ML20069D593

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Forwards Response to NRC Question Attachment 1-1 Re Manufacturer Design Info on Single Failure Proof Cranes & Revised Response to NRC Attachment 1-5 Concerning Interfacing Lift Point Evaluation
ML20069D593
Person / Time
Site: Point Beach  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 09/16/1982
From: Fay C
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CO.
To: Clark R, Harold Denton
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
REF-GTECI-A-36, REF-GTECI-SF, RTR-NUREG-0612, RTR-NUREG-612, TASK-A-36, TASK-OR TAC-07727, TAC-08074, TAC-7727, TAC-8074, NUDOCS 8209210319
Download: ML20069D593 (4)


Text

Wisconsin Electnc powra coursur 231 W. MICHIGAN, P.O. BOX 2046, MILWA'!KEE WI 53201 September 16, 1982 Mr. H. R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Washington, D. C. 20555 Attention: Mr. R. A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch 3 Gentlemen:

DOCKET NOS. 50-266 AND 50-301 SUBMITTAL OF OUTSTANDING INFORMATION NUREG-0612, CONTROL OF HEAVY LOADS POINT BEACH NUCLEAR PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2 Your letters dated December 22, 1980 and February 3, 1981 requested that Wisconsin Electric Power Company review the handling of heavy loads at the Point Beach Nuclear Plant and provide information as requested in Enclosure 2 to the December 22 letter. Our transmittals of September 30, 1981 and January ll, 1982 submitted our six and nine-month responses, respectively, which included the majority of the information requested in your letters. Our February 25, 1982 letter provided a proposed schedule for the completion of those outstanding information items.

Enclosed for your review is Wisconsin Electric's response to NRC Question Attachment 1-1, " Manufacturer and Design Informa-tion on Single-Failure-Proof Cranes". This information is provided in the form of a revised page 3 f.or inclusion in our nine-month response.

Also enclosed for your review is a revised response to NRC Question Attachment 1-5, " Interfacing Lift Point Evaluation".

[033

)

8H20 9 210 3 lCl i

r Mr. H. R. Denton September 16, 1982 This information is provided in the form of a revised Appendix D for inclusion in our nine-month response.

Please contact us if you have any questions.

Very truly yours, Assistant Vice President C. W. Fay Enclosures Copy to NRC Resident Inspector Subscribed and sworn to before me this /$1 day of September 1982.

M8 Wh4 Y=.

N5tary PulgitTc, State of Wisconsin

~

My Commission expires / /ff[

7,

Revision 1

~

2.3- NRC QUESTION 2.2-3 Identify any cranes listed in 2.2-1, above, which you have evaluated as having sufficient design features to make the likelihood of a load drop extremely small for all loads to be carried and the basis for this evaluation (i.e., complete compliance with NUREG-0612, Section 5.1.6 or partial compliance supplemented by suitable alternative or additional design features). For each crane so evaluated, provide the load-handling-system (i.e., crane load-combination) information specified in Attachment 1.

RESPONSE

The auxiliary building crane will be modified to meet the guidelines of NUREG-0612, Section 5.1.6, or partial compliance supplemented by suitable alternatives or additional design features. Dependent upon equipment delivery, it is expected that the auxiliary building crane upgrade modifications can be completed within two years.

The information requested on Single-Failure-Proof Handling Systems in Attachment 1 to the NRC letter of December 22, 1980, is provided below.

Information on Single-Failure-Proof Handling System 2.3.1 NRC QUESTION ATTACHMENT l-1 Provide the name of tha manufacturer and the design-rated load (DRL). If the maximum critical load (MCL), as defined in NUREG-0554, is not the same as the DRL, provide this capacity.

RESPONSE

Ederer Crane, a division of Ederer Incorporated, will be supplying a single-failure-proof replacement trolley for the auxiliary building crane. The trolley will be Ederer's X-SAM type and will have a Design Related Load (DRL) and Maximum Critical Load (MCL) of 100 tons.

2.3.2 NRC QUESTION ATTACHMENT l-2 Provide a detailed evaluation of the overhead handling system with respect to the features of design, fabrication, inspection, testing, and operation as delineated in NUREG-0554 and supple-mented by the identified alternatives specified in NUREG-0612, Appendix C. This evaluation must include a point-by-point comparison for each section of NUREG-0554. If the alternatives of NUREG-0612, Appendix C, are used for certain applications in 1.09/11 Rav. 2

/ 2 o 2. -

APPENDIX D Interface lift points were evaluated in accordance to NUREG-0612, Section 5.1.6 and the results are tabulated below in Table Dl.

TABLE D1 EQUIPMENT WEIGHT MATERIAL / REQUIRED CALCULATED UTS (KSI) SAFETY SAFETY FACTOR FACTOR Concrete Hatch 6,250 A-36/58 10 11.52 Covers Large Filter Cask 5,000 A-36/58 10 17.40

(' Small Filter Cask 2,000 A-36/58 10 43.50 Resin Cask 48,000 A240 Type 304 10 11.44

/75 Spent Fuel Pool 3,000 A-36/58 10 29.00 Gate (Watergate)

O 136/51

.