ML20234C746
Text
,,,
n f
3
(
=
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS -
UNITED STATES A70MIC ENERGY CDMMISSION Washington 25, D.. C.
April 18,1963 '
Honorable Glenn T. Seaborg
. Chairman U.' S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington 25, D.- C.
Subject:
REPORT ON IDDMGA BAY A70MIC PARK - UNIT #1
Dear Dr. Seaborg:
At its forty-seventh meeting, April 11-13, 1963, the Advisory Committee
~
on Raactor Safeguards considered the application by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company for appmval of construction of a nuclear power unit at Bodega Boy Atomic Park, on Bodega Head, Sonoma County, California. The Committee had the benefit of discussions with representatives of the Pacific Gas and Electric Company, the_ General Electric Company, and the AEC Staff and their consultants.
The application had ' lso been reviewed a
with the applicant at a subcommittee meeting on March 20,1963, and in a preliminary form at a subcommittee meeting on July 31, 1962.- Members of the Committee viewed the site at an earlier date. In its dilibera-tions, the Committee made use of thi documents listed.
The site of the proposed nuclear power unit is on the Pacific coast, about fifty miles northwest of the City of San Francisco. Areas nearby are used for camping and picnicking, agriculture, and some commercial fishing. An adjacent tract of land is being acquired by the University of California.as a field station for marine biology and other scientific studies.
The reactor site proposed is about one thousand feet west of the San Andreas fault zone. The surrounding population dens'.ty is rela-tively low. The plant will incorporate engineered safeguards.
The 1000 Mw(t) reactor plant proposed is of the forced-circulation, boiling water type. Pressure suppression confinement is to be used, with the reactor located in a dry well that is rated at 62 psi internal pres-sure, and is connected to' a toroidal suppression chamber rated at 35 psi internal pressure. As proposed, the turbine and some associated primary piping as well as some other parts of the primary system, such ac feed-water pumps and the primary water cleanup system, are not to be confined.
All pip %g penetrations through the dry well' wall are to be provided with
. isolation valves. The applicant se,ates that all major linea that pene-trate the dry well wall and open into the dry well or the nuclear steam 9709210401 831217 PDR-FOIA FIRESTOB5-665 PDR "p,
&.:X n
f P
(
(
Honorable Glenn T. Seaborg April 18, 1963 supply system are to be provided with two valves, one being remotely i
operable. Consideration should' be given to' the inclusion of additional backup isolation valves in some of the primary system piping and to inclusion of a strainer before the main ~ steam line isolation valve to prevent foreign matter from interfering with proper valve action.
9 Further consideration should be given to providing the emergency f
cooling system with pump back-up beyond that provided by the. auxiliary
.l feedwater pump.
1 The Committee believes th2t the dry well and the suppression pool should be designed and built to permit leak testing at design pressure i
after the installation of all penetrations, and that design and con-i struction should permit periodic leak testing at the suppression chamber l
design pressure. In the initial tests of the dry well, the leak rates should be determined as a function of-the internal pressure, so that the results of subsequent tests 'at lower than dry well design pressure can be extrapolated with confidence.
1 In the unlikely event of a reactor _ accident, the emergency ventilation
)
system is relied on to reduce the consequences. The Committee believes that this system should also be designed and constructed to permit frequent testing of the ability of the filtration and iodine removal units to meet their specified efficiency levels.
The requirements that are imposed on plant design because of location in 4
an active seismic area have been considered by the applicant, and the referenced documents contain the recommendations of seismologists who hau been consulted on this question. Tentative exploration indicates that the reactor and turbine buildings will not be located on an active fault line. The Committee believes that if this point is established, the design criteria for the plant are adequate from the standpoint of hazards associated with earthquakes. Careful examination of the quartz-j diorite rock below should be made during building excavation, to confirm this point. Furthermore, the Committee suggests that, during design, j
careful attention should be given to the ability of emergency shutdown systems to operate properly during and subsequent to violent earth shocks, and to the stress effects that might be introduced because the j
reactor building and the" turbine bui.1 ding are to be anchored in differ-ent geological formations. The need for earthquake-induced shutdown and j
isolation of the primary system can be considered at a later time 1
1
]
au_
z
i k
(
I Honorable Glenn T. Seaborg April 18, 1963 f
A meteorological tower has been erec'ted on the sik.nd analyses of the observations will be used to establish atmospheric dispersion coefficients, i
and as one of the bases for determinining the height of the off-gas stack.
(
q The applicant has submitted evidence to establish that the anticipated
- {
temperature changes in the ocean near the condenser coolant discharge point will not be great enough to cause appreciable influence on the local' marine life. The expected release of radioactive effluent by the condenser j
coolant water will be at rates well below the 10 CFR 20 lbnits.. In addition, j
the applicant has made arrangements to obtain environmental data or marine 1
and land life in the neighborhood of the proposed plant both before and after reactor operation. These measures seem adequate to insure that the j
plant can be operated so as not to alter the local ecology or cause undesirable concentration of radioactivity in marine life.
l The ACRS believes that, subject to the above conditions, the proposed reactor can be designed and built at the proposed location on Bodega
' Head with reasonable assurance that it can be operated without undue Imzard to the health and safety of the public.
Sincerely yours,
/s/ D. P. Hall D. B. Hall Chairman
References:
1.
Preliminary Hazards Summary Report, Bodega Bay Atomic Park - Unit Number 1, dated December 28, 1962.
2.
Amenament Number 1, Answers to Questions Raised by the Division of Licensing and Regulation Relative to Construction Permit Application, dated March h, 1963.
m~
- m. _ ~ ~ -
.-.~a-
~ _ _ - -. -. _ _.. - - - - _ - - _ _ _ _
s.