ML20155B427

Forwards Supplemental RAI Re 980515 Application for Amend to Change TS 5.5.Change Would Reflect Proposed Mods to Increase Storage Capacity of Spent Fuel Pool at Plant,Unit 1.Response Requested within 45 Days of Receipt of Ltr

ML20155B427
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	10/27/1998
From:	Hood D NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned)
To:	Mueller J NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP.
Shared Package
ML20155B432	List: ML20155B427 ML20155B445 ML20155B453
References
TAC-MA1945, NUDOCS 9810300141
Download: ML20155B427 (7)

Text

_ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ ._ _._ __ _ .._ .__ _ _ ____.__ ______ _ _.___ _

. Mr. John H. Mulil2r October 27, 1998 I

g , Chitf Nuclur Officer Niagara Mohrwk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Operations Building, Second Floor P.O. Box 63 Lycoming, NY 13093

SUBJECT:

SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING INCREASED SPENT FUEL POOL STORAGE CAPACITY AT NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1 (TAC NO. MA1945)

Dear Mr. Mueller:

i By letter dated May 15,1998, you submitted an application for license amendment to change Technical Specification 5.5," Storage of Unirradiated and Spent Fuel." The changes would  :

reflect proposed modifications to increase the storage capacity of the spent fuel pool at Nine Mile l Point Nuclear Station, Unit No.1. The NRC staff is reviewing this application and finds that additional information, identified in the enclosure, is needed. The requests in the enclosure supplement our requests by letters dated August 11 and 24,1998, to which you responded September 25 and October 13,1998, respectively.

As shown in Enclosure 2, a draft version of Enclosure 1 was faxed to Mr. S. Leonard of your organization on October 16,1998, and an accompanying e mail requested that the response date be identified. Based on Mr. Leonard's reply that a response can be provided within 45 days of receipt of NRC's letter, it has been determined that a mutually acceptable response date is December 11,1998. If you have any questions regarding this request or find that you are unable to meet this response schedule, please contact me by phone on (301) 415-3049 or by electronic mail at dsh@nrc. gov.

Sincerely, ORIGINAL SIGNED BY:

1 Darl S. Hood, Senior Project Manager 9810300141 981027 Project Directorate 1-1 PDR ADOCK 05000220 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 P PDR Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

! . Docket No. 50-220

Enclosures:

1. Supplemental Request for Additional information l 2. Correspondence regarding response date cc w/encis: See next page

""O 3

}  % hh DISTRIBUTION: C l Docket File.

PUBLIC SBajwa SLittle OGC ACRS YKim CHinson n

L/ l PDl 1 R/F DHood LDoerflein, RI DShum )

JZwolinski(A) LKopp KParczewski DOCUMENT NAME: G:\NMPi\NM1 A1945.RA3 To receive a copy of this document, indicate in the box: "C" = Copy without attachment / enclosure "E" = Copy with attachment / enclosure "N" = No copy ,

OFFICE PM: POI 1 lE LA: POI 1,0(/ I 0: POI 1 ,d l l l NAME DHood/rst 35S Slittle " SBajwa A%

DATE 10/ ; (r/98 , 10/3(orve 10/ ) M /98 /98 Official Record Copy

pS 44 "A g% UNITED STATES 4 j j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON D.C. 20666 4001

\...../ October 27, 1998 Mr. John H. Mueller Chief Nuclear Officer Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Operations Building, Second Floor P.O. Box 63 Lycoming, NY 13093

SUBJECT:

SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING INCREASED SPENT FUEL POOL STORAGE CAPACITY AT NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT NO.1 (TAC NO. MA1945)

Dear Mr. Mueller-By letter dated May 15,1998, you submitted an application for license amendment to change Technical Specification 5.5," Storage of Unirradiated and Spent Fuel." The changes would reflect proposed modifications to increase the storage capacity of the spent fuel pool at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No.1. The NRC staff is reviewing this application and finds that additional information, identified in Enclosure 1, is needed. The requests in Enclosure i supplement our requests by letters dated August 11 and 24,1998, to which you responded on September 25 and October 13,1998, respectively.

As shown in Enclosure 2, a draft version of Enclosure 1 was faxed to Mr. S. Leonard of your organization on October 16,1998, and an accompanying e-mail requested that the response date be identified. Based on Mr. Leonard's reply that a response can be provided within 45 days of receipt of NRC's letter, it has been determined that a mutually acceptable response date is December 11,1998. If you have any questions regarding this request or find that you are unable to meet this response schedule, please contact me by phone on (301) 415-3049 or by electronic mail at dsh@nrc. gov.

Sincerely, Da~ll M,"(

Darl S. Hood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-1 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/11 Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-220 l

Enclosures:

1. Supplemental Request for Additional

! Information l 2. Correspondence regarding response date cc w/encls: See next page

John H. Mueller Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Unit No.1

. cc:

Regional Administrator, Region i U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Resident inspector U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box 126 Lycoming, NY 13093 Charles Donaldson, Esquire Assistant Attomey General New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Mr. Paul D. Eddy State of New York Department of Public Service Power Division, System Operations 3 Empire State Plaza Albany, NY 12223 Mr. F. William Valentino, President New York State Energy, Research, and Development Authority Corporate Plaza West 286 Washington Avenue Extension Albany, NY 12203-6399 Mark J. Wetterhahn, Esquire Winston & Strawn 1400 L Street, NW Washington, DC 20005-3502 Gary D. Wilson, Esquire Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation 300 Erie Boulevard West Syracuse, NY 13202 Supervisor Town of Scriba Route 8, Box 382 '

Oswego, NY 13126

I SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING SPENT FUEL POOL MOD!FICATIONS NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT NO.1 DOCKET NO. 50-220 in addition to the information requested by the NRC staff by letters dated August 11 and 24,1998 (to which you responded September 25 and October 13,1998, respectively), provide the following additionalinformation regarding the application for license amendment by letter dated May 15,1998:

IV. RADIATION PROTECTION

11. In Section 9.3 of Attachment C to your application dated May 15,1998, you state that radiation levels in zones surrounding the pool are not expected to be significantly affected by the proposed spent fuel pool (SFP) reracking. Please confirm that, and explain why, the increased number of fuel assemblies stored in the SFP and the closer vicinity of the replacement spent fuel racks to the SFP walls does not significantly affect dose rates in accessible areas adjacent to the SFP that may be below the refueling pool deck level or below the SFP itself. Describe any administrative controls used to preclude storing freshly offloaded fuel assemblies in celllocations adjacer:t to SFP walls.

12. What precautions (such as use of TV monitoring, tethers, etc.) will be used to ensure that divers will maintain a safe distance from spent fuel assemblies or any other high radiation sources in the SFP? How will you monitor the doses received by divers during the reracking operation (e.g., use of dosimetry, alarming dosimeters, remote readout radiation detectors)?

Discuss any other procedures that you will use to ensure that doses to divers are minimized.

13. Your application for amendment dated May 15,1998, does not include an analysis of the potential radiological consequences of a fuel handling accident (FHA) in the reactor building, although such an analysis was provided in support of your application dated May 2,1998, i regarding changes to the initiation circuitry for the Control Room Air Treatment System.

Please confirm that all the assumptions used in this previous FHA analysis in the reactor building remain applicable with respect to your May 15,1998, application for amendment, or 5 identify the revised assumptions. Similarly, confirm that the resulting postulated thyroid and whole body doses at the Exclusion Area Boundary, Low Population Zone, and within the control room as a result of an FHA remain valid, or provide revised doses.

l i

I 1

Enclosure 1 l l

1

l T

pn nsauq p t UNITED STATES g j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o WASHINGTON, D.C. m1 FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION DATE:

/O - /4 - 7 f 1

TO: M FAX NO:

S (5 - S y 9. gj TEL NO: 37p y ,

FROM: Oar [M /k U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION FAX NO.: (301) 415-2102 TEL NO: 3 o / - WI- So *+q PAGE 1 OF PAGES 3 i

~

REMARKS:

&f /&. A ?A E m U8t# / S'ff

_ m <=

}

Enclosure 2

[

l Mr. John H. Mueller l Chief Nuclear Of'icer l Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation l Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Operations Building, Second Floor P.O. Box 63 Lycoming, NY 13093 I

I

SUBJECT:

SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING INCREASED SPENT FUEL POOL STORAGE CAPACITY AT NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION,~ UNIT NO.1 (TAC NO. MA1945)

Dear Mr. Mueller:

By letter dated May 15,1998, you submitted an application for license amendment to change Technical Specification 5.5, " Storage of Unirradiated and Spent Fuel." The changes would reflect proposed modifications to increase the storage capacity of the spent fuel pool at Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, Unit No.1. The NRC staff is reviewing this application and finds that additionalinformation, identified in the enclosure, is needed. The requests in the enclosure supplement our requests by letters dated August 11,1998 (to which you responded on September 25,1998), and August 24,1998.

The enclosure was discussed with Ms. D. Wolniak and other members of your organization during a telephone conversation on .1998. During this conversation, it was determined that a mutually acceptable response date would be .1998, if you have any questions regarding this request or find that you are unable to meet this response schedule, please contact me by phone on (301) 415-3049 or by electronic mail at dsh@nrc. gov.

Sincerely, Darl S. Hood, Senior Project Manager Project Directorate 1-1 Division of Reactor Projects - 1/II Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-220

Enclosure:

Supplemental Request for Additional Information Jg p. 7 cc w/ encl: See next page i

SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION D RA P T REGARDING SPENT FUEL POOL MODIFICATIONS NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORPORATION NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION. UNIT NO.1 DOCKET NO. 50-220 in addition to the information requested by the NRC staff by letters dated August 11,1998 (to which you responded September 25,1998) and August 24,1998, provide the following additional information regarding the application for license amendment by letter dated May 15, 199fa:

IV. RADIATION PROTECTION

11. In Section 9.3 of Attachment C to your application dated May 15,1998, you state that radiation levels in zones surrounding the pool are not expected to be significantly affected by the proposed spent fuel pool (SFP) reracking. Please confirm that, and explain why, the increased number of fuel assemblies stored in the SFP and the closer vicinity of the replacement spent fuel racks to the SFP walls does not significantly affect dose rates in accessible areas adjacent to the SFP that may be below the refueling pool deck level or below the SFP itself. Describe any administrative controls used to preclude storing freshly offloaded fuel assemblies in cell locations adjacent to SFP walls.

12. What precautions (such as use of TV monitoring, tethers, etc.) will be used to ensure that divers will maintain a safe distance from spent fuel assemblies or any other high radiation sources in the SFP? How will you' monitor the doses received by divers during the reracking operation (e.g., use of dosimetry, alarming dosimeters, remote readout radiation detectors)? Discuss any other procedures that you will use to ensure that doses to divers are minimized.

13. Your application for amendment dated May 15,1998, does not include an analysis of the potential radiological consequences of a fuel handling accident (FHA)in the reactor building, although such an analysis was provided in support of your application dated May 2,1998, regarding changes to the initiation circuitry for the Control Room Air Treatment System. Please confirm that all the assumptions used in this previous FHA analysis in the reactor building remain applicable with respect to your May 15,1998 application for amendment, or identify the revised assumptions. Similarly, confirm that the resulting postulated thyroid and whole body doses at the Exclusion Area Boundary, Low Population Zone, and within the control room as a result of a FHA remain valid, or provide revised doses.  !

4 hif A F T

)

I Enclosure