ML20214G662
| ML20214G662 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 12/14/1971 |
| From: | Case E US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| To: | Morris P US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC) |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0141, CON-WNP-141 NUDOCS 8605220374 | |
| Download: ML20214G662 (3) | |
Text
'
?
DEC 1 ! *:".
Docket No. 50-397 Peter A, Morris, Director Division of Beactor LicensiaR EAMFORD NO. 2 The enclosed is submittet for inclusion in your question list for Memford 50. 2.
Cn;.
- E. G. C. 2 Edson G. Case, Director Division of Reactor Standards Eaclosuret Baquest for Additional laformation cc w/ encl S. Manauer, DE R. Boyd, DEL V. Stallo, DEL S. Miner, DEL Distribution:
Suppl.
DR heading DRS heading SPB Reading bec:
- h. Specter, DRS
.. uhs:SPs odS:SPii
[
DI.
/ 'Jf-(
'. A 'K.. Pa,d,
- ndsen EC C oc sumeAner >
[
DATr >
.12/o/,71 12/
1 lI/ /71 form AEC-SIS tRev. 9-531 AECM 0240 o u s covn a%=*e %t
==2 t 'wo Kt s o7 s.4: e.4e s 8605220374 711214 PDR ADOCK 05000397 A
I i
i I
i I
l i
REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL IMPOEMATION MANFORD No. 2 l
w rrT up. 50-197 f
1.
In order to analyze the contaimeent design basis accident please i
j provide the following:
l j
Initial pressures in the drywell and watvall l
laitial relative humidities in the drywell and vetwell i'
A table of blowdown masses and enthaplies for e.he design break arez l
2.
What is the height of the downconers above the drywell floor and by i
j what design basis is this determined?
i 3.
Assuming pure steam flow, relate drywell-to-wetvell air chamber bypass area to primary system break area for an envelope of pressures within the design pressure.
4.
What is the capacity and design basis for the wetvell spray system?
5.
The Hanford No. 2 plant appears to have a deeper downconer submer-gence than all other BWR containments. What is the design basis i
that establishes the downcener submergence?
6.
Elaborate on D. E. Miller's statement sa page 7 of the AEME paper I
68-u&/NE-1 "The clearance between the downconer exit and the pool I
bottom should be no less than six feet nor more than twelve feet.
t OFTICE >
r SURSI A ML >
DATT )
.m.
m-m ~..su mu m
~._.~.~~~o..e..~,-
- w------,---y
-~y ww
-g.
e-ww---
J i
k j
2 l
1
?
l The twelve foot limit abould be appramehad with caution giving due consideration to pool mixing for the case of a small break in the l
reactor system."
7.
Which Moss Imading tests are utilised to size the wetwell-to-drywell vacuum relief valves? Provide the analysis of the sising of these relief valves. What is the relationship between small primary system breaks and downcomer water level oscillations as applied to the Hanford design and as observed in the Moss Landing tests?
8.
The vent resistance factor for the Bodega tests listed in NEDO-10320 j
1 l
is given as 4.07, including 1.0 for the exit loss. Justify this value, including any dat.a provided by the vent manufacturer.
9.
Figure 12 of ASME j>urnal paper 61-WA-222 by Barton, Ashworth, Janssen, 3
and Robbins (1961) indicates that although much of the drywell air is pushed over into the wetwell air chamber duriss a LOCA, the time i
j dependency of the air carryover may be a function of the drywell break
)
l location and/or drywell flow resistances. Demonstrate that the method
{
of calculating the Hanford 2 peak deck differential pressure is con-i servative, including consideration of the above experimental observa-tions.
i i
10.
Provide a plot of peak drywell pressure and peak deck differential pressure versus primary system break area. Include values greater than the design break area.
OFTICE k I
SURNAest >
DATE >
Forum AEC-Sn8 (Rev. 9-53) AECM 0240 e u s covea me ?==.va.o ore.cr som_er is.
.