Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
UCS Concerns about Harris Spent Fuel Pool Plans <br />Creation of s New or Different Kind of Accident <br />In the top paragraph on page 6 of Enclosure 2 to Serial: HNP-98-188, "lOCFR50.92 Evaluation <br />Significant Hazards Consideration," CP&L stated: <br />Due to the proposed activity, an accidental drop of a rack module during construction <br />activity in the pool was considered as the only event which might represent a new or <br />different kind of accident. <br />On page 5-16 of Enclosure 7 to Serial: HNP-98-188, "Licensing Report for Expanding Storage <br />Capacity in Harris Spent Fuel Pools `C' and `D' (Non-Proprietary Version)," Holtec reported that <br />the bounding (maximum) decay heat load input from stored fuel in Spent Fuel Pools C & D is <br />15.63 Million Btu/hr. <br />On page 2 of Enclosure 9 to Serial: HNP-98-188, "Unreviewed Safety Question Analysis," <br />CP&L stated: <br />The new thermal-hydraulic analysis was performed to evaluate to 1.0 Mbtu/hr heat load <br />that would be added to Spent Fuei Pools `C' and `D' as a result of this activity. <br />CP&L proposes to administratively control, via a new requirement in the Technical <br />Specifications, the heat load in Pools C and D to 1.0 Mbtu/hr, or less than 6.4 percent of the <br />maximum heat load that Holtec determined may reside in them. <br />Item (f) on page 9.1.3-1 of the Harris FSAR (Section 9.1.3.1, Design Basis for the Fuel Pool <br />Cooling and Cleanup System, Amend. No. 48), stated: <br />Administrative controls are placed in the minimum cooling time before transfer of spent <br />fuel to the pools to limit the fuel pool temperature to less than or equal to 137°F. <br />Although similar to the administrative controls being proposed by CP&L on the heat load in <br />Pools C and D, this FSAR condition will not directly apply. If it did, CP&L would not have had <br />to propose the heat load limit be added to the Technical Specifications: <br />The proposed activity creates the potential for a fuel unloading error that results in a combined <br />heat load in Pools C and D greater than 1.0 Mbtu/hr. For example, a cask containing spent fuel <br />shipped from Brunswick or Robinson could be unloaded and increase the total heat load in the <br />pools to greater than 1.0 Mbtu/hr. If such an error were to occur, than the containment response <br />during a postulated accident may be degraded as detailed in Enclosure 9. <br />Therefore, CP&L failed to address the potential creation of a new or different accident through <br />the proposed activity. <br />04/05/99 Page 3 <br />