ML20214R398

Summary of 861112 Meeting W/Util,Pickard,Lowe & Garrick,Inc, Fauske & Assoc,Bnl & Westinghouse in Bethesda,Md Re Emergency Planning Sensitivity Study.Rupture of Steam Generator Tubes During Core Melt Not Included in Study

ML20214R398
Person / Time
Site:	Seabrook
Issue date:	11/25/1986
From:	Long S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8612050456
Download: ML20214R398 (35)

Text

o UNITED STATES 8[c% 'g 3 - 'i o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555

.....' 2 5 NOV 1986 Docket No.: 50-443 APPL.ICANT: Public Service Company of New Hampshire FACII.ITY: Seabrook Station, Unit 1

SUMMARY

OF MEETING PELD ON NOVEMBER 12, 1986 TO DISCUSS SEABROOK EMERGENCY PLANNING SENSITIVITY STUDY

REFERENCE:

Seabrook Station Risk Management and Emergency Planning Study and Seabrook Station Emergency Planning Sensitivity Study. Submitted by letter from John DeVincentis to Vincent Noonan, dated July 21, 1986.

A publiclv noticed meeting was held on November 12, 1986, at NRC offices in Bethesda, Maryland. The NRC staff was represerted by members of the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, and Brookhaven National I.aboratory. The Applicant was represented by members of the Public Service Company of New Hampshire, Pickard, l. owe and Garrick, Inc., Fauske & Associates and Westinghouse Electric Corporation.

A list of attendees is included as Enclosure 1.

The purpose of the meeting was to discuss issues affecting the level of confidence in PSNW's conclusions that could be established by Brookhaven's review of the referenced documents. The discussions focused on the dose probability vs. distance parameterization of public risk. It was agreed that the reoion of interest lay in the distance range of a few miles and the probability range near the values shown by NUREG-0396 for a distance of 10 miles. (The PSNP results show the risk at 1 mile from Seabrook to be below the NUREG-0396 value at 10 miles.) BNI. analyses are not yet complete enouoh to determine whether explicit differences identified in their review would challenge the PSkP conclusions, but those differences that have been quantified to date have not negated the PSNP conclusion.

There was also a discussion concerning confidence that all tignificant risk contributors have been identified and quantified. Because the Seabrook study resulted in reducing the overall risk by reducing the estimates for several known risk contributors, the question was raised as to whether other events that may have been neglected in previous studies because of low probabilities mioht still have probabilities high enough to be significant contributors to the Seabrook results. There was some confidence tentatively expressed by Brookhaven personnel that all risk contributors significant to the region of interest delineated above had been identified. Powever, there may be sorre difficulty in adeouately quantifying some of the potentially significant risk contributors.

8612050456 861125 hDR ADOCK 05000443 PDR

B One potentially significant risk contributor not included in the referenced study is rupture of steam generator tubes during core melt due to convective transport of heat from the core to the steam generators. This was the subject of an earlier meeting at Brookhaven on October 17, 1986. An additional presentation on this sub. ject was made by Fauske & Associates personnel during the current meeting. Their conclusion was that the tubes would not reach temperatures high enough to cause creep failure. Copies of the slides from this presentation are included as enclosure 2.

The final topic of the meeting was a presentation by Westinghouse personnel concerning the potential for direct containment atmosphere heating by high pressure ejection of core debris at the time of vessel failure. Physical modeling results were presented for the Zion plant configuration to demonstrate that the fraction of the ejected debris that was aerosolized ranged from 0.003 to 0.052. The slides from this presentation are included as Enclosure 3.

/ M $5 ,>n Steven M. l.ong, Pro.je Manager PWR Project Directorate No. 5 Division of PWR I.icensing-A

, c, q- '

- ,;y .y .

j a l <'

.4, . . -L m g r, .

. m -

y 1 . .

n'

_y

,; 4-y a y . s -.

' ENCLOSURE 1'

-y

\

l u I , ,

- 4 , ,

y s

-x .

'O MEETING ATTENDANCE

• O

, f. 4,-s s , 3 Steve f.ong' NRC ' '- o , s u; ,8 Vincent S. Noonan , hRC b. ].

Goutam Bagchi n' fRC1 ,

Trevor Pratt { % B'NI. [ s s. ,

Bob Youngblood  % S. BNI. v '- @N,s

, , s t ' q N Mohen Khatib-Rahbar J. NI. -

s. '

Warren I. yon NRC/DPLA/RS8 ,

e' s ' ",, . x.. .

Scott Newberry -

N3C/DPLA/F08 Victor Benaroya

, ,'NRC/PAF0

.w ,

t s . ..

Don Hickman b - t' -

W /PAFO x 4' t

,, / s-s

' s ' '

John DeVincentis \NHY/ENG " ' /< ~

e R. E. Henry -

Fauske & Assoc. Inct . 1i t

s s.

Pickard, lowe & Garnick, Inc. N Fred Torri . 2 Jim Moodv 4\, NHY Karl Fleming Picard,l. owe & Garrick, Inc.

David A. Maidrand Asst. Pro.1 Mngr - YNSD R. J. Lutz, Jr. ,W estinghouse Electric Keith Woodard #ld Marc Kenton (FauskefrAssoc. '._.. ,

Bill Sanchez VNHYEngineering

.. 8 Sarah Davis. NRC/DS(0/RRAB ,

.j Richard Barrett NJtR/DSR0/AR/.B 'e ' 'Q.

Robert E. Sweeney NHY Bethesda Office '\

g.

leonard Soffer l;NRC/NRR/DSR0 . /

'4 Ernie Rossi NRC/NRR/PWR-A i s.

s.

w -

!,y t V ,, ,;

+

3 s

" i *. p

\ s

. i 9 [ g' N* E &N * ,

)

)

'--1 4

i< *

• y

' * \ ^

\ ' > # ,

4 g

I  %* )

w .

s ,

I i -

i k .. -_ - . . - , - - . - . . , - _ . . .. _I

ENCLOStlRE 2 D 6 MAAP ANALYSES TO ASSESS THE POTENTIAL FOR

_ TEMPERATURE-INDUCED STEAM GENERATOR FAILURES i

1. ' No Operator Action 0, Base case, b, . Seal LOCAs, 2, Operator Action

a. With turbine-driven AFW (not shown-sequence does not progress),

b, With failure of AFW and manual depressuri-g zation of primary system when core tempera-l tures reach 1200*F, 3, Uncertainty Analyses of Bose Case

c. High core melting temperature (3000 K),

l b. High core-upper plenum flow (low friction factors),

i c. Low steam generator flow (low fraction of 1 tubes carrying flow away from inlet plenum),

d ,' ' Stuck-open secondary relief,

e. No core blockage,

E

!% j l

i

\

o .

PEAK SG INLET PLENUM GAS TEMPERATURE AT MAXIMUM AP ( K)

1. Base case 860

2. ' Seal LOCA 865

3. Manual depressurization 680

4. High eutectic temperature 880

5. High upper plenum flow 870

6. Low SG flow 980

7. Stuck secondary relief 850

8. No blockage . 1040

< J

4

• CALCULATION OF STEAM GENERATOR TUBE TEMPERATURES

1. MAAP calculates primary side gas temperatures at inlet to SG tubes and average SG tube wall temperatures,

2. To calculate peak SG tube wall temperatures, need to. compute the ratio of the heat transfer coeffi-cients on the primary side of the tube to that on the secondary. .

3, Both heat transfer coefficients are driven by the difference in temperatures near the inlet of the tubes carrying out flow compared to temperatures elsewhere; thus can efficiently use scaling argu-ments to compare them, e >

CALCULATION OF STEAM GENERATOR TUBE TEMPERATURES (cont'd)

4. Primary side flowrote given by (see FAI/86-39 for nomenclature)

Q SG f D p Af W

3 P = Pp 9@gf , i

.= 3,4 kg/sec at time to peak gas inlet temperatures (vs. MAAP:3,3)

5. Secondary side flows given by similar expression; ratio of heat transfer coefficients is then:

P D 'M A

'N

~ 2 27

~.9 E

~

l CALCULATION OF STEAM GENERATOR TUBE TEMPERATURES (cont'd)

6. For approximately equal heat transfer coefficients, tubs temperature is the average of the primary and secondary side gas temperatures.

~

( J

Ts '

L s

a 1

V e - "

Tp inlet outlet plenum plenum Natural circulation flows on the inside and outside of a tube carrying fluid from the inlet to the 00tlet plenum.

[

l

l l .

STEAM GENERATOR TUBE STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY

1. Tube Degradation 1.1 Property Evaluation 1.2 Thinning and Cracking 1.3 Denting

2. Creep Rupture 1.1 Property Evaluation 1.2 Quantification and Conclusions

~

E

( J

PROPERTY EVALUATION FOR TUBE DEGRADATION e Flow stress proportional to yield stress + ultimate stress for ductile fracture, e Flow stress ratio ef(T) _

ey(T) + e u(T)

Tgli n) ~ cy (1 9) +Tti u n) e Burst strength at elevated temperature af(T)

Pburst(T) = P burst (T g

)

• mf(Ig) e Extensive data at 600 F can thus be applied to higher temperatures,

( J 1

i

l D l

INCONEL-600 DUCTILE FRACTURE PROPERTIES Temperature Flow Stress Rotto 600 F 1.0 1000 F 0,90 1350 F 0,56 O

I f

E

^

~

( J

l l

TUBE WITH CRACKING DEFECTS l

e EDM slots simulate cracks 1.5 inch long slot 55-60% wall depth e Burst pressure = 5 ksi e 5 ksi

• 0.56 = 2,8 ksi a 1350 F e This exceeds any possible. AP across the tubes l

l l

l E

TUBE DENTING AND THINNING e Elliptical wastage e Denting at support plates simulated 0.75 inch length; angle varied 0.04 to 0.05 inch denting depth e Bur.st pressure > 5 ksi all cases

! e 5 ksi

• 0.56 = 2.8 ksi a 1350 F l

e This exceeds any possible AP across the tubes H

[

( I J

TUBEDEFECTCONCLdSIONS e Thinning Cracking Denting plus thinning All examined e Burst pressure exceeds any possible tube AP when the effect of temoerature on properties included

~

( J

PROPERTY EVALUATION FOR CREEP RUPTURE e Data for Inconel and SS-316 indicates great creep behavior similarity e Tube wall hoop stress $ 10 ksi e At 1350 F, rupture time Just under 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br /> e Short rupture time data:

1500 F, 10 ksi + 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br />

~

E

( J

CREEP RUPTURE QUANTIFICATION e Larson-Miller parameter quantifies temperature, time combination e LMP = T * (A + log t )

• B r

e Inconel data maps onto SS-316 data using LMP abCissa e Using LMP, 1000 hour0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br /> rupture at 10 ksi requires 1280 F to 1340 *F: This agrees with all Inconel data i

~

E"

( J

CREEP RUPTURE CONCLUSIONS e Inconel creep rupture data is consistent and quan-tifiable e Rupture time and temperature combination cannot be achieved for Seabrook SG tubing l

d E"

( J

lT

)

E r

h- .

0 ,o l 0 0i e 0 0, op n o 8 1

Or c I

r I n F 0

ac 0 er a 6 1 u i t a

' r 0 ep 0 m 4 \ q\N 4 1

t e

\\\\

0 g 3 0 n 0g 3

i w\ \ 0i 2 s 1

t T

e 0

\ s

\ 0 s 0 1

4 j \ 3 4 in 0

0 1

. t

. s 0 0'

8 h r.

- r "

Or o -

0 C

0 Op r " 0

'Orol o

io I

8 1

c n F i

0 ,

0 e 6

1 r

u

' t a

f\\s\

r 0 0 e 0 p 3

, vN A 4 me 1

t

\

\ g

'3 0

1 y \ <

0 n 0i t 2 se

\ \N 1 T

0 7 0 0

\g 5 3 3 0 4 1

' ~ 0 i 0 0 '

4 8 4

i ge i.

(

CREEP RUPTURE STRESS FOR INCONEL - 600 Temp.K Temp F 1000 __ _ __ _ . _ _

__- _ __- Z'- Z Z --

22 .-100 c

W_

~

~

7 -~

~

_..4 -'~--Jg ~~ -==--

N s'

~._4 ~

~

-__g ~--- ~ ~

%. a,-

-- 19nr. '-- ~_

100 --

~-  :::-- ..

_ ~ -

as --T ^-

___,_;g, ^ -

=--u;

-,o

-,,L; ,;,y .-10 n

o. --

'~~"

-~ ,_ .m w__ --s o E '

<w.stE '

-- s r a n, ' - - ,_ "---, O .

- s -w  % O m

~

~,_ rem _ - _ -- -

m m --

N _ _ w m g W "

m p - - --, m m 10 E

._-- F-

)

1 10 10' 10' 10s 10 4 10 8 t

l TIME TO RUPTURE, hours M J

l

1 G -

o G .

. c N w .

O E

~ a W  ?

z i

1. em .

I = N l *M 0 u

e 3 .. h ].

C =

SMB C x .-

g u m

a e ." .i _

3 g

= -

s .: ,2 o, e

@ E 3

Y o O

il

~

$i i .c p .

I s  :=

a W

i o -

CO ~ z eN =

o y['. O 1' M & {

u o 2

a.

xe.

O a

- a. w e .~

=~

23 r Q8 l 0 =e e L# .

_ oE mm E

.~g '

6 = c.

3  ; 3~'.

~

" g E9 i

d N i r

, am - -

$ <C g '

- e= .

Pr.w..

em ce "2 mg e

e co oC e ooo b -f

• c 1 C

i

=m 2<

l 3 =

s-u se_EEI* uu o _=

l

, ** u u u e . _

& ~e e ,. a v:

Q'- c

. o-C c .u om-ne N m ce c _ og C-

=c g -

g

~~me na g-E i '

2xoc<> 3!.

l Em C5 l

, O ,  !

e w .:

em mo o -

E W 9 ~

E l

E 3

-edW 68'9 = ISM l) (!SM) SS9J1S i

l l

l

CONCLUSIONS

1. Base case peak steam generatar tube temperature is 750 K and is only 850 K in worst-case uncertainty analysis.

2. Tube integrity anclysis indicates that temperatures of ab 1100 K are required to fall tubes. Thus considerable margin exists. .

l

~

E

( J l - .

ENCLOSURE 3

-~

t

/ , 3 MM*"*  % , ,

l N _

\ -

g

> i $

Q. .2

& l 2

/ '

/

D

/ ~

3

- u

/,  ;

m O

1

- p 40 ci 4,

,- C

/

/

i

i 1

k

ZION CAVITY SIMULATION EXPERIMENTS a

Test Floor of Uoner Surface of Vert ic'al 1 Section Catch Volume Catch Volume Walls k

Lip 6.07 ~0 17.8 76.3 4 Steam Generator Geometry fl8. 0 7.38 2fl . f4 17

Reduction Area 76.6 ~0 16.5 ~7 3D 97. li 2.37' O 208 0

*0ut of doorway next to seal table wall.

t p

l i

w- - . - - - - - -

9 0 A

r l

I' i ~

( .

s e \

a

~

. =.

l SEAL -

TABLE

//

TRANSPARENT

/[/

/

PLATE

/

SUPPLY

[ ['""" %l m s 'M ~

j# amN '

i # s

//////// Y\

2 w e

O

@j=_ .

\

=.

ra \x N TRANSP SUPPLY a e- 4 if f!] 3

-, -w, -- , _ , - , - - - _ . - . , , , . _ _ - . , , , , _ , , _ _ _ _ _ , , . . , , _ _ _

, . ,q l I .

1- 1 I I I

' l I l I I l i

i .I J l l l I

l l SEAL i I  ; ,

TABLE i i

'l

, l kj i I I

.l DOOR I i r" 1 ISTEAM BIOLOGICALj i ' '

l l GENERATOR [ DOOR SHIELD i'i i l l

i l l I 1 I I lIgSUPPLY TUBE I l _

I e

G O

v, - - - .,-

i DOOR j

l -

I O 1 O

KEYWAY I SCREEN IN OPENING 1

/ ,

TOP SURFACE

_q  ::

'J SUPPLY , l

,I i TUBE 3l ll,'

lj  ; , ,

.g DOOR

+

h, i ,; , ..

l_ ..g f h . ---.

5

'l k!  :!l SEAL T- BIOLOGICAL SHIELD [  ;'

!  ; , :l, TABLE LIP ,-

+ _ _

l STEAM GENERATOR i i l .

e 9

O

• s t l

1 dL s

f' Ii l

~%

l i'

I

. .*.J

[*k

• 2.7 m I

L . '.!!!!:: '

Y l

i l

l

5.8 m  :

_ft.E I E N N E E E AL n

r, ^%

'i~ f gmimurg \

/ " "

l /

f '

2.7 m

+ .

t s . _; i

. Y f ,

cm > c c J JJ c=s InPS Test Apoaratus Placed in the Experiment interaction Chamber

tt

't

~

SNL HIPS TESTS #I

1. HIPS-7C and -8C: 1/10 scale Zion cavity open-ended con"inement room.

2. ~ 97% cf debris on floor or pod immediately outside.

3, 0.3 - 5,2% cerosolized ( < 10 micron),

O

. g

?

. , Mr. Robert J. Harrison Public Service Company of New Hampshire Seabrook Nuclear Power Station cc:

Thomas Dignan, Esq. E. Tupper Kinder, Esq.

John A. Ritscher, Esq. G. Dana Bisbee, Esq.

Ropes and Gray Assistant Attorney General 225 Franklin Street Office of Attorney General Boston, Massachusetts 02110 208 State Hosue Annex Concord, New Hampshire 03301 Mr. Bruce B. Beckley, Project Manager Public Service Company of New Hampshire Resident Inspector Post Office Box 330 Seabrook Nuclear Power Station Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 c/o US Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 700 Dr. Mauray Tye, President Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 Sun Valley Association 209 Summer Street Mr. John DeVincentis, Director Haverhill, Massachusetts 01839 Engineering and licensing Yankee Atomic Electric Company Robert A. Backus, Esq. 1671 Worchester Road O'Neil, Backus and Spielman Framingham, Massachusetts 01701 116 lowell Street Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 Mr. A. M. Ebner, Project Manager United Engineers & Constructors William S. Jordan, III 30 South 17th Street Diane Curran Post Office Box 8223 Harmon, Weiss & Jordan Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19101

-20001 S Street, NW Suite 430 Washington, D.C. 20009 Mr. Philip Ahrens, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General State House, Station #6 Augusta, Maine 04333 Carol S. Sneider, Esq.

Office of the Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division Mr. Warren Hall One Ashburton Place Public Service Company of Boston, Massachusetts 02108 New Hampshire Post Office Box 330 D. Pierre G. Cameron, Jr., Esq.

Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 General Counsel Public Scryice Company of New Hampshire Seacoast Anti Pollution League Post Office Box 330 Ms. Jane Doughty Manchester, New Hampshire 03105 5 Market Street Portsmouth, New Hampshire 03801 Regional Administrator, Region I U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Diana P.'Randall 631 Park Avenue 70 Collins Street King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406 Seabrook, New Hampshire 03874 Richard Hampe, Esq.

New Hampshire Civil Defense Agency 107 Pleasant Street Concord, New Hampshire 03301

. Public Service Company of Seabrook Nuclear Power Statfor New Hampshire cc:

Mr. Calvin A. Canney, City Manager Mr. Alfred V. Sargent, City Pdll Chairman 126 Daniel Street Board of Selectmen Portsmouth, New Pampshire 03801 Town of Salisbury, MA 01950 Ms. t.etty Pett Senator Gordon J. Humphrey Town of Brentwood ATTN: Tom Burack RFD Dalton Road U.S. Senate Brentwood, New Hampshire 03833 Washington, D.C. 20510 Ms. Roberta C. Pevear Mr. Owen B. Durgin, Chairman Town of Hampton Falls, New Hampshire Durham Board of Selectmen Drinkwater Road Town of Durham Pampton Falls, New Hampshire 03844 Durham, New Hampshire 03824 Ms. Sandra Gavutis Charles Cross, Esq.

Town of Kensington, New Hampshire Shaines, Mardrigan and RDF 1 McEaschern Tast Kingston, New Hampshire 03827 25 Maplewood Avenue Post Office Box 366 Chaik,an, Board of Selectmen RFD 2 South Hampton, New Pampshire 03827 Mr. Guy Chichester, Chaiman Rye Nuclear Intervention Mr. Angie Machiros, Chairman Committee Board of Selectmen c/o Rye Town Pall for the Town of Newbury 10 Central Road Newbury, Massachusetts 01950 Rye, New Hampshire 03870 Ms. Cashman, Chairman Jane Spector Board of Selectmen Federal Energy Regulatory Towa of Amesbury Commission Town Pall 825 North Capital Street, NE l Amesbury, Massachusetts 01913 Room 8105 Washington, D. C. 20426 Honorable Peter J. Matthers l Mayor, City of Newburyport Mr. R. Sweeney

! Office of the Mayor New Pampshire Yankee Division City Hall Public Service of New Hampshire Newburyport, Massachusetts 01950 Company 7910 Woodmont Avenue l ., Mr. Donald E. Chick, Town Manager Bethesda, Maryland 20814 l Town of Exeter l 10 Front Street Mr. William B. Derrickson Exeter, New Hampshire 03823 Senior Vice President Public Service Company of l Mr. Richard Strome, Director New Hampshire

! State Civil Defense Agency Post Office Box 700, Route 1 State Office Park South Seabrook, New Pampshire 03874 107 Pleasant Street Concord, New Pampshire 03301

One potentially significant risk contributor not included in the referenced study is rupture of steam generator tubes during core melt due to convective transport of heat from the core to the steam generators. This was the subject of an earlier meeting at Brookhaven on October 17, 1986. An additional presentation on this subject was made by Fauske 8 Associates personnel during the current meeting. Their conclusion was that the tubes would not reach temperatures high enough to cause creep failure. Copies of the slides from this presentation are included as enclosure 2.

The final topic of the meeting was a presentation by Westinghouse personnel concerning the potential for direct containment atmosphere heating by high pressure ejection of core debris at the time of vessel failure. Physical

' modeling results were presented for the Zion plant configuration to demonstrate that the fraction of the ejected debris that was aerosolized ranged from 0.003 to 0.052. The slides from this presentation are included as

' Enclosure 3.

\

Steven M. Long, Project Manager PWR Project Directorate No. 5 Division of PWR I.icensing-A St.ong:es h /2r/86 m

i j Meeting Notice Distribution

. Docket: Files NRC Participants NRC'PDR' l.ocal PDR Steve I.ong PD#5 R/F V. Noonan ORAS G. Bagchi H. Denton Scott Newberry T. Novak V. Benarova Pro. ject Manager Don Hickman E. Doolittle Sara Davis OEl.D l.eonard Soffer E. Jordan E. Rossi ,

8. Grimes Richard Barrett '

J. Partlow Receptionist (Building where meeting is being held)

ACRS (10)

OPA PPAS/TOSB Resident Inspector .

Regional Administrator j MRushbrook cc: Licensee / applicant & Service f.ist

__