ML20128G936
| ML20128G936 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 10/03/1996 |
| From: | Muench R WOLF CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19355E440 | List: |
| References | |
| ET-96-0077, ET-96-77, NUDOCS 9610090182 | |
| Download: ML20128G936 (2) | |
Text
l
. i j
i LF CREEK W@) NUCLEAR OPERATING Richard A. Muench Vice President Engineering October 3, 1996 ET 96-0077 U.
S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN:
Document Control Desk Mail Station P1-137 Washington, D.
C.
20555
Reference:
Letter ET 96-0041, dated July 20, 1996, from R. A. Muench, WCNOC, to USNRC
Subject:
Docket No. 50-482:
Withdrawal and Transmittal of Proprietary Information Gentlemen:
This letter withdraws proprietary information transmitted by the reference.
Because of the proprietary nature of this information, please return the original and all copies to Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation.
This submittal is based on discussions between J.
C. Stone, NRC, and S. Wideman, on i
August 27, 1996.
j This letter resubmits information requested by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission regarding the " Wolf Creek Generating Station Site Examination Report, 95 SAP-G-0065."
This transmittal includes one copy of "WCGS Site Examination Report, 95 SAP-G-0065,"
(Proprietary) and one copy of "WCGS Site Examination Report, 95 SAP-G-0065,"
(Non-proprietary)."
Also enclosed are a Westinghouse authorization
- letter, CAW-96-1005 accompanying affidavit, Proprietary Information notice, and Copyright Notice.
Enclosure 1
provides information proprietary to Westinghouse Electric Corporation and is supported by an affidavit signed by Westinghouse, the owner of the information. The affidavit sets forth the basis on which the information may be withheld from public disclosure by the Commission and addresses with specificity the considerations listed in paragraph (b) (4) of Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations.
Accordingly, it is requested that the information which is proprietary to Westinghouse be withheld from public disclosure in accordance with 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations. provides the non-proprietary version of "WCGS Site Examination Report, 95 SAP-G-0065." provides the Westinghouse application for withholding proprietary information from public disclosure, a proprietary
/
information notice, and a copyright notice.
IJ 9610090182 961003 1hjI PDR ADOCK 05000482
\\'
P pon i
PO. Box 411/ Burhngton, KS 66839 / Phone' (316) 364-8831 h/) l N' ^(
An Equal Opportunity Employer M F HC/ VET I
e twne chsGh4Av WLKL
__.m ET 96-0077 j
Page 2 of 2 i
=
1 3
l Correspondence with respect to the copyright or proprietary aspects of the items listed above or the supporting Westinghouse Affidavit should reference
~
CAW-96-1005 and should be addressed to N.
J.
Liparulo, Manager of Regulatory and Engineering Networks, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, P.
O.
Box 355, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15230-0355.
If you have any questions concerning this matter, please-contact me at (316) 364-8831, extension 4034, or Mr. Terry S. Morrill, at extension 8707, 1
i Very truly yours, a
i Richa d A. Muench l
I
{
RAM /jad
)
1 1
Enclosures
- 1. WCGS Site Examination Report, 95 SAP-G-0065 (Proprietary) 1
- 2. WCGS Site Examination Report, 95 SAP-G-0065 (Non-Proprietary) j
- 3. Westinghouse Proprietary Information Application, Propriety l
l Information Notice, and Copyright Notice
{
1 cc:
L. J. Callan ' (NRC), w/o l
l W. D. Johnson (NRC), w/o J.
F. Ringwald (NRC), w/o
.l j'
J. C.
Stone (NRC), w/e
{
i i
i t
I 1
l' 4
j'.
1 i
i 1
l 4
j I
I i
1
..)
.~
H
'3, i
n..
O m
o Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 0
i0
\\
- -o
\\
0 0~
i i
j i
4 ENCLOSURE 2 Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
]
Wolf Creek Nuclear Station WCGS Site Examination Report,95 SAP-G-0065 Westinghouse Non-Proprietary Class 3 1
1 5
J l
2 I
j I
NSDNT*M/SAPt23 1
i l
- H..
- 3
- 'D..*
y:,
jO Wastinghouse Non Proprietary Class 3 m
- *g
!o
- 2 Westinghouse Energy Systems sa 3
- 3
- g Electric Corporation eswanausmana mo.
- m i
io October 25,1995 i\\
]2 95 SAP G 0065
- 0^
l Mr. Richard D. Flannigan Manager, Nuclear Engineering Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation q
Wolf Creek. Generating Station i
P. O. Box 411 l
Burlington, Kansas 66839 l
i
Dear Mr. Flanrugan:
e WOLP CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION 4
l SITE EXAMINATION REPORT i
j l have attached a copy of the report summarizing the activities of the site examination i
performed at Wolf Creek from August 22,1995 through August 25,1995. The examination consisted largely of a series of drag tests. The objective of these tests was to determine the acceptability of RCCA RS-43 and fuel assembly H-81 which displayed high drag during the refueling ou* age prior to the start of Cycle 8.
4 I;
Based on these test results, it is recommended RCCA RS-43 not be reused, and fuel assembly H-81 be restricted to non-control rod locations. The cause of the high drag could not be determined.
l l
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely, I
i r
Jedhuptwelsem.
Prcject Eng' Domestic Sales & Customer Projects JLS/sh j
Attachment j
cc:
S. D. Ferguson Buriington 1A P.D. Adam Buriington 1A j
G. J. Nesses Burlington 1A i
]
seemoge6 wat i
~{,
.y..
U INTRODUCTION
.m m
~
A series of drag tests have been performed on a fuel assembly and RCCA at the Wolf Creek Station. These tests were the result of an event that occurred during the Cycle o
a 8 refueling. On October 13,1994, RCCA drag testing showed a drag of[ ]%unds
\\
~
in core location PO8. This position contained fuel assembly H-81 and RCCA RS-43.
The upper internals were removed and the following inspections were conducted.
g
)
A RCCA drag test was performed before the assembly was removed from the core. Excessive drag was apparent.
a 2.
The assembly was moved to the spent fuel pool and a visualinspection was conducted. No anomalies were found.
3.
RCCA RS-43 was removed from fuel assembly H 81 and a drag test was performed in another fuel assembly.
A high drag was observed indicating a possible problem with the RCCA.
4.
A hafnium RCCA was removed from storage, with low drag observed upon removal, and drag tested in assembly H-81. A high drag was observed, thus indicating a possible problem with fuel assembly H-81.
5.
The kow on fuel assembly H-[1 was measured visually at approximately
[
] inch with[
] twist.
Fuel assembly H 81 and RCCA RS-43 were removed from the core for further examination.
On August 22, 1995 through August 25, 1995 the following inspections were conducted:
1.
Drag check of each thimble tube on fuel assembly H-81 with probe made per drawing P6664E33G01, Rev.1.
This probe was intended to simulate a rodlet from an RCCA. The probe was inserted and removed from each thimble tube while the load was monitored.
Results:
The highest drag observed was[] pounds which occurred at position
[
]'For most positions the drag was between[
] pounds.The results are shown in Table 1.
None of the thimble tubes showed own weight [g, and the probe went to the bottom of each tube b excessive dra
]'"
2.
A visualinspection was conducted on RCCA RS 43. One anomaly was observed. Wear marks were seen on the end plugs of four rodlets across i
one face on the periphery of the RCCA. It is not known if these marks are related to the high drag.
jH
- 3.
- n :
!.Ci m
3.
RCCA RS-43 was drag tested in a " good" fuel assembly (assembly G-i c i
23). The RCCA was withdrawn and inserted three times with consistent results. The drag in the dashpot was approximately[~
%unds with about[ ]pliunds when the rodlets were above the dashp]ot. A
! O j )
this would satisfy the requirements in specification F-5, it is higher than normal and suggests an interference problem with the RCCA.
.O
- \\
4.
Dummy RCCA drag tested in the dummy fuel assembly and fuel E
c' assembly H 81. The intent of this test was to establish a baseline using un-irradiated components and compare the results to fuel assembly H-
{
81.
i i
The dummy RCCA was withdrawn and insarted twice in the dummy fuel assembly. Both times the drag was near zero for the entire length,
{.
including the dashpot, i
The dummy RCCA was then withdrawn and inserted in fuel assembly H-l
- 81. The drag was measured at about[
]$unds in the dashpot and
{
about[ ]p8'unds above the dashpot. This indicated a possible problem,
f with fuel assembly H 81.
4 4
5.
RCCA RS-43 was drag tested in fuel assembly F-66. This was intended
)
to confirm the results of RS-43 in a " good" fuel assembly. The drag i
measured about[ ]plunds in the dashpot and about[ ] pounds above j
the dashpot. This was consistent for three insertions and withdrawals.
l The drag forces lower than those from fuel assembly G-
.., however, the i
drag in the dashpot still suge its a potential problem with RCCA RS 43 i
i i
6.
RCCA R-26 drag tested in fun. assemblies C-09 and H-81. The objective l
of this test was to establish a baseline with a particular RCCA and test i
that RCCA in fuel assembly H-81.
RCCA R-26 was inserted and I
withdrawn three times in fuel assembl C-09 with consistent results.
l The drag in the dashpot was about[ y]%unds, and about[]%unds above the dashpot. This is within the experience base for " normal" drag l
on irritated fuel assemblies.
For comparison RCCA R-26 was then inserted and withdrawn in fuel assembly H-81 three times with consistent results. The dra dashpot was about[-
]$iunds in the dashpot and about[ [Qn the pounds above the dashpot. This is judged to be high drag force, and indicates i
a potentialinterference with fuel assembly H 81.
6,
.+..-.-.v c
. -~
.m
.p..
e
H j
- 3 n.
a 4.m i
io 7.
A visual inspection of fuel assemblies H 81 was conduction and the following observations were made:
i
!O if i
The assembly did not display abnormal bow e
s
{o There was no visible " dishing" or other damage to the bottom e
1
,\\
nozzle D
0^
All thimble screws appeared secure and normal.
e Ne mechanical damage was observed anywhere on the fuel e
assembly j
All lock tubes were in place and secure e
There were no anomalies observed on the top nozzle, including e
the adaptor plate and thimble holes.
The insperJcion was concluded with no observations relating to the high drag observed
}
on this fuel assembly.
CONCLUSIONS:
1.
Based on the single thimble tube probe, fuel assembly H-81 does not hava gross debris or gross buckling / bowing of the dashpot.
2.
RCCA RS-43 shows rub marks or four rodlet end plugs that was. caused by mechanicalinterference. However, the nature of the interference is not known.
3.
RCCA RS-43 displays high drag in all tested fuel assemblies. In addition to fuel assembly H-81 the RCCA was tested in fuel assemblies G-23 and F-66. These fuel assemblies are believed to have displayed " normal" (rag in the past.
4.
Fuel assembly H-81 displayed high drag with all RCCA's tested. In addition to RS-43, the dummy RCCA and R-26 was tested in assembly H 81. Both of these RCCA's showed " acceptable" drag when tested in other fuel assemblies.
5.
It is concluded an interference problem exists with both RCCA RS-43 and fuel assembly H-81. However, the root cause of the high drag cannot be determined from these tests.
H 1.
- 't.:
- a
.m
- o RECOMMENDATIONS
1 O
Fuel assembly H-81 should be located in non-control rod locations only. Based on the i
above inspections, this assembly will perform normally provided this limitation is met.
\\
RCCA RS-43 should not be re-used. It is known to display high drag forces in " good" o
fuel assemblies, which could result in marginal drop times.
\\
i 2m 1
l t
)
3 1
J
'l 1
i 3
I b
4 4
H 3,
.. =
'D l o
TABLE 1
.m n
~
TH.lMBLE TUBE DRAG TEST RESULTS o
D l
LOCATION DRAG (POUNDS) o
~
\\
E-3 i
x ir i.3 L-3 D-4 N-4 C-S F-6 l-6 L-6 0-6 C-9 F-9 L-9 O-9 C-12 F-12 l
1-12 L-12 0-12 D-14 N-14 F-15 l-15 L-15 9
..___.____.____m_._._.m..
ij a
i 4
l 2
i 1
i j
i 4
i I
i 1
ENCLOSURE 3 i
Westinghouse letter " Application for Withholding Proprietary information from Public Disclosure" (CAW-96-926) with Affidavit CAW-96-926 Proprietary Information Notice Copyright Notice i
i i
l