ML052550050

University of California, Irvine, Annual Report Submittal for Period July 1 - June 30, 2005, Per Technical Specification 6.7f

ML052550050
Person / Time
Site:	University of California - Irvine
Issue date:	08/31/2005
From:	Geoffrey Miller University of California - Irvine
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML052550050 (10)

Text

, r' irjtt UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE BERKELEY

• DAVIS

• IRVINE

• LOS ANGELES

• RIVERSIDE

• SAN DIEGO

• SAN FRANCISCO SANTA BARBARA

• SANTA CRUZ

'_

i-,.:

George E. Miller IRVINE, CA 92697-2025 Senior Lecturer Emeritus (949) 824-6649 Department of Chemistry and FAX: (949) 824-6082 or (949) 824-8571 Supervisor, Nuclear Reactor Facility Internet: GEMILLER~uci.edu August 31, 2005 US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Mail Station P1-137 Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Docket 50-326: License R-1 16 Annual Report Submittal. Tech Spec 6.7f Ladies/Gentlemen:

Please find enclosed three(3) copies of the annual report for the UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility, covering the period July 1st 2004 through June 30th 2005.

Sincerely, George E. Miller Reactor Supervisor cc: American Nuclear Insurance, 95 Glastonbury Blvd, Glastonbury CT 06033, Policy NF-176 Craig Bassett, US Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Reactor Operations Committee Members, UCI Dean of Physical Sciences, Ron Stem

$VDRo

U. C. IRVINE Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report for July Ist 2004 to June 30th 2005 Facility License R-1 16 Docket 50-326 Prepared in Accordance with Part 6.7f of the Facility Technical Specifications by Dr. G. E. Miller Reactor Supervisor UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page I

Section 1.

Operations Summary Operation of this facility is in support of the Department of Chemistry program of research and education regarding application of radioisotopes and radiochemical techniques in chemical studies.

Reactor utilization, apart from operator training and maintenance, is thus entirely for sample irradiation. Samples come from diverse origins related to forensic science, fossil fuels, geochemistry, art, and archaeological studies, chemical synthesis, industrial quality control, enzyme studies, trace element pollution studies, etc. The reactor is also used in class work by undergraduates learning tracer and activation analysis techniques using small quantities of short-lived activated materials.

Enrollment in Winter Quarter 2005 was 28 students.

Some use is made of the facility by other educational institutions. This program has involved tours, class demonstrations, and analyses of samples submitted by faculty. No support was obtained from the Reactor Sharing program for this year, but some support was available from participation in Western Nuclear Science Alliance (WNSA) since September 2004. Support was granted for instrumentation upgrade from the URI program of the US Department of Energy for a Compton Suppression Gamma Spectrometer System to be assembled from the grant, existing equipment and loan equipment. Upgrades have been made to security system hardware, including camera surveillance systems as part of a continued program of security compensatory measures.

Operations have been maintained similar to last year with slight increases. Criticality was achieved for 155 hours0.00179 days <br />0.0431 hours <br />2.562831e-4 weeks <br />5.89775e-5 months <br />, and the total energy generated was equivalent to 71 hours8.217593e-4 days <br />0.0197 hours <br />1.173942e-4 weeks <br />2.70155e-5 months <br /> at full steady state power.

74 experiments were performed, and over 1100 samples were irradiated (sometimes multiple samples are included in a single capsule and are not always separately logged). 13 low-level isotope shipments were made (Yellow II category or less). No pulse operations have been performed, even for test purposes.

An NRC general inspection was carried out during November 2004 (15th -18th). One significant problem was identified and a Notice of Violation, Severity Level IV issued regarding apparent incorrect filling out of shipping papers. New procedures and checklists have been introduced to guard against further incorrect entries on copies retained on file at the reactor.

A follow-up item noted was to assure greater consistency between written standard operating procedures and actual practices currently in use.

A facility security review was conducted by NRC in May, 2005. All facets were reviewed with UCI personnel (representing Administration, Environmental Health and Safety, Law Enforcement, and Facilities Management), and a few suggestions voiced. No required changes were identified.

Monthly inspections continue to be routine from the EH&S Office at UCI. These continue to identify log entries that are not fully explained and apparent lack documentation of follow-up on identified items noted. No significant safety or maintenance problems were encountered during this reporting period.

Two trainee operators have continued to practice operations under supervision during this period.

The facility has two licensed senior operators currently active.

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 2

Section 2. Data Tabulations for the Period Julvyst. 2004 toJune 30th, 2005 TABLE I.

Experiment Approvals on file 8 Experiments performed (including repeats) 74 Samples irradiated 1177+

Energy generated this period (Megawatt hours) 17.7 Total, 69 element core = 127.0

>74 element core = 1277.6 Total energy generated since initial criticality 1404.6 Mwh Pulse operation this period 0 Total pulses to 6/30/05 978 Hours critical this period 155.6 Total hours critical to date 8153.0 Inadvertent scrams or unplanned shutdowns 4 Visitors to reactor - as individuals or in tour groups - 368 Maximum dosimeter recorded for visitors - all less than 1 mrem Visiting researchers (dosimeter issues) 16 Maximum dose recorded at one visit 2.89 mrem Visiting researchers (badged) 4 TABLE II Reactor Status 6/30/05 (unchanged from 6/30/04)

Fuel elements in core (including 2 fuel followers) 82 Fuel elements in storage (reactor tank - used) 25 Fuel elements unused (4 instrumented elements + I element + 1 FFCR) 6 Graphite reflector elements in core 34 Graphite reflector elements in reactor tank storage 0 Water filled fuel element positions 6 Experimental facilities in core positions 4 Non-fuel control rods 2 Total core positions accounted for 127 Core excess, cold, no xenon $2.72 Control rod worth (1/13/05) REG $2.83 SHIM $3.60 ATR $1.77 FTR $0.66 Total: $8.86 Maximum possible pulse insertion $2.43 Maximum peak power recorded (no pulse operation during this period) - Mw Maximum peak temperature recorded in pulse (B-ring) -.0C UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 3

Section 3.

Inadvertent Scrams and Unplanned Shutdowns TABLE III.

Date Time Power Type and Cause 2004 11/18 09:57 <1.5 w Period scram during start to critical. Possible noise in circuit.

09:58 Recurrence of above scram, moved leads to check for contacts.

12/13 14:13 60 kw Linear power Scram - apparently noise on auto range switching.

2005 3/01 11:28 250 kw Fuel Temperature Scram initiated by contact movement during measurement of fuel temp TC outputs in surveillance.

5/27 12:15 250 kw FT Scram recurrence of above problem during surveillance.

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 4

Section 4 Maintenance and Surveillance The following non-routine maintenance activities were carried out during this period. Some reactor operation related items have been included above and are not repeated here.

2004 December 14: recorder output from Wide Range Linear Monitor was low by significant amount.

Meter readings appeared normal. Problem traced to isolation amplifier output. Unused output amp was exchanged to cure problem. Gamma-Metrics indicated unit suffers slow capacitor failure over time. Unit was rebuilt in July, 2005 with new electrolytic capacitors and performs well. "Spare" unit now being rebuilt.

2005 January 4: period scram failed to reset after testing. Problem traced to circuit board in Wide Range Monitor. Repaired by Gamma-Metrics by replacing an Op-Amp. Unit tested and returned to service.

January 13-18: full rod and power calibrations accomplished without incident.

May 3: rods reported as failing to raise. Traced to poor contacts on AIR switch. Operating the switch a couple of times cured the problem.

June 24: distilled water line in wet lab leaked as a plastic fitting cracked. Item replaced by facilities management plumbers. Water spill confined to lab area and did not affect reactor pool.

Section 5 Facility Changes and Special Experiments Approved No changes in the official security plan were made as a result of the CAL changes, which were approved by NRC as improving security, so no approvals were sought. All changes resulted in increased security response capability.

No special or unusual experiments were approved during this period.

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 5

Section 6 Radioactive Effluent Release.

(a) Gases.

The major direct release to the environs is Argon-41 produced during normal operations.

Very small amounts of other gases may be released from irradiated materials in experiments.

Releases are computed based on original estimates at point of origin within the facility and taking only dilution into account. Since much of the release is from operation of the pneumatic transfer system for samples, this is a conservative estimate in that assumption is made that all use of the PT is at full steady state power level (250 kW) when, in fact, some use is with the reactor at a lower power level. In view of the small numbers involved, and the fact that an integrated dose check is provided by an environmental dosimeter (CaSO 4 -Dy) hanging directly in the exhaust at the point of stack discharge, it is considered unnecessary to provide further checks of these estimates. The dosimeter data confirm that an individual standing directly in the exhaust flow for one year would receive an additional submersion dose from the exhaust less than the reliability limit of the dosimeters, or less than 20 mrem per year. The dosimeter data are presented separately in Section 7.

Table IV. Over the years that data have been collected, the accumulated exposure at the exhaust location have been lower than for "control" points because of lower masses of concrete structures in the vicinity. In fact the data have been consistently at 20-25 mrem per year background level, so confidence of exposure less than 5 mrem over background seems possible.

Release estimates based on operational parameters are as follows:

(1) Operation of pneumatic transfer system (7/1/04-6/30/05):

a. Minutes of operation: 242 minutes

b. Release rate assumed: 6. x 10-8 microcuries/mL

c. Flow rate of exhaust air: 1.2 x 108 m/min.

Total release computed: (a x b x c) = 1.7 x 10 microcuries (2) Release from pool surface (7/1/04-6/30/05):

a. Total hours of operation at power (Mwvh x 4) 70.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br />

b. Release rate assumed: <1. x 10-8 microcuries/mL

c. Flow rate of exhaust air: 1.2 x Io8 mL/min.

Total release computed: (a x 60 x b x c) 5.1 x 103 microcuries

d. Total of (1) and (2) emission in 1 year 6.8 x 103 microcuries

e. Total effluent released in 1 year (525960 minutes/yr. x c) = 6.3 x 1013 mL Concentration averaged over 12 months (d/e) = 1.1 x 10 10 microcurics/mL Since 20 x 10-10 microcuries/mL provides an annual exposure for constant immersion of 10 mrem, this corresponds to < 0.5 mrem potential additional radiation exposure to an individual standing breathing in the effluent stack for the entire y'ear.

This is similar to values reported in previous years and assumes no dilution of the plume at or beyond the stack. It also assumes all PT operation is at full 250 kw power.

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 6

Section 6. (continued)

(b) Liquids and Solids.

Liquid and solid wastes from utilization of by-product materials are disposed through a University contract. Waste is transferred to the custody of the Campus Environmental Health and Safety Office (EH&S). Disposals to this custody are given below. It is important to note that activity values are estimated at the time of transfer to EH&S control. Since few shipments are being made from campus, decay to negligible levels occurs for all medium-lived radionuclides. Teaching course items (used for training in liquid scintillation counting techniques) may be a mixture of reactor generated byproducts and purchased materials (exclusively 14 C and 3H).

DRY WASTES:

10/22/04 3 ft3 dry waste containing less than 100 microcuries of mixed activation products (including 60Co and shorter-lived products) from irradiation experiments.

05/13/05 3 ft3 dry waste containing less than 10 microcuries of mixed activation products (including 60Co, shorter-lived products, and some purchased 3H and 14C) from irradiation experiments.

LIQUIDS:

05/13/05 2 gallons LSC waste (in water) est: I microcuries 3H and I microcuries ' 4 C.

Section 7.

Environmental Surveillance.

Calcium Sulfate/Dysprosium thermoluminescent dosimeters have been placed at nine locations around the UCI Campus for many years. Starting July 1 2004, the former service was discontinued and is now provided by Global Dosimetry Solutions (GDS), Costa Mesa, California.

The GDS packs have three chips in each pack which are averaged for exposure recording. One pack is kept on the edge of campus in a wood frame house in University Hills.

Contamination surveys consisting of wipe tests and G-M surveys have shown mostly a "clean" facility with significant, removable contamination only in areas coming into direct contact with samples removed from the reactor, and on sample handling tools. Trash is surveyed before disposal and not disposed unless found to be free of removable and fixed contamination.

Table of Locations for Environmental Dosimeter Packs.

1. Window of reactor room east wall (inside the facility).

2. In hallway on exterior of south wall of facility (inside building).

3. Loading dock, adjacent to west wall of reactor room.

4. Laboratory 152, directly over reactor facility, approximately over core center.

5. In roof exhaust air flow from reactor room, roof level (hung in center of duct at final release point).

6. Biological Sciences 2 building, 5th floorlaboratory near window*.

7. Main library building across campus, 5th floor office in sunny window

8. Computer Science building, 4th floor office, in shaded window.

9. Fume hood exhaust, roof level, from reactor laboratory (hung in center of duct).

10. 12 Perkins Court, University Hills, private residence (wood frame house).

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 7

TABLE IV.

Environmental Dosimetry Data.

2004-2005 Average Total Exposures in mrem (including "control background")

Location. Quart Annual Prior year Excess over er control 3/04 4/04 1/05 2/05 Total Totals mr 2004/5 2003/4 (GDS) (RDC)

1. S. Facility perimeter 49 43 49 41 182* 144* 77

2. W. Facility perimeter 26 23 27 26 102 38 -3

3. N Facility perimeter 28 24 28 27 107 42 2

4. Lab Room over facility 26 22 26 25 99 28 -7

5. Facility main air 25 22 24 25 96 24 -9 exhaust

6. Bio. Sci II top floor 28 22 25 26 101 29 -4 7.Librarytopfloor 32 29 35 31 127 63 22

8. Computer Sci. top floor 23 21 23 20 87 20 -18

9. Facility fume hood exh. 27 22 25 22 96 29 -9

10. Faculty housing 23 18 22 20 83 17 -22 Background control 25 26 25 29 105 65 0

• exposure due to proximity of Cs-137 irradiator and stored Cf-252 source.

Discussion Raw data is presented here, along with control comparisons. Within this range, the data vary significantly.

Data for this year reflects two issues:

• The GDS dosimeters appear to be more sensitive than RDC, so all numbers - including background controls are higher.

• all but the location I and 7 are within GDS estimated "control" background level.

• Location 1 is a hallway with an extremely low occupancy rate. (See additional note below)

Exposure estimate probability to a single individual in an uncontrolled area at this facility is still very minimal. Locations I and 2 are in or near hallways with extremely minimal occupancy or travel, especially since recent security changes resulted in permanently locked doors to the hallways on this floor level (access only to individuals with building keys). Location 3 is on an outside loading dock also with low occupancy. The laboratory overhead (location 4) is occupied by very few individuals (one or two at the most) with instruments in the space above the reactor core. Office space is far removed from the area immediately over the reactor. The air released from the facility (measured by locations #5 and #9) continues to give no detectable exposure above background for dosimeters immersed in it. Location 7 consistently shows higher readings presumably because it is in a window above a warm, outside, cement wall. The cement may have higher U and Th levels. Over many years, the data at each specific location has shown remarkable consistency. The net conclusion is that, compared to distant control areas (numbers 7 and 10), we are operating fully ALARA as far as public exposure potential is concerned.

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 8

Section 8.

Radiation Exposure to Personnel.

UCI issues TLD badges to most students or researchers utilizing radiation. Finger dosimetry (TLD) rings are also issued to personnel who might be regularly handling isotopes. TLD and badge dosimetry are read quarterly by Global Dosimetry Solutions, and results are presented in Table V.

7 persons were issued dosimeters on a continual basis; 6 were also issued with finger dosimeters (TLD). Up to 13 mrem in a quarter were randomly reported for TLD badges never worn but kept in the facility. 30 students and 2 teaching assistants in a radiochemistry class were also issued TLD monitors.

Visiting individuals and tour groups are issued with direct-reading Canary II digital monitor instruments that record in units of 0.01 mR so low exposure information is available. Background levels during a tour visit typically accumulates 0.03-0.05 mR during a 45 minute visit to the facility.

In the past this was recorded as "0", so it will continue to be referred to in that way. Any reading of 0.10 or above will be tabulated. In the past only readings in excess of 1 mR would have been noted.

Individuals working on facility general maintenance were also issued Canary Dosimeters. All work was done with the reactor shut down, and no readings >0.05 were found. Data for the second quarter 2005 were not available as of this report, so these reflect only 9 months of operations.

TABLE V.

Personnel Exposure Report Summary for 6/30/05 to 3/30/05 (in mrem)

Individuals Whole Body Finger Rins TEDE TODE (Shallow) 1' 126 79 506 12 11 11 231 12 11 11 45 12 0 0 56 3 13 13 0 3 13 13 -

P 0 0 40 294 0 0 35 14-15 14-15 __-

Totals 7 174 127 878 (non-class) (16 (WB) person-mremi 9 months average, above controls)

1. This individual does extensive activation analysis and radiochemical work at the facility. Most of the exposure is a result of C1-38 radioactivity production.

2. Individuals receiving exposure as a result of operator/trainee and/or calibrating activities in the facility.

3. Individuals who did NOT ENTER THE FACILITY AT ALL during this period, so badge exposure is an indication of range of general background within the facility, where the badges are stored.

4. Students and teaching assistants in radiochemistry class Jan-March 2004.

5. Non-zero reported for class badges.

Aggregated non-zero data from self-reading dosimeters used by researchers in addition to TLD badges are:

Persons Accumulation 1 6.75 15 2.30 Summation 16 9.05 (0.57 person mrem average)

As noted earlier, 368 visitors were monitored using self-reading digital dosimeters (each individual or 3-8 dosimeters per group when in a group). No readings >0. 10 mrem were recorded for these tour events.

Personnel exposures continue to be very low at this facility in keeping with ALARA efforts.

UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2004-2005 Page 9