ML20137B347

Univ of VA Reactor Facility Annual Rept for 1996

ML20137B347
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	12/31/1996
From:	Farrar J VIRGINIA, UNIV. OF, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA
To:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned), NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9703210284
Download: ML20137B347 (44)

Text

g ) ,

SCH00L OF ENGINEERING @

&APPUEDSCIENCE NUCLEAR REACTOR FACILITY Department of Mechanical, Aerospace & Nuclear Engineering University of Virginia Charlottesville, VA 22903-2442 804-982-5440 FAX: 804-982-5473 March 18,1997 Director, Division of Reactor Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Document Control Desk Mail Stop PI-137 Washington, D.C. 20555 Re: Docket No. 50-62 Docket No. 50-396

Dear Sir:

We hereby submit, as required by section 6.7.2 of the Technical Specifications, our annual report of the operations of the University of Virginia Reactor (UVAR), License No. R-66, Docket No. 50-62 and the CAVALIER Reactor, License No. R-123, Docket No. 50-396 during the period January 1,1996 through December 31,1996. This report has been reviewed and approved by the Reactor Safety Committee.

Sincerely, Q. .h W J}. Farrar, Administrator U.Va. Reactor Facility 1

A lh cc: USNRC, Mr. A. Adams USNRC, Region II 9703210284 961231 PDR ADOCK 05000062' lEEEE%'EEE@

R PDR 1

b g

• * * "r j #*, ,.7 *

• f n s,' . ,,9 I #h - * #

• e .

f *p g #4 f

.r , . f c.-l, ;'m: '*4pC4 i Xw$ q,%#e 1 h .- , ( ,,

Q y,,. i : 6 ;. y'i;%

s 8,.&;;Y-C..O:.p.J: . 'n: ;W Q.m  : %%p%%g$

[

M hb N h $ k$y W y % : h .(ff

+ n % W. + ~ ':h 44W , . g s  % ,d: @

a[' "'h, i/% m 'irWil1

(. . , ,l ? : > M,j"}, . .

n .

,. w.

kN:

.m w.m n ";W::r w[WW'&+*Wf:?b .

i .

a.

y.M

~ .#r:_:. k :M: _iV H F y

'.:H. .v!M:p%u..%Y;>.$;%p%:y%lgg.;y.q:(y~1

$.%f

. , j.1.:d:.y:%.,:.?:

D4:  :

. ez. ,

u., 4f.%. <.dn>. p:::.f:p(l,:'.&um.

N 1O v Q,v. )Q: :M:.

n,: V. '. :n y'

,a e: .;; n ;

, . . . . j ' ** a-..

v:, . .: .. ..  :

.;, r f;m\s L. ,s.g l%,v 1;"h. Qtds :. ap : :: s* f ,\. ,. ' .. p '%

, ;5

• l% *. 'klJ ', .

q. . .

a, .

,,7 ,, ,;. .% -

~

.' '. I .;  ; . '., ,l' / ,

. . '.

1. : \.

. i:.s,y / 'u . .%

.,,. t -

c. t * . *t . .; . .,,; . <.< @, =

'o .%

c . : n'y . u , . + < :.>s: s. n ~ c - s . f ;t. l .

m. . . -.,. ^?

..: .s *. , .

.m

..h.'.. ~...:,

e. g L. ) ; ,+..* . .;n ,E ', b ', s s.n, r.,.i p[* %m  :' 's {. 1.,4 ,e

• ..  !*u, J, f %./,A n-t l * .1u

.f.:g<, , ,

I

..e , . s.e ; .eb ytf . w .. .$,ls'.i,. .::

.'s. , 4 f. ".3 e

,g. f

. :, n ' l.)s. e' g.,g , . ,e. .6'7. )sl. ,myi]4** .. l,l,

.: ' ' ,c*; , *1 .. : .. ;.

- ,  % ,,*, !.,o f .K .,,

,g, ' l[p> lJ' llq;....,. .

., n t ;;; y, ,e.q.' e , .::n , .,.p:(n , , .:p,. ,y :o;3; 8  ;,..n ( : 4 9 . .gsg ;.. ;. . ,. . . .:;.,, , . ' . sy; ., :t_ : ,

....,;y ht" yy>;,,,. .s;p., y .3,h, ~,kN.I N .M: h :~h.',cd',.N .. :bd b. ;U.>. b; , .b(;:b' lhb-l k) i ':#:,.

p.,:q ;hh:. v.h .'llf' % "',,;.g. & &.~ e . ..

,a ~ Q * . ,.; :!Q .. :c .2:l E l:.f.,m: :y:';.,Qfi ..'.l >,s

... a . u. :.: . y .;..e . u: ag., '

. ' , , .c

,-p:'. :r: w  ;, ,: .

s.

w. ;y. ,...a. .'

:e . ..~ :. g ; b I'; . l . ,

'~.:.ll A: %iv. ml'z.f.,

j ,.O .

s,  : .

.y. .

,4 @;::'a h.y , :}: a . :L: .%; Wp ':,?.:%,.l:. .it: s.M:. :l. ;:[::NlwlL.* r

.:  :.; k 137.d .; ' . 6&

.,.s , ..;;;.. .( f a,.e.w;. ..e m..e. M Rs..

y o c;,.n,,, k . 4 ;: n;,,;e %c: k. P.q,f 4.; g,::7.  ;.. : ,.p. 9 ,1 a;.

1

u ,.Q.

.:n :e 6:

.. ,,, r u 9 ,as. . . e v .

y v ..  :. ? < .

.s.

8 s ,,,;. r,44 ,,. s: ., ,.

cy :., :c ..,

. . , .y

.~.

.$. %y ~, ,c.s - j$*, s. &. v.,.m9.,.,. Vq. . + x.;p:.8 <,%. y.y ;f 9 .

. ,. , . y s ..

's y 4 ,+.  ; *.' ,. , b

,. n:

e '

n: .;4. y.. > , y  ;

..~

.a

.. 9 1(.

i ev+- , ..

. d,A .r(1<,M :p )y,,*:f, .t.,. fg

.o ,t'. ., .e . ,, e ; ,,,. .

s.n/  !. , w'f,[:

tr . a.n, i, ,, . .

f. / /* ,. J . '

- . i .p >

u, 4< p. . /gs g,1 '; g'pf.g., , * .Ms

.c . u >

.' , g., * * . i' ' ;. ' . , . 1. '.; e*. ,. e, ,,. sf

% 9.; a g " g /*/ 7.& p y y[/ , , . , , " . * : <*

~ ' Q.ly,1,,? c *

? he '. . , . ' .

v.

.,&.w*

s,n . t f :' '.?(. 5

m,uy, '*,. v.. ,,. . ,.. '.. ,.

:a , p v. a, .< - . v.. . , e.: s, nr. .,< 3.s .y:+w.' w. ss:, ,.1.,

4

. . .l .

s.,, + n ,n- k... a s, w< 1$ '. . ..z'

. .s < + . .,,f. m's,,. $ w o, t . , :..4 ve'* u < 1, > . 3. g . .# s uj

,; . 4d .Q t. .s<

nfit ,l?:y.. . . :., t%- W ;*G,.';l A;.u;:n\;";

+ e' f: Y,. ' }

• .  %  :,  !'" n :. '- .U.  %

'..' eQ. s y.,m,. :c %ln;',fe'$v;'o.1 s -s  ! #.

.,; y.g . g; 4, , n::,:y ,  ;.  ;. c:9, ~ ,, e. y'.7,":q.%;;

e '",?*i $:  :'. :e, U,ik1;.s ,

, m;  :

.4  ; t,.

e;;o..,y'3..}'4:c..,.n

~>,

j z ~,

, i (h,. ... ,jf

, {,..  %, i; '

,s  ;.

• f g. n

.s.,.

J //,f l v l3 a.:; .:'9.,3l4j.

e J., ,*,

e ,e .:

, ;r ye.1'

, ., s . .

6," %n ,*,; g$ ;4', g 4.,, p.; .. .,4; 4 g

' qf

,-b, f .

..j *[ . ". ,,. - , , , , . ,l , . '

.g .j p ( ' , %f}:,

m,

, .! .. x ,,; ,)

'.':[.n .'f ~ . .. ,.

. ..f *(. f;' *I 'g'['.Y. . .E,.I ,I$l. - ,

4 , . . , < . #

1. <A

, . f.\.l . ., "n, I). s. .. .,1:th

'%,,-a

..  : ). v? -&M  ;\ . . l

-?{) L.]l. , ' Q n' 4'l.?:.b.. sts ' L 3 .V " .' ' .?, . ' l ,,:es ' "

. . r/i': [w'  ; '. .%,~ % :n ;l~' , s,. . ;. ", v :

'- ; 7 ;. /,%

~ ~. . :0, . y n.,r

. .p.

:;i;l.w , m, c  :.,.,p4:

.. :.~... :y. 3 ;. .

.;.. : . q< ; , ',. . -q. ai .~:;.,,q:.(2:J

.. ,,,:.. .: . m .s,, .e, .x.%.  ;.. .:.y~. ,

g..t. n..' s.>.t.

. o u,;< . . . ' . . , . .. . , ... . ..e"; , ;y.A. . 7,;v.. -. ;., ,:. ,

.. ,, .,  : n a.

.  : . !: s

. "4... t

. : o-s

' s t $uk ',., hd*b: - '.h. '

MY. >e

e

:. W:

'*i,,u . h ., Y *. .

'o

' ve jf k ((c,.;.

v: :~: , pb,, ,!

n *%:" ., ,,;.%l '

s..:.. Y: c[$' .n- j,. ,5,y,.!,'b . [l) y #'[ ;-)

! ye i 'y n

.C.u.-

!'f)1) y:%pp Wgy:Ef

,..g

1. 4 .pg  :.%p,

's "

N;

%p... a,* n(. . :vi"4;:n,f.h; g:s,.;ml.:,1 e

.e

, ' ?' .

v c

P ,.p:.9.

~-

.~,);%

. ., i ;' . 'r .

4, gh J.& y N v. .. O, b; '/[* ,

O:: ,

,'Q

.l.

> '  ? f

.,=

'M Yly;q* i,:.e y.<!. ,,j;.; - %, r; l' ^

.f + . > ,z, . : n.<,- ,. , , ',e ,

.i . .: , x. > ' . y ,3. .v. , ' : . .g , - . +> ,

• !  ?

i

.. 1 . . ~ . n.. . a. ,f. ..ma.}

y a

. . . . I. ~ -

s.

.w z

A*  ? . . 'l,G

. . , vll .

• L ',

G

• w~ n

$

• y: . 'i . . i.

. 9 **

N~b:ar it.jU: 4 h$G ue u;sm. h e{dSb p;,k;is Q 'k

&l N

• : 0;'h.;.Q*?s 4 &w J ]WQ .n.l..

&. W l:  :$ h f.

m ? . h ffg;q& w.sf g%:

v

%@ l

%;&l,+% tyQ.

&m.p%[%

g ,yw$. g%n;o..!p:&w& ,

gfy;y,

a. f, y.pg:;On :: v m in?

A 1 4Y % 7 @4%

a . J

__ 4

$Wh 0kN Y hhbhhh~Nhh_h m ner>,

m...mf,f.,

&y,'?l N,

, a.

)k

!P.t phy @

4h N.Wh h vi % w@.um u.

• e . - %. J a..ed 5

Y 1 . ~ . -

.a a+4n Q f,&

w6w%' W.y. .

Y s

W@hll&$(AWhflgi$$fhhW, ig r,

.,, hf n,3 l 8 W ;g.,i * ,f lI'*{r$$$

+

e 1 4

LLNIVERSITY OF - -

VIRGINIA x REACTOR FACILITY t

1

. . . _ _[ - -.

p.  ; ,

1996 ADLAL REPORT  :

UNIVERSITY OF  ;

VIRGINIA i

. REACTOR FACILITY l

1 1996 )

ANNUAL REPORT l 1

l J ) l This report was compiled by the following personnel:

Sections I, II, and III -

J.P. Farrar, Administrator Section IV -

D.P. Steva, Health Physicist Sections V and VI -

P.E. Benneche, Reactor Supenisor We wish to thank the Reactor Safety Committee for their review of this report and their constructive comments on the form and content.

s

l 1996 ANNUAL REPORT UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA REACTOR FACILITY Table of Contents I. INTROD UCTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..1. . . . . . . . . .

4 A. Reactor Facility Reporting Requirements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1. Reporting Period . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I  ;

2. Basis for Reporting . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 l

B. Reactor Facility Description . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . I

1. 2 M W U VAR . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

2. 100-watt CAVALIER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

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

a. U V A R .................................. ............ 3

b. CAVALI ER . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

4. Summary of 1996 Reactor Utilization. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

a. U V A R .. ... ...... ............ .. ......... ... .. . . . ... . 5

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

1. Operations St aff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

2. Health Physics Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

3. Reactor Safety Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 l 1

i II. REACTOR OPERATI ONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 A. UVAR.....................................................9

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

2. Standard Operating Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

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

a. Rod Drop Tests and Visual Inspection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

b. Tests and Calibrations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 4.

5.

Maintenance ........................................... 14 Unplanned Sh utdowns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

6. Pool Wat er M ake-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

7. Fuel Shipme nts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

a. Fresh Fu el . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

b. Sp en t Fu el . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

8. Personnel Training and Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

a. Reactor Facility Staff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

b. Summer Course for High School Teachers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

9. React or Tou rs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 B. CAVALIER Reactor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

1. R eact o r S h u t d own . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

t.

il I

s l I Eage  !

III. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 i i

A. Reactor Safety Committee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

1. M ee t ings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

2. Audits................................................. 19

3. Approvals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

4. 10 CFR 50.59 Reviews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 B. I n spections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 C. Licensing Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 D. Emergency Preparedness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 IV. HEALTH PHYSICS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 A. Pe rsonnel Dosimet ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 I

1. Visitor Exposure Data For 1996 ............................. 22

2. Reactor Facility Personnel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

a. Monthly Whole Body Badge Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

b. Neutron Exposu res . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

c. Extremity Exposu res . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24

d. Direct-reading Dosimeter Exposures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 B. Effluents Released During 1996 ................................. 25

1. Airborne Effluents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 l

2. Liquid Effluents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ............. 25

3. Solid Waste Shipments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 .

1 C. Environmental Surveillance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 l

1. Wat er Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

2. Air Sampling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29 ,

3. Outside Area TLD Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30 l 1

l D. UVAR Facility Health Physics Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

1. Radiation and Contamination Surveys . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

2. Airborne Radioactivity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 E. Q uality Assu rance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 F. S u m m a ry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 l

l 1

l I

i

O iii 1

P_aage V. RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND. SERVICE ACTIVITIES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 A. Irradiation and Other Research Facilities Available . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 a

B. Research Activi ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 C. Se rvice Projects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 D. Reactor Sharing Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 E. Reactor Facility Supported Courses and Laboratories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 F. Degrees Granted by U.Va. in Nuclear Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 VI. FINANCES ................................................. 37 A. Expendi t u res . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 B. Income ................................................. 37 C. State Support / Research and Service Income . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

I f

1 i

1996 ANNUAL REPORT  !

University of Virginia Reactor Facility i I. INTRODUCTION  ;

A. Reactor Facility Reportine Reauirements

1. Reportine Period His report on Reactor Facility activities during 1996 covers the period January 1,1996 through December 31,1995.

2. Basis for Reportine  !

y An annual report of reactor operations is required by the UVAR Technical 3 Specifications, Section 6.7.2. Additionally, it is the desire of the Facility . j management to document and publicize the most important results derived l from reactor operations.

t B. Reactor Facility Descriotion The Reactor Facility is located on the grounds of the University of Virginia  ;

(U.Va.) at Charlottesville, Virginia and is operated by the Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear Engirieering. The Facility houses the UVAR  ;

2 MW pool type research reactor and CAVALIER 100 watt training reactor (now l shut.down, awaiting decommissioning). He Facility also has a 3000 curie cobalt- .

60 gamma irradiation facility, a hot cell facility with remote manipulators, several radiochemistry laboratories with fume hoods, radiation detectors, counters and l laboratory counting equipment, computerized data acquisition-analysis systems, and  :

fully equipped machine and electronics shops.

1. - - 2 MW UVAR The UVAR is a light water cooled, modernied and shielded type reactor that -

first went into operation at a licensed power level of one megawatt in June 1960, under license No. R-66. In 1971, the authorized power level was increased to two megawatts. In September 1982 the operating license for the  !

UVAR was extended for 20 years. The UVAR was converted to LEU fuel j during 1994. Figure 1 shows a layout of the reactor and the various experimental facilities associated with the UVAR. l h

i l

2 SOUTH ACCESS FACILITY NEUTRON . .:.  :. .  ; : < *.:.*..:? ' . j w ,

BEAM PORT g. $..+@j;'. 'l :...sij :. . w}, .

i;:. ,$1;'!

.,, . .(;j D, m~. . :&If,f.h NEUTRON Sid7.i. ".0'.f.j'J"g  :<;;:i ., #"'y:0'g ' ;: j:yj!&pi'

'.L ypSi';(4W'ii[,

i .

RADIOGRAPHY

.M) E$.

,..,..,g.

. fo .& ['//gg,.fj.,'j.;g.gg:lJjf BEAM PdRTS qq.,. . :.y f $.y3. Iy. . )f!.$,;Es,c,'s.n.

..s: .

'~..cA IRON *p

. :.; .. SHOT".. . > 4..s, .  :

i. .

,r 4 ;.;.2 . . 7. ..;.;,,,: .cs. ;. y.

a

. ,rr ..:. . :.~.. w:

. .; 4., .

. n;;;. :.y.c

r.

, :: ;i.4::n. :.b.

2.u..,.x.. :n4;..ts:.,y.M,.

k9 3..:t. .::o

.y,..z.e;M. g?+.&.

..:.. g;. .;.:n. g. c. i:..:.4,,t g; ,g

.. &.e. r

...u..';h; ;r:... %. .* 'p:. ,. ..

. .::. .: . ..,., . . i:,'. .. :* .

. . ..' , ....- ,.:, s ,

Q.

..e t.. r .w;:M . . c...

. .li.;,,

,v,. 4.;4..s, . :..;,'.W

. , .x . . . . v.

-* ..):,

. o.*.~.

.i: - ;.:.. .Q:n.u..:.,

s ',:=* Q.'s.c ?

. y .} ,s:,... +

r c p.. s';t.:r..s... ! g..g ;.sp g.s .6g. o  :

J. . .r.N .

, < . ~

2

,. il;iy;?. .: t c:.

..s . .~.

.w:..  : * . .!.:p'.,?:.'

.p ... . . .

• L 1. . .

.q . #.: ;~ . :... . .. . <. .:. , k. .;.'s

. ~ v .:,, ,.

.u. * :9::

,: ,: r..: 6. , 6,,,.

... .'y.

~.7 :c,, .'.y:

..r.,.-  :

e.

y.c' ;*.s .n::p::y.%y..,

4. .~ :! y

,:. yn.*. . j;. .....g-.

'.'p.t ,. : :i,p.; .:.?.,n. f.*. ..

.; .':: s *f. ; . ; .

. .*p . .* e'< s .!*

. . . * * : .f 4.; ' ;. g 6

• f

• A ^'

'?'.,'. '.f..".

.T. *

*. $

v .l

' ; . .i .** .s '*\t N;;,2.,gg.,ll

., . , r,=

.*-.j .,+ , ,. . . ,.:e.!'.l.s;,

.r,- , , ,. ** ,.n, . , t .g , ) n .

. - :,.t.'. *V

• i ,.,e.5 t' .8 .,.f'

..* * ' .#N

.t.i.F '

f

' *:.'4'.i .

t. N  ;'

. I.

.:s.:['. . .. ..'bi j':, . . */,. ,',.;v,,.

. ,,?, , . . .y. ,5.,l1: i. s/4.-

..* .. ' ' ' , , w 7 ia

,i, .77.,;.,

, s.s.

,, . ., // r,. ,,..,..t.'i;.7 %. .,' .*.,)*,/.1

.e

,~.

j!:'

.: ..'a i 'wl. ,es. .....'.,::,..,4,.'

(: ,y ,. * ' 4 * .i. e. , p *

'.t.,.... <.)!..;t %.

g,'!

w.y 9 Aa '( 4. . . . .

.. .... .:...*...*- . s. .

• . 's $.

• 2

, g.

a* :.3 3 e . .. .

4- 0 7  ?.ds KEY:

5-- ~ e ef.

i p.,G 1 NE1JTRON BEAM PORT

. :." .:Y:.-m2 ', EPI-THERMAL RABBIT 6 --- + MINERAL

i

: q0 3 THERMAL RABBIT

.:7 IRRAD.

. .r(d..

.f 4 HOT THIMBLES f'*;a REACTOR '!:;g 5 REACTOR FUEL POOL :d 6 MWERAL IRRADIATION

@.!M 7 TANGENTIAL BEAM polit

.M.:.c..

.:cz, . -

..w 1

1 N i 1

i I

Figure 1. UVAR Experimental Facilities

3

2. 100 W CAVALIER The CAVALIER (Cooperatively Assembled Virginia Low Intensity Educational Reactor) first went into operation in October 1974, under license j l

R-123, at a licensed maximum 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 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. An order to decommission was issued on February 3,1992. The  ;

reactor will be decommissioned in the near future.  !

3. Past Operatine History

a. UVAR The UVAR operating history is shown in Table 1.

4 TABLE 1 Operating History of University of Virginia Reactor l Year (s) Megavsatt-hours Ilours Operated  :

1960-1970 3960 4500 ,

1971 1975 1654 1800 I 1976-1978 1769 1480 1979-1980 9036 5627 1981 4988 3568 1982 5507 3024 1983 6079 3556  ;

1984 5687 3166 1985 927 718 1986 1330 891 1987 1220 801 1988 910 621 1989 1378 869 1990 1837 1087 1991 2360 1365 1992 2428 1450 1993 2663 1533 1994 1594 1016 1995 1703 1079 1996 1741 1083 During the years 1979 through 1984, the UVAR was operated approximately 110 hours0.00127 days <br />0.0306 hours <br />1.818783e-4 weeks <br />4.1855e-5 months <br /> per week to irradiate metal specimens for radiation damage studies on pressure vessel steels. Since that time, the reactor has operated on a variable schedule up to 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> per week.

The UVAR first operated at full power with LEU fuel on May 12,1994.

e. >

4

., r- MECRA!!ICAL

.IOUIPMEl(T EccM

\ s r 1 1 '

i #

MACFT7TE SHOP .

STAI?.S 70 ME22.GIIII _

1 CPIRATIlic APIA CCliCRMZ SEIED I,':a'84 *. 'a N l

. $a

7.EACTCR

1 ICDEPATOR a r' '. FIT TAlir. t la 1'l 4

, .s

. s . ./ .

L Plas Viny cf CAVA1.IER Operating Area s CCliCF2TI s' g Izt3 a b 7 tl

' ^

.'* sa' ', .( ' I CP.0'JrD T100R

• l

,, '3 '/ ,a , IDT.L IM

• H0DEPATCR TA:iX

,' ,'a ' , , , ,

,,g a s. 7 , ,

. 6, 66 a'3 .

8, ll IARTI '. a , ' .' .

DEIO!!IZER ',$

nu. ,: , .> . ran PIACTCR nLL s' &

', CCRE s3 / *

'#'a

~

'8 4 'DPAIN l

• TO

• A

• 6*o#

3A P0h*D 6 j

1 A *

\\

',' .U"~ )::=s 4 -q

."* * . s .s a

.a a .. . . . . . , , , , ji . , . ,,,.

is l

Vertical Section Through Reactor Pit i

Figure 2

5

b. CAVALIER The CAVALIER operating history is shown in Table 2. i TABLE 2 Operating History of CAVALIER Year (s) Watt-hours Hours Operated 1974-1980 2128 758 1981-1985 1278 388 1986 147 37 1987 28 29 1988-19 % shutdown shutdown The CAVALIER was used primarily for reactor operator training and undergraduate lab experiments, although it has not been operated over the past nine years. The last date of operation was August 4,1987.

The CAVALIER fuel and start-up source were unloaded on March 3 -

1988. A decommissioning plan was submitted to the NRC in January, 1990. An order to decommission was issued by the NRC on February 3, 1992. Decommissioning should be completed in the near future.

4. Summary of 1996 Reactor Utilization

a. UVAR During 1996, the UVAR was operated for 1083 hours0.0125 days <br />0.301 hours <br />0.00179 weeks <br />4.120815e-4 months <br /> and a total integrated power of 1741 Megawatt-hours. The following projects were performed utilizing the UVAR:

472 neutron activation analysis (NAA) samples were run in the pneumatic rabbit system.  ;

6 sets of samples were run in the mineral irradiation facility (MIF).

20 separate runs were made in the canister irradiation facility (CIF) R for a total of 465 hours0.00538 days <br />0.129 hours <br />7.688492e-4 weeks <br />1.769325e-4 months <br />. l 231 hours0.00267 days <br />0.0642 hours <br />3.819444e-4 weeks <br />8.78955e-5 months <br /> of reactor operations were dedicated to neutron radiography. ,

Student Laboratory Experiments l

- Reactor Operator Training l

\

l

6

5. Special Facilities I

The following facilities are operated in connection with UVAR:

• Two neutron beam ports, of eight-inch diameter entrance, stepped I to 10 inches at the exit, are available. One beam port is currently I

dedicated to neutron radiography, e Two access ports (6 ft x 4 ft). One port is currently configured for a high energy photon beam, and the other port for a neutron beam. I

< e Hydraulic rabbit, for activation analysis, permitting samples with less than 0.69 inch diameter and 6 inch length.

• Pne-umatic rabbit, for activation analysis, permitting sample diameters of 1 inch and length not exceeding 2.3 inches, accessing j

either a thermal or an epithermal irradiation facility.

• Solid gel irradiator for electropho.esis.

• Epithermal neutron mineral irradiatien facility. )

e A rotating irradiation facility used to equalize neutron fluence l( during irradiation of a large number of specimens. '

• Epithermal neutron irradiation facilities with heaters for sample temperature control.

• Cobalt-60 gamma irradiation facility with 3,000 curies, permitting underwater exposures at rates up to 100,000 R/hr.

.

• Depleted uranium subcritical facility.

• Small hot cell, (10 ft x 6 ft x 12.5 ft high) with remote manipulators.

o Machine and electronic shops.

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

• Low-background counting room with shielded, solid state c germanium and silicon detectors and computerized data acquisition / analysis system.

7 C. Reactor Staff Orcanization

1. Ooerations Staff A NRC approved Reactor Facility organization chart is shown in Figure 3.

Personnel on the reactor staff as of the end of 1996 were:

i

~ R.U. Mulder . . . . . . . . . Reactor Director J.P. Farrar . . . . . . . . . . Administrator P.E. Benneche . . . . . . . Reactor Supervisor (SRO)

B.

Hosticka . . . . . . . . Research Scientist (SRO)

C.A. Bly . . . . . . . . . . . . Senior Reactor Operator (SRO)

T.E. Doyle . . . . . . . . . . Research Scientist (SRO)

S.R. Bose . . . . . . . . . . . Research Specialist, Sr.

M. Cook . . . . . . . . . . . Part Time Student i

M.J. Crawford . . . . . . . Electronic Shop Supervisor J.S. Baber . . . . . . . . . . Machine Shop Supervisor V.S. Thomas . . . . . . . . . . Reactor Facility Secretary LR. Thorne . . . . . . . . . . Office Services Assistant

2. Health Physics Staff at the Facility i

D.P. Steva . . . . Reactor Health Physicist D. Moody . . . Radiation Safety Technician The Health Physicist is assisted by students paid frrm n; actor services income.

Other health physicists and technicians employed by fl e University are on call through the Office of Environmental Health and Safety.

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

W.R. Johnson . . Professor Emeritus, Nuclear Engineering (Chair)

R.A. Rydin . . . . Associate Professor, Nuclear Engineering J.S. Brenizer . . Associate Proti.ssor, Nuclear Engineering

• J.R. Oilchrist . . Assistant Director, Environmental Health & Safety G.T. Oillies . . . Research Professor, Mech. & Biomedical Eng.

R.U. Mulder . . . Reactor Director & Assoc. Professor, Nuclear Engineering R.O. Piccolo . . . University Radiation Safety Officer

Peesiden ,

unaversity of Virginia L

I Provost A

I A 1 l

Associate Provost Dean, For Research School of Engineering .,

e And Applied Science e a

e ,

t i

e OIeeceor, Cheir, e ChaIe.

,g., ogggg, .g g ,g,.. , g,g tevel Dept. of Meckenical n,gg 5,g,,y i

ll e a I s k and Safety Aerespece & Nuclea' ,e C oenm i I t c e Engineering ,

e e

e

.' Radiation e Reactor safety U.Va. t

- * - + d-----+

(L,,el 2

Reactor Director Committee Safety Officers A &

I e'

4 ----------- J ltealth thysIcs Reactor supervisors . ,______________............... Staff (L e3 v Je ll ,

A.

'{* Reac or 5taff +--------------------------------~~~~~~--#

1 Lines of Responsibility

---

Llnes of Communications .

Figure 3: Oganizational Structure of N.VA. Reactor Facility i

.. .- - - . = - - . . - - . . . . . - . . - . - . . -- - . . -

l 0

9 II. REACTOR OPERATIONS A..UVAR j 1. Core Confieurations A typical UVAR core configuration is shown in Figure 4. The reactor j' employs three boron-stainless steel safety rods and one stainless steel j

regulating rod for fine power control. The fuel elements are of the Materials t

Test Reactor (MTR) flat plate-type elements, utilizing U3 Si 2 . The fuel is approximately 19.7% enriched in the U-235 isotope. The elements have 22 fuel plates per element, with a loading of approximately 275 grams of f

U-235 per element. The control rod elements have 11 fuel plates with a loading of approximately 137 grams U-235 per element. A plan view of these elements is shown in Figure 5.

i

2. Standard Operatine Procedures During the year changes were made to the following sections of the SOP's:

j-Personnel Responsibilities, Checklists, Operating Procedures, Material Irradiation Handling, System Calibration and Maintenance, Primary and

Secondary Water Control, Radiation Protection, and Abnormal Conditions.

j The Reactor Safety Committee reviewed and approved these changes.

i

3. Surveillance Reauirements

}

The following surveillance items were completed during the year as required i

[ by Section 4.0 of the Technical Specifications: l

a. Rod Dron Tests and Visual Insoection

~ Rod drop times are measured at least semi-annually, or whenever rods are moved or maintenance is performed.

i Magnet release time should be less than 50 milliseconds and free drop time less than 700 milliseconds.

Rods are visually inspected at least annually for physical integrity.

Rod drop times were measured on the UVAR and are shown in Table 3.

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

4 I

a 10 l UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA REACTOR CORE LOADING DIAGRAM

j. CORE LOADING 95-2 SHUTDOW MARGIN - S 2.44 (Base)

Date May 7. 1996 EXCESS REACTIVITY + $ 4.192 (Base)

U-235 4546 GRAMS (9-30-96) EXPERIMENT WORTH $ 0.79 i s

• F - Normal Fuel Element P - Grid Plate Plug  !

PF - Partial Fuel Element HYD RAB - Hydraulic Rabbit '

CR - Control Rod Fuel Element THER RAB - Thermal Pneumatic Rabbit  !

j G - Graphite Element EFI RAB - Epithermal Pneumatic Rabbit S.- Graphite Source Element. RB - Radiation Basket REG Control Rod Fuel Element with Regulating Rod J

, Rod Vorths =1 - S 3 94 *2 - S 3.78 =3 - S 2.85 Ree - S 0.50 '

' MINERAL IRRADIATION

, FACLITY F F F-REG F F j P VS-015 VS-009 VC 001 VS-013 VS-004 C P 4

11 12- 13 14 15 16 17 A ig  !

N l F F-CR1 PF F F I l G v'S-006 VC-002 VP-001 VS-007 VS-008 S P l 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 T 28 i

,i E

{

F F F F-CR2 F R i G VS-001 VS-010 VS 002 VC-003 VS-012 P _

31 32 33 34 35 36 I 37 38 ,

R j F F F-CR3 F F R.

G- VS 014 VS 003 VC-004 VS 005 VS-011 P 41 42 43- 44 45 46- 47 F 48 A

C.

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

-THER.

G G RAB G G P' G G-71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 G G G G -G G G G 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 Figure 4 l I

11 LEU FUEL ELEMENTS (Dimensions in inches) 3.0 01 _

~

2.991 a

d

, -.040

, -l

'l -

STANDARD l .- - -

3.140

- J 1.570 e n 4,

.099 COOLANT GAP 21 PLACES

.085

=

3.0 01 --

'2.991

' b s s s'

1

$ 3.140

\ s N \

\ \

CONTROL -% -

\ \ h

\ \

\ \

5  %

?,. J' 1.570 s ,

'J, "

.099 COOLANT GAP 11 PLACES

.085 Figure 5

12 TABLE 3 Measured Control Rod Drop Times on UVAR Rod Magnet Rod Magnet Free Total Number Current Position Release Drop Drop (m-amps) (inches) Time Time Time (msec) (msec) (msec) 4-30-96 Semi-annual Surveillance, used fast strip recorder.

1 175 26 24 479 503 2 175 26 36 465 501 3 75 26 29 470 499 8-14-96 After core change to Loading 96-1. Used digital storage Oscilloscope. Measured several times. Average reported.

(will use Oscilloscope fdrfuture measurements).

I 175 26 10.4 481.5 491.9 2 175 26 31.8 477.3 509.1 3 75 26 40.9 497 537.9 8-29-96 Aftet core change back to loading 95-2.

1 175 26 22.2 548 570.2 2 175 26 43.4 511 554.4 3 75 26 46.4 577 623.4 11-11-96 Semi-annual Surveillance 1 175 26 15.6 554 569.6 2 175 26 34.2 514 548.2 3 75 26 45.8 572 617.8 The rod drop times continue to be within the limits required by the Tech.

Specs. (700 msec free drop and 50 msee magnet release).

The UVAR control rods were visually inspected on 4-29-96. The following is abstracted from the reactor log book and the surveillance files:

Rod #1 - Inspected rod under water. No indication of cracks or swelling.

No significant rubbing. Rod passed 0.90 inch gauge easily.

Rod #2 - Inspected rod under water. No cracks or swelling noted. Red dot noted on side of rod. No pits felt by wire over red spot. Rod passed 0.95 inch gauge easily.

Rod #3 - Inspected rod under water. A few rub marks noted. No evidence of cracking or swelling. Passes 0.95 inch gauge easily.

All of the rods appear essentially the same as in previous inspections.

13

b. Tests and Calibrations Data on these tests and calibrations are on file at the Facility.

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

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

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

3) Annually The emergency cooling system was tested on November 4,1996.

The results are as follows:

S.E. Tank S.W. Tank

{ gal /1!1in) (cal / mint minimum required flow 11.0 11.5 1104-% actual flow 11.9 12.4 last five year range 11.9-12.5 12.1-12.5 4

No pattern was observed in the variation of the test results for the last five years.

4) Daily Checklist .

'Ihe daily checklist, which is completed when the reactor is to be operated, provides for checks on all the significant automatic shutdown systems associated with the reactor.

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

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

14

6) Core Configuration Chances The UVAR core configuration was changed on August 12,1996.

The configuration was the same except it was positioned in a different location in the grid plate for special beamport experiments. Rod drop times were measured and the rods were recalibrated. The core was returned to its original position during the week of August 26,1996 and rod drop times were again measured.

7) Communication Checks The security system and emergency communications with the University Police and Fire Department were checked on a weekly basis throughout the year. These checks confirmed the availability of systems and communication equipment.

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

4. Maintenance The maintenance performed on the UVAR systems during the calendar year

~ 1996 is shown in Table 4.

9

15 TABLE 4 Reactor System Maintenance Performed in 1996 Date System Problem Corrective Action 01 02- % Scram logic Drawer SSR failure indicator lamp on Found resistors had changed value due to aging with heating.

Replaced resistors.

01 % NBP Blockhouse No problem. Rewired Beamport Assembled wiring in conduit warning lights. and checked out system.

01-05-96 Back-up Conductivity Meter could not be calibrated. Removed meter from service Meter Found bad probe. since it was a back-up and not needed.

01 % Blockhouse Intrusion Sensitivity decreasing. Falsely Installed new intrusion alarm.

Alarm indicates intrusion. Checked out system.  :

01 % Blockhause door alarm Box housing door alarm is Replaced door alarm box and box unsound. Needs repjacing. checked for proper operation.

02 % Power Range Channels Uncertain as to linearity between Checked out system with  !

ranges. external signals. Installed two  !

diodes under 50.59 revision to  :

improve linearity. ,

02 % Power Range Drawer Trace winng in preparation for Traced wiring. Everything O.K. I installing new instrumentation.

02-22-96 Fire AlarmSystem False alarm received at Police Checked system at facility and Station. police station. No problems  ;

found. l 1

03-06-96 Secondary Pump Controller overheats and trips lastalled new controller. Checks l Controller pump. out O.K. 1 03 % Thermal Rabbit Upper hold-up pin sealleak Replaced tubing and seals. j 03 % Blockhouse Scram Circuit Blockhouse scram when Replaced blockhouse scram j blockhouse not in use. relay. Checked out O.K.

03-29 96 MIF Cooling System Not cooling. A.C. fan not running. Switch bad. By-passed switch, replaced burnt wire.

03 % N-16 monitor Zero is low and cannot be Adjusted course zero on input i adjusted from front panel. head. Checks out O.K. l 04 % Source Range Drawer Dirty contacts on test switch. Cleaned contacts. Replaced Tec connection. Calibrated.

04 % Hand and Foot Monitor No problem. Added switch to Added switch to select speaker speaker. to monitor just hand probe or all channels.

04 10-96 Source Range Period and Level bistable erratic. Replaced low voltage power Rippic on voltage supply, supply. Checks O.K. ,

04-30 % Rod #3 seating switch Wire was pinched and shorted. Replaced wire. Checks out O.K.

05-16-96 Power Range #1 and #2 Pegs low upon shifting from the Added two diodes in series with 4 200 kW to 2 MW range. shunt resistor under 50.59 l review. Checks out O.K.

05-28-96 Auxillary temperature No problem. Installed new probe Installed probe near existing probe for monitoring pool temperature. pool temperature probe.

l t

_ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ .. l

j .

3- 16 i

i l Table 4 Reactor System Maintenance, continued l 06 % Cooling Tower No problem. Annual cleaning of Drained cooling tower to cooling tower. sanitary sewer after water ,

1 sample check. Cleaned, refilled and put back in service.

06 % Rod #1 down light Light will not go out as rod is Adjusted switch position.

withdrawn. Checks out O.K.

j 07 % Heat Exchanger Annualcleaning and inspection Found one smallleaking tube

1 and plugged it.

} 07 26- % Pool Makeup System Timer on makeup system does not Replaced timer switch. Checks i always turn off. out O.K.

i 08-13 96 Evacuation Alarm No problem. Added new alarm. Added alarmin Neutron l j Radiography Lab. Tested O.K.

08 % Rod #2 seating switch Does not indicate rod seated. Found and replaced bad wire.

Checks out O.K.

09 % Core Gamma Monitor Ammeter blows fuses. Found and replaced shorted i

! diode. Checks O.K.

f 10 % Source Range Detector will not respond to Found and replaced bad voltage

. neutron source. power supply. Checks O.K.

! 11-04-96 Control Room to Bridge Intercom noisey. I.ets of static. Replaced unshieled cable with j Intercom shielded. Reduced noise.

11 % Bridge Radiation Monitor Intermittent Scrams Cleaned relay. Checked O.K.

l

. . 12-02-% Rabbit Holdup Monitor No problem. Increased effective Replaced 91K resistor in offset j range of instrument. circuit with 62K. Calibrated.

I j No significant trends were noted in the maintenance.

i I

5. Unolanned Shutdowns l

f The 19 unplanned shutdowns which occurred on the UVAR during the 8

calendar year 1996 are shown in Table 5.

d.

4 M, -

L 4

i o , , . --, , .- - --

17 TABLE 5 Unplanned Reactor Shutdowns in 1996 Date # Shutdown Mechanism 01-30-96 1 Scram - Caused by corroded connector on MIF lead Shield Prabe.

02-27-96 1 Scram - Indicated pool level #1. Ixvel O.K. Problem in float switch.

03-06-96 1 Scram Pool level #1 Probicm in float switch.

03-25-96 1 Scram - Ground floor manual scram indication. Malfunction in NBP circuit.

03-29-96 1 Scram - Momentary buikling power failure.

04-02-96 2 Scram - Momentary power failure.

04-25-96 1 Scram - Momentary power failure.

06-11-96 1 Scram - MIF pump controller tripped by thermal overload.

06-19-96 1 Scram - Momentary power failure.

06-24-96 1 Scram - Momentary power failure.

06-25 96 1 Scram - Student opened escape hatch for tour group, not knowmg of scram.

08-16 96 1 Scram - Momentary power failure.

08-29-96 1 Scram - Intermediate Range during loading of fuel assembly.

09-10-96 1 Scram - Loss of power to MIF cooling pump.

09-24-96 1 Scram High power at 200 kW.

10-25-96 1 Scram - Momentary power failure.

11-19-96 1 Scram - Operator scram as part of Annual Emergency Drill.

11 21-96 1 Scram - Bridge Monitor scram due to relay noise in Secondary Console.

1 i

I

18

6. Pool Water Make-un During the year makeup water to the reactor pool averaged 89 gallons per day.

Most of this is due to evaporation while operating the UVAR at 2 Mw.

7. Fuel Shioments

a. Fresh Fuel No fresh fuel was received at the facility during 1996.

b. Spent Fuel No spent fuel was shipped from the facility during 1996.

8. Personnel Trainine and Instruction

a. Reactor Facility Staff At the end of 1996 the staff had four senior reactor operators. All licensed operators participated in the Facility's operator requalification program, which was carried out during the year. The program consists of periodic lectures, participation in the daily operation of the Facility, performing checklists and start-ups of the reactor and a biennial written examination.

b. Summer Course for High School Teachers During the month of June,1996,27 high school teachers from within the state of Virginia attended a one week special course at the Reactor Facility entitled: " Science of Nuclear Energy and Radiation". The course consisted of formal lectures, laboratory experiments with the UVAR reactor in the areas of sub<ritical multiplication, basic radiation counting, and gamma-ray analysis. During the week the teachers also visited the North Anna Nuclear Power Station.

9. Reactor Tours During the calendar year 1996, the staff guided 36 groups on tours of the Facility, for a total of 664 visitors.

B. CAVALIER Reactor

1. Reactor Shut Down The reactor was completely and permanently unloaded during the first week of March,1988. A decommissioning order was issued by the NRC on February 3,1992. The decommissioning should be completed in the near future.

19 III. REGULATORY COMPLIANCE A. Reactor Safety Committee

1. Meetings During 1996, the Reactor Safety Committee met four times, on the following dates:

February 20,1996 October 17,1996 May 22,1996 December 16,1996 The Technical Specifications require the committee to meet at least twice each year.

2. Audits During the year sub-committees of the Reactor Safety Committee performed two audits of the Facility in the areas of: reactor operations records, H.P.

Program, Security and Emergency Pians.

3. Anorovals The Reactor Safety Committee approved changes to the UVAR Standard Operating Procedures during the year in the area of Personnel Responsibilities, Checklists, Operating Procedures, Material Irradiation Handling, System Calibration and Maintenance, Primary and Secondary Water Control, Radiation Protection, and Abnormal Conditions.

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:

1) Change of corrosion inhibiting chemical and blocides used in secondary water system and addition of an automatic system to control secondary water pH.

1

2) Add two diodes to 2 Mw shunt resistor in amplifier P to approximate bias l point of Q1 base when shifting to the 2 Mw mode.

3) Use indoor plastic waste tanks for holding regeneration liquid and disposing ofliquid waste to sewers.

4) Moved filter and pump for sewer release of radioactive waste to outside waste tanks and emptied tanks to sewer after analyzing contents.

20 B. Inspections During 1996 the Facility had four NRC compliance inspections, at the following times and in the area of: .

1-26-96 Sub-Critical Facility 5-20-% Health Physics 11-05-96 Security 11-19-96 Emergency Preparedness There were no violations cited as a result of these inspections.

D. Licensine Action

1. A new security plan was submitted to the NRC for approval on February 22,1996. As of this date no action has been taken on this request.

21 D. Emergency Preparedness

1. On April 24,1996 at 11:14 A.M. a practice evacuation was initiated by activating the criticality alarm system located at the fuel storage area. The alarm was initiated at the CAVAI1ER reactor room. All personnel within the building at the time evacuated wi.hin three minutes. Twenty two individuals were accounted for. The staff brought ivith them portable radiation instruments, pocket dosimeters, portable radios, a ollular phone, personnel dosimetry racks, the visitors log, the reactor log, and a copy of the EPIP's. One area in the building (the neutron radiography lab) reported difficulty hearing the alarm. A separate alarm has been added to that area since the drill. The drill was terminated at 11:22 A.M.

2. On June 3,19% a requalification lecture was held to review the Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures. Seven staff members attended. .

3. On October 16,1996, a nurse from the American Red Cross conducted a recertification course in CPR at the facility. Six staff members were recertified in CPR.

4. On November 14,1996, a table-top training session was held at the facility.

Personnel responsibilities for the individual Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures were discussed. Several emergency scenarios were presented and the staff was asked how they would respond to these scenarios. All staff members contributed to the discussion.

5. On November 19,1996, an emergency drill was initiated at the facility.

The scenario involved an intruder who injured a student and left him lying on the floor near the CAVALIER room. He intruder then cut the lock on the CAVALIER room door and placed a package with a bomb inside the room. The drill was initiated at 08:54 when the CAVALIER room doors were opened, which initiated an intrusion alarm at the UVA police department. The police responded within 4 minutes and the staff began a search of the building to determine what set off the alarm. De reactor operator scrammed the UVAR reactor. A staff member found the injured student, the cut lock at the CAVALIER room, and the " bomb". The building was immediately evacuated and personnel gathered at the main gate to the site. Personnel accountability was initiated and all personnel were accounted for. H.P. personnel from The Office of Environmental Health and Safety were called to assist as needed. At 09:04 the injured student was moved to the main gate on a stretcher. The rescue squad was called at.09:05. At 09:10 the Emergency Director declared an Unusual Event emergency and notified the NRC and the State Office of Emergency Services. A fire truck and rescue squad arrived at 09:16 and the injured student was transferred to the rescue squad for transport to the U.Va.

hospital (simulated). At 09:24 the command center was moved to the EH&S facility and the bomb squad was called. At 09:40 a phone call was received on the cellular phone from someone with a foreign accent that said "we were lucky to get the boy out, but unlucky for the bomb". At 09:43 the emergency was upgraded to an " Alert" emergency. At 10:01 two policemen and the reactor supervisor searched the building. It was subsequently determined that the bomb" was a dud and the drill was terminated at 10:22.

i

22 IV. HEALTH PHYSICS A. Personnel Dosimetry

1. Visitor Exposure Data For 1996 During 1996, there were 757 visitors who toured or assisted in work at the Reactor Facility. Of these visitors,664 were visitors in tour groups.

The highest dose received in any one visit was 1 mrem. Most visitors received no measurable dose.

2. Reactor Facility Personnel Dosimetry Data For 1996

a. Monthly Whole Body Badge Data Radiation doses received by Reactor Facility personnel were measured using Landauer personnel dosimeters. Film badge dosimeters measured exposure from beta, X, gamma and thermal neutron radiation. All personnel working with the neutron beamports at the Facility were issued neutron dosimeters in addition to their whole body film badges. The neutron dosimeters used were Landauer Neutrak ER badges that allowed detection of an extended range of neutron energies. All dosimeters were changed out on a monthly basis.

The dose distribution for personnel badged at the Reactor Facility during the period January 1,1996 through December 31,1996 is shown in Table 6.

l

- _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . 1

23 TABLE 6 1996 Personnel Radiation Doses Received at Reactor Facility Measured Accumulated Number of Individuals in Deep Dose Equivalent

• Dose Range (mrem)

Less than 10 (M) 71 10 - 20 2 21 - 30 2 31 - 40 0 41 - 50 1 51 - 100 0 101 - 150 0 151 - 500 2 Greater than 500 0 Number of badged personnel: 78 persons Collective dose for this group: 0.550 rem

• Deep dose equivalent as measured by film badge dosimeters. These dosimeters have a detection minimum of 10 mrem for gamma, X-rays and thermal neutrons and 40 mrem for energetic beta particles.

The individual who received the highest annual dose (230 mrem), was a Reactor Facility staff member routinely involved in unloading the mineral irradiation facility and preparing Iridium - 192 seeds for shipment. All facility personnel doses were less than the University of Virginia ALARA Investigational Level 1 of 125 mrem /qtr.

l

24

b. Neutron Exposures Thirteen Facility personnel were issued Neutrak ER neutron badges in 1996. The neutron dose distribution for this group is shown in Table 7.

TABLE 7 1996 Personnel Neutron Doses at the Reactor Facility Measured Accumulated Number ofIndividuals in Deep Dose Equivalent Dose Range (mrem)

Less than 20 (M) 13 20 - 30 0 Greater than 30 0 NOTE: These dosimeters have a minimum reporting dose of 20 mrem.

c. Extremity Exposures During 1996,21 Facility personnel were issued TLD ring badges in addition to their whole body badges. The following is a summary of the extremity doses received by Reactor Facility personnel who wore ring badges during the period January 1,1996 through December 31,1996.

TABLE 8 1996 Personnel Extremity Doses at the Reactor Facility Measured Accumulated Number of Individuals in Extremity Dose (mrem) Dose Range Less than 30 13 30 - 500 6 J 501 - 1250 1 1251 - 5000 1 Greater than 5000 0 NOTE: These dosimeters have a minimum reporting dose of 30 mrem for X and gamma. rays and 40 mrem for energetic beta particles.

The individual who received the highest extremity dose (1810 mrem), was a Reactor Facility staff member routinely involved in unloading the mineral irradiation facility and preparing Iridium -192 seeds for shipment. All facility personnel doses (extremity) were less than the University of Virginia ALARA Investigative Level 1 of 1250 mrem /qtr.

25

d. Direct-readine Dosimeter Exoosures Direct-reading dosimeters (in addition to whole body film badges) are worn by UVAR personnel when they are handling irradiated material that 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 recorded in an exposure log kept in the control room. This information is helpful in assessing the amount of exposure received during specific operations. The total of all exposures recorded in the log book during 1996 was 96.2 mR. 'Ite highest individual exposure was 36.0 mR. This exposure was received by an individual handling activated material.

B. Effluents Released Durine 1996

1. Airbome Effluents 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 Argon-41 activity was calculated from a known amount of activity released into the reactor room during a leak rate test of the room and readings obtained on the room argon monitor. These readings were then correlated to the normal readings on the argon monitor during 2 MW operation. Using this method, and the known amount of time the reactor was at power during 1996 (1741 MW-hours), the calculated maximum activity of Ar-41 released was 2.51 curies.

Calculations were performed to determine compliance with 10 CFR 61, Subpart I, entitled: National Emissions Standards For Radioactive Emissions From Facilities Licensed by the NRC and Federal Facilities Not Operated by the DOE. The calculated Total Effective Dose Equivalent (using the USEPA's COMPLY Code: VI.5d), from Ar-41 release was 2.9 x 10 2 mrem. On the basis of this calculation and the totals for the University as a whole, the University is exempt from reporting to the EPA on the annual emissions of radioactive material in 1996.

- 2. Liauid Effluents Liquid radioactive waste generated at the UVAR is disposed of by one of two means. Liquid waste generated in the student laboratories is poured into approved containers that 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 ofliquid released off-site is from an on-site l

pond. This pond receives surface runoff and water from a creek that flows

26 into it. In unusual situations, it may receive a direct discharge from the j facility (e.g., draining of the reactor pool). Regeneration of the UVAR demineralizer system is the major source of radioactivity in the liquid effluent released from the Facility. He release of effluents from the regeneration of the demineralizer system has been reduced considerably.

This is due to better management of pool water makeup and pool water surface skimming that increases the time between regeneration of the demineralizer.

Prior to September,1996, the regeneration liquid was stored in two 5,000 gallon underground tanks where it was circulated through Cuno filters.

The liquid in these tanks was analyzed for radioactivity content and then released through the pond spillway where it was diluted with pond water.

In August,1996, the underground tanks were disconnected and a new system utilizing three 2250 gallon tanks was installed inside the facility.

He liquid waste collected in these tapks is now being released to the sanitary sewer in accordance with 10 CFR 20 requirements. Prior to, and during all liquid releases, water samples were collected and analyzed for radioactive content. During 1996 there were 21 releases of pond water (none of these included effluent from the regeneration of the demineralizer system) and 6 releases to the sanitary sewer (see Table 9).

A small amount of pond water routinely leaks through the pond spillway to the release standpipe at an average rate of 3 gallons per minute. As this is considered release of pond water, it is sampled on a routine basis and analyzed for gross beta particle activity. In addition, from January 20 through April 22, water leaked from the release valve in the spillway resulting in a continuous release of pond water during this time. The average rate of release from this leak was approximately 15 gallons per minute. Consequently, the volume and activity released via these pathways was included in the 1996 liquid release totals.

The average concentration of radioactive material (as measured by gross beta particle activity analysis) released in effluent from the UVAR pond was 5.0 x 104 pCi/ml. This concentration was 17% of the UVAR administrative release limit and was less than the average concentration of radioactive material measured in the water in the creek feeding the pond 4

(6.0 x 10 pCi/ml). He average tritium concentration in effluent released from the pond was 7.0 x 104 pCi/ml. His concentration was 0.07% of the applicable Effluent Concentration (EC) limit.

The total activity (excluding tritium activity) released in effluent was 230 pCi. His activity includes naturally occuring radionuclides contributed to the pond from the runoff and feeder creek mentioned above. The total tritium activity released during 1996 was 22,000 pCi.

l

27 The total volume ofliquid released off-site from the pond in 1996 was 45,000,000 liters (11,889,000 gallons). The total volume of waste water released to the sanitary sewer was 55,000 liters. The total tritium activity released to the sanitary sewer was 8000 pCi. The total of all other radionuclides released to the sewer was 198 pCi.

Table 9 Liquid Efiluent Release Sample Results Release No. Avs. Gr= Beta ^ctiviv Release No. Avg. Grm Bem Activiy (excluding Tritium) (excluding Tritium)

(x 10* pC1/mi

• 2 s.d.) (x104 pCi/ml 2 s.d.)

1 0.4 0.2 14 0.9 0.01 2 0.4 0.2 15 0.3 0.1 3 0.5 0.3 16 0.5 0.1 4 0.5 0.4 17 0.5 0.1 5 0.4 0.1 18 0.4 0.1 6 0.5 0.02 19 0.4 0.1 7 0.5 0.02 20 0.4 0.02 8- 0.9 0.08 21 0.4 0.4 9 0.6 0.04 10 0.7 0.03 11 0.5 0.1 12 0.6 0.3 13 0.7 0.2 A priori LL.D: 03 x 104

3. Solid Waste Shloments In 1996, fifteen (15) cubic feet of low level radioactive waste was transferred from the reactor to EHS for disposal.

28 C. Environmental Surveillance

1. Water Sampline Environmental water samples were collected on a monthly basis from the locations indicated in Table 10. Gross beta particle activity analysis was performed on all water samples collected. The results of the analyses are provided in Table 10. The average gross beta concentration measured at 4

each location was less than the UVAR Administrative Effluent Concentration Release Limit of 3 x 10-8 pCi/ml.

Table 10 Environmental Water Sampling Results Gmes Beta Particle Activity ( x 104pCi/ml i 2 sigma)

Meadow Creek near Barracks Road,1.8 mi.

northeast (2 samples collected short distance Upstream of on-site Water filtration plant apart on creek, results pond 0.26 mi. southeast are averaged)

January 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.1 February 0.4 0.2 03 0.2 0.2 0.2 March 0.4 0.2 0.0 0.1 03 0.1 April 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.6 0.1 May 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.8 0.1 June 0.6 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.02 July 0.5 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.4 0.1 August 0.4 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.5 0.1 September 1.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.7 0.01 October 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.1 0.6 0.2 November 0.7 0.2 03 0.1 0.9 2 0.1 December 0.6 0.2 03 0.2 0.7 0.2 Avg + 2 s.d. 0.6 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.2 A priori 11D: 03 x 104 i

29  :

l i

2. Air Sampline '

Environmental air samples were collected on a monthly basis at the following locations:

A-1 Roof of reactor building A-2 Indicator - approximately 0.13 mi. E of UVAR A-3 Control - approximately 3.1 mi. NW of UVAR l Fixed sampling locations are utilized to collect air samples at locations A-2 and A-3.

Sampling time for these off-site samples is approximately % hours. Air samples were mllected at location A-1 using a portable air sampler that is run for approximately two hours. All air samples collected at these locations were particulate air samples and were analyzed for gross beta particle activity. Results are provided in Table 11.

I

• l fable 11 - Environmental Air Sampling Results )

l Gmas Beta Particle Activity in Air Pasticles ( x 10'"pCi/ mil i 2 sigma) i Roof of IJVAR Facility 0.13 miles cast of 3.1 miles northwest of LJVAR Facility UVAR Facility l

January .920.6 0.9

• 0.1 0.920.1 l l

February 2.120.9 0.710.1 0.810.1 j March 1.020.5 0.320.04 03 20.04 April 6.711.2 1.7

• 0.1 1.6

• 0.1 May 11.010.8* 2.120.1 3.220.1 June 2.410.6 1.120.1 1.020.1 l July 2.620.4 0.8

• 0.04 0.820.04 August 9.620.4 2,320.1 2.620.1 September 10.0

• IS 2.120.1 2.2 e 0.1 october 7.120.8 2.020.1 2.210.1 November 6.111.0 _

0.620.1 0.610.1 Dcamber 1.4

• 0.6 0.420.1 0.520.1 Avg. + 2 s.d. 5.223.7 1.3 0.7 1.410.9 a) Decay of activity on filter exhibited effective half. life of 11 hours1.273148e-4 days <br />0.00306 hours <br />1.818783e-5 weeks <br />4.1855e-6 months <br /> (thoron daughters).

Roof 56 Mer a priori LLD: 2.8 x 10'" pCi/mi I Environ 6.:al samplers a priori LLD 6.2 x 10'" Ci/ml l

l l

l l

30

3. Outside Area TLD Network

-In the vicinity of the UVAR Facility, TLD's are mounted at 8 fixed field sites.

All of the sites are outside the facility but within the area surrounding the facility that is bounded by the exclusion fence. The dosimeters are changed out J

and read on a quarterly basis. Table 12 shows the doses recorded by these dosimeters.

Table 12 - 1996 Environmenta! Surveillance - Outside Ana TLD Network Deep Dose Equivalent (arem) For Periods Sinown Below I

location 1st Quarter 2nd 3rd 4th Annual Annual Quarter Quarter Quarter Total Net

• 280 M M 20 20 40 40 281 M M 10 10 20 20 282 10 M 20 20 50 50 283 M M 10 10 20 20 1

284 10 M 20 30 60 60 285 M M M 10 10 10 )i 286 M M 10 20 30 30  !

287 M M M M M M Control M M M- M M Control l Control -M M M M M Control M = minimum detection limits: 10 mrem for gamma and x-rays. 40 mrem for energetic betas.

• Annual Net = Annual Total . Control Annual Total m4 D. UVAR Facility Health Physics Surveys

1. Radiation and Contamination Surveys Daily, weekly and monthly surveys are performed throughout the Faciliti m monitor radiation and contamination levels. All required area radiation and contamination surveys were performed during 1996.

The levels of contamination detected in the Facility during 1996 were 2

generally very low (typically less than 50 dpm/100 cm ). In keeping with the I ALARA policy, most areas are decontaminated if found to have greater 2

than 50 dpm/100 cm . The area radiation level surveys revealed no overall increase in background or systems-related radiation levels.

l

', 1 i 31 I

2. Airborne Radioactivity l

t l A particulate air sample is collected in the reactor room as part of the weekly survey of the Reactor Facility. The average concentration of radioactive material detected in the air in the reactor room (as measured by gross beta particle activity analysis of the particulate samples) was  ;

3.0 x 1042 pCi/ml. The airborne radioactivity detected was primarily due to 1

radon and thoron daughters. None of the measured concentrations  !

exceeded the applicable Derived Air Concentration (DAC) [ 3 x 10-" pci/cc],  ;

i E. Ouality Assurance The UVAR Facility participates in the U.S. Environmental Protection -  !

Agency (EPA) Laboratory Intercomparison Studies Program as part of its  :

quality control program for radiation measurement of air and water ,

samples. The UVAR FaciHty participates in the following studies:

Gamma activity in water, on a triennial basis i Gross alpha, gross beta activity in water, on a triennial basis j Tritium in water, on a semiannual basis <

Gross beta activity on air filter, on a semiannual basis i

Three independent determinations for each radionuclide included in a study ,

are made and analysis results are reported to the EPA. A tabulation of all  !

results reported by all participating laboratories is generated by the FPA. j

'Ihis tabulation report contains analytical precision values that are used as a ,

basis for judging a laboratory's performance. Table 13 contains the results of the UVAR's performance in the above mentioned studies.

The normalized deviation of the mean from the known value is calculated from the deviation of the mean from the known value and the standard error of the mean values. The deviation of the mean from the known value - l is calculated by subtracting the known value from the average of the ~

laboratory's three results. The standard error of the mean is calculated by , 3 dividing the expected precision by the square root of 3 (the number of i results). The normalized deviation of the mean from the known value is  ;

calculated by dividing the deviation of the mean from the known value by l the standard error of the mean.

J l

9

, s 32 Table 13 Results of EPA Rndioactivity Measuitment Laboratory Inter-Comparison Pmgram Date Study Known Value UVAR Normalized reported Deviation

• average value 1996 Air filter (Beta) Study discontinued in 1996 1-26-96 Gross a/B in H2O 7.0 pCi/l 10.23 1.12 7-19-96 44.8 pCiA 44.7 -0.01 10-25 34.6 pCi/l 41.1 2.25 3-08-96 H-3 in water 22002 pCi/l 22423 0.33 8-09-96 10879 pCi/l 11683 1.28 6-07-96 Gamma in water Co-60 99 pCi/l 96.67 -0.81 Zn-65 300 pCill 296.0 -0.23 Cs-134 79.0 pCi/l 67.33 -4.04 Cs-137197.0 pCi/l 194.67 -0.40 3a-133 745 pCi/l 705.33 -0.92 11 % Gamma in water Co-60 44.0 pCi/l Zn-65 35.0 pCi/l l Cs-13411.0 pCi/l NRP Cs-13719.0 pCi/l Ba-133 64.0 pCi/l NRP - No results reported by UVAR Facility

• If this value is between 2.00 and 3.00 the analytical process precision is in the warning zone; if it exceeds 3.00 it is outside of the control limits specified by the EPA.

F. Summarv

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

33' V. RESEARCH, EDUCATION AND SERVICE ACTIVITIES j A. Jrradiation and Other Research Facilities Available An overall description of the experimental facilities available at the UVAR Facility 1

is listed in section I.B.5. During 1996, one new experimental facility designed to

irradiate objects with a beam of gamma rays from the Co-60 pile located in the i

UVAR pool while under temperature control was constructed and placed into l sesvice in the reactor pool. No substantial changes were made to any existing experimental facilities. i i.

B. Research Activities l 3 i

- 1. A continuing program of research was pursued on behalf of the Philip 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 spiking of tobacco with radioactive isotopes.

2. Staff assistance was provided to a number of small projects utilizing a cobalt-60 irradiation facility. Several researchers at both U.Va., other universities and some high schools provided a number of different kinds of l

samples to be irradiated for either sterilization or to attempt to create genetic mutations.

3. One indium-114 source was created and shipped to a researcher at the University of Alabama at Huntsville for use in a project sponsored by NASA.

This particular source went into space on January 12,1997 on the Space Shuttle and is currently on the Russian space station, MIR.

4. Several uranium-235 foils were irradiated in the reactor to produce small quantities of fission products to be used to test counting equipment being assembled and tested for PSR Corporation which is working under a federal government contract. Several other sources for use in the calibration of detector set-ups were also produced. Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty Radiation Monitoring sponsored by PSR remained an ongoing project, involving radhtion' detector and spectrum analysis using irradiated materials.

One staff member and one professor were involved in this project.

5.

Eagle Picher, a manufacturer of commercial boron products had the Reactor Facility (a professor, staff and students were involved) perform neutron radiography and gaging on a large number of aluminum-boron plates as part l of a quality assurance program._ These plates are designed to be part of a i nuclear power plant spent fuel storage containers.

. .I 34

- 6. Industrial Quality, Inc., SBIR Phase II for U.S. Navy. A major two year program to develop a new electronic neutron imaging system was ongoing.

His work involved evaluation of numerous thermal and fast neutron scintillators as well as evaluation of a new CCD camera. One professor and one student were involved in this project.

7. Track etch radiography was utilized to study boron and nitrogen distributions in metalic samples. An IAEA fellow from Uzbekistan, one staff member, and a professor were involved in this work.

8. Aerogel water vapor uptake was measured for a new project investigating the ice of aerogels as collectors. His work, sponsored by PSR and DARPA, involved two professois and and two students.

9. ' One PhD student completed an investigation of scattering corrections for neutron computed tomography. His work was sponsored by the American Society of Nondestructive Testing and involved one student and one professor.

C. Service Proiects

1. Iodine determination by epithermal neutron activation analysis (ENAA) was performed on behalf of several sponsors, including Ross Laboratories, Woodson-Tenet Laboratories, Industrial Laboratories and the IAMS Company. The substances analyzed were infant formula, liquid diet supplements and pet foods. .

2. Various samples were tested by neutron activation analysis in search of the trace levels of several elements for the Kodak Company as part of continuing research being conducted at one of their laboratories.

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

4. The Protechnics International Company and its subsidiary Spectratec Services, which supply various radioactive sources to industry, had the Reactor Facility irradiate and ship to them about 50 canisters of a ceramic powder spiked with iridium. His material is used by companies performing oil well drilling. The canisters were irradiated (for 25-35 hours) and shipped three at a time.

. 5. . Silicon samples were examined using NAA for a researcher at a small commercial company, Biomineral Sciences International.

6. A number of small radioactive sources were produced for use in graduate and undergraduate nuclear engineering laboratories.

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

i O I l

35

7. A UVA graduate chemistry class used NAA to determine the yield on l synthesized transition element compounds.

8. Co-60 sterilization was completed on a large number of micro-pipettes used

{

for manipulation and fertilization of human eggs prior to their implantation in l a woman's uterus. This is a continuing project for a local company, Humagen J

- Fertility Diagnostics,Inc. that manufactures and distributes these pipettes.

D. Reactor Sharine Program The Department of Energy has for the past sixteen years funded a program at the University entitled Reactor Sharing. The purpose of this program is to make  ;

available the UVAR facilities to faculty and students at universiti.es and other  !

educational institutions which do not have nuclear science facilities. Over the  !

years, hundreds of students and dozens of professors have used this arrangement to enhance both their educational and research opportunities. This past year a ,

number of touni, laboratories and research projects were conducted under this l program. j 1

The following is a list of both the directly and indirectly funded activities completed in 1996.

School tours:

Twenty-five tours from high schools, middle schools and elementary schools involving 434 students and teachers.

College tours:

Seven tours from colleges involving 81 students and instructors.

I Special tours in conjunction with U.Va. programs:

Six tours involving 113 individuals; including faculty, staff, students and guests.

Individual tours:

Individuals, not part of groups, touring the facility in 1996 totaled 70.

Research projects:

Several research projects utilizing neutron activation analysis or cobalt-60 gamma ray irradiation were conducted by students and faculty from other schools during the year.

_.. __. . . _ _ . _ _ _=-. _ _ . ._ .___ ._ _. _ __ _. _ _ .

l

. r 36 )

1 E. ' Reactor Facility Supported Courses and Laboratories

1. Academic Courses and Laboratories i

ne following laboratory course was taught by professors of Nuclear I Engineering during 1996 utilizing in part services provided by the Reactor l Facility. I

i NE 682 - Nuclear Engineering Laboratory During June 1996,27 high school and middle school teachers from the state i- of Virginia attended a one week special course at the Reactor Facility. The j

! title of the course was " Science of Nuclear Energy and Radiation:

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

F. Deerees Granted by U.Va. in Nuclear Eneineerine  ;

l The following number of degrees were awarded during 1996 by the University of Virginia in the discipline of Nuclear Engineering: '

Masters of Science, Nuclear Engineering . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Masters of Engineering Nuclear Engineering . . . . . . . 4 J Doctor of Philosophy, Nuclear Engineering . . . . . . . . . . _1 TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 The following PhD and Master theses by students majoring in Nuclear Engineering were completed during 1996 in part using services or facilities provided at the U.Va. Reactor Facility.  !

A Scatterine Effect' Correction for High Resolution for Neutron Radioeraohv l and Computed Tomorraohv. PhD thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Dudley A.

Raine.

Radionuclide Monitorine of Precioitation as an Option for Verification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. MS thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Richard H. Irmen.

Evaluation and Performance Analysis of Trieger Detectors for Alertine Radionuclide Monitorine Stations. MS thesis in Nuclear Engineering by Piero L. Simoni.

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

P

0 - '

'O_t 37 VI. FINANCES' A. Exoenditures 1

Expenditures for 1996 were as follows: .

l State Support locally Generated ' Monies ,

Salaries + Fringe benefits: $251,000 $128,500 l Operations: 35,400 17,500

{

l Subtotals: $286,400 $146,000  :

TOTAL EXPENDITURES: $432A00 l.

1 B. Income '

l Income, both the actual amounts received (for work done in 1996 and in .

previous years) and billed (in 1996) are shown below:  !

I Va. State support in 1996: $286,400 '

Local income received in 1996: 142,200  ;

' TOTAL INCOME: $428,600 Total billed in 1996: 150,100 Approximate total receivables as of 12/31/95 151,800

• Note: In J')96, additional income and expenses in the form of staff salary support from research account budgets was also received and spent.

This support has the effect of reducing expenditures from the local account budget. In 1996, the total for salaries and fringe benefits to -

support reactor staff members from research budgets was about

$20,000.

C. State Suppon / Research and Service Income The University of Virginia is supported by allocations from the State of Virginia.

Of these' monies, a portion is allocated for the operation 'of the Nuclear Reactor Facility. These funds cover many of the expenses directly related to the operation of the reactor but additional monies are necessary to provide for remaining services provided to the university community by the Facility. Additional income is

l '

l 38 ;

i i- in the form of fees received for research and service work support. This income is i l- "not business related income" because it is primarily used to pay the salaries of extra professional staff members at the Facility who are not state supported.

During 1996 there were two full-time salaried staff members receiving their salaries wholly or in part from local funds. Two other full-time salaried staff members were supported for part of the year (they were hired at mid year) as was one full-time wage employee (who resigned near the end of the year). One student was employed in the capacity of a health physics technician and another was a HP tech. ,

and reactor _ operator for part of the year.

l l Some staff members take courses and receive degrees at the University while their salaries are paid from monies generated by service work. In effect, this is another method by which the Reactor Facility supports science education in the University of Virginia School of Engineering and Applied Science. During 19% two staff members took courses in pursuit of their PhD's in Nuclear Engineering.  ;

1 i

l l

l l

l l

[

l 1

l l

l Y

b t

.