ML17309A626
| ML17309A626 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Ginna  |
| Issue date: | 01/27/1998 |
| From: | Mecredy R ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP. |
| To: | Vissing G NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned), NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17265A152 | List: |
| References | |
| TAC-M95759, NUDOCS 9802040410 | |
| Download: ML17309A626 (27) | |
Text
CATEGORY 1
'EGULA'I Y INFORMATION DISTRIBUTXOA YSTEM (RIDS)
ACCESSION NBR:9802040410 DOC.DATE: 98/01/27 NOTARIZED: YES FACXL:50-244 Robert Emmet Ginna Nuclear Plant, Unit 1, Rochester G
AUTH.NAME AUTHOR AFFILIAT1ON MECREDY,R.C.
Rochester Gas
& Electric Corp.
RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION VXSSING,G.S.
DOCKET 05000244
SUBJECT:
Forwards non-proprietary
& proprietary response to question 1 to 971216 RAI re structural aspects of SFP storage rack C
mod at plant. Proprietary encl withheld.
A D1STRTBUTTON CODE:
AP01D COPTES RECETVED:LTR J ENCL I
S1EE:
I P TITLE: Proprietary Review Distribution - Pre Operating License S Operating Rp NOTES:License Exp date in accordance with 10CFR2,2.109(9/19/72) 05000244E RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME PD1-1 LA VISSING,G.
INTERNAL~
CENTER 0
EXTERNAL: NRC PDR COPIES RECIPIENT LTTR ENCL 'D CODE/NAME 1
1 PD1-1 PD 1
1 1
1 OGC/HDS3
) ~1m COPIES LTTR ENCL 1
1 1
0 D
E N
NOTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:
PLEASE HELP US TO REDUCE WASTE. TO HAVE YOUR NAME OR ORGANIZATION REMOVED FROM DISTRIBUTION LISTS OR REDUCE THE NUMBER OF COPIES RECEIVED BY YOU OR YOUR ORGANIZATION, CONTACT THE DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK (DCD)
ON EXTENSION 415-2083 TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED:
LTTR 6
ENCL 4
A f
L
%t li
~l
AND 0
ROCHESTER GAS ANDE1ECTRIC CORPORATTON
~ 89 EASTAVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 146d9.0001 AREA CODE 716 5'-2700 ROBERT C. MECREDY Vice president Nuclear Operations January 27, 1998 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control, Desk Attn:
Guy S. Vissing Project Directorate I-1 Washington, D.C.
20555
Subject:
Ref. (1):
Response
to Request for Additional Information on the Structural Aspects of the Spent Fuel Pool Storage Rack Modification at Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (TAC No.
M95759)
Letter from G.
S. Vissing (NRC) to R.
C. Mecredy (RG&E),
Subject:
- Request, for Additional Information on the Structural Aspects of the Spent Fuel Pool Storage Rack Modification at Ginna Nuclear Power Plant (TAC 'No.
M95759), dated December 16, 1997.
Dear Mr. Vissing:
By Reference 1,
the NRC staff requested additional information regarding the proposed license amendment request for modification of the Ginna Spent Fuel Storage Pool dated March 31, 1997.
The questions were related to the Structural Evaluation of the proposed Modification.
Responses to Questions 2 and 3 were provided in our letter on the same subject dated January 15, 1998.
The enclosures to this letter provide the response to Question 1.
This response is provided in two separate
'documents:
a Non-Proprietary and a
FRAMATOME Proprietary.
The Non-Proprietary document contains all the responses but omits information which is considered FRAMATOME Proprietary.
The FRAMATOME Proprietary data in that document is supported by an affidavit signed by FRAMATOME TECHNOLOGIES, Inc..
Accordingly, it is respectfully requested that the document.
entitled "FRAMATOMEProprietary" be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10CFR 2.790 of the Commission's regulations.
Very truly yours, 9802040410 980i27 PDR ADQCK 05000244 P
PDR Robert C.
Mec Enclosures g 4g O Q 4
,,ii~~IIilllllllmlllljlllIlllllll pr
) (wQ,prep
JPO'tt493 Subscribed and sworn to before me on this 27th day of January, 1998 P
Notary Public LORETTA ttrlARSHALLPARKER Notary Public m the State of Nesr Port MONROE COUNTY Comausaon Expires Dec. 12. 19.'Rg xc:
Mr. Guy S. Vissing (Mail Stop 14B2)
Senior Project Manager Project Directorate I-1 Washington, D.C.
20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region I 475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406 Ginna Senior Resident Inspector Mr. Paul D. Eddy State of New York Department of Public Service 3 Empire State
- Plaza, Tenth Floor
- Albany, NY 12223-1350 Mr. F. William Valentino, President New York State
- Energy, Research, and Development Authority Corporate Plaza West 286 Washington Ave. Extension
- Albany, NY 12203-6399
0
~
o
~
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A January 20, 1993
.9802040410 In the staffs September 5, 1997, request foradditionalinformation (RAI),you were requested to provide detailed discrissions as to how the dynamicfluidcoupling (FLUID38ofthe ANSYS code) was modeledin yorirsingle-and multi-rack analyses. Inyour response (Reference 1), you indicated that the dynamicfluidcoripling usedis based on a rectangular body vibratinginfluid containedin an annulus created by a rectangiilar outer body, The staffunderstands that your approach may be one approximate way ofmodeling the fluid-structure interaction for the single-rack analysis.
However, your approach may not be applicable for modeling the stnicture fluid-stnicture interaction ofthe multi-rack analysis considering the fact that thefluid and stnictural responses ofthe multi-rack system are somewhat random andindependent between rack to rack in a three dimensional space under safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) loading. RGcKis reqiiested to provide the following:
(a)
Detailed explanations ofhow the dynamicfluidcoupling was consideredfor modeling the structure fluid-structure interaction in the multi-rack analysis and technical justificationsfor using such modeling.
(b)
An example calculation ofa multi-rack analysis that demonstrates the adequacy ofyour dynamic fluidcoupling model explained initem (a) above.
(c)
You indicated on page 108 ofReference 2 that the nodal points ofa rack usedin the multi-rack analysis are shown in Figiire 3.5-40 ofReference
- 2. However, Figure 3.5-40 does not show any information related to the nodes and elements ofthe rack models used.
Submit a model drawing with complete information (i.e., element and node numbers with their locationsin the global coordinate system, spacing between racks, common node numbers, etc). Also, submit the ANSYSiirputdatain ASCIIfor the 3-D multi-rack analysis with complete information (i.e., artificialtime history input motions loading conditions, boundary conditions, material properties, loading steps, etc) on a 3.5 inch diskette.
References:
"Response to Reqiiest forAdditionalIiiformation-Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) Modification-Stnictural Design Considerations (TACNo. M95759), RE Ginna Niiclear Power Plant, Docket No. 50-244, "Letter dated October 20, 1997, from RGdcE to U.S. NRC.
2.
"Applicationfor Amendment to Facility Operating License, Revised Spent Fuel Pool Storage Requirements, Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant, Docket No. 50-244, " Letter dated March 31, 1997, from RGdcE to U.S.
NRC.
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A-2 January 20, 1998 The inter-rack hydrodynamic masses were calculated using formulations developed for rectangular shapes by Scavuzzo (Reference 1).
The hydrodynamic masses for concentric long cylinders were used for fuel-to-rack coupling (Reference 2). Linear fluid coupling coefficients based on initial gaps between racks and rack-to-wall were used.
Gaps were represented by ANSYS element CONTACT52 and hydrodynamic coupling was represented with ANSYS element FLUID38. Details ofthe rack-to-rack and the rack-to-pool wall hydrodynamic coupling are provided in Section 3.5.2.5.2 ofthe Licensing Report. Figure NRCQ21.5 provides an isometric view ofthe racks in the 3-D whole-pool model with the hydrodynamic coupling elements shown intercon'nected to the racks and the pool walls. The hydrodynamic coupling elements are connected at the top, middle and bottom as shown in Figure NRCQ21.11.
The averaged hydrodynamic coupling values for ea'ch rack are provided in Tables 3.5-10 and 3.5-11 of the Licensing Report.
Constant hydrodynamic coupling terms b'ased on an initial rack-to-rack and rack-to-wall gap are consistent with currently licensed storage racks approved by NRC staff FCF likewise utilizes constant linear fluid coupling coefficients based on initial gaps between racks. During the seismic event the gap widths may change, therefore, the hydrodynamic coupling effects may change. If the gaps decrease, the hydrodynamic coupling would increase resulting in less rack displacement.
Recent re-racking licensing submittals to the NRC have discussed "in-phase" and "out-of-phase" rack motions for the determination ofappropriate gaps to be used for establishing hydrodynamic coupling terms.
Previous seismic studies performed by FCF addressed the effect ofvarying gaps between racks on inter-rack relative displacements, i.e., the effects of"in-phase" and "out-of-phase" rack motions. The results provided the following conclusions:
i)
Analysis ofthe smaller (one-half ofnominal gaps) inter-rack gaps increased the
~ hydrodynamic coupling, resulting in reduced relative inter-rack displacement as expected.
ii)
Both internal rack forces and relative inter-rack displacements were reduced with the smaller gaps (halfthe nominal gaps).
iii)
In-phase motion is most characteristic ofthe GINNAracks during a seismic event; ideal out-of-phase motion is unlikely (see response to item (b)). In-phase motion results in all racks moving together in general. The in-phase motion is most likely attributed to the small gaps that exist between racks versus the larger perimeter gaps that exist between the perimeter racks and the pool walls. Thus, the racks tend to move as a single group within the pool. The change in inter-rack gaps and resulting hydrodynamic coupling effects are minimal. Therefore, use ofthe initial nominal gaps is appropriate.
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A-3 January 20, 1998 The final relative displacements between the racks and between the racks and the spent fuel pool wall using the results from the whole-pool multi-rack analysis are provided in Tables 3.5-91 through 3.5-114 ofthe Licensing Report. Typical time history plots ofthe horizontal displacements at the top ofthe racks (superimposed for two racks) are provided in Figures NRCQ21.1 and NRCQ21.3.
Plots ofthe relative displacements between the tops ofthe racks are provided in Figures NRCQ21.2 and NRCQ21.4.
The GINNAspent fuel pool layout ofthe racks is shown in Figure NRCQ21.6.
These plots demonstrate the in-phase motions ofthe racks in both the orthogonal horizontal X and Y directions.
The maximum absolute displacement at the top ofthe racks in these plots are the same as previously presented in Table NRCQ7.1 ofReference 3.
The plots presented in Figures NRCQ21.2 and NRCQ21.4 show that the relative displacement between the racks is small compared to the size ofthe initial inter-rack gaps. 'A maximum relative motion between the racks 1 and 2 in the Y direction is [ PROPRIETARY ] inch and between racks 3 and 5 in the X direction is [ PROPRIETARY ] inch. The minimum gap that exists between the racks anywhere in the pool is [ PROPRIETARY ] inch, and exists between racks 1
and 2 in the Y direction. Therefore, the small relative displacement between the racks would preclude any rack-to-rack impact.
Although in-phase motion is demonstrated for the GINNAracks, ifone were to assume out-of-phase motion and assume an initial gap size one-half the nominal gap size [ PROPRIETARY ],
the small relative displacement between the racks, as provided above, would still preclude any rack-to-rack impact [ PROPRIETARY ]. Further, these relative displacements were obtained with hydrodynamic coupling values based on initial nominal gaps.
Lower relative displacements would be expected by using higher hydrodynamic coupling values based on one-half the initial nominal gaps.
Therefore, the use ofhydrodynamic coupling values based on initial nominal gaps is conservative for determining the relative motions between racks.
In addition, the current FCF analysis produced higher (thus more conservative) displacements than the previous 1985 reracking analysis.
An independent check on the validityofthe approach used by FCF in the hydrodynamic coupling model used in the whole-pool multi-rack analysis is made, by comparing the maximum displacement values obtained independently from the NRC-approved 1985 GINNAre-racking stress report (Reference 3.25 ofthe Licensing Report) ofthe resident racks. For the same resident racks (racks 1 through 6), the comparison between the maximum displacements (at the tops ofthe racks) for the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) with the coefficient offriction 0.8 demonstrated that the current FCF analysis produced higher (thus more conservative) displacements than the previous 1985 analysis.
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing Eden A-4 January 20, 1998 1.
Scavuzzo, R.J., Stokey, W.F., and Radke, E.F., "Dynamic Fluid Structure Coupling of Rectangular Modules in Rectangular Pools," ASME Publication PVP-39, pp.77-87, 1979.
Singh, S., Putman, S.F., and Pop Jr., J., "Structural Evaluation ofOnsite Spent Fuel Storage: Recent Developments," Current Issues Related to Nuclear Power Plant, Structures Equipment and Piping. Proceedings ofthe Third Symposium, Orlando, Florida, December 1990. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-740, pp.
V/4-1-V/4-18.
3.
Letter from R.C. Mecredy (RG&E) to G.S. Vissing (NRC),
Subject:
Response to Request for Additional Information - Spent Fuel Pool (SFP) Modifications - Structural Design Considerations, dated October 20, 1997.
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A-5 January 20, 1998 Figure NRCQ21.1 Horizontal Displacements UYfor Racks I and 2 at Tops - Load Case (LC) 01
[ PROPRIETARY ]
U.S. NRC S. Vissing A-6 January 20, 1998 Figure NRCQ21.2 Relative Horizontal Displacements UYfor Racks 1 and 2 at Tops - LC¹1 I'ROPRIETARY]
0
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A-7 January 20, 1998 Figure NRCQ21.3 Horizontal Displacements UXfor Racks 3 and 5 at Tops - LCP1
[ PROPRIETARY ]
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A-8 January 20, 1998 Figure NRCQ21.4 Relative Horizontal Displacements UXfor Racks 3 and 5 at Tops - LCP1
[ PROPMETARY ]
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing A-9 January 20, 1998 Figure NRCQ21.5 Isometric View - GINNA3-D Whole-Pool Model ofRacks With Hydrodynamic Coupling Elements
[ PROPRIETARY ]
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing Figure NRCQ21.6 GINNARack Location in Pool A-10 January 20, 1998 North Pool Wall 10
U.S. NRC G. S. Vissing i
1 A-11 January 20, 1998 The finite element model ofeach rack is similar to the model shown in Figure NRCQ21.7.
The complete whole-pool model is shown in Figures NRCQ21.8 and NRCQ21.9.
The spacing between racks is given in Tables NRCQ21.1 and NRCQ21.2.
The element, listing for the whole-pool model is given in Table NRCQ21.3.
The node numbers with their locations in the global coordinate system are given in Table NRCQ21.4.
The ANSYS input data for the 3-D multi-rack model is provided in ASCII format on a 3.5 inch diskette labeled "NRC-GR2A." The ANSYS data on this diskette is proprietary. The file name is "LC1."
[ PROPRIETARY ]
0 0
0
AFFIDAVIT F TH MA A. C LEMAN A.
My name is Thomas A. Coleman.
I am Vice President of Government Relations for.
Framatome Cogema Fuels (FCF). Therefore, I am authorized to execute this Affidavit.
B.
I am familiar with the criteria applied by FCF to determine whether certain information of FCF is proprietary and I am familiar with the procedures established within FCF to ensure the proper application of these criteria, C.
In determining whether an FCF document is to be classified as proprietary information, an initial determination is made by the Unit Manager, who is responsible for originating the
- document, as to whether it falls within the criteria set forth in Paragraph D hereof. If the information falls within any one of these criteria, it is classified as proprietary by the originating Unit Manager.
This initial determination is reviewed by the cognizant Section Manager. Ifthe document. is designated as proprietary, it is reviewed again by personnel and other management within FCF as designated by the Vice President of Government Relations to assure that the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Section 2.790 are met.
D.
The following information is provided to demonstrate that the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations have been considered:
The information has been held in confidence by FCF.
Copies of the document are clearly identified as proprietary.
In addition, whenever FCF transmits the information to a customer, customer's
- agent, potential customer or regulatory
- agency, the transmittal requests the recipient to hold the information as proprietary.
Also, in order to strictly limit any potential or actual customer's use of proprietary information, the substance of the following provision is included in all agreements entered into by FCF, and an equivalent version of the proprietary provision is included in all of FCF's proposals:
0
AFFIDAVITOF TH MAS A. COLEMAN(Cont'd.)
"Any proprietary information concerning Company's or its Supplier's products or manufacturing processes which is so designated by Company or its Suppliers and disclosed to Purchaser incident to the performance of such contract shall remain the property of Company or its Suppliers and is disclosed in confidence, and Purchaser shall not publish or otherwise disclose it to others without the written approval of Company, and no rights, implied or otherwise, are granted to produce or have produced any products or to practice or cause to be practiced any manufacturing processes covered thereby.
Notwithstanding the above, Purchaser may provide the NRC or any other regulatory agency with any such proprietary information as the NRC or such other agency may require; provided, however, that Purchaser shall first give Company written notice of such proposed disclosure and Company shall have the right to amend such proprietary information so as to make it non-proprietary.
In the event that Company cannot amend such proprietary information, Purchaser
- shall, prior to disclosing such information, use its best efforts to obtain a commitment from NRC or such other agency to have such information withheld from public inspection.
Company shall be given the right to participate in pursuit of such confidential treatment."
AFFIDAVITOF THOMAS A C LEMAN(Cont'd.)
The following criteria are customarily applied by FCF in a rational decision process to determine whether the information should be classified as proprietary.
Information may be classified as proprietary if one or more of the following criteria are met:
a.
Information reveals cost or price information, commercial strategies, production capabilities, or budget levels of FCF, its customers or suppliers.
b.
The information reveals data or material concerning FCF research or development plans or programs of present or potential competitive advantage to FCF.
c.
The use of the information by a
competitor would decrease his expenditures, in time or resources, in designing, producing or marketing a similar product.
d.
The information consists of test data or other similar data concerning a
- process, method or component, the application of which results in a competitive advantage to FCF.
e.
The information reveals special aspects of a process, method, component or the like, the exclusive use of which results in a competitive advantage to FCF.
f.
The information contains ideas for which patent protection may be sought.
AFFIDAVIT F TH MAS A. COLEMAN(Cont'd.)
The document(s) listed on Exhibit "A", which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, has been evaluated in accordance with normal FCF procedures with respect to classification and has been found to contain information which falls within one or more of the criteria enumerated above.
Exhibit "B", which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, specifically identifies the criteria applicable to the document(s) listed in Exhibit "A".
The document(s) listed in Exhibit "A", which has been made available to the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission was made available in confidence with a request that the document(s) and the information contained therein be withheld from public disclosure.
(iv)
The information is not available in the open literature and to the best of our knowledge is not known by Combustion Engineering,
- Siemens, General Electric, Westinghouse or other current or potential domestic or foreign competitors of Framatome Cogema Fuels.
(v)
Specific information with regard to whether public disclosure of the information is likely to cause harm to the competitive position of FCF, taking into account the value of the information to FCF; the amount of effort or money expended by FCF developing the information; and the ease or difficulty with which the information could be properly duplicated by others is given in Exhibit "B".
E.
I have personally reviewed the document(s) listed on Exhibit "A" and have found that it is considered proprietary by FCF because it contains information which falls within one or more of the criteria enumerated in Paragraph D, and it is information which is customarily held in confidence and protected as proprietary information by FCF.
This report comprises information utilized by FCF in its business which afford FCF an opportunity to obtain a
AFFIDAVIT F THOMAS A C LEMAN(Cont'd.)
competitive advantage over those who may wish to know or use the information contained in the document(s).
THOMAS A. COLEMAN State of Virginia)
City of Lynchburg)
)
SS. Lynchburg Thomas A. Coleman, being duly sworn, on his oath deposes and says that he is the person who subscribed his name to the foregoing statement, and that the matters and facts set forth in the statement are true.
THOMAS A. COLEMAN Subscri ed and sworn before me this ~
day of 1998.
Notary Public in and for the City of Lynchburg, State of Virginia.
My Commission Expires ~CI44
+I>IF'.