad/hr/100cm2 on cavity floor. • Initial de-con effort reduced the contamination levels to 400Kdpm/100cm2. • The 2nd De-con effort (mopping of the trough) achieved our goal <100kdpm/100cm2. • A rough estimated of 1 man hour and 100mRem was saved.

  3. Conclusion: Westinghouse experienced no personal contamination events during the RX Head tensioning. This was due to reduced contamination levels at the flange and trough area. 2RF08 Cavity de-con was noted by management as excellent. RWST (cavity water) PEAK ENERGY DECAY CORR ISOTOPE ENERGY DIFF (KEV) uCi/ML -------- ------- ---------- ---------- CR-51 320.07 -0.06 1.708E-03 MN-54 834.81 -0.18 3.497E-05 CO-57 122.07 0.24 5.963E-06 CO-58 810.75 -0.09 2.001E-03 FE-59 1099.22 0.26 5.285E-05 CO-60 1332.51 0.08 1.006E-04 ZN-65 1115.52 0.18 7.982E-06 NB-95 765.82 -0.17 1.670E-04 ZR-95 756.72 -0.17 1.140E-04 ------ --------- AVG ENERGY DIFF = 0.01 4.192E-03 = TOTAL GAMMA ACTIVITY

  4. Test results: Dura-Solution vs Detergent 8 150K – 1st decon 200K – 200K 2st decon 3st decon 35K-40K 4st decon-Effect solution Subject matter: Stainless steel, Fuel Handling Load Guide Assembly Post outage decontamination Beginning Contamination Levels = 200K dpm/100cm2 In this corner Detergent 8 In this corner Dura-Solution Results dpm/100cm2 Results dpm/100cm2 1st decon 30K - 40K 2st decon 15K - 20K Note: Dose rate on rags 3-5 mR/hr Round 1 Time in motion study. Deconing to 30K Detergent 8 4 Rag + 4 Decons = Rad Waste Increase Dura-Solution 1 Rag + 1 Decon = Rad Waste Reduction

More Related