|
|---|
Category:REPORTS-TOPICAL (BY MANUFACTURERS-VENDORS ETC)
MONTHYEARML20154E4211998-01-31031 January 1998
Amend 1 to CE NPSD-911, Analysis of Moderator Temperature Coefficients in Support of Change in TSs End of Cycle Negative Mtc Limit. App a Consists of Responses to 970226 NRC RAI
ML20141L9791997-02-28028 February 1997
Suppl 8 to Annual Rept on Abb CE ECCS Performance Evaluation Models, Final Rept
ML20112G5301996-06-10010 June 1996
Annual Report on Abb CE ECCS Performance Evaluation Models
ML20082H4011995-02-28028 February 1995
Annual Rept on Abb CE ECCS Performance Evaluation Models, Feb 1995
ML20073D4561994-09-30030 September 1994
Verification of Cecor Coefficient Methodology for Application to PWRs of Entergy Sys
ML20063C7571993-12-31031 December 1993
Qualification of Reactor Methods for Pressurized Water Reactors of Entergy Sys
ML20079C1621993-05-31031 May 1993
Analysis of Moderator Temp Coefficients in Support of Change in TS of EOC Negative Mtc Limit
ML20044G5181993-04-30030 April 1993
Suppl 4 to Annual Rept on C-E ECCS Codes & Methods for 10CFR50.46, Final Rept
ML20127M2731992-11-30030 November 1992
Analysis of Capsule W-97 Entergy Operations,Inc Waterford Generating Station,Unit 3,Reactor Vessel Matl Surveillance Program
ML20153E0561988-05-31031 May 1988
Errata to Handbook on Flaw Evaluation Waterford Unit 3 Reactor Vessel Outlet Nozzle to Shell Welds, Consisting of Page Inadvertently Omitted from Original Rept
ML20154D6281988-05-31031 May 1988
Handbook of Flaw Evaluation Waterford Unit 3 Reactor Vessel Outlet Nozzle to Shell Welds
W3P86-3328, Boric Acid Concentration Reduction Effort,Technical Bases & Operational Analysis,Waterford Nuclear Power Plant Unit 31986-10-31031 October 1986
Boric Acid Concentration Reduction Effort,Technical Bases & Operational Analysis,Waterford Nuclear Power Plant Unit 3
ML20215H6961986-10-31031 October 1986
Nonproprietary Statistical Combination of Uncertainties for Waterford 3
ML20203M8701986-07-31031 July 1986
Nonproprietary Waterford Unit 3,Cycle 2 Shoulder Gap Evaluation
ML20155J5231986-05-31031 May 1986
Rev 1 to Functional Design Requirement for Core Protection Calculator
ML20155J5051986-05-31031 May 1986
Rev 1 to Functional Design Requirements for Control Element Assembly Calculator
ML20155J4911986-05-31031 May 1986
Rev 0 to Core Protection Calculator/Control Element Assembly Calculator Software Mods for CPC Improvement Program Reload Data Block
ML20151Z0521986-01-31031 January 1986
Rev 3 to CEN-39(A)-NP, CPC Protection Algorithm Software Change Procedure
ML20151Z0641986-01-31031 January 1986
Rev 0 to CEN-323-NP Reload Data Block Constant Installation Guidelines
ML20134N3021985-07-31031 July 1985
Rev 00 to Functional Design Requirement for Core Protection Calculator
ML20134N2941985-07-31031 July 1985
Rev 00 to Functional Design Requirement for Control Element Assembly Calculator
ML20080Q4551984-01-16016 January 1984
Nonproprietary, Response to NRC Question on Waterford-3 Bypass Flowrate
ML20077J6801983-07-15015 July 1983
Nonproprietary Rev 1 to Final Assessment of Waterford-3 Fuel Structural Integrity Under Faulted Conditions. Info Deleted
ML20028F9431982-12-31031 December 1982
Responses to Questions on Cesec.
ML20050B1721982-03-31031 March 1982
Nonproprietary Version of Cpc/Ceac Protection Algorithm Test Plan.
ML20050C5301982-03-31031 March 1982
Nonproprietary Version of Cpc/Ceac Software Mod for Waterford 3.
ML20050C5311982-03-31031 March 1982
Nonproprietary Version of Safety Evaluation of Reactor Power Cutback Sys.
ML20039F8661981-12-31031 December 1981
Evaluation of Pressurized Thermal Shock Effects Due to Small Break LOCAs W/Loss of Feedwater for Waterford Reactor Vessel.
1998-01-31
[Table view]
Category:TEXT-SAFETY REPORT
MONTHYEARML20217F2891999-10-13013 October 1999
Drill 99-08 Emergency Preparedness Exercise on 991013
ML20217G7211999-09-30030 September 1999
Monthly Operating Repts for Sept 1999 for Waterford 3 Ses. with
ML20211Q2141999-08-31031 August 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for Aug 1999 for Waterord 3 Ses.With
ML20210Q6361999-07-31031 July 1999
Corrected Monthly Operating Rept for July 1999 for Waterford 3
ML20210S0581999-07-31031 July 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for July 1999 for Waterford 3.With
ML20210D8951999-07-23023 July 1999
Safety Evaluation Accepting First 10-yr Interval Inservice Insp Plan Requests for Relief ISI-018 - ISI-020
ML20209H3781999-06-30030 June 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for June 1999 for Waterford 3 Ses. with
ML20195J8951999-06-17017 June 1999
Safety Evaluation Granting Relief for Listed ISI Parts for Current Interval,Per 10CFR50.55a(g)(5)(iii)
ML20207E8631999-06-0303 June 1999
Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee 990114 Submittal of one-time Request for Relief from ASME B&PV Code IST Requirements for Pressure Safety Valves at Plant,Unit 3
ML20195K3391999-05-31031 May 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for May 1999 for Waterford 3 Ses.With
ML20195C3041999-05-28028 May 1999
Annual Rept on Abb CE ECCS Performance Evaluation Models
ML20206S7401999-04-30030 April 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for Apr 1999 for Waterford 3.With
ML20205T2621999-04-22022 April 1999
LER 99-S02-00:on 990216,contract Employee Inappropriately Granted Unescorted Access to Plant Protected Area.Caused by Personnel Error.Security Personnel Performed Review of Work & Work Area That Individual Was Involved with
ML20205N9671999-03-31031 March 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for Mar 1999 for Waterford 3 Ses.With
ML20205E8531999-03-30030 March 1999
Corrected Pages COLR 3/4 1-4 & COLR 3/4 2-6 to Rev 1, Cycle 10, Colr
ML20205A6331999-03-25025 March 1999
SER Accepting Request to Use Mechanical Nozzle Seal Assemblies as an Alternative Repair Method,Per 10CFR50.55a(a)(3)(i) for Reactor Coolant Sys Applications at Plant,Unit 3
ML20204H1401999-03-23023 March 1999
Rev 1 to Engineering Rept C-NOME-ER-0120, Design Evaluation of Various Applications at Waterford Unit 3
ML20204H1231999-03-22022 March 1999
Rev 1 to Design Rept C-PENG-DR-006, Addendum to Cenc Rept 1444 Analytical Rept for Waterford Unit 3 Piping
ML20204H2451999-03-22022 March 1999
Rev 2 to C-NOME-SP-0067, Design Specification for Mechanical Nozzle Seal Assembly (Mnsa) Waterford Unit 3
ML20204F0791999-03-17017 March 1999
Rev 1 to Waterford 3 COLR for Cycle 10
ML20207M9231999-03-12012 March 1999
Amended Part 21 Rept Re Cooper-Bessemer Ksv EDG Power Piston Failure.Total of 198 or More Pistons Have Been Measured at Seven Different Sites.All Potentially Defective Pistons Have Been Removed from Svc Based on Encl Results
ML20207F3491999-03-0505 March 1999
LER 99-S01-00:on 990203,contraband Was Discovered in Plant Protected Area.Bottle Was Determined to Have Been There Since Original Plant Construction.Bottle Was Removed & Security Personnel Performed Search of Area.With
ML20204B5141999-02-28028 February 1999
Monthly Operating Rept for Feb 1999 for Waterford 3.With
ML20203H8591999-02-17017 February 1999
Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee Second Ten Year ISI Program & Associated Relief Requests for Plant,Unit 3
ML20199H6261999-01-21021 January 1999
Safety Evaluation Accepting Classification of Instrument Air Tubing & Components for Safety Related Valve Top Works.Staff Recommends That EOI Revise Licensing Basis to Permit Incorporation of Change
ML20199C9101998-12-31031 December 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Dec 1998 for Waterford 3.With
ML20196F4911998-12-0101 December 1998
SER Accepting Request for Relief ISI2-09 for Waterford Steam Electric Station,Unit 3 & Arkansas Nuclear One,Unit 2
ML20206N4131998-11-30030 November 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Nov 1998 for Waterford 3.With
ML20195C4841998-11-0606 November 1998
SER Accepting QA Program Change to Consolidate Four Existing QA Programs for Arkansas Nuclear One,Grand Gulf Nuclear Station,River Bend Station & Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station Into Single QA Program
ML20195E5161998-10-31031 October 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Oct 1998 for Waterford 3.With
ML20155C1351998-10-26026 October 1998
Rev B to Entergy QA Program Manual
ML20154K0801998-09-30030 September 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Sept 1998 for Waterford 3 Ses. with
ML20151W8331998-08-31031 August 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Aug 1998 for Waterford,Unit 3. with
ML20237B6831998-08-17017 August 1998
LER 98-S01-00:on 980723,discovered That Waterford 3 Physical Security Plan,Safeguards Document Was Not Under Positive Control of Authorized Person at All Times.Caused by Human Error/Inappropriate Action.Counseled Employee Involved
ML20237C5661998-08-17017 August 1998
Safety Evaluation Accepting Licensee Request for Exemption from Section Iii.O of Appendix R to 10CFR50
ML18066A2771998-08-13013 August 1998
Part 21 Rept Re Deficiency in CE Current Screening Methodology for Determining Limiting Fuel Assembly for Detailed PWR thermal-hydraulic Sa.Evaluations Were Performed for Affected Plants to Determine Effect of Deficiency
ML20237B5261998-07-31031 July 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for July 1998 for Waterford 3
ML20236S9031998-07-22022 July 1998
SER Accepting Rev 19 to Quality Assurance Program for Waterford Steam Electric Station,Unit 3
ML20198H3911998-07-14014 July 1998
Non-proprietary Rev 5 to HI-961586, Thermal-Hydraulic Analysis of Waterford-3 Spent Fuel Pool
ML20236N4181998-06-30030 June 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for June 1998 for Waterford,Unit 3
ML20248E7781998-06-0101 June 1998
Annual Rept on Abb CE ECCS Performance Evaluation Models
ML20249A4711998-05-31031 May 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for May 1998 for Waterford 3 Ses
ML20196A4051998-05-31031 May 1998
Rept of Facility Changes,Tests & Experiments,Per 10CFR50.59 for 970601-980531. with
ML20198H4681998-05-20020 May 1998
Non-proprietary Rev 1 to HI-981942, Independent Review of Waterford Unit 3 Spent Fuel Pool Cfd Model
ML20247A3891998-05-0101 May 1998
SG Eddy Current Examination (8th Refueling Outage)
ML20247F6761998-04-30030 April 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Apr 1998 for Waterford,Unit 3.W/
ML20217M8951998-04-30030 April 1998
QA Program Manual
ML20217P8281998-04-0707 April 1998
Safety Evaluation Accepting Relief Authorization for Alternative to Requirements of ASME Section Xi,Subarticle IWA-5250 Bolting Exam for Plants,Per 10CFR50.55a(a)(3)(i)
ML20216B1751998-03-31031 March 1998
Monthly Operating Rept for Mar 1998 for Waterford 3 Ses
ML20217M1411998-03-0303 March 1998
Rev 2 of Waterford 3 Cycle 9 Colr
1999-09-30
[Table view] |
Text
.. ._.
COMBUSTION ENGINEERING, INC.
CEN-275(C)-NP s
l 9
i -
- Response to NRC Question on Waterford - 3 Bypass Flowrate
+
January 16, 1984 4
't i
ed-2 gfa O A
L . .
L LEGAL NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by Combustion Engineering, Inc. Neither Combustion Engineering nor any person acting on its behalf:
A. Makes any warranty or representation, express or implied including the warranties of fitness for a particular purpose or merchantability, with respect to the accuracy, completeness, or usefullness of the information contained in this report, or that the use of any information, apparatus,
. method, or pro ~ cess disclosed in this report may not infringe privately owned rights; or, B. Assumes any liability with respect to the use of, or for damages resulting from the use of, any information, apparatus, method or process disclosed in this report.
\
)
ARD764 Response to NRC Question on Waterford Bypass Flowrate t
Questions:
a) Justify the Waterford-3 design value of 2.6% for the bypass flow and the value of 2.1% for the calculated bypass flow, b) Provide a description of the guide tube designs before and after the reduction in bypass flow.
Responses:
a) Bypass Flow Rate The bypass flow rate for Waterford-3 was recalculated after two minor design changes. This reassessment iustified lowering the design value for the bypass flow, sumarized in the following table:
Previous Now
- Design bypass flow 3.5% 2.6%
Calculated best estimate bypass flow 2.7% 2.1%
The first design change was the reduction of the overall flow area of inlet flowholes in the guide tubes. The second design change involved adding sleeves in the upper ends of the guide tubes.
Both of these changes increase the hydraulic resistance in the guide tubes and thereby reduce the bypass flow through the guide tubes. Tne bypass flows in the other leakage paths remain the same. This is summarized in the following table:
1 Best Estimate Bypass Flow Rate
- Bypass flow path Previous Now Outlet nozzle /CSB gap .61 .61 Core shroud /CSB annulus .62 .62 Alignment keys .09 .09 Guide tubes 1.38 .78+
2.70% 2.10%
As a result, the design bypass flow was reduced from the previous 3.5% value to the present 2.6% to take advantage of the lower expected leakage. The present design value of 2.6% contains an additional 0.5% increment over the best estimate value of 2.1% to account for the effects of core crudding, tolerances, etc.
6
- Figures given in percent of W design of 148.0 x 10 lb/hr.
+See Appendix A for detailed breakdown of bypass flow through guide tubes and the flow networks used to calculate the present guide tube leakage.
We e -- --
, _ , . - - , ..-,m, - _ , _.c.,__. . - . ,
b) Guide Tube Designs A description of the guide tube designs before and after the design changes is given in the following table:
Before - center guide tube flow holes:
flow hole, area = in2 no sleeve, annular area between control rod and guide tube = in2
_c_orner guide tube _ flow holes: .
flow holes, area =L_ ,
no sleeve, annular a'rea between control rod and guide tube =
After - center guide tube flow holes.
flow holes, area =
sleeved guide tube, annular area =__ - __
_ corner guide tube flow holes.
flow holes, area = _
sleeved guide tube, annular area = _ ,
l
~.
t (
w -
n---- <en - -
t APPENDIX A Detailed Description of Bypass Flow Calculations for the Guide Tubes l
~ e r ,- -- --- --- -
The Waterford 3 reactor contains five different kinds of guide tubes. They are:
- 1. center guide tubes containing control rods (CEA's)
- 2. -center guide tubes containing in-core instrumentation
- 3. center guide tubes containing no control rods
- 4. corner guide tubes containing control rods
- 5. corner guide tubes containing no control rods Important values for the different types of guide tubes are summarized below.
Driving AP Flow
- Type Number PSI lbm/hr % of Q g Center GT, rodded 87 -
Center GT w/ICI 56 Center GT, unrodded 74 Corner GT, rodded 364 Corner GT, unrodded 504 TOTAL 1085 1,158,900 .78 l Notes concerning flow networks presented on following pages:
- 1. For convenience, the pressure at the exit of the rodded guide tubes is arbitrarily designated as 0 psi. All other pressures are referenced to this
,,. pressure.
- 2. The pressure loss coefficients along the branche: are shown in the form K/A2, which can be interpreted as the pressure loss coefficient per unit square area. The K values are based on empirical information from published literature and the design flow rate of 148x106 lbm/hr.
- . - - - , , - - - - , - . . - - , - . _ , , - - . - , - . , - .-, - , - - - , ,en, . .,
~
RODCED CENTER GUIDE TUBES
- Fue.1 Alignment Plate
- [ ] f..
Upper 4N T N N.
End gLN D Fitting g j w
~,
h i
Lower #+
End
2 Fitting Core } }
Support Plate The numerical solution of the above network yields a GT bypass flow of lbm/hr The total bypass flow for the 87 rodded center guide tubes is lbm/hr e s - ,, , _ . . ~ . - - . - - . , , - , . - - , , . . - - . , - . . . - , .
INSTRIEENTED CENTER GUIDE TUBE ,
) Fuel Alignment
[ } { Plate
'- + ,s b
N
..'l_L . ,
i l
k +.
l.. ,
i l l
i y Lower End
/ Fi tting Core Support
} } Plate The numerical solution of the above network yields a GT bypass flow of lbm/hr The total bypass flow for the 56 instrumented center guide tubes is lbm/hr b
, , _ . -. r - -
UNRODOED CENTER GUIDE TUBES f Fuel Alignment 3 f. Plate L y_ i Q '
N N Upper End M_ _k Fi tting W.
4 pt h Lower End Fi tting h { Core Support Plate Tiie numerical solution of the above network yields a GT bypass flow of lbm/hr l The total bypass flow for the 74 unrodded center guide tubes is i
_ _lbm/hr i
.+
RODDED CORNER GUIDE TUBES 5
~
FUEL ALIGNMENT f }
t .
_ d I
- UPPER END FITTING D: 3 v
Jb
+
s, .
! 4 LOWER END FITTING f 4 CORE SUPPORT PLATE e
.; The numerical solution of the above network yields a GT bypass flow of Ibm /hr The total bypass flow for the 364 rodded corner tubes is lbm/hr
i UNRODDED CORNER GUIDE TUBES 4
Fuel l Alignment
- i. Plate n
3 k
D. l Upper End g ,i Fitting a
f A
P Lower End Fitting
$ ) Core Support Plate The numerical solution of the above network yields a GT bypass flow of l
lbm/hr The total bypass flow for the 504 unrodded corner guide tubes is lbm/hr l
1 I
r -,----v- m , w - ,- -
,w--+ p-
