ML20205B092

Rept of Reactor Operations for Jan-Dec 1998. with

ML20205B092
Person / Time
Site:	Purdue University
Issue date:	12/31/1998
From:	Merritt E PURDUE UNIV., WEST LAFAYETTE, IN
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9903310147
Download: ML20205B092 (6)

Text

c l

s, ..?

PURDUE U NIVER SITY SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING March 26,1999 U.S. NRC Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Docket No. 50-182 l l

Enclosed please find two copies of the 1998 Annual Report for the Purdue University Reactor (PUR-1).

Sincerely, l ' O . }' S E. C. Merritt Reactor Supervisor ECM/jh Enclosure  ;

i 0 7#

l 3000<10 1

9903310147 981231 PDR R ADOCK 05000192 o n,, i I

PDR I a -3  !

I l

'L* * ,' <.*l I a

- 1290 NUCLEAR ENGINEERING BUILDING

• WEST LAFAYET7E, IN 47907-1290

• FAX (765) 494+9570 WEmstTE: HTTP:#WWW.EC N.PUh DUE.EDU/N E/

e______-

r .

SCHOOL OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING

~

4 a . . ,

d p . .  !

n .

1 i

I j

Purdue University West Lafayette, Indiana 47907 I h

m z\~2 r ' 'o.

O.

sp l

l t

4

i 1

l l

REPORT ON REACTOR OPERATIONS For the Period January 1,1998 to December 31,1998 PURDUE UNIVERSITY REACTOR-1

~

PURDUE UNIVERSITY West Lafayette, Indiana 47907 March 1999 Prepared by ,

E. C. Merritt i Reactor Superv sor l I

l

g 1

1-' .

1. INTRODUCTION i

This report is submitted to meet the requirements set forth in 10 CFR 50.59 and the technical specifications of the Purdue University Reactor (PUR-1) for the period January 1, 1998 to December 31,1998.

During the reporting period of 1998 a total of 650 people visited the reactor facility. Those people included 140 different groups, of which 61 groups were for the purpose of maintenance.or surveillance testing,40 groups were for class purposes, 34 groups were pre- scheduled tours, and 5 groups were participants in our reactor sharing program.

2. PI> ANT DESIGN AND OPERATIONAI, CHANGES 2.1 Facility Desien Changes

. There were no design changes to the facility in 1998.

2.2 Performance Characteristics I l

The operation of the PUR-1 facility continued satisfactorily during the reporting period. During the visual inspection of the surfaces of two representative fuel plates, l no changes were identified. This inspection included any defects that might compromise the integrity of the cladding including any evidence of corrosion.

Satisfactory performance of the fuel continued during the year.

2.3 Chances in Operating Procedures Concernine Safety of Facility Operations One (1) new maintenance procedure; for the rod worth calibrations; was approved during the reporting period of1998.

2.4 Results of Surveillance Tests and Inspections 2.4.1 Reactivity Limits The reactivity worths of the control rods were determined to be as follows:

! Shim-safety #1 - 4.24%

Shim-safety #2 - 2.35%

Regulating Rod - 0.26%

These values are consistent with previous reported values. These values reflect  !

l- the new procedure for rod worth calibrations. The worth curves of the control I

rods were checked after the inspection and the excess was determined to be 0.43%. The shutdown margin was deterrnined to be 6.41 % based on these "alues.

i l*

l l a

I 1

l 1

. The inspection of the control rods was completed on August 21,1998 with no evidence of change or deterioration observed.

i No experiment was placed in the reactor pool during the year that would l

require the determination ofits reactivity during the initial criticality following its installation.

2.4.2 Reactor Safety Systems l l Each pre-startup check included a channel test for each safety system, provided the shutdown exceeded 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> or if the system was repaired or de-energized.

With the exception of one run on August 21,1998 during which the reactor was in a suberitical mode, each reactor safety system had a channel check performed at time intervals of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> during operation.

On October 7,1998, the electronic calibration of all safety channels was completed.

The irradiation of gold foils for a power calibration was done on October 8, 1998. The calibration indicated that the actual power was 8.3% below (i.e.,

conservative) the indicated power level at 100 watts and that the system was nonlinear in the last decade but in a conservative direction (i.e. the actual power being 697 watts when the indicated power level was at 850 watts).

During the pre-startup which precedes each run, the radiation area monitors and the continuous air monitor were checked for normal operation. During 1998 the calibration of the radiation area monitors and the continuous air monitor was completed on March 20 and September 30.

. Following the control rod inspections, the rod drop times were measured on August 21,1998. The rod drop times fell between 545 and 647 milliseconds.  !

These values are consistent with past measurements and are well within the specification limit of one second.

2.4.3 Primarv Coolant System The weekly measurements of the pH of the primary coolant consistently gave readings between 5.0 and 5.4 during 1998. These values are within the specification limits cf 5.5 1.0. During the weekly checks and the pre-startup check which precedes each run, the conductivity of the primary coolant was measured and the values never exceeded 1.30 micrombos-cm. Tins represents

a resistivity of more than 769,000 ohm /cm, which exceeds the lower limit of 330,000 ohm /cm as given in the specifications.

i 1

I

, The specification of 13 feet of water was always either met or exceeded, according to the pre-startup checklist that was completed prior to each reactor run.

Monthly samples of the primaty coolant were collected and analyzed by personnel from Radiological and Environmental Management for gross alp'n a and beta activity. No activity was identified in the samples, which would indicate failure of the fuel plates.

2.4.4 Containment Readings between 0.07 and O.14 inches of water were recorded weekly for the negative pressure in the reactor room.

The semi-annual checks made ..i 1998 for the proper operation of the inlet and outlet dampers and the air conditioner were completed on January 21, June 30, and December 17. All worked satisfactorily Selected fuel plates were visually inspected on August 21,1998. The surface condition of fuel plate #4-3-73 indicated no change from the last inspection, and the cladding of the other inspected plates identified no changes.

2.4.5 Experiments The mass of the singly encapsulated samples ard the flux of the reactor are such that the complete release of all gaseci.s, particulate, and volatile components of the samples would not result ir. doses in excess of 10% of the equivalent annual doses as stated in 10 CFR 20.

i No samples of unknown composition or that required double encapsulation were submitted for irradiation.

2.5 Chances. Tests and Experiments Requirine Commission Authorization During 1998 no changes, or experiments, which required authorization from the Commission pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59 (a), were performed.

2.6 Chanees in Facility Staff There were no changes in the Facility Staff during the year.

3. POWER GENERATION Operation of the PUR-1 during 1998 consisted of 24 nms, which generated 158,725 watt-minutes of energy and covered an integrated running time of 54.9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br />.

. I i

1

r: i 4., UNSCHEDULED SHUTDOWNS No unscheduled shutdowns occurred during 1998.

5. MAINTENANCE There were ten (10) instances of non-routine maintenance during the reporting period, none of ivhich caused scrams nor related to the core. All could be expected with our instrumentation and all were found during either prestart checks or during maintenance l procedures.

l

6. CHANGES, TESTS AND EXPERIMENTS l

l The Emergency Plan was revised and approved during 1998. Most changes reflected organizatior al name changes within the Purdue campus. All changes to the Emergency Plan were carried out without prior Commission approval, because the changes do r.

decrease the effectiveness of the emergency plan. No other changes, tests or experiments j were carried out without prior Commission approval pursuant to the requirements of 10 CFR 50.59 (b).

7. RADIOACTIVE EFFLUENT RELEASES No measurable amount of radioactive effluent was released to the environs beyond our effective control, as measured at or prior to the point of such release.

8. OCCUPATIONAL PERSONNEL RADIATION EXPOSURE No radiation exposures greater than 25% of the appropriate limits of 10 CFR 20 were

, received during the reporting period.

('

l o-0