L-2006-241, Significance Determination Regarding a Loss of Power to Operating Residual Heat Removal Pump - Additional Information Regarding Gothic Analysis

Significance Determination Regarding a Loss of Power to Operating Residual Heat Removal Pump - Additional Information Regarding Gothic Analysis

ML063040597
Person / Time
Site:	Turkey Point
Issue date:	10/17/2006
From:	Jones T Florida Power & Light Co
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
EA-06-200, IR-06-015, L-2006-241
Download: ML063040597 (28)

Text

10 CFR 50.4 FPL L-2006-241 October 17, 2006 Attn: Document Control Desk U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Subject:

Turkey Point Unit 3 Docket No. 50-250 Significance Determination Regarding a Loss of Power to an Operating Residual Heat Removal Pump - Additional Information Regarding Gothic Analysis

References:

1) NRC Letter, Mr. C. A. Casto to Mr. J. A. Stall, Turkey Point Nuclear Plant -

NRC Integrated Inspection Report 05000250/2006015; EA-06-200, Preliminary White Finding, dated August 24, 2006

2) FPL letter L-2006-239 to the NRC dated October 13, 2006, Additional Information Pertaining to Regulatory Conference on Turkey Point Preliminary White Finding Held October 10, 2006

3) FPL letter L-2006-240 to the NRC dated October 17, 2006, Presentation Material Pertaining to Regulatory Conference on Turkey Point Preliminary White Finding Held October 10, 2006 In Reference 1 the NRC documented a preliminary white finding related to a loss of power to an operating residual heat removal (RHR) pump that occurred at Turkey Point Unit 3 in March 2006.

Florida Power and Light Company (FPL) representatives met with the NRC staff at a regulatory conference held on October 10, 2006 to present the NRC with additional information related to the finding. At the conference, the NRC staff requested additional information which was provided by Reference 2. The material presented at the conference was provided by Reference 3.

On October 16, 2006, FPL was requested to provide additional information regarding the GOTHIC thermal-hydraulic analysis performed in response to the loss of RHR event. This request was made through the NRC Senior Resident Inspector to the FPL Turkey Point Licensing Manager.

Attached to this letter is the response to the information request regarding the thermal-hydraulic analysis.

If there are any questions regarding this request, please contact James Connolly at 305-246-6632.

Very truly yours, Terry 0. Jones Vice President Turkey Point Nuclear Plant cc: Regional Administrator, Region II, USNRC.

Senior Resident Inspector, USNRC, Turkey Point an FPL Group company

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 1 of 27 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY RESPONSE TO NRC INFORMATION REQUEST FROM REVIEW OF TURKEY POINT DECAY HEAT REMOVAL DATED OCTOBER 4, 2006 GOTHIC ANALYSIS PERFORMED FOR UNIT 3 LOSS OF RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL FLOW EVENT REVISION 0 October 17, 2006 Piepared by::. Date: 47,o-*

Revieymd by. Date;: LL-a Reviewed by:

~1/jkLy~ ~r

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 2 of 27 RESPONSE TO NRC INFORMATION REQUEST FOR NEXT REVISION OF SIGNIFICANCE DETERMINATION PROCESS RISK-INFORMED INSPECTION NOTEBOOK PURPOSE Reference 1 transmitted specific requests for GOTHIC modeling and analysis information regarding the Turkey Point (PTN) Unit 3 loss of residual heat removal event of March 08, 2006. The following provides the responses to these questions for transmittal to NRC.

The information requested is only for clarification of already existing analyses developed for Turkey Point Unit 3. No modifications were made to the design of Safety Related items which are necessary to assure the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, the capability to shutdown and maintain the reactor in a safely shutdown condition, or the capability to prevent or mitigate the consequences of accidents that could result in offsite exposures comparable to 10CFR100 levels. Consistent with previous PSA-related insights to risk-informed applications, this evaluation is classified as Quality Related.

These responses were based on input from Numerical Applications Inc. and Westinghouse Electric Co.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 3 of 27 NRC Request Paragraph 1.0:

Please identify the decay heat curve used in the analysis and the core power level.

The nodalization diagramdoes not show the level of nodal detail in the vessel; particularlythe core, upperplenum, and hot legs. Are the core, upper plenum, and hot leg regions represented each with a single cell or are these regions axially segmented to properlytract the large void gradientsin these regions? Does GOTHIC have a level tracking model? What flow regimes are encounteredin the hot legs during these events? How is countercurrentflow modeling in GOTHIC and what limits are placed on this flow behavior? Pleaseexplain.

FPL Response:

The decay heat curve used for this analysis was a best estimate based on Reference 2 assuming actual cycle power history and event initiation at 64 hours7.407407e-4 days <br />0.0178 hours <br />1.058201e-4 weeks <br />2.4352e-5 months <br /> after shutdown from a 50% power level held for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

The GOTHIC nodalization used in this model primarily consists of single cell components. The vessel model is subdivided to show the lower plenum, core region and upper plenum. This nodalization was selected because the event being analyzed occurs several days after reactor shutdown with the system already vented and depressurized. As such, the transient with no Safety Injection progresses as a boiloff/slow mixing event. Since both the vessel and pressurizer are vented, any flow through the hot legs which does occur is a result of the density differences between the top of the core and the liquid which is pushed up into the steam generator U-tubes.

Therefore, fluid velocities are very small, and large void gradients do not develop. For analysis cases 2 and 3 with Safety Injection, voiding does not occur. The flow path nodalization utilized for this analysis does include junctions connected at the top and bottom halves of the hot legs to both the vessel and the steam generator steam generator volumes. This modeling approach enables the density differences to drive countercurrent flow through the system.

GOTHIC calculates the liquid and vapor fraction in each volume. The level in each volume is determined by the product of the liquid volume fraction and the volume height. This collapsed liquid level can be selected for display for any volume.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 4 of 27 NRC Request Paragraph 2.0:

Foreach of the cases show the void fraction vs time in the following components:

- core (show the axial void distributionsin the core vs time).

- hot legs

- upperplenum adjacentthe hot legs Are the Figureslabeled hot leg level and vessel level, liquid levels or two-phase levels? If not please provide the two-phase level plots in the upperplenum and hot legs vs time. Does the nodalization/codeallow a void gradientto develop along the hot legs from the upper plenum to the location of the RHR line? How is countercurrentflow and entrainment in the hot legs model/simulated? Pleaseexplain.

FPL Response:

The requested figures are provided on the following pages for all three cases analyzed. Note that the vapor void fraction includes both steam as well as air. Therefore, since the vessel is drained to the elevation of the flange at the beginning of the event, the initial void fraction in the upper plenum is approximately 40%. However, there is no mechanism to draw air from the vessel or U-tubes into the hot legs. The liquid levels calculated by GOTHIC represent collapsed liquid levels. 'Two-phase' or 'mixture level' plots are not available, however such plots would not be meaningful since the hot legs are not being emptied during the first nine hours of Case 1. In fact, due to the heating and pressurization of the RCS, the collapsed liquid level on the primary side of the steam generators, which is initially set at the elevation of the tube sheet, rises into the lower region of the U-tubes to enable heat transfer to the secondary. For the figures depicting the results of cases 2 and 3, note that the time frames cover not more than the first hour since any voiding occurs only during this time frame. For discussion of steam entrainment into the RHR pump suction, refer to the response to NRC Request Paragraph 4.0.

As described in the response to NRC Request Paragraph 1.0, countercurrent flow occurs due to the parallel flow paths employed. Entrainment is function of inter-facial drag, which is accounted for within flow paths by GOTHIC.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 5 of 27 Cava I1- WA-U.L %1gV -xVol.Nnw Frac 6on 9

AV Cm 7 14 211 29 3

~Z~¶TTim (a w.,,'r X1 03 IACase 1I Ccto Vam r VohiMa Fraclio AV is2,

-59 0; 7 14 21 2893

-r*_

P.X1 93

~rTI~ T ~*S~ZZ4 ~

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 6 of 27 iCbrio 11- Uppwi, F1 aoun: V~apr Vdlj m a, Fiadio~

XAVI Ai~

LLU a 7 '14 :21__3 Tiw. am

'CnQr.Q.2 - Hi-kQFpt LVJr akrnn Fru~diorn LLU E.

..L~

a 03A 0LH 1.2 21J "Mo. %Ww. X,I Ga

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 7 of 27 22' CU& 2- (.Awo Vapor Vohim a~ rawion AW14I 2

.5S HC CN 0.40.

CA 1'.2 1.6.2 Cava2 ~~rPnpr'oin Fracdion Lfl Xii

- IEl MgMwic-, U.&M21C

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 8 of 27 Car. 3a- Notr LQ9v'pwslcr iahn~o 'Fmili~an

0. 0.9 1.2 1~2 Tvrn.v c'10 Gii¶ TADLIh 1,M' Q 1';AZ !44 2Z Gazo - Cco. VaPar%)hrnGm' Frwtion.

LL I=. .- 0. ~ 0B Tii-w (1 c) t"i~

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 9 of 27 i -- QpWr P1 a nmn Vapo r Valum' Fmcfi an:

2C Ct:1 E

1.6 Z 4. 24 4 Xi'

1M"Cw9 hw."a dfixiEdz.1"bid di.CA =

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 10 of 27 NRC Request ParagraDh 3.0:

Please explain how heat transferin the steam generatordevelops. Does the steam compress the non-condensables into the upper portions of the active tubes or is the steam mixed with the non-condensables? How is heat transfer modeled between the primary and secondary? Are the heat transferand film coefficients level/region dependent? Explain how condensationis calculatedin the steam generators,particularlywhen the two-phase level change on both sides. Is heat transferfrom the non-condensable region modeled? Please explain.

FPL Response:

Steam will mix with the non-condensable gasses in the vapor portion of the tubes, and the vapor region will be compressed as liquid is forced into the tubes. This compression of the gases has a significant role in Case 2 after the Safety Injection pump is started, which restores the liquid level in the tubes sufficiently to allow natural circulation to occur. Standard GOTHIC heat transfer options were applied. The selected heat transfer option on the primary side of the steam generators was limited to convection into the continuous liquid phase. On the secondary side, a GOTHIC heat transfer model was selected which applies condensation to dry portions of surfaces and convection to wet portions of surfaces as applicable. This same option will also use boiling heat transfer if the surface temperature is greater than saturation. In this event, the steam generator inventory is sufficiently high that drying of the surfaces would not be expected to occur, which would preclude condensation heat transfer from taking place.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 11 of 27 NRC Request Paraqraph 4.0:

What is the void fraction in the hot legs at the time RHR is placed in service? What void fraction will cause cavitation of the RHR pumps? Please show that the conditionsin the hot legs will not preclude operation of RHR at the actuation times and that the GOTHIC code properly models the void distributionsexpected in the upperplenum and hot legs.

FPL Response 4:

Reference 3 documents the results of investigations of vortexing considerations for RHR suction lines in the hot legs of Westinghouse PWRs. That report discusses individual plant tests and scale model tests to determine the minimum hot leg level for RHR operation. The required level is based on the more limiting of that level at which air is ingested on a continuous basis but not more than 2% by volume of intake flow rate or the level at which air is ingested in sporadic gulps which do not exceed 5% by volume of intake flow. For the Turkey Point hot leg and RHR suction geometry, the required hot leg level is 25.9 feet at maximum RHR flow (approximately 3.3 inches above hot leg mid-loop). During the transient, the collapsed liquid level is maintained above this required hot leg level thus vortexing is avoided.

Investigation of the NPSH requirements for the Turkey Point RHR pumps at 3700 gpm indicates that the elevation head is sufficient to provide the required NPSH without credit for RCS pressure (assuming that RCS pressure is equal to saturation pressure). Note that the RHR pumps are located approximately 28 feet below the hot leg mid-loop elevation.

Hot leg void fractions are presented in the response to NRC Request Paragraph 2.0 above. RHR can be assumed to be placed into service at any time during the time lines presented in the analysis.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 12 of 27 NRC Request Paraqraph 5.0:

Please describe andpresent the benchmarking and validation effort for GOTHIC to demonstrate that the code can successfully predict key phenomena including the prediction of two-phase level swell, axial void distributionsin the core, upperplenum, and hot leg regions during periods of voiding characteristicof this event. Please describe the separate effects and integraltests used to validate GOTHIC.

FPL Response:

Extensive benchmarking of the standard GOTHIC models for heat transfer, two-phase flow, and non-condensable gas behavior has been performed and is documented in EPRI Report NAI-8907-09, GOTHIC Containment Analysis Package Qualification Report. Attachment 1 to this response presents a summary of this qualification effort. Note that NRC has approved the use of GOTHIC for Containment analyses and has also approved the use of GOTHIC by Dominion to perform Mass and Energy Release calculations (SER dated August 30, 2006).

Westinghouse developed generic plant models that include RHR system models, RCPs, thermal conductors, and steam generators models. A series of functional tests were performed with each of the new plant models to verify that they were capable of modeling the phenomena of interest during transients at shutdown. The results from the functional tests were reasonable and demonstrated that the generic plant models were able to adequately modeled the important shutdown phenomena.

Model validation testing was performed to qualify the capability of the GOTHIC code and the generic plant model noding structure for modeling the important phenomena during shutdown events. Both standalone and system models for the FLECHT SEASET test facility were constructed. Results from these models (generated using GOTHIC Version 6.1 P) were compared with FLECHT SEASET test data covering several major modes of operation, including single-phase natural 'circulation, two-phase natural circulation and reflux condensation with helium gas injection. The model results compared well with test data in the single-phase and two-phase natural circulation cooling modes. The model exhibited the expected overall behavior under reflux condensation conditions as well. The results of these data comparisons provided validation for the GOTHIC FLECHT SEASET model under single-phase and two-phase natural circulation conditions and form a basis for the full scale shutdown analysis plant models operating in those cooling modes. To calculate the proper two-phase flow in natural circulation, the code must provide a reasonable calculation of the void distribution in the upper plenum, hot legs and SG tubes.

Note that GOTHIC has been used extensively for analysis of Pressurized Water Reactor shutdown operations as documented in References 4, 5 and 6.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 13 of 27 NRC Request ParagraDh 6.0:

What sensitivity studies were performed to justify the model and the adequacy of the simulations?

What time steps were used in the analyses? Pleasediscuss the sensitivity of the results to the mannerin which the void fraction is determined (flow regimes and drag modeling of void in two-phase regions)? Pleaseexplain.

FPL Response 6:

The impact of changes to model parameters such as noding and heat transfer options was not evaluated. GOTHIC automatically calculates a time step size to be used at each time step that falls within the range selected by the user. GOTHIC determines the time step size based on solution stability (e.g., flow and phase change Courant limits, avoiding large variations in calculated parameters, oscillations in gravity-driven systems, etc.). A minimum time step of 0.0001 was applied in all cases.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 14 of 27 REFERENCES

1. NRC to Turkey Point Licensing information request of October 16, 2006,

Subject:

"Review of Turkey Point Decay Heat Removal Dated October 4, 2006 GOTHIC Analysis".

2. "Residual Decay Energy for Light-Water Reactors for Long-Term Cooling", Branch Technical Position ASB 9-2, Standard Review Plan, NUREG-0800, Rev.2, July 1981.

3. WCAP-11916, Rev. 0, "Loss of RHRS Cooling While the RCS is Partially Filled," Westinghouse Electric Corp., July, 1988.

4. WCAP-1 4089, Rev. 1, "Analyses to Develop a Basis for Surge Line Flooding Response to Support Shutdown Operations", Westinghouse Electric Corp., 1994.

5. WCAP-14988, Rev. 0, "Use of GOTHIC Computer Code for Analyses to Support Shutdown Operations", Westinghouse Electric Co., April, 1998.

6. WCAP-15145, Rev. 0, "Development and Testing of Generic Plant Models with the GOTHIC Computer Code for Analyses to Support Shutdown Operations", Westinghouse Electric Co.,

February, 1999.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 15 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 1 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 12 GOTHIC 'VALIDAlTON TEST MATRIX The majorit of code validation that has been Defori*ed for GOTHIC i documented in the preceding. sections of th"s qualificatou xeport Additio a validation informa-ion comes from the indishdw=, zactor repoit that ate completed each time a chanee is made or a new model -i added to GOTHIC. The action reports include any testing that was performed to valdale the Le-, model., Same, but not a.l of the validation tests i*cluded in action reports are al documented in the qualifi cation report. A tkird source ofvaidaio, documentatio is contained in reporti publiihed by GOTHIC users.

The: va hdation matrix which follo wsip o,.Ade s a summary of GOTHIC validation tests from the three sources listed above. Tne matrix is in spreadsheet farm with phenomena of inter-es t as column headiuýgs and va idati.o tests as rows. Terst identified as GSP # are GOTHICC standard problems that were developed to test GOTHIC capabilities. Only qqatilative comparisons with analyt-i or expermenatn results are included in the validation matris-Tests that provi4eSOnly qualitative esults, some of which are documented it previous sec-tions of the qualification report, are noi included in the validation matrix.

The Listed, phenomena were identified by a review of the GOTHIC Technical Manual, Some very basic phenomena such as mass, enerzy and momernum conser*vation and equa-tions of stare are zot Listed because they are fundamental to all of the other modeled phe-nomen and therefore implicitly included.

The validation terss can be ctassitftied as analytc, separate effects or combined effects- The analytic tesis compare the code results to generally accepted analytic so'u.1.ons to the gov-erming physical laws or io a correia.ion. fit to eerimeenal data. The separate effects tests have primary focus on a single phenomenon with oiher phenomena possibly playing: mmor roles. The combined effec ts rests measure selected system parameters in tests where multi-pie phenomen play sigmificant roles, poisibly at different limes in a transient test. Some of the validation rests also represent comparis*om with multiple test r=ns i* an experimen-tal program designed to study various aspects of a particular problem. The heavy line across the lower part of the matrix divides the combined effects tests from the separate and analytic tests.

The matrix cells identify the significant phenomena for each test. An ,n' a pnricl ar row i.dicates, that test provides validation for the phenomenon identified by ihe corresponding column lahbel. There is also a number located above each columnh eading onthe first page of the matrix to idenrift the toto namber of tests that apply tothat p*atticlar phenomenon.

Note that some of thie tests repreent comparison with two or more experiments but thaT only one test is credited in the validation tally. For those phenomena marked with a zero in the top ro,, none of the tests currently- identified in the matrix provide sig3ificant valida-tion for the phenomenon.. The validation rally is also shaded to indicate the lesting cover-are. No -hading for phenomena with no relevant lesting, light shading for I test, medium shadimg for 2 to 4 tests and dark shading for 5 or more relevant tests.

22-1

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 16 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 2 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 4 2 Z 2 E 2 3 7 E E,1 3 1 5 1 1 1 3 1 1 3

p

_1 I E.

Test.

1 EDro Enmrn~en1 A.

1' Hi A

w 01 (1 L

Li

(-I U U Li I Crop Enta~rmebfciy

K 3 Je and; Drcrp 6Bwup 4 Crop heat &avWona Tlriarzt S GS27P - Heat.7mnzter S GSP 14 - OaV NumefI:al Benchm'it ReC~argular Cwidty 9 GSP 2' - ThvmWa' cndu:tI*

In Sads CLjlnwUlj*

7andma 9 Ccndui:Irr sufamko~wlace 10 7"fTmaI Drfia~n fnl i~pa and Uquald

.condew-tsafim 12 Mist IO1s~c La.wer Madel fbr W31 H14e and Ms "transfer  :

14 GSi I - Noua]t CI*Jtaticn IA Veitlal -nd Haftcnfl.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 17 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 3 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 2 3 7 1 1 0 1 0 [1S, 1 2 1 !9 1 1 .1 1 C

V S, a

1I M Test

• 4*~

x w I S IL Aj

-Jo U U U

17 CEP 2 -H yzrogen Inkecl'cn I-7L, r, P1en :eG e v ra etd I* A.

Sq~re Gidd 20 FiDwmr A Re:tsnnjr Cucv 21Pm~e

=2 Gsp 29 z~ I~

Z4 KyVa- Bum. Te~k ZEFame Fadlhe Eneflrwftl z-- Kevacai veu1 are Evpeflmwft ZTGEP 3 - Purp~pdwmnmrce ZS zP 3 -Dmfe HeW Ewmner 30 GSP 23 - Htat Exchanr2ff 0;az T

22-,3

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 18 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 4 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix I S 2 .II IL 6 I I

Uj U

W:

b C U Z,- a a

Test

-1AAr aAC 7e-~I n rure A& Do:er eW 3.3 SameAtr C-cale 34 G=-P Z: - Fan Heztn:r 371cv~ e D ezay 3S AEVL Recafttner 40 Ptxe Penwv Dmgxp 41 Irra :ýrmyzn wa0"Iel F-IV*^

,2 Ice ?JeftU &1i Ccnirn~att 42 r r-Wtaner 7e--t 22-4

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 19 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 5 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 11SIS 111 21 21 S171SI -1 1 1017IS121 S1 I 1=

LI

.JJ X Lu I;

U

'IC)

LI

-J 80.

IL U

'A I"-

CL5 5, Test Lf "45 dh~ ryW mi V-e acdtry I II I I XI I I I 1 415 W34x r.Aaria Leauage, W/ALE) Expermerd.  : K X -f X Ccratimnerf I~-a Tests 47 tLECHT Sr=A~SET 'Jr-%1b~a Umrnatcn. Test,~

K X W X K I 49 Maav1Prr , UI Scev Centanmen2t.ests X K K X X Ocrriabmerd Test3 If le K K leKv W5FNurear Pywer ning'eet ug C~p adniJUPaC)jr KK K K5 Ttr KR SS Edxwi PDe Bca&n 2-24

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 20 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 6 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 4 j..5 I I 117 1 -,'C 1 7 1 1 D] 4 1 1 1 ', 1 121 1 1 4 1 1 [ - 1 2 1 _- 1 4 1 7 w

'-p C

-9 C S, i S I-71 15

'%Z!

5Ii I IF.

Test 1=

I Drop Erituahmerf 2 Drop SL--1-r \e~cay 3 J&.and. rrr~pS.eijp 4 Drop Ieat mni A.a,-r Thr1r 7 HCzfnmu4tnr aulndET ImA Rj&and L-, .K X4 Gandu~abcr Sufvno Surac 1Ner-M ~0t!¶z a yer,=Cft YnL I

~45~d an%~ LMqU IC V X 11 G.SP 37- P"aojrAl ChWtF4afte I.W n =;7nfrXX Ket 22-6

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 21 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 7 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 1 5 _I 1 1 171 iCj 7 [ 1:1 1 4 1 1 1 12 1 1 1 4 1 1 1

-4

'Sd I

w 6

iv A 0 4 *6 V6

• 1 I I; -4 S La a,'

7:

-4 'p P i.

a's Test 17 aGSP 2 -,Hyrc~en' I r~ectdc ISGEP . Coprerto

-A'r IS 7urodexw':e C-enerated;'ZryA

=4 Rv& A Rs_-:tan.7Jar Dud.

.= *P 29 - Cavoed F10W 24 i~yd+/-ag Sumn Teef Rame =;az hy Et~erimra-ts

-27 GEP S -,FUrn P~srmac e

ZE GP7-,S~ngreI-et 2 .- SP GS: - Dwol Heal.

Em~wer G0 CS F23;-He e.Erccha3 r

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 22 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 8 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 1 r- 7 13 4 1 12 1 4. 1 w

I 7-I S I

t. j6 C

Y (j

¶

& C) w I:

Test '4 BSZ Brure Ar Czo'er-~~

3-4 SSP Z4 - Fan H4e_-An-

.3 GS=PZS - V'Acmrn 12rea 0^-r

.39 CGcusinlTests

-3 Isor~peDerV 40P Ie Prs-umE rapz 41 Ice ~ cn-~~c 42, BNW ~efti;A,1 rCendr Te k

'22-8

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 23 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 9 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 4,I1] 7 L .314 1 f[ -1 2 I-I  ! e LU S -

I; C I B I

I.,

L~J Li 12 Li 0 t7 1' ur~

Test 44I~ 1S3n2o~e Velcdty - --- --

4S Weialerc."ma Ledagae C-cntA~vmevJLA.C=yrTets If X :I I X I 47 LEC14T SEALSE7 NaJurW

-ýý rVTRSrnutWd1 DEA Tez~tz K XXK KK X:

C-cshtmerr2:eft ~ X :K X X Dc X W X SO Ba-eLFranPkA:r1 CcnIa'nmerivetýre X X X, :iK K X W X-b X X HeOR FU I Krf K Klmw S1 Nud'ear Fkvie Ehg~mernU U~PC Cc rpcralt" (44c- 7 --.t K) KX1

54 PRWV Testz Se6' PMIS7RA, SS6 Ed-ids P"e Eltwdawun 22-4;

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 24 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 10 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix IoI _; I ý: 1 2 E - 1 ý_ I -=, I ;: 1 4 1 :1 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 ý 1 :3 1 2 1 2 .

n U B

• B C

'T L

E U-

'Ii I-w 'A IL L

Test i 3 Jeti rc .~u 4 CrSp Ke-n Th Wa= ra-rf

,vchm~ Kft-7-crdzcmtn1I Cyinzfl- h.,A Rectwgular ~~

,3 GSP _1',- The.ma_ C'cvdu:1~r, 10 Therr-al OWrruafl 11 p and -cult 11 Q7EF 17 - Jýr1A'TVR Ftwte 12 r.1 isDM rc r L,3,.er K13dI!ýf?r 1.,1 I ~-It, andj M3,z. 7-anzftr 14 G.SP I - Na.j -a C1 cmalsw IS[WeikaI.wnd I-fuflzrnb 2:10

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 25 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 11 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix

~IA1.2.V:z~I Ej 4.~

7

~I-~+/- I I I I ~I

~ ~

I

~

T i J T 2~'~

.:3 Test I I,,

I 'F i-.

I'P a

LI SE UD 17 2-P,- Hytrc~en. 1Ltr-t.an Vito At' I.S GASP 3 - A r Ccf pr 5 ýr 1ExpGeetmerf t. d Em n-ze -

SO FtISw :I A Reaý xchnger uc ov"U-):

-- I I Ft 22.-1 1.

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 26 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 12 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix

-1 1 3 Li V

2 I jv

'5

'fi U,.

9' L.

2:4 i; 7

U

'-4 lii A Test

& a 32BWeA 1 BS Same N~r Ccater

,4G 4,- FaIn:He2n; 3P 5- V.racdri Weaker

Z Dcuz~n~ Teztz 3-Is-0Ce Oerzy 3S AEOL Reomrbin,!

1, crdenzation, Evpytfl'nr_

40' P" Ples'ur,~eDrcp 41 Ice F43rmatan or CZoce Flabe

-211cer'I C-endemnfia 43, BNWX Ice Cor-Ceerz Tc&-t 22-12

FPL Letter L-2006-241 - Attachment Response to Questions Regarding GOTHIC Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis Page 27 of 27 Attachment 1 (page 13 of 13)

GOTHIC Validation Test Matrix 3 E, 114,0`1 C 3 1 1 1 1 1 S 2 13 v

UU 51 Test ,I,.

i,'VoA-S", Experlrents, 4,i U;C-ý Watei, Ccria rMere"I'LAr-E) 7eSIS 47 F-ECHTSEASE7 NMLr&ý ca resft :If T 4.--- rVTF%,5,iru1at&d DSA 7es-Is 4S Ma".,em RAI Z-:c3ge Te'.13 X v w If X ocni"Ment SO Temtr. X Ir K v X Carlatmerd S1 FEDL ýHydrcgcn,%1Vz'r1p Tesft-X 3f le X S_- F- C R F;_ i I E r,31e CaMdroner-t

-Cff":

,SS Nu clear Fkymer, ErglneeVnj; Cc Mc m4an -.1N U PE C) 7, --z Is X K

-54 P R V Tes 1s X 30 SS 70S2&N S6 ?AES7 R-A, Pt:e SItwdoan Edsa-ft Ew. e rl mertzz;

'22*-13