ML20195J982

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re 881010 Application for Amend to License R-101.Response Requested within 30 Days

ML20195J982
Person / Time
Site:	Berkeley Research Reactor
Issue date:	11/30/1988
From:	Alexander Adams Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Fowler T CALIFORNIA, UNIV. OF, BERKELEY, CA
References
NUDOCS 8812050104
Download: ML20195J982 (4)

Text

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

6, November 30, 1988 L Docket No. 50-224 Dr. T. Kenneth Fowler Reactor Administrator University of California, Berkeley Department of Nuclear Engineering Berkeley, CA 94720

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIUNAL INFORMATION We are continuing our revfew of your application for ameadment of Facility Operating License No. R-101 fo* the University of California at Berkeley TRIGA research reactor that was submitted on October 10, 1988. During our review of the information you had submitted, 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. Following receipt of the additional infernation we will continue our review of your wendment application. If you have any questions regarding this review, please contact me at (301) 492-1121.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P. L.95-511.

Sincerely,

/s/

Alexander Adams, Jr., Project Manager Standardization and Non-Power Reactor Project Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - III, IV, Y ar3 lpecial Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Enclosu m:

As stated

, cc: See nevt Pege og S"a DISTRIBUTION:

en OW1 NRC A Local PDRs "O

PDSNP R/F M

EHylten AAdams 8.g c EJordan

@ BGrimes

-m OGC-Rockville

$@a. ACRS(10) 3 L RP PM:t D:P NP on AAd :w Chiller p 11/f /88 11 V88 11/1//88

v**

/'.oet,'% UNITE 3 8 TAT ES

!' NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NIoYmYe"rd,Y88

%...../

Docket No. 50-224 ,.

I Dr. T. Kenneth Fowler Reactor Actninistrator University of California, Berkeley Department of Nuclear Engineering Berkeley, CA 94720

SUBJECT:

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMAYION We are conti~/ing our review of your application for cmendment of Facility l Operating License: No. R-101 for the University of California at Berkeley TRIGA research reactor that was submitted on October 10, 1988. During our review of the information you had submitted, questions have arisen for which we require

additional information and cl6rification. Please provide responses to the enclosed Request for Additional Information within 30 days of the date of this letter. Following receipt of the additional information we will continue our review of your amendment application. If you have any questions regarding (

tilis review, please contact me at (301) 492-1121.

The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, ONB clearance is not required under P. L.95-511.

Sincerely, Y l roj t Manager Alexander Adams, Jr.,

Standardization and No P er Reactor rToject Directorate Division of Reactor Projects - !!!, IV, Y and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosure:

As stated -

cc: See next page O

l 1

is

- 6niversity of California Docket No. 50-224 at Berkeley cc: California Department of Health ATTN: Chief, Environmental Radiation Control Unit Radiological Health Section 714 P Street, Room 498 Sacramento, California 95814 Mr. Tek Lim Reactor Supervisor Department of Nuclear Engineering University of California at Berkeley College of Engineering Berkeley, California 94720 Adjudicatory File (2)

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Docket U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D.C. 20555

~

l i

l l

4 l

l

1. - t

)t i

ENCLOSURE I REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION  !

D0CKET N0. 50-224 l UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY

1. By eliminating Technical Specification 1.2.c, you are also eliminating i 4 reference to maintenance of the reactor or its control mechanism as part l l of the requirements for "Reactor Secured". Please justify this deletion.  !

i

2. The proposed definition of "Fuel Handling" refers to the reactor start-up  !

channel. However, you do not state if this channel must be operable as l defined by the Technical Specifications. Please explain what the required j status of this channel will be for movement of fuel.  !

l

3. Your proposed definition of "Fuel Handling" refers to operability of the  !

! "stackflas monitor" and "air particulate monitor." However, the Technical

! Specif< cations refer to a "continuous air particulate monitor" and "exhaust gas radiation monitor." What is the relationship between these monitors?

If these are not the monitors that appear in the Technical Specifications, please justify the substitution.  !

l

4. Your proposed definition of "Fuel Handling" states that "Normal t ventilation shall be maintained". How does this relate to the i requirements of Technical Specifications section 3.7, "Engineered  ;

Safety Feature - Ve .tilation System"? l

5. Your proposed definition of "Fuel Handling" states that prior to fuel  !

handlinj, the reactor shutdown margin shall be calculated. What value of }

shutdoe,n margin is acceptable to move fuel and how often or uNer what j condicions will the value of shutdown margin be recalculated?  ;

r I

6. four safetyanevaluation states that the chanfes youexplain are requesting do not constitute unreviewed safety question, lease how you reached f l

this conclusion, l

l l

l 1

- - - _.