ML20141K584

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 5 to License R-89

ML20141K584
Person / Time
Site:	05000097
Issue date:	05/23/1997
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20141K563	List: ML20141K561 ML20141K574 ML20141K584
References
NUDOCS 9705290226
Download: ML20141K584 (2)

Text

-

Kro g i j UNITED STATES g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o

• WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666 4001

. . . . . ,o i

l SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT N0. 5 TO

{

i FACILITY LICENSE NO. R-80 l CORNELL UNIVERSITY ZER0 POWER REACTOR DOCKET NO. 50-97

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated March 7, 1997, Cornell University (licensee) submitted a i request for amendment to Facility License No. R-89 for the Cornell University '

Zero Power Reactor. The amendment would revise the Technical Specifications (TSs) to show changes to the organizational chain leading to the Ward Center for Nuclear the essentially Sciences same. but would leave the maintenance of the reactor 2.0 EVALUATION l

The organizational chain leading to the Director of the reactor has been  !

changed because of organizational changes at the University Itvel. The Nuclear Science and Engineering program (in effect, a department) was disbanded by the Dean of Engineering leaving its academic responsibilities for degrees and courses to the existing degree-granting entity called the Graduate Field of Nuclear Science and Engineering. Also, the Dean of Engineering and the Vice President for Research and Advanced Studies decided for various reasons to have the Ward Laboratory operate as a new entity, to be called the Ward Center for Nuclear Science.

Many of the changes from the existing Technical Specifications are changes in {

titles only. The basic safety functions of the Director of the Ward  ;

Laboratory (now to be named Director Ward Center for Nuclear Science), the i Ward Laboratory Safety Committee (now to be named Ward Center Safety l Committee), and University's Radiation Safety Office (RS0) and the staff j responsible for the reactor are largely unchanged. The principal functional or substantive changes are: (1) the Director, Ward Center for Nuclear ,

Sciences and the Ward Center Safety Committee are now appointed by the Vice  !

President for Research and Advanced Studies instead of the Dean College of l Engineering, (2) there will now be a Ward Center Advisory Board (mostly j faculty) to guide policies, (3) the Director, Ward Center for Nuclear Sciences j

is no longer required to be a faculty member (4) the composition of the Ward '

Center Safety Committee is modified somewhat, and (5) the relationship between I safety responsibilities of the University RS0 and the Ward Center Safety I Officer is explicitly described.

D AD K 05 97 i P PDR ,

l

i e

i With regard to the composition of the Ward Center Safety Committee, the following changes have been made:

i-

-(1) ^

instead of two persons proficient in rector and nuclear physics, the j

requirement now is that one or more persons be proficient.

(2) instead of two persons proficient in chemistry or chemical- engineering, the requirement now is that one or more persons be proficient.

(3) instead of the Director of the Nuclear Science and Engineering Program or his deputy, ex-officio, the requirement now is that a member of the Executive Committee of the Ward Center Advisory Board or his/her deputy,

ex-officio.

With regard to the relationship between safety responsibilities of the University RSO and the Ward Center Safety Officer, paragraph 6.lg has been added to the TSs.

The staff-finds that the organizational changes do not affect the management of the reactor, is consistent with the guidance of ANSI /ANS 15.1-1990, and therefore, finds them acceptable.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment involves changes in administrative requirements. Accordingly, this 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.

4.0 CONCLUSION

The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:

(1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the proposed activities, (2) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulation, and (3) 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: Theodore S. Michaels 1 i

Date: May 23, 1997 i

i i

l l

6 - - - . , _ _