IR 05000062/1981002
| ML20031E748 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Virginia |
| Issue date: | 09/18/1981 |
| From: | Butcher R, Julian C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20031E739 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-062-81-02, 50-396-81-02, 50-396-81-2, 50-62-81-2, NUDOCS 8110160377 | |
| Download: ML20031E748 (5) | |
Text
.
.
/
UNITED STATES 4*t, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
g i
REGION 11
101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100 e
Ye
[
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
Report Nos. 50-62/81-2 and 50-396/81-2 Licensee: University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22901 Facility Name:
UVAR and Cavalier Docket Nos. 50-62 and 50-396 License Nos. R-66 and R-123 Inspector:
9[/'l[#1 R. Butcher, Projecy inspector IJate ' Signed Approved by:
///9/9/
C. Julian, Acting Section Chief, Division of Date' Signed
' "
Resident and Reactor Project Inspection SUMARY Inspection on August 31 thru September 3, 1981 Areas Inspected This routine unannounced inspection involved 28 inspector-hours on site in the
,
'
areas of procedures, logs and records, requalificatio.1 training, surveillances, IE Circular followup, experiments and plant operations.
Resul ts Of the seven areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
8110160377 8109j8 PDR ADOCK 05000062
-
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
'
Licensee Employees
- T. G. Williamson, Chairman, Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics
'
Department
- H. Berk, Radiation Safety Officer
- B. Shriver, Director, Nuclear Reactor Facility
- J. P. Farrar, Reactor Supervisor
- T. Porter, Senior Reactor Operator F. Hoss, Senior Reactor Operator P. Benneche, Reactor Engineer B. Hosticka, Senior Reactor Engineer
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 3,1981, with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previcus Inspection Findings a.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (62/79-01-07) Definition is needed for T.S.
6.2.B.2 concerning what constitutes an untried core loading.
The licensee's Reactor Safety Cannittee (RSC) released a memorandum dated September 11, 1979 defining the functions and responsibilities of the RSC.
Paragraph IV.C. defines what changes to the reactor core can be made without RSC approval. The inspector concurred in the restriction noted in the memorandum. This item is closed, b.
(Closed) Infraction (62/79-03-01) Licensee failure to calibrate the pool water temperature RTD as part of channel calibration.
l The licensee UVAR S0P 7.6.1 requires that the pool water temperature RTD be calibrated.
This item is closed.
4.
Unresolved Items (
Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Reactor Operations and Plant Tour a.
A tour of the UVAR and the CAVALIER facilities was conducted on
,
August 31, 1981. The inspector noted the following:
(1.) Housekeeping in the control rooms and reactor rooms was satis-factory.
.
-. - -
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
.
-
-
.
(
<
,
.
(2.) An in-calibration survey meter was in the control room.
(3.) An in-calibration hand and foot radiation monitor was available outside the UVAR entrance for personnel monitoring.
(4.) Both facilities were inaccessible except through locked security doors.
b.
The inspector witnessed a reactor startup and power operation on the UVAR.
Neither facility was being operated at the time of the inspection and power was limited to 100 KV on the UVAR due to the replacement of a coolant pump. The reactor could only be operated in the natural convection mode. The inspector walked through a start-up check out and noted no discrepancies.
The inspector had no comments.
6.
Followup on Circulars a.
(80-CI-14) IE Circular 80-14, Radioactive Contamination of Plant Demineralized Water System and Resultant Internal Contamination of Personnel and (77-CI-14) Separation of Contaminated Water Systems from Non-contaminated Plant System.
The inspector reviewed the circumstances of cross contamination with the licensee. The licensee does not have this problem since make up water for the UVAR and the CAVALIER both come from an open water tank.
The water tank is filled from a water spigot located high in the tank that is controlled by a water level float. This item is closed.
b.
(80-CI-02) IE Circular 80-02, Nuclear Power Plant Shift Work Hours.
The inspector discussed the reason for the circular with the licensee.
The licensee was aware of the circular but felt that this was not a problem since they have never experienced excessive work hours at the facilities even when operating around the clock.
This item is closed.
c.
(79-CI-08) IE Circular 79-08, Attempted Extortion - Low Enriched Uranium.
The 'icensee has received and reviewed this circular. They have an appcoved security plan that was inspected this year and the fuel used in the facilities is well controlled.
This item is closed.
d.
(79-FI-03) IE Circular 79-15, Malfunction of SurvivAir Self Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA)
The licensee does not use the SurvivAir SCBA and is therefore not affected. This item is closed.
....
-
)
r
.
.
7.
Review of Reactor Experiments The inspector reviewed selected experiment records. The experiments were conducted in accordance with licensee procedures and the logs were complete and up to date. The Reactor Safety Committee reviewed new experiments. The inspector had no further questions.
8.
Procedures The inspector reviewed selected operation, maintenance and emergency procedures for compliance to Technical Specifications. The procedures reviewed were up to date and complete. The control room copy of procedures was complete and readily available.
The inspector had no further questions.
9.
Surveillances The inspector reviewed the surveillances conducted by the licensee. The procedures and related administrative requirements were satisfactory.
The inspector noted the following discrepancies.
a.
The digital pool temperature calibration required per UVAR Standard Operating Procedure (50P) 7.6.1 was missing for the period between February 4,1980 and February 16, 1981.
The requirement is to perform a calibration at intervals not to exceed eight months. Discussions with the licensee indicate the surveillance was conducted in August concurrently with the delta temperature system calibration, which had completed surveillance records for August,1980, since they are normally accomplished together.
It appears the licensee did conduct the surveillance but lost the surveillance record sheet.
b.
The surveillance record for calibration of the power level meter on the UVAR console for July 27, 1981, did not specify local versus remote meter calibration.
Previous surveillance records indicated both meters were being calibrated. The licensee stated that the surveillance form would be revised so that each meter, remote and local, would be specified.
c.
For the UVAR, on flay 13, 1981, data for safety rod reactivity worth for safety rod 3 was obtained while moving the regulating rod out from 0 to 25 inches. The data for the regulating rod showed a total worth of 45 cents which did not correspond with previous regulating rod worth values, so the regulating rod worth was reaccomplished on flay 14, 1981.
The data obtained for safety rod 3 on !!ay 13,1981 was still used for its reactivity worth. This approach is inconsistent.
d.
The CAVALIER S0P 7.4 " Control Rod Calibration" requires that data be recorded on form 7.4.
The latest data was not recorded on Form 7.4 and no shutdown margin calculation was filed with the rod calibration data.
The licensee had calculated the shutdown margin and showed it to the inspector when the data was questione r
..
.
The licensee has comitted to improving the surveillance record in the area of safety rod reactivity worths. This will be an inspector follow up item (50-62/81-02-01 and 50-396/81-02-01).
10.
Reactor Logs and Records a.
Reactor Operations and liaintenance Logs. The inspector reviewed the daily check sheets and the console log.
Entries were complete and traceable to related documents.
It was noted that in a few places there were mark-thrus and revised entries without the person who was making the change initialing the log. The inspector had no further comments, b.
Review of liinutes of Reactor Safety Committee. The Reactor Safety Committee minutes were complete, the required quorums were present and meetings were conducted within the required frequency. The RSC reviewed safety analysis for proposed new experiments, reviewed new procedures and procedure changes, reactor design changes and reactor operations. The inspector had no further questions.
11.
Requalification Training The inspector reviewed requalification records for 1980 and 1981. The examinations and each individuals answers, documentation of the required reactor control manipulations and notification of disqualified individuals were satisfactory.
The inspector had no further questions.
12.
Previously Identified Concerns a.
(Closed) -Inspector Followup Item (62/79-01-02). Licensee to review discrepancy in power range channel calibration per S0P 7.1.4.
The licensee has revised S0P 7.1.4.b to require the meter read 100 t 1 percent.
This item is closed.
b.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (62/78-03-03).
Licensee to upgrade annual reports in accordance with T.S.6.7.
The inspector reviewed the licensees annual report for the period January 1, 1980 through December 31, 1980. The report met the requirements of T.S.6.7.e.
This item is closed.
c.
(Closed) Inspector Followup Item (62/78-03-04). Licensee to rewrite operator requalification plans and documents to assure compliance with 10 CFR 55, Appendix A.
The inspector reviewed the licensees operator requalification records and they are acceptable.
This item is closed.