ML052500482
| ML052500482 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000139 |
| Issue date: | 09/12/2005 |
| From: | Alexander Adams NRC/NRR/DRIP/RNRP |
| To: | Addison S Univ of Washington |
| Adams A, NRC/N RR/DRIP/RNRP, 415-1127 | |
| References | |
| TAC MC5097 | |
| Download: ML052500482 (4) | |
Text
September 12, 2005 Dr. Stanley Addison, Radiation Safety Officer Environmental Health and Safety University of Washington Box 354400 Seattle, Washington 98195-4400
SUBJECT:
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTONREQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE: CHANGE TO DECOMMISSIONING ORDER (TAC NO. MC5097)
Dear Dr. Addison:
We are continuing our review of your request for amendment of the Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility and Disposition of Component Parts for the University of Washington Research Reactor which you submitted on October 27, 2004, as supplemented on March 18, 2005. During our review of your request, questions have arisen for which we require additional information and clarification. Please provide responses to the enclosed request for additional information within 30 days of the date of this letter. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.30(b), your response must be executed in a signed original under oath or affirmation. Following receipt of the additional information, we will continue our evaluation of your request.
If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at (301) 415-1127.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Alexander Adams, Jr., Senior Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Section New, Research and Test Reactors Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-139
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure: See next page
September 12, 2005 Dr. Stanley Addison, Radiation Safety Officer Environmental Health and Safety University of Washington Box 354400 Seattle, Washington 98195-4400
SUBJECT:
UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTONREQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RE: CHANGE TO DECOMMISSIONING ORDER (TAC NO. MC5097)
Dear Dr. Addison:
We are continuing our review of your request for amendment of the Order Authorizing Dismantling of Facility and Disposition of Component Parts for the University of Washington Research Reactor which you submitted on October 27, 2004, as supplemented on March 18, 2005. During our review of your request, questions have arisen for which we require additional information and clarification. Please provide responses to the enclosed request for additional information within 30 days of the date of this letter. In accordance with 10 CFR 50.30(b), your response must be executed in a signed original under oath or affirmation. Following receipt of the additional information, we will continue our evaluation of your request.
If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at (301) 415-1127.
Sincerely,
/RA/
Alexander Adams, Jr., Senior Project Manager Research and Test Reactors Section New, Research and Test Reactors Program Division of Regulatory Improvement Programs Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-139
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure: See next page DISTRIBUTION:
PUBLIC RNRP/R&TR r/f MVoth WSchuster DHughes TDragoun MMendonca AAdams CLyon BThomas WBeckner OGC EHylton FGillespie KWitt DHarrison CBassett DMatthews PYoung PDoyle WEresian PIsaac GHill (2)
ADAMS ACCESSION NO.: ML052500482 TEMPLATE No.: NRR-088 OFFICE RNRP:PM RNRP:LA RNRP:SC NAME AAdams EHylton BThomas DATE 9/8/05 9/7/05 9/9/05 C = COVER E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON RESEARCH REACTOR DOCKET NO. 50-139
- 1. In section (c)(1) of your proposed change process for the University of Washington (UW) Decommissioning Plan (DP), for changes in the facility and in procedures described in the DP, reference is made to the DP and not the DP (as updated). Please explain why an updated DP is not referenced for changes in the facility or in procedures or amend your proposed wording to reference the DP as amended.
- 2. In section (c)(1)(ii) of your proposed change process you only refer to making changes and not tests or experiment. Please explain why (c)(1)(ii) only refers to changes when (c)(1) refers to changes, tests and experiments or amend your proposed wording to include tests and experiments.
- 3. In section (2) there appears to be a typographical error in that the phrase if the change appears twice. Is this a typographical error? If so, please correct.
- 4. When comparing section (2) of your proposed change process with the corresponding 10 CFR 50.59 section [50.59 (c)(2)] subsections (v), (vi), (vii) and (viii) do not appear in your proposed wording. Please explain why these subsections are not needed or propose corresponding subsections appropriately modified to be applicable to changes to your DP.
- 5. You have proposed that certain sections of the DP not be subject to your proposed change process. Section 1.3.1 and 2.1 discuss the decommissioning alternative selected, DECON. The decommissioning alternative is one of the fundamental decisions made in facility decommissioning from which many other details of the DP are based. Please propose making these sections not subject to your proposed change process or explain why these two sections should be subject to the change process.