ML20034A292
| ML20034A292 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Buffalo |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1989 |
| From: | Sullivan S NEW YORK, STATE UNIV. OF, BUFFALO, NY |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9004200758 | |
| Download: ML20034A292 (21) | |
Text
.
- e. +
9MN-o o
BUFFALO MATERIALS RESEARCH CENTER
_FJ L M -
April 11, 1990 DOCKET 50-57 LICENSE R-77 U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-WASHINGTON,-D.C.
20555 ATTN:
DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK Gentlemen:
Enclosed is a copy of the Buffalo Materials Research Center 1989 Annual Operating Report.
This report is submitted pursuant to Technical Specification section 6.7.1.
Sincerely, Daniel W. Sullivan, Jr Director DWS/stf l'
1 F
h l
l 9004200758'891231 T
I l
PDR ADOCM 05000057-R PNV i
I l~
- SUNY BUFFALO, ROTARY ROAD, BUFFALO, NEW YORK'14214-TELEPHONE (716) 8312626
- EasyLink 62910144
q~-
e ~-3 '-
2 sa y_,
s:
\\'p 7
h..k _k, W -
t i
.g t
- ,.;
- 1 ":Q*
- 4 ';
[ ?' i
- 3'.
n f.,'
+
I.
.r..
l',
s
+
r i
R
. T_I '-
ANNUAL OPERATING REPORT STATE UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK <AT BUFFALO-E BUFFALO HATERIALS RESEARCH: CENTER s
q
- 4.-
i License R Docket 50-57.
.CALENDAN YEAR 19891 Submitted by Daniel W. Sullivan Direct'or-t u;,
M:
a s
-' ' i
[.
3
.i.
y
~
9
,:- N-
~->
N 4
p p
g F
4' A. _INITODUCTION This report is submitted pursuant to section 6.7.1-of Appen--
dix A, licence R-77, Technica l Specifications for the -Buf-falo Materialn Research' Center of the State University of
'New York at Buffalo.
It summarizes operations.
personnel:
radiation exposures, and radioactive effluents _ for the calendar year 1989.
B.
Safety:Related Ehangea.in_Eac.111Ay__D.e.eism 'or per.forMADCA
~
There were no safety related changes in.the Facility Design' during the reporting period.
On Nov.-5, 1989, a small leak was detected in the aluminum.
reactor tank. Investigation of the-leak' determined that reactor coolant seeps through a crack in the bottom of the liner and migrates.through an abandoned pipe to a-sump in the sub; basement-level N-16 holdup vault. From>this sump, the water in turn dr ains to the radioactive waste water a
holding tank'ayatem, s
In response to detection of.the leak, the University volun-tarily agreed not to operate.the reactor until the leak was repaired,'or until_the NRC otherwise agreed.to the resump-tion of reactor operations. Since-the leak is in the bottom of the tank, it cannot be repaired without' dismantling the entire in-tank reactor system. Planning for this is under-way. As a result the reactor has_ remained shut down.
C.
Ens ulittof_Jiu rre11_lanc.e_Ieatta_ and_I nspec.tlo n During the period 1/1/89 tof10/31/89 all required monthly, quarterly, and annual inspections, tests, and calibrations
[
were performed. The results were unremarkable.
It was not possible to perform al-1 scheduled surveillance-tests-during the fourth quarter, since the reactor was shut.
down. For instance, it.was not possible to. test the reactor-scram syctems since this-requires the partial withdrawal'.of i
the control blades from the core. Such a control blade withdrawal, would constitute reactor " operation" as defined f,,
by technical spectfications.
2
V
-t With the exception of measuring control blade drop times, the surveillance which was not performed, are required as
" limiting conditions of operation", and are therefor not
.necessary if the reactor is maintained in.the shut down con-dition. All other tests which'can be performed without operating 1the reactor were successfully1 performed.
In order to allow full testing of the reactor safety systems i
the University's commitment not to operated the_ reactor was l
modified in a letter to the Region I Administrator on March g
29, 1990. It was agreed in discussion with the Commission ~
l that suberitical manipulation of the reactor' controls-to test the safety. systems or to move. fuel within the reactor tank was appropriate and necessary. At no. time will the reactor be allowed to approach critica'llity.
Therefor all' l
future reactor surveillance. tests which do not require critical operation of.the reactor will be performed.
a Rod. drop times will therefor be-measured to comply with f
technical specification requirements, before fuel transfer operations from the reactor grid plate are accomplished.
]
Control blade #6 was removed from the core for visual in-
-l spections. Surveillance procedures require such an inspec-1 tion of one blade each year on a rotating basis. The Control blade appeared to be in an acceptable physion1 condition. No bowing or cracking of the blade was observed. However it is 4
evident that the nickel flashing of the' control blades con-tinues to corrode. This is.further evidenced by escalating j
silver dissolution into the coolant. This problem has-been
-i developing for several years.There has been no observable effect on drop times or the reactivity worth of the blades, i
which have remained within Technical Specification limits.
l In order to mitigate this problem, replacement control blades have been ordered, with delivery expected before the
)
reactor is re-assembled. The replacement blades.will be of-identical physical composition and dimension. It'is an-ticipated that the nickel coating processes which are our-
~j rently utilized, will significantly increase the corrosion resistance of the new blades.
.l 1
D.
fionthly_EnerRv Release.n l
The reactor released 376 megawatt-days of energy during the calendar year 1989.
This represents an average of 86.5 j
hours of full-power operation per week. The average weekly j
energy release before the shut down was 205.7 megawatt-hours or 102.8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> of full time operation per week. A summary of i
eners, releases is presented in Appendix A'.
i 3
i l
2
-c 1
L t
E.
Unolanned_ Shutdowns Durina 1989 l'
There were 15 unplanned shutdowns during 1989 which are sum-marized in Table I. Additional explanation is provided below.
Shutdown #1 The toggie switch which controls the independent motion of con-trol blade rumber four fel.ved, causing the control blade to drive I
i to the. full out position. Operatore compensated by inserting the L
remaining control blades and the reactor was thus.immediately shut down. Operator response was therefor within prescribed pro-cedures. All automatic protective systems functioned properly.
This event was reported to and discussed-with Region I in detail.
It was also reviewed by the Nuclear Safety Committee. Corrective l
action was instituted pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59, and consisted of the replacement of all contro'1 blade drive switches with equiv-l alent new switches. There has been no recurrence of the problem.
Shutdown #2 l-Control blades 1,2,3,and 4 spontaneously separated from the l
holding magnets and dropped into the-core, shutting down the reactor.
The Safety Amplifier (which generates the magnet currents, and-interrupts current upon receipt of a scram signal) and related components were tested and no problems were detected. The suspected cause of the rod drops was low magnet currents (perhaps enhanced by an otherwise unobservable transient dip in line current). Magnet currents are typically adjusted at startup and are maintained at as low a reasonable level as possible in order to minimize rod drop times. All operators were; instructed to maintain minimum holding currents. There has been no recurrence of the problem.
Shutdowns #3 and #4 The stack exhaust system which ventilates the reactor irradiation facilities and selected fume hoods is driven by two 6000 CFM-blowers operating in tandem. One blower is located in the BMRC l
basement, while the other'is located at the base of the stack in the University Power House. If this fan is not in-service the reactor must be shutdown to comply with Technical Specifications.
Loss of operation of the " Power House" fan occurred on the two referenced dates due to the temporary interruption of AC power to the fan. Operators were alerted to the condition by a Control Room indicator light, and the reactor was shutdown until opera-tion of the fan was restored.
4 i
r
- i 7
)
~I 1
4 7
Shutdowns #5, #10, #11, #12 andn#13 l
All of these shutdowns were caused by interruption of AC power.to
^
the BMRC. This causes the control blades to drop into the core when the holding magnet currents collapse. The frequent power -
outages were inadvertent and resulted from maintenance operations.
with the campus main AC switching gear. A contributing factor was improper labeling of some of-the switching gear which has been.
t corrected. The maintenance operations were completed, and no fu -
-ture. problems are expected. There have been no further power.
e outages.
.i Shutdown #8
~
A portable radiation' survey instrument (ion chamber) was dropped in the reactor pool and landed on the " shelf"'above core ~ height..
The meter was being used pursuant to written procedures, which
! require operators to monitor exposure levels when' removing ir-radiated samples from a vertical dry irradiation tube. TheLmeter is placed in a frame where it can be observed by the operator-in l
a hands free condition.
1~
The strings used to suspend the irradiation samples became tangled with the handle of the survey meter.The meter was dis-lodged from the frame and dropped into the pool.
The reactor was immediately shut down by manual scram.
After management review of the event, a velero strap was added to restrain the meter within the holding frame. Operators were in-structed to fold down the pivoting handle of the meter before:
o strapping the meter into the frame. There has-been-no recurrence of the problem.
g l
' Shutdowns #7,#14, and #15 Procedures call for the shutdown of.the reactor in the event of the actual or potential obstruction of flow through the fuel as-sembly cooling channel'(s). On the. referenced occasions
" foreign materials" were observed in or on fuel assemblies. The reactor was shutdown.and the fuel assemblies were' removed'from the grid plate to clear the obstructions.
The exact nature of'the foreign materials is not known.
Suspect materials include small scraps of paper'or plastic.which have dropped in the pool, or flakes of " dirt" which sometimes form in stagnant areas of the reactor tank.
Shutdown 88 8
Certain irradiation targets are irradiated in a dry vertical tube, using polyethylene vials as the primary encapsulation.
5
+
s 4
2 h
Several'of the flat cylindricallvials are generally stacked end-0 to end and wrapped into an irradiation " bundle". These bundles
-are string and wire suspended in the irradiation tube for brief.
periods of time (typically less than one: hour). After the'ir-radiation is complete they are~ transferred-(remotely) to an ad-dacent storage: tube for temporary decay and storage.
On occasion a bundle will swell as a result of off< gassing and~
thermal. heating of the sample. This restricts the vertical motion of the bundle. Operator response is to' shut'down the reactor to allow the samples to cool and vent. Since.the irradiation tube,is
(
vented to the stack exhaust system, there is no dangerLof air-borne. exposure to the staff.
If-itLis necessary to promptly_re.
start the reactor the entire irradiation facility can=be removed from the reactor reflector.-
Shutdown # 9 The~ Building Air monitoring system samples the filtered' air ex -
hausted from the reactor bay = area-and certain low level fume hoods. A side-stream ofLair is drawn from1the duct, passes through'the gaseous and particulate radiation monitors and-is returned to the exhaust duct. On the referenced date the motor failed which drives the sampling air blower. Monitor response-decayed slowly towards zero.
Failure of the system was not promptly detected by.the reactor operators, and therefor the reactor was not promptly shut down.
This violated Technical' Specifications and therefor a report of the " reportable occurrence" was filed with the NRC.
This event was thoroughly reviewed.by the BMRC management staffL and by the Nuclear Safety Committee. Corrective action included modification of reactor log keeping procedures to make monitor failures more readily apparent. Also a special' meeting-was con-ducted to remind all operators of their responsibility to properly monitor the effluent instruments-and-the serious con-sequences of failing to do so.
b b
6
l
, -- - ~.
?:
a L
1 i
Table I 4
Dascheduled Shut downs Calendar Year 1989 1
Date Tvoe Cause Action Taken j
1_01/24/89 Run In Fetled Drive Control-Replaced ~ defective.
(manual)
Switch : rod # 4 switch i
2 02/22/89 -Rod drop Unknown (low magnet Restart after current suspected) systems tested 3 03/17/89 Run In Power Loss Stack Restart after
_(manual) ventilation fan power restored 4 03/22/89_-Run In Power Loss Stack-Restart after (manual) ventilation fan power restored' 5 05/31/89 Rod drop Power outage Restart after power. restored-6 06/13/89 Scram Object Dropped-Object removed (manual) in pool 7 06/28/89 Run In Foreign object Object removed (manual)
_(debris)on core 8 07/19/89 Run In Sample jammed Removed sample (manual) in' irradiation tube-9 08/03/89 Run In Motor Failure.
Replaced motor (manual)
Effluent radiation monitor 10.09/08/89 Rod drop Power Outage Restart after power restored 11 09/07/89 Rod drop Power. Outage Restart after power restored 12 09/25/89 Rod drop-Power Outage-Restart after power restored 13 09/28/89 Rod drop Power Outage' Restart after power restored 14 10/15/89 Run In Foreign object Object removed (manual)
(debris) on core
- 8 15 10/15/89 Run In Foreign object Object removed (manual)
(debris) on core 7
f
a _,.,. a F.
Maintenance Ooerations e
There were no remarkable maintenance' operations during this reporting period.
G.
Exoeriments. Tests. and Facility Channes There were no changes which would change a description in'the Safety Analysis Report; : no-experiments were conducted that deviated from the-Safety Analysis Report.
There were no major changes or upgrades in the Facility.
During the reporting period nine experiments or maintenance operations received formal review to ensure compliance.with 10CFR 50.59.
In each case-it-was concluded that the proposed change did not raise un-reviewed safety questions or require amendment of the Technical Specifications.
They were therefor implemented without prior approval of the NRC.
Review summary-sheets are provided as Appendix B.
H.
Radiological Effluents Controlled Releases to the Sanitary Sewer.
During the. reporting period there were five controlled releases of radioactivity to the sanitary eewer.
The total volume of water released was 105,490 liters, with a total radioactivity of q
107.6 millicuries.
The yearly averaged fraction of maximum per--
missible concentrations released.was.21 per cent.
1 Appendix C,
. Tables I - V' provide individual nuclide.and total j
quantity information for each release to the sanitary sewer.
Tables labeled "old tank" refer to releases from the original (buried) system.
Tables labeled "new tank" refer.to a newer sys-j tem installed within the BMRC sub-basement.
j Table VI provides yearly averages.. The average sewer. flow rate j
for the Winspear Avenue trunk for.1988 was 3.79 E08 ml/ day.
-1 Building Air Releases j
1 The building air system releases airborne effluents from the general bay areas (breathing air) and certain low level fume hoods.
The primary gaseous effluent is Argon 41 (T1/2
=
1.E hrs),
of which a total of 5.0 curies was released in 1989. :The maximum-and yearly average release concentrations were 8.2 -E-07 and 7.5 E-08 microcuries/ml, respectively.
This corresponds with 21 per cent and 3.7 per cent of the limits established by techni-cal specifications.
)
i I
8 3
5 I
)
...m._
1 Stack Gas Releases The stack exhaust system releases airborne effluents from the high level fume hoods, the hot cell, and from various irradiation and experiment facilities, through a
filtered -50 meter. high stack.- The primary' gaseous release is Argon 41 (T1/2 = 1.8 hrs),
and. the primary particulate release ~ is Cesium 138 (T1/2 = 32, minutes).
The maximum and yearly averaged release rates were 1.7E-04 and 7.6 E-06 curies per second, respectively.
This-rep-i resents 18 per cent and.2.4 per cent of the limits established by technical specifications.
Appendix C, Table VII provides the total activities and-yearly average concentrations for measured particulates and gases.
I.
Emtir_onmental - Surve.ym In response -to detection of the leak in the reactor pool liner, numerous water samples were analyzed from the sub basement sumps and from nearby storm receivers.
No radioactivity.(other than l
natural background) was detected in the outside samples. Low con-centrations of radioactivity were detected.in a sump at the' South end.of the N-16 decay tank vault.. Gamma. spectroscopic analyses of these samples demonstrated that none of the characteristic'short-lived nuclides associated with reactor coolant ~ were present.in l
the samples.
Only longer lived nuclides were present.- In par-ticular no Co-57 was present although.Co-60 was. It was concluded that the contamination in this sump was an-artifact - of previous leaks in the cooling system which-were remediated-in 1978.
Specific data relating to the analysis 'of these samples was transmitted to and discussed with the NRC.
External dose rates were monitored outside of the reactor build-
- ing, adjacent-to the
" truck door" equipment hatch.
Vendor provided film badges were used.
The results of these dosimeters was unremarkable and predominantly reflect exposure from outgoing and incoming radioactive shipments.
All such shipping activities are monitored by the BMRC Health Physica staff.
J.
-Dosimetrv Dosimetry records were maintained for a total of 110 staff mem-bers and facility users.
Out of this total, 55 were University-Public Safety
- Officers, none of which received measurable ex -
I posure.
An additional 727 persons entered-the
- facility, using the
" visitor" dosimetry badges.
One such individual received a i
whole body exposure of 20 mrem.
This individual was not-a visitor with a tour group but instead a customer using the-reac-tor with the operations group to perform neutron detector' tests.
8 The dose was received over 8 visits during the month of March.
He has since been issued his own film badge.
The estimated sen-9
q-y Jn
+
4 e'-
Et i
I sitivity of1the whole body-radiation dosimeters used is.102 mrem.
The : maximum annual cwhole -body dose to1~an individual was 0.980~
a total l
Rem.
_The average annual exposure was 0.305 Rem... with man-rem expenditure of 9.460, distributed over 31 individuals _who-:
j
- received' measurable exposures.
Appendix lC, Table VIII'provides a l
summary 1of personnel exposures.
K.
. Rndiation and_.Contfuninat. inn _Eurvev.a h
Exit Mon $toring Exit monitoring is ~ required from each egress from.the reactor containment or.the sub-basement.
- These~ surveys occasionally:
4 detect contamination,-
a))owing-rapid detection and' correction of.
- contaminationLproblems.
- Routine-Surveys Short-lived' radioisotopes are procensed on a nominal-twice: per-week frequency..
Contamination: and dose' rate surveys:are per-formed after each day's processing; The'results oflthesefeurveys-a during'1989 were unremarkable.
Monthly surveys areEperformed by the BMRC; Health Physieu person-nel,. lof-all areas of the Center.
-ContaminationLin1 excess of-ac-tion. limits was' detected 76' times during thesetsurveys.
10f 4the I
~
76 detections, 6' exceeded 10,000 dpm/100cm2, Surveys include:the inside of fume hoods and. liquid disposalesinks where-contamina-tion'is routinely anticipated.
'Thereiwereinoiknown or suspected uncontrolled-releases, cn?
personnel 1 uptakes ~ of radioactive
- (
materials.
I i
l-l lo s
q i
Li
" ~ '
~ ~
,.1:
pkf '.
+
=
,x-t s
+
y
,_a.>
&y:. Wi;
_Q j -l '
n is i J, s.;_
rr; '-
.. g..
y:-
w~.
r r,
N
'gj e
w pi' ~
l-
- -]
d j
Appendix A
-C
-i d:i y
~ Honthly Enerav'Re1eames for 1989.
b,
.c
.t
- Month
- MW-hours Releasedi
]
- 853. 7/.
M!
. January.,.
JFebruary.
l872.3.
~ March 976.9:!
- Apri'l' 772.'l.
May.
906.9:
9 "Junei 919.0-d July.
.-:845.5:l
..4
- August-'.
1003.3:-
?
- September
- ,819;91
- r October:
i-943.2-d s
November-
,113.0 n
1 December
- O.O-s
-i
)
e Total Hw-hours 9025.0 Total-Hw -days 376,1 s
- t
=i
-t
.._f I
w t
y
\\
e' v
k
't b*
I '
g
.f i
e q
4
)
)
r a
- f 3
. Ji I
> y_
G P
)
,-i' h
-~..!
11
?,
a
.i i
i
'f f
9 6
k 1 %
k r
p
,m' p-
,- i, 4,.
.i,,.
4 m -
w?
s'
- e. t
J p
. W',
. c..
~
V W
4 ic 6
Appendix B Compliance Reviews -:10 CFR.50;59 ltem_Bo.
. Summany_.oLexneniment /._maintenanc.e Replaced cooling tower drive shaft and flanges with ex-1 act replacements.,
-Repair-' stack exhaust. system fan.
Replacement'.com-2 u
ponents were. exact replacements.
Replaced: secondary pump-: shaft-seals with exact replace-3 ment-seals.
Installed pressure switch and. loss of ventilation alarm-14 in the hot cell-exhaust duct.
5 Innta11ed manometer in hot-cell 1 exhaust duct to monitor exhaust filter condition.
6 Installed a~ digital pool levelfindicating system.
7 Installe'd-an isolation amplifier to facilitate 1use of the linear.' recorder. reactor power' signal' forL ex-perimental measurements.
8 ReplacedIrod drive switches ~with exact replacements.
9 Installed radioact'ive. materials-. testing facility that exhausts inert. gases;through--a'. water. trap and:HEPA-fil-ter to the stack exhaust system.
I
.a y
fj J
4
.i.
i
' 12 -
]
q s
-r
w
+
~"
.79..c 1
y
,/
Y " '
r-W q ::~ ; g
,.0
-? y
_ ' q:. gyp :5';,
7
?:
ry
_ 5.-
x-o
.u.
w~,. @ ?
- 3' ll
_. 7(4 D[
1lV.
'A 4
f6 ny.
4 b
-Append 1xiC=
. a Radiologicalf Data Tables' IL--; VIII m
.Tabl.e 1
- WASTE TANK 89 Old:WasteiSystem?
-Amount. Released:
1.63E+07-ml'
-Date'.of Release:
.23-Feb-891
. lL z l:
- -l '
l'
'!- Isotope <. !
~ mpo
._ l _
'( uC1/m1') '-
-l (uCi/ml): l::.mpo
- l?
Tank'..
f l~. Release ':l': Percentf-l -
l~
-1(uCi/ml).l-;
i
- i. -
i e
l-H-3
!~ 1E4011:-!
1'.5E-05!i6.5E-07;!.6.5E-04:!
~
i
- g.
. it i-i, g.
Co-60.:
-l 1E--03 !-
578E-0.41 l--. 2. SE-05 !:: 2. 5E+00 El
~
~
!l 4-l t
t 6
I '-
t--
'%. i_
- i si i
'-i Ag-110m 1. '
9E-04-l-f.8E-04 l -:7. 7E-0.6 -lE 8 ' 6E-01" i :
i i'
- i i
Total'cf.mpelReleased:
l3.4 %'
~
- )h! >
1
-l 1
i 9
- I y
's T
13 1
a.
4
'I s
si r
"A w;,
.j
l?
r
~
- n +
-l9
. -. y ;u,
j?-
e
,y d
c:c.
t.
wQy
~
WASTE TANK-89-2' New Waste System
]
Amount L Released :-:
f 3. 02E+07 ml-Date of' Release:"
29-Mar-89
]
r
- l -:
l<
- l..
. p l:
e.
lLRelease?ll Percent-l-0
' !: Isotope: 1.: _ ' mpo !.. j
. T a n k-: _. _
.l(uCi/ml) 1: lmpoi l,.
i.
-!(uCi/ml) i (uCi/ml),
l l-
^l
- l-
- -l =
l q
j H l 1E-01~!
3._7E-05'.l: 2.9E-06111: 2. 9E-031: !.
l il
'i' l_
c
. l-Co-58 4E-03c-:!.
- l-Co-60 l
.1; 2E-05 '- l J 9. 6E-07..il. 9. 6E-02 / l:-
~
j
-l
-- l -
l
.o
-l_
l-
<11 l>
l Ag-110m.!
'9E-040!.-
3.9E-05cl::L3.1E-06 '.l, 3. 5E-01E.: l '
i.-
i i
j' Sb-124 l-
'7E-04:!:
l
!?
1-UN-ID
.:9E-05'l
- 1.9E-05 l
- 1;1E-08:!- 1.2E+001l1 Beta-
'l
.i i.
-i -
i.
e
. Total of['mpc! Released:
2 '. 7.: %
a
-].'r
- f h.
'h s
-]
x a
1q i
i
'^
l
-"t'
.[
14 f
I s
-t'.<,
4
,t a
m Yl his:.
n if:?
' fi 4
+
- fyi- + c p v
g e2 Y M: ;;,
- k. ni
+y
-~
s If'f?
g.
-1 sy -
,.'! i- ~'
Table-III-m
- 2 x
- WASTE :q TANK " 89--3
_ Old - Wastel Sys' tem -
4 e
o
^
"c
-~A m o u n ti R e l e a s e d :-:
2.10E+07.;- ml;
- 1. e
~
^
- Date?ofERelease
- '-
'a
^
21'-Sep-89 5 t,
_i i,
i-s
-i; i.
1.
-i_.. -
^z.,
-!-Isotope ll-
? mpo' '
L!! <. Tank 1
- l" Release - Is Percent 2l-1e Ll E!l(uCi/ml) :l'.(uCi/ml) g;l-(uC1/ml.)T!.
_mpo.
is
- - : i. -
4
-..i _
-i -
i' 3n-3; 7
1E-01M. -
7.9E-06?:!f4 4E-07 !f4i4E-04.j!;
1 9
i-i-
-i i.
i=
Co-00 l-
_1E-03 li 3.2E-05~l'1.8E-08?li=1.8E-011l>
,i-i>
i-
. r.
1 i
i
_i i
i-i-
-l- 'Ag-110m-l L9E-041!,
.is i,
. - ~ ~
l-
'I-I-
.I i1 7
,-TotalLofimpo Released:_
1016. K
..e j._-
4
[-
h
'5
-^
'l 'b t
c
'i
'f 1
I
-j
.~ j
{l ii 7j n
j L,'
- )'_k r 'g 15 g
.'Y,-
a 4
pym-
, ~-
a 7.
- 4. y u -
ert,.
e..
p
_,. s r
1m c
-~l
~ -
)l -
, 4.:
n
,t 5 ilh-(
.'r s
'{f Table _LV:
p.
- WASTE-TANK 89-4 LNew WastecSystem.
Amourit Released-
- 2. 96E+07!- ml-
?
. Date.of Release:-
07-Nov..
?I,.
'l,
-li
.1
^
-11 Isotope -- l ;. !mpo
._ l
,l Tank t! Release.l Percent'ic
.,l'(uCi/ml),i-q(uCi/ml)
.l(uCi/ml). l Empc'
- ll t
6 i'
8 I.-
4-l M-3:
-l 1E- 01
,l - _
- 7 ; 3E-05 -' !. l 5. 7 E-001!,15 L7 E-03 7ll }
3 i
t : Hn-5.4-Tl:
4E-03 !,:
1. 2 E - 0 5;.! r 9.'4 E - 0 7.n l.:-J 2. 3 E - 0 2 !
y-
'l co :!-
i 4
-1 Co-60
-ly 1 E - 0 3
.l~-
lS.SE-05 4 4.3E-061lf4.3E-017l' l
l
- l-l l -Ag-110m l
- 9E-04Ll-
- 2. 7E405 L l, '2.1E-061-l 2. 3E-01.1 ll l
l l-
-l
,.-Sb-124 1,
17E-04'l-
.5.0E-06:l13.9E-07ol;5.6E-02>l _
l l1 La-140- ~!~
7E-04 !
4.7E-07?! 3.7E-08,! ; Si2E- 03 :.!
e
.i - -
i.
=
i-i i
i Total of mpo:Relea~ sed:
J 0'. 8 '% '
h
!}
~
i-(.
.'g 1
1 1
-i 16 "d
+.
'l 9;
.s I
v'
,.i L;;.
' ;-i
'2 /-.),.
b y:
4 gr a
, s.
,a e
,' =-
~.
-, hY.f;.}
', d
' Qi)-
3
'p
['h ~;
~(
5
-t 4
g, m:;n -. n}ll;.
- 7 r
s y
q., '.t.
s
-ar
., d,.
9
.jg :-
3 4
b4 p.O as,
~
w.
r; s
b.-
~
{::
-y7 7,
4
,. _ ~ ^
w L _.
- i. y 1 Table X v.
b WASTE TANK-89 X Old Waste l: System L,
y',
c.
L.
f:<
. Amountt: Released:
a 2 ; G 1 E t 0 7.t m l._
s
. Dateiof1 Release;>
'091Nov-89, y:!vm
.. ; 1.:
- I'
- li.
i!;
'.-r I ;..,
- !CRelease f !? PercentDl:.
- i~ l Isotope ' :!N t mpos,
'li-
,;- Tank : _.
- .l Lt (uCi/.mlFli -
- :(uCi/mlh..
t,;(uCi/ml).i.. l 2mpo;;
l li.
7,3 l:
e.
i.
.i i
. ic
... Co-60 l :-
11E-03 :::.l a
.n
- y
<i
-.i-i
. i: -
i
!,;*._;Ag-110m'1
- 9E+04i ;l,::. '
- 5.9E-05 l L4.1E-06f,!?41 SE,01T;l7
..1 is l.La-140 1
17E-04l-'!::
K7 2 SE-07p; j _: 5'.2E-08; lq 7 4 E--03.L l : -
,3 t
t 6.
t t
't.
' Totallof..:mpcL: Released:
- 0t 7/X:
c y
Q v
s.
cp:
l9
[
- -\\
cp
(..
T. i-1
\\
W p
h 5
1.l I
d m '
m;
'}
q l}
a.
-17
<1
-1..
1 w
{; {,
e+
- g;q -
a i c
m
^
Jan w
, ;;+
- m. p 7,y; #
1 e,
c.~
o. p.._ _
s
-. E ;,-e ;
,-w 2
m.,
s 3.-
s
- 4 q..
- s 1-4 a.
JTable ll YEARLY l: AVERAGE RELEASES.ToaTHELSANITARY. SEWER;- 1989:
s
.-a.
1,
. l ::
LAverage.
-l-'
1,
-lL 'Annu'al!.
l:
l l ; 'I sotope ? ll Releasee! Concentration'j.
- l (Ci)L
't
'(uC1/ml.)'
sl
~l 1.
.t :-
s :
1.
H-3;
,!J3.7E-03 !;
s2.-7E-081,1.
x i-i m
. 1:. Mn-54
..I.
3.6E-04!.!E 2.GE-09.!!i i
i.
___ _ i-i-
! 'Co-58; 15.J.1.9E-04e!E 1'. 3 E - 0 9 :l d
I-i.
Jii Co-60
,l :1. 3E.02. Ic
- 9.4Et08;T..
3-e s.
t t
I t,
~l: ' Ag--110m lL 7.9E-034!
5 '. 7 E - 0 8 -l1
- (
i -Sb-124-
.l L 3'. 0 E - 0 3 ;!. -
- 2.1E-08 :sl:
i
.! : La-140..-l 3.3E-05'l 2 4E-10ci.:
.l_
i i-i.- UN-ID-l'5.7E-04 !
4;1E-091l'
- +-
Beta
,l l l.
~
i i
I l
l 1
y,
...7 p
a",
g j a l
3 g
- Ip, i
llm,
l
- J
?;
p :.
, ;it 3 li
.1 18 ii s
~
.a 2
g
{
4.i
,,,t~
.i
,'=
~ ~
'm o
o
- w yp py w
<-?
m
~
c, >
+
=
g RjL
,h
- Table.lll1
.BMRC.' ARGON-41 AND'CESIUH-138DAIR RELEASES FOR 1989-
~
POINT OF RELEASE <
BUILDING'
-STACKI tSTACK-AIR.
GAS; PARTICULATE- : UNITS
. Nuclide:
Argon-412
- Argon-41'
- Cesium-138 1
Total amount.
5.0E+00,
.2.4E+00l 1.6E-02
'Haximum valuon:
- concentration 8.2E407
6'.OE-05 111E-091
- uCi/cc -
- rate,
-1.BE-06.
1.7E-041
^3.2E-09f
=Ci/sec limiti*-
4. 0E-O'6 :
uCi/co-
- 9.'6E-04; 7~2E-04.
Ci/ sect
% of limits;*t 2.1E+01
.1.8E+01 4.4E percent:
Annu'al average:
. concentration
'2.3E-10 uCi/ce?
rate 1.6E-07 7.. GE-06 5.0E-10 Ci/sec-limit-*
'2.0E.
uCi/cc-3.2E-04:
~2.4E-04' Ci/sec
-%:of limits
- t
-3.7E+00 2.4E+00 2.1 E--0 4 _-
percent--
T
' Monitor sensitivities:
- JANUARY 1 -
.1.JE-09 2.9E-09' 5.5E-13
.uC1/cc-CPM:
SEPTEMBER.28 3;0E-09 2.8EJO9 17. 6E-13' -
- uCi/cc-CPM
' Additional-Data:
-Period include 1in calculations
.=
- 366 days-Number of transient releases-
=4
~113-Time of reactor operation:
- =-
-4539 hours
. Ventilation system ON'
.5236.3. hours
='
Stack flow rates:
q
' Building air
=
7.65E+09: - cc/ hr '
u Stack (vent. ON)
=i 1.02E+10' cc/hr-
. Stack (shut-down)-
4.25E+09' ec/hr
=-
Total stack flow'to'date,
=-
-6.83E+13 coc-
- = Permissible limit baned on DMRC Technical' Specifications.-(6/83)
"i
- = Percents must~be summed for all nuclides for eoch release point'-
w
'J 19'
\\
..n.
g,p p+s;p 41
~
^
W~
p
.m
=
y $N.'fe.j?
~ t;Y i
f-.q-
- =;-
+' :
g7 L
'T
{E f D,
_4_
3 t
at.
~
yt
. IA RLIt_V n l.
c1 x
- EXPOSURE-
SUMMARY
e-'1989 y
B
- !Totial. WiB.' l Icotopol '!::1 Genera 1Ti'
_ il
- l )
, l _.
Lil
- Donel
! Processors!. Staff l Investigators l Security 4.! Visitors l Tours!r r
!),(REM)l tc
~
- l'(BMRC)-
l-
- (SPA) it
!T
_ !L ' '
W
.l__________;_
T_ _ _ _ _ t ;
SS-
-l :
- None:
. - l
.. l '
-!^
'; ll 1
l Hen'eurable!__
0 l-
- l f17. l 55i.l:
509_1:li217:: !)
1 i,
.is a
-i i c.
i.
i:
61.l1 0I (l11:!: od l
e l.010L. loch.
L
.OL -
6
.i.
ll,i1'011.250!,--
La!,
20!,1
- ob!,I 4 0 f,.,
'OL!,! - O ?!L-i:
-v_
s..
. S.!
10 1
-0 ri?
i
- ! 251!.500!-
- 0 l' 4
. O ! "[0 :[g.
l01.l:
10 L:
'Ui l
- 12. !
.oY.
- O h-
- t5014.75d!
- ot!,
- -
-i
.i
- e..
i l.751 -81.00l-1 l
- 3. !
- 1
- 0f1 0 -l l 0'j=
A 4
I i~
l 1-I i'
t-Oj !. {.
(6E!.)1.0f!.
!,~
10l,l
!'.1.-2
!L
_o- !
0
~
l 2L-3
- 20h, 0!!-
0!'
70:?!-
> 0N.i07.-
- c 4
i.
1,.-
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. '; _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ p _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ; _ _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ g _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ l _ _ _ _ _ _
z., -
,i _,
i.
.,z l
~ TOTALS ~ !
41_
~26:!
- 25 ?!
c55 Eic 1510 1.,.12173:-l z t e s.
t t
t I-t
=J.
t
-i.
u.~
I
.t
.t
.tr i'
l='T e.
s,'
i.
1
=c 4
[:
S!)
Mi t
-U D
r N:p
'U.
.h J
(
- i t
t
' l ;.
T
.,'t 20
. jk!
fif " l IV w < - ta.
m
_m,: