ML20209H567

Annual Rept for Triga Mark I Reactor at Univ of Arizona,Jul 1985 - June 1986

ML20209H567
Person / Time
Site:	05000113
Issue date:	08/27/1986
From:	Nelson G ARIZONA, UNIV. OF, TUCSON, AZ
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
References
NUDOCS 8609150278
Download: ML20209H567 (7)

Text

• 1885

The University of Arizona College of Engineering and Mines Department of Nuclear and Energy Engineering Tucson, Arizona 85721 k9b)_

A Pruud ikginning b

August 27q 1986 g o =

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Corcmission Region V y y gk

< OE Office of Inspection and Enforcement

~

O $

1450 Maria Lane, Suite 210 "

y" Walnut Creek, CA 94596

=~

4: Annual Report for License R-52, Docket 50-113 Gentlemen:

This is the Annual Report covering the period July 1,1985 through June 30, 1986, for the activities of the TRIGA Mark I Reactor at the University of Arizona, Tucson, Arizona. This report is submitted in compliance with Section 6.7e of the Facility Technical Specifications and Paragraph 50.59(b) of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

1. During the reporting period, the reactor was operated for research and education. It was used for reactor operator training of replacement operators at this facility. The reactor was used for graduate thesis research and undergraduate Nuclear Engineering course experiments, including approaches to critical, control rod calibrations, measurements of the dynamic response of the reacator to step and periodic changes in reactivity, and flux mapping. The reactor was also used for neutron activation analysis and production of short-lived radioisotopes for teaching and research. Less than ten percent of total reactor operating time was used for nonuniversity-related purposes.

Reactor upgrading and modification include hardwiring one light fixture each in the reactor room and the control console room to provide 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> illumination for the after hours security force.

Routine surveillance tests of the power channels, including recalibration, showed only minor changes in zero adjustment and full scale trip settings.

The total worths of the regulating, shim, and transient rods were measured to be $3.94, $3.06, and $2.49 respectively. The largest change in worth was

-1.9% on the shim rod which is in line with rotational changes of position of individual fuel elements from fuel movement during approach to critical experiments.

No fuel elemeents were measured for length or bend during the reporting period as use is below the surveillance requirements as set forth in the facility technical specifications.

8609150278 860620 PDR ADOCK 0500M13 _

R PDR ,c'/

kl

4 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

! page 2 August 27, 1986

]

The transient rod drive assembly was inspected twice during the reporting period. Both piston seals were found to be in satisfactory condition and no wear or rust accumulation was present in the air cylinder. Mechanical testing of the shock absorber showed an adequate amount of hydraulic fluid for proper operation.

Rod drop times from full out to full insertion, were measured to be 0.33, 0.32, and 0.73 seconds for the regulating, shim, and transient rods,

! respectively. There was no appreciable changes in the regulating and shim 1

rods since the last rod drop measurements. All three drop times were less then the time required by the facility technical specifications. The interval between rod drop time tests exceeded the interval allowed by the facility technical specifications by thirty days. This matter was reported by letter to your office on June 18, 1986.

Visual inspection of the control rods was not required during the reporting period by the facility technical specifications.

4 l' 2. "The reactor was critical for a total of 103 hours0.00119 days <br />0.0286 hours <br />1.703042e-4 weeks <br />3.91915e-5 months <br />, producing 3794 kw-hours (0.158 Mw-day) of thermal energy. The cumulative energy output since the facility was commissioned is 7.187 Mw-days. During the reporting period 58 pulses with input reactivity greater than $1.00 were performed. The total number of pulses greater than $1.00 from the time pulsing was initiated is 1390.

The reactor was in operation 135 days during the reporting period, with

approximately 364 hours0.00421 days <br />0.101 hours <br />6.018518e-4 weeks <br />1.38502e-4 months <br /> of operating time.

l j 3. There were two inadvertent reactor scrams during the reporting period. On August 2,1985, the shim rod dropped inadvertently while the reactor was being operated at 100 watts. The cause of the rod drop was a burned out magnet "on" light bulb in the shim rod control circuit. This bulb is wired in series with i the shim rod magnet coil and when it opens, the shim rod magnet loses current causing the rod to drop. The bulb socket housing has provision for two bulbs

! in parallel. Two bulbs were replaced to help prevent a recurrence of this l inadvertent scram.

On September 27, 1985, while the reactor was still suberitical, a building power failure caused the shim rod to drop inadvertently. The building power i

4 l

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

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission page 3 August 27, 1986 was off for ten minutes. When power was returned, all control systems were checked for satisfactory performance and reactor operation was continued.

4. Major maintenance items include repair of blistered paint above the water line in the reactor pool, replacement of resins and filters in the water purification system, and cleaning of the reactor pool and core hardwart with j an underwater vacuum cleaning system. Minor maintenance items include i replacing transients in the alarm circuit of the area monitor for the west window in the reactor room, resoldering a loose wire in the n v-nyt circuit, i replacing the CAM airflow microswitch, replacing the high voltage power supply for the pulse chamber, greasing of reactor room exhaust fan bearings, replacing burned out light bulbs in the reactor pool, and replacing burned out

annunciator bulbs in the reactor control console.

5. The reactor committee met four times during the reporting period (9/26/85,

12/J 9/85, 3/31/86, 5/19/86). The following items of business were covered

J

The Committee reviewed and approved modifications to an administrative procedure for an annual audit by the University Health Physicist, and an operating procedure for replacement of filter cartridges and resins in the water' purification system.

I j The Committee reviewed and approved the annual audit of the facility's health physics practices by the University Health Physicist. This annual audit is the first of such audits as provided by modification of facility procedures.

l The Committee reviewed and approved the Radiation Control Program for the Nuclear Reactor Laboratory (NRL) noting that this document should be considered a policy statement from the Director of the NRL rather than a facility procedure. A summary of results of area radiation surveys, environmental surveys and personnel monitoring for the NRL was also reviewed

at this time.

4 i

The Committee reviewed and discussed the NRC Region V reactor operations i inspection on November 5-8, 1985. Results of the inspection indicated that l more documentation of the Committee members' audits of NRL operations would l be desirabic.

l The Committee reviewed and approved the biennial review of the facility

! Physical Security Plan and Procedures and also the annual review of the j facility Emergency Plan and Procedures.

i

+.

l

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission page 4 August 27, 1986 The Committee reviewed and approved, with additions, a proposed procedure for the repair of blistered paint in the reactor pool above water line.

The Committee discussed minor repairs of the reactor pool water refrigeration system and noted that there had been no recurrance of the freon leak since its repair on 4/3/84.

The Committee discussed a preliminary report of the NRC Safeguards inspection performed April 14-16, 1986. The facility Security Plan is to be modified to describe a ceiling penetration into the reactor room from the room above.

The Committee reviewed a report and critique of the annual emergency drill held at this facility. As the drill postulated a non-credible accident, the Committee recommended looking into the format of the Emergency Plan to see if a fault-tree format might aid emergency personnel in its use.

The Committee reviewed a verbal report from the Director of the NRL concerning a student claiming to seek information for a term paper about possible release of radioactivity from the University TRIGA reactor. The suspicious nature of the student's inquiry prompted the Director to notify the NRC security office and the University Police. The identity of the student was verified and questioning by Police officials determined his motives to be non-detrimental to the security of the NRL. The Committee agreed that dissemination of information already in the public domain was entirely appropriate.

The Committee reviewed and approved modifications to the monthly checklist to include current reactor operator requalification status and Reactor Committee meeting status and a modification to the annual checklist to include documentation of the annual Health Physics audit.

At its meetings and in individual reviews by Committee members, the Committee reviewed operations and operational records of the facility as specified by the Committee charter. This included audit of preliminary check sheets, pulsing check sheets, approach to critical and termination check sheets, operations and maintenance logbooks, monthly and annual checksheets, irradiation records, and experiments performed with the reactor. The Committee received reports about new operator trainees, laboratory class enrollment, and reviewed the 1985 annual report to the NRC.

1

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission page 5 August 27, 1986

6. No liquid waste was discharged from the facility during the reporting period. Fif teen gallons of spent resin from the water purification system containing 0.79 pCi Sb-124, 0.24 p C1 Co-58, 0.68 pCi Co-60, and 0.33 p Ci Mn-54 and the old top grid plate from the reactor (removed in 1981) containing 0.15 mci Co-60 were collected by the University Radiation Control office for burial at the state-licensed facility. A total of 5 cubic feet of solid waste (floor sweepings, tissues, plastic gloves, decayed neutron activation samples, and

.i standards) containing trace quantities of mixed irradiation products and 8.3 p Ci Zn-65 was also collected. The material was buried at the University of Arizona Waste Burial Ground, maintained under ARRA license 10-24. These collections were made in August and December 1985.

Argon-41 was produced in concentrations that are not measurable because the radiation level is much less than natural background. However, based on a calculated upper bounding estimate for production of Argon-41 of 50 microcuries per 100 kw-hours generated, the calculated amounts of Argon-41 produced for each month of the reporting period are presented below. Most of the Argon-41 would have remained in the pool water until conversion to stable Potassium-41, since Argon-41 has a short halflife.

Month Argon-41 (microcuries)

July 1985 <175

, August 1985 <270 September 1985 <100 October 1985 < 50 November 1985 <100 December 1985 <150 January 1986 <327 i

February 1986 <127

! March 1986 <127 April 1986 (427 May 1986 <127 June 1986 <150 The total of these amounts during the reporting period is 1.90 mil 11 curies.

This is less than 0.5 percent of the allowable Argon-41 release as per 10CFR20. During the reporting period, the facility received from the Northrup Corporation, an Argon-41 detection system. Due to an accelerated shipping schedule for much of the decommissioned equipment, Northrup was not able to supply this .f acility with several parts of the system until a later time. The

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission page 6 August 27, 1986 Department of Nuclear and Energy Engineering has received the full time services of an IAEA Fellow in electronics and instrumentation for the upcoming academic year and a portion of this time has been scheduled for upgrading the electronics and calibration of the Argon-41 detection system.

7. Fif ty-five (55) persons were issued film badges on a monthly basis in the Department of Nuclear and Energy Engineering during the reporting period. The persons receiving badges included all reactor operators, faculty and staff members, and all students in laboratory courses. No badged individual received a measurable whole body exposure. Three individuals received measurable exposures of penetrating radiation on finger ring badges. Two of these exposures were received by personnel who were installing an irradiation fixture in a Cobalt-60 irradiation facility. The third person received exposure while performing chemical separation on neutron activation analysis samples.

In the first two cases, neither person was involved in reactor use at the time of exposure. In the third case, the exposure was not directly attributable to reactor operation. The largest of the three exposures was less than 0.3 percent of the annual exposure allowed by 10CFR20.10lb.

Five hundred forty-four (544) non-badged persons were admitted to the Reactor Laboratory in classes, tours, or on official business during the reporting pe riod.' All groups were issued pocket dosimeters or were admitted only after completion of a radiation survey which showed all dose rates to be less than that in an unrestricted area as required by the facility procedures. No radiation exposure was received by any visitor, as measured by the pocket dosimeters.

8. Radiaticn surveys of the reactor room, control room, and experiment set-up room were conducted monthly during the reporting period by members of the University of Arizona Radiation Control Office using direct measurement and wipe tests. The results show little detectable activity except where expected (i.e., irradf ated samples in storage areas and internal wall surfaces of the irradiation facilities). Other radiation surveys were performed by members of the reactor laboratory staff when necessary. No radiation exposure which can be attributed to reactor operations has been detected outside the reactor laboratory.

0 .

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission page 7 August 27, 1986

9. Environmental TLD monitors at 3 locations on the building housing the reactor and at 10 other locations on the University campus were replaced and read monthly. For the Il-month period from July 1,1985 through May 31, 1986, the average reading of the 3 TLD's located on the building, was 16 mrem and the average of the 10 other TLD's was 19 mrem, relative to two control TDL's which were kept in a shielded container in a non-radiation area. There is thus no evidence that radiation expostires in the vicinity of the reactor are higher than normal, but rather, as indicated by the TLD's is slightly lower than the average for the University.

In writing this report, I have tried to be both complete and as brief as is reasonable, and still satisfy the requirements of 10CFR50.59, the Facility Technical Specifications, and the needs of the Commission. If other or more detailed information is needed, please contact me at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely, dW George W. Nelson, Director Nuclear Reactor Laboratory GWN/km cc: Director, Office of Inspection & Enforcement USNRC Washington, DC 20555 l

L