ML20058P040
| ML20058P040 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/15/1993 |
| From: | Ronaldo Jenkins Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Nowlen S SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-J-2017, CON-FIN-J-2018 NUDOCS 9310220010 | |
| Download: ML20058P040 (4) | |
Text
_
October 15, 1993 Mr. Steve P. Nowlen Nuclear Energy Technology Organization 6449 Sandia National Laboratories Albuquerque, New Mexico 87185
Dear Mr. Nowlen:
Enclosed are the meeting notes of our telephone conference call held on October 12, 1993, regarding the ongoing work under the task orders JCN J-2017 and JCN J-2018. The scope of the work remains within the specifications previously described in earlier contract correspondence and it is not expected that funding will need to be increased as a result of the actions discussed during this meeting.
The purpose of this letter is to document NRC comments on the status of work and/or draft work documents under the subject Task Orders now authorized for work.
If you have any questions, please call me. Thank you for your assistance.
Sincerely, (A
Ronaldo Jenkins Electrical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
Aeeting Notes DISTRIBUTION w/ enclosure JTWiggins, NRR CHBerlinger, NRR PGill, NRR RVJenkins, NRR BGrenier, NRR Official Contract File (7 026)
PDR Central Files EELB R/F f
Y (0k\\'
Document Name: G:\\ SHARED \\NOWLEN101.LTR I
O EELB:DE:NRR A ff/
SC/EElp,:
- NRR p6/, l g",'IT RVJenkins:nkw /
PGill h0
/
-.g,. n j X g f 4 ) - (e 10////93 10///j'/9
/
gW' "
FJBC HLE BENTED COPY 9310220010 931015 PDR ORC NRRB PDR
O Enclosure From:
Ronaldo V. Jenkins To:
ASG Date:
Tuesday, October 12, 1993 11:00 - 12:30 p.m.
Subject:
SNL CONFERENCE CALL - TASK ORDER REPORTS / FUTURE ACTIVITIES Attendees:
P. Gill, R. Jenkins, S. Nowlen (SNL), R. Dykhuizen (SNL),
and T. Tanaka (SNL)
The following questions and responses were noted between NRC and SNL representatives pertaining to ongoing work under JCN J-2017 and JCN J-2018.
TASK ORDER #1 (J2018) - OIG CONCERNS REGARDING TSI PAPER (MCKELVEY)
Question:
Please expand on the differences between results using simple convection correlations based on room temperature air versus elevated air temperature.
SNL RESPONSE:
R. Dykhuizen responded that the differences would be minor and he would develop a Case 8 analysis to describe the results under elevated temperatures for air.
P. Gill asked that the final technical letter report state whether the subject paper involved any changes requested by TSI were questionable or inappropriate.
TASK ORDER #1 (J2017)- TV TEST REPORT General:
1.
SNL to review and coment on TU Test Report.
2.
Language should be more definite and less ambiguous in nature.
3.
If there are specific questions regarding the TV Electric Report or submittals which require clarification then SNL should prepare a list of questions in order to dispatch a Request for Additional Information (RAI).
SNL RESPONSE:
S. Nowlen commented that he had not been aware of the generic application envisioned by NUMARC and other licensees for the TV Electric Test Report. Mr. Nowlen noted that the intent of the draft report was to respond quickly to the specific questions stated in the June 25, 1993, memorandum from R. Jenkins to P. Gill.
P. Gill requested that SNL review the TV Test Report within the context of the issues raised by the questions identified in the subject memorandum.
R. Jankins requested that the language or tone of the final letter be definitive such that there are no questions raised as to the final conclusions or insights.
S. Nowlen stated that h
i g.
they would combine the two memorandums inherent in the draft letter report and SNL will review the TU Report as requested by P. Gill.
.S. Nowlen also noted that several j
questions for the licensee were described in the draft letter should a RAI be necessary.
P. Gill requested a specific list of questions which the staff will use to prepare a RAI. Mr. Nowlen responded that SNL will provide a list of question by the end of October 1993.
l Specific:
Q1:
Is there a material difference. expected between the i
ampacity test results of a 36" tray vs. a 24" tray? If there is a difference, please explain.
l SNL RESPONSE:
SNL will clarify section to discuss under what conditions-tray width will materially affect ampacity test results.
Q2: Are there several questions we should transmit to TV Electric?
J SNL RESPONSE:
SNL will develop question (s) for use in RAI to licensee.
)
Q3: What question can be developed to point out the flaw in the licensee's assertion?
SNL RESPONSE:
SNL will develop question (s) for use in RAI to licens ee.
Q4: Are the mathematical modeling for air drops comparable to the test results?
i SNL RESPONSE:
R. Dykhuizen commented that the modeling utilized by the licensee was conservative relative to the test results.
Q5: What configurations were considered for this response?
What configurations would the convection of heat off of the outer surface be important?
SNL RESPONSE:
SNL stated that the vertical configuration would be cited as the configuration considered in the response.
Q6: What does "almost independent of the type of cables or depth of cables used" mean? Are you stating that as long as the tray specimen are the same in baseline and insulated tests that there will be little difference in the expected ACF7 SNL RESPONSE:
SNL stated that this section will be clarified in the final report. !
l 07:
Is there a question for the licensee here?
SNL RESPONSE:
SNL will develop question (s) for use in RAI to licensee.
GENERAL CONCLUSIONS / ACTION ITEMS R. Jenkins discussed briefly the staff's expectations for Task #2 under JCN J-2018.
S. Nowlen noted that currently the Task Order was at the Task #2 work milestone.
T. Tanaka cited that approximately 70 technical literature sources had been located in SNL's database search.
R. Jenkins asked SNL to review both the test methods and mathematical models toward the future goals (by end of 1993) of relative ranking of methods and models and the development of proactive technical positions on the ampacity derating issue.
i
< 1