ML20041E871
| ML20041E871 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1982 |
| From: | Check P Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Longenecker J ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8203150197 | |
| Download: ML20041E871 (4) | |
Text
Distribution Docket File February 26, 1982 NRC PDR S
D Local PDR p
NSIC gECsyg CRBR Readin Docket 110.:
50-537 R. Stark u
AtgEggg_.
C. Thomas
-; e P. Check 9-S. Hou Mr. John R. Longenecker W. Foster a
Licensing and Enviroriaental Coordination P. Shuttlewort g'j Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant U. S. Department of Energy, ilE-661 Washington, D.C.
20S45
Dear Hr. Longenecker:
SUBJECT:
CLI!4Cil RIVER BREEDER REACTOR PLNIT, REQUEST FOR ADDITIO:iAL IiiFORMATIO.:1 As a result of our review of your application for a construction permit for the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant, we find that we need addi-tional infonnation in the area of Mechanical Engineering. Please provide your final responses within sixty days of the receipt of this request.
The reporting and/or recordkeeping requirements contained in this letter affect fewer than ten respondents; therefore, OMP clearance is not required under P.L.96-511.
If you desire any discussion or clarification of the information requested, please contact R. H. Stark, Project Manager (301) 492-9732.
Sincerely.
Orivmal Signed by l'aul S. check Paul S. Check, Director CRBR Program Office Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated cc: Service List m
n omcc> 0
.h.RR,,
,,B
'CR 0:NRR,
RR yc
.u m >.R,S ta,rk[bm,,,,
- ,J,,s,,,
er 2/$ /82 s2/zJ82 2/,7f/,82,,,,,,, 2g,82,,,,,,,
f Nm 8203150197 820226 PDR ADOCK 05000537 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom asi-mm o
FMOR
< cc:
Dr. Cadet H. Hand, Jr., Director Barbara A. Finamore Bodega Marine Laboratory S. Jacob Scherr University of California Ellyn R. Weiss P. C. Box 247 Dr. Thomas B. Cochran Bodega Bay, California 94923 Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc.
Daniel Swanson 1725 I Street, N.W.
Office of the Executive Suite 600 Legal Director Washington, D.C.
20006 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Eldon V. C. Greenberg Washington, D.C.
20555 Tuttle & Taylor 1901 L Street, N.W.
William B. Hubbard, Esq.
Suite 805 Assistant Attorney General Washington, D.C.
20036 State of Tennessee Office of the Attorney General L. Ribb 450 James Robertson Parkway LNR Associates Nashville, TN 37219 Nuclear Power Safety Consultants 8605 Grimsby Court William E. Lantrip, Esq.
Potomac, MD 20854 City Attorney Municipal Building P. O. Box 1 Oak Ridge, TN 37830 George L. Edgar, Esq.
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20036 Herbert S. Sanger, Jr., Esq.
General Counsel Tennessee Valley Authority Knoxville, TN 37902 Chase Stephens, Chief Docketing and Service Section Office of the Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Raymond '
Copeland Project Management Corp.
P. O. Box U Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830
j' v
/
CRBRP (Docket No.
50-537)
Mechanical Engineering Branch, DE
q
'1 For SRP 3.9.3 - Component design for elevated temperature service:
CS220.1 Inrp'iping s'ystems at elevated temperatures, large local defomation may occur at areas of geometric dischntinuity, such as at fittings.
Provide methods and procedures for the following:
J A.
Define elastic follow-up.
B.
Evaluate creep ' rupture and fatigue damage.
C.
Justify the use of simplified creep ratcheting bounding techniques used in computer codes.
CS220.2 Describe methods and procedures used to evaluate the structural integrity at locations having severe thermal stripping effects.
l
^
CS220.3 Thermal expansion and creep rate generally vary among different materials.
Describe methods and procedures used to evaluate local stresses and strains at places where Bi-metallic and Tri-metallic transition welds are applied.
i CS220.4 The ASME Section III Code does not require a fatigue evaluation for Class 2/3 i<
piping design. However, for operating at elevated temperature, creep fatigue effects may become severe in Class 2/3 piping.
Describe the method used for creep fatigue evaluation for Class 2/3 piping, or justify why such conside -
ation is not needed.
Furthermore, verify whether ru?es in Code Case N-253 are met.
CS220.5 Describe methods used to evaluate creep buckling for components under axial l
compression. Specify acceptance criteria used and identify design margins.
[
l c
l f}
J
( i\\ CS220.6 Describe testing or analysis performed which assures the leakage will not occur at 21/2 Cr-1 Mo threaded closures in steam generator bolted connections during elevated temperature service.
CS220.7 Due to the constant evolution of rules in Code Case 1592 (N-47) during the period when the PSAR was prepared, identify any areas where the rules delineated in current Appendix T of Code Case N-47 have not been satisfied.
Provide the basis to show that such deviations, if any, are acceptable in terms of design margins to ensure safety.
CS220.8 Provide rules and acceptance criteria used in the design of mechanical component supports, especially those supports for pipir.g at elevated temper-ature service.
CS220.9 Specify strain or deformation lim'its used to ensure operability of active mechanical components in elevated-tenperature service. Since sustained stresses at service level C and D may induce excessive deforoa -
due to creep mechanisms, specify the criteria used to ensure piping functional capability.
I i