Text

Exam Rept 50-243/OL-86-01 on 860106.Exam Results:One Candidate Passed Written Exam.Waiver Granted for Operating Exam
	ML20137V480
Person / Time
Site:	Oregon State University
Issue date:	01/15/1986
From:	Elin J, Johnston G; NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20137V464	List: ML20137V460; ML20137V480;
References
	50-243-OL-86-01, 50-243-OL-86-1, NUDOCS 8602190584
	Download: ML20137V480 (14)
	v • d • e

I f

-l U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REGION V Examination Report No.

50-243/0L-86-01 Facility Name:

Oregon State TRIGA Reactor Docket No.

50-243 Examinations Administered at: Corvallis, Oregon, January 6,1986 M

!/d Chief Examiner:

G. W Q)fnston er tor License Examiner D,gte $igned

/N

@b Approved By:

pnO.Elin, Chief,OperationSection Date Signed Summary:

Examinations on December 17-19, 1985 A written examination was administered to one Reactor Operator candidate. The candidate passed the written examination. No Operating examination was administere4 A waiver was gragped for the Operating exarpiqation.

g2190584860121 y

ADOCM 05000243 PDR o

f R-c 1.

Persons Examined,

'One Reactor Operator candidate.

2.

Examiner

G. Johnston, RV

Lead Examiner-3.

Persons Attending Exit' Meeting Licensee Representatives:

B. Dodd, Assistant Reactor Administrator T. Anderson, Reactor Supervisor NRC:

G. Johnston, RV 4.

Written Examination and Facility Review The written exam was administered as follows:

One Reactor Operator - January 6,1986.

Immediately after the administration of the examination the facility staff reviewed the examination and the key, and provided the examiner with all their comments. No comments were to be forwarded.

5.

Exit Meeting The exit meeting was conducted immediately after the review of the examination. No Operating examination was administered. The examiner discussed future exam scheduling and other concerns raised by the staff about licensing actions.

1 l

{

c> ; }

.r<

- ~-

9 9,_h F

{f=

c

+

s j - >

?; _,;g

- n J.

?

y~

~

_. f

, +-

.g f

p

.i~

0..

Resolution'of: Facilitiy Comments s

e:

i x

' 11 0 Facility Comment:1 Question-C.3

~

s

_ : ai -

n s *

,9, Thef,facilityjreviewersiindi'cated.to,the examiner thatithe:poo1~

~-temperature constant:had ~just been' measured'and was found to'..be 4.93 deg.

. C ~perl100 kW-hr.-

3:

~

'Resolutioni.

The emaisiner will 'take into account the possible-use: of a different-itemperature constant as long as the candidate in'icates the'use of one'in' d

lthe calculation.

~

m s..

4 y

^

2.0' Facility Comment: Question'C.4-

,. a b

y

-ThE reviewers indicated that an insertion ^ of $2.30 of prompt; reactivity?

~

.would place the reactor outside the Technical Specification. limits.4 '

^

' Resolution:

e,,

.The examiner agrees witE the comment and will tak'e that into. account when +

~

grading.. Ifsthe. candidate indica _tes that it is o'utside the TS

~

requirements full credit will be allotted.

r..,

. n. g g..

a 3.0 Facility,;Commeni:/ uestion C.6 '

y ',

j Q

j g

The reviewers expressed a: concern that the question'may be'~ misleading.

This concern;was ba' sed on'redding*th'e answer in the key, it appeared to them that the. key-focused on delayed neutrons and not the prompt

~

neutrons'.. '.,

s 1}. G :-

1

~

s, ' >, w m,y,+*,

J' 47

i g Resolution: n

.x 1 '*

I 1 1

t'

.i The examiner feels the, relationship expressed'in' the key is ;important. and :

--would expect ~the'can,'didat,etto cover.,it in the response -

, 4 s

. (

f 5

s n

_E~ i y

~

y 2,

J_

7 9

Q 1

I w

,1 s

k -

7

. j s

b 2-

_a.

A f

y

,u E

' u,.

g_.

?

s 1.-

- o:'

0'.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION REACTOR OPERATOR LICENSE EXAMINATION Facility:

orecon state Reacter Type: TRICA Date Administered:

January 6, 1986 Examiner:

cary Johnston va h APP 1i #"t*

V INSTRUCTIONS TO APPLICANT:

Use separate paper for the answers.

. Staple ouestion sheet on -top of the answer sheets.

Points for each ouestion are indicated in parenthesis after the question.

The passing grade reouires at least 70% in each category.

Examination papers.will be picked up six (6) hours after the examination starts.

Reference:

" Nuclear Reactor Engineering" -(Glasstone and Sesonske) 3 1

G L_.

m-s

+ ~ - - - - -, - - -

g 1.0 t

r 5

t=0 TIM 6 ist m

W D *? 10sm.

k}R w e.-

m 1:0, s

.1

= se w 7.

e a3

\\

Rv 1

\\

1

' I twQ A

h lN$

t

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

6 Ficos.:

C -l KET

\\

/,0 g

ee a

i g[

g.g son-

t kg = ME' *

(

k incveuse C @<c-

,k ve.7 se///c (c. u)

{=,

~

no

4. i.' x q'" 3

'r',_._______________J i

g u..

g Abh pevtod (o.n) d'

%,e+ Log (o.ss)

.se w

y P < 9, i

i s.,

me,w puo = w k[g' %, ; ~h.

(PR4kfP

~

y sw

[o33) o.i' ~ s, p

v

~

t,* O tst

..T:nE S

-,,,n--,a--y r

Y

.c C.2

' ( 1. 5 ).

~

The'. fallowing

_ data fwere taken during'a.tiransi ent ' for a

reactor.. Calculate the " reactor period".

TIME COUNT RATE

.(ggCgNDS1.

O 200-

'30 330~

60-550

.90

'895 120

1480 150 2440 C.2 Answer:

t2 - t1 7. ___

in (CR2/CR1) 150 - 30 In (2440/330)

= 60 sec.

Reference:

" Academic Program for Nuclear-Power Plant. Person'nel",

Volume II, pp. 5-37, General Physics Corporation.

O

~ 1 2

i

.2 1.'

m

C.3.

(2.5)

.During operation the secondary cooling system

fails, the OSTR' pool-temperature is 71 deg.

F and the reactor is operating at_150 kilowatts.

a.

If' the reactor continued to operate at :150 (1.5) kilowatts, what would be the pool temperature after 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />? Show any assumptions.

b.

What would the estimated reactivity effect of (1.0) this change in pool temperature be?

(Indicate magnitude and direction.)

C.3 Answer:

a.

At approximately 5.25'deg. C per 100 kW-hr the change in temperature would be:

150 ( 4 )

600 kW-hr (0.5)

=

5.25 ( 600 )/ 100 = 31.5 deg C.

(0.5) 31.5 ( 9/5 ) = 56.7 deg. F 71 + 56.7 = 12Z22

(+ or - 1 deg.) deg. F (0.5)

Will accept deg.

C.

b.

With O.005 $ per 10 deg. C:

- Rho = 31.5 ( O.005 )/ 10 = 0.0158 $

(1.0)

Reference:

" Oregon State TRIGA Training Manual", Volumes V and VI pages V-17 and VI-75.

/10Wf#

g pyjgy g4 g e oc 9 93 *c p.c iaucud<.

C.4-

~(2.0)

An experimenter has determined.that an experiment needs a

pulse of approximately-1500 megawatts peak power.

The previously logged pulse had a peak power of 2100- megawatts with a prompt reactivity of-$2.30.

a.

What prompt reactivity must be. inserted' to (2.0) provide an approximate peak of 1500 megawatts?

C.4 Answer:

a.

P1 = last known pulse = 2100 MW P2 = Projected pulse = 1500 MW delta K1 =-Prompt reactivity last pulse = $2.30 delta K2 = Prompt reactivity of projected pulse.

P1 P2

=

(t,oy (delta K1)**2 (del ta K2) **2 (delta K2)**2 P2 (delta K1)**2

=

P1 delta K2 = ((1500)

(2.30)**2)**0.5 2100 i

delta K2 = $1.94 (1.0)

Reference:

" Oregon State TRIGA Reactor Training Manual",

Volume VI, pages VI-101 and VI-102.

$2.so e 9 ~g{f r;.4 9<< d:s:J w../J'y c-L y

L. Jd6

<~k 6:L -

a a w-c-n,c a s %,:w.

Q lev,b}h Q r cl.E s c u n i n -

beb Sf yw,'Lkn w;// La a/ Lad.

~

4 5

-y.. ~

~O pr a :.

. a

. g. <

-.:.+-y; C.5I l(1. 5)I Regarding criticalJrod position:

a.

Give lthree. factors.that may cause a change: in

( 1. 5 ).

critical-. rod position?

'C.5: Answer '

o.

.a.

1. Power. history-(Xenon,1 fuel burnup').

'(0 5) 2.

Temperature.

(o,5)

3. Experiments..

. (0. 5)-

Reference:

" Oregon State TRIGA~ Reactor Training Manual",

Volume VI, pages VI-22 to VI-29.

u e

t 7

J

+

J s

O

{

4-

.s

~ C.~ 6 - ( 1. 0 ) !

Regarding reactorJcontrole a.

Why. - i s - it important that a't their generation

- ( 1. 0)'

(emission),

prompt neutrons have a

higher average energy level than delayed neutrons?.

C.6 Answer:

a.

The. prompt neutrons will~ experience a greater loss due to-leakage'and absorbtion-from

.the-higher energy level.1QuGl.

This effectively gives the delayed neutrons more influence by giving more weight to their effect on true kinetic uehavior of the' reactor 1Q 51

Reference:

" Oregon State TRIGA Reactor' Training Manual",-

' ~

Volume VI',

pages VI-32 and VI-33.

t 6-O

C.7-

. ( l '. 5 ) -

Consider two cases, both-begin with the sameLflux -leve1~.

. Case A: The rods are withdrawn.immediately to.the point at!

which' criticality occurs.-

Case B: The rods are withdrawn slowly to the point-of criticality.

.a.

Will the flux at which the reactor becomes (1.5) critical..be the same for both cases? Exglainz i

C.7 Answers.

a. No IQu5l.

In Case A.the' flux will barely _ have time to change durin'g withdrawal, - so'that the-reactor will become critical at' a

low ' flux

}

1evel iQu5l. In Case B,.the flux builds innfrom sub-critical multiplication, therefore'it'has a considerably larger level than Case A _(0.51.

Reference:

" Oregon State _TRIGA' Reactor Training = Manual",

Volume VI, page VI-50.

F END OF SECTION C END OF EXAMINATION

~

ag J

4 e

1 j

1 i

7 E

1

-

ML20137V480

Contents

Text

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Navigation menu

ML20137V480

Text

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Reference:

Navigation menu

Search