ML20132B070

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 11 to License R-59

ML20132B070
Person / Time
Site:	University of Iowa
Issue date:	12/13/1996
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132B047	List: ML20132B044 ML20132B064 ML20132B070
References
NUDOCS 9612170022
Download: ML20132B070 (2)

Text

.

,** l

, $* "*tti y "

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f WASHINGTON, D.C. 20eeHo01.

\.....,/

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION  !

_9)fPORTING AMENDMENT NO.11 10 )

FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-59 IOWA STATE UNIVERSITY l DOCKET NO. 50-116

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated August 27, 1996, as supplemented on October 10, 1996, the Iowa State University (licensee) requested that the definition of " Confinement  !

Secured" be changed in its Technical Specifications (TSs) in order to account '

for extensive modifications in the Nuclear Engineering Liouratory building to bring it up to the fire code in the State of Iowa. Also, three changes to the

~

Administrative Controls Section of the TSs were requested.

2.0 EVALUATION The licensee has proposed changes to the doors, windows, walls, and the covering of the second floor corridors in the definition of " Confinement Secured" that shall be secured or be intact in the event of an emergency and during fuel transfers. The NRC staff has reviewed and' discussed these changes with the licensee, in a telecon between T. Michaels (NRC) and Scott Wendt (licensee) on October 9,1996, and found that the changes as. originally submitted, as modified on October 10, 1996, are acceptable and will provide for a secure confinement.

The first Administrative Control change is in Section 6.1.4 of the TS, which specifies the requirements for " Selection and Training of Personnel," and it states that operations personnel shall meet or exceed the requirements of American National Standard for Selection and Training of Personnel for Research Reactors,-ANS/ANS-15.4-1988. It was'noted during the last NRC inspection that several operators had medical physical frequencies that were greater than 24 months (but less than 30 months). This met the requirements of ANSI /ANS 15.4-1988 but not 10 CFR 55.21, which requires a physical every two years. The TSs have been changed to require that the selection, training, and requalification of operations personnel meet or exceed the requirements in both ANSI /ANS 15.4-1988 and 10 CFR Part 55. This change will ensure compliance with the most restrictive rule and will eliminate the ambiguity that existed before. The staff finds this acceptable.

9612170022 961213 1 PDR ADOCK 05000116 P l PDR '

l i

_-. . - . . . - - . . - . . . . - . . - . - - - . . _ - . - - - . - . - ~ _ ~ - - -

4

. ~

! i I  !

! The second Administrative Control change is in Section 6.2.2(2) of the TS, .

which defines the ground rules for approving by a phone poll, items discussed

• i at meetings or for approval of other items deemed as routine. The same rules apply to phone polling and face-to-face voting, and any member can veto the  !

! phone poll and call for the convening of a face-to-face meeting. The staff  ;

i finds this classification is useful and acceptable.

3 The third Administrative Control change is in Section 6.6.1(5) of the TS. It deletes the sentence which permitted the licensee to not report effluent

releases less than 25 percent of the allowed or recommended concentrations.

Since the licensee will now be reporting all effluent releases and not i excluding those less than 25 percent of the allowed or recommended j concentrations, the staff finds this change acceptable.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

I This amencuent changes recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures i 4

or requirements. Accordingly, the amendment meets the eligibility criteria  !

l for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(10). Pursuant to 10 l

CFR 51.22(b), no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment '

! need be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.

+

j

4.0 CONCLUSION

j The staff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: 4 4 (1) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public l 5 will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (2) such j activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations i and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense j and security or the health and safety of the public.

j Principal Contributor: Theodore S. Michaels Date: December 13, 1996 1

i l

- _ . . _ ,