Similar Documents at Byron |
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20149M2951996-11-29029 November 1996 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50.60 Re Safety Margins Recommended in ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code Case N-514 TXX-9522, Comment Opposing Proposed GL on Testing of safety-related Logic Circuits.Believes That Complete Technical Review of All Surveillance Procedures Would Be Expensive & Unnecessary Expenditure of Licensee Resources1995-08-26026 August 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed GL on Testing of safety-related Logic Circuits.Believes That Complete Technical Review of All Surveillance Procedures Would Be Expensive & Unnecessary Expenditure of Licensee Resources ML20059C2351993-12-17017 December 1993 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Commercial Grade Item Dedication ML20044A8111990-06-27027 June 1990 Comment Opposing Closure of Lpdr of Rockford Public Library ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20214X1871987-06-11011 June 1987 Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in Amount of $25,000 Based on Four Severity Level III Violations Noted During 860721-0808 Insp ML20205Q1711987-04-0202 April 1987 Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in Amount of $25,000. App Re Evaluations & Conclusions Encl IR 05000812/20100311987-02-26026 February 1987 Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in Amount of $100,000 Based on Violations Noted During Insps on 850812-1031 ML20210T7321987-02-11011 February 1987 Unexecuted Amend 6 to Indemnity Agreement B-97 Substituting Item 3 of Attachment to Indemnity Agreement in Entirety W/ Listed License Numbers,Effective 870130 ML20209J3251987-01-30030 January 1987 Transcript of 870130 Commission Discussion/Possible Vote on Full Power OL for Facility.Pp 1-72.Supporting Viewgraphs Encl ML20213G4381986-10-24024 October 1986 Unexecuted Amend 5 to Indemnity Agreement B-97,substituting Item 3 of Attachment to Agreement in Entirety W/Listed License Numbers,Effective on 861106 ML20211B0841986-08-0505 August 1986 Transcript of 860805 Meeting Between Region Iii,Computer Interference Elimination & Util in Redmond,Wa Re Plant as-built Drawing Review.Pp 1-200 IR 05000506/20070221986-05-0202 May 1986 Order Imposing Civil Monetary Penalty in Amount of $25,000 for Violations Noted During Insp on 850506-0722.Violations Noted:Failure to Establish Radiological Safety Procedures & to Adequately Train Personnel ML20138C7301985-12-0909 December 1985 Order Imposing Civil Penalty in Amount of $25,000 Per 850606 Notice of Violation & Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty.Licensee May Request Hearing within 30 Days of Date of Order ML20205E8741985-10-28028 October 1985 Exemption from GDC 4 of 10CFR50,App a Requirement to Install Protective Devices Associated W/Postulated Pipe Breaks Primary Coolant Sys.Topical Rept Evaluation Encl ML20102A2981985-01-0707 January 1985 Petition Requesting Aslab Grant Intervenor Appeal & Order Further Hearings on Safety of Plant ML20099L2581984-11-27027 November 1984 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20099G5381984-11-23023 November 1984 Supplemental Appeal Brief in Response to Intervenor 841106 Supplemental Brief on Appeal & in Support of ASLB 841016 Supplemental Initial Decision Authorizing Issuance of Ol. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20100K0411984-11-22022 November 1984 Submits Concerns Re Safety of Local Residents in Event of Accident & Excessively High Cost of Projected Operation of Facility ML20107H7841984-11-0606 November 1984 Supplemental Brief on Appeal of ASLB 841016 Supplemental Initial Decision Granting Authority for Issuance of Ol. Decision Should Be Reversed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20140E4081984-10-31031 October 1984 Executed Amend 1 to Indemnity Agreement B-97,deleting Items 2A & 3 in Entirety ML20098G8841984-10-0202 October 1984 Joint Statement of RW Manz & W Faires Re Findings 3-11 Through 3-17 of NRC 830930 Integrated Design Insp Rept. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20098G8681984-10-0202 October 1984 Answer to Intervenor Motion to Reopen Record Re Bechtel Independent Design Review.Motion Should Be Denied ML20098G8901984-10-0202 October 1984 Joint Statement of Kj Green & RW Hooks Re Integrated Design Insp ML20098G8911984-10-0202 October 1984 Joint Statement of Cw Dick & EM Hughes Re Independent Design Insp ML20098G8821984-10-0101 October 1984 Affidavit of Kj Green Re Integrated Design Insp Concerning Mechanical Engineering Work ML20098G8741984-10-0101 October 1984 Affidavit of Br Shelton Re Integrated Design Insp ML20098G8881984-09-29029 September 1984 Affidavit of RW Hooks Re Integrated Design Insp Concerning Structural Design ML20098G8831984-09-28028 September 1984 Affidavit of W Faires Re Findings 3-15 & 3-16 of NRC 830930 Integrated Design Insp Rept ML20098G8811984-09-28028 September 1984 Affidavit of Cw Dick Re Independent Design Review ML20098G8791984-09-28028 September 1984 Affidavit of RP Tuetken Re Readiness for Fuel Loading ML20098G8781984-09-28028 September 1984 Affidavit of RW Manz Concerning Findings 3-11 Through 3-14 & 3-17 of NRC 830930 Integrated Design Insp Re Westinghouse ML20098G8871984-09-28028 September 1984 Affidavit of EM Hughes Re Idvp ML20098G8851984-09-27027 September 1984 Affidavit of Rl Heumann Re Costs of Delay in Startup & Operation of Unit 1 ML20098E2371984-09-24024 September 1984 Reply to Intervenor 840918 Proposed Supplemental Initial Decision.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20097E7221984-09-13013 September 1984 Agreed Motion for Time Extension Until 841101 to File Petition for Hearing Re Emergency Planning Commitment W ML20097C5311984-09-12012 September 1984 Motion to Reopen Record to Include Plant Design as Issue. Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20097B7791984-09-10010 September 1984 Proposed Supplemental Initial Decision Re Reinsp Program. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20096A6391984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of RW Hooks Re Validity of Info in Attachment 7 to Stokes Testimony Concerning Design Assumption for Plant.Stokes Info Inapplicable to Plant. Related Correspondence ML20096A6191984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of B Erler Re Stokes Allegations Concerning Evaluations of Discrepancies in Calculated Actual Stress Performed by Sargent & Lundy.Related Correspondence ML20096A6261984-08-30030 August 1984 Summary of Rebuttal Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag, Eb Branch,D Demoss,Mr Frankel,Bf Maurer & Jk Buchanan Re Plant QC Inspector Reinsp Program & C Stokes Allegations Re Welds.Related Correspondence ML20096A6441984-08-28028 August 1984 Notice of Withdrawal of Appearance in Proceeding.Related Correspondence ML20112D5271984-08-24024 August 1984 Applicant Exhibit A-R-4,consisting of Feb 1984 Rept on Bryon QC Inspector Reinsp Program ML20112D5031984-08-24024 August 1984 Applicant Exhibit A-R-5,consisting of June 1984 Suppl to Rept on Bryon QC Inspector Reinsp Program ML20112D7441984-08-23023 August 1984 Intervenor Exhibit I-R-1,consisting of Undated List of Teutken Safety Category Insp Types ML20112D7511984-08-21021 August 1984 Staff Exhibit S-R-1,consisting of 840813 Instruction for Walkdown of Cable Tray Hanger Connection Welds ML20112D4641984-08-21021 August 1984 Intervenor Exhibit I-R-11,consisting of Undated Chronological Date Listing of Util Responses to Interrogatory 12.VA Judson to Mi Miller Re Interrogatory 12 & Supplemental Responses Encl 1999-03-02
[Table view] Category:TRANSCRIPTS
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20209J3251987-01-30030 January 1987 Transcript of 870130 Commission Discussion/Possible Vote on Full Power OL for Facility.Pp 1-72.Supporting Viewgraphs Encl ML20211B0841986-08-0505 August 1986 Transcript of 860805 Meeting Between Region Iii,Computer Interference Elimination & Util in Redmond,Wa Re Plant as-built Drawing Review.Pp 1-200 ML20096A6261984-08-30030 August 1984 Summary of Rebuttal Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag, Eb Branch,D Demoss,Mr Frankel,Bf Maurer & Jk Buchanan Re Plant QC Inspector Reinsp Program & C Stokes Allegations Re Welds.Related Correspondence ML20096A6191984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of B Erler Re Stokes Allegations Concerning Evaluations of Discrepancies in Calculated Actual Stress Performed by Sargent & Lundy.Related Correspondence ML20096A6391984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of RW Hooks Re Validity of Info in Attachment 7 to Stokes Testimony Concerning Design Assumption for Plant.Stokes Info Inapplicable to Plant. Related Correspondence ML20094P7721984-08-17017 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Direct Testimony of CC Stokes on Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20094R1021984-08-17017 August 1984 Transcript of CC Stokes 840817 Deposition in Chicago,Il. Pp 1-173.Vol Ii.Related Correspondence ML20094P5991984-08-16016 August 1984 Direct Testimony of CC Stokes Re Engineering Evaluations Performed & Use of Engineering Judgement by Sargent & Lundy. Suggests Need for Independent Engineering Analysis of Safety Significance of Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20094P6311984-08-14014 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ds Kochhar on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20094P6831984-08-13013 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wh Bleuel on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Resume Encl.Related Correspondence ML20094P6951984-08-13013 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of EP Erickson on Contention 1 Re Reinsp program-inspector Qualification & Work Quality.Resume & Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20093L4881984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Eb Branch Re Contention 1 (Reinsp Program,Work Quality).Related Correspondence ML20093L1811984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of KT Kostal on Contention 1 Re Capacity of Sys Control Corp Supplied Components to Carry Design Loads.Related Correspondence ML20093L2721984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ak Singh on Contention 1 Re Evaluations of Discrepancies in Cable Tray Hanger Connections,Solid Bottom Tray Welds & Ladder Tray Weld Connections.Related Correspondence ML20093L2051984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ld Johnson on Contention 1 Re Adequacy of Sys Control Corp Supplied Main Control Boards.Related Correspondence ML20090E5521984-07-17017 July 1984 Testimony of Eb Branch Re Job Responsibilities,Educ Background & Work Experience.Related Correspondence ML20090A7981984-07-0909 July 1984 Testimony of Gf Marcus Re Pittsburgh Testing Lab Source Insp of Equipment & Components Supplied by Sys Control Corp ML20090A8121984-07-0909 July 1984 Testimony of Bf Maurer Re Analysis of Structural Adequacy of Main Control Panels Designed & Fabricated by Sys Control Corp ML20092P7921984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag Re QA Inspector Reinsp Program for Hunter Corp.Related Correspondence ML20092P7891984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Rv Laney on Contention 1 Re Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7951984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ak Singh on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7941984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of LO Delgeorge on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Inspector Qualification & Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P5541984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Dl Leone on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program for Work Quality ML20092P5551984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of R French on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program ML20092P7781984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wj Shewski on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Inspector Qualification.Related Correspondence ML20092P7811984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Jm Mclaughlin on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7871984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Direct Testimony & Testimony of RP Tuetken Re Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20092P7851984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wb Behnke on Contention 1 Re Overview of Quality Program,Work Quality. Related Correspondence ML20092N4971984-06-29029 June 1984 Testimony of Bg Treece on Issues 5 & 6 Re Cable Overtensioning,As Limited by ASLB 840608 Order.Related Correspondence ML20092N4911984-06-29029 June 1984 Summary of Direct Testimony of Jo Binder on Issues 5 & 6 Re Cable Overtensioning,As Limited by ASLB 840608 Order.Related Correspondence ML20092K7691984-06-26026 June 1984 Summary of Testimony of J Hansel on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Prof Qualifications Encl.Related Correspondence ML20205H8901983-08-10010 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830810 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,585-7,610 ML20205H8941983-08-10010 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830810 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing W/Ofc of Investigations in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,611.1- 7,611.71 ML20205H8841983-08-0909 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830809 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,304-7,405 ML20080B3051983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of RP Tuetken Re Util Reinsp Program of Work Performed by Contractor Insp Personnel Prior to NRC Region III Mar,Apr & May 1982 Insps.Appropriate Steps Taken to Remedy Problems ML20080B3091983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of Aw Koca Re General Nature of Hatfield Inspector Training & Certification Program.Certification of J Hughes Described ML20080B2951983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of Ma Stanish Re Recertification of Qa/Qc Inspectors Subsequent to NRC Region III Mar,Apr & May 1982 Special Team Insps.Reinsp Program Implemented to Review Work Performed by Inspectors Before NRC 1982 Insp ML20023C7151983-05-12012 May 1983 Testimony of P Holmbeck Re Investigation Into Adequacy of Emergency Plans Re Emergency Planning Contentions.Util Made No Attempt to Study Protective Value of Sheltering Populations Around Plant ML20204F5721983-04-26026 April 1983 Transcript of 830426 Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 5,964-6,156 ML20069M4791983-04-25025 April 1983 Handwritten Testimony of J Hughes Re Qa/Qc at Facility ML20069K5691983-04-21021 April 1983 Testimony of Ld Butterfield Re Steam Generator Tube Integrity.Proposed Steam Generator Mods Would Minimize Tube Wear Due to Flow Induced Vibration.Related Correspondence ML20069K5631983-04-21021 April 1983 Revised Testimony of Tf Timmons Re Steam Generator Tube Integrity (Flow Induced Vibration Phenomenon).No Significant Tube Wear Will Be Experienced in Steam Generators Due to Flow Induced Vibration.Related Correspondence ML20073J6691983-04-18018 April 1983 Testimony of Jl Murphy on Rockford League of Women Voters & Dekalb Area Alliance for Responsible Energy/Sinnissippi Alliance for Environ Consolidated Emergency Planning Contentions 3 & 13.Related Correspondence ML20073K4461983-04-18018 April 1983 Rebuttal Testimony of Levine Re Rockford League of Women Voters Contentions 8 & 62 & Dekalb Area Alliance for Responsible Energy/Sinnissippi Alliance for Environ Contention 2a on Public Risk.Related Correspondence ML20073G4241983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Ee Jones Re State of Il Emergency Svc & Disaster Agency Responsibilities Concerning Emergency Planning for Nuclear Facilities & Intervenor Amended Emergency Planning Contention ML20073G4051983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Jc Golden Re Amended Emergency Planning Contention ML20073G4121983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Dl Smith Re Resources Available for Transport & Treatment of Contaminated Injured Persons.Resume Encl 1999-03-02
[Table view] Category:DEPOSITIONS
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20209J3251987-01-30030 January 1987 Transcript of 870130 Commission Discussion/Possible Vote on Full Power OL for Facility.Pp 1-72.Supporting Viewgraphs Encl ML20211B0841986-08-0505 August 1986 Transcript of 860805 Meeting Between Region Iii,Computer Interference Elimination & Util in Redmond,Wa Re Plant as-built Drawing Review.Pp 1-200 ML20096A6261984-08-30030 August 1984 Summary of Rebuttal Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag, Eb Branch,D Demoss,Mr Frankel,Bf Maurer & Jk Buchanan Re Plant QC Inspector Reinsp Program & C Stokes Allegations Re Welds.Related Correspondence ML20096A6191984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of B Erler Re Stokes Allegations Concerning Evaluations of Discrepancies in Calculated Actual Stress Performed by Sargent & Lundy.Related Correspondence ML20096A6391984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of RW Hooks Re Validity of Info in Attachment 7 to Stokes Testimony Concerning Design Assumption for Plant.Stokes Info Inapplicable to Plant. Related Correspondence ML20094P7721984-08-17017 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Direct Testimony of CC Stokes on Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20094R1021984-08-17017 August 1984 Transcript of CC Stokes 840817 Deposition in Chicago,Il. Pp 1-173.Vol Ii.Related Correspondence ML20094P5991984-08-16016 August 1984 Direct Testimony of CC Stokes Re Engineering Evaluations Performed & Use of Engineering Judgement by Sargent & Lundy. Suggests Need for Independent Engineering Analysis of Safety Significance of Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20094P6311984-08-14014 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ds Kochhar on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20094P6831984-08-13013 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wh Bleuel on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Resume Encl.Related Correspondence ML20094P6951984-08-13013 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of EP Erickson on Contention 1 Re Reinsp program-inspector Qualification & Work Quality.Resume & Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20093L4881984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Eb Branch Re Contention 1 (Reinsp Program,Work Quality).Related Correspondence ML20093L1811984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of KT Kostal on Contention 1 Re Capacity of Sys Control Corp Supplied Components to Carry Design Loads.Related Correspondence ML20093L2721984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ak Singh on Contention 1 Re Evaluations of Discrepancies in Cable Tray Hanger Connections,Solid Bottom Tray Welds & Ladder Tray Weld Connections.Related Correspondence ML20093L2051984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ld Johnson on Contention 1 Re Adequacy of Sys Control Corp Supplied Main Control Boards.Related Correspondence ML20090E5521984-07-17017 July 1984 Testimony of Eb Branch Re Job Responsibilities,Educ Background & Work Experience.Related Correspondence ML20090A7981984-07-0909 July 1984 Testimony of Gf Marcus Re Pittsburgh Testing Lab Source Insp of Equipment & Components Supplied by Sys Control Corp ML20090A8121984-07-0909 July 1984 Testimony of Bf Maurer Re Analysis of Structural Adequacy of Main Control Panels Designed & Fabricated by Sys Control Corp ML20092P7921984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag Re QA Inspector Reinsp Program for Hunter Corp.Related Correspondence ML20092P7891984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Rv Laney on Contention 1 Re Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7951984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ak Singh on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7941984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of LO Delgeorge on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Inspector Qualification & Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P5541984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Dl Leone on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program for Work Quality ML20092P5551984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of R French on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program ML20092P7781984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wj Shewski on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Inspector Qualification.Related Correspondence ML20092P7811984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Jm Mclaughlin on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7871984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Direct Testimony & Testimony of RP Tuetken Re Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20092P7851984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wb Behnke on Contention 1 Re Overview of Quality Program,Work Quality. Related Correspondence ML20092N4971984-06-29029 June 1984 Testimony of Bg Treece on Issues 5 & 6 Re Cable Overtensioning,As Limited by ASLB 840608 Order.Related Correspondence ML20092N4911984-06-29029 June 1984 Summary of Direct Testimony of Jo Binder on Issues 5 & 6 Re Cable Overtensioning,As Limited by ASLB 840608 Order.Related Correspondence ML20092K7691984-06-26026 June 1984 Summary of Testimony of J Hansel on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Prof Qualifications Encl.Related Correspondence ML20205H8901983-08-10010 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830810 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,585-7,610 ML20205H8941983-08-10010 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830810 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing W/Ofc of Investigations in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,611.1- 7,611.71 ML20205H8841983-08-0909 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830809 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,304-7,405 ML20080B3051983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of RP Tuetken Re Util Reinsp Program of Work Performed by Contractor Insp Personnel Prior to NRC Region III Mar,Apr & May 1982 Insps.Appropriate Steps Taken to Remedy Problems ML20080B3091983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of Aw Koca Re General Nature of Hatfield Inspector Training & Certification Program.Certification of J Hughes Described ML20080B2951983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of Ma Stanish Re Recertification of Qa/Qc Inspectors Subsequent to NRC Region III Mar,Apr & May 1982 Special Team Insps.Reinsp Program Implemented to Review Work Performed by Inspectors Before NRC 1982 Insp ML20023C7151983-05-12012 May 1983 Testimony of P Holmbeck Re Investigation Into Adequacy of Emergency Plans Re Emergency Planning Contentions.Util Made No Attempt to Study Protective Value of Sheltering Populations Around Plant ML20204F5721983-04-26026 April 1983 Transcript of 830426 Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 5,964-6,156 ML20069M4791983-04-25025 April 1983 Handwritten Testimony of J Hughes Re Qa/Qc at Facility ML20069K5691983-04-21021 April 1983 Testimony of Ld Butterfield Re Steam Generator Tube Integrity.Proposed Steam Generator Mods Would Minimize Tube Wear Due to Flow Induced Vibration.Related Correspondence ML20069K5631983-04-21021 April 1983 Revised Testimony of Tf Timmons Re Steam Generator Tube Integrity (Flow Induced Vibration Phenomenon).No Significant Tube Wear Will Be Experienced in Steam Generators Due to Flow Induced Vibration.Related Correspondence ML20073J6691983-04-18018 April 1983 Testimony of Jl Murphy on Rockford League of Women Voters & Dekalb Area Alliance for Responsible Energy/Sinnissippi Alliance for Environ Consolidated Emergency Planning Contentions 3 & 13.Related Correspondence ML20073K4461983-04-18018 April 1983 Rebuttal Testimony of Levine Re Rockford League of Women Voters Contentions 8 & 62 & Dekalb Area Alliance for Responsible Energy/Sinnissippi Alliance for Environ Contention 2a on Public Risk.Related Correspondence ML20073G4241983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Ee Jones Re State of Il Emergency Svc & Disaster Agency Responsibilities Concerning Emergency Planning for Nuclear Facilities & Intervenor Amended Emergency Planning Contention ML20073G4051983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Jc Golden Re Amended Emergency Planning Contention ML20073G4121983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Dl Smith Re Resources Available for Transport & Treatment of Contaminated Injured Persons.Resume Encl 1999-03-02
[Table view] Category:NARRATIVE TESTIMONY
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20209J3251987-01-30030 January 1987 Transcript of 870130 Commission Discussion/Possible Vote on Full Power OL for Facility.Pp 1-72.Supporting Viewgraphs Encl ML20211B0841986-08-0505 August 1986 Transcript of 860805 Meeting Between Region Iii,Computer Interference Elimination & Util in Redmond,Wa Re Plant as-built Drawing Review.Pp 1-200 ML20096A6261984-08-30030 August 1984 Summary of Rebuttal Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag, Eb Branch,D Demoss,Mr Frankel,Bf Maurer & Jk Buchanan Re Plant QC Inspector Reinsp Program & C Stokes Allegations Re Welds.Related Correspondence ML20096A6191984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of B Erler Re Stokes Allegations Concerning Evaluations of Discrepancies in Calculated Actual Stress Performed by Sargent & Lundy.Related Correspondence ML20096A6391984-08-30030 August 1984 Rebuttal Testimony of RW Hooks Re Validity of Info in Attachment 7 to Stokes Testimony Concerning Design Assumption for Plant.Stokes Info Inapplicable to Plant. Related Correspondence ML20094P7721984-08-17017 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Direct Testimony of CC Stokes on Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20094R1021984-08-17017 August 1984 Transcript of CC Stokes 840817 Deposition in Chicago,Il. Pp 1-173.Vol Ii.Related Correspondence ML20094P5991984-08-16016 August 1984 Direct Testimony of CC Stokes Re Engineering Evaluations Performed & Use of Engineering Judgement by Sargent & Lundy. Suggests Need for Independent Engineering Analysis of Safety Significance of Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20094P6311984-08-14014 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ds Kochhar on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20094P6831984-08-13013 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wh Bleuel on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Resume Encl.Related Correspondence ML20094P6951984-08-13013 August 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of EP Erickson on Contention 1 Re Reinsp program-inspector Qualification & Work Quality.Resume & Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20093L4881984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Eb Branch Re Contention 1 (Reinsp Program,Work Quality).Related Correspondence ML20093L1811984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of KT Kostal on Contention 1 Re Capacity of Sys Control Corp Supplied Components to Carry Design Loads.Related Correspondence ML20093L2721984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ak Singh on Contention 1 Re Evaluations of Discrepancies in Cable Tray Hanger Connections,Solid Bottom Tray Welds & Ladder Tray Weld Connections.Related Correspondence ML20093L2051984-07-30030 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ld Johnson on Contention 1 Re Adequacy of Sys Control Corp Supplied Main Control Boards.Related Correspondence ML20090E5521984-07-17017 July 1984 Testimony of Eb Branch Re Job Responsibilities,Educ Background & Work Experience.Related Correspondence ML20090A7981984-07-0909 July 1984 Testimony of Gf Marcus Re Pittsburgh Testing Lab Source Insp of Equipment & Components Supplied by Sys Control Corp ML20090A8121984-07-0909 July 1984 Testimony of Bf Maurer Re Analysis of Structural Adequacy of Main Control Panels Designed & Fabricated by Sys Control Corp ML20092P7921984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of ML Somsag Re QA Inspector Reinsp Program for Hunter Corp.Related Correspondence ML20092P7891984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Rv Laney on Contention 1 Re Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7951984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Ak Singh on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7941984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of LO Delgeorge on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Inspector Qualification & Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P5541984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Dl Leone on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program for Work Quality ML20092P5551984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of R French on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program ML20092P7781984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wj Shewski on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Inspector Qualification.Related Correspondence ML20092P7811984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Jm Mclaughlin on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program,Work Quality.Related Correspondence ML20092P7871984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Direct Testimony & Testimony of RP Tuetken Re Reinsp Program.Related Correspondence ML20092P7851984-07-0202 July 1984 Summary of Testimony & Testimony of Wb Behnke on Contention 1 Re Overview of Quality Program,Work Quality. Related Correspondence ML20092N4971984-06-29029 June 1984 Testimony of Bg Treece on Issues 5 & 6 Re Cable Overtensioning,As Limited by ASLB 840608 Order.Related Correspondence ML20092N4911984-06-29029 June 1984 Summary of Direct Testimony of Jo Binder on Issues 5 & 6 Re Cable Overtensioning,As Limited by ASLB 840608 Order.Related Correspondence ML20092K7691984-06-26026 June 1984 Summary of Testimony of J Hansel on Contention 1 Re Reinsp Program.Prof Qualifications Encl.Related Correspondence ML20205H8901983-08-10010 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830810 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,585-7,610 ML20205H8941983-08-10010 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830810 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing W/Ofc of Investigations in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,611.1- 7,611.71 ML20205H8841983-08-0909 August 1983 Public Version of Transcript of 830809 in Camera,Ex Parte Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 7,304-7,405 ML20080B3051983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of RP Tuetken Re Util Reinsp Program of Work Performed by Contractor Insp Personnel Prior to NRC Region III Mar,Apr & May 1982 Insps.Appropriate Steps Taken to Remedy Problems ML20080B3091983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of Aw Koca Re General Nature of Hatfield Inspector Training & Certification Program.Certification of J Hughes Described ML20080B2951983-08-0303 August 1983 Testimony of Ma Stanish Re Recertification of Qa/Qc Inspectors Subsequent to NRC Region III Mar,Apr & May 1982 Special Team Insps.Reinsp Program Implemented to Review Work Performed by Inspectors Before NRC 1982 Insp ML20023C7151983-05-12012 May 1983 Testimony of P Holmbeck Re Investigation Into Adequacy of Emergency Plans Re Emergency Planning Contentions.Util Made No Attempt to Study Protective Value of Sheltering Populations Around Plant ML20204F5721983-04-26026 April 1983 Transcript of 830426 Hearing in Rockford,Il.Pp 5,964-6,156 ML20069M4791983-04-25025 April 1983 Handwritten Testimony of J Hughes Re Qa/Qc at Facility ML20069K5691983-04-21021 April 1983 Testimony of Ld Butterfield Re Steam Generator Tube Integrity.Proposed Steam Generator Mods Would Minimize Tube Wear Due to Flow Induced Vibration.Related Correspondence ML20069K5631983-04-21021 April 1983 Revised Testimony of Tf Timmons Re Steam Generator Tube Integrity (Flow Induced Vibration Phenomenon).No Significant Tube Wear Will Be Experienced in Steam Generators Due to Flow Induced Vibration.Related Correspondence ML20073J6691983-04-18018 April 1983 Testimony of Jl Murphy on Rockford League of Women Voters & Dekalb Area Alliance for Responsible Energy/Sinnissippi Alliance for Environ Consolidated Emergency Planning Contentions 3 & 13.Related Correspondence ML20073K4461983-04-18018 April 1983 Rebuttal Testimony of Levine Re Rockford League of Women Voters Contentions 8 & 62 & Dekalb Area Alliance for Responsible Energy/Sinnissippi Alliance for Environ Contention 2a on Public Risk.Related Correspondence ML20073G4241983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Ee Jones Re State of Il Emergency Svc & Disaster Agency Responsibilities Concerning Emergency Planning for Nuclear Facilities & Intervenor Amended Emergency Planning Contention ML20073G4051983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Jc Golden Re Amended Emergency Planning Contention ML20073G4121983-04-11011 April 1983 Testimony of Dl Smith Re Resources Available for Transport & Treatment of Contaminated Injured Persons.Resume Encl 1999-03-02
[Table view] |
Text
'
As Rsvisad 4/21/83 c>
[p'1 \\
4 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICM NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMI S,; O
+,8g/S d2 7y ,
q ;-
/
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICEN OARD
' l l ch l \ \t*
In the Matter of )
)
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-454-OLA
) 50-455-OLA (Byron Station, Units 1 and 2) .)
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS F. TIMMONS CONCERNING STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY (FLOW-INDUCED VIBRATION PHENOMENON)
Submitted on behalf of the Applicant, Commonwealth Edison Company, in Response to DAARE/ SAFE Contention 9c and League Contention 22 r
February 25, 1983 1
l-l 8304260398 830421 l PDR ADOCK 05000454 l T PDR .
L 2
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE-THE-ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
)
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-454-OLA
) 50-455-OLA (Byron Station, Units 1 and 2) )
SUMMARY
The testimony of Mr. Thomas'F. Timmons addresses the flow-induced vibration phenomenon and its rel~ation to tube wear in Westinghouse Model D steam generators. After detailing his professional qualifications as an expert, Mr.
Timmons describes the comprehensive program established by Westinghouse for the purpose of understanding and resolving tube wear problems resulting from flow induced vibration. .The program, based on the collection of extensive operating plant data and laboratory and model test data, established that (i) tube vibration was less significant in Model D4 and D5 steam generators as compared to Model D2's and D3's, (ii) no significant tube wear is expected in Model D4 and D5 steam generators as long as main feed flow rates do not exceed 70%,
(iii) modifications should be make to the Byron Station steam generators to permit the plant to operate at full power without any significant tube vibration.
Mr. Timmons testifies that Westinghouse has recom-mended to Commonwealth Edison Company that the preheater sections of the-Byron steam generators be modified by expanding approximately 100 tubes at certain baffle plate locations and by diverting 10% of the feedwater flow through the auxiliary feedwater nozzle. Westinghouse expects to install the modifications during the third quarter of 1983.
Mr. Timmons concludes that, as modified, no significant tube wear will be experienced in the Byron steam generators due to flow-induced vibration.
4/21/83 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
)
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-454-OLA
) 50-455-OLA
, (Byron Station, Units 1 and 2) )
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS F. TIMMONS CONCERNING STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INTEGRITY (FLOW-INDUCED VIBRATION PHENOMENON)
O.l. State your name, address and present. occupation.
A.l. My name is Thomas F. Timmons. My business address is P.O. Box 355, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230. I am employed by Westinghouse Electric Corporation as the Manager of Reactor Coolant Systems Components Licensing in the Nuclear Safety Department of the Nuclear Technology Division.
Q.2. State your educational background and professional work experience.
l A.2. I graduated from Marquette University in 1968 with a Bachelors degree in Mechanical Engineering. Upon graduation, I received a commission as an Ensign in the U.S. Navy and was assigned to the U.S. Navy Nuclear Power Program. From August 1968 to August i 1969, I successfully completed the courses of study l
l
at the U.S. Navy Nuclear Power School at Mare Island, California and at the U.S. Navy Nuclear Power Prototype School at Idaho Falls, Idaho.
From September 1969 to September 1972, I was assigned to the Engineering Department of the USS Bainbridge (DLGN-25), a nuclear powered, guided-missile frigate. I served as the Reactor Labo-ratories Officer in charge of technicians who controlled reactor coolant system and steam-generator chemistry and all radiological monitoring
- and control for the twin nuclear reactor plants of the USS Bainbridge. My subsequent duties included serving as the Electrical Officer in charge of the
~
ship's electrical generation and distribution systems and components, including the electrical systems and components of the nuclear power plants.
- I was also qualified as Engineering Officer of the l -
Watch (EOOW) and as Engineering Duty Officer (EDO).
As EOOW, I supervised the operation and maintenance of the nuclear reactor plants while they were in operation and as EDO, I supervised the Engineering Department, including operation and maintenance of the nuclear reactor plants while the ship was in port. Following my separation from the U.S. Navy as l
~
a Lieutenant, senior grade, I took a three month vacation.
From January 1973 to August 1975, I was employed by the WEDCO Corporation, a subsidiary of Westinghouse Electric Corporation, at the Indian Point Nuclear Station as an Electrical Startup Engineer-in the Operations Department. My duties included recon-ciliation of as-built conditions with drawings, post-installation electrical checkout of control circuits, motors, circuit breakers, etc. and supervision of startup testing.
From September 1975 to January 1980, I was employed in the Safety Standards Group in the Nuclear Safety Department of the PWR Systems Division of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation located at Monroe-ville,. Pennsylvania. There I held positions as an engineer and as a senior engineer. My duties included development, evaluation and application of safety criteria in safety evaluations of nuclear power plant components and systems. During 1978 and 1979, I also coordinated a research program on nuclear power plant operator response to accident situations. -
In February _1980, I was appointed Manager of Mechanical and Fluid Systems Evaluation in the Nuclear. Safety Department. In this capacity, I was responsible for licensing activities and safety evaluations in the areas of fluid systems and mechanical components, including steam generators, fo'r operating and-non-operating plants with Westing-house Nuclear Steam Supply Systems. In March of 1982, I was appointed Manager of Reactor Coolant Systems Components Licensing, a position that I currently hold. In this position, I am responsible for all licensing activities.and safety evaluations for the reactor coolant system and its components, including steam generators, for operating and nonoperating plants. Since March 1982, I have also been' assigned a collateral position as Manager, Licensing for the Model D Steam Generator Task Force.
, 0.3. What are your responsibilities as Manager, Licensing for the Model D Task Force?
A.3. As Manager, Licensing for the Model D Steam Generator Task Force, I am responsible for the licensing support activities necessary for resoly-tion of the flow induced vibration issue. These activities include the collection and review of
o engineering information; the performance and documentation of safety evaluations; the definition and evaluation of applicable regulatory criteria; coordination, review and submittal of licensing reports; and management of licensing interactions with utilities and their nuclear regulatory agencies.
Q.4. What is the purpose of your testimony?
A.4. My testimony addresses Rockford League of Women Voters' Contention 22 and'DAARE/ SAFE Cont'ention 9(c) insofar as these contentions concern the potential for steam generator tube wear resulting from flow induced tube vibration in the preheater section of Westinghouse Model D steam generators.
Q.5. What design variations exist within Model D. steam generators?
A.5. There are four models, or variations of Model D steam generators, called Models D2, D3, D4 and D5.
l An outline drawing of a preheat steam generator is given in attachment 1. As shown in this figure, the l
preheat region is located on the cold leg side of l
the tube bundle'and faces the feedwater inlet nozzle. Within the Model D preheat steam generator
s erie s', there are two general types of steam generators. These are the split-flow type (Models D2 and D3) and the counterflow type (Mcdels D4, DS).
These two types of steam generators differ signifi-cantly in the configuration of the inlet nozzle water box area and in the flow paths for the feed-water in the preheater itself.
In the split-flow type (see attachments 2 and 3),
the incoming feedwater enters at the midsection of the preheater, encounters a circular impingement plate, which directs the flow outward over the front of the outer row of tubes, and then the feedwater enters the tube bundle. At the rear of the inlet pass (at the centerline of the steam generator) the flow " splits" with portions being directed upward
, and downward around the tubes and baffles. Model D3 has a different impingement plate design than the
. D2.
In the counterflow type (see attachment 4), the incoming feedwater enters the inlet water box and impinges on a wall that directs the water outward to fill the water box volume and downward to the preheater inlet pass located near the bottom of the steam generator. The water enters the tube bundle
4 at the inlet pass, flows around the tubes and then upward around the tubes and baffles. This upward flow is " counter" to the direction of the flow of the primary water inside the steam generator tubes.
Models D4 and DS are also' equipped with a "T"-shaped blowdown pipe to minimize the accumulation of sludge on the tubesheet. This blowdown pipe is accommo-dated by a "T"-shaped lane (see attachment 5). The Model D5 steam generator differs from the D4 in that it has ferritic stainless steel baffles and support plates.
Q.6. How do these major design features affect tube vibration?~
A.6. In the split-flow type steam generator, the incoming feedwater encounters the impingement plate, is directed outward over the front of the outer row of tubes and then turns to enter the tube bundle. At full flow conditions, this directing and turning of the feedwater flow can produce vibration of some tubes in the front four rows of tubes. The dif-ferences in D2 and D3 impingement plate design affect only the local flow distribution patterns.
l In the counterflow type steam generator, the incoming feedwater is distributed within the inlet l
l l
'M
F waterbox before it enters the tube bundle. 'Because of'the different distribution of the incoming feedwater over the front of the tube bundle, less vibration of the tubes in the outer row of the tube bundle and some tubes in the next two rows of tubes occurs. The presence of the "T"-slot in the tube bundle produces a pathway for flow to preferentially enter and permit some amplitude of vibration of a few additional tubes on either side thereof. The amplitudes of vibration of tubes in the counterflow models are less pronounced than those observed in the split-flow mcdels. The main feed flow rate at which tube. vibrations become significant is higher for the counter flow models than it is for the split-flow models.
Q.7. . .What is the origin of the flow induced vibration issue in Westinghouse preheat steam generators?
A.7. Preheater region tube wear was initially identified in Sweden at Ringhals Unit 3, a plant with Model D3 steam generators. On Octob,er 21, 1981, the plant was shut down due to an approximate 2.5 gpm primary to secondary leak. Subsequent examination revealed a through-wall hole in a single steam generator tube at a baffle plate. That tube was located in the outer row of the tube bundle facing the feedwater
o inlet. Eddy current testing (ECT) of the steam generator tubes indicated tube wall wear in some tubes located in the outer rows near the inlet nozzle. ECT was then performed at Almaraz 1, a nondomestic plant with D3 steam generators; at McGuire 1, a domestic plant with Model D2 Steam generators; and at Krsko, a non-domestic plant with D4 steam generators. The ECT of Almaraz 1 also revealed indications of possible tube wear in tubes located in the outer rows of the bundle. The plants with Model D2 and with Model D4 steam generators had no indications of possible tube wear. These two plants had not operated above 50% power. Based on these early ECT indications, Westinghouse estab-lished an extensive program to determine the.cause and extent of tube wear in Model D steam generators.
0.8. What is included in this program?
A.8. Westinghouse has undertaken an extensive program to investigate, understand and define vibration and tube wear in Model D steam generators and to conceive, develop, test and evaluate any modifica-tions necessary to allow operation of Model D steam
, generators at full power. This program includes gathering, reviewing and analyzing data from
operating plants and from laboratory and model tests.
Q.9. Can you tell us more about the operating plant data collection and analysis portion of the program?
A.9. Yes. Operating plant data was obtained from four of
~
the five operational plants with preheat model steam generators. A fifth plant, Angra. 1, was not used as it was undergoing startup testing and low power operation and had not operated with any flow through the main feedwater nozzle. Likewise, two additional plants with preheat model steam generators that began their initial startup program at the end of 1982 were not included.
The collection of' operating plant data began in October 1981 with the eddy current testing (ECT) performed at the Ringhals 3 plant and at the other operating Model D plants. For the two plants with l D3 steam generators that had operated at 75% power or above, the ECT showed indications at baffle plate locations in the outer rows of the preheater near the feedwater nozzle. Visual and metallurgical l examination and analysis of two steam generator
. tubes removed from the outer row of the preheater region of the Ringhals 3 plant revealed the presence
, - - . - ...-.,7- , n_ ...- ,....._ ,
g -e. .,_ ,,
I of wear marks at the baffle plate locations. For those Model D plants that had operated at power levels of 50% or less, no ECT indications of tube wear were observed. Based on these data, in November 1981, Westinghouse recommended 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br /> as an interim operating period and 50% power as an interim, maximum operating power level.
In December 1981, two tubes were removed from and tube instrumentation was installed in the preheater region of the Model D3 steam generators at the Almaraz 1 plant. Upon resumption of operations in January 1981, vibration data was obtained at various power levels. The Krsko (Model D4) and McGuire (Model D2) plants operated at 50% power for approxi-mately 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br /> before another ECT inspection was performed and vibration instrumentation was installed. The ECT data from Krsko and McGuire did not reveal indications of tube wear. Upon startup of these plants, vibration data was obtained at various power levels and feedwater configurations.
This additional ECT data and the tube vibration data were reviewed and analyzed by Westinghouse.
The aforementioned data from operating plants were used to determine the extent of tube vibration and 1
to determine the main feed flow rates below which significant tube vibration would not be expected to occur. It was observed that operation at or below 50% for Model D steam generators did not produce any significant tube vibration or any significant changes in tube wear. It was also observed that operation of the Krsko steam generators at or below 70% main feed flow did not produce any significant tube vibration. Based on the plan't data and laboratory test data available at that. time, Westinghouse continued to recommend 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br /> as a prudent-interim operating period, and continued to
, recommend a maximum of 50% main feed flow as an i interim feed flow for Models D2 and D3 and a maximum of 70% main feed flow for Model D4. +
l In March of 1982, the Almaraz 1 plant shut down after approximately 1500 hours0.0174 days <br />0.417 hours <br />0.00248 weeks <br />5.7075e-4 months <br /> of operation at 50%
power and performed an ECT inspection of the steam generators. No significant changes-in the ECT signals from the previous inspection of tubes in the preheater were observed. At that time, two tubes
. were removed from the steam generators at Almaraz 1.
Visual and metallurgical examinations and analyses of these tubes revealed the presence of wear marks at baffle plate locations. These wear marks were l
r I
i similar to those observed on the tubes removed from Ringhals 3 in November 1981. Additional ECT inspec-tion was performed at Ringhals 3 and an additional tube was removed.for visual and non-destructive examinations. From the ECT data, it was determined that the results of the eddy current testing performed in October of 1981 over-estimated the depth of wear at baffle plate locations. A new method of eddy current testing was qualified by performing ECT testing on the removed tube prior to its removal and after its removal from the steam generator. This new method of eddy current testing provides more accurate data on the depths of tube wear marks. ,
In April of 1982, the Ringhals 3 plant resumed ope' ration at 40% power. Data from vibration instrumentation installed in this plant was similar to that taken from other split flow steam generators.
During the period from November 1981 until May 1982, l Westinghouse performed further analyses, evaluation and correlation of available data from removed tubes, ECT, vibration instrumentation and laboratory testing. As a result, Westinghouse developed a certain empirical data base with respect to operation of Model D steam generators. This data I
l'
base permitted Westinghouse to make conservative estimates of potential tube wear for operating
, conditions extending to 100% main feed flow. During the iast half of 1982, the McGuire 1 plant was
~
operated for two periods of approximately 700 hours0.0081 days <br />0.194 hours <br />0.00116 weeks <br />2.6635e-4 months <br /> each for a total of c.pproximately 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br /> at a power level of 75%. At the end of each period, the s
ECT indications observed in the McGuire steam gererators were, with the exception of one tube, a
within the bounds of the wear projected by Westing-house.
In May 1982, the Krsko plant performed an ECT
' inspection, installed additional vibration instru-mentation, and removed one tube from a steam generator for visual and metallurgical examination and analysis. No indications of tube wear were detected by ECT. The removed tube had some wear with a depth below the limit of ECT detectability.
Modifications to the fee v'ater bypass system to l allow operation of - r ant at 100% power with up to 30% of the feeddater 119w bypassing the preheater
- of the steam generator were also installed at this
( time.
I i -
I
. After resumption of operations, vibration data was collected at various power levels and various combinations of main feed and bypass feed flows (e.g. 70/0, 70/30, 90/10, 100/0, etc.). From this data it was observed that the tube vibrations at the 70% main feed /30% bypass feed combination were slightly greater than those at the 70/0 combination and that the vibrations observed at 70/30 were acceptable.
In November 1982, the Krsko plant performed an ECT inspection, installed additional tube vibration instrumentation in both steam generators, removed two tubes and expanded one tube at baffle plate intersections. No indications of tube wear were observed from the ECT inspection. The two removed tubes had wear marks of .001 to .002 inches in depth which are below the limit of ECT detectability.
After resumption of operation, tube vibration data were obtained. From this data, it was observed that l
l the tube vibrations in both steam generators were similar and had not changed with time. The expanded tube had been previously instrumented for vibration and was re-instrumented. Previous tube vibration data was compared with the data obtained after the 1
tube had been expanded and it was concluded that the l
l
16 -
tube vibrations were reduced by at least a factor of 5 from the non-expanded case. Based on conclusions from the data base and on ECT data, Westinghouse recommen.ded that the operating interval at 70/30 be increased to approximately 4500 hours0.0521 days <br />1.25 hours <br />0.00744 weeks <br />0.00171 months <br />.
In addition to the previously mentioned uses of the tube vibration and removed tube data, these data have also provided baseline information that was used to calibrate and qualify laboratory test models and the flow-induced-vibration dynamic analysis model.
Q.10. Please discuss the laboratory and model tests that were conducted as a part of the Westinghouse program.
A.10. Various size scale models of the steam generator preheater region have been constructed and have provided data not obtainable from operating plants.
Since two significantly different preheater flow designs comprise the Model D series steam generators, two subprograms were undertaken for the laboratory tests: one for the Models D2 and D3 (split-flow) steam generators and another for the Models D4 and D5 (counterflow) steam generators.
O
For the split-flow steam generators, a 0.417 scale model, a 2/3 scale model and the Swedish (SSPB) full scale model were utilized. The 0.417 scale model consisted of the full preheater region and contained the full complement of tubes. All flow passes within the preheater were modeled. Tube vibration
' data was th'e main output from this model, by using tubes instrumented internally with strain gages.
Additionally, some flow velocity data was obtained in areas of interest.
The 2/3 scale model included all components (i.e.,
impingement plate, tubes, baffles and supports) from the feedwater nozzle to the exit of the first pass.
All tubes were present with instrumentation provided within the first five rows of tubes nearest to the feedwater nozzle. This test model was designed to measure shell-side local water velocities and to determine the flow distribution patterns within these first rows of tubes. Additionally, the model
! permitted the measurement of steady state and j oscillating flow-induced drag forces on these tubes.
l l The SSPB full scale model duplicates the inlet pass .
t of.the preheater and includes a section of full length tubes representing the full height of the l
l t
I l
tubes from the tubesheet to the U-bend elevation.
Adjustment of the alignment of tube support plates provided for simulation of the actual hot operating steam generator support plate conditions as well as the replication of tube vibration to compare with actual operating plant measured tube vibration.
A similar program encompassing various test models was established for the counterflow steam generator program. Here, a 0.95 scale air model, a 1/4 scale water model, and a 16* full scale water model were used. Additionally, the 2/3 scale water model from the split-flow program was modified for testing in the counterflow configuration.
i The 0.95 scale air model was used to determine flow velocity distributions within the preheater. The flow distribution patterns obtained from this model were then verified in the 2/3 scale water model. In addition to determining the shell side local water i
velocities and flow distribution patterns, the 2/3 scale water model permitted measurement of the drag forces on the tubes and the pressure drops at I various locations within the preheater.
A 16* full scal'e model was used to replicate in the
. laboratory the tube vibration response observed in
- operating steam generators. This model consists of one half of a preheater region (the other half is symmetrical) . Within this region, all of the tubes were installed with those tubes contained within a 16* " slice" being full length (typ to the U-bend elevation). This model, like the SSPB model, was used to test various tube / support plate interactions under varying inlet flow velocities and distributions.
1 A single tube vibration model was used to t
characterize tube response under various excitation and support conditions. Here, a device was used to i
vibrate a full length tube. Support plates were located at the same elevations as in the actual i steam generator.
l l The use of these various test models provided the l
additional capability of testing various concepts designed to reduce tube vibrations. By this manner, l
several design concepts were rejected while others
[
are being optimized. Testing to optimize concepts and to obtain data on performance will be completed l ,
in the second quarter of 1983.
l
~
Concurrent with collecting and analyzing operating plant and laboratory test data,.a computer model was developed to predict tube behavior as a result of
, flow induced vibration. This model is a multi-span dynamic analysis model which uses annular gap elements at the support plate locations and is thus able to simulate tube response within the support plate clearance. The gap elements can be offset to simulate various support conditions. Results from
'this model have been correlated with data obtained
- from operating plants and scale models.
Consideration was also given to installation of proposed modifications within the actual steam generators. Full scale mockups of the steam generator preheater region to include the feedwater nozzle and surrounding obstacles were constructed.
The ability and ease of installation of each proposed modification was evaluated. The mockups also provided a means to test installation tooling and to train maintenance personnel.
Q.ll. What conclusions were reached by Westinghouse as a result of the Model D program described in answer to Q.9. and 0.10.?
m n-, +w _ - , - n--,.., -9
A.11. Evaluation of the data from the Model D program reduced to date has provided an insight into the unexpected phenomenon which has produced the tube wear occurring within the preheater region of Model D steam generators. Conclusions may be drawn that for the split-flow steam generators in the unmodi-fied condition (Models D2 and D3), operation at high main feed flow rates may produce significant tube vibration in the outer rows of tubes closest to the inlet of the preheater. This vibration can produce tube wear.
Operation of Models D2 and D3 steam generators in the unmodified condition at main feed flow rates up to 50 percent has not produced any significant tube vibration or tube wear. Installation of the D2/D3 modification should permit the plant to operate at 100 percent main feed flow without an increase in the potential for excessive tube vibration or excessive tube wear.
l Operation of Model 04 steam generators at high main l
feed flow rates could produce significant tube vibration of a few tubes. Since the anticipated vibration is less pronounced than that observed in operating Model D2 and D3 steam generators, any wear l
f
that may occur in Model D4 steam generators attrib-utable to tube vibration is expected to be less.
4 To date, operation of Model D4 steam generators with main feed flow rates up to 70 percent has not produced any tube wear that can be detected by ECT, although visual examinatin of three removed tubes did disclose some small amount of wear, approxi-mately 0.001 to 0.0025 inches in depth.
The-feedwater bypass modification installed at Krsko has been effective in reducing tube vibrations to low levels and has permitted the plant to operate at full power.
Q.12. Is the Krsko tube vibration experience applicable to the steam generators installed at the Byron Station?
A.12. Yes. However, since the feed flow at Byron is 7%
lower than that at Krsko, the level of vibration is expected to be less.
Q.13. Will Westinghouse recommend a modification of the Byron plant to minimize tube wear from flow-induced vibration?
t A.13. Yes, Westinghouse has recommended that Commonwealth
Edison Company make modifications to the Byron plant to reduce the potential for significant tube vibrations in the Byron steam generators. These
_ modifications are: 1) the expansion at baffle locations of approximately 100 tubes per steam generatcr and 2) the bypassing of approximately 10 percent of the flow from the main feedwater nozzle to the auxiliary feedwater rozzlp* The expansion of tubes at baffle plate locations will limit the tube movement at the baffle plate intersections to a few thousandths of an inch. The bypassing of 10 percent of the main feed flow to the auxiliary nozzle of the steam generator will reduce the main feed flow at the inlet to the preheater to approximately 90 percent and will further reduce the potential for vibration of the tubes in the preheater.
l Q.14. How will expansion of the tubes be accomplished?
l j A.14. Westinghouse has developed a proprietary process that will be used to expand the steam generator I tubes. The process involves the insertion of tools into the tubes frcm the primary side of the steam generator tubesheet. The tools are then used to locate the baffle plate intersection and to expand the tube at the appropriate location. The expansion zone will be entirely within the thickness of the I
i
baffle plate. (Baffle plates are provided within the preheater section of the steam generator to direct the flow past the tubes.) After the expansion has been effected, the expansion is verified by the use of Eddy Current Testing.
Q.15. How has Westinghouse evaluated the effect of the tube expansion on the integrity of the steam generator tubes?
A.15. Expansion of tubes in steam generators has long been utilized in the manufacture of steam generators.
Westinghouse established a program to evaluate the effect of tube expansion. This program included an evaluation of the levels of residual stresses in expanded tubes. Westinghouse has concluded that the levels of residual stresses in the expanded tubes, coupled with the relatively low temperature in the preheater region, does not significantly increase the potential for stress corrosion cracking in the expanded location.
Westinghouse has also. conducted accelerated corro-sion testing to assess the effects of the reduced tube-to-tube hole clearance on the potential for denting of the expanded tubes. The results of this testing indicates that the potential for denting is
f not increased for tubes expanded at the baffle intersections. .
Westinghouse has also performed structural analyses of the expanded tube for design basis, transients and accidents. The results of the struct ural analyses indicate that the ASME Code allowable values for stresses and fatigue usage factors are not exceeded for expanded tubes.
Q.16. How will the feedwater bypass modification be accomplished for Byron?
A.16. For the Byron plant, the feedwater bypass modifica-tion will require that the present feedwater pre-heater bypass valve remain open during high main feed flow rates. This will result in approximately.
90 percent of the feedwater flow entering the main feedwater nozzle and the remainder of the feedwater flow entering the steam generator through the auxiliary feedwater nozzle.
Q.17. What effect will the proposed modifications have on tube vibration?
A.17. Westinghouse has tested the modifications in the 16*
Model and in the KRSKO plant. In the 16* Model, a number of tubes were expanded and testing was
l I
conducted to determine the effect of tube expansion on tube vibration. At a flow rate equivalent to 90 l percent of the Byron main feed flow rate the j expanded tubes exhibited vibration levels that were less than those observed at flow rates equivalent to i 70 percent of the Byron main feed flow rate without tube expansion. As I indicated earlier, a 70% main feed flow rate will not result in significant tube wear. In addition to the testing in the 16* Model at the krsko plant, one tube that had been previously instrumented was expanded at baffle plate locations. Previous tube vibration data was compared with the data obtained after the tube had been expanded and it was. concluded that tube vibrations were reduced by at least a factor of 5
, from the non-expanded case. This reduction resulted in a negligible level of vibration for that tube.
i l~
! In my. opinion, these model and test data demonstrate that flow-induced vibration in the Byron steam generators will be minimized to the point where tube wear will not significantly affect the structural integrity of the Byron steam generator tubes.
Q.18. When will a modification be available for instal-lation at the Byron Station?
~_ . - - - . ~ _
27 -
4 A.18 . - . The present schedule for the engineering program is expected to have the modification available for
- installation in the Byron Station by the third i quarter of 1983 to support plant schedules.
i e
4 4
i 4
4 1
9 E
4 i
R d
(
r-- ,-, w --m, -em.-,,,,.-.. ,,y , , . - - , . - ,__,me.,, , , - - , , , . ,, ,, ,,r.w.-., ,,.w,-v . - . . , ,. ,.y,,. .--yn--r, a-, =-..,,----e,,--,mm--,- a-,w, ... , - - -ya, --