ML060180275
| ML060180275 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | La Crosse File:Dairyland Power Cooperative icon.png |
| Issue date: | 01/24/2006 |
| From: | Kristina Banovac NRC/NMSS/DWMEP/DD |
| To: | NRC/NMSS/DWMEP |
| Banovac K, NMSS/DWM, 301-415-5114 | |
| References | |
| TAC 60560 | |
| Download: ML060180275 (3) | |
Text
January 24, 2006 MEMORANDUM TO: Biweekly Notice Coordinator FROM:
Kristina L. Banovac, Project Manager /RA/
Decommissioning Directorate Division of Waste Management and Environmental Protection Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR PUBLICATION IN BIWEEKLY FR NOTICE - NOTICE OF CONSIDERATION OF ISSUANCE OF AMENDMENT TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE, PROPOSED NO SIGNIFICANT HAZARDS CONSIDERATION DETERMINATION, AND OPPORTUNITY FOR A HEARING (TAC NO. 60560)
Dairyland Power Cooperative, Docket No. 50-409, La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor, Genoa, Wisconsin Date of amendment request: December 13, 2005 Description of amendment requests:
The La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor (LACBWR) is currently undergoing limited decommissioning and dismantlement. The proposed license amendment would revise Technical Specifications (TS) to allow waste processing components or fixtures to be handled over the Fuel Element Storage Well (FESW), limiting the weight of such items to 50 tons (the weight of the heavy load drop found acceptable in the cask drop analyses performed for the LACBWR FESW). The proposed wording changes to the TS would allow processing and shipment of Class B and Class C radioactive waste currently stored in the FESW, which will require a cask similar to the spent fuel shipping cask reflected in the current TS.
Basis for proposed no significant hazards consideration determination:
As required by 10 CFR Part 50.91(a), the licensee has provided its analysis of the issue of no significant hazards consideration, which is presented below:
(1) Does the proposed change involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of an accident previously evaluated? No The shipping cask, whether it is a spent fuel shipping cask or a waste shipping cask, will be handled with the same equipment, under essentially the same LACBWR crane operating procedures and precautions, and will be conservatively enveloped by previous accident evaluations that assumed a heavy load drop weighing 50 tons. Allowing the placement of typical waste processing equipment in the FESW and the handling of a waste shipping cask limited to weighing less than 50 tons over the FESW may increase the number of cask movements over the FESW slightly but will not increase the probability nor consequences of an accident previously evaluated during a given cask handling.
(2) Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? No Simply changing the name of the heavy load handled over the FESW from "spent fuel shipping cask" to the generic term "shipping cask," as long as the heavy loads are limited to the analyzed drop weight of 50 tons and their methods of handling are essentially equivalent, does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Other waste processing equipment will likewise be limited to the analyzed drop weight.
(3) Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? No Any shipping cask or other waste processing equipment to be handled over the LACBWR FESW will be conservatively enveloped by the load and conditions in the heavy load drop analysis, which assumed a drop weight of 50 tons, performed for the LACBWR FESW and, therefore, the TS change will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR Part 50.92(c) are satisfied.
Therefore, NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
NRC Section Chief: Claudia Craig January 24, 2006 placement of typical waste processing equipment in the FESW and the handling of a waste shipping cask limited to weighing less than 50 tons over the FESW may increase the number of cask movements over the FESW slightly but will not increase the probability nor consequences of an accident previously evaluated during a given cask handling.
(2) Does the proposed change create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated? No Simply changing the name of the heavy load handled over the FESW from "spent fuel shipping cask" to the generic term "shipping cask," as long as the heavy loads are limited to the analyzed drop weight of 50 tons and their methods of handling are essentially equivalent, does not create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident from any accident previously evaluated. Other waste processing equipment will likewise be limited to the analyzed drop weight.
(3) Does the proposed change involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety? No Any shipping cask or other waste processing equipment to be handled over the LACBWR FESW will be conservatively enveloped by the load and conditions in the heavy load drop analysis, which assumed a drop weight of 50 tons, performed for the LACBWR FESW and, therefore, the TS change will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety.
The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff has reviewed the licensee's analysis and, based on this review, it appears that the three standards of 10 CFR Part 50.92(c) are satisfied.
Therefore, NRC staff proposes to determine that the amendment request involves no significant hazards consideration.
NRC Section Chief: Claudia Craig DISTRIBUTION:
DCD r/f DGillen DOrlando RidsRgn3mailCenter RidsOgcMailCenter ML060180275 OFFICE DWMEP:PM DWMEP:LA DWMEP:SC OGC NAME KBanovac CBurkhalter JTB for CCraig GSM for STreby DATE 1/18/06 1/19/06 1/19/06 1/20/06 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY