ML20154E550

Advises That 740821 Security Plan & 740820 Amend Meet Requirements of 10CFR50.34(c) & 10CFR73.40 & Acceptable, Provided Licensee Inventory of SNM Does Not Equal or Exceed Formula Quantity Specified in 10CFR73.1

ML20154E550
Person / Time
Site:	05000142
Issue date:	11/19/1974
From:	Houston R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Lear G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20154E537	List: ML20154E534 ML20154E550 ML20154E560 ML20154E565 ML20154E570 ML20154E574 ML20154E585
References
FOIA-85-196 NUDOCS 8805200248
Download: ML20154E550 (4)

Text

32.

/'

p UNITED STATES

&f-

?

ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION

, g' y !s7p wasmucros, o.c. um

%g Doc e No. 50-142 November 19, 1974 -

i

~

George E. Lear, Chief, ORB-3, L' RESPONSE TO TECHICAL ASSISTANCE REQUEST, REVIEW 0F UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES, SECURITY PLAN (TAR-769)

Licensee: University of California, Los Angeles Branch & LPi1 Requesting Assistance: ORB-3, D. Jaffe Review Branch Involved: L:IS&EP Requested Completion Date: 9/30/74 Review Status: Complete

e have revie'ced the University of California, Les An;eles, reactor security plan dated i.ugust 21, 1974, nr.d its mendment dated bgus t 2.',1.'74, a.n ins t th? "1.mtwi- bida. ce - f'rpar,i z= tion ud Content of Security Plans fo- Lc.t Fr..'er Peactor3", dated April 1974

!!e find the plan rs?tuae re;uirenents of 10 CFR 50.34(c) and 10 CFR 73.40 and is acceptable, providei the licensae's inventory ,

_of S!C! does not equal or exceed t%f2rCalLEJM? Wfj,11.a,1j,n,,

$.Fy}d, R. Wayne Houston, Chief Industrial Security and Emergency Planning Branch Directorate of Licensing f" cc: A. Giam'usso o

. Mcdonald -

D. Skovholt K.

AC Jaf P Goller

. enspach H. Thornburg (2)

J. Whiteaker T. Flood

(

8805200240 880513 A ER -196 PDR

~7

. APR!L 1974 h.,

1 I Interin Guidance - Orgarization and Content of Security Plans for Low Power Research and Training Reactors Applicability - This interim guidance is for use in developing and evaluating security plans for low power research and training reactors. For purposes of this guice, these reactors are defined as TRIGA reactors with authorized power levels less than or equal to 250 KW and all other researcn and training reactors with power levels less than or equal to 100 KW, including AGil's, zero power, and critical facilities.

Purpose - The purpose of the security plan developed according to this guidance is to protect the reactor against acts of sabotage. It is intended for use by the licensee to demonstrate compliance with 10CFR50.34(c)and10CFR73.40. Conformance with this guide will not assure compliance with 10CFR73.50 and 10CFR73.60, if these parts are applicable to tne licensee, i

Definition of Terms - Terms used in these security plans should conform to the definitions as given in 10CFR73.2.

{

f. l 1

j I. Design Features A. Essential Equipment - Essential equipment should be designated in the security plan. This should include, but not necessarily be 1

limited to, the following: the reactor, the reactor coolant system, reactor controls, and any associated equipment the

I

,- failure of which could endanger the health and safety of the public. .

t B. Security Area - security areas should be identified and described, including plan drawings or sketches showing these in context of the site location and showing access points.

At least the fuel storage area., the reactor control room, '

and the reactor room or building should be described as security areas.

C. Security Systems

1. Locks and Keys - a description of the lock and key system should be provided; describe how keys are controlled; identify the specific individual (by position title) responsible for the security of the keys.

2. Comunicatior.s - the comunication system to be used in the event of a security violation should be described.

~

II. Administrative Controls A. Organization

1. ' Security organization the person responsible for the facility security program should be identified (by position title); the person (s) or group (s) having security functions and responsibilities on a day to day basis should be identified.

t

,- F

2. Local Law Enforcement Authorities - arrangements with the local law enforcement agencies for aid in the event

, i of a security violation at the reactor facility should be described.

B. Access Control

1. Personnel - the categories of personnel who are authorized 6 to enter security areas should be identified. '

2. Control - the means employed to control access to security areas should be described.

C. Surveillance - Plans for providing surveillance of essential equipment and security areas during working and non-working hours should be aescribed.

D. Procedures - procedures and plans for dealing with the following i situations should be briefly described:

1. Response to detected unauthorized intrusions of security l l

areas.

j

2. Security violations by authorized personnel.

3. Bomb . threats.

4. Acts of civil disorder.

E. Security Program Review

1. The security program should be reviewed not less frequently

~

than once every two years by the ' individual designated in

• item II. A.l . This provision should be documented in the security plan itself. In this connection the licensee is, directed to the provisions of 10CFR50.54(p).

i I

e t I t UNITED STATES j NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION  !

W AsHINc ton, o. c. 20555 February 5, 1976 ,

Docket No. 50-142 [

The Regents of the University ,'

of California t.

ATTN: Mr. Harold V. Brown .

Environmental Health and Safety Officer

'l g

Los Angeles, California 90024 Gentlemen:

i The Commission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 10 to Facility Operating License No. R-71 for the UCLA Training Reactor in accordance  !

with your application for amendment dated May 22, 1975, and Supplement j dated November 5, 1975. .

The amendment modifies the Technical Specifications relating to (1) production, monitoring and release of Argon 41, (2) changes to the restrictions on in-core experiments, and (3) administrative changes.

The Commission's staff has evaluated the potential for environmental impact associated with operation of the UCLA Training Reactor in the proposed manner. From this evaluation, the staff has determined that there will be no significant environmental impact attributable to the proposed action. l'aving made this determination, the Commission has further concludea, pursuant to 10 CFR Part 51, Section 51.5(c)(1) 8 thet no environmental impact statement need be prepared for this action.

Copies of the Negative Declaration, which is being filed with the Office of the Federal Register for publication, and the Environmental Impact Appraisal are enclosed.

A copy of the related Safety Evaluation is enclosed.

Please note that we have discontinued the use of separate identifying -

numbers for changes to Technical Specifications. Sequential amendment numbers will be continued as in the past.  ;

}; l Sincerely, s il 1

George Le , Chief  ;

Operating Reactors Branch #3 '

Division of Reactor Licensing "

h*

C/B

e

. t '

t ,

The Regents of the University of February 5, 1976 California

Enclosures:

1

'g

1. A:r.endment No. 10 -< <

2. Negative Declaration in

3. Environmental Impact Appraisal ,

4. Safety Evaluation .

c 1

l l

i l

l

}

1 I l t

l.

h l

1 1.

tl J

b a

Y In

, f

• UNITEo STATES  !

NUCLEAR REGU /T M ( 0 ". **

m *; .

W AsHIN o T CN. O. c. 20555 l L

THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA i 1

DOCKET NO. 50-142 a

1 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE '

j Amendment No. 10 M License No. R-71

1. The Nuclear Regulatory Comission (the Cc=ission) has found that:

l A. The applications for amendment by The P.egents of the University of California (the licensee) d a t e d '.'s y 2 2 , 1975 and suppleme .. g dated November 5,1975, comply with the requirements of the ,

Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the '

l Comission's nales and regulations set. forth in 10 CFR Chapter l I; .

B. The facility will operate in conformity with the application, i 1 the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of 1 the Co c.ission; C. There is reasonable assurance: (i) that the activities authori:ed  ;

by this operating license can be conducted without endangering l the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities I will be conducted in compliance with the rules and regulations of the Commission; ,

\

D. The issuance of this amendment will dot be inicical to the l comon defense and security or to the health and safety of '

/ the public; and .

E. Publication of notice of this amendment is not required since _ j the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration. -

i lj i 1

2. Accordingly, Facility Operating License No. R-71, as amended, is  ; l hereby further amended by adding subparagraph (3) to Paragraph 1 2.C. 'and a change to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the attachment to this license amendment. .

'[

4 I -

e q l 1

\

! 1 c

I Subparagraph 2.C.(3) i 9

"(3) h'ithin 30 days following the issuance of Amendment - '

No. 10 to this license, the licensee shall initiate an Environmental Program which will be~ maintained

at the UCLA Nuclear Energy Lab for a minimum of two years subject to the following condition: i

a. A system of not 1 css than 12 Ca-Dy Sulfate J 7

(or equivalent) high sensitivity dosincters, i placed at 6 locations, from a commercial supplier will be used and changed on a -

quarterly basis." 4

3. This license amendment 3 s effective thirty (30) days following date of its issuanet.

i FOR Tile NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO3011SSION lt i

i

. k i'

Coorge Icar, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 43 Division of Reactor Licensing

Attachment:

Change to the Technical Specifications Date of Issuance: February 5, 1976 l

r m

i 4l l

1

'! i L .

, .. . - . - . - , _ - _ , - - - - , .._.._y-, . . ,-__ . , s

t APPENDIX A TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS .

t FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-71

' UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES NUCLEAR REACTOR DOCKET NO. 50-142 DATE: l'a r e n 1, 19 71 The dicensions, measurements or other numerical values of these specifications may dif fer from the ceasured values as a result of normal construction and manuf acturing tolerances or from variations in the normal accuracy of instru-mentation.

1. Definitions A. Reactor Shutdown The reactor is shut down when all of the following conditions are met:

1. All control blades are fully inserted and the reactor is suberitical by a margin greater than 0.00748. When calculating the suberitical margin, no credit shall be taken for experiments, temperature effects or xenon poisoning.

2. The console key switch is in the of f position, the key is removed and under the control of a licensed operator. ,

1

- 3. No maintenance or work is in progress that could reduce the suberitical margin. l B. Reactor Operation Reactor operation shall mean any conditions wherein the reactor is not shut down.

C. Reactor Scram A reactor scram is the gravity drop of all control blades.

l

. l l

1 a . \

l l

D. Experiment t l An expariment shall be any of the following l

1. Any apparatus, device or material placed in the reactor core region, in the exposure facilities, or in a beam of I

radiation originating from the reactor core.

2. Any operation designed to measure or observe reactor parameters or characteristics.

E. Reactor Safety System The reactor safety system is that combination of measuring l channels which forms the automatic protective system f or the l reactor or provides information which requires manual pro-tective action :o be initiated.

i F. Operable i Operable means a system or component is capable of performing its intended function in a normal manner.

G. Operating Operating means a system or component is performing its i intended function in a normal manner.

H. Operability Test Operability test means qualitatively verifying the operability )

of the channel by observation of channel behavior or by the introduction of an externally generated signal.

t' I. Calibration Calibration means adjusting a channel output such that it responds, within acceptable range and accuracy, to known values of the parameter which the channel measures. Calibration shall encom-pass the entire channel including equipment actuation, alarm or trip.

1

.. . . i t

L I L. Site and Reactor ?. con

'1 a ,

A. Site <

"1. The renetor shall be housed in a reinforced concrete i buildias in the School of. Engineering and .\pplied Science, University of California, Los An;cles, California.

2. The rcotricted arca shall encompr.ss the .Mucicar Encegy '

Labora'.ory unich is comprised of the react:r roem, control '

room, an:1 surroundia; support facilitics.

j l 1 j

B. .i React.or--- Roon.

e

1. The reactor reca nhill have an inde: pendent ventilation ,

and air-cenditioning, syston. if i

2. All cases which ..cy cause a ha.tard throu;h neut ron {

ac.tiv..t ton shall be exhaus tc 1 f ror1 experi . cats or experi- '

~ nental ficilitic; inntalled in er cdjacunt to the core or surrecadLas crcphite to the ca L ron:.:ent via a co:/aon exhau;t duct.

3. Air with.irawn frca the reactor roon shall be diluted to a volut.e rate of nr.proxinately 11,000 CI':-1, monitored for gasecus activity and part iculate conta d na tion, an<l

, - exhausted to the atn.i.4phere through a stael, approxin.ately ,

107 feet aleove ground level. l

- I

4. In the event that the limits for Argon 41 contained in (

j- I 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, with a reduction factor of 460 are exceeded in the stack, the ventilation j 1

system shall be secured and shall cause the automatic damper systen to seal the reactor room, and the reactor*

shall be shut down. p "j

I

5. The 10-toa cranc shall not be used in such a usy that the control blode drive units could suf f er damage by .f dropping or suin31 ns a load. ,

O d

6. Doors penetratinh the reactor rocn are within the restricted area. All doors leadina into the reactor room

'shall have a flashing alarn light indicating reactor operation and'shall be under a lock and key security system.

Amendment No.10 - Dated: FEB 5 n;6  !

l III. Reactor Systems i A. Reactor Core

1. The core shall consist of a maximum of 24 assemblies of up to 11 plates each. These assemblies are contained in six aluminum boxes surrounded by graphite. The boxes are arranged in two parallel rows of three boxes each, separated by about 30 centimeters of graphite.

2. A fuel plate shall be enriched uranium-aluminum alloy fuel clad with aluminum. There shall be nominally 14.5 grams of uranium per fuel plate.

3. A neutron source shall be provided during reactor startup.

B. Primary Coolant System

1. The primary coolant shall be demineralized light water.

2. The primary coolant flow rate shall be greater than 15 spm for reactor operacica at power levels above 1 vatt.

3. The average primary coolant outlet temperature shall not etceed 200'F. .

4. The resistivity of the primary coolant shall be measured

~

prior to each startup. The resistivity shall not be less than 0.5 megohm centimeters.

5. The primary coolant quick-dump valve shal.1 be activated f_ manually and upon receipt of an automatic shutdown signal prior to each startup to assure proper operation.

C. Reactor Control System

1. Four cadmium-tipped semaphore-type blades shall be used for reactor control. The control blades shall be pro-tected by shrouds to assure freedom of motion.

9 l

- . - - - - - - - -- -. , . _ , . - - - - . - _ . - , . - . , - - - . , - , , - - . , - - . , , . - - , , , . , , . - . , e

4 5-2.

Thereactorshallnotbemadecriti'calunlessIllcontrol blade drives are operable.

J

3. The reactor shall not be made critical unless the inter-locks in Table I are operable.

4. Tests, limits and frequencies of tests for the control system shall be as listed in Table II.

5. Following maintenance or modification to the reactor control system, an operability test of the affected portion of the system, including verification of control blade drive speed, shall be performed before the system is considered operable.

D. Reactor Safety System

1. The reactor shall not be made critical unless the reactor safety system is operable in accordance with Table III.

2. Tests for operability shall be made in accordance with Table IV. .

3. The neutron channels shall be calibrated against an independent measure of core power at intervals not exceeding 12 months.

4. The following channels shall be calibrated at interval =

not exceeding 12 months, or any time a change in chancel performance is noted.

a. log N period channel d b. power level safety channels ,

c. linear power level channel

5. Following maintenance or modifications to the reactor safety system, an operability test and calibration of the affected channel shall be performed before the reactor safety system is considered operable.

?

T

- -,._,.,..,,,,....-..-,m.pg...,,-,,.-e,nry,ne,----.w,-,~w.,,n,

s

. . .. i

i. .

t.

I i

[

t  ?

E. Pneuratic Sampic Transfer System

1. A Pneumatic Sa pic Transf er System may be installed in U

~

the ucst vertical expericental port of tne reactor.

2. All operations of the Pneu=ctic Sanple Trans f er Systco will be in accordance with approved p,rocedurcs, g i

3. No sampic shall be pneumatically inserted or removed '

from a critical reactor if the resultant stabic positive period will be less than 20 seconds. i t

IV. R,c a c t iv i t y_ t A. The core excess reactivity at cold critical, without xenon pdisoning, shall not execed 0.023 /0 t

B. The primary coolant void and to perature coef ficients of i -

,. reactivity shall be negative. I C. The ntnimum shutdein targin, with thc cost reactive control blade f ully uithdrat.n, shall bc 0.018 /).

D. Tne reactivity insertion rate for a sin;1c centrol blade shall not execed 0.0005 P/sec.

E. Ite s C and D shall be verified in accordance with Table II, Test 2. .

d V. Radiation ~enitoring System i

. A. The reactor room shall be centinuously tonitored by at ~

least tuo arca radiation monitors. The monitors shall be 3i capable of audibly warning per'sonnel of high radiation 1 i levels. The output of these monitors shall be continuously 1  :

indicated. '

l l

0 B. During reactor operations or core alterations, exhaust air ,,

drawn from the reactor room shall be continuously monitored j for gross concentrations of radioactive gases. p I

Amendment No. 10 Dated:FES 5 B16 l

. . }

I L.

'd .

C. The radiation nenitors in itens A and B shall be calibrated semiannually. i

' J D. The relcase of radioactivity f ran the racctor f acility shall i

~

be kept to as lou a level as practical.

d E. The concentration of Argon 41 released to the atmosphere shall [

not exceed the limits of 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, e Column 1 with a reduction factor of 460 defined as the product j of (1) a reactor use factor, (2) an occupancy factor, and (3) a dilution factor. The Comr.iission shall be notified if, over j any one year period, the reactor use factor, the occupancy factor or the dilation facter change so as ta increase the I

- cffective reduction factor, f

VI. Tuc 1 liand1_isand S t onge, A. Scw fuel uny be stored in its shipping container or in othbr appropriato centalacrs. Ilo t fuel shall be stored in secol-lir:2 aterage pits located in the concrete floor of the ht;h '

bay. Fuel cleucnts er fueled dev'ees shall be stored and

• handled in a secuc.try such that kgi is less than 0.3 under optinun cond it ions of r:3dera t ion c.nd ref lec tion.

B. Irradiated fuel elenants or fueled devices shall be stored so that tenperatures do not c::cced desiga values. l

' l

\'Lt. Exper!nents p A. The reactor supervisor and the resident health physicist shall revic'..' and approve in writing all propoacd experiments '

prior to their perfor.ance. .

B. The follouing conditicas sh-[11 govern the perfornance of Il l

cxperinents

," ,

q

1. Itc reactivity worth of any sinsic unconstrained experi- fj ment shall not exccod 0.006 P. '1 ,

0 l V

(

2. An experinent shall not be inserted or removed unicss all the control blados are fully inserted or ita absolute reactivity s' orth is less than that which would cause a 20-second positive stable period. I

3. No explosive noterials shall be irradiated.

4. The sua of the absolute reactivity worths of experinents

, shall not execed 0.0023 j0.  !

' FEB 5 n,y i 3....a.... vn in nntna.  !

. I t

. I I

VIII. Adninistrative Requirencats i l

A. The Chcncellor of the University, the Dean of the School of l-Engineering and Applied Science, the Director of the ::uclear

n ergy Lahor; tory, and the re's: tor supc. visor sh:ll have i -

line responsibility fer the administrative control of the reactor f acility, saf cguarding the general public and f acility <

personnel' f ren radiation e.spesure and ad:.cring to all require- '

- n:nts of the f acility license and the Technical Specifications.

B. The reactor superviser shall be responsible fer the safe oper-ation of the reacter, the schedulia; and supervision of experi- C' j

r.2nts util!4 tn; the reactor , the control of the reactor f uel, i the hecpins of logs and recorda, the esintonance of the physical .'

- eenditlen of the res.:tur and the t rainin;; ei operatin:., personnel The reactor supervisor shall :tintain the necessary records .

to assure compliance uith Sectica V.E.

l C. The reactor cuperviser and health physicist shall review and appr.;ve la uriting all pecposed c:: peri-. cat.; prior to their  !

performance. Toey snall suinit to the Director of the ::uclear Energy L.$ oratory or to t..e R .dia tion U se Co-t:ittee a,ll ncv c::per!r. cats and all preposed .changea to tric f aellity which nl:;ht af f ect its anfety.

D. A ntninun of tuo qualified persons, cue a licensed j operator, chall be in the laborstery at all tiges during j reactor operat ion, en: opt for precritica.1 censole checkouts. ,

A pcraon is censidered qualiited uhen he receives end under-

! s t a nd.4 a brlating on the fac!1lty enceccacy procedures.

. E. A licensed scalor operator shall be readil) availabic on cali during all reactor operations. .

j- F. Line respops t'ollity f or radiological saf ety at the ' Nuclear Energy 1.sboratory shall include successively the Campus Redistion Ssfety Comhittee, the Environmental llealth and Safety Of fice and the ::ucicar Ene,rsy Lcboratory health i physicist. The Cenpus Radiation Safety Coccittcc shall bc j' l independent of the line organization ~for reactor operation in item A.

i1 1 G. The Nuclear Energy Lcboratory health physicist shcIl bc . *

'2 responsible for implementing and enforcing the radiological  ;- ,

safety program at the Suc1 car Energy Laboratory. - j l

Amendetent No.10 -

Datc3: l

,. FEB 5 nyg

p

\

t

'4. ; There. ,is a Radiation Use Comittee which reviews ahd approves l new experiments and proposed alterations to the reactor. The Commi~tt'ee 'shall' review and audit reactor operations for safety.

. ThiL committee shall be composed of the reactor supervisor and

radi'aiidn' heal th physicis t , ex officio, and three other members havihg' exp'ertise in reactor technology. Comittee members ,

l

. shall be appointed by the Dean of the School of Engineering

~

andNp~pliedScience. A quorum shall be three members. 'th e Radi'ation Use Coc:mittee shall meet at least semiannually and a shall.kee The Comittee

~s halI..'e'p r po'rwritten t directly records to the of Dean its meetings.

of the School of Engineering 1

and)ppliedScience. The Radiation Use Corsaittee shall:

{

i 1.

)" ,

((w hen. such changes have safety significance, and determine whether they involve an amendment to the

" _ facility license, a change in the Technical Specifi- '

[ cations. incorporated in the facility license, or an

' uh' review' e d saf ety question pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59,

2. .gg recomend action.

2. 'kkview proposed te.ts or experiments significantly dif-

.' , ' ferent.from any previously approved and determine whether

,t hey involve an unreviewed saf ety question pursuant to J~ 0lCFR. 50.59, and recomend action.

,3. . Review facility operations, procedures and records for

.ssfety considerar. ions and recommend improvements where

~ ' appropriate. In addition to a continuing review of

.*ihese matters, an intensive in-depth review of f acility gperations shall be made at Irast annually. '

f, 4. . Review the circumstances of all abnormal occurrences

'AndNidlations of Technical Specifications and proposed cmeasures.co, preclude a recurrence, and recommend remedial action.

)

1. Any afdhfon 'recom= ended by the Radiation Use Comittee, which may Affect the operation and/or safety of the University comirif tybeyond the Nuclear Energy Laboratory facility, shallle brought to the attention of the Campus Radiation Safety Comittee which shall have veto power to such a recomendation.

- ---- - - - - ---,-,,-,,w-- - , , - - - - - - , --- -- -- , , - - - - - , - , - . -

J. Procedures The f acility shall be operated and maintained in accordance with approved written procedures. All procedures and major changes thereto shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Nuclear Energy Laboratory prior to being effective.

Changes which do not change the original intent of a pro-cedure may be approved in writing by the reactor supervisor.

Such changes shall be recorded and submitted to the Director for routine review. The following types of written procedures shall be maintained: '

l. Normal startup, operation and shutdown procedures for the reactor. These procedures shall include applicable checkof f lists and instructions.

2. Procedures which delineate the operater action regt. ired in the event of specific malfunctions and emergene.!es.

3. Radiological control procedures for all f acility personnel.

4. A laboratory emergency procedure to guide the behavior and action of all personnel in the event of an emergency condition. Semiannual evacuation drills for facility

, personnel shall be conducted te assure that facility personnel are f amiliar with the emergency plan.

5. Procedures for the installation, operation and removal of experiments where reactor saf ety is concerned.

6. Procedures for handling irradiated and unirradiated p fuel elements.

7. Procedures for operation of the Pneumatic Sample Transfer System.

K. Records In addition to requirements of applicable regulations,and in no way substituting therefor, the following minimum records shall be maintained:

, - - , - - - - - - , , - - - - - - - - - - +

w-n - . - , - - ._ __ , ,, , - , -

(

1. Reactor operations, including unscheduled shutdowt.s [, '

and tests and experinents performed.

i ,

n

2. Abnormal occurrences. j i

, 3 .,

Principal caintenance activitics and the reasons therefer.

. :.v 4 Revicus of changes made to tho 'f acility or procedures cad reviews of tests e.nd experiments perfontad

• ithout prior .Y-approval by the U. S. Suelcar Regulatory Cor. mission pursuant to 10 CFR 50.59..

i

5. Shipments of radioactive ratorials.

[

I

6. Releas.s of Easeuus end liquid wastes to the envirens.  ;

P

7. Facility radiation and contanination aurveys.

8. Fuel inventories and fuct trans f ers.

9. Radiation exposurcs for all. facility personnel.

L. Action ta be Taken in the Event of an Abner:21 Occurrence

1. Any abnormal occurrence shall be prorptly reported to the reactor supervisor and sh.111 be revicted by the -

Radiatien Use Cor.mittec. A report of the occurrence shall be p'repared, including an evaluation of the causc(s) and recencendations for appropricto cetion to prevent

. or reduce the probability of recurrence. The results of the investigation shall be maintained ai part of the permanent records.

9. .

2. All abnorcal occurrences shall be reported to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Consission in accordance with ~

Section M.I. of these specifications. N i

3. Abnormal occurrences shall include, .but not necessarily be ,.1 limited to, the following: ,j

a. a violation of the Technical Specifications or the facility license; .

• }l ,

11 a

Amendm,nt No.10 .

. Dated: FEB 5 G.'6 l

t

.. i

i 4

l' l

L i y

t s ,

! Y

b. an uncentrolled or unanticipated reactivity change; l

c. na uncontrolled or unanticipated release of radio- '

J activity fron the site;

- d. a safety systen component nalfunction or other systen ,j or ce:ponent nalf unction which renders or threaten.; { ,

to render the saic.ty systen inccpabic of perforning .

its inton-led safety function; .

I.

c. an obsc ved inndcquacy in the ieplonantation of I cither a.!-.ta'.st rative or procedural controls , such  !

that the laaicquecy cow es or could have caused the {

4 existence or developnent of an unsaf e condition stith [  ;

re;; sed to reactor operation; and

, f. abnornal de;;rade. Lion of reactor fuct as ravealed by periodic in.ty ction, g l i

M- f:d?_of.:.U.3. letd.!a911L.S. 4 In e.ddition to the requirce.cnt. of applievale regulations, and In no way substitutin.; therefor, reports r, hall be nade to -

the NP.C as follows: ,

1. A report not later than the following working day (by telephone or telegraph to the Director, NRC Rc2 ion V

' . Inspection G F.nforcement Office) and a report within g 10 days (in writing to the Director, Division of

/

Operating Reactors, USSRC, Washington, D. C. 20555) of:

a. Abnormal o:currences as defined in Section L.

a

b. Reluarcs of radioactivi'ty from the facility above '. ,

the permissible limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix D, Tabic II, as meal /d in secordance ,

with Sec1' n V.E.

2. A report within 30 days (in writing to the Director.

Division of Operating Reactors, USNkC, Washin; ton, D. C. -

, 20555) of: l 1

i Amendment No. 10 .

Dated: FEB 5 W6 l 4

i j

1 o

a v

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ ______._____________..__-_____.________.-__.__.____________m_ _

t I

4 1.

. s

a. Significant changes in the f acility organization. l

b. Significant chen ;cs in the transient or accident analyucs described in the saf ety analysis report, ,

as amended.

c. Substantial variances of saf ety related operating E ,

churr.cteristics fron previously predicted or c.cacured l values.

3. A routine report (in writing to the Director, Division of l Operatinr, P.cactors, llSSRC, Kashin;; ton, D. C. 205S5) at ,

the enj of each 12-tonth period providing, the t'ollcuing  ;

. infornition:

a. A narrative sumary of reactor operatir.g experience, including the enerr,y cer. crated by the reactor (!n .

cognactt-hours). ,- i

b. A dir.cu sien of unech duled shutdcrins, including the correctisc actien taken to prcclude recurren..c.

' A surnary of the preventive and corrective naintenance I c.

operations perforned havin; safety significar.co. -[

d. A discussion of the changes in the f acility and pro- * ',

cedures, ano the tests and experi cents, carried out without prior approval by the U. S. Nuclear Regt.latory

. Commission pursuant to 10 CFR Part 50, Section 50.59.

$. e. A sutenry of the nature and cuount of radioactive

• material released to the environs. .

L

, f. The results of any environnontal surveys perforced 3.)

'eutside the facility.

> - :s

g. A sun:.tary of sigaf ficant (above 500 nRc=) radiation /

exposures received by f acility personnel and visitors  !

in any one year, including the dates and times of 'l j significant exposures. *

[j

?

h. The results of the Environt.: ental Progrca shall S included in the NEL facility annual report sent to the Cornissior, and availabic to Cor.nission inspectors upon request.

A 4endnent No.10

.. Dated: pf,3 5 M

[

t

_ TABLE I Control Blade Withdrawal Inhibit Interlocks

1. Startup channel count rate less than 1 count per second.

2. Log N period amplifier selector switch not in operate position.

3. Reactor period less than 6 seconds.

, TABLE II Control System Tests Test Limi't Frequency

1. Drop time of each 1 second from inir.ia- annual (14 month control blade (from tion of blade drop to maximum interval) full withdrawn full insertion position)

2. Reactivity' worth of annual (14 month each control b1cde, maximum interval) reactivity insertion '

rate of each control  ;

blade, and shutdown l margin  !

3. Operability test of operable prior to each startup interlocks listed in Table I 9

e

,.- . i l

^l l

i.

TABLE III Reactor Safety System i

Safety System Trips Drop Blades Dump Valve Open Period less than 3 seconds yes yes Power at 125% of full power yes yes  ;

Manual scram yes yes Loss of slectrical power to control console yes yes Primary cooling system Loss of pump power yes no Icv vater level in core yes no No flow yes no Shield tank system Low water level yes no Ventilation system Loss of power to f, ventilation fans yes no .

O

i . - . 4

, i TABLE IV -

Safety System Operability Tests Component or Scram Function Frequency Log N period channel -s Power level safety channels  !

Loss of primary coolant pump power ,

Prior to the first Loss of primary coolant level startup of each day and .

after repair or de-Loss of shield tank water level energitation Loss of power to ventilation fans i

l e

I 1

l 4

i I

)

v + _,,m--e,---y7e( e- ~

---v - - - - + -__ - -w - , -- - - + r ---y-- v--ave r r - -e-e p-t- w e-- e3--= a -gv- - ~ * - + = - -

.. g f

l.

L NEGATIVE DECLARATIO:1 REGARDIliG { .

FACILITY OPEPATIfiG LICENSE R-71 -

FOR THE ,

II UNIVERSITY OF CALIF 0PJ11A AT LOS ANGELES TRAINING REACTOR I I

DOCKET NO. 50-142  !

The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccanission (the Cennission) has considered ..

~

the Amendment to Facility Operating License No. R-71 for the University l of California at Los Angeles, The amendment provides for changes in Technical Specifications to allow for alterations in effluent discharge and monitoring thereof, restrictions on in core experiments, and change..

in some administrative aspects of 'the operation.

1 The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Division of Reactor Licensing, has prepared an environmental impact appra'isal for this research reactor.

On the basis of this appraisal, we have concluded that an environmental

/. impact.statenent for this particular action is not warranted Meause there will be no significant environmental impact attributable to the proposed action. The environmental inpact appraisal is available for public inspec- 7[

.' tion at the Co=nission's Public Document Room at 1717 H Street, N. W., -

l]

I Washington, D. C. d Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this M day of h FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY. COMMISSION t 2

[/ k. h 4M.e b Envi an$3*"ai NajeIht ranch 4

@/p/>5$/o%-(/g7 Division of Reactor Licensing

. . e e

i 3

! Ei1 VIRO:tMEilTAL' D9ACT APPRAISAL l

FOR THE j 9 {

a .

i VillVERSITY OF CAllFOR'll A AT LOS A!!GELES -

e il i TRA!!!! lG REACTOR LICEftSE fl0. R-71 u

)

. ~

DOCKET 110. 50-142 l

1 The enclosed document discusses the environmental aspects.of an cc.endrent I 1 l to the license for the operation of the University of California at les  ;

I  :

u Angeles Training Reactor to allow changes in efflucnt discharge and I monitoring thereof, restrictions on in-core experirents, and changes in i

some adainistrative aspects of the operation, it is issu

d in support  :

of the Con-itsion's negative declaration with respect to th0 need for c i 2 separate environ .cntal impact statetent for the University of California .

at Los Angeles Training Reactor. j l .

i i i i i

1

. i f f '

l li

! lip l

u l

!' .l '

10 l I

i i

~ ,

ENVIRO::ME: ITAL CC:lSIDERATIO:lS REGAR01: G THE AMEi DMEllT OF THE LICE'iSE OF ,

THE U:ll'!ERSITY OF CALIFORNI A AT LOS A';GELES TRAll!!i;G REACTOR, OPERATI::G 1 LICEllSE R-71 i 7 THE PRO?"> SED ACTIO:! , ,

By application for license amendment dated May 22, 1975, the University q i of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) requested changes to the Technical r Specificaticas for the UCLA Training Reactor. The requested changes to the Technical Specifications involve a modified stock discharge rate and new 1 Argon-41 discharge limits, an additional restriction on in-core expericents, l and administrative changes. These changes are indicated in the follcuing "

discussion. I i

1. Effluent Discheree: Technical Specification ll B.3 would be r.odified '

l to correctly state tne height of the facility stack with the acceleraticn nozzle rcroved. Peroval of the acceleration noz?le would provid2 en of fIvent I ficw rate out of the stack of 14,003 CFM in conformar.co uith the original l Technical Specification. The current release rate is 11,203 Cl:'. Technical Specification ll.S.4 uould be changed and V. E. added to clic. for a reduc-tion f acter of 450 for alleueble concentrations of f.rr n-41 in the stack and relecscs to the atnosphere resp 2ctively. Technical Specificatien Y. B.  ;

would t.e changed to require the exheust air to be ronitored only during *

, reactor cperation and during core alterations. The present Technical i Speci fication: require that exh:ust cir reust be n-M tcred continuously.

l 2. In-Core Experirents:

~

Technical Sp:cification !!1.E.3. was incorrectiv '

j worded in its ori;1nal fom, requiring thit no se-'ple be pncu 6ticcily re. moved from a critical reactor if the resultant stable peric.d will exceed .

3 twenty (20) seconds. The tem "exceed" should have been "less than."  !

Additionally, the licensee has requested thLt this section be char.g d to ,

reficct the additional potential for a transient, with a stable pericd of t less than 20 seconds, which might result from the insertion of a sample into

' the reactor core.

/. 3. Administrative Chances: The licensco has requested a new Technical SpecT(ication, vill.S., Uiiich eculd assign the responsibility for maintainir.g records +.o the reactor supervisor. Additional administrative changes involve -l the subtitution of "Nuclear Regulatory Ceznission" and "USNRC" for "Atomic I l Energy Comission" and "USAEC." respectively, in the Technical Specifications.

q

i. ..i PRODABLE ENVIRO:IMENTAL IMPACTS OF PROPOSED ACTION i i

The probabic enviromental impacts of the proposed ebenges in the Technical l'.

l Specifications for the UCLA Training Reactor are indicated and discussed d

) bel o.v.

1 i

1 .

I .

. ,. I

. . 2  ;

. s l

t

1. Effluent Dischtree: The proposed stack rodification ard re;ultin; increase in effluent' Tic. rate cut of the stac': from 11,200 C ' :o 14,000 i CFM uould result in a decrease in the concentration of rcdionu:' ides present i' in the effluent. The isotepe of interest, Arcon-41, wculd be reduced to

• a concentration of apprc>.i ately 1.0 x 10-5 uCi/:.Ti s.nen tne reactcP is operation at 100 LW. Utilization of the exposure reduction f actor for Argcn-41 of 460 unich includes consideration of an occupency f actor of 0.10, a reactor utilizatien f actor of 0.188 and a dispursion f actor of 0.115, is parnissible under 10 CFR 20.lC5 ('c ), and results in acceptable ef fluent concentrations availcble to cny non-occupationally exposed indivicsals who are potenticily exp;scble to the reactor stack effluent. a f

As accidental radioective discharges could only result during reactor i operatico ur during altercti:ns to the rec tor core, the r:enitoring of '

exhaust air at other tiras cess not r:.crially tdd to the health and safety '

of the facili'.y. Accor dirgly, the prop: sed Tecnnicel S ecificcticn '.'.C.

is ccceptcble. No reasurable . enviro". 2ntal irprct is c<pected as a result i of these changes in Technical Specifications.

2. ),n-Core E /.:e riments: Correcting the Techinccl Specifications regcrding rer.oveT of irrediate: sanvies end edding the sp?cifict. tion on irsertion of sc ;1:s will ir. crease tne inherent safety of the reacter and its operations. I I:e envircnr:ntal irpact as a result of this cha: ige is expected.

I

3. Adninistrative Chances: The adiinistrative chonnes to the Tcchnicel j

Sp:cificctin.s ci incic:ted will n:t h:.c :ny inpact en the envircr cnt.

CO':CLU5!01 The NRC staff ccncludes that there will be no significer.t environmental -

impact associated with the crend ent of the UCLA Train n] Reactor license i

and that no enviror. mental irpact state::ent is required to be veritten for the issuance of the ar.endment to the operating license for this facility.

1 FEB 5 G75 9a l

~

s9 11 4

.1 I

J l l

l l

l

l 4 UNITto STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION  !,

W ASHING TON. o. c. 20s55 i i l

1 i-SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR RECULATION '

i 9 SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.10 TO LICENSE NO. R-71 j

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES ,) ,

UCLA TRAINING REACTOR l ,

i DOCKET NO. 50-142 b t

Introduction  !

By application for license amendment dated May 22, 1975, the University of California at Los Angeles (the licensec) requested changes to the Technical Jpecifications foi the UCIA Tr. lining Retetor. The changcr to the Technical Specifications involve (1) codified Argon-41 restrictions, (2) changes to the restrictions on in-core experiments, and (3) administra-tive changes.

In reviewing the application for license amend.t.cnt it was found that .

several changes were required in the proposed Technical Specifications. l These chan;,cs were discussed with and concurred in by the licensec.

Discussiori i

Discussions of the licensco's proposed Technical Specification changes 1 are contained in the following sections.

1. Modified Argon-41 (Ar-41) Restrictions . t

. The UCLA Training Reactor has a graphite moderated core in which f, the fuel is arranged in separate, water cooled, fuel boxes. During reactor operation the air which is located between the fuel boxes is irradiated producing isotopes of Argon (Ar-41), Nitrogen (N-16),

)l

. Of these isotopes, 0-19 and Oxygen N-16 have (0-19), and Carbon very short (C-14)/ (29.4 and 7.3 seconds, respectively) half-lives,_ 1 and C-14 exists in very minute quantities; Ar-41 however has a .

half life of 109 minutes and is present in sufficient abundance I to be a significant effluent. Air' conte.ining Ar-41 is drawn from '; ,

the reactor room by the ventilation system, filtered and monitored ';

! for radioactivity, diluted with fresh air and exhausted through an acceleration no::lc at the top of the facility stack. ,

d.,

MA "half life" is the ti'ne it would take for the radimetivity of a  :

i given isotope to decrease to 1/2 of its initial vclue.

l i

9? /9$5Y/&&/-$g)

I

1 L

In the application for license amendment dated May 22, 1975, the .,  !

licensee requested several changes to the Technical Specifid.ations addressing the production, monitoring, and release of Ar-41. The 'l requested changes are as follows: (1) Technical Specification '1 >

II.B.3 would be modified to state correctly the height of the facility stack with the acceleration no::1c removed. Removal of the

'l

, acceleration no::1c would establish a flow rate of 14,000 CFM .;

in conformance with the original Technical Specification, (2) "

Technical Specification V.P. would be changed to require the exhaust air to be moniroted only during reactor operation and during core  !

alterations. At the present time exhaust air cust be monitored +

"continuously". (3) Technical Specifications II.B.4 would be  !

changed and V.E. added to allow a reduction factor of 460 for allownble i concentrations of Ar-41 in the stack and releases to the atmosphere, i respectively. l

2. Changes to the Restrictions on In-Core Experirents Technical Specification III.E.3 states that "No sample shall be pneumatically,yenoved from a critical reactor if the resultant

, stable periods will exceed 20 reconds". This Technical Specification was incorrectly worded; the term "exceed" should have read "bc less than". In addition, the licensee has requested that this section be changed to reficct the additional potential for a transient, with a stable period of less than 20 seconds, which might result from the insertion of a sample into the reactor core.

3. , Administrative Changes The licensec has requested that a Technical Specification be added

. to be designated as paragraph VIII B which would assign the responsi-bility to the reactor supervisor for maintaining records of AR-41

/* releases. Additional administrative changes include substitution of "Nuclear Regvlatory Commission" for "Atomic Energy Ccamission" -

in Specifications VIII.K.4, VIII.L.2, and VIII.M.3.d; substitution - <

of "NRC" for "AEC" in VIII.M and VIII.M.1. , and substitution of p',

"USNRC" for "USAEC" in VIII.M.2 and VIII.M.3. These administrativv g'.

changes have no safety significance and will not be discussed further. .;

Evaluation '

Our evaluation of the licensee's proposed Technical Specifications is l!l g

contained in the following sections. --

2/ 1he stable period is the time it would take the neutron flux to change by a factor of 2.3.

i 1

1. Modified Ar-41 Restrictions

'Ihe effect of removing the acceleration no::le from the facility "

stack will be an increase in the gascous discharge rate fronispproxi- '

nately 11,200 CFM to approximately 14,000 CFM. This will res' ult  :

in a ccrresponding reduction in the concentration of Ar-41; thus, ,

we find proposed Technical Specification II.B.3 to be acceptabic. ,

We have reviewed the licensee's proposal to require exhaust air  !'

nonitoring during n actor operation and during core alterations, ,

as compared to the present requirements of Technical Specification "

V.B which requires "continuous nonitoring". Accidental radioactive l discharges could only result frca reactor operation or from nitorations i to the reactor core such as the movement of fuel or experiments; i thus', the monitoring of exhaust air during other than these times  ;

does not materially add to the safety of the facility. Accordingly, i proposed Technical Specification V.B is acceptabic. l The licensee has requested that we approve effluent release limits '

for Ar-41 in excess of those permitted by 10 CFR Part 20, Section 20.106 (a) . This request, submitted via license amendment dated llay 22, 1975 and supplemented by let ter dated November 5,1975, was made pursuant to 10 CFR Part 20, Section 20.106(b) . In the course of our review, we have made the following findings as required by 10 CF.; Part 20, Section 20.106(b) prior to our approval of increased release limits: (1) The applicant has made a reasonabic effort to minimi:e the r.'dioactivity contained in effluents to

, unrestricted areas. Various experiments involving the sealing of the reactor, use of an inert "sweep gas", and provisions for a i 3 hour3.472222e-5 days <br />8.333333e-4 hours <br />4.960317e-6 weeks <br />1.1415e-6 months <br /> delay time yicided only nodest results with regard to reduction '

of the Ar-41 effluent. The licensco has, however, committed to re-ducing the use of the facility to a minimum level. Ne have approved a reactor utill:ation factor of .188 for consideration of the effective concentration of Ar-41. (2) It is not likely that radioactive material ,

! / discharged in the effluent would result in the exposure of an individual i to concentrations of radioactive material in air or water exceeding -

the limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix "B", Tabic II. .

In making this finding, we have considered the effects of atmosphe-ic ,

dilution and occupancy of the facility as follows: I' l facility stack is in a restricted area as defined by(al Since the10 CFR Pnrt 20, *'

i Section 20.3(a)(14), the licensee may take credit for a dispersion :j factor pursuant to 10 CFR Part 20, Section 20.106(d). h'e have 'I -

approved a dispersion factor of .115. The licensec has proposed an Environmental Program to be carried out over a two year period i to confinn the conservative nature of the dispers!:,.i factor. The b requirements of this prograr have been incorporated into the Facility -

Operating License as paragraph 2.C.(3); the associated reporting i

[ requirement are contained in Technical Specification }!.3.h. (b)

The anticipated human occupancy in the most adverse area, with regard l

4

)

. l

< . . I i i l

I J= i

, s ,. -

• t

. t l

to expected radiation dose is Icw. h'c have approved an occupney 9 factor of .10 for consideration of the effective concentration of '

Ar-41. The combined effect of the reactor utilization factor, the l dispersion factor, and the occupancy factor yields a reduction

)

factor of 460. Accordingly, we find proposed Technical Specifications II.D.4 and V.E., which allow for a reduction factor of 460 for Ar-41 effluent in the stack and rolesses to the atmosphere, respectively,

- to be acceptabic. If any of components of the reduction factor a change over a period of one year so as to increase the effectue i value of the reduction factor, Technical Specification V.E. would .

1 require the licensee to so inform the Conmission. {

2. Changes to the Restrictions on In-Core Experiments J Technial Specification III.E.3 stntes thnt "No :tr.ple shall bc

~ '

8 pneumatics11y rc=oved from a critical reactor if the res011 ant  ;

4 stabic period will execed 20 seconds". This Specification is

. deficient for two reasons. First, the requirement for stabic periods to exceed 20 seconds is cicarly in error since transients yiciding shorter rather than longer periods are more ha:ardous in that they have the potentici of rapidly incrensing the reactor power. Secondly, this Spe:ification does not recogni:c the potent a1 for achieving a positive reactor period as a result of inserting a ss=ple in the i reactor. The proposed Specification III.E.3 requires that "No 3

sampic shall be pneumatically inserted or removed from a critical i reactor if the resultant stable positive period will be less than 4

20 seconds". This Specification corrects the two above referenced deficiencies and is acceptable. .

Conclusion ,

f. We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: i (1) because the changes do not involve a significant increase in the ,

probability or consequences ci accidents previously considered and do ~

not involve a significant ha:ards consideration, (2) there is reasonabic assuranec that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be ['

e i

j conducted in compliance with the Commission's reguistions and the issuance !j of this amendment will not be inimical to the cocnen defense and security V j or to the health and safety of the public. ,

L 3 l C

Dat e: FIB 5 s 76 , _

\

l I

l i I

~ \

l* .

.