ML20198F280
| ML20198F280 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Washington Public Power Supply System |
| Issue date: | 01/02/1974 |
| From: | Tedesco R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Moore V US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0938, CON-WNP-938 NUDOCS 8605280459 | |
| Download: ML20198F280 (3) | |
Text
__
4/s "w
/~2~7f Docket No. 50-460 Voss Moore, Assistant Director for Light Water Reactors, Croup 2, L QUESTIONS POR VPPSS UNIT 1 PSAR REVIEW Plant Name: Vaahington Public Power Supply Systeens Nuclear Project No. 1 Licemaing Stage: CP Docket thenber: 50-460 Responsible Branch: LWR 2-3 Project Leader:
T. Cox Description of Response: Questions for PSAR Review Requested Completion Date: December 28, 1973 Review Status: Under review We have reviewed the PSAR for WPPSS, Unit 1, and have determined that additional information is necessary. Enclosed is the additional information we need to complete our evaluation.
Questions not directly associated with the Standard Format have been marked by double asterisks; positions are marked by a single asterisk.
Pe need responses to our request by March 4,1974, to meet our schedula.
Robert Tedesco, Assistaat Director for Containment Safety Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated DISTRIBUTION:
Docket (50-460) cc: w/o enclosura L Reading A. Ciambusso CS Reading W. Mcdonald ETSB Reading w/ enclosure S. Uanauer J. Hendria W. Regan 8605280459 74010L R. Loose PDR ADOCK 0500 0
A. Schwencer T. Cox S. Varga
~
p i
- r., eur Q
J. Cly's ETSB/L ETSB/L AD/SS/N
,J.2,/
omer*
PStoddart:cc VBenaroya RTedesco summa m
- ___.E._SLoddart 12/ /73 12/!!/73 12/p/73 oat <>
- _==-
r Asc.noin wsu Aucu ouo eo can i
=ia*
- i + + = * * *
?
ADDITIONAL INFORMATION_ FOR WPPSS UNIT 1
- 11.1 Table 11.1-7 and Table 11.1-8 of the PSAR present expected tritium concentrations in the reactor coolant prior to, and during, refueling operaticas. Justify your calculated tritium accu =ulation in the reactor coolant and describe your tritium control measures with respect to caintaining plant operating personnel exposures as low as practicable.
~
11.2 Table 3.2-2 in the PSAR lists components of the radioactive waste handling systems that are designed to Quality Group D standards and non-Category I seismic design criteria. Justify your position for not following the guidelines of Regulatory Guides 1.26 " Quality Group Classifications and Standards" and 1.29 " Seismic Design Classification".
- 11.3 Table 11.2-1 in the PSAR lists the expected volumes of liquid radioactive waste for WNP-1.
Based on experience at operating reactors, like Oconee, we consider these values to be low as a design basis for the storage and processing of the liquid radioactive waste streams.
Provide a liquid waste system that will be capable of reducing effluents to less than 5 Ci/yr and meet the guidelines of "as low as practicable".
- 11.4 Section 11.2.2 in the PSAR describes the reverse osmosis unit of the liquid radioective vaste processing system. Reference is made to the use of a reverse osmosis unit at the H.B. Robinson plant; however, no data are presented or cited. In Table 11.2-2 and Table 11.2-3 in the PSAR, data are given on the use of reverse osmosis in the treatment of water in municipal water treatment plants. We do not consider the data provided in these tables adequate for the purposes of our evaluation.
Provide the following information:
s) Available operating data, incl'uding,' econtamination~ factors, for d
reverse ossosis processing of radioactive liquid wastes of radioactivity concentrations and chemical compositions similar to those expected for WNP-1.
i b) Discuss system requirements and provisions for pH control that will l
be incorporated in the reverse osmosis portion of the liquid radioactive waste processing system.
c) Discuss the capacity of the demineralizer which would be utilized to treat radioactive liquid wastes in the event of the failure or' malfunction of the reverse osmosis unit.
t d) Provide the assumed DF for each stage of the reverse osmosis' unit, i
i i
I
. 11.5 Identify the syste=s and tanks in the plant that will contain radionuclides and that will not be designed to withstand the effects of a tornado, probable maximum flood, or the design basis earthquake.
List the maximum quantity of each isotope that would be contained in each system or tank. Provide an analysis to show that the-concentrations that could result from the release of the radionuclides to unrestricted areas as a result of the tornado, flood, or earthquake would be within the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 at the point of the first well or intake of the nearest public water supply. Identify all assumptions used in the analysis. Provide information on the dilution factors between the plant site and the closest municipal water intake downstream for both continuous and slug releases. ladicate the alternate water supplies to those affected municipalities.
11.6 For the solid radwaste system:
a) Describe the methods that will be used to verify the absence of free liquid in solid waste containers; and b) Evaluate component failures and system malfunctions, and calculate the resulting doses to operating personnel. Use assumptions based on 1% of the fission product source term and accident meteorology.
Give bases for all assumptions.
.