ML20125B328
| ML20125B328 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 10/26/1972 |
| From: | Skovholt D US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Dienhart A NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9212090315 | |
| Download: ML20125B328 (2) | |
Text
-
i,-
-~- - :..... -
l
,'* V:. "p..,
j a.
..a
.1,
j L
L.. m m OCT 2 61972 1
nochet me. S t63 4
i Northera States Peeer Company ATTN:
Mr. Arthur V. Disahart Vice President of Engineering 414 Nioelett Mall Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 Centlemen 1
A copy of a letter freen the Advisory Committee en Beacter Safe-guards dated October 19, 1972, is enclosed for your information. The letter constitutes the Cor.mittee's report on your June 15, 1972, request to convert Provisional Operating License No. DFB-12 for the Monticelle Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit No.1, to a full-term operating license.
Sincerely, i
Original Signed by:
Donald J. Skovholt Donald J. Skovbolt Assistant Director for Operating-Reactars Directorate of Licensing Enclosures i
ACES lte dtd 10/19/72 oc w/anel (see attached t) bec w/ enclosure:
J. Gallo, OGC eket File AEC PDR.
Branch Reading R0 (3)
RP Reading DJSkovholt RMDiggs TJCarter Frank Karas, SECY JShea j) g Q
T f omes >
L:
R_ _
_L:OR L: 0 1,,,,,,,,
VJ
..l.. I.O.tna n n DJS oy/,,t o l t_
SURMA &IE> D.I)..EI.fW.......
f ontr> lQ/fd22.,,, 10d1_2 10h/,72 s
Form AEC-Ste (Rev.9-53) ABCM 0240
- u s covanemur peristino orect 1,72 4es-ote
- 9212090315 721026 PDR ADOCK 05000263 P
7 1
l l
l t.
1 e
es e/easlooseen i
l Esseed J. Wegel i
Eatttle & 9 ment t
j
$14 Fleer Emehenge Besiding Mianespetts, Mienneste 554t5 i
Steve Godler, P. E.
l
/
1 2120 carter Avesse
[ 't
' ' j d, j
i St. Feel, Minnesota 55108
/<
a /2 c / 7y c ~,Jf s,,
/
<. /
y!
l Harriett Lansing, Esquire
)
Assistant City Attermey
/
- o' l[k' '
A City of St.- Paul
/ /, ' 7 '
l 638 City Hall
/<
i St. Paul, Minnesota 55182 e
)
Jemethat M. Morgan, Eegeise Assistant Attorney Comoral Office of Attermoy General 717 Dalesman Street, S. E.
mi--
- _11e, Minnesota 55440 l
Een Deusse Minneesta Pellettee Centuel Asemey 717 nelassae Stseet, S. E.
l Minneapolie, Minnesota 55440 i
Warren R. Lasses, M. 3.
i Secretary and tessutive efficer State Departiment of Health i
Univoretty Ommyne i
Minneapolis, Miameosta 55440 8
E Mr. 3. S. Douglas, Auditor Triskt commty Board of Comentesteners l
Buffalo, M&easseta 55313 l
/
[
Environmental Resoures Center l
Minneapolis Public Library 1222 S. E. 4th Street Minneapolie, Minaseeta 55414 f
. Gerald Charnoff, Esquire j
l Shaw, Pittman, Potts, Trowbridge & Madden i
i 910 - 17th Street. N. W.
i Washington, D. C.
20006 OFFICE D j
SURNAME >
DATE*
Form AEC 319 (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240 I
i 1
--~-ar,
.-m
+ - -..--,.,- - --.-.-, -..
.,...n.,n.,-a.,
<.,-,.-.-r en-
--+-.,.,,,. - - -...., -
-.. _~ _
- [
-O
~
{
}
e ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS
~
UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 2054$
1 i
October 19, 1972.
a i
\\
Honorable James R. Schlesinger I
Chairman U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 i
Subject:
REPORT ON MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT, UNIT NO. 1 l
l
Dear Dr. Schlesinger:
At.its 150th meeting, October 12-14,1972, - the Advisory Connnittee on Reactor Safeguards reviewed the application by the Northern States j
Power Company for conversion of its provisional operating license for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit No.~ l to a full-term operating license. This project was considered at Subcommittee meetings on September 11 and 30, 1972, in Washington, D. C.
During j
its review, the Committee had the benefit of discussion with rep-resentatives and consultants of the Northern States Power Company, l
the General Electric Company, and the AEC Regulatory Staff, and of 3
1-the documents listed. The Committee has reported to the Commission 3
the results of its review of various-aspects of this project in i
reports dated May 11, 1966, April 13, 1967, January 10,-1970, and-June 15, 1970.
1 In its report _of January 10,-1970, on the application for.a provisional operating license, the Committee stated that the! applicant had been responsive-to recommendations:made in the Committee's_ construction permit report, but made further-specific recommendations relating to main steam line valves, vibration testing, and. integrity and isolability of-instrument lines. Operating experience' suggests that continuing study and surveillance'is necessary to assure satisfactory perfermance of the main steam line-isolation valves. The_ vibration testing program y
'l-during the preoperational period was satisfactory. The Committee believes the_ applicant should_further evaluate the design of the instrument-lines with respect to the: Supplement to Safety Guide 11;.the Committee 4
t-
[
wishes to be kept informed.-
n t
}.'
,T Y
Q/'\\ f*) *** WA 2M l wwen 1 -,
.,,c.n-
-.,,, ~. -
,v,.,-n me.r-.-,,,
,,,.e.,.n-,e n--
a v.,e
+
0 2.
j r
1
\\
(
4 Honorable James R. Schlesinger October 19, 1972 The Committee also called attention to the need for continuing evaluation and appropriate action with respect to problems common to water-cooled reactors. One of the items mentioned was the problem-of hydrogen generation in the unlikely event of a loss-of-coolant accident. The applicant has i
described his studies for controlling hydrogen buildup, but has not submitted a firm proposal. The Committee believes the applicant should commit himself to completion of design and installation of an acceptable system on a time schedule satisfactory to the Regulatory Staff.
Another item specifically mentioned was the need for design features to make tolerable the consequences of failure to scram during anticipated transients. Studies by the reactor designer indicate that a system modification may accomplish the desired objective, but a final determination has not yet been made. The applicant has indicated that he will make
]
the necessary modifications when a decision has been made on a generic basis.
Analyses of postulated control-rod drop accidents have been revised by the applicant to employ a more realistic rate of reactivity insertion than formerly a(sumed. These analyses indicate that, for accidents occurring during certain operations and certain portions of the fuel cycle, the results may be unacceptable. The applicant has proposed interim procedures which the Committee believes to be satisfactory. The final resolution should be made in a manner satisfactory to the Regulatory Staff.
Commercial operation of the plant started June 30, 1971. There have since been a number of unscheduled shutdowns caused by equipment or system malfunctions. The Committee recognizes that, during the early stages of operation of a large power plant, some forced shutdowns will occur and corrective action will be necessary. The Committee believes that the number of such events in the Monticello plant has not been excessive.
However, the Committee wishes to reiterate its opinion that improvement of the plant and operating procedures to enchance safety should be a continuing process, factoring in technological advances and past and future industry-wide experience.
The Committee believes that the applicant should seek a careful and detailed delineation of responsibilities and authority for determining action levels, implementation, and coordination of the State and local f
agencies involved in emergency plans.
i
$i i
i 1
- _ _.~
o.
2 l'
l1 3
October'19, 1972-Honorable James R. Schlesinger.
i Other problems relating'to large water reactors which have been identified
}-
by the Regulatory Staf f and the ACRS and cited in previous ACRS reports, should be dealt with appropriately by the Regulatory Staff and the applicant
,I as suitable approaches are developed.
The Advisory Committee _on Reactor Safeguards believes that.-in view of l
t the operating experience to date, and if due regard is given to the items mentioned above, there is reasonable assurance that Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Unit No. 1, can continue to operate at power levels up j
to 1670 MW(t) under a full-term operating license withou.c undue risk to.
j-the health and safety of the public.
)
I Mr. Hill did not participate in the-review of this project.
1 i
Sincerely y s,
s+
C. P. Siess j-Chairman s
References Attached.
i i
I,'
f i
1 I;.
1 i
1
{
{
4 4
%e:
w-
.-'e
%-e+ wri n:
wr
- +ws+1*v.w+v*-
- mp-g.ma-rf---e'y+vs e rryg -ju-rg-
- EN"--g
=T g gag 9,g yw,-rv74+4T--
e+ -! T er g e-*WMg-d wrpshj
~b
.-+g t W p
- we g g e-d 7
rg ( p ay-PF vtrTU r -y at g $ 's = We'
_...g-...
4 b
(
Honorable James R. Schlesinger October 19, 1972-i l-References l
1.
Final Safety Analysis Report for Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant,-
. 4 Unit No. 1 i
i Amendments No. 10-24, 26 and 27 to.the license application j-2.
d J
I 3.
Northern States. Power Company letter dated February 28, 1972 transmitting Six-Month Operating Report No. 2 for the period of July 1 to December 31, 1971 i
j 4.
Northern States Power Company letter dated June 15, 1972 transmitting an Application to convert Provisional Operating License No. DPR-22 to a Full-Term Operating License for the Monticello Nuclear Generating:
Plant, Unit No. 1 1
i
- 5.
Northern States-Power Company letter dated August 30,- 1972 transmitting.
'Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant'Six-Month Operating Report No. 3 l~
for the period of January 1,1972 through June -30,-'1972 i
4 4
l O
4 i
i 4
0 4
l.
e s
.h.
,m m
4., -, ~~,,
- _ _ _, _. ~,,,,.,
-w.,~.-m.-
-