ML20092M289
| ML20092M289 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Virginia |
| Issue date: | 06/22/1984 |
| From: | VIRGINIA, UNIV. OF, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20092M276 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8407020192 | |
| Download: ML20092M289 (125) | |
Text
6 m
c SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT IN SUPPORT FOR LICENSE RENEWAL FOR A LOW INTENSITY TRAINING REACTOR CAVALIER DOCKET NO. 50-396 LICENSE NO. R-123 AT THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA O
4 i
i 0
8407020192 840622 PDR ADOCK 05000396 P PDR
TABLE OF CONTENTS O.
CHAPTER #
PAGE
1.0 INTRODUCTION
. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 i 2.0 THE CAVALIER SITE AND LOCATION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 t
3.0 REACTOR CORE AND OPERATING LIMITS . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
- 3.1 Reactor Core Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 l
3.1.1 Reactor Assembly. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 3.1.2 Fuel Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 3.1.3 Critical Loadings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3.1.4 Reflector Options . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 -
3.1.5 Control Rods. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 3.1.6 Control Rod Drives. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
() 3.1.7 Startup Neutron Source. . . . . . . . . . . . 25 3.2 Operating Limits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
31 3.2.1 Operating Limits List . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 3.2.2 Maximum Average Power Limit . . . . . . . . . 31 i 3.2.3 Maximum Power Level . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 3.2.4 Maximum Excess Reactivity . . . . . . . . . . 32
. 3.2.5 Shutdown Margin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 9
3.2.6 Minimum Operating Period. . . . . . . . . . . 33 3.2.7 Maximum Worth of an Individual Experiment . . 34 *
, 4.0 INSTRUMENTATION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 4.2 Source Range Channels. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 0 .
u...
/'S CHAPTER b PAGE 4.3 Neutron Power Range and Period Channel . . . . . . . 36 4.4 Gamma-Ray Power Range Channel. . . . . . . . . . . . 38 4.5 Area Monitors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40 4.6 Safety System. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.6.1 Scram Circuit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41 4.6.2 Safety Response to a Single Fault . . . . . . 44 4.6.3 Rod Withdrawal Interlock Circuit. . . . . . . 50 4.7 Instrument System Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 5.0 AUXILIARY SYSTEMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 5.1 Water. Cleanup System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 5.2 Ventilation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59 5.3 Communication. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 d 6.0 OPERATIONS AND EXPERIMENTAL PROGRAM . . . . . . . . . . . 60 6.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 6.2 Experimental Facilities. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 6.3 Analysis of Experimental Program . . . . . . . . . . 61 6.3.1 Reactivity Effects. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 6.3.2 Mechanical Stress Effects . . . . . . . . . . 62 6.3.3 Material Content of Experiments . . . . . . . 62 6.4 Administrative Controls of Experiments . . . . . . . 64 i
7.0 HEALTH PHYSICS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 7.1 General Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 7.2 Education in Health Physics. . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 l
7.3 Personnel Monitoring and Protection. . . . . . . . . 66 i
j f-)
7.4 Permanent Monitoring and Surveys . . . . . . . . . . 66 1 \-)
7.5 Prohibitions and Sanctions . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 l
- 7.6 Waste Disposal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68 l 7.7 Shipping Transport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 i
I i
9 CHAPTER PAGE 8.0 mmSmT10x . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69 8.1 General Organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 69 t
8.2 Reactor Safety Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 71 i i
8.3 Procedures . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73 9.0 SAFETY ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 i
- 9.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 f
L 9.2 Loss of Moderator Tank Water . . . . . . . . . . . . 74 ,
4.
9.3 Transient Analysis of Ramp Reactivity Insertion. . . 76 9.3.1 Ramp Reactivity Insertions. . . . . . . . . . 78 9.4 Large Reactivity Excursions. . . . . . . . . . . . . 80 9.4.1 Equivalence of CAVALIER and SPERT-1 Cores . . 82 !
9.4.2 Ener^ Release Considerations . . . . . . . . 83 9.4.3 Direct Radiation to Operators During Excursion 83 9.4.4 Fission Product Release . . . . . . . . . . . 84 ;
9.4.5 Discussion of Large Reactivity Excursions . . 89 f
9.4.6 Additional Shutdown Mechanism . . . .. . . . 89 f 9.4.6.1 Background. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89 4
9.4.6.2 ARIS Description. . . . . . . . . . . 90 l REFERENCES ............................ 94 t
i
[
V !
P I
s i
l LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE PAGE l= 2.1. Floor Plans, New Wing Showing CAVALIER Location . . . . . . 3 2.2A Plan View of CAVALIER Operating Area . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2B Vertical Section Through Reactor Pit. . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3 CAVALIER Face Survey-Power Level 1 Watt . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.4 CAVALIER Survey-Control Room-Power Level 1 Watt . . . . . . 7 2.5 Room Above CAVALIER Survey-Power Level 1 Watt . . . . . . . 8 2.6 CAVALIER Face Survey-Power Level 45 Watts . . . . . . . . . 9 2.7 CAVALIER Survey-Control Room-Power Level 45 Watts . . . . . 10 2.8 Room Above CAVALIER Survey-Power Level 45 Watts . . . . . . 11 3.1 Grid Plate Assembly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 3.2 Standard Fuel Element . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 3.3 Control Rod Fuel Element. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 l
3.4 Flat and Curvc Plate Elements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
! 3.5 Typical Water-Reflected Loading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 3.6 Typical Graphite Reflected Loading. . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 3.7 Rod Drive Unit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 3.8 Channel Steel Support Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 3.9 Rod Drive Structural Support. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28 3.10 Rod Drive Arrangement for Typical Core Loading. . . . . . . 29 3.11 Top View of Typical Core Loading. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 3.12 Outmotion Latch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 4.1 CAVALIER Control and Safety Systems, Block Diagram. . . . . 35 4.2 Source Range Channel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 4.3 Logarithmic Power Level Channel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 O 4.4 Safety System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
p)
FIGURE PAGE 4.5 CAVALIER Safety System-Solid State Relay. . . . . . . . . . 45 4.6 CAVALIER Scram Logic Drawer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 4.7 Schematic Diagram for Fault Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . 51 4.8 Rod Withdrawal Interlock Circuit. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53 4.9 Range of Instrument Response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.10 Response of Gamma-Ray Sensitive, Linear Power Channel to a Square Wave Power Step. Chamber Position at Tank Wall, 30 in. Above Core. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 4.11 Log Gamma Channel Response. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 8.1 Radiation Safety Organization at the University of Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70 8.2 Organization of the Reactor Facility at the University of Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 72
~
9.1 Ramp Insertion Rate of 1x10 ' Ak/k/sec. . . . . .. . . . . 79 9.2 Ramp Insertions Terminated _by a Fi.ve Second Period Scarm. . 86 9.3 Alternate Reactivity Insertion System . . . . . . . . . . . 91 0
to 4
t- ., -
/, .
Y s ;
f i
,, LIST OF TABLES TABLE ,J .,c PAGE
[
3-l' ~ Reactor Data. .I. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
- . / !
3-2 Control Rod Drive System Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 i
9-1 Dose _ Rates from Shutdown Core and Fuel Elements . . . . . . 75 2 24-Hour 4 Integrated Doses in the Mezzanine Laboratory.
. . . 77 f f
9-3 Dose from Ramp Insertions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 !
9-4 CAVALIER-SPERT Fuel Element Comparison. . . . . . . .
. . . 82 9-5 Airborne Radioisotope Inventories . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 I
946 Radiological Consequences of Airborne Fission Products. . . 88 !
f i
s is s
t t
, i
,4*
I L
d
. >r *
.I g 1
,~, ,
i t
3 i
o . !
f
. 1 3 !
' i L
4 l ,
/ * - !
l ,
- b e . ,
l l
(
1.0 Introduction The CAVALIER reactor is currently operated under License R-123, Docket No. 50-396 by the Department of Nuclear Engineering. The CAVALIER is housed in the same building as the 2W UVAR reactor, which has been in operation since 1960. The CAVALIER is located on the ground floor of the west wing of the building. This wing was added to the facility in 1969. The present License (R-123) was issued on September 24, 1974 and the reactor achieved criticality for the first time on October 21, 1974. The fuel elements, control rods and nuclear instrumentation are the same as is used with the 2W UVAR reactor. The
! maximum operating power level is less than 80 watts and the limit on integrated power per day.is less than 200 watt-hrs (limiting safety system setting). Low power operation minimizes the shielding O reeuirements durin. operation, makes pessib1e fue1 e1ement 8and11n.
subsequent to operation, and reduces the hazard associated with fission product release in the unlikely event of an accident. The major accident mode for a low power reactor is a reactivity excursion. By design and by procedure the excess reactivity and reactivity insertion mechanisms for the CAVALIER are limited to such an extent that destructive excursions are essentially impossible. The main function of the CAVALIER is to provide a safe and convenient facility for laboratory training of undergraduate and graduate students. The facility can also be used for reactor experiments, such as noise measurements, which do not require high neutron fluxes. The use of the CAVALIER for these purposes frees the 2 W UVAR reactor for full time experimental use, and g eliminates the necessity for training students on a relutively high power reactor. The safety aspects of the CAVALIER
- Cooperatively Assembled Virginia Low Intensity Educational Reactor.
1
g i
are maximized by maintaining low inventories of; fission products and excess reactivity. TINfacility'santhusoperatewithoutcontainment
+
c a'nd with no need for emerg'ency cooling. Conservative analysis presented
~
a -
..in this report indicates that, even in the event of a major fission s ,
product release (TID--14844 type) from IEis reactor, the magnitudes of i
. personnel exposures at the site boundary,a1and in the surrounding areas, are with,in the limits of 10CFR20, averag'ed 'over a period of a year.
SOtce the CAVALIER _and UVAR reactors are identical in many .
.- - 3 - '
respects, such as site and fuel element design, much of the information l.
3 >. 7 .
that would normally be included in a safety analysis report will be in'corporated by refer'ences to the UVAR Safety Analysis Report, which is on file with the NRC.
_ -s .
2.0' THE-CAyALIER' SITE AND LOCATION b)
(' .,
2.1 [he C'AVALIER s.
is located in.the same building which houses the 2 MW University of Virginia Reactor. This site has been described in several
+ -
submissions to th'e NRC, [1,2,3]. A fende around the building defines a
'- small exclusion'arda. Out to~a distance of about 250 meters in all
- \
directions, there exist only a few University and University related m .
laboratories and the land belongs-6o the University. Beyond this, on j ' the east, is the University, and the center of Charlottesville is
[ approximately 2 miles away. Detaf_ led information on the site may be
^
found in UVAR-18. [3] ,
Within the , Reactor Building, the CAVALIER is located in a concrete l A -
reactor pit locatdd;on'the Ground Floor of the wes't wing. Figure 2.1
- shows floor plans for this wing and a portion of the rest of the j
q building. Locations of the existing UVAR, and the CAVALIER are ,
Q) >, ' '
indicated.
~
l
. 2 s i
r l
- O n .
i i
l t // !! 1.
l
) :
! o 3- b,y) y 3
~~l sr, a D.. .d. u ,
a e c._nn
- %,.m!21 o c g 4- x; m h ;
DS" gd rpmall
- ~
- n g g'- -
, p ~ n"~
a
( ,
?
. o-eeg 3) g as.
2-w w ,
a %-. g a l o ,...
am Q s e, --
o < . . <
1 FIRST FLOGR PLAN !
1 A
,; -y ,
_. . t i NC MC _,,,,Jf L Q.'U 9 t' r I r -) l h(
~~
-} :
n n 1
. ==w= w -!v_W (
i 1 M. C.i N} '
'0 -
M ,_
--( aa i / '( \ yp q -. L U a r.:n-- - -
]
_.. ,_, . _ . , ./ 3-1EE --' '* r C
-~I :: o o ? -r F 1 M --l
-]3 E
~
lL t ,l r, r= - ' ljh ' I .., .
- e II 3 -_ . . _ _ -
C1- - i MEZZANINE LEVEL i l UVAR Core ; h -- 5 2'= = = _, j E , I:n , LLL Arpi H'
+{
gg h -- d 1 l l 3_ Q y %_- loH 1 I/
,,,r-)
2~* CWAI tER. Il^ - J V --.N ! 'AI W Reactor Fit l* 2- , GROUND FLOOR PLAN i l ,p~ . l l 'v l Fig. 2.1 Floor Plans, Wing Shavf..g CAVALIER Location i l l 3 l
-~
Inside the pit whose depth below floor level is 9-feet, and at one , end, stands a Moderator Tank, constructed of welded aluminum, 67-inches square, and 11-feet high. The reactor is located at the bottom of this tank, with a minimum of 7.25 feet of water above the core, to serve as i biological shielding. At a power of 50 watts the gamma-ray dose rate directly over the core. at the top of the tank, is ~3 mR/hr. The Operating Area dose rate at this power is <1 mR/hr. A concrete block shield wall, up to 3-feet thick, separates the , Moderator Tank from the rest of the Reactor Pit, to reduce dose rates in the pit and general area. The pit houses the clean-up demineralizer for the CAVALIER system. Plan and elevation views of the laboratory area, and pit are presented in Fig. 2.2A and 2.2B. () 2.2 Health Physics Surveys Health physics surveys were performed with the reactor power at - 1 watt and - 45 watts and the results are shown in figures 2.3 through 2.8. At a power level of 1 watt the highest dose rate was observed in the bottom of the pit adjacent to the reactor near the instrument tubes. Additional shielding was placed around this area before increasing power. At a power of ~ 45 watts the dose rate in this area is ~ 50 i mr/hr. This area is inaccessible during reactor operations. ' 3.0 REACTOR CORE AND OPERATING LIMITS 3.1 Reactor Core Description j 3.1.1 Reactor Assembly A Grid Assembly, originally consisting of a 4x7 lattice of holes, ! is mounted on the bottom of the a'.uminum moderator tank and bolted , securely to it. The hole spacings in the assembly duplicate those on l 4
.-- -- . , - - - . ~ . - - . - .--
r !ECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ROOM ' l- % r ; j C" '~ l ' b
\
\
MACHIIE SHOP 7 STAIRS TO MEZZANINE ,_, t i i 1. OPERATING AREA I CONCRETE SHIELD
, '*:a 4 4 0, "a N s.
", 8
, a REACTOR
^l MODERATOR 2 m . PIT TANK " 8A :
4 I l
, ..,----,a . y
; L I
t 1, Fig. 2.2A Plan View of ' CAVALIER Operating Area SCALE: 1/8" = 1' I v)(v/d 1 1 CONCRETE SHIELD i % I I 2'J~ l 66 & t. ~'
^
l d s a s I 0,A]
*gg "k4a' A
GROUND FLOOR MI, f_ A # AA A'L a d IgT MODERATOR ,',, 5^ ^dM
, TANK a, p ',
3
, a' 11' .'*
o* a DEIONIZER i j EARTH f 8 EARTH 3 ,a FILL 6 6 FILL 4 g REACTOR a a .= . 1 6 CORE
# aa
- l 'a' 6 a 3
'~
DRAIN I ' '
^
3 o, TO [ts, \ 6 b
~
POND 6 sb 6 a AA A
- A I a
'4 _1/ _- " M ,
N,
'..a a a , s . .s
- a a m a. *. ^ .+ n)o - , "a $ A' O
Fig. 2.2B Vertical Section Through Reactor Pit SCALE: 1/4" = l' 5
/
< $ g '
/L
- i O -
.03 MR/HR .
9 i i I
*I
* ~
l . F l , t I E' - d.M . . . l
/ ;
ll m _.MO_N. .ITOR._ . 8 O . ju D.ETECTOR ~ . i e
< 1 MR/HR ;
h
. i.
J > S - 7 l \ s
. i i
3.5 MR/HR , i l ! l I hf A a A l m N DRAIN LINE I I INSTRUMENT TUBES - O - FIGURE 2.3 POWER LEVEL 1 WATT l CAVALIER-FACE SURVEY ' t l REACTOR FACILITY - UNIVERSITY OF VIRCINIA > 1 6 i
.n. . . - . - . - . . - . , , , . - - - - - - . , , , ....,.----....,-,-...~,----,..-,.-,n ,n.. ------- --. .---. , - . - , , , - , ,
STAIR WZLL L I O m.R i. I.05 MR/HR
- E I
.05 MR/HR l l
1 + I g <.05 MR/HR l -
, _ ._ . _ _ _ . _ _ . . ._ J '
. ._. 5-SERVICE PIT
<.05 MR/HR <.05 MR/HR
~ '-*
O I a i_, l N N SHOP . l 1 FIGURE 2.4 POWER LEVEL 1 WATT CAVALIER - Control Room
/
REACTOR FACILITY - UNIVERSITY OF VIGINIA 7
. i E Bood Sink I e O H.u i : l
. <.05 MR/HR l
* [
i
. )f008 I
- l 2
l I gg . e f l l t p
<.05 MR/HR O N009 ..
l t t I i t Sink .
- o ;
l
. t i
' !t M010 i b
e Second Floor Survey
~
i O - Ase CAvitIER FIGURE 2.5 POWER LEVEL 1 WATT r REACTOR FACILITY - UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA . 8
i
< h
/\
O . 1 1 I
) i i
i
<0.5 MREM /HR NEUTRO}iS _
AREA ,, ,
~-
/ 1 7 MR/HR GAMMA MONI'IOR ,,_. !
ll - ..
- I
"" " ' ^~
O - - I i i 5, f l
. i !
t f' l i 50 MR/HR GAMMA 1.5 MREM /HR NEUTRONS I i i i y o O
- V !
a + a j
-\ DRAIN LINE i INSTRUMENT TUBES _ _
O FIGURE 2.6 POWER LEVEL 45 WATTS i l CAVALIER FACE SURVEY l REACTOR FACILITY - UNIVERSITY'0F VIRGINIA I
- 9. [
SIAIR WELL I I- ' 1 MR/HR ' f' . , O .' REACTOR I
- <0.5 HR/HR 2 MR/HR !
l 1
<0.5 MR/HR GAMMJ i
<041 MREM /HR
/ ;
NEUTRONS g .
<0.5 MR/HR I .
+
.. -- --- . __ J .
SERVICE i PIT i / r- t-- , 1 MR/HR l I i l i. N N - SHOP . FIGURE 2.7 POWER LEVEL 45 WATTS CAVALIER - Control Room
/
REACTOR FACILITY - UNIVERSITY OF VIGINIA p) 10 l
~~
.l Hood Sink p
Hall 0.5 MR/HR @ FLOOR <.03 MR/HR 0.25 MR/HR 3 FT UP
. M008 Sihk - '
.05 MR/B.R . --
<.03 MR/HR
(/ s_ M009 9 Sink M010 Second Floor Survey
'N (V Rooms Above CAVALIER FIGURE 2.8 POWER LEVEL 45 WATTS REACTOR FACILITY - UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA 11
I l l
/"% the UVAR grid plate providing means of positioning the fuel elements in b
a close packed array. The Grid Assembly, shown in Fig. 3.1 provides i support and lateral stability to the elements.
- 3.1.2 Fuel Elements Fuel elements for the CAVALIER are identical to those for UVAR, and are described in UVAR-18 [3]. The standard fuel element is approximately 3-inches by 3-inches cross section with an active core length of about 2 feet. The element is generally similar to the MTR type element but is made with 12 flat plates. In the control rod fuel ;
i element, the six plates in the center are missing to allow space for i irisertion of a control rod. The standard fuel element contains about j 165 grams of U-235 and the control rod fuel element contains bout 82.5 grams. (see figures 3.2 and 3.3). , Half loaded fuel elements are also used, in order to assure sufficient flexibility in loading the reactor so to maintain the minimum i amount of excess reactivity. A half loaded fuel element is made up of t alternate fuel-bearing plates and contains 82.5 grams of U-235. The fuel plates are of the sandwich type construction with a 0.020-inch meat and 0.15-inch cladding. The water gap between plates is 0.211-inch and 1 the metal to water ratio for the standard fuel element including side plates is 0.40. : Also available for use in the CAVALIER are MTR type curved plate elements. The standard fuel element has 18 fuel plates and a loading of
~ 195 grams of U-235. The control rod fuel elements have 9 fuel plates with a loading of-97.5 grams of U-235. Partial loaded fuel elements are
, also available for use. The construction of these elements is the same as the flat plate elements as shown in Figure 3.4. 12
jO O.
;i < 36" >
4, , j 6" O yn L- 0 0
~
- s, O O O : :
! O
'i'" O 000 O noo j - -
u,, *' 25"
^ ""
-Q000 ^
, a O 0000 O 6
nio o Joe ,
;5" a O O
0000 O O O u 7"
.. l 6"
" + _.
' PLAN VIEW SIDE VIEW SPACERS AND ASSEPSLY SCREWS I" 1 N NNNNN NN NN NN) M a N AX NNNw XNNN NNi I.
! 1/2" 1 +
. N. -.
<1 M
t 5" N J M- SUPPORT LEG n' E N
- 1/2'd I s 3 c~
s . s ,.. s s u s v, s. s. ._...s ,,. s. ~_,.s. - l TANK BOTTOM
' SECTION A-A l 0 -
Fig. 3.1 Grid Plate Assembly SCALE 1/8" = 1". 13 t
r n r
,- s_ .m ruum se .crm f I
/
3 (
\
i l Q'" e - 7g
~ . ,
l l 0 I
. l 9 k I ,
,es r_ Ne t
- I.. .
i i V i i
- ). .
. l i i *..
i .
~ '
t 3 , t Tl . lI , lis
. , l ,. . - . - ..-s 3 l O l .
.,r...
., t .,,s d .
, - . L. ,
s i i l.' *. .' . c -
. 1
., 2- - s
. .'..d.,. 6;,? c. ~*d.. e l- .
q vs 4d. g D. jM: .;.eAW
* " i
,... ?:. ' ,
l i ,, - 5 . i
} Y 1. . f.' '. , '" l' :#2SI **,I '
...u.'...%
- em
- 4. .,,., ; .'."' *
, .v .
. . . ,i
(. .-
, t.... .. .s
'.e u. t.. i i
'*. amm .
, w : ,o.i. ,.. ', .;.y<
'~ ;
a.- -
.jw' - - -
S---.-- l
- s. ,
--: --- ,e
'Q'. . . .
, .. :.g- ,.. , .
, .,:s , ...i .:.,.,~,,..p -. :t.. p. .: u: .. . ,.; >
,.s .. . . . , . , .
.. , ' .~ . -
, .1 '. : )..
j ".*. . L ': .. ..
' W .
.,..v. r m
- w / , :. y. .
.,M..,
+
**c 4
y ~ 3 .ct'* ),e o e .",',p' ,4
' 1 r.t
( - '
. a$r- I e
, g fr..} ; _Y
-( ,
N ': ,,, t.; I'.. Y f :.i / .
'; . , - :ll H -
.d - <
. .n% . .. s.. s .ce. .
l .I i,: % *
- .WQ. 1,.S.;b, l.b ...$ , .
j ' ,f
..'T.* <,*f.M/drE E. 7 4,p~p> I * '
u .
, .e . . . i, 8
; . *{,,.. y '; se. ,. *;- ..w. . ' .,
. ,.. . ,, .. o ., . . ...r.,.__. . ......
1
- . . 3..f.a. .. N. g.. ,r2 ' .
...y -
r;
=
- t. u /'.
- 1 <
., e ..M.,,.
y e,
. u. .
e,
; * *.* I r;, t,l sh' . ' I ',?;,
, t..
.. . .. . .y . r .. . . .,. e. - { Q L. .
*. e.
4' e.,
- e, 4 tio
. ;,,f .- w s
- ..h. ,
fa. 1 e.
. .I a 9; ...
- g. -
t -
', . . c. -
-I i
- i. - ;, ', .
^
I t f . 1 .t / e i.
); j
't, . w ; .
a p.,__. .g
.. m
- s. T" - c9t r ~
f4 gr 4
) .
~m , 1 /.r i
* -;t y,-
V r
. T t i ,
\l I ,
j
- u. '
5 ; % s\ k ' L i (g/ ./ j i .
.T u
- d. .
14
e,-- - "
......r---- m _f
- 9
*- -O,' -
F 7
)( ) . L 4 - -
J ... w J
~
h p 4 f e I f I i
.! L--
\ti , - -l-
.xp i
lf w.- c-- ,
-na- ev- i l
. . i L
- l
- l I I ' l t
l e 6 l I l
, i l
, I ai I
i t
, ik ere
.*? vis i
" l' -
I
, 4
)
i p g
' .i g A.- s / -. , /
Q
-} $?q y lm. - .. ~,. /. .-
f
.i . . v ;. r.... e = t i;l a "
ij} ; j rO' i . : .' O . 6! M%i i a
..;s t.' a,..+ *. .s:. $* ,..,
k
,f *',q,- . .., ' -
g f
, . .e.s.*,. ,, ,
O 31i s v .i . .
.. a;
. 9.i . ., .
' . J ' '.,. ., ,' { *; .:*; '
- s. :- w * ' '
i s gg , , s O
,t... R $4
. , p
.., 3. * '*]:- .4.%.,.f iE
.r *..o! **. 5 i8 C3
-r.
...'e : ,l O 7%
d ( 4,'
.' ?, t".4
* ; r e
- 1 0 d
>,te
' f.
} ,
9 M 24 4.,, - .. , *
.4
* .f. , .;b
.e j
i-. ..
< l<. .
; to
, w
. i n.
] ,
.[- -
a r, , i
,(*
jg f I . I l* .. Q , e .
,, 4 l.
t . . . . s t l' _. ='* f=- t.- -
. . . .. .e f l
r . l 4
. .'- - I1. -I ,( h
. *P; . -*
-l j
! l' e
,. V ==
;* s .. . .,;
-._e.=
,' . ,' t . .J . , ,i . - : -- swa ..
-l
.-,. . 7.g ~ .. -
' ' .y . p
- L .',p . .
. . . gggy .. . E L ,- *e- f-e op!
'3*p -%g,.4
. . ..- W),'y2)(
, \a "o er s, ;lg(.(,r . , '.y. .f,. '.i,,
g.
; , ).. . .e.
3-l 3,on 9.. f .- -.g mta, f_-
. i.. . m y ,.J. a . .. .
. :. / . ,, .
- 1
- tie r *
-/ e h t.
-i TU" *
.,. '3 'w .y ; i ,s.r'y't'?y M .
p
..i* e., 3(
+
- c.
,. c
., s
.. ..,9 h.,.., .. g '. . -
e i ., ; , -
.+; * . . . .
) n ,ew, : . * '. e .
e y .' . .
,.(g.
44- t q.. S'** q
'8 i
he. . ==*
- I.* .:,;ff.
. - = ogn =
,g e M #- '.k.. . . . At * ,
- . 4- m.
.:q;c . ... " . .* -
.. o. ;
; j.u.@3 ;.1... . %w. %w. r .u.
.yW,$
#a
. un.s . m: ~w ~. ..xy pu g.'a . .,
. g 15
FIGURE 3.4 .
. ~
FLAT PLATE " ELEMENT . r-
, 9 a -
n , I 11 1 . I 1_ - l_
~
I -
" i
-a1
.I -
(r-3.140 '
- I 1 11/64 .
3 M ;J u _ 1 I _
~
._[ I .
15 1. l
~
~ I-1 1
I , T . l I _ b
; ; 2.9% )
2.996 a 0 0 CONTROL - EMNDRD l : CURVED Pl. ATE ELEMENT 2.996 r N 2.996 4 .
! 9 l
A
, , ,.,, . p :: .
- = -
= =.= ~ .
m
- d~= == ~O= = =.:~.'C 1
p r
, T e =
i 3.150 e s 7 = a
- - a - -
.d ' -
C -. ;- - - ' 3 a
- g
. a w '
a ,
~. 1.749
,t ==.=
_ _ . r.r _ .D =- =.=...g.
= =% % % = O :'0
- ~ _
=
e muss == 16
l 3.1.3 Critical Loadings
) $
A water reflected 4x5 array of fuel elements, containing 16 ! i : standard and 4 control rod elements will be critical with about 1.6 percent excess reactivity, depending on the position of the control rod i I elements. The addition of a 6-inch graphite reflector on all sides ! reduces the critical size to 4x4 (still 4 control rods). Table 3-1 ) t , gives various fuel element and critical array data for the 4x5 water I reflected and 4x4 graphite reflected cores. ; 1 3.1.4 Reflector Options The normal CAVALIER configuration will include a water reflector. ; In this geometry open-work (wire mesh) aluminum boxes are mounted along E i the sides of the core to eliminate the possibility of a reactivity f addition resulting from an object dropped alongside the core. On one [ () side of the core, special purpose, non-fuel bearing elements may replace l t the aluminum boxes. These could include radiation baskets, instrument' l I tubes, etc. A water reflected configuration is shown in Fig. 3.5. [ The CAVALIER may be operated with a graphite reflector by placing l the open (water filled) aluminum boxes with aluminum boxes filled with j graphite bars. The size of these boxes are such that a single box would cover a side of the core (the UVAR graphite elements are fuel element i sized and fit:into individual grid plate positions). A graphite reflect d core arrangement for CAVALIER is shown in Fig. 3.6. l 3.1.5 Control Rods " The shim rods for CAVALIER are of the bayonet type, having an elongated oval cross sectional shape and rectangular grooves along each . side. The control material is boron stainless steel. The very low
'- neutron flux of CAVALIER precludes problems of radiation heating and 17
- . _ . . _ . _ . _ _ . . . . _ . - _ ~ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ . , , ___ . _ . _ ._.
r l'h V TABLE 3-1 REACTOR DATA i Graphite Water , Reflected )~
, Reflected Active Core Dimensions Length in. 23.5 23.5 Width in. 12.13 12.13 Depth in. 12.60 15.94 Active Core Volume Liters 59.53 74.43 3
in. 3.63 x 10 4.54 x 10 3 Number of Standard Elements 12 16 Number of Control Rod Elements 4 4 Mass U Kg 2.31 2.97
^
Mass AL( Kg 44.78 57.23 Mass H2 O at 100 F( Kg 42.30 52.88 Metal to Water Rati (} ' 1H0 0.394 0.394 Atomic Ratios in Active Core ( 235 Atoms U 1 y Atoms AL 172 168 Molecules H 2O 239 232 , Average Thermal Flux at f 10W Operation neut 1.1 x 10 8.5 x 10 cm see 235 E,U g 0.0573 0.0555 (1) An infinite water reflector follows the 6-inch graphite reflector. (2) Calculated on basis of complete loading of standard fuel elements. 18 y-- --e. , - - - -,.-g. ,-,gs,-y ,, m-,----,,.- g,eg,--,y, aw., ,m ag.,, _ - - . ,, , , , , , - _ - , - .,--,._._,p _.,,,,-_p_m g, 94a ,_
. = _. .._-_-- _. _ . _
i Table 3-1 ! (Continued) l Fuel Elements - U-AL Alloy Clad with Al Curved ; Flat Plate Plate [ Overall Dimensions . Length in. 34.38 34.38 l Width in. 2.996 2.996 ' Depth in. , 3.150 3.150 Standard Element Number of Plates 12 18 Width in. 2.886 2.754 1 Thickness (inner plates) in. 0.050 0.050 (outer plates) in. 0.050 0.065 Length in. 24.63 24.63 Cladding Thickness (inner plates) in. 0.015 0.015 * (outer plates) in. 0.015 0.0225 Fuel Thickness (U-AL Meat) in. 0.020 0.020 Fuel Width in. 2.50 2.375 Fuel Length ' in. 23.5 23.5 235 U vol % in Alloy 3.67 not known Weight U 235 per element gm. 165 1 3% 195 i 3% Water space between plates in. 0.211 0.122 Sid'e Plates - Overall I Length in. 28.69 28.69 Width in. 0.188 0.188 Depth in. 3.150 3.150 Number of Grooves 12 18
, Depth of Grooves in . 0.138 0.100 i
l_ Width of Grooves in. 0.055 0.058 ' Partial Elements - Same as standard elements with only one-half of the U 235 content. [ Control Rod Element - Only half the number of fuel plates that are in a standard, element with.a central gap to allow for insertion of absorber. l-(o3 l l- 19 I
- ' - - ~-
. - - - .m..- w.e. v -- --- - - , .r--,
- - e+- - - - ---r. _,----,w.m< -g -------rr--- w7 r-==+----if-
- . _ . . .. = ..
i P p TABLE 3-1 (~~)'s
\_
(Continued) . s I, Control Rods Shim Safety Rods r Number 4 Absorber Material Boron-Stainless Steel 1.5% Boron , Dimensions, Overall l Width (Approx.) in. 1 ! t Depth (Approx.) in. 2.38 l Length (Approx.) in. 27.5 I Travel (Approx.) in. 24 Weight (Dropping Section) kg 5.5 i Drive - Electric motor,115 V 60 cycle, split phase, through reduction gear and rack and pinion l drive ' Drive Speed in/ min Approx 3.7 ' Release - Magnetic Clutch
'h/ Typical Reactivity, fully inserted % AK 5g 3.0 '
Typical Reactivity per inch % 0 '" 0.125 Typical rate of Reactivity Increase in up travel % 0.008 Reactivity Coefficients Temperature Coefficient -4
-1.16 x 10 /F Void Coefficient -7.2 x 10-3/% void I
+
B k t (~) 20 L
- . . _ . . _ , _ . _ , _ _ , . _ . _ . , , _ , _ _ . . . . _ , , - , - _ . . _ . , , , . _ , . _ _ _ _ . - , _ _ . _ , _ . _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ , _ , ~ . _ . . , _ _ . , , , . . . . _ . . _ , - _ . _ _ , .
l XEY:
) (N.' '} , IRRADIATION BASKET ,
)V
I REGULAR FUEL ELEMENT ' CONTROL ROD FUEL ELEMENT ,
; INSTRUMENT LOCATION h' 1 ALUMINUM MESH BOX . !
' GRAPHITE CANNED IN ALUMINUM
. .l j-
~
< 36" ? -
i
- I
.- h o .
i4i. . :
} // /
.a / _
c / - 0 dog . .n. XXXX : J " X'a'aX . 41 XXXX 1 XMMX , XXXX n .
, ,/ // ,
- 't
// / / / I i
,_? GRID PLATE , j . ! 7
. .] SCALE! 1/8" = 1"
, Fig. 3.5 Typical Water Reflected Loading L
21
..-..__--._.m_,_ - . . - . _ . . . _ . . . , , . -
..-,.,_._.y,,..,.-,,._,.-,-,.,__,.,.___y--.,,.,_,___.,_,.-_m.__ - _
REY: w
, ~ .
IRRADIATION BASKET . =: . , REGULAR FUEL ELEMENT . CONTROL ROD FUEL ELEMENT ' l INSTRUMENT LOCATION O t ALUMINUM MESH BOX .
~'
GRAPHITE CANNED IN ALUMINUM l
. i
- t. < 36" > ~ ~
h ; I t O Ml f i-XWXX ,
- XXMX -
i XMXX : XXRX
.( t I
I i i l n \ . GRID PLATE SCALE: 1/8" = 1"
\ '
[ Fig. 3.6 Typical Graphite Reflected Loading 22
~s damage to the control rods. Three of the control rods are those removed f )
v from the UVAR reactor several years ago; the fourth rod is new, but similar in design to the ones taken from UVAR. The control rods move in the slot at the center of the Control Rod Fuel Elements (See Fig. 3.3 and Fig. 3.4). Because the neutron fluxes in CAVALIER are so low (1 hour in UVAR is equivalent in neutron fluence to - 10 years in CAVALIER) no radiation damage problems are expected either for the old rods or the new one. 3.1.6 control Rod Drives The control rod drives for CAVALIER were obtained from Battelle Memorial Institute where they had been used with the VMR critical Assembly [4]. The drive assembly consists of a motor-clutch unit, () linear potentiometer position indication, a rack and pinion drive and a hydraulic shock absorber. Such a system, as employed at VMR, is shown in Fig. 3.7. Scram action is controlled by a magnetic clutch, which when unpowered, or in the tripped condition, allows the control rod and its entire drive mechanism to fall to the low limit. Position indication follows the rod position at all times in such a system, in contrast to the UVAR rod drives in which the position of the drive mechanism is indicated, but the control rods themselves become disconnected from the drive, on a scram. The VMR drives have been modified to reduce the rod drive speed to approximately 3.5-inches per minute. Ess&1miarary measurements indicate M that the rods atti drop on scram with an acceleration of about 0.7 g,
, resulting in a 24-inch travel time of about 0.5 second. Rod drive speed
.( \ L,/ 23
4 i I A i i
- y. pb c: T"hy:M.. y7.u- 7m ytwijy7 - 'W
!? s P7 M"
- T'yaj " ? ' 'Z3M"r " . ' -
Q'hk/.i[.kDN+ .: *+Q -t 2- ay b"!';J m ' -' Q a:'. i /
;.3J O8 N ) h /.I. k h '
- kMff 4-
.ms [WMGMf 1
i L 9 '
).
. .nt, - .'+~+,* ;#m?%.
p-D % - p ~e*s- s. b e + T e4 N
,.y s
- w. 4~ % n.-hmi.'i mn ,'v. nag; m...M.%.e,,
- e.~nE V n ~, g
~4::.+6 i t ..
w;f:cWNWkin3%
".', n---- :. m%n.
~,-..
s - i s.
,, % _*w%3/ . ,
n..G'W aa v max u .. A p: u,
, s > , ~_ c n, .c .-bs4w*'a -
.a .sylls< v';4,. na ,* ;u" n;%n.. p^ ",9. . p .' wW;%'4'?',W' I
. C s
r; W'4'-'d 7 M 3s , A;4 . s '.m"y ,~,5 # .~wK,'=
".. :'. 4 Y*'- ' . ft ' '"'^"' ;
K. . .m ..,v. 0n2 :1 . , - " Q !:f . , . - +- x . - ,- . , ,.n.&.N t' e
.es x m+. ,a. 7r 3 e s m,,
t, y s .- i y: e, M. v w.m. .M. n :- t..
- .. ,e. .
l a.m. #g w,p r .- :.7 w a.s... a. m.- ey: ; A~s. A. p:~.
,+,,_,e.p,,g, y. . e,;g:,.4 a /.:~.
w sn. .:u 4,9 a ' . ,r.ne. y*a.,;
- s. . -
i
.e i
., y, _ ,
_~,_., s+.A;;# <
,-2,.. 2.-- .
Wdmj *~ dQ:.cN. I$" ',I 'p 'q p~h
.-]dA ji[n[ 2,'$h%., . c.7W ;; /'%a.
, I
, ~ e.--;. .n 3 . m, ... , , , s;%
f
- m. p ' W-~- ,
e *n*
,?. l 1
.,[(wyw:., M. '.nMlQ &y2,,H,.i,.k. ;w ,, e WD . ~~ _w "i &l~. ..z@a v,,f.5W,-@a . ~_ ;
- 5~ ~M s,
. .- m w . w. .
\ ,
a s_. ,
. s . ~ .
-l y w. YG , *
;g. AC%.^a.:m: 4 ,n ./. . w ~~l 4-_?yl s, Y;g*._&,
-.,* r w.::~'u. ?%f
%+a:e;'> f i %, - .. .r_ , .' . , ';}
e y m; >.v ,
. q. .-
a .., a 3- w. , CvirQ' %; :D{e : ;;ps'alQ
~<:g.. ..v, . i @lk_: ,bc, K '
;: ! ._ 'n . :
W.,'. w:F:.
~ .?
4 c .. m . nn . , sv r; n ' . . g:. ... . _ >. :.1 %r;~y ,'_ e. r,r j.; ?.pq . ; fa 3, .
- t. 4 ,
, m _'y .2 w .._-y
~
i
, t, ' -
1e %,. . _ , _ s .
= - . s.,
o r 1. ,m .
.- u ; .a .
s@'<,yU W.9M*C" i ~ ', '~r . -js,N 3 ; - P 7 m . y, l
, ',.c,.-
g .f * ' + - ii.' r e.' ' W f< *' , -
) J. n+ ,
~O E -
J[ ; :. 4 , a 4
.a ..,..g m . ;,
3, s . >
;,r -
- 3
. s
.r f 'E '
kg :M - * - j -- ]3' ,. , :
~ " "
! +
, y CMG ,
.g .
Au .
+
l n, - .s > L
-' Av
,e * ** ' ,..s*
aN 4 p w, ., . ,. _ ](). 7 4
+ j W-
_ p p ,< *
- r--
l s m _. . n r I t:1,^' *- **+'%^^ W I 7 %paeAL b . $> l q? 4 l
.$ . ]
m } , p
, . s y , ,
t1 .
- n. e , f b'
~
II . h , t 6 I ;
. . . -F' . I ,',A -
10
.:pr. } {
t 'w' r l I
/ .
.e*
Fig. 3.7 Rod Drive Unit , I l l l f r 24 h
and actual release and drop times as measured for the final system are recorded in Table 3-2, Control Rod Drive System Data. Structural support for the control rod drives is provided by a network of channel steel mounted on top of the moderator tank and centered above the grid plate. A plan view of this arrangement is shown in Figure 3.8. The moving position of the rod drives is enclosed in a tubular guide extending from the top of the tank down to the control rod fuel element. Positive holddown for the control rod fuel element is : affected by a support arm extending from the channel steel frame to a bracket on the tubular guide. The support arm is bolted in place to allow easy removal for fuel handling operations. A vertical section of a control rod drive assembly is shown in Figure 3.9. The motor clutch units of the control rod drives are bolted to the deck plates which form () the enclosure for the moderator tank. The rod drive arrangement for a , typical core loading is shown in Figures 3.10 and 3.11. Undesired upward rod motion, such as could be caused by physical ! manipulation of the rack at the rack and pinion mechanism, is prevented t by a sonenoid operated pawl engaging a racket gear on the motor-clutch unit drive shaft as shown in Figure 3.12. The pawl has a ratchet action which allows downward rod motion under all conditions (solenoid activated or not), while outward motion can occur only when the pawl is pulled free of the gear by the solenoid. The solenoid is energized when the console key switch is energized. 3.1.7 Startup Neutron Source ! The low neutron flux levels attained during CAVALIER operation preclude the use of an Sb-Be neutron source as employed in the UVAR. O v 25
..g . - n -- - - - - , , , , - , - . , , -- -- .. -,
m _.. - m _ . . _ __ _ __ . . _ . . _ . .. 5
- (s ) '
i ! l TABLE 3-2 t { t l CONTROL ROD DRIVE SYSTEM DATA i INITIAL CHECKOUT OF SYSTEM IN 1974
! Rod Number Magnet Release Time Free Drop Time Rod Speed i
., i i 1 50 usec. 489 maec. 3.78 in/ min. ! i I.
.; 2 49 msec. 480 maec. 3.80 in/ min.
, y f j t 3 82 msec. 568 maec. 1 3.80 in/ min. ! 1 , j i 4 87 maec. 467 maec. J,', 3.78 in/ min. !
! i I
Average Over Past 5 Years ! r.' i ~ 1 62.0 463 3.8 I ( 2 51.5 449 3.6
.! 3 82.0 478 3.9 i
. .i 4 71.5 500 3.8 i { ylj i d- ) f v, '
- - j r
. . 6 d
*I i
,I '
t
. l a
l [ [ p i 4 i
.O- 2e ;
r I b I' ! t i
b
.- i l-I - -- 67" ;
a p <., . . . ,.
?
i 1 i I s 20" t I I
,1 l 1 1 +. t h
, 11"
! +
! I
! is f
i n , L , ', 11" l i t -' : , . a !
,-w
- .q .
i 4 i t
-1 l t
i' ! t q. i I PLAN VIEW \ TYPICAL h" CHANNEL STEEL ; i.; -
/ 7.25 lb/ft i
? .
l
- i VERTICAL SECTION l
l i. O FIGa 3.8 Channel Steel Support Network 27 i i t n- - - - - . ,,--.n. ~-. . ._n,. ,,n,----n--.nnn-.--,...-...,,,.-,,.-.-.--,,,,.--n.n_,,n--. -- -,-,-.----e - - - - ,
f
-T .
P c
.U ( ^ .
i t
, ( (3
(
, '~
N PACK and PDIION MECHANISM m . m X
, SUPPORT
- ,e c- AaM
, 4 II F l
h" STEEL FRAME g
! 4 5 6
. at r
!OO '
k 6-7/8" 9 99-11/16" TUBULAR GUIDE 3.0" O.D. 2 7" I.D. i
/
N a I m e v
, CO?ITROL R0D FUEL ELEMDTT f./
O : FIC. 3.9 Rod Drive Structural Support. 7
/
i 28
i
\ f iO '
,- 9.'s ..
?. m .. l
- (3 .. ,
~M . Wl (-
1 .. ,.f'u . s,.i, 7 '" M*J ~ y' l
~'**
.j , _
K. > q. l . TT ~: ' t
%y ,
..)
l t !l A. Side View ! e l l
- i OO i 1
....7 .
l i
*l t ,
~'
'. c. [ [
. 35== : p
- 4. c. . -._ -
gii']) : =
= = = - - i 4 . .r=E ,
w v. - ,3 6 . ' l h-- .
+- --
l , ,. ; 1 r [ D
~
i B. End View l O 118 3 1o ^ea orive Arr se e== rer treic 1 cere te 41== i 29 I i f f r _ _ , _ _ - . . - - - - - - - - _ _ -s--
_ __ amu _- r --mm. e s s - - b OC . . _ .
.r -
f , [ ,.
.t ? , ;*
- g
' eu/,,1sg;,
.4
-.,o j
\ . ' ' . i. r;, . .; ; .
. (
. / . j ' % ,.; [
.l,
.( . : 4 . < . - ",
.p2 . - .
.- wb -. .... m
., . . ...4 ,,y t
) Fig. 3.11- Top' View cf Typical Cote Loading iOe
-l
} N . RV'f .w 1
[; (,
- L .
w-g
/.-
i e ,
.,i4
{ , _ ' *;"} w,0Y ~~. sn- ..!: Y-r..i- %,, ,
=
^ *
' * ;P 's 2 . ni, W
l *4,. "'
,if
~
*b1EjN
'NCf 5M 4 Jj?:':.".::'
tf . , , ' ,;
>= !?
di
, .miua th %:?):. .
- i. Fig. 3.12 Outmotion Latch O
A Pu-Be neutron source is therefore used as a startup neutron source in (} CAVALIER. The neutron source is enclosed in an aluminum tube which extends down into the wire mesh screens or graphite reflector beside the core. The source is attached to a motor drive cable allowing it to be withdrawn from the core a distance of approximately 3 ft. after reactor r startup has been accomplished. No danger of source damage due to t internal heating is presented because of the low neutron flux levels
- present in the moderator tank.
3.2 Operating Limits In this section the operating limits for CAVALIER will be listed and discussed briefly. In particular, the bases for establishing the various limits will be discussed. 3.2.1 Operating Limits List
- 1) Maximum Average Power (S.L.) 240 watts-hours / day
- 2) Maximum Power Level (S.L.) 100 watts
- 3) Maximum Excess Reactivity 1.6% Ak/k
- 4) "hutdown Margin With the rod of highest worth fully withdrawn, the reactor shall be
> 0.4% Ak/k suberitical. '
- 5) Minimum Operating Period 5 seconds ,
- 6) Maximum Worth of an 0.5% Ak/k Individual Experiment 3.2.2 Maximum Average Power Limit The maximum average power limit of 240 watt hr/ day (i.e.,_10 watt average power) was chosen to limit the buildup of fission product inventory in the fuel. By keeping the fission product inventory low,
/' fuel handling outside of the tank can be performed, and the hazards b]
associated with fission product release in the evento f an accident are 31
, - , , - + , , -- ,-, - - ------
- - - - - - - --+,-n-~ , , , - - , -, ,
f~g minimized. The inventory of I-131 as a result of long operation at an () average power of 10 watts is equal to that generated in a 10 Mw-sec excursion. The latter value representran upper bound on the possible energy release by an excursion in the CAVALIER. In general the proposed 1Laits are quite conservative. This approach is believed justified by the fact that much use will be made of the facility for student training. 3.2.3 Maximum Power Level The maximum power level, greater than the average power, was chosen on the basis of possible need for higher fluxes in activation experiments, and in maneuvering during training. The limit of 100 watts was determined by the radiation levels above the water of the Moderator Tank. At 100 watts with 7.25 ft. of water above the core, the gamma-rcy () dose rate has been extrapolated to be 20 mR/hr at the top of the tenk, ; and at the nearby areas accessible to personnel, less than 1 mR/hr. The fast neutron dose rates at these positions are negligible (less than 10
-3 Gamma-ray dose rates are based on calculations and mrem /hr. ) .
actual measurements. 3.2.4 Maximum Excess Reactivity Excess reactivity provisions are made to allow for experiments and operating maneuverability. For 1.6 percent Ak/k, a maximum , superprompt insertion of about $1 is possible ($1 = 0.80 percent Ak/k). The SPERT experiments, for fuel elements similar to those of UVAR and CAVALIER, gave an energy release of approximately 10 Mw-sec for a superprompt reactivity of $1, and little core damage or fission product release were noted. [5] In Chapter 9 the effects of a 10 Mw-sec (^) excursion are analyzed. i 32 l t
t i e i i 3.2.5 Shutdown Margin I' The required shutdown margin is 0.4% Ak/k'with the most reactive i rod fully withdrawn. This margin will ensure that a shutdown can be I obtained and maintained in the event of a scram without further operator j action. 3.2.6 Minimum 3perating Period I
- -- For administrative purposes, a minimum operating period of 15 f
seconds is imposed, backed up by a period trip at a value greater than 5 ; i seconds. This value will provide an adequate safety margin in the case ( of an abnormal reactivity insertion. The Safety Analyses of Chapter 9 , are. based on a period trip which operates at 5 seconds. The scram on 3 i ; period at no less than five seconds is to insure that the safety limit l on power is not exceeded. Assume the reactor is on a period of 5.01 ( )- ' seconds (just missing a scram on period) and scrams on power level at 80 . watts (the limiting safety system setting). The magnet release time is , e no greater than 0.1 seconds and the free drop time for the rods is no l greater than 0.7 seconds. (See Technical Specification on Rod Drop Times.) The very conservative assumption is made that the rods must i, drop all the way to terminate the 5.01 second period, 0.8 seconds elapse after the scram is initiated at 80 watts. The peak power will be P = 80 exp [0.8/5.01] P = 93.85 watts The safety limit of 100 watts is not exceeded. This is the worst case. If the reactor is on a shorter period, it will scram on period at a , lower power level, and if the reactor is on a longer period, it will i
. scram at 80 watts with less of a power overshoot.
33 ! 4 [ i !
. _ , _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ ~ . _ . . ., _ _ _ - . _ . - - _ - . . , . . . _ . . _ _ ___ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ _ . _ _ _
r i s_/ p 3.2.7 Maximum Worth of an Individual Experiment i A limit of 0.5 percent Ak/k is put on any single experiment. ~ This limits to about 1.4 seconds, the reactor period associated with an experiment failure, well below prompt critical. Thus the worst possible experiment failure, aside from presenting little or no hazard to the , operators, will involve no datage to the fuel or system equipment. l 4.0 INSTRUMENTATION , 4.1- Introduction Since the CAVALIER is a low power reactor, the instrumentation
. system is designed on the basis of only two ranges of reactor power;
. source level and power level. The CAVALIER nuclear instrumentation t
system is based on equipment provided by the Bailey Meter Company, some of which is modified to meet specific requirements of the CAVALIER l system. The functional operation of this equipment was described in UVAR-18 [3]. Figure 4.1 shows, in block diagram form, the principal elements of the CAVALIER Control and Safety System. 4.2 Source Range Channels and Detectors The Bailey Meter System source range instrumentation provides power level and period indication over six decades of reactor power. The , I source range detectors are BF e unters which are mounted under the grid 3 plate on opposite sides of the core. The counters used are effective over a range of 10- to 104n/cm -sec at the detector location with a sensitivity of approximately 13 cps /nv which corresponds to a maximum 5 count rate of 10 counts per second. The BF e unters perate 3 satisfactorily in gamma-ray fluxes up to 100 R/hr. The exact positions of detectors may be manually adjusted to obtain optimum operating l' 5 > conditions. At power levels exceeding the maximum count rate of 10 cps. > 34
.- - - - . . , - - . - . , - . .--,-.+m,- m,~ . -,,,..----,y __,,--,y.,---w- r- -.c-----.-- .,wr---e-+-w-.e
t I i I. } . l SOURCE RANGE INSTRUMENTATION: ' l
! / I LOG i BF LEVEL PERIOD w '
COUNT i 00th bR PREMP
-RATE
. AMP W RECORDER l
3 HI(sH l l ' i VOLTAGE / [
!s .
BF LEVEL PERIOD pg COINC. COUN ER CIRCUIT g g ' HIGH I I : R TAGE ! I I i l POWER RANGE INSTRtNENTATION:
'i HIGH LINEAR '
. VOLTMETER
_1 VOLTAGE RECORDER i
~ ;.k I, MM StM4ING /
, CHWSER pc SPLITTING
' .l ' ' CIRCUIT -
SM LOGIC ! I N '
~ DRAWER
<! CHMBER [i j LOG LEVEL PERIOD
, AMP AMP s
i COMP. ION _ LOG LEVEL PERIOD LOG-N CHM 8ER AMP MP RECORDER i HIGH / /8 i VOLTAGE F h i , O T4Nx TOP HONITOR "0NiTOR LOGIC
~
i Fig. h.1 CAVALIER Control and Safety Systems, Block Diagram DOUBLE LINES REPRESENT TRIP SIGNALS. ! 1- u _ _ . _ . _ ~ - _ . _ - _ - _ _ . - - - . - - -
the high voltage supplies to the BF3e unters must be secured to prevent v damage to the detectors. This is accomplished by manual switches on the source range drawers. ' Two channels of source range instrumentation are used in the CAVALIER. These channels are identical except that one of them contains an audio amp. Figure 4.2 shows one of the sour e range channels connected for operation. Modules not necessary for an understanding of the operation of this instrument have been omitted. . Pulses from the BF3 C unter are amplified and discriminated to remove gamma-ray effects. The resulting neutron pulses are applied to the log integrating circuits which produce a DC output logarithmically proportional to reactor power. The DC signal is amplified by Amplifier-S and applied to a local meter and a chart recorder. Amplifier S also provides signals to the period circuit and a low count rate interlock bistable. The input to the period circuit is differentiated and amplified by a parametric amplifier arrangement. The output is applied to a local meter and a period scram bistable. The instrumentation system is connected such that an. unsafe signal from the period scram bistables in v both instruments in coincidence will cause a scram to be initiated. Since the high voltage to the BF detectors must be tumed on when 3 operating in the power range, period scram protection from the source range channels is not required (see Technical Specificatic 3.4). 4.3 Neutron Power Range and Period Channel The power range channel provides indication of reactor period and power level over seven decades from neutron fluxes of 103 to 10 10
# 2 n/cm -sec at the detector location. In the CAVALIER system one neutron 36
- . _ _ . m . . _ . . . _ i _ _ _a . _ . . . .x . . _ .. , ,_ .. . . _ _ .. -__ _-_ _ _. ._ ._
.O O' Id Q
(. -a .j i I AUCT i OF SR2 l ALDIO
'I SPEAKER HIGH Aff) 3%RT _ PETER VOLTAGE i
l . SCALE LOG LOG Ati) w PULSE u DISC. . i- OF 2 A B S AP4) i 4 j u
- P. A>() .
BI- DEM00. Aff) MOD DIFF 1- FILTER i STABLE ! P4 B P 1, t i 2 ! DET. ETER
- i TO AND GATE i
Fig. 14.2 Source Range Channel i l 1 e .-._,. ..- . -.__----...-_-._yv .
----,---,.-v. , . - - . . . - -v-~,-_..m, .- ,,. .. .._--,-...- - -
m_. , - _ - - - . . , _ _ . . __,...----_..,x......--u.-- , - ,._ - - - -,-,-
r3 sensitive logarithmic power range channel is employed. Figure 4.3 shows N-] - the modules necessary to understand the operation of the channel; other modules have been omitted.
-This channel receives a current input proportional to reactor power from a~ neutron sensitive, compensated ionization chamber. The input current, which may range from 10 -11 to 10
-3 amps, is modulated with a 10 kHz sine wave and a series circuit of diodes converts the linear current signal into a logarithmic voltage signal in the Modulator L. The AC signal is now awplified in an Amplifier B. After amplification, the Demodulator LP demodulates the AC signal and a voltage divider prepares the DC signal for the appropriate output. The level signal is displayed i on a panel meter (1-15 volt, 0-1 ma) and is also available for a remote recorder. Two bistables are employed in the level section of this
() channel; both of which are driven by the Demodulator LP. One controls the low-count interlock in conjunction with the source range channel bistables. The second initiates a high power scram. A level signal from the Demodulator LP is also supplied to the period circuit. " Since, in the power renae, the neutron flux will be greater than at source level, a non-coincident period signal is used rather than the two-out-of-two coinaidence useo ?or the source range instrumentation. The CIC detector for the Log N and Period Channel is located in a ' position perpendicular to the grid plate. Since the influence of gamma rays can be compensated for and the upper limit of the detector is above the maximum flux, the detector is located as close to the core as physically possible. 4.4 Gamma-Ray power Range Channel '~' A gamma-ray sensitive power range channel is used as a means of absolute power level determination since a heat balance cannot be 38
. - . --.-.a..... - .. . .:-. = . . . - .. a.-;--~.-. .- .:... . . .
,. ,3 ,.,
's .
\'/
- g ,
4 h I I . l 1 i s i HIGH BI-1 BI-STABE 1 VOLTAGE 1 BLE ! lETER COP 4) i 4 l VOLTAGE 1
$ MOD. APf' DDOO.
, L B & i i 1 l BI- DEMOD APP M00. DIFF. i TO CIC STABLE P B P ! l FROM CIC TER
! TO SCRAM CilAPeEL , Fig. 4.3 Logarithmic Power Level Channel i
a
(~} performed on this reactor. This system also allows altering of the core % ./ configuration without disturbing the calibration of the channel. The detectors are two gamma-ray sensitive ionization chambers mounted at opposite ends of the moderator tank approximately 30 in, above the top of the active fuel. The channel is sensitive to gamma-ray dose rates from 10 mr/hr to approximately 11 R/hr corresponding, at this location, to power levels of 0.1 to 110 watts. The output of each detector is applied to a summing and splitting circuit which sums the current from the two detectors and provides both a voltage and a current output. The voltage output is applied to a voltmeter and a chart recorder and is used as a linear power channel. The current output is applied to a log power level and period channel similar to that described in Section 4.3. The log channel provides both level and period scram trip signals to the safety system. 4.5 Area Monitoring System In addition to the Bailey meter reactor instrumentation and safety system a three channel gamma-ray sensitive area monitoring system is installed. The monitors are located at the top of the moderator tank, in the equipmenc area of the reactor pit, and near the control console in the operating area of the reactor room. Each area monitaring channel is an independent unit consisting of a detector, both high and low voltage power supplies, a metering circuit, and a alarm circuit. The monitor sensing the radiation level at the top of the moderator tank initiates a reactor scram and a shutdown of the reactor room ventilation systen in the event of high Jevels. The g- remaining two channels provide warning alarm's in the event of high U radiation levels. 40
L I Radiation levels at the three locations are displayed on individual j meters on the control console over a range of .01 to 1000 mr/hr. L 4.6 Safety System
- i The Safety System receives logic data from all of the other monitoring systems and analyzes it. In addition to initiating scrams, [
4 i this system controls the rod withdrawal interlock function and supplies I i
- annunciators with signals to visibly display the state of the reactor.
4.6.1 Reactor Scram Circuit The scram logic is binary and originates in bistables which are located in the various channels discussed earlier. The bistables
- produce a safe, or "on," signal of 10 volts DC and an unsafe, or "off,"
signal or 0 volts. The trip point of the bistables is manually variable. Each logic signal has one bistable associated with it, () implying that one bistable cannot control two logic functions. The Safety System can be divided into two sections. The function : 1 of the first section is only to interrupt the rod-drive motor circuit. 1 t The second section terminates the current supply to the rod hold magnets [ when the logic is unsafe, causing a reactor scram. Figure 4.4 is a block diagram of the Scram System including only the modules necessary to understand its operation. Some of the ! t components illustrated are not acutally found in the Safety System instrument rack. i All bistable logic signals from the various systems are directed to I the Mixer Drivers and an Auxiliary Control which annunicates the reactor i state. Those system which do not have bistables, such as tank water t level, have relays which interrupt a 10 volt signal to the Mixer Drivers ; C:) and Auxiliary Controls. Ten volt supplies are included in the Safety 41 l
, , _ n J P : 'n , < , -
;f . ,
a ac s , , c
.su -- .- -
- O Q o
~ e o.
4 i c NEUTRON GAM A-RAT SOURCE SOURCE WATER -AUX. TRIPS RANGE l POWER POWER RANGE LEVEL . RAD. MONITOR RANGE RANGE NO. 1 NO. 2' ! TRIP KEY SWITCH Evam1&TTON CHANNEL CHANNEL l 1 i LEVEL PERIOD LEVEL PERIOD PERIOD PERIOD TRIP TRIP TRIP TRIP TRIP TRIP i , i i ' I I I 1 AND 1' - GATE .; ; u - sat l a s n av. ) n , w . a . -ww I l
- I t
MIXER DRIVER 'MIXE!'. DRIVER i 4 ) 1
~
B v s y s - Y "B-2 SbLID - e ~^ SOLID
\- ) K- STATE
{ STATE REuT kK-] v v i ,f REtiT i S-6[" h S-6 CONSOLE MANUAL t SCRAM j .
@_ 1 it g gt. -@- t lt glI l
f Fig. 4.4 Safety System i'
;._ t
~ System for this purpose. As far as the system is concerned, thes, v relays operate as bistables giving a 10 volt safe signal and 0 volt t i } unsafe signal. !
" i , Each of the Mixer Drivers is a 28 input OR gate. When any one of the logic inputs is unsafe the Mixer Driver has an unsafe output. All i
inputs must be safe for a safe output. For redundancy, two Mixer ! r i Drivers are used. In the event of failure of one Mixer driver, the [ L i= remaining, unfailed Mixer Driver can secure the reactor. , The Mixer Driver output is the input for the Solid State Relays. j ? By referring to the diagram, (Fig. 4.4) it can be seen that the signal i
- i. ;
from Mixer Driver to Solid State Relay must pass through relay contacts
- controlled by another Solid State Relay. This desf,a feature allows any i combination of one Mixer Driver and on Solid State Relay to secure the reactor.
The Solid State Relays can supply up to 5 amps DC in the presence i i of a safe signal. No current is available in an unsafe condition. One [ Solid State Relay supplies current to two rod magnets and one relay. , l I If either Mixer Driver output signal is unsafe, the associated L Solid State Relay ceases to supply current. This causes the magnets to !
- be deenergized and the relay associated with the other Solid State Relay l 1 5 i to open. The opening of this relay causes the second Solid State Relay f to stop supplying the current, causing the magnets associated with it to
{ i be deenergized and the relay to open. ! Once a safe signal returns to the Mixer Driver output, the system can be placed back on line. This must be done manually for the relays t
. which control the input to the Solid State Relays are open. These !
! O. relays can be closed by engaging the reset buttons B1 and B2. l i 43
1 ' The system is designed so that both Mixer Drivers must fail or two O. . diodes in each Solid State Relay must fail before a "can't scram" r condition will exist. The operator must test the Mixer Drivers for [ i failure, but indication is provided for Solid State Relay failure. In j l the event of Solid State Relay failure, annunciator lights on the front : panel of the scram channel will light. If one of these lights is on, a i
"can't scram" condition will exist for that Solid State Relay. However, the other Solid State Relay will still be capable of dropping two safety t l
t
+
rods. i. It should also be noted that the manual scram signal is on the SSR output side and thus will be operable even in the event of simultaneous i failures of both of these modules. 4.6.2 Safety Response to a Single Fault () Figure 4.5 is a detailed schematic diagram of one of'the two c identical s lid o state relays (SSR) used in the CAVALIER safety system. , l t Each SSR is contained in a separate module and is connected to the scram . E logic drawer (SLD) chassis by means of a 25 pin cannon plug. The positioning of the SSR modules on the SLD chassis is shown in Figure '
. 4.6. (Modules not directly involved in this discussion have been i
.omitted for simplicity). '
The SSR acts as a controlled power supply for the rod magnets. - (Refer to Fig. 4.5) 160 VAC is supplied to the SSR module on pins 13 and t i 25 from an external transformer. The 160 VAC input is rectified by diode CR-1, passes through two SCR's and appears at pins 3 and 16 as 70 t VDC. The presence of the 70 VDC at the output is controlled by the SCR's and VR-1 and VR-2. The SCR's will conduct only if a trigger pulse is P 4 applied to the gates at the beginning of each rectification cycle. The ,
, 44
~..w~.-~w --* .-- y . --me,.,,,..-n,.rw-,gn- 9- ,---wv- =,w rv. - wy'v-+--*-,w~,-erwarwwwww m y + y~ m y w yt w- + - - - * -y-t---ew-=- - *v--, 4~~e ""
~ - ~ ' '
TI .2 P/D Pi
+2SV *
' '>10 i O. .
- 4=: 1u,fs'a O O.
~ QI
,^ 2N343 R6 2K i 6 ,, f ;4 LOGIC INPUT FROM-4 gg MIXER DRIVER THRU KlorK2
- R4' < *RS 1 CRIO b4TO UlK R7 CRT IOK IN645 i Jj IN662 h 12 j *y y ^# ^-
- J2 --
! if JtCR9 :: .22UF Cl CRS IN645 IN645 TRIGGER i
~
M >l -
~
! C RI $,$g
' P/0 Pi Val VR2 '
- 11(315( "p'
<3
? 13 s' n -
"n' -
f 160 VAC C35G C35G OUTPUT TO MAGNETS 1 INPUT CR2 - ff ((^::.
~
IN2l$S.* . C2 THRU MANUAL SCRAM
$lg 186 25' ^::. ^::. *IUF JtCR3 -
IN2tSS MODULE 1 . __ CASg c 020 GND.
= = * '
3yv, 18 ' CR4 IN645 R8 g,$g INTERLO CK N
^^^
,) S COM PAR ATOR
*. . C3
- - -'AUF
; . 17-C ouPAR ATOR 19 (
CRS ___ pg . j IN645 - gog ! N ... 1 i '..C4 < R IO
- ~'sur D3.3 K
.g. .g -
NOTES: ] 1. UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED: i RESISTANCE VALUES ARE IN CHMS . 1 FIGURE 4.5 CAVALIER SAFETY SYSTEM - SOLID STATE RELAY e N l~____.__ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ - . . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ .
I SCR trigger pulses are supplied by t ransistor Q-1. Transistor Q-1 can conduct and produce trigger pulses only if a safe (+10VDC) signal is present at pin 14. This safe signal is supplied from the mixer driver modules through crossconnect relays K-1 and K-2 (refer to Fig. 4.4.) The operation of an SSR module during an automatic scram is described by the following sequence. A scram trip sensed by the mixer driver is transmitted to the SSR as an unsafe (OV) signal on pin 14. The OV signal causes transistor Q-1 to cutoff stopping the production of SCR trigger pulses. The absence of trigger pulses causes SCR's VR-1 and VR-2 to stop conducting. The SSR output to the magnets at pins 3 and 16 drops from -70VDC to OV. The manual scram portion of the safety. system consists of a rotary, snap action switch located on the control console. The switch consists of four enclosed decks; each deck contains one set of single pole, double throw contacts. The output from each SSR module passes through a separato deck on the manual scram switch and is fed to the scram magnets and cross connect relays (refer to Figure 4.4). A manual scram is initiated by rotating the scram switch through 90 to the " scram" position. This breaks the circuit and de-energizes the magnets and cross connect relays. Notice that only one set of manual scram switch contacts need open to de-energize all four magnets due to the operation I
?
of the cross connect relays. The design of the CAVALIER safety system precludes the possibility of a signal component failure resulting in an inability to scram. A mechanical failure of the manual scram switch would not affe.it the ability of the SSR meaules to process an automatic scram, and a component failure within the SSR module would not affect the operation of the 46
,V
- 2 3 1 3
J J a R R R E O e C M O A R e T T V O A A F R R 0 S A A T 6 N P P U 1 A M M O R O O Y T C C A 1 2 L K L A C I S Y H P
.), 8 R 1 E , C .
W A R I D C I G O L M A R C Y Y S A A L L R E E E R R I L E E A T T V A A A T T C S S 6 D D I I 4 L L E O O S S R U ( G I ' I F a N A 7 1 v y).
-(,
O
r- . l: - manual switch. The remaining possibility for a signal fault failure is O an inadvertent short circuit that would bypass both the SSR module and the manual scram switch. It is obvious from Fig. 4.4 that there is no L single short circuit that can bypass both SSR's and both sets of manual scram switch contacts; and,.since only one SSR or one set of manual l scram switch contacts is needed to cause all four rods to scram, a short I i circuit of one SSR and one set of manual contacts would not render the system incapable of performing its function. Further analysis is l-presented to show that it is not possible for a single short circuit to i bypass both one SSR and one set of manual scram switch contacts. Since the scram logic drawer chassis and the manual scram switch are physically situated in different sections of the control console, a short common to both the SSR and manual switch musteinvolve the leads returning from the manual switch to the cross connect relays K-1 and K-2 ! (refer to Fig. 4.4). Figure 4.6 gives the physical layout of the scram-i logic drawer showing the relative locations of the solid state relays, comparators, cross connect relays, and external connectors J-31 and J-32 which are Winchester type plugs. Also shown is the 160VAC transformer which supplies the AC input to the SSR modules. This transformer is external to the chassis and is connected to the SSR's through a separate plug beneath the drawer. The output form the SSR's exits the scram logic drawer through J31 while the leads returning from the scram switch enter the drawer through J32 and travel through a separate cable run to K-1 and K-2 (refer to l Fig. 4.6). Even though the components (SSR's and cross connect) relays are contained on the same chassis some degree of physical separation is attained which reduces the likelihood of a common short circuit. 48 i
i t t t Two possibilities exist for a short circuit that would completely i bypass both the SSR and the manual scram switch. The first situation is j a short circuit from pins 13 or 25 of the SSR modules to one of the ; cross connect relays K-1 or K-2. In this case the SSR and scram switch I would be bypassed, and 160 VAC would be applied to the scram magnets which are DC devices and will not hold a rod with an AC voltage applied. i t t Actual tests conducted with spare rod magnets have confirmed that they will not function with an AC voltage. So this fault rather than t preventing a scram will actually cause the rods to drop into the core. Since it is known that the magnets require a DC voltage to hold the rods, it is obvious that a short circuit bypassing both the automatic and manual scram would have to bypass both VR-1 and VR-2 in the SSR and ;
- the manual scram switch without bypassing CR-1 in the SSR modules.
Since CR-1, VR-1, and VR-2 are physically enclosed in the SSR module, the only possible mechanism for such a short would be from pins 5 and 7 l 3 of the SSR module to K-1 or K-2. Actually. the leads from pins 5 and 7
. i of the SSR modules go to the.comparator modules on the SLD chassis f (refer.to Fig. 4.6). The comparators are simple voltage sensing ;
i circuits'which monitor the conditions of VR-1 and VR-2 in the SSR and j provide the SSR failure indication (Section 4.61.). Minimum physical ; separation exists at this point, and a short between the comparator module plug and the cross connect relays K-1 or K-2 would be the most probable occurrence. Figure 4.7 is a schematic diagram of the overall system conditions
, that would exist if a short circuit developed from pin 5 of the SSR i
l module to cross connect relay k-1. A short circuit from pin 7 to K-1 would result in an essentially identical situation and the following analysis is therefore applicable to either' case.
- 49
Referring to Figure 4.7 it can be seen that VR-1 and VR-2 conduct during the negative alternation of the 160VAC input cycle. During this time diode CR-4 is reversed biased and cannot conduct. Therefore, an automatic scram signal, which will remove the trigger pulses from VR-1 and VR-2 preventing them from conducting on the negative alternation, will cause the -70VDC to be removed from the rod magnets. Also , initiation of a manual scram with the scram switch will remove the
-70VDC from the magnets. During the positive alternation of the 160VAC
, input - Cr-1, VR-1, and VR-2 are reversed biased and cannot conduct. At this time CR-4 is forward biased and will conduct allowing current flow through the magnets. However, voltage measurements taken at pins 5 and 7 show that the circuit resistance reduces the voltage to less than
-+5VDC which is far below the minimum value required to support the rods (approximately 40VDC). It can therefore be concluded that a short circuit from pins 5 and 7 of the SSR to cross connect relays K-1 or K-2 will not disable either the automatic or the manual scram functions.
It is, therefore, not possible for a single fault in the form of a component failure or an inadvertent short circuit to prevent the operation of both the automatic and the manual scram portions of the CAVALIER safety system. 4.6.3 Rod Withdrawal Interlock Circuit The rod withdrawal interlock circuit prevents reactor startup under improper conditions. Outward rod motion is possible only when at lease one of the source range instruments is indicating >2 cps and all instrument test switches are in the " operate" position. An input from the neutron sensitive power range channel is also provided to satisfy -O 50
l l MANUAL i SCRAM l J31
,' \ \ p j s- d CR-1 N R-1 VR-2 l
.~ g L
NbI CR2{ g
; ,W-- M %" C2 l R1 R2 R3 I l l ROD J32 - 41AGNET@
FAULT e iV I l - - 1
! K1 l l
CR4 R8 1 '
--> g 5 ~~
O j l , l 1 CR5 r R9 7 l l' l
. Y C4 M'
I
~
1 g
<< R10 i - -
l l SSR MODULE _ l__ __ g 'il i i t /i i I f j l 1l I - I COMP._._ 1 l SLD CIIASSIS I FIGURE 4.7 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM FOR FAULT ANALYSIS j .
the interlock during operations at power which may requite high voltage to be r'emoved from the source range detectors. (See Section 4.2). Figure 4.8 is a block diagram of the rod withdrawal interlock circuit. A bistable from each of the source range instruments provides a +10V output when indicated count rate is >2 cps. A bistable from the neutron sensitive power range (Log N) provides a +10V output when 3 neutron flux at the detector is >2 x 10 nv. These bistable outputs at
+10V will cause a +10V output from the NA-45.
The auxiliary control relay (ACR) receives inputs from the NA-45 gate and from a +10V power supply through all instrument test switches. Both ACR inputs must be at +10V to cause an output to the rod nermissive relay. Low signal levels in the reactor instrumentation or any of the instrument test switches out of "opefate" will cause one of the ACR q '> inputs to fall to OV which will de-energize the rod permissive relay. 4.7 Instrument System Response Vigure 4.9 shows in graph form the typical response of each of the instrumentation channels in the CAVALIER control and safety systems for the range of reactor power proposed. The exact positions of the various sensors may be adjusted to improve sensitivity and possibly increase the degree of overlap. In particular the Logarithmic Power Range Channel may be positioned to be "on scale" at source range, and that at least one of the Source Range Channels shall be capable of remaining operable up to maximum power of 100 watts. The response of the Linear Power Channel, the sensors for which are two ionization chambers sensitive only to gamma rays, is drawn for a
-12 ~) lower level of readable ionization current of 10 amp (10 mR/hr),
(U corresponding to a power of 0.1 watt. The chamber position for this 52
a l'
.t [
t l
.., (
a p l o!*, , ' I iV SOURCE SOURCE NEUTRON RANGE RANGE POWER
] NO, 1 NO. 2 RNIGE I
.],, . >
i .is . i v
, .s
.) LEVEL LEVEL LEVEL TRIP TRIP TRIP i
..,.] I i
i i ,
, . .I . ;
i ; q
.4
+10 ;
f i J,)' VOLTS , 3
. 4
, , -d
, j.1
. .e ..
/ t 14 INSTRUMENT / l
'.1 AND GATE TEST M !
SWITCHES P [ 2.') ' ' .0:1 -[ y [ r GlA:l *\
*';gOt:jy n
- 1~ ,
- t
- e.di ; f4 f i i t t ACR r1 i, -,y. i,
- e..
.1 ,
1 ! i ! TO ROD PERMISSIVE : t i ! ( ! q e
- s. :) i
' Fig. 4.8 Rod Withdrawal Interlock Circuit
. . s. .)
*J .
4 J l 5 ': . E
\' '
O . w n m w I I
, I ,. i e
w I i w I
. L ii e E L N E .
N N ~- A N,. I o H A n w m l .o C g H C, R 0 , I I l 1 ! iu l B ! i . l l l l l I I I l i E R I'
. iI W O
E W N O P O M P -n C A ~
) I I R E i e
m S M A R H E A O T W T A T I R N I L m ( o A wO G y R I i L O ii i E E L W N r O N - P A e s H - C - I ,. e i E o G m N - A - L R nn E E wO I N C ,, N R i , A - I I U C O v S , E , G 1 N i A R g i g ,. E C R - w :v 1 U - O J - S 1 3 em , O w - 2 'T . *.e m8ma O% 4E+c >
,tc m$!* -
i - v t $i
! ,1 ' ! 1I1) 'Il! i )4 <jj Ijli !l' iil
- . . . . . ~ ~ - . - - .-.-. - _-. _ - - -.. -- --
+ reading is at the side of the moderator tank, about 30 inches above the i t , s F top 6f the active fuel. The readings at this position have been 4 verified by measurements made on the UVAR pool reactor. [ , The gamma-ray source strength of the CAVALIER core is not always 1 ' 0 proportional to core neutron, or thermal, power. Short-lived fission f products must. build up to their equilibrium levels upon start-up, and c
)
after shutdown fission product gamma-ray decay persists long after L i :
- neutrons have died away. The Linear Power Channel gamma-ray chambers l are placed as far from the core as possible to maximize the prompt !
, gamma-ray signal, a hard energy spectrum, and to minimize the fission f I product contribution, a softer spectrum. b 4 Figure 4.10 shows the calculated response of the Linear Channel for l a step function power operation, for two operating time histories. Some I experimental points are shown as well, measured for.a detector position similar to that used for the CAVALIER. ! 6 For a step power increase, the calculated gamma chamber response is n I within 95% of an equilibrium value within about 8 minutes, and the l l ' measurements for a more reasonable approach to power (50 see period) ! i L j show 95% at-45 sec. i Shutdown from prolonged operation represents the most severe Linear I I , Channel error problem. For a 10-hr run at 10-watt power the apparent f gamma-ray chamber power is 0.5 watts (5%) after.10-minutes, and does not reach the lower-level sensitivity of the chamber, 0.1 watt (1%) until about 2.5 hours after shutdown. For shorter periods of operation .(e.g. 1 hour) the 5% value comes in about 3 minutes and 1% at 40 min. t For a 1-hour run at 100 watts, followed by a scram and an immediate l return to 10 watts, which would require at best about 20 minutes, the l 1 55 l
eh 46 - ia as
. . .a. .-,..h. . .V ..+!,,+.+r*.J..- e4
!o. .
+.
h...... ., .. 4.
. . . ., m..
.... . . . ..~ .
.. . .. . , .+. 1 t.*,,.. ..
.+.., . . .
1+ + ..
+1._..
**+t...w.,..
.+4 .
. , ~. .w . . . . a.
,. 4. . _ :::_
++ . . + . .
. +. 4 ...
. . u_
4.. .. ... ~
~ . .
.... .u. . . *L . . t. o .- .:..
4
- . . . - +..:: - :
t..J.o
,.,-.. *tt .. ..+1. Ht .. . n 1n... 4. ...:. . . . it 1
w.. . . . -. j ".. . . . . t4 . _: w:. -
'
- a g .
... E lt; i *.MT:1 12' *d
- a L}:.W ,::!r'.O .. ::4.*.
.. . dt r-1. :.- . ~ *Jmi; :!g"rH -~~Ind. .:r.*+.22:*~
. . T. m
, . , ., - L :. ,.,........
. . . . , ....... ._...t*.
......t, ._t,.,.,~. .) ,. .
. . . . . :n . . .
i , . .. .., .. . .. . 4 . .
./m s. ~
+ 3 .l. .e..!
1
.. t..l. - .
.a. . .o.
.t.,.}... .. .
.+
..t.,.
j.. . . . . ..
... 2. ..-.2..
. . . .~. . . . . . . ~ :
.g ,;
' II .f . j .# .U... "* * . b. . .I*.-
. * ~ . . .-I .
1
' . ' . ! . L. ' ...~.h**+ y ... .. .* . " . * . ~ .
'., ..- i tI . .
.. .J.?.... ' * *._.m. ,
t+r..'
. 11.
. .. . ,4.l, .
+
~ d. . ..... .... ,.. . ..n., . ..!.
1 . . . .
. . _... i; , .
+ . ...... .. .Jr .. . . . ....
..t.- .4 ..
.. 1.
+. !. !. .u
.l 4!...4.
., . i . 4t.e,
- u. ... + 16 u, . . , ..- t'.1. I . .. . ..., ,. Chi
- a. ~
... + . .T . .. . . .
gt .. . o. ..
.... ...,. ..w. . ~ .
- 3, 1.
+.
.p 4....
$ g.. ..,. wmgo -
. .,, . +
- t. ... g+w. --..L. . 1..g .g.
..[*... .... m.... .L. . . .
. - . .$. . . .....,.?.4. . . .. . . . . . A. .
i
, _ 0
.m. .,.. . . . . . . .. .
. .! ... .! ..m. . o....I. . . . ,}....-
, .1..... .... p
. 1, ... 2 I ,. gto.
. . . .. ,. ..o .- . ..
. O. .
6 .. 3 ~_._F_.L
.. . 1.- * + ... 7..
. L.*
.4+..
. . . ~...o.o. . . .
. . . 1.%.
++
. C/)
,*!*. . y. .! . . +
.-m . . ..
F. . .
... o._
..1_
,.aus p.,
.JT*+7' ..,i., . . ..
.. y... . ..... ..~. . . .
... . . o.....s.._ .
..~ ..-.
,u . ..
..+...y...
.g-
.,.1... .i.. g.. .i . . .. p. 2. .., g u .. .. . . . g.,. , .
3, .. 7... .
.. . g
.. . .t . . ..,.-
4... . ..
. ..I_q o ., .. t. ..... . . , . .
i..,.. .
.,....,. ,..L..;
....5.. T.. .. .. ... ;.. ...... .I, o, ..
..... .1 . .
..n i o
.. . . . . , . , . . . . ~ . . .
... . . ..n... . . .
t 1i..- , , . ,
,-L... .. . . . p.
..v-J : ,t..:
_:. ...+ .
< *21 .....
,4 ,.
.. .... q... 4. ... . _i . . __._. e
. . . t ...
g.. i....r. ,7 ,, , . , sp. .. .q, .
. .p ,t.
...r ..
..s,
.. ..--.... .. .41, .
.1...
.. .m
._. .v. g.
_ . 3 _.._ .h. as
,41e.
,. . a. .. ..g.+
4
. .J4 . .19, . . . .m.g. r.r i. a. .. ...-.i...,. . . . ., .. ..
... . . .... .1 . . _. ..,,..4 . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. . r. r- .- . . - * . * . .* . * . * - +. . :s ... .. . . _ .. . . -. - .
.c.
... 4 t
... ..g, ..,p._.. .
o.4 . . 3. .. ._.
.f.. .. g .. .._
. . .... . . . t. , . .-.
**++*-+4-.
. ..4 .
...s... . . . .tt~.. J.. ,. .,
O
.,m. : : .:
.g.. .gr..,.,1,.. . .
f . .. .. . _ . . .
- g. L. . . . . _. 3 .
. .g ..
- i. p.,
.m.-. ,....e ,. . . ,.
. .3.11.. .
3 . w..-
. . . _~ . . . . . . . .g.. . . !
. .a._
. ,.1. i. .T ,. .. 1 ~.,.A.,..
. t..,-,, .. ..l. .m. ..... . . . . ~ , . . .
c.
.,t,
,.. ..,. . ~ .. _.., p...
ct) i :
... ,. t t, i .
..t. . .. [ ..t.. . .
.f ...t.,._..._. _ . -~. .I
. . . . .. .n
. ... . . . .J ..2.,..
e
._.1....-....._.m...f. . .. . .
. u!
., ,A.
m t...... ~ . . .. . . .e. . -. . . 6
.... . $1. ,
., t r,.. ....
- 4. . . a .. I, a... .
.s-d, . o
.. t. . _ . . . .1,..... . . _4_. 1.c. ,. .fi. p .
.t. _. ....o,. ..1 . . .L.. . . .. - .
2+
+...
.,. 4. . .. .
, **!. e.....
. t... ..,, .
. . . -L ... --. . .
, ..,.,5 ..
..- . m
!. .. ...i._. 4 ..
o
- t. *rt..1e . . ...! . .. . . .. t. t..
. . t..
. _.. .t .. _ .
. I C
.I . ...f. _.. L .w.
. . - .. .1.. .
84 .,I... .-,.1,. .. ... . . . - .,..t... ...... . . .. .. _. ......... ,A....
. . .. ... t O
.' ... ' . .. . r
**' *~ * * * *
. . . " .. ' ' ** . . . . . ' . 4
. g+
,, P. h '- .m..,
< *w .1 +
W. . . . ..'"
' ' . . F. I'.....4 O
.I ' ' . ' .T. . T.
i..t....
, .n. .
o
. ... _. ..it . t*..1. ......
..... . tt. a.. .a
. .. . ... . - . . -...1 ,
.!, a o. ..- 7 . 1. 4. . LI. ..
.. .t ... ... . . _ .,. . - ..
m 4.
... .d. **
**~ .
. k
.i.. . .
.y m-.. . , .q... ,1
, g.
,,.L .... .
4 .! .Lt.,,
- r. . . . . .
... .1 . .
. m... . . - w , o. ..., . . 4.... .. _~ .. .u ,, . . . . , ... . . . .a.....
l3 e
,,... 1. .%. ma . . . .i... .. ...
a.. . . . _..
. . T. .*. . , ..
. o. . + . . O >
. . . .,,ses8' .r,
.4 . .
.1.
.. . .. . . .u.
.. . . 4.. . .
..+ -.. . ..,.,,.,,s 5.:: . . : r.. . . .. # ,. . .-..., As
... ... '.t**. ..It' i n. %.
. . -.. ...y . . ... .. t. . .
' . ' ' .o. . 4 I I I. '. . .
.rt t .. ~ .. .. . .4...
- h. j f . .gr l ' *17 ! 't ~ . * . ' .--~-!.'++*.
*. . , 4
/, i, ._g ., . . .
. . ' ' -~. * *
. ' ' * *E." . ' * . '. . . . ' ' ' . ' . ' .' ' ' * * ' ' . ' ' ' . . ' . .!. . . . * " * * * *-
- m** P' +'. . '.' esl
- p. .
~,,
.-6.. ... . . .. .. . + . , . . {.
v t", * . ,.6 . -.
, . . . . . . . ..,L! .... . ,, , . , , . ...
.. o .
. .... % .. _4.. .. o. f; . 4 .... .1 .u . ...
.... f .
.l
..u . . ..
s .
.... .p. , 4 . .. . . .
i, . 1,.1. .n. .l. .. ... , . - . . . - . . . .
.T.
C C
....d ,1.
, !.! . ..1 r . 4.
- 4. . , .1 . ...
6 e. _: 4 ww
,... . . . . ....p..
. 4,
. .* .~ . . ._ +,. ..
#11, . .. ,. . . . t.h:
...I, . !; 6. .-..
. . ~ . . .. p
- t. . ! , 1 ..J .., ..
!.. . .. t., . . .....I .... _
i. l . .,,, . t.... . .
.O
.~.
m
* .'P, '- t ' r. **_ . _
t .. n . .3 ._* .,t,. i., *+., . * ' '* ,..t.. 4 *-
' **** ' * * ~ ~ * + '
.. ' ' . , . . .. . , . . . ! ,, '.m+..~'
..,.-* ,a*.*'. '..'-~e'.*.*'. , .1
. . e
. ' .. /
,.1
.4 .
!. ..t.. . 4. ., ,.. . u. . ..,,4..
1.*. . 4n
!. 4 .'
i .
.. . 4. .J
... . . . .. _u*t, ..
_ . . . .o .. w ts .. . .4 .,.f?, . ., L.. n- . ..
....e,.... - . ..
. . , . . . . ,1. ..-, . . . . --
+
., t ..
1_. .~ . ._.,.1 w. p J.11 1.1. . J. . ..I .. -- . . . .. -. . ..t .6
. .4.J .,.
,., . . ,.. 1 v.. ,
-..t
.o
_ . . . ... . . . . -..e ... . ,
-L. .
.. o.. . + + . . v4 m>
-.:.-. .-. j :. . ..<_,. ...-
- c. ,,
I 4.. T
-I. c. ... . .
.. I.-, . _I -.
.4
- f. T . .i C
.I ti< .+. ....! .. . . .
,. l .
i
.4.. u. . . . .
. .o.-t.*.*-- . . . , . ... ..
t.~. . .
..6....- .-.. . ... . .
. _. 0 .ht
. ::... .4 ...i. J. ..f. . . . .
.4. ..
CO
... 1* .a a __
- [.
- 1. . g...f.
.. . . . !. .. ...g .r . ,~..{ .. ..,1.t..,.. . , _ . .- 1 . .. ... . u. . . . . .
- m. ... . . . ...41. .. I gg 4...-.._
_3 g. ~ . . - e
. ,. 6. . . .
!} } _.o. ..._.4.. . .. ..- ... +. ou, . . . .4. . . . .
o .. . ,, g .1. 6.... ..-.
. . g_ ......u ...
..m i . ,
. .v .. .
. .. ..~..o.
.t.t . s. .. . gr. p
.t..
. e J.. .,. ... . 1.,. +
J. +I.
. -... t.... .1_:--. ..c.J . ,
6!. .~. . . . . .
. el u.... 4, J. . . .... ......t...
Zl
- 6. *t.*.'.. o u .... , , . ,.. _.1 ....,..f. . u. x..,...+. .-. .. ,....
- o. . .l . , ... 1 El
,, .. i f4..
- ..t... ..
- . m. . ..m .. I. .
4
-, . v .t .+.- .6.
- t. 4*.
.. T!. o.
. . . .-. .. .. . t. 4... aJ. . . .. .
t. 1u... 4: I .t
. . L..
.+
. o..
- ^
!..!t.. ^. .. 3 ... ..... ... u. .
. . . . 1. . ...... .
.. f- . ...... . . , .w . . . . .
t i tb.:
- 1 .W. i..
..- VI . f *,1.1 ..I, ......I" 'i..., ...I 4 ..... . .. ..
._.. .... ,4
..r.. ..M..i
.).- .. bi+ op
.*i + .. .. .., .... . .
..a..
. .1 ... I. r. . .j ,+*' t.t. -*1 }... .e.. ..-t...+. _... . ...- . .... .....o. . . . . . ..o.
..... ... ,4
. . . - ...r... _ . .
- o. .. . ... .
ge m
.. .. . .1- .... .
;: .__- ,.,+ -
+., 1.5. .:. . . t+. . ,
l.. i..
,+..
t ., I
....,... , ..-I.... .. . T . .. , ... .. .l.
.-+u.
..+ +. oO
...1...
.t4u J+.t . .
...o
,A
_1. . _ .. .. L. I..
. . . . . . ... .. . n...-
+.. ... ..
t o. . , .. .- ...l ..,. I., . ..,,.}. ... ... ., . . .
. . Mt . . m4
. . .... ,.. ....i. ... T., ..
..t.. .. , . .. . . .
. . .. .. .. . . . u, .- . . , .. ..u..
f.. . .
- l. . . ..
( m . f ,. . ....,o,
. . .. . f.. .
~. I..!T . .. .
$. . 4 . c@
.1*.*. .* l
.. . l t.
.,,.l.,.. .,
...,.., 1.. . t ,.;.. .-.... . . . ., ...
.. .... p' . . . . . ***
u, ! ;...(,.1 l..
- 4. l ..
I .' .' o. ..' . I .".,.* ' . * + .l*g.
.9...._ g. u 4.I..
t.d. . . -
>. .. +.1 ... po. ... .t * *'
- m
.. . .. . ~ . . .. . :
4 -. .a . E
*. .A. 4 J ' .'.. ...*.. 4* t ' *.. . .
U
, - w .4 ,. ... . ..
.4. . . -
. . . . n.
. ._lw . . -
; ! { IA. . .. .T, . . . 1. ., .2
! ... . . .t. ....
.i.I: .I
...o.. .. ~. .. ..
..o ...
.. J .x. . .. o. .. . t , ... .
..1. .... .. . . , . ....
.. i... .. u
. ~+ + g .+, ., . . 4
.. -- . .: - .. , . 4. u....t ,. t.1.Lo _.. .
.w
.+. .. .
...n. -ee
.,. . uT*!. % ,..,..
.o . . , .o. ...
i . li . . , 7 +!. . .. . . .!3.y( l.g......
. .l .I. 3g g. .
9a
- m. . . . ..o,....
. .. ... . . .. . t. o. . .
.u.. - .o.
.w. l 1. mo. .- ,
. = . ,1 . q
_, .. g ........
.11. ....-. . l ,. .. ., .,.
-,. + ~ . .
..o. o ...1 m*.o.. ...
... o,....o. . . t . .+.m o...
. J.
1.,.,.. . .. .
.i. ..t.. .,. j
..o., .
..-.I .
e
.A. !.. .. f . ..
n.4 ...! . .. .. . . . . . .4 ... . _ .
. .... .. . .-O . + . .. . .l.., .
. . . . ... ....,- .1
+ c
, ... ..t.. ,.
1..,., .. . ... - r-t . . .
..1.---... ... ..... .
. . . . .. . .. ...a 1...
- .- . I ....- ..
!.. l . I...b . .
. 6
,. . . u. .. & .6. - .
. ... .. 4 . ...
!. 1.. L..
2 ,
- 1. .. .. .,
,. -..1 t ....
,. A . . . ..o . .
- d. 1 ., .
t~. I 14 l . ..
.!. .,....... J.!
' . +. ... .... ..
. . . .I l i
L .. .. .. . . . u.... ... ._ . . . . .
. ... , ... ,j,.
.,... 9..... .. ,.4.. ..
.. ,.,m.,.
....I
. d..
,. .t.._ _ . ,
. a 6 .,1. . . ..
. .s.. ..
. C O 0 C l; .. Q .
't!'t. 1. . . .
. I < f3
..,...o... l. '
r .. 1 CO 6d . '
. t.
. 4 ' . ..i ...l *. . *
. . '. +. ..I .TJ
....,.. . 1 .,
e. I
. .,. . . 4 !.!. .. .
l.
. .i. . . . . .... . ., .1 ..
Wt ' ' ' .
.I.
... t '. '. I.. '. I. ' . I ' 3 ' . . t <
- . l- -
j . . .j . .. 't
> %:iuecaenis tech' 56
7\ t error in a supposed 10-watt reading would be about 2% of the 100 watt
} '~'
steady state value, ora 20% of 10 watts. This represents an extreme test of the system. If the wait time has been 1 hour, the error in the 10-watt value would have been-7%. The long-term fission product buildup due to multiple operating periods will contribute far less than lowest signal (0.1 watt), as determined from UVAR measurements. In summary, there will be some errors in the Linear Power signal, all of them leading to apparent power levels which are higher than actual, except for the brief, slight under-reading at start-up. However, for sustained operations and for normal operations near the average rated power, the gamma-ray sensing syster offers an absolute power measare which will be relatively unperturbed by core loading or n (,) configuration changes. In a system where thermodynamic power calibration is not practical, these latter advantages outweigh the errors in short-term transient response. Figure 4.11 she*te the respanse that would be observed on the log gamma channel, under the maximum error conditions of 2% of the 100w steady state value, as true power increases on a stable period of 5 sec. < The error in che indicated power oecomes lens significant as true power icvel increases and is within 4% of true power by 50 watts. Since indicated power is higher than true power, the error is conservative. The period indication from this channel will also contain a significant error initially because it indicates the rate of change of indicated power. Again this error becomes less significant as the power 7_ level increases, and the indicated period is within 2% of the actuni h kj period by a power level of 50w. 57
'wJ 10 L Indicated ?ower * *
- 10
V*1 True Power (ws t])
W . 2% Maximum Error
\.
1-v l l ,m. . b) 10 _1, 10 20 30 40 50 60 Time (see) Figure 4.11 Log Cam:na Channel Response 58
i 4 O s. Aux i iar srsrtas The only auxiliary system associated with the operation of the CAVALIER are the water cleanup and building ventilation systems. Also discussed in this chapter will be the various communication systems I available to the CAVALIER operation. 5.1 Water Cleanup System i A mixed-bed deionizer, employing throw away resins, is used to keep , the water in the CAVALIER tank at conductivity of less than 5 x 10-6 , mhos/cm. The Moderator Tank water is continuously pumped through the - deionizer at about 5 gpm. Demineralized water to fill and make-up the ; t Tank will be taken from the large, regenerateable demineralizer which ! serves the UVAR. Discharged resin from the CAVALIER demineralizer is ,
-s considered as potentially radioactive and is monitored to determine if
. ) it shall be disposed of as hot or normal waste. The conductivity and pH '
'of tank water is periodically measured and the water periodically )
assayed for radioactivity. ; 5.2 ventilation The building heating and air conditioning system supplies air to the Student Laboratory, in which the CAVALIER is located. There is no return air system, as Student Lab air is forced into adjoining room and spaces. The CAVALIER operating procedures provide that doors to the Student Lab will be normally closed during reactor operations, but may be opened I momentarily for personnel entrance or egress. Further, the gamma-ray ; monitor above the Moderator Tank has an output so that a scram signal i l(})- resulting from high radiation at this point also trips off the supply air blower to the room and closes a damper in the air supply line. - 59
() The provis cas of the above paragraph are intended to provide for the partial isolation and retention of radioactive materials in the Student Laboratory in the event of an incident. 5.3 Communication The following means of communication will be provided within the Student Laboratory area: An outside telephone; building loudspeaker microphone, building intercom master station, and a building evacuation alarm initiation button and horn. There are two exits from the Student Lab which lead to other portions of the building (see Fig. 2.1).
- 6. Operations and Experimental Program 6.1 Introduction-The CAVALIER is operated primarily as a training and educational reactor. The operations and experiments performed fall into three basic categories.
- 1) Operator training and laboratory experiments using only installed equipment and instrumentation. Examples of activities performed in this category are formal instruction in reactor operations under the direct supervision of a licensed operator and performance of Nuclear Engineering Laboratory course experiments such as approach to criticality and control rod calibration. .
I
- 2) Laboratory experiments and research projects designed to measure reactor paraceters using equipment and instrumentation in addition to I
that installed. Examples of activities in this area are reactor flux and power mapping and reactivity effects.
- 3) Laboratory experiments and research projects using the reactor for
( }. the irradiation of materials. An example of this type of experi-60
ment would be neutron activation analysis of samples for elements with extremely short half lives. The design of the CAVALIER system and the operating limits imposed by Section 3.2 naturally limit experiments to those not requiring high neutron fluxes or long irradiation times. 6.2 Experimental Facilities The experimental facilities in the CAVALIER system consist of irradiation baskets which may be inserted into the reactor grid plate as shown in Figure 3.5. Provisions are also made for a hydraulic or pneumatic rabbit that can be mounted into the grid plate. there are no penetrations in the Moderator Tank for experimental facilities. 6.3 _ Analysis of Experimental Program Operations and experiments falling into the first category listed () in Section 6.1 involve normal operation of the CAVALIER system and the analyses given in Chapter 9 apply. Activities performed under the i second or third categories require the insertion of equipment or instrumentation into the core area and, therefore, require further , analysis. l The safety oriented considerations applicable to the activities covered by the experimental program are reactivity effects, mechanical stress effects, and material content of the experiments performed. Thermal-hydraulic effects are not significant due to the low power limitations of the CAVALIER system. 6.3.1 Reactivity Effects The limiting period necessary to prevent reactor power from exceeding the 100 W safety limit during the 0.8 second rod drop time is O O 0.166 seconds (see Section 9.3). The reactivity needed to cause such a 61
period is 0.8% AK/K. The reactivity worth of experiments is limited in value to prevent the addition of this amount of reactivity. The reactivity worth of movable experiments is limited to amounts which can be compensated for by manual rod motion. The total worth of all experiments is limited to less than 1.6% AK/k which is consistent with the maximum excess reactivity limitation specified in Section 3.2.4. While the simultaneous failure of all experiments in the reactor is considered highly unlikely, the results of such an occurrence is analyzed in Section 9.4 uid it is shown that resulting doses to unrestricted areas are within the limits of 10 CFR 20 averaged over one year.
'6.3.2 Mechanical Stress Effects Mechanical stress effects will be limited by designing (V3- experiments so that the structural support is provided completely by the grid plate and the channel steel support network on top of the moderator tank. Under no circumstance will the fuel' elements or control rod l drives be used in the structural support system of an experiment.
The stored mechanical energy within an expericent will be limited by limiting the pressure buildup to a maximum of 200 psi, designing l experiments to withstand pressures a factor of two greater than the f maximum expected, and requiring prototype testing of all experiments for-which pressure buildup is expected. The results of a fuel clad failure due to mechanical stress affects g would be less severe than the fission product release analyzed in Section 9.4.'4. 6:3.3 Material Content of Experiments The material content of experiments is significant for several reasons. High cross section materials will have a reactivity effect 62
which must be considered and limited as discussed in Section 6.3.1; radioactive materials present a potential radiological hazard; and highly reactive or corrosive chemicals present a threat to the fuel clad integrity. The low thermal neutron flux (1.1x10 neut/cm -sec @ 100W) and the limitation on integrated power (240 watt-hr/ day) limit the radiological hazard associated with the irradiation of materials in the CAVALIER system. As an example consider the irradiation of an air sample for 2.4 hours at a 100 W power level. At the completion of the experiment the Ar-41 concentration in the air sample is 3.1x10- pCi/cm . An experimental failure resulting in the release of one liter of air at j this concentration to the student laboratory (1.8x10 8cm volume) 3 would s result in'a concentration after mixing of 1.73x10-8 Ci/cm3 of Ar-41 which is below the 10 CFR 20 limit of 4x10 -8 pCi/cm3 for unrestricted areas.
-The radioactive material content of all experiments will be limited i
as.follows. For singly encapsulated experiments the radioactive material present shall be limited to that amount which if released will result in doses no greater than 10% of the equivalent annual doses stated in 10 CFR 20 for persons in unrestricted areas continuously for j two hours after time of release or for persons in restricted areas during the length of time required to evacuate the restricted area. The radioactive material content of a doubly encapsulated or vented experiment will be limited to that amount which if released would result in doses of less than 0.5 rem to the whole body or 1.5 rem to the thyroid of persons occupying an unrestricted area continuously for two hours af ter release or less than 5 rem to the whole body or 30 rem to the thyroid of persons occupying a restricted area during the length of 63
.() time required to evacuate the r.estricted area.
Highly reactive or explosive chemicals, cryogenic liquids, unknown materials with the exception of trace materials will not be placed within the reactor core or moderator tank. Chemicals which are highly corrosive to aluminum must be doubly encapsulated prior to insertion into the reactor core or moderator tank. Such chemicals include mercury, alkalies, chlorinated solvents, and anhydrous ethyl, propyl, or butyl alcohols.(1) The results of a fuel clad failure due to the corrosive effects of these chemicals would be less severe than the fission product release analyzed in Section 9.4.4. 6.4 Administrative Controls of Experiments All previously untried experiments will be reviewed and approved by O the Reactor Safety Committee. This review will assure that all experiments are within the limitations of regulatory criteria, technical specifications, and approved oper'ating procedures. Experiments will be conducted with the explicit approval and under supervision of the Licensed Senior Operator in charge of reactor operations. The Licensed Senior Operator must determine that the persons conducting the experiment have sufficient knowledge and training to conduct the experiment safely. l All experimental equipment will be inspected by the Senior Operator in charge to determine that the equipment meets the design requirements and limitations imposed by the Reactor Safety Committee and the approved operating procedures for the reactor. O
~
64
q 7.0 HEALTH PHYSICS
\_/
7.1 General Information
- l The Reactor Facility is a research tool of the University and as s i
such, subject to use by all of its schools. It is the responsibility of , the operations staff and the Health Physicist to provide and maintain full use of this tool, yet prevent undue risks and hazards to the ! individual workers, the University, and the Community at large. , The Health Physicist is responsible for assuring that those measures and regulations pertaining to the Health Physics aspects of the Reactor and its operation are carried out and maintained. The Director of the Reactor Facility is advised by the Health Physicist in all pertinent matters. The close association but independence of the Health Physics i and Reactor Facility operations has worked well at other reactor () installations, and the University has patterned its brganization , accordingly. ' 7.2 Education in Health Physics It shall be the duty of the Health Physics Office to instruct all , personnel about the risks and hazards of radiation, and the means of lessening this danger to themselves and others. This shall be done as follows: L (A) Each individual will be given an indoctrination lecture about 1 Health Physics, followed by a question and answer period, so that the biologic aspects and the genetic aspects of radiation change are , understood. (B) On-the-spot lectures will be given during a particular phase of operations to emphasize the protection aspectp of Health Physics. 65 ,
.,.m.- -.
.--y-. ~, .----y..._ , _ , , -
'~ /N (C) Pre-experiment evaluation of the hazards of a particular O
experiment will be determined by the individual proposing the experiment and the Health Physicist. (D) A radiation log will be prepared for each " permanent" worker at the facility. In this log will be recorded all the monthly dose data. 7.3 Personnel Monitoring and Protection The Health Physicist is charged with the procurement and maintenance of the detection equipment and the film badges for personnel exposure monitoring. Film badges: These will be used for monthly checking of personnel gamma and/or neutron dose. This will be through a commercial supplier. Pocket chambers: Direct reading - will be worn by personnel working in high radiation areas. Finger badges - will be worn by personnel handling radioactive material who could receive 25% of MPC extremity dose as specified in 10 CFR Part 20. Street clothes will be worn by the majority of workers at the facility; however, if there is a possibility that contamination with resultant spread could occur, protective and/or disposable clothing will be provided and worn. 7.4 Permanent Monitoring and Surveys Stationary radiation monitors associated with CAVALIER operations are mounted in the following areas:
- 1) At the top of the Moderator Tank.
- 2) In the Reactor Pit, outside of the concrete shield wall.
- 3) Near the Reactor Control Console.
The readings of these monitors are displayed individually on the CAVALIER instrument console. The existence of radiation in any of these 66 l.
() areas causes an audible alarm to sound at the console. Initiation of
- the Moderator Tank monitor alarm scrams the reactor.
i In addition, numerous portable instruments are available for surveying all areas in the facility. I Calibration of these instruments are on a regular basis established by the Health Physicist. The results of each calibration are recorded and maintained as a permanent record. ; i I The initial run of any new type experiment or the use of radioactive materials will be extensively monitored and a permanent { record maintained of the results, if the work is such that the Health l Physicist determines a possible radiological hazard to personnel exists. i f Surveys of the facility with protable apparatus will be made at random as well as sampling of air, smears on tables, walls, and work (;)
~ ' areas on a regular basis established by the Health Physicist. These I will be considered as spot surveys and will be recorded.
7.5 Prohibitions and Sanctions The Reactor Safety Committee and Director are responsible for regulating and enforcing the various regulations necessary to run the f acility. The Health Physicist will report to these persons on ; irregularities and recommend necessary steps for correction, and the Director will decide the disciplinary action; however, if it is apparent to the Health Physicist that emergency orders are necessary, he may ; order the necessary steps to be taken as his own responsibility. Certain areas will be designated as "No Smoking Areas," and safe areas for eating and drinking when deemed necessary by the Health
-(} Physicist.
67 , I
- m. .,, . _ , , . . ._m, _- . . _ ,--,,_,_,_m-. , , . -,,y~- - , , ,--, ,_,%.,.. _ . , . , , , _ , , , - . . . ,
(3 (_) As Part of its ALARA Program the University has established a whole body personnel dose investigation limit of 0.125 rem / quarter which is 10% of the limits in 10CFR, Part 20. If any individual receives a radiation dose in excess of these limits as determined by ionization chambers, film badges, or any other methods, the Health Physicist will notify the Facility Director. The Health Physicist will provide information concerning the amount and type of exposure and recommend actions that should be taken by the individual to avoid future, similar exposures. 7.6 Waste Disposal The Health Physicist will check on all waste and refuse, monitoring it Frior to release to disposal areas. s Water and sewage: This system will be separate and not connected to the water drainage systems that may be used to remove radioactive material. Dry litter and waste will be stored until it has decayed to safe levels or disposed of in sealed storage bins. No material may be released without the approval of the Health Physicist. Liquid Waste: The CAVALIER demineralizer is a non-regenerable type and therefore there is no liquid waste from this system. If the water in the CAVALIER tank has to be drained it will be sampled and analyzed for specific activity and released directly to the pond. The water released from the pond is sampled at the beginning, during, and at the end of each release and the results of these samples will be maintained in a permanent record by the health physicist. No O 68
-( ) waste is released with an active concentration in excess of lx10-microcuries per milliliter. This limit is based on 10 CFR Part 20 limits for facilities with no iodine 129 or radium present.
7.7 Shipping and Transport Intradepartmental shipments of radioactive materials: Insofar as possible, all radioactive material will be used at the reactor site. However, when it is necessary to ship material from the reactor to one of the schools on campus, the regulations governing shipments of radioactive material as outlined in 10 CFR Part 71 will be followed. Radioactive material will not be allowed to leave the reactor site unless the recipient is properly licensed under NRC regulations. Intrastate shipments: Should it be necessary to ship radioactive > material to areas other than the immediate campus arec, 10 CFR Part 71 O will be followed. , 8.0 ADMINISTRATION 8.1 General Organization The organization of the University of Virginia as related to ensuring the safe use of radioactive materials is shown in Figure 8.1. This organization consists of ts , major committees; the University Radiation Safety Committee and the Reactor Safety Committee. The Radiation Safety Committee is appointed by the President of the University and must approve the possession and use of radioactive materials at the University with the exception of those associated with the Reactor Facility. Production, possession and usage of radioactive materials at the reactor come under the reactor license and are reviewed i
~T by the Reactor Safety Committee. However, if a radioisotope is made in (V
i 69 L i
O O O . i l
- PPESIDENT I I REACTOR SAFETY RADIATION SAFEW cotHITTEE COPHITTEE i
EDICAL ISOTOPE l i stb-COM41TTEE 8
. . l.
l 1 RADIATION SAFELY - -r 0FFICER, LNIVERSITY .. i l l LNIVERSITY EDICAL SCHOOL 1 HEALTH PHYSICS EAL111 PHYSICS i i i i i FIGlRE .8-1 RADIATION-SAFE 1Y ORGANIZATION AT TIE LNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA I I i I - i _ _ - . - . .
t () the reactor for use outside the Reactor Facility its possession and use ; must be approved by the Radiation Safety Committee. , 8.2 Reactor Safety Committee The UVAR reactor is operated under NRC License R-66 granted in 1960. As required by the license, a Reactor Safety Committee was appointed at the time. The Committee is also responsible for the safety of operations of the CAVALIER. The organization within the University ; is shown in Fig. 8-1 and the organization of the Reactor Facility is shown in Fig. 8-2. As a minimum, the Reactor Safety Committee is composed of at least five members and includes the Radiation Safety Officer, a member of the organizational structure responsible for reactor operations and an ,_s individual from outside the department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics. Senior members of the Reactor staff attend connittee meetings in an advisory capacity, but there is only one vote by the Reactor Staff. This is to prevent domination of the Committee by members of the operating organization of the reactor. The Committee reviews and approves all experiments that affect the safety of the reactor. These include critical experiments, as well as experiments in which the reactor is used as a source of radiation. There are written reactor-operating procedures and written emergency procedures approved by the Committee. Although the Reactor Safety Committee has the authority to question procedures relating to exposure of personnel to radiation, the immediate responsibility for corpliance with Title 10, Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, rests with the Reactor Staff and, in particular, () ss ~ with the Health Physicist. All personnel, including students who work routinely at the Reactor Facility, wear film badges. Occasional _-. 73. -
O O O . i PRES 10ENT OF THE t UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA e.
' DEAN, SCHOOL OF i RADIATION S AFETY ENGINEERING AND d
COMMITTEE ' APPLIED SCIENCE I i RE T FETY , . " ' ' - - - CHAIRMAN EPARTMENT i OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING [
- I l0 L__________,
i 1 i RADIATIOri SAFETY LEVEL 2 i ! OFFICER OR =~~~~~~~-----------a' REACTOR FACIUTY HEALTH PHYSICIST DIRECTOR l i LEVEL 3 REACTOR SUPERVISOR i l CHANilELS OF RESPONSIBluTY REACTOR OPERATORS AND STAFF
-----_ CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION i
I Figure 8-2 Organizational structure of UVA relating 'to reactor facility l
{} visitors are issued pocket dosimeters. For large groups of visitors, two pocket dosimeters are worn by the staff member acting as a guide. This permits tours to be conducted without issuing large numbers of individual pocket dosimeters. It also should be emphasized that, although the Reactor Safety Committee approves the safety of all operations and experiments, the detailed routine enforcement of reactor safety is the responsibility of the operating staff. The reactor log book and all other records are open for inspection by the Reactor Safety Committee. These records, ' t plus all the records of the activities of the Safety Committee, are open for inspection by the representative from the NRC Division of Compliance. An annual report is submitted to the NRC Division of Regulation listing any changes to the facility and describing cny minor (+ \ incidents pertinent to safety. Major incidents are reported immediately, as required in the Technical Specifications. 8.3 Procedures
- The reactor is operated in accordance with written procedures l established under the approval of the Reactor Safety Committee. These procedures include normal startup, operation and shutdown of the reactor as well as emergency procedures and special procedures for unusual operations. General procedures for the headling of experiments are promulgated but these are supplemented by special procedures which apply only to the experiment under consideration in light of the facts surrounding that experiment.
All procedures concerning the operation of the reactor and g- associated experiments must have the approval of the Reactor Safety V Committee and may be changed only by their authorization. However, in 73
(} the final analysis, the safe operation of the. reactor is dependent upon the Reactor Staff and their exercise of good judgement. 9.0 SAFETY ANALYSIS 9.1 Introduction Inasmuch as the maximum power level of CAVALIER is far below that which would give rise to core melting in the event of a loss-of-coolant accident, the principal accident mode for the system is a reactivity excursion. Several types of excursions are discussed below, and the hazards associated with them determined. Also, the radiation hazard to CAVALIER operators and persons in the adjacent spaces are determined, for the loss-of-shielding (water) accident and for various excursions. 9.2 Loss of Moderator Tank Water A loss of water from the' Moderator Tank, though not serious from the standpoint of core melting, would result in high radiation levels above the Tank, and in the laboratory on the mezzanine floor above CAVALIER. Calculations have been performed to obtain upper limit values of dose rates under such circumstances. Also, since fuel elements must be handled after their use in CAVALIER, calculations have been performed to determine the dose rate from individual fuel elements. In the - analytical model used, no credit for air shielding, self-shielding by the fuel elements themselves, or in the case of the laboratory above, shielding by the floor. The results of these calculations are presented in Table 9.1, for several combinations of power history and wait time. The results shown in Table 9-1 indicate that while the initial dose rates above the core are high, after a loss-of-water accident, they would not lead to significant exposes, and that they decrease rapidly 74
. . .a - . ._ T '
.._.c___.._w - '
-o,
- 0 &q
( r
- TABLE 9-1 DOSE RATES FROM SHUTDOWN CORE AND FUEL ELEMENTS
- Fission Product Heactor Time Dose Rate at Distance Shown, R/hr i Source and Power After Model Geometry History Shutdown 150 cm 220 cm* 550 cm**
i REACTOR CORE 100 hr-at 10 watts 17 min (103 see) 2.4 1.2 0.18 li AS A 100 hr-at 10 watts 28 hr (10' see) 0.3 0.15 0.025 u 17 min (103 see) POINT SOURCE 1 hr -at 100 watts 95 k.6 0.7 ' 1 hr-at 100 watts 28 hr (10' see) 0.09 0.046 0.006 1 3 AN AVERAGE J0O hr-at 10 watts 17 min (10 see) 0.14 1 FUEL ELEMENT 100 hr-at 10 watts 28 hr (10 see) 0.018 AS 1 1 hr-at 100 watts 17 min (10 see) 0 56 LINE SOURCE 1 hr-at 100 watts 28 hr (10' see) 0.005 ' I 4
- Top of Tank
; ** Ceiling of Student Lab i
5,
with time. Also, the dose rates associated with handling fuel elements after operation are seen to be quite low, if an adequate waiting time (.1 day) is allowed pr1or to fuel handling, af ter operations. In a separate calculation, in which the shielding effects of the Mezzanine Level floor are accounted for, the 24-hour integrated dose in the Mezzanine Level laboratory directly above CAVALIER was determined.
.The floor, an 8-inch prestressed concrete slab, with a 2-inch topping
~
was taken to be equivalent to 5-inches of ordinary concrete. These results are presented in Table 9-2. Again, the resulting doses are not excessive, and for the rather conservative conditions assumed, in no case exceeds the 500 mR yearly dose limit of 10 CFR-20. 9.3 Transient Analysis of Ramp Reactivity Insertion The range of response for the log power channel shown in Figure 4.9 O is suite censervetive. This cemeensated ien chamber v111 resec>d at
. source level. However, for this analysis, it is assumed that the log-power channel is on scale and will respond and initiate a scram at 10 -3 of the safety limit or at 0.1 watts.- Again it is conservatively assumed that the rods must drop all the way and it takes 0.8 seconds to terminate the power rise after the period scram is initiated at 0.1 watts.- The limiting period is found from 2 100 3 p = 0.1 " ""U
- 1 or T = 0.116 see A positive reactivity of 0.8% would be required to place the reactor on such a period.
76
t
.i. .
[ . P
'i
] 1 TABLE 9-2 ;
l
'l J T'IENTY-FOUR HOUR INTEGRATED DOSES.IN THE NEZZANINE LAB !
- 1 ,
t i CAVALIER Power History ;
;j Prior to Loss of Integrated .
~. 1 Water Dose R t s
, 1000 hours at 10 watts 0.32 j 1 hour at 100 watts 0.26 ;
- g ;
- ,4 :
.A 2 hours at 100 watts 0.43 '
%Os n1 .9 1 In the calculations for Tables 9-1 and 9-2, the 7-Group, i time dependent, fission product gamma-ray data of Perkins and 7)l .
- !i Kingwereused.[63 l
'. .) ; i
, t A f '. i
.e t y , i] m . r A ~ *j . i
- i ll h s.'.)
77
*.,e-- ,- _,e. . _ _ . - - -_,--.p.__----- _ . -.%--, , . - -y%.g4 %-7 my,.99 , ,y,. , , , ,, ,,wr.,-p--.e g. . - - ,--ge-- 9
An analysis was run to determine the effects of~a ranp insertion (} from below the sensitive range of log power channel. Since criticality l
~
-is expected to occur at approximately 10 watts, the ramp insertion was I
commenced there. The average reactivity addition rate for this analysis
-4 was 1.075 x 10 AK/K/sec.
The results of the analysis are chown in Figure 9.1. Power level reaches the sensitive range of the log power channel in approximately 42.5 sec. The period at this time is about 4 sec. resulting in an ; immediate scram. Assuming it takes 0.8 sec. to terminate the transient with the rods, the peak power is 0.14 watts. The total reactivity addition at the time of the scram is 0.45% which is well below the t limiting value given above. . With the minimum sensitivity of 0.1 watts and the period scram i g 5J setpoint of 5 sec., the log power channel is effective in terminating the transient well before the 100w safety limit is reached even for 4 transients starting in the source range. 9.3.1 Ramp Reactivity Insertions The most probeble Corm of power excursion for a system like the CAVALIER is that resulting from a ramp-like insertion of reactivity due to a rod, or rods, being inadvertently withdrawn from the core. Since normally such transients would be terminated by period and level trips, calculations were done assuming failure of level trip signals. The results of the reactivity transients are evaluated in terms of the , radiation dose at the top of the Moderator Tank, and as can be seen from Table 9-3, the consequences of the transients analyzed are negligible. l rs No reactor damage would be expected at the peak power reached, 2.2 ' d kilowatts. 78
i I
. < s.
j v i i I I 1 -- i I I I I I I I
/
I
~
10 . Power
, )
~
10 e e') t_/ -2 - 10 ' 10 20 30 40 50 0 Time (seci Figure 9.1 Ramp losertion Rate of 1 X 10-4 AK/K/Sec. 79
The analysis was performed assuming the reactor was at 100 watts when the transient began. Ramp insertion rates were calculated assu:ning one rod to be worth 3 percent and having a withdrawal rate of 3.74 in/ min. Although a rod is approximately 27-inches long, only 24-inches is inserted in the core. For conservatism, it was assumed that the first 5-inches of a withdrawn rod has essentially no worth due to the differential rod worth. Under these assumptions, the constant withdrawal of one rod represents a ramp insertion rate of about 10
-4
/sec. If two rods were constantly withdrawn, the ramp rate is 2x10 -4
/sec.
Calculations were made for ramp insertions of 1x10 '
~
/sec,
-4 and 2x10 /sec, and the resulting reactor power profiles shown in Fig. 9.2. For the smaller ramp, the power reaches 2200 watts before the U
5-second period scram. In the second case, the period reaches 5-seconds at 550 watts. By integrating the curves, the total integrated power released during these transients was determined. From this, the dose at the top of the Moderator Tank was calculated for each case, and results are shown in Table 9-3. 9.4 Large Reactivity Excursions As shown in the proceeding sections, there is no significant hazard associated with a loss of water, or with reasonable rates of ramp-reactivity insertion. In this.section a limiting case of large step insertion of reactivity will be evaluated for the CAVALIER system. As a result of the excess reactivity limit of 1.6 percent ak/k, and the CAVALIER design features which preclude the addition of reactivity by dropping elements into or along side the core, the maximum amount of excess reactivity that could possibly be inserted as a step would be 80
l 100-t l El TABLE 9-3 f. e
; DOSE FROM RAMP INSERTIONS :
~
Ramp Insertion 1x10" #N 2x10
# I* I see see Initial Power 100 watt 100 watt i
Peak Power 2200 watt 550 watt r
.n d11 Integrated Power 0.02 Nyt-sec 0.004 Nwt-see
, si .
- 1 i e
' ,! Dose 1.1 mrad 0.22 mrad
~,
() J t
- Dose calculated assuming 0.36 Nwt-sec equals 20 mrad at .the top of
/* the Moderator Tank.
T [ I j
.1
.; )
e 4 i 1 6
~
Q. .
. 81
I ()T 1.6 percent Ak/k or $1 super prompt (for 8,gg = 0.008). Information gained in the SPERT, reactor transient, tests indicate that such an addition of excess reactivity would produce a nuclear excursion having a total energy release about 10 MW-sec (9,500 Btu). In this section a justification for using SPERT results is presented and the consequences of a 10 MW-sec nuclear excursion are analyzed. - -
-c,, ,. r- 8 9.4.1 Equivalence of CAVALIER and SPERT-1 Cores .
The SPERT-1 Test Series, Runs 22-54, were made using plate type, U-Al alloy fuel elements which were quite similar to the fuel elements of CAVALIER and UVAR. In Table 9-4, a comparison of several parameters of the elements which make up the two reactors is made. Also a calculation has been made of the total energy release from CAVALIER r km) (UVAR) using an experimentally determined prompt, negative feedback
-5 J
coefficient of -2.710 Ak/k/ F (7,8) . The calculated value of energy I release was 23 MW-see for a $20/sec assembly rate, which corresponds to ' an experimentally determined value of 31 MW-sec for an equivalent , t reactivity insertion to SPERT (a = 313 sec-1) , i L TABLE 9-4 f CAVALIER-SPERT FUEL ELEMENT COMPARISON CAVALIER SPERT Parameter (UVAR) Du 12/25 Core i Fuel Plates per Element 12 12 , l Uranium Enrichment >90% >90% Clad-Meat-Clad, Dimension, mils 15-20-15 20-20-20 () Between-Plate Watergap, mils 211 179 Fuel Material U-Al U-Al j 82
( .] 9.4.2 Energy Release Considerations The SPERT tests for excursions having energy releases in the range cf 10 MW-see showed some fuel plate buckling and rippling that might be deleterious to continued use of the fuel, but there was no melting or fission product release apparent. In modeling to estimate the effects of a 10 MW-sec release from CAVALIER it has been conservatively assumed that 60 percent of the energy is produced in the central region of the core, making up one third of the total fuel and water volume. Under this assumption, the energy release first will cause temperature of the metallic fuel (~30 lbs. A1) in the central region to rise adiabatically to about 1000 F, well below the aluminum melting point of 1220 F. The heat in the central portion of the core will then be transferred to the adjacent water. Assuming no water flow during this heat addition process, the water at the center (~30 lbs.) will be raised to the boiling temperature, and enough energy will remain to produce about 2.4 pounds of steam. The local pressures initially associated with the steam formation will be high, but will quickly be relieved by condensation and coolant expansion and, according to the SPERT data, cause little fuel damage. This amount of steam, at atmospheric pressure would occupy 65 ft 3 . The area in which the reactor 3 will be located has a volume of about 6500 ft , thus the maximun pressure rise due to steam formation and release would be 0.01 atm. 9.4.3 Direct Radiation to Operators During Excursion During the peak flux portions of a reactivity excursion, the Moderator Tank water would still be in place, providing shielding to 83
-l Ih d operators of the CAVALIER. The total radiation dose at the top of the tank for a 10 MW-see can be determined by relating steady state operations to this energy release. The dose rate at the top of the tank is 20 mR/hr for a reactor power level of 100 watts, and thus and hour's -
worth of operation (3.6x10-1 MW-sec) yields an integrated dose of 20 mR. ; A 10 MW-see power pulse would then deliver 28 times as much radiation, i i for a total dose of .600 mR, at the tank top. The integrated dose would ; be about one fourth of this at the operator's position. 9.4.4 Fission Product Release r The SPERT results showed that for excursions of the order of 10 ! MW-see there was no release of fission products. However, in order to obtain a complete assessment of the hazards potential related to the ; i operation of the CAVALIER, calculations have been performed to determine ' t,_T
~' ~
exclusion area doses as a result of fission product releases, making the following grossly conservative aesumptions; s Reactor History: 2-years at 10 watts, plus a' 10 MW-sec excursion
- Fraction'of Fission: Products Airborne: i
-50% iodine isotopes, l 100% noble gas isotopes,>
1% solid fission products. The inventory of airborne radioisotopes present in the Student Laboratory immediately after their release is given in Table 9-5. The fourthcN1umnoftheTableshowstheisotopeinventoryassociatedwith long-term operation at 10 watts, and the fifth column the total gj' < inventory, long-term plus those isotopes produced in a 10 MW-sec excursion. Note that the 10 MW-sec excursion yields by far the greatest t l s 84 r
, , y- _. .- p g_, , - __ye... _ _ , __ , - . _ , , . . v, .- s .~ m --.,
.. .. . --- - - .- -. ~
3 .7-
,j. '
' ~
. - . :.l = * '..i w * ' h ..;;w.. ;a _
.. u =- -
~
~
, G -
O 4 2 vanr.m 9_5 AIRBORNE RADIOISOTOPE INVENTORIES Long Term Total Inventory, Gamma Ray 10-Watt Long Tem + 10 Mv-sec. ; j Isotope Half-Life Deegy Energr, Inventory Initial 2-hr. Avg. MeV Ci Ci Ci I-131 8.1 a 0.4 0.14 0.27 0.27 I-132 2.3 h 2.2 0.19 16.0 12.0 t l I-133 21.0 h 5.2 0.29 2.8 2.8 l @ I-134 53.0 m 2.k O.36 74.0 39.0 ' l I-135 6.7 h 1.6 0.26 77 6.9 i I Xe-133M 2.3 a 0.23 0.01k c.32 0.32 Xe-133 5.27 a 0.081 0.57 1.1 1.1
- Xe-135M 15.0 m 0.53 0.16 115.0 22.0 ;
i Xe-135 9.2 h 0.24 0.54 12.0 11.0 Xe-138 17.0 m 0.9 - 0.1.8 324.0 72.0 1 i Kr-83M 1.86 h 0.0h1 0.049 '4.9 3. 5, , Kr-85M 4.4 h 0.18 0.11 7.3 6.1 Kr-87 76.0 :n 1.1 0.22 32.0 20.0 ! Kr-88 2.8 h 1.9 0.30 22.0 16.0 4 solids 47 0.39 73.0 30.0 i'
. - . _ . . . . - . . _ . . - _ _ - - . . . . . . _ _ . - _ - . -. . _ - _ . , . _ . . - - , , . . . . . - ~ . . . . . - - . - ~ . . . . . - _ ,.__ _ ._..--- .~, ....- _.. m..- .. . _ . , . _ , , . . , . , . . , . . , . _ _ - _ . . , -
~.
..\ -
~
16g. E i i 1 i
'...i. -
~
- s. .
! l i
i i - ji w t
- I 1
y . s 1 l i 4 1 x 10
-4 Ak
*.i
-/sec k
j 1o 3 _ _s
\, ,
, ; s (u, -.
n m C -
. 8 - ~
ac l r i... ;, . ,
-h*Ak 1
.' l 2 x 10 g/sec
- N , .
h
.1 -
1
, c -
I j
- l. s t .
.. s .
i - s
\
.w 10 # ' ~
l 0.000 10.000 20.000 30.000 40.000. 50'000.
' TIM (SEC)
Fig. 9.2 hamp Insertions Teminated by a Five' Sec Period Scram -
, 86
portion of the inventory. Also shown is the 2-hour average value inventory, which accounts for decay of the shorter-lived isotopes, and which was used to calculate 2-hour doses. Dose calculations were made using the conservative meteorology model of TID-14844 [9], a'nd a building wake factor ( , of 16.7 [10]. Thelatterassumesavalueofc=f,and the smallest possible building areas, that associated with the west end of the building, 105 m . The apparent building area looking from the south is about 600 m . A ground release, and ground receptor were postulated, and essentially all of the radioactive material was assumed to be released from the Student Laboratory in a period of two hours. The assumption is conservative and maximizes the 2-hour dose. A 40 meter exclusion distance (site boundary) was assumed. No 30-day doses are presented, but because of
.the short release time of material from the building, the 30-day and 2-hour doses at any position are nearly equal.
Radioiodine doses to the thyroid are calculated as in TID-14844. Whole body doses at the exclusion distance were determined by assuming a multiple line-source model for the plume. No air shielding was accounted for, and tihe dose point was taken to be at the center of a
-symmetric, elongated cloud.
A summary of the results of dose calculations is given in Table 9-6. The table indicates that the 2-hour doses at the site boundary are low, and are in fact within the limits of 10 CFR-20, averaged over a period of a year. The initial thyroid dose rates to persons in the Student Lab are high, but the whole body dose rates are not, and if
-persons in the area left immediately the consequences of an accident of this magnitude would not be sufficient to cause major physiological damage.
87
4 i [ 1 ; J:j TABLE 9-6 : a [ i} RADIOLOGICAL CONSEQUENCES OF AIRBORNE FISSION PRODUCTS
. 3;
,A ,
1
.d Condition Dose Rate or Dose
-I
.1
,1 2-Hour Doses at M M l
.! Site Boundary - Exclusion Distance: I
.{
.q Whole Body 0.093 rad ,
- ;) Thyroid, inhalation 0.230 rad j 1
..j Initial Dose Rate to Persons (h in the Student Laboratory:
i 3 , i
- Whole Body 2 rad / min 3
ji Thyroid, inhalation 350 rad / min
-]l
- )
2-Hour Dose to Persons in Laboratory , above CAVALIER after 10-Mw-See ! Excursion. Assumes at least 1-ft ! 1 of Water remains above core: i
.1 i
, l Whole Body s8 rad l
.] ;
er 1
.l -
l l] t 88
O 9.4.5 Discussion of Large Reactivity Excursion We have investigated the effects of a large reactivity excursion, and have pessimistically associated with the excursion a far greater-than expected release of airborne radioactivity. Our results indicate that the consequences of such an incident to persons off-site would be within the limits of 10-CFR-20. Under these conditions, the dose rates to persons actually in the Student Laboratory with the reactor would be high, but even these individuals, if they were to leave quickly, would not receive a medically significant exposure. This analysis has been presented to show that the hazards potential of the CAVALIER system, even under extreme conditions, is well within normally accepted limits for public safety. 9.4.6 Additional Shutdown Mechanism V 9.4.6.1 Background When the original application for a license to operate the I CAVALIER reactor was being reviewed (1974), the NRC staff proposed the following incredible situation. The maximum allowable excess reactivity (1.6% Ak/k) is suddenly added to the reactor and the entire safety system fails rendering the reactor incapable of being shut down. It was l pointed out that the shim rod magnet power is provided by two separate ' solid state relay units, each of which supplies two rods. All trip s ignals are supplied to the mixer driver-solid state relay chains, which in turn also send trip activation signals to each other. There are redundant safety channels which derive trip activation signals from reactor power and period. All safety system channels are tested prior to reactor operation and the shim rods are driven over most of their range during operation. Finally a frequent, if not normal mode of j 89
reactor shutdown is the intentional activation of one of the safety ' channels, resulting in a full' test of the trip system including rod
~
insertion. Under these conditions of reactor design and operation it i
. appears incredible that a failure mode could exist that would render the i
e . safety system inoperable. If no shim rod action is considered after the insertion of 1.6% Ak/k the reactor would eventually reach an operating l mode in the megawatt power range in which the excess reactivity would be '
- compensated for by moderator temperature and density effects. The l ultimate shutdown mechanism in this unrealistic situation would be by cumulative' temperature effect such as water loss by boiling.
The ; t radiation levels in the CAVALIER operating area and adjacent laboratory i areas would be in the order of 10 R/hr if the reactor were allowed to operate-at a power level sufficient to compensate for a 1.6% Ak/k () .r reactivity insertion. These levels are not so high as to preclude safe evacuation of the effected areas and possibly some remedial action. i i The decision was made, however, to install a new system capable of i L shutting down the reactor independent of the safety system. The system ) ' is known as the " Alternate Reactivity Insertion System" (ARIS). [ t 9.4.6.2 ARIS Description i The alternate reactivity insertion system consists of.a covered i tank with sight-glass, a manually operated 2 inch gate valve, a small-t I leak detection trap, and 2 inch = piping and fittings. The tank contains ; a solution of boric acid (H B0 3 J 3 and Borax (Na 2 407 10H2O). A 2 inch t pipe leads from the tank to the bottom of the CAVALIER moderator tank. J . A diagram of the system is shown in figure 9.3. An operator noting the~
' ' failure.to scram situation would open the valve allowing the borated !
{. solution to flow by gravity into the moderator tank. An amount of i 90 y = g w ww. -r-air -rv - -wy---.'m-w -&mv e-wv+--e-= ,p e w=wm-e =. ----=-e mee+--e----% -e---w=--,rw-+--------rw-v.--mmww m +- e e-+, ==~=% -ewev---
i i CEILING - ELEVATION 10 FT ABOVE FLOOR 7 i -
) ;
s ,
. g 4
/ l
.I AIR VENT '
i
-> 25 SIGHTGLASS GAL. :
TANK
, A '
d i FLANGED 2" PIPE " TEE" c) lT. 4'6" [ .
,' . LEAK DETECTION TRAP Y
A k 4,# [ 4 9.,*.[
- e. 4 4
.3 'A A *k<A4 rj Sh* 1' ** .4.-
,. is i A'i 4.'.A 'A 4 I
\\ \ \ \ \ \ \'
1.m]. g.
- .. . - 's 7)
MODERATOR FLOOR LEVEL TANK
\
?.a s N - sq ,
~ :j i -
( I i 1 .
\
i \ .
~ { .. . , N
'l t o \
1- \\. s, ., . \. s N. ., \ , y,y, , . 5
,y ,
~; * %
\
- FIGURE 9.3 ALTERNATE REACTIVITY INSERTION SYSTEM
>6
?
91
}- solution sufficient to overcome 1.6% Ak/k excess reactivity in the core would flow into the tank in less than one minute.
The small leak detection trap, in which any leakage through the normally closed valve would be noticeable before it could enter the moderator tank, is included to preclude reactivity changes in the CAVALIER system resulting from boron solution leaks that would not be noticed by inspection of the sight glass. Such leaks could cause inadvertent fluctuation with reactivity of the CAVALIER system. The boron solution contains 0.144 lbs./ gallon of boron, an amount ( that will remain in solution throughout a temperature range of 60 -85 F. l The CAVALIER control room is kept within the range. With this concentration a volume of 21.5 gallons of solution leads to a negative reactivity addition of 3.2% Ak/k when the solution is uniformly mixed O with the water in the moderator tank. The same reactivity addition will result from a volume of 24 gallons of solution at a concentration of O.129 lb./ gallon of boron which is considered the minimun requirement of the system. The ARIS tank normally contains 25 gallons of solution at a concentration of 0.144 lb./ gallon of boron. Introducing the poison at the bottom of the moderator tank would produce an even stronger negative reactivity effect in the core area immediately after system initiation. The system flow characteristics are based on a minimum gravity head in the tank of 4.6 feet (or 2 psi) above the top of the moderator tank. For a 2 inch line, taken as 200 feet long to account for pressure losses in the pipe run, bends, and other flow restrictions, the initial flow rate into the moderator tank from the boron tank (assuming the boron tank is 18 inches high) is 39 gallons / min., Thus the entire 25 gallon poison solution would flow into the moderator tank in well less than 2 92
b l r d i minutes, and an amount sufficient to add a negative reactivity greater f than 1.6% Ak/k will flow into the tank in less than 1 minute. ' i To reduce the likelihood of an inadvertent system initiation the i ARIS valve has a lock on the valve hand wheel which can be engaged when ! the reactor is shutdown and no licensed operator is present. The valve is unlocked prior to any reactor operation. i I I l 5 1 L l t i i l
't 9
6 O i h 93
C) U REFERENCI:S
- 1. Quarles, L.R. and W.P. Walker, "A Hazards Summary of the Proposed Research and Training Reactor," UVAR-3, submitted March 14, 1957 to USAEC-DRL.
- 2. Meem, J.L., "The University of Virginia Reactor, Description and Operation," UVAR-8, submitted Sept. 23, 1958 to USAEC-DRL.
- 3. Meem, J.L., " Revised Safety Analysis Report in Support of Ammendment to License R-66 for Two Megawatt Operation, University of Virginia Reactor," UVAR-18, Pt. I, submitted October 1970 to USAEC-DRL.
- 4. Egen, R.A., et al., " Hazards Summary Report for the VMR Critical Assembly Experiments," p. 20, BMI-1445, June 10, 1960.
- 5. Thompson, T.J. and J.G. Beckerly, "The Technology of Nuclear Reactor Safety, Vol I Reactor Physics and Control," pp. 683-684, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. (1964).
- 6. Perkins, J.F. and R.W. King, " Energy Release from the Decay of Fission Products," Nuc. Sci. Engr. 3_, 726 (1958).
- 7. Palabrica, R. DeJ., " Determination of the Temperature Coefficients n v of Reactivity of a Reactor by Analysis of its Response to a Ramp Input," unpublished Doctor Dissertation, University of Virginia (June, 1968).
- 8. Obeid, M. and A.C. Lapsley, " Determination of the Lumped Heat-Transfer and Reactivity Coefficients of a Research Reactor,"
, J. of Nuc. Energy, 3
_2,3_, pp. 191-181 (1969).
- 9. DiNunno, J.J., et al., " Calculations of the Distance Factors for Power and Test Reactor Sites," TID-14844, 1962.
- 10. Slade, D.H., Edt., " Meteorology and Atomic Energy, 1968," pp.
111-113, USAEC - TID-24190, July, 1968. O N) 94
~ -
--y 1982-83 Financial Report d[*I o
University of Virginia
, e . ,
i s- , a M { Financial Summary
~ Current Fund Revenues '1982-1983
,; Edu'cational and General $ 186,000,000 Hospital Operations 131,000,000 EAuxiliary and Independent Operations 31,000,000 Total $ 348,000,000 Current Fund Expenditures and Mandatory Transfers Educational and General - $ 177,000,000
. Hospital Operations 126,000,000 Auxiliary and Independent Operations 28,000,000
-Total $ 331,000,000 Fun'd Balances at June 30,1983 Current Funds -.
~ Unrestricted '$ 31,000,000
- Restricted 27,000,000 Loan Funds 15,000,000-Endowment and Similar Funds 226,000,000 Plant Funds' 328,000,000
.Tdtal. $ 627,000,000 1982-83 Tuition and Fees In-State Out-of-State i University Division ,
- Arts & Sciences - Undergraduate-
$1,350 $3,276 .
Graduate. 1,350 3,276- ) Graduate Business (MBA) 2,566 5,466 l Law 2,088 4,588 d
; Medicine 3,946 8,146 Hoom and Board 2,180 2,180 l
l l l g .
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA FINANCIAL REPORT 1982-83 October 21,1983 To the President and Board of Visitors of the University of Virginia: We are pleased to submit the annual financial report of the University of Virginia for the fiscal year ended June 30,1983. The financial statements are presented in conformance with the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants' Audit Guide for Colleges and Universities. The State Auditor of Public Accounts conducted the audit of the University for the fourth consecutive year.The Auditor's opinion on the financial statements appears on page 9. We again wish to acknowl. edge the contributions of the State Auditor and the University's Internal Audit department to the financial report. Respectfully submit'ed, Peter L. Munger Assistant Vice President for Finance 4 0 Al Ray C. nt, Jr. Vice President for Ilusiness and Finance i 1
Yar in Roviaw The University felt the impact of a depressed December 1981. Although 85% of the total goal was econ:my when the Commonwealth of Virginia cut reached by June 30,1983, certain goal areas were state appropriations previously budgeted for 1983 below target and will be emphasized during the operations. State appropriations to the University coming year. Division for educational and general programs w;re reduced ,by approximately $3.8 million or 5%.
, Plans for a $187 million replacement hospital At the same time,1983 state guidehnes required were unveiled during 1982-83. The project includes th:t ctudents pay a greater share of their cost of a new 445-bed facility and renovation of the exist-j educction. Of the 18% increase in tuition and fees ing facility to house an additional 218 beds. A chprges,11% was due to the shift in the amount vendor was selected during 1982-83 to provide new paid b,y students versus state appropriations and financial systems for the hospital with implementa-oth rincome. tion of patient accounting scheduled for the fall of l As of June 30,1983 the University had received 1983. Although a vendor was chosen for the patient
$76.7 million in gifts and pledges as part of a three- care portion of the HospitalInformation System, yrr $90 million capital campaign announced in contract negotiations had not begun by year-end.
ADMISSIONS STATISTICS . UNIVERSITY DIVISION 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 l Off:rs as a percentage of epplications (Fall Semester) Undergraduate 37.1% 39.6% 39.6% 39.2% 42.2% Graduate and First Professional 32.1% 34.2% 33.3% 37.9% 36.2% Enrollment as a percentage of offers (Fall Semester) i Undergraduate 61.1% 60.9% 61.0% 62.5% 58.9 % Graduate and First Professional 54.0 % 54.6% 53.4 % 53.9% 52.5% Demand for the University's academic pro- Enrollment in the University Division during grzms is evidenced by the accompanying admis- 1982-83 was slightly greater than the 16,400 enroll-sion ; statistics. Offers as a percent of applications, ment plan limit approved by the Board of Visitors. ct 37.1% and 32.1% for undergraduates and gradu-ctes respectively, were the lowest in five years. FALL ENROLLMENT (FTE) 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 University Division Undergraduate 11,486 11,261 11,098 11,062 10,838 First Professional 1,584 1,618 1,591 1,567 1,542 Graduate 3,621 3,513 3,513 3,430 3,360 Total 16,691 16,392 16,202 16,059 15,740 Continuing Education Division 1,713 1,984 1,785 1,835 1,663 Clinch Valley College 873 805 836 829 765 DEGREES AWARDED 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 Undergraduate 2,734 2,583 2,599 2,492 2,442 First Professional 491 521 486 490 490 Graduate 1,408 1,350 1,375 1,355 1,362 Total 4,633 4,454 4,460 4,337 4,294 2
I Financial Highlights
~
Current Funds EDUCATIONAL AND GENERAL Summary of Activity IIEVENUES 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 (in millions of dollars) Student Tuition and Fees 36.9 19.8 30.4 18.0 27.3 17.6 24.2 17.3 22.7 18.0 State Appropriations 77.3 41.6 72.0 42.5 67.2 43.3 59.2 42.2 54.6 43.3 Goverr: ment Grants & Contracts 37.4 20.1 39.3 23.2 40.5 26.1 36.1 ?.5.7 31.0 24.6 Private Gifts & Grants 16.2 8.7 12.1 7.1 9.3 6.0 8.2 5.9 7.4 5.9 Endowment Income 8.2 4.4 7.1 4.2 6.2 4.0 4.6 3.3 5.2 4.1 Sales and Services, Other 10.1 5.4 8.4 5.0 4.7 3.0 7.9 5.6 5.2 4.1 Total 186.1 100.0 169.3 100.0 155.2 100.0 140.2 100.0 126.1 100 9 EXPENDITUltES AND MANDATORY TRANSFERS (in millions of dollars) instruction 72.8 41.1 64.7 39.5 58.9 39.1 52.5 39.6 48.6 41.1 Research 31.2 17.6 28.8 17.6 26.2 17.4 22.8 17.2 19.6 16.6 Public Service 3.3 1.9 4.5 2.7 6.1 4.0 5.5 4.1 5.2 4.4 Academic Support 24.5 13.8 21.9 13.4 18.2 12.1 16.8 12.7 14.6 12.3 Student Services 7.3 4.1 6.8 4.1 5.9 3.9 5.0 3.8 4.7 4.0 Institutional Support 12.9 7.2 12.7 7.8 12.1 8.0 10.5 7.9 8.9 7.5 Operation & Maintenance of Plant 13.8 7.8 13.8 8.4 12.6 8.4 11.1 8.4 9.3 7.9 Scholarships & Fellowships 11.5 6.5 10.6 6.5 10.6 7.1 8.3 6.3 7.3 6.2 Total 177.3 100.0 163.8 100.0 150.6 100.0 132.5 100.0 118.2 100.0 Educational and general revenues and expendi- port and service declined. These two changes result tures are those which are directly or indirectly in from improved productivity in the support areas support of the University's primary program areas and a successful energy savings and physical ofinstruction, research and public service.The plant program. Research and financial aid expendi-chart above shows 1983 educational and general tures, as a percent of total, remained constant revenues exceeding expenditures by $8.8 million, between 1983 and 1982. The lack of external sup-representing a 60% increase over the previous year. port for public service has caused a continued Tuition and fees revenue increased by more decline in the amount expended for this program, than 21% while state appropriations increased by The University began recording accrued sick only 7%, which reflects the state plan for students and annual leave in 1982 to comply with the to pay a larger portion of their educational costs. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) The amount of educational and general revenue Statement No. 43. Only the increase in accrued from government grants and contracts declined for leave from 1982 is included in expenditures for the second consecutive year. The decrease was due 1983. primarily to a reduction in government support of public service programs. The University's use of private gifts and endowment income has grown by almost 100% during the past five years, demonstrat-ing the importance of private donations in support-ing the University's programs. Total educational and general expenditures for 1983 exceed 1982 hy 8.2%, the smallest increase in the past four years. The percentage of total expendi-tures for instruction was greater than last year while the percentage of total expenditures for sup. 3
SPONSORED PROGRAMS l l Awards (in millions of dollars) 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 Research 34.7 79.4 32.9 74.3 31.5 69.6 29.2 65.0 25.3 69.3 Tr;ining 3.8 8.7 3.1 7.0 4.5 9.9 5.4 12.0 4.5 12.3 Student Support 3.0 ' 6.9 3.5 7.9 3.9 8.6 3.9 8.7 1.0 2.8 Oth:r 2.2 5.0 4.8 10.8 5.4 11.9 6.4 14.3 5.7 15.6 Total 43.7 100.0 44.3 100.0 45.3 100.0 44.9 100.0 36.5 100.0 Sponsored Progtam awards, which are not University's development campaign and should included in revenues until expended, decreased by result in increased funding from private sources in 1% to $43.7 million in 1982-83. The dollar totals future years. include amounts awarded for both direct and indi- Awards for research were $34.7 million or 79.4% rect costs. A 4.2% decrease in federally-funded of the total, an increase of 5.5%. Awards for programs was partially offset by a 17.4% increase training programs in 1982-83 were $3.8 million, an in non-federal awards. Federal awards for 1982-83 increase of 23%. Approximately 47% of the dollar ctill accounted for 85% of total awards versus 87% value of awards were to the Medical Center, while for 1981-82. The University is actively seeking non- 24% and 16% were to the College of Arts and federal sources for research and training to offset Sciences and the School of Engineering and Ap-reduced federal expenditures for such sponsored plied Science, respectively. program activities. This effort perallels that of the AUXILIARY OPERATIONS Summary of Revenues and Expenses (in millions of dollars) '1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 REV EXP! REV EXP REV EXP REV EXP REV EXP Food Services 14.9 14.5 14.1 13.4 12.1 11.5 10.3 10.0 9.2 9.0 Residential Facilities 6.6 5.0 5.9 5.1 5.3 4.6 4.8 4.3 4.8 4.4 Athletics 4.2 3.6 3.9 3.6 2.9 2.8 2.7 2.3 1.8 2.0 Oth r(Hookstore, Student licalth) 9.4 8.1 < 8.3 7.3 7.6 6.6 7.6 6.5 6.0 5.2 Gross Activity 35.1 31.2 32.2 29.4 27,9 25.5 25.4 23.1 21.8 20.6 less Recoveries 5.0 5.0 4.8 4.8 3.8 3.8 4.1 4.1 3.7 3.7 Total 30.1 26.2 27.4 24.6 24.1 21.7 21.3 19.0 18.1 16.9 The activities included in auxiliary operations support services, such as a bakery and a meat c re self-supporting. The o,erations are an integral department. Students may enter a food contract part of the University ant. contribute directly to the plan or dine at one of several non-contract food residential and educational environment by deliver- service facilities. Among parking and transporta-ing essential services to students, faculty, staff, tion services are provision of some 10,000 spaces clumni and guests. Recoveries represent intra- for students, faculty, staff and visitors; registration university sales. of approximately 15,000 cars; and operation of a The University houses approximately 5,200 bus charter service, a motor pool and an 18-bus gt:_duate and undergraduate students in some 39 transportation system carrying more than 13,000 residential units, placing families and single stu. passengers each day. Other auxiliary activities d:nts in apartments and dormitories. Food service include intercollegiate athletics, student health ser-includes contract and cash operations, vending, vices and the bookstore. concessions, catering, specialty shops and central 4
IIOSPITALS Szmmary of Activity (in millions ordollars) l1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 Revenues 130.5 . 115.7 95.7 86.8 77.6 Expenditures 126.4 - 112.8 97.7 81.1 71.0 Revenues less expenditures 4.1 2.9 (2.0) 5.7 6.6 l 1 P:tient Days 208,900 4 200,800 201,200 207,500 219,400 1 The Main IIospital discharged 24,275 patients Room. This represented an increase of 16,994 visits during 1982-83, an increase of 1,911 discharges over the previous year, an increase of 18%. Emer-ov:r 1981-82. Total patient days, exclusive of nurser- gency Room visits decreased slightly, from 37,579 ics, were 191,638, an increase of 6% over the 1981-82 in 1981-82 to 37,139. total of 181,049. The average daily census The Blue Ridge Ilospital generated 17,323 increased from 496 in 1981-82 to 526 during 1982- patient days during the 1982-83 year, a decrease
- 83. Average length of stay decreased slightly dur- from the 19,830 patient days generated the prior ing 1982 83 to 8.4 days from 8.8 days in the year. Reflecting its changing role, Tuberculin pr:vious year. Reflecting its role as a comprehen- patient days dropped dramatically from 12,607 in cive teaching facility, the llospital discharged 1981-82 to 5,547 in 1982-83, a 56% drop. Geriatric /
17,577 patients who reside in areas other than Oncology and Medicine patient days for 1982-83 Charlottesville and Albemarle County and 2,316 of were 6,159, an increase of 4,548 patient days over thne patients were from other states. 1981-82. This trend is expected to continue into A total of 111,317 outpatient clinic visits were 1983-84 and should offset the loss in Tuberculin recorded in the llospital and Primary Care Center patient days. Clinica during 1982-83, excluding the Emergency Loan Funds S mmary of Student Loans Outstanding (in millions of dollars) U1982-83" 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 I$ %.. $ % $ % $ % $ % Federallean Programs i13.8 92.0: 13.1 93.0 12.4 93.2 11.5 93.5 9.4 86.2 Other Loans 1.2 - 8.0 , 1.0 7.0 .9 6.8 .8 6.5 1.5 13.8 Total (15.0 100.01 14.1 100.0 13.3 100.0 12.3 100.0 10.9 100.0 Default Itates: NDSL 9.4 - { 8.8 8.9 9.3 9.2 IIPSL , 9.9 . 6.1 9.9 N/A N/A NSL , 7.3 6.4 18.5 N/A N/A On June 30,1983, more than $15.0 million in specified types of employment. loans were outstanding,in support of 9,283 present The method of calculating the default rate for l cnd former University students.This balance the IIPSL and NSL programs has materially represents an increase of approximately 6% over changed in 1982-83 and accounts for the increase ths previous year and 38% over four years ago. in the current year default rates. Th:re were 3,677 new loans and additions to exist- Federal guaranteed student loan funds (GSL) ! ing loans totalling $3.5 million. received directly by students are not included in l More than 91% of allloans outstanding have University Loan Funds. been inade through federal loan programs, particu- The chart above depicts the growth during the I 1:rly the National Defense / Direct Student Loan last five years in the aggregate dollar amount of (NDSL), Ilealth Professions Student Loan (IIPSL), loans outstanding. The amount of new loans cnd Nursing Student Loan (NSL) programs. In granted during 1982-83 was slightly more than the g;neral, the federal programs provide for repay- previous year, reflecting an increase in nonfederal m:nt ofloans within 10 years. Special cancellation (University) loan support. An ongoing collection benefits are available to those engaged in certain effort included the litigation of 134 loans. 5 l l
Endowment and Similar Funds
.- . - .- ~ +
Market Value (in millions of dollars) 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 Corporate Stocks -.136.8 60.5 96.6 62.6 125.3 69.7 96.9 68.1 76.7 65.1 Bonds 27.8 12.3 ' 19.6 12.7 18.6 10.4 11.2 7.9 14.4 12.2 Mortgages 21.8 9.6 21.7 14.1 20.0 11.1 16.8 11.8 13.8 11.7 Other 39.7 17.6 ; 16.3 10.6 15.8 8.8 17.4 12.2 12.9 11.0 Total ?226.1 100.0 154.2 100.0 179.7 100.0 142.3 100.0 117.8 100.0 Per Share Values ' S $ $ $ $ Consolidated Endowment Fund Market value per share ! 408.97. ~ 285.32 347.27 277.82 236.27 Earnings per average share 17.98 17.12 12.89 12.00 11.61 Eminent Scholars Fund . Market value per share 124.15 96.94 108.16 108.25 103.38 Earnings per average share 9.45 9.15 9.04 8.28 6.83 Total Returns Consolidated Endowment 50.7 (13.1) 29.6 23.1 15.6 Eminent Scholars Endowment 39.3 - ' (2.1) 8.3 12.7 10.5 S&P 500 61.2 (11.7) 20.4 17.1 13.7 lehman Brothers /Kuhn Loeb Bond Index 29.1 11.9 (8.5) (1.0) 7.1 Consumer Price Index 2.4 , 7.1 9.6 14.3 10.9 Precipitated by an easing of credit by the Fed- Foundations. Gifts to the University's endowment eral Reserve Board and led by rapidly rising bond are added to one of the first three categories based prices, a dynamic bull market in equities began in on donor designations or determinations by the August 1982. This trend continued throughout the Board of Visitors. Funds in the fourth category are period ended June 30,1983. The stock market, as managed by designated trustees and foundations measured by the S&P 500 Index, rose 61.2% during and are not the University's responsibility. the fiscal year, the most rapid rise in the postwar The Consolidated Endowment Fund, the period. The bond market likewise registered a largest of the four groups, had a market value of healthy 29.1% return as measured by the Lehman $202 million on June 30,1983. The consolidated Brothers /Kuhn Loeb Index. The fiscal year ending fund is pooled for investment purposes with earned June 30,1983 also was an exceptional one for the income distributed annually to participating University's endowment, which grew from $154 University accounts on a share basis. The primary million to $226 million, a 47% increase for the investment objective of the fund is to achieve a period. More than 90% of that growth was attributa- long-term average annual total return equal to the ble to capital appreciation which resulted largely rate ofinflation plus the average level of spending from the University's continued commitment to of endowment income. In addition, income is tar-equities. Gifts and additions to quasi. endowment of geted to grow on a per share basis at a rate of at approximately $7.0 million accounted for the least 4% annually. remainder.Tne tables above provide a five-year Since the revision ofinvestment guidelines four historical perspective of the market value and asset years ago, the 20.2% total return on the Consoli-mix of the Unisrsity's endowment, as well as the dated Endowment has exceeded the 8.5% rate of share value and income per share and performance inflation, as measured by the Consumer Price for the two pooled endowments. Index plus spending of 4% to 5% A shift in asset mix out of equities and into bonds in spring 1981 The University of Virginia's endowment, most and the exceptional yields available in the bond of which is managed by external investment coun- markets have resulted in a significant increase in sel,is divided into four major categories: the Con- income per share in the last two years. Should this solidated Endowment Fund, the Eminent Scholars trend continue, the Finance Committee of the Endowment Fund, Other University Administered Board of Visitors may consider measures to bring Funds, and Funds IIeld by Trustees and Affiliated income growth back in line with the 4% objective. 6
- - :- _ +_____.__ _ _ CONSOLIDNFED ENDOWMENT FUND AND MARKET INDEX* CUMULATIVE RETURNS FIVE YEARS ENDED JUNE 30,1983 BASE: JUNE 30,1978 = $100
$200
, $191.1 l
4e s e a *+ $155.2
.* M 150
.- *v
.. /
100 6-30-78 6-30 79 6-30-60 6-30-81 6-30-82 6-30-83 mememes Consolidated Endowment Fund -Market Index*
' Comprised 75% S&P 500/ 25% Lehman Brothers /Kuhn loeb Index The Finance Committee believes that the best size income rather than total return. The goals are way to meet the investment objectivo is to commit to meet spending requirements of 6% to 7% of the some 75 percent of the total market value of the market value of the fund and to increase participa-Consolidated Fund to equity investments. Though tion by the Commonwealth. The total return on the equity returns may fiuctuate in any given period, fund has averaged 13.6% over the past four years.
the Finance Committee has a long term orientation Income per share for 1982-83 was $9.45, a modest and currently believes that the potential principal increase over 1981-82. The fund continues to pro-appreciation and yield from equities will exceed duce an income flow above spending levels due to those available from fixed income instruments. The the exceptional yields prevalent in the bond market graph above plots the cumulative returns of the during the past several years. Consolidated Endowment Fund versus a market Funds Administered by the University index comprised 75% of the S&P 500 and 25% of the separate from the pooled accounts include contribu-Ixhman Brothers /Kuhn Loeb Bond Index.The tions with limited marketability or donor restric-fund continues to outperform the market over the tions or thore with purposes inconsistent with long term. either of the pooled funds. Whenever possible, these The Eminent Scholnra Fund also is a pooled funds are transferred to the pooled accounts. Trustec-held Funds, for which the University endowmer.t. the income from which is used to is the income beneficiary, totaled more than $53 provide salary supplements above base State salar-ies to dit,tinguished scholars holding endowed pro- million at June 30,1983 and each year contribute fessorships. Income used for supplements each income of more than $2 million to academic pro-year is matched by the Commonwealth of Virginia. grams and student aid. In addition, certain endow-The fund had a market value of $16.7 million at ments are held by affiliated foundations, which June 30,1983. The fund continues to be the benefi- exist for the benefit of the University. Distributions ciary of generous gifts which added some $1.7 from these affiliated foundations are treated as gift rc.illion to this balance over the past year. income at the time of receipt. Neither trustee-held The primary investment objective of the fund, funds nor funds held by affiliated foundations are unlike that of the consolidated fund,is to empha. included in the University's fm' ancial statements. 7 l .. _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
i
~
Plant Funds ( Investment in Plant (in millions of dollars) 1982-83 1981-82 1980-81 1979-80 1978-79 Land, Improvements & Buildings 231.3 71.1 205.3 69.9 193.0 69.7 179.2 70.5 179.9 94.1 Equipment 94.2 28.9 88.6 30.1 83.8 30.3 75.1 29.5 11.2 5.9 Total Investment in Plant 325.5 100.0 293.9 100.0 276.8 100.0 254.3 100.0 191.1 100.0 Plant Indebtedness 36.0 11.1 31.0 10.5 28.9 10.4 31.5 12.4 30.1 15.8 Net Investment in Plant 289.5 88.9 262.9 89.5 247.9 89.6 222.8 87.6 161.0 84.2 During 1982 83, total expenditures for plant of equipment as of June 30,1979) while indebted-additions consisting of equipment, renovations and ness has increased by approximately 20%. This improvements, totaled $37.9 million which repre- indicates that the University has funded large sents a $15.3 million increase compared to the 1981- amounts of plant expansion from sources other 82 total of $22.6 million. Net additions to plant than debt. charged to current funds in 1982-83 increased to The most significant project completed during
$16.2 million from $11.2 million during 1981-82. 1982 83 was the replacement of the University's Total plant fund long-term indebtedness, primar. telephone system. The project involved the acquisi-ily related to plant used for auxiliary enterprises tion of a computerized branch exchange telephone and the replacement of telephone equipment, system. In addition,7,200 telephone instruments amounted to $52.0 million at June 30,1983. This were purchased to replace leased equipment.
represented a significant increase from the $33.1 As in the past, the areas of emphasis for future million outstanding at June 30,1982. The increase plant expansion will include research space and rc:ults from the issue of $5.8 million of bonds student housing. Currently under construction are related to auxiliary enterprises and $15.0 million of three student housing projects, Alderman-Stadium noter related to various capital projects including Road, Faulkner and Sprigg Lane, that will provide the acquisition of property and scientific equip- space for almost 1,000 students. The Medical l ment as well as construction of student housing. Research Building and Engineering Research The above table presents summary information Building are currently under construction while on investment in plant for the past five years. planning has begun for the Gilmer Hall Addition. During that period, the total investment in plant IJelow is a list indicating the status of major l has increased approximately 45% (excluding the capital outlay projects. t
$46.5 million increase due to the initial inventory l l
l MAJOR CAPITAL OUTLAY PROJECTS Completion Cost Mrjor Projects Completed During 1982-83 Date (in Thousands) Clinch Valley College Student Union Building November 1982 $ 1,981 Food Services Central Support Facilities August 1982 1,923 Modernization of Central Telephone System August 1982 9,386 Newcomb IIall Addition - Phase I/ Peabody Renovations July 1982 2,031 , Sprinkler / Smoke Detector System - Medical Center April 1983 1,879 ! Mrjor Projects in Progresa at . June 39,1983 Alderman / Stadium Itoad flousing August 1984 $13,615 Ilirdwood Golf Course November 1984 1,810 Children's llehabilitation Center Addition June 1984 1,620 Engineering Research lluilding December 1984 2,912 Faulkner flousing December 1983 3,107 Medical Research lluilding Mit.4 August 1983 2,047 Newcomb itall Addition Phase II February 1984 2.768 Sprigg I,ane llousing January 1934 1,825 Mrjor Projecta Approved for Planning at. June 30,1983 Gilmer llall Addition $ 8,088 Scott Stadium Athletic Facility 2,899 Spons.or's llall Addition 2,120 8
t . . _.t AUDITOR OF PUB IC ACCO NTS P. O. B o x 1295 [o , RI C H M O N D 23210 October 21,1983 The Honorable Charles S. Robb Governor of Virginia The IIonorable liunter B. Andrews Chairman, Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission The Board of Visitors University of Virginia Gentlemen: We have examined the balance sheet of the UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA as of June 30, 1983, and the related statements of changes in fund balances and current funds revenues, expenditures and other changes for the fiscal year then ended. Our examination was made in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards and, accordingly, included such tests of the accounting records and such other auditing procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. In our opinion, the accompanying financial statements present fairly the financial condition of the University of Virginia as of June 30,1983, and the changes in fund balances and current funds revenues, expenditures and other changes for the fiscal year then ended,in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles and the Code of Virginia on a basis consistent with that of the preceding year. Sincerely, 84M h.
~
AUDITOR OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS 9
Bolanca Shoot
- Ao cf Juna 32, IC83 With Comparative Figures for 1C82 ASSETS CURRENT FUNDS I -1983 1982 Unrestricted: ,
Cash and Temporary Investments ;$ 14,221,020 $ 19,063,749 Accounts Receivable-Hospital, less allowance for doubtful accounts end contractual adjustments of $12,603,000 in 1983 and $8,064,000 in 1982 ! 26,896,103- 23,863,554 E:timated Amounts due from Third Party Payors (Note 2) !' 2,270,355 2,052,759 Accounts Receivable - Other, less allowance for doubtful accounts , of $146,000 in 1983 and $110,000 in 1982 i 1,363,203 - 1,125,343 Interest Receivable 940,989- 927,083 Inventories l 4,634,209 ' 4,058,717 Prepaid Expenses 671,847 1,177,820 Loans Receivable from Investment in Plant (Note 8) -
,1,516,051 2,171,446 Due from Current Restricted Funds 1,362,131 1,337,123 Due from Loan Funds ; 57,865-Due from Endowment and Similar Funds '
52,099 54,418 Total Unrestricted v
'53,985,872 55,832,012 Re:tricted: :
( Cash and Temporary Investments i- 28,512,458 24,194,324 f" Interest Receivable f 68,384 Grants and Contracts Receivable .2,925,564 4,012,814 Prepaid Expenses e 171,541 112,599 f Due from Endowment and Similar Funds ! 101,133 110,486 [ > Total Restricted . 31,779,080 : 28,430,223 i TOTAL CURRENT FUNDS ? $ 85,764,952 , $ 84,262,235 LOAN FUNDS i Cash and Temporary Investments ~$ 1,083,584' $ 768,215 Notes Receivable,less allowance for doubtful notes receivable of <
$1,408,000 in 1983 and $1,243,000 in 1982 12,980,971 Due from Current Restricted Funds l'
13,604,878 , 101,790 TOTAL LOAN FUNDS ,8 14,688,462 $ 13,850,976
?
l ENDOWMENT AND SIMILAR FUNDS Cash and Temporary Investments $- 2,507,702 $ 1,738,978 Investments at Market Value (Note 4) 232,964,257 ' 164,892,886 Interest Receivable , -590,193-Loans Receivable from Investment in Plant (Note 8) .2,554,218 ' 2,818,350 Due from Unexpended Plant Funds (Note 4) , 11,782,413 . 2,067,223 l Due from lavestment in Plant (Note 4) 10,717,587 5,432,777 t TOTAL ENDOWMENT AND SIMILAR FUNDS $ 261,116,370 ' $ 176,950,714
- d. , .
10
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES CURRENT FUNDS 1983 1982 Unrestricted: Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses S 5,477,267 $ 5,745,452 Collateral Deposits on Securities Loaned to Brokers 4,000,000 Deposits and Deferred Revenues 3,081,210_ 2,472,936 Advance from Treasurer of Virginia (Note 7) 570,500 570,500 Accrued Leave (Note 6) 8,318,974 7,543,635 Due to Unexpended Plant Funds 1,870,494 537,334 Due to Reserve for Renewals and Replacements 79,115 79,115 Fund Balance 30,588,312 - 38,883,040 Total Unrestricted 53,985,872 _ 55,832,012 Restricted: Accounts Payable and Accrued Expenses 980,285 666,558 Grant and Contract Prepayments 2,200,803 ^ 3,115,014 Accrued Leave (Note 6) 363,656 l 383,952 Due to Current Unrestricted Fund 1,362,131 1,337,123 Due to Loan Funds 101,790 Fund Balances 26,872,205 22,825,786 Total Restricted 31,779,080 281430,223 TOTAL CURRENT FUNDS $ 85,764,952 : $ 84,262,235 LOAN FUNDS Accounts Payable $ 531 $ 569 Due to Current Unrestricted Fund 57,865 Fund Balances: U.S. Government Granta Refundable 12,133,813 - 11,540,236 University Funds-Restricted 2,496,253 2,310,171 TOTAL LOAN FUNDS $ 14,688,462 $_13,850,976 ENDOWMENT AND SIMILAR FUNDS Collateral Deposits on Securities Loaned to Brokers $ 3,550,305- $ 8,138,800 Notes Payable (Note 8) 15,000,000 ; 7,r>00,000 Bonds Payable (Note 8) 14,109,424 6,919,443 Investments IIeld for Foundations 2,235,131 Due to Current Unrestricted Fund 52,099- 54,418 Due to Current Restricted Funds 101,133 110,486 Fund Balances: Endowment 82,927,052 - 56,854,146 Term endowment 707,258 911,417 Quasi-endowment-Unrestricted 71,235,290 47,074,970 Quasi endowment-Restricted 71 1981678 49,387,034 TOTAL ENDOWMENT AND StMiLAR FUNDS $ 261,116,370 : $ .176,950,714 11
Balana Shoot (C ntinucd) As of Jzca 30,1983 With Compar;tiva Figures f;r 1C'32 ASSETS _ L1983 + 1982 LIFE INCOME FUNDS
- Investments at Market Value (Note 4) !$ 606,903) $ 272,103 TOTAL LIFE INCOME FUNDS [$- 606,903 I $ 272,103
( , l s p-PLANT FUNDS l Unexpended: Cash and Temporary Investments [$ (
> 31,302,248$; 16,371,929 Appropriations Receivable 9,241,254 5,480,732 Accounts Receivable . 93,236 295,548 Due from Current Unrestricted Fund b 1,870,494 537,334 Total Unexpended ) '42,507,232 22,685,543 Renewals and Replacements: 1 Cah and Temporary Investments . 11,457,801 ! 3,537,896 Due from Current Unrestricted Fund - 79,115 ~ 79,115 Tbtal Renewals and Replacements i 11,536,916 3,617,011 Retirement ofIndebtedness:
Cash and Temporary Investments ,
-1,016,427 ; 313,065 Investments with 'IYeasurer of Virginia 2,118,668 2,092,754 Prepaid Expenses 10,587 20,625 Total Retirement ofIndebtedness 3,145,682 = 2,426,444 Investment in Plant:
Land *
'10,890,963 ? 8,817,870 Land Improvemenis 24,508,397 ; 14,743,526 B:ildings .180,263,191 162,612,872 Equipment !. 94,202,800 , 88,558,385 C;nstruction in Progress '15,600,348 19,206,652 i
( Total Investment in Plant 325,465,699 293,939,305 TOTAL PLANT FUNDS I $ 382,655,529 $ 322,668,303 AGENCY FUNDS C:sh and Temporary Investments-licalth Services Foundation :$ 1,649,075- $ 1,847,574 C:sh and Temporary Investments-Other 1,947,042 545,934 TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS :$- 3,596,117 $ 2,393,508 12
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES 1983 1982 LIFE INCOME FUNDS Fund Balances $ 606,903 $ 272,103 TOTAL LIFE INCOME FUNDS $ 606,903 $ 272,103 PLANT FUNDS Unexpended: .. Accounts Payable $ 2,774,005 $ 1,077,682 Bonds Payable (Note 8) 4,262,194 Security Deposits ~ 50,000 50,000 Due to Endowment and Similar Funds (Note 4) 11,782,413 2,067,223 Fund Balances -23,638,620 19,490,638 Total Unexpended 42,507,232 ~ 22,685,543 Renewals and Replacements: Accounts Payable 470 47,070 Fund Balances 11,536,446 3,569,941
'Ibtal Renewals and Replacements . 11,536,916 ! 3,617,011 Retirement of Indebtedness:
Fund Balances 3,145,682 2,426,444 Total Retirement of Indebtedness 3,145,682 2,426,444 Investment in Plant: Installment Purchases Payable (Note 8) 1,033,842 657,127 Advance from Treasurer of Virginia 2,018,500 Honda Payable (Note 8) 19,575,640 16,925,903 Loans Payable to Current Unrestricted Fund (Note 8) 1,516,051 2,171,446 Loans Payable to Endowment and Similar Funds (Note 8) 2,554,218 2,818,850 Due to Endowment and Similar Funds (Note 4) 10,717,587 - 5,432,777 Capitalized Lease Purchases Payable (Note 8) , 561,543. 1,012,105 Net Investment in Plant 289,506,818 262,902,597 Total Investment in Plant 325,465,69') 293,939,305 TOTAL PLANT FUNDS . $ 382,655,529 $ 322,668,303 AGENCY FUNDS Deposits IIeld in Custody for Others-Ilealth Services Foundation $ 1,G49,075 $ 1,847,574 Deposits IIeld in Custody for Others-Other 1,947,042 545,934 TOTAL AGENCY FUNDS $ 3,596,117 $ 2,393,508 The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. 13
Statamont of Changas in Fund Balances Fcr tha Ycir Ended Juna 30,1983 1 i Current Funds Unrestricted Restricted Loan Funds Rev:nues and Other Additions:
'$ 296,515,404 EUnrestricted Current Fund Revenues
~ M
[ State Appropriations-Restricted '. . $ 1,829,463 X Federal Grants and Contracts-Restricted , 35,253,552- + k State Grants and Contracts-Restricted - , 377,299 ... Local Grants and Contracts-Restricted 118,921 Private Gifts, Grants and Contracts-Restricted 16,830,269 $ 254 Endowment Income ~~
'~ 8,987,455 65,043 i Interest o~ n Imans Receivable ~ ^ ~' ~ ~
238,123 ~ iU.S. Government Advances ~ 500,326 [ Expended for Plant Facilities (including $15,598,501 E charged to Current Fund) _ , _ . _. _ _ _ _ Retirement ofIndebtedness Unrealized Gain on Investments Realized Gain on Investments Other Sources 696,014 TOTAL REVENUES AND OTHER ADDITIONS 296,515,404 64,092,973 803,746 Expenditures and Other Deductions: ~ ~~ F Education'al ~and General Expenditu'res - ~ -126,242,456 - ~ 51,093,169
! Auxiliary Enterprise Expenditures 24,362,191 7 7 Hospital Expenditures -
126,249,181 165,665 I t ndependent Operations Expenditures . . .; . __ _ .825,542 . j Indirect Costa Recovered 8,022,316 Loan Cancellations and Write-Offs 249,322 Administrative and Collection Costs " "' 64,645 F Expended for Plant Facilities (including $1,082,608
' '~
1 y Not Capitalised) .
~
p Retirement of Plant Facilities (Note 10) : LRetirement ofIndebtedness- _ _ _ ._ , ,, _ . .~ _ _ , . G , Interest on Indebtedness Refunded to Grantors TOTAL EXPENDITURES AND OTHER DEDUCTIONS 277,679,370 59,281,150 313,967 Trin fers Among -Funds: - - -. .- . .
- t Debt Service and Other o z- . _ m. . _(2,220,187). .
(55,600) .55,600 s i Non-mandatory: Debt Service and Other (2,083,748) (127,187) (To)/From Other Funds (22,826,827) (582,617) 234,280 - r TOTAL TRANSFERS (27,130,762) (765,404) 289,880 Ntt Increase (Decrease) for the Year (8,294,728) 4,046,419 779,659 Fund Balance at Beginning of Year 38,883,040 22,825,786 13,850,407 Fund Balance at End of Year $ 30,588,312 $ 26,872,205 $ 14,630,066
Plant Funds Endowment and Life Income Renewals and Retirement of Investment Similar Funds Funds Unexpended Replacements Indebtedness In Plant q ( *- $ 6,514,578 ps 1 c , - _
$ 3,697,844 $ 241,677 925,098 452,095 _ -
F
,$ 30,059,329 2,940,062 48,455,941 29,690 16,420,128 63,433 116,658 $ 80,653 $ 507,494 68,573,913 334,800 8,008,429 80,653 507,494 32,999,391 a ~ c
> 14,789,967 :753,469 6,395,170 ,
;2,940,062 7
1,542,524 76,317 _ _ 14,866,284 753,469 4,482,586 6,395,170 7 ,. 5 2,220,187, .. (196,342) (66,866) 2,474,143 3,266,798 11,202,179 8,706,187 3,266,798 11,005,837 8,639,321 4,694,330 334,800 4,147,982 7,966,505 719,238 26,604,221 71,840,711 272,103 19,490,638 3,569,941 2,426,444 262,902,597 154,227,567 606,903 $ 23,638,620 $ 11,536,446 $ 3,145,682 $ 289,506,818
$ 226,068,278 $
The accompanying Notes to Financial Statements are an integral part of this statement. 15
Statem:nt cf Currcnt Funda Roycnu :, Expenditurca l And Oth:r Chrnges F:r tha Yccr Ended Jun3 30,1983
- With Comparativ.e F]gures for 1982 c ,
Year Ended Year Ended June 30,1983 June 30, 1982* REVEMUES Unrestricted Restricted Total 4 Total Student hition and Fees .
$ 36,902.487 $ - 36,902,487 $ 30,441,564 State Appropriations-llospitals ,, .9 20,567,530 - 23,567,530 19,287,290 State Approprietions-Curunt Operaima 75,404,848 $ 1,855,963 77,260,811' 72,016,712 Federal Grants and Contracts 7,634,183 29,700,200 37,334,383 38,896,317 State Grants and Contracts s' 3,054 102,924 105,978 102,982 local Grants ana Contracts - N 11,825 159 11,984 272,262 Private Gifts, Grants and Contrach 1,059,425 15,119,900 '
16,179,325 12,069,415 Endowment Income i s 3,976,016 4,181,668 ' 8,157,684 7,148,135 Sales and Services of Educational Departments 2,273,600 4 2,273,600 2,465,847 Sales and Services of Auxiliary Enterprises 30,128,170 C <) 30,128,170 27,374,748 Sales and Services of Ilospitals, _ 109,952,438 ! 109,952,438 96,462,062 Sales and Services to Independent Operations 1,162,748 - 1,162,748 1,131.757 Other Sources 7,439,080 353,620 7,792,700 5,954,181 Total Current Revenues 296,515,404 51,31_4,434 347,829,838' 313,623,272 EXPENDITURES AND MANDATORY TRANSFERS F i Educational and Generah Instruction 64,$13,517 8,523,280 F .72,836,797 64,647,068 l . Research 2,802,727 28,349,299 1
-31,152,026 28,816,179 Public Service 1,443,145 1,5395,877 3,339,022 4,510,234 Academic Support 22,038,285 2,511,407 24,549,692 21,915,880 Student Services ,
7,122,724 100,122 y 7,322,846 6,835,663
' Institutionni Support 12,835,769 '17,552 L 12,853,321 12,635,126 Operation and Maintenance of Plant 13,790,200 4,178 13,794,378 13,803,755 Scholarships and Fellowships _
1,896,089 9,591,454 11,487,543 10,596,581 Total-Educational and General 126,242,456 51,093,169- 177,335,625 163,760,486 { M:ndatory Transferg for Debt Service and Other 55,600 i 55,600 37,200
. %tal-Educational and General Expenditures and Mandatory'IYansfers 126,242,456 51,148,769 177,391,225 163,797,686 Auxiliary Enterpriserf . ,.. . '
Omting Iboendiuires s 2 s. _d 24,362,191 24,362,191 22,933,521
, Mahdatory'ltansfete for Debt Service 1,795,187 1,795,187 1,688,153 L *
.. Total-Auxilhyy Eoterprise Expenditures i and Mandptory Trpnsfers 26,157,378 .26,157 3_78, 24,621,674
' g(,llospitals - s\.
s 126,249,181 165,665 l 126$14,846' 112,791,529 i Independent O\ \ - t perations:q l; 1 J*;
. - ,3 1 Orrrating Exy nditures ,
o 25,542 8M,542 772,499 M;.ndatory Tyinsfers iM liebt Service $5,000 425,000_ 495,832
'Wal-Ande'pindent Opa ations -
1,250,542 1,250,542' 1,268,331 hitpendiurty and Man 6{atory Trosfers
' intal-Expenditure and tlandatory * "
g' *
; gransferst s ' ~
3 279,899,557) \, [51,314,434 3 gl,213,991: 302,479,220 4 OYllERTRAIJSFElW AND ADI)DIOM1/(DEDUCTIONS) <<
' - Macess of Restricted Receipts over'Ironsters s ,
k to Revenues y '\ 4,756,221 4,756,223 7,697,063 RcGnded to GrantenW '~ ~
; , (2,894)
Private Clinic IMinco A. - N- _
~ IIcalth Servicta Fotndt l\n ' -
(931,784) AccrtiaJ l A ve 1"' - a ,' i (7,927,587) Non Mandatory Transfaist \ w .
, 'Ib Enuowment and Simihr Funds \ *
(2,537,256) (727,615) '(3,264,871) (2,471,288)
. To lean' Funds ts (234,280) , -(234,280) (166,298) i - -- (22,01A,332) (82,896) '(22,121,228) (7,061,123)
A,\q]7o Phnt Fundsfb Obrrept Restricted FunshN p.d 99 334,987 v'
- 9) . .
7 -l Net inircase (Decrease)it. Fund Batances $_ (8,294,728) $ 4,046,419 { '(4,24h $ 280,141 (Ceyir(1982' amounts hNe been redistributed /9 ronform to 1983 expenditure classifications. The ace'otpanying Notes to Fin'amal Statements are an integral part of this statement, A ; a ~X
-r g
s a
~~- s N s
. + \
- .= -
.i Notas to tho Financial Statcments N:te 1: Summary of significant University Division current fund expenditures for equipment accounting policies are capitalized when the unit acquisition cost is $500 or greater The accompanying financial statements include the and the estimated useful life is two years or more. Effective, July 1,1982 the Hospital and Blue Ridge Ihvisions changed their c ecounts of all organizational units of the University of capitalization hmit from $300 to $500. Clinch Valley College Virginia including the University Division, the University current expenditures for equipment art not capitalized. Current llospital, the lilue Ridge Ifospital Division, the Division of fund expenditures for library acqu isitions have not been capital-Continuing Education and Clinch Valley College.The signifi. 8"E c nt accounting policies of the University are as follows: .
The accompanying financial statements include no provision f r depreciation of plant assets.
- c. Hasis of accounting The University has adopted the accrual basis of accounting
- f. Due to/from other funds in cecordance with the American Institute of Certified Public Interfun Accountants
- Audit Guide for Colleges and Universities. Accru. funds pendm,d advances g the receipt represent of monies from grants,theloan temporary agree- use of current el) for interest on student loans and bond interest payable have ments or the receipt of pledged gifts from various donors.
not been recorded and are not considered by management to be m terial. Effective July 1,1982, the University changed its K. Funds held in trust by others m;thod of recording endowment investment income to an Assets of funds held by trustees for the benefit of the accrual basis. I rior years' accruals were not considered by University are not reflected in the accompanying balance sheet. m:nagement to be material. The University follows the practice The Un,versity i has irrevocable rights to all or a portion of the of recording gifts and pledges when collected. No value is inc me of these funds. Ilowever, assets of the funds are not casigned to art and other collections received as gifts. under tha management discretion of the University according to Non faculty salaried employees' attendance and leave regula- the trust agre ements. The followmg table reflects the market tions make provision for the granting of a specified number of value of these funds at Juq 30,1983 and 1982, and the amount drya ofleave with pay each year. The amount of leave earned finc me received from their trustees daring the years then but not taken is recorded on the balance sheet. ended; 1983 1982 h, Fund accounting Market value of funds held by In order to ensure observance of limitations and restrictions trustees for the benefit of the pizced on the une of resources available to the University, the Ummsity 8 53,230,121 $ 38,185,318 accounts of the Univarsity are maintained in accordance with thi principles of fund accounting.The accounts relating to Inc me received from funds c pecified activities or objectives have been classified into sepa- held b trustee for the benefit r;te funds. Similar funds have been combined for financial , reporting purposes. Within each fund group, fund balances restricted by outside h. Affiliated Foundations sources are so indicated and are distinguished from unrestricted Assets f affiliated foundations which are separately incorpo. funds allocated to specific purposes by action of the floard of Vi itors. Ilestricted resources may only be used for the purposes rated and managed by their own boards are not, included in these statements. These Foun+itions are organized as fund-est:blished by the source of such funds. ltestricted gifts, appropriations, endowment income and raising activities which either support the Umversit,y or benefit specific schools. Income received from such foundations is other restricted sources are accounted for in the appropriate recorded as a gift when received. restricted funds. Itentricted funds are repcrted as revenues and The Univeriity of Virginia llealth Services Foundation, cxpenditures when expended for current operating purposes. whose lloard includes officers of the University,is described in All gains and losses arising from the sale, collection, or other Note 3. di: position ofinvestments and other noncash assets are cecounted for in the fund which owned such assets. Ordinary income derived from investments, receivables, and the like is accounted for in the fund owning such assets, except for income Note 2: Estimated amounts due on settle-d: rived from investments of endowment and similar funds, ment with third party payors which income is accounted for in the fund to which it is The University llospital provides services to patients under restricted or,if unrestricted, as revenues in unrestricted current reimbursement agreements with third party payors. lleimburse-funds. ments under certain agreements are determined on the basis of the cost of providing services to patients covered by these plans,
- c. Inventories subject to certain limitations, and are subject to audit and
, Inventories are valued at the lower of cost (generally deter- retroactive adjustment. Provisions for possible adjustments of mined on the first-m, fireteut method) or market. cost reports have been reflected in the accompanying financial statements as considered appropriate
- d. Investmen,ts For each of the five years ended June 30,1982, the llospital's Temporary mvestments and endowment fund investments in Medicare and Medicaid cost reimbursement has been subject to corporate stocks and marketable bonds are recorded at market a 1 mitation on in-patient general routine service costs arising v lue. Mortgages held for investment by the endowment fund from the classification as a "non-urban" hospital. During this c re recorded at book value representing principal amounts due, period, actual costs based on cost reports filed, or adjusted as Investments in real estate (included in " Miscellaneous in Note appropriate, exceed this limitation by an aggregate of approxi-
- 4) tre recorded at book value, mately $4p0,000 which is not included as a receivable in the accompanying financial statements. The llospital has submit-Financing Administration I nt as to ar stat actual or estimated cost at date of ted a request (ilCFA) to from for relief the llealth Care,tations under various exemp-such hmi ccquisition. Construction is capitalized as expended and tions or eteeptions as provided by Medicare and Medicaid reflected in net investment in plant. Current fund expenditures regulations. The University expects that the request for relief of $10,000 or greater for renewals and replacements are capital- will be approved, in some degree, resulting in the recoveries of ized only to the extent that such expenditures represent long- C # "*"*""' "'I #"I "*" "#
term improvements to properties or significantly enhance the usefulness of the properties. 17 b _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
sum 1 -Amar--w-- Note 3: Health Services Foundation Note 4: Valuation and performance of The University of Virginia Health Services Foundation, a endowment and similar funds non-profit educational, scientific and charitabs organization, and life income funds was estabhatut by the Board of waitors as of June 30,1980 t assist tt e Universitiin providiny hoe,ntal and medical care Investments of endowment and similar funds and life services. medical educution prograras, medical research and income fuads are composed of the following: programs of puhtic charity at the linkersity of Virginia. Except + as noted, the financial statementa do not include the assets, June 30,1983 lisbilities and, equity of the lier.Ith Services Foundation. Endowment and Similar Funds: followmg ta a condensed summary of the financial condition of the Ilealth Services Foundation as of June 30,1983 and 1982: Ccrporate Stocks 5 136 832,574 $ 78,650,690 Hond, 27,788,149 27,186,121 Assets ,1083 1982 rtgne6 28,391,690 28,391,690 Miscell.meoua 3,748,445 3,707,592 Cash and Investmenta $ 14,586,000 $ 13,954,000 Cash and Short Term Other Assets 11,638,000 9,545,000 Investmnts 36,203,399 36,525,428 Total Assets $ #,224,000
$ 23,499,000 $ 232,964,257 $ 174,461,521 Liabilities and Fund Life Income Funds:
Halances Corporate Stocks $ 409 $ 1 Bonds 228,243 220,387 Liabilities t 7,493,000 $ 8,140.000 Car,h and Short Term Fund Halances 18,731,000_ 15,359.000 investments 378,251 378,251 Total Liabilities S 606,903 $ 598.639 and Fund Dalances 3 26,224,000 $ 23,499,000 June 30,1982 The revenues and expenditures for the liealth Services Founda- Market Value Cost tion were $52,810,000 and $49,736,000, respectively,ir. % and Eodowmer.t and Similar Funds:
$44,241,000 and $44,035,000, respectively,in 1982, Corporste Stocks $ 96,613,712 $ 83,347,176 Fund balances of the Clinic Private Division as of July 1, Bonds 19,647,320 22,388,830 1981 totaling $932,000 were transferred during 1981-82 from the Mortgages 21,254,256 21,254,256 University to the Foundstion. During 1982-83 and 1981-82 the Miscellaneous 3,758,339 3,737,507 University acted as fiscal agent for the Foundation and held in Cash and Short Term custody for the I cundation $1,649,000 and $1,848,000 as of June Invwtments 23,619,259 23,618,322 30,1983, and June 30,1982, respectively, 8 164,892,886 $ 154,846,091 The Founcation has contracted with the University fcr the 12fe Income Funds:
provision of office space and certain administrative services Corporato Stocks S 75,368 $ 71,987 and has rein burned $97,000 and $114,000, respectuely, for then. Bonda 219,592 194'785 items in 1982-83 and $93,000 and $158,000;respectively, for Cash and Short Term these items in 198142. In addition to the contracted services, the Investmmts 1,950 Foundation reimbursed the University for other administrative 1'950 services of $1,443,000 for 198243. The Foundation paid the $ 272,103 $ 293,529 University of Virginia llospital $2,764,000 in 1932e3 and
$1,076,000 in 198182 for corts associated with certain clinical operations. The University of Virginia llospital has contracted Included m endowment investments are real estate mort-with the Foundation for the provision of supervisory and gages amounting to $12,822,185 and $12,466,432 at June 30, administrative services. The amounts paid to the Foundation 1983 and 1982, respectively, which are held by Virginia for such services in 1982-83 and 1981-82 were 39,298,000 and National Bank as trustee under a bond indenture agreement $7,292,000, respectively. related to bar.ds issued in 1972. These real estate mortgages are pledged as arcurity for the outstanding bonds of $6,609,424 and 46,919,443 at J me 30,1983 and 1982, respectively. Under the terms of the agreement, the principal and interest payments on the mortgages are collected by the trustee and,in turn, used to pay the principal and interest on the bonds outstanding.
The University of Virginia, pursuant to a resolution adopted by the Board of Vishors on March 22,1980, has issued
$7,500,000 in T=lephone Honds of 1983. The proceeds of the sale of the Bonds constitute a part cf the University's Endowment Funds. After payment of the cost ofissuance of the Bonds, monies were used to purchase a telephone communications system to replace the leased telephone system formerly used by the University in Charlottesvil!e. In order to reimburse the Endowment Fund for the cost of the system, the University has
_ deposited its special obligation promissory note (the " System Note") in the principal amount of $7,500,000 in the Endowment Fund and pledged the System Note to secure the bonds. The University of Virginia, pursuant to a resolution adopted ly the Board of Visitors on January 27,1983, has issued
$15,000.009 in Endowment Fund Demand Revenue Notes of 1983 (the " Capital Projects Loan"). The proceeds of these notes will be used to finance, on a temporary basis, the acquisition, construction and renovation of fixed assets. The Notes are limited obligations of the University and are secured by, and 18
1983 1982 payable exclusively from, the University's Unrestricted Quasi- Eminent Scholars Fund Book value $ 13,775,361 $ 11,771,722 Endowment Fund. Unrealized net gain (loss) 2,961,532 (180,799) The major portion of the investments of the endowment and Market value $_ 16,736,893 $ 11,590,923 s,imilar funds are pooled under two major funds.The Consoli-cated Endowment Fund is the general endowment pool for the University. On June 2,1979 the University adopted an invest-ment objective whereby the average annual return over the long- Unit Values terra would equal the rate of inflation, measured by the Consu- Number of units outstanding at June 30 134,815 119,576 mer Price Index, plus its average level of spending from endowment income. The average annual return for the Consoli-Ilook value $ 102.18 $ 98.45 dated Endowment Fund was 50.7% in 1983 and (13.1%)in 1982. Unrealized net gain (loss) 21.97 (1.51) These percentages have been computed using realized and unrealized gains and losses and endowment income at a weigh- Market value $ 124.15 $ 96.94 ted average market value. The Eminent Scholars Fund is the second major pooled fund. The primary investment objective of this fund is to earn a Average number of units current return which meets current spending requirements and outstanding during the year 125,512 111,455 maximizes partippation by the Commonwealth of Virginia in the Eminent Scholars Program. A secondary obiective is to provide growth in income equal to one-half the inflation rate. Earnings per average unit The average annual return for the Eminent Scholars Fund was outstanding (Exclusive 39.3% in 1983 and (2.1%) in 1982. These percentages have been of net gain) $ 9.45 $ 9.15 computed using realized and unrealized gains and losses and endowment income at a weighted average market value: Note 5: Employee benefits In both funds, the mvestment objectives do not anticipate Substantially all full-tim. e faculty and certain administrative the expenditure of capitalized endowment income. staff participate in the University,a retirement annuity program Both the Consolidated Endowment Fund and the Eminent through TI AA/CitEF Insurance Companies. This is a fixed-Scholars Fund are pooled using a market value basis, with each contribution program where the retirement benefits received are individual fund subscribing to or disposing of units on the basis based upon the employer and employee contributions, plus of the market value per unit at the beginning of the calendar interest and dividends. Individual contracts issued under the , month within which the transaction takes place. A summary of plan provide for full and immediate vesting of both the Universi-book and market values as of June 30,1983 and 1982, together ty's and the participants' contributions. Total pension costs with unit value information and earnings per unit for the year under this plan were approximately $3,880,000 in 1983 and then ended for the pooled funds is presented below: $3,612,000 in 1982. All ther full-time salaried employees are participants in the 1983 1982 Virginia Supplemental Retirement System (VSRS). Guaranteed retirement payments under the VSRS plan are based on years of Separately Invested Funds service and achieved salary levels. The employer's cost related ikk value $ 7,564,384 $ 7,581,388 to the VSRS retirement program was $6,273,000 in 1983 and Unrealized net loss (306,591) (977,195)
$4,472,000 in 1982.
Market value $ 7,257,793- $ 6,604,19'l Note 6: Accrued leave In accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASH) Statement No. 43, the University has recognized a Consolidated Endowment Fund liabihty of $8,682,630 for 1982-83 and $7,927,587 for 1981-82 for lhk value $ 146,225,797 $ 124,827,662 Unrealized net gain 55,847,795 11,204,789 the amount of sick and annualleave earned but not taken as of June 30 of each year for its non-faculty salaried, employees. The Market value $ 202,073,592 $ 136,032,451 amount reflects, an of June 30, all earned vacation leave not taken and the amount payable under the Commonwealth of Virginia's sick leave payout policy upon termination which is Unit Values the lesser of 25% of sick leave not taken or $2,500 per employee Number of units with five or more years of service. outstanding at June 30 494,099 476,774 Since the University cannot determine the amount of 295.94 $ 261.82 accrued leave attributable to prior years, the cumulative amount Ilook value $ of accrued leave for June 30,1982 of $7,927,587 is treated as an Unrealized net gain 113.03 23.50 other deduction in the Statement of Current Funds Revenues, Market value $ 408.97 $ 285.32 Expenditures and Other Changes for the year ended June 30, 1982. Changes in accrued leave attributable to 1982-83 have Average number of been treated as expenditures in the Statement of Current Funds units outstanding Revenues, Expenditures and Other Changes for the year ended during the year 484,064 466,960 June 30,1983. The University believes that the liability will be funded from future revenues. Earnings per average unit Note 7: Temporary advance from outstanding (Exclusive Treasurer of Virginia of net gain) $ 17.98 $ 17.12 Temporary advance authorized by the Treasurer of Virginia to provide interim funding at June 30,1983: Current Funds: Imprest funds for payroll and other expenditures. $ 570,500 19 :
l N:te 8: Long-term debt long term debt matures as follows: I ng m debt at the University at June 30,1983 consists of 1983-84 8 3,524,373 1984-85 3,507,394 PI:nt Funds: 1985-86 18,313,940 1986-87 3,102,605 Installment purchases payable over varying 1987-88 3,233,593 periods up to five years for the purchase of Later Years 26,931,007 equipment. $ 1,033,842 $ 58,612,912 loans payable to endowment funds repres' ent loans for long-term financing of auxil- Note 9: Commitments irry enterprise facilities approved by the At June 30,1983, the University was a party to construction Hoard of Visitors with interest at 6% Loans contracts and commitments totaling approximately $32,966,353 c re payable over periods established by the of which $13,822,076 has been incurred. Pledges outstanding Board of Visitors from 3 to 12 years. Repay. relating to plant construction aggregated $4,041,963. ment terms for loans amounting to The University occupies certain buildings and uses various
$1,679,396 have not been established. 2f>54,218 types of equipment under lease arrangements. Commitments for subsequent fiscal years are as follows:
loans payable to current unrestricted funds represent advances for periods of up to 5 1983-84 $ 1,845,335 years for construction of several facilities 1984-85 1,157,184 epproved by the Board of Visitors with 1985-86 395,050 either no interest or a variable rate of one. 1986-87 242,736 half of the prime rate plus one-half of 1% 1,516,051 The total rental expense for all property and equipment was Commonwealth of Virginia bonds issued by approxiraately $4,693,400 and $5,301,130 for fiscal years ended the Treasurer of Virginia pursuant to the June 30,1983 and 1982, respectively. provisions of Section 9(c) of Article X of the Constitution of Virginia. This subsection Note 10: Inventory and valuation of . provides tl at the General Assembly may hospital building and equipment s uthorize the creation of debt secured by a pledge of net revenues derived from rates, A physical inventory of buildings and equipment was con-fees or other charges and the full faith and ducted as of July 1,1982 for the llospital and Blue Ridge credit of the Commonwealth, provided that Divisions. The inventory was undertaken in order to update cuch debt is created for specific revenue existing fixed 83 set records and establish a detailed information and accounting system. producing capital projects of, among others, institutions of higher learning of the Com- As of July 1,1982 the llospital and Blue Ridge Divisions changed their capitalization limit for equipment from $300 to monwealth. Bonds are payable over periods of 1 to 20 years and bear interest at rates $500. Fully depreciated equipment costing less than $500 was r;nging from 3.5% to 12%. 19,480,000 not inventoried and has been removed from the fixed asset records. University of Virginia Revenue Honds are
. .. Following is a summary of the adjustments made as of July payable over 1 to 9 years, with interest from 1,1982, to bring balance sheet costs into agreement with supporting inventory records.
3.25% to 3.6%. 3,220,000 Net Decrease in Other bonds including $911,000 of the * " Department ofIfousing and Urban Develop-IIo8pital ment supported issues with interest rates $ 5,188,775 from 2.88% to 6% are payable over periods Blue Ridge 73,208 up to 36 years. 1,137,834 3 5,261,983 Ce pitalized lease purchases payable for additions to plant and equipment. 561,543 Endowment Funds: Faculty Mortgage Revenue Honds with inter-est rates from 4.3% to 5.5%. These bonds are payable in installments to maturity in 1997. 6,609,424 Telephone Honds of 1983, payable over 1 to 9 years, with interest from 8% to 8.75% 7,500,000 Ca pital Projects loan, with a variable inter-est rate (one half of prime plus one-half percent), payable in 1986. 15,000,000
$ 58,612,912 20 f
CAVALIER Training and Research Reactor Annual Operating Costs 1984/85 Estimate Personnel: Senior Nuclear Reactor Operator (100%) $20,117 Nuclear Reactor Operator Supervisor (15%) 4,836 Subtotal $24,953 Fringe Benefits 6,238 2,000 Supplies Total Annual Operating Costs $33,191 Over the next five years these costs will remain consistent. However, they will increase due to (yet to be determined) across the board salary raises mandated by tne State of Virginia and price increases of supplies. Future budgets of the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Phy sics will include sufficient funds (as requested by the Department's Chairman and approved by the Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science) for safe operation of the CAVALIER or suf ficient f unds to decommission the CAVALIER. Signed: 46W - #4*Md - anne M. Hammer udget Officer School of Engineering and Applied Science
l 4 4 4 1 i Hoard of University Academic Visitors Officers Deans Fred G. Pollard Frank L. Hereford, Jr. Jaquelin T. Robertson Rector President Architecture John S. Battle, Jr. Ray C. Ilunt, Jr. Robert L. Kellogg Vice President for Business and Finance College of Arts and Sciences William M. Camp, Jr. and Chief Operating Officer William G. Shenkir Mrs. George M. Cochran Edwin E. Floyd Commerce Vice President and Provost C. Clarke Canr.ingham, Jr. Adelle F. Robertson William H. Muller, Jr., M,D. Continuing Education Joshua V. Darden, Jr. Vice President for Health Atfairs Richard M. Brandt llenry A. Dudley Raymond M. Haas Education Vice President for Administration William M. Dudley Ralph A. Lowry Ernest 11. Ern Engineering William R. Harvey Vice President for Student Affairs Merrill D. Peterson David N. Montague Marion B. Peavey Faculty of Arts and Sciences Vice President for Development and Ferman W. Perry University Relations W. Dextc Whitehead Graduate Arts and Sciences Carl W. Smith Business and John W. Rosenblum James L. Trinkle Finance Staff Graduate Business E. Massie Valentine Robert IL Barnett Richard A. Merrill Assistant Vice Presicient for M Neal O. Wade, Jr. Business Operations Norman J. Knorr, M.D. Edgar N. Weaver, M.D. Alice II. Gerow 3fedicine Investment Officer Gordon F. Wilh.a Rose Marie Chioni Charles T. Gillet Nursing Raymond C. Bice, Jr. University Comptroller Secretary J. Robert Henderson Internal Auditing Assistant Vice President for Health A// airs Finance Richard A. Kovatch Director of Audits Peter L. Munger Assistant Vice President for Finance Leonard W. Sandridge, Jr. Assistant Vice President for Budget and Planning
}
\
.. _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ J}}