ML25233A086
| ML25233A086 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 12/27/1974 |
| From: | US Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| Download: ML25233A086 (1) | |
Text
SUPPLE11ENT ~10.. 3 TO THE SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT OF THE BRUNSWICK STEAH ELECTRIC PLANT UNITS J. A.ND 2 DOCKET NOS. 50-324 AND 50-325 UNITED STATES ATmac E:-.IERGY crn-rHISSIOl~
DIRECTOPJ,TE OF LICE~:SING WASHINGTON, D. C.
Issued:
December 27, 1974
TABLE OF CWTE~HS INTRODUCTION.
- LO 2.0 GENERAL ELECTIU C :CCCS EVALUATIOJ HODEL *
- 5. 0 CO!~CLUSIO:,S 6.0 REFER.r,NC:CS.
APPEtWI.X A -
OPEI'J\\TING RESTRI"CTIO:-!S APPEl\\DI X B -
LETTI:R FROH THI:: ADVISORY CO:-u-fITTEE m~ REACTOR SAFEGUARDS, NOVE~*IBI::R 20, 19 74..
1
. 5 11 11 13 14
. ;
- 1. 0.
IHTRODUCTIO?~
On January 4, 19 74, the Commission published its acceptance criteria for emergency core c~oling systems for light water power reactors (39 FR 1003).
This rule included Appendix K to 10 CFR Part 50 whicl1 specifics analytical techniques to be employed for the evaluation of th0. ECCS effectiveness.
On Au&ust 5, 1974, General Electric officially subrJit ted a topical report (l) constituting their proposed ECCS evaluation model.
The R~gulatory staff revi~wcd this docu:nent and published a Status Report on October 15, 19 711 ~ <2) which address~d each item required by Appendj_x K and identified areas \\lhich,1ere acceptable to the staff. and areas of staff concern which were to be resolved.
The information contained in this report had been the subject of a number of inform;:il conferences and discussions between the staff and General Electric, starting just after the ptililic~tion of the Acceptance Criteria in January 1974.
2 -
On November 13, 1974, the Regulatory staff published a Supplement (3) to the Status Report which addressed each of these areas of concern.
As reflected in the Supplement and Status Report, for some items adequate additional information was provided to enable the staff to accept the General Electric approach.
For some other items, General Electric has agreed to modify its model in accordance with the staff 's comments.
For still other items, the _ s~aff concluded that ad equate justification had not been provided and jhat further modification of the model was required.
. With these required modifi-cations, the General Electric evaluation model wo.uld be acceptable to.the staff.
General Electric is making the r~quired modifications.
In addition, in the period since the Supplement to the Status Report was issued, (on November 13, 1974), General Electric has made the modificatiocs discussed in section 2.0 and performed the general sensitivity studies described below.
As discuss ed in section 2.0 the modifications made in connection with the generic studies are acceptable.
Accordingly, the General Electric model with the modifications described in section 2.0 of this Safety Evaluation 1/
1s acceptable and would conform to Appendix K.
(3)
A report of the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards, attached as Appendix B, was issued on November 20, 1974 regarding the generic 1/ Although General Electric is making necessary changes in its August 5 Evalualion model to reflect staff cor.llTie nts and requirements, General Electric hns indicated that it is considering the development of other modifications of its August 5th model which it believes would be improve-ments over the model with changes r eq uired by the staff.
When submitted, it will be reviewed by the staff and if it conforms ~ith Appendix K such models, would after approval, consti tut e an acceptable model for use in evaluations required in accordance with 10 CFR 50.46.
Such a modified model would be the subject of a subsequent staff evaluation report.
review and the acceptability of the General Electric ECCS Evaluation Model.
On August 5, 1974, Carolina Power and Light Company (the licensee) submitted an analysis of ECCS performance for Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 & 2 along with proposed Technical Specification changes to (4) reflect the impact of the new ECCS evaluation model calculations.
These evaluations were based upon the General Electric August 5~ 1974 evaluation model.
Section 3.0 of this SER Supplem~nt aiscussei the applicability of the generic evaluation model to specific Brunswick Units land 2 plant analyses.
As stated in the Status Report and its Supplement, the August 5th General Electric evaluation model was deficient and specific model changes are now being made to the generic General Electric evaluation model.
the Brunswick Units 1 and 2 evaluations were based upon a model which was not acceptable, they also require some changes.
A revised aet of Since computations for this plant *(and* for other facilities in a like position),
using a newly revised and acceptable evaluation model cannot be submitted for a number of months.
To determine the effect of the model changes made to the August 5, 1974 General Electric Evaluation Model, the staff requested, and General Electric submitted, a series of generic plant sensitivity studies which quantified the effect of the model changes on _the results of calculations_performed (5) using the August 5, 1974 model.
The staff followed the performance of these sensitivity studies while they were in progress and has reviewed the results upon completion.
These results are discussed in Section 4.0 along with a discussion of the effects of these results on the evaluation submitted for Brunswick Units 1 and 2 (here in after termed "the-plant") on August 5, 1974.
From these studies it appears that certain operating restrictions are required to assure that 1n the event of a postulated loss-of-coolant accident, ECCS cooling performance will not exceed the values for calculated peak cladding temperature and oxidation and hydrogen generation limits set forth in 10 CFR 50.46(b).
Appendix A of this supplement describes the manner in which these restrictions on reactor operation are *d_erived and presents the currently acceptable operating limit"ations.
Although these restrictions were established on the basis of applicable generic sensitivity studies of the effect of model changes, the staff believes that in conformity with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.46, these restrictions should be verified by a reanalysis based upon the General Electric Evaluation Model, as corrected.
An evaluation of ECCS performance, wholly in conformity with 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K, and based upon an approved evaluation model should be submitted for the plant, as promptly as it can reasonably be performed, along with proposed Technical Specifications based upon such an evaluation.
During the interim, before an evaluation wholly in conformity with the tequirements of 10 CFR 50.46 can be submitted and evaluated, continued conformance to the requirements of the Commissions Interim Acceptance Criteria (IAC) and the restrictions contained in the licensee's August 5, 1974 submittal, combined with the additional limitations set forth in Appendix A hereto, will provide reasonable assurance that the public health and safety will not be endangered.
- 5 2, 0 GEl~ElUI.L ELECTRIC ECCS I:VALU,\\TIO~ ?*10lJEL The staff Status Report(2) and its Supplement(3) provide a complete evalu~tion of the General Electric ECCS evaluation reodcl, Each part of 10 CF!: 50, /1ppendix K was addressed and appropriate co!ll!ilents regardin g compliance to each -1spect part of the model were included.
All phases of the General Electric analytical methods were concluded to meet Appendix K requirc&cnts with the exceptions noted in the Status Report and its Supplement 1.
General Electric l1ad agreed to all of the modificatio~s noted in the Statu~ Report, except those discussed in the SuppleDent.
The Supplcm2nt discuss1.:d these itc1.1s and ~onclude<l \\1ith respect to a11* but t*,;::.i of these open items General Electric's approach was acccptab1e.
The two items uere:
- 1) modifications of the Re flood and rtcfill calculations;
- 2) de1:1onstration of co:npliancc with the single failure criteria for :m-r~
plants other than the r.~m.-3 type.*.
Sj_ncc the Supplcr.:ent was issued on noveml..>er 13, 1974, General E) e:ctr::..c h
cl d. f.
t.
f. t
'c1 1 ( 6) f 1 ff a~ r:1a e 1:10 J. *ica ions o
- 1. s r.1c c to re
- cct s ta
- requirc111en ts in or,:c**
to perform the E;encric studies requested by the staff to dcter,unc the of all required moJcl changes on the previously subnitted calculations had employed the General Electric ' s August St h model.
In connection wi Lh ci1cse studies General Electric ~odi[icd its reflood and refill calculntio~s as described bclm,1.
Also described below are the other considerations described in the Stntus Report, (\\dtich were not resolved by the Supplc1:,cr;t),
which require model modific.:1U.ons, i. c. Assembly Power, Fission Energy,md Post-Cllf Heat Transfer.
No modifications or further analysis was required for this facility with respect to single failure criterion requirements sine this facility has an ECCS system identical to the gcn~ric analysis discussed Hi the Supplcmen t.
'i"S f
- cc *ootnotc on next pace.
2;1 Assc1~1bly l'm-1cr For the analysis of fission heat, d~cay of actinides, and fission product <lecny the evaluation model must use the 102% factor for asse1;ibly power, rather the 100,~ factor used in th_e August 5th r.:odcL
.This chance has been properly mR<lc by General Electric.
- 2. 2 Fission Energy Release The August 5th model used 207.5 Mev/fission as a reference fission energy release.
The fission product decay must be based on 200 llev/fission as recom,11cndcc.l i11 the October 1971 version of the propose:<l ANS:-5.1 guide and required Ly Appendix K.
This change. has properly been made.
2.3 Post-CllF llcc.t Trnnsfer.
During the flow stagnation period betvcen jct pump uncovery and lower plenum flnshing, film boilj_ng is experienced. _ The August 5th model tlses th~
Dougnll-ltohse:110\\,1 correlation *with the steam updraft flow calculated assuuing nucleate boiling in the region of the core belou the l1ich powered noc1 c.
However, the staff required that the 1aass flux be calculated assuninti pool film boiling heat transf~r to the coolant in tlie low_er portion of the fuel assen~)ly below the hieh powered node and flashing of the coolant in the sa:::e portion of the f ucl asse1i!l:>ly.
This change has properly been 1.lacle.
- A complete listine of each computer prograJn in the same form as used in the Evaluation Model, was furnished to the Regulatory staff for review at San Jose, and locked in a file cabinet at San Jose, with the staff retaining the*keys.
7 -
2.4 Refill ond Rcflood Calculations 1nncle by previous versions of SAFE during the ECCS injection phase of a BWTI. LOCA are unacceptable to the staff as discussed in the Supplement to the Status Report.
In order for the SAFE code to be considcrecl.
acceptable for calculating vessel refilling and core reflooding during the ECC~
injection phase of a rn*!R LOCA, the staff required that the code be refined and expanded to include consideration of:
the effects of entrainrr.ent of ECCS water durinc the refill period; 2ccurr.1:1lation of ECCS *\\,*ater in the core hyp.1Ds reeion; ancl possible higher he~t transfer rates in the J.m-,er power.'.lss.err.tilic~;.
The General Electric C0i:1pany h;w now incorporated into a n:odified version of SAFE(G) the followini considerations:
- 1) counter-current flo*.-.r li1~itinG (CCFL) of ECCS. water injected over the core and bypass regions;
- 2) entrainmc:nt and subsC!quent carry-out of ECCS \\.;ater injected over the core*;
- 3) fillinr; of indiv:Lclu.::il volu1, es (guide tubes, lm,:er plenum, and byi)clSS rC[;i e,_
in the reactor that ~,ere lum;_)ed to1;ether in previous versions of SAI E.
The calculations for. the period of blowclo*.-m and prior to the initiatio!l of ECCS water injection bcsed upon the August 5th version of SAFE are acceptable to the !Zcr.;ulatory staff.
For this period, tl1e previous versj on of SAFE may be used to provide the initial conditons for the modi!ied SAFE code
- .calculations (i.e., water level and enthalpies in guide tubes and lower plenu~
along with reactor vessel pressure and ECCS flow rates).
In addition, in the interim period sjnce the Supplement to the Status Report was is..,ued on November 13, 197!1, General Electric has conducted a series of tests in order to obtain further experimental data with respect to entrainment and evaporation heat transfer.
This data has been properly 1;*
considered in the revised version of SAFE.
The principal differences uith respect. to previous versions of SAFE are as f 0J.J.c,,1s:
- 1) ECCS injection flo*.-1 is split between the fuel bundles and t:he between-channel bypass regjon as a function not only of available flow areas (as in the previous version of SAFE), but also as a function of CCFL conditions in the fuel bundles, in the bypass region bet,-:cen channels, and in the byp~ss region bct~1cen the pcrip'1eral fuel asser.:blie:.s anc;l the core shroud.
The appropµiate flow distribctions in the ~odifled SAFE code arc detercincd by the uix1arcl steai~ flo~-, leaving Llw _ co!'e nncl the CCFL chnracteris.::ics of the fuel bundle~ and bypass region.
- 2) _Entr,:dna:cnt and lo.ss of ECCS liquid above the core is nO\\: based on hc;:;Lccl bundle experimental results.
In previous versions of SAFE, it was not considered because air flow tests sh0\\-1ed it \\-ms not sir,nificant.
- 3)
Vaporization of the ECCS J iguid in tl1e core now considers cxpcr1.riE:r,l.'.ll results. It \\,,as based on what was considered to be a nor.iinally hieh heat transfer coefficient in previous varsions of SAFE.
- 4) Water b1vcntories and enthalpies arc calculated individually in the control rod guide tubes, the l ower plenum free voluccs, the bypass recion, and the fuel bundles (the first three of these were lumped tocether in previous versions of SAFE).
- 5) Stenm flow through the core is calculated including all available flow paths (all steam was ~ssumed to pass through the fuel bundles in previous versions of SAF[).
9 -
- 6) The lower plenum an<l guide tube inventories arc represented as either,
subcooled or a homogcn~o\\1s t\\m-ph.:isc mixture,-:hich is c:!.lcula tcd by usinp, the bubble rise correlation *used in previous versions of SAFE (previous versions of SAFE assu:ued a subcoolc<l region,d.th a two-phase region above, with no mixing).
We believe tliat these changes adequately consider the deficiencies identified in the Supplement to the Status Report.
We now ~onclude tl1at the evaluation model clesc:ribcd. in NED[-20566 (l)uith lhe r:iodificc1tions'" described.in Sections
- 1 2 4 b
1 1 d.
1 G
1* El
, ** d 1 (S ' 6) 2.
. through
., wlp.ch have,een 1.nc uc e J.n t 1e enc re,._
~ ec tric :*,o c,
will confor!il to.t\\ppendix 1~ to 10 CFR Part SO.
The generic plent sensiti\\*ity (5) studies have been performed with these changes.
Tl1e result~ are dj.scusscd in section l1,0, v,1hich asse~:ses the impact on this plant's operating r2f;trictic:1.:;.
In some respects the r:.odiLi.c::2tions provicte additional conscrvatis;.:s.
responcl to the s uiff 1*equircn:cn.ts within the lii:1i ted ti:r:e a rnil~ble, cert ai-:-1 considerations \\:ere not included \\!hic:h \\,ould tend to provide a nore realistic trea tr.1en t of the ref load phenomena.
- 1) The maxir.1u,n vnluc of
- the t:Lrae depc,ndcnt vaporization in the fuel assc~.,bly is assumed. for purposes of calcula tinr, CCFL conditions.
Use of tir.lC clcpcc.dcnt values might result in increased flow through the fuel bundles into tLe lm.'e r plenum inventory.
- 2) The average power bundle is assuraed to reprcscn t the entire core.
Lm,'cr power peripheral bundles might result in less restrictive CCFL conditjons and result in increased lower plenum inventory.
General Electric has indicated that it is considering other modifications of its model to take into consideration the following factors which General Electric bclicycs would be improvements over the model with staff required changes discussed above.
- 10
- 3) Any water.:1ccunul.:1ted a~ove the core bnce the-bypass region is filled is arbitrarily assumed to be lost from the system.
More realistic calcul.:1tions,.,ould allow v,ater to accu;r,_ulate above the core, and credit might be taken for additional pressure in the bypass region (forcing increased flow into flow into the lower plem~1), for availability cf _ t_he stared v.'a ter for later flow int'.o the lmwr plenum whc-n CCFL condtions becorne less restrictive, and for possihle improvements due to the subcooled rnb:ture th:lt in:i.ght accumulate in the upper plenum once the level is above the spr~y spargers.
- 4) Channel rewetting might realistically occur cc!rlier than
- predicted in the present r..:odified model due to flooding in the bypass region,,ihi.ch is not considered for the se purposes.
- 5) The contain~cn t is as~umed to he at atmospl1eric pressure.
Higher pressure might result in less restrictive conditions.
- 6) Steam cooling in the fuel bundles mich t result in lower temperature.
Increased !teat transfer coefficients due to steam cooling from lower plenwn flashing are not included in the present modified version of SAFE.
1,:
11 -
3.0 APPLICABILITY OF GENERIC EVALUATION MODEL The General Electric ECCS Evaluation Model for jet pump reactors is composed of four main computer codes.
Each of these codes requires plant specific and fuel input parameters together with thermal-hydraulic correlations in accordance with Appendix K to 10 CFR 50.
The sensi-tivity studies, fuel parameters, and thermal-hydraulic correlations from the generic model used by the licensee constitute an acceptable ECCS evaluat ion applicable to this facility.
4.0 RESULTS OF LOCA CALCULATION The licensee performed a break spectrum analysis from a small break to the design basis loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) using th e required single-failure analysis generically presented for BWR 4 reactors 1n reference 1.
The desiin basis LOCA coincid ent with the worst single failure (failure of the LPCI ihjection valve) yielded 0
a peak clad temperature of 2190 F 1n the no ECCS limited exposure range, a maximum core average *hydrogen generation of_ 0.1%, and a maximum local cladding oxidation of 7%.
The highest temperature intermediate 0
break yielded a peak clad temperature of 1240 Fat a break area of 2
0.1 ft. (with l!PCI failure).
The analysis submitted. in reference 4 showed that the reactor is not ECCS limited with respect to linear heat generation rate (LHGR) at exposur*e s below 21000 HWD/T.
A maximum (bundle) average planar linear heat generation rate (HAPLHGR) is used in the LOCA analysis The MAPLllGR curves versus planar e?Cposurc are
12 -
limits of operation to ensure conformance with 10 CFR 50.46 and Appendix K to 10 CfR Part 50.
At those fuel e:>rposures wh~re ECCS conside1*ation are not limitini, the fuel design linear heat gencn:1 tion rate restricts specific core power.
All of the mod~l deficiencies noted in Section 2.0 of this document
\\:ere examined by Gcrteral Electric with rcgnrd to imp~ct assessment on current operatinB rc~ctors.
This wos done by a series of (5) sensitivity studies conducted by General Electric and reviewed by the staff.
These studie.s sl1ow th3t t11e required P.~odifications desc1_-j b0c!
in t;ection 2.0 result in the need for adjust.r;:cnt of ccrt2.in op~rat:in~
] *
- t t.
' b th J *
- 1
- 1 *
- t t 1 ( 4)
.1.1:u *a ions proposcc:
y e
J.ccasce 1.n u.s suu111. *a The rr.odel corrections,-:ould cause :Jn incrc~asc. in calcul.,tccl pc;)): clc1c1 tcrnpc:rature.
- llmwvcr, c1 new LOCA linitec.l t'... :\\Pl}JCr.. curve, which is &n incremental clcc.rec"\\se in the }!APLJ!GR curve as orJ.gin.:-illy submit Led by tL c, licensee,,.*ould restrict peak clad tc:r.peratm:c to 2200'-'f,:hich,., a!:; clct.e:::**.fr.
to be the li1Jitin6 ~riterion.
Thus, these new 1-rAPLllGR curves set fort.Ii ia Appendix A assure that the criteria of 10 CFR 50.46(b) arc not cxcc~cc<l.
\\
13
- 5. 0 CONCL l!S I~~
nased on the analysis set forth in thjs Safety Evaluation, certain limitations, in addition to those contained in ci1e licensee's submittal, (Ii) arc required **to assure confor.r..111.cc with the peak clad temperature limit, ar.d maxi1~un oxi ci::1 tiori. and hydro~cn generation criteria of 10 CFR S0.l16(b).
The restrictions.should lir:;it.
operatio:,s to co11fc,n:! to the l*L-\\l'Ll:G?-. curve:s, s:~t* forth in Appc11d*l.-:,: A.
These res tric Lions should be vcrif iecl by a reanalysis-based on
- the General Electric cval.uation nodel, ~edified as described in
/\\
d.
d.
h s T
- en this Safety [valunLlon r:.cport
- S lSCUSSC 111 t C
t.atus '.eport of a cool2hlc gcor:ct1*y.?.nd ) on?, term coolin::,.
The.> he>c1t re..1ov,1l system for Jonr; tcnn cooling for the plant described in the SAR
- is satisfactory for th~=,e rcquire~2nts.
An c:valu~ tion of ECCS per fori:ance \\,holly in conforriance \\-~i th 10 CFR 50. l16 and J\\ppcnc lx Y, basccl on an approvecl ev<1lutltio:1 rroclcl should be subnitte<l for this facility as soon es practicable but within six months or before any rc.fl1elh1g is authorized.
In the interim, operation should conform to *the requiren:ents of the Interim Acceptance CriLcria and Lhe previously approved Technical Specific.:1Lic:,s,
( l1) as well as the requirements o[ the licensee's submittal and t1 e requirements of Appendix A.
1,-
6.0 REFERENCES
- 1.
General Electric Company Analytical Model for Loss-or-Coolant Analysis in Accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix K, NEDE-20566 (Proprietary), NED0-20566 (Non-proprietary),
Draft, August 1974.
- 2.
Status Report by the Directorate of Licensing in the Matter of General Electric ECCS Evaluation Model Co_nformance to 10 CFR 50, Appendix K, October-1974.
- 3.
Supplement 1 to the Status Report by the Directorate of Licensing in the Matter of General Electric ECCS Evaluation Model Conformance to 10 CFR 50, Appendix K, November 13, 1974.
- 4.
Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 and 2 Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analysis Conformance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix K l August 2, 1974.
- 5.
Letter from G. Gye:rey, GE to V. Stello, AEC, dated December 13,
- 6.
Letter from G. Gyorcy, GE to V. Stello, AEC, dated Decemb.er 20, 197.'...
l 97LL
APPENDIX A BRUNSWICK OPERATIO~~ R.ESTRICTIO.:IS I The proposed Technical Specification limiting conditions of operation present two limitations on power distribution related to the LOCA analysis.
These are the limiting assembly oaximum average planar linear heat generation rate, HAPLHGR, and the minim.um critical power-ratio limit related to boiling crisis, 1CPR.
The HCPR value used in the LOCA analysis was 1.19_.
The limiting value of }!APLHGR included with the proposed Technical Specifications submitted on *August 5, 1974~
have been revised to account for the General Electric ECCS Evaluoticn Hodel deficiencies,.;hich have been discussed in this 'report.
The revised values are given in Figures B.3.11-lA and B.3.11-1:B.
Operation shall conform to these values.
Oper ation shall also conform to a MCPR value cif 1.20 as proposed by the licensee
- _J fl,j:-_:!, TYPE:
r.:aTL\\L CO:-:F: TY?E l l 3
.. I...
- r :*-~ : : :.. :... i
- *.:..:_ - !.. * :.. :. :.. \\
FIGURE D-SA DECIJ*!BER 197 4
- M/\\XJMU~*1 AVER;\\C-.:: PLM!,\\R LI~:::/\\R HE/\\T GEt*iEC-:/,TIC't; R/\\TE VERSUS PLl\\r;;\\~ J\\VE~/',GE EXPOSURE
r-LL
~
CY.:..._,,
z UJ
< r-
_J <
CL ~
J.!J..,..
l'.J 0
~ ~
l:J <
~-
< LU
\\
t..:.J
- ) t.9 I-X <
< :.:.J e:::
w i
z
\\
_J
\\
- \\
I '
.,,.-,*.r-
.' \\. ~: ' '/ \\.._~ _:
\\'l :: ~ -~ ~
l.
\\
I
. 1
! *.. I
- i
? L /.. ~ J_:, r-! L ! : : ~:,.._ ~ 1-i ':, \\ T.:; ~: : : :: R ;\\ T i (): L C;Lr\\;;,\\f; ;.... /".:..~-:;, -::,: t::1 PCJ~Ur~t
ADViSQ ?"..;Y CO~'i ;v; IT-;*::::.:: C\\; r;E:/-.c-rcn Sr\\i-7,:G :J!\\~DS UNiTC:D STA~ES,;,-:) /,*~lC :::~c:~GY co:,~~lS~, ION WA!".t-111'.GTON, P.C. ;.of<:l Honorcible Dixy Lee Ray Chair,~wn
- u. S. f.to:.1.ic. Encr~y Co:.,*r.issio:i Washinston, D. C. 20545 November 20, 1974 Sub_j cc t:
REI'CR'i' C,' EV!,LP:'tt'J.O~, !*'.OuZTn5 FO~ CO~'::USSI01, C~IT:"::i:'..I.J. FO:~ EY-.S:RG~:;cy CORE COJLI:.;c SYSTE:*iS FO!l LIC!*ff-y;A'L:?..~COOLED :-;uc:,::!Jl. PGi:ZR ?..:::.-\\czci::;.s
Dear nr. Ray:
Al its 175th rr:ccU.n~, ~ovr.:~~.:)er 1!1-1.G, 197!,, the,'-.dvisory Co::-.::1ittcc on Rc.;cto *c Safc;;uards cc::'.plc.tc.cl J. Ye:viC\\,' of EvJ.hu::U.oci ~:oC:cls
_-*.-:,ich have beer:
sub:-:.itl(;CJ in 2.cr.ord.:,r,cc \\*.'it.h t:=-.c Cc:-:*.. --::is.s.:;0;1 crite.rio. set foc:th in 10 C*'?,
- 50. l: 6.
The f o 1l o'.: i :1g.s t:bcv:-.:-:1i t tc'.C r:i-2c U r:::-,s wi t:1 rc.::c tor vcnu,~r s,,*e:rc nc* l d
- i n \\*,'ashi;;;~co:1, D. C.:
1-'..:rch ~~6, 197!,, 15::hcoci~,,1,d \\.iiJ.co~: ; /.1-ril 25, 197!,,
Gc*ne:.. *~l Ele:c td.c C0:~-?-:::1y ;,'qril 26, 19,.';, ',!e:s tir~;h'.:ll!'" 2 Elcc ~-r ic Cori)o,::: tiui:;
and Viay 1.8, 1S74, Cc:::cu:,t:.io:'!. l*::1~i.1c-cri::~:, Inc, Sul,co:-..:.ilte:e:: r.:*.,et:in£;s \\!C:l."C held \\:it:-1 the Rc;uJ.2.tory S::aff -1:1d Lhei, cc-nsu:L,,;*L5 ia \\.'.::,s]--:in;::.to;1, D. C;,
on Ati f_t:~t 6, 1~17!1, Scptc.-:-.:_;e;r. 25, 19 */,, c:nG Octo:ic*r 26, - l97t,.
'i'hc. Cc-:::,:-,itt.c::.
also he.cl the bc.ne:fit or the doc\\.:;;:;:;nt s l:'..~ te:d ".:,.::lc-,w.
Pr.t\\Vious r('?Orts t.u -he Cm~1issi0n on inLcri~ ~ccc~t~~c0 crilcri3 ~ere ~cdc on J~nu2ry 7, 1972,.:nd
.on the 1J:'°0j)O Se:d ch.::.,,i:,CS of: S.::?lc..l.>c-r 10, 1973.
The Cc,,.-_-;-;i t U:C: h.-::s also addrc~scd t~a s~fcty research proir~~s a1 d the latest repor t is on
?,ovc,-:-ibe:r 20, 197l;.
The /*.C!:.3 Lclieves t!1 at. the !:our li2.ht-;.;~te:r react.O1: v endors ha-.*c dcvclo~,c:d
£vc\\luatio:1 :-:oocls *,,hich,,:il!1 the.::.:.:d~.t:.c,::13.l ::-.ooifica:.:ioas requi::-ec..l by~:-:~
Rcz,ulat.ory Staff,,-:ill ccnror.:.. co Ar,p end:i.x K to Part 50.
A~provc.:G EvalL!atio:, :-:ocicls will aid in co.~cbctin; t:1c liccnsinr; re*;i<::*"*s, b:..it a v.:-,ricty of. S?cci:-ics,.. usL be cvalu.1tcd 0:-1 a casc-b:,-.. c2..sc bas::..s.
I:e::.:s such as the p,,rticul.:::r :e:-ttures of a cont2.i.:.::-.cn t, scquc.-.cir.; 0£ operatio;1s,
sin~lc fo.ilurc ~nalyJis and srQcial fco.turcs oi the re~ctor ~csi;~, arc note:d in the Staff ' s rcvio, of t.he vcncor r.:oc1els.
P.dciitio.1.2.l itc.--:is i,wolvi.n; peakin~ f~ccors and t-..-c2~:cnt of the u~ccr:.:aintics in the p0~2r distrib~t~o~s and ;.:c,::1ito-..-i:1; of U 12 po*.*8r lev.:ls rc:.:oin to be. incorporat -2d, c ase-by-c2..s~,
in Lhe Technical S?ccific~tions with approp=iate conscrvatis6.
Honorable Dixy L(!C Ray The ec.ncr:i.c revi ew o7 the v r:~~or r::.o<lcL r,:.-o;)o!jcci f.0:: A2pu:E:-: :,, like the
...- ~*.* 1.* c*.c*;:: or~ t',,.,,., t 0 -**,. 'c"C"..... "'C" c,-*~,.,..... ;- ~-,-,**,;,.
~1~* -c - **,:-ibute<l
- ~
.:.n.__1.,., r. -
.. :t... ---'-" ***-.., :---~ '
to i ~?rovcd undcrst~~<li~; 0i th~ ~odcli~~ tcch~iq~ ~~, i ~ci~:i~ ~~ the applicability a~d l~~:t~tiu~s en currc~t k~o~lc rl 2~ o{ th~~=--~1 cn6 hydr~clic Phcno
--* *~':l
-~
- tnc rc*d ::,..- -'"'~*c dcf~-,:.&-)",.-n s""\\ *-:e:
1
- ~ r"- n "",-*r~"""i ~,-c-~*"'.'11-ns ""G'
.t,\\;,.-,
al*.U
.l..J~
..-,,.\\...v~
'-- )
-"-' ~ -*--~'.'
l:--
code clc.vclor::-,cnts.
The :.i~;:iic:,c,,t.1tio~: of s3fe:cy :::.::~c~:::-c.h ?::-c,z;,:-i.~.1s, noted in thle! Cc.,::2itt:c (! 1 s
(?~*:c.-::*::;c::-
20, 197() ::.:::per::,,_.-,,l t~,d.:- :-c:::ults should have i,:,2.:ict on tr.c futu:-c C':.-;luc1~io,1 r:.*.:*..:.hcds :*nd ~:cc systc..s.
The 1-.CRS rc,.12i;1s :--.incf'Jl th :-. t tlic Ev-=<~-c;:;t.:.on ~-:oc~J.:::, in tr:::::::*e: l.\\-:':.S ?.re not Lhc: dcsin:d c::-.d p1:odl1c:*_;, h:::: t11.::c. c:::.::c.ti*:e,. -i:c l5.2.l)2. -:: c-:;:;1:t; ::,:cy coT.0.
cool. 5.n.., :.1stc;;1:. ;;.-re the n"ti j.:.cU.vc.
T:,c Co~.:;-:.itt>~ C".c~*.:,o-.:i.*.:~1;*~*s :,h<! -c oJt".*i-bu tion to :-c,*:uc(*.::l i,C*c".k cl: d ~.....:12rc,L:;T.~'S ::..:: :; ~:1:..:.i_ )_. {*.:(_,:, -r.::c ~:-.l c~~c desi ;:::
C}l
-r,....,,.
- 1** u'",..,'.'\\.-:~......,.,.
)*~s... -,s 1* 1-~,--
.-*--***-' *;i1 t*"r** :* --
1 ****,"-*n -
,o" 1c,-,-:i 1-c.-.,.,,*_-1*
~ '- J.. l. s ~..,.,
!'~
. -~~*'.., v,*.... _,, -*
...:..,i -'-'***... -**
-., i th.:it i,\\*1*0,*c:d secs ~*c:i:!.::'J::.~-~-t.y.:-:ncl c~p.::*,iJ.i"ty ~r:*,--~.d cc:1::.~_::,.:e to be sot.: z,;*,::.
anci, to t.h c! extcn~- p.:::.::.ctic,~i, c.~~1l6y....ci *
- References Attached,
,1. R. St.:.:,, t. t. );-)
Ch(,i r.,*,2.n
Honorable Dixy _Lee Ray
- Ref creme cs
- 1)
- 2)
- 3)
- 4)
- 5)
- 6)
- 7)
- 8)
- 9)
- 10)
- 11)
- 12)
- 13)
- 15)
- 16)
- 17)
- 18) 19).
- 20) 2l)
- 22_)
- 23)
\\lCAP-&170 (t') dated Ju:i.c 1974, "Calculationnl Model for Core R~::L:-crlir,:-.;
After a Jh::.s-of**Cool. a~1 t Accident" WC/..P-3200 (!l~v. 2 (P)) d.:ited Ju:1c 1974, "WFL:'.SH -
ls Fort.:-,m -
I" Coq>,.1!*.,:*.. -
Pro6r~{:i1. for Si::iul.::t:ion of Tr.:ins::.c:1.ts in ;1 ~-~ulti-Loop n-,11.
11 WCAP-t-.'.:,(11 *u,) date:d Jtmc 197.'t, "LOC':LI~ -
IV Prognl:-:: Loss-of-CooL:::::.
Trc1nsi e.1 t,\\n.:ilysi::"
\\-;c.:~P-S3C2 (P) (1.::ttc*ci Jut,c l97L,, "S,\\.TA2~ IV Pro3rc::::1: Co~.~prc:~rnsiv~! S~:.ce--'i*_:_ -
Dq> e:r.ch:*r. L /_n;;lys is o £ Le,s s-o f--C00 l 2.:1 t"
\\*.'.r'.J,?** ;;:_1'.-:7 fr;)
-;~L{\\ r '
J,.]., 197' "C*-t -,J*~----,** Prr.~st1 1**--
,~.,, **.,;s"
\\;.
l,;...,.1,.,....J,,* -f
,..l,i o.-J,.~c * * *-6*"-.,.
- -~
,/'l..'!.*---J.._..-"--..
\\*:U.P** 0 3.39 ( ::-:2 ) C:.:. ::,:* d.Ju :1 c 1 c_, *,1 i;, "\\~cs ti r, ~)1:--u s c; i.:,i!c-:q:.;;.,1c. y Co re Co.) 1. i,,;
Systc.:-:: i>:.:ilt!J.l: io:1 :'.cH.'. 21, St!!::-:-,,u: y"
~lC,\\?- E',:;t,O d;~tcd Jul/ 1974, 11',*:"c!; ti1,0:,0{1sC! ECCS -
Pl.:!nt. Scil~itiYi i:.y Stu~'.:i*;.:"
\\.T:'.?- S3f1 l (P) clatc-j Ju]'/ 19i'l1' " VC'.S\\'.il sf:8USC Fr.,crica,1C)' Co;.*;; Coo] :i.:1;_;
Systc:-:1 Lv~:luc~t:ion ~: )~~ ]. Scr:sitivity S~uCi....:.*.s 11
\\.;C/.r-8354 (P) d.:1tcci.July 197L;> "Long 't'c;..,:1 Ice Co:1dc:1se:r Co,1t~h.:-:-.cr..t LOT lC C0,1c "
B.'*.,*:-1GC*)1, "?,S~,:' s r:CCS F:valu::tio-;; ~:oclel ':-',c::Jort,,.,iL.11 S;,ccific !s'.) ';, 1.ic2!:.ic,:-:
to ;_*;7 :-\\.\\ c;l::~s PJ.2:~~s h*it~ Lc,~.-c~t~d Loo?.\\."!~*..:.. -.nce:::~c
- 1nL, 11 /-.~0ust 19/..:,
B.!~~;--10092, C~**.~Vl2 ** Yc,*ttr2.n Prc*~.r~::-;; for T;:;.;__;it~,l Si:-;:d.-'1t..i.on c,f.
- 2. :-;;..:L~i::,.t:*~
Rc:,.cto:.- ?J..::.:~~ Duri,.; Lo:,s-o f -C0c,J,,r1t.,
11 july }97:,
?.~.'t-'-10:,9::i,,
11,*0:=.-LCCi) -
Dcscri~)tio:i of :foc:cl for :-:ult 5.:10dc Core r~cflccJ
/,n.::lysi5,
11 Jujy 19"/!;
B.1*.1.-:-1009!,, " ;=;,cvisic.c.s to 'fi~!~Tl 1--3, l. Co:~-t1;.;te:.: Code for :,uclcc:r r..-::::c tor C0r~ 'f:1-'.!~::::.:!l.'-_;::i~.ysis," I~-::.t,c'.i5, Jul:,- 197!1 P.-J~'.-!-1 OOS 5, "cc :,-;:-~;::? :::- -
Cc,;~r u i...c::: Pro,;::.::.::1 [or Prcd i.c U.11::; Co:-1 t,:d :-c.,: n t l'rcss 1J::e-*'i' "'.::-?!2::-.:-.-tu:-::; :\\c ~~io;-1sc to a Loss-c,;-Cool;'.!:it.
- Acciccnt," J,;ly ls-;:.
C,. *:::,.,
< '; r, "C. 1
.- '." " ~ '.-, *
- fr ~ t, C C *::- L",. ~-,, --..,. I r,.. '
t.* '. 1*.,. ~
~
,[,l*... v-..1.._,.. t
,._,.L CU.J......... J~, <,;
. n
.tJ crc:,1r..:
.1)4(:~.:~
_,4..,1\\.J.-\\ L\\ (....
u'-..__Q.4
'I.(_..,_,),-.)
fl
( l.))
< U 'U ~ t 1 (';)-; I j",vl.*..... )
4
,t t.,
v I '""r Cf:*,*2r J'I/ c~).
"]
,c,...,,
11~~"'"' - C r-A p f
1*
'['>
~,, j)-
J*I r
.-,:1r:i. -
J..'J,...,
1...0.-, !'.'.',"'..:-:
1,,~
1:og1:0.,-a :or
- ,;,:creQilCY.-.C-l.. --
Rcflood of L!':e Core" C.. "')~ 1 ~-
( 0 '
- 1 ) () 7' tlr* n **1., -*,* r-AC 1* d
- l G l'
1 I' t,*,,u-...., )
. ).--.pri
.:ni,, 1."-
1-,
y ::.n -rica co::-.etry
- uc
- .oo He;, t T.:- r.:13 -~ e:r.Pro f,:* :.::1 11 CF:~:i.lD-136 (P) Jdy 197!,,
11:li~h Tc:::-,crc.ture Properties of Zircaloy Gncl UOz for l!sc in LOC.-'. 1*:v.::]_l!<1ti.on- :-;odc l3" cr:~:I1:>:57 (P),',c2.~1sc J.9 7!t, 11C:1l cul.:1~:.ve :*'.ct:iods for the CE S;:iall Ei::c 2. ~~
LOCA Ev.:1lu., t:ion ;-:ocicl 11 c r.:.,~))-1:":.~ (?) ;.?rii l97t,,
11 ?.'.RCH -
A ?ort:r2.:1 IV D:i.git.:l Co;;:putcr ?ro 0:::-.::*~1 to Ev.:ilu.:itc i.'oo l.... i1oiU~1 ; /.xi.11 Rod.'.'lr.d CooL::r.t Hcatup" C..... ). - ~,..
"C"
~ *1 --
..i 1 (**,,...,-~ 'fh 1
71 d
t,:,LiJ-.L,,,
- ., rue
.:-,--:::Lu.:-,~1.on :,Ol: C
- ,i.;
- .,;::,
, c.:-r.i.J.
icr;:or_,c\\acc an Dcnsific.1:.-ion ~:oclcl)"
- -;r
- DJ-20566 (n:~- /r) _(I') - "General £1.cctr.i.c f.n.'.llytical :-'.o~cl for Loss**of-Cool~.-.t k1.:ilysis in /-.ccord~ncc,::i.th 10 C?~ 50 A?r:,cr:dix
- K 1
Stntus Report :i.y The Di;:-ccLo:raLe oi Lice::-:si:1r, In TLc :-:.:itt.cr Of B.:1bcoc.k cind \\lilcox ECCS Evalt.1t:ion ~:odcl Co.:[o::-:-.:.:-,nc c To 10 c~*:-;, 50, Appc°'ciix i<.
J.
(tmdCitcd)
\\
\\
Honorable Dixy Lee Ray Nove~ber 20, 1974
- 24)
Supplc~cnt 1 To T~e Status Report By The Director3 tc Of Licensing In The ?*lotter Of B~hcod: :'1_7d ",,,'ilcox ECCS E\\*.:i luation I-:odel Conforr:12.ncc To 10 CFR 50, A~p~ndix K, Kovc~bcr 13, 1914
- 25)
Status ~cport By The Directorate Of Licensin& In The Matter Of Co~bustion Engineering, Ice. ECCS Evaluation Xodcl Confo~1ance To 10 CfR 50, A?pcnti~x ~
(un<l:i tcd )
- 26)
Supplc.:e:nt To The Status Report ny The Direc torate Of Lice.using Ia The Matter Of Co~bustion En~inccrini, Inc, ECCS Evalu~tion Model Confo~~~~c~
To 10 CFR 50, /.[)j)C:-..dix K,
'.~ovc:-:ib.:.:r 13, 197,i
- 27)
Status l~C:?ort ?,y ':'1-.::: Di::e:ctor'""tc Of Li.cc:1sing ln '1'he:.*:atte:r Of Gcnc;:-2.l Elcc t1~ic ECCS f:\\*2lu.:1 t.io~! ~:cdt:!l Conio:-r:lz::icc To 10 C~R. 50, /..!)pCildix !{
(uncbt.e:d)
- 28)
Suy1-1lc:,c1 t 1 To 'i'hc: St3tus Report By T:-ic D.i.rcctor.:1t~ O[ Licensing I::.
The ~;c;tte:r O{ G~:-..-!c.ral r~lccLric SCCS Ev.s.Li.:i::.io,1 ~-:oJc l Confon-:2:ace To 10 CFR 50, Ap~cn~ix K, ~ovc~be:r 13, 1914
- 29)
SL.:itus Rc?ort ;:;y '~'r,e: Dir cc.Lq::c:t.e: Of Licc:-,sin; In The l*\\.:1tte;r Of \\*:cst in~~h:i~.:~
Electric Cui,-.;)2,1y r:ccs Ev<1h:c1::ion ;-.:oe:cl Co::.:o:...,.,~ncc To 10 en:. 50, :*.n,c..r1di.:..:
K (undct.cd)
- 30)
Suppl,~:~c::t To '!.'he St.:,Lus Re;-,ort Ey The Di-::-cctoH1le Of Liccr,sin~ In 7llc Matlcr 0£ We,:;ti;:;-_:-.0;2se: ::lec!.:ric Co::.)£,n:,, ECCS Evalu.::U.0:1 :-:ot:cl Co;,£c,r:;.:::nce:
To 10 Cf'R :iO, :.;:,;).:.:.. ciL::
~~, ~:ovc.::-.ber 13, u*;:;
3.l)
\\~R..1.:;,:: \\.,'2.ce::r ::.e:.:::c:t:o:r )~v~luc.L.i.0:1 :-:odcl, 0..-:Lol>(;r 197t,, Her,ul.:1!.:o,*y St:..Lf-*
37.)
- .
- .-~u-*.: r'.2::c::or :*>:~*lu~t!.:::..-.-
~.-.*:--,d.__~1 (**:;.::v)-
- 1) *...,,*oa*.,1,..,,,t"r"' /...,d V
l i..
'I * \\.. **
- I\\ '\\.
~ '\\
..:..... 1.. -
u.
Studies, Oct o':)e:~ 19 7 !.,, I~c:::,~i~a to,y S t.:1£ f *. -,'e:c:*::ic.:d. :,e:vic.. :
- 33) 1,*.'a!..c!r. 1-:c~c~o:.--
- \\*..:-~luc:.ti0:1 :*<ode:j_
(l(t-~'-.E~*~):
- .:,;.:\\. ;;:,Galizc::tic,n..-*J1ci Sensitivity SLuclics, Oc~obcr 1~7~, ~tgulato=y St~If-Ttc~~ic~l ~cvicw 3l1)
Ev2 lu.:i~jo:1 0-C LCC:\\ Hydrndy,:2..--:;i.cs, }:ovc:.,bci: J.97!;, R,2 6ul.::tory Staff**
'l'cchi1ical i-:evie:-,,
.,