|
|
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) |
Line 3: |
Line 3: |
| | issue date = 07/13/2012 | | | issue date = 07/13/2012 |
| | title = Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal, Response to RAI | | | title = Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal, Response to RAI |
| | author name = Jenkins J H | | | author name = Jenkins J |
| | author affiliation = Purdue Univ | | | author affiliation = Purdue Univ |
| | addressee name = Montgomery C K | | | addressee name = Montgomery C |
| | addressee affiliation = NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR/DPR | | | addressee affiliation = NRC/Document Control Desk, NRC/NRR/DPR |
| | docket = 05000182 | | | docket = 05000182 |
Line 18: |
Line 18: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:PURDUEU K I V E R S I T Y SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING13 July 2012Document Control DeskUS Nuclear Regulatory CommissionOne White Flint North11555 Rockville PikeRockville, MD 20852Attn: Ms. Cindy Montgomery, Research & Test Reactors (NRR/DPR/PRLB), Mailstop 012 D20 | | {{#Wiki_filter:PURDUE U K I V E R S I T Y SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING 13 July 2012 Document Control Desk US Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Attn: Ms. Cindy Montgomery, Research & Test Reactors (NRR/DPR/PRLB), Mailstop 012 D20 |
|
| |
|
| ==SUBJECT:== | | ==SUBJECT:== |
| PURDUE UNIVERSITY -REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATIONREGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME1594), RESPONSES TO RAIs (ML1 03400115 and ML1 03400250) | | PURDUE UNIVERSITY - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594), RESPONSES TO RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) |
|
| |
|
| ==Dear Ms. Montgomery:== | | ==Dear Ms. Montgomery:== |
| Enclosed please find the responses to the Request for Additional Information regarding thePurdue University Reactor License Renewal dated 6 July 2011. Included with this submissionare responses to questions 49, 50, 53, 64, and 72. Should you have any questions or requirefurther information, please don't hesitate to call me at 765.496.3573, or e-mail atjere@purdue.edu.I hereby certify under penalty of perjury with my signature below that the information containedin this submission is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.or of Radiation LaboratoriesAttachments: As described.Cc: Duane Hardesty, USNRC Project Manager for PUR-1Leah Jamieson; Purdue University College of EngineeringJim Schweitzer, Purdue University REM, CORO ChairAhmed Hassanein, Purdue NE'~ Schoolo Nuc lear EnergBideingScol fNuclear Engineering Building | | |
| * 400 Central Drive. West Lafayette, IN 47907-2017(765) 494-5739 | | Enclosed please find the responses to the Request for Additional Information regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal dated 6 July 2011. Included with this submission are responses to questions 49, 50, 53, 64, and 72. Should you have any questions or require further information, please don't hesitate to call me at 765.496.3573, or e-mail at jere@purdue.edu. |
| | I hereby certify under penalty of perjury with my signature below that the information contained in this submission is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. |
| | or |
| | *Di of Radiation Laboratories Attachments: As described. |
| | Cc: Duane Hardesty, USNRC Project Manager for PUR-1 Leah Jamieson; Purdue University College of Engineering Jim Schweitzer, Purdue University REM, CORO Chair Ahmed Hassanein, Purdue NE |
| | *'~ Schoolo Nuc EnergBideing lear Scol Engineering fNuclear Building |
| | * 400 Central Drive. West Lafayette, IN 47907-2017 (765) 494-5739 |
| * Fax: (765) 494-9570 | | * Fax: (765) 494-9570 |
| * https://engineering.purdue.edu/NE PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO RAIsREGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594)49 SAR Section 2.3.2 indicates that buildings at Purdue are designed to withstand the wind loadof 17 pounds per square foot from the data indicating a maximum wind zone of 80 miles perhour. Please provide an evaluation of a safety analysis that indicates the safety margin of theDuncan Annex wind load rating relative to the maximum wind load.Response:The information provided in the SAR as submitted was transferred from the 1988 SAR approved by theNRC. Further investigation and discussions with Purdue Facilities engineers yielded the followinginformation.1. Per the original drawings, the design roof live load was 30 PSF. The design wind load was notstated, however, 20 PSF would be a reasonable assumption. The drawings are dated 1940. The1927 UBC (uniform building code) required a 20 PSF wind load.2. Historically, the design wind speed for this area had been 80 mph. Referencing the 1982 UBC,wind stagnation pressure at 30' was 17 PSF for 80 mph wind, and 21 PSF for 90 mph wind. Thispressure is then modified by other factors including importance factor (type of facility), exposurefactor (surrounding physical obstructions), Topographic factor (surrounding topography). Also,wind pressures are higher at edges and corners, and increase with elevation. Historically, auniform snow load of 30 PSF was used for this area.3. Currently, ASCE 7 is referenced by 2006 IBC as amended by 2008 Indiana Building Code as thestandard for structural loads for buildings including snow and wind. Design wind speed for thisarea is now 90 mph, and ground snow load for this area now is 20 PSF, which is then modifiedfor other factors including importance, exposure, thermal, and drift.4. These loads and the corresponding design would typically have a factor of safety above 1.5, butthe safety factors will vary depending on the type of member (roof, wall, etc.) and material underconsideration. In other words, the structure could sustain loads 1.5 times the design loads (this isconservative) and not fail.Based on the fact that the Duncan Annex building was originally designed as a high voltage laboratory,and the building is windowless, constructed with steel reinforced concrete, concrete block and brick, andthe reactor itself is contained in a pool constructed with steel reinforced concrete, lined with a stainlesssteel tank, it is very unlikely that high winds or snow loads could lead to core damage.50. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 3.2 provides guidance on describing the design for theprotection from meteorological conditions. Please indicate the maximum snow and ice loadthat the PUR-1 facility roof must be capable of withstanding to ensure safe reactor operationis not jeopardized. Please provide reference to local building codes, standards or othercriteria as part of your response.Response:Please see the answer to Question 49 above.Page 1 of 313 July 2012 PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)53. NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 10 provides guidance for providing information on theexperimental facilities, the experimental program and its intended use. Please provide adescription of the general focus of the experimental program (radiation science, medical,materials testing, teaching, etc.), the experimental facilities, the basic type of experimentsthat are irradiated (incore, thermal column, external beam, etc.), any limiting experimentalcharacteristics (e.g., reactivity, contents) monitoring and control of the experiments, and theinteraction between the experiment and the reactor control and safety systems.Response:Section 10.2 describes the experimental facilities that exist for PUR-1, and they are also discussed inChapters 4 and 13. The general scope of the experimental program is for teaching, training and radiationscience. For teaching and training, reactor experiments such as "Approach to Critical" and "Control RodWorth" are routinely performed with senior undergraduate and graduate nuclear engineering studentsunder the direction of reactor operators. Radiation science experiments focus primarily on activations,training, and some material testing.Reactivity and content limitations for experiments are described in the Technical Specifications, andaccident analyses for the experiments (for failure of experiments with reactivity worth, as well as reactivityworth changes that would result from failure of experiments with reactivity worth or flooding of a dry droptube are described in Chapter 1364. SAR, Section 2.5.2 states "it is highly unlikely that any reactor water would be lost during anysevere seismic activity" but no indication is provided that damaging seismic activity to otherstructures, systems or components (SSC) is unlikely. Please provide an evaluation of asafety analysis indicating that if any seismic activity were to occur, the radiologicalconsequences are bounded, indicate where the analysis occurs in the SAR or justify why ananalyses is not required.Response:The reactor building and reactor infrastructure was built to seismic code in existence at the time. Due tothe low probability of seismic activity, and limited damage to Purdue buildings that would result fromseismic activity, core damage would be negligible. The only overhead equipment in the room that couldpotentially fall into the pool as a result of seismic activity would be the overhead crane, which is notparked over the pool when not in use, as a rule, and is used only rarely, generally less than once everythree years.72. NUREG-1537, Section 9.3 provides guidance for fire protection systems and programs at thefacility. SAR section 9.3 discusses the fire protection system as being "appropriate for thetypes of fires that could be encountered in the reactor room." However, Section 9.3 of theSAR does not discuss methods to detect, control, or extinguish fires. Please indicate themeans the facility has for preventing, detecting, and combating fires and the facilitycompliance with the local national fire codes. Please provide an evaluation of the safetyanalysis for fire protection with sufficient information describing potential radiologicalconsequences of a fire will not prevent safe reactor shutdown or result in a fire-relatedrelease of radioactive material or if such a release is possible, that release of radioactivePage 2 of 313 July 2012 PUR-A: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)material would not cause radiation exposure that exceeds the requirements of 10 CFR Part20.Response:The reactor and the building where the reactor is located are intrinsically fireproof, and in the event of afire no special precautions are required. The fire protection system for the reactor facility is typical ofthose at most university low-power research reactors. There are two portable fire extinguishers in thereactor room located at either end of the room. These extinguishers are inspected annually by personnelfrom the Purdue University Fire Department (PUFD) to verify they meet fire codes as required. A fullyfunctional campus fire station, manned 24 hours/day, is located on campus (-1/2 mile from the reactor)and is available on short notice to assist in case of a fire.If a fire should occur while the reactor is in operation, the reactor would be shut down and the supervisor,or alternate, would be notified. Normal fire procedures for the building are in place and are expected topreclude accumulation of flammable materials. If a fire occurs when the reactor is not in operation andreactor personnel are not present, the reactor pool will be adequate to prevent core damage for anextended period of time, until building fire alarms are tripped and PUFD responds.There is no sprinkler system in the reactor room due to the potential damage to the reactor I&C systemthat could result from leaks or failure of a sprinkler head. Fire inspectors visit the facility on a 3-5 yearrotation to verify that the reactor room meets applicable fire codes.Page 3 of 3 13 July 2012Page 3 of 313 July 2012 | | * https://engineering.purdue.edu/NE |
| }} | | |
| | PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) |
| | REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO RAIs REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594) 49 SAR Section 2.3.2 indicates that buildings at Purdue are designed to withstand the wind load of 17 pounds per square foot from the data indicating a maximum wind zone of 80 miles per hour. Please provide an evaluation of a safety analysis that indicates the safety margin of the Duncan Annex wind load ratingrelative to the maximum wind load. |
| | |
| | ===Response=== |
| | The information provided in the SAR as submitted was transferred from the 1988 SAR approved by the NRC. Further investigation and discussions with Purdue Facilities engineers yielded the following information. |
| | : 1. Per the original drawings, the design roof live load was 30 PSF. The design wind load was not stated, however, 20 PSF would be a reasonable assumption. The drawings are dated 1940. The 1927 UBC (uniform building code) required a 20 PSF wind load. |
| | : 2. Historically, the design wind speed for this area had been 80 mph. Referencing the 1982 UBC, wind stagnation pressure at 30' was 17 PSF for 80 mph wind, and 21 PSF for 90 mph wind. This pressure is then modified by other factors including importance factor (type of facility), exposure factor (surrounding physical obstructions), Topographic factor (surrounding topography). Also, wind pressures are higher at edges and corners, and increase with elevation. Historically, a uniform snow load of 30 PSF was used for this area. |
| | : 3. Currently, ASCE 7 is referenced by 2006 IBC as amended by 2008 Indiana Building Code as the standard for structural loads for buildings including snow and wind. Design wind speed for this area is now 90 mph, and ground snow load for this area now is 20 PSF, which is then modified for other factors including importance, exposure, thermal, and drift. |
| | : 4. These loads and the corresponding design would typically have a factor of safety above 1.5, but the safety factors will vary depending on the type of member (roof, wall, etc.) and material under consideration. In other words, the structure could sustain loads 1.5 times the design loads (this is conservative) and not fail. |
| | Based on the fact that the Duncan Annex building was originally designed as a high voltage laboratory, and the building is windowless, constructed with steel reinforced concrete, concrete block and brick, and the reactor itself is contained in a pool constructed with steel reinforced concrete, lined with a stainless steel tank, it is very unlikely that high winds or snow loads could lead to core damage. |
| | : 50. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 3.2 provides guidance on describing the design for the protection from meteorological conditions. Please indicate the maximum snow and ice load that the PUR-1 facility roof must be capable of withstanding to ensure safe reactoroperation is not jeopardized. Please provide reference to local building codes, standards or other criteriaas part of your response. |
| | |
| | ===Response=== |
| | Please see the answer to Question 49 above. |
| | Page 1 of 3 13 July 2012 |
| | |
| | PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) |
| | : 53. NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 10 provides guidance for providing information on the experimental facilities, the experimental program and its intended use. Please provide a description of the general focus of the experimental program (radiation science, medical, materials testing, teaching, etc.), the experimental facilities, the basic type of experiments that are irradiated (incore, thermal column, external beam, etc.), any limiting experimental characteristics(e.g., reactivity, contents) monitoring and control of the experiments, and the interaction between the experiment and the reactorcontrol and safety systems. |
| | |
| | ===Response=== |
| | Section 10.2 describes the experimental facilities that exist for PUR-1, and they are also discussed in Chapters 4 and 13. The general scope of the experimental program is for teaching, training and radiation science. For teaching and training, reactor experiments such as "Approach to Critical" and "Control Rod Worth" are routinely performed with senior undergraduate and graduate nuclear engineering students under the direction of reactor operators. Radiation science experiments focus primarily on activations, training, and some material testing. |
| | Reactivity and content limitations for experiments are described in the Technical Specifications, and accident analyses for the experiments (for failure of experiments with reactivity worth, as well as reactivity worth changes that would result from failure of experiments with reactivity worth or flooding of a dry drop tube are described in Chapter 13 |
| | : 64. SAR, Section 2.5.2 states "it is highly unlikely that any reactorwater would be lost during any severe seismic activity" but no indication is provided that damaging seismic activity to other structures, systems or components (SSC) is unlikely. Please provide an evaluation of a safety analysis indicating that if any seismic activity were to occur, the radiological consequences are bounded, indicate where the analysis occurs in the SAR orjustify why an analyses is not required. |
| | |
| | ===Response=== |
| | The reactor building and reactor infrastructure was built to seismic code in existence at the time. Due to the low probability of seismic activity, and limited damage to Purdue buildings that would result from seismic activity, core damage would be negligible. The only overhead equipment in the room that could potentially fall into the pool as a result of seismic activity would be the overhead crane, which is not parked over the pool when not in use, as a rule, and is used only rarely, generally less than once every three years. |
| | : 72. NUREG-1537, Section 9.3 provides guidance for fire protection systems and programs at the facility. SAR section 9.3 discusses the fire protection system as being "appropriatefor the types of fires that could be encountered in the reactor room." However, Section 9.3 of the SAR does not discuss methods to detect, control, or extinguish fires. Please indicate the means the facility has for preventing, detecting, and combating fires and the facility compliance with the local national fire codes. Please provide an evaluation of the safety analysis for fire protection with sufficient information describing potential radiological consequences of a fire will not prevent safe reactor shutdown or result in a fire-related release of radioactive material or if such a release is possible, that release of radioactive Page 2 of 3 13 July 2012 |
| | |
| | PUR-A: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) material would not cause radiation exposure that exceeds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20. |
| | |
| | ===Response=== |
| | The reactor and the building where the reactor is located are intrinsically fireproof, and in the event of a fire no special precautions are required. The fire protection system for the reactor facility is typical of those at most university low-power research reactors. There are two portable fire extinguishers in the reactor room located at either end of the room. These extinguishers are inspected annually by personnel from the Purdue University Fire Department (PUFD) to verify they meet fire codes as required. A fully functional campus fire station, manned 24 hours/day, is located on campus (-1/2 mile from the reactor) and is available on short notice to assist in case of a fire. |
| | If a fire should occur while the reactor is in operation, the reactor would be shut down and the supervisor, or alternate, would be notified. Normal fire procedures for the building are in place and are expected to preclude accumulation of flammable materials. If a fire occurs when the reactor is not in operation and reactor personnel are not present, the reactor pool will be adequate to prevent core damage for an extended period of time, until building fire alarms are tripped and PUFD responds. |
| | There is no sprinkler system in the reactor room due to the potential damage to the reactor I&C system that could result from leaks or failure of a sprinkler head. Fire inspectors visit the facility on a 3-5 year rotation to verify that the reactor room meets applicable fire codes. |
| | 13 July 2012 Page of 33 Page 33 of 13 July 2012}} |
Letter Sequence Response to RAI |
---|
|
Initiation
- Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request, Request
- Acceptance
|
MONTHYEARML1008200192010-03-24024 March 2010 Purdue University, Request for Additional Information, Renewal of Facility Operating License, Financial Qualifications (Tac No. ME1594) Project stage: RAI ML1016201842010-06-0404 June 2010 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal (Tac No. Me 1594), Responses to RAIs Dated 24 March 2010 Project stage: Response to RAI ML1014604292011-07-0606 July 2011 Purdue University - 30 Day Request for Additional Information Regarding the PUR-1 License Renewal Project stage: RAI ML1034001152011-07-0808 July 2011 Purdue University - 60 Day Request for Additional Information Regarding the PUR-1 License Renewal Project stage: RAI ML1117906492011-08-11011 August 2011 Purdue University, Letter to Licensee, Notice of Acceptance for Docketing and Opportunity to Provide Written Comments And/Or Request a Hearing and Order Imposing Procedures for Access to SGI and SUNSI License Renewal (Tac ME1594) Project stage: Acceptance Review ML1123719362011-08-23023 August 2011 Purdue University - E-mail from J. Jenkins, Purdue to D. Hardesty NRC Project Manager Request for an Extension of Time to Respond to NRC Request for Additional Information Project stage: Request ML1133604702011-11-0404 November 2011 Purdue University - E-mail from J. Jenkins, Purdue to C. Montgomery, NRC Project Manager, Request for an Extension to Respond to NRC Request for Additional Information (30-Day) Dated July 6, 2011 (Tac No. ME1594) Project stage: Request ML11320A2872011-11-15015 November 2011 Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal (TAC ME1594), Response to RAIs Dated 6 July 2011 (ML101460429) Project stage: Response to RAI ML1133604912011-12-28028 December 2011 Purdue University - Approval of Request for an Extension of Time to Respond to NRC Request for Additional Information (Tac No. ME1594) Project stage: RAI ML12006A1932012-01-0404 January 2012 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the License Renewal, Responses to RAIs Dated 6 July 2011 Project stage: Response to RAI ML1200500042012-01-0404 January 2012 Purdue University - E-mail from J. Jenkins, Purdue to C. Montgomery, NRC Project Manager Licensee Requesting Extension to Respond to NRC Request for Additional Information Dated July 8, 2011 and July 14, 2011 (Tac No. ME1594) Project stage: Request ML12031A2232012-01-30030 January 2012 Purdue University - Responses to the Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Dated July 6, 2011 Project stage: Request ML1209005712012-03-26026 March 2012 Purdue University License Renewal -- Renewal for Additional Time to Respond to the 60 and 90 Day Requests for Additional Information (Rais) Until January 31, 2012 Project stage: Other ML1213606312012-05-11011 May 2012 Email - Purdue University License Renewal-Submission Schedule for Request for Additional Time to Respond to the 60- and 90-day Requests for Additional Information (RAIs)--Until January 31, 2012 Project stage: Request ML1210301972012-05-29029 May 2012 Purdue University - NRC Approval of Request for Additional Time to Respond to the 60- and 90-day Requests for Additional Information Until January 31, 2013 Project stage: RAI ML12156A3642012-06-0101 June 2012 Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal (TAC ME1594), Responses to RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) Project stage: Response to RAI ML12170B0182012-06-15015 June 2012 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) Project stage: Response to RAI ML1218500042012-06-29029 June 2012 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal, Responses to RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) Project stage: Response to RAI ML12201A0702012-07-13013 July 2012 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal, Response to RAI Project stage: Response to RAI ML12226A4002012-08-11011 August 2012 Purdue University - Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding Purdue University Reactor License Renewal (TAC No. ME1594, Responses to RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) Project stage: Response to RAI ML13101A0442013-04-10010 April 2013 Purdue University - Response to Request Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Project stage: Request ML14115A2212014-08-29029 August 2014 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application Project stage: RAI ML15210A2872015-07-24024 July 2015 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to Letter Dated August 29, 2014 (ML14115A221). Part 4 of 5 Project stage: Request ML15210A2852015-07-24024 July 2015 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to Letter Dated August 29, 2014 (ML14115A221). Part 3 of 5 Project stage: Request ML15210A2832015-07-24024 July 2015 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to Letter Dated August 29, 2014 (ML14115A221). Part 2 of 5 Project stage: Request ML15210A2882015-07-24024 July 2015 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to Letter Dated August 29, 2014 (ML14115A221). Part 5 of 5 Project stage: Request ML15210A2802015-07-24024 July 2015 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to Letter Dated August 29, 2014 (ML14115A221) Project stage: Request ML15210A2822015-07-24024 July 2015 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal Application (TAC No. ME1594), Responses to Letter Dated August 29, 2014 (ML14115A221). Part 1 of 5 Project stage: Request ML15349B0432015-12-23023 December 2015 Purdue University Research Reactor - Request for Additional Information Physical Security Plan Review for License Renewal Project stage: RAI ML16047A3822016-01-29029 January 2016 Purdue University - Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Physical Security Plan Review for License Renewal Project stage: Response to RAI ML16083A2192016-02-26026 February 2016 Purdue University - Re-Submittal Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Physical Security Plan Review for License Renewal Project stage: Response to RAI ML16102A1192016-03-31031 March 2016 Purdue Univ., Submittal of 2015 Annual Report for PUR-1 Project stage: Request ML16102A1232016-03-31031 March 2016 Purdue Re-Submittal of Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Physical Security Plan Review for License Renewal Project stage: Response to RAI ML16134A1432016-05-0909 May 2016 Purdue University - Second Re-Submittal of Response to NRC Request for Additional Information Regarding Physical Security Plan Review for License Renewal Project stage: Response to RAI ML16193A6812016-07-0707 July 2016 Purdue University School of Nuclear Engineering Notice of ADAMS Document Correction, PUR-1, Docket 50-182, ML16187A371. Technical Specifications, Proposed Amendment 13 Enclosed Project stage: Request ML16207A4262016-07-19019 July 2016 Purdue University Responses to Request for Additional Information Re PUR-1 License Renewal and Power Uprate Project stage: Response to RAI ML16187A3712016-07-25025 July 2016 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Regarding the Renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-87 for the Purdue University Reactor Project stage: RAI ML16267A4652016-09-19019 September 2016 Purdue University - Response to Request for Additional Information Regarding the Reactor License Renewal Application, Responses to Letter Dated July 25, 2016 Project stage: Response to RAI ML16277A1652016-09-29029 September 2016 Purdue University - Explanation of Technical Specification Changes and Emergency Operator Action Project stage: Other ML16265A6342016-10-21021 October 2016 Purdue University - Notice of Issuance of Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding the Renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-87 (FRN) Project stage: Request ML16265A6322016-10-21021 October 2016 Purdue University Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Regarding Renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-87 for the Purdue University Reactor (Letter) Project stage: Other 2012-06-29
[Table View] |
|
---|
Category:Letter
MONTHYEARML23268A0752023-09-18018 September 2023 Purdue Univ., Submittal of Revised License Renewal Request ML23227A2462023-08-16016 August 2023 Examination Confirmation Letter No. 50-182/OL-24-01, Purdue University ML23171B0272023-06-13013 June 2023 Purdue Univ., Reply to Notice of Violation in NRC Inspection Report 05000182/2023201 IR 05000182/20232012023-05-23023 May 2023 Purdue University - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Inspection Report No. 05000182-2023201 and Notice of Violation ML23090A2012023-03-31031 March 2023 Purdue Univ., Submittal of 2022 Annual Report ML22238A2492022-09-0808 September 2022 Examination Confirmation Letter No. 50-182/OL-23-01, Purdue University IR 05000182/20212042021-12-0202 December 2021 Purdue University U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Follow-Up Safety Inspection Report 05000182/2021204 ML21306A1602021-11-11011 November 2021 Examination Confirmation Letter No. 50-182/OL-22-02, Purdue University ML21267A4272021-09-21021 September 2021 Purdue Univ., Reply to Notice of Violation in NRC Special Inspection Report No. 05000182/2021202 ML21267A4052021-09-14014 September 2021 Purdue Univ., Reply to Notice of Violation in NRC Special Inspection Report No. 05000182/2021203 IR 05000182/20212032021-07-29029 July 2021 Purdue Safety HP - Safety Inspection Report No. 05000182/2021203 and Notice of Violation IR 05000182/20212022021-07-28028 July 2021 Purdue University Nuclear Regulatory Commission Security Inspection Report No. 05000182/2021202 (Cover Letter) ML21173A3102021-06-25025 June 2021 Purdue University Additional Training Preformed in Lieu of Annual Operating Test ML21153A4272021-06-24024 June 2021 Examination Confirmation Letter No. 50-182/OL-21-01, Purdue University ML21172A1562021-06-0303 June 2021 Request to Compensate for a Missed Annual Operating Test by Utilizing 10 CFR 55.59(b) for SOP-70830 at Purdue Univ ML21148A1132021-05-0707 May 2021 Update to Facility Personnel at Purdue University Reactor, PUR-1, Docket 50-182 ML21139A1242021-05-0707 May 2021 Update to Facility Personnel at Purdue University Reactor, PUR-1, Docket 50-182 IR 05000182/20212012021-05-0606 May 2021 Purdue University, Routine Safety Inspection 050182/2021201 ML21118A0232021-03-31031 March 2021 Purdue University - Report on Reactor Operations for the Period January 1, 2020 to December 31, 2020 IR 05000182/20202012021-02-16016 February 2021 Purdue University Reactor Notice of Violation and Special Inspection Report 05000182/2020-201 ML21029A0562021-01-21021 January 2021 Purdue University Reactor, Update to Facility Personnel ML21035A0142021-01-0606 January 2021 Response to Apparent Violations in NRC Special Inspection Report 05000182/2020201 ML20336A3242020-12-11011 December 2020 Purdue University - Issuance of Amendment No. 16 to Renewed Facility Operating License No. R-87, for the Purdue University Research Reactor to Modify the Technical Specifications to Allow Startup of the Purdue University Reactor to Calibrat ML20332A0832020-12-0707 December 2020 Purdue University, Special Inspection Report 05000182/2020201 ML20330A2312020-11-27027 November 2020 Purdue University - Acceptance of the Application for a License Amendment Modification of Technical Specifications to Allow Startup of the Purdue University Reactor to Calibrate Nuclear Instrumentation (EPID A11010//L-2020-PPM-0000) ML20337A1042020-11-24024 November 2020 Purdue University Submission of License Amendment Request, PUR-1, Docket 50-182 ML20295A4242020-11-16016 November 2020 Notification of Mailing Address Change Regarding Submittal of Fingerprint Cards ML20311A2642020-11-0303 November 2020 Purdue Univ. School of Nuclear Engineering - Written Conveyance of 14-Day Special Report, PUR-1 ML20045E4522020-02-18018 February 2020 Purdue University - Acknowledgement of Withdrawal of the Application for a License Amendment Request for Management Chain Change ML20038A2872020-02-0606 February 2020 Purdue University - Withdrawal of License Amendment Request, PUR-1, Docket 50-182 - Management Chain ML20017A2632020-01-17017 January 2020 Purdue University, Indiana - Letter Regarding Dean Mung Chiang New Position Assignment as a Science and Technology Adviser to the Secretary of State ML19345F3782019-12-11011 December 2019 Examination Confirmation Letter No. 50-020/OL-20-01, Massachusetts Institute of Technology ML19345F2712019-12-11011 December 2019 Examination Confirmation Letter No. 50-182/OL-20-01, Purdue University IR 05000182/20192022019-10-30030 October 2019 Purdue University U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Inspection Report No. 05000182/2019-202 ML19274C4472019-10-0808 October 2019 Examination Report No. 50-182/OL-19-01, Purdue University ML19142A2722019-05-24024 May 2019 Purdue University - Issuance of Amendment No. 15 Regarding Implementation Date Change for Licensing Amendment No. 14 for Facility Operating License No. R-87 ML19143A3842019-05-21021 May 2019 LAR Implementation Extenstion - PUR1 - 20190521 ML18262A4342019-04-0101 April 2019 Purdue University Transmittal Letter for Issuance of Amendment No. 14 to Renewed Operating License No. R-87 for the Purdue University Research Reactor Digital Instrumentation Control Upgrade IR 05000182/20192012019-03-20020 March 2019 Purdue University - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Inspection Report No. 05000182/2019-201 ML18282A1912018-10-0505 October 2018 Purdue University - Interlock Language Retention in Technical Specification Submission Supporting License Amendment Request, PUR-1, Docket 50-182 IR 05000182/20184102018-09-26026 September 2018 Purdue University - Transmittal Letter Regarding U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Security-Related Inspection Report No. 05000182/2018-410 ML18263A1572018-09-20020 September 2018 Purdue University - Revisions to Technical Specification Submission Supporting License Amendment Request, PUR-1, Docket 50-182 ML18134A1612018-05-14014 May 2018 Purdue University - Notification of Level 1 Personnel Change ML18116A4462018-04-20020 April 2018 Purdue Univ., Special Report-Event Notification #53321 - Technical Specification 6.7.b.1.c.vi ML18116A4472018-03-30030 March 2018 Purdue Univ., Submittal of 2017 Annual Report ML18061A1392018-03-0202 March 2018 Purdue University - Augmented Request for Additional Information Response for Digital Control and Instrumentation Upgrade License Amendment Request ML17321B0662017-12-20020 December 2017 Purdue University - Regulatory Audit Report for Digital Control and Instrumentation Up-Grade License Amendment Request ML18010A8952017-12-18018 December 2017 Purdue University - Request for Additional Information Response for Digital Control and Instrumentation Upgrade License Amendment Request ML17272A0392017-10-0303 October 2017 Purdue University Supplemental Information Needed for Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action License Amendment Request for Management Chain Change ML17241A0312017-08-28028 August 2017 Submission of License Amendment Request, PUR-1, Docket 50-182-Management Chain Change 2023-09-18
[Table view] |
Text
PURDUE U K I V E R S I T Y SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING 13 July 2012 Document Control Desk US Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852 Attn: Ms. Cindy Montgomery, Research & Test Reactors (NRR/DPR/PRLB), Mailstop 012 D20
SUBJECT:
PURDUE UNIVERSITY - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594), RESPONSES TO RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250)
Dear Ms. Montgomery:
Enclosed please find the responses to the Request for Additional Information regarding the Purdue University Reactor License Renewal dated 6 July 2011. Included with this submission are responses to questions 49, 50, 53, 64, and 72. Should you have any questions or require further information, please don't hesitate to call me at 765.496.3573, or e-mail at jere@purdue.edu.
I hereby certify under penalty of perjury with my signature below that the information contained in this submission is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
or
- Di of Radiation Laboratories Attachments: As described.
Cc: Duane Hardesty, USNRC Project Manager for PUR-1 Leah Jamieson; Purdue University College of Engineering Jim Schweitzer, Purdue University REM, CORO Chair Ahmed Hassanein, Purdue NE
- '~ Schoolo Nuc EnergBideing lear Scol Engineering fNuclear Building
- 400 Central Drive. West Lafayette, IN 47907-2017 (765) 494-5739
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)
REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO RAIs REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594) 49 SAR Section 2.3.2 indicates that buildings at Purdue are designed to withstand the wind load of 17 pounds per square foot from the data indicating a maximum wind zone of 80 miles per hour. Please provide an evaluation of a safety analysis that indicates the safety margin of the Duncan Annex wind load ratingrelative to the maximum wind load.
Response
The information provided in the SAR as submitted was transferred from the 1988 SAR approved by the NRC. Further investigation and discussions with Purdue Facilities engineers yielded the following information.
- 1. Per the original drawings, the design roof live load was 30 PSF. The design wind load was not stated, however, 20 PSF would be a reasonable assumption. The drawings are dated 1940. The 1927 UBC (uniform building code) required a 20 PSF wind load.
- 2. Historically, the design wind speed for this area had been 80 mph. Referencing the 1982 UBC, wind stagnation pressure at 30' was 17 PSF for 80 mph wind, and 21 PSF for 90 mph wind. This pressure is then modified by other factors including importance factor (type of facility), exposure factor (surrounding physical obstructions), Topographic factor (surrounding topography). Also, wind pressures are higher at edges and corners, and increase with elevation. Historically, a uniform snow load of 30 PSF was used for this area.
- 3. Currently, ASCE 7 is referenced by 2006 IBC as amended by 2008 Indiana Building Code as the standard for structural loads for buildings including snow and wind. Design wind speed for this area is now 90 mph, and ground snow load for this area now is 20 PSF, which is then modified for other factors including importance, exposure, thermal, and drift.
- 4. These loads and the corresponding design would typically have a factor of safety above 1.5, but the safety factors will vary depending on the type of member (roof, wall, etc.) and material under consideration. In other words, the structure could sustain loads 1.5 times the design loads (this is conservative) and not fail.
Based on the fact that the Duncan Annex building was originally designed as a high voltage laboratory, and the building is windowless, constructed with steel reinforced concrete, concrete block and brick, and the reactor itself is contained in a pool constructed with steel reinforced concrete, lined with a stainless steel tank, it is very unlikely that high winds or snow loads could lead to core damage.
- 50. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 3.2 provides guidance on describing the design for the protection from meteorological conditions. Please indicate the maximum snow and ice load that the PUR-1 facility roof must be capable of withstanding to ensure safe reactoroperation is not jeopardized. Please provide reference to local building codes, standards or other criteriaas part of your response.
Response
Please see the answer to Question 49 above.
Page 1 of 3 13 July 2012
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)
- 53. NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 10 provides guidance for providing information on the experimental facilities, the experimental program and its intended use. Please provide a description of the general focus of the experimental program (radiation science, medical, materials testing, teaching, etc.), the experimental facilities, the basic type of experiments that are irradiated (incore, thermal column, external beam, etc.), any limiting experimental characteristics(e.g., reactivity, contents) monitoring and control of the experiments, and the interaction between the experiment and the reactorcontrol and safety systems.
Response
Section 10.2 describes the experimental facilities that exist for PUR-1, and they are also discussed in Chapters 4 and 13. The general scope of the experimental program is for teaching, training and radiation science. For teaching and training, reactor experiments such as "Approach to Critical" and "Control Rod Worth" are routinely performed with senior undergraduate and graduate nuclear engineering students under the direction of reactor operators. Radiation science experiments focus primarily on activations, training, and some material testing.
Reactivity and content limitations for experiments are described in the Technical Specifications, and accident analyses for the experiments (for failure of experiments with reactivity worth, as well as reactivity worth changes that would result from failure of experiments with reactivity worth or flooding of a dry drop tube are described in Chapter 13
- 64. SAR, Section 2.5.2 states "it is highly unlikely that any reactorwater would be lost during any severe seismic activity" but no indication is provided that damaging seismic activity to other structures, systems or components (SSC) is unlikely. Please provide an evaluation of a safety analysis indicating that if any seismic activity were to occur, the radiological consequences are bounded, indicate where the analysis occurs in the SAR orjustify why an analyses is not required.
Response
The reactor building and reactor infrastructure was built to seismic code in existence at the time. Due to the low probability of seismic activity, and limited damage to Purdue buildings that would result from seismic activity, core damage would be negligible. The only overhead equipment in the room that could potentially fall into the pool as a result of seismic activity would be the overhead crane, which is not parked over the pool when not in use, as a rule, and is used only rarely, generally less than once every three years.
- 72. NUREG-1537, Section 9.3 provides guidance for fire protection systems and programs at the facility. SAR section 9.3 discusses the fire protection system as being "appropriatefor the types of fires that could be encountered in the reactor room." However, Section 9.3 of the SAR does not discuss methods to detect, control, or extinguish fires. Please indicate the means the facility has for preventing, detecting, and combating fires and the facility compliance with the local national fire codes. Please provide an evaluation of the safety analysis for fire protection with sufficient information describing potential radiological consequences of a fire will not prevent safe reactor shutdown or result in a fire-related release of radioactive material or if such a release is possible, that release of radioactive Page 2 of 3 13 July 2012
PUR-A: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) material would not cause radiation exposure that exceeds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 20.
Response
The reactor and the building where the reactor is located are intrinsically fireproof, and in the event of a fire no special precautions are required. The fire protection system for the reactor facility is typical of those at most university low-power research reactors. There are two portable fire extinguishers in the reactor room located at either end of the room. These extinguishers are inspected annually by personnel from the Purdue University Fire Department (PUFD) to verify they meet fire codes as required. A fully functional campus fire station, manned 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />s/day, is located on campus (-1/2 mile from the reactor) and is available on short notice to assist in case of a fire.
If a fire should occur while the reactor is in operation, the reactor would be shut down and the supervisor, or alternate, would be notified. Normal fire procedures for the building are in place and are expected to preclude accumulation of flammable materials. If a fire occurs when the reactor is not in operation and reactor personnel are not present, the reactor pool will be adequate to prevent core damage for an extended period of time, until building fire alarms are tripped and PUFD responds.
There is no sprinkler system in the reactor room due to the potential damage to the reactor I&C system that could result from leaks or failure of a sprinkler head. Fire inspectors visit the facility on a 3-5 year rotation to verify that the reactor room meets applicable fire codes.
13 July 2012 Page of 33 Page 33 of 13 July 2012