ML20116B878
| ML20116B878 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Iowa |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1996 |
| From: | Wendt S IOWA STATE UNIV., AMES, IA |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9607300333 | |
| Download: ML20116B878 (4) | |
Text
.
IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY
[,[**",l"***1,iem,mmemg OF SClENCE AN D T EC HNOLOGY Nuclear Engincering Program 107 Nuclear Engineering lab I
Ames. Iowa 5001i-224i j
515 294-5 40 8
s FAX Si5 294-7224 Docket No. 50-116 Ref: 10 CFR 50.71 (a) i July 25,1996 i
4 1
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l
ATTN: Document Control Desk j
Washington, DC 20555 To Whom it May Concem:
i a
Please find enclosed the Annual Operations Report for the Iowa State University UTR-10 l
reactor. the period covered by this report is from July,1995 to June 30,1996.
Sincerely, Scott E. Wendt, Reactor Manager Mechanical Engineering Department SEW:bs Enclosure c:
American Nuclear Insurers D.B. Bullen, Facility Director R. A.Jacobson, Chm., Radiation Safety Committee S. Bahadur, interim-Chm., Mechanical Engineering Department E. E. Sobottka, Dir., Environmental Health & Safety E. B. Bartlett, Chm., Reactor Use Committee U.S. NRC,. Region 111 9607300333 960630 PDR ADOCK 05000116 R
PDR 76VT /
300017
l i
Annual Operations Report Iowa State University's UTR-10 Reactor-Docket No. 50-116 4
July 1,1995 to June 30,1996 This is a routine operations report to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in accordance I
with the requirements of Section 6.6 of the Technical Specifications, Appendix A to l
Operating License R-59.
- 1. Summary of reactor operatine experience includine the enerev nroduced by the reactor:
The reactor is operated in support of the nuclear engineering program. No laboratory i
courses were taught during this reporting period. The reactor was used to support the 1
training of reactor operations personnel.
During the period July 1,1995, to June 30,1996, a total of 9.20 kw-brs of energy production and 105.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> of operation were recorded. Last year's numbers were 24.11 kw-hrs and 96.07 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />. Since the initial criticality of the LEU core in August of 1991, j
the cumulative kilowatt-hours are 203.4 kw-hrs and the cumulative hours of operation are 669.50 hours5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br />. The total energy produced during the life of the facility ( both HEU and LEU cores) is 7527.40 kw-hrs with a cumulative operation time of 9341.22 hours2.546296e-4 days <br />0.00611 hours <br />3.637566e-5 weeks <br />8.371e-6 months <br />. A percentage breakdown by operational categories for the years 95-96 and 94-95 is shown below.
Table 1. Allocation of energy production and operation time,in percent.
Year Research Teaching Teaching Maintenance Operator Senice Undergrad.
Graduate Training Energy %
95-%
0.0 0.0 0.0 33.I 66.8 0.I 94-95
<0.1 0.0 0.1 98.7 0.5 0.7 Time %
95-%
0.0 0.0 0.0 18.1 76.7 5.2 94-95 4.8 0.0 5.0 16.0 68.2 6.0 Annual Operations Report for R-59.... Page 1 of 3
- 2. Unscheduled shutdowns includine. where anolicable. corrective action taken to preclude recurrence _:
There were no unscheduled shutdowns during this reporting period.
- 3. Maior preventive and corrective maintenance operations havine safety sinnificance:
All preventive maintenance required by Technical Specifications was completed satisfactorily by the end of this reporting period. Several of the annual maintenance procedures, however, were NOT completed within the allowed time periods. Difficulties encountered in the calibration of strip chart recorder for the linear power channel, the unavailability of borrowed equipment and the frequent interruptions from contractors involved in building modifications kept the reactor staff from completing five required maintenance procedures on time. Furthermore, the building modifications at times left the confinement boundary inoperable and incapable of being secured. Subsequently, normal reactor operations were suspended from January 16 through April 30, except when required by the unfinished maintenance procedures. On April 30 the reactor was cleared for normal operations after the last unfinished maintenance procedure was completed satisfactorily. During the intervening time the confinement boundary was re-constructed and the bulk of the building modifications were completed.
A two hour test of the standby battery power supply was performed afler a third evacuation horn was added to the system. The battery's performance was found to be satisfactory.
Throughout the reporting period, monitoring of the "in core" cladding samples has continued. The samples do not appear to be changing. Also, fission product analysis using the high purity germanium detector (HPGe) has continued. No fission produ:tr have been detected in the primary coolant.
j
- 4. Maior channes in the reactor facility, orocedures. and new tests or experiments.
or both. that are sinnificantiv different from those performed oreviousiv and are not described in the Safety Analysis Report. includine conclusions that no unreviewed safety auestions were involved:
In November 1995 the Iowa State University Emergency Plan Update 4 was sent to NRC for approval. NRC approval was subsequently received in December 1995. Substantive changes to the plan include the removal of Environmental Health & Safety Staff from the Lab Emergency Director roster and the updating of emergency exposure limits for reentry into a very high radiation environment.
Annual Operations Report for R-59.., Page 2 of 3
D 4
l In December 1995 the Physical Security Plan Update 3 was sent to NRC for approval.
NRC was subsequently received in January 1996. The substantive changes to the security plan dealt with the removal of rooms 111,112, and 113 from the list of security areas and from the list of rooms where radioactive materials are used. The descriptions of these rooms were deleted from the security plan and the reference to the door between rooms 113 and 114 was removed because the door is inoperable and inaccessible. All other changes to the security plan were editorial.
During the spring of 1996, the Nuclear Engineering Laboratory underwent significant l
modifications to bring the building into compliance with the state fire code. Changes to the reactor facility include: 1) the construction of walls which now isolate the reactor bay 4
from the garage area to the south of the reactor,2) the construction of walls which now l
isolate the reactor bay from the 2nd floor balcony surrounding the reactor on the north, south, and east sides; 3) the addition of a third evacuation horn to the radiation evacuation I
system (to compenso3 for the soundproofing provided by the new walls); and 4) the replacement of the durs in the south wall of the reactor enclosure with larger, fire doors.
Amendments to the Tecimical Specifications, Emergency Plan, and Security Plan which j
reflect the building modifications will be completed during the next report period 1
There were no major changes in facility tests or experiments.
j
- 5. Summary of the nature and amount of radioactive effluents released or discharmed to the environs beyond the effective control of the University as d
determined at or before the point of such release or discharne. Uncluded. to the tutent oractical. are estimates ofindividual radionuclides present in the effluent, If 3
j the estimate averane release after dilution or diffusion is less than 25 percent of the i
concentration allowed or recommended, a statement to this effect is usedh J
)
Argon-41: The operating records show that less than 0.04% (based on 9.20 kWh of energy production) of the concentration allowed by 10CFR20, Appendix B, Table II were 4
released to the environs.
{
Others: No measurable amounts of other radioactive effluents were released to the environs.
- 6. Summarized results of any environmental surveys performed outside the facility:
No environmental surveys outside the facility were required to be performed since the trigger level, based on surveys inside the facility, was not exceeded.
- 7. Summary of exposure received by t'acility personnel and visitors where such exnosures are arcater than 25 percent of that allowed or recommended:
No facility personnel or visitors had exposures greater than 25% of that allowed or recommended.
Annual Operations Repon for R 59... Page 3 of 3
- + -,,
,p- -,
w
+g q