ML17255A305

Forwards Addl Info Requested 830407 Re Containment Pressure Monitor,Containment Water Level Monitor & Containment Hydrogen Monitors Installed Per Requirements of TMI Items II.F.1.4,II.F.1.5 & II.F.1.6,respectively

ML17255A305
Person / Time
Site:	Ginna
Issue date:	06/20/1983
From:	Maier J ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORP.
To:	Crutchfield D Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.F.1, TASK-TM NUDOCS 8306270360
Download: ML17255A305 (19)

Text

REGULATOR+NFORNATION DISTRIBUTION SlEN (RIDE)

ACCESSION NBR;8306270360 DOC ~ DATE ~ 83/06/20 NOTARIZED; .NO DOCKET FACIL:50 244 Robert Emmet -Ginna Nuclear. Pl anti Uni1t li Rochester G 05000244 AUTH>>NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION MAIERiJ>>E>> Rochester Gas 8 .Electric Corp>>

'EiCIP,NAME, RECIPIENT AFFILIATION CRQTCHF IKL~r D ~ Operating Reactors Br anch .5

SUBJECT:

For wards addi info requested 830407 re containment pressure monitoricontainment water level* monitor','L containment hydrogen moni,tors instal,led per requirements of iTNI Items II F>>1>>4e II F 5 4 II F>> l >>6>>

~ ~ ~ 1 ~ ~

./ J DISTRIBUTION COOK: A046S COPIES RECKI YKD:LTR, /ENCL,Q SIZE: *

TITLE: OR Submittal: TAI Action Plan Rgmt NUREG 0737 L;NUREG 0660 NOTESINRR/DL/SEP icy, 05000244 RECIPIENT COPIES REC IP I ENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME. CTTR ENCL ID -CODE/NAME ,LTTR ENCL NRR ORB5 BC 01 "7 7 INTERNAL>> ELD/HDS4 1 0 IK/DEPER DIR 33 IK/DEPKR/EPB 3 3 IE/DEPER/IRB NRR PASLSOh,n. 1 1 NRR/DHFS/DEPY29 NRA/DL DIR 14 1 NRR/DL/ADL l6 NRA/DL/ORAB 18 3 3 NRR/DSI/ADRS 27 NRR/DS I/AEB 1 1 NRR/DS I/ASB-8 I-/R 1 NRR/DST DIR 30 EG FILE 04 1 RGN1-EXTERNAL>> ACRS LPDR 34 03 "05 10 1

10 NRC NTIS PDR'2 INPOiJ>>STARNES 1 1

-1 NSIC 1 1 NOTES: 1 1

.TOTAL'UMBER OF COPIES REQUlRED: LTTR 43 ENCL 42

4

~ I. II I f ~ I

~ II V

I l l SI 4 fN II 1 V

f if%

t zimzzt/ ljpziuztiz(

i uzfE~I~ uzzI! ZZ, ROCHESTER GAS AND ELECTRIC CORPORATION ~ 89 EAST AVENUE, ROCHESTER, N.Y. 14649 JOHN E, MAIER TKLKPHONK Vice President ARKA COOK 7ld 546-2700 June 20, 1983 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. Dennis M. Crutchfield, Chief Operating Reactors Branch No. 5 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

NUREG 0737, Items II.F.1.4, II.F.1.5, II.F.le6 R. E. Ginna Nuclear Power Plant Docket No. 50-244

Dear Mr. Crutchfield:

Your letter dated February 23, 1983 requested additional information concerning the containment pressure monitor, con-tainment water level monitor and containment hydrogen monitors installed to meet post-TMI requirements. Your letter dated April 7, 1983 provided reference material which RG&E had requested con-cerning the evaluation techniques to be used for system reviews.

The enclosure to this letter provides the additional information which you requested in February.

Very truly yours, J. E. Maier 8306270360 830620 PDR ADOCK 05000244 P PDR

~ ~

r<

R

ROCHESTER GAS & ELECTRIC CORPORATION REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON NUREG-0737 ITEMS II.F.le4 CONTAINMENT PRESSURE MONITOR II.F.1.5 CONTAINMENT WATER LEVEL MONITOR II.F.le6 CONTAINMENT HYDROGEN MONITOR (1) EXCEPTIONS BEING TAKEN TO NUREG-0737 REQUIREMENTS (1a) Please indicate any exceptions that you plan to take to the NUREG-0737 items in our scope of review. For each exception indicate (1) why you find it difficult to comply with this item, (2) how this exception will affect the monitor system accuracy, speed, dependability, availability, and utility, (3) if this exception in any way compromises- the safety margin that the monitor is supposed to provide, and (4) any extenuating factors that make this exception less deleterious than it appears at face value.

~Res onse: Previous submittals (October 17, 1979, November 19, 1979, December 28, 1979, October 22, 1980, December 15, 1980, December 30, 1980, November 25, 1981, April 23, 1982) have described the equipment we have installed and identified exceptions to the NUREG 0737 positions. No exceptions other than those previously noted have been identified. There is a change to information which we previously provided concerning the hydrogen monitors. No accuracy requirement for the hydrogen monitoring system is specified in NUREG-0737 although RGSE previously stated that the systems would be accurate to + 2% of the instrument range of 0 to 10% volume concentration of hydrogen. That statement was based upon the manufacturers specification for the equipment. It now appears that the uncertainty of the equipment may be as large as 10% of the monitored range. The accuracy of the system remains adequate, however, for its post-accident function, which is to provide an indication to the operators when it may be necessary to start the recombiners. Procedures can account for the uncertainty in system accuracy so that the rec'ombiners are started at an appropriate time.

(1b) In your letter of December 15, 1980 from John E. Maier (RG8E) to Dennis M. Crutchfield (NRC), you indicate that containment pressure will not be recorded continuously, as required by NUREG-0737, but that recording will be initiated by a Safety Injection or Containment Isolation signal. We find this acceptable and we will not require any further justification from you on this point. Can the control room operator easily initiate and curtail pressure'ecording manually?

1

'1 tl I lf

't I

1 h

, cl, 1 ft pi ',I, '" 'M h'll lt t

~ 1 1 I

II I tf M

lf M tl fl ' I

~ fl 1 '

II t t ~

1 j (h

'I il f 1

~Res onse: Subsequent to our December 15, 1980 letter;.the design of the containment pressure monitor has been modified to provide continuous pressure recording in accordance with the NUREG-0737 position.

(1c) In your letter of December 15, 1980 you indicate that your water level monitor has a capacity of 500;000 gallons, rather than 600,000 gallons as is indicated in NUREG-0737. We understand that the 500,000 gallon capacity is based on the total water inventory available for flooding the containment.

We find the 500,000 gallon capacity acceptable and will not require further justification from you on this point.

~Res onse: No response required.

(2) IFFY 1 ' - PRESURE MONITORING SYSTEM (PMS) - ACCURACY TIME RESPONSE AND (2a) Provide a block diagram of the configuration of modules that make up your PMS. Provide an explanation of any details in the block diagram that might be necessary for an understanding of your PMS accuracy and time response.

~Res onse: See Figure 1 for block diagram (2b) For each module provide a list of all parameters+ which describe the overall uncertainty in the transfer function of that module.

~Res onse: The uncertainty of .the transfer function of each module xs a measure of random inaccuracy only.

(2c) Combine++ parameters in 2b to get an overall system uncertainty. If you have both strip chart recorder and indicator output, give the overall system uncertainty for both systems. If you have systems spanning different ranges, give the overall system uncertainty for each system.

~Res onse:

Module Uncertainties (Ref. Fig. 1):

lA + 0.5% of span 1B + 0.5% of span 1C + 1.5% of span 1D + 0.5% of span Unceitaint of Containment Pressure Indicator and Recorder For conservatism, individual component uncertainties are summed algebraically.

Indicator Uncertainty = 0.5 + 0.5 + 1.5 = 2e5% of span

II lf ,II ll t

P y

1'V 4 ~ ~ ~

v r g

4 'j V

4 q ~,

I N A A w

\ J J

r ll II 1 II d

f

Recorder Uncertainty = 0.5 + 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.5% of span (2d) For each module indicate the time response+++.

For modules with a linear transfer function, state either the time constant or the Ramp Asymptotic Delay Time, RADT.

For modules with an output that varies linearly in time, state the full scale response time. (Most likely the only module you have in this category is the strip chart recorder.)

~Res onse:

Module Time Responses (Ref. Fig. 1):

lA time constant = 0.478 seconds 1B negligible 1C 2.5 sec lD 0.2 sec (3) II.F.1.5 - WATER LEVEL MONITORING SYSTEM (WLMS) - ACCURACY (3a) Provide a block diagram of the configuration of modules that make up your WLMS. Provide an explanation of any, details in the block diagram that might be necessary for an understanding of your WLMS accuracy.

~Res onse: See Figures 2 and 3 for block diagrams.

(3b) For each module provide a list of all parameters+ which describe the overall uncertainty in the transfer function of that module.

~Res onse: The uncertainty of the transfer function of each module is a function of random inaccuracy only.

(3c) Combine++ parameters in 3b to get an overall system uncertainty. If you have both strip chart recorder and indicator output,'give the overall system uncertainty for both systems. If you have systems spanning different ranges, give the overall system uncertainty for each system.

~Res onse:

Narrow Ran e Containment Water Level (Ref. Fi . 2)

Module Uncertainties:

2A + 0.24% of span 2B + 0.25% of span 2C + 0.5% of span 2D + 1.5% of span 2E + 0.5% of span

N

.k L

~ i ~

~g

'i ~ i ff ~

> which describe the overall uncertainty in the transfer function of that module.

~Res onse: The uncertainty of the transfer function of each module is a measure of random inaccuracy only.

1

)

I II f

W

'I e J h

R

~ 1

)

I',4 f, 4, f"

K h

~

'i

~

C

'K

"~y fI Jl l

II + I 'I J (

( ~r

(4.) Combine++ the parameters in 4b to get an overall system uncertainty.

indicator If output, you have both strip chart recorder give the overall system and uncertainty for both systems.

~Res onse:

Module Uncertainties:

4A + 10% of span 4B + .25% of span Uncertaxnt of Containment H dro en Recorder Algebraically Sum Uncertainties. Spans are the same.

+ 10% + + .25% = + 10.25%

Uncertainty as a  % of the full 0-10% range.

(4d) Indicate the placement and number of hydrogen monitor intake ports in containment. Indicate any special sampling techniques that are used either to examine one region of containment or to assure that a good cross section of containment is being monitored.

~Res onse: Ginna Station has two hydrogen sample ports in containment.

Elevation Quadrant 256'3" Northwest 256'3" Northwest No special sampling techniques are used.

(4e) Are there any ob'structions which would prevent hydrogen escaping from the core from reaching the hydrogen sample ports quickly?

~Res onse: The only obstruction which would affect the time required for hydrogen to move from the core to the sample ports is the reactor coolant system pressure boundary. The degree of affect on the transport time of hydrogen depends on the magnitude of the loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) and the location of the break. EPRI Report I NP-2669, Project 1932-8 entitled "Hydrogen Mixing and Distribution in Containment Atmospheres" further shows that there will be a good distribution of hydrogen in containment following a release of hydrogen. Factors contributing to a good mix would be momentum transfer from fluid jets, forced convection, and natural convection.

l W sl l

ll t

,h n II I

I ~h I

'I 1

1 V 1 v

'I C'

s Ib -g

"~

~ ~

PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEM Pressure Transmitter 1A Current/

Current Converter 1B Pressure Pressure Indicator Recorder 1C 1D Range: 10-200 psia FIGURE 1

CONTAINMENT NARROW =RANGE WATER LEVEL MONITORING SYSTEM Transducer/

Transmitter 2A Current/

Voltage Converter 2B Voltage/

Current Converter 2C Level Level Indicator Recorder 2D 2E Range: 0-30 feet FIGURE 2

CONTAINMENT WIDE RANGE WATER LEVEL MONITORING SYSTEM Level Switches 214 inches 3E 180 inches 3D Level Indicator 113 Light Level inches Display Recorder 3C 3F 3G 78 inches 3B 8

inches 3A FIGURE 3

HYDROGEN MONITORING SYSTEM HYDROGEN CONTROL ROOM SAMPLE INDICATION SYSTEM (STRIP CHART W/INDICATION RECORDER)

MODULE 4A MODULE 4B RANGE: 0-10% H 2

FIGURE 4

I