ML18043B120
| ML18043B120 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1979 |
| From: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bixel D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910260317 | |
| Download: ML18043B120 (8) | |
Text
-
.*;.* u1i\\'1*\\llc1\\1 ll~\\\\\\.t\\I;~-~-&"
'.. _1'1;\\)1l_l;,1. 1q tl~ 11 V _ -- -
Docket No. 50-255
, "i. '}
v
. DIST~! BU HON
...E?g9Gk t :::>
,.NRC PDR
. Lota l PDR
- OCT 15,1979 ORB #2 Reading NRR Read.i ng D_Eisenhut RHVollmer OELD Mr. David Bixel Nuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power Company
. 212 West Michig*an Avenue Jackson, Michigan 492'01
Dear ~r. Bixel:
or&E (3)
DLZiemann
. RDSilver HSmith
--GKniqhton*
JRBuc hanan TERA ACRS* (.16).
DCrutChf i el d We are continuing our'review of your January 3, 1979 sutrnittal related to steam ge~erator replacement.. for* the Palisades Plant.. and have found that the add'itiona 1 information described in the enclosure to this letter is 'needed.'
Please inform us of your* planned. date of response to this letter. *
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information
- cc w/ent:losure:
See next. page
.sincere l,y' OrigtnaJ signed by
., Dennis L. Uem.o.n~
Dennis L. Zienann, Chief Operating* Reactors Branch *#2
. Division. of Operating Reactors
/ 'r:. *
- OP'P'ICS..
UU RNAIH"-
RD. *... ~ ~~*; :~*h..
"[)i_'ii'~~*~*~*~*........ *~.'."...... *;\\ '.~..... :.. :. : '. :...... ~.................... :....... :................ ~.. ~*... :.: *:.. *:
-- :Toli"Ltl9""". T6i\\s Fi~*******
~... :............. :.... _........ :....._*:*.. ~:........................................................ _
DATBI>
-~.mlK w ~74-\\ ~
aa.il u.s. OOVBANllllNT. PRINTING OP'f'ICI!: 1171 -... - 711
. 7 91 Q 2 6 :;.1 7 -'
""" R*ra"'-
c..,.
~>.
/¥0~
~
~
0
~
- ~
0
~
~
...,+.
o'
<#i UNITED ST A TES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20l5IS5.
October 15, 1979 Docket No. 50-255 Mr. David Bixel Nuclear Licensing Administrator Conswners Power CCJ11pany 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. Bixel:
- We are continuing our review of your January 3, 1979 sutmittal related to steam generator replacsnent for the Palisades Plant and hav~ found that the additional infonnation described in the enclosure to this letter is needed.
Please infonn us of your planned date of response to this letter.
Enclosure:
Request' for Additional Infonnation cc w/enclosure:
See next page Sincerely, r.;n. I.]::*~
f:;J~""'~
Dennis L. Zisnann, ief
- Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Operating Reactors
Mr. David Bixel cc w/enclosure:
M. I. Miller, Esquire Isham, Lineal n & Beale Suite 4200
- One First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60670 Mr. Paul A. Perry, Se~retary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201
- Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Myron M. Cherry, Esquire Suite 4501 One IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60611 Ms~ Ma~y P. Sinclair G~eat Lakes Energy Alliance 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Charles Bechhoefer, Esq., Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. s. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. c. 20555 Or. George C. Anderson Department of Oceanography University of Washington Seattle, Washington 9819~
Dr *. M. Stanley Livingston 1005 Calle Largo Santa fe, New Mexico 87501
- Kalamazoo Public Library 315 South Rose Street
- Kalamazoo, ~ichigan
- 49006 *
- October 15, 1979
PALISADES REVIEW OF STEAM GENERATOR REPAIR REPORT REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
- l.
Section 4.1'. 4 describes the various types of accidents which might occur while handling the* steam generators..
However, estimates of the dose conse-quences of these accidents are not presented.* Estimate the dose. consequences of 1) accidents which might rupture the old steam generators such as a steam generator drop accident, 2) accidents which might affect safety related equip-ment such as a crane drop on the diesel. generat.or room or a dropped steam generator rolling into buildings housing safety related* equipment, and 3) accidents.. which might cause the-release of radioactivity such as a crane drop onto a storage tank.
Explain the assumptions and parameters used in these
.. estimates.
- 2.
Section 4.3.6.3 identifies three potential sources of radioactive liquid wastes.
Is the secondary c;oolant a potential source of releases of radio-active liquids?
Describe the normal liquid radwaste processing scheme.
What is the estimated quantity and radioactivity of each of thes.e wastes?
Explain l) what portions of the releases are due to nonnal *refueling and
. work outage and 2) what.portions are added by the steam generator repair effort~.* Des_cri be the criteria which wi 11 be.used to detenni ne if the wastes will be processed thru {l) filters, (2) evaporators and/or (3) de-mineralizers prior to release to the environment.
For each of the three potential sources of radioactive liquid, evaluate their environmental im-pact.
The evaluation should include estimates of the doses individuals in the public and the population within SO miles might receive.
Identify the equipment which will be available to process the wastes.
E~aluate the po~sibility of the lo~al decontamination sblution(s) having deleterious ef-fect(s) on _the equipment employed to process it.
Are the concentrations in
- Table 6.2-3 typical of refueling/major work outages?
Include Fe-33 in your release estimates, and conmit to sampling for Fe-55 and Ni-63 in liquid ef-fluents during the repair program.
During the Surry repair program, Fe-55 and Nt-63 were.found in effluent analyses.
- 3.
Your analysis and calculation of the inventory of-activated corrosion products in a steam generator presented in Table 4.4-1 is not clear.
The estimate of 3.5 x 105 inches of steam generator tube appears to be too low (from the FSAR, 8519 tubes times an average tub.e length of
- roughly 650 inches equals S.5 x 106 inches of tube). Also, it is not clear what is meant by tubes per tube sheet, and the ratio of Co-58 to Co-60 is much higher than that ratio found at Turkey Point.
- Provide information to clarify these items.*
- 4.
- Describe any effects which your modifications to the steam generator, blow-down drain, and sample systans may have on doses,associated with the various accident analyses presented in yo'ur FSAR.
- 5.
Provide estimates of the Fe-55, Ni-63 and t~ansuranic content of the "old"
The estimates should be based on sample analyses similar to those presented in Table 4.4-1.
- 6.
Your analysis of gaseous releases from cutting reactor coolant piping presented in Table 6.2-1 does not appear to be correct.
The equation presented does not yield the answer given and. the area of cut values of 0.5 square inches is too low.
Estimate the releases from cutting the blowdown,
- .feedwater, and main steam piping using similar analyses. Also, es:imate the releases from cutting the construction opening of the contai.nment.
Es-timate the amount of gaseous radioactivity which will be released from rou-
"tine refueling/work outage activities such as fuel movement.
Also, estimate the added releases from steam generator repair activities such as complete defueling, local decontamination and construction activities within contain~
ment.
- 7.
Explain what release path, treatment and effluent monitoring will be used for the air which is exhausted from the containment. Also, ex-plain how releases through the construction opening will be prevented or controlled and monitored.
Page 4-4 of your report states that the opening will be covered; page 4-25 states that air will be drawn in through the *opening.
Provide clarification..
- 8.
Provide estimates of th~ doses which 1) an individual living near the site and 2) the population within 50 miles might receive due to the gaseous effluents from the repair effort.*
- 9.
Estimate the volume and radioactivity content of the various types of sol~d radioactive waste which will be generated by the repair effort:
a) concrete b) metal shavings c) construction materials d) solidified decontamination f1~ids e) piping*
f) paper, rags, clothing, etc.
g) spent resins, ~vaporator bottoms, spent filters, etc.
- 10.
We have been informed that VEPCO experienced 214 man~rem in cutting reactor coolant piping at Surry.
Fifteen cuts were made with a motorized, track mounted plasma arc device.
You have estimated that 35 man-rem will be used to make 12 cuts at Palisades with a track mounted oxygen-acetylene torch.
The dose rates at Surry were in the 40-60 millirem per hour range, similar to your estimated/measured dose rates.
Reevaluate your estimate of 35 man~~em for Palisades in 1 i ght of experience at Surry.
- 11.
Your discussion of radiation protection training on page 4-29 is not clear.
E~plain who will receive what levels of training. Explain who is included in "selected crafts." Explain what training will be given. to training personnel entering 1) the containment building, 2) radiation
~rea~and 3) high radiation areas. Explain what training will be given to personnel* who may wear.respiratory protection devices.
- 12.
Discuss your plans -for keeping radiation exposures Al.ARA when rewelding.
primary coolant piping.
Evaluate the potential man-rem savings of decontaminating the cut-out sections of primary coolant piping.
Indicate whether, based on that evaluation, the cut-out pipe sections will be decontaminated or not.
At Surry decontamination of the primary coolant sectfons was successful in significantly reducing radi oat ti ve contamination.
The lower contamination levels resulted in lower ;1oses for reinstallation
- of the pi_ping.
- 5.;.
.13.
Radioactive contamination on the outside of the steam generators could be released during storage or during transportation.
Estimate the amount of radioactive contaminatjon on the outside of the steam generators, and describe any plans for removing or fixing that contamination.
Your esti-*
.
- mat_e of removable activity should be based on actual measurements.
Also, describe any plans for incorporating these~features into the design of the steam generator storage building to control the release of radio-activity.
- a. A sealed floor,
- b. A floor sump from which water could be sampled for radioactivity
{if'any collected),
- c. Particulate filters over ~entilation or ~reathing openings in walls and ceiling.
- 14.
Describe any plans to maintain a high water level inside the steam generators to provide shielding during the repair effort.. This measure was effective in reducing dose rates during operations such as pipe.cutting at Surry.
- 15.
Evaluate the ability of your radwaste solidification system to acceptably solidify the solutions which will be used for local decontamination in. the repair effort.
The current burial ground criteria for acceptance of solid radwaste call for the waste to contain no free water.
- 16.
Describe what precautions and post-repair tests will.be utilized tb ensure that the effectiveness of ventilation and safety-related air filter systems is not impaired.