ML12170B018: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=Text= | =Text= | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:PURDUE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING 15 June 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 | {{#Wiki_filter:PURDUE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING 15 June 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 | PURDUE UNIVERSITY - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594), | ||
-REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594), RESPONSES TO RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) | RESPONSES TO RAIs (ML103400115 and ML103400250) | ||
==Dear Ms. Montgomery:== | ==Dear Ms. Montgomery:== | ||
| Line 28: | Line 28: | ||
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 46, 47, 52, 57, and 59. 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. | 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 46, 47, 52, 57, and 59. 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. | 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. | ||
Very res p~ully, bJ Jenklins Director of Radiation Laboratories Attachments: | Very res p~ully, bJ Jenklins Director of Radiation Laboratories Attachments: As described. | ||
As described. | Cc: Duane Hardesty, USNRC Project Manager Leah Jamieson; Purdue University College of Engineering Jim Schweitzer, Purdue University REM Ahmed Hassanein, Purdue NE School of Nuclear Engineering A4 c Nuclear Engineering Building m 400 Central Drive m West Lafayette, IN 47907-2017 (765) 494-5739 m Fax: (765) 494-9570 a https://engineering.purdue.edu/NE | ||
Cc: Duane Hardesty, USNRC Project Manager Leah Jamieson; Purdue University College of Engineering Jim Schweitzer, Purdue University REM Ahmed Hassanein, Purdue NE School of Nuclear Engineering A4 c Nuclear Engineering Building m 400 Central Drive m West Lafayette, IN 47907-2017 (765) 494-5739 m Fax: (765) 494-9570 a https://engineering.purdue.edu/NE PUR-1: Partial Response to RAls for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) | |||
REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO RAIs REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594)46. Section 1.4 of the SAR states the reactor is located in the Duncan Annex, but does not indicate if there are any shared facilities and equipment as described in NUREG-1537, Section 1.4. Examples of shared facilities include water purification systems; electrical supplies;heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; any subcritical assemblies, | PUR-1: Partial Response to RAls for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) | ||
: 47. Section 1.6 of the SAR states the | REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO RAIs REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594) | ||
Also, | : 46. Section 1.4 of the SAR states the reactor is located in the Duncan Annex, but does not indicate if there are any shared facilities and equipment as described in NUREG-1537, Section 1.4. Examples of shared facilities include water purification systems; electrical supplies; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; any subcritical assemblies, irradiationfacilities, or hot cell located within the restricted area to which this SAR applies. | ||
Most of the runs are very low power, where reactor power does not exceed 100 W. About 10-15% of the reactor operations are for irradiations or other research related work.With the uprate, the number of research related work will likely increase somewhat with the expanded capabilities. | Please describe the shared facilities and equipment or provide an explanation describingyour reason(s) for not incorporatingadditionaldescription of sharedfacilities into the SAR. | ||
All of this is similar to similar facilities, such as the Ohio State University Research Reactor (OSURR), with the main difference being OSURR has a much greater research share.52. SAR Section 5.5 describes automatic pool water level control. Please describe how you would determine if the amount of make-up water to the reactor pool was excessive and indicative of a pool leak.Response | |||
Please discuss how | ===Response=== | ||
Page 2 of 3 15 June 2012 PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) | The reactor room is the defined facility restricted area. The HVAC system is, as described elsewhere in the SAR, isolated from the rest of the building HVAC. The reactor pool make-up water is drawn from the building water supply, but the water process system is a closed loop. The reactor room electrical supply is part of that of the rest of the building, but the reactor room circuits are separately fused. There are no other items such as subcritical assemblies, irradiation facilities or hot cells, which is why they weren't mentioned. | ||
Response: | : 47. Section 1.6 of the SAR states the reactoroperates about 90 times per year on average. Please describe the typical reactor operations during these "90 times per year" (i.e., typical operatingpower level and schedule). Also, indicateif these operations,including the facility's requested power uprate, are consistent with proposed operations described in the SAR and are consistent with the comparison to similarfacilities as described in NUREG- 1537, Section 1.5. | ||
1 r, Pool level is monitored by comparison of the pool level to a ruler at the top of the pool, and is observed at least once a week by reactor staff members. Make-up water usage is tracked in a log book on the console. In looking at the last 15 years, the average weekly water usage has been 36.8+/-12 gallons. The data are presented in Figure 1. Weekly usage that exceeds the average value plus three standard deviations could indicate a leak.Over the 50 year operations history of PUR-1, there has been no detectable contamination in the primary water as a result of operations. | |||
And based on the construction of the pool, with its stainless steel tank liner with no penetrations below floor level, leakage of water to the environment is extremely unlikely (as noted in the 1988 SER for the PUR-1 license, see NUREG-1 283). Observation of water level, and comparison to historical records should be adequate considering the risks involved.59. NUREG-1537, Section 8 discusses the need for emergency electrical power systems to protect the public from radioactive releases. | ===Response=== | ||
Please describe how the | The majority of reactor operations are for training/education activities in association with nuclear engineering laboratory classes. For example, two experiments that are performed are an approach to critical, and a control rod calibration. Most of the runs are very low power, where reactor power does not exceed 100 W. About 10-15% of the reactor operations are for irradiations or other research related work. | ||
Response | With the uprate, the number of research related work will likely increase somewhat with the expanded capabilities. All of this is similar to similar facilities, such as the Ohio State University Research Reactor (OSURR), with the main difference being OSURR has a much greater research share. | ||
: 52. SAR Section 5.5 describes automatic pool water level control. Please describe how you would determine if the amount of make-up water to the reactor pool was excessive and indicative of a pool leak. | |||
===Response=== | |||
The automatic pool water level control is only activated when needed to replace evaporated coolant inventory, and the automation is solely to prevent overfill of the pool. Operations staff activate the system, and track the amount of water used each time in a log book. Data exists for facility water usage back to Page 1 of 3 15 June 2012 | |||
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) about 1974. In looking at the last 15 years, the average weekly water usage has been 36.8+/-12 gallons. | |||
The data are presented in Figure 1. Weekly usage that exceeds the average value plus three standard deviations could indicate a leak. | |||
PUR-1 Weekly Make-up Water Usage 100 90 80 70 o 60 50 40o 30 20 10 0 5/01 11/01 5/02 11/02 5/03 11/03 5/04 11/04 5/05 11/05 5/06 11/06 5/07 11/07 5/08 11/08 5/09 11/09 5/10 11/10 5/11 11/11 5/12 Date Seriesl - 20 per. Mov. Avg. (Seriesl) | |||
Figure 1: Weekly make-up water usage for PUR-1. | |||
: 57. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 4.3, Reactor Tank or Pool states the applicantshould present all information about the pool necessary to ensure its integrity and should assess the possibility of uncontrolledleakage of contaminated primary water. | |||
: a. Section 5 of the SAR does not describe reactorpool level monitoring.Please discuss how reactorpool level is monitored, and if a leak develops in the reactorpool cooling system during off-hours, how it would be mitigated when approximately up to four feet of pool water could leak out? | |||
: b. Please discuss the typical radioactivity content of the pool, required responses from operator and/or university personnel, if a leakage is detected; Please discuss potential release pathways of reactor pool water leakage to the environment and the radiological impact of a release. | |||
: c. Please provide an estimate of the minimum detectable amount of leakage and an estimate of how long such a leak could exist before detection; any trends associated with the required make up water, and the physical means with which PUR-1 can detect small releases from the pool directly to the environment. | |||
Page 2 of 3 15 June 2012 | |||
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) | |||
Response: 1 r, Pool level is monitored by comparison of the pool level to a ruler at the top of the pool, and is observed at least once a week by reactor staff members. Make-up water usage is tracked in a log book on the console. In looking at the last 15 years, the average weekly water usage has been 36.8+/-12 gallons. The data are presented in Figure 1. Weekly usage that exceeds the average value plus three standard deviations could indicate a leak. | |||
Over the 50 year operations history of PUR-1, there has been no detectable contamination in the primary water as a result of operations. And based on the construction of the pool, with its stainless steel tank liner with no penetrations below floor level, leakage of water to the environment is extremely unlikely (as noted in the 1988 SER for the PUR-1 license, see NUREG-1 283). Observation of water level, and comparison to historical records should be adequate considering the risks involved. | |||
: 59. NUREG-1537, Section 8 discusses the need for emergency electrical power systems to protect the public from radioactive releases. Please describe how the radiationprotection system, including alarms, interlocks, and powered radiation monitors, functions without emergency power or if these systems do require power, describe how the facility and/or emergency responder personnel would monitor the radiation environment in the reactor building and in the rest of the ElectricalEngineering Building if power were not available. | |||
===Response=== | |||
Loss of power to the instrumentation and control systems of PUR-1 will result in a SCRAM since the shim-safety control rods are suspended by electro-magnets, thereby shutting down the reactor. Loss of power will also result in isolation of the reactor room, since the dampers will close. Battery powered survey meters and ionization chambers are available in the reactor room to ensure operations staff is aware of any possible radiation exposure hazards following a power outage. Emergency responder personnel at Purdue University also have battery operated survey meters and ionization chambers on their vehicles, should they be required. | |||
of 33 15 June 2012 Page 33 of Page 15 June 2012}} | |||
Latest revision as of 02:01, 12 November 2019
| ML12170B018 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Purdue University |
| Issue date: | 06/15/2012 |
| From: | Joel Jenkins Purdue University Research Reactor |
| To: | Cindy Montgomery Document Control Desk, Division of Policy and Rulemaking |
| References | |
| TAC ME1594 | |
| Download: ML12170B018 (4) | |
Text
PURDUE UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING 15 June 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 46, 47, 52, 57, and 59. 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.
Very res p~ully, bJ Jenklins Director of Radiation Laboratories Attachments: As described.
Cc: Duane Hardesty, USNRC Project Manager Leah Jamieson; Purdue University College of Engineering Jim Schweitzer, Purdue University REM Ahmed Hassanein, Purdue NE School of Nuclear Engineering A4 c Nuclear Engineering Building m 400 Central Drive m West Lafayette, IN 47907-2017 (765) 494-5739 m Fax: (765) 494-9570 a https://engineering.purdue.edu/NE
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAls for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)
REQUESTED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN RESPONSE TO RAIs REGARDING THE PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME 1594)
- 46. Section 1.4 of the SAR states the reactor is located in the Duncan Annex, but does not indicate if there are any shared facilities and equipment as described in NUREG-1537, Section 1.4. Examples of shared facilities include water purification systems; electrical supplies; heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; any subcritical assemblies, irradiationfacilities, or hot cell located within the restricted area to which this SAR applies.
Please describe the shared facilities and equipment or provide an explanation describingyour reason(s) for not incorporatingadditionaldescription of sharedfacilities into the SAR.
Response
The reactor room is the defined facility restricted area. The HVAC system is, as described elsewhere in the SAR, isolated from the rest of the building HVAC. The reactor pool make-up water is drawn from the building water supply, but the water process system is a closed loop. The reactor room electrical supply is part of that of the rest of the building, but the reactor room circuits are separately fused. There are no other items such as subcritical assemblies, irradiation facilities or hot cells, which is why they weren't mentioned.
- 47. Section 1.6 of the SAR states the reactoroperates about 90 times per year on average. Please describe the typical reactor operations during these "90 times per year" (i.e., typical operatingpower level and schedule). Also, indicateif these operations,including the facility's requested power uprate, are consistent with proposed operations described in the SAR and are consistent with the comparison to similarfacilities as described in NUREG- 1537, Section 1.5.
Response
The majority of reactor operations are for training/education activities in association with nuclear engineering laboratory classes. For example, two experiments that are performed are an approach to critical, and a control rod calibration. Most of the runs are very low power, where reactor power does not exceed 100 W. About 10-15% of the reactor operations are for irradiations or other research related work.
With the uprate, the number of research related work will likely increase somewhat with the expanded capabilities. All of this is similar to similar facilities, such as the Ohio State University Research Reactor (OSURR), with the main difference being OSURR has a much greater research share.
- 52. SAR Section 5.5 describes automatic pool water level control. Please describe how you would determine if the amount of make-up water to the reactor pool was excessive and indicative of a pool leak.
Response
The automatic pool water level control is only activated when needed to replace evaporated coolant inventory, and the automation is solely to prevent overfill of the pool. Operations staff activate the system, and track the amount of water used each time in a log book. Data exists for facility water usage back to Page 1 of 3 15 June 2012
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250) about 1974. In looking at the last 15 years, the average weekly water usage has been 36.8+/-12 gallons.
The data are presented in Figure 1. Weekly usage that exceeds the average value plus three standard deviations could indicate a leak.
PUR-1 Weekly Make-up Water Usage 100 90 80 70 o 60 50 40o 30 20 10 0 5/01 11/01 5/02 11/02 5/03 11/03 5/04 11/04 5/05 11/05 5/06 11/06 5/07 11/07 5/08 11/08 5/09 11/09 5/10 11/10 5/11 11/11 5/12 Date Seriesl - 20 per. Mov. Avg. (Seriesl)
Figure 1: Weekly make-up water usage for PUR-1.
- 57. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 4.3, Reactor Tank or Pool states the applicantshould present all information about the pool necessary to ensure its integrity and should assess the possibility of uncontrolledleakage of contaminated primary water.
- a. Section 5 of the SAR does not describe reactorpool level monitoring.Please discuss how reactorpool level is monitored, and if a leak develops in the reactorpool cooling system during off-hours, how it would be mitigated when approximately up to four feet of pool water could leak out?
- b. Please discuss the typical radioactivity content of the pool, required responses from operator and/or university personnel, if a leakage is detected; Please discuss potential release pathways of reactor pool water leakage to the environment and the radiological impact of a release.
- c. Please provide an estimate of the minimum detectable amount of leakage and an estimate of how long such a leak could exist before detection; any trends associated with the required make up water, and the physical means with which PUR-1 can detect small releases from the pool directly to the environment.
Page 2 of 3 15 June 2012
PUR-1: Partial Response to RAIs for license renewal (ML103400115 and ML103400250)
Response: 1 r, Pool level is monitored by comparison of the pool level to a ruler at the top of the pool, and is observed at least once a week by reactor staff members. Make-up water usage is tracked in a log book on the console. In looking at the last 15 years, the average weekly water usage has been 36.8+/-12 gallons. The data are presented in Figure 1. Weekly usage that exceeds the average value plus three standard deviations could indicate a leak.
Over the 50 year operations history of PUR-1, there has been no detectable contamination in the primary water as a result of operations. And based on the construction of the pool, with its stainless steel tank liner with no penetrations below floor level, leakage of water to the environment is extremely unlikely (as noted in the 1988 SER for the PUR-1 license, see NUREG-1 283). Observation of water level, and comparison to historical records should be adequate considering the risks involved.
- 59. NUREG-1537, Section 8 discusses the need for emergency electrical power systems to protect the public from radioactive releases. Please describe how the radiationprotection system, including alarms, interlocks, and powered radiation monitors, functions without emergency power or if these systems do require power, describe how the facility and/or emergency responder personnel would monitor the radiation environment in the reactor building and in the rest of the ElectricalEngineering Building if power were not available.
Response
Loss of power to the instrumentation and control systems of PUR-1 will result in a SCRAM since the shim-safety control rods are suspended by electro-magnets, thereby shutting down the reactor. Loss of power will also result in isolation of the reactor room, since the dampers will close. Battery powered survey meters and ionization chambers are available in the reactor room to ensure operations staff is aware of any possible radiation exposure hazards following a power outage. Emergency responder personnel at Purdue University also have battery operated survey meters and ionization chambers on their vehicles, should they be required.
of 33 15 June 2012 Page 33 of Page 15 June 2012