ML20198B086
| ML20198B086 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, 05000106 |
| Issue date: | 11/09/1983 |
| From: | Wang C Oregon State University, CORVALLIS, OR |
| To: | Gilinsky V NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20155J110 | List: |
| References | |
| FRN-48FR27769, FRN-49FR27769, RULE-PR-50 AB60-2-092, AB60-2-92, AB61-2-92, NUDOCS 8605210507 | |
| Download: ML20198B086 (3) | |
Text
,.. +'
I
?-
g E".
~
Ra$ation Center UnlVeTSity Conraus. Otepon 9MM seospea-an i
(
I November 9,1983 Mr. Victor Gilinsky Connissioner U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission Washington, D.C. 20555 l
Dear Commissioner Gilinsky:
I appreciated receiving your letter dated October 7,1983 and the j
interesting report prepared by Dr. Gerald Pollack on the subject of con-verting academic research reactors from high enriched uranium fuel (HEU) j Many of us in the research reactor to fuel of lower enrichments (LEU).
4 concunity have been closely following the development of this issue, and l
4 Oregon. State University has participated in two separate studies of this progranedesigned to provide information to the NRC staff.
9 -
A.s your report accurately points out, there are a niimber of con-l
.siderations which must be resolved before conversion of nonpower reactors to LEU can be fully implemented. We certainly emphatically concur with all of.the specific problems you have identified, and believe, however, that there are still others applicable to our TRIGA facility which were For example, Oregon State University has worked very hard
~
not included.
to develop the first fully verified self-protection program for TRIGA fuel.
i With this program in place and operational, our fuel is now kept well above the 100 rem per hour at 3 feet threshold.
Should we be requested to refuel, we.will need to handle fuel which has intentionally been made much more radioactive (>100 times more radioactive), rather than handling fuel which This will obviously has been allowed to cool in the traditional manner.
reduce an. ability to meet our comitment to the Commission to keep radia-tien exposures to personnel as ' low as reasonably achievable.
Another consideration is that the shipping casks mentioned in your
'j
]
The crane report are very heavy, averaging about 13 tons or so each.
capacity in our facility, and I suspect in many other university reactors, One university reactor recently told us that cannot handle this weight.
it cost them approximately $25,000 to upgrade their crane to handle 15 tons..;This is a significant additional cost and a time consuming en-gineering effort.
I f
8605210507 860514 PDR PR 50 49FR27769 PDR; Oregon S'ase Urwersky k en N!ama:ive Ac;bn/Ecos! Opponunity Employer 0.,,.
=
z w..
a.-
__ a.,
y a..
t November 9,1983 Mr. Victor Gilinsky Yotr also note in your report that LEU fuel for TRIGA reactors does not limi't their functional use, although you acknowledge that pulsing With respect to this, we have two characteristics may suffer somewhat.
~
major concerns regarding the acceptability (to us and to the NRC) of the First of all, the.new new LEU f'ue] manufactured by G.A. Technologies.
fuel has been tested by the DOE only in long steady state runs to ascerta l
j They have performed no testing from the puls-GA has pulsed the fuel to some extent, j
perfomance, burnup, etc.
ing standpoint, and none is planned.
but we have no idea if the NRC will accept their result l
j i
Additiona which is a very important consideration to us in our operations.
the numerical values used to describe expected fission product releases l
in the event of fuel cladding failure (the fission product release fractio have been carefully reviewed and accepted by the NRC for our current fu Since these values weigh heavily on the results of any projected accident scenario involving fuel cladding failure, they are of. great importance in preparation of the facility Safety Analysis Report and Emergency Respl At this time we are concerned about what these new values might t
be, if. hey have been deemed acceptable by the Commission, and how th Plan.
will effect our existing accident projections and emergency re t
l Technohgies may be in a position to manufacture LEU fuel for TRIGAs i requirements.
adequat'e supply, there are a number of unknowns associateil, exclusiv with the installation, use and licensing of such fuel for which we must have answers before the university TRIGAs are asked to accept the fue' for use in their reactors.
As I mentioned earlier in this letter, Oregon State Universi.ty has worked very hard to achieve compliance with the Commissio on self-protection of fuel.
to perfecting our overall physical security program because we share you belief that enriched uranium of any type should b l
discourage any type of undesirable activities.to continue our requirements for physical security, and will continue to welcome the
. opportunity to work with the Commission to seek improvements to our j
program.
Once again, let me thank you fo.r providing the opportunity to submit I
these views on the HEU-LEU conversion program for research reactors.
certainly hope you will find them to be of value, even though you have i
4 i
9 i
.~.
.., - - +. - - - - - -
~.. -
s..
..r Noveder 9 H83
-3 Mr. Victor Gilinsky already identified the ma.jor problems most universities will experience.
Please let me know if there is more information we can provide to assist you with your study.
Yours truly, C. H. Wang Reactor Administrator - OSTR Director, Radiation Center jrl Dr. Nunzio J. Palladino, Chairman, USNRC cc:
Director, Oregon Department of Energy Dr. Robert MacVicar, President, OSU Dr. Theran Parsons, V.P. for Administration, OSU Prof. S. Binney, Chairman, Reactor Operations Committee Prof. A. Johnson, Assist. Dir., Radiation Center-Prof. B. Dodd, Assist. Reactor Administrator e.
- * ~
i
~
i t
I l
i 3
?
i 1
}
~
- _:? -._,.:_
~'
~-
32 S: - -.-- s h.=.-.. E E.m,.... _A_...,.,
_.s..._ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
-r
%Q
' UNITED STATES
)#
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
/?.,o p
f y, wAsMiwoTow.o.c.aosas M,j 3
Male f.
u s
November 15, 1983 TW t%N * *y L N w E-OFFICE oF TMs Q
cowatssionan Y' -
MEMORkNDUMFOR:Chaiman Palladino e
James K. Asselstine
~_
FROM:
SUBJECT:
COMMISSIONER GILINS S CORRESPONDENCE WITH
~
l UNIVERSITIES AND THE EXECUTIVE BRANCH REGARDING RESEARCH REACTORS (COMNP-83,16)
While I am prepared to send the universities and the Executive Branch a follow-up to Comissioner Gilinsky's letter on the use of highly en-l riched uranium fuel at university research reactors, I believe that the attached revisions to your letter more directly reflect what the Comission has done and intends to do in this regard. I suggest the Comission send the attached letter.
t j
Enclosure:
f, Draft letter i
2 cc: -Comissioner Gilinsky 4
Comissioner Roberts i
Comissioner Bernthal SECY OGC OPE CY:ROSS GILLESTIE.
W}ASSETT ELBER MARINO FILE t
!/
1
?
.=
G.
H c,t v
~
i
a a.-
n.,
- ---- T T
.c.
.?
e..
9
==Dear
- ==
i i
,(I understand that you recently r.eceived a letter from Com ss oner Gilinsky concerning the use of highly-enriched uranium fuel at 1
The Comission has issued a policy I
university research reactors.
statement on this subject and will be considering further specific restrictions on the use of highly-enriched uranium at domestic research reactors in the near future. Comissioner Gilinsky has forwarded to all The Comissioners the responses that he has received thus far.
Comission would be interested in any further comments you might have on the views and materials supplied by Comissioner Gilinsky.
As stated in the enclosed policy statement published last year, the Comission is interested in reducing, to the maximum extent possible, In the use of high-enriched uranium in domestic research reactors.
addition to issuing this policy statement, the Comis.sion has directed the NRC staff to develop a proposed rule for Comission review that a
would prohibit the issuance of licenses for new research or test
'I reactors using highly-enriched uranium fuel unless the applicant shows that the unique purposes of the project innot be achieved without using i1/
With regard to existing research and t'est reactors, the HEU fuel.
j proposed rule being developed would require the replacement at each refueling of burned up HEU fuel with fuel having appreciably lower enrichment than the original if such action would be technically feasible with existing fuel technology at the time of refueling, and unless the licensee shows that the unique purposes of the project could not be achieved without using HEU fuel.
The Comission recognizes that
~!
\\i l
0-J.~s... -,
..... r g
8..
several issues must be resolved before it reaches a final decision on this proposed rule.
r.
The Comission expects to address this matter further at a public meeting now planned for late December 1983.
I can assure you that we will give consideration to all relevant factors prior to concluding our deliberations..
Sincerely, Nunzio J. Palladino,
i t
1
~
I i,
,m t:. m.
3.
l k
I t
- g 4
h
_