ML20154B485

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 44 to License R-67

ML20154B485
Person / Time
Site:	General Atomics
Issue date:	10/01/1998
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20154B471	List: ML20154B466 ML20154B473 ML20154B485
References
NUDOCS 9810050225
Download: ML20154B485 (6)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. l l

1. W%

y UNITED STATES j

p NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 4 001 S i SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 44 TO FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-67 J

l GENERAL ATOMICS l DOCKET NO. 50-163 l

1.0 INTRODUCTION

l 1

1 By letter dated July 16,1998, General Atomics (GA or licensee) submitted a request for amendment to Appendix A of Facility License No. R-67, " Technical Specifications for the Torry Pines TRIGA Mark F." The requested changes would replace the Criticality i Safeguards Committee (CSC) with the Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee (CRSC), l add a list of the responsibilities of the CRSC to the Technical Specifications (TSs), decrease the frequency of audits from quarterly to annually, allow the Physicist-in-Charge to make temporary changes to procedures, and make other changes to the Administrative Requirements section of the TSs commensurate with a facility in possession-only status.

2.0 EVALUATION GA has permanently shut down its two reactors in San Diego, the TRIGA Mark F and the TRIGA Mark I (Facility License No. R-38, Docket No. 50-89). The licenses and TSs for these reactors have been amended to possession-only status (Amendment No. 43 issued on March 22,1995, for the Mark F and Amendment No. 35 issued on October 29,1997, for the Mark 1) to remove authority to operate the reactors and TS operational requirements not needed for possession-only status. As part of the license amendment for the Mark I, changes were made to the Administrative Requirements section of the TSs to reflect the possession-only status of the reactor. However, when the TSs for the Mark F were amended to reflect the possession-only status of the reactor, no changes were made to the Administrative Requirements section. The licensee has now requested changes to the Safety Committee and Procedures sections of the TRIGA Mark F TSs to make these administrative requirements similar to those in the Mark i TSs.

The licensee has requested that Section 8.1 of the TSs be given the title " Organization."

The section currently has no title. The staff has determined that this change is administrative in nature and is, therefore, acceptable.

~

9810050225 981001 PDR ADOCK 05000163 ,

P PDR  ;

? j l

2 The licensee has requested that reference to safe ooeration of the reactor be replaced in TS 8.1 with safe possession of the reactor. This change more accurately reflects the possession-only status of the reactor and is, therefore, acceptable to the staff.

The licensee has proposed replacing the CSC with the CRSC by arnending and combining part of TSs 8.1,8.2, and 8.3 into a new TS 8.2. The CSC focused on reactor operations; l however, the CRSC is a corporate-wide committee that has oversight over all laboratories and facilities at GA where radioactive material, special nuclear material, or radiation-producing machines are used or stored. The expertise of the CRSC covers all aspects of the safe possession, storage, and handling of TRIGA fuel, which assures that there is no decrease in the effectiveness of the committee's oversight. The charter of the CRSC mirrors the requirements for the CSC. With the end of operations at the reactor, oversight from a committee that focused on reactcr operations no longer applies.

It is proposed that TS 8.2 be entitled " Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee" and that l reference in the TS to the CSC be changed to the CRSC wherever it appears in the new combined TSs. The proposed changes to this section of the TSs adopt the charter ,

requirements of the CRSC. The charter requirements of the CRSC are similar to those of l the CSC. The licensee has also proposed changing the audit frequency for the facility from quarterly to annually due to the cessation of operation of the reactor and the change in reactor status to possession-only. The licensee has proposed adding a list of i responsibilities for the CRSC. This is an improvement to the TSs because the current TSs I only contain the CSC general responsibility of review and approval of safety standards associated with operation and use of the facility.

Part of TS 8.1 currently reads:

The Criticality Safeguards Committee shall review and approve safety standards associated with operation and use of the facility. The Criticality Safeguards Committee or a Subcommittee thereof must audit reactor operations at least quarterly.

TSs 8.2 and 8.3 currently read:

8.2 The Criticality Safeguards Committee shall be composed of not less than four qualified persons who are not directly involved in the TRIGA Reactor Program and who are selected by the Vice President, or his designated alternate, identified in Section 8.1.

Overall qualifications of the members of the Criticality Safeguards Committee shall be at least equal to those in effect at the time of issuance of these specifications.

8.3 The operations of the Criticality Safeguards Committee shall be in accordance with a written charter, including provisions for:

(a) Meeting frequency (b) Voting rules

3 (c) Quorums (d) Submission of minority reports (e) Method of submission and content of presentations to the Committee (f) Use of subcommittees (g) Review, approval and dissemination of minutes.

The. iicensee has proposed a new T3 8.2 as follows:

8.2 Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee

a. There shall be a Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee (CRSC) which shall review activities of the facility to assure criticality and radiation safety. The Committee shall be composed of at least four members selected by the cognizant Vice President, cr a designee, considering their experience and education with regard to the various aspects of nuclear physics, chemistry, radiological health and statistics, as well as appropriate experience in other disciplines such as metallurgy and engineering. Subcommittees shall be appointed by the Chairman of the CRSC. The subcommittee assigned the responsibility for reviewing facility operations shall not have thereon person (s) who are directly involved with that facility.

b. The Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee shall be in accordance with a written charter including provisions for:

1. Hold meetings or audits at least annually; special meetings may be called by subcommittees of the CRSC or by the Chairman of the CRSC at times when such meetings are deemed appropriate.

2. Have a quorum when a majority of the members attend.

3. Prepare minutes or audit findings of the CRSC meetings by the Chairmen or his designee. Evidence of approval of the participating members of the CRSC shall be obtained before distribution.

c. The Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee, or subcommittee, shall review and approve safety standards associated with possession of the Facility.

The CRSC or a subcommittee thereof shall audit the Facility annually but at intervals not to exceed fifteen (15) months.

_ _ . . . _ . - .w.. ,- - _ - . . . - _ _ - . , - - _ - . . ~ . . - _

1 1

4 l

d. The responsibilities of the Committee or designated l subcommittee thereof include, but are not limited to, j the following: l

1. Review and app.v. . of experiments utilizing the reactor facilities in accordance with Section 10.1;

2. Review and approval of all proposed changes to the facility, procedures, and Technical Specifications

3. Determination of whether a proposed change, test, or experiment would constitute an unreviewed safety l question or a change in the , Technical Specifications:

4. Review of Facility records;

5. Review of abnormal performance of plant equipment and other anomalies; and

6. Review of unusual or abnormal occurrences and incidents which are Reportable Occurrences under 10 CFR Part 20 and 10 CFR Part 50.

The staff has determined that the change in the facility review committee from the CSC to the CRSC is acceptable. The change in the committee reflects the change in status of the facility to possession-only. The reduction in frequency of facility audits is also acceptable tc the staff. The frequency is commensurate with the change of the facility status to possession-only and is within the guidance given in American National Standard ANSl/ANS-15.1-1990, "The Development of Technical Specifications for Research Reactors." The addition of a listing of specific responsibilities of the CRSC to the TSs is acceptable because it clarifies the TSs. The staff has approved similar changes for the GA Mark I research reactor.

The licensee has proposed changes to TS 8.4, concerning written instructions. The TS is l renumbered as TS 8.3 and is entitled " Written Procedures." TS 8.4 currently reads: .

l 8.4 Written instructions shall be in effect for:

(a) Testing and calibration of reactor operating instrumentation and control, control rod drives, and area radiation monitors and air particulate monitors.

(b) Reactor startup, routine operation and reactor l shutdown. i (c) Emergency and abnormal conditions including i evacuation, reentry, and recovery. ,

l I

l l

e 1

5 (d) - Fuel loading or unloading.

(e) Control rod removal or replacement.

(f) Maintenance of the reactor, control rod drives and reactor safety and interlock systems.  ;

The proposed TS 8.3 reads:

F 8.3 Written Procedures Written instructions shall be in effect for the following items.

The instructions shall be adequate to assure the safe possession  ;

of the reactor but shall not preclude the use of independent judgment and action should the situation require such. i

a. Testing and calibration of instrumentation, controls, and

, radiation monitors necessary to meet the requirements of the Technical Specifications.

b. Emergency and abnormal conditions including provisions for '

evacuation, reentry, recovery, and medical support.

c. Fuel element and experiment loading or unloading.  ;

d. Maintenance of systems necessary for assuring the integrity of the fuel or otherwise maintaining the reactor in -

POLA status,

e. Actions to be taken to correct specific and foreseen potential malfunctions of systems or_ components, including responses to alarms and abnormal reactivity changes.

~

Changes which alter the original intent of the above procedures shall be made only with the approval of the Criticality and Radiation Safety Committee (CRSC). Temporary changes to the procedures that do not change their original intent and do not constitute an unreviewed safety l question (as defined in 10 CFR 50.59) may be made by the Physicist-in-Charge. All such temporary changes shall be documented and subsequently reviewed by the CRSC.

These proposed changes to the TSs clarify the method for making changes to procedures. )

Changes that change the originalintent of procedures shall be made only with the approval of the CRSC. .The Physicist-in-Charge can make temporary changes to procedures that do not change their intent or constitute a unreviewed safety question. These temporary ,

]

changes shall be subsequently reviewed by the CRSC. The licensee has proposed changes i

,. 7 _ _ _ . _ - _ , . _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ _ - - - - _

- -- q I

6 l

=

to the list of required procedures to reflect the possession-only status of the reactor. )

These changes to this section of the TSs would make them similar to the GA Mark I TSs.

4 These changes are commensurate with the change of the facility status to possession-only

, and are within the guidance given in American National Standard ANSI /ANS-15.1 1990, j

. "The Development of Technical Specifications for Research Reactors." The staff has l

approved similar changes for the GA Mark I research reactor. Therefore, these changes are acceptable to the staff.

I

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

r 1 This amendment involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(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.

1

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 evaluMed, and does not involve a i significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment docs not involve a significant i 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.

Principal Contributor: A. Adams, Jr.

Date: October 1, 1998

.