ML082130382

NRC Inspection Report No. 50-5/2008-201

ML082130382
Person / Time
Site:	Pennsylvania State University
Issue date:	08/06/2008
From:	Johnny Eads NRC/NRR/ADRA/DPR/PRTB
To:	Pell E Pennsylvania State Univ
Voth M, NRR/ADRA/DPR/PRT, 415-1210
References
IR-08-201
Download: ML082130382 (14)

Text

August 6, 2008 Dr. Eva J. Pell Vice President for Research &

Dean of the Graduate School The Pennsylvania State University 304 Old Main University Park, PA 16802-1504

SUBJECT:

NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-5/2008-201

Dear Dr. Pell:

This letter refers to the inspection conducted on July 22 to 25, 2008, at your Penn State Breazeale Reactor. The inspection included a review of activities authorized for your facility.

The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.

Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations of activities in progress. Based on the results of this inspection, no safety concern or noncompliance of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements was identified. No response to this letter is required.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC=s Agencywide Document Access Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact Marcus Voth at 301-415-1210.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Johnny H. Eads, Branch Chief Research and Test Reactors Branch B Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-5 License No. R-2

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure: See next page

Pennsylvania State University Docket No. 50-5 cc:

Mr. Eric J. Boeldt, Manager of Radiation Protection The Pennsylvania State University 304 Old Main University Park, PA 16802-1504 Dr. Kenan Unlu, Director Penn State Breazeale Reactor The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802-1504 Director, Bureau of Radiation Protection Department of Environmental Protection P.O. Box 8469 Harrisburg, PA 17105-8469 Test, Research, and Training Reactor Newsletter University of Florida 202 Nuclear Sciences Center Gainesville, FL 32611

August 6, 2008 Dr. Eva J. Pell Vice President for Research &

Dean of the Graduate School The Pennsylvania State University 304 Old Main University Park, PA 16802-1504

SUBJECT:

NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 50-5/2008-201

Dear Dr. Pell:

This letter refers to the inspection conducted on July 22 to 25, 2008, at your Penn State Breazeale Reactor. The inspection included a review of activities authorized for your facility.

The enclosed report presents the results of that inspection.

Areas examined during the inspection are identified in the report. Within these areas, the inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures and representative records, interviews with personnel, and observations of activities in progress. Based on the results of this inspection, no safety concern or noncompliance of Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements was identified. No response to this letter is required.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.390 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC=s Agencywide Document Access Management System (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).

Should you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact Marcus Voth at 301-415-1210.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Johnny H. Eads, Branch Chief Research and Test Reactors Branch B Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-5 License No. R-2

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/ enclosure: See next page DISTRIBUTION:

PUBLIC PRTB/rf RidsNrrDprPrtb RidsOgcMailCenter MVoth SPierce BDavis (Ltr only O13-E19)

ADAMS ACCESSION NO.:ML082130382 TEMPLATE #: NRR-106 OFFICE PRT:RI PRT:LA PRT:BC NAME MVoth mhv EBarnhill eeb JEads jhe DATE 8/6/08 8/6/08 8/6/08 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION Docket No:

50-5 License No:

R-2 Report No:

50-5/2008-201 Licensee:

The Pennsylvania State University Facility:

Penn State Breazeale Reactor Location:

University Park, Pennsylvania Dates:

July 22 to 25, 2008 Inspector:

Marcus H. Voth, Lead John J. Donohue Gregory M. Schoenebeck Approved by:

Johnny H. Eads, Branch Chief Research and Test Reactors Branch B Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

EXECUTIVE

SUMMARY

The Pennsylvania State University Penn State Breazeale Reactor Facility NRC Inspection Report No. 50-5/2008-201 The primary focus of this routine, announced operations inspection was the onsite review of selected aspects of the licensees Class II research reactor facility safety programs including organization and staffing; operations logs and records; requalification training; surveillance and limiting conditions for operation; experiments; emergency planning; maintenance logs and records; fuel handling logs and records; and transportation since the last NRC inspection of these areas. The licensee=s programs were acceptably directed toward the protection of public health and safety, and in compliance with NRC requirements.

Organization and Staffing The licensee was in compliance with organizational and staffing requirements for operation of the reactor facility.

Operations Logs and Records The licensees operations record keeping program conformed to Technical Specification requirements.

Requalification Training Operator requalification was conducted as required by the Requalification Program. The lecture series was found to consist of a breadth of relevant topics.

Surveillance and Limiting Conditions for Operation Operations were found to be in compliance with the limiting conditions for operation and surveillances requirements as stated in the Technical Specifications.

Experiments The licensee reviewed and implemented experiments in accordance with their Technical Specifications and procedures.

Emergency Planning The records reviewed by the inspectors indicated that the PSBR Emergency Preparedness Plan, oversight, and training were being implemented as required.

Maintenance Logs and Records The licensee maintained records documenting principal maintenance activities in compliance with Technical Specification requirements.

Fuel Handling Logs and Records The licensee documented the fuel manipulations, performed inspections of the fuel and control rods, and verified reactor safety in accordance with Technical Specification requirements.

Transportation Radioactive material shipments by the licensee were conducted in accordance with applicable procedures and regulatory requirements.

REPORT DETAILS Summary of Facility Status The Pennsylvania State University (PSU) operates the one megawatt Penn State Breazeale Reactor (PSBR) as a major facility in its Radiation Science and Engineering Center (RSEC).

The PSBR continued to be operated in support of graduate and undergraduate research, laboratory instruction, and a variety of radiation services. During the inspection, the reactor was operating approximately ten hours per day, performing multiple startups each day in support of user needs.

1. Organization and Staffing

a. Inspection Scope (Inspection Procedure (IP) 69001-02.01)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify that the requirements of 10 CFR Part 55 and Section 6.0, Administrative Controls, of the Technical Specifications (TS) were being met:

Radiation Science & Engineering Center 52nd Annual Progress Report, December 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 81, March 12, 2007 to September 5, 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 82, September 6, 2007 to February 1, 2008 Reactor Control Logbook # 83, February 4, 2008 to July 14, 2008

b. Observations and Findings The inspector reviewed the TS requirements and discussed the organizational structure for the PSBR with the Reactor Director. The inspector reviewed the minimum shift staffing requirements for reactor operations.

c. Conclusions The licensee was in compliance with organizational and staffing requirements for operation of the reactor facility.

2. Operations Logs and Records

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.02)

The inspectors reviewed selected parts of the following reactor operations records to verify that the requirements of TS Section 6.7, Records, were being met:

Reactor Control Logbook # 81, March 12, 2007 to September 5, 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 82, September 6, 2007 to February 1, 2008 Reactor Control Logbook # 83, February 4, 2008 to July 14, 2008 Procedure SOP-1, Reactor Operating Procedure, Rev. 15, March 2, 2007 Procedure SOP-2, Daily Checkout Procedure, Rev. 19

b. Observations and FindingsSection VI.A.5.C of SOP-1, Conduct of Operations - Reactor Logbook Entries, provided reactor operators with criteria for making logbook entries. The inspectors found entries to be consistent with the procedural requirements; namely, such matters as pre-start checks, reactor startups, personnel on duty, experiments being performed, maintenance, surveillance, and core configurations.

c. Conclusions The licensees operations record keeping program conformed to Technical Specification requirements.

3. Requalification Training

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.04)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify that the requirements of 10 CFR 50.55, Operators Licenses, were being met:

Procedure AP-3, Operator and Senior Operator Requalification, Rev. 2, October 17, 2005 PSBR Operator Requalification File, 2006-2007 PSBR Operator Training file, 2006-2007 Operator Requalification files for two operators (randomly selected)

b. Observations and Findings The inspectors found the licensees requalification plan to include the regulatory requirements such as the two-year program; written, oral, and operating examinations; lectures; and procedure review. The written examination was determined to be of equivalent difficulty as those administered by the NRC; scores ranged from 89 to 99 percent. Files of two operators were reviewed in depth, one for a long-term operator and the second for a relatively new operator.

Records reviewed indicated perfect attendance at all training lectures, despite provisions for make-up of missed sessions. Topics included refresher subject material, lessons learned from incidents at other facilities, pre-job briefings, revised security requirements, and CPR training.

c. Conclusions Operator requalification was conducted as required by the Requalification Program. The lecture series was found to consist of a breadth of relevant topics.

4. Surveillance and Limiting Conditions for Operation

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.05)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify compliance with TS Section 3.0, Limiting Conditions for Operation, and to determine if the periodic surveillance tests on safety systems were performed as stipulated in TS Section 4.0, Surveillance Requirements:

Check and Calibration Procedure (CCP) Manual CCP-2, Reactor Thermal Power Calibration, completed August 23, 2007 CCP-3, Pool Temperature Channel Calibration, completed May 22, 2007 CCP Status Matrix SOP-2, Daily Checkout Procedure, Rev. 19 SOP-4, Radiation, Evacuation and Alarm Checks, Rev. 10

b. Observations and Findings The inspectors selected a sample of the TS limiting conditions for operation (LCOs) to verify implementation. In all cases the licensee demonstrated a method of compliance built into standard operating procedures (SOPs) and/or CCP which documented completion in reactor logbooks or on procedure data sheets. Records were well maintained and easily retrieved.

Surveillances less frequent than monthly were tracked on the CCP Status Matrix.

Monthly surveillances were tracked as a subset using procedure SOP-4. Daily surveillances were recorded in the daily checkout procedure.

Two surveillance procedures were reviewed in depth for their technical approach, the reactor power and the pool temperature channel calibrations. The inspectors also observed preparations for testing of the emergency exhaust system filter efficiency.

c. Conclusions Operations were found to be in compliance with the limiting conditions for operation and surveillances requirements as stated in the Technical Specifications.

5. Experiments

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.06)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify that the requirements of TS Sections 3.7, Limitations on Experiments, and 6.4, Review and Approval of Experiments, were being met:

Safety Review Committee Meeting Minutes from 2007 and 2008 SOP-5, Experiment Evaluation and Authorization, Rev.4 PSBR Experiment Evaluation and Authorization Forms for 2007 and 2008 Reactor Control Logbook # 81, March 12, 2007 to September 5, 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 82, September 6, 2007 to February 1, 2008

b. Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed numerous experiment evaluation and authorization submittals.

The objective of the review process by the PSBR staff was to ensure that the experiment:

was in accordance with As Low As Reasonably Achievable (ALARA) practices, did not cause physical damage to the reactor facility, and did not violate TS limits on core parameters.

The inspectors observed several experiment manipulations and found that operations were consistent with implementing procedures.

Although there were no experiments among those reviewed that involved deviation from the previously reviewed experiment types, the licensee was cognizant and had review plans in place which met the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 governing new or modified experiments.

c. Conclusions The licensee reviewed and implemented experiments in accordance with their Technical Specifications and procedures.

6. Emergency Planning

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.10)

To verify compliance with 10 CFR 50.34, Appendix E, and TS 6.3.u, the inspectors reviewed the following documents and selective records:

Penn State Breazeale Reactor Emergency Preparedness Plan (EPP), Rev. 4, September 21, 2000 EP-1, Evacuation (EPP Implementation), Rev. 13, July 24, 2008 CCP-22, Emergency Drill and Preparedness, Rev. 2, July 18, 2005 CCP-28, Annual Review of PSBR Emergency Preparedness Plan, Rev. 2, April 2004 File of minutes from critiques of exercises and evacuation drills conducted in 2007 and 2008.

Training records for emergency on-site response personnel

b. Observation and Findings The inspectors reviewed the current EPP which had not changed since the previous inspection. Four controlled copies the EPP procedures were readily available to users as required. Training and Emergency Plan review with the reactor staff, emergency exercises/drills, and critiques of the exercises/drills were conducted annually. The exercises/drills included testing of the communication link as required.

The inspectors verified that lists containing key emergency personnel notification information were readily available in the control room and the emergency support center.

c. Conclusions The records reviewed by the inspectors indicated that the PSBR Emergency Preparedness Plan, oversight, and training were being implemented as required.

7. Maintenance Logs and Records

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.11)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify compliance with the record-keeping requirements for preventive and corrective maintenance of electronic and reactor equipment pursuant to TS Sections 6.7.1.c and 6.7.1.g:

Reactor Control Logbook # 81, March 12, 2007 to September 5, 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 82, September 6, 2007 to February 1, 2008 Reactor Control Logbook # 83, February 4, 2008 to July 14, 2008 Electronic Maintenance Log, March 2003 to present Software Change Log for the AECL Console Installation, August 13, 1991 to present AP-4, Identification, Evaluation and Documentation of Safety System Failures, Abnormal Events, and Operational Events, Rev. 3, May 18, 2004 AP-13, Maintenance/Repair, Rev. 4, September 6, 2004 File of Open RSEC Condition Reporting Forms, 2008-017 through 2008-029

b. Observations and Findings The inspectors reviewed selected portions of logbooks governing the interval of time since the previous inspection. Maintenance was logged in one of three places referenced above depending on whether it affected reactor console software, electronics, or other auxiliary equipment. Maintenance that was not related to software or electronics was logged in the reactor control logbooks. Major maintenance activities were found documented in a level of detail commensurate with the safety significance of the activity.

The licensee maintained a file of condition report forms, a system which allowed any staff member to document in writing observed or suspected problems for management attention. The inspectors found that matters reported were being given timely review and resolution.

c. Conclusions The licensee maintained records documenting principal maintenance activities in compliance with Technical Specification requirements.

8. Fuel Handling Logs and Records

a. Inspection Scope (IP 69001-02.12)

The inspectors reviewed the following to verify that requirements of TS Sections 3.1, Reactor Core Parameters, 4.1.3, TRIGA Fuel Elements, and 6.3.b, Operating

Procedures (Core loading, unloading, and fuel movement within the reactor) were being met:

SOP-3, Core Loading and Fuel Handling CCP-1, Control Rod Speed and Scram Time Checks CCP-11, Core Reactivity Evaluation CCP-16, Inspection of Fuel Elements CCP-17, Control Rod Inspection Core 53 Master Safety Review Committee Meeting Minutes, November 16, 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 81, March 12, 2007 to September 5, 2007 Reactor Control Logbook # 82, September 6, 2007 to February 1, 2008

b. Observations and Find The inspectors reviewed an appreciable number of fuel handling records which included the reactor pool leak repair and reactor core 53 configuration. The records filed in the Core 53 Master Procedure binder indicated that TS safety limits were not exceeded.

The records also indicated that under procedural control the licensee moved spent fuel to storage racks in the reactor pool, recording fuel element serial numbers, storage rack locations, and time of fuel movement. Inspections of the fuel and control rods were performed using written operating procedures which implemented TS requirements.

c. Conclusions The licensee documented the fuel manipulations, performed inspections of the fuel and control rods, and verified reactor safety in accordance with Technical Specification requirements.

9. Transportation

a. Inspection Scope (IP 86740)

To verify compliance with 10 CFR Part 71 and 49 CFR Parts 100-185 and procedural compliance for transporting or shipping licensed radioactive material, the inspectors reviewed the following:

Selected records of various types of radioactive material shipments Radiation Protection Procedure RP-Shipping-10, Radioactive Receipt and Shipping Procedure, January 2007 Completed RP-Shipping-10, Appendix B Forms, Shipment Checklist for a Limited Quantity of Radioactive from January 2008 to present Completed RP-Shipping-10, Appendix C Forms, Type A Quantities Only, dated from January 2008 to present Completed RP-Shipping-11, Low Level Specific Activity Waste Pickup, dated from January 2008 to present

b. Observations and Findings Through records reviewed and discussions with licensee personnel, the inspectors determined that the licensee had shipped various packages of radioactive material since the previous inspection. The records indicated that the radioisotope types and quantities were calculated and dose rates measured as required. All radioactive material records reviewed by the inspectors had been completed in accordance with the Department of Transportation (DOT) and NRC regulations.

The inspectors verified that the licensee maintained copies of shipment recipients licenses to possess radioactive material as required and that the licensees were verified prior to shipment. The training of staff members responsible for shipping material was also reviewed. The inspectors verified that the shippers training met NRC and DOT requirements.

c. Conclusions Radioactive material shipments by the licensee were conducted in accordance with applicable procedures and regulatory requirements.

10. Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on July 25, 2008, with members of licensee management. The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.

PARTIAL LIST OF PERSONS CONTACTED Licensee A. Atchley, Associate Dean of Engineering E. Boeldt, Manager, Radiation Protection M. Bryan, Research Engineer M. Claver, Director, Environmental Health and Safety C. Davison, Research and Education Specialist B. Heidrich, Senior Research Assistant M. Morlang, Research Engineer E. Pell, Vice President for Research and Dean of the Graduate School D. Sathianathan, Penn State Reactor Safeguards Committee, Chairman M. Trump, Associate Director for Operations K. Unlu, Director, Radiation Science & Engineering Center INSPECTION PROCEDURES USED IP 69001 Class II Research and Test Reactors IP 86740 Transportation ITEMS OPENED, CLOSED, AND DISCUSSED Opened None Closed None Discussed None PARTIAL LIST OF ACRONYMS USED ADAMS Agencywide Document Access Management System ALARA As Low As Reasonably Achievable CCP Checks and Calibrations Procedures CFR Code of Federal Regulations DOT Department of Transportation EPP Emergency Preparedness Plan IP Inspection Procedure LCO Limiting Conditions for Operation NRC Nuclear Regulatory Commission PARS Publicly Available Records PSBR Penn State Breazeale Reactor PSU Penn State University Rev.

Revision RSEC Radiation Science and Engineering Center SOP Standard Operating Procedure TS Technical Specifications