ML20051N959
| ML20051N959 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1982 |
| From: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Vandewalle D CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| References | |
| TASK-09-01, TASK-9-1, TASK-RR LSO5-82-05-032, LSO5-82-5-32, NUDOCS 8205170371 | |
| Download: ML20051N959 (7) | |
Text
,
f
/
J.-
,3 May 13,1982 M
E S
h >
I C'
Docket No. 50-155 A
LS05-82-05-032 7
w [#
l-
- r z\\-
g[
/l v
/,i
~-
s Mr. David J. VandeWalle
/ g-- '
f Nuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power Company 1945 W. Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. VandeWalle:
SUBJECT:
SEP TOPIC IX-1, FUEL STORAGE - BIG ROCK POINT Enclosed is the staff's evaluation of SEP Topic IX-1, " Fuel Storage" for the Big Rock Point facility. This assessment compares your facility as described in Docket No. 50-155 with the criteria currently used for licensing new facilities.
It is recognized that the spent fuel pool expansion in being contested in a public hearing.
If the outcome of that hearing should affect our evaluation of Topic IX-1 we will revise the evaluation accordingly.
This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assess-ment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your facility. This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.
Sincerely, hTgindsigneaty[
oy
~
Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5
//
Division of Licensing g
(,.SlaI6/
Enclosure:
g M//
As stated cc w/ enclosure:
See next r y P
l 8205170 M I l
- SEE PREVIOUS CONCURRENCE l
..S g B.,,,,,*,,,,,,
,,,S,E,PB,,,,*
,,,S,E PB,,,, *
,,0 R,B,#,5 *
,,,g,RBiS*
,A.-
- ,D(,,,,,,
orr,c,>
L
.uome>..c Cwa,,1.,1,,n,a,; b,1...c C,wa.u,n,a,,,,,.W.R,u,s s, ell,,,,,, R Em c,h,,,,,,,,,,,, QC,ru,tc,hfi el,d
, G,,,,,n a,s,,,,,
. 3./.1. 9LE..........al.1.9/.8 2........3/.l.9/A2........ 3 /.19/82.........
.5Hl.81.....,... 5/.h.8,2,,,,,
em>
l Nac ronu ais tio-eoi nacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY uso m asi-m m
.. ~ _
y 7
- Q,,
.s w
Docket No. 50-155 LS05 Mr. Dvaid J. VandeWalle Nuclear Licensing Administrator Consumers Power Company 1945 W. Parnall Road Jackson, Michigan 49201
Dear Mr. VandeWalle:
SUBJECT:
SEP TOPIC IX-1, FUEL STORAGE - BIG ROCK POINT Enclosed is the staff's evaluation of SEP Topic IX-1, " Fuel Storage" for the Big Rock Point facility. TH s assessment compares your> facility as described in Docket No. 50-155 with the criteria currently used for licensing new facilities.
It is recognized that the spent fuel pool expansion is being contested in a p:sblic hearing.
If the outcome of that hearing should affect our evaluation of Topic IX-1 we will revise the evaluation accordingly.
This evaluation will be a basic input to the integrated safety assess-ment for your facility unless you identify changes needed to reflect the as-built conditions at your facility. This assessment may be revised in the future if your facility design is changed or if NRC criteria relating to this subject are modified before the integrated assessment is completed.
Sincerely, l
l l
i Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief l
Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
l As stated cc w/ enclosure:
See next page IM/
omce>.S.. E...
...S.E..
.. 5.W.......O R.B.. #. 5...
A D. : S. A..:..DL
,,La1nas sunare >.G
......D.aj,b.1,,
,,G,
na WRussel1 REmch,,
DC,r,
1e1d G
.. 3//.8/.22.......
... 31/.f.l@R....,. 3/.jj/.gg...,
.. 3/l.7/82.,.,
,.,h,,.,7./SR..,,... 3/..../32...,
om>
i NRC FORM 318 00-80MRCM 0243 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usago: mi-mm
Big Rock Point Docket No. 50-155 Rev. 2/8/82 s
Mr. David J. VandeWalle i
cc U. S. Environmental Protection Mr. Paul A. Perry, Secretary Consumers Power Company Agency 212 West Michigan Avenue Federal Activities Branch Jackson, Michigan 49201 Region V Office ATTN:
Regional Radiation Representative Judd L. Bacon, Esquire 230 South Dearborn Street Consumers Power Company Chicago, Illinois 60604 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 Peter B. Bloch, Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Joseph Gallo, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Isham, Lincoln & Beale Washington, D. C.
20555 1120 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 Washington, 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 Regulatary Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant ATTN: Mr. C. J. Hartman Mr. John O'Neill, II Plant Superintendent Route 2, Box AA Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Maple City, Michigan 49664 Christa-Maria Charlevoix Public Library Route 2, Box 108C 107 Clinton Street Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Charlevoix, Michigan William J. Scanlon, Esquire Chairman 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 l
Counsel for Christa Maria, et al.-
Route 2, Box 108C Urban Law Institute Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 lL Antioch School of Law 263316th Street, NW Washington, D. C.
20460 l
t n
.--.,r
- +,, -..
, - =, -.,,
n.
. Big Rock Point Docket No, 50-155 Mr. David J. VandeWalle cc Dr. John H. Buck Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Ms. JoAnn Bier 204 Clinton Street Charlevoix, Michigan 49720 Thomas S. Moore Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 James G. Keppler, Regional Administrator Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Region III Office of Inspection and Enforcement 799 Roosevelt Road
~
Glen Ellyn, Illinois 60137 g
t
\\
SYSTEMATIC EVALUATION PROGRAM TOPIC IX-1 BIG ROCK POIGT.
TOPIC IT-1. FUEL STORAGE I.
INTRODUCTION The purpose of SEP Topic IX-1 is to review the storage facility for new and irradiated fuel, including the cooling capability and seismic classification of the fuel pool cooling system of the spent fuel storage pool in order to assure that new and irradiated fuel are stored safely with respect to criticality, c6oling capability shield ing, and structural capability.
II.
R_EVIEW CRITERIA The plant design was reviewed with regard to Section VI, " Fuel and Radioactivity Control of Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 50, General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants" which requires that the fuel storage systems shall be designed to assure adegaate safety under normal.and postulated accident conditions.
III.
RELATED SAFETY TOPICS C
SEP Topic II-3.B. " Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements" identifies the design basis flood for which the plant must be adequately designed for.
SEP Topic III-1, " Classification of Structures. Compqnents and Systems (Seismic and Quality)".is intended to assure that structures, systems and components important to safety are of the quality level connensurate with their safety function.
SEP Topic III-4. A, " Tornado Missiles" covers tornado missile protection of a number of structures and systems including fuel storage areas and support systems.
SEP Topic III-6, " Seismic Design Considerations" will-ensure the capability of the plant to withstand the effects of earthquakes.
j SEP Topic IX-2, " Overhead Handling Systems-Crsnes" covers the potential for dropping heavy objects.onto spent fuel. This topic has been deleted since the review criteria is identical to that of Unresolved Safety' Issue A-36, " Control of Heavy Loads Near Spent Fuel."
SEP Topic IX-5, " Ventilation Systems" assures that the ventilation systems #
have the capability to provide a safe environment for plant personnel and engineered safety features equipment.
l m
s
. IV.
REVIEW GUIDELINES Current guidance for the review of spent fuel storage is provided in Standard Review Plan Section 9.1.1 New Fuel Storage, Section 9.1.2 Spent Fuel Storage, Section 9.1.3 Spent Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup System, Section 9.1.4 Fuel Handling System and Regulatory Guides 1.29 Seismic Design Classification,1.13 Fuel Storage Facility Design Basis, 1.26 Quality Group Classification and Standards for Water-Steam and Radioactive Waste-Containing Components of Nuclear Power Plants as well as the guidance contained in the April 14, 1978 generic letter - OT Position for Review and Acceptance of Spent Fuel Storage and Handling Applications (i.e., D0R Technical Activities Category A item 27, Increase in Spent Fuel Storage Capacity).
Those portions of the topic which have been previously reviewed to current criteria have rot been reevaluated.
V.
EVALUATION By letter dated April 23, 1979, as supplemented on June 26, October 1, October 19, October 25, December 28, 1979, January 7 January 16, February 1, June 20, August 11, August 14, and December 5,1980, Consumers Power Company (CPCo) (the licensee) requested an amendment to Facility Operating License No. DPR-6 for the Big Rock Point Plant, lhe amendment would authorize an 4
increase in the storage capacity of the spent fuel pool (SFP) from the present 193 fuel assemblies to 441 fuel assemblies at the Big Rock Point Plant.
This increase in storage capacity will allow the storage of spent fuel until 1990 while retaining the capability to offload a full core up to that time.
By letter dated May 15, 1981, the staff issued a Safety Evaluation (SE) regarding the expansion of the Big Rock Point spent fuel storage capacity.
This SE addressed criticality considerations, spent fuel cooling capability, structural and mechanical design and materials considerations and radiological considerations of the expanded spent fuel pool. The SE concluded that the proposed modifications are acceptable. Since the staff analysis was performed in accordance with current licensing criteria, we conclude that the May 15, 1 981 SE satisfies the requirements for SEP Topic IX-1.
We therefore conclude that the spent fuel storage facility is acceptable with respect to the re-quirements of Standard Review Plan 9.1.2 and 9.1.3.
The structural response of the Big Rock Point plant wit'n respect to seismic capability will be examined as part of SEP Topic III-6, " Seismic Design Considerations."
i i
I l
l
s
, Regarding new fuel storage, the new fuel storage area is located in the containment building.
New fuel is stored dry in the fuel storage area.
The primary concern would be flooding of the storage area with the poten-tial for inadvertent criticality.
There are no fluid lines in the vicinity of the new fuel storage vault whose rupture could cause flooding of the vault.
In addition, the new fuel storage area is covered with metal plates which would prevent sud-den flooding of the area.
Leakage through the metal plates would be removed via a drain in the new fuel enclosure.
Based on the above we conclude that the new fuel storage facility meets the guidance of Standard Review Plan 9.1.1.
VI.
CONCLUSIONS Based on the above considerations, we conclude that the Big Rock Point fuel storage systems meet current acceptance criteria. We further con-clude that SEP Topic IX-1 is complete.
e l
_