ML17272A804
| ML17272A804 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 02/01/1980 |
| From: | Renberger D WASHINGTON PUBLIC POWER SUPPLY SYSTEM |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RTR-REGGD-01.097, RTR-REGGD-1.097, TASK-OS, TASK-RS-917-4 GO2-80-29, NUDOCS 8002120459 | |
| Download: ML17272A804 (80) | |
Text
REGULATORY NFORNATION PISTRIBUTION S
EN (RIDS)
$ r ACCESSION NBR:8002120459 DOC,DATE; 80/02/01 NOTARIZED NO DOCKET FACIL;50-397 NPPSS Nuclear Projects Unit 2~ Washington Public Powe 05000397 "AOTH,NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION RENBERGER<D,L, Washington Public Power Supply System RECAP ~ NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION DENTONgH,R, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
Forwards comments on Revision 2 to Reg Guide 1.97 L results of facility design review re)ative to proposed guide.
DISTRIBUTION CODE; B001B COPIES RECEIVED L'TR I. ENCL
~
SIZE:
TITLE: PSAR/FSAR AMDTS and Related Cor respondence ES. Pi/: Z ~rS AP~~ &r~
N T KS e ~gy~~yy~y~~~yy~~yg~~~y~~~yyy~~ygy~~~~~~~yy~~yy~~~~~~~ygg~~ygyy~y~yy~~~y~~~~~~yy~~~~ygg ~~~
INTERNAL:
0 REG FILE 06 09 GEOSC IEN BR 11 MECH ENG BA MATL ENG BR 16 ANALYSIS 8A 18 AUX'YS BR 20 I 8
C SYS BR 22 AD SITE TECH 27 EFFL TRT S7S 29 K?RKi'(OOD AD PLANT SYS AD SITE ANLYSIS HYDRO METEOR BR OKLD 1
1 2
2 l) 1 2
2i 1
1 1
1 1
0 i
1 i
1 0
i 0
2 2
1 0
RECIPIENT COPIES ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ACTION:
05 PN N'P~C~
Zi'C CeC r9~4-RECIPIENT ID CODE/NAME AD wcu~
LA~ MWW 02 NRC PDR
~ 08 OPERA LIC BR 10 GAS 12 STRUC ENG BR 15 REAC SYS BR 17 CORE PERF BR 19 CONTAIN 8YS 21 POWER SYS BR 26 ACCDNT AALYS 28 RAD ASNT BR AD FOR ENG AD REAC SAFETY DIRECTOR NAA MPA COPIES LTTR ENCL 0
1 0
1 1i 1
1i 1
1 1
i i
1 iii 0
1 0
1 0
1 0
EXTERNAL! 03 LPDR 30 ACRS 1
1 10 10 04 NSIC 1
1 Ll K,'f costa SPRAT Z D. BJ0 g,8.i5 lF.Feet-Z 1
FEB g> t~eO I
l 1'OTAL NUMBER OF COPIFS REQUIRED:
LTTR ~
ENCL
D I
~
I
~
~
H C)D l
DI
~
~ lpl ll
'D C
Washington Public Power Supply System A JOINT OPERATING AGENCY P. O. BOX 968 3000 GSO. W*SHINCTON WAY RICHI.ANO. WASHINCTON 99352 PHONE 1509) 375.5000 Docket No. 50-397 February 1,
1980 G02-80-29 Mr. Harold R. Denton Director, Nuclear Reactor Regulation U. S.'Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.
C.
20555
Subject:
WPPSS NUCLEAR PROJECT NO.
2 DRAFT 2 of REG.
GUIDE 1.97
Dear Mr. Denton:
On December 14, 1979, WPPSS and other near-term OL BWR Owners met with your staff to discuss the proposed revision 2 to Regulatory Guide 1.97 with respect to their BWR plants.
At the meeting there were many detailed comments of the various parameters in Table 3, HBWR Variables",
and we were asked to put the comments in writing, especially with relationship to our own specific plant designs.
Attachment I is a list of our comments from the aspect of our own WNP-2 Plant (a
BWR).
Due to the potential significance and backfit considerations relative to complete compliance with the proposed guide on WNP-2, we have spent a
great deal of effort in reviewing the WNP-2 design relative to the proposed guide.
Attachment II documents for you the results of this review including estimated cost information (not including cost of schedule slippage).
We feel that Attachment II must be reviewed care-fully by you to understand the basis for our general comments on the guide in Attachment I; Attachment III is a mark-up of the guide itself.
We hope this information is useful to you in development of the Reg.
Guide and we hope you consider them carefully.
We would welcome a
1 '" h(F l ~
HR Denton Page 2
e February 1,
1980 meeting with you at any time to discuss these comments.
We expect to provide further comments on the guide from the aspect of our PWR plants in the near future.
Very truly yours, DLR:OKE:cph D. L.
RENBERGER Assistant Director Technology Attachments:
1.
Comments on Rev.
2 to R.
G. 1.97 2.
Comments on R.G. 1.97 Table 3 Variables 3.
Mark-up of R.G
~ 1.97 cc w/att:
V. Benaroya -
NRC A. Hintze -
NRC L. Kintner -
NRC MD Lynch -
NRC L. Rubenstein NRC E.
Chang - GE/San Jose FA MacLean - GE/San Jose AN Tschaecke GE/San Jose JJ Verderber - Burns 5 Roe/N.Y.
RC Root - Burns 8 Roe/Site JR Lewis Bonneville Power Adm.
ND Lewis - EFSEC/Olympia WNP-2 I.iles
0 h
.l
'5 8
Attachment I CONiRENTS ON REVISION 2 TO REG.
GUIDE 1.97 FROM THE ASPECT OF WNP-2 BWR 5/MK II l.
The WNP-2 Plant is in substantial com liance with the intent
~fh fd.
R f
fd h
I h
h variables requested are monitored appropriately in the WNP-2 design.
Variables which aren't explicitly monitored are covered by another parameter (e.g.
core exit temperature on a
BWR is really adequately monitored by vessel level).
2.
The amount of backfit and cost of im lementation for com lete com liance with R. G.'1.97 on WNP-2 wou e
ar e.
ttach-ment II indicates the estimated costs and work to be done for complete compliance for the individual items.
The total estimated cost not taking into account any costs of schedule impacts or costs of money is approximately
$11,000,000.
If schedule impacts occur, these costs are large and could easily cause the estimated costs to double and triple.
The reason for this is WNP-2 is essentially complete as far as any backfit considerations is concerned and, in this regard, is efiectively the same as an operating plant.
By and large the greatest component to costs is labor.
Equipment and material costs are relatively small.
However, qualification of equipment with the necessary documentation and gA increases material cost by order of magnitude.
3.
The im acts of'the uide'are in the details of im lementation which do not increase safet mar ins si nificantl Though WNP-2 is in substantial compliance w>th the guide, the backfit effort and implementation costs are large due to details, i.e.,
providing emergency power for an instrument, upgrading qualifi-cation and gA documentation, changing ranges, providing redun-dancy, monitoring one specific variable rather than another.
These changes in most instances do not in reality increase safety margins significantly.
d ~
4.
Re..Guide'1.97 is too" rescri tive and doesn't focus enou h
on criteria.
The table 3 variables in essence would become a
fhf ".
Rf h
gh d
h-fd f
f g f h
stifled.
It would be better to provide criteria and request documentation of the design to such criteria in the SAR.
Appropriate criteria are generally in ANS 4-5.
The table 3
variables should be used as examples.
5.
Re
. Guide 1.97 is bein too rescri tive contains re uirements which in instances are arbitrar
, in error, in conflict with current NRC
- uidance, and not ade uatel ustified.
See attachment II for specifics.
The instrument quality and design requirements in Table I should be carefully justified.
They should be commensurate with the safety function or parameter being monitored.
For example, there is no reason for upgrading design requirements in Table I beyond the reasoned approach of ANS 4.5.
Lack of attention in this area increases costs unjustifiably and unnecessarily without commensurate increases in sa fety.
Attachment II Page 1 of 1
CONMENTS ON REG.
GUIDE 1.97 TABLE 3 VARIABLES
~Le end Y
Yes N
No CB Critical..Buss 4.11, 279 - 1971 Refer to Note 8 of Table 1
of Reg.
Guide 1.97 App 8 App B of 10CFR50 Con or Cont Continuous Rec Ind OD UPS gual.
Recorder Indicator, On Demand Uninterruptible Power Supply to cond. of op gualified to Conditions of Operation N/A -
Not Applicable
O' 1.97 - Table 3 Variables
~2.2 I
2%,$
I. Variable - Core Exit Tem erature Page 1
A.
Range - 150 F - 2300 F
B.
Type -
B, C
C.
Purpose - To provide incore temperature measurements to identify localized hot areas; (Approximately 50 measurements)
II. ~WIIP-2 I A.
Instrument Range - No instrument of this type exists at WNP-2.
B.
WNP-2 Design Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out, of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide Y
CBA.ll 279-1,971 N
~A. B CON REC 7
7 WNP-2 Com liance III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Thermocouples would have to be installed in the in-core monitor strings (LPRM's) at 4 elevations in the core.
Designing for single failure, etc.
would be difficult and separation problems would arise under the vessel.
Require unique identification GE estimates
$600,000 and.21-32 months to
- design, purchase and install the equipment.
FIELD CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR COSTS ARE estimated to be APPROX.
$697,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$1,297,000.00 IV. Comments This variable is of littlevalui. in a BWR since core coverage virtually guarantees Fuel'ntegrity.
~
~
(< ~
I. Yariable -
C A.
Range - Full B.
Type -
D
,C.
Purpose - To ins II. ~NNP-2 9
Ol
~3.
9 19 1.91 - I 31 I 9 I
31 tin4 in or not Full in provide pos'ition indication that the control rods are fully erted '(Minimum of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after accident)
A.
Instrument Range -
Full in B.
MNP-2 Design Lights for all rods on full core display Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Rea Guide N
N Y
~Emer
. Power 4.11 279-1971 N
~A. 9 00 YNB N
Y MNP-2 Com liance N
N 1
N 2
UP IN STD TECH SPECS N
N Cont.
LIGHTS N+3 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Mould require environmental qualification of RPIS EQUIPMENT TO INCLUDE PORTIONS of the computer (multiplexer) and cabling.
gualification of sensors and cabling in containment would have to be documented.
GE estimates
$300,000 and 16 months to upgrade the system.
CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR COSTS
=
$23,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$319,000.00.
IV. Comments 1.
WPPSS uses the process computer as a back-up indicator.
2.
The 200 day qual. std.
makes no sense for this instrument.
3.
A certain amount of testing may be performed in line with Tech Specs to meet the intent of R.G.1-118.
4.
Rod position indication is not justified as a Type D variable.
There are many other indicators available to confirm scram.
Operators are taught to
~heck these variables as a priority action in operator training.
c 0
~R.
9 Id 1.97 - 7 bl 3 9 I bl I. Yariable - Neutron Flux A.
Range -
1 c/s to 15 power B.
Type -
B C.
Purpose - ANS-4.5, secti'on 6.2.2 For indication of approach to criticality 1 1.
R~IIIP-2 Il A.
Instrument Range - 10.
to 10 cps B.
WNP-2 Design
- Monitored by Source Range Monitors (SRM's)
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA,level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.,
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide Y
Y Y
CB
~~~ 9-1 931
~ZHr~
WNP;2
~E N+
UPS for Displ ay, N g~~
ECH'PECS'lHILE IN CORE III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Would require seismic and environmental qualification of instrument and detector drive.
Dr ive would require total'edesign to bring it to quality standards.
Drive power source would require change - presently no IE 34 power available.
Require unique ident.
GE estimates
$360,000 and 18-24 months to perform upgrade.
CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR COSTS
=
$18,000.
Total Cost estimate equals
$378,000.00:
IV. Comments 1.
Have 4
SRM s from divisionalized power so, it is in partial compliance with R.G.
1-53 intent.
2.
Can perform checks in SRM in-core per Tech Specs.
meet intent of R.G.1-118 Many unknowns with this item -
GE would assume drive would have to be operable for 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> only - ie, just long enough to drive the SRM's into t'e core and leave them there.
A better solution might be an ex-vessel monitor in the annulus between the sacrificial shield and the vessel.
~R.
2 IR 1.99 - T Yl 3
9 I
91 I. Variable - Reactor Vessel Pressure A.
Range -
15 psig - 2000 psig B.
Type-B, C
C.
Purpdse - ANS-4.5, Secti'ons 6.2.3,6.2.4; 6.3.3 and 6.3.5 - For indication of an accident'and to indicate that action must be taken to mitigate ll. ~IINP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range 1500 psig B.
MNP-2 Design
- Redundant Pressure Recorders l.
2.
3.
5.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.,
Desi n Criteria Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual. per RG 1.89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portable QA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Res Guide Y
Y Y
CB 4,11 2929-1971 N
APP.
B CON REC Y
Y WNP-2 Ccmelieece.
IN TECH SPEC N
APP.B CON REC N
Y III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Recorder has been seismicly qualified by type only.
Requires range change.
Instrument can be respanned without replacement.
Recorder scale must be changed.
Require unique ident.
GE ESTIMATES
$250,000'.
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR COSTS
= $48,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$298,000.
IV. Comments TRANSMITTERS qualified to 1971 criteria.
Qualification under review.
RECORDER QUALIFIED BY TYPE TEST ONLY Maximum pressure reached in analysis is ~1,250 psig for an ATllS.
1500 psig should be adequate then.
~9.319 1.91 131 39 131 I. Variable - Coolant Level in the Reactor A.
Range - Bottom of core support plate to above top of discharge plenum B.
Type -
8 C.
Purpose - ANS-4.5, Section 6.2.3, for indication of fuel submergency for a LOCA event.
9~2 A.
Instrument Range - -150" to 60"
- Redundant level recorders from 1 ft.
just below steam line discharge.
Ol Required by Req Guide Y
Y Y
CB 4.11,279-1971 APP.
B CON REC Y
B.
WNP-2 Design Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule above active fuel to WNP-2
~2 Y@2 Y
&PS
].N THH SPECS
/HAPP.B
?
fGH Y
To cover the active Fuel zone, additional instruments and taps to the vessel will be required.
One tap could be off the Standby Liquid Control System.
Another tap would have to be added.
Require unique identification GE estimates
$800,000 and 24-36 months for design, nurchase and installation of equipment which would compensate for fuel zone level instrumentation inaccuracy.
ESTIMATE CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR COSTS
= $48,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$848,000.
IV. Comments 1.
Refueling level indicator covers range of core but is redundant but taps off jet pump.
Is not accurate with flow through jet pumps
( 12").
2.
Transmitter qual to 1971 criteria (under review) -
RECORDERS tlUALIFIEP BY TYPE TEST ONLY The single new instrument with a tap off the SBLCS in conjunction with the existing refueling level indicator (accuracy
+12"} should be suffictent and would cost less than complete compliance as indicated by GE.
O
~ll.919 1.91-291 39 191 I. Variable - Main Steamline Flow A.
Range -
0 -1PO/ design Flow (4.29 x 10 lb/hr)
B.
Type -
B C.
Purpose -
To provfdezn indication of the integrity of the pressure boundary II. ~INP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range 4.25 x 10 lb/hr 6
B.
WNP-2 Design
- One flow indicator on each mainsteam line Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide Y
4.11 279-1971 N
APP.
B CON REC Y
Y WNP-2 Com liance N
N IliiPS NOT IN TECH SPECS N
NO rON INO NO YES III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires seismic and environmental qualification of transmitters and instru-ment power supplies.
Redundent transmitters would have to be provided.
Re-quiree unique ident. Indicator s would have to be replaced with redundant, qualified recorders.
GE estimates
$250,000 and 15-21 months for upgrade.
ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR = $96,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$346,000.
IV. Comments This instrument is not useful for the purpose stated.
Useful only during first few seconds while there is steam flow and this is dependent on loca-tion of sensor.
MSIV position indication and the MSIV-LCS provide sufficient redundancy and diversity to meet the intent.
~t.did 3.99 iti 30 iti I. Variable-ol System A.
Range -
0 - 15" H20, 0-5 psid B.
Type -
B C.
Purpose - To provide an 'indication of the pressure boundary and containment ii. ~ltNP-2 0
A.
Instrument Range 50 psig, 0 - 0.5 CFM B.
WNP-2 Design l.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Y
Y CE iCT1,279 197il N
APP.
B'ON REC Y
- Single pressure indicator for inboard and single for outboard one flow indicator per system.
Required by
~ti 0 it Req Guide indi'cator WNP-2
~0 Mm UPS
~:CH SPECS H%~
B 713H IND F6 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Replace indicators with seismically qualified recorders.
Require an additional flow sensor and recorder for outboard system.
Require unique ident.
perform seismic and environmental qualification on sensors.
GE estimates
$140,000 and 12-18 months to upgrade.
CONSTRUCTION ANn LABOR COSTS
=
$90,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$230,:000.00 IV. Comments l ~
TRANSt1ITTERS are qualified to 1971 criteria..I gualificalion is under review.
2.
Single failure criteria applies only on a system basis, ie, single indicator for a single system.
~R.
9 id 1.92 - I Ri 3
9 I
Ri I. Variable - Primar S stem Safet Relief Valve Position A.
Instrument Range - Closed - open
- Non-r edundant close-open indication from logic (ADS)
Temperature sensor on tailpipe.
Required by
~Di 2 ii Req Guide B.
MNP-2 Design WNP-2
~2 lSe
~70 UPS IN TECH SPECS N
APP.
B LIcyIB-CONT I
1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.'A level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Y
Y Y
CB 4.11 279-1971 N
APP.B CONT REC Y
Y III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Install redundant acoustic monitors which are qualified seismically and environmentally (Redundancy may not be a requirement in light of Lessons Learned discussions).
Require unique ident. estimated cost -
$425,000 with no schedule impact.
Cost estimated during TtlI Lessons learned effort.
A.
Range - Closed - not closed or 0 to 50 psig B.
Type -
B, D.
C.
Purpose - By these measurements, the operator knows if there ia a path open fOr loss'ofdcoolant and if an event may be in progress.
II. ~999-2 IV. Comments 2.
3.
ADS valves are qualified,to 1971 criteria and are redundant.
(1971 criteria under review)
Partial compliance in line with TECH SPEC surveillance requirements.
NUREG 0578 does not require single failure proof instnumenta'tion.
Back-up will be tailpipe thermocouples.
~3.
GOd 1.91 I 91 I I I
91 sm I. Variable -
di vel in Coolant A.
Range - 10~Ci/cc - 10 Ci/cc B.
Type -
C C.
Purpose -
ANS-4.5, Section 6.3.2.
For early indication of Fuel cladding Failure 'and estimaite of extent of damage.
II. ~939-I 9
A.
instrument Range -
No current instrument.Qi Area Monitors, Main Steam Line radiation Monitors, off-gas B.
>lNP-2 Design pretreatment monitor sampling satisfy intent.
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 WNP-2 Com liance N/A 1
Required by Req Guide Y
lf
~ee6.3.6 of ANS 4-5 CT1, P9-71 NO-but may ge portable APP.B outside containment CON fKC III. Chan es Re uired for Full Compliance,
- Cost, Schedule Install new redundant, qualified monitors adjacent to pipes carrying activity (could be outside containment next to
Require unique ident.
as part of TMI, sampling capability needs to be upgraded to handle 10 Ci/cc.
Monitors have to be calibrated to expected activity in the coolant.
ESTIMATED COST -
$205,000.
IV. Comments l.
Main Steam radiation monitors (which IE, redundant, qualified, etc.)
and the off-gas pre-treatment monitor meet the intent of this instru-ment for immediate detection of Fuel failure.
After isolation true levels of coolant activity may only be taken by sampling.
Indirect measurements of activity may be taken by area monitors. in vicinity of RHR piping.
~lt d
1.91-191 31 191 0
4I
~
~
I. Variable - Primar Containment Pressure I
A.
Range -
10 psia to 3x design press for concrete or 4x design press for steel B.
Type -
B,C C.
Purpose - ANS-4.5, Section 6.2.5, 6.3.3, 6.3.4 and 6.3.5.
For indication of the integrity of the primary containment pr essure
- boundary, to in-II.~IINP-291.d1<<3911211<<9 A.
Instrument Range - 0 2 psig 0 - 100 psig B.
MNP-2 Design Redundant pressure recorders are provided.
10 Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual.
per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.=
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Requir ed by Req Guide Y
Y CB 3FP.F CONT 1KC Y
Y WNP-2
~I
~Yl Q2 7+5 UK IH TECH SPECS KPPB COHT mz.
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Change ranges on both instruments.
Requires unique ident.
Requires re-qualification.
CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR COSTS -
$8,000.
Requalification cost
=
$70,000.
Total cost estimate -
$78,000.
IV. Comments 1.
gualified'o 1971 criteria (under review}
2.
Recorders are seismically qualified by type only, Monitoring more than 105 over design pressure is not useful.
100 psig for MNP-2 is over 2x design pressure.
It would not be prudent to allow containment pressures to exceed design 'allowables by any appreciable margins.
Venting through filters under such conditions (which have not been hypotherized) would be much preferrable to allowing potential cont-ainment breach'y excessive pressure.
~R. Gld 3.32 3 ii 3 i i ii I. Variable -
PRIMARY CONTAINMENT H2 Concentration A.
Range -
0 - 105 B.
Type -
B,C C.
Purpose -
ANS-4.5, Sections 6.25, 6.35.
For indication of the need for and 0 measurement of the performance of the containment hydrogen re-ii. W~NP-2 3
i ii d
if 3
i f
3 i i 3
A.
Instrument Range -
0 - 10Ã W
ll S.
WNP-2 Design Redundant H2 monitor s and recorders.
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
QA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Rea Guide Y
Y CB 4.11 279-71 i N
APP B
CONT REC Y
Y WNP-2 Com 1 iance Y
1 Y
1 MES
~T~H SPECS N
APP.B CONT REC 11 Y
2 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires unique ident.
and requalification (or purchase new monitors).
Estimated total cost
$78,000.
IV. Comments 1.
gualified to 1971 criteria (under review) 2.
As per Tech Specs.
L
~ll
. GHd 1.91 - I 91 3
9 I
31 12 I. Variable -
PRIMARY CONTAINMENT 02 Concentration A.
Range -
0 -
10K.
B.
Type -
8, C
C.
Purpose - For indication of the need for and
= 02 elimination system.
II. ~999-2 Il (for plants with inerted containments) a measurement of the containment A.
Instrument Range -
0 - 25'4 B.
WNP-2 Design Redundant 02 monitors and recorders Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
(}A level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Rea Guide Y
Y Y
CB 4.11 279-71 N
APP.B CONT REC Y
Y WNP-2 Com liance Y
1 Y
1 UPS IN TECH SPECS N
APP.B CONT REC N
Y 2
-III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires unique ident.
and requalification (or purchase new monitors).
Estimated total cost
=
$78,000.00 IY. Comments l.
gualified to 1971 criteria (under review) 2.
As per Tech Specs.
WNP-2 Containment is currently not inerted.
~I
~
~
I. Variable-
~2. Gld 1.91 - 1 91 3
9 I
91 solation Valve Pos'ition 13 Open/closed lights for each remote operable containment isolation valve.
Manual valves are locked closed or open Required by WNP-2 Req Guide
~2 Y
Y 1
Y Y 2 Y
Y D ESELO3 4.11,1971, PER TECH SPECS N
B APP.B APP.B YWT TAB Y+
B.
WNP-2 Design Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule 9
Indicators require seismic qualification.
Require unique identification.
CONSTRUCTION, MATERIAL, ENGINEERING AND LABOR COSTS
= $240,000.
12-18 months required to procure, upgrade and install.
A.
Range -
Closed - Not closed B.
Type -
B, D
C.
Purpose - ANS-4.5, Section 6.2.5.
To indicate the status of containment isolation and to provide information on the status of values in p'rocess lines that 11.~922-29 I
Id dl I
11 2
A.
Instrument Range -
Open/Closed IV. Comments l.
qualified to 1971 criteria (under review).
Indicators (lights) are not qualified.
2.
Meets single failure on system basis, ie, one indicator per valve.
Have inside and outside valves.
3.
Some indicators and relays were supplied from non - IE sources
- This is being revised.
4.
t1eets intent through TECH SPEC surveillance.
~3.9 2
193 TRI 39 231 0,
I. Yariable - Su r ession Pool Water Level A.
Range -
Top of vent to top of weir well B.
Type -
B C.
Purpose - ANS-4.5, Section 6.3.3 II. R~INP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range - -25" to +25" (0 = Normal level)
B.
WNP-2 Design
- Redundant Suppression Pool Level Recorders 14 Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1. 53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
qA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide Y
Y Y
~B 4
11 279-1971 N
BEZEL
~LNN REC Y
Y WNP-2
~9 YQiQ2 IN TECH SPECS N
ILE'M rnid~
REC Y+3 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Range needs to be increased.
Recorders
.are type tested only.
Require unique ident..BWR owners group has committed to monitor water level to the lowest ECCS suction pt.
COST FOR MATERIAL, ENGINEERING, CONSTRUCTION AND LABOR equal
$35,000.
Cost for requalification to current standards
= $78,000.00 Total cost estimate equals
$113,000.00 IY. Comments l.
gualified to 1971 criteria (under review) 2.
Recorders are qualified by type only.
3.
Per Tech Spec 4.
Item was apparently written for a BWR-6/Mark III
~
)
~I
~ll
. GPd 1.97 I 01 3
0 I
01
~0
~
~
I. Yariable -
Su ression Pool Mater Temperature A.
Range F'- 250'F B.
Type -
B C.
Purpose - To ensure proper temperature for NPSH of ECCS.
of the makeup system.
II. ~tlNP-2 0
A.
Instrument Range 50'
- 400'F To verify operation 15 B.
>JNP-2 Design l.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual. per RG 1.89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portable gA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Y
Y Y
CB 4.11 279-1941 N
APP.
B CONT REC Y
Y III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance; Cost, Schedule Redundant temp recorders - monitors 24 points (24 sets of 2 thermocouples each)
Required by
~01 0 it Req Guide WNP-2
~0 YQ Y
UPS PER TECH SPECS B
APP.B CONT.
REC Y+
Requires unique identification.
Cost is minor.
Current design meets NRC criteria.
IV. Comments 1.
,As feasible by Tech Spec. surveillance requirements.
2.
Recorders are seismically qualified by Type only.
~R. Bk 1.91 I 91 I 1 I
91 I. Yariable -
Or well Pressure 16 A.
Range -
12 psia -
3 psig, 0-110$ design B.
- Type -
B, E
C.
Purpose -
ANS-4.5 Secti'on 6.3.3.
Diagnosis of impact of accident on structure.
II. 9~9-9 9
A.
Instrument Range -
Same as Containment pressure.
B.
WNP-2 Design Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
- Portable, 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide
)<NP-2 corn liance III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule
'one - item N/A IY. Comments 1.
Item apparently refers to BWR 6/Mar k III application - N/A for BWR 5/Mark II.
0 I
~R.
9 IR 3.99 I 91 3
9 I
91 I. Variable -
Dr well Drain Sum
.Level (Ident.
and Unident.
Leakage)
A.
Range - Bottom to top B.
Type -
B, C
C.
Purpose -
ANS-4.5, Section 6.3.3 II. W~NP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range See Note Ql B.
WNP-2 Design 17 Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide WNP-2 Com liance III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule None - item N/A IV. Comments 1.
This item apparently written for BWR 6/Mark III application.
Sump drains in BWR 5/Mark II to outside containment and the line is iso-lated on containment isolation - Leakage would end up in Suppression Pool.
Re
. Guide 1.97 - Table 3 Variables WNP-2
~p Y
1 Y
Y 1
t IPS PER TECH SPECS N
APP.B
~OAT
~EC N
Y 2 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Y
Y CB 4.11 279-71 i
N BPKE1
~lI
~UZ Y
Y III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule To gain sensitivity requirement, additional redundant, qualified monitors would have to be placed inside containmeng with an expanded range (probably would require two overlapping detectors).M~
Unique Ident. is required.
Total cost for new detectors, labor, i.nstallation is
$600,000.
I. Variable - Hi h Ran e Containment Area Radiation A.
Range 107 R/t) (60 KeV to 3HeV with +20Ã accuracy)
B.
Type -
B, C
C.
Purpose - To help identi'fy if an accident has degraded beyond calculated values and to indicate its magnitude in order to determine action to protect ii. P~INP-2 2 i 2
p Pi i A.
Instrument Range - 104 R/m.(equivalent to 107 R/m in containment except Xe133).
B.
WNP-2 Design Redundant ion chambers set in biological shield wall outside containment.
Required by
~Pi 2 ii Rea Guide IV. Comments 1.
Seismic and Environmental gualification to 1971 standards (under review)
RECORDERS QUALIFIED BY TYPE ONLY 2.
Per TECH SPECS 3.
WNP-2 meets the intent of these instruments with the ex-containment design and feels strongly that the additional expense of in-containment monitors is not warranted.
The present monitors are located directly next to the steel containment and will be cali:brated to read in-contain-ment doses'hese readings combined with gas samples will provide the sensitivity required.
19
~ll.9 9
1.91-131 39 131 I. Variable - Main Feedwater Flow B.
WNP-2 Design One flow indic'ator per feedwater line Required by Re< Guide L TO COND OF OP)
'HR Desi n
Cr iteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 N
2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 NYtPA 4.
Power Source SldgHGE 5.
Out of Service interval n
6.
Portable N
7.
QA level A.~v.g 8.
Display type OD 9.
Display method INO 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 HO III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule A.
Range 110/ design flow
= B.
Type-E C.
Purpose -
To indicate an adequate source of water to the reactor II. P~IIIP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range
0 to 8.5 x 10 lb/hr WNP-2 Com liance Nll N
Am GFlT THV HO Vill Upgrade QA documentation on Feedwater monitors.
Estimated cost
= $6000.
(assuming new monitors do not have to be purchased).
IV. Comments l.
Even though the feedwater indicators are supplied from emergency
- power, it makes no sense to require it since the system itself is not.
2.
'The QA level of the feedwater system is not QA Class I (App.B) so it makes no sense to require the'indicators to be. If feedwater is being
- used, there are other class I instruments available to verify injection (IE, vessel level).
~9. 9Pd 1.91 I 91 3
9 I
91 I. Yariable - Condensate Stora e Tank Level A.
Range -
Bottom to Top B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose -
To-indicate availabl.e water for core cooling II. W~NP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range 0-35 ft.
B.
WNP-2 Design One level indicator per tank (2 tanks) 20 Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N
~ll UAL TO COND OF OP)
B!ERG PWll N
N APP.B OD IND NO NO WNP-2 Com liance 3!
N N
.N APP.O (j3 IND NO
!IO III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Upgrade gA documentation for CST level monitors.
Estimated cost
= $6000.
(assuming new monitors do not have to be purchased).
IY. Comments
- l. It doesn't make sense to require gA Class I requirements for these instruments since the system is not.
instruments which cause switch over of pump suction to the suppression pool in the event of loss of suction.
~R.R 2 131-131 33 131
~
2 I. Variable - Containment S ra Flow A.
Range -
0 to 1105 design B.
Type -
D C.. Purpose - For indication'f system Operation II. ~RRP-2 3
A.
Instrument Range-B.
WNP-2 Design Same as RHR System Flow Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
APP.B 60 IND WNP-2 Com 1iance N/A III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Four new monitors (2 for drywell spray loops, 2 for wetwell spray loops) appropriately qualified would be required.
Estimate ~ $200,000 for cost and labor for new monitoring system.
IV. Comments l.
Valve position plus RHR flow indicates spray flow.
~R.R 3 197-231 39 lbl I Q
~
I. Variable -
Steam Flow to RCIC 22 A.
Range 110/ Design B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose -
To verify'that adequate steam is available for the sytem to perform its function.
R~INP-2 Il A.
Instrument Range-Variable is not monitored at WHP-2 (or in other BWR-4,5;6 designs B.
WNP-2 Design-Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1;100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of. Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
$I PUPAL TO COND OF 0. )
~:fK'WR UO TlR HO HO WNP-2 Com liance N/A III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires addition of,flow element, transmitter,,
recorder.with appropr~
qualification and gA.
GE estimates
$210,000 with 12-18 months delivery..
CONSTRUCTION, HATL. AND LABOR COSTS
= $ 60,000.
Total:
cost estimate equals
$250,000.
IV. Comments 1.
Steam Line pressure is monitored and provides equivalent information.
I. Yariable -
RCIC Flow
~R. GOd 1.31 I 31 3
1 I
31 23 I I. ~flllP-2 3 A.
Instrument Range -
0 - 700 GPN (678 gpm)
B.
MNP-2 Design Single set ofFlow monitoring instrumentation A.
Range 1105 Design B.
Type -
D C.
Purpose -
For indicatio'n of system Operation Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual.
per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9;
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N Y
EMERG PMR.
PER TECH SPEC N
APP B
OD INO N
Y WNP-2 Com liance N
APP."O CO.'IT INO N
Y III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule gualification upgrade to current criteria.
Estimated cost is
$78,000.00 IV. Comments l.
gualified to 1971 criteria (does not meet 200 day qual} (qual under review)
~
~
~R.
3 ld 1.37
. I 01 3
1 I
01
~
~
I. Variable -
RHR S stem Flow A.
Range -
0 to 110K design (8690gpm)
B.
Type -
D C.
Purpose - For indication of system operation 0
I I. ~RRP-2 0
A.
Instrument Range -
0-10,000gpm B.
WNP-2 Design Single set of flow monitoring instrumentation per loop.
~0i 01 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
Y EHEBJ'I lR KB JFSH SPEC
'2EJk
~E WNP-2 Com
', iance
~2S CH SPFC MKL DPHIL I-II~
Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule gualification upgrade to current criteria.
Estimated cost is
$78,000.00 IV. Comments 1,
gualified to 1971 criteria (does not meet 200 day qual)(gual under review)
25 Re G
de 1.97 Table 3 Variables I. Variable-n er Outlet Temperature A.
Range - 32'F to 350'F B.
Type -
D
~
1 C.
Purpose - For indication of system operation it. ~flNP.2 0
A.
Instrument Range - 660 B.
WNP-2 Design-One monitor per heat exchanger loop N
Tl N
Cont REC
~NA No Required by WNP-2
~oi ci Res Guide
~c 1.
Seis.
qua'i. per RG 1.100 N
2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qUal. per RG 1.89 Y
4.
Power Source
~Emer Power 5.
Out of Service interval Rer tech spec 6.
Portable N
7.
QA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method IND 10.
Unique -Identification No ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Y
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires appropriate qualification, gA on sensors, power source must be changed to come off of an emergency buss.
Est-cost for construction and labor is
$860,000.
gualification upgrade estimated at $78,000.
Total cost estimate equals
$138,000.
IY. Comments This variable 'if of little use.
Primary coolant pressure, RHR flow and service water flow yield desired information.
~R.GOd 1.97-231 39 131 I. Variable -
in Water Temp.
A.
Range -
32 F - 200 F
B.
Type -
D 2
Purpose - For indication of system oPeration I~199-2 3
26 A.
Instrument Range-B.
WNP-2 Design WNP does not have such an instrument 1
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. q'ual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
Y
~Emer Power pRL.~f1 SplBC IHD.
WNP-2
~C N/A HTA
~NA
~NA
~NA
~A III. Chan es Re uired.for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Require installation of qualifie'd, emergency power fed temperature
- sensor, transmitter, and indicator for the total service cooling water temperature (ie service water into ultimate heat sink) - Estimate cost and labor is
$35,000.00.
IV. Comments l.
WNP-2 does monitor the RHR heat exchanger service water outlet.
temperature on a recorder in the control room.
It is not on emergency
- power, however, and the sensor is not environmentally qualifie'd -
other individual service water cooled items are individually monitored by local indicators and alarms.
2.
Service water cooling flow and ultimate heat sinks temp provide the information needed (plus RHR heat exchanger service water outlet per 5'1 above).
27 I. Variable-i Water Flow A.
Range 110'A design B.
Type -
D C.
Purpose -
For indication of system operation I I.
~IINP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range-B.
WNP-2 Design Desi n Criteria No such instrument at WNP-2 I Required by Req Guide WNP-2 Com liance 1.
Seis.
qual.
per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 N
Y Fjner~o wer per.~h spec
~$
N/A IQX'NA MlLL.
Mls.
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Install qualified flow transmitters at Indicators (or standby service cooling water flow at inlet to ultimate heat sink) Est. cost for procurement, labor and qualification is
$40,000.00.
IY. Comments 1.
WNP-2 has pressure monitors at pump discharge.
4l Re
. Guide 1.97 - Table 3 Variables L
~
I I. Variable -
Flow in Ultimate Heat Sink Loop A.
Range -
0 to 1105 design flow B.
Type -
D C.
Purpose -
For indication of system operation II. P~IIIP-2 I 28 A.
Instrument Range-B.
WNP-2 Design Flow in UHS loop is the same as service cooling water flow l.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9 10.'l.
Desi n Criteria Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portable qA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
~mer<m Power ym tech spec App-~
~HO WNP-2 Com liance N/A llTlC
~A MLQ
~gk
~lQ III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule See Service Cooling Water Flow.
IV. Comments
I. Variable-A.
Range-B.
Type-C.
Purpose o
o
~2.9 2 192-291 39 IYI Tem erature in Ultimate heat Sink Loop 30'F to 150 F
D For indication of system operation 29 II. ~WNP-2 3
0 A.
Instrument Range -
0-150 F
B-MNP-2 Design-Two channels of indication per pond Design Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.'A level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N Y
]:mer~ower ggp~ech spec
~D IND No Y
MNP-2
~2 N
N N
UPS Ner tech spec N
N cont IND N
~Her tech spec)
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires qualification of temperature sensors.
Est~17,000 labor and construction for new sensors.
IV. Comments
b
~ I
~
~
I. Variable-A.
Range-B.
Type-C.
Purpose ~
R.Pd i.ii-iiiii i bi i
Ultimate Heat Sinks Level plant specific D
To ensure adequate source of cooling water 30 ii. ~MNP-2 D
A.
Instrument Range -
0-14'.
WNP-2 Design-Two channels of indication per spray pond Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Requ ired by Req Guide N
~Emer ower
~er tech spec N
~AB OD IND No WNP-2
~C N
Ups ger tech spec N
N cont IND 7I
~~er tech spec)
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Requires qualification of detector.
Estimated cost for qualification upgrade equals @8,000.00.
IV. Comments
31
.4 2
I. Variable-
~ll.9 9
1.91-191 39 191
~
~
SLCS Stora e Tank Level A.
Range -
Bottom to top B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose - to provide indication of inventory for boron injection for shutdown.
II. ~NNP-I 9
A.
Instrument Range 5000 gal.
WNP 2 Design - single tank level indicator in control room.
1.'.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11..
Desi n Criteria Seis.
qual.
per.RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual. per RG 1.89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portable QA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N
~Noah' Elmer ower N
N
~AB OD IND N
N WNP-2
~d N
for cond of op.) ~2 N
N N
N C
~ND
~III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Provide source of emergency power-for instrument.
Require qualification upgrade (assume QA documentation upgrade sufficient).
Estimated cost for labor, materials, engineering,
.and upgrade is
$10,000.00.
IV. Comments
32 O
. I 4
~R.
9 9
I 97-791'l 7
97
~
w I. Variable -
Sum Level in s aces of equipment required for safety A.
Range - to corresponding. level of safety equipment failure B.
Type -
D C.
Purpose -
To monitor potential for failure of equipment in closed spaces due to flooding;.
II. ~RRP-9 Il A.
Instrument Range - Non-analog alarm.
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N Y
flDNZ~Ower ggz~ch spec
~D III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule B.
HNP-2 Design - Sump level alarms (non-class IE), high level (Class IE) alarm at floor level WNP-2
~C N/A(See Note 1)
H7JV 87M
~NA
~ll A
~NA
~NA
~NA
~NA
~NA
~NA Addition of an emergency power, level indication system for each sump in the ECCS rooms (4 total).
Estimated cost for new, qualified system is
$97,000.00.
IV. Comments 1.
The 4
ECCS room sumps at MNP-2 employ non-class IE alarm systems.
If the sump overflows on to the floor, a class IE level sensor is actuated-an analysis has been performed that shows the operator has adequate time to isolate any leak source after'the alarm before damage to any IE equipment.
33 4
~ll.9 9 199-291 39 ill I. Variable -
Hi h radioactivit liquid tank level A.
Range -
top to bottom B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose - available volume. to store primary coolant.
I I. ~WNP-2 Il A.
Instrument Range -
top to bottom.
B.
WNP-2 Design - level indication in the Radwaste Control Room.
~d'i ldll i
1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
QA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
~Nual for Ltd' power cond of op)
WNP-2 Com liance N
N N
N N
cont Rec N
N
'II.
Chan es Re hired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Require emergency power for indication and environmental qualifications and QA upgrade.
Estimated cost for labor, materials, and qualification is
$21,000.00.
(Assume documentation upgrade only required.)
IY. Comments l.
- 10CFR50, App B doesn't make sense for non-quality Class I system.
2.
Emerg power doesn't make insense when Radwaste system does not have emerg power.
3.
This 'item is under review as part of TMI lessons learned.
Our judgement would indicate that we would not use these tanks for primary coolant after a large TMI like event without specific study of the condition at the time.
34 I. Variable-A.
Range-B.
Type-C.
Purpose
~WWP-2 9
Charcoal Dela Gas System Gas flow or radioactivity level as required.
E To monitor performances of system.
A.
Instrument Range -
10 106 cpm B.
WNP-2 Design - two post treatment off gas rad monitors.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7 8.
9 10.
11.
Desi n Criteria Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual. per RG 1.89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portables QA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
~Nagual for
~~)ower
'ID N
N cond of op}
WNP-2
~C N
Ups
~er tech spec N
~Ay B
cont Rec N
~H9 er tech spec)
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Hone.
IV. Comments
- l. It doesn't make sense to levy these requirements on a non-Quality Class I system.
35
~
'2 0 Ill -2220 Pill 0 P:P A.
Range -
Open-closed status B.
Type -
D C.
Purpose -
To ensure proper ventilation under accident conditions.
I I.
~WWP2 0
A.
Instrument Range - Full closed, Full open B.
MNP-2 Design - Open/closed indication on all dampers (reactor Bldg 5 Control Room).
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
QA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
g=m~~rPower
~r tech spec 2'.M
~tD HNP-2
~c Y
Diesel
~er tech spec hag.
&201 III~
Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Environmental gualification review.
Estimate for qualification upgrade is
$78,000.00.
IV. Comments 1.
One per damper, 2 dampers are in series to meet single failure.
2.
Per 1971 criteria. (under review), light bulbs are not qualified.
36
~3.3 2
1.31-231 31 131 I. Variable -
Tem erature of s ace in vicinity of equipment required for safety, A.
Range -
30 F to 130 F
B.
Type -
B (1)
C.
Purpose -
To monitor environmental conditions of equipment in closed spaces.
~flllP-2 3 A.
Instrument Range -
50 F to 400 F (various ranges dependent on area)
B.
WNP-2 Design - Redundant space temp monitors are provided.
provided with suitable inputs for each'ivision.
Required by
~di 2
1 Req Guide 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 Y
2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual.
per,RG 1.89 Y
4.
Power Source
~B 5.
Out of Service interval pm~. 11,279-71 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type
~a 9.
Display method Uhc 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule A single meter is WNP-2 Com liance Y
~(2)
~(2)
UPS p~r tech spec
~E Replace meter module with qualified recorder, provide unique ID.
Provide qualified sensors and indicators for critical meter control center and switchgear rooms in the Reactor Building.
Estimated cost for materials, qualification upgrade,
- labor, and engineering is
$415,000.00.
GE estimates
$210,000.00 and 12-18 months of schedule for its scope of supply.
\\
IV. Comments 1.
Is 'D'nder Table 2
'PWR variables'.
Recommend this be 'D'lso.
2.
Qualified per 1971 criteria (under review).
~ ~
~
~
37 Re G
. de 1.97 - Table 3 Variables
~
I I. Variable -
.- Status of Class IE Power Supplies and Systems A.
Range -
Voltages and Currents.
B.
Type -
0 C.
Purpose -
To ensure an adequate source of electric power for safety systems.
t~tllP-2 0
A.
Instrument Range - voltage, current B.
QNP 2 Design - Each safety related Buss is monitored for voltage or current, or both.
l.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
.8.
9 10.
11.
Desi n Criteria Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual.
per RG 1.89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portable QA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Rect Guide N
Bmerg power per tech spec
~AB OD IND N
Y WNP-2
~C Y (1)
~1)
UPS t! Diesel N
N N
Cont IND N
Y III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule
" Upgrade qualification of readout devices.
Assume QA 'documentation upgrade will be sufficient.
Estimated cost is $6,000.00.
IV. 'Comments 1.
Per 1971 cr iteria (under review), readout devices are qualified by type only.
38
~9.R 9
1.97-131 39 131
~
~
I. Variable -
. Status of Non-Class IE Power Supplies A.
Range -
Voltages and Currents.
B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose -
To indicate adequate source of electric power.
II. I~<IIP-2 Il A.
Instrument Range -
Voltages, currents B
MNP-2 Design - Each non-class IE Buss of 4KV or greater is monitored.
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N
~Nual for cond
~Emer power (1)
N 1
I'I
~ND (2)
OD IND N
N of op)
MNP-2 Com liance N
cont
~ND III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Provide special Buss monitoring indicators.I Assume only action will be to upgrade gA documentation.
Estimated cost equals
$6,000.00.
9 IV. Comments 1.
This doesn't make sense since instruments are powered from Buss.
2.
App B doesn't apply for Non-quality Class I equipment.
39 I. Variable-A.
Range-B.
Type-C.
Purpose Radiation Ex osure Rates 101 to 104 R/hr for photons.
(1) (3)
E For measurement of high-range radiation exposure rates at various locations.
B.
WNP-2 Design
- Area monitors throughout buildings (4)
Required by
~Di 91 Req Guide N
N(qua) for cond of op)
Elmer ower~
N N
~pD (6)
D IND 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule II. R~INP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range -
10-3 to 10 R/hr(some higher dependent on area)
WNP-2 Com 1iance N
N (2)
N N
~con
~ec Require addition of approximatejy 6 high range monitor.
Upgrade gA qualification, provide emergency power.
Total estimated cost for labor, material, and gA equals
$146,000.00.
IV. Comments
- l. It doesn't make sense to be prescriptive. on range here.
It should be dependent on maximum possible dose.rate for the area monitored.
2.
Specified for environment in which monitor is located 3.
Calibration above 102 R/hr is virtually impossible.
4.
Backup provided by portable instruments 5.
Emergency power shouldn't be required where backup can be provided by portable instruments.
6.
- 10CFR50, App.
B doesn't make sense for non guality Class I instruments.
40 B.
WNP-2 Design l
~R.
9 IR 1.97 I 37 3 7 I
37 1
2
~
I. Variable - 'ffluent radioactivity - Noble gases-containment exhaust vent and SBGTS vent A.
Range -
10-7 to 105ACi/cc xe 133 B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose -
ANS - 4.5,. sect.. 6.2.6 to provide operator with information regarding release of radioactive noble gases on a continuous basis
.II.
~WNP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range -
low range 10-7 to 3 X 10-2AC'/cc (xe 133) 2.
high range 2 X'10 2 to 2 X 10 QCi/cc (xe 133)
Two channels for high range elevated release Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11..
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Rea Guide N
~~al for cond Emer~ower Qadi B (1)
~IN N
N of op)
WNP-2 Com 1iance N
N Ups per tech spec N
N cont Rec N
H III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Reposition one of the high range detectors to increase range qualification records.
Estimated cost for labor, materials, equals
$ 18,000.00.
to 105/(Ci/cc upgrade engineering, and gA IY. Comments l.
10 CFR 50, App B doesn't make sense for non-qual Class I instruments.
2.
WPPSS feels that 2
X 104jfCi/cc is sufficient upper range for the BMR 5/I1KII containment/Reactor Bldg, configuration.
O O
~R.
9 19 1.91 - I b1 3
3 I bI 1
I. Variable -
Effluent radioactivity - Noble gases
- other points A.
Range
10 I to 102QCi/cc (xe 133)
(2)
B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose -
ANS-4.5, Section 6.2.6 II. ~IINP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range -
10 to B
X 10 2j(Ci/cc (xe 133)
B.
WNP-2 Design - Monitors on Turbine Bldg and Radwaste Bldg Exhaust Duct 41 l.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Desi n Criteria Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual. per RG 1;89 Power Source Out of Service interval Portable QA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
~Nual to cond of op)
Elmer ower N
N
~AB (I)
OD IND N
N WNP-2
~Corn 1 i;--:e N
N UPS N
N N
cont Rec N
ii III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Add additional detectors (2-one for each location).
High range detectors can be placed on the duct or added to the present off line gas monitors to gain the extended range.
Estimated cost for labor, material, engineering, and gA equals
$54,000.00.
IV. Comments r~
f acct C.~m Z.
< urrde~my (2) range should not be prescribed.
42 O
~R.9 19 1.97 191 39 191
~
~ e
~
I. Variable -
Effluent radioactivity - high range radiohalogens and Particulates A.
Range -
10 to 102/(Ci/cc B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose -
to provide the operator with information regarding <<release of radioactive halogens.and particulates.
II. ~MNP-2 9
A.
Instrument Range -
N/A (2)
B.
MNP-2 Design -
3 effluent monitors - particulate and iodine filters can be removed for lab analysis l.
2.
3.
4.
--5;
,6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Desi n Criteria Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 Sing. failure per RG 1.53 Env. qual. per RG 1.89 Power Source
~ Out of Service interval Portable gA level Display type Display method Unique Identification Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N
~NDual for
~Emer power N
N
~AB (1)
OD IND N
N cond of op)
WNP-2 Com liance N/A 7m('n(
mtTII
<<<<7Ã N/A H7%
H7%~
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule For effective on live monitoring; 3 new particulate monitors would be required downstream of. filter systems on the exhaust streams.
Estimated cost for labor, material, engineering, and gA equals
$424,000.00.
IY. Comments l.
10CFR50 App B doesn't make sense for non-quality Class I systems.
2.
In plant particulate monitors upstream of filters monitor exhaust stream air to high sensitivities.
Since Turbine building employs no filters, these units monitor particulate environmental release at low levels.
43 a>
w I
I. Variable-A.
Range-B.
Type-C.
Purpose
~R.
2 12 1.31 I 31 3
3 I
31 Environs radioactivity - Exposure rate 10-6 to 102 R/hr E
For estimating release rates during an accident from unidentified release paths (not covered by affluent monitors)
II. ~flNP-2 2
A.
Instrument Range -
10 to 10-2 R/hr(2)
B.
WNP-2 Design - 9 ion chambers for WNP-1,2, gl 4.
Only one powered from WNP-2.
Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification 11.. Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
~Nual for Elmer ower N
~AB (1)
OD IND N
N cond of op)
WNP-2 Com liance N'
N
~con INO III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule BWR 5/HK II Design satisfies intent (see note 2). If not, add 20 units around site environs.
The cost is not estimated.
The instruments above to cover 20 locations for the range requested would be
$400,000.00.
To this would be the cost of small shacks with air conditioning, heating, cabling, labor, etc:
The cost would easily go over
$ 1 mill.ion (or a small return.of benefit)'.
IV. Comments 1.
10CFR50 App B doesn't make sense (or non-quality Class 1 systems) 2.
BWR-5NKIIs.cover all effluent release paths with monitors due to primary containment being located entirely within a secondary containment and e'ffluent monitors on all release points (secondary containment, Reactor Building, Turbine Building, Radwaste Building).
3.
Emerg power should not be required where portable instruments can provide satisfactory back up.
t ~
~ g
44
~
~R.
9 19 1.97 I 01 I 7 I
01 I. Variable-tivity-Radiohalogens and Particulates A.
Range -
10 to 103ACi/cc B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose - For estimating release rates of radioactive materials released during an accident from unidentified release paths (not covered by effluent monitors).
I I. ~IINP-2 0
A.
Instrument Range -
N/A (analysis)
B.
WNP-2 Design - One sampler located at the same location as the 9 ion chambers.
Samples must be removed for analysis.
Required by WNP-2
~0i C
Req Guide
~C 1.
Seis. qual. per RG 1.100 N
N 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89
~N qual cond of op) 4.
Power Source
~merg power 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable N
7.
gA level
~pp (1) 8.
Display type 1)D conE 9.
Display method
~l'LD
~amp e
10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule BWR 5/MK II Design satisfies intent (see Note 2). If not, add 20 samplers around site, environs.
See the comments on the previous page for cost.
The cost for 20 samplers above would be
$80,000.00.
IV. Comments 1.
2.
3.
10 CFR 50, App B doesn't make sense for non-quality Class I systems.
See Note.(2) on previous page.
Emerg.
power should not be required where portable instruments can provide satisfactory back up.
~
~
e
~
g
45
~d.did 7.37-737 37 idi I. Variable -
Plant and Environs Readioactivity (portable instruments)
A.
Range -
High Range-0. 1 to 10 R/M, 0!.1 to 10" rads/M b and low energy B.
Type -
E C.
Purpose - During and following accident, to mointor activity throughout facility where stationary monitors are inprhctical.
~IINP-2 3
A.
Instrument Range-B.
WNP-2 Design Portable instruments and a multi-channel analyzer will be available at WNP-2 Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Displ ay-type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 Required by Req Guide N
N
~~Nual for N/A N
Y
~AB (I)
N/A
~NA NPPN
'NA cond of op)
WNP-2 Com liance N
N Tl77i lf N
N,g KTK III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule None.
IV. Comments l.
10 CFR 50, App B doesn't have meaning for portable instruments.
2.
Portable instruments reading >1000 R/M are not practical considering human exposure.
46
~g.did 1.91-lbl PY 1 bi I. yariab]e Post Accident Sampling Capability A.
Range -
As required based on Reg-Guide 1-3 guidelines (x-ray spectrum, PH,H2 02)
B.
Type -
E purpose - ANS-4.5, Section 6.3.2.
to provide means for safe and convenient sampling.
These provisions should incl'ude shielding (ALARA), sampling containers Il.~flNP-2P 1
P lbl
/
Pll gd 1, Pbllltl't Pl d
P 2
gP handling and transport capabil-ity, pre-arrangement for analysis 8 interpretat-A.
Instrument Kange-ion.
Sampling is providedcontainment air effluent vents, and primary B.
WNP-2 Design coolant Desi n Criteria l.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG l.ll8 Required by Req Guide N
%(qual for Emerg power
~pp 79K H7K H7K WNP-'2
~g See Note 1
See Vote 1
cond of op)
~ee emote 1
See7lote 1
See~ote 1
~ee Vote 1
'.<<ee Rote 1
~ee lote 1
SeeMote 1
~ee ote 1
~ee ote 1
III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule gdd containment penetrations, add additional coolant and suppression pool sample lines, shield sample lines, provide special radiological analysis lab.
Provide emergency power, for sampling capability.
Estimated cost (in connection with Th11 lessons learned) for engineering, materials,
- labor, and gA is
$2.5 million.
IV. Comments 1.
This item is under review in connection with THI 2 lessons learned in
. response. to NUREG 0578.
NRC position should be compatible with 0578.
47 I. Variable-A.
Range-B.
Type-C.
Purpose
~2.
9 ld 1.97 I 91 3 9 I
31
)1eteorology Mind Direction, Wind Speed, Temperature, Vertical Temperature Diff, o
+
ss 0-300
, 0-30 mps-60 F to 120 F, -9 F to 9 F, recording rain guage E-For determining weather conditions.
II.
~flN -2 II O
0-540
, 0.6-60 mph, -30'F to 130 F, -10 F to 10 F, recording rain guage Recorders for all measurements in Met Tower Shack readouts in Q
control room (recorders) provided for all measurements except precut[
Required by WNP-2 Req Guide
~C N
N
~Nqual for cond of op)
Elmer powerQ)
N N
pp ~i im
~con le) iiec fi A.
Instrument Range-B.
WNP-2 Design Desi n Criteria 1.
Seis.
qual. per RG 1.100 2.
Sing. failure per RG 1.53 3.
Env. qual. per RG 1.89 4.
Power Source 5.
Out of Service interval 6.
Portable 7.
gA level 8.
Display type 9.
Display method 10.
Unique Identification ll.
Periodic testing per RG 1.118 III. Chan es Re uired for Full Com liance,
- Cost, Schedule Provide emergency power for MULTIPLEXERS IN REACTOR BLDG.
This requires new multiplexer cabinets.
Estimated total cost for engineering,
- labor, and gA is
'$162,000.00.
IV. Comments 1.
10 CFR 50, App B doesn't make sense for non-guality Class I instruments.
2.
Emerg power shouldn't be required if appropriate back-ups are available on the Hanford reservation, DOE maintains a t1et Tower.
3.
WNP-2 is located in the desert, so control room precip recording is not considered appropriate.
e
Attachment III MARK-UP OF REG.
GUIDE 1.97*
- Table 2 not included.
ocl.ip h
~ npv rn.-!~revnii
~ ~
~
bv>>
~ ~
~
v I IO i ~
vvoit lima o'U ~ ~
OFFI OF STANDARDS DEVELOPl1EHT Dece&ier 1979 DRAFT REGULAT GUIDE AND YALUE/IllPACT STAT i)EHT Oivi'.ion 1 Task RS 917-4 t t.
A.
S. Hintze f.":0 ~<-"~3 PROPOSED REVISION 2" TO REGULATORY GUIDE 1.97 INSTRUMENTATION FOR LIGHT-MATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS TO ASSESS PLANT AND ENVIRONS CONDITIONS..DURING AND FOLLOWING AN ACCIDENT A.
INTRODUCTION
'I Criterion 13, "Instrumentation arid Control," of Appendix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power P1ants,"
to 10 CFR Part 50, "Domestic Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," includes a requirement;that instrumen-tation be provided to monitor variables and systems fol accident conditions as appropriate to ensure adequate safety.";
Criterion 19, "Control-Room," of Appendix A to 10 CFR-Part 50 includes a
requirement that a control room be provided from which actions can be taken to maintain the nuclear power unit in a safe condition~under accident conditions, including loss-of-coolant accidents, and that equipments"including the necessary instrumentation, at appropriate locations outside-'thI: control room be provided v
...with a design capability for prompt hot shutdownmf.the reactor.
Criterion 64, uHonitoring -Radioactivjty;.Releases,n of Appendix A to 10 CFR I'
Part 50 includes a requirement that meatus b'j~grovided for monitoring the reactor containment atmosphere, spaces containing.comp'onents for recirculation of loss-of-coolant accident,. fluid, effluent~dihcharge
- paths, and the plant environs gf E.q for radioactivity that may be released from postulated accidents.
<riting to the U.S. Huclear Regulatory Commission, t'ashington, O.C.
20555, Attent.ion:
- Oirector, Oivision of Technical information and Oocument Control.
~A B.
DISCUSSION
~
~
L 4
1 Indications of plant variables and status of systems important to safety are required by the plant operator (li'censee) during accident situations to (1) provide information required to permit the operator to take preplanned manual actions to accomplish safe plant shutdown; (2) determine whether the t'eactor trip, engineered-safety-feature
- systems, and manually initiated systems are performing their intended functions (i.e., reactivity control, core cooling, 4
~
maintaining reactor coolant system integrity, and maintaining containment integrity); (3) provide information to the operator that will enable him to determine the potential for causing a breach of the barriers to radioactivity
~
~
release (i.e., fuel" cladding, reactor. coolant pressure
- boundary, and containment) and if a barrier has been breached; (4) furnish data for deciding on the need to take unplanned action if an automatic or manually ini qiated safety system is not.functioning properly or the plant is not responding properly to the safety systems in operation; and (5) al'low for early indica~ion of the need to initiate
~l f
~
action necessary to protect the public and for an estimate of the magnitude of the impending threat.
At the start of an accident, it may be difficult for the operator to.deter-mine immediately what accidetIt has occurred or is occurring and,'there<ore, to
-determine the appropriate response.
For this reason, reactor trip and certain other safety actions (e.g.,
emergency core cooling actuation, containment isola-tion, or depressurization) have been designed to be performed automatically l
during the initial stages of an accident.
Instrumentation is also provided to indicate information about plant parameters required to enable the operation of manually initiated safety systems and other appropriate operator actions involv-ing systems important to safety.
Instrumentation is also needed to provide information about some plant parameters that will alert the operator to conditions that have degraded beyond those postulated in ~he accident analysis.
In particular, it is important that the operator be informed regarding that status of coolant level in the reactor vessel or the existence of core voiding that would indicate degraded core cooling.
'Qgekc-l4yt'C~
+ sWe.
LQ Qgg
~1k'I
'1 It is essential that degraded conditions be identified so +hat the operator can take
C>>
w o'ii a
e>>
le I g>> v>>n 'a
~ ootq>>eeo>>ev i>>
Iw v I II4CIIGeQ anal the operator be encouraged to prematurely circumvent systems importa t to f
but that he be adequately informed in order that unplanned
-ctions can be taken when necessary.
. Examp1es of serious events that could threaten safety-are loss-of-coolant accidents (LOCAs)., overpressure transients, anticipated transients without scram (ATMS), reactivity excursions, and releases of radioactive materials.
Such events require that the operator understand, within a short time period, the ability of the barriers to limit radioactivity release, i.e., the potential for 'b'reach of' barr ier, or an actual breach of a barrier by an accident in progress.
It is essential that the required instrumentation be capable of surviving the accident environment in which it i0 1'ocated for the length of time its func-tion is required C
~
4
~
~
~
V%
i4 4
II It could therefore either be designed to withstand the accident environment or be protected by a local protected environment.
If the environment surrounding an instrument component is the same for accident and normal operating conditions (e. g.,
some instrumentation components outside of containment or those in the main con rol room powered by a Class 1E source),
the instrumentation components need no special environmental qualification.
~lg lies
~4 hag dVq,~
w s ae Ho%
I'4 CCCQn 4~ I.
. ksc~a J
~ ~
~
J.
4 4
4 Gaea~
I Parameters selected for accident monitoring can be selected so as to permit relatively'ew instruments to provide the essential informaticn needed by the operator for postaccident monitoring.
Further, it is prudent that a limited
'Copies may be obtained from the American Huclear Socsei,
- Avenue, La Grange Par k, Illinois 60525.
Although this standard has been balloted by the responsible subcommittee and reviewed by ihe responsible cen-ser sus body, Draft 4 does not reflect the resolution of all comments.
A sub-sequent draft is intended to address the comments that formed the basis of tf e negative subccmmit ee ballots.
h+~+
I 4~~+6~ s tgmtK~4 number of those parameters+P.g.,
containment pressure, priory system pressure)
~
hCs mOnitOred bV inStrumentS Oval ified tO mOre Stringent ssnVi VOnmsantel s eess4 v n ments and with ranges.that extend well beyond that which the selected parameters can attain under limiting conditions.
It,is essential that the range selections
, not be arbitrary but sufficiently high that the instruments will always be
~gmesat St f on scale; for example, a range for the containment~~
monitor extending Rye se, espc4 es
+ago e LOCA in order that the operator will not be cenSansstaw>
g'Ww%m~
pea~@.(S csssaEF+~f blind as to Provisions of such instruments are important so that responses to correcti.ve actions can be observed and the 3
need for, and magnitude of, further actions determined.
On the other hand, it is also necessary to make sure that when a range is extended, the sensitivity
~,
. and accuracy of the insti ument are within acceptable limi'ts.
Normal power plant instrumentation remaining functional for all accident
/
1 conditions can provide 'indication, records, and (with pertain types of instru" s
1 ments) time-history responses for many parameters important to following the t
course of the accident.
Therefore, it is prudent to select the required accident-.
I monitoring instrumentation from the normal power plant instrumentation to enable I
the operator to use, during accident situations, instruments with which he is most familiar.
Since some accidents,impbse severe operating requirements, on..instrumen-J tation components, it may be necessary to upgrade those instrumentation components s(i to withstand the more severe operating conditions and to measure greater variations s
~
of monitored variables that may be associated with the accident if they are to be s
used for both accident'nd normal operation.
However, it is essential that instrumentation so upgraded does not compromise the accuracy and sensitivity required for normal operation.
In some cases, this will necessitate use of overlapping ranges of instruments to monitor the required range of the parameter t
~
to. be monitor'ed.
Draft Standard ANS-4.5, Draft 4 dated November 1979, delineates criteria for determining the variables to be monitored by the control room operator, as required for safety, during the course of an accident and during the long-term stable shutdown phase followng an accident.
Draft Standard ANS-4.5 was prepared by Working Group 4.5 of subcommittee ANS-4 with two primary objectives:
(1) to address that instrumentation that permits the operator to monitor expected parameter changes in an accident period and (2) to address extended range instrum ntation deemed appropriate for the possibility of encountering previously unforeseen events.
eraul~s p~ <<Q
A ~
W
~
~
f g Pg (
t
~ IV f 0
<<Pq<<
~ <<<<
~
~ (
~ gJ of aiding the. designer in his selection of 'accident-monitoring instrumentation and applicable criteria.
The types are:
(1) Type A - those variables that provide informa-tion needed for preplanned operator actions, (2) Type 8 - those variables that provide information to indicate whether plant safety functions are being accom-
- plished, (3) Type C - those variables that provide information to indicate the potential for 'being br eached or the actual breach of the barriers to fission p".oduct release, i. e., fyel cladding, primary coolant pressure
- boundary, and containment, (4) Type 0 - those variables that provide information to indicate h+Nhtqp~) Type Ep (g alde4 g 94(g aeq~t~t i the perfora nce of individual safety systems,geek (5) T+e E - those Fariables to be monitorea as required for use in determining the magnitude of'he release
~ ~
of radioactive materia.s and for continuously asses4ing such releases, for providing deMnse in depth, and for diagnosis.
Type R variables have not been included in the listings of variables to be measured because they are plant specific and will depend on the operations that the designer chooses for pre-planned manual action.
The five classifications are not mutually exclusive in that a given variable (5r instrument) may be included in one or more types, as well as for normal powerjplant operation or for automatically initiated safety actions.
Mhere such multiple listing or use occurs, it is essential that instrumentation be capable of meeting the most stringent requirements.
The time phases (Phases I, II, and III) delineated in.ANS-4.5 are not specified for each variable in this regulatory guide.
These considerations are plant specific.
It is important that the required instrumentation survive the accident environment and function as long as the information it provides is needed by the plant operator.
~
REGULATORY POSITION
'he criter ia, requirements, and recommendations (identified as important to safety) contained in Draft Standard ANS-4.5, "Functional Requirements for Accident Monitoring in a Nuclear Power Generatino Station," Draft 4 dated November 1979, are considered by the NRC staff to be generally acceptable poS+-
<<r providing instrumentation to monitor variables and systems for>accident
~ ~
~
J J
J J
J J
condltlonsa CC E'
q m4
~ i
\\
4
~
r
~ ~>
~
em p a
~
<<pa ~
~
~ J U
a'.
Section
- 2. 0 of ANS-4. 5 defines the scope of the standard as contain-
'ing criteria for determining the variables to be monitored by the control room operator during and following an accident that will need some operator action.
Consideration should be given to the additional requirements (e.g.,
emergency planning) of variables to be monitored by the plant operator (licensee) during and following an accident.
Instrumentation selected for use by the plant opera-tor for monitoring conditions of the plant is useful in an emergency situation and for other purposes and therefore should be factored into the emergency plans action level criteria. '.
3.
Section 0 of ANS-4. 5 efines design basis acciden events.
In conjunction wit th~fesign b sis accident e ents delineat in the stan rd, those events hat are expe ed'o occur o
or more time during the 1 fe of a nuclear p wer unit and i lude but are t limited to oss of power o all recirc ating pumps, ipping of the urbine genera r set, isola on of the main condenser, and oss of all offsite power should be included 9h <<gh+
Out
%if see She oin%
yl iS<<~s.
- g. +
- Section 4.2 of ANS-4.5 discusses the various types of variables.
4 e
Q + fC o
4
~
~ 4
~
4L pubs<
They are,'owever, along with those of an additional type, Type E, included in this regulatory guide.
(See Tables 1, 2, and 3.)
8-S.
Section
- 6. 1 of ANS-4.5 pertains to General Design Criteria for instru-mentation monitoring Types A, B, and C variables.
In conjunction with Section 6 -i
. 2.
In Section 3.0 of ANS-4.5, the definition of "Type C" includes two
- items, (1) and (2).
Item (1) includes those instruments that indicate the extent to which parameters that indicate the potentia) for a breach in the N
containment have exceeded the design basis values.
In conjunction with the parameters that indicate the potential'or a breach in the containment, the parameters that have the potential for causing a breach in the fuel cladding (e.g.,
core exit temperature) and the reactor coolant pressure boundary (e.g.,
reactor coolant pressure) should, al'so be included.
References to Type'C instru-
,, i,
- ments, and associated parameters to be measured, in Draft Standard ANS-4.5 (e.g.,
Sections 4.2, 5.0, 5.1.3, 5.2, 6.1, 6.3) should include this expanded deiinition. ~lac:.
auide.
. 's
~ <<r J,
e e
I ~
~ ',nstrumentation monitoring Types 0 and E variables should also be it eluded.
C
~
~ V I' S
~ I ~
~ 5 p ~lc+e.
m4%r cy ~<41 lo Se tion 6. 1. 2 of A S-4. 5 pertains to the duration that instrumentation F.::-:-'::.=:::
qual ifi d to function.
In conjunct on with Secti
- 6. 1. 2, Phase II instr en-I tation s ould be qualif d to functi for not less than 200 day unless a
horter
- time, sed on need or component a
essability f replacement r repair can be ju tified.
7.
Sections 6.2.2, 6.2.3, 6.'2.4, 6.2.5, 6.2.6, 6.3.2, 6.3.3, 6.3.4, and 6.3.5 of ANS-4. 5 pertain to variables and variable ranges for monitoring.
In conjunction with the above sections, Tables. 1, 2, and 3 of this regulatory guide (which include those parameters mentioned in the above sections) should be us'ed in developing the minimum set of instruments and their respective ranges for ac"ident-monitoring instrumentation for each nuclear power plant.
Se ion 6. 4.of ANS 4.5 pertai to specific desi n criteria or accident-monitorin instrumentatio In conj ction with Secti 6.4, the ovisions as indicate in Table 1 of his regula ory guide should be used.
Defe+c
+4lo~<
wlrewq \\5 ~pp~P>%4e 1$
D.
IMPLEMENTATION ~s ~. s
~
I'hi s proposed revision has been rel eas ed to encourage publ ic par ticipa-tion in its devel opment.
Except i n those cases i n which an appl icant proposes an acceptable al ter nati ve method for comp lying with spec ified portions of the Commi s s ion '
regul ati ons, the method to be descr ibed in the acti ve guide reflecti ng publ ic comments will be used i n the eval uati on of the fol 1 owi ng appl icati ons that are docketed after the impl ementati on date to be speci fied in the guide:
1.
Pre 1 imi nary Des ign Approval ( POA) appl icati ons and
're 1 imi nary Dupl icate De s i gn Approval ( PDDA) appl icati ons.
2.
Fi nal Des i gn Approval, Type 2 ( FDA-2),
app 1 icati ons and Fi nal Oup 1 icate Des ign Approval, Type 2 ( FDDA-2 ),
app 1 icati ons.
3.
Manufactur ing License (ML) appl icati ons.
Constructi on Permit (CP ) appl icati ons except for + hos e portions of CP app licati ons that reference stardard des igns (i. e.,
POA FOA-1, FOA-2,
PDDA,
FDDA-1, FDDA-2, or ML) or that reference qua 1 ified base plant des igns under the replication'ption.
g 4
~.
In addition, the NRC staff intends to implement part or all of this guide
-e-,a='.;- p'an=s, p a-~s under cons~ruction, ai i ru~s ano riiAs, a'i i PDDAs and all FDDAs that may involve additions, elimination, or modification of structures, systems,'r components of the facility after the construction permit or design approval has been issued.
All backfitting decisions in accordance with the positions stated in this guide will be determined by the staff on a case-by-case basis.
The implementation date of this guide will in no case be earlier than
'pril'15, 1980.'
~
UUITERXn l.
Seismic qualification per Regulatory Guide 1. 100 Table 1 DESIGN CRITERIA1 INSTRUHENTATION TYPES2 B
C D
E h)o yes... 'es yes.
no nos 2.
Single failure criteria per Regulatory Guide l. 53 2l wI mao yes
. yes ~
'no no
>>~
~ e 3.
Environmenta'l qualification per Regulatory Guide 1.89 4.
Power source 5.
Out-of-service interval before accident yes Emr8 8
8 9
10 Ho yes yes~
yes-nQ ata lbO CB7
- CB7, 5.
>ortable no Pno Bt) ng Derei qt 7.
guality assurance level 6.
Display type1 9.
Display method 10.
Unique identification 11.,Periodic testing per Regulatory Guide 1.118 12 12 12 M
lg H ce AtO
'es yes yes yes no no yes yes
~
no VD Con
~
Con1~
Con "
p01s 00>>
RecI Rec~Rec"
IndI s i jnd18 19
~
Unless different:specifications are given in this regulatory guide, the specifications in ANSI N320-1979, "Performance Specifications for Reactor Emergency Radiological Honitoring Instrumentation,"
apply to the high-range containment area monitors, area exposure rate monitors in other buildings, effluent and environmental
- monitors, and portable instruments for measuring radiation or radioactivity..
. Type A - Those irstruments that provide information required to take preplanned manual actions.
Type B - Those instruments that provide information to monitor the process of accomplishing critical safety functions.
Type C - Those instruments that indicate the potential for breaching or the the actual breach of the barriers to fission product release.
Type 0 - Those instruments that indicate the performance of individual safety systems.
"'p<< " Those instruments that provide information for use'n determining the magnitude of the release of radioactive materials and for cor inuously assessing such releases, for defense in depth, and for diagnosis.
""sd'.ation monitors should meet the requirements of ANSI N320-19"'9, Sec iof
,=- d/or Section
- 9. 1. 15, as appropriate.
S<< Paragraph 6.3.6 of Draft Standard AHS-4.5.
(Footnotes con inued}
E E
c oogfloge5, cofi7,'g nui-u s Ui' ab I c Q occh~ f SR+
~It%)%)gg QiJ hS
~> equi pneum
'i/4'g 1Critica] Instrument Bus - Class 1E Power+
CD~H
) L4QKT~h.~lr<4<4 P~~~~-)
sparagraph 4.11,* "Exemption," of. IEEE Standard 279-1971.
sBased on normal Technical Specification requirements on out-of-'service for the safety system it serves.
~oNot necessary to include in the Technical Specifications unless specified by other requirements.
Radiation monitoring outside containment may be port ble if so design in Tables 2 and 3.
'""Level of quality assurance per'ppendix B to 10 CFR part 50 Continuous indication or recording displays a given variable at all times.
intermittent indication or recording displays a given variable periodically; on-demand indication or recording displays a given variable only when requested
~~Continuous display.
Indication on demand.4~
< "<<~o~+)
>6Vhere trend or transient information is essential to planned operator actions.
~~Recording.
~sDial or digital indication.Co> ~<~<<0
~ Effluent release monitors require recording, includivg effluent radioactivity
- monitors, environs exposure rate monitors, and meteorology monitors.
Radiation monitors should be periodically tested in accordance with the requirements of ANSI N320-1979.
<(~il~~fq q~at t<~~4-8
~
~
~p X +, ~
a, Table 3
Q~~PieS of O'AR VARIABLES pa f grec 4f~ C.ewwc. n4's p~ g,+ Q
~l~ + Ltg Shou(ct ac l4L Ql'e.J~
e W~~Pte'S X+
SKOM't8 Q ac.
~p. +g
'Tsa, ean
~e;w\\QHcI koc.u~an+ ~P 1 i~nce p'ropra~+a
+a nra4rrrao, easured Variable Range Type Purpose
- re Exi Temperature 1504F to 2300oF B,C To provide incore.emperature measurements to ioentify )ocalized hot areas.
(Approximately 50 measurements) rontrol Rod Posi ion Full in'r not full in To provide position indication that the control rods are fully inserted.
{Minimum of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> after accident) neutron Flux 1 c/s to ~~ power
{at least one fission counter)
ANS-4.5, Section
- 6. 2. 2.
For indication of approach to criticality.
'..-CTOR COOLANT SYSTEM RCS Pressure 15 psia to 2000 psig
~
oii
~
B,C ANS-4.5, Sections 6.2.3, 6.2.4, 6.3.3, and 6.3.5.
For indication of an accident and to indicate that actions must be taken to mitigate an event.
Coolant Level in the Reactor Bottom of core
'upport plate to above top of discharge plenum ANS-4.5, Section 6.2.3.
For indication of fuel submergency for a
LOCA event.
."ain Steamline Flow 0 to 120% design flows To provide an indication of the integrity of the pressure boundary.
"a<n Steamline Isola-t::n Valves'eakage
.2:nero'I System
~ -essure 0 to 15" of water 0 to 5 psid To provide an indication of he pressure boundary and containmert
-- -.ary System Safety
.e'!ef Valve Posi-es.
including
'.; "r Flaow Through r-e!s re !n Valve es Closed-not closed or 0 to 30 psig B,D By these measurements, the operator knows if there is a path open.or loss of coolant and if an event ray be in progress.
-na
-aa'...un flo an aoaoa'on an norraa oooraaaon.
'" i/