ML19319D418

Forwards Summary of 730201 Meeting W/Util in Bethesda,Md Regarding NRC Request Re Water Level & Plant Site Protection During PMH

ML19319D418
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	02/16/1973
From:	Faulkner H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Deyoung R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 8003170553
Download: ML19319D418 (2)

Text

,, :.

, - s..

n.g. y yv

-m.

- _ :-~.~y,-

7 _

. - ne H@b@

ec;[? @Yi@c A v.V M Q G*fGEQ Nfp W W PE rd W ;i d -ibe

. ffJf f..:.<

2 em m+,e.: v.y-.., m~m.#.-c w.,.s,33.- %g4

. w w..n f. m.

3-. w

. e c.x -

s m.o w-w..-

w.w.

..s.

e2,me e

uegn

.ggm+4asymn,wAAw gwaw:::n,a,c.w.

...r. r. ~, ; p:ww w15~g-;.w ;. w =q g. m m,w. w aeg a w n : w gs + y;; 4;g g. w m.:.-

u

' > J.Lggw c: wyrg, :w~=, ::r.'"wr w-~n;;.w,... m.'u~n;x,.m.~,=~c~24 2.n" %n w: kus. +: e

~

ew.w a ~ m.

.a.n2m s-- :Pa-w en ~-

u,.

w w r c

w,

r:w y

,.y 3

~. -. ~..

{

.O

.ea.i. 4 e73

- m

.,1 n

i I.

I Docket No. 50-302 s

4

3. C. DeYoung, Assistant Director for Pressurized Vatar Reactors, I.

THRU A. Schwancer, Chief, Pressurized Water Reactors Branch No. 4, L MZETING WITH FLORIDA POWER.CORFORATION CONCERNING TEE OPEEAT7.HG LICENSE APPLICATION FOR C2YSTAL RIVER UNIT 3. DOCKET No. 50-302 Enclosed is a smunary of a meeting held in Bethesda, Maryhnd, on 7ebruary 1.. 1973 with Florida Poster Corpcracian. An attendsuca list is enclosed.

o m-t O -

~.A by 3c:ard ;. it'.uner

11. J. E-cihner, Project ifanager Pressur:. zed Wacair Reactora J4 i

Directorsta of Liccnci ;

[

Encloonres:

1.

Meeting %=-ary cf 2/1/73 2.

Attendance List cc: RSBoyd DISTRIBCIION DShavholt Docket File i

Dhuth FJR-4 Reading l

EMaccary RP Reacing RTedesco HJFaulkner P

HDentom ASchwencer PR Branch Chiefs.

F w

'y' g.

ggi h g,

go a D

9 f

. R3 (3).

l

' AEC participants Wc o

.AEC ?DR l

~ Local ?DR s

o 2

.m.

r

~ - -

+

4

+

. - +

is 3

~.

mg,.

e, o

f-

...j,..p sr M..

P PCR..-4

f. ;P R-4.-

,. Q,,, f,. s t'

4

~

i -

w.

.4

1. . f.

4 y;.,,.- g 0 0 3., u

- Sy eN.A*.tE o g g,g c g. A...b.C

~..

.y...--.~

s..a

,.../ 7 3 l

.~

.../..

s g

i fc ;Q%' /73

'2/t

- - i m

1

! :/.;..

2 E.

,:,. ).

....R'

'.o..

.....%...4..m.......i.~

....{.*,.~....

' D A T E s-4

.-JN.D " C N.I8 8.* h D M d O N $ $.1 h i N b.* E V 25f-r M 9 U..i d. A J M 'u i. - m wit:

CF=~

. yy-A4e.' WJ.lIN.A a..K J.

.%W 55. N.

s s,

• s.

4 ENCLOSURE 1 FLORIDA PC'4ER CORPORATION - CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 DCCKET No. 50-302 SLTMARY OF MEETING - FE3RUARY 1, 1973 SDUaRY A neeting was -held in Bethesda on February 1,1973 at the request of the AEC to discuss the response of Florida Power Corporation to our request concerning the water level and protection of the plant site during the.Frobable Maximus Hurricane (P.NH). A six-foot difference in wave heights exists between the value determined by our consultant and that of the applican:, with our value being the higher.

It was agreed to schedule a future meeting between our hydrology staff and the applicant's consultant, Da=es and Moore, to discuss details of the calculations and codels.

Following this caeting we will formally transsit additional infor=ation requests on this subject to the applicant.

Florida Power Corporation also discussed the isolation valves which are to be ins:alled in the four main ateam linea.

DIS CUSSION 1.

?.NH Uater Level and Plant Protection The hurricana producac water levels and associatad wind generated wave heights presented by the applicant were discussed relativa to cha more conservative values deternined by our consultant, CERO.

A s"--,ry of the applicent's hurricana analysis is included as At:ach-cent 1.

There is approxima:ely a four foat difference ia still vater

. levels and about a six foot difference in wave heights between the eatinates.

Several areas in which there is technical disagreement be:veen the Da:es and Moore =cdci used by the applican: and our connultan:'s codel require resolution before a final decision of water level and wave heights can be =ade.

It was agreed to hold a separate meeting within two weeks between the two hydrologic staffs to discuss these differences in. detail.

/

The. applicant was informed that he has no: described in sufficient detail the safety related facilities necessary for safe operation that require hurricanc protecticn, nor those facill:1cs required for cold shut dcwn in the event cf nere severe hurricanes.

The applicant agreed to describe chose facilitics necessary for both nodes of operation in more detail and any design changes and protective naasuras which =ay be necessary to assure adequata hurricane pro:cc:icn.

r