ML19206B208
| ML19206B208 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 09/19/1969 |
| From: | US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| PR-690919, NUDOCS 7905080059 | |
| Download: ML19206B208 (5) | |
Text
-.
'l
( )
)
c PREHEARING CONFERENCE STATEMENT ntREE MILE ISLAND U'IIT NO. 2 Docket No. 50-320 i
Scy gmber 19, 1969 On April 29, 1968 the Jersey Central Power & Light Company applied to the Atomic Energy Commission for a construction permit and facility license for a proposed thit 2 of the Oyster Creek Nuclear Station at the Oyster Creek site in Ocean County, New Jersey. On March 10, 1969 Amendment No. 6 was submitted, changing the location of the proposed facility to the Three Mile Island site in Dauphin County, Pennsylvania. The facility was redesignated the Three Mlle Island Nuclear Station Unit 2, to be co-owned by the t
Jersey Central Power & Light Company and the Metropolitan Edison Company. Amend:aent No. 9 was submit ted on May 7,1969, making the Metropolitan Edison Company responsible for the design, construction and operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2 (T'il #2).
i' The proposed pressurized water reactor designed by The Babcock
& Wilcox Company vill operate initially at core power levels up to 2452 Megawatts thermal (Mwt).
However, it is expected that this core power level can eventually be increased t,
2772 Mwt.
Accordingly, Metropolitan Edison analyzed, and the regulatory staf f evaluated, the engineered safety features of the reactor, and the accident consequences at the 2772 Mwt power level. The thermal hydraulic core characteristics of the reactor were analyzed and evaluated 2 ;
2 3 /> 7 90n os oo#P C
l
's
\\)
..)
~-
- i
~.
l I
based upon the 2452 Mwt power level. We have reviewed the details of the design of the nuclear steam supply system based on the 2452 Mwt power level and have concluded that it is acceptable, The nuclear steam supply system proposed for TMI #2 is similar i
in design to the Three Mlle Island Nuclear Station Unit 1, Oconee Nuclear Station, Rancho Seco Nuclear Station, Crystal River Nuclear I
Station, and Russellville Nuclear Station which are all under construc-tion pursuant to Commission authorized construction permits.
We and our environmental consultants anel the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) have reviewed the various site-related factors presented in the application and, amendments. On the basis of these reviews it was found that the extent of flood protection to be provided for the Three Mile Island site will require further review during plant construction. The reouired level of flood t
protection will be based upon the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) for the Susquehanna River at the site as calculated by the United States Corps of Engineers. As noted in our Safety Evaluation, the exact i
j PMF level at the site will not be available until the middle of 1970.
Consequently, Metropolitan Edison has indicated that protection for the Taree Mile Island site will be adjusted to meet the U.S. Corps of Engineers of ficial PMF icvel to assure that safe shutdown of both nuclear units can be accomplished if the PMF were to occur. This commitment by the applicants is considered adequate, and we and our consultants will review the adequacy of flood protection proposed for the site.
9' 9$ /
6i 4.-
N, T
(,.
.s l The U. S. Geological Survey has conunented favorably. on geological The Environmental Science and other hydrological aspects o f the si te.
Services Administ ration (ll.S. Weather Bureau) has commented favorably l
l on the meteorology of the site.
of the Interior The Fish and WLtdlife Service of the Department recommended that pre-operational and post-operational radiolcgical surveys be made and that the applicant cooperate with the Fish and i
4 Wildlife Service and interested Pe nnsylvania state agencies in the The development of the plans of these surveys and in other areas.
applicants will cooperate with '.nteres ted S tate and Federal agencies.
Our seismic design consultant, Nathan M. Newmark Consulting the design of the Three Engineering Services, has deterrined that tiile Island Nuclear Generating Unit No. 2 will be adequate to ensure the plant can withstand those seismic accelerations which have t
that been estimated by our seismological consultant, the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey.
We have evaluated the consequences of potential accidents which could involve release of radioactivity f rom the linit 2 site and have concluded that in the unlikely event of any of these accidents the potential doses from the release of radioact ivi ty would not exceed the guidelines set forth in 10 C Fit l'a r t 100 of the Commission's re gulatio ns.
2 c_
,r
I l
(' )
B Unit 2 will be protected against an aircraf t strike and i
l accompanying fire to the same criteria as were required for Unit 1.
i Further development work and evaluation will be performed during the detailed design of TMI #2.
This includes work related to core i
fuel rod stability, core thermal and hydraulic characteristics, clad failures, high fuel burnup performance, internal vent valves,
control rod drive tests, once-through steam generators, in-core neutron detectors, blowdown forces on reactor internals, chemical spray system, and radiolytic hydrogen control. We conclude that this development work will be completed during the final design phase of the TMI #2.
These development programs will provide the data necessary to construct the TM1 #2 in accordance with the criteria and specification set forth in the applicat ion.
The ACRS has also conducted an independent review of this plant f
and has made comments and recommendations in its report of July 17, 1969 to Chairman Seaborg. We have considered each of the recommen-I dations and will be guided by all of them in our continuing review of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 2.
The ACRS letter concludes that with due consideration to the various items mentioned therein, "The linit 2 proposed for the Three Mile Island site can be constructed with reasonable assurance that it can be operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public."
O' 95Q.
Ls
- i. s -
7'
~1 6
~
~
_5-We have concluded, on the basis of our review of the application and Amendments that appropriate findings can be made on each of the j
i issues set forth in the Notice of IIcaring in this proceeding, i
i i
l l
l h
t.
(,
w-1 1