ML20003F621

Responses to Joint Intervenors' Interrogatories 19-1 Through 19-7 Re Fuel Element Assembly Guide Wear Problem. Affidavits & Certificate of Svc Encl

ML20003F621
Person / Time
Site:	Waterford
Issue date:	04/15/1981
From:	LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
Shared Package
ML20003F618	List: ML20003F617 ML20003F621
References
NUDOCS 8104230204
Download: ML20003F621 (8)

Text

. .

O April 15, 1981 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-382

)

(Waterford Steam Electric )

Station, Unit 3) )

APPLICANT'S RESPONSES TO JOINT INTERVENORS' INTERROGATORIES 19-1 THROUGH 19-7 Interrogatory No. 19-1. At what point in the licensing procedure must the fuel element assembly guide wear problem be resolved?

Answer. Determination of the point in the licensing procedure at which the guide tube wear problem must be resolved is the responsibility of the licensing authority (NRC). In its Question No. 231.1, the NRC Staff took the position that the problem would I

" ultimately require resolution before the issuance of the operating license. " Combustion Engineering, Inc. considers the technical guide tube wear problem to be resolved.

Interrogatory No. 19-2. List all research being done on this l problem.

B10420 M

. a Answer. Research and testing is described in Applicant's amended answer to NRC Question No. 231.1 (Amend =ent No. 16, March 1981) .

As described therein, in order to reduce control rod vibration, flow channel extensions are to be installed in the five-element CEA cavities and flow bypass inserts are to be installed in the four-element CEA shrouds. Testing to confirm the final design consisted of two separate 250-hour flow tests using full size 16x16 fuel assemblies. Hardware tolerances and flow conditions were purposely chosen to reflect adverse conditions. The results of these tests showed that a dramatic reduction in control rod vibra-tion characteristics had been achieved, ce= pared to the original hardware configuration, and that very little guide tube wear would be predicted over the course of the fuel lifetime.

The use of the above out-of-pile tests to predict the in-reactor rate of guide tube wear is justified by a demonstration program recently completed in the Calvert Cliffs 2 reactor. The results showed that the wear rate predicted by out-of-pile testing is con-sistent with that occurring in long-term reactor operation. Because this demonstration program was performed for geometries other than those in Waterford 3, stainless steel guide tube sleeves will be used in the fuel under the CEA's, as an interim measure, until a similar demonstration program planned for Cycle 1 of San Onofre 2 has been completed.

Interrocatorv No. 19-3. Give timetable for the resolution of this problem.

Answer. See answer to Interrogatory No. 19-1.

Interrogatorv No. 19-4. Give precise technical definition of what is meant by the " resolution of a problem." Give references.

Answer. Applicant is unaware of any " technical definition" of the phrase " resolution of a problem." Applicant takes this phrase, in its orcinary sense, to mean that a problem has been eliminated, cured or dealt with in such a way that it is no longer a " problem." In the case of guide tube wear, the problem has been resolved in the manner described in Applicant's amended answer to NRC Question No. 231.1 (Amendment No. 16, March 1981).

Any further answer to this interrogatory would be an exercise in abstract semantics unrelated to the actual issues in this proceeding.

Interrogatory No. 19-5. Is it possible that a problem is only

" partially resolved"?

Answer. Applicant assumes that it might be accurate to charac-terize a problem as having been " partially resolved" if, for l

l example, work on the problem had been started but not completed or if only some aspects of a multifaceted problem had been resolved. See answer to Interrogatory No. 19-4.

l

Interrogatory No. 19-6.'What is meant by " partially resolving" a problem?

Answer. See answer to Interrogatory 19-5.

Interrogatory No. 19-7. Give a history of proble=s that have been presented to Congress as " resolved" and additional research work has, in fact, been dene on them.

Answer. Applicant does not know what problems Joint Intervenors are referring to in this question. Under 42 U.S.C. S 5850, the NRC is required to submit to Congress certain information about

" unresolved safety issues." However, guide tube wear is not an

" unresolved safety issue." Most information submitted to Congress is in the public domain, and Applicant has no better access to congressional information than do Joint Intervenors. In any event, Applicant is unaware that the issue of guide tube wear has been addressed in correspondence to Ccngress, and, as stated in the answer to Interrogatory 19-4, the issue has been resolved for the Waterford 3 facility.

9

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the AtomiE Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-382 (Waterford Steam Electric Station, )

Unit 3) )

AFFIDAVIT OF R. E. NEWMAN State of Connecticut ) 33 County of Hartford )

R. E. Newman, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the Waterford 3 Project Manager with Combustion Engineering, Inc., Power Systems Group; that the information contained in Applicants' Responses to Joint Intervenors' Interrogatory Nos. 19-1, 19-2, and 19-3 is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and belief.

, I

.l. U, R. E. Newman Waterford 3 Project Manager i

Sworn to the subscribed before me this L> d day of d,,ft ,

1981.

. b b%.:.' k

" Notaty Public ~

My Comission Expires 77% ,,,j, 4 /MS ~

, b l

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

)

LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) DOCKET NO. 50-382

)

(Waterford Steam Electric Station, )

Unit 3) )

AFFIDAVIT OF F. J. DRUMMOND State of Louisiana )

) SS Parish of Orleans )

F. J. Drummond, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is the Waterford 3 SES Project Manager with Louisiana Power

& Light Company; that the information contained in Applicants' Responses to Joint Intervenors Interrogatory Nos. 19-4 through 19-7 is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief.

W^

F. J. Drummond Waterford 3 SES Project Manager Sworn to the subscribed before

~

me this /) day of

//

[

l .[f

' - [ . otg Pu A

My Commission expires e.i uc ~ eu. ,.,.r. .. ,.,,,y,,_

_ April 15, 1981 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION In the Matter of )

)

LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-382

)

(Waterford Steam Electric )

Station, Unit 3) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing APPLICANT'S RESPONSES TO JOINT INTERVENORS' INTERROGATORIES 19-1 THROUGH 19-7, and transmittal letter, dated April 15, 1981, were served upon those persons listed on the attached Service List by United States Mail, postage prepaid, this 15th day of April, 1981.

James 13. Hamlih Co for Applicant Dated: April 15, 1981.

. . - . _ _ _ . ~ . _ _ _ . ._ _ ._ __ _-_ . - - . _ _

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR NEGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atoric Safety and Licensine Board In the Matter of )

)

LOUISIANA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) Docket No. 50-382

)

(Waterford Steam Electric )

Station, Unit 3) )

SERVICE LIST Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire Lyman L. Jones, Jr. , Esquire Chairman, Atomic Safety and Gillespie & Jones Licensing Board Suite 201 U.S. Nuc1 car Regulatory 1420 Veterans Memorial Boulevard Commission Metairie, Louisiana 70005 Washington, D.C. 20555 Stephen M. Irving, Esquire Dr. Harry Foreman Louisiana Consumers League, Inc.

Director, Center for 535 No. 6th Street Population Stud:tes Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70802 Box 395, Mayo University of Minnesota Luke E. Fontana Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455 824 Esplanade Avenue New Orleans, Louisiana 70116 Dr. Walter H. Jordan 881 West Oucer Drive Atomic Safety and Licensing i Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37820 Soard Panel l

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Joseph R. Gray, Esquire Commission Office of the Executive Washington, D.C. 20555 Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing Commission Appeal Board Panel Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Docketing and Service Section (3) Washington, D%C. 20555 Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory l Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 l

!