ML20030A552

Responds to 741003 Request for Addl Info Re Reactor Depressurization Sys.Revised Pages to 740815 Sys Description & Pressure Drop Calculations Encl

ML20030A552
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	11/14/1974
From:	Sewell R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
To:	Ziemann D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 8101090999
Download: ML20030A552 (18)

Text

.

g Rh!!f

~'

\\

81974 t-E C0llSilmCiS j/")L O

POWBf ic <r Q%

Company w

s

.gya 49201. Area Code 517 788 OSSO Generai on.c.: 212 we. uiengan Avenue.

po 49 V

c}

/

OCCsT7p N-MC N vember 1h, 197h REGU~._! ~0RY D00KET FILE COP-,: r c.2,2 a ign C ef tri FT (q,,

l.Wt er,p

'G 3

D;CYU cla..

/'

_hite: Docket 50-155 Mr. Dennis L. Ziemann 6

License DPR-6 Chief, Operating Reactors Branch No 2 Directorate of Licensing Big Rock Point US Atomic Energy Conmission Washington, DC 20545

Dear Mr. Ziemann:

Yourletter dated October 3,197h, requested additional informa-tion regarding the Big Rock Point Reactor Depressurization System. This information, to the extent possible at this time, is contained in Enclo-sure 1.

One entire question and a portion of another question could not be answered at this time. A separate response vill be submitted by December 15, 197h. contains two revised pages of the report titled,

" Big Rock Point Plant Reactor Depressurizing System P<scription, Opera-tion and Performance Analysis," dated August 197h api submitted by letter dated August 15, 197h. These pages are marked Revfsion 1 and replace the identically numbered pages in the report.

During a recent telephone conversation, a member of the Direc-torate of Licensing Staff requested additional information regarding pressure drop calculation for the Deplassurization System. Attached as Enclosure 2 are the pressure drop calculations.

In addition, during another telephone conversation, a member of the Directorate of Licensing Staff indicated concern over the physical separation criteria being used to prevent a hot short at both trip logic modules (1.2 and 1.1) output causing an inadvertent blowdown of one path.

A minimum separation distance of 15 inches (vertically) for these outputs has been established. We believe this minimum separation is acceptable.

Yours very truly, wea g'

RBS/ map Ralph B. Sewell Nuclear Lic asing Administrator CC: JGKeppler, USAEC hhY

l

(-

ENCLOSURE 1 RESPONSE TO AEC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Dated October 3,1974 (Numbers Below Correspond to Those Contained in Enclosure 1 to AEC Letter Dated October 3,197h) 1.

35 Missile Protection Revised Pages 7-7 and 7-8 of the RDS Performance Analysis Report are attached to provide the additional information.

37 Seismic Design A reply is being prepared and will be forwarded by Decedber 15, 197h.

3.8.3 Concrete and Structural Steel Internal structures of Steel or Concrete Containments and

(

3.8.5 Foundations and Concrete Supports Both items will be addressed in a reply to be forwarded by December 15, 1974.

2.

A reply is being prepared to demonstrate that the safety margins that will be employed are equivalent to those resulting from the use of the SEB position paper concerning high-energy pipe breaks.

This reply will be ready by December 15, 1974.

3 Regulatory Guide 1.15 pertaining to testing of feinforcing bar used in reinforced concrete Category I structures is not con-sidered applicable to the RDS since no such structures are to be added as part of this plant modification. Guide 1.60 was employed in the development of the ground response spectra. Guide 1.61 was employed in the derivation of floor response spectra for the varicus equipment locations.

It also is included as an applicable document in the design specifications for all of the safety-related system components.

r i

I

i 2

{s 4.

The modifications planned to existing structures within contain-ment consist of the attachment to them of pipe supports and pipe line restraints. The design of these attachments will asrure that the imposed loads do not affect the capacity of the structures to perform their functions. The structure which will be utilized to take the majority of the supports and restraints is t

steam drum enclosure. The main functions of the enclosure are to provide shielding, to support the steam drum and to support several com-ponents of various auxiliary systems. The shielding function has resulted in the enclosure being a massive reinforced concrete structure with great load carrying capability. This feature led to the selection of the enclosure as the structure which would be utilized to carry the RDS loads. After installation of the RDS and with the plant at power, a shielding survey will be conducted at the RDS/ enclosure interfaces to assure that the enclosure shield-ing function has not been affected. Due to the undesirability of exhausting large quantities of primary steam to the contr.inment, a full flow test of the system is not considered feasible. A reduced flow test is planned which will verify the adequacy of the supports and their attachments to accept the deadweight of the system, the thermally induced loads and the thrusts associated with valve discharge.

The modifications to the containment consist of the addition of four electrical penetration assemblies. These assemblies are to be welded into existing spare penetration sleeven. After instal-lation, a strength and leak test of each veld will be conducted in accordance with Subarticle NE6300-Pneumatic Test of ASME Section III. The individual feedthroughs in each penetration assembly are pressurized and instrumented to permit periodic monitoring of tightness over their iffetime.

I

, p*. -

(

accident. In addition, pipe whip inpact on the emergency condenser lines could inpose macceptable forces on tio emergency condmser shell and cause possible failure. Direct inpact on the mergency condenser shell would also be maoceptable. hhile it is gecrnrically possible for a broken and mrestrained RDS high pressure pipe to im-pact on the contairunent shell as it rotates arotnd a plastic hinge at the point of penetration through the steam drEun enclosum, the probability is quite low since inpact will occur for only limited planes of rota-tion. Nevertheless, such inpact will be prevented by adequate restraints.

RDS high pressure piping failure could result in jet impingement on equipment located on top of the steam drum enclosure.

None of this equipment is, however, needed for safe shutdown. The effect of Jet impingement on the emergency condenser shell and vent pipe and on the containment shell is being considered. If the results are unaccept-(,

able, Jet deflectors or guard pipes will be provided.

The primary and backup containment spray headers are located on the south side of the steam drum enclosure just below the RDS depres-surizing valves.

Although improbable, a pipe failure could result in impact of the discharge pipe or of the steam Jet on the sp' ray headers.

Loss of header integrity will be prevented by providing adequate support and/or an impact barrier or by removing the portion o'f the ring headers near the RDS piping.

'Ihe RDS will be designed so that potential missiles which could be generated as the result of failures in the RDS, will not prevent safe shutdown of the reactor and will not result in loss of cantainment integrity. Because of systan location and orientation the only struc-tures or barriers which must be aansidered for missile inpact are the containment shell and the steam drun enclosure structure. liissile i

Rev 1 7-7 11/74

(

barriers will be provided only if it is fomd that unacceptable dannge would otherwise result from a missile.

Potential missiles which could be gen rated as the result of failures in the IDS system are limited to thernowells and portions of the depres-surizing and isolation valves. %ernowells will be oriented so that they will not dannge any safety-related equignent or structures. Ebr the depressurizing valve the only potential missiles are the solenoid valve internals and the position indicator assernbly. %e characteristics of these missiles are given below:

trust Inpact Weight Area Area Energy Velocity Origin (lb)

(in2)

(in2)

(ft-lb)

(ft/sec)

Depressurizing Valve:

Solenoid Valve Assembly 2.8 1.23 0.785 552 113

(

Position Indicator 8.8 1.23 7.07 311 47.7 A very conservative analysis indicates that neither of these two objects would penetrate the containment shell. Ebr the isolation valve, failure of the yoke clamp would allow the valve stan and operator to move upward; however, this would be stopped by the back ecat. Ebr the valve bonnet to become a missile would require failure of the valve body o1. a seg-mented retaining ring. Since the valve is hydrostatically tested to 6975 psig versus the normal operating pressure cf 1350 heig such a failure is not considered credible. We characteristic of othar potential missiles will be provided when equipnent procurstmt is further advanced.

W e procedures that will be followed for determining the ability of plant structures to withstand the effects of missiles or for the design of barriers, if needed, will be in accordance with Secticn E of the AEC staff doctznent entitled " Structural Design Criteria for Evaluating the Effects of High-Energy Pipe Breaks on Category I Structures Outside The

{

OJntainment," June 1973.

I 7-8 Rev 1 11/74

ENCIDSIJRE: 2 Big Ibck Point Plant heactor Depressurization Systan Pressure Drop Calculation 1.0 Introduction The pressure drop calculations are based on equations, loss coefficient and data from Crane Technical Paper No. 410, 1974. The piping layout given in Drgs A-13007 and 13011 were used in these calculations.

2.0 Input Data 1350 psig (1364.7 psia)

Steam Drum Pressure

=

1175 BTU /lb.

Steam Enthalpy

=

0.3109 ft. /lb.

Specific volume

=

433 lb/sec.

Steam Flow

=

3.0 Pressure drop from Steam drum to Depressurizino valve 3.1 Pipino between Steam drum and RDS 12" Tee 8 " ' eh 120 (Int. dia. = 7.189")

Pipe Size:

o Fittings: Two 90 Elbows and One 8" x 12" enlarger.

Pipe length: 12 ft.

Steam flow: 433 = 108.25 lb/sec.

4 R = 6. 3.1 W_

.......... Equation 3-3, Ref. -1 d/p p = 0.0335 from page A-2, Ref. -1

. R 6.31 x 100.25 x 3600 1

• 02 x 10 e

=

7.189 x 0.0335 I

Page 1 of 8

=

4 g

-(-

f r= 0.0145 from page A-25, Ref. - 1 Entrance loss coefficient for 8" pipe, K = 0.5 K = 0.5 = f k = 0. 014 5 x L x 12 D

7.189

. L = 20. 7 ft. (equivalent length for K = 0.5)

I Equivalentlength for two 90 elbows L = 30h (D

/

= 2 x 7.189 x 30 = 36 ft.

12 Equivalent length for one enlarger (K = 0.3) 12.4 ft.

= 0. 3 x,Q = 0.3 x 7.189 x

1

=

f 12 0.0145

(

. Total equivalent length of 8" piping and fittings 81.1 ft.

= 12 + 20. 7 + 3 6 + 12. 4

=

Pressure drop = 0.00000336 f LW V

... Equ" 3-5, Ref - 1.

5 g

= 0.00000336 x 0.0145 x 81.1 x 008.25 x 3600)

,x 0.3109 7.189

= 9.7 psi 3.2 Pressure drop in the RDS pipino from Steam Leader to 6" branch lines

^'

Steam flow = 433 lb./sec

' Pace 2 of. 8

(

RDS piping size = 12", Sch'120 (Int. dia. = 10.75 in'.)

R = 6.31 x 433 x 3600 = 2.74 x 10 10.75 x 0.0335 f = 0.0135 page A-25, Ref. - 1 Length of 12" piping

= 46 ft.

Equiv. length of four elbows

=107.5 f t.

'Equiv. length of o:.s 45 standard elbow

= 14. 3 f t.

Equiv. length of one Tee (flow through branch)

= 53.75 ft.

Total Equivalent Length

=2 21. 55 ft.

. Pressure drop using equation 3-5, Ref. - 1

= 0.00000336 x 0.0135 x 221.55 x (433 x 3600) x 0.3109

(

(10.75)

= 52.88 psi 3.0 Pressure drop from 12" RDS main to depressurizing_

Valve.

4 Steam Flow

~E

= 144 lb./sec.

Steam Pressure (1364.7 - 9.7 - 52.88)

=1302.12 psia Specific Volume (Ref. - 2)

= 0.325 ft. /lb.

Pipe Int. Dia. (6" Sch 120)

= 5.501 inches 4

e

(

i

' Page '3, Lof 8

i

(

R = 6.31 x 144 x 3600 5.501 x 0.0326

= 1.824 x 10 f = 0.0154 page A-25, Ref. -1

s 1.5 is, Length of 6" pipe

=

Equiv. length for entrance loss co. !ficient (K = 0.5) = 14.88 ft.

5.96 ft.

Equiv. length ofisolation valve L = 13

=

D Total equivalent length

= 22. 34 ft.

[.. Pressure drop using equation 3-5, Ref. -1

= 0.00000336 x 0.0154 x 22.34 x (144 x 3600)'

x 0.325

(

= 19.92 psi.

. Pressure at inlet to depressurizing valve

= 1302.12 - 19.92

= '282.2 psia The depressurtzing valve is designed for an upstream pressure of 1283 psia for a flow rate of 144 lb/sec..

The pressure drops in the RDS piping were recalculsted using the loss coefficients in diagrams 7-29 and 7-21 for the 12" tee and the 6" brmn from " Handbook of Hydraulic Resistance", AEC - Til-6630.

The total pressure drop in the RDS piping increased by 8.6 psi,

' (-

which would cause a flow reduction in the depressurizing valve of about 0.67%. However, this would not effect the minimum flow i

Page' 4 of 8 1

r

=

,m

i requirements, as the valve has been designed for a 2.5 %

larger flow. In other words, the valve will discharge 144 lb./sec at upstream pressure of1252 psia. (Reference - 3).

4.0 Pressure drop in the 10" discharge pipino:

The pressure at the pipe e.<it (Py required to eccommodate the specific volume at sonic velocity is calculated and the pressure drop in the 10" piping is added to the exit pressure to arrive at the maximum pressure at the 10" pipe inlet (downstream of the depressurizing valve) required to maintain the design flow of 144 lb/sec.

Steam flow

= 144 lb/sec Pipe Internal diameter (10", sch 80) 9.564 in.

=

v, = Sonic vele*'ity at exit = 183.3 w V (Equation 3-2, Ref. -1) 2 d

Assume a velocity of 1575 ft./sec

.1575 = 183.3 x 144 x v 9.564 9

= 5.458 ft.3/lb.

The enthalpy at exit 1175 - Vs

=

2g]

1175 - 1575

=

2 x 32.2 x 778 1125 BTUAb.

=

From Reference - 2 at 1125 BTU /lb. and specific volume at

(

l Page 5 of 8

.a

t e

5.458 ft. /lb, pressure =,25 osia = Pg

- Cross checking the assumed value for v,

,=

j kgl44 P 9

........ Equa tion 3-8, Ref.- 1 y

g 1.305 x 32.2 x 144 x 75 x 5.458 v

=

s Q

1574 ft./sec.

=

Since pressure drop in the piping is likely to be large, the modified Darcy's formula is used.

i 2

.b_?

w = 0.525 Yd Equation 3-20, Ref. -1 q

gy 1

The piping consists of 27 ft. of pipe and two 45 elbows.L. = 16' D

. Equivalent length = 27+ (2 x 9 564 x 16 52.5 ft.

=

2 12 Re = 6.31 x 144 x 3600

' dp

= 6.31 x 144 x 3600 9.554 x 0.018

= 1. 9 x 10 f = 0.0136

(

Page 6 of 8

i i

l Equivalent K for.the piping and elbows

= L = 0. 013 6 x 52. 5_

x 12 = 0.9 D

9.564 Exit loss, K = 1

. Total K = 1 + 0.9 = 1.9 Assume a pressure drop of 100 psi in the pipe Pressure at 10" pipe inlet = 100 + 75 = 175 psia.

.4P, = 100

= 0. 5 71 P

175 3

y = 0.635 from page A -22, Ref. - 1 9, at 175 psia and h = 1125 BTU /lb = 2.4 ft. /lb. from Ref. - 2

. w = 144 = 0.525 x 0.635 x 9.564 x 4P s

1.9 x 2.4 AP = 101 psi which is close to th'e assumed value

. Maximum pressure downstream of the depressurizing valve in the 10" discharge line.for a flow of 144 lb/mc is 101 + 75 = 176 psia 4.1 Choke Flow Considerations

~

With a depressurizing vslve open and discharging rated flow thru the discharge pipe, choking or sonic flow conditions will o.ccur at the valve throat and at the end of the discharge pipe.

The downstream choking leads to a pipe pressure of 75 psig. Adding the friction fosses in the piping of 101 psig yields a pressure at I

Page 7 of 8 4 -

i the outlet of the depressurizing valve of 176 psig.

This is far below the critical pressuta for the depressruizing valve and therefore does not affect valve flow rate.

References:

1.

Flow of Fluids - Crane Technical Paper No 410, 1974.

2.

Thermodynamic charts - Ellenwood & McKay, 1966.

3.

Valve Seat Size Computation of Depressurizing valve Report 1447, March 27,1974, Target Rock Corporation.

(

I Page 8 of 8 4

[3 J.. S

?$ '

i i ILEPollT NO. 14 17 i

~

c.e. Py No.

,,.r....

m.

,- p..'r...>.,M.. .. %

(f.W,,, i PROJECT NO. 73V i

.., n, us

• r, MI I.

. t, :., J DATE 3/27/74

' T..} h. f,sk.' 't,. 'J, $. '" '.-. r >'.'. g frW, "I ;'i.

' TOTAL PAGES 1

'?

U,.

.l..M *

... ;... y r. t,. 3

\\g ;.* -

r.,

.. c. a.

.n

.u -

_ V _<..; }*y. % K ' " ;.,,.

(....-i,

• h

'./.

... y s

FT U-., d.'1' VA1NE SPAT SI?J COMP __UTATION Y

t T. ' i Of

~.

r,.

.., r

~..

,. u,

,a

.' " " D

_6 " x 10 " DI' PRESSURIZING _ VAINE y,.

,4

-yor-2

.. n - a p

(.-;...

,3te:

frig SUNTAC NUCLEAR CORPORATION s,.

1528 WALNUT STRHET

.g y', :~m -

PHIIADPLPiilA, _ PENNSYLVANIA

~

c.,..,

.a.. N-)

, ' -~.I Por Use In

~

~

c.2.s.,u...,.

.'; w '

,,9 B.IG LOCK I'Oi r NUCLEAR POWER STATION

c.. Z.*.,

6:. '

CONS 11MP.RS POWER COMPANY

"/8eOV D

(

Cfc. e

(.

vy CITART.EVOlX, MIC1HCAN M'

.. 'l-SUNTAC P.O. #34490-1302rR.W#

y.) -- ~9'..,v'F[

.,u.'

i g.yW./l./",],,p O

.-a, V g g u..?, '

SUNTAG SPEC. #3M3 0*~-5300-5 02.-

i u

,; ped d

e,..--e'."..',.,,c y,,,mn i-

,a, s's,

',r * *% u! t -. a 1 r.

94 A,o gg

c. -

Y :ye. s r:' g'*

s.

a,

~..

. s M '". t

,,.W

-> 0, r e CN'

, ); j cob

• a.

3, s; - <-

o my y.tg /. / w "...

? p. *,. 7 Conducted By: _

V. Liantonio

's,3 f,

qg?.. ' ' '

c Lead Engineer g; h '

[

New Products Dept.

?

qD -

s

(\\Q, e.#'.

.. 7,. R,ECEIVED Checked By:

T 0 3 APR 1974 -

' M.S. Mcclintock Design Engineer H. C. BUSHKOff.

Engineering Dept.

j TARGET ROCK C O R P O R A T LO N E A ST T A RMING D A LE. LO N C I S L A N D. N. Y.*

fif)n n n n a n 41.A 3.

FUUn UIUblHflL

ItI:.'

VJNG cal'ACIT, il:0 OP UAPETY '."'.VLS

.n. -yul

...f.,.,'

ItELTEP VA1NES

,,..s.

e.

e TIIE NATIONAL COARD OT_l; OIL 1:R & PRESSURE VESSEL

.~

INSPP.CTORS s-

. ~ e-:

\\

16S N. High Strcet

-s

.e.

]'

..' i.

Columhus t Ohio 43201

. Safety and Relief Valve Relieving Capacifici

'.[*

MPR.-TARGET COCK CORPOR ATION, liesapstes e, l'est Teck TYPIMI.#el(IP. Tifet fSersted Safett Itali:5 Velve AVCC. t'Oti.N'T -1;, u tr3. I;==.P3 1,.1s as 511 Tested on stearn at tar Ohie State 4;ni* enit,. l'****nson I.st.orat.rr sect Cectir,n lit AS.41;.Nues.se Cede. JtateJ JJ Assunu:sta.a In!ct Size 6" Seat Dia. 4.910" 3.i

...r

m..:... t c i.c.i.

I c.pacier Prusar. Li.

3.si.

t i.tri in,h i

1.t.s r.ev staer 1,000 1

50 i

2.55 i

733.000 2,050 50 2.58 1

700,000 s

2,0SO 50 2.53 l

W 1.000 1,10_0 50 ll' 2.5S l

E05.000 2.53 i

L23,000 1,125 50 e

3,140 50 2.53 1

E31,000 3.200

'I.

50 l

2.58 l

8T7,~030

'Het !!ize 6" Sest Dir. 4.910"-

3 ron:c:

. m. 6.. i caracity casse.tr Press iee 3As.

1.bs. '

_1 L!f t Iri.h -

11.s. Per ifcar 1,000 50 l

2 53 l

74.1..,.0. 00 1,050 50 l

2.5S l

718.000 3,030 50 l

2.53 1

E00,000 l

3,100 L

50 l

2.SS 1

S14,000 3,125 l

50 l

_2.53_

i 833.000 w.--

140 l

50 6

2.5S l

1_:4_;,050

_ 200 l

50 l

2.58 l

E FB,000.

1,

... 'Jolet Size G

Sect Die. 5.030" s

Psessere 3 As. l 3.bs.

1.lf t Inith l

I.hs. l'er lieur repmr.c

m. c..n i

c.:. cier i

. cus. ir 1,000 50 2.53 1e'dif00 3.050 50 2.53 EK000 3,f'.80 50 il 2I53 Edo000

~

1,100 50 l

2.55 1

E 11.000 1,12i>

50 l

2.5S SC3.000 4

. E75.0. 00 2.53 I

3,140 50 3,200 11 50 2.53 020.000

- r r

.z 52 g

...~s._

~.

r

's o

g e

l.

,?

P00R ORIGINAL c.

1

-.~,....

-~

........m

* ' I

'" I

! -(f.ftGEY ICCt? COrJ Olt, i :ON

.,.n..",

E/.5T I AI :!!

.11!.1 0 t ONG l'.' ' N e t. N Y.

.. e.. a a j f.j y

, < r. e u e ir ci........... _ ____ _ -. -.. -. --.

..-ic.t 73V arttoveer av

.--__=a__n..

~'

SEAT ORIPlCE SP/.E COMPUTATION d

References:

1)

Pago 3 of "Blite Book"*.isting I'ormula for Computati >n (attached) 2)

Page 552 of "Blum Book" 1.isting Target Rock 6"x10" Valve Flow Data.

Since internal configuration of subJcet va've is the same as G"x10" relief valve tested, the formula shown in Ecference 1, is applicable.

W = (51. 45 x AP x K). 90

~

Where pammeters are define'd in Reference 1.

Note that the stamped capacity of the valve is based on a 3% accumulation.

Since the de-prc.ssurizing valvp is required to flow at the denited rate at tbc pressure designated, the actual pressure will be used.

Given:

./.'= 144 4!/sec = 518,400,il/hr Steam P= 1283 psia while flowing K=.6 x.9 =.720 (Sec Ref. 2) 2 Solving for A --' in 518,400

10. 9073 8 i.n 2

~

A = 51. 45 x 12 83 x. 72 0

=

s-

+5%

Si,nce flow desired is -o

, let us increase area by 2.5%,

2

1. 025 x,10. 00738 = 11.100 in

' Orifice Diameter d = 3.774 in.'

O g

P00R ORIGINAL

'\\

(

v. % h.:

vuhr ffa(0v.:Ss p :> gf.,,4..

F"

6 4

RUT.1);VANC CAPAGITil S OF Sr IT*1Y VAT.Vr.3

}

enu 4

..,.: RP.I.11;r,VATNES e -..

TIIP. NATICie.T. BOARD OP T.OIIER & PRT.SSUI" VESSEI.

INSPECTORS s,

~

.'ll55. 'N, Iligh' Street

.2 if

',t'-

... '., - Columbus, Ohio 43201..,,.,, :

~,'

e.

.u The folloi-ine is e.:: explanation ct femcles nied to

' 3 N

t ato li'.ted in this hooldet.

detennko r.-Jety valvo and 2clicI valto cap citia which..

...c....

. cSAFETY YALVES FOR TOWER BOILERS

.4- '

d.

Fced: uhs':

for G degree sut W=(61.45 X rDLP X.':07 X K) 0.00 e

• for fir.t seat W=(51.45 X 'DLP X E) 0.90 1

~

.' for noz:lo W=(51.45 X AP X K) 0.50

[.,. *

• WhereW=starnped capnelty, potinds'pce hour

, D= seat diameter, laches

• ?'

Ic-lif t, lacbes

~

f P=(1.03 X set pres:.ure) + 14.7, psL..

~

' ' ' ' E=r.Terago coeficicnt A=no.;1o throst arca, rquarc in:hes.

..~

.c.

~ -

l

.r

.. ~,:.;,. y

.g e

.'?

^

t t

a s

SAFETY VALVES AND RELIEF VALVES F5R HEAT-

~

ING BOILERS The formulas arn the same r.s listed aboro for Pooer.

boilers except for the value of P which is t.s fellosis:

For 15 pound eteam safety valves P, the absoluto pres-curo has a value of (2.33 X 25) plus 14.7.

For relief valves fo.r hot water boilcis P, the r.bsoluto

, pressure has a value of 110% of the set pics:ure plus 14.7.

t.

g g.

g.,

g S

e g

.uuu

.ON g

(-

~

P00R!DRIGINAL.

~

o F

s

.(

i.

i AEC DISTRIBUTION FOR PART 50 DOCKET MATERI AL (TEMPORARY FORM)

CONTROL NO: 11763 FILE:

FROM. Consumers Power Company DATE OF DOC DATE REC'D LTR TWX RPT OTHER Jackson, Michigan 49201 11-14 74 11-18-74 XXXXX TO:

ORIG CC OTHER SENT AEC PDR XX Mr. Ziemann one signed SENT LOCAL PDR vv CLASS UNCLASS PROPINFO INPUT NO CYS REC'D DOCKET NO:

XXXXXXXX 1

50-155 DESCRIPTION:

ENCLOSURES:

Ltr re our 10-3-74 ler...trans the following:

Response to__AEC Request For Additional Info:

.......concerning " Big Rock Point Plant Reactor Depressurizing System Description, Operation and Performance Analysis"...................

ACn.!OU d b M

PLANT N AME:

Big Rock Point FOR ACTION /INFORMATION 11-18-74 ehr

[

BUTLER (L)

SCHWENCER (L)#71EMANN (L)

REG AN (E)

W.~ Copies W/ Copies Wi& Copies W/ Copies CLARK (L)

STOLZ (L)

DICKER (E)

LE AR (L)

W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copics PARR (L)

VASSALLO (L)

KNIGH10N (E)

W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies KNIEL (L)

PURPLE (L)

YOUNGBLOOD (E) j W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copies W/ Copics INTERNAL DISTRIBUTION M'EE F f f FT TECH REVIEW AENTON LIC ASST A/T IND

/AIC PDR GRIMES BRAlTMAN AGC, ROOM P-506A SCHROEDER GAMMILL

1. DIGGS (L)

SALTZMAN

/$AUNTZING/STAF F pNIACCARY K ASTN E R GE ARIN (L)

B. !IUI '

CASE KNIGHT BALLARD GOULBOURNE (L)

GIAMBUSSO P AWLICKl SPANGLER KREUTZE R (E)

PLANS BOYD SHAO LEE (L)

,A1CDONALD MOORE (L) (0WR)

/STELLO ENVIRO M AIGRET (L)

CHAPMAN DEYOUNG (L) (PWR)

HOUSTON MULLER REED (E)

DUBE w! input SKOVHOLT (L)

NOVAK DICKER SERVICE (L)

E. COUPE AOLLER (L)

ROSS KNIGHTON SHEPPARD (L)

P. CO LLINS IPPOLITO YOUNGBLOOD SL ATER (E)

D. THOMPSON (2)

DENISE

/TEDESCO REGAN SMITH (L)

KLECKER REG OPR LONG PROJECT LDR TEETS (L)

EISENHUT

/FlLE & REGION (3)

L AIN AS WILLI AMS (E)

~

MORRIS BENAROYA H AR LE SS WILSON (L)

ST EELE VO LlM E R EXTERN AL DISTRIBUTION

//(C

//

l

1. 1 - LOCAL PDRC))ar/c@ep, M'

/1 -- TIC (ABERN ATHY) (1)(2)(10) - N ATIONAL LABS 1 - PDR SAN /LA/NY pl - NSIC (BUCHANAN) 1 - ASLBPIEN/ Bldg. Rm S29) 1 - BROOKHAVEN N AT LAB 1-ASLB 1 - W. PENNiNGTON, Rm E 201 GT 1 - G. ULRIKSON, ORN L 1 - Newton Anderson 1 - B&M SWINEBROAD, Rm E 201 GT 1 - AGMED (RUTH GUSSMAN:

1. 16 - ACRS HOLDING 4(Asy" 70 1 - CONSU LT ANTS Rm B 127 GT NEWM ARK!BLUME/AG B ABI AN 1 - R D. MUELLER, Rm E-20; us. As s7* g,

9

?*