ML20055F914
| ML20055F914 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000054 |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1990 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055F912 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9007190357 | |
| Download: ML20055F914 (2) | |
Text
-
J*
,.*[*
,[
UNITED STATES 4
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a
i
- WASHINGTON, D. C. 20666 I
5 5
..g..
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 26 TO-l FACILITY'0PERATING LICENSE NO. R-81 CINTICHEM, INC.
i DOCKET NO. 50-54 a
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Onkpril4,1990,Cintichem,Inc.(thelicensee)announcedthattheywere going to close and decommission the company's five-megawatt nuclear research reactor used for the production of isotopes. The reactor has now been defueled 3
and the fuel elements are stored in storage racks within the reactor pool. On June 19, 1990, the licensee requested that their license be amended to delete certain Technical Specifications (TS) dealing with surveillance requirements, i
since these cannot be done or are unnecessary. On June 28, 1990 in a.telecon=
between T.S. Michaels (NRC) and W.G. Ruzicka (Cintichem), the licensee agreed.
to modify his request of Juw 19, 1990. The licensee's request has now been modif 4d to stipulate that certain surveillance requirements are not applicable-i L
prov @ d the reactor is defueled, but if the reactor is refueled they will be l
applicable.
2.0 EVALVATION Since the reactor is presently defueled it will be' impossible to meet certain 4
TS requirements. TS requirements such as a channel calibration of each h
measuring and safety channel (Section 4.1), the reactivity worth of each control rod,)the reactivity worth of an experiment,' auging of rods.
(Section4.2 scram times, channel tests and checks Section4.3)andflux d14tribution of the core-(Section 4.10) are meaningless and in many cases impossible to perform while the reactor is defueled and, therefore, can be deleted. However, even though the licensee does not expect to refuel the core, since the licensee.is developing decommissioning-plans, the staff has. modified-L'
.the licensee's request of June 19, 1990 to permit the elimination of these L
requirements only when the reactor is defueled.. If for any reasor, the reactor is refueled, a highly unlikely circumstance, then all these tests must be performed before restart of the reactor.
In the case of TS 4.8, the pH and specific resistance of the pool water is j
determined each week. The licensee wants to modify this TS to say that the present measurements will be made each week, whenever the pool contains reactor
. fuel. The licensee is planning to ship the fuel as soon as arrangements can be made and has introduced this modification so that this surveillance requirement can be eliminated after the fuel is removed. The pH and conductivity measure-1 9007190337 900717 PDR ADOCK 05000054 i'
P PDC
2 iaents are useful to detect fuel corrosion. With no fuel in the pool the need toperformthismeasurementisnegatedandtherefore,thestafffipdsthisTS modification acceptable, y
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
l l
This anendment involves changes in the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in inspection and surveillance requirements. The staff has determined that the i
amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in.the types, of. any effluents that may be released offsite, and there L
is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation L
exposure. The staff has also determined that this amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9).
Pursuantto10CFR51.22(b),noEnvironmentalIm>actStatementorEnvironmental Assessment need be prepared in connection with t1e issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has 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 evaluated, or create the possibility of a new or different kind of eccident from any accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment dces not involve a significant hazards consideration (2)there isreasonableassurancethatthehealthandsafetyofthepublicwIllnotbe endangered by the proposed activities, 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 the I
health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: -T. S. Michaels Datap: July 17,1990 m
l-l 1
l 4
i
.