ML19246C419
| ML19246C419 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000129 |
| Issue date: | 06/13/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19246C402 | List: |
| References | |
| SER-790613, NUDOCS 7907240578 | |
| Download: ML19246C419 (2) | |
Text
.
8(p" "'49).
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION UNITED STATES
- f6( 3 $
W ASHINGTON. O. C. 20555 1e e
'S SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENCMENT NO. 7 TO AMENDED FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-58 WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY DOCKET NO. 50-129 Introduction By letter dated May 30, 1979, West Virginia University (the licensee) requested that their " possession-only" Amended Facility L-
'nse No. R-52 be extended 12 months to allcw time for decccmissioning. The U. ensee furth'er requested that condition 2.C.(4) of License No. R-58 be amende.d to allow transfer of the fuel to a suitably licensed party.
Discussion We have reviewed the licensee's application and have concluded that the lice 1se should be stended the requested 12-month period to pe.mit orderly dismantling and decommis-sioning.
This requires the submission and approval of a detailed dismantling plan.
In conjunction with this action, we reviewed our records for a physical s9curity plan and find there is none. While the license describes certain measures tc be taken to control the St!M, it dces not fulfill the requirerents of the regulations. As dis-cussed and agreed to on June 11, 1979, the license period is being extended with the condition that a physical security plan will be submitted within 30 days of receipt of this notice.
Our Svety Evaluation dated June 13, 1973, concluded that the condition imposed by paragraph 2.C,(1) of the license provided adequate :entrol of fuel elements removed from the core during the period of the " possession-only" license.
In view of this, the reque:ted amendment should be included as part Of the licensee's proposed dis-nantling clan.
Envi enmentai Conside at':n We have deter nined that the amendment does not authcri:e a change iit effluent types or total am:unts ner an increase in p0wer level and will not result in any signif' cant environmental im:act. Having made this deter;ination, we have further concluded that the amendm:r.:
inv:lves an action which is insignificaat fr0m the standacint of envi Onmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(a), that an environmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environ-mental im;act appraisal need not be prepared in connection with th 26 027 issuance :f this amendment.
4 7 9 0724 0 5 7f /'
- Conclusion We nave concluded, based en the considerations discussed above and :ne Safety Evaluation of June 13,1973, that: (1) because the amend.ren: does not involve a signi#icanc increase :n the probability or consequences of accidents previcusly considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the acandment does not involve a significant ha:ards c:nsideraticn, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety cf the public will not be endangered' by operation in the cr::csed manrrer, and (3) such activities wi.11 be conducted in compliance with the C:raissien's regulations and the issuance of this amendment, will not be inimical to the common defense and security o. to the healta and safety of the public.
Dated:
June 13, 1979 426 028
.