ML20238E873

Pulstar Reactor Annual Rept for Period Jul 1997 - June 1998

ML20238E873
Person / Time
Site:	North Carolina State University
Issue date:	06/30/1998
From:	Perez P North Carolina State University, RALEIGH, NC
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9809020258
Download: ML20238E873 (28)

Text

3 North Carchna State University is a land.

Nuclear ReactIt Program grant university and a constituent institution of The University of North Carolina Department of Nuclear Engineering Campus Box 7909 i

Raleigh, NC 27695 7909 919.515.2321 919.515 5115 (fax) 31 August 1998 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATrN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Subject:

NCSU PULSTAR Annual Report Docket No. 50-297

Dear Sir:

In compliance with Section 6.7.4 of the North Carolina State University PULSTAR Technical Specifications, our Nuclear Reactor Program staff has prepared the attached Annual Report for the period 01 July 1997 through 30 June 1998. Please feel free to contact me at (919) 515-4602 if you have any questions or comments.

Sincerely, d.

Pedro B. P6rez Associate Director

)

Nuclear Reactor Program 1 u 9809020253900630

.I PDR ADOCK 05000297 R

PDR

I l

Page Two U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk 31 August 1998 Ref:

NCSU PULSTAR Annual Report Docket No. 50-297 copy w/ attachments:

Dr. Nino A. Masnari, Dean College of Engineering Dr. David J. DeMaster, Chairman Radiation Protection Committee Dr. Charles W. Mayo, Chairman Reactor Safety and Audit Committee Mr. Stephen J. Bilyj Reactor Operations Manager Mr. David Rainer, Director Environmental Health and Safety Center Dr. Nelson Couch Radiation Safety Officer Mr. Mark Poirier ANI/MAELU

(

l l

4 PULSTAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT TO UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION for 01 July 1997 - 30 June 1998 NCSU NUCLEAR REACTOR PROGRAM 31 August 1998

Reference:

PULSTAR Technical Specifications Section 6.7.4 Docket No. 50-297 i

Department of Nuclear Engineering l

North Carolina State University i

Raleigh, North Carolina 27695 I

l l

4 DEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING PULSTAR REACTOR ANNUAL REPORT DOCKET NUMBER 50-297 For the Period: 01 July 1997 - 30 June 1998 The following report is submitted in accordance with Section 6.7.4 of the j

PULSTAR Technical Specifications:

q l

6.7.4.a Brief Summary Reactor operations have been routine during this reporting period. One j

exception was the reoccurrence of a small unaccounted water loss at the original

]

liner seal which was installed in 1990. There have not been any unexpected maintenance or operational problems during this reporting period.

(i)

(1) Reactor Operating Experience:

The NCSU PULSTAR Reactor has been utilized for the following:

Teaching and Short Courses 145.7 hours8.101852e-5 days <br />0.00194 hours <br />1.157407e-5 weeks <br />2.6635e-6 months <br /> i

Faculty and Graduate Student Research 9.1 Isotope Production 8.8 Neutron Activation Analysis 787.1 Beam Tube Facilities 5.4 Nuclear Training (Utilities) 46.0 PULSTAR Reactor Training 9.1 Reactor Cal / Measurements & Surveillance 52.8 Reactor Health Physics Surveillance 19.1 Reactor Sharing 13.0 TOTAL 1,096.1 hours1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br /> Last reporting period:

1,241.0 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> 1

i I

1

PUISrAR REACIDR ANNUAL REPORT 2

DOCKLT NUMBER 50 297

(

01 July 1997 - 30 June 1998 (2) A Summary of Experiments Performed in the Reactor:

i Teaching laboratories and research Reactor thermal power measurements Dynamic reactivity measurements Axial power and peaking factor measurements Neutron temperature measurements Neutron diffusion length in graphite Neutron fluence and spectral measurements Neutron Transmutation Doping of GaN and Si Neutron Activation Analysis cereals tissue finger nails l

bone sediments / soil rain / river water vegetation fibers l

polymers ceramics graphite copper silicon crystals fertilizers dust j

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

None l

l (iii) Results of Surveillance, Tests, and Inspections:

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

l

4 PUISTAR REACIOR ANNUAL REPORT 3

DOCKET NUMBER 50-297

- 01 July 1997-30 June 1998 6.7.4.b Total Fnerev Output:

16.8 Megawatt days Reactor was Critical:

619.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> Cumulative Total Energy Output Since Initial Criticality:

849.2 Megawatt days 6.7.4.c Number of Emergency and Unscheduled Shutdowns:

1.

Unscheduled Shutdowns - 6 total a.

Spurious Manual SCRAM b.

Manual SCRAM c.

Unear Channel SCRAM i

d.

Manual SCRAM due to building fire alarm (2) 1 l

e.

Shutdown due to high differential pressure in Reactor Building Explanation of la. above:

Reactor operations were unexpectedly terminated by a spurious Manual SCRAM while the operator was increasing reactor power using the control rod Gang switch, which is located approximately 5 inches from the Manual SCRAM switch. The Manual SCRAM switch contact block was cleaned and operations resumed without further incident.

l Explanation of Ib. above:

A sample being irradiated in the Pneumatic System did not return at the end of its automatic timed cycle. The operator shut down the reactor by Manual SCRAM to avoid production of excess activity and radiation levels in the sample. The sample was retrieved at the Pneumatic System terminal adjacent to the reactor and operations were resumed.

l l

Explanation of Ic. above:

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

L_______-______.

s PUISTAR REACrOR ANNUAL REPORT 4

DoCKLT NUMBER 50-297 01 July 1997 30 June 1998 Explanation of Id. above:

A fire alarm smoke detector was inadvertently activated by fumes produced by a metal lathe located in a machine shop in the basement of the building. This event was repeated a second time before the lathe operator finally realized he was the cause of the fire alarm.

1 Explanation of le. above:

A pneumatically operatec' damper partially closed about fifteen minutes into a routine reactor startup. The opdator aborted the startup and maintenance was performed on the damper linkage. Operations resumed the following day.

6.7.4.d Corrective and Preventative Maintenance:

Unaccounted primary water loss approached operational limits of 0.7 gal /hr during the month of November. Reactor operations were suspended until the j

source of the water loss was identified. Using underwater hydrophones and cameras, a detailed grid search of the pool liner was initiated after external piping and components were eliminated as the source of the problem. The original leak site was found to be the source of water loss.

A mechanical cantilevered sealing device, originally constructed in case the 1990 epoxy seal failed during application, was positioned over the epoxy seal material stopping the unaccounted water loss. The company which manufactured the original epoxy was contacted and additional material was purchased. The PULSTAR staff can reapply new epoxy using the original seal application device at a future time.

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 Specifications are monitored by this file system to ensure timely maintenance r.nd calibrations. All historical data relating to those components in addition to many other minor components are maintained in these files.

l

PUISTAR RFACIOR ANNUAL RMRT 5

IX)CKEr NUMBER 50-297 01 July 1997 - 30 June 1998 6.7.4.e Changes in Facility. Procedures. Tests. and Emeriments:

1.

Design Changes (DC) a.

DC 97-3 with 50.59 evaluation authorized the relocation of the Primary System Imw Point Drain Valve (P-7) to a location immediately adjacent to the pipe. This change also eliminated a segment of pipe buried beneath the concrete floor where inspection was not possible.

b.

DC 97-4 with a 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation authorized the use of ten beryllium reflectors on the core periphery. The design change is now awaiting NRC approval, c.

DC 98-1 Dry fresh fuel pin storage. (pending RSAC review) d.

DC 98-2 with a 50.59 evaluation authorized the relocation of the Radiation Monitoring Rack to a position immediately adjacent to the control console. This change allowed unrestricted access to the rear of the radiation instruments for calibration purposes.

2.

Procedure Changes (NP=New Procedure, PC= Procedure Change) a.

NP 98-1 re-established Radiological Surveys (HP3) as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was changed to an instruction. This action converts it back to a procedure.

b.

NP 98-2 re-established Radiation Program Self-Assessment (HP4) as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was l

changed to an instruction. This action converts it back to a procedure.

c.

NP 98-3 established Assessment of Airborne Effluent (PS-6-16-1) as i

an approved surveillance procedure. It had originally been an instruction. This action converts it to a surveillance procedure.

d.

NP 98-4 re-established Sampling, Analysis, and Assessment of Liquid Effluent (PS-6-16-2) as an approved surveillance procedure. It had originally been a HP procedure, but was changed to an instruction.

This action converts it to a surveillance procedure.

e.

NP 98-5 re-established Receipt, Transfer, and Shipment of Radioactive Materials and Disposal of Solid Radioactive Waste (HP6) i

)

PUISTAR REACroR ANNUAL RF# ORT 6

DoCKIrr NUMBER 50 297 i

j 01 July 1997 30 June 1998 as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was changed to an instruction. This action converts it back to a procedure, f.

NP 98-6 re-established Leak Test, Inventory and Accountability of Special Nuclear Material and Scaled Sources (HP7) as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was changed to an instruction. This action converts it back to a procedure.

g.

NP 98-7 re-established Radiation Work Permits and Protective Clothing (HP8) as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was changed to an instruction. This action converts it i

back to a procedure.

h.

NP 98-8 te-established Respirators and Bioassays (HP9) as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was l

changed to an instruction. This action converts it back to a l

procedure.

i.

NP 98-9 re-established Program for Calibration, Operation, and Maintenance of Radiation Survey and Chemical Instruments (HP10) as an approved procedure. It had originally been a procedure, but was changed to an instruction. This action converts it back to a procedure.

j.

NP 98-10 was a new PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-6-15-1C) to perform the annual calibration of the PULSTAR Radiation Monitoring Rack Recorder.

k.

NP 98-11 was a new PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-5-06-4) to perform quarterly tests on a differential pressure alarm switch, l.

NP 98-12 was a new PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-8-02-1) to calculate excess reactivity and shutdown margin on a monthly basis.

m.

NP 98-13 was a new procedure to document the receipt and subsequent inspection of new fuel pins received from the Buffalo PULSTAR at State University of New York.

n.

NP 98-14 was a new procedure to trim excess seal material from the original liner repair.

o.

NP 98-15 was a new PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-6-17-1A) to calibrate the area monitors and ratemeters along with channel testing of the radiation recorder and ratemeter.

l

)

PUISTAR REACIDR ANNUAL REPORT 7

DOCKET NUMBER $0-297

{

01 July 1997 - 30 June 1998 p.

NP 98-16 was a new PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-6-17-2A) to calibrate the radiation process monitors and ratemeters along with channel testing the radiation recorder and ratemeter.

q.

PC 6-97 revised the NCSU Emergency Plan.

r.

PC 7-97 was a temporary change to the PULSTAR Operations Manual.

s.

PC 8-97 was Revision 21 to the PULSTAR Operations Manual.

t.

PC 9-97 updated PULSTAR Special Procedure 3.5 (SP 3.5) Rod Worth Curve Verification.

u.

PC 10 97 updated PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-4-08-1)

Gang Control Rod Worth Verification.

v.

PC 11-97 was Amendment 12 to the PULSTAR Technical

)

Specifications updating street name changes on campus.

w.

PC 12-97 is pending as Amendment 13 to the PUMTAR Technical Specifications for the utilization of beryllium as a reflector along the l

core periphery. See (b) above.

i x.

PC 13-97 was Revision 2 which updated PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-5-03-1) for testing Confinement Fan No. I with auxiliary power.

y.

PC 14-97 was Revision 2 which updated PULSTAR Surveillance procedure (PS-5-04-1) for testing Confinement Fan No. 2 with auxiliary power.

z.

PC 15-97 was Revision 1 which updated the Reactor Health Physics Radiation Protection Program (HP1).

aa. PC 16-97 was Revision 5 which updated Special Procedure 2.1 (SP 2.1) Review and Approval of Changes and Deviations.

bb. PC 1-98 was Revision 6 which updated Special Procedure 2.1 (SP 2.1) 1 Review and Approval of Changes and Deviations.

ec. PC 2-98 was Revision 2 which updated the Reactor Health Physics Radiation Protection Program (HP1).

1

a PULSTAR REACIUR ANNUAL REPORT g

DOCKET NUMBFA 50 297 01 July 1997-30 June 1998 Summary: A total of thirty-five procedures were written or revised, some of which were just minor changes, covering the calibration of installed equipment, reactor operations, surveillance, and Health Physics. These procedures have been reviewed and/or approved by the Reactor Safety and Audit Committee (RSAC) and where required approved by the Radiation Protection Committee (RPC).

6.7.4.f Radioactive Effhient:

1. Liquid Waste (summarized by quarters) 1.

Radioactivity Released During the Reporting Period:

(1)

(2)

(3)

(4)'

(5)

{

No. of Total Tot. Vol.

Diluent Tritium l

Period Batches Ci Liters Liters Ci 01 Jul - 30 Sep 97 2

8 5,100 2.6E4 5

01 Oct - 31 Dec 97 1

21 3,000 5.7E4 15 01 Jan - 31 Mar 98 0

0 0

0 0

01 Apr - 30 Jun 98-1 17 3,400 2.7E4 14 (6) 34 Ci of tritium was released during this reporting period.'

(7) 46 Ci 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 2 x 10-5 Ci/ml. Isotopic analyses of these batches indicated low levels of typical corrosion and activation products. No fission products were detected.

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

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

l 8 Based on gross beta activity only. Tritium did not require further dilution.

]

PUISrAR REACIVR ANNUAL REPORT 9

DOCKirr NUMBER 50 297 01 July 1997 - 30 June 1998

2. Gaseous Waste (summarized monthly)

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

(1)

Gases:

Total Time

{

Xcat Period In Hours Curies 1997 01 Jul - 31 Jul 744 0.087 01 Aug - 31 Aug 744 0.224 01 Sep - 30 Sep 720 0.275 01 Oct - 31 Oct 744 0.064 01 Nov - 30 Nov 720 0

01 Dec - 31 Dec 744 0.082 1998 01 Jan - 31 Jan 744 0.150 01 Feb - 28 Feb 672 0.086 01 Mar - 31 Mar 744 0.142 01 Apr - 30 Apr 720 0.132 01 May - 31 May 744 0.220 01 Jun - 30 Jun 720 0.128 Totals 8,760 1.590 (2)

Particulate 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 tu2 >8 days indicated on any filter during this reporting period.

ii. Gases and Particulate Discharged During the Reporting Period:

(1)

Gases:

Total activity of argon-41 release was 1.590 curies.

The yearly average concentration of argon-41 released from the j

l PULSTAR reactor facility exhaust stack during this period was 4.8E-9 Ci/cc. His is below the regulatory limit of 1 x 10-' Ci/cc in 10 CFR 20 Appendix B. Dose calculations were perfonned using " COMPLY" code for the fiscal year.

Results were less than the 10 mrem constraint levels given in 10 CFR 20.

l l

PUISTAR REACIDR ANNUAL REPORT

}Q DOCIEr NUMBER 50-297 01 July 1997 30 June 1998 (2)

Particulate:

See gaseous waste 1.(2) above.

3. Solid Waste from Reactor Total volume of solid waste - 22 ft (0.61 m')

Total activity of solid waste - 0.042 mci Dates of shipments and disposal - All waste is transferred to the NCSU Environmental Health and Safety Center for temporary storage and disposal under the NCSU state license. Only one transfer was performed and it occurred on 09 March 1998.

6.7.4.g Personnel Radiation Exoosure Reoort Twenty-nine members of the faculty and staff were monitored for external radiation exposure during the reporting period. Eleven of the twenty-nine received measurable exposure which ranged from 0.01 to 0.03 rem. Total person-rem for the faculty and staff was 0.15 through May 1998. June 1998 data was not available at the time of the report.

Film badges were issued to 25 students, short course participants, and visitors.

All of these exposures were in the "no measurable exposure" range.

6.7.4.h Summary of Rndintion 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 external radiation levels in the remaining areas were as expected due to reactor operations contamination levels in most areas were not detectable 4

when contamination was detected, the area or item was confined or decontaminated 2 Solid waste generated by the PULSTAR Reactor is transferred to the NCSU Radiation Protection Division for storage or disposal.

1

PUISTAR REACIUR ANNUAL REPORT DoCKLT NUMBER $0-297 01 July 1997 30 June 1998 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: external radiation levels were at background levels for most areas (10 rem /h) contamination levels were not detectable e 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. 1 I l i I i

l l ATTACHMENT A l NORTH CAROLINA STATE UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH AND SAFETY { RADIATION PROTECTION DIVISION ENVIRONMENTAL RADIATION SURVEILLANCE REPORT FOR THE PERIOD l JULY 1,1997 - JUNE 30,1998 i I ) l

TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE NO. 1. INTRODUCTION 1 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

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 Table 6.1 Environmental TLD Exposures 17 7. QUALITY CONTROL INTERCOMPARISON PROGRAM 18 i Tables 7.1a - 7.1c 19 - 21 8. CONCLUSIONS 22 APPENDIX 1 23-27

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 radionuclides containment in the reactor facility; 4) Meeting legal liability obligations; and 5) Providing public assurance and acceptance. During 1995, the Director of the Environmental Health and Safety Center created a committee to assess the environmental monitoring program for the PULSTAR Reactor. This committee issued a detailed report entitled " Report of the Committee to Assess the Environmental Monitoring Program for the North Carolina State PULSTAR Reactor"in which several recommendations were proposed regarding modifications to this program. This information is summarized in Table 1 which has been excerpted from the committee's report. In brief, the committee recommended the following changes: 1) Discontinue the monthly milk sampling, but instead collect and analyze one milk sample in alternate years. This recommendation has been put into effect. 1 2) Discontinue the semi-annual vegetation collection, but instead collect and analyze one vegetation sample in alternate years. This recommendation has been put into effect. 3) Change the frequency of air sampling from continuous sampling with l filters being collected each week (7-day cycle) to a periodic sampling mode in which air samplers are operated for only one week (7 days) during each 3 month period of the year. This recommendation has been put into effect. 4) Move the air sampler at David Clark Labs to the Environmental Health and Safety Center. This recommendation has been put into effect. 5) Move the air sampler at Withers Hall to North Hall (a student dormitory). This recommendation could not be accomplished due to restrictions on 1.

locating equipment on the building which could damage the rubber-lined roof. To achieve partial compliance with the committee's recommendations, a TLD station has been located at North Hall to monitor environmental gamma radiation levels. Table 1: Environmental Monitoring Programs for the PULSTAR Reactor at North Carolina State University Sample Activity Conducted Previous Current Basis For Measured By Frequency Frequency Measurement Stack Gases Gross Gamma N.E. Continuous Continuous 10 CFR 20 T.S. 6.7.4 i Stack Particles Gross Beta N.E. Monthly Monthly 10 CFR 20 Indiv. Gamma N.E. T.S. 6.7.4 j Emitters l Water from Gross Beta N.E. Prior to Prior to Discharge 10 CFR 20 l Reactor Facility Gross Gamma N.E. Discharge - Monthly T.S. 6.7.4 Tritium N.E. (~ Monthly) City of Raleigh Ordinance l 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 7 TLD Dosimeter RPD/EHSC Quarterly Quarterly 10 CFR 20 Campus Stations +

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 Campus Gamma RPD/EHSC Altemate years NCSU 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. i

• These 5 stations include:

Withers, Riddick, Broughton, Hill Library and Environmental Health & Safety Center. l +These 7 stations include: the PULSTAR stack, a control station (EHSC) and the 5 air sampling stations, and North Hall. l 2 j

l ~ l 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 1 meter vs. sampling quarters per year). The highest gross beta activity observed was 11.8 fCim at the EH&S Center station during the week of 08/01/97 to 08/08/97. The annual campus average was 9.9 fCim' Table 2.2 lists LLD values for several gamma emitters which would be indicative of fission product activity. No gamma 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 SlIE DIRECTION' DISTANCE 2 ELEVATION 3 (meters) (meters) ) BROUGHTON SOUTHWEST 125 -17 i

• DAVID CLARK LABS WEST 500

-18 LIBRARY NORTHWEST 192 +11 RIDDlCK 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.

J Radiation Protection Division. l l l 1 3 1 I

M P 0 0 1 0 U 6 3 1 8 / / / / N 0 2 1 1 0 1 G 1 4 9 0 1 9 P 0 0 9 - - 9 E 6 3 8 1 0 7 R / / 1 8 I 0 3 / / O 8 1 1 0 D 7 8 C 0 0 0 0 o 1 1 1 1 6 4 1 3 57 C 0 0 0. o 0 2 2 2 3 0 3 3 60 N 0 0 0 0 b 2 2 2 2 1 5 8 1 9 5 0 0 0 0 Z .4 r-2 4 3 9 7 0 5 8 5 N U R C 0 0 0 u 0 L 2 2 2 2 1 I 2 4 6 0 D 3 ES R 2 1 2 1 u 5 1-1 9 2 0 6 1 1 06 C 0 0 0 0 s 2 2. 2 1 1 0 1 4 8 37 C 0 0 0 e 2 0. 3 2 1 3 8 1 8 4 1 C 1 0. e 1 1 1 2 9 0 1 9 3 4 1 4 4 v w

e es. NAFI _oEEg CRG . BU 1 1 SOR O 4 e g 2 TRE ATN2 4l: { ;' ,,l EEa UG NR IO V S E 0 R S 8 SB / IE 0 TT 1 1 YA CA 's 0 AC 8 MT /0 PIV 8 UI G STY 1 1 / = c-0 1 2 s i 1 1 / 1 Q 7 u B a r r o t e r u s g p e h r t Y o e n a r 0 3 /24 3 03 LAR / s 3 LLE DEG 1 - RU T L 1 LA fCET iVO /MER 2LY (3=L 5I 7 0M X0IT "a f 0 1 6 0C= / i f/1 0 Bi0 1 20 q(0 4 / 0 0 M. f 6 9C / )1i / 0 8M 8 5S B( 3 y q0 / 0 M3 3 )7 e B q / M 3 ) lll 1ll ll

1 1 O 2 4 6 8 0 2 t I 0 8 /0 1 1 0 8 /0 8 1 1 / 1 0 2 1 1 / 1 7 Q ua e W rt r i s t h p e e r r Y s e a r 3 4

1 1 0 2 4 6 8 0 2 l 0 8 /0 1 1 0 8 /0 8 1 1 / 1 0 2 1 1 /1 7 Q u a r R te i rs d d p i e c r Y k ea r 0 3 /2 4 3 0 3 /3 1 0s / 0 1 4 0 6 /0 8 N

1 1 O 4 6 8 0 2 ~. 0 8 / 0 1 1 0 8 / 0 8 1 1 / 1 0 2 1 1 / .D 1 7 Q u H a r te H rs i p l l e L r i Y b e r a a r 0 r 3 y / 2 4 3 0 3 / 3 1 ~ e 0 6 O /0 1 4 0 6 /0 8 a i m sn me e n i

1 O 2 4 6 8 2 t !t ~ ~ 0 8 / o 1 1 0 8 /0 8 s Env 1 i 1 r / o 1 0 n 2 m 1 e 1 n / 1 t 7 Q a l ua H r te e rs a l p t e h r Y ea S r 0 3 a / f 2 e 4 ty 3 0 3 C / e 3 n 1 te r 4 W u s n u m w i

I TABLE 2.3 REGULATORY LIMITS, ALERT LEVELS, AND BACKGROUND LEVELS FOR AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY (fCi M-s), REGULATORY ALERT AVERAGE N.C. NUCLIDE LIMLI LEVEL BACKGROUND LEVEL GROSS ALPHA 20 10 4 ~ GROSS BETA 1000 500 100 Cs-137 5 X 105 10 2 Ce-144 ' 2 X 105 100 0 Ru-106 2 X 105 30 0 1-131 1 X 105 10 0

Reference:

Environmental Radiation Surveillance Report 1986-88, State of N.C. Radiation Protection Section j I

l 1 3. MILK (TABLE 3.1) Milk samples are collected in alternate years from the Campus Creamery and the Lake Wheeler Road Dairy. Data was last supplied in March 1997. The next data will be supplied in 1999. 4 4 TABLE 3.1 1-131 IN COWS MILK (pCiliter 12 c) LLD - 3 pCiliter pCi liter' DATE Camous Creamerv Lake Wheeler 1998 No data No data l' _1 i

l 1 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 - 0.3 pCi liter' and - 0.4 pCiliter', respectively. For gross alpha activity the Alert Level is 5 pCiliter' and the Regulatory Limit is 15 pCiliter'. 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 secon:1 quarter of 1997. l TABLE 4.1 GROSS ALPHA AND BETA ACTIVITY IN SURFACE WATER (pCiliter' i 20) f 'LLDcx ~ 0.3 pCiliter' LLDD - 0.4 pCi liter' pCiliter GROSS GROSS DATE LOCATION ALPHA BETA THIRD QUARTER 1997 ON < 0.3 1.9 i 0.6 OFF < 0.3 2.4 1 0.6 FOURTH QUARTER 1997 ON < 0.3 2.9 i 0.8 OFF < 0.3 2.3 i 0.6 FIRST QUARTER 1998 ON < 0.3 2.6 0.5 OFF < 0.3 2.6 1 0.5 A SECOND QUARTER 1998 ON < 0.3 2.4 1 0.6 OFF < 0.3 2.4 1 0.6 l i

• LLD VALUES ARE DETERMINED QUARTERLY I

12 4 I

TABLE 4.2 LLD VALUES FOR GAMMA EMITTERS IN SURFACE WATER NUCLIDE LLD (oCiliterY 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 2ND QUARTER OF 1997 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 will be supplied next in 1999. I l TABLE 5.1 GROSS BETA ACTI'/ITY IN CAMPUS VEGETATION

• LLD - 0.5 pCl g '

SAMPLE DATE SAMPLE LOCATION (oCi a-' +20) 1998 NORTH CAMPUS No data 1998 SOUTH CAMPUS No data 1998 EAST CAMPUS No data 1998 WEST CAMPUS No data I~ 14 l

TABLE 5.2 LLD VALUES FOR GAMMA EMITTERS IN VEGETATION l 1 NUCLIDE LLD (pCi gram")* Co-60 0.01 Zn-65 0.02 i Cs-137 0.01 Cs-134 0.01 Sr-85 0.01 Ru-103 0.01 I Nb-95 0.01 Zr-95 0.02

• LLD VALUES ARE FOR THE 1ST QUARTER OF 1997 l

15 \\J i

C 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 five air monitor stations listed in Table 2.1 and also at the top of the PULSTAR Reactor stack. During July 1996, a TLD stat;an was added to North Hall which is a student dormitory located 402 meters northeast of Burlington Labs. Also, the TLD station on David Clark Labs was moved to the Environmental Health and Safety Center. 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. The contractor does not believe that the unexplained lower-than-usual exposure readings are due to any processing

errors, l

l 16

~ 0 00 _ 2 _ 1 6 6 3 ../ 0 1 / / / 3 3 3 _ 3/ 1 0 01 1 6 T D V h a i l i t A s a d N 5. n a a _. f. o } t t 3 4 3 3 . hM y 7 w e 3 9 5 ~ 1 i a! t s a _ ~ IV n v T ~ o a S t i al _ ~ E p b 3 e el _ 3~3~ R r 4 5 i f 2 _ 8'7~ _7 7 v 7oir. { u _ o R I yl m s _ ~ D t . ~ -D Ci h ~ a i e v_ i o 4 3 3 .. IU a c a_ 3 l ~ n 3 8 4 9 _ B 7 I b I t [ ~ [ r el a . ~ ~ _ _ R c _ ~ t t r . ' ~ O o o r _ ~ O m_ G t ~ ~ ~ ._ E he T c O f o f. ~ 3n_ 4 _ _ I3 Wt r 3 _T . D' a. _ O5 cL o__ H t r_ _.I f_ . - l i o i ~ _ ~ L 7 cl _ _. 3~3~. - T, r 3n _ 4 I ul . 7 . 7 7 } si _. T }~ E H ~ o 5 n 5i S 4 _ 43 8n j. 3 _ 2 6 I f! t P ~h _ ~ U ~e 9 L 1 ~ S T 9 A ~6 ~ R~ ~ S~ 9 7 Y re p o C K r 3 4 - l t i 8 3 3 C ~ NT f56 I 4 33 3 8 3 56 N O R T R 5~ _ 3 4 3 7 2 8 C j

I { 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 (QAP 47) 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 controllimit 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 controllimits for QAP 47 were developed from the percentiles of data distributions for the years 1991-1996. 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% cf the historical data. The following are recommended performance criteria for analysis of environmentallevels of analytes: Acceptable: Lower Middle Limit s A s Upper Middle Limit Acceptable with Warning: Lower Limit s W < Lower Middle Limit or Upper Middle Limit < W s Upper Limit Not Acceptable: N < Lower Limit or N > Upper Limit Control Limits are reported i:.s the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value. The results of tne i 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. l l l 18 i I

TABLE 7.1a GROSS ALPHA & BETA ACTIVITY AIR FILTER--INTERCOMPARISON STUDY 01 September 1997 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 Sqlfilter. The errors are reported as 12 standard deviations.

• NCSU - ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Radio-
• Reported
• Reported EML EML Error Reported nuclide Value Error Value EML Gross Alpha 1.550 0.060 1.490 0.090 1.040 Gross Beta 2.800 0.060 3.000 0.140 0.930 QAP 47 Statistical Summary Radio-EML EML Mean Median Std. Dev.

No, Of Reported nuclide Value Error Values Gross Alpha 1.490 0.090 1.097 1.070 0.206 67 Gross Beta 3.000 0.140 1.048 1.035 0.145 72 QAP 47 Control Limits by Matrix Radio-nuclide Lower Limit Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper Limit Limit Limit l Gross Alpha 0.45 0.80 1.34 1.57 Gross Beta 0.50 0.80 1.48 1.77 1 Control limits are reported as: the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value 1 l I 19 I L_.___.___.__

\\ TABLE 7.1b MULTINUCLIDE AIR FILTER -INTERCOMPARISON STUDY 01 September 1997 l 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/ filter. The errors are reported as i2 standard deviations.

• NCSU - ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS i

Radio-

• Reported
• Reported EML EML Error Reported nuclide Value Error Value EML Ce144 16.410 1.660 19.120 0.700 0.860 CoS7 10.950 0.430 12.640 0.430 0.860 Co60 8.370 0.560 10.730 1.090 0.782 Cs134 25.200 0.690 28.170 0.730 0.890 Cs137 6.540 0.530 7.310 0.250 0.890 Mn54 6.340 0.570 6.720 0.270 0.940 Sb125 14.750 1.340 16.120 0.790 0.910 QAP 47 Statistical Summary Radio-EML EML Mean Median Std. Dev.

No. Of Reported nuclide Value Error Values Ce144 19.120 0.700 0.870 0.860 0.121 81 CoS7 12.640 0.430 0.918 0.900 0.121 91 Co60 10.730 1.090 0.919 0.900 0.094 93 Cs134 28.170 0.730 0.898 0.890 0.089 92 Cs137 7.310 0.250 0.957 0.955 0.109 98 Mn54 6.720 0.270 0.988 0.980 0.113 92 Sb125 16.120 0.790 0.976 0.990 0.160 88 QAP 47 Control Limits by Matrix Radio-nuclide Lower Limit Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper Limit Limit Limit Ce144 0.58 0.66 1.10 1.26 CoS7 0.62 0.69 1.10 1.28 Co60 0.75 0.82 1.10 1.27 Cs134 0.73 0.81 1.19 1.22 Cs137 0.72 0.82 1.11 1.33 Mn54 0.76 0.83 1.11 1.32 Sb125 0.58 0.81 1.14 1.36 Control limits are reported as: the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value 20

I TABLE 7.it MULTINUCLIDE WATER SAMPLE -INTERCOMPARISON STUDY 01 September 1997 The sample consists of a spiked,455 ml aliquot of acidified water (~1 N hcl). The reported values and the known values are given in Bq/ liter. The errors are reported as i2 standard deviations.

• NCSU - ENVIRONMENTAL LABORATORY RESULTS Radio-
• Reported
• Reported EML EML Error Reported nuclide Value Error Value EML Co60 23.430 1.380 23.300 1.200 1.010 Cs134 66.150 0.790 66.000 2.600 1.000 Cs137 34.910 0.700 34.300 1.700 1.020 1

Mn54 39.210 1.650 37.800 1.900 1.040 ) l l QAP 47 Statistical Summary Radio-EML EML Mean Median Std. Dev. No. Of Reported nuclide Value Error Values Co60 23.300 1.200 1.019 1.010 0.057 91 Cs134 66.000 2.600 1.049 1.040 0.073 93 I Cs137 34.300 1.700 1.050 1.040 0.082 97 Mn54 37.800 1.900 1.067 1.070 0.075 91 QAP 47 Control Limits by Matrix Radio-nuclide Lower Limit Lower Middle Upper Middle Upper Limit Limit Limit Co60 0.80 0.90 1.13 1.18 Cs134 0.89 0.90 1.16 1.25 l I Cs137 0.80 0.90 1.18 1.21 Mn54 0.80 0.90 1.16 1.22 Control limits are reported as: the ratio of Reported Value vs. EML Value 21

i4

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 result 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.

l l 1 l l 22

I 9 l l APPENDIX 1 ) The following example calculation gives a set of data, the mean value, the experimerital sigma, I 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. The normalized range measures the dispersion of the data s (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 j or instrumentation may be indicated by these results. t l l 23

i EXAMPLE CALCULATIONS ' Experimental Data: Known value = p = 32'/3 pCl 3H/ liter on September 24,1974 Expected laboratory precision = a = 357 pCilliter Sample Result X, 3060 pCi/ liter X 3060 pCi/ liter 2 X 3240 pCi/ liter 3 Mean = Y X, 9360 x 3 = 3120 pCi/ liter N where N = number of results = 3 Experimental sigma = s ( X,) 2 91 (X,)2_ s = v2-N h N-1 (3060+3060+3240)2 (3060)2+(3060)2+(3240)2_ 3 s = 103.9 pCi/ liter s = Range = r l' maximum result-minimum resultI r = l 13240 - 30601 r = p t 180 pCl/ liter r = 24

s' l Range Analysis (RNG ANLY)* R Mean range = R d0 where d " = 1.693 for N = 3 = 2 2 (1.693)(357) = R 604.4 pCi/ liter Control limit CL = R + So CL = n D,R where D " = 2.575 for N = 3 = 4 (2.575)(604.4) = CL 1556 pCi/ liter = Standard error of the range = ca (R + 3c - R) + 3 o = n a (D.R - R) + 3 = (1556 - 604.4) + 3 = 317.2 pCi/ liter j o = n 1 Let Range = r = wR + xca = 180 pCi/ liter i Define normalized range = w + x for r > R, w = 1 then r = wR + xon=R+xon r-R or x= on r-R therefore w+x=1+x=1+ on

• Rosentein, M., and A. S. Goldin, " Statistical Techniquer 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 Tab!es for Probability and Statistics. 2nd EditiQD, The Chemical Rubber Co., Cleveland, Ohio,1968, p. 454. 25 c_______

4 e for r s R, x = 0 then r = wR + xon = wR l r or w= R r therefore w + x = w + 0 = l 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, = v'N 357 = v3 c, = 206.1 pCi/ liter D ND - Om -153 = 206.1 ND = -0.7 Controllimit = CL CL = (p i 30 ) i 26 I l u_ J

e [ Warning limit = WL WL = (p i 20.) Experimental sigma (alllaboratories) = si ( x,)* fx 2_ 11 = s* h N-1 162639133 - 15 h 14 s, = 149 pCi/ liter Grand Average = GA X i GA = N 49345 15 GA = 3290 pCi/ liter Normalized deviation from the grand average = ND' Deviation of the mean from the grand average = D' D' = i - GA = 3120 - 3290 p D' = -170 pCi/ liter 9 ND' C. -170 = 206.1 N D' = - 0.8 27}}