ML20037D068
| ML20037D068 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Fermi  |
| Issue date: | 05/18/1981 |
| From: | Kintner L Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8105210360 | |
| Download: ML20037D068 (7) | |
Text
Tern g(
o,,
UNITED STATES g
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION j
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
,f r.
,o/
44y E E Ml 4.\\
Qd
' D,
$ /
- h E
Docket No. 50-341 G
APPLICANT: Detroit Edison Company f,
FACILITY:
Fermi 2
'W,
'Q j {
t* -
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MAY 13, 1981 OL REVIEW MEETING REGARDING SPENT FUEL P00L COOLING SYSTEM The purpose of the meeting was to discuss criteria and means for cooling the spent fuel for normal refueling and off loading of an entire core.
Exemptions to Appendix G and H of 10 CFR 50 was rescheduled for a meeting in May 19, 1981. is a list of attendees. is an agenda.
Applicant responded to the agenda items satisfactory and agreed to provide a written response during the week of May 19, 1981. Applicant agreed that piping connecting the fuel pool to the residual heat removal system should withstand earthquake loadings.
").)
s 13 il LWML%
L. L. Kintner, Project Manager Licensing Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page o105210$fd p
Mr. Harry Tauber Vice President Engineering & Construction Detroit Edison Compar.y 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 40226 cc:
Eugene B. Thomas, Jr., Esq.
David E. Howell. Esq.
LeBoeuf, Lamb, Leiby & MacRae 21916 John R 1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N. W.
Hazel' Park, Micnigan 48030 Washington, D. C.
20036 Mr. Bruce Little Peter A. Marquardt, Esq.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comrission Co-Counsel Resident Inspector's Offict Th'e Detroit Edison Company 6450 W. Dixie I!igh.ay 2000 Second Avenue Newport, Michigan 48166 Detroit, Michigan 48226 Dr. Wayne Jens Mr. William J. Fahrner Detroit Edison Conpany Project Manager - Fermi 2 2000 Second Avenue The Detroit Edison Company Detroit, Michigan 48226 2000 Second Avenue Detroit, Michigan 48226 Mr. Larry E. Schuerman Detroit Edison. Company.....
3331 West Big Beaver Road Troy, Mich_igan. 38084 t
I'
-.=
,n ENCLOSURE 1 May 13, 1981 Detroit Edison Company Meeting NRR L. L. Kintner V. Panciera F. Clemenson Detroit Edison Company
(
L. Schuerman D. F. Lehnert M. L. Batch G.G.
P. Tan Stone & Webster T. Lanza
!l l
l l
l
.-g pw 9
....--,w,,
,,...--..m..-.
...c,~
,._wmr._,_w...m...
,,w,
-,.w..
..em,,,
.m. _, +,. ~ _ _ y
-.y,....,,.~,
a Enclosur 2 Agenda fcr May 13, 1981 Meeting Enrico Fenni Unit 2 High Density Spent Fuel Storage System 1,
In accordance with item 1.2(1) of the April 14, 1978 generic letter on spent fuel expansions described and discuss the potential for criticality being achieved if fuel assemblies are inadvertently placed arouno the perimeter of the conventional aluminum storage racks containing fuel assemblies.
2-Amendment 32 described five different possible heat loads without identi-fying those that determine the spent fuel pool heat removal system require-
?
ments.
In this regard provide the following.information.
(a)
Identify the particular five eischarge cycles that define the spent fuel pool cooling system requirements (b)
Indicate the minimum elapsed time between shutdown and when all of the discharge fuel is in the spent fuel storage pool.
(c) Verify that all calculated valuesof decay heat have been ob-
.tained in accordance with the guidance in ASB Technical position 9-2.
It should be noted that ASB TP 9-2 presumes the reactor had been operating at rated power i.e., it is not acceptable to assume the reactor had been operating at 80% of rated power (d) Using that nonnal refueling cycle whien yields the maximum decay heat load, provide a plot of the cumulative spent fuel pool heat load versus time similar to Figure 9.1-25 in Amendmer.t 32.
l
.e 2-Superimpose on the plot the rated heat removal capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system,the heat removal capacity of the RHR system and the combined heat removal capacity 'of the spent fuel pool cooling system and the RHR system.
normal (e) In each occasion in the above plot where the total cumulative heat 3
load exceeds the rated capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system indicate the additional decay time (resident turn in the spent fuel pool)'before the heat load will decay to a value equal to the capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system i.e. the RHR noI.nser system is required to augment the spent fuel pool cooling system (f) Using the cumulative decay heat valves developed above, provide a plot of the total heat load assuming a full core discharge were to occur instead of a noraml discharge at each refueling periods.
Superimpose on the plot the heat removal capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system, the RHR system and the combined spent fuel pool cooling system and RHR system 4ptaj muimum (g)
In each occasion where the above cumulative heat load plot exceeds the rated capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system indicate the required additional decay time in the spent fuel pool before the heat load will decay to a value equal to the capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system (h) Describe and discuss the methods that will be employed to verify that the decay heat load in the pool is equal to or less than the capacity of the spent fuel pool cooling system and therefore the RHR system
.,~e
,.-r..
.r,,
m.
y y
a 3-can safety be returned to its nonnal safety function.
3-Assuming the maximum heat load in the spent. fuel pool!(include a full core discharge) and a comp 40e loss of external pool cooling, indicate the$ime inErv~al before boiling would occur and indicate the boil off rate.
In regard to the identified sources of makeup water given in compliance with
.f-each muhu p sou -ce.
Regulatory Guide 1.13 Amendment I dated November 1975 describe and discuss 3
the quantity of makeup water available, the makeup rate and time required before it can be available at the pool.
4 Assuming the reactor is operating at power, and the spent fuel pool cooling 6 BW system fails when the pool has,a heat load of 7.9 x 10
/hr Indicate the elapsed time before boiling occurs.
Relate this time interval to the time interval required to place the RHR system in the spent fuel pool cool-ing mode of operation.
The discussion is to include the plant conditions that must be met before the RHR system can be made available for cooling the pool 5.
Describe and discuss the assumptions and input data used in establishing the heat' removal capacity of the RHR system when operating in the spent fuel pool cooling mode.
6.
In regard to the ability of the high density storage racks to protect the stored spent fuel assemblies from load drops. the staff has assumed in the
-.--e y
r
--,----,e
.-.--,v
=.4
-,_m
--r.
.y.
e 4
past that all lessar loads when dropped from their maximum elevation would cause less damage, i.e., tiie product of the w6ight of the load times the drop height would be less that the weight of one fuel assembly and its associated handling tool when dropped fmm its maximum elevation above stored spent fuel. Verify that this assump-tion is correct.
I l
I i
l
[
l J
_., _ _ -... _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _, _. _ _,. _.. _. _ - _. - _ _.. - _ _ - - _ -.... _.