ML20195K139: 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:}}
{{#Wiki_filter:.
W 1  g f            t.                              UNITED STATES s"                j t
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001
    \*****,o8                                        November 23, 1998 DOCKET:                          70-7001 CERTIFICATE HOLDER:              United States Enrichment Corporation Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Paducah, KY
 
==SUBJECT:==
COMPLIANCE EVALUATION REPORT: APPLICATION DATED APRIL 24,1998, CYLINDER CRANE UPGRADES, TSRS 2.1.5.2 AND 2.3.
 
==5.2 BACKGROUND==
 
By letter dated April 24,1998, the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) requested an amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP). The request was to revise Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 on the design features of the cranes in the withdrawal facilities (C-310 and C-315) and the Toll Transfer and Sampling facility (C-360). By letter dated May 20,1998, the staff requested additionalinformation. USEC responded by letter dated July 16,1998.
DISCUSSION The current TSRs contain Design Features for the cranes in the Toll Transfer and Sampling facility (C-360) and the Product and Tails Withdrawal facilities (C-310 and C 315). For the C-360 cranes, TSR 2.1.5.2 credits the cranes with having one DC rectified shoe brake and one electro-mechanical hydraulic ca!iper brake on the hoist. For the C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities, TSR 2.3.5.2 credits the cranes with having two DC rectified shoe brakes. USEC proposes to revise both TSRs to require two hoist brakes that meet the requirements of ANSI B30.2-1990," Overhead and Gantry Cranes," including Addendum A,1991. This revision will make these TSRs consistent with the crane TSR for the feed facilities, which was similarly revised in Amendment 2.
The safety function of the brakes to stop and hold or control the load (UF cylinder) remains unchanged. The current TSRs specify the specific type of brake allowed on the crane and does not specify that the brakes must meet the ANSI standard. The specific type of brake does not make any safety difference as long as it serves the safety function. One method of providing reasonable assurance that the brake design meets the safety function is to comply with accepted industry standards. The appropriate standard in this case in ANSI B30.2," Overhead and Gantry Cranes." USEC is committing to having two brakes that meet this standard. These proposed TSR changes are considered an improvement over the existing TSR language because of the commitment to ANSI B30.2-1990.
USEC is pursuing the TSR changes at this time because USEC has recently installed new cylinder handling cranes in the C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities. USEC wants the flexibility to use different crane brake designs for the new cranes. The proposed TSR language provides this flexibility along with increased safety due to the clear commitment to the brake portion of the ANSI standard.
!        9811250192 981123 PDR      ADOCK 07007001 C                        PDR
 
T 2
l l
As part of the review for this amendment, the staff questioned the extent of the commitment to ANSI B30.2. The proposed TSR commits USEC to having two hoist brakes that meet the requirements in the standard. USEC has previously committed in Safety Analysis Report Chapter 1, Appendix A to portions of Chapter 2-2," Inspections, Testing and Maintenance" of        i ANSI B30.2-1990. In response to the staff's questions, USEC e 'ed that the design and operating guidance contained within ANSI B30.2 was conside              . id applied to the new cylinder handling cranes in C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities, with the two exceptions discussed behw.
1 Section 2-1.3.1(d) requires the installation of wind speed indicators. USEC terminates cylinder handling operations when excessive winds conditions exist. The plant provides this functionality via the C-300 Central Control Facility. The second exception concerns the load tests of the cranes. Section 2-2.2.2 (b2 and b3) require that the test load travel the entire trolly length and that the bridge travelits entire length with the trolly located at both the extreme right and extreme left positions. The plant does not conduct the load tests in this manner because it would entail traveling the test load over autoclaves and UF cylinders. The risk of dropping the test load onto safety related equipment does not warrant using this technique. The plant performs the load test using approved procedures which include precautions to protect the autoclaves and UF cylinders against such risks.
Although not a commitment, the staff is satisfied that USEC has appropriately applied the standard for the new cranes. The staff notes that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has specific requirements in 29 CFR 1910.179, that apply to the cranes. Tho Quality Assurance Program also requires identification and documentation of design inputs such as codes and standards for O systems. The cranes are considered O systems.                    ,
USEC's propo. sed changes do commit tne plant to the requirements pertaining to the hoist brakes, the subject of this amendment. The changes are considered an improvement to the existing references to specific types of brakes without the commitment to the standard.
The staff is currently reviewing the completion / closure of Compliance Plan Issue 45," Codes and Standards." As part of that review, the staff will determine if there are any questions related to codes and standards from the initial certification review that remain unanswered.
Resolution of issue 45 was intended to resolve all remaining unanswered questions on this issue. Any questions related to the adherence to code and standards pertaining to the cranes that remain open will be resolved as part of that Compliance Plan Issue 45 review.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW lssuance of an amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 to revise TSRs 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 to change the design requirement for the crane brakes is subject to the categorical exclusion provided in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(19). Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required for the proposed action.
 
                  .                                                                                      3 i
CONCLUSION
                      ~ The staff concludes that the TSR revisions to revise the crane brake design for the C-360 l
transfer and sampling facility and for C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities will not adversely
                      . impact the safety of the plant. The proposed revision to TSRs 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 commits
: PGDP to the requirements of ANSI B30.2-1990 for the crane hoist brakes and is considered an improvement over the current language. The staff recommends that the revised TSRs be approved.                                                                                                                                              .
l                        The Region ill Inspection ~ staff has no objection to this proposed action.                                                                            l i                                                                                                                                                                              :
i
                      ' Princioal Contributg l                        Merri Horn l                                                                                                                                                                            'l I
l i
I DISTRIBUTION:(Control No. 390S)
(-
Docket 70-7001                                            NRC File Center PUBLIC      Rill KO'Brien, All!                YChen NMSSrM- .                                NMSS dir. ofc. r# FCSSrn                              FCOB                      SPB r#
PHiland, Rill
                        *See previous concurrence OFC                *SPB                          '* SPB
                                                                                          *SPB              3 NAME                          n:ij                  DHoadley                MGallaway          hierson DATE'                11/10/98                        '11/10/98                  11/10/98        N /h/98 C = COVER                  E = COVER & ENCLOSURE                                  N = NO COPY a:ker21. pad
: l.                                                                                  OFFICIAL RECORD COPY t-f I
l l.
l-(-    ,          ,                        ,                    ..                  ..          ,      ..      ~                                              . . .,z ... ,.
 
                    ..                                                                                            3                                                            !
: 2.      2 cnd 2.3.5.2 commits PGDP to tha requiremtnts of ANSI B30.2-1990 for the crane hoist brakes d is considered an improvement over the current language. The staff recommends
                              - that the re          d TSRs be approved.'
The Region ill ins                      n staff has no objection to this proposed action.
Princioal Contributor Merri Horn I
J
                            ' DISTRIBUTION: (Control No. 390S)
Docket 70-7001                                  NRC File Center PUBLIC                          Alli KO'Brien, Alli          YChen NMSSrM                              NMSS dir. ofc. r# FCSSr#                                              FCOB                SPBrM PHWand, Rill OFC                          SPB          M            '
                                                                -SPB          I            SPEl                          SPB NAME                          MHo :                      DNdiey                            G$way                  RPierson DATE                          11 //v/98                  Il /IQ98 '                ll /IM                            / /98                                              l C = COVER -              E = COVER & ENCLOSURE                                      N = NO COPY a:k:er21. pad                                    OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l
i l
i-i l
e
                                                                                                                                                                    ,    -,}}

Revision as of 12:18, 13 November 2020

Compliance Evaluation Rept Supporting Amend to Coc GDP-1, Revising Technical Safety Requirements (Tsrs) Re Cylinder Crane Upgrades
ML20195K139
Person / Time
Site: 07007001
Issue date: 11/23/1998
From:
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To:
Shared Package
ML20195K137 List:
References
NUDOCS 9811250192
Download: ML20195K139 (4)


Text

.

W 1 g f t. UNITED STATES s" j t

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001

\*****,o8 November 23, 1998 DOCKET: 70-7001 CERTIFICATE HOLDER: United States Enrichment Corporation Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant Paducah, KY

SUBJECT:

COMPLIANCE EVALUATION REPORT: APPLICATION DATED APRIL 24,1998, CYLINDER CRANE UPGRADES, TSRS 2.1.5.2 AND 2.3.

5.2 BACKGROUND

By letter dated April 24,1998, the United States Enrichment Corporation (USEC) requested an amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 for the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant (PGDP). The request was to revise Technical Safety Requirements (TSRs) 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 on the design features of the cranes in the withdrawal facilities (C-310 and C-315) and the Toll Transfer and Sampling facility (C-360). By letter dated May 20,1998, the staff requested additionalinformation. USEC responded by letter dated July 16,1998.

DISCUSSION The current TSRs contain Design Features for the cranes in the Toll Transfer and Sampling facility (C-360) and the Product and Tails Withdrawal facilities (C-310 and C 315). For the C-360 cranes, TSR 2.1.5.2 credits the cranes with having one DC rectified shoe brake and one electro-mechanical hydraulic ca!iper brake on the hoist. For the C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities, TSR 2.3.5.2 credits the cranes with having two DC rectified shoe brakes. USEC proposes to revise both TSRs to require two hoist brakes that meet the requirements of ANSI B30.2-1990," Overhead and Gantry Cranes," including Addendum A,1991. This revision will make these TSRs consistent with the crane TSR for the feed facilities, which was similarly revised in Amendment 2.

The safety function of the brakes to stop and hold or control the load (UF cylinder) remains unchanged. The current TSRs specify the specific type of brake allowed on the crane and does not specify that the brakes must meet the ANSI standard. The specific type of brake does not make any safety difference as long as it serves the safety function. One method of providing reasonable assurance that the brake design meets the safety function is to comply with accepted industry standards. The appropriate standard in this case in ANSI B30.2," Overhead and Gantry Cranes." USEC is committing to having two brakes that meet this standard. These proposed TSR changes are considered an improvement over the existing TSR language because of the commitment to ANSI B30.2-1990.

USEC is pursuing the TSR changes at this time because USEC has recently installed new cylinder handling cranes in the C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities. USEC wants the flexibility to use different crane brake designs for the new cranes. The proposed TSR language provides this flexibility along with increased safety due to the clear commitment to the brake portion of the ANSI standard.

! 9811250192 981123 PDR ADOCK 07007001 C PDR

T 2

l l

As part of the review for this amendment, the staff questioned the extent of the commitment to ANSI B30.2. The proposed TSR commits USEC to having two hoist brakes that meet the requirements in the standard. USEC has previously committed in Safety Analysis Report Chapter 1, Appendix A to portions of Chapter 2-2," Inspections, Testing and Maintenance" of i ANSI B30.2-1990. In response to the staff's questions, USEC e 'ed that the design and operating guidance contained within ANSI B30.2 was conside . id applied to the new cylinder handling cranes in C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities, with the two exceptions discussed behw.

1 Section 2-1.3.1(d) requires the installation of wind speed indicators. USEC terminates cylinder handling operations when excessive winds conditions exist. The plant provides this functionality via the C-300 Central Control Facility. The second exception concerns the load tests of the cranes. Section 2-2.2.2 (b2 and b3) require that the test load travel the entire trolly length and that the bridge travelits entire length with the trolly located at both the extreme right and extreme left positions. The plant does not conduct the load tests in this manner because it would entail traveling the test load over autoclaves and UF cylinders. The risk of dropping the test load onto safety related equipment does not warrant using this technique. The plant performs the load test using approved procedures which include precautions to protect the autoclaves and UF cylinders against such risks.

Although not a commitment, the staff is satisfied that USEC has appropriately applied the standard for the new cranes. The staff notes that the Occupational Safety and Health Administration has specific requirements in 29 CFR 1910.179, that apply to the cranes. Tho Quality Assurance Program also requires identification and documentation of design inputs such as codes and standards for O systems. The cranes are considered O systems. ,

USEC's propo. sed changes do commit tne plant to the requirements pertaining to the hoist brakes, the subject of this amendment. The changes are considered an improvement to the existing references to specific types of brakes without the commitment to the standard.

The staff is currently reviewing the completion / closure of Compliance Plan Issue 45," Codes and Standards." As part of that review, the staff will determine if there are any questions related to codes and standards from the initial certification review that remain unanswered.

Resolution of issue 45 was intended to resolve all remaining unanswered questions on this issue. Any questions related to the adherence to code and standards pertaining to the cranes that remain open will be resolved as part of that Compliance Plan Issue 45 review.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW lssuance of an amendment to Certificate of Compliance GDP-1 to revise TSRs 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 to change the design requirement for the crane brakes is subject to the categorical exclusion provided in 10 CFR 51.22(c)(19). Therefore, neither an environmental assessment nor an environmental impact statement is required for the proposed action.

. 3 i

CONCLUSION

~ The staff concludes that the TSR revisions to revise the crane brake design for the C-360 l

transfer and sampling facility and for C-310 and C-315 withdrawal facilities will not adversely

. impact the safety of the plant. The proposed revision to TSRs 2.1.5.2 and 2.3.5.2 commits

PGDP to the requirements of ANSI B30.2-1990 for the crane hoist brakes and is considered an improvement over the current language. The staff recommends that the revised TSRs be approved. .

l The Region ill Inspection ~ staff has no objection to this proposed action. l i  :

i

' Princioal Contributg l Merri Horn l 'l I

l i

I DISTRIBUTION:(Control No. 390S)

(-

Docket 70-7001 NRC File Center PUBLIC Rill KO'Brien, All! YChen NMSSrM- . NMSS dir. ofc. r# FCSSrn FCOB SPB r#

PHiland, Rill

  • See previous concurrence OFC *SPB '* SPB
  • SPB 3 NAME n:ij DHoadley MGallaway hierson DATE' 11/10/98 '11/10/98 11/10/98 N /h/98 C = COVER E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY a:ker21. pad
l. OFFICIAL RECORD COPY t-f I

l l.

l-(- , , , .. .. , .. ~ . . .,z ... ,.

.. 3  !

2. 2 cnd 2.3.5.2 commits PGDP to tha requiremtnts of ANSI B30.2-1990 for the crane hoist brakes d is considered an improvement over the current language. The staff recommends

- that the re d TSRs be approved.'

The Region ill ins n staff has no objection to this proposed action.

Princioal Contributor Merri Horn I

J

' DISTRIBUTION: (Control No. 390S)

Docket 70-7001 NRC File Center PUBLIC Alli KO'Brien, Alli YChen NMSSrM NMSS dir. ofc. r# FCSSr# FCOB SPBrM PHWand, Rill OFC SPB M '

-SPB I SPEl SPB NAME MHo : DNdiey G$way RPierson DATE 11 //v/98 Il /IQ98 ' ll /IM / /98 l C = COVER - E = COVER & ENCLOSURE N = NO COPY a:k:er21. pad OFFICIAL RECORD COPY l

i l

i-i l

e

, -,