ML20136G162

Requests Written Responses to Encl Questions by 851209 to Continue Evaluation of L-77 Research Reactor Decommissioning Plan

ML20136G162
Person / Time
Site:	05000433
Issue date:	11/15/1985
From:	Thomas C Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Profio A CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, SANTA BARBARA, CA
References
NUDOCS 8511220271
Download: ML20136G162 (4)

Text

,F November 15, 1985 Docket No. 50-433 Dr. A. E. Proff o Nuclear Reactor Director Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, U.C.S.B. L-77 RESEARCH REACTOR DECOMMISSIONING PLAN We are continuing our review of the Decommissioning Plan that has been submitted in support of your application for authorization to decomission your L-77 research reactor. Since our first request for additional information, the Region V Office has submitted several questions for which we require answers. You are requested to provide written responses to the enclosed questions no later than December 9, 1985. Following receipt of this information, we will continue our evaluation of your plans for decomissioning. If you have any questions, please contact Harold Bernard, our Project Manager for your facility, at (301) 492-9799.

Sincerely, Original signed by Cecil 0. Thomas, Chief Standardization and Special Projects Branch Division of Licensing cc: See next page DISTRIBUTION: ~

1M

'NRC PDR

DCS SSPB Reading NSIC PAnderson es rnard 5 0$d$$4 HBerkow PDR CThomas Region V SBlock DLtSSPB D: PB DLi5pB D: D S PAnd4rson:ac a HBe ard He s

///85 n/IC/85 /85 I//p,/85 II/ /%

o UNITED STATES g

2[ o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

(; p WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

%.....* November 15, 1985 Docket No. 50-433 ,

Dr. A. E. Profio Nuclear Reactor Director Department of Chemical and Nuclear Engineering University of California, Santa Barbara Santa Barbara, California 93106

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, U.C.S.B. L-77 RESEARCH REACTOR DEC0Pt!ISSIONING PLAN i We are continuing our review of the Decomissioning Plan that has been submitted in support of your application for authorization to decommission your L-77 research reactor. Since our first request for additional information, the Region V Office has submitted several questions for which we require answers. You are requested to provide written responses to the i enclosed questions no later than December 9, 1985. Following receipt of this information, we will continue our evaluation of your plans for decomissioning. If you have any questions, please contact Harold Bernard, our Project Manager for your facility, at (301) 492-9799.

Sincerely, i

0 w

'! Cecil 0. Thomas, Chief I Standardization and Special Projects Branch Division of Licensing cc: See next page

l University of California at Docket No. 50-433 Santa Barbara cc: California Departr.ent of Health i ATTN: Chief Environmental

, Radiation Control Unit l Radiologic Health Section 4 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency '

i Region IX Office

! ATTN: EIS CGCFDINATOR <

) 215 Freemont Street '

l San Francisco, California 94111 Chief, Energy Systems Analyses Branch (AW-459)

!, Office of Radiation Programs  ;

U. S. Environmental Protection Agency -

i! Room 645, East Tower

!: 401 M Street, S.P.

Washington, D. C. 20460 i

Mayor

! City of Santa Barbara 1 1500 Warburton Avenue Santa Barbara, California 95050 Director

i. Energy Facilities Siting Division 4

j Energy Resources Conservation i i ,

and Development Commission iI 1516 - 9th Street

& Sacramento, California 95814 .

Attorney General i j

555 Capitol Mall l Sacramento, California 95814 i

I t

i i

l

1 Additional Questions to U. C. Santa Barbara '

l Regarding The Decomissioning Plan of the L-77 Research Reactor  ;

\ '

1. Whowillconducttheanalysisoftheshie}dingwaterandwhatanalytical

. method will be used? Will analysis for H be included?

2. Throughout the plan statements are made that certain records (e.g.,

calibration records, training records) will be kept by the f i contractor. UCSB management has the responsibility for compliance i

with all requirements and commitments. Will copies of all records "

necessary to demonstrate compliance with regulatory requirements and l commitments made in the Decomissioning Plan be available at the  ;

j UCSB facility?

... 3. Section 2.1, Radiation Protection Program, states that the radiation I j protection program to be used for this decomissioning project is an 4 extension of the program used by the contractor. Will the UCSB  :

! management review this program to assure compliance and consistency l with UCSB's license? Will the' extent and conclusions of this review  :

i be documented? Will the records documenting the implementation of the- l j' radiation protection program be maintained at the UCSB facility?

(

i*~ The residual surface contamination criteria presented in Section 7.0,

4.

j Technical and Environmental Specifications, is not fully consistent

'; with the guidance provided in Regulatory Guide 1.86. Provide the basis for this proposed deviation, or include Table I of Regulatory i Guide 1.86 in Section 7 of the Decomissioning Plan. The reference to the residual ambient radiation does not specify a distance. This l

, should read 5 pr/hr above background at one meter from any surface.

i 5. The sodium iodide scintillator's response is very dependent on the i, energy of the incoming radiation. It is therefore not possible to

, . detemine the ambient radiation exposure rate using this instrument.

, Specify the instrument (s) and methcdology that will be used when l

! detemining compliance with the 5 pr/hr residual gama exposure rate at- l i one meter. ,

, t The NRC staff will use Reuter-Stokes PIC's to verify the residual i game exposure rates at one meter during our Termination Radiation j Survey. These detectors will be used to detemine compliance with  ;

4 your Decomissioning Plan.  ;

2 2

! 6. Your method of surveying Im from every 9m in your proposed  ;

1 Temination Radiation Survey Plan may not be adequate. During the  !'

! NRC's Temination Radiation Survey, different areas than those t

yoganalyzedmightbesurveyed. Also, more than one area within any i 9m area might be surveyed. Please revise your Temination Radiation  ;

l Survey Plan to accomodate these considerations. [

! f i  !

i I