ML15126A256

Vogtle GSI-191 Program Chemical Effects Testing Strainer Headloss Testing NRC Public Meeting - November 6, 2014

ML15126A256
Person / Time
Site:	Vogtle
Issue date:	05/06/2015
From:	Southern Nuclear Operating Co
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Martin R E
References
Download: ML15126A256 (76)

Text

VOGTLE GSI-191 PROGRAM CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING STRAINER HEADLOSS TESTING NRC PUBLIC MEETINGNOVEMBER 6, 2014 AGENDA AGENDA*Introductions

• Introductions

• Objectives for Meeting

• • Discussion of Integrated Chemical Effects Test Plans

• • Discussion of Strainer Head Loss Test Plans

• Feedback on Documents Provided for Review Prior to Meeting Meeting*Staff Questions and Concerns*Presentation provides topic highlights only, more detailed informationiscontainedinotherdocumentsprovided information is contained in other documents provided.2 SNCATTENDEES SNC ATTENDEES*KenMcElroyLicensingManager

• Ken McElroy -Licensing Manager*Ryan Joyce -Licensing

• PhillipGrissom

-ProgramManagerGSI

-191 Phillip Grissom Program Manager GSI 191*Tim Littleton -Lead Engineer Vogtle Design

• Franchelli Febo

-Vogtle Site Design

• Owen Scott -Risk Informed Engineering 3

OBJECTIVESOFTHEMEETING OBJECTIVES OF THE MEETING*ProvideanoverviewofVogtleplansforfuture large*Provide an overview of Vogtle plans for future large scale chemical effects and strainer headloss testing, and receive any comments, concerns, or feedback from NRC staffReceiveanyNRCobservationsorfeedbackon

• Receive any NRC observations or feedback on documents provided for review prior to this meeting 4

VOGTLEBACKGROUND VOGTLE BACKGROUNDVogtleDescription Vogtle Description

• Westinghouse 4-Loop PWR, 99% NUKON Insulation

• ~ 6 ft3 of Interam fire barrier

• GEStackedDiskStrainersforECCSandContainmentSpray

• GE Stacked Disk Strainers for ECCS and Containment Spray (4/unit)*765 ft2 per each of 2 ECCS trains, separate CS strainers (2)

• TSPBuffer TSP Buffer Vogtle Status

• Strainer Head Loss and In-vessel issues remain open

• Previouschemicaleffectstestingprovidedverypromising

• Previous chemical effects testing provided very promising results, but not accepted by NRC

• Vogtle elected to follow Option 2B (risk-informed resolution) of SECY-12-0093

, as bein g p iloted b y STP,gpy 5 DOCUMENTS PROVIDED FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO MEETING

• Strainer Headloss

• SNCV083-PR-05, Rev 0, "Risk-Informed Head Loss Test Strategy", October 2014

• ChemicalEffects

• Chemical Effects*CHLE-SNC-001, Rev. 2, "Bench Test Results for Series 1000 Tests for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant", September 2013 C SC002"hlfSi3000*C HLE-S N C-00 7, Rev. 2 , "Benc h Test Resu l ts f or S er i es 3000 Tests for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant", January 2014

• CHLE-SNC-008, Rev. 3, "Column Chemical Head Loss EitlPddAtCiti"Mh E xper i men t a l P roce dures an d A ccep t ance C r it er i a", M arc h 2014*CHLE-SNC-020, Rev 0, "Test Plan-Vogtle Risk Informed GSI-191CHLETtT6T7dT8"Otb2014 191 CHLE T es t T6 , T7 an d T8", O c t o b er 2014 6 INTEGRATED CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTINGUNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO ENERCON ENERCONALION SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY 7

CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW OVERVIEW*30-Day Integrated Tank Test w/Debris Bed System (T8)

• Similar to STP Test T2, but with Vogtle Specifics

• Prototypical Water Chemistry for Vogtle During LOCA

• BasedonDoubleEndedGuillotineBreakofthe29"HotLeg Based on Double Ended Guillotine Break of the 29 Hot Leg Piping on Loop 4 of the RCS (Weld# 11201-004-6-RB)

• Additional Chemical Effects Testing

• Bench Scale Tests

• Prototypical Water Chemistry Tank Test w/o Debris Beds (T6)

• Forced Preci pitation Tank Test w/Debris Beds (T7)p ()8 30-DAYINTEGRATEDTANKTEST(T8)30-DAY INTEGRATED TANK TEST (T8)*Objective:

Objective:

• Determine and characterize chemical precipitates generated during a simulated LOCA event

• Investigate effects of potential chemical products on head lossGlfildbk*Generate test resu l ts for a s i mu l ate d b rea k case to compare with the chemical effects model

• Based on Double Ended Guillotine Break of the 29" Hot Leg Pipin g on Loop 4 of the RCS (Weld# 11201-004-6-RB

)g()*Includes:*CHLE Corrosion tank

• Prototypical Vogtle Water Chemistry

• Corrosion and Ancillary Materials

• Vertical Column System

• Multi-Particulate Debris Beds 9

SUMMARY

OF PREVIOUS TESTING (STP)()T1T2T3T4T5 Corrosion-Al-Alscaffold

-AlGSZn-Alcoupons-Alscaffold Corrosion materials-Al scaffolding

-Fiberglass

-Al scaffold-Fiberglass

-GS, Zn coupons-Concrete-Al , GS , Zn coupons

-Fiberglass

-Concrete-Al coupons-Fiberglass

-Al scaffold-Fiberglass

-GS, Zn coupons-Concrete-Concrete-ConcreteAvgVel(ft/s)0.010.010.010.010.01pH7.227.327.227.227.25 Temperature profileMB-LOCALB-LOCA Non-Prototypical Non-Prototypical LB-LOCATesting Per.30-day30-day10-day10-day10-dayBed prep.NEINEIBlend & NEIBlend & NEIBlender 10

SUMMARY

OF PROPOSED TESTING (SNC)()T6T7T8 Corrosion materials-Al, GS, Cu, CS-Fiberglass Concrete-Al, GS coupons

-Fiberglass Concrete-Al, GS, Cu, CS-

Fiberglass Concrete-Concrete-MAP, Interam, Dirt

-Epoxy,IOZ

-Concrete-IOZ-Concrete-MAP, Interam, Dirt-Epoxy,IOZ Velocity (ft/s)001300130013 Velocity (ft/s)0.013 0.013 0.013TargetpH7.27.27.2 Temperature filModified LB-LOCANon-PrototypicalModified LB-LOCA pro fil eTesting period30-day10-day30-day Bed t ypeNoneMulti-ConstituentMulti-Constituent ypParticulateParticulate 11 TEMPERATUREPROFILE:T8 TEMPERATURE PROFILE: T8 12 TEMPERATUREPROFILE:T8 TEMPERATURE PROFILE: T8*T6/T8 Temperature Profile (initial hour)

• Best Estimate case is below 185°F within ~10 min

• T6/T8 materials are immediately submerged and exposed to sprays

• Nocredittakenforthetimetoactivatespraysandfillthesump 13*No credit taken for the time to activate sprays and fill the sump*No credit taken for thermal lag of materials in containment CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW 30DayIntegratedTankTestw/DebrisBed

• 30-Day Integrated Tank Test w/Debris Bed System (T8)VerticalColumnHeadLoss System*Vertical Column Head Loss System*CHLE Corrosion Tank

• Protot yp ical Water C hemistr y for Vo gtleDurin g L OC AypCy ggOC*Additional Chemical Effects Testing

• Bench Scale Tests

• Prototypical Water Chemistry Tank Test w/o Debris Beds

• Forced Precipitation Tank Test w/Debris Beds 14 CHLE -VERTICAL HEAD LOSS TESTING TESTING UNMTesting FacilityUNM Testing Facility Previous Testing (NEI and Blender Beds)HeadLossResultsHead Loss Results*Debris Beds with Acrylic Particulates oHeadloss-Repeatability o Head loss Repeatability oHead loss -Stability & variability oBed sensitivity, Hysteresis & detectabilityDbiBdithEPtilt*D e b r i s B e d s w ith E poxy P ar ti cu l a t es 15 CHLE UNM Testing Facility CHLE UNM Testing Facility 16 CHLEVERTICALHEADLOSSMODULES CHLE VERTICAL HEAD LOSS MODULES 17 CHLEPREVIOUSTESTING CHLE PREVIOUS TESTINGNEI -Beds CHLE 01040 mg/L of WCAP CHLE-010Blender Bed6 mg/L of WCAP CHLE Results: Repeatability 60 T e s t 1 (P a v = 5.7 1 H 2 O")Test #1, 2, and 3 -Paint/Fiber (40/20) 50 (a v 2)T e s t 2 (P a v = 5.6 9 H 2 O")T e s t 3 (P a v = 5.9 7 H 2 O")3 0 40 A p p r o a c h V e l o c i t y (f r o m 0.0 5 t o 0.0 1 3 f t/s)s , P (H 2 O")20 3 0 Head Los s Acrylic PtiltSEM 10P a v = 5.7 9 (H 2 O")P ar ti cu l a t e SEM 0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18Time (hr)19 CHLEResults: Stability and VariabilityTest #3 -Paint/Fiber (40/20) -Long term test 10 C o l u m n#1 600.10 A p p r o a c h V e l o c i t yTest #1, 2, and 3 -Paint/Fiber (40/20) 8 9 C o l u m n#1 C o l u m n #2 C o l u m n #3+ 5%")4 0 500.08 A p p r o a c h V e l o c i t y H e a d L o s s 2 O")6 7- 5%P a v=7.6 9 ss, P (H 2 O" 30 4 00.06 A p p r o a c h V e l o c i t y (f r o m 0.0 4 9 5 t o 0.0 1 3 f t/s)d Loss, P (H 2 After Adding Latent Debris/Dirt 4 5- 7%+ 7%P a v=4.4 8 9 Head Lo 10 20 0.0 20.04P a v = 5.9 8 (H 2 O") - A f t e r 5 d a y sP a v = 5.9 7 (H 2 O") - A f t e r 1 1 h r s Hea dBefore Addin g 2 3 0 5 1 0 1 5 2 0 0 0 1 2 3 4 5Time (Day) gLatent Debris/Dirt 0 5 0 5 0Time (hr)20 CHLEResults: Sensitivity, Hysteresis &

Chemical Detectability Chemical Detectability 70.020P a v= 6.1 2 4P a v= 6.8 5 9P=5.9 8 (H O")20 O O H O O H O O H P O 4)2 P O 4)2 P O 4)2 Head Loss 5 6 0 0 1 6P=4 5 9P a v= 5.2 9 7P a v 5.9 8 (H 2 O)O")(ft/s)14 16 1 8 8" B a t c h 3- A l B a t c h 2- A l O B a t c h 1- A l O B a t c h 3- C a 3 (P B a t c h 2- C a 3 (P B a t c h 1- C a 3 (P O")3 4 0.0 1 6 A V = 0.0 1 3 A V = 0.0 1 4P a v= 3.2 9P a v= 3.9 4 2P a v= 4.5 9oss, P (H 2 ch Velocity (8 10 12P = 1 5.7 8P = 1 5.2 7"P = 1 4.6"P = 1 4.5 2"P = 1 3.1 5" 6" C o n v = 5.1 2" Loss, P (H 2 O Appro ach 2 30.012 A V 0 0 1 0 A V = 0.0 1 1 A V = 0.0 1 2 A V = 0.0 1 3 f t/sHead LApproa c 4 6 8 0 0 8 6 f t/sP = 1 0.5P C Head ach Velocit y 0 1 0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 20.008 A V = 0.0 0 9 A V = 0.0 1 0 0 2 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90100110 0.0 8 6 f t/sTime (hr)Time (Day) 21 0 0 5 1 4CHLE -Results: Detectability with Epoxy 0.0 5 1 2 1 40.60.8 1.0 0 4%Criteria (%)Medium -Thick Beds with Epoxy0.04 1 2ity (ft/s)

H 2 O")00.20.4 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0 0.4%Stability C SEM IOZ0.03 10 roach Veloc ead Loss (H 0 5 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 2 0 0Time (hr)Fiber = 20 gE36)2 SEM -IOZSEM -Epoxy0.02 8 A V 0 0 1 2 8 f t/App r H e Epoxy = 36 gIOZ = 2 g Latent Debris/Dirt = 2 g AlOOH AlOOH Ca 3 (PO 4)0.01 0 2 5 5 0 7 5 1 0 0 1 2 5 1 5 0 1 7 5 2 0 0 2 2 5 6 A V =0.0 1 2 8 f t/sTime (hr)22 CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW*30-DayIntegratedTankTestw/DebrisBedSystem(T8) 30 Day Integrated Tank Test w/Debris Bed System (T8)*Vertical Column Head Loss System

• CHLE Corrosion Tank

• Prototypical Water Chemistry for Vogtle During LOCA

• Additional Chemical Effects Testing

• Bench Scale Tests

• PrototypicalWaterChemistryTankTestw/oDebrisBeds

• Prototypical Water Chemistry Tank Test w/o Debris Beds*Forced Precipitation Tank Test w/Debris Beds 23 PROTOTYPICAL CHEMICALS: CHLE TANKChemical TypeVogtleQuantity (mM)CHLETank Quantity (g)Significance H 3 BO 3221.415546Initial Pool ChemistryLiOH0.05041.372HCl2.3999Radiolysis Generated Chemicals HNO 30.08736.2TSP5.832582 Containment Buffering Agent 24 CHEMICALADDITIONPROTOCOLS CHEMICAL ADDITION PROTOCOLS*InitialPoolChemistry

• Initial Pool Chemistry*Boric Acid

• Lithium Hydroxide ([Li]=0.35 mg/L)

• TSP metered in continuously during first two hours of test to desired final concentrationRadiolysisgeneratedmaterialsaddedthroughout

• Radiolysis generated materials added throughout test*Batch addition at 1, 2, 5, 10, 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> initially

• Continued additions periodically thereafter 25 PROTOTYPICAL MATERIALS:

CHLE TANK (1 OF 2)MaterialTypeVogtle Quantity 300 gal CHLE Material TypeVogtle QuantityTest Quantity*Aluminum (submerged)54 ft 2 0.026 ft 2 (3.7 in 2)Aluminum(exposedtospray)4,003ft 21.91ft 2 Aluminum (exposed to spray)4,003 ft 1.91 ftGalvanized Steel (submerged)19,144 ft 2 9.13 ft 2Galvanized Steel (exposed to

)191,234ft 291.2ft 2 spray)191,234 ft 91.2 ftCopper (submerged)149.8 ft 2 0.0715 ft 2 (10.3 in 2)Fire Extin g uisher Dr y Chemical gy-Monoammoniumphosphate (MAP)357 lb m 0.170 lb m (77.2 g)InteramŽ E-54C (submer g ed)4.448 ft 3 2.12 x10-3 ft 3 (3.67 in 3)(g)()26 PROTOTYPICAL MATERIALS: CHLETANK(2OF2)

CHLE TANK (2 OF 2)MaterialTypeVogtle Quantity 300 gal CHLE Material TypeVogtle QuantityTest Quantity*Carbon Steel (submerged)548.0 ft 2 0.261 ft 2 (37.6 in 2)CarbonSteel(exposedto 2 2 2 Carbon Steel (exposed to spray)367.5 ft 2 0.175 ft 2 (25.2 in 2)Concrete (submerged)2,092 ft 2 0.998 ft 2 (144 in 2)IOZCoatingsZincFiller IOZ Coatings Zinc Filler (submerged) 50 lb m 0.024 lb m(11 g)Epoxy Coatings (submerged)2,785 lb m 1.33 lb m (603 g)Latent Dirt/Dust (submerged)51 lb m 0.024 lb m(11 g)Fiberglass (submerged)2,552 ft 3 1.218 ft 3 27 MATERIALADDITIONPROTOCOLS MATERIAL ADDITION PROTOCOLS*Submergedmetalcoupons

• Submerged metal coupons*Arranged in a submergible rack system within tank

• Unsubmerged metal couponsiiiii*Secured i nd i v idually to a rack system w i th i n tan k*Loose materials

• Concrete affixed to a submer ged cou p on rac k gp*Interam, MAP, latent dirt/dust, fiberglass and IOZ* will be loosely packed in wire mesh 'bags' submerged front of one of the tank headers

• • Total inventory of IOZ may be added to the vertical columns instead of to the tank if it is determined to be too fine to contain in a mesh bag 28 COUPONRACKS COUPON RACKS 29 MATERIALBAGS MATERIAL BAGS 30 PROTOTYPICAL MATERIALS: DEBRIS BEDSMaterial Type 300 gal CHLETestQuantity

• Quantity per Column (g)Test Quantity (g)IOZ Coatings Zinc Filler 0.014 lb m(6.4 g)2.13Epoxy Coatings0.236 lb m (107.2 g)35.74*DebrisBedMaterialsareloadedintocolumnsLatent Dirt/Dust0.014 lb m(6.4 g)2.13Fiberglass0.055 ft 3 (60 g)20 Debris Bed Materials are loaded into columns before connection to tank solution with

loaded tank materials

• Connection between tank and column system occurs once beds reach criteria for tbilit s t a bilit y 31 CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW*30-DayIntegratedTankTestw/DebrisBedSystem 30 Day Integrated Tank Test w/Debris Bed System*Vertical Column Head Loss System

• CHLE Corrosion Tank

• Prototypical Water Chemistry for VogtleDuring LOCA

• AdditionalChemicalEffectsTesting Additional Chemical Effects Testing*Bench Scale Tests

• Protot yp ical Water Chemistr y Tank Test w

/o Debris Bedsypy/*Forced Precipitation Tank Test w/Debris Beds 32 BENCHSCALETESTS:ALUMINUM BENCH SCALE TESTS: ALUMINUM*Objectives Objectives

• Time-Averaged Corrosion due to Variations in pH, Temperature, Phht(TSP)Ph osp h a t e (TSP)*Corrosion and release rates over a rangeoftemperatureandpHvalues range of temperature and pH values*Comparison with WCAP correlation for Al

• Effects on Al Corrosion due to Other Corrosion Materials Present During LOCA*ZincCopper Iron Chlorine Zinc , Copper , Iron , Chlorine 33 BENCHSCALERESULTS:ALUMINUM BENCH SCALE RESULTS: ALUMINUM*Time-averagedcorrosionratereached Time averaged corrosion rate reached maximum within 5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br />sPitiflid ithi*P ass i va ti on o f a l um i num occurre d w ithi n 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> (stabilized rate of release)

• Direct correlation between corrosion rate and higher temperature/pH values (next two figures) 34 BENCHSCALERESULTS:ALUMINUM BENCH SCALE RESULTS: ALUMINUM 12 8 10 o n (mg/L)6 8 c oncentrati o 2 4 Aluminum c 0020406080100120 Time (hr)Series110085degrCSeries150070degrCSeries160055degrC 35Series 1100 , 85degrCSeries 1500 , 70degrCSeries 1600 , 55degrC BENCHSCALERESULTS:ALUMINUM BENCH SCALE RESULTS: ALUMINUM 40 30 35 o n (mg/L)20 25 c oncentrati o 5 10 15 A luminum c 0 5020406080100120 A Time (hr)Si1400H784Si1100H734Si1300H684 36 S er i es 1400 , p H 7.84 S er i es 1100 , p H 7.34 S er i es 1300 , p H 6.84 BENCHSCALERESULTS:ALUMINUM BENCH SCALE RESULTS: ALUMINUM*Presenceofzincinhibitsthecorrosion

• Presence of zinc inhibits the corrosion of aluminum

• Presenceofcopperchlorideandiron

• Presence of copper , chloride and iron ions have little appreciable effect on corrosionofaluminum corrosion of aluminum*24-hour release of aluminum is reducedbyafactorof2

-3compared reduced by a factor of 2 3 compared to the WCAP-16530 equations by including passivation in the TSP it env i ronmen t 37 CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW*30-DayIntegratedTankTestw/DebrisBedSystem 30 Day Integrated Tank Test w/Debris Bed System*Vertical Column Head Loss System

• CHLE Corrosion Tank

• Prototypical Water Chemistry for VogtleDuring LOCA

• AdditionalChemicalEffectsTesting Additional Chemical Effects Testing*Bench Scale Tests

• Protot yp ical Water Chemistr y Tank ypyTest w/o Debris Beds (T6)

• Forced Precipitation Tank Test w/Debris Beds 38 ADDITIONALCETANKTESTS ADDITIONAL CE TANK TESTS*30 Day RecirculatoryTankTest (T6)*30-Day Recirculatory Tank Test (T6)*Objective:

iifff*Invest i gate i solated e ffects o f water chemistry on plant materials during a LOCA LOCA*No vertical column system or debris beds

• Prototypical VogtleWater Chemistry

• Temperature Profile Identical to T8 39 CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW*30-Da y Inte g rated Tank Test w

/Debris Bed S y stemyg/y*Vertical Column Head Loss System

• CHLE Corrosion Tank

• PrototypicalWaterChemistryfor VogtleDuringLOCA

• Prototypical Water Chemistry for Vogtle During LOCA*Additional Chemical Effects Testing

• Bench Scale Tests

• Prototypical Water Chemistry Tank Test w/o Debris BedsFdPiittiTkTt

• F orce d P rec i p it a ti on T an k T es t w/Debris Beds (T7) 40 ADDITIONALCETANKTESTS ADDITIONAL CE TANK TESTS*10-Day Integrated Tank Test (T7)

• Objective:

• Investigate material corrosion and any resulting ffthdldfdiitti e ff ec t s on h ea d l oss un d er f orce d prec i p it a ti on conditions using Vogtle quantities for boron, TSP, concrete, galvanized steel, and zinc

• Corrosion Tank

• Vertical Column Head Loss System

• Excess aluminum submerged in CHLE Tank (parallel to T3 test for STP)

• DifferentTemperatureProfilethanT6/T8

• Different Temperature Profile than T6/T8 41 TEMPERATUREPROFILE:T7 TEMPERATURE PROFILE: T7 42 NEXTSTEPS NEXT STEPS-*VerticalColumnHeadLoss

• Vertical Column Head Loss*Explore effects of chemical surrogates on measured head loss for various fiber/particulate ratios (thin, medium, and thick debris beds)TkTt*T an k T es t s*Perform T6, T7, T8 tests

• BenchScaleTests

• Bench Scale Tests*Zinc*Calcium*Calcium 43 REFERENCES REFERENCES

• CHLE SNC001(BenchTests:Aluminum)

• CHLE-SNC-001 (Bench Tests: Aluminum)*CHLE-SNC-007 (Bench Tests: Aluminum w/other metals))*CHLE-SNC-008 (HL Operating Procedure)

• CHLE-SNC-020 (Test Plan for T6, T7 & T8) 44 STRAINER HEAD LOSS TEST PLAN 45 RISK-INFORMED CONVENTIONAL HEAD LOSS TEST STRATEGY

• EnerconServicesInc

• Enercon Services , Inc. *Tim Sande*Kip Walker

• Alden Research Laboratory

• Ludwig Haber 46 HEADLOSSMODEL HEAD LOSS MODEL*Whyisaheadlossmodelnecessary?

Why is a head loss model necessary?

• Thousands of break scenarios

• Each with unique conditions (break flow rate, sump water level, debris loads, etc.)*Parameters that chan g e with time g*It is not practical to conduct a head loss test for every scenario

• Approaches for developing a risk-informed head loss model

• Correlation approach has some advantages, but very difficult to implement implement*Rule-based approach is focused on prototypical conditions for a given plant, which makes it more practical

• Hybrid approach uses rule-based head loss data to create an em p irical correlation p*An overall head loss test strategy is presented which includes some Vogtle-specific implementation information. Other plants are evaluating and may use all or parts of this strategy.

47 HYPOTHETICALTESTRESULTS HYPOTHETICAL TEST RESULTS 48= particulate/fiber ratio PRACTICALCONSIDERATIONS PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

• "Conservatisms "requiredtolimittestscope

• Conservatisms required to limit test scope*Reduce all particulate types to one bounding surrogate

• Reduce all fiber types to one bounding surrogate

• Reduce all water chemistries to one bounding chemistry

• Notes:*Surrogatepropertiesincludethedebristypesize

• Surrogate properties include the debris type , size distribution, density, etc.

• Bounding refers to a parameter value that maximizes head losswithintherangeofplantspecificconditions loss within the range of plant-specific conditions

• Test details will be fully developed in a plant-specific test plan 49 PRACTICALCONSIDERATIONS PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS

• Definitionoftestinglimitsbasedonplant specific*Definition of testing limits based on plant-specific conditions

• Maximum fiber quantity

• Maximum particulate quantity

• Maximum particulate to fiber ratio (max )*Useofsmall

-scaletesting

• Use of small-scale testing *If a small-scale version of the prototype strainer can be shown to provide the same head loss results as a large-scale strainertestprogramwillutilizesmallscaleheadlossvalues strainer , test program will utilize small-scale head loss values to build model

• Reduced cost and schedule would allow more data to be gathered gathered 50 OVERVIEWOFTESTPROGRAM OVERVIEW OF TEST PROGRAM*TestSeries Test Series*Large-scale test with thin-bed protocol

• Large-scale test with full-load protocol

• Validation of small-scale testing

• Small-scale sensitivity tests

• Small-scale tests with full-load protocol

• Need to determine minimum fiber and maximum particulatequantity(iemaximum)requiredto particulate quantity (i.e., maximum ) required to generate "significant" conventional debris head loss

• Significant head loss subjectively defined as 1.5 ft

• Vogtle'sNPSHmarginrangesfrom10 fttoover40 ft ,Vogtles NPSH margin ranges from 10 ft to over 40 ft , depending on pool temperature and containment pressure

• Head loss below 1.5 ftis not likely to cause failures under most circumstances even if future chemical effects testing results in significantheadloss significant head loss 51 LARGE-SCALE TEST WITH THIN-BED PROTOCOL*Purpose Purpose*Identify minimum fiber load required to develop "significant" conventional head loss (maximum )*Obtain prototypical head loss data for use in validating the small-scale strainer*Measure bounding strainer head loss for thin-bed conditions

• Test Protocol

• Use buffered and borated water at 120 °F

• Perform flow swee p to measure clean strainer head loss p*Add prototypical mixture of particulate debris (max quantities)

• Batch in prototypical mixture of fiber debris (one type at Vogtle) in small increments (1/32 ndinch equivalent bed thickness)

• Measure stable head loss and perform flow sweep between each batch

• Continue adding fiber until a head loss of 1.5 ftis observed

• Perform temperature sweep

• Batch in chemical precipitates (quantity and form to be determined by separate analysis/testing) 52 LARGE-SCALE TEST WITH FULL-LOAD PROTOCOL*Purpose Purpose*Identify fiber quantity required to fill the interstitial volume

• Obtain prototypical head loss data for use in validating the small-scale strainer*Measure boundin g strainer head loss for full-load conditions g*Test Protocol

• Use buffered and borated water at 120 °F

• Perform flow sweep to measure clean strainer head loss

• Utilizevaluecorrespondingtoboundingfiberdebrisquantitywithsame Utilize value corresponding to bounding fiber debris quantity with same particulate load used for large-scale thin-bed test

• Batch in prototypical mixture of fiber and particulate debris maintaining the desired value for each batch

• Measure stable head loss and perform flow sweep between each batch

• Repeat batches and flow sweeps until full fiber and particulate load has been added

• Perform temperature sweep

• Batch in chemical precipitates (quantity and form to be determined by separateanalysis/testing) separate analysis/testing) 53 VALIDATION OF SMALL-SCALE TESTING*Designsmallscalestrainerusingprovenscaling

• Design small-scale strainer using proven scaling techniques

• Test small-scale strainer under conditions similar to large-scale testing (both thin-bed and full-load protocols)Adjuststrainerortankdesignasnecessaryto

• Adjust strainer or tank design as necessary to appropriately match large-scale test results

• Note: If small-scale testin g cannot be validated due g to competing scaling factors, the remaining tests could be performed using the large-scale strainer 54 SMALL-SCALESENSITIVITYTESTS SMALL-SCALE SENSITIVITY TESTS*Purpose*Purpose*Reduce all particulate types to a single bounding surrogate

• Reduce all fiber types to a single bounding surrogate (Vogtle only has one fiber type)

• Reduce range of prototypical water chemistries to a single bounding chemistry

• Tests will be run with a variety of representative parameters to identify the parameters for use in remaining tests

• Gather data for head loss caused b y various t yp es of y ypchemical surrogates 55 SMALL-SCALE TESTS WITH FULL-LOAD PROTOCOL*Purposeofthesetestsaretogatherdatanecessary

• Purpose of these tests are to gather data necessary to build the head loss model

• Test Protocol will be similar to lar g e-scale, full-load gtest except that the small-scale tests will be conducted using the bounding surrogates for fiber, particulateandwaterchemistry particulate , and water chemistry*Perform series of tests (e.g., 9 tests) at different values with equivalent fiber batch sizes for each test 56 RULE-BASEDIMPLEMENTATION RULE-BASED IMPLEMENTATION 57 OPTIONSFORIMPLEMENTATION OPTIONS FOR IMPLEMENTATION

• Selectheadlossvalueforboundingfiberquantity

• Select head loss value for bounding fiber quantity and value*Inter polate between two fiber values and use p bounding value*Interpolate between all four points 58 VOGTLEDEBRISGENERATION VOGTLE DEBRIS GENERATION

• Debrisquantitiesvarysignificantly Debris quantities vary significantly for different weld locations and

break sizes

• Max Fiber (11201-004-6-RB, Hot legatbaseofSG) leg at base of SG)*Nukon: 2,235 ft 3*Latent fiber: 4 ft 3*Total: 2,239 ft 3MaxParticulate(11201 008 4 RB*Max Particulate (11201-008-4-RB , Crossover leg)

• Interam: 183 lb m*Qualified epoxy: 188 lb m*Qualified IOZ: 61 lb m*Unqualified epoxy: 2,602 lb m*Unqualified IOZ: 25 lb m*Unqualified alkyd: 32 lb m*RCS Crud: 23 lb m*Latent dirt/dust: 51 lb m*Total: 3,165 lb m 59 VOGTLEDEBRISTRANSPORT VOGTLE DEBRIS TRANSPORT*Debristransportvariessignificantlydependingon

• Debris transport varies significantly depending on several parameters

• Break location (compartment)

• Debris size distribution

• Number of pumps/trains in operation

• Whethercontainmentspraysareactivated Whether containment sprays are activated*Location of unqualified coatings

• Time when containment sprays are securedFiltiflifidti

• F a il ure ti me f or unqua lifi e d coa ti ngs*ECCS/CSS pump flow rates

• Recirculation pool water level 60 VOGTLE FIBER TRANSPORT FRACTIONS TO ONE RHR STRAINER*

Debris Size1Trainw/2Trainw/1Train2Train Debris Type Size 1 Train w/ Spray 2 Train w/ Spray 1 Train w/out Spray 2 Train w/out Spray N u k onFin es 58%2 9%2 3%12%uo es 58%9%3%%Small48%24%5%2%Large6%3%7%4%Itt 0%0%0%0%I n t ac t 0%0%0%0%LatentFines58%29%28%14%* Preliminary values 61 VOGTLE PARTICULATE TRANSPORT FRACTIONS TO ONE RHR STRAINER*Debris TypeSize1 Train w/

Spray2 Train w/

Spray1 Train w/out Spray2 Train w/out Spray Spray Spray Spray SprayUnqualifiedEpoxyFines58%29%44%22%Fine Chips0%0%0%0%

Small Chips0%0%0%0%Large Chips0%0%0%0%

Curled Chips58%29%5%7%UnqualifiedIOZFines58%29%12%6%UlifidAlkd Fi 58%29%100%50%U nqua lifi e d Alk y d Fi nes 58%29%100%50%InteramFines58%29%23%12%

Qualified EpoxyFines58%29%23%12%QualifiedIOZ Fines 58%29%23%12%Qualified IOZ Fines 58%29%23%12%Latent dirt/dustFines58%29%28%14%

RCSCrudFines58%29%23%12%* Preliminary values 62 DEBRIS TRANSPORT W/O CONTAINMENT SPRAYS

• Blowdowntransportfractionsarenotchanged

• Blowdown transport fractions are not changed*Distribution of debris prior to recirculation remains unchan g ed g*5% of fines assumed to be washed down due to condensation in containment 63 VOGTLE FIBER TRANSPORT TO ONE RHR STRAINER, 1 TRAIN W/SPRAY*DebrisType SizeDGQuantity Transport Quantity Debris Type Size DG Quantity (ft 3)Transport Fraction Quantity (ft 3)NukonFines290.558%168.5 Small10011 48%4805 Small 1 , 001.1 48%480.5Large453.66%27.2Intact489.40%0.0Total2,234.7676.3LatentFines3.858%2.2Total2 ,238.5678.4

,* Preliminary values 64 VOGTLE PARTICULATE TRANSPORT TO ONE RHR STRAINER, 1 TRAIN W/SPRAY*Debris TypeSizeDG Quantity (lb m)TransportFractionQuantity(lb m)UnqualifiedEpoxyFines319.558%185.3Fine Chips968.70%0.0 Small Chips245.40%0.0LChi5342 0%00 L arge Chi ps 534.2 0%0.0Curled Chips534.258%309.8 Total2,602.0495.2 Un qualifiedIOZFines25.058

%14.5 q%Unqualified AlkydFines32.058%18.6 InteramFines182.958%106.1 Qualified EpoxyFines187.658%108.8Qualified IOZFines61.358%35.6 Latent dirt/dustFines51.058%29.6 RCSCrudFines23.058%13.3 Total316488216 Total 3 , 164.8 821.6 65* Preliminary values HYPOTHETICAL TEST RESULTS WITH TRANSPORT CONSIDERATIONS 66

SUMMARY

• Acomprehensivetestprogramisnecessaryto

• A comprehensive test program is necessary to quantify head loss for thousands of break scenarios

• The rule based a pp roach is a more practical o p tion ppppthan a full correlation or test for every break scenarioSimplificationsoffibertypeparticulatesurrogate

• Simplifications of fiber type , particulate surrogate , and water chemistry are necessary to develop a practical test matrix

• Small-scale testing may be utilized to gather a majority of the data 67 CHEMICAL EFFECTS BACKUP SLIDES 68 CHEMICAL EFFECTS TESTING OVERVIEW*30-Da y Inte g rated Tank Test w

/Debris Bed S y stem (T8)yg/y()*Vertical Column Head Loss System

• CHLE Corrosion Tank

• Prototypical Water Chemistry for VogtleDuring LOCAAdditionalChemicalEffectsTesting

• Additional Chemical Effects Testing*Bench Scale Tests

• Prototypical Water Chemistry Tank Test w/o Debris Beds

• Forced Precipitation Tank Test w/Debris Beds 69 CHLETROUBLESHOOTINGAPPROACH CHLE TROUBLESHOOTING APPROACHModificationstoCHLETank&ColumnModifications to CHLE Tank & Column System 1.Singleflowheaderforeach column 1.Single flow header for each column 2.Unified suction and discharge plumbing arrangement 3.Improved flow distribution sparger 4.Develo p a new procedure for debris bed p p preparation and loading [CHLE-SNC-008] Stable head loss Rtblhdl(ill)R epea t a bl e h ea d l oss (s i ng l e co l umn)Minimum variability Chemical detection 70 CHLE TANK AND COLUMN MODIFICATIONSUpperstainlessPolycarbonate sectionLower stainless steel sectionUpper stainless steel section V6CHLE System Before ModificationsColumn Head Loss Module C1C2C3 FMSpray systemCHLE Tank C 3 V 1C3-V2 C 3 V 3C3-V4C3-V5C3-V6 C 2 V 1 C2-V2 C 2 V 3 C2-V4C2-V5 C2-V6To Drain C 1-V 1 C1-V2 C 1 V 3C1-V4C1-V5C1-V6To DrainTo Drain V8CHLE System After C 3-V 1 C 3-V 3 C 2-V 1 C 2-V 3 C 1-V 1 C 1-V 3 V9V1V2 V3 V4 V5 V6 V7V10 V11V12To Drain V13 After ModificationsV14(Sampling) 71 ALUMINUMCORRELATIONDATA:BESTFIT ALUMINUM CORRELATION DATA: BEST FIT 40 L)30 a tion (mg/L 20 d concentr a 10 Predicte d 0010203040 Measured concentration (mg/L) 72 STRAINER HEADLOSS BACKUP SLIDES 73 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION

• 35YearsofHistoryandLessonsLearned

• 35 Years of History and Lessons Learned*USI A-43 (opened in 1979)

• Head loss testing/correlations for fiber and RMI (no particulate)

• Resolved without major plant modifications

• Bulletins 93-02 and 96-03

• Incident at Barsebckin 1992 and similar events at Perry and Limerick showed that mixtures of fiber and particulate can cause higher head loss than previously evaluated

• BWR research and plant-specific evaluations led to strainer replacementsatallUSBWRs replacements at all U.S. BWRs*Issue resolved in early 2000s.

74 INTRODUCTION INTRODUCTION

• 35YearsofHistoryandLessonsLearnedCont

• 35 Years of History and Lessons Learned , Cont.*GSI-191 and GL 2004-02

• Based on BWR concerns, GSI-191 was opened in 1996 to ddECCStiffPWR a dd ress ECCS s t ra i ner per f ormance f or PWR s*Chemical effects identified as an additional contributor to strainer head loss

• PWRresearchandplantspecificevaluationsledtostrainer

• PWR research and plant-specific evaluations led to strainer replacements at all U.S. PWRs

• Complexities in evaluations have delayed closure for most p l a nt spas*NRC head loss guidance issued in March 2008 75 3MINTERAME

-50SERIES 3M INTERAM E-50 SERIES*MSDSandobservationsindicatethatitis30%fiber

• MSDS and observations indicate that it is 30% fiber and 70% particulate

• Non-QA testin g with NEI fiber p re p aration p rotocol gpppindicates that it is more robust than Temp-Mat

• 11.7D ZOI can be justifiedTestingindicatesthat50%finesand50%small

• Testing indicates that 50% fines and 50% small pieces would be conservative (i.e.. smaller than

actual)*Transport metrics can be developed based on density and particle sizes, similar to other types of debris debris 76