ML17194A670
| ML17194A670 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 05/05/1982 |
| From: | Oconnor P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Delgeorge L COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| References | |
| TASK-09-01, TASK-9-1, TASK-RR LSO5-82-05-001, LSO5-82-5-1, NUDOCS 8205140440 | |
| Download: ML17194A670 (5) | |
Text
-.
1
\\ __.
Docket No. 50-237 LS05~82-05-001 Mr. L. De 1 George Director of Nuclear Licensing Commonwealth Edison Company Post Office Box 767 Chicago, Illinois 60690 0
Dear Mr. DelGeorge:
May 5, 1982
SUBJECT:
- SEP TOPIC IX-1, FUEL STOftp.Gi DRESDEN 2
- * ~
i~pclosed is our final eval uat1on of SEP Topic IX-1, "Fuel Storage'~ for the Dresden 2 facility. This evaluation compares your facility as
~- described in Docket No. 50-237 with the criteria currently used for licensing new facilities.
It is recognized that the spent fuel pool expansion is being. contested in a public hearing. This evaluatipn addre$ses the proposed configura-tion of the fuel storage facilities.-
- 1f the outcome of the hearing should affect our evaluation of Topic IX-1 we will revise the evaluation accordingly.
This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assess-ment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect.
the as-built conditions at your facility. This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the *integrated assessment is completed.
40 020505
- [ "\\
51404CK o5000237 ADO p~R-~-
-r-- ---- --*-*---
\\
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
See next page Sincerely, Paul O'Connor, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch No~ 5 Oivision of Licensing
~
\\ \\
- ' \\
' : :.,* t OFFICE* *** j~~~*****..... s.~P.a.:.o _... s..a;.o.L...... :... oR.atts.:P.M........ Q1WJtn.:jj£........ A~.~
~ou.~.:.;.........................
suRNAME* **** ~.tn-~.:.'1... ;CGr.;i;r11a,s........ ~s&e~-+........ pQ.'*Gom~<W**.....Mlf.,;t"Ge*f*i *l<ltG *. na~*.;'..........................
DATE *.. ** 1a.-}. ~ g_............ 1.G.1i~f.........
1.~t.?.?........... 11.'=~ I. ~L........ 51.:'1. L.~.?......... *'I.. I. Bf~-.. :..........................
NRC FORM318 (10-80) NRCM0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGP0:1981-335-960
....,.*-~
Mr. L. De1George cc
- I sham, Lincoln & Beale Counselors at Law One First National Plaza, 42nd Floor Chicago, Illinois. 60603 Mr. Doug Scott Plant Superintendent Dresden Nuclear Power Station
- Rural Route #1
- Morris, Illinois 60450
- The.Honorable Tom Corcoran United States House of Represent"atives Washington, D. C.
20515 *
- u.. s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
- Mary Jo Murray
- . Assistant: Attorney 3enera1 Env{ronmental Contro.1 Division 188 W. Randolph Street
.* Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Chairman Bo~rd. of Supervisors of
,.Grundy County Grunay *tounty Courthouse Morris, Illinois 60450 John F.*woif, Esquire 3409 Shepherd Street Chevy Chase, Maryland 20015 Dr. Linda w. Little*
500 Hermitage Ori ve Raleigh, North Carolina 27612.
Judge Forrest J. Remick
.. The Carriage House - Apartment 205 2201 L Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20037 v
v
--~-!*
111inois*Department of Nuclear s*afety 1035 Outer Park Drive, 5th Flooi Springfield, Illinois. 62704 *
- U. S. Environmental Protecti-on Agency Federal Activities Branch Region V Office ATTN:
Regional Radiation Representative 230 S.outli Dearborn Street -
Chica~o 1 ~Illinois 60604 James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III 799 Roosevelt Street Glen Ellyn, Illinois* 60137
TOPIC IX-1, FUEL STORAGE I.
INTRODUCTION
...... ~.
- ~*:;
SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION PROGRAM
/-
TOPIC IX-1 DRESDEN 2 The purpose of SEP Topic IX-1 is to review the storage facility for new and irradiated fuel, including the cooling capability and seismic tlassification of the fuel* pool cooling system of the spent fuel storage pool in order to a~sure that new and irradiated fuel are stored safely with respect to criticality, cooling capability, shield-ing, and structural capability.
II~*
REVIEW CRITERIA The plant design was reviewed with regard to Section VI, "Fuel and
- Radioactivity Control of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants" which requi"res that the fuel storage systems shall be designed to assure _adequate safety under normal and postulated accident ~onditions.
III.
RELATED SAFETY TOPICS SEP. Topic II"."3.B, "Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements" identifies the design basis flood for which the plant must be adequat~ly designed.
SEP Topic III-1, "Classification of Structures, Components and Systems (Seismit and Quality). is intended to assure that structures, systems and components important to safety are of the quality level commensurate with their safety function.
SEP Topic 111-4.A, "Tornado Missiles** covers tornado missile protection of a number of structures and systems including fuel storage areas and
- support systems.
SEP Topic IlI-6, "Seismic Design Considerations".. will ensure the capability of the plant to withstand the effects *Of earthquakes.
SEP Topic !X-2, "Overhead Handling Systems-Cranes"\\ covers the* po ten ti al for dr9pping heavy objects onto spent fuel.
This topic has been del_eted since the review cr-iteria is identical to that of Unresolved Safety.
I_ssue A-36, "Control of Heavy Loads Near Spent Fuel."
SEP Topic lX-5, 11Venti.lation Systems" assures that. the ventilation systems have-the capabiHty to provi'de a safe environment for plant personnel and engineered safety features equipment.
IV.
REVIEW GUIDELINES Current guidance for the review of spent fuel storage is provided in Standard Review Plan Section 9. 1.0 New Fuel Storage, Section 9. 1.2 Spent* Fuel Storage, Section 9.1.3 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup-*
System, Section 9. 1.4 Fuel Handling System and Regulatory Guides 1.29 Seismic Design Classification, 1.13 Fuel Storage Facility Design Basis, 1.26 Quality Group Classification and Standards for Water-Steam and
- Radioactive Waste-Containing Co~ponents of Nuclear Power Plants as well as the guidance contained in the April 14, 1978 generic letter*- OT Position for Review and Acce_ptance of Spent Fue 1.Storage and Handling Applications (i.e., DOR Technical Activities Category A Item 27, *Increase in Spent.Fuel Storage Capacity)*.
""~:~..
Those portions of the topic which have been previously reviewed to current criteria have not been reevaluated.
V **
EVALUATION By letter dated May 11, 1978, a~ supplemented by letters dated January 12, January 24, May 30, June 12; A.ugust 17 and October 19, 1979, the licensee requested an amendment to their operating license to allow for increased on-site storage of *spent fuel.
On June 5, 1980, the staff issued a Safety Evaluation (SE) supporting the proposed facility modifications.
Since the existing fuel rack design remains the same as that reviewed
_"and.approved in the previous NRC safety evaluation our conclusions concerning the criticality analysis, rack, mecha*nical and material review, radiation level, nuclear thermal and hydraulic aspects and heat removal capability of the spent fuel pool cooling system reain valid.
Since the staff analysis was performed in accordance with current licensing criteria, we conclude that the June 5, 1~80 SE satisfies the requirements of SEP Topic IX-1.
The* structura 1 response of the Dresden 2 faci 1 i ty with respect to seismic ca_pability is being evaluated as part of SEP Topic III-6, "Seismic Design Considerations.
The evaluation of Topic III-6 specifically addresses the reactor building whi~h houses the spent fuel pool.
In addition, hearings are currently underway examining the structural capability of.
the spent fuel pool walls and bottom to withstand seismically induced motion of the spent fuel racks and the structural capability of the racks.
The staff evaluation of rack and pool structure loading is being review~d independr* tly of the SEP program to support the ongoing hearings..
- Regarding new fuel storage, the new fuel storage vault is located ~ithin the reactor building.
The fuel is stored within a subcritical array.
The minimum center* to center spacin9 of the new fuel assemblies within a given row is 6.5 inches and* the minimum spacing between assemblies *in adjacent rows is 10 inches.
These spacings ensure that Keff < *0.90 under dry conditions and Keff ~* 0. 95 if the vault were fl coded.
The vault has concrete hatches to prevent water leakage into the vault.
Therefore, no moderator conditi.ons between 100% and 0% water can reasonably be expected to occur and Keff will be ~.95.
The racks are top entry, full length and designed to prevent fuel assembly insertion into non-design locations.
Drainage is provided for the vault.
to prevent the accumulation of liquids.
Personnel openings are provided for inspection purposes.
A fuel vault radiation monitor detects any radiation.level increase.
The fuel storage vault is covered by concrete hatches which protect the stored fuel bundles from damage due to dropped objects.
Based on the abo~e considerations, we conclude that the new fuel storage facility meets the guidance of Standard Review Plan 9.1.1.
VI.
CONCLUSION With the exception of structural capacity of the spent fuel racks, pool
- . walls and pool bottom, we conclude that the Dresden Unit 2.fuel storage systems meet current acceptance criteria and, therefore, Topic IX-1 is complete.
The structural review of spent fuel racks and pool is part of an ongoing Atomic Safety Licensing Board hearihg and wil 1 not be reviewed as part of SEP Topic III-6, "Seismic Design_."..
- i..