ML20057C946
| ML20057C946 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/21/1993 |
| From: | Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | |
| References | |
| ACRS-T-1976, NUDOCS 9309300170 | |
| Download: ML20057C946 (50) | |
Text
W[in5ENBBeh$$$$e$g$
$45VWNWOFFICIAERRANSCRIPTsOEjPROCEEDIMQS h$
__s s_@f%g@y%mm%w;r_sse,_wms&ne
_P g
AygincyfMin_aMWs_uistoM_wp_adoM_WNW,A N
ai p a,u #m q@ww aa ynee w
a m
aapewwgaqw%m mk 4w a
u wg s
m ghgamap m aa u?wd4 egpFpl
$Mc$$s%M iAMQM@%sMEdd9@fSMGM. j m
y gN ggw W
/m dl%
g h gag g.bs h
%Q%iy#1fW$4& wy!p@p@%oykMg,%g ? a g
gy ne
$3M d%M NMN se%se%e@mtiedemer#Waw4#r nnp&d O W W W 2 D d M M W M h % D @
Mu 2
B eame m M % M
%N hW s
erneamwwnmuspe %5muMe%g@Q@y$p%y gg u w g M seeem M es w a p
was g%
' ak
~%gQgg m nypfg&WM%%%g%p%#g;MQM&&k MM6%%gh
& fyyyy M af g gg$Q$ n a gh%
L 8%%%
QWWk@WNM e&% M3MQ%
2
_M _MW _a~~
_w t, n ym,sy _b m_ _w g s
ways _;r&m&~wgw_wg & _p+p,y~ _my
.m, mn
~
n nm ev, 4
n nay g y+
w_ a_4 W e8_m _h e r & _&smar aw gm_ m_%Gnm_e WW y_s m_%M _e m
%a e%
ap d&d&m m a g?W k@Wksh_gpM,M bm?T;n -);;m yys y me m W _% % w qg n yggf M. p w.n% _w g w
,e_ n _w$ a _x.0D mB m e #m w e m _m a m.m m
eo u
u Ykh M{W%[_f-hbh~Yk
_hY.[Y k_y h hYh gs._M:.'@_9$t h/
,!! -Q_[ ' [j % %p;f % m*i d: s"%F$h k w@u h
_W N M,w@%r@@%
u.
m
[wm ac '
c y e " dQ a s W W M AGA # M gY;;. y>
+
J i voiW+4 m 4+-4 %mx+ %i w
9 Jub 9
2Wd x%
hEs%ampa#wM*# n INiRILEYWASSOCIATESRLTD4 s 69@g%g e "sa wR 9 ag hmg * ' **"a%w$MMWastdagtees D.C.20006CJ%*WW6 Ba
... nn--w~~m,h&%%mm2ezr293:39sesypW g
' m us2 r N K % se m eh r MN
% gem v3ov300
- % p- -
w Y%7:;"go nom 4Q s/
NCE m Q % % %%%!EMhW %?n % W2k% dFDpA@4& &j W
eoe
A-CR37~ R74
~
0 9 G L\\'A i O
OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
=
s Agency:
nuclear Regulatory commission Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards
Title:
Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena Subcommittee Meeting Docket No.
D LOCATION:
morvallis, Oregon DATE:
Tuesday, September 21, 1993 PAGES:
1-7 EN36Mv1 238 - 271 -
fn.3es *. g-q3Q ACRS OfficsC@FReta'n o-te Jfe of the ConmiuT" c
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
1612 K St., N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D.C. 20006 pp np (202) 293-3950
, c
e i
i PUBLIC NOTICE BY THE UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS DATE:
September 21, 1993 i
-i 1
O The contents of this-transcript of the proceedings
~
of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
}
Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, (date)
September 21, 1993
, as Reported herein, are a record 2
of the discussions recorded at the meeting held on the above date.
This transcript has not been reviewed, corrected or edited, and it may contain inaccuracies.
i
-)
,y ANN RILEY &. ASSOCIATES, Ltd.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street, N.W., Suite 300 Washington, D. C. 20006 (202);293-3950
1 1
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
.-g.
-D 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS 5
THERMAL HYDRAULIC PHENOMENA SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING v
6 7
W AP600 OSU Integral Systems Test 8
Facility 9
Oregon State University i
10 LaSells Stewart Center 1
11 Agriculture / Science Room
[
i 12 Corvallis, Oregon 13
[,
14 Tuesday, September 21, 1993 O
15 1
I 16 The above-entitled meeting commenced, pursuant to 17 notice, at 8:00 a.m.,
Ivan Catton, Chairman, presiding.
18 i
t 19 l
r 20
[
21 E
i 22
[
23 24 P
25 O_
j ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300
-[
l Washington, D.C.
20006 i
(202) 293-3950 l
l 1
-.. ~...,. _ _ _ -....,... _. _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _,., _ _,,
m 2-
~
1 PRESENT FOR THE ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE COMMITTEE:
j
-2 I.
Catton T.'Kress 4
3 P. Davis 4
5' 5
PARTICIPANTS:
6 P. Boehnert W-Wulff 7
N.
Zuber V.
Dhir 5
8 A.
Levin J.
Groome 9
L. Hochreiter R. Hasselberg i
i.
10 L.
Lau B.
McIntyre t-j 11 J. Reyes a
12 33 14 I
15 4
16 o
j 17.
d l
-18 19 i
20 21 4
22 23 2
24-3:
25 1-1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l.
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite'300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
i
)
3 i
i 1
PROCEEDINGS i
2
[8:03 a.m.]
3 MR. CATTON:
The meeting will now come to order.
4 This is a meeting of the ACRS Subcommittee on
'i 5
Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena.
I am Ivan Catton, Chairman of j
l 6
the Subcommittee.
ACRS Members in attendance are Pete l
7 Davis, Tom Kress, ACRS Consultants in attendance Vijay-Dhir, 8
Wolfgang Wulff and Novak Zuber.
i 9
The purpose of this meeting is for the 10 subcommittee to continue its review of the Westinghouse 11 Integral Systems Test Programs supporting the AP600 design j
i 12 certification effort.
13 The focus of this meeting will be on the details i
l 14 associated with the design, construction and test matrix of 15 the OSU AP600 Integral System and Long-Term Cooling Test 16 Facility.
17 Paul Boehnert is the cognizant ACRS Staff Member-18 for this meeting.
The rules for participation in today's 19 meeting have been announced as part of the notice of this 1
i 20 meeting previously published in t)a Federal Register on
]
21 September 1, 1993.
22 Portions of.this meeting will be closed to the 23 public in order to discuss information deemed proprietary by 24 the Westinghouse Electric Corporation.
25 A transcript of the meeting is being kept and will ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
4 1-be made available as stated in the Federal Register Notice.
It is requested that each speaker first identify himself or herself and speak with sufficient clarity and volume so that 4
he or she can be readily heard.
5 We have received no written comments or requests 6
for time to make oral statements from members of the public.
7 I would like to just put on the record that we visited the_
J 8
OSU facility yesterday and we also were observers at a i
9 meeting with the NRR, and I would just like to comment that 10 the OSU facility is one of the best thermal hydraulic l
11 facilities I have seen, and the scaling report that is its t
12 basis was an extremely well done document.
That doesn't 13 mean we don't have questions about it.
l l
With that, we will proceed with the meeting, j
O 14 15 unless there'are comments by members or consultants?
l j
16 MR. ZUBER:
May I make a comment?
~
i 17 MR. CATTON:
You can make a comment.
Today it is l
i 18 my meeting.
l 19 MR. ZUBER:
I have some general comments l
l l
20 concerning that report and the questions that you are E
)
21 raising.
22 MR. CATTON:
The general comments should wait l
I
[
23 because I believe the scaling analysis is closed.
1 24 Is that right, Larry?
25 MR. HOCHREITER:
Yes, that is correct.
i.
1 I
i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 l
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
.=
1 5
1 MR. CATTON:
You be sure and tell us if we 2
encroach on things that-are closed.
3' MR. HOCHREITER:
Okay.
4 MR. CATTON:
So that should wait.
5 Proceeding with the meeting, Dr. Jose Reyes.
)
~\\
6 MR. REYES:
I would like to extend a welcome to 7
the ACRS.
We are very pleased to have you here at Oregon
}
8 State, especially at the campus right here.
As was 9
mentioned yesterday, we had the Vice President of Research l
10 here expressing his support.
In fact, we have gotten 11 significant interest from the President of the University l
1 12 all the way through on this project and their support.
We l
i 13 have had support from industry.
We have had support from j
14 different electronics companies who are excited and have O
15 provided some of the equipment which we are using for our t
16 data acquisition system, and I just want to extend my l
17 welcome at this time.
I think Brian also is on the cue for
~
i 18 a welcome.
-l 19 As far as administratively, we do have lunch f
20 prepared today which'will be nearby, so we don't have to go 21 very far today.
22 Thank you.
l l
23 MR. CATTON:
Thank you.
i 24 Brian.
25 MR. McINTYRE:
My name is Brian McIntyre.
I am 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
m
+-
4
,~.e as a
re e
a
.n
-... _ =
6 1
the Manager of the AP600 Licensing Program for Westinghouse.
2 One sort of, I guess, editorial comment or housekeeping, 3
whatever you want to call it, the material that we are going 4
to present today is the same as the material that we 1
5 discussed yesterday.
There are copies of it, I believe,-at i
6 the back of the room, if somebody needs to have an extra i
7 copy, or if there is somebody here at this point that needs-1 8
a copy of it.
j 9
The following-sessions from here on, when I stop 10 talking and the next person talks, is our proprietary l
11 session, and the only thing that is different from yesterday l',
12 is that Larry does have an added discussion at the end of 13 the presentation, or where we are going to decide to put it, i
14 that talks about the atypicalities of the test compared to 15 the AP600.
16 We think we have been making some significant i
17 progress that has now gotten to a point that we can't
}
18 present it to you.
The scaling report is finished in the i
19 draft form.
You only had some sections of it before, and I 20 know that that was some sense of frustration on the part of l
21 the committee.
We now have that in your hands.
We are 22 going to be talking about it today, and we certainly 23 appreciate your positive comments regarding the facility and' i
24 the scaling report.
We think we have done some good stuff.
25 MR. CATTON:
Positive and negative comments.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters I
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
_y
m...
_ _ _ _ _. -,. _ _ _.. _. ~. _ _ _. _ _. _ -. _. _ - _. _
4 7
1 Thank you.
.' l 2.
-I think'the next on the agenda is closed.
3 MR. IIOCHREITER:
That is correct.
4'
[Whereupon, at 8:10 a.m.,
the meeting entered.into 5
closed session.]
6
.i i
.I 7
'l n-8 9
l 4
i 10 l
L s-11 1
6 3
12
)
j' 13
)
i -
14-j b
15
-i 16.
u.
u 17 r
i d
18 19
)
l 20
-j i
i 1
21 I
22 l
\\
23 1
l; 24 I
25 i
i e
4 l '
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K-Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 i
Washington, D.C.
20006
.(202) 293-3950-
i
~!
-238 1
OPEN SESSION-
[ ~
2
_ 3:30 p.m.]
3 MR. LEVIN:
~Well, Mr. McPherson will speak, i
4 MR. CATTON:
Mr. McPherson from NRR.
The next 5
speaker will be et al. from NRR.
-i 6
[ Laughter.)
7 MR. McPHERSON:
I just wanted to lead off the 8
discussion from NRR's side and then introduce Dr. Levin to 9
follow up on some details.
These are more general comments.
10 I first wanted to associate myself for the sake of brevity 11 with the comments that have been made by the subcommittee 12 concerning the scaling approach that has been used here by1 13 OSU and Westinghouse, and they are comments regarding the
'14 benefits of cooperation among industry, academia, and
.O 15 government, and the benefits that-will accrue towards 16 education and training of both students and faculty members.
17 I'm not sure if you mentioned faculty members, but 18 I feel that --
l 19 MR. CATTON:
They need it, too.
j 20 MR. McPherson:
-- they will benefit considerably.
21 You say they need it, yes, indeed.
It is seldom that they 22 have an opportunity, I think, to work with a facility which.
I 23 is being used by industry and be part of a team that's out 24 there.in the real world.
25 I would also like to thank the subcommittee-for ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 4
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
.~ -
239 th'e attempts and the suggestions to clarify and simplify the I
2
.use of the pi ratios to make them a little more-susceptible
{
\\
3
-to interpretation and to explanation.
I think this will 4
assist all of us when we're dealing with this problem when i
I 5
it comes to larger groups of people who are not so aux l
6 couron in this area of thermal hydraulics.
l t
7 Concerning the tour that we had yesterday, I 8
wanted to say that I, for one, was impressed with the 9
faculty members that we met, the Apex facility, the f
10 housekeeping of that facility, its construction, the 11 instrumentation, and the data acquisition system, they're
{
12 all first class.
13 I think in combination all these things I've just 14 mentioned should lead, I detect a feeling of an attempt to l
O 15 reach a level of excellence that I have not seen in any 16 facility prior to this time that's been in support of i
17 certification or licensing movement.
t 18 Just one disappointment that I'd like to mention i
19 and that relates to the scheduling.
I was very surprised to 20 learn that we were nowhere near testing and that several j
21 months probably will pass before that time occurs; and i
22 encourage those efforts which I understand are now underway 23 to improve and control the scheduling of the tasks yet to be i
24 done.
I hope that once that gets under control it is 25 maintained throughout the entire test period.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 l
Washington, D.C.
20006
'{
(202) 293-3950 i
I
240 1
Finally, I wanted to say that I'm very please with 2
the cooperative relationship that I believe has been 3
. established between Westinghouse and the NRC staff It's 4
not all perfect, we are finding certain' problems and you'll 5
hear more about that from Alan Levin in just a second.
But 6
from what I see-in my discussions with Westinghouse, I think-7 they're acting in very good faith to work out-these problems-8 to bring us the answers we're looking for and to take our 9
comments into consideration in the design of this facility 10 and the analysis work.
11 That's all I had and I want to introduce Dr. Levin 12 now.
Are there any questions of me?
13 MR. CATTON:
Thank you, Don.
14 MR. LEVIN:
I'm Alan Levin from Reactor Systems 15 Branch, NRR.
I think I know most of the people here.
Most 16 people know me.
Let me make a couple of opening comments.
17 First and most important I want to make note of the fact 18 that these slides were done, obviously before I got here.
19 They represent the state of things as of last week, if you 20 will.
And when I review, as part of my presentation, the 21 results of yesterday's meeting and some of the discussions 22 that I've had with Westinghouse personnel outside of 23 yesterday's meeting, some of the issues that are noted here 24 is still pending resolution or moving.
So don't take the 25 slides as being the final word on everything.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1622 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
)
241 1
I would also like to preface my remarks by saying 2
that I've been generally very impressed with the job that 3
Westinghouse and OSU have done on-this. facility.
It 4
bespeaks a lot of careful design and consideration and the l
5 facility itself is very impressive and I'milooking forward
.j i
6 to seeing some good test results out of it So not
.I 7
everything we say.is critical.
f 8
Just a little background, the staff provided 5
9 initial comments on the OSU program after our meeting last 10 December.
These were transmitted informally, I guess, to
?
11 Westinghouse in January and then I think they were
{
12 transmitted formally by letter within the last couple of j
13 months.
We raised questions regarding the piping scaling, f
14 some of the pressure drop calculations, we made some l
O 1
15 recommendations for additional instrumentation especially on j
16 the first runs of surge line because of the concerns, i-r 17 because of the rather unique design of the surge line 18 compared to current plants, and we recommended that several 19 additional tests be considered for the facility, 20 specifically steam generated tube rupture assuming ADS i
21 actuation, steam line break, and investigation of shutdown-I 22 related accidents, and a variation of containment-related 23 parameters, since this is a long-term cooling test.
l 24 The first two, let me say, are more of a -- the r
i 25 comments were more along the line of we think it would be l
i O
t ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
i Court Reporters I
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300
' Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
1 242 1
prudent to maintain this capability in the facility rather
?(
I 2
than we.think you definitely ought to run a test.
And the 1
3-reason is because SPES really is more appropriately
[
4 configured to investigate these kinds of conditions and, as 5
Larry said in his presentation, but if SPES shows response
{
6 that.could be interpreted as bringing the plant into a low l
7 pressure configuration, ADS actuation of the steam generated l
8 tube rupture, something like that, or some kind of I
9 unexpected behavior of the steam line break that OSU might i
10 be the better facility to investigate long-term cooling 11 effects that derive from those accidents.
f 12 This is the as-of-last-week slide or these next l
13 two slides.
We did discuss these comments on scaling and l
14 instrumentation early by telephone and some written i
15 communication.
Some of the scaling questions were 16 tentatively resolved pending submission of the draft scaling i
i 17 report which we now have.
And Westinghouse did agree to add i
18 some of the instrumentation that we recommended.
l 19 MR. WULFF:
What are the outstanding scaling 20 questions or issues that NRR still has open?
Can you
{
21 comment on that?
[
l 22 MR. LEVIN:
I still -- well, we have RAIs to be I
i 23 developed that will address these in a formal manner for i
24 Westinghouse to respond in writing.
After looking at the
[
25 pressure drop calculations in the piping scaling in Chapter l
ANN RTLEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD, i
Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 I
243 1
6, I still have some_ questions about how those things are 2'
interpreted and I think.I need a little bit -- we have a
.3
. draft response from Westinghouse we've been looking over.
I 4
still think we need a little bit better interpretation of I
5 that.
It's not quite clear to me how these were done and j
i 6
what the nature of their impact on the way the facility is 7
going to be or run is going to be.
8 We have some other concerns that have been raised 9
in more of an overview, a systems-oriented kind of approach.
10 Our detail review of the scaling report is in progress and I-11 can't give you specific comments right now.
I've only had a 12 chance to sit down and look at the thing within the last'few I
13 days.
And we have -- the Office of Research is assisting us 14 in this and I would expect that we would have our questions 15 ready to be put together to go to Westinghouse in the 16 relatively near future -- in the next couple of weeks, I 17 would hope.
18 MR. BOEHNERT:
Can we get copies of that?
The 19 questions when they go out?
20 MR. LEVIN:
RAIs are a matter of public record.
I 21 guess -- do we send copies to ACRS?
22 MR. CATTON:
Well, we should be able to get them 23 anyway.
24 MR. HASSELBERG:
I think you're on distribution 25 already, but if you're not, we'll get your address.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
m.
o i
' I b
244 i
i 1-MR. CATTON:
Well, we are, but what.happens is, j
i s
2 one distribution comes through Medhat.
And in order to get j
t l
3 it properly distributed to this' subcommittee -- Alan, if you l
j.
4
- could just ship them to Paul and then we would be sure and l -
I 5
get them right away.
a
[
6 MR. LEVIN:
I can't do that because what we do is, l
l j
7 we send them to projects and projects sends them to 8
l 9
MR. CATTON:
Well, then projects sends them to our l
I:
l 10 projects and our projects --
i l
11 MR. LEVIN:
Well, yeah.
1 j_
12 MR. HASSELBERG:
I'll do that.
13 MR. LEVIN:
Mr. Hasselberg will take an action to i
14 make sure you get what you need to get.
'l i
15 MR. CATTON:
It goes up, over and then short1of i
16 rains down slowly like a bureaucracy.
! ~
l
- 8. -
l 17 MR. LEVIN:
Yes, yes.
Well, it happens to us, 18 too, because occasionally our wording gets changed and we
'1 19 don't see it until after it goes out then we've got to call t
i l
20 projects and tell them to change that.
i I
l 21 MR. CATTON:
That's a separate problem.
l~
22 MR. LEVIN:
Yes, but it's the same sort of t
23 convoluted path.
But that's the way it works.
I 24 One of the issues -- I have some preliminary 125 comments from our contractor who is looking at this on the I
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
j Court Reporters i
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 l-Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
.l '
(+gy-'yTr
-n we.in.-y,-,-g7, 9w.,,,y,,,
,3,,,m,qgw.-p-sy,,,,,,,,,.,,,,.,,,,,,_,,,,,__,,y, g
j t
'245
.1 scaling report.
He has raised some issues and because he 2
has given me a draft and his review is incomplete, I don't i
3 want to raise too many specific issues right now.
One of 4
the things that he did bring out and that I do want to 5
mention is that there has been some emphasis in.the f
6 discussions on the scaling emphasis and things like peak 7
clad temperature which for a small break loca and long-term 8
cooling point of view seems like a misplaced emphasis.
The 9
thing that we think is more important and it has been 10 discussed, things like inventory distribution, and making 11 sure that we know where the mass is and that it can be 12 predicted.
So what I've been hearing gives me a little bit 13 more -- puts me a little bit more at ease because the 14 discussions have focused more on that sort of an issue.
15 We had some discussions yesterday -- I had some i
16 discussions with Westinghouse people-about the test matrix.
l 17 We think we're moving toward a resolution in that area 18 including some capability in OSU to address questions that 19 might arise out of SPES if something comes up that's 20 unexpected.
The one major issue that continues to be a i
)
21 point of contention to a certain extent is the steam 22 generated tube rupture with ADS actuation, and the NRR point I
a.
23 of view, as I can best represent it, speaking from what I've 24 heard my management discussing --
25 MR. CATTON: -Are you looking for this to be a test' ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington,.D.C.
20006-(202) 293-3950
.l 1
l m.
~
'246 1
at SPES or at OSU?
2 MR. LEVIN:
Well, it's going to be a test at SPES.
~
3 MR. CATTON:
Okay.
But you're looking for them to f
4 also do it at OSU?
j 5
MR. LEVIN:
Well, --
6 MR. CATTON:
Possibly?
]
7 MR. LEVIN:
SPES has got a multiple steam' 8
generated tube rupture plant.
9 actuation or as a matter of course within the test is an 10 open issue.at this point because it may or may not.
l 11 Westinghouse is saying it won't.
l 12 MR. CATTON:
The test will decide that.
13 MR. LEVIN:
The test will decide that, that's 14 right.
Now, from NRR's point of view there's another issue O
15 and that is what happens during a steam generated tube i
16 rupture accident that's going to occur in one of these
- j i
j 17 plants, is the operator going to punch the ADS button l
l 18 regardless of whether the ADS would be actuated by the-tube l
.i 19 rupture itself.
And we think that that's an important 20 question to be addressed.
Now, we think that that is 21 something that needs to be addressed by Westinghouse.
The 22 appropriate place to address it, at least initially, would-i 23 be at SPES if'by analysis and by SPES results there appear-24 to be some questions about what the low pressure behavior of 25 the system would be as this thing progresses.
Then we think i
.l 1
.[
ANN R.ILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters i
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 l
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
247 1
it would be prudent to incorporate the ability within OSU 2
facility to investigate this problem.
That capability is 3
not currently planned in the facility, but it's something.
4 that Westinghouse has agreed to look at.
l 5
MR. ZUBER:
What is involved?
I mean, what 6
capability has to be provided?.
7 MR. CATTON:
They have to connect the primary 8
system to the secondary side in.the steam generator.
i 9
MR. LEVIN:
.Yes, you have to be able to open a 10 breaker.
I I
11 MR. HOCHREITER:
Our response, we provided a draft 12 response to this, you know, the facility has the capability t
13 of doing it.
I don't see the need.
14 MR. CATTON:
So you could do it if you needed?
i 15 MR. HOCHREITER:
Oh, yes, all it takes is time and 16 money.
17 MR. DHIR:
Which you have.
18 MR. HOCHREITER:
Huh?
19 MR. DHIR:
Which you have.
- 20
[ Laughter.]
21 MR. HOCHREITER:
You're looking at'the wrong guy, 22 B.J.
23 MR. CATTON:
But if you were going to hook such a 24 system up now would be the time to do it, probably.
25 MR. LEVIN:
We did discuss this yesterday.and I l
i I
O ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 1(202) 293-3950
248 I
1 think that Westinghouse better understands NRR's point of f
2
-view now and I think we can resolve this issue.
I'll leave 3
it at that.
There's more discussions that have to be held, 4
but 1 don't want to leave the impression that staff comments 5
regarding additional testing have not been addressed.
As of 6
last week they really hadn't been.
In the discussions that 7
we've had in the last couple of days, we have been moving, I.
8 think, toward a resolution, so Westinghouse has addressed 9
some of these issues now.
10 I just covered this one.
With the steam line 11 break, I'm a little more tenuous on that.
The calculation 12 shows some really strange behavior, I think, that drops the 13 primary system. pressure just via the cool down for the steam 14 generator down to below the accumulator injection pressure.
l 15 I've seen calculations that the primary pressure drops down i
16 to below 600 psi.
Now, I don't know what's going to. happen 17 when you get the primary system down that low.
The CMTs are i
18 going to inject, presumably Westinghouse's calculations show 19 they can make up the shrink.
20-MR. CATTON:
Why would the CMTs inject?
i i
21 MR. LEVIN:
Because you get an S signal
[
22 MR. CATTON:
Oh, that would just open the valves.
l 23 MR. HOCHREITER:
That's right.
They'll 24 recirculate.
25 MR. LEVIN:
That's right.
{
i l
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 l
i
249 1
MR. HOCHREITER:
There may be some draining, the
- O 2
accumulators come on, you shut off the CMTs.
i 3
MR. LEVIN:
That's right.
So you've got some l
5 4
strange systems interactions there.
l 5.
MR. CATTON:
No, I understand.
6 MR. LEVIN:
SPES will have test like this.
- And, 1
7 again, my argument was a prudency argument.
Suppose SPES 8
shows some really weird behavior that you didn't expect i
9 where you get down into a low pressure cooling regime where 10 the initial conditions for entering into this are much,'much 11 different than for small break type of accidents.
Then the 1
12 capability for investigating it further in OSU might be a i
13 reasonable thing to include.
I don't think that would be a l
14 big problem, I mean, opening a hole in the secondary side of 0,
15 the steam generator for this thing.
And I'm willing to hold l
16 that in abeyance.
I think that --
17 MR. ZUBER:
Do you mean to open the hole in the 18 OSU facility?
19
_MR.
LEVIN:
Yes, yes.
I would be very interested i
20 to see what the results -- th t's the last SPES test, by the j
i 21 way.
I'm interested to see what the results turn out to be 22 there because it is a rather atypical transient compared to 23 almost everything else.
i 24 The last area was shutdown accidents.
These have i
25 been getting a lot of attention in the regulatory side as i
t O
I ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
.]
Court Reporters i
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
.j 1
4 250 1
the ACRS knows, I think as Westinghouse knows as well.
And.
2 of particular interest for us is the ability of the plant to l
3 respond to shutdown events such as a loss of RHR with the j
4 passive systems.
And whether the passive systems would be j
5 capable by themselves of responding to these kinds of events 6
or whether you would need to include some nonsafety-related 7
systems in the responses.
q 8
We'need to discuss this more with Westinghouse.
I.
9 think we need to define exactly what we would like to see 10 and we need to know what capability Westinghouse thinks OSU i
11 would have to address these questions.
Westinghouse has i
12 agreed to look into this question and we have a little 13 homework to do ourselves on this.
e 14 The last thing is long-term behavior, the l
15 containment processes and Westinghouse has added tests into 16 the matrix or added a test in the matrix to-look at varying 17 the amount of condensate returning to the sump versus the 18 IRWST.
They have also introduced a test to look at l
J 19 containment back pressure effects.
These all may have some i
20 impact on the long-term cooling capability for the AP600.
21 I was asked to address, if I could, what we were j
i 22 looking for in terms of the sump recirculation thing and I i
i 23 think that here we're looking for some kind of an assessment 24 of margin.
Basically.seeing what.is the minimum amount of 25
- condensate or minimum. amount of liquid in the sump that i
-l ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
I Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite'300 Washington, D.C.
20006
( 2 02 )' 293-3950 l
i I
e s.,
~.
- i 251-1 gives_you enough driving head to maintain' adequate core i
2 cooling.
Our feeling is that in terms of analyzing AP600 l
3 behavior this is one area that the computer codes don't do t
4 very well on.
And we're going to have fairly large 5
uncertainties in our analyses.
l 6
MR. ZUBER:
Can you repeat that sentence?
The 7
code -
.I was writing-here and I missed that.
8 MR. LEVIN:
We don't think the codes do a 9
particularly good job in this area.
10 MR. CATTON:
On the other hand, on the low flow.
f 1
11 This is an area where I think a little bit of thinking and
{
r 12 hand calculations probably does a good job.
j i
13 MR. LEVIN:
I think you' re probably right, but the.
14 important questions are, where is the fluid, where is it O
- )
15 going, what are the driving heads, very, very small.
{
l 16 MR. CATTON:
But this is on the tail of that 17 distribution.
18 MR. LEVIN:
Right.
\\
19 MR. CATTON:
Things are pretty stable in that_
l l
20 area.
21 MR. ZUBER:
This is very good calculation.
22 MR. CATTON:
Well, then you don't use the code, 23 you use your head.
l l
24 MR. ZUBER:
Okay.
I think your comment is very.
25 good.
j i
- i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
j Court Reporters i
1612;K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 i
Washington, D.C.
20006
'(202) 293-3950 l
I r
_y 252 1
MR. LEVIN:
I would agree with you, Ivan, except 2
that my -- well, my_ experience is that when you get into
- s 3
two-phase floe behavior, sometimes things behave counter-4 intuitively.
5 MR. CATTON:
You know,'you're right, but I suspect 6
'it's going to be pretty much stratified flow'way out on the 7
tail end.
8 MR. LEVIN:
I'think so, too, but what we're 9
looking --
10 MR. CATTCN:
We're both speculating.
11 MR. LEVIN:
-- but what we're looking for is some 12 indication that there's enough margin built into the system 13 that with all the uncertainties involved we still have a-14 pretty good feeling that there's going to be enough-fluid' 15 flowing back into the reactor to keep the core cool.
That's 16 the bottom line.
17 MR. CATTON:
I agree.
18 MR. LEVIN:
This also goes into trying to couple 19 our reactor system analysis codes into the containment 20 analysis codes.
So it gets us into that regime as well.
21' MR. ZUBER:
I agree completely.
22 MR. LEVIN:
Thank you.
23 MR. ZUBER:
It's a_ good thing you are thinking.
24 MR. CATTON:
I'm having a little rebellion or 25 mutiny.
But go ahead.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K-Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
253 1
MR. WULFF:
I think I agree, too.
2
'MR.
LEVIN:
Thank you.
3 MR. CATTON:
I just better shut up.
4 MR. ZUBER:
No, we agree.
I think that should not 5
be used and other records should be developed.
And whether 6
you want to.use another simplified form or you want to do 7
some hand calculation, this is up to you.
But the basis 8
that what has been used what has this problem is not good,
[
9 period.
10 MR. CATTON:
Absolutely.
Okay.
We're in 11 agreement.
We agree.
.i 12 MR. LEVIN:
All right.
I think I've already said l
i 13 everything in various statements that I was going to make 14 here, but let me just recapitulate a little bit.
On my 15 review of yesterday's meeting, I thought that we got a lot 16 of good information yesterday.. We have a lot of stuff to go 17 back and look at in terms of completing our review of the 18 scaling report.
We are, I think speaking for myself and Don l
i 19 has already given you his comments, we're very impressed 20 with the facility and I think that we'll get a lot of good
]
21 information out of it.
We've gotten some of our concerns on.
22 the scaling instrumentation resolved and some of our 23 concerns on the test matrix resolved and we're moving
{
24 towards resolution on some of the other issues.
i 25 The last thing is our future plans.
This is very l
i O
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters
-{
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 i
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202).293-3950
- )
254
')
1.
general and I can be a little bit more specific.
We are l
2 planning to observe a number of tests in this facility.
Our 3
observation will stretch over a period before and after the
{
4 test to look at pre-test preparation and post-test 5
activities, data handling, this is consistent with what 6
we're planning to do at SPES.
Our schedule and the specific 7
test to be observed will be determined when Westinghouse's 8
test schedule is a little bit more definite.
We now have 9
even more of a waiting period before we're going to be 10 involved in doing this.
11 What we've done on SPES is to look at the five 12 series of tests that are going to be run, the cold leg f
13 break, DVI run breaks, balance line breaks, steam generator t
14 tube rupture, steam line break.
You can pick one test out l
O 15 of each series to observe.
In the steam line break there is 16 only one, but the other ones there are several.
3 17 MR. ZUBER:
You said for SPES or OSU?
I 18 MR. LEVIN:
This is for SPES.
I'm leading up to 19 this.
For OSU we will do something along the same lines.
f i
20 We will look at the families of tests to be run and pick 21 what we consider to be key tests out of those families.
1 l
22 We're not going to come out of here and watch every test, I
}
23 don't think.
We just don't have that kind of time or 24 manpower to be able to handle that kind of a schedule, not' 25 with 20 some odd tests being run.
But I think we can get a ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 u
5 255 1
pretty good overview of the program if we picked, say, three 7
L\\
2' or four or five key tests, what we consider to be key tests 3
and come out and observe those.
When we have -- well, we've r
l 4
got Westinghouse's test matrix now.
We're still negotiating 5
a little bit on that.
When we've got the test matrix tied 6
down and a schedule tied down we will make more definite j
7 plans.
My biggest concern is that I don't have to try to be 8
two or three places at one time.
I'm' good, but I'm not that f
9 good.
10 The tests of greatest interest to us are the ones 11 that are going to continue into the long-term cooling mode 12 and we note that there are several more of those in the test 13 matrix now than there were a while back.
And we will 14 concentrate on those tests for observation.
And our l
l 15 evaluation of the testing including our observations will be 16 part of the AP600 SER.
l l
17 MR. DAVIS:
What's the schedule for that now, or 18 is it up in the air as a result of the delay in the test 19 program?
i 20 MR. LEVIN:
Do you want to address that?
21-MR. McINTYRE:
I will.
The staff plans right now, t
22 they are going to split the draft SER, and the first section 23 will be issued in May of next year is going to includ.e those' 24 chapters that do not relate to the items that are affected 25 by the testing program.
And to you all, that's all the i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
256 1-importantfstuff, but to us who are working on the whole
(
2 plant design, that's only about two and a half out of the 18 I
.3 chapters in the SSAR.
So for the structural things and the l
4 BOP things, that's enough that we'll get the staff thinking i
l 5
on that and we can go forth.
And the second half to the i
6 draft SER is then dependent on when the testing is 7
completed, review of the safety analysis program., Chapter j
i 8
15, the Chapter 6.2 stuff, and maybe some of the stuff in t
9 the auxiliary systems depending on how the regulatory
.i I
10 treatment of nonsafety systems issue shakes out.
.I 11 MR. DAVIS:
Will that May issue have Chapter 19 12 covered?
13 MR. McINTYRE:
What's Chapter 19?
l i
l 14 MR. DAVIS:
Severe accidents, PRA.
l.
15 MR. McINTYRE:
No, we don't have a Chapter 19.
We i
16 have our PRA separate.
s f-17 MR. DAVIS:
Okay.
1 l
18 MR. McINTYRE:
We hope that that will also be
[
19 included, yes.
l l
20 MR. CATTON:
Don't you have their PRA, Pete?-
21 MR. DAVIS:
No.
22.
MR. CATTON:
It's two boxes.
They'd be delighted i --
23 to send it to you.
24 MR. LEVIN:
The reason I hedged, I have to say,'it 1
25 doesn't matter whether it's on the record or not, the reason i
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
I Court Reporters j;
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 j
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
. a..;. _ _
257
-1 I hedged is because this has been discussed, but I wasn't
.2 sure whether it was a matter of official policy yet.
I've 3
been told it was brought out yesterday.at the Commission 4
meeting so I guess it is now official policy.
Yeah.
Yeah.
5 MR. McINTYRE:
Is what I said correct, Rick?
l 6
MR. HASSELBERG:
That's my understanding in the 7
letter that you got.
8 MR. McINTYRE:
Good.
9 MR. LEVIN:
That gets handled in a different part 10 of the agency from me.
So I don't always see that kind of 11 stuff.
That's good to know.
[
.t 12 Our NRRs analysis and our data review focus on 13 whether in our view the data from this facility taking a-
.f 14 combination with the other tests provides an adequate basis.
f 15 for analysis per the regulatory requirements-in 10 CFR 5247.
]
16 In this regard let me say again what I said yesterday, we j
f 17 don't view the OSU facility not any of the -- nor the other 18 integral facility at SPES as an AP600 simulator.
Our 19 concern is that an appropriate phenomenological parametric 20 range is covered to provide a substantial data base for
'I 21 validating codes and the codes will be the ultimate scaling.
t 22 tool: then up to the full plant.
l 23 I don't want to get lost -- well, I'm not'sure-24 exactly how to put.this.
I don't want to get buried in
]
1 25 discussions of whether what's happening in OSU is what's H
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K' Street, N.W.,' Suite 300-Washington, D.C.
20006
-(202) 293-3950
258 1
going to happen in AP600 exactly down the line because I 2
don't think'anybody can make that final judgment, but I do 3
want to be as confident as I can be within my ability to 4
make those judgments that what's happening in the test 5
facilities represents an appropriately broad range of 6
phenomena that we can use to validate the codes and tnen go 7
on to calculate what's going on in the plant.
8 MR. CATTON:
You want a developed basis that would
' i 9
give you confidence in the code's ability to predict'--
10 MR. LEVIN:
Right.
11 MR. CATTON:
-- the full size AP600?
f 12 MR. LEVIN:
Right.
13 MR. WULFF; But the comment you made I have to I
14 take exception to.
You wanted to use the code for scaling O
15 out, that is impossible unless you have a code that meets 16 the scaling criteria in all closure related.
17 MR. LEVIN:
I'm not talking about scaling in the 18 sense of a formal scaling procedure as we've been going 19 through here.
20 MR. WULFF: _And neither am I, but you are thinking j
21 that you can tune your code to OSU and then predict what
~l 22 happens in a power plant and that perception is wrong.
l 23 MR. LEVIN:
No, that's not what I'm looking for.
24 I'm looking for a broad enough range of data on which to 25 validate the code that when I apply it to the plant I have ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
259 1
enough confidence that the code can predict what's going on I
2 there.
I'm not going to try to tune it to OSU and then 3
claim that -- go straight to the plant calculation.
4 You have a data base that's derived from a 5
separate effects test and from the integral test and you use 6
that as an entirety.on which to make engineering judgment.
7 You don't focus in on one specific test facility.
8 MR. CATTON:
I think we all agree.
9 MR. ZUBER:
One moment.
Alan had a good comment 10 on it.
Can you repeat it.
i 11 MR. CATTON:
We want to develop the basis for 12 establishing sufficient confidence that the code can predict 13 the behavior of the AP600.
That's what this is all about.
14 MR. LEVIN:
That's right.
And that's what this --
15 MR. HOCHREITER:
I agree with that.
16 MR. LEVIN:
-- that's what this last comment is, 17 right here j
18 MR. ZUBER:
Let me ask you, when you say NRC code
.i 19 validation purpose, you have a particular code in mind or I 20 mean you are open minded?
f i
21 MR. LEVIN:
Our reference code right now is Relap j
22 5
We are also looking at using TRAC for some analyses.
23 The specifics of how this is going to.be done is something 4
24 that we're working on internally because we have NRR 25 contractors, we have the Office of Research and their 4
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
i Court Reporters t
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 l
j
260 1
contractors,'and we have our own analytical support group O
2
'and between those three organizations, if you want to call 3
them that, we are developing a coordination so that 4
everybody has got enough work to do,-nobody is overlapping 5
what anybody els-o doing, and we can get the work done q
l 6
that we have to get done on the schedule that it needs to be 7
done on.
l 8
MR. ZUBER:
Look, Alan, what you are saying is-9 really i rationalization of a bureaucratic process not to 10 step on somebody else's stuff which doesn't ensure that NRR j
11 will have the capability calculate reliably and with i
12 confidence some of these transients.
13 MR. LEVIN:
That is our bottom line desire and we 14 were planning our program to try to accommodate that wish as O
15-best we can.
l
-r 16 MR. ZUBER:
Okay, fine.
Now, let me say this, 17 again, to be on the record.
There is only past experience i
18 on the shortcomings of the large cores, the large TRAC and l
19 the right relock -- predict correctly the pressure drops
]
20 like liquid levels, calculate condensations, and predict 21 really condensation.
This process is not important for the 22 large break loca.
These codes were designed to address the 23 national driven phenomena, the phenomena which you are 24 looking at really balance a very fine friction and heads.
N 25 These codes are not capable -- they are not-designed to i
i
?
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
+
Court Reporters
.l 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 i
Washington, D.C.
20006 i
(202)'293-3950-l
261 1-address this problem and I think what you & 'id ft r the long-l f
2 term cooling that you have difficulty, thi s 2 o an example.
i 3
And my advice would be that you should really broaden your 4
view points, forget the new technology nd develop a tool j
5 which will be good for you two years f rom now apart from the.
6 bureaucratic turf fighting.
Really, >therwise you may'have 7
a tool which will not be adequate for the rest of your 8
problems.
9 MR. CATTON:
With that I thlnk we will end this 10 discuss.
11 MR. LEVIN:
Well, let me ge' one last comment in.
i 12 We have to do a careful assessment of the codes capabilities 13 to be able to calculate through the taansients.
If we find 14 there are areas where they are deficient, we will have to 15 address that either by modifying thosi codes or by 16 developing new tools to be able to ap) roach those problems.
17 At this point I don't think we're far enough along to b able i
18 to say with confidence-exactly what specific course of 19 action has to be.
We are aware of these concerns and we 20 will take steps to address them as is lequired as we go-
. along i
22 MR. CATTON:
And when you catc h up you'll agree.
23 MR. DHIR:
But some things you know.
You have 3
-l 24 known for two years now.
The last two ye.tra we have'been 25' talking about that these codes, especially Relap would not i
1 ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W, Suite 300 Washington,.D.C. 20006
'(202) 293-3950 g
i 262 1
predict --
f 2
MR. CATTON:
Okay.
This will be a subject of 3
another meeting, the use of the code.
4 MR. LEVIN:
I will.let the Office of Research l
5 address --
[
6 MR. CATTON:
I'm only envious in the spirit of 7
time.
8 MR. LEVIN:
Okay.
I will let the Office of 9
Research address the specific code modifications.
10 MR. CATTON:
Alan, you're finished.
11 MR. LEVIN:
Unless there are any questions, yes.
-)
12 You said you wanted to end the discussion, I thought that
'l 13 was my dismissal notice.
14 MR. CATTON:
Do you have any questions?
I just j
i 15 wanted to put a lid on it.
16 MR. LEVIN:
Okay.
17 MR. CATTON:
Anyway, before we go off the record I 18 would like-to thank everybody that participated.
19 MR. DHIR:
'I didn't talk.
I was going to, but you j
20 stopped me.
i 21 MR. CATTON:
If it's quick.
22 MR. DHIR:
Yeah, because you see you have know t
23 that there's a deficiency in the codes with respect to low-
]
24 flow conditions, low-pressure drops, that they cannot.
i 25 predict it.
Why you have not put something in motion to fix
{
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 l
Washington, D.C.
20006 l
(202) 293-3950 l
~
.i i
263 l'
that deficiency?
2 MR. LEVIN:
Who says we haven't?
.l
)
3 MR. CATTON:
That's right.
4 MR. DHIR:
But I guess that's the. implication from 5
your statement.
i 6
MR. LEVIN:
No, I'm not leaving that implication 7
at all.
We have been working with research to address i
l 8
specific areas where we know the codes have problems.
We've l
9 been monitoring what they've been doing and where we see the 10 need for additional work, we are diccussing that.
And the 11 Office of Research can better address for you the specific j
12 areas that they're doing and where they feel they are and 13 where they feel work needs to be done and so forth.
14 Part of the problem here is, and I think it's O
15 important to recognize that RES is depending to significant l
l 16 extent on the same data that Westinghouse is for model i
17 development, code validation, and so forth.
And the delays 1
18 in Westinghouse's test program in getting the data have an I
19 impact on research's programs as much as they have an impact 20 on Westinghouse.
So'until we have experimental data that-we l
21 can go and assess the codes against in these regimes, 22 there's only so much that can be done in terms of model 23 development and running along and running along.
So when we 24 have data to assess how well the codes can do, if we find-25 there are still deficiencies, we'll look at ways to address ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612.K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
i P'
264 1
those deficiencies,-if we feel that the codes can be I
2 modified to address them appropriately, that's fine.
If-it t
t 3
looks like there is a need to go ahead and develop i
4 alternative tools for calculations, that's something we'll 5
have to address at that time, too.
We're kind of running'in I
6 a vacuum here a little bit because there is really a passity' 7
of data to address the validation of some of these specific f'I 8
kinds of models.
[
9 MR. CATTON:
Well, I'm not sure I would quite 10 agree with you.
There are a number of areas where we know l
11 there are deficiencies --
12 MR. WULFF:
We had this with priority submitted.
l 13 MR. CATTON:
-- low flow, low pressure, and a few 14 of these other areas were things that could be initiated 15 now.
Condensation, we had some interesting discussions 16 about the condensation capabilities in the codes in Idaho l
1 17 and you might take a look at the transcript.
These are 18 areas that could be addressed now and don't need to wait,-
1 J
19 but I think we should give Research a chance when we meet 20 with them to talk about this.
)
21 MR. LEVIN:
Yes, I agree.
22 MR. CATTON:
I just want to set the record i
23 straight that you're not right in what you're saying which 24 is we don't have the information -- we do have information 25 that we could step forward.
You don't need to wait for slow O
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612'K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
265 3
flow in a Westinghouse facility to fix the code to deal with 1
2 it.
You don't need to wait for data from the-Westinghouse 3
facility to deal-with the condensation question.
4 MR. LEVIN:
I would agree, but where there is --
~
5 MR. CATTON:
I could give you a few more --
q 6
MR. LEVIN:
-- well, where there is an adequate-t 7
data base to go have a model assessment, I agree with you.
8 I haven't gone into any detail to look at where those areas-9 are and where they aren't.
I do know that having results
'I 10 from the Westinghouse tests would assist the Office of j
11 Research in their model assessment activities.
12 MR. CATTON:
The thing I'm afraid of Alan, is that 13 if you wait until that data is in hand, you're six to nine l
14 months downstream from now.
Anyway this is not --
j 15 MR. ZUBER:
This is exactly the reason I'm always l
16 bringing it.
The sooner you look at it, we have later to
-t 17 make a decision.
The sooner you look to the effect which 18 may be more adequate, the better off you will be.
j 19 Otherwise, you postpone it, it may be too late.
[
i
- 2 -0 MR. CATTON:
And with that I'm going to end it.
i 2 11 MR. SHOTKIN:
No, could I end it by asking for j
22 references of the data that Dr. Zuber knows about that we 23 can use today.
I really would like to see the specific 24 references.
25 MR. CATTON:
For --
i O-t ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
i L
Court Reporters j
1612 K' Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
~
y
o 266 1
MR. SHOTKIN:
For whatever he says, there's data 2
we can use today, we can use to develop these groups models
-3 and the codes, and we would really appreciate getting the 4
specific references for that data.
5 MR. ZUBER:
Let me say, you have-data on
')
i 6
condensation, you can compare how to --
.j 7
MR. SHOTKIN:
No, specific references.
]
8 MR. ZUBER:
Yes, and you have contractors who can
.i 9
provide you with all kinds of tests on condensation.
10 MR. CATTON:
That's okay.
There's something
[
11 called a citation index.
Look up the word condensation and.
.j 12 you get $5,000 references.
Anyway, I think we should end j
13 this.
This is not the place for this.
This should be a'
-)
14 meeting with Research not with Westinghouse.
So I would O
i 15 like to thank everybody, particularly, I think to echo what i
16 I said earlier, I think the OSU facility is a fine facility.
17 Oh, I had one more question for you, Alan.
Do you i
18 f
i 1
19
[ Laughter.]
}
I 20 MR. CATTON:
No, hold it.
You really don't have-21 to walk all the way back.
Do you see any show stoppers?
='
i 22 MR. LEVIN:
From where I stand right now, no.
23 MR. CATTON:
Good, that's all I needed.
i 24 MR. DAVIS:
I'd like to ask Westinghouse one last' ~
P 25 question, if I could.
i ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K. Street,.N.W., Suite 300
{
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950
~
i f
267 1
MR. LEVIN:
Is Alan through?
-2 MR. DAVIS:
You're through?
3 MR. LEVIN:
Well, you put me on a spot.
l 4
MR. WULFF:
You said, no.
5 MR. LEVIN:
I said, from where I stand right now, l
'6 no.
7 MR. WULFF:
Okay.
t 8
MR. LEVIN:
I don't have a whole lot of basis for.
9 making a statement yes or no with sparse data and I don't.
[
i 10 see anything that really looks like it's --
[
t 11 MR. CATTON:
Well, let me explain'what I meant by f
12 a showstopper.
I don't mean a discussion between you and 13 Westinghouse and a protesty run, I don't mean whether or not 14 they're going to drill a hole in order to hook.up their i
15 steam generator to rupture to OSU.
I don't mean that kind i
16 of thing.
Something that's grossly deficient that you don't l
17 see could be fixed by doing something that's simple.
i
'l 18 MR. LEVIN:
Oh, in that respect, no.
19 MR. CATTON:
That's what I mean.
20 MR. LEVIN:
No, no, no, no.
I don't see anything 21 along those lines at all.
22 MR. CATTON:
That's good.- That's my view.also as 23 well.
24 MR. DHIR.:
CMT.
25.
MR. CATTON:
Well, CMT is a problem, but I can i
[
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
-Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
268 think of things they might be able to do.
1 2
MR. ZUBER:
Well, I think I would think of them 3
right now.
4 MR. CATTON:
Well, you guys should write them down 5
and communicate them to me.
6 MR. LEVIN:
I see areas where we have concerns.
7 We need to address those concerns with Westinghouse to'make 8
sure we feel that they're being adequately addressed.
9 Grossly deficient, no.
Areas where we have concerns, yes.
10 But I wouldn't characterize them as show stoppers, at least 11 not at this point.
12 MR. CATTON:
Okay.
13 MR. WULFF:
You reserve the right to come in_with 14 another answer at a different time.
15 MR. CATTON:
Well, Westinghouse is committed to 16 put the CMT part of this thing together for us.
There are 17 several CMT tests going on, there is OSU, SPES, CMT tests, 18 all of these things, you put them in the right perspective.
19 It might be that that turns out to be insufficient and 20 another separate effects test is --
21' MR. ZUBER:
To me, I am not confident and at this 22 with certain of the CMT analyses and procedures.
And until 23-they provide us with more evidence and more data I will 24 almost consider the CMT as a potential stopper because it 25 may cause some trouble.
l O
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 l
(202) 293-3950 l
I 269 1
MR. HOCHREITER:
I'm sorry, you have not seen if 2
there is any on the plan analysis.
There may be no or minor
-3 impact on the plan analysis.
4 MR. CATTON:
That's going to be part of what you 5
prepare, Larry, and I think at this point saying that there 6
could be a problem is just as valid as saying I don't see 7
any problem.
8 MR. HOCHREITER:
I think it's premature.
j 9
MR. CATTON:
Well, it could be, but that's why 10 you're going to put that thing -- wonderful.
11 MR. ZUBER:
Have you implemented thermal couples?
i 12 MR. CATTON:
Tom, if you're going to speak, you' t
13 had better speak.
14 MR. DAVIS:
I had better because you're going to O
i 15 close it.
It's a simple question.
When you finish all of j
r 16 these tests with SPES and APEX, how and where do you see i
t 17 that this will fit in or impact on your PRA?
j 18 MR. HOCHREITER:
PR or PRA?
19 MR. DAVIS:
PRA.
20 MR. HOCHREITER:
I don't know.
I haven't even f
I 21 thought about that.
]
22' MR. McINTYRE:
From a standpoint of doing best-l 23 estimate calculations for the level 2 and' level 3 24 calculations?
I i
25 MR. DAVIS:
Yes.
I c
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
1 Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 4
(202) 293-3950
m 270 1
MR. McINTYRE:
I would expect we would go back and 2
look at these types of experiments also with the codes that 3
we used for that part of the PRA.
4 MR. DAVIS:
And what would you change in the PRA 5
as a result?
6 MR. McINTYRE:
Hopefully nothing.
7 MR. DAVIS:
Am I to infer from that that there are 8
probably no risk significance of what we're doing?
9 MR. McINTYRE:
I think that you would see that I 10 believe that it's covered.
Remember that the PRA uses all 11 the safety and nonsafety assists.
I don't think you would 12 see anything that we're doing that's going to change the PRA 13 numbers or the success criteria.
14 MR. CATTON:
I think that's because you're O
15 operating under the belief that you're going to demonstrate 16 with the tests that the numbers in the PRA are correct.
17 That's why it's not going to change it.
18 MR. McINTYRE:
Oh, yes.
Yes.
That's why I said, 19 hopefully nothing.
20 MR. HOCHREITER:
The other source of the-data 21 woul.d be used to help validate those codes which are used 22 for the PRA.
So you've got more confidence in those codes.
23 MR. DAVIS:
Okay.
24 MR. McINTYRE:
Remember, these are validation 25 tests.
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
Court Reporters 1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 m
. ~ ~
.....n..-.
..~,
T i
271-V 1
i,.
1 MR. CATTON:
Proof of --
2' MR. McINTYRE:
Something like that, yes.
[
3 MR. CATTON:
Are there any other questions from f
1-4 the subcommittee?
Clarification only, i
i 5
[No response.]
l 6
MR. CATTON:
Seeing none, again I'll initiate --
t i.
7 again, I would like to than everybody for participation.
I i
8-think this has been a very a good meeting and the question l
9 is what do we do next.
And I think before we get into any l
4 1
10 discussion like that we can go off the record.
5 I
,l 11
[Whereupon, at 4:20 p.m.,
the above-entitled l
i
(
12 meeting was adjourned.]
]
i 13 i
I 1
r l' -
14
_j l
I l-15 i
-i 16 l
l 17 i
l 18 i-19 i
l 8
20 l.
j, 21 l
22 t
I 23 1
}-
24 i
^$
25 l
i i
't l-ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD.
i Court Reporters l
1612 K Street, N.W.,
Suite 300 j.
Washington, D.C.
20006 (202) 293-3950 i
l......,.
-... -., -... _. -. - - -..... -.. -... -. -.. -... ~. -.. --
. ',I
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE i
This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory j
commission in the matter of:
NAME OF PROCEEDING:
ACRS Thermal Hydraulic Phenomena i
Open Session-DOCKET NUMBER:
r PLACE OF PROCEEDING:
Corvallis, OR 6
were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting by =e or under the direction of the court reporting O,
company, and that the transcript is.a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
l i
t
- _ DG fb(1/ l}
Official Reporter M'
Ann Riley & Associateb>, Ltd.
j i
l i
- g O.
NRR COMMENTS ON WESTINGHOUSE'S LONG-TERM COOLING INTEGRAL TEST PROGRAM i
O ALAN LEVIN REACTOR SYSTEMS BRANCH ACRS THERMAL-HYDRAULIC PHENOMENA SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING SEPTEMBER 21,1993 0
i c.
i COMMENTS ON OSU PROGRAM O
l P
STAFF PROVIDED COMMENTS ON OSU PROGRAM SC4 LING, i
INSTRUMENTA TION, AND TEST MA TRIX AFTER REVIEC' MEETING IN l
DECEMBER 1992 i
QUESTIONS WERE RAISED REGARDING PRESSURE DROP BASED SCALING APPROACH FOR PIPING i
d RECOMMENDA TIONS MADE FOR SOME ADDITIONAL k
lNSTRUMENTA TION, ESPECIALL Y ON PZR SURGE LINE l
a SEVERAL ADDITIONAL-TESTS RECOMMENDED FOR FACILITY, TO INVESTIGA TE LONG-TERM BEHA VIOR FOLLOWING:
l O
SVEAM GENERATOR TUBE RUPTURE (ASSUMMG ADS ACTUATION) l STEAM LINE BREAK SHUTDOWN CONDITIONS VARIATION OF CONTAINMENT-RELATED PARAMETERS 1
I
.l O
RESOLUTION / STATUS OF STAFF COMMENTS STAFF DISCUSSED COMMENTS ON SCAUNG AND INSTRUMENTATION WITH WESTINGHOUSEIN TELEPHONE CONVERSATIONS EARLYIN 1993 SOME SCALING QUESTIONS WERE TENTATIVELY RESOLVED, PENDING SUBMISSION OF COMPLETE DRAFT SCALING REPORT (RECEIVED LAST MONTH)
WESTINGHOUSE AGREED TO ADD SOME RECOMMENDED INSTRUMENTA TION I
REVIEW OF SCALING REPORTIN PROGRESS TO DETERMINE IF QUESTIONS RAISED PREVIOUSL Y HA VE BEEN ADEQUA TEL Y ADDRESSED-SHOULD BE COMPLETED IN NEAR FUTURE O
NO APPARENT CHANGES HA VE BEEN MADE TO TEST MA TRIX FOR PROGRAM; STAFF COMMENTS REGARDING ADDITIONAL TESTING HA VE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED M O
4.-
e RESOLUTION /STA TUS OF STAFF COMMENTS (CONT'D)
STAFF STILL BELIEVES THAT THEREIS A NEED FOR ADDITIONAL TESTS TO COVER SCENARIOS DESCRIBED PREVIOUSLY.
i MSGTR MA Y PROCEED TO ADS ACTUA TION; LONG-TERM i
BEHA VIOR IS OF CONSIDERABLE INTEREST STEAM LINE BREAK CALCULA TIONS SHOW VERY LARGE DROP IN RCS PRESSURE, ALTHOUGH ADS IS NOT PREDICTED TO ACTUATE l
PROVISIONS FOR INVESTIGATING SLB SHOULD BE INCLUDED PENDING RESULTS FROM SPES l
SHUTDOWN ACCIDENTS HA VE BEEN RECEIVING INCREASED
+
Q REGULATORY ATTENTION OF PARTICULAR INTERESTIN AP600 IS ABILITY OF l
PLANT TO RESPOND TO SHUTDOWN EVENTS USING ONL Y PASSIVE (SAFETY-RELA TED) SYSTEMS (E.G., LOSS OF RHR)
E i
LONG-TERM BEHA VIOR IS DEPENDENT ON CONTAINMENT PROCESSES VARIA TION OF AMOUNT OF CONDENSA TE RETURNING TO SUMP VS IRWST, CONTAINMENT BACKPRESSURE, l
CONDENSA TE TEMPERA TURE, MA Y ALL HA VE IMPACT ON ABILITY TO MAINTAIN LONG-TERM COOLING STAFF BEllEVES THA T WESTINGHOUSE NEEDS TO INCLUDE THESE SCENARIOS WITHIN OSUTESTING SCOPE O
+
FM
-4 9
REVIEW OF NRRM MEETING ON SEPTEMBER 20 O.
i l
i t
'l l
l j
i
- l i
t a
f E
i O
.1 i
k i
I i
i i
n
.I l
i l
I i
- 0 4
i I
- ' y FUTURE PLANS TEST OBSERVATION STAFF WILL OBSERVE SEVERAL OSU TESTS, INCLUDING PRE-TEST PREPARATIONS AND POST-TEST ACTIVITIES SCHEDULE AND SPECIFIC TESTS TO BE OBSERVED TO BE
'l DETERMINED WHEN WESTINGHOUSE'S TEST SCHEDULEIS MORE
.l DEFINITE TESTS OF GREA TEST lNTEREST ARE THOSE CONTINUING INTO THE LONG-TERM COOLING MODE l
STAFF'S EVALUATION OF TESTING WILL BEINCLUDED AS PART OF Q
THE AP600 SER
]
POST-TEST ANALYSES AND DATA REVIEW i
NRR WILL REVIEW DATA FROM FACILITY TO ENSURE ADEQUATE i
BASIS IS PROVIDED FOR ANALYSES, PER 10 CFR 52.47 t
i POST-TEST ANALYSES TO BEPERFORMED, COORDINATED WITH l
SASG, RES, AND CONTRACTORS, BOTH TO CHECK WESTINGHOUSE'S CALCULATIONS AND FOR NRC CODE VAUDATION PURPOSES l
i BROAD RANGE OF TESTING SCENARIOS TO BE CHOSEN TO l
FULL Y EXERCISE RELEVANT CODE MODELS -
l O
i