ML19208D389

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Environ Considerations Re Licensing of Research Reactors & Critical Facilities
ML19208D389
Person / Time
Site: Idaho State University
Issue date: 01/28/1974
From: Muller D
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Skovholt D
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML19208D378 List:
References
NUDOCS 7909280353
Download: ML19208D389 (4)


Text

_

c

...EL~

- s@..M.'. '

UNITED STATCS n

_ " ~. -

f{f V,

G} ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION g g{! i {; o

.f g

h}

1 J

WAsWNGTCN. D.C. 2034s g

]Qc:.

g {ll

'JAN 2S b h

i n ' *L,u'J i ! I bu M.-]

?##E L

uu w,

D. Skovholt, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors, L 7

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS RECARDINO THE LICENSING OF RESEARCH REACTORS

..=._.E

==.

AND CRITICAL FACILITIES

_Z..

t l

Introduction et%W

=

=..

g.=

This discussien deals with research reactors and critical facilities which.are d2si;ned to operate at lo.s pcuer levels, 2.Wt and lower, and I are used primarily for basic research in neutren physics, neutron f:_

f.

radiography, isotope production, e.geri=ents associated with nuclear 47 engineeri:';, training and as a part of the nuclear physics curriculu. i 5..

Operation cf such facilities will generally not exceed a 5 day week, E

t 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> day or ab ut 2007 hours0.0232 days <br />0.558 hours <br />0.00332 weeks <br />7.636635e-4 months <br /> per year.

Such reactors are located 15 i

adjacent to technical cervice support facilities with convenient access for students and faculty.

s[@h

= =... -

Sited most frequently on the campus' of large universities, the reactors are usually housed in alt :ady existing structures, appropriately

[.!.

modified, or placed in new buildings that are designed and constructed ih to blend in with existing facilities.

ga Facility

'i5b 5~NN-There are no exterior coeduits, pipelines,.clectrical or cechanical.. '.

s.h structures or transcission lines attached to or adjacent to the facility

]

!E~E?

other than utility service facilitics which are similar to those required l KE.

in other ca. pus facilities, specifically laboratories.

Heat dissipa tio::.

Qi is generally acconplished by use of,a aoling tower located on the roef F~~

of.the building.

These cooling towers are on the order of 10' X 10' X 10'

+

and are c:= parable to cooling towers associated with the air-conditionin;

=

syste:a of large office buildin;s.

E" -

Hake up for this cooling system is readily available and ususHy obtained b

from the local water supply.

Radioactive gaseous effluents are limited IEE; to Ar 41 and the release of radicactive liquid effluents can be carefully F

monitore.d and centrolled.

Thace liquid wastes are collected in :torage

+'

tanks to allow for decay and monitoring prior to dilution and release to the sanitary sewer system.

Solid radioactive wastes are packaged and

  • hipped of f-site for s torage at AEC appros ed sites.. The transportation'

[

s of such waste is done in accordance with cr.isting AEC-C' T regula'tions

~

J in approved shipping cents;ncrs.

Chemical and sanitary waste systems are similar to those existing at-other university laboratories and buildin;:.

7 9 0928 G0 1052 v295

l 5' {h h' h)

EE It H

r-

c EEfE

/

, U,. -

U - ' '

yr,N M 137.i 5[

T na

Im -

m r,1

=

Nj-i m2-D. Skovholt:

!t i

.b:

dbu B=EM hb" Envirore. ental Effects of Site Prennration and Facility Cons truc tion Er Construction of such facilit'ics invariably occurs in areas that have

=...

aircady been disturbed by other university building construccion and in 7

some cases solcly within an aircady existing building.

Therefore, con-

5..5 struction would not be expected to have any significant affect on the

.g terrain, vegetation, wildlife or nearby waters or aquatic life. The EaK societal, economic and esthetic i= pacts of construction would be no greater than that associated with the construction of a large office building c: similar university facility.

=

Envir'o--=

'1 E'fects of Fecility Ooeration Release of thernal' effluents fro:t n reactor of less than 2 Wt will not

i. _

have a significant effect on the environment.

This s=all n ount of JJll ' ~

waste heat is generally rejected to the at=osphere by ceans of small cooling towers.

Extensive drif t and/or fog will not occur at this low MF E=

power level.

=

Release of routine gaseous effluent can be limited to Ar 41 which is generated by neutron activation of air.

This will be kept as low as

[~

practic'able by cininua air ventilation of the tubes.

Yearly doses to p?b un:cstricted areas will be at.or below establish 2d li=its.

Routine s==

releases of radioactive liquid effluents can 'ce carefully conitored and

$4=.:

~

controlled in a canner that,dil ensure compliance with current

~=_

l standards.

Solid radioactive vastes will be shipped to an authorized

= _.

disposal site in approved containers.

These was tes should not anount

$h to more than a few shipping e atainers, a yea..

E.-.

Based on experience with other research reacters, specifically TMCA ggi

==

reactors, operating in the 1 to 2 Wt ran;e, the annual release of

. gaseous and liquid effluents to unrestricte4 ar,eas should be less than

~... -

30 cur,ics ajd 0,01 curies respectively.

h No release of potentially haraful chemical substances will occur during normal operation.

Snall amoun:t of chc=icals and/or high-solid content Q.

water ecy be released frc= the facility through the sanitary sewer 3.-

during periodic blowdown of the cooling tower or f:C: lahor00 cry **P*ri-EJE

=~

ments.

Other potential effcets of the facility, such as esthetics, noise, societal or impact on local flora and fauna arc expected to be. co small to censure.

e 1052 296

~

/

@i tc'lT)I? 7)

JAN 2 31974 W

3-D.'Skovholt

"'"i' H:id::!j.

I u

o a

l' ); l.

r l :pna ;l: t'1 v

r.

a! I_1,

.r

=

tt I

=r-1 Env:.romental Ef fcers of Accidents "l 0 ':,&, U L U ".,. ' i

==..

.s i

ir r

il Accidents ranging from the failure of experic. ants up to the largest

{

~

core dau;c and fission product celease considered po:sibic result in

=_.;

doses of only a's=211 fraction of 10 CFR Part 100 guidelines and arc g.

considered negligible with respect to the enviro ment.

p3" =

s

~

Unavoidabic Ef fects of Facility C:nstruction and Coar2 tion The unavoidable effects of construction and operation involves the materials used in construction that cannot be recovered and the fissionable =aterial used in the reactor.

No adverse 5 pact on the EE~

enviro =e c t is expected fron either of these unavoidable effects.

"= =.

iU:

r...:.'.-

f.~

Alternatives to Construction and 0$cratior of the Facility 5f 2.:: -

==--

To accceplish the objectives associated with research reactors, there.

g.

are no suitable alternatives.

Scme of these obj ectives are. training of

-l~

students in the oparation of reactors, production of radioisotcpes,.

,.;;;;;w and use of neutrou and ga==a ray bea=s to conduct expericents.

g c.:.7

= =..

55;h--

Lone-Ter-Ef fects of Facility Construction anh Oceration kj:

me The long-tc= effects of research facilitics are considered to be b..

beneficial as a result of the contribution to scientific knobledge and EE~

r =..

training.

a Because of the relatively lov amount of capital resources involved and 5]

the s=211 i= pact on the enviro =e:r very little irreversible and irretrievable co==it=ent is associated with such facilita.es.

=;.

.=

Costs and Benefits of Facility and Alternatives

-- 7

=

[.;

The costs are on the order of several millions of dollars with very littic enviro =antaf impact.

The benefits include, but are not limited

.s

=L._

to, sete combination of tb follouing:

conduct of activation an: lyses,

{

conduct of neutron radiography, training of operating personnel and 3.

==

education of students.

Soc.:e of thess activities could be conducted j

Q using particle acec'erators or radioactive sources which would be core costly and Icss efficient.

There is no reasoncbic altecnative to a s -

nuclear research reactor for conducting this spectru= of activitics.

=

~':

1052 297

i g.g..

S..

WM"

=.\\g69

~

,r s:?

/

f:

4-J M 23 1974

.D.

skovholt

+

FA s... e

= :-

Conclu sion 5l0-.

55-The staff concludes th:t there trill be no significant envirorcental 5?

impact associated with the licensins of research reactors or critical jEE-f acilities designed to operate at po.:c levels of 2 M'It or lot r and

[F -

that no enviro = ental ir.pset statements are required to be written for L;.

the issuance of construction permits or operating licenses for such f-facilities.

/

s.

o Y hh/

s; w Daniel R. Muller, Assistant Director

m.,.

.for Envirorcental Projects

~

Directorate of Licensing

.Y

=.

Epi.,

7 i

c E:'

f

~i'~ ~

si.

L

i. l f j '

,1

.t 3

CJJJ/.

',lJ i ! ') ' ! !!

r

  • 0 22 L

i

't, fgj;

!, l~\\ [

[ii:

ri Q '1 f,!

(a 1 ;J 3i.

t i f' i.

1 n'

o{.,u y J w:I;la,uu':l_;,,_

2-

~

g....

['

ea.

O 1052 298 9

,-.4

. _...