ML20244D258
| ML20244D258 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000294 |
| Issue date: | 06/07/1989 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20244D245 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8906160189 | |
| Download: ML20244D258 (2) | |
Text
. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ -
- /p ucg'o UNITED STATES 8%' o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
{ E
- WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%..+
/
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 7 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-114 MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY 00CKET NO. 50-294
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated December 1,1988, the licensee, Michigan State University (licensee) rer:uested that its license be amended to " possession-only*
status. The Iftensee submitted revisions to the license conditions and Technical Specifications (TS) and documentation to support the revisions.
On December 14, 1988 the licensee submitted additional revisions to the TS.
The licensee has also requested waiver from the physical security and emergency plans since there is no fuel at the site. The licensee is planning to decommission the reactor and has awarded a contract for the preparation of a decommissioning plan.
2.0 EVALUATION In preparation for dismantling and decommissioning the reactor, the licensee shipped the fuel offsite. The only radioactive material onsite consists of activated byproduct material, a 3 curie sealed americium-beryllium neutron source and 2 grams of contained U-235 in conr.ection with reactor instrumentation (fission chamber). Because of these conditions, the licensee has requested a waiver from both the emergency and physical security plans. The staff finds that a specific exemption under 10 CFR 50.12 is appropriate. This special exemption is authorized by law, will not present an undue risk to the public health and safety, and is consistent with the common defense and security and special circumstance of 10 CFR 50.12(2)(11) exists, i.e. application of the regulation in the particular circumstance is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the rule. .The TS, however, require that operating procedures be in-place for radiation safety and emergency situations. A physical security plan is no longer required; however a new technical specification, Section 6.6, has been added to provide facility access control.
The Technical Specifications have been modified extensively to reflect the !
" possession-only" status requested by the licensee. In general, those Technical !
Specifications relating to reactor operation, performance, safety, surveillance, i and related reporting were deleted. Those relating to staff and population safety, surveillance, monitoring, organization, and related reporting requirements have been retained.
8906160189 890607 PDR ADOCK 05000294 P FDC i
-j N 2-All specifications relating to.'in-core fuel, coolant, and moderator systems; reactor control;and safety systems;.and.in'-core experiments'have.been deleted.
Since' the reactor cannot be fueled or. operated, these ~ items are. no longer relevant'and Technical SpecificationsLthat address them are not. meaningful..
.Those Technical Specifications that pertain to the? " possession-only" status of L
- the facility were retained. They include the radiation' monitoring system and ^
administrative functions.; The amended Technical Specifications will continue to ensure that the various activities permitted under the." possession-only"- ",
license status will be conducted without-significant risk to the health and -
safety of onsite personnel or the public or to the' environment.-
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATE 0N' d a
~
This amendment involves changes in'th'e installation or use of facility' c'omponents 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 hazards consideration (as discussed below)', .)j there is no significant change in the types or significant increase in.the~
amounts of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is;no signifi- j cant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.- -i Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for-categorical' i exclusionsetforthin10CFR51.22(c)(9). Pursuantto10CFR'51.22(b),no j environmental impact statement-or environmental assessment'need be prepared 1in l connection with the issuance of this amendment. j
4.0 CONCLUSION
l The. staff concludes, that amending thisl license to a possession-onlyl status is 1 appropriate. The staff has further concluded, based on the considerations. 1 discussed above, that: (1) because the amende nt does not involve'a significant- l increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated.- j or create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any '
accident previously evaluated, or involve a significant' reduction z in a margin -
of safety, the amendment does not involve.a significant hazards consideration, -l (2) there is reasonable assurance that.the health and safety of the public' '!
will not be endangered by the proposed activities, and (3)-such activities ~ 1 will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations.and the l issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to-the common defense and !
security or the health ~and safety of the public, i l
l Principal Contributor: Theodore S. Michaels.
Dated: June, 1989
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ -