ML20209J428

Annotated Memo Re Proposed Program for Verification of BWR Torus Capability,Per GE plant-specific Analytical Model for Quad Cities Unit 2.Means of Verification for Remaining Listed Plants Needed,Based on Tests at Browns Ferry Unit 1

ML20209J428
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry, Quad Cities, 05000000
Issue date:	02/21/1974
From:	Rieslind J US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To:	Giambusso A US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20209J032	List: ML20209J028 ML20209J102 ML20209J362 ML20209J414 ML20209J428 ML20209J450 ML20209J504 ML20210A204 ML20210A316 ML20210A365 ML20210A410 ML20210A454 ML20210A522 ML20210A538 ML20210A585 ML20210A633 ML20210A720 ML20210B005 ML20210B037 ML20210B073 ML20210B140 ML20210B165 ML20210B193 ML20210B233 ML20210B262 ML20210B269 ML20210B312 ML20210B376 ML20210B424
References
FOIA-87-40 NUDOCS 8705040285
Download: ML20209J428 (2)

Text

C

.s .. . , - .r f

_p j, .i" & '

/ _, .s v

^

p 'g

.^.-( f., . L '

p.

f 3 }..A S).a .f ... ., l , o yl 8c.. ( '

'_ I _

d Uu% k,: .._l C 6 . $ , m ,,_ t es gl,, ,, ,

February 21, 1974 gg , ,,

A. GIAh3USSO jfr thre,.e ~l THRU: D. J. Skovh6Et Q Q ,'F- .,.(, , y Q, 3.-

g L. Ziemann

% m A -(N; .t_.' 4.'- ...-[1 -

R ') ,,,

PROPOSED PROG FOR VERIFICATION OF BWR TORUS CAPABILITY b6 -w d&G .I '

d--f,s.+ M 1 '.i(,./

Two operating BWR plants, Quad-Cities Unit 2 and Browns Ferry Unit 1, lj .m %(

have reported abnormal occurrences concerning unexpected movements q ,

and stresses of the torus structure from the effects of relief valve ,

blowdowns. Although other operating BWR plants have reported no Ll , . (, .,

such experiences, we cannot conclude that out-of-normal movements and stresses have not occurred from the dynamic effects of relief (' ',,^ In~. -

valve blowdown at plants having a torus light bulb containment con- - , - ~ .

figuration. Torus structures exist in the following 22 plants: ,. .

~

Operating Plants (13) OL Review (7)

Oyster Creek . Fitzpatrick '/ul. -

Nine Mile Point 1 Browns Ferry 2 Dresden 2 & Browns Ferry 3 Dresden 3 Peach Bottom 3 Millstone Point 1 -Hatch 1 Monticello yE nrico Fermi 2-Pilgrim 1 Duane Arnold 1 Quad-Cities 1 Quad-Cities 2 CP Review (2)

Vermont Yankee Peach Botton 2 Hope Creek 1 (Newbold Island 1)

. Browns Ferry 1 Hope Creek 2 (Newbold Island 2)

Cooper In NED0-10859, now under review, GE presented an analytical model for ,

determining stresses in the torus structure of Quad-Cities Unit 2.

Based on tests performed at Quad-Cities Unit 2, the analytical model results indicate less stresses than those analyzed from meager test data and are considered unacceptable. Following analysis of extensive data obtained from relief valve blowdown tests at Browns Ferry Unit 1, ,

8705040285 870428 PDR FOIA THOMASB7-40 PDR

r

-.~

A. GIAMBUSSO February 21, 1974 CE, during a ceeting at the site, advised that the analytical mocel was not applicable to plants other than Quad-Cities. GE's evaluation of the blowdown effects at Browns Ferry Unit 1 is based entirely on structural test measurements. Based on preliminary evaluation of information received regarding Quad-Cities and Browns Ferry torus tests, the torus structures are expected to retain their capability through a significant portion of their life. However, whether or not fatigue failure will occur during the life of the plant cannot be predicted for facilities other than Browns Ferry Unit 1. Since it does not appear to be feasible to predict these dynamic effects analytically, it will be necessary to institute a test program utilizing structural response instrumentation which can measure the response on critical parts of the torus structure in order to pro-vide reasonable assurance that each BWR torus will be capable of performing its design function through the plant life.

During a meeting between R. Maccary, L. Shao, and S. Chan of TR and J. Stolz, F. Williams, and J. Riesland of RP, the overall problem was discussed and the following course of action was agreed upon.

Following our evaluation of the GE analysis of Browns Ferry Unit 1 test results, we will request GE to provide a topical report specifying a test program for the other BWR plants listed above and an inservice surveillance program for the torus. If GE objects to providing such a topical report, we shall request this info'rmation from the licensees of each of the above listed plants. Technical Review will be requested to review and comment on the topical reports when received.

The generic torus capability, including the review of the GE topical report on this subj ect, is presently being directed by ORB #2. Your concurrence with the proposed program, under the direction of ORB #2, is requested.

j J.Uf a J John I. Riesland e

i i

]