ML20059N272

Responds to Requesting Matl for Mixed Waste Training Course Manual

ML20059N272
Person / Time
Issue date:	10/02/1990
From:	Dennise Orlando NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:	Katsury S FLORIDA, STATE OF
References
REF-WM-3 NUDOCS 9010110132
Download: ML20059N272 (21)

Text

Y..

N0/FLA SPECH 0 E 1990 Dr. Satish Katsury Florida Department of Environmental Regulation Twin Towers Office Bldg.

2600 Blair Stone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2400

Dear Dr. Katsury:

I This is in response to your letter of September 20,199C, requesting material for the Mixed Waste Training Course manual.

I have enclesed copies of the slides that will I will be using to support sity presentation for inclusion in this manual.

I spoke to Mr. Chis Teif, on September 27, 1990, concerning the course syllabus, as your letter indicated that I would be presenting lectures on facility inspections and emergency response in addition to a lecture on Federal perspectives of mixed waste management.

It was sty understanding, as communicated to Dan Nash, that I would present one lecture, on Federal perspectives of mixed waste management.

Chris informed me that I would be presenting one formal lecture on the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) mixed waste perspectives and siting in on lectures pertaining to emergency response and facility inspections.

Please let me know if this is your understanding of the course agenda and if you have arty questions concerning the enclosed material, please contact me at your convenience.

Sincerely, Original signed by Dominick A. Orlando, Project Manager Regfiatory Branch Division of Low-Level Waste Management and Decommissioning, NMSS i

Enclosures:

As Stated l

l DISTRIBUTION:

Central: File i NMSS r/f RLBangart PLchaus JJSurmeier JGreeves JAustin LLRB r/f N0rlando RBoyle PDR Yes: d/

1 PDR No: /

/

Reason:

Proprietary /

/

or CF Only /

/

ACNW Yes:

/

/

No: /v /

SUBJECT ABSTRACT:

INFORMATION RE MIXED WASTE TRAINING COURSE I j OFC :LLRB

LLR

LLRBf NAME:N0 ptfdo/jl :RBoyle

J Auftin :

DATE:10/f/90

10f2,/90 :10/ Zr90 :

/ /90 :

/ /90

/ /90 :

/ /90 Q {oab g T

+o10110132 9o1002 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 3

PDR WASTE I

WM-3 PDC g, gM

)

UPDATE ON MIXED WASTE

p. l:.

1, _

p..n.

o nj SIGNIFICAN7 REGU ATORY; L

AUTHORITY e Atomic Energy Act of 1954.

e Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976 e : Low-Level Waste. Policy Amendry ats Act of 1985 5

i.

P

$Q yf en m

.. ~

,+

nmo

's

i,i1 I\\I l

1 l,

l, l

ll1<}

~

y t

. _i l

i

. b

~

i n

r o

p

)

)e e.

h s

t t

s s

a a

e W-DE W

R Ci E T Ao e.

s v

u

~

t y

R.

o X S Pd c

o r

a A

Ea ro Nd z

l ImMW a

H_

t R.

A a

A R

E C

l A

R u

(

(

ge

. R la u

~

D g

}

i.i

!:I,[ii

!:lI.!li

.i,!

i!

l.

,1[1::-

3I

[.l, i! <

.[!,i!'

I

[

E M.

o t

E e

r

.t H

te L

- C s0 9

- S

'r 9 ra1 C

Y 9

n1

. R a

y mr O.

r a i

e a u T

m h n A

o s

Ca s

e J

nf L

n c

i o

i e

n dl U

d e

ea l

r t

t u

s ad G

i U

b s

t n

S E

y n

o n a l

ir c

o

. R a

n m

it s

is i

s s

. L e

a.

o e l

s it Pr a

c A

e n

g n

e Cn U

t n

o..

Ro U

- P NC

. D e

. o e.

iL!-

i

.!L;!

! l j7 l!

iII

!! ;i 1

+

4 i

i JOINTMRC/ EPA GUIDANCE DOCUMENTSi t

l elDefinition of Mixed Waste October 4,L1989

- y

[

(January 8,1987)-

j l

j i

e Combined EPA /NRC Siting Guidelines-

June 29,1987 o

o l

• Conceptual Mixed: Waste Disposal:

August 3,1987

[

Facility

~

{

)

}

1 j

{

1 i

E i i

.' I

-l

~

3 il '.,.

.. _.,. ~..

~.

~.

~

4 WHAT IS MIXED WAST':?

g " "" " "' ""

it is not Mixed LLW, but it may be Harard-Step 1.

Is the Waste LLW?

ous Waste or another Radioactive W;aste.

Yes Step 2.

Are Usted Hazardous No Step 3.

- Do Non-AEA Materials Cause

~ ~-~

Wastes Contained in the the Waste to exhibit any of LLW?

)

the HEuardous Waste Chr wiwiistics?

.y Yes l

^

No The waste is Mixed LLW.

The waste.is not Mixed L WL.

E 4

i k

mvm.-m y

,w

+

=.t-

,i<y-g g

-w

,-wg.

y--h*+m" 4

m,.

Nm w

• =p.

W#

-,y*,

c6-s p'-%

g w.

vm.

v.#-.

eor e

_.2.,

'.ii il

l'

+j:

3!

j:

=

de n

l o

e d

it a

o o

M l

s I

d e

e ts z

i a

r A

W e

tc I

a R

r Ls a

E e

h v

C T

itu g

e I

e n

g R

b e

n

'a j

i O

B n

i C

r ia f

I e

od

'r r

c e

D G

n ez d

a bly o

m l

N m

aa o

a l

r pn F-e I

o aA r

f r

t T

C a

s r

e

.d e

p-I P

d e e

.Y.

U S

m n

o

. 0.

m e

br 0

t i

re a

sit

.r un

. 1 u

T-

.D Mo

.in m

u g

M

. t n

l i

e n

l.e i

. o t

o i

L W

S

- N.

M e

e e

. e e.

4

• i il;

!4

!5

SITING CRITERIA-(Continued) eNot on Designated Lands e Stable Foundation for Engineered Structures-e Stable Geologic Arca

-e No Discharge to Groundwater Within Site Boundaries e No Groundwater intrusion into the Waste

eVulnerable Hydrogeology Deserves Special Attention e

~ '

-1..

_J'.-,-

- +... -__

--.---m-

- - - - -- ___- =_

-~

LONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF A COVER SYSTEM AT A MIXED WASTE DISPOSAL FACILITY --FIGUR' A

~

AREA REGRADED FOLLOURNG POST-CLOSURE CARE PERIOD

'l=

]

I

,,RALC. ER I

i gg

. y-PERREm9%BERRR Igg 1

FOR tEAcunve I seRm

. I sOuonEDwaste fRUNOFFCN cm zone e

I g

3 I

1 33 ggM

)

.l A b

I 80'eUE MER S UEACME CDufmION SWB8EMl

=

\\_/- o.

J M

uusane w osom SURFACE RUN ON LEAK DETECTION'

~.

CONTROL TANK (TO EPA

\\

BERM STANDARDS)

GROUND WATER 5

e N-h

h t

?NRC/EPAJJOINT DOCUMENTS

~

UNDER DEVELOPMENT c

e Storage e Waste Characterization (Sampling)-

eJoint Licensing and Permitting; e I acility inspection n

. - +.

, S r_-__--_

- - ~ ' ^ ' ~ - ' " ~ - "

- ' ' ~ ' ' ~ ' ~ ~

- ' ' ~ ' ' ' '

' ' ^ '

" " ~ ^ ^

~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ' " ^ " ' ^ '

^^~

~~"

,enn-MIXED WASTE WORKSHOPS e EPA PERMIT WRITERS AND INSPECTORS 7

Santa Fe,'New. Mexico November 27-28,1989 (Chicago, Illinois March 6-7,1990

-Washington, D.C.

May 14-15,1990 Denver, Colorado June 19-20,1990 Buffalo, New York..

-July 31 - August 1,1990

- Oakland,-California September 5-6,11990 e NRC REGIONAL INSPECTORS eNRC AGREEMENT STATE REGUI.ATORS State of Florida-October 31 - November 1,1990 I

r

=. ~ __ _ __ ___

= ~ ~ ~ ' ' ' " * -

m.

MIXED WASTE COURSE CONTENT e Regulation - EPA, DOE, NRC and States

-e. Basic Radiation Concepts -

.e-Mixed Waste Universe

• KInspections and On-Site f divities e Facility Permitting / Licensing o-Mixed Waste Site Visit.

=

e e

n:

• an

]

4 1

4 m.

NATIONALLMIXED WASTE SURVEY i

k

's PRINCIPLE ORGANIZATIONS INVOLVED 1

LeNRC.

.eEPA

.eDOE eTCC-1 o

-eORNL i

i

[

TIMEFRAME e Project initiation: -

. September 1990

~

September 1991 - March 1992 l

[

eProject Completion!

l.

-m.

1 -.;

_ l Q. f -~

~_

.=.

ws.

. ~. -

~ -

j; i.o 1

4 LNATIONAL~ MIXED WASTE SURVEY PURPOSE e Reduce uncertainties on volumes, characteristics,-

l and treatability;of commercial mixed wastes' p

i

. PRINCIP'.E PRODUCTS l

e National Mixed Waste Profile

[

e Treatability of: Mixed Waste Streams L

i.

n'

=

~

j L-2 n

')

9 NATIONAL MIXED WA.STE SURVEY 1

2.

I

+r

.q PHASEI Evaluate Existing l

Werature & Data Specific Thsks' i

i j

PROJECT-PHASEII l

National Mixed Waste Collect & Analyze I

k h kn 4

M

~

' Survey -

' PHASE 111 Document Data

& '~

SpecificTusks i

Prepare Final Report l

I I

u i-b

.I

.s

'"*"+F'"

e

% W "*

"1

-"FF' W

"r

1. e My_

m

__+,__

m f'*W' "

a

.i

~

)

4*

I'-

NATIONAL MIXED WASTE SURVEY

=

l PHASEI Tasks i'

.e Evaluate Existing Data e Evaluate Adequacy _of Existing Data for Compiling Mixed J

Waste Profile j

t j ',

s i-

^

-l

p i

i t

~

2 f

j

. J u.

.x

+

1

ii 0!

l.!

i

i 1

z,

~

YE 1

V

=

RU

..a S

t n

a a

D E

P t

l c

a T

n e

t a

o

. l S

l t

. o D

i c

e

. C e

A z

l o

y l

W Es C

l lo t

l

)

a s

n S k a

. (

A D

Aa l

s t

o a

o d

D E

HT

. T n

x p

p s

X P

o o

t c

l

.l I

e e

e M

v v

l l

e

. e o

D D

C L

e e

AN O

L I

T A

N h

. L L

1 4

l

i!r; I:

!i

!!i e

t!}

.* i a

li

.l l;li i :1 l

,;.j,ih!

t

i

!i!

H

~

YE V.

R m

y i

U t

i l

S

. i

. b a

t E

e a

l f

e i

T o

T.

r r

~

S P

e.

e

. t A

X s

as t

I a

W W

Es W

.ts l

d u

Sk d

e_

s D

s e

x e

Aa x

M R

i E.

H T M

i t

X n

n P

e o

e t

m l

I ip=

M.

m.

p c

ro u

o e

o L

C R

D A

e e.

e N.

O.

~

a IT A

N

~

~

2

- ~~,

~

a

?

^

1 i f,

;

V

!3

,

j,t l

N' l;l!!!

llLl[t

1. s.

- 4 PRINCIPLE MIXED WASTE UNCERTAINTIES-1 i

. j 1

e Volume of Mixed Waste a

e Storage, Treatment, and Disposal of Mixed Waste co Sampling of Mixed Waste.

i i

e Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (TCLP;L j.

j e Inspections of Stored Waste j

l 1

j e EPA' RCRA Siting Standards l

a L

-e Land Disposal Restrictions 1

i e inconsistency Determinations l

l 1

~

.,5 r

p 3.

+

~

..a_,-

._.s

._,.-.1..d_,-._,_-c__.-

., -. ~. - -. -.,.,

, -.. - ~.. -

- - - ~ ~. -

j~'

.i 2;

)

4 4

A FUTURE MIXED WASTE ACTIVITIES l

1 eEducational Workshops j

c L

eJoint NRC/ EPA Guida.nce. Documents i

- eNRC/ EPA / DOE Mixed Waste Survey.

L

~

eResolution of AEA/ RCRA Inconsistencies t

eDevelopment of Joint NRC/ EPA High-Level Task Force.

q u

l-i i

J

=

y i

o 4

.. r

"'.d

..3,

,gy,.

.[

,m.,

+..

s

_s.-

e, 4

m a

p

-g

?

JWRC Form get U.S. NU;LEAA RE,ULATOxY COMMf9800N 1

(12D1) 10 CF R.201 !

SAFETY INSPECTION '

i' 1, LICENSE E

2. REGION AL OF F le'.

N WA

$ 0 00 4 Y I^' TI C-jy 5 Q p (

$ 't 0 /)l HM

. b g i vf

't ] [ } L i L w M L f ~ A & b f/f f 1 86 R Cp/

fy; pg z y f' l( W & 0 f ' lA $ &A

/ A ^) 7 t/ g f -

l

3. DOCKET NUMBE RES)

4. LICENSE NUMBE PIS)

5. DATE OF INSPECTION O 30- //4,// a,

? ? - N o ? - c 7 +51 o p-f p p d d

O $ /J - /19 4 9 3 7. / t/ /?9-Of

]

-1 Licznsee:

s Th1 inspection was an examination of the activities conducted under your license as they relate to radiation s.5v **.0.o comp'iance with the Nuclear -

i Hegulttory Commissionk (NRC) rules and regulations and the conditions of your license. The inspection consisted of selective examinations of procedures tnd to resentative records, in arviews, with personnel, and obsersations by the inspector.= The fin '.gs as a result of this inspection'are es f oliows:

1. Within the scope of this in psction, no violetions were' observed.

1

. The inspector also verified the steps you have taken to correct the violations identified during the last inspection. We have no further questions on --

those actions at this time.

] 3. Ourmg this inspection certain of your activities.as checked below, were in violation of NRC requirements.

THl$ IS A NOTICE OF VIOLATION which is required to be posted in accordence with 10 CFR 19.1 ?.

A.

was not properly posted to indicate the presen' e c

of e

.10 CFR 20.203(b), (c), (d), (e) or 34.42.

were not property,

i B. Conteners loca ted in labeled to indicate the presence of radioactive material 10 CFR 20.203(f)(1), or (f)(2).

C.

of sealed sources were not performed at the proper -

f requencies. 10 CF'l License condition Number '

q.

.(

D. Records of i were not properly maintained.

10 CFR

' or License Condition Number

] E. Documents were not property' posted or otherwise made eveilable.10 CFR 19.11 '

] F. Reports or notif cations of were not made in accordance with 10 CFR

-or License Condition Number H.

l.

J.

IfcSIGNATED ORIGI AL.

gg,

g A l., - -

4D% SL

^-

m' eq

.. h ; o f

.7 t

vap uuwv uy. -- - - -

r~

=

'. ? f (..

1 titreby state that within 30 days the actions desertbed by me to the inspector will be taken to correct the violations identified 6n the items check ed above; y

Thte sittement of corrective actions is made in accordance with the requirements of to CF R 2.201.' No furthee response will be submitted unless required by

/y the N H C.

fs W f -

t d4 N 3 lh, f

kn.(f -

(f h/

c SIGNATURE LICENSEE DATE SIGNATUR E - N FIC INSPE CTO R DATE

~

90101102o8 900917 b'k REill LIC30

,.i i

37-141.79--026 PDC

~

am

_.~

.[

a

\\...

}

,J = e. ** L l'

D

' Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Rocky Hill Road Plymouth. Massachusetts 02360 i

Ralph G. Bird v

. senior Vice President - Nuclear BECo 90 '112 -

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission September 27, 1990-

.-Document Control Desk LWashington, DC 20555 1

License DPR-35' Docket-50-293 l.

_ Changes-to Technical Specification Bases'for the-Standbv Liauid Control-System and-Jet Pumo Flow Mismatch

.The Technical Specification ~ Bees, for the Standby. Liquid Control : System (SLCS) at the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station ~ have been revised to correct the' minimum-boron-concentration calculated to occur;in the reactor vessel upon SLCS inj ection.' The corrected boron concentration in the reactr at the cold 1

shutdown condition is equivalent to 675 ppm of natural boro'n.

This concentration results in a shutdown margin of 4.01%' Ak for the current cycle, whichs exceeds' the minimum required shutdown margin'of 3% Ak. lThis correction only affects Technical SpecificationiBases Page 100 and does not reduce the margin of safety defined.by the 3%- Ak minimum required shutdown margin, p

The-Technical Specification Bases for_-jet pump flow mismatch:have also:been revised on Page 148 to add further _ justification for the restriction' based on 0

I

' core flow coastdown concerns.

This bases change does not alter Technical.

~ Specification 3.6.F because additional justification is provided.for the!

't existing specification.

a

'In accordance with 10CFR50.36(a)' the bases are not'a 'egal part oflthe l

Technical Specifications.

Therefore,-these~-bases changes do.not constitute an amendment to.the: operating license ~and prior NRC approval is not required.

These changes have been reviewed and appicvad by the Operations Review Committee. Please incorporate these bases c.,nges into your. copy of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station Technical Soecifi ations by replacing Pages.100 and 148 with the attached Revision 142 pages.

h1

+

R. G.

ird DMV/ cab /4769

Attachment:

Technical Specification Bases Pages 100 and 148, Revision 142 J

cc:

Mr. R. Eaton,' Project Manager

.U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commissier Div of Reactor Projects - I/II.

Region I-Office of Nuclear Reactor Reg.

475 Allendale Road i

Hail Stop:

14D1 King of Prussia, PA -19.406 g0\\

U S.- Nuclear Reg. Commission U

l. White Flint North Senior NRC Resident Inspector

\\.

j

-11555 Rockville Pike 0*9*^~

Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station

.Rockville, MD 20852 I'2 9010110002 900927 ""E E

i N

- PDR ADOCK 05000293c

.n p-FNW

Q(

y yl

.AYN'f'=#

f hhhh BASf.S:

3.4 & 4.4 STANDBY LIOUID CONTROL SYSTEM A.

The requirements for SLC capability to shutdown the reactor are identified via the station Nuclear Safety Operational Analysis (Appendix G to the FSAR, Special Event 45).

If no more than one I

operable control rod is withdrawn, the basic shutdown reactivity requirement for the core is satisfied and the Standby Liquid Control system is not required.

Thus, the basic reactivity requirement for the core is the primary determinant of when the standby liquid control system is required. The design objective of the standby liquid control system is to provide the capability of bringing the reactor from full power to a cold, xenon-free shutdown i

condition assumir.g thrt none of the withdrawn control rods can be inserted. To meet this objective, the Standby Liquid Control system is designed to inject a quantity of boron that produces a minimum concentration equivalent to 675 ppm of natural boron in the reactor core.

The 675 ppm equivalent concentration in the reactor core is required to bring the reactor from full power to at least a three percent Ak subtritical condition, considering the hot to cold reactivity difference, xenon poisoning etc.

The system will inject this boron solution in less than 125 minutes. The maximum g

time requirement for inserting the boron solution was selected to override the rate of reactivity insertion causeJ by cooldown of the reactor following the xenon poison peak.

The Standby Liquid Control system is also required to meet 10CFR50.62 (Requirements for Reduction of Risk from Anticipated Transients Without Scram (ATHS) Events for Lirt-Hater-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants).

The Standby Liquid Con:rol system must have the equivalent control capacity (injection rate) of 86 gpm at 13 percent by wt. natural sodium pentaborate for a 251" diameter reactor pressure vessel in order to satisfy 10CFR50.62 requi rements.

This equivalency requirement is fulfilled by a l

combination of concentration, B'0 enrichment and flow rate of sodium centaborate solution. A minimum 8.42% concentration and 54.5% enrichment of BM isotope at a 39 GPM pump flow rate satisfies the ATHS Rule (10CFR50.62) equivalency requirement.

1 Because the concentration / volume curve has been revised to reflect the increased BW isotopic enrichment, an additional requirement has been added to evaluate the solution's capability to meet the original design shutdown criteria whenever the BM enrichment requirement is not met.

Experience with pump operability indicates that the monthly test, ia combination with the tests during each operating cycle, is sufficient to maintain pump performance. The only practical time to fully test the liquid control system is during a refueling outage. Various components of the system are individually tested periodically, thus making more frequent testing of the entire system unnecessary-Revision 142 100 9010110003 900927 PDR ADDCK 05000293 P

PNU 4

3-fLASLS:

3.6.F and 4 E Jet Pumo Flow Mismatch The LPCI loop selection logic has been previously described in the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station FSAR.

For some limited low probability accidents with the recirculation loop operating with large speed differences, it is possible for the logic to select the wrong loop for injection.

For these limited conditions the core spray itself is adequate to prevent fuel temperatures from exceeding e'lowable limits.

However, to limit the probability even further, a procedurai limitation has been placed on the allowable variation in speed between the recirculation pumps The licensee's analyses indicate that above 80% power the loop select logic could not be expected to function at a speed differential of 15%. At or below 80% power the loop select logic would not be expected to function at a speed differential of 20%.

This specification provides a margin of 5% in pump speed differential before a problem could arise.

If the reactor is opertting on one pump, the loop select logic trips that pump before making the loop selection.

The flow mismatch restriction also derives from the " Core Flow Coastdown" concern.

This concern postulates that if the recirculation loop with the higher flow is broken, the " effective core flow" is determined by the loop with the lower flow.

Compared to a matched flow condition, this would start pump coastdown from a lower flow / speed with the reactor power effectively above the rated rod line.

Therefore, boiling transition may occur earlier during a postulated LOCA event, which could result in higher calculated peak cladding temperatures (PCTs).

Therefore, the purpose of the " Core Flow Coastdown" flow mismatch restriction is to maintain Pilgrim with'n its analyzed conditions Specification 3.6.F allows 30 minutes to correct a mismatch in recircuiation pump speeds in order to take manual control of the recirculation pump MG set scoop tube positioner in the event that its control system should fail.

I J

l l

Revision 142 148 I

_.___--___--_j