ML20214D537

Annual Status Rept,1985

ML20214D537
Person / Time
Site:	Plum Brook
Issue date:	12/31/1985
From:	Pfanner H, Richley E NATIONAL AERONAUTICS & SPACE ADMINISTRATION
To:	NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
References
1605, NUDOCS 8603050252
Download: ML20214D537 (12)

Text

. .

ANNUAL STATUS REPORT Reporting Period: January 1, 1985 - December 31, 1985 NASA, Plum Brook Reactor NASA, Plum Brook Mock-Up Reactor License No. TR-3 License No. R-93 Docket No. 50-30 Docket No. 50-185 USNRC Dismantling Order dated May 26, 1981 -

i i

i I

February 25, 1986 NASA, Lewis Research Center Plum Brook Station i 6100 Columbus Ave.

Sandusky, OH 44870  !

i l

i 8603050252 860225 /2CP/>

PDR ADOCK 05000030 R PDR /(ij

t L

I TABLE OF CONTENTS 4

1. Introduction

2. Status of Reactor Facility

3. Organization i

4. Condition of Systems and Components

5. Security and Surveillance Measures

6. Facility Changes I

7. Facility and Environmental Radiological Surveys

8. Significant Maintenance Performed

9. Audits and Inspections

.i .

10. Unusual Occurrences l l

i 11. License Changes

12. Other i

r I

i

^

I j

4 l

1 i

ANNUAL STATUS REPORT FOR THE NASA, PLUM BROOK REACTOR AND PLUM BROOK M0CK-UP REACTOR

1.

Introduction:

l The following Annual Status Report for the period January 1, 1985 through i December 31, 1985, has been prepared pursuant to Section IV.S.15 of the Dismantling Plan, Plum Brook Reactor Dismantling, dated February 1980, which supported the NASA request for USNRC issuance of a Dismantling Order.

2. Status of Reactor Facility: i

! At the time NASA requested a Dismantling Order, funding of the reactor i dismantling project was anticipated and an active dismantling effort was planned and scheduled. However, because of continuing federal budget l

restrictions, NASA has continued to find it necessary to defer funding of

! this project. As a result, no major dismantling activities have been

! performed to date, nor are any planned.

! Since 1982, NASA has continued to slowly remove various uncontaminated 4

tools, spare parts, and experimental hardware. In addition, some

! uncontaminated equipment not necessary for maintaining protected safe storage or needed to support future dismantlement efforts is being removed. This is being done to reduce Station inventories and to make

such items available to NASA and other Government agencies.

In its letter to NASA dated August 16, 1984, the USNRC requested NASA to either request reinstatement of the " possess-but-not-use" status for the i two Plum Brook Reactors, or to submit a revised dismantling plan and

! schedule. NASA responded in a letter dated October 29, 1984, stating j that it intended to formally request return to the " possess-but-not-use" a licensing status. On July 26, 1985, NASA submitted to the USNRC appli-

cations and supporting documents for the " possess-but-not-use" status, j To date, this action is still pending.

i j In addition to providing adequate resources and funding for past, present and future protected safe storage of the reactors, NASA recently funded an

engineering study to document the existing conditions at the site, j The study was initiated near the end of CY 1984, and major field work j began in early 1985. The study is being performed by Teledyne Isotopes, j Inc., the same company which provides the contracted services for daily security, surveillance, and maintenance of the reactors and the Plum Brook Station. The purpose of the study is to gather data on the current

! condition of the facilities and equipment at the site, and to reinventory the radioactive contamination at the end of the thirteen year radiological 4 decay period since Reactor shutdown in January, 1973. All of the field

! work for this study has been completed and the final report is due during mid-1986.

1 1

(

1

---.,..._.m -

-. - , -,,.-,-,_,,_,.,,..,.-------,---.y--- _ _ _ _ - .-

3. Organization:

Mr. Henry G. Pfanner was appointed Engineer, Plum Brook Reactor Facility

(PBRF), replacing Mr. Earl C. Boitel, Jr. Mr. Pfanner is responsible for maintaining the protected safe storage mode of the reactors. The daily security, surveillance, and maintenance activities continue to be per-formed by an on-site service contractor, Teledyne Isotopes. Inc. Mr. Harry E. McCune is assigned as first alternate PBRF Engineer. Mr. Albert B.

Smith, NASA-Lewis Health Physicist and Radiation Officer has replaced Mr. Thomas Junod as the PBRF Radiation Safety Officer, as of December 27, 1985. Mr. Smith also serves as second alternate PBRF Engineer. Mr.

Robert P. Kozar will replace Mr. Raphael J. Koch as Manager of the Plum

Brook Station as of January 3, 1986.

d The Dismantling Safety Committee (DSC) has been changed to the Plum Brook Reactor Facility Safety Committee (PSC). Mr. Richard Schuh remains as chairman. Three full PBRF Safety Committee meetings were held in 1985.

As a result of the NASA decision to request reinstatement of the

" possess-but-not-use" licenses, NASA has changed the organization respon-sible for management of the PBRF. The management of the PBRF is now under the Plum Brook Management Office. An Organization Chart and supporting information regarding this change appears in Section 4 of the current License Application. (See Figure 1 at the end of this report.)

l 4. Condition of Systems and Components:

a The condition of all systems and components vital to maintaining safe i protective storage has been carefully reviewed. They are performing satisfactorily.

As reported in previous years, the Containment Vessel (CV) cathodic protection system remains energized, but is providing less than the recommended level of cathodic protection for a portion of the CV wall.

Ultrasonic testing at four inspection ports in 1985 showed no measureable change in (CV) wall thickness from the original material speciff-cations. The ultrasonic testing continues on an annual basis. In addition, NASA has established periodic visual inspections and corrosion rate assessment checks using sample coupons. Results of the 1985 1

quarterly sample coupon checks indicated no appreciable corrosion rates could be established during this short test period. These coupon samples will be checked twice in 1986 and annually thereafter.

5. Security and Surveillance Measures

Security inspections are conducted at the PBRF once per shift; i.e., three times per day, and each of the major buildings is inspected by a guard 1'

once each day. In addition, other security checks such as checks of fences and locks are conducted monthly. Surveillance of operating systems and

, components, absolute filters, and radiological surveys are performed as specified in the PBRF Procedures Manual. Surveillance inspections are per-i formed for some non-operating systems and components to assure that the protected safe storage conditions are maintained.

2

All of the security and surveillance inspections are accomplished by use of ,

Inspection and Test Report (ITR) checksheets to insure that they are promptly and properly completed. Completed ITRs are reviewed and approved by the Engineer, PBRF and/or alternates and filed in the PBRF Vital Records. Any ITRs requiring corrective action are reviewed as well by Plum Brook Station Management. Equipment Maintenance Records (EMRs) are utilized to document maintenance on vital components, equipment, systems and facilities which are not otherwise covered under the routine ITR system (See Section S.).

The security and surveillance program in effect at the PBRF is more than adequate to maintain the facilities in a protected safe storage mode.

Personnel access to areas of the reactor site with known or suspected significant levels of radiation present is controlled under a Safe Work Permit (SWP) system.

As a result of the engineering study performed during the past year, an above average number of (SWP)s were issued. Thirty-seven (SWP)s were issued to obtain access to radiological controlled areas for various

radiation surveys. Ten (SWP)s were issued to cover crane inspection and

! maintenance items. Other (SWP)s covered inspection, maintenance or work described in Section 10, part (a, b, & c).

A total of 53 (SWP)s were issued during 1985 and all personnel exposures 4

were well within permissible limits of 10 CRF 20. A statistical breakdown of the exposure levels as per 10 CRF 20.407 is given below.

Estimated Whole Body Number of Exposure Range (RENs) Individuals in Each Range No measurable exposure 0  !

Measureable exposure less than .1 26

.1 to .25 1

.25 and above 0 1

6. Facility Changes:

4 A Facility Change System is utilized to provide documentation and approval of changes to existing facilities and structures, new structures, a j physical change to equipment or system, or any change which alters a de-j fined end condition.

There was one Facility Change (FC) initiated in 1985. This Facility Change, FC-85-1 (HRA annulus Pump Out System), was prompted by the discovery of water in the base of the Hot Retention Area (HRA) annulus.

The work involved and rationale behind this change is presented in more detail in Section (10.c). This (FC) is essentially complete and only minor items remain to be closed out in 1986.

3 i

4

7. Facility and Environmental Radiological Surveys:

The 1985 monitoring data continued to include direct radiation; surface contamination; and airborne, waterborne, stream silt, and precipitation /

fallout radioactivity. These parameters did not vary significantly from data obtained.during the previous 12 years of standby or protected safe storage of the PBRF. All data indicates the radioactivity within PBRF is being saft.ly contained.

8. Significant Maintenance Performed:

Fifty-two maintenance tasks were performed during this reporting period under the Equipment Maintenance Record (EMR) system. Twenty-eight of these tasks were classified as routine maintenance. Ten others involved inspec-tion and servicing of overhead cranes required to access radiological controlled zones and equipment during the engineering study. Eight (EMR)s were issued to cover support work required during the study. The remaining six tasks involved significant maintenance or repair and are summarized below,

a. Repairs were made for a persistent minor ground water leak in the Hot Pipa Tunnel (HPT). The soil around the tunnel was removed and the concrete was inspected to determine the source of ground water infiltration. This infiltration did not cause a spread of contamination, since the water was contained in the tunnel area. No radioactive contamination was detected in the excavcted soil adjacent to the tunnel.

The cracks in the tunnel roof and walls were cleaned out and patched. The repaired areas were then covered with three layers of bituminous water sealer. In addition, two existing footer drains were cleaned and an additional drain access pipe added.

After this work was completed no ground water infiltration was observed during an unusually wet Fall season.

b. Work was performed in the Hot Retention Area (HRA) to install, wire, and checkout a HRA Annulus sump pump and discharge system. This work was covered under Facility Change FC-85-1 (HRA Annulus Pump Out System). The work involved is discussed in detail in Section 10.a.

c. Durinn a survey conducted under the engineering study, an un-usually high radiation area was discovered on the floor of the Hot Pipe Tunnel (HPT). Further investigation disclosed that the contamination resulted from a crack in an overhead drain line. Trapped contaminated water from an abandoned, sealed line leaked onto the floor, evaporated, and left behind a contaminated residue. The Ifne was patched and the contaminated floor cleaned. The work performed is described in more detail in Section 10.b. The leak occurred in a secured High Radiation Area and no spread of contamination outside this area was encountered.

4

. o

9. Audits and Inspections:

Two internal audits of the Plum Brook Reactor Facility (PBRF) were con-ducted by Albert B. Smith, Health Physicist and NASA Lewis Research Center Radiation Officer. These audits were conducted on 6/26/85 and 11/10/85. No items of noncompliance were noted during either audit.

No on-site inspections of the PBRF facility were conducted by the USNP.C during 1985.

10. Unusual Occurrences:

There were no unusual occurrences at the PBRF during 1985 which were re-portable to USNRC under the criteria of 10 CFR 21.3,10 CFR 21.4 and 10 CFR 50.72.

Although not under the category of an unusual occurrence, the following items of importance were discovered as a result of the engineering study performed at the PBRF in 1985. A description of these items and actions taken or planned are as follows:

a. Water was discovered in the Annulus surrounding the eight holding tanks in the Hot Retention Area (HRA), which is a a locked and controlled radiation zone. This water was found to be an accumulation of both surface and ground water infil-tration. An existing active deep well sump pump and footer drain is located outside this enclosure but these do not remove all of the ground water penetrating under and around the (HRA) floor.

The water in the Annulus was isotopically analyzed and found to be within HPC discharge limits, and was discharged into the nomal PBRF drainage system. An (HRA) sump pump and discharge line was installed under Facility Change FC 85-1 (HRA Annulus Pump Out System). The annulus water from this pump is discharged into one of the existing Cold Retention Areas (CRA). These CRA drains are open to allow for normal exchange of ground water during water table fluctuations. Although no significant radio-activity is expected, the discharge from this sump pump will be monitored weekly for three months to establish history and then quarterly thereafter. This Inspection and Test ReportITR). (quarterly monitoring will be by an In addition to the water in the annulus, water was found

~

in three of the eight holding tanks. These tanks had been cleaned and left dry at the time of the reactor shutdown in 1973. The source was determined to be surface water from roof

, leaks and voids in the valve extension handle housings. This water was sampled and was found to be contaminated by residual radioactivity in the tanks. Plans are being made to properly dispose of this water after the roof penetrations have been sealed and the roof area repaired. The valve extension handles i

5 s .

. \

a

4 are to be removed, roof penetrations sealed and the entire roof area sealed with a urethane foam membrane as part of planned repairs and maintenance in 1986.

b. Following the discovery of radioactive contamination described in Paragraph 8.c., a cracked polyethylene drain line was discovered to be its source. Approximately three to five gallons of trapped contaminated water leaked from this cracked drain '

line to the floor and evaporated. The affected area was approximately a 10 foot square. This occurred in a locked and controlled High Radiation Area. There was no spread of contamination outside of this area. The drain line was patched and several applications of "Alara" latex were applied to the affected area. The floor contamination levels were reduced from an average of 3600 mR/hr Beta to 1500 mR/hr Beta. This area has been appropriately marked and covered with plastic to reduce contamination spread,

c. Water was found in other areas such as resin beds and a hot sump liner. In no instance was there any spread of contamination outside of a radiation controlled zone. The water found was primarily ground water infiltration. The water from the hot sump liner was checked by gross counting. A dilution factor was established and used to achieve discharge limits of .25 Maximum Permissible Concentrations (MPC). The water from the two resin pits was isotopically analyzed. Dilution factors were estab-lished and used to achieve discharge limits of .14 (MPC) and .6 (MPC). Both the dilution factors and procedures used were developed by the Health Physicist and reviewed by the Radiation Safety Officer before any discharge was made. Immediate remedial action such as caulking of lids and patching obvious entry points was completed. Permanent repairs will be made to these areas as weather permits. 1986 maintenance projects include repair and urethane foaming of six roofs in the reactor complex, painting of metal siding, concrete wall preservation and other exterior building maintenance.

d. Measurements of radioactivity levels inside the Reactor Tank (RT) were planned as part of the engineering study. The (RT) has been sealed to assure a contained volume for the dry N2 purge that was started when the reactor shutdown phase began in 1973. Performing the in-tank activity measurements requires gaining access to the contained volume of the (RT) by uncapping a sealed tube. Before breaking this seal, NASA believed it prudent to sample the N2 purge gas for tritium and any other gaseous activity. Tritium was searched for because much of the t ? actor's beryllium reflector has been stored in the (RT) since shutdown.

i l

l 6

i

Measurements of the Na purge gas showed no activity other than tritium. Trit.ium activity in the purge gas is about 2.0 x 10 -7 micro curies per cc, which is the,MPC,for unrestricted release.

This purge gas is released inside the PBRF air release stack and undergoes a dilution factor estimated to be greater than 100 be-fore it is discharged to the environment from top of the stack.

11. License Changes:

There were no changes to the PBRF licenses in 1985. As mentioned previously, NASA requested reinstatement of the licenses for " possess-but-not-use" status in July of 1985, since its plans for PBRF dismantle-ment have not materialized due to continuing budget restrictions.

12. Other:

Disposal of Excess Plum Brook Station Property - GSA continues to investigate the possible transfer of 604 acres in the Southwest portion of Plum Brook Station to other government agencies. It is hoped the disposal of this parcel will be completed in 1986. The Station fenceline will be modified to conform to the new Station perimeter when the disposal of this parcel is completed. The nearest point of property affected is approximately 5,000 feet from the fenced site of the PBRF. In any case, NASA will continue to control access to the total Station, inspect, maintain and provide security surveillance for the existing or revised Plum Brook Station perimeter fenceline. Conditions at the PBRF will be unaffected.

7 l

i

. o GENERIC ORGANIZATION CNART NASA LEWIS RESEARCH CENTER DTQFr*mD I

EXECUTIVE LEVEL 1 SAFETY DIRECTORATE DOARD DIRECTOR INTERNAL HEALTH SAFETY AND AUDIT SECURITY DIV.

PBRF LEVEL 2 RADIATION SAFETY P B STATION SAFETY COMMITTEE MANAGEMENT OFFICER OFFICE PLOT SECURITY LEVEL 3 REALTH PHYSICS AND PBRF ENGINEER AND INSPECTION MAINTFNANCE

Contract) (Contract)

RESPONSIBLE FOR

~

LEVEL 1 - Compliance LEVEL 2 - Surveilance and Maintenance LEVEL 3 - Day to Day Oversite ,

1 FIGURE 1 1

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

National Aeronautics and Space Administration ,

Lewis Research Center Plum Brook Station 6100 Columbus Avenue Sandusky, Ohio 44870 n- .ee 1605 February 25, 1986 l

Director - Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation i Attn: Document Control Desk l U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l Washington, DC 20555 l

Subject:

Report of Reactor Status for the NASA Plum Brook Reactor (License No. TR-3, Docket 50-30) and the NASA Plum Brook .

Mock-Up Reactor (License R-93, Docket 50-185) l Pursuant to Section IV.5.15 of Dismantling Plan, Plum Brook Reactor Dismantling, enclosed herewith is the Annual Status Report dated February 10, l 1986, for the Plum Brook Reactor, 60 MW (th), and the Plum Brook Mock-Up Reactor,100 kw (th) for the reporting period January 1,1985 through  !

December 31, 1985. Submission of this annual report is also in compliance with Section 4.3 of the application for " possess-but-not-operate" with pro-tected safe storage submitted to the NRC, Subject reactors continue to be maintained in a protected safe storage condition.

7 [ J%c.

Henry G. Pfanner Engineer, Plum Brook Reactor Facility Enclosure Approved:

ndY 'b h!

Edward A. Richley r

Director of Administration l and Computer Services

/

b o I

')i

t cc:

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region III Attn: Mr. Kenneth R. Ridgeway, Inspector Reactor Operations Nuclear Support Branch Program Support Section 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Division of Licensing Attn: Mr. Robert E. Carter, Project Manager Standardization and Special Projects Branch l Washington, DC 20555 (Internal)

. 0120/W. A. Brahms

! 1000/E. A. Richley 1605/R. P. Kozar 1600/J. M. Earls 1620/A. B. Smith 8240/R. M. Schuh 7650/E. C. Boitel, Jr.

1605/H. E. McCune 1605/H. G. Pfanner 1605/H. G. Pfanner, PBRF Vital Records TEL/ ISO /J. E. Ross Lewis Research Center Library i

1 j

i i

i

!  ! Code  ! 1605 1 _ _16_00_ _1 _ _ _ _ _1 . _ _ _ _! _ _._ _ _.!

i

! CONCUR I Initials !_____! _-_ _ _.I _ _ _ _ _! _ _ _ _ _! _ _ _ _ _!

l I Date  ! # ~^ '

• 4 1 2 ' # N 1 1 1 I

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ - - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _