ML20040B916
| ML20040B916 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1980 |
| From: | Ostrander N CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, LOS ANGELES, CA |
| To: | Wohl M Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| FOIA-81-339 NUDOCS 8201260589 | |
| Download: ML20040B916 (11) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- l'NIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES UCLA
~$
?, ' &g,8.\ sgsri n gungn4
- sgsTg t ht Z atstetry ngs is insssE . t os t se.Fa t.s nig t ssipE s as nitt;o . sgs t atstest o a/ y :)
Gr.W:;ut
':1!b 2567 Boelter Hall SCHOOLOF ENGINEEHING 4ND AlTI. LED %CIENCE 13n ANGEL.E'i, C41.!FOHNI4 'Jfir!4 15 October 1980 Mr. Millard Wohl Mail Stop P-608 Division of System Integration Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S.N.R.C. +. na Washington, D.C. 20555 w Docket 50-142
Dear Mr. Wohl:
The enclosed drawings are transmitted in accordance with our telephone conversation of October 14, 1980. Some of the drawings are marked " void" and I believe they differ from final drawing only in detail or in notes relating to concrete mix specifications. The drawings are briefly identified in the following paragraphs. Three Control Blades (Dwg 89-31-119) are of magnesium with cadmiur,i tips, 41/2" wide by 131/2" high-(max.). The cadmium load in the' fourth (reg rod) is narrower (-2" instead of 41/2, Dwg 89-31-327, not included herewith). Control Blade shrouds (Dwg 89-31-118) are of 1/8" magnesium. Shrouds were rebuilt with modifications not shown on the drawing.
- 1) Approximately three inches was removed from the horizontal bottom and graphite is stacked to the higher elevation to prevent the blades from falling beyond the point of _
maximum insertion.
- 2) Rivets were replaced with counter-sunk, flat-head screws.
- 3) Rectangular inspection port risers were added at the top to permit visual inspet. tion of the blades by removal of the -
two upper concrete shield blocks. l Fuel box plugs are illustrated in Dwg's 89-31-201 and 89-31-208. Concrete shield blocks:
-Dwg 89-31-171 is a key to other shield block drawings.
j -Dwg 89-31-175 shows the " doughnut" block immediately above . l the_ core. The graphite center island, fuel box plugs, and l control blade inspection port rise to a level corresponding to the top surface of this block. The density of this block 7 is235'lbs/CF(min).
- -Dwg 89-31-293 shows the block inmediately above the " doughnut" block. The density is 235 lbs/CF (min).
-Dwg 89-31-289 shows the top block. The concrete density is i
l 197 lbs/CF (min). 8201260599 811006 PDR sm an Euncs unonuont k h hi-339 n n ,.u ion. ninn ion
UNIVEllSITY OF cal.lFORNIA, I.OS ANCEI.ES
, UCIA o,,,,,,,.,,,,,,. ,,,,u . u,,~:m.,. ,,n.,,,,,. m ,,,m,. m ,m asa, _ r.9: -g., m 1........ m,, , ,u Mr. Millard Wohl 2567 Boelter ifall pay 2 two sc,imtos tscius nisc wn arrornscitsce im ncrtu.caunini,me4 The Fuel Box Arrangement is shown in (a) an isometric sketch with dimensional infomation and (b) a reduced scale copy of Dwg 89-31-100 which shows the layout in plan view. The upper flanges match the fuel box plugs (Dwg89-31-201).
Overall reactor dimensions are shown in Figure II-l _ (taken from the original ! llazardsAnalysis). As originall tank (above the main shielding) was y conceived, the upper to be surrounded portion of the by removab_1,e shieldslabs. concrete The slab toward the experimental holes has since be'ch removed. Two borated paraffin blocks 40" high by 19" thick by 40" wide haite been added to control . streaming radiati'o n from the vertical ports. As I suggested, these drawings may not suffice for all of your needs, but they should suffice to establish a basis for further communication. Sincerely, 11idta O E ls^- Neill C. Ostrander, Manager
-Nuclear Energy Laboratory NC0/jb enc.
I
' ht'CLE,H FNk HG1 LABOR ATORY IV4N CARTON, DIRECTOR f
k-J1avLSllocic,fsy-p "re: (/di ff b biese f&s wi} FREEDOM OF lNFORMATK)N ACT REQUEST pp_ g FO.T b 'A-dg; . P .:y - p [ 3ECI5? ^O "?C 3?/CF ?C~ p?CTUC'C" Intervenor hereby requests the follcuine docunents be produced. 3ese docunents can be produced by havinc copies sent to Intervenors -
. or the~ can be rade available for inspection and copying at the IICE.
'c.ese requests are nade pursuant to the Freedon of Infornation Act as well as the discovery procedures established in this proceeding.
~-tervenor recuests waivirr of any cop;inc and search fees, as per the g
Freedon o' Infornation Act, as the use to which the docunents will be put is provision of infer .ation to the Atonic 3afety and Licensing loard 1. a ratter of reactor sa'ety. Provisien of a full. evidentiary record for the Icard is o'eviously in the public it.terest. Furthernere, Intervencr notes that :'EC Staff has not charged the other party in this proceeding for docu .ents provided. 2e follouing docunents are hereby recuested for productions all licensee event reports for the University of Yashington and the University of Florida Argonaut reactors for the period 1970 to the present, all abnormal occurrence reports fron U cf F and i of W ATEenaut reactors 1970 to present not included in iten above, a-nual repcrts for the last,three years from both reactors initial hazard analysis fron University of 'a'ashington drawinrs provided URC Staff by UCIA in response to :'RC Question r/1, l 4-17-80. I reactor core drawings provided by ::RC Staff to C.E. Cort for his study. AEC 1ctter, Price to 3celter, regarding Argon 41, September 9, 1960 l
- p. 2. inspection reycrt 1963 application for relicensing, Universit;' of "ashington and Universit-l cf Florida
) inspection reports,1975 to present, University of ' ashington and University of Ilorida reactors l l probabilistic risk assessnents for research reactors perforned by l :'EC f . compilations of statistical data regardirg operating perfornance (# of unintentional scrans, abnormal occurrences, violations) conparirs research reactor perfernance, currert statenent of 'JRC policy regarding consideration of Class 9 accidents in 3 3s. EIAs. and licensing hearings. ( 2eg. Cuide 1.60 l docunents detailing results o' or status of review of total saeguards l requirenents at research reactors nentioned in 12 :3C 528, CLI-20-37, II O ' f
\~ > 7 74 i 25 .
i --~ 9 e 9 ;
; 2 .1 } rR/44 }
2 . . gf.. . - - ; f
/6 3 1 *
. */ - M M g l
3 ,. 3
}' >
6 .q,-.6 s r-l! !I - - l'~3C .
.mr ,i i
- - - - -_ _ _ , - -- h Jh
, ug. _ __._
k ~ . -~~ ~.)
***' (~ /," A h l ~&WLL (t f g .
q 1,r' y l ,
/ 'IN '
'~
! l{ Mi ,.
y- N' , , ,_ - j 1 k 1 l; j j/ ~* .
't? I il -
,j f th- I- / /g'
% _ , , , "*f U { '-QI Ni .R.' '
! !!' i
/// ~** - Ng.89' xvu uw.g.3,,,Y[ Mfg.lffMSG ~
-k h Ei %- li T
~
/ .<
jI C Ely/; L' W tY>Y3"r77/MT - i q '. - I l:1 ( 3l 4 r ~((// s
. $$$,7'hjfh$5[$5 cwwo
}tI. ) - - - - --- -- ~~' J _;[ _i t l*I*i r-
- h.
- I
.,.,+.
_..__..1 CCacsarda,9 mg,,M. Q *"4p,13,ha)4 1 ! "-
.. .. . _ _ _ , // *b *. . Y ',)~e,deIIn~.c.=
f I t g 1, Hi , 1 2 -
!i %14 ig {osn s .1 j ji _.
_* Ld 1 3/c -
.i 1 /-
. !a '
- 7- ---i l, *
/ N.'. f. - .
~
{ '% j; .
. MA TEWA!_
\ .
I p i jpg/l hcl?P / '
' ALUMINyM TYPC *l/00 s.
,\. r.
St% /-
;. : r' t 48-32 TAP l ML*P Au A m p.m tk. u o s.
t a-noces -
.3 -W 3 I v-
-g i
i
- d 1 .
j svusot. l " ' ' ' ' ' " " (DATrl APPMOVED [c ';, GENERAL NUCLEAR ENGINEERING CO . oussois I
. ~gtMf]g..'.
. c.. x x o
, , , , , , , ,o g AMF ATOMICS uored* /
,, '. ... 3!35[m.m-P.-N """,I'JMf4W'S GilEENWICH, CONN. '" '"N J -
.. . *~..." ~
3 9 % *, % 7 ""M"IJV f 7/~"" onAwswono
# 4'~##C - I
// e. + .
_ _ - . - - ,, j._ _ . _ m -- - g., /,f _. .2_ - C N
. -- _ i
~rs'=w.wwwm . -, s, ?. s n :. - -
3---~~ -n, ,. 3 - . x 1.1 - :' 7
- '; .-: . y* ~ x~
- y. .c s
,., , 3 - ~% o 4' , ,. _
.3.
n.- , _ -
/- 1:
<, - Q , '~ g2ag, J g .l j [ / ~~
u h,& vb T'i
- r p;
t;s . , , .
,; , . 1 .
. s .; .+ s, ..,...,,t i <'v .,: :1 ,,s 'c'c ,c',. ',?/,J- .
;a :yh. ,.'.s w . ,,
-s
+
- v;r p &, %c,
~7 n . .
1 ..,.N-
.n
,3
, ~1, 3 - ,,n,
' y *@_ <s ) a s.% &k ['; w : ,Q
~.,
or i <
- s. . a v3 3, a
&.. 1 w: : :<;. ' S. .. .n:-
- ..: y. . .3L. . . .fs . c
-,. y r > .- L - &g .1je A h, }(,..a:, ' 'f Q . : y b.:.f. g&y
.c3.,p,.p4 i k .* <
W .. ' L,. , . : d:&, ;r. .Lw;n yg
- a%;WAgex .h m .,.
e r g 5 W. nt.+
)_ '*,,g-~ _ ~'
~
y u. a ; van .e) rm w g,$*
? 4
.m o .,. .,~ a y.% {d 7 . -&
$.N & > ~a la.s ' Y Y, , ' , ..:.r.wpl[;.
~. -
'l
'&,4, t .
R { I D,dh{:.c. ' - l, ' g 3 , .g.g l ,
} .
> , r n ..
, y y j;;w:,:;y.. g . ,. .:
lW::, v ,, @ p . .. . , , s , ,. . ..-e. 6 ,3 \ s. it i h r . g
/
,..4 4 s r . '[.
,, f. , 3
.s ,
r , _.
, .
- _ .; 4 . gh - ~. _ , , . ' *. ..% ,, .,,, , 4 ! -
1
.. M- ,
t . , 4t t i g . h.
~. ,q
~ ' "
i : =. c
.s. u -
, p, ,
w ,
'\ s. , s - ;
l i /
- Y- .,-b pt #
/6 #A..
e 9 p
* *g
,' [ * . '. ,f g ' . -- ',J
'~,.. egg "".*O' * ' ' '
f ,
< % . ,1
'w e= % .?" -
f
,J t & .'.s .3 h.,.2.~ .
(g g, -*
)>'
.. - c #
u..
) r . . n. f.,'. .g . . . .
,_ x
'. & ;g ...T ' , . &[ . . :, D
-+ s -e 26:t;% 4 't., *i . 1. .u ? ; ; 6 [:,' : ..., -
*f i g j * *
? ll .
p ;e.,i'.. gu ~ {avn.: ... p. a .c E . y J s.m p4p a m.. oe dtn . ;w#y)n.v. w .v w.; a u. ~, %m : : x maneyp y W s m a n w w p.
#:A
+y w p eyw p d x E.A ~o g%p w?,.:
qc m.
%n y u m s.y.
g g 4 ":.yb f $r u. .. Wp
~ Ap he.w&w.mo -.n 2M p m+';': ' -' s .o e::
ww' u }. M Q+ks;a s ~ a --
-% s. p. Ji f~, .- y, . -
N{ V:.w. q&O h{s.h $^4?f,;";?gMj ~ , eONpu M m .
~
p, V
.y.wy y qq p.
a w, e. 4 w$ h k y Ym a yh, gn Eb ! 3 N 'f2 w<,W w.!.W& M2 w nw A g &s.. x . . .GW h r
,. .F Tey w. .
" m.V,Q,ndth
)Y Q. ;g %. [ ' ?
w S,g I y]4.,t
. u,;. a. .
]'J'.;I ,
w k.g
+y ,1 , z ., s .. a.
.g&p' J y sy G q:s .y;,.;,y,s .w ' ,, _.
? ,
.- ; y ..
7 qy. . ;;ng. : Ak Tr . v' * ,,%, - 4; .,,Ye~2
..A -.'c.w . % e.* ' c .-- ' s.
/ gE W w#f. ?*"D Ot j.' '
3a,.g3) ,* , 43 4a
,y r gi N%d ~17,, #m
.
- i',pn*EHd 2 @; -t
[ A.43' pg,, 1 T.fg.h y s,.$ .e p.
'g' -
4, g( S
,q,q
, i n .,
h[, -
, ,i% **v ^ -
N* 4-.- ,.[, -
***'c.' '
*g[ a , .,
'd
- h. ,w r k a
.~ ,
-?
c-y*mDw A'.p. y' .)y n.p, .. *G
. n w? c-. a.p. , hg(, s,, . .: y b4 ' ~ '
~
r., $;;".h~ ? hh,d$ Ml L, ,, t>%eA .,z Nis;.e V p@" ...' ? . ' - b, y- .' . ; - . O 'f k.TA o y a.' , m",3 1. J W $ p'- {p,,6M ,#tr,t j M M 2k,i e b'.'
. ; J.
1r, p
, fgt.;*{ ' ' ' ,'f ' " h . g.
3" / [ d' ((2 j p'gQg i . p% p 's
, x
, , ,p Mt
~
.b- '.'**
- 4. '
- v. r ~. _
f',.N V ..^q. ;',.gN-N Nj', -
4 j F'-.* 4 1 -'4'"'.
-' -' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ~
*.See
. t' t
) ^-
j' .. E7 - - . "Y , 3 r , IW m.. g~ .. . . , .
~
,n p.s . . s .s y ~
. - :n<
- c. ._
m +.w y , s. . ..
. p.? ,
4 s a3 ~
>/.yF , ' , '" y' 3 2
~
,< ,4 . ; , y.
N sv', '. ', '. vi ,
;N ,c,.N ,>
i ,{
>7 M *'{ . .(
8
- /, ' , #S$$Ki r i ;3
- yo -
/g
...:;'. s A 34 .*
M i '; -r' ' ' ' j.
. 's' {, s ;.
y , s ,. .i .
.,s ; 3, tK.--
d_wa m#,1 m e,$ y
.,1 i .
,7 ~
NE.E.ya.,mm ( 'bm, ;m. j p , 1
,;,f i h
5.."M.
!: :6r
,!4g.$',.
d . * (p i.M. . . 4
;e.2 h
wW4 r:. tfl t .,[ i '
'liib
., a 3
of ,. + g ..,n -
.- 2n, 4$
' y= -Qy $ .
( ft. ., -
),[Ill'! I I . ,. y g
., , M '
i ( a.< , e1. EY w sun m,, g lkg E.e
. &w up h,
. n. w$ c; Q; n g. e 4
'N Mijq /, r
.a, %e ..
id y0 fe gL. s a hi n . glt M.O.[g]V ' J w r x 'p;pra(7.b.!'"W..c'$.I' e c ;,9- :...y;,
. , y,, esg bra., 7- '. M
,a P Qg:e R., w. .f.4
%4 a p ..
;q c x - y!! .:. !
NA h-p JI . .. FMa s 'i!.WS kg l- 41 4p j Ubf1?g - Ms ' ?y.w s.A'.a'h .
/ .,
!Iw,Mg n,re .
1 t :. e #a - , qe.. N !l.ld R.
.j.u .G. 9(xy w c+. -
ur 1 wg ,aspg p! a y,4 Nl. l.h b h H I p .. _ d s ~ . i , 3 Rf ; ~rS:k 8 @): 1.!!- i <Mu ,nwg<yif G. . J%g4 >24 f b,.ns 1 ( 3. . .$3h Hj = N.qiG=7 Egg qi
,W pg4 g 31, j
.. v.e ,
< d< : yp,mw ;,ggg
--ye y} o$" > ; rmhy[u g1,1, .
** . . -' ' q.jQ1fe ,u. : .m .y .f.^.
.t C
g
, a.t .
? . . ,
( t.. ,, . n b.m. m.=. .. Wu% , q .. , c5 u r C. '.c
. . %;I na.;5.m,4.4
.w
.e I' A
., j I n, . +. n .a a , %' ;
. A, mg k I .
[P d%:N dd3Edk ,hYe .. _ $ [ b _ k N _$Yp$ _ [Y _ ,
(-- . j f 6
- b. ',d k , y
,h r =M r '
W -
. E # I,,,h =
N ; g 3 ;
*-- I @*f s I lUen ' '.J . , 7J u 8 N1, s ,
O l0. ? g
,Y3t wt CO.
l U . 's ~ g t, ; I. < , m 7J l j L 4_ - - .. h . .f ' 4 g Q %i g _
' V ' i. i ' [! !I ; i [ .l 34
.P
- 7 uJ :' -
I'.o .
& %l -
, L j ,.y )3 -
I p ' 1.. s i
, u ll:i ,o~ 4m .i t. I
~s .
z g y Q , , -
.o m..
.. .a -- .
_,n i 1
'i -
' 4d'. @ '
p -g* '9 j
. . 'Z' l I, e
.h =
.f 0
. z. ' , ,u ue n '
- t. s ; h- .
F.
. .'ri k. h.4'
- I., 4 L . . .
!-.,-m> - -
c:.L. . ,, e y . . -. y - .- e rr.. n p J.* 1..,,,> y'- 9-
,.y .,3. ',,
,, ,_l* < 5: )
LA. *
., . .s . 4 ,3.. . \os . ,. ' i j j.-. 1
_,_ ,, }
.. s .Ej
, ,j
*1 *
' .. - '" r y N
is
, '?*7','M :
7:'9 ,s. M. - /. -g.t* 2.,
. .v t "
. .6 , .
.;,!t.-- - a s .
j __
. : -) - - 4 pp. * .fn .a. , .
, y} : ; - .._-w -
-m,
); *,'4} .*w# s . 4' '+e's .' b .-
..'~ ., . L. s * '
\ ' =
r"',, -
* .. . *. ~ . l . lg' %.t i
-- .. *f i
/, !. . $* '
.' ',, g . h , j \ ' O 1, {f)/ *
-. . y 8
l
- p. . . .~,t
'M u- 1 i h ,- , f .,w t.'
,v .<." *'
Q,'. ,. . . .g, - i
=_'
1
,-3 g l..f G: - C4 ,* , 'M _
,N; :i I ., 't . -
j '
,e t p t** , W ?
a..
*** ft 5 v, 't: WP L'-
I'a- W" N 3
, . . h-e - e < ,7 . .- . < .
y 3 .
, s
,e (.
,. . _ ... ..i ,.
y' s.... _. 4_....m dt .*2 , i
% 6
., t + . . . . . .
~l ., ,. S ,;
f,
],
,, 4.c.
- f ; ga.n .N ..'. . . ._.__.._
i _
.y y ;
%- - - - - - - - - gi . nj. ' _
dy, . i si
- g. ,
f . % e G 6p , i I 8
. s h 0 I . ,
1 fi
, ; i T
- 4 e -
- f. .
^>
l, Q\ _ Q ;'. g.. . ~ .a .,.i - Iw
, i i-n l ;Q{
)4 g, g , , ,
. t-t -
9 h* ' n l > I m N) - i ,, s 1
. . _ --_ _cm )_
g) - fM
, e' f !
f
\ l W .
l
.. \
Nj j -i
,k / 5 f U 4
_fW y,M.. .
~1
._Q.........~..-.. .----.. . . ....~..
. . . - - .. , .e
' ' 4 M
'gk.'
6 i , . . . _
.,\
_n :'
- b. 2 N = --
j . ... ..
;) ;I ,
,, [. c .............
,,m S . . y
.T. .
,, 1,....._._. 3 ..., .
7__ d _ f .. cy) -) ' l } f h . 7
) _
5,'.P.atO , . 3 .i'. r. ...i M 2
,,. ru [ } I ", T # I.# WT4 % . ,
- -[.7 IT% .
s g '
- .. s .
,,.m
,- [ a / ,.y, I' l [*g l i! q
- y. ..
it 2
- ,l i
j i 44 i ai l' r 13 ..:. 0 h t
~'
. ..J
,.. b ' , ,
' ;N' 3l
~
.i ,
.. q!I Nysi.
p ; m..rargrtF
, , u u, :
/. idk, i !!' m hi. i. a. .. . .. .
til lilij m; i 3, k .. , ,.i i Wi M * [ ' t." '- k sd; INM c.. un. 59%k ,!
. g.y k y k .
; = -
y megem; , ,W y.n = n.' w fi . 7 fg Jg Ji .-
- 1 p.<. .. , ,% . + '
p6'gt424 '
- ..$y.)'gjb c.
.n..>
.! t. .n Jr f. .
!.d.t:
$y, tM . .; ;.y % 7 5*gy tkUI 4y
- n
,vne. .1q;q. . ,,
7 vyc a:t dP w.c
- 1 1
, , z l
.c .
. c .
N y .- , g, hp/ .t l M'^ lqp,.@'jin: A,v l I;[14.")U % ty: a., e d nbit h.m., . a4 x+ $e '.:~
.., ...: , c.
.g -.. J :. k I
'I Q, ' '
p'l - 1 .u a >:..w. .. T,t. .. l L. , a f' :- ;J %m .d e- r- -
' y' t;[ Q dh%..h.l.N<5j:
_._ 7 C~ il - L'r
,g i ,,
.h r w g '. a r m, _w u r u o , , w ....../ m t-.u s
m... j _ ,g'{,l ial[..
* 'l,; l:.e : l Il n -.- . . 1 -
I .x. y -,- -, l!
,l t !! l. l; s ij
* *4*: 4
- a. ,
t . . . 1 8 $ ;
--I------~'-*
10
,/
- . t es
.g 1
,-w:
}$ , , ,
. t. > i..- 2. ,
1 tj j
'g ~) . , a '-: . .%e
'*j$'
'k . , ,
- :. e
*. A * * ' M.I .
'Mik4,Y " '
) i ; L - x Qi A .i
. 4 . !
f~ i a,l .- 5 lI \; p s
]{ ):i 9 {[, C 1 - , 1 I
-j j f:
7 bj, ' all ,. i j, i! > . ailid l C 5I ll!!!j i . in n ' 4
). .' .)., g tp' ;
if
. -> n,\ ewrQ .7g 3 3, , , ,,
1 . r ;m p g
, .s..
.x . .
- g.,- -
c c -- .___.u -
! ] .. - -- 2- aik ,
8- %,
- 1. ;
s 5 . {~ -
. . .. , a
% i .g .
~, 'w 4 's 'it. * . _ . . , _ *es ' ' * '*""#
,e o
_ ] '. l.! '! 3 'i i, d _, _ }
, l % .
-b
* ', ;iTl1l a , , .;-r;, , --</ s c, ,- .
' T. \ /
~
l ' 1
- i 4 !. L ..l r-- -A *==9 , . ,,) l_ -l '.Q,i
= 1 w[ h=,. b,'. ' -v fil v.. E I I - .*
- f I: )
i 11 ._u- :w T, r ,,,_) y 9 L _
. . . .uw . / [,'y' ) U-l= ; ;
; ;e .,3
) h. ~
yvp-ys,mpq
*t -
$^' -
g y y - r p w n: % m ~ pn. : ph: ll r m
.::n.. ..., ma r@m s i
i i c.i
'i , n
%d i I
1 , 4 j ~. . .( L. )
- l '
=Y )
]!
e 1; . i 1 T 1 . A s l* . _ - - . - m e ~ i
e F,1.7 ~.7
* '5'
.t .e4'T'.
i "J t' . r 71 3 X'"V',a'. i_ .' i_' '__ - i - I' ./_" ta f d - I 5 )
.* g
' + r j .
- z. J {.
' ~ '
l . 4
- s eh tlp qs.
F
,g ,
_ . 2 #'- I i.lb0 i -lij
) r Js--ru+ ..
./, . J.J
~
L .[ ' u
. e 'y ;g
-<- ,; '", 'W
', I * . ,$ [.
m> .,m.m' '. , r . - - f a 9 I 4 r-
-. -\- * . .
. . , * **. ; y.;*
- r. i
- f. * +
~
d. y.
! l- EBBl%
4 . rn L_ e us; -- ; -
;- , a_ a .
m-- t. g ]i , . . ... w i _ep... c !: ,1 c .. .
#. .= .
i~3~ { '
,l, t 5. l ' '
. = j '. f . '~ .h' . h.
, , ti' '
! l.
i .. .) ;
.r(er,.
-q. . . l,
,, i 31 4 -.
*' l %. iip
,l j -
s
~-
,;, l- r - ., , _
4,. lt l ' T ~, . s# .l :' h(kb{ e,. I
,; h-N I g;ppyps , .,c. .,
f pul, \
< m,Q OEht'--N"~rh'W$1mang.f}s . y. .
4., J. -- l i ,f I
*- N i 3
-\ r , 4 4 a
--( 5, lI I l --
l[ '
.( ,
' 2
~J' h- $
'y* ,. .
[^( tt j : Q
.3
,,yn.n w ,
,/---
. =
. . . - .- - , = ,n ,
l !o d, y ); )
.y , .rst A j .1 p .1 7 e .,a c a. - :-. I, a 9* I S. *( s i
[m 4 , ' %) t[ g )i , ..n. ; a a
~
% , . s.Lh h
, 2 ,
mk.' (3. " e't -S' - q-y' .k?Y > { <
)< .
.) ( - - ' '
4' k, ( f
< s
, ,. A FM O
.- qe. ,
. , .j
\:,
s a w z,,. s e (. 3> < 9-J. M.h i.., =~r e s 2 a% g
\ s,{( %s 2
}. , !
= Im - 3 -
.n -
b g. (, g O r .;;p aa
' (W'a.h -{L, -
?y,j k k , , & a
/, .; =. w 1 4 y
~,5
., r. " i b9
~% m )q ..y
>v 'J ', t p g s ' , . ' ^
yi - -
, 5 ,,
2"
, ,p
~
,' ' ij *-$,g
< - s -
w yg f4 - 3 . c, p
~
i
* .j
,4 m' ' p kkysj %>
A .
- L,
..t.
,t, s,, ,, Q - - a. g - hI.l ;*a ,
g3 ';
. P ,
. 5' gf y 3 ..- J. .J , T**
e ,, - a-- _ . ." ]&
- t ,, h. D Q}?'
], l #*
7
] * (MC } %. ,
a
.y t' c
,fA -
= Cr3 Q'i > ,
s.
, . . . g.
;,, * ~ . . * * .
TA
- h f, i. k* * =\' ,
C) 4 Un,)
.f n' '* , .# . A 6 Og '?- p '
4
- ndw s ?- n.
-" ,' l X o s Q '. C'Q
'- l u,, *4 , ,. 'w' " ' /
E
-2t Q t t ,
- h. ..+b , e o, .
I f S.- s- s
- v an , t ,. .
).
wp-,_ i .; . ' --- El.
.l
.Q ~ , --- S, s. ,
<;t n 8 -
. s /.s - .. a.
$g f.gh61 (h*: a /u \'. )g.-
y-s
$t erZ y 9 h.
r g ., , , l ., -
,,3_. , _ .
e
, m.
.a e ;. pd .t
, ya .
h, ;a ' a
, ,. ., z y en i c) -
l "1
^ '
_[_ Q , .s
~, a ,~~~~ _,
0
.. ~, , , . /m- y. . y ., . + .p -.
. .- . b~n .
u .-.n. w f n' z (mv. 2 wc w.m, .
, . w. .;nyt em e M. -.*n 9i m
. v my sv ~
- sw ee o.),p Ary,p A y e
3_~, <e-
~g c ;<
.t i ,. 9. - . , y g. erg 9, ,.s -
. m 3
9 C 4 .I >i *+ s.
<; ;3p h Fi %p.g., '
>~
OL 7yis 2t ,;
! 't' g,a. y f4' 3 ~**
p [# ' fig j apM.irj.3f.y --W a g, <, h.;< $w, i *3 a ' m1
+% A s - o* D. %, s
- 3,..
, [-]v. '?."[s- , m"J>
w, :. ,7 - \ + e
~h k .
1 4*.;fs-'4 ,,- '4,g . e4 '8*
- i
^f ..e ' ET4
> .S. -j 4
" ' y, g{- . m. k.y'f) ..-w :: ./w' g :ee .n
$W ##h '* 5 ",
xe n L A' E $, 4., ','C - n ' - v Q *., .a IU s
+
- y.a*g&
r rp ~mwy y,' (# * ' . i .w ,
, . . ++, . ra .
w -
.n
- f p, k 3 -
*UlQ 3 .' k 1 T.4 ( [ %. !8.f thy) 8,, a , '. ng4 % .
e r , a. <>. Y%., .', d.s 3 ,. ?
?g+ *pg&? If. .];.&*m ~cy .
Y v, 2 l h' yr l1 1 t N p Q &p *\ [ g [ v [ ,<*' -2 4 '?l . . .* ;: rp q.n s vJt.?p;&+&a p n%s + m -
- v. ,' m d af . p.r pu. 9 x , a,yo e a
m., g:%y:q g-. ,mw .y. s a
.otw,. -
NN #.m ii. ny$ m2 m . . . v s -
.x- a 2 qmdp.ive g.n
+C '
'A"+ '
3 wey
' f % 6+ ** 8- 0 g%Ay;y$.4 }*v+Wm?l% $ Q % C W
L% - wwma
'4 c
'[
l
'1 ., l u@
4*W
*gg-%aci:. r d%h ye%m ! &p%
- x. . o% t. 3~ - .- ' fn 9
- ne q+m w$w Y +<* cp- " t i o dd%
% f?%ghe:.% w y% ;4? % q -c.:gNo.%. - 4m%q, R*N Q {;
4@x'
. %. $.c4h*tsf.
4
- dM V ,
- t. A c.@- A
&+'s, .
l..' g ? e> ,$ . ., [ , ,f.f *ye p,T-v
%$ g i(g fYN an
.. 4 >
v c. c Q} v - A y. ., e 2
-{fr m f$NMW . %grq %'1p -i . * . :3C QM W Q a a $.
l:vy&w#%am%-}y%,g kh wyn bsx ; .x
- w, w.2 e w 4 ,,
W $a Ma . o + pw%nllm ., 0 $ % w E u; ' , v* 1 Q nL
' > p :v~.- .zw .W.,
. ~ ,x .n -
M d m.q. , wo n . + s. f. i % v ~s* . < "10, n
~
.- = ---
DETAILS
- 1. Scope of Visit An unannounced visit was made by H. S. North, Radiation Specialist and R. T. Dodds, Reactor Inspector, Region V, Division of Compliance on April 17- ,
19, 1963 to the University of California at Les Angeles Training Reactor. The inspector's visit included reviews of reactor operating logbooks, irradiation records, the minutes of the Reactor Hazards Committee meetings, material trans-fer records, personnel monitoring records, radiation survey records, and effluent monitoring records. The visit included a tour of t!se facility, inspection of changes that were being made for 100 kw operation, and observation of the reactor instrumentation while the reactor was operating at 10 kw. Personnel contacted included: Dr. T. Ricks - Director, Engineering Nuclear Reactor R. MacLain - Supervising Engineer P. Jordan - Reactor Operator, Health Physicist J. Horner - Reactor Operator, Electronic Technician D. Jones - Reactor Operator, Machinist II. Results of Visit l l A. In-pile Irradiations and Reactor Experiments l The inspectogr reviewed the reactor operating logbook to determine what in-pile irradiations have been performed. Mr. MacLain stated that the details of experimental irradiations were recorded in the experimentWr's logbooks . Experimental irradiations were performed in the reactor for under-graduate students, graduate students, other departments at the university and f'r Douglas Aircraft Corporation. The records complied with Section 2.E.(2) of Amendment 2 License No. R-71.
- 1. Water Temperature Variations l
On December 4,1962 a temperature coefficient experiment was l l n
COREGE NUCLEAR FACILITIES DIVISION
,g UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
. OF oEPARTMENT OF NUCLEAR ENGINEERING SCIENCES
~g' ,/ 102 NUCLEAR REACTOR BUILDING ENGINEERING GAINEsVILLE. FLoRioA 32611
^ " ' ^ ' '""""'""'
IE FILE COP 1 May 23, 1980 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Division of Operating Reactors Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20545 RE: Facility License R-56, Docket 50-83 Gentlemen: - We are hereby reporting a potential violation of our Technical Speci-fications, as follows: - -
- 1. Regulations: our Tech Specs . require that the Facility be operated and maintained according to written procedures. Standard Ooerating Procedures UFTR-SOP-D.4 " Radiation Protection Weekly Survey", para-graph II. A. requires that' surface contamination in the (reactor) cell be monitored by taking random swipes and recording the results on a weekly basis. .
- 2. Finding: contrary to this requirement, no surface contamination monitoring was done for the week of May 12, 1980. The survey was not performed because the operator in charge was assigned to work at another facility for the week and no established procedure for for-mally assigning the responsibility to another technician exists.
- 3. Actions to Prevent Recurrence: operators with fixed assigned res-sponsibilities are to have their responsibility re-assigned in writ-ing when they are not going to be in the reactor facility for any one week.
Please let us know if further information is required. ,. Sincerely yours, ,
,p N '
0
/j NilsJ.diaz
( /g Professor and frector of h Nuclear Facilities c.c. NRC, Region II, UFTR Subcomittee, Reactor Operators NILS J. DIAZ. DIRECTOR (904)392-1406 8006020346 g '**''""""c"*""*"'*'^c*'"na""
w
, ( l. b.
/
#- COLLEGE NUCLEAR FACILITIES' DIVISION y- 7 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA f.,) OF DEPARTMENT oF NUCL'JR ENGINEERING SCIENCES q j ENGINEERING 102 NUCLEAR REACTOR BUILDING GAINEsVILLE. FLORIDA 32611 AREA CODE 904 PHONE 3321429 Qugust7',f980 ,
Mr. James R. Miller . Standardization and Special Projects Branch Division of Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation - U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washingt'on, D.C. 20555 RE: Physical Security Plan - University of Florida Training
. . Re a c to r . . - .. . :._. .. . . .,,, _, ,
b y License .R.-56 '; Docket.10,83;h
Dear Mr. Miller:
Pursuant to the requirements of the new 10 CFR 73.67, enclosed is a re-vised and upgraded Physical Security Plan for the University of Florida Training Reactor. The plan is designed to provide physical security for a fixed site with special nuclear material of moderate strategic signifi-cance; essential elements have already been implemented. All parts of the plan will be implemented by September,21,1980 or 30 days after the plan is approved, whichever is later. Please note that this plan'is also officially submitted in partial fulfill - ment of the re-licensing documentation for the UFTR. Please let me know if further information is needed. l Sincerely yours, h' i Mis Diaz Professor an Director of Nuclear Facilities Soo? Approved by E.E. Carro)4,IJr 5 Acting Chairman Nuclear Engineering Sciences Dept. pp p //h
/
Enclosure (6 copies of the Physical Security Plan) ! NILS J. DIAZ, DIRECTOR (904)332-1406 L _ eovat sueto,uen occoarwrv,.mauarm cno suntovin
1 I e Cite as 12 NRC 528 (1980) CLI-80-37 ""## '" 8 * *"I * "# #" **** * ""* " P""# **
- competing considerations that have made the resolution of this matter w (INITED STATES OF AMERICA Protracted and difliccit. Our decision, which we explain in more detad NUOLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION below,' accepts the proposed traditional clearance program for use to grant access to or control o.cr those materials in the nuclear fuel cycle presenting COMMISSIONERS the most serious safeguards risks, and announces the agency's decision to develop and publish for comment a proposed rule for broader use John F. Ahearne, Chairman throughout the nuclear industry that embodies concepts widely advocated Victor Gilinsky by nongovernment participants in the hearing.
Joseph M. Hendrie Peter A. Bradford Background On March 17,1977 the Commission caused to be published for public in the Matter of Docket No. RM 50-7 comment a clearance rule to govern access to or control over special nuclear material by individuals in the licensed nuclear industry.2 The AUTHORITY FOR ACCESS TO ' Proposed rule provided for an access authorization program g.aded in OR CONTROL OVER SPECIAL scope of background investigation 8 and crcploying as guidelines for NUCLEAR MATERIAL November 17, 1980 granting c!carances government wide crite:ia currently in use for NRC clearances for access to information.* The coverage of the rule included The Commission concludes a rulemaking on a system of personnel licensed fuel cycle facilities, power reactors, and research reactors as well as security clearances for access to special nuclear material by individuals in transportation of special nuclear material associated with these licensed ihr licensed nuclear industry, and decides to institute the traditional , activities. It was stated that Section 16ti(2) of the Atomic Energy Act of government program for granting security clearances only with regard to formula quan:Wes of special nuclear material at fuel cycle facilities and in 1954 as amended provided authority for the promulgation of the propos rule. transit. He Commission also announces its intention (1) to develop and publish for comment a proposed rule providing guidelines for an industry- ne public expressed considerable interest in the Commission's proposa conducted clearance program for use at power reactors; and (2) to defer its In light of the number of comments and in response to specific ree,uest decision with respeci to research rcactors pending completion ora separate. ' a hearing, the Commission decided to provide a modified Icgislative ty public hearing to afTord gnater opportunity for comment and enable ongoing reiliWortotaf safeguards requirementrat such' facilities; ; expansion of those views already made known to the Commission in DECISION comment. The hearing was to be informal and " oriented toward additional i information as well as further comment on policy issues." 42 FR M703, His decision concludes a rulemaking begun over three years ago m. 64704 (1977). The scope of the hearing was "to encompass all relevant
- which the Commission has considered whether and how to provide for a system of personnel security clearances for access to special nuclear material. Security clearances were proposed in order to provide additional Erotection in the aspect of the Commission's safeguards program that T l
""h*' d*'*d*d '8P amios d the nde incifis pron &d in the natesnent d supplementa endeavors to reduce d.c r. ks that msiders as w.ll i facilitate the theft or mformation of the Federal Regisect publication of the rule we have adopicJ and whi diversion of special nuclear material for uses inimical to the common ati ched hercio ns Appendia A.s,, 45 FR 76968(November 21,19s0).
342 FR 14880(1977). defense and security. As a part of the rulemaking, the Commission 8Len unsinve clearances were to be band on inveuigative data Jenved from a Nauonal re'luested Public comment, convened a public hearing, and entertained
, ^sency Check wlule mou wasinve clearances would mjuire a fun Geld in"*64*
recommendations from its hearing board. Finally, the Comnu,ssion bal. Applicanu for both ty
.S,, so cyg r.,, jo, pes ofclearances would be considered in the light of the same
/.,'2, f M M [ g(
rw
1 issues raised by the proposed rule," and particularly seven issues identified Decision by Categories as being of particular impo.tance.s A hearing board was appointed to preside over the conduct of the The Commission has determined that requiring identic ! all licensed facilities and related transportation is not warranted. Rath 1 hearing and instructed that, when the hearing record was closed, the different clearance programs will be applied to dilTerent categories presiding officer should forward the record to the Commission without activities as follows: re'ndering any decision or making any recommendation. Subsequently, in l
- 1. At licensed fuel reprocessing plants,in the licensed use, processings the course of the hearing, the Commission decided it would be useful to l storage of formula quantities' of special nuclear material and in il have recommendations from the hearing board, and requested them. De Board submitted its Report on April 2,1979.ne Board s Report meludes a transportation by the private sector of formula quantities of speci nuc! car material, a traditional clearance program will be put in ple
- more detailed account of much of the foregoing information as well as a substantially as provided in the proposed rule.
j summary of the proceeding, recommendations on the proposed rule, and an
- 2. At power reactors licensed pursuant to 10 CFR Part 508 and faciliti, issue.by. issue analysis of the seven issues the Commission requested that . .
the hearing address. possessing only irradiated special nuclear material sub'ect J to :l The Commission appreciates the efforts of the board and, as detailed , CXCmPtion op 73.6(b)' we will not apply a program based ( below, has accepted many of the board's recommendations. kme of the traditional government clearance. Rather, we will issue for comme board's analyses and recommendations on specific issues were less
- P,roposed rule for power reactors based on the board's recommei complete than others. His appears to be because no public participants i dation that at power reactors an industry-conducted prograi chose to provide furthe~r information on those points. In such instances we meeting federal guidelines is preferable. He rule will set forth it have proceeded on the basis of the information made available to us before ,
standards for that program. Facilities possessing only irradiat< issuance of tb proposed rule or subsequently by our staff.' nuclear material subject to the exemption of 73.6(b) will be exemj from this rule as well. ine se,en issues are.
- 3. A final decision has not been made on how to proceed at non-pow <
- l. ne need for the proposed clearance rule in each of the licensed activities covered by ~
reactoN[ wit}Ues~pdt'o liael stored for them. He Commissio th* Pr Posed rule. I has determined that it should await compledo of a separate ongoir
- 2. He identification and advantages / disadvantages of alternative programs. such as psycteolo5 i cal testing administeru! by ticensees under standards estabtished by the review of total safeguards requirements ade9ua9 at such facilitic Comnussion, and alternative safeguards measures not involving investigation or testing of ge wigg enlarge on each of these separate decisions in turn. Ilowever, a y hcensee employees such as surveillance and access controls, a general principle the Commission endeavored to minimize the extensia
. 3. ne impact of the proposed rule on manpower requirements and costs during planned fg n en run security clearance progr:tms into the p4vate sector. W 1 ouuges at power reactors. c neluded that we should apply a clearance rule only to those activitic r .
- 4. He suitability and relevance of 10 CFR Part 10 derogatory information categories f '
where malevolent actions by an insider or insiders could clearly result in matenal acccu authoruation. threat to the common defense and security. . ! $. De catent to which a cicarance program should be credited isward meeting the I. Imposition of a Traditional Government Clearance Program at Fuel Cycia performance requirement of 10 CFR 73.5$ and proposed 10 CFR 73.20 (42 FR 34312). Facihties and for Certain Persons involved in Transportation of SP*cial and p.ruculasly toward meeting the postulated threat ofinternal conspiracy. Nuclear Material (SNM)
- 6. He desirability of applying the rule to university research and training reactors subject to 10 CFR Pan 73.
"* Formula quantily" means strategic special nuclear material in any combination in of 5,000 grams or more compused by the formula provided in 10 CFR 73.2(bb).
- 7. Impact of the proposed clearance program on transpntation of special nuclear
*Eacept for the Fort St. Vrain facility, which because its fuel contains highly ennched uranius material Presents special consideration.
. Staff analyses and norwally coafidential legal enemoranda from the offices of the Eaccutive 'Ihis caemption caciudes frosa other safeguards requirements special nuclear nuscrial m I' Legal Director and General Counsel have been provided to all panicipants on the service list readily separable from other radioactive material and which has a total casernal radiation dos mth opportunity for coanment. De staff apers P that were available to the Board included late in excess of 100 rems per hout at a dis %cc of 3 feet. as the Comminion has determinci t
informanon on allissues specifically raised in the notice of hearing. that a threat of theft or diversion of such materialis minhnal. l
The Commission decided to institute at this time the traditic,nal percentage of persons in transportation as to provide a signer nt extensi government clearance program at and only at fuel cycle facilities possessing of govemment clearances into that segment of the private sector. To t formul.: quantities of SNM and for transportation of those certain extent it does introduce this factor into a new segment of the priva quantities of SNM. It, so doing we have declined to nome extent to accept economy, we determine that it is warranted because of the particulh the recommendation of the ficaring Board as it pertains to fuel cycle vulnerability of SNM in transport to theft and diversion. facilities and transportation. As best we read the Board's recommendations it was neutral or negative about the need for the proposed rule, preferred a
'; Decision to Adopt the Traditional Government Program rule incorporating psychological screening and recommended especially On the basis of the record before it the Ilearing Board recommended ai against the continued use of,some of the Part 10 criteria.
industry-run personnel clearance program and if, notwithstanding, governmental run program was selected, that the criteria to be employed . Need at Fuel Cycle Faci!ities revised to climinate certain questionable criteria.
- With regard to need for a rule, several observations should be made.
We have rejected these aspects of the Board recommendation for fu First, we note that the hearing did not ever really focus on the need issue as it concerned fuel facilities. This was evidenced by the Board's declining to cycle facilities and transportation because we believe that adoption of traditional clearance program is the most reasonable course at this time. 4 recommend on whether an access program was needed at fuel cycle , facilitiesp }{owever,it is well recognized that fuel cycle facihties generally traditional program is ready, tested, consistent with, clearances alrea required, and is designed to provide an assurance ofindividual trustw possess formula quantities of special nuclear material and that such iness and celiability, which is in the final analysis the assurance that we no i material when misused could endanger the coir. mon defense and security. j seek. On the other hand, the program recommended by the Board wouf Furthermore, the Commission has determined that, while no proof can be first need to be designed and issued for public comment. Moreover, adduced that theft or sabotage will take place in the future, on the basis of have chosen to develop for power reactors the type of program recommen past events a credible danger of insider malfeasance may be assumed to
- ed by the Board. We will have an opportunity to observe the opera exist. And a significant part of our safeguards program already in place is the specific program that is adopted and, ifexperience indicates that such based on the Commission's concerns related to insider harm.H A clearance program is more effective than the traditional program, we can subseques
' rule will increase our required level orprotection against such threats, i ly change the requiicments for fuel facilities or transportation.
Because DOE clearances and NRC cicarances for classified information
. It is with some chagrin that we conclude that the immediate availabili:
are alresdy in force in this category of facilities, the institution of a I of the traditional clearance program need be a criterion of decisio! requirement for an NRC material access clearance will net constitute a Ilowever, we embarked on this t*uttter years ago and we are uneasy thI significant extension into the private sector. fuel facilities and transportation of SNM have so long gone without id j added protection of a clearance program. We face a situation today who Need in Transiertation the only rule that is ready for adaption is the traditional rule. While this For the same reasons, SNM in transit requires protection and further, l not alone a sufficient reason for its adoption, it is a factor that.we hat the very fact that it is being transported makes it particularly vulnerable.n taken into account. It is therefore important to provide the additional protection of a clearance program to drivers of motor vehicles, pilots of aircraft, and ' hose who escort The widespread use throughout the government of the type of prograj i we institute is another factor we weigh more heavily than did the lleari ' or schedule road, rail, air or sea shipments transporting formula quantities Board. For the same reasons we are less troubled than was the Board by t. of special nuc! car material. Such a requirement would not involve so large a criteria's lack of specific focus on acces to material. In this area we are
*we beheve it is fair to usume that chief among the reasons the hearing tacked focus on the dealing with mathematical or scientific certainties? We are seekin8 issue of need for a rule at fuel cycle facihties was the general acceptance of the proposition that assurance of reliability and trustworthiness so that we may be confide the consequences or malevolcat actions by an insider or insiders at a ruel cycle racihty could be w great a4 to wanent strong measures to reduce the hkchhood of malevolent action. 'rThe factual compcnent of psychological testing is less clear. Nonetheless, we are insiisutin(
"See e g.10 CFR 73.la. program that will incorporate psychological testing at power reactors. and the results will uBoard's Report p. 85. transferahic to fuel facilitics and other projects if warranted.
_ .____- __ =. _ _ .. - - - - - that the common defense and security is protected. We find it reasonabtr. malefactors and there is some reason to believe that piecemeal resision o for this purpose to accept a government-wide and long-tested program the government-wide criteria is not d:sirabte.'* Our expectations were tha developed to provide those assurances. And we also give weighty consider-other agencies of the government more intimately concerned with thew ation to the fact that DOE and DOD clearances of the same type se matters and with greater expertise would have by now completed thef already in use in these facilities so that consistency will be served by our review and revised as necessary the government's criteria." This has no adoption of the traditional prograrn. Avoidance of requiring redundant happened as expeditiously as we had hoped. Ilowever, in that we havi intrusive clearance procedures will be achieved along with the accompany- decided to limit so stringently the area of application of the traditiona ing cost savings for government and industry. clearance program, we believe more is to be lost by partial revisions than is to be gained. Our maintenance of the traditional program will penoit the Questionable Criteria casy transferability of clearances used for in DOE and DOD programs an( The Commission believes that the hearing did not produce a record should do much to reduce potentially redundant invasions of privacy as adequate to cause it to a!!u the government-wide criteria used in clearance ' well as costs. programs. Such a program provides "a total package ofinformation [to] be '
- 2. Industry-Conducted Program at Power Reactors taken and evaluated to determine the trustworthiness and reliability, uability, of the person.**H It relies on a sensitive common sense application The Commission has decided that because a different set of circum.
of the criteria to avoid ' unfairness *s. For example, one of the most actively , stances obtains with regard to power reactors - notable among them tN contested criteria is 10 CFR 10. lib (a) which considers information of absence of a threat related to theft of weapons grade nuclear material -i homosexual activity to be derogatwy information. It has been pointed out will adopt for them the resolution of the hearing board (Report of the that a chief reason given for inclusion of this criterion is the susceptibility to Board, p. 60, et seg. ). To do so will clearly satisfy the overwheiming blackmail of the person involved in this activity.n Sensitive application of . majority of participants in the proceeding. this criterion might give it no weight where the applicant was an open or The Board-recommended program would involve a limited backgrount avowed homosexual in a community accepting of this behavior. On the investigation including employment history and criminal history. It wouk other hand the secret homosexual who believes that he stands to suffer from not support investigation into constitutionally protected areas of associa. a loss of secrecy might be susceptible to blackmail attempts that could tion and belief. A psychological screening program and a system foi t;ratermine his trustworthiness. That possibility, while not controlling, could continued observation by supervisors would be required. Procedures foi in our view be a legitimate concern in evaluating whether or not to grant a appeals and privacy protections will also be provided. clearance. The objective ofinquiry of any psychological screening to be required is Similarly, derogatory criteria based on spousal attributes has been the detection of emotional instability that would serve as a predictor e criticized as having no relationship to an applicant's reliability to handle unreliability. We specifically do not intend to require or to authorize or ir special nuclear material as opposed to classified information; however, it is any way anticipate probing of candidates for deternnnation of theii not clear that pressures from a spouse would be less influential in causing a i person to violate his trust relative to material access than to classified information. Information in this area, like all potentially derogatory "As revealed by the memoranda from both our legal offices subausted for the record, the Comnussaos beheves that it has authority to estabh.h its own criteria and that at need na Information, raises a flag that requires the adjudicator to make a j.udgment foDow criteria enabhabed by the Department of Energy. We also are of the view the du whether this information in context is meaningftilly related to an evaluation record supports the staffin its assertion that it considered alternative critena. tJafortunaiety of the APPli cant's trustworthiness and reliability. ihe modet or the potential .hief or saboteur is elusive and therefore desisa of a screes in sum, nothing on the record has convinced us that the deletion of some particulanzed to catch only such a maneracier has not been achieved. We are forced so rely os a scheme desigacd to catch the dissoyal, untrustworthy and unseliable, counting on the criteria will create a more sensitive screen to separate out potential unitivity of those admininering the program to ensure that a acaus esists between the disloyalty, untrustworthiness and unretsability of such a person and security of special nucleaa
" Transcript. p. 76 (Staff witnesses).
f "Wntten tenimony of Dr. Franklin E. Kemeny, p. 3. niena were written in a different generation and the tanguage is somewhat anachronis. tic and therefore perhaps more oficasive on its face than need be the case.
.~
political or religious beliefs or other matters protected by the First Amendment. Dissenting views of Commissioner Bradford and separate views ( Chairman Ahearne and Commissioners Gilinsky and llendrie are attacQf , The Board particularly expressed its concern regarding the paucity of it is so ORDERED. views of organized labor about clearance programs such as the Board recommended r-rogram vis-a-vis individual privacy. (See Board's Report p. For the Commission
- 62 and note). Our decision to issue the regulations incorporating the Board's recommendation es a proposed rule for public comment will provide a new opportunity for labor and others to comment on this and SAMUEL J. CillLK other issues.The record of decision for the new rule willinclude,in addition Secretary of the Commission to any comments received, the l{ caring Board's Report as it relates to Dated at Washington, D.C.
power reactors and the secord in that regard on which the Board relied. this 17th day of November,1980. 3.J Research Reactors *This opinion memorializes a decision made by a three-to-twe vote of the r%--A - June 24,1980. Chairman Ahearne and Commissioners Kennedy and Hendrie voted for rule; Comminioners Gdinsky and Bradford voted against the rule. He Commission has determined to defer its decision with respect to research reactors pending compl: tion of separate ongoing review of total safeguards requirements, adequaq at such facilities. It does so fully , conscious that at the very few rewarch reactors handling formula quantities of SNM the same standard ofcaution that we are applying elsewhere in the commercial nuclear community will not apply at this time. Our delay recognizes that a requirement of clearances would be a significantly more drastic step with regard to university and research programs than at fuel cycle facilities. It might preclude altogether the survival of these programs. His is true in large measure because of the difficulty of meshing academic plans for research participation of one or two terms' duration with the time required to process clearances. In :ontrast, the greater stability of the employee population of the nuclear industry enabies us to apply the rule without drastic effect by allowing all those workers in the existing work force who apply for clearances to conticue working pending a decision. . And in any event, such clearances are already required in the afTected industry whereas only in rare instances do members of the academic , j community possess security clearances. l We believe it is reasonable to await completion of our stalTs evaluation I of total safeguards protection at research reactors. i l
*Ihe rule we anticipate will not require iuuance under the authoney of 161i(2). Its issuance there'ere is not dependent on the resolution of the legal dispute over the applicabdity of that secu,ri to power reactors.
gitc I (
- 8 O, UNITED STATES
!4 % NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '[- ; ,E W SSHINGTON D. C. 20555 7
pl JUN 2 Tz81 p
#yr Docket No.: 50-83 /
Dr. Nils J. Diaz Professor & Directer of Nuclear Facilities Department of Nuclear Engineering University of Florida 102 Nuclear Sciences Building Gainesville, Florida 32611
Dear Dr. Diaz:
Sy letter dated Adgust 7,1980 as supplemented by letter dated April 27, 1981, you submitted a revision of the University of Florida Phy.:! cal Security Plan for your Argonaut reactor, License No. R-56. We have revhwed the submittals and have concluded that the revision meets the requirements _of.10 CFR 73.67_ . for the . protection of special nuclecr material of moderate strategic signifi-i cance; Since the current NRC* approved physical security plan should properly be reflected in the license authorization for your facility, we are herewitn issuing Amendment No.12 to Facility License No. R-56 which identifies your currently approved physical security plan. Changes which would not decrease the effectiveness 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 l approval shculd be submitted and identified as license amendment requests. Based on the fact that this license amendment applies to the physical security-plan and incorporates into the license the latest requirements of your updated physical security plan, we have concluded that: (1) the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the - probability or consequence of accidents previously considered, does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, and, therefore, does not involve a significant hazards consider-
, ation; (27'there is reasonable assur:nce that the health and' safety of the public will not be endangered by this acticn; and (3) such activities will be condJcted 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.
g-g&1Y ~
. :q
[_~ ~ .5 e/ - t
' I I
2 IS8I Dr. Nils J. Diaz 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 ection is not one of those covered by 10 CFR 51.5(a) or (b). Having made these determinations, we have further concluded that, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), an environmental impact statement 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 University of Florida Argonaut 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 issu6nce of this amendment. Sincerely, .
.f f .f- l- & ; t
.- , James R. Miller, Chief -
/ Standardization and Special Projects Branch Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
Amendment No.12 cc w/ enclosure: See next page bd. J
. ' 7;
.'7_ --;
75
f u%g , I J, UNITED STATES
- y. gg NUCLEAR REGLILATORY COMMISSION
, g, -
p E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%...a;i ..
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA DOCXET NO.: 50-83 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPER4 TING LICENSE Amendment No.12 License No. R-56
- 1. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission) has found that:
A. The facility will operate in conformity with the provisions of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; B. There is reasonable assurance (i) that the activities authorized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be
' conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; C. The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; D. The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10 CFR Part 51 of the Commission's regulations and all applicable requirements have been satisfied; and E. Publication of notice of this amendment is not required since it does not involve a significant hazards consideration nor amendment of a license of the type described in 10 CFR Section 2.106(a)(2).
) 2. Accordingly, Facility Operating License No. R-56 is hereby amended by l adding paragraph 2.C.(3), as follows: 2.C.(3) Physical Security Plan The licensee shall maintain and fully implement all provisions of the Commission's approved physical security plan, including amendments and changes made pursuant to the authority of 10 CFR 50.54(p). The approved security l plan consists of documents withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790, entitled " Physical Security Plan for the University of Florida Training Reactor" dated August 4,1980, submitted by letter dated August 7,1980, as revised by letter dated April 27, 1981. l ' s
* ~A
- 73
',-. . f JUN 2 1981
- 2-
- 3. The license amendment is effective 30 days from the date of its issuance.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULAT,ORY . COMMISSION
. .V .-
; .J-
- c.. ,
- James R. Miller, Chief 4
' Standardization and Special Projects Branch Division of Licensing i
Date of Issuance: June 2,1981 0 9 I e o e 1 l 5 e l e, e a
.e
-- . . . ._7 1
. .- - . _ _ e r w -
--. - -_ -, .--.w.- %,--- . - - - - - -- -- _ _ _ . - - , ,,.w - . %--
y ( ,e6. s - UNIVERSITY OF WASillNGTON SEATTLE,WASil!NGTON 95 e College of ingineering Departonent of .Vuclear Engineering 24 July 1981 Docket No. 50-139 Mr. Robert L. Tedesco .p
/(k Y $Qh r-Q/
/ J,.s.'/
Assistant Director for Licensing k) /'S Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
h((.[O'~
5-I h-Washington, D.C. 20555 p Sgg g g $3P osa $ 9.h dre
Dear Mr. Tedesco:
\{4 S In response to your letter of June l' jour comments in the enclosure, the modified version of our .~o Security Plan and responses to your coments are enclosed. -
The enclosures contain infonnation of the type specified in 10CFR2.790 (d) and should be withheld from public disclosure. Sincerely yours, ir At* /^ 4 S William S. Chalk Director Nuclear Reactor WSC:mt Enclosures N 88k 5n f 07500192_B10724 Renm. Hall, BF-10 / Telethone: (206) lU-27.4 P OCK 05000139 F PDR
.a
<M A -
t . . i. UNIVERSITY OF WASlil.':GTON sE ATT L E. WASHINt' TON 'ssi a (c!kgr of Enginuring Defortment of .%chcr Enginerring August 11, 1981 Docket No. 50-139 Mr. William Patch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Physical Security Mail Stop SS-881 Washington, DC 20555
Dear Mr. Patch:
In response to your telephone call of August 10, 1981 the statement on the following page is to be included as part of our security plan. The enclosure contains information of the type specified in 10CTR2.790(d) and should be withheld from public disclosure. Sincerely yours, i C4 b ?! & y - William S. Chalk Director Nuclear Reactor WSC:1k Enclosure 0C000 /39 bo3P c2 a.// 7 / 1 .
- - e * =
l
- l
/r
/-Q . .5 l
*fo g-[ * . G =
l Q 2
- l. v s --
1 . -
, c "ooY g n <. .. a .? : - 5 ,
(3, ,, v.s. :g~e., - -- . . . . .
;j
\h .
N"'" * :.D..& " " * " '7 "
~
m c6 108 Jo=262 ADoCK etoein' osooosa, j PDR _] _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ y
~}}