ML20216F983
| ML20216F983 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Illinois |
| Issue date: | 09/20/1999 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20216F970 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9909270170 | |
| Download: ML20216F983 (5) | |
Text
.
po c 4 i
- .- p '4 4o ,j UNITED STATES -
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066-0001
- * * * * ,5 I
_ SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR i SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO.11 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO R-115 THE UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA-CHAMPAIGN DOCKET NO. 50-151 1.0 JNTRODUCTION By letter dated November 13,1998, as supplemented on May 11 and August 3, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UlUC or the licensee) submitted th decommissioning plan for the UlUC Nuclear Reactor Laboratory and the UlUC A TRIGA Research Reactor (TRIGA). The licensee also made application for term Facility Operating License No. R-115 pursuant to 10 CFR 50.82(b)(1).
2.0 EVALUATION The UlUC has decided to cease operation of its TRIGA and to decommission October 5,1998, as supplemented, the licensee request technical specifications (TSs) be modified to prohibit reactor operation and allo only" of the reactor. Amendment No.10 was issued on April 12,1999.
This license amendment removed authorization from the license to operate the reactor, authorized
. possession only of the reactor, and changed the TSs to remove or modify operat administrative controls for the reactor facility.are not needed for poss The regulations in 10 CFR 50.82(b)(4)(i) require licensees to include in their prop decommissioning plan their choice of the alternative for decommissioning. This further states that a decommissioning attemative is acceptable if it provides for decommissioning without significant delay. To meet this regulation, licensees fo reactors (NPRs) usually choose the DECON alternative for decommissioning, which lea the immediate dismantlement and decontamination of the reactor facility. However regulations go on to state that consideration will be given to an attemative that provid delayed completion of decommissioning only when necessary to protect the publ safety. The regulations give factors to be considered in evaluating an attemative for delayed
. disposal capacity.completion of decommissioning. One of these factors is the unavail ;
9909270170 990920 PDR p ADOCK 05000151 PDR
L Normally, one of the first steps in the decommissioning of a university NPR is the return of the reactor fuel to the Department of Energy (DOE). DOE stores NPR fuel by fuel type. TRIGA fuelis stored at the Idaho National Engineering and Environmental Laboratory (INEEL). DOE historically has promptly removed fuel from decommissioning NPRs upon request of the licensee. However, in accordance with the settlement agreement of a lawsuit concerning spe nuclear fuel and nuclear waste at the INEEL, domestic spent nuclear fuel receipts at the INEEL have been severely constrained. In a letter to UlUC from the Director of the Spent Fuel
- Program at the Idaho Operations Office of DOE dated July 23,1998, it is stated that "the INEEL could probably support any post 2009 receipt date given sufficient notification and funding.
Receipt of the University of lilinois spent nuclear fuel from 2001 through 2009 is currently precluded due to high priority spent nuclear fuel receipts already scheduled and limitations on the number of receipts within the State of Idaho as established by the Settlement Agreement."
The Nuclear Peactor Laboratory is a stand-alone building. Irradiated fuel can be stored in storage racks in the reactor pool or in the bulk shielding tank. The UlUC has no other facilities for the storage of irradiated reactor fuel. Because the fuel must be stored in the Nuclear
~
Reactor Laboratory and because DOE cannot accept receipt of the fuel until 2009 at the earliest, the licensee has chosen the SAFSTOR decommissioning option. SAFSTOR is the altemative in which the facility is placed and maintained in a condition that allows the facility to be safely stored and subsequently decontaminated to levels that permit release for unrestricted use. SAFSTOR consists of a short period of preparation for safe storage, a variable safe storage period of continuing care consisting of security, surveillance, and maintenance, and ends with a period of deferred decontamination. The staff finds that waste disposal capacity for disposal of the reactor fuelis unavailable. Therefore, the staff concludes that the licensee's choice of SAFSTOR for the decommissioning alternative is acceptable and that the licensee meets the requirements of 10 CFR 50.82(b)(4)(i). 4 The regulations in 10 CFR 50.82(b)(2) state that for decommissioning plans in which the majo dismantlement activities are delayed by first placing the facility in storage, planning for these delayed activities may be less detailed. Updated detailed plans must be submitted and approved before the start of these activities. Potential changes in decommissioning technology, waste disposal, and regulations make detailed planning now for decommissioning activities that would start sometime after 2009 impractical. The contents of the licensee's decommissioning plan reflect this facet of the regulations. The decommissioning plan does not contain detailed information on the dismantlement of the facility. The plan contains information on maintaining the facility in a SAFSTOR condition and monitoring the condition of the facility. The staff concludes that 10 CFR 50.82(b)(2) is applicable in this case and that the reduced detail in the licensee's decommissioning plan is acceptable.
Assurance of funding to complete decommissioning is an important aspect of NRC's decommissioning regulations. The regulations in 10 CFR 50.82(b)(4)(iv) require the licensee to submit as part of its decommissioning plan an updated cost estimate for the chosen attemative for decommissioning, comparison of that estimate with current funds set aside for decommissioning, and plans for assuring the availability of adequate funds for completion of decommissioning. For decommissioning plans that delay completion of decommissioning by including a period of storage or surveillance, the regulations in 10 CFR 50.82(b)(3) require information on assurance of funds needed to complete decommissioning and means for adjusting cost estimates and levels of funding.
l The licensee engaged a contractor to estimate decommissioning co has reviewed the cost estimate and finds .
s at it to b maintaining the reactor during the SAFSTOR period will cost app (1998 dollars). The UlUC is a State institution of higher education and h statement licensee of intent originally for financial provided a statementassurance of intent in aas discussed letter dated Ju ee decided, as part of entry into decommissioning status, ntoand update its st using a statement ofintent, there is no require because full funding will be provided by the State when needed. e Th estimate of SAFSTOR and decommissioning costs on a biennial bas factors and information on the cost of the disposal of low-level radioac 1307). At the end of the SAFSTOR period, the licensee willoning prepare a ne cost estimate for submission as part of a full decommissioning plan. Th the statement ofintent of decommissioning funding, the licensee's estimates o complete decommissioning meet the requirements 50.82(b)(4)(iv).
e o plan the choice of the alternative for decommiss g The licensee is completing actions under the existing license to plac .
condition. A major action in preparation for SAFSTOR is the placement of f Shielding Facility, which is a tank of water that is part of the reactor biolo separate from the reactor tank. The design of the Bulk Shielding Facility allow approved as part of Amendment No.10 .to the facility l A new set of design in use at the facility. The change to the fac s made under 10 CFR 50.59 of the Commission's regulations. Storage of fueli the fuel. This measure is desirable because fuel damage if mishandling occurs. or han The licensee plans to maintain a regular surveil lance schedule at the fa performance. The TS requirements of Amendment and fuel inspection. These requirements help to ensu ,
properly con' olled during the SAFSTOR period. The licensee has established va SAFSTOR period. Although not required to do so b important process variables from any computer on weekly physical checks of the facility.
The licensee procedures, hasasproposed which reads follows: an addition (TS 6.41.) to TS 6.4, " Procedures i
I i
4 i
- 1. Those procedures necessary to safely maintain the facility during the i period and decommissioning. This shallinclude a periodic physical check quarterly surveillance checklists. support systems and equipment wit ,
The licensee submitted examples of checklists as part of its amendmen checklists appear to adequately address surveillance of the permanently 3
Reactor Laboratory. The actual checklists used by the licensee will b inspections of the facility to confirm that they are appropriate for SAFSTOR SAFSTOR condition, the staff concludes that the 50.82(b)(4)(l) to provide a description of activities involved in the c alternative. The decommissioning staffis also procedures finds that the proposed addition of TS 6.4 i. to acceptable.
The licensee will continue with its current health physics program durin Likewise, the licensee will continue to follow the approved emergency ,
license amendment will be in force during the SAF requirements to ensure that the requirements of the TSs are met. The TSs Committee review and audit responsibility over activities at the reactor facil surveillance requirements and independent oversight act as quality assurance The storage of fuel will be performed in accordance with the requirements o the probability of an accident that could lead to fuel products. With the permanent shutdown of the reactor, the fission product i has significantly decayed if the cladding failed on a fuel element, the conse which assumes the higher fission product inventory as ,
shutdown of the reactor. The primary airbome effl no longer produced. The licensee estimates that the typical dose commitmen SAFSTOR period to a member of the public at the site boundary will be less th be less than 50 mrem per year per staff member.
requirements.
will T i I
The licensee will follow the release criteria regulations in place at the time of final -
decommissioning activities and license termination. The planned final radi the existing regulations, the licensee would follow th .
10 CFR Part 20, Subpart E. Final radiation survey plans currently follow the gu Multi-Agency Radiation Survey and Site Investigation Manual (MARSSIM). D on release criteria and the final radiation survey will be presented in the additional decommissioning plan that the licensee will submit at the end of the SAFSTOR
i The licensee has also requested changes to TS 6.8, " Reporting Requirements," to remove reference to the Regional Administrator of Region lit for submission of reports. The NPR inspection program has been transferred from the regions to NRC Headquarters. The staff finds that this change to the TSs is administrative in nature to reflect changes in NRC organization and is therefore acceptable.
A " Notice and Solicitation of Comments Pursuant to 10 CFR 20.140 Conceming Proposed Action to Decommission University of Illinois at Urbana-Champa University of Illinois Advanced TRIGA Research Reactor" was published in the FEDERAL REGISTER on June 14,1999 (64 FR 31882), and in the Chamoaion News-Gazette on 1999. No comments were received on the proposed decommissioning amendment.
The staff concludes that the level of detail in the decommissioning plan is sufficient in SAFSTOR status when final dismantlement will not take place until some time after 200 that the contents of the decommissioning plan meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.82 The staff also concludes that the health and safety of the public and the facility staff will be acceptably protected during the SAFSTOR period. Therefore, the SAFSTOR decommiss plan submitted by the licensee is acceptable to the staff.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
The Commission has prepared an Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant impact (EA), which was published in the Federal Reaister on August ,1999, (64 FR).
On the basis of the EA and this safety evaluation, the Commission has determined that no environmental impact statement is required and that issuance of this amendment approvin decommissioning will have no significant adverse effect of the quality of the human environment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
On the basis of the staff's review of the licensee's decommissioning plan, it is concluded that the licensee is adequately cognizant of its continuing responsibilities to protect the health and safety of both workers and the public from undue radiological risk. The decommissioning pl provides reasonable evidence that the licensee is prepared to maintain the reactor in a SAFSTOR condition in accordance with applicable regulations and applicable NRC guidance until DOE can accept the fuel from the facility. At the end of the SAFSTOR period, the licensee
.will submit an updated decommissioning plan for review and approval of the NRC staff. The staff, therefore, finds the licensee's plans to be acceptable.
The staff has concluded on the basis of the above considerations that (1) there i assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the proposed activities, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and (3) the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and sec or the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: A. Adams, Jr, NRC Date: September 20, 1999