ML18102A293
| ML18102A293 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 08/02/1996 |
| From: | Dawn Powell Public Service Enterprise Group |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| LR-N96218, NUDOCS 9608140051 | |
| Download: ML18102A293 (4) | |
Text
-PS~G Public Service Electric and Gas Company P.O. Box 236 Hancocks Bridge, New Jersey 08038-0236 Nuclear Business Unit AUG 0 2 1996 LR-N96218 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen; SPENT FUEL SURVEY COMMITMENTS SALEM GENERATING STATION UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-272 AND 50-311 In letter dated June 27, 1996, you requested that Public Service Electric and Gas provide confirmation and projected completion dates for verbal commitments identified in response to the above referenced survey. to this letter provides the requested information, including justification for the proposed schedules where appropriate.
Should you have any questions regarding the enclosed information, please fe~l free to contact me.
Attachment 120055 The power is in your hands.
Sincerely, JJ.J<. lluudt D. R. Powell Manager -
Licensing and Regulation
Document Control Desk LR-N96218 2
AUG 0 2 1996 c
Mr. Hubert J. Miller, Administrator -
Region I U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Mr. L. N. Olshan, Licensing Project Manager -
Salem U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission One White Flint North 11555 Rockville Pike Mail Stop 14E21 Rockville, MD 20852 Mr. C. Marschall (X24)
USNRC Senior Resident Inspector Mr. K. Tosch, Manager, IV Bureau of Nuclear Engineering 33 Arctic Parkway CN 415 Trenton, NJ 08625
ATTACHMENT 1 TO LR-N96218 Commitment Confirmation and Projected Schedules
- 1) Revise the Current Licensing Basis to state that a full core offload is the routine practice during refueling outages.
This activity is complete.
The Salem Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) has been updated to eliminate reference to the one-third core off load case as the normal refueling practice.
The UFSAR now reflects the current analysis basis which includes full core off-load as one possible refueling scenario.
This update was submitted to the NRC on June 12, 1996 as part of Revision 15 to the UFSAR.
- 2) Provide an analysis of the spent fuel pool (SFP) structures and associated systems to consider SFP water temperatures above 180°F.
This activity will be completed prior to the affected Unit's next core off-load.
Analysis of the SFP liner and concrete and the SFP Cooling System including the SFP heat exchanger, have been completed with acceptable results.
Analysis of spent fuel storage rack performance at elevated temperatures is ongoing.
- 3) Develop a procedure for using the cross connect between the heat exchangers to support the one unit with the SFP excess heat load.
PSE&G will establish an integrated approach to Spent Fuel Pool Decay Heat Load management.
This will include establishing appropriate controls over heat exchanger operation in the cross connected mode of operation to assure that both spent fuel storage pools are adequately cooled.
This activity will be completed prior to the affected Unit's next core off-load.
- 4) Establish procedural controls that assure that the SFP heat load is maintained below the analyzed value.
PSE&G will establish an integrated approach to Spent Fuel Pool Decay Heat Load management.
This will include establishing appropriate controls on the addition of newly irradiated fuel to the spent fuel pool to assure that spent fuel cooling requirements are satisfied.
This activity will be completed prior to the affected Unit's next core off-load.
ATTACHMENT 1 TO LR-N96218 (CONT)
Basis for Projected Schedules (Items 2, 3 and 4)
The Salem Unit 1 and 2 SFP cooling systems are non-seismic, and as such are postulated to fail following either an Operating Basis or Design Basis earthquake.
Loss of SFP cooling could result in pool boiling conditions if sufficient heat inventory is available.
Sufficient decay heat load is available immediately following core off-load during planned refueling outages.
For the present inventory of spent fuel, sufficient decay time has elapsed such that SFP temperatures would remain below 180°F for the Salem Unit 1 and 2 SFP's should the cooling systems become unavailable.
Because of this, pool boiling potential is not credible until such time as freshly irradiated fuel is transferred to the SFP.
The Current Licensing Basis includes an evaluation of the decay heat associated with a mid-cycle emergency core off-load condition.
While this establishes a bounding case for decay heat removal by the cooling system, it does not impose a requirement to off-load the core under this condition.