ML20151Z270

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 45 to License R-28

ML20151Z270
Person / Time
Site:	University of Michigan
Issue date:	09/17/1998
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20151Z260	List: ML20151Z256 ML20151Z265 ML20151Z270
References
NUDOCS 9809210235
Download: ML20151Z270 (2)

Text

_ _ _ . _ . . - .-- -

o a' p its

$ p 1 UNITED STATES j

j 2

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2006e 4001

• • • • • ,o 1

SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 45 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-28 UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN DOCKET NO. 50-2

1.0 INTRODUCTION

By letter dated July 6,1998, the University of Michigan (licensee) requested that the scope  !

of the reactor license (No. R-28) be amended to clarify the meaning of possession and use i of byproduct materials. Also, the licensee submitted a complete set of Technical Specifications (TSs), which have been converted from an outdated word processing l program to a word processor currently supported (Microsoft Word). This resulted in a  ;

consolidation in the number of pages. Also, some minor changes were made to improve l clarity.

2.0 EVALUATION L

All non-power reactors have a license condition which effectively permits the license to l

" possess but not separate such byproduct material as may have been produced by the l operation of the facility." For this licensee this condition appears in license condition B.(4).

However, this license condition does not address the status of byproduct material received at the facility, i.e., under what license is the material authorized?

In order to clarify the status of byproduct material received within the confines of the facility, a license condition has been added to be more meaningful as to the ability of the licensee to receive byproduct material. This license condition is in B.(5) and reads as follows:

Pursuant to the Act and 10 CFR Part 30, " Rules of General Applicability to Domestic licensing of Byproduct Material," to receive for irradiation in the reactor in the amounts as required any byproduct material without restriction to chemical or physical form having a definite research and i development purpose.

The added license condition eliminates the ambiguity that exists in the present license condition in regard to the ability of a licensee to receive and possess byproduct material under the reactor license. Also, the uncertainty that could arise as to what license is j responsible for violations while the byproduct materialis within the confines of the reactor facility is eliminated, tracking of the material on the reactor site would be more efficient.

i l

9809210235 900917 PDR ADOCK 05000002 ,

P PDR l

. . - - . . . . . - _ = _ .. . . _ . _ . . . . _ _ . .

a 0,  :

4 A similar license condition has been approved in Amendment No.13 to the Texas A&M license, Docket No. 50-128, dated October 26,1993.

The byproduct material received at the facility will still be under the regulations specified in ,

License Condition C and the limits imposed by TS Section 3.7 " Limitations of Experiments." ,

The licensee has stated in the application that procedures will be developed and modified as necessary to assure that TS and material accountability requirements, are met. These l procedures will be reviewed and approved by the Safety Review Committee prior to receipt of any byproduct material under this amendment.

The staff finds that License Condition B.(5)is acceptable.

The staff has reviewed the reconfigured TSs and has found that there are no substantive changes except for an update of Figure 6.1. This update revises the Organization Chart from the President of the University down to the management of the reactor. However, the line organization leading to the direct management of the reactor has not changed, and the other changes are not of concern with regard to the safe operation of the reactor.

The staff finds the revised TSs acceptable. l

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment involves a change to 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 environmentalimpact 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 regulations, 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, i

Principal Contributor: Theodore S. Michaels l l

i 1

1

'