ML18047A606
| ML18047A606 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1982 |
| From: | Wambach T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Vandewalle D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| TASK-02-03.A, TASK-02-03.B, TASK-02-03.C, TASK-2-3.A, TASK-2-3.B, TASK-2-3.C, TASK-RR LSO5-82-10-017, LSO5-82-10-17, NUDOCS 8210120323 | |
| Download: ML18047A606 (5) | |
Text
,
- w~.
October 07, 1982 Docket No. 50-255 LS05-82 017 Mr. David J. VandeWalle Nuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parna11 Roe;d Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. VandeWalle:
SUBJECT:
PALISADES - SEP TOPIC II-3.A, HYOROLOGIC DESCRIPTION, II-3. B, FLOODING POTENTIAL AND PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS,
.* II-3. B.1, CAPABILITY OF OPERATING PLANTS TO COPE MITH DESIGN BASTS FLOODING CONDITIONS; AND II-3.C, SAFETY-RELATED WATER SUPPLY (ULTIMATE MEAT SINK)
Enclosed is a supplement to the Safety Evaluation Report:\\SER) of February 19, 1982, for the subject topics, which reanalyzes the design basis surge level f9r the Palisades-Pl-ant.
The February 19,.1982 SER found the design basis surge level was 597.1 ft. mean sea*~;. level (msl) and that this flood level was too high for certain aspects of plant safety. That is, procedures and facilities were not available to cope with this flood level and the service water and auxiliary feedwater pumps could pe flooded at this level.
The integrated assessment of your plant (NUREG-0820) categorized these topics as needing refined engineering analysis or continuation of ongoing evalua-tion.11 In response to this you submitted, on March 23, 1982, a final report on the,evC1luation you were performing entitled, 11High Water Level Study, Palisades-Plant, Lake Michigan 11 by R. M. Noble & Associates dated March 12~
1982.
The staff has reviewed this report and agrees with some of the
- findings. Additionally, the staff has reanalyzed the design basis surge level and has concluded,tha;tr; for the Palisades Plant under current NRC licensing criteria, it is 593":5 ft. msl.
This level is not a threat to the
~--- _ service water or aux Hi ary feedwater pumps and the present emergency pro-cedures for this flood level are adequate.
Therefore, the unresolved diffe~ences in the subject topics are now considered acceptably resolved and the topic reviews are complete.
8210i20323 821007 PDR ADOCK 05000255 P
PDR Sincerely, Thomas V.
~Jambach, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch #5 OFFICE. ""js.. ~~.~.fi:g.~x~:.1... ~~?..~.=.. ~.~.......
.... ~RE~~-=.~1L1** ~-~-~~-~~~~--~****** I-~-~-~-~-~-~-~..........
1*11c ae~'s:u
~~rimes w usse SURNAME~ ************************ ****************o******* ************************ ************************....*.*************.*
~...
- DATE **** ~~(.J!..~.~......... ~.~!.Co..!.~~*****...... ~.~l.~.t.~?...... *********.... ~...............................
NRCFORM318(10-BO)NRCM0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
David
Enclosure:
As stated cc w/enclosure:
See next page OFFICE ************************.
SURNAME. ************************
DATE.........................
NRC FORM 318 (10-80) NRCM 0240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY USGPO: 1981-335-960
Mr. David J. VandeWa11e cc M *. I. Mi 11 e r, E sq u i re Isham~ Lincoln & Beale Suite 4200 One First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60670 Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Mi_chigan 49201 CHERRY & FLYNN
. Suite 3700 Three First National Plaza Chicago, I1lino1s 60602 Ms. Mary P. Si nc la i r Great Lakes Energy Al 1 i ance 57li Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 William J. Scanlon, Esquire 2034 Pauline Boulevard Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 Township Supervisor Cove rt Towns hi Route 1, Box 10 Van Buren County, Michigan 49043 Office of the Governor (2)
Room l - Capitol Building Lansing, Michigan 48913 Palisades Plant ATTN:
Mr. Robert Montross Plan_t M.anager Covert, Michigan 49043 U. S. Environmental *protection Agency Federal Activit_ies* Branch Region V Office ATTN:
Regional Radiation Representative 230 South Dearborn Street Chicago, Illinois 60604 Resident Inspector.
c/o U. S. NRC Palisades Plant Route 2, P. O. Box 155 Covert, Michigan 49043 James G. Keppler, R~gional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137
. :. *.. ::.::. ~.
- i Palisades Nuclear Plant SER Supplement* Input - Topics II-3.A, II-3.B, II-3.B. l and II-3.C Flood Potential from Lake Michigan The staff issued a* Draft Safety Evaluation Report for the Palisades Nuclear Plant covering Hydrology Topics II-3.A, B and C.ir1February 1982.
This report included a conservattve estimate for Probable Maximum Surge (Seiche). This es.timate wfticfa f\\ad originally been calculated in 1970. was reviewed oy our consultant,Franklin Research Center, who concluded that it was still*approprtate. The staff* recognized that the estimate was conservative but due to limited manpower was. unable to pursue a more refined estimate.
The licensee subsequently su5mitted an independent non-conservative estimate 9f surge and comments on the staff value.
rhe li-censee's report is entitled 11High Water Level Study, Palisades Plant, Lake Michigan" 5y R. M. No5le & Associates dated March 12, 1982.
The report provides an independent analysis of the surge at the Palisades Plant
. site associated with t~e Probable Maximum Meteorological event in the So_uthern Basin of Lake Michigan.
The report concludes that the probable maximum surge
- from Lake Michigan at the Palisades site would be 4.8 feet.
This. is super-imposed on the maximum monthly lake level of 583.6 feet msf resulting in a maximum stil 1 water level of 588.4 feet msl.
We *concur with the offshore I
surge value used 5y the licensee but cannot iden~ify where the water depth associated with the surge value nor the transposition of this value onshore are discussed.
We therefore cannot agree that a still water level of 588.4
- ft. msl is the appropriate value for the site.
In 1970, our consultants, the U. S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center (CERC), using the procedure presented.in a series of pape*r~* entitled 11Th~ Prediction of su*rges in the Southern Basin of Lake Michigan" by G. S. Platzrnan, S. M. Irish, and L. A. Hughes, Monthlj Weather Review, Vol~
93 No. 5, May 1965, developed a Probable Maximum Surge of 13.6 feet for the Palisades site. The procedure required the application of an empirical shoaling coefficient *camplific~tion factor) to the offsho~e surge height value. The*
offshore surge heignt wa~ determined 5y using Probable Maximum Meteorological i:vent parameters in a mathematical surge model developed 5y Platzman.
The shoaling coefficient transposes the offshore surge (wave) height to an
.e I amplifi~d sur~e height at the shore.
Previous applicatiohs of the empirical shoaling coefficient have 5een 5ased on a comparison of June 1954 observed values at an offshore structure and a shoreline value within Montrose Harbor.
It has recently Eleen recogntzed tftat since the shoreline observation was within~ har5or, it is posstble fhat har5or s~iching o~ oscillation may have amplified the o5served surge hetgHt value. As a result, the shoaling coefficient developed from the Montrose Har5or observation, when applied to an open coastal area such as at the Paltsades site, would tend to overpredict tile shoreline surge height.
The staff, therefore, made a comprehensive review of the literature for a more appropriate pro~edure tb transpose the offshore surge (wave) height
{at a specified depth of water) than the empirical shoaling coefficient devel"oped oy 'cERC in 1970.
This review resulted in applying Green's Law in order to transpose the offshore surge height to the -plant* site. This law states that the ratio of the wave heights is inversely proportional to the fourth root of the ratio of the water depths. Applying this procedure to Platzman's offshore surge value, the onshore surge height becomes 10.9 feet.
Combining this revised surge value of 10.9 feet with the more appropriate maxi-mum monthly mean lake level (1900-1~81) of El. 582,6 feet (msl}*instead of the maximum monthly mean lake level (1860-1981} of El. 583,5 feet (msl) results in an acceptable conservative Probable Maximum flood protection level for Palisades Nuclear Plant of El. 593.5 feet msl.
The twentieth century maximum monthly lake level is more app~opriate than going back into the nineteenth cent~ry
- because channel dredging around the turn of the century modified.
- subseq.uent lake levels. This level is 4.5 feet above the plant grade level of EL 589.0 feet and 1.2 fee.t below the service water pump motors at El. 594.7 feet msl.
The staff concludes that the des.ign basis surge elevation for the Palisades plant under current NRC licensing criteria is 593.5 feet msl.
This meet~' the requirem~nt~ of.GDC-2 and is acceptable *
- There are two ele~ation datums pertinent to Lake Michigan *.
(1) International Great Lakes D~tum (IGLD), 1955 and (2) _mean sea l eve 1 (msl) datum.
The convers1 on between these datums 1 s IGLD=msl-1. 56 feet~ This evaluation uses mean sea level throughout.