ML20052G892
| ML20052G892 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 05/13/1982 |
| From: | Vincent R CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TASK-02-03.A, TASK-02-03.B, TASK-02-03.C, TASK-2-3.A, TASK-2-3.B, TASK-2-3.C, TASK-RR NUDOCS 8205190125 | |
| Download: ML20052G892 (11) | |
Text
,
Consumers Power Company General othces: 1945 West PerneH Road. Jack son, MI 49201 e (517) 788 0550 May 13, 1982 Dennis M Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No 5 Nuclear Reactor Regulation US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 DOCKET 50-155 - LICENSE DPR '
BIG ROCK POINT PLANT - SEP TOPICS II-3.A, II-3.B, II-3.B.1, II-3.c, HYDROLOGY TOPICS By letter dated January 11, 1982, the NRC requested additional information on SEP Topics II-3.A, 3.B, 3.B.1 and 3.C for Big Rock Point. This letter is provided in response to those requests.
Attached is a list of drawings which contain information pertinent to the NRC requests.
In addition a short discussion is provided for each question to lead the reviewer to the appropriate locations on each drawing.
Because of the large volume of the drawings, they have not been included in this letter. A complete set of the listed drawings was given to Mr R Scholl, SEPB on May 6, 1982 for the use of the topic reviewer.
If additional informa-tion is required, it is suggested that a site visit be considered to allow the reviewer to see the revelant site features first hand.
A um m
Robert A Vincent Q{
Staff Licensing Engineer b
CC Administrator, Region III, USNRC NRC Resident Inspector-Big Rock Point Pages oc0582-0007a142 8205190125 820513 PDR ADOCK 05000155 P
ATTACHMENT SEP TOPICS II-3.A, 3.B, 3.B.1, 3.C Big Rock Point Plant l
l I
l l
l t
1 ic0582-0007bl42
BIG ROCK POINT SEP TOPICS II-3. A. 3.B. 3.B.1, 3.C LIST OF DRAWINGS Dwg. No.
Re v.
Sht Title G16kO8 A
2 Big Rock Point Plant Site - Site Develop-ment SG16408-B 1
Big Rock Point Plant - Parking Area Expansion SF16kO8 1
Topo of Discharge Area C-5 Site Plan Clearing Rough Grading &
Excavation C-7 H
Plot Plan Finish Grading & Paving C-lk J
Yard Piping General Plan C-20 B
Miscellaneous Yard Foundations C-32 3
Offshore Intake Line Plan & Profile C-35 D
Screen Well, Pump House & Discharge Structure Substructure - Plans C-37 4
Screen Well, Pump House & Discharge Structure Sections & Details II C-251 B
Turbine Building Foundation Plan C-261 B
Turbine Building Ground Floor Plan C-280 3
1 Turbine Building Equipment Foundation 07kOG20302 A
1 Radvaste Processing Building Site Plan 740-G83010 F
3 Water quality Control Sanitary System Subsurface Disposal Sections NUkOG1901 C
1 Permanent Track Layout M7kOG1901 B
2 Permanent Track Layout M74001901 A
3 Railroad Cross Sections NRh001902 1
Permanent Track Profiles Nyk001902 B
2 Permanent Track Profiles NU40G1903 B
1 Entrance Road Layout M74001903 2
Entrance Road Profile M7kOG1903 C
3 Parking Lot Layout
r BACKGROUND This Request for Additional Information (RFI) is the result of an evaluation of the information contained in NRC Docket No. 50-155 (Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Station) relating to hydrological considerations. The four topics for which further information la sought are Systematic Evaluation Program (SEP) Topics II-3.A (Hydrologic Description), II-3.B (Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements), II-3.B.1 (Capability of Operating Plants to Cope with Design Basis Flooding Conditions), and II-3.C (Safety
.Related Water Supply - Ultimate Beat Sink). The information obtained from this RFI will be used to supplement other docketed information concerning hydrologic considerations at Big Rock Point and to resolve all outstanding issues under those SEP topics. Ls Fra.nklin Resea.r.ch Center a on
.t n= rm..
an,.
l
Topic II-3.B Flooding Potential and Protection Requirements ne purpose of this topic is to identify the design basis flood level for the plant and site, under current licensing criteria, resulting from all potential flood sources external to the plant and site.
It includes the evaluation and discussion of significant differences between the levels or values used for design and construction and those derived under curront licensing criteria. The evaluation includes the effects of flood and of changes in hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads on safety-related structures, systems, and equipment. The discussion includes features of existing or proposed flood protection measures such as revetsents, flood walls or doors, and emergency or administrative procedures.
ITLM 1 CONCERN Ponding from precipitation, runoff from areas adjacent to the site, and I
high waves on Lake Michigan may. present a hazard to safety-related structures.
REQUEST Provide a list of structures housing equipment needed for safe shut'down.
For each such structure, specify the location and elevation of the lowest non-watertight openings.
ITD; 2 CONCERN Iocal precipitation may cause runoff flow from adjacent areas toward the plant site. Inadequacies in drainage and diversion structures or unfavorable topography may direct this water through the site. L d Franidin Research Center A DMeman af The FM tumunump
REQUEST Provide drawings showing topography and water control structures such as beras or drainage ditches in the areas south and east of the immediate plant site. These drawings should include elevations, should cover the area up to the immediate plant site, and should be consistent with contiguous site drawings at the line where two drawings join or overlap, so that drainage patterns may be determined. Drawings C-3 (0740G20003), Site Plan, and C-7 (0740G20007) Plot Plan - Finish Grading and Paving, were submitted previously but do not adequately cover the area in question.
ITEM 3 CONCERN Local precipitation may cause flooding on the plant site. Storm drains may become clogged with debris or be inadequate to carry the large volume of water. Parking lot, roof top, and landscape runof f may pond in low areas, causing hydrostatic loads and leaking into safety-related structures through non-watertight openings.
REQUEST Provide storm drain locations, elevations, sizes, and capacities. Provide drawings showing the present topography of the site landscaping, including elevations of parking lots, roads, walkways, and railroad tracks.
ITEM 4 CONCERN Groundwater fluctuations can cause changes in loads applied to buildings and flood protection structures. The chosen design basis groundwater level should give reasonable certainty that it will not be exceeded *at the plant j
site.
. liU d Franklin Research Center A h af The Fm buenas
Safety-related structures must be able to withstand the ccubined loads of design basis groundwater level and safe shutdown earthquake.
REQUEST Groundwater loads were not considered in the original design of the Big Rock Point Nuclear Power station, but safety-related structures have subsequently been analyzed for hydrostatic loading to 483.6' mean sea level (msl). To ensure that this is a reasonably conservative value to use in place of design basis ground water level, provide all onsite groundwater measurements, referenced to the ground surface. Specify how long groundwater levels were monitored and state whether this period included seasonal fluctuations and times of high lake levels.
ITEM 5 CONCERN
' The Final Hazards Summary Report shows no calcula.tions of high water levels which might be caused by a surge or seiche.
REQUEST Provide any calculations which have been made of surge and seiche stillwater level and wave height.
ITEM 6 CONCERN Drawing C-7 (0740G20007), Plot Plan - Finish Grading and Paving, shows a fence on a strip of paving immediately north of the plant. Drawing C-3 l
(0740G20003), Site Plan, shews the label " Toe of Rock Berm" at the west end of that fence.
(
/
4 Nb Franklin Research Center A Damen et The Freden buenas
I REQUEST Are these structures part of a flood wall? If so, provide drawings and descriptions of its construction, and specify elevation of protection.
Describe the event it was designed to protect against, including still water level and wave run-up.
- FranMn Research Center AOsmannof1heF, ween w
l ITEM 1 a)
Pumphouse/ Diesel Generating Building On drawing 740G20035 door openings are shown at elevation 589.00'.
Electric manhole top level is also at elevation 589.00 per drawing 0740G20037. This same location is shown as elevation 588.6 on drawing 0740G20014. Field check of elevations on 4/27/82 shows top of manhole at elevation 588.98 (FB857) with door opening at elevation 589.04.
Drawing 0740G20007 shows pavement grades sloping eastward from 590.0 at the southwest corner to 588.2 at the end of the ramp into the diesel generator room and down to 588.0 at edge of pavement east of ramp and northward from the southwest corner to 588.7 at the step south of the manhole and to 588.5 at the edge of the pavement at the end of the ramp into the traveling screen room. Floor drains in the 583'-6" floor level drain into the lake but are equipped with backwater valves.
b) Turbine Building Note 2 in upper left corner of drawing 0740G20251 calls for top of concrete at doorways at elevation 593.00'.
Section E on drawing 0740G20261 shows top of railroad rail at 593.00.
Detail 2 on drawing 0740G20280 shows 2-1/2" deep flangeway for rails. Thus the lowest opening is at 592.79 but drawing 0740G20261 shows floorline elevation around the tracks of 593.00. Water level would have to rise above 593.00 to move onto the floor.
c)
Reactor Building The reactor building utilizes airloci type entrances.
ITEM 2 Consumers Power Company has no drawing showing contours beyond the immediate plant area. Enclosed is a USGS Bayshore, Michigan 15' quadrangle map marked up to show approximate plant property lines and reactor location. At a scale of 1" equals 5208' only gross drainage patterns as described in Volume II of FHSR are shown.
Drawings M740-Gl901 Sheets 1 thru 3 and M740-Gl902 Sheets 1 and 2 show rai,lroad layout, sections and profile. Note from M740-Gl902 Sheet 1 that the railroad crosses US 31 at a high point of the highway and then slopes downward all the way to the plant area. Sections on M740-Gl901 Sheet 3 indicate the ditch bottom on each side of the roadbed to be at least three feet below top of ballast (3'-8" below top of rail) for the full length of railroad. No culverts pass under the railroad except at the open ditch just south of the south plant security fence. I culvert originally installed at station 56+40 has been plugged and surface drainage on the east side of the railroad tracks is routed around the enlarged radwaste processing area as shown on drawing 0740G20302, Sheet 1.
Drawings M740-G1903 Sheets 1, 2 and 3 show entrance road plan and profile and parking lot layout. On sheet I note location and slope of culverts under roadway. All culverts drain natural low areas toward the north and/or east.
The drive slopes down from US 31 to Station 12+38.8 and then at 0.0% grade into the plant.
Entrance road centerline Station 30+57.04 is at plant coordinates N12676, E7337.
Drawing 0740G20005
" clearing, Rough Grading and Excavation", indicates original ditches and drainage pattern in the immediate plant area. Drawings M740-G83010 Sheet 3 and 0740G20302 Sheet 1 indicate modifications to the original drainage pattern. The storm drain called for by revision F on drawing M740G83010 Sheet 3 was not installed.
ITEM 3 Drawing 0740G20005, 0740G20014, M740-Gl903 Sheet 3 show storm drain locations, sizes and slopes along with open ditches around the site. Drawing 740G83010 Sheet 3 shows layout and cross section of a service drive from the parking lot to the sanitary waste disposal area. The culvert under the existing road at the northwest corner of the security fence has an outside diameter of about 69 inches.
Drainage inside the paved road around the plant leads to a headwall and 18" CMP leading to the lake directly north of the reactor building. Low point of the crown of the paved drive is 590.00 as shown on drawing 0740G20009.
Drawing SF-16408 Sheet 1 shows "as-built" elevations north of the security fence.
ITEM 4 No records have been found indicating any formal groundwerer level monitoring having been done at this site. A mention of groundwater level of 579' in the original borings is found in FHSR Vol II.
Borings made for the radwaste expansion in 1981 indicate an artesian head under the hard gray clay layer that raised borehole water level to elevation 590 1 after penetrating the gravel below the clay. Borings also indicate possible shallow perched water table above the clay independent of the lower aquifer.
ITEM S Nothing has been found to indicate that any calculations were made to define water levels caused by surge or seiche other than a mention of the possibility in FHSR Vol II.
Lake Michigan levels provided by the Corps of Engineers show highest recorded lake level at Mackinac City to be 582.95 USGS on July 22, 1952 and about 582.97 USGS at Ludington on June 16, 1973. Predicted 500 year flood level on this portion of Lake Michigan is 583.0 IGLD which is about 584.2 USGS and a 100 year flood level of about 583.6 USGS.
Doc 2412A i
ITEM 6 There is a fence running northward from the containment across the paved drive and aceting an east-west oriented fence in the graveled area north of the plant. The northwest corner of the east-west fence is near the outlet of the open ditch around the south and west sides of the plant area. This fence serves as the security fence for the plant area.
Drawing 0740G20005 " Rough Grading" indicates the extent of the filled area between the fence and the lake. Revision note 6 implies the addition of riprap along this filled area from the pumphouse to the drainage ditch outlet. A section "E" is noted on this drawing but section "E" has been deleted from drawing 0740G20020. A reference to shoreline riprap is found on drawing 0740G20032.
No calculations or drawings have been found covering the design of this riprap, however, the sloping lakeward face of the fill is covered by random stone and rock.
The note " Toe of Rock Berm" appears on several drawings. The direction of the arrowhead and the notation " Top" and " Foot of limestone terrace" shown on drawing G16408 Sheet 2 along with the preconstruction contours shown on the site drawings lead to the conclusion that this note was on the original topographical drawing used as a base drawing and was not put in as part of the plant construction. The note should be removed to prevent further confusion.
l Doc 2412A i
,