ML042330395
| ML042330395 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of California - Irvine |
| Issue date: | 08/12/2004 |
| From: | Geoffrey Miller University of California - Irvine |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML042330395 (10) | |
Text
dL L UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, IRVINE BERKELY
- DAvis .AmviNE
- LOSANGELES
- RIVERSDE
- SANDEEGO SANMRNCSCO SANTAB BA
- SA ACRUZ George E. Miller IRVINE, CA 92697-2025 SenionLecturer Emeritus (949) 824-6649 Departmentof Chemistry and FAX: (949) 824-2210 or (949) 824-8571 Supervisor,Nuclear Reactor Facility. Intemet: GEMILLER@uci.edu 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 Nuc'lear'Reactor Facility, covering the period July 1st 2003 through June 30th 2004.
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
U. C. IRVINE Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report for July 1st 2003 to June 30th 2004 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 2003-2004 Page I
Section 1.
Operations Summary Operation of this facility is in support of the Department of Chemistry program of research and education in the use and application of radiochemical techniques and radioisotopes 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 2004 was 28 students, including one extension student in archeology from Cal. State Long Beach. A graduate course "Nuclear and Radiochemistry" was offered in the Spring Quarter, with an enrollment of 9 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. Support was granted for instrumentation upgrade from the URI program of the US Department of Energy: a new analyzer system has been purchased for gamma ray spectrometry use and a new HPGe detector ordered with funds granted for 2003-2004.
Upgrades have been made to security system hardware, and camera surveillance systems as part of security compensatory measures.
Operations have been at a low to modest level, up slightly from last year. Criticality was achieved for 107 hours0.00124 days <br />0.0297 hours <br />1.76918e-4 weeks <br />4.07135e-5 months <br />, and the total energy generated was equivalent to 62 hours7.175926e-4 days <br />0.0172 hours <br />1.025132e-4 weeks <br />2.3591e-5 months <br /> at full steady state power. 85 experiments were performed, and over 1000 samples were irradiated (sometimes multiple samples are included in a single capsule and are not separately logged). Only 5 low-level isotope shipments were made (Yellow H category or less). No pulse operations have been performed, even for test purposes.
An NRC inspection was carried out during December 2003 (6I j No significant problems were 9).
identified. Security issues were discussed in revisions of a CAL agreement finalized in March 2004.
Monthly inspections are now routine from the EH&S Office at UCI. No significant safety or maintenance problems were encountered during this reporting period, except for one pump failure in the new AMS-4 (replacing CAM). Fortunately a second pump was on hand as a quick replacement.
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 2003-2004 Page 2
Section 2. Data Tabulations for the Period July 1st. 2003 to June 30th. 2004 TABLE I.
Experiment Approvals on file 8 Experiments performed (including repeats) 85 Samples irradiated 1032+
Energy generated this period (Megawatt hours) 15.5 Total, 69 element core = 127.0
>74 element core = 1259.9 Total energy generated since initial criticality 1386.9 Mwh Pulse operation this period 0 Total pulses to 6/30/03 978 Hours critical -this -period--- adz 106.6-Total hours critical to date 7997.4 Inadvertent scrams or unplanned shutdowns 18 (15 due to a problem with scram circuitry in the Linear channel)
Visitors to reactor - as individuals or in tour groups - 293 Maximum dosimeter recorded for visitors - all less than 1 mrem Visiting researchers (dosimeter issues) 8 Maximum dose recorded at one visit 3.18 mrem Visiting researchers (badged) 4 TABLE II Reactor Status 6/30/04 (I graphite element added 1/6/04).
Fuel elements in core (including 2 fuel followers) 82 Fuel elements in storage (reactor tank - used) 25 Fuel elements unused (4 instrumented elements + 1 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 $2.71 Control rod worths (1/08/04) REG $2.89 (after core fuel measurement) SHIM $3.62 ATR $1.74 FIR $0.70 Total: $8.95 Maximum possible pulse insertion $2.44 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 2003-2004 Page 3
Section 3.
Inadvertent Scrams and Unplanned Shutdowns TABLE III.
Date Time Power Type and Cause 2003 8/01 14:53 2.5 w Period scram during start to higher power. Trainee operator error.
9/17 13:45 250 kw Fuel temperature scram initiated by personnel inadvertently moving wiring connecting to Fuel Temperature circuit.
12/16 13:31 -2.5 kw Console power scram due to building power drop.
2004 1/08 15:32 -25w Linear Power scram due to apparent sudden power surge not followed accurately by auto range change during rod calibration operations.
16:23 -1.5 w Reoccurrence of above scram.
18:03 75 mw Reoccurrence of above scram.
1/09 13:51 200 kw Reoccurrence of above scram while at steady state. Cause investigated and thought to be dry solder joint found on HV connector on Wide Range Linear Module.
14:22 75 kw Linear scram again. All circuit boards reseated during investigation, all connecters re-plugged and scram relay boards removes and re-plugged.
Seems to cure problem.
1/21 11:08 -250 kw Linear power scram - electronic surge without explanation.
3/02 10:47 -25 mw repeat of above scram.
11:02 1.5 w repeat of above scram 3/09 19:48; 20:29; 20:34; 20:35; 20:48 and 21:26 multiple recurrences of above scram at various power levels. Scram mercury relay switch examined closely and found dry joint on one leg. Re-soldered all connections to this circuit. New relay switch ordered.
4/01 13:27 -25 w Scram with no annunciator igtpparent electronic glitch - not repeatable, operations continued.
UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2003-2004 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.
2003 12/10-12/11 New AMS-4 instrument (Eberline)substituted for old CAM system with both annunciation and alarm-ventilation system shutdown functions transferred to new unit.
Checklists (start-up and shutdown) were modified to accommodate changes in procedures for daily tests.
12/18 Sensitivity adjusted on Zone 2 motion sensor to improve reliability.
2004 01/06 Graphite dummy element moved into core to add $0.05-$0.10 (anticipated) reactivity to core. (Found change from ca. $2.62 to $2.72 after rod recalibrations.) 1 fuel element moved from storage rack at east end of tank to rack at West end of tank.
Handling tool was "borrowed" from Cornell to replace ours, which had failed owing to rusting of shield cabling.
01/12 Low-flow AMS-4 alarm sent in. Filter clogged. Plan to change filters only once each month was revised to weekly change.
02/26 RMS unit 3 failed to reset after being tested at high alarm. Unit temporarily removed from service.
03/03 Test reported that pool low level alarm failed to report to UCIPD. Pool level checked until March 5th when verification of proper operation was received. No apparent reason for failure the first time.
03/05 RMS unit 3 inspected. Problem solely due to alarm relay sticking in closed position.
Problem not repeatable. Unit placed back in service after passing full tests.
06/03 AMS4 reported failure. Found pump inoperative. AMS4 #2 pump substituted for continued operation. Unit fully tested for operation of alarms, etc. Considerable increase in flow rate. (27 to 48 L/hr) so perhaps pump #1 always faulty. New blades ordered for repair of pump #1.
6/10 Problems occurring with one zone receiver in motion sensor system. Could not clear alarm, so removed from service. Other zones actually cover the facility adequately during walk tests so this not needed. Problem to repair since no circuit diagram ever provided, and DSC no longer sells these units.
6/17 RMS system calibrated.
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.
UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2003-2004 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 (CaSO4 -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 (7/1/03-6/30/04):
- a. Minutes of operation: 246 minutes
- b. Release rate assumed: 6. x 10-8 microcuries/mL
- c. Flow rate of exhaust air: 1.2 x 1o8 ni/min.
Total release computed: (a x b x c) 1.7 x 10 3 microcuries (2) Release from pool surface (7/1/03-6/30/04):
- a. Total hours of operation at power (Mwh x 4) 62.2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />
- b. Release rate assumed: <1. x 10- 8 microcuries/mL
-____c. Flowxateof exhaust air:1 - 3.2 x108 mL/min.
Total release computed: (a x 60 x b x c) = 4.5 x 10 3 microcuries
- d. Total of (1) and (2) emission in 1 year = 6.2 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) = - I x 10-10 microcuries/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 year.
This is similar to values reported in previous years and assumes no dilution of the plume at or beyond the stack.
UCI Nuclear Reactor Facility Annual Report 2003-2004 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 1 C and H).
DRY WASTES:
09/23/03 2 II3 dry waste containing less than 10 microcuries of mixed activation products (including 6OCo and shorter-lived products) from irradiation experiments.
21208/03 2 3 drywaste tcont lessthan 1f0 irocuries of mixed i 60Co and shorter-lived products) from irradiation experiments.
02/24/04 2 ft3 dry waste containing less than 100 microcuries of mixed activation products (including 60Co and shorter-lived products) from irradiation experiments.
06/29/042 ft3 dry waste containing less than 30 microcuries of mixed activation products (including 60Co and shorter-lived products) from irradiation experiments.
LIQUIDS:
09/23/03 1 gallon LSC waste est: 10 microcuries 3H and 10 microcuries "C.
04/12/04 1 gallon LSC waste est < I mCi 3H and I mCi 14C Section 7.
Environmental Surveillance.
Calcium sulfate/Dysprosium thermoluminescent dosimeters in packs supplied by the Radiation Detection Company, Sunnyvale, California are placed at nine locations around the UCI Campus. 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
_ amnles removed from the reactor, and on sample handling tools. All waste material especially old flooring was surveyed by EH&S before disposal ndfound to befree 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 floor, laboratory 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 2003-2004 Page 7
TABLE IV.
Environmental Dosimetry Data.
2003-2004 Average Total Exposures in mrem (including "control background"!)
Location. Ouarter Annual Prior year Ratio 2/03 3/03 4/03 1/04 Total Total 2004f2003 2003/4 2002/3
- 1. S. Facility perimeter 24 24 43 *53 144 97* 1.5
- 2. W. Facilityperimeter 13 9 6 10 38 39 1.0
- 3. N Facility perimeter 14 11 7 10 42 45 1.0 4.-Lab Room over facility -10 -' 64-- `28 - 39- 0.7
- 5. Facility main air exhaust 8 6 3 7 24 26 0.9
- 6. Bio. Sci II top floor 10 8 5 6 29 36 0.8
- 7. Librarytop floor 22 17 12 12 63 71 0.9
- 8. Computer Sci. top floor 7 7 2 4 20 26 0.8
- 9. Facility fume hood exh. 11 7 5 6 29 36 0.8 10.Facultyhousing 6 6 2 3 17 21 0.8 Background RDC control 20 17 14 14 65 72 0.9
- increased exposure due to relocation of stored Cf-252 source closer to this sensor.
Discussion Raw data is presented here, with no attempt to compute an average local "background" since the data vary significantly.
Data for this year reflects two issues:
- most raw results have reversed the trend of increasing and have reverted to values before last year.
- the experimental work has resulted in a modest increase at location 1. This is transmitting to an internal corridor area with an extremely low occupancy rate, so is not considered a problem.
"- ~
- all'ubutthe loZtnra eblo-wRDCst ie-d6o-ntrol" background level.
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. Over many years, the data at each specific location has shown remarkable consistency. Increases seen last year have not been repeated. The net conclusion is that compared to 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 2003-2004 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. Neutron exposure badges are used by personnel (up to 4) who might work with the Cf-252 source. TLD and badge dosimetry are read quarterly by Radiation Detection Company, and results are presented in Table V.
7 persons were issued dosimeters on a continual basis; 6 were also issued with finger dosimeters (liD). Up to 24 mrem in a quarter were randomly reported for TLD badges never worn but kept in the facility. 28 students and 4 teaching assistants in a radiochemistry class were also issued TLD monitors. A new dosimetry contractor is being used as of January 1 2004 and higher "non-exposure" results are being reported.
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-rmR 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 I 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 2004 were not available as of this report, so these reflect only 9 months of operations.
TABLE V.
Personnel Exposure Report Summary for 6/30/03 to 3/30/04 (in mremr)
Individuals Whole Body Finger Rina TEDE TODE (Shallow) 11 81 81 245 12 34 34 255 12 23 23 140 12 53 53 63 3 20 20 36 13 59 59 41 324 11-15 11-15 -
35 10-13 10-13 -
Totals 6 220 220 780 (non-class) (16 (WB) person-mrern/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 Cl-38 radioactivity production.
`-I27ndividuals receiving Zxvr5e 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 radiochernistry class Jan-March 2004.
- 5. Spare badges used as controls for the radiochemistry class.
Additional Note: Contract changed 1/1/2004 to Global Dosimetry Solutions, Inc, Costa Mesa, CA.
Aggregated non-zero data from self-reading dosimeters used by researchers in addition to TLD badges are:
Persons accumulation 1 5.96 7 1.74 Summation 8 6.70 (0.84 person mrem average)
As noted earlier, 293 visitors were monitored using self-reading digital dosimeters (individuals or 3 or more per group when in a group). No readings >0.05 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 2003-2004 Page 9