Information Notice 2014-09, Spent Fuel Storage or Transportation System Mis-loading

From kanterella
(Redirected from Information Notice 2014-09)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Spent Fuel Storage or Transportation System Mis-loading
ML14121A469
Person / Time
Issue date: 06/20/2014
From: Camper L, Michael Cheok, Kokajko L, Mark Lombard
NRC/FSME/DWMEP, NRC/NMSS/SFST, Division of Construction Inspection and Operational Programs, Division of Policy and Rulemaking
To:
M Banic, NRR/ DPR, 301-415-2771
References
TAC ME6799 IN-14-009
Download: ML14121A469 (6)


ML14121A469 UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION

OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY AND SAFEGUARDS

OFFICE OF NEW REACTORS

OFFICE OF FEDERAL AND STATE MATERIALS

AND ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

WASHINGTON, DC 20555-0001

June 20, 2014

NRC INFORMATION NOTICE 2014-09:

SPENT FUEL STORAGE OR TRANSPORTATION

SYSTEM MISLOADING

ADDRESSEES

All holders of an operating license or construction permit for a nuclear power reactor under

Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) Part 50, Domestic Licensing of

Production and Utilization Facilities, including those that have permanently ceased operations

and have spent fuel stored in spent fuel pools (SFPs).

All holders of or applicants for a combined license issued under 10 CFR Part 52, Licenses, Certifications, and Approvals for Nuclear Power Plants.

All holders of or applicants for a certificate of compliance (CoC) for a spent fuel transportation

package design under 10 CFR Part 71, Packaging and Transportation of Radioactive Material.

All holders of or applicants for a general or site-specific license for storage of spent fuel, or for a

spent fuel storage cask CoC under 10 CFR Part 72, Licensing Requirements for the

Independent Storage of Spent Nuclear Fuel, High-Level Radioactive Waste, and

Reactor-Related Greater Than Class C Waste.

PURPOSE

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) is issuing this information notice (IN) to notify

addressees of SFP and spent fuel dry storage cask misloading events. The NRC expects the

recipients to review the information within this IN for applicability to their facilities or cask

designs and consider actions, as appropriate, for their facility or cask design. However, suggestions contained in this IN are not NRC requirements; therefore, no specific action or

written response is required.

DESCRIPTION OF CIRCUMSTANCES

This section describes SFP and spent fuel dry storage cask misloading events. These events

apply to Part 50 and Part 72 licensees. However, because similar operating procedures and

personnel may be used to load transportation casks, the possibility of similar misloads should

also be considered for Part 71 users. Part 50 licensees

Indian Point Unit 2

The Indian Point Unit 2 technical specifications (TS) require fresh fuel in one area of the SFP to

be stored with one face of the fuel bundle facing adjacent empty storage cells. On

February 17, 2012, the licensee discovered that 11 fresh fuel assemblies that had been moved

into that area between January 23 and 24, 2012, were stored in a manner inconsistent with the

TS in that those 11 fresh fuel assemblies were stored with at least one face adjacent to a

depleted fuel assembly. This error stemmed from incorrect Reactor Engineering move sheets

issued that month. The verifier and preparer did not review the TS thoroughly, thus resulting in

poor self and peer checking and reviewing. The licensee put corrective actions into place to

correct the misload with a new Fuel Assembly Transfer Form (FATF) and other performance

actions. The licensee developed training to reinforce TS compliance and independent

verification and self checking.

Oconee Units 1 and 2

On June 10, 2009, the licensee found that there had been three prior instances of spent fuel

assemblies being incorrectly stored within the SFP, thus violating requirements listed in the TS.

These three instances occurred in the shared SFP for Units 1 and 2 during refueling outages.

The three misloads existed for approximately 1 week to 1 month before the licensee corrected

the issue. According to the TS, once a licensee finds a misload, it must be corrected

immediately. Duke Energy, the licensee, concluded that these instances were not corrected in

a proper timeframe relative to the required completion time or in a timely manner. As corrective

actions, the licensee revised applicable fuel handling procedures to ensure future storage

configuration changes are valid before fuel handling.

Sequoyah Units 1 and 2

The licensee improperly stored four spent fuel assemblies in the SFP in violation of Sequoyah

TS for criticality control requirements during an October 2009 SFP reconfiguration campaign, which was done to maintain conformance with the SFP decay heat dispersion requirements.

The licensee incorrectly placed these four spent fuel assemblies because the FATFs did not

properly incorporate the criticality requirements found in the TS. Once this nonconformance

was discovered, the licensee took corrective actions to relocate the four misplaced spent fuel

assemblies to comply with the TS. The root cause of this misplacement was insufficient

procedural guidance involved in designing the SFP configuration and creating the FATFs.

South Texas Unit 2

On October 16, 2008, while planning fuel movements for South Texas Unit 2 SFP, the licensee

found a Category 11 fuel assembly in a location where the TS only allowed Category 9 fuel.

The licensee removed the Category 11 fuel assembly and placed it in a location of the SFP with

no adjacent fuel assemblies. This misplacement was determined to stem from an error

mapping the SFP storage configuration. In turn, this mapping was used for creating fuel transfer forms (FTF). Both the FTF preparer and verifier did not perform proper checking and

review. This led to the moving of a Category 11 assembly adjacent to Category 9 assemblies, which violate the TS.

Zion Units 1 and 2

On July 13, 2011, the licensee improperly stored the fuel assembly in the spent fuel pool for

Zion Units 1 and 2, where a two-region configuration had been installed. While reviewing

records during a site training class, the licensee determined that a fuel rod storage canister

(FRSC) was incorrectly stored in Region 2 of the SFP. The licensee determined that 9 of the

13 fuel rods contained in the FRSC did not satisfy the requirements to allow Region 2 rack

storage. This FRSC storage was considered a violation of permanently defueled TS, and the

licensee initiated immediate relocation to SFP Region 1.

Part 72 licensees

Palisades

The licensee determined in November 2000 that 11 spent fuel assemblies had been incorrectly

placed into five Ventilated Storage Casks (VSC-24) at the Palisades Plant during the June 1999 to August 1999 spent fuel loading campaign. The CoC required the assemblies to undergo 5 years of cooling following their discharge from the reactor core before being loaded in the cask.

However, the assemblies in question had cooled for just over 4 years. The licensee determined

that the event was caused by an error in recording the core discharge dates for these

assemblies. As part of the corrective actions, the licensee modified the fuel selection process to

include a specific procedure for fuel selection. In addition, the licensee upgraded the reactor

engineering fuel management file to include fuel cycle date information.

Grand Gulf

On June 18, 2008, during a data update of the Cask Loading Database, the licensee discovered

that four HI-STORM 100 model casks had been incorrectly loaded with fuel bundles that

exceeded limits specified in the CoC. The licensee found that, due to errors in the Cask

Loading Database, 8 assemblies exceeded the individual assembly decay heat or exposure

limits allowed in the CoC. The database contained incorrect bundle exposures for the affected

assemblies. During the time in which the licensee was identifying these errors, the decay heat

loads for all of the assemblies in question had been verified to be within the CoC limits. As a

result of this event, the licensee developed a standard procedure for developing the necessary

databases and calculations for selecting and analyzing spent fuel cask loads and for addressing

the scope and method for performing the independent verification. North Anna and Surry

In March 2011, during a review of historical NUHOMS dry storage canister (DSC) loading

certification documents for North Anna and Surry, the licensee discovered that a number of

DSCs were incorrectly loaded. The cask design included asymmetrical decay heat limits that

were not adequately described in the written cask loading procedures, leading to repeated

errors in the loading process. These errors resulted in 17 assemblies exceeding the maximum

decay heat limits for their respective canister locations. The licensees corrective actions

involved revising procedures to include an explanation of the asymmetrical decay heat limits.

BACKGROUND

Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants, Criterion 62, Prevention of Criticality in Fuel Storage and Handling, requires Criticality in the fuel storage

and handling system shall be prevented by physical systems or processes, preferably by use of

geometrically safe configurations. Additionally, regulations in 10 CFR 50.68, Criticality

Accident Requirements, contain criteria that a licensee must meet to ensure that the pool is

maintained subcritical at all times.

For dry cask storage, 10 CFR 72.124(a) requires that:

Spent fuel handling, packaging, transfer, and storage systems must be designed

to be maintained subcritical and to ensure that, before a nuclear criticality

accident is possible, at least two unlikely, independent, and concurrent or

sequential changes have occurred in the conditions essential to nuclear criticality

safety. The design of handling, packaging, transfer, and storage systems must

include margins of safety for the nuclear criticality parameters that are

commensurate with the uncertainties in the data and methods used in

calculations and demonstrate safety for the handling, packaging, transfer and

storage conditions and in the nature of the immediate environment under

accident conditions.

DISCUSSION

Both the SFP licenses and the spent fuel dry storage cask CoCs contain storage requirements

for spent and fresh nuclear fuel. Those requirements are based on NRC reviewed and

approved analyses that, if adhered to, will provide reasonable assurance of compliance with the

applicable storage regulations. Failure to adhere to those requirements places the fuel storage

system in an unanalyzed condition and could lead to a potential safety concern.

The above events show that misloading of fuel assemblies into SFPs and spent fuel dry storage

casks can occur as a result of inadequate procedures or training. SFP and spent fuel dry

storage cask loading requirements can be quite complex, often with several different sets of

criteria that must be met simultaneously.

CONTACT

This IN requires no specific action or written response. Please direct any questions about this

matter to the technical contacts listed below or the appropriate NRC project manager.

/RA/

/RA/

Michael C. Cheok, Director

Lawrence E. Kokajko, Director

Division of Construction Inspection

Division of Policy and Rulemaking

and Operational Program

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Office of New Reactors

/RA by Andrew Persinko for/

/RA by Anthony H. Hsia for/

Larry W. Camper, Director

Mark Lombard, Director

Division of Waste Management

Division of Spent Fuel Storage

and Environmental Protection

and Transportation

Office of Federal and State Materials

Office of Nuclear Material Safety

and Environmental Management Programs

and Safeguards

Technical Contacts: Kent A. Wood, NRR/DSS

301-415-4120

Email: kent.wood@nrc.gov

Note: NRC generic communications may be found on the NRC public Web site, http://www.nrc.gov, under Electronic Reading Room/Document Collections.

ML14121A469

TAC ME6799 *concurred via email

OFFICE

NRR:DSS/SRXB/SFT

NRR:DSS/SRXB/SFT

TECH EDITOR*

NRR:DSS/SRXB*

NRR/DSS*

NAME

DCunanan

KWood

JDougherty

CJackson

TMcGinty

DATE

5/22/2014

5/22/2014

4/29/2014

5/31/2014

5/30/2014 OFFICE

NMSS/DSFST/CSDAB*

NRR/DPR/PGCB*

NRR/DPR/PGCB

NRR/DPR/PGCB

NRO/DCIP

NAME

MRahimi

CHawes

MBanic

SStuchell

MCheok

DATE

5/28/2014

6/3/2014

6/3/14

6/5/2014

6/5/2014 OFFICE

FSME/DWMEP

NMSS/DSFST

NRR/DPR

NRR/DPR

NAME

LCamper (APersinko for)

MLombard (AHsia for)

SBahadur

LKokajko

DATE

6/13/2014

6/10/2014

6/17/2014

6/20/2014