ML20235C618

From kanterella
Revision as of 17:44, 20 March 2021 by StriderTol (talk | contribs) (StriderTol Bot change)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Advises That Containment Design Pressure May Not Be Reduced as Proposed in & Design Pressure Should Remain at 62 Psig Value.Conclusion Based on Need to Retain Sufficient Margins.Max Drywell Liner Temp Reevaluation Requested
ML20235C618
Person / Time
Site: Brunswick, 05000000
Issue date: 08/25/1970
From: Morris P
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Colby P
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
Shared Package
ML20235B311 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-87-111 NUDOCS 8709240509
Download: ML20235C618 (2)


Text

. lN , ,

. . . . . . . . . . . . . A Dockeg (2)g J [* . .

, .AEC PDR (2) mskevhsic sco12tmo d/ Ci,, # DR reading WRButler

. . . ORL Readins SMKari ,

BWR-1 File ACRS 48@x (18) i AUG 2 51970 EGCase, DRS CKBeck, DR NNewman, OGC MMMann,_DR j RSBoyd SHanuaer, DR j Compliance (2) FSchroeder, DRL Docket Nos. 50-324 soubex48$_ TRWilson, DRL' and 50-325 RDeYoung DRL/DRS Br. Chiefs i :xof asxWxatWD8E@f4xWO PWHowe, DRL, asxs4xsettyxsI4EP/WK BGrimes, DRL

  • sx*xsarrts4xT@c - WNyer, (2)

Mr. P. S. Colby 2sxt***"st Newmark & Hall (2)-

Senior Vice 1 resident A x24x* " *""'*1x4EG E.

Operating & Engineering Group rsxMsxtaughttupgxa gg  ;

carolina rower & Light Company 1sxasxwattayxasta l 336 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27602

Dear Mr. Colby:

We have completed our review of your proposed reduction of the design pressure from 62 pois to 53 psig for the drywell and torus. of the Brunswick containments, which you filed with your letter of March 9, 1970. We have carefully considered the additional inforination con-tained in the proprietary G. E. report, " Additional Information -

Pressure Suppression Concept - Test Data Report," NEDE-10182, May, 1970 and in your July 30, 1970 response to our letter of May 28, 1970.

It is our conclusion that the Brunswick contairement design pressure may not be reduced as you have proposed and that the design g ressure should remain at the previously accepted value of 62 psig. 'this conclusion is based on a need to retain sufficient margins to cover (1) the limited experience and experimental data available for defining accident phenomena and containment response and (2) uncertainties in the vent flow model and in the degree of accuracy to which the Bodega and Humboldt test data may be extrapolated to the Brunswick design.

Moreover,.we request that you reevaluate the maximum drywell liner temperature that could result. from a primary system blowdown from intermediate ,

operating pressures. We request that you file the results of this evaluation  !

, along with the other information you agreed to furnish prior to construction. ]

Sincerely, triginal signed by i Peter A. Morria q Peter A. Morris, Pi* c .tr Division of Reactoi Lic:.4 sing l l

cc: G. F. Trowbridge, Ecq. (See attached. Rewritten per GArlotto, EGCase)

Retvoed 8/24/70 j omce > D.RL/.BWR-1 DRL/.BWRM1, nRL .. DRS .. ...DL .

9 "

sunnAuc >

RSBoyd FSchroeder EGCase PA ris

/

osrt > ..B124110.. ... . .BL..DD .. 81...110... .-.. 6L. 110 8 L. DO.. ..

. Fon. Asc.no oto, s.u) Ascx one u ...m ,..m ,,a.....-u ,

8709240509 870921 l PDR FOIA "

MENZ87-111 PDR

~ -

m

~ .

Distributi Docket (2) ACRS (3) j AEC PDR (2) J DR Reading DRL Reading BWR-1 File EGCase, DRS NNewman, OGC Docket Nos. 50-324 RSBoyd and 50-32., Compliance (2)

NDube (3)

RDeYoung DSkovholt PCollins WRButler Mr. F. S. Colby SMKari Senior Vice President bec: H. J. McAlduff, ORO i Operating & Engineering Group E. E. Hall, GMR/H j Carolina Power & Light Company J. A. Harris, PI l 336 Fayetteville Street R. Leith, OC d Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 J. R. Buchanan, ORNL j T. W Laughlin, DTIE

Dear Mr. Carlby:

A.*A. Wells, ASLB 1

We have completed.our review of your proposed reduction of the design f pressure from 62 pois to 53 pais for the drywell and torus of the Brunswick contaimeents, which you filed with your letter of March 9, 1970. We have carefully considered the additional information con-tained in the proprietary G. E. report, " Additional Information -

rressure suppression Concept - Test Data Report," NEDE-10182, nay, 1970 and in your July 30, 1970 response to our letter of May 28, 1970. 7 1

It is our conclusion that the . w..ick contair==nne design pressure may not be reduced as you have proposed and that the design pressure should remain at the previously accepted value of 62 pois. This conclusion is based on a need to retain sufficient margins to cover existing uncertainties in the went flow model and in the degree of accuracy to which the Bodega and Bueboldt test data may be extrapolated to the Brunswick design.

Moreover, we request that you reevaluate the ==w4-= drywell liner j temperature that could result from a primary system blowdown,from j intermediate operating pressures. We request that you file the results  !

of this evaluation along with the other information you agreed to furnish pr: Lor to construction.

f Sincerely,

Feter A. Norris, Director

! Division of Reactor Licensing {

I cc: G. F. Trowbridge , Esc . .

or er > . . . . . . . .

-grAL EFKnuth:emn FS @ oeder Q .DRS... .

nn t. .

_ sum ut > EGCase PAMorris

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... R R Rnyd,,,,,,,,, -

e" .

Str > .. .

.8/.20/.70.. .. .8R/.120 Bl...12D H/ / 711-- ---

Forms AEC-$1 (Rev.943) AECM SHo e L sommasin insisvime wnce i toes o-nos.en'

_ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _