ML20038A771
| ML20038A771 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 11/05/1981 |
| From: | Hood D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Adensam E Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8111160426 | |
| Download: ML20038A771 (2) | |
Text
.
t Docket i;os. 50-329/330 MEM0PANDUM FOR:
Elinor G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch #4, DL FROM:
Darl S. Hood, Project Manager Licensing Branch #4, DL SUDJECT:
NOTICE OF MEETING - MIDLAND PLANT, UNITS 1 & 2 DATE & tit!E:
!!ovember 17 - 19, 1981 8:30 N1 LOCATION:
777 Eisenhower Parkwqy Ann Attor, Michigan PURPOSE:
To discuss open items in Preliminary Draft SER Sections 3.6.2, 3.7.3 and 3.9.
TARTICIPANTS3/: NRC Babcock & Wilcox D. Hood J. Agar, et al F. Chernay A. Cappucci Bechtel J. Rajan W. T Chen, et al D. F. Lewis, et al Qy
'nue r J.
, ugadam, et al Dar Hood, Project Manager
/ Licensing Branch f4 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
N.LD Letter dated 10/16/81
- o cc w/ enc 1: See next page 06 82 xro E etings between NRC technical staff and applicants for licenses are open for o"
Me g$
interested members of the public, petitioners, intervenors, or other parties o-to attend as observers pursuant to "Open meeting and Statement of NRC Staff 0
3 o Poliev". 43 Federal Reaister 28058. 06/2n/7n_
un s
- cy. DL
- LB H,,,,,,
,DEjMEB D,Lj sua.uoc >
- o.od:1b.@ msnad,b,.,EA'pB,
.. e../...F...../. 81 1 / 1 /. 81
.,.y.G../..t../.81 1
1 oery
%/rpt./j/ OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom an-w-m we row ais oo#n ucu ena
MIDLAND Mr. J. W. Cook Vice President Consumers Power Company 1945 West Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201 cc: Michael I. Miller, Esq.
Mr. Don van Farrowe, Chief
~
Ronald G. Zamarin, Esq.
Division of Radiological Health Alan S. Farnell, Esq.
Department of Public Health Isham, Lincoln & Beale P.O. Box 33035 Suite 4200 Lansing, Michigan 48909 1 First National Plaza
- Chicago, Illinois 60603 William J. Scanlon, Esq.
2034 Pauline Boulevard James E. Brunner, Esq.
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48103 Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Jackson, Michigan 49201 Resident Inspectors Office Rcute 7 Myron M. Cherry, Esq.
Midland, Michigan 48640 1 IBM Plaza Chicago, Illinois 60511 Ms. Barbara Stamiris 5795 N. River Ms. Mary Sinclair Freeland, Michigan 48623 5711 Summerset Drive Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. Paul A. Perry, Se.cretary f
Consumers Power Company Stewart H. Freeman 212 W. Michigan Avenue Assistant Attorney General Jackson, Michigan 49201 State of Michigan Environmental Protection Division Mr. Walt Apley 720 Law Building c/o Mr. Max Clausen Lansing, Michigan 48913 Battelle Pacific North West Labs (PNWL)
Battelle Blvd.
Mr. Wendell Marshall SIGMA IV Building Route 10 Richland, Washington 99352 Midland, Michigan 48640 Mr. I. Charak, Manager Mr. Steve Gadler NRC Assistance Project 2120 Carter Avenue Argonne National Laboratory St. Paul, Minnesota 55108 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 Mr. Roger W. Huston Suite 220 Mr. R. B. Borsum 7910 Woodmont Avenue Nuclear Power Generation Division Bethesda, Maryland 20814 Babcock & Wilcox 7910 Woodmont Avenue, Suite 220 Bethesda, Maryland 20814
g i
e f' T C011SumBIS POW 8f
?
James W CNk Vice Wsidert - P,0le.ss, Enginredng
'I an ' Constructsou i
oeneral offices: 1946 West Pernell Road, Jackson. MI 49201 e (517) 788-0453 '
October 16, 1981
~
Mr Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 MIDLAND PROJECT -
DOCKET NOS 50-329, 50-330 DRAFT SER SECTIONS 3.6.2, 3.7.3 AND 3.9 FILE 0505.803 SERIAL 14538 ENCLOSURE: DRAFT SER ISSUES We have reviewed the subject preliminary sections of the draft SER and have identified the issues we believe must be discussed further with the Staff in order to finalize the draft SER. The enclosure entitled " Draft SER Issues" is f
a listing of these issues, a preliminary response, and foreca'st dates when these issues can be resolved.
We propose a meeting to discuss, clarify, and resolve these issues beginning on November 16, 1981 at the Bechtel office in Ann Arbor, Michigan for a period of 3-5 days. The enclosure provides a basis for developing a meeting agenda.
We will contact our Project Manager to finalize arrangements.
)
JWC/c1 CC RJBosnak,'USimC BJCook, Midland DSHood, USNBC RWHuston, Washington DBMiller, Midland BuPE OF 8tLG2.7GG27 oc1081-0823a100
y.
~ 'n
+:
l ',,v j-I.g L'
g
>g*
/
a f
+
~
i
[ Section 0.6.2 Page 3-2 We will discuss with you the Midland design criteria for the high energy pipe whip restraints acd the use of Bechtel Topical reports BC-TOP-9 and BN-TOP-2 in the November meeting.
Section 3.6.2 - Page 3-3 The break freeze criteria stated here differ from our criteria contained in FSAR Section 3.6.2.
The Midland break freeze criteria apply only to breaks which have been postulated to satisfy the requirement that a minimum of two
^
intermediate. breaks which have been postulated for each system analyzed. The
{
break points were chosen because they were the points of highest stress at that time, even though the stress at those points may not have been particularly high.
If a subsequent reanalysis of the piping is required, and results in no new points where any of the stress criteria in Section 3.6.2 of the FSAR are exceeded, and the pipe ~ routing in the vicinity of the original intermediate breaks is not changed'signi'ficancly, then the old break locations are retained, and the new points of highest stress are not evaluated.
Section 3.6.2 - Page 3-3 The method of postulating breaks at branch connections for Midland was
' discussed with and agreed to by the staff during the May 21, 1976 meeting in Bethesda. Based on the staff's agreement we consider this issue closed, but we will be. prepared for further discussion at the meeting.
mi1081-0815a102
2 4
Section 3.6.2 - Page 3-3 The results of the LOCA and jet impingement analysis of the major reactor coolant loop components, FSAR Section 3.6.3.3, will be provided in a Revision to the FSAR which is scheduled for submittal in April 1983.
Class 1 piping was originally analyzed using Class 2 procedures in order to provide information required as part of Section 3.6 of the FSAR.
Information based on Class I anaysis will be provided in an FSAR amendment scheduled for submittal in May 1, 1982.
Section 3.7.3 - Page 3-5 P&W will supply the list of applicable computer programs used to assess the NSSS along with the required validation information. The mathematical model used to analyze the NSSS piping and components is superimposed on to the f
structural seismic model of the containment building described in section 3.7.2.
By correctly coupiing the structure with the NSSS, the proper dynamic response of the NSSS has been assured.
The computed stress responses will therefore include the effects of deformations and interactions with the supporting structures to which the components are mounted.
The FSAR will be amended to clarify this point in the February 1981 update.
Section 3.7.3 - Page 3-5 The analysis of piping and components is performed on a complete system basis.
The piping systems extend between more or less rigid beundaries (ie penetrations, rigid hangers, and vessels) and account for the significant i
attached piping. Therefore, the effects of piping interactions has been properly accounted for. The method used for the seismic analysis of the mi1081-0815a102
,.o 3
'Bechtel supplied Category I piping is described in FSAR Appendix 3D.
Externally applied structural restraints'are of two basic types; 1) pipe hangers' and supports, and 2) pipe. whip restraints. The interactive effects
.of'the pipe hangers and supports are factored into.the subsystem analyses by providing'the proper mathematical representation of them in the model.
However, there are no interactive effects associated with the pipe whip
-restraint, for conditions othcr-than a pipe break, a sufficiently large gap is provided between the restraint and the pipe to preclude any.possible.
. interactions.
I Section 3.7.3 - Page 3-6 (Item 1),
B&W will provide justification that all significant modes in the NSSS have g
been copsidered in their analyses in an asiendment to the FSAR in the February l
1981 update. As stated.in FSAR Appendix 3D, the Bechtel Category I piping lf analyses are performed for all significant modes.
l -.
Section 3.7.3 - Page 3-6'(Item 2) l L
The verification of ME 101 is indicated in paragraph 3.9.1.2.1 (Rev 3) of the j
FSAR. A Revision of this paragraph is being prepared to show that verification has been made against ASME and NRC benchmark calculations as well as other programs. HE 632'and all Bechtel standard computer programs are reverified following any modifica.cion,, including program additions and/or program loading into a new computer syrtems, and is reported in FSAR Section 3D7.1.
The above information will be provided in the Revision to the FSAR to be aubmitted February 1982.
mi1081-0815a102
______t
--_a_
4 Section 3.7.3 --Page 3-6, 7 (Item 3)
The Midland plant piping design combines all individual modes in each indiv~ dual spatial coordinate-by the square root of the sum of the squares method. The effect due to closely spaced modes addresced in Reg Guide 1.92 is not being utilized. We will resolve this issue at the meeting.
Section 3.7.3 - Page 3-7 (Item 4)
The seismic analysis of the buried puping is currently being discussed with the staff as a seperate issue. This issue will be resolved along with the other staff concerns on buried safety grade piping. The current schedule for resolution is December 1981.
Section 3.7.3 - Page 3-7, (Item 5)
\\..
The Midland design commitment for the interactive effects of Category I piping with Non-Category I piping is described in Section 3.2.1 and 3.2.2 of the FSAR, and response to Reg Guide 1.29 in Appendix.3A.
Section 3.9.1 - Page 3-9
.i 1
In regards to the independent piping analysis of the Midland Decay, Heat Removal and Core Flooding Systems, we will be prepared to discuss with the staff the additional requested information for this independent analysis at the scheduled meeting. The final
- nozzle loads connecting the noted systems with the primary system is coupled with the reanalysis schedule of the primary
- system, mi1081-0815a102
=
=
- ,=
5 Section 3.9.3 - Page 3-13 The items listed in Table 3.91 are scheduled to be added to the FSAR by Amendment. The Amendment which will supply the data has not been finilized; however we will provide these dates in our November meeting.
The draft SER requested that' applicable transients from Table 3.9-2 be added to Table,3.9-3b.
Table 3.9-2 identifies the transients used in the design and fatigue analysis of ASME Code Class I components, reactor internals, and i
I l
component supports. The Code Class I components of Table 3.9-3b have been classified as normal duty per the guidelines of paragraphs NB-3500 from the Code. Per this classification and size limitations, the. valves do not require a fatigue analysis. This is discussed in FSAR Sections 3.9.3.2.2 and 3.9.3.2.3.
The remaining components are Code Class 2 or 3.
These components are discussed in Section 3.9.3.1.2.
Loading conditions such asunormal, upset, and emergency, were not applied to Class 2 and 3 components since no design rules comparable to those used for ASME Class 1 equipment had been established by the ASME Code for Class 2 and 3 components at the time the components were purchased.
Also allowables used for the elastic plastic evaluation are requested to be added to Table 3.9-9, -10, -11 and -15.
The elastic plastic analysis is in accordance wit,h Code Case 144! of Section III. This was addressed by Question 110.20.
j l
Section 3.9.3 - Page 3-13 f
The-six items concerning the buried piping are currently being discussed with
- the staif. We will present a status review on buried piping at the November meeting.
mi1081-0815a102
i 6
Section 3.9.3 - Page 3-15 The operability of the 18 inch containment purge valves has been discussed in various questions. Additional data is provided in r sponses to Questions 022.31, 022.42, and 022.47. The response to Question 022.47 was recently submitted in FSAR Revision 38.
If questions remain following our presentatica this item can be resolved in our meeting during the week of November 16, 1981.
Section 3.9.3 - Page 3-16 Not all supports for ASME Code components were designed and constructed to the ASME Code. Midland FSAR Section 3.8.6 has been revised to clarify the point.
The following ASME Code component supports, all supplied by Bechtel, have been designed and constructed according to the criteria put forth in the Midland FSAR, Section 3.8.6; Rcactor vessel upper lateral support and lower support
-l -
excluding the reactor skirt and flange, steam generator upper. lateral support 4 -
and lower support excluding the vessel skirt and flange, core flood tank supports, and the pressurizer upper and lower supports. B&W supplied the Reactor and Steam generator skirts and flanges, and these were design in 1
accordance with the ASME Code.
Section 3.9.3 - Page 3-16 We will brief the Mechanical Engineering Branch as to the current status of the corrective actions being taken with.regards to the three broken anchor studs on the Unit I reactor vessel. We intend to make a formal presentation to all of the pertinent NRC branches in Bethesda the. week of November 30.
At the Bechesda meeting we will discuss status of this issue as well as our third report on the Reactor Pressure Vessel Support Modification which will be published by then.
mi1081-0815a102
7-
~
7 Section 3'.9.6 - Pages 3-20 and 3-21 The'~ detailed review'of this section of the FSAR has not been completed by~the NRC; however, there are two areas of concern which have been identified. We will address these areas along with any others that may be identified during-our meeting on November 16, 1981.
l 9
I i-i l!-
I
.l l
mi1081-0815alC2-
- - _ ~.
MEETING NOTICE DISTRIBUTION Docket File go-u 7 J. Krame'r NRC PDR J. Stolz Local PDR S. Ha.nauer
. TIC P. Collins NOV 5 1981 NSIC D. Vassallo TERA D. Ziemann LB #4 r/f T. Murley E. Case F. Schroeder
'D. Eisenhut K. Kniel-R. Purple D. Skovholt T. Novak G. Knighton S. Varga M. Ernst T. Ippolito R. Baer
~
R. A. Clark E. Adensam N. Hughes A. Thandani R. Tedesco ACRS (16)
J. Youngblood Attorney, OELD A. Schwencer 0IE (3)
F. Miraglia RES (7)
J. R. Miller Project Manger D. Hood /R. Hernan G. Lainas Licensing Assistant M. Duncan D. Crutchfield Receptionist 4
W. Russell J. LeDoux, I&E J. 01shinki I&E Headquarters R. Vollmer I&E Region I R. Bosnak-I&E Region II F. Schauer I&E Region III R. E. Jackson I&E Region IV G. Lear 4'
I&E Region V W. ~ J ohnston N
'p9h
({(Lul.L S. Pawlicki 3
u 9)
NRC
Participants:
V. Benaroya NOVO gjggjp s D. good Z. Rosztoczy 4
,p/
F. Cherney W. Haass E,
u.s. @'isse A. Cappucc1 D. Muller
/
s R. Ballard h
7/
J. Rajan W. P. Chen, et. al.
W. Regan ys
.V. Moore R. Mattson P. Check F. Congel
- 0. Parr F. Rosa W. Butler bec: Applicant & Service List W. Kreger R. W. Houston W. Gammill L. Rubenstein T. Speis M. Srinivasan B. Grimes S. Schwartz F. Pagano
- S. Ramos