ML20138D766

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Discusses Results of NRC Review of Conceptual Design of BNL Hfbr SFP Liner & Forwards Se.Final Design Should Clarify That Leak Detection Sys Has Ability to Be Isolated & Effect of Corrosion Due to Dissimilar Metals Should Be Evaluated
ML20138D766
Person / Time
Issue date: 04/28/1997
From: Michaels T
NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To: Holland M
ENERGY, DEPT. OF
Shared Package
ML20138D773 List:
References
PROJECT-701 TAC-M98195, NUDOCS 9705010234
Download: ML20138D766 (3)


Text

._.

. =

_m.

m.

p Riog t

UNITED STATES j{

j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20665 4 001

/

April 28, 1997 Mr. Michael D. liolland, Project Manager HFBR Restart and Modification Department of Energy Brookhaven Group Building 464 P.O. Box 5000 Upton, New York 11973

~

SUBJECT:

REVIEW OF THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY HIGH FLUX BEAM REACTOR (HFBR) SPENT FUEL P0OL LINER (TAC NO. M98195).

References:

1)

Letter T. Lash to L. Joseph Callan, dated March 11, 1997,

Subject:

Request for NRC Technical Assistance on the Design, Fabrication and Installation of High Flux Beam Reactor Spent Fuel Pool Liner 2)

Letter M. Holland to T. Michaels, dated March 26, 1997,

Subject:

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Technical Assistance on the Review of the Structural Adequacy of the Proposed Brookhaven National Laboratory High Flux Beam Reactor Spent Fuel Pool Liner 3)

BNL document, Conceptual Design for RD Modification Approval (RMA) No. 97-01, Impervious Liner for the HFBR Spent fuel Storage Canal, Revision 0, April 4,1997, (Final Draft)

4) Meeting between NRC, DOE, and BNL, April 18, 1997, NRC Headquarters, Rockville, Maryland,

Subject:

Review and Discussion of NRC Preliminary Comments on Reference 3

Dear Mr. Holland:

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has reviewed the conceptual design of the Brookhaven National Laboratory High Flux Beam Reactor Spent Fuel Pool Liner as requested by References 1 and 2.

[/

The conceptual design in Reference 3 was reviewed against the review scope in Reference 2, and we have determined that the design requirements, the proposed design loads, load combinations, liner acceptance criteria and seismic analysis for options A, B and E are feasible and acceptable to the staff.

Le With regard to material compatibility and additional analyses and evaluations 93 necessary for incorporation into the final design documents we have the following comments.

pg Q f 3 l

x

/YM~- 70 I 17-8b

$.. > -o[o2a4wo42e vp.E CEfH S M PDR ORG EUSDOE PDR a

l M. Holland April 28, 1997 The final design should clarify that the leak detection system has the ability to be isolated.

The issue of cathodic protection for 304 SS liner material should be resolved with Suffolk County.

If Carbon steel stiffeners are going to be exposed to air, the possibility of corrosion should be investigated to determine their acceptability.

i

)

The effect of corrosion due to dissimilar metals should be evaluated further.

]

Enclosed is a safety evaluation on the structural analysis.

If you have any questions,pleasecallmeat}301-415-1102.

Sincerely,~.

t Originalsigned'by:

Theodore S.~Michaels, Senior Project Manager Non-Power Reactors'and Decommissioning l

Project Directorate Division of Reactor Program Management 1

-0ffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. P-701

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation DISTRIBUTION:

Central File MSlosson OGC (015-B-18)

PIsaac PUBLIC SWeiss MMendonca WEresian PDND r/f EHylton TDragoun PDoyle TMartin TMichaels AAdams RRothman GHubbard GBagchi JMa CBajwa

  • See previous concurrence i

PDND:PM PDND:LA DSSA*

ECGB*

PDND:D TMichaels EHylton GHubbard GBagchi SWeiss t

4/ /97 4/ /97 4/24/97 4/24/97 M/2897 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY 4

DOCUMENT NAME:

G:\\SECY\\MICHAELS\\CODESIG.TM l

l 1

1 l

M. Holland l l

l The final design should clarify that the leak detection system has the ability to be isolated.

l The issue of cathodic protection for 304 SS liner material should be resolved with Suffolk County.

If Carbon steel stiffeners are going to be exposed to air, the possibility of corrosion should be investigated to determine their acceptability.

The effect of corrosion due to dissimilar metals should be evaluated further.

l Enclosed is a safety evaluation on the structural analysis.

If you have any questions, please call me at 301-415-1102.

Sincerely, f

$ 'll Theodore S. Michaels, Senior Project Manager Non-Power Reactors and Decommissioning Project Directorate

{

Division of Reactor Program Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. P-701

Enclosure:

Safety Evaluation l

!