ML102790351

Summary of Meeting with Firstenergy Nuclear Operating Company, on the Request for Additional Resposnses Regarding the Spent Fuel Rerack for Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 2

ML102790351
Person / Time
Site:	Beaver Valley
Issue date:	10/18/2010
From:	Nadiyah Morgan Plant Licensing Branch 1
To:
morgan n
References
TAC ME1079
Download: ML102790351 (16)

Text

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 October 18, 2010 LICENSEE: FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company FACILITY: Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit NO.2 SUB~IECT:

SUMMARY

OF SEPTEMBER 27,2010, CATEGORY 'I MEETING WITH FIRSTENERGY NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY ON THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING THE SPENT FUEL POOL RERACK FOR BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION, UNIT NO.2 (TAC NO. ME1079)

On September 27, 2010, a Category 1 public meeting was held between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and representatives of FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (the licensee) and Holtec International, Inc. (the vendor), at NRC Headquarters, Two White Flint North, 11545 Rockville Pike, Rockville, MD. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the licensee's responses, dated August 9, 2010 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System (ADAMS) Accession No. ML102240256), to the NRC staff's request for additional information (RAI), dated March 19, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML100760584). NRC's RAI letter was in response to the licensee's license amendment request (LAR) to install high density fuel storage racks in the Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit NO.2 (BVPS-2) spent fuel pool (SFP), dated April 9, 2010 (ADAMS Accession No. ML091210251). A list of attendees is provided in Enclosure 1.

The licensee presented background information on the BVPS-2 SFP LAR review and gave a brief overview of the agenda for the public meeting. The licensee's slides are provided in .

The NRC staff queried the licensee and the vendor on issues relative to the following RAI responses: (1) the approach used to evaluate the global bending of the SFP slab in the response RAI 5, (2) the revised analyses performed for the cell-to-cell welds in the response to RAI 6, (3) the evaluation methodology used to determine the shear capacity of the SFP walls and slab following the proposed rerack in the response RAI 8, and (4) the methodology used to perform the shallow drop mechanical accident analysis in the response to RAI 17. The NRC staff was prepared to question the rack drop analysis which was re-performed using a revised value for the design compressive concrete strength in the response to RAI 19. However, the licensee requested to discuss RAI 19 at a later time. .

The licensee agreed to provide supplemental information to address the NRC staff's questions and concerns. The licensee committed to following up with the NRC staff, during the week of October 4, 2010, to discuss the projected schedule for submitting the supplemental information.

Members of the public were in attendance, via teleconference. Public Meeting Feedback forms were not received. However, via electronic mail, comments received stated that there were significant issues regarding microphones dropping in and out or not working at all.

-2 If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1016, or Nadiyah.Morgan@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, adiyah S. Morgan, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-412

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees

2. Licensee Handout cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv

ATIENDANCE RECORD PURPOSE: \1Z6cv&f V4t\tej:l ~ t f1,te/( DATE: 9' /on / :J-o I 0

?0\) \ R~ r-A'GL .\Z: A1-- ~tsfh'Y\ X-S,

~1_iiR~;lIIlili'fll\iiliiiilii\ltllllllr.j.l.i~'il~il iXl! taf~/ey  : f:6A/OC MfrTT" MC/0-J:A./l--E? Y  : HOLTEG

-ti1~,c.A~~~  ! ~o~k' G~ trC?M~? We.p-\\o C'QQk~--1:,.---_V...:...--=E::.!.N~Ql<LC=-- _

_Ntt!ha~ Wq'ker  ! ~EA1DG 12A\I ltD E Pi. L c.#-=  : ~<::!4J [) c C-UUUJ,. ~UA& /-lOL.-TR--

UtmA.- ,IJ'JA(Vw)O Ff~a (

~Mq> l-e.""",h

\ ( ' \ . '" ,- j 'I*

Enclosure 1

ATTENDANCE RECORD PURPOSE: -')<,a tee V<;\!(Jkj !) Sp?-!':+ ~~l DATE: 1/;27 I

I ;;lu {O

£l)\) I R{.rAc-IC. RAJ- ~sfU1\%)

J~;:I~.~:IIII1"'ili}iF4,li\i\.'jlli_lIfIf\lIi.il'lIfl~J

_tacybaJ FttJULwl 1A/1(,~ [ . . . ." .....

__ I

(;j;/!,'tYM JUS...,.  :

'~\_......

\_l...... *~ __ *\'-\~

.;.;;..;(),...:..../\;..""s...... I_ _-...::~~~~:..;..;.....:.- _

( CL f I, I 0 (3 vPC 0 e..  !

I I

---

11-------------- I I

N (1)

S

l Vl o

u c

w

Agenda Meeting Objectives License Amendment Request Overview Mechanical/Civil Review NRC Staff Open Items

• RAI #5 - Global Bending of the Spent Fuel Pool Slab

• RAI #6 - Cell-to-Cell Welds: Revised Analysis

• RAI #17 - Shallow Fuel Drop Accident: Methodo,logy

• RAI #19 - Rack Drop Analysis: Concrete Compressive Strength

Meeting ObJectives

• Resolve open questions related to the Mechanical and Civil Engineering Branch review of the license amendment request.

• If required, define scope and schedule of remaining closure actions.

License Amend;ment* Request Overview

• Submitted on April 9, 2009 Maintains core offload capability Will extend projected Unit 2 storage capacity through 2025.

- Replaces the existing spent fuel pool racks with high density storage racks.

• Proposed project implementation schedule

- Planned for the Unit 2, Spring 2011 refueling outage

Mechanical/Civil Review Original LAR Submittal April 9, 2009 Additional Mechanical/Civil Communications

- March 19, 2010 NRC Request for Additional Information

- May 3, 2010 FENOC Response (excepting RAls 8, 13, and 20)

- May 21, 2010 FENOC Response for RAls 8, 13, and 20

- August 9, 2010 FENOC Supplemental Response

• Public Meeting September 27,2010

RAI #5 - Global Bending of the Spent Fuel Pool Slab

• Summary of 8/9/10 FENOe Supplemental Response

- To quantify the flexural behavior of the slab during a rack drop event, the slab has been conservatively analyzed as a beam on an elastic foundation with a concentrated load at its center. The calculated moment at the center of the beam, due to the rack drop event, is combined with the maximum slab bending moments due to dead load and thermal load. The com:bined moment is conservative since the maximum slab moments due to dead load, thermal load, and rack drop are summed together irrespective of their slab location.

RAI #6 - Cell-ta-Cell Welds: Revised Analysis

• Summary of 8/9/10 FENOe Supplemental Response

- A revised analysis has been performed to combine thermal and seismic stresses for the cell-to-cell welds (which are most vulnerable to differential heating across adjoining cells). The maximum shear stress from thermal loads was summed with the maximum shear stress from seismic loads.

In summary, the combined stress on the cell-to-cell welds for the BVPS Unit No.2 spent fuel racks is less than the limit given in the NRC position paper.

• NRC Agenda Item as of 9/13/10 NRC staff would Ii

RAI #17 - Shallow Fuel Drop Accident:

Methodology

• Summary of 8/9/10 FENOe Supplemental Response

- The shallow fuel drop accident was re-analyzed using LS-DYNA to incorporate:

- a true stress-strain curve for the weld material;

- failure strain limits based on data provided in Table 8.1 of NUREG 1864;

- a lower bound triaxiality factor is applied to the uni-axial failure strain limits at the start of simulation;

- a strain rate amplification curve developed from test data.

- The LS-DYNA analys:is results demonstrate that the plastic deformation in the rack cell wall resulting from a shallow drop accident does not extend down into the "neutron absorber zone".

Therefore, the functional capability of the rack is not adversely ffeeted by the shallow fuel drcm,accident

RAI #19 - Rack Drop Analysis: Concrete Compressive Strength

• NRC Agenda Item as of 9/13/10

- The NRC staff would like to discuss the rack drop analysis which was re-performed using a revised value for the design compressive concrete strength.

• FENOC would like to discuss this at another time.

RAI #8- Shear Capacity of Spent Fuel Pool Walls/Slab: Methodology

• Summary of 8/9/10 FENOe Supplemental Response

- The original response was revised to include both 1-way action and 2-way action shear evaluations and to reference ACI-318-1971.

- The revised response was clarified to explain that the SFP liner is not specifically analyzed for the effects of the SFP temperature rise since the liner is designated as seismically qualifi1ed, but non-safety related (Seis,mic CateQiory II).

• NRC Agenda Item as of 9/13/10

- The NRC staff would like to discuss the evaluation

en E

(])

c

(])

c..

o

'+

o c

--o

J

-o en

(])

0:::

-2 If you have any questions, please contact me at (301) 415-1016, or Nadiyah.Morgan@nrc.gov.

Sincerely, IRA!

Nadiyah S. Morgan, Project Manager Plant Licensing Branch 1-1 Division of Operating Reactor Licensing Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-412

Enclosures:

1. List of Attendees

2. Licensee Handout cc w/encls: Distribution via Listserv DISTRI BUTION:

PUBLIC RidsOgcRp Tony Nakanishi Branch Reading RidsOpaMail Evan Davidson RidsAcrsAcnw_MailCTR RidsRgn1 MailCenter Steve Jones RidsNrrOd RidsNrrDeEmcb DWerkheiser RidsNrrDorlLpl1-1 Farhad Farzam EBonney RidsNrrPMBeaverValley William Jessup RBeliamy RidsN rrLAS Little KWood Kl\Ilanoly ADAMS Accession' ML102790351 OFFICE DORLlLPL1-1/PM DORLlLPL1-1/LA DE/EMCB/BC DORLlLPL 1-1 /BC NAME NMorgan SLittie ABaxter for MKhanna NSalgado DATE 10/12/10 10/12/10 10/13/10 10/18/10 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY