ML12284A197

Pennsylvania State University - Request for Additional Information Re Reactor Bay Ventilation System License Amendment Request (TAC No. ME8001)

ML12284A197
Person / Time
Site:	Pennsylvania State University
Issue date:	11/21/2012
From:	Xiaosong Yin Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch
To:	Unlu K Pennsylvania State Univ
Yin, X
References
TAC ME8001
Download: ML12284A197 (5)

Text

November 21, 2012 Dr. Kenan Unlu, Director Radiation Science and Engineering Center Breazeale Nuclear Reactor University Park, PA 16802-2301

SUBJECT:

PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PENN STATE BREAZEALE REACTOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST (TAC NO. ME8001)

Dear Dr. Unlu:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of reviewing your application dated February 7, 2012 for amendment of Facility Operating License No. R-2 for the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) Breazeale Reactor. The amendment regards the reactor bay ventilation system upgrade which impacts the license technical specifications. During our review, questions have arisen for which we require additional information and clarification.

Please provide responses to the enclosed request for additional information within 30 days of the date of this letter. In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.30(b), you must execute your response in a signed original document under oath or affirmation. Your response must be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 50.4, "Written Communications." Information included in your response that is considered security, sensitive, or proprietary, that you seek to have withheld from the public, must be marked in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, "Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding." Following receipt of the additional information, we will continue our evaluation of your license amendment request.

If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at 301-415-1404 or by electronic mail at Xiaosong.Yin@nrc.gov. Sincerely, /RA/ Xiaosong Yin, Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Licensing Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Docket No.50-005

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure: See next page Pennsylvania State University Docket No.50-005 cc: Mr. Eric J. Boeldt, Manager of Radiation Protection Pennsylvania State University 304 Old Main University Park, PA 16802-1504 Dr. Henry C. Foley Vice President for Research Dean of the Graduate School Pennsylvania State University 304 Old Main University Park, PA 16802

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 November 21, 2012 Dr. Kenan Unlu, Director Radiation Science and Engineering Center Breazeale Nuclear Reactor University Park, PA 16802-2301

SUBJECT:

PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE PENN STATE BREAZEALE REACTOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REQUEST (TAC NO. ME8001)

Dear Dr. Unlu:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of reviewing your application dated February 7, 2012 for amendment of Facility Operating License No. R-2 for the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) Breazeale Reactor. The amendment regards the reactor bay ventilation system upgrade which impacts the license technical specifications. During our review, questions have arisen for which we require additional information and clarification.

Please provide responses to the enclosed request for additional information within 30 days of the date of this letter. In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.30(b), you must execute your response in a signed original document under oath or affirmation. Your response must be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 50.4, "Written Communications." Information included in your response that is considered security, sensitive, or proprietary, that you seek to have withheld from the public, must be marked in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, "Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding." Following receipt of the additional information, we will continue our evaluation of your license amendment request.

If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at 301-415-1404 or by electronic mail at Xiaosong.Yin@nrc.gov. Sincerely, /RA/ Xiaosong Yin, Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Licensing Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No.50-005

Enclosure:

As stated cc w/enclosure: See next page DISTRIBUTION: RTR r/f RidsNrrDprPrta RidsNrrDprPrtb RidsNrrDpr Resource GLappert, NRR GSchoenebeck, NRR AAdams, NRR XYin, NRR ACCESSION NO.: ML12284A197 Office PRLB:PM PRLB:LA PRLB:ABC PRLB:PM Name XYin GLappert PIsaac XYin Date 10/10/2012 10/18/2012 11/21/2012 11/21/2012 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY Enclosure OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING LICENSE AMENDMENT FOR THE PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY BREAZEALE NUCLEAR REACTOR LICENSE NO. R-2 DOCKET NO.50-005 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission is in the process of reviewing your application dated February 7 2012 for amendment of Facility Operating License No. R-2 for the Pennsylvania State University (Penn State) Breazeale Reactor. The amendment regards the reactor bay ventilation system upgrade which impacts the license technical specifications. During our review, questions have arisen for which we require additional information and clarification. Following receipt of the additional information, we will continue our evaluation of your amendment request 1. Please specify ALL modifications you have made to your Technical Specifications (TS) that were submitted with your amendment request and provide brief justifications to each and every one of them accordingly. 2. Please clarify how many fans are associated with the new ventilation system. In your application, you identified that there are two roof top exhaust fans and one emergency fan. However the Safety Analysis Report Section 6.1, Summary Description, attached to your application, states there are "three fans" associated with the new Reactor Bay Heating, Ventilation, Air Conditioning, and Exhaust System plus one for the Emergency Exhaust System. 3. Under TS 3.3.3, you have requested to remove the requirement that the air particulate monitor activate the building evacuation alarm. Please provide detailed justification to support your request. Specifically, state your reasoning and the resulted safety impact for this modification; how this modification will change the current emergency procedure; under what circumstances this change will benefit your reactor operation; and how reactor personnel and public safety will not be compromised because of this change. 4. Under TS 3.5, you have requested to increase the reactor operation time pertaining to the emergency exhaust fan operability from 48 hours5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> to 30 days. In addition, you have also proposed a new one (1) hour window to allow the reactor to operate without ANY exhaust fans. Provide detailed justification to support these change requests. Please provide your safety analysis results to support the increases to demonstrate that there will be no increased (or very minimum) safety risks to the reactor personnel and/or to the reactor due to these proposed changes. 5. Under TSs 3.6.3, 3.6.4, 4.6.2, and TS 4.6.3, you have requested to remove those sections regarding argon-41 (Ar-41) and as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) specifications. While realizing those requirements are codified in 10 CFR Part 20, what (where) are your commitments to those requirements after the removal of these reference TS sections? 6. Please provide clarifications to TS 5.5 regarding air exhaust stack height at the roof level. In your application, you are using "34 feet above reactor bay floor" versus the current TS version as "24 feet above ground level." Is this only a reference change or is this an air stack height change to reflect the new ventilation system? Please justify for this change accordingly.