ML20136B549

Rev 1 to ECCS Analysis for Mnp W/Nukon Insulation Sys

ML20136B549
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	01/29/1993
From:	Hart G PERFORMANCE CONTRACTING, INC.
To:
Shared Package
ML20136B539	List: ML20136B536 ML20136B543 ML20136B549
References
NSP-ECCS-1, NUDOCS 9703110023
Download: ML20136B549 (31)

Text

- . -. _. . . . - - . . --.

4 h

1 a

ECCS ANALYSIS FOR THE MONTICELLO NUCLEAR PLANT WITH THE NUKON* INSULATION SYSTEM i

! BY GORDON H. H ART, P.E.

-TECHNICAL SERVICES M ANAGER

~

Pl?RilORM ANCE CONTRACTING, INC.

i k

I CA LCU LATION NO. NSP-ECCS-1. REV.1 Date b li fITT3 l'erfontied b) _

Reviewed by , _./ 'l[D b[- Date M 23 ITTS

\( V 9703110023 970304 DR ADOCK05C0g3 Page 4-2

1 1

Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1 l

d 11 ACKDRO_UllD:

\

In December 19S5, the USNRC released Reguiatory Guide 1.82, Revision 1, titled " Water  ;

Sources for 1.ong-Term Recirculation Cooling Following a Loss-of-Coolant Accident."

This document gives guidelines for performing an engineering analysis, for a nuclear plant's 1.CCS following a 1.(K'A, to determine whether insulation debris crer ed by the LOCA will

, imivde the recirculation of the ECCS water sulTiciently to lead to pump cavitation.

3 This Reg. Guide was directed at new replacement insulation, not existing insulation. As a i

guide, it was not considered mandatory, although many utilities did incorporate it as a

, requirement prior to the introduction of new containment insulation. l More recenti,s. :1.e t'SNRC issued Information Notice 92-71 (September 30, 1992) titled,

" Partial Plugging of Suppression Pool Strainers at a Foreign BWR." This reported an l event at Barsebek, a ,%edish IlWR, where some fibrous insulation was dislodged by steam esca ping from a va fet y v..'ve n hich had accidentally opened. While the scenario did not exactly !

duplicate a I.OU A. a nd many otherconditions were difTerent from those at U.S. BWR's. it did

prompt some L

.S. utilities to review Reg. Guide 1.82, Rev.1, more closely as it applies to their plants. (The N RC concluded that the risk associated with the sump clogging concern did not warrant backlitting of domestic plants. However, based on the Barsebek event, this NRC conclusion is being re-evaluated.)

In view of these documents, and in view of the fact that most of the Monticello drywell insulation consists of NUKON* blankets installed over a space of a dozen years, Northern States Power has decided to perform an ECCS analysis.

Ol)J13CTIVli:

The objective of this engineering analysis is to determine whether the NUKON* Insulation blankets at Monticello meet the guidelines of USNRC Reg. Guide 1.82, Rev.1.

Page 4-3

_ ,__._ ,____ . ~ _ _. ,____ ._ _ _ _

l' Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev. I s

Page 2 l

I Rl!I l!RENCliSAND RELEVANT DOCUMENTS-l 1. US N R C lleg. G uitte 1.82. Revision 1,"WaterSources for Longterm Recirculation Cooling l'ollowing a Loss-of-Coolant Accident"(1985). l

2. lISNitU Nt ltliG 0897 Revision 1," Methodology for Evaluation ofInsulation Debris tilTects"(1985).

3. " Test Report: IIDR Blowdown Tests with NUKON* Insulation Blankets,"

Owens.co

ning liiberglas Corporation (1985).

4 "NUKON" Debris Sink RateTests,"Owens Corning Fiberglas Corporation, R&D Services 11eport No. 37384 (1985).

{

5. " Transport and IIcad Loss Tests of Owens-Corning NUKON* Fiberglas Insulation," Altien Research Laboratory (1983).

o. thsens Corning l'iberglas Drawing No. L-64-023-NK, Monticello Nuclear Generation Station. " Recirculating Water Outlet System, 3" Single Layer Insulation," (19S1).

N1onticello l :S AII. Itevision 5 (12/86), Section 6.2, " Emergency Core Cooling System (liCCS)"

8. Nlonticello Nuclear Operating Plant," Operations Daily Log- Part A," Revision 57, page 4. " Torous Water Leval and Temperature Check."

9 Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, NEQ Central File, Part B - Environmental Specineations 11.2.4. Pro 0le B.2.1 "DrywellTemperature and Pressure Response."

Page 4-4

i Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1 Page 3 l

l l

10 Chicago Snstpe & tron Company, Monticello Project, " 20" O Header for Suppression Chamber," NSP Drawing No. NX 8291-51, Rev. A.

11. Northern States Power, Drawning No. NH-36248, Rev. 2, Core Spray System. l l

12. Northern Sta tes Power, N EQ Central File, Part B- Environmental Specifications B.2.4, l

Profile 11.2.1 Drywell Temperature and Pressure Response. I 1

13. I.etter to Gortion llart (Performance Contracting, Inc.) from Jim Divine (Northern States Powers on the topic of:

Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant li-92QO20 " Replace Drywell RBCCW Insulation" lingineering Analysis Comments S Pl.M-3701 Dated January 25,1993

-A 4

Page 4-5

. . ~ . . . _ . , _ _ , _ , , , _ _ - _ . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . - . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ . _ , - _

- Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1 Page 4 ,

1

ASSUMPTIONS

1. A worst case LOCA occurs with a break at one of the two 28" suction side RC nozzles.

2. 100% of the NUKON* blankets, within a 90' cone downstream of the break, are -

destroyed, with the 3" thick NUKON* Base Wool being totally converted to fibrous debris (Ref. 2).

3. 80% of the NUKON* debris generated is transported to the torous, where it becomes perfectly distributed throughout the torous water (the other 20% remaining in the drywell).

4. Due to water turbulence, the NUKON* debris remains perfectly distributed throughout the torous water for 60 seconds after the occurrence of the LOCA (Ref. I !). See Figure 2,

5. After 60 seconds, the torous water turbulence subsides and the NU KON* debris settles at a uniform rate of 1 inch /second (Ref. 4 & 11).

6. Once the NUKON* debris has settled below the level of the sump screens, none is drawn to those screens.

7. The torous water depth is 13'10" (above the torous bottom) (Ref. 8).

8. NUKON* debris in the torous that does not get drawn onto the sump screens settles onto the torous bottom.

9. All NUKON* debris drawn to the sump screens collects on the screens (as opposed to passing through).

10. The recirculation water is chemically neutral, having a pH value about equal to 7.0.

I1. The analysis will consider the effects of either three LPCI pumps operating simultaneously or of one core spray pump and two LPCI pumps operating simultaneously (Ref. 7).

Page 4-6

i-Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1 i 1 l 1

Page 5 l

liNGINEERING_DAT.A 4

1. liach of the two core spray pumps has a Dow capacity of 3540 gpm (Ref. 7).

4 J

i 2. liaeh of the four LPCI pumps has a Dow ra'e of 4,000 gpm. Only three of the four pump < will oivrate following a LOCA, for a total of 12,000 gpm now rate (Ref. 7).

3. The N PSI I Available for the LPSI System is 31.0 ft. of water and the NPSH Required j is 29.0 ft. of water (Ref. 7).

, 4 . liaeh suetion sitie RC line connects into the side of the RPV and turns down 90' as show n in llel. h.

5. There are four equally spaced sump strainersin the torous. These are positioned 7 feet

olT the torous bottom and have 20" diameter by 14" high, with 1/8" opening semen ma terial ( Ref.1").

6 The torous contains a volume of 72,910 ft' of water and has a diameter of 27'8"(the water Glis to a depth of 13'10")(Refs. 7 & 8).

I 7. The N U KO N

• debris sinks at a uniform rate of 1 inch /sec in non turbulent water (Ref.

4L

S. Within 10 seconds following the LOCA, all the core spray and LPCI pumps that am going to operate have started (with a total now rate of 12,000 gpm)(Ref. 7).

9. The head loss of water Dowing through NUKON* debris lodged on a screen is l calculated as aller.1 & 5): <

I ' Equ 1 d 11 = 68.3 vw '" th '"

) where v, = water velocity (IVsec) through the screen

~

th = NUKON* debris thickness on screen (ft) i , d 11 = head loss (feet of water) across the NUKON* debris 5

Page 4-7

_ - . . , . . , . . - , . ~ _ _ . ~ _ _ _ _ - , . . -

i Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1 e

l i

l Page 6 l

CALCULATIONS

1. Q111ultitLolMUKON" insniation Destroyed by LOCA 11.561.!! of 3" thick NUKON*, on one of the two RC discharge lines,is destroyed by 1

a I.OCA at one of the nozzles. See Figure 1.

i ,

1 Volume of NUKON" Debris = V,,,,

i l 3

= x (28 in i 2(3in) ) (11.56 ft) (3 in) / (144 in'/ft')

25.7 ft' i

j 2. f.httultity.xf N.UKON" Debris Trnnsnorted to Torous 1

i V'ynx 0.8 V ui,g =- (0.8) (25.7 ft') = 20.6 ft'

3. Concelltrativiter NUKON* Debris in Torous Water i '

j V.,,,, 72,910 ft' . (Ref. 8)

C,, V'si,g / V.n,g = 20.6 ft'/ 72,910 ft' 2.825 x 10

• ft' NUKON* debris /ft' water

-1 Iintelotthe_htUXON* Debris to Settle Below the 12 vel of the Sump Screens NUKON' Debris Sink Rate = 1 inch /sec = 0.0833 ft/sec Vertical difference between water level and sump screens = h.

l 13'i0" - 7' = 6'10" = 6.83 ft.

\

t ,,,, h,,,,/v,,,, = (6.83 ft/0.0833 IVsec) = 82 seconds J

Page 4-8

. -% - w,,ww.ame _

j ,

4

Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev. I Page 7 4

i

5. CikulatietLof time for NUKON Debris to Sink to Torous Bottom i

O t .y = (60 + 82) sec = 142 sec

! 6. Gilc11atieJLef(_)uantity of NUKON* Debris Drawn to Each Stimn Screen L

l \

water flow rate = Qw = (12,000 gpm)(0.002228 ft'/sec/gpm) /4 l

= 6.69 ft'/sec l J

Quantity of NUKON* Debris Drawn to Each Sump Screen l V %. =CQw o d t,

= (2.825 x 10" ft'/ft') (6.69 ft'/sec) (142 sec)

= 0.268 ft'  !

l i

I

7. Calculatio1LOf Eh h Stimn Screen Face Area i A.r y x D ,J/4 + x Dw h J

j where D.r y screen diameter = 20" h screen height = 14" A. m - 8.29 ft2 i S Calutlation of Water Velocity through Fach Sumn Screen 1

vy, = Q/ A .y = 26.74 ft'/sec / (8.29 ft') 4 = 0.806 ft/sec .

9 Calculatio1Lof NUKON* Debris Thickness on each Sumn Screen th = Vuy / A cs = 0.268 ft' / 8.29 ft' = 0.0324 ft.

4 4

Page 4-9

_ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ - . _ j

s Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1 j i

i l

Page 8 i

I

^

10. Calculation of Water Head Loss Across Stimn Screen 611 = 68.3 vy .'" th *

. - 68.3 (0.806 IVsec)" (0.0324 ft)*

1.18 ft. of water head loss I 1. Calculation of NPSH Margin NPSil s, = NPSH3 - NPSH, = (31.0 - 29.0) ft

= 2.0 ft of water i

i 4

)

l Page 4-10

. _ ___ __ . _ . . _ _ ~ _ . .

1 Calculation No. NSP-ECCS-1, Rev.1

1 2

1

' I Page 9 1 1

l.

CORCLUSIONS i

The calculated value ord II head loss is 1.18 R of water. This is less than the 2.0 R. of NPSH Margin we have available. Under the conditions given for NPSH Available and NPSH Required, the Mon tieello Plant with NUKON* Insulation meets the requirements of USNRC -

Regulatory Guitte l.S2. Rev.1.

I i

f a

i l

l f

Page 4-11

..._,_. .- _.. _ -__ - - - _ . = _ - _ - ~ _ - .,_ _ _ _ _

f_ / .

i -

) *

~ ~ ' .'

s. ?g. ,a $ .. t h

.~ff. hp  ; h t ~

/

(z) PW-s~

'[ , , i k h,

[ ,

, ) ,

_g3,p g .

^

- g- /

L64ro23-yK '

M-6 l

. =

, .l Ni . .

y/ l/

~ _. _

g d '

, _ 4, . >J

/ - ELEV. = %l'_ It" _ .a l ) p -q EL--A+ .s' ,

.' /

\

/ s n

%g IS - /

. Fw- --.-- 14 si.,- qv . . g

j E '

l

~

2. fr" N /' S PtTA'o w 3 --

i l ,

E .'.~ . .'g.. - .

g SUProer RIO

,/,

.(0CA % o} ArbA'ic.

. FW- !_ '.__l [ o % sis m

ELEV. =jS3 '-O '

C 5 /

l'.'l I' __\1

'-- '- J

"" N4

\*LM-oli_MK

\ SEdfloM E-g .Tohklq% :: ll$k L

- , l C

.( m:ikh hl. rf t o m j' 4

2

~

~

s.

\

i.

\

g SUPrvrtr g

g

s. reise

..- . E CUTLET l

i I

I suPPorcr k

~)

i rRibJcip /g l

n _

i  ; _ _ _ _ j______________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __

~ " -

Nsle~ J Plant Hevision 3 1

'NEQ Central File .

a l

4 l

t 9 70 I

.350 -

Tsax = 335'F $ D 300 sec.

i k -

l

• Eft: fless Castela=rn; Temperstws/.'. . 60 Prettuce Pesfilen ere tensee.

l tive esopolitet of the 1tstting l l D- ectident condittens des to altsee g

l ,

a feelrestatten er staan line , g treak teside samtatement.

, l 1 .

l ,N' 4

= 40 I e4 l

,,{ , 4 x = 41 A Psts 8 1 arc.

, i v=+,g y jawt es i

[ '"'h 30 l

' s - -

l 8

_ ise e

/ -

i l N e

" i g. '

200 l

/ '

l 4  %  %

- 10

/

i s

_, . .a 3 . .

gg6 39j l 103 104 105 10*1 10 0 101 I0 18 -

atopays I - -

i Tint (ste.)

l . PRDFILE 3.2.1 -INmfEl.L TUPEMTURE Ntb PftES$URE RESPORSE-i

' l= { G V (LE 2 -

i

} Part B - Environmental Specifications B.2.4 0719s i

i Page 4-13

. . ,, . ,. , rm -- - - - . - --

+ .

Performance Contracting..Inc.

Power and Process Division _ _ . . _ _ . _

j l _ .._ _..

1

=

1

l

WEIGHT PER LINEAR FOOT OF NUKON PIPING (LB/FT)

WITH 36/22 GAUGE STAINLESS STEEL JACKET:

i PIPE SZIE THICKNESS IN INCHES

! IPS 1 1.5 2_ 2.5 3 3.5 -

4 e

! 0.50 1.6 2.1 2.9 3.6 4.3 5.0 7.2 O.75 1.6 2.2 3.0 3.7 4.4 5.1 -7.4 L 1.00 1.8 . 2.3 3.2 3.8 4.5 5.3 7.6 y 1.25 1.9 2.4 3.4 4.0 . 4.7 6.9 7.9

j. 1.50 2.0 2.5' 3.5 4.2 '4.9 7.1 8.1 2.00 2.2 2.7 ' 3.8 4.4 5.2 7.5 8.5 2.50 2.4 2.9~ 4.0 4.7 6.9 7.9 8.9 :

3.00 2.6 3.2 4.4 5.1 7.4 8.4 '

9.4 3.50 2.8 3.4 4.0 6.2 7.8 8.8 9.8 l

i 4.00 3.0 3.6 4.3 6.5 8.2- 9.2 10.2 4.50 3.2 3.8 5.9 6.8 8.5 , 9 '.6 10.6 6.00 -

3.2 6.0 6.9 7.9 9.8 10.9 12.0 8.00 6.3 7.2 8.1 9.1 11.3. 12.4 13.6 10 .00 7.1 8.0 8.9 10.0 12.3 13.5 14.7 12.00 8.2 9.1 10.1 11.2 13.9 15.0 16.3 14.00 9.3 10 .3 11.3 12.4 15 .4 16.6 17 .9 16.00 10.3 11.4 12.5 13.7 14.9- 18.2 19.5 18.00 11.4 12.5 13.7 14.9 16.2 19 .7 21.1 20.00 12.9 14.1 15.3 16.6 17.9 21.7' 23.2 22.00 14.0 15 .2 16.5 17.8 19.2 23.3 24.8 24.00 15 .1 16.3 17.7 19.0 20.5 '24.8 26.4 26.00 16.1 17.5 18 .8 20.3 21.8 26.4- .28.0 28.00 17.2 18.6 20.0 21.5 23.1 28.0 29.6

'30.00 18.3 19.7 21.2 22.8 24.3 29.5 31.3 32.00 19.4 20.9 22.4 24.0 25.6 31.1 32.9 34.00 ,20.4 22.0 23.6 25.2 26.9 32.6 34.5 36.00 21.5 23.1 24.8 26.5 28.2 34.2- 36.1 38.00 22.6 24.2 25.9 27.7 29.5 35.8 37.7 40.00 23.7 25.4 27.1 28.9 30.8 37.3 39.3 42.00 24.8 26.5 28.3 30.2 32.1 38.9 40.9 2

WEIGirr PER SQUARE FOOT OF. NUKON EQUIPMENT PADS (LB/FT )

WITH 22 CAUCE STAINLESS STEEL 1.9 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.4 2.6 2.7 TLAT

- _ - . . - . - . . ~ _ . _- .. . - . _ - . . - . - ~ . - - . . - -

Performance Contracting. Inc.

~

Power and Process Division

~

4 g _. -. .. .- _ . - . _ . - . - . . .s-_...__._. \

3 i WEIGHT PER LINEAR FOOT OF NUKON PIPING (LB/FT)

WITHOUT STAINLESS STEEL JACKET l

s PIPE SZIE THICKNESS Di INotES -l IPS 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 .j

0.50 0.6 0.9 1.5 1.9

~

0.75 2.3 2.9 3.4 0.6 0.9 1.5 2.0 2.4 2.9-1.00 0.7 3.5 'i 0.9 1.6 ,. 2. 0 2.5 3.1 3.6 -l 1.25 0.7 1.0 1.7 2.2 2.7' 1.50 '3.2 3.8-

! 0.7 1.1 1.8 2.3 2.7- 3.3 2.00 0.8 3.9 1.1 2.0 ' 2. 4' - 2.9 3.5 4.1 2.50 0.9 1.2 2.1 2.6 3.1 3.00 3.7 4.3 1.0 1.4 2.3 2.8 3.4 3.9 4.6 3.50 1.1 1.4 1.9 2.3 3.5 4

4.00 4.1 4.8 1.2 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.7 4.3 5.0 j 4.50 1.2 1.6 2.1 2.6 3.9 4.5 ~ 5.2.

l 6.00 1. 's 1.9 2.4 3.0- 4.5 5.2 8.00 5.9 1.8 2.3 2.9 3.5 5.3 6.0 6.8 10.00 2.1 2.6 3.2 ~3.8 5.8 i,

12.00 6.6 - 7.4 2.4 3.0 3.6 4.3 6.6 ~7.4 8.2 4

14.0G 2.7 3.3 4.0 4.8 7.3 8.2 16.00 9.1 <

! 3.0 3.7 4.5 5.2 6.1 9.0 10.0 5

18.00 3.4 4.1 4.9 5.7 6.6 9.8 > 10.8

20.00 3.7 4.5 - 5.3 6.2 7.2- 10.6' 11.7 l 22.00 4.0 4.8 5.7 6.7 7.7 11.4 24.00 12.6 4.3 5.2 6.2 7.2 8.2 12.2 13.4 26.00 4.7 5.6 6.6 7.7 - 8 .3 13.0 14.3 t

28.00 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.1 9.3 13.8 30.00 15.1

' 5.3 5.4 7.5 8.6 9.8 14.7 16.0 32.00 5.6 6.7 7.9 9.1 10.4 15 .5 16.9 4

34.00 6.0 7.1 8.3 9.6 10 .9 16.3 17.7

36.00 6.3 7.5 8.8 10.1 11.5 17.1 18.6

' 38.00 6.6 7.9 9.2 10.6 12.0 17.9 19.5-i 40.00 6.9 8.2 9.6 11.1 12.5 18.7 20.3 i

! 42.00 7.2 8.6 10.1 11.5 13.1 19 .5 21.2 WEIGHT PER SQUARE TOOT OF NUKON EQUIPMDfT PADS (I.B/FT2 )

s FLAT 0.6 0.8 0.9 1.0 .1.2 1.3 1.5 i .

i I

• a og e o o so a I

Page 4-15 ,2

. .~ ~. , .-- - --

Performance Contracting, Inc.

Power and Process Division l

1 i

1 1

WEIGHT PER LINEAR FOOT OF NUKON PIPING (LB/FT) l WITH MAXIMUM SUPPORT JACKETING (MSJ)

THICKNESS IN INCHES PIPE SIZE NPS 1" 1.5" 2" 2.5" 3" .3.5" 4" 3.00 3.2 3.9 5.3 6.1 8.3 9.6 10 .7 3.50 3.5 4.2 4.9 7.2 8.9 10.0 - 11.2 4.00 3.7 4.4 5.2 7.6 9.1 10.5 11.6~

6.00 6.1 7.0 8.1 9.2- 11.0 12.4 13.6.

8.00 7.4 8.5 9.4 10.6 12.8 14.1- 15.4 10.00 8.4 9.4 10.4 11.7 13.8 15.4 16.7 12.00 9.7 10.7 11.8 13.0 15.9 17.1 18.5-14.00 10.9 12.0 13.2 14.4 .17.5 18.8' 20.2 16.00 12.1 13.3 14.5 15.9 17.2 20.6 22.0 18.00 13.4 14.6 15.9 17.2 18.7 22.3' 23.8 20.00 15.1 16.4 17.7 19.1- 20.6- 24.5 26.1 22.00 16.4 17.7 18.9 20.5 21.8 26.3 27.9 24.00 17.7 19.0 20.5 21.9 23.3 27.9 29.3 26.00 18.9 20.4 21.8 23.4 24.8. 29.7 31.4 28.00 20.2 21.7 23.2 24.8 26.3- 31.5' 33.2 30.00 21.5 23.0 24.6 26.3 27.7 33.2 35.1 32.00 22.6 24.2 26.0 27.7 29.2 - 35.0 36.9 34.00 23.9 25.6 27.4 29.1 30.7 36.7 38.7 36.00 25.2 26.9 28.7 30.6 32.1 .38.5 40.5 38.00 26.5 28.2 30.0 32.0 33.6 40.3 42.3 40.00 27.8 29.6 31.4 33.3 35.1 42.0 44.1 42.00 29.1 30.9 32.8 34.8 36.6 42.8 45.9 1 +

2-i

4. ,g . . .

" ' Page 4-16

Response to USNRC Request For Additional Information March 4,1997 Attachment 5 b

i i

SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION FOR LICENSE AMENDMENT REOUEST l DATED JANUARY 23.1997 l 3

! NEDO-32418. SOURCE OF INPUT PARAMETERS 1 1 i I Exhibit D of our License Amendment Request dated January 23,1997, contained a report

, prepared by the General Electric Company, NEDO-32418, "Monticello Nuclear l Generating Plant Design Basis Accident Containment Pressure and Temperature Response for USAR Update," December,1994.

1 Description of Computer Codes General Electric (GE) used the M3CPT short-term and the HXSIZ long-term containment codes to perform the analyses documented in NEDO-32418. The M3CPT05V code was

- used to determine the vessel LOCA blowdown and short-term containment response.

< This modelis described in References 1, 2, and 3. References 1 and 2 describe the basic p containment analytical models used in GE codes. Reference 3 describes the vessel break I i flow model used for Mark I containment analyses.

The HXSIZO3V code was used to determine the long-term containment response. The . l j HXSIZ code is documuted in Reference 4.

The GE methods have been reviewed by the NRC (References 5 and 6) 4 h

Input Parameters s

1 l Input par:seters are shown on the attached Table 1. The basis for all inputs is provided with references and notes.

Input parameters are based primarily on:

4

- e Data used in the earlier NEDO-30485 analysis which was approved by the NRC 2

l

• Data provided in the Monticello Update Safety Analysis Report i e Data used in the Mark I Containment Long Term Program.

i i

i j

1 Page 5 - 1

- . - , . , . - - , , . ~, - -,

. . _ . . _ . . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . _ . _ . . - . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . ~ . _ , . _ _ . _ _ - . _ . . . . . . . . _ _ . _

J Response to USNRC Request For Additional Information March 4,1997

! Attachment 5 I

1 References 3

1. General Electric Company, "The GE Pressure Suppression Containment System Analytical Model," NEDO-10320, April,1971.

i

) 2. General Electric Company, "The General Electric Mark III Pressure Suppression Containment System Analytical Model," NEDO-20533, June,1974 4 3. General Electric Company, " Maximum Discharge of Liquid-Vapor Mixtures from l Vessels," NEDO-21052, September,1975.

4 General Electric Company, "The General Electric Mark III Pressure Suppression l

, Containment System Analytical Model - Supplement 1," NEDO-20533-1, 2

September,1975.

5. NUREG-0661, " Mark I Containment Long-Term Program Safety Evaluation l

Report," July,1980.

6. NUREG-0800, USNRC Standard Review Plan, Section 6.2.1.1.C," Pressure-

{ Suppression Type BWR Containments," Revision 6, August,1984.

Page 5 - 2

TABLE 1 '- INPUT PARAMETERS FOR MONTICELLO CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS - PAGEl-1

. i RESOLT ED '

PROPOSED PROPOSED FOR PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS Core Thermal Power (102% of MWt 1703 (I.2) 1703 1703 Rated Power) t Drywell Free (Airspace) Volume f13 134.200 (3) 1.2 134.200 D4 200 (including vent system) ,

v.

f s' Initial Suppression Chamber Free fi3

% Volume v, ( Airspace)

O Low Water Level (LWL) 108.250 (3.4) 1.2 108.250 108.250 High Water Level 103.340 1.2 103.340 103.340 (3,4)

Initial Suppression Pool volume fi3 ,

Min. Water Level (LWL) 68.000 (2.3) 1.2.10 68.000 68.000 IIigh Water Level (IIWL)

(3.4.5) 1.2.10 72.910 72.910  ;

• Niimbers shown in ( ) correspond to notes at the end of Table I

. - . - - . - - . -- . . . . . - . - . . . . ~ . . . . ..- .. ...

TABLE I -INPUT PARAMETERS FOR MONTICEl.LO CONTAINh'ENT ANALYSIS PAGE l-2 i RESOLVED PROPOSED PROPOSED FOR PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS '

Initial Drywell Pressure psig 1.0 ( 2 ) 1.3 1.0 1.0 Initial Drywell Temperature F 135 ( 2 i 1.2.3 135 135 Initial Drywell Relative Humidity  % 20 ( 2 ) 1.3 20 20 t

~

Initial Suppression Chamber psig 1.0 ( 2 ) 1.3 1.0 1.0 t Pressure i Operating Drywell-to-Wetwell psid 0.0 ( 2 ) 0.0 0.0 i Diff'erential Pressure - j m ,

[

y Initial Suppression Chamber F 90 ( 2 ) 1 90 90

• - Airspace Temperature Initial Suppression Chamber  % 100 (2) 1 100 100 '

t Airspace Relative Humidity Initial Suppression Pool F 90 ( 2) 1.10.a 90 90 .

Temperature No. of Downcomers 96 ( 3.11 ) 1 96 96 Total Vent Downcomer Area ft2 289.65 1 289.65 289.65 (based on 96 downcomers with a (3.11 )  !

1.96" inner diameter) .

t i

• Numbers shown in ( } correspond to notes at the end of Table 1

TABLE 1 "12Uz' PARAMETERS FOR MONTICELLO CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS PAGE l-3

~

RESOLVED PROIOSED PROPOSED FOR.

PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS 4

Initial Downcomer Submergence fl IIigh Water Level 3.58 ( 4) 1 3.58 3.58 Low Water Level 3.0 (4) 1 3.0 3.0 E

T Downcomer I.D. 11 1.96 ( 3.11 ) 1 1.96 1.96 Vent System Flow Path Loss 5.17 ( 3.11 ) 7 S.17 5.17 Coefficient (includes exit loss) .-

Supp Cienber(Toms) Major ft 49.0(3.1I) 1 49.0 49.0 Radius Supp. Chamber (Torus) Minor fl 13.883 1 13.883 13.883 Radius (3.11 )

No. of Main Vents 8 (3.11 ) 1 8 g No. of Vent IIeader Mitre Bends 16 ( 3.11 ) I 16 16

• Nnnders shmvn in ( ) corremond in notes at the end orTable 3

TABLE 1 - INPUT PARAMETERS FOR MONTICEi LO CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS - PAGE l-4 .

~

RESOLVED PROPOSED PROPOSED FOR PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS Main Vent I. D. ft 6.75(3.11 ) 1 6.75 6.75 Downcomer I. D. ft 1.96 ( 3.11 ) 1 1.96 1.96 Vent IIeader I. D. ft 4.75 (3.11 1 1 4.75 4.75 Angle of Main Vent with IIorizontal deg 20.13 (3.11 ) 1 20.13 20.I3 Angle of First Downcomer Mitre deg ."60.0 (3.11 ) 1 60.0 60.0 Bend with IIorizontal

?

oo

[ Suppression Pool Surface Area (in fl2 4 contact with suppression chamber air space)

Minimum 8429 (3) 1 8429 8429 Maximum 8501 G) 1 8501 8501 Suppression Chamber-to-Drywell Vacuum Breaker Opening Diff.

Press

- start psid 0.096 ( 3 )- 1 0.096 0.096

- full open psid 0.242 ( 3 ) 1 0.0242 0.0242 Breaker Valve Opening Time sec 1.0 ( 3 ) 1 1.0 1.0

• Numbers shown in ( ) correspond to notes at the end of Table i

TABLE I - INPUT PARAMETERS FOR MONTICELLO CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS PAGE l-5

~

RESOLVED PROPOSED PROPOSED FOR PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS t

Supp. Chamber-to-Drywell Vacuum ft2 1 65 (3 ) 1 1.65 1.65 Breaker Flow Area (per valve ,

system)

Supp. Chamber-to-Drywell Vacuum 3.804 ( 3 ) 1 3.804 3.804 Breaker Flow Loss Coeflicient per Valve System z s'

T

~

No. of Supp. Chamber-to-Dgwell 8( 3 ) 1 8 8 Vacuum Breaker Systems LPCUContainment Cooling Service F 90 ( 2 1 3 . 90 90 Water Temperature LPCUContainment Cooling Pump hp 600 ( 2) 8 600 600 Heat (per pump) s

• Numbers shown in ( ) conespond to notes at the end of Tabic I

. = . .

~

TABLE I - INPUT PARAMETERS FOR MONTICELLO CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS ,

PAGE l-6 ..

~

RESOLVED PROPOSED PROPOSED FOR PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS Core Spray Pump Heat (per pump) ' hp 800 ( 2 ) 8 800 800 LPCI/ Containment Cooling System sec _600 (2.8) 2.3 600 600 ,

in Containment Cooling mode (after m LOCA signal) .

p ECCS & Containment Cooling ,

g Configuration to be Used For

, Long-term DBA-LOCA Pressure 4 and Temperature Analysis .

No. of RHR Pumps 1 9 1 1 No. of Service Water Pumps 1 9 1 1  ;

No. of Core Spray Pumps I 9 1 1 RHR Flowin Pool Cooling Mode gpm (6) 4000 15.I7 4000 Total Core Spray Pump Flow gpm- 3020 (2) 8 2700 14.15.17 2700 f Total LPCI Pump Flowin Vessel gpm 4000- 8 7740 (< 600s) 14.17 7740 (< 600s)

Injection Mode 4000 (> 600s) - 15.17 4000 (> 600s) t Total Service Water Pump Flow gpm (6) -0 (<600 s) 14.17 0 (<600 s) '

- 3500 (>600 s) 15.17 - 3500 (>600 si i

't;

• Numbers shown in ( ) correspond to notes at the end of Table 1

g.

m t TABLE 1 - INPUT PARAMETERS FOR MONTICELLO CONTAINMENT ANALYSIS. PAGE l-7 -

RESOLVED  :

PROPOSED PROPOSED FOR PARAMETER UNITS BY GENE REFERENCE BY NSP REFERENCE ANALYSIS '

RHR Heat Exchanger K in Btin/s- (6) 143.I 16.17 143.1 Suppression Pool Cooling Mode F DBA-LOCA Break Area ft2 4.09 (9) 6 4.095 14.17 4.095 Feedwater Addition (to RPV after Inputs villbe 1 11 Per telecon of Inputs will be start of event; mass and energy) basedcn 9/26/94 with based on attached S. Shirey OK attached Table 2.2 to use GE Table 2.2

= from proposed from

- Referes.ce i1 inputs (12) Reference 11 _

p (10) (10,12)

Y e

t i

t i

b

• Numters shown in ( ) correspond to notes at the end of Table I

. . . ___ .-- - - _ - - _ _ _ - - _ _ _ - _ - - . - - - - _ _ _ _ - _ - _ - - - _ - - - - =

NOTES FOR TABLE I PAGE l-8 N_Q NOTES -

1. Analyses will be performed based on 102% of tiie rated power per Regulatory Guide 1.49.-

2. perating parameter used in NEDC-30485 analvsis (Reference 3).

3. These are based on data given in the Mark I containment data book for Monticello (Reference 1) which was generated during the Mark I Contamment Long-Term Program.

4. Vent submergence, wetwell water volumes and airspace volumes corresponding to Iligh Water Level (IIWL) will be used for analysis of the containment short-term DBA-LOCA response to maximize the peak drywell pressure.

Vent submergence, wetwell water volumes and airspace volumes corresponding to Low Water Level (LWL) will be m used for analysis of the DBA-LOCA suppression pool long-term temperature response and containment pressure and l g temperature response to maximize the long-term suppression pool temperature response.

Y 5. Reference 13 (attached), from Harold Paustian of NSP, indicated that the maximum suppression pool volume with a o g dw-to-ww delta P given in Reference 1, may be incorrect. NSP should confirm the correct value to use. { Note, in reply to Mr. Paustian letter, GENE confirmed ti.ht this inconsistency would not impact the MELLLA containment analysis referred to in his letter). ,

- . . . - - - - _ - . . - - . - . . . - . . - . . . ~ . . .

=

~!

NOTES FOR TABLE 1 - PAGE l . 1 M NOTES '

l I

6. Per Reference 9, it is requested that NSP provide the values of pump flow for i RIIR pump and the pump flow for 1 i SW pump plus the corresponding RIIR heat exchanger K value (Btu /sec- F) to use in the analysis. .

t "K" is defined as:  ?

Q = K(Tp - Tsw) -

where: l l

Q = heat exchanger energy removed @tu/sec)

Tp = Supppression pool temperaturc, mto heat exchanger ( F)

~

Tsw = Service water inlet temperature ( F)  :

K = heat exchanger 'ieat transfer coefficient (btu /sec *F)  :

m .

S 7. During analysis of the long-term containment response all the rated pump heat per pump is added to the

[i containment / vessel system to maxinne long-term suppression pool temperature. j C 8. The ECCS and containment configuration for the long-term DBA-LOCA analyses will be based on the worst-case t configuration which assumes the availability of 3 pumps. It is assumed that 2 LPCI and 1 LPCS pumps are in vessel injection mode until 600 seconds. After 600 seconds 1 LPCI pump is switched to RIIR pool coolmg mode and '4 LPCI  !

is turned off and replaced by 1 SW pump to initiate containment cooling. NSP should confirm that they can support operation action at 600 seconds to mitiate sappression pool cooling.

9. This break area was originally evaluated in Reference 6 and used for the Reference 3 analysis to update the USAR. I

10. All feedwater system mass and energy which increases the peak suppression pool temperature will be added.

The feedwater mputs will be based on the feedwater data provided to GE during the Mark I LTP in Reference 1 I  !

which is Reference B of the Monticello containment data book 22A5751. This data was previosly used for the .

Reference 12 analysis (summarized in UFSAR Sec 5.2.3.5.4 & UFSAR Table 5.2-6).  !

i 11 Inputs associated with the torus and vent system geometry were provided in Section 3.5 of Reference I and have been used in the short-term DBA-LOCA analyses of References 3,4,5 and 6.

r i

NOTES FOR TABLE I PAGE l-10 ,,

NO. NOTES 12 NSP requested in Reference 17 that FW flow proposed by GE not be included in analysis since it was expected that FW flow would be unavailable with loss of offsite power. During the telecon of 9/26/94 between S. Mintz (GE) and S. Shirey (NSP) the use of FW flow inputs was discussed'and NSP concurred with using the GE proposed FW input.  :

T t Y

C

/

o REFERENCES FOR TABLE I P/.GE l-11 ,

M REFERENCE _

i 1 Monticello Containment Data Book,22A5751, Rev 4, Nov.1983.

2. Monticello USAR, Section 5.2, Table 5.2.1

3. NEDO-30485, "Monticello Design Basis Accident Containment Pressure and Temperature Response for FSAR Update 4 GE NEDO-24576, " Mark 1 Containment Program, Plant Unique Load Definition, Monticello Nuclear Plant," Rev. I, October 1981.

1

5. NEDC-31849P, " Maximum Extended. Load Line Limit Analysis for Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, Cycle 15,"

m June 1992.

m 5 6. NEDO-30477, " Safety Analysis of the RIIR intertie line, Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant, " June 1984

~

Y O 7. GE-NEDO-21888," Mark I Containment Program Load Definition Report," Rev. 2, November 1981.

8. UFSAR Section 6.2 (Tables 6.2.1, 6.2.2)

9. Letter, C N. Gallt (GE) to Mr. S. B. Kibler, "Monticello Nuclear Plant, Containment Analysis to Update the Long-Term DBA-LOCA Containment Pressure and Temperature Response Curves of NEDO-30485," GE Proposal No.

295-lENI A-EKI, Rev. l., May 26,1994.

10. Monticello Technical Specifications (T/S) T/S 3 7/4.7 Rev 105 i

10.a Monticello Technical Specifications (T/S) T/S 3.7/4.7 Rev i 13 ,

11. Nutech Document NSP-11-040, Rev. 2, 30.207.0013, " Piping System Data Calculation for Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant," June 1978. (Cover page and Table 2.2 from report attached.)

(Reference B in Monticello containment data book 22A5751.)

12, NEDC-24387-P, " Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant Suppression Pool Temperature Response," December 1981.

+

REFERENCES FOR TABLE I PAGE l-12 ,

HQ REFERENCE

13. Letter, II. H. Paustian (NSP) to S. Wolf (GE), (no title) With corrected torus Monticello water volume for operation without drywell-to-wetwell pressure difference, March 30,1992. (Attached)

14. NEDC-31786P, Monticello SAFER /GESTR-LOCA Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analysis, December 1990. { Identified by NSP in Reference 17}

15. Design Basis Document for Residual IIcat Removal System DBD B.3.4,3/23/94 { Identified by NSP in Reference 17} j ia 16. NSP Calc # CA-94-066 (Identified by NSP in Reference 17}

17. Letter, S. Shirey to S.Minu:, Untitled, Transnys NSP comments on GE proposed inputs to Monticello containment analysis, 9/2/94. <

e T

T .

E  :

l r

i f

k

s -

I  ; .

CONTAINh1ENT ANAL.YSIS INPtiT PAllAMiiTlittS VliltlFICATION i Olth!

FOR MONTICEl.l.O 4

Prepared by:

Signature,' NanW, Organization.

, /VF f[J//Z_

Date GE Nuclear Energy ,

t Verified and Commented by. ,

e

? .

~

54 9lA/ l+/

Datd

~

Signatufe, Name danization NSP C

Final Values Resolved by:

.h , ft/P ?l2 7l? Y~~

Signature, N6 die, GTganization, Date -

GE Nuclear Energy i

'_Y <^t ~

0 b __ -

ignature, ame, ahization, NSP Datg ' -

4 6

4

_____._____________._m. _ _ . _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _