Publication Date: 5/1/84
    Pages: 8
    Date Entered: 10/4/84
    Title: NONDESTRUCTIVE ASSAY FOR PLUTONIUM IN SCRAP MATERIAL BY SPONTANEOUS FISSION DETECTION (6/74)
    Revision 1(*)
    May 1984
    U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
    REGULATORY GUIDE
    OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REGULATORY RESEARCH
    REGULATORY GUIDE 5.34
    (Task SG 046-4) NONDESTRUCTIVE ASSAY FOR PLUTONIUM IN SCRAP MATERIAL
    BY SPONTANEOUS FISSION DETECTION
A. INTRODUCTION
    Section 70.51, "Material Balance, Inventory, and Records
    Requirements," of 10CFR Part 70, "Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear
    Material," requires certain licensees authorized to possess at any one
    time more than one effective kilogram of special nuclear material to
    establish and maintain a system of control and accountability so that
    the standard error (estimator) associated with the inventory difference
    (SEID), obtained as a result of a measured material balance, meets
    minimum standards. This guide is intended for those licensees who
    possess plutonium scrap materials and who are also subjected to the
    requirements of Section 70.51 of 10 CFR Part 70.
    Included in a typical material balance are containers of
    inhomogeneous scrap material that are not amenable to assay by the
    traditional method of sampling and chemical analysis. With proper
    controls, the non-destructive assay (NDA) technique of spontaneous
    fission detection is one acceptable method for the assay of plutonium in
    containers of bulk scrap material. The use of spontaneous fission
    detection thus facilitates the preparation of a complete plant material
    balance whose SEID meets established requirements.
    This guide describes procedures acceptable to the NRC staff for
    applying the NDA technique of spontaneous fission detection to plutonium
    in scrap.
    Any guidance in this document related to information collection
    activities has been cleared under OMB Clearance No. 3150-0009.
B. DISCUSSION
    Plutonium in scrap material can contribute significantly to the
    inventory difference and its associated standard error. Unlike the
    major quantity of material flowing through the process, scrap is
    typically inhomogeneous and difficult to sample. Therefore, a separate
    assay of the entire content of each container of scrap material is a
    more reliable method of scrap accountability. NDA is a method for
    assaying the entire content of every container of scrap.
    The term "scrap" refers to material that is generated from the
    main process stream because of the inefficiency of the process. Scrap
    material is generally economically recoverable. Scrap, therefore,
    consists of rejected or contaminated process material such as pellet
    grinder sludge, sweeping from gloveboxes, dried filter sludge, and
    rejected powder and pellets. Scrap is generally distinguished from
    "waste" by the density or concentration of heavy elements in the two
    materials, but it is the recovery cost (per mass unit of special nuclear
    material) that determines whether a material is "scrap" or "waste." The
    concentration of uranium and plutonium in scrap is approximately the
    same as it is in process material, i.e., 85-90 percent (uranium +
    plutonium) by weight. However, on occasion the fraction in both process
    and scrap material can be less than 25 percent. Plutonium in fast
    reactor scrap material is 15-20 percent by weight and in thermal reactor
    recycle material, 2-9 percent by weight. The main difference between
    scrap and process material is that scrap is contaminated and
    inhomogeneous. Waste, on the other hand, contains a low concentration
    of uranium and plutonium, i.e., a few percent or less (uranium +
    plutonium) by weight. However, the recovery of combustible waste by
    incineration may produce ash that is high in uranium and plutonium
    concentrations. Such incinerator ash is also considered "scrap" in this
    guide. However, it should be noted that ash may be more homogeneous in
    its characteristics compared to most scrap and may, therefore, be
    accountable using sampling and chemical analysis methods.
    ----------
    (*) The substantial number of changes in this revision has made it
    impractical to indicate the changes with lines in the margin.
    ----------
    NDA of plutonium can be accomplished primarily by the passive
    methods of gamma ray spectrometry, calorimetry, and spontaneous fission
    detection. Active neutron methods using total count rates or delayed
    neutron detection can also be used in scrap assay measurements.
    Regulatory Guide 5.11, "Nondestructive Assay of Special Nuclear Material
    Contained in Scrap and Waste," provides a framework for the use of these
    NDA methods.(1) The NDA of dense scrap materials using gamma ray spectroscopy can
    be unreliable because of severe gamma ray attenuation. However, the
    isotopic composition of plutonium in scrap materials, with the exception
    of (242)Pu, can be obtained quite reliably using high-resolution gamma
    ray spectrometry measurements (Ref. 1).
    Calorimetry is an accurate method of plutonium assay when there is
    an accurate knowledge of the relative abundance of each plutonium
    isotope and (241)Am. Scrap may contain a mixture of materials of
    different radionuclide compositions, especially different (241)Am
    concentrations, thereby necessitating the measurement of the average
    radionuclide composition. The average radionuclide abundances can be
    accurately measured only when the scrap is reasonably homogeneous. When
    the radionuclide abundances can be accurately measured or controlled,
    calorimetry can be applied to scrap assay (Ref. 2). However,
    calorimetry is time consuming for materials of high heat capacity and
    may not be a practical method for the routine assay of large numbers of
    containers.
    Spontaneous fission detection is a practical NDA technique for the
    assay of plutonium in scrap material. The assay method involves the
    passive counting of spontaneous fission neutrons emitted primarily from
    the fission of (240)Pu. Neutron coincidence counters are used to detect
    these time-correlated neutrons. The theory and practice of neutron
    coincidence counting for plutonium assay are discussed thoroughly in
    References 3 through 6. Spontaneous fission neutrons are sufficiently
    penetrating to provide a representative signal from all the plutonium
    within a container. Since the neutron coincidence signal is dependent
    on both the quantity and relative abundance of (238)Pu, (240)Pu, and
    (242)Pu, the plutonium isotopic composition must be known for assay of
    total plutonium by spontaneous fission detection. The quantity of scrap
    material on inventory when a material balance is computed can be reduced
    through good management, and the scrap remaining on inventory can be
    assayed by spontaneous fission detection to meet the overall plant
    inventory difference (ID) and SEID constraints required by paragraph
    70.51(e)(5) of 10 CFR Part 70.
    ----------
    (1) Revision 1 to this guide was issued in April 1984.
    ----------
    This guide gives recommendations useful for the assay by
    spontaneous fission detection of containers, each containing a few
    liters of scrap and having contents ranging from a few grams to 10
    kilograms of plutonium or up to approximately 2 kilograms of effective
    (240)Pu(2) (see Ref. 7). Containers with a significant plutonium
    content (i.e., 50 grams or more) give a spontaneous fission response
    that must be corrected for the effects of neutron multiplication (Refs.
    8, 9). Scrap materials that have large loadings of plutonium in
    addition to fluorine, oxygen, or other alpha/neutron-producing elements
    are difficult to measure and correct for multiplication effects because
    of the large random neutron flux from the (alpha, n) reactions in the
    matrix materials. These samples should be segregated into smaller
    quantities for measurements. In general, a large quantity of plutonium
    can be assayed by spontaneous fission detection by subdividing the scrap
    into smaller amounts, or the items may be more amenable to assay by
    calorimetry.
C. REGULATORY POSITION
    The spontaneous fission detection method for the NDA of plutonium
    in bulk inhomogeneous scrap material should include (1) discrimination
    of spontaneous fission radiations from random background by coincidence
    techniques and (2) measurement of the relative plutonium isotopic
    composition of the scrap. An acceptable spontaneous fission detection
    method of plutonium assay is described below.
1. SPONTANEOUS FISSION DETECTION SYSTEM
    1.1 Detectors
    Instruments based on moderated thermal neutron detectors, i.e.,
    neutron well coincidence counters, are recommended for applications in
    which the gross neutron detection rate does not exceed 2 x 10(5)
    neutrons/sec. The dead time inherent in these slow coincidence systems
    can be reduced by emplying a shift-register coincidence circuit. If the
    gross neutron detection rate is primarily due to random background and
    exceeds 2 x 10(5) neutrons/sec, a fast-neutron-detection,
    single-coincidence system can be used, provided adequate corrections can
    be made for matrix effects. Matrix effects are more severe in
    fast-neutron-detection systems, as shown in Table 1.
    ----------
    (2) The effective (240)Pu mass is a weighted average of the mass
    of each of the plutonium isotopes. The weighting is equal to the
    spontaneous fission neutron yield of each isotope relative to that of
    (240)Pu. Since only the even-numbered isotopes have significant
    spontaneous fission rates, the effective (240)Pu mass is given
    approximately by:
    M(240)(eff)=M(240) + (1.64 plus or minus 0.07)M(242) + (2.66 plus
    or minus 0.19)M(238)where M is the mass of the isotope indicated in parentheses. The
    uncertainties in the coefficients and in the effective (240)Pu
    abundances in the table are from the reported standard deviations in the
    most reliable data available (Ref. 7). The mathematical procedure for
    converting from M(240)(eff) to m(total Pu) is presented in the appendix
    to this guide together with a sample calculation.
    ----------
    (Due to database constraints, Tables 1 and 2 are not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)1.2 Detection Chamber
    The chamber should permit reproducible positioning of
    standard-sized containers in the location of maximum spatial response
    uniformity.
    1.3 Fission Source
    A spontaneous fission source with a neutron intensity comparable
    to the intensity of the largest plutonium mass to be assayed should be
    used for making matrix corrections using the source addition technique
    (Ref. 10). A nanogram of (252)Ca is approximately equivalent to a gram
    of effective (240)Pu.
    1.4 Readout
    Readout should allow computation of the
    accidental-to-real-coincidence ratio in addition to the net
    real-coincidence rate. Live-time readout or a means of computing the
    dead time should also be provided.
    1.5 Performance Specifications
    The performance of a spontaneous fission detection instrument
    should be evaluated according to its stability, uniformity of spatial
    response, and insensitivity to matrix effects. Therefore, information
    should be obtained regarding:
1. The precision of the coincidence response as a function of
    the real-coincidence counting rate and the
    accidental-to-real-coincidence ratio. Extremes in the background or
    accidental-coincidence rate can be simulated by using a source of random
    neutrons (nonfission).
2. The uniformity of spatial response. Graphs should be
    obtained on the relative coincidence response to a small fission neutron
    source as a function of position in the counting chamber.
3. The sensitivity of matrix interference. A table of the
    relative coincidence response to a small fission neutron source as a
    function of the composition of the matrix material surrounding the point
    source should be obtained. Included in the matrix should be materials
    considered representative of common scrap materials. Table 1 is an
    example of such a tabulation of the relative response for a wide range
    of materials.
    This information should be used for evaluating the expected
    instrument performance and for estimating errors. The above performance
    information can be requested from the instrument suppliers during
    instrument selection and should be verified during preoperational
    instrument testing.
2. ANALYST
    A trained individual should oversee spontaneous fission detection
    assay of plutonium and should have primary responsibility for instrument
    specification, preoperational instrument testing, standards and
    calibration, an operation manual, measurement control, and error
    analysis. Experience or training equivalent to a bachelor's degree in
    science or engineering from an accredited college or university and a
    laboratory course in radiation measurement should be the minimum
    qualifications of the analyst. The spontaneous fission detection
    analyst should frequently review the spontaneous fission detection
    operation and should authorize any changes in the operation.
3. CONTAINERS AND PACKAGING
    A single type of container should be used for packaging all scrap
    in each category. A uniform container that would facilitate accurate
    measurement and would standardize this segment of instrument design,
    e.g., a thin-walled metal (steel) can with an inside diameter between 10
    and 35 cm, is recommended. For further guidance on container
    standardization in NDA measurements, see Reference 12.
4. REDUCING ERROR DUE TO MATERIAL VARIABILITY
    The variation in spontaneous fission detection response due to
    material variability in scrap should be reduced by (1) segregating scrap
    into categories that are independently calibrated, (2) correcting for
    matrix effects using the source addition technique (Ref. 10), or (3)
    applying both the categorization and the source addition technique.
    Categorization should be used if the spontaneous fission detection
    method is more sensitive to the material variability from scrap type to
    scrap type than to the material variability within a scrap type.
    Application of the source addition technique reduces the sensitivity to
    material variability and may allow the majority of scrap types to be
    assayed under a single calibration. Material characteristics that
    should be considered in selecting categories include:
1. Plutonium isotopic composition and content,
2. Uranium/plutonium ratio,
3. Types of container and packaging,
4. Abundance of high-yield alpha/neutron material, i.e.,
    low-atomic-number impurities,
5. Size and distribution of materials in packages,
6. Density (both average density and local density extremes
    should be considered), and
7. Matrix composition.
5. CALIBRATION
    Guidelines for calibration and measurement control for NDA are
    available in Regulatory Guide 5.53, "Qualification, Calibration, and
    Error Estimation Methods for Nondestructive Assay," which endorses ANSI
    N15.20-1975, "Guide to Calibrating Nondestructive Assay Systems."(3)
    The guide and standard include details on calibration standards,
    calibration procedures, curve fitting, and error analysis. Guidelines
    relevant to spontaneous fission detection are given below.
    Calibration can be used for either a single isotopic composition
    or variable isotopic mixtures. In the former case, the resulting
    calibration curve will be used to convert "net real-coincidence count"
    to "grams plutonium." In the latter case, the conversion is from "net
    real-coincidence count" to "effective grams (240)Pu." The mathematical
    procedure for converting from effective grams (240)Pu, M(240)(eff), to
    total grams plutonium, M(total Pu), is presented in the appendix to this
    guide together with a sample calculation.
    A minimum of four calibration standards with isotopic compositions
    similar to those of the unknowns should be used for calibration. If
    practicable, a calibration curve should be generated for each isotopic
    blend of plutonium. When plutonium of different isotopic composition is
    assayed using a single calibration, the effect of isotopic composition
    on the spontaneous fission detection response should be determined over
    the operating ranges by measuring standards of different plutonium
    isotopic compositions. This is necessary because the use of the
    effective (240)Pu concept can lead to error owing to the uncertainty in
    the spontaneous fission half-lives and the variation in response with
    isotopic composition. Table 2 illustrates the uncertainty in effective
    (240)Pu abundance with different isotopic compositions (Ref. 13).
    Calibration standards should be fabricated from material having a
    plutonium content determined by a technique traceable to or calibrated
    with the standard reference material of the National Bureau of
    Standards. Well-characterized homogeneous material similar to the
    process material from which the scrap is generated can be used to obtain
    calibration standards.
    Fabrication of calibration standards that are truly representative
    of the unknowns is impossible for scrap assay. To measure the
    reliability of the calibration based on the fabricated standards
    discussed above and to improve this calibration, unknowns that have been
    assayed by spontaneous fission detection should periodically be selected
    for assay by an independent technique. Calorimetry (Ref. 2) can be used
    to assay a random selection of scrap in containers and to provide
    reliable data that should be fed back into the calibration fitting
    procedure to improve spontaneous fission detection calibration. The
    original calibration standards should be retained as working standards.
    ----------
    (3) Copies of this standard may be obtained from the American
    National Standards Institute, Inc., 1430 Broadway, New York, New York
    10018.
    ----------
6. MEASUREMENT CONTROL
    For proper measurement control, on each day that scrap is assayed,
    a secondary standard should be assayed as a background measurement.
    Also, on each day that scrap is assayed, control (or working) standards
    should be assayed for normalization and for ensuring reliable operation.
    The source addition technique (Ref. 10) is recommended for
    correcting the spontaneous fission detection response for each assay.
    If not used routinely, the source addition technique should be applied
    to a random selection of items with a frequency comparable to the assay
    schedule. The results of random applications of the source addition
    technique can be used in two ways:
1. As an average correction factor to be applied to a group of
    items, and
2. As a check on the item being assayed to verify that it is
    similar to the standards used in calibration and that no additional
    matrix effects are present, i.e., purely as a qualitative assurance that
    the calibration is valid.
7. ERROR ANALYSIS
    The sources of error in spontaneous fission detection are
    discussed in Regulatory Guide 5.11. Analysis of the error in the
    calibration is discussed in ANSI N15.20-1975 and in References 4 and 13.
    REFERENCES
1. J. F. Lemming and D. A. Rakel, "Guide to Plutonium Isotopic
    Measurements Using Gamma-Ray Spectroscopy," MLM-2981, August 1982.
2. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, "Calorimetric Assay for
    Plutonium," NUREG-0228, 1977.
3. N. Ensslin et al., "Neutron Coincidence Counters for Plutonium
    Measurements," Nuclear Materials Management, Vol. VII, No. 2, p.
    43, 1978.
4. R. Sher, "Operating Characteristics of Neutron Well Coincidence
    Counters," Brookhaven National Laboratory, BNL-50332, 1972.
5. K. Boehnel, "Determination of Plutonium in Nuclear Fuels Using the
    Neutron Coincidence Method," AWRE-Trans-70(54/4252) (English
    translation of KfK 2203), 1978.
6. M. S. Zucker, "Neutron Correlation Counting for the Nondestructive
    Analysis of Nuclear Materials," in Analytical Methods for
    Safeguards and Accountability Measurements of Special Nuclear
    Materials, NBS Special Publication 528, pp. 261-283, November
    1978.
7. J. D. Hastings and W. W. Strohm, "Spontaneous Fission Half-Life of
    (238)Pu," Journal of Inorganic and Nuclear Chemistry, Vol. 34, p.
    25, 1972.
8. N. Ensslin, J. Stewart, and J. Sapir, "Self-Multiplication
    Correction Factors for Neutron Coincidence Counting," Nuclear
    Materials Management, Vol. VIII, No. 2, p. 60, 1979.
9. M. S. Krick, "Neutron Multiplication Corrections for Passive
    Thermal Neutron Well Counters," Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory,
    LA-8460-MS, 1980.
10. H. O. Menlove and R. B. Walton, "4 phi Coincidence Unit for
    One-Gallon Cans and Smaller Samples," Los Alamos Scientific
    Laboratory, LA-4457-MS, 1970.
    11. H. O. Menlove, "Matrix Material Effects on Fission-Neutron
    Counting Using Thermal- and Fast-Neutron Detectors," Los Alamos
    Scientific Laboratory, LA-4994-PR, p. 4, 1972.
    12. K. R. Alvar, H. R. Lukens, and N. A. Lurie, "Standard Containers
    for SNM Storage, Transfer, and Measurement," U.S. Nuclear
    Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-1847, 1980.
    13. J. Jaech, "Statistical Methods in Nuclear Material Control,"
    Atomic Energy Commission, TID-26298, Section 3.3.8, 1974.
    BIBLIOGRAPHY
    American National Standards Institute, "Standard Test Methods for
    Nondestructive Assay of Special Nuclear Materials Contained in Scrap and
    Waste," ANSI/ASTM C 853-79, 1979.
    Brouns, R. J., F. P. Roberts, and U. L. Upson, "Considerations for
    Sampling Nuclear Materials for SNM Accounting Measurements," U.S.
    Nuclear Regulatory Commission, NUREG/CR-0087, 1978.
    APPENDIX
    Procedure for Converting M(240)(eff) to M(total Pu) and Sample
    Calculation
    When the measurement situation dictates the expression of the
    primary assay result as "effective grams of (240)Pu," it is necessary to
    convert this result to total grams of plutonium using the relationship
    between these two quantities and the known isotopic composition of the
    plutonium sample. Let f(238), f(239), f(240), f(241), f(242) represent
    the weight fractions of the plutonium isotopes in the unknown sample.
    The effective (240)Pu mass from coincidence counting, M(240)(eff), and
    the individual masses of the spontaneously fissioning plutonium isotopes
    are related by:
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)The masses of the (242)Pu and (238)Pu isotopes can be expressed in terms
    of M(240), using the isotopic weight fractions, so that:
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)Since M(240)/f(240) = M(total Pu), we have the final results:
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.) The quantity in the denominator of Equation 3 is called the
    "(240)Pu effective weight fraction, f(240) (effective)." Thus the total
    plutonium mass can be expressed as the (240)Pu effective mass divided by
    the (240)Pu effective weight fraction:
    M(total Pu) = M(240)(eff)/f(240)(effective) As an example, suppose that the net coincidence count from an
    unknown sample indicates 10.0 @@ 0.5 effective grams of (240)Pu.
    Furthermore, suppose that the plutonium isotopic composition of the
    unknown sample was previously established to be:
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)(Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)Using these results in Equation 3, we have:
    M(total Pu) = 10.0/[0.20 + 1.64 x 0.02
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.) To obtain the value of the variance of the M(total Pu) result, we
    must propagate the variances of the M(240)(eff) and the isotopic weight
    fractions. Let the variance in M(240)(eff) = sigma(2)(eff), and let the
    variances in the relevant plutonium weight fractions be sigma(2)(238),
    sigma(2)(240), and sigma(2)(242). The variance of the total plutonium
    mass, sigma(2)(Pu), is given by:
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)In our example calculation, sigma(eff) = 0.5 gram, sigma(238) = 0.005,
    sigma(240) = 0.004, and sigma(242) = 0.002. The variance in the total
    plutonium mass is therefore given by:
    (Due to database constraints, this equation is not included. Please
    contact LIS to obtain a copy.)Thus the final assay result from this coincidence count is quoted as:
    M(total Pu) = 38.6 @@ 2.9 grams.
    For most plutonium samples, the dominant measurement uncertainties
    will be in the (240)Pu effective mass and the (240)Pu isotopic weight
    fraction, f(240). Thus good precision in M(total Pu) is achieved
    primarily through minimizing the uncertainties in these quantities.
    VALUE/IMPACT STATEMENT
1. PROPOSED ACTION
    1.1 Description
    Licensees authorized to possess at any one time more than one
    effective kilogram of plutonium are required in Section 70.51 of 10 CFR
    Part 70, "Domestic Licensing of Special Nuclear Material," to establish
    and maintain a system of control and accountability so that the standard
    error (estimator) associated with the inventory difference (SEID)
    ascertained as a result of a measured material balance meets minimum
    standards.
    Included in a typical material balance are containers of
    inhomogeneous scrap material that are not amenable to assay by the
    traditional method of sampling and chemical analysis. With proper
    controls, the nondestructive assay (NDA) technique of spontaneous
    fission detection is one acceptable method for the assay of plutonium in
    containers of bulk scrap material. The use of spontaneous fission
    detection thus facilitates the preparation of a complete plant material
    balance whose SEID meets established requirements.
    Regulatory Guide 5.34 was issued in June 1974 to describe
    procedures acceptable to the NRC staff for applying the NDA technique of
    spontaneous fission detection to plutonium in scrap.
    1.2 Need for Proposed Action
    Improvements in technology have occurred since Regulatory Guide
    5.34 was issued, and the proposed action is needed to bring it up to
    date.
    1.3 Value/Impact of Proposed Action
    1.3.1NRC Operations
    The improvements in technology that have occurred since the guide
    was issued will be made available for the regulatory procedure. Using
    these updated techniques should have no adverse impact.
    1.3.2Other Government Agencies
    Not applicable.
    1.3.3Industry
    Since industry is already applying the techniques discussed in the
    guide, updating these techniques should have no adverse impact.
    1.3.4Public
    No impact on the public can be foreseen.
    1.4 Decision on Proposed Action
    The guide should be revised to reflect improvements in the
    technique and to bring the language of the guide into conformity with
    current usage.
2. TECHNICAL APPROACH
    Not applicable.
3. PROCEDURAL APPROACH
    Of the procedural alternatives considered, revision of the
    existing regulatory guide was selected as the most advantageous and cost
    effective.
4. STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS
    4.1 NRC Authority
    Authority for this guide is derived from the safety requirements
    of the Atomic Energy Act through the Commission's regulations, in
    particular, Section 70.51 of 10 CFR Part 70.
    4.2 Need for NEPA Assessment
    The proposed action is not a major action that may significantly
    affect the quality of the human environment and does not require an
    environmental impact statement.
5. RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER EXISTING OR PROPOSED REGULATIONS OR POLICIES
    The proposed action is one of a series of revisions of existing
    regulatory guides on NDA techniques.
6. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
    Regulatory Guide 5.34 should be updated.
    31