Bypass Testing Paul Leonard.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Participation Requirements for a Guideline Panel Co-Chair.
Advertisements

TITLE OF PROJECT PROPOSAL NUMBER Principal Investigator PI’s Organization ESTCP Selection Meeting DATE.
Basel III.
Groundwater Protection Initiative Status George Oliver RETS/REMP Conference June 25-27, 2007.
Statistical Issues in Research Planning and Evaluation
MAKING A CASE FOR EXPANDING SHARED LIVING IN PENNSYLVANIA.
1 Generic Safety Issue (GSI) 191 Pressurized Water Reactor (PWR) Sump Performance Presented by: Donnie Harrison Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Presented.
> NRC Regulatory Information Conference March 12, 2009 AREVA NP Inc. 2 AREVA Perspectives on the Containment Sump Design and Downstream Effects for U.S.
Debris Effects in Long-Term Post-LOCA PWR Cooling
UNFCCC How to address DOE Liability in context of PoA: Perspective of a Project Developer 8 th May 2011 Gareth Phillips Chairman, Project Developer Forum.
Actionable Process Steps and Focused Mitigation Strategies
GSI-191 Status and Lessons Learned Presented by: Donnie Harrison Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Presented at:
PWR Owners Group Post-Accident Chemical Effects Work NEI Chemistry Meeting, January 26, 2012.
Westinghouse Perspective on New Reactor Sumps
NEI Presentation on Nuclear Decommissioning Trust (NDT) Use Concerns.
Jonathan Dryden Lorain County Community College. ◦ Concern that students who have earned PLA credit will lack sufficient academic preparation for upper.
Research & Technology Implementation TxDOT RTI OFFICE.
CHLE Update STP October Team Lead Meeting 11/29/2012 Janet Leavitt, Ph.D. 1.
Leukocyte-Reduced Blood Components Lore Fields MT(ASCP)SBB Consumer Safety Officer, DBA, OBRR, CBER September 16, 2009.
Evaluating Impacts of MSP Grants Hilary Rhodes, PhD Ellen Bobronnikov February 22, 2010 Common Issues and Recommendations.
TACIS Project: R8.01/98 – TRANSLATION, EDITING AND DIFFUSION OF DOCUMENTS (Result Dissemination) Probabilistic Safety Analysis Technology (PSA) TACIS R3.1/91.
Evaluating Impacts of MSP Grants Ellen Bobronnikov Hilary Rhodes January 11, 2010 Common Issues and Recommendations.
1 Impact of Revised 10 CFR 50.46(b) ECCS Acceptance Criteria 2009 Regulatory Information Conference Rockville, MD March 12, 2009 Mitch Nissley Westinghouse.
1 Public Meeting with ASME to Discuss Pump Inservice Testing Issues NRC Headquarters OWFN Room 1F22 June 4, 2007.
1 RIC 2009 Design Acceptance Criteria: Searching for Acceptance Andrea Sterdis Tennessee Valley Authority March 11, 2009.
ECCS Operability Determination Jim Andrachek Fellow Engineer Westinghouse Electric Company.
Presented to: By: Date: Federal Aviation Administration Engine Nacelle Halon Replacement International Aircraft Systems Fire Protection Working Group Douglas.
Option 2b Template Example Phillip Grissom – Southern Nuclear Based on Vogtle (more or less)
Option 2a Template Example Phillip Grissom – Southern Nuclear Based on Farley (more or less)
Closure Option 1 GSI-191 Workshop October 18-19,2012.
HOLD-TIME STUDIES.
Bioreactor Harvest miniBIOMAN 2017
Principal Investigator ESTCP Selection Meeting
Groundwater Pilot Treatment System Update May 2017
Evaluation Requirements for MSP and Characteristics of Designs to Estimate Impacts with Confidence Ellen Bobronnikov March 23, 2011.
Defense-in-Depth and Mitigative Measures
FDA’s IDE Decisions and Communications
Principal Investigator ESTCP Selection Meeting
Presented by Harry C. Elinsky, Jr. Filtech, Inc.
WHO Technical Report Series, No. 953, 2009
Fall Low Level Waste Forum Meeting
Flooding Walkdown Guidance
Regen Media Filter & Filter Media Task Group Update
Pressurized Water Reactor Owners Group
Creating Partnerships: EPA R8, NRCS, and States
LLW Forum Meeting October 17, 2017 Alexandria, Virginia
HIV Counseling.
Moving Forward From Fukushima Near-Term Task Force EP Recommendations
  Aptiv Global Supplier Quality Early Production Containment Training.
MIT Nuclear Reactor Laboratory
Obj. 2.2 Discuss considerations involved before, during and after an interview To view this presentation, first, turn up your volume and second, launch.
Designed for internal training use:
Superstructures REPORTS
ASSESSMENT IN COUNSELLING PREPAIRED BY: DR.MUNA ABDEEN ABDELRAHMAN.
Treatment – Plant Design
Document 3:12 (2011–2012) Published 5/31/2012
Week Ten – IT Audit Reporting
TRTR Briefing September 2013
Pressurized Water Reactor Owners Group
GNI Advanced Reactors Safeguards Analysis & Findings
PWR Sump Performance (GSI-191) Industry Workshop
Goal-Driven Continuous Risk Management
RESOLUTION OF GENERIC SAFETY ISSUE 191
FdSc Module 107 Systems Analysis
Risk-Informing In-Vessel Effects
Goal-Driven Software Measurement
Introduction to Pricing
RESOLUTION OF GENERIC SAFETY ISSUE 191
Chapter 5 Calculations for Sterile Compounding.
Presentation transcript:

Bypass Testing Paul Leonard

Background Bypass testing establishes the quantity of material that passes through the strainer and interacts with downstream components The significant concern is the fiber that passes through and interacts with the reactor fuel Many licensees have performed bypass testing, but very few have had their testing reviewed by the NRC This has left most licensees unsure as to the acceptability of previously performed testing

Recent History NEI developed a generic bypass test protocol with the intent to submit it to the NRC for their review Some licensees were concerned that this could pre-empt previously performed testing and force them to re-perform bypass testing Some licensees that needed to perform, or re-perform bypass testing submitted bypass test protocols to the NRC for review NRC stated that they did not have technical concerns with protocol, but could not specifically endorse the protocol due to the human actions required for it to be correctly implemented NRC also requested that they be able to witness the testing

Current Status Recently, NRC has provided (verbally) those attributes that they believe are the most important for acceptable bypass testing Debris preparation Concentration of debris arriving at strainer Face velocity at strainer Bypassed debris capture method Test termination criteria Interpretation of test results These attributes are discussed in the following slides

Current Status Debris Preparation Debris is to be prepared in a method that provides for readily suspendable fibers for introduction to the test flume or test tank NEI debris preparation protocol is an acceptable method Concentration of Debris Arriving at Strainer Batch addition to the test loop must be less than an equivalent 1/16” bed thickness across the test strainer OR Must demonstrate that the concentration of fibers in the scaled batch addition(s) is representative of the concentration that would be conservatively expected to be at the strainer in the plant at the initiation of recirculation Especially important for initial batches for a higher fiber plant in which a filtering fiber bed could quickly be formed on the strainer

Current Status Face Velocity at Strainer Test loop flow must provide a strainer face velocity that is equal to or greater than the velocity that would be expected in the plant Bypassed Debris Capture Method Debris capture method must be by filtration, not liquid sampling Filtration can be either filter bags or screen capture but must be of sufficiently small size to ensure bypassed fibers are captured Test Termination Criteria The test duration must be sufficiently long to ensure that the quantity of fibers that would be expected to bypass the strainer would in fact be captured by the filtering media Insignificant increases in captured fibers on the filtering media If a significant fiber bed is established on the test strainer, the bed is stable and not passing additional fibers The test duration can be tied to the time from initiation of recirculation to swapover to hot leg recirculation

Current Status Interpretation of Test Results The intent of bypass testing is to establish a total quantity of fibers that would be expected to pass through the strainer to interact with downstream components, e.g., reactor fuel There is some concern by NRC in the use of the term % bypass in that this could be incorrectly applied in the determination of the total quantity of fibers that would be expected to bypass Along with test termination criteria, similar to questions that were asked regarding strainer head loss testing, there could be questions regarding extrapolation of test results for tests that may not demonstrate an insignificant increase in fiber collection downstream of the test strainer over time

Conclusion Bypass testing, if performed, will establish the quantity of fiber expected to reach the fuel If a plant intends to use the 15g/FA limit established by WCAP-16793 to support closure of GL 2004-02, and intends to rely on previously performed bypass testing, then the attributes presented need to be considered If a plant is going to follow the PWROG test plan that is expected to improve reactor core fiber limits, then bypass testing previously performed or planned to be performed also needs to consider the attributes presented It is recommended that plants that are not certain of the acceptability of previously performed bypass testing Develop the case for acceptability Present their case to the NRC

Additional Information As part of South Texas Project’s risk-informed effort, screen penetration testing is being performed Gil Zigler will now discuss information learned from that testing