ML19345H077
| ML19345H077 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Missouri-Columbia |
| Issue date: | 04/15/1981 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19345H074 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104300405 | |
| Download: ML19345H077 (3) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:m. /f "tcy% UNITED STATES
- D,#q, NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- y /*'d wAsMNGTON. D. C. 20666 ..g %%.[.,- SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 14 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-103 UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI - COLUMBIA 00CXET NO. 50-186 Introduction By letters dated Decenter 15, 1980 and March 3,1981, the University of Missouri at Columbia requested a chan ie in Facility Operating License No. R-103 for its research reactor (F JRR). The proposed change would modify the definition of " Reactor See ared", item 1.20, in the Technical Specifications, Appendix A, of the license. Discussion The currently approved format for reactor Technical Specifications includes a set of definitions of special terms. One condition in the definition of " Reactor Secured" in the licensee's Technical Specfications prohibits any work being in progress involving the control rods or control rod drives. This prohibition is intended to insure that the reactor is considered to be "in operation" whenever such work is being done and, therefore, work is done only urder the supervision of appropriately licensed operations personnel. This should minimize the probability that a control rod mignt be inadvertently withdrawn and cause a reactor excursion. However, the licensee has a set of control rod dummy loads which can be connected to the.lectrical control circuitry in place of the control rod drive mechanism. When these loacs are installed, it is ingossible to move the control rods, even inaovertently, from the control console. The purpose of these dununy loads is to sinulate the electrical characteristics of the control rod drive units, in order to per-form various tests and checks on the control circuitry. Because the term " reactor secured" is used in other parts of the Technical Specifications or in operations procedures, the licensee requested the change in definition to allow, without ambiguity, the possibility to perform these tests at the same time other maintenance work might be in progress. This would give the licensee more flexibility than he has now in scheduling and performing maintenance, with a consequent increase in efficiency in both manpower and reactor utilization. 820.480o{Q(
2-The requested change in the definition of " Reactor Secured" would allow the licensee to connect or disconnect the dumny loads without that being considered to be work on the control rods, or would require that a licensed operator be present in the control room if the dumny loads are installed. Evaluation The condition known as " Reactor Secured" is one in whict the reactor is safely shutdown and only knowledgeable authorized personnal have access to the means of changing its reactivity status. Some of the items in the definition of " Reactor Secured" are physical limitations, such as insufficient fuel to achieve criticality, or the Master Control switch turned to "off", and the key in proper custody. Some of the itens in the definition are administrative such as no work in progress involving transferring fuel, or no work in progress involving the control rods or control rod drives. Therefore, it is not inconsistent e with current practice for a licensee to request a change in his authorized ad11nistrative procedures. Furthermore, it is current practice for NRC to approve such requests which do not decrease the safety of operations and de not increase hazards or risks to the public or to the environment. The changes requested by the licensee clearly appear to be consistent with these two criteria for acceptability. The licensee's proposed changes in definition still require that a licensed operator be present in the control room if the Master Switch key lock is turned on, whether or not the dumny loads are i nstalled. Furthermore, while the dunny loads are being installed or removed, the Master Switch would normally be turned off and the key in proper custody, or a licensed operator would be present in the control room. In both cases, the reactor would be as secure against inadvertent or unauthorized operation as is currently the case. The advantage to the licensee in obtaining approval for the requested change in definition is that it allows other maintenance and instrumentation eneckouts to be made at the same time. These other tests are not associated with the control rods but are administratively limited to being accomplished during a condition of " Reactor Secured". These other tests have no safety impact as long as the reactor is inoperable. Environmental Considerations We have determined that this amendment 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 determined that this action is not one af those covered by 10 CFR 51.5(a) or (b). Having made these determinations, we have further concluded that, pursuant ( i ( .~. _ _. = _ _
3-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. Conclusions on Safety Based on the evaluation which is summarized above, we conclude that the licensee's requested changes in the definition of " Reactor Secured" do not decrease the safety of operation of the reactor. Furthermore, the changes would not alter the operating characteristics of the reactor which might have an impact on the public or the environment. Therefore, we conclude that the proposed changes are acceptable. We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered, and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendment 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 operation in the proposed manner, 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 connon defense and security or to the health and safety of the public. Dated: April 15,1981 v ww,-- + - - -, - - -, ,,y e-ww rw , p e w y- --m y-r pg- ,--y*, e w , * - -w-w ,w y-y---- = =y}}