ML20004D701
| ML20004D701 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 06/01/1981 |
| From: | Mattimoe J SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | Stolz J Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TASK-1.C.1, TASK-TM TAC-44265, NUDOCS 8106090662 | |
| Download: ML20004D701 (2) | |
Text
.
$SMUD SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT O S201 s street. Box 15830, sacramento, Califomia 95813; (916) 452-3211 June 1, 1981
\\1*I g
m O
/N DIRECTOR OF NUCLEAR REACTOR REGULATION
.J ATTENTION JOHN F STOLZ CHIEF 2*
JUN 0 81991
- d OPERATING REACTORS BRANCH 4
, v,s. m..nuas i J/
U S NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
WASHINGTON D C 20555
\\
f%sp g $,b DOCKET 50-312 RANCHO SEC0 NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION UNIT N0 1 SMALL BREAK LOCA MODEL Your letter of February 24, 1981 requested further post-test analyses of the S-07-10D and L3-1 tests. On April 20,1981 and 11ay 5,1981, we informed you of a B&W Owners Group program for responding to this request. This effort has been completed and B&W reports, "B&W's Post Test Analysis for Semiscale Test S-07-10D", Document No. 86-1125888-00 and, "B&W's Post Test Evaluation of LOFT Test L3-1", Document No. 51-1125988-00 are attached.
Your letter of February 24, 1981 requested responses to four questions. The questions are addressed in the enclosed reports and can be summarized as follows:
1.
The evaluations provided demonstrate that the present small break analysis techniques result in good agreement with the test data when actual test conditions are considered.
2.
No code modification and/or improvements were necessary to predict the experiments.
However, as noted in the S-07-100 post test analysis, a more detailed core representation was necessary to provide a best estimate simulation of the experiment due to the extensive core uncovery which occurred in the test.
3.
The core representation in the evaluation model gives conserfative results when core uncovery occurs. Therefore, a more detailed representation of the core need not be included in the evaluation model.
$d l
8106090 % 4
$t (
A 's ELECTRIC SYSTEM SE97tNJ MORE THAN 600.000 IN THE HEART OF C A LI F 0 R N I A
JOHN F STOLZ June 1, 1981 4.
In order to improve the verification process, it is suggested that an approach similar to that utilized for the recent L3-6 prediction be employed. That approach consists of setting up and submitting a " blind pre-test" model. Then following receipt of the test data, perform a post-test evaluation and resubmit the results together with justifications for any model changes for the " blind pre-test" model.
We feel this letter and the attachments constitute a full response to your February 24, 1981 letter.
If we can provide any additional information, please advise.
h hn J. Mattimoe Assistant General Manager and Chief Engineer Enclosure i
h t
.,n.
-.. ~...,. -
}
)
l 6
B&W's Post Test Evaluation of LOFT Test L3-1 l
Document No. 51-1125988-00 i
May 1981 l
Principal Investigators l
l N. K. Savani R. C. Jones l
Prepared by l
BABC0CK & WILC0X COMPANY l
ock & Wilcox DUPLICATE DOCUMENT Systems Entire document previously
~:
entered into system under:
f ANO 4
No. of pages:
_.._y
.,_..,_.____._....,,._..-__._,,..,.-.,,,___..._-__.,,_...._-...___-..._-_m
i J
B&W'S POST TEST ANALYSIS FOR SEMISCALE TEST S-07-100 Document No. 86-1125888-00 May 20, 1981
.~
.l Principal Investigar. ors T. E. Geer i
P. A. Thornhill l
R. C. Jones l
l Prepared by e-,p3ny Ra hen e t, f.
u 41,-..
l i
DUPLICATE DOCUMENT
. & WilCoX Entire document previously
- iS Systems entered into system under:
B/ov#o5 l99 nNO No. of pages:
M N
..