ML20050A446
| ML20050A446 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1982 |
| From: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8204010298 | |
| Download: ML20050A446 (2) | |
Text
e o
esuuo SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT O 6201 S street, Box 15830 sacramento, California 9 9 13; (916) 452-3211 00 o>
March 25, 1982 e
S A CrJ 2 M
2 MAR 311982*
DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION INEr.Yn h ATTENTION JOHN F STOLZ CHIEF-2 y
s OPERATING REACTORS BRANCH 4
/
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Cu to WASHINGTON D C 20555 D0CKET 50-312 RANCHO SEC0 NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT N0 1 HPI N0ZZLE USAGE The Sacramento Municipal Utility District has received a copy of the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board's Memorandum and Order dated March 8,1982.
This order requests the NRC Staff to answer several questions by March 31, 1982. We wish to offer the following information for your assistance in pre-paring a reply to the Appeal Board's questions.
During the hearings following the Three-Mile-Island accident, there was some oral testimony centered around the contention that the change in setpoints for PORV and reactor trip and the control grade reactor trips which had been installed following the accident would lead to excessive use of the safety systems at Rancho Seco.
It was brought out in this testimony that the high pressure injection nozzles had originally been designed for forty cycles and that over thirty had already bcen utilized.
It is true that the original design basis for the plant included forty cycles of high pressure injection initiation plus forty cycles of test initiation of the system.
Following the hearing, operating procedures were changed and no additional thermal cycles have occurred to the high pressure injection nozzles. We concur with Mr. Padovan's January 5, 1982 affidavit that "there is sufficient existing margin t^ the design thermal cycle limits on the HPI nozzles to permit continued plant operation over the near tenn."
Also following the hearing, the District requested an analysis by B&W to provide additional cycles for the nozzles.
Staff questions have recently arisen con-cerning this analysis, but it should be made clear to the Appeal Board that the questions only relate to the additional seventy cycles and not the original eighty.
O B204010298 820325 6%
PDR ADOCK 05000312 P
PDR Ah [L[CTRIC SYST[M $[RVihG MORE iHAN 600,000 IN THE HFART Of CALIFORN:A