4 Matching Results

Search Results

Advanced search parameters have been applied.

Verification Survey of Rooms 113, 114, and 208 of the Inhalation Toxicology Laboratory, Lovelace Respiratory Research Institute, Albuquerque, NM

Description: The objectives of the verification survey were to confirm that accessible surfaces of the three laboratories meet the DOE’s established criteria for residual contamination. Drain pipes and ductwork were not included within the survey scope.
Date: June 25, 2008
Creator: Vitkus, T. J.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Verification Survey of the Building 4059 Site (Phase B); Post Historical Site Assessment Sites, Block 1; and Radioactive Materials Handling Facility HOldup Pond (Site 4614), Santa Susana Field Laboratory, The Boeing Company, Ventura County, California

Description: Confirm that the final radiological conditions were accurately and adequately described in the FSS documentation, relative to the established release criteria.
Date: June 6, 2008
Creator: Vitkus, T.J.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department

Comparative evaluation of the US Environmental Protection Agency`s and the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education`s environmental survey and site assessment program field sampling procedures

Description: At the request of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission`s (NRC`s) Headquarters Office, the Environmental Survey and Site Assessment Program (ESSAP) of the Oak Ridge Institute for Science and Education (ORISE) compared the documented procedures that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and ESSAP use for collecting environmental samples. The project objectives were to review both organizations` procedures applicable to collecting various sample matrices, compare the procedures for similarities and differences, and then to evaluate the reason for any identified procedural differences and their potential impact on ESSAP`s sample data quality. The procedures reviewed included those for sampling surface and subsurface soil, surface and groundwater, vegetation, air, and removable surface contamination. ESSAP obtained copies of relevant EPA documents and reviewed and prepared a tabulated summary of each applicable procedure. The methods for collecting and handling each type of sample were evaluated for differences, and where these were identified, the significance and effect of the differences on analytical quality were determined. The results of the comparison showed that, overall, the procedures and methods that EPA and ESSAP use for sample collection are very similar. The number of minor differences noted were the result of restrictions or procedures necessary to ensure sample integrity and prevent the introduction of interfering compounds when samples are to be analyzed for chemical parameters. For most radio nuclide analyses, these additional procedures are not necessary. Another item noted was EPA`s inclusion of steps that reduce the potential for sample cross-contamination by preparing (dressing) a location prior to collecting a sample or removing a portion of a sample prior to containerization.
Date: October 1, 1997
Creator: Vitkus, T.J.; Bright, T.L. & Roberts, S.A.
Partner: UNT Libraries Government Documents Department