ML20217K140
| ML20217K140 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000128 |
| Issue date: | 12/31/1997 |
| From: | Okelly S TEXAS A&M UNIV., COLLEGE STATION, TX |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 98-0058, 98-58, NUDOCS 9804070135 | |
| Download: ML20217K140 (23) | |
Text
,
TEXAS ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION 8'
TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY COLLEGE STATION, TEXAS 77843-3576
[ *f l
Y i L NUCLEAR SCIENCE CENTER 409/845-7551 March 30,1998 98-0058 l U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
! ' ATTN: Document Control Desk l Washington,DC 20555
Subject:
Annual Report l
l
Reference:
NRC Facility License R-83, Docket 50-128
Dear Sir:
Attached you will find the 1997 Annual Report for the Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Center. Ifyou have any questions or comments please contact me at 409/845-7551.
Sincerely, l (
L Sean O' Kelly
, Assistant Director SOK/tli
Attachment:
1997 Annual Report xc: ' 12110/ Central File o*O NRC License File NRC Correspondence File 9804070135 971231 PDR ADOCK 05000128 -
R PDR RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR MANKIND
l .
l- .
l 1 I
Texas A&M University System Texas Engineering Experiment Station Nuclear Science Center 1
1997 Annual Report Facility Operating License R-83 Building 1995 J
Nuclear Science Road College Station, Texas 77843-3575 March 1998 1
~
l Texas A&M Univ:rsity System Nucliar Science Ccnter 1997 Annual Report Contents 1.0* Introduction 4 1.1 Nuclear Science Center StafT 5 2.0 ' Reactor Utilization for 1995-1996 5 2.1 Research Enhancement Pregram . 7 2.2 TAMU Academic Support Program 7 I
23 . DOE University Reactor Sharing Program 7 j 2.4 Commercial Activities 8 3.0 Facility and Procedure Changes 9 i
3.1 - Facility Modifications 9
- 3.2 . Er.periment Modifications 11 4.0 ' Reactor Ma.utenance and Surveillance 11 4.1 Scheduled Maintenance 11 4.2 Unscheduled Maintenance 11 4.3 Emergency Planning and Review a 4.4 Unscheduled Shutdowns 13 4.5 Reportable Occurrences 13 5.0 IIcalth Physics Surveillance 17 5.1 Radioactive Shipments .17
~5.2' PersonnelMonitoring 17
- l. 53 . Facility Monitoring 13 ;
i 5.4 Particulate Efnuent Munitoring 18 !
5.5 Gaseous Efiluent Monitoring 19. l l 1 I 5.6 Liquid Effluent Monitoring . -20 L
. 6.0 EnvironmentalMonitoring 20 6.1 - Environment Survey Samples 21 6.2 Site Boundary Monitoring 22 2
Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Ccsnter 1997 AnnualReport I
7.0 - Radioactive Waste Shipments 23 8.0 Reactor Safety Board 23 3
Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Center 1997 Annual Report
~ 1. 0 Introduction The Nuclear Science Center is operated by the Texas Engineering Experiment Station as a service to the Texas A&M University System and the state of Texas. The Nuclear Science Center (NSC) is a multi-disciplinary research and education center supporting basic and applied research in all nuclear related fields of science and engineering as well as providing educational opportunities for students in those fields. The NSC also provides services to commercial ventures requiring ediation or isotope production services.
This annual report has been prepared by the NSC staff to satisfy the reporting requirements of Technical Specification 6.6.1 of the facility operating license R-83 and of the Department of Energy University Reactor Fuel Assistance Program subcontract No.
C87-101594 (DE-AC07-76ER02426). The facility license currently extends to March 2003.
I l-i 4
i l
f.
a Texas A&M University System Nuclear Sci:nce Center 1997 Annual Report l
1.I ' Nuclear Science Center Staff
~ The staff at the Nuclear Science Center is divided into four primary work groups:
Operations, Health Physics, Maintenance and Administration. Personnel directly
' involved with the operation and maintenance of the reactor are NRC-licensed operators.
Th'e NSC is committed to its educational responsibilities and many of the staff are part or full-time students at Texas A&M University.
~5_ l l
- 7. l
- === =n= =E==- =- ~==-
- 55: 53_
-b l- 7-l E.'l *l lI- 'I
~ ~
l -E: l - l #:~~ l
-$- 'l :l i~
l.::.ll==.llTl-((.i.,
l==l =-;
J==l i i
l==l 1l -
2.0 Reactor Utilization for 1997 )
The Nuclear Science Center reactor has been in operation since 1962. The reactor is a 1 l Megawatt MTR converted to TRIGA fuel. The TRIGA fuel is high-enrichment uranium (HEU) with 70% enrichment, but will be converted to 20% enriched fuel when DOE funids become available. Core VIII-A is the current core configuration and has been used since March 1986. The NSC reactor is pulse operational and is pulsed to approximately 1100 MW for nuclear engineering laboratories and staff training.-
The NSC reactor operated for 2199 hours0.0255 days <br />0.611 hours <br />0.00364 weeks <br />8.367195e-4 months <br /> in 1997 with a total integrated power of 89.8 MW-Days. There were 773 irradiations and services performed at the NSC during the reporting period. The NSC provided services to TAMUS departments, other universities, research centers and secondary schools in and outside the state of Texas. Ten departments at TAMU and 6 other universities used the reactor regularly in 1997. The L NSC reactor had 90 % availability in 1997.
L l
5 i
i a.- l
Texas A&M University System Nuclect Science Center 1997 Annual Report Reactor Utilization Summary
, , 1997 Days of Reactor Operation 230 Integrated Po'-u 89.8 Number of Ho u at Steady-State 2199.14 Number of Pulses 47 Number of Reactor Irradiations 773 Beam Port / Thermal Column Experiment Hours 1250 Ilours Irradiation Cell Use 186.5 Number of Visitors 2853 Annual Reactor Utilization 2200 ?'"
2120 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 Year 6
I Tzxas A&M Univ;rsity System Nuclear Science Center 1997 AnnualReport
. 2.1 Research Enhancement Program The 70th Texas Legislature established the Research Enhancement Program (REP) in 1987 to " encourage and provide for research conducted by faculty members". The REP replaced the fonner " Organized Research" program.
The TAMU Office of the Vice President for Research administers the REP funds. REP funds are generally allocated to the NSC carly in the fiscal year. TAMUS faculty that desire to use the many irradiation services at the NSC reactor must fonnally apply at the NSC to receive local funding for each individual project. This proposal method is flexible and significantly reduces a project's start-up time.
2.2 Texas A&M University Academic Support Program Texas A&M University provides funding for at the reactor for such academic activities as nuclear engineering laboratories, neutron activation analysis demonstrations and laboratories, graduate student thesis research and undergraduate research projects. The program has been very successful and is crucial for many graduate students whose chosen research uses the NSC reactor in some way, but is not supponed by any research grant.
The NSC's reputation as a multi-disciplinary institution is reflected in the wide range of the academic users from the university.
2.3 Reactor Sharing Program The University Reactor Sharing Program provides funds for reactor experimentation to those institutions that do not normally have access to a research reactor. The Nuclear Science Center (NSC) has participated in the program since 1980 with great success.
During the 1996-1997 contract year, eleven research institutions utilized the NSC with the support of the Reactor Sharing Program Additionally, the funding provided reactor tours and " hands-on" projects to many secondary schools.
The research projects supported by the program range from geological dating to higher current superconducting magnets. The funding gave small colleges and universities the opportunity to use the NSC for teaching courses in nuclear processes; specifically neutron l activation analysis and gamma spectroscopy. The Reactor Sharing Program supported the constmetion of a Fast Neutron Flux Irradiator for users at New Mexico Institute of l Mining and Technology and the University of Houston. This device has been l characterized and has been found to have near optimum neutron fluxes for Ar"/Ar*
dating.
7
I Texas A&M University System Nucieni Science Center 1997 AnnualReport l
,_ 2A Commercial Activity and External Research The NSC provides services to a variety of users who have their own funding. A majority of the commercial activities are related to isotope production of radioactive tracers for suppoit of the Texas petroleum and chemical industries.' Another commercial activity uses the converted Thennal Column Area for the production of micropore filters that are -)
now being used in ultra-pure water systems in the semiconductor industry. A significant amount of research at the reactor is funded by outside research grants.
The NSC has many years of experience in the production of radioisotopes and has developed several customer-specific methods for radioactive sample handling. The production of radioisotopes generally involves handling high-activity radioactive materials during unloading, therefore the stafTtake. all possible precautions to minimize their exposures during the transfer of materials to the shipping shields.
I n
8 i
1 T;;xts A&M Univzrsity System Nuclear Scienc2 Center 1997 AnnualReport l
I 3.0, Facility and Procedure Changes Facility Modifications The following items were authorized facility modifications and maintenance in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59. The approvals were documented in NSC staff meeting j minutes or RSB meeting minutes as appropriate.
- 1. Corrective maintenance to repair bent Transient Rod shaft (March 18)
During semiannual maintenance the week of 3/10/97, the TR drive assembly was broken down to repair an air leak in the piston area. During the disassembly it was noted that the piston shaft had a slight bend in it that was attributed to problems during inspections and repairs in July 1996. The piston was replaced with a spare that required a small amount of machining. When the drive assembly was reinstalled a new set oflimit switches were installed to replace a set that determined TR position indication reset and TR down light, i
During testing the rod performed as expected with a measured scram time of 1.0 second.
During prestartup tests Operators noted that TR position indication was indicating ,
incorrectly and not always resetting at 1.0%. The limit switches were checked and 4 adjusted but the problem was not corrected. Troubleshooting by the Electronics Shop I fo.md a broken foil on the PC board for the position indication electronics. This failure I was intermittent and prevented the limit switch that reset indications from receiving a
" Cylinder Down" signal. As the indication counter was not reset the controller logic did ;
not consider an indication of 00.0 to be a tme cylinder down indication and allowed the TR motor to continue to drive when the operator held the DOWN button on the controller.
The motor and drive chain had sufficient torque to drive the shock absorber into the piston shaft and the compressive stress caused the stainless steel piston shaft to bend. ]'
This was found during th.: restests of the TR indication when the rod withdrew as the outer cylinder reached ~17%.
The bent shaft would have prevented a complete scram of the TR from the full up position. As the shaft was bent and discovered during shutdown maintenance this was not considered to be a reportable occurrence as defined in the Technical Specifications.
' A review of MA-47, Safety Evaluation of TR upgrade, found that the original motor had an approximate torque of 10 in-oz (it was noted that this could not be easily verified as 4 the motor rated torque was not on the original motor label plate) the replacement motor I had a torque of 10 in-lbs. The motor torque was high enough to stress the piston shaft l rather than stalling out. Previously, the chain drive was a light-weight soft plastic chain i that had produced a large amount of plastic-wear dust. The chain was replaced with a j hard plastic chain that had high strength. This chain, in tum, allowed the high-torque j motor to apply stress to the piston rod. j I
I 9
l
l Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Center 1997 Annu 1 Report Corrective Action
~
, A new shaft was manufactured as a replacement to the bent shaft. The dimensions were l obtained from original drawings and direct measurements of the first piston rod.
l The immediate corrective actions involve the prevention of another electrical failure that caused the motor to continue to drive. A set oflimit switches on the TR shock absorber will electrically disable the drive motor at the rod bottom position and at the point wherc
! it would contact the pulse stop (approximately 28% rod position). This in effect is a backup to the console rod controller which opens the relay to the motors when the rod has -
been driven to 0.0%. A mechanical stop has been added which will prevent damage if the l rod were moved by hand (during a shutdown maintenance period).
- 2. Temporary Removal of NSC Rear Fence (April 7) i-l Due to the construction of the Microbeam Accelerator building it was necessary to temporarily remove a section of the NSC site boundary. The fence defined the rear .
boundary of the NSC facility and designated the restricted area for radiological purposes.
It was determined that a member of the public would need to travel through a mile of
- dense forest to arrive at the rear of the NSC. 'A temporary construction fence was installed that would clearly indicate that a boundary existed.
H 3. Installation of booster fan for Lab #3 fume hood (May 8)
A chemical fume hood was installed in Lab #3 in order to support the chemical etching of silicon wafers for NAA. The Lab has been refurbished primarily to support NAA chemical separations. It was necessary to install a booster fan to remove nitric acid vapors from the hood. The fan exhausted directly into the suction of the Central Exhaust Fan for greater flow. A waming light is installed at the fume hood to warn experimenters if the CEF has been tripped off.-
- 4. Temporary replacement of potentiometer in Safety Amplifier Drawer (December 12)
The " Trip Test Switch" on Safety Amplifier #2 failed during a prestartup check. A direct replacement was ordered but would not be delivered for 7-10 days. It was determined that a locally obtained replacement would perform the same function with the exception of an "OFF" position. The SRO was required to verify that the test current was zero prior to reactor startup. The potentiometer was replaced as soon as possible.
- 5. - Microbeam Accelerator Building L A new building that will house a 2 MV Tandem linear accelerator and an industrial X-ray machine has been built on the NSC site. The machines will be used as part of a new radiobiology program at Texas A&M. The machines will be registered with the state of Texas and monitored by the NSC HP staff.
l 1
10
Tcxas A&M University System Nuclear Science Center 1997 AnnualReport 3.2 Experiment Authorizations and Modifications An experiment to produce Iodine-125 was presented to the Reactor Safety Board review.
Approval is pending NRC license change and experiment review. A request for a license amendment was prepared in late 1997.
4.0 Reactor Maintenance and Surveillance 4.1 Scheduled Maintenance
. Calibrations were performed on the Fuel Element Temperature Channel, Area Radiation Monitors and the Linear, Log, and Safety Power Channels as required by the Technical Specifications. All surveillances required by the reactor license were performed.
Control rod worth, and scram time measurements were performed in September 1997.
The total rod worth was found to be $16.95. The most reactive control rod is Shim Safety
- 4 with a worth of $ 4.69. Shutdown margin was determined to be $ 3.26 and core excess was measured as $ 709. Scram times on all rods were less than 1.2 seconds.
A calorimetric calibration was performed following each maintenance period. Fuel inspections were perfonned as required by the Technical Specification with no abnormalities noted. Bundle I-dot was noted to be difficult to breakdown. A small washer was found jammed in the bundle top-handle. All operators were lectured on the importance of maintaining control ofloose items above the reactor. All Control Rods were visually inspected.
The cold critical reactivity worth for each reactor experiment was measured prior to full experiment approval. The most reactive fixed experiment has been found to be the Fast Flux Pneumatic Receiver (-$1.44) with the negative worth caused by high boron loading.
4.2 Unscheduled Maintenance j 1/22/97 Failure of relay in linear drawer prevented Regulating Rod from driving in automatically. Rod could be operated in manual.
2/12/97 Repair of air connection to Transient Rod cylinder. Repair ofIrradiation ell Scram switch and wiring 2/18/97 Repair of Security System backup battery i
2/20/97 Replacement of Facility Air Compressor after-cooler i
' 2/23/97 Replacement of Transient Rod Console Controller and Indicator Module f
l l
11 ]
Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Center 1997 Annual Repon l 2/27/97 Failure of SS#4 Position Indication when fully inserted (Carriage Down Light). Repaired.
3/10/97 Repair of Cooling Tower supply water line 3/11/97 Bent Transient Rod Piston Shaft due to failure of TR position indication.
3/28/97 Repair to pool skimmer pump controller 4/7/97 Repair Cell door / Reactor bridge interlock 4/15/97 Repair to SS#3 CRDM encoder 5/21/97 Replaced bearings in #1 Sump Pump 5/26/97 Minor leak on #2 Liquid Waste huk Valve. Repaired.
7/12/97 Repair of Skimmer pump bearings 7/23/97 Broken ground in Regulating Rod. Repaired.
7/29/97 Replaced Pneumatic Transfer Hoses to Lab #6 8/10/97 Facility Air Compressor Gasket Repair 8/18/97 Repair of Water line to Cooling Tower 8/21/97 Repair of Facility Hot Water System 9/23/97 Seized drive motor on Regulating Rod. Repaired 9/24/97 Replaced backup facility air compressor with larger capacity compressor 10/11/97 Change switch position of Fuel Thermocouples 11/3/97 Inspections of elements following reportable occurance i
11/7/97 Surveillance camera added to rear of facility l 11/13/97- Movement of ARM for Lab 6 and 7 to be near the operator 11/14/97 Movement of ARM for Lab 3 to another wall 12/12/97 Calibration of Pulse Drawer .
l 12/18/97 Disassembly of TC Irradiator Area prior to refurbishment !
12 t
e' '
TGxas A&M University System Nuclear Science Osnter 1997 AnnualReport 4.3 Emergency Planning and Review The Facility Security Plan and Emergency Plan were review by the NSC staff on March 3 and by the RSB on May 27. ' All required extemal audits were completed during the reporting period.'
4.4 ' Unscheduled Shutdowns -
There were nine unscheduled reactor shutdowns occurred during 1997,' Four shutdowns resulted from a loss of facility electrical power. The remaining causes are detailed below:
- 1. January 14, Failure in Regulating Rod Drawer caused overcurrent condition and arcing at motor. Manual Scram.
- 2. September 1, During fuel removal from reactor the neutron source was moved and caused period scram.
- 3. September 11, Noisy signal on log drawer was being investigated and teclinician caused period scram. During Rod Calibrations
,4. September 12, Investigating SS#3 Jam light during rod testing. Mechanical shock
- caused Shim Safety 3 to drop.
- 5. December 19, During reactor pulsing a spurious sign. *,used safety amplifier scram.
' 4.5 Reportable Occurrences There was a single reportable occurrence in 1997.
On Thursday, October 30, during an evening Nuclear Engineering Lab (Reactor
. Calorimetric), Shim Safety No. 2 was found to be binding and became stuck in the withdrawn position. The control rod failed to scram; therefore this was considered a reportable occurrence in accordance with the R-83 Technical Specifications. NSC Management informed Mr. Marvin Mendonca (NRR/DRPM/PDND) of the NRC on October 31. The reactor was inspected and returned to normal operations.
l
'" The following is a description of the events and the conclusions.
Sequence ofEvents 13
Texas A&M University Systern Nuclear Science Center 1997 AnnualReport The reactor was being taken to a power of 500kW for a Nuclear Engineering 405 calorimetric experiment. The SRO instructed the RO to start up the reactor to 500kW.
Upon movement of the shim safeties in " gang," the RO noticed that the Rod Down light never cleared. This meant that the control rod was not coupled to the rod drive and was not withdrawing with the other three shim safetics. On Tuesday, Octcber 28,1997, the control rod drive for shim safety No.2 had been replaced for scheduled annual maintenance. Knowing this, the SRO and RO decided to swap the control rod drives back because the old control rod drive was known to have worked before the initial swap.
After the rod drive assembly replacement, startup continued and all indications were nonnal.
The reactor was at 500kW and the control rods were in the process of being banked. The control rod positions were at approximately 59.5% and were going to be banked at 60.0%. When shim safety No.2 was being moved to 60.0%, the " engaged" light went out and the " rod down" light did not actuate. The RO thought that the wiring behind the light (LED) might be at fault. The shim safety No.2 was driven down and the " engaged" light re-energized at approximately 59.8%. A second attempt was made to raise shim safety No.2 to 60.0%. Shim safety No.2 was raised to 60.0% with normal indications. The
" engaged" light blinked off and then back on while the RO was taking log readings following the reactor startup.
The SRO verified that shim safety No.2 was still in the raised position at the Reactor Bridge. An attempt was made to individually scram shim safety No.2 to determine its location. The " engaged" light went out momentarily, but the " rod down" light never actuated. The SRO directed to shutdown the reactor and abort the experiment. During the shutdown, shim safety No.2 was found to scram with the " rod down" light actuating between 20.0% and 30.0%. Shim safety No.2 was tested with the reactor shutdown. It was determined that the control rod scrammed at a maximum height of approximately 40.5%.
Afler these events, the Director and Assistant Director were notified and the appropriate comments were made in the shift change and RO logs.
Subsequent Events On Friday, October 31,1997, it was decided that the reactor would be partially unloaded l to examine shim safety No.2 and the respective bundle for damage. The Health Physicist obtained a reactor pool sample to determine if there had been any damage to the bundle, fueled follower or poison section. The results were negative and no fission products detected. The core was examined prior to unloading. It was discovered that the hold down foot, attached to the bottom of the control rod barrel (see attached figures), was not positioned properly on the bundle top handle. There was indication that the hold down foot was rotated approximately 45*. It was also determined that the top of the control rod drive assembly at the bridge level was higher than the other control rod drives. The control rod was repositioned until the drive motor housing heights matched. The core was re-examined and it was found that the control rod hold down foot was still not l
14
! J
Tex:s A&M University System Nudear Sci:nce Center 1997 Annual Report properly positioned even though the height was correct. The hold down foot was found positioned on the side of the bundle top handle and not directly over the handle. 'ne core was then partially unloaded to the point where shim safeties No.2 and No.3 could be removed and inspected. Shim safety No.2 and the respective bundle were inspected and no abnormalities were found. The core was reassembled and the control rods returned to the same locations. The core and control rods were verified as being properly assembled by the Director and Assistant Director. Scram times were measured on both control rods that were removed. The times were 0.69 and 0.65 seconds for shim safeties No.2 and No.3 respectively. The Director then gave written permission in accordance with the facility Technical Specifications for a return to regular reactor operations.
Root Cause ofthe Reportable Occurrence A root cause analysis meeting was held on November 4 with a representative of the NRC (Mr. Stephen Holmes) in attendance. The cause was identified as incorrect spacing between the hold down foot and the bundle top-handle. The fueled control rod followers and hold down feet were installed in the reactor i- 1972. The design was for the hold down foot to be 0.125 inches above the top handle to accommodate possible thermal expansion of the fuel bundle. The NSC procedure (SOP II-I) for the installation of the )
control rod calls for the rod to be raised approximately 0.250 inches via the control rod i barrel support adjusting nuts. This distance was chosen to prevent measurement errors in a limiting direction. A 0.250 inch clearance was intended to insure the 0.125 inch )
distance while not lifting the hold down foot over the top handle (0.5 inch diameter).
The Shim Safety No.2 rod had been removed during a partial core unload in early October. Scram time was measured as 0.67 seconds at that time. There was no prior indication of rod binding until the rod became stuck on October 30. It is belies ed that the j spacing was incorrect at that time but the rod was correctly aligned. During the change of l Shim Safety No.2 drive assemblies the technician (a qualified RO) may have slightly tumed the lower rod drive assembly. This misalignment then caused the rod to bind i when it was partially withdrawn.
Conclusions and recommendations The SRO and RO made the correct response to the indications of a stuck rod. The failure of the single control rod to scram did not violate reactor safety. The procedure for removal and insertion of rod drives will be modified to prevent a reoccurrence of the incorrect spacing . The following is the draft changes to SOP-II-I to be reviewed and approved at the next Reactor Safety Board meeting (compare to attached procedure).
- a. Removal and Installation of the Shim Safety Rod (1) Disconnect the electrical connector to the rod drive unit. l 15
Texas A&M University System Nuclear Scirnce Center 1997 AnnualReport 4
L Using a mler, determine and record the height, to the nearest 1/16 (2) inch, of the rod drive unit top relative to the upper support plate.
l ,
(3) Attach the chain lifting device or a ...
i L
l To install the rod, reverse the above applicable steps, making sure that the bottom of the hold dawn assembly is properly positioned and secured over the fuel bundle top handle.
- 1. Lower the assembly until the hold down foot of the hold down assembly rests on the fuel bundle top handle.
- 2. Adjust the barrel support rods for a clearance of between 0.125 to L 0.250 inches between the hold down foot and the bundle top
! handle.
- 3. Measure height of rod drive unit above upper support plate.
Height should be within 1/16 inch of previous measurement.
- 4. The control rod should be tested for operability as per SOP II-I-6.d.
" All Operators have been counseled on attention to procedures and ' maintaining a questioning attitude during normal and abnormal operations.
I 16 J
I- l
~
Texas A&M University Syst:m Nuclear Science Center 1997 Annu:1 Report
'k each month. All accessible areas at the NSC are evaluated for contamination and rad,iation monthly. In areas where contamination is expected, access / egress controls are l in place and are evaluated on shorter intervals.
5.4 Particulate Emuent Monitoring
( Radioactive particulates were monitored at the base of the central exhaust stack and summarized on a monthly basis. The annual average release rate was 3.93 x 10'" pCi/cc.
Total activity released for 1997 was 4.66 x 10^3 pCi.
The following table summarizes annual particulate effluent releases during 1997.
Quarter Month Average Diluted Exhaust Total Conc.*1 Conc.*2 Volume *3 Release *4 (pCi/cc) (pCi/cc) (cc) (Cl) 1 January 5.37E-11 2.68E-13 1.01E+13 5.43E-04 February 5.59E-11 2.79E-13 9.14E+12 5.llE-04 l March 1.23E-Il 6.15E-14 1.01E+13 1.24 E-04 Average: 4.06E-11 2.03E-13 9.79E+12 3.93E-04 Total: 2.90E+13 1.18E-03 II April 6.60E-11 3.30E-13 9.79E+12 6.46E-04 l
May 4.17E-Il 2.09E-13 1.01E+13 4.22E-04 June 5.57E-11 2.79E-13 9.79E+12 5.45E-04 Average: 5.45E-11 2.72E-13 9.90E+12 5.38604 Total: 2.98E+13 1.61E-33 III July 3.95E-Il 1.98E-13 1.01E+13 4.00E-04 August 5.29E-11 2.65E-13 1.01E+13 5.35E-04 September 0.00E+01 0.00E+01 9.79E+12 0.00E+01 l
Average: 3.08E-ll 1.54E-13 1.00E+13 3.12E-04
- Total: 2.99E+13 9.35E-04 i IV October 4.54E-Il 2.27E-13 1.01E+13 4.59E-04 November 4.84E-11 2.42E-13 9.79E+12 4.74E-04 December 9.28E-14 4.64E-16 1.01E+13 9.39E-07 4
Average: 3.13E-Il 1.56E-13 1.00E+13 3.llE-04 Total: 2.99E+13 9.34E-04 Annual j' Average: 3.93E-11 1.96E-13 9.93E+12 3.88E-04 Total released: 1.19E+14 4.66E-03 18 i
l
'L '
Texas A&M University System Nucleu Science Center 1997 AnnualReport.
l, .
l
! 5.5 Gaseous Emuents Monitoring Argon-41 is the major gaseous effluent produced and released at the Nuclear Science Center. This effluent is monitored at the central exhaust stack. Total Argon-41 released during 1997 was 13.25 Ci with an annual release rate of 5.56 x 10~' pCi/cc.
- The annual gaseous effluent data is summarized below
1 Quarter Month Average Diluted Exhaust Total Conc.*1 Conc.*2 Volume *3 Release *4
!~ (pCi/cc) (pCi/cc) (cc) (Cl) l 1 January 2.09E-07 1.0$E-09 1.01E+13 2.12E-00 February 2.36E-09 1.18E-11 9.14E+ 12 2.16E-02 March 9.34E-08 4.67E-10 1.01E+13 9.45E 01 Average: 1.02E-07 5.08E-10 9.79E+12 1.03E-00 Total: 2.90E+13 3.08E-00 11 April 1.02E-07 5.10E-10 9.79E+12 9.99E-01 May 6.55E-09 3.28E-Il 1.01E+13 6.63E-02 June 3.97E-07 1.99E-09 9.79E+12 3.89E-00 l Average: 1.69E-07 8.43E-10 9.90E+12 1.65E-00 Total: 2.98E+13 4.95E-00 ,
Ill July _ 8.76E-08 4.38E-10 1.01E+13 8.86E-01 August 1.09E-07 5.45E-10 1.01E+13 1.10E-00 September 1.61E-07 8.05E-10 9.79E+12 1.58E-00 Average: 1.19E-07 5.96E-10 1.00E+13 1.19E-00 Total: 2.99E+13 3.57E-00 l
IV October 8.68E-08 434E-10 1.01E+13 8.78E-01 November 7.73E-08 3.87E-10 9.79E+12 7.57E.01 I
December 2.00E-09 1.00E-Il 1.01E+13 2.02E-02 Average: 5.54E-08 2.77E-10 1.00E+13 5.52E-01 Total: 2.99E+13 1.66E-00 l
Annual Average: 1.llE-07 5.56E-10 9.93E+12 1.10E-00 Total released: 1.19E+14 1.33E+91 4
19 I
i J
4
~
Texas A&M University System Nucleir Science Center 1997 AnnuilReport 5.6 Liquid Einuents Monitoring Radioactive Liquid effluents are maintained in collection tanks prior to release from the confmes of the Nuclear Science Center. Sample activity concentrations and isotope identifications were determined prior to each release. There were 36 releases in 1997, totaling 1.30 x 10' liters, excluding dilution from the Nuclear Science Center. The total radioactivity released that was 3.66 x 10^' Ci with an average concentration of 4.28 x 104 Ci/cc. Summaries of the release data are presented in the table below. Radioactivity concentrations for each isotope found were below the limits specified in 10CFR20,
!1 Appendix B.
Number of Volume Total Radio- Conc. Released MONTH Releases Released (L) activity (Ci) (pCi/cc) iF January 3 6.71E44 4.66E-04 6.95E-06 February 1 1.83E+04 1.39E-05 7.58E-07 March 2 3.66E+04 2.17E-04 5.93E-06 Quarter. Totals: 6 1.22E+05 6.98E-04 5.72E-06 April 3 5.79E+04 1.46E-04 2.51E-06 May 4 7.2EE+04 4.03E-04 5.53E-06 June 2 5.64E+04 1.27E-04 2.26E-06 Quaner. Totals: 9 1.87E+05 6.76E-04 3.61E-06 i July 4 6.47E+04 4.27E-05 6.60E-07 August 6 9.45E+04 1.80E-04 1.91E-06 September 3 4.49E+04 1.41E-05 3.13E-07 Quarter. Totals: 13 2.04E+05 2.37E-04 1.16E-06 October 6 9.72E+04 1.13E-04 1.16E-06 November 0 0.00E+01 0.00E+01 0.00E+01 December 2 3.91E+04 1.07E-04 2.74E-06 Quarter. Totals: 8 1.36E45 2.20E-04 1.62E-06 AnnualTotals: 36 1.30E+06 3.66E-03 4.28E-05 6.0 Environmental Monitoring In conjunction with representatives from the State of Texas Department of Health, a quarterly environmental survey program is conducted to insure compliance with federal regulations. This program consists of TLD monitors located at various locations on the NSC site and a background monitor located at the Brazos River,5.25 miles west of the i site. The collection, analysis, and evaluation of soil, water, and milk samples are included in the program.
20
p Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Centsr 1997 AnmtlReport L
6.I ' Environmental Survey Samples The environmental survey samples were collected in accordance with the schedules of the cooperative suiveillance program between the Texas State Department of Health and the
- Texas A&M University. These samples were analyzed using an intrinsic germanium
! detection system for isotopic identification at the NSC. A second set of samples is also
, analyzed by a Texas Department of Health lab for comparison to NSC results. Data -
L. < collected from this analysis reflect the continued positive use of retention facilities and L- ' sample analysis for laboratory effluents prior to their release.
Summaries of the environmental survey program for 1997 are presented in the three t tables below. Isotopic activity listed is as reported to, or as determined by, the NSC when -
data from the state was unavailable.
. Water Samples 1997 Quarter Sample Location Concentration (pCi/ml) 1" Brazos River < MDA
!- 2'd Brazos River < MDA d' Brazos River < MDA 3
4* - Brazos River < MDA l
i 1997 Quarter Sample Location Concentration (pCi/ml) 1" NSC Creek < MDA t
t Milk Samples 1997 Quarter Sample Location Concentration (pCi/ml) 1" , ' TAMU Dairy < MDA 2d . TAMU Dairy < MDA
' 3d TAMU Dairy < MDA 4* TAMU Dairy < MDA i -
21
i j Texas AAM University System Nucle:r Science Center 1997 AnnualReport
.,7 v 0
( Soil Samples 1997 Quarter Sample Location Concentration (pCi/g) 4 1" NSC Soil 1.1 x 10 d
2 NSC Soil 1.0 x 10'7 3"' NSC Soil 4.0 x 10'7 4* NSC Soil 5.5 x 10'7 6.2 Site Boundary Dose Rate l' The environmental survey program measures the integrated radiation exposures at the exclusion area boundaries. These measurements are made for periods of approximately 90 days, using TLDs. The dosimeters are provided and processed by Texas Department of Health'(TDH), Bureau of Radiation Control, Division of Environmental Programs.
The state background monitor (site # 14) is located at a point 5.25 miles west-southwest of the facility and generally at right angles to the prevailing southeasterly winds. These totals are then multiplied by our newly determined occupancy factor (1/16) to determine total deep dose to the general public. {
The highest exposure points over the past years were found to be at site #6 and site #18 near the Waste Storage / Calibration Range building. In 1997 the fence line near these TLD's were moved to prevent general public access. High exposure level bags of solid waste were also removed from the waste building to minimize total exposure. Due to this move, TLD sites #6 & #18 were removed from their original positions. Site #18 was placed in position on the new fence boundary. Site #6 was not replaced. Third quarter results for site #3 were calculated by the TDH*after the TLD for this location was lost.
Processing of fourth quarter results were delayed at TDH due to a man power shortage.
The exposure received by the TLD's while in storage was calculated and subtracted from the total TLD exposure. The closest off-site point of extended occupancy continues to be located just beyond the site boundary fence directly behind the site #10 monitoring location; the occupants of this area continue to receive minimal levels of exposure.
1 To determine intemal exposure to individuals outside the site area the EPA's approved
' code COMPLYwas used. The exposure calculated via COMPLYwas 0.3 mrem /yr. This exposure, plus 0.1 mrem /yr calculated from liquid efIluent releases, is added to the calculated total deep dose. This total is the dose received by the general public.
22
L Texas A&M University System Nuclear Science Center 1997 Annual Report to review audit reports, security and emergency plans, new experiments and modifications to the facility.
Membersbip (1997) .
Chairman / Licensee:
l Dr. B. Don Russell, Deputy Director, Texas Engineering Experiment Station l' Members:
Dr. Marvin Adams, Professor, Nuclear Engineering Department
(
f Dr. William Dennis James, Research Chemist
,. Chemistry Department Dr. Robert Kenefick, Professor Physics Department l
Dr. Roger Koppa, Associate Professor, Industrial Engineering Department i.
4 ,
Dr. Earl Morris, Professor A L, : Veterinary Medicine-Large Animal Clinic Dr. Ted Parish, Professor Nucleaf Engineering Department
)
Ex-Omcio Members:
I Robert Berry, Coordinator ~
l :- AGN201 David Hearnsberger, Senior Health Physicist j Nuclear Science Center - j Mr. Chris Meyer, Director, _
l Environmental Health and Safety I
i .
Dr. John Poston, Professor and Head, j s Nuclear Engineering Department Dr. Warren Reece, Director, l Nuclear Science Center 24 l l