ML19269D407

Safety Evaluation & Eia Supporting Amend 10 to License R-25

ML19269D407
Person / Time
Site:	05000072
Issue date:	05/02/1979
From:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:
Shared Package
ML19269D405	List: ML19269D404 ML19269D406 ML19269D407 ML19269D408
References
NUDOCS 7906020235
Download: ML19269D407 (13)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:,. [ UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMiss!CN g,7

p. g y

j WASHINGTON, O. C. 20555 j, bjj Q SAFETY EVALUATION AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT APPRAISAL BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-25 THE INSTITUTIONAL COUNCIL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF UTAH DOCKET NO. 50-72 Introduction By letter dated July 8, 1977, The Institutional Council of the University of Utah (the licensee) requested that Facility Ooerating License No. R-25 for their AGN-20lM research reactor, Serial No.107, be renewed for a period of twenty years. This would extend the expiration date of the license to September 12, 1997. In response to our request, the licensee provided additional information in support of this renewal application by letters dated March 3,1978 and January 2,1979. The proposed revised Technical Specifications (TS) submitted with the renewal application have beer: modified to meet regulatory requirements. The modifications ~have been discussed with and accepted by the licensee. Discussion This AGN-20lM reactor is located in the Merrill Engineering Building, the University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, and is of a design developed by Aerojet-General Nucleonics. The reactor was first licensed to operate on September 12, 1957, for a period of twenty years. The reactor is currently licensed to operate up to a steady state power level of 5 watts thennal. A number of AGN-20lM reactors have been licensed to operate at this power level and greater. Moreover, considerable operating experience to date indicates that the AGN-20lM reactor parameters can be accurately predicted. No unusual problems have arisen or are anticipated from operation of The University of Utah AGN-20lM reactor in the manner author-ized by the license. Reactor Descriotion The AGN-20lM is a small research reactor designed to ocerate at power levels up to 20 watts. This type of reactor has been used extensively for education and training and for experimental programs requiring a low neutron flux level. The reactor core consists of a number of poly-ethylene disks impregnated witn uranium dioxide enriched in U-235. The 2263 350 7 90002 02-3 f

.. inherent design features of this reactor and the low power level at which it is operated prechde the buildup of significant amounts of fission products. I. Safety Evaluation The present facility has not significantly changed from that described in the licensee's application for License Amendment No. 4, January 3, 1962, when the reactor was moved to its permanent location in the Merrill Engineering Building on the University's campus at Salt Lake City, Utah. By virtue of their power, negligible fission product inventory and strong negative temperature coefficient of reactivity, the AGN-20lM reactors do not present significant hazards to the public. Their safety and reliability have been demonstrated in several facilities for many years. The proposed TS have been reviewed and revised. The TS generally incor-parate the design features, characteristics, and operating conditions described in the original Hazards Summary Report for the AGN-201 Reactor (I) submitted in support of Dockets F-15 and F-32 and referenced in the licensee's application. Inclusion of comprehensive surveillance require-ments and administrative controls will assure acceptable perfcrmance of safety related equipment and require safety related reviews, audits, and operating procedures. Record keeping and reporting requirements will provide sufficient information to permit an assessment by the Commission of safety related activities and changes. There are, however, several differences between the accompanying TS and the original AGN documentation. These are discussed below. The AGN-201 Freliminary Design Report (2), submitted on the F-15 docket, mentioned tnemal fuses in the control and safety rods and a boron-loaded polyetnylene sheet surrounding the graphite reflector. The function of the themal fuses in the control and safety rods was to cause the rods to fall from the core in the event of excessive temperatures produced in a nuclear excursion. They would, therefore serve as a backup to the core themal fuse which already serves as a backup to the normal scram system. The function of the boron-loaded sheet was to absorb thermal neutrons thereby reducing ganna ray production fron neutron capture in the shield water and the resulting radiation level outside the shield. These design features were not mentignqd in subsequent submittals, 4)eportil R l, the AGN-201 Reactor Manual (3), including the Hazards Summar and the Shield Design Report They were not referred to in the original AEC Hazards Analysis (5) or subsequent safety evaluations. They were not incorporated into the assemoled AGN reactors and are not included in the existing or proposed TS. 2263 351

. Many years of experience operating AGN-201 research reactors without thermal fuses in the control and safety rods and without a boron-loaded polyethylene sheet surrounding the graphite reflector has established that these reactors can operate safely, as assembled, at licensed power within acceptable radiation levels to both operating personnel and the general public. Based on our review and the above considerations, we have concluded there is reasonable assurance that operation without thermal fuses in control and safety rods and the boron-lcaded polyethylene sheet referred to in the Preliminary Design Report will not endanger the health and safety of the public. The original AGN-201 documentationO-3) limited the total available excess reactivity to 0.2% ak/k. As a result of a detailed test and evaluation conducted at Georgia Tech and subsequent NRC staff evaluation, AGM-201 reactor licensees were advised that increases in the excess available reactivity, including contributions from positive worth experiments, to 0.65% ak/k could be authorized. Because of the self-limiting action of the large negative temperature coefficient, an instantaneous reactivity insertion as high as 2.0% ak/k would not result in core damage or radioactivity release. Limiting the total available excess reactivity to 0.65% ak/k assures that the reactor will not become prompt critical and that the reactor periods will be sufficiently long such that the reactor protection system and/or operator action can effectively scram the reactor well before any safety limits are exceeded. From an NRC staff-evaluated postulated most severe accident resulting from the instantaneous addition of 1.0% ak/k in reactivity, it was determined that a step reactivity addition of this magnitude would result in an energy release of 0.905 megajoules. There would be no significant radiation damage to the polyethylene moderator from the excursion, and any fission products which diffuse from the UO -poly-2 ethylene matrix would be retained in the sealed core tank. Even assuming the most pessimistic release of fission products, no person would receive a dose in one week which would exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20 for restricted areas. We have concluded, therefore, that the postulated excursion will not endanger the health and safety of the public. Experience with similar reactors has indicated that gaseous fission products and hydrogen are released from the fuel matrix when operated at 20 watts. The University of Utah recognizes that gas evolution could occur as a result of operation at 5 watts for extended aeriods and there could be a pressure buildup within the core tank or control rod cans. To preclude such a pressure buildup, the licensee has established procedures to measure the core tank pressure every kilowatt-hour of 2263 352

4 operation and vent if necessary to maintain an acceptable low system pressure. In addition, prior to opening the core tank, pressure and fission gas activity will be measured. If a high level of gaseous activity is measured, approcriate radiological crocedures will be instituted to preclude personnel hazards from the release of radio-active effluents. We have concluded that those crecautions are acceptable measures to prevent excessive ;ersonnel exposures or pressure buildup within the reactor core tank due to the production of radioactive gases; and that for the normal operating cycle experi-enced during the past 20 years of operation, it is very remote that any gas evolution will occur. The fuel consists of polvethylene material with uranium oioxide (enriched to less than 20% in U-23$) unifornly dispersed tnroughout the polyethylene. polyethylene is an organic material that can sustain radiation damage when exposed to f1ssion product bombardment. Test data was provided by Aerojet-General Nucleanics of samples of core material exposed in the Argonne National Laboratory CP-5 reactor. The Cp-5 reactor is a 5 megawatt (Flux-10 2 n/cm2-sec) reactor. Tests included exposures 1 at full power for periods up to one week continuous operation. Analyses of these tests revealed that radiation damage was evident in a reduced density and there was some loss of hydrogen from the polyethylene. An extrapolation of these results, assuming that the integrated flux-time (nyt) is responsible for the damage, for continuous operation at 100 watts equates to a core life of six years prior to any damage occurring. At 5 eatts continuous operation the core life would be approximately 120 years and at 0.1 watt continous operation about 6,000 years. As the nomal operating cycle is less than 40 hours per/ week, or less than 24%, the projected life approaches 25,000 years at 0.1 watt and 500 years at 5.0 watts. Forn this analysis it is reasonable to conclude that the AGN-{0lM core operating 40 hourt per week at 5 watts (flux - 2.5 X 108 n/c8-sec) would sastain no raciation damage over the 20 years of reactor operation requested by the licensee's application. Moreover, due to the fact that: (1) no unusual problems have arisen curing over 20 years of authori:ed cperation at 0.1 watt (T) and 5.0 watts (T), (2) the revised T5 require surveillance and periodic testing of safety related equipment to assure continued safe operation of the reactor and to assure that any significant component degradation will be detected in a timely manner, and (3) other AGN-201M reactors of this type also have considerabie operating ex::erience without evidence of any unusual problems, we have concluded that The University of Utah AGN-20lM reactor can continue to be coerated in a safe manner for the requestad 20-year period. Further cre, based on these con-siderations, we have ccncluced that the estinated useful life of tne 'acility will extend at least to the end af the recuested 20-year ceriod. ~herefore, # rom a reactor safety stand:;oint the renewai re-Ouested is acceo acie. 2263 153

.. The licensee submitted a revised safety analysis report in the renewal application that incorporates the foregoing changes. No changes made to the facility have resulted in a decrease in margins of safety. Furthermore, reactors virtually identical to this one with similar TS have been licensed for operation for periods of uo to 40 years. Hence, the bases and conclusions with respect to the safety of operation that were detennined in our Safety Evaluation supporting the original license, as amended, and in support of the current operating license, remain unchanged. The revised TS are more definitive than the original TS and will provide the necessary controls and surveillance require-ments to ensure safe operation during the period of the license renewal. The subject facility has been in operation since September 1957 for education and training and for experimental programs requiring a low neutron flux level. The current facility staff consiats of four reactor operators and two senior reactor operators with effective licenses. Familiarity with the facility is maintained through facility operation and active programs in operator training and requalification. The licensee's Operator Requalification Program has been reviewed and found to be acceptable. Financial Considerations Based on The University of Utah's financial information submitted with the application dated July 8,1977, and the addition.i infornation provided March 3,1978, in response to NRC staff request of January 26, 1978, we have concluded that the licensee possesses or can obtain the neces-sary funds to meet the requirements of Section 50.33(f) of 10 CFR Part 50 and that the licensee is financially qualified to continue operation of the facility over the 20-year renewal period requested. Emercency plannine Emergency procedures were submitted with the application dated July 8, 1977. We have reviewed these precedures and conclude they provide a basis for an acceptable state of emergency preparedness. Although the prtcedures are acceptable, they do not confonn with the guidance provided. The University of Utah has agreed to resubmit emergency procedures in an overall Emergency Plan that will include both the AGN-201M and the TRIGA reactors. The licensee has stated that this resubmittal will be provided as soon as possible. 2263 j54

. Security Plannina We reviewed the current security plan dated August 4,1972, and Revision i dated July 16, 1974, and by letter dated January 26, 1979, we informed the licensee of our approval of the plan and is"ued Amendment No. 9 to Facility License No. R-25 to incorporate the security plan as part of the. license conditions to conform with 10 CFR 50.54(p). The security plan and our evaluation findings are in the Commission's files and are withheld from public disclosure pur-suant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.790(d). Conclusion on Safety We have concluded, based on the censiderations discussed above, : hat: (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the precosed manner, and (2) such activities will be conducted in comoliance with the Cormission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. II. Environmental Imoact Accraisal The environmental impact associated with operation of research reactors has been generically evaluated in the attached memorandum (6). This memorandum concludes that there will be no significant environmental impact associated with the licensing of research reactors to operate at power levels up to 2MWt and that no environmental imoact state-ments are required to be written for the issuance of construction permits or operating licenses for such facilities. We have determined that this generic evaluation is applicable to aceration of The Univer-sity of Utah AGN-20lM reactor and that there are no special or different features which would preclude reliance on the generic evaluation. Ccn-sequently, we have determined that the conclusion reached in the generic evaluation is equally applicable to this license renewal action and that an envi onmental imcact statement need not be prepared. Further-more, based on our review of specific facility items which are cen-sidered for potential environmental impact, discussed belcw, we have concluded that this license renewal action is insignificant from the standcoint of environmental imcact. ac il i ty There are no picelines or transmission lines entering or leaving the site ar.ove grade. All utility services (water, steam, electricity, teleonone and sewage) are below grade and are :: caracle to those -e-Outred for tycical camcus laboratories. ea dissi;a:icn is accomclishec u

y raciation in a large water tank anicn serves as One ' eat sink anc is r

a sealed unit. The reactor is designec as i sealed system, and in nornal aceraticn does not have any gasecus or licuid racicactive effluent. Solid, icw-level racicactive waste generated in :ne researen effort will 2263 a55

, be packaged in accordance with USNRC and Decartment of Transoortation (00T) regulations and snipped for storage at NRC accroved sites. The transportation of such waste will be done in accordance with existing NRC-DOT regulations in approved shipoing containers. Chemical and sanitary waste systems are similar to those existing at other univer-sity laboratories and buildings. Environmental Effects of Facility Oceration Release of thermal effluents from a reactor of 5.0 watts will not have a significant effect on the environment. This small amount of waste heat is rejected to the surrounding water tank and eventually to the atmosphere by means of conduction and radiation. There will be no release of gaseous or liquid effluents. Yearly doses to unrestricted areas from external radiation will be at or below estaclished limits.* Solid radioactive wastes generated in the research ;rogram will be shipped to an authorized disposal site in approved containers. These wastes should not amount to more than a few snipping containers a year. No release of potentially harmful chemical substances will occur during normal operation. Small amounts of chemicals and/or high-solid content water may be released from the facility through the sanitary sewer frca laboratory experiments. Other potential effects of the facility, such as esthetics, noise and societal or impact on local flora and fauna are expected to be too small to measure. Environmental Effects of Accidents Accidents ranging from the failure of experiments up to the largest core damage and fissicn product release considered possible result in doses of only a small fraction of 10 CFR Part 100 guidelines and are considered negligible with respect to the environment. Unavoidable Effects of Facility Oceration The unavoidable effects of operation involve the fissionable material used in the reactor. No adverse impact on the environment is expected frem these unavoidable effects. Alternatives to Coeration of the Facility To accomolf sn the objectives associated.vith research reactors, Onere are no suitable alternatives. Some of these cojectives are raininc of students in the operation of reactors, Oroduction of radioisotcoes, and use of neutrcn and gamma ray beams to concuct ex:eriments. +10 CFR 20 2263 356

3 8-Lono-Term Effects of Facility Construction and Oceration The long-term effects of research facilities are considered to be beneficial as a result of the contribution to scientific knowledge and training. There is no construction planned during the renewal period; and therefore, no construction is authorized under tnis licensing action. Because of the relatively lcw amount of capital resources involved and the small impact on the environment very little irreversible and irretrievable commitment is associated with such facilities. Costs and Benefits of Facility and Alternatives The menetary costs involved in operaticn of the facility are less than 55,000/ year. There will be very limited environmental imcacts. The benefits include, but are not limited tc, some ccebination of the following: conduct of activation analyses, conduct of neutron radiography, training of ccerating personnel and education of students. Some of these activities could be cenduc ed using carticle accelerators or radicactive scurces wnicn wculd be acre costly and less efficient. There is no reasonable alternatives to a nuclear rCaarch reactor for conducting this spectrum of activities. Conclusion and Basis for Necative Declaration Based on the foregoing analysis, we have ccacluded that there will be no significant environmen;al imcact attributed 'tc this procosed license renewal. Having made this conclusien, we have further concluded that no environnental impact statement for i ne ;reccsed action need t be precared and that a negative declaraticn to this effect is accro-priate. Cated: .v y 2,1979 a 2263 a57

References 1. "Ha:ards Summary Report for the AGN-201 Reac:ce," Aerojet General Nucleanics, February 1962 (see Cocket F-15). 2. "AGN Model 201 Reactor, Preliminary Cesign Study," Aerojet General Nucleenics, May 1956 (see Cocket F-15). 3. "AGN-201 Reactor Manual," Aerojet Generai Mucleonics, July 1957 (see Doc'ket F-15). a. " Shield Cesien for the AGN-201 Reactor," Appendix F to Reference 1 September 1956 (see Cocket F-15). 5. AEC "emorandum accompanying License R-10, March 29,1957. (see Docket F-32). 6. D. Muller to 0. Skovholt memorandum " Environmental Considerations Regarding the Licansing of Research Reactors and Cri-ical Facilities" dated January 23,1974(attached). 2263 358

/ UNITED STATCS 14,.J.W.',. ' Ks ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION 1 l L. I wass:NGToN, D.C. 3s4s i 1M 23 174 D. Skovholt, Assistant Director for Operating Reactors, L ENVIRORIENTAL CONSIDERATI02:S RECARDING THE LICENSING OF RESEARCH AND CRITICAL FACILITIES Introduction This discussion deals uith research reactor: and critical facilities which.are d2 signed to opa:ste at low power levels, 2..Tt and loser, and are used pri=arily for basic research in neutron phy:ics, neutron as:ociated with nuclear radiography, isotope p:cduction, experiment: engineerir;, training sad as a part of the nuclear physics curriculu=. Operation of such facilities will senerally not exceed a 5 day week, Such reactors are located 8 hour-day or about 2000 hours per year. ' adjacent to technical :ervice support facilitics with convenient access for students and faculty. ~ Sited cost frequently on the campus' of large universitics, the reactors are usually housed in stready existing structures, appropriately ~ modified, or placed in new buildings that are designed and constructed to blend in with existing facilities. Facility There are no exterior co=dults, pipelines,.clectrical or cechanical or transcission lines attached to or adjacent to the facilitf structure: other than utility service f acilities which are si=ilar to those required in other campus facilities, specifically laboratories. Heat dissipation is' generally acco:plished by use of,a coolin; tower located on the roof These cooling towers are on the o-der of 10' X 10' X 10' of.the building. and are c:= parable to coolin; towers associated with the air-conditionin; system of large office buildin;s. Make up for this cooling system is readily available and usually obtained Radioactive gaseous effluents are licited from the, local water supply. to Ar 41 and the release of :-dioactive liquid effluents can be carefully monitored and centrolled. Th::e liquid castes are collect 2d in :torage tanks to allow for decay and monitoring prior to dilution and release to Solid radioactive wastes are packa; d and the sanitary sever sys tem. The transportation ' shipped of f-site for stora;e at AEC approved sites.. of 5.ch vaste is done in accordance with existin; AEC-DOT rc;ula'tions in approved shippin; containers. Chemical and sanitary waste systems are similar to those existing at other university laboratories and building:. 2263 359-

J AN 23 1374 D.,Sk vholt Con s truc tio n Environmental Effcets of Site Frenaration and Facility Construction of such facilit'ies invsrisb[y cecurs in aress that have aircady beec disturbed by other university building construction and in Therefore, ccn-some cases scicly within en al:cady existing buildin;. struction would not be expected to have any significant affect on the ~ The terrain, vegetation, wildlife or ncarcy waters or squatic life. societal, econocic and osthetic i= pacts of construction would be no that associst:d with the construction of a large office greater th : building c: si=ilar university facility. Envir'o =setsl Effects of F2cility Coeration Release of ther=t;f effluents fron.a reactor of less th:n 2 Mit will not have a signific::: effect on the environment. This s= ll :: cunt of waste heat is generally rejected to the at=esphere by ceans of small Extensive drif t and/or fog will not occur et this low cooling towers. power level. Release of cutine gaseous effluent can be limited to Ar 41 which is This will be kept as low as generated by neutron activation of air. Yectly doses to practichble by ainicun air ventilation of the tubes. Poutine unrestricted areas will be at or below establishad li=its. releases of radioactive liquid effluents can be carefully conitored and that will ensure compliance with current controlled in a en :e: Solid radioactive wastes will be shipped to an authorized standards. These vastes should not assunt disposal site in approved cc: tainers. to more than a few shipping c:ntainers_ a year. Based on experience with other research reactor:, specifically TRICA 2 reactors, operating in the 1 to 2 Wit ran;e, the cenual release of should be less then . gaseous and liquid effluents to unrestricte4 arca: 30 cur,1cs 4:d 0,01 curies respectively. No release of potentially har=ful chemical substances will occur during S:sil arounts of chemicals and/or high-solid content normal operation. water cay be released f:ce the facility chrough the sanitary sewer during periodic blewdewn of the cooli ; tower or fec= laboratory experi-cents. Other potential effects of the facility, such as esthetics, noise, societ:1 or impact 'on local flora cnd f auna are expected to be. too small to =casure. ~ 2263 360 ~

4 4 4++<%> $<s' he ,. eEEv Le 1,em TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 5DEDM y l," EE I.l [jmEM ut 1.25 l.4 l 1.6 s.. = MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

1. 4

$ 4% 'S < A 4 fax)/ 4 4,,,//

,

\\ IMAGE EVALUATION NNNN TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 522 DM S m g=22 m m = 1.1 ['" EM Ja 1.25 1.4 1.6 6" MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

1. 4 4$ 4%

• hybf

. hWb 5,,/ gr f28;;>, xxxx[9 s'>e+ 'e'4# s ,mAeE Ev <e 1,em TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 l# 8H Baa llj EE I,l [" HM la 1.25 1.4 i.6 6- = MICROCOPY RESOLUTION TEST CHART

1. 4

+ 4% 'A (O

• %fb//h/

%v%;+ 4, O $5R+ ////h'Ak %'>e %<e4 s , _ EEv Le 1,em TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 l# En EM y,yEE I.l ['S lWlM ut I.25 1.4 g 1.6 s.. MICROCOPY RESOLUTlON TEST CHART

1. 4

+4%

• W k

4N+k; Ei 4 \\ D.'Skovholt JAN 2 3 1974 Environ = ental Effects of Accidents _ ~ Accidents snging from the failure of experiments up to the largest ~ core damage end fission preduct reic:se considered possibic result in doses of only a'se:11 fraction of 10 CFR Part 100 guidelines and are considered negligibic with respect to the enviroc=ent, s Unsvoidabia Ef hec'ts of Facility Construction and Coa:stien ,+ The unavoidable effects of construction and operation iavolves the materi:ls used in construction that c:nnot be recovered and the No adverse i= pact on the fissionable material used in the reactor. environnect is expected fro: either of these unavoidable effects. Alter 7stives to Constructien and Coc : tion of the Facility To accouplish the objectives essociated with :cscarch reactors, there. Sc=e of these objectives are.t:sining of are no suitable alternstives. students in the operation of reactors, production of rcdioisotepes, and use of neutron and gamma ray beans to conduct experi=ents. Lone-Terr Effects of Facility Cons truction and Oneration The long-tcrn effects of reses ch facilitics c:e considered to be beneficial as a result of the contribbtion to scientific knc'uledge and training. Because of the relatively lov e,meunt of capital resources involved and the s=sil impact en the environnent very little irreversible a:d irretrievable co=:itzent is associated'with such facilities. Costs and Eenefits of Facility cnd Alternatives The costs are on the order of several millions of dollars with very ~ littic environments 1 impact. The benefits include, but are not limited to, some combination of the follouing: conduct _of ac,tivation analyses, -conduct of neutron radiog:cphy, trainin; of operating personnel :nd Some of theca activities could be ccaducted education of students. using particic accelerators or ::dioactive coerces which uculd Le core There is no reasencbic alternative to a costly and less efficient. nucle r research cactor for conductin; this spectrum of activitics. 2264 001 .- es JAN 2 3 ISE .D.'Skovholt. Conclusion The staff concludes that there trill be no significant environnental impact associated with the licensing of research reactors or critical facilities designed to operate at pouer levels of 2 MUt or louer and that no enviro :: ental ispset statements are required to be written for the issuance of construction per::its or operating licenses for such facilities. ~ / i / s>Hn // ~ Daniel R. Muller, Assistant Director .for Environ = ental Projects ~ Directorate of Licensing 2264 002 .}}