ML20027B879
| ML20027B879 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 09/16/1982 |
| From: | CONSUMERS ENERGY CO. (FORMERLY CONSUMERS POWER CO.) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20027B861 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8209300254 | |
| Download: ML20027B879 (16) | |
Text
CONSUMERS POWER COMPANY BIG ROCK POINT NUCLEAR PLANT Docket No 50-155 License No DPR-6 Special Report No 31 1982 REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATED LEAKAGE RATE TEST September 16, 1982 8209300254 820916 16 Pages PDR ADOCK 05000155 P
BIG ROCK POINF REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATED LEAKAGE RATE TEST Report Contents hK' 1.0
SUMMARY
1.1 Introduction........................
1 1.2 Results 1
2.0 DISCUSSION 2.1 Analysis Techniques 9
2.2 Data Acquisition............._.........
9 23 Containment Conditions..................
10 3.'O CONCLUSION 11
4.0 REFERENCES
i4 List of Tables TABLE 1 - Sununary of Big Rock Point Plant Containment Integrated Leak Rate Tests.....
2 TABLE 2 - Summary of Local Leakage Re.te Tests 4
List of Figures FIGURE 1 - Graphs of Average RED, Dewcell, and Pressure Guages...
12 FIGURE 2 - Graph of Containment Mass................
13
1.0
SUMMARY
1.1 _IlffRODUCTION Consumers Power Company's Big Rock Point Nuclear Power Plant coapleted its ninth (in a series from 1962) reduced pressure Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test (CILE). A summary of past CILE's is given in Table 1 and a summary of previous Local Leakage Rate Tests (LLE) is given in Table 2.
The containment vessel is made of carbon steel plate rangin6 from ) inch thick to 3/4 inch thick with 1-1.5 inches of polyurethane insulation. Therefore it is susceptible to changes in atmos-pheric conditions. Overcast conditions prevailed through a majority of the 24-hour hold test with wind conditions ranging from calm to gusty. Temperatures ranged from 2/-40 degrees farenheit and pre-cipi't.ation in the form of rain and snow fell. Minimal diurnal effects were experienced during the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> hold test.
1.2 RSSULTS In order to fulfill the requirements of Reference 3, a CILE began with pressurization on March 30, 1982 and concluded with depressur-ization on April 2,1982. A reduced pressure of 12.6 PSIG was recorded at the end of the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> hold test.
From the 24-hour hold test data, e calculated nominal leakage rate of 0.0201 weight %/ day with a one sided approximate upper confidence limit of 0.0232 weight %/dey of contained dry air mass was calculated.
Using the actual test pressure of 12.6 PSIG, the maximum allowable leakage rate is 0.3416 weight %/ day. Reference 3 also requires that the leakage rate cannot exceed '/5% of the allowable leakage rate or O.2562 weight %/ day before resumption of power operation. This criterion was met therefore the Big Rock Point Plant was able to resume power operation without repairing any containment penetrations and reperforming the CILE. --
~
9 TABLE 1
SUMMARY
OF bio ROCK POINT PLANT CONTADbENT INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TErs Test Measured Leak Allowable Leak Date P essure (Psig)
Rate (%/ Day)
Rate (5/ Day)
Comments 1/61 27 0.036 0.5 Included pneumatic over-load test at 33.75 Pcis 6/62 lo 0.021 0.121 A n oved leak rate is 75%
of Technical Specification reduced pressure allowed leak rate from 6/62 to the last test of h/Th.
4/6k 10 0.037 1 0.034 0.121 h/66 10 0.077 1 0.025 0.121 T/68 10 0.061 1 0.017 0.121 3/70 10 0.084 1 0.030 0.121 4/T2 12 0.028 1 0.072 0.1h9 h/74 13 0.075 1 0.047 0.131 Measur,ed contain=ent leak-age rate after acceptance of ventilation valve D
Q 9/TT 13 0.072 1 0.0h3 0.174/0.3h7 0 95% confidence level of containment leak rate corrected for measured local leak-age rate of feedvater check valve
@ Technical Specification limit /loCFR50 Appendix J,Section III A.h limit.
0 4/82 12.6 0.0201/0.0232 o.3416 Nominal measured leakage rate /95% approx upper con-fidence limit. The uif-ference in leakage rates from before maint. and after meint results is not added to these leakage rates.
l - _
LEGEND FOR TABLE 2 SVV
- Supply Vent Valve EVV
- Exhaust Vent Valve PL
- Personnel Lock EqL
- Equipment Lock EsL
- Escape Lock CPen - Conax Penetrations Hk0, H65, H81, H83 CSPD - Clean Sump Pump Discharge DSPD - Dirty Sump Pump Discharge EC
- Emergency Condenser Sample Point Check Valve or Sight Glass Vent Valve TWR
- Treated Waste Return RS
- Resin Sluice Line R&FPD - Reactor and Fuel Pit Drain CRD
- Control Rod Drive Isolation MS
- Main Steam Isolation and Drain FW
- Feedvater Check Valve
- D' min Water Isolation DM e
- Ventilation Probe
re htO 4
1 P
0 V
1 9
ND 3
1 1
09 3
8 0
H88 5
W 5
F 1
W>
D 2
R 0
5 C
1 D
8 0
9 2
P 2
7 h.
9 F&
0 8
5 0
0 R
6 6
h 1
SRU 1
O S
H R
1 1
h2
/
S 3
2 D
R 1
N W
0 E
U T
0 3
L P
BA CE 0
0 T
ETAR 0
2 D
8 5
E P
G S
1 3
A D
1 K
C n
5 0
e 3
PC 2
3 5
t 6
9 s
E 1
2 1
6 L
5 7
q E
2 2
4 5
2 L
5 0
1 P
9 0
0 1
1 1
2 V
1 8
1 V
0 7
4 E
5 7
1 1
3 6
0 V
7 3
0 0
VS 0
0 2
7 8
8 8
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
9 9
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
7 7
e
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
t k
4 b
6 0
3 7
1 1
L 5
h 5
7 1
3 5
8 3
0 1
8 9
0 1
?
a 0
0 2
2 2
2 2
3 0
0 0
2 2
2 0
0 0
0 1
2 2
2 2
3 3
1 D
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
//
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
8 0
0 0
1 1
1 1
2 2
2 2
27 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
8 8
8 8
9 0
1 1
1 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0 0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
3 h.
2 re htO i
PV ta t
,1 1
09 0
8-.
H88 W
F S
M 63 7
1 DR h
3 9
C 8
6 1
DPF&
R Sm h
5 lo S
H R
1 h
)
2
/
t S
R n
D V
o N
C U
O
(
P C
0 2
E E
E T
L AR D
h B
P 3
A E
S T
G D
1 AKAE D
2 L
PS 1
C 1
ne PC ts 0
0 E
3 2
7 6
t 0
6 a
2 0
E 5
3 1
3 9
L 2
1 7
P 3
3 1
1 h
0 W
6 7
8 3
3 7
E 0
2 7
9 2
7 1
1 6
3 1
6 2
y 2
6 v
S 7
5 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7 7 7 7 7 8 8 8 8 8 B 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8
/ /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
e 1
2 3 h 5 9 9 8 3 2 1 6 7 9 0 6 0 2 7 5 6 8 t
1 1
1 1
1 1
1 2
1 2
1 1
1 2 3 2 1
1 0
1 2 2 a / /
/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / /
D 0 0 0
0 0 0 2 2 3 3 L h
4 L k 8 9 9 0 0 0 0 1
1 1
1 1
1 0 0 0 0 O O 0 O o 0 0 0 1
1 1
1 h'
l l
9 T
J;?
1 2
h.Y.
?.
k.
5 g
w w
O
=
o N
N 8
E 8 8 o
M
- 8. *.
p E
8 o
R E
6 V
B s
=
i:
0 t
e
~
m k
a m
C
-Q U
U H
N 8
e o
o N
Q "o
2 e
8 8
{
s 2
8 8
5 1
=
e e
1 8
m e-4 M
i 8
O.
9 S
d e.
o.
o af M
E y
4
(
c a
~
~
m o
o e
o 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 8 G G G G 2 a e 2 2 2 & 8 8 3 ? >
3 2 7 R A H' ? s 2 2 2 3 2 2 3 3 3 3 9-e e e E c e a e c c e e c e e c e c e c e e
=
- ::::enas ses ssMas aas 8 _.
2 re h
tO PV 1
6h 8
o 3
1 1
09 7
9 8
h 0
9 0
H8 0
0 8
0 W
0 F
1 S
M DR T
C IM IL D
2 P
2 1
N F
0 0
O 1
0 I
R TAC I
7 h
F 0
6 I
S 0
1 0
1 C
R EP
)
S tn L
R o
A W
C 1
C T
(
ID 2
CI C
0 2
E E
0 T
E 0
F L
O B
D 6
A 5
P 9
0 S
6 5
T D
3 0
ET 1
A D
8 5
R P
8 5
3 S
1 2
2 E
C 0
0 0
o AKAE n
L e
PC bs E
Lq E
.e 6
9 r
V 2
6 u
V 9
6 s
E 0
0 se i
r p
8 2
d V
7 2
l V
4 h
o S
0 o.
h o
t 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
2 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 8
8 e
e
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
l t
k 6
7 8
1 2
5 1
5 7
8 0
6 3
b a
2 2
2 2
0 0
0 1
1 1
1 2
2 0
a D
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
n 2
2 2
2 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
3 3
t U
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 o
eY 1
~
l A verification test was conducted following the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> hold test byimposinga0.266 weight %/dayleakagerateonthecontainment.
Reference 4 ctates the controlled leakage rate acceptance criteria is as follows:
Lowerbound i observed leakage rate 5 upperbound.
A calculated nominal leakage rate of 0.2031 weight %/ day of contained dry air mass was obtained using the measured data. Using the above equation, the controlled leakage rate acceptance criteria is 0.197 i O.20310 374 (weight %/ day). This value meets the requirements of Reference 3,Section III.A.3.b, and thus confirms the CILIE hold test results.
The following plant modifications affecting containment integrity were performed since the 1977 CILRr:
1.
The seat configuration for the supply vent butterfly valve has been modified.
2.
A new exhaust vent butterfly valve has been installed.
3 The feedwater check valve disc has been lapped several times.
The leakage rates for components that were repaired during the refuel-ing outage prior to the CILRT are:
Leakage Rates % of Technical Specification Limit Component Before Maint. '
After Maint.
Supply Vent Valve 0.0678%
0.0422%
Exhaust Vent Valve 0.0926%
0.o669%
Reactor and Fuel Pit Drain 0.1164%
0.0012%
Feedwater Check Valve 150.0%
0.1000%
Resin Sluice Valve Would not hold 0.0007%
pressure The Big Rock Point LLRT program identified the penetrations which required maintenance / repair because the measured leakage rate from the CILRT was less than the allowed leakage rate, therefore, the integrity of the Big Rock Point containment was verified and the next CILRF test has been tentatively scheduled for the 1985 refueling outage.. _.. _ - _
2.0 DISCUSSION 2.1 ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES The weighting factors used to calculate the average containment drybulb and dewpoint temperature have been calculated based on the number of sensors within a sub-volume. The containment vapor pressure is computed by converting the Foxboro dew point temperature sensor (Dewcel) readings to vapor pressure readings through the use of the ASME Steam Tables for water and applying the appropriate weighting factors. This containment vapor pressure is subtracted from the absolute pressure to give the containment dry air partial pressure.
The partial pressure of dry air and the weighted average containment temperature are then used to calculate the leakage rate in weight %/ day.
The absolute method of determining the leakage rate was used for this test and measurements were recorded every fifteen minutes. The leakage rate was computed using the mass point method of analysis which is endorsed by Reference 2.
In the mass point method of analysis, data from an absolute system is reduced to a contained mass of dry air by application of the ideal gas law. The test data consists of a time series of independent values of contained air mass. If the assumption is made that the leakage rate is constant with time, the data lends itself to analysis by the method of linear least squares. The slope of this line represents the rate of change of air mass with respect to time, which is the leakage rate. Because of its indepen-dent nature, a measurement error will result in only one bad data point and not materially affect the test results. Although no data was rejected in this test, the data rejection criteria found in Appendix D of Reference 2 was used by the computer program to check for anomalous data.
2.2 DATA ACQUISITION Previous CILRIs have used the reference vessel method and absolute method to measure the leakage rate. Data was taken every half hour using the original temperature, humidity and pressure sensors.
-9 4
....,-----e
.-,.-.-..e-
--,.,w-
Because of the physical setup of the measurement system, instrument error and human error influenced the test results. Since the CILE conducted in 1977, significant changes have been made to assure that satisfactory containment leak rate test data will be obtained. The changes which have been made for the 1982 CIIRE are discussed below.
Twenty resistance temperature detectors (EDs), ten deweels and two pressure sensors are used to measure the average dry bulb and dew-point temperatures and the containment pressure respectively. The weighting factors used to calculate the average containment air temperature have been calculated based on the number of sensors within a subvolume. The maximum weighting factors were 5.836% for a ED and 11.645% for a dewcel.
No sensors were lost during the test. The sensitivity of the EDs and dewcels is within the requirements of Reference 2, Section 4.31. The calculated Instrument Selection Guide (ISG) for the instrumentation used during the test is t 0.005%/ day, which meets the requirements of Reference 2, Section 4.1.2.
Data is collected by the ILE panel purchased from Volumetrics (model 14629) and transferred to the PDP11/03 digital minicomputer after receiving the data, the minicomputer program performs the iltnctions listed below:
1.
Reduces raw data into weighted average temperatures, vapor i
pressures, and containment pressure necessary for use in the leakage rate calculations.
2.
Calculates the leakage rate in weight $/ day using the mass point analysis method.
3.
Determines the approximate 95% upper confidence limit of the leakage rate using the methods described in Reference 2, Appendix B.
4.
Calculates the data outlier and the appropriate rejection level eccording to the criteria of Reference 2, Appendix D.
5 Provides plots of individual test parameters as well as containment everage temperature, pressure, vapor pressure, and mass as a function of time. 1
-. - - i
A listing containing all of the measured data has been filed with the ILRT test procedure (Reference 3).
23 00NrAINMENE CONDITIONS The average containment temperature fulfilled the stabilization requirements of Reference 2, Section 5 313, and Reference 5, Section 5.3.1, approximately 10 hours1.157407e-4 days <br />0.00278 hours <br />1.653439e-5 weeks <br />3.805e-6 months <br /> after pressurization was completed. Therefore, the hold test portion of this leakage rate test has been declared to start at 090/16:00:00.
The average containment parameters have been plotted to show the containment conditions during the 24-hour hold test as shown in Figure 1.
The average containment temperature and pressure began to increase during the last portion of the test.
Figure 2 shows a plot of the average containment mass along with a solid line representing the 75% allowable leakage rate of 14.03 Pound mass / hour (0.2562 weight %/ day). The leakage rate during the last segment of the test is within the acceptance criteria, even with a change in the trend of the containment parameters.
30 00NCLUSION 31 The Big Rock Point containment satisfied the acceptance criteria for the CILRT.
32 The controlled leakage rate verified the hold test results.
33 The calculated Iso fulfilled the requirements of Reference 5 3.4 The after maintenance results of the LLRTs meets the requirements of Reference 4, Section 3.7
FIGURd 1
........3...................................................
59.M AVG RTD 1
..... ~...... -......
58.00
...... ~.. ~..-
i 57.00 l
l IEG. F
... ~..............
56.00
..........I.............................................-
55.00 l
_I D.
t 54.00 STARTING JULIAN DATE & TIE: 090 16:00:00 I
HOLRl 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 1B
- 20 22 24 i
.......................................... ~.... ~ -
~. -...... ~......-..
9.16 AVG DEMCELL
==......-
6.15
......n.
- r..
........ h..........................
... ~.......................
A.
9.14 PSIA
..............................................................%p 9.13
.v 9.12 t
9.111 STARTING JULIAN DATE S TIE: 090 16:00:00,,
I HOUR l 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
........l................................................
27.70l AVG FRESS GAUGE 27.60 27.50 l
PSIA i
4........................................
27.40 1
l_
..........g.........................................
27.34 l
g I
27.20 STARTING JLt I AN DATE & TIE: 090 16:00:00 l
HOUR 2
4 6
8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _
FIGURE 2 1
i
==_ -
130320.
CCNTAIttENT tR%
130300.
v.
..............s.......................-..............................................................
130280.
s
'l
- s ' ;.
fSf r
r
......."...n.,.'...-
.N..... '... :.... i..'#'....... %....,;..~..W.
LBS
^
..n.,.
..f......
.,,,V V. -
N 130260.
a
.........................................\\t........
130240.T..
L.A E
130220.l STMtTING.AA.IAN DATE & TIPE: 090 16:00:00 I
HOLR,
2 4
6 8
10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24
4.0 REFERENCES
4.1 Consumers Power Company Special Report 27, " Reactor Containment Building Integrated Leakage Rate Test, 1978."
4.2 ANSI /ANS %.8 - 1981 "American National Standard Containment System Leakage Testing Requirements."
4.4 Big Rock Point Technical Specifications.
4.5 Big Rock Point 1982 CILRf Test Procedures TV-02.
14-
,e w-~
-,w-
---ma-
- -