ML19344A056
| ML19344A056 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crystal River  |
| Issue date: | 06/27/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Reid R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003160033 | |
| Download: ML19344A056 (5) | |
Text
__
L i
,)
D
% N
' MEMORANDUM FOR: R. Reid, Chief, Operating Reactors Branch No. 4 Division of Operating Reactors FROM:
Acting Branch Chief, Engineering Branch Division of Operating Reactors
SUBJECT:
FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION - SPENT FUEL POOL MODIFICATI0fi (TAC - 7468)
Plant Name: Crystal River Unit 3 Licensing Stage: Operating Plant Docket Husber: 50-302 Branch and Project Manager Requesting Assistance: CRS-4, C. Nelson Requested Completion Date: 7/1/78 Operating Reactors Branch Involved: Engineering Branch, Plant Systems Branda.
Environmental Evaluation Branch Description of Task: TAC 7468 Review Status: Awaiting Additional Information The Engineering B-anch, DOR, has reviewed the structural, mchanical and materials aspects of the information submitted by Florida Power Co::pany in a report entitled " Investigation on the Structural Safety of the Spent Fuel Pool Due to Installation of High Capacity Fuel Racks? and the Nuclear Engineering Services, Inc. report entitled, " Structural Analysis Design Report for the Crystal River Unit 3 High Desity Fuel Storage Racks."
We find that before we can cc=plete our review, additional information,.ss indicated in the enclosure, is necessary.
~
kigina M M s
Acting Branch Chief Engineering Branch, Division of Operating Reactors fg,
Enclosure:
. As stated N
1 s
cc:
V. Stello B. Grimes y
V. Noonan
- c. nelson
"- - % 7[l L,.yair
_EB:00R ES:00R d,
E3:00Rf ome s.
eu. awa *
..V Nc C.": *;.'l.. -
J..,,*..
- n 6pf/78
,,6/: ] 8,,,,,,.,
_6[ /,[$,,__.
f omtr e NRC PORM He (9-76) NRCX 0240 W u. s. eovsemmen mwene omers me - ese.es4 0
800316003.3 P
g o
^^
ENGINEERING BRANCH
[
d DIVISION OF OPERATING REACTORS REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 - SPENT FUEL POOL MODIFICATION i
1.
Page-6 of the. spent fuel pool structural analysis states that adjacent l
. structural elements are analyzed to account for the restraint they contribute to the spent fuel pool structure.
Provide justification that these elements retain their structural integrity under the imposed loads.
2.
Discuss the effect of the water sloshing effects discussed in the rack analysis report on the fuel pool walls.
3.
Provide a direct comparison of loads used in pool structural analysis to those obtained from the rack seismic analysis.
4.
Provide values in terms of g's used for the structural seismic loadings mentioned in 4.3.4 (b) of the fuel pool structural analysis.
Also, indicate the directions of all applied seismic loads.
5.
Section 5.7.1 of the fuel pool analysis states that " forces generated by the elastic analysis indicates that the existing reinforcement is insufficient,..." Provide justification for the adequacy of the fuel poci under this loading condition.
6.
Provide details showing areas where load and moment averaging is required to justify the structural adequacy of the fuel pool, and provide justification of the structural adequacy of all areas where the limts in the Standard Review Plan have not been met.
7.
Quantify the statement in Section 5.7.3, "However, in several isolated
~
areas,; generally whenever a sharp change in the mean, temperature occurs between adjacent elements, very large stresses exit," and provide analytical' justification for the structural adequacy of these areas..
8.. Provide an explanation of the statement in the pool structural anlaysis given on page 28, "The embedment plates to which the fuel racks are attached were not evaluated for increased seismic loading."
' 9.
'rovide. detailed drawings of the rack seismic bracing including the attachment to the pool wall.
10.
The. limit for load ccmbination 5 given ir Section 5.2 (b) of the rack structural analysis report should be 1.5S.
.p'
y e
a e."'
C G
aux o 58 2
. 11.
Discuss the effect of the gaps between-adjacent rack assemblies and between the rack' assembly and the seismic bracing on the seismic analysis results.
12 '.
Provide the deflections of the rack base and fuel cans obtained from the' seismic analysis.
~
13.
Provide -justification that fuel ' pool liner will not develop leaks due to the applied loads including thermal loads.
Also, provide justification that the stud bolts will not fail under the loadings.
14.
Explain how the spacer bars between each storage cell are considered
~
in the seismic analysis model.
15.
The mathematical model of the fuel rack assembly shows the feet are assumed anchored to the pool floor.
How were the shear loads transmitted to the liner th' rough the feet been corysidered in the analysis.of.the 1.iner integrity?
16.
Provide results v.* an analysis considering an temperature gradient across the rack structure due to differential heating between a full and empty cell.
17.
Discuss the local effects of the impacting fuel assembly on the storage cell and the absorber material.
18.
Discuss how the effects of the impacting fuel assemblies were considered in the energy balance used to determine the maximum rack uplift during an.SSE.
Also, provide stability analysis for other rack assemblies.
19.
Discuss.the effects of a fuel assembly drop on a -spent fuel storage cell which is.directly above one of the rack feet.
Include the effects on the fuel assembly.
- 20. Appendix G of the rack structural analysis report gives a calcualtions.
of an adjusted frequency of a-rack due to support flexibility in the upendor area... Provide a more detailed a seismic analysis of the rack; structure and seismic bracing.
~
- 21.
Provice information on the heat treatment requirements'.and hardness-testing results for the 17-4l,' PH stainless steel used for the
' leveling pads. Also. provide information-on.-the methods used for removing the film coating resulting from the beat' treatment.
- u
mam
~; -
% "i
. ;jg-;. ; y
- -g-
- g-.
<q 9 q BM
--.-- y r_r}
y,
22.
Discuss the fuel pool water chemistry and include the allowable concentrations of fluorides, :hlorides and boron.
23.
Discuss the measures that will be taken to prevent outgassing from the B4C absorber raterial in light of the current problems with stuck fuel assemblies.
~.
m u
e 9
MEETING SUM'GRY DISTRIBUTIO!!
ORB #4 Arkansas Power & Light Company Metropolitan Edison Company ATTN: Mr. William Cavanaugh III ATTN:
Mr. J. G. Hertein Executive Director - Generation Vice President and Construction Department P. O. Box 542 Post Office Box 551 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Little Rock, Arkansas 72203 Sacramento Municipal Utility District ATTN: Mr. J. J. Mattimoe Florida Power Corporation Assistant General fianager ATTN: Mr. W. P. Stewart and Chief Engineer Director, Power Production 6201 S Street P. O. Box 14042, Mail Stop C-4 P. O. Box 15830 St. Petersburg, Florida 33733 Sacramento, Califernia 95813
- .e r @
L. Shao R. Baer NRC PDq W. Butler L PDR L. B rrett ORBd4 Reading Projectfianager NRR Readinc E. G. Case-Att rney, OELD OI&E(3)
V. Stello R. Ingram B. Grimes R. Fraley, ACRS(16)
T. Carter T. B. Abernathv
~
D. Eisenhut J. R. Buchanan A. Sch.tencer Meeting Sur: mary File D. Ziemann NRC Participant (s)
G. Lear R. Reid (S. Rhow, P. Shemanski, C. Berlinger, L. Olshan, G. Zwetzi, H. Silver, C. Nelson t.
9
.