ML20154D122
| ML20154D122 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 09/09/1988 |
| From: | Mcneil S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Tiernan J BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| TAC-68416, TAC-68417, NUDOCS 8809150157 | |
| Download: ML20154D122 (6) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _ _
o' September 9, 1988 Docket Nos. 50-317 Distribution and 50-318 16:7 NRCPDR Local PDR Mr. J. A. Tiernan PDI-1 Rdg.
Vice President - Nuclear Energy SVarga Baltimore Gas and Electric Company BBoger Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant CVogan MD. Routes 2 & 4 SMcNeil P. O. Box 1535 OGC Lusby, Maryland 20657 EJordan BGrimes
Dear Mr. Tiernan:
LTripp, RI ACRS (10)
SUBJECT:
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - PROPOSED INCREASE IN 0-235 ENRICHMENT LIMITS FOR THE NEW AND SPENT FUEL POOLS (TACS 68416 AND 68417)
The NRC staff, in evaluating your submittal dated June 9, 1988, has determined that additional information is needed to facilitate the completion of our review. The request for additional information is enclosed.
As you are relying uMn a December 1988 review completion date, it is requested that you respond to this request within 45 days of its date of issuance.
This request for infortnation affects fewer than 10 respondents; t'erefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Sincerely, original signed by Scot Alexander McNeil Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects, I/II
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc: w/ enclosure See next page i
PDI-1:LA PDI-PD -1:D CVo an SMcNeil:vr RCapra heg 9/ /88 9/ Tr/88 9/7/88 hf
\\
nr$:n um PNV p
Mr. J. A. Tiernan Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Calvert Cliffs huclear Power Plant cc:
Mr. John M. Gott, President Calvert County Board of Connissioners Prince Frederick, Maryland 20768
- 0. A. Brune, Esq.
General Counsel Baltimore Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Mr. Jay E. Silberg, Esq.
Shtw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Mr. W. J. Lippold, General Supervisor Technical Services Engineering Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant M0 Rts 2 & 4, P. O. Box 1535 Lusby, Maryland 20657 Resident Inspector c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission P. O. Box 437 Lusby, Maryland 20657 Departirent of Natural Resources Energy Administration, Pow;.r Plant Siting Program ATTN: Mr. T. Magette Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, Maryland 21204 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Connission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406
~
J f
ROUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROPOSED NEW AND SPENT FUEL POOL ENRICHMENT INCREASE BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET N05. 50-317 AND 50-318 1.
The staff's position on the criticality of unirradiated fuel stored in the new fuel storage racks is that k # will not exceed 0.98 if accidentallymoderatedbytheextrem8fow-densitywaterorother hydrogenous niaterial such as may occur for fog, mist, and firefighting foam.
The new fuel storage facility must also be designed so that k will not exceed 0.95 if accidentally fully flooded with pure water. 'd$th of these conditions have been analyzed and stated to have been met.
However, Technical Specification (TS), "Criticality-New Fuel " only refers to the 0.98 criterion.
Since this TS is being modified to increase the enrichment limit, we recommend that it also be modified to include the 0.95 criterion as well.
P.
The reactivity effect of a possible 4-inch gap at the centerline of every Poraflex sheet was analyzed and found to meet the staff's limiting criterion.
Justify that gao formation larger than this, in size and extent, would not occur and describe any monitoring program at Calvert Cliffs which would detect dearaded Boraflex sheets including possible gap fo rma tion.
3.
How were the uncertainties in the manufacturing tolerances of U-235 enrichment and fuel pellet density considered in the determination of the 95/95 confidence level uncertainty?
4 TS 5.3.1, "Reactor Core-Fuel Assemblies," places a maximum enrichment limit of 4.1 weight percent U-P35 on reload fuel located in the reactor core. When do you intend to request that this limit be raised? To what value will you propose to raise it? What accident analyses do you intend to perform to justify an increase in this limit?
k September 9, 1988 Docket Nos. 50-317 Distribution and 50-318 Docket File NRCPOR Local PDR Mr. J. A. Tiernan PDI-1 Rdg.
Vice President - Nuclear Energy SVarga Baltimore Gas and Electric Company BBoger Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant CVogan MD Routes 2 & 4 SMcNeil P. O. Box 1535 OGC Lusby, Maryland 20657 EJordan BGrimes
Dear Mr. Tiernan:
LTripp, RI ACRS (10)
SUBJECT:
RE0 VEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION - PROPOSED INCREASE IN U-235 ENRICHMENT LIMITS FOR THE NEW AND SPENT FUEL P0OLS (TACS 68416 AND 68417)
The NRC staff, in evaluating your submittal dated June 9,1988, has determined that additional information is needed to facilitate the completion of our review. The request for additional infonnatinn is enclosed.
As you are relying upon a December 1988 review completion date, it is requested that you respond to this request within 45 days of its date of issuance.
This raquest for information affects fewer than 10 respondents; therefore, OMB clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
Sincerely, l
original signed by l
Scot Alexander McNeil, Project Manager i
Project Directorate I-1 Division of Reactor Projects, I/II
Enclosure:
i Request for Additional Information cc: w/enclosu-e See next page PD!-1:LA PDI-PG - :D CVo SMcNeil:vr RCapra j
9/$gan
/88 9/&/88 9/ f /88
6 Mr. J. A. Tiernan Baltimore Gas & Electric Company Calvert Cliffs iguclear Power Plant cc:
Mr. John M. Gott, President Calvert County Board of Comissioners Prince Frederick, Maryland 20768
- 0. A. Brune, Esq.
General Counsel Baltimore Gas and Electric Company P. O. Box 1475 Baltimore, Maryland 21203 Mr. Jay E. Silberg, Esq.
Shaw, Pittman, Potts and Trowbridge 1800 M Street, NW Washington, DC 20036 Mr. W. J. Lippold, General Supervisor Technical Services Engineering Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant MD Rts 2 & 4, P. O. Box 1535 Lusby, Maryland 20657 Resident Inspector c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission P. O. Box 437 Lusby, Maryland 20657 Department of Natural Resources Energy Administration, Power Plant Siting Program ATTN: Mr. T. Magette Tawes State Office Building Annapolis, Maryland 21204 Reci U.5.cnal Administrator, Region I Nuclear Regulatory Comission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia Pennsylvania 19406
1 s
e b
RCUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION PROPOSED NEW AND SPENT FUEL POOL ENRICHMENT INCREASE BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-317 AND 50-318 1.
The staff's position on the criticality of unirradiated fuel stored in will not exceed 0.98 if the new fuel storage racks is that k f accidentallymoderatedbvtheextremIfow-densitywaterorother hydrogenous material such as may occur for fog, mist, and firefighting r
foam.
The new fuel storage facility must also be designed so that k willnotexceed0.95ifaccidentallyfullyfloodedwithpurewater.'$$th of these conditions have been analyzed and stated to have been met.
However, Technical Specification (TS), "Criticality-New Fuel," only refers to the 0.98 criterion.
Since this TS is being modified to increase the enrichment limit, we recommend that it also be modified to include the 0.95 criterion as well.
2.
The reactivity effect of a possible 4-inch gap at the centerline of every Poraflex sheet was analyzed and found to meet the staff's limiting criterion. Justify that gap formation larger than this, in size and extent, would not occur and describe any mnnitoring program at Calvert Cliffs which would detect degraded Boraflex sheets including possible gap fo rma tion.
3.
How were the uncertainties in the manufacturing tolerances of U-235 enrichment and fuel pellet density considered in the determination of i
the 95/95 confidence level uncertainty?
4 TS 5.3.1, "Reactor Core-Fuel Assemblies," places a maximum enrichment limit of 4.1 weight percent U-235 on reload fuel located in the reactor core. When do you intend to request that this limit be raised? To what value will you propose to raise it? What accident analyses do you intend i
to perform to justify an increase in this limit?
l t
!