|
|
| Line 33: |
Line 33: |
| 5.2 ECCS Strainer Structural Evaluation ** | | 5.2 ECCS Strainer Structural Evaluation ** |
|
| |
|
| ===5.3 Chemical===
| | 5.3 Chemical Effects Evaluation |
| Effects Evaluation | |
|
| |
|
| 5.4 In-vessel Downstream Effects Evaluation}} | | 5.4 In-vessel Downstream Effects Evaluation}} |
Revision as of 01:49, 5 May 2019
|
|---|
Category:Audit Report
MONTHYEARML19136A2812019-05-29029 May 2019
Regulatory Audit Results Summary Report for the Advanced Boiling-Water Reactor Design Certification Renewal Peak Cladding Temperature Increase
ML18354B1672019-01-24024 January 2019
ABWR DC Renewal - ECCS Suction Strainer Design Audit Report
ML17352A5762018-01-16016 January 2018
Regulatory Audit Results Summary Report of the Probabilistic Risk Assessment of Design Changes for the Advanced Boiling-Water Reactor Design Certification Renewal
2019-05-29
[Table view]
Category:Memoranda
MONTHYEARML19171A2932019-06-27027 June 2019
ABWR DC Renewal Issue 18b Section 9.1.2.2 New and SFP Racks Seismic Structural Analysis Rev 4
ML19136A2812019-05-29029 May 2019
Regulatory Audit Results Summary Report for the Advanced Boiling-Water Reactor Design Certification Renewal Peak Cladding Temperature Increase
ML18234A4322019-02-0404 February 2019
Memo SE with No Open Items GEH ABWR Subsection 6.2.1.6
ML18164A1102019-02-0404 February 2019
Memo - GEH ABWR DC Renewal SE for Subsection 6.2.1.3
ML18354B1672019-01-24024 January 2019
ABWR DC Renewal - ECCS Suction Strainer Design Audit Report
ML19002A3932019-01-11011 January 2019
Memo to ACRS - GEH Advanced Boiling Water Reactor DC Renewal Safety Evaluation for Subsections 8.2.5 and 8.3.3.17
ML18312A1642018-12-0404 December 2018
Memo - GEH ABWR DC Renewal Safety Evaluation for Section 19.1, Probabilistic Risk Assessment
ML18312A1622018-12-0404 December 2018
Safety Evaluation - ABWR DC Renewal Safety Evaluation, Section 19.1, Probabilistic Risk Assessment
ML18312A1632018-12-0404 December 2018
Letter to Applicant - ABWR DC Renewal Safety Evaluation, Section 19.1, Probabilistic Risk Assessment
ML18200A3202018-07-26026 July 2018
Memo to ACRS - GEH ABWR DC Renewal SE for Subsection 3.7.3
ML18199A2732018-07-25025 July 2018
GEH ABWR DC Renewal Audit Plan - PCT Increase
ML18176A1432018-06-27027 June 2018
Memo to ACRS - GEH ABWR DC Renewal SE for Section 13.5
ML18157A2152018-06-11011 June 2018
Summary of Teleconference to Discuss Open Items Associated with the Review of the Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Certification Renewal
ML18088A2242018-04-0909 April 2018
Memo - Safety Evaluation with No Open Items GEH Advanced Boiling Water Reactor Section 13.3, Emergency Planning
ML18029A2592018-01-31031 January 2018
Memo to ACRS - GEH ABWR DC Renewal SE for Section 12
2019-06-27
[Table view] |
Text
/RA/
Code of Federal Regulations
- (GEH/GNF Proprietary(GEH/GLE/GNF Proprietary (GE Proprietary (GE Proprietary (GEH Proprietary (GEH Proprietary(GEH Proprietary(GEH Proprietary(GEH/GNF Proprietary
(GEH Proprietary(GEH Proprietary(GE Proprietary(GEH Proprietary (GEH Proprietary (GEH Proprietary(GNF Proprietary
(GE Proprietary(GEH Proprietary (GEH Proprietary(GEH Proprietary
5.1 ECCS Strainer Sizing Evaluation
GE adopted an empirical means for correlating the test data. Because GE chose to correlate head loss in term of superficial parameters (such as circumscribed velocity) that are easy to determine in plant applications, concerns were identified regarding the generic applicability of the GE correlation, especially application beyond the test range. However, upon further review the staff believes that GE introduced sufficient margin to compensate for any deficiencies in the correlation. Therefore, the staff concluded that this margin would allow GE to apply its correlation within a narrow range beyond the range for which the test data was obtained. LANL also conducted independent analyses to evaluate the applicability of GE methodology to each of the plant applications cited in GE's submittals. Based on the results of these calculations, the staff concluded that the use of GE's hydraulics design method is acceptable for all the plants with exception noted above.
5.2 ECCS Strainer Structural Evaluation **
5.3 Chemical Effects Evaluation
5.4 In-vessel Downstream Effects Evaluation