ML20210N035
| ML20210N035 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 08/09/1999 |
| From: | Stephen Dembek NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| To: | NRC (Affiliation Not Assigned) |
| References | |
| PROJECT-692 NUDOCS 9908100267 | |
| Download: ML20210N035 (21) | |
Text
..t August 9, 1999 COMPANY: FRAMATOME TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON JUNE 21,1999, TO DISCUSS FUTURE i
ELECTROSLEEVE TECHNOLOGY ACTIVITIES j
On June 21,1999, the NRC and Framatome Technologies incorporated (FTI) met in Rockville, J
' Maryland, to discuss the lessons learned and planned future actions as a result of the staffs review of the FTl electrosleeving methodology. Enclosure 1 is the list of attendees for this meeting, and Enclosure 2 is the slides presented by FTI.
1 The primary topics discussed during this meeting were the appropriate assumptions to be used in analyzing severe accident scenarios and the acceptable methods and assumptions to be used evaluating the structural capabilities of an electrosleeved tube. FTl indicated that it expects additional license amendments will be submitted in 1999 to use the electrosteeve technology.
. It was agreed at the conclusion of the meeting that the staff and FTl would meet later this year to discuss progress made in resolving these issues.
ORIG. SIGNED BY Steve Dembek, Section Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management 1
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 692
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Meeting Attendees
- 2. Meeting Slides cc w/encis: Mr. Michael Schoppman Mr. J. J. Kelly, Manager Licensing Manager B&W Owners' Group Services Framatome Technologies, Inc.
Framatome Technologies, Inc.
1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525 P.O. Box 10935 Rockville, MD 20852-1631 Lynchburg, VA 24506-0935 DISTRIBUTION
/
Hard Conv E-Mail
/
Docket File
, JZwolinski/SBlack CBeardslee - JStrosnider PUBLIC SRichards EHackett C
hIo}
PDIV-2 Reading CJamerson BBateman OGC.
GHolahan MMayfield ACRS JMuscara EThron SDembek CTinkler SLong To receive a copy of tnis cocument, inaicate v in tne box -
OFFICE PDIV-2/PM PDIV-2/LA' SDembek:rdtJamersord/
NAME -
DATE f / T /99 8 / 9 /99 h 0 bi
. DOCUMENT NAME: G:\\PDIV-2\\Framatome\\MTS6-21.wpd 9 n n n p.,,,,
OFFICIAL RECORD COPY 9908100267 990809
~
PDR TOPRP ENVFRAMA C
POR t o t m) -
u 9 -
yn Mkiq p
UNITED STATES g
,j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
2 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20066 0001 s,*****/
August 9, 1999 COMPANY: FRAMATOME TECHNOLOGIES INCORPORATED
SUBJECT:
SUMMARY
OF MEETING HELD ON JUNE 21,1999 TO DISCUSS FUTURE
)
ELECTROSLEEVE TECHNOLOGY ACTIVITIES On June 21,1999, the NRC and Framatome Technologies incorporated (FTI) met in Rockville, Maryland, to discuss the lessons leamed and planned future actions as a result of the staffs review of the FTl electrosleeving methodology. Enclosure 1 is the list of attendees for this meeting, and Enclosure 2 is the slides presented by FTI.
The primary topics discussed during this meeting were the appropriate assumptions to be used in analyzing severe accident scenarios and the acceptable methods and assumptions to be used evaluating the structural capabilities of an electrosleeved tube. FTl indicated that it expects additional license amendments will be submitted in 1999 to use the electrosleeve technology, it was agreed at the conclusion of the meeting that the staff and FTl would meet later this year to discuss progress made in resolving these issues.
s
' Steve Dembek, Se ion Chief, Section 2 Project Directorate IV & Decommissioning Division of Licensing Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Project No. 692
Enclosures:
- 1. List of Meeting Attendees
- 2. Meeting Slides cc w/encls: Mr. Michael Schoppman Mr. J. J. Kelly, Manager Licensing Manager B&W Owners' Group Services Framatome Technologies, Inc.
Framatome Technologies, Inc.
1700 Rockville Pike, Suite 525 P.O. Box 10935 Rockville, MD 20852-1631 Lynchburg, VA 24506-0935
u O -. v LIST OF MEETING ATTENDEES i
MEETING WITH FRAMATOME TECHNOLOGIES. INC.
1 ELECTROSLEEVE ISSUE JUNE 21.1999 NAME ORGANIZATION G. Holahan NRC/NRR l
C. Beardslee NRC/NRR J. Strosnider NRC/NRR W. Bateman NRC/NRR E. Throm NRC/NRR S.Long NRC/NRR J. Muscara NRC/RES C. Tinkler NRC/RES E. Hackett NRC/RES M. Mayfield NRC/RES C. Woody FTl B. Enzinna FTl J. Galford FTl M. Senoffman FTl G. Peters FTl L. Collins ABB CENP D.Jubb Westinghouse G. Kammerdeiner Duquesne Light Company ENCLOSURE 1 l-
f l
9 -.*
FTI/NRC l
l Electrosleeve Meeting l
June 21,19991:00 p.m.
l Agenda l
l I.
Purpose of Meeting A.
Dialog on Severe Accident Considerations in Submittals for Electrosleeve License Amendments B.
Long Term Plan-Scope & Priorities II.
Future Applications for License Amendments for Electrosleeving A.
Near term - 1999 e Risk-informed Regulatory Guide 1.174 Areas Where NRC Clarification Needed (e.g., Free Span Length Relative to Top of Tubesheet)
Realistic Assumptions (Crack Testing etc.)
Favorable Assessment Scenarlos B.
2000 and Beyond Analysis Code Convergence-SCDAP/RELAP &
e i
MAPP Surge Line Modeling and Testing or Other Primary e
Relief Paths (i.e., Instrumentation Lines, etc.)
l III.
Status of Ongoing Work by FTI IV.
Summary and Action Items for Follow-up l
l l
ENCLOSURE 2 l
l
.4 Purpose of Meeting A.
Dialog on Severe Accident Considerations for Electrosleeve License Amendments (See II.A.)
1.
Callaway:
a.
Three-year Process b.
Lessons Learned 2.
Deterministic vs. Risk-inbrmed License Amendments 3.
Evaluation of Severe Accident Concerns B.
Long Term Work Plan Scope & Priorities (See II.B) 1.
Convergence of Results of Severe Accident Analysis Codes 2.
Surge Line Modeling and Testing 3.
Other Primary Relief Paths 4.
Part of Broader Industry /NRC effort.
4 l
NRC &
~
Framatome Technologies, Inc Electrosleeve Status Meeting June 21,1999 f" man
Risk Assessment Reg. Guide 1.174 guideline A LERF < 10-6 to 10-7
/ reactor-year LERF =
(frequency of severe accident) x (conditional probability of offsite release)
Nweam
.I F
b Incremental Risk due to Electrosleeve
~
A LERF due to the Electrosleeve
=
(frequency of severe accident that challenges tubes) x (incremental change in conditional probability of SGTR due to the Electrosleeve
)
"mam
Incremental Risk due to Electrosleeve A LERF = 0, if the failure j
likelihood of an Electrosleeved tube is no worse than a baseline tube, for the postulated severe accident Therefore, FTI focus is on Electrosleeve performance during the severe accident bmmm
NearTerm Actions:
ANL Structural Burst Model Simulation, Evaluate '"Real" flaw profile.
Provide Parameter evaluation.
Burst Test "Real" Sleeved Flaws.
Flaw Growth Test.
)
UT Depth Sizing Qualification.
Installation Thickness Margins.
Accident Cade Simulation Differences.
l N.wn.se.i
)
Year 2000 And Beyond
. Analysis code convergence
. Surge line modeling and testing "mawi
1 Analysis Code Convergence
. SCDAP/RELAP & MAAP versions 3/4
. Discuss desires of NRC
. Current work being done
. Plans for the future
(
ECH oL00 E
Surge Line Modeling
& Testing
- Discuss NRC desires
. Discuss additional primary components that may be studied (ie instrumentation lines, pump packing, fittings etc)
OLOO
Status of on-going work at FTI Installation Requirements Preservice NDE Inservice NDE Severe Accident Burst Testing Burst Temperature Simulation l
Tube Flaw Burst Testing i
Conservatism (s)
Model Simulation, ANL l
4 f.fMTNRM
Installation of an Electrosleeve Tube Identification ISI/ECT Variables: Probe Selection, POD, Flaw Type.
Electrosleeve Installation Fundamental Requirement, Tube does not leak (flaw <100%).
Process Controls set to " Process Target Thickness".
Preservice UT Installation Thickness, Bond, Position.
w e ?.s e.t
.a Electrosleeve Thickness Loaic Minimum Thickness (ASME Code),
Tube Loads (i.e. locked),
Tube Ovality, Electrodeposition Probe Alignment, and Process Variability.
Process Produces a sleeve that exceeds minimum requirements, UT verifies installation.
Additional Thickness Considerations:
Installation time, NDE of tube above the sleeve (IsI of remaining tube), and Thermal Hydraulic Losses
(>75 sleeves = 1 plugged tube),
fMYN. M
e Inservice Inspection of Installed Sleeve NDE method - UT.
NRC Approval status (4/99): Depth Sizing Concern.
Depth Under Call of "Short" Axial Cracks.
Detected Flaw versus Depth Issue.
i Research relative to mode-conversion signal (improves accuracy).
POD using UT is higher than ECT.
What does an OD IGA look like? (Reference pulled tube data) i UT Qualification: EPRI Appendix J Procedures In Final FTI Review Procedure review /EPRI peer review Data Set For Qualification (completed as of 6/99)
Rh?HP.Y.5 l
l
.r 1
Tube Flaw Burst TeStina Tubes and Electrosleeved Tubes Tested.
Electrosleeve Sample Fabrication:
Sleeved " Free Span" tube, EDM " Rectangular" notches to simulate degradation, and Sleeve thickness at minimum process acceptance values.
Burst Test:
Sleeved tube maintained at 2250 psi.
Tube heated in a controlled manner until rupture.
I i
i i
f?MN.9?.\\
... x Tube Flaw Burst Testing (cont.)
Qualitative Results:
Alloy 600 tubes and sleeved tubes taken to failure.
Electrosleevem material properties are lower than Alloy 600 tube material for temperatures greater than 1000'F.
(The Electrosleeve" doesn't Melt!)
Axial EDM,100% TW,1 inch long; comparable to Tube.
Axial EDM,100% TW, near 2 inch long; failed at lower temperature than a failure of a 50% degraded Tube.
%TN.a.M
Evaluation of Conservatism (s)
Burst Test Flaws, "Real" flaw profiles versus 100% EDM7 Use flaw depth in tube near 100%.
Install Sleeve over a "Real" flaw.
)
UT Inspection.
1 Burst Temperature Test.
Flaw Growth Test; Does Electrosleeve reduce flaw growth?
Produce OD axial SCC Flaw in tube.
Flaw depth in tube near 100%?
Install Sleeve over "Real" OD flaw.
UT Inspection.
Grow "New" Flaw in tube (sleeved tube flaw exposed to same environment).
UT Inspection.
DE and/or Burst Temperature Test Free Span, Tube sheet or support plate reinforcement?
Define Structural Attenuation length.
Flaw length influenced by residual stresses in transition.
Burst Temperature Test with Tube sheet mockup.
'MYN.9m
O.a m. x Burst Temperature Simulation Computer Code Differences.
If Challenge of Sleeved Steam Generator Tube is based on Primary Loop Pressure Relief Surge line creep rupture, RC Pump Seal Leakage, Flanges, CRDM, Hand Holes, Manways, In-core Instrument Lines (lower RV head), and Instrumentation Lines, should be included in evaluation.
1 l
l "ATN.Ds!