ML20002E116
| ML20002E116 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 03/23/1973 |
| From: | Anthony Giambusso US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Ford G HOUSE OF REP. |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20002E117 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8101260466 | |
| Download: ML20002E116 (7) | |
Text
.
QC:C K-l W
l Docket No.30-155 g
l l
Honorable Gerald R. Ford House of Representatives
Dear Hr. Ford:
We are pleased to reply to your letter of March 1,1973, concerning Mrs. (.alvin Miller's inquiry regarding the use of plutonium fuel in the Big Rock Point nuclear power plant at Charlevoix, Michigan.
The Big Rock Point nuclear power plant was shut down early in March 1973 for routine inspection, maintenance, and partial refueling of the nuclear core. During this shutdown the nuclear core will be refueled for the tenth tims since initial startup ten years ago.
Tae depleted fuel bundles will b-replaced with new fuel bundles which are essentially the same as those removed except that six of the new bundles will be partially enr~ -hed with plutonium as well as uranium fissile fuel. The new fuel to be inserted during March 1973 will con-tain approximately 18 pounds of plutonium in contrast to more than 265 pounds of enriched uranium. The total fissile inventory for the refueled core will be approximately 768 pounds U-235 and 65 to 80 pounds of plutonissa. When the f acility resumes operation in April 1973, the nuclear core will, in fact, contain less plutonium than it did prior to the refueling outage because the amount of recycle plutonium added with the new fuel is less than the amount which had been produced during irradiation of the depljted fuel that was removed.
]
The design features of the new feel headles containing plutonium enhance j
fuel rod integrity. We have performed a comprehensive technical eval-1 untion of the proposed plutonium fuel, and based on this review we concluded that the use of these bundles with restricted amounts of plutonium does not present significant hasards considerations not described or implicit in the Big Rock Point Safety Analysis Report and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the public will not be==A=ngered by operation of the reacter with plutonium enriched feel as proposed.
The " leak" referenced in Mrs. Miller's letter occurred over a 20-hour period during December 1972 and involved a release of radioactive material from the standby er emergency condenser vent to the atmosphere.
/(
e release levels were vs11 within safe limits and resulted in equivalent.
i Honorable Gerald R. Ford exposure at the site boundary of approximately 0.el4 mR compared with the normal background from the sun and environment of approximately 100 mR/ year.
The specific proposal to use plutonium fuel in the Big Rock Point core was carefully and thoroughly evaluated by the USAEC Regulatory staff for more than a year before it was approved by the enclosed letter dated December 6, 1972.
In addition, the use of plutonium fuel in water-cooled reactors has been anticipated for more than 15 years during which the national laboratories studied various aspects of the use of plutonium fuel.
The Battelle Northwest Laboratory, in particular,. erformed extensive investigations of plutonium utilization in commercial power reactors.
Sincerely, Original signed by A. (:iam!stmo A. Giambusso, Deputy Director for Reactor Projects Directorate of Licensiag Enclosure.
Ltr dtd 12/6/7
Di,s tribution A cket File AEC PDR RP Reading L Reading JF0' Leary, DR AGiambusso, L:RP GErtter, DRA (#5380)
DJSkovholt, L:0R G#
TJCarter, L:0R DLZIemann, L:0RB #1 JJShea, L:0RB #2 RMDiggs, L:0RB #2 Branch Reading OCR (3)
J}Diendrie L:TR
{t1 SEE A A LED YELLOW FOR CONCURRENCES:
EHuthes. L:RP N
gg,, L,:0RB #2 _.
L,: RP 1,,_,0CE
.....C0pf Senl.PDR.....
JJShea:sjh)a--
X7403 DLZieman
. AGiam,,usso summwr >
om,
3/22/y3 3/42n3_
3/p./y3 Form ATC.518 (Rev 9 53) AECM 0240
- v. s. connuin nevTo.c orrict : i,to o. 4os.3
v Bonorable Garald R. Ford exposure at the site boundary of approximately 0.014 mR compared with the normal background from the sun and environment of approximately 100 mR/ year.
The use of plutonium fuel in water-cooled reactors has been anticipried for more than 15 years, and the riska associated with the use of plutonium in water-cooled nuclear power plants have been carefully explored and Jocomented by the national laboratories, particularly the latte11e Northwest Laboratory where plutonium utilization in commercial power reactors was systematically evaluated.
The specific proposal to use plutonium fuel in the Big Rock Point core was care-fully and thoroughly evaluated by the USAEC Regulatory staff for more than a year before approval to use plutonium in the Big Rock Point plant was granted by the enclosed letter dated December 6,1972.
Sincerely, A. Ciambusso, Deputy Director for Reactor Projects Directorate of Licensing Ruelosure:
Ltr dtd 12/6/72 Distribution Docket 'eile AEC PDX JMHendrie, L:TR RP Reading EHughes, L:RP L Reailing JFO'Lury, DR AGiambusso, L:RP GErtter, DRA (#5380)
MGroff, DRA JScinto, OGC DJSkovholt, L:0R TJCarter, L:0R I
i DLZiemann, L:0RB #2 Lb JJShea, L:0RB #2
\\
rie( J RMDiggs, L:0RB #2 J
t Branch Reading OCR (3) 3/6/73
(
L:0RB #2 L:0RB
~ ~" ' "' # 2 OG L:0R omer,Gj5h33T5["
L:RP I
]p{"
X7403 OCR
)
Qy
~
I" suanawr >
_RMDpg
& DLZiemann
{
.DJS,kovhol t AGiambusso oart >
3/..
3/ /73 Form ATC-Ste (Rev. 9 53) AECM 0240.
3/!3/73 _ __ __
, 3/p73 3/ /73 3/ /73
- c. A covrnunT nato.c omer : 3,70 o. eos.aes
m A
DRAFT #1 JJShea:sj h Docket No. 50-155 3/12/73 Honorable Garald R. Ford House of Representatives
Dear Mr.~ Ford:
We are pleased to reply to your letter of March 1, 1973, concerning Mrs. Calvin Miller's inquiry regarding the use of plutonium fuel in the Big Rock Point nuclear power plant at Charlevoix, Michigan.
The Big Rock Point nuclear power plant was shut down early in March 1973 for routine inspection, maintenance, and partial refueling-s of the nuclear core. During this shutdown the nuclear core will be refueled for the tenth time since initial startup ten years ago.
The depleted fuel bundles will be replaced with new fuel bundles which are esaentially the same as those removed except that six of the new bundles will be partially enriched with plutonium as we.1 as uranium fissile fuel.
The new fuel to be inserted during March 1973 will con-tain approximately 18 pounds of plutonium in contrast to more than 265 pounds of enriched uranium, The total fissile inventory for the refueled core will be npproximately 768 pounds U-235 and 65 jh.80 pounds of plutonium. When the facility resumes operation in April 1973, the nuclear core will, in fact, contain less plutonium than it did prior to the refueling outage because the amount of recycle plutonium added with the new fuel is less than the amount,which had been produced during irradiation of the depleted fuel hich was removed.
y---
T'W
,m
-g w
I
- i
<Honora' ale Gerald R.: Ford- -
The design features of the new fuel bundles containing plutonium enhance fuel rod integrity. We have performed a comprehensive technical evaluation of the proposed plutonium fuel, and based on this review we concluded that-the use of-these bundles with restricted amounts of-plutonium does not present significant hazards considerations not described or implicit in the Big Rock Point Safety Analysis Report and that there is reasonable assurance that the health and safety of the
,p-ti y W
~
public will not be endangered by operation of the reactor in:the manner gi ;,n fAS f
g proposed.
d The "leck" referenced in Mrs. I 11er's letter occurred ever a during December 1972 and involved a radteactivity release 20-hour period,L.'s I hvW
$,, 5., &.a hS-
- M the standby or emergency condenser vent to the atmosphere. The 3
release levels were well within safe limits and resulted in equivalent exposure at the site boundary of approximately 0.014 mR compared with the normal background from the sun and environment of approximately 100 mR/ year.
M pMb gg The use of plutonium fuelhhas been anticipated for/maer years, and the risks associated with the use of plutonium in water-cooled nuclear power plants have been carefully explored and documented by the national i
laboratories, particularly the Battelle Northwest. Laboratory where plutonium utilization in commercial power reactors was systematically evaluated. The specific proposal to use plutonium fuel in the Big Rock Point core was carfully and thoroughly evaluated by the Regulatory [gk' //
tUACC
/
w....
lionorable Gerald R. Ford for more than a year before approval to use plutonium in the Big Rock Point plant was granted by the enclosed letter dated December 6, 1972.
Sincerely, A. blamousso, Deputy Director g"y for Reactor Projects v,
Directorate of Licensing
Enclosure:
Ltr dtd 12/6/72 i
.