ML050470515

RAI Regarding Amendment Application for Fuel Storage Building Gantry Crane

ML050470515
Person / Time
Site:	Indian Point
Issue date:	02/25/2005
From:	Milano P NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1
To:	Kansler M Entergy Nuclear Operations
Milano P, NRR/DLPM , 415-1457
References
TAC MC5036
Download: ML050470515 (6)

Text

February 25, 2005 Mr. Michael R. Kansler, President Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601

SUBJECT:

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 2 - REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING AMENDMENT APPLICATION FOR FUEL STORAGE BUILDING GANTRY CRANE (TAC NO. MC5036)

Dear Mr. Kansler:

On November 1, 2004, Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. (Entergy), submitted an application for a proposed amendment to the licensing basis for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 to allow use of a new single-failure proof gantry crane to be installed in the fuel storage building.

In addition, Entergy has a commitment to not move the spent fuel cask over any region of the spent fuel pool until the cask handling has been reviewed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) and found to be acceptable.

The NRC staff is reviewing the information provided and has determined that additional information is needed to complete its review. The specific questions are found in the enclosed request for additional information (RAI). During a telephone call on February 10, 2005, the Entergy staff indicated that a response to the RAI would be provided within 45 days.

Please contact me at (301) 415-1457 if you have any questions on this issue.

Sincerely,

/RA/

Patrick D. Milano, Senior Project Manager, Section 1 Project Directorate I Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Docket No. 50-247

Enclosure:

RAI cc w/encl: See next page

ML050470515 OFFICE PDI-1/PM PDI-1/LA SPLB/SC EMEB/SC PDI-1/SC NAME PMilano SLittle SJones KManoly RLaufer DATE 02/24/05 02/24/05 01/24/05 02/24/05 02/25/05 Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 cc:

Mr. Gary J. Taylor Ms. Charlene D. Faison Chief Executive Officer Manager, Licensing Entergy Operations, Inc. Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

1340 Echelon Parkway 440 Hamilton Avenue Jackson, MS 39213 White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. John T. Herron Mr. Michael J. Colomb Senior Vice President and Director of Oversight Chief Operating Officer Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 440 Hamilton Avenue 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 White Plains, NY 10601 Mr. James Comiotes Mr. Fred Dacimo Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance Site Vice President Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Indian Point Energy Center Indian Point Energy Center 295 Broadway, Suite 1 295 Broadway, Suite 2 P.O. Box 249 P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Mr. Patric Conroy Mr. Christopher Schwarz Manager, Licensing General Manager, Plant Operations Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Indian Point Energy Center Indian Point Energy Center 295 Broadway, Suite 1 295 Broadway, Suite 1 P. O. Box 249 P.O. Box 249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Buchanan, NY 10511-0249 Mr. John M. Fulton Mr. Danny L. Pace Assistant General Counsel Vice President Engineering Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. 440 Hamilton Avenue 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 White Plains, NY 10601 Regional Administrator, Region I Mr. Brian OGrady U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Vice President, Operations Support 475 Allendale Road Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. King of Prussia, PA 19406 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601 Senior Resident Inspectors Office Indian Point 2 Mr. John McCann U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Director, Nuclear Safety Assurance P.O. Box 59 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. Buchanan, NY 10511-0038 440 Hamilton Avenue White Plains, NY 10601

Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 cc:

Mr. Peter R. Smith, President Mr. Dan C. Poole New York State Energy, Research, and PWR SRC Consultant Development Authority 20 Captains Cove Road 17 Columbia Circle Inglis, FL 34449 Albany, NY 12203-6399 Mr. William T. Russell Mr. Paul Eddy PWR SRC Consultant Electric Division 400 Plantation Lane New York State Department Stevensville, MD 21666-3232 of Public Service 3 Empire State Plaza, 10th Floor Mr. Jim Riccio Albany, NY 12223 Greenpeace 702 H Street, NW Mr. Charles Donaldson, Esquire Suite 300 Assistant Attorney General Washington, DC 20001 New York Department of Law 120 Broadway New York, NY 10271 Mayor, Village of Buchanan 236 Tate Avenue Buchanan, NY 10511 Mr. Ray Albanese Executive Chair Four County Nuclear Safety Committee Westchester County Fire Training Center 4 Dana Road Valhalla, NY 10592 Ms. Stacey Lousteau Treasury Department Entergy Services, Inc.

639 Loyola Avenue Mail Stop: L-ENT-15E New Orleans, LA 70113 Mr. William DiProfio PWR SRC Consultant 139 Depot Road East Kingston, NH 03827

REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION REGARDING FUEL STRAGE BUILDING GANTRY CRANE ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

INDIAN POINT NUCLEAR GENERATING UNIT NO. 2 DOCKET NO. 50-247 In a letter dated November 1, 2004 (ADAMS Accession No. ML043140282), Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc., submitted an application for a proposed amendment to the licensing basis for Indian Point Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 (IP2) to allow use of a new single-failure proof gantry crane to be installed in the fuel storage building. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has the following questions regarding the information in the application.

1. On page 3 of Attachment 1 of the November 1 letter, it states that the crane main hoist has a 110-ton capacity while an auxiliary hoist has a 45-ton capacity. On page 4, it states that the 110-ton hoist is used to lift the Holtec HI-TRAC 100 transfer cask, whereas the 45-ton hoist is used to handle the ancillary components of the HI-STORM 100 Cask System.

a. Describe the means to ensure that the 45-ton hoist will not be inadvertently used to handle loads that exceed its rated capacity.

b. Provide prints, if available, to show the details of the crane and its location relative to the spent fuel pool and the existing 40-ton overhead crane. Are there any postulated scenarios whereby the new crane may interfere with the existing crane (or vice versa) during load handling operations?

2. On page 2 of Appendix B to Attachment 3, it states that the crane will not be used to lift fuel elements from the spent fuel racks. Therefore, interlocks to prevent trolley and bridge movements while hoisting were not provided.

Describe the control(s) used to ensure the crane will not be inadvertently used for other unintended purposes (e.g., lifting fuel elements from the spent fuel racks), given no interlocks are provided.

3. In Attachment 4, it states that the entire new crane is seismically qualified by response spectrum analysis. Briefly describe the components that constitute the entire new crane.

4. Provide drawings that show the configuration and member sizes of the proposed crane, the steel counterweight box, the crane wheel, and crane rails, and their locations in the fuel storage building. The drawing should also show how the counterweight box is embedded below the floor.

5. Attachment 5 includes the method of analysis of the anchorage system. It states that Enclosure

the required weight of the steel counterweight box was determined by treating the box as a foundation, which provides gravity weight resistance for both operating-basis earthquake and safe-shutdown earthquake loading. Provide the weight of the steel counterweight box.

6. In Attachment 4, it states that the crane is installed on new rails connected to a new foundation forming part of the reconstructed truck bay floor in the fuel storage building.

Is this new foundation the same as the foundation (steel counterweight box) mentioned above? If not, provide the drawing that shows the relationship among the crane, rails, new foundation, and the structural members that support the new foundation.

7. In Attachment 4, it also states that restraining lugs and anchors are provided to withstand the calculated uplift forces. Provide drawings that show the lugs and anchors and their surrounding material(s), and describe the methods and procedures on how the restraining forces were calculated.

8. In Attachment 5, it states that the steel counterweight box is embedded below the floor to resist the uplift forces.

Provide the magnitude of the maximum uplift force at the location of the steel counterweight box resulting from all applicable loading combinations, and identify the loading combination. Provide the punching shear stress and punching shear strength (capacity) in the floor resulting from the maximum uplift force.

9. In Attachment 5, it states that turnbuckles are used as tie-downs. Provide the maximum stress in the turnbuckles for all applicable loading combinations and the allowable stress for the turnbuckles.