ML23125A115
| ML23125A115 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | HI-STORM 100 |
| Issue date: | 04/11/2023 |
| From: | Yen-Ju Chen Storage and Transportation Licensing Branch |
| To: | Holtec |
| References | |
| Download: ML23125A115 (2) | |
Text
(12-2020)
NRC FORM 699 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CONVERSATION RECORD Page 1 of 2 NRC Form 699 (12-2020)
NAME OF PERSON(S)/TITLE CONTACTED OR IN CONTACT WITH YOU See below.
DATE OF CONTACT 04/11/2023 E-MAIL ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER TYPE OF CONVERSATION E-MAIL TELEPHONE
INCOMING OUTGOING ORGANIZATION Holtec International, Inc. (Holtec)
DOCKET NUMBER(S) 07201040 LICENSE NAME AND NUMBER(S)
CoC No. 1040, HI-STORM UMAX Amendment 3 MAIL CONTROL NUMBER(S)
SUBJECT Clarification calls for RAIs for UMAX Amendment 3
SUMMARY
AND ACTION REQUIRED (IF ANY)
The staff issued RAIs on March 31, 2023 (ML22258A260) to address some of the most substantive issues for which additional information is necessary for the staff to complete the review of UMAX Amendment 3. Holtec requested clarification calls on the RAIs. The staff conducted the discussions with Holtec in three sessions on April 11, 2023.
Session 1 - RAI-28, RAI-29, and questions from 12/15/2020 public meeting NRC attendees: Yen-Ju Chen, Jeremy Tapp, John Wise Holtec attendees: Stefan Anton, Robert Mahorter, Kimberly Manzione RAI-28 asked for the fabrication, inspection, test, and maintenance and repair program information of equipment used for the canister transfer process. The purpose is to identify the specific maintenance program (licensing basis) for the general licensees (GLs) to follow during the transfer process and to ensure the equipment receives the proper maintenance with the adequate frequency.
RAI-29 asked for the safety classifications of all transfer equipment used during the canister transfer process.
The staff did not see any safety classification or justification for not providing a classification in the SAR for some equipment, such as the mating collar or tilting frame.
NAME OF PERSON DOCUMENTING CONVERSATION Yen-Ju Chen Add 1 Continuation Page Delete 1 Continuation Page SIGNATURE AND DATE Yen-Ju Chen Digitally signed by Yen-Ju Chen Date: 2023.05.01 11:07:34 -04'00'
CONVERSATION RECORD (continued)
NRC FORM 699 (12-2020)
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Page 2 of 2 NRC Form 699 (12-2020)
LICENSE NAME AND NUMBER(S)
CoC No. 1040, HI-STORM UMAX Amendment 3 MAIL CONTROL NUMBER(S)
SUMMARY
AND ACTION REQUIRED (IF ANY) (Continued)
Public meeting issue #1 is related the boundary for the Certificate of Compliance (CoC) No. 1040. The goal is to provide clarity for GLs on which requirements to follow for CoC No. 1040.
Public meeting issue #2 is related to the service life of the canister. Based on Holtec's response on March 3, 2023 (ML23062A662), the staff considered the additional information would resolve staff's concern.
Specifically, the additional sentence to CoC appendix C, section 5.4.2 addresses staff's question. No additional response is needed.
Session 2 - Structural RAIs (RAI-6, RAI-15, and RAI-16)
NRC attendees: Tom Boyce, Yen-Ju Chen, Yong Kim PNNL attendee: Brian Koeppel, Antonio Rigato Holtec attendees: Chuck Bullard, Kimberly Manzione Holtec indicated that they might have misunderstood the staff's questions in RAI-6 when responding to the RAI earlier. Holtec will submit the requested information.
Both RAI-15 and RAI-16 questioned the seismic analysis/modeling approach. In Amendment No. 3, Holtec has used the same seismic analysis/modeling approach that was used in the past amendments for the UMAX system. It is a half-symmetric model and uses the resulting seismic forces (originally three directions but replaced with 2 components) in the analysis. Holtec claimed that it used a 1.5g earthquake in the generic seismic analysis for the UMAX system. The GLs who wish to use the UMAX system must perform a site-specific analysis to ensure the site-specific analysis results are bounded by the generic analysis results. NRC staff and contractors discussed how the analysis as presented is applicable to linear analysis and not applicable to the nonlinear phenomena described in RAI-15 and RAI-16. The staff noted that it is not questioning the basis of UMAX seismic analysis in the past amendments but has questions with the analysis for storing 24PT1-DSC canister in the UMAX system.
Session 3 - Criticality RAIs (RAI-21 and RAI-23)
NRC attendees: Yen-Ju Chen, Jason Piotter, Jeremy Smith Holtec attendees: Stefan Anton, Jameson Hetrick, Kimberly Manzione Both RAIs questioned the assumption that the 24PT1-DSC canister will be always dry in the UMAX system.
Holtec's past responses have not supported this assumption, and the staff could not accept this approach to demonstrate criticality safety. The staff also clarified that the statement in the original RAI-21 (ML20325A257) regarding the same engineering features from UMAX Amendment No. 0 refers to the same vigorous criticality analysis for 24PT1-DSC canister in the UMAX system.
Overall, Holtec understood the staff's questions and will be working on the responses. Holtec will provide a schedule for submitting the responses later.
Add 2nd Continuation Page Delete 2nd Continuation Page