ML20217H189

Rept of Reactor Operations Jan-Dec 1997 for Ford Michigan Memorial - Phoenix Project Univ of Mi Ann Arbor

ML20217H189
Person / Time
Site:	University of Michigan
Issue date:	12/31/1997
From:	Fleming R MICHIGAN, UNIV. OF, ANN ARBOR, MI
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9804030217
Download: ML20217H189 (21)

Text

.

, h h NS 0hb$

/0l 0 ((lb' MICHIGAN MEMORIAL-PHOENIX PROJECT i

g,g PHOENIX MEMORIAL LABORATORY FORD NUCLEAR REACTOR ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN 48109-2100 March 19,1998 Document Control Desk United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: License R-28 Docket 50-2

Dear Sir:

The enclosed REPORT ON REACTOR OPERATIONS for the period January 1,1997 to December 31,1997 is submitted to comply with Section 6.6 of the Ford Nuclear Reactor Technical Specifications.

Sincerely,

& b! -

Ronald F. Fleming Director, Michigan Memorial-Phoenix Project xc: Theodore Michaels, Project Manager Document Control Desk United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Thomas Burdick Region III 801 Warrenville Road Lisle, IL 60532-4351 American Nuclear Insurers FNR Safety Review Committee FNR Health Physicist FNR Control Room Enclosure (1) \p I

,.O

( , V * -* '# '

N 9004030217 971231 DR ADOCK 050000 2

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

Phone:(734) 7644220 rax: (7341936-157I www.umich.edu/-mmpp/

a .

REPORT OF REACTOR OPERATIONS January 1,1997 to December 31,1997 FORD NUCLEAR REACTOR MICHIGAN MEMORIAL - PHOENIX PROJECT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN ANN ARBOR March 1998 Prepared For The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

- Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 ABSTRACT Technical Specifications for the Ford Nuclear Reactor (FNR) require the annual submission of this review of reactor operations to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC).

The reactor schedule of ten days of continuous operation at licensed power of two megawatts followed by four days of shutdown resulted in 5739.7 reactor operating hours,5,442.2 operating hours at full power,11,120.5 accumulated megawatt hours, and an overall reactor availability of 62.3 percent for the calendar year.

There were no reportable occurrences.

There were 12 unscheduled reactor shutdowns during the year.

There were no radioactive effluent releases above 10CFR20 limits. The maximum radiation dose equivalent received by an individual at the facility was 1.24 rem TEDE. The total radiation dose equivalent for all of the workers at the facility was 9.43 rem TEDE.

I l

)

2

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 FORD NUCLEAR REACTOR Docket No. 50-2 License No. R-28 REPORT OF REACTOR OPERATIONS January 1,1997 - December 31,1997 This report reviews the operation of the University of Michigan's Ford Nuclear Reactor for the period January I to December 31,1997.The report is to meet the requirement of Technical Specifications for the Ford Nuclear Reactor. The format for the sections that follow conforms to Section 6.6.1 of Technical Specifications.

The Ford Nuclear Reactor is operated by the Michigan Memorial-Phoenix Project of the University of Michigan. The Project, established in 1949 as a memorial to students and alumni of the University who died in World War II, encourages and supports research on the peaceful uses of nuclear energy and its social implications. In addition to the Ford Nuclear Reactor (FNR), the Project operates the Phoenix Memorial Laboratory (PML). These laboratories, together with a faculty research grant program, are the means by which the Project carries out its purpose.

The operation of the Ford Nuclear Reactor provides major assistance to a wide variety of research and educational programs. The reactor provides neutron irradiation services and neutron beamport experimental facilities for use by faculty, students, and researchers from the University of Michigan, other universities, and indust:ial research organizations. Reactor staff members teach classes related to nuclear reactors and the Ford Nuclear Reactor in particular and assist in reactor- )

related laboratories.

Tours are provided for school children, university students, and the public at large as part of a public education program. During the year 861 people participated in 70 tours.

The operating schedule of the reactor enables a sustained high level of participation by research groups. Continued support by the Department of Energy through the University Research Reactor Assistance Program [ Contract No. J-AF-4000-000 (DE-AC02-76ER00385)] and the Reactor Facility Cost Sharing Program (Contract No. DE-FG07-80ER10724) has been essential to maintaining operation of the reactor facility. )

l l

l l

• Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

1. OPERATIONS

SUMMARY

In January,1966, a continuous operating cycle was adopted for the Ford Nuclear Reactor at its licensed power level of two megawatts. The cycle consisted of approximately 25 days at full power followed by three days of shutdown maintenance. In June,1975, a reduced operating cycle consisting of ten days at full power followed by four days of shutdown maintenance was adopted A typical week consisted of 120 full-power operating hours. In July,1983, the reactor operating schedule was changed to Monday through Friday at licensed power and weekend shutdowns. Periodic maintenance weeks were scheduled during the year. In January,1985, a cycle consisting of four days or 96 full-:

power operating hours per week at licensed power followed by three days of shutdown maintenance was estabhshed in order to eliminate the periodic shutdown maintenance weeks needed in the previous cycle. Beginning July 1,1987, the reactor operating cycle returned to ten day operation at full power followed by four days of shutdown maintenance. This calendar year began with cycle 402 and ended with cycle 414. A cycle covers four weeks; two of the ten day - four day sequences.

er level of two megawatts which produces a peak The thermal reactor operates at a flux of approximately 2x10maximum n

2 pw/cm /sec. An equilibrium core configuration consists of approximately'41 standard and 4 control,19.75% enriched, plate-ty x: fuel elements. Standard elements contain 167 gm of U235 in 18 aluminum clad fue . plates.

Control elements, which have control rod guide channels, have nine plates and contain 83 gm of U235. Overall active fuel element dimensions are approximately 3"x 3"x 24".

Fuel elements are retired after burnup levels of approximately 35-40% are reached. Fuel burnup rate is approximately 2.46 gm U235/ day at two megawatts.

1.1 Facility Design Changes None 1.2 Equipment and Fuel Performance Characteristics Reactor equipment and fuel exhibited no abnormal characteristics. Replacement of expended fuel elements resulted in an annual use of six standard fuel elements and two control fuel elements.

No new standard or control fuel elements were received.

There were no spent fuel shipments.

4

- Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 1.3 Safety-Related Procedure Changes Safety-related procedures are those associated with operation, calibration, and maintenance of the primary coolant, the reactor safety system, the shim-safety rods, all scram functions, the high temperature auto rundown function, and the pool level rundown.

Calibration and Maintenance Procedure 201 - Shim-Safety Rod Calibration

1. The period per rod pull was increased from 45 to about 60 seconds to avoid exceeding the 30 second control rod inhibit signal due to dynamic reactivity effects while pulling the control rod to place the reactor on the stable 45 - 60 second period. This 30-second control rod inhibit (from the period recorder), when actuated, provided undesirable distraction and interruption in the calibration procedure.

The plotting portion of the procedure now specifies the objectives without mandating a method.

Table 1,"Information," was revised to document the methods and tools used for plotting rod worth curves. Table 1 now includes a signature from the Shift Supervisor, as well as a management review, to verify that the fit between the curves (plots) and the actual calibration data was checked and is acceptable.

Onerating Procedure 101 - Reactor Start-Up

1. Immediately prior to rod withdrawal, the procedure now instructs the operators to check the header up. This addition was made as a consequence of the March scram due to high power / header down.

2. The startup checklist was expanded to incorpoiate the mndown for reactor coolant inlet temperature reaching 116 F (114 F trip set point) when the reactor is at 2 MW. This change was part of Modification Request 123, which is discussed in section 5.1 of this report.

1.4 Maintenance, Surveillance Tests, and Inspection Results as Required by Technical Specifications.

Maintenance, surveillance tests, and inspections required by Technical Specifications were completed at the prescribed intervals. Procedures, data sheets, and a maintenance schedule / record provide documentation.

1.5 Summary of Changes, Tests, and Experiments for Which NRC Authorization was Required.

None 5

1

- Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 1.6 Operating Staff Changes The following reactor operations staff changes occurred:

Newiv Hired Position Dats Michael Landis Reactor Operator 02/10/97 Charlie Weger Reactor Operator 07/08/97 Eric Sharp Reactor Operator 09/02/97 Resiened or Retired

• Position Date James Young Lead Reactor Operator 05/23/97 William Stevenson Lead Reactor Operator 05/23/97 Charles Weger Engineering Technician III 02/07/97 1.7 Reportable Occurrences None

2. POWER GENERATION

SUMMARY

The following table summarizes reactor annual power generation.

Operating Full Power Megawatt Percent Cysjg Inclusive Dates Hours Operating Hours Hours Availability 402 01/07/97-02/04/97 354.0 339.2 684.2 50.5 403 02/04/97-03/03/97 506.7 471.2 950.3 70.1 404 03/03/97-03/29/97 470.5 437.6 878.2 65.1 405 03/29/97-04/28/97 493.0 454.7 916.6 67.7 406 04/28/97-05/27/97 472.9 416.4 836.8 62.0 407 05/27/97-06/24/97 480.2 455.8 917.0 67.8 408 06/24/97-07/22/97 446.6 435.9 875.6 64.9 409 07/22/97-08/19/97 442.4 408.1 823.8 60.7 410 08/19/97-09/15/97 463.3 453.1 911.6 67.5 411 09/15/97-10/13/97 488.2 480.3 939.6 71.5 412 10/13/97-11/11/97 488.2 477.3 958.0 71.0 413 11/11/97-12/09/97 391.2 373.7 753.4 55.6 414 12/10/97-01/07/98 242.5 238.9 675.4 35.6 Totals: 5,739.7 5,442.2 11,120.5 62.3 %

3. UNSCHEDULED REACTOR SHUTDOWN

SUMMARY

The followir.g table summarizes unscheduled reactor shutdowns.

3.1 Unscheduled Shutdowns Total Unscheduled Shutdowns 12 Average Operating Hours Between Unscheduled Shutdowns 478 6

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor '

January 1 - December 31,1997 3.2 Shutdown Types Single Rod Drop (NAR) 0 Multiple Rod Drop (NAR) 0 Operator Action 4 Operator Error 1

' Process Equipment 3 Reactor Controls 1 Electric Power Failure 3 3.3 Shutdown Type Definitions Single Rod Drop and Multiple Rod Drop (NAR)

An unscheduled shutdown caused by the release of one or more of the reactor shim-safety rods from its electromagnet, and for which at the time of the rod release, no specific component malfunction and no apparent reason (NAR) can be identified as having caused the release.

Ooerator Action A condition exists (usually some minor difficulty with an experiment) for which the operator on dutyjudges that shutdown of the reactor is required until the difficulty is cot.cected.

Operator Error The operator on duty makes a judgment or manipulative error which results in shutdown of the reactor.

Process Equipment Shutdown caused by a malfunction in the process equipment interlocks of the reactor control system.

Reactor Controls Shutdown initiated by malfunction of the control and detection equipment directly I associated with the reactor safety and control system.

E';ctrical Power Failure Shutdown caused by interruption in the reactor facility electric power supply.

n 7 -

.t

~

- Repon of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 3.4 Cycle Summary of Unscheduled Shutdowns Cycle 402 There was one unscheduled shutdown during cycle 402. The reactor shutdown was due to the secondary cooling pump motor tripping offline. December 1996 motor repairs were unsuccessful. A new motor was ordered and installed. The secondary pump has been performing normally with the new motor. The old motor was rebuilt by University of Michigan's Machinery Repair Group and retumed to FNR as a spare.

Cycle 404 There were four unscheduled shutdowns during cycle 404.

One unscheduled shutdown was due to a high power / header down scram actuation after an electrical power outage. The reactor remained shutdown until the following week's maintenance interval while a thorough and patient review of the events and '

subsequent facility conditions was performed. In addition, contact with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission was initiated to discuss the event with them. The review concluded that there was no reportable occurrence involved, and that FNR's response and corrective actions were appropriate. After verifying that the electrical power outage had not affected any reactor-associated systems or equipment deletoriously, the reactor was restarted at the next scheduled startup date.  ;

1 Two unscheduled shutdowns were due to electrical power flickers from Detroit Edison.

The founh unscheduled shutdown was due to a lead operator experiencing an irregular heartbeat. This lead operator had never experienced that before. The j

reactor was therefore shutdown and the lead operator promptly went to the U of M I

Hospital Emergency Room. The lead operator received a clean bill of health from the doctors prior to resuming licensed activities. The reactor was restarted after an SRO-licensed relief operator later arrived on-site. A full startup checklist was performed prior to restarting the reactor. Since then, this lead operator has not had a reoccurrence.

Cvele 406 There was one unscheduled shutdown during cycle 406 due to a Safety Signals Unbalanced alarm. A circuit problem in the non-safety analog output circuits of the FNR safety systems resulted m a down-scale analog meter reading and a safety signals unbalanced alami. The safety-related level trip circuits were not affected, and the reactor remained at normal power. The operators initiated a manual l shutdown due to the abnormal indication. Troubleshooting and IC op-amp replacements were perfomied on the analog output circuits. The reactor was restarted after all FNR safety system circuits were verified to be indicating (as well as functioning) normally again.

8

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 Cycle 408 There were two unscheduled shus ' owns during cycle 408.

The first was due to a tornado warning. The reactor was shutdown upon receipt of a tomado warning (funnel cloud sighted in Washtenaw County) from Department of Public Safety. No tornadoes were sighted near the reactor building or North Campus. The reactor was restarted after the tornado warning was lifted.

The second was due to the secondary cooling pump tripping out. The secondary pump motor was tripping on overload. The motor was running very hot, yet drawing current within its rated homeplate range. The pump-end bearing was greased and the thermal overload trip point raised. The new thermal overloads still satisfy the National Electrical Code requirements for overload protection of continuous duty motors (Article 430-32). These corrective actions restored the motor to normal operation. The reactor remained shutdown due to the imminent shutdown weekend.

Cvele 409 There was one unscheduled shutdown during cycle 409 due to an electrical power outage. The electrical power outage was due to brief service interruptions at Detroit Edison. The reactor stayed shutdown during the subsequent local flooding, which contributed over 10,000 gallons of rainwater to the Retention Tanks. FNR remained shutdown for a full day for facility cleanup and recovery of Retention Tank capacity. After a full checkout, the reactor was then restarted without difficulty.

Cvele 412 There were two unscheduled shutdowns during cycle 412.

The first unscheduled shutdown was a reactor scram due to Safety Channel B. The scram signal was attributed to a noise spike originating from the aged detector. The reactor was restarted without difficulty. A newly purchased detector was installed in channel B during a subsequent shutdown maintenance period.

The second unscheduled shutdown was a reactor scram due to operator error. A console operator accidentally pressed the " Annunciator Tect" pushbutton while responding to a routine alarm. Since the annunciator test signal simulates (among other things) reactor slow scrams, a scram occurred. The reactor was restarted without difficulty.

Cvele 413 There was one unscheduled shutdown during cycle 413. The reactor shutdown was due to debris found on the core. The debris was a piece of poly bc M from an old irradiation. This bottle broke while being retrieved during a prior < lown maintenance period and one piece was not retrieved. The reactor was pr. ptly shutdown when the piece was noted. The debris was retrieved and put ir, radwaste. A careful visual inspection of the core and vicinity found no otha debris. The reactor was then restarted without difficulty.

9

Report of Reactor Operations l Ford Nuclear Reactor l January 1 - December 31,1997 l l

4. CORRECTIVE MAINTENANCE ON SAFETY RELATED SYSTEMS AND

. COMPONENTS None

5. CHANGES, TESTS, AND EXPERIMENTS CARRIED OUT WITHOUT PRIOR NRC APPROVAL PURSUANT TO 10CFR50.59(a) 5.1 Modification Reauest 123 - Install temperature recorder rundown at core inlet temperature of 116 F when at 2 MW.

A change in the primary coolant pump resulted in a coolant flow rate increase from l 990 gpm to 1180 gpm. Although this is viewed as a benefit to safe operation, a potential difficulty m maintaining core inlet temperature below 116 F when the current rundown would occur at 129 F when the core is at high power (>80%) to ensure the fullest compliance with Safety Limit 2.1.1.2 (Tin =116F at 2 MW). A J Temporary Operating Instruction reduced the temperature recorder nmdown until i this modification could be installed. The SRC noted that the actual set point should I 1

be at i14 F to allow for instrument error. The SRC also considered the alternative of reducing primary coolant flow rate by throttling the pump discharge valve instead of performing this modification. This modification was judged preferable to reducing primary coolant flow rate. The SRC approved this modification request prior to installation.

6. RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENT RELEASE Quantities and types of radioactive effluent releases, environmental monitoring locations and data, and occupational personnel radiation exposures are provided in this section.

6.1 Gaseous Effluents Ar Releases Gaseous effluent concentrations are averaged over a period of one year. t l Quantity l Unit l )

a. Total gross radioactivity. 4.94x 10' Ci

b. Average concentration released. 1.43x10-7 Ci/ml

c. Average release rate. 1.55 pCi/sec

d. Maximum instantaneous concentration during Not pCi/ml special operations, tests, and experiments. Applicable

e. Percent ofAr ERL (Ef0uent Release Limits) 1428 Percent  ;

4 (1.0x10 pCi/ml) without dilution factor. l

f. Percent of d'Ar ERL with 400 dilution factor. 3.57 Percent j l

10 j

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997' 6.2 Radiohalogen Releases

a. Total iodine radioactivity by nuclide based upon a representative isotopic analysis. (Required if iodine is identified in primary coolant samples or if fueled experimente are conducted at the facility). Based on this criteria, this section of the report is not required. The analysis is based on primary coolant activity following one week of decay.

Iodine-131 was not identified in the one week count of the primary coolant samples.

Xenon-133 was not identified in the one week count of the primary coolant samples.

Tne pool water analyses show no indication of leaking fuel,

b. "' Iodine releases related to steady state reactor operation (Sample C-3, main reactor exhaust stack).

l Quantity Unit l

1. Total "'I release. 49 Ci

2. Average concentration released. 2.22x 10'" Ci/ml 0.11 Percent

3. Percent of "'I ERL (2.0x10-'6 Ci/ml) without dilution factor.

4. Percent of "'I ERL with 400 dilution 0.00028 Percent factor,

c. Radiohalogen releases related to combined steady state reactor operation and radiation laboratory activities (Sample C-2; combined secondary reactor exhaust and partial radiation laboratory exhaust.

1. Total C-2 stack radiohalogen releases.

Br-82 11,082 Ci I-123 417 Ci I-125 300 pCi  !

I-131 136 Ci l Hg-203 39 Ci i

11

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

2. ' Average concentration released.

l Quantity Unit l Br-82 7.54x 10 " Ci/ml I-123 2.84x1012 Ci/ml I-125 2.04x 10 i2 Ci/ml I-131 9.24x 10'" pCi/ml Hg-203 2.68x 10 ~ Ci/ml

3. Percent of ERL without the dilution factor.

Br-82 1.51 Percent I-123 0.01 - Percent I-125 0.68 Percent I-131 0.46 Percent Hg-203 0.03 Percent

4. Percent of ERL with factor of 400 dilution factor.

Br-82 0.00377 Percent I-123 0.00004 Percent 1-125 0.00170 Percent I-131 0.00116 Percent Hg-203 0.00007 Percent

d. Total Facility Release of Radiohalogens.

1. Total facility radiohalogen releases.

Br-82 19,061 Ci I-123 1,991 pCi 1-125 3,769 pCi 1-131 26,391 pCi Hg-203 1,680 pCi

2. Average concentration released.

l Br 3.34x 10~" pCi/ml I-123 3.49x10~ Ci/ml I-125 5.71 x 10- pCi/ml I-131 4.00x 10-" Ci/ml Hg-203 2.95 x 10 Ci/ml 12

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

3. Percent of ERL without the dilution factor.

gantity Unit 7 Br-82 0.67 Percent I-123 0.02 Percent I-125 1.90 Percent I-131 19.99 Percent Hg-203 0.29 Percent TOTAL 22.87 Percent

4. Percent of ERL with factor of 400 dilution factor.

Br-82 0.00167 Percent I-123 0.00004 Percent I-125 0.00476 Percent I-131 0.04998 Percent Hg-203 0.00074 Percent TOTAL 0.05719 Percent 6.3 Particulate Releases Particulate activity for nuclides with halflives greater than eight days.

a. Total gross radioactivity. 326 pCi

b. Average concentration. 5.39x10- 2 pCi/ml

c. Percent of *I ERL(1.0x10 2 pCi/ml) 53.91 Percent without dilution factor.

d. Percent of ERL with 400 dilution 0.13 Pcreent factor.

4 Gross alpha activity is required to be measured if the operational or experimental ,

program could result in the release of alpha emitters. )

e. Gross alpha radioactivity. l Not Required l 6.4 Liquid Effluents -)

a. Gross Beta-Gamma Radioactivity.

H-3 1,862 pCi Gross Beta . 580.24 Ci  ;

Gross Gamma 961.76 pCi TUTAL 3,404 Ci .

I 13 l

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

b. Average Beta-Gamma Concentrations Released.

l Quantity Unit l d

H-3 1.64x10 pCi/ml Gross Beta 5.11x10 5 Ci/ml Gross Gamma 8.47x10 5 Ci/ml d

TOTAL 3.00x10 pCi/ml

c. Maximum Beta-Gamma Concentrations Released.

d H-3 1.64x10 pCi/ml Gross Beta 5.11 x 10 pCi/ml Gross Gamma 8.47x10 5 Ci/ml TOTAL 3.00x10" pCi/ml

d. Alpha Radioactivity - Not Required

c. Average Alpha Concentrations - Not Required

f. Total Liquid Waste Volume - 1.14x 10' ml

g. Total dilution water volume added prior to release - None

h. Isotopic Analysis-Total Activity Activity Isotope ( Ci)

Ag-108m 8.97 Ag-110m 25.21 Co-60 108.21 Na-24 789.17 Mn-56 30.20 Gross beta 580.24 H-3 1,862.22 TOTAL 3.404.23 14

• - Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

i. Isotopic Analysis-Concentration Concentration Isotope ( Ci/ml)

Ag-108m 7.90x10 4 Ag-110m 2.22x 10~6 Co-60 9.53x 10

Na-24 6.95x10 5 Mn-56 2.66x 10-'

Gross beta 5.1 lx 10'5 d

H-3 1.64x10 TOTAL 3.00x10 4

j. Percent of 10CFR20, Appendix B, Table 3, Release to sewers Monthly Average Concentration (MAC) undiluted.

% MAC Isotope undiluted Ag-108m 0.009 Ag-110m 0.037 Co-60 0.318 Na-24 0.139 Mn-56 0.004 Gross beta 5.110 II-3 0.016 TOTAL 5.633

k. Percent of 10CFR20, Appendix B, Table 3, Release to sewers (MAC) with 300 dilution factor.

% MAC Isotope diluted Ag-108m 2.93x10 5 4

Ag-110m 1.23x10 Co-60 1.06x 10'8 Na-24 4.63x10 4 Mn-56 1.27x10 5 Gross beta 1.70x10 2 H-3 5.47x10'8 TUTAL- 0.019 6.5 Accident Evaluation Monitoring The accident evaluation monitoring program for the Ford Nuclear Reactor facility

- consists of direct radiation monitors (TLD), air sampling stations located around the facility, and selected water and sewer sampling stations.

15

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

a. TLD Monitors ,

TLDs located at stations to the nonh (lawn adjacent to the reactor building),

northeast (fluids), east (Beal Avenue), south (Glazier Way), and west (School of Music) of the reactor facility are collected and sent to a commercial dosimetry company for analysis. The values reported have a deploy control TLD subtracted. Background (UM Botanical Gardens) has not been subtracted from the TLD values.

Annual Quarterly Total Mean Location Direction (mrem) (mrem)

FNR Lawn North 40.1 10.0 Fluids

• Northeast 19.7 6.6 Beal

• East 22.9 7.6 Glazier W ty South 25.4 6.4 School of Music West 26.2 6.6 Environmental Control (UM Botanical Gardens) 24.2 6.1

• Missing dosimeter for Beal in the 1st Quarter and fluids in the 3rd Quarter.

Background is taken at a distance in excess of one mile from the reactor at The University of Michigan Botanical Gardens. None of the readings for  !

the indicator locations were statistically distinguishable from the background readings (Student's T-Test),

b. Dust Samples Five air grab samples are collected weekly from continuously operating monitors located to the north (Nonhwood Apartments), east (Industrial and Operations Engineering), northeast (Laundry), south (Institute of Science and Technology), and west (Media Union) of the reactor facility. Each filter sample is counted for net beta activity. There are 48 samples included in this report for each location except for the Media Union and Environmental Control which have 47. Gas proportional counter backgrounds have been subtracted from the concentrations reported. Environmental background (University of. Michigan Botanical Gardens) has not been subtracted from the mean radioactivity concentrations shown below.

Mean Station Description Concentration Unit Northwood (N) 1.75x10 Ci/ml Industrial and Operations Engineering (E) 2.58x 10 Ci/ml Media Union (W) 2.64x 10 Ci/ml Institute of Science and Technology (S) 2.73 x 10 pCi/ml Laundry (NE) 2.66x 10 Ci/ml Environmental Control (Background) 2.69x 10 Ci/ml 16

4 .

• Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 The result of air sampling expressed in percentages of the Effluunt Release

. Limits are shown be..ow.

Percent Station Description ERL Unit Northwood (N) 1.75 Percent Industrial and Operations Engineering (E) 2.58 Percent Media Union (W) .

2.64 Percent Institute of Science and Technology (S) 2.73 Percent Laundry (NE) 2.66 Percent Environmental Control (Background) 2.69 Percent

c. Water Samples Three monthly water grab samples are collected from the Huron River. One location is upstream (Argo Pump) and the other two are downstream (Dixboro and Superior). There are 12 samples for each location. Each water sample is concentrated by evaporation on a planchet and then analyzed on a gas proportional counter. Gas proportional counter backgrounds have been subtracted from the concentrations reported. Environmental background (tap water) has not been subtracted from the concentrations reported.

Average Concentration Location Direction Ci/ml %ERL Argo Pump West Upstream 8.66x 10-' O.87 Dixboro Southeast Downstream 1.48x 10 O.15 Superior (discharge Ann Southeast Arbor Wastewater Treatment Downstream 2.92x 10* 0.03 Background (Tap Water) West Upstream - 1.94 x 10 -0.19 Environmental Control (Whitmore Lake) North Upstream - 1.66x 10 -0.17

d. Sewage Samples  ;

Ann Arbor Waste Water Treatment Plant personnel collect two 100ml samples daily; one raw and one treated sewage. Composite samples are collected monthly. Each sample is concentrated by evaporation on a planchet and then analyzed on a gas proportional counter. Gas proportional counter backgrounds have been subtracted from the concentrations reported.

Environmental background (tap water) has not been subtracted from the concentrations reported.

17

______a

Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

- Average Concentration Location Direction Ci/ml %ERL Ann Arbor Sewage Untreated Southeast Downstream 9.81x10 4 0.98 Ann ArborSewage-Treated Southeast Downstream 8.05x10 4 0.80

e. Maximum Cumulative Radiation Dose The maximum cumulative radiation dose which could have been received by an individual continuously present in an unrestricted area during reactor operations from direct radiation exposure, exposure to gaseous effluents, and exposure to liquid effluents:

1. Direct radiation exposure to such an individual is negligible since a survey of occupied areas around the reactor building shows insignificant radiation dose rates above background from the reactor.

2. Airborne Effluents The airborne effluents from the reactor and the contiguous laboratory facility are as follows:

Total %ERL  % ERL Isotope Release Concentration Undiluted Diluted (pCi) - (pCi/ml)

Ar-41 4.94x 10' l .43x 10 1428.36 3.57000 Br-82 19061.40 3.34x 10~" 0.67 0.00167 Hg-203 1680.31 2.95x 10-i2 0.29 0.00074 I-123 1990.60 3.49x10-i2 0.02 0.00004 I-125 3769.08 5.71x 10-i2 1.90 0.00476 I-131 26391.90 4.00x 10'" 19.99 0.04998 Gross Particulate 325.78 5.39x 10- 53.91 0.13000 TOTAL 1505.15 3.75719 Equivalent Radiation Dose (mrem) 1.88 The total airborne effluent releases are well within the allowed release concentrations when the conservative dilution factor of 400 is applied.

The equivalent total dose from all airbome effluent releases is well below the 10 mrem per year constraint described in NRC Information Notice 97-04," Implementation of a New Constraint on Radioactive Air Effluents."

18

• Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997

3. Liquid Effluents The liquid effluents from the reactor and the contiguous laboratory facility are as follows:

Total %ERL  % ERL Isotooe Release Concentration Undiluted Diluted (pCi) (pCi/ml)

Ag-108m 8.97 7.90x 10 O.088 0.00029 Ag-110m 25.21 2.22x 10 O.370 0.00123 Co-60 108.21 9.53x 10 3.177 0.01059 Na-24 789.17 6.95x10 5 1.390 0.00463 Mn-56 30.20 2.66x 10^6 0.038 0.00013 Gross Beta 580.24 5.11 x 10 51.100 0.17033 4

H-3 1862.22 1.64x10 0.164 0.00055 TOTAL 56.326 0.18775 Equivalent Radiation Dose (mrem) 0.09

f. If levels of radioactive materials in environmental media, as determined by an environmental monitoring program, indicate the likelihood of public intake in excess of 1% of those that could result from continuous exposure to the concentration values listed in Appendix B, Table 2,10CFR20, estimate the likely resultant exposure to individuals and to population groups and the assumptions upon which those estimates are based.

Exposure of the general public to 1 ERL would result in a whole body dose of 50 mrem. The maximum public dose based on airborne and lic uid effluent releases of 3.94% ERL is 1.97 mrem. This dose is basec on a member of the public being continuously present at the point of minimum dilution near the reactor building.

6.6 Occupational Personnel Radiation Exposures Two hundred facility personnel were provided personal radiation dosimeters.

Individuals for whom extremity monitoring was provided received TLD ring dosimeters for each hand. No radiation exposures greater than 50 mrem were received at the facility by individuals under the age of 18. There are no declared pregnant females at the facility.

19

'* Report of Reactor Operations Ford Nuclear Reactor January 1 - December 31,1997 A summary of whole body exposures for the year is as follows:

Estimated Whole Body (DDE) Number ofIndividuals Exposure Range (rem) in Each Range No measurable exposure 129 Measurable exposure:

less than 0.10 52 0.10 - 0.25' 3 0.25 - 0.50 11 0.50 - 0.75 3 0.75 - 1.00 1 1.00 - 1.25 1 Greater than 1.25 0 Total 200 Maximum individual whole body exposure: 1.24 rem DDE Facility total " deep" whole body exposure: 9.43 rem DDE Mean " deep" whole body exposure: 47 mrem DDE 20