ML050910128

University of Virginia Reactor Facility 2004 Annual Report

ML050910128
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	03/30/2005
From:	Benneche P University of Virginia
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML050910128 (13)

Text

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITY U.S. MAIL ADDRESS STREET ADDRESS P.O. Box 400322 675 Old Reservoir Road Charlottesville, VA Charlottesville, VA 22903 229044322 Telephone: 434-982-5440 Fax: 434-982-5473 March 30, 2005 Director, Division of Reactor Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Document Control Desk 11555 Rockville Pike Mail Stop 3H3 Rockville, MD 20852 Re: Docket No. 50-62 Docket No. 50-396

Dear Sir:

We hereby submit, as required by section 6.7.2 of the Technical Specifications, our annual report of the University of Virginia Reactor (UVAR), License No. R-66, Docket No. 50-62 and the CAVALIER Reactor, License No. R-123, Docket No. 50-396 during the period January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004.

I declare underpenalty ofperjury that the foregoing is tree and correct.

Sincerely, Paul E. Benneche, Acting Reactor Director 3-30-05 UVA Reactor Facility cc: USNRC, Mr. Daniel Hughes

UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA REACTOR FACILITY 2004 ANNUAL REPORT This report was compiled and edited by the following personnel:

Paul Benneche, Acting Reactor Director & Reactor Supervisor Deborah Steva, Assistant Radiation Safety Officer & Reactor Health Physicist and reviewed by Reactor Decommissioning Committee on March 29, 2005

2004 ANNUAL REPORT UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA REACTOR FACILITY Table of Contents Pasge

1. REACTOR FACILITY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ........................ 1 A. Reactor Facility Reporting Requirements ............... 1...................

1. Reporting Period .................. .............................. 1

2. Basis for Reporting ................ .............................. 1 II. REACTOR FACILITY UTILIZATION A. Past UVAR Reactor Utilization. I B. Past CAVALIER Reactor Utilization .1 C. Current Reactor Utilization .1

m. UNIVERSITY STAFF ASSIGNED TO DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES A. Reactor Staff ................. ............................ 2 B. Health Physics Staff .............................................. 2 C. Reactor Safety Committee ............................................. 2 D. Reactor Decommissioning Committee ................. ................... 2 Figure 1: Organizational Chart ............ .............................. 3 IV. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION COMPLIANCE AND REPORTABLE EVENTS ..... 4 V. RESULTS OF NRC INSPECTIONS AND LICENSING ACTIONS ..... ........... 4 VI. REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING COMMN1TEE MEETINGS. 4 AND AUDIT FINDINGS A. Meetings. 4 B. Audits .5 VI[. HEALTH PHYSICS PROGRAM.. 4 VIm. RADIATION EXPOSURE TO INDIVIDUALS. 5 A. Summary .5 B. Visitor Exposure Data from 2004 .5 C. Decommissioning Project Personnel Dosimetry Data for 2004. 6 Table 1: 2004 Personnel Radiation Doses. 6 Table 2: 2004 Personnel Extremity Doses. 6

ii IX. ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEYS AND SAMPLING . ........................... 7 A. Environmental Dosimetry Network ................ ...................... 7 B. Air Samples . ................................................ 7 C. Water Samples ................................................. 7 X. RADIATION AND CONTAMINATION SURVEYS INSIDE . . 7 THE REACTOR FACILITY XI. RADIOACTIVE MATERIAL RELEASED TO THE ENVIRONMENT. 7 A. Airborne Effluents. 7 B. Liquid Effluents. 7 XI[. RADIOACTIVE WASTE SHIPPED ...................... 8 XIII. DECOMMISSIONING FUNDING AND EXPENDITURES ............. 8 XIV. CONTRACTOR COMPANIES OPERATING ON-SITE .............. 8 XV. CONTRACTED TASKS AND TIME LINES ..................... 8 XVI. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE REACTOR FACILITY, REACTOR SOPs. 9 AND CHANGES MADE PER 10 CFR 50.59 A. Significant Changes to the Facility. 9 B. Changes to the Standard Operating Procedures. 9 C. Changes Made Per 10 CFR 50.59. 9 XVII. EQUIPMENT TRANSFERS ................ ...................... 9 XVIII. NEW AND MODIFIED SOPs HAVING RADIATION SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE .... 9 XIX. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS ............................ 9 XX. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS ............................. 9

I 2004 ANNUAL REPORT University of Virginia Reactor Facility REACTOR FACILITY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS A. Reporting Period This report on Reactor Facility activities conducted during 2004 covers the period January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004.

B. Basis for Reporting An annual report of reactor operations is required by the UVAR Technical Specifications, Section 6.7.2.

II. REACTOR FACILITY UTILIZATION A. The University of Virginia Research Reactor (UVAR) was operated from June 1960 through June 1998 under license R-66 at a maximum power of two megawatts. The Administration of the University of Virginia School of Engineering and Applied Science, with the approval of the University's Board of Visitors, decided in early 1998 to permanently cease reactor operations as of July 1, 1998 and to begin the process of decommissioning the Reactor Facility. In 2004, the physical decommissioning of the reactor facility having been completed in 2003, the final paperwork and confirmation phase was begun and is continuing into 2005.

B. The second reactor at the University of Virginia, the Cooperatively Assembled Virginia Low Intensity Experimental Reactor (CAVALIER) first went into operation in October 1974, under license R-123, at a licensed maximum power of 100 watts. Reactor operations were terminated in 1988. A decommissioning plan for this reactor was submitted to the NRC in early in 1990. An order to decommission was issued by the NRC on February 3, 1992. The CAVALIER now is scheduled to be decommissioned concurrently with the UVAR. All major decommissioning activities in the CAVALIER room were completed in 2002, the final status survey was finished in 2003 and a request for license termination was submitted on April 4, 2003.

C. The only utilization of the reactor facility building in 2004 was for staff and faculty offices, a group performing the review of applications for graduate engineering school admission, a couple small student research projects, minor continuing surveillance and minor health physics activities monitoring the shutdown facility. There were no significant physical decommissioning activities in 2004.

2

m. UNIVERSITY STAFF ASSIGNED TO DECOMMISSIONING ACTIVITIES A. Reactor Staff A NRC approved Reactor Facility organization chart is shown in Figure 1. Personnel on the reactor staff as of the end of 2004 were:

Paul E. Benneche .... Reactor Supervisor and Acting Reactor Director Mr. Benneche has been employed by the University since 1977 and has served at the Reactor in a wide variety of positions. He completed both his B.S. and M.S. degrees in Nuclear Engineering at UVA. He is responsible for the day-to-day operations at the facility, including decommissioning activities.

Robert Mulder, who was the University of Virginia Reactor Director from 1984 until September 2003, changed positions at the University and is now employed as a Medical Physicist in the UVA Medical Center's Department of Radiological Physics.

B. Health Physics Staff Deborah P. Steva .... Assistant Radiation Safety Officer and Reactor Health Physicist Ms. Steva has been assigned as the UVA Reactor Health Physicist since 1989 and assumed the additional duties of Assistant Radiation Safety Officer in 2004. She received an undergraduate degree in Biology with an emphasis in Health Physics from Virginia Tech and has held several health physics related positions since graduation. She is responsible for the Health Physics program at the Reactor Facility and has oversight for all health physics aspects of decommissioning.

Other personnel from the UVA Office of Environmental Health and Safety assisted with work at the Reactor on an as needed basis.

C. Reactor Safety Committee (ReSC)

The final meeting of this committee was October 27, 2000. As per UVAR and CAVALIER Technical Specification amendments, applicable and remaining responsibilities of the ReSC were assumed by the Reactor Decommissioning Committee.

D. Reactor Decommissioning Committee (RDC)

The RDC was composed of the following individuals (as of the end of 2004):

Ralph 0. Allen .... Director of UVA Office of Environmental Health and Safety & Professor of Chemistry (Chair)

Paul E. Benneche .. UVA Reactor Supervisor and Acting Reactor Director David J. Hudson .. Associate Vice President for Research & Public Service Deborah P. Steva .. Assistant RSO & Radiation Safety Specialist, UVA Office of Environmental Health and Safety

PRESIDENT UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA VICE PRESIDENT VICE PRESIDENT FOR RESEARCH & PUBLIC SERVICE AND PROVOST (LEVEL 1)

DIRECTOR CHAIR ENVIR. HEALTH & SAFETY RADIATION SAFETY COMM.

I RADIATION SAFETY OFFICER DIRECTOR REACTOR FACILITY (LEVEL 2) H RADIATION SAFETY COMM.

I HEALTH PHYSICS STAFF REACTOR SUPERVISOR (LEVEL 3)

] CHAIR DECOMMISSIONING COMM.

DECOMMISSIONING REACTOR CONTRACTORS DECOMMISSIONING COMM.

(LEVEL 4)

- reporting lines FIGURE 1

- - - communications lines ORGANIZATIONAL CHART UNIV. OF VIRGINIA NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITY (AFTER SHIPMENT OF ALL FUEL ELEMENTS OFF-SITE)

4 IV. TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION COMPLIANCE AND REPORTABLE EVENTS A. During 2004 there were no identified violations of the reactor technical specifications, nor were there any identified reportable events.

V. RESULTS OF NRC INSPECTIONS AND LICENSING ACTIONS A. During 2004 there were no NRC inspections of the University of Virginia Reactor Facility.

B. During 2004, requests to change licensing documents, documents necessary to proceed with the decommissioning process, or other required documents were either submitted to, or responses about prior submittals were received back from, the NRC.

1. March 30, 2004 - Submitted 2003 Annual Report.

2. March 31, 2004 - Date of letter from Daniel Hughes of the USNRC; Approval of Final Status Survey Plan Coverage Change for License No. R-66 (in response to UVA request dated December 5, 2003).

3. April 19, 2004 - Submitted Changes to University of Virginia Reactor Facility Emergency Plan made under the provisions of I OCFR50.54(q).

2. June 18, 2004 - Submitted Decommissioning Plan Performance Summary (dated April 2004) and the Final Status Survey Report - Evaluation of Radiological Results Relative to Termination of NRC License R-66 (dated May 2004).

4. July 27, 2004 - Date of letter from Daniel Hughes of the USNRC; acknowledges receipt UVA letter of April 19, 2004 with Emergency Plan Changes for License R-66.

3. September 7, 2004 - Received Request for Additional Information (RAI) concerning Decommissioning Plan Performance Summary, from Daniel Hughes of the USNRC to Paul Benneche.

4. December 9, 2004 - Submitted answers to RAI (see (3) above), letter from Paul Benneche to Daniel Hughes.

VI. REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND AUDIT FINDINGS A. Meetings During 2004, the Reactor Decommissioning Committee met approximately quarterly, thereby fulfilling the meeting frequency requirement.

5 B. Audits The Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures were audited concurrently with their being rewritten from September 2003 to February 2004.

Necessary changes and updates were made.

VII. HEALTH PHYSICS PROGRAM During decommissioning activities, the goal of the University of Virginia's Reactor Health Physics Program continues to be protection of the health of workers and the public. UVA's radiation protection program establishes radioactive material controls that ensure the following:

prevention of inadvertent radioactive material release to uncontrolled areas, assurance that personnel are not inadvertently exposed to radiation from licensed radioactive materials, and minimization of the amount of radioactive waste material generated during decommissioning.

The policy of the University in general is to keep occupational doses and doses to members of the general public As Low As Reasonably Achievable.

VIII. RADIATION EXPOSURE TO INDIVIDUALS A. Summary The radiation exposure of workers and the public has successfully been minimized by the implementation of the procedures and guidance included in the health physics and ALARA programs. Projected exposure for the decommissioning project is four person-rem. The collective dose for the project to date is 0.702 rem. In addition to external monitoring, internal monitoring through bioassay was performed on all permanent UVAP personnel. Baseline urine samples were collected for all permanent UVAP personnel involved in decommissioning work. Exit samples were collected when individuals' work on the project terminated. There were no positive bioassay results. All analysis results were less than MDC.

There was no significant exposure to any individual working at the reactor in 2004.

B. Visitor Exposure Data For 2004 Visitors to the UVAR were monitored in accordance with requirements of the access plan, UVA HP procedures and according to the radiological hazards of areas to be entered. No measurable dose was received by any individual in any single visit.

Doses to members of the public from decommissioning activities have been negligible due to carefully planned decommissioning activities and site perimeter controls restricting members of the public from the area where decommissioning activities have occurred.

The dose to the public during decommissioning was estimated to be less than 0.1 person-rem. The total to date as measured by SRDs issued to visitors is 0.002 person-rem.

6 C. Decommissioning Project Personnel Dosimetry Data For 2004 No significant physical decommissioning activities were conducted in 2004. Radiation dosimetry was not required for any of the activities conducted in 2004, but was available to personnel if it were required.

Appropriate signage was posted to alert personnel to the location of the small number of radioactive sources still remaining in the building.

No doses received in 2004 by personnel in the building exceeded any administrative limits. The dose distribution for personnel badged at the Reactor Facility during the period January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004 is shown in Tables 1 and 2.

TABLE 1 2004 Personnel Radiation Doses Measured Accumulated Number of Individuals in Deep Dose Equivalent* (mrem) Dose Range Less than 10 1 10-50 2 51-100 0 Greater than 100 0 Collective dose for this group: 0.020 rem Dosimeter used to measure DDE have a minimal reporting level of one mrem for gamma and x-rays, 10 mrem for beta and 20 mrern for thermal and fast neutrons TABLE 2 2004 Personnel Extremity Doses Measured Accumulated Number of Individuals in Dose Extremity Dose* (mrem) Range Less than 30 2 31 - 125 1 126-500 0 Greater than 500 0 I Ring badges used to monitor extremity dose have a minimum reporting dose of 30 rarem for X and gamma-rays and 40 mrem for energetic beta particles.

7 IX. ENVIRONMENTAL SURVEILLANCE A. Environmental Dosimetry Network Luxel Aluminum Oxide dosimeters are mounted at eight fixed field sites in the vicinity of the UVAR. All of the monitoring sites are outside the UVAR facility but within the area surrounding the facility that is bounded by the exclusion fence. The control locations are approximately one mile and 15 miles distant from the facility. The dosimeters are changed out and read on a quarterly basis. The annual total dose measured at each location was less than the annual dose limit to the general public of 100 mrem.

B. Air Samples Air sampling was discontinued on May 15, 2003, at the end of major physical decommissioning activities, as approved by the Reactor Decommissioning Committee.

C. Water Samples The requirement for downstream environmental sampling was deleted in November 2002, with the pond having been drained and all potential sources of liquid environmental release having been eliminated.

X. RADIATION AND CONTAMINATION SURVEYS INSIDE THE REACTOR FACILITY By May 30, 2003 substantially all decommissioning work was completed. In accordance with the SOPs and with the approval of the Reactor Decommissioning Committee, the scope of routine surveys was reduced. Only the remaining source storage areas continued to be surveyed by OEHS on approximately a weekly basis, primarily to assure that the one licensed source remaining in the building has not been moved or tampered with.

XI. EFFLUENTS RELEASED TO THE ENVIRONS DURING 2004 A. Airborne Effluents No airborne effluents were released from the facility in 2004.

B. Liquid Effluents No liquid radioactive waste was generated or released from the Reactor Facility in 2004.

Prior to commencement of decommissioning activities involving the reactor pool, pond water released through the spillway was sampled on a quarterly basis. Upon initiation of decommissioning activities in the pool, the previous SOP for sampling and release of pond water was reinstated. Throughout 2004 the pond has remained drained with the runoff from the local environs running through the basin where the pond was located.

8 XII. RADIOACTIVE WASTE SHIPPED A. No solid radioactive waste was generated or shipped from the Reactor Facility in 2004.

Six drums of very low level contaminated soil was moved from the Facility to another University location to be included with other low-level university generated radioactive waste.

XIII. DECOMMISSIONING FUNDING AND EXPENDITURES A. Funding for the decommissioning of the Reactor Facilities comes from both Virginia state sources and internal private sources available to the University Administration. University officials, as well as University Staff and decommissioning contractors are committed to the safe and efficient decommissioning of the reactors within all regulatory parameters.

The funds necessary to complete the decommissioning activities are available and will be committed as necessary.

B. During 2004, a total of $188,072 was expended on personnel, equipment and services as part of the decommissioning efforts.

XIV. CONTRACTOR COMPANIES OPERATING ON-SITE A. During 2004, the primary decommissioning contractor did not maintain an on-site presence, as all the physical decommissioning activities were completed during 2003.

Work on final decommissioning reports were worked on by the primary contractor and their subcontractors at their home offices.

XV. CONTRACTED TASKS AND TIME LINES A. CH2M HILL has been contracted to perform all the tasks necessary to fulfill the NRC approved decommissioning plans, through the free release of the Reactor Facility from both the UVAR and CAVALIER reactor licenses.

B. Decommissioning activities were begun about April 1, 2002 with the mobilization of the principal contractor and sub-contractors on site. The final status survey was completed in August 2003 (with the exception of a couple minor remediations and follow-up surveys which were done in the last quarter of 2003). A final condition report and request for license termination was drafted and submitted to the NRC. Questions about the report were received from the NRC and were answered. A confirmatory survey was completed in March 2005 by personnel from Oak Ridge National Laboratory under contract to the NRC. We are awaiting the results of this survey.

9 XVI. SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE REACTOR FACILITY. REACTOR SOPs AND CHANGES MADE PER 10 CFR 50.59 A. There were no significant changes to the facility in 2004.

B. There were no changes to the Standard Operating Procedures in 2004.

C. There were no changes to the facility in 2004 utilizing 10CFR50.59.

XVII. EQUIPMENT TRANSFERS A small amount of equipment, supplies and material was disposed of during 2004. These items were either sold as surplus, donated to other schools or departments, or disposed of as clean waste. These materials were cleared during the period of decommissioning surveys.

XVIII. NEW AND MODIFIED SOPs HAVING RADIATION SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE The UVAR Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) were not modified in 2004.

XIX. EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS A. From September 2003 through February 2004 the Emergency Plan and Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures were in various stages of being rewritten to both update them and make them more compatible with current conditions at the Reactor Facility. This review and rewrite has now been completed and the rewritten procedures have been distributed to the emergency responders who might have need of them.

B. Because of the current conditions (only one radioactive source sealed in a shipping container and secured in a locked room) at the reactor and the minimal personnel presence in the facility it was concluded that further emergency drills would be both unnecessary and impractical. Therefore, such drills have not been included in the rewritten emergency documents.

C. The good condition of emergency supplies and equipment was verified on a semi-annual basis.

D. All new personnel working at the building were given instruction in appropriate emergency procedures.

XX. INDUSTRIAL ACCIDENTS OR INCIDENTS A. There were no industrial accidents or incidents on the Reactor Facility site in 2004.