Text

Non-proprietary MK-B9 Spectrum LOCA Lhr Limit Analyses for 177-Fuel Assembly Lowered Loop Plants
	ML20216A913
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	06/27/1991
From:	Pacheco K, Seals J; BABCOCK & WILCOX CO.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML19317C696	List: 3F0997-18, Forwards non-proprietary & Proprietary Versions of 86-1202153-00 Calculation, Mk-B9 LL Spectrum LOCA Study. Proprietary Info,Withheld; ML20216A913;
References
	86-1202153-01, 86-1202153-1, NUDOCS 9709050159
	Download: ML20216A913 (85)
	v • d • e

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - - -

P 069/- )

N LC CALCULATION BUMMARY SHEET (C88)

DOCUMENT IDENTIFIER 86-1202153-01 TITLE Mk-B9 LL Spectrum IDCA Study PREPARED BY REYlEWED BY uggg KS Pacheco , ,g JC Seals, m SicNATURE SIGNATURE .

Engineer I Lead EngT eer TITLE - DATE b TITLE pagg.6 f!9L COST CENTER 575 REF. PACE (S) 91, 92 '

TM STATEMENT: REVIEWER INDEPENDENC ' '

PURPOSE AND

SUMMARY

OF RESULTS:

The purpose of this revision is to provide a non-proprietary version of Revision 00. Revision 01 does not replace the original document.

l This document summarizes the spectrum larc;e break LOCA analyses, performed in accordance with 10 CF3 50 Appendix K and 10 CFR 50.46, to cupport the licensing of the Mark-B9 fuel for the lowered loop operating plants. All proprietary information has been deleted.

( % N'Ofe - % ^/am bwl9 m pa w J!)

THE FOLLOWING COMPUTER CODES HAVE BEEN USED IN THIS DOCUMENT: 'd V CODE / VERSION / REV CODE / VERSION / REV ASS Pi A MU T E ON AFE R L TED K YES ( ) NO ( X )

9709050159 970902 DR ADOCK 05000302 PAGE 1 0F 92 e PDR _

HRHBSW NUCLEAR BW76 30C05 3 00/89)

I2WTECHNOLOGIES NUMBER RECORD OF REVISION 86-1202in-01 REV. NO. CHANGE SECT / PARA. DESCRIPTION / CHANGE AUTHORIZATION 00 N/A Original Release -

01 Revision 01 is a non-proprietary version of Revision 00. Revision 01 does not replace Revision 00.

! In the text portion of the document the deleted proprietary information is enclosed by brackets. In the figures and tables the l proprietary information has simply been omitted, including the transient fuel temperatures plotted in Figures 6-3 and 6-6 through 6-31.

Revision 00 and Revision 01 should be compared to determine specific information considered B&W proprietary.

e 4

.NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01.

i $

l l MK-B9 SPECTRUM.LOCA LHR LIMIT ANALYSES

'FOR 177-FUEL. ASSEMBLY LOWERED LOOP PLANTS June 27, 1991 Prepared By B&W Nuclear Service Company B&W Nuclear Technologies

-Lynchburg, Virginia For B&W Fuel Company Lynchburg, Virginia 3

s

9 4

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 MK--B9 SPECTRUM LOCA LHR-LIMIT ANALYSES FOR 177-FUEL ASSEMBLY LOWERED LOOP PLANTS Kev Words: MK-B9, LOCA. LHR LIMIT l

ABSTRACT I

This report describes the large break loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) analyses, performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix K and 10 CFR 50.46, for the Mark-B9 fuel design. The results of the LOCA _ analyses define the kilowatts-per-foot limits, or linear heat rate: (LHR) limits, for the Mark-B0 fuel, as functions of core elevation and do not apply to previous fuel designs. The LOCA analyses suppo'rt variations in Technical Specification limits, but do not constitute the basis for a Technical Specification change.

LHR limits were developed that are valid for the entire life of the Mark-B9 fuel.

i k

4 NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 CONTENIH Page

1. INTRODUCTION. . . . . . ............ . . . 1-1

2.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.1 CFT Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2 LOCA LHR Analyses . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 2-2 2.3 Time-in-Life LOCA LHR Limits . . . . . . . . . . 2-2

3. BACKGROUND. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 l 3.1 TACO 3 Fuel Pin Performance Code. . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.2 Mk-B9 Fuel Design. ....... . . . . . . . . 3-2 3.3 History of Plant Specific Technical i Specification Variations . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-3 3.4 CFT Sensitivity Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-5

4. ANALYTICAL MODEL AND INPUT. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.2 TACO 3 Code . . . . ....... . . . . . . . . 4-1 t

4.2.1 General Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.2.2 Power History . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.2.3 Axial Power Flux Shape . . . . . . . . . 4-2 4.2.4 [ ] Uncertainty Factor . . . . . 4-2 4.2.5 Pin Pressure Calculated Using 18 kW/ft. . 4-2 4.3 CRAFT 2 Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-3 4.3 REFLOD3 Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-4 4.4 FLECSET Code . . . ........ . . . . . . . 4-4 4.5 THETA 1-B Code . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5 4.5.1 THETA 1-B Hot Pin Analysis . . . . . . . . 4-5 4.5.2 Fuel Input. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-5

5. SENSITIVITY STUDIES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. . . . . . 5-1 5.1 Maximum CFT Pressure and Minimum Line Resistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2 5.2 Minimum CFT Pressure and Maximum Line Resistance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-2 5.3 2-ft Elevation Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . 5-3 5.4 10-ft Elevation Sensitivity Study. . . . . . . . 5-3 5.5 4-ft Elevation Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . 5-3 5.6 6- and B-ft Elevation Sensitivity Studies. . . . 5-4 5.7 CFT Sensitivity Model. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-4 5.8 CFT Sensitivity Study Recommendations. . . . . . 5-5

6. LOCA LHR LIMIT ANALYSES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. . . . 6-1 6.1 General Transient Progression. . . . . . . . . . 6-1 6.2 LOCA LHR Limit Analyses. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-2 6.2.1 BOL LHR Limits. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-3 6.2.2 Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study. . . . . . 6-3 11 g

1

. 0 4

4

! NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 i

LONTENTS. cont'd 1

Page .

6.2.3 Time-in-Life LOCA LHR Limits. . . . . . . 6-4 1

! 6.2.4 Burnup Warrant 6-4 i

i 6.3 2-ft Core Elevation. .y .. .. . . . . . . . . . . .

. . . . . . . . . . . 6-5 6.3.1 BOL Conditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-5

- 6.3.2 Time-in-Life Conditions . . . . . . . . . 6-5 6.4- 4-ft Core Elevation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-5 i 6.4.1 BOL Ctmditions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-5 6.4.2 Time-An-Life Conditions . .. . . . . . . 6-5 1 6.5 6-ft Core Elevation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-5

4 6.5.1 BOL Conditions. . . . . . . .. . . . . . 6-5 6.5.2 Timo-in-Life Conditions . . . . . . . . . 6-6 -

6.6 8-ft Com Elevation. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 6-6 6.6.1

L Conditions.-. . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6 6.6.2 22.ne-in-Life Conditions . . . . . . . . . 6-6 i 6.7 10-ft cure Elevation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-6 3 6.7.1 BOL Conditions. . .. . . . . . . . . . . 6 4 67.2 Time-in-Life Conditions . . . . . . .. .- 6-7 6.8 Burrup Warranty case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7 1 6.9 -Summary of Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-7

7. REFERENCES. .. . . . . . . , , , ., , , , , , ., , , , 7,7 i

i y

l b

4' s

111 h

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 l

LIST OF TABLES Table Paae l

3 '

ECCS 1pt Upgrade Plant-Specific and Generic Plant Parameters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 3-2 Comparison of CFT-Related Input Parameters. . . . . . 3-8 5-1 CFT Sensitivity Study at the 2-ft Elevation . . . . . 5-6 ,

5-2 CFT Sensitivity Study at the 10-ft Elevation. . . . 5-7 1

i 5-3 CFT Sensitivity Study at the 4-ft Elevation . . . . . 5-8 6-1 Mk-B9 BOL LOCA Limit Summary. . . . . . . .. . . . . . 6-9 L 6-2 Mk-B9-4-ft-Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study Summary . . 6-10 6-3 MX-B9 Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Summary . . . . . . . . 6-11 6-4 Mk-B9 10-ft Burnup Warranty Case Summhr'.y . . . .. . 6-12 iv

, 7

1 .

! NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 LIST OF FIGURES Floure Eaga i

2-1 LOCA LHR Limits as Functions of Burnup. . . . . . . . 2-4 3-1 Average Fuel Temperature vs. Burnup for TACO 3/ TACO 2

Fuel Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-9 3-2 Pin Pressure vs. Burnup for TACO 3/ TACO 2 Fuel Data . . 3-10 i 1

4 4-1 Code Interfaces for Present EM Large Break LOCA l Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-6 4-2 TACO 3 Power History Fuel' Sensitivity Data . . . . . . 4-7

4-3 TACO 3 Axial Power Shape sensitivity study Data. . . . 4-8

5-1 Downcomer Water Level vs. Time for 2-ft Elevation l Maximum Pressure / Minimum Line Resistance and Minimum >

j Pressure / Maximum Line Resistance cases. . . . . . . . 5 I c

5-2 Comparison of Flooding Rates for 2-ft Elevation l sensitivity studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5-10

)_ i 5-3 Downcomer Water Level vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation !

j Maxinum Pressure / Minimum Line Resistance and Minimum Pressure / Maximum Line Resistance Cases. . . . . . . . 5-11 '

t .

4 4 Comparison of Flooding Rates for 10-ft Elevation "

i sensitivity studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 5-12

(

5-5 Downcomer Water Level vs. Time for 4-ft Elevation Maximum Pressure / Minimum Line Resistance and Minimum Pressure / Maximum Line Resistance Cases. . . . . . . . 5-13 5-6 Comparison of Flooding Rates for 4-ft Elevation Sensitivity Studies . . .- . .. . . . . . . . . . . . 5-14 4

i 6-1 Pressure vs. Time During Blowdown . . . . . . . . . . 6 6-2' Core Power vs. Time During Blowdown . . . . . . . . . 6-14 I 6-3 Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time During Blowdown. . 6-15 6-4 Enthalpy vs. Time During Blowdown . . .- .- . . . . . . 6-16 l 6-5 Core Flow vs. Time During Blowdown. . . . . . . . . . 6-17 i

i 3

VL 8 !

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 LIST OF FIGURES, cont 8d Ficure Pace 6-6 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for MOL 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-18 6-7 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for MOL 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-19 6-8 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for EOL 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-20 6-9 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for EOL 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-21 6-10 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for Composite 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-22 6-11 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for Composite 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life sensitivity Study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-23 6-12 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 2-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-24 6-13 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 2-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-25 6-14 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fue3/ Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 2-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-26 6-15 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 2-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-27 6-16 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 4-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysic . 6-28 6-17 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 4-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-29 6-18 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 6-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-30 vi 9

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 LIST OF FIGURES. cont'd Floure Eage 6-19 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 6-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-31 6-20 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 6-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-32 6-21 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Tempereture vs. Time fot 6-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-33 1

6-22 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-34 6-23 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis . 6-35 6-24 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-36 6-25 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-37 6-26 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis. 6-38 6-27 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation BOL LOCA Limit Analysis. 6-39 6-28 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-40 6-29 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation Time-in-Life LOCA Limit Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-41 6-30 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation Burnup Warranty Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-42 6-31 THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation Burnup Warranty Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6-43 vii

/0

& cdMhatWs@, gilplWRt ' '-

K-fjf E(' .

W-3 Ib ' NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

1. INTRODUCTION The B&W Fuel Company has developed an upgraded Mark-B fuel design, designated the Mark-B9, for the operating B&W-designed 177-fuel assembly lowered loop (177-FA LL) plants. Relevant design features of the Mark-B9 fuel are also briefly discussed in this report.

This report describes the large break loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) analyses, performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix K and 10 CFR 50.46, to support the licensing of the Mark-B9 fuel.

1 The currently accepted B&W emergency core cooling system (ECCS) evaluation model formed the basis for the Mk-B9 LOCA studies. The model input was revised to incorporate the fuel performance data for the Mark-B9 fuel that were obtained from the TACO 3 computer code. In' performing the LOCA analyses, the modeled ECCS water temperatures and tino delay for ECCS actuation were increased relative to the temperatures and delays in previously-submitted LOCA studies.

The effects of variations in initial core flood tank (CFT) conditions, within normal plant technical specification limits, and variations in the resistances of the core flooding lines, were also examined in a separate sensitivity study. That study, which indicated that such variations can significantly impact the analytical results, is also described in this document.

The results of the LOCA analyses define the kilowatts-per-foot ;

limits (kW/ft), or linear heat rate (LHR) limits, for the Mark-B9 fuel, as a function of core elevation. LHR limits were developed that are valid for the entire life of the Mark-B9 fuel.

1-1 g

4 NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

2.

SUMMARY

AND CONCLUSIONS 2.1 -cPT sensitivity' study A set of sensitivity studies were performed to evaluate the most l conservative combination of CPT pressure and CFT line resistance, l for LOCA limits at the 2 , 4, and 10-ft core elevations. The j values for CFT pressure were ( ) and ( ), for the minimum l

and maximum pressure cases, respectively. The CFT line resistances for the A/B CPT lines were [ ] and ( ) for the minimum line resistance and maximum line resistance cases, >

respectively.

The maximum pressure / minimum line resistance cases result in

(

).

The PCTs for the other elevations that were considered in the sensitivity study (

2-1 12

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

). Section 5 details the analyses and results of the CPT sensitivity studies.

2.2 LOCA LHR Analyses The LOCA LHR limits for the 177-fuel assembly, lowered loop plants have been analyzed using a best-estimate fuel performance code, TACO 3, with conservative LOCA fuel initial temperatures and with the Mk-B9 fuel design. The most limiting break configuration was used in this analysis, as determined by BAW-10103A, Rev. 3 (Ref.

1) . - This is the double-anded break in the reactor coolant pump discharge piping with a break discharge coefficient of 1.0. The allowable LHRs were analyzed at both BOL and time-in-life conditions to establish a LOCA LHR limit versus burnup curve, as shown in Figure 2-1. The dashed line of Figure 2-1 represents a fuel mechanical performance limit which corresponds to a TACO 3.

calculated internal pin pressure of ( ). This value is the current TACO 3 safety evaluation report (SER) constraint. The LOCA LHR limits for a given elevation are valid until they intersect this TACO 3 limit curve. Beyond this, the peak LHR limit must be reduced to maintain an internal pin pressure of no greater than

( 3-2.3 TIME-IN-LIFE LOCA LHR LIMITS The time-in-life LOCA LHR limits established for the Mk-B9 fuel design show a different trend than the previous time-in-life LOCA limits for 177-FA LL plants. This is essentially due to the use of TACO 3 instead of TACO 2 to analyze the fuel performance over a range of burnups.

[

2-2 l$

u

1 NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 3

As a result of these changes, when the fu'al internal pin pressure approaches ( ), large amounts of fission gases are released in the gap, especially krypton and xenon. These gases dilute the l helium and significantly decrease the gap gas thermal conductivity.

These additional gases also decrease the contact conductance by relieving some of the fuel to cladding contact pressure. As a result, the average fuel temperatures increaae slightly at extended burnups and pin pressures are higher then previously seen with TACO 2. Figure 3-1 illustrates the different trend in average fuel temperature at extended burnups between TACO 2 and TACO 3.

An additional difference between TACO 2 and TACO 3 is the fuel pin radial power distribution. [

3 Therefore, the increased average fuel temperature and higher pin pressures at extended burnups coupled with a radially increasing power distribution versus burnup, result in generally higher PCTs and lower LOCA limits at extenced burnups.

2-3 l/r

~

gx f s7,.4$<*

' aU05-

' 0 6

] \

\

\ '

\ _

[ \ _

\

\'

\ _

p g

u \ ' 0 4

n r

u B

f ))

o - dsUt s n n '

am s/

o ud i

t oW c ? ( h T (M n t ' (

1 u f p

2 F -

0 u E s 1, n R

U a - r 8, 0 u G

I s -

2 B F t 4 i

m 3_

i L t t E f R

E 2 6 J .Il'~

I .ll' A t C f O &

L 1 t

Jt f , f 4 6 2

. O 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

^ ~NX~ j A j , sad I 4

+ e NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

3. BACKGROUND 3.1 TACO 3 Fuel Performance Code In August of 1990, the NRC approved the incorpor'Ition of a revised fuel pin performance code, TACO 3 (Refs. 2, 3, and 4) , into the B&W ECCS evaluation model. The TACO 3 code provides best estimate predictions for thermal and mechanical performance and generates improved fuel input data for use in the LHR limit analyses. The NRC approval also stipulated that the use of TACO 3 constituted an l

input change, not an EM change, and therefore, BWNS could still use the Dougall-Rohsenow flow film boiling correlation.

The primary difference between the TACO 3 steady-state fuel pin performance code and its predecessor codes is that Taco 3 provides best estimate predictions and calculated uncertainties. TACO 3 calculates best estimate values, and then a conservative (

) margin is added to the initial fuel steady-state stored energy. These changes in the fuel pin performance model provide a margin of improvement over Taco 2. The resulting Taco 3 initial fuel data generated as input for 14CA LHR limit analyses provide significantly lower initial average fuel temperatures. Figures 3-1 and 3-2 illustrate the general trends of fuel temperatures and internal pin pressures as functions of burnup for both TACO 2 and TACO 3. The sharp decrease in the Taco 3 average fuel temperature curve reflects the internal pin pressure reaching the SER restriction of (

).

3-1 lia

l

)

. i

)

- NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 ;

other differences include better representation of total gap heat '

4. conductance by Taco 3, which uses both a contact and a gap gas j conductance model. [ '

! i i ;

i ,

3 :

I 1

3.2 Mk-B9 Fuel Desian f

[ The analyses performed herein assume the Mk-B9-fuel design, which offers the following benefits (Ref. 5): f

=+

Increased fuel assembly burnups 1 .

Reduced bypass flow :

i + Optimized fuel rod design !

j Reduced pellet-to-cladding gap Increased plenum volume i

Modified pellet configuration j Grippable upper end cap *

~

Bullet-nosed lower end cap

, Skirtless removable lower end fitting ;

l

Analytical. improvements '

] TACO 3 fuel code Improved creep collapse-predictions 4

The optimized Mk-B9 fuel pellet was developed to improve fuel thermal performance and extend the burnup capability of the Mk-B t fuel rod. [ i

).

- The' optimized pellet . reduces the pellet-clad diametral gap by ;

approximately ( ),. which improves the gap heat transfer and .

Iowers the average fuel temperature. As a result, fewer fission 3-2 17

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 gases are released to the rod atmosphere for a given burnup.

Additionally, the larger diameter of the optimized fuel pellet allows a shortening of the fuel column to maintain the same fuel loading.

This shorter fuel column leaves more room for the fuel rod plena; thus the fission gases released to the rod atmosphere will cause a slower build-up of rod internal pressure.

i The improved heat transfer across the smaller pellet-clad gap reduces the amount of stored energy that must be removed by the reactor coolant and ECCS fluid in order to assure adequate core cooling.

3.3 History of Plant Soecific Technical Soecification Variations In recent years, various B&W Owners Group (BWOG) utilities have requested that BWNS evaluate plant parameters that have been outside the generic assumptions used in the B&W ECCS Evaluation Model (EM). Based on calculated peak clad temperatures in the

[ ] range, for those ECCS analyses, the plant variations were determined to have little impact, i.e. less than 50'F increase in PCT. Therefore, they were not reportable under 10 CFR Part 50 (Ref. 7). These evaluations are listed below:

1. CFT pressure and inventory.

Entergy Operations (Ref. 8)

Sacramento Municipal Utility District (Ref. 9)

2. Borated water storage tank temperature.

Entergy Operations (Ref. 10)

GPU Nuclear Corporation (Refs. 11 and 12)

Toledo Edison

3. Low pressure injection flow.

Duke Power Company (Ref. 13)

4. ECCS delay time extension.

Duke Power Company (Ref. 14)

In reevaluating these plant parameter variations, based on the TACO 2 fuel code (Ref. 15), BWC CHF correlation, end FLECSET heat transfer coefficients, it was determined that the PCTs had t

increased significantly, to the ( ) range. At these PCTs, the 3-3 g

i NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 plant variations could no longer be justified by evaluation alone.

Revised calculations were then performed at the 4-ft elevation and 6-ft elevation, reducing the LHR from 16.1 kW/ft to 15.9 kW/f t and from 16.5 kW/ft to 16.1 kW/ft, respectively (Refs.16 and 17) . The results of these calculations allowed the plant variations to remain justified, but required a reduction in LHR at the 4- and the 6-ft elevations. To avoid reducing the 4-ft LHR, a benchmark LOCA analysis was performed at the 4-ft elevation with the TACO 3 fuel pin performance code at 16.1 kW/ft. The resultw of this analysis allowed the 177-FA LL plants to maintain the 4-ft LHR limit of 16.1 kW/ft, and all plant variations that had been justified were still acceptable as a result of this analysis.

An upgrade to the B&W ECCS EM input was proposed to the BWOG utilities. Table 3-1 tabulates the parameters assumed in the EM and the plant-specific values supplied by the individual utilities.

Also included is the revised ECCS EM input used in these analyses.

The input changes to the EM include (

). The maximum borated water storage tank (BWST) fluid temperature assumed in the model is ( ). CFT temperatures of ( ) were incorporated in the EM along with a minimum core flood tank inventory of ( ). (

).

PSC-13-86 concerned the ef fect of steam condensation in the reactor vessel downcomer. (

3-4 fg

I NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 i

1 l !

I l !

) . These conservative methods were used for tho analyses presented within this report.

(

).

As the Mark-B9 fuel design became available, a complete set of LOCA LHR limits analyses was required. The logical progression was then to include the EM input upgrades into the Mk-B9 LOCA LHR analyses program.

3.4 CPT Sensitivity Studies The core flooding system (CFTs, CFT lines, etc.) model, used in B&W's previous 177-FA LL plant LOCA limits analyses (Refs. 19 and

1) assumed nominal conditions as shown in Table 3-2. Recently, questions have arisen concerning the applicability of those analyses for deviations in actual-plant CFT conditions from nominal conditions, but within the allowable Technical Specification limita. To answer these questions, a sensitivity study was performed on these parameters, as described in Section 5 of this report.

3-5 99

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 ;

For the CPT sensitivity studies, the initial values of the CPT I parameters were varied as shown in Table 3-2. Two cases were analyzed with the following conditions:

1. The minimum initial CFT pressure and the maximum CPT-line resistance for the existing B&W 177-FA LL 2568 MWt plants (Ref. 1); and l 2. The maximum initial CPT pressure and the minimum CPT-line resistance representing the existing 177-FA LL 2568 MWt j plants, as reported in Table 3-1.

In addition to the input changes outilned, other CFT-related changes were also made, as noted in Table 3-2. (

r 1

3-6 1l

i .

Table 3-1 x ECCS EM Unarade Plant-Specific and Ganaric Plant Para ==ters s

Parameter Analysis ANQ-1 CR-3 Oconee TMI-1 Revised Input E Power (NWt) 2772 2568 2566.4 2568 2568 $

n H

M CFT Liquid H Volume, ft3 $

r CFT Pressure, psia ,

CFT Temp. ;

(*F) '

t ECCS Delay

Time, sec.

Y ESFAS Setpoint l psia.

, BWST Temp..

1

(*F) ,

i Min. CFT A/B !

Line Resistance Max. CFT

} Line Resistance **

m 4

, 8 .

.i W \

M i

Data not received from Utility

- S

]

Reference 1 g :

u 8

O t

N N !

l et r - - + + + e-- - ' .__. m- -* ----_ ___.__m - _ _ _ _ _ . _ .__.-.m .__ ..

4 l NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 Table 3-2 Comnarison of CFT-Related Incut Parameters i

Previous Min. CFT Max. CFT BAW-10103 Press./ Max. Press./ Min.

Model Line Resisti h@ist . ,

I

Initial .<ressure, psia .

Initial Water volume 3 Per Tank, ft InitialGasVo}ume Per Tank, ft CPT Water Temperature,'T 1

CFT-Line Resistance '

(k-factor) '

CFT A CFT 5 Elevation Difference Between CFT outlet and Reactor Vessel Inlet, ft CFT A CFT 5 4

)

4 1

)

e a

d.

3-8 1N

\ !I!!li'i li111\ {

!l I zO2'5:oO 3wM8g<- iC0g'to

'w 3

O .

C A

T

/

2 '

O C

A T

r o

f p.

ut ni a

rm ui 2

O.

BL C U A

.R t T re sEJ )

vI s d

n

(

s et a a f

+

rf . ' s u/ u ,

tW h o g ak T n 3 r ( r O e8 u C p1 S A

mn T ea T

r lo ef a O u

Fa t

ea gD a

rl ee vu '

AF 1

3 e

r u

g o i

F - - - - - - * - - - -

1 3 9 8 7 6 5 4 2 2 s 2 9 8 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 1 8

7:= ._

,?=%iS~ = .Tt

.,I e .

n4-

4 No!!-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-0I l '

a s

1 L

n -

8 l

kN 8

u S N o

d

-s

& 7 8

E 1

s' jI a A o B

5 2 o a

Y -

n .

B 5.

t .

o l t I I I I I t t i t I w n N m N e e > w e w n N

N N N N 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 =

(spuesnoyi) sisd 'eansseJa vid 3-10 4(

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

4. ANALYTICAL MODEL AND INPUT l 4.1. Introduction i

B&W developed a system of computer codes and related analytical ;

l- procedures according to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix 3C, l to evaluate the effectiveness of the ECCS during a postulated MCA.

This calculational framework, which embodies the evaluation model I for B&W-designed plants, is described in detail in Reference 1.

The CRAFT 2 (Ref. 20), REFLOD3 (Ref. 21), FLECSET (Ref. 22), and ,

-THETAl-B (Ref. 23) computer codes are the major analytical tools '

-used in the LOCA limit analyses. Figure 4-1 illustrates the code interfaces for present EM large break MCA analyses. The following sections briefly discuss each evaluation model code and the specific input chenges related to the revised TACO 3 fuel input and the Mk-B9 fuel design.

4.2. TACO 3 Code f.2.1 General InDut The TACO 3 output of volumetric average fuel temperature as a function of LHR provides the initialization of the stored energy for LOCA analyses, specifically as input for.the CRAFT 2 and the THETAl-3 calculations. The TACO 3 code contains models to account for thr. effects of cladding creep, fuel-densification and swelling, and fission gas release during burnup. The fuel rod internal pressure is determined as a function of burnup and used as input to the - : LOCA initialization in CRAFT 2. Furthermore, the burnup-dependent fuel and cladding dimensions used as input to the CRAFT 2 and the . THETAl-B codes are predicted by TACO 3. A complete description of the TACO 3 model and its application is given in Reference 2.

M ,2 Power liistory The Mk-B9 LOCA transient initialization analysis required an evaluation of the impact of various power history envelopes on the 4-1 2(p

l .

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

! maximum allowable local peak versus burnup. ( ) different types of power histories were developed that enveloped available power-history data (Ref. 24) . These different power histories arise from

! various fuel shuffle schemes that any given fuel assembly can follow during the course of its irradiation. ) power Of the (

histories, the most limiting ( ) provides the basis for the Mk-B9 LOCA initialization, see Figure 4-2. A(

) factor is applied to the limiting power history to provide additional conservatism for all 177-FA LL plants.

4.2.3 Axial Flux Shane

. Prior to the Mk-B9 LOCA LHR limit evaluations, a TACO 3 axial power shape study (Ref. 25) was performed to establish a limiting axial flux shape to be used in the initialization _of the LOCA analyses at-all elevations. This study considered the five peak locations evaluated in the LOCA analyses and the variation of results with burnup. It was concluded that the (- ) flux shape provides the highest temperatures from the inlet _to the peak at all linear heat rates, see Figure 4-3. Therefore, it is conservative to apply the average fuel temperature-to-linear heat rate response of the

[ ] flux shape as bounding for all peak elevations as input to the 14CA codes.

4.2.3 I 1 Uncertainty Factor Previously, an ( ) uncertainty factor was applied to the TACO 3 best estimate fuel temperatures to provide conservative inputs into the LOCA LHR analyses. This uncertainty factor was increased to ( ) for the Mk-B9 LOCA evaluations. The increased conservatism provides additional margin for any future fuel design or fuel cycle changes that could result in slightly higher average fuel temperatures versus burnup.

4.2.4 Pin Pressures Calculated Usina 18 kW/ft A restriction in the SER for TACO 3 requires the calculated internal fuel pin pressure to be limited to ( ). The TACO 3 pin 4-2 ,27

4 NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 pressure calculations assume a constant LHR of 18 kW/f t until a burnup is reached where the pin pressure exceeds [ ). Since the LHR used in the pin pressure calculations (18 kW/ft) is greater

(- than allowed by the LOCA LHR limits calculations, an earlier time-in-life is identified that requires a decrease in the allowed LHR

- in order to meet the SER restriction. This method ensures that conservative boundary conditions were used at all times-in-life.

4.3 CRAFT 2 The CRAFT 2 computer program was developed to analyze the behavior of a nuclear steam system during a LOCA transient. The program permits the user to select the nodal representation that results in the best finite differencing of the fluid system to be analyzed.

CRAFT 2 contains flexible models of all major components. Various options as well as.uper input parameters enable the program to represent. the reactor core, reactor coolant pumps, steam generatore, and connecting piping in any configuration and operating mode desired. The diversity of the models-also allows the program to model any thermal-hydraull.: system containing similar components. CRAFT 2 calculates mass flow rates, mass and energy inventories, pressures, temperatures, steam qualities, and core decay energy along with other variables associated with the blowdown portion of a LOCA.

Details of the CRAFT 2 model and specific. input for the 177-fuel assembly lowered-loop plants are contained in Section 4.2 of BAW-10103A, Rev. 3. Additional changes to the CRAFT 2 model, made after the publication of BAW-10103A, Rev. 3, are addressed below and have

- been' incorporated into the CRAFT 2 model used in these analyses.

1. The ( ) critical heat flux (CHF)- correlation replaced the

( -. -) CHF correlation..

2. .NUREG-630 fuel pin rupture data was implemented.

4-3 gg l

O NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

-For these studies, changes were made to the input CRAFT 2 model in the following creas:

3. The initial core power level, ECCS water temperature, LPI flow rates. ESFAS actuation setpoint, and ECCS delay times that are noted in Section 3.3 of this document.

4.- The CFT inputs to the CRAFT 2 model that are discussed in Section 3.4 of this document.

5. The reactor core portion of the CRAFT 2 model that is necessary to reflect the utilization of the B&W Mk-B9 fuel design. The significant features of that design are highlighted in Section 3.2 of this report, 4.4. REFLOD3 Code The REFLOD3 computer program was developed to permit analysis of RCS behavior during core refill and reflood phases of the LBLoCA transient. The program calculates mass flow rates, condensation, mass and energy inventories, pressures, temperatures, and steam:

qualities along with the variables associated with the refilling of the reactor lower plenum and recovery of the core.

-4.4. FLECSET Code The FLECSET computer code is used to calculate the heat transfer coefficients during the reflooding phase of a LOCA. To calculate the heat transfer coefficients as well as the quench time and carryout rate fraction, the flooding rates are calculated from REFLOD3 integrated net flow and input into FLECSET as a function of time after the end of adiabatic heatup (EOAH). FLECSET calculates its own time step and heat transfer coefficient for input to THETA 1-B.

4-4 M

. _ _ _ - _ . - - . ~ . - - _ - . _ - - -- - - -

i NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 4.5. THETA 1-B Code 4.5.1. THETA 1-B Hot Pin Analysis ,

The THETA 1-B computer code is ubed to analyze the hot pin thermal response during the-blowdown, refill, and reflood portions of a LOCA. The hot spot mass flux, system pressure, power, inlet enthalpy, and internal pin pressure as functions of time during blowdown are supplied by the CRAFT 2 computer code to analyze the hot spot temperature transient. THETA 1-B calculates the locai ,

channel fluid properties, heat transfer from the fuel to the cladding, and heat transfer from the cladding to the surrounding ,

fluid. Changes in fuel pin dimensions due to the thermal expansion, pressure differentials, and cladding swell and rupture are also calculated. The heat transfer coefficients generated by FLECSET are input into THETA 1-B. These coefficients, .in combination with the power and the saturated fluid temperature, are used.to determine the fuel pin thermal responses and metal-water reaction.

4.5.2. Fuel Inout As explained in section 4.2.1, the fuel parameters predicted by TACO 3 are used in THETA 1-B to analyze the hot pin behavior and calculate peak cladding temperature. The average fuel temperature, pin pressure, radial power factors, and fuel pin dimensions are

! calculated as burnup-dependent and are used as input _to THETA 1-B.

I i

4-5 g

. . ~ - _ _

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-0I "9"

Code Interfaces for Present EM Large Break LOCA Analysis.

INITIAL RC INITMI. CORE SYSTEM & : THERMAL CORE PARAMETERS CONDIT10NS INITIALCORE TACO 3 PARAME1ERS l

o k

CORE RESPONSE DURING BLOWDOWN o

M EI CONTAINMENT ._

POWER pggggggg PRESSURE RESPONSE PLOW CONT NTERNAL STORED ENERGY P RE

- URE VEssa. o o GENERATE INVENTORY PLECSET NTO N

PLOCON3 REPLOOD HEAT a o o TRANSPERCCEFFICIENTS NA14 HOTG4MGM.

fM PONIE o'

HOT PN THERMALRESPON88 SURPACE HEATTRAN$PER COEPPICIENT HOT CHANNa.PLUIDTEMPERATURE METALWATERREACTION h-6 g

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-0i FIGURE d-2 Taco 3 Power History Fuel Sensi*.ivity Data 8

l a.

3 1

LU l,

8 9

l l l l l D

9 9 T 9 9 7 " 9

- - - - - - o OdW 00W " land 4-7

O 4

O

o 2.4 o

O 2.3 - 5 a m

~

u . . .<

e 2.1 - >

m 9,

m 2- [

E 1.9 - .a 7 E vc 1.8 - .

n

n. I m m 1.7 - 7 "

e 2

g 3O m o

, eg

_J 1.s -

g g 1.s -

= = 5 m 1.4 -

0 g

1.3 - <

I E W '<

q 1.2 - m 1.1 - E 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . o 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 Et h

~

UNEAR HEAT RATE (KW/FT)

~

U S

e b

NON-PROVRIETARY 86-1202151-01

5. SENSITIVITY STUDIES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION.

All information contained in section 5 is considered B&W Proprietary. This page represents pages 34 through 47, including tables and figures, in the proprietary version of this document.

5-1 pge+ 34' b 47

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

6. LOCA LHR LIMIT ANALYSES RESULTS AND DISCUSSION F

This section presents the alleiwable LOCA LHR limit (kW/ft) as a function of elevation in the core and burnup. This generic analysis represents a conservative limit for the Mk-B9 fuel design in 177-fuel assembly plants with the lowered-loop arrangement throughout core life, bl General Transient ProaressioJ1 A postulated rupture of the primary coolant piping greater than 0.5 fta and up to a double-ended break of the hot leg is classified as ,

a large break LOCA (LBLOCA). LBLOCAs are characterized by the distinct phases of the event: blowdown, refill, and reflood. The blowdown phase is the period during which the RCS is rapidly depressurized, to a pressure nearly equal to that of the surrounding containment. Core flow is variable and dependent upon the nature, size, and location of the break. Departure from nucleate boiling is generally calculated to occur very quickly, and core cooling is by a film boiling process. [

). During the last seconds of blowdown, cooling is by convection to steam. The cladding temperature again rises. Figures 6-1 through 6-5 are representative plots of pressure, power, temperature, enthalpy, and core flow for an LDLOCA blowdown, from the CRAFT 2 computer code.

The core flow plot is typical of a ( ) analysis; however, the general trend of the plot is representative of the other core elevations.

Following blowdown, a short time is required for the ECCS to refill the bottom of the RV before the final mode of cooling can be established. During this period, designated as the refill phase, core cooling is negligible with the cladding experiencing a near-adiabatic heatup. When the ECCS water reaches the bottom of the core, the reflood period commences. Core cooling is to a mixture 6-1 6

.=

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 of steam generated below the rising water level and water droplets entrained in the steam. The cladding temperature excursion at a-given elevation is generally terminated before that elevation is covered by water since the entrained droplet flow is sufficient to remove the relatively low core energy being generated at this time.

The core is eventually covered by a mixture of steam and water with the path to long-term cooling established through the use of pumped injection to supply makeup water.

6.2 LOCA LHR Limit Analyses To impose further conservatisms on the EM to ensure justification of LOCA LHR limits through future fuel design changes and possible plant-specific variations, BWNS has chosen to restrict the maximum PCTs in the LHR limit calculations. PCTs will be approximately limited to less than [

). These PCTs were chosen as reasonable limits based on the sensitivity of the ruptured and unruptured node PCTs to fuel / clad gap conditions and metal-water reaction energy contributions.

An additional conservatism was added concerning the lock into flow film boiling in THETAl-B. (

6-2 49

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 3

The LOCA LHR limit analyses are further documented in (

) (Ref. 27).

l 6.2.1 BOL LHR Limits The BOL LOCA LHR limit analyses were done using BOL fuel data obtained from TACO 3 fuel performance code. The results of these j analyses are discussed in Sections 6.3 through 6.7 and summarized in Table 6-1.

f l 6.2.2. Time-in-Life Sensitivity Study A TACO 3 study was performed (Ref. 25) which showed that for a given LHR, the fuel temperature does not change significantly between the burnups of ( ) and ( ) mwd /mtU. These burnups represent (

) for LHRs of ( ) and [ ] kW/ft, respectively. For LHRs between [ ] and

(- ) kW/ft, therefore, the use of ( ) mwd /mtU data is acceptable for EOL conditions. The MOL burnup ([ ] mwd /mtU) was chosen as the burnup-when the average fuel temperature equalled the average fuel temperature at -( ).

A time-in-life sensitivity study was performed at the 4-ft elevation.- This study consisted of an MOL ([ ] mwd /mtU) case, an EOL ([ ] mwd /mtU) case, and a composite case, at the same LHR to determine which time-in-life case is most limiting. The composite case consisted of EOL pressure and temperature data for the hot channel, with MOL oxide thickness. The PCTs were calculated as 1862*F, 2047'F, and 2051*F, for the MOL, EOL, and composite cases, respectively, as seen in Figures 6-6 to 6-11.

Therefore, the- composite case was determined to be the most limiting. The composite ' case, because it includes EOL temperature and pressure as well as MOL oxide thickness, is valid from ( )

6-3 So

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 mwd /mtU - through EOL. To verify that the BOL LHR- limit is acceptable at [ ] mwd /mtU, an additional 4-ft time-in-life sensitivity, case was analyzed, at MOL and 17.5 kW/ft. This case resulted in a PCT of 1992*F, verifying that the BOL LHR limit can be extended to ( ) mwd /mtU. Table 6-2 tabulates the results for the time-in-life sensitivity study.

6.2.3 Time-in-Life LOCA LHR Limits Based on the time-in-life sensitivity study, a composite case was performed at each elevation to determine the time-in-life LOCA LHR limit. The TACO 3 average fuel temperature increases as a function i of burnup late in life. The MOL burnup (( ) mwd /mtU) wan chosen as the one at which the average fuel temperature approximately equals the average fuel temperature at [ ), at a l LHR of 18.0 kW/ft. This burnup is dependent on LHR. Therefore, i once the time-in-life LOCA limits were established, the MOL burnup for each elevation was calculated considering the time-in-life LHR limits. The calculated burnups differed from ( ) mwd /mtU by at most ( ) mwd /mtU. This burnup difference only yielded an average fuel temperature difference of approximately [ ), which can be considered insignificant. Therefore, MOL will be defined as [

]

mwd /mtU for all elevations. The composite case is thus valid from

( ) mwd /mtU through EOL. The EOL burnup is dependent on the time-in-life LOCA LHR limit, as seen in Figure 2-1. The results of the time-in-life analyses are discussed in Sections 6.3 through 6.7 and summarized in Table 6-3, 6.2.4 Burnuo Warranty Mk-B9 fuel is warranted to [ ]-mwd /mtU. At this burnup, an LHR of ( ) kW/ft will yield pin pressure equal to ( ),

and is, therefore, the maximum LHR allowable at that burnup. A LOCA analysis was performed at this burnup and LHR to confirm the acceptability of this warranty. The results of this case are discussed in Section 6.8 and tabulated in Table 6-4, 6-4 5/

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 6.3 2-ft Core Elevation 6.3.1 BOL Conditions at 16.7 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured ( ) and the unruptured ( ) nodes were calculated as 1931*F and 1871*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-12 and 6-13. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 2.39 percent. The 2-ft elevation BOL LOCA limit is ruptured node limited.

6.3.2 Time-in-Life Conditions at 16.7 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured [ ] and the unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated as 1705'F and 1913'F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-14 and 6-15. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 1.21 percent. The 2-ft elevation time-in-life LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.4 4-ft Core Elevation 6.4.1 BOL Conditions at 17.5 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured ( ) and the unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated as 1681'F and 2034*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-16 and 6-17. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 2.91 percent. The 4-ft elevation BOL LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.4.2 Time-in-Life Conditions at 16.5 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured [ ] and the unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated as 1622*F and 2051*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-10 and 6-11. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 2.89 percent. The 4-ft elevation time-in-life LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.5 6-ft Core Elevation 6.5.1 BOL Conditions at 17.0 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured [ ] and the unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated as 1596*F and 1980*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-18 and 6-19. The local metal-6-5 g

l

_A

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 water reaction was' calculated as 2.81 percent. The 6-ft elevation BOL LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.5.2 Time-in-Life Conditions at 16.3 kW/ft The' maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured ( ) and the unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated as 1630*F and 2043*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-20 and 6-21. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 3.95 percent. The 6-ft elevation l

time-in-life LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.6 8-ft Core Elevation l 6.6.1 BOL Conditions at 17.0 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured ( -) and the unruptured ( ) nodes were calculated as 1502'F and 1917'F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-22 and 6-23. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 2.55 percent. The 8-ft elevation BOL LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.6.2 Time-in-Life Conditions at 16.5 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured [ ] and the unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated.as 1641*F and 2020*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-24 and 6-25. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 3.41 percent. The 8-ft elevation time-in-life LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.7 10-ft Core Elevation 6.7.1 BOL Conditions at 17.0 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured ( ) and the unruptured (. ] nodes were calculated as 1476*F and 1846*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-26 and 6-27. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 2.47 percent. The 10-ft elevation BOL LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6-6 53

NON-PROPRIETARY _ 86-1202153-01 6.7.2 Time-in-Life Conditions at 16.5 kW/ft The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured [ ] and the unruptured [- ) nodes were calculated as 1684*F and 2000*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-28 and 6-29. _The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 3.86 percent. The 10-ft elevation time-in-life LOCA limit is unruptured node limited.

6.8 Burnuo Warranty Case at f 1 kW/ft and i 1 mwd /mtU The maximum cladding temperatures for the ruptured [ ] and the' 1 unruptured [ ] nodes were calculated as 1201*F and 1450*F, respectively, as shown in Figures 6-30 and 6-31. The local metal-water reaction was calculated as 2.35 percent. The burnup warranty case was unruptured node limited.

i 6.9 Summ5ry of Results The LOCA LHR limits for the 177-fuel assembly, lowered-loop plants have been analyzed using a best-estimate fuel performance code, TACO 3, with conservative LOCA fuel initial temperatures and with the Mk-B9 fuel design. The most limiting break configuration was used in this_ analysis, as determined by BAW-10103A, Rev. 3_(Ref.

1). This configuration is the double-ended break >in the reactor coolant pump discharge piping with a break discharge coefficient of 1.0. These analyses-support variations in Technical Specification limits for LBLOCA Mk-B9 fuel only. Therefore, these analyses do-not constitute the basis for a Technical Specifications change.

The allowable LHRs were analyzed at both BOL and time-in-life conditions to establish a LOCA LHR limit versus burnup curve, as shown-in Figure 2-1. The dashed line of Figure 2-1 represents a fual mechanical performance which corresponds to a TACO 3 calculated internal pin pressure of ( ) psia. This value is the current b TACO 3 safety evaluation report (SER) constraint. The LOCA LHR limits for a given elevation are valid until they intersect this TACO 3 limit curve. Beyond this, the peak LHR limit must be reduced 6-7 Sf

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 to maintain an internal' pin pressure of no greater than (

) psia.

A; case was analyzed at the Mk-B9 fuel assembly burnup warranty,

( ), to confirm this_ warranty. Figure 2-1, therefore, establishes the current' LOCA LHR limits as functions of burnup for Mk-B9 fuel in B&W-designed 177-FA lowered loop plants.

6-8

Table 6-1. MK-B9. BOL LOCA LIMIT

SUMMARY

8 Y

CORE ELEVATION E

'2-ft 4-ft 6-ft 8-ft 10-ft @

CRAFT 2 LHR, kW/ft 17.0 17.5 17.0 17.0 17.0 N M

17.0 17.0 17.0 8 THETA 1-B IJiR, kW/ft 16.7 17.5 Internal Pin Pressure $.<

(Psia)

Initial Ave. Fuel Temp.

(*F)

ECCS Systems Actuate, sec CFTs Begin Injecting, sec EOB, sec 25.6 24.4 24.0 24.4 24.4 LPI Begins Injecting, sec EOAH, sec 36.2 33.1 32.6 33.1 33.1

?

Downconer Filled, sec CFT1 EMPTY, sec CFT2 EMPTY, sec Rupture Time, sec 24.8 25.8 26.7 31.9 36.9 Ruptured Node PCT, *F 1931 1681 1596 1502 1476 Time, sec 38.8' 38.0 33.0 33.0 36.9 Unruptured Node PCT, *F 1871 2034 1980 1917 1846 .

Time, sec 38.0 90.8 116.7 122.3 147.9 f Maximum Local Metal b Water Reaction, % 2.39 2.91 2.81 2.55 2.47 8 5

't O

T

__ _. .. . . _ _ _ . . . __ . . _ _. _ ._= . . _ _ ..

Table 6-2. MK-B9. 4-FT TIME-IN-LIFE SENSITIVITY STUDY

SUMMARY

y

?

m MOL EOL -@

BOL COMPOSITE g H

M CRAFT 2 LHR, kW/ft 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 17.5 8 16.5 16.5 16.5 E

g THETA 1-B LHR, kW/ft 17.5 17.5 Internal Pin Pressure (Psia)

Initial Ave. Fuel Temp.

(*F)

ECCS Systems Actuate, sec CFTs Begin Injecting, sec EOB, sec 24.4 24.0 24.0 24.4 24.4 p LPI Begins Injecting, sec E$ EOAH, sec 33.1 32.6 32.6 33.1 33.1 Downconer Filled, sec CFT1 EMPTY, sec CFT2 EMPTY, sec Rupture Time, sec 25.8 26.7 28.5 24.4 24.4 Ruptured Node PCT, *F 1681 1559 1519 1611 1622 Time, sec 38.8 33.0 32.5 88.5 80.0 Unruptured Node .m PCT, *F 2034 1993 1862 2047 2051 i Time, sec 90.8 89.7 89.3 93.9 93.9 u

Maximum Local Metal Water Reaction, % 2.91 2.57 1.57 2.86 2.89 h m

N

. I l

l l

Table 6-3. MK-B9. TIME-IN-LIFE LOCA LIMIT

SUMMARY

?

CORE ELEVATION s-o i

2-ft 4-ft 6-ft 8-ft 10-ft j H

CRAFT 2 LHR, kW/ft 17.0 17.5 17.0 17.0 17.0 N THETA 1-B IJIR, kW/ft 16.7 16.5 16.3 16.5 16.5 .

Internal Pin Pressure (psia)

Initial Ave. Fuel Temp.

(*F)

ECCS Systems Actuate, sec CFTs Begin Injecting, sec EOB, sec 25.2 24.4 24.0 24.0 24.4 LPI Begins. Injecting, sec EOAH, sec 35.7 33.1 32.6 32.6 33.1 Downconer Filled, sec CFT1 EMPTY, sec CFT2 EMPTY, sec Rupture Time, sec 22.5 24.4 26.1 26.6 ~ 27.7 Ruptured Node PCT, *F 1705 1622 1630 1641 1684 Time, sec 38.0 88.0 109.5 124.0 149.5 Unruptured Node .

m PCT, *F 1913 2051 2043 2020 2000 Time, sec 37.9 93.9 114.2 124.3 149.0 h Maximum Local Metal S Water Reaction, % 1.21 2.89 3.95 3.41 3.86 y Y

H t _

Table 6-4. MK-B9. 10-FT BURNUP WARRANTY CASE

SUMMARY

f

.2o E

8 CRAFT 2 LHR, kW/ft THETA 1-B LHR, kW/ft Internal Pin Pressure (psia)

Initial Ave. Fuel Temp.

(*F)

ECCS Systems Actuate, sec CFTs Begin Injecting, sec EOB, sec 24.4 LPI Begins Injecting, sec EOAH, sec 33.1

?

U Downconer Filled, sec CFT1 EMPT'I, sec CFT2 EMPTY, sec Rupture Time, sec 63.7 Ruptured Node PCT, *F 1201 Time, sec 63.7 Unruptured Node ,

1450 m PCT, "F Time, sec 148.1 O u

Maximum Local Metal 8 Water Reaction, % 2.35 g Y

2

-s

NON-PROPRIETARY- 86-1202153 i

. E

,W

. .J N-C 3

O t '

3-0 d y M N m /

[ .

/

H k /

-p Q / g G N E

,* J b- .

.- y o m / U M-

/ e v k

3 / O M E W .

W u #

As

, i N

.sg -

w!

g . 1 Y

b

.t 4

v-

/

E-1 l

, !_. ! ! 8 elsd 'sansssJd 6-13

-g

M tit-9 Normalized Core Power, P/Po p p S S * ~ ~

, m , m e m N Q .. -

\

s a '

J '

,m

./ 5

! R=

m 7 T~

t .-

j , .

Z O

"1 n

0 y

3 M w a g.s N M6 1 N k

. a e Q. 9 2 n g g o g i 7 m

a 4 O

S t 5, E n.

m ( 3 S m @

T

to

-i O C-

- g a t a g

=

N. '

f t

IO-CSIE0EI-98 AHM3IHdOHd-HON e

- --w,-. . , . , , , - - , - ~ , - , . - - , , ,n-, n.--- - - - . , , -. . . . . . - ~ , - - . ~ , -<.e,,-

N c

%OZITl COT 3 MH>l< s

sWNouHuu8oH 2

- 3 Ieo

'd ul FC D

N Q

n d =

9 2 _

w o .

d w

o _

l B '

g 4 i

n '.

=

2 r

u -

D *.

e Y-m i

T - 0

= 2 s

v e

.v )

c r e u .' s t - 6 (

a = 1 r

e e p

m e

'f T m

i T

g

/ '

n /= 2 i 1 d -

d a ;

l C

/

l y ~

e F

u e

s e g

3 6

E R

U

'C G

I j 4 F

=.

m N

Ol ,

0 0 0 3 3 0 0 0 e 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 2 s 4 0 1 1 2 2 2 Ot3#0n tUgEg-k I

g m'v*

j

il! lli-j !l11lilj J l fI 1 =

gOZeO0O*0c>tR ' 3 l

<) u

$ c. a 8

sh u ON F(n ulo**

.2

- 3 D

N E

G l- 0

.E_ 2 l

4 I

2 n

w o

d w 0 o I 2

l B -

g )

n c i

r 'e u s D 6 (

I 1 e e m m -

i i T T s

v 2 _

y 1 i- 1 p.

l .

a h

t .

n - .

E

_ 8 4,

6 E

R U

G I

F 4

F 0

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 8 6 4 6 4 1 1 1 1 O_ gHy .XO_]C_eC34 $9 Cm L

g i mb* -

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

,a-G S

'd g l

c 3 l i O 3- 1 s

O N

E 1 o,

C ; -

c U

o Q

s -

l

e

'J e -

a e,

.y- E y .-

5 J 3 .

N O

$ =

e 4 u -

O l m

. J 1 J a - . _

/

g- , *

$ $- @ y j I

s/q[ 'motj paaastij

'6-17 g

. ' , L , ' ' '! . r ! r

^ _.

Mg m::MM8 b<* s mo oN $ YO-O S

I 0

g p. p nm i

4 1

g ee L tt

_ O M I d

r ea ul f

o e

f c

.~

N 0 2

m +w 4 1

_ i T

s .

. v '

e r

u 0 t y 0 1

a d -

r u

. e t p S m

h d s

e y T t . ' n o

c i

g v i

n i t 0 e d i 8 s.

d s a ne ,

l

/

l C S e

- i e

m ef

-^

ui T F L .

e n 0

_ d i

6 o -

N e

. m '

d i

_ e T r

u n t o p i u t R a !

0 v 4 B e

- l 1 E A

T t E f H -

T 4 0

6 2 6

e r

u g

i F

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 2 8 4 1

2 2 2 1 L

a 0L3$LOQEo- l I$

o%

I l4 ,i il! !.i ljl!i\l ) l i

zo ? *yo g MM46 g <- m ~ MON y 8

6 1

L O

m ,. . '

0 M o c

pp ma 4

1 .

- r t ee c

f t tt e

l d

m ea

. i ul f c M

_ T

_ 0

. 2:

_ s + M v

r e .

u '

t a .

ry ed pu mt s m eS - + i T -

y s gt ni d i v di n dt o

ai c l s C n - 0 e

/e 0 s l S . _.

e - , _

Ff ue e eL

.i m _

d - i Ni on T -

d e 0 -

em ri 6 uT ._. _

t _

pn , _

uo ri nt U a v .

B e l 0 1 E 4 A

Tt Ef H -

T4 g

7 6

- - Jf 0 2

e r

u g

i F

0 8 0 0 0 8 m 0 0 0 2 8

M 4 _..

8 4 0 6 2 _

2 2 2 1 -- 1 _

'e<3% c0 nee- t h$e c

e .

L[

l)il Illll 1<

iI!f f

@' f I

l O$H n8$*

t

,iU8GYO _ -

0 6

1 D

N . 0 E pp 4 G nn 1 E ee L t t

- l d

- ea ul f c _

e 0

_ r 2 u &M

_ t 1

ae rf ei pL m-en Ti 0 ge nm ' 0 1

ii s dT d d

an - n lo o Ci c

/t la 0 e ev 8 s ue 6 Fl ,

"t E e I e m

, dt i .

K U N-of f

'j 4 y 0 N d'Ld e rOu 6

uEt v

pr S t

uoy -

Rft i

Bev 0 mi 4 1it ATi T

E .s Hse n

TvS

[ / 0 t 2 0 .

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ..

0 4 0 6 2 8 4 2 2 2 1 1 e'3# $ OE mE) d

f l -

l .

N4N h-9 ,

s . THETA 1-B Unruptured Node. Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs.-Time forStudy Sensitivity EOL 4-ft Elevation Time-in-Life x 9.

2 2800 a LEGEND O

& fueI t erup . y M clad temp. w H

g 8

2400 ..

b.<

2000 " '= =

N N

'_ /

e f

s

%.1600 L

/

0 O_

E .

O l--

1200 Y 000 m 7

0 3

o Si 400 a

~

0 20 40 60 00 100 120 140 160 Time, seconds

. i ' j' llllI;Il ll lI' ! !l )

o7 mh TIHN X E<. ma SGY .

0 6

1 D

N E pp 0

4 G u r m 1 E._ ee t t t I

d ea uI e

f c t M N 0 2

1 f

ei -

. rL u-

- tn ai r-ee pm 0 mi 0

~

1 eT T s n d go _

ni x n _

it o da c dv -

e ae -

0 8 s ll CE ,

/

0 1 lt e r ef m

( u- i

, F4 T te l

i ee 0

Q dt oi 6 Ns d py o w.

emd rou ,

uCt pr~ S t

uoy Rft N .

0 4

i Bev mi 1it ATi T s E .n Hse /

TvS 0 1 2 0 O' 0 0 0 0 0 0 ,

0 0 .

0 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 0

2 2 2 8 4 .

2 1 1 s

k aL3% LaQEe s

m I$ . g _

L

<; l li) jl ll Il 2@,$O$yR <

. 8 8GuI3 O

S I

D N . .

pp 9 4

_ E mm 1 E ee L tt l

d ea uI f c 0

+ M 2 1

ee rf ui tL N -

a-rn ei p-me 0 em ; 0 1

Ti -

gT s _

nn d io' x n

_ di o dt aa lv

- 0 c

e Ce

/l

, 8 s lE ,

l l e e

[

ut m b" Ff .

i _. .

- T hd6 Nt e4 oe 0

6 i _

ds eo rpy ~

umd tou, pct.

u S rr noy 0

4 Uft i

Bev

- mi 1it ATi T.sn E

0 Hse 2 TvS 0

0 M 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 e 0 B 4 2

6 1

2 1

s 4

)

OL3%c0QEo-l 0bw mo

; lill ljl i 'Ill,l 2Oz O$y8m "- Y ._

0 6

1 f

e . .

E pp 0 G ma 4 E ee 1 L tt I

d s ea i uI s f c ey -

rl + e 0 ua s 2

n . 1 t.c r

A

et .-

pi -

mm iD ai TL gA nC

~ 0 0

1 dI s d d aL lO n CB o

/ c

_ ln no 0 e ui 0 s .

Ft k

l

's desv a x e I

ol i m

CNE

$ t T

jdt . -

t ef 0 fr- 6 u2 t

pr uo -

Rf Be

-m 0 1i AT 4 T.

E Hs Tv 0

2 M 0 0 M 0 0 0

2 4

2 _ . .

0 6

1 0

2 1

m e 0 4

s-L s

E 2 '+ .QEa-I m[o" g

l$gML W O THETA 1-11 Unruptured Nods Fu21/Clcdding TcaperOturs ~

vs. Time for' 2-ft Elevation BOL IDCA Limit Analysis 2:

2000- .O ume 4

=

+ fuei temp. -O' M clad temp. $

t9 2400 2000 h.

L m 3

[ $1600 b

m d

E e A F-1200 800 ,,

?

a 8

40e i' O 20 40 60 80 300 120 140 160

~~

g Time, seconds

SUtllg-f-f ^

THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / cladding Temperature vs. Time for 2-ft Elevation Time-in-Life IDCA Limit Analysis g.

2000 LEGEND i*tt l i

g- 1

+ fueI temp. m.

M c I ad teenp. '3 N

2400 $

e<

2000 L

ED i'M 5

y 1600 [N L

(D CL E

b 1200 7 800 -

x $

N .. N ui :-

u 400 o a 20 40 60 80' 100 120 140 160 Time, seconds a

4 L___ - - - - -

- l: e !' i.l,.l' r! .l ;I

~

g zo2IT$MNt8$< e ci%80u$-

O S

I D

N . . 0 pp 4 E mm 1 E ee L tt l

d ea ul f c -

t ei 0 rm ui +M 2 1

tL .

a rA -

eC pD mI e

Te , 0 f g 0 gi 1 nL i- s dn d .

di a- n _

le o _

Cm c .

/i 0 e _

lT 9 s _

e 5 un ,

1 Fo e i

et m .

i da Mov Ne T

k dE e

l~ O G

rt uf _

t-p2 u

rr -

no Uf , 0 Bes

4 mi -

1is ATy T l E .a Hsn -

TvA 0

2 -

l 3

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 6 2 8 4 2 2 2 1 1 k O'3% t0QEOH s

os$

Il il! !ll.flI iI\!II lt i

sI l

,I 2O;.wkyUg<. m G80y; g

sa

~

e . . g o

c pp na 4

1 ee u tt l d _

ee ul f c 0

s + es , 2 3

i ey s .

rl .

ua tn aA r

et 0 pi a mm ei t

TL s d

gA n nC o iD dI c d 0 e aL = 8 s lO CB ,

/

ln e .

eo m

_ i U ui T Ft

- a t ev > 1 B G

hde h

ol ME dt ef r-u4

% ~

t pr 3 uo 4 Rf Be m

1i AT T.

E 0

Hs Tv 2 I

> 8 -

O e e 0 0 e -

0 e M W 0 0 8

e 0 4 0 6 2 4 2 2 2 1 1 L ' e-I

. h

< Q

fid d It-IT i THETA 1-D Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperr;.tura vs. Time - for 4-ft Elevation BOL IDCA Limit Analysis ,

f i

Z k i 20M trcom k.

4

' ao !

+

w ,

fueI tenp. O !

M clad temp. ]

H I

t 29

2400- d !'

E 4

I

[

2g . 7 % O s La. ;. [

N i

L t m 3 to 1600 8

ro _

I a

j W L f

e3 O.

l 6 e

4 l-4 .

1200 !

I !

i

.0a t

=

@ L I

i H l M

i

, O N

<l H

UB I r

I 43 b8 e .

20 40 60 80 IN 120 E 4

140 160 I,

$ Time, seconds !

- f a

m. n., e as-avse aw l

~

zOx *g*MM2d C O 9 <.

a@t 3Nu$

0 0

l 2

5 g p.

mq t

s 2 7 1

g tt ee l d ee uI s f C i 0 ey s 5 rl +M g 1 ua -

tn .

aA r

et pi mm ei 5

2 TL 1 gA s nC d iD n

/

dI d

lO aL CB ln l

% 0 e 0 s 1

o c

O- uieo e Ft m h a 7 i

ev T Qde ol NE ~ 5 7

dt ef r-u6 x

^

t pr -

uo Rf y 0 5

0e

-m 1i AT T.

E Hs Tv 5 c 2 I

/

y

+ i O

i 0 9 m N E

9 0 s

9 2

g m 0 4 E i 1 2 2 2 L

1

- O OL % L Oh0 .

g 4s

' >. ! ,' , .!; , . i!r l.ft-[:t!s{' e t Il ttI Ii&Ii I* i '* .

~ .

zo% .:oo]HP8gg l s a*na mO3dwOh9ULe -

- N N mp.m W

E ee

_ L t t s l d ei ee ul rs uy f c tl W aa rn + sa I eA p

mt ei Tm i -

gL 5 n 2 iA , 1 dC dD aI s

l d CL , n

/O o lB , c e 0 e N un l

~

0 r

-r Fo

1 I i * ,

et da e k

6t y ov Ne l

f T m

i h dE e

rt

/ r 5

uf a t -

p6 u

rr -

no Uf Be .

0

-m 5 1i #

AT -

T.

E Hs Tv 5

4 2

- 7 r

l ,

O 0 0 g 0 0

_ 0 0

0 4

g g g 0 2 @ 0 4

2 2 g g 1 t

o ec3P0Lca6o- 8 l

s Oeo8 t5

! ]' , i 4 .I 4i i

) i* ,; '

1 a .i 1

y 2oZ8o3O

=3 @eMe o

e C 3 Uuso t

D

_ N ..

- E pp ,

G ms i E

L ee t t I

d e

wI f c '

t _ ,

+ M i + 2, m

ei rL

u ,

tA '

C rD eI p

me = ,

ef ,

Ti L -

s g-nn -

d ii n d- o de c am e s e li CT s

/ ,

l n

/

0 S' eo e

- ui m l, Ft i a T ev yde ol e s

b NE dt ef r- _-

u6 -

t pr uo Rf o N e 4

Bes mi 1is ATy T.l E a Hsn TvA , , \ 0 2

m r

m 0 0 e o 0 0 0 m 0 n

2 4 0 s 0 m %

2 2 i 2 O 4 <

1 s

L L3% hoEe-t s

n m$ n g

~

2o g :tO x :sMM1$<.

+ ;

,it8tY0 ;

0 6

1 o p. p 0

c mm 4 y ee 1 t tt 3

d ea ul

_ f c %

+ N 0 t -

2 1

ei rm ui '

tL x c

rA eC pD -

mI 0 e 0 Te f

m 1 gi s

nL d i-dn di a-g o c

n e

le 0 Cm 8 S

/i lT ,

e un e Fo m i

l t i T et l edaov 0 sNe 6

/

r l p dE (d ert uf t-p6 u

rr 0 no 4 Uf Des mi

/

1is ATy T.la E

0 Hsn i k 2

TvA -

i 8

9 9

1 I 6 J-0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 J 0

2 4 0 6 0

2 W 0 4 2 2 1 1 B 4 8

_ 6 i aeLoOEoW 3 y

e N

A T

s w

"o i

h4Ir5 THETA 1-B Ruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation BOL IDCA Limit Analysis o

z y e LEEND y >

m J + fuel temp.

m clad teap.

to 8

g i

2408 y

v

L.

8 L ta 3 g 16W .

D ,

r Q. ~

E 8 -

A 's sees y y

/ N.

i

,i xw

'\

M On

~ >

O M

9*

Ut 69 0

4ee b a 4e se 120 16e 2ee 24e !

2se 32e e .

Time, seconds r -e _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . - .

6 lr-Zb THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation BOL IDCA Limit Analysis x O

280s z LETJO y

+

o fueI tesop. M y

w clad teap. s M

+-3 2488 29BBir- + _

k -*

~ ~ s. . .

/ ,.w '~%

e / '

m s

t 3 , .

~'s '

v"i 1688 e

Q.

E -

e H

1298 y 888 m

?

0 e

8 S

400 e 4e ee 4

320 16e 20e 240

~

200 320 g Time, seconds

g <*

2oZ 42 k WHtH e etU8 >= E'o -

E 2

3 U

N . , a pp l e

E ne 2 E ee L t t id ea uI f c t

i N d 4

m & M ?.

oi %

rL .

u tA aC .

rD eI p 0 me 3 ef Ti N 2 L s g- d nn ii d-Q O C

t t

de am li

~ 3 e G S CT I

/n l

eo t v

s ui s Y Ft e

a f r ev 3 t de ,2 ol ydt ME 1 Gefr- -

u8 t

pr uo Rf -

/ -

0 8

Bes mi lis ATy T l E .a Hsn TvA '

3 4

e e

/ -r i

l

- O

+

3 a 0 0 J a e 0 3 3 0 3 a N e s.

0 4 0 6 2 S 4 2 2 2 1 1 L

a. . O L 3 #" ~ fU- l n

n

O*

AW

, hUKs It'76 THETA 1-B Unruptured Mode Fuel / Cladding Temperature-

vs. Time for 8-ft Elevation Time-in-Life IDCA Limit Analysis 2:

2000 0 LLU_ND f

+ fuei tenp. f i

. as clad temp.- 4 j

y M

M 24JB

. *il e<

, 2 egg .

-~~ _

]

u.

[ N 's g

t- \

m 3 N

b $ 1633 t.

U Q_

E 3 '.

I

(

1238 4

000 m

l m 4

d u

O w

400 E 3 40 83 120 IGO 200 240 263 320h f i n.e , seconds 4

n.,m, . , y . . .r. .

yoZE=kW $ <. : ;

mi:80u$-

0 2

3 pp 0 M

E m.

ee a . m 8

2 s 3

- tt i l d -

s y ea _ -

ul el f c ra un tA 0

4

+m a 2 rt ei pm mi eL - M T

A -

gC 0 nO - 0 2

iL d

dL s aO d lB n N

b C

/n lo ei ut Fa y

N 3 e 6

1 s

o c

eev p dl oE e

m kMdft i

T e-r0

" 0 2

1 u1 .

t pr uo Rf Be

-m 1i AT

, 0 8

T E .

Hs Tv 8

0 4

[ '

i L

0 0 0 g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 4 0 . 6 8 4 2 2 2 1 i

t OL3%cDO.EU-l s

OO= Q

l

.) i(j! ll11 !I ll{\)\l \li <l ZOeNgWHgH .

'.%55a ~ _

0 _

2 _

3 _

D N

E G

pp ms w 0 8

2 E ee _

L tt s l d i ea es ry u1 f c ul ta - 0 an += 4 rA e

2 pt mi em Ti ,

g L nA 0 iC 0 dD dI 2

a

lL CO b

/B l

7 en 1 uo Fi ea t +

% 0 6

1 dv oe Nl E =

d et rf 0 u- .

2 t0 - 1 p1 u

rr no Uf Be m I 0 1i 8 AT T

E.

Hs Tv

/

0 4

k i

M-

} 0 I

M 0 0 0

0 i

4 8

0 4 m 0 0 a 0

. 6 2 8 4 2 2 g 1 1 u _e 2# L GEeW vw

! ' l ,t' -I; f trf[ !li Ii' '.. 'f ;! , t s v

=

zo= ,f m:t 8eM e $ <. e.I Oe Jd

>0E _

0 2

3 +

w m

o

.. ~ 0 0

c mm ee

' 2 u t t l

d ea ^

s ul f c t 0 i 4 m + M 2 i w eL r .

uA C _"

t.rrID e 0 pe 0 mf ' 2 ei ~

TL s

gn d ni . n i -

o de c dm O e ai S s lT I C

n ,

0

$ l/oei e

m

' ut : i NFa :

T s v (ee r

dl 0

2 VoE

_

1 M _

t df e-r0

[

1 t

pr uo 0 Rf 0 0es mi 1is ATy T.la E

Hsn

- 0 TvA 4 l

3[

- O 8 0 0 0 0 0

. 8 0 0 0 0 0 8

2 4

2 0 6 2 M 4

. 2 1 1 L. .eL:p8LeGec

)

pco

- +M i <

1 NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01 2

m k .. m b if . n B e[

d

$ 11 "

24 d5 ga 1 m eew E'1 E d C , gy

%T -

n 28 Uw , ,

m C

>" 0 3 2g .

. a3 ea 6 .% -

4 3;z-ll

. W h 19 m

$Y S

$2

Bu 88 i

?Ed -

g Gi:R, l Li .

eEk 1 m

(

w I

m E

n l

~

8 2

E E

E

3 ' aanse a sdwaj, l

6-h1 N

i l l !

O zO'5OyHbE

, ::3

aE0 -

0 2

3 pp 0

M r.

u ee r

r 8

2 W t t I

d ea _

uI _

f c _

e ,

0 _

- r u

+w 2

4 _

t .

ay .

rt en pa mr er Ta 5 M

g W I Z

np iu dn

^ s d

dr n

- au -

o lB C c

/n -

O e 0

2 ei lo S s I

ut WFa v e o

t ee m kt dl i I} oE T YN t a df 2 e- . 1 r0 u1 t

pr uo Rf Bes ni 0 mi 8 1is ATy T.la

/ y E

Hsn TvA 0

/ 4

)

~

0 0

0 0 I 0 g M 0 0

2 g 0

5 1

- 5 1

M I

I

- 0 5

1

a. Ea%L

mL" 3

hjur6 b-M

THETA 1-B Unruptured Node Fuel / Cladding Temperature vs. Time for 10-ft Elevation Burnup Warranty Z Analysis O 2000 - 8

. I EGDO y O

. + fueI temp.

clad tecip.

]

H 153 4.;' ~ +3 gng * -

e b

1500 _

la.

N m ..

4 n

w 1250- -

L 0

Q.

E f

IIMMB U

1 i m .

j t V 3 .

see Y t 0 40 80 12e 3sg -- 2 0 0 240 280 320 a

o Time, seconds l

t

NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

7. REFERENCES

1. B.M. Dunn, et al . , "ECCS Analysis of B&W's 177-FA Lowered-Loop l NSS", DAW-10103A. Rev. 3, Babcock & Wilcox, Lynchburg, VA, July, 1977.

2. " TACO 3 - Fuel Pin Thermal Analysis Code", BAW-10161P, Babcock

& Wilcox, Lynchburg, VA, Novembor, 1989.

3. Lotter, J.H. Taylor, BWNT, to T.E. Murley, NRC, JHT/90-106, dated July 12, 1990, (

).

4. Letter, T.E. Murley, HRC, to J.H. Taylor, BWNT, dated August 2, 1990, (

).

5. (

3 l G. I 3*

7. Codo of the Federal of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Parts O to 199, Office Register National Archivos and Records Administration, Washington, D.C., January 1, 1987.

8. ( ).

9. (

).

10. (

).

11. (

3

12. (

).

13. [

3

14. (

3*

15. " TACO 2 - Fuel Pin Performance Analysis," BAW-140041P, Babcock

& Wilcox, Lynchburg, Virginia, August, 1979.

16. (

).

17. (

).

18. [

3 7-1 g

l e

t NON-PROPRIETARY 86-1202153-01

19. B. M. Dunn, et a l a. , "B&W's ECCS Evaluation Model", BAW-10104PA. Rev. E, Babcock & Wilcox, Lynchburg, Virginia, November, 1988.

20. R. A. Hedrick, et a l _._ , " CRAFT 2 Fortran Program for - Digital Simulation of a Multinode Reactor Plant During Loss of Coolant", BAW-10092. Rev.2, Babcock & Wilcox, Lynchburg, Virginia, April 1975.

21. "REFLOD3 Model for Multinode Core Reflooding Analysis", BAW-10148, Babcock & Wilcox, Lynchburg, Virginia, May 1981.

22. "FLECSET -

Computer Program to Calculate Heat Transfer coefficients During Reflooding", NPD-TM-3. Rev. C, Babcock &

Wilcox, Lynchburg, Virginia, March,-1986.

23. R.H. Stoudt, et al., " THETA 1-B, a computer Code for Nuclear Reactor Core Thermal Analysis", BAW-10_094. Rev. 3, Babcock &

Wilcox, Lynchburg, Virginia, June, 1986.

24. (

).

25. (

).

26. (

).

'27. (

}*

28. B. Dunn et al., "B&W's ECCS Evaluation Model Report with Specific Application to 177-FA Class Plants with Lowered Loop Arrangement," BAW-10091, Babcock & Wilcox, - Lynchburg, Va.,

August, 1974.

7-2 12-

s I (

o l

AFFIDAVIT _OF JAMER M. TA7LDR .

A. My name is James H. Taylor. I am Manager of Licensing services in the B&W Nuclear services company (BWNS), which is a part of B&W Nuclear Technologies (BWNT). The B&W Fuel Company is I administrative 1y responsible to B&W Nuclear Technologies and l

utilitzes the BWNs Licensing Services. Therefore I an authorized to execute this Affidavit. '

B. I am familiar with the criteria applied by B&W to determine whether certain information of B&W is proprietary and I am familiar with the procedures established within B&W, particularly the Nuclear services company, to ensure the proper application of these criteria.

(, C. In determining whether a B&W document is to be c?assified as l

proprietary information, an initial determination is made by the Unit Manager,-who is responsible for originating the document, as to whether it falls within the criteria set forth in Paragraph D hereof. If the information fall's-within any one of these criteria, it is classified as proprietary by the originating Unit Manager. This initial determination is reviewed by the cognizat) section Manager. If the document is designated'as proprietary, it is reviewed again by Licensing personnel and other management within BWNS as designated by the Manager of Licensing Services to assure that the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR Section 2.790 are met.

D. The following information is providad to demonstrate that the provisions of 10 CFR Section 2.790 of the Commission's regulations have been considered:

(i) The information has been held in confidence by B&W.

Copies,of the document are clearly identified as proprietary. In addition, whenever B&W transmits the i..- .. - . .

.' (' (~

MFIBAVIT OF JAMme M. TAY!AR (Cont'd.)

information to a customer, customer's agent, potential customer or regulatory agency, the transmittal requests the recipient to hold the information as proprietary. Also, in order to strictly limit any potential or actual customer's use of proprietary information, the following provision is

! included in all proposals submitted by BW, and an

! -applicable version of the proprietary provision is included l in all of B&W's contracts:- I 5

" Purchaser may retain company's proposal for use in !

connection with any contract resulting therefrom, and, for that purpose, make-such copies thereof as may be-necessary. Any proprietary information concerning company's or its supplier's products or manuf acturing processes which is so designated by, company or its '

suppliers and disclosed to Purchaser incident to the performance of such contract shall remain the property of - company or. its suppliers and is disclosed in confidence, and Purchaser -shall not publish or otherwise disclose it to others without the written approval of company, and no rights, implied or otherwise, are granted to produce or have produced any products or to practice or cause to be practiced _any manufacturing processes covered thereby.

Notwithstanding the above, Purchaser may provide the NRc or any other regvlatory agency with any _ such proprietary information as the NRC or such other-agency may require; provided, however, that Purchaser shall'first give company written notice of-such-proposed disclosure'and company shall have the-right to amend such proprietary information so as to make it non-proprietary. In the event that company cannot amend such proprietary information, Purchaser 2

( (~

O AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAYLOR (Cont'd.)

shall, prior to disclosing such information, use its best efforts to obtain a commitment from NRC or such other agency to have such information withheld from public inspection.

Company shall be given the right to participate in pursuit of such confidential treatment."

(ii) The following criteria are customarily applied by B&W in a rational decision process to determine whether the information should be classified as proprietary.

i Information may be classified as proprietary if one or more of the following criteria are mett

a. Information reveals cost or price information, commercial strategies, production capabilities, or i

budget levels of B&W, its customers or suppliers.

b.

The information reveals data or material concernin?

B&W research or development plans or programs of present or potential competitive advantage to B&W.

c. The use of the information by a competitor would decrease his expenditures, in time or resources, in designing, producing or marketing a similar product.

d. The information consists of test data or other similar data concerning a process, method or component, the application of which results in a competitive advantage to Babcock & Wilcox.

e. The information reveals special aspects of a t process, method, component or the like, the exclusive use of which results in a competitive advantage to Babcock & Wilcox.

3

(

a

("

AFFIBAVIT OF JAMER M. TAYLDR (Cont'd.)

f. The information contains ideas for which patent protection may be sought.

The document (s) listed on Exhibit "A",_which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, has been evaluated in accordance with normal B&W procedures with respect to classification and has been found to contain information which falls within one or more of the criteria enumerated above. Exhibit "B", which is attached hereto and made a part hereof, specifically identifies the criteria ;

applicable to the document (s) listed in Exhibit "A". '

(iii) The document (s) listed in Exhibit "A", which has been made available to the United States Nuclear Regulatory-Commission was made available in confidence with a

, request that the document (s) and the information contained therein be withheld from public disclosure.

(iv) The information is not available in the open literature and to the best of our knowledge is not known by Combustion Engineering, EXXON, General Electric, Westinghouse or-other current or potential domestic or foreign competitors of B&W.

(v) Specific information with regard to whether public disclosure of the information is likely to cause harm to the competitive position of B&W, taking-into account the value of the information to B&W; the amount of effort or money expended by B&W developing the information; and the ease or difficulty _with which the information could be properly duplicated by others is given in Exhibit "B".

E. I have personally reviewed the~ document (s) listed on Exhibit "A" and have found that it is considered proprietary by B&W because it contains information which falls within one or more of the 4

(- (

AFFIDAVIT OF JAMES H. TAY1hR (Cont'd.)

criteria enumerated in Paragraph D, and it is information which ,

is customarily held in confidence and protected as proprietary i information by B&W. This report comprises information utilized by B&W in its business which afford B&W an opportunity to obtain

' a cospetitive advantage over those who may wish to know or use the information contained in the document (s).

/

W

[ JAMESH.TAYh State of Virginia)

) SS. Lynchburg l city of Lynchburg)

James H. Taylor, being duly sworn, on his oath deposes and says that he is the person who subscribed his name to the foregoing statement, and that the matters and facts set forth in the statement

} are true.

lW

[ JAMES H. TAYL k Subscribed andofsworp?it before u l> me 1992.

this M day fl

~ 22 d e . 0 m 10m Notary Public in and for the city of Lynchburg, State of Virginia.

MyCommissionEkpiresh431,195 5

(

MIMIRITS h & B i

IIIIBIT A BWNT Document 86-1202153-00, "MK-89 Spectrum LOCA LHR Limit i Analyses for 177-Fuel Assembly Lowered Loop Plants", June 27, 1991.

EXIIBIT B I

L l

The above listed document contains information which is considered Proprietary in accordance with criteria c, d, and e of the attached affidavit.

~

_

ML20216A913

Contents

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

ML20216A913

Text

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

SUMMARY

Navigation menu

Search