ML21068A397: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-2.1_______
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 2.1: Fuel Specifications and Loading Conditions 2.1.1: Fuel Specifications and Loading Conditions 2.1.2: Fuel Loading CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                      No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                      Yes Contents (Selection A2                                    Yes Criteria)                A3                                Yes Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                                No Technical          Conditions for          L2                                No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                                No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                  N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                                N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                                N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2. Applies generically to all three criteria (A1, A2, A3).
Page 1 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: __D-2.2________
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 2.2: Violations If any Fuel Specifications or Loading Conditions of 2.1 are violated, the following actions shall be completed:
2.2.1 The affected fuel assemblies shall be placed in a safe condition.
2.2.2 Within 24 hours, notify the NRC Operations Center.
2.2.3 Within 30 days, submit a special report which describes the cause of the violation, and actions taken to restore compliance and prevent recurrence.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                    No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  Yes Controls A significant increase in                                N/A Risk Insight**:    the probability or Will removing      consequences of an this                accident previously requirement        evaluated in the cask from the CoC/TS FSAR?
result in          The possibility of a new or                              N/A different kind of accident Page 2 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D being created compared to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                            N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                            Retain in Appendix D Section 4 as these are procedural and record keeping administrative controls.
Page 3 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: __D-Table 2.1-1________
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.1-1: Fuel Assembly Limits CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Table provides information such as enrichment, cooling time, and assembly condition (72.236(a)). (Criterion A1)
Page 4 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Table 2.1-2_______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.1-2: PWR Fuel Assembly Characteristics for MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                    No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Table provides information such as size for assembly components (72.236(a)). (Criterion A1)
Page 5 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Table 2.1-3 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.1-3: MPC-32M Non-Fuel Hardware Cooling and Average Burnup CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  Yes Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Table provides cooling time and burnup limits for approved content.
(Criterion A2)
Page 6 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: __D-Table 2.1-4_ _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.1-4: Burnup and Cooling Time Fuel Qualification for MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  Yes Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix B Section 2 as this Table provides cooling time and burnup limits for approved content.
(Criterion A2)
Page 7 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Fig. 2.1-1 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Figure 2.1-1: Cell Identification for MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                      No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                      No Contents (Selection A2                                    Yes Criteria)                A3                                No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                                No Technical          Conditions for          L2                                No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                                No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                  N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                                N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                                N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this figure illustrates fuel loading information necessary to understand the information in other tables in this section. (Criterion A2)
Page 8 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-2.4 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 2.4: Decay Heat Limits 2.4.1 Regionalized Fuel Loading Decay Heat Limits for ZR-Clad Fuel FOR A VENTILATED OVERPACK 2.4.2 Discrete Loading Pattern Decay Heat Limits for ZR-Clad Fuel for a VENTILATED OVERPACK 2.4.3 When complying with the maximum fuel storage location decay heat limits, users must account for the decay heat from both the fuel assembly and any NON-FUEL HARDWARE, as applicable for the particular fuel storage location, to ensure the decay heat emitted by all contents in a storage location does not exceed the limit.
2.4.4  Variable Fuel Height for MPC-32M 2.4.5 Decay Heat Limits for MPC-32M for UNVENTILATE OVERPACK CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                    No Appendix B.        Criteria)              A3                                No Technical          Section 3 Limiting      L1                                No Specifications      Conditions for          L2                                No Operation (LCOs)*      L3                                No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Page 9 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D Section 4 Administrative                              No Controls A significant increase in                            N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:  evaluated in the cask Will removing    FSAR?
this              The possibility of a new or                          N/A requirement      different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in        to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                            N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                              Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Section provides information on decay heat limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 10 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___ D-Table 2.4-1_______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.4-1: Allowable Heat Loads and Soluble Boron Requirements for MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Table provides information related to heat load limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 11 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Table 2.4-2 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.4-2: Maximum Allowable Decay Heat Loads for MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Table provides information related to heat load limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 12 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Tables 2.4-3 and 2.4-4 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.4-3: MPC-32M Fuel Storage Regions Table 2.4-4: MPC-32M Fuel Storage Quadrants CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                      No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                      No Contents (Selection A2                                    Yes Criteria)                A3                                No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                                No Technical          Conditions for          L2                                No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                                No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                  N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                                N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                                N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as these Tables illustrate fuel loading information necessary to Page 13 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D understand the information in other tables in this section. (Criterion A2)
Page 14 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Tables 2.4-5a and 2.4-5b _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.4-5a: MPC-32M Heat Load Data Unventilated Overpack Table 2.4-5b: MPC-32M Requirements on Developing Regionalized Heat Load Patterns for Unventilated Overpack CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Page 15 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D Evaluation Summary                            Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as these Tables provide information on heat load limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 16 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Table 2.4-6 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.4-6: Section Heat Load Calculations for MPC-32M for Unventilated Overpack CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Section provides information on heat load limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 17 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Table 2.4-7 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 2.4-7: DFC and DFI Storage Locations with Heat Load Penalties for MPC-32M for UNVENTILATED OVERPACK CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Section provides information on heat load limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 18 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: __D-Fig. 2.4-1 through 2.4-2_ _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Figure 2.4-1: Discrete Pattern A per Cell Allowable Heat Loads (kW) - MPC-32M Figure 2.4-2: Discrete Pattern B per Cell Allowable Heat Loads (kW) - MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    Yes Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Page 19 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D Evaluation Summary                            Retain in Appendix D Section 2 as this Section provides information on heat load limits (72.236(a)).
(Criterion A1)
Page 20 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.1 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.1: Site 3.1.1: Site Location The HI-STORM 100 Cask System is authorized for general use by 10 CFR Part 50 license holders at various site locations under the provisions of 10 CFR 72, Subpart K.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                No the probability or consequences of an Risk Insight**:
accident previously Will removing evaluated in the cask this FSAR?
requirement The possibility of a new or                              No from the CoC/TS different kind of accident result in being created compared to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
Page 21 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D A Significant reduction in                            No the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                            Eliminate from CoC - not required as compliance with the QA provisions in 10 CFR 72 Subpart K is a regulatory requirement that must be met.
Page 22 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.2 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.2: Design Features Important for Criticality Control 3.2.1: MPC-24, 24E, 24EF, 32, 32F, 68, 68F, 68FF and 68M, in HI-STORM 100S Version E shall meet the specifications of Appendix B Section 3.2 3.2.2: MPC-32 versions 1 3.2.3: MPC-68 version 1 3.2.4: MPC-32M CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A Risk Insight**:    the probability or Will removing      consequences of an this                accident previously requirement        evaluated in the cask from the CoC/TS FSAR?
result in          The possibility of a new or                              N/A different kind of accident Page 23 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D being created compared to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                            N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                            Retain in Appendix C - important to criticality control Page 24 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.2.6 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.2.6: Neutron Absorber Tests MPC-24, 24E, 24EF, 32, 32F, 68, 68F, 68FF and 68M MPCs listed in 3.2.1 shall meet the minimum requirements for 10B areal density or B4C content, as applicable in Appendix B, Section 3.2.9.
MPC-32 Version 1 and MPC-68 Version 1 - Metamic Classic Section 9.1.5.3 of the HI-STORM 100 FSAR is hereby incorporated by reference into the HI-STORM 100 CoC. For each MPC model specified in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 (MPC-32 version 1 and MPC-68 version 1) above, the neutron absorber shall meet the minimum requirements for 10B areal density or B4C content, as applicable.
MPC-32M - Metamic-HT
: 1.      The weight percentage of the boron carbide must be confirmed to be greater than or equal to 10% in each lot of Al/B4C powder.
: 2.      The areal density of the B-10 isotope corresponding to the 10% min. weight density in the manufactured Metamic-HT panels shall be independently confirmed by the neutron attenuation test method by testing at least one coupon from a randomly selected panel in each lot.
: 3.      If the B-10 areal density criterion in the tested panels fails to meet the specific minimum, then the manufacturer has the option to reject the entire lot or to test a statistically significant number of panels and perform statistical analysis for acceptance.
: 4.      All test procedures used in demonstrating compliance with the above requirements shall conform to the cask designers QA program which has been approved by the USNRC under docket number 71-0784.
Page 25 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Body          Section I. Technology                                  No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                              No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                      Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                  No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                            No Appendix B.      Section 3 Limiting      L1                            No Technical        Conditions for          L2                            No Specifications    Operation (LCOs)*        L3                            No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                              N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:  evaluated in the cask Will removing    FSAR?
this              The possibility of a new or                            N/A requirement      different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in        to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                              Retain in Appendix C as the described tests ensure the MPC has been manufactured and will operate in conformance with the certified design, and that the safety functions of confinement, sub-criticality and shielding will be performed.
Page 26 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.3 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.3: Codes and Standards The American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (ASME Code), 1995 Edition with Addenda through 1997, is the governing Code for the HI- STORM 100 System MPCs, OVERPACKs, and TRANSFER CASKs, as clarified in Specification 3.3.1 below, except for Code Sections V and IX. The latest effective editions of ASME Code Sections V and IX, including addenda, may be used for activities governed by those sections, provided a written reconciliation of the later edition against the 1995 Edition, including addenda, is performed by the certificate holder. American Concrete Institute (ACI) 349-85 is the governing Code for plain concrete as clarified in Appendix 1.D of the Final Safety Analysis Report for the HI-STORM 100 Cask System.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  Yes Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                    No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls Risk Insight**:    A significant increase in                                N/A Will removing      the probability or Page 27 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D this              consequences of an requirement      accident previously from the CoC/TS  evaluated in the cask result in        FSAR?
The possibility of a new or                            N/A different kind of accident being created compared to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                              Retain in CoC Section II as this explains which Codes and Standards are applicable to the cask and canister designs.
Page 28 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.3.1 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section: Alternatives to Codes, Standards, and Criteria Table 3-1 lists approved alternatives to the ASME Code for the design of the MPCs, OVERPACKs, and TRANSFER CASKs of the HI-STORM 100 Cask System.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                Yes Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        No Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an Risk Insight**:
accident previously Will removing evaluated in the cask this FSAR?
requirement The possibility of a new or                              N/A from the CoC/TS different kind of accident result in being created compared to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
Page 29 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                            Retain in CoC Section II as this explains which Codes and Standards are applicable to the cask and canister designs.
Page 30 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.3.2 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.3.2: Construction/Fabrication Alternatives to Codes, Standards, and Criteria Proposed alternatives to the ASME Code, Sections II and III, 1995 Edition with Addenda through 1997 including modifications to the alternatives allowed by Specification 3.3.1 may be used on a case-specific basis when authorized by the Director of the Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards or designee.
The request for such alternative should demonstrate that:
: 1.        The proposed alternatives would provide an acceptable level of quality and safety, or
: 2.        Compliance with the specified requirements of the ASME Code, Section III, 1995 Edition with Addenda through 1997, would result in hardship or unusual difficulty without a compensating increase in the level of quality and safety.
Requests for alternatives shall be submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 72.4.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  Yes Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                    No Appendix B.        Criteria)              A3                                No Technical          Section 3 Limiting      L1                                No Specifications      Conditions for          L2                                No Operation (LCOs)*      L3                                No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Page 31 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                              N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:  evaluated in the cask Will removing    FSAR?
this              The possibility of a new or                            N/A requirement      different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in        to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                              Retain in CoC Section II as this explains which Codes and Standards are applicable to the cask and canister designs.
Page 32 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___ D-Table 3-1_______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 3-1: List of ASME Code Alternatives for HI-STORM Multi-Purpose Canisters (MPCs)
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                While this Table could potentially be removed without any risk impact, the removal could increase the need for cumbersome alternative code use Page 33 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D approval requests. Therefore, this table will be retained in Appendix C.
Page 34 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.4 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.4: Site-Specific Parameters and Analyses for HI-STORM 100S Version E with all MPCs CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retained in Appendix C as this includes key generic design criteria used by the CoC holder in the cask design, which require general licensee evaluation.
Page 35 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.5 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.5: Cask Transfer Facility (CTF) 3.5.1: Transfer Cask and MPC Lifters 3.5.2: CTF Structure Requirements 3.5.2.1: Cask Transfer Station and Stationary Lifting Devices 3.5.2.2: Mobile Lift Devices CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                    No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Page 36 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D Evaluation Summary                            Retained in Appendix C as this includes design features for equipment that is only needed under specified circumstances, unlike the main equipment for the system described in CoC Sections I and II.
Page 37 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-Table 3-2 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Table 3-2: Load Combinations and Service Condition Definitions for the CTF Structure CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retained in Appendix C as this includes design features for equipment that is only needed under specified circumstances, unlike the main equipment for the system described in CoC Sections I and II.
Page 38 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.6 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.6: Forced Helium Dehydration System 3.6.1: System Description 3.6.2: Design Criteria 3.6.3: Fuel Cladding Temperature 3.6.4: Pressure Monitoring During FHD Malfunction CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Page 39 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D Evaluation Summary                            Retained in Appendix C as this includes design features for equipment that is only needed under specified circumstances, unlike the main equipment for the system described in CoC Sections I and II.
Page 40 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.7 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.7: Supplemental Cooling System 3.7.1: System Description 3.7.2: Design Criteria CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:    evaluated in the cask Will removing      FSAR?
this                The possibility of a new or                              N/A requirement        different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in          to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                              N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                                Retained in Appendix C as this includes design features for equipment that is only needed under Page 41 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D specified circumstances, unlike the main equipment for the system described in CoC Sections I and II.
Page 42 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.8 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.8: Combustible Gas Monitoring During MPC Lid Welding and Cutting During MPC lid-to-shell welding and cutting operations, combustible gas monitoring of the space under the MPC lid is required, to ensure that there is no combustible mixture present.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                    No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                        Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                              No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                    No Contents (Selection A2                                  No Criteria)                A3                              No Appendix B.        Section 3 Limiting      L1                              No Technical          Conditions for          L2                              No Specifications      Operation (LCOs)*        L3                              No and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                  No Controls A significant increase in                                N/A the probability or consequences of an Risk Insight**:
accident previously Will removing evaluated in the cask this FSAR?
requirement The possibility of a new or                              N/A from the CoC/TS different kind of accident result in being created compared to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
Page 43 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D A Significant reduction in                            N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                            Retained in Appendix C as these are monitoring requirements Page 44 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D CoC Condition/TS Identifier: ___D-3.9 _______
* All LCOs also require an Applicability, Condition(s), Required Action(s), Completion Time(s),
Surveillance Requirement(s), and Frequency(ies). Refer to NUREG-1745 for additional guidance.
** In performing the risk insight evaluation above, the evaluator should think about subsequent changes to a relocated CoC requirement. Specifically, ask the question what is the likelihood and worst possible consequences of a future change to this requirement in the less conservative direction?
Requirement                                        Appendix D Section 3.9: Environmental Temperature Requirements TRANSPORT OPERATIONS involving any version of the HI-TRAC transfer cask can be carried out if the reference ambient temperature (three day average around the cask) is ABOVE  0° F and below the Threshold Temperature of 110 deg. F ambient temperature, applicable during HI-TRAC MS transfer operations inside the 10 CFR Part 50 or 10 CFR Part 52 structural boundary and 90 deg. F outside of it.
The determination of the Threshold Temperature compliance shall be made based on the best available thermal data for the site.
If the reference ambient temperature exceeds the corresponding Threshold Temperature then a site specific analysis shall be performed using the actual heat load and reference ambient temperature equal to the three day average to ensure that the steady state peak fuel cladding temperature will remain below the ISG-11 Rev 3 limits. If the peak fuel cladding temperature exceeds ISG-11 Rev 3 limits, then the operation of a Supplemental Cooling System (SCS) in accordance with LCO 3.1.4 is mandatory.
CoC Body            Section I. Technology                                      No Certified Design Section II. Design Features                                  No Appendix A - Inspections, Tests, and                                          Yes Evaluations Section 1 Definitions, Use                                No and Application Section 2 Approved A1                                      No Appendix B.
Contents (Selection A2                                    No Technical Criteria)              A3                                No Specifications Section 3 Limiting      L1                                No Conditions for          L2                                No Operation (LCOs)*      L3                                No Page 45 of 46
 
Attachment 35 to Holtec Letter 5014917 CoC Condition/Technical Specification Evaluation Form - CoC original Appendix D and Surveillance Requirements (SRs)
(Selection Criteria)
Section 4 Administrative                                No Controls A significant increase in                              N/A the probability or consequences of an accident previously Risk Insight**:  evaluated in the cask Will removing    FSAR?
this              The possibility of a new or                            N/A requirement      different kind of accident from the CoC/TS being created compared result in        to those previously evaluated in the FSAR?
A Significant reduction in                            N/A the margin of safety for ISFSI or cask operation?
Evaluation Summary                              Retained in Appendix C as this includes design features for equipment that is only needed under specified circumstances, unlike the main equipment for the system described in CoC Sections I and II.
Page 46 of 46}}

Revision as of 00:18, 18 January 2022

Attachment 35 - HI-STORM 100 Amendment 16 Certificate of Compliance, Appendix D Reorganization Evaluation Form (Non-Proprietary)
ML21068A397
Person / Time
Site: Holtec
Issue date: 03/09/2021
From:
Holtec
To:
Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
Shared Package
ML21068A360 List:
References
5014917, CoC No. 1014
Download: ML21068A397 (46)
v • d • e


Text

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML21068A397&oldid=3399027"