ML20151D223
"Draft Meeting" is not in the list (Request, Draft Request, Supplement, Acceptance Review, Meeting, Withholding Request, Withholding Request Acceptance, RAI, Draft RAI, Draft Response to RAI, ...) of allowed values for the "Project stage" property.
| ML20151D223 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 07000036 |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1988 |
| From: | Bidinger G NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | Scherer A ABB COMBUSTION ENGINEERING NUCLEAR FUEL (FORMERLY |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8804140052 | |
| Download: ML20151D223 (3) | |
Text
-
c t
i IU 41%
h IMUF:GHB 70-36 Comoustion Engineering, Inc.
i ATTN:
Mr. A.E.Scherer Director, Nuclear Licensing j
1000 Prospect Hill Road t
Windsor, Connecticut 06095-0500 3
l Gentlemen:
i i
i Per our discussion, enclosed is a draft agenda for our meeting in 3
l Hematite on April 14, 1988.
1 kh
)
George M. Bidinger i
Uranium Fuel Section i
Fuel Cycle Safety Branch i
f Division of Industrial and j
Medical Nuclear Safety, NHSS l
1 i
i
Enclosure:
1 As stated I
1 i
Distribution w/ enc 1.
l I
Docket No: 70-36 POR LpHH: File Centef NMSS R/F i
IMUF R/F IMSB R/F VLTharpe George Bidinger (2) i I
Region III GFrance, III LCRouse JSwift I
i W
t i
i i
i i
i r
OFC:IMUF: g j
..............6................:.....:.....:.....................................
)
j NAME:GHBidinger:mh:
l*
OATE:4/F /88 4/ /88 4/ /88 I
0FFICIAL RECORD COPY l
8 0414u052 880400 f.
i 4
j g ADOCK 070 6
i i
,,,~,..,,.c,_---
~
i s
LICENSE AMENOMENT APPLICATION DATED DECEMBER 28, 1987 RE URANIUM ENRICHED TO 5 W/0 U-235 Part I 1.
Table 4.2.4 should include SIU criteria for slabs of uranium enriched to 5 w/o U-235.
The criteria should be based on optimum moderation of the unit.
2.
Section 4 shou'd include moderation control criteria which is used in the demonstrat:ons of nuclear criticality safety in Part II. In addition, justification of the criteria should be provided in Part II.
3.
Section 6 should be expanded to include the limiting conditions of operations for the UF conversion process.
This section should include operabilityrequiremektspriortoandduringaconversionrunandthe automatic and manual actions to be taken in event of the loss of instruments and controls to ensure nuclear criticality safety during a process operation.
Part II 1.
Sections 8 and 9 need to be revised to base all safety analyses on l
5 percent U-235 enrichment.
Subsections 8.1.1, 9.5, and 9.6, for example, are based on lower enrichments.
etc.
2.
Sections 8 and 9 need to be revised to assure that, for each process step, the basis for nuclear safety is clearly referenced to criteria in Section 4, Part I.
Examples of this problem are:
a.
the 30 kg storage cans - Section 8.1.6 b.
the 25.7 liter blender - Section 8.2.1 c.
5 gallon pails - Section 8.2.2.
3.
In Subsection 8.7, several of ths safety evaluations (e.g., 8.7.3, 8.7.5., etc.) demonstrate that the process equipment are subcritical, but the units do not have the safety factors established in Subsections 4.2.3 or 4.2.4 of Part I.
The subsection should be revised to assure that unit safety factors and unit spacing are consistent with Part I.
4.
In Section 8.8, the dimensions of equipment should be given to show that Chapter 4, Part I, criteria are satisfied.
5.
In Section 9, assumptions of conditions with less than eptimum moderation, full reflection, heterogeneity, etc., lead to reduced k-ef fective values in the safety analysis.
These assumptions must be assured by appropriate limits and controls which are established as license condition in Part I.
3 c-i i
t i
2
..se,..c-ii k
?
i 6.
In Section 9.3, the increase in k-effective for conversion equipment containing 5% U-235, rather than 4.1% U-235, has been ignored.
The allowable solid angle had been exceeded even for conversion equipment f
containing 4.1% U-235.
The loss of safety margins on both k-effective l'
and solid angle must be evaluated.
7.
In Section 9.6, the k-effective for the blenders has not been evaluated s
for 5% U-235.
I 8.
In Section 9.7, the enrichment was increased from 4.1 to 5% U-235 without explanation, the k-effective for the reactor-dropped from 0.96 to 0.95.
Please explain this effect.
h I
t i
1 h
4 i
r I
r h
l J
i
'l i
1 f
i 4
_ _ _.