ML19224A339
| ML19224A339 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 12/12/1978 |
| From: | Zwetzig G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 7812280049 | |
| Download: ML19224A339 (10) | |
Text
,
R RfCg
[gh UNITED STATES NCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-J. ' j y
2..
WASHINGTON, D. C. 2055is S.(([.J'
[
Oecember 12, 1978 Docket No. 50-289 d
LICENSEE:
METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY, et al.
FACILITIES: THREE MILE ISLAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNITS NOS. 1 AND 2 (TMI-l and TMI-2)
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON NOVEMBER 22, 1978 TO DISCUSS LICENSEE'S REVISED PROPOSED MODIFICATION TO ELIMINATE RELIANCE ON PROMPT OPERATOR ACTION FOLLOWING A SMALL BREAK LOCA.
The meeting was held at the Commission's offices in Bethesda, Maryland. A list of attendees is given in Attachment 1.
Introduction The purpose of the meeting was to allow Metropolitan Edison Company (Met Ed) to describe a proposed modification to the high pressure injection (HPI) systems for TMI-l and TMI-2. A modification of some type is necessary for these systems to eliminate the need for reliance on prompt operator action in mitigating the consequences of the worst case small break LOCA.
It was a further purpose of the meeting to allow the NRC staff to ask questions about the proposed modification and to obtain an indication from the staff of the acceptability of the proposed modification.
Summary Met Ed opened the meeting by stating that they had originally looked at seven possible modifications. These were then narrowed down to two options:
an electrical "fix", which would require sim? c operator action; and a mechanical "fix", which required no l
operator action. Met Ed stated that they proposed the electrical fix in their letter of July 24, 1978 because it appeared to be the option which was least expensive and could be installed at the earliest date. As a result of subsequent discussions with the staff and additional infomation gained in developing a detailed design for the electrical fix, however, the licensee detemined that this approach actually offered little advantage in tems of either cost or
-8~042 781228007t D
Metropolitan Edison Company schedule. Accordingly, Met Ed stated it was withdrawing its proposed electrical fix and substituting a mechanical fix which could be provided on about the same schedule at about the same cost, and offered the advantage of not requiring any operator action.
Met Ed then described the newly proposed mechanical modifications for TMI-l and TMI-2.
In eacn case the basic modification consisted of installation of connecting piping between each injection line in one train of the HPI system to one of the injection line: in the other train as shown in Figure 2 of Attachment 2.
For TMI-1, these connecting pipes would be installed inside the reactor building as shown in Figure 5.
An additional change needed for the TMI-l modification is the relocation of the reactor coolant system makeup supply injection p7 int from outside containment to a point in the same line inside containment and downstream of the cross-connecting piping. This is needed to maintain the normal makeup flow path in the presence of the cross-connecting piping and requires procurement of a check valve and a containment penetration assembly.
Other than piping, the principal procurement items needed for TMI-2 are five check valves.
The Met Ed representatives also provided copies of their letter dated November 21, 1978 which were concurrently being delivered for docketing. This letter formally withdrew the electrical fix proposed by their letter of July 24, 1978, and substituted for it the mechanical fix discussed at the meeting. This letter also provided additional information concerning the proposed modifications at TMI-l and TMI-2, including system design values and the codes to which the modifications would confom.
Following discussion of the modifications between the staff and the Met Ed representatives, the staff indicated at the conclusion of the meeting that the modification proposed for TMI-l was acceptable, but that the acceptability of the modification for TMI-2 remained to be resolved. The issue affecting TMI-2 related to locating the cross-connecting piping outside containment and the effect of this location on separation of the trains. The staff recalled this had been an issue during the review of the B&W standarized 205 fuel assembly design, and agreed to check on this matter and advise Met Ed of its finding en November 27, 1978.*
Met Ed was informed by telephone on November 28, 1978 that the codification proposed for TMI-2 also was acceptable to the staff.
"8~043
Metropolitan Edison Company The staff also advised Met Ed that it had serious reservations as to the acceptability of the schedule for implementing the proposed modifications (Approximately February 1980 for TMI-l and April 1980 for TMI-2) and stated that Met Ed would need to provide very strong justification for these schedules.
A d.dd 0
1 Gerald B. Zwetzig, Project Manager Operating Reactors Branch #4 Division of Operating Reactors Attachments:
1.
List of Attendees 2.
Proposed Mechanical Modifications
-b Catl
e-MEETING
SUMMARY
DISTRIBUTION OR8d4 Mr. J. G. Herbein Vice President Metropolitan Edison Company P. O. Box 542 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 Docket File LNRr emo V. Nconan L PDR P. Check ORBS 4 Rdg G. Lainas NRR Rdg G. Knighton H. Denton Project Manager E. G. Case JELD V. Stello OI&E(3)
B. Grimes R. Ingram T. Carter R. Fraley, ACRS(16)
D. Eisenhut TERA A. Schwencer v'. Suchanan D. Ziemann Meeting Summary File T. Ippolito Program Succort Branch R. Reid NRC Participants M. Chiramal L. Olshan C. Berlinger T Q T.'5
MEETING WITH METROPOLITAN EDISON COMPANY ON ECCS MODIFICATIONS AT AT THI-l AND TMI-2 e
NRC MET ED Gerald B. Zwetzig P. A. Lengel Matt Chiramal W. E. Potts L. N. Olshan M. B. Fairtile GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES C. H. Berlinger C. W. Smyth
~fi' 0
- 6
SMALL BREAK LOCA MEETINC I.
OPE'11NG RDtARKS (W. E. POTTS)
A.
BACKGROUND B.
ELECTRICAL FIX C.
MECHANICAL FIX D.
B-SAR 205 E.
LATEST EVALCATION F.
CONCLUSICN II.
SYSTO! DESCR!PTION T?fI-I (R. A. LENGEL)
A.
TECitiICAL B.
MATERIALS C.
B-SAR 205 CC32ARIS0N D.
SCHEDLIE S v. d i. t D t. g r_-,a... _....
- m...,. _ 9
-n r
I.I.
A.
TECH';IC.C.
B.
MAHRIALS C.
B-SAR 205 D.
S CHED'.~_ E IV 0'JESTIO':S A' 3 A':5'G9S
- f.j O S,-f r
V',g
0-4 C
I i
i O
)
d E
L
~
c e
?
G n
o- '--
w\\
T--
h
.O U..
S s.
s,. w c
7'*
- N
/N y'N q)
EeK C\\'
c;I i
I c
I {
l i
<t v
T(
V7
?
4.b L.
O l'
I C1
[
L!
1 i
U l t
l Cj
[
~
i i
i 9)
!.i i
I b
e W
W W
1 i
Y
[
0
~Es~C.TT3
e e
==
an.. -
.e w.
m e
e I
i n
k
)
D L
@t t
c O
4\\.
f
. p k
W W
was h
d
~
A*e O
.4 MMd 3.j.-e s,
s; x-s, o e
- N AN VN A
C. Q e
c.
t.
e o
Q O l si V
V E
R R
k' S.
s s
%\\
6
%n y
q-
]
\\
6 m
\\
o l
-s s
s s L
- p4 's,,s s
. s s s s s sv s
~
.o
. _o
- +
e-r
,,,,,.,o c
.~
L.,
g p
s s
N
(
d r
I
-g p4q
,s s
\\
/
~~
s e
t i
i o
3 o
t L
I i
oO i
X~
X X
i s,
sa v
v
^
b%
VN VN c.^.
l Kt y
v 4
ih O
9 LL 3 o.
nN s
NN,
- a. _. -
m
-t 4
%w#
l t
1 _ E.
I H
o-i __
_;l_
i I
O
\\
T eA
~
-,-,c c h \\ __,.
N
.h, e
SE.L, f,r l
/ __s.
G
(
c,
.1.
,}
}"*
J
/,
'e 1
c-
..h g
e; u_.
r e
t-.
_N
\\
\\
\\
s
-a f
1 I
1 1
l 5
-8~ 0.50 l.
l e
kQ Q
~-
D 4
S e
~1 c.
L m
ul a:,
oO O
2 Vo 2
-El'051
ge N MummeW 9
O ee e
O eleG g
a pg m,w, e.
I i
3
)
d 1
6 i
G
.6 e
W N
.g 6
X~
X K
A b%
VN h
i s0 I,
k W
T T/
7 O
9 (Q
O f
3 Y
l
] p ;&
,tmnr o
s, e
t m_
+9
_N. -
\\
L,.%,-m c
a c.
N 4
m s
[c jj
[
1 O.
?
C' t "
i g,,I
-p V
ay-e g'
\\ '-
{-,
(
I y5 _s. k..
w.
'~.., ~ w s b
~ - '-- _-
~
h L~
W LW
\\
.N.-
\\
\\
Ii y
5 g
j i
I 4
i p,
- < ~
q-,)
q; W
~_
,