ML20055D346
| ML20055D346 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck, Millstone File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 07/03/1990 |
| From: | Mroczka E CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO., NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGY CO., NORTHEAST UTILITIES |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-90 A08646, A8646, IEB-90-001, IEB-90-1, NUDOCS 9007060211 | |
| Download: ML20055D346 (15) | |
Text
F
.s'
> :o i;
h.
p 1
Generel Offices e seiden street, Berlin, Connecticut j
j I,s7ESE,YE*~
P.O. Box 270
] 7,',I$'*,,UEC HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT 061410270 k
(203) 665 6000 me..
July 3,1990 h
Docket Non. 50 213 50 245
-(
50 336 M.:.423 A08646 i
Re: NRC Bulletin 90 01 l
r U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk i
Washington, DC 20585
References:
( 1 ) C. E. Rossi letter to Licensees, NRC Dulletin 90-01, dated March 9,1990,
' Loss of Fill-Oli in Transmitters Manufactured by Rosemount".
.j i
( 2 ) E. J. Mroczka letter to USN AC, *Rosemount Transmitters,'
dated April 13, 1989.
{
( 3 ) E. J. Mroczka letter to USNRC, " Response to inspection 50 423/89 04,*
dated August 1,1989.
t 4
Gentlemen:
Haddam Neck Plant Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit Nos.1,2, and 3 NRC Bulletin No. 90 01 Lots of Fill-Oli in Transmittern Manufactured by Ronemount i
Reference (1) discussed problems with Rosemount transmitters which could poteatlally lead to i
failures _ which would be difficult to detect during normal operation.
Reference (1) also requested Licensees to perform certain actions, to provide confirmat:on of completion of those act_lons, and to provide information on certain models of installed Rosemount transmitters. This -
- letter is being provided in response to that request.
Reouested Actions l
- 1. Identify Model 1153 Series B,1153 Series D, and Model 1154 pressure or differential r
pressure transmitters, excluding Model 1153 Series B,1153 Series D, and Model 1154 transmitters manufactured by Rosemount subsequent to July 11, 1989, that are currently utilized in either safety related systems or systems installed in accordance with 10 CFR 50.62 (the ATWS rule).
$@@%@@ f,Q@[,8(
ossm nev,4 ee Q
PbC l'
i i
l USffC A08646/Page 2 j
July 3,1990 i
Renoonse i
The Haddam Neck Plant and Millstone Unit No.1 do not utilize any of the identified transmitters.
Table 1 lists all Model 1153 and 1154 Rosemount transmitters for Millstone Unit Nos. 2 and 3.
]
2.
Determine whether any transmitters identified in item 1 are from the manufacturing lots j
that have been identified by Rosemount as having a high failure fraction due to loss of fill-1 oil. Addressees are requested not to utilize transmitters from these suspect lots in the reactor protection or engineered safety features actuation systemst therefore, addressees are requested to develop and Implement a program to replace, at the earliest appropriate opportunity, transmitters from these suspect lots in use in the reactor protection or engineered safety features actuation systems.
Besponse Based upon an analysis of the failure data and from time histories of the failures at the Millstone Station, the leakage of oil from the measuring cell starts when the measuring cell is initially pressurized.
This position is also supported by Rosemount and therefore infers that the defect, or leak path, is present at the time of manufacture. Conservatively, all transmitters which contain a defect would have exhibited drift symptoms (or would have failed) by 60,000 PSI.
MONTHS.
As of June 1990, our review of data from all inputs to Reactor Protection System (RPS) eud Engineered Safety Features Actuation System (ESF) transmitters has conluded that there are no symptoms of loss of oil and therefore no defect is present. This review is based upon at least thirty sets of very precise computer data which has the capability of detecting changes in output of less than 0.1% of the transmitter's upper range limit. This data was taken over the past nine months and will continue to be analyzed at the frequency specified in item 4.
The replacement of transmitters In suspect lots identified by Rosemount would have no measurable gain with respect to reactor safety. The presently installed transmitters, even in RPS or ESF functions, have been shown not to contain any defects, in addition, replacement has been estimated to cost over $100,000 and 1 manrem.
In the remote case that a defect is postu%ted to occur due to mishandling, maintenance, or is process induced, the symptoms would De readily identifiable by the enhanced surveillance progr. and'or calibration and the loss of oil detected prior to failure.
Therefore, replacemem of "suspe. transmitters is not planned.
3.
Review plant records (for example, the three most recent calibration records) associated with the transmitters identified in item 1 above to determine whether any of these transmitters may have already exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oil.
Appropriate operability acceptance criteria should be developed and applied to transmitters
P A08646/Page 3 July 3,1990 identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oll from this plant record review. Transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oil that do not conform to the operability acceptance criteria should be addressed in accordance
. with the applicable technical specification. Transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oil that do not conform to the operability acceptance criteria and are not addressed in the technical specifications should be replaced at the earliest appropriate opportunity, i
Response
Operability acceptance criterla have been establishcd (see Attachment 1). A monitoring program has also been established (see response to lit.m #4 below). The required review was done via the monitoring program to the operability acceptance criteria. For those transmitters which are part of the monitoring program, a minimum of thirty datasets have been reviewed for any symptoms. The review of unmonitored transmitters includes data from at least three previous calibrations, with an interval between calibrations of at least six months.
No new loss of fill oil fallutes have been identified. Historleal Rosemount failures are listed in Table 2.
4.
Develop and implement an enhanced surveillance program to monitor transmitters identified in item 1 for symptoms of loss of fill-oll. This enhanced surveillance program should consider the following or equally effective actions:
a) Ensuring appropriate licensee personnel are aware of the symptoms that a transmitter, both during operation and during calibration activities, may exhibit if it is experiencing a loss of fill oil and the need for prompt identification of transmitters that may exhibit these symptoms; b) Enhanced transmitter monitoring to identify sustained transmitter drift; c) Review of transmitter performance following planned or unplanned plant translents or t
tests to identify sluggish transmitter response, d) Enhanced awareness of sluggish transmitter response to either increasing or decreasing test pressures during calibration act!vities:
1 e) Development and implementation of a program to detect changes in process noise; and f)
Development and application to transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms Indicative of loss of fill oil of an appropriate operability acceptance criteria.
l Transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill-oll that
- - -. +
USNRC A08646/Page 4 July 3,1990 do not conform to the operability acceptance criterla should be addressed in accordance with the applicable technical specification.
Transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oil that do not conform to the operability acceptance criteria and are not addressed in the technical specifications should be replaced at the earliest appropriate opportunity.
Response
The enhanced surveillance program for the installed Rosemount transmitters has been implemented. This program addresses the considerations of Reference (1) as follows:
a) Instrumentation and Controls (l&C) personnel are aware of the symptoms that a transmitter, both during operation and during calibration activities, may exhibit if it is experiencing a loss of fill-oil. l&C Department personnel have been on distribution for all pertinent Information pertaining to Rosemount technical bulletins and this information has been included into the required reading program in the 18C Department.
Training of l&C and Operations personnel will be completed by July 1990. This training includes information on the symptoms exhibited by a transmitter that is losing fill oil and the need for prompt Identification of such transmitters, b) The enhanced surveillance program includes periodic checks of the transmitters identified in Table 1 and the review of calibration records for these transmitters to look for transmitter drift, as discussed in item 3 above. The transmitters providing an input to the RPS and ESF also provide input to the Plant Computer System (PCS) and will be checked on a periodic basis using PCS data.
The frequency of monitoring for loss of fill-oll is determined by the time pressure product of the installed transmitters. As a minimum, all Rosemount Model 1153 and 1154 transmitters will be monitored at an interval not to exceed 4000 PSI MONTHS.
With this monitoring interval, any loss of fill oil will be detected ado.t to the failure of the transmitter.
Channel checks will continue to be done on a shift basis as presently required.
Transmitters that do not provide inputs to the PCS will be checked at the frequency determined by the 4000 PSI. MONTH criterion.
The only exception to this is transmitter 3SlH F917 used to monitor charging pump discharge flow during safety injection. This transmitter has been in service for greater than 80,000 PSI MONTHS and has experienced no drift which would Indicato either a defect or a loss of oil from the sensing cell.
This monitoring program data and the data from transmitter calibrations will be trended to determine if any of these transmitters are exhibiting drift which may be an indication of a possible fill-oil loss.
l I
i A08646/Page 5 j
July 3,1990 For most of the channels, drift will be detected by trending the deviation in the output 1
of a transmitter from a known value or the average output of redundant transmitters.
c) Based on the information from Rosemount, monitoring for drift should give the first Indication of failure long before sluggish response in a transient would be identified.
Therefore, the enhanced surveillance program does not include a review following i
1 d) The 180 technicians observe for sluggish response when calibrating Rosemount transmitters. During the calibration, the technician observes the qualitativ3 time response performance due to a rapid chang 6 in the input. Based on the Rosemount literature, a quantitative response time test during routine calibration is not required since the degradation in response time should be noticeable to the technician. However, a quantitative time response test will be performed to verify operability of a transtnitter identified by the trending program as discussed in the response to item 3 above or that exhibits sluggish response during the test of the qualitative response
- time, e) The crimarv method of detection of a potential loss of fill oll will be the trending of the performance of the instrument channel, that is, the drift observed during the periodic checks and the calibrations. Based on the information from Rosemount, monitoring for drift should give the first indication of failure before a decrease in transmitter noise level amplitude would be identified. Therefore, the noise level l
amplitude and cross correlation have been included as a confirmatorv indicator of failure.
f) The operability acceptance criteria are as identified in the response to llem 3 above.
Transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oil that
('
are included in the technical specifications and that do not conform to the operability
[
acceptance criteria will be addressed in accordance with the applicable technical specification. Transmitters identified as having exhibited symptoms indicative of loss of fill oil that do not conform to the operability acceptance criteria and are not addressed in the technical specifications will be replaced at the earliest appropriate opportunity. Those transmitters that exhibit the symptoms indicative of a possible loss of fill-cil but that satisfy the operability acceptance criteria will be evaluated on a case by case basis to determine a specific course of action.
This program has been developed and implemented for all transmitters in Table 1. The program will. be formalized (i.e., a new plant surveillance procedure generated) by November 30,1990. Currently, data collection and analysis for drift monitoring is being performed by corporate engineering personnel who developed the monitoring program. The computer software used in the analysis is being fully verified in accordance with the l
software quality assurance program. This is expected to be complete by the end of 1990.
5.
Document and maintain in accordance with existing plant procedures a basis for continued plant operation covering the time period from the present until such time that the Model 1153 Series B,1143 Series D, and Model 1154 transmitters from the manufacturing lots I
.-e
-.w,.,
-e
l i
i USNRC i
A08646/Page 6 July 3,1990 l
that have been identified by Rosemount as having a high failure fraction due to bss of fill-oil in use in the reactor protection or engineered safefy features actuation systems can be replaced. In addition, while performing the actions requested above, addressees may identify 1 Tnsmitters exhibiting symptoms indicative of loss of fill oll that do not conform to the established operability acceptance criteria and are not addressed in the technical specifications.
As these transm!!!ers are identified, this basis for continued plant operation should be updated to address these transmitters covering the time period from the time these transmitters are identified until such time that these transmitters can be replaced. When develop!ng and updating this basis for continued plant operation, addressees may wish to consider transmitter diversity and redundancy, diverse trip functions (a separate trip function that may also provide a corresponding trip signal), special system and/or component tests, or (if necessary) immediate replacement of certain suspect transmitters.
t
Response
Operability determinations have been performed and documented for all Rosemount 1153 and 1154 transmitters at Millstone Unit Nos. 2 and 3.
References (2) and (3) provided information regarding Millstona Unit No. 3's operability determinations. Millstone Unit No. 2's operability determination was similarly completed. Since all installed transmitters l
are operable, no justification for continued operation is required.
If there are any questions, please do not hesitate to contact my staff directly.
Very truly yours, NORTHEAST NUCLEAR ENERGYCOMPANY COtNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY l
J E. J. Mrpka r
Senior Vice President cc: See Page 7 l
l
USNRO A08646/Page 7 July 3,1990 cc: T. T. Martin, Region l Administrator M. L. Boyle, NRC Project Manager, Millstone Unit No. t G. S. Vissing, NRC Project Manager, Millstone Unit No. 2
- 0. H. Jaffe, NRC Project Manager, Millstone Unit No. 3 A. B. Wang, NRC Project Manager, Haddam Neck Plant W. J. Raymond, Senior Resident inspector, Millstone Unit Nos.1,2, and 3 J. T. Shediosky, Senior Resident inspector, Haddam Neck Plant STATEOFCONNECTICLIT )
) ss. Berlin COUNTY OF HARTFORD )
Then personally appeared before me as, E. J. Mroczka, who being duly sworn, did state that he is Senior Vice President of Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company and Northeast Nuclear Energy Company, Licensees herein, that he is authorized to execute and file the foregoing information in the name and on behalf of the Licensees herein, and that the statements contained in said information are true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief, t4 Mil.
mi /
Ndtary Pubigi My Comml:4I6n Expires !! arch 31,1993 L
i
)
i ATTACHMENT l OPERABILITY ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA This document describes the Operabilltr Acceptance Criteria (OAC) used for Millstone, which is consistent with Rosemount Technical '3ulletin #4 (TB4).
l Drift and Drift Rato The following is a list of the maximuri drift percent before response time begins to degrade as
]
specified by Rosemount for the various range codes. These values are modified for each transmitter to reflect the effect of turn down ratio per TBd.
Maximum Cumulative Drift /2ero Shift from TB4 Range Transmitter Zero Shift Cod;t URL
(%URL) 3 30" 3.0%
4 150' O.5%
5 750*
0.8%
6 100 psi 2.8%
7 300 psi 0.9%
8 1000 psi 0.4 %
9 3000 psi 0.15%
10 6000 psi 0.07 %
lf cumulative drift, as determined by either review of calibration records and/or the monitoring program, exceeds 75% of these values, other inRators will be reviewed for loss of oil symptoms. If, in addition to observed drift, either crop correlation or variance is reduced by a factor of 2 or more, the transmitter will be declared inoperable.
Cumulative drift is the total algebraic sum of the drift calculated for the calibrations from installation (or last 3 calibrations) or the drift observed from the monitoring program.
If there are no other symptoms other than exceeding 75% of the drift limits and the cause of the l
l drill can not be attributed to any other causes other than the Rosemount transmitter then the l-following actions will take place:
i 1.
Increase monitoring frequency to 1000 psi-month intervals.
2, Perform record review from initial pressurization, 11 the cumulative drift exceeds 90% of the specified values or other symptoms are present then the transmitter will be considered inoperable.
l l
~
j i
Attachment i A08646/Page 2 July 3,1990 if the drift is in the direction of the single protective function, the transmitter may not have to be considered inoperable until the allowable values of the Technical Specifications are exceeded.
For the purposes of this program, drift is defined as a steady or increasing change in output
[
with time. Except for range codes 8,9,10, a step change or a significant change in the drift rate would not be considered a symptom of loss of oil but may be indicative of some other failure mechanism.
Variance or Noise Level The variance, or noise level, may also be an indicator of loss of oil in either the high or low side of the sensing cell. When the loss of oil causes the isolation diaphragm to come in contact with the fixed Internal surface of the cell, the noise level or variance will eventually decrease to zero. This symptom has been observed in actual failure data and confirmed by Rosemount.
As the loss of oil progresses to a point where the isolation diaphragm comes in contact with the fixed intomat surface, the sensing diaphragm can no longer move due to increases in input pressure but it may be able to respond to decreases in input pressure. The output signal at this time becomes "one sided" and the noise level or variance will be reduced. Further oil loss will result in the variance approaching zero.
Other symptoms such as skewedness and kurtosis may also change as a result of the loss of oilin the sensing cell. These are statistical terms and will detect the "one sided" response of a transmitter with a loss of oil.
Variance is a measurement of the noise level present in the output signal of the transmitter. A reduction in the variance by a factor of two, either by itself or in combination with observed drift exceeding 75% of the above limits, will result in the transmitter being declared inoperable and further confirmatory testing will be undertaken. Unless the change in variance or noise level is attributable to other causes such as line blockage, the transmitter will undergo further evaluation.
Cross Correlation Fallure data from Millstone Unit No. 3 has confirmed that a reduction in the cross correlation between redundant sensors is an indication of significant oil loss that could result in the transmitter falling to perform as required. Cross correlation is a statistical term which determines the ability of two redundant transmitters to follow changes in the process. This term is only an Indicator if the measured variable is sensed by redundant sensors on a nolsy process and exhibits a consistent cross correlation value exceeding 50%. Should this normal value be less than 60%, it will not be used to confirm a loss of oil failure.
A decrease in this calculated value by a factor of two from its normal (average) value, in combination with observed drift exceeding 75% of the above values will result in the transmitter being r,eclared inoperable.
0
~
Attachment I A08646/Page 3 July 3,1990 If symptoms of oil loss are identified, confirmatory or corrective actions will be taken by plant personnel. Should a single symptom be observed (i.e. sustained drift >75% of the cumulative drift limits) other indicators will be reviewed, if any additional symptoms (i.e., reduced variance or cross correlation) are present, the transmitter will be considered inoperable. If the drift reaches 90% of the stated limits, absent of other symptoms, the transmitter will also be considered inoperable. The plant will then take actions in accordance with the Tochnical Specification requirements, if the transmitter is not covered by Technical Specifications, the failure will be evaluated in accordance with plant procedures.
Evaluation of Sunnect Transmittern Should a transmitter exhibit symptoms of oil loss during operation such as a reduction in the observed noise level, or a change in the drift rate or cumulative drift exceeds 75% of the values specified above, then further testing will be performed as follows:
1.
Check all other possible causes of the symptoms such as electronic drift, rack errors, blocked sensing lines, etc.
2.
Perform review of previous calibration records which may indicate continued drift.
3.
Perform catibration check and record "as found" data.
4.
Recalibrate the transmitter to its upper range limit (URL). Apply a rapid input pressure, equal to 131% of the URL to the suspect side of the cell and make a qualitative assessment of the transmitter's response.
5.
Report any failed transmitters in accordance with the requirements of Reference (1). The defective transmitter or sensing cell shall be returned to Rosemount for further evaluation, if possible.
A quantitative assessment of the transmitter's operability will be performed with respect to range capability and response time. Should this assessment demonstrate that the transmitter did not meet its specified requirements, then appropriate evaluations for reportability will be assessed.
If the above testing indicates that no symptoms are present other than drift, further evaluation and recommendations for disposition of the transmitter will be made, i
1
-u
l i
NRCB 90-01 TABLE 1 MILLSTONE UNITS 2&3 TRAN5MITTER FUNCTION RANGE SUSPECT STATIC TECH SURVEILLANCE SURVEILLANCE
-TAG CODE LOT PRES 5 SPEC FREQUENCY ETH00 3
NUPSER (PSIA)
(NOTE 1)
(NOTE 1)
MILLSTONE UNIT 3 3CCP:FT67A RHR OUTLET FLOW 5
N0
<100*
N0 REFUELING RC
,3CCP:FT678 RHR C'JTLET FLOW 5
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3CCP:FT178A RCP SEAL H20 FLOW 00T 5
N0
<100 N0 REFUELING RC 3CCP2FT1788 RCP SEAL H20 FLOW 00T N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3CCP FT178C RCP SEAL H20 FLOW OUT 5
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3CCP:FT1780 RCP SEAL H20 FLOW OUT 5
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3CHS LT102 BAT SA LEVEL 5
YES
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3CH5cLT104 BAT SA LEVEL 5
YES
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3CH5fLT105 BAT SB LEVEL 5
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3CH5fLT106 BAT 58 LEVEL 5
YES
<100 N0 REFUELING RC 3CH5-FT121 CHARGIK FLOW 5
N0 2250 N0 20 DAYS
-CM,RC 3CH5-FT132 LETDOWN FLOW 5
N0 400 N0 20 DAYS CM,RC 3CH5-FT142 RCP SEAL H20 FLOW IN 4
NO 2250 NO 20 DAYS CM,RC 3CH5-FT143 RCP SEAL H20 FLOW IN 4
N0 2250 N0 20 DAYS CM,RC 3CH5-FT145 -
RCP SEAL H20 FLOW IN 4
N0 2250 N0 20 DAYS CM,RC 3CHS-FT144 RCP SEAL H20 FLOW IN 4
NO 2250 N0 20 DAYS CM,RC 3CHS-LT112 VCT LEVEL IND 4
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 4
3CHS-LT185 VCT LEVEL CTL 4
N0
<100 NO REFUELING f!C 3FWAcLT20A DWST LEVEL 5
N0
<100 YES REFUELING RC 3FWAcLT208 DWST LEVEL 5
N0
<100 YES REFUELING RC 3FWA-FT33A AUX FEED IND 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FWA FT33B AUX FEED IND 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FWA-FT330 AUX FEED INO 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC l
3FWA-FT330 AUX FEED IND 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FWA-FT51A AUX FEED INO 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FWA-FT51B-AUX FEED IND 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FWA-FT51C AUX FEED IND 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FWA-FT51D AUX FEED IND 5
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 3FW5cLT551 STM GEN LYL TRIP 4
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3FW5tLT552 STM GEN LVL TRIP 4
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3FWSCLT553 STM GEN LVL TRIP 4
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC l
3FW$tLT554 STM GEN LVL TRIP 4
NO 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC
-3HVC*PT73A AIR STORAGE TANK PRES 9
N0 3000 NO REFUELING RC l
3HVC PT738 AIR STORAGE TANK PRES 9
N0 3000 NO REFUELING RC
)
3HVK PDT32A CHILLED H20 SUPPLY DP 6
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3HVK*PDT328 CHILLED H20 SUPPLY DP 6
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3HVRIPDT208A AUX BLDG FLT EXH FAN 3
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC l'
l
-3HVR*PDT2088 AUX BLOG FLT EXH FAN 3
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC l
3HVR*PT104A AUX BLDG INLT FLT CNTR 3
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3HVR*PT1048 AUX BLDG INLT FLT CNTR 3
N0
<100 NO REFUELING RC 3LMSCPT24A CTNT PRESS WR 7
N0
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3LMS*PT248 CTNT PRESS WR 7
NO
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3LM5tPT43A CTMT PRESS LR 5
NO
<100 YES REFUELING RC 3LMScPT439 CTNT PRESS LR 5
NO
<100 YES REFUELING RC i
Page...
NRCS 90 01 TCLE 1 (CONT)
MILLSTONE UNIT
. TRANSMITTER FUNCTION RANGE SUSPECT STATIC TECH SURVE!LLANCE SURVEILLANCE TAG CODE LOT PRESS SPEC FREQUENCY PETH00 NUPSER (PSIA)
(NOTE 1) 3LM5*PT934 CTNT PRESS 6
N0
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3LMS*PT935 CTMT PRESS 6
N0
<100 YE5 20 DAYS CM,RC 3LMS*PT936 CTMT PRESS 6
N0
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3LMS*PT937 CTNT PRESS 6
N0
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3M55*PT514 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3M55*PT515 SG LP TRIP 9
NO 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3MS$* PTS 16 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3M55*PT524 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YE5 20 DAYS CM,RC
+
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC i
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3MS$*PT534 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3M55*PT535 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC j
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3MS$cPT544 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3MS$*PT545 5G LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3MS$*PT546 SG LP TRIP 9
N0 1000 YE5 20 DAYS CM,RC 3MS$*PT505 TURS 15T STG PRESS (RPS) 8 NO 650 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3M55*PT506 TURS IST STG PRESS (RPS) 8 N0 650 YE5 20 DAYS CM,RC 3055cLT930 RWST LEVEL 6
NO
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3055cLT931 RWST LEVEL 6
N0
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 30$$cLT932 RWST LEVEL 6
N0
<100 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3055cLT933 RWST LEVEL 6
N0
<100 YES REFUELING RC
?
3RC5cFT414 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC l
3RC5cFT415 RC5 FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cFT416 RC5 FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC$cFT424 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
YES 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC$cFT425 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC i
3RC5cFT426 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
YES 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cFT434 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cFT435 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC$cFT436 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
YES 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC50FT444 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
NO 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cFT445 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
NO 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cFT446 RCS FLOW TRIP 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cLT460 PZR HI LYL TRIP (RPS) 5 N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cLT461 PZR HI LVL TRIP (RPS) 5 YES 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cPT403 RCS WR PRESS 9
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC5cPT403A RCS WR PRESS 9
YES 2250 YES 20 DAYS RC,CC**
3RCS*PT457 PZR PRESS (RPS/ESF) 9 N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC 3RC$cPT458 PZR PRESS (RPS/ESF) 9 NO 2250 YES 20 DAYS CM,RC l
3RCS*PT49 RCS WR PRESS 10 N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS RC,CC**
3RC5cPT50. RCS WR PRESS 10 N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS RC,CCa*
3RH5-FT618 RHR HX OUT FLOW 6
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3RHS-FT619 RHR HX DUT FLOW 6
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R55cFT38A CTMT RECIRC PUMP FLOW 4
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R$$cFT388 CTNT RECIRC PUPF FLOW 4
NO
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R$$cFT400 CTNT RECIRC PUPF FLOW 4
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R$5cFT400 CTMT RECIRC PUPF FLOW 4
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC Page.
NRCS 90-01 TABLE 1(CON 1) i 1
MILLSTONE UNIT 3 TRAN5MITTER FUNCTION RANGE SUSPECT STATIC TECH $URVEILLANCE SURVE!LLANCE i
TAG CODE LOT PRESS SPEC FREQUENCY ETH00 NUPSER (PSIA)
(NOTE 1) 3R$5*PT25A CTMT RCR PW DSC PRES 7
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R$$*PT258 CTMT RCR PW DSC PRES 7
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R$$*PT250 CTMT RCR PW DSC PRES 7
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 3R55*PT250 CTMT RCR PW DSC PRES 7
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC
'351H-FT917 CNG PUW DISCH FLOW 7
N0 2250 NO REFUELING RC 351H-FT918 51-A PUW DISC 6
N0
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 351H-FT922 51-8 PUPF DISC 6
NO
<100*
YES REFUELING RC 35IL-PT961 SI TANK - A PRES 8
N0 650 YES 20 DAYS RC,CC***
351L-PT963 SI TANK - B PRES 8
N0 650 YE5 20 DAYS RC,CC***
35!L-PT965-SI TANK - C PRES 8
N0 650 YES 20 DAYS RC,CC***
351L-PT967 51 TANK - D PRES 8
N0 650 YES 20 DAYS RC,CC***
35W-FT59A CTNT RECR C0OLER FLOW 5
YES
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 35WP-FT598 CTMT RECR C0OLER FLOW 5
YES
<100*
N0 REFUELING RC 35WP-FT59C CTNT RECR C0OLER FLOW 5
N0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC 35WP-FT590 CTNT RECR C00lIR FLOW 5
H0
<100*
NO REFUELING RC MILL 5 TONE UNIT 2 i
LT-110X PZR LEVEL 5
N0 2250 YES 20 DAYS RC,0FIS LT-110Y PZR LEVEL 5
YES 2250 YES 20 DAYS RC,0FIS PT-103-1 PZR PRES 5URE 9
N0 2250 YE5 20 DAYS RC,0FIS Page.
. - ~ -
i l.
i NRC8 90-01 TABLE 1(CONT) l i
NOTE 1
(*) FOR SYSTEMS NORMALLY IN STANDBY AND DEPRESSURIZED, <100 PSI IS STATED.
FOR BRIEF PERIOOS (i.e. DURING TESTING AND POST TRIP CONDITIONS) THE TRANSMITTER WILL SEE HIGHER PRE 550RES AND THE MONITORING FREQUENCIES ADJUSTED ACCORDINGLY.
l l
(RC) NORMAL REFUELING CALIBRATION WITH CUMULATIVE DRIFT MONITORED AND RECORDED.
(CM) COMPUTERIZED MONITORING SYSTEM !$ IMPLEMENTED TO TRACK BOTH DRIFT AND DRIFT RATE.
DATA WILL BE OBTAINED AND ANALYZE 0 AT A FREQUENCY NOT TO EXCEED 20 DAYS IN MODES 1 & 2.
(CC**) TRANSMITTER $ 3RC$*PT49 & 3RC$*PT50 ARE WIDE RANGE PRES $URE TRANSMITTERS (RANGE CODE 10) U$ED ONLY TO MONITOR PRESSURE DURING A POSTULATED ATWS EVENT. $H00LO EITHER 0F THESE FAIL DUE TO L055 0F OIL, THIS FAILURE 1
WOULO BE READILY IDENTIFIED DURING THE CHANNEL CHECK. ACCORDING T0 ROSEM0UNT, THE LOSS OF OIL WILL RESULT IN A DECREASING OUTPUT AT THE RATE OF ABOUT 14 0F UPPER RANGE LIMIT PER DAY. THIS FAILURE WILL BE DETECTED WITHIN FIVE DAYS ONCE THE FAILURE EFFECTS THE OPERATING POINT.
TRANSMITTER 3RC$*PT403A IS A RANGE CODE 9 CALIBRATED 0 TO 1000 PSI. THE
)
PRIMARY FUNCTION OF THIS TRAN5MITTER IS TO PROVIDE THE INTERLOCK FOR THE RHR SYSTEM.
$H00LD THIS TRANSMITTER FAIL DUE T0 LOSS OF OIL, IT WILL BE DETECTED BY CDPFARING ITS OUTPUT TO A REDUNDANT, DIVERSE TRANSMITTER 3RC$*PT405A DURING THE PERIDOIC CHANNEL CHECK $.
(CC***) TRANSMITTERS 351L-PT961, PT963, PT965,& PT967 MONITOR THE STATIC PRES $URE IN EACH 0F THE FOUR SAFETY INJECTION TANKS.
SHOULD A LOSS OF DIL FAILURE OCCUR IN ANY OF THESE TRANSMITTERS, IN WILL BE READILY DETECTED BY THE PERIODIC CHANNEL CHECKS COMPARING THE OUTPUTS TO REDUNDANT TRANSMITTERS.
(0FIS) MILLSTONE UNIT 2 HAS THREE R0$EM00NT TRANSMITTERS INSTALLED (LT-110X, l
LT110Y AND PT-103-1)USEDTOMONITORPRES$URIZER LEVEL AND PRESSURE RESPECTIVELY. THESE TRANSMITTERS WILL BE MONITORED AT A MINIMUM 1
FREQUENCY OF 20 DAYS USING 0FFSITE FACILITY INFORMATION SYSTEM (0FIS.)
UTILIZING DATA FROM 0FIS, A LOSS OF OIL FROM THESE TRANSMITTERS WILL BE DETECTED PRIOR TO ACTUAL FAILURE.
l
_Page 4 _
e
~
INtCB 90-01 TABIA 2 FAII2D ROSENOWIT TRANSHITTERS AT MILLSTUlm Millstene Unit 3 Plant ID Transnitter Serial Confirmed By Suspect System /
Date Date Time at Failure No.
Rosemount Lot Function Pressurized Failures Pressure Symptoms Detected Days 3RCS*FT416 1153HD5PC 408187 Tes Tes RCS Flow Loop 1 1985 11-9-87 525 1, 5 3RCS*FT425 1153HD5PC 408189 Tes Tes RCS Flov Loop 2 1985 9-14-87 480 1, 2, 3, 4 3RCS*FT434 1153HD5PC 408191 Tes Yes RCS Flow Loop 3 1985 5-29-87 435 1, 2, 3, 4 3RCS*FT444 1153HD5PC 408194 Tes Yes RCS Flow Loop 4 1985 3-23-87 453 1,2,3,4 3RCS*FT445 1153HDSPC 408195 Tes Yes RCS Flow Loop 4 1985 10-15-87 490 1, 2, 3, 4 3RCS*LT460 1153HD5PC 408197 Teg Yes PZR Lvl CH2 1985 3-27-87 435 1, 5 3CHS*FT121 1153HB5PC 408118 No No CHG Line Flov 1985 1-14-87 2%
1, 3, 5 Millstone Unit 2 LT-110X 1153HD5PA 418755 No" No PZR Lvl 5-13-88 6-13-88 30 2, 4, 5 LT-110X 1153HD5PA 411942 Tes Yes PZR Lvl Jan 1984 5-13-88 747 5
A.
Corrective Action Taken - All above transmitters were confirmed failed and replaced.
B.
Disposition - a) of the nine (9) failed transmitters, seven (7) were returned to vendor ior analysis.
b) transmitters are stored at Millstone site.
Symptoms 1
Drift 2
Loss of Noise 3
Sluggish Response 6
One Sided Noise 5
Unable to Calibrate
~s
.~
~
-