ML19296A884
| ML19296A884 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Yankee Rowe |
| Issue date: | 01/15/1980 |
| From: | Lainas G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Ziemann D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296A886 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002190224 | |
| Download: ML19296A884 (2) | |
Text
-
+
.V J
~ --
.w g
_,_}._[ itl 05b I!bE b "
DISTRIBllTIGk.
Central Files
~
JAN 151980 NRC POR -
PSB Reading MEMORANDUM FOR:
Dennis L. Ziemann, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #2, Division of Operating Reactors FROM:
G. Lainas, Chief Plant Systems Branch Division of Operating Reactors
SUBJECT:
EVALUATI0fl 0F 'lUTECH'S TEST REPORT, NUSER SSP-01-001, DATED OCTOBER 3, 1979 Plant Name: Yankee Rowe Licensee: Yankee Atomic Electric Ccmpany Occket No. : 50-29 Responsible Branch: ORB!2 Project Manager:
A. Burger Reviewing Branch: PSB Statas : SER issued, evaluation of incomplete items on-going.
By letter dated October 3,1979, the Yankee Atomic Electric Coreany requested the staff to review NUTECH's test report for conoliance in the in-situ test requirements as stated in Section 4.2 of their Fire Protection SER.
We and our consultants have reviewed this report. We are enclosing an evaluation of this report prepared by Brookhaven National Laboratory's (BNL) (Enclosure No.1) and a letter from Mr. Francis E. Gung, a former consultant to NUTECH (Enclosure No. 2).
We find that NUTECH's method does not satisfy the requiremenc for 4".-situ testinc, and that the test requirerent is beyond present state-of-the-art technology.
In addition, NUTECH test report contains major deficiencies which detract from the credibility of the test method, such as inconsistencies in the interpretation and presentation of data, and the use of unexplained rationale which require additional in-plant testing to improve or clarify the derived test result.s.
s 6. g e) 8002100
n
..~= m>
7;
/
-~:
O F
. s.
L,U s,
Dennis L. Ziemann JAN 151980 The licensee should be relieved of any schedule or commitments to comply with this requirement until we have developed acceptance criteria that can be applied with present technology.
c e{h\\
G. Lainas, Chief-Plant Systems Branch Division of Operating Reactors
Contact:
C. Heit, X27270 Enclosures :
As stated cc w/ enclosures:
D. Eisenhut G. Lainas R. Ferguson A. Surger C. Heit k
%' 4 D
D 9
v C0 R : P.S.B.,
,. C0.pf.S.8/ S.1,...d S.S/ S.G.
.,na,
...Che i.t.; p.h...
..,,8,F,ggys pn,,,,,
.4 in.ag..,,
t.../.1.../.80..
I../..13/. 80
.../..../.80..--
5
.m
- nac ross sis am rause ous
- ........---v-..-===m.n.-n.
Enclosure No. 1 7
b).3j 3
.j BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
'l'll ASSOCIATED UNIVERSITIES, INC.
~*J.,
Upt. New York 11973 Cepcrtn7ent cf Nuciect Energy (516) 345-7690 November 30, 1979 Mr. Robert L. Ferguson Plant Systens Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 RE: Evaluation of NUTECH's In Situ Test Method - NUTECH report SSP-01-001, October 3.1979 " Smoke Simulation Prototype Test Conducted at Yankee Rowe Nuclear Plant."
Dear Bob:
In cmpliance with your request by letter dated November 7,1979 the fol-lowing is a cmposite evaluation, prepared with the collaboration of I. Asp, J. Klevan, and I. Pinkel, of the NUTECH test method for smoke detector siting.
To some extent, the contents herein, re-emphasize our creliminary appraisal, by letters dated September 21 and October 17, 1979 to C. Heit, of the use of tracer gas for smoke detector siting. Although Mr. Pinkel did not participate directly in the NUTECH test at Yankee Rowe as did I. Asp, J. Klevan,- and mys-elf, he did attend the June 20, 1979 pretest conference at the Nuclear Re-gulatory Cmmission (NRC) and did review the cited document. His preliminary views on the subject matter are contained in his October 30, 1979 letter to me; a copy of sich had been fomarded to you.
At the outset, I must categorically state that I find the use of tracer gas, such as sulfur hexafluoride (SF ) in conjunction with electron-capture 6
gas chrmatography an acceptable technique for assessing the convective flow patterns witnin (or around) cmolex geometries.
I have culled the open literature, especially in the fields of meteorology, atmospheric environment, and industrial aerodynamics and found the tracer gas technique to be insed for 1.
experimentally characterizing ventilation systems in buildf ags, 2.
for probing the air flow within the wake downwind of buildings, and 3.
for study of pollutant transport and dispersion from sources ranging fra smoke stakes to large urban areas.
Thus it certainly appears feasible that the tracer gas technique can be used for the study of smoke movement. Understandably, of course, the experimental program e been exercised when s within an enclosed DUPLICATE DOCUMENT source.
Entire document previously entered into system u der:
3 912 040 h b ANO N o.
of pages:
/[