|
|
| Line 15: |
Line 15: |
|
| |
|
| =Text= | | =Text= |
| {{#Wiki_filter:NRC Wolf Creek Flaw Evaluation NRC Wolf Creek Flaw EvaluationNovember 30, 2006 2U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission NRC Analysis of NRC Analysis of Wolf Creek Flaws Wolf Creek Flaws | | {{#Wiki_filter:NRC Wolf Creek Flaw Evaluation November 30, 2006 |
| *NRC analysis of Wolf Creek flaws to determine:-Time from initiati on to current size.-Time from current size to leakage.-Time from leakage to rupture*Normal operating condition*Faulted condition. | | |
| *Results broken down by nozzle type-Surge/Relief/Safety 3U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Analysis Assumptions Analysis Assumptions | | NRC Analysis of Wolf Creek Flaws |
| *Assumptions:-Time to leakage = time to reach 100% through wall.-Time to rupture = time to reach critical flaw size.-Aspect ratio for growing crack: | | * NRC analysis of Wolf Creek flaws to determine: |
| *K-driven: governed by K-solution at both surface and deepest point shape; i.e. semi-elliptical shape. | | - Time from initiation to current size. |
| *Constant c/a: growth in depth direction driven by K, length is set by original c/a ratio.-MRP-115 crack growth rate for Alloy 182 adjusted to 644 o F.-For initiation: back calculated crack growth to 0.04" crack depth. | | - Time from current size to leakage. |
| -No flaw interactions for surge line.-Weld Residual Stresses (WRS) as identified for each case. | | - Time from leakage to rupture |
| 4U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Surge Nozzle: Assumptions Surge Nozzle: Assumptions
| | * Normal operating condition |
| *Assumptions:-WRS evaluated:*Repair WRS = 15%ID repair -FE analysis | | * Faulted condition. |
| *No Repair WRS | | * Results broken down by nozzle type |
| *No WRS-Loading conditions:*Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include:-Deadweight | | - Surge/Relief/Safety U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2 |
| -Pressure | | |
| -Thermal Expansion (no stratification)*Rupture analysis evaluated both:-Normal operating condition | | Analysis Assumptions |
| -Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE) 5U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Surge Nozzle: Results Surge Nozzle: Results | | * Assumptions: |
| *Three Circumferential Flaws-4" ~31% Through Wall (9:1)-2.2" ~25% Through Wall (5:1)-0.8" @ inner surface (2:1) | | - Time to leakage = time to reach 100% through wall. |
| *Weld Length = 38" | | - Time to rupture = time to reach critical flaw size. |
| *Weld ID = 12" / OD = 15" | | - Aspect ratio for growing crack: |
| *Extensive Repair History | | * K-driven: governed by K-solution at both surface and deepest point shape; i.e. semi-elliptical shape. |
| *Last Volumetric Examination: 1993 6U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Surge Nozzle: Results Surge Nozzle: Results-606Time (years)Constant 9:1 (WRS)K-driven (WRS)6:1NRCMRP10/0010/0610/1210/0310/09Constant 9:1 (No WRS)10:120:1*Last Volumetric Examination: 1993Initiation to Current SizeCurrent Size to LeakageCurrent time to Rupture (Normal Op.)Current time to Rupture (Faulted)K-driven (No WRS)1.2Y1.5Y* MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than theNRC'sleakage flaw size. | | * Constant c/a: growth in depth direction driven by K, length is set by original c/a ratio. |
| 7U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Relief Nozzle: Assumptions Relief Nozzle: Assumptions
| | - MRP-115 crack growth rate for Alloy 182 adjusted to 644oF. |
| *Assumptions:-WRS evaluated:*ASME WRS based on 30ksi yield | | - For initiation: back calculated crack growth to 0.04 crack depth. |
| *ASME WRS based on 40ksi yield | | - No flaw interactions for surge line. |
| *No WRS-Loading conditions:*Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include:-Deadweight | | - Weld Residual Stresses (WRS) as identified for each case. |
| -Pressure | | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3 |
| -Thermal Expansion (no stratification)*Rupture analysis evaluated both:-Normal operating condition | | |
| -Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE) 8U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Relief Nozzle: Results Relief Nozzle: Results | | Surge Nozzle: Assumptions |
| *One Circumferential Flaw-7.7" ~26% Through Wall (21:1) | | * Assumptions: |
| *Weld Length = 16.3" | | - WRS evaluated: |
| *Weld ID = 5.17" / OD = 8" | | * Repair WRS = 15%ID repair - FE analysis |
| *Extensive Repair History | | * No Repair WRS |
| *Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 9U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Relief Nozzle: Results Relief Nozzle: Results-707Time (years)Constant 21:1 (WRS)K-driven (WRS)6:1 NRCMRP10/9910/0610/13Constant 21:1 (No WRS)10:120:1*Last Volumetric Examination: 2000Initiation to Current SizeCurrent Size to LeakageCurrent time to Rupture (Normal Op.)Current time to Rupture (Faulted)K-driven (No WRS)0-3M0-4M5-14M6-15M* MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than theNRC'sleakage flaw size. | | * No WRS |
| 10U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Nozzle: Assumptions Safety Nozzle: Assumptions
| | - Loading conditions: |
| *Assumptions:-WRS evaluated:*ASME WRS based on 30ksi yield | | * Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include: |
| *ASME WRS based on 40ksi yield | | - Deadweight |
| *No WRS-Loading conditions:*Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include:-Deadweight | | - Pressure |
| -Pressure | | - Thermal Expansion (no stratification) |
| -Thermal Expansion (no stratification)*Rupture analysis evaluated both:-Normal operating condition | | * Rupture analysis evaluated both: |
| -Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE) 11U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Nozzle: Results Safety Nozzle: Results | | - Normal operating condition |
| *One Circumferential Flaw-2.5" ~23% Through Wall (8:1) | | - Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE) |
| *Weld Length = 16.3" | | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4 |
| *Weld ID = 5.17" / OD = 8" | | |
| *No known repair history | | Surge Nozzle: Results |
| *Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 12U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Safety Nozzle: Results Safety Nozzle: Results-909Time (years)Constant 8:1 (WRS)K-driven (WRS)6:1 NRCMRP10/9710/0610/15Constant 8:1 (No WRS)10:120:1*Last Volumetric Examination: 2000Initiation to Current SizeCurrent Size to LeakageCurrent time to Rupture (Normal Op.)Current time to Rupture (Faulted)K-driven (No WRS)0-9M0-10M4-5Y* MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than theNRC'sleakage flaw size. | | * Three Circumferential Flaws |
| 13U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Conclusions Conclusions
| | - 4 ~31% Through Wall (9:1) |
| *Range of numerical results dependent upon assumptions. | | - 2.2 ~25% Through Wall (5:1) |
| *Timeframes to leakage for Surge and Relief lines range from 1-21/2years; Safety line timeframes longer. | | - 0.8 @ inner surface (2:1) |
| *More conservative assumptions and calculations show no time between leakage and rupture. | | * Weld Length = 38 |
| *More realistic calculations show timeframes between leakage and rupture range from a few months to a year. | | * Weld ID = 12 / OD = 15 |
| *Important to understand and reso lve the differences in the NRC and MRP analyses, e.g. the assumptions and models that drive the results.}} | | * Extensive Repair History |
| | * Last Volumetric Examination: 1993 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5 |
| | |
| | Surge Nozzle: Results 1.2Y K-driven (WRS) 1.5Y K-driven (No WRS) |
| | NRC Constant 9:1 (WRS) |
| | Constant 9:1 (No WRS) 6:1 MRP 10:1 20:1 Initiation to Current Size Current time Current time Current Size to Leakage to Rupture to Rupture (Normal Op.) (Faulted) 10/00 10/03 10/06 10/09 10/12 |
| | -6 0 6 Time (years) |
| | *Last Volumetric Examination: 1993 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6 |
| | * MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than the NRCs leakage flaw size. |
| | |
| | Relief Nozzle: Assumptions |
| | * Assumptions: |
| | - WRS evaluated: |
| | * ASME WRS based on 30ksi yield |
| | * ASME WRS based on 40ksi yield |
| | * No WRS |
| | - Loading conditions: |
| | * Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include: |
| | - Deadweight |
| | - Pressure |
| | - Thermal Expansion (no stratification) |
| | * Rupture analysis evaluated both: |
| | - Normal operating condition |
| | - Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE) |
| | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7 |
| | |
| | Relief Nozzle: Results |
| | * One Circumferential Flaw |
| | - 7.7 ~26% Through Wall (21:1) |
| | * Weld Length = 16.3 |
| | * Weld ID = 5.17 / OD = 8 |
| | * Extensive Repair History |
| | * Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8 |
| | |
| | Relief Nozzle: Results 0-3M K-driven (WRS) 0-4M 5-14M K-driven (No WRS) 6-15M NRC Constant 21:1 (WRS) |
| | Constant 21:1 (No WRS) 6:1 MRP 10:1 20:1 Initiation to Current Size Current time Current time Current Size to Leakage to Rupture to Rupture (Normal Op.) (Faulted) 10/99 10/06 10/13 |
| | -7 0 7 Time (years) |
| | *Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9 |
| | * MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than the NRCs leakage flaw size. |
| | |
| | Safety Nozzle: Assumptions |
| | * Assumptions: |
| | - WRS evaluated: |
| | * ASME WRS based on 30ksi yield |
| | * ASME WRS based on 40ksi yield |
| | * No WRS |
| | - Loading conditions: |
| | * Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include: |
| | - Deadweight |
| | - Pressure |
| | - Thermal Expansion (no stratification) |
| | * Rupture analysis evaluated both: |
| | - Normal operating condition |
| | - Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE) |
| | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 |
| | |
| | Safety Nozzle: Results |
| | * One Circumferential Flaw |
| | - 2.5 ~23% Through Wall (8:1) |
| | * Weld Length = 16.3 |
| | * Weld ID = 5.17 / OD = 8 |
| | * No known repair history |
| | * Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11 |
| | |
| | Safety Nozzle: Results 0-9M K-driven (WRS) 0-10M 4-5Y K-driven (No WRS) |
| | NRC Constant 8:1 (WRS) |
| | Constant 8:1 (No WRS) 6:1 MRP 10:1 20:1 Initiation to Current Size Current time Current time Current Size to Leakage to Rupture to Rupture (Normal Op.) (Faulted) 10/97 10/06 10/15 |
| | -9 0 9 Time (years) |
| | *Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 12 |
| | * MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than the NRCs leakage flaw size. |
| | |
| | Conclusions |
| | * Range of numerical results dependent upon assumptions. |
| | * Timeframes to leakage for Surge and Relief lines range from 1-21/2 years; Safety line timeframes longer. |
| | * More conservative assumptions and calculations show no time between leakage and rupture. |
| | * More realistic calculations show timeframes between leakage and rupture range from a few months to a year. |
| | * Important to understand and resolve the differences in the NRC and MRP analyses, e.g. the assumptions and models that drive the results. |
| | U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 13}} |
|
|---|
Category:Meeting Briefing Package/Handouts
MONTHYEARML24311A1572024-11-0606 November 2024
Slides for Pre-submittal Public Teleconference Meeting for License Amendment Request to Adopt 10 CFR 50.69, Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems and Components for Nuclear Power Reactors
ML24180A0092024-06-28028 June 2024
July 23, 2024, Portable Lighting Amendment 237 Meeting Slides
ML24071A2102024-03-25025 March 2024
March 25, 2024, Portable Lighting Revised SE Meeting Slides
ML24085A2732024-03-21021 March 2024
Comments for March 25, 2024 Meeting on Portable Lighting Revised SE
ML23275A1712023-10-16016 October 2023
October 16, 2023, Licensee Pre-submittal Meeting Slides - License Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications to Adopt Risk-Informed Completion Times TSTF-505-A, Revision 2 for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML21333A1512021-11-29029 November 2021
Pre-Submittal Meeting Slides License Amendment Request Addressing Portable Lighting for Operator Manual Actions
ML21179A0892021-07-13013 July 2021
Background Information July 13, 2021, Pre-Submittal Public Teleconference
ML20308A7332020-11-18018 November 2020
Slides for GSI-191 Pre-Submittal Public Teleconference November 18, 2020
ML18299A0492018-10-30030 October 2018
Accident Analyses Methodology Transition LAR Public Meeting
IR 05000482/20174072017-12-22022 December 2017
Summary of Closed Regulatory Conference to Discuss Wolf Creek, Unit 1, Security Inspection Report 05000482/2017407
ML16271A4822016-09-27027 September 2016
Summary of Regulatory Conference to Discuss Safety Significance of Wolf Creek Generating Station Emergency Generator Excitation Diode Apparent Violation
ML16236A0952016-08-25025 August 2016
and Wolf Creek Generating Station - August 25, 2016, Class 1E Electrical Equipment Air Conditioning System Pre-Application Meeting
ML16095A0782016-04-12012 April 2016
Slides for the WCGS Meeting Discussion 4/12/16
ML16095A0852016-04-12012 April 2016
Large Scale Head Loss Test Specification 4/12/16
ML16095A0802016-04-12012 April 2016
Large Scale Penetration Test Specification 4/12/16
ML16095A0922016-03-31031 March 2016
Large Scale Penetration and Head Loss Test Plan 4/12/16
ML14188C4812014-07-0707 July 2014
Summary of Annual Assessment Meeting with Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML14134A1842014-05-14014 May 2014
Summary of Public Meeting to Discuss an Apparent Violation Identified at Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML14038A3852014-02-0606 February 2014
1/22/2014 - Summary of Public Meeting to Discuss Corrective Actions Implemented to Address the Chilling Effect Letter
ML13218A0212013-08-0707 August 2013
Licensee Slides, 08/07/13 Preapplication Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Long-Term Corrective Actions for Water Hammer Events in the Essential Service Water System at Wolf Creek
ML13205A2142013-07-30030 July 2013
Operating Corporation - Slides for Pre-application Meeting on 7/30/13 - Core Design and Safety Analysis Methodology Transition License Amendment Request for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML12263A3622012-09-20020 September 2012
Pre-application Meeting Slide Core Design and Safety Analysis Methodology Transition License Amendment Request TAC No. ME9495)
ML12191A1742012-07-0909 July 2012
6/25/2012 Summary of Public Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
ML1110104292011-04-11011 April 2011
Summary of Annual Performance Assessment Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Wolf Creek Generating Station Performance for the NRC Inspection Period Ending December 31, 2010
ML1016901162010-06-16016 June 2010
6/16/2010 Construction Reactor Oversight Process Category 2 Public Meeting Handout: Meeting Slides (Enforcement Cases)
ML1016204902010-06-16016 June 2010
Notice of Construction Reactor Oversight Process Category 2 Public Meeting Handout: Wolf Creek 2, Notice of Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty, Dated 11/21/1984
ML1013404892010-05-14014 May 2010
Summary of Annual Performance Assessment Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss the Wolf Creek Generating Station Performance for the NRC Inspection Period from January 1 Through December 31, 2009
ML0933702032009-12-0303 December 2009
Summary of Public Meeting for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML0933801482009-11-20020 November 2009
Licensee Handouts from November 20, 2009, Public Meeting with Union Electric Company and Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Company to Discuss GL 2004-02 Response Rai'S
ML0913300232009-05-13013 May 2009
Meeting Slides, Successful Licensing of the Als Fpga Based Safety Related I&C Platform
ML0912600692009-05-0606 May 2009
Lessons Learned Using Digital I&C Interim Staff Guidance Workshop
ML0902102422009-01-15015 January 2009
Licensee Slides, January 15, 2009, Category 1 Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Changes to Post Fire Shutdown Unresolved Items Analysis Methods Pre-Application for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML0834700222008-12-11011 December 2008
Slides, Category 2 Public Meeting Digital Instrumentation and Control Steering Committee
M080717, M080717-Commission Briefing Slides/Exhibits Briefing on Fire Protection2008-07-17017 July 2008
M080717-Commission Briefing Slides/Exhibits Briefing on Fire Protection
ML0817706682008-06-25025 June 2008
Summary of Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Several Initiatives That Were Being Implemented to Improve Plant Performance at Wolf Creek
ML0803706102008-01-11011 January 2008
Westinghouse Electric Company LLC, LTR-CDME-08-2, Rev. 1 NP-Attachment, Meeting Handouts from the December 13, 2007 Meeting with Wolf Creek and NRR on H*/B*.
ML0729204682007-10-29029 October 2007
09/25/2007, Summary of Meeting Between the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff and Strategic Teaming and Resource Sharing Representatives to Discuss License Renewal Activities
ML0721501532007-08-0202 August 2007
NRC Staff Handout for August 2, 2007, Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
ML0721102382007-07-24024 July 2007
Performanc Contracting, Inc.'S Powerpoint Slide, Proposed Wolf Creek/Callaway Test Configuration
ML0719303772007-07-11011 July 2007
Handouts (NRC and Licensee) for Meeting with Representatives of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
ML0718606902007-06-19019 June 2007
06/19-20/2007 Slides,Fabrication Records Review, from Category 2 Public Meeting Between the NRC Staff and the Expert Panel for the Wolf Creek Advanced Finite Element Analyses (Fea)
ML0716203882007-06-0101 June 2007
06/01/07 - Presentation Material, Advanced Fea Crack Growth Calculations for Evaluation of PWR Pressurizer Nozzle Dissimilar Metal Weld Circumferential Pwscc.
ML0733409182007-05-31031 May 2007
05/31/2007 Presentation by J. Cudsworth NRC Treatment of Issues Other than Category 2 Issues for License Renewal
ML0713703642007-05-17017 May 2007
Handout for Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation on the Licensee'S Application for the Main Steam and Feedwater Isolation System (Msfis) Modification
ML0713506532007-05-0808 May 2007
Slides, Recommendations for Critical Flaw Size Calculations (in Wolf Creek Advanced Fea Project).
ML0713506462007-05-0808 May 2007
Industry Slides, Advanced Fea Crack Growth Calculations for Evaluation of PWR Pressurizer Nozzle Dissimilar Metal Weld Circumferential PWSCC, from Status Meeting on Implications of Wolf Creek Dissimilar Metal Weld Inspections
ML0713506512007-05-0808 May 2007
Slides, Category 2 Public Meeting with NEI on the Implications of the Wolf Creek Dissimilar Metal Weld Inspections.
ML0713603732007-05-0101 May 2007
Enclosure-1 05/01/2007 Dominion Engineering Presentation Advanced Fea Crack Growth Calculations for Evaluation of PWR Pressurizer Nozzle Dissimilar Metal Weld Circumferential Pwscc.
ML0713603962007-05-0101 May 2007
Enclosure 2-05/01/2007 Engineering Mechanics Corporation of Columbus Presentation, NRC Welding Residual Stress Solutions as Generated by Battelle and Emc2.
ML0701704732007-01-19019 January 2007
12/19/2006 Summary of Public Meetings Related to the Review of the Wolf Creek Generating Station License Renewal Application
2024-06-28
[Table view]
Category:Slides and Viewgraphs
MONTHYEARML24311A1572024-11-0606 November 2024
Slides for Pre-submittal Public Teleconference Meeting for License Amendment Request to Adopt 10 CFR 50.69, Risk-Informed Categorization and Treatment of Structures, Systems and Components for Nuclear Power Reactors
ML24180A0092024-06-28028 June 2024
July 23, 2024, Portable Lighting Amendment 237 Meeting Slides
ML24071A2102024-03-25025 March 2024
March 25, 2024, Portable Lighting Revised SE Meeting Slides
ML23275A1712023-10-16016 October 2023
October 16, 2023, Licensee Pre-submittal Meeting Slides - License Amendment Request to Revise Technical Specifications to Adopt Risk-Informed Completion Times TSTF-505-A, Revision 2 for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML21333A1512021-11-29029 November 2021
Pre-Submittal Meeting Slides License Amendment Request Addressing Portable Lighting for Operator Manual Actions
ML20310A2232020-11-19019 November 2020
Slides for ERO Staffing pre-submittal Public Teleconference November 19, 2020 (L-2020-LRM-0104)
IR 05000482/20174072017-12-22022 December 2017
Summary of Closed Regulatory Conference to Discuss Wolf Creek, Unit 1, Security Inspection Report 05000482/2017407
ML16236A0952016-08-25025 August 2016
and Wolf Creek Generating Station - August 25, 2016, Class 1E Electrical Equipment Air Conditioning System Pre-Application Meeting
ML16236A0972016-08-25025 August 2016
Operating Corporation - August 25, 2016, Core Design and Safety System Analysis Methodology Transition License Amendment Request Revised
ML16095A0782016-04-12012 April 2016
Slides for the WCGS Meeting Discussion 4/12/16
ML14188C4812014-07-0707 July 2014
Summary of Annual Assessment Meeting with Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML14134A1842014-05-14014 May 2014
Summary of Public Meeting to Discuss an Apparent Violation Identified at Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML14038A3852014-02-0606 February 2014
1/22/2014 - Summary of Public Meeting to Discuss Corrective Actions Implemented to Address the Chilling Effect Letter
ML13218A0212013-08-0707 August 2013
Licensee Slides, 08/07/13 Preapplication Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Long-Term Corrective Actions for Water Hammer Events in the Essential Service Water System at Wolf Creek
ML13219A1932013-08-0707 August 2013
Licensee Slides (Final), 08/07/13 Preapplication Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Long-Term Corrective Actions for Water Hammer Events in the Essential Service Water System at Wolf Creek
ML13205A2142013-07-30030 July 2013
Operating Corporation - Slides for Pre-application Meeting on 7/30/13 - Core Design and Safety Analysis Methodology Transition License Amendment Request for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML13121A4892013-05-0101 May 2013
End of Cycle Meeting Summary 4-18-13
ML12263A3622012-09-20020 September 2012
Pre-application Meeting Slide Core Design and Safety Analysis Methodology Transition License Amendment Request TAC No. ME9495)
ML12191A1742012-07-0909 July 2012
6/25/2012 Summary of Public Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
ML1110104292011-04-11011 April 2011
Summary of Annual Performance Assessment Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Wolf Creek Generating Station Performance for the NRC Inspection Period Ending December 31, 2010
ML1016901162010-06-16016 June 2010
6/16/2010 Construction Reactor Oversight Process Category 2 Public Meeting Handout: Meeting Slides (Enforcement Cases)
ML1013404892010-05-14014 May 2010
Summary of Annual Performance Assessment Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss the Wolf Creek Generating Station Performance for the NRC Inspection Period from January 1 Through December 31, 2009
ML0933702032009-12-0303 December 2009
Summary of Public Meeting for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML0933801482009-11-20020 November 2009
Licensee Handouts from November 20, 2009, Public Meeting with Union Electric Company and Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Company to Discuss GL 2004-02 Response Rai'S
ML0913300232009-05-13013 May 2009
Meeting Slides, Successful Licensing of the Als Fpga Based Safety Related I&C Platform
ML0912600762009-05-0606 May 2009
Lessons Learned Using Digital I&C Interim Staff Guidance Workshop Application of ISG-4 During Wolf Creek and Oconee Reviews
ML0912600692009-05-0606 May 2009
Lessons Learned Using Digital I&C Interim Staff Guidance Workshop
ML0902102422009-01-15015 January 2009
Licensee Slides, January 15, 2009, Category 1 Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Changes to Post Fire Shutdown Unresolved Items Analysis Methods Pre-Application for Wolf Creek Generating Station
ML0834700222008-12-11011 December 2008
Slides, Category 2 Public Meeting Digital Instrumentation and Control Steering Committee
M080717, M080717-Commission Briefing Slides/Exhibits Briefing on Fire Protection2008-07-17017 July 2008
M080717-Commission Briefing Slides/Exhibits Briefing on Fire Protection
ML0817706682008-06-25025 June 2008
Summary of Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation to Discuss Several Initiatives That Were Being Implemented to Improve Plant Performance at Wolf Creek
ML0813606472008-06-10010 June 2008
05/01/2008-Summary of Public Meeting on Safety Evaluation Report with Open Items Regarding the Wolf Creek Generating Station License Renewal Review
ML0721102382007-07-24024 July 2007
Performanc Contracting, Inc.'S Powerpoint Slide, Proposed Wolf Creek/Callaway Test Configuration
ML0720601382007-07-17017 July 2007
Slides from Meeting Between NRC Staff and Wolf Creek Panel Enclosures 2 to 3, Advanced Fea Crack Growth Calculations for Evaluation of PWR Pressurizer Nozzle Dissimilar Metal Weld Circumferential Pwscc.
ML0719303772007-07-11011 July 2007
Handouts (NRC and Licensee) for Meeting with Representatives of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation
ML0718606902007-06-19019 June 2007
06/19-20/2007 Slides,Fabrication Records Review, from Category 2 Public Meeting Between the NRC Staff and the Expert Panel for the Wolf Creek Advanced Finite Element Analyses (Fea)
ML0716203882007-06-0101 June 2007
06/01/07 - Presentation Material, Advanced Fea Crack Growth Calculations for Evaluation of PWR Pressurizer Nozzle Dissimilar Metal Weld Circumferential Pwscc.
ML0733409182007-05-31031 May 2007
05/31/2007 Presentation by J. Cudsworth NRC Treatment of Issues Other than Category 2 Issues for License Renewal
ML0713703642007-05-17017 May 2007
Handout for Meeting with Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation on the Licensee'S Application for the Main Steam and Feedwater Isolation System (Msfis) Modification
ML0713506512007-05-0808 May 2007
Slides, Category 2 Public Meeting with NEI on the Implications of the Wolf Creek Dissimilar Metal Weld Inspections.
ML0713506532007-05-0808 May 2007
Slides, Recommendations for Critical Flaw Size Calculations (in Wolf Creek Advanced Fea Project).
ML0713603962007-05-0101 May 2007
Enclosure 2-05/01/2007 Engineering Mechanics Corporation of Columbus Presentation, NRC Welding Residual Stress Solutions as Generated by Battelle and Emc2.
ML0713603732007-05-0101 May 2007
Enclosure-1 05/01/2007 Dominion Engineering Presentation Advanced Fea Crack Growth Calculations for Evaluation of PWR Pressurizer Nozzle Dissimilar Metal Weld Circumferential Pwscc.
ML0701601892006-12-19019 December 2006
12/19/2006, Viewgraphs from Meeting with Wolf Creek Generating Station to Discuss License Renewal Process and Environmental Scoping
ML0635603582006-11-30030 November 2006
Industry Presentation Slides: MRP-139 Analysis Basis
ML0635603462006-11-30030 November 2006
November 30, 2006 NRC Presentation Slides: Wolf Creek Flaw Evaluation
ML0632100772006-11-16016 November 2006
NRC Presentation: NRC Perspective on Wolf Creek Inspection Results
ML0632100802006-11-16016 November 2006
Industry Presentations: Nov. 16, 2006 Public Meeting
ML0622804372006-08-16016 August 2006
Handouts from Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation and from Union Electric Company for Meeting with NRC on the Main Steam Isolation Valve (MSIV) Operability Determination
ML0618000292006-06-28028 June 2006
Handout for June 28, 2006, Meeting with Representatives of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation for Wolf Creek Generating Station on the Main Steam and Feedwater Isolation System (Msfis) Controls Replacement Project
2024-06-28
[Table view] |
Text
NRC Wolf Creek Flaw Evaluation November 30, 2006
NRC Analysis of Wolf Creek Flaws
- NRC analysis of Wolf Creek flaws to determine:
- Time from initiation to current size.
- Time from current size to leakage.
- Time from leakage to rupture
- Normal operating condition
- Results broken down by nozzle type
- Surge/Relief/Safety U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 2
Analysis Assumptions
- Time to leakage = time to reach 100% through wall.
- Time to rupture = time to reach critical flaw size.
- Aspect ratio for growing crack:
- K-driven: governed by K-solution at both surface and deepest point shape; i.e. semi-elliptical shape.
- Constant c/a: growth in depth direction driven by K, length is set by original c/a ratio.
- MRP-115 crack growth rate for Alloy 182 adjusted to 644oF.
- For initiation: back calculated crack growth to 0.04 crack depth.
- No flaw interactions for surge line.
- Weld Residual Stresses (WRS) as identified for each case.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 3
Surge Nozzle: Assumptions
- WRS evaluated:
- Repair WRS = 15%ID repair - FE analysis
- Loading conditions:
- Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include:
- Deadweight
- Pressure
- Thermal Expansion (no stratification)
- Rupture analysis evaluated both:
- Normal operating condition
- Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 4
Surge Nozzle: Results
- Three Circumferential Flaws
- 4 ~31% Through Wall (9:1)
- 2.2 ~25% Through Wall (5:1)
- 0.8 @ inner surface (2:1)
- Last Volumetric Examination: 1993 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 5
Surge Nozzle: Results 1.2Y K-driven (WRS) 1.5Y K-driven (No WRS)
NRC Constant 9:1 (WRS)
Constant 9:1 (No WRS) 6:1 MRP 10:1 20:1 Initiation to Current Size Current time Current time Current Size to Leakage to Rupture to Rupture (Normal Op.) (Faulted) 10/00 10/03 10/06 10/09 10/12
-6 0 6 Time (years)
- Last Volumetric Examination: 1993 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 6
- MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than the NRCs leakage flaw size.
Relief Nozzle: Assumptions
- WRS evaluated:
- ASME WRS based on 30ksi yield
- ASME WRS based on 40ksi yield
- Loading conditions:
- Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include:
- Deadweight
- Pressure
- Thermal Expansion (no stratification)
- Rupture analysis evaluated both:
- Normal operating condition
- Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 7
Relief Nozzle: Results
- 7.7 ~26% Through Wall (21:1)
- Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 8
Relief Nozzle: Results 0-3M K-driven (WRS) 0-4M 5-14M K-driven (No WRS) 6-15M NRC Constant 21:1 (WRS)
Constant 21:1 (No WRS) 6:1 MRP 10:1 20:1 Initiation to Current Size Current time Current time Current Size to Leakage to Rupture to Rupture (Normal Op.) (Faulted) 10/99 10/06 10/13
-7 0 7 Time (years)
- Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 9
- MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than the NRCs leakage flaw size.
Safety Nozzle: Assumptions
- WRS evaluated:
- ASME WRS based on 30ksi yield
- ASME WRS based on 40ksi yield
- Loading conditions:
- Leakage analysis used normal operating loads that include:
- Deadweight
- Pressure
- Thermal Expansion (no stratification)
- Rupture analysis evaluated both:
- Normal operating condition
- Faulted loading condition (Normal operating + SSE)
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10
Safety Nozzle: Results
- 2.5 ~23% Through Wall (8:1)
- Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 11
Safety Nozzle: Results 0-9M K-driven (WRS) 0-10M 4-5Y K-driven (No WRS)
NRC Constant 8:1 (WRS)
Constant 8:1 (No WRS) 6:1 MRP 10:1 20:1 Initiation to Current Size Current time Current time Current Size to Leakage to Rupture to Rupture (Normal Op.) (Faulted) 10/97 10/06 10/15
-9 0 9 Time (years)
- Last Volumetric Examination: 2000 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 12
- MRP defines time to rupture as the time from a 1gpm leakage flaw to grow to the critical flaw size, which is significantly smaller than the NRCs leakage flaw size.
Conclusions
- Range of numerical results dependent upon assumptions.
- Timeframes to leakage for Surge and Relief lines range from 1-21/2 years; Safety line timeframes longer.
- More conservative assumptions and calculations show no time between leakage and rupture.
- More realistic calculations show timeframes between leakage and rupture range from a few months to a year.
- Important to understand and resolve the differences in the NRC and MRP analyses, e.g. the assumptions and models that drive the results.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 13
