ML20197J335
| ML20197J335 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Utah |
| Issue date: | 12/03/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20197J324 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9812150043 | |
| Download: ML20197J335 (2) | |
Text
-.
. p*W%
- - p k "
UNITED STATES U
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E WASHINGTON, D.C. 20065-0001
%...../ SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-126 UNIVERSITY OF UTAH
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 2,1998, the University of Utah (the licensee), submitted a request to clarify the Technical Specifications for its research reactor. These clarifications were in response to an NRC inspection (50-407/98-201). The changes were reviewed by the responsible inspector as part of this evaluation.
2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 Radiation Monitoring Systems 2.1.1 Surveillance The licensee has proposed to change the surveillance requirement in Technical Specification 4.3.3, " Radiation Monitoring System." The change is to make the surveillance frequency consistent with the current facility practice and the " Basis" for this Technical Specification. It would change the calibration frequency in the Technical Specification from biennially to annually. This change is conservative, and the licensee has indicated that it has been doing the calibration at this frequency. Therefore, the change is acceptable.
2.1.2 Design Description This change to Technical Specification 5.4 clarifies the design of the radiation monitoring system. The change indicates that radiation monitoring is conducted in the building exhaust rather than in the pool room. Also, it clarifies that the radiation monitoring system monitors both particulate and gaseous radioactivity. Finally, it corrects a typographical error in the " Basis" for this Technical Specification. This change is consistent with the i system description provided by the licensee. It also ensures monitoring of radioactive effluents from the facility consistent with the intended function in the " Basis." Therefore, this change is acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment 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 surveillance
! 9812150043 981203 PDR ADOCK 05000407 y PDR 4
~ _ _ _ - - . __ _ _ _ _- ._ _ _ ._ . _ . _ . .__ _ _.___ _.
!- l
., j
.. l l
2 l
! requirements. The staff has determined that the 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 is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria ,
! for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no i Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment need be prepared in !
connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
j l
l The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because j the amendment does not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences i of accidents previously evaluated, or create the possibility of a new or different kind of l accident from any accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant j reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards j consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will I not be 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 common defense and security or the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributors: Marvin M. Mendonca Stephen W. Holmes Dated: December 3, 1998 l
l 1
i i l' i i
,_