ML20236C446
| ML20236C446 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000192 |
| Issue date: | 03/08/1989 |
| From: | Bauer T, Klein D TEXAS, UNIV. OF, AUSTIN, TX |
| To: | Alexander Adams NRC |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8903220154 | |
| Download: ML20236C446 (3) | |
Text
t
{
aFfW COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
[ +f**%?..
THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN s ; }s ;
l-M t,
,,\\QQg/ Departments lhiechanicalEngineering NuclearEngineeringProgram Austin, Texas 78712-(312)471-3 Attention: Al Adams Re:
50-192 (R-92)
Subject:
Letters of August 1, 1988 and September 13, 1988 s
Dear Sir:
i Enclosed is a response to a question by NRC staff (letter December 14, l
1988). The information supplements the original amendment request.
Sincerely,
[
,.o ). Daw" Thomas L. Bauer Assistant Director Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory Ap;' roved GlAfM 3kif9 Dale Klein, Director Nuclear Engineering Teaching Laboratory cc:
H. Walls H. Marcus l
TLB:j gr Enclosure 1
I
!)0 8903220154 990308 m
fDR ADOCK 05000192 q0r I
\\\\
L_---_----
a 4
489b COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING f.C!3 y
%vggl)
HE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN 2
T
/
Departmentof AlechanicalEngineering NaclearEngineeringProgram Austin, Texas 78712 (312)471-3136 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of 5'
l The University of Texas 5
at Austin 5
Docket No. 50-192 6
Balcones Research Center i
Nuclear Engineering Teaching 5
Laboratory (NETL) 1 1
Gerhard J. Fonken being duly sworn, hereby deposes and says that he is Executive Vice President and Provost, The University of Texas at Austin; that he is duly authorized to sign and file with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission the attached information for amendment of the R-92 technical specifications; that he is familiar with the content thereof; and that the matters set forth therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.
AN A'u Gerhpfd J. Fonken Executive Vice President & Provost STATE OF TEXAS Subscribed and sworn to before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Texas, this % day of % etq,.<,d
, 1989.
$M A Notary Public in and fof the State of Texas rATRIC'A T. SYlePER rM EXPIRES 3/30/89 l
m_____._______
a
..s-t Response,to question:- Do you plan to complete' post-poned surveillance to make the facility operable prior to movenent,of the fuel?- No-Any-post-poned surveillance that occurs as a_conseq'uence of. equipment j
failure or personnel availability are' prerequisites prior to normal operation activities. Note that these Surveillance activities may take more than one day and the order of performance is at the discretion'and appropriate judgement of qualified operators. This is normal practice for any situation that woul6 delay timely surveillance activities such as
.j equipment failures, calibration errors, corrective actions or other delaying events. A similar situation occurs at the initial critical I
condition and excess adjustment subsequent to suberitical multiplication
~
~
- experiments. If the experiment involves a " Reciprocal Multiplication" measurement with the removal and loading of fuel elements several types of surveillance become due. During the status' of a core configuration that
- can not become critical by operation of control rods these ' surveillance
(
become due upon the immediate available condition forsoperation.
_See j
. amendment request sec 4.2.lf and 4.2.2f).
While the specification seems to be clear on this issue the l
definitions distort the issue. The definition of reactor shutdown (1.1) is clear and concise with no regard to the-status of control system, experiments or other reactivity devices._ Likewise the definition of.
reactor operation (1.3) is clear by, reference to the'. previous definition (1.2).
The definition for reactor secured (1.2) contains 3 subsections.
Items (a) and (b) are, again, clear and concise. However, item (c) allows several situations that do:not represent safety questions but do, by definition, designate a non reactor secured condition.: This deficiency in
. the definition had been previously identified and an alternate was used in the docket 50-602 Technical Specification. The following modification to the definition is proposed.
l 1.2 Reactor Secure The reactor is secure when:
1 1.2.1 It contains insufficient fissile material or. moderator present in the 1
reactor, control rods or adjacent experiments, to attain criticality under optimum available conditions of moderation and reflection, or j
l 1.2.2 i
The minimum number of neutron absor'bing control rods are fully a.
inserted or other safety devices are in shutdown position, as i
required'by technical specifications.
b.
The console key switch is in the off position and the key is removed from the lock.
c.
No work is in progress involving core fuel, core structure, installed control rods, or control rod drives unless they'are i
physically decoupled from the control rods, d.
No experiments in or near the reactor are being moved or serviced that have, on movement, a reactivity worth exceeding >the maximum allowed for a single experiment or one dollar which ever is smaller.
l N