ML20040C022
| ML20040C022 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 01/20/1982 |
| From: | Gilmore J CITIZENS FOR FAIR UTILITY REGULATION |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8201270176 | |
| Download: ML20040C022 (11) | |
Text
,
o.
D'.FETEi p h 2.ol%L f
22 E!25 P310 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMh!ISSION BEFORE THE ATOh!IC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the hiatter of
)
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING m
)
DOCKET NOS:
50-445 0 50-44 (Comanche Peak Steam Electric
/
Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
NECEIVED s
9m JAN261982m..
- 12
==
CITIZENS FOR FAIR UTILITY REGULATIONS SEVENTH rac
/
SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO, AND REQUEST FOR c,
DOCUMENTS FROM, NRC STAFF s
g I
The CFUR hereby requests that NRC Staff, pursuant to 10 CFR Sec. 2.740b and 2.741, answer separately and fully, in writing under oath or affirmation, the following Interrogatories and produce q,r make available for, inspection and copying, all documentary material identified in the responses to Interrogatories below.
According to the schedule established by the Atomic Safety and Licensing i
Board (" Licensing Board") in its " Scheduling Order" issued on December 11, 1981, these Interrogatories must be answered by January 22, 1982.
All references provided in response to these Interrogatories are to be identified by author, title, date of publication and publisher if the reference is published; if any such reference is not published, it is to be identified by author, title, date it was written, the qualifications of the author relevant to this proceeding, and the location where a copy of the document may be obtained.
All persons named in response to these Interrogatories are to be identified by name, address, employer, position, education, professional qualifications, and publications related to their views concerning the subject matter of this proceeding.
hc>3 4
0 R
G
INTERROGATORIES ON CONTENTION 2 1.
In the CPSES /FSAR Section 1. 5, it is stated [1. 5.1. 4, p.1.5-4]
" A DNB correlation will be developed from these test results for use in the Westinghouse ECCS analyses".
This statement implies future action; however, the other portions of the FS AR appear to represent complete ECCS analyses.
A.
State whether or not the NRC Staff sutiably verified and formally accepted the ECCS analyses in the absence of the afore-mentioned DNB correlation.
If so provide the basis for this action.
Produce documents regarding the basis for this action.
B.
Is there any future effort required to demonstrate a conservatism of the final design of the ECCS system? Provide information on the nature, status and date of final resolution of such efforts.
Produce documents regarding the nature and status of these efforts.
C.
Is there any contemplate'd future changes in design or modes of operation in the ECCS system that the NRC Staff is aware of ?
Provide information on the nature, status and date of final resolution of such changes.
Produce documents regarding the nature and status of these contemplated changes.
2.
Is the information contained in CPSES /FS AR Section 1.5 sufficient as a resume of all special technical information development programs of which the NRC Staff is aware? Provide documentation on those programs applicable to CPSES.
Page Two
3.
Is Section 1.6 complete? A complete tabulation of all topical reports revelant to CPSES ?
~
4.
Is Section 1.6 a complete tabulation of separate reports of tests and
~
analyses applicable to CPSES [as indicated by Regulatory Guide 1.70, Revision 3, November 1979] ?
5.
Are the reports listed in Table 1 formally accepted? If so, produce documents reg.rding formal acceptance.
6.
For those reports not yet formally accepted, produce documentation on the nature, status, and date of final resolution to enable the reports to be formally accepted or rejected ?
7.
Are the technical aspects of the reports listed in Table 1 suitably verified ? If so, produce documentation regarding such verification.
8.
For the reports not suitably verified, produce documentation on the nature, status, and date of final resolution to enable the following reports to be verified or rejected:
a.
" An Evaluation of Solid State Logic Reactor Protection in Anticipated Transients," WCAP-77-6-4 (Proprietary) and WCAP-7706 (Non-Proprietary), February 1973.
Page Three
b.
" Overpressure Protection for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors," WCAP-7769, October 1971.
" Overpressure Protection for Westinghouse Pressurized Water c.
Reactors," WCAP-7769, Revision 1, June 1972.
d.
"LOFTRAN Code Description," WCAP-7707, June 1972.
e.
"FACTRAN - A FORTRAN-IV Code for Thermal Transients in a UO Fuel Rod," WCAP-7908, June 1972 2
f.
" MARVEL, A Digital Computer Code for Transient Analysis of a Multiloop FWR System," WCAP-7909, June 1972.
g.
" Reactor Collant Pump Intergrity in LOCA," WCAP-8163, September 1973.
h.
" Documentation of Selected West.inghouse Structural Analysis Computer Codes, " WCAP-8252, Revision 1, July 1977.
i.
" Hydraulic Flow Test of 'the 17x17 Fuel Assembly," WCAP-8278 (Proprietary) and WCAP-8279 (Non-Proprietary), February 1974 j.
" Westinghouse Anticipated Transients Without Trip Analysis,"
WCAP-8330, August 1974.
k.
"An Evaluation of Loss of Flow Accidents Caused by Power System Frecuency Transients in Westinghouse FWRs," WCAP-8424, Revision 1, June 1975.
1.
" Fuel Rod Bowing," WCAP-8691 (Proprietary) and WCAP-8692 (Non-Proprietary), December 1975 Page Four
Q v
m.
" Improved Analytical Models Used in Westinghouse Fuc1 Rod Design Computations," WCAP-8720 (Proprietary) and WCAP-8785 (Non-Proprietary), October 1976.
" Properties of Fuel and Core Component Materials,"
n.
WCAP-9179 (Proprietary), September 1977 o.
" Evaluation of Nuclear Hot Channel Factor Uncertainties,"
WCAP-730S-L (Proprietary) and WCAP-7310 (Non-Proprietary),
December 1971.
p.
" Seismic Vibration Testing with Sine Beats," WCAP-7558, October 1971.
q.
" Encore Power Distribution Deteminatjon.in Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors," WCAP-8498, July 1975 r.
Failu:e Mode and Effects Analysis (F,EA) of the Engineered Safeguard Features Actuation System," WCAP-8584 (Proprietary) and WCAP-8760 (Non-Proprietary), Revision 1, February 1980 Enviromental Qualification of Westinghouse Class 1E Equipment,"
s.
WCAP-8587, September 1975.
t.
" General Method of Developing Multi-frequency Bioxial Test Inputs for Bistables," WCAP-8624 9 Proprietary) September 1975 and WCAP-8695 (Non-Proprietary) August 1975 Pcge Five
u.
"hiass and Energy Releases Following a Steam Line R upture, " WCAP-8822 (Proprietary) and WCAP-8860 (Non-Propreitary), September 1976.
v.
" Bench Mark Problem Solutions Employed for Verification of WECAN Computer Program," WCAP-8929, June 1977.
" Failure Mode and Effects Analysis [FMEA] of the Solid w.
State Full Length Rod Control System," WCAP-8976, September 1977.
x.
" Westinghouse Emergency Core Cooling System Evaluation Model for Analyzing Large LOCA's During Operation with One Loop Out of Service for Plants Without Loop Isolation Values,"
WCAP-9166, February 1978.
y.
" Reactor Vecsel Head Drop Analyses," WCAP-9198, January 1978.
9 Has the NRC Staff suitably verified and formally accepted these codes:
a.
MRI/STARDYNE
- p. 3.7B (A)-2 FSAR b.
SCONV p. 3.7B (A)-12 FS AR c.
SPECTRA p. 3. 7B (A )-10, p. 3. 7B ( A)-15 l
d.
NASTRAN p. 3. 7B ( A)- 9 ICESSTRVDL-II, June 1971, p. 3. 7 B (A)-10 c.
l f.
QUAKE p. 3.7 B(A)-1 l
g.
STRESS p. 3. 7B (A )- 11 l
h.
KALNINS p. 3. 7B ( A )-11 i.
TIME p. 3. 7B ( A)- 16 j.
ADLPIPE p.
- 3. 7B ( A) -17 k.
ANSYS p. 3. 7B ( A )- 18 Page Six
10.
What are the requirements for the NRC Staff to declare that a report (or underlying technical aspects) is verified? Provide complete description of the process.
Produce documentation for the verification process for the following reports:
a.
WC AP-77&9 b.
WCAP-7907 c.
WCAP-7908 f.
WC AP-8330 e.
WCAP-8424 f.
WC AP-9166 11.
What are the requirements for the NRC Staff to issue a formal letter of acceptance for a report ? Provide complete description of the process.
Produce documentation for the acceptance of the following codes:
a.
WCAP-7832 b.
WC AP-7950 c.
d.
WCAP-8288 e.
W CAP-8720 f.
' WC AP-8785 g.
WC AP-9220-P-A h.
WC A P-9221-P-A l
12.
What actions are taken to insure that limitations or the use of the reports described in a staff evaluation are complied with by the Applicant ?
Provide as an example those actions taken by the Staff to insure t. hat Page Seven
the limitations described in -Staff eva uation of WCAP-7956, WCAP-8054, l
WCAP-8567 and WCAP-8762 (April 19,1978) are complied with by the Applicant.
13.
Provide a list of all computer codes and corresponding reports used in the verification process for CPSES.
Provide documentation on these reports.
14.
What is the most recent version of computer codes and corresponding reports used in the verification process with respect to I 13?
15.
What are the salient differences between the most recent version and those used in the verification process for CPSES ? Provide bases for any
~
failure to use more recent versions of the computer codes and reports referred to in Interrogatories 13 and 14.
16.
For those computer codes and corresponding reports listed under i
responses to Interrogatories 13 - 15 please answer the following questions:
a.
What are the dominent parameters and processes for each 1
code?
b.
How are they determined by sensitivity studies ?
How do accident and experiment sensitivities compare with l
c.
regard to dominant parameters and processes ?
d.
How is experimental error accounted for? How are corresponding model changes made ?
Page Eight l
l
How are uncertainties in analysis and experiment c.
controlled ? How are model omissions addresses?
Are they resolved by "large real-material tests" ?
f.
What are the levels or steps of the verficiation process?
17.
In the load following process, movement of control rods induce dynamic stresses.
Does the application include sufficient analysis and documentation to insure an adequate margin of conservation? If so, produce documentation and provide basis for the NRC Staff evaluation?
18.
On the current CPSES design, the born injection system has been deleted.
As a result, highly concentrated borated water at relatively high pressures from CVCS charging pumps will not be delivered.
Less borated water at lower pressures will be delitersd through some non-redundant piping networks.
It appears to CFUR that this may impact on the margin of conservation for small break accidents which maintain relatively large pressures in the reactor collant loops. Provide bases for the NRC Staff's evaluation of this situation.
Provide documentation of NRC analyses.
19.
In the current CPSES design, hafnium control rods have been substituted by silver-induim-cadmium ( A g-Iu-Cd ).
The Applicant makes the argument t hat certain key differences cited in the South Texas Project Meeting Summary of May 26, 1981 at Bethesda, Md. either leaves the design margin unchanged or improved.
However, it appears these differences Page Nine
~
have not been incorporated in the analyses documentated in the FS AR.
The concern is that s ame of these differences may, in subtle ways, impact in an unanticipated manner.
Provide bases for not insisting that the as-built conditions be represented in all analyses regarding CPSES. Produce documentation on any and all analysis incorporating the as-build condition.
20.
Provide a descritpion of the verification process for each of the concerns stated in Interrogatories 16 - 18.
Produce documentation on the verification process.
21.
Provide a description of the formal acceptance process for each of the concerns stated in Interrogatories 16 - 18.
Produce documentation on the acceptance process.
CITIZENS FOR FAIR UTILITY REGULATIONS BY: /
/
/
MARSI LL GILMORE
/..
Page Ten
,l u
UNITED STATES OF A:41E RI C A NUCLE AR REGULATORY COi1'.i!SSION
+82 Jm 25 P 3 :1B DF. FORE T HE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING UOARD
.,M.4:u u. - n., n I n t he.'.1at ter of
)
)
TEN AS UTILITIES GENERATING
)
Docket Nos.
50-445 CO.'.!P A N Y, et al.
)
50-446
)
(Comanche Deak Steam Electric
)
Station. Units 1 and 2
)
( Application for j
)
Operating I,icenses)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing instrument in the above captioned matter were served upon the following acrso.
y deposit in the United States mail, first class postage prepaid thisd70 lay o _
__ p 1982_.
O Chair. nan, Atomic Safety &
. stars hail n. Miller. E,sq.
UcenSing Appeal Panel Chairman, Atomic Safety and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Licensing Board W as h.in gton, D.C. 205.33 L. S. n,,uclear Regulatory Commission
~
Washington, D.C. 20555 Dav.d J. Preister, E,sq.
i Assistant Attorney General, D r. Kenneth A. McCollom Environmental Protection Divison Dean, Division of.g.n ginee ri n g,
P.O. Box 12548 Capitol Station architecture & Technology A ustin,.T N.,,8711 Oklahoma State University Stilhvater, Oklahoma 74074 J. Marshall Gilmore, Esq.
1060 W. Pincline a
Dr. Richard Cole, Member liu rs t..F a, /.,.60 5 3 Ato :'ic Safety & Licensing Board U.S. N ucitar Reg ulatory Commission 3--
Mrs. J uanita Elb.s
.... ar hin gton, tJ. C. 20 3 3
.) re s. d e n t. C Ab, _.
i r
l 1426 South Polk Street thlo rman, a. tomic Safet y & Licensing Dallas TV, 75224 tioard Panel l
U.S. N uclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Chase R. Stephens
,,, a s, u.n g to n D. C.
~,0...333 s
Docketing 4 S.ervice Branch U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
.., man Rot hschild, E.:, q.
..., a r;.or:e u.
i
- as hi n g t o n. D. C..
20.__33b of fice or the Executive t.egal D.irector U.S.
.uclear Reg ulatory Commission Richa rd r... Fouke
... m ". e t e n. D. C.
.,0 3 0 3 1668-B Carter Dr.
i Arlington. TX 76010
.w t a n,.i.s 5 acy noid,..., q.
! cbt voise & Liberman 1200 17th St.. N.W.
Ls hin g ton, D.C.
200 %
- 3. M A RSil/si 1. Gil.MORE l