ML19210A593

Forwards Response to Doi,Fish & Wildlife Svc Questions Re Amend 18 to Unit 1 Fsar,Forwarded W/Nrc

ML19210A593
Person / Time
Site:	Crane
Issue date:	03/06/1972
From:	John Miller METROPOLITAN EDISON CO.
To:	Deyoung R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 7910300633
Download: ML19210A593 (4)

Text

_

/, bara care er pocoxEur oxrE mEerrvEn wo.3 Matropolitan Edison Company Mar. 6, 1972 Mar. 8, 1972 acading, Pa.

19603 tra.

uExo, moroRr:

cratR.

J.G. Miller 1

TOs CRIG.s cCs CTHERs Mr. K.C. DeYoung 1

ACTION NICESSARY

]

CCNCUr.3ENCE ]

DAIE ANSWERED no actrex nEcEssxRy O ceuxEur O

Evi

. cuumr.

rear crrI:E ras CocE.

U mEc. No, 50-289 l DEsca!PTIONs (Must 3. UnclassiGed) ggrERRED To DATE l RtcEIVED BY ESTE Ltr trans the following:

penton J-0-72 u/2 cys for ACTION I

STRIBUTION:

zuaosumEsa 4 8 File Cy Response to questions on Andt No.18 to OCC-Rm-P-506-A Unit I FSAR......

Muntzing & S ff Morris /Schr er Case /Maccary Knieltmy/Karas (All ExP.ra Cys)

(1 Orig & 20 conf'd cys of encl rec'd) t

?ikY!1Y0YI:

DL v.s.uomczataar comussion MAIL CONTROL FORM romu xEc.in A U. S. Government Printing Office: 1968 - 296 - 614 MO 1492 058 v.sto300 63 3' A

YN a,,,

v%:,,

meo roe mns DegufatOff

,% U' METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY POST OFFICE BOX 542 READING, PENNSYLVANI A 19603 TELEPHONE 215 - 929-3601 March-6, 1972

=

~

30 Mr. R. C. DeYoung, Assistant Director for Pressurized Water Reactors i

Division of Reactor Licensing U. S. Atomic Energy Cocmission

~

Washington, D. C. 20545

Subject:

Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit #1 Docket Nc. 50-289 Enclosed please find twenty (20) copies of our response to the questions on Amendment #18 to the Unit #1 FSAR, raised by the U. S.

Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service. These questions were forwarded to us as an attachment to your letter dated January 24, 1972.

Very truly yours, J. G. Miller Vice President g\\fs&T~,

s '~ "O '

JCM/DHR/ah Enclosures q

"N/

TO.rT

/V UKEC

/

cc, w;o enclosure:

((].

Mr. Thomas M. Gerusky

\\i2R - 1',/p c.

4 Mr. C. Robert Budd Mr. Richard Menear P

Mr. Daniel W. Slater, Chief Division of River Basin Studies Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife U. S. Department cf the Interior 1492 059 Washington, D. C. 20240 i

PapsfatM1

% Of' Question 1

,g,

Section 1.3.2.19 en page 1-10, states that the minimum average effluent ficv rate frcm the mechanical draft cooling tower vill be increased frca 2,000 to 5,000 gpm.

Does this increased flow rate correspond to a similar increase in cooling water intake volume and what will the effluent tempera-ture be as a result of the increased volume?

Answer The increase in the minimum average effluent flev rate from the techanical draft cooling tcvers referred to in Section 1.3.2.19 of the reference docu-ment relates only to an administrative limit governing the initiation of releases of radioactive liquid discharges to the cooling tov,- effluent.

Re-fer to the fifth paragraph of Section 11.2.1.3, page 11-7 of che reference docu-ment, for the application of this administrative limit. Further, this minimum average effluent flow rate fonned the basis for dilution of radioactive liquid vastes in the design basis calculation of annual average activity levels entering the Susquehanna River as presented in the reference document. Refer to item 6, Table 11-6 page 11-37 and Table 11-7 pages 11-38 and 11-38a.

Since the mechanical draft cooling tower effluent flev rate from both units is expected to normally be about 35,000 gpm, the actual annual average effluent flow rate is well above the administrative minimum 5000 gp= for initiation of releases of radicactive liquids. Therefore, the increase in minimum average cooling tower effluent flow rate referred to in Section 1.3.2.19, does not affect either the cooling water intake volume or the cooling water effluent temperature.

Question 2 The second paragraph of Section 11.2.1.h en page 11-7 refers to inadvertent releases of vaste material by an operator. Since the effluent already would have entered the environment prior to the radiation monitors terminating the release, is there not scne system that vould sense radiation levels prior to the release thus preventing the situation?

Answer Paragraph 11.2.1.3 of the Three Mile Island FSAR describes the methods used to operate the liquid vaste disposal systen. All disposals to the river are en a batch basis with activity analyses (including an isetcpic breakdown if necessary) of samples from the batch being obtained prior to disposal. Based on the batch analysis and the diluent flow rate from the mechanical draft eccling towers, a maximun flev rate for the disposal of the batch is determined. The f1cv rate of each such batch disposal of radicactive liquids is controlled to ensure that the activity in the cooling tower effluent being discharged to the river is within 10 CFR 20 limits.

Set points en the flew and activity tonitors (providing direct surveillance over the discharge of a batch) are set acccrdingly before initiating the discharge.

1492 060

4-3atches of liquid vaste are not disposed to the effluent from the mechanical draft cooling tower if its flow rate is less than 5,000 gym and dilution credit is taken only for cooling tcver effluent flow rates up to 38,000 gpm.

On an average annual basis for liquid vaste disposal, the su= nation is made en the basis that the flow rate of cooling tower effluent has been the minimum 5,000 gpn throughout the year. This method of operation, under design basis con-ditions of primary ecolant activity and quantity, assures that the activity in the cooling tower effluent is within 10 CFR 20 limits.

Paragraph ll.h.h describes the liquid monitoring system used en Three Mile Island Unit 1.

All discharges are continuously monitored with monitors located upstream of the isolation valve. The genitor is calibrated using a CS 137 source and has a sensitivity of 2x10-D to 1x10-1 uci/cc for CS 137.

This is the =cnitor located in the discharge line from the tank in which the liquid to be discharged is stored.

It senses the activity level of the discharge and terminates it automatically, in the event that the activity level sensed exceeds its set point. Based on the pu.ip capacity and the con-trol response times, it is estimated that less than 10 gallons (of the 7500 gallens stored in the :ank) would be released to the cooling tower effluent before the release was autcmatically terminated.

1492 061