ML20063M919: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML20063M919
| number = ML20063M919
| issue date = 08/20/1982
| issue date = 08/20/1982
| title = Responds to NRC 820730 Ltr Re Violation Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-160/82-01.Corrective Actions:Importance & Specified Requirement to Perform Heat Balance Every Wk Whenever Reactor Is Operated at Above 1 MW Discussed W/Staff
| title = Responds to NRC Re Violation Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-160/82-01.Corrective Actions:Importance & Specified Requirement to Perform Heat Balance Every Wk Whenever Reactor Is Operated at Above 1 MW Discussed W/Staff
| author name = Carlson W
| author name = Carlson W
| author affiliation = GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ATLANTA, GA
| author affiliation = GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ATLANTA, GA
Line 11: Line 11:
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = NUDOCS 8209160380
| document report number = NUDOCS 8209160380
| title reference date = 07-30-1982
| package number = ML20063M912
| package number = ML20063M912
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION TO NRC, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION TO NRC, INCOMING CORRESPONDENCE
Line 17: Line 18:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:f                     .        ,                                                                                                              l 1
{{#Wiki_filter:f l
Georgia Institute of Technology R*"                   SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND HEALTH PHYSICS ATLANTA, GEO9GIA 30332 extw exnce nescmcs                            j2 [nc 26     ^B   3L                                                 t.o., ee..aeco CE N TE R August 20, 1982 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W.
R*"
SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND HEALTH PHYSICS Georgia Institute of Technology ATLANTA, GEO9GIA 30332 j2 [nc 26
^B 3L extw exnce nescmcs t.o., ee..aeco CE N TE R August 20, 1982 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W.
Atlanta, Georgia 30303
Atlanta, Georgia 30303


==Reference:==
==Reference:==
Report No. 50-160/82-01 Gentlemen:
Report No. 50-160/82-01 Gentlemen:
This           letter     is     our     response     to       the         referenced report / inspection of the Georgia Tech Research Reactor by Mr. A.
This letter is our response to the referenced report / inspection of the Georgia Tech Research Reactor by Mr.
K. Hardin of your office                     to   Dr. L. Weaver. Dr. Weaver has recently accepted the position of Dean of Engineering of Auburn University at Auburn Alabama. As Acting Director of the School of Nuc7 ear Engineering and Health Physics, I am assuming his responsibility with regard to the GTRR until such time as a new Director is appointed.
A.
Item           No heat balance vs. channel checks for certain periods when the reactor was operated at levels of 1 MW.
K.
We have carefully re-examined our records for the periods in question and have concluded that on four weekly periods (two in     April,           one in May, and one in June) the reactor was indeed operated at 1 MW without a heat balance vs. channel check being recorded. We did note that on April 14 , 1982 and May 19, 1982 the reactor was operated at 1 MW for several periods of nine minutes or less. This time period is not                                     sufficient for meaningful heat balance data to be obtained. Additionally, as your           inspector           noted,       our     Heat Balance Procedure 2015 erroneously states that the channel check is to be made every thirty days rather than weekly.
Hardin of your office to Dr.
l                             Our efforts to prevent recurrence of this problem have been directed to discussion with each                               licensed         staff           member concerning the                 importance and specified requirement to perform e
L.
Weaver.
Dr.
Weaver has recently accepted the position of Dean of Engineering of Auburn University at Auburn Alabama.
As Acting Director of the School of Nuc7 ear Engineering and Health Physics, I am assuming his responsibility with regard to the GTRR until such time as a new Director is appointed.
Item No heat balance vs. channel checks for certain periods when the reactor was operated at levels of 1 MW.
We have carefully re-examined our records for the periods in question and have concluded that on four weekly periods (two in
: April, one in May, and one in June) the reactor was indeed operated at 1 MW without a heat balance vs. channel check being recorded.
We did note that on April 14, 1982 and May 19, 1982 the reactor was operated at 1 MW for several periods of nine minutes or less.
This time period is not sufficient for meaningful heat balance data to be obtained.
Additionally, as your inspector
: noted, our Heat Balance Procedure 2015 erroneously states that the channel check is to be made every thirty days rather than weekly.
l Our efforts to prevent recurrence of this problem have been directed to discussion with each licensed staff member concerning the importance and specified requirement to perform e
e b
e b
l   c1391bO380820831]
l c1391bO380820831]
PvRADOCK05000gg{
PvRADOCK05000gg{
G A Unit of the Unwersity System o' George                                           An Equal Educahon and Ernployment opportundy instituten
G A Unit of the Unwersity System o' George An Equal Educahon and Ernployment opportundy instituten


the . heat balance every week whenever the. reactor is operated at or above 1 MW. These discussions have been completed. We believe that our particular operations schedule would make it impractical to incorporate a specific instruction that would require,   for   example, a heat balance on a specific day or at a specific time. We do not,         therefore,   believe   such     an instruction should be issued. The discrepancy in our Procedure 2015 will be eliminated. This action should be completed by September 30, 1982.
the. heat balance every week whenever the. reactor is operated at or above 1
I believe   this answers   the questions in the referenced report. If   you should need   additional   clarification     or information, please do not hesitate to call.
MW.
These discussions have been completed.
We believe that our particular operations schedule would make it impractical to incorporate a specific instruction that would
: require, for example, a heat balance on a specific day or at a specific time.
We do
: not, therefore, believe such an instruction should be issued.
The discrepancy in our Procedure 2015 will be eliminated.
This action should be completed by September 30, 1982.
I believe this answers the questions in the referenced report.
If you should need additional clarification or information, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely yours,
Sincerely yours,
[NMh
[NMh
                                        ,W. O. Carlson, Acting irector School of Nuclear Engineering         i and Health Physics WOC /jh                     .
,W. O. Carlson, Acting irector School of Nuclear Engineering i
cc:   File /NRC Inspection, Members, Nuclear Safeguards Committee}}
and Health Physics WOC /jh cc:
File /NRC Inspection, Members, Nuclear Safeguards Committee}}

Latest revision as of 21:28, 16 December 2024

Responds to NRC Re Violation Noted in IE Insp Rept 50-160/82-01.Corrective Actions:Importance & Specified Requirement to Perform Heat Balance Every Wk Whenever Reactor Is Operated at Above 1 MW Discussed W/Staff
ML20063M919
Person / Time
Site: Neely Research Reactor
Issue date: 08/20/1982
From: Carlson W
Neely Research Reactor, ATLANTA, GA
To:
NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
Shared Package
ML20063M912 List:
References
NUDOCS 8209160380
Download: ML20063M919 (2)
v • d • e


Text

f l

R*"

SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING AND HEALTH PHYSICS Georgia Institute of Technology ATLANTA, GEO9GIA 30332 j2 [nc 26

^B 3L extw exnce nescmcs t.o., ee..aeco CE N TE R August 20, 1982 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region II 101 Marietta Street, N.W.

Atlanta, Georgia 30303

Reference:

Report No. 50-160/82-01 Gentlemen:

This letter is our response to the referenced report / inspection of the Georgia Tech Research Reactor by Mr.

A.

K.

Hardin of your office to Dr.

L.

Weaver.

Dr.

Weaver has recently accepted the position of Dean of Engineering of Auburn University at Auburn Alabama.

As Acting Director of the School of Nuc7 ear Engineering and Health Physics, I am assuming his responsibility with regard to the GTRR until such time as a new Director is appointed.

Item No heat balance vs. channel checks for certain periods when the reactor was operated at levels of 1 MW.

We have carefully re-examined our records for the periods in question and have concluded that on four weekly periods (two in

April, one in May, and one in June) the reactor was indeed operated at 1 MW without a heat balance vs. channel check being recorded.

We did note that on April 14, 1982 and May 19, 1982 the reactor was operated at 1 MW for several periods of nine minutes or less.

This time period is not sufficient for meaningful heat balance data to be obtained.

Additionally, as your inspector

noted, our Heat Balance Procedure 2015 erroneously states that the channel check is to be made every thirty days rather than weekly.

l Our efforts to prevent recurrence of this problem have been directed to discussion with each licensed staff member concerning the importance and specified requirement to perform e

e b

l c1391bO380820831]

PvRADOCK05000gg{

G A Unit of the Unwersity System o' George An Equal Educahon and Ernployment opportundy instituten

the. heat balance every week whenever the. reactor is operated at or above 1

MW.

These discussions have been completed.

We believe that our particular operations schedule would make it impractical to incorporate a specific instruction that would

require, for example, a heat balance on a specific day or at a specific time.

We do

not, therefore, believe such an instruction should be issued.

The discrepancy in our Procedure 2015 will be eliminated.

This action should be completed by September 30, 1982.

I believe this answers the questions in the referenced report.

If you should need additional clarification or information, please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely yours,

[NMh

,W. O. Carlson, Acting irector School of Nuclear Engineering i

and Health Physics WOC /jh cc:

File /NRC Inspection, Members, Nuclear Safeguards Committee

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20063M919&oldid=4446959"