ML19261E994
| ML19261E994 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/14/1973 |
| From: | Mangelsdorf H Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Ray D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19261E990 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 7910171048 | |
| Download: ML19261E994 (4) | |
Text
,
ENCLOSURE 2 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAF c. GUARDS UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON. D.C. 20545 August 14, 1973 Honorable Dixy Lee Ray Chairman U. S. Atomic Energy Comission Washington, D. C.
20545
Subject:
REPORT ON THREE MILE ISIAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1
Dear Dr. Ray:
During its 160th meeting, August 9-11, 1973, the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards completed its revies of the application of the Metro-politan Edison Company, Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Pennsyl-vania Electric Company, and General Public Utilities Corporation for a license to operate Unit 1 of the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station at power levels up to 2535 W(t). This project was considered during a Subcomittee site visit and meeting conducted on May 27 and 28,1971.
The Subcomittee visited the site again on May 3,1973, and held a meeting in Washington, D. C. on July 25, 1973. In the course of the review, the Comittee had the benefit of discussions with representa-ti,es and consultants of the Metropolitan Edison Company, the General Public Utilities Corporation, Gilbert Associates, the Babcock and Wilcox Company, and the AEC Regulatory Staff, and of the documents listed. The Comittee reported to the Comission on the construction of this Unit in its letters of January 17 and April 6,1968, and on tha construction of Unit 2 in its letter of July 17, 1969.
f Three Mile Island Nuclea t ation is located on Three Mile Island in the D:n=hanna River, about 10 miles southeast of Harrisburg, Pe3nsylvania.
Harrisburg International Airport is located 2-1/2 miles northwest of Unit 1.
The applicant has provided protection of the engineered safety features and safe shutdown equipment in the unlikely event of the Mpact of an aircraft up to 200,000 pounds, and against fires resulting from crashes of even larger aircraft.
The application for a construction permit proposed initial operation at power levels up to 2452 W(t), the same as the construction permic power level of Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1 which employs a similarreactor.
Safety studies and performance analyses have been made for a power level of 2525 W(t) for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
The 1486 033
~I 4 6057 7910171 0 %
Honorable Dixy Lee Ray August 14, 1973 Committee believes that review of the operation of Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit 1 by the Regulatory Staff should be completed and satisfactory performance of 0conee Nuclear Station, Unit 1 should be demonstrated before Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 is operated at full licensed power.
The hot functional testing of Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit I which was conducted in 1972 caused damage of some components, including reactor vessel internals. The design changes which were made for Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit I have been applied to Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
The Committee believes that these changes are acceptable.
The applicane has been responsive to the Committee's reco=mendation that suitable instrumentation be sought to monitor for loose parts and for nibration; such instrumentation has been designed and will be utilized.
The applicant stated that he will propose appropriate additional operating limitations if, at any time during operation, the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity is positive. This matter should be resolved in a manner satisfactory to the Regulatory Staff.
The Regulatory Staff has been investigating on a generic basis the problems associated with a potential reactor coolant pump overspeed in the unlikelf event of a particular type of rupture at certain locations in a main cool-ant pipe. Some additions 1 protective measures may be warranted and this matter should be resolved to the satisfaction of the Regulatory Staff.
The Committee wishes to be kept informed.
The Committee reiterate:: its previous comments on the need for further study of means for preventing common mode failures from negating reactor scram action, and of design features to make tolerable the consequences of failure to scram during anticipated transients. The Committee believes it desirable to expedite these studies and to implement in timely fashion such design modifications as are found to improve significantly the safety of the plant in this regard. The Committee wishes to be kept informed of the resolution of this matter.
The applicant should assure bimself that instrumentation for determining the. coarse of potentially serious accidents, on a time scale that will permit appropriate emergency action, is provided at the station and that appropriate calibration methods and calculated bases for interpreting instrument responses are available.
1486 034
Honorable Dizy Lee Ray Jugust 14, 1973 It was reported that some of the steel bearin5 plat 3s st the upper ends of the vertical prestressing tendons in the contniment voll had depressed into the concrece as much as one-eir,hth inch during the tensioning opers-tion. The Coesni, tce believes that the cause of this behavior should be dstartsined and itic possioie ef tects should be evaluated. nis inatter should be renolved in a manner satisfactory to the Regulatory Staff. We Coussittee wishes te he kept infor'ned.
The applicant has proposed measures, including alarme and administrative procedures, to prevent operating under conditions which might result in exceeding accept:able fuel limits established from accident studies and other considerations. The current review has been confined to the first fuel cycle and the analyses have been based on the as-built fuel. The ACES reconsnends that the Regulatory Staf f establish suitable criteria for these measures, and provide suitable bases for evaluating future loadings.
W e Committee wishes to be kept informed.
The coasnittee recognizes that re-evaluation of operating limits may be necessary as a result of possible changes in the acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems. no Consnittee wishes as be kept informed.
Other problems relating to large water reactors which have been identified by the Regulatory Staff and the ACRS and cited in previous reports should be dealt with appropriately by the Regulatory Staff and the applicant as suitable approaches are developed.
The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards believes that, if due regard is given to the items mentioned above, and subject to satisfactory comple-tion of construction and preoperational testing, there is reasonable assur-ance that Wree Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 can be op-nted at power levels up to 2535 Ifd(t) without undue risk to the health cod safety of the public.
Sincerely yours, Lub m u!y(Lolj Original Signed by 3
H. G. Mangelsdorf E. C. Mangelsdorf Chairman
Attachment:
List of References 1486 035 O
P S
-s s
s Honorable Dixy Lee Ray, August 14, 1973 References 1.
Final Safety Analysis Report, Vols. I through. 5 2.
Amendments 13 through 41 to the Application 3.
BAW-1389 (Proprietary), dated June 15, 1973, "Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Fuel Densification Report" 4.
DL Technical Report on Densification of B&W Reactor Fuel, dated July 6, 1973 5.
DL Safety Evaluation, dated July 11, 1973 1486 036 e
.. -