ML17037B940

12/02/1976 Summary of Meeting Between Representatives of the Mark II Owners, GE, and the NRC Staff to Discuss Mark II Containment Structural Design and Pool Dynamic Loads Supporting Program

ML17037B940
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point, Susquehanna, Columbia, Limerick, LaSalle, Zimmer, Shoreham, Bailly  File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png
Issue date:	12/29/1976
From:	Miner S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Niagara Mohawk Power Corp
References
Download: ML17037B940 (24)

Text

RECT<

(4<OS UNITED STATES.

~4 ~ 0 ~

4V NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION p WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 I

p

/p 0

++*++ DEC 2S 1976 Docket Nos: 50-322, 50-352 5 50-353, 50-358, 50-367 50-373 5 50-374, 50-387 8( 50-388, 50-397, 50 10 FACILITIES: Shoreham Nuclear Power Station Unit No. 1, Limerick Generating Station Units No. 1 and No. 2, William H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station, Unit 1, Bailly Generatin Station Nuclear No. 1, LaSalle County Station Units No. 1 and No. 2, Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Units No. 1 and No. 2, WPPSS Nuclear Project Ho. 2, Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station Unit Ho. 2.

APPLICANTS: Long Island Lighting Co., Philadelphia Electric, Cincinnati Gas and Electric Co., Northern Indiana Public Service Co .,

Commonwealth Edison, Pennsylvania Power and Light Co.,

Washington Public Power Supply System and Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation

SUMMARY

OF MEETINGS HELD ON DECEMBER 2, 1976 TO DISCUSS MARK II CONTAINMENT STRUCTURAL DESIGN AND POOL SYNAMIC LOADS SUPPORTING PROGRAM A meeting was held on December 2, 1976 between representatives of'he Mar k II Owner s, the General Electric Company and the NRC staff. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss with GE and the Mark I'I Owners (1) the method for comgining dynamic loads for structural design and

2) the status of the Pool Dynamics Load Supporting Program, The attendee lists and copies of some of the slides given to the attendees are enclosed.

Copieh of the remainder of the slides are available in my office. The major typics discussed are as follows:

A. D namic Load/Res onse Combinations In Section 5.2.2 of the Dynamic Forcing Function Report (DFFR)

NEDO-21061 it is stated that "the peak dynamic responses due to individual loads should be combined in the SRSS method." We indicated this is currently unacceptable.

The General Electric Company stated that they were not asking for blanket approval of the SRSS method but f'r selective application of the method (figure 1). They further stated the SRSS method has been used for many years for combining rapidly varying dynamic loads/r esponses and that the method provides adequate margin in (figure 2) . If the absolute sum of the dynamic response 'esign method, which is acceptable to the staff, has to be used for all cases there is a high probability that existing plant hardware

Pp I,)

will have to be modified. This will result in delays to a number of Hark II plants. Me indicated that the blanket statement as now provided in the DFFR on the use of the SRSS method gave no indication of its application or justification and therefore is unacceptable.

The Nark II owners suggested the following approach to resolve the issue. They will (1) establish a quantitative program to provide details on Dynamic Loads/Response combinations and justifications, (2) provide in January a description of the program, (3) meet with the staff to discuss the program and provide a schedule for its completion, and (4} r evise the DFFR when the program is complete.

B.'ool D namic Loads Su ortin Pro ram

{1) Steam Loads (Chugging) Program General Electric Company provided the cur rent schedule for the Mark II'upporting Program (fig . 3}. The pool swell model report is now scheduled to be completed on January 31, 1971.

The program for defining the steam loads (chugging loads) developed by the Hark I'I'wners consists of a parallel analytical and experimental approach. GE stated their analysis indicates that the single cell tests provide the bounding chugging load. Therefore, the objective of their chugging program will be to first confirm the conservatism of the single cell approach and then to develop a more realistic predictive method for individual plants (Fig. 4}.

The overall chugging program technical strategy (the analytical and experimental program) is shown on Fig . 4 . The analytical approach is to develop an analytical model from first principles and to compile and use all known experimental data to verify and refine the model. As a parallel effort GE is planning a multi vent test and has started the acquisition of equipment.

However, they expect that their analytical approach will resolve the chugging problem and they do not expect to have to run the multi vent tests. The decision on whether to proceed with the tests will be made in January. The analytical program is a Hark I and Nark II owners jointly funded program. The current status of the program is shown in Fig . 5 .

(2} SRI/EPRI The SRI/EPRI tests were completed and the report will be available the end of February or the beginning of March. The report will be. made available to the staff. The Hark II owners have not, yet

made the deteelination whether the tests could be used to satisfy the staff request for air tests. If the tests are applicable they will be used to satisfy this requirement. EPRI has not decided whether to conduct the 1/13 scale single downcomer tests.

Sydney Miner, Project Manager Light Mater Reactors Branch No. 3 Division of Project Management

Enclosures:

As stated CC: Pennsylvania Power and Light Company Commonwealth Edison Company ATTN: Mr. Norman W. Curtis ATTN: Mr. Byron Lee, Jr.

Vice President - Engineering Vice President and Construction P. 0. Box 767 2 North Ninth Street Chicago, Illinois 60690 Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Richard E. Powell, Esq.

Gerald Charnoff, Esq. Isham, Lincoln & Beale Shaw, Pittman, Potts, One First National Plaza, Suite 2400 Trowbridge 8 Madden Chicago, Illinois 60670 Barr Building 910 17th Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20006 Mr. William E. Barberich Licensing Engineer Pennsylvania Power 5 Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Mr. Robert J. Shovlin, Project Manager Susquehanna Pennsylvania Power 8 Light Company 2 North Ninth Street Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101

ATTENDEES LIST DECEMBER 2, 1976 DYNAMIC LOADS MEETING NRC Burns 5 Roe S. Miner P. Hsueh C. Anderson J. Kudrick NPPSS G. Lainas G. Gelhaus CFE/EBASCO CECO Y. Oktay B. Shelton PP&L Co.

E. Mead Sar ent 8 Lund R. Crawford Stone & Webster R. Klause Nuclear Services Cor .

W. Hennessy S. Chow F. Schraub P.EPCO LILCO H. Chau R. Logue J. Novarro BECNTEL CGE Co.

E. McFarland H. Brinkmann NIPSCO GE J. Dunn P. Marriott L. Frauenholz A. Smith

ATTENDEES LIST DECEMBER 2, 1976 STRUCTURAL MEETING CGE

. NRC S. Miner H. Brinkmann P. Kuo F. Schauer D. Jeng LILCO S. Hou W. Paulson H. Chau J. Novarro Stone & Webster L. Frauenholz P. Marriott S. Chow D. Ditmore W. Hennessy A. Smith- R. Klause PECO Nuclear Services R. Logue F. Schraub S&L PPBLCO B. Erler E. Mead R. Crawford CFE EBASCO WPPSS Y. Oktay G. Gelhaus BECHTEL Burns & Roe E. McFarland P. Hsueh HIPSCO CECO J. Dunn B. Shelton

PERSPECTIVE OW PROBLEM o >!OT PRESSI'lG FOR BLANKET APPROVAL OF SRSS BOTH ABS 8 SRSS ARE EMPLOYED o SRSS APPLICATION IS SELECTIVE

- ACTUAl LOAD NOT EXPECTED TO EXCEED SRSS

- MINIMAL IMPACT IF SRSS EXCEEDED o BLAflKEt REQUIREMENT FOR ABS ilOT APPROPRIATE

- NOT ."lEEESSARY TO ASSURE DESIGN ADEQUACY DESIGN IMPACT IS SIGNIFICANT o SRSS IS TECHNICALl Y JUSTIFIED Ill SPECIFIC APPLICATIOI'lS

QUALITATIVE FACTORS Fig. 2 INFLUENCING SRSS APPLICATION e ACTUAL LOAD U,")LIKELY TO EXCEED SRSS

" LOAD EVE."1TS TINE OVERLAP UNLIKELY

- RESPONSES RANDON ANPLITIIDE AND PHASE

- RESPONSES VARY RAPIDLY AND SHORT DURATIOfl

- RESPOI'lSE FREQUENCIES CONPARABLE SO

- M, PEAKS UNLIKELY TO COINCIDE

- STRESS/STRAIN RISE AND DECAY RAPIDLY a CONSEQUENCES OF EXCEEDI:"1G STRSS NIflIHAL

- DY!'PANIC LOADS Al'JD NODELS CONSERVATIVE

- CODE RULES PROVIDE LARGE DESIGN f'tARGIfl

J Fig. 3 NARK II SUPPORTING PROGRN A. LOCA RELATED ACTIVITIES

l. 0T POOL SMELL TESTS I

PHASE II 8 III TEST REPORT ~isuis PHASE II 8 III APPLICATIONS NENORANDUN 1/31/77 2, POOL SMELL MDEL REPORT 1/31/77

3. IMPACT TESTS COMPLETE I

.IMPACT MEL COMPLETE

Fig. 3 ('continued)

MARK II SUPPORTING PROGRAM B. S/RY RELATED ACTIVITIES

1. QUENCHER MODEL COMPLETE

2. RAMSHEAD NDEL COMPLETE

3. S/RV TESTS - RNSHM COMPLETE PRELININARY TEST REPORT 12/31/76 FINAL TEST REPORT 0/30/77 0.. CONSECUTIVE ACTUATION ANALYSIS 6/77 5.'/RV TESTS - QUENCHER '-6/77 TEST PLN 1/2/77 FINAL REPORT ~10/77

6. THERMAL NIXING L.H.F.

11/76

I y Fig. 4 Ug~ L~G- PRo&RAtvl gqCRAI-C WGCHmI CCV STRAKE,&f MARK X OTHER v~sTs L,RP SIN6LE CE,U- hWl1'I V E,NT

~ uwu - KwU

{eVNI-r) IVLARVIK&l PIXEL ScALE ~

JAPAN E,.S6 4PPI.I CAVleH

~

POSSIBI.E eK Qgvl0 ANAL~ICAL-pgo5RAM

~ SInlGLE. CE,L.L

~ MvLTIVKNT

~ l gRV cHo6.

. 4T FI.VIP/

~@V CTOlZE.

II VaMCVIOQ

~

ggS QM MOPEI-

l Fig. 5 Qpgg Q cHoGG JNG'ROCRAH CoaeekT STATUS DATA COtvl Pt L.A~iON UH De.RWA (

gyral +Ut TI PLh VE.kT TEST UHOER, OTV 0 f PLL, AN AD'Tt CAL TASKS OhJP~RNIA'Y.

SE CORPORATE . R.C-D CGhlTE'P AERoeAUT t CAL RESEARCH ASSOC >WV ES ~k Pg]eCezoe R.M. t ARsoQs AeAmET APV l SoaY COME t Tzeg WZMea PN hrt l 2 l Co

h ~ y l

MvEE( I(NS S(J:"ilWRY DISTRIBL(T:OW ocket File NRC PDR D. Ross Local PDR R. Tedesco TIC J. Knight ACRS (16) S. Pawlicki IE (3) I. Sihwei]

OEL'D P. Check NRR Reading T. Novak LWR-3 File Z. Rosztoczy B. Rusche V. Benaroya E. Case 6. Lainas R. Boyd T. Ippolito R. DeYoung V. Moore V. Stello R. Vollmer D. Skovholt M. Ernst J. Stolz W. Gammill K. Kniel 6. Knighton

0. Parr B. Youngblood D. Vassallo W. Regan R. Clark D. Bunch T. Speis J. Collins P. Collins W. Kreger C. Heltemes R. Ballard R, Houston M. Spangler S. Varga J. Stepp J. Miller L. Hulman F. W lliams H. Smith R. Heineman M. Rushbrook (3)

HE Denton Project.Mvanager D. Muller HRC Participants W. Butler P. Kuo F. Schauer D. Jeng

'S. Hou W. Paulson C. Anderson J. Kudrick G. L'ainas

N ~ ~

I'