ML19341B321
| ML19341B321 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Berkeley Research Reactor |
| Issue date: | 01/19/1981 |
| From: | John Miller Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kaplan S CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, BERKELEY, CA |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19341B322 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101300711 | |
| Download: ML19341B321 (3) | |
Text
j][0, kb 8
UNITED STATES
[
i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION e
l wAsMNGTON. 0!C. 20665
\\, v...../
m 19 m, Docket No. : 50-224 a
s, s
p/ t R & f [ *. 3 Mr. Selig N. Kaplan
.d JA N 'o, m Reactor Administrator
'M
~
The Regents of the University
$ u.a. DIEo'^.^'o" [
of California Department of Nuclear Engineering
- c O,d a
Berkeley, California 94720
' t.
Nr i
Dear Mr. Kaplan:
By letter dated March 4,1980 as amended by letter dated August 25,1980, you submitted a revision of the Berkeley Research Reactor physical Security Plan for your TRIGA reactor, License No. R-101. We have reviewed the submittal and have concluded that the revision meets the requirements of 10 CFR 73.67 for the protection of special nuclear material of low strategic significance.
Since the. current NRC-approved physical security plan should properly be reflected in the license authorization for your facility, we are herewith issuing Amendment No. 4 to Facility License No. R-101, which identifies your currently approved physical security plan.
Changes which would not decrease the effe'ctiveness of your approved physical security plan may be made without prior approval by the Commission pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.54(p). Changes which do require prior NRC approval should be submitted and identified as license amendment requests.
Based on the fact that this licensa amendment appiias to the physical security plan and incorporates into the license the latest rcquirements of yo'ur updated physical security plan, we have concluded that:
(1) the amendrvtnt does not involve a significant increasti in the pro'dbility or censequence of accidents previously considered, does not invcive a significant decrease in a safety margin, and, therefore, does not involve a significant hazards consideration; (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by this action; and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission'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.
B10 3 30 0
I 9 I997 4r. Selig Kaplan We have determined that this amendmer.+. will not result in any significant environmental impact and that it does not constitute a major Commission action significantly affecting the quality of the human environment. We have also determired that..this action is not one of those covered by 10 CFR 51.5(a) or (b). -daving made these determinations, we have further concluded that, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), an environmental impact appraisal and negative declaration need not be prepared in connection with
~
issuance of this amendment.
The documents comprising the currently approved physical security plan for the Berkeley Research reactor and our evaluation findings have been placed in the Commission's files. Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(d), this information is being withheld from public disclosure.
It is required that this physical security plan be implemented within 30 days from the date of issuance of this amendment.
Sincerely, j
- , ', /
/ / /.
s,,~--
-log James R. Miller, Chief Standardization & Special Projects Branch Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Amendment No. 4 cc w/ enclosure:
See next page O
o University of California at Berkeley cc w/ enclosure (s):
Director Energy Facilities Siting Division Energy Resources Conservation &
Cevelopment Commission lill Howe Avenue Sacramento, California 95525 California Department of Health ATTN: Chief, Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814
._