ML022660245
| ML022660245 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 09/18/2002 |
| From: | Katz P Constellation Energy Group |
| To: | Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TAC MB3974, TAC MB3975 | |
| Download: ML022660245 (15) | |
Text
Peter E. Katz 1650 Calvert Cliffs Parkway Vice President Lusby, Maryland 20657 Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant 410 495-4455 Constellation Generation Group, LLC 410 495-3500 Fax Constellation Energy Group September 18, 2002 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 ATTENTION: Document Control Desk
SUBJECT:
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Unit Nos. 1 & 2; Docket Nos. 50-317 & 50-318 Response to Request for Additional Information: Safety Injection Tank Verification Frequency (TAC Nos. MB3974 and MB3975)
REFERENCE:
(a) Letter from C. H. Cruse (CCNPP) to Document Control Desk (NRC),
dated January 31, 2002, License Amendment Request: Safety Injection Tank Verification Frequency In the Reference (a), Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant requested a change to the method for complying with the sampling surveillance in the Technical Specifications for the Safety Injection Tanks (SITs). In a phone call held on August 21, 2002, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Staff requested that we respond to several questions concerning that amendment request. The Attachment (1) contains the requested information.
In addition to the requested information, we have determined that the reliability of the SITs should be tracked under the Maintenance Rule. Appropriate goals will be set for the SITs based on the boron concentration from SIT samples.
The information provided by this letter does not change the conclusions of the No Significant Hazards Determination contained in the referenced letter.
0
/
Document Control Desk September 18, 2002 Page 2 Should you have questions regarding this matter, we will be pleased to discuss them with you.
Very truly yours, STATE OF MARYLAND
- TO WIT:
COUNTY OF CALVERT I, Peter E. Katz, being duly sworn, state that I am Vice President - Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc. (CCNPP), and that I am duly authorized to execute and file this License Amendment Request on behalf of CCNPP. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the statements contained in this document are true and correct. To the extent that these statements are not based on my personal knowledge, they are based upon information provided by other CCNPP employees and/or consultants. Such information has been reviewed in accordance with company practice and I believe it o be reliable.
Subscribed and sworn before me, a Notary Public in and for the State of Maryland and County of this 1 day of A
[I~u'*
- -/i,4,002.
LJA WITNESS my Hand and Notarial Seal:
Notary Public My Commission Expires: OR !01a1lO PEK/PSF/bjd
Attachment:
(1) Response to Request for Additional Information: Safety Injection Tank Verification Frequency cc: J. Petro, Esquire H. J. Miller, NRC J. E. Silberg, Esquire Resident Inspector, NRC Director, Project Directorate I-1, NRC R. I. McLean, DNR D. M. Skay, NRC
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant, Inc.
September 18, 2002
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY NRC Question 1 The frequency of a large break loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) is assumed to be 2E-6/yr. It is stated that this frequency is derived from a log normal interpolation of the data provided in NUREG/CR-5750 for large break LOCAs. However, it is not clear how the 2E-6/yr frequency was derived. NUREG/CR-5750 recommends a mean value of 5E-6/yr for large break frequency in PWRs. Please clarify.
CCNPPResponse The NUREG/CR-5750 large break LOCA frequency is based on LOCA break sizes between a 6" diameter pipe and double-ended rupture. The Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant large LOCA frequency is based on a break size between 0.5 ft2 (9.57" diameter pipe) and double-ended rupture.
The NUREG/CR initiating event frequency for small break LOCAs is about 100 times larger than the large break LOCA. This data indicates that the likelihood of a break logarithmically decreases as the break size increases. The log of the pipe diameters for the NUREG verses the frequency of break data was least squares fit (all points were used). This fit was used to determine the equivalent initiating event frequency for the Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant large break LOCA range.
NRC Question 2 On page 4 it is stated:
"The SIT [safety injection tank] boron concentrationsample data is evaluatedusing data after these
[check valve seat]replacements. This replacement reducedthe amount of leakage into the SITs. The SIT concentrationsample data is evaluatedusing dataafter these replacements... there is less than a 0.2% chance that the boron concentration will fall below 2300 ppm on a single SIT given monthly surveillance."
The staff needs more detailed information about the data and the approach used to calculate the likelihood of low (below 2300 PPM) boron concentration given current and proposed surveillance requirements.
This additional information should include all data points used, a brief description of the "median ranking method," as well as the major steps and important intermediate results needed to understand what and how was done.
CCNPPResponse The likelihood of a boron concentration below 2300 PPM was determined using the median rank method. For example:
Rank Data Median Rank (j) (PPM) (j-0.3)/(n+0.4) 1 2394 0.20%
2 2453 0.48%
3 2459 0.77%
4 2465 1.05%
352 2695 99.80%
The risk analysis contained 352 data points (i.e., n=352). There were no samples that fell below 2300 PPM (i.e., j=l). Therefore, the rank associated with the first point would be 0.2%. This is conservative, as the lowest PPM in the data was 2394 PPM.
I
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY The next step in the risk evaluation is determining what the concentrations would be with a six-month interval. The base assumption is that the number of gallons of Reactor Coolant System (RCS) fluid that leaks into the SITs is proportional to the surveillance interval. For example, if 20 gallons of RCS fluid enters the SIT in a one-month interval, then 120 gallons would enter the SIT in a six-month interval.
On the surface, this conservative assumption would seem to mean that the change in boron concentration between surveillance tests would be proportionally larger. For example, a 10 PPM reduction in boron concentration in a one-month interval would represent a 60 PPM reduction for a six-month interval. But with the RCS boron concentration dropping due to normal operation, the change is actually larger. For example, a 10 PPM change in SIT concentration in the first month following an outage would take many more gallons of RCS fluid to accomplish than a 10 PPM change in SIT concentration in the sixth month after the outage. Considering this effect, the delta change in PPM is considered to be 7.6 times larger during the six-month interval (e.g., a 10 PPM becomes a 76 PPM change).
Excerpts for median ranking for the estimated six-month interval testing are:
Median Rank Rank Order Data Percentile (j) (PPM) (j-0.3)/(n+0.4) 1 1901 0.20%
2 2005 0.49%
3 2107 0.78%
8 2302 2.24%
344 3807 99.80%
As some of the data was used to calculate the delta interval for the last data point (i.e., four SITs per Unit). This ranking has only 344 data points (i.e., 344=352-8). This conservative approach yields a 2% likelihood that the boron concentration will fall below 2300 PPM. Complete ranking data and results are given in Table 1.
NRC Question 3 On page 2 it is stated:
"To justify this proposed change, the SIT levels, volume additions, leakage in, leakage out, and sample concentrations (for the RCS and SITs) were evaluatedfor both units for a six month period from July 1, 1999 to December 31, 1999. A review has shown thisperiodto be representative of SIT behaviorsince 1997."
(a) Please explain how the review has shown that the data for those six months are representative for the entire period since the valve seats have been replaced. Were data from this six-month period only used in the risk assessment?
(b) Were there any instances, since valve seat replacement, where the boron concentration was found by sampling to be close or below 2300 PPM?
2
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY (c) Were there any instances, since valve seat replacement, where the in-leakage flow rate was such that if it had been allowed to continue for six months without proper boron addition would cause the SIT boron concentration to fall below 2300 PPM? Please explain and provide data to support your statements, as needed.
(d) The table provided in page 2 includes data for a six-month period and lists boron concentration at the beginning and the end of such period. This information does not show whether there would be instances of low boron concentration at the end of the six-month period if the information from the monthly sampling had not been available. Low boron concentration at the end of the six-month period could occur since leakage out of the tank can mask leakage into the tank and proper addition of boron would not have occurred without the monthly sampling. Please explain and provide data to support your conclusion.
CCNPP Response 3(a) Sample data for the entire period since the valve seats were replaced was reviewed. No unusual data perturbations were noted. The trend noted in the chosen six month period was consistent with trends for the entire period since the valve seats were replaced.
3(b) There are no instances, since valve seat replacement, when the boron concentration was found to be near or below 2300 PPM.
3(c) On March 2, 1999, the level in the No. 21A SIT had increased 10 inches and the tank was sampled in accordance with existing procedures. That sample was found to have a boron concentration of 2394 PPM. The tank was then borated to 2465 PPM. At no other time since valve seat replacement has the level in the tanks changed enough that samples were required to be taken.
Boron concentration has not been adjusted in the tanks at any other time.
3(d) The data in the Table on page 2 shows the boron concentration in each tank after a six month period. No changes in boron concentration were made by the operators during that six month period.
If information from the monthly samples had not been available, the results at the end of the six month period would have been the same.
Makeup to the SITs is done to control level in the tanks, not as a means of controlling boron concentration. Water is added to the SITs from the refueling water storage tank, whose boron concentration is controlled by Technical Specifications. Also, prior to any water addition to the SITs, the boron concentration of the water being added is determined. This ensures that water being added for level control is always adequately borated. With the exception of the instance noted in answer 3(c), it has not been necessary to adjust the boron concentration in any SIT since valve seat replacement.
Although actual experience indicates that with a six-month surveillance interval none of the samples would fall below 2300 PPM, the conservative calculation used in the risk analysis indicates that 2%
of the 352 samples would fall below 2300 PPM. It is important to stress the conservative nature of the risk calculation. No credit is taken for the operators' ability to monitor SIT level changes and take appropriate action. The most likely cause of boron concentration changes in the SIT is due to RCS in-leakage. As the SIT levels are monitored by operations, the actual likelihood of the SIT concentration falling below 2300 PPM is far lower than the number used in the risk assessment.
3
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE I Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual) 1 test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 1 2394 0.20% 1 1901 0.20%
2 2453 0.48% 2 2005 0.49%
3 2459 0.77% 3 2107 0.78%
4 2465 1.05% 4 2136 1.07%
5 2467 1.33% 5 2175 1.36%
6 2468 1.62% 6 2263 1.66%
7 2470 1.90% 7 2275 1.95%
8 2477 2.19% 8 2302 2.24%
9 2480 2.47% 9 2334 2.53%
10 2487 2.75% 10 2361 2.82%
11 2489 3.04% 11 2367 3.11%
12 2492 3.32% 12 2377 3.40%
13 2492 3.60% 13 2383 3.69%
14 2494 3.89% 14 2384 3.98%
15 2494 4.17% 15 2394 4.27%
16 2497 4.46% 16 2394 4.56%
17 2499 4.74% 17 2394 4.85%
18 2499 5.02% 18 2397 5.14%
19 2500 5.31% 19 2398 5.43%
20 2510 5.59% 20 2398 5.72%
21 2511 5.87% 21 2400 6.01%
22 2511 6.16% 22 2403 6.30%
23 2511 6.44% 23 2403 6.59%
24 2512 6.73% 24 2404 6.88%
25 2513 7.01% 25 2407 7.17%
26 2519 7.29% 26 2408 7.46%
27 2520 7.58% 27 2411 7.75%
28 2521 7.86% 28 2413 8.04%
29 2521 8.14% 29 2413 8.33%
30 2521 8.43% 30 2422 8.62%
31 2521 8.71% 31 2426 8.91%
32 2522 9.00% 32 2426 9.20%
33 2522 9.28% 33 2427 9.49%
34 2525 9.56% 34 2428 9.79%
35 2526 9.85% 35 2428 10.08%
36 2529 10.13% 36 2430 10.37%
37 2531 10.41% 37 2436 10.66%
38 2532 10.70% 38 2439 10.95%
39 2535 10.98% 39 2441 11.24%
40 2536 11.27% 40 2443 11.53%
4
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE I Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 41 2536 11.55% 41 2445 11.82%
42 2537 11.83% 42 2448 12.11%
43 2539 12.12% 43 2453 12.40%
44 2542 12.40% 44 2454 12.69%
45 2542 12.68% 45 2461 12.98%
46 2544 12.97% 46 2464 13.27%
47 2544 13.25% 47 2465 13.56%
48 2547 13.54% 48 2467 13.85%
49 2547 13.82% 49 2471 14.14%
50 2549 14.10% 50 2473 14.43%
51 2556 14.39% 51 2474 14.72%
52 2561 14.67% 52 2477 15.01%
53 2562 14.95% 53 2481 15.30%
54 2564 15.24% 54 2483 15.59%
55 2565 15.52% 55 2485 15.88%
56 2567 15.81% 56 2486 16.17%
57 2569 16.09% 57 2488 16.46%
58 2573 16.37% 58 2489 16.75%
59 2575 16.66% 59 2494 17.04%
60 2576 16.94% 60 2495 17.33%
61 2576 17.22% 61 2496 17.62%
62 2576 17.51% 62 2496 17.92%
63 2583 17.79% 63 2497 18.21%
64 2584 18.08% 64 2497 18.50%
65 2585 18.36% 65 2503 18.79%
66 2585 18.64% 66 2504 19.08%
67 2585 18.93% 67 2505 19.37%
68 2585 19.21% 68 2506 19.66%
69 2587 19.49% 69 2515 19.95%
70 2588 19.78% 70 2515 20.24%
71 2593 20.06% 71 2522 20.53%
72 2593 20.35% 72 2526 20.82%
73 2595 20.63% 73 2527 21.11%
74 2597 20.91% 74 2527 21.40%
75 2597 21.20% 75 2529 21.69%
76 2597 21.48% 76 2531 21.98%
77 2598 21.77% 77 2532 22.27%
78 2599 22.05% 78 2532 22.56%
79 2600 22.33% 79 2532 22.85%
80 2600 22.62% 80 2532 23.14%
5
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE 1 Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 81 2601 22.90% 81 2534 23.43%
82 2602 23.18% 82 2536 23.72%
83 2602 23.47% 83 2537 24.01%
84 2602 23.75% 84 2538 24.30%
85 2603 24.04% 85 2538 24.59%
86 2603 24.32% 86 2540 24.88%
87 2604 24.60% 87 2540 25.17%
88 2604 24.89% 88 2545 25.46%
89 2604 25.17% 89 2548 25.75%
90 2604 25.45% 90 2548 26.05%
91 2604 25.74% 91 2548 26.34%
92 2604 26.02% 92 2551 26.63%
93 2605 26.31% 93 2556 26.92%
94 2605 26.59% 94 2556 27.21%
95 2605 26.87% 95 2558 27.50%
96 2605 27.16% 96 2559 27.79%
97 2606 27.44% 97 2559 28.08%
98 2606 27.72% 98 2560 28.37%
99 2608 28.01% 99 2560 28.66%
100 2608 28.29% 100 2562 28.95%
101 2609 28.58% 101 2563 29.24%
102 2610 28.86% 102 2563 29.53%
103 2610 29.14% 103 2563 29.82%
104 2611 29.43% 104 2563 30.11%
105 2611 29.71% 105 2568 30.40%
106 2611 29.99% 106 2570 30.69%
107 2611 30.28% 107 2570 30.98%
108 2613 30.56% 108 2571 31.27%
109 2613 30.85% 109 2572 31.56%
110 2613 31.13% 110 2572 31.85%
111 2613 31.41% 111 2573 32.14%
112 2614 31.70% 112 2573 32.43%
113 2615 31.98% 113 2575 32.72%
114 2615 32.26% 114 2576 33.01%
115 2615 32.55% 115 2576 33.30%
116 2615 32.83% 116 2576 33.59%
117 2616 33.12% 117 2580 33.89%
118 2616 33.40% 118 2580 34.18%
119 2616 33.68% 119 2581 34.47%
120 2616 33.97% 120 2583 34.76%
6
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE 1 Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 121 2617 34.25% 121 2583 35.05%
122 2617 34.53% 122 2584 35.34%
123 2618 34.82% 123 2584 35.63%
124 2618 35.10% 124 2584 35.92%
125 2618 35.39% 125 2585 36.21%
126 2619 35.67% 126 2585 36.50%
127 2619 35.95% 127 2587 36.79%
128 2619 36.24% 128 2587 37.08%
129 2620 36.52% 129 2588 37.37%
130 2620 36.80% 130 2591 37.66%
131 2620 37.09% 131 2594 37.95%
132 2621 37.37% 132 2594 38.24%
133 2621 37.66% 133 2594 38.53%
134 2621 37.94% 134 2594 38.82%
135 2622 38.22% 135 2595 39.11%
136 2622 38.51% 136 2595 39.40%
137 2622 38.79% 137 2596 39.69%
138 2622 39.07% 138 2597 39.98%
139 2623 39.36% 139 2597 40.27%
140 2623 39.64% 140 2598 40.56%
141 2623 39.93% 141 2598 40.85%
142 2624 40.21% 142 2599 41.14%
143 2624 40.49% 143 2599 41.43%
144 2625 40.78% 144 2600 41.72%
145 2626 41.06% 145 2600 42.02%
146 2626 41.35% 146 2601 42.31%
147 2627 41.63% 147 2602 42.60%
148 2627 41.91% 148 2602 42.89%
149 2628 42.20% 149 2602 43.18%
150 2628 42.48% 150 2603 43.47%
151 2628 42.76% 151 2603 43.76%
152 2628 43.05% 152 2604 44.05%
153 2628 43.33% 153 2605 44.34%
154 2628 43.62% 154 2605 44.63%
155 2628 43.90% 155 2607 44.92%
156 2628 44.18% 156 2608 45.21%
157 2629 44.47% 157 2609 45.50%
158 2629 44.75% 158 2609 45.79%
159 2629 45.03% 159 2610 46.08%
160 2630 45.32% 160 2612 46.37%
7
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE I Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 161 2631 45.60% 161 2612 46.66%
162 2631 45.89% 162 2612 46.95%
163 2631 46.17% 163 2613 47.24%
164 2631 46.45% 164 2613 47.53%
165 2631 46.74% 165 2613 47.82%
166 2632 47.02% 166 2614 48.11%
167 2632 47.30% 167 2614 48.40%
168 2632 47.59% 168 2614 48.69%
169 2633 47.87% 169 2615 48.98%
170 2633 48.16% 170 2617 49.27%
171 2633 48.44% 171 2618 49.56%
172 2633 48.72% 172 2619 49.85%
173 2634 49.01% 173 2620 50.15%
174 2634 49.29% 174 2620 50.44%
175 2634 49.57% 175 2620 50.73%
176 2634 49.86% 176 2621 51.02%
177 2634 50.14% 177 2621 51.31%
178 2634 50.43% 178 2621 51.60%
179 2634 50.71% 179 2624 51.89%
180 2634 50.99% 180 2624 52.18%
181 2634 51.28% 181 2624 52.47%
182 2634 51.56% 182 2625 52.76%
183 2634 51.84% 183 2625 53.05%
184 2635 52.13% 184 2625 53.34%
185 2635 52.41% 185 2625 53.63%
186 2635 52.70% 186 2626 53.92%
187 2635 52.98% 187 2627 54.21%
188 2635 53.26% 188 2627 54.50%
189 2635 53.55% 189 2627 54.79%
190 2636 53.83% 190 2627 55.08%
191 2636 54.11% 191 2628 55.37%
192 2636 54.40% 192 2628 55.66%
193 2636 54.68% 193 2628 55.95%
194 2636 54.97% 194 2629 56.24%
195 2637 55.25% 195 2629 56.53%
196 2637 55.53% 196 2629 56.82%
197 2637 55.82% 197 2630 57.11%
198 2637 56.10% 198 2631 57.40%
199 2637 56.38% 199 2631 57.69%
200 2638 56.67% 200 2632 57.98%
8
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE 1 Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual) 1 test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 201 2638 56.95% 201 2633 58.28%
202 2638 57.24% 202 2634 58.57%
203 2638 57.52% 203 2634 58.86%
204 2638 57.80% 204 2634 59.15%
205 2638 58.09% 205 2634 59.44%
206 2638 58.37% 206 2634 59.73%
207 2639 58.65% 207 2635 60.02%
208 2639 58.94% 208 2636 60.31%
209 2639 59.22% 209 2637 60.60%
210 2639 59.51% 210 2638 60.89%
211 2639 59.79% 211 2639 61.18%
212 2640 60.07% 212 2640 61.47%
213 2640 60.36% 213 2643 61.76%
214 2640 60.64% 214 2643 62.05%
215 2640 60.93% 215 2644 62.34%
216 2640 61.21% 216 2644 62.63%
217 2640 61.49% 217 2644 62.92%
218 2640 61.78% 218 2644 63.21%
219 2640 62.06% 219 2645 63.50%
220 2640 62.34% 220 2645 63.79%
221 2641 62.63% 221 2645 64.08%
222 2641 62.91% 222 2645 64.37%
223 2641 63.20% 223 2646 64.66%
224 2641 63.48% 224 2646 64.95%
225 2642 63.76% 225 2647 65.24%
226 2642 64.05% 226 2647 65.53%
227 2642 64.33% 227 2647 65.82%
228 2642 64.61% 228 2648 66.11%
229 2642 64.90% 229 2648 66.41%
230 2643 65.18% 230 2648 66.70%
231 2643 65.47% 231 2649 66.99%
232 2643 65.75% 232 2649 67.28%
233 2643 66.03% 233 2650 67.57%
234 2643 66.32% 234 2652 67.86%
235 2644 66.60% 235 2652 68.15%
236 2644 66.88% 236 2652 68.44%
237 2644 67.17% 237 2652 68.73%
238 2644 67.45% 238 2653 69.02%
239 2644 67.74% 239 2653 69.31%
240 2644 68.02% 240 2654 69.60%
9
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE I Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 241 2644 68.30% 241 2655 69.89%
242 2645 68.59% 242 2656 70.18%
243 2645 68.87% 243 2659 70.47%
244 2645 69.15% 244 2661 70.76%
245 2645 69.44% 245 2661 71.05%
246 2645 69.72% 246 2662 71.34%
247 2645 70.01% 247 2664 71.63%
248 2645 70.29% 248 2667 71.92%
249 2646 70.57% 249 2667 72.21%
250 2646 70.86% 250 2667 72.50%
251 2646 71.14% 251 2668 72.79%
252 2646 71.42% 252 2669 73.08%
253 2646 71.71% 253 2672 73.37%
254 2647 71.99% 254 2672 73.66%
255 2647 72.28% 255 2673 73.95%
256 2647 72.56% 256 2673 74.25%
257 2647 72.84% 257 2673 74.54%
258 2647 73.13% 258 2673 74.83%
259 2647 73.41% 259 2674 75.12%
260 2647 73.69% 260 2675 75.41%
261 2647 73.98% 261 2675 75.70%
262 2648 74.26% 262 2676 75.99%
263 2648 74.55% 263 2678 76.28%
264 2648 74.83% 264 2679 76.57%
265 2648 75.11% 265 2680 76.86%
266 2648 75.40% 266 2680 77.15%
267 2648 75.68% 267 2681 77.44%
268 2649 75.96% 268 2681 77.73%
269 2650 76.25% 269 2681 78.02%
270 2650 76.53% 270 2681 78.31%
271 2650 76.82% 271 2683 78.60%
272 2650 77.10% 272 2683 78.89%
273 2650 77.38% 273 2684 79.18%
274 2651 77.67% 274 2685 79.47%
275 2651 77.95% 275 2688 79.76%
276 2651 78.23% 276 2688 80.05%
277 2651 78.52% 277 2689 80.34%
278 2651 78.80% 278 2689 80.63%
279 2652 79.09% 279 2690 80.92%
280 2652 79.37% 280 2691 81.21%
10
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE I Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 281 2652 79.65% 281 2691 81.50%
282 2652 79.94% 282 2692 81.79%
283 2652 80.22% 283 2692 82.08%
284 2652 80.51% 284 2692 82.38%
285 2652 80.79% 285 2692 82.67%
286 2652 81.07% 286 2693 82.96%
287 2652 81.36% 287 2697 83.25%
288 2652 81.64% 288 2698 83.54%
289 2652 81.92% 289 2699 83.83%
290 2652 82.21% 290 2700 84.12%
291 2652 82.49% 291 2702 84.41%
292 2652 82.78% 292 2703 84.70%
293 2652 83.06% 293 2706 84.99%
294 2653 83.34% 294 2706 85.28%
295 2653 83.63% 295 2707 85.57%
296 2653 83.91% 296 2709 85.86%
297 2653 84.19% 297 2714 86.15%
298 2653 84.48% 298 2715 86.44%
299 2653 84.76% 299 2716 86.73%
300 2653 85.05% 300 2718 87.02%
301 2654 85.33% 301 2718 87.31%
302 2654 85.61% 302 2719 87.60%
303 2654 85.90% 303 2719 87.89%
304 2654 86.18% 304 2721 88.18%
305 2654 86.46% 305 2726 88.47%
306 2654 86.75% 306 2727 88.76%
307 2654 87.03% 307 2731 89.05%
308 2654 87.32% 308 2736 89.34%
309 2654 87.60% 309 2738 89.63%
310 2654 87.88% 310 2742 89.92%
311 2654 88.17% 311 2742 90.21%
312 2655 88.45% 312 2743 90.51%
313 2655 88.73% 313 2744 90.80%
314 2655 89.02% 314 2751 91.09%
315 2655 89.30% 315 2752 91.38%
316 2655 89.59% 316 2756 91.67%
317 2655 89.87% 317 2756 91.96%
318 2656 90.15% 318 2760 92.25%
319 2656 90.44% 319 2765 92.54%
320 2656 90.72% 320 2769 92.83%
11
ATTACHMENT (1)
RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
SAFETY INJECTION TANK VERIFICATION FREQUENCY TABLE I Boron Concentration Median Rank Results Projected Data Actual Data (NOT Actual)
I test per month Median 2 tests per year Median Rank Boron in Rank Rank Boron in Rank Order (in ppm) Percentile Order (in ppm) Percentile 321 2656 91.00% 321 2776 93.12%
322 2657 91.29% 322 2780 93.41%
323 2657 91.57% 323 2782 93.70%
324 2657 91.86% 324 2785 93.99%
325 2657 92.14% 325 2801 94.28%
326 2658 92.42% 326 2804 94.57%
327 2658 92.71% 327 2809 94.86%
328 2658 92.99% 328 2810 95.15%
329 2658 93.27% 329 2813 95.44%
330 2658 93.56% 330 2866 95.73%
331 2659 93.84% 331 2869 96.02%
332 2659 94.13% 332 2874 96.31%
333 2659 94.41% 333 2897 96.60%
334 2660 94.69% 334 2927 96.89%
335 2660 94.98% 335 2934 97.18%
336 2660 95.26% 336 2969 97.47%
337 2660 95.54% 337 3010 97.76%
338 2660 95.83% 338 3117 98.05%
339 2661 96.11% 339 3229 98.34%
340 2662 96.40% 340 3253 98.64%
341 2662 96.68% 341 3421 98.93%
342 2662 96.96% 342 3441 99.22%
343 2662 97.25% 343 3486 99.51%
344 2663 97.53% 344 3807 99.80%
345 2663 97.81%
346 2665 98.10%
347 2667 98.38%
348 2667 98.67%
349 2692 98.95%
350 2692 99.23%
351 2692 99.52%
352 2695 99.80%
12