ML20054C511

Discusses Compliance Rept 50-047/68-03.Presence of Waterleg Pressure Relief Device & Single Containment Isolation Valves Should Be Addressed in Proposed SAR

ML20054C511
Person / Time
Site:	05000047
Issue date:	11/20/1968
From:	Madsen G US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML17298A033	List: IR 05000047/1971001 IR 05000047/1972001 IR 05000047/1974001 IR 05000047/1975001 IR 05000047/1976001 IR 05000047/1976002 IR 05000047/1977001 ML17298A032 ML20054C422 ML20054C424 ML20054C425 ML20054C427 ML20054C432 ML20054C440 ML20054C441 ML20054C442 ML20054C444 ML20054C447 ML20054C450 ML20054C505 ML20054C507 ML20054C511 ML20054C517 ML20054C534 ML20054C548 ML20054C554 ML20054C562 ML20054C565 ML20054C570 ML20054C571 ML20054C573 ML20054C574 ML20054C578 ML20054C580 ML20054C582 ML20054C587 ML20054C590 ML20054C591 ML20054C595 ML20054C599 ML20054C668 ML20054C672 ML20054C681 ML20054C685 ML20054C691 ML20054C696 ML20054C702 ML20054C704 ML20054C707 ML20054C709 ... further results
References
FOIA-81-311, FOIA-Z81-311 NUDOCS 8204210224
Download: ML20054C511 (1)

Text

. - - - _ -..

'~

UNITED STATES

_ ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION 4

OtVISION OF" COMPT.!ANCE 201 6452370 l 'l

>(*

I mes:ON I kM 970 BROAD STMEET NEWARK. NEW JERSEY 07102 sq,g g November 20, 1968 N. C. Moseley, Senior Reactor Inspector Region I, Division of Compliance U. S. ARMY MATERIAI.S AND MECHANICS RESEARCH CENTER CO REPORT NO. 47/68-3 The available rod worth information is considered somewhat lacking.

However, this is new water over the dam.

Mr. O'Connor has agreed to do a calibration of rods in conjunction with the core reloading.

This should supply the information necessary to dispel my doubts on this subject.

The presence of the water leg pressure relief device and the existence of single containment isolation valves seems un-desireable.

These conditions should be answered by DRL's evaluation of the proposed Safety Analysis Report.

The applicability of 10 CFR 70.24 to fuel stcrage in the reactor annulus is still unanswered.

I feel that the present arrange-ment provides adequate protection.

The scram frequency seems excessive; however, the majority of the scrams were associated with two problems which. appear to have been corrected.

I hope to see an improvement.

The progress in gaining approval of the propcsed Safety Analysis and Technical Specification is proceeding at a scmewhat sicw pace.

I feel that ARMMC is now genuinely interested in going to 5 Mw soon and the pace will be noticeably increased.

m'l2 X M:

fn f.'a Y

x MU -f G en L. Madsen, Reactor Inspector I

e204210224 011005 (7

PDR FOI A,.311 PDR KABAT-Z81 7

- _ _ -