Text

Univ of Virginia Reactor Facility Annual Rept 1989. W/ 900307 Ltr
	ML20042D758
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	12/31/1989
From:	Farrar J; VIRGINIA, UNIV. OF, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA
To:	Alexander Adams; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
	NUDOCS 9004050367
	Download: ML20042D758 (44)
	v • d • e

- , 1 o sema v, ENGINEERING ! l

& APPLIED SCIENCE I Dil'ARTMIXT OI MICLIAR I.NGlWIikl%G

& I ngl %I thl%G flh*hlCi March 7, 1990 Unhemr3 of Yupnia Reactor I acility Charlottenille, VA 22WO 2442 mu 924 71% I'AX WM 9C 2634 Director of Nuclent Reactor Regulation U.S. Nucicar Regulatory Commission Mail Station Pl.137 Washington, D.C. 20555 Att: Mr. Alexander Adams Jr.

Non Power Reactor Projects Re: Docket No. 50 62 Docket No. 50 396 Dear Mr. Adams; Ve hereby submit, as required by section 6.6.2 of the Technical Specifications, our annual report of the operations 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, 1989 through December 31, 1989. This report has been reviewed and approved by the Reactor Safety Committee.

Sincerely, D- d4444.-

J .V P. Farrar, Administrator U,Va Reactor racility cc: USNRC, Region II 90040".0367 891231 DR HOOCK ODOOhHg2 I\

4

)

v: liv 8FSi;V 0:,,Vi?oili8 o l

! s !

9 j 7 I f,680';0F!BCili';y l

! A:xallext:; l l

l

~989 l l !

s z :

l t i

4 :

l s

. _ _ _ - , . . . ~ - . - , . . . - _ . , . . . _ . . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ , _ , . _ _ _ . . , . _ _ _ _ - _ , . . , . . . _ . - . . , - - . . _ , . . _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . , , .

o e i

1989 ANNUAL REPORT i UNIVERSITY OT VIRGINIA REACTOR FACILITY l Table of Contents j EAEA i I. INTRODUCTION 1 [

A. Reactor Facility Reporting Requirements 1 I

1. Reporting Period 1

2. Basis for Reporting 1 ;

B. Reactor racility Description i f

1. Two Megawatt UVAR Reactor 1 i

2. 100 Watt CAVALIER Reactor

3. Past Operating History 3 :

a. UVAR Reactor 3 l

b. CAVALIER Reactor 5 i

4. Summary of 1989 Reactor Utilization 5 i

a. UVAR Reactor 5 (

b. CAVALIER Reactor 5 !

5. Special Facilities 6 C. Reactor Staff Organization 7 ;

1. Operations Staff 7

2. Health Physics Staff 7 >

3. Reactor Safety Committee 7 l

II. xtACTOR OPERATIONS 9 A. UVAR Reactor 9 f

1. Core Configurations 9 -

2. Standard Operating Procedures 9 ;

3. Surveillance Requirements 9 t

a. Rod Drop Tests and Visual Inspection 9

b. Tests and Calibrations 12 1

(1) Monthly 12 (2) Semi-Annually 13 (3) Annually 13 ;

(4) Daily Checklist 13 (5) Reactor Pool Water Quality 13 (6) Core Configuration Changes 14 i (7) Communication Checks 14 i (t) Alara System Checks 14 l

4. Maintenance 14 ;

5. Unplanned shutdowns 17 j

6. Pool Water Make-up 18 '

i l

j

11 9125

7. ruel Shipments 19

a. Fresh Fuel 19

b. Spent Fuel 19 1 8. Personnel Training and Instruction 19 I

a. Reactor Facility Staff 19

b. Summer Course for High School Teachers 19 l c. Disadvantaged American Operator Training 19 Program l 9. Reactor Tours 20 B. CAVALIER Reactor 20

1. Core Configuration 20 1

III. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE 22 i A. Resctor Safety Committee 22 l

Meetings

1. 22

2. Audits 22

3. Approvals 22 l 4. 10 CFR 50.59 Reviews 22

a. New drain hole through roof of UVAR 22 i Reactor Room I b. dw. Hao Make-up System for UVAR Pool 22

c. A Rotating Irradiation Facility 22

d. Modification to Liquid Waste Tank System 23

e. Criticality Monitor Power System 23

f. Magnet Current Meters for UVAR Console 23

g. Solid Aluminum Plate for Mineral Irradiation 23 Facility (MIF) Experiment

h. Modification to South Beamport Facility 23 B. Changes to Reactor Facility 23

1. Low Enriched Uranium (LEU) Conversion Plans 23

2. Raising of Cooling Tower 23 C. NRC Inspections 24 D. Licensing Action 24 E. Emergency Preparedness 24

iii PAEt IV. HEALTH PHYSICS 27 A. Personnel Dosinatry 27

1. Visitor Exposure Data 27

2. Reactor Facility Personnel 27

3. Dosinetry for Specific Activities 28 B. Effluent Releases 28

1. Gaseous Effluents 28

2. Liquid Effluents 28

3. Solid Wasta 30 C. Environmental Monitoring 30

1. Air Sanples 30

2. Water Samples 30 D. Radiation and Contanination Levels 31 E. Summary 31 V. RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND REACTOR SERVICES 32 A. Irradiation and Research Facilities Available 32 B. Research Activities 32 C. Service Projects 34 D. Reactor Sharing Program 35 E. Reactor Facility Supported Courses and Labs 36 F. Degrees Granted by the Department of Nuclear 36 Engineering and Engineering Physics VI. FINANCES 30 A. Expenditures 38 B. State Support and Service Income 38

j 1

1989 ANKUAL REPORT ,

f University of Virginia Reactor Facility [

t I. INTRODUCTION i A. Reactor Facility Reporting Requirements ;

I

1. Reporting Period l This report on Reactor Facility activities during f 1989 covers the period January 1, 1989 through }

December 31, 1989. s

2. Basis for Reporting An annual report of reactor operations is required by l the UVAR and CAVALIER Technical specifications, !

section 6.6.2. Additionally, it is the desire of the :

Facility management to document and publicize the !

nost inportant results derived from reactor ;

operations, j B. Reactor Facility Description

{

The Reactor Facility is located on the grounds of the '

University of Virginia at Charlottesville, Virginia and i is operated by the De !

Engineering Physics. partment The Facility of Nuclear housesEngineering the UVAR two and i negawatt pool type research reactor and CAVALIER 100 watt I training reactor (now shutdown, awaiting !'

l decommissioning). The Facility also has a 8,000 curie cobalt-60 gamma irradiation facility, a hot cell facility i

with remote manipulators, several radiochemistry ,

laboratories with fume hoods, radiation detectors, i counters and laboratory counting equipment, computerized l l data acquisition-analysis systems, and a fully equipped l nachine shop and electronic shop. *

1. Two Megawatt UVAR Reactor l :

i The UVAR reactor is a light water cooled, moderated !

and shielded " swimming pool" type reactor that first !

went into operation at a licensed power level of one '

l megawatt in June 1960, under facility license No. R- I l 66. In 1971, the authorized power level was i j increased to two negawatts. In September of 1982, the operating license for the UVAR was extended for t 20 years. Figure 1 shows a layout of the reactor and the various experimental facilities associated with '

it.

i i

w..-- , - , ,,.n. , - . , - , . , , , , . , . , , - - , . - ,, - - - ~ . . , , , _ ,, a-. , -,-- .. - , , .

0 2

UVAR Experimental Facilities TANCENTIAL htAv PORT -

T A RSC T DOE ""* _ pg M. .

FUEL [LEWENT TANSCNTIAL "bC AM TUBE a b p - -

A

/ -

N DEAM - "". $0VTHEA$T

, o F LI V

$0VTH ACCtb5 FACILIT Y RESEARCH FACll.lTIES

Two Neutron Beam Ports, one currently utilized e Other short or long term irradiation f acilities for Neutton Radiography with temperature and environmental control e Two Access Ports (6't4'), one currently con.

4,000 Ci Cobalt 60 Camma Irradiation f acility figured for a High [nergy Gamma Photon Beam o Hot Cell, with remote manipulators e Hydraulic Rabbit,for etivation analysis e Machine Shop, fully equipped (sample size < 0.69* diameter,6' length) e [lectronic $ hop, w ell equipped e Pneumatic Rabbit, for activation analysis

Several Radiochemistry labs provided with lume (sample size 1* diameter and < 2.3* length) hoods, counters and laboratory equipment

Heated [pithermal Neutron irradiation f acility, e Computerized data acquisition / analysis s) stem for trace element analysis v

Figure 1

i 3 l 2 !

t l

) 2. 100 Watt CAVALIER Reactor The CAVALIER (Cooperatively Assembled Virginia Low l Intensity Educational Reactor) first went into !

operation in October 1974, under facility license R- l 123, at a licensed power of 100 watts. The reactor ;

was built to acconnodate reactor operator training i i and perform experiments for undergraduate laboratory !

! courses. The operating license was renewed in May ?

i 1985, for a period of 20 years. Figure 2 shows a j layout of this reactor and its control room. A :

I dismantlement plan was submitted in November, 1987 to i i

the NRC. This plan will be superceded by a l l decommissioning plan, to be submitted early in 1990. !

1 l 3. Past Operating History '

i i

a. UVAR Reactor '

The UVAR reactor operating history is as follows

1 Yearts) NWhours Hours Operated [

1960-1965 1218 1500 !

1966-1970 2742 3000 i 1971-1975 1654 1800 i 1976-1978 1769 1480 ,

l 1979 4426 2764 l 1980 4610 2863 l l 1981 4988 3568 ;

1 1982 5507 3024 !

1 1983 6079 3556 i 1

1984 5687 3166 i i 1985 927 718 l

1986 1330 891 l j 1987 1220 801 ;

1988 910 621 1989 1378 869 (

l

During the years 1979 through 1984, the UVAR {

4 reactor was operated ~110 hours per week to i

irradiate metal specimens for radiation damage !

) studies on pressure vessel steels. Since that time, the reactor staff has been on an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days 0.00222 hours 1.322751e-5 weeks 3.044e-6 months , 5 I day per week schedule. The intent of the reactor j 3 management is to perforn various on-going small and diverse irradiation projects, rather than a l single large irradiation project. The areas ;

where irradiations have been or are being sought i are nineral irradiations, semiconductor 3 transmutation doping, isotope production for industry or medicine, and NAA or ENAA on large i numbers of similar samples. 1

'f

{' El '

I %

.i . N{ i i

i N

4 1

> BTArms To

- C<

. 0, i

EtrMIn ,

h 1 i 4

1 OPERATING i

i '

4 CONCRER Sg gLD

\

' p s *, * 's 9 1

'S 6 l i Nll$tRATOR . 4 8 i

TAME ,

r a4 'j t 6

s , . , .v }

I 1 '

i f

i Plan View of CAVAL!ta operating Area i

SCALE: 1/8" = le f l :

l t i

% CONCRETE sgIELD l 's I 2!

i p !

4

.i 6 =

I a 6 6 4*8 n ..

t

! * ' GROUND F140R r

,. a'*/ ' , a ,' LEVEL E T. TOR '

l N07 dye 6 *g p a .m -

a . . , -

i 1 *

t 1

8, 11e 6,i '

6 .

, )

E RARTs 6 ae DEIONIgER ,',

nu :' . > / . EARen uAcron i i *

. CORE '

s

a. ,. / nu j

a

I"' .

g s6 4 *

- DRAIN I b*> TO *

l

\

NN &&4 4a h-W y POND 6

{

l a

-X%

l

'. . ,, 4 ci . . . . . . . . . . . . . , ,

si t )

i Vertical Section Through Raattor P.it SCALE: 1/4" = 1' {

Figure 2 !

i

f 5 l

b. CAVALIER Reactor The CAVALIER reactor operating history is as i follows:

l

.. . , , ,; Years Mggt-Hours Hours Operated l 1974-1980 2128 758 !

1981-1985 1278 388 !

1986 147 37 i 1987 28 29 l 1988 Permanently Shutdown !

The CAVALIER reactor has been used primarily for l reactor operator training and undergraduate lab l experiments, although it has not been operated ;

over the past two years. A dismantlement plan !

was submitted to the NRC in November, 1987 but i the NRC decided the Facility should submit a [

decommissioning plan. A complete decommissioning [

plan will be submitted in the near future. The i CAVALIER was unloaded and disassembled on March !

3, 1988. l

4. Summary of 1989 Reactor Utilization

a. UVAR Reactor

s During 1989, the UVAR was operated for 869 hours0.0101 days 0.241 hours 0.00144 weeks 3.306545e-4 months {

and a total integrated power of 1378 Megawatt- !

hours. The following experiments were performed l utilizing the UVAR reactort i

955 NAA samples were run in the pneumatic rabbit system !

16 NAA samples were run in the hydraulic i l rabbit system

21 NAA samples were irradiated in the l

I radiation basket ,

i two sets of samples were irradiated for electrophoresis experiments !

l

Three sets of samples were run in the nineral !

l irradiation facility l

!

11 separate runs were made in the rotating irradiation facility l

171.5 hours5.787037e-5 days 0.00139 hours 8.267196e-6 weeks 1.9025e-6 months of reactor operations were j l dedicated to neutron radiography j

b. CAVALIER Reactor i

l The CAVALIER rerActor was permanently shutdown in !

1988 and will no longer be operated. >

5 6

l

t f

8 i

[

5. Special racilities !

The following facilities are operated in connection {

with the UVARI i e Two neutron beam ports, of a inch diaceter, I are available. One beam port is currently dedicated to neutron radiography. [

t

Two access ports (6 ft x 4 ft). One port is f currently configured for a high energy photon [

beam. t

Hydraulic rabbit, for activation analysis, I permitting samples with dimensions of less l than 0.69 inch diameter and six inch length. !

Pneumatic rabbit, for activation analysis, ;

permitting sample diameters of one inch and l 1ength not exceeding 2.3 inches, accessing ;

either a thermal or an epithermal irradiation t facility.

Epithermal neutron irradiation facility, for i trace element analysis with reduced thermal !

neutron flux. 1

Solid gel irradiator for electrophoresis. !

Epithermal neutron mineral irradiation !

facility. !

A rotating irradiation facility currently :

used for activation of iridium seeds for !

cancer inplantation. l

Irradiation facilities with environmental '

control. !

cobalt-60 gamma irradiation facility with !

8,000 curies permitting exposures at rates up l to 180,000 R/h.

Small hot cell, with remote manipulators.

~{

Machine and Electronic shops, well equipped.

Several radiochemistry labs with fume hoods, counters and standard lab equipment.

Low-background counting room with shielded i solid state detectors and computerized data :

acquisition / analysis system. l

}

l

[

I

[

I l

i

?

C. Reactor Staff 01ganization

1. Operations Staff {

\

A Reactor Facility organisation chart is shown in 1 Figure 3. Personnel on the reactor staff as of the l end of 1989 were l I

R.U. Mulder - Reactor Director i J.P. Farrar - Reactor Administrator l P.E. Bennache - Services Supervisor B. Hosticka - Research Scientist

D.W. Freeman - Senior Reactor Operator T.L. Nguyen - Senior Reactor Operator L.L. Scheid - Reactor Operatore V.G. Hanpton - Electronic Shop Supervisor J.S. Baber - Machine Shop Supervisor V.E. Thomas - Reactor Facility Secretary I

Paid from reactor services income account

2. Health Physics Staff at the Facility A.M. Jackson - Reactor Health Physicist l D. Steva - Reactor Health Physicist i i

The Health Physicist is assisted by a health physics !

technician paid from reactor services income, other :

health physicists and technicians employed by the !

University are on call with the office of ;

Environmental Health and Safety. I

3. Reactor Safety Committee )

The Reactor Safety Committee is composed of the following individuals:

J.L. Meem - Professor Emeritus - Chairman f J.S. Brenizer - Assoc. Professor - Nuclear Engr. i J.R. Gilchrist - U.Va. Radiation Safety Officer i R.U. Mulder - Director, Reactor Facility '

A.B. Reynolds - Professor, Nuclear Engineering R.A. Rydin - Assoc. Professor, Nuclear Engr.

X.R. Lawless - Professor, Material Science l

i i

o .

e c

Y T

8 ,

P ,

E t ,

ME S E i c, T

A ,

s s T es T

.i::. e, s

s e W ,

8 T m ,

A o A

s O

A C

v. , .

e s

U, T.

, f T

o e y

,M . r rt T.

f u t i

E C

oEYT .

Y t

c i

I F M.EM T w o u i F

I L i T r c f d t

e A C t a

cNS D e e

t 5

S F f

t A A

EI d, n

e, t

F C

S I

asa S m pt P

M O

i.

a r

7 se E S I

t M vs 8 C e e

E l o

Fcse t

5 C t Rs3 E E l

vc e4 Rs H a t T i . 3 P. C a e f

o f

o n c

_9 E

S vv e 5 C t s N v C r H

I F

t 0e S s e p, S s o a DF R sg e t

L I

s f D f

oS s 8

H F f o3 T T O

Osa Ce o a l e

M,0 4 t E U oE

M e I T. I C C 3 f R

s P L L T

.E I e

A E

A E E8 H =C R

o O

O P P E ac w E ,

H t

I C z .

HM D e n a i

C . t .

I S l ,O . .

a V a s MS . . .

sf .

oE n C I mO i n S .

. g .

U E N T .

i K 4 . . .

r D E mMf H .

O C .

, , e s s p I Y a e Y

T .

,I A f

.T Mm I

i l

T a el v

E v. ,t 3 8 4 t

ME S T E U c, 2 f E Kt NTN3 P se T l I T f e 5 ** O uRO t t .~ *::

R ,, v ee f s T i O ,

T .

e MI

YDP i

T r P ECn E

C T t ER c, s t u

A I e e t L lb S Nd I

a 8

D ,,

I I

(

I C t A RE F

D

,ot

a.C w

iitlliItllll'1IllI !l

o e i

i 9

l )

< r l

II. REACTOR OPERATIONS i

) A. UVAR Reactor !

l l

1. Core Configurations l A typical UVAR core configuration is shown in Figure ,

i 4. The reactor employs three boron-stainless steel l

) safety rods and one stainless-steel regulating rod i for fine power control. The fuel einments are of the

) Materials Test Reacter (MTR) curved plate-type l

! elements, utilising a uranium-aluminum alloy. The !

l fuel is approximately 934 enriched. The elements !

l have 18 fuel plates per element, with a loading of j approximately 195 grams / element. The control rod I j elements have 9 fuel plates with a loading of [

1 approximately 97.5 grams / element. A plan view of ;

! these elements is shown in Figure 5. }

! I j 2. Standard Operating Procedures !

Three sections of the UVAR standard operating ;

i procedures were changed during 1989 in the areas of j the calculation of shutdown margin, the pool make-up i 4 system and abnormal conditions. The Reactor Safety ;

i committee reviewed and approved these changes. I

3. Surveillance Requirements I i

The following surveillance items were completed {

during the year as required by section 4.0 of the !

Technical Specifications: ;

a. Rod Drop Tests and Visual Ynspection i

lt Rod drop times are measured at least semi- '

annually, or whenever rods are moved or i j maintenance is performed, i i >

! Magnet release time should be less than 50 !

milliseconds and free drop time less than 700 !

milliseconds. )

I Rods are visually inspected at least annually.

e

. . . - . . . -.- ,, , ----,m ~ . - _ _ , - _ _ , _ _ - - _ - . - - , . . , . ._.r,__. - . _ - - - - - - ~ . -

FIGURE 4 10 i

- UVAR REACTOR LOADING CHART Date........... Shutdown Margin......... X selta-k/x U-235........gr. Excess Reestavity........ X seita-k/k ;

i Secured Exp. Worth... . x delta-k/k F* Fuel Element CR*Contral Red A!F*Aineral irrestatten res111ty i I

Go Graphite ER* Spathermal Rabbit Pnevnette Tube

{

Po Plug TR* Thermal Aabbit Pnevnetic Tube i NR* NyWrevate Rabbit Tube 't ,

S* Source Element R8* ReW1stion Beeket t

.. h t

i

^ l J F F F F F D D t Ji 12 13 14 IE 16 17 IB I

^

d F F S F F 'D D

}

i 3

Pi n n #4 m a rF M !

J F F F $ F

^

D '

St $2 $3 2 d -

54 SE M 9F Se

I ^

O F ft F F F .

D :

j di 42 43 44 es 46 47 de i

51 52 53 54 % M 5F 68 i

\

fR

, m m o

a a a a }

l I 61 62 63 64 1

M a R3 i

% 60 c) i i , , , - ?

J R J 2 2 J J J i Fi F3 F4 FS F6 FF F9 l

a a a a a (F R) a a !

( .i ., .. .4 <

. J .r . '

l - '

Core 1.oeding Approved by: i i

---.-6.......+.............. Deter,,,,,,,,,,,,,, >

11 FUEL ELEMENTS -

< 2.996 ;

u y ,

g -

~.

k-e _

m c = 2 a STANDARD

+ e =

E_ .

k 1.749 1 v

1

< :2.996 r

, g . . ' " % .. , ,

~::: ~

, ,::: = 0 7-$2 % O .'-

= ~~ c m

[

L 3 T CONTROL 3.150 n

N m.

.M

.A_. -

5 , = ~:. .: ~- ' ' =' ."d

' :-i , ~

_ . . - - - ~ . ,._.:~:.*.*

~

~- ~ -

~~:-

Y Figure 5 I .

12 Rod drop times were measured on the UVAR reactor as follows:

After maintenance on magnet current meters on April 26, 1989:

Magnet Rod Magnet Free Total Current Position Release Drop Drop B Red faa) 160 fin) 26 Ima) MM 1 12 562 574 2 160 26 25 452 477 3 75 26 33 586 619 After installation of new magnet currsnt meters on May 24, 1989:

1 160 26 7.5 463 470.5 2 160 26 33 456 489 3 75 26 29.5 449 478.5 After core configuration change on Aug. 1, 1989:

1 160 26 5 570 575 2 160 26 34 451 485 3 75 26 32 457 489 After core configuration change on Aug. 22, 1989 1 160 26 20 490 510 2 160 26 39 459 498 3 75 26 39 458 497 The rod drop times continue to be within the limits required by Technical specifications.

The visual inspection of control rods was originally scheduled for the month of December but was postponed until early January, 1990 due to extensive operations of the UVAR reactor during the month of December to complete exper:.nental projects. The UVAR reactor was shutdown between December 22, 1989 and January 4, 1990.

b. Tests and Calibrations (1) Monthly operational checks of the ventilation duct, personnel door, truck door and energency exit cover were performed as required.

1 . .

13 (2) Semi-Annually Visual inspection of gaskets on personnel door, ventilation duct and truck door was completed.

calibration checks of source range channel, linear power channel, core gamma monitor, bridge radiation monitor, reactor face monitor, duct argon monitor, constant air monitor, pool level monitors, pool temperature monitors, core differential pool temperature monitors, and primary flow were done.

(3) Annually The energency cooling systen was tested during the months of September and October, 1989. The results were as follows:

S.E. Tank S.W. Tank faal/ min) faal/ min) minimum required flow 11.0 11.5 09-27-89 actual flow 11.3 12.3 backflushed system and repeated test 10-06-89 actual flow 11.8 12.4 (4) Daily checklist The daily checklist, which is completed when the reactor is to be operated, provided for checks on all of the automatic shutdown systens associated with the reactor.

(5) Reactor Pool Water Quality The Technical Specifications require that the pH and conductivity of the pool water be measured at least once every two weeks.

These measurements were actually made on a daily basis when the reactor was operating and at least once each week. These measurements have indicated that the water quality was maintained well within the Technical Specification Limits of pH between 5.0 and 7.5 with conductivity < 5 micrombos/ca.

14 (6) Core Configuration Changes I

The core configuration for the UVAR reactor was changed three times during the year to accommodate new experiments.

(7) Communication Checks The security system and emergency communications with the University Police were checked on a weekly basis throughout the year.

(8) Alarm System Checks The fire alarm system was checked during the acnth of December for proper alarm functions, both in the Facility and at the University Police Department.

Data on all of these tests and calibrations are on file at the Facility.

l

4. Maintenance l J

The following maintenance was performed on the UVAR t reactor system during the calendar' year 1989:

01/04/89 Liquid Waste Tanks - Pressure build-up in filtering system. Found residue build-up in f bottom of filter columns. Corrective action:

Removed filters and residue, replaced one filter column and all filters. Modified suction lines from both tanks to minimize residue build-up. i l

02/01/89 CAVALIER Reactor Room and Tank Top Radiation l Monitors, (used for criticality monitors for fuel {

storage room). Need to provide separate power for these monitors so that CAVALIER console power ;

can be de-energized. Corrective action: Wired !

both monitors to hot side of console power switch '

so that power is on continuously. i 02/01/89 ?ond level float monitor - float became unattached and sank. Corrective action: {

Installed new float device. '

l

o . ;

1 i

15 l i

f 02/03/89 Reactor Bridge Radiation Monitor - would not :

calibrate in mid-range. Corrective action Switched Hot Cell monitor with Bridge monitor to i

allow continued reactor operation and calibrated. !

Replaced Hot Cell monitor with spara monitor from i shop. !

i 03/08/89 Make-up to cooling tower not functioning - found I make-up line frozen due to very cold temperature. 1 Corrective action: Reduced reactor power and '

secured secondary pump. Thawed make-up line with heat gun and torch and installed heat tape around t exposed make-up line. When attempting to restart j secondary pump, found and replaced two blown fuses. Restarted pump and put system back in ;

service.

05/03/89 Secondary Pump - Excessive leakage around packing '

glands Corrective action: Added one ring of .

packing material and adjusted to small drip for j cooling.

4 05/24/89 Rod Magnet current Meters position rod magnet current switch and 3 rod current potentiometers '

very unstable. Switch contacts and pot wipers were badly oxidized. Corrective action:

j Installed new front panel with 3 separate meters '

and new high resolution pots.

05/26/89 Demineralizer Area Monitor - unresponsive, found module bad at detector. Corrective actions Replaced detector and re-calibrated system.

06/01/89 Power Range #2 - Bad "megger" readings on cables i

to detector. Corrective action: Replaced detector and calibrated system.

l 06/06/89 Secondary Pump - Would not start after being shut off. Corrective action: Found and replaced one I blown fuse.

s 06/13/89 Secondary Pump - Low oil level. Corrective action: Added ~1 pint of oil and installed new r sight glass for oil.

06/14/89 Liquid Waste Tanks - Totalizer gauge for GPM not registering. Corrective action: Found bad connections. Replaced entire cable from waste tanks to release point.

06/15-16/89 Performed annual draining and cleaning of cooling tower.

1

. - = _. - - . - .. , - --_

. o l

t 16

[

i I

06/29/89 Secondary Pump - Punp shut off while operating 1 reactor. Corrective action: Found and replaced two blown fuses. Cleaned fuse contacts which. ;

were badly oxidized, causing overheating. ;

07/21/89 Liquid Waste Tanks - Totalizer gauge not ;

Eunctioning. Corrective action: Found and ,

replaced shorted cable in waste tank pit. !

07/27/89 Rod Magnet current Meter #1 - Current meter would not "zero". Corrective action: Found bent !

painter on meter. Replaced with new meter.

08/15/89 Control Rod #1 - Control rod seating light would not come on although rod was fully inserted. :

Corrective action: Found and replaced dirty micro-switch and connectors.

08/30/89 Delta T System - Read-out inoperative.

Corrective action: Found bad connector at RTD probe. Replaced probe and cable connector and calibrated system.

j 09/05/89 Linear Channel - Erratic behavior. Corrective action: Cleaned contacts on range switch and installed solid ground wire between instrument >

and console chassis.

11/28/89 Linear Channel - Erratic behavior. Corrective y action: Installed reconditioned detector with new connectors and removed ~5 inches of cable and installed new cable connectors. +

12/12/89 Linear Channel - Still having erratic behavior.

Corrective action: Replaced detector and installed new cables from detector to top of reactor bridge. Cleaned power supply terminals.

System now very stable.

12/15/89 Intermediate Range Recordef - Chart drive not moving. Corrective action: Found winding burned out in drive motor. Replaced motor.

12/21/89 Cooling Tower - Secondary system not cooling normally with reactor at full power in very cold weather. Corrective action: Main problem appeared to be ice blockage of air flow on north side of cooling tower, but some leaves were found ,

blocking water flow from top basin. Also, north '

basin was overflowing. Removed leaves in north top basin and adjusted flow distribution so that neither top basin was over-flowing.

o .

17

)

i i

5. Unplanned Shutdowns I The following unplanned shutdowns occurred on the !

l UVAR reactor during the calendar year 1989:

01-04-89 Scram due to noise in thermocouple circuit in j mineral irradiation facility (MIF) experiment.

Cleaned contacts on thermocouple connector and -

restarted reactor. ;

01-06-89 Scram on high power indication at 250 kilowatt. !

Operator forgot to move range switch from 200 kilowatt position to two megawatt position as power increased.

L 01-11-89 Scram from noise in pool level #2 circuit. Pool <

1evel was ~1 1/2 inches above scram setpoint.

Scram from noise in Intermediate period circuit.

Reactor was sub-critical at the time. ,

01-12-89 Scram from noise in pool level #2 circuit.

t 01-13-89 Scram due to noise in thermocouple circuit in MIF. Reactor was sub-critical at time. Adjusted thermocouple. ,

01-16-89 Scram from noise while adjusting rods.

01-18-89 Scram from noise in pool level #2 circuit, chattering relay. Cleaned contacts and adjusted sensitivity.

01-20-89 Scram from thermocouple noise in MIF.

01-24-89 Scram from Pool level #2 - Found and corrected loose connection. i 01-30-89 Scram from noise in Intermediate period circuit.

03-16-89 Scram from noise in Power Range #1 circuit.

Meter was reading 100% at time.

04-11-89 Scram from face radiation monitor - operator sent staff member to area with portable monitor -

highest dose rate found was 0.2 mr/hr.- Scram appeared to be caused by noise associated with r movement of regulating rod.

04-17-89 Scram due to building power failure.

04-28-89 Scram on beamport monitor caused by brief power failure.

l l

18 05-09-89 Scram due to building power failure.

06-21-89 Scram due to noise in thermocouple in MIF experiment. Scram due to building power failure.

06-26-89 Scram when staff member moved thermocouple lead to MIF.

08-15-89 Scram from noise in Power Range #2 when adjusting rods.

09-14-89 Scram from noise in Power Range #2 when adjusting rods.

09-29-89 Scram from building power failure.

10-12-89 Scram from malfunction in MIF compressor. Scram from building power failure.

10-13-89 Scram when resetting fire alarm system after test. l 10-27-89 Intentional Scram when evacuation alarm was j activated for drill.

I l 11-01-89 Scram from noise in face monitor circuit.

l 11-03-89 Scram from loss of building power. Scram from noise in power range #2 while adjusting position of fission chamber.

! 11-06-89 Scram from noise in Intermediate Period circuit. .

I

6. Pool Water Make-up During the calendar year 1989, make-up water to the UVAR pool averaged approximately 23 gallons per day.

I over the past 12 years, the pool water make-up has '

i varied from a minimum of 16 gallons per day to a !

maximum of 85 gallons per day, depending on reactor '

operation. The loss of water is mostly due to <

! evaporation from the pool while operating at full !

j power. l l

l I

l i

19 l

l

7. Fuel Shipments

a. Fresh Fuel No fresh fuel was received at the Facility during [

1989. -

b. Spent Fuel '

No spent fuel was shipped from the Facility ;

during 1989. l

8. Personnel Training and Instruction

a. Reactor Facility Staff '

j At the end of 1989 the staff had five senior reactor operators and one regular operator. All -

licensed operators participated in the Facility's operator requalification program, which was l carried out during the year. The program t

consisted of periodic lectures, participation in i the daily operation of the' Facility (including performing check-lists and start-ups of the UVAR l reactor) and taking an annual written examination -

administered by the' Facility management.

l b. Summer Course for High School Teachers During the month of June, 1989, 36 High School Teachers from within the state of Virginia !

attended a one week special course at the Reactor Facility entitled: " Science of Nuclear Energy.

Environmental Issues an Safety". The course ,

consisted of formal lectures, laboratory experiments with the UVAR reactor in the areas of sub-critical multiplication, rod calibration, measurement of temperature coefficient and power calibration.

c. Disadvantaged American Reactor operator' Training '

U.Va. has since 1984 administered a reactor operator training program for disadvantaged americans sponsored by the Department of Energy.

The program involved four other Universities, but at the beginning of 1989 only UVa remained active in the program. The trainee at Uva, a female, took a Reactor Operator examination administered i

by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in November, 1988, which she passed. A Reactor Operator License was issued to her on January 4, 1989.

1

, _ . . _ - , . ~ .. -- . , , , , _ - . . . _ . . - . - - , - - ,

20 j She was upgraded to a position of Nuclear Reactor i operator in May, 1989, with the DOE stipend l being supplemented with local funds from the 1 Reactor Facility. The program was scheduled to ;

terminate at the end of 1989 but sufficient funds l remain in the program to justify its J continuation. UVa requested and was granted a no ,

cost extension of the program and will begin a search for a new trainee in early 1990.

i

9. Reactor Tours During the calendar year 1989, the staff guided 34 5 groups on tours of the Facility, for a total of 601 '

visitors.

l B. CAVALIER Reactor

1. Core Configuration A typical CAVALIER core configuration is shown in Figure 6. The reactor employed four boron-stainless steel control rods. The control rods were positioned at the four corners of the reactor in order to L minimize relative rod worth and excess reactivity. ;

An " experimental" fuel element (grid position 43) was ;

used to adjust excess reactivity by either inserting i or removing individual fuel plates from this element (12 of 18 plates being removable).

f The fuel elements that were used in the CAVALIER reactor are identical to those used in the UVAR 1 reactor.

The CAVALIER reactor has not been operated during 1989. The reactor was completely and permanently unloaded during the first week of March, 1988. As of this time there are plans to fully decommission this reactor.

s

o '* , !

2'i '

figure 6 .-

CAVALIER REACTOR LOADING CHART l l

Leading No. Date _

Total Mass gram U-235 F - Normal Fuel Element Excess Reactivity ;

P - Partial Fuel Element ;

C - Control Rod Fuel Element i E - Removable Plate Fuel Element Shutdown Margin j u

l 6

AL Wire Mesh '

N

,i- ,, ,, ,. /

'7 t

ll ll S-

., i@, ., F ., E .ii F .F ., F F

/ m F F F F - '

1I Ii 8 F F @

nli n n sii /

A A A -

1 e

e

l 22 !

III. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE A. Reactor Safety Committee ;

i

1. Meetings During 1989, the Reactor Safety Committee met eight times, on the following datest ;

February 28, 1989 September 12, 1989 ,

March 23, 1989 '

September 26, 1989 May 22, 1989 . October 10, 1989 July 7, 1989 October 24, 1989 L r

2. Audits During the year a sub-committee of the Reactor Safety Committee performed an audit of the Health Physics !

program in the areas of radiation and contamination

, surveys, transfer of radioactive material, and personnel dosimetry records. No major problems were found.

l 3. Approvals t

The Reactor Safety Committee approved three' changes !

to the UVAR Standard Operating Procedures during the i year concerning the calculation of shutdown margin, the addition of a new pool water make-up system, and i i

revisions to the abnormal conditions section cf the operating Procedures. j

4. 10 CFR 50.59 Reviews '

The following'10 CFR 50.59 analyses were performed during the year and were reviewed by the Reactor safety Committee: ,

n. Drill hole through center of UVAR Reactor Room s roof and install new drain, to be tied to existing rain water drains. .

b. New Hao make-up system for UVAR pool.

c. A rotating irradiation facility (RIF) for the uniform activation of iridium seeds for medical purposes.

b' _ . . , _ . - . - . . , - - , -

O- .

1 23 I

d. Modification of liquid waste tank level monitoring system such that a change of level in either tank results in: 1) shut-off of l

recirculation pump, and 2) illumination of )

warning light located in reactor building. :

l l e. Provide separate power to criticality monitors so j i

that CAVALIER console can be de-energized. I

! f. New magnet current meters for UVAR console. !

g. Solid aluminum plate H 0 displacer and gamma j shield for MIF experiment, t i

h. Modification to south beamport facility. t l ;

B. Changes to the Reactor Facility

1. Low Enriched Uranium Conversion Plans The NRC mandated in 1986 a change from high enriched uranium (HEU) fuel to low enriched uranium (LEU) 1 fuel, with~the date of conversion to depend on l several. factors. The U.Va. Facility will be among

the initial group of research reactor facilities to -

convert to LEU fuel. A study funded by. DOE was begun in the spring of 1986 to accomplish this.- A management decision has been made to' shut down the CAVALIER reactor and a Dismantlement Plan was submitted to the NRC, however, the NRC has' requested

that a complete decommissioning plan be submitted.

This will be done in the near future. The present plans call for the convarsion of the UVAR reactor in 1990, but will depend on the availability of new LEU ^

j fuel and a cask for spent fuel transport. A Safety

~

Analysis Report on the LEU fuel and revised Technical 4

Specifications were submitted to the NRC in November, 1989.

During the early part of 1989 the roof was replaced

, 2.

on the entire facility. In order to accomplish this the cooling tower was raised approximately two feet.

l l

. - . , . . 7 -- ,

24 !

4 1

C. Inspections During 1989 the Facility underwent four NRC compliance inspections, at the following times and in the areas oft I

07-11-89 Health Physics 08-16-89 Security 09-18-89 Reactor Operations [

11-29-89 Emergency Preparedness 04-20-89 The Facility was inspected by a ,

representative from the American Nuclear !

Insurers Co. ,

D. Licensing Action !

1 During 1989 the following License change was initiated:

07-20-89 Amendment #18 to the UVAR License and Amendment #6 to the CAVALIER License to !

i change the organizational structure to

, have H.P. report to chairman of Nuclear

! Engineering and Engineering Physics

Department.

E. Emergency Preparedness i

! 1. On January 17, 1989, an emergency drill was initiated ;

at the Reactor Facility. The scenario for the drill involved the^mcVement of an irradiated fuel element in a shipping cask inside the reactor room. The crane malfunctioned causing the cask to fall to the reactor room floon and pin a staff member under the cask. The indivic'ual was unconscious, bleeding profusely and had a crushed leg. The fuel element was partially exposed. The drill was initiated at 10:30 A.M. and the emergency team was notified. All non-essential perreonnel were evacuated from the immediate area. An attempt was made to move the fuel element with a long handling tool but this proved ,

unsuccessful. 7. member of the emergency team then -

grabbed the element and threw it into the reactor r pool in order to reduce the high radiation levels since the injured staff member was pinned under the cask. With the elimination of the high radiation levels the cask was removed from the staff member and emergency first aid was then administered. If this had been a real incident the Rescue Squad would have been called immediately and the TLD badge worn by the staff member who grabbed the fuel element would have

\

---,,,.m ---,-s---- , -,- e

- - - - ,, __n .

25 l

been sent to the vendor for immediate analysis.

Based on postulated dose rates from the scenario the individual would have received 1.5 R whole body dose and 50 R to the hands.

H.P. personnel were present during the drill and after the fuel element had been thrown into the pool they began surveying for possible contamination and took air samples within the reactor room. A staff member took pool water samples to determine if the fuel element had been damaged with possible fission product release to the pool.

During the drill 12 emergency implementing procedures were initiated, including communication checks with the NRC, Va. Office of Emergency Services and the UVa Police Department.

2. On April 14, 1989 an evacuation drill was held at the j Facility to check personnel accountability i procedures. The evacuation alarm was sounded from the first floor hallway at 4:11 P.M. The building was evacuated in an orderly manner and personnel accountability procedures were initiated. It was determined that the following people were present:

15 faculty, staff and students, three H.P. personnel and one visitor. Dosimeters, portable instruments and copies of the Emergency Procedures were brought out of the building by staff members. The total I evacuation and accountability procedure took approximately 8 minutes.

3. On October 27, 1989, an evacuation drill was initiated again to check personnel response. The alarm was set off from the UVAR reactor control room at 4:02 P.M. The evacuation was orderly and was accomplished in approximately two minutes. All personnel were accounted for and the drill was <

terminated at approximately 4:11 P.M. and personnel !

were allowed to reenter the building. l

4. On November 30, 1989, an emergency drill was conducted inspectors.

at the Facility and was observed by two NRC The scenario involved a fire in a 3 radiochemistry lab with thick black smoke emanating ,

from the room. There was a possibility of radioactive contamination and the fire was near the main electrical panel that supplies power to the building. ,

The immediate area was evacuated and the emergency team was alerted. The Emergency Coordinator sent a

j i

26 staff member and a H.P. Technician into the room with Scott Airpacks, fire extinguishers and survey meters !

to ascertain if there were any personnel in the room ,

and determine the extent of the fire. The Emergency Director set up a command post in the front office of i the Facility and maintained radio contact with the i emergency coordinator. The area was roped off and H.P. personnel surveyed for possible contamination.

UVa police were called to man the entrance to the Facility and limit access to the site. H.P. personnel i took air samples around the periphery of the site to r determine if there was airborne contamination. It was determined that outside help was needed and the :

local fire department was called. They arrived L i

within 10 minutes to assist the staff. During the 7 drill the Emergency Director verified that :

communication links existed with the NRC Emergency ;

Center in Washington, the NRC Regional Office.in Atlanta, and the Virginia office of Emergency :

! Services. The drill lasted - 1 1/2 hours and 14 EPIP procedures were initiated. A critique was held after l the drill with all participants and the NRC.

I

5. Four classroom training sessions were held during the year and seven staff members and two H.P. personnel

, completed a Red Cross Hulti-media First Aid course.

i l

1 i

J i

i 27 f

IV. HEALTH PHYSICS A. Personnel Dosimetry i

1. Visitor Exposure Data for 1989 '

During 1989, there were 2,936 visitor entries into the Reactor Facility. Exposure received by visitors is measured with self-reading dosimeters. No visitor ,

received more than five mR of total exposure.

2. Reactor Facility Personnel Dosimetry Data for 1989 Information listed below is derived from whole-body gamma, beta, x-ray and neutron radiation dose data (deep dose only) from January 1, 1989 to December 31, 1989.

The dose distribution for current Reactor Facility personnel is as follows:

Dose Received Occurrences in 1989 inPen)

Less than 10 96 11 - 20 1 21 - 30 1 31 - 40 0 41 - 50 4 51 - 60 0 61 - 70 2 71 - 80 'l 81 - 90 0 Greater than 90 1 0 155 mrem Total Number 106 of Badged Personnel During 1989, a total of 0.585 man-rem was received by badged Reactor Facility personnel. The individual with the highest exposure (155 mrem) was a Reactor Facility staff member involved in the handling of radioactive materials for neutron activation ,

analysis.

. . g l

J 28 )

)

I

3. Dosimetry Information for Specific Activities f

Self-reading dosimeters must be worn when handling i irradiated material that produces exposure rates ,

greater than 100 mR per hour, measured one foot from '

the source. These exposures and other unrequired i uses of the self reading dosimeters are logged in a ,

book kept in the control room. This information is ,

helpful in assessing the amount of exposure received l

during specific operations. A review of the control room log book revealed no individual exposures greater than 10 mR during 1989. The total exposure recorded on these special dosimeters was 50 mR. !

B. Effluents Released During 1989

1. Gaseous Effluents I Argon-41 gaseous release concentrations are :

calculated using a methodology described in a June, .

1977, memorandum entitled: " Memo to Senior Operators- Argon 41 production in UVAR". The methodology described in this memorandum assumes: (a) a maximum production rate for Ar-41 (given the '

present UVAR core loading), (b) immediate evolution l of Ar-41 from the pool water into the UVAR confinement atmosphere, (c) no decay and (d) air saturating the UVAR pool water at 68' F. Based on this method, and using the known amount of time the ,

reactor was at power during 1989, a total release of 1.98 Curies of Ar-41 has been calculated.

2. Liquid Effluents Liquid radioactive waste is released off-site after having been sampled for gross beta activity (excluding tritium)'and diluted if necessary).

During 1989 there were 36 releases of liquid effluent to the environment (see Figure 7). The average concentration per release was 2.2 x 10 pCi/ ml. i The total gross beta activity released was 550 Ci.

The total liquid volume released was 6,500,000 gallons.

Tritium release activity is calculated by first taking a discharge tank sample and analyzing it for tritium using a liquid scintillation counter.

Release values for tritium are then calculated using a known pond water dilution ratio, pond samples are also regularly analyzed for tritium and this activity or the minimum detectable activity for the counting system is included in the total release calculation.

j i

29 D .1 A : 1 !

h 0j E{ l 5 ] 1 . i

$Z h 0 0

RR :

0 - 0 1 M

0 0 s

g 5 _

0 -bn .

M e k C hqh a Z $

q e 'J L

Zh"

-B n O W

$ 0 IN

!e W

g 0 n -@

D - ,

w -

E -R :

C L

O

!2 0

E O 20)

- "O 3 8

[aQ p i s

O : D"3

_m y

" %0 8

~

D C) 5 0 I n" ' i

.m ; a _ -N

-1 P

0 "O e 0 -

g4 2 2 0 - o)"

.m

% No I i

f

s*e 1

ON D C -m+

E Q -

3 _n :

O Q

hO [0 o

i

A i

~

OdW quemd l naure 7

] c O

1 k ,

g t k

o + j 30 i The total tritium activity released during 1989 was +

18 2C1. The average tritium release concentration was 7. 2 x 10" pCi/ 21.

3. Solid Waste Shipments During 1989, no solid waste was shipped off-grounds for burial or disposal.

C. Environmental Monitoring Program Results

1. Environmental Air Samples Environmental air samples are taken monthly outside '

of the Reactor building. The University received a violation from the Nuclear Regulatory Comnission for failing to have an adequate lower limit of detection for environmental air samples. Steps have now been taken to improve the measurement technique. No measurement ever indicated unsafe airborne radiation levels.

2. Environmental Water Samples The water analysis program used for both the liquid effluent release calculations and the environmental water samples was improved. This program now prints out all the input data, provides an LLD calculation capable of accounting for different background.and sample counting times and operates in a much more interactive manner.

Four environmental water samples are taken monthly at !

the following locations and analyzed for gross beta concentrations:

a. The University water filtration plant. The average concentration found at the filtration plant was 8.6 x 10 4 pci/ml. ,

b. The creek adjacent to the Barracks Road Shopping Center. This location is downstream of the main University water discharge point; two samples are ~

taken at this point. The average concentration found at the Barracks Road location was 1.5 x 10" pCi/ml.

1

o o 31

c. The creek that feeds the Reactor Facility pond, used as a source of dilution water. The average concentration of this surface water dilution I water was 2.0 x 10 4 pCi/ml. Notice that this I upstream value is very close to (and perhaps insignificant 1y different from) the gross beta liquid effluent release concentration for the i Facility (2.2 x 10 4 pCi/ml). i All 1989 environmental water concentrations were below the federal limits.

D. Radiation and contamination Level Summary The levels of contamination found throughout the Facility are low, below the procedural definition of " contaminated area" of 2200 dpm/100 cm". Normally, if a contamination survey detects loose surface contamination greater than ,

or equal to 200 dpm/100 cm 8, that r.rea is decontaminated immediately. .

All required radiation level surveys were performed during 1989. There was no overall increase in background or systems-related radiation levels. .

E. Summary During 1989 no State or Federal limits for exposure to personnel or the public were exceeded.

1

(

o u o 32 V. Research. Education and Service Activities A. Irradiation and Other Research Facilities Available An overall description of the experimental facilities available at the UVA reactor is listed in section I.B.5.

During 1989, a new rotating irradiation facility (RIF) was constructed and installed in the UVAR reactor. This

" water wheel" facility is used primarily to irradiate up to 20,000 small pellets of iridium encased in platinum to be used in cancer therapy. This facility can also be used to uniformly irradiate NAA samples.

Work was begun on research projects utilizing tangential beam ports which extend the south and southeast access facilities of the UVAR. These projects require modifications of the existing equipment. This was begun in 1989 and should be completed in 1990. Modification proposals are being submitted to the Reactor Safety Committee for approval and 10CFR50.59 documentation is being completed.

B. Research Activities

1. A continuing program of research was pursued on behalf of a major tobacco company. This work was supervised by Dr. Jack Brenizer and conducted primarily by graduate students with Reactor Facility staff assistance.

q The major projects were neutron ;

radiographic examinations of burning cigarettes, neutron activation analysis of various tobacco products and other substances used in the tobacco industry and the analysis of the distribution of smoke from a smoked cigarette.through spiking of tobacco with radioactive isotopes.

2.

Staff assistance was provided for two major projects and several minor projects utilizing the cobalt-60 i irradiation facility. The major projects are on i behalf of sponsors related to the nuclear power industry spor. sors. They involve the gamma i i

irradiation of radiation sensitive components from nuclear power plants and the corrosion of steel samples in a variety of environments. Drs. Albert l

Reynolds, W. Reed Johnson and James Kelly are the '

principle investigators for these projects.

. . . j 33 i 1

3. The safety analysin of the low enriched uranium fuel l element design proposed for the UVAR Reactor was l completed in 1989. This fuel conversion study is l being funded by the Department of Energy. The '

principle faculty members involved are Drs. Roger i Rydin and Robert Mulder.

4. Several reactor irradiations were performed on lithium compounds as part of a larger " cold fusion" l experiment with the UVA Chemistry and Materials science Departments.

l l

e L

l-6 a

i, 6

5

_~

e a s 1 34 I i

1 C. Service Proiects l

1. Iodine determination by epithermal neutron activation analysis (ENAA) was performed on behalf of several sponsors. The substances analyzed were infant '

formula, liquid diet supplements, surgical diets, pet i foods and various chemical compounds.

2. Rhodium, iodine and copper determinations by neutron activation analysis (NAA) were performed on a number

of chemical mixtures for a major chemical >

manufacturer. '

l l 3. The project involving the color enhancement of '

various gemstone grade minerals by fast neutron i I irradiation was pursued by the reactor staff on behalf on several sponsors involved in the commercial gem trade.

i 4. Two reactor irradiations on electrophoresis gels were '

performed for a researcher from the National ',

Institute of Standards and Technology. These were dono in a facility specially designed and built by ;

l the reactor staff for this purpose. =

1

5. A high specific activity chromium source was produced 1

for a UVA nuclear engineering professor for use in j testing a-precision, radioactive source position

, determination apparatus. .

6. Several LEXAN neutron track-etch detectors were r irradiated for the National Institute of Standards and Technology.

7. Several samples of niobium metal were irradiated as '

part of a project to quantify the usefulness of niobium power plants.

as a neutron fluence dosimeter in nuclear 4

i

8. A number of small gold pellets were irradiated for use by the Department of Radiological Physics at the University of Virginia Health Sciences Center in the treatment of inoperable cancerous tumors.

9. The Ciba-Geigy pharmaceutical company has begun 4

sponsoring service work involving NAA and production of samarium and erbium radioactive tracers. The interest is to develop methods to measure and control drug delivery and release mechanisms which employ i

d hydrogel bead technology. Favorable preliminary '

results could lead to research projects in the future.

1 l

. 's 35 D. Reactor Sharina Proaram The Department of Energy has for the past eleven years funded a Sharing. program at theofUniversity The purpose entitled this program Reactor is to make available the UVAR facilities to faculty and students at universities and other educational institutions which do not have nuclear science facilities. Over the years, hundreds of students and dozens of professors have used this arrangement to enhance both their educational and research opportunities. This past year a number of tours, laboratories and research projects were conducted under this program.

The following is a list of both the directly and indirectly funded activities completed in 1989.

High school tours 14 tours from 11 schools involving 335 students and teachers.

Five tours by special groups of high school aged students involving 88 students.

College tours:

Five tours from three colleges involving 56 students and professors.

Three tours by special groups of college students involving 45 students and other adults.

College labs:

one of the college student tours involved laboratories which were participated in by six of the people.

Research projects:

Six research projects utilizing neutron activation analysis were conducted by college .

i students and faculty during the year. l

- e s 36 E. Reactor Facility Suonerted Courses and Laboratories

1. Academic Courses and Laboratories The following courses and laboratories ware taught by professors in the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics during 1989 utilizing in part services provided by the Reactor Facility.

NE 488 - Nuclear Power Plant Operations NE 382 - Nuclear Engineering Laboratory During June 1989, 36 high school teachers from the state of Virginia attended a one week special course at the Reactor Facility. The title of the course was

" Science of Nuclear Energy and Radiation:

Environmental Issues and Safety." It consisted of lectures by University of Virginia nuclear engineering faculty and laboratory experiments using the reactors.

F. Decrees Granted by the Deot. of Nuclear Enaineerina and Encineerina Physics The following number of degrees were awarded during 1989 by the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics.

Bachelors of Science, Nuclear Engineering 6 Bachelors of Science, Engineering Science 4 Masters, Nuclear Engineering 7 i

Masters, Engineering Physics 6 Doctor of Philosophy, Nuclear Engineering 1 Doctor of Philosophy, Engineering Physics _i TOTAL 28 The following theses by students in the N.E.E.P.

department were completed during 1989 in part using services or facilities provided at the UVA reactor.

{

Radiation-Induced Interaranular Corrosion of Low- t Carbon steel in Acueous Solutions, PhD thesis.in Nuclear Engineering by Ralph J. Reda.

Non-Invasive Radio-Nuclide Assessment of Colonic '

Transit of Non-dicestible Solids in Man, PhD thesis in Engineering Physics by James B. Stubbs.

Precision Limits of Mich Temnerature Y.Ch: EU Fluorescence Thermometry, PhD thesis in Engineering Physics by L. Jonathan Dowell. '

_ . _ . __.._ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1

., .o 37 )1

- i

&ggroximations in Neutron ThermaliEation for Enaineerina Calculations in Cold Neutron Source Design, PhD thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Roger L.

Ritenour.

Testina of Hydroaan Ionitors Under Simulated severe '

Accident Conditions, Masters thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Thomas Doyle.

Niobium X-Rava From Trace Isotones, Masters thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Ailan Chubb.

1 Damian Ootimization of a Low Enrichment UVA Nuclear Reactor, Masters thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Mary Fahr.

Investiaation of Alkali Metals Transfer to Tobacco smoke, Masters thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Roger Johnson. -

The Effects of Anti-oridants on Radiation Daaradation of Electric Cable Insulation, Masters thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Jeffrey Ray.

l Dose Rate Effects on Radiation Induced Dearadation of Electric Cable Insulation, Masters thesis in i

Engineering Physics by Peter Terwilliger. '

The research work for several other theses is in I progress utilizing Reactor Facility support. !

e t

_ . , , . , _ , _ _ -...e.- .- -- . - - - - -

= a'c ;

I 38 VI. Finances !

A. Expenditures '

Expenditures for 1989 were as follows:

State Buenort Locally Generated Monies Salaries: $250,400 $62,700 Operations: 44,800 30,300 Subtotals: $295,200 93,000 TOTAL: $388,200.(state and local)

B. State Suenort / Research and Service Income The University of Virginia is supported by allocations from the State of Virginia. Of these monies, a portion is allocated to the Department of Nuclear and Engineering -

Physics for the operation of the Nuclear Reactor Facility. These funds cover many of the expenses i directly related to the operation of the reactor but~ <

i additional monies are necessary to provide for remaining services provided to the university community by the l Facility. Additional income is in the form of fees received for research and service work support. This totaled about $70,000 in 1989. The income is "not business related income" because it is primarily used to pay the salaries of extra professional staff members at the Facility who are not state supported. Currently, there are two staff members receiving salary from local funds.

Many staff members take courses and receive degrees at the University while their salaries are paid from monies generated by service work. In effect, this is another method by which the Reactor Facility supports science education at the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics.

f t

t

- - . _ _ _ _ _ . ._. - - _ . . . .. . . . _ . ._ - . --

ML20042D758

Text

Navigation menu

Search