ML051960023

Presentation Slides from July 14, 2005, Public Meeting with Omaha Public Power District (OPPD) Ft. Calhoun Being a Pilot Plant for Resolution of GL 2004-02

ML051960023
Person / Time
Site:	Fort Calhoun
Issue date:	07/14/2005
From:	General Electric Co, Omaha Public Power District
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML052230294	List: ML051960023
References
GL-04-002
Download: ML051960023 (36)

Text

u~r-

.NFf i:,

1. '.-I.'.

s.

o-

• ,.,,;. r,' ' I'.

r.. '..' '.'..'

. t d'Sis,'.-N 8,...........

' : 1 I... - -

1.

Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station Generic Letter 2004-02 Pilot Plant Overview Meeting July 14, 2005 V

U000 K

IV

Meeting Agenda Bernie Van Sant

• Introduction and Overview - OPPD

• FCS Approach and Progress-OPPD

• Debris Generation and Transport - Alion

• Strainer Hardware Overview - GE

• Downstream Effects - S&L

- Design Change Process - S&L

• Overview of Expectations - NRC

• Future Actions/Meetings - All July 14, 2005 f;f*;,.,

P 2

Lu-r"I Introduction and Overview

. Project Team

. 2006 Major Projects

. Project Status a Hardware a Licensing o Analysis Ei Installation Juy 1

118119,11w K.

July 14, 2005 3

Fort Calhoun Station Team Members

• Omaha Public Power District (OPPD)

Bernie Van Sant - Manager Nuclear Projects Michael Friedman - Project Manager Tom Matthews - Nuclear Licensing Supervisor

• Alion Science and Technology Jan Bostelman - Debris Generation, Debris Transport, CFD, General Project Support

• General Electric Barry Smith - Strainer Hardware

• Sargent & Lundy Steve Raupp - Design Change Package, Downstream Effects, Minor Modifications, General Project Support July 14, 2005

,vP e(

4

F, 2006 Outage Major Projects

• Steam Generator Replacement

• Reactor Vessel Head Replacement

• Rapid Refueling Package Installation

• Pressurizer Replacement

• ECCS Sump Strainers

• Low Pressure Turbine Replacement

• Main Output Transformer Replacement July 14, 2005 w 2 5

Project Status Strainer Hardware

• New strainers of approximately 2800 ft2 (total) will be installed in Fall 2006 to replace existing 56 ft2 strainers

• Design will be a large passive stacked disk strainer

• Complex testing program and evaluation/

optimization required for final hardware sizing -

August 2005

• Design Change Package for installation -

April 2006 July 14, 2005

-,v 6

Project Status Licensing: Generic Letter 2004-02

• Initial 90-Day response - Completed

• RAI response for chemical effects - In Progress

• September 2005 response - Under Development a Will reflect expected post-modification plant design cl Working to evaluate and resolve industry unknowns o Considering several alternatives to optimize design and demonstrate design margin July 14, 2005 RIPPER 7

Project Status (cont.)

Analysis

• Debris Generation (DG), Debris Transport (DT) and Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD)

Calculation developed

• Water level calculation complete

• NPSH calculation being revised using flow

-modeling software

• Downstream effects Phase 1 (Blockage) currently being finalized; Phase 2 (Wear and Fuel Blockage) in progress July 14,2005 ULPP M,.ULQ 8

1-,

Project Status (cont.)

Installation

• Installation to be performed by replacement contractor steam generator

• Fall 2006 Refueling Outage

• Planned for 93 days y 1, 2 K

"7~P L**V July 14, 2005 9

77 -

-777l r-Passive Strainer Conceptual SI12 j9

\\\\\\

l Sump.ltG 2

Jul y14. 2005 10

r.

., :...Z \\ 10

_,ur

.LU

1. Fogz

'-I Fort Calhoun Station (FCS)

Approach and Progress Michael Friedman Project Manager - ECCS Strainers Fort Calhoun Station J u l 1 4, 2 0 0 5 1 ! 111 1J f

UjPOU !m

=A,_*e;tZihwis K X July 14, 2005 1 1

F4'.M -

1 ru FCS Approach Objective

• Ensure nuclear safety by meeting the design considerations identified in the industry documents and the NRC SER

• Optimize the project by minimizing cost, schedule, and operational limitations July 14, 2005 12

Project Progress Analysis

• Debris Generation, Transport and CFD prepared to identify debris loads a Calculation updates planned to include evolving knowledge base such as coatings testing

• Flow Modeling and Containment Analysis Li Realistic NPSH margin for a variety of conditions and time dependant variables

• Downstream Effects Evaluation r1 Two phase program - maximum particle size and long term effects

• Water Level Evaluation Li Improved analysis for water hold up July 14, 2005 13

Project Progress

• Chemical Effects rE Evaluation to consider applicability of industry data to plant specific parameters E NPSH margin provided for September GL response Eo NPSH margin validated based on vendor strainer testing E Response to RAI on chemical effects - information discussed above will be included

• Upstream Effects ri Plant walkdowns and evaluation of potential water retention completed; identified plant enhancement modification to raise sump pool water level July 14, 2005

,U 2

14

Administrative Controls

• Insulation Control Program (drafted/not approved)

El Maintains configuration control a Requires Engineering approval to change insulation type or quantity in containment n Insulation inventory spread sheet on web page with hot-linked photographs

• Latent Debris Collection (drafted/not approved) ri Plant procedure drafted and used during 2005 RFO for latent debris collection

• Validated values used in debris generation calculation are conservative

• Validates plant cleanliness procedures are effective July 14, 2005 15

L-i Administrative Controls

• Downstream Configuration Control

[i Modified/replacement components will require downstream effects evaluation a Requirements to be added to design change process July 1,

200 16.

,,VIISF, F

....... So Kn,.

July 14, 2005 16

row Modifications

• Strainer hardware contracts in place

• Spacers to be installed for RPV flange seal base -

enhancement based on upstream evaluation

• Insulation Replacement ESteam Generators and Pressurizer

• Reflective metal insulation for vessels

• Thermal wrap for associated piping E Other locations as needed July 14, 2005

-IITY 17

77

7

. i Project Optimization

• Project optimization planned immediately after testing n1 Need to find the technically best and most cost effective solution Ea Several variables need to be evaluated to identify final design a Provide adequate design margin for unknowns

• Design options fall into three categories m Reduction of debris and transport source term a NPSH and head loss Ei Strainer design and modifications July 1K July 14, 2005

)

p18

Resolution Optimization

-is

&,,fi, a

UPSONd Efl'5'IN LIG July 14, 2005 19

Project Optimization

• Containment spray pump operation El Temporary license amendment approved for operation with one pump, can become permanent El Defeat auto start for one spray pump to improve NPSH margin

• Time dependent/event dependent NPSH evaluation, instead of cumulative worst case analysis

• Increase containment overpressure (license amendment required)

• Insulation replacement - asbestos July 14, 2005

-IPP L n

-p 20

Project Optimization

• Primary Methods Being Evaluated El Crediting Alternate Evaluation Region 2 Methodology for additional margin beyond design basis

• 14" break loads evaluated in debris generation

• 10" break to be considered based on largest pipe connection (pressurizer surge line)

• Scope of work currently being evaluated ai Realistic vs. conservative NPSH margin evaluation

• Nominal tank volumes

• Operator action to secure pumps

• Realistic containment heat removal/decay heat rates

• Pump operation with minimal cavitation

• Injection of refilled Safety Injection & Refueling Water tank July 14, 2005

,-^

ItrA I 21

0 r w

 : -,
-,

- - :- 7
- -.- - -

,. 5,

. 11 I I -

I

,
.
:

`
'.

- :1,, 1 '-.

L.,,

I

1., -,.. I -..

W

 :; *-,

- I Schedule Pilot Plant kickoff meeting Head loss testing Optimization GL 2004-02 Response License Amendments (if required)

Design Change Package complete Hardware on site Installation Updated/as-built design July 2005 July/August 2005 August 2005 September 2005 December 2005 April 2006 August 2006 October/November 2006 December 2006 Jy425 July 14, 2005 22

rU-Debris Generation and Transport Calculations Jan Bostelman Alion Science and Technology July 14, 200500 23 filed

.)
-

L, 23

.r7i LU:

OPPD Resolution Strategy

• Debris Source Identification

• Debris Analysis E Debris Generation (DG)

C Debris Transport (DT) includes 3D Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) my 14, 2005

§P

Jul, 24

Debris Source Identification

• NEI-02-01 Walkdown (RFO 2003) OPPD/Enercon/Alion/CCCL Team Insulation Types o Calcium silicate with and without asbestos o Transco Reflective Metal Insulation (RMI) o NUKON o Cerafiber o TempMat o High Density (HD) Supertemp o Foam Rubber o Fiberglass Low Density Fiber Glass (LDFG)

July 14, 2005 7KA 25

F -

- r -

L; - w

= -

Insulation Data Sheet Example Area Inslaton 1--

Desripton Loatin EevaionNominal IDDescription DePpesomrinttutide Legt Sie (in Dameter i (Ill Regen HX to Aux Pzr A

I CH-205 Spray Outside west walL of 1052'-11' to 1042-6' 2

Box 10-x10'x10' N/A 2'RC-2508R Pzr Cubicle (EL 1045) 2-CH-2508R Regen HX to Aux Pzr A

1 HCV-249 SprayO Pzr Cubide (EL. 1045) 1052'-11" to 1042'-6' 2

2.375 N/A 2 CH-2508R Regen HX to Aux Pzr A

I CH-469 2-RC-2508R Pzr Cubide (EL. 1045) 1052'-1 1 to 1042-6 2

Box 12 x12-x12-N/A 2tCH-2508R Regen HX to Aux Pzr A

I HCV-240 Spray Outside west wall of 1052'-11 to 104Z 2

2.375 2

2'RC-2508R Pzr Cubicle (EL. 1045) 2-CH-2508R Outlet Une Tube Side Regen Regen HX to Aux Pzr AHX (From Regen HX to Aux Spray Outside west wall of A

1 Pzr Spray) - 2 Sections 1) from 2 RC-2508R Pzr Cubicle (EL. 1045) 1052-11 to 1042' 2

2.375 8

floor to U/S HCV-240; 2) D/S 2"CH-2508R CH-205 to elbow Regen HX to Aux Pzr AI Elbow D/S CH-205 to Wall Spray Outside west wall of 1021Vto04-223571 A

1 Penetration 2 RC-2508R Pzr Cubicle (EL. 1045) 1052-11 to 1042'-6 2

2.375 17.1 2-CH-2508R A

1.1 Radiant Energy Shield with Valve HCV-249 outside l 1 1 to1042'-6 N/A N/A N

structural steel outside Pzr Radiant Energy Shield 102.

Cubicle61 N/

NA

/

cube by Cont. WallPzCuil J-uly-.

0 2

B3Oe.P

~L.-dy..

July 14, 2005 26

Er-

...1--..... -

.. I. -

=-

Continuation of Insulation Data Sheet

.. ~:'~For~nf.">o" fo insulation.:

FrIf.-

Type Thicknes Calculated:Jacket--BlOny Inuain-Mtra

&D-ISO Lyt ShedPhoto

1. 1 VYolume (Cu it) K N te 2 V '-

E-23866-21 0-120 Temp Mat 2

0.57 Aluminum Sh. 1A, E-23866.

CH-2014, Sh. I 11045-M-16 0

0.57 210-110 Sh. 1A P11 60078.ipa E-23866-21 0-120 None NIA 0.00 None Sh. 1A. E-23866-CH-2014, Sh. I 11045-M-16 0

0.00 210-1lIOSh. IA P11 60078.ioa E-23866-21 0-120 Temp Mat 2

1.00 Aluminum Sh. IA, E-23866-CH-2014, Sh. 1 11045-M-16 0

1.00 210-1I1 0Sh. IA P11 60078.opQ July 14 2005 2

K t.....

July 14, 2005 27

Coatings

• Acceptable Coatings o Phenoline 305/CZ1 1: steel liner plate, polar crane, structural steel o Keeler & Long 6548/7107 with E-1: maintenance steel, liner plate, o Nu-Klad 1 1 OAA/Amercoat No. 66: concrete floors, walls, ceilings o Carboline 191/Phenoline 305: maintenance steel o Carboguard 890: new equipment, piping supports, maintenance steel

• Unqualified Coatings o Corlar 825-8031 Zinc Chromate/Phenoline 305: safety injection tanks o #773 Dulux Zinc Chromate/Phenoline 305:quench tank o Alkyds: valve operators, junction boxes, snubbers, unistrut o Aluminum Coatings: reactor vessel, steam generators, and pressurizer (note new pressurizer, reactor vessel head and steam generators will not have Aluminum Coatings)

July 14, 2005 Ibd i28

Latent Debris

• Latent Debris (surveyed/measured by OPPD and samples examined/measured by Los Alamos National Labs-LAN L)

• Estimated as 159 Ibm dirt/dust/fiber from surveys

• Extensive cleaning conducted 2003 outage

• In analysis conservatively used 200 Ibm, 85% dirt/dust, 15% fiber

• Measured/counted labels yielding reduction in strainer area of 71 ft2

• Follow-on inspection Spring 2005 outage Survey performed 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> after reactor shutdown

• Spring 2005 outage survey estimated containment debris load as 28 Ibm July 14, 2005

,10 29

F 0r;-

I, Debris Generation

• Large, Medium and Small Full DEGB Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA)

• Main Steam Line Break/Feedwater Line Break do not require recirculation

• Zone of Influence (ZOI) 17.1 Length/Diam for NUKON insulation

• ZOI 11.7 L/D used for TempMat insulation

• ZOI 5.5 L/D used for Calcium Silicate luly 14, 2005 LOPE SOW,.)30 eter (L/D) used J

30

r!'.I_

ru:.Mrf.. ru I LU I,1 A:: -

Debris Generation

• ZOI 10.0 and 4.0 L/D used for approved coatings (pending further industry studies)

• NUKON and TempMat Size Distribution: 60% fines and 40% large pieces (per GR/SER)

• Cerafiber 1 00% fines: all Cerafiber in containment assumed failed

• Calcium Silicate 1 00% fines

• Plant-specific latent debris walkdown LANL tests) information (and K

J l 1, 2...5.

July 14, 2005 31

e l-i'-'

I Let~ 71 Fort Calhoun Station DG and CFD CAD Model-Highly Compartmentalized a

K And...

O a u

. /5 A ~ r July 14, 2005 32

I F A r

¢:£ DG Breaks 5.5 LID Spherical ZOI for Calcium Silicate rot b

j.Lj "I

'1 Li Jul 14, 2005 33 HP1 OU-Nai

=_ ;*

R;W G--W

P July 14, 2005 33

5.'i. r ma,.V L. 61 17n DG Breaks 11.7 L/D Spherical ZOI for TempMat I

I P

I I

Ju-14,2053 Ua~5ndY...K.

July 14, 2005 34

F I L.

Pivot Tables Table 4.3-6b Break No. 3 Breaks in the most direct path to the sump Case 3 - Spray Control Valve Line Scenario Sum of Calculated Volume (cu ft)

Insulation Type Total Fiberglass 100.8463268 Temp Mat 2.361648644 Calcium Silicate 0.621969896 CalSil / Asbestos 4.223609523 Grand Total 108.0535549 HOMOi LG.V J

l 1

4 2

July 14, 2005 35

[U1 ULI-p."'

Break No. 1-Large Break LOCA Debris Summary INSULATION DEBRIS

- CASE 1 LARGE PIECES CASE I FINES CASE 2 LARGE PIECES CASE 2 FINES HIGH FIBER SCENARIO Calcium Silicate Calcium Silicate/Asbestos Craftier

• Foam Rubber NUKONO Temp-MatO RMI 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.54 ft3 0.92 ft3 64.99 ft3 33,645.68 ft2 4.81 ft3 49.41 ft3 0.88 ft3 0.00 ft3 1.38 ft3 97.48 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.54 ft3 107.3 ft3 64.99 ft3 33,645.68 ft2 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.88 ft3 0.00 ft3 161.0 ft3 97.48 ft3 HIGH PARTICULATE SCENARIO Calcium Silicate Calcium Silicate/Asbestos Cerafiber

• Foam Rubber NUKONS Temp-MatO RMI 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.54 ft3 0.53 ft3 9.32 ft3 33,645.68 ft2 1.

0.15 ft3 93.3 ft3 1.72 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.80 ft3 13.98 ft3 COATINGS DEBRIS Acceptable Coatings 4 L/D ZOI Acceptable Coatings 10 L/D ZOI Unqualified Coatings 150 Ibm 941 Ibm 1125 Ibm 150 Ibm 941 Ibm 1125 Ibm LATENT DEBRIS Particles Fibers Others Stickers/Tape Reduce Strainer Screen Area 80.3 Ibm 4.4 Ibm 74.3 Ibm 71.0 ft2 80.3 Ibm 4.4 Ibm 74.3 Ibm 71.0 ft2 M 0

;_ *;Z.

K.

r-07 1-L--.IV...

July 14, 2005 36

Ur L.. I

u.

m D-Medium Break LOCA Debris Summary Table 4.3-6 Break No. I MBLOCA RCS 14" Breach Debris Generation Case I Table 4.3-7 Break No. I MBLOCA RCS 14" Breach Debris Generation Case 2 Quantity Insulation Type Destroyed Calcium Silicate 0.00 ft3 Calcium Silicate/Asbestos 36.3 ft3 Cerafiber 0.88 ft3 Foam Rubber 0.54 ft3 NUKONO 2.30 ft3 Temp-Matj 87.92 ft3 RMI 33,645.68 ft2 Insulation Type Quantity Destroyed Calcium Silicate 0.00 ft3 Calcium Silicate/Asbestos 0.00 ft3 Cerafiber 0.88 ft3 Foam Rubber 0.54 ft3 NUKONO 268.34 ft3 Temp-Mat 87.92 ft3 RMI 33,645.68 ft2 U W E ll 1 1 July 14, 2005 3

--7
Y L",.,v July 14, 2005 37

Small Break LOCA Debris Summary BREAK NO. 3 - MOST DIRECT PATH TO THE SUMP INSULATION DEBRIS CASE I LARGE PIECES CASE I FINES CASE 2 LARGE PIECES CASE 2 FINES Calcium Silicate Calcium Silicate/Asbestos Fiberglass Temp-MatO 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.94 ft3 5.39 ft3 38.97 ft3 61.33 ft3 1.42 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.94 ft3 0.62 ft3 4.22 ft3 100.84 ft3 1.42 ft3 jt*-

NIPPE*R K

July 14, 2005 38

W

-7:

Debris Transport

• Logic tree approach similar to Drywell Debris Transport Studies (DDTS)

• Fibrous debris 2-size distribution used without refinement

• Blowdown, washdown, pool fillup and recirculation

• CFD analysis conducted for recirculation only (all fines transport)

• Assumed non-homogenous distribution of debris in recirculation pool

• CFD results: recirculation transport fines 1 00%

July 14, 2005

,3,,

3

Debris Transport

• Used LBLOCA minimum water level for conservatism in CFD (LBLOCA level at 3.96 ft)

• 1 0O inactive area

• Fibrous debris 2-size distribution already accounts for erosion of LDFG; evaluated this information against data available at 9 and 16 inch pool depths; FCS deep pool

• CFD is very conservative in. not modeling the large passive array (i.e., very low approach velocities in that area); currently utilizes only the existing piping configuration

• CFD results illustrated debris interceptors would not be necessary for FCS July 14, 2005

• LPWf H

L t0

r7l Recirculation Pool Transport RMI

• Utilized CFD model to evaluate turbulent kinetic energy and velocities (tumbling/sliding) for RMI (Break B Bay on left, Break A Bay on right)

- Maximum break flow 3 High Pressure Safety Injection (HPSI) pumps (1,350 gpm)

• Maximum Containment Spray (CS) flow (3 pumps)

Kn-P July 14, 2005 July 14, 2005 4100 41

Recirculation Pool Transport Small LDFG

• Utilized CFD model to evaluate turbulent kinetic energy and velocities (tumbling/sliding) for small LDFG (Break B Bay on left, Break A Bay on right)

• Maximum break flow 3 HPSls (1,350 gpm)

• Maximum CS flow prv.

OROU.

=Z;-

(a H

July 14, 2005 42

Ir7 LE.

A-----

Recirculation Pool Transport Small TempMat

• Utilized CFD model to evaluate turbulent kinetic energy and velocities (tumbli (Break B Bay on left, ng/sliding) for small TempMat Break A Bay on right)

• Maximum break flow 3 HPSls (1,350 gpm)

• Maximum CS flow X

`7 1

-d..

July 14, 2005 43

~Ir' a rum rM Recirculation Pool Transport Large LDFG

• Utilized CFD model to evaluate turbulent kinetic energy and velocities (tumbling/sliding) for large LDFG (Break B Bay on left, Break A Bay on right)

• Maximum break flow 3 HPSls (1,350 gpm)

• Maximum CS flow u 1 2;;05 c

I I M I y 4 4...

July 14, 2005 44

F-r I Lur' 1 '

7"I Recirculation Pool Transport RMI m Utilized CFD model to evaluate turbulent kinetic energy and velocities (tumbling/sliding) for RMI maximum flow on left, intermediate flow on right

' f l # E Onp__-

111 PWI IC July 14, 2005 45



July 14, 2005 45

7-L-L Recirculation Pool Transport Intermediate Flow

• Utilized CFD model to evaluate and velocities (tumbling/sliding) conditions (Large LDFG on left, turbulent kinetic energy for intermediate flow Small on right)

Jy 14 2

.,g.,~--

W^ewvO, July 14, 2005 46

Lu Debris Transport to Sump Overall Debris Transport Fraction (DTF) to the Sump LBLOCA Fibrous Debris LBLOCA Calcium Silicate LBLOCA Reflective Metallic Debris SBLOCA Fibrous Debris SBLOCA Calcium Silicate SBLOCA Reflective Metallic Debris Latent Debris 56%

90%

29%

100%

100%

100%

100%

S Das...

f Yu-July 14, 2005 47

High Fiber Scenario Debris to Strainer after RSG (worst case ECCS)

Case 2 BREAK No. I - Largest Potential For debris INSULATION Debris Total Volume Generated (Large pieces and fines)

DTF Volume/Mass or Area at Strainer High Fiber Scenario Calcium Silicate Calcium Silicate/Asbestos Cerafiber

• Foam Rubber NUKONO Temp-MatO RMI Coatings Debris Acceptable Coatings 4 L/D ZOI Acceptable Coatings 10 LID ZOI Unqualified Coatings Chips Latent Debris Particles Fibers Others Stickers/Tape Reduce Strainer Screen Area July 14, 2005 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.88 ft3 0.54 ft3 268.3 ft3 162.47 ft3 33,645.68 ft2 150 Ibm 941 Ibm 1125 Ibm 80.3 Ibm 4.4 Ibm 74.3 ibm 71.0ft2 0.9 0.9 0.56 0.00 0.56 0.56 0.29 0.90 0.90 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.49 f 3 0.00 ft3 150.25 ft3 90.98 ft3 9,757 ft2 135 Ibm 847 Ibm 563 Ibm 80.3 Ibm 4.4 Ibm 74.3 Ibm 71.0 ft2 agoi LlOb 4

H* il Y,

aw-,4=<

,fw L..."N...

48

F4-.

r 1 -..

1.E rl High Fiber Scenario Debris to Strainer after RSG (intermediate case ECCS)

Case 2 BREAK No. 1 - Largest Potential For debris INSULATION Debris Total Volume Generated (Large pieces and fines)

DTF Volume/Mass or Area at Strainer High Fiber Scenario Calcium Silicate Calcium Silicate/Asbestos Cerafiber

• Foam Rubber NUKONO Temp-Mat RMI Coatings Debris Acceptable Coatings 4 LID ZOI Acceptable Coatings 10 LID ZOI Unqualified Coatings Chips Latent Debris Particles Fibers Others Stickers/Tape Reduce Strainer Screen Area July 14, 2005 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.88 ft3 0.54 ft3 268.3 ft3 162.47 ft3 33,645.68 ft2 150 Ibm 941 Ibm 1125 Ibm 80.3 Ibm 4.4 Ibm 74.3 Ibm 71.0 ft2 0.9 0.9 0.54 0.00 0.54 0.54 0.20 0.90 0.90 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 ft3 0.00 ft3 0.49 ft3 0.00 ft3 150.25 ft3 90.98 ft3 9,757 ft2 135 Ibm 847 Ibm 563 Ibm 80.3 Ibm 4.4 Ibm 74.3 Ibm 71.0 ft2 HIPPRIG K

49

Conservatisms in Debris Generation/Transport

• Used only 2 size distribution, could utilize SER proposed distribution for fiber (4 sizes) and account for some erosion

• Used only 2 size distribution for CalSil, could optimize with OPG data to possible 4 size distribution but would need to expand ZOI out for OPG results

• CFD analyzed current pipe layout for recirculation, exact strainer design array would indicate much lower turbulence levels near strainer, and therefore. less potential for transport

• Utilized maximum ECCS and full DEGB breaks July 14, 2005 IIITM

,_a; 5( )o

rAr:

a -! r

[, WE Strainer Hardware Overview Barry Smith General Electric ok (g

'77L..N July 14, 2005 51

r L

rn GE Topics

• GE/FCS Sump Strainer Program Overview

• GE Strainer Sizing Methodology - FCS

• GE Technical Safety Evaluation S!

_ A )

K

-ty July 14, 2005 52

r L.

GE-FCS Sump Strainer Program Interfaces NRC SER/

NEI Methodology Chemical Effects Testing Downstream Effects Methods FCS Specific Debris Generation &

Transport

/

UPOUEW$ i July 14, 2005 53

LEm N:2 r tt-, f -

L;o-GE-FCS Sump Strainer Program GE Scope - Task Flow and Schedule July 14,20 M

r, p

July 14, 2005 54

GE Strainer Sizing Methodology - FCS FCS Design Inputs

• Water Level o Large break LOCA: 3.96 ft o Small break LOCA: 3.41 ft

• NPSH Margin o Large break LOCA: 2.53 ft o Small break LOCA: 1.98 ft

• Flow rates o Train A, Strainer B: 4140 gpm o Train B, Strainer A: 6700 gpm

• Debris Cases o Large break LOCA high Calcium Silicate debris mix o Large break LOCA high fiber debris mix o Small break LOCA July 14, 2005 RIPPERn Y

55

.orFr-W GE Strainer Sizing Methodology - I-CS

• FCS passive strainer design based on plant-specific testing scaled to plant design basis

• Scaled testing to be performed to understand debris head loss characteristics -- three design basis debris scenarios

• Resulting head loss to be scaled for actual plant temperature/size conditions

• Larger scale test will confirm predicted head loss for three debris cases

• Strainer will be sized to:

o Fit within available containment space (recognizing significant interferences and the need to move considerable containment equipment) o Remain within available NPSH margin Jufy 1

§gPX-DIC July 14, 2005 56

Fr_

LI:,r GE Strainer Sizing Methodology - FCS ETest Program ECurrent schedule test window: 3 weeks beginning -July 21, 2005 ETesting to be performed at GE subcontractor test facility using FCS-specific test plan El FCS test matrix a

Debris generated by subcontractor using their procedures a

Using subcontractor test procedures and approved QA program ETest facility and test article were illustrated in the 6/29 GE presentation to the NRC (NRC-GE GSI-191 Closed Vendor Meeting)

July 14, 2005

-w 57

i-v

-1 GE Strainer Sizing Methodology - F:Cs HOpen Issues EChemical Effects - Expect testing in conjunction with industry action UlDownstream Effects Take grab samples of water flow through the strainer to characterize pass-through material July 14 2005 5

July 14, 2005 58

GE Strainer Technical Safety Evaluation TSE Outline

i. Introduction and background (benefits to plant of strainer program)

2. Overall description of program including conformance to design requirements and limitations/assumptions

3. Plant operational changes

4. Evaluation of potential areas of concern

5. Effect on plant technical specifications

6. Effect on plant safety analysis

7. Summary and Conclusions July 14, 2005 59

LrE rIq w7s7 Downstream Effects Evaluations Steve Sargent Raupp

&Lundy HPga OU A..

July 14, 2005 60

FI' Identify Affected Components Identify components in recirculation path with close clearance sub-components

• Active components (RVs, check valves)

• Orifices and Nozzles

• Throttled valves

• Heat Exchanger

• Non-flow instruments

• Valves

• Pumps

• Level Indicators

• Fuel (by Fuel vendor)

• Refueling pool drains July 14, 2005 61

Fr L-W n

Acceptable Criteria for Blockage

. Review in accordance with WCAP 16406 dated June 30, 2005

• Determine clearances and categorize based on screen mesh c "Too small" (less than 1 1 0% of screen mesh)

Ea "Further evaluation" (11 0% to 200% of screen mesh) a Acceptable (greater than 200% of screen mesh)

• Select maximum opening dimension in new screens (1/8", 1/12" or 1/16" opening)

• Fuel review by fuel vendor J y 4 2 5

=;;

9 W

L--Ip...

K.,P July 14, 2005 62

r7*~

N 17l Establish Debris Concentration

• Debris Generation and Transport Calculations define debris at screen

• Filter efficiency used to initial concentration remove fiber from the E efficiency (1-Open Area)2

• Debris removal in accordance with Eq. 7.2-1 with a decay constant of 0.07/hr

• If debris size can be established RMI and particulate filtering by bare screen will be credited.

zii Ge July 14, 2005 6

E1..1n L-1V...

July 14, 2005 63

Determine Wear

• Initially use full post-accident period from USAR

• Use WCAP equations for wear rate

• Compute wear for throttled valves, pump internals, heat exchanger tubes, orifices and nozzles

• Consult OEM for pump hydraulic and vibratory performance with increased wear

• Evaluate wear effects on throttling performance

• Evaluate minimum wall thickness based on wear July 14, 2005 64 6

Remediation and More Detailed Analyses

• Reduced mission times for components not acceptable with first cut values

• Component modifications to increase allowable mission time, if required

• Debris reduction options to increase allowable mission time, if required July 14, 2005

-Q*ar 65; 65

F-. -

Implementation of Sump Strainer Replacement UPOU MINIE 10w Anv d

L."V...

K.

July 14, 2005 66

Fort Calhoun Modification Process

• Captures and coordinates required analytical and test inputs

• Assures plant impact reviews for configuration control

• Documents output design documents

• Provides installation requirements

• Initiates 50.59 screening/evaluation and incorporates GE safety evaluation

• Initiates Station Modification Acceptance Review Team and Plant Review Committee for approval of design July 14, 2005

-QL!

67

Flu-t.oi r L Go17 M1 Interferences with New Strainers

• Spatial Interferences are identified with:

a TSP baskets E Stairwell a Small bore piping support

• Interfering items to be modified or relocated

• These design changes will be addressed by the modification process g,,. a

k...

July 14, 2005 68

I

-. 7m I iv.: M Questions and Answers July.14,.2005...

July 14, 2005 69

[.-.~.

-
- -

I
f

-
- L:.,

..
.

7 -,

.

.,L I.

I..

1 Overview of Expectations -NRC e

ta a. w.

=Qt-r ;WN gA...

July 14, 2005 70

r-

r.. Fill-L'.

1n Future Actions/Meetings July 14, 2005 e! Ctt tbYI HOW#

,v...

July 14, 2005 71 i