ML18052A416
| ML18052A416 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades  |
| Issue date: | 05/06/1986 |
| From: | Wambach T Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Berry K CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| REF-GTECI-A-49, REF-GTECI-RV, TASK-A-49, TASK-OR NUDOCS 8605090552 | |
| Download: ML18052A416 (4) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:_, 'I d.. May 6, 1986 .Docket No. 50-255 EJordan BGrimes OELD Mrc.-'Kennetrnv-. --ae-rry - Director, Nuclear Licensing Consumers Power Company Distribution }Docket File -{ '"'"NRc-a;*racar-PDR --PD#8 Reading AThadani PKreutzer TWambach ACRS (10} Gray File (4) ., 1945 West Parn*a1 l Road Jackson, Mit~igan 49201 ~; I.* ~
Dear* Mr;. Berry:
~ .I ,. 'SµBJECT:. PRESSURIZED THERMAL SHOCK RULE (PTS), 10 CFR 50. 61, RESPONSE \\:,. .FOR* P8LiSADES PLANT
- \\ __ Your submi:tt~J 'oated' January 23, 1986 providing your respon~.e to the PTS rule did not conform 10 the requirements of 10 CFR 50.6l(b)(2)(ii) with regard to
- *the requi.red *margin to be used in the ca lcul at ion for determining when the
-screening-c;fi't_er'jon would be exceeded.* This is discussed more fully in the
- enclosure th~t *al sq requests additional informa*tion with regard to your response. :*.
- * *,, ~-...:
Us-ing the.ma:rgin.prescribed by the PTS rule would result inthe Palisades vesse 1 exceedh1g the screerii ng criterion during the p 1 ant life (1998). Consequently, within 3 months from*receipt of this request, Consumers Power
- co!'J1pany is required to submit, in accordance with 10 CFR 50.61(b)(3),_ an analysis and schedule for implementation. of such flux redoctibn programs ~s are.~e~sonably practi~~ble to avoid exceeding the PTS screening. criterion.
This request for information affects fewer than 10 respondents; therefore OMB Clearance is not.required pursuant to P.L~ 96-511.
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page PD#8* P~~tzer 5*rr~/86 PD#8: ~ 71 !fl/ TWambach:jch s I I /86 (' 8005090552 860506 I PDR *.' ADOCK 05000255 p I 'i-PDR Sincerely, /SI Thomas V. Wambach, Project Director PWR Project Directorate #8 Division of PWR Licensing-8 fr( PD#8: ATha~ni s l._)/86
I Mr. Kenneth W. Berry Consumers Power Company cc: M. I. Miller, Esquire Isham, Lincoln & Beale 51st Floor Three First National Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60602 Mr. Thomas A. McNish, Secretary Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Judd L. Bacon, Esquire Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Regional Administrator, Region III U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 Jerry Sarno Township Supervisor Covert Township 36197 M-140 Highway Covert, Michigan 49043
- Office of the Governor Room 1 - Capitol Building
. Lansing, Michigan 48913
- Palisades Plant ATTN:
Mr. Joseph F. Firlit Plant General Manager. 27780 Blue Star Memorial Hwy. Covert, Michigan 49043 Resident Inspector c/o U.S. NRC Palisades Plant. 27782 Blue Star Memorial Hwy. Covert, Michigan. 49043 Palisades Plant Nuclear Facilities and Environmental Monitoring Section Office
- Division of Radiological Health P.O. Box 30035 Lansing, Michigan 48909
t Enclosure PALISADES PLANT MATERIAL PROPERTIES FOR FRACTURE TOUGHNESS RE§UIREMENTS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST PRESSURIZED THERMAL SH CK EVENTS 10 CFR 50.61 The Consumers p*ower Company sµbmittal does not conform to the requirements of the PTS rule in all respects. The key item is the calculation of RT for. the plate material, where 10°F margin was used instead of 48°F as re~~~red by the PTS rule. Thus, the EOL (32 EFPY) value of RT~TS becomes 309°F, and the screening criterion (270°F) will be reached in 1998 lf the fluence rate continues as at present. (The rule was made very prescriptive in an attempt to avoid time consu~ing arguments.about the way RTprs should be calculated, because flux reduction programs, if needed, should De started early for maximu~ benefit.) In addition, there are certain corrections and additional information needed* to complete our review of the January 23, 1986 submittal.
- 1.
Correct the margin term as described above.
- 2.
The PTS rule requires that RTPTS be calculated 11 for each weld and plate, or fo.rging in. the reactor vessel beltline. 11 The intent of this requirement'was to provide justification that the values reported are
- indeed for the controlling material with regard to meeting the screening criterion.
The submittal needs to provide this justification.
- 3.
In the January 23 submittal, the phrase. 11generic chemistry 11 needs explana-tion.. It was used in regard to the weld metal, and reference was made to a Consumers Power Company letter dated Juhe 14, 1985. How many heats of weld wire were considered in deriving the 11generic chemistry 11 for the longitudinal w~ld, and for the circumferential weld? What was the number and range of copper and nickel val~es considered for. ~ach?
- 4.
In the January 23 submittal (Reference 1) there is no justifil~tion 2f the projected end of life peak vessel fluence value of 6.8x10 n/cm. $uch justification should include plant specific neutron sources, the use of a benchmarked code, cross sections and approximations.
- 5.
The January 23 submittal was based on information from WCAP~10637 (Reference 2) in which the Cycle 5 power distribution was assumed to be a conservative representation of the power distribution (for purposes of neutron leakage) for Cycles 1-4. Please present data to support this assumption. -
I~.
- .-~-'
- ~..
I
- 6.
- 7. In reference 2 the axial peaking factor is listed as 1.2. *Justify this value for the past cycles and for the fluence projection.
Give an estimate of the uncertainty of the fluence calculations for cycles 1-5 and under the assumptions of the extrapolation for the fluence at the end of life (32 EFPY). References
- 1.
Letter K. W. Berry, Consumers Power Company to Director, NRR, dated* January 23, 1986.
- 2.
WCAP-10637 "Analysis of Capsules T-330 and W-290 from the Consumer Power Company Palisades Reactor Vessel Radiation Surveillan~e Program" W September 1984. -}}