ML25197A085
| ML25197A085 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Pilgrim |
| Issue date: | 11/14/1975 |
| From: | Kerr W Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Anders W NRC/Chairman |
| References | |
| Download: ML25197A085 (1) | |
Text
ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 November 14, 1975 ttonorable William A. Anders Chairman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
SUBJECT:
INTERIM REPORT 00 PIIGRIM NOCLFAR GENERATING 5'12\\TION, UNIT NO. 2
Dear Mr. Anders:
At its 187th meeting, November 6-8, 1975, the Advisory Comnittee on Reactor Safeguards canpleted a partial review of the application of Boston :Edison Company and joint applicants (Applicants) for a permit to construct the Pilgrim NUclear Generating Station, Unit No. 2. The site was visited on February 20, 1975, and the project was considered at a Subconrnittee meeting at Plymouth, Massachusetts on November 4, 1975.
During its review, the COnmittee had the benefit of discussions with representatives and consultants of the Applicants, Combustion Engi-neering, Inc., Bechtel Corporation, and the NUclear Regulatory Com-mission (NRC) Staff. 'Ihe Committee also had the benefit of the documents listed.
The plant will be located in Plymouth County, fi'..assachusetts approxi-mately 38 miles southeast of Boston. The NRC staff has designated a group of contiguous camnunities consisting of Plymouth Center, ~st and North Plymouth, and Kingston Center, some located as near as 2.2 miles :tran the site, to be the nearest population center (1970 population of 20,000 and the projected 1990 population of 25,000). 'Ihe minimum ex-clusion distance is 441 meters and the low population zone radius is 1.5 miles. Major land uses in the vicinity of the plant site are for residential and recreational activities.
The Nuclear Steam SUWly System (NSSS) for Pilgrim Unit 2 will be fur-nished by COmbustion Engineering, Inc. It will consist of a pressurized water reactor with a two-loop reactor coolant systen and will be rated at a thermal power output of 3473 megawatts.
'Ihe design of the NSSS is similar to that of San Onofre Units 2 and 3 which was reported on in the cammittee*s report of July 21, 1972.
The Committee has not carg;>leted its review of the seismicity of the site region, the proposed seismic design basis, and the foundation engineering for category I structures. 'lhese matters will be reviewed by the COnm.i ttee following conpletion of the NRC Staff review. 'lhe Conmittee will canplete its review of LOCA-ECCS at the same time.
1270
Honorable William November 14> 1975
'Ihe source of normal and emergency cooling water will be Cape Cod Bay.
'!he intake structure and the intake channel will be protected by existing breakwaters constructed for Pilgrim Unit I.
Pilgrim Unit 2 will enploy a containment consisting of a steel-lined, pre-stressed, post-tensioned concrete cy!inder and hemispherical dome roof with a total free volume of 2.48xl0 cu. ft. '!he design pressure and temperature are 60 psig and 300°F., respectively. '!he Committee believes that this contaimnent design, with its auxiliary systems, is satisfactory for this plant.
'Ihe NRC Staff has identified other outstanding issues which will require resolution before the issuance of a construction permit. '!he Committee recommends that these matters be resolved in a manner satisfactory to the Staff.
'Ihe Committee recommends that the NRC staff and the Applicants review further the design features that are intended to prevent the occurrence of fires and to minimize the consequences to safety-related equipnent should a fire occur. 'Ibis matter should be resolved to the satisfaction of the NRC Staff. '!he Committee wishes to be kept informed.
'Ihe ACRS considered the problem of turbine missiles in its report of April 18, 1973, where recommendations were made concerning overspeed pro-tection systems, optimum turbine orientation, and projectile penetration.
'Ihe Committee recarrnends that the NRC Staff continue to review the com-bination of overspeed protection systems and low angle missile barriers to determine if changes l<<>Uld enhance the safety of Pilgrim Unit 2, recognizing that design of this plant, which utilizes.a non-optimum turbine orientation was well advanced prior to 1973.
For future plants, the ACRS reiterates its reconmendation that a peninsular arrangement, optimized to be non-interactive with critical components in both single and multi-unit stations, is preferred.
'Ihe Committee believes that the Applicants and the NRC staff should con-tinue to review the Pilgrim tmit 2 design for features that could reduce the possibility and consequences of sabotage. '!he Cormnittee reconmends that adequate attention be given by the Applicants and the NRC staff to ensure that satisfactory measures are developed and implemented to assure the protection of Pilgrim Unit 1 during the construction of Unit 2.
Generic problems relating to large water reactors are discussed in the Corrmittee 's report dated March 12, 1975. 'Ihese problems should be dealt with appropriately by the NRC Staff and the Applicants.
1271
Honorable William November 14, 1975 With satisfactory conclusions on IOCA-ECCS, the seismic-related items, and the foundation engineering of Category I structures, identified above as matters requiring further Committee review, and with due consideration to the other items mentioned above, the Committee believes that Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 2 can be constructed with reasonable assurance that it can be operated without undue risk to the health and safety of the public.
Sincerely, W\\UN-
- w. Kerr Chainnan References
- 1.
Poston Fdison Conpany and joint applicants, "Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 2 Preliminary Safety Analysis Rep;:>rt,"
(PSAR), Vols. I-XI.
- 2.
Amendments 1-21 to PSAR.
- 3.
o.s.N.R.C., Safety Evaluation Rep;:>rt for the Pilgrim Nuclear Generating Station, Unit No. 2, June 1975.
- 4.
Letter, dated January 3, 1975, D:>ston F.dison Company to DRL, concerning Anticipated Transients Without Scram.
1272