ML19322D175
| ML19322D175 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane, Davis Besse  |
| Issue date: | 08/08/1978 |
| From: | Lawraski S Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Hendrie J NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| TASK-TF, TASK-TMR NUDOCS 8002100015 | |
| Download: ML19322D175 (3) | |
Text
t* *'-or
}
g j
r A
vWi s i O LTATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 8'
$#4
+l ADVISORY CO!*..M TTEC ON RE ACTOn - TEGUARDS WAStitNGTON, D. C. 205%
f August 8, 1978 Honorable Joseph M. Hendrie Chairman U. S. Nuclcar Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
~
SUBJECT:
REEORP ON DiWIS-BESSE NUCLEAR POWER STATION, UNITS 2 AND 3
Dear Dr. Hendrie:
3-5, 1978, the Advisory Cccaittee on During its 220th Meeting, August Reactor Safeguards completed its review of the application of the Toledo Edison Company, the Cleveland Electric Illtrninating Company, Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, and Pennsylvania Power Company (here-inafter referred to collectively as the Applicant) for a permit to con-A Subcommittee struct the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3.
meeting to review this application was. held in Washington, D.C. on June 30, 4
During its review, the Committee had the '.enefit of discussions with 1978.
representatives and consultants of the Toledo Edison Company, representing Q
the Applicant, the Babcock & Wilcox Company, the Bechtel Corporation, and 3
the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) Staff. 'Ihe Committee also had the benefit of the documents listed.
Units 2 and 3 will be located immediately adjacent to Unit 1 on the south-western shore of Lake Erie approximately 21 miles east of Toledo, Ohio.
The suitability of the site was considered by the Committee in its re-views of the construction permit and operating license applications for' Unit 1, as discussed in its reports of August 20, 1970 and January 14, 1977. Tnere have been no adverse changes in the site characteristics
~
since those reviews were made.
o The safe shutdown earthquake for Units 2 and 3 will be characterized by'Ihe a zero-period acceleration of 0.20g applied at the foundation level.
operating basis earthquake will correspond to an acceleration of 0.08g.
9 The Committee finds these values acceptable.
5 Each nuclear steam supply system will employ a 2772 MNt Babcock & Wilcox pressurized water reactor similar to that used in Davis-Besse Unit 1 ex-the reactor core for Units 2 and.3 will utilize the cept in two respects:
.Y j
- 4 n
Q d
7 O
4 R 0 0' 2 Id 0 06
' c,j, - __ _ ;. _
y b
/'
O ienorabie aosegh n. iiendrie August 8, 1978 -
l Mark C 17x17 fuel assemblies, and the reactor protection system will be a f
hybrid analog-digital system, designated RPS-II.
Both of these features have been prog > sed for other plants, and the NRC Staff expects all ques-tions regarding the Mark C fuel and the RPS-II to be resolved in connection with its operating license review for the Tennessee Valley Authority's Bellefonte Nuclear Plant. We Committee finds this procedure acceptable.
h e Applicant has proposed to control the concentration of combustible gas following a postulated loss-of-coolant accident (WCA) by repressurizing
/
the containment to dilute the gas present and by subsequent release of the mixture to the atmosphere. We NRC Staff has found this unacceptable and requires the Applicant to utilize hydrogen recombiners as the primary means j for control of combustible gas following a IOCA.
The Committee believes that repressurization of the containment is not desirable and that hydrogen recombiners should b3 provided in these units.
Because the steam turbine-generators are oriented tangentially to their respcctive containment buildings, the NRC Staff has requested nore detailed analyses of the probability that a turbine missile would strike and damage the primary system piping and equipment inside the contain-
%e Applicant has agreed to perform such analyses utilizing data O
ment.from the missile penetration tests now being carried out for the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI).
If these analyses do not yield acceptably low probabilities of damage, structural barriers can be provided.
If the results of the EPRI test program are not available prior to construction of the affected structures, the NRC Staff will evaluate the requirements for protection against turbine missiles using current penetration criteria.
%e Committee finds this position acceptable.
i In,accordance with a recently adopted position, the NRC Staff is reviewing
^
the capability to bring the reactors to a cold shutdown condition in ap-proximately 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br />, using only safety-grade equipment, assuming a loss of onsite or offsite power, and assuming a single failure.
W e Committee believes that this matter should be resolved in a manner satisfactory to the NRC Staff. W e Committee wishes to be kept i1 formed.
a
~.With regard to other generic problems cited in the Committee's report,
" Status of Ger.eric Items Relating to Light-Water Reactors: Report No.
6,"
dated November 15, 1977, those items considered relevant to Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 are:
II-2, 3, 4, 58, 6, 7, 9, 10; IIA-2, 3, 4; IIC-1, 2, 3A, 3B, 4,-5, 6; IID-2; IIE-1.
'Ihese problems should be dealt with by the NRC Staff and the Applicant as solutions are found.
}
.O W
-mem
-- w -
U..
e e,
lionorable Joseph M. Hendrie August 8, 1978 The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards believes that, if due con-1 sideration i's given to the items mentioned above, the Davis-Besse Nuclear
-m Power Station, Units 2 and 3 can be constructed with reasonable assurance that they can be operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
Sincerely yours,
$$*/ @WCC Y
Stephen Lawroski
. Chairman 1
References:
l.
Davis-Eesse Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3 - Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Volumes 1-9, Revisions 1 through 20.
2.
Report to the ACRS by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of Toledo Edison Company, Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Duquesne Light Com-pany, Ohio Edison Company, and Pennsylvania Power Company, Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Uni _ts 2 and 3, Docket Nos. 50-500 and 3
50-501, dated June 15, 1978..
3.
Safety Evaluatica Report by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regula-l tion, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of Toledo Edison Company, Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, and Pennsylvania Power Company, Ihvis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Units 2 and 3, Docket Nos. 50-500 and 50-501, NUREG-0421, dated July 6,1978.
4.
Intter from L. Roe, Toledo. Edison Company, to D. Vassallo, NRC,
Subject:
Response to nine outstanding issues concerning applica-tion for a construction permit, dated March 7, 1978.
m _
5.
Ictter from L. Roe, Toledo Edison Company, to D. Vassallo, NRC,
Subject:
Response to outstanding issues 9, 13, 16 & 19, dated March 10, 1978.
6.
Ietter from L. Roe, Toledo Edison Company, to D. Vassallo, NRC,
Subject:
Outstanding issue 21 concerning combustible gas control in-side containment vessels, dated Narch 22, 1978.
y 1
7.
Ictter from L. Roe, Toledo Edison Company, to R. Baer, NRC,
Subject:
Outstanding items in Report to the ACDS by NRC Staff, dated June 26, i
1978.
8.
Ictter from L. Roe, Toledo Edison Company, to R. Baer, NRC,
Subject:
Resolution of outstanding item 1 contained in the Report to ACRS by NRC Staff, dated June 28, 1978.
e e
O 6
m lg
~
y s
\\ ?..
-