Testimony of D O'Boyle Updating Testimony on Channel Deformation.Major Source of Fuel Channel Deformation Due to Bowing Should Be Eliminated in Future Irridiation Cycles Due to Modified Fabrication Process & Fuel Mgt ProgramML20041C643 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
Dresden ![Constellation icon.png](/w/images/b/be/Constellation_icon.png) |
---|
Issue date: |
02/23/1982 |
---|
From: |
Oboyle D COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
---|
To: |
|
---|
Shared Package |
---|
ML20041C631 |
List: |
---|
References |
---|
ISSUANCES-SP, NUDOCS 8203020407 |
Download: ML20041C643 (6) |
|
|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20141K3801997-05-27027 May 1997 Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-licensed Activities (Effective Immediately) for Dr Baudino for Period of Five Years ML20080A6081994-10-24024 October 1994 Refers to Pierce Actions Re Util Failure to Provide Adequate Training or Guidance Concerning Applicability of Doa 300-12 While Expert Present Directing Control Rod Movements ML20070B0081994-06-20020 June 1994 Response to Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-licensed Activities.* Informs That Order Will Have Negative Impact on Health & Safety of Public ML20059C2351993-12-17017 December 1993 Comment Supporting Petition for Rulemaking PRM-21-2 Re Commercial Grade Item Dedication ML20245J0191989-04-14014 April 1989 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Ensuring Effectiveness of Maint Programs for Nuclear Power Plants ML20235T9661989-03-0101 March 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Alternatives Provide No Enhancement of Reactor Safety & Will Reduce Experience Level of Senior Operators ML20235T8251989-02-28028 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants.Proposed Rules Provide No Enhancement of Reactor Safety ML20235T8701989-02-28028 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants.Rule Will Cause Career Stagnation & Animosity Among Operators ML20235S8241989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Proposed Rule Alternatives Would Reduce to Nothing Reactor Operators Advancing to Senior Operator ML20235T1551989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Education & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Alternative Provides No Enhancement of Reactor Safety & Will Reduce Experience Level of Senior Operators ML20235T1231989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Alternatives Provide No Enhancement of Reactor Safety & Reduce Experience Level of Senior Operators ML20235S9791989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Both Alternatives Would Eventually Reduce to Nothing Reactor Operators Advancing to Senior Operator ML20235S8371989-02-27027 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235T8381989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235T1361989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Alternative Provides No Enhancement of Reactor Safety & Will Reduce Experience Level of Senior Operators ML20235T7951989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants.Both Alternatives Do Not Provide Enhancement of Reactor Safety ML20235T7041989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors at Nuclear Power Plants ML20235T0911989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Alternatives Provide No Enhancement of Reactor Safety & Reduce Experience Level of Senior Operators ML20235T0461989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Both Alternatives Would Reduce Number of Reactor Operators Advancing to Senior Operator to Nothing ML20235S9541989-02-22022 February 1989 Comment Opposing Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 55 Re Educ & Experience Requirements for Senior Reactor Operators & Supervisors.Alternatives Provide No Enhancement of Reactor Safety & Reduce Experience Level of Senior Operators ML20205T0891988-10-28028 October 1988 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR26 Re Fitness for Duty Program.Proposed Rule Unnecessary as Utils Have Effective Fitness for Duty Program ML20205N0941988-10-24024 October 1988 Comments on Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-50 Re Authorization of Reactor Licensees to Depart from License Conditions & Tech Specs in Emergency Situations.Young Criticism of Inerting Practices at Plant W/O Credence ML20155A6591988-09-0303 September 1988 Comment Supporting Petition to Rescind Paragraphs (X)(Y) of Section 10CFR50.54 Re Cases of Hazardous Practices Including Util Authorizing Senior Operator to Turn Off Safety Sys in Emergency Before Sys Has Finished Job ML20247N7531988-07-28028 July 1988 Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-53 Requesting NRC Action to Review Undue Risk Posed by BWR Thermal Hydraulic Instability.Nrr Should Issue Order Requiring All GE BWRs to Be Placed in Cold Shutdown for Stated Reasons ML20207T2351987-02-16016 February 1987 Endorsement 16 to Maelu Policy MF-114 ML20207T2281987-01-28028 January 1987 Endorsement 21 to Nelia Policy NF-277 ML20213D3501986-08-11011 August 1986 Endorsement 95 to Nelia Policy NF-187 ML20213D3491986-08-11011 August 1986 Endorsement 94 to Nelia Policy NF-187 ML20213D3461986-08-11011 August 1986 Endorsement 78 to Maelu Policy MF-54 ML20213D3421986-08-11011 August 1986 Endorsement 79 to Maelu Policy MF-54 ML20213D3511986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 179 to Nelia Policy NF-43 ML20213D3521986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 153 to Maelu Policy MF-22 ML20213D3591986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 154 to Maelu Policy MF-22 ML20213D3681986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 73 to Maelu Policy MF-64 ML20213D3791986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 178 to Nelia Policy NF-43 ML20213D3761986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 84 to Nelia Policy NF-201 ML20213D3691986-08-0808 August 1986 Endorsement 72 to Maelu Policy MF-64 ML20063M3061982-09-0101 September 1982 Response Opposing Reopening of Record Re Comm Ed Use of 9-ton Auxiliary Hook of Main Overhead Crane Sys During 1981 Installation of High Density Spent Fuel Racks.Incident Not Relevant to Proceeding.Svc List Encl.Related Correspondence ML20063A2551982-08-18018 August 1982 Response to ASLB 820728 Order.Requests Leave to Withdraw Application W/O Prejudice.Need for Transshipment in near- Term Reduced Due to Approval of Installation of High Density Spent Fuel Racks.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20055B4521982-07-20020 July 1982 Transcript of 820720 Hearing in Bethesda,Md Re Spent Fuel Pool Mods.Pp 1,192-1,284 ML20055A6681982-07-14014 July 1982 Notice of Appearance in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054L9371982-07-0808 July 1982 Memorandum in Response to Applicant Motion for Reconsideration or Clarification of Notice of Hearing Re Issue of Whether Spent Fuel Pool Floor Can Withstand Loads Imposed by New High Density Fuel Racks During Seismic Event ML20054K6511982-07-0101 July 1982 Response Supporting Applicant 820616 Motion for Reconsideration or Clarification of Notice of Hearing.Aslb Should Render Final Decision on Basis of Supplemental SER & ASLB Former Findings.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054L9591982-07-0101 July 1982 Testimony of Oo Rothberg & G Harstead.Spent Fuel Pool Expansion for Full 33 Rack Installation Is Acceptable.Spent Fuel Pool Floor Can Withstand Impact If All 33 Racks Tip During Seismic Event ML20054G0051982-06-16016 June 1982 Motion for Reconsideration or Clarification of Hearing Scheduled for 820713 by ASLB 820609 Notice of Hearing. Further Evidentiary Sessions Unnecessary & Improper.Final Decision Proper.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20054F5391982-06-0909 June 1982 Notice of 820713 Hearing in Bethesda,Md,To Continue to 0714 If Necessary.Evidence Relevant to Issue of Whether Spent Fuel Pool Floors Can Withstand Loads Which Could Be Imposed by New Fuel Racks During Seismic Event Will Be Taken ML20054F7151982-06-0707 June 1982 Testimony of DB Davidoff & LB Czech on Commission Questions 3 & 4.NY State Radiological Emergency Preparedness Plan Discussed.Certificate of Svc Encl 1999-03-02
[Table view] Category:TRANSCRIPTS
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20055B4521982-07-20020 July 1982 Transcript of 820720 Hearing in Bethesda,Md Re Spent Fuel Pool Mods.Pp 1,192-1,284 ML20054L9591982-07-0101 July 1982 Testimony of Oo Rothberg & G Harstead.Spent Fuel Pool Expansion for Full 33 Rack Installation Is Acceptable.Spent Fuel Pool Floor Can Withstand Impact If All 33 Racks Tip During Seismic Event ML20054F7151982-06-0707 June 1982 Testimony of DB Davidoff & LB Czech on Commission Questions 3 & 4.NY State Radiological Emergency Preparedness Plan Discussed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041C6431982-02-23023 February 1982 Testimony of D O'Boyle Updating Testimony on Channel Deformation.Major Source of Fuel Channel Deformation Due to Bowing Should Be Eliminated in Future Irridiation Cycles Due to Modified Fabrication Process & Fuel Mgt Program 1999-03-02
[Table view] Category:DEPOSITIONS
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20055B4521982-07-20020 July 1982 Transcript of 820720 Hearing in Bethesda,Md Re Spent Fuel Pool Mods.Pp 1,192-1,284 ML20054L9591982-07-0101 July 1982 Testimony of Oo Rothberg & G Harstead.Spent Fuel Pool Expansion for Full 33 Rack Installation Is Acceptable.Spent Fuel Pool Floor Can Withstand Impact If All 33 Racks Tip During Seismic Event ML20054F7151982-06-0707 June 1982 Testimony of DB Davidoff & LB Czech on Commission Questions 3 & 4.NY State Radiological Emergency Preparedness Plan Discussed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041C6431982-02-23023 February 1982 Testimony of D O'Boyle Updating Testimony on Channel Deformation.Major Source of Fuel Channel Deformation Due to Bowing Should Be Eliminated in Future Irridiation Cycles Due to Modified Fabrication Process & Fuel Mgt Program 1999-03-02
[Table view] Category:NARRATIVE TESTIMONY
MONTHYEARML20207E0051999-03-0202 March 1999 Transcript of 990302 Public Meeting with Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-104.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20236H9381998-06-30030 June 1998 Transcript of 980630 Meeting W/Commonwealth Edison in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-123.Supporting Documentation Encl ML20198P3001997-11-0404 November 1997 Transcript of 971104 Public Meeting W/Ceco in Rockville,Md Re Measures Established by Ceco to Track Plant Performance & to Gain Understanding of CAs Put Into Place to Improve Safety.Pp 1-105.W/Certificate & Viewgraphs ML20055B4521982-07-20020 July 1982 Transcript of 820720 Hearing in Bethesda,Md Re Spent Fuel Pool Mods.Pp 1,192-1,284 ML20054L9591982-07-0101 July 1982 Testimony of Oo Rothberg & G Harstead.Spent Fuel Pool Expansion for Full 33 Rack Installation Is Acceptable.Spent Fuel Pool Floor Can Withstand Impact If All 33 Racks Tip During Seismic Event ML20054F7151982-06-0707 June 1982 Testimony of DB Davidoff & LB Czech on Commission Questions 3 & 4.NY State Radiological Emergency Preparedness Plan Discussed.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20041C6431982-02-23023 February 1982 Testimony of D O'Boyle Updating Testimony on Channel Deformation.Major Source of Fuel Channel Deformation Due to Bowing Should Be Eliminated in Future Irridiation Cycles Due to Modified Fabrication Process & Fuel Mgt Program 1999-03-02
[Table view] |
Text
.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )
) Docket Nos. 50-237-SP COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) 50-249-SP
) (Spent Fuel Pool (Dresden Station, Units 2 & 3)) Modification)
AFFIDAVIT OF DENNIS O'BOYLE State of Illinois )
) SS.
County of C o o k )
I, Dennis O'Boyle, being first duly sworn, state that the attached testimony is true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Dennis OBoyle SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN TO before me this AL ) day of February, 1982.
W QAMn b
' Not(try Public 0203020407 820223 PDRADOCK05000g T
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND I.ICENSING BOARL In the Matter of )
) Docket Nos. 50-237-SP COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) 50-249-SP
) (Spent Fuel Pool (Dresden Station, Units 2 & 3)) Modification)
Testimony Updating Previous Information On Channel Deformation My name is Dennis O'Boyle and I presented both written and oral testimony in the Dresden Nuclear Station Spent Fuel Pool Modification hearings conducted before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (" Licensing Board") . The testimony I presented primarily concerned the dimensional changes BWR fuel channels undergo as a result of irradiation in the reactor core. The testimony I presented was based on dimensional measurements of fuel channels located at the Quad Cities Nuclear Station. Since my testimony was pre-sented, Commonwealth Edison has continued a measurement program on irradiated channels and now has completed measure-ments on approximately 1,900 channels located in the spent fuel storage pools at both the Quad Cities and Dresden Nuclear Stations. The purpose of this testimony is to inform the Licensing Board as to the results of these recent measurements and changes in our current understanding concerning the causes of channel deformation by bowing.
A total of 300 irradiated channels have been measured at Dresden Nuclear Station since my earlier testi-mony and the maximum amount of bow plus bulge which has been observed is 0.292 inches. This value is much smaller than the maximum amount of bow plus bulge of 0.420 inches which I reported as having been measured at the Quad Cities Nuclear Station in my written testimony dated January 30, 1981.
The worst-case analysis set forth in the written and oral testimony of Mr. J. D. Gilcrest assumed a maximum bow plus bulge deformation of 0.500 inches. See, Testimony of James D. Gilcrest Related To Fuel Channel Bowing at p. 9, follow-ing Tr. 1013. Thus, the recent measurements of fuel channels at the Dresden Nuclear Station do not suggest any problems.
Since my earlier testimony, the dimensions of 724 additional irradiated fuel channels have been measured at the Quad Cities Nuclear Station. One of the fuel channels measured had a maximum bow plus bulge deformation of 0.462 2nches. All of the other fuel channels measured had a maximum bow plus bulge deformation of less than 0.400 inches. Thus, only one channel of the 724 additional fuel channels measured exceeded the largest bow plus bulge de-formation reported in my earlier testimony. A bow plus bulge deformation of 0.462 inches is well within the limits of the analysis presented by Mr. Gilcrest in his testimony at the Dresden hearing. See, Testimony of James D. Gilcrest Related To Fuel Channel Bowing at p. 9, following Tr. 1013.
Pursuant to Commonwealth Edison's fuel channel management program, measured fuel channels with a bow plus bulge deformation greater than 0.300 inches are not rein-serted into reactor cores and are not subject to additional irradiation. Accordingly, deformation of fuel channels durinc Iuture irradiation at the Dresden Nuclear Station should not exceed the amount of deformation observed in the recent measurements conducted at the Dresden Nuclear Station. .
Based on the results of the additional measurements referred to above, my conclusions with respect to the storage of irradiated fuel channels presented in the previous testimony remain valid.
As a result of further analysis of the channel deformation measurements, I have modified my opinion con-cerning the major cause of large bowing of fuel channels.
Previously, the industry's (and my) understanding was that channel bowing was caused mainly by the fast neutron flux gradient near the edge of the reactor core. At the time I testified before this Licensing Board, time constraints limited the breadth of my analysis of the channel measure-ments. With respect to the fifteen channels having the largest bow deformation, the majority had been loaded into the peripheral core region where the neutron flux gradient was the largest for at least one fuel cycle. See, O'Boyle Testimony On Dimensional Changes of SWR Fuel Channels as a Result of Irradiation and Non-GE Fuel Bundles and Channels
and p. 10, following Tr. 1013. Indeed, the channel which exhibited the largest amount of bow had been loaded into peripheral core locations for four fuel cycles. (Tr. 752.)
Further investigation showed that a fuel channel that had been intentionally located in peripheral core locations for four fuel cycles had only bowed approximately 0.130 inches. This led me to question the earlier belief as to the main cause of large channel bowing and I reexamined the fifteen channels having the largest in-core deformation.
The results of this analysis did not support my earlier testimony that the largest channel bowing was caused mainly by the neutron flux gradient in the peripheral region of the reactor core. Although the majority of the fifteen channels had indeed been located in peripheral core locations for at least one cycle, it became apparent that the majority had spent more of their time in the reactor core in non-peripheral locations than in peripheral locations. Thus, the correla-tion between core location and large bow plus bulge seemed questionable and I began to look for other explanations of large bow plus bulge.
I now believe that, while flux gradients contri-bute to fuel channel bow, the major cause of large channel l
bowing is related to the fabrication history of the indi- l vidual fuel channel. See, Attachment No. 1. Fabrication processes used in the early 1970's to manufacture the fuel ,
l channels utilized at the Quad Cities and Dresden Nuclear 1
l l
Stations resulted in a small percentage of these channels having sligntly non-uniform metallurgical properties. Fuel channels currently being purchased by Commonwealt'1 Edison no longer use this fabrication process.
Thus, as a result of the modified fabrication process and the above noted fuel manage.aent program, the major source of fuel channel deformation due to bowing should be eliminated in future irradiation cycles. This new understanding of channel deformation suggests that future channel deformation will be smaller than had been predicted previously, and the potential for interference between irra-diated channels and the fuel storage racks is less than previously thought.
O s