ML19273B474
| ML19273B474 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Zimmer |
| Issue date: | 03/13/1979 |
| From: | Carbon M Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19273B470 | List: |
| References | |
| ACRS-R-0822, ACRS-R-822, NUDOCS 7904060472 | |
| Download: ML19273B474 (3) | |
Text
.
enno f
w%
?
UNITED STATES
[Y)s
[g; NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gjD/ l ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 3
/
WASHINGTON. D. C. 20555 March 13, 1979 Honorable Joseph M. Hendrie Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
SUBJECT:
REPCRT W WILLIAM H. ZIMMIR NUCLEAR PCWER STATICN, UNIT 1
Dear Dr. Hendrie:
During its 227th meeting, March 8-10, 1979, the Advisory Committee on React.or Safeguards completed its review of the application of the Cin-cinnati Gas and Electric Company (CU&E), the Columbus and Southern Chio Electric Company, and the Dayton Power and Light Company (hereinafter referred to collectively as the Applicants) for authori::ation to oper-ate the William H. Zimer Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1.
CG&E will be responsible for operating the plant. A tour of the facility was made by members of the Subcommittee on November 16, 1978 and the applica-tion was considered r.t Subecxumittee meetings on November 17, 1978 and February 27, ISI). During its review, the Comittee had the benefit of discussions with representatives and consultants of the Applicants, the General Electric Company, Sargent and Lundy Company, Kaiser Engi-neers Incorporated and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staff.
We Comittee also had the benefit of the documents listed. Se Com-mittee reported on the application for a construction permit for this plant on September 17, 1971.
We Zimer Nuclear Power Station is located in Chio on the Ohio River approximately 24 miles southeast of Cincinnati and one-half mile north of Moscow, Ohio. Se plant will utili::e a 2436 MWt BWR/5 boiling water reactor which is similar to the EWR/4 used in the Edwin I. Hatch Nuclear
ant, Unit No. 2.
A principal difference is the use of recirculation flow control valves to regulate power rather than pump speed control which has been used on plants of the EHR/4 type.
We Zimer Nuclear Power Station has a Mark II pressure suppression containment and is designated as one of the lead plants for this type containment. Se NRC Staff has reviewed the generic aspects of the Mark II containment system and has reported its findings in NUREG-0487.
We generic aspects of Mark II load evaluation and acceptance criteria were censidered at Sabcommittee meetings on July 7-8, 1977, Novenber 30, 1977, May 23, 1978, and November 28-30, 1978. te Comittee believes that the acceptance criteria are suitable for the lead Mark II plants.
790406047 7
Honorable Jose @ M. Hendrie March 13, 1979 The Applicants have taken exception to some of the acceptance criteria developed by the NRC Staff. Se Staff and the Applicants are continu-ing to work together to resolve this matter. W e Committee wishes to be kept informed.
We Mark II Cwners Group and the NRC Staff are continuirg to develop information relating to the method of ccabining loads on the contain-ment structure. However, the Applicants have indicated that they will accept the NRC Staff's current, perhaps overly conservative, methodology, to expedite the licensing action. We Committee considers this acceptable.
Se NRC Staff has determined that the present Emergency Core Cooling System analysis contains adequate margins for assessing the performance of the Zimer Plant. It should be noted that recent tests in the Tm Loop Test Apparatus (TLTA) have produced new data on the rate of vapor-ization of emergency core cooling water. Se NRC Staff believes that further analysis of the TLTA test results may require changes in the General Electric model for calculation of this vaporization rate in order to reflect more accurately the observed phys! cal phenomena. Se Comittee wishes to be kept informed.
In 'riew of the important role of the Operational Review Committee in pro-viding continuing reviews, and in updating and implementing safety meas-ures, the ACRS recommends that the Operational Rcview Committee incitde additional experienced personnel from outside the corporate structure as voting members for the first few years of operation.
With regard to the generic items cited in the Committee's report, " Status of Generic Items Relating to Light Water Reactors:
Rep 3rt No.
6," dated November 15, 1977, those items considered relevant to Zimmer are:
II-4, 5b, 6, 7, 8, 10; IIA-4; IIB-4; IIC-1, 2A, 3B, 5; IID-2.
Rese itens should be dealt with by the NRC Staff and the Applicants as solutions are found.
De Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards believes that, if due consid-eration is given to the items mentioned above, and subject to satisfactory completion of construction and preoperational testing, the William H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1 can be operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
Sincerely, Max W.
rbon Clairman
Honorable Joseph M. Hendrie March 13, 1979
References:
1.
Cincinnati Gas and Electric Company, " Final Safety Analysis Report, William H. Zimer Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1," with Amendments 23 through 82.
2.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (USNRC), " Safety Evaluation Report Related to the Operation of William H. Zimer Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Docket No. 50-358," USNRC Report NUPE-0528, dated January 31, 1979.
3.
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Mark II Containment Leal Plant Program Ioad Evaluation and Acceptance Criteria," USNRC Re-p::rt NUREG-0487, dated October,1978.
_