ML19220B235
| ML19220B235 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1974 |
| From: | Stello V US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Moore V US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7904250527 | |
| Download: ML19220B235 (2) | |
Text
5 Docket 'lo. 50-320 13 54 V. A. Moore, Assistant Director for Light Vacer Reactors Group 2, L REVIEW OF FSAR FOR THREE MILE ISLA'it MTIT 2 - FIRST RCCiD QUESTICNS Plant Name:
Three Mile Island Unit 2 Docket No.:
50-320 Responsible Branch LWR 2-2 and Project Manager:
- 3. Washburn Technical Review Branch Involved: Core Performance Branch Requested Completion Date:
October 10, 1974 Lescription of Review:
First Round Questions Enclosed are first round questicas of the Reactor Physics Section of the Core Performance Branch relating to Chapters 4,14, and 15 of the subject FSAR.
Or:d.n2151ced by.
Victor Steno Victor Stello, Jr., Assistant Director for Reactor Safety Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
Questions cc:
S. H:maver F. Schroeder W. Mcdonald L Iniel.
D stribution:
i D. Ross Docket files P. Check CP3 Reading a.
x
- 3. Washburn L Reading M
S. Varga V. Stello N @' N
\\
E. Leins W. Brecks k
74-ess l
CPB [F((2' VSteII)
CPB AD/
/
WBrooks;bj _hHeck D_Ro ss
_11/// /74 11/(T/74 11//7_/74 11/I //4 r-acm3 i x,. *m.ucx a:o 2...............,,........,,,,.......
730425Q5R7 i
r
-('
dl>
242-1 242.0 REACTOR ?HYSICS SECTICN - CCRE PERFORMANCE 3 RANCH 242.1 Provide core assurance that a stuck APSR will not produce (4.3.2.2.6) unacceptable power peaks than the state =ent "It is not likely that......"
Discuss the " pinch effect" produced by APSR's in the bottom of the core and FLR's in the top of the core.
242.2 Provide a co==ittent to conitor the initial startup power caps (4. 3. 2. 2. 6) and the reload startup power =aps for the presence of a wrongly placed fuel assembly.
242.3 Table 4.3-7 and 4.3-22 are not consistent. At what coderator (4.3.2.3) te=perature was the curve of Figure 4.3-22 calculated?
242.4 Provide assurance that the ceasurements of inserted rod worths (14.1) will be performed at the 11 its of allowed control rod configurations that taxi =1:e these worths.
242.5 Regulatory Guide 1.49 states that accidents should be analyzed (15.1) at an assu ed core power of 1.02 ti=es the design power to account for the calorimetric error. In addition, the envirencental consequences of all accidents which produce such consequences should be analyzed under the assu=ption of at least 1.02 times the design power.
Provide revised analyses of the accidents for which these requirements have not been cet.
242.6 Transient analyses have been perfor:ed with the KAPP4 code which (15.1) the staff has found to be unacceptable.
Provided revised analyses using the CADD code.
242.7 Provide the value of the initial syste: pressure used in these (15.1.1 &
accidents and show that the value is conservative.
15.1.2) 242.3 Explain the use of the value or -1.37 x 10-5 ('k/k)/F for the (15.1.3)
Doppler coefficient in the analysis of this accident. The cost negative value in Table 4.3-4 is -1.77 x 10-0 (ak/k)/F for ECL at HZP.
242.9 Explain the origin of the value of 0.65 i ak/k for the dropped (15.1.3) rod worth.
This value does not appear in Section 4.3.
Have calculational uncertaincies been conservatively applied to this value?
242.10 Specify in Table 15.1.19-6 which rod ejection accident produces (15.1.19) the indicated consequences.
242.11 Provide the basis for the value of 27.9 Mwt for the asse=bly pcuer (15.1.21) given in Table 15.1.21-1.
g..
..