ML17221A362
| ML17221A362 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Saint Lucie  |
| Issue date: | 08/20/1987 |
| From: | Tourigny E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Woody C FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-65587, NUDOCS 8708280305 | |
| Download: ML17221A362 (9) | |
Text
Docket No.:
50-335 Mr. C. 0.
Woody Group Vice President Nuclear Energy Florida Power and Light Company Post Office Box 14000 Juno Beach, Florida 33408
Dear Mr. Woody:
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION (TAC NO. 65587)
In order for us to maintain our review schedule, your response is requested within 45 days of your receipt of this letter.
We are also prepared to meet with your staff to discuss the responses to expedite our review.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than 10 respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Please contact me at (301) 492-9786 if you have any questions concerning this letter.
Sincerely,
/s/
E.
G. Tourigny, Project Manager Project Directorate II-2 Division of Reactor Projects-I/II
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
See next page DISTRIBUTION:
NRC PDR 5 Local PDR PD22 Reading S. Varga/G. Lainas D. Miller E. Tourigny OGC-Bethesda E. Jordan J. Partlow J. Ridgely ACRS (10)
Gray File P
DRP-I/II D
er/mac 08/40 /87 8708280305 870820 PDR
- Doc/4 05000335 P
PDR PD@~Igg)RP-I/I I 08/
/87 PDP P-I/II HBr w
08/Qc / 7 In conducting our review of your June 12, 1987 submittal relating to expanding the spent fuel pool storage capacity at the St. Lucie Plant, Unit No. 1, we have determined that we will need additional information identified in the enclosure to continue our review.
o
~ <<+
I'h Jt It te t
h t
'I II o
~
e I
I
~
~
'I
~-
e
Mr. C. 0.
Woody Florida Power 5 Light Company St. Lucie Plant CC:
Mr. Jack Shreve Office of the Public Counsel Room 4, Holland Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 Resident Inspector c/o U.S.
NRC 7585 S.
Hwy AIA Jensen Beach, Florida 34957 State Planning 5 Development Cl ea ringhouse Office of Planning 8 Budget Executive Office of the Governor The Capitol Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 Harold F. Reis, Esq.
Newman 5 Holtzinger 1615 L Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20036 Norman A. Coll, Esq.
McCarthy, Steel, Hector and Davis 14th Floor, First National Bank Building Miami, Florida 33131 Administrator Department of Environmental Regulation Power Plant Siting Section State of Florida 2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Flori'da 32301 Mr. Weldon B. Lewis, County Administrator St. Lucie County 2300 Virginia Avenue, Room 104 Fort Pierce, Florida 33450 Mr. Charles B. Brinkman, Manager Washington - Nuclear Operations Combustion Engineering, Inc.
7910 Woodmont Avenue
- Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Jacob Daniel Nash Office of Radiation Control Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services 1317 Winewood Blvd.
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0700 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Executive Director for Operations 101 Marietta Street N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323
0
Encl osure Re uest for Additional Information S ent Fuel Pool Ca acit Ex ansion St. Lucie, Unit 1 Docket Number:
50-335 1.
.Descri tion of the S ent Fuel Pool and Racks a.
Provide typical fuel rack design drawings which indicate all weld details.
b.
Provide a typical fuel assembly drawing indicating details of rack interface areas.
c.
Provide detailed fuel pool drawings which show the liner weld
- seams, the leak detection system channels, and any modifications.
d.
Will any shim plates be used between the rack feet and the pool floor?
e.
Are there any structural restraints to prevent the racks from sliding into the cask area?
2.
Seismic and Im act Loads a.
Provide a detailed description of the methodology and analytical models used to generate the new floor response spectra shown in Figure 4.9.
b.
Provide a detailed description of the methodology used to generate the pool floor time histories.
c.
Provide a comparison of the response spectra for the pool floor motion shown 'in Figures 4-12, 13, 14, with the corresponding design response spectra of Figure 4.9.
d.
Have impacts between fuel racks and the pool walls been considered?
Do the walls have sufficient margin to accomnodate these loads?
3.
Desi n and Anal sis Procedures a ~
b.
c ~
d.
Provide a list of values of modeling parameters used in the fuel rack analysis including:
-Inter-rack impact element properties
-Rack/fuel impact element properties
-Support foot properties
-Friction element properties
-Mass of rack and fuel
-Dimensions
-Gaps between racks and wall, racks and fuel, and rack to rack
-Fluid coupling coefficients Provide the calculations which defined the key modeling parameters.
Do the spring stiffnesses used in the fuel rack model represent calculated values?
If not, provide justification.
Provide justification for the assumption that the motion of a fuel rack can be represented by a rigid six degree of freedom structure.
e.
Provide the natural frequencies of the fuel racks in both the vertical and horizontal (rocking) directions.
Consider variations in geometry, fluid immersion, and fuel load conditions.
Were rack modules B2, G1, and H1 the only racks analyzed as indicated in Table 4-10?
On what basis were these racks selected?
g, h.
j ~
k.
Provide justification for using a single rack model of a fuel rack.
How are multiple rack effects accounted for in the analysis?
Provide a description of the DYNARACK program and sample outputs.
Discuss how the program was verified.
Provide additional information on how fluid coupling effects are incorporated into the equations of motion.
Provide justification for using fluid coupling coefficients based on small displacements and constant gaps for both fuel-to-cell and rack-to-rack coupling.
Did the fuel-to-wall fluid coupling coefficients consider the flow area through the fuel assemblies?
If not provide calculations demonstrating the conservatism of the model.
How was structural damping incorporated into the fuel rack model?
Describe method and list specific elements in which damping is included.
4
~j r
3 w
E 1.
Provide justification for assuming the same friction coefficient for both static and sliding rack conditions.
m.
Provide justification for modeling the fuel assemblies as independent rattling masses.
n.
Discuss the basis for selection of the fuel to cell impact spring elevations.
Are these only locations where fuel to cell impacts are anticipated?
7
~
0 4