ML19261E135
| ML19261E135 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute |
| Issue date: | 05/15/1979 |
| From: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Lahey R RENSSELAER POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE, TROY, NY |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7907050172 | |
| Download: ML19261E135 (9) | |
Text
I ps nean
,f 8,,
UNITED STATES
+
y ') 3 vic h
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 j[
May 15, 1979 Docket No. 50-225 Dr. Richard Lahey, Director Critical Facility Laboratory Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute Troy, New York 12181
Dear Dr. Lahey:
Your License No. CX-22 will expire June 30, 1979. Renewal of.your license requires submission of an application that demonstrates the reactor can continue to be operated safely and that the reactor components and systems will be capable of withstanding prolonged use over the tem of the renewal. General requirements are provided in Title 10 Coce of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Parts 50, 51, 55 and 73. Enclosed are specific items that will be reviewed prior to renewal of your license.
You are reminded that if you are planning to renew your license, 10 CFR 2.109 requires a timely filing (at least 30 days prior to expiration of your current license tem) of your application. You are further advised to review 10 CFR 50.51 to assist you in determining i
the period of the renewal.
The foregoing has been provided to assist you in the license renewal process. Please do not hesitate to contact Steve Ramos (301-492-7435) who has been assigned project manager for your facility.
Sincerely, O
} ///
b /-
- l
^
Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosure:
License Renewal Review Items
,l3 237 i
no,oso t 72 P
LICENSE RENEWAL REV!EW ITEMS A.
Contents of Acclication 1.
General Informa tion (10 CFR 50.33)
Provide applicable information delineated in the referent regulation. The following 10 CFR 50.33 paragraphs obtain and additional guicance is provided herein:
(e)
Include all NRC licenses issued for use on the campus (f) Financial Considerations - The review process t0 satisfy iO CFR 50.33(f) requires information that will snow : hat the licensee possesses the funds necessary :: cover estimated operating costs or that there is reasonable assurance of obtaining tne funds for the period of the license renewal plus the estimated costs of pemanently shutting down the facility and maintaining it in a. safe condition. To facilitate reviewing the financial ascects, it is requested that the following information be provided in three signed and notari:ed originals and six additional copies:
(1) The most recent published annual statement.
Indicate, or provide separately, that portion of the budget which clearly delineates the sources of funds to be utilized to cover costs of operation of your reactor facility.
(2) The estimated annual costs to operate the reactor for the additional license renewal period and a certification that amounts designated in your application for renewal of the facility will be included in future budgets.
(3) The estir.ated costs of pemanently shutting down tne reactor, a listing of wna: is included in these costs, the assumptions made in estir.ating the c:sts, the type of shutdown contemplated, and tne source of funds to cover these costs.
(4) An estimate of the annuai c:st t: maintain the shutd:wn facilities in a safe ::nditi:n.
In:icate what is inciuced in tnis estimate, assum::i:ns made in de:e-::ining tne ::st, any in arest rs:es ass =e:, an:
the sour;E cf funcs 2 Ver this.
, l 4, 28/
i x_ n.
G v,, v5 3
t.
8,m..
- u 1
4-
[
h3
!! $tal d'---'
. a.
The following is provided to assist in de:emining your estimated costs for pemanently shutting down y:ur reacter.
Choose the option (see Regulatory Guide 1.85) you deem rest appropriate. The following is an examcle for a TRIGA reactor using the mo nballing option for de::mmissicning.
It is assumed that dismantling of the core structure and other radioactive portions of the rea: or sys.em will be performed 3 to 5 years af ter ccmciete removai Of tne fuel.
The following provides estimated da::=issioning costs (1975 5 value):
a.
Removal and disposal of fuel 9 52000.00/ fuel elemen:
Approx.150 x 52000.00 200,000.00 b.
Remeval and disposal of core structure 5
20,000.00 c.
Removal and disposal of reactor tank, beamports, thermal column, etc.
5 250,000.00 d.
Removal and discosal of reactor
~
exposure reem and biological concrete shield
- 5. 250,000.00 e.
Decontamina tion 5
50,C00.00 f.
Dismantling of reactor bridge and cooling system 5
10,000.00 g.
Unexpected expenses
! 120,000.00 Total 51,000,000.00 Three to five (3-5) years c cling pericd af ter c:malete removal of the fuel is necessary before dismantling of the core structure and other radica::ive ;;r-icns Of the reacter assem:iy. During this period One rec hcusi ; the reacter stru: ure will be maintained as a ' es ri::e: area under.1 NC : ssession-nniv license.
ty the nuclear bigula::ry ::-issica :ha:
- is recc=ence:
- ne same security level be main: air ec cu-ing this ericd as
- escribed in the Texas AL" Universi y TE:3A Researon Rea:: r security plan. Tiinimum :nitoring s /ste.ms, ill :e such as insure tha: the health and safety of :ne :ubi": is no:
E* car ~~"2" a #acili!y radiation surve' an en'."#:n7 ental a b y A n L i ya a e
I p
d s
e 9
. survey and an administrative procedure will be established for the notification and reporting of abnormal occurrence.
Estimated cost (1975 5 value) to maintain the shutd:wn facility in a safe condition:
Personnel a.
Radiological survey, maintenance and administration 5
25,200.00/yr.
b.
Superviscry and to prepare and coordinate detailed plan for dismantling and disposal of structure 5 20,000.00 Total amount for a maximum period of 5 years (5 x S25,200.00) + 520,000.00
$151,000.00 The foregoing numbers, would of course, be different for your facility and also changed if you chcose a different option. This has been provided because of requests from other licensees on what criteria sacuid be considered.
287 176 9
. 2.
Filine of A olications Provide applicable information as delineated in 10 C.P. E0,30 as follows:
(e)
Exempt (f)
Environmental Considerations Attached is a memorandum, " Environmental Considerations Regarding the Licensing of Research Reactors anc Cri:ical Facilities" dated January 28, 1974, from D. F.uiler to D. Skovhcit, that provides the general envircnmental impact of research reactors and may be used as a refsrence in developing an Environmental Impact Appraisal (EIA).
As a result of the attached memorandum, it was determined that an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is not reputred for rssearch reactors authori:ed to nperate at 2 Kd(t) and 'iess.
Mcwever, an EIA is required, ard, therefore, sufficient information must be submitted to support and develop the EIA.
(See MSU EIA).
3.
Technical Information (10 CFR 50.34)
(a)
FSAR - (acclicable cortions) of 10 CFR 50.34fb)
A cceplete review of your Safety Hazards Report (SA.3) will be conducted to ensure no significant safety ha:ard exists.
Data should be included to update the SAR with regard to natural and unnatural phencmena.
Thi s i n fe rma-tion must use current analysis technicues and information.
iurther, a description and analysis of the structures, systems and components of the facility, with emphasis on the operational performance and the ability to function properiy and safely for the term of the license. This is particularly important because the original license was evaluated for a specific term. As some arts have r
obviously worn and there is scme cetericraticn cf the structure, the ability cf the facility t cp= race safely for the requested term is a safs:y cuestien.
'T 0 7 177 Lu/
i/#
. (b) 10 CFR 50.34(b)(6) - Applicable portions The following pertains to specific itens:
(v) Emergency Plannir.g The plan should contain, but not be limited to the elements listed in Section IV of Appendix E to 10 CFR Part 50. Attached are draft copies of ANS 15.16, " Standard for Emergency Planning for Research Reactors," and Regulatory Guide 2.6 (issued for comment) " Emergency Planning for Research Reactors."
Although in draft form they are being used by Staff reviewers to ensure compliance with Appendix E.
You are requested to use these documents as guides in preparing the emergency plan portion of your application.
(vi) Proposed Technical Specifications (E.S.) in accordance with 10 CFR 50.36)
A review of your license and T.S. reveals that, in general, it conforns in content to that prescribed in the regulations. Attached is a copy of Union Carbide's T.S. which were just recently approved. This T.S. is being used as a sample along with ANS 15.18, " Standard for Administrative Controls for Research Reactors,"
and a sample administrative control section previously provided as guidance to all research reactor facilities.
You are requested to use the foregoing references (attached) in reviewing your T.S.
i ~l {
n-7
&bi
- i
. The following guidance previously prnvided shoui; be considered in your review process:
(a_) ALARA consideration should be included in the T.S.,
as delineated in 10 CFR 50.36a (see ANS 15.12 attached).
(b) Provision regarding the insertion and irraciation of explosives must be included in the T.S. or not be handled at all.
All research reactors licensees were advised of this recuirement June 1971.
Previous concerns are reiterated in the following:
"An increasing number of programs being performed at restar:h and testin; react:r ft:ilities involve the radiography of explosives.
The pres ence and irradiation of explosives in a reactor facility must be evaluated ca.refully because of the potential for damage to the reactor.
The use of explosives within a reactor facility is considered to be an unreviewed safety cue;ticn pursuar.: t: Section 50.59 of.10 CFR Part 50 unless such usage has been reviewed and approved by the Cor:rnission.
If you presently receive, or have plans to receive and handle explosives, an evaluation of the consequences of accidental explosions should be made and submitted to the Co==ission's Division of Reactor Licensing.
Proposed operating restrictions that prcvide for safe usage of explosive materials should be submitted for inclusion in your Technical Sp eci fications.
In this context, "exolosives" include all materials tna! would constitute Class A, Class B and Class C explosives as described in Title 49, Parts 172 and 173 of the Code of Federal Regulations, regarding transportation of explosives and other dangerous materials.
The Technical Specificatiens should :ntain sufficient infor nation to establish c:erating restrictions; should indicate the maximu cuantity of explosives (in pounds of ecuivaient TNT) allowed in the facility, the f:-= cf the ex:icsives, the rOntrOls exercised when handling End s*.Or'ng ex losives, the Cumulitive "adii'.i:n ex;;sure l i".i:2 f:r expl0si /es, Ohi uti s i ati n Of ex:lCsives within the facility,1.% the mixi T.u.T gantity :-
expl;sives that COuld be inVClVed in ?;s".ulated 100idents; and shCuld include ir assessmen; Of the Or:bibility and the ter.tii' 007. sequences Of in *xpl;sion Occurring".
1 c;
, h,] 7 I
s < i
(c.) Many of the research reactnrs still use abnormal occurrences (AO) as previously used in Regulatory Guide 1.15.
It was used :o designate any unscheduled or unanticipatec operatioral event reported to the Conmission.
Indluded in these reported events were (1) events tha-would or did have significance from the standpoint of public health or safety and (2) events reported to NRC for perfcr-mance evaluation and trend determinatiers.
In Section 2C8 of the Energy Reorgani:ation Act of 1974 (Pub. L.93-438), an "ab ormal occurrence" is defined for :he purp;se; Of the reporting. requirements of the Act as an unscneduled incident or event wnich the Commissi:n determines is significant from the stancpoint or pu:lic health or safety.
In order to be consister.t with this definition, the events previct' sly designated as
" abnormal occurrences" are now designated " reportable occurrences." The decision to enange the designation to " abnormal occurence" rests with the C:mmission.
o (d) Also attached is one set of Regulat:ry Guides (2.1-2.5) tnat pertain to researcn reactors that should be used in ceveloping your T.S.
(c) 0;erator Licenses and Requalification Training Procram (10 CFP. Part 55)
~
(10 CFR 50.34 (b)(7) and (8).
(d) Physical Security Plan (10 CFR 50.34/c))
Your physical security clan will be reviewed in accordance wi:n guicance provided June 1974 (copy attached) and 10 CFR Par: 73 change < published since then.
If required, submit six cc:ies or your revised physical security plan (PSP) wi n ycur renewal apolication. As your PSP will become part of -he license and re erenced as such in :ne renewed license documen:ation, i: is further recuested ina: the ;1an te recon:iled in:: 3 sin 13 d:cument. 70 facilitate fur:ner revisiccs macc i, 3r--
1
--e 2
a.,
.Ou- :u.:-(:) and amer.cnen:: su:m.::e:
- r a::r:va,,
Wi-..
i
.s i
is. ecu=stec :na: :ne :SP e in 1:c e iea 5r 3,
,3 e
I :,i *1 ng 1 s a n exam l e f a li ens e amer.cren r,3 <,i n:
c a r ". : ~, :Te license
- gp b
i [d a 7
'CA i
\\
J e
4 0
.g_
"The licensee shall maintain in effect and full;. implement all provisions of the NRC Staf f-acpr:ved physi:al security plan, inclocing amencments and changes mace pursuant t0 One ;utnority of 10 CFR 50.54(p).
The approved securi:y plan c:nsists of documents withheld fror public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790, collectively :itled, " veterans Acministration Hospital, Omaha, Napraska, sec. ri y Plan,"
u as follows:
Original, submitted with letter dated May 31, 1973 Revision.1, submitted with letter dated Novemter 25, 1973 Revision 2, submitted witn letter dated January la,1974 Revision 3, submitted with letter dated Marca li,1972" This, of c:urse, is only an example and does not reflect your actual PSP.
Attached is a copy of preposed Regulatory Guide 5.XX It contains a femat to ensure compliance with the regulations. Although not yet issued, it does provide the essential femat and guidance to be folicwed; therefere, it is recuested you use tnis guide in developing your li:ense renewal application.
Department of Energy and State Department have instituted a program to implement the Nonproliferation Act of March 10, 1978, by reducing. the enrichment of fuels in noncewer reactors.
Concomitant to this, the proposed Regula: ion ! 73.47 is designed to implement the US/IAEA Agreement when aoproved by the Senate. Both of these actions are keyed to the enrichment of fuel and other SNM; therefore, your license, wnicn authorizes certain maximum possession limits of SNM (U235, Pu, U233), should e changed to reflect not eniy the to:al am:unt of SNM, but the percent enricn:gnt Of each; the amcunt of SNM exempt and how exem:-
(i.e.,10 C.-R u.e(S)); and the amount of SNM nonexe :t.
This wiP es.ablish the basis for the level of protection of v y~
are requested to review the foregoing with respe:: i ur ?SP.svcurfaci!tt an-include ycur proposed SNM recuiraments in ycur a::licaticn.
~
i O, $
~g e
im U I
(
_ 9-5.
Standards and Reculaccrv Guides For your information, conccmitant to the review of items in A above, all documents will include a persual to ensure ycu have included references and use of applicable ANS/ ANSI standards and NRC Regulatory Guides (2.1-2.5) for research reactors.
- Note:
1.
All items from referenced 10 CFR articles not listed above are self-explanatory.
2.
Above subcaragraphs are keyed to 10 CFR :aragraphs.
A ttachments :
1.
Muller /Skcynol Mema dtd. 1/28/7?
2.
Draf t Copy ANS 15.16 - Emergency Plannin; 3.
Copy Reg. Guide 2.6 - Emergency Planning (Issued for Ccmment) 4 NRC Regulatory Guides 2.1-2.5 E.
Draft Copy ANS 15.18 6.
NRC Guidance for Administrative Controls 7.
Draft Regulatory Guide 5.XX - Physical Secut ity Plan 8.
Draft ANS 15.12 9.
Union Carbide T.S.
- 10. MSU EIA 1
l 2 ( ~/
iJc u
-m-