ML20035F391

Notification of 930420 & 22-23 Meeting W/Italian Officials in Casaccia,Italy to Discuss Activities for Westinghouse AP600 & GE Sbwr Designs.Proposed Agenda & Questions for Discussions Encl

ML20035F391
Person / Time
Site:	05200003, 05200004
Issue date:	04/16/1993
From:	Borchardt R, Hasselberg F Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Miraglia F, Murley T, Russell W NRC
References
NUDOCS 9304210229
Download: ML20035F391 (14)

Text

f28.cf

>n neruq'o, UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION eb 8

n WASHtNGTON, D. C. 20555 n

p d~

++.....

April 16, 1993 Docket Nos.52-003 and 52-004 MEMORANDUM FOR:

T. Murley G. Lainas C. Rossi F. Miraglia J. Roe R. Zimmerman W. Russell J. Zwolinski B. Boger J. Partlow M. Virgilio R. Gallo D. Crutchfield B. Grimes F. Congel W. Travers J. Richardson E. Butcher A. Gody, Acing B. D. Liaw W. Bateman, EDO S. Varga A. Thadani A. Vietti-Cook J. Calvo G. Holahan Operations Center THRU:

Richard W. Borchardt, Acting Director j Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Rea ors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

?

FROM:

Frederick !>!. Hasselberg, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reacters and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Melinda Malloy, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

SUBJECT:

DAILY HIGHLIGHT - FORTHCOMING MEETING BETWEEN THE NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0i MISSION (NRC) STAFF, ITALIAN OFFICIALS, AND NRC APPLICANTS ON TEST FACILITIES AND ACTIVIC ES FOR THE WESTINGHOUSE AP600 AND THE GE NUCLEAR FNERGY (GE) SIMPLIFIED BOILING WATER REACTOR (SBWR) DE.1 +

4 DATES AND TIMES:

April 20 and 22, 1993 (9 a.m. - 5 g.m.)

April 23, 1993, (9 a.m. - I p.m.)

T I

0?$

$N kN NN W' gD0 tp\\

9304210229 930416 PDR ADOCK 05200003 A

PDR

i

! April 16, 1993 3

i f

(

l Commission for Nuclear and Alternative Energy Sources) Vapore Facility, Automatic Depressurization System

~ '

(ADS) Test Facility Casaccia, Italy April 22. 1993 l

t SIET (Societs Informazioni Esperienze Termoidrauliche)

SPES-2 Test Facility 1

Piacenza, Italy e

April 23. 1993 SIET PANTHERS Test Facility 1

Piacenza, Italy PURPOSE:

Visit to and discussions with Italian officials and NRC applicant representatives: on April 20, the ADS test

-l fecility; on April 22, the SPES-2 full-height, high-pressure integral test facility for the AP600 design; and on April 23, the PANTHER $ full-scale isolation condenser test facility for the SBWR design.

Proposed agenda'and questions for discussion during the visits are enclosed.

NOTE:

Proprietary features on the Westinghouse AP600 and GE-SBWR designs will be discussed. These purtions of the meetings will be closed to the public.

PARTICIPANTS *:

HRC ENEA SIET t

T. Murley~

C. Kropp C. Medich l

I. Catton P. Incalcaterrc M. Rigamonte A. Thadani et al.

G. Bianconi J. N. Wilson

0. Vescori

-3 F. Hasselberg et al.

A. Levin i

et al.

I

-f 4

I 4

1

4 l

. April 16, 1993 Westinahouse (April 20 and 22) GE Nuclear Enerav (April 23)

B. McIntyre R. McCandless L. Conway A. Rao E. Piplica R. Buchholz et al.

et al.

(Original signed by)

Frederick W. Hasselberg, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (Original signed by)

Melinda Malloy, Project Manager Standardization Project Directorate Associate Directorate for Advanced Reactors and License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

Enclosures:

1.

Agenda For 4/20 and Questions on ADS Testing 2.

Agenda F'.r 4/22 and Quest ons on SPES-2 Testing 3.

Agenda for 4/23 and Questions on PANTHERS Testing cc w/ enclosures:

See next page

• Meetings between the NRC technical staff and applicants or licensees are open for interested members of the public, petitioners, intervenors, or other parties to attend as observers pursuant to "Open Meeting Statement of NRC Staff Policy," 43 [ederal Reaister 28058, 6/28/78. However, portions of these meetings may be closed to protect Westinghouse and GE Nuclear Energy proprietary information. Members of the public who wish to attend should contact either Frederick W. Hasselberg at (301) 504-1141 or Melinda Malloy at (301) 504-1178.

DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION (w/enclosuresl:

w/o enclosures:

Docket File (52-003) Docket File (52-004) PDST R/F RPerch, 8D1 PDR GDick, 12G18 RHasselberg JMoore, 15B18 MMalloy RBorchardt TEssig NRR Mailroom,12G18 JNWilson AThadani, 8E2 GHolahan, BE2 J0'Brien, RES RBarrett, 8D1 RJones, 8E23 Alevin, 8E23 P0' Dell RElliott, 801 TMurley, 12G18 OPA ACRS (11)

PShea (2)

MCullingford, 12G18 OIP EJordan, MNBB 3701 GGrant, EDO TKenyon

• SEE P FV1005 CC RRENCE OFC:oLA:PDST:ADAR PM:PDS :A R NI N ADAR SC:PDST 9-T:ADAR PD:

T:ADAR I

JN " son RBo ardt NAME:PShea fha

.oerg MMalloy:tz TEssig DATE:04/15/93 04/}p 93 04//p/93 04/gfy9' 04/ (j/93 04/l$/93 0FFICIAL RECORD COPY: MTG42323.MM

r:=

q i

AP600

~

. Westinghouse Electric Corporation Docket No.52-003 l

cc:

Mr. Nicholas J. Liparulo, Manager Nuclear Safety and Regulatory Division l

Westinghouse Electric Corporation P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 Mr. B. A. McIntyre i

Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Westinghouse Electric Corporation Energy Systems Business Unit P.O. Box 355 Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 t

Mr. John C. Butler j

Advanced Plant Safety & Licensing Westinghouse Electric Corporation Energy Systems Business Unit Box 355 i

Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230 j

Mr. M. D. Beaumont Nuclear and Advanced Technology Division Westinghouse Electric Corporation One Montrose Metro i

11921 Rockville Pike Suite 350 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Mr. Sterling Franks U. S. Department of Energy NE-42 4

Washington, D.C.

20585 Mr. S. M. Modro EG&G Idaho Inc.

Post Office Box 1625 Idaho Falls, Idaho 83415 l

Mr. Steve Goldberg Budget Examiner l

725 17th Street, N.W.

Room 8002 Washington, D.C.

20503 Mr. Frank A. Ross U.S. Department of Energy, NE-42 4

Office of LWR Safety and Technology 19901 Germantown Road Germantown, Maryland 20874 t

I

i

'GE Nuclear Energy SBWR

.Docke't No.52-004 t

cc:

Mr. Patrick W. Marriott, Manager Licensing & Consulting Services GE Nuclear Energy i

175.urtner Avenue San Jose, California 95125 Mr. Laurence S. Gifford GE Nuclear Energy 12300 Twinbrook Parkway Suite 315 Rockville, Maryland 20852 Director, Criteria & Standards Division Office of Radiation Programs U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C.

20460 Mr. Sterling Franks U. S. Department of Energy NE-42 Washington, D.C.

20585 Mr. Jeffrey C. Baechler GE Nuclear Energy 175 Curtner Avenue, MC-782 San. Jose, California 95125 Mr. Frank A. Ross Program Manager, ALWR Office of. LWR Safety & Technology 1

U.S. Department of Energy NE-42 19901 Germantown Road Germantown, Maryland 20874 6

N k

r P

t

's I

h i

Draft Agends for Meeting at ENEA Automatic Depressurization System Test Facility Casaccia, Italy Tuesday, April 20,1993 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m..

REVIEW OF ADS TEST PROGRAM

' Phase A Testing isparger placement)

Phase A Facility Design Completed Phase A Test Matrix Summary of Phase A Restdts Phase B Testing (Stage 1,2 and 3 ADS valve response and thermal hydraulks)

Phase B Facility Modifications Proposed Phase B Test Matrix Planned Post test Analysis Schedule for Completion of Phase B Testing and Test Reports submittal to NRC TOUR OF ADS TEST FACILITY t

e

.e t

I

~

1

~

Questions for ENEA on Westinghouse ADS Testing I.

Please summarize the important information gained from the Phase A tests t

performed on the ADS sparger. Specific points of interest include:

i a.

Stratification behavior in the tank, and its impact on the decision on the best elevation in the tank for the sparger for Phase B tests; b.

Tank / internal. loads due to condensation and air clearing at the

)

sparger and application to the AP600 design; c.

Any experience with water hammer during the tests; J

d.

Any unexpected behavior of the sparger during the tests.

2.

The operation of the passive RHR heat exchangers in the IRWST could be expected to have an impact on ADS operation, especially with regard to changing the temperature profile of the water in the IRWST prior to initiation of depressurization. Were these effects simulated in Phase A? Will they be. simulated in Phase B7 3.

Please discuss test procedures to be used during Phase B testing of the ADS valves. Areas of specific interest include:

a.

Duration of tests, and tank temperature profiles prior to and i

during testing (see question 2 above);

b.

Valve opening times and relationship to AP600 operation; c.

Measurement of key parameters during tests, such as' mass flows, void fractions, and transition from critical to subsonic flow.

4.

What types of analyses will be performed using ADS test data (both phases)? Have analyses of Phase A tests been initiated?

If so, please discuss analytical results and compare to test data.

4 i

i l

q Questions for.ENEA on AP600 ADS Tests 3

Dr. Ivan Catton of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards will be accompanying Dr. Murley on the trip, and has requested that the following questions be addressed, in addition to those already provided.

F 1.

a.

How will the fluid entering the depressurization valve (s) be conditioned prior to reaching the valve (s)?

b.

What is the basis for choosing the specified conditions?

c.

What range of thermal-hydraulic conditions will the fluid experience over the course of each test?

~

2.

Have any pre-test calculations been performed for these tests, to aid in determining how to set fluid conditions? In other words, how has it been determined that the range of thermal-hydraulic conditions covered in the Phase B tests corresponds to those conditions that are expected in the AP600 plant?

k 4

l

+

9 Draft Agenda for Meeting at SIET SPES 2 Full Pressure, Full Height Integral Systems Test Facility Placenza, Italy Thursday, April 22,1993 i

9:00 a.m.

5:00 p.m.

OVERVIEW OF SPES2 FACIIJTY AND TEST PROGRAM SPES 2 Design and Scaling Criteria i

SPES 2 Instrumentation and Data Acquisition Planned SPES 2 Shakedown Testing and Results to Date Proposed SPES 2 Test Matrix Pretest Analyses and Comparison of SPES-2 to AP600 Behavior Schedule for Completion of SPES 2 Testing and Test Report Submittal.

TOUR OF SPES 2 FACILITY i

l

I s.

Questions for SIET i

Westinghouse testir.g in SPES-2 i

1.

Please summarize the modifications made to the SPES facility to prepare i

for the AP600-related tests, including hardware, configuration, and-instrumentation.

k 2.

Please discuss the effect of the "short" pressurizer on system response.

3.

According to the test schedule, cold shakedown tests should be completed, and hot shakedown tests should be in progress.

a.

Is the testing still on schedule? Please review the schedule for h

future testing.

b.

Please summarize important insights on facility behavior that has been gained to this point during shakedown testing. Areas of interest include:

flow distribution and pressure losses; facility heat loss characteristics; instrumentation response and data acquisition; actual system behavior compared to analytical predictions.

Please discuss test procedures for matrix tests, with emphasis on c.

any insights gained from shakedown testing.

i h

o I

I

.)

1

f Additional Questions for SIET on SPES-2 2

Dr. Ivan Catton of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards will be i

accompanying Dr. Murley on the trip, and has requested that the following questions be addressed, in addition to those already provided.

1.

Please address the effect of the cold leg configuration on system response, as compared to the AP600. Of particular note is the split cold leg design and the resistance between the two communicating inlet pipes, and the use of only one pump per loop rather than two.

2.

Please discuss the downcomer configuration. Will any multi-dimensional effects be observable in these tests?

t I

4 e

L s

s I

?

Draft Agenda I

PANTHERS Test Program Meeting with NRC, GE, ENEL,ENEA,SIET and Ansaldo i

April 23,1983

-i 0900 Welcome and Introduction i

0915 SBWR systems and testing approach GE t.ssive cooling / inventory control

- fun scale prototype tests t

- Full height integral tests 0945 Detailed description of PANTHERS facility ENEA/SIET Ii 1030 Break 1045 Facility tour SIET 1145 Test procedure, instrumentation ENEA I

1215 Test Matrix, schedule, reports and NRC interaction GE s

1 induding answers to questions 1250 Summary and Conclusion 1300 Lunch

- l r

v i

i I

1

.~,

Questions for SIET GE testing in PANTHERS l

1.

Please describe the facility designs for the PCCS and IC testing.

2.

A brief description of the test programs was presented at the ICONE-2 conference in March, and additional information is contained in other documentation received from GE.

From the information presented on the PCCS tests, it appears that it will be difficult, if not impossible, to run transient tests on the heat exchanger, since the air and steam are metered into the HX inlet. While these steady-state tests may cover the range of parameters expected during system operation, they do not capture the essential cyclical behavior of the system in the plant:

efficient condensation at the beginning of a cycle, then a gradual build-up of non-condensible gas, which degrades condensation, and a resultant increase in drywell pressure that ultimately pushes the non-condensibles through the vent line to the wetwell,. clearing the HX and returning to the start of the cycle again. Why can't the air and steam be mixed in a tank, similar to the way in which the IC tests are to be run, so that the system behavier and the header gas distribution are more typical of plant conditions?

3.

The initial condition of the IC system in the plant includes a rather long column of cold water that is prevented from entering the RCS by the closed return line valve.

When the system is put into operation, it would appear that a potential exists for (a) water hammer and (b) thermal stress of the return line nozzle as the cold water enters the reactor vessel.

Both of these phenomena would appear to have the

~

potential to degrade system response. How will they be measured and-analyzed?

4.

The tests for both the IC and PCC HXs appear to call for steady-state pool conditions, with both temperature and level maintained approximately constant.

If one considers the operating conditions for these HXs, however, it would appear that the heat exchanger performance as the pool boils down is of significant interest, as is pool thermal behavior (stratification, mixing, etc.). The systems codes used to predict plant behavior may well need models based on or validated using data on those very parameters.

Please address why no tests involving either pool boil-down and/or stratification are included in the preliminary test matrices, to allow characterization of heat exchanger performance as a function of pool level and temperature distribution.

4 6

Additional Questions for SIET on PANTHERS Dr. Ivan Catton of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards will be accompanying Dr. Murley on the trip, and has requested that the following questions be addressed, in addition to those already provided.

I.

Please describe in detail the instrumentation for the PCC and IC heat exchangers and the test loop, and discuss why you believe that the instrumentation will be sufficient to acquire the necessary performance data.

2.

For both the PCC and IC tests, please discuss how the range of non-condensible gas fractions was chosen, and why that range is representative of operating conditions in the SBWR. We note that both air and helium (simulating hydrogen) will be used in these tests.

However, while the air mass flows are shown explicitly on the PCCS test matrix, neither the helium PCC fractions nor the non-condensible (air and/or helium) IC fractions are shown on the respective test matrices.

f s

I 4

6