ML19322C579
| ML19322C579 | |
| 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) |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8001170904 | |
| Download: ML19322C579 (4) | |
Text
f
...u-J..... :,.
t ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION J
WASHINGTON. D.C.
20545 August 14, 1973 Honorable Dixy Lee Ray Chairman r.
U. S. Atomic Energy Conmission F
Washington, D. C.
20545 1.L
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 Reactor Safeguards completed its review 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 FU(t). This project was considered during a Subcommittee site visit and meeting conducted on May 27 and 28,1971.
The Subcommittee 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 Committee had the benefit of discussions with representa-tives 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 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.
nree Mile Island Nuclear Station is located on Three Mile Island in the Susquehanna River, about 10 miles southeast of Harrisburg, Pennsylvania.
Harrisburg International Airport is located 2-1/2 miles northwest of Unit 1.
n e applicant.has provided protection of the engineered safety features and safe shutdown equipment in the unlikely event of the impact B'
of an aircraft up to 200,000 pounds, and against fires resulting from I~
crashes of even' larger aircraft.
P i
[
The application for a construction permit proposed initial operation at power icvels up to 2452 FN(t), the same as the construction permit power level of Oconee Nucicar Station, Unit I which employs a similarreactor.
Safety studies and performance analyses have been made for a power level
(.'
of 2535 FG(t) for nrce Mile Island Nuc1 car Station, Unit 1.
The
[..
[b gh l
8001170gjf7 o
s
-.. c m.w. m.,. 4.. r
r
. o '...,
1
~...
Honorable Dixy Lee Ray August 14, 1973 o~
C.
Comaittee believes that review of the operation of Oconce Nuclear Station, Unit 1 by the Regulatory Staff should be completed and satisfactory performance of Oconce Nuclear Station, Unit 1 should be demonstrated before n ree Mile Island Nucicar Station, Unit 1 is operated at full licensed power.
The hot functional testing of Oconce 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 1 have been applied to Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1.
The Committee believes that these changes are acceptable.
~ he applicant has been responsive to the Committee's recomendation that T
suitable instrumentation be sought to monitor for loose parts and for
}
vibration; such instrumentation has been designed and will be utilized.
no applicant stated that he will propose appropriate additional operating ifmitations 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
.f associated with a potential reactor coolant pump overspeed in the unlikely 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 j
matter should be resolved to the satisfaction of the Regulatory Staff.
The Committee wishes to be kept informed.
The Committee reiterates its previous comments on the need for further study of means for preventing common mode failures from negating reactor i
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 impicment in timely fashion
- i such design modifications as are found to improve significantly the safety f,
of the plant in this regard. The Committee wishes to be kept informed of P
the resolution of this matter.
)
The applicant should assure himself that instrum.cntation for determining i
the course of potentially serious accidents, on a time scale that will j
permit appropriate emergency action, is provided at the station and that appropriate calibration methods and calculated bases for interpreting 1
instrument responses are available.
1 C:*
pg\\
e.:
1 1
.(
1
--_...-._.._---~m.----
,)
r-Honorable Dixy Leo Ray, August 14, 1973 It was reported that some of the oteel bearin3 plates at the upper eiv!s of the vertical prestressing tendons in the contninment wall had depressed into the concrete as much as one-eighth inch during the tensioning opera-tion. The Comittee believes that the ccuse of this behavior should be determined and its poasible effects should be evaluated. This natter should be resolved in a canner satisfactory to the Regulatory Staf f.
The Cocuittee wishes to be kept informed.
The applicant has proposed measures, including alarms and administrative procedures, to prevent operating under conditions uhich might result in exceeding acceptable fuel limits established fron accident studies and other considerations. The current review has boon confined to the first fuel cycle and the analyses heve been based on the es-built fuel. The ACRS recommends that the Regulatory Staf f establish cuitablo criteria for these measures, and provide suitable bases for evaluating future loadings.
The Co~nittee wishes to be kept informed.
The Counittee recognizes that re-evaluation of operating limits toay be necessary as a result of possible changes in the acceptance criteria for emergency core cooling systems. The Coccitteo wishes to be kept informed.
,fh Other probicas relating to large water reactors which have been identified by the Regulatory Staff and the ACRS and cited in previous reports chould bo dealt with appropriately by the Regulatory Staff and the applicant as ouitablo approaches aro developed.
The Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguseds belicves that, if duc regard is given to the items mentioned above, and subject to satisfactory coepic-tion of construction and preoperational testing, there is reasonable assur-ance that Three Mile Island Nucicar Station, Unit I can ba operated at L
power levels up to 2535 W(t) without undue risk to tho health and safety
[
of the public.
t Sincerely yours, is/
I H. G. Mangoledorf f
Chairuan
?h,
Attachment:
List of References g
o g"
g,g-3 gg &W 4
w s
i
-c ui c
a n.
.1-
.r.
L1L Ej
6 l.l Honorable Dixy Lee Ray August 14, 1973 I
References 1.
Final Safety Analysis Report, Vols. 1 through 5 2.
Amendments 13 through 41 to the Application 3.
RW-1389 (Proprietary), dated June 15, 1973, "Ihree Mile Island, Unit 1 Fuct Densification Report" 4.
DL Technical Report on Densification of B6W Reactor Fuel, dated July 6, 1973 5.
DL Safety Evaluation, dated July 11, 1973 J'
M I
^)
l e
K L
4 w y e me ses,, e,m.=.
=~-=%e-4........
.w.,
p L
-