ML20134M737
| ML20134M737 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 02/07/1997 |
| From: | James Knubel GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| 6710-97-2039, NUDOCS 9702200387 | |
| Download: ML20134M737 (8) | |
Text
.
e 1
l GPU Nuclear, Inc.
(
Route 441 South NUCLEAR Post Office Box 480 Middletcwn, PA 17057-0480 Tel 717-944-7621 February 07, 1997 6710-97-2039 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 Gentlemen:
Subject:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1 (TMI-1)
Operating License No. DPR-50 Docket No. 50-289 Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24(a) 2 i
Pursuant to 10 CFR 70.24(d) and 70.14(a), GPUN requests an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a), " Criticality Accident Requirements," for TMI-1. This request, as described in the enclosure, involves no change to radiation monitoring alarm 1
response or emergency procedures presently utilized. We request approval of this exemption by June 27,1997, to accommodate the onsite arrival of new fuel that will be used in the 1997 Fall 4
refueling outage.
Specific exemption from section 70.24 was previously granted for TMI-l and was contained in the special nuclear material (SNM) license. However, the exemption was not explicitly included in the Part 50 operating license at the time it was issued. It is our understanding that the NRC staff has recently taken the position that the exemptions from section 70.24 granted in i
SNM licenses expire with the issuance of a Pan 50 license. Themfom, we are submitting tins j
application for exemption to clearly resolve the matter by obtaining formal relief from the requirements of section 70.24(a).
f
\\.\\
l i
9702200387 970207 fDR ADOCK 0500 9
)l 1900.99
6710-97-2039
. Page 2 of 2 The exemption is technically appropriate for the same reasons the AEC granted the exemption in connection with the SNM license. A criticality accident monitoring system was not and is not necessary at TMI-1.
If you have any questions or require any additional information, please contact Adam Miller at (717) 948-8128.
Sincerely, 8
J. Knubel Vice President and Director, TMI Enclosure AWM cc:
Region I Administrator, w/ enclosure TMI-l Senior Project Manager, w/ enclosure TMI Senior Resident Inspector, w/ enclosure
.=.
=. -..
Enclosure 4
Request for Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24(a)
Criticality Accident Requirements Pursuant to 10 CFR 70.24(d) and 70.14(a), GPUN hereby requests an exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a), " Criticality Accident Requirements," for TMI-1. This request is an administrative matter and involves no change to radiation monitoring alarm response or emergency procedures presently utilized at TMI-1.
Specific exemption from retion 70.24 was previously granted and was cor4tained in the special nuclear material (SNM' iicense issued to TMI-1, AEC Material License No. SNM-1313 issued on December 11, 197.2 However, the exemption was not explicitly included in the Pan 50 operating license when it was subsequently issued. It is our understanding that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently taken the position that an exemption from section 70.24 granted in an SNM license expires with the issuance of the Pan 50 license.
GPUN believes that the exemption is technically appmpriate for the same reasons the AEC granted the exemption in connection with the SNM license. A criticality accident monitoring system was and is not necessary at TMI-1. The NRC has recently granted an exemption under similar circumstances for the Perry and Farley plants. This application for exemption is very similar to those requests and explains the reasons for granting this exemption.
I. REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS 10 CFR 70.24(a) requires licensees authorized to possess cenain amounts of special nuclear material to maintain a monitoring system and emergency procedures for the purpose of detecting and responding to accidental criticality. These requirements are applicable to TMI-1.
Specifically, section 70.24(a) requires licensees to:
- 1. Maintain in each area in which such licensed special nuclear is handled, used, or stored, a monitoring system meeting the requirements of either paragraph (a)(1) or (a)(2),
as appmpriate, and using gamma or neutron sensitive radiation detectors which will energize clearly audible alarm signals if accidental criticality occurs.
j
- 2. Maintain emergency procedures for each area in which this licensed special nuclear material is handled, used, or stored to assure that all personnel withdraw to an area of safety upon the sounding of the alarm, and
- 3. Retain a copy of current procedures for each area as a record for as long as licensed special nuclear material is handled, used, or stored in an area. The licensee shall retain any superseded ponion of the procedures for three years after the ponion is superseded.
Section 70.24(d) anticipates that relief from these requirements is appropriate in some circumstances and allows licensees to apply for an exemption from section 70.24 if good cause is shown. GPUN believes that good cause exists for four reasons: (i) as explained below, the Page 1 of 6
_.m..
fuel storage design and procedural controls preclude accidental criticality, (ii) compliance with section 70.24(a) would not serve the underlying purpose of the regulation, (iii) exemption from section 70.24(a) was previously extended to TMI-l in its SNM license, and (iv) since the i
original exemption was issued, no changes in the use, storage, or handling of SNM have i
occurred which would make compliance with section 70.24(a) necessary.
In addition to a showing of good cause pursuant to section 70.24(d), a request for an exemption from section 70.24(a) must also satisfy the requirements of 10 CFR 70.14(a).
For the reasons given below, the application for exemption fmm the requirements of section 70.24(a) is justified under section 70.14(a).
l I
j II. THE EXEMPTION APPLICATION SATISFIES THE STANDARDS UNDER SECTION l
70.14(a) AND SHOULD BE GRANTED Under section 70.14(a), the NRC is authorized to grant an exemption upon a demonstration that l
l the exemptions: (i) will not endanger life or propeny or the common defense and security, and I
j (ii) is in the public interest. The following addresses each of these requirements and demonstrates that the NRC should grant the requested exemption.
A. The Exemption Will Not Endanger Life or Propeny Or the Common Defense and Security An exemption will not endanger life or propeny or the common defense and security if the request meets the statutory standard of adequate pmtection to the health and safety of the public.
To further ensure that the common defense and security are not endangered, the exemption request must demonstrate that the loss or diversion of SNM is precluded. As described below 1
the use, storage, and handling of SNM at TMI-1 provides adequate protection to the health and i
safety of the public, and precludes against loss or diversion of SNM. In panicular, this discussion will be focused on the following points: design, characteristics, technical specification requirements, procedural controls, and existing accident analyses.
l
- 1. Use of SNM i
SNM is present principally in the form of nuclear fuel. However, other quantities of SNM are 2
used in the form of fissile material incorporated into nuclear instmmentation. The total amount of SNM used in non-fuel capacities is small - significantly less than the quantity specified in section 70.24(a). The small quantity of non-fuel SNM present, and the form in which the SNM is used and stored, precludes an inadvenent criticality. Additionally, in accordance with section 70.24(c), TMI-l is exempt from section 70.24(b) for SNM "used or to be used in the reactor."
Thus, the remainder of this discussion is directed only towaiti the requirements of 70.24(a) with respect to irradiated and unirradiated nuclear fuel.
4 Inadvenent or accidental criticality of SNM while in use in the reactor vessel is precluded through compliance with the facility technical specifications, including reactivity requirements
]
j (e.g., shutdown margins, limits on control rod movement), instmmentation requirements ( e.g.,
reactor power and radiation monitors), and controls on refueling operations (e.g., control rod interlocks and source range monitor requirements). In addition, the opemtors' continuous Page 2 of 6
=
'sv, c w w
n
_~-
....~.--.-- -
.-~-
attention toward instruments monitoring behavior of the nuclear fuel in the reactor assures that the facility is operated in such a manner as to preclude inadvertent criticality. Finally, since access to the fuel in the reactor vessel is not physically possible while in use and is pmcedurally controlled during refueling, there are no concerns associated with loss or diversion of the fuel.
1 i
Therefore, the requirements of section 70.24(a) are not necessary for SNM in the form of nuclear fuel while used in the reactor vessel, and thus, granting this exemption will not endanger life or pmperty or the common defense and security.
I
- 2. Storage of SNM SNM as nuclear fuel is stored in one of two locations - the spent fuel pool or the new fuel
)
storage area. The spent fuel pool is used to store new, or irradiated fuel under water after its discharge from the reactor. The pool is designed to store the fuel in a geometric array that precludes criticality. In addition, existing technical specification limits on k,g are maintained less than or equal to.95, even in the event of a fuel handling accident.
The new fuel storage area can be used to receive and store new fuel in a dry condition upon arrival on site and prior to loading in the reactor. The new fuel storage area is designed to store new fuel in a geometric array that precludes criticality. In addition, existing safety evaluations demonstrate that k,g is maintained less than or equal to.949 when the new fuel racks are fully j
loaded and dry or flooded with unborated water and less than or equal to.953 for optimum moderation conditions (e.g., because of the presence of aqueous foam or mist) or in the event of a fuel handling accident.
Fresh fuel is shipped in a plastic wrap. In some cases the fuel is stored in the new fuel storage racks with the plastic wrap in place and in other cases the plastic wrap is removed prior to storage. In all cases where fuel is stored with the plastic wrap in place, the wrap either cannot hold water due to its design or it is rendered incapable of holding water prior to fuel stonge.
Therefore, there is no concern that the plastic wrap used as part.of fresh fuel storage will hold water from flooding from overhead sources. Additionally, as discussed above, the new fuel storage racks have been analyzed for a postulated flooded condition and results showed that k,y is maintained less than or equal to.953.
- 3. Handling of SNM J
Both irradiated and unirradiated fuel can be moved to and from the reactor vessel, and the spent fuel pool to accommodate refueling operations. Also, unirradiated fuel can be moved to and from the new fuel storage area. In addition, movements of fuel into the facility and within the reactor vessel or within the spent fuel pool occur. In all cases, fuel movements are procedurally controlled and designed to preclude conditions involving criticality concerns. Moreover, previous accident analyses have demonstrated that a fuel handling accident (i.e., a dropped fuel element) will not create conditions which exceed design specifications. In addition, the technical specifications specifically address the refueling operations and limit the handling of fuel to ensure against an accidental criticality and to preclude certain movements over the spent fuel pool and the reactor vessel.
Page 3 of 6
i The procedural controls discussed in the above section (II. A.2) ensure SNM handling is authorized and monitored, thereby minimizing the potential opportunity for loss or diversion.
Similarly, the absence of an accidental criticality monitoring system would not affect the capability of TMI-1 to ensure SNM is safeguarded during handling.
The exemptions from the requirements of section 70.24 approved by the AEC in connection j
with the TMI-1 SNM license were based upon the AEC's agreement that the nature of the special nuclear material, stomge arrangements, and procedural controls proposed would preclude any possibility of accidental criticality during receipt, unloading, inspection and j
4 2
storage of new fuel assemblies. The facilities, storage and inspection and procedures and other safeguards that were in place at the time the exemption was granted are consistent with what is in place today and justify the exemption requested herein.
1 Themfore, the requirements of section 70.24(a) are not necessary for the handling of SNM.
Gmnting these exemptions as regards fuel handling will not endanger life or property or the l
common defense and security.
1 I
B. The Exemption Request Is In The Public Interest
?
}
The NRC has not provided specific detailed guidance on how to apply the "public interest" l
standard under section 70.14(a). However, in a 1985 amendment to action 50.12(a) the NRC i
deleted the "public interest" standard from that section in favor of defining the "special circumstances" that justify requesting an exemption from the NRC regulations. 50 Fed. Reg.
l l
50764 (December 12,1985). At the same time, the NRC implied that section 70.14(a) was not 1
revised to be consistent with section 50.12(a) only because the NRC did not envision frequent use of section 70.14(a). It seems masonable to accept that the NRC intends the "special j
circumstances" articulated in st La 50.12(a) to serve the same purpose as the "public interest" l
criterion of section 70.14(a) and that an exemption request which satisfies the special circumstances of 50.12(a) also satisfies the public interest element of 70.14(a).
4 4
Among the several special circumstances identified in section 50.12(a)(2), two are relevant to this exemption mquest:
l (a)(2)(ii) Application of the regulation in the particular circumstances would not serve the j
underlying purpose of the rule or is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of the i
rule: or (a)(2)(iii) Compliance would result in undue hardship or other costs that are significantly l
in excess of those contemplated when the regulation was adopted, or that are significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly situated...
4 Each of these 50.12(a)(2) items are reviewed in turn below.
l t
ii) Application of 10 CFR 70.24 would not serve and is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of this requirement.
1 4
l Page 4 of 6
1 The explicit language of section 70.24 does not identify the purpose (s) for requiring an accidental criticality monitoring system and the associated emergency procedures. However, j
the regulatory history underlying this requirement indicates that:
The following amendments [i.e., section 70.24]to these regulations [i.e., Pan 70] is
[ sic] designed to assure that all licensees who are authorized to possess special nuclear material in amounts which may oroduce conditions of accidental criticality have in operation adequate alarm systems and emergency plans to evacuate j
personnel.
I i
{
23 Fed. Reg. 8747 (November 11,1958) (emphasis added). Based on this language, the NRC j
apparently promulgated section 70.24 to ensum that licensees are aware of, and take appropriate response to, conditions of accidental criticality.
l As a corollary, this language funher implies that whem design and/or procedural safeguards -
ensure against conditions of accidental criticality in the first place, compliance with section l
70.24 would not sesve the underlying purpose of the regulation. The NRC echoes suppon for l
this interpmtation in its regulatory position contained in Section C.1 of Regulatory Guide 8.12, Criticality Accident Alarm Systems, Revision 2, (October 1988) (emphasis added) as follows:
i i
Section 70.24 of 10 CFR Pan 70 requires alarm coverage "In each area in which such licensed special nuclear material is handled, used, or stomd..." whereas paragraph 4.2.1 of the standard states that the need for criticality alarms must be evaluated for such areas.
If such an evaluation does not determine that a notential for criticality exists, as for i
example where the quantities or form of special nuclear material make criticality i
practically impossible or where geometric spacing is used to preclude criticality, such as in some storage spaces for unirradiated nuclear plant fuel, it is approoriate to request an i
exemotion from 70.24.
}
i r
As discussed above in section H. A, the design of and safety analyses for the spent fuel pool and l
new fuel stomge area, as well as the associated procedural control and technical specification l
requirements, ensure that conditions of accidental criticality are precluded. Therefore, the j
application of section 70.24(a) to TMI-l would not serve and is not necessary to achieve the underlying purpose of this requirement. ~ Additionally, TMI-l fuel storage requirements for new l
l and spent fuel were reviewed and approved by the NRC upon issuing License Amendments No.
i 164 and 170, with no safety concerns directed at the fuel storage and handling arrangements.
Based on these special circumstances which would justify the granting of the exemption application using the guidance of section 50.12(a), the exemption mquest is in the public interest for the purpose of section 70.14(a).
).
iii) Compliance with section 70.24(a) would result in undue hardship or other costs j
significantly in excess of those contemplated when this regulation was adopted. and that are significantly in excess of those incurred by others.
]
A criticality accident monitoring system requims a considerable expenditure of resources, l
including the design and installation of the system, the development and implementation of any i
Page 5 of 6
l associated emergency procedures, and the operation and maintenance of the systems for the life of the plant. In light of the purpose of an accidental criticality monitoring system, these expenditures could otherwise be put to better use improving the operation of the plant.
Accordingly, strict compliance with section 70.24(a) would result in an undue hardship and other costs that are significantly in excess of those likely contemplated when this regulation was j
adopted.
j It is our understanding that exemptions from the requirements of section 70.24(a) are typically granted to Part 50 licensees. As a recent example, the Farley Units 1 and 2 plants were granted j
an exemption from section 70.24(a) in connection with the possession. ' SNM at its nuclear facility. Moreover, this exemption was granted under circumstances very similar to the present application. Therefom, we conclude that compliance with section 70.24(a) would certainly 2
create an undue hardship and other costs significantly in excess of those incurred by others similarly situated.
]
III. CONCLUSION i
Because exemption from the requirements of 10 CFR 70.24(a) for TMI-l is authorized by law, will not endanger life or property or the common defense and security, is in the public intemst i
due to the presence of special circumstances, and is mquested for good cause, we respectfully-submit that, in accordance with the mquirements of 10 CFR 70.14(a) and 70.24(d), the NRC should grant the mquested exemption.
4 1
l j
I i
4 a
j i
4 i
l i
'l i
i l
i i
k l
Page 6 of 6
- ---