ML042260317

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Catawba Hearing 07/15/04 - Intervenor Exhibit 53, E-mail from Robert C. Harvey to Steven P. Nesbit Re Oecd/Nea/Csni Special Experts Topical Meeting on LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria, Cadarache France, March 22-23, 2001 - Rec'D 07/15/04
ML042260317
Person / Time
Site: Catawba  Duke Energy icon.png
Issue date: 06/07/2004
From: Harvey R
Duke Power Co
To: Nesbit S
Duke Power Co, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Byrdsong A T
References
50-413-OLA, 50-414-OLA, ASLBP 03-815-03-OLA, Catawba-Intervenor-53, RAS 8316
Download: ML042260317 (4)


Text

i DOCKETED Robert C Harvey To: Steven P NesbPWGen/DukePower@ DukePower USNRC C.cc 06/07/WO2004 04:25 PM sbet ae

Subject:

Paper 5 August 9,2004 (11:45AM)

OFFICE OF SECRETARY Forwarded by Robert C Harvey/GenlDukePower on 06/07/2004 04:25 PM RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF s iNssley,'Mitchen E.* To: "Robert C Harvey' <rcharvey~duke-energy.com>

  • D nIssleme~westingho cc: Kobelak, Jeffrey R." <KobelaJR,1westinghouse.comr use.com>

Subject:

Paper 06/07/2004 03:34 PM qj2.pdfi>

This is from the Proceedings of the OECD/NEAICSNI Special Experts Topical Meeting on LOCA Fuel Safety Criteria, Cadarache France, March 22-23,2001. The paperwas actuaffy distributed ealier, as part of the NRC-sponsored High Bumup PIRT program. I commented on the expected significance of relocation In the following email:

<<RE: Apparent Contradiction>> 12.pdf

- Message from uNissley. Mitchell E." <nlsslemeGwestinghouse.corn> on Thu, 19 Oct 2000 12:28:22

-0400-To: joe@anatech.com, alexandc@battelle.org, lehnuc@engr.psu.edu, nwaeckel@epri.com, bdunn,@fra rdeveney@ framatech.com, geraldpotts@gene.ge.com, jens.andersen@gene.ge.com, fmoody@gfol wolfgang.wiesenack@hrp.no, georges.hache@ipsn.frjoelle.papin@ipsn.fr, bboyack@ianl.gov, do sej @nfuel.com, hgrkO3 @nspco.com, richardj.rohrer@nspco.com, toyo@nsrr.tokai jaeri.goJp, Afl keijo.valtonen@stuk.fi, k-peddicord~tamu.edu, tulenko@ufl.edu, 'Risher, Daniel Hi" <risherdh@

<ROM@nrc.gov>

cc: Harold Scott <HHS.twf5..po.TWFN DO@nrc.gov>, Sudharnay Basu <SXB2.twf5_po.TWF )C

<nissleme@westinghouse.com>, "Ohkawa, Katsuhiro" <ohkawak@westinghouse.com>, "Ebeling-

<derek.b.ebeling-koning@us.westinghouse.com>, "Blaisdell, John A. (Notes)" <john.a.blaisdel(i@

Subject RE: Apparent Contradiction Reviewing the transcripts at page 288, the discussion had to do with the experimental simulation of fuel relocation effects on local power generation. I would agree that fuel relocation is a real phenomenon which could have a significant effect on whether or not the experiments are prototype Designing an experiment with external heating to simulate these effects would certainly be challenling. However, analyzing the effects in a reactor transient Is more straightforward, and has been dorne by1several organizations. atJ b For the purposes of the analysis group, I think the ranking of mediums is appropri for igh bumup U02 fuel. Brent Boyack provided the following IPSN paper In his email of 6127/00:

(same attachment, deleted for storage reasons)

Using a deterministic method similar to the US Appendix K approach, IPSN showed What high bumup U02 fuel with relocation had margin to the 2200F1/1200C cladding temperature limit. The residual ductile cladding thickness was also sufficient to satisfy the Chung and Kassner criteria for thermal shock 011077 qe AemJXLTAS Ie 7~,,o/afe; o.g sec 10%

INUCLEAR REGULATORY COMivji,.; .

Docket No 5 L) Official Exh. No. _ _

In the matte Of _o Staff IDENTIFIED.II Applicant RECEIVED La Intervenor _ REJECrED Cont'g Off'r Cotractor DAE Other _,_____

, .d4.

.1, I embrittlement. It was noted that more severe results would be obtained for low bumuD U02 or high burnup MOX.

Westinghouse has included fuel relocation effects on local power generation, fuel thermal conductivity, and gap conductance in its best-estimate + uncertainties large break LOCA mQdel approved by the.

USNRC. When the analysis Is done statistically, 'such that all parameters are NOT at their worst value simultaneously as done in a deterministic calculation, the burst node is typically non-limiting except in very high temperature transients. The 10 CFR 50A6 acceptance criteria are met for low bumup U02 fuel.

The above supports the conclusion that rmeediumm Is an appropriate ranking for high bumup U02 fuel. A higher ranking for MOX may be appropriate.

Mitch From: Ralph Meyer[SMTP:ROM~nrc.gov]

Sent: Friday, October 13, 200010:52 AM To: 16etanatech.com; alexandcrbattelle.org; lehnuc engr.psu.edu; 'nwaeckelbepricom; bdunn@framatech.com; rdeveney~framatech.com; gerald.potts@ gene.ge.comr; jens.andersen~gene.ge.com; fmoodyigoldrush.com; lab@grs.de; wolfgangvWiesenack~hrp.no; georges.hache~ipsn.fr joelle.papin@ ipsn.fr, bboyack@ lanL.gov, dougwpruitf@ nfuel.com; seJ @nfuel.com; hgrkO3 @nspco.com; richard.j.rohrerl nspco.com; toyo @nsrr.tokal.jaeri.gojp; ATM2@psu.edu; keijo.valtonen stuk.fi; k-peddicord~tamu.edu; tulenko~ufl.edu; Nissley, Mitchell E.; Risher, Daniel H.

Cc: Harold Scott; Sudhamay Basu

Subject:

Apparent Contradiction PIRT Participants, During the LOCA PIRT meeting, we had discussions about fuel relocation =

into the ballooned section of a fuel rod. This discussion starts on p. =

288 of the transcript.

In Category B, the experimental group ranked 'Fuel relocation, residual =

bonding andlor dispersal as 7H, OM. OL and referred to this as a =

"significant effect.'

In Category C, the analytical group ranked "Fuel relocations as OH, 5M, OL =

and said it had a "modest effect on local linear heat rate."

My guess is that all the people who are concerned about this issue were in the experimental group and that the analytical group ranked this too low. =

Ballooning strains can be 100% (twice the diameter and four times the =

area) such that relocated fuel could substantially increase the local =

linear heat rate even though the rubble density would be less than the =

original pellet density.

This is one of the issues that I am going to include in my writeup of =

011078 AIOXL7Ar 5.e&

II

i. -. , -

Implications and actions. Maybe we should re-visit this Issue during the =

discussions at the coming PIRT meeting. Please think about it. I have =

reviewed some older information on this subject since the last PIRT =

meeting and could mention that Information in a discussion at the next =

meeting.

Ralph 011079 QUOXLA

- S%'