ML20236D212
| ML20236D212 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000054 |
| Issue date: | 03/14/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20236D206 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8903220529 | |
| Download: ML20236D212 (5) | |
Text
_ __-_--
- o UNITED STATES 8" )
f g7 o g
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 As ..v/(/,/
..+
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 25 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-81 CINTICHEM, INC.
DOCKET NO. 50-54
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 12, 1988, Cintichem Inc. (licensee) requested an amendment to their Technical Specifications (TS) for their 5 MW (thermal) research reactor. Five changes have been requested. Three of the changes result from inconsistencies in the TS with regard to actual operation of the reactor and the remaining two are changes identified by an NRC inspection.
2.0 EVALUATION The sections of the TS requiring the corrections, and the basis for the requested change are as follows:
Change 1 (Change due to inconsistency with regard to operation)
DEFI?ITION OF REACTOR SECURED Present Specification - Technical Specification Definitions Reactor Secured: The reactor is secured when (1) the core contains in-suf ficient f uel to attain criticality under optimum conditions of moderation and reflection; (2) the moderator has been removed; (3) the minimum number of control rods are fully inserted as required by Technical Specifications; (4) the console ke the lock; (5) yno switch workisisininthe OFF position progress involving andcore the key fuel,iscore removed from structure, installed control rods or control rod drives unless they are physically decoupled from the control rods; and (6) no in-core experiments are behg moved or serviced with a reactivity worth exceeding the maximum value allowed for a single experiment or one dollar, whichever is smaller.
Proposed Specification: Reformat the Definition of Reactor Secured Definition - Reactor Secured - The reactor is secured when:
a) The core contains insufficient fuel to attain criticality under optimum conditions of moderation and reflection, g b) The moderator has been removed, or 8903220529 890314 4 PDR ADOCK 050 P
c) 1) minimum number of control rods fully inserted as ;
required by Technical Specifications, and
- 2) the console key switch is in the OFF position and the key is removed frun the lock, and
- 3) no work is in progress involving core fuel, core structure, installed control rods or control rod drives unless they are physically _
decoupled from.the. control rods, and
- 4) no in-core experiments are being moved or serviced with a reactivity worth exceeding the maximum value allowed for a single experiment or one dollar, whichever is smaller.
Basis for the Change 1 The Technical Specifications were reformated when they were revised in 1984 )
for the license renewal. The original or and and clarifiers were l inadvertently removed at that time. ThTs led to an interpretation of this '
definition which is contnry to its intent. The old TS, shown under the
" Proposed Specification", is correct in that the reactor is secured when ,
certain specific conditions are met rather than when all specific conditions l are met simultaneously. The old TS are also consistant with American l National Standard ANS-15.1.
Change 2 (Change identified by NRC inspection)
SAFETY CHANNEL SETPOINTS Present Specification - Technical Specification 2.2.1 - 1 Safety Channel Setpoints in Forced Cooling Mode For operation in the forced cooling mode, the liiniting safety system settings shall be:
(1) power level at any flow rate not to exceed 7.5 MW (nominal)
(2) steady-state power levels not to exceed 5 MWt (3) coolant flow shall not be less than 1,800 gpm for powers above 250 KW (4) pool level shall not be less than 20 ft above the top of the core
l l
l l
Proposed Specification: Delete Technical Specification 2.2.1 l Item (2) and renumber remaining items (1) power level at any flow rate not to exceed 7.5 MW (nominal) l (2) coolant flow'shall not.be less than 1,800 gpm for powers above 250 KW i (3) pool level shall not be less than 20 ft above the top of the core Basis for the Change-l Thereisnoreactorscram'(automaticprotectiveaction)associatedwith5MW,'as '
l there is for the other limiting safety system settings. The December 12,_
.1984 Technical Specification amendment (Amendment No. 22) removed the safety limit of 5 MW (nominal) from the Technical Specification and added ,a limit -
based on flow and reactor power. '
Since 5 MW is not a safety limit, has.no associated automatic protective i action, and was not used in the Safety Analysis, this limiting safety system I setting can be removed. The licensee however, is by-license condition, limited to operation of the reactor not to exceed 5 MWT. l Change 3 (Change due to inconsistency with regard to operation)
POOL TEMPERATURE i
Present Specification - Technical Specification-3.3.4 - ;
MeasuringChannels(lastparagraph) l l' Pool temperature information allows the operator to adjust the cooling
! system to keep pool temperature within a preferred range, and to adjust the everpowerreversesetpoint(seeSection3.3.4).
Proposed Specification Delete part of Technical Specification 3.3.4. -
MeasuringChannels(Partofthelastparagraph).
Pool temperature information allows the operator to adjust the cooling system to keep pool temperature within a preferred range.
Basis for the Change <
The' overpower reverse function was deleted from the Technical Specification in1984,AmendmentNo.21(licenserenewal). This requirement was inadver-tently left in this section.
y -
j b
j i
Change 4 (Change identified by NRC inspection) l CALIBRATIONS OF MEASURING AND SAFETY CHANNELS l l
Present Specification - Technical Specification 4.1 - 1 Safety Channel Calibration A channel calibration of each safety channel shall be performed annually (see Section3.3.4).
I Proposed Specification - Technical Specification 4.1 -
Measuring and Safety Channel d Calibration a
A channel calibration of each measuring and safety channel shall be performed annually (see Sections 3.3.4 and 3.3.5). .
Basis for the Change The present Technical Specifications require the safety channels to be calibrated. The only difference between measuring channels and safety channels is that measuring channels also include a core delta T and rod position indication. Both of these channels have been calibrated in the past, but adding this to the Technical Specifications will facilitate a formal yearly calibration of these systems.
1 Change 5 (Change due to inconsistency with regard to operation) I l
IRRADIATED FUEL 1
Present Specification: - Technical Specification 5.6.2 -
Irradiated Fuel ,
Irradiated fuel is stored upright under water in the storage pool,within l the reactor building in criticality-safe racks. Each rack acconnodates 16 l elements in wells with center-to-center spacing of 6 in. "Sup Information to Final Hazards Suninary Report" ( April 28.- 1961)plefnentary states that an infinite ". umber of elements so stored would be subcritical. Each well has a hole at tne bottom to allow the water to circulate for cooling.
Proposed Specification - Add 516 element racks to Technical Specification 5.6.2. Irradiated Fuel Irradiated fuel is stored upright under water in the storage pool within the reactor building in criticality-safe racks. Each rack accommodates s 16 elements in wells with center-to-center spacing of 6 in. "Su l Information to Final Hazards Sununary Report" (April 28,1961)pplementary states that an I
infinite number of elements so stored would be subcritical. Each well has a hole at the bottom to allow the water to circulate for cooling.
Easis for the Change Six element wall racks have always been used at Cintichem along with the sixteen element floor racks. These six element racks have the same element to element spacing as the sixteen element racks and are more criticality safe as fewer elements are stored.
j
.. 1 1
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves changes in the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in inspection and surveillance requirements. The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that -
may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eli j set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)gibility criteria (9). Pursuant to 10for categorical CFR 51.22(b), exclusion no )
environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be i prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
l
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase ]
in the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated, or ,
create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any <
accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant l reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a i
significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that 1 the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the ,
proposed activities, and (3) such activities will be conducted in I i compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this l l amendment will not be inimical to the comon defense and security or the health and safety of the public. 1 Principal Contributor: Theodore S. Michaels Dated: March 14, 1989 l
l 1
-___