We don't have any locations that kind of difference.  We occasionally have 
individuals in a couple of offices that will pick up 10-12 mrem of the OSLD and 
not enter the for the quarter.  With the Thermo EDs (set with 7% bias), we see 
a 20% over response in N-16 areas, but with the scattered / skyshine there 
hasn't been any noticeable difference.  Our BREs nor any offices are 
significantly close to the Turbine.  We do have a hallway and some other 
unoccupied locations  which we monitor that does receive some significant dose 
over a year.  We did place a shield over the top of the HP turbine when we did 
an upgrade a few years back as part of power uprate in order to reduce the 
impact to the site boundary dose.

John Geyster
RP Support Supv
Vermont Yankee
(802) 258-5471

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
Bebb, Jeremy L.
Sent: Wednesday, August 14, 2013 2:35 PM
To: '[email protected]'
Subject: Powernet: Turbine Shine

All BWRs,

We have a discrepancy in our DLR to DRD data in that the DLRs always report 
higher than our DLR dose.  We have maintenance personnel located on the same 
elevation as our turbine.  We see approximately 8 rem worth of exposure 
annually that is unaccounted for by DRD measurements.  We also have security 
personnel located in BREs around the site that received between 1-2 rem 
annually from turbine shine.

Do any of your sites have personnel located within close proximity to your 
Turbine?

If so what kind of delta between your DLR and DRD readings do you see?

What kind of DRDs and DLRs are you utilizing and what is your DRD bias?


Thanks,

Jeremy Bebb
Staff Health Physicist
Cooper Nuclear Station
(402) 825-5026



Reply via email to