ML20204J355

Responds to Re Concerns About Licensee Ability to Operate Reactor Safely.Nrc Issued Order on 880120 to Cease Irradiation Experiments & Confirmatory Order Issued on 880317 to Cease Reactor Operations

ML20204J355
Person / Time
Site:	Neely Research Reactor
Issue date:	10/11/1988
From:	Ernst M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:	Clements T AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
NUDOCS 8810250104
Download: ML20204J355 (2)

Text

.- ,- --

t { . ,

%g /

OCT 11 NII Mr. Tom Clements J857BartonWoodsRoad Atlanta, Georgia 30307

Dear Mr. Clements:

This is in response to your letter to Dr. J. Nelson Grace, dateC August 31, 1988, in which you expressed concerns related to the Georgia Tech Research Reactor resuming operations and requested a hearing in this regard. Your request implies a concern regarding the ability of Georgia Tech to operate their reactor safely. The _ NRC shares your safety . interest, and reasonable assurance of safe operation will be obtained by the NRC prior to allowing the Georgia Tech Reactor to restart. It is for this very reason that we issued an Order on January 20, 1988, to cease irradiation experiments and a Confirmatory Order on March 17, 1988, to ceast reactor operations until all safety questions had been resolved to the NRC's satisfaction and the NRC approved resumption of operations.

When the NRC issued the Confirmatory Order on March 17, any party adversely affected by that Order w's efforded an opportunity within twenty days of the date of the Order to request a public hearing. As no such request was filed within the required time, no hearing is required to be held. More importantly, the safety aspects of operating the reactor were all carefully reviewed at the time of licensing, and none of those considerations have been changed. The thrust of our efforts over the past few months have been to improve certain management and administrative practices that have deteriorated over time, and these issues will be resolved prior to giving our permission for restart.

Thus, because of the relatively narrow, well-defined focus of the issues at hand, a hearing would not be useful from a safety standpoint. For these two reasons, we are denying your request.

Regarding your concern of the age of the GTRR and the possible weakening or deterioration of components and safety systems, the gradual aging of equipment is considered in the initial licensing of a facility for 30 years. In addi-tion, the NRC routine inspection program is designed to preclude any decrease in the safety margin for operating the facility. This program includes the performance of components, systems and instrumentation not only on the reactor l but also on radiological program equipment. With regard to procedures being up-to-date, this is an open issue that we have identified to the University.

We will inspect procedures for adequacy prior to any NRC concurrence in restart of the reactor.

8s10250104 881011 PDR ADOCK 05000160 P PDC l

zen

q

. Tom Clements 2-OCF11 M I trust we have been responsive to the issues you raised.

~

Sincerely, Malcolm L. Ernst Acting Regional Administrator cc:jDr.Ra'tibA.Karam, Director Neely Nuclear Research Center gA.P.Sheppard,ActingVice President for Research State of Georgia l bec: Document Control Desk DRS Technical Assiatant A. Adams, NRR l

l i

l l

,b

, . Un i

< RII Rll (\\ & NRF Ril 4

1 Y

DVerrelli R es ns RGod ard h

GHolahan s P tohr 10/j/88 10///88 10/ /88 10/. /88 88

[L/} 88 10g

\

.___ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . - - _ _ _ _ . . . - _ _ . - _ _ _ _ . . , . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . , _ . _ _ . _ _