ML18079A970
| ML18079A970 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 07/17/1979 |
| From: | Beverly Smith NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Johnson E AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7909250510 | |
| Download: ML18079A970 (2) | |
Text
Mr. Earl Johnson REGD~ATORY DOCKET FIL~fY UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 July 17, 1979
_,lii/*~,
1/J,, ii1/
829 South 48th Street Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 1914l
Dear Mr. Johnson:
In the Matter of Public Service Electric & Gas Company (Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. l)
Docket No. 50-272 Proposed Issuance of Amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-70 The enclosure to this letter is in response to the question you asked during your limited appearance statement made at the prehearing conference at Salem on March 15-16, 1979.
I hope that the Staff's response addresses the concern you expressed at the prehearing conference.
(*
Enclosure As stated cc w/encl.: See Salem Service List
/j::;t1t:~
Barry H. Smith Counsel for NRC Staff 7 909250 5/0
.1
- ~¥ **** __,....
NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO MR. EARL JOHNSON'S LIMITED APPEARANCE STATEMENT AT THE SALEM PREHEARING CONFERENCE ON MARCH 15-16, 1979 Contrary to the implication in your limited appearance statement, the temperature of the water in a spent fuel pool will not be determined by the value of the keff as long as the keff is below 1.0.
In a subcritical spent fuel pool the temperature of the water is determined solely by the difference between the amount of decay heat generated vs. the amount of heat removed from the pool by heat exchangers.
There is an inverse correlation between the keff and the water temperature in the Salem pool, i.e., the keff decreases by a small amount as the water temperature is increased, but this has nothing to do with the heat generation rate as long as the keff is less than 1.O.
On examining the book by R. E. Webb which you mentioned in your limited appearance statement the only discussion of calculations of reactivity that the Staff could find appears on page 52.
These are space-time neutronic calculations which are done for the worst possible accident in a nuclear reactor where the keff is rising rapidly and goes above 1.0 during the accident. These space-time calculations are far more complex than the time independent calculations which are done to determine the steady state keff in spent fuel pools. It is not necessary to make the type of transient calculations as reported by Dr. Webb for a spent fuel pool where the intent is to make the keff low enough so that it will not get up to 1.0 under any conditions.
R. E. Webb does mention the possible error in steady state keff calculations due to fuel depletion and fission product buildup.
However, as stated in the Salem Safety Evaluation this possible error is avoided by assuming the fuel is new and undepleted. This is the most reactive condition and thus gives a conservatively high value of keff*
_.,._