{{#if:12/01/2016|{{#if:05000602|{{#if: | {{#invoke:Navbox|navbox}}{{#arraymap:|,|xx|[[Project::xx| ]]| }} | {{#if:{{#ask:[[{{#arraymap:NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR/DPR/PRLB|,|xx|xx|||}}]]}}|{{#if:{{#ask:document::ML17052A169[[Project::+]][[issue date::<{{#time:m-d-Y|12/01/2016 + 9 months}}]]|mainlabel=-|?Project=|link=none|limit=1|sort=issue date|order=descending}} |{{#invoke:Navbox|navbox}} }}

{{#arraymap:{{#ask:document::ML17052A169[[Project::+]][[issue date::<{{#time:m-d-Y|12/01/2016 + 9 months}}]]|mainlabel=-|?Project=|link=none|limit=1|searchlabel=|sort=issue date|order=descending}}|,|xx|[[Project::xx| ]]| }}{{#if:Response to RAI| | }} }} }} }}{{#if:Response to RAI| }}{{#ifeq:|yes||

{{#if:{{#if:|document id::}} {{#if:|
name::|{{#if:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version|{{#Wiki_filter:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}[[title::{{#Regex_clear:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}| ]]}}}}|}}{{#if:|{{#if:{{{above}}} |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }} }} }}{{#ifeq:|yes|{{#if:{{#if:|document id::}} {{#if:|
name::|{{#if:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version|{{#Wiki_filter:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}[[title::{{#Regex_clear:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}| ]]}}}}|{{#if:|document id::}} {{#if:|
name::|{{#if:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version|{{#Wiki_filter:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}[[title::{{#Regex_clear:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}| ]]}}}}}}}}{{#if:|{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{{subheader}}}

|{{#if: | }} }} }}{{#if:|{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{{subheader2}}}

|{{#if: | }} }} }}{{#if:|{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{{image1}}} {{#if:|
{{{caption1}}}}}

|{{#if: | }} }} }}{{#if:|{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{{image2}}}{{#if:|
{{{caption2}}}}}

|{{#if: | }} }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:[[Accession number::{{#if:ML17052A169|ML17052A169|{{#if:|}}}}]]

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if:Person / Time |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#show:ML17052A169|?site}}{{#arraymap:05000602|,|x| || }}{{#if:05000602|{{#if:{{#show:{{#explode:05000602|,|0}}|?company|link=none}}|{{#if:{{#show:{{#show:{{#explode:05000602|,|0}}|?company|link=none}}|?icon|link=none}}| [[{{#show:{{#show:{{#explode:05000602|,|0}}|?company|link=none}}|?icon|link=none}}|link={{#show:{{#explode:05000602|,|0}}|?company|link=none}}]]}}}}}}

|{{#if:Site: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:[[Start date::Issue date::{{#if:12/01/2016|12/01/2016}}]]

|{{#if:Issue date: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#if:|Revision::}}

|{{#if:{{#if:|Revision:}} | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#arraymap:Whaley P|,|x|[[from::{{#if:{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|x}}]]}}{{#if:|{{#if:{{#show:|?name|link=none}}|{{#show:|?name|link=none}}|}}}}{{#if:Univ of Texas|
{{#arraymap:{{#replace:{{#replace:Univ of Texas|, LLC| }}|, Inc| }}|,|x|[[from::{{#if:{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|x}}]] }} }}

|{{#if:From: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#arraymap:Balazik M|,|x|[[to::{{#if:{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|x}}]]}}{{#if:|{{#arraymap:|,|x|to::x}}}}
{{#arraymap:{{#replace:{{#replace:NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR/DPR/PRLB|, LLC| }}|, Inc| }}|,|x|[[to::{{#if:{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|{{#show:x|?name|link=none}}|x}}]]}}

|{{#if:To: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if:Contacts: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#if:Wertz G, NRR/DPR/PRLB, 301-415-0893|contact::Wertz G, NRR/DPR/PRLB, 301-415-0893}}

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#if:|Category:Press Release      }}

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if:{{#if:|Shared Package}} |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#if:|List: {{#ask:in package::|format=ul}} }}

|{{#if:{{#if:|{{#arraymap:|;|xx|in package::xx}} }} | }} }}{{#if:References |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#arraymap:|,|x|{{#Wiki_filter:x}}}} {{#arraymap:|,|x|{{#Wiki_filter:x}}}}

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:{{#if:{{#ask:Followed by::ML17052A169|link=none}}|{{#ask:Followed by::ML17052A169|?Issue date=|format=ul|sort=Issue date|order=descending}} }}

|{{#if:{{#if:{{#ask:Followed by::ML17052A169|link=none}}|Preceding documents:}} | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if: |

|{{#if:

|{{#if: | }} }}{{#if:{{#if:ML17052A169|Download: [[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:ML17052A169%7C0%7C6}}/ML17052A169.pdf%7CML17052A169]]|[[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:%7C0%7C6}}/.pdf%7C]]}} {{#if:84|(page count::84)}}|}}{{#if:Adams|}} {{#ifeq:|yes||

}}{{#if:Letter, Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI)|{{#arraymap:Letter, Response to Request for Additional Information (RAI)|,|x|| }}{{#if:{{#show:ML17052A169|?site}}|{{#invoke:Navbox|navbox}}

|{{#invoke:Navbox|navbox}} }} }}
|{{#if:ML17052A169|Download: [[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:ML17052A169%7C0%7C6}}/ML17052A169.pdf%7CML17052A169]]|[[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:%7C0%7C6}}/.pdf%7C]]}} }}

Text

{{#if:|document id::}} {{#if:|
name::|{{#if:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version|{{#Wiki_filter:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}[[title::{{#Regex_clear:University of Texas at Austin Triga Research Reactor - Partial Responses to Request for Additional Information for License Renewal Application 12/01/2016, Redacted Version }}| ]]}}}}
{{{above}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{header}}}
Person / Time
{{#if:\|Shared Package}}
References
	{{#if:ML17052A169\|Download: [[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:ML17052A169%7C0%7C6}}/ML17052A169.pdf%7CML17052A169]]\|[[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:%7C0%7C6}}/.pdf%7C]]}} {{#if:84\|(page count::84)}}
	{{#if:\| <span\|<div}} class="noprint plainlinksneverexpand navbar" style="background:none; padding:0; font-weight:normal;; font-size:xx-small; ">{{#if:1\|\|This box: }}{{#if:\|[}}[[{{#switch: \|#default = Adams \| = {{#ifeq: \| \| Template:Adams \| Adams }} }}\|{{#if:1\|v\|view}}]] • [[\|{{#if:1\|d\|talk}}]]{{#if:\|\| • [{{fullurl:{{#switch: \|#default = Adams \| = {{#ifeq: \| \| Template:Adams \| Adams }} }}\|action=edit}}{{#if:1\|e\|edit}}]}}{{#if:\|]}}{{#if:\| \|}}

{{#Wiki_filter:UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN NUCLEAR ENGINEERING TEACHING LABORATORY TRIGA RESEARCH REACTOR LICENSE NO. R-129 DOCKET NO. 50-602 PARTIAL RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION DECEMBER 1, 2016 REDACTED VERSION* SECURITY-RELATED INFORMATION REMOVED

REDACTED TEXT AND FIGURES BLACKED OUR OR DENOTED BY BRACKETS

L Dcpartmcnc of Mechanical Engineering THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN Nuclettr Engineering Teaching Laboratory *Armin, Tex,u 78758 512-232-5370 *FAX: 512-471-4589

http:llwww.me.utexas.edu/~net!I December 1, 2016 ATTN: Document Control Desk Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C., 20555-0001 Michael Balazik Project Manager/Engineer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch OWFN-12E05

SUBJECT:

Docket No. 50-602, Request for Renewal of Facility Operating License R-129

REFERENCE:

(1) University of Teas at Austin - Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Renewal Request for the Nuclear"Engineering Teaching Laboratory TRIGA Mark II Nuclear Research Reactor (TAC No. ME7694) June 25, 2012 Sir: (2) University of Teas at Austin - Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Renewal Request for the Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory TRIGA Mark II Nuclear Research Reactor (TAC No. ME7694) November 1, 2016 Attached is a partial response to the reference letters above, addressing Requests for Additional Information (RAJ) as follows:

RAI 6.(R2)

RAI 19.2(R2)

RAI 20.1(R2)
RAI 22.(R2)

RAI 30.(R2)

RAI 42.

RAI 43.

RAJ 44.

RAI 44.1 RAJ 44.2

RAI 44.3 RAJ 44.4
RAJ 45.1 RAI 45.2 lp'J-P RAl46 tJ""

RAI 47

We respectfully request an additional 90 days to complete RAls related to neutronic analysis in progress (8(R2), 11.(R2), 12(R2), 14(R2), 15(R2), 28(R2), and 29(R2) with revised parts). If there are any questions, please feel free to contact P. M. Whaley at 512-232-5373 or whaley@mail.utexas.edu. Your attention in this matter is greatly appreciated, P. M. Whaley w/att Attachment I: Response to Request for Additional Information Attachment II: {{#if:

| {{#if:{{#show:ML17052A169|?site|limit=1|link=none}}
  | [[letter::{{#ask:from::[[site::{{#show:ML17052A169|?site|limit=1|link=none}}]]Issue date::May 25, 1994|limit=1|link=none|searchlabel=}}|May 25, 1994 letter]]
  | {{#ask:from::Issue date::May 25, 1994|limit=0|searchlabel=May 25, 1994 letter }}
  }}
| {{#if:{{#show:ML17052A169|?site|limit=1|link=none}}
  | {{#if:{{#ask:[[site::{{#show:ML17052A169|?site|limit=1|link=none}}]]Issue date::May 25, 1994!~Information Notice*!~Press Release*}}
    | [[letter::{{#ask:[[site::{{#show:ML17052A169|?site|limit=1|link=none}}]]Issue date::May 25, 1994!~Information Notice*!~Press Release*|limit=1|link=none|searchlabel=}}|May 25, 1994 letter]]
    | May 25, 1994 letter
    }}
  | May 25, 1994 letter
  }}

}} (Annual Report 1993, 1992, Startup report) excerpts Attachment Ill: Analysis of Effluent Argon Production, release, and Exposure for The University of Texas at Austin TRIGA reactor

ATTACHMENT I: RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RAI 6.(R2) The guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 4.4, "Biological Shield," requests that the licensee provide a description of the biological shield and how it assures acceptable control of personnel exposure. However, in your response dated September 17, 2012 (ADAMS Accession No. ML12307A071), you described your methodology but the response does not include supporting survey information that demonstrates that the radiation fields resulting from using those methods are acceptable. Provide supporting radiation survey information that demonstrates the acceptability of your methodology for control of personnel exposure.

RESPONSE

1.

The biological shield was constructed under the original UT TRIGA construction permit and tested according to the 1988 Startup Plan, with the applicable section of the plan communicated in response to the original RAI 6 {which requested a description of methodology). A written report of the startup test program results was submitted to the USNRC May, 25, 1994, which included the results of shielding surveys. The transmittal letter and extracted radiation survey data are attached,

2.

The proposed SAR, Chapter 11, 11.1.3.1 states, "Operational experience has shown the shield performs as designed." SAR, Chapter 11.1.4.1 states that the routine monitoring program of the radiation protection program includes weekly surveys in restricted areas, monthly surveys of exterior walls and roof, quarterly surveys of non-restricted areas to "make sure that adequate radiation measurements of both radiation fields and contamination are made on a regular basis." Current radiation control procedures include: HP-001, Radiation Monitoring - Personnel (requiring monitoring of personnel exposure) HP-002, Radiation Monitoring - Facility (requiring weekly surveys of neutron and gamma radiation at during high power operations, quarterly gamma radiation surveys in non-restricted areas, and area dosimeters in locations in the reactor bay and other areas)

3.

An annual report for the UT TRIGA reactor is required by the USN RC approved Technical Specifications, section 6.6.1, including "A summary of exposures received by facility personnel and visitors where such exposures are greater than 25% of that allowed or recommended," and "A summarized result of environmental surveys performed outside the facility." These reports provide evidence that the biological shielding provides acceptable radiation control or personnel radiation exposure. These reports since 1999 (except for 2008) are available on ADAMS with accession numbers: 1999 ML003700511

2000 ML010930509 2001 ML021120567 2002 ML031040461 2003 ML051020355 2004 ML041050068 2005 ML061020253 2006 ML070930297 2007 ML080950122 2009 ML100980050 2010 ML110960418 2011 ML12102A109 2012 ML13249A075 2013 ML14099A082 2014 ML15099A041 The radiological section of these reports demonstrates "the acceptability of... methodology for control of personnel exposure." RAI 19.(R2) The guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 9.1, "Heating, Ventilation and Air Conditioning System," requests that the licensee provide a description on how air exhaust systems or stacks are designed to reduce the radiological impact on the unrestricted environment. The UT SAR, Section 9.2.3, "Operational analysis and safety function, provides details on the operational analysis and safety function on the reactor bay heating, ventilation, and air conditioning system. 19.2(R2) In your response dated December 22, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16015A052), the stack diameter of 45.72 cm does not correspond to the cited area of 0.4012 m2. Provide resolution of the apparent discrepancy of the calculated and cited stack area.

RESPONSE

The December 22, 2015 response notes that the 45. 72 cm value is the diameter of the stack, and not the flow area. The question is apparently based on a misconception that the cross section of the stack is the flow area of the HVAC system. The Safety Analysis Report, Figure 9.1, shows two exhaust lines combined in the stack exhaust. The paragraph following states, "An exhaust stack on the roof combines the ventilation exhausts from both the main and the purge systems." Figure 9.4A provides a second view of the combined air flows. The flow area for the HVAC system is based on the stack diameter, reduced by the displacement of the cross section of the purge system. The stack diameter is necessary but not sufficient to calculate the flow area at the stack exit, and there is no discrepancy in the two specifications.

RAI 20.(R2) The guidance in NUREG-1537,Part 1, Section 9.2, "Handling and Storage of Reactor Fuel," requests that the licensee provide assurance that subcriticality is maintained under all conditions of fuel handlin~ and storage. RAI R20.1(R2) During a site visit to the NETL, the NRG staff observed that fuel elements are stored in what appeared to be a non-standard rack for which no analysis was provided in the UT SAR. UT provided an analysis on March 22, 2013(ML13091A006) that supports new fuel storage. In the RAI response, UT did not identify the storage location for irradiated fuel. Identify any other locations covered by the license where fuel elements (new or irradiated) are stored, identify the types and numbers of fuel elements that are stored, provide details concerning the storage rack or bin geometry, and analysis that demonstrates that such racks or bins provide adequate conditions for storage.

RESPONSE

Fuel elements are stored only as described in the RAI response and in the proposed Safety Analysis Report, 9.4.2. The in-pool racks are standard TRIGA fuel element storage racks. The standard analysis by F. C. Foushee (March 1, 1966) applies. The proposed Safety Analysis Report, 9.4.2 states "Nineteen elements may be stored in a rack in each well, with a total capacity of two racks.... Spaces in the rack provide a storage array for the fuel equivalent to the innermost three rings of the reactor core, including one element in the center." TRIGA Mark II Reactor General Specifications an Description, GA-2627 (March 1964) in Section 7 indicates core loading of approximately 2.2 kg U235, corresponding to 55 elements (assuming 40 g U235). Since more than 50 elements with reflection are required for criticality using TRIGA fuel in the core grid plate, 19 elements in a space equivalent to the innermost three rings of the reactor core cannot be made critical. Therefore there are adequate conditions to control criticality in storage at the UT facility. Currently there are TRIGA fuel elements on site, as indicated in the following table (where the column "ID" provides serial numbers). In the "Type" column, SFE stands for Standard Fuel Element, IFE for instrumented fuel elements, and FFCR for fuel followers.

/

RAI 22.(R2) The guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 11.1.1, "Radiation Sources," requests that the licensee include airborne dose information for characterization of Ar-41, including providing best estimates of the maximum annual dose and the collective dose for the major radiological activities for the full range of normal operations for facility staff and members of the public. However, your response dated December 22, 2015 (ADAMS Accession No. ML16015A052), provides an attachment that calculates Ar-41 production and release to the reactor bay. There are apparent discrepancies in the calculations that may affect the results: (1) the dimensions in Figure 1, "Geometry of the Air Space above the Pool," do not match the SAR discussions in Section 4.3, "Reactor Pool." For example, pool construction consists of two half-cylinders with a radius of 6.5 ft. (1.981 m) separated by 6.5 ft. (1.981 m). However, Figure 1 shows a smaller cylinder radius and separation distance. This will lead to a lower calculated air volume above the pool; (2) the calculated air volume in Figure 1 cites a value of 3.28 m3, but the volume used in Table 1, "Ar-41 Production Source Terms," is 2.68 m3; (3) the DAG value for the Ar-41 is 3x1o-6µCi/ml (0.111 Bq/ml). However, the analysis in Section 2.1, "Worker Doses," uses a value of 0.0111 Bq/ml. This apparent discrepancy results in a lower stay time duration in Table 5, "Impact on Worker Doses, 1.1 MW Operation, HVAC Only." Provide the revised Ar-41 occupational exposure including stay times and the effect of ventilation, and how these compare to the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 and the commitments of the UT TRIGA ALARA program using assumptions, as well as the annual exposure for the maximally exposed member of the public consistent with your TS and Emergency Plan.

RESPONSE

( 1) RAI 16.1 identified that the pool dimensions in the original proposed SAR was not correct; therefore comparison of pool dimensions in ML16015A052 with the originally submitted SAR discussions in Section 4.3, "Reactor Pool" is irrelevant. (2) In the ML16015A052 response, the sentence in 1.2, "Total volume of the air space is 3.28x106 cm3" should be "Total volume of the space is 3.28x106 cm3*" The pool covers, bridge, and transient rod air tank displace a fraction of that air so that the calculated volume is less (Table 1, 2.68E+05). (3) The value of 0.0111 Bq/ml is a typographical error. J

(4) Argon 41 effluent is a normal, routine effluent and not addressed in the Emergency Plan. An alternate analysis (attached) has been prepared based on modeling (attached) that will replace previous submissions. Values using previous methodology are reasonably close to the results of current modeling for worker doses, and show effluent consequences are acceptably low. (5) The maximum concentration within the reactor bay for full power operations in various configurations of the HVAC and argon purge systems is provided in Table IX (Dose Rates and Stay Times in the Reactor Bay for Various Ventilation Lineups with All Three Sources (Pool, Beam, RSR)) of the attached analysis. With the building ventilation isolation and operations at steady state full power, dose times to rates from argon 41 in the reactor bay would limit stay times to 2.2 hours. Since the reactor will not be operated without ventilation, the stay time is not challenged. If the purge system were secured then operations with only the reactor bay HVAC system, dose times to rates from argon 41 in the reactor bay would limit stay times to 81 hours. Control of exposure would be accomplished by personal monitoring required under the radiation protection program. If the purge system is operating, there are no limits on stay time in the reactor bay (6) Characterization of concentrations and dose rates for maximally exposed individuals is provided in Table X (Exposures and Dose Rates at Point of interest) of the attachment. Maximally exposed individuals are insignificant with the exception of the adjacent ground source, which for normal operations is within the 1 OCFR20 constraint for effluents, and assuming full power operation with isolation is within the 1 OCFR20 limit. RAI 30.(R2) The guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 13.1.6, "Experiment Malfunction," requests that the licensee provide analysis of an experiment malfunction event. However, in your response dated August 21, 2013 (ADAMS Accession No. ML13246A014), it is not clear at what locations the CAP 88 calculations are performed. Furthermore, CAP 88 is generally considered appropriate for normal operation (chronic) releases and not applicable to accident analysis. In Table 1, "Maximum Potential Dose Outside Reactor Bay from Fueled Experiments," it is unclear how the maximum dose is calculated. It also appears that the iodine inventory decayed, but this is not clear in the RAI response. The reason for this interpretation is that the inhalation dose at a given location should be proportional to the quantity (curies) released multiplied by the dose conversion factor (Q*DCF). From the data in Table 1 of the response, the ratio of Sr-90/1-131 dose is 6.4, whereas the ratio of Q*DCF(Sr)/Q*DCF(I) is 3.961. This indicates that the 1-131 curie release is less than the inventory of 932,000 µCi listed in Table 1. Provide an analysis based on the accidental (i.e., short-term) release and demonstrate that the doses are less than the proposed limit in TS 5.4, demonstrate that the proposed TS limit is acceptable, or demonstrate that the doses are bounded by the MHA.

RESPONSE

Using the "conservative" parameters in the Hotspot computer code and assuming the entire activity airborne in the reactor bay HVAC stack results in a maximum dose of 26 mrem for the failed fueled experiment (considering all the Sr and I isotopes). Activation products that may be

in experiments were calculated, but individually did not result in a significant dose; 17 mrem is the maximum calculated dose for all the isotopes in a single experiment from activation products. These doses are acceptable. Table 30.(R2} 1000 Isotope Hotspot Max Hotspot Max Dose DAC (Ci) Dose(mrem) Distance (m) 0.03296 Sr-90 (D) 2.60E+01 110 0.00824 Sr-90 (Y) 0.0824 1-131 12.36 1-132 16.48 l-132m 0.412 1-133 82.4 1-134 2.884 1-135 82.4 H-3 1.60E-01 310 0.412 N-16 1.68E-08 120 0.412 0-19 2.52E-05 180 0.412 F-18 5.33E-03 310 0.412 F-20 no Hotspot 0.412 Ne-23 no Hotspot 4.12 Cl-36 2.13E+OO 310 82.4 Cl-38 1.42E+OO 300 4120000 Ar-37 O.OOE+OO 10 824 Ar-39 2.01E-02 310 12.36 Ar-41 1.57E-01 310 329.6 Ga-70 3.6'7E-01 300 4.12 Ga-72 2.67E-01 310 1.236 As-74 1.96E-01 310 2.472 As-76 1.39E-01 310 8.24 As-77 2.30E-01 310 1.236 Se-75 9.33E-02 310 0.412 Se-77m 2.63E-07 160 0.412 Se-79m 1.48E-05 270 412 Se-81 2.58E-01 300 123.6 Se-81m 1.48E-01 310 206 Se-83 4.94E+OO 300 0.412 Se-83m 4.45E-04 220 370.8 Br-80 4.79E-01 300 28.84 Br-80m 1.69E-01 310 8.24 Br-82 5.81 E-01 310 0.412 Br-82m 8.50E-06 280 82.4 Kr-85m 1.19E-01 310 20.6 Kr-87 1.67E-01 310 8.24 Kr-88 1.67E-01 310 1.236 Rb-86 8.27E-02 310 0.412 Rb-86m 1.71 E-04 210 123.6 Rb-88 8.59E-01 300 82.4 Xe-125 1.89E-01 310 41.2 Xe-127 9.89E-02 310

Table 30.(R2} 1000 Isotope Hotspot Max Hotspot Max Dose DAC (Ci) Dose (mrem) Distance (m) 824 Xe-129m 1.61E-01 310 1648 Xe-131m 1.25E-01 310 412 Xe-133 1.20E-01 310 412 Xe-133m 1.13E-01 310 41.2 Xe-135 9.58E-02 310 37.08 Xe-135m 1.21E-01 300 0.412 Xe-137 4.21E-04 270 16.48 Xe-138 1.54E-01 290 24.72 Hg-197 5.42E-01 310 16.48 Hg-197m 6.32E-01 310 288.4 Hg-199m 1.03E+OO 300 2.06 Hg-203 3.50E-01 310 0.412 Hg-205 3.04E-05 270 RAl42. UT's latest annual financial statements were not included in the UT SAR. Please provide a copy of UT's latest annual financial statements. *

RESPONSE

Current financial information for The University of Texas at Austin is located at https://budget.utexas.edu. RAl43. Assuming review of this application is completed on schedule, and a renewed license granted in FY 2013, please provide the estimated operating costs for each of the FYs 2013 through FY2017

RESPONSE

Operating costs and income projections for the next 5 fiscal years are provided below. EXPENSES 2017-2018-2019-2020-2021-2022-2023-2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 FTE $392,740 $395,882 $398,653 $401,443 $404,253 $407,083 $409,933 Student support $57,086 $57,371 $57,733 $58,097 $58,463 $58,831 $59,202 Equiment $7,000 $7,000.00 $7,000.00 $7,005.00 $7,014.00 $7,014.00 $7,032.00 Travel $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 $3,000 Communications & $16,000 $15,680 $15,680 $15,680 $15,680 $15,693 $15,693 Security TOTAL $475,826 $478,933 $482,066 $485,225 $488,410 $491,621 $494,859

INCOME 2017-2018-2019-2020-2021-2022-2023-2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 State Budget $208,540 $209,583 $210,631 $211,684 $212,742 $213,806 $214,875 Auxiliary University $146,731 $148,198 $149,680 $151,177 $152,689 $154,216 $155,758 Fund[1J Overhead Return . $60,555 $61,152 $61,755 $62,364 $62,979 $63,600 $64,227 Research & service $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 $60,000 TOTAL $475,826 $478,933 $482,066 $485,225 $488,410 $491,621 $494,860 NOTE{l]: Return on UT investment portfolio, consequently fluctuates RAl44. Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.75(d)(1): [e]ach non-power reactor applicant for or holder of an operating license for a production or utilization facility shall submit a decommissioning report as required by§ 50.33(k) of this part. Further, pursuant to 10 CFR 50. 75( d)(2), the report must: (i) Contain a cost estimate for decommissioning the facility; (ii) Indicate which method or methods described in paragraph (e) of this section as acceptable to the NRC will be used to provide funds for decommissioning; and (iii) Provide a description of the means of adjusting the cost estimate and associated funding level periodically over the life of the facility. UT SAR Section 15, Appendix 15.4 updates the decommissioning cost estimate of the UT TRIGA to $888,609 in 2033, referencing NUREG/CR-1756 Addendum, "Technology, Safety and Costs of Decommissioning Reference Nuclear Research and Test Reactors." UT derived this original estimate by cost comparing the UT TRIGA reactor to the DORF (Diamond Ordnance Radiation Facility) reactor which possessed a comparatively smaller power limit (250 KW) and decommissioned over three decades ago in 1980. The February 21, 2012, supplement to the UT SAR provided further information on cost escalation factors, projections, calculations of the decommissioning cost estimate for UT TRIGA, and estimated a decommissioning cost of $2. 71 million in 203~. Please provide the following additional information:

RESPONSE

New calculations have been performed; each RAI is addressed based on the new calculations in context. RAI 44.1 A comparison of the UT TRIGA decommissioning cost estimate to more recently decommissioned research reactors of similar licensed power limit as the UT TRIGA.

RESPONSE

J

Cost estimates for three decommissioned facilities at 1 MW or higher are reported below. In addition, although decommissioning is not anticipated for the Texas Agricultural & Mechanical University (TAMU), the 2014 decommissioning estimate TAMU prepared for license renewal for is considered as directly applicable to the UT TRIGA because of comparable power level and location. INSTITUTION YEAR ESTIMATE Georgia Technical Institute 2001 $7,151,464 University of Michigan 1 2004 $7,024,703 University of Illinois 2006 $4,209,348 Texas Agricultural & Mechanical University 2014 $8,550,000 There is a large variation in cost in the decommissioning estimates for the 4 institutions, even considering the range of time over which the estimates were generated. DECOMISSIONING ESTIMATES, COMPARABLE FACILITIES $9,000,000 TAMU $8,000,000 GEORGIA TECH UM $7,000,000 $6,000,000 $5,000,000 $4,000,000 $3,000,000 -**---T--**-** 2001 2004 2006 2014 Decommissioning costs for Georgia Technical Institute, the University of Michigan and the University of Illinois were developed by rigorous methods to support development of contracts, while the Texas Agricultural & Mechanical University (TAMU) was developed using simplified methodology available in NUREG-1307. NUREG-1307 suggests the general equation to estimate decommissioning costs: Estimated Cost (Yr X) = [1986$Cost] *(A* Lx + B * [0.58

Px + 0.42
Fx] + C *Bx)

In the general equation, the A, B, and C coefficients are fraction of total cost in labor, energy, and radioactive waste disposal (or burial) costs. The associated terms Lx, Ex, and Bx are multiplication factors that reflect changes over time. Specifically: The coefficients (A, B and C) are based on the 'reference' cost estimate: 1 High estimate 28.18%, low estimate -12.12%.

The coefficient A is the fraction of total cost in the reference year that is required to support labor The coefficient B is the fraction of total cost in the reference year that is required to support electric power consumed in the decommissioning and the cost of fuel The coefficient C is the fraction of total cost in the reference year that is required for disposal (i.e., burial) of radioactive waste Lx is the cost adjustment (or escalation) factor based on the appropriate regional data from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS), "Employment Cost Indices" for the "Employment Cost Index for total compensation, for private industry Workers by bargaining status, census regions and division, and metropolitan area status" (codes CIU2010000000210I, CIU20100000002201 CIU20100000002301 and CIU20100000002401 for Northeast, South, Midwest and West regions respectively). Ex is the cost adjustment (or escalation) factor based on the energy adjustment factor I (NURGE 1307, section 3.2) for PWRs, is a weighted average of industrial electric power (Px) and light fuel oil (F x) taken from the BLS data (year of interest PPI Commodity Code 0543 and 0573 respectively) Ex = 0.58

Px + 0.42
Fx

and, Bx is the cost adjustment (or escalation) factor based on the waste burial/disposition factor taken from the appropriate LLW burial location as given in N UREG-1307, TABLE 2-1.

The BLS and burial cost data is converted into a time-escalation factor for each associated cost by dividing the cost in a specific year by the cost in the reference year. Application to the UT TR/GA Reactor Details of the TAMU decommissioning estimate used in conjunction with the general equation are provided in the table "2014 Decommissioning Cost Estimate." The TAMU and the UT TRIGA reactors have similar power levels and are within the same geographic region; therefore the TAMU cost estimate is adopted as the UT TRIGA decommissioning cost estimate. The definition of the A, B and C coefficient of the general equation allows development of

coefficients for 2014, which can then be used as the reference year. Using 2014 as the reference year, the time-escalation factors for the UT TRIGA decommissioning costs are the ratios of the cost in 2014 (based on the 2014 Decommissioning Cost Estimate) to the cost in the year of interest.

2014 DECOMISSIONING COST ESTIMATE Category Cost Coefficients Labor $1,487,000 0.17 Enerav $470,000 0.05 Burial $6,593,000 0.77 Sub-total $8,550,000 Na 25% Contingency $2, 138,000 Na Total $10,688,000 Na

Time Escalation Factors for Bureau of Labor Data The cost of labor in the West, Midwest and South are provided in the table "Labor Cost" along with the time-escalation factor (EF) for years associated with the cost estimates above using 2014 as the reference year. Labor Costs West Midwest South YEAR COST EF COST EF COST EF 2001 84.475 0.696 87.75 0.734 87.6 0.719 2004 96.45 0.795 96.1 0.804 96.55 0.793 2006 101.975 0.840 101.875 0.852 102.225 0.839 2014 121.35 1.000 119.55 1.000 121.825 1.000 Similarly, BLS data for the costs industrial electricity, light fuel oil, and burial are provided in the table "Other Costs" along with the associated escalation factors. Other Costs Power Burial YEAR Industrial Electricity Light Fuel Oil Generic Compact Cost EF Cost EF Cost EF 2001 141.1 0.647 83.5 0.290 16.271 0.496 2004 147.2 0.675 124.5 0.433 20.084 0.612 2006 172.8 0.793 212.1 0.737 22.626 0.690 2014 218 1.000 287.7 1.000 32.794 1.000 Time Escalation Factors for Burial Data Burial data is provided in NUREG1307 only for even numbered years, with the most current data set 2012. While data is not available for unspecified compacts before 2008, the 2008, 2010, and 2012 PWR data for 'Waste for Generic LLW Disposal Site" is the identical to "Values for the South Carolina Site, Atlantic Compact." Therefore it is assumed that values for the generic case across the years from 2002-2014 are equal to the South Carolina data, as indicated on the graph, "NUREG 1307 Burial Costs, Generic Compact Affiliated. Burial Costs YEAR COMPACT Brn 2001 16.271 0.496 2004 20.084 0.612 2006 22.626 0.690 2014 32.794 1.000 EC(Yr) = $8,550,000 * (0.17

Lyr + 0.05 * [0.58
Pyr + 0.42
Fyr] + 0.77
Byr)

Adjustment for Regional Variation in Labor Cost For the case where cost estimates in the reference year are adjusted to simulate decommissioning that occurs for the same facility in a different region, the decommissioning cost estimate equation reduces to: EC(Reg) = EC(West) * (0.17

LReg + 0.827)

Where the cost escalation (EF) is based on the cost in a specific region normalized to the cost in the reference region (EC(West)). An adjustment (or multiplication) factor (ADJ(R)) can be developed as: EC(Reg)

AD](R) = EC(West) = 0.17
LReg + 0.827 Regional labor costs (COST), escalation factors (EF), and adjustment factors (ADJ) are tabulated in the "Labor Costs, Regional Escalation Factors" table.

Labor Costs, Regional Escalation Factors West Midwest South YEAR ADJ ADJ COST EF COST EF COST EF 2014 121.35 1 119.55 0.985 0.994 121.825 1.004 0.998 Adjustment of the UT TR/GA Decommissioning Cost Estimate for Cost-Variations in Time Adjusting the 2014 decommissioning cost estimate (EC) to different years (Yr) for each region (R) is accomplished using the modified general equation for the reference year (in this case 2014) and the year of interest, dividing the two equations, and manipulating the formula to: EC(R, Yr)= AD]R

EC(Ref) *[A* Lyr + B * {0.58
Pyr + 0.42
Fyr} + C
Byr]

UT TR/GA Decommissioning Cost Estimate for a UT TR/GA Reactor in 2001, South The Georgia Technical Institute decommissioning estimate is based on labor rates from the South in 2001. The 2014 cost estimate calculated for a UT TRIGA reactor decommissioned with labor rates from the South in 2001 is: EC(South, 2001) = 0.998

EC(Ref) * [0.17
Lyr + 0.05 * {0.58
Pyr + 0.42
Fyr} + 0.77
Byr]

EC(R, Yr)= 0.998 * $8,550,000 * [0.17

0.719 + 0.05 * {0.58
0.647 + 0.42
0.29} + 0.77
0.496]

EC(South, 2001) = $4,513,930 With a 25% contingency incorporated, the cost is: EC(South, 2001) = $5,642,412 UT TR/GA Decommissioning Cost Estimate for a UT TR/GA Reactor in 2004, Midwest

The Michigan University decommissioning estimate is based on labor rates from the Midwest in 2004. The 2014 cost estimate calculated for a UT TRIGA reactor decommissioned with labor rates from the Midwest in 2004 is: EC(R, Yr)= 0.994 * $8,550,000 * [0.17

0.793 + 0.05 * {0.58
0.675 + 0.42
0.433} + 0.77
0.612]

EC(Midwest, 2004) = $4,513,930 With a 25% contingency incorporated, the cost is: EC(Midwest, 2004) = $6,742,847 UT TR/GA Decommissioning Cost Estimate for a UT TR/GA Reactor in 2006, Midwest The University of Illinois decommissioning estimates are based on labor rates from the Midwest in 2006. The 2014 cost estimate calculated for a UT TRIGA reactor decommissioned with labor rates from the Midwest in 2006 is: EC(R, Yr)= 0.994 * $8,550,000 * [0.17

0.839 + 0.05 * {0.58
0.793 + 0.42
0.737} + 0.77
0.69]

EC(Midwest, 2004) = $6,054,508 With a 25% contingency incorporated, the cost is: EC(Midwest, 2006) = $7,568,135 Comparison of UT TR/GA Equivalent Reactor Decommissioning Cost Estimate to Facility Decommissioning Cost Estimate A summary of the facility decommissioning cost estimates for reactors in different regions at different times, cost estimates for the UT TRIGA decommissioning cost adjusted to regions and years for the other facility cost estimates, and the deviation from the facility cost is provide in the "Cost Comparison" table. Although the earliest facility cost estimates are reasonably close to the UT TRIGA equivalent, the University of Illinois is significantly lower than the equivalent UT TRIGA estimate. Since the UT TRIGA cost is conservatively higher, there is no purpose in analyzing the reasons for the difference except to note that the University of Illinois cost estimate does not seem consistent with the other cost estimates, including the T AMU estimate. Cost Comparison INSTITUTION Year Facility UTTRIGA Deviation Estimate Equivalent Georgia Technical Institute 2001 $7,151,464 $5,642,412 21% University of Michigan 2004 $7,024,703 $6,742,847 4% University of Illinois 2006 $4,209,348 $7,568,135 -80%

RAI 44.2 A FY 2012 - FY 2013 decommissioning cost estimate for the UT TRIGA to meet the NRC's radiological release criteria for decommissioning the facility, which should also include a contingency factor of at least 25 percent. A contingency factor provides reasonable assurance for unforeseen circumstances that could increase decommissioning costs (see NUREG/CR-6477, NUREG/CR-1756, NUREG-1713).]

RESPONSE

Current cost calculated in response to RAI 44.3 will be increased by 25%. RAI R44.3 Provide a calculation detailing how the rates in Table 15.3 "Escalation Costs," were derived. The University of Texas at Austin will follow the guidance provided in up-to-date revisions of USNRC UNREG/CR-1756 and NUREG-1307, updating values to current BLS information to allow use of the equation developed from NURGE 1307 as described above, using: EC(Yr) = $8,550,000 * (0.17

Lyr + 0.05 * [0.58
Pyr + 0.42
Fyr] + 0.77
Byr)

Current Decommissioning Cost Estimates As previously noted, the most current burial cost estimate in NUREG 1307 is 2012. The TAMU estimate escalated burial costs to 2014 based on CPI, and this estimate (as an accepted response to additional information) is used as a reference value for the UT TRIGA. However, burial costs reported in NURGE 1307 for the years after 2002 and before 2012 (generic Compact Affiliated data) exhibit an approximately linear relationship (R2 value of 0.992) with the least square fit to the data represented by the equation: 1.271 *YR - 2527 ByR = --3-2-.7-9_4 __ It is therefore reasonable to use the data to extrapolate the burial cost for at least a few years beyond the data range. The escalation factor is calculated to be 1.12 for 2017.

NU REG 1307 Burial Costs, Generic Compact Affiliated $35 $33 531 +" $29 S27 $25 COST: 1.271. YR

2S27 S23 R' :0.9924

$21 $19 ,*+ $17 $15 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 ic BLS statistics for the cost of industrial electricity increased from 218 in 2014 to 223.7 in 2015, increasing by a factor of 1.026 (i.e., 223.7/218). The trend has been relatively stable, as shown in the graph, "Industrial Electricity and Light Fuel Oil." Therefore escalation from 2014 to 2017 is assumed to be 1.078. BLS statistics for the cost of light fuel oil has been erratic, but for three years prior to 2014, the escalation cost decreased by approximately 0.03 followed by a significant decrease in 2016. Therefore it is considered conservative to assume the 2017 light fuel oil cost is the same as 2014, with an escalation factor of unity. The escalation factor for light fuel oil is therefore assumed to be 1. Industrial Electricity and Fuel Oil Escalation Costs (BLS) 1.2 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 o.o 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 1nd. Electricity - uaht Fuel Oil BLS data shows labor costs tend to change smoothly and gradually (as opposed to commodity costs). For a few years prior to 2016, escalation costs (annual cost normalized to 2014) have

been rising smoothly at a linear rate as indicated on the graph "Time Dependent Labor Costs for the West (BLS)." Escalation factor is calculated to be 1.20 for labor cost in 2017. Time Dpendent Labor Costs for the West (BLS) 1.05 1.00 0.95 0.90 0.85 0.80 0.75 0.70 0.65 2000 D D n u D D D u 2005 a* .er tr D D y = 0.0221x - 43.602 D R2= 0.998 2010 2015 Estimated cost of decommissioning in 2017 is therefore calculated as: 2020 EC(2017) = $8,550,000 * (0.17

1.20 + 0.05 * [0.58
1.078 + 0.42
1] + 0.77
1.12)

EC(2017) = $9,564,560 RAI 44.4 Provide a calculation showing how the escalation factors in Table 15.4 "Calculation Summary," were derived.

RESPONSE

Escalation factors will be calculated as indicated above, using current BLS and NUREG 1307 data when available, using best estimate from extrapolation of recent data when data is not available. RAI 45.1 Provide the following information: Ari updated SOI containing the decommissioning cost estimate in 2013 dollars, and the name of the document(s) governing control of funds RESPONSE. The current (11/2016) budget information for The University of Texas at Austin can be found at: http://cms.utsystem.edu/sites/utsfiles/documents/controller/ut-system-institution-annual-operating-budgets-ut-austin/aus-fy17-budget.pdf A current (2017) decommissioning cost estimate is provided below.

2017 DECOMISSIONING COST ESTIMATE Category Cost Labor $1,744,200 Energy $446,840 Burial $7,373,520 Sub-total $9,564,560 25% Contingency $2,391,140 Total $11,955,700 RAI 45.2 Provide the following information: Written documentation verifying that the signator of the SOI, Kevin P. Hegarty, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, is authorized to execute the SOI that binds UT financially.

RESPONSE

The Vice President and Chief Financial Officer has changed. A letter of intent written by the current Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, incorporating a statement of authority. Rules and Regulations associated with Delegation of Authority can currently (11/2016) be found at: http://utsystem.edu/documents/docs/delegation-authority/delegations-authority-academic-institution and http://utsystem.edu/sites/utsfiles/documents/general-counsel/delegation-authority-charts/utaus.pdf name and assoicated rule

OFFICE OF THE SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN P.O. Box 8179 *Austin, Texas 78713-8179

512-471-1422 *FAX 512-471-7742 Mr. M. Balazik Project Manager Division of Policy and Rule Making Research and Test Reactor Licensing Branch Washington, DC 20555-0001 RE:

Docket 50-602 License R-129

Dear Mr. Balazik:

November 9, 2016 This concerns the ultimate decommissioning of The University of Texas TRJGA II Research Reactor, currently licensed for operation by the University until January 17, 2012. Pursuant to the Code of Federal regulations, title 10, Part 50, this is to assure that the University, an entity of the State of Texas, will obtain funds for decommissioning when it is necessary. It is our intention to renew the current facility operating license. Nevertheless, whenever a decision to decommission the facility is made, the University will secure funding from internal and external sources, including requests for legislative appropriations, if appropriate, sufficiently in advance of decommissioning to prevent delay of required activities. The Constitution of the State of Texas (Article 7, Sections 17 and 18) addresses appropriation, funding, and commitment of financial resources for colleges and universities. The Office of the Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer for The University of Texas at Austin is responsible for developing the University's official operating budget, strategic planning, financial reporting, financial analysis, and fiscal analysis of proposed and actual legislation affecting the University through the Budget Office. The University of Texas System Board of Regents' Rules and Regulations (Ruic 10501) establishes the financial authority for financial commitments for The University of Texas at Austin in the University's President, who delegated authority to execute and deliver contracts to Darrell Bazzell (Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer) on April 18, 2016. Therefore I am vested with the authority to sign this statement of intent. Sincerely, Darrell Bazzell Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer c: Dr. Daniel Jaffe, UT Austin, Vice President for Research Dr. Steven Biegalski, UT Austin, Director, NETL Mr. Paul Michael Whaley, UT Austin, Associate Director, NETL

L RAl46. The guidance in NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 11.1.4, "Radiation Monitoring and Surveying," requests that the licensee identify the radiation monitoring equipment, its location, and function. The UT SAR, Section 11.1.4.2, "Radiation Monitoring Equipment," lists only "Representative Radiation Detection Instrumentation." Provide a list of all such equipment required for operation of UT TRIGA within the facility, specify where the equipment is located, describe any alarm functions, and for any such equipment that is applicable, cite the appropriate TS limiting condition for operation and surveillance requirements by number.

RESPONSE

The following information will be added to Chapter 7: FIXED RADIATION MONITORING SYSTEMS Continuous monitoring of radiation levels in the facility is accomplished by area radiation monitors, continuous air monitoring of the atmosphere in the reactor bay, and monitoring contamination in the purge system. Area Radiation Monitors Area radiation monitors have local and remote (in the control room) indications and alarms continuously monitoring gamma radiation levels at strategic locations. Three channels monitor areas around beam ports (beam port 1, near beam port 2 and 3, and near beam ports 4 and 5). Other channels monitor the control room, the 12 foot level, and at the rail surrounding the reactor pool. These channels interface with the control console, with digital based indication and alarms. These channels provide information to the operator at the controls, experimenters, and other personnel about radiological conditions to help manage and control exposure. Alarms are established to identify and alert the operator at the controls and personnel who occupy the area when levels exceed a threshold above normal for the specific area during reactor operation. Although the facility operating schedule and work load does not typically require a person occupying any area for 2000 hours of full power operation, a 2.5 mrem/h setpoint (or less) assures occupational exposure cannot exceed limits. A 5 mrem/h setpoint identifies when an area becomes a radiation area. A 100 mrem/h setpoint identifies when an area becomes a high radiation area. An additional and similar set of radiation monitors are positioned near the pool cleanup resin column, pool cooling piping and fume hoods (reactor bay sorting hood and pneumatic tube

receiving station). In addition to information about radiological conditions for potential personnel exposure, the resin column and pool piping monitors may also indicate developing problems.

Continuous Air Monitor (Air Particulate Detector) The continuous air monitor (or air particulate detector) drives a stream of reactor bay air through a filter, with the filter monitored by a radiation detector. Alert or alarm indications may exist and could provide a signal for isolation of the ventilation system or indications to alert an operator to the need for isolation. Sampling rate is set to provide an alarm within 2 hours if the concentration of airborne particulate in reactor bay air exceeds the 10 CFR 20 occupational

dose concentrations for a single fission product in the range of 84-105or129-149. This channel interfaces with the control console, with digital based indication and alarms. Assuming a constant level of airborne contamination, activity on the CAM filter will consist of an accumulation term and a decay term, with the time rate of change: Where N1 is the activity on the filter q is the sample rate (cm3/min) vis the room volume N, is the activity in the room E is the collection efficiency With solution: dN1 q -=-*N *c dt V r q Nr. c [ A.*t] Ni=-*--* 1-e V /l At equilibrium: V*A. Nr = N00 *-- q

t:

An alarm setpoint (a) in cpm that will detect a specific radioisotope concentration (a) in dpm/cm3 over collection time (t) for a detector with efficiency (I)) can be calculated by: a= a* (q

t:)
t
TJ Filters are selected for 1 % efficiency for 0.25 micron particles. Detector efficiency for thin window GM tubes for Tc-99 is typically 36%. Efficiency for fission products range from 30-50%.

During normal operation, fission products evolving from pool water will be ventilated by the argon purge system. When the reactor ventilation system is secured, fission products will be ventilated by the HVAC system and therefore have potential to be detected by the CAM. Argon Monitor The argon monitor (also known as argon 41 Monitor or purge monitor) normally functions during reactor operation. The argon monitor samples experiment facility purge flow; purge flow is manually selected based on experiment facilities in use as described in Chapter 9. This channel interfaces with the control console, with digital based indication and alarms. Effluent monitoring for Ar-41 will normally be provided by continuous air sampling or integrating dosimeters in areas of interest or release. Measurements of yearly dose or concentration will meet the prescribed limits. The alarm setpoint for the argon 41 monitor will be based on an Ar-41 concentration at which the maximally exposed individual is exposed to the limit for Ar-41 in 1 OCFR20, App B. Argon release may be calculated from measured average release concentrations in periods of CAM inoperability.

Since fission products evolving from pool water will be ventilated by the argon purge system during normal operation, the argon monitor is the most likely first indication of a fuel element failure. The following information will be added to the list of radiation monitoring equipment in Chapter 11: Area radiation monitors (see Chapter 7) Continuous Air Monitor (see Chapter 7) Argon Monitor (see Chapter 7) RAl47. Section 3.3 of the UT Emergency Plan, "Protective Action Values" states: "... the Emergency Director with the concurrence of the Radiation Safety Officer may authorize exposure in excess of these values to facilitate rescue of personnel with injuries or take corrective actions to mitigate consequences of an emergency event. The whole body exposure limit for life-saving is 100 rem and 25 rem for corrective actions." Tables 2.2 in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Protective Action Guide (PAG) Manual, dated 2013 and 1992 respectively, provide the following guidance for response worker exposure. Table 2.2: EPA PAG Manual, 2013, Response Worker Guidelines Guideline Activity Condition 5 rem (50 mSv) All occupational exposures All reasonably achievable actions have been taken to minimize dose. 10 rem (100 Protecting valuable Exceeding 5 rem (50mSv) mSv) 8 property necessary for unavoidable and all appropriate public welfare (e.g. a actions taken to reduce dose. power plant) Monitoring available to project or measure dose. 25 rem (250 Lifesaving or protection of Exceeding 5 rem (50mSv) mSv)b large populations. unavoidable and all appropriate actions taken to reduce dose. Monitoring available to project or measure dose. a For potential doses >5 rem (50mSv), medical monitoring programs should be considered. b In the case of a very large incident, such as an improvised nuclear device, incident commanders may need to consider raising the property and lifesaving response worker guidelines to prevent further loss of life and massive spread of destruction.

Table 2.2: EPA PAG Manual, 1992, Guidance.on Dose Limits for Workers Performing Emergency Services Dose limit a Activity Condition (rem) 5 All 10 Protecting valuable property Lower dose not practicable 25 Lifesaving or protection of Lower dose not large populations practicable >25 Lifesaving or protection of Only on a large populations voluntary basis to persons fully aware of the risks involved (See tables 2-3 and 2-

4) a Sum of external effective dose equivalent and committed dose equivalent to non-pregnant adults from exposure and intake during an emergency situation.

Workers performing services during emergencies should limit dose to the lens of the eye three times the listed value and doses to any other organ (including skin and body extremities) to ten times the listed value. These limits apply to all doses from an incident, except those received in unrestricted areas as members of the public during the intermediate phase of the incident (see chapters 3 and 4). Revise the whole body exposure limit for life saving and corrective actions or justify the current exposure limits provided in the UT Emergency Plan.

RESPONSE

Whole body exposure limit for life saving and corrective actions will be revised to reflect Table 2.2: EPA PAG Manual, 2013, Response Worker Guidelines.

/ Tiff U:'\\1\\'EHSIT\\' rn: TEX:\\S :\\T i\\USTIN May 25, 1994 Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Subject:

Docket 50-602 Annual Report 1993, 1992, Startup Report

Dear Sir:

Reports are enclosed for the R-129 license activities of The University of Texas at Austin. One copy of each report is enclosed. The reports cover (1) the Startup Program of the UT-TRIGA reactor at the Balcones Research Center and (2) the annual activities of the 1992 and 1993 calendar years. Sincerely, Thomas L. Bauer Assistant Director, Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory

Enclosures:

cc: Region IV A. Adams B. Wehring D. Klein .* _.. l.J 1992 Annual Report 1993 Annual keport Startup Report w/enclosures 1 copy w/enclosures 1 copy w/enclosures 1 copy w/enclosures 1 copy /

NUCLEAR REACTOR LABORATORY TECHNICAL REPORT THE CNIVERSITY OF TEXAS l.OLLEGF OF f:NG!NEEhlNG DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAJ. fNGTNEERINl; ~406030139 940525 PDR ADOCK 0500)~02 . R --......, F'Df:.

NUCLEAR REACTOR LABORATORY TECHNICAL REPORT THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT OF MECHA:<TCAL ENGINEERING 9406030139 940525 PDR ADOCK 0500060?

R F'OR-

Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory The university of Texas at Austin Balcones Research Center Startup Report July 1992

Radiation Surveys Radiation surveys, neutron and gamma, were taken throughout the reactor area at o, JOO, 600, and full power levels. Measurements at*predefined Radiation Base Points were recorded as benchmarks for comparison with future measurements. No detectable neutron counts were found at any location. Values represent the highest value within the area of the Radiation Base Point or in special cases the value at the Radiation Base Point. The reactor shield structure performed as designed. Neutron readings were minimal, less than 0.15 mrem the detection sensitivity, throughout the reactor bay. During the survey, the neutron measurements were taken as count detection events rather than allowing the neutron detection instrument, an Eberline PRS-2, to integrate the events to display dose. The gamma readings were within deiign goals. Locations which showed appreciable readings at 1 MW were the conduit access plate on the bay floor (Point SSWl), the coolant pipes at all three levels, and the area immediately surrounding the pool surface. Data locations at the pool surface were not taken at equilibrium cooling conditions. Areas (RBP #'s 21-24 and 36-42) show conflicting results. These measurements are an indication of the operating status of the cooling system. The dose rates are from N-16 in the thermal column from the reactor. Following startup to power and during the transient thermal conditions in the pool the dose rates may reach as high as 10 - 40 mrem/hr for short periods. At stable conditions tha doses do not exceed 1-4 rnrern/hr. 75 Onoo"'1r u ' \\)

Table of Survey Instruments Radiation survey Instruments Gamma Manufacturer: Model #: Serial #: Scale (all measurements) Comments: Sensitivity: Neutron Manufacturer: Model #: Serial #: Comments: Sensitivity: 76 Bicron micro-rem A784Q Xl tissue equivalent plastic scintillator Eberline PRS-2 452 BF3 tube in 8" polyethylene sphere Counts/mrem

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 2S 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 List of Radiation Base Points Startup survey Description Area Symbol 1st level 1 meter above floor middle of south side (S) center of BP-1 plate (SSE) middle of east-south-east side (ESE) center of BP-2 plate (E) center of BP-3 plate (ENE) middle of north-north-east side (NNE) center of BP-4 plate (N) c~nter of BP-5 plate (NNW) middle of west-north-west side (WNW) middle of west side (W) middle of we~t-south-west (WSW) middle of south-south-west side (SSW) 2nd level 1 meter above floor middle of south-west side (SXW) middle of south-south-east side (SSE) middle of south-east side (SXE) middle of east-north-east side (ENE) middle of north-east side (NXE) middle of north-north-west side (NNW) middle of north-west side (NXW) middle of west-south-west side (WSW) 3rd level at pool deck area (deck lev~ pool area south-south-east area pool area east-north-east area pool area north-north-west area pool area west-south-west area 3rd level platform floor area {floor level) floor area south-south-east side floor area east-north-east side floor area north-north-west side floor area west-south-west side points 1 meter above floor center of water treatment room vicinity of control room console SSSl SS El ESEl EEEl EN El NNEl NNNl NNWl WNWl WWWl WSWl SSWl SXW2 SSE2 SXE2 ENE2 NXE2 NNW2 NXW2 WSW2 SXE3 NXW3 NXW3 SXW3 SSE3 ENE3 NNW3 WSW3 WTRl ICS3 Reference 12oints for beam shield configurations Beam Port 1 intersection with wall. BPlW Beam Port 2 intersection with wall. BP2W Beam Port 3 intersection with wall. BP3W Beam Port 4 intersection with wall. BP4W Beam Port 5 intersection with wall. BP4W 77 0 n [) n ***-* V u I I

36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 Radiation Base Point Startup survey Penetrations Water or shield penetrations at pool deck level top of RSR loading tube. top of RSR drive tube. top of central thimble. res conduit bundle (SSE) area monitor conduit (ENE) argon vent line (NNW) tank ground connect box (S) conduit collection boxes ac power pull box at 5 foot level DAC pull box at 14 foot level CSC pull box at 25 foot level COlidUit for utility gower 1 1st level AC power near BPl (SSE) AC power near BP2 (ESE) AC power near BP3 (EEE) AC power near BP4 (NNE) AC power near BP5 (NNW) AC power near BP6 (SSW) Conguit fO[ a[g~ rnonitO[S 1 J,st l~vel Radiation detector between BPl & BP2 Radiation detector between BP2 & BPJ Radiation detector between BP4 & BPS Conduit for utility power at 2nd level AC power south~west side (SXW) AC power east-north-east side (ENE) AC power nortl:-north-west side (llNW) Instrumentation conduits and level NMlOOO pre-amp NMlOOO processor ~eg rod drive translator 78 LRSR DRSR XCTX !CSX RADX ARGN GRND XACX DACX cscx BPlP BP2P BPJP BP4P BP5P BP6P Pl2D P23D P45D SX"wP ENEP NNWP NAMP NCPU REGT

Table of Gamma Dose Rates Number RBP mrem/hr 0 kW. 300 kW 600 kW 1000 kW 1 SSSl .006

0.

0.030

0. 450 2

SS El .006 0.02 o.oi5 0.030 3 ES El .006 0.025 0.025 0.030 4 EEEl .006 0.020 0.015 0.030 5 ENEl .005 0.020 0.030 0.030 6 NNEl .005 0.020 0.025 0.060 7 NNNl .005 0.015 0.030 0.030 8 NNWl .005 0.015 0.030 0.070 9 WNWl .006 0.015

o. 025 0.030 10 WWWl

.012 0.040 0.120 0.040 11 WSWl .005 0.050 0.090 0.200 12 SSWl .006 0.035 0.100 0.250 13 SXW2 .005 0.020 0.050 0.050 14 SSE2 .005 0.030 0.030 0.040 15 SXE2 .006 0.025 0.020 0.030 16 ENE2 .005 0.020 0.025 0.040 17 NXE2 .005 0.015

0. 030 0.030 18 NNW2

.006 0.025

o. 070 0.150 19 NXW2

.006 0.040 0.040 0.200 20 WSW2 .005 0.050 0.070 0.200 21 SXW3 .005 0.160

0. 350 3.500 22 NXE3

.006 0.140 0.500 2.000 23 NXW3 .006 0.170 0,600 1.700 24 SXW3 .007 0.200 0.500

1. 500 25 SSE3

.005 0.020 0.010 0.015 26 ENE3 .006 0.150 0.012 0.020 27 NNW3 .007 0.150 0.020 0.025 28 WSW3 .005 0.150 0.010 0.007 29 WTRl .005 0.020 0.200 0.300 30 ICS3 .005 0.080 0.010 0.010 31 BPlW .005 0.020 0.015 0.009 32 BP2W .006 0.020 0.015 0.008 33 BP3W .005 0.050 0.020 0.020 34 BP4W .004 0.060 0.015 0.010 35 BP5W .004 0.070

o. 040 0.040 79 oooc~*~

36 LRSR .004 4.000

o. 300 3.000 37 DRSR

.003 4.000 0.200 2.500 38 XCTX .005 3.000 0.300 3.000 39 rcsx .005 2.000

o. 200 2.500 40 RADX

.005 2.000 0.200 2.500 41 ARGN . 005. 2.500 0.400 5.000 42 GRND .005 2.000 0.150 2.000 43 XACX .007 0.090 0.170 0.450 44 DACX .005 0.020 0.020 0.020 45 cscx .005 0.025 0.020 46 BPlP .005 0.030 0.025 0.030 47 BP2P .005 0.020 0.020 0.030 48 BP3P .006 0.020 0.025 0.030 49 BP4P .006 0.020 0.030 0.040 50 BP5P . 007 0.010 0.025 0.030 51 BP6P .005 0.075 0.120

o. 300 52 P12D

.007 0.025 0.030 0.020 53 P23D .007 0.020 0.020 0.020 54 P45D .007 0.015 0.025 0.020 55 SXWP .005

o. 020 0.015 0.015 56 ENEP

.006 0.015 0.020 0.020 57 NNWP .007

o. 015 0~080 0.150 58 NAMP

.005 0.050 0.020 0.030 59 NCPU .006

0. 020 0.020 0.040 60 REGT

.007 1.500 0.020 0.030 80 000080

Table of Neutron count Rates twmber RBP CPM 0 kW. 300 kW 600 kW 1000 kW 1 SSSl 3 2 1 2 SS El 2 3 2 3 ES El 3 2 2 4 EEEl 2 5 1 5 EN El 2 2 3 6 NNEl 2 3 2 7 NNNl 3 3 2 8 NNWl 2 2 2 9 WNWl 2 3 2 10 WWWl 3 3 2 11 WSWl 3 4 1 12 SSWl 3 3 1 13 SXW2 4 3 3 14 SSE2 3 3 2 15 SXE2 3 5 1 16 ENE2 4 7 1 17 NXE2 4 3 2 18 NNW2 3 4 2 19 NXW2 3 3 1 20 WSW2 4 ) 1 21 SXW3 4 2 3 22 NXE3 3 3 3 23 NXW3 4 4 2 24 SXW3 3 3 2 25 SSE3 2 3 26 ENE3 3 3 27 NNW3 3 2 28 WSW3 2 j 29 W'I 1Rl 2 2 30 ICS3 2 3 31 BPlW 3 2 2 32 BP2W 4 3 2 33 BPJW ) 2 3 34 BP4W 2 2 B 35 BP5W 2 2 2 36 LRSR 4 2 3 37 DRSR 3 2 2 38 XCTX 4 2 2 39 ICSX 4 J 3 40 RADX 3 2 2 41 ARGN 4 2 3 42 GRND 3 3 2 43 XACX 3 2 1 44 DACX 8 2 3 45 cscx 4 2 2 81 UOOOZJ.

46 BPlP 3 4 2 47 BP2P 2 3 2 48 BP3P 3 4 2 49 BP4P 2 2 2 50 BP5P 2 3 2 51 BP6P 2 2 2 52 Pl2D 3 3 2 53 P23D 1 2 2 54 P45D 1 3 2 55 SXWP

3.

2 2 56 ENEP 4 3 1 57 NNWP 3 3 1 58 NAMP 3 2 59 NCPU 7 5 2 60 REGT 3 3 82 000032

Analysis of Effluent Argon Production, Release, and Exposure for The University of Texas at Austin TRIGA Reactor G. KLINE, 2016

Table of Contents List of Figures................................................................................................................................................ 2 List of Tables................................................................................................................................................. 2 Introduction.................................................................................................................................................. 3 Background........................................................................................................... :....................................... 3 Model............................................................................................................................................................ 4 List of Variables......................................................................................................................................... 4 Argon Production...................................................................................................................................... 6 Geometry and Specifications................................................................................................................ 6 Environment.......................................................................................................................................... 8 Production Calculations........................................................................................................................ 9 Concentration................................................................................................................................... 9 Activity and Dose............................................................................................................................ 11 Argon Dispersion...................................................................................................................................... 12 Effective Stack Height......................................................................................................................... 12 Building and Stack Geometry.......................................................................................................... 12 Environment.................................................................................................................................... 13 Building Wake Effects and Downwash............................................................................................ 16 Plume Development and Dispersion.................................................................................................. 19 Ground Source................................................................................................................................ 19 Gaussian Plume............................................................................................................................... 20 Area Points of Interest........................................................................................................................ 24 Results......................................................................................................................................................... 24 Occupational Dose and Stay Time.......................................................................................................... 24 Effluent Dose to Environment and Maximum Exposed Individual......................................................... 25 Ground Source.................................................................................................................................... 25 Gaussian Plume................................................................................................................................... 26 Conclusion................................................................................................................................................... 27 References.................................................................................................................................................. 27 Code............................................................................................................................................................ 28 Argon Production.................................................................................................................................... 28 Argon Production ODE............................................................................................................................ 34 Plume Modelling..................................................................................................................................... 35 1

List of Figures Figure 1. Pool area measurements and volume calculations created in Solidworks................................... 7 Figure 2. Control Volumes Considered in Effluent Production Analysis....................................................... 9 Figure 3. Typical reactor bay concentration trend for purge system operations....................................... 11 Figure 4. NETL Stack Layout........................................ ;............................................................................... 13 Figure 5. NETL Stack Concentric Configuration........................................................................................... 13 Figure 6. Winter wind rose......................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 7. Summer wind rose....................................................................................................................... 14 Figure 8. Building wake development[6].................................................................................................... 17 Figure 9. Effective Stack Height at NETL..................................................................................................... 19 Figure 10. Dispersion coefficients used in ground source calculations...................................................... 20 Figure 11. Plume orientation from NETL.................................................................................................... 20 Figure 12. Dispersion coefficients for atmospheric conditions.................................................................. 21 Figure 13. Ground pattern[3]...................................................................................................................... 22 Figure 14. 8m Pattern[3]............................................................................................................................. 23 Figure 15. 20m Pattern[3]........................................................................................................................... 23 Figure 16. Ground source dose rates for prevailing winds for isolation release........................................ 26 List of Tables Table I: Symbols............................................................................................................................................ 4 Table II: Model Volumes............................................ ~................................................................................. 7 Table Ill: Flow Rates for Ventilation............................................................................................................ 8 Table IV: Flux Values Used in Production.......................................................... ~......................................... 8 Table V: Effective Decay Constants........................................................................................................... 10 Table VI. Argon-41 Concentrations in Source Locations with HVAC and Purge Running........................ 11 Table VII: NETL Stack Parameters.............................................................................................................. 13 Table VIII. Points of Interest in NETL plume exposure.............................................................................. 24 Table IX: Dose Rates and Stay Times in the Reactor Bay for Various Ventilation Lineups with All Three Sources (Pool, Beam, RSR)......................................................................................................................... 25 Table X. Exposures and Dose Rates at Points of Interest......................................................................... 26 2 L

Introduction The main radionuclide of concern in normal operations is Argon-41 produced from the natural argon in the air being exposed to the core. The production and dispersion of Ar-41 is modelled for various core operating parameters and ventilation conditions. These allow for the occupational and general populace exposures to be found.

Background

Argon-41 production comes principally from the soluble argon gas at the core area as well as beam line and rotary specimen rack {RSR) air cavities. There are two ventilation systems responsible for air movement: purge and reactor bay heating and air conditioning {HVAC) system. The HVAC system is a standard building circulation system containing both suction and return fans.[1] The HVAC system draws from the room, contains psychrometric interface, temperature control, and room isolation. The purge system is designed to provide suction from near the point of Ar-41 production in the different facilities. The purge system draws from a number of enclosures (experiment facilities and pool surface) with dilution from the reactor bay air and provides isolation on demand, but provides no return fan.[1] The Argon-41 concentrations and exposure potentials vary with changes in system line ups. The nuclear engineering teaching laboratory {NETL) is located in a moderately urbanized area. The buildings in the area percentages for the most part are between 2-4 stories and have retail and office occupancy. The prevailing winds come directly from the north in the winter time and directly from the south in the summer time.[2] The NETL building itself is not square, however, the reactor bay size and shape dominates the wake effects and a square-assumption remains valid.[3]-[5]. The effluent release is modelled using Gaussian plume modelling for the resident prevailing wind speeds and atmospheric conditions.[6]-[9] The ground source estimates are found for effluents trapped in the wake using ground source criteria.[9]-[11] The building has no physical boundary, therefore exposure ' up to the building walls needs to be considered. Points of interest are found based on occupancy and geographic relationship to NETL. The maximally exposed individual is taken from the maximum of these mappings. Occupational exposure is determined from a person standing in the reactor bay over the core. In either case, a semi-infinite cloud model is used to find dose rate and dose.[12] Effective stack height, building wake, and atmospheric stability are taken from DOE references.[6] The effects are found for all atmospheric conditions and wind speeds relevant to the Austin, TX area.[2], [6] The most limiting of these conditions for each scenario is used for that scenario's exposure.[3] 3

Model List of Variables Table I: Symbols Change in Argon 41 dN4,i number density for the Vt Volume of the ith element (m3) ith element (;:s) dt Number density of Argon Gas in Ai Area of the ithelement (m2) Na,i (atoms) the ith element ~ vi Velocity of ithelement (7) O'a Energy averaged cross section of absorption (m2) Core flux in the ith area (;:s) /hdecay mechanism of </>i il-. the itharea (~) 1.i Number density of Argon 41 N4,i (atoms) in the ith element ~ ti;2 Half - life of Argon (s) Qi Volumetric flow rate of ith item (~ 3 ) NA (atoms) Avagadro' s Number mol Pair Pressure of Air (Pa) R Universal Gas Constant (m:l K) Mol fraction of Argon Tair Temperature of Air (K) CAr (molAr) inair --l-* mo.,.,,r Specific activity of Dose rate from semi Acti . (Bq) concentraiton i m 3 Dr infinite cloud (m:) Conversionfactor for ky (Rad dis m 3 _) cloud model -s-MeV Bq XA. Fraction of Gamma Energy EA. Gamma energy (MeV) Fr Generic placeholder for a sum of an effect M Time duration to be considered tr Time function reaches steady state after function reaches steady state (s) rate of change (s) to Initialization of ventilation effects (s) F(t1) Steady state value for a function rate of change kr Conversion from (~) to (":iR) tstay Stay time (h) 4

Mole density of Argon Gas in Lr Radioactive exposure limit (mR) ni (atommols*) the ith element m 3 Ro Plume exit radius (m) w Stack velocity out (7) Plume volume flux, Bouyancy flux (73 4 ) Vo,~ volumetric flow (~ 3 -) pi M Momentumflux (;:) u Prevailing wind speed (7) Te, Tp Temperature of environment, e, g Gravity(~) and plume, p (C) Pi Density of ithelement (~) s Atmospheric stability C 1

2) z Atmospheric mixing depth (m)

Zo Roughness length (m)

u.

Friction velocity (7) E Eddy dissipation rate (::) H Surface bouyancy flux (::) H,W,L Building height, width, length (m) b.ha Change ineffective height hs Physical stack height from atmospheric conditions(m) from ground(m) ha Stack height with physical height hd Downwash corrected and atmospheric effects(m) stack height(m) ( Smaller of building ~ Smaller of building height (H)or width (W) (m) height (H)or width (W) (m) fl Charactoristic length (m) Le Roof cavity distance (m) He Roof cavity height (m) Zn, Zm High turbulance boundary, Roof wake boundary (m) Xr Cavity region distance(m) X,s Wake cavity constants Concentration of the he Final effective stack height(m) Ci ithregion (~) Mass flow rate of the Standard deviation rhi ith region (k:) O"y,z disspersion coefficients (m) z' Bent plume trajectory (m) . (ay,z)eff Ef f ectvie standard deviation dissp.ersion coefficients (m) 5

Argon Production Argon production at the UT TRIGA is modelled using a first order production decay formula. (1) The production term is found using the area's Argon number density and neutron flux. The removal term has three components including radioactive decay, purge flow, and HVAC flow. The radioactive decay constant is a function of the radionuclide half-life, while ventilation constants are based on flow rate and suction volume. (2) (3) Geometry and Specifications The reactor bay volume is divided into four main areas including reactor bay, pool area, beam lines, RSR. The reactor bay is the nominal volume of the room, excluding the other three areas. The pool area is the air space above the core, normally enclosed by deck plating. Beam lines and RSR facilities have production and flow regions. These regions are defined by the suction point of the purge system. The volume between the core interface and the purge suction is the production volume term, while the flow area is the area between the purge suction and the reactor bay. Volume of the reactor bay is taken from the University of Texas SAR.[1] The pool area volume was taken from measurements of the area, while beam line and RSR volumes come from mechanical blueprints. 6

1-4------ 3.556 -----.-!PI -~~ -:-:-:-.-:*:*H:+*.: .. -: '*:-.-:-..-~*:.-:..-:: 'RtAtYOI 1 JI 73 1 .* *. *.* *:. :.* *. *: *: :. * *:. *POOL _t 2.5146

-.. :-:-:-:-.-:-:-:-. :-:-:-:..... :-:-:.:.. \\:-.. :-:.:-:.. -::- J

:: :::-::: :-::::-::*1:::.: :>. :::* <::-:::>~:-:\\: :: :-::~:. :-.

'------4-----1-____:,_i R0.9906 (X2) VOLUME: 3.280068 mll3 Figure 1. Pool area measurements and volume calculations created in Solidworks. Dimensions are in m. The pool area volume is taken at the nominal pool depth of 8.lOOm. Since the solubility of argon at the core depth fluctuates little over the operational depth range, this is considered acceptable. Table II: Model Volumes Location Volume (m 3 ) RX Bay 4120 Pool Area (nominal) 3.280 Pool Area (worst case) 2.922 Beam Line Production 1.000 Beam Line Flow 3.000 RSR Production .0264 RSR Flow .0066 Flow rates for the various ventilation points are found using the purge and HVAC nominal velocities of 4000fpm and 1700fpm, (20.32~ and 8.64~ ), respectively, as well as the area of s s the item at the point of suction. (4) 7

L Equation (4) leads to the following flow rates: Table Ill: Flow Rates for Ventilation Location Velocity (~) Area (m2) m3 Flow(-) s s HVAC Suction 8.636 1.806 15.60 Purge Pool Suction 20.32 .0324 .6590 Beam Line Suction 20.32 .0014 .0290 RSR Suction 20.32 2.850e-4 .0058 RX Bay Purge Suction 20.32 .0324 .6590 The production terms are based on the argon 40 number density and neutron flux of the core at the various locations. The RSR flux is well characterized from gold foil experiments, while the beam line is an overestimate based on the gold foils in the pneumatic tube, near the inside reflector surface. Values from the core are based foil experiments from the central thimble experiment tube (A ring). Table IV: Flux Values Used in Production Location Flux c:::J Core le11 Beam lines leis RSR 2e16 Historically, gold foil experiments in the past have provided reliable data for flux calculations. Number density for available argon was calculated either from solubility at depth (for activation of water in the pool) or the mole fraction in air (for activation in dry experiment facilities). The Argon-40 absorption cross section was taken from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) website.[13] Environment The reactor bay is maintained at nominal pressure and temperature [NTP], (20°C and 101325 Pa). The beam lines, RSR, and bay are all assumed to be well mixed volumes at NTP. Gas-liquid phase boundary physics of the pool air-water interface and Argon-air diffusion coefficients were evaluated. These effects are considered negligible, as they add complexity and do not change the steady state concentration of argon in the reactor bay volume, only the rate of approach.[14]-[18] The number density of argon in air is derived from the natural mole fraction of argon. This density applies to the RSR and the beam lines. The number density of air atoms for nominal temperature and pressure is found by: 8

(5) (6) The solubility of Argon in water is both temperature and depth dependent. The value used was taken from reference material (19) as 0.941 (mg/L). Production Calculations Concentration To facilitate calculations in the reactor bay, the volumes considered in Table II are divided into control volumes. Their relationships and interactions vary based on the physics of the ventilation modes. r

i

I I l I J_ CVI: RX /lay lliix Huy Figure 2. Control Volumes Considered in Effluent Production Analysis The reactor by and reactor ventilation system operates in four modes, including isolation, HVAC only, purge only, HVAC and purge. All of these modes are evaluated for effects on occupational dose and effluent release. Additionally, three main modes of experiment facility were analyzed based on volumes of Argon-41 is production including (1) core, beam, and RSR; (2) core and beam; and (3) core only. For exposure analysis, the configuration with core, beam, and RSR production (PBR) is considered the worst case scenario. The effective removal constants of the ventilation modes are provided in Table V. With the exception of the purge draw from the dilution valve, the effects of the removal by the HVAC and purge systems are orders of magnitude greater than reduction from 9

radioactive decay. Table V: Effective Decay Constants Decay Term Value (1/s) Radioactive Decay 1.054e-4 HVAC .0038 Beam Purge .00290 RSR Purge .2194 Pool Purge .2009 Dilution Purge 1.599e-4 Considering this, in the 'isolation' and 'HVAC only' modes, the control volumes around the pool, beam, and RSR can be neglected with their areas only considered source terms to the reactor bay only. The Argon-41 atoms are drawn into the bay at a rate that exceeds decay. Argon-41 is diluted in the reactor bay and is removed either by decay or removal in the HVAC exhaust. This allows these two removal modes to be considered in first order linear ODEs only. The decay of HVAC in equation (7) only applies in the 'HVAC only' mode. These are solved for the reactor bay concentration of Argon-41. (7) (8) When the purge system is operating, the momentum and draw of the purge valves is significant relative to the diffusion into the bay and radioactive decay. Thus, the system is no longer a single first order ODE; each smaller control volume is its own first order ODE combined into the reactor bay first order ODE. This creates a system of first order OD Es that needs to be so.lved using ODE solution methods. dN4,Rx "f.(Ni(Ja</Ji - ilp,iN4,1)¥i {

}*

dt = lL -il.rN4,RX - i\\.HN4,RX Ap,diluteN4,RX ""total In this case, the two scenarios involve first 'purge only' and then 'purge and HVAC.' Only the HVAC decay constant is considered in the 'purge and HVAC' mode. The ODE set is solved in MALAB using ODE45, a variable time step Runge-Kutta 45 method, and extremely tight error tolerances of le8 % absolute and relative error.[4], [S] The second order nature of equation (9) leads to a concentration function, which approaches a steady state value on the order of five half-lives of radioactive decay. 10 (9)

!j "'.. " 5 c§ 25 2 15 0$ 0 1o* Concentration of Ngon 41 vs. Time for RNdOt 8111 with 811 ThnM Sourcu \\ \\,' 0 OS to 2-~ Tome($) tr Figure 3. Typical reactor boy concentration trend for purge system operations 10' To find the total effects of such concentration changes, the integral is used. f tr Fr= F(t)dt + F(tr )M to Table VI. Argon-41 Concentrations in Source Locations with HVAC and Purge Running location Concentration (µCi/ml) Reactor Bay 1.168e-6 0 Pool Area (nominal) .0013 Pool Area (worst) .0012 Stack (nominal) 5.457e"5 0 d Stack (worst) 4.907e*5 RSR .0043 0 Beam lines .0016 n the above calculations, the pool volume considered to be the worst case scenario leads to lower concentrations. The rest of the analysis uses the higher concentration. Act1v1ty and Dose (10) Semi-infinite cloud exposure calculations require the specific activity from concentration and the radioactive decay constant. (11) The semi-infinite cloud model uses the specific activity, gamma energy, and constants to convert the activity from equation (11) into an effective dose rate.[12] Dy = krkyActi L X.tE.t (12) 11

Argon-41 is a gamma emitter and with a quality factor of 1, making the Rad to REM conversion factor 1. This equation is used to find the reactor bay dose rate. Argon Dispersion With potential concentrations calculated, area dispersion is considered. A local meteorologist was consulted for environmental conditions.[20] DOE/TIC-11223 provides equations for effective stack height, Gaussian plume,[6], [7], [11], [21] and ground sources. [6], [9], [22] Points of interest around the building include the maximum individual, ground exposure, multiple commercial facilities nearby, and the closest operational laboratory. Effective Stack Height The effective stack height is a pseudo-physical stack height created from the stack's physical height in combination with different physical process factors such as atmospheric stability, stagnation velocity, prevailing wind velocity, and building and surrounding wake effects. Building and Stack Geometry NETL is a building formed from three main cubical sections. The reactor bay stands in the middle, is significantly taller than the other two sections, and is much longer. For the sake of the model, building length is in the north-south direction, width is east to west and height is vertical. The entire building sits atop a built up berm, adding about 2 m of height. The blueprints have the reactor bay walls at 18.288 m wide by 15.698 m high, giving a north-south cross sectional area of 287 m2* 12

Figure 4. NETL Stock Layout Ar,qon l'ur,q" OtschC1rJ1e Figure 5. NfTL Stock Concentric Configuration The ventilation stack sits atop the reactor bay roof. The ventilation stack consists of concentric discharge lines, with the argon purge system being the inner portion. The concentric stacks sit -4.26m off the roof surface and have nozzle features that increase the exit velocities. System velocities are measured up stream at the fan interfaces, and are adjusted for assuming conversation of volumetric flow. Table VII: NETL Stack Parameters System Discharge Area (m2) Exit Velocity (m/s) Volumetric Flow (m3 /s) HVAC .1317 35.94 4.734 Purge .0182 36.12 1.353 The exit velocities of the two effluent streams are similar, allowing a mixture to dilute with little momentum loss. The purge suction lines draw at a point of higher concentration but the purge stream is initially diluted through a reactor bay air suction line. Then, the purge stream is entrained in the HVAC reactor bay suction line. The HVAC volumetric flow is higher, creating an entrained, diluted mixture. Environment L nr\\1 1tmix = -- ~otal (13) The Austin area NETL is in has two sets of prevailing winds.[2], [20] The wind direction changes based on the season, with the wind coming from the north in winter and from the south in summer. 13

Figure 6. Winter wind rose Figure 7. Summer wind rose A wind speed velocity vector is developed from 0 to 21knots, as to represent the range of wind conditions. The temperature ranges of Texas vary considerably, while the plume temperature tends to be steady. For these calculations a plume temperature of 2s*c, and environment of 20°C was chosen. These temperatures are used to find the buoyancy and momentum fluxes. With the environment at a higher temperature than the stack, the fluxes are negative, and the plume is caught in the wake. For the times of 14

the year when the plume is warmer, these temperatures are nominally offset by the range used. To find the effects on stack height based on atmospheric conditions, the stability, wind speed, plume speed and fluxes all come into play. The velocity flux (a.k.a. volumetric flow) is found first. V0 = w0R0 2 (vertical); V0 = uR0 2(bent over) (14) From the velocity flux and the densities found from temperatures, the buoyancy and momentum fluxes can be found. g ( )- Fo = T Tpo - Teo Vo pO Ppo M=-w0V0 Peo In addition to these parameters, the atmospheric stability needs to be found. For the short heights involved with the NETL plume, the change in environmental temperature with height is ignored. g (aTe ) s = Te az +.0098 (15) (16) (17) A multitude of atmospheric stack height changes exists based on plume shape and surroundings. These include: rise limited by atmospheric stability; nearly neutral conditions; and convective conditions. To maintain a conservative approach to stack height change, each change in height was found for each wind speed in the vector. Then, the minimum height for each prevailing wind speed was used. This ensures credit is given for plume rise, but worst case scenarios are considered. Three conditions are considered: rise limited by ambient stability, ambient turbulence neutral conditions and ambient turbulence in convective conditions. For buoyant bent over plumes, the need arises for a friction velocity. This involves a mixing depth and roughness length relative to the building height. H Zo = 10 .4u

u. = ln (z)

Zo (18) (19) For the convective conditions, the eddy dissipation rate leads to a surface buoyancy flux needed to find this condition's change in height. (20) 15

I E =.25H (21) Below are the four methods. Each method is applied to every wind speed, and the lowest height change for each wind speed is used. ( F, )1/3 b,.ha = 2.6 u: (ambient stability, bent over plume) (22) ( F, )2/3 b,.ha = 1.54 uu: 2 h/13 (nearly neutral bouyant bent over plume) (23) b,.ha = 3(2R0) (:0- 1) (nearly neutral vertical jet) (24) ( F, )3/5 b,.ha = 3 : H-2/ 5 (convective conditions) (25) At this point the effective stack height incorporates the physical height and the atmospheric effects. Building Wake Effects and Downwash The first effect to consider is downwash around the stack. This occurs when the stack velocity to prevailing wind speed ratio is less than 1.5.[6] b,.hd = 2 (: 0 - 1.5) (2Ro) While the building is not perfectly cubical, the features are cubical enough to allow the building wake to be found using DOE/TIC.[6] Features to be considered include roof separation region, cavity zone, wake boundary and turbulent zone boundary. 16 (26) (27) (28)

Ul'\\VIHO VflOCITV PROFllf U

Uld Figure 8. Building wake development[6) r11 HIGH TuR8UlfHCE ZON( llOUNOARV z1q ROOf WlllCE 80UNOAllV First, calculations must be made to see if the plume is trapped in a developed roof wake.

This begins with finding a characteristic length based off of building criteria, then develop equations for the boundary layers. R = r,2/3 ( i/3 Le ::::::.9R He ~.22R x :::::- e 2 Zu x - 1-R -. . R (29) (30) (31) (32) (33) (34) For NETL, the recirculation height is ~3.3m while the stack is 4.2m. The plume clears the roof wake effects in all conditions but those where it is trapped in the cavity. For plumes caught in the cavity region, it is necessary to find the geometry of this region. The distance from the building is found based on the building length to height ratio. NETL's building to height ratio is >1.6, making A=l.75, B=.25 17

For NETL, this distance is 24.8m. Plumes trapped in the building wake still need to be considered for their dose, however, because the walls of NETL are accessible from non rad worker personnel such as grounds keepers and maintenance. (35) Final effective stack height is found by taking into account the effect the building has on the downwash corrected, atmospheric corrected plume. The effects are relative to plume height and building properties. {36) he = 2hd - (H + 1.5() { hd < H + 1.5( & hct > H } (37) (38) he = 0 { hd <.5(, Ground Source} {39) For the ground source portion, the plume is considered to have zero height and be trapped in the building wake. For wind speeds less than lm/s, the plume is near vertical and the effective height is found using buoyancy flux.[6] 4Fo.zs he = hd + 5.375 The effective stack heights at NETL are the vectorized relative to wind speed. 18 (40)

20 10

>< /

8 10 Prova.llng W1od Speed (mis) Figure 9. Effective Stack Height at NETL Plume Development and Dispersion 12 14 16 Plume dispersion is separated into two main outcomes: ground source capture (or building wake effects), and Gaussian plume. Ground Source Ground source plumes are trapped in the building wake area, act as a ground sources, and create a concentration based on equation (41). Cground = ( ) rrayO'z + cW H u The concentration trapped in the building wake (Cgroun<1) ranges between.5 and 2. The highest concentration is 0.5, used as the more conservative value. The dispersion coefficients used were the worst case, atmospherically and taken for the lOOm point. 19 (41)

... 10' 10' tr!' 10' O*Sl AMCE DOWNWIND. 11.m l

l 10 1

OISTAHCI OOWHWINO, 'm lb) F ** 4.4 c...- ol 07....i 0& roe...w..- '"""balocl °".,_~Irr P....,..W (1961). [F'°"' F. A. CW....!. Turtaalenl Dllfllaioot*Ty.... Sc... eo: A am.w. fV..cL S./.. 17(1): 71 (1976).J Figure 10. Dispersion coefficients used in ground source colculotions. Gaussian Plume The steady state Gaussian plume model gives concentrations at points downwind from the point of continuous release. For this release, the origin is set at the effective stack height for each of the atmospheric and prevailing wind speed conditions. The x-direction is taken in the north-south direction away from NETL. They-direction is the east-west, while z-direction is height. z Figure 11. Plume orientation from NETL This model takes the time average exposure in an area and assumes Gaussian distributed concentrations radially and orthogonal to wind direction vector. The wind is assumed to be constant as well as the concentration out of the stack. While the puff 20

model may be more representative to the true operational conditions, these puff concentrations would be lower than that of a constant plume, based on the time it takes for the plume to become steady state in the normal operation modes.(23], (24] The area is mapped in lm by lm horizontal grids and the concentration is found at the desired height using (42). Here, a is the atmospheric condition, w is the wind speed; the equation is separated into the effective portions for ease of reading. C(a,w,x,y)= (rhptume) ( 1 ) u(w) 21rcry(a, w, x)az(a, w, x) ( - y 2 ) [ - (z-he)2 -(z+he)2 l (42) e 20J(a,w,x) e2<1~ (a.w.x) + e2<1~ (a.w.x) For the dispersion constants, their values relative to x are found based on atmospheric conditions. NETL is situated in an urban area, thus the bottom set are used. Table 4.5 FonnuJas Recommended by Briggs (1973) for Oy(x) and Oz(x) (102 < x < 104m) Open-Country Conditions A 0.22x(l + 0.000lx)- ~ 0.20x 8 0.16x(l + O.OOOlx)-% 0.12x C O.llx(l + O.OOOlx)-IS 0.08x(l + 0.0002x)-~ 0 0.08x(l + O.OOOlx)- ~ 0.06x(l + O.OOlSx)- ~ E 0.06x(l + 0.000lx)- ~ 0.03x(l + 0.0003x)- 1 f 0.04x(l + O.OOOlx)- ~ 0.016x(l + 0.0003x)-1 Urban Conditions A-B 0.32x(l + 0.0004x)-~ 0.24x(l + O.OOlx)'\\2 c 0.22x(I + o.oo04xr ~ o.2ox D 0.16x(l + 0.0004.x)- ~ 0.14x(l + 0.0003x)-~ E-F 0.llx(l + 0.0004.xr IS 0.08x(l + O.OOOlSx)-:-lii Figure 12. Dispersion coefficients for atmospheric conditions. For values of x close to the building, the dispersion coefficients do not fully represent the entrainment of atmospheric air and the development of the plume in the "bent-over" region. To account for this an effective dispersion coefficient is found using the calculated trajectory.[21], [24] First the plume trajectory in the bent portion is found. 1.63) F0x 2 z'(x)= --- u 21 (43)

The effective dispersion coefficients in this range are then found. {44) The dispersion patterns of interest exist at 1.Sm, 8m, and 20m. The plume patterns are found below. CIQ for Ground Concentration (1.5m) from NETL 10.. .. I 1 4 1 2 -4 1 J e ~08 ""1 Q 0 06 .. ~ 02 0 1000 1000 y-d1rect100 (m) -1000 0 x-<lirecuoo (m) Figure 13. Ground pottern[3) 22

- 10" 1.6 1.4 1.2 ~e- !!. 0.8 Q u 0.6 Mi Q u 0.4 0.2 ' 0 1000 10"' 2 1.5 0.5 0 1000 C/Q Pattern for Bm from Ground for NETL 1000 y-<l.. ect1on (m) -1000 0 x-<l~ect1on (m) Figure 14. Bm Pottern[3) CIQ Pattern for 20m Height from Ground for NETL 1000 y-d1tection (m) -1000 0 x-direction (m) Figure 15. 20m Pottern(3] 23

Results These patterns can be used to find the maximum dose rate and location relative to NETL. It can also be used to find the exposure at various points of interest. Area Points of Interest There are four main points of interest at NETL, including the maximum exposed individual, IBM north, Macy's north and ARL south. The maximum individual is necessary for NETL's public exposure limit calculation. The maximum exposed individual is located 214 m due north of the stack in the parking lot of IBM. While highly unlikely, there is no constraint to prevent a person to stand there all year; therefore no occupancy times are used. IBM is located ~240m due north of the stack and is the closest facility in the plume. There are no external access areas such as balconies, so the ventilation suctions are taken as the height and location of interest. This gives the maximum public exposure to the employees inside. Macy's and ARL have the same situation, except that Macy's is taller and ARL is south. Table VIII. Points of Interest in NETL plume exposure. Location North/South (m) East/West (m) Height (m) Maximum Individual 214.0 0.000 1.500 IBM 240.0 104.6 7.836 Macy's 174.8 480.2 19.97 ARL 751.0 71.59 7.836 Occupational Dose and Stay Time Equations (10), (11) and {12) provide the dose rates in the reactor bay and lead to occupational dose for a given exposure time. Focus is put on stay time, or how long a worker can be in the reactor bay before exceeding a specified limit. For this, the limit comes from 10 CFR 20 as 5000mR/yr. Since the entire analysis is taken over the course of one year, the limit is 5000mR. Lr tstay = -.- Dy In the case of the purge modes calculations, equation (45) is slightly modified to account for the distribution function. The integrated dose from initiation of the ventilation lineup to steady state dose rate development is subtracted from the 10 CFR 20 limit. The remaining available dose is divided by the steady state dose rate and added to the transient time to find the total stay time. (45) [Lr - f/1 l\\(t)dt] tstay= 0 +(tr-to) (46) Dy It can easily be seen that the large decay constants of ventilation have significant effects on the stay time and dose rates in the bay. For the transient analyses, the steady state dose rate and peak are shown. 24

Table IX: Dose Rates and Stay Times in the Reactor Bay for Various Ventilation lineups with All Three Sources (Pool, Beam, RSR) Lineup Concentration (µCi/ml) ' Dose Rate (mR/h) Stay Time (h) Isolation 2.125e-3 2260 2.21 HVAC only 5.757e-5 61.38 81.5 Purge only 1.400e-6(pk.), 2.524e-12(SS) 1.493(pk.), 2.691e-6(SS) 1.86e9 HVAC and Purge 1.168e-6(pk.), 1.372e-23(SS) 1.246(pk.), 4.184e-18(SS) 1.20e21 10 CFR 20 Limit (Ar41) 3e-6 The effectiveness of the purge system can clearly be seen; however, it is also valid to show that under worst case conditions (all sources and isolation), plenty of time is available for personnel to evacuate the reactor bay. In a worst case situation, a worker can evacuate the reactor bay in ~3 min, receiving an estimated dose of ~113mR. This would involve a situation where the primary floor's exit is blocked, forcing a move to another floor. In a nominal situation, the exit time is ~3os, receiving a dose of ~19mR. Under normal operation, the reactor is operated with both ventilations systems running and averaging 30 hours of operational time per week, with varying powers. The analysis above assumed 168 hours of full power operations per week, thus the stay time for normal operations is even longer than in Table IX. However, using equation (10), the dose received from a staff worker in the reactor bay for 8760 hours of continuous full power operation and full experimental facilities is 86.13mR. This is less than 1/101h ofthe local NETL exposure limit. The NETL limit is set with ALARA in mind, and meeting this limit with such a margin shows the effectiveness of the system to meet ALARA standards. Effluent Dose to Environment and Maximum Exposed Individual Ground Source The ground source dose rate varies with the oncoming wind speed. The worst case scenario is the sudden release of Argon-41 after steady state operations with the ventilation system isolated. 25

'.2 ii: 0.95 0.9 0.85 .s 0.8 2 ro o:'. Q) 0. 75 (/) 0 0 0.7 0.65 0.6 Ground Source Dose Rate vs. Wind Speed 0.55 ~--~--~--~---~--~--~---~~~ 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Prevailing Winds (m/s) Figure 16. Ground source dose rates for prevailing winds for isolation release. For the worst case wind in this situation, the dose rate, when evacuating from an isolation condition, is.96mR/h, meeting the 10 CFR 20 limit of 2mR/h. Under normal operating conditions with both systems running, the ground source reduces to 24.7µR/h (.0247mR/h}. This is well below 10 CFR 20 limits. Gaussian Plume Using the Gaussian plume distribution and the points of interest, the following dose rates and exposure for one year are found. Table X. Exposures and Dose Rates at Points of Interest Isolation Normal Operations Location Dose Rate Dose Concentration Dose Rate Dose Concentration (mR/h) (mR) (µCi/ml) (mR/h) (mR) (µCi/ml) Maximum .1718 1504.9 5.971e-104 .0088 77.298 3.066e-105 Individual IBM 3.306e-59 2.896e-55 7.410e-76 1.697e-60 1.487e-56 3.8ose*77 Macy's 3.204e-33 2.807e*29 7.183e-50 1.645e-34 l.441e-30 3.689e-51 ARL 4.112e-15 3.602e*11 9.217e-32 2.llle-16 1.8Soe*12 4.733e-33 Ground .9600 8409.6 2.08se*17 .0247 2163.7 1.071e-18 Source 26

L Conclusion This analysis provides extremely conservative estimates for the exposures. The production terms involve worst case flux considerations, concentrations, and a state of reactor equilibrium far beyond what would be achieved within a normal working week. The building wake effects are worst case by considering the most conservative atmospheric conditions and considering that the yearly status. In reality, the weather and climate of Texas are extremely dynamic. The maximum exposed individual falls below 10 CFR 20 dose limits for 8760 hours of continuous normal operations. All area exposures fall below public dose rate limits as well. The isolation condition is an extreme situation that, if it occurred, the argon-41 would be allowed to decay in place in the reactor bay prior to release, making these numbers far above the realm of possibility. References [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] M.Krause, "The University of Texas at Austin TRIGA Safety and Analysis Report," Austin, TX, 1991. TCEQ, "Texas Commission on Environmental Quality," 2015. [Online]. Available: https://www.tceq.texas.gov/airquality/monops/windroses.html. [Accessed: 01-Jan-2016]. G. Kline, "Plume_Model_2016." 2016. G. Kline, "Argon_Concentration_script." 2016. G. Kline, "Argon_Concentration_script_ODE." 2016. \\ J. P. Lodge, Handbook on atmospheric diffusion, vol. 17, no. 3. 1983. D. T. Allen and C. J. Durrenberger, "Gaussian Plume Modeling." 2014. D. Coast, "Plumes and Thermals," pp. 163-180. A. G. Robins, "Plume dispersion from ground level sources in simulated atmospheric boundary layers," Atmos. Environ., vol. 12, no. 5, pp. 1033-1044, 1978. S. etman M. Embaby, A.B. Mayhoub, K.S. M. Essa, "Worst case ground concentration.pdf," Atmos/era, vol. 15, pp. 185-191, 2002. K. S. M. Essa and M. Em baby, "Worst Air Concentration From Non-Gaussian Plume Model," no. 2007,pp. 11-15,2009. J. J. Bevelacqua, Contemporary Health Physics, 1st ed. Weinheim: WILEY-VCH, 2004. NIST, "NIST Cross sections," 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.ncnr.nist.gov/resources/n-lengths/elements/ar.html. [Accessed: 01-Jan-2016]. "Kinetic Transport Interactions in Gas-Liquid-Solid systems.pdf.". [15]

A. J. Wagner and C. M. Pooley, "Interface width and bulk stability: Requirements for the simulation of deeply quenched liquid-gas systems," Phys. Rev. E - Stat. Nonlinear, Soft Matter Phys., vol. 76, no. 4, pp. 1-5, 2007.

27

[16) W. Whitman, "The two film theory of gas absorption," Int. J. Heat Mass Trans/., vol. 5, no. May, pp.429-433, 1962. [17) M. Y. Christi, "Gas-Liquid Mass Transfer Fundamentals," Airlift bioreactors. pp. 12-32, 1989. [18) T. R. Marrero and E. A. Mason, "Gaseous Diffusion Coefficients," Journal of Physical and Chemical Reference Data, vol. l, no. 1. pp. 3-118, 1972. [19) C. John, Dissolved Gas Concentration in Water, 2nd ed. Elsevier, 2012. [20) T. Kimmel, "Consultation." Austin, TX, 2016. [21) U. of Washington, "Gaussian Plumes from' Point' Sources." Seattle, pp. 1-27. [22) S. E. M. Em baby, A.B. Mayhoub, K.S. Essa, "Worst case ground concentration.pdf," Atmos/era, vol. 15, pp. 185-191, 2002. [23) B. T. 0. Formulation, "Plume I Puff Spread and Mean Concentration Module Specifications," no. December, pp. 1-26, 2012. [24) J. Bluett, N. Gimson, G. Fisher, C. Heydenrych, T. Freeman, and J. Godfrey, Good practice guide for atmospheric dispersion modelling. 2004. Code Argon Production Script to easily compute concentrations etc Auth~r

Greg Kline Date:

11110/~n16 P.evision : 3. 0 Core Model Parameters

gradient model additions beam_length = 2; m

beam purge x =. 25; RSR length- = 8 ; RSR-purge x =. 25; pooI_1 = -:-5; pool_purge_x =. 1; flux Core flux (nO/cmA:/s) Flux_cm:_core = :e1:; t G-ring Flux cm2 core = le13; Central thimble Flux-cm2-RSR = 2e12 ; RSR flux Flux=::cm2=::0eam_line = lell ; .Beam port average flux Core flux (n0/mA2/s) Flux m2 cor e = Flux cm2 core

10000; Flux-m2-RSR = Flux ~m2 RSR
10000; RSR flux Flux=::m2=::seam_ line ~ Flux_cm2_ Beam_line
10000; Beam port average flux
core mid height depth (m) core_vol_depth = 7. 1 ;

Argon Values Half-life of Ar-41 (S) half_li fe_Ar_41 = 6. 5766e3; 28

density_air

1. 204;
_r, Ar-40 1n al.r ( IDOl /moll mol_frac *. 00934; molar ~c19tt ~ a.r (~g/mol)

M_al.r

28. 966 I 1000; lar density f a.r I mol I m'31 num_a1r
2. 69e25; Arq r l
l.r 1 ntol m"~ )

Number_density_Ar_air_m3 = mol frac ~ num_air; Mo dr mass Argon 41 (kg/moll M Ar

4le-3 ;

Avog*dro ' s nurr.ber (atoms/moll N_A

6. 022e23; Cros "rt1~n ot absorption Ar-40 (m"2) xs_absorp_Ar_40 = 6. 6e-29; Bulk po temperature CK) {:!OC]

bulk_pool_temp

293. 15;

..i dY a.r temperature (i".) (20C] bulk_bay_temp

293. 15;

man' or-..-an

¥ k Boltz* 1. 38064852e-23; ua ~ of one Ar ". >rr ko mass_one_Ar

M Ar I N_A; Velo A ~o-

~n t~e Bay m/s velocity_gas

sqrt( 3
k Boltz
bul k_bay_temp I mass_one_Arl *. l; ab r'I ~ 7m soluability_at_core_mgL kq Irr* ~

. 941; soluability_at_core_kgm3 = soluability_at_core_mgL I le3 ; lmc 1 I n, l Number_density_Ar_at_core_mol soluability_at_core_kgm3 I M_Ar ; (dtom:>/m" 3) Number_density_Ar_at_co re_atomm3_ l Number_density_Ar_at_core_mol

N_A; soluability at surface mgL =. 5562;

!mg/L) soluability=at=surface=kgm3 = soluability_at_surface_mgL I 1000; m(P~' nles~ Henry's coeff1c1ent (c_aq/c_gas) H_cc

3.425e-2; tluw~. Areas and Volumes

/Hl r-are a purge pool = 0. 03242927866; area-retur; duct =. 762

1. 0668 ;

area-HVAC pipe* (0.4572/2)"2

pi; per unit, : exh, 11 supply area-HVAC-supply top =area HVAC pipe
5; area=HVAC=supply=bot = area=HVAC~ipe
6; area HVAC supply = area HVAC supply top + area HVAC supply bot; area-HVAC:exh
area_HVAC_supply;

-~ass bal~nce Vclu i.y purge 14U 10 tprr m/s) veloci~y_purge , 20. 319999999957 ; Velocity of HVAC (1700 fpm] <m/s) 29

velocity_HVAC

8.6359999999819; VO w

A~ volume pool area ~ 3. 280068; volume-pool-grates *.04

2. 5146 y

3. 556; volume: pool=area_worst

volume_pool_area - volume_pool_grates; MaKe

~ thing here to ma ~c it easi er to cun numbers volume_pool a rea

vol wne_pool_area_worst; volume RX bay
4120; volume-BPl 5
2; volume-BP 2 *.5; volume-BP-3 *. S; volume-BP-4
1; TechSpec volume of t he bay volume-BP-total *volume BPl 5 +volume BP_2 + volume_BP_3 +

volume-beam flow =. 75 * -volUrne BP total; volume-beam-prod= volume BP total-- volume_beam_flow; volume-RSR :.0330; volume-RSR prod c . 8

volume RSR ;

volume-RSR-flow ~ volume RSR =volume RSR prod; volume-total

volume RX-bay + volume-BP total + volume_RSR

+ volume_pool_area; - ~ lo w in and u*t . ~ dot) {m*3/s) volume_BP_4; Flow of the dilution va l ve i n the first bay is the same as t h e pool purg

flow rate, haw u~r,

suc~1on co~es f rom *he PC and

h*** the concent r ation 1-41 c

~( ~~ns1de re d nonexistent m*3/s flow rate purge pool = area purge pool

velocity purge; flow-rate-HVAC exh = area HVAC exh
velocity HVAC; flow-rate-HVAC-supply =area HVAC supply
velocity HVAC; flow-rate-beam-purge single; pi~ 0. 009525"2
velocity purge; flow_rate=RSR_purge ; flow_ rate_beam_purge_single; flow_dilution_valve
flow_ rate_purge_pool; Argon d1!f1s1on {Llenha r~.:.4,

Dab* Cl.SSS3e-1)T*3/2/ p *rho"2

O:neqa_O) ' s qrt Cl/MA t l/ MB)

LJ p air l; tm LJ-rho Ar 3.542; Anqstrom LJ=rho: air

3. 711 ;

e kb Ar

93. 3; e:kb=air
78.6; LJ MA Ar 39. 95 ;

kq/kmo l LJ=MA=air. 28. 96; f nd ?ab LJ rho AB . 5 * (LJ rho Ar+ LJ rho air) ; e kb AB ~ sqrt(e kb Ar *-e kb air); - LJ_T-* 293.15; k_bT_eAB - LJ T I e_kb_AB; 3.4 2 3 ~ Omega_o . 9186; .o. kb1,eAB of 3.4

u~ nn con tJn*

f argon in air ~ *~ts 0 AB * (l.8583e-7

LJ T" (3/2J)/{LJ pair* LJ rho AB"2
Orrega_Ol...

. sqrt ( l/LJ_MA_Ar-+ l/LJ_MA_airl7 Concen* rat1ons for Var1ous condltiuns I atoms I m*J) Decay constants 1/s) flow cate deca y -~n s tan-s are a r~ t-~ of flow to volurre drawn f rom lambda Ar ~l

log (2) I half life Ar 41; lambda-HVAC s flow rate HVAC-exh 7 volume RX bay; lambda-purge pool ~ flo; rate purge pool 7 volume pool area; lambda_purge=pool_worst ; flo;_rate:purge_pool I ~olume_pool_area_worst; l a mbda_pu1qe_pool = l arnbda_purge_pool_worst; 30

lambda_purge_RSR = flow_rate_RSR_purge I volume_RSR_prod; lambda_purge_beam = 5

flow_rate_beam_purge_single I volume_beam_prod; lambda_purge_RX flow_dilution_valve I volume_RX_bay; i Sources ( n I ( s i Pool area source pool Number density Ar at core atomm3 1
xs_absorp_Ar_40...
Flux m2 core *-volume_j)ooI_area ; -

i Beam source beam = Number density Ar air m3

xs absorp Ar 40
Flux_m2_Beam_line
volume_beam_prod;-

i RSR source RSR = Number density Ar air m3

xs_absorp_Ar_40
Flux_m2_RSR *-volume_RSR=prod; l Isolation ( n / mA3 l Pool, Beams, and RSR C_Iso_PBR = ( source_pool + source_beam +source RSR )...

I ( volume_total

lambda_Ar_41 ) ;

Pool and Beams C !so PB= (source pool+ source beam)... /-( volume_total *lambda Ar 41 ) ; i Pool c Iso P = ( source_pool )... I ( volume - total. lambda Ar 41 ) ; HVAC Only ( n I mA3 )

Pool, Beams, and RSR C HVAC PBR = (source pool+ source beam+ source RSR)...

I ( volume_total * ( lambda_Ar 41 +lambda HVAC ) ; Pool and Beams C HVAC PB = ( source pool + source beam )... I ( volume_total-* ( lambda_Ar=41 +lambda HVAC) ) ; Pool C HVAC P = ( source pool)... I ( volume_total * (lambda Ar 41 +lambda HVAC ) ) ; i Purge and Both Purge and HVAC ODE ( n I mA3 Define an array of variables to pass to t he ODE solver to remove need for alobal variables and speed process up NV = ( Number density Ar at core atomm3 1 Number density Ai air m3-lambda=Ar_ 41 lambda HVAC lambda_purge_pool lambda_purge_RSR lambda_purge_beam lambda purge RX flux m2 core-volume_pool_area flux m2 Beam line volu~e_beam_j)rod flux m2 RSR vol~e_RSR_prod volume total volume RX bay xs absorp-Ar 40 laiiihda_purge=pool_worst J; g ODE Initial Conditions ( number density ) l IC = [ Rx bay purge PBR Rx bay purge PB Rx bay purge P pool purge -beam purge PSR purge-Rx bay purge HVAC PBR-Rx bay-purge HVAC PB Rx bay purge HVAC P pool-purge HVAC beam purge-RSR purge HVAC J ; IC [ 0 0 0 0- 0 0- 0 0 0- 0 0 0 ]; 31

< ODE option vector option= odeset(' RelTol ', le-8, ' AbsTol ', le-8) ; Solve the ODE ( n I mA3 l t O O; , Initial time (s) t =f = 50000; Final time (s) Model time, Con loop ] = ode45(@(t, y)Argon Concentration script ODE 3 0( t, y, NV )... , [ t_O t_fl, IC, option) ; switch conditions from columns to rows ( n I mA3 ) Con_loop = Con_loop '; %l Specific Activities ( Bq I ( mA3 s )) Iso A Iso PBR = C Iso PBR

lambda Ar 41; A=Iso=PB = C_Iso_PB
lambda_Ar_4l; A_Iso_P = C_Iso_P
lambda_Ar_41;

~ HVAC Only A_HVAC_PBR = C_HVAC_PBR

lambda Ar 41; A HVAC PB = c HVAC PB
lambda Ar 4l; A-HVAC-P c HVAC P
lambda_Ar_4l;

" Purge for a = 1 : 9 Act_purge (a, : ) Con_loop(a, : )

lambda_Ar_41; end ii Dose and Dose Rate Calculations

% Convert activity to Dose in mR t Semi-infinite cloud model [Bevelacqua 2004] (R/sl Dose constant k_l = (l/100)

l.6e-6 * (1/1293) *. 5; Gamma energy and fraction ( fraction
NRG in MeV) gamma_Energy

[. 9995*1. 2936. 0005*1. 6772] ; Isolation Dose rate Iso (R/s) Dose rate Iso PBR mRh Dose=rate=Iso=PB_~Rh Dose_rate_ Iso_P_mRh = k 1

A Iso PBR
sum(gamma Energy)
1000
3600;

= k 1

A iso P
surn (gamma Energy)
1000
3600; k_l
A_Iso_P
sum(gamma_Energy)
1000
3600; Dose Iso in one year (rnR )

Dose_Iso PBR_rnRh = Dose_rate_Iso_PBR rnRh

8736; Dose Iso PB mRh = Dose rate Iso PB mRh
8736; Dose=Iso=P-~Rh Dose_rate_Iso_P_mRh
8736; t

HVAC Only Dose rate HVAC (R/s) Dose_rate_HVAC PBR_mRh = k l

A HVAC PBR
surn(gamrna Energy)
1000
3600; Dose rate HVAC PB mRh = k 1
A HVAC PB
sum(gamma Energy)
1000
3600; Dose=rate=HVAC=P-~h = k_l
A_HVAC P
sum(gamma_Energy)
1000
3600; Dose Iso in one year (mR)

Dose_HVAC_PBR_mRh = Dose_rate_HVAC PBR mRh

8736; Dose HVAC PB mRh = Dose rate HVAC PB mRh
8736; Dose=HVAC=P-~h = Dose_rate_HVAC_P_mRh
8736; Dose rate for purge items (mR/hl for dr = 1 : 9 Dose_rate_purge(dr, : ) = k 1
Act_Purge(dr, : )
surn(gamma_Energy)
1000
3600; end Purge Dose rate purge PBR mRh =Dose rate purge(l, : ) ;

Dose :rate=purge=PB_~h = Dose_rate_i)urge(2, : ) ; Dose_rate_purge_P_mRh = Dose_rate_purge (3, : ) ; 32

Pu rqe ai Oose_rate_purge_HVAC_PBR_mRh = Oose_rate_purge(7,: ) ; Dose rate purge HVAC PB mRh =Dose rate purge (B, : ) ; Oose:rate:purge: HvAc:P_inRh = Oose_rate_purge (9, : ) ; s*eady state do~ ~

mi' h Dose_rate_SS
Dose_rate_purge(:,end) ;

the combo lineup converges ver y f asL a nd fluctuates near 0 so effects to f1 nd a gooa steady stat v~ u~ n~ed t be per formed. fo r pf

l:length (Dose_rate_SS) temp_ find
Dose_rate_purge(pf, : ) ;

pf find find(temp find> 0 ); Dose_rate_SS (pfl = Dose_rate_purge(pf, max (pf_f1nd) ) ; end Dose t or purqe 1t ems <mP) converr to mR/s tor i ntegration Dose_ rate_purge_mRs = Dose_rate_purge. / 3600; fo r d

1: 9 Dose_purge(d) a trapz(Model_time, Dose_rate_purge_mRs(d, : ));

end Dose f1om a worker for a full year both systems Transient dose

re!Mtn n? *.me
SS Dose rate Dose_both_staff_year = Dose_purge (l )...

+ I 8736

3600 - Model_time(end) ) *Dose rate_SS (l ) ;

Peactor Bay Stay times I h, BasPd on 10 CFR ~O Limits of 5R/yr Li nut ll.mit_mR

5000; S~ay times Isolatinn r~

Stay time !so PBR = limit mR I Dose rate !so PBR mRh; Stay-t i me-Iso-PB - limit ;i;R I Dose rate Iso PB mRh; Stay: time: rso: P

limit_mR I Dose_rate_Iso_P_mRh; Stay '..,,

1 I\\ vr. y h Stay time HVAC PBR s limit mR / Dose rate HVAC PBR mRh; Stay-time-HVAC-PB E limit mR I Dose rate HVAC PB mRh; Stay: time-HVAC: P

limit_;i;R I Dose_rate_HVAC_P_mRh;

-tdY ti me P~rge (h) Stay time purge PBR * ( limit mR - Dose purge(l) ) I Dose rate SS(l) + ( t f - t 0 )/3600 ; Stay:time_purge: PB = ( limit_inR - Dosej)urge(2) ) I Dose_rate_SS(2) + ( t_f - t_O )/3600 ; Stay_time_purge_P = ( limit_mR - Dose_purge(3) ) I Dose_rate_SS(3) t ( t _f - t_O )/3600; ~ JY L*"* rurg<.. rnr! flltAC h Stay time purge HVAC PBR = ( limit mR - Dose_purge (7) l I Dose_ rate_SS (7) + ( t_f - t_ O )/3600; Stay time purge HVAC PB * ( limit mR - Dose purge(B ) ) I Dose rate SS(8 ) T ( t f - t 0 ) /3600; Stay_time_purge_HVAC_P * ( limit_mR - Oose_purge(9 ) ) I Dose_rate_SS19l + ( t f - t 0 ) /3600 ; Convert to x~rm ~.or pluoe I so lat ion Pool,

dllel RSR C Tso PBR kqm3
C_ Iso_PBR
M Ar / N_A;

-Pool a 1 ans c lSO PB kgro3 - c Iso PB

M_Ar I N_A;

-Pool - C_Iso_P_ kgm3

C_Iso_P
M Ar / N A; HVAC Only ( n I m~;

Pool, Be ~, ~J SP C_HVAC_PBR_kgm3 s C_HVAC_PBR

M Ar / N_A; nd B* '"'

C_HVAC PB kgm3

C_HVAC_PB
M Ar / N_A; 33

Pool C_HVAC_P_kgm3 \\ Purge C HVAC P

M_Ar / N_A; Use molar balance t o do mixing ratios for teh purge and purge HVAC Purge only All t hr ee e xperiment facilities d raw plus reactor bay total_purge_flow = flow_rate_purge_pool + flow_dilution_valve

+ flow_rate_beam_purge_single

5 + flow_rate_RSR_purge ;

Concentra tion of purge e xic (n/m'3) Con Purge mix= {Con loop(!,: ).

flow dilution valve+ Con_loop {4, : )

flo; rate-purge pool~-- + Con-loop{S, : ).

flow rate beam purge single.
5...

+ Con=loop (6,: ).

flow=rate=RSR_purge ). I total_purge_flow; Convert to (kg/m'3) for plume Con_purge_mix_kgm3 = Con_Purge_mix
M Ar I N_A; Concent r ation of HVAC and purge Find new purge mix Con_Purge_mix_H = ( Con_loop{7, : ).* flow_dilution_valve + Con_loop{4, : )

flow rate purge pool...

+ Con-loop(S, : ). *flow rate beam purge single.* 5...

+ Con=loop(6, : ).

flow=rate=RSRj)"urge). / total_purge_flow; Mixture at stack (n/mA3)

Con_HVAC_purge = ( Con_Purge_mix_H.

total_purge_flow...

+ Con_loop(7).

flow_rate_HVAC_exh). / ( total_purge_flow + flow_rate_HVAC_exh) ;

Convert to kg/m'3 Con_HVAC_purge_kgm3 Con_HVAC_purge

M Ar / N_A ;

Argon Production ODE function [ R dot ] = Argon Concentration script ODE( t, R, NV ) Differential equation solver for purge-re l ated t hi ngs Sources Pool area onl y purge R_dot(4) = NV(l)

NV(l7)
NV(9) - NV{S)
R(4);

Beam tines only purge R_dot(S) = NV(2)

NV{l7)
NV(ll) - NV{7 )
R(S) ;

P.SR only purge R_dot(6) = NV(2)

NV{l7)
NV(l3) - NV(6)
R(6) ;

Reactor bay Rx Bay with only purge PBP R dot {l) = ( R dot(4)

NV(lO) + R dot(S)
NV(l2) + R_dot(6)
NV (l4) ) / NV(l6)...

R (1) * { NV ( 3) + NV ( 8) ) ; - Px Bay with only purge PB R_dot(2) = R dot{4)

NV(lO ) + R dot(S)
NV(12) ) I NV{16)...

R{2) * { NV(3) + NV(8) ) ; Rx Bay with only purge P R dot(3) = ( R dot(4)

NV(l0) ) I NV(16)...

R ( 3) * ( NV ( 3) + NV ( 8) ) ; P.x Bay HVAC and Pur ge PBR R_dot(7) = ( R_dot(4)

NV(lO) + R_dot(S)
NV{12) + R_dot{6)
NV(l4) ) I NV(l6)...

34

- R ( 7} * ( NV ( 3) + NV ( 8) + NV ( 4} } Rx Bay HVAC and Purge PB R_dot(B) = R dot(4)

NV(lO) + R dot(5)
NV(l2) ) I NV(l6)...

- R(8)

7 NV(3) + NV(8) + NV74) } ;

Rx Bay HVAC and Purge P R dot(9} = ( R dot(4)

NV(lO) } / NV(16)

R(9)

7 NV(3) + NV (B) + NV(4) ) ;

Copies for now. If the method changes these will be used Pool area HVAC purge R_dot(lO} = NV(l)

NV(l7)
NV(9) -

NV(5)

R(4);

Beam line HVAC and purge R_dot(ll) = NV(2)

NV(l7)
NV(ll) -

NV(7)

R(5) ;

RSR HVAC and purge R_dot(l2) = NV (2)

NV(17)
NV(13) -

NV(6)

R(6) ;

R dot ei:;d R_dot '; Plume Modelling function [ Dose ] Plume_Model_2016 ( A, u ) \\ Plume Model 2016 t Author : Greg Kline t Date : 10/25/2016 % Revision 2. 0 't, % The first revision was lost in the cloud due to a data leak. This model calculates t he t dose and equivalent dispersion of Ar-41 from the stack at NETL. It uses calculations % from facility features and the work of DOE/TIC--11223 Handbook on atmospheric diffusion. ~ The facility features are taken from the blue prints and calculations based on operational parameters tic Wind speed (m/s) u = linspace(. 1, 15. 4333, 50) ; Concentration from stack (kg/mA3 ) These values are calculated from the Argon production scenarios in RAis C 0 Iso C 0 ; 5. 0796e-14 ; " C 0 HVAC C=Q-c 1. 3760e-15; C 0 Purqe SS C=O-= l.635le-14; C 0 Purge HVAC SS t C=O-a 1. 3042e-l5; Concentration from stack (kg/mA3) All normal f acilities operating, lel3 at core, concertation volume is % the RX bay. This is the plausible, isolated, worse case scenario t c 0 = l. 5090e-10; \\ Concentration from stack Ckg/mA3) All normal facilities operating, 2. 5e13 at core, concertation volume is the RX bay. This is the plausible, isolated, worse case scenario C 0 z 3. 6183e-10; Concentration from stack (kg/m'3) % All normal facilities make Ar_41 and this is concentrated in pool area 35

~ c O = 4. 5449e-7 ; ' All possible air in the reactor bay makes it through the central thimble, i hits equilibrium, and is then concentrated into the pool area with pool suction only (kg/mA3) \\ c_o = 5.6944e-4 ; % All possible air in the reactor bay makes it through the central thimble, t hits equilibrium, and is then concentrated into the RSR facility, the % smallest suction-able volume Ckg/mA3l c_o =. 0576 ; %~ Building Constants NETL dimensions % The building has 3 main parts : nO gen room, r x bay, offices which are Nn, Nrx, No

respectively.

dimensions are taken from an overhead view with (+) being in the north % and east directions. Length is northward, width is eastward ~ Building dimensions Cm) Neutron generator room (m) Nn width= 12. 192; No-length 12. 192 ; Nn=height = 7. 214 ;

Reactor bay (m)

Nrx width = 18. 288 ; Nrx-length 25. 908 ; Nrx=height = 13. 564 ; Office space (m) No width= 30. 48 ; No-length 12. 192; No=height = 9. 550; Building designations Berm height (m) N berm= 2. 134 ; NETL Argon Stack Height from roof Cm) N_stack_ roof = 4. 2672 ; Purge pipe radius (m) N_purge_ stack_radius_in . 1016; Nozzle radius (m) N__purge_stack_radius_out . 0762 ; HVAC radius (m) N_HVAC_radius_out = 0. 2286; Stack distance from building end (m) N_stack_north_edge = 21. 31; Purge nozzle Velocity in (m/s) N__purge_stack_velocity_in = 20.32 ; HVAC system N_HVAC_stack_velocity in Pressure of air (Pa) p = 101325; 8. 6360 ; specific gas constant for air ( J I kg K ) R_ air = 287. 058 ; specific gas constant for Argon ( J I kg K ) R argon = 208 ; Volume of the reactor bay C m'3 ) V r x = 4120 ; 36

charq u d.1g geometry analysis a r e easier to do here N_L

Nrx length; N W
Nrx-width ;

N H

Nrx-height + N_berm; P.aJ.u q~ J ltn vA

~nd purge N_stack_radius_out ~ N_purge_stack_radius_out; N_stac k j us out

N HVAC_radius_out ;

Average wind direction calculations maJority headings are directly north or directly south. This section is a vector additive calculation. For plume modelling, both directions will be cons1dcred. t wind d1rect1ons in rad ( Orad \\ heading

O: p1/8 : 2' p1-pi/8; east, CCW )

% occupation percentage (%/100) occ per* (. 035. 035.06. 08. 08. 04. 04. 03. 025. 02. 03. 07... . 17. 14. 10. 045 ) ; x coroponent Vx

sum(occ_per.*cos(heading)) ;

\\ y component Vy* sum(occ_per.

s1n(head1n9)) ;

probab1l1ty ad)usted angle (deg) wind_d1r atan( Vx/Vy ); AdJUSt bu1ld1ng width to co~pensate for wind direction (ml it wind is E ~ in d1rect1on, the length and width values need s wapped if abs(wind dir) <* 45 [ N L, N ~ I deal (N_I\\, N_L) ; Ad]USt width for 11n9le m N_W

N "

/ cos (wind_dir); Model rnn.. ~11nts n rtt1>rly Hound d anr .rom s~ack (ml Z_x

linspace(N_stack_north_edge-N_L, 1000, 10000) ;

.rlv ty 1 m/s*21 g - 9. 8066; Avogad ro ' s number ( atoms/mol ) N_A

6. 022e23 ;

M,,Jerul H ma"' 1kg/mol) M Ar

41 I 1000 ;

M=air

28. 9 I 1000; Halt-.lltc of Ar-41 (s hal f _life_Ar_41
6.5766e3; a1 consta
Ar-4.

.1~ lambda_Ar_41

109 (2) I half_life Ar 41; uw~~uing C ru1~r1~

Stack d1sta F ~ u h edge m N_s tac k_south_edge ~ Nrx_length - N_stack_north_edge; c ~rci.1.n !"!\\" A_purge_stack_in

pi
N_pur ge_s tack_radius_inA2 ;

A_HVAC_stac k_in

0. 762A2 -

A_pur ge_stack_in; "n x 301n - area pllrge ~ ~~ ~r~~ nu~ m~? r urge '/ rn A_purge_stac k_out

pi
N_purge_stack_radius_outA2; 37

% HVAC system ( annulus ) ~ Nozzle sits slightly above the HVAC release so larger radius is subtracted from HVAC A_HVAC_stack_out =pi* ( N_HVAC_radius_outA2 - N_purge_stack_radius_inA2 ) ; Velocity of Argon out of stack (m/sJ Purge system with nozzle N purge stack velocity out = N purge stack velocity in

A:J>urge=stack_in- / A_purge_sta~k_out7 HVAC system with nozzle N HVAC stack velocity out = N_HVAC_stack_velocity_in
A_HVAC=stack_in-/ A_HVAC stack out ;

Initial stack height (m) N_stack_height_O = N_H + N_stack_roof ;

Section 3 designations (m)

N zeta= min( Nrx height, NW) ; N=xi =max ( Nrx_height, N_W-) ; Characteristic length (m) N_R = N_zetaA (2/3)

N_xiA (1/3) ;

~ Roof cavity (m) NLc=. 9*N_R; cavity height (m) N_Hc =. 22

N_R; cavity distance (m)

N_xc = N_R I 2; Shear layer boundary (ml NZ II = N_R * (. 27 - .1 * (Z_x/N_R) ) ; Roof wake boundary (mJ N_Z_III = N_R *. 28 * (Z_x/N_R). A(l/3) ; Cavity zone Cavity constants if N L I N H <= l A -2~0 + 3. 7 * (N L/N HJA(-1/3) ; B = -. 15 +. 305 * (N_L/N_H)A( - 1/3) ; elseif N_L I N H > 1 A 1.75 ; B =. 25; else display ( ' Cavity Error ') ; end Cavity length (m) N xr = N_H * ( ( A* N_W / N_H) / (1 + B *NW I N_H) ) ;

Mass of argon in Rx bay <kg) m_argon_inside = C_O
M_Ar / N_A; Initial mass flow of purge (kg/s)

Q_purge = C_O

A_purge_stack_out
N_purge_stack_velocity_out; Initial mass flow of HVAC (kg/ s)

Q_HVAC = C_O

A_HVAC_stack_out
N_HVAC_stack_velocity_out; total mass flow (kg/s)

Purge only Q = Q_purge; % HVAC only Q = Q_ HVAC; 38

% % Purge and HVAC ~ Q = Q_purge + Q_purge ; Point of Interest Constants Distances to points of interest (m) ' Direction from stac k R netl to fence= 64. 71; N R-netl-to-IBM = 277. 97; N R-netl-to-ARL = 699. 40; s R-netl-to-wells fargo z 207. 41; SSE R=netl=to=macys-= 535. 25; SE Top hat model equations display ( ' Beginning top hat calculations... ') ; Initial volume flux (mA4/2) Initial_volume_ flux = N_purge_stack_velocity_out

pi
N_stack_radius_outA2 ;

~vo Plume temperature correction ( C I g/mol) Temepratures (C) T plume = 25; T=envi ro = 20; Corrected temperatures < C I kg/mol l T pO T plume; T=eO = T=enviro; Initial buoyancy flu x mA5 I sA3 ) Initial _bouyancy_flux = g I T_pO * ( T_pO - T eO l

Initial_volume flux; FO Density of air ( kg/m'3 density air outside= p I ( R air* ( T enviro + 273.15) ) ;

density=air=inside = p I ( R_air * ( T_plume + 273. 15) ) ; Mass of air in the reactor bay kg ) m_air_inside = density_ai r_i nside

v_rx; Reactor mixutre gas constant < J I kg K R mix R argon
m argon inside+ R ai r* m air inside)...

I ( m_a~gon_insid; + m_air_inside ) ; kg/m'3 I Density of mixture density_mi x_inside p I ( R_mix

T_pl ume ) ;

Initial momentum flux ( mAS I s'2 ) Initial momentum flu x = densi ty mi x inside I density air outside

N=purge_stack_velocity_out
Initi al_bouyancy_flux7

~ Atmospheric stability (sA-2) s = g/T_enviro * (. 0098) ; Atmospheric conditional stack height changes Many conditions exist that change the effective height based on stability and the ambient wind speed. Each condition is calculated and the minimum stack height is used as the change in stack height to ensure worst case scenario per wind speed di spl ay(' Calculating atmospheric effects on stack height... ') ; Rise limited by ambient stability Atmospheric final rise of a buoyant plume stack_dH (l,: ) = 2. 6 * ( Initial_bouyancy_flux. / ( u

s) ). '(1/3);

Nearly neutral conditions Mixing depth (m) z = 1500;

Roughness length (m) zO ~ N_H I 10; Friction velocity (m/s) u star=. 4.* u. /log ( z/zO) ;

i Nearly neutral conditions delta height <ml 39

' buoyant bent over plume (m) stack dH(2, : } = 1.54 * ( Initial bouyancy flux. / ( u

u_star)). A(2/3)...

.

N_stack_height_OA(l/3) ;

Jet (m) stack_dH (3, : } u -

1) ;

3

( N_purge_stack_radius_out
2 ) * ( N_purge_stack_velocity_out. /...

i Convective conditions (m} Eddy dissipation rate eddy_rate = u_star. A3 I (. 4

z} ;

Surface buoyancy flux surface_bouyancy_flux eddy_rate I. 25 ; stack dH(4,: } = 3 * (Initial bouyancy flux. / u }. A(3/5)... .

sur face_bouyancy_flux. ~(-2/5) ; -

Correct for inf and nan sit uations stack_dH(-isfinite(stack_dH}) = 0 ; \\ Create effective stack height adjustment (m} stack_h_atmos = N_stack_height_O + min(stack_dH} ; i Downwash Calculations display(' Calculating downwash and ground source... '} ;

Downwash height (m) stack_Hd 2 * ( N_Purge_stack_velocity_out. / u -

1. 5) * ( N_Purge_stack_radius_out

2 ) ;

Ratios greater than 1. 5 do not have downwash, thus a positive value has no meaning stack_Hd(stack_Hd > 0) = O; Ad)ust effective stack height for downwash (m) stack_h_prime = stack_h_atmos + stack Hd; Building effects corrected effective stack height (m) Conditions condl = stack_h_Prime > Nrx height + l. 5*N zeta ; cond2 stack h prime <= Nrx height + l. 5*N zeta & stack_h_Prime >= Nrx_height ; cond3 stack=h=prime < Nrx_height ; Apply the formulas stack_He(condl) stack_h_Prime(condl} ; stack_He(cond2) 2.* stack_h_Prime(cond2) - ( NH+ 1. 5

N_ zeta} ;

stack_He(cond3) stack_h_Prime(cond3} - 1. 5

N_zeta;

~ Look for trapped plumes the 0 m/s wind condition would be grabbed by this, but that is a ver tical ~ plume ground source= find( stack He<. 5

N zeta & u -= O} ;

stack_HeCground_source> = o; Find vertical plumes ( DOE suggests for wind speeds < 1 m/s } vert_plume =find( u < 1} ; stack_He(vert_plume) stack_h_Pr ime(vert_Plume) + 4

Initial_bouyancy_flux A. 25 I sA. 375; Gaussian Plume display(' Performing Gaussian plume calculations... ') ;

point density (#) points = 1000 ; Develop an x direction vector, 0 is dt the scack and positive is ~ northbound x = linspace(0,1000, points} ; Develop d y direction vector, 0 is dt the stack and west is positive IAW ' flg 4.1 y = linspace(-1000, 1000, 2*points); 40

i Develop a i vector, 0 is at stack height, so z is a 2D matrix, the rows % % are the z values, while the columns are the wind speeds \\ z = zeros(po1nts, length(u) ); % fo r l l : length(u) a - u(l ) ; stack hei ght (m) b 1000-u ( l}; lkm ceiling minus stack he1ght ~ ~ Build a 20 array z( :, l) ~ linspace(a,b, points); 'i end i Standard deviation constants are considered using the Urban Conditions of table 4. 5, as NETL sits in an urban area as of 2016, here, the A-B % cond1tions use the same equation, as well as the E-F conditions, creating a 4 x wind sp x length(x ) array of values sig y (ml sig y (l, : ) sig-y(2, : ) sig=y(3,: ) sig_y (4,: ) sig z <ml sig z (l, : ) sig=z(2, : ) sig z (3, : ) sig=z(4, : } . 32

x.

. 22

x

.16

x

. 11

x

( ( ( ( 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + . 004 . 004 . 004 . 004 x ). ' (- 1/2) ;

x ). ' (- 1/2) ;

X ). A(-1/2) ; X ). A(-1 /2 ) ; . 24

X
( l +. 001.* X). A(l/2) ;

. 20

x;

. 14

X * ( 1 +. 0003.
X). A(-1/2 ) ;

. 08

X. *

( 1 +. 00015.* X). A(-1/2 ) ; find the values of u that are not trapped in the plume u_plume = u(stack_He >=. 5

N_zeta ) ;

Gaussian equation blows up for u < l ; % u_plume (u_plume<l)=l; neor the stack ( x < lOOm l the sigma diffusion equations blow up, it is t necessary to consider the buoyancy of the plume being developed here t and the dispersion of the net-over plume z_prime units for x <150m z_prime_x x (x <=150) ; z prime ( wind sp rows dist column ) for zs = l :length(u_plume) z_prime (zs, : ) = 1. 6.* ( Initial_bouyancy_flux

z_pri me_x. A2 ). A(l/ 3). / u_plume(zs) ;

end ' update the sigmas to represent the plume conditions ford= l : length (u plume) sig y eff(d, : )- sqrt( sig y(l, l :length (z prime x)J. A2 + sig=z=eff(d, : ) =sqrt ( sig=z(l,l: length(z~rime:x )). A2 + end make a 30 matrix to account for plume trap by source sig( atmos, dist, wind ) sig_y repmat (sig_y, 1, 1,length(u_plume)) ; sig_z = repmat(sig_z, 1, 1, length (u_plume)); z_prime (d,: ) I 3. 5 ).A2 ) ; z_prime (d, : ) I 3. 5 ). A2 ) ; i Find the l. 5m off the ground concentration per atmospheric conditions and wind speeds the 2D map is relative to y and x direction c 1 Sm= zeros (length (sig_y( :, l )}, length(u_plume), l ength (x), length(y)} ; set the he i ght for personal ground exposure (ml zl5 = 1.5; Build an array of 20 maps for height atmospheres for plumes not trapped. atmos = l A-B c D E-FJ for atmos = l :length (sig y(:, l, l)l for wind sp = l : length(u plume) for i = l :length( x} - of l. 5m for varying wind and C(atmos,wind sp, x, y) [kg/mJ] for j = l :length(y) C_l_Sm(atmos, wind_sp, i, j) = ( Q. / u (wind_sp) ) 41

L 1. / ( 2.* pi . ~ sig_y (atmos, i,wind_sp).* sig_z(atmos, i,wind_sp) )...

( exp ( -y (j ) A2./ (2.* sig y (atmos, i,wind sp). A2)))...
( exp ( - ( zlS -

stack_He(wind_sp) ) A2. / (Z sig_ z (atmos, i,wind sp). A2 ))... - +exp ( - ( zl~ + stack_He (wind_sp ) J A2. i (2 sig_z (atmos, i,wind_sp l. A2 J ) ) ; end end end end The l.Sm ~~ -* b'~w up using the effective siqma 1unct1ons. Jpis t E H'

ut r,ht. ef:'.ecti ve ones for as
l : length(sig_z( :, 1, 1))

sig y(as, l :length (z prime x), : ) sig=z(as, l :length (z=prime=x), : ) end sig y eff '; sig=z=eff '; ~em oft Lhe ground represent s t he inta ke he19ht of the IBM building accroas the ~trePt and the 2nd story balcony height of the ~pa r tments behind it as W* 1 the air t nt11 kes of buildi nqs to the south Cm) zB

7. 836; Pre-allo ate arrny space c_am
c_1_sm.* O; Build an axxay of 20 maps for ~e ight atmo8pheres *or olwrnq n~t tra~p ed.

atmc>~

I A-

- E-r for atmos l : length (sig_y( :, l, l )J fo r wind sp

l :length(u plUltle) for I
l:length( x) -

for j

l:length (y)

C 8m(atmos, wind sp, i, of 1. Sm ~ or V<Irying 1o11nd and C(atri:os,;;1nd sp, x, i*l J J * ( Q. I u (wind spl l... ( 1. / ( 2.

pi sig_y (atmos, i,wind_sp).
sig_z (atmos, i,wind_spl

)... sig ( exp ( - y(j ) A2. / (2.* sig y(atmos, i,wind sp).A2) ) J...

( exp( -( z8 - stack_He(wind_spl )A2./ (2-z Catmos, i, wind spl. A2) )...

+ exp ( -( zB + stack_He (wind_sp) )A2. / (2

sig_z(atmos, i,wind_sp). A2)

) ) ; end end end end M3cy'

i r 1nta k ~ happens to be close t o t he height o l thu stack z20
19. 9652 ;

Pre-1llocatr *"ray space C_20m "" C_ l _ Sm.

0; Build an array 01 20 maps for neiont o! 1.Sm fox varying ~ ind and atmo.spher *'S i ot p.lUl'le
nr>t t ra~ ped.

C (atr:ios,wJ.nd ep, "'* r > atmos

I A-B C D E-r for atmos
l : length(sig_y( :, 1, 1))

for wind_sp

l : length(u_plWI:e )

for 1 2 l : length (x) for j ~ l : length(y) C 20m (atmos, wind sp, i, j ) ~ ( Q./ u(wind sp) )

( 1. /

< 2-.

pi.* sig_y (atmos, J., wind_sp).* sig_z(atmos, i,wind_sp)

)...

( exp ( -y(jJA2. / (2.
sig y(atmos, i, wind sp). "2) ) )...
( exp ( - ( z20 - stack He (wind spl )A2. / (Z sig z latmos,i,wind sp )."2) )...

+ exp ( -( z20 + stack_He(wind_sp) ) A2./ (2 sig_z (atmos, i,wind_spJ. A2 ) ) ) ; end end end 42 J

end nite Cloud constants display (' Pet forming inf1n1te cloud dose calculations...

l ;

~ e rate PX bay (mR)

semi-int in1 te cloud model ! Bevelacqua 2004) (IVs)

Dos ant k 1

11/1001
1. 6e-6 * (1/1293) *. 5;

.a.'"'la *n rqy and tr~rtion f raction NPu in MeV) gamma_Energy - [.9995 *1. 2936.OOOS*l.6772]; P1umP-ruse Rate Items 1. Sm oft the ground spec1f1 activity l. Sm off the ground activity (Bq/m"3) Act_ l _Sm

C_ l _5m.* ( N_A I M_Ar).
lambda_Ar_41; Dose rlte l. 5m off the ground (mR/h)

Dose_Rate_1_ 5m_mRh a k 1

Act_1_5m
sum(gamma_Energy)
1000
3600;

~~ ff lhe grvund pN. f1-i t1v1ty ~ir off the ground ac:t1v1ty Bq/m"3) Act_8m - c _8m

( NA I M_Ar ).* lambda_Ar_41; Dvse ta,e <

the gr *und 1mR/h Dose_Rate_8m mRh

k 1
Act 8m
sum (gamma_Energy)
1000
3600 ;

20m off the qronpn specific act ~1tv o~ off the ground JCt1v_ry ~q m"3) Ac t _20m

C_20m.* ( N_A / M_Ar l.* lambda_Ar 41; Dose rate 20m otf the ground mR h Dose_Rate_20m_mRh
k 1
Act_20m
sum(gamma_Energy )
1000
3600; Ground sourc dose rote -tems

~

andard tion constants at OM from the bu1ld1ng (m) sig y GND 4;

si g: z: GNO 2.5; .... 111ord' s suggest.5 Giff_c *. 5; o... nant (DOE/TIC -- 11~23) [unit-less) to 2, . 5 is more conservative <;round * >n* < ntt a 1 "n 1kg/m*3 \\ C GNO

Q * /

( ( pi

sig y GND
sig_z_GND + Giff_c
N W ' N H l...

.

u(ground_sourcel 17 -

Ground A* t inty Concentration ( Bq/m*J l Act_GNO C GNO

N_A / M_Ar )
lambda_Ar_41; 11v~e 1 ~t qr JnJ our~e mR/h Oose_rate_GND_mRh s

k 1

Act_GND
sum (gamma_Energy)
1000
3600; Total Rece1v~d Duse in lyr Total dn e-tmP' Ground r e t otal_dose_year_mR_ GNO (ground_source) 1.~m exposure lmR)

Dose_rate_GNO_mRh

8760; total_dose_year_l_5m
Dose_Rate_l_5m_mRh
87 60 ;

"' exp* Jr ~ total_dose_year_8m Dose_Rate_Sm_mRh

8760; xp

.H 1...!11 total dose_year_20m 5 Dose_Rate_20m_mRh

8760; 114. PF i
1 po1n* s d i splay ( ' F1nd1ng points of interest and e xposure... ' ) ;

43

Phys1cal distances Cm) NETL to IBM Im NETL_to_IBM_N

240.04 ;

NETL_to_IBM_W

104.64 ;

m:~L to llclls Fargv lml NETL to WF N

129. 30 ;

NETL: to: wr: w

146. 04 ;

NETL t ~ y Im) NETL_ to_Macys_N - 174. 83; NETL_to_Macys w - 480. 16; N"TL t APM ) NETL_to_ARL_S

751. 02; NETL_to_ ARL_E P 71. 59 ;

NETL bu1ld1nq ma ximum (m) NETL side N N stac k sout h edge; NETL: side-W o: Ind~ x p~1nt~ (1ndex l NFTL l? BM ! ) it, NETL_ to_IBM_N_pt it, NETL_to_IBM_W_pt min( abs (x-NETL to IBM N)) ; Nok<' ASGLU> min( abs (x-NETL=to=IBM=W) ) ; ~£TL to Wells ~rq m it, NETL_t o_WF_N_pt J ~ mi n (abs {x-NETL to_WF_N)) ; i t, NETL_t o_WF_W_pt ) = min (abs (x-NETL=to_WF_W)) ; NETL to M y ~ it, NETL_to_Macys_N_pt it, NETL_t o_Macys_W_pt min (abs (x-NETL to Macys N) ) ; min(abs (x-NETL=to:Macys=W)) ; 1:£TL to ARL (ml it, NETL t o ARL S pt i t, NETL:t o=ARL: E: pt min (abs (x-NETL to ARL $ )) ;

min (abs (x-NETL=t o=ARL:E )) ;

NETL s1d~ it, NETL side N pt it, NETL~side-w:pt min (a bs (x-NETL side N)) ; min (abs (x-NETL=side=W) ) ; Maps of dose rates and exposure for locations ""Se r-"rf' lmR/hl ~>SP r H* al I BM air* intake vents 1mR/hl Dose Rate IBM air inta ke mRh = squeeze( Dose:Rate:8m_mRh ( ~, :, NETL_ to_IBM_N_pt, NETL_ to_IBM_W_pt ) ) ; Dose rH*.1t IBM,;11r inta ke vents (mR/h ) Dose Rate WF air inta ke mRh = squeeze ( Dose: Rate-l_Sm_mRh ( :, :, NETL_to_WF_N_pt, NETL_to_wF_w_pt) ) ; o~ BM ~.r.nt~ke vents mF/h* Dose Rate Macys air intake mRh = squeeze ( Dose: Rate:2om_mRh ( :; :, NETL:to_Macys_N_pt, NETL_to_Macys_W_pt l ) ; r-e -.teat IBM -*c intake vents 1mR/h Dose Rate ARL air intake mRh = squeeze ( Oose:Rate:8m_ii\\Rh (~, :, NETL_to_ARL_S_pt, NETL_to_ARL_E_pt ) ) ; I te at :lETL .de ( p h Dose_Rate_building_side_mRh =squee ze ( Dose_Rate_ l_5m_mRh (:, :, N£TL_s1de_N_pt, NETL_side_W_pt l ) ; To~a. dose f~r nne year l~~I Dose at IBM i .r*ake v~nts mi> Dose I BM air intake mR = squeeze ( Dose_Rate_8m_mRh ( :, :, NETL_t o_IBM N.pt,NETL_to_IBM_W_pt ) )

87607 Dowe at IBM air inta ke vents mRI 44

Dose WF air_intake_mR

squeeze( Dose_Rate_l_Sm_mRh(:, :,NETL_to_WF_N_pt,NETL_to_WF_W_pt) )
87607 -

Dose at tu r ~ntake vents mR Dose Macys air intake mR - squeeze( Dose=Rate_2om_iiiRh( :, : ~NETL_to_Macys_N_pt,NETL_to_Macys_W_ptl >

8760;

~ t at ~M ~.r intake vents mR) Dose ARL air intake mR squeeze( Dose_Rate_em_mRh(:, :, NETL_to_ARL_S_pt, NETL_to_ARL_E_pt) )

87607 Ou l 1

NE ldE" (mR) Dose_building_side_mR =squeeze( Dose_Rate_l_Sm_mRh(:,:, NETL_side_N_pt,NETL_side_W_pt) )

8760; Outpui display(' Creating output patterns... ') ;

01ffus1on concentration patterns (kg/mA3) pattern 1 Sm* squeeze(C 1 Sm(l, 2, :, : )) ; pattern-em* squeeze(C Sm(l, 2, :, : )) ; pattern=20m - squeeze(C_20m(l, 2, :, : )) ; Finddo e for lyr exposure (mR) 020, 020_rate ] % Con2Dose(pattern_20m); ~pu ~lhle spePd, model blows up pattern_20m_i

squeeze(C_20m(l, 1,:, : )) ;

r. a dos

yr exposure mR D20_1, D20 rate i I = Con2Dose(pattero_20m_i) ;

Find dose rate for IBM exposure side mR) 08, D8_rate ]

Con20ose(pattern_8mJ; d

r e

r lyr exposure side mR Dl, Ol_rate J 2 Con20ose(pattern_1_5m) ;

toe end 45}}

{{{above}}}
{{{label}}}	\|	}}{{{data}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{label}}}	\|	}}{{{subheader}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{label}}}	\|	}}{{{subheader2}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{label}}}	\|	}}{{{image1}}} {{#if:\| {{{caption1}}}}}
{{{header}}}
{{{label}}}	\|	}}{{{image2}}}{{#if:\| {{{caption2}}}}}

	\|	}}[[Accession number::{{#if:ML17052A169\|ML17052A169\|{{#if:\|}}}}]]
Person / Time
	\|	}}

Site:	\|	}}{{#show:ML17052A169\|?site}}{{#arraymap:05000602\|,\|x\| \|\| }}{{#if:05000602\|{{#if:{{#show:{{#explode:05000602\|,\|0}}\|?company\|link=none}}\|{{#if:{{#show:{{#show:{{#explode:05000602\|,\|0}}\|?company\|link=none}}\|?icon\|link=none}}\| [[{{#show:{{#show:{{#explode:05000602\|,\|0}}\|?company\|link=none}}\|?icon\|link=none}}\|link={{#show:{{#explode:05000602\|,\|0}}\|?company\|link=none}}]]}}}}}}

Issue date:	\|	}}[[Start date::Issue date::{{#if:12/01/2016\|12/01/2016}}]]

{{#if:\|Revision:}}	\|	}}{{#if:\|Revision::}}

From:	\|	}}{{#arraymap:Whaley P\|,\|x\|[[from::{{#if:{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|x}}]]}}{{#if:\|{{#if:{{#show:\|?name\|link=none}}\|{{#show:\|?name\|link=none}}\|}}}}{{#if:Univ of Texas\| {{#arraymap:{{#replace:{{#replace:Univ of Texas\|, LLC\| }}\|, Inc\| }}\|,\|x\|[[from::{{#if:{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|x}}]] }} }}

To:	\|	}}{{#arraymap:Balazik M\|,\|x\|[[to::{{#if:{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|x}}]]}}{{#if:\|{{#arraymap:\|,\|x\|to::x}}}} {{#arraymap:{{#replace:{{#replace:NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR/DPR/PRLB\|, LLC\| }}\|, Inc\| }}\|,\|x\|[[to::{{#if:{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|{{#show:x\|?name\|link=none}}\|x}}]]}}

Contacts:	\|	}}

	\|	}}{{#if:Wertz G, NRR/DPR/PRLB, 301-415-0893\|contact::Wertz G, NRR/DPR/PRLB, 301-415-0893}}

	\|	}}{{#if:\|Category:Press Release }}
{{#if:\|Shared Package}}
	\|	}}

{{#if:\|{{#arraymap:\|;\|xx\|in package::xx}} }}	\|	}}{{#if:\|List: {{#ask:in package::\|format=ul}} }}
References
	\|	}}

	\|	}}{{#arraymap:\|,\|x\|{{#Wiki_filter:x}}}} {{#arraymap:\|,\|x\|{{#Wiki_filter:x}}}}

{{#if:{{#ask:Followed by::ML17052A169\|link=none}}\|Preceding documents:}}	\|	}}{{#if:{{#ask:Followed by::ML17052A169\|link=none}}\|{{#ask:Followed by::ML17052A169\|?Issue date=\|format=ul\|sort=Issue date\|order=descending}} }}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}

	\|	}}
{{#if:ML17052A169\|Download: [[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:ML17052A169%7C0%7C6}}/ML17052A169.pdf%7CML17052A169]]\|[[URL::http://pbadupws.nrc.gov/docs/{{#sub:%7C0%7C6}}/.pdf%7C]]}} {{#if:84\|(page count::84)}}
{{#if:\| <span\|<div}} class="noprint plainlinksneverexpand navbar" style="background:none; padding:0; font-weight:normal;; font-size:xx-small; ">{{#if:1\|\|This box: }}{{#if:\|[}}[[{{#switch: \|#default = Adams \| = {{#ifeq: \| \| Template:Adams \| Adams }} }}\|{{#if:1\|v\|view}}]] • [[\|{{#if:1\|d\|talk}}]]{{#if:\|\| • [{{fullurl:{{#switch: \|#default = Adams \| = {{#ifeq: \| \| Template:Adams \| Adams }} }}\|action=edit}}{{#if:1\|e\|edit}}]}}{{#if:\|]}}{{#if:\| \|}}

Search

ML17052A169

Text

SUBJECT:

REFERENCE:

RAI 47

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

Dear Mr. Balazik:

RESPONSE

RESPONSE

Subject:

Dear Sir:

Enclosures:

Background

i