ML19210E864
| ML19210E864 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 11/28/1979 |
| From: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Bixel D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| TASK-09-01, TASK-9-1, TASK-RR NUDOCS 7912130112 | |
| Download: ML19210E864 (3) | |
Text
.
)
2 L
UNITED STATES
[' y - f 'i NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 7,
v.,..pi E
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
- "'?"ls November 28, 19 ?
%,'^..... "
Docket No. 50-155 Mr. David Bixel Nuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. Bixel:
We are continuing our review of your submittals dated A:ril 23, June 26, October 1, October 19 and October 25, 1979, related to the proposed expansion of the storage capacity of the spent fuel pool for the Big Rock Point plant and your response to our April 4, 1979 Safety Evaluation Report item 3.2.1 related to fuel pool cooling.
We have found that the additional information described in the enclosure to this letter is reeded.
Please provide your response within 30 days of the date of this letter.
Sincerely,
.. k! i.. )
.,,I f'
c.
, / r, Dennis L. Ziemann, Chief
'/
Operating Reactors Branch #2 Division of Operating Reactors
Enclosure:
Request for Additional Information cc w/ enclosure:
See next page 1 SC I'37 2912330 \\\\2.
7
lir. uavid E,ixel November 28, 1979
~
cc Mr. Poul A. Perry. Sec retary Lunsuuers Power Luupony 212 West dienison Avenue Jacksuri, Michigori 49201
,gMf N
Judd L. bacori, t. squire Consuuers Power Coupony
[Oh*
212 West Mitni a 1 Averiue 9
Jocksun, Michigan 49201 Huntun a Willious George L. Freeuen, Jr., Esquire P. U. oux Idab kicouonc. Vir91nio 23212 Peter n. steketee, Lsquire dub Peuples buildin3 brona hegios, t.icnison 49603 sheldun, Hariaun, Kuisuan oric Weiss 17c a 1 Street, i;.
a.
Suite DbV r.J 4tiill3 ull, U. L.
4U000 l
ur. voini u' heil l,11 KOute 2, OV A 4 *+
nogle City, nichison 49064 rieraert brussi;ori, tsy., Chairman ntvi..ic Saf etj unc Licensin3 boord U. S. tiuclear Ke3ulutury Cuuuission ndshinbton, U. C.
20bDb Ur. Uscar h. Peris atuuic aofety ariu Licensin3 uvard
- u. S. fiuclear rie ulatory Counission s
wasriingtun, U. C.
20555 nr. Frederick J. Snun Aturiic Setety ario Licensins board
- b. d. hucl ear se3ul atory Lous.iission 1543 290 nosnin3 on, U. L.
zudub t
Charlevvia, Public Llorary 107 blintun street C h a r l e v u 13., hic ni s an 49720
EriCLOSURE CONSUMERS DONER C0:1PA"Y BIG ROCK POINT PLAtiT (DOCKET =50-155)
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL It! FORMATION 1.
With regard to installation considerations, your October 1, 1979 and October 19, 1979 responses indicate that no rack will be handled in the vicinity of stored spent fuel.
Verify and provide a basis for your conclusion that the possibility of a dropped or tipped rack on an empty rack will not impact and damage an adjacent rack with stored spent fuel.
2.
Specify all areas or parts of the new racks which are not type 304 stainless steel, and verify that the significance of corrosion, if any, related to these parts has been considered.
3.
Sections 3.2.1 and 4.16 of our Fire Protection SER dated April 4, 1979 noted that, due to lack of separation criterion for electrical cabling of redundant fuel pool cooling systems, postulated fires in various areas may result in loss of cooling systems for the spent fuel pool.
We noted that the structural effects on the spent fuel pool due to boiling resulting from loss of the redundant systems had not been addressed and that you were evaluating the effect of boiling on pool integrity.
Amendment 25 dated April 4, 1979 required that you submit the results of this evaluation and any required protective actions by June 30,1979.
By telephone conversation with our staff you stated that your reply to our concerns was addressed in your April 23, 1979 submittal related to spent fuel pool capacity expansion.
We have reviewed the April 23, 1979 submittal and find your reply does not fully address our concerns.
Therefore, we request that you verify with a detailed discussion, that the increased thermal loads resulting from a double pump failure will not adversely affect the spent fuel pool racks, liner (including welds), and concrete structure.
In our fire protection reviews we have allowed credit to be assumed for fire damaged equipment 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> after a fire, provided licensees can provide infomation to assure that repairs can be made within a 72 hour8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> period.
We, therefore, request that your discussion include the effects on the racks, liner; and structure, of the cooling systems being unavailable for 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> if repairs can be made within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />.
If repairs cannot be made within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> discuss the effects of the longer period of cooling system unavailability associated within the longer repair time.
Discuss the measures that will be used to minimize the time period in which the cooling systems would not be available.
The discussion of the effects of loss cf cooling syste s should address the currently licensed storage rack design and capacity and your proposed rack design and capacity.
P00RORgy-1543 291