ML19276H050

Responds to 790730 Ltr.Upgrade Rule Will Not Imply Significant Changes in Ri Atomic Energy Commission Nuclear Science Ctr.Operating Data for Jul 1977-June 1978 Encl

ML19276H050
Person / Time
Site:	Rhode Island Atomic Energy Commission
Issue date:	08/17/1979
From:	Dimeglio A RHODE ISLAND, STATE OF
To:	John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19276H051	List: ML19276H050 ML19276H053
References
NUDOCS 7908310533
Download: ML19276H050 (2)

Text

,.

.Y '. .

] kj STATE OF RHODE ISLAND AND PROVIDENCE PLANTATIONS Rhode Island Atomic Energy Commission NUCLEAR S,CIENCE CENTER South Ferry Ro,.d Narragansett, R. I. 02882 August 17, 1979 00u-c7 Co-l93 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccrmission Washingtcn, D. C. 20555 Attenticn: Jares R. Miller, Acting Asst. Director for Site and Safeguards Gentlemen:

Please refer to your letter of July 30, 1979 concerning the effect of the upgrade rule on the R. I. Nuclear Science Center. We have already been visited by a team from NRC and New Mexico.

Based on the discussicns with the team and our existirg security arrangerents, we do not believe that significant changes in cur facility will-be necessary to met the requirements of the uppade rule. We also do not believe that sigr.ificant charges in cur secu-rity pmcedures will be necessary. 'Ihis is because, althcugh we are licensed for greater than 5000 grams of U-235, the arount of fuel that is not self pmtecting is always less than 5000 gms.

In additicn, since the reactor cperates at 2M4, we do not antic-ipate prcblems in maintaining the fuel in the swirrdng pool at the self protection limit. To do this, hcwever, may require N-cycling into the reacter, fuel eierents which otherdise wculd have been allcwed to decay until shiprent to reprocessing.

The impact of 1 :plementing the SafeW2 upgrade rule will not be great enough for us to censider closing the facility. We do not have an estirnte of the ecst of shutting down the facility or the cost of maintaining pcssession cnly status.

The arnual budget for crerating is abcut $360,000. This dces not include the funded meearch pregame which approximately arcunt to an additional $1,0C0,000.

?96 272 g 6k1 7908310 63 3

Enclosed is a ccpy of our annual report for the 77/78 fiscal year.

Pages 12 thru 19 will provide the kinds of infor ation m;ested in your letter.

The follcwing am the answers to your specific questions:

1. Mintral

2. Minkal 3 Miniral

4. No data available 5 No data available

6. 'Ihe less to industry will be through the loss of trained personnel with advanced degrees. The reactor is used for research in master and doctoral programs. We do not train cperators for pcwer react-ors.

7 We have two research programs with applicaticns in the medical area.

We do not produce medical isotcpes.

8. Based en NRC facility visit, minimal.

9 Yes

10. 'Ihere are about 25 faculty merters who use the facility and about 25 advanced degree students. There are about 40 publications an-nually resulting from the work.

11. Eleven. No

12. We do not mn a training mactor 13 'Nenty-five . Yes

14. $360,000 15 Yes, by recycling back in M reactor. However, fuel decay of 90 days prior to shipment to reprocessing may present a problem.

Assuning no problem with shipping to reprocessing, the financial 1: Tact will be minirnl.

16. About 19. However, some involve cnly a couple of hours at the facility. 'Ihey will not be cut.

Based cn our operating experience, we see two potential prcblems, bcth ccncerning spent fuel. 'Ihe first is the decay tLT required by the reprocessing plant ce the decay heat limits en the shipping cask and the availability of transportation companies who meet the re-quirements of 73 37 Since we received your letter en August 14, 1979, we have not, as yet, checked these items.

We will be pleased to provide nore infomation, if necessary.

Very truly yours, 3

VYs i

,~ m T< ,M6 273 A. Francis DDieglio Directcr AFD:ag

. _ ._,_ _.-_ _ _ _ _ - _ . - -