Letter Sequence Meeting |
|---|
|
|
MONTHYEARHNP-10-125, Request for Exemption in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.12 Regarding Use of M5 Alloy in Fuel Rod Cladding2011-01-19019 January 2011 Request for Exemption in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.12 Regarding Use of M5 Alloy in Fuel Rod Cladding Project stage: Request HNP-11-067, License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report References for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis2011-08-22022 August 2011 License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report References for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Project stage: Request ML11238A0782011-08-31031 August 2011 ANP-3011(NP), Rev. 1, Harris Nuclear Plant Unit 1 Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Project stage: Request ML11272A0642011-09-29029 September 2011 NRR E-mail Capture - Acceptance Review for ME6999- Shearon Harris Unit 1, Realistic LBLOCA Methodology (TS 6.9.1.6.2) Project stage: Acceptance Review ML11336A1592011-12-0202 December 2011 Notice of Closed Meeting with Carolina Power & Light Company Regarding Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant, Unit 1 (TAC ME6999), the Purpose of the Meeting Is to Discuss the August 22, 2011, Large Break Loss of Coolant Accident Submittal Project stage: Meeting ML11354A2912011-12-13013 December 2011 Meeting Slides - Meeting with Carolina Power and Light Discussion of ANP-3011 Project stage: Request ML11340A0852011-12-19019 December 2011 Request for Withholding Information from Public Disclosure Project stage: Withholding Request Acceptance ML11339A0502011-12-28028 December 2011 Acceptance of Requested Licensing Action Regarding Realistic Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident (TAC No. ME6999)(HNP-11-067) Project stage: Acceptance Review ML12076A1652012-01-11011 January 2012 Meeting Slides - Harris Realistic LBLOCA Question Response Meeting Project stage: Meeting ML12076A1422012-01-11011 January 2012 Meeting Topics - Suggested Discussion Items Regarding Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident Submittal - Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Project stage: Meeting HNP-12-028, Realistic LBLOCA Question Response Meeting Handout, Enclosure 3 to HNP-12-0282012-01-11011 January 2012 Realistic LBLOCA Question Response Meeting Handout, Enclosure 3 to HNP-12-028 Project stage: Meeting ML11354A2892012-02-0808 February 2012 Summary of Meeting with Carolina Power and Light to Discuss Realistic Large Break Loss-of-Coolant-Accident Project stage: Meeting ML11354A3782012-02-0808 February 2012 Meeting Handout - Meeting with Carolina Power and Light Suggested Discussion Items Regarding Realistic Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident Project stage: Meeting HNP-12-023, License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report References for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Response to Request for Additional Information2012-02-23023 February 2012 License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report References for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Response to Request for Additional Information Project stage: Response to RAI ML12073A2922012-02-24024 February 2012 License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Project stage: Request ML12067A1802012-02-29029 February 2012 ANP-3011Q1(NP), Revision 000, Harris Nuclear Plant Unit 1 Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis. Enclosure 4 Response to Request for Additional Information (Non-Proprietary) Project stage: Response to RAI ML12067A2322012-03-16016 March 2012 Request of Withholding Information from Public Disclosure Project stage: Other ML12067A2292012-03-16016 March 2012 Request for Withholding Information from Public Disclosure Project stage: Withholding Request Acceptance ML12067A2312012-03-20020 March 2012 Request for Withholding Information from Public Disclosure Project stage: Withholding Request Acceptance HNP-12-050, License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Revised Technical Specification Page2012-04-0202 April 2012 License Amendment Request for Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report for Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis Revised Technical Specification Page Project stage: Request ML12076A1412012-04-0505 April 2012 Summary of Meeting Summary with Carolina Power & Light to Discuss Realistic Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Project stage: Meeting ML12076A1032012-05-30030 May 2012 Issuance of Amendment Regarding the Revision to Technical Specification Core Operating Limits Report References for Realistic Large Break Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analysis Project stage: Approval 2012-01-11
[Table View] |
Text
SUGGESTED DISCUSSION ITEMS [AS MODIFIED DURING THE MEETING]
LARGE BREAK LOSS-OF-COOLANT-ACCIDENT SUBMITTAL SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNIT NO. 1 PROGRESS ENERGY DOCKET NO. 50-400
- 1. The submitted ECCS evaluation is not clear as it does not appear to consider the droplet shattering model separate from the fuel relocation study. See, for instance, Figure 6-17.
- a.
Please characterize the impact of enabling the droplet shattering model without modeling the fuel relocation.
- b.
Similarly, please show the sensitivity of the fuel relocation model study to fuel relocation packing factor. Consideration should be made to include a range of packing factors that is more inclusive of the available data, i.e., 30-80 percent. It would be beneficial if this sensitivity is shown using the Shearon Harris Nuclear Plant (SHP) limiting-peak clad temperature (PCT) case, and using an evaluation model variant that does not include the droplet shattering enhancement.
- 2. Address whether droplet shattering is calculated on all flow blockage (non-vertical) surfaces in the S-RELAP5 calculation. If not, provide the flow blockage surfaces which are assumed to cause droplet shattering.
- 3. Page 122 of ANP-3011(P), Harris Nuclear Plant Unit 1Realistic Large Break LOCA Analysis states, In the present model, the rupture blockage ratio [which is correlated to the number of droplets to yield a maximum atomization factor],, is taken from the swelling and rupture correlation.
- a. Address whether droplet shattering is calculated only against the hot pin rupture, or the additional flow blockage areas (i.e., balloon/burst regions, spacer grids, etc.) assumed to be present upstream of the hot pin rupture location, and address implementation of these models in S-RELPA5.
- b. If the additional flow blockage areas are not based on pre-transient core geometry, discuss how the locations and sizes of flow blockages are distributed.
- 4. On page 123 of ANP-3011(P), it is stated, It can be seen that the code predicted the peak cladding temperature variation well.
The data is so tightly clustered that the degree of agreement is difficult to ascertain.
Please tabulate the data to provide a more quantitative indication. Address how well the S-RELAP5 modification predicted the data.
- 5. Comparative data demonstrate the global effects of the droplet shattering phenomena; however, the correlation as implemented discriminates between large and small droplets and the behavioral differences between the two. Validate droplet size distribution as implemented in model. Explain how the Sugimoto/Murao correlation applies to the scenario in which it is applied.
- 6. Explain how droplet shattering model incorporates the following droplet-dependent heat transfer effects:
- a. Inter-phase heat transfer;
- b. Fluid-structural interactions including cladding, balloon, and spacer heat transfer to coolant; and
- c. Validate heat transfer modeling for these separate effects.