ML20002B710
| ML20002B710 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 10/27/1980 |
| From: | Lainas G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Kreger W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8012220524 | |
| Download: ML20002B710 (1) | |
Text
A l-e-
e n.e,._.-e,.,.
Fiih 0
OCT 2 ; 1980 MEMORANDUM FOR:
W. Kreger, Assistant Director for Radiation Protection Division of Systems Integration FROM:
G.C. Lainas, Assistant Director for Safety Assessment Division of Licensing
SUBJECT:
USE OF A TWO ASSEMBLY FUEL SIPPING DEVICE The purpose of this memorandum is to assure that you are aware of activities at operating reactors, relating to radiation protection concerns. The attached memorandum from the Office of Inspection and Enforcement deals with the subject of using a fuel asseinbly sipping device to sip _two_ assemblies at the_same time. IE has_.
determined that utjlityj s safety evaluation performed under 10 CFR _
50.59 was appropriate. We agree with~ the~IE~ determination for this
~
case. However, it would be more desirable to have situations like this addressed in the FSAR, if such situations can be anticipated, since this would eliminate the need for a licensee review (under 10 CFR 50.59) and IE or NRR reviews as the situations develop.
Therefore, it may be worthwhile to consider modifying the Standard Review Plan (Section 15.7.4) to address such cases.
We will attempt to keep you informed of operating reactor events and activities relating to radiation pmtection.
Ongi=al signed by 3.CkuTCH NIELD t
, G.C. Lainas, Assistant Director gi) for Safety Assessment Division of Licensing
~
Contact:
G. Holahan, X27112
Attachment:
As stated l
i cc w/ attachment:
G. Lainas 4,
J. Olshinski g yg i
,P G. Holahan p/
/
L. Barrett V
K. Wichman 7
8 0 1 'o o "
- pp.;f 52-4 f-
~
l 0 FricE p.Ol @.
/3L
.D DL
,,,,,pGHolahan:sh, J01'sninski
- GL AY' nas
, ],
care ). /.# /M./80,, 4 g,/80
,J /%0,j, NRC FORM 318 (9-76) NRCV 0240 DU.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1979-289-369
ATTACHMENT p n a a,,
0 UNITED STATES
[N
.J
' i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SSINS: 6530
~
E WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555
/
0CI P 1SSO l
- ,gv j
+....
MEMORANDUM FOR:
G. C. Lainas, Assistant Director for Safety Assessment, DL, NRR FROM:
Leo B. Higginbotham, Assistant Director, Division cf Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Inspection, IE
SUBJECT:
FUEL HANDLING ACCIDENT - USE OF A TWO ASSEMBLY FUEL SIPPING DEVICE Enclosed for your consideration is a 10 CFR 50.59 safety evaluation performed by the Sacramento Municipal Utility District (Rancho Seco facility). The operation being supported by the evaluation is the use of a two assembly fuel sipping device as opposed to a single assembly sipper.
IE has reviewed the licensee's evaluation and has agreed with the licensee's determination that an unreviewed safety question does not exist when considering the operational and time restrictions placed on the use of the sipper.
The licensee's evaluation is based on the failure of two complete fuel assemblies. This two assembly failure is outside the bounds on the routine NRR fuel handling accident consequences, which considers the failure of only one fuel assembly. Therefore, we are providing a copy of the licensee's evaluation for_NRR's ceneric consideration of j uol handlino accidents and the potential for more than a single effective fuel assembly failure.
eo.lHigskibotham Assistant Director Division of Fuel Facility and Materials Safety Inspection, IE
Enclosure:
As Stated cc:
J. H. Sniezek, IE W. Kreger, NRR S. Bryan, IE W. Houston, DSE Tue f Sw.i & 02 78
PROPOSED 50.59 TEST OR EXPERIMENT
O
/ O '[
el.
DESCRIPTION:
Sipping of as c:ny as two Spent Fuel Assemblics at a time will be accom-
~
ished in the Spent Fuel Pool Cnsk Loading Pit.
Spec. Cyst eqr -ent vil provided by i
i TP424
/
the inst:11ation nnd operation of this c:;uipmen(is coverked 'S -
$(/l%?C 0 ate /z-3
' 3 6'.i; C.l CTenizaitt Operating tng1;mer 2.
TEST OR EXPERIMENT:
CALCULATIONS SAFETY ANALYSIS [
. Cal @.ons -ASa fetyMysis to support this operation arpsattac
- Y f h%
Da e e /2. 99
/ d' h*U $
Date /Q n
~
Cognizant" Engine,/r Manager Gen. Engr.
/
Yes[4 No {'
3.
PRC F.ECO:01ENDATION:
50.59(a) - Yes No 50.59(b)
DISPOSITION OF PRC:
a.
Unani=ously reco== ends proposal d.
Safety Analysis inadequate b.
Send to MSRC for concurre'nce e.
MSRC review prior to 1:ple:enting c.
Rece= mends not to proceed
~
wAAWIm Date'li~ll-PRC Chair =an 4.
A"ALTSIS:
50.59(a)
Yes Recon =end to Proceed: Yes No Refer to MSF.C I
~
No 50.59(b)
Yes h l
~
No
)
Datef-$?-0
~
.MJ 7Iant Superintendent 5.
MSRC FINDINGS:
50.59(a)
Yes No 50.59(b)
Yes %
No ]
DISPCSITIC" 0F MSRC:
Reco== ends proposal h
c.
Reco= mends not to proceed a.
b.
Send to'NRC for appreval d.
Safety analysis inadequate
/),7
[
h/ n.ss.J.L A Date d }pI4/?I r
v.-
=================================================y====p==================
Al T /S
/S*59h
" ' ~ ~
6.
C012:ISSION APPROVAL 03TAINED Date MSRC Chair =an
,=============================================================================================
7.
tioRK DISPOSITICN:. Test or expericant co=pleted.
r* 4 t./ k. <
W.+1
/
,/
)Q M
pate /
Co;nicant Engineer
+
E.
OVIFj.1.1. REVIEW:
Docu entation complete.
Test or experiment complete.
g c o ]g D
hh A
nAk%
ranapr i.uclear 0;, era:1ons Date Gaaiity tssurance r.iretter
"?te l'Ltpr k 80lfLl(10()hh
~*
.