ML20133K326
| ML20133K326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | General Atomics |
| Issue date: | 10/17/1985 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20133K322 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8510210187 | |
| Download: ML20133K326 (2) | |
Text
. pa an.q'o,),
UNITED SYATES
[
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION O
-p WASHINGTON, D C. 20555
~s...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 35 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-67 GA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-163 Introduction By letters dated Auoust 26 and September 24, 1985, the licensee, GA Technologies, E-
-.Inc. (GA) requ'ested'an amendment to Operating License R-67 for its TpIGA Mark F non-power reactor. The requested amendment would permit the licenseF to substitute portable radiation detectors for certain reactor room radiation monitors during temporary disruption of operation of permanent detectors for the purposes of calibration or naintenance. Additionally, the requested amendnent would pemit bypassing an automatic reactor scram function of the reactor room continuous air monitor and substituting a manual scram requirement during a scram test or maintenance. The reason for the request is that the licensee is currently performing an experimental program involving incore fueled components that do or may require continuous irradiation for several months. The requested amendment does not decrease the reouired frequency of
~
scram tests or calibrations of the radiation instruments, yet provides the opportunity for the licensee to perform more frequent instrument calibrations and scram tests without shutting down the reactor than under the current Technical Specifications.
Evaluation-The current Technical Specifications require certain operable radiation monitors while the reactor is in operation. Currently, a portable detector ~
with eierm capability may be substituted temporarily for the pemanent area radiation monitor during its calibration or maintenance. However, there is no such provision for the continuous air monitor for airborne radioactivity.
The licensee has requested that the same' provision for temporary detectors with alarm capability be allowed for the air monitor. Under the current Technica's Specifications, the licensee might operate.for several months since the most recent calibration or scram test. Under the amended Technical Specification, the licensee could check calibration or test the scram setting at more frequent intervals without interrupting reactor operation.
This would increase assurance that the air monitor's calibration is correct at all times of reactor operation. Additionally the amendment would permit continuing reactor operation in the event the air monitor required maintenance during an extended irradiation. The opportunity to perform such maintenance could also increase assurance of correct and reliable operation of the radiation detectors. The amendment would require that portable equivalent detectors with alarms, or observable by the reactor operators, would be used tempora rily.
8510210187 851017 PDR ADOCK 05000163 P
-P-The staff has determined that the use of rertable detectors in this way would not sienificantly decrease the safety of operation, and the increised assurance of reliability of the permanent detectces night increase safety.
Therefore, the staf' concludes that this change in the Technical Specifications would cause no siqnificant decrease in safety.
-The requested change to the Technical Specifications authorizing a temporary bypass of the automatic reactor scram initiated by the continuous air monitor and the substitution of a ranual scram if conparable radiation conditions develop provides the operator with comparable information and control of the release of redioactivity. The staff has determined that the licensee's provisions for protective action in the case of malfunction of incore experiner+s are su'ficiently reliable and timely that there is reasonable assurance of no significant decrease in the level o# protection of the health and safety of the public.
n-
' Environmental Consideration i
This amendnent involves changes in the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 70 j
and changes in inspection and surveillance requirerents. The staff has l
j determined that the amendrent involves no significant hazards consideration fas discussed below), there is no signi#icant change in tha types or sianifi-cant increase in the annunts of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, this amendrent reets the eligibility criteria for catecorical exclusion ~ set forth in 10 CFR 51.??(c)(9). Pursuant 1
to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environnental inoact statement or environmental assessment need he prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
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, does not creath the possibility of a new or diffarent kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant reduction in a safety rargin, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, will not be endangered by the croposed activities, and (3) y of the public (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safetsuch activities will be conducted in compliance with the Cormission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security er the.the health and sa'ety nf the public.
Principal Contributor: Robert E. Carter t
Dated: Auqust P2, 1985 r
- -. -. -,,