ML19225A083

Interrogatories & Document Requests for NRC Submitted by Potomac Alliance.Requests Info on Spent Fuel Pool Re Alternatives,Tornado Damage,Turbine Missile Damage,Defective Fuel Rods & Changes in NRC Requirements

ML19225A083
Person / Time
Site:	North Anna
Issue date:	06/01/1979
From:	Jay Dougherty Potomac Alliance
To:
Shared Package
ML19225A081	List: ML19225A080 ML19225A083 ML19225A085 ML19225A090
References
NUDOCS 7907180265
Download: ML19225A083 (10)

Text

, -

4 A.

UNITED STATES OF AMIRICA

$ FEE 9

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 1979 >

4 JUM 4

)

PEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING DOARD S

c,=. d,s,v ge a

> -g,.

CR/3,p s

n>

In the Matter of

)

)

Docket Nos. 50-33EEF VIRGINIA ILECTRIC AND POhTR COMPANY

)

50-339 SF

)

(North Anna Power Station,

)

(Proposed Amendnent to Units 1 and 2) operating license NFP-4)

IN"'ERROGATORIES TO THE NRC STAFF FROM THE POTCMAC ALLIANCE Pursuant to 10 CFR S2.740b, the Pctcmac Alliance requests that the following interrogatories be answered fully, in writing, and under oath or af firmation by any employees cr members of the NRC Scaf f who have personal knowledge thereof or are the closest te having personal knowledge thereof.

The persen answering eacP question should set forth his or her name and title, and shculd identify any other individual who furnishes information en whicP the answer to the questien is based.

Each questien is instructed to be answered in five parts, as fellows:

Answer :: Quest:cr A)

Previde the direct answer te the ques:: r 3)

Ident:f*; all d:cuments and studies relied ; cr b ';

the Staf f now or in the past, which serve as the basis fcr the answer.

Any such document shall be identified with reference to its title, the date it was prepared, its auther (s), any iden::f31.g serial nuw.bers er filing numbers, the partic'lar i

- /

N (')

08-7007180 7 W G

m

. the parts thereof which are relied upen, and the places, other than the of fices of the NRC where it is known to be available for inspection.

In lieu thereof, a copy of each document a'nd study may be attached to the answer.

C)

Identify all documents and studies, and the particular parts thereof, known to exist but not relied upen, onich pertain to the subject matter of the question.

In lieu thereof, a copy of each document and study may be attached to the answer.

D) Explain whether VIPCO, the NRC staff, or any other individual is engaged in or intends to engage in further research which may affect the answer.

Identify such research or werk.

E)

Identify the expert (s), if any, whom the Staf f intends to have testify en the subject matter of the questien.

State the qualifications of each expert.

CCISTICNS:

Have you censidered and analyzed the possibility 1 (a).

fuel of expanding the physical area of the existing spent pcci (SFF) as an alternative to the prcpcsed modifica:icn' (b).

If so, describe such analysis and any dccuments referring to this alternative.

dave you considered and analyzed the pcssibili:;

2 (a).

cel en-sits as cf constructing a separate spent fuel s:Orage e an alternative to the prcpesed modifica:icn?

(b).

If sc, describe such analv. sis and any documents referring to this alternativc.

k) hhh

- 3 (a).

Have you considered and analyzed the possibility of using the SFP at Units 3 and 4 for storage of spent fuel from Units 1 and 2?

(b).

If so, describe such analysis and any documents referring to this alternative.

4 (a).

Assuming that the proposed operating license amendment is not granted, when, according to your projections, will:

(1) the first defueling of Unit 1 occur-(2) Unit 2 begin commercial operations; (3) the SFP be filled to capacity, less a reserve for one full core discharge; (4) the SFP be filled completely?

(b).

Describe fully the basis for the above projections, including any assumption made regarding the number of months between refuelings, the number of fuel assemblies discharge per refueling, and whether the cask loading area will be used for fuel storage.

5 (a).

To your knowledge, is any private corporation or censulting grcup presently preparing a study en the icgistics or other aspects cf stcring and handling spent fuel?

(b).

Identify all preliminary drafts, working papers,

sucP studies, and analyses which have been develeped pursuant and describe the substance of each document so identified.

Y

.o n,

6 In. 52.4 of the Safety Evaluation Report (SER) prepared in connection with the proposed modification it is stated that the original design of the SFP and fuel building was accepted on tne basis that there was a " low probability" that a tornado generated missile would damage sufficient fuel assemblies to cause offsite doses in excess of 10 CFR Part 100.

(a) What is the probability of such an occurrence (assuming the proposed modification is not permitted)?

(b) In the Staff 1s opinion, is this prcbability likely to increase if the proposed modification is permitted?

(c) If the answer to (b) is in the negative, explain the basis for your answer.

(d) If the answer to (b) is in the affirmative, explain the basis for your answer and estimate the increased probability of such an occurrence.

7.

In 52.4 of the SER it is stated that the " design criterien for the tornado missile protections for the facility was such tornade-generated missiles would not cause damage to more than one spent fuel assembly within the spent fuel pccl."

(a) Explain this stacement.

(b) What is the probability that a tornado missile

=ay damage more than one assembly in the SFP (assuming the preposed modification is not permitted)?

I bhbh 7.

(c) Is the probability of such an occurrence likely to increase if the proposed modification is permitted?

(d) If the answer to (c) is in the negative, explain the basis for your answer.

(e) If the answer to (c) is in the affirmative, explain the basis for your answer and estimate the increased probability of such an occurrence.

8.

Describe the damage that would have to be sustained by the fuel in the SFP in order to exceed the limits esta-blished in 10 CFR Part 100.

9.

In an NRC document entitled Draft Generic Environ-mental Impact Siatement on Handling and Storage of Spent Light Water Power Reactor Fuel (March 1978) (NUREG-0404) it is stated in 54.2.3.2 that a tornado missile entering a STP could impact a 45 foot row of assemblies.

(a) Justify the discrepancy between this estimate and your estimate that a tornado missile entering the Ncrth Anna STP would not impact more than one assembly.

(b) What would be the radiolcgical consecuences tf a 45 foot row cf assemblies were damaged by a tornade or turbine missile at the North Anna STP?

nu\\

gs i v

O

'l) 8.

Describe the most destructive (1) tornado and (2) turbine missiles which could conceivably be expected to enter the SFP.

9.

(a) What is the probability that such missiles would be expected to enter the SFP over the life of the plant?

(b) What would be the radiological consequences of such missiles?

(c) Assuming that the proposed modification is not permitted, what is the probability that such missiles would strike directly more than one fuel assembly?

(d) Assuming that the proposed modification is permitted, what is the probability chat such missiles would strike more than one assembly?

10.

Is it your opinion that the distance between assemblies secred in the SFP is relevant to the questien whether more than one assembly is likely to be struck by a missile or a utility pole?

Explain your answer.

11. Based upon operating experience with :ircalley clad fuel, approximately how many of the discharged spent fuel assemblied are expected te contain defect;ve fuel reds?

Cf these, what percentage of the fuel reds centained therein are expected to be defective?

j0:O U '!:'

_7

12. Based upon your experience with and knowledge of zirealloy clad fuel, describe all types of cladding defects that have been observed to occur.

a)

For each defect type, describe the causative ecnf ticns.

b)

For each defect type, state the probable release rate of radioactive matter, in mass and activity units.

Describe all information in your possession, including 13.

personal knowledge, concerning the adverse effects (including corrosien and stress-related effects) upen:

a) fuel red cladding; b) fuel assembly materials other than fuel red cladding; c) fuel storage racks; and d) the poc1 liner as a result of exposure to environments similar to that which will exist in the SFF.

The respense to this questien should discuss, but net be limited to, all nuclear reacters.

Describe all adverse effects mentioned in Cuesticr 14.

13 as they may be expected tc cecur ever the fcilewing time periods:

a) five years b) fifteen yearc c) ferty years If such information is not in your possessien, is it in existence?

If so identify it.

If not, why not?

5 nO ]

V'

.o I

" g

_a_

15.

(a) Have there been any changes in the NRC safety requirements relating to spent fuel pool storage since the expansion was proposed?

(b) Describe all such changes.

What are the projected costs of compliance with any such requirements?

16.

(a) Do you know of any proposed or pending modi-fications to the NRC requirements regarding spent fuel storage?

(b) Describe these modifications fully and project the cost of compliance with such requirements.

17.

Assume that the proposed modification of the SFP is not permitted, and that the SFP is filled to its capacity of 400 fuel assemblies.

(a) Describe all employee activities within the fuel building which involve a risk of radiation exposure, including but not limited to:

(i) changing filters and resin cartridges (ii) ether maintenance, including equipment maintenance (iii) cleaning operations (iv) surveillance (v) fuel leading and unloading (vi) preparing spent fuel for shipment offsite (b) Describe the magnitude of the radiation exposures, in person-rems, involved in these activities, including the radiation levels at all relevant locations and the person-heurs of activity at those 1ccations.

l

')

r 18.

Assume that the proposed modification of the SFP is permitted, and that the SFP is filled to its capacity of 966 fuel assemblies.

(a) Describe all employee activities within the fuel building which involve a risk of radiation expcsure, including but not limited to:

(i) changing filters and reain cartridges (ii) other maintenance, including equipment maintenance (iii) cleaning operations (iv) surveillance (v) fuel loading and unloading (vi) preparing spen

• fuel for shipment offsite (b) Describe the magnitude of the radiation exposures, in person-rems, involved in these activities, including the radiation levels at all relevant locations and the person-hours of activity at those locatiens.

Identify all correspendence between VIPCO and the 19.

NRC concerning the proposed =cdification of the SFF.

Identify all correspendence between the United States 20.

Depart =ent of Energy, its constituent agencies or predecesser and owners of ccmrercial nuclear generating facilities,

agencies, including VEPCO, concerning spent nuclear fuel.

Identifv all memoranda and other corresc.endence between 21.

O(\\

of the SFP.

O MRC Staff concerning the proposed scdifi:ation O

I 22.

Summarize briefly the Staff's independent evalu-ation of the capability of the SFP cooling and purification system to handle the increased cooling requirements as mentioned on p.

1-6 of the Safety Evaluation.

Has this evaluation been modified since VEPCC filed LER 79-44 (April 4, 1979)?

If not, why not?

Respectfully submitted, Of counsel:

Gloria M.

Gilman, Esq.

Jame s B.'Dougherty L/

Counsel for the Dated this 1st day Potomac Alliance of June, 1979 7, n. O.

1h[]

,