ML17300A694
| ML17300A694 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palo Verde  |
| Issue date: | 03/17/1987 |
| From: | Baer R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE) |
| To: | Bergamo F KAMAN INSTRUMENTATION CORP. |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-87, RTR-REGGD-01.045, RTR-REGGD-1.045 NUDOCS 8703190098 | |
| Download: ML17300A694 (34) | |
Text
~v os gAE oG-Wp o
/p 8**>>4 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR R EG ULATORY COMMISS ION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 MAR 1'i I
='r.
Frank Bergamo, Manager I'luclear Products, Customer Services Kaman Instrumentation Corporation P.O.
Box 7463 Colorado Springs, Colorado 80933
Dear Mr. Bergamo,
The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has received a report under 10 CFR Part 21 from the Arizona Nuclear Power Project (ANPP) concerning deficiencies they noted in the particulate channel of the containment building radiation monitor (RU-1) at the Palo Verde Nuclear Station (PVNS).
The RU-1 monitor was supplied by Kaman Instrumentation and is used for detecting reactor coolant leakage in accordance with NRC Regulatory Guide 1.45.
In their report (see attached),
ANPP states that erroneous documentation was supplied with the RU-1 monitor.
This resulted in an incorrect detector efficiency being used in the RU-1 calibration.
They also state that the erasable-programmable-read-only-memory (EPROMs), supplied by Kaman, had been programmed with an incorrect flow conver-sion factor.
The RU-1 operability testing performed at PVNS was inadequate to detect the error in the EPROM programming.
As Mr. Roger Pedersen of my branch discussed with you, my branch's responsibi 1-ity is to identify and resolve potentially,generic industry problems.
When appropriate, this responsibility includes notifying.the industry via a notice or other document.
Since Kaman Instrumentation supplies components to several of our licensees, the reported deficiencies, if verified, could have generic implications.
Assuming that you verify the facts reported, we would like to know:
( 1) whether you have determined if these deficiencies could exist in components supplied to your other customers; (2) if so, what plans you have to inform them of the potential problems; and (3) steps you have taken (or planned) to prevent a reoccurrence.
In cases such as this, when the vendor's resolution is reason-able, successful and thorough, we typically do not issue a notice to the industry, thus avoiding duplication of efforts.
A second potentially generic issue raised by the ANPP deficiency report is whether the RU-1 monitor, as operated at PVNS, is capable of detecting a one gallon per minute leak within one hour as specified in Regulatory Guide 1.45.
Two relevant concerns are raised in the report.
The first concerns the effect that short-lived radionuclides (predominantly Rb-88) have on the monitor's response and the long filter paper stepping time it dictates.
The second concern relates to how the monitor's sensitivity is effected by the relatively low reactor coolant activity coupled with a relatively high background airborne radiation in the containment.
Whether ANPP is meeting its licensing commiT.-
ments is a question we intend to pose to our Office of Nuclear Reactor Regula-tion; however, any comment you have on this issue will be considered.
7 T
II
Nr. Frank'ergamo If you have any questions during your review effort, please call Roger Pedersen (3O1) 492-9425 or me (301) 492-4780.
Sincerely, Robert L. Baer, Chief Engineering and Generic Communications Branch Division of Emergency Preparedness and Engineering
Response
Office of Inspection and Enforcement
Enclosure:
As Stated
1
/
ONTINUINGANALYTICAND EXPERIMEN SSESSMENT ANDVALIDATIONOF KA STRUMENTATIONRADIATIONMONITO J IIVI EAMON KAMANSCIENCES CORPORATION KAMAN
j.
t e
PROBLEM EVALUATETHE SENSITIVITY&TIME RESPONSE OF THE PARTICULATE MONITORINGCHANNELTO VARIATIONSIN:
~ AMBIENTBACKGROUND
~ NOBLE GAS CONTRIBUTION (BACKGROUND)
~ SHORT-LIVED PARTICULATE ISOTOPE ACTIVITY,e.g., Rb-88 (~
= 18 MIN)
~ LONG-LIVEDPARTICULATEACTIVITY,e.g. Cs - 137 KAMAN
@I
METHOD OF SOLUTION e ACTUALEXPERIMENTALVALIDATIONIS NOT FEASIBLE
~ MUST RELY ON COMPUTER SIMULATIONOF MONITOR PERFORMANCE
~ EXACT FUNCTIONALEQUIVALENTOF PARTICULATE PROCESSING ALGORITHMUSED IN MONITOR IS CODED IN PC PROGRAM SIMULATIONPROGRAM "MFCALC"DETERMINES SENSITIVITIES OF ALGORITHMTO VARIOUS PROBLEM PARAMETERS I
KAMAN
II h
I
~,
N g
g l
1 n i f'tl I
MFCALCSIMULATIONPROGRAM INPUTS
~ ACTIVITYOF LONG-LIVEDPARTICULATES (e.g., Cs-137)
~ ACTIVITYOF SHORT-LIVED PARTICULATES (e.g., Rb-88}
~ AMBIENTBACKGROUND, CPM (e.g., 100-300 cpm}
~ SENSITIVITYOF PARTICULATE CHANNEL TO NOBLE GAS ACTIVIT'Y (e.g.; 106 cpm/>Ci/cc)
~ NOBLE GAS ACTIVITY
~ FLOW RATE, CFM
~ TIME STEP 8( TOTAL RUN TIME KAMAN
~
~
I
[i
MFCALC SIMULATIONFEATURES
~ CALCULATES GROSS DETECTOR CPM BASED ON BACKGROUNDAND BUILDUP OF SHORT AND LONG-LIVEDISOTOPES ON FILTER
~ DECAY OF SHORT-LIVED PARTICULATES IS ACCOUNTED FOR STATISTICALFLUCTUATIONS IN COUNT RATE, BACKGROUNDS, AND FLOW RATE ARE ACCOUNTED FOR
~ CALCULATEDACTIVITYCONCENTRATION OF PARTICULATES IS DETERMINED FROM COUNT RATE EXACTLYAS DONE IN'MONITOR PERCENTAGE DIFFFRENCE BETWEEN "CALCULATED"AND "ACTUAL"(I.E.,
INPUT) ACTIVITYIS COMPUTED AT EACH TIME STEP RESULTS ARE PLOTTED VS. TIME
EXAMPLE 1 - THE EASY CASE TOTALCOUNT RATE CPM LONG-LIVEDCONTRIBUTION SHORT-LIVED CONTRIBUTION AMBIENT + NOBLE GAS BACKGROUND TIME
[Concentration of Long-Lived Isotopes] >>
[Background
+ Concentration Short-Lived Isotopes)
KANAN
~
~
I',"
'I' e4 I
J"
EXAMPLE 2 - THE DIFFICULTCASE TOTALCOUNT RATE CPM SHORT-LIVED CONTRIBUTION AMBIENT + NOBLE GAS BACKGROUND LONG-LIVED CONTRIBUTION TIME
[Concentratior:of Long-Lived IsotopesJ((Background
+ Concentration of Short-Lived Isotopes]
KAMAN I
I
~
~
t
Representative MFCALC Output FIXED FILTER PARTICULATE CHANNEL PROCESSING SIMULATION PROGRAM DATE 01-31-1987 TIME 17:50:16 Ver.K, Rev 9
01/30/87 RUN NUMBER 3 INITIALACTIVITY-7E-11 INITIALFLOW-2.5 TIME STEP 1
PRINT TIME-300 DETECTOR RESP.
FACTOR 440000 CPM/uCi/cc;
- EST.
RUN TIME 75.15658 MIN AMBIENT BACKGROUND CPM-0 GAS ACTIVITY.015 GAS BACKGROUND 21000 CPM FRACTION OF ACTIVITY DUE TO SHORT-LIVED PARTICULATES
.25 HALF-LIFE 18 MIN T
295 595 595
.895 1195 1495 1795 2095 2395 2395 CPM 21318.65 21396.85 21396.85 21315.95 21329.85 21303.15 21313.05 21407.75 21424.15 21424.15 MEAS ACTIV 3.641197E-10 4.197585E-10 4.197585E-10 1.186128E-10 1.085356E-10 5.193253E-11 5.216236E-11 1.34632E-10 1.316152E-10 1.316152E-10 ACT ACTIV 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 7E-11 PROJ ACTIV PCT DIFF 3.083203E-10 3/40 2.318078E-10 231 2.302657E-10 228 1.447209E-10 106 1.478436E-10 111 1.124572E-10 60 1.016412E-10 45 1.111153E-10 58 7.938693E-11 13 8.194691E-11 17 CC NPTS
-46 24 5
~
38
-10 30
-23 35
, 19 42 14 31 14 42 26 38
-21 51
-16 30 KAMAN
P1
FIXED FILTER PARTICULATE CHANNEL PROCESSING SIMULATION PROGRAM DATE 01-31-1987 TIME 17:43:12 Ver.K, Rev 9
01/30/87 RUN NUMBER 2 INITIALACTIVITY-4E-11 INITIALFLOW-2.5 TIME STEP-1 PRINT TIME-300 DETECTOR RESP.
FACTOR-440000 CPM/uCi/cc; EST.
RUN TIME 75.15658 MIN AMBIENT BACKGROUND CPM-0
,GAS ACTIVITY.015 GAS BACKGROUND 21000 CPM FRACTION OF ACTIVITY DUE TO SHORT-LIVED PARTICULATES
.25 HALF-LIFE 18 MIN T
CPM MEAS ACTIV 295 21166. 38
- 2. 629798E-10 595 21259.48 4.39829E-10 895 21201.88 1.644249E-10 1195 21260.98 2.193368E-10 1495 21217.08 1.136721E-10 1795 21168.98 4.61726E-11 2095 21206.88 7.477208E-11 2395 21228.58 8.297291E-11 2695 21233.68 7.669058E-11 2995 21218.88 5.811189E-11 3295 21233. 88
- 6. 247917E-11 3595 21195.08 3.613029E-11 3895 21245.48 5.711502E-11 4195 21241.08 5.241452E-11 4495 21236.38 4.596233E-ll 4795 21266.28 5.496655E-11 5095 21252.38 4.682357E-11 5395 21303.88 6.474446E-11 5695 21219.98 3.160865E-11 5995 21211.78 2.688776E-11 6295 21279.28 4.622798E-11 6595 21275.28 4.272275E-11 6895 21292.58 4.558322E-11 7195 21281.38 4.054687E-11 7495 21349.28 5.635515E-11 7795 21270.18 3.603973E-11 8095 21295.28 3.952088E-ll STABLE TIME-8400 TOTAL PROBLEM TIME - 423.4805 S
ACT ACTIV 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-ll 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-ll 4E-11 4E-11 4E-ll 4E-11 4E 11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-11 4E-ll 4E-11 4E-ll ECONDS FOR 0
STEPS.
0 STEPS PER PROJ ACTIV PCT DIFF 5.086622E-10 1171 2.205468E-10 451 1.522921E-10 280 1.523214E-10 280 7.817228E-11 95 9.202764E-11 130 1.252319E-10 213 8.237611E-11 105 6.878652E-11 71 6.181864E-11 54 4.495709E-11 12 6.148377E-11 53
- 4. 904727E-11 22
- 4. 047987E-ll 1
5.120635E-11 28 4.660255E-11 16 4.670452E-11 16 4.686305E-11 17 4.527479E-11 13 4.88094E-11 22 4.36316E-11 9
4.533653E-11 13 3.863461E-11
-4 3.910292E-11
-3 4.22067E-11 5
4.027818E-11 0
3.55605E-11
-12 CC 28 7
-1 29
-13 8
52 16
-1 7
-17 19 4
-27 20 5
12 5
5 24 6
20
-1
-8 13
-2
-22 SEC NPTS 24 31 31 42 31 40 35 60 37 33 35 37 36 31 54 39 60 56 38 60 40 60 33 58 37 37 KAMAN
~
0
~
~
4
~ fl I
l II
t
~
~
f I
o
~
o a
~
~
~
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
s i
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
~
I I
~
~
)
I
~
~
~
0
t
~*
t
~
t 1 ~
a
~ t
1988 4
SIHULAXE9 RESPOHSE OF PARTICULATE CHAHHEL: COUHT: RATE 819
~
628 g 439
-U~
l-4[
~
248 80@ o "6~%
yl
~. F42-o ~
..gtl5o ~
S2-'4a y Short-Term-Response
-No obvious trend to countrate buildup in one hour.
High Noble Gas Activity se 12 Minutes 24 36 488 pygmy 48 6e 4
SIHULAT ESPOHSE OF PARTICULATE CHAHHELl ERROR:
C
+ 57+8I~I ZATIO~
l I MQ 9C 0 Qi~
(
398 o 'Nolle. Css fk(sinai-TY <<>>
I' 7000 C PM 288 Iee 12 36 48 Minutes KAMAN
I ~
4l
2ZBB 2188 4
SIHULATKD RESPOHSE OF PARTICULATE CHAHHELl COVHT RATE l 700 Long-Term Response k
~
1668 1149 High Noble Gas Activity Trend clear at about four hours.
628 198 128 248 Minutes 488 1too 688 2,5 4
SIHVLATED RESPOHSE OF PARTICULATE CKAHHEL: ACTIVITY
->o 0
. l~q~ h<<ivi~5 l~
p<'(<<
O
'.s
-1'3 7 ICE, 2iV-88
~=isw"
~ Wg,l, Cr,S ((3itccGOau0)
M~iv,ry 5 A'<~-> f Cle'
~ 700O<3~
I-0
~ 5 qg5)(.c KAl'<oM 4 Wv
DIFFICULT CONDITIONS High Concentration of Short-Lived Isotopes
'arge Noble Gas Activity 528 68 128 248.
Minutes 368 488 Slow Response i35,n0 688 Converges to Long-Lived Component
~
I b~PrL $ 67IUI7'6
( X I 4 Iv~'/C6.
(g P.
C.-I>7 qoS.
~ Noel~
~ $ lP &I (- I g A '7i O ~ 7 ~ MF y QIIRS 1.8
,8.8 O
" 8.6 gAS A(TIvt'YV 5X>o P6
/c6.
'000 Cj'M 8A(,tggovhl)P o 8,4 0
C
.2 8.2 u
18 SIHULATED RESPONSE: OF PARTICULATE CHANNELS ACTIVITY
~ I 'L 72 144 Minutes 216 288 368 KAMAN
~
tf ~
SOME GENERAL CONCLUSIONS ALGORITHMHAS BEEN VERIFIED FOR WIDE VARIETYOF INPUT CONDITIONS IDENTIFIEDAREAS WHERE MONITOR RESPONSE WILLBE VERY SLOW
~ IDENTIFIED PRIMARY FACTOR WHICH REDUCES EFFICIENCY OF'LGORITHM (I.E., FRACTION SHORT-LIVED ISOTOPE)
NOBLE GAS ACTIVITYDOES NOT GREATLYAFFECT MONITOR RESPONSE
.'MBIENT BACKGROUND HAS LITTLE EFFECT ON RESPONSE
~ RESPONSE TIME RELATIVELYCONSTANT OVER WIDE RANGE OF PARTICULATEACTIVITIES(10-1.~ 7)
KANAN
Pp,
~ t 0 \\
.~
~ II
~
~ ~
~
~
~
~
~ '
~
~
~
~
g
~
~
~
~
~
~
0
~
~
~ '
~ ~