ML20140C878

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Affidavit of Lt Gesinski Re Contention 5 Concerning Seismic Loads on Fuel Assemblies.Methodology Used in Analysis Appropriate & Results Obtained from Analysis Accurate. Summary of Experience Encl
ML20140C878
Person / Time
Site: Turkey Point  NextEra Energy icon.png
Issue date: 01/21/1986
From: Gesinski L
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO., WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC COMPANY, DIV OF CBS CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20140C819 List:
References
OLA-2, NUDOCS 8601290015
Download: ML20140C878 (7)
v • d • e


Text

-

/- Ng 3 -p -

N

\

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

.$ NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION '6; S//g , _

g toh BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD.; ej]w /.b , .'" J /4

- i y

.x,%'.y c)

N4%g

) _

In the Matter of

)

) Docket Nos. 50-250-OLA-2 FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY ) 50-251-OLA-2

)

(Turkey Point Nuclear Generating ) (Spent Fuel Pool Expansion)

Units 3 and 4) )

)

)

AFFIDAVIT OF LEONARD T. GESINSKI ON CONTENTION NO. 5

1. My name is Leonard T. Gesinski. I am a Fellow Engineer in the Nuclear Fuel Division of Westinghouse Electric Corporation. My business address is Westinghouse Electric Corporation, P.O. Box 3912, Pittsburgh, PA.

15230. A summary of my professional qualifications and experience is attached hereto as Exhibit A, which is incorporated herein by reference.

2. The purpose of my affidavit is to address Contention No. 5 as limited to the effects of seismic loads that the Turkey Point spent fuel storage racks could exert upon the fuel assemblies within the spent fuel storage racks. I have reviewed the Westinghouse analysis of the impact of seismic loads upon fuel assemblies stored in the Turkey Point spent fuel storage racks and have verified that the methodology used in the analysis was 8601290015$hbo ADOCK 50 PDR PDR G

s appropriate and that the results obtained from the analysis are accurate. The Affidavit of Harry E. Flanders, Jr.

on Contention Number 5 addresses the seismic analysis of the spent fuel storage racks.

3. Contention No. 5 and the bases for the contention are as follows:

Contention 5 That the main safety function of the spent fuel pool which is to maintain the spent fuel assemblies in a safe configuration through all environmental and abnormal loadings, may not be met as a result of a recently brought to light unreviewed safety question involved in the current cer'ck design that allows racks whose outer rows ovarhang the support pads in the spent fuel pool. Thus, t.he amendments should be revoked.

Bases for Contention In a February 1, 1985 letter from Williams, FPL, to Varga, NRC, which describes the potential for rack lift-off under seismic event conditions (sic).

This is clearly an unreviewed safety question that demands a safety analysis of all seismic and hurricane conditions and their potential impact on the racks in question before the license amendments are issued, because of the potential to increase the possibility of an accident previously evaluate (sic), or to create the possibility of a new or different kind of accident caused by loss of structural integrity. If integrity is lost, the damaged fuel rods could cause a criticality accident.

(Hurricane loads were rejected as a basis for Contention 3 in the Licensing Board's Memorandum and Order of September 16, 1985).

4. The design of the Turkey Point spent fuel storage racks is described in the Affidavit of William A. Boyd on Contention 10 and Harry E. Flanders, Jr. on Contention Number 5. Each Turkey Point fuel assembly consists of a i

15x15 array of cylindrical fuel rods, approximately 8.5 inches square and 12 feet in length. Each rod contains uranium dioxide fuel pellets clad in Zircaloy tubing having an outside diameter of 0.422 inches and a wall thickness of 0.0243 inches. Inconel grids, positioned at vertical intervals along their length, maintain rod spacing and geometry.

5. The fuel assemblies and fuel rods have been designed to perform satisfactorily throughout their lifetime in the reactor. The loads, stresses, and strains resulting from the combined effects of flow induced vibrations earthquakes, reactor pressure, fission gas pressure, fuel growth, thermal strain, and differential expansion during both steady state and transient reactor operating conditions have been considered in the design of the fuel rods and fuel assemblies. These conditions in the reactor are far more severe than those postulated for the Turkey Point spent fuel pool during a seismic event, or during their potential storage period of forty years.

Thus, the stored spent fuel assemblies and fuel rods would be able to withstand a postulated seismic event at Turkey Point without loss of structural integrity.

6. A finite element analysis was performed to confirm that there would be no loss of integrity (breaching of the fuel rod cladding) in the stored spent fuel assemblies as a result of a postulated worst case safe shutdown 1

9

- earthquake (SSE). During a postulated seismic event at Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, the fuel assemblies in the spent fuel pool storage racks would contact the stainless steel walls of the storage rack cells due to the motion of the rack assembly relative to the motion of the fuel assemblies. Employing finite element methods of the type described in the Affidavit of Harry E. Flanders, Jr. on Contention Number 5, the maximum acceleration imposed upon a spent fuel assembly as a result of an SSE at Turkey Point was calculated to be 1.6 g (where g is the acceleration due to gravity at the earth's surface).

7. The maximum acceleration that a fuel rod in the fuel assemblies can sustain without cladding failure was also calculated, employing finite element analysis methods, for the irradiated fuel rods and their supporting grids. The finite element analysis method has been recognized by various NRC Regulatory Guides and industry codes, including the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Code, as an acceptable structural analysis method.

Specifically Section NG3200 Article A.1000 and A.ll10 recognize the acceptability of finite element analysis by the ASME.

The finite element method of analysis translates the structure being analyzed into a model consisting of discrete elements, each of which has stress and deflection characteristics easily defined by stresss strain theory.

_c_

. The structure, therefore, has been replaced by a network of finite elements whose material and structural properties are known and whose structural response can be represented mathematically by equations. These equations then can be solved to determine the results for the particular load conditions.

8. The results of the finite element analysis show that the spent fuel assemblies can sustain an acceleration of 36 g without localized cladding failure. Therefore the integrity of the fuel cladding will be maintained for the worst case seismic event because the 36 g acceleration required to produce fuel cladding failure is more than an order of magnitude greater than the 1.6 g acceleration that the fuel assemblies would experience in the Turkey Point spent fuel racks for the maximum anticipated earthquake (SSE).

FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETH NOT The foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. ,

h Leonard T"G'esinski STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA)

COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY )

f Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3/

day of Q w w. A , 1986. My commission expires /J -/ V-B 7

$ W

& _ARY NOT PUBLICm.P M '

LORRAINE M. PIPLICA. NOTARY PUBLIC MONROEV:LLE BORD. ALLIGHf hY COUNTY MY COMMISSION EXPIRES DEC 14.1987 Member. Penns',kanta Association of Notanes

EXHIBIT A STATEMENT OF PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS AND EXPERIENCE OF LEONARD T. GESINSKI My name is Leonard T. Gesinski and my business address is P.O. Box 3912, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15230. I am employed by Westinghouse Electric Corporation (Westinghouse) as a Fellow Engineer in the Nuclear Fuel Division.

1 I graduated from Pennsylvania State University with a l Bachelor of Science Degree in Engineering Mechanics in 1961 and a Master of Science Degree in Engineering Mechanics in 1963. I also completed 27 credits of graduate study in Mechanical Engineering at the University of Pittsburgh.

In June 1967, I joined Westinghouse in the Pressurized Water Reactor Systems Division. I was responsible for the structural dynamic analyses of reactor internals under various accident conditions. I was directly involved in the development of structural codes and in the dynamic analysis of reactor internals.

In March 1969, I was transferred to the Nuclear Fuel Division of Westinghouse, where I was responsible for developing analytical methods for evaluating nuclear fuel assemblies under seisreic and loss of coolant (LOCA) accident conditions. These analyses required the use of non-linear finite element structural analysis codes and cubstantial amounts of test information. I was responsible for defining and conducting the various types of fuel assembly and component tests used in support of the fuel assembly structural analysis. I authored numerous reports on the subject of fuel assembly accident analysis and structural testing. The non-linear dynamic analysis (time history) methods, which I initially developed (circa 1972) were eventually approved by the NRC and have been adopted by the various nuclear fuel vendors as a standard for evaluating fuel assembly seismic performance. As a part of that e'f fort, 'I alse; developed a complex non-linear finite element structural model to represent the mechanical response of a fuel assembly.

In November 1975, I was promoted by Westinghouse to Fellow Engineer with responsibility for specifying the fuel rod design parameters for first cores and reloads. I also have been responsible for directing and training other engineers in the area of fuel assembly structural analysis. I have been involved in numerous mechanical analyses and tests of various fuel assembly components and designs. I am currently responsible for performing the mechanical analysis of boiling water reactor (BWR) type fuel.

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

l A-2 From 1963 to 1965, I was employed by Westinghouse at the Astro Nuclear Laboratory where I was responsible for conducting vibration testing of nuclear rocket reactor components.

l From 1965 to 1967, I was employed by Rockwell Mfg. in Pittsburgh, Pa. as design engineer. My principal duties included design and development of high pressure valve products.

- - .- -s - - - - , . . . .,--,,-..-r--, -

- , - -- , -wr - ----

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20140C878&oldid=3367738"