ML20054H688
| ML20054H688 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden, Byron, Braidwood, Quad Cities, Zion, LaSalle, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 06/16/1982 |
| From: | Schroeder C COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054H689 | List: |
| References | |
| 4364N, NUDOCS 8206240332 | |
| Download: ML20054H688 (1) | |
Text
[ON Commonwealth Edison
) ona First Natctri Ptza. Chicago, litinois C
~J Addr:ss R; ply 13: Post Offect Box 767
(
/ Chicago, Illinois 60690 Jun e 16, 1982 Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director Of fice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555
Subject:
Commonwealth Edison Company Of fsite Dose Calculation System NRC Docket Nos. 50-10/237/249, 50-295/304, 50-254/265, 50-373/374, 50-454/455/456/457 References (a):
W.
Naughton letter to H.
R. Denton dated Augus t 29, 1980.
(b):
L.
DelGeorge letter to H. R. Denton dated January 19, 1981.
(c):
C. Schroeder letter to A. Schwencer dated March 30, 1982.
Dear Mr. Denton:
Re ference (a) originally submitted the Commonwealth Edison Of fsite Dose Calculation System Program on the Zion dockets.
Re fe r-ence (b) submitted the program for all Commonwealth Edison dockets.
Reference (c) submitted a February, 1982 Revision 3 update of this program on the LaSalle dockets.
The purpose of this letter is to submit the February, 1982 Revision 3 update for all Commonwealth Edison nuclear station dockets.
If there are any questions in this matter, please contact this office.
Enclosed for your use are one (1) signed original and twenty-five (25) copies of this letter and the Offsite Dose Calcula--
tion System Program.
Very truly yours, O
6// 7/92 -
C. W. Schroeder Nuclear Licensing Administrator 1m Enclosures
[h#4[ g ac/
cc: NRC Resident Inspector - All Stations 8206240332 B20616
[I j
{DRADOCK05000 4364N t
February 1982 Revision 3 COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY
't
^
OFFSITE DOSE CAIEULATION SYSTEM A Meteorological Monitoring, Offsite Dose Calculation Program for Emergency Preparedness at Operating Nuclear Power Plants Prepared by:
Radioecology Team Technical Services Nuclear Commonwealth Edison Company l
80291A l
l
~
\\
l hb g,
% V Li G ~i G liq
February 1982 Revision 3 Page i Table of Contents Page 1
I.
Introduction 2
II.
Objectives of the ODCS 3
III. Description of the ODCS 3
1.
System Design and Atmospheric Dispersion Models 8
2.
Backup Measurement Systems 19 3.
Weather Forecasts 4.
Lake Ef fects at Zion Station 21 25 5.
NRC Data Link 26 IV.
Model Accuracy and Conservatism 31 V.
Quality Assurance Program 32 VI.
Schedule VII. Appendices A.
ODCS Class A Model B.
Independent Signal Pathways at Meteorological Facilities C.
Quality Articles and Quality Assurance Program D.
ODCS Class C Model E.
ODCS Tracking Model F.
Lake Breeze Forecast Consideration G.
References k
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 1 Commonwealth Edison Company Offsite Dose Calculation System This report describes the upgraded Commonwealth Edison (CECO) Offsite Dose Calculation System (ODCS), a computer-based method for estimating the environmental impact of unplanned airborne releases of radioactivity from nuclear stations. The ODCS is designed to meet the meteorological criteria of NUREG-0654 and the NRC order for Zion Station dated 02/29/80.
It also addresses the intent of the criteria in Regulatory Guide 1.23.
The original ODCS submittal was made in July 1980 on all dockets and is referenced in this report. Only pertinent appendices from that submittal are reproduced herein.
NUREG-0654 " Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants" and the NRC order for Zion Station dated 2/29/80 describe meteorological criteria for emergency preparedness at operating nuclear power plants and Zion in particular. The position of the NRC is that all operating plants shall have an adequate operational meteorological measurements program to produce real-time and record historical local meteorological data. Highlights of these criteria are l
(1)
There shall be a primary meteorological measurements program and a viable backup system and/or procedures to obtain i
real-time local meteorological data.
(2)
There shall be a QA program consistent with applicable provisions of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50; the acceptance criteria of Revision 1, Section 17.2 of NUREG-75/087 apply.
(3)
The meteorological tower (s) shall be connected to a power system which is supplied from redundant power sources.
(4)
There shall be two classes of atmospheric dispersion models:
Class As A model which can produce initial transport and diffusion estimates within 15 minutes following classification of an incident.
Class B: A model which can produce refined estimates for the duration of the release. It shall also include forecasts of changing meteorological conditions.
(5)
The models shall incorporate these features: weather forecasts-(for the Class B model only), local meteorological anomalies (such as lake ef fects at Zion), routine meteorological data transmission to the NRC, and simultaneous remote interrogation by the licensee, the emergency response organization and the NRC.
II.
Objectives of the ODCS '
The objectives of the Commonwealth Edison Offsite Dose Calculation System are:
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 2 (1) Meet the intent of the meteorological criteria of NUREG-0654 the Zion order,and Regulatory Guide 1.23.
(2)
Provide, where possible, redundant independent pathways of data transmission and redundant data processing computers for use in an emergency situation.
(3)
Provide quick and reasonably accurate estimates of radiation dose to persons living offsite, including preparation of procedures and training of users required to accomplish this assessment.
(4)
Provide off-site access to plant and meteorological information by the licensee, the emergency response organization and the NRC.
(5)
?; ovide a method for the meteorological contractor to secure meteorological data for assessment of routine releases and to detect equipment failure quickly.
III.
Description of the O.D.C.S.
1.
System Design and Atmospheric Dispersion Models Design on a routine basis each nuclear station meteorological tower will be interrogated many times daily by the meteorological contractor to secure the information necessary for preparation of meteorological operating reports and to detect system f ailures.
Every hour, and more frequently during an accident, a corporate (in Chicago) computer will poll each meteorological facility to prepare the corporate data file and to check the system in order to maintain the ODCS in a readiness posture. The corporate computer will then store the data for an extended period of time and process the data when refined estimates of dose are needed.
At each nuclear station, two computers with different functional requirements will process the meteorological information. The plant i
process computers produce one minute averages of meteorological data f rom the analog signals. The plant Prime computer uses the 1-minute averages to create 15 minute running averages of meteorological data. Refined estimates of dose may be generated in the Technical Support Center (TSC) and Emergency Operations Facility (EOF).
During an accident, the described computer systems will provide the various users with timely information required to make decisions.
Emergency actions will be performed in the following approximate time frame sequences:
first - initial one-half hour or so post-accident - the control room operator will rely on wind speed and direction and effluent release rate information provided by the plant process computer and these data converted into requisite
.n6hL
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 3 second - 1/2 hour to few hours - the plant will rely on the station designated ODCS user to analyze the off-site consequences using either the A-model,(demand execution mode) or the C-model.
third - few hours to duration of accident - a corporate environmental group, formed to support all nuclear stations, will provide refined estimates of the offsite consequences for the duration of the emergency period using the B-model and a CECO developed, C-model for analysis of certain environmental dose pathways. A data link between the corporate facility and each EOF will provide these independent analyses to the EOF recovery team. Additionally the EOF ODCS operator will produce refined estamate of dose using the A, B, and C. models.
Figure 1 shows the ODCS data processing centers and the multi-tiered lines of communication for transmitting meteorological information among the centers. The control room operator will be provided ODCS information from the plant process computer which will be linked directly to the meteorological tower. The operator will have immediately available on command meteorological, noble gas effluent, emergency action level, and offsite dose consequence information through the Class A computer model.
Table 1 provides a summary of CECO's planned Offsite Dose Calculation l
system.
l The backup meteorological measurements program, forecasts of changing meteorological conditions and the NRC data link for meteorological information are described in subsequent sections.
Models l
The Class A model will activate the necessary EAL alarms for site i
emergency: 2-minute average noble gas release rate having projected offsite dose rate of 500 mR/hr and 30-minute average noble gas release rate having projected offsite dose rate of 50 mR/hr, using worst case meteorology, and for general emergency:
2-minute average noble gas j
release rate having projected offsite dose rate of 1000 mR/hr using i
15-minute average actual meteorology. For additional information on this model see Appendix A.
The ODCS operator in the TSC has access to the plant computers. As a result, the TSC operator can produce estimates of the offsite consequences with the Class A or Class C-models. Site meteorological data are available to the TSC through a number of paths: directly via the process computer or indirectly via the telephone link to the Microtels.
In addition, meteorological information from other similarly equipped CECO meteorological towers (there are a total of six) may be interrogated directly via the prime network or indirectly via telephone link to the Microtels. All data are stored in the corporate computer for 60 days.
(Note that dew point temperatures at Dresden, Quad Cities, LaSalle and Zion will be available through Microtel A but not through Microtel B due to limited rack space.)
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 4 The Class C-model incorporates techniques for making refined estimates of offsite radiation doses. Through a series of short, quick, calculations based on the Gaussian straight line plume model, the ODCS operator may easily update changing meteorological and plant information, keeping the offsite assessment as current and up-to-date as possible.
Inhalation and ingestion doses may be determined using actual field measurements of dose rate. Further, the model allows for dose assessment under lake breeze conditions of plume trapping and fumigation. As a predictive tool, forecasted meteorological data may be input and projected offsite consequences determined.
As an adjunct to the Class C-model, a tracking model has been developed to aid in the depiction of flow regimes, especially under lake breeze conditions. The model is described in detail in Appendix E.
The Class B-model, a historical model, documents all releases (multiple release periods) and changing conditions for the duration of the incident. The offsite individual's whole body dose, the population whole body dose, the individuals skin dose and the inhalation dose to 7 organs of the adult and infant from 73 different non-noble gas nuclides are determined. The B-model is described in Section 9.0 of the Commonwealth Edison Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ref.14)
All four computer models used by CECO are based on atmospheric transport models and data processing techniques described in TID-24190
" Meteorology and Atomic Energy 1968", NUREG/CR-0936 " Recommendations for Meteorological Measurement Programs and Atmospheric Diffusion Prediction Methods for Use at Coastal Nuclear Reactor Sites", and Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.109 " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix I".
At Zion Station, the lake breeze effects of plume trapping and fumigation have been incorporated into each of the models, developed from the NUREG/CR-0936 Class.Section I.4 describes the lake effect model in further detail.
Plume meander or absence thereof as 9stimated from the measurement of sigma-subtheta has been incorporated into the plume centerline dispersion model which heretofore was based only oa a measurement of differential temperature on the tower.
Lastly, all calculations have been documented in emergency procedures (ref. 18) such that they may be performed manually, if necessary.
O ls
,d I
l @-H rl y_g_8 i l>
i i
'u a
T uf
- s g a
F l
l Il u o i
- g o
e g
~~~--
5 1
t_
- n__ -_______
t 13 3u l
g y;
_ _ _ _ __ _ _ _,l j
g 3
a g
81 g
a g
i p -
- n_
c 2u i
i e
a e
t 5 yl i i di il' 1 *T l
>llo@-~l c---,'l i
! !s a l i!
[a.
s sli A
a r
i 4 3 g
s s a r,.
'i 8iz
- os2a l2 9
@(9 i
m a
iI 5 sgM
'a g
Lo _ _ _s _Ii a
I a
ssr 3 9 a
L g
g 2
o n I
3 o
g of I
7 I '_ ~_ ]I
,$j g
Wp 9
o L g n
c 8
Si
<3 a
f os
I gga a
c#
d 59 T
ii,
- bj M
- f a
- 26
,uf 8
3 i
o aos so i.
oe i i o
i g,hl5$ Rb 0 p 'a N h N Y ".
' I CQ ic y
- s2 a
i i ir i.- u a -
2 i
at $
f a u 6J d,-
+ F l l O J2 y!, f p
E g ig 1
I 7, p u - o 4-
> c i
}C g
ih 9 2 'h5 i
+E I ih?!!h f $$ E I
i 0
I 2
lhe y
t----
'i W go! ! ! 3, N,y!S
$ ll u
u a u ru1 2 c
~
o y
f 8g!
l
~
e u
I e
L______
_ _ _._ _ _ a [ - _
g j jj j ggg d
g g
a6 0-fyh 8 @(E 6f o
o
__q F
a n
l N
N N
i T
it i
I j
i i
1 g
l l
0 t
I 4
. ~4
_r_
gego55!
"eN l
, l tjlle i
i lf[yf'
_a i
p i
s____
j l
1 I
I d
j e
3 l
N I
i$
u I
0 I Fh i
I
_j_
_l_
2 i
.a Oge isg a
i i
2 g
g 8,
g l
l3 g
uy t_
o!. _ _ _ _3 au t
February, 1982 Revision 3 Pag 6 6 Table 1 A Summary of the Offsite Dose Calculation System Source of Meteorological Information Radiation User or Computer Site Other Sites Forecast Dose Model Data Link Pltnt Process (1) Direct (1) Manual A
. Control room oper.
analog entry for
.TSC ODCS oper.
signal lake effect from parameters tower (Zion only)
Pirnt Prime (1) Plant Process (1) Phone link to (1) Metro-Contractor C,A
.TSC ODCS oper.
(2) Phone link to Tower Microtel on command T
. EOF ODCS oper.
Tower Microtel (2) Phone link to (3) Phone link to Plant Microtel Plant Microtel (3) Prime Computer Link Tow 2r Microtel (1) Direct Backup Data Link analog for:
signal
. Plant Computer
. Corporate Computer
. Metro Contractor Plcnt Microtel (1) Direct Data Link for:
analog
. Plant Computer signal
.IDNS from
. Metro Contractor tower
. Corporate Computer i
February, 1982 i
Revision 3 Page 7 Table 1 A Summary of the Off ite Dose Calculation System Source of Meteorological Information Radiation User or j
Computer Site Other Si'.es Forecast Dose Model Data Link Corporate Prime (1) Phone Link to Same as (1) Metro-Contractor T,C
. Corporate ODCS oper.
Tower Microtel plant Prime polled routinely A
.All stations TSC and EOF every 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />, operators.
(2) Phone Link to computer (2) Metro-Contractor on command Plant Microtel (3) Manual entry Corporate IBM (1) Corporate Prime B*
. Corporate ODCS operator 1
i l
i
- The B model will be placed in the Prime computer in 1983.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 8 2.
Backup Measurement Systems Section 2 of Annex 2 to the Zion 2/29/80 order and NUREG-0654, Appendix 2, both require a backup metro measurements program consisting of either a " viable backup system and/or procedures."
Although the order calls for a system and/or procedures, CECO will implement both. The backup systems consist of the already existing multiple measurement tower-mounted equipment that is being specially isolated to provide completely independent signals from one another (Tables 2a - 2f). Therefore, loss of any signal due to component failure will not result in the loss of additional signals. This method of signal isolation is superior to the installation of more instrumented towers in several ways.
First, based on more than 50 station years of operation, instrument failures from whatever cause have occurred in the sensor and/or signal conditioners, thereby preventing other unaffected sensors' signals f rom being processed. The isolated signal processing with independent power supplies and signal paths is designed to prevent this failure mode from occuring.
(For a more detailed description of the independent signal pathways see Appendix C).
Second, a disaster of sufficient magnitude to render all measurements on the tower useless, although extremely remote, would in all probability also inflict similar damage to any backup tower nearby.
Should a disaster of sufficient magnitude occur, a contract is maintained to have a temporary tower erected within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br />. For l
l ready placement on this temporary tower the meteorological contractor maintains two levels of sensors (wind speed, wind direction and temperature).
Third, CECO's existing instrumented towers at six (6) nuclear plant sites located in Northern Illinois provide a high-density measurement network with multiple backup opportunities.
Finally, CECO's meteorological consultants provide a 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> per day, l
l 7 days per week data source consisting of all routinely available National Weather Service information plus the CECO network data.
l l
The backup system priority is summarized in Tables 3 and 4.
For example, if a ground level release occurred (Table 3) at Quad Cities and the primary wind or differential temperature (196 f t. and 196-33 ft.) were lost then the immediate backup measurements would be the second level (296 ft. and 296-33 f t.) at Quad Cities. The backup identified in the table with
'f' represents values provided by the meteorological consultant. Backup systems for accidental elevated releases are shown in Table 4 with similar interpretations.
i I
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 9 The backup priority was developed from the following considerations:
(a)
As described in Appendix C, the sensors and signal conditioners for each elevation on the tower are isolated from one another to the extent possible into two independent paths (denoted by A and B in Figure 1). Since all the towers have wind instruments at at least two elevations, each is placed in separate paths.
Similarly, where multiple measurements of the same parameter are made, they are separated into two paths.
( b) The primary measurements are those located on the tower at the elevation that most appropriately represents the principal release points, i.e. elevated or ground level.
(c) The first backup system for reach release level will come from the signals provided in the alternate path on the same tower.
(d) Data from additional tower systems in the network or from the meteorological consultant comprise the remainder of the backup.
2.1 Meteorological Maintenance Program The meteorological maintenance program consists of several independent methods to verify quality data transmissions from each meteorological tower.
The corporate computer polls each meteorological tower every hour.
The A Microtel is polled first, if the poll fails, the B Microtel is then called. If a transmission is not received from either Microtel, the computer automatically increments its request for the next hour. Should the number of requests be four or more, the console operator notifies the computer system's ODCS staff who begins to isolate the cause. The meteorological contractor is also notified and an independent check of the transmission is made from the contractor's office.
Each day's data are screened by a validation program which flags all missing and/or suspect values. The meteorological contractor is notified of persistent outages and the proper restoration procedure is followed.
Additionally, data may be examined in the corporate office, for correctness, on demand.
As an independent method of data retrieval, the meteorological contractor interrogates each meteorological tower three times a day. Data are passed through a validation proceduro, and suspect data closely examined. Field teams are then assigned for restoration of the system.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 10 The meteorological contractor maintains a comprehensive field Routine visits are made to each tower once a week to retrieve program.
analog data and inspect the equipment. These visits are directed toward ground based equipment, although a visual inspection of the tower sensing equipment is made. Those instruments equipped with internal calibrations are checked on a weekly basis. A log of the week's activities is filled out and kept on file both with the contractor and at the corporate office.
Bi-monthly calibrations are performed at each meteorological tower as part of the maintenance program. An instrument technician and a tower climber verify the operating performance of the system. Using a precision digital multi-meter which is NBS traceable, to monitor signals during the inspection, all systems are checked and calibrated. Worn or damaged wind sensors are replaced with working spares. The complete wind system is checked for proper operation. Anemometers are stopped and signal zero is verified. Vanes are oriented toward targets whose directions from the tower were predetermined and the orientation verified. Sensor tracking is also checked. Reference tumperatures are measured on the tower with an independent device. All analog recorders are checked for proper operation. The microprocessing units are checked for proper operation and their outputs verified. These procedures help maintain the highest possible operating levels of all measuring and recording systems and the maximum data integrity.
Emergency field visits to the meteorological sites are made as quickly as possible after a detection of a failure. A two man team consisting of an instrument technician and tower climber are available 7 days per week, 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> an day to respond to detected failures. Wherever possible, components are replaced with working spares to minimize data loss.
Damaged items are later repaired in-house or replaced.
m F;bruary, 1982 R3vicien 3 Paga 11 Table 2a Braidwood Station Instrument Locations and Data Record Elevation Recording Recorder Chart Chart Me2surement Type Location (Above Grade)
Frequency Type Speed Period lDind speed / direction MRI Model Tower 34 ft.
Continuous Belfort/
3"/Hr.
2 weeks Esterline Angus 1074-2 Jind rpeed/ direction MRI Model Tower 203 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks 1074-2 babisnt Air Temper-MRI Model 832 Tower 30 ft.
1 minute Esterline 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Angus Ell 24 htura hiffersntial Temper-MRI Model 832 Tower 199-30 ft.
1 minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks ptura I
ibEw Point Temperature EG&G 220 Tower 30', 199' 1 minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks
}recipitEtion MRI Model 302 Ground 3 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Tipping Bucket
Fcbrurry, 1982 Ravicien 3 Pag 2 12 Table 2b Byron Station Instrument Locations and Data Record Elevation Recording Recorder Chart Chart Metaurement Type Location (Above Grade)
Frequency Type Speed Period Wind gpeed/ direction MRI Model Tower 30 ft.
Continuous Belfort/
3"/Hr.
2 weeks 1074-2 Esterline Angus Wind speed / direction MRI Model Tower 250 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks 1074-2 Ambisnt Air Temperature MRI Model 832 Tower 30 ft.
1 minute Esterline 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Angus Ell 24 Dif ferential Temper-MRI Model 832 Tower 250-30 ft.
1 minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks 2ture Dew Point Temperature EG&G 220 Tower 30', 250' 1 minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks
@rzcipitation MRI Model 302 Ground 3 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Tipping Bucket I
F;bruzry, 1982 R3 vision 3 Paga 13 Table 2c Dresden Station Instrument Locations and Data Recorded Elevation Recording Recorder Chart Chart M2trurement Type Location (Above Grade)
Frequency Type Speed Period
'ind cpeed/ direction Teledyne/Geo.
Tower 35 ft.
Continuous Esterline 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Tech Series 50 Angus Series lind cpeed/ direction Teledyne/Geo.
Tower 150 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Tech Series 50 lind speed / direction Teledyne/Geo.
Tower 300 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Tech Series 50 Labisnt Air Temperature EG&G Model 110S-M Tower 35 ft.
1 minute Esterline 2"/Hr.
3 weeks Angus Ell 24 fiffsrsntialTemper-EG&G Model 110S-M Tower 150-35 ft.
1 minute 2"/Hr.
3 weeks kturo lfiffsrsntialTemper-EG&G Model 110S-M Tower 300-35 ft.
1 minute 2"/Hr.
3 weeks hture
>ew Point Temperature EG&G Model 110S-M Tower 35', 150',
1 minute 2"/Hr.
3 weeks 300' Precipitation MRI Model 302 Shelter 10 ft.
Continuous Esterline 1.5 cm/
3 weeks Roof Angus MS401 Hr.
Februtry, 1982 Ravision 3 Paga 14 Table 2d LaSalle County Station Instrument Locations and Data Recorded Elevation Recording Recorder Chart Chart M2&surement Type Location (Above Grade)
Frequency Type Speed Period find speed / direction MRI Model 1022 S&D Tower 33 ft.
Continuous Esterline 3"/Hr 2 weeks Angus Model 1102S find epeed/ direction MRI Model 1022 Tower 200 ft.
Continuous Esterline 3"/Hr.
2 weeks S&D Angus Model 1102S sind speed / direction MRI Model 1022 Tower 375 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks S&D Ambisnt Air Temperature MRI Model 15021 Tower 33 ft.
1 minute Esterline 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Angus Model Ell 24E (multipoint) iffsrsntial Temper-MRI Model 15021 Tower 200-33 ft.
1 minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks
{turo siffsrsntial Temper-MRI Model 15021 Tower 375-33 ft.
I minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks iture tw Point Temperature EG6G 110-SM Tower 33', 200' 1 minute 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Trecipitation MRI Model 302 Shelter 10 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Tipping Bucket Roof
F4brutry, 1982 R2 vision 3 Pag 2 15 Table 2e Quad Cities Station (South)
Instrument Locations and Data Recorded (a)
Elevation Recording Recorder Chart Chart ct&uriment Type Location (Above Grade)
Frequency Type Speed Period ind cpeed/ direction Climet Tower 33 ft.
Continuous Esterline Angus 2"/Hr 2 weeks i
ind speed / direction Climet Tower 196 ft.
Continuous Esterline Angus 2"/Hr.
2 weeks ind epeed/ direction Climet Tower 296 ft.
Continuous 2"/Hr.
2 weeks kmbisnt Air Temperature Rosemont Tower 33 ft.
2 minutes Esterline Angus 2"/Hr.
2 weeks
$78-0065-0041 Ell 24 piffsrsntialTemper-Rosemont Tower 196-33 ft.
2 minutes 2"/Hr.
2 weeks ptura l
yiffsrentialTemper-Rosemont Tower 296-33 ft.
2 minutes 2"/Hr.
2 weeks Dtura
!lew Point Temperature EG&G Tower 33 ft.
2 minutes 2"/Hr.
2 weeks
$recipitation MRI Model 302 Shelter 10 ft.
Continuous 2"/hr.
2 weeks Tipping Bucket Roof
- Ga) In addition there is an MRI Series 10-22 wind speed / direction sensor on a 30 f t. pole located in the switchyard for providing wind information to the control room on an interim basis. This system will be discontinued when the ODCS is fully operational.
l
Februnry, 1982 Ravision 3 Paga 16 Table 2f Zion Station i
Instrument Locations and Data Recorded Sensor Elevation Recording Recorder Chart Chart l[;]cmurement Type Location (Above Grade)
Frequency Type Speed Period l
l bind speed / direction Teledyne 1500 Tower 35 ft.
Continuous Esterline 3"/Hr.
2 weeks Series Angus L1102S Cind rpeed/ direction Tower 125 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks
- Cind speed / direction Tower 250 ft.
Continuous 3"/Hr.
2 weeks
'Ambisnt Air Temper-Bristol Shielded Tower 250-35 ft.
1 minute Westronics 2"/Hr.
3 weeks ltture Resistance multipoint Model MllD2 Thermometer iMiffersntial Temper-Bristol Shielded Tower 125-35 ft.
1 minute 2"/Hr.
3 weeks ctura Resistance Thermometer Diffsrential Temper-Bristol Shielded Tower 250-35 ft.
1 minute 2"/Hr.
3 weeks lstura Resistance Thermometer
. Dew Point Temperature Foxboro Dewcell Instrument 5 ft.
1 minute 2"/Hr.
3 weeks Shelter Prccipitation MRI Model 302 Shelter 10 ft.
Continuous 2"/Hr.
3 weeks Tipping Bucket
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 17 Table 3 Backup Metro Measurements Program Ground Level Release (a)
Primary
- Backup Tertiary 4th 5th Station Wind M W g W
M W M W g Braidwood (Bd) 1 2
2 f
D1 D2 D2 D3 L1 L2 Byron (By) 1 2
2 f
f f
Rockford**
Dresden (D) 1 2
2 3
Bdl Bd2 L1 L1 3
f Quad Cities (Q) 1 2
2 3
f f
Moline **
Zion (Z) 1 2
2 3
3 f
f f
LaSalle County (L) 1 2
2 3
D1 D2 D2 D3 a
the levels are numbered from the lower level up the tower; level 1 is typically at a height of 35'.
information for any group must come from same source; i.e., one can't mix stations; ex. D1 Bd2.
6T represents stability class.
f hindcast, nowcast and forecast for station National Weather Bureau stations - information that could be provided to a station by the meteorological contractor.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 18 Table 4 Backup Metro Measurements Program Elevated Release (a)
Primary
- Backup Tertiary 4th 5th Station Wind M W
g W
M W M W M Dresden 3
3 2
2 Bd2 Bd2 L3 L3 L2 L2 LaSalle 3
3 2
2 D3 D3 Bd2 Bd2 D2 D2 Quad Cities 3
3 2
2 f
f Moline **
a the levels are numbered from the lower level up the tower; level 1 is typically at a height of 35'.
information for any group must come from same source; i.e., one can't mix stations; ex. D1 Bd2.
d T represents stability class.
f hindcast, nowcast and forecast for station National Weather Bureau stations - information that could be provided to a station by the meteorological contractor.
p
-n---
y
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 19 3.
Weather Forecasts Forecasts will be prepared by CECO's meteorological consultant
- Each forecast is for a 36-hour period routinely twice each day.
beginning at 1200 CST or 2400 CST.
The hourly forecasted parameters include the following:
All Sites:
Output to CECO Forecasted Inputs MPS l.1 1-Wind Speed Degrees 1.2 1-Wind Direction DeltaT/DeltaZ 1.3 1-Stability ZION Only:
0 - for no lake 1.4 1-Air Temp. over water effect**
1.5 1-Air Temp. over land 1 - for Case 1 1.6 1-Air Mass Stability.
lake effect 2 - for Case 2 lake effect Convergence Zone 0 - No lake breeze 1 - Convergence Zone
- 45. 2 mi 2 - Convergence Zone
> 2 but j( 5 mi 3 - Convergence Zone
)r 5 mi The corporate computer will poll the consultant's computer every 12 Forecasted data are available to station via the hours automatically. Additionally, the plant computer is able to call the computer network.
consultant's computer for the forecast should communications with the corporate computer be interrupted.
The corporate ODCS operator, TSC and EOF ODCS operators may use these weather forecasts to estimate radiation doses accruing f rom postulated future releases of radioactivity.
Currently Murray and Trettel, Inc., Northfield, Illinois.
See next section for description of lake effect conditions.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 20 Required Forecast Inputs to Model The lake effects model requires a variety of inputs. Some are used to determine whether or not a boundary exists. Others are used to select the limited mixing or the fumigation mode. The inputs used to decide whether lake effects will occur are:
Hour of day Wind Direction Wind Speed Temperature contrast between lake and land The additional input used to select the appropriate dispersion mode is air mass stability.
Signals representing the temperature differential between lake and land and air mass stability are not directly available.
Instead they are determined f rom a variety of meteorological reporting stations and provided by the meteorological consultant. Predicted hourly differential and stability factors are also prepared by the consultant.
The presence or absence of a lake effect condition is reported by the meteorological consultant. and appended to the Zion Station forecast.
A "zero" (0) indicates that no lake effect condition is forecasted for a particular hour. A "one" (1) indicates that there is a forecasted Case 1 lake effect condition. A "two" (2) indicates that there is a forecasted Case 2 condition.
The predicted inland distance of the lake breeze front is also appended to the forecast. A "zero" (0) indicates no lake breeze. A "one" (1) indicates the convergence zone is less than or equal to 2 miles. A "two" (2) indicates the convergence zone is beyond 2 miles but less than or equal to 5 miles. A "three" (3) indicates the l
convergence zone is beyond 5 miles. Appendix F describes this further.
l Using the lake effect indicator and associated penetration distance j
of the convergence zone, the computers select the appropriate l
atmospheric dispersion model for estimating the offsite consequences of a release.
l i
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 21 4.
Lake Effects at Zion Station Currently recommended meteorological programs and diffusion methods for nuclear power plante located in coastal zones were recently reviewed for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NUREG/CR-0936 BNL-NUREG-51045, October 1979). Among certain deficiencies in guidelines and procedures noted in this document were " failure to consider the role of coastal internal boundary layers, specifications for tower locations and instrument heights, (and) methods for classifying atmospheric stability...".
Included were recommendations for changes to the guidelines.
An atmospheric dispersion model has been developed to account for boundary layer conditions that could occur at the Zion plant. The model development essentially followed the various methods itemized in the reference cited. Conservatively high ground level concentrations result from the model when compared to standard dispersion calculations.
(Section 9.4 of Reference 14, the ODCM, provides additional information on the lake breeze model.)
The Boundary Layer Continuous measurements of the boundary layer in the vicinity of Zion are not available.
Indeed, aside from a few intensive short term studies of lake shore dispersion in the vicinity, no boundary layer j
data exist. Consequently readily available meteorological l
measurements representing a two year period were used in conjunction with the boundary equation (1) found in NUREG-0936 to infer the existence and location of the boundary.
NUREG-0936 equation (1) was evaluated subject to the following assumptions and conditions:
(1) friction velocity U* = 1 mps (2) Wind speed less than or = 6 mps (3)
Land-water temperature contrast at least 50F (4) Air mass stability was estimated by the 250-125 ft.
I differential temperature measured on the Zion tower.
(5) Wind direction onshore The results are shown in Figure 2.
In summary, the boundary was l
computed to occur roughly 10 percent of the hours annually (876/8760). Of those 876 hours0.0101 days <br />0.243 hours <br />0.00145 weeks <br />3.33318e-4 months <br /> it occurred well above the Zion ventilation stacks 9j! percent of the time (832 hours0.00963 days <br />0.231 hours <br />0.00138 weeks <br />3.16576e-4 months <br />). The remaining j! percent of the time (44 hours5.092593e-4 days <br />0.0122 hours <br />7.275132e-5 weeks <br />1.6742e-5 months <br />) it was below the stacks leading to potential fumigation downwind (cf. Figure 3).
l l
l l
l
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 22 It should be noted that the existing Zion meteorological tower is For all practical located entirely within the calculated boundary.
cases, then, the measurements from the tower can be assumed to represent the boundary layer conditions and not be partially in the boundary layer and partially in the ' lake' air (a caution referred to in NUREG-0936).
Dispersion Model when a boundary height, variable both in time and inland fetch, is four downwind zones with different dispersion taken into account, The dispersion equations differ for the four characteristics emerge.
cases summarized below.
The boundary layer is located above the stacks.
Case 1.
Consequently vertical dispersion is limited by the boundary and the ground at all ranges downwind to 10 miles (the downwind extent of the model evaluation). Boundary layer dispersion is characterized by meteorological tower measurements.
This can The boundary layer is located below the stacks.
Case 2.
lead to three distinct cases depending on the downwind range in question.
At downwind distances f rom the stacks to the Cat;e 2.1. beneath which the bottom of the plume point X,
The plume is embedded in the 1
intersects the boundary.
relatively turbulent-free leke air.
to the At downwind distances from point X,
1 Case 2.2.
point X, beneath which the top of the plume intersects 2
In this zone fumigation is assumed to the boundary.
j The effluent is uniformly distributed in the occur.
l vertical.
At downwind distances beyond the point X
- 2 Case 2.3.
Here limited mixing occurs due to the plume being trapped Here also the effluent is uniformly beneath the boundary.
distributed in vertical.
Results The model was evaluated at various downwind distances to ten (10)
The highest concentrations miles, to yield the ' worst case' values.The remaining cases were were due either to Case 1 or Case 2.2.
therefore eliminated as possible worst cases.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 23 Fiqure 2 ZION STATION Estimated Frequencies of Occurence*
(Hours per year - Percent)
No Lake Effects 90 Lake Effects 10 100 Lake Effect - Trapping 9
Lake Eff ect - Fumigation 1
10 Based on 1978 - 1979 Hourly Measurements (March through November)
e i
I l
I 6
l i
FIGURE 3 1
B0UNDARY POSITION 1978-1979
'0CCURRE0' 821/10,272 HOURS (8%) MARCH-SEPTE!1BER i
350 -
MEDIAN POSITION OCCURRED 411/10,272 HOURS (4%)
l
' FUMIGATION' POSITION OCCURRED 41/10,272 HOURS (0.4%)
300 -
E 250 -
I" 50%
LaJ
^
i 200 -
i i
S i
W 150 -
t
/p/
100 -
/
55
/
/
p 50 -
/
ASE*#
' Q MICROWAVE
-- g EXISTING
/,R TOWER MET TOWER
/
//
j
/
-=0=
LAKE 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 l
INLAND RANGE - METERS m mm so td Q
$ h.
m to H CD i
p O r0 w
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 25 5.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Nuclear Data Link- (NDL)
The NRC staff is engaged in improving the capabilities of its NRC Operations Center (OC) at Bethesda, Maryland. One aspect of this effort involves the transmission of various plant parameters including meteorological data over the NDL from each nuclear plant to the OC.
In accordance with Reg. Guide 1.23, the 15-minute averaged meteorological data for the previous 12 hour1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> period are available for recall in the OC.
When the final scope of the NDL as been determined by the NRC, CECO will review the NRC specifications for the timely application of the NDL at each station.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 26 IV.
Model Accuracy and Conservatism Commonwealth Edison has adopted for use the atmospheric transport and plume gamma dose models recommended by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in its Regulatory Guide series (e.g., RG 1.23, 1.109 and 1.111) and in the publication " Meteorology and Atomic Energy 1968" (TID-24190, July 1968).
Two very relevant documents to Commonwealth Edison are references 8 and 9 in Appendix G.
Reference 8 is a state-of-the-art review of meteorological measurement and atmospheric transport and diffusion prediction models for plants located in coastal zones, such as Zion Station. Whereas this study by Brookhaven National Laboratory was restricted to simple coastlines (such as near Zion) without complex terrain, that only effects within five miles of the plant should be considered, and that models recommended should give conservative predictions for plant design purposes, CECO has adopted the model to the realtime prediction situation.
This modified model should be adequate for the purpose intended: to help the control room operator and the ODCS operator reach a decision concerning the necessity to recommend protective actions in the vicinity of the plant during the initial phase of an accident, i.e., before field personnel are fully capable of tracking the direction of and measuring the radiation intensity from the plume, and to make a reasonably conservative estimate of radiation dose to the public. Once field personnel are dispatched and the plume's behavior is being tracked f rom the ground and/or air, then the role of a predictive meteorological model is reduced.
Appendix G reference 9 reviews the uncertainty in atmospheric dispersion models to 50 miles. Tables 5 to 8 reproduced herein from reference 9 summarize the uncertainty associated with concentration predictions made by the Gaussian plume atmospheric dispersion model. CECO does not disagree with these findings, in fact our own research supports the accuracy estimates for locations near the i
plant.
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 27 Table 5 An estimate of the uncertainty associated with concentration predictions made by the Gaussian plume atmospheric dispersion modela Range of the ratio Conditions Predicted Observed 0.8-1.2 Highly instrumented flat-field site; ground-level centerline concentration within 10 km of continuous point source Specific hour and receptor point; flat 0.1-10 terrain, steady meteorological conditions; within 10 km of release point Ensemble average for a specific point, flat 0.5-2 l
terrain, within 10 km of release point (such as monthly, seasonal, or annual average)
Monthly and seasonal averages, flat terrain 0.25-4 10-100 km downwind b
l Complex terrain or meteorology (e.g., sea breeze regimes) aT. V. Crawf ord (Chairperson), Atmospheric Transport of Radionuclides, pp. 5-32 in Proceedings of a Workshop on the evaluation of Models Used for the Environmental Assessment of Radionuclide Releases, ed. by F.O. Hof fman, D. L. Shaeffer, C. W. Miller, and C. T. Garten, Jr.,
USDOE Report CONF-770901, NTIS, April 1978.
bThe group which assembled these estimates did not feel there was enough information available to make even a " scientific judgment" l
estimate under these conditions.
l 1
i I
l
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 28 Table 6 Some validation results for ensemble averages predicted by the Gaussian plume model Range of the ratio Conditions Predicted Observed Annual average S02 concentrations 0.5-j[ 2 for Roane Co., Tennessee; both point and area source emissions included 0.33-1.78 Continuous gamma-ray measurements 0.04-6.8 km downwind of a boiling water reactor Gamma-ray doses downwind of 0.5-f"2 Humboldt Bay Nuclear Power Plant Monthly gamma-ray doses for four 0.30-4.78 stations downwind of a nuclear individual stations 1.55 mean of all data power plant at an inland site
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 29 Table 7 Validation results for Gaussian plume model predictions out to 140 km Range of the ratio Conditions Predicted-Observed 85Kr measurements30-140 km downwind of the Savannah River Plant 0.25-4 Weekly and annual averages Seasonal averages, Spring 2-4, 69% of samples 2-10, 100% of samples Summer 0.5-4, 46% of samples 0.5-10,85% of samples Fall 0.5-4, 31% of samples 0.5-10, 85% of samples Winter 2-4, 69% of samples 2-10, 92% of samples Annual Average 1-4, 77% of samples 1-10, 92% of samples 10-hour averages, six variations of 0.5-2, 42-65% of samples the model 0.1-10, 79-95% of samples i
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 30 Table 8 Some validation results for Gaussian plume model predictions in speed, inversion conditions both complex terrain and also under low wind Range of the ratio conditions Predicted Observed Review of a number of experiments 0.01-300, individual conducted in complex terrain for measurements close plume centerline concentrations to the source 0.50-2, 2-15 km downwind of source Review of a number of experiments conducted under low wind speed, inversion conditions stability category a
E F
G smooth desertlike terrain 2.3-10 1.3-12 3.6-20 a
20-25 20-40 20-30 wooded flat terrain wooded hilly terrain 50-350 300-500 a
aRatios estimated from curves provided by Van der Hoven.41
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 31 V. Quality Assurance Program The NRC Zion Order dated 2/29/80 and NUREG-0654 Appendix 2 requires the establishment of a quality assurance program (Q.A.P.)
consistent with applicable provisions of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50.
It states further that the acceptance criteria stated in Revision 1, Section 17.2 of NUREG-75/087 apply. CECO agrees that a Q.A.P. can be developed consistent with applicable provisions of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B.
The Commonwealth Edison Company has had a formal quality assurance program (Q.A.P.) for its meteorological monitoring since 1976. The scope of the Q.A.P.
is delineated in Standard Quality Assurance Articles which are appended to the contract specifications. The current Articles (Rev. 1) and current Q.A.P. are provided in Appendix C of this report. The Q.A. Articles for meteorological monitoring were adopted specifically for this program from 10 CFR 50 Appendix B.
However, sir.ce the meteorological facility is not composed of structures, systems and components that prevent or mitigate the consequences of postulated accidents and is thus not " safety related", not all aspects of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B apply. Those aspects of quality assurance germane to supplying good meteorological information for a nuclear power plant were kept in the Articles and incorporated into the contractor's Q.A.P.
l I
I
February 1982 Revision 3 Page 32 VI. Schedule The ODCS that is available on 04/01/82:
(1) Weather forecasts except for the convergence zone forecast routinely mode available to Zion Station and the corporate of fice.
(2) Routine polling of all six meteorological towers by the corporate office.
(3) Operational B&C models available to all TSCs and EOFs.
(4) A functional A-model at LaSalle Station.
The ODCS anticipated to be available on 10/01/82:
(1) A fully operational tracking model installed at Zion Station.
(2) An operational A-model installed at Zion Station.
(3) Covergence zone forecasts appended to the existing transmissions.
The ODCS implementation schedule beyond 10/01/82 includes:
(1) Installation of the full ODCS at Byron and Braidwood before the operating license.
(2) Installation of the Nuclear Data Link as soon as practical after the NRC specifications are finished.
(3) Installation of the A-model at Dresden and Quad Cities as new computers are installed onsite.
(4) Complete the IDNS computer links as soon as practical. Note that the IDNS system is not a critical component of the ODCS as depected in Figure 1, but is included to show how data are transmitted between the licensee and the state.
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX A ODCS Class A-Model n
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX A ODCS Class A-Model The plant process / Prime computer system houses the A-model, producing initial transport and dispersion estimates within 15-minutes following the classification of an incident. Meteorological signals, along with the final effluent monitors for noble gases and containment activity monitors are hardwired into the system. These data are converted into the requisite Emergency Action Levels (EALs) for use by the control room operator. The A-model may be accessed in the final TSCs and final EOFs.
Effluent Monitor EAL Criteria (uCi/sec)
_.gldq
_.030 min Ground Level 8.9E6 8.9ES Elevated 1.3E8 1.3E7 Warning Messages for Q min:
The Site Emergency EAL of 500 mR/hr offsite using worst 2
case meteorology has been exceeded, for Q30 min The Site Emergency EAL of 50 mR/hr offsite using worst case meteorology has been exceeded.
When the calculated maximum offsite dose rate, using the Q min and 2
actual meteorology, meets or exceeds the General Emergency EAL of 1000 mR/hr, the following warning is issued:
for U min:
The General Emergency EAL of 1000 mR/hr offsite using 2
actual meteorlogy has been exceeded.
Available on demand are dose rates at each of six preselected downwind ranges (400, 800,1609, 3218, 8045,16090 m) in the affected centerline sector. The output also includes the affected adjacent sectors, and the wind direction, wind speed and stability class used in the calculations.
Similarly, the drywell radiation monitors are sampled once per minute and compared to the EAL criteria.
2.E2 jb, Activity ( 4E2 R/hr; Alert EAL 4.E2 jC, Activity ( 2E3 R/hr; Site Emergency EAL 2.E3 ;$, Activity; General Emergency EAL When the EAL is met or exceeded, the appropriate warning message is issued. Available on demand are projected dose calculations at each of the six downwind ranges based on the ground level, non-meandering plume model and all activity released to the atmosphere. Similarly, the output includes the affected adjacent sectors and the meteorological data used
QtR% A TAC tL L.
l'IGukt 1-I 'DCK uu r4C 1/g Jrgy
*"''N j
706Lc f(; opp CUh5 FRCM s,,g_
u-1 l
ru ee,as
(
cb r><,ce "II 1
/re,,i CDdAf
~
Tams 4 2 b
- q. Y/a e.46-1 c, evp (- Ab)
[
e/q 1, c.n
-~~
~T~~
/, g e,
2 M FRK6R/ fueibn'ic,4 OneM T A sh6
,, e-lbr, 6provenT 1 A 2.
6.LE-1 : (cN WR5K+1 UET AW pc(;m3 Mcw6rcq5
?lcw A: 3.4 E - 4 sco -fer GE M o
grge e - (oc m.s.. a t w o o / w s ( ~/ a )
MET.
wg ST AT t C M "fCw C R 7
~
WD
~
V. Vscioc.(.w)
L. B CDeu TAac l
Mic n*K nacuve C D*GM tt.1 - t
'~
O'(rwum IA) :
c stev.o Lei v tL (q. ic we t-xe))/ws
~-
t.1 ACTot (o)
CDCM TM 4 92.-l ca e cur.un o im u 1sss
- r c ifs o rti 1xsc Ran: (Mnt^s/nR.)
v '-o rJ G Rt:h t TIMC /*ETCCRN CG V
CLASS A McbCL FIGURE Z.
DL1( *tm*4L 7/q recq s, n a.i.o r9 MMM c[fe4 FR064 TRAPPIM6 AT/gW; O N *2 3
C~
5~Ac.trC D (mrent) :
g "vP (-At)
A7/a I 71E-4 6e
/'s TN5LG 9.2-b
.e. '.
% rem
/ waan ~ 7 I
c; mig %
runicaricW isn = lb.
ecem.wmsu r 7
4 c y,o, n g
44 I. 72 6 - '4 ' f c Wihict4 &v.i wr pg, g m s N ON i fcE's
~ ~ *
> IC N
~g O
) = 3,4 C -4 20(
kr fa R -T/)
W5 12 (Ocwww.9o DArmi l'*)/WS (o'l5))
"' T -
WD 5,a tic w 4cwCA 7
br /31.
j g g g, L FACTCR UM4
(, 52,,
gy,,, gg
( qg _,gg g We i e RVl C
{
6.,Es CN2T -
M gg D'ON) cRcob b (mierd o wLt f*
N&* W h'(
a
~"'
lt-rNic R (c) i
?#
D DC H TbihC 91-1 (W temmAND '* A t V6* 5
'O
' IIT ' "' Ud L',e w b CC416'NM D*T'0'I'd**Y
" D Rc At, f e M6i MCTLCCCLC0Y
February 1982 Revision 3 i
TABLE 1 METEOROLOGICAL SIGNALS HARDWIRED INTO THE PROCESS COMPUTER STATION WIND SP.
WIND DIR.
TEMP.
DELTA T PRECIP.*
DEW PT.
Dresden 35' 35' 35' 150-35' 35' 150' 150' 300-35' 300' 300' Quad Cities 33' 33' 33' 196-33' 33' 196' 196' 296-33' 296' 296' Zion 35' 35' 35' 125-35' 35' 125' 125' 250-35' 250' 250' LaSalle 33' 33' 33' 200-33' 33' 200' 200' 375-33' 375' 375' Byron 30' 30' 30' 250-30' 30' 30' 250' 250' 250' Braidwood 34' 34' 30' 199-30' 30' 30' 203' 203' 199' Precipitation samplers are at ground level but for purposes of computer listing they are considered to be at the lowest measurement location on the tower.
i i
February 1982 Revision 3 TABLE 2 PLANT MONITORS HARDWIRED INTO THE PROCESS COMPUTER STATION CHIMNEY VENT CONTAIb e.dNT (Effluent)
(Ef fluent)
(Activity) 1 Dresden X
X X
Quad Cities X
X X
Zion X
X LaSalle X
X Byron X
X Braidwood X
X I
t I
i i
i
, +-,
,,-.,.,,.--,,w
..,....n., - -,.,.., -,,
...n
.-,_..,..-_.~,,...--,n-.-,n..-n,...n--
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX B INDEPENDENT SIGNAL PATHWAYS AT METEOROLOGICAL FACILITIES
I r4 d
h b W!
e s )
s w
a s
a e
l 1 [ [
2 g
5 4
5 d' % m 85
- E g
i-
! Mh I
j
[$
a o
y nE 31 5:$
]
6 i
,=
69
'3 i
r a
4 8
r M
i f
E 5
a 1
w v
s mmummmmmmumuus 5
\\
\\
g N
I
\\
g N
p f
N N
N A
y N
N 3
N
\\
d N
s y = :<
s 3
s z
s
\\
N 2
\\
N s
9 P
mya mi.
D
>2E E
k$
O
'$o
-o{s 0
mo a 3
C ed o
Ye r
C*Ih ye
-g E
8 di.
J
~
d s.
2 ;l z <
cX e zi a n
2 o-G G3r' w
.oc 4
=
e d
4' 3 53 3
e h-4 E
A 3
I O
3 s a e
o a g
m l
J F
o 3 3 F k b k b k k
k k N I
a t
W 3 k $
s e s G
U E 4\\
o' o e
$=
as a
a as g
o a
m r
,s u
M E
~,,, '$
I i F I
z e
o 1
4 a
a 05 US E
f 7
i s
w L1 N
kl N
{ e$
h 1
a xxxxxxNNANNNNNANANNNNNNNNNxxx a
s s
s s
s N
g
\\
h s
s r
s s
e n2g i
T
.s=,
a s
- .uil s 36 s
s
}X+
2 r
s s
2 s
N o
s 4
e g
$a NS um
.sg 0
in
-31,
.oso
>e
_oy
_us
)*
gO O N
I*mM d
J e
__J L__
41m N
J tl
$ 2 o.5sk i]
$ D 3's e
r
-2_.
33c 4
e
- 3e 3u ci
. ci b$
sk sa m z a
1 a
e 3
D e m g
3 3
A e m 3
k 3
3 r R $ *t
$ 'o E
'o o
o 'o a
e n e e
e s e e
A D
D 8
DE 4E E /
K KI WB T
f l
T MA A
/
N C
I MN R [O I
E L L
N A
O OSC P
E g
E N
R T
N O T L "T g
E O
E O
C E Nf1.
C E
H U
P iN T
NE D N
I O D AN E I
L O L
L N R HP Rt E
A H
3 D
E T E Ce u j.
I u
T N T0G Q T
d OS g
gl N
I R1 E
E
/
oR 9
t o
D E(E R R
Y y
g i
R O S
e M
P VE L T
B g
7 P
L T E
r E
C WMA AF D
p OA cp o8 'B L
D N
D 6
RC o
Rl M
A P C PNI A
E p
E Rg c
p Ti g
ON g
iN
{
I l f. i P A
A Y
R N D P,
/
T Cl EVKI E R
P g
r cD P R
E A.
l Z
2 o oADP U
R
/
N TRAA M
P s
/
/
/
G
/
/
'// /,/#7///////////
//# / //#/#f / fy / / / f// '/
/
/
I'
/
l/
/
/
/
M
/
l
/
/
M
/
/
/
6 o
/
/
/
P M
/
U
/
/
/
/
/
L
/
S
/
/
E
/
T
/
/
T
/
U
/
P
/
/
RI 'A
/
u T
/
u
/
i
/
c
/
io o
/
M
/
/
T
/
S A
. R.
/
V. g vL T C E
/
g S D Nga nN m Ea N
/
o
/
ogm o N o.
'Cy N Vi
/
g0 BcA T
H-2 E
/
'A
,g 1 C-l D
D s
/
/c-o E
O
/
V o4
/v g S ON o
R C
/
g
-I
/
D L
PR A
y, NE N
g q
I D
IG o
m WR S
'.c o
C 4
'0 c 0E g
'f O
3R y
R.
R P R PE P. E ND E
D I
o o
Ec S' c
'O c TE
'>E FE R
- R
]
1R
'0 '0 R
LE R
L R
At P. E A1 E 3l NoJ 05 NP W D e D cR gGN N
,O&oR e
~
t O
t O o T
l 6cT a
O E C sC T O
i RE PR C.
C.
C.
C.
C,.
S 5
S 5
9 W
T.
T r.
F P
P P.
F P
W D S P $
M M
M w
W D
W M I
T T
T D
D W W E
E E
E W W P.
E D
E C
'o
'o 5'
5* '0 6
'0
'0
'0
'0 6'
o c 5 0
5 5
0 5
5 M 3
3 3
1 3
S 3 33 2
1 1
i!
,jl lI!'
,:I'
!l
!IiJ' 1'
-(
illl!ljj,
l
)'
I g
_2 P
g
/
E K
T
/g y
A
/, /p N
V.
R 3
3 IL N
D E
P g
o "a C O
E r
R g
T N
O A
N C
g D
H E
N P
N
$l I p l
L TV L,
sE M
l N
E E
. 8 I
L
- E
.S A
0, T
oC T
R p
E.
tot A E
- g. )f sT E O L
N P
6 P
R b T E
0 WPs#
cW oA T
i T
y E T 4
y B
o EE P
l PW
- T lc og P
R Rg,
D T.
N y
Q o
No C
A y
G c
ou L
Y y
V ct Mi A
EN A
y O
TNs" R
p R
IP oOu' R
g P
Z Z
3_
NCp' M
p A
U g
P
, /
r d
- ////y///
/
/ / ///// ///// /////////,/ /
j y
/
7 7,
/
7 f
7 i
7 f
H 7
f f
o 7
t f
S M
7 o
R f
E P
LE U
7 T
f E
E L
7 5
f E N=
T f
V N E
7 N
u f
o T
goM2 m ;, 'A o
7 P
N T
f C
7 C-u f
c-l 7
o f
/54 i
l O
T V
M 7
I
- A cR 7
I pE
~S N
vO R
R G
E 5 T 6S I
L -
I T L L 0D t E 4 6
A N
seNg S
O vN N
A C
ANAg O O L
OHg C
C C, l
~
A 0 4 I
N t
l
/
1 G
V V
IS ptueo l
D R.
Wm DR o
N E 5' c NG D
c I O IW 5a WR R
'0 o O
6' C c
0 7E e
2 3R R
P. p L
R
'5 u
R o
M,t iE 7
A '~ E
- Ao o
N N*
3 z
wD NA e e s.#s w
.#so.
g 1
Tg 5 c. #' -
T i
A gCT 6
F
. p.
. p.
ew Gw o
t s
S c.
Sc T.
T.
P P
P.
P.
P.
P M
w w
P M
M s
M D
6 3
E N
e e
+
D W' E
W E
T W
W R
D D
w T
T c
5 5'
5
'3 0
0 E
0 o
'5 7
7 6
7 0
0 R
0,.
0 S
2 2
P 2,
2 S
3 M 3 3
D 3 3
(jl!
l
\\l lllllf l
l
l l
1
l lll D
2 yf E
{( /
o 3
T T
j A
g f/
/j/
/
N D
R g
u E
O TO P
e CTE R
E E
T T
S N
E C
o T
o N E A ).
c E
E C
C U
g N UP N
X p
ODSA I
P C
L, p g T
t RK M E
9 A
E O
R i
T U
p W TA L I
E R )j:
T
/[
O EC N
T f
sE RBE L
i TE N
R R
sT E
EU m
NV DN E
T
'Y T
B e
l N EA N
D S
N cP o
o O TH O
N D
D O
oM 6
o P CI C H
A E
E y
CI R O W
M P
Y R
V DI PC J
E t I 8
A A
O T
8
/
D DVL(
L R
Pl R
VN 2
C
- E A
R E
P I
U R
P O
I T
D H
P A
C ON o
L s
///#///f//
j//[/j ////////#,pj / / /
/
A s
N s
G s
I S
s s
D 3
s g
N s
I W
s l
s S
l=
'3 s,
3 P
U L
E T
0l f
Rl A II C
I e
M I
N o
iT g
A R
T S
E S L
G TL a
REa E
D ENm Nm A
V N 0 g
N o.
u AN A 2 H
A 2 Q
' O e
H C C-C-
4 o
H T
0 T
/ 0 1
U V1 OS DR R
D NE E
ND I D WR s R wO O
'% E C
rC L
R E
2R 9 R L
R 6
6 P. C AI E t
D I
F E 9
9 ME N N N'6 vD N' 2
1 ER G
O N NOA T
T T
I Ol G
I OI SCT SC T A
6 D
T
,D P
T
.D D*D 6GN
, N
' gN gN 9IO O
3iO 3g O 2SC C
3gC 3gC N
O T
I P.
P.
T R
P A
M M
M W
W w S p U S T E
E 5 p W W PI T
T T
D E
E W w I
'3
'3 3
C W
6 E
3 9
R 3
3 2
2 33 I
1 P
2 1
i D
N
,g E
y T.
A.
c C
gg E
D No T E.
g N T NP u
o.
.El e
o d uE U
gp TDcM Q E
O AP E g
N NRPt UR ai I
ES Q 1
f p
L T
T 4RxeF I
6 R
$ "R g
N oEc.I E
t
,l b
l PVpA E
$E M
D t
o E
N y
E C T sT H
W O wE U
u o
D P
cP g
P E CPoD O
WM oM c
D EiD Ro i
L
- /Tt A T
l c
Pc g
A E Vio o
t T
m O
Ooipe Z
C NTLAD s
)'
l
/
, / / f / /// f / /////
///////##f/////jj r
/
f
/
/
j
/
/
j
/
/
j j
/
/
,Ml j
/
/
l j
/
/
s j
/
/
p j
/
/
O S
L T
/
r E
f l
U
/
V. )
T P
L o
j E
O O
/
O N m C I A' f
T
/
N N a RI N
U I
j
/
CAo M
T C,
R E
j l
/
C l.
A D E l
f T
N
/
/Vo4 f
S V O
/
l
~-
f 1
I
- T
/
N I
0 D R
D N
R E
f S
TS Z
O E
C T L RL EE a RE a VN NNm L
ENi v
A VNv OA0 N
NA0 B
H2
'AOH2 C
G C -
S CC-I O
1 4
/01
/0 V
l V1 R
DR R
D E I^
NE 1 A DR E
I R
ND D
p f p t
/
D y
O 1
'0 C A
/
o C
1 o
Ec
'5 E.
I 5E R /
'5 c TE 3R 1R o 3 g
2 E R
e E
g E
R 1
o T
T c
A A
'[
D D
IN R
_IJ pl T,J
'0 '5 s E R
L L'
5 1 A.N t
M, g AE E
Mg oaTio A 'D 2
1 I
T c.
g c,
NDN'O N
T I
7 RsI g
0 N
CiP S.
3
&Ho' E
G ot t
S 3
AgN A
3 3
ScT R
f-fL (l
(L T d
- c
/
D N
Y Y
S O A p P
R Y e 8
M P S A
n R
u W'
p D
P 6
R E
W n
F T
W W
i T
T R.
w
- u s c
,0 5
'5 3
2 2 0
'0 M
R p
5 5'
5 9
5 P
5 2
2 2
2 3
,5 4
1 i
l 4
l1 lI l,II l
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX C QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM (1)
Commonwealth Edison Company Quality Articles for Meteorological Monitoring Revision 1, July 1980.
(2)
Meteorological Contractor's Quality Assurance Program for Meteorological Monitoring Programs Revision 4, January 1981*
i 1
l l
This is the Q.A. Program of CECO's present contractor. A similar program will be required of any meteorological contractor.
Revision 1 July 1980 Commonwealth Edison Company Quality Articles for Meteorological Monitoring Section I - Quality Assurance 1.0 Quality Assurance Program:
1.1 The contractor shall be required to have an acceptable Quality Assurance Program which will be in effect for the duration of the contract.- The Quality Assurance Program shall include the quality assurance system, organization, policies, responsibilities, listing of procedures and/or requirements for processes necessary to control quality throughout all phases of the contract.
This program shall meet the applicable requirements of 10CFR50, Appendix B and must address the requirements delineated in Article 50, " Acceptance Criteria".
Acceptable guides for meeting the applicable requirements are ANSI N 45 2, " Quality Assurance Requirements for Nuclear Power P2 ants", and applicable associated ANSI N 45 2 daughter documents.
The program must be accepted by the purchaser prior to award of con-tract.
2.0 Quality Assurance Program Approval:
2.1 Before any contractor can be considered acceptable for an award of contract, he must have submitted an acceptable-Quality Assurance Program.
In order to be considered as acceptable, the program must address, as applicable, the Page 1 of 16
Revision 1 July 1980 requirements delineated in Article 1.0 above.
2.2 If the contractor's program does not cover all of the requirements in detail, he must state when and how the requirements do not apply.
This statement of non-applicability must be substantiated.
23 Commitments accepted by the purchaser as a condition of award shall be implemented by the contractor immediately upon award of contract.
These commitments shall require the contractor to make written changes to the program in the form of revisions or supplements to the program.
The supplement shall be controlled in the same manner as the manual, and considered as a auditable part of the program.
2.4 The control of the accepted Quality Assurance Program is the responsibility of the contractor.
Contractor shall promptly notify the purchaser of all revisions to the Quality Assurance Program for the duration of the contract.
No, revisions to the accepted Quality Assurance Program shall be implemented on the purchaser's work by the con-tractor without the purchaser's written approval of the Program revision.
l 30 Quality Assurance Program Submittal with Proposal:
31 A contractor who has written acceptance by the purchaser and a controlled copy of the accepted Quality Assurance Program assigned to the Manager of Quality Assurance, i
Commonwealth Edison Company, need only submit documented l
Page 2 of 16 L
Revision 1 July 1980 verification that the controlled copy is applicable to the scope of work involved in the bid, and include l
information with the proposal covering the current effective date of the program manual, including all current revisions and supplements in effect.
32 A contractor who does not have an accepted and controlled copy of his Quality Assurance Program as described in Article 3 1 above shall submit to the purchaser with his bid two (2) controlled copies of his Quality Assurance Program for review and acceptance, one assigned to the Manager of Quality Assurance and the other assigned to the Nuclear Stations Division Manager.
4.0 Quality Assurance Program Submittal After Award:
4.1 After award, if the contractor meets the requirements of 3 2 above, he must submit three (3) uncontrolled copies I
of the accepted Quality Assurance Program to the purchaser.
4.2 After award, if the contractor meets the requirements of-3 1 above, the contractor must submit four (4) copies of the accepted Quality Assurance Program.
One (1) copy must be controlled, and will be assigned to a designated individual in the Nuclear Stations Division; the-three (3) remaining shall be uncontrolled.
4.3 After award, if contract is for more than one station, the contractor must submit two (2) additional uncontrolled
-copies for each additional station.
Page 3 of 16
Revision 1 July 1980 4
4.4 After award, any revisions to the accepted quality assurance program which the purchaser approves, the contractor must submit copies of the accepted revisions for the uncontrolled and controlled manuals in the purchaser's possession for the duration of the contract.
5.o Quality Assurance Program Acceptance Criteria:
51 organization:
A.
The contractor's Quality Assurance Program shall in-clude an organization chart identifying key positions and the reporting relationship between the Quality personnel and management (including field Q.A.
organization, if applicable).
All quality related activities which are referenced in the manual must be assigned to specific personnel.
The Quality Assurance personnel shall have:
1.
Written responsibilities for quality related job positions.
2.
Authority and organizational freedom to:
a.
identify and evaluate problems b.
require and implement approved corrective actions c.
control further activities where appropriate action such as "stop work" may be required.
3 Independence from groups involved in design and/
or operation of the system, computer programming, data processing system design / modification.
Page ' 4 of 16
Revision 1 July 1980 52 Quality Assurance Program:
A.
The contractor's Quality Assurance Program must be formally accepted by Company Management with a written policy statement.
This Program shall be implemented through written procedures and/or in-structions or they shall be established to ensure that the subject's work is accomplished in com-pliance with the appropriate code and procurement requirements.
B.
Provisions for training Quality Assurance personnel performing activities affecting quality shall be a part of the program.
These provisions must in-clude how this training is accomplished and who is responsible for its implementation.
C.
Provisions for a review of the status, adequacy, im-plementation and effectiveness of the total Quality Assurance Program on a specific time schedule shall be a part of the Program.
D.
Provisions shall be established in the Program for the controlled issuance of the latest revision to the quality assurance manual, procedures and in-structions.
E.
Includedin the Program is a commitment that the program complies with applicable portions of 10 CFR 50 Appendix B and/or ANSI N 45 2.
F.
The Program shall delegate responsible individual (s) to sign off on Certificates of Conformance and/or Page 5 of 16
Revision 1 July 1980 Compliance 53 Design Control:
A.
Measures to assure that the design basis for the systems and/or components are correctly translated into specifications, drawings, procedures, and instructions as appropriate, shall be described.
These measures shall include provisions to insure that appropriate quality standards are specified and a
included in design documents.
B.
The design control measures for independent veri-fication or check of the adequacy of design, such as by the performance of design reviews, by the use of alternate or simplified calculational methods, or by the performance of a suitable testing program shall be described.
C.
Means by which the contractor will insure that de-sign changes are subjected to design control measures commensurate with those applied to the original de-sign shall be described.
j 5.4 Procurement Document Control:
A.
Measures to assure that purchase documents for procurement of material, equipment, and services, whether purchased by the contractor or by a sub-contractor performing a significant portion of the actual services, are reviewed for inclusion of quality requirements shall be described in the Program.
Page 6 of 16
Revicion 1 July 1980 Subcontractors who perform a significant portion of the service shall be required to provide to the contractor a Quality Assurance Program consis-tant with the requirements of the contractor's Q.A.
program for review and acceptance by the contractor.
The contractor will be responsible for determining the Quality Assurance requirements to be applied to any subcontractor who performs a significant portion of the actual services.
55 Instructions, Procedures and Drawings:
A.
Activities affecting quality shall be prescribed by documented work procedures or instructions, as appro-priate, and accomplished in accordance with these documents.
Procedures or instructions shall include l
appropriate acceptance criteria for work performance and quality compliance.
The above measures shall be described in the Program.
5.6 Document control:
A.
Measures to control the issuance of the latest appli-cable documents such as instructions, procedures, drawings, purchase requirements and confirmatory docu-nents such as test reports, including changes thereto, which prescribe activities affecting quality shall be described.
These measures shall assure that documents l
including changes are reviewed for adequacy and appro-val for release by authorized personnel and are dis-tributed to and used at locations where the prescribed Page 7 of 16 l
Revision 1 July 1980 activity is performed; and shall assure that obsolete drawings, speci fications and instructions have been destroyed or isolated from use.
57 Control of Purchased Material, Equipment and Services:
A.
Measures to assure that purchased material, equip-t ment and services, whether purchased directly or through subcontractors, conform to the procurement documents shall be described.
These measures shall include provisions, as appropriate, for source evaluation and selection, objective evidence of quality furnished by contractor or subcontractor, inspection at the contractor or subcontractor source, and receiving inspection for compliance with pro-curement documents upon delivery.
The effectiveness of Quality Control by contractor, or by subcontractors who perform a significant portion of the actual services, may be assessed by purchaser or his de-.
signee at intervals appropriate to the importance, complexity, and quantity of the activities being performed.
5.8 Inspections
A.
The inspection program for activities affecting quality that is established and executed by or for the contractor and his subcontractors to verify conformance with documented instructions procedures, and drawings shall be described.
Such inspection shall be performed by qualified personnel, with Page 8 of 16
Revision 1 July 1980 certification as required, other than those who perform the activities being inspected.
The program shall identify the person responsible for the training, documentation of this training, and maintenance of the training records.
B.
There shall be provisions in the Program for es-tablishing, after award of contract, inspection, by the customer or by other as directed by Edison, of any activities or facilities utilized in the performance of these services by the contractor or significant subcontractors.
C.
The Program shall have provisions for documenting and retaining all inspection results:
59 Test control:
A.
A test program shall be established to insure that any bench or field testing required to demonstrate that the systems and/or components perform satis-factorily in service is performed by qualified personnel, with certification as required, in accordance with written test procedures which in-corporate the requirement and acceptance criteria and limits contained in specifications.
Test procedures shall include provisions for assuring that all prerequisites for the given test have been met, that adequate and calibrated test instrumentation is available and used, and that the test is performed under appropriate environmental conditions.
l Page 9 of 16 l
l
Rsvision 1 July 1980 B.
The Program shall have provisions for documenting, evaluating, and retaining all test results.
5 10 Control of Measuring and Test Equipment:
A.
Measures shall be established in the Program to assure that proper tools, gauges, instruments and other measuring and testing devices are used in activities affecting quality.
To assure accuracy the equipment shall be calibrated, adjusted and maintained at prescribed intervals or prior to use against certified equipment having known valid relationships to the National Bureau of Standards or other recognized applicable standards.
B.
Records shall be maintained and equipment suitably marked (such as tag, sticker, etching, etc.) to verify calibration status.
5 11 Handling, Storage and Shipping:
A.
Measures established to protect equipment being transported or in storage against damage or deterio-ration shall be described.
5 12 Nonconforming Materials, Parts or Components:
A.
Measures established to control materials, parts or components which do not conform to requirements in order to prevent their inadvertent use or installa-tion shall be described.
These measures shall in-clude procedures for identification, documentation, segregation and disposition.
5 13 Corrective Action:
A.
Measures shall be established to assure that conditions adverse to quality are promptly identified and
~-
,~a
heviclon 1 July 1980 corrected.
The identificrition of the cdverse con-ditions, the cause of such condition and the corrective action taken to prevent continuing recurrence of like conditions shall be documented and reported to appropriate levels of management and the customer.
5 14 Quality Assurance Records:
A.
Records shall be maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting Quality.
The contractor shall establish measures that will assure prompt and com-plete delivery to the purchaser of any documents re-quired by the specification.
The contractor shall meet the requirements of applicabic codes and ANSI Standards concerning record retention regarding identifiability and retrievability, duration of re-tention, location, and assigned responsibilities.
5 15 Audit:
A.
Measures established to provide a comprehensive program of planned and scheduled audits to be carried out to verify compliance with all aspects of the Program, and to determine the effectiveness of that Program, shall be described.
This plan shall in-clude both scheduled internal audits and, where appropriate, audits of subcontractors who perform a significant portion of actual services.
B.
The Program shall provide for audits to be conducted in accordance with written procedures and/or checklists by trained and certified audit personnel not having direct responsibilities in areas being audited.
A Page 11 of 16
1 Revision 1 July 1980 description shall be provided in the Program of Auditor training activities, with qualification and certification requirements.
This sh 11 include a description of training activities, a delegation of responsibilities for performance of these activities, and documentation of these activities.
C.
Audit results shall be documented with objective evidence, distributed, and an archival file shall be maintained.
The audit results shall be reviewed by management having responsibilities for the area being audited.
D.
Follow-up action, including re-audit of the deficient areas (s) to assure corrective action has been accom-plished, shall be described in Program.
Section II - Quality Control 1.0 Quality Control Document Submittal with Proposal A.
The contractor shall include with his proposal an index of Quality Control Procedures to be applied to the work.
B.
The contractor shall submit with his proposal for in-clusion into the contract awarded, a detailed list of the quality records and documentation regarding system operations and activities, other than those required by the specification, which will be furnished to, or avail-able for inspection by the purchaser.
Page 12 of 16
Revision 1 July 1980 2.0 Quality Control Document Submittal after Award:
2.1 Quality Control Procedures:
A.
Within six weeks after an award of contract, the con-tractor should submit the detailed procedures to be used or a schedule for submitting these procedures.
NOTE:
A contractor shall not start any work covered
~
by these procedures until the appropriate procedures have been accepted in writing by the purchaser and/or the purchaser's consulting engineer as appropriate.
B.
The Qus11ty Control Procedures shall contain those administrative procedures necessary to implement each Section (51 through 515) of the Quality Assurance Program described above.
The procedures shall desig-nate who is responsible for the implementation by each of the departments stated in the Quality Assurance Program and define the authorities and duties of all personnel associated with quality control.
The procedures shall detail how all elements affecting the product quality will be processed and shall include the specification of the necessary documentation.
C.
Quality Control Procedures shall also contain those design, testing, inspection, cleaning, etc., procedures necessary for the accomplishment of the work and to assure its proper quality.
Procedures shall be qualified as necessary to Code or Standard requirements.
These procedures shall detail what equipment is to be used, limiting conditions, acceptance criteria, techniques, i
etc., that will be used.
Page 13 of 16
R3 vision 1 July 1980 2.2 Inspection Program:
A.
An inspection program shall be established by the contractor and shall include pertinent maintenance and inspection operations which will be of concern to the purchaser relative to Quality Control.
Contractor's recommend cilibration and maintenance program will be applied to the equipment, and documented in monthly reports.
Inspection programs shall be submitted to Nuclear Stations Division Manager or his designee.
NOTE:
1.
The contractor shall not start any work which requires an inspection program until the purchaser or the purchaser's consulting engineer has reviewed and accepted the program as appropriate.
B.
Purchaser and/or his designated representative shall have full access to contractor's and subcontractor's shops and field sites for reviewing progress and determining acceptability of Quality Control activities.
Nuclear Stations Division Manager or his designee shall be notified at least two (2) working days, excluding Saturdays and Sundays, prior to starting of specified installation, calibration, or test programs.
C.
Purchaser and/or his designated representative shall have full access to contractor's and subcontractor's shops for reviewing and auditing the implementation Page 14 of 16
-______-______-_-___________________________________O
Revision 1 July 1980 of its quality assurance program.
Any findings resulting from a contractor's/ subcontractor's audit shall be addressed and promptly corrected to the purchaser's satisfaction.
The audited organization shall provide a scheduled date for completion of corrective action.
2 3. Subcontractor Requirements:
A.
Contractor shall be responsible for the review, comment and acceptance of the Quality Assurance Program and Quality Control Procedures of the sub-contractor who performs a significant portion of actual services.
In addition, contractor shail be responsible for the subcontractor's work.
2.4 Nonconformance Report:
A.
Any nonconformance with purchase documents, approved drawings, procedures, or approved material selection shall be promptly reported in writing to the Purchaser.
25 Quality Control Records:
A.
Copies of all appropriate documentation as herein specified or as required by applicable Codes, Standards, or criteria, shall be submitted in monthly and semi-annual reports.
2.6 Certificate of Compliance /Conformance:
A.
Certificate of Compliance A Certificate of Compliance signed by a qualified party, attesting that the items or services are in Page 15 or 16 j
Revision 1 July 1980 accordance with the customer's purchase order and specification, and accompanied by all docu-mentation required by these articles to sub-stantiate that statement, is required upon l
commencement of the services contemplated by j
this contract.
27 Invoice Submittal:
A.
Invoices for equipment purchased for customer shall be sent to Nuclear Stations Division, Commonwealth Edison Company 2.8 Spare Parts:
A.
All requirements regarding Quality Control and docu-mentation that applied to the original parts of the specified equipment shall apply equally to the spare parts of the specified equipment.
Contractor shall identify those requirements in detail on spare parts quote.
Page 16 of 16 I
_ - -