ML20212A998

SER Supporting Licensee 860613,0722,0822 & 0919 Application for Amend to License,Authorizing Name Change & Mfg & Storage of New Parts

ML20212A998
Person / Time
Site:	07000371
Issue date:	12/17/1986
From:	Bidinger G, Crow W NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:
Shared Package
ML20212A995	List: ML20212A989 ML20212A998 ML20212B003
References
NUDOCS 8612290119
Download: ML20212A998 (3)

Text

.

DEC 171986 FCUP:GHB DOCKET NO: 70-371 LICENSEE: UNC, Inc.

Montville, CT

SUBJECT:

SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT, APPLICATION DATED JUNE 13, 1986, AND SUPPLEMENTS DATED JULY 22, AUGUST 22, AND SEPTEMBER 19, 1986

Background

In the June 13, 1986, application, UNC requested authorization for a name change and to manufacture and store new parts. On August 26, 1986, Amendment No. 5 was issued to recognize the new corporate name. On September 3, 1986, UNC was requested to revise the information in the subject application. In the three supplements, UNC continued to revise its application and to provide additional information.

Discussion The applicant has proposed adding page 10.0-7e, Part I, to Table 10.0-I. This proposed table establishes five new units to be fabricated by UNC. The dimensions for the units in Items 7a and 7b of Table 10.0-I, Part I, exceed the dimer.sions of units used in the referenced safety analyses in Section 3.39.1, Part II. Moreover, the k-effective value for units in Item 7b has been evaluated and compared to an approved unit in Table 10.0-I. However, the interaction between the ranger units in proposed Item 7b was not evaluated.

Therefore, it is necessary to limit the size of the individual fuel pieces in Items 7a and 7b and to limit the stack height for Item 7b. Accordingly, the following license conditions are recommended:

The size of the individual units in Items 7a and 7b in Table 10.0-1, Part I, shall not exceed the size of the units used in the safety demonstration in Section 3.39.1, Part II.

The unit stack height for Item 7b in Table 10.0-I, Part I, shall not exceed the vertical dimension of the unit in Item 2 of Table 10.0-I, Part I, of the application. The vertical dimension of the cluster shall be taken from the " Approx. Dimens." column for Item 2 in Table 10.0-I.

8612290119 061217 PDR ADOCK 07000371 C PDR

3

, DEC 171986 The other three items in the proposed new page 10.0-7e are shown to be similar to previously approved units in Table 10.0-I, Part I.

On page 3-34, Part I, the applicant has proposed a new Item 10 which is a cart for the transport and storage of specified elements in Table 10.0-1. The safety demonstration in Section 3.40.2, Part II, is flawed because the double batch calculation does not match the text. The double batch situation assumed in the calculation is not realistic. (This was also noted in our letter of September 3, 1986.) Because the k-effective values derived from the imprecise calculations are low enough, the staff can agree that the cart can be used safely. However, the analysis must be revised for the renewal application.

Proposed page 3-38, Part I, has been revised to show that one of the element parameters satisfies parameters on existing page 3-37, Part I. However, other parameters for the element filler, as given in Part II, do not conform to the parameters in Table 3.9.5.3, Part I. Because of this conflict, it is necessary to restrict the batch processing of fillers for the element identified as Item 7a in Table 10.0-I, Part I, to the mass specified in Item 1 of Table 3.9.5.1, Part I. Accordingly, the following license condition is recommended:

The mass of uranium in a safe individual unit (SIU) of fillers for the elements in Item 7a, Table 10.0-1, Part I, shall be limited to not more than the uranium quantity specified for the unit in Item 1, Table 3.9.5.1, Part I, and not less than the unit spacing specified for the same unit.

Page 8.2-9, Part I, has been revised to add references for approved Item A.

Existing approved Item B was changed to Item B.1, and Item B.2 was added to Section 8.2.4. The safety analysis for Item B.2 is referenced to new Section 3.41, Part II. In typical fashion, UNC provided information on the individual unit but failed to provide criteria for separation between units.

Accordingly, the following license condition is recommended:

Storage of units identified in Item B.2 of the Table in Section 8.2.4, Part I, shall be in slab storage in carts and racks. The carts and racks shall be designed to ensure a mininc 6-inch separation between the fuel and the edge of the cart or rack.

The manufacturing process for the new parts will follow existing fabrication techniques. No new radiological hazards are expected from this proposed license modification.

)

k? 6 3

DEC 171986 l

Conclusion / Recommendation

' _The new parts can be safely manufactured without undue risk to the public

[:r ' health and safety. Approval of the application, subject to the four. proposed license conditions above, is recommended.

NI inal 8 Signed By:

George H. Bidinger Uranium Process Licensing Section Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, NMSS Original Signed B7 Approved by:

W. T. Crow, Section Leader OFC:fCUP :FCUF :FCUF *

$8M :VLTh__....________.._g:h_______:_....__..:._

NAME:GHBidinger:ht be :WTCrow  :  :

DATE:IS//p/86 :11/1/86 :17//6/86 :  :  :

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY