ML20211G681

Pulstar Reactor Annual Rept to Us NRC for Jul 1998 - June 1999. with

ML20211G681
Person / Time
Site:	North Carolina State University
Issue date:	06/30/1999
From:	Perez P North Carolina State University, RALEIGH, NC
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9908310331
Download: ML20211G681 (30)

Text

_ _ . . ____-- - ___-__-__ _ _ -__ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ - -

4 North Carchna State University is a land- Nrci::r React 1r Program S

grant university and a constituent institution of The University of North Carchna Department of Nuclear Engineering Campus Box 7909 Raleigh, NC 27695-7909 919.515 4598 919.515.5115 (fax) 31 August 1999 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Subject:

NCSU PULSTAR Annual Report Docket No. 50-297

Dear Sir or Madam:

In compliance with Section 6.7.4 of the North Carolina State University PULSTAR Technical Specifications, our Nuclear Reactor Program stafThas prepared the attached Annual Report for the period 01 July 1998 through 30 June 1999, Please feel free to contact me at (919) 515-4602 ifyou have any questions or comments.

Sincerely, Nd6.Ch Pedro B. P6rez Associate Director Nuclear Reactor Program i

Oa0 i ,

9908310331 990630 PDR ADOCK 05000297.

R PDR

l l

Page Two U. S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Document Control Desk 31 August 1999 Ref: NCSU PULSTAR Annual Report Docket No. 50-297 4 copy w/ attach- nts:

Dr. Nino A. Masnari, Dean College of Engineering Dr. Orlando E. Hankins, Chairman

. Radiation Protection Committee Dr. Ronald O. Scattergood, Chairman Reactor Safety and Audit Committee Dr. Donald J. Dudziak, Head Department of Nuclear Engineering Dr. Charles W. Mayo, Director Nuclear Reactor Program Dr. Nelson W. Couch Radiation Safety Officer Mr. Stephen J. Bilyj Reactor Operations Manager Mr. David Rainer, Director

. Environmental Health and Safety Center Mr. Mark Poirier ANI/MAELU

Mr. Alexander Adams, Jr.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. CraigBassett Nuclear Regulatory Commission

PULSTAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION for 01 July 1998 - 30 June 1999 I

NCSU NUCLEAR REACTOR PROGRAM I 31 August 1999

Reference:

PULSTAR Technical Specifications !

Section 6.7.4 Docket No. 50-297 l

Department of Nuclear Engineering North Carolina State University Raleigh, North Carolina 27695

I DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING PULSTAR REACTOR ANN'UAL REPORT DOCKET NUMBER 50-297 For the Period: 01 July 1998 - 30 June 1999 The following report is submitted in accordance with Section 6.7.4 of the PULSTAR Technical Specifications:

6.7.4.a BriefSummary Reactor operations have been routine during this reporting period. There has not been any unexpected operational problems during this time. The epoxy seal placed over a small leak in the south fuel storage pit in February 1990 was removed and replaced with a new epoxy seal of the same material. Authorized by License Amendment 13 to the PULSTAR Technical Specifications, five graphite reflectors were replaced with five begilium reflectors along one face of the core enhancing fuel lifetime.

(i) (1) Reactor Operating Experience:

The NCSU PULSTAR Reactor has been utilized for the following:

• Teaching and Short Courses 139.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br />

• Faculty and Graduate Student Research 63.4 -

• Isotope Production 9.8

• Neutron Activation Analysis 923.6

• Beam Tube Facilities 0,1

• Nuclear Training (Utilities) 31.1

• PULSTAR Reactor Training 4.4

• Reactor Cal / Measurements & Surveillance 83.0

• Reactor Health Physics Surveillance 41.3

• Reactor Sharing 2.3 TOTAL 1,298.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> l

Last reporting period: 1,096.1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> i

j

e PULSTAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT DOCKET NUMBER 50-397 2

• 01 July 1998 30 June 1999 (2) A Summary of Experiments Performed in the Reactor:

. Teaching laboratories and research Reactor thermal power measurements Dynamic reactivity measurements Axial power and peaking factor measurements Neutron temperature ineasurements Neutron diffusion length in graphite Neutron fluence and spectral measurements Neutron Transmutation Doping of silicon and diamond a Neutron Activation Analysis cereals tissue finger nails i bone sediments / soil rain / river water vegetation tobacco fibers polymers ceramics graphite steel copper l

gold foils I quartz l silicon crystals fertilizers l dust )

sludge coal rubber (ii) Changes in Performance Characteristics Related to Reactor Safety:

None (iii) Results of Surveillance, Tests, and Inspections:

The reactor surveillance program has revealed no significant or unexpected trends in reactor syst' ems performance during this reporting period. The annual audit of the facility and records was determined to be satisfactory by the Reactor Safety and Audit Committee (RSAC).

• PUIXTAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT DOCKET NUMBER 50497 3

0 01 July 1998 30 June 1999 6.7.4.b Total Enerev Out03J: :

19.1 Megawatt days Reactor was Critical:

713.1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> 1

Cumulative Total Energy Output Since Initial Criticality:

868.3 Megawatt days j

6.7.4.c Number of Emergency and Unscheduled Shutdowns:

1. Emergency Shutdowns - none

2. Unscheduled Shutdowns - 4

a. Shutdown due to loss of secondary cooling makeup

b. Shutdown due to downscale spike on Safety Channel

c. Manual SCRAM due to sample binding in an irradiation facility

d. Linear Channel Overpower SCRAM due to range switch error Explanation of 2a. above:

Reactor operations were terminated by the operator when secondary coolant makeup water was lost. Wires for the water level switch at the cooling tower were cut by contractors excavating for new building electrical service. The damaged wires were replaced by the contractor. Operations were able to continue during the repair by opening a manual bypass valve supplying water to the cooling tower.

Explanation of 2b. above:

The reactor operator terminated the run when a downscale spike was observed on the Safety Channel. All other instrument indications were normal. Testing determined that

~

movement of the detector cable at the bridge could cause a downscale deflection of the channelindication. Reactor personnel were advised to be extremely cautious when working in the vicinity of the detector cables.

Explanation of 2c. above:

Samples being irradiated in one of the Rotating Exposure Ports (venical rotating guide tubes) momentarily got stuck while being withdrawn. The samples were housed in an aluminum basket tied to a length of nylon cord. The operator shut down the reactor by Manual SCRAM to avoid production of excess activity in the samples. The sample basket was retrieved within a couple of minutes by alternately tensioning and releasing the cord. Reactor operations were resumed within fifteen minutes.

2

• PUtXTAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT )

4 DOCKET NUMBER 50-397

01 July 1998 30 June 1999 Explanation of 2d. above:

While'the reactor was at 10 watts, a utility trainee downranged the Linear Channel Picoammeter instead of upranging causing an Overpower SCRAM.

6.7.4.d Corrective and Preventative Maintenance:

Preventative maintenance, tests and calibrations are performed under a system called the PULSTAR Surveillance File System. Each major component of the Reactor Safety System defined in Section 3.3, and all surveillance required by Section 4 of the Technical l Specifications are monitored by this file system to ensure that maintenance and calibrations are performed in a timely manner. All historical data relating to those components, in addition to many other minor components, are maintained in these files.

6.7.4.e Channes in Facility. Procedures. Tests. and Exneriments:

1. License Amendment The NRC approved Amendment 13 to the PULSTAR license R-120 for the use of up to five beryllium reflectors along with graphite reflectors for a total of ten reflectors on the core periphery.

2. Design Changes (DC)

a. DC 98-3 with 50.59 evaluation authorized the construction and installation of a dry storage rack for unirradiated fuel pins in a subcritical array. Criticality l analysis was performed and documented prior to fuel loading.

b. DC 98-4 with 50.59 evaluation added an isolation valve in series with a check valve to prevent raw water intrusion into the Service Water Purification System while it is ollline.

c. DC 98-5 with 50.59 evaluation replaced the reactor instrument air compressor with a current model by the same manufacturer as the original.

3. Procedure Changes (NP=New Procedure, PC= Procedure Change, MC= Minor Change)

a. NP (none this reporting period)

b. PC 3-98 was Revision 26 to the PULSTAR Operations Manual updating various sections to comply with license documents and correct typographical errors.

l I

j

. PUIETAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT DOCKET NUMBER 50-297 5

. 01 July 1998 30 Jurw 1999

c. PC 1-99 was Revision 28 to the PULSTAR Operations Manual incorporating technical specifications definitions for experiment classifications and reactivity values. The PULSTAR Reactor Air System drawing was updated.

d. PC 2-99 updated PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-6-01-1 A) Control Room Area Monitor Calibration Verification.

e. PC 3-99 updated PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-6-02-1 A) Pool Area Monitor Cdibration Verification.

f. PC 4-99 updated PULSTAR Suiveillance procedure (PS-6-03-1 A) West Wall Area Monitor Calibration Verification.

g. PC 5-99 updated PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-6-04-1 A)

Demineralizer Area Monitor Calibration Verification.

h. MC 98-4 made minor corrections to a startup procedure for the Linear Channel monitor.

i. MC 98-5 updated a surveillance procedure to incorporate the actual revision level of the vendor's manual for the Linear Channel.

j. MC 98-6 updated a surveillance procedure to incorporate the actual revision level of the vendor's manual for the Safety Channel.

k. MC 98-7 made minor revisions to the original procedure used to apply the epoxy seal to the fuel storage pit leak.

1. MC 98-8 made minor changes to "Use ofIrradiations Facilities" incorporating wording required for review and approval of" Request for Reactor Operations"(Run Sheets)

m. MC 98-9 updated a surveillance procedure for area radiation monitors to incorporate changes made by the vendor to its service manual.

n. MC 98-10 updated a surveillance procedure for process radiation monitors to incorporate changes made by the vendor to its service manual.

o. MC 98-11 was revision 24 to the PULSTAR Operations Manual correcting an omission to one of the startup checklists.

p. MC 98-12 added the requirement to record the serial number of the instrument and the High Voltage setting on Attachment I when calibrating the Waste Tank No. 2 radiation monitor.

q. MC 98-13 clarified several steps of the epoxy seal installation instmetions learned after the first attempt to replace the seal.

. FU13 TAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT g DOCKET NUMBER $0-297 e= 0] haly 1998 30 June 1999

r. MC 98-14 was revision 25 to the PULSTAR Operations Manual substituting text required by the re-installation of the new Safety Channel monitor after repairs were made by the vendor.

s. MC 99-1 was revision 27 to the PULSTAR Operations Manual allowing higher count rates during reactor startups after the beryllium reflectors were added by Amendment 13 to the license.

Summary: Procedures were written or revised, most of which were just minor changes, covering the calibration ofinstalled equipment, reactor operations, surveillance, and liealth Physics. These procedures have been review ~1 and/or approved by the Reactor Safety and Audit Committee (RSAt i nd where required, approved by the Radiation Protection Comm nee (RPC).

6.7.4.f Radioactive Efiluent:

1. Liquid Waste (summarized by quarters)

i. Radioactivity Released During the Reporting Period:

(1) (2) (3) (4)' (5)

No. of Total Tot. Vol. Diluent Tritium Period Batches pCi Liters Liters pCi 01 Jul- 30 Sep 98 2 20 4,090 1.9E4 18 01 Oct - 31 Dec 98 1 12 1,500 7.7E3 11 01 Jan - 31 Mar 99 1 13 1,610 1.1 E4 12 01 Apr- 30 Jun 99 1 20 3,420 6.8E3 19 (6) 60 pCi of tritium was released during this reporting period.

(7) 65 pCi total activity was released during this reporting period.

ii. Identification of Fission and Activation Products:

The gross beta-gamma activity of the batches in (1) above were less than 5

2 x 10 pCi/ml. Isotopic analyses of these batches indicated low levels of typical corrosion and activation products. No fission products were detected.

iii. Disposition of Liquid Efiluent not Releasable to Sanitary Sewer System:

All liquid effluent met the requirements of 10 CFR 20 for release to the sanitary sewer.

i

' Based on gross beta activity only. Tritium did not requirefurther dilution.

. PUIETAR REACroR ANNUAL REM)RT DOCKET NUMDER $0-297 7 e 01 July 1998 30 June 1999

2. Gaseous Waste (summarized monthly)

i. Radioactivity Discharged During the Reporting Period (in Curies) for:

(1) Gases:

Total Time Year Period in Hour.1 Curies 1998 01 Jul- 31 Jul 744 0.108 01 Aug- 31 Aug 744 0.116 01 Sep - 30 Sep 720 0.140 01 Oct - 31 Oct 744 0.200 01 Nov - 30 Nov 720 0.220 01 Dec - 31 Dec 744 0.143 1999 01 Jan - 31 Jan 744 0.112 01 Feb - 28 Feb 672 0.198 01 Mar - 31 Mar 744 0.233 01 Apr - 30 Apr 720 0.094 01 May - 31 May 744 0.173 01 Jun - 30 Jun 720 0.190 Totals 8,760 1.927 (2) Particulates with a half-life of greater than eight days:

Particulate filters from the Stack Particulate Monitoring Channel were analyzed upon removal. There was no particulate activity with t ira >8 days indicated on any filter during this reporting period.

ii. Gases and Particulates Discharged During the Reporting Period:

(1) Gases:

Total activity of argon-41 release was 1.927 curies.

The yearly average concentration of argon-41 released from the PULSTAR reactor facility exhaust stack during this period was 5.8 x 10* pCi/cc . This is below the regulatory limit of I x 10-' Ci/cc given in 10 CFR 20 Appendix B. Dose calculations were performed using " COMPLY" code for the fiscal year. Results were less than the 10 mrem constraint levels given in 10 CFR 20.

(2) Particulates:

See gaseous waste i.(2) above.

. PULSTAR REACTOR AhWUAL REPORT g DOCKET NUMn0R so-297 o 01 July 1998 30 Jurw 1999

3. Solid Waste from Reactor 2 Total volume of solid waste - 17.2 f1' (0.49 m')

= Total activity of solid waste - 1.8 mci

• Dates of shipments and disposal - All waste is transferred to the NCSU Environmental IIealth and Safety Center for temporary storage and disposal under the NCSU state license. Transfers were made on 16 Nov 98 and 03 Mar 99.

6.7.4.g Personnel Radiation Exposure Repon June 1998 data, which was not available for inclusion in last years report, indicated that:

Collective dose was 0.21 person-rem through 30 Jun 98. Fourteen of twenty-nine monitored personnel received measurable radiation dose.

01 July 1998 - 30 June 1999:

Thirty-one members of the faculty and staff were monitored for external radiation dose during the reporting period. During the fall of 1998 the University switched to a new, more sensitive dosimeter which is changed on a quarterly basis. As a result, all personnel have received measurable radiation dose. Collective dose for this reporting period was 0.45 person-rem. Individual doses ranged from 0.001 to 0.121 rem. There were no visitors that required official monitoring during this reponing period.

6.7.4.h Summarv of Radiation and Contamination Surveys Within the Facility Radiation and contamination surveys performed within the facility by the PULSTAR staffindicated that:

• external radiation levels in the majority of areas were 2 mrem /h or less e external radiation levels in the remaining areas were higher due to reactor operations e contamination in most areas was not detectable a when contamination was detected, the area or item was confined or decontaminated

' Solid waste generated by the PULSIAR Reactor is transferred to the NCSU Radiation Protection Divisionfor storage or disposal.

. FulDrAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT g DOCKET NUMBER $0 397 e 01 July 1998 30 June 1999 l

1 6.7.4.i Description of Environmental Surveys Outside of the Facility '

See Attachment A prepared by the Radiation Protection Division of the Environmental Health and Safety Center.

Perimeter surveys were performed adjacent to the Reactor Building by the PULSTAR staff and indicated that:

e external radiation levels t ere at background levels for most areas (10 rem /h) e contamination levels were not detectable

=

Net external radiation levels ranged up to 20 rem /h in some areas when the reactor was operating at power. However, external radiation levels were at background levels in routinely occupied spaces.

4 I

i ATTACHMENT A NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY  !

CENTER l RADIATION SAFETY DIVISION I

PULSTAR REACTOR '

ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION SURVEILLANCE REPORT I FOR THE PERIOD JULY 1,1998 - JUNE 30,1999 by Ralton J. Harris

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO.

1. INTRODUCTION 1 l Table 1 Environmental Monitoring Programs for the PULSTAR Reactor 2

2. AIR MONITORING 3 Table 2.1 Location of Air Monitoring Stations 3 Table 2.2 Aerially Transported Gamma Activity (LLD Values) 4 Figures 2a-2e Airborne Gross Beta Activities 5-9 Table 2.3 Regulatory Limits, Alert Levels and Background Levels for Airborne Radioactivity , 10

~

3. Milk Table 3.1 11 i

}

4. SURFACE WATER Table 4.1 Gross Alpha and Beta Activity in Surface Water 12 Table 4.2 LLD Values for Gamma Emitters in Surface Water 13

5. VEGETATION Table 5.1 Gross Beta Activity in Campus Vegetation 14 Table 5.2 LLD Values for Gamma Emitters in Vegetation 15

6. THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS 16 l Table 6.1 Environmental TLD Exposures .17

7. QUALITY CONTROL lNTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM 18 Tables 7.1a - 7.1c 19 - 21

8. CONCLUSIONS 22 i

l APPENDIX 1 23-27

n 1

, \

l j 1 <

1. INTRODUCTION The Environmental Radiation Surveillance Program exists to provide routine

, measurements of the university environment surrounding the PULSTAR Reactor.

The specific objectives of this program include:

1) Providing information that assesses the adequacy of the protection of the university community and the public-at-large;

2) Meeting requirements of regulatory agencies;

3) Verifying radionuclide containment in the reactor facility;

4) Meeting legal liability obligations; and

5) Providing public assurance and acceptance.

The essential elements of this program are summarized in Table 1 on page 2.

9 1

Table 1:

Environmental Monitoring Programs for the PULSTAR Reactor at North Carolina State University i

Sample Activity Conducted Previous Current Basis For Measured By Frequency Frequency Measurement )

l Stack Gases Gross Gamma N.E. Continuous Continuous 10 CFR 20 i T.S. 6.7.4 Stack Gross Beta N.E. Monthly Monthly 10 CFR 20 i Particles Indiv. Gamma N.E. T.S. 6.7.4 l Emitters Water from Gross Beta N.E. Prior to Prior to Discharge 10 CFR 20 Reactor Gross Gamma N.E. Discharge - Monthly T.S. 6.7.4 Facility Tritium N.E. (~ Monthly) City of Raleigh Ordinance Air / Particles at Gross Beta RPD/EHSC Weekly Quarterly 10 CFR 20  !

5 Campus Indiv. Gamma ' RPD/EHSC Weekly 10 CFR 20 Stations

• Emitters Air / Dosage at TLD Dosimeter RPD/EHSC Quarterly Quarterly 10 CFR 20 7 Campus Stations + i Surface Water Gross Beta RPD/EHSC Quarterly Quarterly NCSU Rocky Branch Indiv. Gamma RPD/EHSC Quarterly Quarterly NCSU Creek Emitters Vegetation Gross Beta RPD/EHSC Semi-annually Alternate years NCSU NCSU Gamma RPD/EHSC Alternate years NCSU Campus Milk l-131 RPD/EHSC Monthly Alternate years NCSU Local Dairy Abbreviations Used in Table:

N.E. = Nuclear Engineering / Reactor Facility; RPD/EHSC = Radiation Protection Division.

• These 5 stations include:

Withers, Riddick, Broughton', Hill Library and Environmental Health & Safety Center.

+These 7 stations include: the PULSTAR stack, a control station (EHSC) and the 5 air sampling stations, and North Hall.

2

O

2. AIR MONITORING (TABLES 2.1,2.2, AND 2.3; FIGURES 2a THROUGH 2e)

Beginning in January 1996, air monitoring frequency has been changed such that air sampling is performed continually for one week during each of four (4) quarters during the year. The data shows the normal fluctuations in gross beta activity levels expected during ,

the year. Figures 2a through 2e show bar graphs of gross beta activity (fCi/ cubic meter vs.

sampling quarters per year). The highest gross beta activity observed was 16.3.fCim'3 at the EH&S Center station during the week of 06/07/99 to 06/14/99. The annual campus average was 12.1 fCim' . -

Table 2.2 lists LLD values for several gamma emitters which would be indicative of fission product activity. No aamma activity due to any of these radionuclides was detected.

Table 2.3 lists regulatory limits, alert levels, and average background levels for airborne radioactivity.

TABLE 2.1 LOCATION OF AIR MONITORING STATIONS SjTE DIRECTION' DISTANCE 2 ELEVATION (meters) (meters)

BROUGHTON SOUTHWEST 125 -17

• DAVID CLARK LABS WEST 500 -18 LIBRARY NORTHWEST 192 +11 RIDDICK SOUTHEAST 99 -14 WITHERS NORTHEAST 82 -6 EH & S CENTER WEST 1230 -3 NORTH HALL NORTHEAST 402 -4

' DIRECTION - DIRECTION FROM REACTOR STACK 2

DISTANCE - DISTANCE FROM REACTOR STACK ELEVATION - ELEVATION RELATIVE TO THE TOP OF THE REACTOR STACK

• The station at David Clark Labs was relocated to the EH & S Center in January 1996, however a TLD monitor is maintained at David Clark Labs for the State of N.C. Radiation Protection Division.

I

~

3

4 e

s 00 61

. ~

1 0

~

wT u

a b

.el 2

__.59

//

//

01 1 01 2 _

79 -

9 94

~- - A 60 1

1

/

2 9_

9 .

1 1

0 9

R I

O e

r i

a 4 6 _ / / l 1 2 D .yl 6 1 .

T r

- a n

s C p 00 0 0 o- o r

2 2 1 1 t 78 1 5 e 7 d

_~ G T. -

{

C r

a m

00 _

d~ 0 o- -- .. _a

- m

.3~.3 I9 _ i5 d4 6 -

~ ._.

.;{

~

0 q.A -

c ti v

i

' y t

N O. 0 3 3 3 1 0 0 22 89 b-9 5 _

0 0 0 0 Z

&_lLDj 5 5 0 4 4 4 8

7 A

I v

al S u

- e s

T I! .

~

I[ t f

- C 0~O 3~3 0

2'2 6'

R t

i-1

- c u

i

/

63 _

0 b

~

8~7 ci

__ 3 .

IT _ ,

~ -

~~}~

m t

e R e r

2 2 2 2 u-4 5 4 1 1 1 1 8 7 0 6

Lj

_C 0 0 0

0 s-2 2 3 3 _1 8 4 56 3

- 7

~ _

(( II t

L

~~ - ~~~ _C ._

00 0 e- _.

53~I 34 _

1 -

93 _ 48 ~

4 1

_ ~~

il Ifl 1

1 1 1 C

e-4 .4 2 2 1 1 0 8 2 5 5

~

O

• 88D2 Ee O, 1 1 1 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 4  !.r ,i

- ' 1 i - l 4l 0

- 9

/

1 -

1 4 .

1 9 -

9 _

80 9 _

/

2 1

1 _

1 .

/ -

1 9 0 A _.

2 9 - ri 9 b 8 11 o r

/

1 n .

6 eBr .

M o

. F rGou _

gi og ni t

ush ,

r st _

o e o r

i n 2 Bn e

g ata H a

P Al l e ci ri o t i

v

d. y i

t 0

1

/

1 19 9

3 . -

• 9 _

90 1

/

- 2 6 _

+

0 _

' 6

/

1 0 4 9 -7 9

9 0/6 1

4 a

l L

e8a9E2E 1 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2

j F I 1i;ei .!!jj l!;h ia I! -

0 9

/

1 1 1 4 9 -

b 9 80 9

/

2 1

+

1 1

A i

/ r 0 b o

2 ' 199 9- r n

81 e s

1

/

1 FGi W ir t 6 g oh use M r e srs o

n 2B be aH i

t o.

r i

t al l n

g A c

t P i v

e i n t y

o d

0 1

/

1 1 9 9 -

3

• 9 90 1

/

2 6

. 0 6

/

1 0 7

4 , 9 -

9 0 -

9 6 _

/

1 _

4

O 9 n2 5t 1 1 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 r - +I!itit }Iiij +ljl 0

9

/

1 1 1 4 9 -

= 9 80 9

/

2

_ 1 1

1 2 .

1 9

/

0 A i

9 -

r

, 9 b 81 1

/

o r

1 n

6 e R

M FGi d o ir g od n

i usi c t

o r s r

ni g

e 2

c Be H t

k a

- al l P A e

r

- c i t o i v

d t i

y 0

1

/

E g 9 1

3 9 -

9 90 1

/

2 6

0 6

/

0 1 7 4 9 -

9 90 6

/

1 4

N

O 9SS9 Eg5 1 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4i 4!i 4 '- l !ill4l t!j i  !

0 9

/

1 1

1 4 9 -

9 80 9

/

2 1

1 1

/

A 2 0 ri 1 9 b 9

9

- o r

81 1

/

n .D e

M o

1 6 FG.H i r n g oH ti usl i o -

r e sl r

i n - 2 BiL g r deb t r p

aa r e -

Ay r

i c

o ti v

d i t

0 y 1

/

1 3 1 9 9 -

9 90 1

/

2 6

0 6

/

0 4 1 7 g -

g g0 6

/

1 4

5

4 O$BhEE 1 1 1 1 1 O 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8 4! + 7 !ilig -

j; iIfll7

. .. 0 9

/

A 1 4 1

9 -

1 9

. 80 9

/

2 1

E n

1 v i

r 1

/

0 Ao i n r

1 9 b 2 9 - o m 9 r e 8 11 n nt

/ e a 1

6 F Gl M gi o r He o * .

u s al r

ni e s t t

o - 2 B h e e &

r - t ni g + a S A af P c et t

e r

i y v

i o ti y C d e n

t e

r 0

1

/

1. 1 3

1 9 9 -

9 90 1

/

2 5

0 6

/

1 0

< 9 -7 9

9 60

/

1 4 4 .

u m

C TABLE 2.3 REGULATORY LIMITS, ALERT LEVELS, AND BACKGROUND LEVELS FOR AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY (fCi M'3).

REGULATORY ALERT AVERAGE N.C.

NUCLIDE LIMIT LEVEL BACKGROUND LEVEL GROSS ALPHA 20 10 4 GROSS BETA 1000 500 100 Cs-137 5 X 10 5 10 2 Ce-144 2 X 10 5 100 0 Ru-106 ~ 2 X 10 5 30 0 1-131 1 X 10 5 10 0

Reference:

Environmental Radiation Surveillance Report 1986-88, State of N.C Radiation Protection Section 10  ;

I j

l .

3. MILK (TABLE 3.1)

Milk samples are collected in alternate years from the Campus Creamery and the Lake Wheeler Road Dairy and analyzed for 1-131. The data for 1999 indicates that no 1-131 activity was detected.

4 TABLE 3.1- I-131 IN COW'S MILK (pCi Liter i 2 o) LLD ~3 pCi Liter

pCiliter DATE Camous Creamerv Lake Wheeler April 1999 <3 <3 i

4 i

11 ,

4. SURFACE WATER (TABLES 4.1 AND 4.2)

Table 4.1 gives the gross alpha and beta activities for water from Rocky Branch at points where it enters (ON) and exits (OFF) the campus. The LLD values for gross alpha and beta activities are 0.4 pCl Liter' and 0.4 pCi Liter', respectively. For gross alpha activity the Alert Level is 5 pCi Liter' and the Regulatory Limit is 15 pCi Liter'. For gross beta activity the Alert Levelis 5 pCi Liter' and the Regulatory Limit is 50 pCi Liter'. Samples with gross alpha or beta activities exceeding these Alert Levels would require gamma analysis to identify the radionuclides present. The LLD values in Table 4.2 are for the third quarter of 1998.

TABLE 4.1 GROSS ALPHA AND BETA ACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER (pCi Liter' i 20)

• LLDa 0.4 pCl Liter LLDp 0.4 pCi Liter' pCi Liter'-

GROSS GROSS DATE LOCATION ALPHA BETA THIRD QUARTER 1998 ON < 0.4 3.2 i 0.7 OFF < 0.4 3.0 1 0.7 FOURTH QUARTER 1998 ON < 0.4 2.4 1 0.6 OFF < 0.4 1.9 1 0.6 FIRST QUARTER 1999 ON < 0.4 2.6 1 0.0 OFF < 0.4 2.5 0.6 SECOND QUARTER 1999 ON < 0.4 2.5 1 0.6 OFF < 0.4 2.5 1 0.6

• LLD VALUES ARE DETERMINED QUARTERLY 12

TABLE 4.2 LLD VALUES FOR GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER NUCLIDE LLD (oCl LiterY Co-60 0.4 Zn-65 0.7 Cs-137 0.3 Cs-134 0.4 Sr-85 0.4 Ru-103 0.3 Ru-106 3.0 Nb-95 0.4 Zr-95 0.5

• LLD VALUES ARE FOR THE 3RD QUARTER OF 1998 i

1 13

5. VEGETATION (TABLE 5.1 AND 5.2)

Table 5.1 gives gross beta activities for grass samples collected on the NCSU Campus. Table 5.2 lists LLD values for several gamma emitters. Beginning in January of 1996, the vegetation sampling has been revised to be performed in alternate years. The data for 1999 indicates the presence of only normal background radioactivity.

TABLE 5.1 GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN CAMPUS VEGETATION

• LLD - 0.5 pCl g-'

SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE LOCATION (DCi a 120)

April 1999 NORTH CAMPUS 2.3 i 0.1 April 1999 SOUTH CAMPUS 2.6 1 0.1 April 1999 EAST CAMPUS 2.5 t 0.1 April 1999 WEST CAMPUS 2.6 1 0.1 4

14

-TABLE 5.2 LLD VALUES FOR GAMMA EMITTERS IN VEGETATION NUCLIDE LLD (pCi gram ')*

Co-60 0.01 Zn-65 0.02 Cs-137 0.01 Cs-134 0.01 l Sr-85 0.01 Ru-103 0.01 Nb-95 0.01 Zr-95 0.02

• LLD VALUES ARE FOR THE 1ST QUARTER OF 1998 I

i 15

6. THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETERS (TLDs) (TABLE 6.1)

TLD analysis is contracted to Thermo Nutech for determination of ambient gamma exposures. The dosimeters are LiF and have a manufacturer-stated sensitivity of 0.5 i 0.15 mR (90% C.L.).

Exposures are integrated over a three-month period at each of the six air monitor stations listed in Table 2.1 and also at the top of the FULSTAR Reactor stack. A control station is located in Room 107 of the Environmental Safety Center. Table 6.1 gives the data for these seven (7) monitoring locations.

The gross exposures are given along with the transit exposure reading. The net exposures are lower than those typically expected in this area of North Carolina (i.e., is 18 - 20 mR per quarter year), and lower than those observed in past years on the NCSU campus. Due to a lack of promptness on the part of the contractor in providing replacement TLD's and data reports, a new contractor has been selected beginning with the second quarter of 1999.

l i

i 16

e 0

4 1 0d _

41 5 0 D T

/ 9 / 7

_ 0

/ 7 A A 09 1 0 .

0 /

0 T B I8 61 -

1 1 E L 5 -

E 0 6' 1 0

/Y I - -

6 3 if

/

0 S 4 2

/

3 9

/

3 6

1 NIij 1 0 J

_IiTR.

I T _E D]

a i

l ~ N l

s t a

_ A V

~ .

d N I a

t

_n_o t

_. S I

R O

4a 4 2~5 T 1 y 5 58' N 1

w [ e M a t W E s a N

I n v T o a i H T p

t a

l E A r b R L 4 e l 4 2 5 T 1 e 6 6 9 S 1

vi l f l l' I l- L o r o R D u

s m _ I D E X

4a yl a

v t

h e

c 4

~_ _

25 D

I C

K P

O S

2i

' a!

b l

el f

o(

n t

r a{

c]

t

,48 Ii _

-_~

~

{j5j B-R.

O-U R

E S

o_

r o U (

m .r _ G m H R t

h _ T

/

Q e O U 4c 2 o 5 2

2 5 4 9 N A l

n [ R t

r D T a

c t

or

_. H H

I E

R Y

f L E 4o L

P 0ri 4

2 2

5 5

,8 A S a i n )

R h g E e e . cl _ H e u

l'S7 5 t

1 4i s

_ & 4 1 o _.

4 5

S l

n 1( [f.

ni t

I!

~

i; P

U h L e S 1 T 9 A 9 R 7- S _

9 T -

8 A -

r C 4 pe 4 2 5 K -

1 o 4 58 _

Ir '

t

~ C _

_ _ O N

T _

_ ~

~

_ ._. R _

O

-j W ' - [I _ .f6 S _

.50 L j; I ' !f N -

~

O .

_ ~ R

_ T

_ H 4 8 6

_2 2 8 50 _

C _

7. QUALITY CONTROL INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM The Environmental Radiation Surveillance Laboratory (ERSL) of the Radiation Protection Division has participated in the U.S. DOE Environmental Measurements Laboratory Quality Assurance Division Program (OAP 49) during this reporting period. The objective of this program is to provide laboratories performing environmental radiation measurements with unknowns to test their analytical techniques.

The 'EML value' listed in the Tables 7.1 (a-c) to which the ERSL results are compared is the mean of replicate determinations for each nuclide. The EML uncertainty is the standard error of the mean. All other uncertainties are as reported by the participants.

The control limit was established from percentiles of historic data distributions (1982-1992). The evaluation of historic data and the development of the controllimits are presented in DOE report EML-564. The control limits for QAP 49 were developed from the percentiles of data distributions )

for the years 1993-1998.

Participants' analytical performance is evaluated based on the historical analytical capabilities for individual analyte / matrix pairs. The criteria for acceptable performance, "A", has been chosen to be between the 15* and 85* percentile of the cumulative normalized distribution, which can be viewed as the middle 70% of all historic measurements. The acceptable with warning criteria, "W", is between the 5* and 15* percentile and between the 85* and 95* percentile. In other words, the middle 90% of all reported values are acceptable, while the outer 5*-15* (10%) and 85*-95*

percentiles (10%) are in the warning area. The not acceptable criteria, "N", is established at less than the 5* percentile and greater than the 95* percentile, that is, the outer 10% of the historical data.

The following are recommended performance criteria for analysis of environmental levels of analytes:

Acceptable: Lower Middle Limit s A s Upper Middle Limit Acceptable with Warning: Lower Limit s W < Lower Middle Limit or i Upper Middle Limit < W s Upper Limit Not Acceptable: N < Lower Limit or N > Upper Limit Control Limits are reported as the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value. The results of the intercomparison studies are given in Table 7.1 (a-c), and are stated in the SI unit becquerel (Bq) as required by the EML reporting protocol.

In addition to the EML Quality Assurance Program, the ERSL conducts an intralaboratory QC program to track the performance of routine radioactivity measurements. The types of calculations employed for this program are shown in an example calculation in Appendix 1.

18

TABLE 7.1a GROSS ALPHA & BETA ACTIVITY AIR FILTER--INTERCOMPARISON STUDY 01 September 1998 The sample consists of one 50 mm diameter simulated filter spiked with a matrix-free solution containing a single alpha and a single beta emitting nuclide. The reported values and the known values are given in Bq/ filter. The errors are reported as 12 standard deviations.

• NCSU - ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Radionuclide

• Reported

• Reported EML EML Reported Value -

Error Value Error EML Gross Alpha 1.620 0.133 1.650 0.160 0.982 Gross Beta 2.133 0.126 2.160 0.070 0.987 QAP 49_ Statistical Summary Radionuclide EML EML Mean Median Std. Dev. No. Of Reported Value Error Values Gross Alpha 1.650 0.160 1.028 0.982 0.166 73 Gross Beta 2.160 0.070 0.958 0.926 0.160 75 QAP 49 Control Limits by Matrix Radionuclide Lower Limit Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper' Limit Limit Limit Gross Alpha 0.50 0.81 1.32 1.55 Gross Beta 0.72 0.89 1.39 1.67 Control limits are reported as: the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value 19

1 l .

1 TABLE 7.1b MULTINUCLIDE AIR FILTER -INTERCOMPARISON STUDY 01 September 1998 ,

The sample consists of one 7 cm diameter glass fiber filter which has been spiked with 0.10 gram of solution and dried. The reported values and the known values are given in Bq/fUter. The errors are reported as i2 standard deviations..

• NCSU - ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Radionuclide

• Reported

• Reported EML EML Reported Value Error Value Error EML Co60 8.813- 0.228 9.160 0.580 0.962 Cs137 21.074 0.848 22.470 1.030 0.938 i Mn54 4.866 0.247 4.920 0.400 0.989 l Sb125 7.239 0.290 8.890 0.550 0.814 i

QAP 49 Statistical Summary Radionuclide EML EML Mean Median Std. Dev. No. of Reported Value Error Values Co60 9.160 0.580 0.993 0.9993 0.074 101 Cs137 22.470 1.030 1.005 1.001 0.090 99 Mn54 4.920 0.400 1.042 1.043 0.092 95 Sb125 8.890 0.550 1.004 1.016 0.131 88 QAP 49 Control Limits by Matrix Radionuclide Lower Limit Lower Middio Upper Middle Upper Limit Limit Limit Co60 0.75 0.83 1.10 1.32 Cs137 0.73 0.82 1.14 1.37 Mn54 0.76 0.84 1.18 1.42 Sb125 0.61 0.83 1.19 1.43 Control limits are reported as: the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value 1

I' 20 i

l l

o i

TABLE 7.1c MULTINUCLIDE WATER SAMPLE -INTERCOMPARISON STUDY 01 September 1998 The sample consists of a spiked,455 ml aliquot of acidified water (~1 N hcl). The reported values i and the known values are given in Bq/ Liter. The errors are reported as 12 standard deviations. j

• NCSU - ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS 1 Radionuclide

• Reported

• Reported EML EML Error Reported Value Error Value EML  ;

Co60 49.586 1.775 49.400 1.200 1.004 l Cs137 47.630 -

2.489 50.000 1.700 0.953 Mn54 34.710 2.083 32.400 1.400 1.071 l

QAP 49 Statistical Summary Radionuclide EML EML Mean Median Std. Dev. No. of Reported Value Error Values Co60 49.400 1.200 1.039 1.032 0.049 105 Cs137 50.000 1.700 1.051 1.036 0.078 107 Mn54 32.400 1.400 1.093 1.090 0.068 93 QAP 49 Control Limits by Matrix '

Radionuclide Lower Limit Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper Limit Limit Limit Co60 0.80 0.90 1.14 1.20 Cs137 0.80 0.90 1.18 1.26 Mn54 0.80 0.90 1.17 1.25 i

Control limits are reported as: the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value 21

8. CONCLUSIONS The data obtained during this period do not show any fission product activities. The observed environmental radioactivity is due primarily to radon progeny, primordial radionuclides (e.g. K-40) and those radionuclides (e.g., Be-7) which originate in the upper atmosphere as the resttit of cosmic ray interactions. These facts justify the conclusion that the PULSTAR Reactor facility continues to operate safely and does not release fission product materials into the environment.

s h

22

APPENDIX 1 The following example calculation gives a set of data, the mean value, the experimental sigma, and the range. These statistics provide measures of the central tendency and dispersion of the data.

The normalized range is computed by first finding mean range, R, the control limit, CL, and the standard error of the range, o n. The normalized range measures the dispersion of the data (precision) in such a form that control charts may be used. Control charts allow one to readily compare past analytical performance with present performance. In the example, the normalized range equals 0.3 which is less than 3 which is the upper control level. The precision of the results is acceptable.

The normalized deviation is calculated by computing the deviation and the standard error of the mean, o,,,. The normalized deviation allows one to measure central tendency (accuracy) readily through the use of control charts. Trends in analytical accuracy can be determined in this manner.

For this example, the normalized deviation is -0.7 which falls between +2 and -2 which are the upper and lower warning levels. The accuracy of the data is acceptable. Any bias in methodology or instrumentation may be indicated by these results.

i l

)

i 23

r v

t .

D 8

EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS Experimental Data:

Known value = p = 3273 pCi'H/ liter on September 24,1974 Expected laboratory precision = a = 357 pCilliter <

Sample Result X, 3060 pCi/ liter X, 3060 pCl/ liter X 3240 pCi/ liter

. Mean = x X,. 9360

= '**' = = 3120 pCl/ liter x 3 where N = number of results = 3

. Experimental sigma = s i

( X,)8 s = ( X,) 8 -

s .1 - N

% N-l '

I + + '

(3060)8+(3060)2+(3240)8 3

% 2 s = 103.9 pCi/ liter I

Range = r r = - Imaximum result- minimum result 1 i

i r = D240- 30601 r = 180 pCi/ liter ,

24 I i

i

~

3 i

Range Analysis (RNG ANLY)*  !

Mean range = R ,

l l

R = d02 where d2 " = 1.693 for N = 3 l j

= (1.693)(357)

R = 604.4 pCi/ liter Controllimit = CL i

CL = R + 3on

= D.R where D4 " = 2.575 for N = 3

= (2.575)(604.4)

CL = 1556 pCl/ liter l

Standard error of the range = on

= . (R + Son - R) + 3 on

= (D R - R) + 3 1

1

= (1556 -604.4) + 3 )

4 og = 317.2 pCi/ liter i Let Range = r = wR + xon= _180 pCi/ liter Define normalized range = w + x for r > R, w = 1  ;

~

then r = wR + xca = R + xon r-R )

or x=

on r-R therefore w+x=1+x=1+-  !

on l

l

'Rosentein, M., and A. S. Goldin, " Statistical Techniques for Quality Control of Environmental Radioassay," '

AOCS Reoort Stat-1. U.S. Department of Health Education and Welfare, PHS, November 1964.

• • From table " Factors for Computing Control Limits," Handbook of Tables for Probabliity and Statistics. 2Dd Edition. The Chemical Rubber Co., Cleveland, Ohio,1968, p. 454.

l 25

Q

. for r s R,' x = 0 then r = wR + xca = wR r

of W=

R r

therefore w + x '= w + 0 =

R since r < R, (180 < 604.4) 180 W+x=

604.4 W + x = 0.30 Normalized deviation of the mean from the known value = ND Deviation of mean from the known value = D D = x -p

= 3120 - 3273 D = -153 pCi/ liter Standard error of the mean = 0, o

o, =

/N 357

=

V3 o, = 206.1 pCi/ liter D

ND =

o,

-153-

=

206.1 ND = -0.7.

Controllimit = CL CL = . (p i 30.)

26

3*

Warning limit = WL WL = (p i 20.)

Experimentalsigma(alllaboratories) = s,

( x,)*

f g 2_ 41 41 N N-1 h

162639133 - (49345)8 15 h 14 s, = 149 pCi/ liter Grand Average = GA -

Xi

= '**

GA N

49345 15 GA = 3290 pCl/ liter Normalized deviation from the grand average = ND' Deviation of the mean from the grand average = D' D' = x - GA

= 3120 - 3290 D' = -170 pCl/ liter ND' = Y 0,

-170

=

206.1 ND' = . 0.8 27