ML20234D172
| ML20234D172 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Grand Gulf |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1974 |
| From: | Curet H AEROJET NUCLEAR CO. |
| To: | Mckinley J Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20234A777 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-40 NUDOCS 8707070122 | |
| Download: ML20234D172 (2) | |
Text
_ - - - -
op.2 s
s (s Qerojet nuclear Comppay C/
s 550 Second Street 4, ?! 'J/," 3 Es b Q ioano rAtts ionne e3401 April 29, 1974
.1,. i m.
- C 3MM.
JINISORi L....
MiTEE ON JC McKinley 7 ACTOR 5,JEGUARDS Senior Staff Assistant isdvisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards US Atomic Energy Commission 1717 H Street Washington DC 20545 CONCLUSIONS 0:; Till ADEQUACY OF MAPI III DESIGN - Cur-34-74
!w requested lu yout lettet dutcu April 16. 1974, 1 am foruarding to you my responses to the questions you posed.
_ question
Response
1.
The analyses of the responsc of the MARL; III contain-ment to LOCA conditions, that I have reviewed, were related to the stea.: line breaks.
It may be presump-tuous to assume that the MARK III design is adequate based solely on steam line break conditions. Sensitivity studies of the effects or break size and break locations should be performed to attain assurance that anomalous responses of a MAII III containment to such blowdown conditions have not been overlooked.
Such sensitivity studies may exist: I personally am not aware of such.
2.
In general the experimental facility is probably adecuate to evaluate a MAPI III containment performance, liovever, I have not seen a detail test program plan which delineates the objectives of each test sequence and the range of test conditions.
The experimental facility cannot provide data related to circumferential effects. liowever, I do not consider this a serious deficiency.
The ACRS should be assured by CE that the range of test conditions will be comprehensive enough to demonstrate, within the limitations of scaled experiments, the feasibility of the MAIU; III concept.
3.
The uncertainties in the MAPI III design, if any, vill best be uncovered by a well planned experimental progrem.
Thus, GE's test plan is of the utmost importance.
4 Construction of the Grand Gulf containment system should be permitted with the understanding that design changes may be required if future analytical and Filed: Grand Gulf h
.h
$' V7 - @ Y707oyo]22 870610 n u e.m co, c., a i j....
ra j
...a. i i v
- c. u o s WiiU lj O.y
- t!)dFh;_ kJUf,"^S*"
yr
JC McKinley Cur-34-74 Page 2.
III design.
5.
lio response 6.
If not aircady available, analytical sensitivity studies of break size and break location should be performed to determine the response of the Grand Gulf containment system to a complete range of LOCA conditions.
7.
- o response If you have any questions about my responses and need clarification, please give me a call.
??
10 Curet kr 1
s.
,