ML19210A314
| ML19210A314 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 05/24/1978 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19210A309 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7910290549 | |
| Download: ML19210A314 (4) | |
Text
- o UNITED STATES
~*
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISslON 3,
E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
\\*.v /
SAFETY EVALUATION BY THE OFFICE OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION SUPPOP. TING AMENDMENT NO. 41 TO FACILITY OPERATING LICENSE NO. OPR-50 METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY JERSEY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY AND PENNSYLVANI A ELTCTRIC COMPANY THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT NO. 1 DOCKET NO. 50-289 Introduction By letter dated July 22, 1977, Metropolitan Edison Company (Met Ed) requested amendment of Facility Operating License No. DPR-50 for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1 (TMI-1). The rcquested change would add limiting conditions for operations with respect to air temperatures inside the reactor containment.
Background
.By letter dated October 24, 1975, Met Ed transmitted Nonroutire 30-Jay Report 75-08 which informed us that during the summer months, temper-atures inside the containment at TMI-l sometimes exceeded the 1100F sustained temperature assumed in the THI-l Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR).
Specifically, average temperatures approaching l'OcF had been experienced above elevation 320 feet and temperatures in the range of llooF to 120c~ had been experienced below elevation 320 feet, on days when the TJtside wet bulb air temperature was greater than approximately i;oF.
This submittal also presented info mation supportino the ic'eptability of the observed temperatures and ;, oposed corrective ' :n.
Additional information on this matter was contained in tne Met Ed letter of March 25,1977, v.hich responded to our request of February 17, 1977.
Our letter of May 16, 1977, requested that Met Ed propose technical specifications governing air temperature in the containment patterred after the Standard Technical Specifications for Babcock and Wilcox reactors (NUREG-0103, Revision 1).
The present application is in response to this request.
1488 158 1 0 ego Evaluation Our review of this matter has included four areas of concern:
(1) the effect that increased containment operating temperatures would have on post-LOCA (loss of coolant accident) containment conditions; (2) effect on containment structural integrity; (3) the effect on critical components located within the containment; and (4) the absence of technical specifications requiring surveillance and control of air temperatures inside containment.
1.
Effect on Post-LOCA Containnert Conditions In our review of this possible concern, we performed a sensitivity study to determine the effect ;.;at the increased containnent operating temperature would have on the post-LOCA containment conditions. To conduct this study, four containment pressure and temperature response analyses were performed.
In each case, a new initial temperature was assumed to exist through-out the containment.
The initial tenperatures utilized were:
900F, 1300F, 1500 F,
and 1700F.
The results of these analyses indicate that none of the calculated peak accident pressures exceed the containment design pressure of 55 psig.
In addition, the calculated peak-accident. temperature does not exceed the design temperature of 281oF, for those cases wnere the initial temperature in the containment is below 1500F.
Therefore, the sensitivity study has demonstrated that the magnitude of changes in the calcula'.ed peak pressure and temperature due to the differences in the operating temp 2r-atures experienced in the TMI-l containment is insignifi: ant, and that the resultant pressure and temperature in containmen; would not exceed the design values.
2.
Reactor Buildina Structural Intearity Our concerns relating to the structural integrity includ2d th following:
a) The methods used by Met Ed for the stress analysis of the structure.
b) The criteria for acceptance of edditional stresses g2nera:ed by the higher thermal loads.
c) The effect of higher temperatures on the prestressing ten fons.
1488 159 J
l
~
d) The effect on the liner and leakage characteristics of the post-LOCA conditions.
[
Met Ed used the Working Strest Design method of the ACI 318-63 Ccde, the Ultimate Strengtn Design method of the same code, and the allowables from the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section I.II, Division 2 (Jan. 1, 1975) to determine i
the structural integrity of the containment. All the loading combinations listed in the FSAR have been considered with temperature stresses due to higher operating temperature,
added to the stresses generated by other pertinent loads.
The effect on tendons is negligible. Met Ed has used in the design of the containment a temperature differential of about 900F which is not exceeded.
Since the ccmpression stresses are slightly increased, explained by an increase in internal temperatures, no additional leakage through the liner is expected. The effect of higher temperatures in the liner during LOCA has been investigated.
The liner has had no bulging due to the higher operating temperature.
3.
The Effect on Components within the Containment A detailed study has been made by itet Ed of all safety-related components located in the containment.
Met Ed has determined, and we concur, that all components are compatible witn the increased operating temperatures.
It should be noted that they are located ecstly below elevation 320 feet and that at this elevation the operating temperature is only slightly above the design operating temperature:
1200F in lieu of Il00F.
This increase is negligible.
4.
Technical Specifications The TMI-l Technical' Specifications do not presently contain surveillance requirements for and limits on air tenperature inside containment.
Such orovisions are necessary, however, to assure the maintenance of containment structural integrity in the event of an accident.
Accordingly, we requested Met Ed to propose technical specifications for containment air temperature based on the temperatures we have fcund acceptable and patterned af ter the technical specifications issued for similar plants which are currently being licensed.
In response to our request, Met Ed proposed technical specifica-tions in general conformance with our guicance. We have made some changes in the proposed technical specifications to provide improved conformity with our model. These changes have been discussed with and accepted by Met Ed.
1488 160 4
Environmental Consideration We have determined that the amendment does not authorize a change in effluent types or total amounts nor an increase in power level and will not result in any significant environmental impact. Having made this determination, we have further concluded that tb.; amendment involvesan action which is insignificant from the standpoint of environmental impact and, pursuant to 10 CFR 951.5(d)(4). that an environmental impact statement or negative declaration and environ-mental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with the issuance of this amendment.
Conclusion We have concluded, based on the considerations discussed above, that:
(1) because the amendment do s not involve a significant increase in the probability or consequences of accidents previously considered and does not involve a significant decrease in a safety margin, the amendment does not involve a sionificant hazards consideration, (2) there is reasonable assurance tilat the health and safety of the public will not be endangered by operation in the proposed manner, and (3) such activities will be conducted in compliance with the Commission's regulations and the issuance of this amendment wi'l not be inimical to the common defense and security or to the health and safety of the public.
Dated:
May 24, 1978 1488 161
0,u..J STATES ?!UCLEAR REGULATORY Cu 55I0'i DOCKET f0. 50-289 METROPOLITMl EDISCN C0ftPANY JERSEY CENTRAL PC'n'ER AND LIGHT COMPANY PEN'1SYLVANI A ELECTRIC COMPANY NOTICE OF ISSUAfiCE OF Af1END!'ENT TO FACILITY 0PERATING LICENSE The U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (the Cocnission) has issued Amendment No. 41 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-50, issued to Metropolitan L'dison Company, Jersey Central Power and Light Company and Pennsylvania Electric Company (the licensees), which revised Technical Specifications for operation of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit No.1 (the facility) located in Dauphin-County, Pennsylvania. The amendment is effective as of its date of issuance.
This amendment revises the Technical Specifications to add surveillance requirements and limiting conditions for operations with respect to the averace air temperature inside the containment.
The application for the amendment complies with the standards and requirements of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the Commission's rules and regulations.
The Commission has made appropriate findings as required by the Act and the Commission's rules and regulations in 10 CFR Chapter I, which are set forth in the license amendment.
Prior public notice of this 1L88 162 0YNSSy$
^ %22 4 y z
-s amendment was not required since the amendment does not involve a significant hazards consideration.
The Commission has determined that the issuance of this amendrent will not result in any significar.t environmental impact and that pursuant to 10 CFR 551.5(d)(4) an env ironmental impact statement, or negative declaration and environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared in connection with issuance of this amendment.
For further details with respect to this action, see (1) the application for amendment dated July 22,1977,(2) Amendment th.41 to License No. DPR-50, and (3) the Commission's related Safety Evalua-tion. All of these items are available for public inspection at the Comission's Public Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D. C. and at the Government Publications Section, State Library of Pennsylvania, Box 1601 (Education Building), Harrisburg, Penns/lvania.
A copy of items (2) and (3) may be obtained upon reg.Nt addressed to the V. S. tuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, D. C.
- 20555, Attention:
Director, Division of Operating Reactors.
Dated at Bethesda, Maryland, this 24th day of May 1978.
FOR THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY CC"filSSIO'i 7
2-Robert W. Reid, Chief Operating Reactors Branch =4 Division of Operating Reactors 1488 163
.