ML19308B961
| ML19308B961 | |
| 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 | |
| ML19308B954 | List: |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001170683 | |
| Download: ML19308B961 (4) | |
Text
.
- 4..r,..
'Tc
~
n.-
Ok ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS I#
UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION E
l WASHWGTON. D.C.
M545
(
August 14, 1973 4
Honorable Dixy Lee Ray Chairman U. S. Atomic Energy Cotinission Wasi-ington, D. C.
20545 I
Subject:
REPORT ON THREE MILE ISIAND NUCLEAR STATION, UNIT 1
Dear Dr. Ray:
During its 160th meeting, August 9-11, 1973, the Advisory Committee on
,f Reactor Safeguards completed its review of the application of the Metro-politan Edison Company, Jersey Central Power and Light Company, Pennsyl-vania hicctric Company, and General Public Utilities Corporation for a b
license to operate Unit 1 of the Three Mile Island nuclear Station at F
power levels up to 2535 FN(t). This project was considered during a Subcommittee site visit and meeting conducted on Fby 27 and 28,1971.
f The Subcommittee visited the site again on May 3,1973, and held a 4
meeting in Washington, D. C. on July 25, 1973.
In the course of the review, the Committee had the benefit of discussions with - epresenta-tives and consultants of the Metropolitan Edison Company, the General Public Utilities Corporation, Gilbert Associates, the Babcock and Wilcox g
Company, and the AEC Regulatory Staff, and of the documents listed. The i
Committee reported to the Commission on the construction of this Unit in its letters of January 17 and April 6,1968, and on the construction of Unit 2 in its letter of July 17, 1969.
i Three Mile Island Nuclear Station is located on Three Mile Island in the Susquehanna River, about 10 miles scutheast of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
j.
Harrisburg International Airport is located 2-1/2 miles northwest of Unit 1.
The applicant has provided protection of the engineered safety l,
features and safe shutdown equipment in the unlikely event of the impact 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 I
power levels up to 2452 FN(t), the same as the construction permit power Icvel of Oconce Nuclear Station, Unit I which employs a similar reactor.
c Safety studies and performance analyses have been made for a power icvel l'
of 2535 KJ(t) for Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
The
- c C
8001170hM
'l
.m.
~. 9, w.
.. q.....;..
~
, _ _ ___- _-_l_
,m
's e
y Honorable Dixy Ime Ray August 14, 1973 x
S Committee believes that revicw of the operation of Oconee Nucicar Station, Unit 1 by the Regulatory Staff should be completed and i
satisfactory performance of Oconee Nuc1 car Station, Unit i 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 reacror 4
vessel internals. The design changes which were made for Oconee Nuclear Station, Unit I have been applied to Three Mile Island Nucicar Station, Unit 1.
The Committee believes that these changes are acceptable.
4 l
'1he applicant has been responsive to the Committee's recommendation that suitable instrumentation be sought to monitor for loose parts id for vibration; such instrumentation has been designed and will be utilized.
I The applicant stated that he will propose appropriate additional operating limitations if, at any time during operation, the moderator temperature l
coefficient of reactivity is positive. This matter should be resolved in a manner satisfactory to the Regulatory Staff.
3 The Regulatory Staf f has been investigating on a generic basis the problems th.
associated with a potential reactor coolant pump overspeed in the unlikely j
event of a particular type of rupture at certain locations in a main cool-
{
l ant pipe. Some additional protective measures may be warranted and this matter should be resolved to the satisfaction of the Regulatory Staff.
j g
i The Committee wishes to be kept informed.
j The Committee reiterates 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 j
of the plant in this regard. The Committee wishes to be kept informed of i
a the resolution of this matter.
't f,
The applicant should assure himself that ins.trumentation for determining d
the course of potentially serious accidents, on a time scale that will i
permit appropriate emergency action, is provided at the station and that
]t appropriate calibration methods and calculated bases for interpreting 9,
instrument responses are available.
j!
i; 4:+
,
- c, k
}
ik i, l.
t pp i
W
e r
j Honorablo Diny Leo Ray, August 14, 1973 h
It was reported that some of the steel bearing plates at the upper ends of the vertical prestressin7, tendons in the contaianent wall had depressed into the concrete as cuch as one-eighth inch during the tensioning opera-tion.
The Committee believes that the cr.use of this behavior should be datermined and its possible ef tects should be evaluated. "ihis matter chould be resolved in a canner satiefactory to the Regulatory Staf f.
The Consittee wishes to be kept inforued.
The applicant has proposed measures, including alaras and administrative procedures, to prevent operating under conditions uhich might result in exceeding acceptable fuel limits established from accident studies and other considerations. The current review has been confined to the first fuel cycle and the analyscs heve been based on the as-built fuel. The ACRS recommends that the Regulatory Staf f establish suitablo criteria for theso measures, and provide suitable bases for evaluating futura loadings.
Ilta Coenittee wishes to bo kept informed.
The Committee recognizes that re-evaluation of operating limits may be necessary as a result of possible changes in tha acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems. Tha Committee wishes to be kept informed.
['.
Other problems relating to largo water resctors which have been identified by the Regulatory Staff and the ACnc and cited in previous reports should bo dealt with appropriately by the Regulatory Staff and the applicant as cuitable approachos aro developed.
The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards belicves that, if due regard is given to the iteus mentioned above, and subject to satisfactory cocple-tion of construction and preoperational testing, there is reasonable assur-ance that Three Mile Island Nucicar Station, Unit 1 can be operated at power levels
,9 to 2535 IN(t) without unduo risk to the health and cafety of the public.
t Sincerely yours,
{,
't.,
t
[
W H. G. Manacledorf Ciuiirean f,
Attachments r
(b)
J List of References
~
['.
,CT
%l s
()
j?.
- f s'
i 1OL
e f'
Honorable D hy Lee Ray August 14, 1973 i
_ References 1.
Final Safety Analysis Report, Vols. I through 5 2
Amendaents 13 through 41 to the Application 3.
PAW-1389 (Proprietary), dated June 15, 1973, "Three Mile Island, Unit 1 Fuci 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
- ok.
m l
4 L
. _ ~.... -
.