ML112700006

Texas A&M System, Texas Engineering Experiment Station - Request for Additional Information License Renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-83 (TAC ME1584)

ML112700006
Person / Time
Site:	05000128
Issue date:	09/29/2011
From:	Tran L N Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch
To:	Reece W D Texas A&M Univ
Tran, L N, NRR/DPR, 415-4103
References
TAC ME1584
Download: ML112700006 (5)

Text

September 29, 2011 Dr. Warren D. Reece, Director Nuclear Science Center Texas Engineering Experiment Station 1095 Nuclear Science Road MS 3575 College Station, Texas 77843

SUBJECT:

TEXAS A&M SYSTEM, TEXAS ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE NUCLEAR SCIENCE CENTER REACTOR LICENSE RENEWAL (TAC NO. ME1584)

Dear Dr. Reece:

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is continuing the review of your application for renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-83, dated February 27, 2003, as supplemented on March 30, 2005, July 22, 2009, August 30, 2010, May 27, and June 9, 2011. During our review, several questions have arisen for which we need additional information and clarification.

The enclosed request for additional information identifies the additional information needed to complete our review. Please provide responses to the enclosed request for additional information within 30 days of the date of this letter.

In accordance with Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR), Section 50.30(b), you must execute your response in a signed original document under oath or affirmation. Your response must be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 50.4, "Written Communications." Information included in your response that is considered security, sensitive, or proprietary, that you seek to have withheld from the public, must be marked in accordance with 10 CFR 2.390, "Public inspections, exemptions, requests for withholding."

If you have any question, please contact me at (301) 415-4103 or by electronic mail at Linh.Tran@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, /RA/ Linh N. Tran, Senior Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Licensing Branch Division of Policy and Rulemaking Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-128

Enclosure:

As Stated

ML112700006 TEMPLATE # NRR-088 OFFICE PRLB :PM PRLB: PM PRPB: LA PRLB: ABC PRLB: PM NAME FDiMeglio LTran GLappert PSilva LTran DATE 9/27/2011 9/27/2011 9/27/2011 9/29/2011 9/29/2011 Texas A&M University Docket No. 50-128

cc: Mayor, City of College Station P.O. Box Drawer 9960 College Station, TX 77840-3575

Governor's Budget and Planning Office P.O. Box 13561 Austin, TX 78711

Texas A&M University System ATTN: Jim Remlinger, Associate Director Nuclear Science Center Texas Engineering Experiment Station 1095 Nuclear Science Road MS 3575 College Station, Texas 77843 Radiation Program Officer Bureau of Radiation Control Dept. Of State Health Services Division for Regulatory Services 1100 West 49 th Street, MC 2828 Austin, TX 78756-3189 Susan M. Jablonski Technical Advisor Office of Permitting, Remediation & Registration Texas Commission on Environmental Quality P.O. Box 13087, MS 122 Austin, TX 78711-3087

Test, Research and Training Reactor Newsletter 202 Nuclear Sciences Center University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TEXAS A&M UNIVERSITY TEXAS ENGINEERING EXPERIMENT STATION NUCLEAR SCIENCE CENTER REACTOR FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-83 DOCKET NO. 50-128 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff is continuing the review of your application for renewal of Facility Operating License No. R-83, dated February 27, 2003, as supplemented on March 30, 2005, July 22, 2009, August 30, 2010, May 27, and June 9, 2011. During our review, several questions have arisen for which we need additional information and clarification. Please address and provide the requested information to the following: 1. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 4.3, Reactor Tank and Pool, states that the applicant should present all information about the pool necessary to ensure its integrity and should assess the possibility of uncontrolled leakage of contaminated primary coolant and should discuss preventive and protective features. Chapter 4 of your safety analysis report (SAR) does not provide this information. The following information is needed to complete our review:

a. Please provide a discussion of the reactor pool water level monitoring system, alarm levels and required responses from the reactor operator and/or university personnel for remote alarm signal. Please provide the minimum detectable leakage as well as an estimate of the amount of time necessary to detect the leakage. b. Please provide a discussion of the potential drainage pathways of reactor pool water leakage, operator response, and radioactivity monitoring. If water enters the uncontrolled environment, please discuss the radiological impact.

2. NUREG 1537, Part 1, Section 10.1, Experimental Facilities and Utilization, states that the applicant should provide sufficient information to demonstrate that no proposed operations involving experimental irradiations will expose reactor operations personnel, experimenters, or the general public to unanticipated radiological consequences. The proposed TS 3.6.2.1.d states that: Cumulative exposures for explosive materials in quantities greater than 25 milligrams (TNT-equivalent) shall not exceed 10 12 n/cm 2 for neutron or 25 Roentgen for gamma exposures. Please provide a basis/justification for this limitation.

In addition, the proposed TS 3.6.2.2 states that: Each fueled experiment shall be controlled such that the total inventory of iodine isotopes 131 through 135 in the experiment is no greater than 10 Ci. Please provide an analysis to demonstrate that a failure in a fueled experiment will not lead to consequences beyond those of the maximum hypothetical accident (MHA). 3. NUREG-1537 Chapter 13, Accident Analysis, recommends MHA doses analysis to the public. The MHA analysis presented in the TAMU TRIGA SAR, as supplemented, is incomplete in that; (1) while providing considerable information, it does not provide a clear presentation of the analyzed scenario, and (2) it does not discuss the dose to on site, non-occupational individuals in the Laboratory Building such as students, faculty, visitors, etc.

a. Please provide a dose assessment for the maximum exposed individual member of the public in the Laboratory Building. Please describe the assumptions used and any systems, plans, procedures, or stay times for which credit is taken in the analysis.

b. If evacuation of these areas is necessary following an MHA, please show that this contingency is discussed in the emergency plan.

c. Please discuss the assumptions used in the dose assessment for the members of the public such as ground release rate, exposure pathways (inhalation, immersion), exposure time for members of public, and dose conversion factors. 4. NUREG 1537, Chapter 11, Radiation Protection Program and Waste Management, states that the applicant should describe airborne radioactive sources. The description should show that the facility design ensures that doses to the staff and the public will not exceed 10 CFR Part 20 limits and that its ALARA [As Low As Reasonably Achievable] requirements for effluents are satisfied. Chapter 11 of your SAR, as supplemented, while providing considerable information, is incomplete in that it does not provide a bounding calculation for Argon-41 doses to the staff and to members of the public. The following information is needed to complete the review: a. Please provide a bounding calculation of Argon-41 doses to staff members (occupational dose) and members of the public (Laboratory Building, fence, nearest residence). Please discuss the assumptions used in the dose models such as, wind directions, air stability model, exposure pathways (inhalation, immersion, or sky shine), and the use of appropriate dose conversion factors.

b. In the bounding calculation above, please consider all modes of operation (e.g., against and away from thermal column).