ML19347C084

Forwards Summary of 800908 Conference Call Re Soil Settlement Problem

ML19347C084
Person / Time
Site:	Midland
Issue date:	10/06/1980
From:	Bates J ROCKWELL INTERNATIONAL CORP.
To:	Bosnak R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
80ETEC-DRF-4264, NUDOCS 8010160554
Download: ML19347C084 (3)

Text

.- . .- - - . _ - . . . _ _ . -. . . - . _ - - -

l .

Energy Tecfwtology Engineering Center i

Energy Systems Group I P O. Box 1449 j L oe l Canoga Park, CA 91304 4D h ' ) b' S',,

(213)341 100 Rockwell Opcated for U.S. oeoartment of Energy lnternatiOnal October 6, 1980 80ETEC-DRF-4264 l Mr. R. J. Bosnak, Chief -

Mechanical Engineering Branch (

Division of Engineering -

U. S. fluclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 '

Subject:

Midland Plant Units 1 & 2: Summary of onference Call of September 8,1980 Regarding Soil Settlement Prcblem References : 1) NRC Letter, Docket 50-539/330, " Summary of January 16, 1980 Meeting on Supplemental Requests Regarding Plant Fill", D. S. Hood, February 4, 1980 ,

2) ETEC Letter 80ETEC-DRF-0123, " Review of Response to 10 CFR 50.54 Request on Plant Fill for Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2", J. O. Bates to A. J. Cappucci, January 17, 1980

Dear Mr. Bosnak:

i Enclosed for record purposes is a summary of the subject conference call between the NRC, ETEC and Consumers Pcwer Company and their consultants regarding the comment items contained in Enclosurc 3 of Reference 1.

These items were based on the ETEC comments rf Reference 2 and pertain to the effects of soil settlement on buried piping for the subject plant.

, Sincerely yours, I

r.h'

^

J. O. Bates, Program Manager Energy Programs Office Energy Technology Engineering Center Enclosures As Noted cc: H. L. Brammer, NRC A. J. Cappucci. NRC 8010160554 g

~

Enclosure to: 80ETEC-DRF-4264 ,

SUMMARY

OF CONFERENCE CALL BETWEEN NRC, ETEC, CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY AND THEIR CONSULTANTS ON SEPT. 8, 1980 REGARDING THE MIDLAND PLANT UNITS 1 & 2 S0Il SETTLEMENT PROBLEM The items of this summary are keyed to the comment numbers of Enclosure 3 of Reference 1.

2. Resoonse to Question 16, Paae 16-1 The Applicant committed to modify the response to address the maximum expected differential settlement over the life of the plant.

3. Resconse to Question 17, Pace 17-1. Para. 1 The Applicant stated that the selection of the Service Water Piping for orofiling was based on the criterion that this piping covered the largest area and was expected to represent the worst case. After some discussion, this item was left unresolved.

4. Resoonse to Duestion 17, Pace 17-2, Para. 2 l The Apolicant indicated that calculations currently being performed did not utilize the method described in the subject paragraph. MRC wil . investigate arrangements for an exchange of ETEC and Bechtel calculations for further review.

5. Response to Question 17, Pace 17-3, Para. 2 The Applicant is investigating the settlements over the life of the plant.

6. Resoonse to Question 17 The Applicant stated that stresses in excess of the previously proposed 3 Sc limit were obtained and is coing to propose that the limit be increased. Such an increase is to be based on stress levels permitted by other asoects of the Code,e.g. manufacturing ,

ETEC's comments are on hold pending receipt of additional information.

7. Resoonse to Question 18, Page 18-1, Para. 2 & 3 The Applicant stated that final closure welds have been made and that the amount of settlement before final closure is unknown. This item is~ unresolved,

~

tric iosur e ts. ov c i tt -unr -4co,

8. Response to Question 18, Pages 18-2, Para. 2 & 3 The Applicant will re-evaluate this item.

9. Resoonse to Question 19, Pages 19-1 to 19-3 The Applicant will re-evaluate this item.

10. Response to Duestion 20 The Applicant will re-evaluate this item.

f e