ML25154A356
| ML25154A356 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Utah |
| Issue date: | 06/05/2025 |
| From: | Jeremy Bowen NRC/NRR/DANU/UNPO |
| To: | Goodell E Univ of Utah, Salt Lake City |
| References | |
| EA-25-0028, EAF-NRR-2025-0066 IR 2024201 | |
| Download: ML25154A356 (1) | |
See also: IR 05000407/2024201
Text
EAF-NRR-2025-0066
Dr. Edward Goodell, Facility Director
Utah Nuclear Engineering Program
Joseph Merrill Engineering Building
110 Central Campus Drive, Room 2000
Salt Lake City, UT 84112
SUBJECT:
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000407/2024201, DISPUTED CITED VIOLATION
RESCINDED
Dear Dr. Goodell:
On January 21, 2025, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued the subject
report, Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No.
(ML24261B239). The inspection report documented a Severity Level IV violation for the failure
to obtain a license amendment for a change to the facility, when the facility involved a change to
a parameter associated with the function of a system as specified in the technical specifications
incorporated in the license.
In a letter dated February 18, 2025 (ML25050A611), you provided a written response and
contested violation (VIO)05000407/2024201-01. On March 19, 2025 (ML25071A243), the NRC
acknowledged receipt of your letter.
The NRC conducted a detailed review of your February 18, 2025, letter and examined
circumstances and applicable regulatory requirements in accordance with Part I, section 2.8 of
the NRC Enforcement Manual. This review was performed by an NRC staff member who was
not involved in the original inspection effort.
In your letter dated February 18, 2025, you requested that the VIO 05000407/2024201-01 be
rescinded because you made an allowable facility change under Title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations (10 CFR) Section 50.59, Changes, tests and experiments, that did not require a
license amendment. Based on this limited review, the NRC staff concluded that the documented
Severity Level IV violation of 10 CFR 50.59(c)(1)(i), will be rescinded. The NRC staff will revise
and reissue NRC Inspection Report No. 05000407/2024201 to reflect this change. The details of
the NRCs evaluation are contained in the enclosure to this letter.
June 5, 2025
E. Goodell
2
In accordance with 10 CFR Section 2.390, Public inspections, exemptions, requests for
withholding, a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be available electronically for public
inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records
component of NRCs document system ADAMS. ADAMS is accessible from the NRC website at
http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public Electronic Reading Room).
If you have any questions concerning this inspection, please contact Juan Arellano at
301-415-0477, or via email at Juan.Arellano@nrc.gov.
Sincerely,
Jeremy S. Bowen, Director
Division of Advanced Reactors and Non-Power
Production and Utilization Facilities
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Docket No. 50-407
License No. R-126
Enclosure:
As stated
cc w/enclosure: GovDelivery Subscribers
Signed by Bowen, Jeremy
on 06/05/25
E. Goodell
3
SUBJECT:
UNIVERSITY OF UTAH - U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
INSPECTION REPORT NO. 05000407/2024201, DISPUTED SEVERITY
LEVEL IV VIOLATION RESCINDED DATED: JUNE 6, 2025
DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC
JBowen, NRR
TBrown, NRR
JGreives, NRR
MFard, NRR
JBraisted, NRR
JArellano, NRR
EBrothman, NRR
CSmith, NRR
DAird, NRR
PMcKenna, NRR
RFelts, NRR
JPeralta, OE
DBradley, OE
KLambert, RIII
DBetancourt, RIII
GEdwards, RIII
CStPeters, RIII
SBakhsh, RIII
ESanchezSantiago, RIII
RidsNrrDanuUnpo Resource
ADAMS ACCESSION NO.: ML25154A356
OFFICE
NRR/DANU/UNPO
NRR/DANU/UNPO
NRR/DANU/UNPO
OE/EB
NRR/DANU/DD
NAME
JArellano
NParker
TBrown
JPeralta
JBowen
DATE
6/3/2025
6/4/2025
6/4/2025
6/4/2025
6/5/2025
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
Enclosure
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
Evaluation of License Response to a Severity Level IV Violation
Restatement of VIO 05000407/2024201-01:
Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) 50.59, Changes, tests and
experiments, paragraph (c)(1)(i) states, in part, that a licensee may make changes in
the facility as described in the final safety analysis report (as updated) without obtaining
a license amendment pursuant to Sec. 50.90 only if [a]n amendment to the technical
specifications incorporated in the license is not required.
Contrary to the above, on September 21, 2023, the licensee made a change to the
facility as described in the final safety analysis report (as updated) without obtaining a
license amendment when the change in the facility involved a change to a parameter
associated with the function of a system as specified in the technical specifications
incorporated in the license. Specifically, the licensee made a change to the reactor tank
water level monitor by lowering the water level to about ten feet below the top of the
tank.
Summary of Licensee Response
In a letter dated February 18, 2025, University of Utah (the licensee) contested a violation of the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) requirements. The licensee indicated that it
complied with the regulatory requirements under 10 CFR 50.59(c)(1)(i) because an amendment
to the technical specification (TS) was not required for lowering the reactor tank water level with
the reactor shutdown and secure.
The licensee asserted that TS 3.3(1) and TS 5.2(3) were satisfied because normal facility
configuration was not changed (i.e., the continued use of a float sensor with a setpoint to ensure
that the water level was no more than 15.5 inches from the top of the tank as specified by the
TS). Additionally, the licensee asserted that changing the setpoint would have violated TSs and
reduced reactor safety by permitting rod withdrawal with reactor water level at a lower level,
which is contrary to the requirements of TS 3.2.3.
The licensee stated their license does not include a TS requirement for monitoring water level
with a shutdown or secured reactor. For this facility configuration, the licensee performed
a 10 CFR 50.59 evaluation and concluded that it may lower the water level beyond 15.5 inches
from the top of the water tank.
TS 4.3(1) states, A channel check of the reactor tank water level monitor shall be performed
monthly. The licensee stated that TS 4.3(1) does not specify that the water level monitoring
system needs to be a float sensor. Additionally, the licensee stated that the notice of violation
failed to mention the use of a submersible area radiation monitor with a low setpoint of 0.5
millirem/hour as a water level monitoring system, which was discussed in their 10 CFR 50.59
evaluation. The licensee asserted that during the period the water level was maintained lower
than 15.5 inches with the reactor shutdown and secured, the surveillance requirement of
TS 4.3(1) was satisfied by their monthly check of the area radiation monitor.
In conclusion, the licensee stated the water tank area radiation monitor functioned as a water
2
level monitoring system for a shutdown and secure reactor, which successfully performed the
design function of indicating an unexpected loss of shielding water while the water level was
lower than 15.5 inches from the top of the tank. The licensee stated their 10 CFR 50.59
evaluation correctly determined that no license amendment was required.
NRC Evaluation and Conclusion
The NRC staff performed an independent review of the licensees position as described in its
letter dated February 18, 2025. During the review, the NRC staff identified ambiguity between
the TSs, design basis, and the work performed by the licensee.
The NRC staff disagrees with the statement that the area radiation monitor checked monthly
during the period water level was maintained lower than 15.5 inches satisfied TS 4.3(1). The
licensees Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Renewal of the Facility Operating License
for the TRIGA Nuclear Reactor at the University of Utah, section 5.4.3 states in part, TS 4.3,
Specification 1 helps ensure that a channel check of the reactor tank water level monitor is
performed as required to support TS 3.3, Specification 1; TS 3.2.2 channel operability; and the
corresponding TS 3.2.3 setpoint. Although TS 4.3(1) does not explicitly state in the TS that the
water level monitoring system needs to be a float sensor, the safety evaluation report specifies
the intent of TS 4.3(1) is to ensure the operability of the water level alarm at 15.5 inches from
the top of the reactor tank. The NRC acknowledges the ambiguity as to how this requirement
should be complied with when the reactor is secured and reactor tank water level is maintained
less than 15.5 inches.
TS 3.3(1) and TS 5.2(3) state, in part, a reactor tank water level alarm shall indicate loss of
coolant if the water level decreases 15.5 inches from the top of the reactor tank. The NRC staff
agrees with the licensees statement that TS 3.3(1) and 5.2(3) would be a violation if the
licensee were to physically relocate this level monitor or modify its setpoint to initiate the alarm
at a new water level without prior NRC approval. This TS level monitor is also tied to a scram
function at 15.5 inches from the top of the reactor tank when the reactor is operational. Due to
the alarm being locked in at the lower water level, control rod withdrawal is not permitted under
TS 3.2.3, and the reactor is unable to operated. The NRC staff also acknowledges that the
licensee implemented an additional means of monitoring water level by correlating readings
from a submersible area radiation monitor with the corresponding indication on an ultrasonic
water level sensor. However, there is a question of ambiguity regarding whether this
implementation constitutes a change to the TSs, given that the water level alarm activates to a
loss of coolant at a lower water level. Specifically, at the new water level, TS 3.3(1) would not be
able to perform its function to alarm at a future loss of coolant scenario.
The NRC staff noted that on September 21, 2023, the licensee removed enough fissile material
from the reactor to not be able to achieve criticality under optimum available conditions of
moderation and reflection, thereby meeting the TS definition of reactor secured. The NRC staff
also noted that the facility was in an extended shutdown period allowing for substantial
radioactive decay, significantly reducing radiation levels.
Based on the lack of clarity in the licensees licensing requirements for reactor tank water level
when the reactor is shutdown and secured; the NRC staff was unable to ascertain that the
licensee was required to obtain a license amendment for monitoring water level in the reactor
tank by using a submersible area radiation monitor with a low setpoint of 0.5 millirem/hour.
Further, given the extended duration since the last operation, the removal of fuel to meet the TS
definition of reactor secured, and the compensatory actions taken by the licensee, the NRC staff
3
concluded that the VIO 05000407/2024201-01, as currently documented in Inspection Report
No. 05000407/2024201, will be rescinded. The NRC staff will revise and reissue the NRC
Inspection Report to reflect this change.