ML20249A596

Safety Evaluation Supporting Amend 23 to License R-66

ML20249A596
Person / Time
Site:	University of Virginia
Issue date:	06/15/1998
From:	NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:
Shared Package
ML20249A593	List: ML20249A592 ML20249A594 ML20249A596
References
NUDOCS 9806170120
Download: ML20249A596 (2)

Text

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

e enmou b

UNITED STATES

{

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20666 4 001

'g..... yo SAFETY EVALU/iTION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR RECULATION SUPPORTING AMENDMENT NO. 23 TO AMENDED FACHITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. R-66 IHg. UNIVERSITY OF vlRGlNM t

D.QQ(ET NO. 53-62 1.0 JNTRODUCTIQti By letter deted February 26,1998, as supplemented on April 6,1998, the University of L Virginis (UVA or licensee) submitted a request for amondment to Appendix A of Amended

. Facility. Operating License No. R-66, Technical Specifications for the University of Virginia l

Reactor. The requested emersdment would transfer responsibility for overall managernent of

. the Univctsity of Virginia Research Reactor (UVAR) from the School of Engineering to the M~

, Office of the Vice Provost for Research. The amendmsnt also updates reporting

.g l requirements to reflect the transfer of the non-power reactor inspection orogram from W>

Region 11 to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Rugulation.

2.0.B/ALUATION

.i Tha licensee has requested changes to technical specification (TS) 6.1i Organization, TS

~6.2, Reactor Safety Committee, TS 6.7, Reporting Requirements, and Figure 6.1,

'I 4

(D Organi7.ational Structure of the U.Va. Research Reactor Facility. The requested changes m

1 would result in the UVAR being an integral part of the University.of Virginia instead of the I

M' ;s School of Engineering and Applied Science. The proposed changes would transfer c7 i responsibility for overall management of the UVAR from the School of Engineering and l

Appifed Science to the Office of ths Vice Provost for Research. Currently the Reactor -

Director reports to the Chair, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear 1 Engineering, who reports to the Dean of the School of Engineering and Applied Science who j

u 1

. reports to the Provost. The licensee has proposed that the Reactor Director report to the i

y

- LVice Provost for Research who reports to the Provost. This results in the Reactor Director i f reporting to a higher level of University management with greater access to resourcos. The pfL

requestad changes would also result in the Reactor Safety Committee advising the Vica i

1 F'

Provost of Research instead of the Chair, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and Nuclear l

Engineering (TS 6.2). A change in the person serving as the Vice Provost for Research,

~

would be reported to NRC instead of the Choir, Department of Mechanical, Aerospace and j

ly%-

S Nuclear Engineering (TS 6.7). Because the changes to the organizational structure do not p_ '

~ decrease management oversight of the UVAR, they are acceptable to the staff.

f 9006170120 900615

.PDR-ADOCK.05000062

'P-PDR p

7y

f l

2 L

The title of Associate Provost for Research on the organizational chart is changed to the Vice Provost for Research. The licenses states that this is a change in title only and not an j

administrative change. Therefore, this change is acceptable to the staff.

1 The liW see has requested changes to TS 6.7, Reporting Requirements. The licensee requeste that Region 11 be removed from TS required notifications and submission of 1

written reports. Notifications would continue to be made to the NRC Operations Center and l

written reports submitted to the Document Control Desk. On August 1,1997, the non-

{

power reactor inspection program was transferred for licensees in Region ll from the region I

to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation. UVA was informed of the change by the region in a letter dated August 1,1997, and was instructed to direct correspondence, reports, and inquirias regarding non-power reactors to the Document Control Desk in headquarters. The staff finds that these changes are administrative in nature, updates the reporting requirements in the license, and are therefore acceptable to the staff.

3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATION

This amendment involves changes in recordkeeping, reporting, or administrative procedures or requirements. Accordingly, the 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 environmental impact statement or environmental assessment need be prepared in connection with the

' issuance of this amendment.

4.0 CONCLUSION

' The staff has concluded, on the basis of 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 Commission's regulations and the issuance of this

' amendment will not be inimical to the ccmmon defense and security or the health and-

safety of the public.

. Principal Contributor: A. Adams, Jr.

. Date: June 15, 1998' I

m

1.

I

'