ML20197J377

Forwards Copy of Environ Assessment & Fonsi for Exemption from Emergency Plan Requirement of 10CFR50.54(q) for Georgia Inst of Technology Research Reactor.Exemption Granted

ML20197J377
Person / Time
Site:	Neely Research Reactor
Issue date:	12/10/1998
From:	Collins S NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Hertel N Neely Research Reactor, ATLANTA, GA
References
TAC-MA3483, NUDOCS 9812150057
Download: ML20197J377 (6)

Text

, . . . _

- f S,o

~

py m#*, UNITED STATES 0

• S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f WASHINGTON D.C. 20666-0001 l

% ,* December 10, 1998 Dr. Nolan E. Hertel, Director Neely Nuclear Research Center Georgia institute of Technology 900 Atlanta Drive Atlanta, GA 30332-0425

SUBJECT:

EMERGENCY PLAN EXEMPTION (TAC NO. MA3483)

Dear Dr. Hertel:

4 On August 20,1998, you requested an exemption from the emergency plan requirement of l 10 CFR 50.54(q) for the Georgia Institute of Technology (Georgia Tech) research reactor.

Part 50.54(q) requires research reactor licensees to follow and maintain in effect I emergency plans that meet the requirements of Appendix E to Part 50. Enclosed is a copy of the Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant impact for this exemption request.

Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.12, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission may grant exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, which are authorized by law, will not present an j undue risk to the public health and safety, and are consistent with the common defense -

and security. The Commission will consider granting an exemption if special circumstances are present. "Special circumstances are present whenever . . . [alpplication of the regulation in the particular circumstances would not serve the underlying purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule; or (clompliance would result in undue hardship or other costs that are significantly in excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted, or that are significantly in excess of those  ;

incurred by others similarly situated." l The research reactor is permanently shut down. All nuclear fuel was removed from the ,

facility in February 1996 and the tritiated heavy water was removed from the facility in July 1998. Georgia Tech referenced the radiological characterization of the facility. The

" Georgia Institute of Technology Research Reactor Decommissioning Project Radiological Characterization Report," which is publicly available, identifies levels of residual

[

yf contamination in the facility. The quantities of radioactive material at the site are noted on page 48 of the report. These quantities are less than the amounts specified in 10 CFR 30.72, Schedule C, " Quantities of radioactive materials requiring consideration of the need for an emergency plan for responding to a release."

9812150057 981210 PDR ADOCK 05000160 h "b"h ' ~

F pog J

. _ _ . . _ . . _ _ ._ . . _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ ._ __..._ _ . _ . ~ . _ . _ . . . _ . _ .. . _ . . . .__

../ .

Dr. Nolan E. Hertel The NRC staff determined that the implementation and maintenance of an emergency plan with essentially no potential for the need for such a plan does not serve the underlying  !

purpose of the regulation. Further, the NRC staff determined that other licensees with  !

similar inventories of radioa:tive byproduct material are not required to have emergency ,

plans, and the implementation and maintenance of an emergency plan for this licensee  !

would unnecessarily require the expenditure of the licensee's limited resources. Therefore, l the staff determined that s secial cir:umstances as set out above are present. The exemption from the 10 CFR 50.54(q) emergency plan requirement is, therefyre, granted.  !

If you have any questions about these issues, please contact Mr. Marvin Mendonca on 301-415-1128.

Sincerely, I r! p .. ,

m

? y /onin ~

^

fa.//mdel J, Cchins, Director

, ' ' ' ~ (OJfIce of' Nuclear Reactor Regulation  ;

. Docket No. 50-160

Enclosure:

Environmental Assessment )

cc w/ enclosure:

See next page l

- ? . - . - . - . . - . _. ..-

1

c -

l

^

Dr. Nolan E. Hertel l l

l The NRC staff determined that the implementation and maintenance of an emergency plan j with essentially no potential for the need for such a plan does not serve the underlying i purpose of the regulation. Further, the NRC staff determined that other licensees with similar inventories of radioactive byproduct material are not required to have emergency plans, and the implementation and maintenance of an emergency plan for this licensee would unnecessarily require the expenditure of the licensee's limited resources. Therefore, the staff determined that special circumstances as set out above are present. The i exemption from the 10 CFR 50.54(q) emergency plan requirement is, therefore, granted.

If you have any questions about these issues, please contact Mr. Marvin Mendonca on  :

301-415-1128. l 1

i Sincerely,  !

ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Roy P. Zimmerman for Samuel J. Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-160 l

Enclosure-  !

I Environmental Assessment cc w/ enclosure:

See next page DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY

[nII E-MAIL COPY MTschiltz ,

iDocket File 502160 ~ JRoe AAdams TMichaels POBLIC' OGC (015-B18) CBassett WEresian PDND r/f LCohen (09-H15) TBurdick SHolmes SWeiss EHylton PDoyle Pisaac MMendonca SCollins (05-E7) TDragoun chi VDrgks(2) MBoyle

(.

'See previous concurrence D\ j PDN PM PDNh TECil ED.* PERB+ GC' PDND:D D DOMRR MMendonca EIMtton RSanders LCohen AHodgdon SWeiss JRoe LSCollins l 12/j /98 11/19/98 11/23/98 11/23/98 12/ l/98 12/1/98 ' 12/3/98 )

12/[/98 OFF'OlAL RECORD COPY j DOCUMENT NAME: G:\SECY\MENDONCA\GATECHEP.WPD j i i l

1

i .*

• l l-J

( . .

i Dr. Nolan E. Hertel The NRC staff determined that the implementation and maintenance of an emergency plan with essentially no potential for the need for such a plan does not serve the underlying purpose of the regulation. Further, the NRC staff determined that other licensees with similar inventories of radioactive byproduct material are not required to have emergency plans, and the implementation and maintenance of an emergency plan for this licensee would unnecessarily require the expenditure of the licensee's limited resources. Therefore, the staff determined that special circumstances as set out above are present. The exemption from th'e 10 CFR 50.54(q) emergency plan requiremerit is, therefore, granted.

If you have any questions about these issues, please contact Mr. Marvin Mendonca on 301-415-1128.

Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY Roy P. Zimmerman for Samuel J. Collins, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-160

Enclosure:

Environmental Assessment cc w/ enclosure:

See next page DISTRIBUTION: on II HARD COPY MTschiltz E-NIAll COPY

l. Docket rite 50-160 JRoe AAdams TMichaels

. PUBLIC OGC (015-B18) CBassett WEresian l PDND r/f LCohen (09-H15) TBurdick SHolmes l SWeiss EHylton PDoyle Pisaac

i. MMendonca SCollins (05-E7) TDragoun

2) MBoyle l

t

• See previous concurrence -

& h i

( )D DONRRT-PDND:PM PDNhA TECH ED.* PERB' OGC* PDND:D D fT MMendonca EMllon RSanders LCohen AHodgdon . SWeiss JRoe J_ SCollins 12/[/98 - 12///98 11/19/98 11/23/98 11/23/98 12/ I/98 12/1/98 l 12/998

' i ob-OFFICIAL RECORD COPY DOCUMENT NAME: G:\SECY\MENDONCA\GATECHEP.WPD 2(

1

=

,, .- . . ~ . - - . . . -

' .. . i l * .

l Georgia institute of Technology Docket No. 50-160 Page 1 of 2 cc:

Mr. Charles H. Badger - Mr. E. F. Cobb l- Office of Planning and Budget Southern Nuclear Company j l Room 608 42 Inverness Center i 270 Washington Street, S.W. Birmingham, Alabama 35242 )

i Atlanta, Georgia 30334 i l Dr. G. Wayne Clough, President l Mayor of City of Atlanta Georgia Institute of Technology l 55 Trinity Avenue, S.W. Carnegie Building Suite 2400 Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0325 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Ms. Glenn Carroll Dr. William Vernetson 139 Kings Highway Director of Nuclear Facilities Decatur, Georgia 30030 l Department of Nuclear Engineering l Sciences Charles Bechhoefer, Chairman

-University of Florida Atomic Safety and 202 Nuclear Sciences Center Licensing Board Panel Gainesville, Florida 32611 U.S. NRC, MS: T3-F23 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Mr. Pedro B. Perez, Associate Director Nuclear Reactor Program Dr. Jerry R. Kline

! North Carolina State University Atomic Safety and P. O. Box 7909 Licensing Board Panel l Raleigh, North Carolina 27695-7909 U.S. NRC, MS: T3-F23 l Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Dr. R. U. Mulder, Director

UVA Reactor Facility Mr. James C. Hardeman, Jr.

l Dept. of Nuclear Engineering Manager Environmental Charlottesville, Virginia 22903-2442 Radiation Program  ;

Environmental Protection I Joe D. Tanner, Commissioner Division  !

I Department of Natural Resources Dept. of Natural Resources

'47 Trinity Avenue, S.W. State of Georgia Atlanta, Georgia 30334 4244 International Parkway 3uite 114 Dr. Rodney Ice, MORS Atlanta, Georgia 30354

Neely Nuclear Research Center Georgia institute of Technology Dr. Jean-Lou Chameau, Vice Provost

900 Atlantic Drive Research and Dean of Graduate

. Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0425 Studies Georgia Institute of Technology 225 North Avenue Ms. Pamela Blockey-O'Brien D23 Golden Valley Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0325 Douglasville, Georgia 30134 l . _ __

Georgia Institute of Technology Docket No. 50-160 Page 2 of 2 ,

cc:

Dr. Nolan E. Hertel, Director Neely Research Center Georgia Institute of Technology 900 Atlantic Drive Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0425 Dr. Peter S Lam Atomic Safety and I Licensing Board Panel '

U.S. NRC, MS: T3-F23 j Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Dr J. Narl Davidson, Interim Dean Chair, Technical and Safety Review Committee Georgia Institute of Technology 225 North Avenue Atlanta, Georgia 30332-0360 Dr. Charles Liotta, Vice Provost of Research and Dean of Graduate Students l Georgia Institute of Technology 225 North Avenue Atlanta, Georgia 30332 l

l l

k

..g

i l

7590-01-P UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY DOCKET NO. 50-160 GEORGIA TECH RESEARCH REACTOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Commission or NRC) is considering ,

1 issuance of an exemption from the requirements of its regulations to Facility Operating License No. R-97, a license held by the Georgia institute of Technology (Georgia Tech or the licensee). The exemption would apply to the Georgia Tech Research Reactor (GTRR), a shutdown and defueled facility located in Atlanta, Georgia.

1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Identification of the Proposed Action:

The proposed exemption would eliminate emergency response plan requirements due to the shutdown and defueled status of the GTRR f acility.

The proposed action is in accordance with the licensee's application dated August 20, l

l 1998. The requested action would grant an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(q) for emergency planning.

l l

f?/202o3't n P-

l

! 2 l

The Need for the Proposed Action:

The nuclear fuel was removed from the GTRR in February 1996. By NRC License Amendment No.12, dated Apnl 2,1998, the authority to operate the reactor was removed and the licensee was authorized to possess the residual by-product material. The tritiated heavy water was removed from the facility in July 1998, in this shutdown and defueled condition, the facility poses a reduced risk to public health and safety. Because of this reduced risk, the requirements of 10 CFR 50.54(c,) are no longer required. An exemption is required from 10 CFR 50.54(q) to allow the licensee to drop the requirement to maintain and implement the Emergency Plan for the GTRR.

Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action:

Before issuing the proposed exemption, the Commission will have concluded that the granting of the exemption from certain portions of 10 CFR 50.54(q) is acceptable, as described in the exemption. The proposed action will not increase the probability or consequences of accidents, no changes are being made in the types of effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in occupational or public radiation exposura. Therefore, there are no significant radiological environmentalimpacts associated with the proposed action.

With regard to potential non-radiologicalimpacts, the proposed action does not involve any historic sites. It does not affect non-radiological plant effluents and has no other environmentalimpact. Therefore, there are no significant non-radiological l

environmental impacts associated with the proposed action.

i

6 3

Accordingly, the Commission concludes that there are no significant environmental l impacts associated with the proposed action.

Alternatives to the Proposed Action:

As an alternative to the proposed action, the staff considered denial of the proposed action. Denial of the exemption would result in no change in current environmental impacts. The environmentalimpacts of the proposed action and the alternative action are i similar.

Alternative Use of Resources:

This action does not involve the use of any resources not previously considered in the Final Environmental Statement for the Georgia Tech Research Reactor.

Agencies and Persons Consulted:

In accordance with its stated policy, on Novembar .5,1998, the NRC staff has consulted with Mr. Thomas Hill of the State of Georgia, Radioactive Materials Program, Department of Natural Resources, regarding the environmentalimpacts of the proposed action. The State official had no comment regarding environmentalimpacts of the proposed action.

I

! FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACT l l

i f On the basis of the environmental assessment, the Commission concludes that the proposed action will not have a significant effect on the quality of the human environment, Accordingly, the Commission has determined not to prepare an environmental impact

-statement for the proposed action.

i i

l

! 4 '

For further details with respect to this action, see the licensee letter dated August 20, I l 1998, which is available for public review at the Commission's Public Document Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L Street, NW, Washington, D.C.

I Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 3rd day of December 1998. l I

FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i l

l

.V . i 7}/sy iT. " '

Seymour H. Weiss, Director Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation I

i i

l 1

i l

a I

a.