ML20137W799
| ML20137W799 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 04/10/1997 |
| From: | Jain S DUQUESNE LIGHT CO. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| TAC-M97469, NUDOCS 9704210006 | |
| Download: ML20137W799 (3) | |
Text
1 i
v Valley Power Station Shippingport, PA 15077-0004
-d SUSHIL C. JAIN (412) 393 5512 gg,a vgProsWnt April 10,1997 rax <4i23 643 80s.
Nuclear Power Division U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555-0001 i
Subject:
Beaver Valley Power Station, Urat No.1 Docket No. 50-334, License No. DPR-66 Response to Request for AdditionalInformation:
Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24 (TAC No. M97469) 4 1
The purpose of this letter is to provide the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) information in response to their request for additional information of January 10, 1997, regarding the need for an environmental assessment. Additionally, on March 24, 1997, in response to an NRC notice of violation regarding compliance with 10 CFR -
70.24, Criticality Accident Requirements, the Duquesne Light Company (DLC) committed to provide additional information to the NRC for the purpose of supporting the preparation of an environmental assessment. This submittal is in response to each of the two issues.
The DLC request for exemption from 10 CFR 70.24, dated December 18,1996, addressed the bases for the exemption request; however, a discussion on radiological and nonradiological plant effluents and consequences was not provided and a discussion on the probability and consequences of accidents needed to be expanded upon.
During the handling and storage of new fuel assemblies (special nuclear material),
as described in 10 CFR 70.24 at Beaver Valley Unit No.1, the process as described in our December 18,1996 request, does not involve the handling of radioactive streams or 4
the reconfiguring of systems which handle radioactive streams. The process requires movement of shipping containers containing new fuel, transferring the new fuel from the i
shipping containers to a new fuel storage area, and subsequently to the spent fuel pool
)
utilizing the new fuel elevator. The plant design also permits the movement of new fuel directly from the shipping containers to the new fuel elevator, thus bypassing the need to relocate,the new fuel in the new fuel storage area. -New fuel is moved with the fuel
)
b7' h handling crane in the fuel building. Each manipulation is a mechanical process which DEllVEllH 9704210006 970410 0UALITY PDR ADOCK 05000334 P
PDR ENER4Y 15111ll3115151)l5lll11)4
1 9
Beav,cr Valley Power Station Unit No.1
)
Exemption from 10 CFR 70.24 i
Page 2 does not require the use ofliquid or air movement in order to accomplish the task of receiving and relocating new fuel assemblies. Normal operation of the spent fuel pool cooling system and the building ventilation system is unaffected by the handling of new fuel. There are no connections to fluid systems for the completion of this process; therefore, there is no opportunity to create a radioactive plant effluent release. A small amount, if any, of radioactive waste may be generated as a result of radiological
- monitoring of the new fuel, the shipping containers and any packing materials. This waste may be smear papers or packaging materials.
The process of handling new fuel is performed entirely within the restricted area
- as defined by 10 CFR 20. Shipping containers are offloaded from the transport vehicle outside of the fuel building and are not opened until they have been relocated to inside the fuel building for receipt inspection and movement to storage locations. There is no involvement with any other plant effluent streams; therefore, nonradiological plant effluents are not affected. The handling of new fuel is performed in accordance with 1
approved procedures.
The exemption request does not introduce new or different activities within this process which have the potential to increase individual or e
cumulative occupational radiation dose. On the other hand, activities which would have to be completed to demonstrate full compliance with 10 CFR 70.24(a) could result in an increase in individual or cumulative dose due to maintaining additional equipment and 4
conducting additional drills in a restricted area.
i The process of handling new fuel introduces the possibility of droppmg an 1
assembly. Since the new fuel has not been irradiated,'dispersible radioactive material is not present in quantities sufficient to cause a release of any consequence. In the same manner, since there are no accident consequences resulting from a dropped new fuel assembly, there likewise is no increase in probability of an accident previously evaluated.
The issue of accidental criticality is discussed in the December 18,1996 request for exemption wherein the design features and administrative controls relating to fuel storage have been demonstrated to preclude a criticality event, r
The request for exemption to 10 CFR 70.24(a) does not involve a significant change in the types or a significant increase in the amount of any effluents that may be 4
released offsite and does not cause a significant increase in individual or cumulative occupational dose; therefore, there is no proposed action within this request that significantly affects the quality of the human environment.
4
\\
.~
Beaver Valley Power Station Unit No.1 Exemption from 10 CFR.70.24
.Page 3 Questions related to this submittal in response to the NRC's request for additional information may be directed to Mr. J. Arias, Director, Safety and Licensing, at (412)393-5203.
Sincerely, Sushil C. Jain c:
Mr. D. M. Kern, Sr. Resident inspector Mr. H. J. Miller, NRC Region I Administrator Mr. D. S. Brinkman, Sr. Project Manager