ML20003A269
| ML20003A269 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 01/20/1981 |
| From: | Jackie Cook CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| 11036, NUDOCS 8102030310 | |
| Download: ML20003A269 (5) | |
Text
(
6' Cb - 3 a.m w cook m
Vuce PrestJent - Projects, Enginernng a=J Construction General offices: 1945 West Parnell Road, Jackson. MI 49201 * (517) 78& O453 January 20, 1981 HRDenton US Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7920 Norfolk Ave Bethesda, MD 20014 MIDLAND PROJECT EFFECT OF THE REACTOR VESSEL UPPER LATERAL SUPPORT DESIGN ON THE ASYMMETRIC CAVITY PRESSURIZATION ANALYSIS FILE:
M1.1, B5.4.13, 0505.806 SERIAL:
11036 On January 6, 1981 Mr P Hurn of the NRC's Containment Systems Branch made a verbal request for certain information on the effect of the reactor vessel upper lateral support (ULS) design on the asymmetric cavity pressurization (ACP) analysis.
In response to that request, we provided the following verbal explanation which is being forwarded to document that discussion.
The brackets presently used in the ULS design are the same brackets which were designed to support the upper shield plug. The original brackets are shown in FSAR Figure 6.2-135 (Rev 20).
It is our conclusion that the ULS design has a negligible impact upon the original reactor vessel cavity ACP analysis.
A review of the original and modified bracket designs, for changes that could affect ACP analysis, indicates 1) the addition of bumpers to the end of the l
brackets and 2) the addition of stif fener plates to four of the twelve brackets (attached Figures 1 and 2).
The bumpers have no impact on the original ACP analysis because no venting between the vessel and the shield plug was assumed. The addition of the four stiffener plates decreased the effective vent area by only 1%, which will have a negligible impact on the ACP analysis.
1 Sufficient conservat
.s is included in the original ACP analysis to accommodate this 1% uecrease in effective vent area. The ACP analv'.is postulates IA hot leg and 1A cold leg breaks in the reactor cavity instead of the smaller actual limited displacement break areas calculated by B&W (0.39A hot leg and 0.24A cold leg). Consequently, due to the inherent conservatism of the original ACP analysis, the ULS design has a negligible impact upon ACP loads.
Bool 1
i/
oc0181-0194a100 610aocc3\\0 I
2 Mr Hurn indicated that the above explanation would provide sufficient information to allow the NRC to close out this enquiry.
JWC/RLT/cr Attachments:
1.
FSAR Figure 6.2-135 (Rev 20) "Prir.:ary Shield Plug Detail" 2.
Figure 1 " Upper Lateral Support Plan" 3.
Figure 2 Typical ULS with Stiffener Plate CC Director of Office of Inspection & Enforcement At Mr Victor Stello, USNRC w/a Director, office of Management Information and Program Control, USNRC w/a RLBaker, (B&W/AA) w/o JVCook, P-26-336B RJCook, Midland Site Inspector w/a IJICurtis, Bechtel w/o DFJudd, B&W w/a GSKeeley, P-14-113B w/o DBMiller, Midland w/a CBechhoefer, ASLB w/o GALinenberger, ASLB w/o FPCowan, ASLB w/o AS&L Appeal Panel w/o MMCherry, Esq w/o MSinclair w/o CRStephens, USNRC w/o WDPaton, Esq, USNRC w/o FJKelly, Esq, Attorney General w/o GTTaylor, Esq, Asst Attorney General w/o WHMarshall w/o oc0181-0194a100
Yk b kkl
~
~~
019594
~
g
=5 Eb !
E=E s=
a i
=
=
1 1,l
!I
$20
<Sf l
I li f,;l. #;jj l!!
![5 i5 !
aw
- e i,
qlll Sas
?
I!
=u..l.l ;,li
).i glil!!!!!
4
[l-
,l't
- ni l
4 Q
- i.. i!!
in !!
k!!.!!
I
.[. t j
p?
p I k ii hf2l
- v.
y
'Jry.jl 1
i 1
y,l Glh 'e i
i
!!J'I 21 t
I! !#3I h',
Yd f e
h4 i
l'Ih' lf !igh3 kI}l!i.!D$,ld, bi p.W3'i$$4lp$
t i
li M
f A.
' PK3nTECTI e r^9sjif(!;geui a'I in!i!)rgl, l
gr$
e 3g6, Iree ' pii p:ih%jj yLllO_h @
ad w
i f
i W,d]F%?Yy$((Tp%.
9 p
ti
[Md EI-5$1 i5 $$1}Qhff wl. v!W gm. %a
~
f
. h,=m 1
x,
- j..:
I = ? ~$y7 h,.... mh?!$ah
.sw
\\QEsq,
'qgy ' "'g s
~. -l n..-
t t
i
..-.m
=. -
)
r Di9594 g'd
=
O' T. UPPER LATERAL SUPPORT x'\\
(TYP) f
- I7*
E.'
6 if
,f - ---4 S
,/
'/
J y/
P.
3 K
[
,e m ~.
f
!TA q
C '
0' 1'
9 270*
_4_
- e.,,4' RV EDGE Y -4 a
- r-j
'('$
i g
~\\
/
,_ j _ _
CONCRETE
/~
SHIECO PLUG '
FOR DETAll d,
SEE FIGURE 2 PRIMARY SHIELD WALL UPPER LATERAL SUPPORT PLAN l
l.
FIGURE 1 1
l
0i9594 Ettsi
- ob" enato & _
i l
I sh P.s 4. i-il
/E;,',
i g
//
I 4
fl/r ;:
K
,s.
n
,/
3 ?;
l.*$ ~4// 4 "x3! 'A 1
O L
3 &&
- fb:
.g 8,v' igse a.r ~
u s
\\
ii/ ll lI
_u __ u.._, t_ _
ir-i - n a- -
,,i
. i,.
i, V
/
- A*.
~
PL AN y
j{
r F.
~
_ I"~
my 4
it t a ss st
~
e FIGURE 2 r