ML18200A120: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
 
Line 16: Line 16:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:Division of Spent Fuel Management, NMSSU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionPublic Meeting with Holtec InternationalJune 19, 2018Holtec HI-STORE CIS Review  
{{#Wiki_filter:Holtec HI-STORE CIS Review -
-Discussion of 5/24/18 RAI responses on Aircraft Hazards Summary*March 28, 2018  
Discussion of 5/24/18 RAI responses on Aircraft Hazards Division of Spent Fuel Management, NMSS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting with Holtec International June 19, 2018
-NRC issues request for additional information (RAI), Part 1  
 
-RAI 2-1 -Requests additional details on aircraft hazards assessment for HI
Summary
-STORE CISF site
* March 28, 2018 - NRC issues request for additional information (RAI), Part 1
*May 24, 2018  
  - RAI 2 Requests additional details on aircraft hazards assessment for HI-STORE CISF site
-Holtec submits responses to RAIs
* May 24, 2018 - Holtec submits responses to RAIs
*NRC staff has identified issues in Holtec's response to the aircraft hazards analysis
* NRC staff has identified issues in Holtec's response to the aircraft hazards analysis
-Proximity criteria for flight paths (NUREG
  - Proximity criteria for flight paths (NUREG-0800)
-0800)-Effective area for the facility
  - Effective area for the facility
-Crash rate for military aircraft
  - Crash rate for military aircraft
-Units of measurement (statute vs. nautical)
  - Units of measurement (statute vs. nautical)
-Descriptions of SAR Figures Issue 1 -Proximity Criteria fromNUREG-0800*Criterion B from Section 3.5.1.6 of NUREG
  - Descriptions of SAR Figures
-0800 not met
 
-Proximity of military flight path to the facility requires detailed analysis*Additional information required for detailed analysis
Issue 1 - Proximity Criteria from NUREG-0800
-Annual number of flights, crash rates for specific aircraft types, distance to site, effective area of facility needed to estimate cumulative annual crash probability Issue 2 -Estimate of effective area of the facility
* Criterion B from Section 3.5.1.6 of NUREG-0800 not met
*Section 3.5.1.6, Subsection 7 of NUREG
  - Proximity of military flight path to the facility requires detailed analysis
-0800 provides guidance for estimating effective area of facility
* Additional information required for detailed analysis
-Must include footprint area of facility, skid area for specific aircraft, and shadow area of facility structures
  - Annual number of flights, crash rates for specific aircraft types, distance to site, effective area of facility needed to estimate cumulative annual crash probability
*Response does not include shadow area or skid area
 
-Only footprint area for facility is included Issue 3 -Basis for military aircraft crash rate
Issue 2 - Estimate of effective area of the facility
*Response does not provide basis provided for assumed military aircraft crash rate
* Section 3.5.1.6, Subsection 7 of NUREG-0800 provides guidance for estimating effective area of facility
*Section 3.5.1.6, Subsection 2 of NUREG
  - Must include footprint area of facility, skid area for specific aircraft, and shadow area of facility structures
-0800 cites specific references with data on aircraft crash rates
* Response does not include shadow area or skid area
-DOE, "Accident Analysis of Aircraft into Hazardous Facilities," DOE-STD-3014-96, October 1996 Issue 4 -Units of measurement for airway distances
  - Only footprint area for facility is included
*RAI response should use consistent distance measurement units  
 
-SAR Table 2.2.5 cites distances in nautical miles, compares with statute miles from FAA Sectional chart
Issue 3 - Basis for military aircraft crash rate
*Analysis should consider distances to edge of airway Issue 5 -References to SAR Figure 2.2.7
* Response does not provide basis provided for assumed military aircraft crash rate
*RAI response does not provide specific explanations of the information in SAR Figure 2.2.7
* Section 3.5.1.6, Subsection 2 of NUREG-0800 cites specific references with data on aircraft crash rates
-Any figures, tables, or charts provided in the application should be adequately described Conclusions
  - DOE, Accident Analysis of Aircraft into Hazardous Facilities, DOE-STD-3014-96, October 1996
*NRC staff needs additional information to address RAIs on aircraft hazards and determine compliance with NRC's safety regulations
 
*Timely completion of NRC review of Holtec's HI
Issue 4 - Units of measurement for airway distances
-STORE CISF application requires complete and high quality responses to NRC staff's questions}}
* RAI response should use consistent distance measurement units
  - SAR Table 2.2.5 cites distances in nautical miles, compares with statute miles from FAA Sectional chart
* Analysis should consider distances to edge of airway
 
Issue 5 - References to SAR Figure 2.2.7
* RAI response does not provide specific explanations of the information in SAR Figure 2.2.7
  - Any figures, tables, or charts provided in the application should be adequately described
 
Conclusions
* NRC staff needs additional information to address RAIs on aircraft hazards and determine compliance with NRC's safety regulations
* Timely completion of NRC review of Holtec's HI-STORE CISF application requires complete and high quality responses to NRC staff's questions}}

Latest revision as of 21:00, 20 October 2019

Enclosure 2: Meeting Slides (Summary of June 19, 2018, Public Meeting with Holtec International to Discuss Holtec'S Response to Nrc'S RAI for the Review of License Application for the Proposed HI-STORE Cisf at Lea County, Nm)
ML18200A120
Person / Time
Site: HI-STORE
Issue date: 06/19/2018
From:
Spent Fuel Licensing Branch
To:
Division of Spent Fuel Management
Cuadrado J
Shared Package
ML18200A123 List:
References
Download: ML18200A120 (8)


Text

Holtec HI-STORE CIS Review -

Discussion of 5/24/18 RAI responses on Aircraft Hazards Division of Spent Fuel Management, NMSS U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Public Meeting with Holtec International June 19, 2018

Summary

  • March 28, 2018 - NRC issues request for additional information (RAI), Part 1

- RAI 2 Requests additional details on aircraft hazards assessment for HI-STORE CISF site

  • May 24, 2018 - Holtec submits responses to RAIs
  • NRC staff has identified issues in Holtec's response to the aircraft hazards analysis

- Proximity criteria for flight paths (NUREG-0800)

- Effective area for the facility

- Crash rate for military aircraft

- Units of measurement (statute vs. nautical)

- Descriptions of SAR Figures

Issue 1 - Proximity Criteria from NUREG-0800

  • Criterion B from Section 3.5.1.6 of NUREG-0800 not met

- Proximity of military flight path to the facility requires detailed analysis

  • Additional information required for detailed analysis

- Annual number of flights, crash rates for specific aircraft types, distance to site, effective area of facility needed to estimate cumulative annual crash probability

Issue 2 - Estimate of effective area of the facility

  • Section 3.5.1.6, Subsection 7 of NUREG-0800 provides guidance for estimating effective area of facility

- Must include footprint area of facility, skid area for specific aircraft, and shadow area of facility structures

  • Response does not include shadow area or skid area

- Only footprint area for facility is included

Issue 3 - Basis for military aircraft crash rate

  • Response does not provide basis provided for assumed military aircraft crash rate
  • Section 3.5.1.6, Subsection 2 of NUREG-0800 cites specific references with data on aircraft crash rates

- DOE, Accident Analysis of Aircraft into Hazardous Facilities, DOE-STD-3014-96, October 1996

Issue 4 - Units of measurement for airway distances

  • RAI response should use consistent distance measurement units

- SAR Table 2.2.5 cites distances in nautical miles, compares with statute miles from FAA Sectional chart

  • Analysis should consider distances to edge of airway

Issue 5 - References to SAR Figure 2.2.7

  • RAI response does not provide specific explanations of the information in SAR Figure 2.2.7

- Any figures, tables, or charts provided in the application should be adequately described

Conclusions

  • NRC staff needs additional information to address RAIs on aircraft hazards and determine compliance with NRC's safety regulations
  • Timely completion of NRC review of Holtec's HI-STORE CISF application requires complete and high quality responses to NRC staff's questions