ML19339B128

Reactor Containment Bldg Integrated Leak Rate Test.

ML19339B128
Person / Time
Site:	Crystal River
Issue date:	09/03/1980
From:	GILBERT/COMMONWEALTH, INC. (FORMERLY GILBERT ASSOCIAT
To:
Shared Package
ML19339B125	List: ML19339B124 ML19339B128
References
2182, NUDOCS 8011060329
Download: ML19339B128 (40)

Text

, __. . . . . . . ,,

i O  :

l

, 1 TEST PERFORMED GAI REPORT NO. 2182

, JUNE 1980 l

I FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION b

REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATFD LEAK RATE i

TEST 4

4

( CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT 3 NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT i

i ISSUE DATE 9-3-80 8

o GILBERT ASSOCIATES, INC.

1 P.O. Box 1498 Reading, Pennsylvania 19603 8011060 d Geert/Commanesse

. . ._ m . . . . . . _ _ . _ . . . ~ s . .

l TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Item Title Pm j 1.0 SYNOPSIS

• 1 i

2.0 INTRODUCTION

3 3.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA 4 4.0 TEST INSTRUMENTATION 5 4.1 Sunnary of Instruments 5 4

4.2 Schematic Arrangement 7 4.3 Calibration Checks 9 4.4 Instrumentation Performance 9 4.5 Systematic Error Analysis 9 4.6 Supplemental Verification 12 5.0 TEST PROCEDURE 14

. 5.1 Prerequisites 14 5.2 General Discussion 16 5.3 Test Performance 17 6.0 METHODS OF ANALYSIS 19 6.1 General Discussion 19

( 1 Statistical Evaluation 21 7.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 23 7.1 Results at P, 23 7.2 Supplemer.tal Test Results 24

8.0 REFERENCES

25 Appendices A. INSTRUMENTATION SCHEMATIC B. REDUCED LEAKAGE RATE DATA i

l C. WEIGHT OF CONTAINMENT AIR AND AVERAGE CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE VERSUS TIME l D. COMPUTER PRINTOUT E. LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT - 1979 F. LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT - 1980 l Gest /Commanuses i

..a..__.. . . _ .___ _ - . . _ _ _ . . . . _ . , . . ~ -. ... ._

4 1.0 SYNOPSIS The Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant reactor containment building was subjected to an integrated leak rate test during the period from June 29, 1980 to June 30, 1980. The purpose of this test was to demonstrate the acceptability of the building leakage rate at an internal pressure of 49.6 psig (P,).

Testing was performed in conformance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J. ANSI N45.4-1972 and Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant FSAR.

The measured leakage rate based on the mass point method of analysis was found to be 0.134 percent by weight per day at 49.6 psig. The leakage rate at the upper bound of the 95 percent confidence interval is 0.141 percent by weight per day which is well below the allowable leakage rate of 0.187 percent by weight per day at 49.6 psig.

Three penetrations could not be lined up in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J and Florida Power Corporation's Surveillance Procedure, SP-178. The addition of the local leakage race of these penetrations, determined subsequent to the integrated leak rate test, must be considered. The combined leakage rate for the three penetrations, determined by local leak rate testing, is 0.0009 percent by weight per day.

The addition of this negligible value does 1.;c change the measured integrated leak rate.

The supplemental instrumentation verification at P, was 21.6 percent, which is within the 25 percent requirement of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Section III A.3.b.

Geertit - t-1-

.u - - +:. . .; . . :- . . _

. . . . . . .. . . ~ . . . . .. . .

I l

All testing was performed by Florida Power Corporation with the technical assistance of Gilbert Associates, Inc. Gilbert Associates, Inc. has previously supplied technical direction for twelve integrated leak rate tests.

Procedural and calculational methods were reviewed by Nuclear Regulatory Commission personnel.

t Gdters/ Common =esta

. . . . - - . ...~ . .._- _ _ _.... _ = -

=_. - --

l l

2.0 ' INTRODUCTION

'(-

The objective'of the integrated leak rate test was the establishment of the degree of overall leak tightness of the reactor containment building at the calculated design basis accident pressure of 49.6 psig. The allowable leakage is defined by the design basis accident applied in the safety analysis in accordance.with site exposure guidelines specified by 10 CFR 100.

For Crystal River Unit.3, the maximum allowable integrated leak rate at the design basis accident pressure of 49.6 psig (P,) is l 0.25 preent by weight per day (L,).

Testing was performed in accordance with the procedural i requirements as stated in Florida Power Corporation Crystal River Unit 3 Surveillance Procedure, SP-178. This procedure was approved by the Crystal River Unit 3 Plant Review Committee prior to the commencement of the test.

), i The combined local leakage rates from the reactor containment building isolation valves and penetrations which are required to ,

be tested under 10 CFR 50, Appendix J was less than 60 percent of the maximum allowable leakage rate (L,) at 49.6 psig prior to the commencement of the integrated leak rate test.

Leakage rate testing was accomplished at the pressure level of 49.6 psig for a period of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. The 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period was followed by a 6 hour6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> supplemental test for a verification of test instrumentation.

i 1

Geert/Cammenseau l t

i l )

3.0 ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA Acceptance criteria established prior to the test and as specified by 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, ANSI N45.4-1972 and the Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant FSAR, Section 15.4.2.2, Amendment 49, are as follows:

a. The measured leakage rate (L,,) at the calculated design basis accident pressure of 49.6 psig (P,) shall be less than 75 percent of the maximum allowable leakage rate (L,),

specified as 0.25 percent by weight of the building atmosphere per day. The acceptance criteria is determined as follows:

L, = 0.25%/ day 0.75L, = 0.187%/ day

b. The test instrumentation shall be verified L; means of a

( supplemental test. Agreement between the containment leakage measured during the Type A test and the containment leakage measured during the supplemental test shall be within 25 percent of L,.

O Geert/Cammeneese

,. . . :.. . . .. . . . - . . .. ~.-..=~-a-~---

l 4.0 TEST INSTRUMENTATION 4.1 Summary of Instruments Test instruments employed are described, by system, in the following subsections:

4.1.1 Temperature Indicating System Overall system accuracy: 1 0.25% of reading plus 0.1 F Overall system repeatability: 1 0.25% of reading plus 0.1 F Components:

a. Resistance Temperature Detectors Quantity 24 i Manufacturer Temtex Type 100 ohm platinum Range, F 75 - 125 Accuracy, F t .25% of reading

b. Digital Temperature Scanner / Printer Quantity 1 Manufacturer Doric Scientific Corp.

Type

• 210-40-NSR-08-17 Digital Data Logger Accuracy, F t 0.1 Repeatability, F t 0.1

• Also equipped with 25 Rosemount Model 401R-4 bridge cards i

Geert /Commoneese r .u......_.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ n .- - -,_..

t 4.1.2 Dewpoint Indicating System Overall system accuracy: 1 1.50 F Overall system repeatability: 1 1.50 F

a. Dewcell Elements Quantity 10 Manufacturer Panametrics Type 2100 M2W Range, F 0 - 140 Accuracy, F 11 Repeatability, F i1

b. Dewpoint Readout Quantity 2

^

i Manufacturer Panametrics Type 2100 - 151 Range, F 0 - 140 Accuracy, F 1 0.50 Repeatability, F 1 0.50 4.1.3 Pressure Monitoring System Overall system accuracy: i 0.010% of reading plus 0.002% of full scale Overall system repeatability: 1 0.001% of full scale i

l c,emim

, Precision 11.:wmure Gauges Quanti 6y 2 Manufacturer Texas Instruments Type 145-01 Range, psia 0 - 100 Accuracy, psia 0.010% of reading plus 0.002% of full scale Repeatability, psia 1 0.001% of full scale 4.1.4 Supplemental Test Flow Monitoring System Overall system accuracy: 1% of full scale Flow Meter Quantity 2 Manufacturer Brooks i Type 1100-08 Range, scfm 0.756 - 7.56 Accuracy, scfm i 1% of full scale 4.2 Schematic Arrangement The arrangement of the four measuring systems summarized in Section 4.1 is depicted in Appendix A.

I Gdtert/Cammanneau l

i l '

! - I 1

Temperature sensors were placed throughout the reactor containment builaing volume to permit monitoring of internal temperature variations at 24 locations. A temperature survey was j performed after the sensors were installed which verified there l were no large areas of temperature variation. Deweells were placed in 10 locations. Placement of temperature sensors ;.nd dewcells was as follows:

l l

No. of Temperature Location Indicators No. of Dewcells Elev. 100' O 1 Elev. 105' 3 1 Elev. 108' 2 0 Elev. 120' O 1

( Elev. 140' 5 1 Elev. 179'-6" 2 0 Elev. 180' 2 2

Elev. 186'-2" 1 0

( Elev. 200' O 1 Elev. 215'-6" 2 2 Elev. 220' 1 0 Elev. 238'-8" 1 0 l Elev. 242'-8" 3 1 Elev. 260' 2 0 These 34 sensors, placed as indicated, made possible representative measurements of reactor containment building intecnal atmospheric conditions. Continuous mixing of the atmosphere was accomplished by operation of the reactor building recirculation units.

I I

I (myt/L - '

~

l .

i 4.3 Calibration Checks f

Temperature, dewpoint and pressure measuring systems were checked for calibration before the test as recommended by ANSI N45.4-1972, Section 6.2 and 6.3. The supplemental test at 49.6 psig confirmed the instrumentation acceptability.

4.4 Instrumentation Performance The twenty-four temperature sensors, ten dewcells, two precision pressure gauges and two flow meters performed satisfactorily throughout the integrated leak rate test and provided more than adequate coverage of the containment.

4.5 Systematic Error Analysis Systematic error, in this test, is induced by the operation of the temperature indicating system, dewpoint indicating system and i ' the pressure indicating system.

t

) Justification of instrumentation selection was accomplished, 1

j using manufacturer's accuracy and repeatability tolerances stated j in Section 4.1, by computing the instrument selection guide j equation as follows:

i 2 2 2 1/2 E + 1 + DV ISG = 2

a. Conditions 4

^

L, = 0.25%/ day P = 64.3 psia

, Gaet /r-9-

1 i

T = 546.57 R drybulb T = 75 F devpoint dp t = 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />

b. Total Abs 91ute Pressure: e P

. No. of sensors: 2 Range 0-100 psia Measurement Sensor repeatability 'trror (E ): p 20.001% of full scale E = 0.00001 (100 psia)

P E = 0.00100 psia p

i e

p

! (Ep ) + (E p) / no.-of sensors 1/2 1/2 e

P

(.00100)2 / 2 e = 1 0.000707 psia P

c. Water Vapor Pressure: e PV No. of sensors: 10 4

{

i 4

Geert/Commonweep

Sensor repeatability error-(E): 21.0 F Measurement system error (c), excluding sensor: 10.5 F E

py

= 21.0 F (0.0143 psia / F)

E py

=

10.01430 psia c

py

=

10.5 F (0.0143 psia / F) c py

= 20.00715 psia

- ~ ~

2 2 1/2 1/2 e no. of sensors

= 2 (Epy) + (cpy) /

e = 2 (0. 0'.43) 2 + (0.00715) I!

/ 10 1/2 pv , , ,_

e py

= 1 0.00506 psia

(

d. Temperature-b No. of sensors: 24 Sensors repeatability error (E) = 10.22 F = 10.22 R Measurement system error (c), excluding sensor: 20.1 F = 10.1 R 2 2 1/2 1/2 e ~ + / f sensors T ,_( b) ("T) _ _

n.

2 2 1/2 1/2 e = 1 T _

(0.22) + (0.1) / 24 e =

T 0.0493 R

. l Gdtert /ConwenseellA -

I s

l

. i

e. Instrument Selection Guide (ISG) 2 2 2- 1/2 00 ISG = 1 2 + 2 + 2 t

._ \ p \p \T -

1 l 0.000707 [0.00506 0.0493 ISC = 1 _2400 + +

24 2[\ 64.3 \ 64.3 55.57 4 - -

ISC = 1 100 2.418 x 10-10 + 1.239 x 10~ -8 1/2

+ 1.627 x 10 ISG = 1 0.017%/ day The ISC does not exceed 0.25 L,-(0.0625%/ day) and it is therefore concluded that the instrumentation selected was acceptable for ,

use in determining the reactor containment integrated leakage rate.

4.6 Supplement u Verification

(

In addition to the calibration checks described in Section 4.3, test instrumentation operation was verified by a supplemental test subsequent to the completion of the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> leakage rate test. This test consisted of imposing a known calibrated leakage rate on the reactor containment building. After the flow rate was established, it was not altered for the duration of the test.

4 i

h GdbertICannormeeth ,-

1 1

1

During the supplemental test, the measured leakage rate was L =L,+L c v o where, Le= measured composite leakage rate consisting of the reactor building leakage rate plus the imposed leakage rate L, = imposed leakage rate Ly , = leakage rate of the reactor building during the supplemental test phase Rearranging the above equar. ion, L,=L -L o v c I

The reactor containment building leakage during the supplemental test can be calculated by subtracting the known superimposed leakage rate from the measured composite leakage rate.

The reactor containment building leakage rate during the supplemental test (L y,) was then compared to the measured reactor containment building leakage rate during the preceding 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test (L,,) to determine instrumentation acceptability.

Instrumentation is considered acceptable if the difference between the two building leakage rates is within 25 percent of the maximum allowable leakage rate (L,).

i i

t  :

1 Geert /Crwneneese 13 -

J 5.0 TEST PROCEDURE 5.1 Prerequisites Prior to commencement of reactor containment building

. pressurization, the following prerequisites were satisfied:

)

a. Proper operation of all test instrumentation was

verified.

b. All reactor containment building isolation valves were closed using the normal mode of operation. Liquid sampling system outside containment isolation vaJ/e CAV-2 and purge supply system inside containment 4

isolation valve AHV-1C could not be successfully local leak rate tested. In addition, the vaste disposal

! system downstream of the outside containment isolation valve WDV-61 could not be vented without releasing

! I radioactive gas into the auxiliary building. The i

liquid sampling system was isolated downstream of

! CAV-2. The purge supply outside containment isolation 1

valve AHV-lD was relied upan to hold containment pressure. A pressure gat.ge was installed between waste disposal system containnent isolation valves WDV-60 i and WDV-61 to detect any leakage. This penetration had successfully passed the local leak rate test with a leakage of 330 scem. Subsequent to the integrated I leakage rate test, valves CAV-2 and AHV-lC were closed using their normal mode and locally leakage rate tested.

4

c. Equipment within the reactor containment building,

! subject to damage, was removed or protected from external differential pressures.

I.

l

(

l Geert/Commeneusna l I

__ ~ . . . . _ , , . . _ . .- , _ _ _ , - _ .

d. Portions of fluid systems, which under post-accident conditions become extensions of the containment boundary, were drained and vented.

e. Pressure gauges were installed on the following systems to provide a means of detection for leakage into these systems:

4

1. Purge Supply

2. Purge Exhaust

3. Main Steam Loop A

4. Main Steam Loop B e 5. Personnel Access Hatch

6. Equipment Hatch Airlock

7. Personnel Access Hatch Seal

8. Equipment Hatch Seals

f. Local leak rate testing of containment isolation valves l and penetrations was concluded with the exceptions noted in b. above.

g. Containment recirculation fans were in operation.

h. Potential pressure sources were removed or isolated from the containment.

i. A general inspection of the accessible interior and exterior surfaces of the containment ;tructures and components was completed.

Geert/Camawasse

l s

5.2 General Discussion Following the satisfaction of the prerequisites stated in Section 5.1, the reactor containment building pressurization was initiated at a rate of approximately 3 psi per hour. Building internal temperature was maintained at approximately 87 F. Building pressure and temperature and the amperage required by the recirculation unit fans (AHF-1A,1B and IC) were monitored every half hour. Leak . ace testing was initiated at the 49.6 psig pressure level. Six hours of stabilization elapsed between reaching the 49.6 psig pressure level and the taking of official data.

During the test the following occured at half-hour intervals (See Appendix B):

a. Pressures indicated by each of the two precision gauges were recorded and the average calculated.

3

b. The twenty-four RTD temperatures were recorded and the average calculated.

c. The ten dewpoint values were recorded. The average of the ten values was converted to vapor pressure using steam tables.

.This permitted correction of the total pressure to the partial pressure of air by subtracting the vapor pressure.

The use of vapor pressura (Pyy), average temperature (T) and the total pressure (P ) is described in more detail in Section 6.1.

T The plot of average temp?rsture and weight of air was performed every half hour. (See Appendix C) s coaum

~

~

5 When convenient, the available half-hour values of Pyy, T and P T

were transmitted via an on-site portable computer terminal to an available computer facility for analysis using the CLERCAL computer program. Computer program results, including a least squares fit of the data, ;ere returned to the site via the terminal. A final computer run was made after data for a full 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period was 4

available.

Immediately following the 24th hour of the test, a superi= posed leakage rate was established for an additional 6 hour6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> period.

! During this time, temperature, pressure and vapor pressure were monitored as described above.

5.3 Test Performance Pressurization of the reactor building containment was started on June 28 at 1000. The pressurization rate was approximately 3 psi per hour. During pressurization of the reactor containment f building, the pressure gauge installed between valves WDV-60 and WDV-61 was monitored. No buildup of pressure between these valves was detected. When containment internal pressure reached 49.6 psig at 0430 on June 29, 1980, the compressors were secured. Temperature control was initiated by throttling valves SWV-42, SWV-44, and/or SWV-308 as required on the discharge side of the service water to l' recirculation fan units AHF-1A, AHF-1B, and/or AHF-lC cooling coils.

After waiting 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />, ieak rate testing was started. Temperature had stabilized at approximately 87 F.

Af ter 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, leakage rate data was obtained and evaluated and the leskage rate found to be acceptable. A known leak rate was imposed on the building through calibrated flowmeters for a period of 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br />.

i uwmc . .:  ;

After all required data was obtained and evaluated, depressurization was started. A post test inspection of the building revealed no unusual findings.

4 d

Canrs tC_ -:

~

o.u METHODS OF ANALYSIS 6.1 General Discussion The absolute method of leakage rate determination was employed during testing at the 49.6 psig pressure level.

The Gilbert Associates, Inc. Cli;RCAL computer code calculates the percent per day leakage rate for the mass point method.

The mass point method of computing leakage rates uses the following ideal gas la.s equation to calculate the weight of air inside containment for each half hour:

y . 144 PV , KP RT T where, e

W = mass of air inside containment, lbm 6 lbm - R - in.

k = 144 V/R = 5.39831 x 10 1 P = partial pressure of air, psia T = average internal containment temperature, R The partial pressure of air, P, is calculated as follows:

4 P=

T1 + T2 -P 2

Geert /Commemseep

- 19 -

I

. I where, P = true corrected total pressure from PI-1, psia Tl P = true c rrected total pressure from PI-2, psia T2 P, = partial pressure of water vapor determined by averaging the ten dewpoint temperatures and converting to vapor 3

pressure with the use of steam tables, psia The average internal containment temperature, T is calculated as follows:

T = sum f24 24 RTD's + 459.69 R The weight of air is plotted versus time for the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test and for the 6 hour6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> supplemental test. The Gilbert Associates, Inc. CLERCAL computer code fits the locus of t these points to a straight line using a linear least squares fit. The equation of the linear least squares fit line is of the form W = W, + Wy t where Wy is the slope in Ibm per hour and W, is the initial weight at time zero. The least squares parameters are calculated as follows:

2

~

D U E W = i i i i i S

XX g , netg Wg -

Et g IW 1 I s xx

! Gdbert /C_. . ._ :-_^

I

l l

where, -

S =NZe g - (I t g)

The weight percent leakage per day can then be determined from the following equation:

~2400 W l

wt. %/ day = y o

where the negative sign is used since Wy is a negative slope to express che leakage rate as a positive quantity.

6.2 Statistical Evaluation After performing the least squares fit, the CLERCAL computer code calculates the following statistical parameters:

a. Standard error of confidence for the curve fit (S,).

b. Limits of the 95 percent confidence interval for the curve fit.

c. Limits of the 95 percent confidence interval for the

leakage race (C ).

The significance of the measured leakage rate can then be evaluated in view of the number of data points exceeding the limits of the 95 percent confidence interval and the magnitude of the upper bound of the 95 percent confidence interval for the leakage rate.

i Geert /Cammanumerta

Standard error of confidence is defined as follows: i

,: i 3 , I[W g -

(W, + Wgt)] g N-2 where, i

Wg = observed mass of air (W, + Wg tg ) = least squares calculated mass of' air l; N = nubmer of data points i

This parameter is an expression of the difference between an observed and a calculated (least squares) mass point. The 95 percent confidence interval of the fit is twice the standard error of confidence (2S,). The " degree-of-fit" is evaluated by determining the number of data points, Wg , '

f not falling in the interval (W l

1

, + Wg t) 22S,.

1 4

i The 95 percent confidence limit for the mass leakage rate is calculated as follows:

a i

1/2 1

S

" + (E t g)2 C =t S +

L 95 e S NS xx xx 0

i where, t

95

= Student's t distributien with N-2 degrees of freedom This parameter is an expression of the uncertainty in the measured leakage rate l

8

. Geert /Commemmaso s

7.0 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS 7.1 Results at P, Data obtained during the leak rate test at P, indicated the following changes during the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test period:

Variable Mbximum Change P 0.085 psia T

P yy 0.006 psia T 0.34 F The method used in calculating the mass point leakage rate is defined in Section 6.0. The results of this calculation is a mass point leakage rate of 0.134%/ day. (See Appendix D)

The 95 percent confidence limit associated with this leakage rate is 0.007 percent per day. Thus the leakage rate at the upper bound of the 95 percent confidence level becomes L,,= 0.134 + 0.007 L,,= 0.141 %/ day The measured leakage rate and the measured leakage rate at the upper bound of the 95 perce'nt confidence level are well below the acceptance criteria of 0.187 percent per day (0.75 L,). A comparison of each of the observed weights with the weight calculated using the least squares line reveals only c.J of the forty-nine data points does not lie within the 95 percent confidence interval. Therefore, reactor containment building leakage at the calculated design basis accident pressure (P,) of 49.6 psig is considered to be acceptable, i

Geert /Commonwoop 23 -

, - ~

l

a l

. 7.2 Supplemental Test Results After conclusion of the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test at 49.6 psig (P,),

flowmeters FI-4 and FI-5 were placed in service and a combined flow rate of 10.99 SCFM was established. This flow rate is equivalent to a leakage rate of 0.188 percent per day at pressure 49.6 psig. After the flow rate was established, it was not altered for the duration of the supplemental test. The measured leakage rate (L ) during the supplemental test was calculated to be 0.268 percent per day using the mass point method of analysis. (See Appendix D). The upper bound of the 95 percent confidence limit associated with e.his leakage rate is 0.020 percent per day.

None of the 13 data points lie outside the 95 percent confidence interval.

The building leakage rate during the supplemental test is then determined as follows:

L,=L -L y c o Ly, = 0.268 %/ day - 0.188 %/ day Ly, = 0.080 %/ day Comparing this leakage rate with the building leakage rate measured during the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> test yields the following:

lbam ~ bv '! " l(0.134) - (0.080)l 0.25%/ day

=. 6 L,

The building leakage rates agree within 21.6 percent of L, which is below the acceptance criteria of 25 percent of L,.

Therefore the acceptability of the test instrumentation is considered to have been verified.

c,mastc- . :_=

4 I

8.0 REFERENCES

1. Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant Final Safety Analysis Report.

t

2. SP-178, " Initial Reactor Building Integrated Leak Rate Test", Florida Power Corporation Surveillance Procedure.

3. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50, Appendix J. (1-1-75).

4 AdSI N45.4-1972, Leakage Rate Testing of Containment Structures for Nuclear Reactors, American Nuclear Society, (March 16, 1972).

5. Steam Tables, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, (1967).

i

6. CLERCAL, Computer Code, Gilbert Associates, Inc.

7. ANS-56.8 N274, " Containment System Leakage Testing Requirements", American Nuclear Society, Revision 3, November 15, 1978.

8. Crystal River Unit 3 Nuclear Generating Plant Reactor Containment Builds ng Preoperational Integrated Leak Rate Test", Florida Power Corporation, (December 10,

, 1976).

s

.I t

.5 GhM /F '

25 -

O 4

4 e

APPENDICES i

I4 4

Geert /Commonweau

e e

e e

APPENDIX A INSTRUMENTATION SCHEMATIC i

Geert/Commoa wtn l

l I

e e

e g

APPENDIX B REDUCED LEAKAGE DATA l

c.ww-va

APPENDIX A SCHEMATIC ARRANGEMENT OF TEST INSTRUMENTATION X

dN s @ @ /

@ " 6%

u.

t 'y I III OUADRANT ORIENTATION

@@ m g 1

1, a g g g gm _

u m

x l

_ I@_ u _@ 4 1 m ,i.. ,,-s W ~~ ~~

O@ @@ @

t L..III IV x x .

(( IV II x  : @  : x II IV II (III I I\ di

\

III IV/ 57

/

INST. TAG ELEV. INST. TAG ELEV. INST. TAG ELEV.

LR-20-TE 105'-0" LR-32-TE 260'-0" LR-41-HE 105'-0" LR-21-TE 105'-0" LR-33-TE- 242'-8" LR-42-HE- 100'-0" LR-22-TE 105'-0" LR-34-TE 220'-0 " L R-43-HE 140 '-0 "

LR-23-TE 108'-0" LR-35-TE 215'-6 " LR-44-HE 120'-0" LR-24-TE 140'-0" LR-36-TE 242'-8" LR-45-HE 242'-8" LR-25-TE 140'-0" LR-37-TE 238 '-8 " LR-46-HE 215'-6" LR-26-TE 140'-0" LR-38-TE 21 5 '-6 " LR-47-HE 215 '-6 "

LR-27-TE 140'-0" LR-39-TE 242'-8" LR-48-HE 200 '-0 "

LR-28-TE 186'-2" LR-52-TE 108'-0" LR-49-HE 180'-0" LR-29-TE 180'-0" LR-53-TE 140'-0" LR-50-HE 180 '-0 "

LR-30-TE 260'-0" LR-54-TE 179'-6 "

LR-31-TE 180 '-0 " LR-55-TE 179'-6"

--- _-_=_. . . - . .-. .-

~

Sheet 1 of 4 ,. ,

?

APPENDIX B .

REDUCED TEST DATA '

Average Partial Pressure Average i Containment of Containment Partial Pressure Containment Weight of Pressure Water Vapor of Containment Temperature Containment Time (psia) (psia) Air (psia) ( R) Air (lbs) 6/29/80 1030 64.273 0.415 63.858 546.57 630,706.55 1100 64.262 0.415 63.847 546.55 630,620.98 1130 64.262 0.415 63.847 546.56 630,609.45 1200 64.262 0.416 63.846 546.57 630,588.03 1230 64.262 0.415 63.847 546.59 630.574.83 1300 64.257 0.416 63.841 546.58 630,527.11 1330 64.252 0.415 63.837 546.58 630,487.61 1400 64.254 0.415 63.839 546.59 630,495.82 1430 64.250 0.416 63.834 546.59 630,446.44 1500 64.249 0.416 63.833 546.59 630,436.57 1530 64.252 0.416 63.836 546.63 630,420.06 1600 64.260 0.415 63.845 546.70 630,428.21 1630 6% 262 0.415 63.847 546.76 630,378.77 1700 64.263 0.416 63.847 546.81 630,321.13 1730 64.262 0.415 63.847 546.82 630,309.61 1800 64.264 0.416 63.848 546.84 630,296.42 1830 64.260 0.416 63.844 546.86 630,233.89

- _ . . . . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ m _ ___ . _ . . . _ . _ _ . _ _. . _ - .. _ _ . . _ _ ..__ .. _ _ _ _ _ _ . - . - . _ . - . _ _ . . _ _ . _ __ . _ _ = _ , .

, M~

Sheet 2 of 4 ,

APPENDIX B (Cont'd) ,

REDUCED TEST DATA I Average Partial Pressure Average

! Containment of Containment Partial Pressure Containment Weight of ,

Pressure Water. Vapor of Containment Temperature Containment Tima (psia) (psla) Air (psia) ( R) Air (Iba) 1900 64.250 0.415 63.835 546.81 630,202.66 1930 64.250 0.414 63.836 546.79 630,235.59 2000 64.244 0.415 63.829 546.78 630,178.00 2030 64.245 0.415 tl.830 546.77 630,199.40 2100 64.241 0.416 63.825 546.78 630,138.51 2130 64.244 0.414 63.830 546.81 630,153.30 2200 64.251 0.415 63.836 546.89 630,120.35 2230 64.242 0.414 63.828 546.85 630,087.47 2300 64.240 0.414 63.826 546.82 630,102.29 2330 64.240 0.414 63.826 546.84 630,079.24 2400 64.235 0.413 63.822 546.81 630,074.32 6/30/80 0030 64.233 0.413 63.820 546.81 630,054.58 ,

0100 64.230 0.413 63.817 546.79 630,048.01 0130 64.226 0.413 63.813 546.78 630,020.04 0200 64.222 0.414 63.808 546.77 629,982.19 0230- 64.216 0.413 63.803 546.73 629,978.92 0300 64.212 0.412 63.800 546.70 629,983.86 i t

_. - - - ~

. .-, - ~ .- - ,_- - - _ . - . . - - . -- . - _ - . - - . . - . - . - - .. . ._

~

Sheet 3 of 4 i . ,

js APPENDIX B (Cont'd) ,

REDUCED TEST DATA Average Partial Pressure Average Containment of Containment Partial Pressure Containment Weight of Pressure Water Vapor of Containment Temperature Containment Time (psia) (psia) Air (psia) ( R) Air-(Ibm) j 0330 64.212 0.412 63.800 546.71 629,972.34 0400 64.212 0.412 63.800 546.71 629,972.34 ,

0430 64.212 0.412 63.800 546.73 629,949.29 0500 64.212 0.411 63.801 546.74 629,947.65

0510 64.210 0.412 63.798 546.74 629,918.03 0600 64.209 0.411 63.798 546.74 629,918.03 0630 64.210 0.412 63.798 546.74 629,918.03 0700 64.216 0.411 63.805 546.80 629,918.01 0730 64.205 0.411 63.794 546.75 629,867.01 0800 64.200 0.412 63.788 546.71 (29,853.85 l

0830 64.194 0.411 63.783 546.68 629,839.04 0900 64.192 0.411 63.781 546.66 629,842.33 0930 64.192 0.411 63.781 546.67 629,830.81 1000 64.190 0.410 63.780 546.67 629,820.94 1030 64.188 0.411 63.777 546.65 629,814.35 I

I k

_________m_.... m_____ _ . . - . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ . . - . . . . . . _ _ . . _ _

Sheet 4 of 4 APPENDIX B (Cont'd) .

REDUCED TEST DATA Average Partial Pressure Average Containment of Containment Partial Pressure Containment Weight of Pressure Water Vapor of Containment Temperature Containment +

. Time ' (p sia) (psia) Air (psia) ( R) Air (lba)

SUPERIMPOSED TEST i

1100 64.183 0.410 63.773 546.65 629,774.85 1130 64.163 0.409 63.754 546.55 629,702.41 4 1200 64.155 0.410 63.745 546.49 629,682.65 1230 64.148 0.409 63.739 546.46 629,657.95 t 1300 64.143 0.410 63.733 546.46 629,598.67 T

1330 64.136 0.409 63.727 546.43 629,573.96 i

1400 64.130 0.409 63.721 546.40 629,549.25

• 1430 64.125 0.409 63.716 546.38 629,522.90 l

1500 64.118 0.409 63.709 546.36 629,476.78 i

1530 64.110 0.409 63.701 546.34 629,420.77 l 1600 64.096 0.409 63.687 546.23 629,409.17 l 1630 64.097 0.409 63.688 546.25 629,396.00 i

i i

i e

APPENDIX C i

i WEIGHT OF CONTAIN1ENT AIR AND AVERAGE i

l l

CONTAINFENT TEMPERATURE VERSUS TILE i

GobertICommonweau

l APPENDlX C

• WEIGHT OF CONTAINMENT AIR AND

• AVERAGE CONTAlHMENT TEMPERATURE VERSUS TIME I I I I I I I I I I I

,3,,,,,gI I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I 630,500 ,

LE AST SQUARES FIT EQUATION d ,

W = 630,583.07 - 35.18e UPPER BOUND ~

E 630, M - ' 957. CONFIDENCE INT ERV AL E

O 630,100 - O ,

"!' 000 LE AST SQUARES FIT 2 ,

EQUATION y - W = 629,794 - 70.35 -

o 629,900 -

u. ,,,

629,700 -

$ LOWER BOUND v 95r. CONFIDENCE INTERVAL _

\

629,300 - 24 HOUR INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST -

6 HOUR SUPPLEMENTAL LEAK RATE TEST y [ 87.5 z-

~

OOO g

n

$ p 86.5 -

?

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 1030 1030 1630 6 80 6-3C-80 6-M-80 TIME (HOURS)

9 4

6 APPENDIX D COMPUTER PRINTOUT I

Gabet /Commonwuo

i

, APPENDEX D

. COMPUTER PRINTOUT CRYSTAL RIVER 3 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST 1980 - START TIME 6/29/80, 1030 LEAST SQUARES RESULTS BASED ON 49 DATA POINTS 4 95Z CONFIDENCE LIMIT TIME CBSERVED WEICHT MINUS CALCULATED PLUS OBS. MINUS CALC.

PERIOD (LS) (LB) (LB) (LB) (LB)

' O.0

• 630706.62 630486.82 630583.07 630679.32 123.55 0.5 630621.05 630469.23 630565.48 630661.73 55.57 1.0 630609.51 630451.64 630547.89 630644.14 61.62 1.5 630588.10 630434.05 630530.30 630626.56 57.79 2.0 630574.90 630416.46 630512.72 630608.97 62.19 2.5 630527.18 630398.88 630495.13 630591.38 32.05 3.0 630487.67 630381.29 630477.54 630573.79 10.14 3.5 630495.89 630363.70 630459.95 630556.20 35.94 4.0 630446.51 630346.11 630442.36 630538.61 4.15 4.5 630436.63 630328.52 630424.77 630521.02 11.86 5.0 630420.13 630310.93 630407.18 630503.43 12.95 5.5 630428.28 630293.34 630389.59 630485.84 38.68 6.0 630378.84 630275.75 630372.00 630468.25 6.84 6.5 630321.20 630258.16 630354.41 630450.67 -33.21 7.0 630309.67 630240.57 630336.83 630433.08 -27.15 7.5 630296.49 630222.99 630319.24 630415.49 -22.74 8.0 630233.95 630205.40 630301.65 630397.90 -67.69 8.5 630202.73 630187.81 630284.06 630380.31 -81.33 9.0 630235.66 630170.22 630266.47 630362.72 -30.81 9.5 630178.07 630152.63 630248.88 630345.13 -70.81 10.0 630199.47 630135.04 630231.29 630327.54 -31.82 10.5 63C138.58 630117.45 630213.70 630309.95 -75.12 11.0 630153.37 630099.86 630115.11 630292.36 -42.74 11.5 630120.42 630082.27 630178.52 630274.78 -58.11 13.0 630087.53 630064.68 630160.94 630257.19 -73.40 l 12.5 630102.36 630047.10 630143.35 630239.60 -40.99

'- 13.0 630079.31 630029.51 630125.76 630222.01 -46.45 13.5 630074.39 630011.92 630108.17 630204.42 -33.78 14.0 630054.65 629994.33 630090.58 630186.83 -35.93 10.5 630048.07 629976.74 630072.99 630169.24 -24.92 15.0 630000.36 629959.15 630055.40 630151.65 -55.04 15.5 629982.26 629941.56 630037.81 630134.06 -55.55 16.0 629978.98 629923.97 630020.22 630116.47 -41.24 16.5 629983.93 629906.38 630002.63 630098.89 -18.70 17.0 629972.41 629888.79 629985.05 630081.30 -12.64 17.5 629972.41 629871.21 629967.46 630063.71 4.95 18.0 629949.36 629853.62 629949.87 630046.12 - 0.51 58.5 629947.71 629836.03 629932.28 630028.53 15.44 19.0 629918.09 629818.44 629914.69 630010.94 3.40 19.5 629918.09 629800.85 629897.10 629993.35 20.99 30.0 629918.09 629783.26 629879.51 629975.76 38.58 30.5 629918.08 629765.67 629861.92 629958.17 56.16 31.0 629867.08 629748.08 629844.33 629940.58 22.74 81.5 629853.92 629730.49 629826.74 629923.00 27.17 33.0 629839.11 629712.90 629809.16 629905.41 29.95 32.5 629842.40 629695.32 629791.57 629887.82 50.83 33.0 629830.88 629677.73 o29773.98 629870.23 56.90 33.5 629821.00 629660.14 629756.39 629852.64 64.62 24.0 629814.42 629642.55 629738.80 629835.05 75.62 l

• - INDICATES VALUE OUTSIDE OF 951 CONFIDENCE TRE LEAST SQUARES EQUATION IS W = WO + W1

• T WO = 630583.07 LB W1 = -35.18 LB/HR-

. 95Z CONFIDENCE LIMIT FOR WO = 26.54 LB 95% CONFIDENCE LIMIT FOR W1 a 1.91 L5/HR

. STANDARD ERROR OF CONFIDENCE = 48.13 La 951 CONFIDENCE LEAKACE RATE = 0.007 : PER DAY l LEAKAGE RATE = 0.134 % PER DAY

• APPENDIE D COMPUTER PRINTOUT CRYSTAL RIVER 3 IMPOSED LEAK RATE TEST FOR VERIFICATION 1980 - START TIME 6/30/80, 1030 LEAST SQUARES RESULTS BASED ON 13 DATA POINTS 95: CONYIDENCE LIMIT TIME OSSERVED VEICHT MINUS CALCUIATED PLUS 083. MINUS CALC.

PERIOD (LB) (LB) (LB) G2) (LB) 0.0 629814.42 629762.32 629794.19 629826.05 20.24 0.5 629774.92 629727.15 629759.01 629790.87 15.91 1.0 629702.48 629691.97 629723.83 629755.69 -21.35 1.5 629682.72 629656.79 629688.65 629720.52 -5.94 2.0 629658.01 629621.62 629653.48 629685.34 4.54 2.5 629598.74 629586.44 629618.30 629650.16 -19.56 3.0 629574.03 62?551.26 629583.12 629614.99 -9.09 3.5 629549.32 6 .08 629547.95 629579.81 1.37 4.0 629522.96 t<, r 91 629512.77 629544.63 10.19 4.5 629476.84 L: 0 .73 629477.59 629509.45 -0.75 5.0 629420.84 62c;io.55 629442.41 629474.28 -21.57 5.5 629409.23 629375.38 629407.24 629439.10 2.00 6.0 629396.07 629340.20 629372.06 629403.92 24.01 1

THE LEAST SQUARES EQUATION IS W = WO + W1

• T WO = 629794.19 LB W1 = -70.35 L5/HR 951 CONFIDENCE LIMIT FOR WO = 18.38 L3 951 CONFIDENCE LIMIT FOR W1 = 5.20 LB/HR STANDARD ERROR OF CONFIDENCE = 15.93 LB 95% CONFIDENCE LEAKAGE RATE = 0.020 : PER DAY t 1.EAKAGE RATE = 0.268 1 PER DAY d

, ew, = me

. .- - = . . . . - . .-- - . _ - . . . . . - ..._ -. __ . _ _

d

! o 1 .

i .

i..

i 1

t i,

I I

f l

APPENDIX E 4

LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT - 1979 t

t k

i t

i i

I

4 1

m ge - m

.- --% ew-- r + + - - --

T + ---y e 9--A ~- - -- - - -s- - -

3re W *- - pd yw w w y -+

• l

~

l l

l l

FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION l CRYSTAL RIVER UNIT (/3 NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT Contract No. 37380 l

Prepared By h Date 9/20/79 k.d DeGrasse - Supervisory Startup Engr.

Reviewed By Date 9/20/79 DUPLICATE DOCUMENT Entire document previously  ;

entered into syster under:

ANO 19 ld)$d43 9 No. of pages: L-f l '

se:es.. sone 1 CATALYTIC, INC. Sheet B 1 of 2 Centre Square West,1500 Merket Street, Philodelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 Rev.

l f

. ,~

10 CAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT o.a: 9/20/79 APPENDIX B LLRT'S PERr0RMED BEWEEN PJTUELING OUTAGES T

6 i

l l

'seems sesee

$*, CATALYTIC, INC. Sheet B2 of 2 Centre Square West 1500 Market Street, Phifedelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 E Rev.

LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT Date: ?/20/79 LLRT'S PERFORMED BETWEEN REFUELING OUTAGES Description As Found Re-Test As-Left Date Tested CAV-1 0 N/A 0 9/2/78 CAV-2 534.6 N/A 534.6 9/2/78 CAV-3 0 N/A 0 9/2/78 i i CAV-126 534 N/A 534 9/2/78 Fuel Transfer Tube 3A 0 N/A 0 9/2/78 Fuel Transfer Tube 3B 0 N/A 0 9/2/78 Equipment Hatch 57.1 N/A 57.1 9/7/78 i

l i

e 9

e e

l APPENDIX F LOCAL LEAK RATE TEST REPORT - 1980 Geert /Commonween

.