ML20211G534

Submits Annual Rept, Covering Period 980701 Through 990630 for Activities of Triga Mark I Reactor.With

ML20211G534
Person / Time
Site:	05000113
Issue date:	06/30/1999
From:	Williams J ARIZONA, UNIV. OF, TUCSON, AZ
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9908310278
Download: ML20211G534 (5)

Text

I

. Nuclear Reactor Laboratory ~ Bit UNIVERSITY cr John G. Williams, Director Engineering Building (20) y e-mail:jgw@ engr. arizona.edu P. O. Box 210020 E -

voice:(520) 621-9729 Tucson,' Arizona 85721-0020 TUCSON ARIZONA FAX:(520) 621-8096 l August 18,1999 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 RE: Annual Report for License R-52, Docket 50-113 This is the Annual Report covering the period July 1,1998, through June 30,1999, for the activities of the TRIGA Mark I Reactor at the University of Arizona, Tucson, l Arizona. The report is submitted in compliance with Section 6.7e of the Facility Technical Specifications and Paragraph 50.59(b) of Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations.

1. During the reporting period, the reactor was operated for research and education. It was used for reactor operator training of operators at this ,

facility. The reactor was used for graduate thesis research and undergraduate course work. The reactor was also used for neutron activation analysis for teaching and research.

l There were no reactor upgrading or modifications during the reporting period.

Power channel calibration by the calorimetric method was performed during the reporting period. The total worth of the regulating, shim, and transient rods were measured to be $3.96, $3.05, and $2.38, respectively. The largest change in worth was 1.2% of total worth on the transient rod, which is consistent with the small changes in rod worth due to rotational changes of position ofindividual fuel elements from fuel movement during approach to critical experiments and fuel inspection.

No fuel elements were measured for length or bend during the reporting period. The number of pulses and elapsed time since the la:;t measurement are less than the surveillance requirements in the facility technical specifications.

Maximum reactivity insertion rates of $0.17/sec, $0.10/sec, and $0.16/sec were measured for the regulating, shim, and transient rods, respectively. All three insertion rates were less than the maximum rate allowed by the facility technical specifications.

The transient rod drive assembly was inspected twice during the reporting s 4

g period. Both piston seals were found to be in satisfactory condition and no I

• * ^ ' "ust ac umulati n was Present in the air cyHnder. f3'g' y v 31 N77 9908310278 990630 PDR ADOCK 05000113 -

R PDR

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 2 {

August 18,1999 Rod dmp times from full out to full insertion were measured to be 0.33,0.35, ) '

and 0.63 seconds for the regulating, shim, and transient rods, respectively.

There was no appreciable change in the drop times of the control rods since the last rod drop measurements. All three drop times were less than the time required by the facility technical specifications. The regulating, shim and transient rods were not required to be visually inspected during the reporting period.

1 The area radiation monitors, the pool activity monitor and the pool conductivity meter were calibrated during the reporting period. l l

2. The reactor was critical for a total of 63 hours7.291667e-4 days <br />0.0175 hours <br />1.041667e-4 weeks <br />2.39715e-5 months <br />, producing 1491.7 kW-hours (0.062 mW-day) of thermal energy. The cumulative energy output since the facility was commissioned is 9.568 MW-days. During the reporting period 5 pulses with input reactivity greater than $1.00 were performed. The -

cumulative number of pulses greater than $1.00 since the time pulsing was i initiated is 2134. I 1

The reactor was in operation 45 days during the reporting period, with 81 hours9.375e-4 days <br />0.0225 hours <br />1.339286e-4 weeks <br />3.08205e-5 months <br /> of operating time, as recorded by the console clock. '

3. There were no inadvertent reactor scrams during the reporting period..

4. Major maintenance included repairing the high voltage section in an area monitor.

Minor maintenance items included servicing the C.A.M. air pump, changing filter cartridges in the water purification system, adding pool water lost by evaporation, replacing burned out light bulbs in the reactor pool, replacing burned out annunciator bulbs in the reactor control console, changing batteries in the low water level detector circuit and area monitors, and making periodic adjustments to the reactor control console circuitry.

5. The Reactor Committee met four times during the reporting period: 9/9/98,11/3/98, 2/3/99, and 5/6/99.

At its meetings and in individual reviews by Committee members, the Committee reviewed operations and operational records of the facility ss specified by the Committee charter. This included audit of preliminary check sheets, pulsing check sheets, approach to critical and termination check sheets, gerations and maintenance log books, monthly and annual check sheets, irradiation records, and experiments performed with the reactor. The Committee reviewed the 1998 annual report to the NRC.

The Reactor Committee reviewed a 10CFR50.59 safety evaluation (attached) for an experiment " Control of the University of Arizona TRIGA Reactor by the Digitally

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 3 August 18,1999 Contmiled, Motor Driven Reactivity Adjustment System (Rotary)". This experiment is ,

essentially the same as the one approved 5/10/96. The safety evaluation for the l previous form of this experiment was attached to the 8/20/96 annual report to the NRC.

The newer version of this experiment incorporates excerpts from facility procedures written for the use of the experiment and for installation and removal of the experiment from the reactor core. The Committee concurred that the experiment did not involve a change in the technical specifications or an unreviewed safety question and gave approval for the experiment.

l

6. No liquid or solid waste was discharged fmm the facility during the reporting period.

Measurements of the Argon-41 concentration in the reactor pool water have demonstrated that the maximum rate of release of Argon-41 from reactor pool water is less than 0.74 pCi per kilowatt-hr of reactor operation. The pneumatic transfer system produces approximately 0.05 Ci of Argon-41 per kW-min of reactor operation, some of which is released when the system is operated. Presented below are the calculations of the maximum monthly releases of Argon-41 from the reactor pool surface, the pneumatic transfer system and the totals.

unwom + w am m nweswems mmwwm 4 gg  % h Sk 6 g&9 WPneumatidM Argon-4 pCI)s b g g;61 i

jC %jTTifaisfe%?y g#

Mg;g$$$j

$ HMMdE 4 l EPM 8%@

h[$$oni-41[(M Serf N N$$n N N $ [E d F$!m M[ (Y S /

July 1998 133.7 0.0 133.7 ,

August 1998 0.0 0.0 0.0 September 1998 73.9 0.0 73.9 October 1998 27.7 0.0 27.7 November 1998 59.5 125.0 184.5 December 1998 231.5 0.0 231.5 January 1999 13.5 0.0 13.5 February 1999 0.1 0.0 0.1 March 1999 83.9 0.0 83.9 April 1999 328.9 0.0 328.9 May 1999 0.0 0.0 0.0 June 1999 151.1 0.0 151.1 m

j l

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 4  !

August 18,1999 I

The daily calculations for Argon-41 release from the pneumatic transfer system did not l

include decay of the isotope prior to release and, therefore, give an over-estimate of 1 Argon-41 release. The maximum total estimated Argon-41 release from the facility during the reporting period is 1.23 millicuries. There were no other gaseous effluents from the facility during the reporting period.

7. Seven (7) persons were issued film badges on a monthly basis for all or part of the reporting period in the Nuclear Reactor I2boratory. The persons receiving badges included all reactor operators, faculty and staff members using the reactor laboratory, researchers, and all students in laboratory courses. No badged individuals were reported as having received exposures above background.

One hur. dred three (103) non-badged persons were admitted to the Reactor Laboratory in classes, tours, or on official business during the reporting period. All groups were issued pocket dosimeters. Pocket dosimeters issued to visitors indicated that no exposure was received.

8. Radiation surveys of the reactor room, control room, and experiment set-up room were a conducted monthly during the reporting period by members of the University of Arizona Radiation Control Office using direct measurement and wipe tests. The results show little detectable activity except where expected (i.e., irradiated samples in storage areas and internal wall surfaces of the irradiation facilities). Other radiation surveys were performed by members of the reactor laboratory staff when necessary. No radiation exposure which can be attributed to reactor operations has been detected outside the reactor laboratory.

9. Environmental TLD monitors at 3 locations on the roof of the building housing the reactor and at 10 other rooflocations on the University campus were replaced and read quarterly during the reporting period. For the 12 month period from July 1,1998, through June 30,1999, the average yearly total of the 3 TLDs located on the reactor building roof was 102 mrem and the average of the 10 other TLDs was 1143 mrem, after subtraction of the average reading of two control TLDs, which were kept in a shielded container in a non-radiation area. This is consistent with similar measurements for these locations in previous years. Thus, there is no evidence that radiation exposures in the vicinity of the reactor are higher than normal. In January,1994, eight TLD monitors were placed at the periphery of the restricted area. In April,1994, two TLD monitors were placed in an office area far removed from the restricted area to provide a baseline reference for building background. The lowest total exposure for the l reporting period at the restricted area periphery was 5.5 mrem, while the highest was 92.5 mrem. Exposure to the public was less than 100 mrem / year. Surveys performed at the periphery of the restricted area with the reactor operating at full power showed the dose rate to be much less than 2 mrem / hour.

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Page 5 August 18,1999 In writing this report, I have tried to be both complete and as brief as is reasonable, and still satisfy the requirements of 10CFR50.59, the Facility Technical Specifications, and the needs of 1 I

the Commission. If other or more detailed information is needed, please contact me at your earliest convenience.

Sincerely, John G. Williams, Director Nuclear Reactor Laboratory JGW:HD/wl cc: Events Assessment, Generic Communications and Non-Power Reactors Branch Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738 Mr. Marvin Mendonca Project Manager USNRC Dr. Richard Powell Vice President for Research i University of Arizona j Dr. Michael Cusanovich Director ARL University of Arizona C:\NRL Documents \anrpt99. doc

(-