ML17173A412

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Classifies Lic Amend for Proposed Fuel Pool Mod as Classes IV & I Not Classes III & I.Requires Addl Charge of $8300 for Each of the Two Appl,To Be Paid W/In 15 Days
ML17173A412
Person / Time
Site: Dresden, Quad Cities  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 12/11/1978
From: Miller W
NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
To: Reed C
COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO.
References
TASK-09-01, TASK-9-1, TASK-RR NUDOCS 7812150228
Download: ML17173A412 (3)
v • d • e


Text

-.

j I

DOCKf!i,,NOS.

~

-"" -/

/-- v.

50-237 '.

50-249 '

50-254 50-265'

.Commonweal th Edi,son _Company'

    • "_ ATTN:: -*Mr~ Corde'l l Reed~.> *

/.

--~... :.... -r-,"~'

DEC 11 f978

t.
.~ 'Assistant Vice Pres'ident

~*... :.

P.O. Box 767

  • ChiCa~o, Illin-ois *60690 GentTemen:

.* ~..

    • _;-: -Y-0~-r *letter dated Augus*t 7, 1978, provided reasons for your 'position that the appl i cations --da:ted April 13.. and May 11 *,.-: 1978, for license amendments_-

. for proposed modifitations of* the* Zion,1 and 2-, and Dresden 2* and *3 fuel pools are properly classified *.as Classes: III and I rather than Clas*ses IV.

and I.

We have.reconsidered you*r appli.cations and the matters discussed in your.August 7 letter._ Although the.NRC-staff.did conclude in NUREG-0404 that, in general, the storage of spent fuel in water pools*is a

_well established technology *and that modifications are**technica1ly and

  • economkally feasible; the"NRC review staff must' still."review each individual applicatio'n.on a e.ase-by-case b(lsis. It is 6 our understanding.

that review of the Zion *and Dresden_-spent fuel pool requests will

  • i~equire 'exten*sive environmentar impact appraisals *and:health and safety is-sues such as.occupational exposure considerQtions.during removal of

- the old racks and inst&llation of the new racks, "and during the storage.*

period since the closer spacing of fuel~~ssemblies tause~ the potential consequences of accidents to be greater iri "terms of expQsures tb personnel.

The reviews will_also. involve other safety issues.in that,"

~s.a IT!~nim1,1m, the NRR,,_sta_ff will have to evaluate the followiJlg:.,.

_(a) criticality safety.:.the closer center-to-center-spacing*

of the fuel assemblies w,ill result in a _higher k effective and therefor~.a smaller margin to criticality;

~

(b). heat removal capacity,

-(c). *struct_uf'.al integrity, and

,.flf~.

(d) corrosion resistance factors.

/'

\\

/11 I. -r rt L:..Jlr. *.;*

~

~*

,~

),_.

\\'.

1*,.:

1**

'.1..*;

,,,* \\.

  • i.t,...

\\

.u* '

j' Commonwealth Edison Co. DEC l L 1r:'1~J. *.

  • Al°though this Branch included only the significant *hazards consi~erat1on as* the previous qual ifie~ for the Cl.ass lV fees,' we perhaps erred to some._

extent iJl that w~ were con¢urrently *advised by the review staff that more.

  • than one safety and env1ronnmntal issues. were in*volved. *Thus, tne appli-/

cations qualify for Class IV fees even if significant ha*zards considera-tion was. no~ the major 1ss-ue.

I

, Based on the: foregoing, it is our determination that.classes IV and I are fair ~nd justified under 10 CFR 170. Thus, the additional charge of

  • $8;300 for each of the.fa~o: applications should.. be paid within fifteen (15}

days after:your receipt of thi'sletterso that:process1ng of your appli-cations will not be 1nter*r~pted.. *

~.

\\fo appreciate your CO!fiffiep~S :.and concern as to the need* for* expanding,the:

deffo.itions of cert~in'*. t~rms used-for fee purposes and the need *to. revise.

other areas of 10 CFR:Par~.170 to provide f9r~ better guidance.*

This.-'~.-'

matter will.be carefully. considereq in the*future reassessment of 10 CFR Part 170.

.~'..

~ * ' * *'

.-.-~.*.

Plea*se fee.1 free to call. us on 301/lJ:92-7i25 at any ti.me that you feel

  • that we can be of assistance to you.

\\.

Sim:erely,

. *'I Qrtginal s~,'-

' Wm. 0. Mill.er. *

. W111iam0. M111er, Chief

.License Fe~ Man~gement Branch.

  • Office of Adm1nistration DI STRIBUT.ION*:

. PDR LPDR Reg~- Docket. File 50-23.7 /249/254/265.

LFMB Reactor ~ile (4)

  • LFMB R/F (2).

R. Fonner, OELD T.. J. Carter, DOR

.' A. Schwencer, ORB-1

.Gary' Zech,-ORB-1 C. Parrish. URB-1

  • D. *Ziemann, ORB-2 P.. 0 1 Conner, ORB-2 H *. Smith, ORB-2 R. Bevan, ORB-3 S. *Sheppard, ORB R. Diggs, LFMB.

E

  • Coup,e, L FMB I'

OPl'ICIS. ~-

.. Y' B E>M*** ;. **l:F14Bt*AE>M******** ****OEl:D*;......... :. :.. oon....... ~.*... -.,_

nnn 1 r:-ii,10 nn1,/

RI

  • l.. CJH

~

          • ~******.******** ~1:.*r1ltl:)"itt1:J1lt****

6UIUIA-~

..:.~ ** <;:; ********* 9.1.1~m~.Y....... Rf.9.nn~r..... :-.:,.... \\SChwencer DZi emann t~OMi ller m*

1s *

..... ~..........

DA~~ ****

  • r.JP.1....... -...... 1.11.... 1.z~.. ;....... 1.... 1..w............ ~~.... l?.e...... ~.... l
1.

1.1a 1 11a.

1la1C P6a14 3UI (9-V6) NRG! 0040

  • .A.

1 u u.a. GOV!!RNMBNT PRIN~NG Ol"P'IC8 '* t...... &GD

  • 7G9

UNITED STATES

  • : NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 DOCKET NOS. 50-237 50-249 50-254 50-265 Commonwealth Edison Company ATTN:

Mr. Cordell Reed Assistant Vice President P.O. Box 767 Chi ca go, I 11 i n.oi s *60690 * >

Gentlemen:

  • ~

~,

\\A * -

Your letter d!lted.Aug4st.'7-., 19l8;" provided reason*s for your position that_*.

the applica~ions"dated ApriJ l3 a."nd.May 11, 1978, for license amendments for proposed mod4fi~ations of the Zion 1 and 2, and Dresden 2 and* 3 fuel.

pools are prqperly _classified.:a~ Classes I~.I.and I rather than Classes I"Y.

  • and L. We. have :rec~n.si_c;lered* your. appH:~ations *and the matters discussed

.*in your l,\\ugust?-letter. Although-_the.. NRC staff did col']clude in.NUREG-0404:tha:t, in general, th.e stpiage of spent'."- fuel in water pools is a

,t£.

well establ i shea ~;"technology and: that mod;ifica:tfons are technically and IL.rJ~,.:_..

economically feasibie; th*e*NRc~rev1ew~*staff rriust still review each

/f..,..,,....

  • individual.appliCition.on \\a c;ase.:.by-case bas,is. It is our understanding 0

, nJ-.,,"l'-<l that review of th~* Z:ion* and ::Dresden spent fuel ool requests will require jwJ-:y "'(

extensive* environmental. impact appra i sa 1 s a.

A

.. £i,/f~-""'<l ' :"'*1f!rGM~s.u.ch-as-Q6cup*ati<<)-na,T. e*xposure,ooh~

.r.a-t--i*ons-~dur'"ing-r*emtiva+.

i q,.

""°.f-.t-he*~0ld.:....:'r-apk*s~i.:ns..taJJ.ai,i.or:i-ef.:....the*.*new*--r-a*G*k~..,,.:..ar.id-dur-.i.ng-the _

I vi.

~.ge-p.er_iolLsince--t~~*er spacing.~of.,-fue-1".'-as* *emb*Hes~ca-uses-the-*

~e-teftt-i"'1-l......(;;ons.e.quence:s-:.1yfcc.a:ec-idents-to-be~-~lrea * -;- *-terms-~0f-e:X-p0sures

  • _to_pe.r:so.nne-1-.--~The-r-evr.i*ew-s.:,will also involve~

safety issue..!S--

. in that, as a minimum,. the NRR staff will have the following:

-~~-

/

(a) criticality safety - the closer center-to-cen er spacing of the fuel assemblies will result in a highe k effective and therefore a smaller margin to criticality (b) heat removal capacity, (c) structural integrity, and (d) corrosion resistance factors.

,kd(/~L i!~'

~~4./,,._...

,*

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML17173A412&oldid=5134032"