ML103410249
| ML103410249 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000036 |
| Issue date: | 12/29/2010 |
| From: | NRC/FSME/DWMEP |
| To: | |
| John Hayes, 415-5928 | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML103410261 | List: |
| References | |
| Download: ML103410249 (3) | |
Text
Enclosure 1 Nuclear Criticality Safety Input to Safety Evaluation Report for the Westinghouse Hematite 10 CFR 70.24 Criticality Monitoring Exemption Request
- 1.
BACKGROUND In a letter dated December 4, 2009, (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) accession number ML093441396), Westinghouse Electric Company LLC (Westinghouse or WEC) submitted a request to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for an exemption from the criticality monitoring system requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a) for the Hematite Decommissioning Project in Festus, Missouri. The Hematite license (SNM-33) authorizes Westinghouse to possess special nuclear material (SNM) in excess of 700 grams of contained U-235 and, as such, the criticality requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a) are applicable to the Hematite facility. Accordingly, Westinghouse is required to maintain a criticality monitoring system meeting the specifications of 10 CFR 70.24(a)(1) or (a)(2) in each area at the Hematite facility where SNM is handled, used or stored.
The December 4, 2009, exemption request addressed Item 8 of the NRCs Confirmatory Action Letter Second Addendum (CAL-3-08-005B) dated November 13, 2009 (ML093200176). The NRC staff reviewed WECs December 4, 2009, exemption request and approved it, in part, on March 17, 2010 (ML100640138). The March 17, 2010, approval pertained solely to building demolition activities and did not provide an exemption for other site areas and activities.
Included with the NRCs letter to WEC regarding the resolution of Hematite Amendment 52, Building Demolition, (ML102990298) was a Safety Evaluation Report (SER) (ML102990346) which discussed the issuance of an exemption to the criticality requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a) for building demolition activities. WECs remaining exemption request covering other site areas and activities is addressed by this SER.
- 2.
DISCUSSION 2.1 Licensees Submittal In their December 4, 2009, submittal, WEC requested an exemption for the following: low concentration materials, buildings and separate areas with mass limits of U-235 per building or area, and materials in containers for shipment.
WEC indicated that low concentration materials on site are safely subcritical. WECs basis for this position was the diffuse nature of the U-235 contamination associated with the materials provides high levels of dilution. WEC defined low concentration materials as those with the following concentration limits: 1.4 g U-235 for solids and 11.6 g U-235 for liquids. WEC also specified the following mass limits for individual buildings or separate areas in the request:
700 g U-235 in uranium enriched to more than 5 wt. % U-235/U; and 1640 g U-235 in uranium enriched to no more than 5 wt. % U-235/U.
2 WEC stated that contaminated materials for shipment would be stored in shipping containers in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 71.15.
2.2 Nuclear Criticality Safety Review:
The NRC staff reviewed WECs submittal and their justification for the § 70.24 exemption request for other site areas and activities. The staff determined that the mass limits established by WEC, as noted above, represent values that are at or below the maximum subcritical limits, as established in numerous technical references, including NUREG/CR-6505, Vol. 1, The Potential for Criticality Following Disposal of Uranium at Low-Level Waste Facilities - Uranium Blended with Soil, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, June 1997, and ANSI/ANS-8.1-1998, Nuclear Criticality Safety in Operations with Fissionable Materials Outside Reactors.
The staff also determined that the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a) do not require monitoring systems when SNM is being transported if the material is packaged in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 71. The staff further determined that a monitoring system would not be required when such material is stored in shipping containers in preparation for shipment.
- 3.
CONCLUSION The staff has reviewed the WEC request for an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24 for Hematites other site areas and activities as described in WECs December 4, 2009, submittal. The staff has concluded that the granting of such an exemption is appropriate and that the following license condition should be incorporated into the Hematite license as License Condition 15:
- 15. Notwithstanding the requirement of 10 CFR 70.24, the licensee shall be exempted from the "monitoring system" requirements in the areas, and under the conditions specified below:
A. Low concentration storage areas for materials having uranium in quantities representing no more than 1.4 g U-235/L for solids, and 11.6 g U-235/L for liquids.
B. Buildings and separate areas provided that:
- 1. Each such area qualifies for appropriate nuclear isolation with respect to other areas where SNM is more concentrated.
- 2. Each such area shall be administratively limited to 700 g U-235 in uranium enriched to more than 5 wt. % U-235/U.
- 3. Each such area shall be administratively limited to 1640 g U-235 in uranium enriched to no more than 5 wt. % U-235/U.
C. Storage areas in which the only SNM present is contained in authorized packages as defined in NRC/DOT regulations, including 10 CFR 71 and 49 CFR 173.
Existing Licensing Conditions 15 and 16 were re-numbered as License Conditions 16 and 17, respectively. In addition, License Condition 16.B was modified to incorporate WECs letters
3 dated December 4, 2009; December 16, 2009 (ML093570277), and March 22, 2010 (ML100830643). In addition, a new License Condition 16.C was added to include WECs emails of August 6, 2010 (ML103050094) and September 15, 2010 (ML103050138). These modifications to Part B of the License Condition and the addition of Part C incorporate the appropriate documentation and correspondence associated with this SER and the resolution of Item 8 of the CAL and Amendment 52.
An Environmental Assessment for this action is not required because this action falls within the class of actions that are categorically excluded by 10 CFR 51.22(c)(11). The proposed action does not result in a change in process operations or equipment and will not result in: (i) a significant change in the types or significant increase in the amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite; (ii) a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure; (iii) a significant construction impact; and (iv) there is no significant increase in the potential for or consequences from radiological accidents.