ML19354A858
| ML19354A858 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07109877 |
| Issue date: | 12/19/2019 |
| From: | Garcia-Santos N Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards |
| To: | Kuprenas M US Dept of the Navy |
| Garcia-Santos N | |
| References | |
| Download: ML19354A858 (3) | |
Text
From: Garcia Santos, Norma To: Kuprenas, Michael A CIV USN NNPP (USA)
Subject:
RE: Question on Reactor Compartment Disposal SARP Date: Thursday, December 19, 2019 1:30:00 PM Attachments: DRAFT_Request for Additional Information_71-9788.pdf Good afternoon Michael, There is one request for additional information related to the review of the application for revising CoC o. 9877. This question will be issued to you in a formal letter. The letter is in concurrence at this time. However, since the Holidays are approaching, proposed to send you an advanced copy of the question that you will be receiving, which should allow you to start working on the response. My goal is to issue the letter soon (hopefully within a week or so) and for you to provide a response by the third week of January 2020, or so, since it is only one question. (Attached is a draft copy of the question that you should be receiving.)
In terms of the schedule, if the staff receives the response in January 2020, and there are no further questions, then, there is a possibility that the CoC could be issued by the end of February 2020. On the other hand, if there are delays of any type, I wanted to communicate that the review may take a little longer.
Thanks in advance, Norma Garcia Santos Project Manager Division of Fuel Management Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Telephone No.: 301-415-6999 Email: Norma.Garcia-Santos@nrc.gov From: Kuprenas, Michael A CIV USN NNPP (USA) <michael.kuprenas@navy.mil>
Sent: Thursday, December 19, 2019 1:17 PM To: Garcia Santos, Norma <Norma.GarciaSantos@nrc.gov>
Subject:
[External_Sender] Question on Reactor Compartment Disposal SARP
- Norma, Thinking about our call, I had a follow-up question.
Is the question that you have going to be in the form of an RAI, or is it just a question? And if it is an RAI, will it not come in until February/March, or would the RAI come in early January and the expectation is it would take two months for us to answer and the NRC to review the answer, after which time the CoC would be issued in early March?
Mike Kuprenas DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Request for Additional Information U.S. Department of Energy National Nuclear Security Administration Docket No. 71-9877 Certificate of Compliance No. 9877 DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Model No. NR By letter dated August 5, 2019 (Agencywide Documents Access and Management System Accession No. ML19227A143), the U.S. Department of Energy, National Nuclear Security Administration (the applicant), submitted an application for revising certificate of compliance (CoC) Number (No.) 9788 to include the S5G reactor compartment as authorized contents.
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT This request for additional information (RAI) identifies information needed by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff (the staff) in connection with its review of the application.
The staff used NUREG-1609, Standard Review Plan for Transportation Packages for Radioactive Material," in its review of the application.
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT The RAI describes information needed by the staff to complete its review of the application and to determine whether the applicant has demonstrated compliance with the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Part 71.
DRAFT Shielding Evaluation DRAFT DRAFT RAI-Sh-1 Provide additional information regarding the methodology used to solve for the neutron flux and how the flux solution was applied to determine activation DRAFT sources.
DRAFT DRAFT Section 5.2.1 of the application mentions that the neutron flux was solved with a transport code, but the applicant did not provide further information about the method used in the code. In prior revisions, a discrete ordinates transport code DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT was used. The application mentions a flux profile, implying axial variation, but it does not address whether or how this factored into the activation analysis. The application also did not explain why the flux profile chosen is conservative.
This information is required to determine compliance with 10 CFR 71.47.
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT Enclosure