ML061790233

From kanterella
Revision as of 16:41, 13 July 2019 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
03/08/2006 - RIC 2006 Presentation - W3D - Maurice E. Dingler - GSI 191
ML061790233
Person / Time
Site: Wolf Creek Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation icon.png
Issue date: 03/08/2006
From: Dingler M
Wolf Creek
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
Download: ML061790233 (9)


Text

RIC 2006 Session W3D GSI 191 Industry Actions for GSI 191 Maurice (Mo) Dingler Technical Staff Engineer

Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Company 3/8/06 2 Key Message GSI 191 is a priority issue for the industry Licensees are implementing hardware changes at the earliest possible outage The many facets of GSI 191 resolution are stretching the capabilities of the industry to resolve all facets by end of 2007

-Chemical effects issue is evolving as tests are being completed by the

industry-Downstream effects of debris on fuel is not a well understood phenomena-Manufacturing, scheduling ,strainer testing 3 Industry Produced Documents major onesNEI 02-01 "Condition Assessment Guide lines Debris Source Inside PWR Containments"NEI 04-07 "Pressurized Water Reactor Sump Performance Evaluation Methodology"WCAP 16362 -NP "PRA Modeling for Sump Blockage"WCAP 16406-P "Evaluation of Downstream Sump Debris Efforts in Support of GSI 191"WCAP 16204 "Evaluation of Potential WRG&EPG Changes to address NRC Bulletin 2003-01 Recommendations"Letter 2005-429 "Transmittal of two WOG Documents -Template to Support WOG chemistry Efforts Follow on Testing and Framework to InterimSafety Assessment for GSI 191"WCAP 16530 "Evaluation of Post-Accident Chemical Effects in Containment Sump Fluids to Support GSI 191" EPRI 101805 "Design Basis Accident Testing of PWR Unqualified Original Equipment Manufacturer Coatings" 4 After Initial Evaluations Plants reviewing evaluations for refinements to the initial evaluation Downstream Wear/ Blockage

-Pumps/Valves/Fuel concerns Possible solutions

-Change out valves and pump wear surfaces

-Change the debris source term Change insulation Install debris interceptorHave vendor test to determi ne screen specific bypass factorDetermine hardness factors of the certain debris Combination of all 5 After Initial Evaluations Chemical Effects

-Data provided to hardware vendors to determine head loss with a plant specific debris mix and

screen-Head loss concerns Possible solutions

-Install screens with margin to handle

-Change the Buffer agent to less "reactive"agent

-Combination of all 6 After Initial Evaluations NOTE-Each potential solution is plant depended and can impact other aspects of the evaluation 7 Future issues This is a change in the License basis for the plant

-Methods has to be in place to maintain as-built to the evaluation or evaluate any changes Understand the evaluation Know your margins

-Coatings nonqualified

-Latent debris

-Changes to flow balances when the throttle value openings are change. -Changes in coating types -use generic or specific

-Changes in insulations 8 Future Issues Cont.

-Examples of new programs that will be needed to be put in place Latent Debris

-Periodic surveys that monitor changes-NRC SE Requirement

-Enhancements to current cont ainment cleanliness programs Coatings--Periodic assessment be identifie d, described, and implemented during routine outages-NRC SE Requirements Enhancement to Equipment /Rad Protection labeling programs

-need to understand changes to amounts 9 Summary The evaluations will be completed. Sump screens can and will be replaced Downstream effects will be addressed Chemical effects will be addressed Plants will need to understand the evaluations so they can address future

issues as they occur.