ML20008F459
| ML20008F459 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Missouri-Rolla |
| Issue date: | 04/09/1981 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20008F457 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8104210018 | |
| Download: ML20008F459 (3) | |
Text
.
~
'n f
- g UNITED STATES
[b
/ ',
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION s
j ~dl j WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 N.' }[f s, v SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPp0RTING AMENDMENT NO. 5 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-79 UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI DOCKET NO. 50-123 Introduction 20, 1980, the University of Missouri at Rolla By letter dated October requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. R-79 for its research reactor, to increase the quantity of enriched uranium that the University is authorized to receive, possess, and use in connection with the operation of the reactor from 7 kg to 9.9 kg of U-235. The if censee also itemized how much of that special nuclear material could be of high-enrichment and how much could be of low-enrichment uranium. In addition, the licensee requested an increase in the authorized possession of plutonium-239 in the fom of sealed plutonium-beryllium neutron sources.
Discussion At present, Facility Operating License No. R-79 authorizes the applicant to receive, possess, and use up to 7 kilograms of uranium-235 in connection This authorization includes all of the with operation of the reactor.
high-enrichment fuel currently in use in the reactor and also was intended to include a partial core of low-enrichment fuel which the University l
planned to acquire eventually in order to convert the reactor to use low-The requested increase in authorization would permit enrichment uranium.
possession of enough special nuclear material to form either a high enrich-I However, at no time has the ment or a low-enrichment operable reactor.
licensee possessed or intended to possess more than 5 kilograms of high enrichmer.t uranium-235. The NRC asked the licensee to submit the referenced request for amendment to clarify the status of the inventory of special nuclear material. The licensee's filing itemizes the quantities of high-enrichment and low-enrichment uranium to provide for continued operation of the reactor while he acquires the low-enrichment fuel, as funds and opportunity permit. The licensee plans eventually to implement the reactor c
conversion and reduce the inventory of high-enrichment uranium. This type of reactor conversion is consistent with current national policy.
_ Evaluation The Technical Specifications of the applicant's license, which enumerate the operating conditions and limitations considered necessary for safe operation, do not specify the quantity of fuel to be loaded into the reactor core. That parameter is controlled by the specified ifmits on total excess reactivity of the core and on the required reactivity shut-down margin. This amendment does not change those Ifmitations. Further-more, the reactor license authorizes the use of the plate-type (MTR) fuel currently in the core, but does not authorize conversion to a mixtwe of fuel types or to a mixture of uranium enrichments. This amendment does not change that authorization. In addition, the current license contains adequate provisions to ensure safe storage of fuel which is not actually in use in the reactor core.
The licensee has also requested that the authorization to possess plutonium-239 in the form of sealed plutonium-beryllium neutron sources be increased from 160 tc 200 grams. The licensee's experience with such sources has eouipped him to handle them knowledgeably and has demonstrated that he does handle them safely. The requested increase in possession limits of plutonium will have an insignificant impact on radiological hazards at the react::r.
Conclusions on Safety Based on the above considerations, we conclude that incressing tne total quantity of special nuclear material authorized and available as requested by the licensee will not decrease the safety of operations of the facility.
Environmental Considerations This amendment does not authorize any changes in the operating parameters of the reactor, such as operating power level, operating schedules, or effluents released to the uncontrolled environment. Therefore, we have determined that this amendment will not result in any significant environ-mental impact and that it does not constitute a major Commission action We have i
significantly affecting the quality of the human environment.
also determined that this action is not one of those covered by 10 CFR l
51.5(a) or (b). Having made these detenninations, we have further concluded that, pursuant to 10 CFR 51.5(d)(4), an environmental impact statement or environmental impact appraisal and negative declaration need not be prepared in connection with issuance of this trendment.
7 l
3-Conclusions We have further determined that this amendment will not increase the probability of occurrence of an accidant analyzed in the Safety Analysis Report, nor does it increase the consequences of such an accident.
We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment does not involve a significant increase of the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered, and does not involve a decrease in a safety margin, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that tne health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the prcposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in cocpliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this Ener.cment will not be inimical to the conncn defense and security
~
or to the healtn and safety of the public.
Oated:
April 9,1981 e