ML20247L651
| ML20247L651 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Plum Brook |
| Issue date: | 05/19/1998 |
| From: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247L633 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9805260036 | |
| Download: ML20247L651 (3) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
l.
l fM %U ye 4 *, UNITED STATES 3 E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i
f WASHINoTON, D.C. 20655-0001
...../
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-93 NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION DOCKET NO. 50-185
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated November 4,1996, as supplemented on December 20,1996, September 18,1997, March 30,1998, and April 13,1998, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA or the licensee) submitted a request for amendment to Facility License No. R 93 and Appendix A, Technical Specifications (TSs). The requested changes would provide administrative changes to the possession only license and TS of the Mock-Up Reactor (MUR). The MUR is located in the same facility as the possession only Plum Brook Reactor Facility License No.TR-3, Docket No.50-30, but is a separate licensed facility also in the possession only status. There is no reactor fuel at the facility.
2.0 EVALUATION 2.1 Changes to License Conditions The licensee has proposed changes to paragraph 2.A of the license. The first change is to specify that the reactor is to add the term "non-operable" to indicate the condition of the MUR. The licensee's proposed change to this license condW~ is to include the previous license amendments as part of the MUR description. These changes are consistent with the facility configuration and condition, and are therefore acceptable.
With regard to the license expiration date, the licensee has provided commitments in the March 30,1998, supplement to provide a decommissioning plan to the NRC by the end of calender year 1999, and to complete decommissioning activities by the end of 2007 in a move to terminate the license. Therefore, in accordance with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.51(b) for a facility that has permanently ceased operations, the licensee is authorized to own and possess the MUR, until the Commission notifies the licensee in writing that the license is terminated.
2.2 Changes to Technical Specifications The proposad changes to TS 1.2.1, and TS 4.2 are to update the use and reference of the American National Standards Institute /American Nuclear Society Standard 15.1 (ANSI /ANS 15.1) from a 1982 version to a 1990 version. The use of the 1990 version is consistent 980$260036 980519 PDR ADOCK 05000185 P PDR ,
with the NRC Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors (NUREG-1537), and is, therefore, acceptable.
TS 3.1.1 proposed changes include changing the word "He" to the words "He or she." This change is acceptable. The proposed changes also add a statement that the " Directorate shall provide the resources to maintain the MUR in protected safe storage." This added delineation of responsibilities is also acceptable.
The former TS 3.1.2 related to the "Aeropropulsion Facilities and Experiments Division" was deleted as it is no longer appropriate to the organization. Also, the organization chart was revised to delete this division. Based on the update of the organization, these changes are acceptable.
The proposed TS 3.1.2 changes provide provisions that the Chairman and members of the internal audit committee shall not be directly associated with the facility. This indepen-dence is consistent with the guidance of NUREG 1537, and, therefore, is acceptable.
The proposed TS 3.4.a changes the word " radioactivity" to " radiation," is a more technically accurate indication for the records to be kept, and therefore is acceptable.
The TSs have been retyped which has resulted in some changes in format and page numbering. These changes are editorial and acceptable.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
1 The amendment involves changes in the installation or use of a faulty component located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20. The staff has determined that this amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in l the types, of any affluents that may be released off site, and there is no significant j increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure. l This amendment also involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(9) and (10). Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
L
4.0 CONCLUSION
The staff has concluded, on the basis of 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 reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (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 will be
conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations, and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or the health and safety of the public.
1 Principal Contributor: M. M. Mendonca Date: May 19, 1998 l
i