ML18101B374
| ML18101B374 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1996 |
| From: | Eric Simpson Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| IEB-96-002, IEB-96-2, LR-N96131, NUDOCS 9605210478 | |
| Download: ML18101B374 (6) | |
Text
./
Public Service Electric and Gas Company E. C. Simpson Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236, Hancocks Bridge, NJ 08038 609-339-1700 MAY 1 3 1996 Senior Vice President - Nuclear Engineering LR-N96131 United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 Gentlemen, RESPONSE TO NRC BULLETIN 96-02 SALEM GENERATING STATION UNITS 1 AND 2 FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NOS. DPR-70 AND DPR-75 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 311 On April 11, 1996, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 96-02, "Movement of Heavy Loads Over Spent Fuel, Over Fuel in the Reactor, or Over Safety-Related Equipment."
The bulletin requested licensees to review their plans and capabilities for handling heavy loads in accordance with their licensing basis and with existing regulatory guidance.
Public Service Electric and Gas Company (PSE&G) recognizes the importance of compliance with regulatory guidance associated with the control and handling of heavy loads at our Salem Generating Station (SGS) in all modes of operation.
PSE&G has reviewed our plant specific analysis and determined that our existing procedural controls continue to satisfy the requirements of NUREG 0612 for the handling of heavy loads.
Because a heavy load is defined at SGS as any load greater than 2200 lbs., and because movements of heavy loads over safety-related equipment occur on an as-necessary basis, it is difficult to project and compile a listing of all heavy load movements for the next two years.
It is, therefore, important to emphasize procedures and heavy load handling capabilities.
PSE&G has no immediate formal plans involving the movement of very heavy loads at SGS (such as spent fuel dry storage casks), however, the possibility of Steam Generator replacement is under consideration for Salem Unit 1.
Should this option be selected, PSE&G will assess the impact of such an activity against our existing heavy load movement program and this bulletin response.
We have, in the enclosure to this letter, addressed the Requested Action and appropriate Required Responses of the Bulletin.
9605210478 960513 PDR ADOCK 05000272 G
/;;)+. Printed on
~
Recycled Paper
'1iG l
-~ ---
- -.~*-::..--.* :-. :*
.* -~.
~. -.
. \\
I Document Control Desk LR-N96131 2 -
MAY 13 1996 Should you have any additional questions, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Mr. T. Martin, Administrator - Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. L. Olshan, Licensing Senior Project Manager - Salem U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. C. Marschall (X24)
USNRC Senior Resident Inspector - Salem Mr. K. Tosch, Manager IV NJ Department of Environmental Protection Bureau of Nuclear Engineering
~..;.:*.;- -*-:. -... -: - '
REF: LR-N96131 STATE OF NEW JERSEY SS.
COUNTY OF SALEM E. C. Simpson, being duly sworn according to law deposes and says:
I am Senior Vice President - Nuclear Engineering of Public Service Electric and Gas Company, and as such, I find the matters set forth in the above referenced letter, concerning the Salem Generating Station, Units 1 and 2, are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief.
Subscribed and Sworn to before me this
/3 day of ~
, 1996 My Commission expires on ELIZABETH J. KIDD NOTARY PUBLIC OF NEW JERSEY My Commission Expires April 25. 2000
.... ;.... ;~*.;.~, _.
. -~;,. :- -.
Background
REF: LR-N96131 ENCLOSURE RESPONSE TO NRC BULLETIN 96-02 SALEM GENERATING STATION On April 11, 1996, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Bulletin 96-02, "Movement of Heavy Loads Over Spent Fuel, Over Fuel in the Reactor, or Over Safety-Related Equipment."
The Bulletin emphasizes the importance that the NRC places on licensee compliance with existing regulatory guidance for the control and handling of heavy loads and was issued in response to concerns raised by the NRC staff regarding 10CFR50.59 justification of spent fuel storage cask handling.
In a Technical Evaluation Report dated June 22, 1984, the NRC staff found that SGS satisfied the guidelines of NUREG 0612, "Control of Heavy Loads at Nuclear Power.Plants."
Our review of the Salem Generating Station heavy loads movement program in response to NRC Bulletin 96-02 indicates that our current procedures continue to accurately reflect regulatory guidance consistent with NUREG 0612.
Our procedures also dictate that non-routine evolutions involving the movement of heavy loads in the plant are evaluated regarding safe load path and load drop consequences consistent with the guidance of NUREG 0612.
The following provides specific response to the applicable required items of the bulletin:
(1)
NRC Required Response Licensees planning to implement activities involving the handling of heavy loads over spent fuel, over the reactor core, or over safety-related equipment while the reactor is at power within the next two years must provide a report, within 30 days of the date of this bulletin, that addresses the licensee's review of its plans and capabilities to handle heavy loads while the reactor is at power (in all modes other than cold shutdown, refueling, and defueled) in accordance with existing regulatory guidelines.
The report should also indicate whether the activities are within the licensing basis and should include, if necessary, a schedule for submission of a license amendment request.
Additionally, the report should indicate whether changes to Technical Specifications will be required.
- :r.,. _,._-**.. *.*.* _
....,,.~- **-. *-*=--.
... SGS Response:
As described above, our review of the SGS heavy loads movement program indicates that our current program continues to satisfy regulatory guidance provided in NUREG 0612.
Our plant procedures control the movement of heavy loads with the reactor at power.
These activities remain within the bounds of the licensing basis for SGS; therefore no license amendment request is required as the result of our review.
(2)
NRC Required Response Licensees planning to implement activities involving the handling of heavy loads over spent fuel, over the reactor core, or over safety-related equipment while the reactor is at power which involve a potential load drop accident not previously evaluated in the FSAR must submit, 6-9 months in advance of the planned movement, a license amendment request so as to afford the staff sufficient time to perform an appropriate review.
SGS Response:
SGS has no plans to perform activities that involve a potential load drop accident that has not been previously evaluated in the UFSAR.
Heavy loads, handled at SGS in compliance with plant procedures, will be handled within the licensing basis.
(3)
NRC Required Response Licensees planning to move dry storage casks over spent fuel, over the reactor core, or over safety-related equipment while the reactor is at power must include, in item 2, a statement of the capability of performing actions necessary for safe shutdown in the presence of radiological source term that may result from a breach of the dry storage cask, damage to the fuel, and damage to safety-related equipment as a result of a load drop.
SGS Response:
As in our response to item 2, SGS has no plans to perform any activities that invQlve a potential load drop accident that has not been previously evaluated in the UFSAR.
Heavy loads handled at SGS in compliance with plant procedures will be handled within the licensing basis.
- -~:.... -:.... *.
- 1.
3 -
(4)
NRC Required Response Licensees planning to move dry storage casks over spent fuel, over the reactor core, or over safety-related equipment while the reactor is at power must determine whether changes to the Technical Specifications will be required in order to allow the handling of heavy loads over fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool and submit, 6-9 months in advance of the planned movement, the appropriate information for NRC review and approval.
SGS Response:
As in our response to item 2 and 3, SGS has no plans to perform any activities that involve a potential load drop accident that has not been previously evaluated in the UFSAR; nor do we have any plans to perform any activities not permitted by our Technical Specifications.
Heavy loads handled at SGS in compliance with plant procedures will be handled within the licensing basis.
Therefore, SGS does not anticipate any need for a change in the Technical Specifications.
Should any activity discussed above be determined to constitute an Unreviewed Safety Question, PSE&G will provide a submittal containing the appropriate information for NRC staff review and approval 6-9 months in advance of the planned evolution.
.. : ~.*.
,** -....