|
---|
Category:INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL MEMORANDUM
MONTHYEARML20199D8791997-11-14014 November 1997 Responds to 961002 Memo to M Weber Re Incorrect Info Provided by Walter Reed Army Medical Facility Related to Where Formally Licensed Homogenous Reactor L-54 Located When Operational ML20199D9311996-10-0202 October 1996 Discusses Status of Terminated non-power Reactor Site Based on Results of Orau Review.Radiation Field Survey of Former Facility & Radiation Field & Contamination Survey of Upper Walls May Be Warranted ML20155C4621988-09-26026 September 1988 Notification of 880930 Meeting W/B&W to Discuss Implementation of New Amends Covering Decommissioning ML20210B4591986-09-11011 September 1986 Discusses Items of Interest,Including 860904 Meeting W/ Aerospace Corp,860909 Meeting W/B&W,E Markey 860918 Hearing Re NFS in Erwin,Tn & Status of Kerr Mcgee/Sequoyah Fuels Hearings ML20210S0281986-05-15015 May 1986 Submits Items of Interest.Meeting Held on 860501 W/B&W to Discuss Site Characterization Studies,Decommissioning Status & License Renewal Activities & Schedules ML20137W6661985-11-27027 November 1985 Submits Items of Interest.On 851127,License SNM-1895 Issued for Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Authorizing Receipt,Possession, Insp & Storage of U,Enriched in U-235,contained Infuel Assemblies ML20141G8321978-05-26026 May 1978 Advises That Fees Normally Charged for Review & Approval of Matls Control & Accounting Programs Being Waived Due to 2-yr Licensing Delay ML20141G8861978-01-16016 January 1978 Forwards First Drafts of Synthesis Repts for B&W/Apollo- Leechburg Sites & Nfs/Erwin Site.Comments & Corrections Requested by 780119.Redrafts of Repts Responsive to Comments Will Be Distributed by 780123 ML20141G8891978-01-0505 January 1978 Discusses Issues for Exxon Fuel Lab,Exxon Reprocessing, NFS-Erwin & B&W Apollo & Leechburg Sites ML20141G4651977-08-0404 August 1977 Returns Final Rept on NRC Task Force Review of Highly Enriched U Operations at B&W,Nuclear Matls Div,Apollo & Leechburg,Pa Sites,Per 770802 Request ML20141C8531976-08-17017 August 1976 Informs That Facilities Operational Status Unchanged. Reinventory of Leechburg Facility Conducted on 760816 & Reconciliation Against Book Inventory in Progress.Apollo Facility Preparing for 760818 Reinventory ML20141C8431974-08-23023 August 1974 Discusses 740821 Telcon W/Lf Ingram Re Questions from Novick on Status of Investigation of Bomb Threats & Valve Problems.Novick Was Referred to Util for Info on Investigation ML20205H6931969-06-0303 June 1969 Notification That Numec 690522 Application for License SNM-145 Requires No Action by Nmss.Div of Matls Licensing May Take Appropriate Action Independently ML20151P3731967-01-23023 January 1967 Comments on Numec Opposition to AEC 661207 & 16 Review & Comments Re Safety Analysis for PWR Area.Numec Should Correctly Consider H/X-density Correspondence ML20151P3761966-12-21021 December 1966 Recommends All Affected Licensees Be Informed That Figures 13,14,15 & 16 of TID-7016 Appear Nonconservative Based on Recent Work by Hk Clark.Specified TID-7016 Criteria Exceeds Min Criteria Values in Some Cases ML20151L3991966-08-12012 August 1966 Forwards Compliance Investigation Rept on 660713-14 Re Apollo,Pa Resident Allegation Concerning Effluent from Facility 1997-11-14
[Table view] Category:MEMORANDUMS-CORRESPONDENCE
MONTHYEARML20199D8791997-11-14014 November 1997 Responds to 961002 Memo to M Weber Re Incorrect Info Provided by Walter Reed Army Medical Facility Related to Where Formally Licensed Homogenous Reactor L-54 Located When Operational ML20199D9311996-10-0202 October 1996 Discusses Status of Terminated non-power Reactor Site Based on Results of Orau Review.Radiation Field Survey of Former Facility & Radiation Field & Contamination Survey of Upper Walls May Be Warranted ML20155C4621988-09-26026 September 1988 Notification of 880930 Meeting W/B&W to Discuss Implementation of New Amends Covering Decommissioning ML20210B4591986-09-11011 September 1986 Discusses Items of Interest,Including 860904 Meeting W/ Aerospace Corp,860909 Meeting W/B&W,E Markey 860918 Hearing Re NFS in Erwin,Tn & Status of Kerr Mcgee/Sequoyah Fuels Hearings ML20210S0281986-05-15015 May 1986 Submits Items of Interest.Meeting Held on 860501 W/B&W to Discuss Site Characterization Studies,Decommissioning Status & License Renewal Activities & Schedules ML20137W6661985-11-27027 November 1985 Submits Items of Interest.On 851127,License SNM-1895 Issued for Nine Mile Point Unit 2 Authorizing Receipt,Possession, Insp & Storage of U,Enriched in U-235,contained Infuel Assemblies ML20141G8321978-05-26026 May 1978 Advises That Fees Normally Charged for Review & Approval of Matls Control & Accounting Programs Being Waived Due to 2-yr Licensing Delay ML20141G8861978-01-16016 January 1978 Forwards First Drafts of Synthesis Repts for B&W/Apollo- Leechburg Sites & Nfs/Erwin Site.Comments & Corrections Requested by 780119.Redrafts of Repts Responsive to Comments Will Be Distributed by 780123 ML20141G8891978-01-0505 January 1978 Discusses Issues for Exxon Fuel Lab,Exxon Reprocessing, NFS-Erwin & B&W Apollo & Leechburg Sites ML20141G4651977-08-0404 August 1977 Returns Final Rept on NRC Task Force Review of Highly Enriched U Operations at B&W,Nuclear Matls Div,Apollo & Leechburg,Pa Sites,Per 770802 Request ML20141C8531976-08-17017 August 1976 Informs That Facilities Operational Status Unchanged. Reinventory of Leechburg Facility Conducted on 760816 & Reconciliation Against Book Inventory in Progress.Apollo Facility Preparing for 760818 Reinventory ML20141C8431974-08-23023 August 1974 Discusses 740821 Telcon W/Lf Ingram Re Questions from Novick on Status of Investigation of Bomb Threats & Valve Problems.Novick Was Referred to Util for Info on Investigation ML20205H6931969-06-0303 June 1969 Notification That Numec 690522 Application for License SNM-145 Requires No Action by Nmss.Div of Matls Licensing May Take Appropriate Action Independently ML20151P3731967-01-23023 January 1967 Comments on Numec Opposition to AEC 661207 & 16 Review & Comments Re Safety Analysis for PWR Area.Numec Should Correctly Consider H/X-density Correspondence ML20151P3761966-12-21021 December 1966 Recommends All Affected Licensees Be Informed That Figures 13,14,15 & 16 of TID-7016 Appear Nonconservative Based on Recent Work by Hk Clark.Specified TID-7016 Criteria Exceeds Min Criteria Values in Some Cases ML20151L3991966-08-12012 August 1966 Forwards Compliance Investigation Rept on 660713-14 Re Apollo,Pa Resident Allegation Concerning Effluent from Facility 1997-11-14
[Table view] |
Text
.- _ __ - _______ .___ ___________
.g. n ,.- . . .
f, /t Sc l
['
UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT Memorandum l To : Donald A. Nussbaumor, Chief, Source and DATE: January 23, 1967 Special Nuclear llatorials Branch, D?!L COM : Charles D. Luke, Chief Criticality Branch, Df!L '
stcjact: NUCLEAR flATERIALS AND EQUIPl!ENT CORPORATION (NIf!EC),
PWR LETTER, JANUARY 6, 1967, DOCKET No.70-135
~
i i
REFERENCE:
(1) Ltr, DAN to l'lf!EC, 12/16/66 (2) lleno, CDL to DAN,12/7/66 l (3) NIA!EC Application, 1/4/67 [
L Dt!L:CB:GIB Nlt!EC disagrees with our review and connonts (Ref. I and 2) concerning the safoty analysis for the PWit area. No offer the following comments: {
a
(
- 1. In response to our first comment, tRf tEC states that the fraction critical " extrapolation to 0.6 as proposed in our application... ;
is indeed reasonabic and conservativo. Such analysis will bo pro- ;
sented at a later dato to justify use of largor individual units...." i NtftEC contradicts this in the second paragraph by stating: "Uo l agroo with you that an individual unit having a fraction critical ;
value of 0.6 when baro could be critical if fully reficcted."
NittEC indicates full reflection is credible. We cannot agroo, !
thereforo, that the critorion '
of 0.6 is indood reasonablo and ;
conservativo. i NiflEC states the intent is to use only the units in Table XII-1 and that each unit will meet the critoria of TID-7016, Rev.1. l Wo havo no objection to the critoria in TID-7016, Rev. 1. Wo do j not agroo that the Tablo XII-1 units moet the critoria because L Ntf!EC has not dononstrated il/X donsity correspondence. l
- 2. Concerning our second comment, Ntt!EC statos: "This statement by j you shows lack of undorstanding of the PWR process which is described -
on page XII-1 of the application wheroin it is stated that the ll/X '
U-235 density rotationship applies to ' Fully enriched coramic grado 002 powdor...blonded with customer speciflod ceramic grado powders, ;
and prossed...into thin warors.' 11ocause of the stated prosence of !
diluonts in the prossed wafors, the nornal void volumo associnted i with lower density U-235 cannot bo tal.on up by water and hence tho :
density ll/X reintionship specified in the abscissa of Figuro 1 of i TID 7016, Rev. 1, for salts and slurrios, does apply."
29M 81%>
hy U.S. Satings %Is Regularly on liv Pa) roll Satings Plan ,
I
o o Donald A. Nussbaumor January 23, 1967 ,
The diluent is not present in all operations for Pl!R wafer production, e.g., the U0 3 as received and initially handled is not diluted. Even where diluent is present, the minimum diluent volumo fraction is not stated.
An examplo may best illustrate our disagreement concerning the ,
il/X-density correspondence.
3
- 1. NtR1EC stated density: fl2.87gU/cm.
- 2. For UO,-H 2 O at the stated density, il/U = 6.2 (
Reference:
L. C. Amos,lill-64421).
l
- 3. Ilocause the uranium is fully enriched, II/U = II/U-235.
- 4. From Figuro 1, TID-7016, Rev. 1, for an ll/U-235 ratio of 6.2, the corresponding U-235 density (Po) is about 1.7 g U-235/cm3
- 5. The mass 11 nits of TID-7016, Rev.1, should be reduced by the factor (fo/P)N, whero N = 1.5 (
Reference:
Fig. 7, TID-7028.)
- 3. Ntt!EC contends that the homogenization process is conservativo in datormining the fraction critical of the storage array. NtR!EC con-l tends that array reactivity increases with additional units, but that fraction critical does not necessarily increase. ife agree with NittEC that reactivity of the array increases with the addition of units. Wo disagroo with NtR!EC concerning the fraction critical statement. Considor, for examplo, a bare critical array of N units.
Each unit has a fraction critical value of 1/N. As each unit is added to the array, the fraction critical increases linearly by 1/N.
The reactivity also increases, but not necessarily in a linear nanner.
i Nlf tEC has erred in changing the basis for the fraction critical calculation. For the single unit, the cell voluno is considered to be the unit volumo. As cach unit is added to tho array, the space betwcon units is added to the coll volumo. NttlEC then homo-genized the several units and spaces in arriving at a fractional critical loss than that of a single unit. ,
The NIEtEC method does not ensuro safety. For examplo, two critical units could be so spaced that a shapo factor greater than 2 is cat-culated. !!athematically dividing the two critical masses by tho l
l i
O O l
Donald A. Nussbaumer January 23, 1967 shape factor results in a subcritical array. However, floa a physical standpoint, the two critical units represent a super-critical array. We realize NtfHIC does not have critical units.
We are demonstrating only that the homogenizing process is not conservative.
In su.amacy, IMHIC should:
- 1. Correctly consider the ll/X-density correspondence. NtIU!C has stated that only the safe units froa TID-7016, llev.1, will be used. The errors identified in our Connents 1 and 2 would be non-existent if NtI!!!C would correctly apply the ll/X-density criterion. In the latest subnission, !MtEC has stated that the 0.6 fraction critical criterion will not be used.
- 2. Correctly calculate the fraction critical for the internediate storage array.
NtInic has submitted (Ref. 3) a revised panc XII-19 to cliainate a clerical error. This revision does not affect our comments in Ref. 2 or in this menorandum.
.