ML20041D481
| ML20041D481 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | University of Lowell |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1992 |
| From: | Michaels T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Beghian L Univ of Massachusetts - Lowell |
| References | |
| Download: ML20041D481 (9) | |
Text
- '
Docket No. 50-223 e
Dr. Leon Beghian Associate Vice President for Research University of Lowell One University Avenue Lowell, Massachusetts 01854
Dear Dr. Beghian:
.=January 15, 1992.*
DISTRIBUTION Docket File (50-223T
B. Boger Wanda Jones C. Grimes ACRS (10)
GPA/PA OC/LFMB Region I (Charles Hehl)
SUBJECT:
ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-125 UNIVERSITY OF LOWELL The ColTD'Ilission has issued the enclosed Amendment No. 10 to Facility Operating License No. R-125 for the University of Lowell Research Reactor.
The amendment consists of changes to the Technical Specifications (TS) in response to your submittal dated January 15, 1991.
The amendment consists of changes to the TS to have the control rod blade removal inhibited rather than the regulating rod when the reactor_.period is less than 15 seconds and to remove the pool water level channel from being classified as a measuring channel.
A copy of the related Safety Evaluation supporting Amendment No. 10 is enclosed.
Enclosures:
- 1. Amendment No. 10
- 2. Safety Evaluation cc w/enclosures:
See next page Sincerely,
/S/
Theodore S. Michaels, Project Manager Non-Power Reactors, Decommissioning and Environmental Project Directorate Division of Advanced Reactors and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation QFC
- PDNP:L
- PDNP:PM 1f.4..Jt. :OGC
- PDNPfiw
=-~r1< ------:--------f&~~:------------:r=:-
NAME :~ n
- TMichaels
- ~i
:------------:------------:------------:----~------:------------:------------:---------
- DATE :01/1 /92
- 01/7 /92
- 011~ /92
- 01/\\'o/92 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY Document Name:
TM AMENDMENT 10 9201220288 920115
~
PDR ADOCK 05000223! I P
{)rol
, l)
University of Lowell cc: Mayor of Lowe 11 City Hal 1 e
Lowell, Massachusetts 08152 Mr. Thomas J. Wallace Nuclear Reactor Supervisor University of Lowell One University Avenue Lowell, Massachusetts 01854 Office of the Attorney General Environmental Protection Division 19th Floor One Ashburton Place Boston, Massachusetts 02108 Docket No. 50-223
(
e UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 UNIVERSITY OF LOWELL DOCKET NO. 50-223 AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE Amendment No. 10 License No. R-125
- 1.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Con,nission (the Corrunission) has found that:
A. _ The application for amendment filed by the University of Lowell (the licensee), dated January 15, 1991, complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Corrunission 1s rules and regulations as set forth in 10 CFR Chapter I; B.
The facility will operate in conformity with the application, the provisions of the Act, and the rules and regulations of the Commission; C.
There is reasonable assurance:
(i) that the activities author-ized by this amendment can be conducted without endangering the health and safety of the public, and (ii) that such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations; D.
The issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public; E.
The issuance of this amendment is in accordance with 10,CFR Part 51 of the Conmission's regulations and all applicable requirements have*been satisfied; and F.
Prior notice of this amendment was not required by 10 CFR 2.105(a){4) and publication of notice for this amendment is not required by 10 CFR 2.106(a)(2).
9201220323 920115~\\
PDR ADOCK 05000223 p
I PDR 2..
Accordingly, the license is amended by changes to the Technical Specifications as indicated in the enclosure to this license amendment, and paragraph 2.C.(2) of License No. R-125 is hereby amended to read as. follows:
(2) Technical Specifications The Technical Specifications contained in Appendix A, as revised through Amendment No. 10, are hereby incorporated in the license. The licensee shall operate the facility in accordance with the Technical Specifications.
- 3.
This license amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.
Enclosure:
Appendix A Technical Specifications Changes FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Seymour H. Weiss, Director Non-Power Reactors, Deconunissioning and Environmental.Project Directorate Division of Advanced Reactors and Special Projects Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Date of Issuance:
January 15, 1992
e ENCLOSURE TO LICENSE AMENDMENT NO. 10 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-125 DOCKET NO. 50-223 Replace the following pages of the Appendix A Technical Specifications with the attached pages. The revised pages are identified by amendment number and contain vertical lines indicating the area of change.
REMOVE IV-17 IV-18 INSERT IV-17 IV-18
I, e
places a reasonable upper limit on the worth of all experiments which is compatible with the allowabie excess reactivity and the shutdown margin and is consistent with the functional mission of the reactor.
3.2 REACTOR.INSTRUMENTATION Applicability This specification applies to the instrumentation which
- must be available and operable for safe operation of the reactor.
Objective The objective is to require that sufficient information be available to the operator to assure safe operation of the reactor.
Specification The reactor shall not be operated unless the measuring channels* listed in the following table are operable:
Measuring Channel
-Poe-1--Wa-t:eP-beVe+/--
Startup Count Rate Log N* (Period)
Power Level (Linear N)
Reactor Coolant. Inlet Temperature Coolant Flow Rate Reactor Pool Temperature Minimum Reg1Jired
--l-----
1 1
2 1
1 l
IV-17 Operating Mode in Which Required
---/di-modes-------
All modes (during reactor startup)
All modes All modes Forced convection Forced convection Natural convection Amendment No. 10
- e.
Bases The neutron detectors assure that measurements of the reactor power level are adequately displayed during reactor startup and low and high power operation.
The temperature*and flow detectors give information to the operator to prevent the exceeding of a Safety Limit.
3.3 REACTOR SAFETY SYSTEM Applicability This specification applies to the reactor safety system channels.
Objective To require the minimum number of reactor safety system channels that must be operable in order to assure safe operation of the reactor.
Specification The reactor shall not be operated unless the reactor safety system channels described in the following table are operable.
Reactor Safety Minimum Required Operating Mode System Component/Channel Startup_Count Rate
- 1 Reactor Period 1
Function Prevent blade withdrawal when N count rate.f 2 cps Automatic reactor scram with.f 3 sec period in Which Required Reactor startup in all modes All modes control blade inhibit
.f 15 sec period IV-18 Amendment No. 10
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 10 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-125 UNIVERSITY OF LOWELL DOCKET NO. 50-223
1.0 INTRODUCTION
By letter dated January 15, 1991, the University of Lowell (licensee) requested that two Technical Specification (TS) changes be made to their reactor Facility Operating License No. R-125.
The first change would have the control rod blade removal inhibited rather than the regulating rod when the reactor period is less than 15 seconds and the second change would remove the pool water level channel from.being classified as a measuring channel.
2.0 EVALUATION The first change would alter the table in Section 3.3 of the TS, which deals with the reactor period *. Specifically, the present TS requires that the regula'ting rod be prohibited from removal from the core if the reactor period is less than 15.seconds. The licensee proposes to change the TS to substitute the control blade rather thap the regulating rod.
The licensee points out that the regulating rod has never had any automatic safety features and is not considered part of the safety system.
The licensee also states this was an error that was missed when the license*
was rewritten for renewal in 1984 and that the automatic withdrawal pro-hibit has always been applied to the control blade rather than the regu-lating rod. This is reasonable, since the control blade worth is greater than the regulating rod whi.ch has minimum worth and is only used for fine control of the power l~vel. The staff finds this change acceptable and the change does not af~~ct the health and safety of the public.
The second change would remove pool water level (PWL) from the list of -
measuring channels required in Section 3.2 of the TS.
The PWL channel is a float operated device which causes a reactor scram when the pool is below a certain level. It is more of an interlock rather than a measur-ing channel.
Removal of the PWL from the measuring channel section of the TS would not remove the need for a PWL scram from the TS since it is also included in the reactor safety system {RSS) interlocks in Section 3.3 of the TS.
Removal of the PWL scram from the measuring channel section however, would remove the requirement for~ channel test of this channel as required by Section 4.2.2 of the TS, which requires that a channel test of each measuring channel in the RSS be p~rformed prior to *each day's operation or prior to each operation extending more than one day.
,J 9201220326 920115 PDR ADOCK 05000223 p
I
'I *
- Sfnce the PWL channel is still part of the RSS and since the PWL interlock will be tested semi-annually in accordance with TS 4.2.8, as are other interlocks of the RSS, the staff finds that removal of the PWL from being classified as a measuring channel is acceptable and the change does not affect the health and safety of the public.
3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION
This amendment involves changes in a requirement with respect to the installation or use of facility components located within the restricted area as defined in 10 CFR Part 20 and changes in surveillance requirements~
The staff has determined that the amendment involves no significant increase in the amounts, and no significant change in the types, of any effluents that may be released offsite, and there is no significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational radiation exposure.
Accordingly, this amendment meets the eligibility criteria for categorical exclusion set forth in 10 CFR 51.22(c}(9}. Pursuant to 10 CFR 51.22(b},
no environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared *in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
4.0 CONCLUSION
The st~ff has concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that: (1} because the amendment does not involve a significant increase
- in'the probability or consequences of accidents previously evaluated, or create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated, and does not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety, the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by the proposed activities, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Conunission**s regulations and the issuance of this amendment will not be inimical to the common defense and security or the health and safety of the public.
Principal Contributor: Theodore S. Michaels Date:
January 15, 1992