ET 09-0024, Response to Request for Clarifications in Response to Application for Withholding Proprietary Information from Public Disclosure
| ML092790333 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 09/03/2009 |
| From: | Garrett T Wolf Creek |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| ET 09-0024, TAC ME1393 | |
| Download: ML092790333 (28) | |
Text
W F CREEK
'NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION Terry J. Garrett September 3, 2009 Vice President Engineering ET 09-0024 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
Reference:
- 2) Letter dated August 11, 2009, from B. K. Singal, USNRC, to R. A. Muench, WCNOC, "Wolf Creek Generating Station -
Request for Additional Information Regarding the Permanent Alternate Repair Criteria License Amendment Request (TAC NO. ME1393)"
- 3) Letter ET 09-0021, dated August 25, 2009, from T. J.
- 4) Letter dated August 28, 2009, from B. K. Singal, USNRC, to R. A. Muench, WCNOC, "Wolf Creek Generating Station -
Request for Clarifications in Response to Application for Withholding Proprietary Information from Public Disclosure (TAC NO. ME1393)
Subject:
Docket No. 50-482: Response to Request for Clarifications in Response to Application for Withholding Proprietary Information from Public Disclosure (TAC NO. ME1393)
Gentlemen:
Reference 1 provided Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation's (WCNOC) application to revise Technical Specification (TS) 5.5.9, "Steam Generator (SG) Program," that proposed a permanent alternate repair criterion to exclude portions of the tube below the top of the steam generator tube sheet from periodic steam generator tube inspections. Westinghouse WCAP-17071-P, Revision 0, "H*: Alternate Repair Criteria for the Tubesheet Expansion Region in Steam Generators with Hydraulically Expanded Tubes (Model F)," was submitted with Reference 1 and provides the basis for the proposed change.
P.O. Box 411 / Burlington, KS 66839 / Phone: (620) 364-8831 An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/HCNET
ET 09-0024 Page 2 of 3 Reference 4 provided a request for clarification regarding how certain items meet the considerations of 10 CFR 2.390(b)(4). Enclosure I provides Westhinghouse Electric Company LLC LTR-RCPL-09-131 that provides a response to the requested clarification. Enclosure I provides corrected pages to WCAP-17071-P and WCAP-17071-NP. The information in Enclosure I, Attachment 1, contains information that is proprietary to Westinghouse. The affidavit and Westinghouse authorization letter provided in Reference 1 is applicable to the information provided in Enclosure I, Attachment I.
Reference 2 provided a request for additional information (RAI) related to the application for a permanent alternate repair criterion. Reference 3 provided the responses to the RAI with the exception of Question 4 in Reference 2. During the rendering and transmittal process, the axis titles on Figures RAII0-1 and RAIl0-2 became illegible. Enclosure II of this letter provides replacement pages with legible axis titles. The information in Enclosure II contains information that is proprietary to Westinghouse. The affidavit and Westinghouse authorization letter provided in Reference 3 is applicable to the information provided in Enclosure II.
Based on a review of Enclosures I and II, the information provided clarifies information provided in Reference 1, did not expand the scope of the application as originally noticed, and does not impact the conclusions of the NRC staff's original proposed no significant hazards consideration determination as published in the Federal Register (74 FR 35892). In accordance with 10 CFR 50.91, a copy of this submittal is being provided to the designated Kansas State official.
This letter contains no commitments. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at (620) 364-4084, or Mr. Richard D. Flannigan at (620) 364-4117.
Sinc ry Terry J. Garrett TJG/rlt Enclosures I Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, LTR-RCPL-09-131, "WCAP-17071-P, Rev. 0 Proprietary Information Clarification" II Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, LTR-SGMP-09-121, "Replacements for Illegible Pages in Prior RAI Response (Reference 1)"
cc: E. E. Collins (NRC), w/e T. A. Conley (KDHE), w/o V. G. Gaddy (NRC), w/e B. K. Singal (NRC), w/e Senior Resident Inspector (NRC), w/e
ET 09-0024 Page 3 of 3 STATE OF KANSAS )
COUNTY OF COFFEY )
Terry J. Garrett, of lawful age, being first duly sworn Upon oath says that he is Vice President Engineering of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; that he has read the foregoing document and knows the contents thereof; that he has executed the same for and on behalf of said Corporation with full power and authority to do so; and that the facts therein stated are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
By Vice Engineering SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this 31"day of ýSO I6 ,2009.
-T;ýFM 6t .,OA Notary Public Expiration Date 4iniL2aw (j - D I 11,M)
Attachment 3 Corrected Pages for WCAP-17071-NP (Non-Proprietary)
1-5 Prior calculations assumed that contact pressure from the tube would expand the tubesheet bore uniformly without considering the restoring forces from adjacent pressurized tubesheet bores. In the structural model, a tubesheet radius dependent stiffness effect is applied by modifying the representative collar thickness (see Section 6.2.4) of the tubesheet material surrounding a tube based on the position of the tube in the bundle. The basis for the radius dependent tubesheet stiffness effect is similar to the previously mentioned "beta factor" approach. The "beta factor" was a coefficient applied to reduce the crevice pressure to reflect the expected crevice pressure during normal operating conditions in some prior H*
calculations and is no longer used in the structural analysis of the tube-to-tubesheet joint. The current structural analysis consistently includes a radius dependent stiffness calculation described in detail in Section 6.2.4. The application of the radius dependent stiffness factor has only a small effect on the ultimate value of H* but rationalizes the sensitivity of H* to uncertainties throughout the tubesheet.
The contact pressure analysis methodology has not changed since 2007 (Reference 1-9). However, the inputs to the contact pressure analysis and how H* is calculated have changed in that period of time. The details describing the inputs to the contact pressure analysis are discussed in Section 6.0.
The calculation for H* includes the summation of axial pull out resistance due to local interactions between the tube bore and the tube. Although tube bending is a direct effect of tubesheet displacement, the calculation for H* conservatively ignores any additional pull out resistance due to tube bending within the tubesheet or Poisson expansion effects acting on the severed tube end. In previous submittals, the force resisting pull out acting on a length of a tube between any two elevations hl and h2 was defined in Equation (1-1):
F, (h2 - h,)F,,,- + Vtcd S'P
= hPdh (1-1)
I where:
FH1E = Resistance per length to pull out due to the installation hydraulic expansion, d = Expanded tube outer diameter, P = Contact pressure acting over the incremental length segment dh, and, It = Coefficient of friction between the tube and tubesheet, conservatively assumed to be 0.2 for the pull out analysis to determine H*.
The current H* analysis generally uses the following equation to determine the axial pull out resistance of a tube between any two elevations hi and h2:
K 1 a,c,e (1-2)
Where the other parameters in Equation (1-2) are the same as in Equation (1-1) and
]p".. A detailed explanation of the WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
1-6 revised axial pull out equation are included in Section 6.0 of this report. However, the reference basis for the H* analysis is the assumption that residual contact pressure contributes zero additional resistance to tube pull out. Therefore, the equation to calculate the pull out resistance in the H* analysis is:
h, F, =rrdfPdh h, (1-3) 1.3.2 Leakage Integrity Analysis Prior submittals of the technical justification of H* (Reference 1-9) argued that K was a function of the contact pressure, P,, and, therefore, that resistance was a function of the location within the tubesheet.
The total resistance was found as the average value of the quantity puK, the resistance per unit length, multiplied by L, or by integrating the incremental resistance, dR = tlK dL over the length L, i.e.,
R = uK (L 2 - Li)=f K dL (1-4)
Interpretation of the results from multiple leak rate testing programs suggested that the logarithm of the loss coefficient was a linear function of the contact pressure, i.e.,
lnK =a 0 +alp,, (1-5) where the coefficients, ao and a, of the linear relation were based on a regression analysis of the test data; both coefficients are greater than zero. Simply put, the loss coefficient was determined to be greater than zero at the point where the contact pressure is zero and it was determined that the loss coefficient increases with increasing contact pressure. Thus, K =a+a-P, (1-6) and the loss coefficient was an exponential function of the contact pressure.
The B* distance (LB) was defined as the depth at which the resistance to leak during SLB was the same as that during normal operating conditions (NOP) (using Equation 1-4, the B* distance was calculated setting RSLB = RNOP and solving for LB). Therefore, when calculating the ratio of the leak rate during the design basis accident condition to the leak rate during normal operating conditions, the change in magnitude of leakage was solely a function of the ratio of the pressure differential between the design basis accident and normal operating plant conditions.
The NRC Staff raised several concerns relative to the credibility of the existence of the loss coefficient versus contact pressure relationship used in support of the development of the B* criterion:
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
1-13 Table 1-1 List of Conservatisms in the H* Structural and Leakage Analysis (Continued)
Assumption/Approach Why Conservative?
A [ This is conservative because it reduces the stiffness of the solid and perforated regions of the tubesheet to the lowest level for each operating condition (see Section 6.2.2.2.2).
ac,e Pressure is not applied to the Applying pressure to the
..... (see Section 6.2.2.2.4).
a,c,e The radius dependent stiffness Including these structures in the analysis would reduce the tubesheet displacement and limit the local deformation of the analysis ignores the presence of tubesheet hole ID (see Section 6.2.4.4).
the [
]a,c,e The tubesheet bore dilation [ Thermal expansions under operating loads were [
]ce (see Section 6.2.5).
]a,c,e 2250 (NOP conditions).
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-3 5.3 CALCULATION OF APPLIED END CAP LOADS The tube pull out loads' (also called end cap loads) to be resisted during normal operating (NOP) and faulted conditions for the bounding Model F plant (Millstone Unit 3) for the hot leg are shown below.
End cap load is calculated by multiplying the required factor of safety times the cross-sectional area of the tubesheet bore hole times the primary side to secondary side pressure difference across the tube for each plant condition.
AP (psi) (Ppr- Area (in2) EnLoadCap Factor of H*DesignCap Operating Condition Ps¢c) (Note 1) (lbs.) Safety Load (Lbs.) ace Normal Op. (maximum)
Faulted (FLB)
I Faulted (SLB)
Faulted (Locked Rotor)
Faulted (Control Rod Ejection)
Notes:
- 1. Tubesheet Bore Cross-Sectional Area = [ ]a,c,e The above calculation of end cap loads is consistent with the calculations of end cap loads in prior H*
justifications and in accordance with the applicable industry guidelines (Reference 5-3). This approach results in conservatively high end cap loads to be resisted during NOP and faulted conditions because a cross-sectional area larger than that defined by the tubesheet bore mean diameter is assumed.
The faulted condition end cap loads will not vary from plant to plant among the Model F population for the postulated FLB for 3- and 4-loop plants because the specified transient for both is the same. The value for end cap load for a 3-loop plant is different than the value for a 4-loop plant for a postulated SLB event and is also provided above. The values vary only slightly for the locked rotor event and control rod ejection event from plant to plant (see Table 5-6).
The end cap loads noted above include a safety factor of 3 applied to the normal operating end cap load and a safety factor of 1.4 applied to the faulted condition end cap loads to meet the associated structural performance criteria consistent with NEI 97-06, Rev. 2 (Reference 5-3).
Seismic loads have also been considered, but they are not significant in the tube joint region of the tubes (Reference 5-1).
H* values are not calculated for the locked rotor and control rod ejection transients because the pressure differential across the tubesheet is bounded by the FLB/SLB transient. For plants that have a locked rotor The values for end cap loads in this subsection of the report are calculated using an outside diameter of the tube equal to the mean diameter of the tubesheet bore plus 2 standard deviations.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-4 with stuck open PORV transient included as part of the licensing basis, this event is bounded by the FLB/SLB event because the peak pressure during this transient is significantly less than that of the SLB/FLB transient.
WCAP-17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-5 Table 5-7 Operating Conditions - Model F H* Plant Plant Parameter and Units Salem Millstone Seabrook Vogtle 11())
Unit 1") Unit 3"2) Unit 113) Units 1 and 2 (4) Wolf Creek Vandellos 1I(6)
Power- MWt 3471 3666 3678 3653 3579 2954 NSSS Primary psia 2250 2250 Pressure 2250 2250 2250 2250 Secondary Psia (Low a ..
Pressure Tavg/High Tavg)
Reactor 'F (Low Vessel Outlet Tavg/High Temperature Tavg)
SG Primary-to-Secondary Psid (Low Pressure Tavg/High Differential Tavg)
( p s id ) I L
() PCWG-2635, Revision 1, Salem Units I and 2 (PSE/PNJ): Approval of Category IV (for Implementation) and IVP (for Limited Implementation) PCWG Parameters to Support 1.4% Uprate, 2/8/05.
(2) PCWG-06-9, Millstone Unit 3 (NEU): Approval of Category II (for Contract) PCWG Parameters to Support a 7% Stretch Power Uprate (SPU) Program, 4/25/06.
(3) PCWG-08-68, Seabrook Unit I (NAH): Approval of Category IV PCWG Parameters to Support a 7.4% Uprate Program, 11/7/08.
(4) PCWG-05-49, Vogtle Units 1 and 2 (GAE/GBE): Approval of Category III (for Contract) PCWG Parameters to Support a 2%
Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR) Uprate, 11/18/05.
(5) PCWG-2417, Wolf Creek Unit I (SAP): Approval of Category IVP Parameters to Support a Best Estimate Flow for Reactor Coolant Pump (RCP) Replacement, 6/17/99.
(6) PCWG-06-15, Revision 1, Vandellos Unit II (EAS): Approval of Category IVP PCWG Parameters to Support a Tavg Range Program, 6/15/06.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-6 Table 5-8 Steam Line Break Conditions Parameters and Units Salem Unit I Millstone Seabrook Vogtle Units Wolf Creek Vandellos II')
a,c,e I
Peak Primary-Secondary Pressure (psig)
Primary Fluid Temperature ('F) (HL and CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature ('F) (HL and CL) t Three-loop plant, all other Model F H* plants are 4-loop plants.
HL - Hot Leg CL - Cold Leg WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-7 3
Table 5-9 Feedwater Line Break Conditions Parameters and Units Salem Unit I P e3 aUnitl Millstone Unit Seabrook J Vogtle Units land2 [ Wolf Creek Vandellos II Peak Primary-Secondary Pressure (psig) F a,c,e Primary Fluid Temperature (°F)(I) (HL/CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature (°F)(1) (HL and CL) 2 Primary Fluid Temperature (°F)( ) (HL/CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature (°F)( 2) (HL and CL)
(I) Low Tavg (2) High Tavg (3) The pressures and temperatures included in this table for a postulated FLB are used for the structural analysis and are based on the SG design specification transient. The pressure and temperatures used for the leakage analysis for FLB are identified in Section 9.0 of this report.
HL - Hot Leg CL - Cold Leg WCAP-17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-8 Table 5-10 Locked Rotor Event Conditions 1 1 Millstone Seabrook Vogtle Units I Wolf Creek Vandellos II Parameters and Units Salem Unit 1 Unit 3 Unit 1 and 2 a.c,e Peak Primary-Secondary Pressure (psig)
Primary Fluid Temperature (OF)° (HL/CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature (°F)(1) (HL and CL)
Primary Fluid Temperature (°F)(2) (HL/CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature (°F)(2) (HL and CL)
(1) Low Tavg (2) HighTavg HL - Hot Leg CL - Cold Leg WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-9 Table 5-11 Control Rod Ejection Parameters and Units Salem Unit 1 Unit 3 Millstone Seabrook Unit I Vogtle I andUnits 2 Wolf Creek Vandellos II a,c,e Peak Primary-Secondary Pressure (psig) F Primary Fluid Temperature (1F)(1) (HL/CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature (°F)(') (HL and CL)
Primary Fluid Temperature (°F)( 2) (HL/CL)
Secondary Fluid Temperature (°F)(2) (HL and CL)
(1) Low T avg (2) High Tavg HL - Hot Leg CL - Cold Leg WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
5-10 Table 5-12 Design End Cap Loads for Normal Operating Plant Conditions, Locked Rotor and Control Rod Ejection for Model F Plants Low Tavg High Tavg Control Rod Ejection End Cap Load End Cap Load Locked Rotor End Cap Load w/Safety Factor w/Safety Factor End Cap Load (lbf)
(lb (lbf) (lbf)
Salem Unit 1 ac,e Millstone Unit 2 Seabrook Vogtle Units 1 and 2 Wolf Creek Vandellos II WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
6-10 Therefore, hnominal = [ ]ace inch (i.e., [ ]a,c,e and "1
= [ ]a"c"e when the tubes are not included. From Slot (Reference 6-5) the in-plane mechanical properties for Poisson's ratio of 0.3 are:
Property Value a,c,e E*/E - -
Vp=
Vd E*/E -
V L Elastic modulus of solid material where the subscripts p and d refer to the pitch and diagonal directions, respectively. These values are substituted into the expressions for the anisotropic elasticity coefficients given previously. The coordinate system used in the analysis and derivation of the tubesheet equations is given in Reference 6-4.
Using the equivalent property ratios calculated above in the equations presented at the beginning of this section yields the elasticity coefficients for the equivalent solid plate in the perforated region of the tubesheet for the finite element model.
The three-dimensional structural model is used in two different analyses: 1) a static structural analysis with applied pressure loads at a uniform temperature and 2) a steady-state thermal analysis with applied surface loads. The solid model and mesh is the same in the structural and thermal analyses but the element types are changed to accommodate the required degrees of freedom (e.g., displacement for structural, temperature for thermal) for each analysis. The tubesheet displacements for the perforated region of the tubesheet in each analysis are recorded for further use in post-processing. Figure 6-2 and Figure 6-3 are screen shots of the three-dimensional solid model of the Model F SG. Figure 6-4 shows the entire 3D model mesh.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
6-18 a,c,e with the elasticity coefficients calculated as:
a,c,e I I I -I a,c,e K J a,c,e a,ce a,c,e I I I and I
where F I ac,e and E Z a,c,e The variables in the equation are:
= Effective elastic modulus for in-plane loading in the pitch direction,
= Effective elastic modulus for loading in the thickness direction, v-p = Effective Poisson's ratio for in-plane loading in the thickness direction, G-p = Effective shear modulus for in-plane loading in the pitch direction,
= Effective shear modulus for transverse shear loading, EdS = Effective shear modulus for in-plane loading in the diagonal direction, Vd = Effective Poisson's ratio for in-plane loading in the diagonal direction, and, v = Poisson's ratio for the solid material, E = Elastic modulus of solid material, YRZ = Transverse shear strain rIz = Transverse shear stress,
[D] = Elasticity coefficient matrix required to define the anisotropy of the material.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
6-21 Table 6-6 Summary of H* Millstone Unit 3 Analysis Mean Input Properties Plant Name Millstone Unit 3 Plant Alpha - J NEU Plant Analysis Type J Hot Leg
.sGType
, " S* I F Input J Value Unit Reference Accident and Normal Temperature Inputs NOP Thoto__"___ . a,c,e OF PCWG-06-9 NOP TIo,* _"_OF PCWG-06-9 SLBTS AT 'O"___',__ °F 1.3F SLB CH-VAT F O_____ 1w.3F, Shell AT °F O_:____...___ PCWG-06-9' FLB Primary AT Hi' O_...°F 1.3F FLB Primary,. AT Low F 1.3F SLB Primary.AT OF 1.3F SLB Secondary AT OF 1.3F Secondary Shell AT Hi *O°F 1.3F Secondar Shell AT Low OF 1.3F Cold Leg AT, - "O" _F PCWG-06-9
- Hlot Starindbyv Temperature OF PCWG-06-9 Operating Pressure Input Faulted"SLB Primary Pressure
.Faulted FLB Primary Pressure.
E ace psig psig 1.3F L3F Normal Primary Pressure -. 2235.0 psig PCWG-06-9 Cold Leg APR a,,*e psig PCWG-06-9 NOP Secondary Pressure- psig PCWG-06-9
. . .- psi W G 06
-L ow NOP Secondary Pressure - Hi ._ - psig PCWG-06-9 Faulted FLB Secondary pg .
Pressure ____psig_1.3F
-Faulted SLB Secondary psig 1.3F
'PressureJ.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
6-22 Table 6-7 List of SG Models and H* Plants With Tubesheet Support Ring Structures General Plant Alpha SG Model TS Support Ring? Arrangement Drawing Braidwood- 2 CDE D5 a,c,e 1103 J99 Sub 3 Byron - 2 CBE D5 I 103J99 Sub 3 SAP - Use Callaway (SCP)
Wolf Creek - 2 SG Drawings F I104J54 Sub 2 PSE - Use Seabrook -2 (NCH) SG Salem - I Drawings F 1104J86 Sub 9 Surry - 1 VPA*** 51F I 105J29 Sub 3 Surry - 2 VIR*** 51F I 105J29 Sub 3 Turkey Point- 4 FLA*** 44F I 105J45 Sub 3 Millstone - 3 NEU F I 182J08 Sub 8 Comanche Peak - 2 TCX D5 1182J16 Sub 1 Vandellos - 2 EAS F 1182J34 Sub I Seabrook - 1 NAH F I182J39 Sub 3 Turkey Point- 3 FPL** 44F 1183J01 Sub 2 Catawba - 2 DDP D5 1183J88 Sub 2 Vogtle - 1 GAE F 1184J31 Sub 13 Vogtle - 2 GBE F 1184J32 Subl Point Beach - 1 WEP** 44F 1184J32 Sub I Robinson - 2 CPL** 44F 6129E52 Sub 3 Indian Point - 2 IPG 44F 6136E16 Sub 2
- Model 44 F - These original SGs have been replaced.
- Model 51 F-These original SGs have been replaced.
April 2009 WCAP- 17071-NP WCAP-17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
6-29 Table 6-8 Conservative Generic NOP Pressures and Temperatures for 4-Loop Model F (These values do not exist in operating SG and are produced by examining worst-case comparisons.)
Normal Operating, Bounding Secondary Surface Temperature a...
Primary Surface Temperature Cold Leg Hot Leg Primary Pressure Cold Leg Hot Leg Secondary Pressure End Cap Pressure Structural Thermal Condition Reference Temperature Table 6-9 Generic NOP Low Tavg Pressures and Temperatures for 4-Loop Model F Normal Operating, Low Tavg .,
Secondary Surface Temperature .....
Primary Surface Temperature Cold Leg Hot Leg Primary Pressure Cold Leg Hot Leg Secondary Pressure End Cap Pressure Structural Thermal Condition Reference Temperature Table 6-10 Generic NOP High Tavg Pressures and Temperatures for 4-Loop Model F Normal Operating, High T__ _ _ _
a,c,e Secondary Surface Temperature Primary Surface Temperature Cold Leg Hot Leg Primary Pressure Cold Leg Hot Leg Secondary Pressure End Cap Pressure Structural Thermal Condition Reference Temperature WCAP-17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
6-30 Table 6-11 Generic SLB Pressures and Temperatures for 4-Loop Model F Main Steam Line Break Secondary Surface Temperature __
Primary Surface Temperature Cold Leg Hot Leg Primary Pressure Cold Leg Hot Leg Secondary Pressure End Cap Pressure Structural Thermal Condition Reference Temperature Table 6-12 Generic FLB Pressures and Temperatures for 4-Loop Model F Feedwater Line Break Secondary Surface Temperature Primary Surface Temperature Cold Leg Hot Leg Primary Pressure Cold Leg Hot Leg Secondary Pressure End Cap Pressure Structural Thermal Condition Reference Temperature Table 6-13 Conservative Generic SLB Pressures and Temperatures for 4-Loop Model F (These values do not exist in operating.SG and are produced by examining worst-case comparisons.)
Main Steam Line Break, High Temp a,c,e Secondary Surface Temperature Primary Surface Temperature Cold Leg Hot Leg Primary Pressure Cold Leg Hot Leg Secondary Pressure End Cap Pressure Structural Thermal Condition Reference Temperature WCAP-17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-24 Table 9-1 Reactor Coolant System Temperature Increase Above Normal Operating Temperature Associated With Design Basis Accidents (References 9-12 and 9-13)
Steam Line/Feedwater Locked Rotor (Dead Locked Rotor (Active Control Rod Ejection Line Break Loop) Loop)
SG Type SG Hot SG Cold SG Hot SG Cold SG Hot SG Cold SG Hot SG Cold Leg Leg (OF) Leg (OF) Leg (CF) Leg (OF) Leg (OF) Leg (OF) Leg (OF) (OF) a,ce Model F Model D5 Model 44F Model 51F
- Best estimate values for temperature during FLB/SLB are used as discussed in Section 9.2.3.1.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-25 Table 9-2 Reactor Coolant Systems Peak Pressures During Design Basis Accidents (References 9-12 and 9-13)
Steam Line Break Feedwater Line Locked Rotor Control Rod Ejection SG Type (psia) Break (psia) (psia) (psia)
Model D5 a-c,e Model F Model 44F Model 5IF WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-26 Table 9-3 Model F Room Temperature Leak Rate Test Data Test No. EP-31080 EP-30860 EP-30860 I EP-29799 I EP-31330 I EP-31320 EP-31300
-a~c~e Collar Bore Dia. (in.) I Test Pressure Leak Rate (drops per minute - dpm)
Differential (psi) 1000 1910 2650 3110 AP Ratio Leak Rate Ratio (normalized to initial AP) Average LR Ratio 1 a,c,e 1.91 2.65 3.11 WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-27 Table 9-4 Model F Elevated Temperature Leak Rate Test Data 0 CD 0 0, 00 00 0 0 en 10 0 0' C'l eni e¢n Test No. en in C-l en 0*
ClJ en w
Collar Bore Dia. (in.) L---I a,c,e Test Pressure Differential (psi) Leak Rate (drops per minute -dpm) 1910 F a,c,e 2650 _
]
3110 AP Ratio Leak Rate Ratio (normalized to initial AP) Average LR Ratio a,c,e 1.39 1.63 L April 2009 17071-NP WCAP- 1707 1-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-28 Table 9-5 H* Plants Operating Conditions Summary ()
Pressure Pressure Differential Differential Across Number Temperature Temperature Temperature Temperature Across the the Tubesheet Plant Name SG Type of Hot Leg (F) Cold Leg (F) Hot Leg (F) Cold Leg (F) Tubesheet (psi)
Loops High Tavg High Tavg Low Tavg Low Tavg (psi) Low Tavg High Tavg a,t:,e Byron Unit 2 and D5 4 Braidwood Unit 2 Salem Unit I F 4 Robinson Unit 2 44F 3 Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 F 4 Millstone Unit 3 F 4 Catawba Unit 2 D5 4 Comanche Peak D5 4 Unit 2 Vandellos Unit 2 F 3 Seabrook Unit 1 F 4 Turkey Point Units 44F 3 3 and 4 Wolf Creek F 4 Surry Units 1 and 2 51F 3 Indian Point Unit 2 44F 4 Point Beach Unit 1 44F 2 (1) The source of all temperatures and pressure differentials is Reference 9-21.
WCAP-17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-29 Table 9-6 H* Plant Maximum Pressure Differentials During Transients that Model Primary-to-Secondary Leakage ()
Plant Name FLB/SLB Pressure Locked Rotor Pressure Control Rod Ejection Normal Operating Pressure Differential (psi) Differential (psi) Pressure Differential (psi) Differential High Tavg (psi) a,c,e Byron Unit 2 and Braidwood Unit 2 Salem Unit 1 Robinson Unit 2 Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 Millstone Unit 3 Catawba Unit 2 Comanche Peak Unit 2 Vandellos Unit 2 Seabrook Unit 1 Turkey Point Units 3 and 4 Wolf Creek Surry Units 1 and 2 Indian Point Unit 2 Point Beach Unit 1 (1) The source of all pressure differentials is Reference 21.
WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0
9-30 Table 9-7 Final H* Leakage Analysis Leak Rate Factors Transient SLB/FLB Locked Rotor Control Rod Ejection FLB- 3 SLB/FLB I Leak VR Leak Adjusted
@ LeakFRRate LR/NOP y Rate Adjusted CRE/NOP @ Rate CRE LRF' Plant Name SLB/NOP PlantName AP Ratio 2672 psia Factor(LRF) AP Ratio 2711 psia Factor LR LRF' AP Ratio 30 0 Factor (High Tav,)2 (LRF) psia (LRF)
_ a,c,e a,c,e Byron Unit 2 and 1.93 Braidwood Unit 2 Salem Unit I 1.79 Robinson Unit 2 1.82 Vogtle Unit 1 and 2 2.02 Millstone Unit 3 2.02 Catawba Unit 2 1.75 Comanche Peak 1.94 Unit 2 Vandellos Unit 2 1.97 Seabrook Unit 1 2.02 Turkey Point Units 3 1.82 and 4 Wolf Creek 2.03 Surry Units 1 and 2 1.80 Indian Point Unit 2 1.75 Point Beach Unit 1 1.73
- 4. Includes time integration leak rate adjustment discussed in Section 9.5.
- 5. The larger of the AP's for SLB or FLB is used.
- 6. VR- Viscosity Ratio WCAP- 17071-NP April 2009 Revision 0