ML18100A607
| ML18100A607 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 09/13/1993 |
| From: | Stone J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Miltenberger S Public Service Enterprise Group |
| References | |
| TAC-M85797, TAC-M85798, NUDOCS 9309160028 | |
| Download: ML18100A607 (5) | |
Text
'.
Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311 Mr. Steven E. Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric and Gas Company Post Office Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
Dear Mr. Miltenberger:
September 13, J-
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCREASE IN SPENT FUEL POOL CAPACITY, SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2 (TAC NOS. M85797 AND M85798)
By letter dated April 28, 1993, Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) submitted a request to install new storage racks (reracking) in the spent fuel pools in order to provide additional storage capacity.
In reviewing PSE&G's submittal, the staff has identified the need for additional information concerning heavy loads and thermal hydraulic considerations.
Enclosed are the specific questions from the staff.
It is requested that you respond to the enclosed questions within 60 days of receipt of this letter. This requirement affects 9 or fewer respondents and, therefore, is not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under PL 96-511.
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:
See next page DISTRIBUTION Docket File NRC & Local PDRs PDI-2 Reading SVarga JCalvo OFFICE NAME DATE 9309160028 930913 PDR ADOCK 05000272 p
PDR c MBoyle JStone MO' Brien OGC ACRS(lO)
PDI-2/PM I /J/93 Sincerely,
/S/
James C. Stone, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation EWenzinger, RGN-I JWlftt-e-,..___-R&N-I
~
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555--0001 Docket Nos. 50-272 and 50-311 Mr. Steven E. Miltenberger Vice President and Chief Nuclear Officer Public Service Electric and Gas Company Post Office Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038
Dear Mr. Miltenberger:
September 13, 1993
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, INCREASE IN SPENT FUEL POOL CAPACITY, SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION, UNITS 1 AND 2
.(TAC NOS. M85797 AND M85798)
By letter dated April 28, 1993, Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) submitted a request to install new storage racks (reracking) in the spent fuel pools in order to provide additional storage capacity.
In reviewing PSE&G's submittal, the staff has identified the need for additional information concerning heavy loads and thermal hydraulic considerations.
Enclosed are the specific questions from the staff.
- It is requested that you respond to the enclosed questions within 60 days of receipt of this letter. This requirement affects 9 or fewer respondents and, therefore, is not subject to Office of Management and Budget review under PL 96-511.
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/enclosure:
See next page James C. Stone, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-2 Division of Reactor Projects - I/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Mr. Steven E. Miltenberger Public Service Electric & Gas Company cc:
Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street NW Washington, DC 20005-3502 Richard Fryling, Jr., Esquire Law Department - Tower SE 80 Park Place Newark, NJ 07101 Mr. Calvin A. Vondra General Manager - Salem Operations Salem Generating Station P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. J. Hagan Vice President - Nuclear Operations Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038 Mr. Thomas P. Johnson, Senior Resident Inspector Salem Generating Station U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Drawer I Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Dr. Jill Lipoti, Asst. Director Radiation Protection Programs NJ Department of Environmental Protection and Energy CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625-0415 Maryland People's Counsel American Building, 9th Floor 231 East Baltimore Street Baltimore, Maryland 21202 Mr. J. T. Robb, Director Joint Owners Affairs Philadelphia Electric Company 955 Chesterbrook Blvd., SlA-13 Wayne, PA 19087 Salem Nuclear Generating Station, Units 1 and 2 Richard Hartung Electric Service Evaluation Board of Regulatory Commissioners 2 Gateway Center, Tenth Floor Newark, NJ 07102
~
Regional Administrator, Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Lower Alloways Creek Township c/o Mary O. Henderson, Clerk Municipal Building, P.O. Box 157 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. Frank X. Thomson, Jr., Manager Licensing and Regulation Nuclear Department P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 Mr. David Wersan Assistant Consumer Advocate Office of Consumer Advocate 1425 Strawberry Square Harrisburg, PA 17120 Mr. J. A. Isabella MGR. - Generation Department Atlantic Electric Company P.O. Box 1500 1199 Black Horse Pike Pleasantville, NJ 08232 Carl D. Schaefer External Operations - Nuclear Delmarva Power & Light Company P.O. Box 231 Wilmington, DE 19899 Public Service Commission of Maryland Engineering Division ATTN:
Chief Engineer 231 E. Baltimore Street Baltimore, MD 21202-3486
A.
HEAVY LOADS REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CRAI)
SALEM NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION. UNITS 1 & 2 RERACKING THE SPENT FUEL POOL DOCKET NOS. 50-272 & 50-311 ENCLOSURE
- l. The method you have chosen for complying with the guidelines of NUREG-0612, "Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants," is not clearly stated. Compliance with the guidelines of NUREG-0612 requires either evaluating potential heavy load drops to satisfy the criteria of Section 5.1 of NUREG-0612 or showing that the potential for a load drop is extremely small by employing a single failure proof heavy load handling system which complies with the guidelines of Section 5.1.6, "Single-Failure-Proof Handling Systems." Describe how the Salem Nuclear Generating Station adequately complies with either set of guidelines.
- 2.
By letter dated August 12, 1993, in the update to the spent fuel pool
.rerack submittal from Public Service Electric & Gas Company (PSE&G}, it was stated that PSE&G completed calculations to support Fuel Handling Crane uprating. Describe how these calculations comply with the requirements of NUREG-0612, "Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power Plants."
- 3.
The following questions apply to the lifting rig:
- a.
How are dynamic loads included in the design?
- b.
What maximum load can the rig hold before the minimum yield stress is reached?
- c.
What is the maximum load the rig can hold before reaching the minimum ultimate stress?
- d.
Do you plan to use the lifting rig for some time after reracking Unit 1 & 2 SFPs? If so, discuss your plans for maintaining compliance with ANSI Nl4.6-1978 (see Section 5.3, "Testing to Verify Continuing Compliance", of ANSI 14.6).
- 4.
On page 2-13 of the Holtec Report. Hl-92950, it was stated that PSE&G's contractor, Holtec International, plans to develop over twenty operating procedures to cover the entire gamut of operations pertaining to the rerack effort, including but not limited to, mobilization, rack handling, upending, lifting, installation, verticality, alignment, dummy gage testing, site safety, and ALARA compliance. Since the rerack efforts are planned to commence in 1994 for Unit 1 and 1995 for Unit 2, when will these procedures for handling both the old racks and new racks be developed?
... B.
THERMAL HYDRAULIC CONCERNS
- 1.
In Section 9.1.3.1 under the design basis of the spent fuel pool cooling system in the updated FSAR for Salem Nuclear Generating Station, it is stated that the SFP water is normally limited to 120°F except in the unloading of a full core, in which case the temperature is limited to 150°F with one pump in operation.
However, on page 5-2 of the Holtec Report Hl-92950, it is stated that the SFP water is limited to 180°F with one pump in operation in the unloading of a full core. Justify the deviation from the design basis for the increase in the SFP water temperature.
Provide assurance that these values are not inconsistent or make the necessary changes in the updated FSAR in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.
- 2.
The installed rack capacity in each pool is 1632 locations.
On page 5-8 of the Holtec Report Hl-92950, it is stated that the assumption of the gross count of 1853 assemblies implies that 221 locations {1853 minus 1632) hold consolidated {with 2:1 consolidation ratio) canisters.
Describe the consolidation process.
Has this process been found acceptable? What is the maximum decay heat to be generated during the process?
- 3. The updated FSAR states that the Spent Fuel Cooling System provides the cooling capacity required for both the annual discharge of 65 fuel assemblies and for a full core discharge of 193 fuel assemblies into the spent fuel pool after 15 years accumulation of spent fuel.
The Holtec Report HI-92950 states that the normal discharge is 68 fuel assemblies.
Provide assurance that these values are not inconsistent or make the necessary changes in the updated FSAR in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59.
- 4.
Standard Review Plan 9.1.3 provides guidelines for cooling and sources of make-up water to the SFP.
{l) The SFP cooling system should be designed to seismic Category I requirements or {2) the fuel pool make-up water source, its source, the fuel pool building and its ventilation and filtration system should be designed to seismic category I requirements.
The Holtec Report HI-92950 does not specify the SFP cooling system as seismic Category I or specify a make-up water system and its source as seismic Category I. Discuss how the decay heat removal function for the SFP is assured during a seismic event.
What effect does reracking have on the capability to remove decay heat from the SFP following a DBE?