ML20151C929
| ML20151C929 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 04/07/1988 |
| From: | Hopkins J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Head G GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-67079, NUDOCS 8804130276 | |
| Download: ML20151C929 (7) | |
Text
_ _ - _ _ _ _
s April 7, 1988 Docket No.: 50-425 Mr. George F. Head Senior Vice President Georgia Power Company P.O. Box 4545 Atlanta, GA 30302
Dear Mr. Head:
SUBJECT:
V0GTLE UNIT 2 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SPENT FUEL-RACKS (TAC 67079)
The NRC staff has comenced its review of the Vogtle Unit 2 s)ent fuel racks described in the letter submitted December 23, 1987. T1e NRC staff finds that it needs additional information in order to complete its review. The submittal did not address actions to be taken to naintain occupational dose ALARA or the impact of occupational radiation exposure that will result during and after the modification.
You should provide information on occupational radiation exposure, radioactive wastes, accident analyses, potential releases of radioective materials, and offsite radiological impacts due to the proposed spent fuel racks.
contains questions regarding these areas. contains questions regarding the boraflex material being used. The NRC staff is willing to meet with you to discuss these matters.
In order to maintain our review schedule, we request responses within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect 1
fewer than 10 respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Sincerely,
/s/
Jon B. Hopkins, Project Manager Project Directorate II-3 Division of Reactor Projects, I/II
Enclosures:
As stated 0804130276 880407 DR ADOCK 050 5
cc:
See next page DISTRIBUTION N.
JWing ACRS (10)
JPartlow NRC PDR JMinns SVarga Local PDR EJordan Glainas PD II-3 Reading File JStone MRood V0GTLE PLANT FILE OGC-WF opkins PD PDII-3 PD
-3 MR0
'JHopkins:sw Acting PD 04/J/88 04/7/88 04///88
Mr. George F. Head Georgia Power Company Vogtle Electric Generating Plant e
cc:
Mr. L. T. Gucwa Resident Inspector Manager of Safety and Licensing Nuclear Regulatory Commission Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 572 P.O. Box 4545 Waynesboro, Georgia 30830 Atlanta, Georgia 30302 Mr. Ruble A. Thomas Deppish Kirkland, III, Ccunsel Executive Consultant Office of the Consumers' Utility Southern Company Services, Inc.
Council P. O. Box 2625 Suite 225 Birmingham, Alabima 35202 32 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Atlanta, Georgia 30302 James E. Joiner Mr. Paul D. Rice Troutman, Sanders, Lockerman, Vice President & Project Director
& Ashmore Georgia Power Company 1400 Candler Building Post Office Box 282 127 Peachtree Street, N.E.
Waynesboro, Georgia 30830 Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Danny Feig Mr. J. A. Bailey 1130 Alta Avenue Project Licensing Manager Atlanta, Georgia 30307 Southern Company Services, Inc.
P.O. Box 2625 Carol Stangler Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Georgians Against Nuclear Energy 425 Euclid Terrace
-e Ernest L. Bla ke, Jr.
Atlanta, Georgia 30307 Bruce W. Churchill, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20037 Mr. G. Bockhold, Jr.
General Manager Nuclear Operatiens Georgia Power Company P. O. Box 1600 Waynesboro, Georgia 30830 Regional Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Coemission 101 Mariett; Street, N.W., Suite 2900 Atlanta, Georgia 30323
- 4
=~
I Enclosuro 1 REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION V0GTLE 2 SPENT FUEL P0OL STORAGE i
RPB #1 Provide the following information:
a.
_ Sources in the Spent Fuel Pool Water Provide a description of fission and corrosion product sources in the i
spent fuel pool (SFP) water from:
(a) introduction of primary coolant 1
into SFP water, (b) movement of fuel from the core into the pool, and (c) defective fuel stored in the pool.
Include a listing of the radionuclides and their concentrations (expressed in mci /mL) expected during normal operations and refueling.
The radionuclides of interest should include.58Co, 60C0, 134Cs, and Cs.
137 b.
A_irborne Radioactive Sources j
')
Provide a description of radioactive materials that may beccme airborne as a remult of failed fuel and evaporation (e.g., 85Kr, and g,
3 respectively). The radionuclide description should include calculated or measured concentrations expected duri ; normal operations and during
]
j refuelings.
j c.
Miscellaneous Sources of Exposure Address the effects of more frecuent replacement of domineralizer filters on cumulative dose equivalent if this is a factor that results from the modification.
a
RPB d2 Dose Rates from Fuel Assemblies, Control Rods, and Burnable Poison Rods a.
Provide a description of the dose rate at the surface of the pool water from the fuel asserrblies, control rods, burnable poison rods or any miscellanecus materials that may be stored in the pool.
Additionally, provide the dose rate from individual fuel assemblies as they are being placed into the fuel racks.
Information relevant to the depth of water shielding the fuel assemblies as they are being transferred into the racks should be specified.
If the depth of water shielding over a fuel assembly while it is being transferred to a spent fuel rack is less than 10 feet, or the dose rate' 3 feet above the spent fuel pool (SFP) water is greater than 5 mR/hr above ambient radiation levels, then submit a Technical Specification spe.ifying the minimum depth of water shielding over the fuel assembly as it is being transferred to the fuel rack and the measures that will be taken to assure that this minimum depth will not be degraded, b.
Address the dose rate changes at the sides of the pool concrete shield walls, where occupied area, are adjacent to these walls, as a result of the modification.
Increasing the capacity of the pool may cause spent fuel assemblies to be relocated close to the concrete walls of the pool, 4
r resulting in an increase of radiation levels in occupied areas.
Please evaluate this potential problem.
i
RPB #3 Dose Rates from SFP Water l
Provide information on the dose rates at the surface of SFP water resulting from radioactivity in the water.
Include:
(1)doseratelevelsinoccupied areas and along the edges and center of the pool and on the fuel handling crane; (2) effects of crud buildup; and (3) based on refueling water activity, the dose rates before, during, and af ter refueling.
RPB #4 a
Dose Rates from Airborne isotopes Based on the source terms, provide the dose rates from submersion and dose 85Kr and.3H.
cornitments from exposure to the concentration of l
RPB #5 I
Dose Assessment from Modification Procedures a.
Discuss the manner in which occupational exposure will be kept ALARA during the modification.
Include the need for and the manner in which j
cleantog of the crud on the SFP walls will be performed to reduce exposure i
j rates in the SFP area.
J 4
e
b.
Discuss vacuum cleaning of SFP floors if divers are used and the distribu-o l
tion of existing spent fuel stored in racks to allow maximum water shield-ing to reduce dose rates to divers.
l c.
Describe plans for clearup of the SFP water to minimize radioactive 1
contamination and to ensure fuel pool clarity and underwater lighting acceptance criteria to help ensure good visibility.
l d.
Discuss underwater radiation surveys that will be made before any diving operation.
These surveys should be performed before or after any fuel movements or movements of any irradiated components stored in the pool, e.
State your intent to equip each diver with a calibrated alarming dosimeter and personnel monitoring dosimeters, which should be checked periodically to ensure that prescribed dose limits are not being exceeded.
l f.
Discuss any preplanning of work by divers as required.
l l
g.
Discuss your provision for surveillance and monitoring of the spent fuel l
pool work area by Health Physics personnel during the modification.
l RPB #6 1
Provide an estimate of the total man-rem to be received by personnel occupying the spent fuel pool area based en all operations in that area including those resulting from (2), (3), and (5) above.
Describe the impact of the spent fuel storage rack modification on these estimates.
1
I i
cheb # 1 l
L Based on the recent experience pertaining to degradation of Botaflex in spent fuel pools at Quad Cities and Point Beach nuclear power plants, provide justification to demonstrate the continued accepability of Boraflex for application in the Vogtle spent fuel pool.
j i
I cheb # 2
\\
Based on the recent information, provide any changes to the inservice surveillance program for Boraflex neutron absorbing material and describe the frequency of exanination and acceptance criteria for continued use.
a Provide the procedures for testing the Boraflex material and interpretation of test data.
cheb #3 Describe the corrective actions to be taken if degraded Boraflex specimens or absorber is found in the spent fuel pool.
1 i
l 1
l l
4 l
i a
i i
i 1
l i
l
-