ML20055J297
| ML20055J297 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000025 |
| Issue date: | 07/30/1990 |
| From: | Horn M NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20055J292 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9008020065 | |
| Download: ML20055J297 (2) | |
Text
-
- p atog b
=b UNITED STATES
'"'[f g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'5 j
WASHINGTON, D, c. 20$s5
\\...../
JUL 3 01990 DOCKET N0:
70-25 i
LICENSEE:
Rocketdyne Division Rockwel? International Corporation Canoga Park, California
SUBJECT:
SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT FOR AMENDMENT REQUEST DATED JUNE 14, 1990, RE EXEMPTION FOR RADIOLOGICAL CONTINGENCY' PLAN (RCP)
Background
By letter dated June 14, 1990, Rocketdyne requested an exemption from the emergency plan requirements of 10 CFR 70.22(1), the criticality alarm i
requirements of.10 CFR 70.24, and requirements relating-to criticality control in Part I of:the license.
Rocketdyne also requested exemptions regarding the SNH Control and Accountability Plan, Physical Security Plan, and physical protection of SNM in transit, which will be handled by the Division of 1
S Safeguards.
Discussion y
To possess enriched uranium or plutonium, each applicant is required by.10'.CFR 70.22(i) to submit an emergency plan if "a criticality alarm. system is required, uranium hexafluoride in excess of 50 kilograms in a single container or 1,000 kilograms total, or in excess of 2 curies of plutonium in: unsealed form or on foils or plated sources." Because of Rocketdyne's possession: limit of 400 grams
. i~
~
of special nuclear material, it is not subject to the requirements' fof a; criticality alarm system (see discussion below).
Additionally, the company does not possess uranium hexafluorido. -Rocketdyne states-.that the Pu contamination is less than 30 mci.
The Region V Principal Inspector agreed that 30 mci was a reasonable estimate of the remaining Pu contamination..Rocketdyne's possession limit allows the company to have up to 400 grams of specici nuclear material in the form of contamination.
However, because Rocketdyne is only authorized to conduct activities related to dacommissioning and-the actual possession-limit is well below.2 curies of plutonium, the staff agrees that Rocketdyne does not need to maintain the RCP.
Rocketdyne does.'not need a specific exemption frem 10 CFR 70.22(1) because the company has not filed for renewal after the April 7,1990, effective date of the regulation.
However, since Rocketdyne is required by License Condition 24 to maintain its RCP dated July 25, 1988, and
)
revision dated May 19, 1989, this condition'should be deleted from the license.
Rocketdyne submitted a revised RCP on December 22, 1989, which has not been incorporated into the license.
No action will be taken on this revision since it is superseded by this-request.
Additionally, Chapter 8 of the' license application regarding the RCP should be deleted.
Therefore, the staff recommends that Condition 9 be revised as follows:
a 020063 900730 C
ADOCK 07000023 PDC i
1 j
JUL 3 01990 1
Rocketdyne' Division
'2 i
l I
9.
Authorized use:
For use_in accordance with statements, representations, I
and conditions contained in_Part I, except Chapter 8, of the licensee's application dated August 20, 1982, and supplements dated October 29 and December 17,' 1982; March 2, March 7, May 29, and June 12, 1984; September 22, 1987; December 19, 1988; and January 26 and November 2, l;
1989.
Rocketdyne will continue to maintain its Master Emergency Plan,- which includes procedures to respond to all-industrial accidents.
Rocketdyne also requested an exe.nption from the criticality alarm requirements l
of 10 CFR 70.24.
Because of Rccketdyne's 400 gram possession limit and the j
fact that they do not have mc.ssive moderators or reflectors, they are not subject to this requirement.
Therefore, Rocketdyne does not need a spet.ific exemption.
Rocketdyne also requested that all requirements relating to criticality control 1
that are established in Part I of the-license be deleted.
This aspect of the l
request is still under staff review, therafore, no action vill be taken at this -
l-time.
If there are specific requiremar.t> kocketd;> would like the staff to consider in the interim, an amendment request (in t;.e form of revised pages) should be submitted listing the specific requirements to be deleted from the
- license, l
Conclusion / Recommendation The staff has determined that Rocketdyne does not need to maintain its RCP.
Therefore, the staff recommends-that License Condition 24 be deleted to remove l
the requirement for an RCP and Condition 9 be revised to delete Chapter 8 from j-the 1icense.
The Region V Principal Inspector has no objection to the proposed action.
l arou,isiped er Herri Horn Uranium Fuel.Section Fuel Cycle Safety Branch Division of-Industrial and Medica 1' Nuclear Safety,-NMSS Approved by:
OrpriW 5pd Br George H. Bidinger, Section Leader MH/7025 ROCKETDYNE SER AMD 6 0FC:IMUF:s IMUF:
IMUF g g ____________________,,,_,_,_
w NAME:MH rn:mh:
VL arpe:
GHBidinger:
DATE:7/N/90:'
7/[/90:
7/Pf/90:
0FFICIAL. RECORD COPY a
. - -