ML19209A660
| ML19209A660 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/04/1979 |
| From: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bixel D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| TASK-09-01, TASK-RR NUDOCS 7910050143 | |
| Download: ML19209A660 (5) | |
Text
TERA a a<c j
oq y!
_ h, UNITED STATES
{ ' ", v.
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
- E W ASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 t '.
[
j September 4,1979 Docket tio. 50-155 Mr. David Bixel fiuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. Bixel:
We are continuing our review of your April 23, 1979 and June 26, 1979 submittals related to the proposed expansion of the storage capacity of the spent fuel pool for the Big Rock Point plant and have found that the additional information described in the enclosure to this letter is needed.
Please provide your response within 45 days of the date of this letter.
Sincerely,
^i hn Dennis L. Ziemt.,n hief Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosure:
Request f'or Additional Infonnation cc w/ enclosure:
See next page 7 910 0 50 /Y3 o
1109 356
Mr. David Bixel September 4, 1979 cc Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Mir!.igan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Hunton 4 Williams Secrge C. Freeman, Jr., Esquire P. O. Box 1535 Richmond, Virginia 23212 Peter W. Steketee, Esquire 505 Peoples Building Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 Charlevoix Public Library 107 Clinton Street Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 i
Ii09 357
ENCLOSURE QUESTIONS FOR THE BIG ROCK POINT PLAT!T SPEf:T FUEL POOL MODIFICATION 1.
Provide the estimated volume of contaminated material (e.g., spent fuel racks, seismic restraints, additional pool fil ters, radwaste system de-mineralizer resins) expected to be removed from the plant because of the pool nodification and shipped to a licensed burial site.
2.
Discuss the history of leakage of water from the spent fuel pool, the pool leak collection systen and the pool leak detection system. Discuss where pool leakage would be transferred to for disposal.
3.
Provide the number of spent fuel movements needed for the proposed pool modification.
These fuel movements may disturb the crud material on the floor of'the pool and may release additional crud material on the assem-blies. Discuss the addition of crud material to the pool water because of these fuel movements during the modification of the pool, the ability of the pool filtering system to remove the crud material from the pool water and the effect of the crud naterial in the water on dose rates in the vicinity of the pool.
4.
Discuss the ef #ect of the proposed pool modification on the radwaste system de ;ineral izer (e.g., frequency of repl acement).
5.
Prcvide the failed fuel fraction for each fuel cycle for the last 5 years at Big Rock Point.
I109 358 6.
Discuss the instrumentation to indicate spent fuel pool water level and water temperature.
Include the capability of the instrumentation to alarn and the location of the alarms.
7.
Identify the principal radionuclides and their respective concentrations in the spent fuel pool water found by gamma isotopic analyses prior to and following refueling.
Provide the dose rate values above and around the spent fuel pool from these concentrations of radionuclides.
C.
Provide an estimate of the annual man-rea from all operations in the SFP area including refueling.
The estinate should be based on occupancy tine and dose rates from fission and corrosion product concentrations and any contaminated equipment that may be stored in the pool.
9.
In your subnittal dated April 23, 1979, you stated that the failed fuel rack to be removed from the spent fuel pool will be cut up and shipped offsite for disposal.
You estimated 27 man-rems will be received by per-sonnel performing these operations.
Based on the above actions, please provide the following information:
(a)
Provide the breakdown of your evaluation of 27 man-ren as follows:
number of workers involved in each phase of the operation includ-ing divers, if any; the duration of each phase; the exposure rate (ar/hr) to occupational workers during each phase of the operation including the dose rate expected from the rack when it is renoved fron.the SFP water and the nan ren received by all workers involved for each phase.
I109 359
. Demonstrate that the removal of the rack with a cumulative dose of 27 nan-rem is as low as reasonably achievable in contrast to other licensees that have performed the same operation removing several con'taminated spent fuel racks with a lesser man-rem ex-posure.
(b) Denonstrate that your disposal method of cutting and shipping the failed fuel rack to be removed will provide as low as is reasonably achievable exposure as compared to crating the entire rack and then shipping it.
10.
Provide a list of all objects that are required to be moved over or near the spent fuel storage pool.
For each object listed, provide its approximate weight and size, a diagram or description of the transfer path utilized, and the frequency of novement.
11.
Identify any heavy load or cask drop analyses perforned to date for your fa-c il i ty.
Provide a copy of all such analyses not previously submitted to the NRC staff.
1109 360