ML20030C525

Forwards Request for Addl Info Re Recirculation Pump Trip to Continue of Probablistic Risk Assessment.Response Requested within 30 Days

ML20030C525
Person / Time
Site:	Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png
Issue date:	08/05/1981
From:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Hoffman D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.)
References
LSO5-81-08-018, LSO5-81-8-18, NUDOCS 8108270003
Download: ML20030C525 (5)

Text

..

a a

j 4:'

. g g' n'

of"'

n a

.e DISTRIBUTION l-Botket August 5,1981 NRCPDR Local TDR ORB Reading Docket No. 50-155 NSIC LS05-81-08-018 TERA DCrutch fiel d HSmith WPaulson Mr. David P. Hofftnan OELD Nuclear Licensing Administrator OISE (3)

Consumers Power Company ACRS (10) 1945 W. Parnall Road SEPB Jackson, Michigan 49201

Dear Mr. Hoffman:

We are continuing our review of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment results relating to the efficacy of a recirculation pump trip for the Big Rock Point Plant. We have found that additional information described in the enclosure to this letter is needed. We request your response within 30 days of ycJr receipt of this letter.

Sincerely, Original signed by Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Granch #5 Division of Licensing

Enclosure:

oj d * ' /.

l As stated

.s d' $

)5 cc w/ enclosure:

8

F

.Jw, 4J Sec next page E

AUG 181981" s.y,gf4'""

9 Nh Y

d ng3 P

8108270003 910805 PDR ADOCK 05000155 P _ _..

PDR

"'c 4 A

..?.5...0 P,d' j15.

.DL cuanw r >WP....on:cc.

D.C ffMe.ld G.L.a...s......'..

.......\\.....W. Y

...% h f]...

318 410 807 NRCM O2/.4 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

"" ' m-32n24 (RClCRM

~-

1. August 5,1981 Mr. David P. Hoffman CC Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary U. S. Environmental Protection Consumers Power Company Agency 212 West Michigan Avenue federal Activities Branch Jackson, Michigan 49201 Region V Office ATTN: EIS COORDINATOR Judd L. Bacon, Esquire 230 South Dearborn Streec Consumers Power Conpany Chicago, Illinois 60604 21% West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Herbert Grossman, Esq., Chairman Atcmic Safety and Licer. sing 30ard Jcseph Gallo, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Isham, Lincoln & Beale Washington, D. C.

20555 ll20. Connecticut Avenue Room 325 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Washington, D. C.

20036 Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Peter W. Steketee, Esquire 4ashington, D. C.

20555 505 Peoples Building Grand Rapids, Michigan 49503 Mr. Frederick J. Shon Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq., Chairman U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board Washington, D. C.

20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatcry Commission Washington,' D. C.

2C655 Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant ATTN:

Mr. C. J. Hartman Mr. John O'Neill,11 Plant Superintendent Route 2, Box 44 Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Maple City, Mica 4gan 49664 Christa-Mari a Charlevoix Public Library Route 2', Box 108C 107 Clinton Street Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Charlevoix, Michigan Wiliiam J. Scanlon, Esquire Chai rman 2034 Pauline Boulevard County Board of Supervisors Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 Charlevoix County Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Resident Inspector Big Rock Point Plant

~

Office of the Governor (2) c/o U.S. NRC Room 1 - Capitol Building RR #3, Box 600 Lansing, Michigan 48913 Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Herbert Semmel Mr. Jim E. Mills Council for Christa Maria, et al.

Route 2, Box 108C Urban Law Institute Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Antioch School of Law 2633 15th Street, NW Thomas S. Moore Washington, D. C.

20460 Atomic Safety & Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

205

o A

Mr. Dayid P. Hoffman August 5,1981 cc Dr. John H. Buck Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.

20555 Ms. JoAnn Bier 204 r,linton Street Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 b

0 CUESTIONS FOR BIG ROCK POINT PROBABILISTIC RISK ASSESSMENT RECIRCULATIOS PUMP TRIP ANALYSIS 1.

Provide information confirming that the RETRAN code provides an appropriate representation of the plant transient behavior as presented in the risk assessrnent analyses for recirculation pump trip.

This information should include any available comparisons of code predictions with experimental data and discussions of differences and similarities between RETRAN and other established industry codes.

The specific applicability of RETRAN to ATWS analyses should be included.

2.

Coopare the current risk analysis for recirculation pump trip (References 1 and-2) with the earlier assessnent described in Reference 3.

In oarticular, discuss the difference in predicted steady state power level followina a turbine trip - 110%

in the earlier analysis vs 80% in the current analysis using RETRAN.

3.

The ATWS analyses presented in References 1 and 2 did not include the case of ATWS for inadvertent control rod withdrawal.

Provide en ATWS analysis for this case or provide a discussion justifying its omission.

Your analyses assumed nominal values for the volumes of the ccndenser hot well 4.

and the steam dru.

Provide sensitivity analyses or discussion of the sensitivity of the risk analyses to the use of ninimum and maxi: rum values for these two volumes.

5.

The Big Rock Point liquid poison system (LPS) is presently not qualified.

Describe any program planned for qualifying this system or, if no such program exists, discuss the possible effects of the evpected environment on the operation of the LPS during the ATWS transients included in the risk assessrent.

In particular, address the effect of the steam released from the pressure relief valves on the LPS.

t e

?

. 6.

Your analysis for loss of feedwater appears to neglect the time delay for operator response until the operator is made aware that an automatic reactor trip has not actuated. Justify and discuss the effect of this time delay on

~

your analysis.

~

7.

Your analysis states that a delay of LPS injection until after RDS actuation is assumed to cause limited core damage with releases similar to the TMI accident.

It would seem that such a failure, in conjunction with predicted containment failure, would cause a significant contribution to risk but that it has not been included in your risk calculations.

Address the contribution for this case.

Refe ences:

(ll Letter fr m G. L. Withrow, CPC, to D. M. Crutchfield, Big Rock Point Plant -

ProbcDilistic Risk Assessment Results Relating to the Efficacy of a Recircula-tior Pump Trip, February 26, 1981.

(2) Letter from D. P. Hoffman, CPC, to D. M. Ct.utchfield, Big Rock Point Plant -

Submittal of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment and Request for Deferral of Requirements Identified as Non-essential by the Probabilistic Risk Assessment, March 31, 1931.

(3) " Anticipated Transients Without Scram Study for Big Rock Point Power Plant,"

NEDE-21065, P. M. Guraraj, October 1975.

. -