ML20234B432
| ML20234B432 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000000, Dresden |
| Issue date: | 07/02/1969 |
| From: | Mckinley J Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| To: | Isbin H Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20234A777 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-87-40 NUDOCS 8707060031 | |
| Download: ML20234B432 (12) | |
Text
,
'p 0FFICIA.USE ONLY 64 e
2;i Julyf,1969 9
g7 p.
J.
ii.
- u. s. tehta, chairmen General Electric subcoassittee i
SU3C0D0ETTEE DEETING ON EEERAL ELECTRIC SOFICAL MPORTS Attechad for your review are draft mieutes of the seabined General Elastric and Dresden 2 and 3 subcommittee meeting with the Reguistory staff as the review of GE Topical Reporte. Fleese forward any sammente you may have se that corrections may be made if moeded.
Original Signed by J. C. McKinley J. C. tkKinley Staff Assistent
Attachment:
Draft Minutes of Combined General Electric and Dresden 2 and 3 Subcommittee Meeting, 6/25/69 cc: Romeinder ACRS FILE:
E & Dresden 2 & 3 files b
i e
h:
o was JCMcKinley:emb 0 :r 'm E" ON J e7o7o6002 e7061o PDR FDIA THOMAS B7-40 PDR
2 0?lCL USE ON.Y 7/1/69 MINtf!ES OF TME METDIG of M CCBSIMD gs Mn ACRS GEM RAL ELacTRIC AIS MESDEN 2 & 3 SM C000EftEE8 45Mf" 05 GE3RRAL EIACTRIC CCBS'ANY 10FICAL REPOES
[f%s' g* ' '
MaaNTMCTgg, 9. C, f
JWE 15, 1969
.et i
l r.r -.
l The combined subcoenittoos amt to start reviewing the various 08 topical reports that have been embaitted to the AEC and to help resolve seem of j
the issues raised in the review of Demeden Daits 2 and 3 ier operettag l
licenses.
i SumsR l
l BEL presented its organization for reviewing the GE topL:a1 reports, the current status of review and a tentative schedule for eetgletice of re-view of individual reporta. ter. DeYoung has been sosigned as tepisal re-ports review coordinator and will keep a record of the sursent status of sech report. Dr. Morris reported that DILL has receives over 50 topical re-I ports from the various reacter venders.
Dr. Morris pelated out a difficulty in pub 1LGing the senclusions of a re-view of any of these topical rsports because any laternal ariteria ser judging en application must be maSe public and should take the form of rule making.
I Attendets M
Bh E. Isbin, Chairman P. Morris l
E. Etherington R. DeYoung S. Ramauer B. 3.Lehings E. 1111 J. Knight M. Petrick, Cemeuttant W. Johnson J. ItsKinley, Staff L. Eintner R. Tedesco Riv. of Cameliance O. Smith E. Desten R. Clark C. Iseon as., e,g 3..ccer se. + 4 M. Taylor y;
1.
s M. -
ew i
i
OTCM USE ONJ July 2, 1999 O A.,'
EN W
Spasugive Sescion
.p ?
Dr.Ishinopenedtheasetingbyrestattagitspurposeto6tartreviewi[
the various GE topical reports and to help resolve some of h issues raised in the Dresden 2 and 3 review. Es suggested that the subesmaittee engage some consultants to assist La h review of some of these ruperts.
Specific consultants will be worked out with the ACRs staff.
Mr. Etherington said that be would th to discuss with DEL the mammer in which the project engineers are kept advised of positions regarding the technical matters treated in the topical reports. Es ales wested to ex-piore the depth of review and the ramifications of a BEL posities on a topical report. For amaaple, the ACES report en Browns Ferry says that stene line isolation valvet idsstiaal to those to be installed should be tested under simulated accidest conditions. h state-line tests reported in APED-5750 do not meet the requirement of identicality with respect to sine and design. What happens if DEL decides t. hat the GE approach is (or is not) satisfactory. Mr. Etherington went on to point out that GE had not analysed & tensile stresses in the valve stem and that a pisten ring was part of the design of the test valvs but is not included in the other de-signs. Be noted that he estimated W stress in the valve stem to be about 50,000 pai. Mr. Etherington noted that GE was proposing the sees approach of testing the first of a generation tut not each individual with regards to core and internals vibration (Oyster Creek - Nias Mile Point tests and l
no others). Es wondered if the ACE 8 plammed to accept this approach. He i
I felt & Committee had not been forced to consider the to,pical reports or make a decision. Be would like to see the reports kept op to date by the
)
addition of any DEL questions and the GE responses.
Dr.1sbin suggested that ACES===hars might give & topical reports a more thorough review than they give an application since the tepisal reports are sometimes more complex and technically significant. We felt the Committee should assure itself that & anciaar designer is doing an adequate Bob then the Committee could drop the review of the details of the technique.
t Dr. Banauer was primarily interested La hearing DEL's plans to review the I
topical reports and their schedule for sempletion.
Dr. Ishin reported that recent loop tests by ORNL toad to seafirm the radi-i olytic hydrogen generation rates observed in the capsula tests. It was ob-I served that inerting the containment had little effect sa the radiety$1c hydsessa problem. Dr. Ennauer was assured that ORNL had been tapressed with the mood for accurate 02 gemoratica rate measurements as well as 52 vetees.
Br. Isbia noted that & precence of phosphates significantly increased the i
genstation rate. He poistad out, hemover, that this did met help memb in i
ing a decision on the need for insrting the containesat. FWR's ase l
JEpplAllietfuty
DRC At USE ONLY July 2.196A;DIf rw g y se surrently being required to be prepared to handle radielytic hydrogen a 3 ;g['
if gWE's are not to be required to provide the same aapahtlity, the Gemi* yip mittee needs to kaev why.
With regard to inerting, Dr. Ramaser denbted if & applicant seuld enter
& contaimeent within a few hours anyway den to radiaties levels and high Dr. Ishin suggested that the Comeittee obtain the services o
tesq>eratures.
of a censultant in this area des to the strong stand that Ceameousalth Edison is taking on this issue. Es thought that Commemmealth might also be pursuias a greater margin of safety although en a differest path (the investigation of laaks at an early stage). Mr. gtherington thought that l
Commonwealth might have exaggerated the difficulcias and time required to de-inert and re-Laert the contaimeent. Dr, Eamauer pointed eve that the decision has been made to inert both Oyster Creek and Nine Mile Feint.
He also metod the tweent report by southern thaclear en estalytis resembiners.
l I
Dr. Ramauer felt the Committee needed to agree on a set of fasts and be metod that he did not have the benefit of the recent ORNL data. Es thought DEL h Committee them aseds to either agree er dis-should provide the facts.
agree with the conclusions er allegations made in the suport and to identify and evaluate items not covered by the report and finally the Consrittee sonst decide if the resulting plant is adequately safe.
Dr. Isbin expressed his disquiet with reaching a judgement and N resseming in reaching that judgement. After all of the facts are is, one smet always I
provide something from one's own experience to make the judgement.
Mr. Etherington expressed some sympathy with Gs's objecties to the mee-eschanistic approach to kamares evaluation.
Dr. Esmauer said that the Committee will discover a murd>er of things that it" had not considered after a few of the large nuclear plaats have serious acci-Es potated out that the Oyster Creek plant is having difficulty getting dents.
N ubole topic of radi-started because of things that had not been foreseen.
olysis had met been considered two years ago.
Dr. Isbin reported that recent experiments, reported at the recent ANS meeting in seattle, show that clad bellooeing may be a more significant effect then had been previously believed. About twice as much balloontag was observed in these experiments as had been anticipated. As a result, more and isore of the ssector manufacturers are poias to rod bundle clad failure tests rather.than tbs stagle rod tests. Ny are also reviewing their smalytical models go.
determine the of fact of this additimaal flow blockage. Dr. Ishin pointed to this as an example of the problems that don't go away if you ignore them.
W'.
O At USE DY.Y
0FFC AL USE ONLY l Jaly 1, 199 -
7 l
E$,.
w : rg,
Dr. Rensuer raised the geestion of how the Acts seuld sentimme te =ah '
l eemetrastion permits if preliminary test results teek possimistia. Se $ sit that the operating lisease stage was toe late to review the Rda program.
Es believes the nuclear industry is surrently hanging en the successful eser-Es noted that the Giana contatament plation of frightening eeries of tests.
structure did perform as predicted but that it was only one potat se a family
~
of curves of prestressed concrete sentainment structure performance.
I geEna with the tamulatory staff i
Dr. Isbia advised the Staff that this subcommittee wanted to hear how BEL was proceeding with the review of the Gg topical reports, how the review of l
the reports was factored into tha review of specific cases, the schedule for review of the reports received to date, and the nochanism to advise projost omgineers of the policies and judgements made on these reports.
Dr. Herris noted that DEL had received ever 50 tepiset reports from the varises f
reactor manufacturers. Some of these reports are descriptive of the surrent Mr. DeYoung plant design uhile others merely provide background informaties.
has been assigned the responsibility of esordinating the reriew of topical re-
)
Frasently, he prepares a progress report every four months. Various ports.
branches within DEL are reviewing the topicals and a few appraisals are maar Dr. Morris felt that the reactor meaufacturers needed to be ad-publication.
vised that submitting a topical report to the AEC and hearing mething back l
(no comment) does not mean that the AEC approvas the report.
l Dr. Morris stated that there had been a lot of uncoordinated review of the The Divi-l topical reports as the project engineers reviewed varises plaats.
l sion is now organised to handi's these reports and be will belhappy te keep the ACES informed on the status of the reviews. Se also indicated that the
[
Regulatory 8tsif might want to discuss certain reports with the Committee or i
an appropriate subcommittee, f
Dr. Morris reported that a non-task force has hean set up to review the assump-tions and requirements of T1D-14844. Mr. Schroeder is coordinating this project.
The first part to be examined will be the source term. It is plannad to son-piste this first phase in about one meath (about August 1,1969).
Regarding the use of a mechanistic vs mem-mechanistic approach DEL is preparing a reply to the latter sent to the AEC by Mr. Wiggia of the AIF em April 3, IM9.
. In soply to Dr. Ishin's question, Dr. Morris reported that Gs una ne lenger astively pursuing a product line certification. CE has issued the fear values j
BEL is hering
- est of Semeral Elmetric Input for Safety Analysis Report (GESAR).
I diffisulty reviewing this document since each applicant most modify it to fit i
i DE A USi DN.Y I
0FCL US!DNJ 5-July 2, 1909J q f[,~b~
his particular plant. In addician, it is met clear that GEsA1 eestates',.;
suffiaient information to comply with the proposed regulatory rule chosens.
Dr. Morris sad his staff then sumanarised the status of each of the reports identified by the Subcommittee as being important for plaats currently under review as follows:
l l
APED-5750 Design and Performance of Full teshmiaal review to (Nar 1949)
GE BWR's Main Steamline be cosyloted by July 18, Isolation Yalves 1969 and a draft Topical Report Review (TR1) pre-t pared. BEL will utilize the services of a consul-tant valve specialist if needed.
APED-5756 Analytical Methods for seing reviewed by moe task l
(Mar 1969)
Evaluating the Radiologi-force in conjunction with cal Aspects of the GE BWR TID-14444. Review of source term to be sempleted by Augest 1, 1969.
APED-5736 Test Intervals and Repair Low priority item, may not (Apr 1969)
Times for Engineered Safe-arrive at a fined position.
guards Estimated completion of re-l view about December, 1969.
APED-5706 In-core Neutron Monitoring DEL has informal informaties (Nov 1968) system for GE EWR that GE plans to revise this i
{
report.
APED-5652 stability and Dynamic BEL does met have the inhouse (Apr 1969)
Performance of the GE BWR capability to review this analysis. They need some est-side consultants and there are very few qualified people in this field in the U. S.
An tattial review is planned by August, IM 9, but no date has been set for the final review.
APED-5453 Vibration Analysis and Test-Initial review by aid Smytem-(Apr 1967) ing of sancter Internals bar, I M9.
4
- l..
E 1
Ofl AL USE ONJ 1
I
09 A. USE ONLY
-C-July 2, LMO,..
f:.y.
- /%...
APED $328 Nuclear Encersies Technology Initial review has beit'deu>_
(dag 1M7) plated and a draft latter'As in the sensurrense eheia.'
BEL has senclnded that in-sufficient informaties has been presented.
APED-5455 The Hochanimal Effects of Initial review has been een-(Jan 1968)
Reactivity Treastsats plated and a draft letter is in the eencarresca shata.
BEL has caneladed that in-sufficient informaties has been presented.
Unnumbered BWE Stability and Dynamic Assumas that this report is (Feb 1968)
Performance superseded by APED-MS2 APED-M40 Xenon Considerations in Review complete, insufficient (Oct 1968)
Design of Large Boitias informaties presented La re.
Water Reacters port but DEL ta ceafident that there will be no Xe oscillations.
APED-5448 Analysis Nethods of Nypo-Initial review complete, in.
(Apr 1968) thetical Super-Prompt sufficient information to Critical Reactivity Tram-support,the eenclusions.
sients La Large Power Reactors APED-5458 Effectiveness of Core A letter is surrently in the (Aug 1968)
Standby Cooling Systems concurrence chain regnesting for GE BWR's that this report be updated to reflect the additional
]
conservatism incorporated ia j
the system.
In addition, DEL has reviewed APED-5696, '"formado Protecties for the Spent Puel Storage Pool", and concluded that GE failed to prove that a tornado can-i mot remove water from the pool. DEL has food additional information on vortex J
ection that indicates a potential for water resoral. The greatest hasard, how-ever, La from tornado propelled missiles. The final DEL positten is in the een-i eurrease sheia now and concludes that the current GE protesties is h-t 7 9.
The tsaster Technology Namorandum (RTM) will be revised to say that testede protesties of the fuel storage pool is required.
r, l
0FIC1. USI ONLY l
]
07CLUSEONI.Y.
^ July 2, 1980 a. -
&v-the BEL position letter on APED-5286, "Dasign Basis for Critiaal East M@
Condition in Soiling Water Reacters", is also in the concurrease chaia.. S BRL has basically accepted the report as being the best data available 'and an acceptable correlation.
Mr. DeYoung described how the tentative TRA's are circulated throu5 DEL, CD, and DRS for their comments and concuerones.
Dr. Merris stated that a TRE or RTH could be issued relatively easily but the rule makisag refleeting the official regulatcry position would require a long time.
Dr. Esnauer couldn't understand how the approval of a small portion 91 the GE design or smalysis would result in rule making.
Dr. Morris rantaded the Subcommittee that the Fr=*da= of Information Act re-quires any internal criteria for judging an application be made public.
Dr. Morris admitted that DEL cc eld be ederrassed by developing seaments or positions on topical reports of features that have been included in plaats that have already been approved. such a case sould be the control rod velo-city limiter (APED-5446) which has been approved is applications but never doeurosated. GE may be requested to revise the topical report to provide all the information required.
Dr. Morris stated that revisions of or new information relating to the topical reports would have to be handled on a case-by-case basis.
In response to Mr. Etherington's question, Dr. Morris said that BRL's tenta-tive, but ao firmly fixed, position uns to accept GE's proposal to analyse I
all plants but to test only the first of a kind, such as the vibratise tasting
)
(APED-5453) at Oyster Creek and a unsch reduced test at Nine Mils Point if the l
Oyster Creek results are favorable.
Dr. Morris noted that GE and its clients are not the only esos using the GE topical reports; DEL recently received a report from gemes & Webster en a Westinghouse plant that was entracted from a GE topical report.
Mr. Tedesco reviewed the status of the items identified in APgD-5608, fisE Analytical and Experimental Programs for Resolution of dCRs safety Concerns",
as requiring further effort. Es referred to the summary in Appendix A and indicated the following status:
1.
f* - Aamisted with Water Raastor Industry (ACR5 asterisk items) 1.
Effects of fuel rod failure GE topical report by December, en ECCS performance.
1969.
5 i
D R C R USE D U
OtfR DEONJ
, Jaly2,1940;gg>
W,4 _
fj,J
- 2.
Effects of fuel bundle flew This is a tasal offset adF blockage.
has not developed a posit $MQ~ ~
yet, will sentimme to review.
3.
Verification of fuel damass On Dresden 2 and 3. OE has in-limit criterion.
dicated it has new data that i
have met yet been submitted.
)
GE will update APED-5608.
l 4.
Q ulity anvrance of primary No topical report supseted -
system.
each application will have to j
be reviewed on a asse-by-case i
basis.
5.
ECCS thermal effects on Under discussion with GE.
reactor vessel.
6.
Effects of 31oudoun forces subject to esatinuing discus-en primary system components.
sion, no topical report yet issued.
7.
separation of control and pro-Being handled on a case-by-case tection system functions.
basis.
8.
Instrumentation for prompt Oyster Creek and Nine Mils Point detection of gross fuel have upgrade.d instrumentation to failure.
determine effectiveness of sein steam time monitors.
II. Items Associated with Railiam Water Reactors 1.
Effects of clad tenparature Program to be somy1sted in 1969, and material on ECCS per-results included im Browns Ferry foresace.
F8AR in March, 1970.
2.
Closure of main steam time Topical report issued.
isolation valve.
3.
Tests of diesel ganarator Tests have been sempleted but the performance.
form of report has not yet been determined, may appear im TSAR or topical.
f
[.-
4.
Formulation of startup program Man 61ed os case-by-case hesia.
O p<
0=CIE.IlSiDN.Y
02 C A.USi DNJ
. July 2, 1960,.;
k :.
h6 j
5.
Investigation of fuel bundle Esadled on sese-by-case hesis.
disorientation.
gj ~ -
l 6.
Implementation of single failure AEC position set by Batch and criterion on REN system.
Brunswick latters.
7.
Formulation of inservice in-Topical report issued but met spection program.
semplete, need to more closely comply with N-45 recommendations.
8.
Diversification of ECCS Done Laitiation signals.
9.
Reevaluation of steam line GE is developing a position that break accident.
SWR's can tolerate a steam line rupture.
l
- 10. Reliability of LPCI sensing Seing evaluated on Dresden and instrumentation.
Millstone.
l
- 11. Depressurisation performance New informaties has been developed of EPCI system.
and submitted as topical report APED-%47, "Depressurisation per-formance of the GE BWR Rish Pres-sure Coolant Injection system".
i l
- 12. Susceptibility of ECCS unter N ring hsader ma$sr the torus l
supply to single point failure uns eliminated thus eliminating l
ens sourcs of this type failure.
No comment om Eatch er Brunswick.
i Dr. Rosen presented the status of th DEL review of APED-5454, " considerations Pertaining to Containment laerting". N Staff was concerned that there was no discussion of radiolysis or operating problems; they have a suaber of goes-tions to forward to CE to have documented.
The Staff has difficulty accepting Gt's values of 0.1% and 0.61 metal / water reaction and potats est that 1.2% re-action will reach the flammability limit. DEL believes the effect on the con-tainment of a hydrogon detonation should be analysed. N Staff does not be-lieve the report is entirely accurate on tb operating and maintenance aspects of an Laerted containment. N TRR lists six items requiring addittomat infor-l motion and concludes tLat inerting is required for BWR contaiansats. p I
i Dr. Merris indicated that operators may be permitted te start de-inerttag M hours prior to shutdown. Mr. Denton meted that the numboldt Ray reactor oper-atos as long as it can with leakage until it is forced to shutdeun with or without Laerting.
t 1
0T!CE BE ON.Y
.l 07C1lEiDH.Y i
t Asly 2,19N,
.. ~.
d Dr. nessa suggested that the inerties equipment may be useful la dispechf' l
ar redistytic hydrogen either es a recombiner er purging devise.
p,+
t Mr. Denton discussed APED-5460, " Design and Performenee of SE SMR Jet Pumps".
l Be noted that GE has tested four producties pumps. BEL has rese19ed data se i
enly the prototype mockup perferusace. h prototype tests insleded stability l
tests. N pressure drop at the measle uss designed to minimine anmifold instability. In examining the effects of breaks or pluggage, ML found that l
as the flow goes down and the reacter power drops.and the ENE remains vir-taally unchanged.
l l
The maasfacturing defects were traced to the easting teshaique and sarburize-tion. New castings beve been provided and the problem appears to be revolved.
l l
The pumps were analysed for stress and seismic effects and found satisfactory l
to ASE seetion III standards. A seimmic amplification faster ef three was
!~
used resulting in a leading of 0.93 (Dr. Neumerk concurred with this value).
j DSL still wants to review the vibration program that GE has prasised for j
Dresden. In general, the GE methods and limits are satisfactory. ERL is aweiting the performance and vibration test data.
Mr. Petrick reviewed the report without the benefit of prior GE information.
He expressed his concern with stability aed his eussestion that a stability l
j analysis be performed considering the effects of pressure changes, failure of one bank of pumps, voids reachlag the talet mess.les, and differemens in l
flew characteristics of individual pumps. Es asked if the flow instruments-l tion use sufficiently sensitive to detect flow instabilities.
i Mr. DeYeung said that DEL was attempting to issue a Titt en the jet pumps by August 1, 1969. He said that the,)st pueps were well docesanted in the Dresden 2 and 3 staff Report and this was a good example of parallel regious.
1 Mr. Patrick made himself available to the staff following the subcommittee l
meeting to discuss potential stability problems.
l l
eo.
k -
- t..
p e
i 0 = C A_ llSi DN.Y I
i 1
s ein [#
/
c s
j9, e) _4, UNITED STATES ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION
' 2#,
WASH INGTON,. o.C. 20545 t
ACRS Com:::1gggu gw, g,g p
t SHB t-ings e 0*'I HE T 4
WLF Ok SHHY
,(,,C 3xnV
\\
Those Listed Belov ESI L
H2
%L This is a General Electric Topical Report, ateLailed gf gj
_ " FIELD TESTING REQUIREMENTS
- R BEL, IJURTAINS
}
C L a a.a.L e
g Roger S. Boyd. A tdnt Director g'~~or Projects Division of Reactor Licensing Distribution :
Number of Copies Public Document Room 1
Docket lile 1
Stan Robinson, SEC 1
M. Mann 1
R. L. Doan 1
P. A. Morris 1
- 1. Schroeder 1,
E. G. Case 5
R. Boyd h
S. Levine 8
D. Skovholt 5
D. Muller h
R. Tedesco 6
C. Long 8
R. Ireland k
D. Ymuth 4
ACRS - {
M'O 18 oGC (3 + 30 to ASLB) 33 Compliance 8
??y G
uf D
b'
,' f d f' ~ ; &, R
,-11 tu s
~.
T s
s r3 r.
dU m
sugy j
-