ML20070R601

Univ of Virginia Reactor Facility 1990 Annual Rept. W/

ML20070R601
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	12/31/1990
From:	Benneche P VIRGINIA, UNIV. OF, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA
To:	Mendonca M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 9104010252
Download: ML20070R601 (47)

Text

,

' M'llOOL Of ENGINEERING @

& APPLIED SCIENCE DIPARUt!NT OF \11 LL4R L \Gl\LERi\G March 26, 1991 a L\cl\unnc tilrsics Mr. Marvin Mendonca University of Virginia US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Reactor f acihty office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Charlottesville, VA 22903-2442 Non-Power Reactor, Decommissioning 804 924 7136 FAX 804 002634 and Environmental Project Directorate Washington, D.C. 20555

Dear Mr. Mendonca,

Enclosed you will find the 1990 annual report for the University of Virginia Reactor Facility (Docket 50-62, license R-66 and Docket 50-396, license R-123).

Sincerely, Y h, $%%C C t

Paul E. Bennoche Reactor Services Supervisor cc: USNRC, Region II, Atlanta American Nuclear Insurers I

I

{

l l

..n 9104010252 901231 -

PDR R

ADOCK 05000062 PDR

/b'

\

4..

J/

o UNIVERSITY F OF

, VIRGINIA l g REACTOR FACILITY 00000

} 1990 ANNUAL REPORT

)

u l

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

UNIVERSITY ,

OF l

VIRGINIA REACTOR FACILITY 00000

, 1990 ANNUAL REPORT p

l

1990 ANNUAL REPORT UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA REACTOR FACILITY Table of Contents p

Paae

1. INTRODUCTION . ............................. ......... 1 A. Reactor Facility Reporting Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 1

1. Re porting Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2. Basis for Reporting ...................... ....... .1 B. Reactor Facility Description . . . . . . .............. .. .... .1

1. Two Megawatt UVAR Reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .1

2. 100 Watt CAVALIER Reactor ................. ...... 3

3. Past Operating History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 3

4. Summary of 1990 Reactor Utilization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... 5

a. UVAR Reactor

b. CAVALIER Reactor

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

1. Operations Staff . . . . . . . . . . . ............... ....... 7 s 2. Health Physics Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 7

3. Reactor Safety Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . ./

11. REACTOR OPERATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ,,............ .. .9 A. UVAR Reactor ...

. ............................. ... 9

1. Core Configurations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......9

2. Standard Operating Prvcedures . . . .......... ........ 9

3. Surveillance Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . ........... .9

4. Maintenance . . . . . . . ....... .......... .... ... . 15

5. Unplanned Shutdowns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... .. . 17

6. Pool Water Make up . , ...... ....... . .... .... 19

7. Fuel Shipments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .......... . 20

a. Fresh Fuel

b. Spent Fuel

8. Personnel Training and Instruction . . . . . . . ..... .. .. 20

a. Reactor Facility Staff

b. Summer Course for High School Teachers

c. Disadvantaged American Operator Training Program

9. Reactor Tours . . . . . . .. ...... . . .... ... . . 21

l D ,

ii Pace B, CAVALIER Reactor . . . . . ... . ... . .. . 21 I

1. Core Configuration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 Ill. R E G U LATO RY C O M P LIA N C E . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A. Reactor Safety Committee . . . . . . . . . . . .................23

1. Meetings . . . . . .......... ....... . ............22

! 2. Audits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........................22

! 3. Approvals . . . . . . . ... ......... .... . . ... . 22 1 4. 10 CFR 50.59 Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . . . 22 S

B. Changes to Reactor Facility . . . . . . . ... .......... .... 23

1. LEU Conversion Plans . . . ........ ..... .... . , . 23 g C. Inspections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............... .. .... . 23 D. Licensing Action . . . .......... ....... .. .. . . 23 l

l E. Emergency Preparedness . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .. .. .. 24 i

D IV. H EALTH P HYSICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ . 25 A. Personnel Dosimetry . . . . . . . ........... .. .. ... 28

1. Visitor Exposure Data For 1990 ........ ........ ... . 25 D 2. Reactor Facility Personnel Dosimetry Data For 1990 ... . 25-B. Effluent Released During 1990 . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... ... . . . . . 27 l 1. G aseo us Efflue nts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 l 2. Liquid Efiluents .... .............................27 D 3. Solid Waste Shipments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 C. Environmental Monitoring . . . . . . . . ...... ..... ... .. . 28

1. Air Samples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .... . .. ...... .... 28 j 2. Water Samples ................. ........ . .... 3C D

Table 3: Environmental Air Sampling Results ... . . 31 Table 4: Environmental Water Sampling Results . . . . . . . . 32 D. UVAR Facility Surveys .... ... ... ...... .. . 33

1. Radiation and Contamination Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33

2. Airborne Radioactivity . . . . .......... . . .. . 33 P

I D

. e

)

iii Paae E. Spills . . . . . .......... .. ......... .... . . . . . . . 33 F. Summary . . . . . .......... ........... .. .... . . . . 33

, V. RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND REACTOR SERVICES . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 I

I A. Irradiation and Research Facilities Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 B. Research Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 l C. Service Projects . . . . . . . ........................... 37 D. Reactor Sharing Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 E. Reactor Facility Supported Courses and Laboratories . , , . . . . 39 p F. Degrees Granted by the Department of Nuclear . .. . . . 39 Engineering and Engineering Physics VI. FINANCES . ......... . ............. ... . . , . 41 A. Expenditures .. ...... . . ... ..... . . . . . . 41 B. State Gupport and Service income . . . . . . . ........ . . 41 l

b 1

_ _____________._.____.___.____.____----_-_-._-.__.-.--)

)

1 1990 ANNUAL REPORT University of Virginia Reactor Facility

)

I. INTRODUCTION A. Reactor Facility Reportino Reauirements

? 1. Reportina Period This report on Reactor Facility activities during 1990 covers the period January 1,1990 through December 31,1990.

) 2. Basis for Reportina An annual report of reactor operations is required by the UVAR and CAVALIER Technical Specifications, section 6.6.2. Additionally, it is the desire of the facility management to document and publicize the most

)

important results derived from reactor operations.

B. . Reactor Facility Description The Reactor Facility is located on the grounds of the University of Virginia (UVA) at Charlottesville, Virginia and is operated by the Department of

) Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics. The Facility houses the UVAR two megawatt pool type research reactor and CAVALIER 100 watt training reactor (now shutdown, awaiting decommissioning). The Facility also has a G,000 curie cobalt 60 gamma irradiation facility, a hot cell facility with remote manipulatcrs, several radiochemistry labocatories with fume hoods, radiation p detectors, counters and laboratory counting equipment, computerized data ecquisition analysis systems, and a fully equipped machine shop and electronic shop.

1. Two Meaawatt UVAR Reactor-

)

l The UVAR reactor is a light water cooled, moderated and shielded

" swimming pool" type reactor that first went into operation at a licensed power level of one megawatt in June 1960, under facility license No. R-

66. In 1971, the authorized power level was increased to two megawatts. In September of 1982, the operating license for the UVAR was extended for 20 years. Figure 1 shows a layout of the reactor and l the various experimental facilities associated with it.

I

8 e

0 2

UVAR Experimental Facilities T ANCEN TI AL BE AM PORT TARGET DCx jfs ... _g 1 i - FUEL. ELEMENT

~t t-t t t-t -

~

O /[, ,0 .

/

T A NGE Nil Al.

"DE AM iUDE yf u ) Q* dig -

A NEUTRON J BEAM *N w -

'$0ginga$f PORTS 9 t.CCESS FACILIT Y w.

SOUTH ACCEb5 F ACILIT Y h

RESE ARCH FACILITIES

• Two Neutron Seasporte, one currently uttilaed e other short or long term LtraJta: ton f acillstes ter Heutron Radiostaphy. with tetryosature anj environmental controt,

• Two Access Ports (6'a 4'), one currently con

• y figured for a High Energy Ceauna Photon Beam.

6.000 Ct Cobalt 00 Camma trraJlatit,n Facility,

• H t Cell, w5 remote manipulaters.

Hydraulle Rabbit, for activation analyste teample else < 0.69* diameter, 6* tengt5).

• Machtne shop, fully equipped.

• Pneumatte Rabt,at, for activation analysts (sample site 1* diameter and < 2.3* length).

• Electronic Shop, well eqalpped.

• Heated tytthermal Neutron irradiation Factitty.

• 8 '" I * * * I ' P * *

~p for trace element analysts. ** ' **""' *" * ***I '9" E*'"

• Computert4ed data acquiettien / analysis system.

)

-)

Figure 1

=

O 3

2. 100 Watt CAVALIER Reactor W

M The CAVALIER (Cooperatively Assembled Virginia Low Intensity Educational Reactor) first went into operation in October 1974, under facility license R 123, at a licensed power of 100 watts. The reactor was

built to accommodate reactor operator training and perform experiments for undergraduate laboratory courses. The operating license was

. renewed in May 1985, for a period of 20 years. Figure 2 shows a layout O of this reactor and its control room. A dismantlement plan was submitted in November,1987 to the NRC. The NRC requested a decommissioning plan which was submitted early in 1990. The staff is still awaiting final approval of the decommissioning plan.

O 3. Past Operatina Historv e

a. UVAR Reactor The UVAR reactor operating history is as follows:

0 Year (s) MW hours Hours Operated 1960-1965 1218 .1500 1966-1970 2742 3000 1971 1975 1654 1800 1976 1978 1769 1480 3 1979 4426 2764 1980 4610 2863 1981 4988 3568 1982 5507 3024-1983 6079 3556 p 1984 5687- 3166-1985 927 718 1986 -1330 891 l 1987 1220 801 1988 910 621 1989 1378 869 1990 1837 1087 During the years 1079 through 1984, the UVAR reactor was operated

~110 hours per week to irradiate metal specimens for radiation damage studies on pressure vessel steels. Since that time, the reactor staff has.

been on an eight hour, five day per week schedule. The intent of the reactor management is to perform various on going small and diverse irradiation projects, rather than a single large irradiation project, r

o i

i

e

• 4 ,

, f- G.i3flIICAL-EQtHhat Itogt I s u - T g V MACHTNE SHOP

_ w-STAIFS TO ~~

ME2 ?JL*lI NE -

1 I

g OPERATING AREA K

CONCRETE SKIELD I e 6.'a'e,0,'aN

' 4, ,, PSACTOR FCOERATOR ,/ m PIT g TANK '

4

[_'  :

.. . . .1 f L

D Plan View of CAVALIER Operating Area i

CCHCRETE SuIELD

. E 6

/ E. n -

4

.a. _<5 a

• ' ," 4 6 ' k ,a ' CROUND FICOR 4* a* a,*

4' LI"v7.L

(~& ., H0DERATOR TM ,'.# 4* ^*J h 4 '. g :r

• i.

6

. DEICHI?.ER tma .: - .' 6 ,

N

'e REACIOR '

a e j *

. roTu a

CORE I

'.')

. /

x s 4

'.aa a '

~::

pggIn '

+

'\ 0 .

• TO '

. x $

aa 6 "7 P0ffD 6 s' NN & A

• a _ v h-' -r- 1:3 [

. s , 1

. 4 s

,. ., a

. , ' , 1i * ., 6 **s*

ll Vertical Section Through Reactor Pit Figure 2

a 8

) ,

5 ,

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

7 Years Watt Hours - Hourr Operated 1974 1980 2128 758  !

1981 1985 1278- -388 1986 147 37 -l j

1987 =28 .

29 i 1988 Permanently Shutdown The CAViu.lER reactor has been used primarily for reactor operator. J training and undergraduate lab experiments, although it has not been

) operated over the past two years. A dismantlement plan was submitted- i to the NRC in November,1987 but the NRC decided the facility should l' submit a decommissioning plan. A complete decommissioning plan was :

submitted in January,1990. - The CAVALIER was unloaded and disassembled 'on March 3,1988.

4. Summarv of 1990 Reactor Utilization-

a. UVAR Reactor During 1990, the UVAR was operated for 1087 hours0.0126 days <br />0.302 hours <br />0.0018 weeks <br />4.136035e-4 months <br />'and a total-

) integrated-power of;1837 Megawatt hours. The following experiments were performed utilizing the UVAR reactor:

l 1406 NAA samples were run in the pneumatic rabbit system

[ 22 NAA samples were run in the hyoraulic rabbit system -

i

• - Eight sets of samples were run in the mineral irradiation

[ facility ; 1 1

)

• Nine separate runs were-made in the Rotating Irradiation Facility i

L

-112 hours of reactor: operations were dedicated to Neutron Radiography:

b. -CAVALIER Reactor i

The CAVALIER reactor was permanently shutdown in 1988 and will 1 1 no longer be operated.

L T

v .

v - .

.O 6

5. .Soecial Facilities The following facilities are operated in connection with the UVAR:

O Two neutron beam ports, of eight inch diameter, are available. One beam port is currently dedicated to neutron radiography.

Two access ports (6 ft x 4 ft). One port is currently configured for a ,

jO high energy photon beam, and the other port for a neutron beam._ )

Hydraulic rabbit, for activation analysis, permitting samples with dimensions of less than 0.69 inch diameter and 6 inch length,

O Pneumatic rabbit, for activation analysis, permitting sample diameters of 1 inch and length not exceeding 2.3 inches, accessing either a thermal or an epithermal irradiation facility.

Epithermal neutron irradiation facility, for trace element analysis with o reduced thermal neutron flux.

Solid gel irradiator for electrophoresis.

Epithermal neutron mineral irradiation facility.

,0

• A rotating irradiation facility currently used for activation of Iridium seeds for cancer implantation.

Irradiation facilities with environmental control.

O

• Cobalt 60 gamma irradiation facility with 6,000 Ci permitting exposures at rates up to 200,000 R/hr.

Depleted uranium suberitical facility.

o Small hot cell, with remote manipulators.

Machine and Electronic Shops, well equipped.

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

Low background counting room with shielded solid state detectors and computerized data acquisition / analysis system.

O O

l

D 7

C. Reactor Staff Oraanization

1. Operations Staff A Reactor Facility organization chart is shown in Figure 3. Personnel on the reactor staff as of the end of 1990 were:

R.U. Mulder . . . . . . Reactor Director

> J.P, Farrar , . . . . . . Reactor Administrator P.E. Bennsche . . . Services Supervisor B. Hosticka . . . . . Research Scientist

• T.L. Nguyen . . . . . Senior Reactor Operator D.D. Krause . . . . . Senior Reactor Operator (Trainee)

> L.L. Scheid . . . . . . Reactor Operator

• i E.H. Yoon . . . . . . . Operator Trainee Under DOE Grant i

V.G. hampton . . . . Electronic Shop Supervisor J.S. Baber . . . . . . . Machine Shop Supervisor V.E. Thomas . . . . Reactor Facility Secretary

• Paid from reactor services income account

2. Health Physics Staff at the Facility D. Steva . . . . . . . . Reactor Health Physicist The Health Physicist is assisted by a Health Physics technician paid from reactor services income. Other health physicists and technicians employed by the University are on call with the Office of Environmental Health and Safety.

3. Reactor Safety Committee The Reactor Safety Committee is composed of the following Individuals:

, A.B. Reynolds . . . . Professor, Nuclear Eng. - Chairman J.S. Brenizer . . . . . Associate Professor - Nuclear Engr, J.R. Gilchrist . . . . . Asst. Director, Environmental Health & Safety R.U. Mulder . . . . . . Asst. Prof., Director, Reactor Facility R.A. Rydin . . . . . . . Associate Professor, Nuclear Engr.

K.R. Lawless . . . . Professor, Materials Science R.G. Piccolo . . . . Radiation Safety Officer 1

h 8

O c$_

l b

it 8 =km a 5 s 5

. s .

e e .

O O

a 0 ~

t ,$ i. .i

• T O e d

-d t -

o o

$t3 3a "

o E3 5L h5 s

l'39* :

5 e

0 a n =

Q -

a o'

__ a bg Qm

o e U O C5 - -

,,  ;; i t O g 8S h@-j g:  : a -

a gs te se: s-  : 9g 5e i

sa c*i i- gg N ,

850 $*: -

• .e8 -

,- d -

8 >o

• 1 *. ! o6 (6o g ili 5

_ cn e

, E -

.e s_

3 i i e m

c "_ U b$-

3Q"_ g_: d'

• e - 5 s5

- g '5 3

- g: bo a M8 a t: -

t- 3 3E 2 g@ g gs' D 8 s

D L.__........ .

b 9

11. REACTOR OPERATIONS

, A. UVAR Reactor

1. Core Confiaurations l A typical UVAR core configuration is shown in Figure 4. The reactor i

employs three boron stalniess steel safety rods and one stainless steel D regulating rod for fine power control. The fuel elements are of the MTR l curved plate type elements, utilizing a U AL alloy. The fuel is l approximately 93% enriched. The elements have 18 fuel plates per

! element, with a loading of approximately 195 grams / element. The control rod elements have nine fuel plates with a loading of p approximately 97.5 grams / element. A plan view of these elements is shown in Figure 5.

2. Standard Operatina Procedures _

, Six sections of the UVAR standard operating procedures were changed during the year in the areas of: General Pegulations, Criticality Monitoring System, Determination of Minimum Critical Rod Positions, Health Physics Procedures, Dai'y Checklist and Secondary Water Chemistry. The Reactor Safety Committee reviewed and approved these changes.

D

3. Surveillance Reouirements The following sunteillance items were completed during the year as required by section 4.0 of the Technical Specifications:

D a. Rod Droo Tests and Visual inspection Technical Specification Requirements Rod drop times are measured at least semi annually, or

, whenever rods are moved or maintenance is performed.

Magnet release time should be less than 50 milliseconds and f 9e drop time less than 700 milliseconds.

, Rods are visually inspected at least annually, D

10 l'NIVERSITY OF 41RGINIA REACTOR CORE LOADING DIACRAM CORE LOADING Typical SilUTDOVN MARCIN N/A 1 delta k/k DATE N/A EXCESS REACTIVITY N/A 1 delta k/k 0 235 GPMS D(PERIMENf WORTH N/A % de1ta k/k F Normal Fuel Elemwnt P Crid Plate Plug FF Partial Fuel Element HYD RAB - Hydraulic Rabbit CR Control Rod Fuel Element THER RAB Thermal Pneumatic Rabbit G Graphite Element . EPI RAB Epithetmal Pneumatic Rabbit S Graphite Source Element RB Radiation Basket REG Control Rod Fuel Element with Regulating Rod Rod Worths al .N/A t #2 .N/A g #3 N/A 1 Rec .N/A g MINERAL 1RRADIAT10N FACILITY

...,,.........7-.-_

G F F F F F$ Y P O

11 >

l2 13 14 15 16 ;17 i 18

~

T Cl l- A G r r r g r r T P 21 i 22 23 24 1 25 26 27 y 2B C l G G i F F R r r F l e 2 i l 1 31 32 33 34 35 36 ', 6 l37 p C E.

G t F F F F R F I P 3  ! F 41 42 43 44 45 46 i47 4 48

~

R C' G I F F F E

F F P 6

51 ;52 53 54 55 56 57 58 G G G RB EPI S HYD P RAB RAB 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 G

" C G G G G P RB 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 G G G G G G G G 81 82 83 B4 85 06 87 88 Loading Approved By: Date:

Figure 4

11

, FUEL ELEMEt1TS

< 2.996 >

t 7

D N 7 m = -

~

-[

T "

c -==-  :"2 e c  % .

2 STAT 1DARD LM  %;

• 1.749 e 9

ui

~

9 8

< -2.996 >

__.. - -L: .

A

s. = =*= = .- ~.

.=

= = = o = =. = ,s, L

y 3 C0tlTROL n 3.150 N

m -

' ?[. ~~L ~ .- O - f ." * * ' -- --. ,C'k&

~ ~~'~

1. .-=..==-

,~**-"*--,.

~

[

s _. - . = - -

)

)f Figure 5

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

After visualinspection of the rods on 102-90 Magnet Rod Magnet Free Total

=

Current Position Release Drop - Drop Rod (maj_ (in) (ms,L (ms) (ms) 1 160 26 21 488 509 2 160 26 34 465 499 3 75 26 34 460 494 After core configuration change on 6-11-90 1 ~160 26 8 486 494 2 160 26 2J 470 493

) 3 75 26 'o

. 453 479 Semi-annual surveillance c a 12 710 1 160 26 18 490 508 b 2 160 26 43 458 501

} 3 75 26 41 455 496 The rod drop times continue to be within the limits required by Technical Specifications.

The UVAR control rods were visually. inspected on 1-02 90.

The following information concerning control rod visual inspection is abstracted from the reactor log book and the surveillance files. In no case did the rub marks or discoloration nsted constitute a substantial change from previous inspections.

.s.

Rod #1 - Inspected rod under ~3 feet of water. Dose rate at surface of water was -10 mr/hr. No sign of cracking or rub marks. Rod passed 0.95 inch gage easily.

Rod #2 - Inspected rod under ~3 feet of water. Dose rate at surface of water was ~13 mr/hr. No evidence of cracking. Some discoloration at top of rod. Rod passed 0.95 inch gage easily.

Rod #3 - Inspected rod under ~3 feet of water. Dose rate at surface of water was ~17 mr/hr. Small rub mark near center of rod. No evidence of cracking. Rod passed 0.95 inch gage easily.

- - - - - - - - - - J

O >

13

b. Tests and Calibrations

1. Month!v 3

Operational checks of the ventilation duct, personnel door, truck l door and emergency exit cover were performed as required. 1

2. Semi Annually Visualinspection of gaskets on personnel door, ventilation duct and truck door was completed.

Calibration checks of source range chF~lnel, linear power 3 channel, core gamma monitor, bridge red;ation monitor, reactor fL:e monitor, duct argon monitor, constu..t air monitor, pool level monitors, pool temperature monitors, core differential pool temperature monitors, and primary flow were done.

3. Annually 3

The emergency cooling system was tested during the month of September,1990.

The results are as follows:

g S.E. Tank S.W, Tank (aal/ min) - (cal /niin) minimurn required flow 11.0 11.5 9 21-90 actud flow 12.0 12.2 last five year range . _11.3 12.1 12.2 12.9

No pattern was observed in the variation of the test results for I

the last five years.

3 4. Dai!v Checklist l

The daily checklist, which is completed when the reactor is to be operated, provided for checks on all of the automatic .

l shutdown systems associated with the reactor.

)

)'

I l

l

D 14

5. Reactor Pool Water Quality The Technical Specifications require that the pH and 3

conductivity of the pool water be measured at least once every two weeks. These measurements were actually made on a daily basis when the reactor was operating and at least once each week. These measurements have indicated that the water quality was maintained well within '.he Technical Specification 3 Limits of pH between 5.0 and 7.o with conductivity < 5 micromhos/cm.

6. Core Confiauration Chances D The core configuration for the UVAR reactor was changed twice during the year, Once, in. March to replace a fuel element that was suspected of being a " leaker" and again in June to accommodate new experiments. l 3 7. Communication Checks The security system and emergency communications with the University Police were checked on a weekly basis throughout the year.

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

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

)

)

)

)

0 15

4. Mainjpeggpt

.O The following maintenance was performed on the UVAR reactor system during the calendar year 1990:

10390 Safety Chamber #2 signal unstable (when leveling off at 2 MW it read 80% and then slowly rose to 100%). Corrective action:

Replaceo detector and calibrated on 104 90.

11690 Safety Chamber #2. Replaced voltage and signal cables and connectors as part of preventative maintenance.

32090 Erratic signals in Safety Chamber circuits. Corrective action:

O Replaced High voltage and signal cables on Safety Chamber i

1. 1 and replaced both detectore. Also found console meter for l Safety Chamber #1 sticky. Replaced meter.

l 41890 Delta T System: Erratic response at constant power level.

,o Corrective action: Resoldered connections to RTD's. RTD's checked out and system put back in service.

42590 Delta T System. Unable to balance bridge circuit. Corrective action; Resolcered all connections and checked RTD's with

, Decade Box.

5890 Primary Flow System: Removed and cleaned in line screen in primary piping as part of preventative maintenance. Flow increased from ~1010 gpm to ~1040 gpm.

4 52990 Linear Range Meter: Needle jumping erratically when test current was applied. Corrective action: Cleaned contacts on

, range switch.

62590 Source Range: High readings with reactor shutdown.

"o i Corrective action: Found input to pre amplifier very noisy, Replaced detector, cables and connectors. Replaced Op Amps in Preamplifier. Checked calibration.

7-11 90 Experimental Area Duct: Replaced absolute filter in ductwork

, as part of preventative maintenance.

71790 Regulating Rod Drive: Drive appeared " sticky" at several points of travel. CorrectNe action: Lubrbated drive screw.

72090 Delta T System: Installed new mrd in system during nbrmal six

1. month calibration of system.

D

D 16 72490 Liquid Level Monitoring System: Tank #1 mit'oswitch not triggering signal when level was changed. Corrective action:

Replaced switch.

3 73090 Criticality Monitoring System: Detector #1 out of calibration during regular six month surveillance and would not respond to source. Corrective action: Replaced detector and calibrated.

• 80290 Room Argon Monitor: Out of calibration when checked during regular six month surveillance Corrective action: Recalibrated linear rate meter board and high and low voltage power supplies.

D 80790 Liquid Level Monitoring System: Tank #1 microswitch malfunct!oned. Corrective action: Replaced switch and sealed all pr.rts with RTV.

82290 Hot Cell Area Monitor: Not responding to check source,"High" 3 and " Alarm" lights dim. Corrective action: cleaned rotary switch on readout module and replaced filter capacitor in power supply, 91490 Waste Tanks: Totalizer gauge erratic. High humidity at location L of system caused corrosion of connectors. Corrective action:

F Installed a portable, box contained D.C. power supply uait to be kept in electronic shop and plugged in as needed.

12690 Header Up Relay: Intermittent scrams ladicated as header down, pump on. Relay sensitive to touch, scrams caused by D slight hand pressure on it. Corrective action: Installed new relay.

l 1? 11 90 Demineializer Area Monitor: Meter stays up scale even when l signallead disconnected. Corrective action: Found dirty p

contacts on selector switch. Cleaned and deoxidized contacts.

System put back into service.

6-p 1

D

D 17

5. Unnlanned Shutdowns The following unplanned shutdowns occurred on the UVAR reactor

) during the calendar year 1990. This number of unplanned shutdowns is not unusual and none of the shutdowns were of any safety t';gnificance.

I 04 90 Scram Annunciator panelindicated scram from ground floor manual scram. No one in the area at the time. Appeared to be 3 noise in system.

1 05-90 Scram Poollevel system. Staff member working near the system disturbed float switch and caused scram.

D 11290 Scram Electronic noise in Power Range Channel #2.

12690 Scram Chattering in scram relay circuit followed by an indicated scram from Power Range #2 Secured operations for the day.

I 2-02 90 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range channel during startup of reactor, 20690 Scram Noise in North Neutron Beamport Monitor. Staff member checked area and found doors locked and no D

indication of radiation problems. Reset alarm and started up reactor without incident.

20790 Scram Noise in North Neutron Beamport Monitor. Staff l member checked area. Area was unoccupied and not in use.

> Restarted reactor without incident, i

22190 Scram Brief building power failure. Reset console and restarted reactor. .

) 22190 Scram Operator manually scrammed reactor when line voltage fluctuations produced noise in console. After line voltage stabilized the reactor was started up with no problems.

22490 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range Channel. Reset console and started up reactor with no problems.

30190 Scram Compressor for MlF experiment tripped off Checked out system, reset and started compressor. Started up reactor and ran all day with no more problems.

> 3 15-90 Scram Noise in Power Range #2 channel.

D

0 18 31990 2 Scrams Noise in Power Range #2 channel.

3 32290 Scram Bridge monitor scram when activated sample became stuck in overshoot tube.

32990 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range channel, f 33090 Scram Noise in intermediate Range channel.

4 30-90 Scram Reactor Face monitor while surveying S.E. Beamport.

Reactor power was ~50 kW.

61990 Scram Noise in Power Range #2 channel caused by spike in ,

f automatic control system, 61990 2 Scrams Air bubbles in MIF water cooling experiment causing low flow scram, p 62190 Scram Momentary loss of building power.

l 70690 Scram Noiso in intermediate Range channel.

71190 Scram Compressor tripped on MIF experiment.

73190 Scram - Noise in Reactor Bridge Monitor circuit.

80190 Scram Compressor tripped on MIF experiment.

8-17 90 Scram Noise in Reactor Bridge Monitor circuit.

82190 Scram Momentary loss of building power.

8-24 90 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range channel.

'D 92890 Scram Momentary loss of building power, i

10 17 90 Scram Pool Level #1 monitor. Poollevel was close to setpoint Made up pool.

, 10 31-90 Scram Neutron Beamport Intrusion alarm. Apparently caused by air bubble in tubing or electronic noise. Beamport verified to be full.

11-09 90 Scram Header down, pump on scram, even though header

, was still up. Checked actuating rod at reactor bridge and found it was barely making contact. Cycled rod several times and reset system. Restarted reactor with no problems.

0 19 11 29 90 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range channel Restarted reactor with no problem.

O 11 30 90 Scram Noise in Intermediate Ranne channel Reactor was l oub critical at the time.

12 03 90 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range channel while maldng rod O dr p measurements. Reactor was suberitical.

12 06 90 Scram Header Down Pump on indication, althou0h header was still up. Found possible problem in relay. Replaced relay.

12 06 90 Scram Gas flow in MIF cooling system. Adjusted flow.

O 12 07 93 Scram Noise in Power Range #2 while leveling at 2 MW, 12 12 90 Scram Brief building. power failure.

O 12 13 90 Scram Evacuation alarm drill.

12 13 90 Scram Noise in Intermediate Range channel.

12 13 90 Scram Noise in Power Range #2 channel.

-0 12 14 90 Scram Signal from Neutron Beamport monitor caused by brief building power failure.

6. Pool Water Make up

'O During the calendar year 1990, make up water to the UVAR pool averaged approximately 24 gallons per day.- Over the past 13 years, the pool water make up has varied from a minimum of 16 gallons per day to a maximum of 85 gallons per day, depending on reactor operation. The loss of water is mostly due to evaporation from the pool while operating O at full power.

O

-0 O.

.O 20

7. Fuel Shioments O a. Fresh Fuel i

No fresh fuel was received at the facility during 1990.

i b. Spent Fuel IO j No spent ft.el was shipped from the facility during 1990.

8. Eersonnel Trainina and instruction l

a. Reactor Facility Staff At the end of 1990 the staff had four senior reactor operators and l one regular operator. A new staff memoer joined the facility in July, t

1990 and is presently training for a Senior Operator License. All licensed operators participated in the Facility's operator

1. requalification program, which was carried out during the year. The program cons!cted of periodM lectures, pcrticipation in the daily operation of the facility (including performing check lists and start-ups of the UVAR reactor) and takin0 an annual written examination administered by the Facility management.

b. Summer Course for Hiah School Teachers I

During the month of June, 1990,42 High School Teachers from within the state of Virginia attended a one week special course at

• the reactor facility entitled: " Science of Nuclear Energy:

Environmental Issues and Safety". The course consisted of formal lectures, laboratory experiments with the UVAR reactor in the areas of sub critical multiplication, rod calibration, measurement of l temperature coefficient and power calibration, k c. Disadvantaoed American Reactor Ooerator Training UVA has, since 1984, administered a reactor operator training program for disadvantaged Americans sponsored by the Department of Energy. The program involved four other universities.

D but at the aeginning of 1990 only UVA remained active in the

program. The program was scheduled to terminate at the end of l 1990 but sufficient funds remain in the program to justify its continuation. UVA requested and was granted a no cost extension of the program and began a search for a trainee in the spring of

, 1990, but had no success. A search was begun again in the fall and a new trainee, a female, was hired and joined the staff on November 1,1990.

L ..

O 21

9. Reactor Tours o During the calendar year 1990, the staff guided 62 groups on tours of the Facility, for a total of 955 visitors.

B. CAVAUER Reactor O

1. Q re Connauration The reactor was completely and permanently unloaded during the first week of March,1988. As of this time there are plans to fully decommission this reactor.

O

,O O

O O

t O

O

)

O

3 22 Ill. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE

) A. Reactor Safety Committig

1. Meetinos During 1990, the Reactor Safety Committee met eight times, on the following dates:

)

January 16,1990 June 7,1990 February 22,1990 July 2,1990 April 12,1990 September 21,1990 April 23,1990 . November 2,1990 D

l'

2. Audits During the year sub committees of the Reactor Safety Committee p performed two audits of the facility in the areas of: The reactor operations log book, the irradiation log book, the OA/OC program, the Health Physics program, the Security Plan and the Emergency Plan. No major problems were detected by the audits.

3

3. Acorovals The Reactor Safety Committee approved four changes to the UVAR Standard Operating Procedures during the year concerning the Criticality Monitoring System, determination of minimum critical rod positions, facility surveys and environmental surveillance, and secondary water chemistry.

4. 10 CFR 50.59 Reviews The following 10 CFR 50.59 analyses were performed during the year and were reviewed by the Reactor Safety Committee:

a. Installation of plexiglass cover over escape hatch in UVAR reactor room.

b. Changes to Mineral Irradiation Facility (MIF) cooling.

c. Gamma Shielding Tank for Neutron Beamport.

d. Installation and operation of SE Beamport Facility.

10

, 23 B. Chances to the Reactor Facility O 1. Low Enriched Uranium Conversion Plans The NRC mandated in 1980 a change from High Enriched Uranium (HEU) fuel to Loin Enriched Uranium (LEU) fuel, with the date of conversion to depend on several factors. The UVA Facility will be am ng the initial group of research reactor facilities to convert to LEU O

fuel. A study funded by DOE was begun in the spring of 1986 to accomplish this. A management decision has been made to shut dcWn the CAVALIER reactor and a Dismantlement Plan was submitted to the NRC, however, the NRC has requested that a complete decommissioning plan be submitted. This was accomplished in early

,O 1990. The present plans call for the conversion of the UVAR reactor in 1991, but will depend on the availability of new LEU fuel and a cask for spent fuel transport. A Safety Analysis Report on the LEU fuel and revised Technical Specifications were submitted to the NRC in November,1989. The NRC sent a follow up questionaire to the facility in o November,1990 and a response was forwarded to the NRC in February

1991.

C. Inspections 3 During 1990 the Facility underwent four NRC compliance inspections, at the following times and in the areas of:

30590 Emergency Preparedness 81490 Health Physics 82090 Reactor Operations

1. 12 11 90 Emergency Preparedness i D. Licensina Action During 1990 the fo!!owing License changes were approved by the NRC:

9 82990 Amendment #19 to the UVAR License and Amendment #7 to the CAVALIER License to change the organizational structure to have H.P. report to the UVA Radiation Safety Officer and a change to clarify the audit function of the D Reactor Safety Committee.

n

tO 24 E. Emeraency Preparedness 0 1. On May 17,1990 an evacuation drill was held at the facility to check personnel accountability procedures. A couple of minor problems wsre uncovered during the drili which were corrected shortly afterwards.

2. On December 11,1990 a bi annual emergency drill involving off site support organizations was held at the facility. The drill scenario O postulated a minor earthquake and a radioactively contaminated and injured individual. Two NRC inspectors monitored the drill. The participants in the drill included the reactor staff, the UVA Office of Environmental Health and Safety, the UVA Police, the Charlottesville Fire Department, the UVA Hospital and the Charlottesville Albemarle Rescue O Squad. Following the drill, the NRC inspector filed inspection report number 50-62/90 05 which identified no violations or deviations in the area inspected.

3. On December 13,1990, with an NRC inspector present, an evacuation O drill was initiated at the reactor facility. The UVAR reactor was in the process of being started up and an automatic shutdown occured. The building was evacuated quickly and only a few minor problems were uncovered during the personnel accountability process at the assembly area.

O O

O o

O 3 l t

O 26 IV. HEALTH PHYSICS g A. Personnel Doses

1. Visitor Exoosure Data For 1990 Visitors to the UVAR primarily consist of students, maintenance personnel and vendors. Visitor exposure at the UVAR is monitored 8 through the use of gamma and X ray sensitive self reading pocket dosimeters. During 1990, there were 2,379 visitor entries into the Reactor Facility. Of these entries,1424 were Individual visitor entries and 955 were visitors as part of 62 tour groups. No visitor received an exposure grerter than five milli roentgens in any one visit.

S

2. Reactor Facility Pergonnel Desi_ metry Data For 1990

a. Monthly Whole Body Badoe Data e Radiation doses received by Reactor Facility personnel were measured using ICN Panasonic TLD badges. These dosimeters measured exposure from beta, X, gamma and slow neutron radiation. Dosimeters were changed out on a monthly basis.

, The dose distribution for personnel badged at the Reactor Facility during the period January 1 through December 31,1990 was as follows in Table 1:

D i

i 1

D D

D D

O 26 O Table 1 WHOLE BODY DOSES RECORDED FOR BADGED INDIVIDUALS AT THE REACTOR FACILITY IN 1990 O Measured Dose

• Number of Occurrences (mrem) in 1990 Less than 15 124 11 20 10 o' 21 30 1 31 40 0 41 50 1 61 - 60 1 61 70 0 71 80 0 0

81 90 0 91 100 1

> 100 0

• whole body deep dose O

Number of badged personnel: 138 persons Total dose in 1990 for this group: 0.38 person rem NOTE: The dosMeters used by the Reactor Facility Q had a detection minimum of 15 mrem.

The individual with the highest whole body exposure (98 mrem) was O a Reactor Facility staff member involved in the handling of radioactive materials for neutron activation analysis.

b. Extremity Exoosures 3 During 1990,26 Facility personnel wore TLD ring badges in addition to their whole body badges. The highest individual annual extremity dose received by Reactor Facility personnel who wore ring badges during the period January 1,1990 through December 31,1990 was 2818 millirem. Two other individuals had extremity exposures in the range of one to two rem.

3 3

L. .

O 27

c. Direct Readino Dosimeter Exposures O Direct reading dosimeters are worn by UVAR personnel when they are handling irradiated material which has a calculated or measured exposure rate of greater than 100 mR per hour, measured at one foot from the source, if the exposure totals more than 5 mR in one day, the exposure is logged in an exposure log kept in the control ro m. This information is helpful in assessing the amount of O

exposure received during specific operations.

A review of this log book revealed no individual whole body exposures greater than 10 mR during 1990. The total of all exposures recorded in the log book was 118 mR (65 mR of this O total was a hand oose and not a whole body dose).

B. Effluents Released Durina 1990

1. Gaseous Effluents O

Argon 41 gaseous release concentrations are calculated using a methodology described in a June,1977 memorandum entitled: " Memo to Senior Operators Argon 41 production in UVAR." The methodology described in this memorandum assumes:

O (a) a maximum production rate for Ar 41 (given the present UVAR core loading)

(b) immediate evolution of Ar-41 from the pool water into the UVAR confinement atmosphere (c) no decay O (d) air saturating the UVAR pool water at 68 F.

Based on this method, and using the known amount of time the reactor was at power during 1990 (2 MW for 919 hours0.0106 days <br />0.255 hours <br />0.00152 weeks <br />3.496795e-4 months <br />), the calculated total activity of Ar-41 released was 2.7 Curies.

O

2. Liauid Effluents Liquid radioactive waste generated at the UVAR is disposed of by one of two means. Uquid waste generated in the student laboratories is

, poured into approved containers which are collected and disposed of by the Environmental Health and Safety Office. Other liquid wastes generated by the UVAR operation are released off site in accordance with 10 CFR 20 release limits. The majority of liquid released off site is from an on site pond. This pond receives surface runoff and water from 8 a creek which flows into it. In unusual situations, it may receive a direct discharge from the facility (e.g. draining of the reactor pool).

3 1

O 28 1 Regeneration of the UVAR demineralizer system is the major source of radioactivity in the effluent from the Facility. Prior to release, the o regeneration liquid is stored in two 5,000 gallon underground tanks where it is circulated through Cuno filters. The liquid in these tanks is ani/ Zed for radioactivlty content and then released through the pond spillway where it is diluted with pond water.

Prior to, and during all liquid releases, water samples are collected and O analyzed for radioactivity content. During 1990 there were 41' releases of liquid effluent to the environment (See_ Fig.-7). The total volume of liquid released effsite was 3.2 x 107 liters (8.4 x 10 gallons). -

The average concentration of radioactive material (as measured by gross O

beta analysis) released in effluent from the UVAR site was 2 x 10 4 pCl/ml. This concentration was 20% of the applicable MPC. The total ,

activity (excluding tritium activity) released in this effluent was 620 pCi. l This activity includes naturally occurring radionuclides coritributed to the pond from sources described above, i O .

'The average tritium concentration in effluent from the site was 6,0 x 10'7 pCl/ml. This concentration was 0.02% of the applicable MPC. The total tritium activity released during 1990 was 19 mCl. These calculations included sample results which were less than or equal to the lower limit O f detection (LLD) and.which were averaged in at the corresponding LLD concentration. Consequently, the total tritium activity given above is a conservative figure.

3. Solid Waste Shioments O- During 1990, several fume hood exhaust filters contaminated with small amounts of activation products were collected by EHS for disposal. No-other solid waste was shipped from the UVAR Facliity for disposal.

C. Environmental Monitorina -

O

1. Air Samolina During 1990, the method and procedure for. environmental air sampling were reviewed and revised. Sampling equipment was upgraded to allow O attainment-of a lower LLD and the computer program used to calculate measured air concentrations ~was m_odified to provide. additional-information on the printout. In September 1991 two fixed sampling ;  !

locations were established which replaced locations portable equipment had been taken to in the past,~ The new locations.have been identified 1 as an indicator location and a control location. Sampling time was 0 increased.from i hour to 96 hours0.00111 days <br />0.0267 hours <br />1.587302e-4 weeks <br />3.6528e-5 months <br /> (4_ days). . Consequently, a new target a

LLD of 6.2 x 10" pCl/ml was met after August 1990.

O.

o o o Liquid Effluent Releases Gross Beta Analysis Results (uCi/ml)

January-December 1990 MPC: 1. 00 E- T 1.0E-07 _

__1 - - , l

- s

, - .. . ....... L q with pond T , ....

! .l\ .

.  ?

l

(,

i

\

T

!\ ig I #

1.0E-08 _

sg k '

/Nj 1-

\ .

k-,

.. . /\

\

I t

1.0E- 09 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 Release Number Apriori LLD: 3.0 E-9 uCi/mi O

Figure 6 i

- ,i i

O 30 From January through August of 1990, environmental air samples were collected at the following three locations:

O Location #1 Roof of reactor building Location #2 Approximately 0.26 mi. SE of UVAR Location #3 Approximately 1.8 ml. NE of UVAR From Septembst through December of 1990, environmental air samples O were collected at the following locations:

A1 Roof of reactor building A2 indicator approximately 0.13 ml. E of UVAR A3 Control approximately 3.1 ml. NW of UVAR

o All air samples collected at these locations were particulate air samples and were analyzed for gross beta activity (See Table 3).

2. Water Samolina Environmental water samples are collected on a monthly basis from the locations indicated in Table 2.

Table 2 LOCATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL WATER SAMPLES TAKEN FROM AROUND THE REACTOR FACILITY IN 1990 Location Description Distance / Direction 3 from UVAR W1 Creek upstream of on site pond on site W2 University water filtration plant 0.26 ml. SE

• W3 Meadow Creek near Barracks Road, 1.8 ml. NE downstream of main University water discharge point (2 samples taken short distance apart on creek, results are averaged) 9 Gross beta analysis was performed on all water samples collected. The results of the analyses are provided in Table 4. The average gross beta concentration measured at each location was less than the applicable MPC.

3 3 1

l. .

10 31 Table 3 o ENVIRONMENTAL AIR SAMPLING RESULTS I

Gross Beta Analyses Results O ROOF OF UVAR 1.8 Ml. NE 0.26 MI. SE FACILITY OF UVAR OF UVAR pCl/mi o

l JAN 1.1 x 108 4.0 x 108

• 1.4 x 10 '8

• FEB 4.2 x 10

• 2.3 x 10'"

• 6.6 x 10'"

• 3 MAR 1.1 x 1012 1.2 x 108 **

APR 3.0 x 108 1.1 x 108 5.2 x 103 l

MAY 1.7 x 10 1,6 x 10 2.5 x 10$

1. JUN 7.6 x 108 2.1 x 1012 9.9 x 10

JUL 7.2 x 10 9.2 x 108 1.7 x 108 l AUG 1.1 x 108 2.6 x 108 (see below) 9 ROOF OF UVAR 3.1 MI. NW 0.13 MI.E FACILITY OF UVAR OF UVAR A1 A3 A2

't AUG -- - -

1.9 x 108 SEP 2.3 x 10 4.3 x 108 3.9 x 108 OCT 2.8 x 108 3.6 x 103 4.0 x 10 '3 l NOV 1.8 x 108 1.3 x 10 1.2 x 10

DEC 2.4 x 10 9.0 x 10'" 7.0 x 10'"

D

• ter p6per counted before 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> waiting period counting 1quipment malfunction, background counting rate unusually high e

D 32 Table 4 D ENVIRONMENTAL WATER SAMPLING RESULTS UPSTREAM FILTRATION MEADOW CREEK 8 OF POND PLANT W1 W2 W3 pCl/mi

~

e JAN 2.4 x 10* 6.1 x 10 4 8.4 x 10 4 l FEB 6.7 x 10 4 1.8 x 10 4 1.3 x 10*

g MAR 8.4 x 10* 1.1 x 10 4 1.9 x 10 4

APR 2.2 x 10 4 1.6 x 10* 4.5 x 104 MAY 1.2 x 10* 2.1 x 10* 4.6 x 10 4 I

JUN 9.5 x 10* 7.6 x 10"0 2.7 x 10*

JUL 8.6 x 10 4 -

2.1 x 100 4.2 x 10 4 AUG 4.0 x 10 2.7 x 10 4 1.2 x 10*

D SEP 1.0 x 10 4 8.7 x 10'" 5.3 x 10 4 OCT 1.4 x 10 4 2.9 x 10 4 5.6 x 10 4 p NOV 6.5 x 104 3.6 x 1 0

• 5.4 x 10*

DEC 1.3 x 10 4 -

4.5 x 10 ' 3.4 x 10 4

, AVG. 1.5 x 10 4 1.8 x 10* 5.9 x 10 4 4

Target LLD of 3.0 x 10 pCl/ml for this analysis was met for all samples.

O 33 D. UVAR Facility Surveys Radiation end Contamination Surveys 0 1.

Daily, weekly and monthly surveys are performed throughout the Facility to monitor radiation and contamination levels. All required area radiation and contamination surveys were performed during 1990.

O The levels of cont 3mination detected in the Facility during 1990 were generally very low (typically less than 100 dpm/100 cm'). Although the procedural definition of " contamination" is an activity of 2200 dpm per '

100 cm' or greater, most areas are decontaminated if found to have

, greater than 50 dpm/100 cm'. This is in keeping with the philosophy of O ALARA. Area radiation level surveys revealed no overall increase in background or systems related radiation levels,

2. Airborne Radioactivity O

A particulate air sample is collected as part of the weekly survey of the Reactor Facility. The average concentration of radioactive material detected in the air in the UVAR toom (as measured by gross beta

~

analysis of the particulate samples) was 5.2 x 10"' pCl/ml. The airborne O radioactivity detected was primarily due to radon and thoron daughters.

None of the measured concentrations exceeded the applicable MPC.

(See Fig. 8),

O in November of 1990, an on. site spill of liquid waste occurred which contaminated a small area on the bank of the pond. This was a result of a break in a pipe leading from the wastewater tank to the pond spillway. The spill was promptly contained and the area was decontaminated. The old O piping was replaced with new piping which provides double containment.

F. Summarv 0 During 1990, no State or Federal limit for exposure to personnel or the general public was exceeded.

1 O

O

O O O 'O G O O' O O O O Reactor Room Particulate Air Samples Gross Beta Analysis Results '(uC//m/1 January-December 1990 1.0E- 10 _=

======_ _____=.__=____===_ -

- __ _ __=.

=

~. _.

- w e. 2 or-u 7

t k b

.'1.0E-11 .

1.

L: f ~'T.T: 1.' T1. i .. _? ~

~.l~T....___._-.-~

-1._. .._ _. M. .1 . _ . _ . _ . , , . . . _ . . . _ - . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ - -

_.~.--___. . . _ _ _ . _ .

. .._. j . . . _ _ .

- _ _ . . . p .

7 rA

. . >. s .

vi 1 s .

4 _ . _ .

.-(-_.. ,

4.

a . _ _.

_ . . _ ~ . _ .,.m_.

f

./

1.0E- 12 1 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 53 Week

• Pre-24 hour count Apriori LLD: 2.8 E-13 uCI/mi Figure 7 L

O 35 V. RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES 3 A. Irradiation and Other Research Facilities Availat2!.0

. An overall description of the experimental facilities available at the UVA Reactor is listed in section I.B.S. During 1990, the p- 10 ting but dismantled southeast neutron beam port was modified and pier ick into service by a graduate student working on his PhD research 1 to the

$ modification of the beam tube which allows it tc d with water when

! not in use the student also designed and built - 4 biological shield i around the beam port exit.

l The north neutron beam port which is used on c regular bas;3 for neutre i S radiography was modified during the year with the adne of a ( 3r entric water shield tank near the end of the port. The tank signed to drain and fill at the same time as the primary water shield at, ,n of the port near the reactor coi1. The pur10se of this shield is to provide additional gamma l ray shielding which allows the researchers to work in the experimental area

% while the reactor is in operation at full power.

I B. Research Activitie.1

1. A continuing program of research was pursued on behalf of the Phillip

, Morris Company. This work was supervised by Dr. Jack Brenizer and conducted primarily by graduate students with Reactor Facility staff assistance. The major projects were neutron radiographic examinations of burning cigarettes, neutron activation analysis of various tobacco products and other substances used in the tobacco industry and the analysis of the distribution of smoke from a smoked cigarette through f

l spiking of tobacco with radioactive isotopes,

! 2. Staff assistance was provided for one major project and several minor projects utilizing the cobalt 60 irradiation facility. The rnajor project is on behalf of sponsors related to the nuclear power industry, it involves the D gamma irradiation of radiation sensitive components from nuclear power plants. Dr. Albert Reynolds is the princ'palinvestigator for this project l which could last several more yearo.

One of the other projects was sponsored by the Continuous Electron

, Beam Accelerator Facility (CEBAF) in Newport News, Virginia. The researchers there are investigating the possible radiation degradation of fiber optic type radiation scintillation detectors that are scheduled for use with the accelerator. This project will be continued in 1991.

A local firm, Biotage, is also using the cobalt facility. A large number of samples have been irradiated to test polymer coated stationary phases for liquid chromatography.

O 36

3. The safety analysis of the low enriched uranium (LEU) fuel element l design proposed for th: UVAR Reactor was completed in 1989. The o revised UVAR Safety Analysis Report (SAR) for the LEU fuel was submitted in 1990 to the NRC for approval. Some follow up questions about the new SAR came back to the facility from the NRC in late 1990 and will be answered in early 1991. This fuel conversion study was funded by the Department of Energy. The principalindividuals involved are faculty members Drs. Roger Rydin and Robert Mulder and staff "O members Bouvard Hosticka, Preston Farrar and Donald Krause.

4. The Ciba Geigy pharmaceutical company continued sponsoring work involving NAA and production of samarium and erbium radioactive tracers. The interest is to develop methods to measure and control drug O delivery and release mechanisms which employ hyCUgel bead technology. Favorable preliminary results lead to further funding for 1991.

.O

0 O

l

O

,O ,

O O-i

O 37 C. Service Projects 0 1. lodine determination by epithermai neutron activation analysis (ENAA) was performed on behalf of several sponsors. The substances analyzed were infant formula, liquid diet supplements, surgical diets, pet foods and various chemical compounds, o 2. Rhodium, lodine and copper determinations by neutron activation analysis (NAA) were performed en a number of chemical mixtures for a major chemical manufacturer.

3. The project involving the color enhancement of various gemstone grade p minerals by fast neutron irradiation was pursued by the reactor staff on behalf on several sponsors involved in the commercial gem trade.

5. Several specimens of high temperature superconductors were irradiated with fast neutrons for AT&T Bell Labs.

O 0. Some specimens of material from platinum rhodium thermocouples were tested by neutron activation analysis to determine if their failure at high temperatures may hcVe been due to contamination by some other metals in low concentrations. This work was done for the NASA Langley Research Center.

O

7. Several samples of niobium and iron were irradiated as part of a project to quantify the usefulness of niobium as a neutron fluence dosimeter in nuclear power plants.

8. A number of small gold pellets were irradiated for use by the Department O

of Radiological Physics at the University of Virginia Health Sciences Center in the treatment of inoperable cancerous tumors.

9. Several activations of up to 20,000 smalliridium pellets were performed for a California company. These pellets are also used in cancer O treatment in hospitals worldwide.

10. High purity silicon wafers were analyzed for trace impurities by NAA for IBM.

O 9

0

. o O

38 D. Reactor Sharina Procram 9 The Department of Energy has for the past twelve years funded a program at the University entitled Rsactor Sharing. The purpose of this program is to make available the UVAR facilities to faculty and students at universities and i other educatienal institutions which do not have nuclear science facilities.

Over the years, hundreds of students and dozens of professors have used

, this arrangement to enhance both their educational and research opportunities. This past year a number of tours, laboratories and research projects were conducted under this program.

The tollowing is a list of both the directly and indirectly funded activities

, compicted in 1990.

Schoo; tours:

Sixt3en tours from 12 high schools involving 367 ctudents and teachers.

9 Seven tours by special groups of junior high school and elemedery school aged students involving 148 students.

College tours:

Four tours from three colleges involving 75 students and professors.

O Special tours in conjunction with UVA programs:

Twelve tours involving 187 Individuals.

College labs:

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

Research projects:

Two research projects utilizing neutron activation analysis were conducted by students and faculty from other schools during the

1. year.

D D

D l

l _

O 39 E. Reactor Facility Suocorted Courses and Laboratories 0 1. Academic Courses and Laboratories The following courses and laboratories were taught by professors in the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics during 1990 utilizing in part services provided by the Reactor Facility.

O NE 488 Nuclear Power Plant Operations NE 382 Nuclear Engineering Laboratory During June 1990,43 high school teachers from the state of Virginia attended a one week special course at the Reactor Facility. The title of O the course was " Science of Nuclear Energy and Radiation:

Environmental issues and Safety." It consisted of lectures by University of Virginia nuclear engineering faculty, laboratory experiments using the reactor and a tour of the North Anna Nuclear Power Station.

O F. Dearees Granted bv the Dept. of Nuclear Enaineerina and Enaineerina Ehysics The following number of degrees were awarded during 1990 by the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics, O

Bachelors of Science, Nuclear Engineering . . . 6 Bachelors of Science, Engineering Science . . . 5 ,

Masters, Nuclear Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Masters, Engineed ,g Physics . . . . , , . . . . . . . 8 Doctor of Philosophy, Nuclear Engineering . . . 0 Doctor of Philosophy, Engineering Physics . . 1 .

TOTAL............................. 26 The following theses by students in the Department of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics were completed during 1990 in

1. part using services or facilities provided at the UVA reactor.

Neutronic Analysis for the UVAR Reactor HEU to LEU Conversion Proieqt, MS thesis in Nuclear Engineering by David W. Freeman, e The Use of Nickel 63 in the Prevention of Microbial Influenced Corrosion of Mild Steel, MS thesis in Engineering Physics by Stephen J. Hus;ttner.

Analvris of Gamma. Radiation and Elevated Temoerature Effects on Polv,ner

Dearadation,

MS Thesis in Engineering Physics by Paul A.

, Wlodkowski.

S l

3 40 Eve'uation of a Portable CdTe Gamma Detection System for Gastric Mglility Anle:smanj, MS Thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Matthew J.

J Combs.

Lnvestiaation of Gamma Radiation and Elevated Temoerature Induced OxidativtQ1 gradation of Electric Cable insu'ation, MS thesis in Nuciear Engineering by Reggie M. Bell.

3 Effective Diffusion Theorv Cross Sections 1gr_ QVAR Qontrol Rods, MS thesis in Engineering Physics by Stuart G. Wasserman.

The Effect of Tramo Uranium on Fission Product Activity in PWRs, MS 3 thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Eric S. Hendrixson.

The research work for severa) other theses is in progress utilizing Reactor Facility support.

)

D D

1 D

D D

D s w.

m _ _ _ _ _ _ . _

b 41 }

VI. FINANCES 3 A. Exnenditurej Expenditures for 1990 were as foilows:

State Sunqg.rt LocalN.,9enerated mod!D Salaries: $253,800 $91,700 i Operations: 41,300 20,100 s

3

@ Subtotals: $294,100 111,800 TOTAL: $405,900 B. State Support / Research and Servke Income The University of Virginia is supported by allocations from the State of Virginia. Of these monies, a portion is alloccted to the Dt,partment of g Nuclear and Engineering Physics for the operation of the Nuclear Reactor Facrity. These funds cover many of the expenses directly relatad to the operation of the reactor but additional monies are necessary to provide for l

remaining services provided to the university community by the Faci'ity.

Additional income is in the form of fees received for research and setvice wc(k support. This totaled about 3150,000 in 1990. The income is *rnt 8

basiress related income" because it is primarily used to pry the salarias of extra professional staff members at the Facility who are not state supported. Currently, there are two staff members receiving salary frorn local funds.

9 Many statt members take courses and receive degrees at the University while their salaries ara paid from monies generated by service work. In effect, this is another methcd by which the Reactor Facility supports science education at the Depa1 ment of Nuclear Engineering and Engineering Physics.

9 I

l D

D

_ s-- . - - - - . - - - - - - - - - - - -