ML20082H774

Annual Progress Rept of Univ of Fl Training Reactor for Sept 1982 - Aug 1983

ML20082H774
Person / Time
Site:	05000083
Issue date:	11/30/1983
From:	Diaz N, Vernetson W FLORIDA, UNIV. OF, GAINESVILLE, FL
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
ORO-4014-13, NUDOCS 8312010282
Download: ML20082H774 (33)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -

Contract # DE-AC05-76ER04014 Report # ORO--4014-13 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FIDRIDA TRAINING REACTOR September 1,1982 - August 31, 1983

.r r

, . -. ~

l NUCLEAR FACILITIES DIVISION DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES College of Engineering University of Florida Gainesville 9312010282 831130 DR ADOCK 05000

Contract #DE-AC05-76ER04014 Report #0RO-4014-13 ANNUAL PROGRESS REPORT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA TRAINING REACTOR September 1,1982. - August 31, 1983 Submitted to the Department of Energy Nuclear Regulatory Commission and University of Florida l

By Dr. Nils J. Diaz l Professor and Director of Nuclear Facilities i and l

Dr. William G. Vernetson Reactor Manager l

Department of Nuclear Engineering Sciences College of Engineering University of Florida Gainesville, Florida November, 1983

TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Nudber

1. INTRODUCTION 1 II. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE REACTOR 4 III. FACILITY OPERATION 6 IV. MODIFICATI'ONS TO THE OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS OR CAPABILITIES OF THE UFTR 13 V. SIGNIFICANT MAINTENANCE AND TESTS OF UFTR REACTOR SYSTEMS 16 VI. CHANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES 18 VII. RADIOACTIVE RELEASES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE 22 VIII. EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND TRAINING UTILIZATION 25 IX. THESES, PUBLICATIONS, REPORTS AND ORAL. PRESENTATIONS OF WORK RELATED TO THE USE AND OPERATION OF THE UFTR 29 i

l

1 I. INTRODUCTION The University of Florida Training Reactor's overall utilization for the past reporting year has increased somewhat compared to the previous year, ap-proaching the levels of utilization characteristic of the previous two report-ing years ending in August, 1980 and August 1981, respectively. The total energy generation'(Kw-Hr) is at average historical levels for the last seven ysars and represents an increase of nearly 50% back up to the improved level cf the 1980-1981 reporting year.

An analysis of the facility utilization shows that cost of the increased usage and energy generation over the previous year is attributable to the installation of the new rabbit system with implementation of the associated Neutron Activation Analysis Laboratory (NAAL). Reactor use by University of Florida courses and laboratories continues at the substantial level estab-lished in the previous year; however, the complete lack of training programs conducted for nuclear utilities during the current reporting year has con-tinued to limit facility utilization and total energy generation. With sev-eral training programs planned for the upcoming year, facility utilization and cnergy generation should be considerably augmented. In addition, research utilization remains at a relatively low level, though a number of investiga-tors on campus have indicated an interest in using the reactor facility and the new functional " rabbit" system during the upcoming year. Furthermore, with the approval of our reactor sharing proposal (September, 1983), we expect core reactor usage from other schools located throughout the State of Florida.

As noted in the 1982 report, the facility administration was considerably hampered by the untimely resignation of the Reactor Manager during the year while the Director of Nuclear Facilities was on sabbatical leave. A suitable

r 2

Acting Reactor Manager was appointed during that year. The Reactor Manager received the SRO license to become fully vested in the position during this reporting year which is partially responsible for the increased facility atili-zztion during thin reporting year. In combination with the return of the Director of Facilities, these conditions are expected to lead to considerable broad-based increases in facility usage for education and training of univer-sity students and utility operators at well as research by faculty at the University of Florida and other schools.

Several significant license-related administrative activities occurred during this reporting year. In a footnote to the 1982 report, it was noted that the NRC issued the new, 20-year operating license for the UFTR on August 30, 1982. New technical specifications were also issued and were put into complete effect early in the reporting year. The review, evaluation and re-issuance of standard operating procedures in compliance with the requirements and terminology of the new Technical Specifications have involved a great deal of administrative effort during the year as this process was essentially com-pleted by June 30, 1983. The UFTR Facility Emergency Plan was submitted to NRC in November,1982 to meet NRC requirements for such a submittal by Novem-ber 3, 1982. As a result of the NRC review of this Plan, a great deal of ad-ditional information and corrections to the Emergency Plan were requested by NRC by August 15, 1983. Because of the pervasive nature of the requested changes, corrections and additions to the Plan, two extensions to the August 15, 1983 deadline were obtained in order to produce a complete, rewritten UFTR Emergency Plan *. This rewritten Plan was to be submitted by October 15, 1983.

The UFTR continues to operate with an outstanding safety record and in full compliance with regulatory requirements. Several NRC inspections during i

• AconhletelyrevisedUFTREmergencyPlanfollowingtheguidelinesofANSI/ANS 15.16-1982 was submitted to NRC on October 14, 1983.

3 the year resulted in only minor recommendations for changes in procedures or cther facility-related activities or record keeping. The reactor and associ-cted facilities continue to maintain a high in-state visibility and strong industry relationships. It is expected that more direct industry training will be accomplished in the upcoming year along with further increases in r: search primarily through the use of the rabbit system and the associated -m NAAL facility.

1 ,-

4 b

b 1

4 e _ . _,-----e, _.-., _ - - -y . , - - - . - - ,- , . - - . . .

4 II. UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA PERSONNEL ASSOCIATED WITH THE REACTOR A. Personnel Employed by the UFTR ,

N.J. Diaz - Professor and Director of Nuclear Facilities i W.G. Vernetson - Assistant Engineer and Reactor Manager H. Gogun - Senior Reactor Operator (full-time)

C. Fogle - Reactor Operator (full-time) (January, 1983 - August, 1933)

'M. Constable - Student Reactor Operator (1/2 time)(September, 1982 -

December, 1982)

B. Gibson - Student Reactor Operator (1/3 time)(September, 1982 -

October, 1982) -

P.M. Whaley - Student Reactor Operator Trainee (1/2 time)(November, 1982 - August, 1983)

B. Radiation Control Office ,. -

D. Munroe - Radiation Control Officer (September, 1982 - August, 1983)

H.G. Norton - Assistant Radiation Control Officer (September 1982 -

August, 1983)

G.R. Renshaw - Radiation Control Technician (September,1982 - August, 1983)

G. McCranie - - Radiation Control Technician (September,1982 - August, 1983)

H. Newman - Nuclear Technician (1/2 time)(September, 1982 - August, 1983)

D. Holden - Nuclear Technician (1/2 time)(September,1982 - August, 1983)-

M. Bielby - Nuclear Technician (1/3 time)(September,1982 - August, 1983)

A. Gody. - Nuclear Technician (1/3 time)(September, 1983 - August, 1983)

5 C. Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee M.J. Ohanian* - Chairman W.G. Vernetson - Member (Reactor Manager)

J. A. Wethington, Jr.* * - Member W.E. Bolch - Member D. Munroe - Member (Radiation Control Officer)

D. Line Responsibility for UFTR Administration R.Q. Marston" - President, University of Florida W.H. Chen - Dean, College of Engineering J.A. Wethington, Jr. - Chairman, Department of Nuclear Engineering Sciences N.J. Diaz - Director of Nuclear Facilities W.G. Vernetson - Reactor Manager E. Line Responsibility for the Radiation Control Office R.Q. Marston - President, University of Florida W.E. Elmore - Vice Preqident, Administrative Affairs T.R. Turk *** - Acting Director, Environmental Health and Safety D. Munroe - Radiation Control Officer nM.J. Ohanian replaced G.R. Dalton on October 22, 1982 as chairman of the Reactor Safety Review Subcommittee.

• • J.A. Wethington, Jr. replaced A.M._Jacobs on September 1, 1982 as he assumed

.the position of Acting Chairman, Department of Nuclear Engineering Sciences.

• • • A search for a new Director is nearing a final selection with the new director expected to be in position by early 1984.

6 III. FACILITY OPERATION The UFTR experienced a 50% increase in its overall utilization when compared to the last reporting year, with utilization approaching the levels of the previous two years. This increase has been despite a continued lack of industry educational and training programs.

Research programs pnd irradiations continue to be at minimal levels. It is expected that the decision to develop.the Neutron Activation Analysis program will improve both research and commercial irradiation utilization.

With successful implementation of the new remote sample-handling " Rabbit" facility, efforts to advertise availability and encourage usage of the UFTR (especially for research) are proceeding favorably.

The level of administrative work dedicated to regulatory activities should be reduced to a more manageable effort this upcoming year following submittal of the updated and revised UFTR Emergency Plan. The facility received its new operating license in early September; the license was issued on August 30, 1982, the last reporting day for the facility with full implementation of the new Technical' Specifications completed in October, 1982.

Shown in Table I is a summary of the reactor utilization for this report-ing period. The list categorizes the thirty different research projects, tests, teaching and training activities. The total reactor run-time was about 320 hours0.0037 days <br />0.0889 hours <br />5.291005e-4 weeks <br />1.2176e-4 months <br /> while the various experiments used over 500 hours0.00579 days <br />0.139 hours <br />8.267196e-4 weeks <br />1.9025e-4 months <br /> of facility time.

Table II summarizes the different categories of reactor utilization:

university teaching, research and UFTR operator's training and requalifica-tion, testing and surveillance, and demonstrations. The research utilization consisted of six projects using about 142 hours0.00164 days <br />0.0394 hours <br />2.347884e-4 weeks <br />5.4031e-5 months <br /> of reactor run-time. With increases in most areas from the last reportirg year, the lack of any

7 commercial utility training programs is primarily responsible for the total facility utilization not being one of the highest in recent UFTR history. ,

With utility training and outside research activities already scheduled for the upcoming year, this next year promises to produce even more facility utilization.

Detailed in Table III are the monthly and total energy generation, as well as the hours at full-power per month and totals for this past year. The UFTR gsnerated 14.48 Hw-hrs during this twelve month reporting period.

Described in Table IV is the reason and date for the only two unscheduled shutdowns for the reporting period. No reportable incidents occurred during this reporting year. However, Table V contains a descriptive log of several unusual occurrences with brief evaluations of each. No uncontrolled releases of radioactivity have occurred from the facility and controlled releases are wall within established limits. The personnel radiation doses were minimal and averaged well under 10% of the allowable dose. Environmental radio-activity surveillance continues to show no detectable off-site dose attri-butable to the UFTR facility.

4 4

g - - --

. , . + . , --a.. - , .,w ,a e am.e. , .me -,w. , - , - ,, --

9 a,, .-n.4 7_m.-- ,,

7 ,

8 TABLE I

SUMMARY

OF FACILITY UTILIZATION (September, 1982 - August, 1983)

NOTE: The projects marked with a

• indicate irradiations or neutron activations. The projects marked with an ** Indicate training /

educational use. The projects marked with an *** indicate demon-strations of reactor operations. " Experiment Time" is total time that the facility dedicates to a particular use, it includes "Run time." "Run time" is inclusive time from reactor startup to shut-down. ,

RUN EXPERIMENT TIME TIME PROJECT AND USER TYPE OF ACTIVITY (hours) (hours)

Instrument Testing - Reactivity Heter Calibration 7.8 18.8 Combustion Engineering for Combustion Engineering, Inc.

nNAA Research - Phosphate Contamination Research 9.2 10.6 Dr. G.S. Roessler CGENU 4505L - Senior Level Nuclear Engineer- 26.9 33.4 Dr. W.H. Ellis ing Lab ONAA Research - Phosphate Contaminant Research 10.9 12.4 Dr. G.S. Roessler

• Rabbit System Development- Gold Foil Irradiation for Rabbit 0.4 0.5 Dr. W.G. Vernetson System Checkout CFIPR NAA Research - NAA of Bird Tissue and Other 97.8 103.6 Dr. G.S. Roessler Samples coAPB-5415 - NAA of Pine Tree Ash and Reactor 0.4 1.6 D. Anthony Demonstration coPreliminary Research on Cerenkov Detector - Determination of Reactivity 0.9 1.8 Dr. E. Carroll Effect of Water in CVP ccNAA Research - NAA Study of Electron Tunnel- 2.7 3.7 Dr. T. Lick ing in MgAl 0 24 ccENU 4905 - Reactor Operations Laboratory 47.6 68.5 Dr. W.G. Vernetson/

Reactor Staff co*ENU 3002 - Operations Demonstration 0.3 0.8 Dr. C.S. Roessler

9 ccENU 4612/5615L - Nuclear Instrumentation Course: 2.7 5.2 Dr. W.H. Ellis Instrument Lectures and Reactor Operations cecENV 4201/5206 - Operations Demonstration 0.4 1.1 Dr. C. Roecaler coENV 4241 - Familiarization Review of 0.5 0.5 Dr. C. Roessler Reactor Instrumentation -

Operations Demonstration e*ENU 5176L - Reactor Operations Laboratory 55.1 117.3 Dr. E.T. Dugan/

Reactor Staff 000ENU 4101L - Operations Demonstration 0.2 1.0 Dr. A.M. Jacobs 6** CHS 5110 - Reactor Demonstration for 0.5 1.5 Dr. L. Muga Radiochenistry Research

• • • Naval ROTC - Reactor Familiarization 4.0 7.0 Lt. Adams and Demonstration

• • ENV 6211 - Radiation Monitor Calibra- 1.1 2.6 H. Norton tion and General Area Survey Techniques

• • • Fla. Foundation for Future Scientists - Summer Student Training Demo 1.2 1.3 Dr . J . Cox

• • Operator Training - NRC Requalification Training 15.6 70.1 Reactor Staff Requirements Operator Exams - NRC Administered Operator 1.5 5.8 Examinations

• • Radiation Surveys / Radiation Surveys of UFTR Cell RadCon Training - and Environment at Steady- 9.0 10.5 Radiation Control / State Full Power Argon-41 Determinations - Argon-41 Stack Concentration 12.2 12.2 Dr. W.G. Vernetson/ Measurements and Evaluation Reactor Staff Tech Spec Requirements - Reactor Testing and Calibration 1.5 1.5 Reactor Staff NAA Lab Development - Rabbit System Functional Check- 1.0 1.7 Reactor Staff out

10 4

Tech Spec Requirements - Measurement of Blade Drop and 0.9 3.7 Reactor Staff Controlled Insertion Times o NAA Lab Development - Reactor run to Check / Survey 0.6 0.6 Reactor Staff Rabbit Shielding Adequacy Reactor Reactivity Calibration of Safety Blade #3 Checkout - by Positive Period for Bench- 5.9 5.9 Reactor Staff marking Industrial Reactivity Meter TOTAL 319.8 506.3 I

l l

11 TABLE II UFTR UTILIZATION

SUMMARY

Run Time Experiment Time (hours) (hours)  ;

UF Courses and Laboratories 119.3 210.9 Research Activities 142.0 165.5 UFTR Operator Training and Requalification 17.1 75.8 UFTR Testing and" Surveillance 31.4 36.6 ,

Reactor Tours and Demonstrations 10.0 18.8 TOTAL 319.8 507.6 0 Console checkouts excluded.

f l

r l

12 TABLE III MONTHLY REACTOR ENERGY GENERATION Monthly Hours at Full Totals Kw-Hrs Power September, 1982 210.0 2.1 Octobe r, 1982 172.7 1.0 November, 1982 1147.6 7.6 December, 198,2 858.3 7.6 January, 1983 6.9 0.1 February, 1983 726.4 7.2 March, 1983 4741.5 47.2 April, 1983 4015.5 38.5 May, 1983 0.0 0.0 June, 1983 749.1 7.3 July, 1983 1504.8 14.6 August, 1983 347.0 3.4 YEARLY TOTAL 14479.8 136.5 l

l l

l l

I

-.....--,---.,-..-____.-.._-a

13 i.

TABLE IV UNSCHEDULED SCRAMS Date Occurrence j

July 13, 1983 Power Failure (Electrical Power Transient) l July 19, 1983 Power Failure (Electrical Power Transient)

J

.i i

j 4. __

I i

I i

--~ . .,,- ,.- _ -...-,--,,-_....,-,,,.,.,_-_-. ,_ ,,.--,,,_,_, . . . , - - ,

14 l 1

TABLE V LOG OF UNUSUAL OCCURRENCES I During this reporting period there were no events which compromised the health and safety of the public. Several events, classified as unusual occurrences, are described below as they deviated from the normal func-tioning of the facility and are included here as the most important such deviations for the reporting year.

17 September 1982 The Primary Coolant System Rupture Disk _was broken at reactor shutdown due to operator error during a training

, exercise. There was no impact on the health and safety of the public.

16 February 1983 Malfunction of primary coolant return line flow scram

s. witch was discovered during shutdown for quarterly scram 1 checks. liua malfunction was caused by small particles of foreign matter which resulted in the switch sticking.

After complete cleaning, the switch was checked and returned to service with no further problem.

7 March 1983 Two aluminum pieces from reactor end of Rabbit system travelled through plastic capsule tube in the reactor cell

, (one in morning, one in af ternoon); both pieces were contained in the shielded box with one being briefly handled. Calculated doses indicated and film badge results confirm that exposures were well below limits specified in 10CFR20 and the lower units in UFTR Standard Operating Procedures. Review by the Reactor Safety Review Sub-

committee indicated agreement on the nature of the inci-dent and that it should be reported in the annual report.

14 March 1983 At 1430 hours0.0166 days <br />0.397 hours <br />0.00236 weeks <br />5.44115e-4 months <br /> the reactor was operated below the critical

position to determine the proper positioning of two He-3 detectors in the South Beam Port and thermal column of the UFTR. These detectors were to be used for an approach-to-

, critical exercise for the ENU 4505L class to be held later on March 14, 1983. This reactor operation was allowed without an approved run request form on file as a potential violation of Tech Specs although verbal approval had been obtained.

15 IV. MODIFICATIONS TO THE OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS OR CAPABILITIES OF THE UFTR No significant modifications to the operating characteristics were made during the reporting period. However, there were several modifications to capabilities of the UFTR as delineated below and listed in Section V.

1. 2.0ct 82: Dilution Fan / Vent Fan interlock with Building Evacuation Alarm was placed into operation. Upon activation of the evacuation alarm, both the Dilution Fan and Vent Fan automatically shut off. If the reactor is running at this time, a reactor trip will also occur.

2. 19 Jan 83: The East-West Throughport (EWTP) rube was removed from the reactor. The thermal column was then restored to normal configuration.

3. 21 Feb 83: In-house designed and built pneumatic sample transfer system (from the previous systems) was placed into operation. The reactor end of the system was placed into the space previously occupied by the East-West Throughport.(EWTP). Cylindrical graphite plugs were placed in the remainder of the EWTP to fill up unused space.

16 V. SIGNIFICANT MAINTENANCE AND TESTS OF UFTR REACTOR SYSTEMS Date Description -

7 September, 1982 Repaired security system sensor 20 September, 1982 Replaced rupture disk broken by operator error 2 October,1982 Lilution fan / vent fan interlock with building evacuation alarm placed into operation.

13 October, 1982 S-1 Measurement of control blade drop times 25 October, 1982' Q-1 Quarterly check of scram functions t

28 October, 1982 Q-2 Quarterly calibration check of area radiation monitors 18 November, 1982 Replaced five (5) defective electrolytic capacitors in the Log Channel of the 2 pen recorder

19 November, 1982 S-4 Measurement of Ar-41 concentration in stack i

effluent 29 November, 1982 A-1 Measurement of stack dilution air flow rate 29 November, 1982 S-2 Measurement of Control Blade worths by blade drop method 8 December,- 1982 Q-4 Radiation survey of restricted areas 8 December, 1982 Q-5 Radiation survey of unrestricted areas 19 January, 1983 East-West throughport tube removed from UFTR; thermal column restored to normal configuration 31 January, 1983 Q-2 calibration check of area monitors 16 February, 1983 Q-1 Quarterly check of scram functions l

l 16 February,1983 Primary coolant return line flow scram switch checked out and cleared.

21 March, 1983 S-1 Measurement of control blade drop (insertion) times 21 March, 1983 S-5 Measurement of control blade controlled insertion times 23 March, 1983 Q-4 Radiation survey of restricted areas 23 March, 1983 Sb-Be Source smear checked for contamination

17 23 March, 1983 Q-5 Radiation survey of unrestricted areas 5 April, 1983 S-2 Measured reactivity worth of Safety-3 by positive period 12 April,.1983 A-2 Performed calorimetric heat balance to verify thermal power 4

19 April, 1983 Q-1 Quarterly check of scram functions 25 April, 1983 A-2 Completed calibration check of nuclear instruments 26 April, 1983 .

Q-2 Calibration check of area monitors 26 April, 1983 Q-3 Radiological Emergency Drill 10 May, 1983 Completed verification of UFTR equipment powered by emergency bus upon loss of main AC power 13 June, 1983 Replaced chart drive motor in east area monitor recorder 28 June, 1983 S-4 Measurement of Ar-41 concentration in stack

- effluent

-28 June, 1983 A-1 Measurement of stack dilution air flow rate 28 June, 1983 Q-4 Radiation survey of restricted areas 28 June, 1983 Q-5 Radiation survey of unrestricted areas 30 June, 1983 PuBe Source smear checked for contaminants i 11 July,1983 S-2 Measured reactivity worth of control blade #3 25' July,'1983 Q-2 Quarterly calibration check of area radiation

- monitors 28 July, 1983 Q-1 Quarterly check of scram functions 31 July, 1983 Completed study of radon in UFTR cell 1 August, 1983 Replaced chart drive gear case on APD 22 August, 1983 Replaced core vent system absolute filter 25 August, 1983 S-1 Measurement of control blade drop times

'25 August, 1983 S-5 Measurement of control blade controlled insertion rate.

i

, , . - , ~ , ,-,,7-.-- ., -,-..,n.,.- -v,,, , -, , - , , - ,. ,- c . ,- - w. an,, ,,-mn,-~ ,, ,

18 VI. CRANGES TO TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS AND STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES A. The new Technical Specifications for the UFTR were issued on August 30, 1982 and officially established on September 30, 1982. These new Tech-nical Specifications necessitated considerable alterations and expansions of existing Standard Operating Procedures during this reporting period.

As a result, all UFTR Standard Operating Procedures were reviewed and rewritten during this reporting period. In addition, two sets of re-quested corrections / changes to the Technical Specifications were submitted to the NRC during this reporting period.

In a letter dated October 27, 1982, following extensive review of the new

~

Technical Specifications transmitted with the UFTR license renewal, the

'MTA administration transmitted a package containing proposed corrections for fourteen (14) pages of the new UFTR Technical Specifications as trans-mitted with the letter dated August 30, 1982 granting a 20 year license renewal. These corrections / changes were requested as being necessary to make these Tech Specs conform with those submitted to and verbally ap-proved by the NRC Staff. In addition to a series of typographical and nomenclature errors, certain correctiona are needed to make these Tech Specs conform to desired and approved UFTR operational requirements as

,well as to avoid unnecessary vagueness at several points. Most changes correct simple typographical errors, omissions or misinterpretations which render the Tech Specs vague, incorrect or. incomplete at the point in-volved. Several other changes were requested as necessary because of errors in the Tech Specs submitted with the' UFTR Safety Analysis Report; however, as explained in the letter, none of these requested corrections represent any change in currently accepted UFTR operation.

In another letter, dated August 19, 1983, it was noted that certain report-ing requirements on permanent changes in UFTR facility organization and on significant changes in the UFTR transient or accident analysis had been inadvertently omitted from the NRC-approved UFTR Technical Specifications.

Therefore, to conform.with ANSI /ANS 15.18-1979 and longstanding UFTR prac-tice, a proposed addition to the Tech Specs remedying this omission was transmitted to the NRC.

To date, there has been no response to these requested changes. However, since none of these changes is considered to involve an unreviewed safety question and in most cases the proposed changes serve only to clear up vague points, errors, or omitted items in the Tech Specs, approval is expected for the changes delineated in both letters.

At this time, no further requests for changes in the approved Tech Specs are expected for the operation of the UFTR with its present high-enriched fuel at a rated power level of 100 KWth.

19 B. Revisions to Standard Operating Procedures As indicated in Part A, during this reporting period, all existing UFTR-Standard Operating Procedures were reviewed and rewritten into a standard format. Following an NRC inspection during the year, this review and rewriting of all existing Standard Operating Procedures was completed as required by June 30, 1983,. The final approved version of each SOP (except security response procedures) is permanently stored in a word processor to facilitate future revisions. The most significant changes are represented in two administrative procedures developed out of existing procedures to centrol and assure the quality of procedure changes as well as UFTR systems maintenance.

Although all* procedures were changed in some respect, the primary changes in most cases were directed toward producing a standard format to facili-tate operator use of the S0P manual. To illustrate the scope of the changes involved, Tables VI-1 and VI-2 contain a listing of the approved UFTR Standard Operating Procedures prior to thic reporting period and at the end of this reporting period, respectively. The latest revision number and date for each S0P is listed in Table VI-2. Those listed as REVISION O represent new procedures, though in some cases this is due to better organization of material already existing in the old SOPS. Al-though considerable changes ,were incorporated with combination or split-ting of procedures in several cases, the key governing factor in the review and rewriting of the procedures was to address requirements of the UFTR Technical Specifications and to maintain the level of control and requirements represented in the prior existing procedures. Although additional procedures are under development, the changes incorporated into the current set of approved SOPS delineated in Table VI-2 represent a great improvement. It is expected that only minor changes will be needed in these SOPS over the next few years. However, a number of completely new procedures continue under development.

i t

_. ,,. - -< m, e , , ~ ,

20

'T TABLE Vl-1 LISTING OF APPROVED UFTR STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURES (AUGUST 31, 1982)

A. Reactor Operations A.1 Pre-Operational Checks A.2 Reactor Startup A.3 Reactor Operation at Power A.4 Normal Reactor Shutdo.wn A.5 Experiments A.6 Operation of Secondary Cooling Water A.7 Determination of Control Blade Integral or Differential Reactivity Worth B. Emergency Procedures B.1 Emergency Procedure - Radiological B.2 Emergency Procedure - Fire B.3A Emergency Procedure - Threat to the Reactor Facility B.3B Intrusion Alarm Procedure B.4 Emergency Flood Procedure C. Fuel Handling Procedures

,i C.1 Irradiated Fuel Handling C.2 Fuel Loading Procedure C.3 Fuel Inventory Procedure D. Radiological Procedures D.1 UFTR Radiation Protection and Control D.2 Radiation Work Permit D.3 Personnel Monitoring D.4 Radiation Protection Weekly Survey D.5 Primary Equipment Pit Entry i

.D.6 Removing Irradiated Samples from UFTR Experimental Ports D.7 Primary Resin Change E. Maintenance Procedures E.1 Maintenance Theory: Maintenance Control and Safety E.2A Changing Primary Purification Demineralizer Resins E.3 Secondary System Maintenance, Repair and Modifications E.bA Operation of City Water Cooling System E.4A Reactor Shielding and Graphite E.4B Auxiliary Systems Maintenance: Shield Tank and Shield Tank Recirculation system E.5 (Radiation Detection and' Survey) Instrument Calibration

21 TABLE VI-2

< LISTING OF REVISED UFTR STANDARD OPERATING PROCBDURES (August 31, 1983)

O. Administrative Control Procedures 0.1 Operating Document Controls (REV 0, 2/83) 0.2 Control of Maintenance (REV 2, 4/83)

A. . Routine Operating Procedures A.1 Pre-operational Checks (REV 12, 1/83)

A.2 Reactor.Startup (REV 9, 4/83)

A.3 Reactor Operation at Power (REV 9, 10/82)

A.4 Reactor Shutdown (REV 8,10/82)

A.5 Experiments (REV 3, 4/83)

A.6 Operation of Secondary Cooling Water (REV 1,10/82)

A.7 Determination of Control Blade Integral or Differential Reactivity Worth (REV 0, 3/82)

B. Emergency Procedures B.1 Radiological Emergency (REV 3, 4/63)

B.2 Fire (REV 7, 4/83)

B.3 Threat to the Reactor Facility (Expanded into F-Series Procedures)

B.4 Flood (REV 1, 4/83)

C. Fuel Handling Procedures C.1 Irradiated fuel Handling (REV 3, 4/83)

C.2 Fuel Loading (REV 4, 4/83)

C ., Fuel Inventory Procedure (REV 2, 4/83)

D. Radiation Controls Procedures D.1 Radiation Protection and Control (REV 3, 4/83)

D.2 Radiation Work Permit (REV 8, 4/83)

D.3 _ Primary Equipment Pit Entry (REV 1, 4/83)

D.4 Removing Irradiated Samples from UFTR Experimental Ports (REV 2, 4/83)

E. Maintenance Procedures E.1 Changing Primary Purification Demineralizer Resins (REV 2, 4/83)

E.2 Alterations to Reactor shielding and Graphite Configuration (REV 2, 4/83)

E.3 Shield Tank and Shield Tank Recirculating system Maintenance (REV 2, 4/S3)

F. Security Plan Response Procedures (Reactor Safeguards Material, Disposition Restricted)

F.1 Physical Security Controls F.2 Bomb Threat F.3 Theft of (or Threat of the Theft of) Special Nuclear Material F.4 Civil Disorder F.5 Fire or Explosion F.6 Industrial Sabotage F.7 Procedure Controls (Original)

22 VII. RADIOACTIVE RELEASES AND ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE A. Caseous (Argon-41)

Month Release Concentration September, 1982 6.82 x 10 5

Ci/ Month 2.24 x 10-10 Ci/ml 5 -10 .

October, 1982 5.61 x 10 "

1.84 x 10 6 ~

November, 1982 5.92 x 10 "

1.94 x 10 ' "

December, 1982 4.43 x 10 6 "

1.45 x 10~9 "

January, 1983 3.35 x 10 4 "

1.15 x 10 ~9 "

February, 1983 3.74 x 10 6 "

1.45 x 10 ~9 "

2.44 x 10 7

~

March, 1983 8.02 x 10 ' "

~

April, 1983 2.53 x 10 "

8.31 x 10 ' "

May, 1983 0 NDA*

-10 June, 1983 2.43 x 10 6 "

7.98 x 10 July, 1983 7.76 x 10 6 "

1.59 x 10 ~9 "

6 " -10 .

August, 1983 1.67 x 10 5.78 x 10 TOTAL ARCON-41 releases = 76.92 Ci ANDA = No detectable amount.

.. _ _ .. _ . _ _ ___ . - - __ m. __.

23

. B. Liquid Waste from the UFTR/ Nuclear Sciences Complex There were approximately 310,600 liters discharged from thr. waste holding 4

tenks to the campus sanitary sewage system durfng this reporting period. These

, bttch discharges are summarized as follows:

\-

Volume Concentrations Month (liters) _

(pci/ml)

-8 October, 1982 74,000 1.6 x 10 April,' 1983 -

78,900 NDA II

-8 '

June, 1983 157,700 9.68 x 10 i

The UFTR normally releases cpproximately 1.5 liters of primary coolant per

week to the holding tank es waste from_ primary coolant sampling. The average activity for this coolant was 2.0 x 10 pCi/ml for this annual reporting pariod.

C. Environmental Monitoring The UFTR maintains film badge and dosimeter monitoring (new this reporting period) in areas adjacent to the UFTR complex. The following are the badge

! and TLD totals for this reporting period from September 1982 through August

] 1983.

Film Badge Total Yearly Total Yearly

_ Designation Exposure (arem)(3} TLDs[4] Exposure (arem)(3)

Al M 1 M A2 20 2 30 M M 3 M A4 M 4 M A5 M 5 30 A6 M 6 M A7 M 7 M 8 30 9 M 10 30 11 30 12 M l

Note 1: The effluent discharged into the holding tanks comes f rom twenty laboratories within the Nuclear Sciences Center as well as the UFTR complex.

' _9 Note 2: NDA - No detectable activity, MDA = 2.4 x 10 UCi/ml (Minimum Detectable Activity)

Note 3: M denotes minimal (<10 mrem) meaning background only.

Note 4: The first seven TLDs are attached adjacent to the corresponding numbered film badge monitors.

I

24 D. Personal Radiation Exposure The following is a list of any personnel exposures greater tha.. -tmum detectable during the reporting period.

January, 1983 N. J. Diaz 20 mrem neutron /whole body H. Gogun " " "

G. Fogle P.M. Whaley " " "

All badges read 20 mrem for the January 1 - January 31, 1983 period while the UFTR was used only minimally (6.85 kw-brs). Subsequent investigation showed badges had probably been stored near a radiation source prior to being processed.

March 8-31, 1983 E. Barreto 70 mrem beta-gamma /whole body This exposure was received while processing and counting 690 samples as part of a neutron activation analysis project.

March 7, 1983 E. Barreto <250 mrem beta-gamma / finger tips This exposure was estimated (conservatively) from reconstructing the events following the release of an irradiated metal retainer wire which was picked up by E. Barreto in the glove box used to receive NAA samples. The film badge worn at this time showed no whole body exposure.

For visitors, students, or other non-permanent UFTR personnel, only one individual (Bjou Afshar) had a non-zero dosimeter exposure measurement for this reporting period. The value of 8 mrem registered for two hours in the control room was undoubtedly due to faulty reading or dropping the dosimeter since several other personnel in the same area for the same time as well as control dosimeters received no measureable exposure.

25 VIII. EDUCATION, RESEARCH AND TRAINING UTILIZATION NOTE: The participating students are indicated with an *. Other participants are faculty or staff members of the University of Florida, unless specifically designated otherwise. A ** indicates those students working on theses or dissertations.

1. NAA Researc,h - Analysis of Environmental Contaminant Levels in Birds from Ph :phate-Mined Florida Wetlands , Dr. G.S. Roessler, Dr. W. R. Marion, Dr. E. Ibddad, E. Barreto*, G. McCranie*

Analysis of dry tissue . samples of birds and related materials from the phosphate-mined wetland areas of Central Florida. The objective of this investigation is to compare radioactivity and trace element concentrations (such as V, Mn, Mg, Al, Ba, Th, U, F, Pb) due to phosphate mining in bird tissues, food items and other materials from celected avian species and environments collected on various phosphate settling ponds and natural (control) wetlands in Florida. This project is particularly significant since phosphate mining-is a widespread industry, especially in the central part of Florida.

2. NAA Research - Neutron Activation Analysis of Gun-shot Residue, Dr. W. H.

Ellis, C. Carey*, E. Burchfield*, E. Barreto*, Reactor Staff.

The penumatic rapid sample transfer system was used to irradiate gunshot residue samples to determine trace element composition with reference standards used as flux monitors. This exploratory work was performed in conjunction with a laboratory exercise to develop data and results upon which to base a proposal to the State of Florida to develop forensic applications of neutron activation analysis.

3. NAA Research - Neutron Activation Analysis of Pine Cone Samples, Dr. D.

Anthony, N. Commerford*, E. Barreto* , Reactor Staff .

Various irradiation schemes were explored for instrumental NAA of pine cone samples taken from trees grown in one type of soil versus a ,

controlled soil. All samples were analyzed using the TN-ll automated computer system as part of a lab session. Specifically, NAA is being examined for possible use to relate elemental pine cone composition to the type of soil the parent tree experiences using activation products produced in the UFTR. The results-of this work will be used in preparing a proposal to seek support for further research efforts in this area.

4. NAA Research - Analysis of Hair Samples for Trace Elements, W.H. Ellis, G.S. Roessler, E. Barreto*.

Human hair samples are irradiated for various time periods. The activated samples are then spectral analyzed using minicomputer methodology to deter-mine and identify abnormal and elemental composition. Following several irradiations as part of a laboratory experiment, this project has been suspended temp'orarily awaiting additional funding based on development of bett 3r analytical and experimental techniques.

26

.5. UFTR Core Redesign (LEU Program) - Neutronics Analysis for UFTR Core Redesign, E.T. Dugan, W.G. Vernetson, N.J. Diaz, G. Kniedler**.

As part of the DOE Low Enrichment Uranium Program, investigations have been performed on the UFTR to determine the feasibility and desirability of replacing the 93% enriched MTR' plate type fuel with 4.8% enriched, cylindrical SPERT fuel pins. For this redesign, the only permanent structural modification is the insertion of new grid assemblies into existing fuel boxes. Acceptable neutronic criteria (Possible k range, maximum flux and degree of undermoderation) have been determine 8ggusing industry-accepted, 4-group cross sections in one, two and three-dimen-sional diffusion theory calculations of k flux profiles, power peaking factors and coefficients of reactivity. Ikhs,torderperturbationcalcu-lations have been used to determine key kinetic parameters. Neutronic results to date indicate that the UFTR/SPERT core redesign can be accom-modated to meet requisite neutronic criteria with an actual increase in peak thermal flux levels which .will be very useful for NAA and other research projects requiring high thermal flux levels.

6. UFTR Core Redesign (LEU Program) - Thermal-hydraulic Analysis for Core Redesign, E.T. Dugan, W.G. Vernetson, N.J. Diaz, R. Hommerson**,

M. Miller *.

As part of the DOE LEU Program, thermal-hydraulic analysis related to l

redesign of the UFTR core using SPERT fuel rods is being performed.

Computer analysis has been undertaken to evaluate the UFTR/SPERT design for steady-state conditions as well as transients arising in response to a step insertion of reactivity, a loss of coolant flow, and a loss-of-coolant accident. Results to date indicate required safety margins and transient response conditions can be maintained with the UFTR/SPERT core design..

7. NAA Research - Trace Element Analysis of Human Blood and Serum Samples, Dr. G.S. Roessler, E. Barreto**.

Blood and serum samples w'ill be analyzed for trace element concentrations from sick as well as healthy patients. Results will also be compared with standards. The objective is to correlate trace element concentrations (high or.lo.w) with certain diseases. This project was in the late prepara-tion stages at the end of the reporting year.

8. NAA Research - Neutron Activation Analysis Study of Electron tunneling in MgA1 D , Dr. T. lick (Stetson University).

24 Several single crystals of MgA1 D were irradiated in the UFTR to produce 24 microscopic neutron damage sites. These sites will be studied in analyzing the phenomenon of electron tunneling in MgA1 024

27

9. Cerenkov Noise Detector Development - Development of a Detector of Reactor Perturbations, Dr. E.E. Carroll, Prof. G.J. Schoessow, H. "

Carvaj al**, Reactor Staff.

An aluminum canister containing pure H O was introduced at various heights 2

in the UFTR CVP in order to measure the void coefficient of reactivity.

This information is being used for the design of a reactor noise source to be used in conjunction with a Cerenkov reactor-noise detector of unique design. The ultimate objective of this project is to detect reactor per-turbations at various power levels through large thicknesses of material by means of high-energy, penetrating, fission-produced gamma rays.

10. UFTR Risk Assessment - Dr. W.G. Vernetson, R. Griffith.

Currently a probabilistic risk assessment of the University of Florida Training Reactor is being conducted. This project will determine an estimate of the probability of occurrence of a set of postulated UFTR accidents. The results will be used to show that the UFTR poses no sig-nificant risk to the general population and environment around the UFTR and to demonstrate proficiency in PRA analyses as additional PRA projects are undertaken.

11. UFTR Operator Training and Requalification - Dr. W.G. Vernetson, Reactor Staff.

Lectures and hands-on operations on the reactor are necessary to license operators for the UFTR. The requalification program establishes a required number of startups, vo'ekly checks, daily checks, drills, and lectures for each operator. Operator participation is mandatory in order to maintain requisite assurance of proficiency levels.

12. Reactor Operations Course Demonstrations Course Instructor ENU 3002 Dr. G.S. Roessler ENU 4101 Dr. A.M. Jacobs ENU 4612/5615 Dr. W.H. Ellis ENU 4201/5206 Dr. C.E. Roessler ENV 4241 Dr. C.E. Roessler NAVAL ROTC Lt. J. Adams

13. NAA Research - Rabbit System Remote Handling Facility Development and Implementation, Dr. G.S. Roessler, Dr. W.G. Vernetson, Dr. N.J. Diaz, E.

Barreto*, Reactor Staff.

Reactor power running was done to allow radiation survey in the radio-chemistry laboratory where the new NAA Instrumentation and Counting Facility will be constructed. Reactor power running was also done to allow checkout of the feasibility of the newly designed ' Rabbit' facility; subsequently, several design changes were incorporated resulting in an efficient rapid transfer system for remote sample insertion and removal from the UFTR core region.

28-

14. - Caseous Release Determinations - Argon-41 Stack Measurements, Dr. W.E.

Bolch,.Dr. W.G. Vernetson, M..Stafford*, Reactor Staff.

The new cobalt-60 Standard Sample has been applied in measurements of radioactivity (Ar-41) in stack effluent. A direct detailed standard operating-procedure (SOP) has been developed and is under review to provide the best possible evaluation of Ar-41 releases from the UFTR facility. 1his study is-continuing as the SOP will be applied to obtain a statistically significant number of data points and to investigate the

_effect of core vent flow on total Ar-41 releases.

15. Nuclear Engineering laboratory I - (ENU 4505L) - Dr. W.H. Ellis, Reactor Staff. .

4 ENU 4505 is the nuclear engineering laboratory for undergraduate senior level students in N' u clear Engineering Sciences. The UFTR is used for a variety of exercises and experiments, including radiation dose measurements, measurement of induced radioactivity and reactor. physics i

parameters as well as operational measurements.

16. Nuclear Engineering Laboratory II - (ENU 6516L) - Dr. E.E. Carroll, Jr.,

Reactor Staff.

j- ENU 6516 is the main laboratory course for Nuclear Engineering graduate

? students. It involves radiation and reactor-related measurements and experimentation on a more advanced level ~than ENU 4505L.

17. Reactor Operations Laboratory - (ENU 4905) - Dr. W.G. Vernetson, Reactor Staff.

f Students of the Reactor Operations Lab (Spring Semester, 1982) spend 2-3 hours weekly at the controls of the.UFTR performing reactor operations under supervision of licensed reactor operators. The lab encompasses.

training in reactivity manipulations, reactor checkouts, operating

,  : procedures, standard operations and all applicable regulations. Specific l exercises directed toward development of understanding' of light water l

-po.wer reactor behavior are included as this laboratory course serves as basic preparation for students entering the utility industry in the test and startup area as well as. plant operation.

18. Radiation Protection and Control Field Exercises - (ENU 6932) - Mr. T.

Turk, D. Munroe, H. Norton, Reactor Staff.

This course provides students in various disciplines with practical experience in radiction protection and control such as performing radiation surveys in and around the UFTR cell and environs, calibrating area radiation monitors, etc. These exercises also serve as training for radiation control technicis'.s.

i i

.. - ~ . . - - _. _

(

29

IX. THESES, PUBLICATIONS, REPORTS AND ORAL PRESENTATIONS OF WORK RELATED TO THE USE AND OPERATION OF THE UFTR

- 1. David E. Bodette, " Application of Correlations and Convolutions to the Extrapolation of Harmonic Signals to Improve' Frequency Response," Masters' Thesis in NES Department, December, 1982.

2. Robert Hommerson, " Thermal-Hydraulic Design of the University of Florida Training Reactor Using SPERT Fuel," Masters' Degree Project, December, 1982.-

3. E.T. Dugan, G.S. Kniedler and N.J. Diaz, "Neutronic Analysis of UFTR Conversion from HEU to LEU Fuel," 1982 International Meeting on Research and Test Reactor Core Conversion from HEU to LEU Fuels, Report No.

ANL/RERTR/TM-4, pp. 627-653,- Argonne, Illinois, November, 1982 (Oral Presentation).

4. E.T. Dugan, N.J. Diaz and R.A. Hommerson, " Thermal Hydraulic Calculations for Modification of the UFTR from High Enrichment MTR Fuel to Low-Enrichment SPERT Fuel," International Symposium on the Use and Development of Low and Medium Flux Research Reactors," (Poster Session) MIT, October, 1983 (accepted for publication in Atomkernenergie/Kerntechnik, 7 pages).

5. E.T. Dugan, N.J. Diaz, and G.S. Kniedler, "Neutronic Calculations for Modification of the UFTR from High Enrichment MTR Fuel to Low Enrichment SPERT fuel," International Symposium on the Use and Development of Low and Medium Flux Research Reactors," (Poster Session) MIT, October, 1983

- (accepted for publication in Atomkernenergie/kerntechnik, 7 pages).

4

- 6. - W.R. Marion, C.E. Roessler, G.S. Roessler, H. Van Rinsvelt, " Levels of Selected Environmental Contaminants in Birds from Phosphate-Mined Wetlands," Annual Report to Florida Institute of Phosphate Research, 1982-1983.

- 7. T.J. Baumgartner, G.S. Roessler, and G. Stewart, "Al/Cu Precipitants in Total Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition Compounding Procedures,"

l resubmitted for publication in the Journal of Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition.

8. G.S. Roessler, E.M. Barreto, " Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis of Biological and Nonbiological Materials Applied to Phosphate Research in Florida," ANS Transactions, Vol. 44, TANSA044 Pg. 27, 1983.

l i

- , - - - - - , - = , , , - , - - - , , - . - - - , - un.,,s --- ~ . - - - , - + - aa--- , , , . - - -e- , --w-,re- , - . - ,,we',w ,-

t

• COLLEGE NUCLEAR FACILITIES DIVISION i

\+, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA j OF DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES

, ENGINEERING 102 NUCLEAR REACTOR BUILDING GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA 32611 AREA CODE 904 FHONE 392-1429 November 23, 1983 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulations Standardization and Special Projects Branch Director, Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 RE: Facility License R-56, Docket No. 50-83

Dear Sir:

In compliance with our Technical Specifications reporting requirements, enclosed is one copy of the 1982 - 1983 University of Florida Training Reactor Annual Progress Report.

This document complies with the requirements of the UFTR Technical Specifications, Section 6.6.1.

Please advise if further information is needed.

Sincerely yours, sb Y"

! William G. Vernetson l Recctor Manager WGV/ps enc.

cc: N. J. Diaz Facility Director l

l NILS J. DIAZ, DIRECTOR (904)392-1406 EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY / AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER