ML20137G908

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Insp Rept 50-264/68-01 on 680926.No Noncompliance Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Visual Insp of Fuel Elements & Control
ML20137G908
Person / Time
Site: Dow Chemical Company, 05000000
Issue date: 10/17/1968
From: Fiorelli G, Thornburg H
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:
Shared Package
ML20136D183 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-85-256, FOIA-85-258, FOIA-85-259, FOIA-85-261 50-264-68-01, 50-264-68-1, NUDOCS 8508280011
Download: ML20137G908 (6)
v • d • e


Text

p .

1 U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION REGION III DIVISION OF COMPLIANCE Report of Inspection CO Report No. 50-264/68-1 Licensee: Dow Chemical Company License No. R-108 Category E Date of Inspection: September 26, 1968 Dates of Previous Inspection:

October 24 and 25, 1967 LijA "

Inspected By: - 1 Reactor Inspector October 17, 1968 Reviewed By: . hornburg Se r Reactor Inspector October 17, 1968 Proprietary Information: None SCOPE An announced inspection was made he 100 kw TRIGA Mark I Research Reactor located in Midland, Michigan.

SUMMARY

Safety Items - None. ,

Noncompliance Items - None.

Unusual Occurrences - None.

Satus of Previously Reported Problems - No problems involving followup action were reported in the previous report.

Other Significant Items - Visual inspections of the fuel elements and control rods revealed no abnormal conditions.

No problems have been encountered with the operation of the control rod switch noted during the previous inspection.

~

8508280011 850712 PDR FOIA KOHN85-256 PDR ,

(_

Management Interview - Inspection results were discussed with Drs. W. H.

Beamer and O. U. Anders. The following items were covered:

1. The inspector reviewed the reporting requirements of the facility's license. Dr. Beamer expressed some concern about what types of experiences should be reported in accordance with the provisions of the license. The inspector informed Drs. Beamer and Anders that judgement should be based on the appropriate reporting sections of the license.
2. The inspector discussed with Dr. Beamer of the annual reporting requirements of 10 CFR 50.59.

Dr. Beamer was informed that the organization of special scram and maintenance records was considered a significant improvement over those observed during the previous inspection.

DETAILS A. Persons Contacted Dr. W. H. Beamer, Laboratory Director Dr. O. U. Anders, Reactor Supervisor Mr. L. G. Silverstein, Radiological Officer Mr. J. Charms, Assistant Radiological Officer B. Administration and Organization The organizational staff of the facility has not changed since the last inspection. All reactor operators (7) have Senior Reactor Operator licenses. Dr. Anders continues to assume the responsibilities of Reactor Supervisor. A review of the senior reactor operator availability and reactor coverage practices with Dr. Beamer and Dr. Anders ponfirmed that the intent of Section 50.54(m) of 10 CFR 50 is being met.y The minutes of the Reactor Operations Committee and Radiation Hazards Committee were reviewed. The frequency of the meetings and material coverage were noted to be in accordance with the intent of the provisions of the technical specifications.

C. Operations The reactor has been operated on an average of four days per week.

Operatius runs have ranged from one to six hours at the maximum license power level of 100 kw. Small sample activation continues to be the primary purpose for reactor operation.

1/ R. H. Engelken memo, " Interpretation of Readily Available on Call" dated 8-16-68.

[-

,  ?

Details (continued)

'A total of.four scrams were experienced since the last inspection.

Three were due to power range switching errors, the fourth to electronic noise.

D. Facility Procedures The emergency procedures were reviewed by the inspector. It was noted that the objectives of the Reactor Inspection Guide, Chapter 2000 were being met by procedures and the overall company emergency protection program.

Practice emergency evacuations are normally conducted once per quarter. The last practice emergency evacuation was conducted in September 1968.

E. Primary System A review of operating records disclosed that the reactor pool temperaturehasbeenmaintainedbelow120Fasrequiredbythetechnfcal specifications. The maximum temperature noted in the records was 90 F.

The inspector was informed by Dr. Beamer that there had been no indications of pool leakage. - Current experience indicates that the pool level drops approximately 1/2 inch over a week's period'of time due to evaporation.

The loss of water by evaporation is maintained at a minimum because of-a pool lid which covers approximately 807. of the pool.

A review of the records and discussions with Dr. Beamer did not dis-close any problems with drain leaks, pipe breaks, or unaccountable water losses.

A review of activity measurements of evaporated pool water samples disclosed activities essentially at background levels.

G. Reactor Control and Core Physics Due to the depletion of the initial Po-Be so received approval to use a 2 curie Am-Be source.The pce, the was source licensee placedhas in position F-17 of the'F ring. The Po-Be source is being stored in the reactor pool storage rack.

The maximum within the 1.5'/. gvailable cold clean limit 8pecified inexcess reactivity the technical was noted to be specifications.

k Control rod calibrations were conducted in accordance with the semi-annual frequency required by the technical specifications. The last measurement was conducted on July 27, 1968, using the rising period method.

1/ Amendment No. 2 to Facility License R-108.

Details (continued)

The following measured values were obtained from the operating logs:

Rod Worth Safety $2.57 Shim 3.13 Regulating .89 Total $6.59 The shutdown margin based on the most reactive of the operable rods withdrawn was determined as follows from logbook entries:

Total Rod Worth $6.59 Most Reactive Rod 3.13 Difference $3.46 Excess Reactivity 2.10 Ak Shutdown bbrgin $1.36 (~1.0% E )

of 0.357. k*

This{sincompliancewiththeminimumtechnicalspecificationlimit Control rod scram timing was noted to have been performed within technical specification frequency requirements and all times were noted to be within the one second technical specification requirement.

A review of power level channel calibrations, interlock functional testing, and power level safety circuit functional testing, were all noted to have been performed in accordance with technical specification require-ments. No unusual conditions or performances were detected.

l H. Core and Internals The licensee performed a visual examination of each of the fuel elements and control rod blades in accordance with technical specification requirements. Dr. Beamer informed the inspector that except for slight discoloration of some fuel elements, no unusual conditions were noted on either the fuel elements or control blades. It should be noted that the fuel elements for the Dow TRICA reactor are spent elements used in a G. A. reactor core prior to initial loading at Dow. A review of the records indicated that the blades were tested following installation, to confirm that drop times were normal.

Dr. Beamer informed the inspector that there have been no indications of fuel failures since the orjyinal defective element was discovered during the initial startup program. -- Pool water samples are taken periodically and have not indicated activities significantly above background.

3/ CO Report No. 50-264/68-1.

I! -

s '.
r.
  • u,

{I

'r EsLLLLL (continued) i ' .

7 P.- Radiation Detection Radiation experience with .the licensee was reviewed with Dr. Beamer and Mr. Silverstein. To date, they have stated that there have been no:

problems with contamination control or irradiated sampling handling.

procedures . The following significant points of discussions and observa-tion are summarized:

i 1.1' Personnel Exposures Reports from the Landauer Company show that the maximum exposure  !

received from January thrcugh August 1968 by reactor operating personnel is 50 mrem.

2. Radiation Levels ,

With the exception of the area immediately above the . pool water, which is measured to be approximately 10 mr/hr at full, power, other reactor areas exhibit minimal radiation level intensities, a

3. Contamination swipes are being taken in association with sample irradia tions . A review of records did not indicate any problema.  ;
4. The alarm set point of the continuous air monitoring sample -

remains at-1000 counts per minute. A review of traces made during operation disclosed essentially background activities.

5. Calibration and testing of radiation detection instrumentation and alarms was noted to have been calibrated in accordance with technical specification requirements.

S. Experiments and Tests s Numerous activations request forms were reviewed by the inspector u ,

s ,1 and found to contain appropriate ' descriptive information and approvals !for I insertion into the reactor experimental facility. The range'of experiaant y worth has been considerably less than the technical specifications < maximum of $2.00. The maximum experiment worth noted was 10c.

A typical experiment proposal was reviewed by the inspector. Appropriate discussions and approvals required by the technical specifications were confirmed to have been made and documented.

.T. Facility Modifications No facility modifications have been made. l

'j l

p ~

,c

., s t Details (continued)

V. gliability Information

1. Control rod scram times - Refer Section G.
2. Power level channel calibration - Refer Section G.
3. Safety circuit interlock and functional testing - Refer Section G.
4. Radiation detection alarm testing - Refer Section P-5.

t

/- ,

i.

?

r ,<

[

f

? t 1

h i

i

' f f I

e 4 , i i

(Ik l

u 1

lkI I

\ _/ , f ,

, =

1 l '.

e

o-(

) (:

i i

]

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20137G908&oldid=2833592"