ML20069G729
| ML20069G729 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 03/18/1983 |
| From: | Jackie Cook CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | James Keppler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| References | |
| 10CFR-050.55E, 10CFR-50.55E, 20730, 81-05-#8, 81-5-#8, MCAR-51, NUDOCS 8303280135 | |
| Download: ML20069G729 (5) | |
Text
.
s 1
Consumers Power -
Jernes w cook Company v,,, m,u,,,, _ mj,,,,. r.,,.,,s.,
and Constru, tion General offices: 1945 West Parnait Road, Jackson, MI 49201 * (517) 788-0453 March 18, 1983 81-05 #8 i
Mr J C Keppler. Regional Administrator US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region III 799 Roosevelt Road Glen Ellyn, IL 60137 MIDLAND NUCLEAR C0 GENERATION PLANT DOCKET NOS 50-329 AND 50-330 SHEAR REINFORCEMENT AT MAJOR CONTAINMENT PENETRATIONS FILE:
0.4.9.53 SERIAL
- 20730
References:
J W Cook letters to J G Keppler, Same
Subject:
(1) Serial 11993, dated May 15, 1981 (2) Serial 12066, dated July 31, 1981 (3) Serial 14635, dated December 14, 1981 (4) Serial 16126, dated March 12, 1982 (5) Serial 17511, dated June 4, 1982 (6) Serial 17598, dated August 31, 1982 (7) Serial 19119, dated December 17, 1982 This letter, as were the referenced letters, is an interim 50.55(e) report concerning the adequacy of shear reinforcements at major containment penetrations. provides the final Bechtel report on the actions necessary to assure adequacy of the shear reinforcements at major containment penetrations. The final conclusion is that the as-designed and as-built containment in this regard is satisfactory. The nnalysis demonstraced that there. is no safety problem.
There are some !urther actions, such as updating FSAR Section 3.8.1.5.1.5 and finalizing the design calculations.
In addition, since the analysis mentioned above resulted in revised numerical values for forces, verification of the adequacy of other reinforcene,uts adjacent to the I
penetrations are being carried out.
No adverse tindings are anticipated to evolve from the remaining engineering analyses to be completed.
s TEU) h44J123 t983 OC0383-0008A-MP0 l
i
2 Serial 20730 81-05 #8 Consumers Power will send either the final report or another interim report-addressing the above issue by June 13, 1983.
y JWC/WRB/lr : MCAR-51, Revised Final Repo t, dated March 7, 1983 CC: Document Control Desk, NRC RJCook, NRC Resident Inspector Washington, DC Midland Nuclear Plant CBechhoefer, ASLB Panel FPCowan, ASLB Panel JHarbour, ASLB Panel AS&L Appeal Panel MMCherry, Esq MSinclair BStamiris CRStephens, USNRC WDPaton, Esq, USNRC FJKelley. Esq Attorney General SHFreeman, Esq, Asst Attorney General WHMarshall GJMerritt, Esq, TNK&J INP0 Records Center OC0383-0008A-MP01
- ~..
Serial 20730 Bechtel Associates ProfessionalCorporation
SUBJECT:
1 (issued 4/21/81)
Shear Reinforcement at Containment Building Major Penetrations 1
FINAL REPORT March 7, 1983 DATE:
P3t0 JECT:
Consumers Power Company Midland Plant Unitt 1 and 2 Bechtel Job 7220 Degeristion of Deficiency The discrepancies discussed in this report concern the amount of radial shear reinforcement provided around the containment builuing esfor (large) penetrations.
Summary of Investiaation and Historical Backaround
Background
While examining drawings for the containment shell, it was determined that there is less radial shear tie reinforcement around the equipment hatch, personnel lock, and the emergency air lock penetrations than in other projects of similar design. The design for these penetri.tions was completed in November 1973, the drawings for the equipment hatch were issued for construction in July 1974, and the containment walls for Units 1 and 2 were constructed in 1976 and 1977.
Investigation Design requirements, criteria, existing cticulations, and drawings were reviewed and it was determined that reevaluation of penetrations for the equipment hatch, main steam line, person.ael lock, purge line, and emergency air lock was required.
The equipment hatch penetrations have been independently analyzed using a more detailed finite-element model than that used in the original design. Shear stresses around the equipment hatch satisfy 4
acceptance criteria, which are contained in ASME Section III, Division 2, Subsection CC 3421.6 and are to be incorporated in FSAR Subsection 3.8.1.5.1.5.
The main steam liae penetration calculations have been reslowed and the shear reinforcement was found acceptable.
0085u
.m.
m.
Bechtel Associates ProfessionalCorporation i 07464 l073i6 NCAR 51 FINAL REPORT Page 2 The personnel lock penetration has been independently analyzed using a finite element model as compared to the hand calculations used for the original design. Two 50-degree segments at the top and bottom of the 1
personnel lock penetration were found to be overstressed by the linear elastic analysis for the secondary load case, which includes accident temperature. The results of a cracked section analysis, however, demonstrated that the stresses satisfy the acceptance criteria discussed earlier for the equipment hatch. The cracked section analysis has been independently reviewed and accepted by consultants.
Based on the acceptability of the personnel lock penetration and because the purge line and emergency air lock penetrations have the same shell thickness and reinforcing details and are subject to the same loading conditions as the personnel lock, they are considered acceptable because they have smaller diameters.
l Analysis of Safety Implications l
l No deficiencies have been found under FSAR loading conditions that I
could adversely affect the safety of the Midland plant.
Corrective Action As a result of examination of the design criteria, FSAR Subsection 3.8.1.5.1.5 will be revised to include the applicable ASME Section I~I, Division 2, Subsection CC 3421.6 equations for punching shear in prestrcssed concrete and to update the finite-element model of the equipment hatch. This will be completed by May 31, 1983. No further corrective action is required as a result of this NCAR.
Probable Cause Not applicable l
l 0085u
. u
Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation 107464 107316 mu 51 FINAL REPORT Page 3 Reportability This condition was reported to the NRC by Consumers Power Company as "potentially reportable" under 10 CFR 50.55(e) on Apri1 17, 1981.
Based on the safety analysis of this report, it is concluded that this condition is "not reportable" under 10 CFR 50.55(e).
Submitted by:
S. Sobkowski Civi1 Structurai Group Supervisor D*b Approved by:
Mif.
E.M. Hugh Ann Arbor roject Engineer Concurrence by:
'///6M/
T.E.Ifnson Chief Civil E(gineer Concurrence by:
M u
l E.H. Smith I
Engineering Manager Concurrence by:
H.A. Dietrich Project Quality Assurance Engineer l
0085u
_,..,,._,.,,.m
..y,..,
.