ML20069B665
| ML20069B665 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Calvert Cliffs  |
| Issue date: | 03/14/1983 |
| From: | Lundvall A BALTIMORE GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Clark R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-0737, RTR-NUREG-737, TASK-2.F.1, TASK-TM NUDOCS 8303170056 | |
| Download: ML20069B665 (9) | |
Text
.
A BALTIMORE GAS AND ELECTRIC CHARLES CENTER.P. O. BOX 1475 BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21203 ARTHUR E. LUNOVALL. JR.
vice Patsiorwr March 14,1983 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Attention: Mr. R. A. Clark, Chief Operating Reactors Branch #3 Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
Subject:
Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Plant Units Nos.1 & 2; Dockets Nos. 50-317 and 50-318 TMI Action Plan, Items II.F.1.4,5, & 6 Post-Implementation Review Gentlemen:
By your letter of January 11,1983, you requested information for your post-implementation review of our containment pressure, water level, and hydtogen monitors. Our response is provided as an attachment to this letter.
Please feel free to contact us if you have any additional questions on this subject.
Very truly yours, w,fdW AEL/MDP/gvg Attachment cc: 3. A. Biddison, Jr., Esq.
G. F. Trowbridge, Esq.
l f
Mr. D. H. Jaffe, NRC OYb Mr. R. E. Architzel, NRC
(
8303170056 830314 PDR ADOCK 05000317 p
[
d CALVERT CLIFFS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IN REGARD TO TMI ACTION PLAN ITEM II.F.1 (1)
EXCEPTIONS BEING TAKEN TO NUREG-4737 REQUIRElWENTS Question: (la) Please indicate any exceptions that you plan to take to the NUREG-0737 items in our scope of review. For each exception indicate:(1) why you find it difficult to comply with this item; (2) how this exception will affect the monitor system accuracy, speed, dependability, availability, and utility; (3) If this exception in any way comprises the safety margin that the monitor is supposed to provide; and (4) any extenuating factors i
that make this exception less deleterious than it appears at face value.
l l
Response
No exceptions are being requested for the NUREG-0737 items listed in the letter except as noted below.
)
Question: (Ib) In your letter of December 15, 1980 from A. E. Lundvall (BG&E) to Darrell G. Eisenhut (NRC) you state that for the containment pressure monitor, data gathering and logging will be performed by the process computer. Describe all the computer outputs for the pressure monitor and give the reasons you feel your system is adequate for post accident pressure monitoring. How accessable is the computer output to the control room operator? Can the computer output be displayed on an existing addressable point strip chart in the control room? How many addressable point strip charts do you have in the control room? During accident conditions would all the addressable point strip charts be monopolized logging other data, and hence be unavailable for pressure monitoring? How far behind real time will your process computer be running under accident conditons? What is the scan frequency of your process computer for the pressure signal? Does your present system
'have any pressure readout in the control room?
Response
1)
Containment pressure data is logged after an accident by the Technical Support Center (TSC) computer and monitored by the Plant Process computer. Historical data will be available from the TSC computer printer logs and the TSC addressable strip chart recorders. Also, the data will be archived on magnetic tape for later retrieval. On line data will be available from the various TSC peripheral devices, the Plant Process Computer printers, and the control room indicators.
2)
The TSC computer printer logs will be available in the TSC, which is adjacent to the control room.
3)
Two sddressable point strip chart recorders in the control room display outputs from the Plant Process computer. These may be used to display containment presssure.
In addition, nine addressable, three-pen strip chart recorders in the TSC display outputs from the TSC computer which may include containment pressure.
4)
If during accident conditions all the addressable point strip chart recorders are dedicated to other parameters, the data will still be output to the prir.ter logs and the magnetic tape logs. Trending will be available from the TSC computer pernpnerals.
5)
The TSC computer and the Plant Process computer will be logging in real time under accident conditions.
6)
The containment pressure channel is scanned once each second by the TSC computer and once every thirty seconds by the Plant Process computer.
7)
The containment presure channels have meter readouts in the control room.
Question: (Ic) In your letter of January 19,1982 from A. E. Lundvall(BG&E) to R. A.
Clark (NRC) you state that you are getting erroneous water level indications, but you think you have a fix for the problem which you should be able to implement on Unit 1 in April 1982 and on Unit 2 in October 1982.
Has the fix on Unit I been completed?
Have the erroneous water levelindications been corrected? If not, please explain the current status of the problem.
Response
All water level measurement systems have been repaired and are functioning properly as reported in our submittal dated January 21, 1983.
(2)
H.F.I.4 - PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEM (PMS)
Question: (2a) Provide a block diagram of the configuration of modules that make up your PMS. Provide an explanation of any details in the block diagram that might be necessar y for an understanding of your PMS accuracy and time response.
Question: (2b) For each module provide a list of all parameters which describe the overall uncertainty in the transfer function of the module.
Response
Refer to Figure 1 for the block diagram and uncertainty parameters for the containment pressure monitoring system.
- Question: (2c) Combine parameters in 2b to get an overall system uncertainty. If you have both strip chart recorder and indicator output, give the overall system uncertainty for both systems. If you have systems spanning different ranges, give the overall system uncertainty for each system.
Response
The total maximum uncertainty for channel A is +,1.8% and for channel B is + 1.2% under normal operating conditions.
Question: (2d) For each module Indicate the time response. For modules with a linear transfer function, state either the time constant, T, or the Ramp Asymptotic Delay Time, RADT.
For modules with an output that varies linearly in time, state the full scale response time. (Most likely the only module you have in this category is the strip chart recorder.)
Response
The time responses for the modules are listed below:
Channel A ITT Barton Transmitter - 180 msec for 10% to 90% of step function.
Sigma Meter - 2 second nominal full scale response Channel B Fischer and Porter transmitters - first order step response time is.03 second.
Sigma Meters - 2 second nominal full scale response (3)
II.F.1.5 - WATER LEVEL MONITORING SYSTEM (WLMS)
Question: (3a) Provide a block diagram of the configuration of modules that make up your WLMS. Provide an explantion of any details in the block diagram that might be necessary for an understanding of your WLMS accuracy.
Question: (3b) For each module provide a list of all parameters which describe the overall uncertainly in the transfer function of that module.
Response
Refer to Figure 2 for the block diagram and uncertainty parameters for the containment water level monitoring system.
Question: (3c) Combine parameters in 3b to get an overall system uncertainty. If you have both strip chart recorder and indicator output, give the overall system uncertainty for both systems. If you have systems spanning different ranges, give the overall system uncertainty for each system.
Response
For normal operating conditions, the total maximum system uncertainty isi.8%
1 (4)
H.F.I.6 - HYDROGEN MONITOR SYSTEM (HMS)
Question: (4a) Provide a block diagram of the configuration of modules that make up your HMS, Provide an explanation of any details in the block diagram that might be necessary for an understanding of your HMS accuracy. If you have different types of HMS's give this information for each type.
. Question: (4b) For each module provide a list of all' parameters which describe the overall uncertainty in the transfer function of that module.
Response: -
Refer to Figure 3 for the block diagram ar.d uncertainty parameters for the containment hydrogen monitoring system.
Question: (4c) Combine the parameters in 4b to get an overall system uncertainty. If you have both strip chart recorder and indicator output, give the overall system uncertainty for both systems.
J
Response
The total maximum system uncertainly for the indicator loop is1 2%
3 and for the strip chart recorder loop is1 5% under normal conditions.
2 Question: (4d) Indicate the placement and number of hydrogen monitor intake ports in containment. Indicate any special sampling techniques that are used either to examine one. region of containment or to assure that a good cross section of containment is being monitored.
Response
The intake ports for hydrogen sampling are located at six points within each containment. The sample ports are located at the containment north primary shield, the containment west 135 foot elevation, the containment dome 189 foot elevation, the containment east 135 foot elevation, the pressurizer compartment and the containment south primary shield. Each port is sampled for five minutes in a predefined sequence.
Question: (4e) Are there any obstructions which would prevent hydrogen escaping from the core from reaching the hydrogen sample ports quickly?
Response
No obstructions exist which would prevent the detection of hydrogen in the containment.
l 9
9
,, -. ~, _, _ -. _.
____m
., ' s'.
a FIGURE 1 Page 1 of 2 PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEM
. System Block Diagram for Channel A:
h E/E + TO TSC PT I/E + TO PC PI X
Parameters:
Pressure Transmitter (PT)
ITT Barton Model 764, TageNumbers 1 (2) PT-5310
-5 to 150 psig calibrated span
=
1 0 5% FS Reference accuracy
=
+ 1.0% FS thermal effects
=
1 1.0% FS long term drift
=
static pressure effects.= negligible negligible 3 Ner supply effects
=
Pressure Indicator (PI)
Sigma Model 9262, Tag numbers 1 (2) PI-5310
-5 to 150 psig
=
span
+ 1% FS reference accuracy
=
1 1/3% FS deadband and hyteresis
=
r FIGURE 1 Pags 2 of 2 PRESSURE MONITORING SYSTEM System Block Diagram for Channel B:
Channel B consists of two loops configured as above with one calibrated 0-150 psig and the other -5 to 5 psig.
Parameters:
Pressure Transmitter (PT)
Fischer & Porter Model 50 EP10TlANS, Tag Nos. 1(2)PT-5307 Fischer & Porter Model 50 EN1021AhS, Tag Nos. 1(2)PT-5308 1 0.5%
=
accuracy 1 0.1%
repeatability
=
+ 0.1%
deadband
=
0 to 150 psig for 1(2)PT-5307 calibrated span
=
-5 to 5 psig for 1(2)PT-5308 calibrated span
=
Pressure Indicator (PI)
Sigma Model 9262, Tag Nos. 1(2)PI-5307, 1(2)PI-5308 span
= 0 to 150 psig for 1(2)PI-5307 span
= -5 to 5 psig for 1(2)PI-5308 reference accuracy
= 11% FS deadband and hysteresis = + 1/3% FS L
FIGURE 2 WATER LEVEL MONITORING SYSTEM System Block Diagram:
LI LT h
E/E
- TOPC X
Parameters:
Pressure-Transmitter (PT)
ITI Barton Model 76h, Tag Nos. 1(2) LT-klh6, 1 (2) LT-h147 0-120 in. H O calibrated span
=
2 1 0 5% FS reference accuracy
=
1 1.0% FS thermal effects
=
1 1.0% FS long term drift
=
negligible static pressure effects
=
negligible power supply effects
=
Level Indicator (LI)
Sigma Model 9262. Tag Nos. 1(2)LI hlh6, 1(2)LI-4147 0-120 in. H O 2
=
span 11% FS reference accuracy
=
1 1/3% FS deadband and hysteresis
=
r-e
~
FIGURE 3 HYDROGEN MONITORING SYSTEM System Block Diagram:
AI1
\\
\\N AIZ Parameters:
AE & AIT: Delphi Instruments Model B5, Tag Nos. 0-AE-6519, 0-AE-6527' 0-AIT-6519, 0-AIT-6527
+ 1%
accuracy = 7 Model CD h000 (AGM), Tag Nos. 0-AT-6519A, 0-AT -6527 Comsip, Inc AT:
accuracy - 1 0 5%
ail & AI2= API Model 70h5-N5-h702-0000 Tag Nos. 0-AI-6519A, 0-AI-65hl, 0-AI-6527, 0-AI-65h0 accuracy = 1 2%
AR =
Tracor Westronics Model DhE, Tag Nos. 0-AR-6519, 0-AR-6527 accuracy =.1 0.5%
Additional uncertainties are present due to the following:
calibration gas concentration = 1 2%
flow of gas through analyzer = 11%
,e
-,-r e --
,