ML19324B605

Application for Amends to Licenses NPF-10 & NPF-15,revising Tech Spec 3.9.7, Heavy Loads Over Fuel Assemblies in Fuel Storage Pool.

ML19324B605
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	11/02/1989
From:	Ray H SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML13303B163	List: ML13303B162 ML19324B605 ML19324B609
References
NUDOCS 8911070165
Download: ML19324B605 (11)

Text

u..

l h

UNITED STATES OF, AMERICA  !

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Application of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA

, EDISON COMPANY, H E, for a Class 103 Docket No. 50-361 l? License to Acquire, Possess, and Use

'a Utilization Facility as Part of Amendment Application d..

Unit No. 2 of the San Onofre Nuclear No. 78 Generating Station j e i SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, H E. pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90, hereby  ;

submit Amendment Application No. 78 to Facility Operating License NPF-10.

l LThis; amendment: application consists of Proposed License Change No. NPF-10-287 j i; to Facility Operating License No. NPF-10. Proposed License Change NPF-10-287

'is a request to revise Technical Specifications 3.9.7, " Heavy Loads Over Fuel l

Assemblies in' the Fue1~ Storage Pool ;" 5.6.1.b and 5.6.2, " Fuel Storage J l- ~ Criticality" and 5.6.4, " Fuel Storage Capacity" to increase the cr.pacity of the L

fuel storage pool racks at both Units 2 and 3 from 800 to 1542 fuel assembly p storage locations and provide for specific heavy load lifts above the new racks  ;

that are needed for construction and normal fuel pool operations.

l l l I'

l1 1

b Revision 4

, g10%Ik b' e

.v.

s 5

Subscribed on this 2nd day of November , 1989.

l

> Respectfully submitted, SOUTHERN CAllFORNIA EDISON COMPANY By:

b Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day of November, 1989 . , _ , _ , , _ , , , , ,

dh. *dt$t$$[$ f "575$7ifd? >

c, a g py,,f ,,

h mrx:n NotaryPublicinandfortheC40ptyof Los Angeles, State _of Californw  :

(

Charles R. Kocher James A. Beolette Attorneys for Southern ,

California Edison Company By: 4 -

Jame . Booletto W e

l

?*

V, ' '

u .

t

- 1. 7:

NL' UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  :

. NUCLEAR REGULATORY (DMMISSION .

L i

O '

x . Application of SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA l

-t .

. EDISON COMPANY, EI AL. for a Class 103 Docket No. 50-362

, License to Acquire Possess, and Use .,

Amendment Application a Utilization Facility as Part of Unit No. 3 of the San Onofre Nuclear No. 64 Generating Station )

SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, El AL. pursuant to 10 CFR 50.90, hereby

]

submit Amendment Application No. 64 to Facility Operating License NPF-15.

4 This amendment application consists of Proposed License Change No. NPF-15-287 '

to Facility Operating License No. NPF-15. Proposed License Change NPF-15-287 is a request to revise Technical Specifications 3.9.7, " Heavy Loads Over Fuel Assemblies in the Fuel Storage Pool;" 5.6.1.b and 5.6.2, " Fuel Storage Criticality" and 5.6.4, " Fuel Storage Capacity" to increase the capacity of the fuel storage. pool racks at both Units 2 and 3 from 800 to 1542 fuel assembly storage locations and provide for specific heavy load lifts above the new racks that are needed for construction and normal fuel pool operations..

L P

i 3> .

1 L

1 1.

Revision 4

p i

[4 '

fjh I p.

L Subscribed on this 2nd day of November , 1989. j Respectfully submitted, s c

. SOUTHERN CAllFORNIA EDISON COMPANY l.

By: ,

1 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 2nd day of November,1989 . m.__. , ,

OFFICIAL,SFAL y i

GIOl A.00MI2 >

"Esidii$E$*

84 h Euwes ien. M.1993

? ,b

.NotaryPublicinandfortheCou@yof Los Angeles, State of California ,

i l:

l I f.

r l Charles R. Kocher _j James A. Beoletto l Attorneys for Southern l

' California Edison Company 1

~~

By:

h - %L James'A. Beoletto ~~ T i

\

1 DESCRIPTION AND SAFETY ANALYSIS '

OF PROPOSED CHANGE NPF-10/15-287 t

This request to revise Technical Specifications 3.9.7, " Heavy Loads Over Fuel Assemblies in the Fuel Storage Poolt" 5.6.1.b and 5.6.2 " Fuel Storage criticality" and 5.6.4, " Fuel Storage capac1ty" is to increase the capacity of the spent fuel pool racks at both Units 2 and 3 from 800 to 1542 fuel assembly 4 storage locations and provide for specific heavy load lifts above i

, the racks that are needed for construction and normal fuel pool operations.

Existina Technical Soecifications:

Unit 2: See Attachment A Unit 3: See Attachment B ProDosed Technical Soecifications:

Unit 2: See Attachment c Unit 3: See Attachment D 9 Descriotion:

New high density spent fuel racks with 1542 fuel assembly storage l4 [

locatiens at both San Onofre Unit 2 and Unit 3 are proposed to  ;

replace the existing racks which have 800 storage locations. The

, new racks will be free standing and use Foraflex neutron absorbing material for criticality control. A two region design is used with 312 storage locations in Region I for storage for all types of Unit 1 and Units 2 and 3 uranium oxide fuel,'and 4

1230 storage locations in Region II for storage of Unit 1 and Units 2 and 3 uranium oxide fuel which meets specified burnup  ;

criteria or other fuel in prescribed storage patterns. <

The proposed Technical Specification changes are described below:

1. Technical Specification 5.6.1(b) will change the .

L current 12.75" center-to-center rack storage location '

spacing to 10.40" center-to-center spacing for Region I, and 8.85" center-to-center spacing for Region II.

2. Existing Technical Specification 5.6.2 for dry storage  ;

of the first core in the fuel poci in alternate rows and columns will be deleted. This Technical Specification was only applicable for the first core and the pool is filled with water which is maintained at a minimum level as prescribed by Technical Specification 3.9.11, " Water Level -- Storage Pool."

3. New Technical Specification 5.6.2 and accompanying Figures 5.6-1, 5.6-2, 5.6-3, and 5.6-4 will define the fuel enrichment /burnup limits for storage of Units 1, 2, and 3 fuel in Region II of the high capacity spent fuel storage racks.

TMFWOO65 9/89 1 Revision 4 l

Ij <-

A s J j'

e This new Technical Specification will also define the conditions and storage patterns (checkerboard or

alternating row) for which new or burned fuel, which does not meet the enrichment vs. burnup criteria

for unrestricted storage in Region II, may be. stored in Region II.

Lastly, this new. Technical Specification will define the conditions (empty'- alternating cells - empty) under which a new/ burned fuel reconstitution station may be established in Region II.

4. Technical. Specification 5.6.4 will be revised to designate that no more than 1542 fuel assemblies may be l4.

stored in the spent fuel racks which is an increase of 742 from the current limit of 800 elements. l4 5.' Technical Specification 3.9.7 will be revised to list

, the following allowable lifts of heavy loads above L, stored spant fuel A. Spent fuel pool gates shall.not be carried at a height greater than 30 inches (elevation 36 feet 4 c

inches) over the fuel racks.

'B. Test e pipment skid (4500 pounds) shall not be carried at a height greater than 72 inches (elevation 39 feet 10 inches) over rack cells which contain Unit 2 or 3. fuel assemblies or greater than 30 feet 8 inches-(elevation 64 feet 6 inches) over rack cells which contain Unit 1 fuel assemblies.

C. Installation or removal of the cask pool cover over the cask pool with fuel in the cask pool.

D. The lift of construction loads, the temporary gantry crane and the old and the new fuel storage racks (including lifting equipment and rigging),

above the cask pool with the cask pool cover in place and fuel in the cask pool. This includes temporary storage of these construction loads on the cask pool cover during construction.  !

l- 6. The basis for Specification 3.9.7 will be revised to E

reflect the analysis for the heavy load drops associated with the revised Specification 3.9.7.

)

7. New Technical Specification and Bases 3/4.9.13 - Spent L Fuel Pool Boron Concentration, require a minimum of 4 1850 ppm boron concentration in the spent fuel pool.

l l

L TMFWOO65 l 9/89 2 Revision 4 l

}i - ,

t- 4

.,i : - ,

-t b1 reposed changes to the fuel J Thedetaileddescriptionofthe$onsplusthedetailedbasesfor storage racks'and'related operat -

the acceptability of the changes and related operations are  !

. Y provided in Attachment E " Spent Fuel Pool Reracking, San onofrw l

' Nuclear. Generating Station, February 1989." '!

j lr i i

t x  :

J l

1 3

f

.I

'I

!t

-i

-f l

l l,

' t 4

1 3

TMFWOO65 9/89 2A Revision 4

g J

,(, + - ,-,,,-.-.-9y

• ge-= % ew----,r,.-,.,.#,- , . . ,,,..-w-,,1--,.. -,e- r-ww . - . . - . - - - - - _ _ - _ - _ - - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

, J( t

)

i 1

l

1) Spent Fuel Assembly Drop The probability of a spent fuel assembly drop during  :

normal movement of spent fuel is not affected by the- I

-spent fuel pool raracking project because the methods- .

and equipment used to move spent fuel are not changed. The probability of a fuel handling accident occurring during construction is not significantly j

,- higher than during normal fuel handling operations because even though a significant number of fuel handling operations will be conducted during the construction, the same equipment and procedures will l be used. Because the fuel enrichments and burnups of .

the fuel assemblies stored in the spent fuel pool or l the cask pool at the time of construction will be  !

less than or equal to those assumed in the analysis  !

in the UFSAR, and the stored fuel will be decayed at least 75 days prior.to being moved (as compared to 7 4 .!'

days assumed in the UFSAR), the consequences of a fuel handling accident are enveloped by the fuel handling accident discussed in the UFSAR which assumes failure of 60 fuel pins. In addition the i criticality calculations show that with 2000 ppm L Boron in the spent fuel pool water (the minimum +

L condition is 2350 ppm), no credible deformation of a '

L rack caused by a fuel drop accident will result in fuel criticality. The offsite doses which result ,

from this scenario are wall within the limits imposed L by 10CFR100. Therefore, the consequences of a fuel >

L handling accident will not be increased by the p proposed modification. ,

! 2) Loss of Spent Fuel pool Cooling

^

1 l Loss of spent fuel pool cooling flow has been l-postulated in Subsection 9.1.3 of the UFSAR. The probability of this type of accident occurring is not ,

affected by the installation of high-density spent  :

fuel racks because of existing spent fuel pool cooling system pumps and heat exchangers will be used without modification. However, the consequences will be increased due to increased number of spent fuel l~ elements stored. Spent fuel cask pool will also be used during construction for temporary storage of I spent fuel assemblies. Loss of cooling flow to the I

spent fuel cask pool has not been specifically analyzed because this accident scenario is enveloped i by the spent fuel pool boiling case. An analysis of I a pool boiling accident has been performed using the l highest expected fuel enrichments and burnups. This anal sis shows that without taking the Fuel Handling Buil ing charcoal and HEPA filters into account, the offsite doses will remain well within the limits L

l TMFWOO65 l 9/89 4 Revision 4 0

1, .

cover plate onto the spent fuel assemblies in the cask pool is not a credible event. Further, the cask pool cover will be designed to allow temporary s storage of construction tools and equipment and will i withstand all possible construction lead drops.

9) Temporary Construction Crane If practical, the. temporary crane will be installed ,

as a single piece assembly. The installation will be  :

done over the cask pool area with spent fuel and cask pool cover in place. If temporary crane installation as a single piece assembly is not. feasible, the assembly of the temporary crane in the fuel buildings'  ;

will be achieved such that no piece of the temporary l crane will be carried over unprotected spent fuel. '

The cask pool cover will be designed for the potential tempora q crane installation load. drops.

Administrative controls will be used to ensure that l' the temporary gantry crane and the cask crane are not operated over the cask pool cover at the same time  ;

.except during erection or disassembly of the temporary gantry crane. These administrative >

controls will preclude impact between these two cranes.  :

L 10) Improperly Stored Fuel A Technical Specification is proposed which will

, define the criteria for fuel assemblies that will be L . stored in Region ~I and Region'II storage racks.

Compliance with this proposed Technical Specification 5.6.2 will ensure that the criticality criterion'of Kegg less than 0.95 is maintained. The administrative a controls'for placement of spent fuel assemblies will be revised-to ensure compliance with this proposed Technical Specification 5.6.2.

A new Technical Specification 3/4.9.13 is proposed to re@ ire a minimum boron concentration of 1850 ppa.

4 This boron concentration will maintain a kogg of less than 0.95 for any misloading.

Therefore, it is concluded that the replacement of the existing spent fuel racks with high-density storage racks will not significantly increase the probability or the consequences of any accident previously evaluated.

B. Does the proposed modification create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident than any evaluated previously?

No. l l

The proposed change does not create a new or ]

different type of accident because the purpose and function of the spent fuel racks are not being i

l TMFWOO65 9/89 7 Revision 4 l E

L l u . _ . _ _ _ , , , . . . - _ _ _ . _ . _ . - _ . - . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

. c

i i

modified. The racks will not be used for any other purpose than that for which they were designed.  !

Nrthermore, . heavy load drops are also accidents that  !

. have been previously analyzed for the spent fuel pool 1 ares. They are discussed in response to A above.  !

C. Does the p oposed modification involve a significant reductionInamarginofsafety?  ;

No. ,

The NRC Staff Safety Evaluation review process has 4 established that the issue of margin of safety, when 1 applied to a raracking modification, should address ,

the following areas:  ;

l a 1.- Nuclear criticality considerations.

1  !

2. Thermal-hydraulic considerations.

l

3. Mechanical, material, and structural  ;

considerations.

1) Nuclear criticality Considerations )

-l The established acceptance criterion for criticality is that the effective neutron multiplication factor 1 (Kegf) in' spent fuel pools shall be less:than or :l' equal to 0.95 including all uncertainties and under.

all conditions. This margin of safety has been adhered to in the criticality analysis for.the new racks.

The criticality analysis assumes zero boron

. concentration (for normal conditions) in.the fuel l' pool water and worst-case fuel enrichments and burnups. Boration at 1800 ppm is assumed for the l4  ;

accident analyses. The new spent fuel rack >

'I configuration meets the acceptance criterion for l criticality in the spent fuel pool such that Kegg is  !

always less than 0.950 including uncertainties at a I 95%/95% probability / confidence level. The original I I

normal condition critf,cality analysis for SONGS 2 & 3 resulted in a. neutron multiplication factor of I 0.946. The calculated Keft has increased from 0.946 j to 0.949. This slight reduction in margin to .I griticality is within required limits. Therefore, the proposed modification will not involve a significant reduction in a margin of safety for j nuclear criticality. j l

1

)

TMFWOO65 9/89 8 Revision 4

,wy- e er .--,e, -,w . . - , , . m ..,..m.. - - . . . , . . . . . . .

e, '

3' i

i

~

2) Thermal-Hydraulic Considerations j similar'to the criticality analysis the spent fuel l pool decay heat load calculation ass,umes worst-case 1 fuel' loading enrichment, and burnup. The ,

calculation u,sss the same methodology as that used j for the original decay heat analysis.- SRP 9.1.3.

i i

P

.r .

i

)

l.

I

\

s t

-t l-l l F 1.

4 i

1 ,

.[

TMFWOO65 9/89 8A Revision 4 i f

.\'-

,y -+-t, , , , , ~ , , , er,---,m,--,,-e-.,..- -nev.,