ANSI N317-1980

American National Standard

Performance Criteria for Instrumentation

Used for Inplant Plutonium Monitoring

Secretariat for N42

Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc

Secretariat for N13

Health Physics Society

Approved November 8, 1978

Reaffirmed April 30, 1985
Reaffirmed March 19, 1991
American National Standards Institute

Published by
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc
345 East 47th Street, New York, NY 10017
© Copyright 1980 by
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc
No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the
prior written permission of the publisher.
American National Standard

An American National Standard implies a consensus of those substantially concerned with its scope and provisions.
An American National Standard is intended as a guide to aid the manufacturer, the consumer, and the general public.
The existence of an American National Standard does not in any respect preclude anyone, whether he has approved the
standard or not, from manufacturing, marketing, purchasing, or using products, processes, or procedures not
conforming to the standard. American National Standards are subject to periodic review and users are cautioned to
obtain the latest editions.

CAUTION NOTICE: This American National Standard may be revised or withdrawn at any time. The procedures of
the American National Standards Institute require that action be taken to reafÞrm, revise, or withdraw this standard no
later than Þve years from the date of publication. Purchasers of American National Standards may receive current
information on all standards by calling or writing the American National Standards Institute.

ii
Foreword

(This Foreword is not a part of ANSI N317-1980 American National Standard Performance Criteria for Instrumentation Used for
Inplant Plutonium Monitoring.)

This standard was prepared under the joint sponsorship of the American National Standards Committee on
Instrumentation, N42, and the American National Standards Committee on Radiation Protection, N13. The members
of both N42 and N13 reviewed and approved this standard.

The ANSI Committee on Instrumentation, N42, and Radiation Protection, N13, had the following representatives at
the time this standard was approved.

American National Standards Committee N42

Louis Costrell, Chair

D. C. Cook, Recording Secretary
Sava I. Sherr, Executive Secretary

American Chemical Society...................................................................................................................................Vacant

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists .............................................................. Jesse Lieberman
American Industrial Hygiene Association ........................................................................................................W.H. Ray
American Nuclear Society .........................................................................................................................F.W. Manning
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ...........................................................................................P.E. Greenwood
American Society of Safety Engineers .............................................................................................................. (Vacant)
Atomic Industrial Forum........................................................................................................................................Vacant
Health Physics Society........................................................................................................................ J.B. Horner Kuper
Robert L. Butenhoff (Alt)
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers .......................................................................................Louis Costrell
D.C. Cook (Alt)
J. Forster (Alt)
P. J. Spurgin (Alt)
Instrument Society of America ....................................................................................................................... M.T. Slind
J. E. Kaveckis (Alt)
Manufacturing Chemists Association .........................................................................................................K.O. Johnson
National Electrical Manufacturers Association.............................................................................. Theodore Hamburger
Oak Ridge National Laboratory ......................................................................................................... Frank W. Manning
D. J. Knowles (Alt)
ScientiÞc Apparatus Makers Association.................................................................................................... Robert Breen
US Department of Energy, Division of Biomedical and Environmental Research.............................. Hodge R. Wasson
US Department of the Army, Materiel Command .............................................................................Abraham E. Cohen
US Defense Civil Preparedness Agency ........................................................................................ Carl R. Siebentritt, Jr
US Department of Commerce, National Bureau of Standards ..................................................................Louis Costrell
US Naval Research Laboratory..................................................................................................................... D. C. Cook
Members-at-Large.........................................................................................................................................J. G. Bellian
O. W. Bilharz
John M. Gallagher, Jr
S. H. Hanauer
W. C. Lipinski
Voss A. Moore
R. F. Shea
E. J. Vallario

iii
Designation (Variable) HeaderTitleLeft (Variable)

American National Standards Institute Committee N13

M. E. Wrenn, Chair
R. J. Burk, Secretary

American Chemical Society......................................................................................................................Ira B. Whitney

American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists ............................................................. D.E. Van Farowe
American Health Physics Society ............................................................................................................Vernon Chilson
John J. Ferry (Alt)
American Industrial Hygiene Association ............................................................................................. Wilbur Speicher
W. D. Kelly (Alt)
American Insurance Association.............................................................................................................. Karl H. Carson
American Mutual Insurance Alliance....................................................................................................... Richard Seelye
American Nuclear Society ......................................................................................................................... Eric T. Clarke
American Occupational Medical Association................................................................................... William W. Burr, Jr
American Public Health Association ......................................................................................................Simon Kinsman
Gerald S. Parker (Alt)
American Society of Mechanical Engineers ............................................................................................Monte Hankins
American Society for Testing and Materials.............................................................................................. L. B. Gardner
J. H. Bystrom (Alt)
A. H. Tschaeche (Alt)
Association of State and Territorial Health OfÞcers ..............................................................................................Vacant
Atomic Industrial Forum........................................................................................................................................Vacant
Electric Light and Power Group ........................................................................................................Marvin K. Sullivan
James Sohngen (Alt)
Environmental Protection Agency ............................................................................................................... David Smith
Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc .............................................................................C. D. Wilkerson
Institute of Nuclear Materials Management................................................................................. Kenneth G. Okolowitz
International Association of Governmental Labor OfÞcials .............................................................. Jacqueline Messite
Frank J. Bradley (Alt)
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers .......................................................................................Paul R. Shoop
Manufacturing Chemist Association, Inc................................................................................................ P. W. McDaniel
Paul Estey (Alt)
National Bureau of Standards .............................................................................................................. Thomas P. Loftus
Nuclear Regulatory Commission .................................................................................................................. Walter Cool
John B. Nehemias
Uranium Operators Association .....................................................................................................................L.W. Swent
R. T. Zittling (Alt)
Energy Research and Development Administration .................................................................................... E. J. Vallario
US Department of Labor............................................................................................................................John P. O'Neil
G. Walker Daubenspeck (Alt)
US Public Health Service....................................................................................................................... Gail D. Schmidt
Robert E. Simpson (Alt)
Individual Members ........................................................................................................................ William O. ChatÞeld
Thomas Philbin
Hugh F. Henry

iv Copyright © 1998 IEEE All Rights Reserved

This standard was prepared under the direction of the following subcommittee members:

Edward J. Vallario, Chair

Joseph Belgian Richard Griffith L. M. Scott

Vernon Chilson Roy A. Parker John F. Sommers
Eric Geiger A. N. Tschaeche

The Working Group responsible for the development of this standard had the following members:

L. G. Faust, Chair

G. W. R. Endres* A. J. Nardi A. M. Valentine

C. H. Johnson

*Consultant

v
CLAUSE PAGE
1. Introduction .........................................................................................................................................................1

2. Scope ...................................................................................................................................................................1

3. Definitions...........................................................................................................................................................2

4. Plutonium Monitoring and Calibration Considerations ......................................................................................2

5. Instrument Performance Criteria.........................................................................................................................3

5.1 Portable Survey Instruments, General Criteria .......................................................................................... 3

5.2 Portable Survey Instruments, Specific Criteria.......................................................................................... 4
5.3 Fixed Monitoring Instruments ................................................................................................................... 5

6. Bibliography........................................................................................................................................................7

Annex A Plutonium Radiation Parameters (Informative)...............................................................................................9

vi
American National Standard

Performance Criteria for Instrumentation

Used for Inplant Plutonium Monitoring

1. Introduction

The monitoring of plutonium requires special instrumentation considerations in order to achieve optimum
measurement performance. Performance speciÞcations consistent with current state-of-art instrumentation technology
is provided in this standard and is applicable to plutonium handling and storage facilities, excluding reactors and
irradiated fuel reprocessing facilities.

2. Scope

Performance criteria for radiation protection instrumentation essential to inplant plutonium monitoring is deÞned in
this standard and its appendix. Plutonium radiations are also characterized here. Performance criteria established in
this standard are limited to instruments capable of measuring (1) photon radiations within the energy range of 0.010 to
1.25 MeV, (2) neutron radiations within the energy range from thermal to 10 MeV, and (3) alpha radiations within the
emitted energy range of 4.5 to 7.5 MeV.

This standard does not apply to the construction of speciÞc instruments nor does it specify instrumentation to be
employed for each survey to be conducted, other than in generic terms. This standard does not deÞne speciÞcations for
personnel dosimeters, efßuent monitoring systems, or instruments needed in bioassay programs, nor does this standard
deÞne those requirements which may be needed to monitor emergency conditions.

Throughout these criteria, two verbs have been used to indicate the degree of rigor intended by the speciÞc criterion.
Shall indicates a minimum criterion that must be met, while should indicates a criterion that is recommended as good
practice and is to be applied when practical.

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 1

IEEE Std N317-1980 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR

3. Definitions

Use of technical terminology within this standard is generally consistent with the deÞnitions in the American National
Standard Glossary of Terms in Nuclear Science and Technology, ANSI N1.1-1976 [1]1 and ICRU Report 20 1971 [2].
The following terms are deÞned speciÞcally for use within this standard.

accuracy: The degree of agreement with the true value of the quantity being measured.
calibrate: To determine the response or reading of an instrument relative to a series of known radiation values over the
range of the instrument.
extracameral response: An instrument response arising from the action of the radiation Þeld on parts of the
instrument other than the intended radiosensitive element.
instrument: A complete system designed to quantify a particular type of ionizing radiation.
national standard: An instrument, source or other system or device maintained and promulgated as such by the US
National Bureau of Standards.
operating range: The region between the limits within which a quantity is measured.
precision: The degree of agreement of repeated measurements of the same property, expressed quantitatively as the
standard deviation computed from the results of the series of measurements.
readout: The device that conveys information regarding the measurement to the user.
resolution: The minimum detectable change in instrument response.
surface contamination: Radioactive material deposited on the surface of facilities (ßoor surfaces, workbench tops,
machines, etc), equipment, or personnel.
survey: The examination of an area for the purpose of detecting the presence of radioactive materials and determining
the quantity of that radioactivity.
survey contamination control: A survey conducted to determine the presence of unwanted contaminants, normally
conducted with alpha or gamma, or both, sensitive instruments.
survey dose rate: A survey conducted to determine the dose rate at some speciÞed location or area and usually
conducted with gamma exposure rate survey instruments. Neutron surveys may also be required frequently.

4. Plutonium Monitoring and Calibration Considerations

The radiations resulting from the radioactive decay of plutonium are varied and include alpha, beta, gamma, x-rays and
neutrons (See Appendix A). An effective monitoring program for plutonium requires instruments that are responsive to
these radiations with the exception of the 7 keV beta resulting from the decay of 241Pu.

In most instances contamination control surveys require alpha sensitive instruments. Exposure rate surveys would
normally be conducted with photon sensitive instruments with known energy responses down to and including 0.010
MeV. Neutron surveys become important when processing tens of grams of 238Pu or hundreds of grams of mixed
isotopes of plutonium, particularly plutonium compounds (for example, PuO2, PuF4, etc). This is possibly the only
survey of importance when photon shields such as leaded glass are employed. The use of such shields normally stops
all of the charged particles, most of the low energy photons and essentially none of the neutrons. Under these
circumstances, neutron radiation is likely to be the major contributor to personnel exposure.

Under certain conditions the extremities and forearms of personnel working with plutonium (and other radioactive
materials) in glove boxes are exposed to the various types of radiations mentioned above. Generally, so-called contact

1Numbers in brackets correspond to those in Section 6. of this standard.

2 Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved

INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR INPLANT PLUTONIUM MONITORING IEEE Std N317-1980

dose rates are established to control the exposure to the workers' hands. No such measurement is currently made to
determine the neutron contact dose equivalent rate because there is no suitable instrument available to perform the
measurement. However, an estimate of the neutron dose equivalent could be made and could be added to the other
measurements for exposure control purposes. Californium-252 is suggested for use as the calibration source because
its neutron energy distribution is similar to that of plutonium metal and PuO2 [3].

5. Instrument Performance Criteria

Instrument performance criteria are presented here for portable survey instruments and for Þxed monitoring
instruments.

5.1 Portable Survey Instruments, General Criteria

Inplant plutonium monitoring programs consist mainly of airborne and surface contamination surveys and dose rate
surveys. General performance criteria for instrumentation needed to conduct these programs are described below.

5.1.1 Detection Capability

1) Except as otherwise speciÞed in this standard, the overall instrument accuracy shall be within ±20% and the
precision within ±10% at the 95% conÞdence level for any single measurement. The ±20% and ±10% Þgures
shall apply over the entire operating range for both logarithmic and linear scales except that for linear scales
they need not be better than ±5% of full scale.
2) Overall instrument response time (0 to 90% of full scale reading), after a 1 min warm-up, shall be £10 s on
the most sensitive ranges and £2 s at readings of 100 mrem/h, 100 mR/h and 500 disintegrations per rain or
greater. This does not preclude the inclusion of variable response time capability. Response time to a
decreasing Þeld (full reading to 10% of original reading) shall be no greater than response times to increasing
Þelds.
3) Stability shall be evidenced by the ability of the instrument to maintain accuracy and precision for at least 24
h of continuous duty after initial warm-up.
4) Resolution shall be £4% of full scale for a linear scale and £8% of a reading for log scale with a maximum
of two decades per 90 of meter movement.
5) Extracameral responses should be undetectable in 1.25 MeV photon Þelds with an intensity of 20 R/h and 2
MeV (Emax) beta Þelds providing an air dose of 10 rd/h.

5.1.2 Readout, Power, and Response Requirements

1) The readout should be illuminated to permit use in darkness; luminous or lighted dials should be considered.
2) A 10 mV or 1 mA recorder output should be provided for instruments which are to be used with a recorder.
3) The instrument should be powered by readily available cells or batteries such as AA, C or D cells or 9 V
batteries. Compatibility with alkaline, No-Cd or mercury cells should be considered. Provision for operation
from a standard automobile 12 V system and 117 V, 60 Hz, alternating current also should be considered.
4) Minimum battery lifetime shall be 200 h of continuous duty operation at an exposure level of 10% of the
maximum full scale reading at temperatures above 0 °C. Alkaline batteries shall be used for temperatures
below 0 °C, and the minimum battery lifetime shall be 100 h of continuous operation.
5) The instrument shall be equipped with a battery check switch and indicator of battery condition.
6) When responding to levels in excess of the maximum range the readout shall remain full upscale.

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 3

IEEE Std N317-1980 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR

5.1.3 Response to Environmental Factors

1) The instrument shall operate within speciÞcations for the temperature extremes anticipated.
2) For the anticipated operation at temperature range the temperature coefÞcient shall be £0.5% per °C. The
variations with temperature over the anticipated operating range should not produce a deviation of more than
±15% from the reference value obtained at 20 °C.
3) The instrument system shall function within speciÞcations over all anticipated combinations of temperature
and humidity. (Testing will normally be conducted at a relative humidity within the range of 40% to 95% over
a temperature range of 15 °C to 65 °C. The instrument system shall continue to operate properly after being
cycled through the dew-point at 20 °C ± 10 °C.

5.2 Portable Survey Instruments, Specific Criteria

SpeciÞc criteria are presented here for alpha, photon and neutron survey instruments.

5.2.1

Alpha survey instruments shall meet the following performance criteria:

1) The minimum detection capability for alpha surface contamination should be 220 disintegrations per
min/100 cm2 of surface area and shall be not more than 500 disintegrations per min/100 cm2, within
the accuracy speciÞed in 5.1.1. This requirement shall be met in the presence of a radiation Þeld of
0.10 rem/h of neutrons in the energy range of thermal to 10 MeV, in the presence of 0.10 rem/h, or in
the presence of both, of photons in the energy range of 0.010 to 1.25 MeV.
2) The operating range of the instruments should be from 0 disintegrations per min to at least 100 000
disintegrations per min/100 cm2 of surface area.

5.2.2

Photon survey instruments shall meet the following performance criteria:

1) Instruments shall meet accuracy requirements in the energy range of 0.01 MeV to 1.25 MeV.
2) Angular dependence for photon measurement instruments should be within ±15% over a 2p steradian frontal
direction using at least two photon sources with energies of 0.06 to 1.25 MeV.
3) Energy dependence shall be within ±15% over the range 0.01 MeV to 1.25 MeV (more than one detector
permissible).
4) Response shall be minimized and known for beta and neutron radiations as a function of their respective
intensities and energies and a statement of the response furnished with the instrument.
5) The operating range shall be 0.5 mR/h to at least 5000 mR/h.

5.2.3

Neutron survey instruments shall meet the following performance criteria:

1) The response for neutron energies in the range from thermal to 10 MeV shall approximate the dose
equivalents given in Table 1 for those instruments designed for dose equivalent rate measurements.
2) The angular dependence should be within ±15% in a 2p steradian frontal direction for 252Cf energy neutrons
or equivalent.
3) The response to photon radiations shall be minimized, known, and a statement of the response furnished with
the instrument.
4) The operating range shall be 0.2 mrem/h to at least 2000 mrem/h.

4 Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved

INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR INPLANT PLUTONIUM MONITORING IEEE Std N317-1980

Table 1ÑNeutron Fluence Dose Equivalents*

Neutron Energy Neutrons per Square Rem per Neutron per

(MeV) Centimeter per Rem Square Centimeter

Thermal 980 á 106 1.0 á 10-9

0.0001 840 á 106 1.2 á 10-9

0.001 980 á 10 1.0 á 10-9

0.01 1000 á 106 1.0 á 10-9

0.1 170 á 106 6.1 á 10-9

0.5 39 á 106 26.0 á 10-9

1.0 27 á 106 37.0 á 10-9

2.5 29 á 106 34.0 á 10-9

5.0 23 á 106 43.0 á 10-9

7.5 24 á 106 42.0 á 10-9

10.0 24 á 105 42.0 á 10-9

20.0 16 á 106 63.0 á 10-9

*See references [5] and [6]

5.3 Fixed Monitoring Instruments

5.3.1

Airborne contamination monitors are normally of the continuous type commonly referred to as continuous air
monitors (CAMs). The following criteria apply to those instruments. More information on air monitoring is contained
in ANSI N13.10-1974 [4].

1) The minimum detection level shall be 1 MPC of 239Pu in 8 h (8 MPC hours)in the presence of nominal
amounts of naturally occurring alpha emitters such as radon and thoron and their daughters. (This
requirement is applicable to MPC values as of the date of this standard.)
2) The operating range of the instrument shall be at least 102 minimum detectable levels.
3) The instrument error shall not exceed ±20% of reading over the upper 80% of its operating range where the
error is deÞned as:
Rr Ð Rt
% errors = ----------------- × 100%
Rt

where:
Rr = indicated quantity
Rt = true quantity
For this determination, the indicated quantity Rr shall be taken from the most accurate readout format; for
example, recorder output or analog-to-digital converter. The usual instrument panel meters may signiÞcantly
contribute to the error (particularly in logarithmic devices) but these are rarely used as the primary
quantitative readout.
4) The reproducibility of the system for any given measurement over its stated range should be within ±10% at
the 95% conÞdence level for a midscale or mid-decade reading.

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 5

IEEE Std N317-1980 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR

5) The response time of the electronic system should not be greater than that required to maintain background
readings within the required accuracy.
6) The instrument shall be capable of continuous operation, within the required accuracy, when tested in relative
humidities of 40 to 95%.
7) The instrument should be capable of continuous operation under ambient pressures expected with less than
5% change in calibration.
8) The instrument shall be capable of operating with less than 5% change in calibration over the ambient
temperature range expected.
9) The instrument shall be equipped with an alarm trip which can be set at any point over the stated range and
should be capable of adjustment and reset without removing the instrument from service. The alarm shall be
both audible and visible at the instrument and provisions shall be made for the signal to be transmitted to
another location.
10) The instrument shall be equipped with an alarm device which provides appropriate notiÞcation at any time if
the system is incapable of monitoring radiation, or if a failure occurs in any component or circuit which
would affect the accuracy of the readout. A latching contact shall be provided to indicate loss of signal,
detector operating voltage, or circuit power.
11) Voltage and frequency variations of ±15% within the design values shall result in reading variations of no
greater than ±5% at the minimum detectable level.
12) Power line noise suppression systems shall be provided to minimize erroneous instrument readings and trips.
13) Radio frequency microwave signals £10 mW/cm2 shall result in reading variations of no greater than ±5% at
the minimum detectable level.
14) For those monitors with emergency power sources, either battery or other than normal ac power, the monitor
should be able to operate in the emergency power mode for at least 18 h in a nonalarm condition and for at
least 2 h in an alarm condition.
15) Air ßow rate shall be indicated and adjustable. Capabilities for maintaining a constant ßow rate should be
considered. Air ßow rates should be ³0.5 cfm.
16) Air sample lines between air inlet and Þlter media should be eliminated where possible and where not
possible shall be designed to meet sampling criteria contained in ANSI N13.1-1969 [7].
17) A thorough primary calibration [8] of the entire system shall be performed at least once using a radionuclide
of known concentration. The radionuclide shall have energies and intensities such as to permit calibrating the
range of energy and rate capabilities intended for the system. Traceability to a national standard shall be
maintained. The calibration shall be related to a secondary source or method which will be used for periodic
recalibration. The source-to-detector geometry shall be maintained identical to that established during the
primary calibration. The surface dimensions of the secondary source shall be the same size as the collecting
media area. Flow rate measuring devices associated with the system shall be calibrated to determine actual
ßow rate at the conditions of temperature and pressure under which the system will be operated. These ßow
rate devices shall be periodically recalibrated.

5.3.2

Surface contamination monitors consist primarily of hand or shoe counters and instruments (or probes), or both, with
sufÞcient ßexibility to survey pieces of equipment, including exterior clothing. The following performance criteria
apply to these instruments:

1) The instrument shall have an audible alarm, the frequency which is proportional to the count rate or a pre-
selectable trip setting and upon reaching that level shall activate an audible or visible alarm, or both.
2) The instrument shall be provided with a check source furnished by the user.
3) Requirements stated for portable survey instruments in 5.1.1, 5.1.3, and 5.2.1 shall apply.
4) Fixed instruments should be ac powered and provided with an emergency power source.

6 Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved

INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR INPLANT PLUTONIUM MONITORING IEEE Std N317-1980

5.3.3

Photon and neutron area monitors consist primarily of instrumentation used for active monitoring of photon and
neutron radiation intensities in areas where signiÞcant quantities of plutonium are stored or handled, or both. The
following performance criteria apply to these instruments:

1) The instrument shall have a pre-selectable trip setting with audible annunciators and shall provide electronic
signals for remote alarms if used as an alarming device.
2) The instrument shall be equipped with a visual meter or a digital readout.
3) Requirements stated for portable survey instruments in paragraphs 5.1.1, 5.1.3, 5.2.2, and 5.2.3 shall apply.
4) All neutron and photon area monitoring instruments should be ac powered and provided with an emergency
power source.

5.3.4

Criticality alarm systems, any and all, shall comply with ANSI N16.2-1969, [17].

6. Bibliography

[1] ANSI N1.1-1976, Standard Glossary of Terms in Nuclear Science and Technology.

[2] ICRU Report 20, Radiation Protection Instrumentation and Its Application, October 1971.

[3] BRACKENBUSH, L. W., ENDRES, G. W. R., and FAUST, L. G., Tissue Equivalent Proportional Counters in
Thin Neutron Shield Studies, BNWL-SA-3561, Proceedings of National Topical Meeting on Neutron Sources and
Applications, April 1971.

[4] ANSI N13.10-1974, Specification and Performance of On-Site Instrumentation for Continuously Monitoring
Radioactivity in Effluents.

[5] NCRP Report No 38, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurement, January 1971, Protection
Against Neutron Radiation.

[6] NCRP Report No 39, National Council on Radiation Protection and Measurements, January 1971, Basic Radiation
Protection Criteria.

[7] ANSI N13.1-1969, Guide to Sampling Airborne Radioactive Materials in Nuclear Facilities.

[8] ANSI N323-1978, Radiation Protection Instrumentation Test and Calibration.

[9] SMITH, R.C., FAUST, L.G., and BRACKENBUSH, L. W., Plutonium Fuel Technology, Part II: Radiation
Exposure from Plutonium in LWR Fuel Manufacture, Nuclear Technology, 18 (May 1973).

[10] BNWL-1697 Rev 1, Considerations in the Assessment of the Consequences of Effluents from Mixed Oxide Fuel
Fabrication Plants.

[11] BNWL-1523, September 1970, PREZBINDOWSKI, D. L., Calculation of 236Pu and 238Pu in the Discharge Fuel
of Light Water Power Reactors.

[12] RFP-795, November 1966, PUTZIER, E. A., Data Used in Health Physics Considerations for Plutonium and
Americium.

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 7

IEEE Std N317-1980 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR

[13] Pregenbibtion and Development of Medical Grade Plutonium-238 Fuels, July 1967-June 1971, MULLINS, L. J.,
compiler, LA-4940, 1972.

[14] GUNNINK, R., and MORROW, R. J., Gamma Ray Energies and Absolute Branching Intensities for 238, 239, 240,
241Pu and 241Am, UCRL-51087, July 1971.

[15] LEDERER, C. M., HOLLANDER, J. M., and PERLMAN, ISADORE, Table of Isotopes, Sixth Edition, John
Wiley and Sons, Inc, New York, 1967.

[16] HOLDEN, N. E. and WALER, F.W., Chart of the Nuclides, Eleventh Edition, Revised to April 1972.

[17] ANSI N16.2-1969, Criticality Accident Alarm System.

8 Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved

INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR INPLANT PLUTONIUM MONITORING IEEE Std N317-1980

Annex A Plutonium Radiation Parameters

(Informative)
(This Appendix is not a part of American National Standard Performance Criteria for Instrumentation Used for Inplant Plutonium
Monitoring, ANSI N317-1980.

A.1 Isotopic Compositions

There are no stable isotopes of plutonium and, since the bulk of the plutonium produced is by neutron capture in 238U,
there are relatively small amounts of isotopically pure plutonium available. Therefore, the plutonium most commonly
found in the nuclear industry consists of a mixture of isotopes ranging from 236Pu to 242Pu in varying percentages. The
number and amount of each isotope is a complex function of the original fuel and reactor irradiation history. An
indication of the ranges to be expected can be found in Table A-1.

The isotopic composition of plutonium produced in light water reactors (LWRs) is a complex function of initial fuel,
the reactor and the fuels' irradiation history. Data in Table A-1 summarize the computed average isotopic compositions
as a function of burnup for the two types of LWRs, that is, pressurized and boiling water reactors. No attempt is made
to detail any speciÞc isotopic composition but rather to give the reader of this standard some knowledge of the ranges
of isotopic compositions to expect.

It is common practice to broadly classify plutonium as either low exposure or high exposure depending on the burnup
of the initial fuel from which the plutonium was recovered. This standard suggests that any plutonium which contains
eighty (80) or less weight percent of 239Pu be classiÞed as high exposure plutonium.

A.2 Decay Radiations

The radiations from the radioactive decay of plutonium consist of alpha, beta, X-ray, gamma and neutron radiations in
various amounts and energies.

Tables A-2 and A-3 summarize the important radiations and their yield from plutonium and signiÞcant daughters
Neutron yields for selected plutonium compounds are also given in Table A-3.

Table A-1ÑTypical Isotopic Composition for Various Plutonium Types (weight percent)

Type 103 Burnup MWD/T 236Pu 238Pu 239Pu 240Pu 241Pu 242Pu

Production Ñ Ñ Ñ 94.5 5.0 0.5 Ñ

Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) 14.5 ± 1 5.1 á 10-6 0.42 67.0 21.7 9.2 2.1

24.0 ± 2 1.2 á 10-5 1.0 58.5 23.9 11.9 4.4

29.5 ± 1.5 1.7 á 10-5 1.4 56.5 23.5 13.0 5.2

32.5 ± 0.5 2.1 á 10-5 1.7 55.5 24.3 13.4 5.7

Boiling Water Reactor (BWR) 19.0 ± 1.5 8.0 á 10-6 0.9 61.7 22.4 11.3 3.4

23.0 ± 0.5 1.1 á 10-5 1.3 56.9 23.8 12.7 5.3

27.0 ± 1.0 1.4 á 10-5 1.7 52.4 25.0 13.7 6.6

28.0 ± 1.0 1.5 á 10-5 1.8 54.2 23.8 13.5 6.4

238Pu Fuel Ñ 1.0 á 10-5 80.0 16.3 3.0 0.6 0.1

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 9

 IEEE Std N317-1980 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR

Table A-2ÑRadioactive Decay Properties of Selected Plutonium Isotopes and Daughters Excluding
Spontaneous Fission2

Mode of Decay X-Ray Gamma Ray

Isotope Half-Life Particle Energy-MeV Yield % Energy-MeV Yield % Energy-MeV Yield %
236Pu 2.85 y* a 5.77 69 Ls 0.011Ð0.021 10 0.047 3.1 á 10-2
a 5.72 31 0.110 1.2 á 10-2
0.165 6.6 á 10-4
0.473Ð0.645 à 5.2 á 10-4
238Pu 87.7 y a 5.49 72 Ls 0.011Ð21.4 10.5 0.0435 3.9 á 10-2
a 5.45 28 0.0999 7.4 á 10-3
a 5.35 0.13 0.1528 1.0 á 10-3
0.201Ð1.085 3.8 á 10-5
239Pu 2.44 á 104 y a 5.147 73.3 Ls 0.0116Ð0.0215 4.8 0.0387 5.9 á 10-3
a 5.134 15.1 0.0516 2.1 á 10-2
a 5.095 11.5 0.129 6.2 á 10-3
0.375 1.58 á 10-3
0.414 1.51 á 10-3
0.142Ð1.057 4.93 á 10-3
240Pu 6.6 á 103 a 5.159 75 Ls 0.0115Ð0.0215 10.8 0.0452 4.5 á 10-2
a 5.115 25 0.104 7.0 á 10-3
0.160 4.2 á 10-4
241Pu 15 y b 0.0222 99.99+ 0.0442 4.5 á 10-6
a 4.896 83% of 2.3 á 10-3% 0.0448 1.1 á 10-6
a 4.853 12% of 2.3 á 10-3% 0.0563 3.7 á 10-6
a 4.797Ð5.055 5% of 2.3 á 10-3% 0.077 2.41 á 10-4
0.1037 1.04 á 10-4
0.121 8.9 á 10-7
0.148 1.9 á 10-4
0.160 6.45 á 10-6
242Pu 3.79 á 105 y a 4.903 76 Ls 0.0116Ð0.0215 4.1 0.0447 5 á 10-2
a 4.863 24
241Am 458 y a 5.486 86 Ls 0.0119Ð22.2 37.6 0.0434 9.1 á 10-2
a 5.443 12.7
a 5.389 1.3 0.0595 35.9
0.0699 2 á 10-3
0.099 2 á 10-2
0.103 1.95 á 10-2
0.123 1 á 10-3
0.125 3.95 á 10-3
0.146 4.6 á 10-4
0.150 7.2 á 10-5
0.159Ð0.2927 1.17 á 10-3
0.301Ð0.4863 1.39 á 10-3
0.514Ð0.863 7.2 á 10-4
237U 6.75 d b 0.248 96 Ls 0.0119Ð0.0208 62.9 0.0264 2.4
0.0332 1.9 á 10-2
0.0434 7.4 á 10-2
0.051 0.22
0.0595 36
0.208 23.3
0.0648Ð0.371 6.3
*y = years; d = days
Total for all X-rays
àGamma rays of many energies are in these groups. Yield is for the gammas included in the range exclusive of those listed separately.

2See Section 6., [14], [15], [16].

10 Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved

INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR INPLANT PLUTONIUM MONITORING IEEE Std N317-1980

A.3 Theoretical Dose Rates

Plutonium is extremely radiotoxic and, therefore, every precaution is taken to preclude any direct exposure of
personnel to plutonium or its aerosols. Physical contact with plutonium is done routinely but always with the beneÞt
of some intervening material such as surgeon's gloves or glove box gloves, etc. This practice accomplishes at least two
things: (1) It reduces the amounts and types of direct radiation exposure and (2) It normally maintains containment
since gloves are an integral part of the containment system.

Often an estimate is needed of the intensity and resulting exposure rate to be expected from a particular isotopic
composition and as a function of time since chemical separation or puriÞcation. The radiation intensity is continually
changing, primarily increasing at least for time periods of interest here. The change is due to the decay of 241Pu into
its daughters 237U and 241Am. The net ingrowth or buildup is expressed by the following equation:
Ax f xlx Ð ( l x Ð l pu )t
- = --------------------1 Ð e
--------
A pu l x Ð l pu

where
Ax
--------
- = the activity ratio,
A pu

fx = the fraction of decays resulting in x,

li = the decay constant of the ith radioisotope, and
t = time since separation in the same units as the half lives.

Solving this equation for 237U, at about 50 days (t=50 days), the exponent approaches zero and equilibrium is
established. For the 241Am daughter, equilibrium is not established for long times, but grows in at an almost linear rate
for several years after chemical separation. These two properties are important because they can be utilized to derive
an equation which can be used to calculate surface dose rates associated with plutonium of any isotopic composition
and for any time since chemical separation between about 35 d and 12 yr. Surface is by deÞnition, at least a few
hundreths of a centimeter away due to the intervening material, be it surgeon's gloves, plastic bags or some other thin
material which is close to tissue in density and atomic number. The following equations have been derived and veriÞed
experimentally for the gamma, X-ray portion of the total exposure rate for a wide isotopic range and time since
separation and for relatively thick sources. Because of density difference, thick sources are deÞned as ³0.127 cm for
plutonium metal and ³0.9 cm of PuO2. The equation [9] for plutonium is:

D s ( rd ¤ h ) = 171 f 238 + 0.51 f 239 + 2.4 f 240

+ 8.7 f 241 + 0.15 f 242 + [ 0.074 f 241 ]t

where

Ds = surface dose rate

fi = weight fraction of the ith isotope
t = time since chemical separation in days, ³35 days.

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 11

IEEE Std N317-1980 PERFORMANCE CRITERIA FOR

Table A-3ÑNeutron Yields from Selected Plutonium Isotopes and Compounds3

Spontaneous Fission v Yield (a,n) Reactor Rate

Isotope Half-Life n/Fission n/gm-s n/gm-s Isotope
236Pu 3.5 á 109y 2.3 3.7 á 104
238Pu 4.9 á 1010y 2.33 2.62 á 103
238PuF 2.1 á 106
4
238Pu0 1.4 á 104
2
239Pu 5.5 á 1015y 3.0 á -2
310
239PuF 4.3 á 103
4
239PuO 4.5 á 101
2
240Pu 1.22 á 1011y 2.25 1.02 á 103
240PuF 1.6 á 104
4
240PuO 1.7 á 102
2
242Pu 7.1 á 1010y 2.18 1.7 á 103
242PuF 1.7 á 102
4
242PuO 2.7
2
244Pu 2.5 á 1010y 2.3* 5.1 á 103
241AmO 2.64 á 103
2

*Estimated

The value of Ds from the above equation becomes the basis for evaluating the decrease in surface dose rate when
plutonium oxide is blended with uranium oxide in a mixed oxide fuel. The mixed oxide (MO2) surface dose rate
equation is:
0.75 0.75
Dsm ( rd ¤ h ) = Ds [ 0.13 ( 1 Ð x ) +x ] + 0.1 rd ¤ h

where

Dsm = surface dose rate of MO2

Ds = surface dose rate of PuO2
x = weight fraction of PuO2 in MO2

The use of the surface dose rate equations can be illustrated assuming an isotopic composition equal to that given in
Table A-1 , pressurized water reactor (PWR) at 29.5 MWD/T, 240 d since chemical separation and mixed with UO2 at
3 weight percent Pu.
Ds = (171 × 0.014 + 0.51 × 0.565 + 2.4 × 0.235
+8.7 × 0.13 + 0.15 × 0.052)
+ [ ( 0.074 × 0.13 )240 ] rd ¤ h
= (2.4 + 0.29 + 0.56 + 1.13 + 0.01
+ 2.31) rd ¤ h
= 6.7 rd ¤ h

3 See Section 6., [19].

12 Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved

INSTRUMENTATION USED FOR INPLANT PLUTONIUM MONITORING IEEE Std N317-1980

Ds = 6.7 [ 0.13 ( 1 Ð 0.13 ) 0.75 + 0.13 0.75 ]

+ 0.1 rd ¤ h
0.75 0.75 0.75
6.7 [ 0.13 ( 0.97 + 0.03 ) + 0.03 ]
= 6.7 [ 0.13 + 0.07 ] + 0.1rd ¤ h
= 1.44 rd ¤ h
Dsm = 6.7 [0.13 (1 - 0.03)0.75]

+ 0.030.75] + 0.1 rd/h

= 6.7 [0.13 (0.970.75 + 0.030.75] + 0.1 rd/h

= 6.7 [0.13 + 0.07] + 0.1 rd/h

= 1.44 rd/h

Copyright © 1980 IEEE All Rights Reserved 13