ML20072S069
| ML20072S069 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Oyster Creek |
| Issue date: | 02/18/1983 |
| From: | Selan J LAWRENCE LIVERMORE NATIONAL LABORATORY |
| To: | NRC |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20072S072 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-FIN-A-0250, CON-FIN-A-250 UCID-19472, NUDOCS 8304060622 | |
| Download: ML20072S069 (9) | |
Text
.
e
~
UCID-19h72
.. a.
,: e.
?.,
~
- ,%:q;;,hu.3. __ M. G; h,.x g..,
w-N -:z.;2,.m.p:'~9+k:.y.%.m..z::3;;y.y$. p&y..; p...;
.;.? y <:.: 1 d.
Mw' p:
+
M:g n
a m;.s:
~.
Mq 9., %:.g.
s.... 4.;..:.
.,w+i.m....q;,:g~..:y. :,;,, g
. "'*... p;.
- ~n.M??'.2;;: ? Q,4.@;bj:ip:s
- 5.Q. X. l;x *3.,&. y:.G R.,S;:Llls @;T: ~. -
M S i;
.[
i
'~
c g,n:l :...
~3 s,w:n e? p'*
x g:.%:% m e r,. xw -v.a.M: :.n. ::w,,;
- t,..9.:. S l c;<+a.,.s.t..y
- ? u; %w w,2L *@ b@.s v. m.p. y.;a;:..:a.a...
. u. x;gc je_%, 4'OM, @p~M. (f{rs.'y.F',n.p,g.. ~,;0g, e,!.
.pM e.. p
.T&e Ne.
d b N. a.F..,g g W-y.t.t'4 '.<p.g*u..2M
. s.
.f.
p L'.'W../jg,?.~;&.g,. j.W@.@h,, TECHNICAL. EVALUAT
~
n E N N.. /A'!
84.%.
I,d.
e.
Yw'M'*%N_.
3.h a
' Ni!N. F.,
4 s j.,&s @.4.;TO THE REACTOR. PROTECTION'SYSTEMCN
-.O.NITORING ' OF. M. -..ECIR.IC.'.P.O.WER":
.g..
M
.y n s,.
u,M_.,d, gMM
. ~....
r-v 7
- ey y O.
m M. S.D N
- ,, p-;;,
- .gy L, u.. Ag.,M...+
? y;g.'y.'t FOR' THE OYSTER ' CREEK NUCLEAR' GENERATING' ST TION
.} s,
,7c.;.g[. q ;
- m.r;.<,'+ e.q.;.;, *.y *;..C 1.1
{r ; u..
... c (..W, m.,,
.n 4.uJ@;;.:.3
- 2. ;w.&'.
. ( :,...,.lc.P y:,,r %,.
..:7 7:,.j e;
, a
. )
.r o...:.:....*(Docket No..?50-219). -
.+.
c
+.....~.:<.;;, m.,.,r 4 ;:. u..~
v
.p.
, s s,. 3....
.c
- g. y r.
xv.< n h ~2 j..
y'...
. :;,... p..
a 3:e.
. ~.,.
V..~3:
- yy.yy..[.g'.:.-[.pm.l,.m. _.m..
~, wc s. :y. c..-
w..:.c.g.w.
y..c; Q. 4... m ;:
v,
- c..
...n
.-gyp.p.o..?.,..
ey w v.
sy p.
3 4,yM-...:..&. ;. > ; A.C3ames C.?.S. e1an.qy.p y,
.g Q.
.e....
)Q n :
...,.g. 3.,,:::.:. c 9 r:p,. ; m, lO. ;.:.M.c.k.?.,-
. :,, v., ;m...e,
. n... w.
- a.
. : - M; ~...,
-v,
- - ;.n.
,..w
.e. -. ~.. O,m,.,s,,? ?:,..,
1.
.., y !.
- .[n
~,e &a 4:.;.:..A.v.<".m:: q.. :. : Y.
my
- o. i. -
+
. Q.x3.a..a y;.c.t.:.7'.g~fm-;:.7 ~.;:;Glg.m. ; [b.ns.,..' ;?,....,g;;;.R g es
.p;..m.,:py.g.yy,9$:., s..,:.g.p.: };Q;.;c.
a:..
.,.. n, w
. n.:., e).: *::L,y ?,f,,c..
- .e, s',..M.(..
> v.g.,g > m ~... m.
~.... m.,, t. c,.
w.
e..
et
., :s : <...
- m... it-.. e.a.,
v m
.... :o h
,s
. H.......,u.. y.--
.c.. o.... e m.a.s>.W.
,.y.
' *?
..... a ~ -: o...x:...y. : n~..
. - ~
.a.-.
- y. 2,
.s
. ro.,;
v.,
[
f: ' ' ',
a,
~
.r
- ;s l
.. ~:. u,a.. y a..,, w,e,r. m m y. w.a, a. y..s;.... w.,m.; :.;. m.. w:-.> n.e;;..
-.m:.
.,..,w...
..v.w...x., - r.:,..w.,. m :.....v.,:n., w.... e,. n
... s -..... m.
- a. m n.
- .;, Q.. ;.:, '..,?y).L,* (*s.g?,...0)fj-
~ -; 'v:.:=./
- '. (.. ' ?, l*V;;
- .w;.* n.;.f.r.%..= *;*;},) }e.V...
- 3c,,';
C. ;r ;
. i.m. Y.q~ g
.;m.
- ,>.. e. o..
3.:.
a. :
.v.,...
..r.e..
n
,. :. u. m..
',y
,.,.%'. V-4.,,f q' v
.l, a **'.. t. ;.?/ 'e n:.'s.
9.* < " i ' '
p'.
e 3. s.1
.::my.c.: : q'*:r m, ?,.N.g' q/,5,i 'J.
s y *y 5nme.mm,';.' * -:,
/. *
. - m w;.., -
. a 4
..g
. ;*s
(..
w
. ;, y Mi?:.m:LyjppyD.:-:m '
2
.e r.
r, '.
,.. s
.O
%- qwp.
- Q.
Qh tl': =_ ~ ; ' W;./.y y&.. :g1,yy.gg,.3{n;s.:. '.m,;; :f:;; :.,:; ;. :..% ~ ' f Q Q* y
- leM.; J hm w, ' 3:.
l
.v
. Wc g,.,.-,.. f.... a
,,.', e :.,,.
. Februarv 18.-1983
,-. g.
.,:~
q@h., m. mag. w,
-,,, y ' "" e
.g.
a y$..,iW v,,ei(g+4f@.g,v.
M..*'
ww.;
. s; j.
,.N
- s.. *.
6 p' q tg.Qg.:.p%.3 +;a J.,..
,,-g..s
- M.*3 $ W.;."f/ 7 $*ML ga'?
f*
N
- Cd "4
m.d f.
,y g
! w. -
~.. ~ * <.
MQ. i'l > f g6[s%gigMkf$$QMhd@@ 4.(
- v - ]..rc,,.'{ Q ';
- 9 E M MENE MPW**4N,,,@.W N,.,;.6,,0' MT. A 4
" 7. M.~ @.t C
This is an informa'l report intended primarily for interna! or limit.ed external dhtribution.
+
s
^q A...p.,
Aj t"
'C
.The opinions and conclusions stated ar's those of the auth'or s'rd may or may not be those
- ' ps @.c f.,u. h d h
g.
of the Laboratory., ' ']. (.$v.l;.:.'.Q..c.,'.p'ig,h....,[.M,.Mhy $.... (' b g
.w.
..l..
v.
. n
.. ~
g ~+ ' f 5
.V 1
, This work was' supported by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission under y f.,; j,
',,,, #,$'p*.4 c Memorandum of Understanding wit.h..t.he United States. Department of En. ergs.
2,,',.. r. ;...,,.
~.x. t yg,, y;gp F
6 s
t
..p
..p.W Xg
.. j,;.4, 7c. @ rj:.Fj f f : 3.?: g ;e
'NRC. FIN NoE A-0250.d.~.. j g:o v
.'., - m>. 9.Q: g
'U..
.g..c%.'{n.
w 1
k
.y
,,+ ' n' _ -'.. a:
y- :w;g At' x
~y'
- )
.' ^* w :"J.f,~,.
y a
. 1...C.:.
- .Yf i
,r
.-c=
. w e
. g :, w..
- y m.
V;. : -
."..XA:L; e.[r;..ppH. o.s>Be. es Siht fo"P.DR^. s 7..
- m..
'. l'
~~.
h,".
- .o
. ;h* *
- ,.*,=e.
' D,
_ ~;
- y
.y
-? 4, '.
- 4.,. ;;;.
l w.-
--v+
1
...:> i %.% ~ s}...,.*
= s pm e
i
.,y
,, a.,; u; e
^si.,
,.'.s s'
t j:.,.P..'
.; L..
.:g
.. -.. '.. +
5 ;s,
c;..
e
.4 9
't,
.e g
3
/
- 9
?
ABSTRACT This report documents the technical evaluation of the monitoring of electric power to the reactor protection system (RPS) at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station. The evaluation is to determine if the proposed design modification will protect the RPS f rom abnormal voltage and frequency conditions which could be supplied from the power supplies and will meet certain requirements set forth by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
The proposed design modifications will protect the RPS from sustained abnormal voltage and fr,equency conditions from the supplying sources.
FOREWORD This report is supplied as part of the Selected Operating Reactor Issues Program II being conducted for the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Division of Licensing, by Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory.
The U. S. Naclear Regulatory Commission funded the work under the authorization entitled " Selected Operating Reactor Issues Program II,"
B&R 20 19 10 11 1, FIN No. A-0250.
W b
e
- e.
e e
O
TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
.>l I
1.
INTRODUCTION.
0 t
2.
DESIGN DESCRIPTION 2
3.
EVALUATION 3
4 4
CONCLUSION 5
REFERENCES J
i e
e A
1 e
I i
- [
-111-r 2
o s
/
o
~~~
~
TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT ON THE MONITORING OF ELECTRIC POWER TO THE REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM AT THE OYSTER CREEK NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION (Docket No. 50-219)
James C. Selan Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Nevada s
1.
INTRODUCTION During the operating license review for Hatch 2, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) staff raised a concern about the capability of the Class lE reactor protection system (RPS) to operate after suffering sustained, abnormal voltage or frequency conditions from a non-Class lE power' supply. Abnormal voltage or frequency conditions could be produced as a result of one of the following causes:
combinations of undetected, random single failures of the power supply components, or multiple failures
~
of the power supply components c.aused by external phenomena such as a seismic event.
The concern for the RPS power supply integrity is generic to al'1 General Electric (GE) boiling water reactors (BWR) MARK 3's, MARK 4's, and MARK 5's and all BWR MARK 6's that have not elected to use,the solid state RPS design.
The staff therefore pursued a generic resolution. Accordingly, GE proposed a revised design, in conceptual form, for resolution of this concern [Ref. 1).
The proposed modification consists of the addition of two Class lE protective packages" in series between'each RPS motor generator (M-G) set and it's respective RPS bus, and the addition of.two similar packages in series in the alternate power source circuit to the RPS buses.
Each protective package would include a breaker and associated overvoltage, undervoltage and underfrequency relaying. Each protective package would meet the testability requirements for Class lE equipment.
With the protective packages installed, any abnormal output type failure (undetectable random or seismically caused) in either of the two RPS M-C sets (or the alternate supply) would result in a trip of either one or both of the two Class lE protective packages. This tripping would interrupt the power to the effected RPS channel, thus producing a scram signal on that channel, while retaining full scram capability by means of the other channel.
Thus, fully redundant Class 1E protection is provided, bringing the overall 6
Q
i RPS design into full conformance with General Design Criteria (GDC)-2
.[Ref. 2], and GDC-21 [Ref. 3] (including IEEE-279 [Ref.'4] and the
' standard review. plan (Ref. : 5]).. The NRC staf f reviewed the proposed GE de, sign and concluded that the mddification was acceptable [Ref. 6],
o and should be implemented in conformance with the applicable criteria for Class lE systems.-
The NRC requires that the components of the RPS not be exposed to unacceptable electric power of any sustained abnormal quality that could damage the RPS. This involves providing means to detect any overvoltage, undervoltage, or underfrequency condition that is outside the design limits of the RPS equipment and to disconnect the RPS from such abnormal electric power before damage to the RPS can occur. The equipment which performs
~
these functions must satisfy the single failure criterion and be seismically
, qualified.
The NRC issued a generic letter [Ref. 7] to all operating BWR's requesting the licensees to submit design modification details and Technical Specifications for post implementation review.
By letters dated December 4, 1980 [Ref. 8], April 29, 1982 [Ref. 9],
and October 18, 1982 [Ref. 10], GPU Nuclear, the licensee, submitted design modification details regarding the monitoring of electrical power to the RPS at the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station.
The purpose of this report is to evaluate the licensee's submittal with respect to the NRC criteria and present the reviewer's conclusion on the adequa:y of the design modifications to protect the RPS from abnormal voltage and frequency conditions.
2.
DESIGN DESCRIPTION The licenst' has proposed to install the GE designed " electrical protection assembly" (GE No. 914E175) to monitor the electric power in each of the three sources of power (RPS M-G sets 1-1 and 1-2, and the alternate L
source) to the RPS. Each assembly (EPA) consists of two identical and redundant packages. Each package includes a circuit breaker and a monitoring
' module. When abnormal electric power is detected by either module, the respec-tive circuit breaker will. trip and disconnect the RPS from the abnormal power source.
The monitoring module detects overvoltage, undervoltage, and
--underfrequency conditions'and_provides a time-delayed trip when a setpoint i
is exceeded.
o l
I.
O e
S
,-a r.,
r 3.
EVALUATION The NRC stated several requirements that the licensee must meet in their design modification to monitor the power to the RPS. A statement of' the'se requirements followed by an evaluation of the licensee's submittals is as follows:
(1)
"The components of the RPS shall not be exposed to unaccept-able electric power of any sustained abnormal quality that could damage the RPS."
The monitoring module will detect overvoltage, undervoltage, and underfrequency conditions with the following setpoints.
The chosen setpoints are within the ratings of the RPS components and thus ensure t?'eir protection from sustained abnormal power:
- nominal voltage, nominal frequency of 60 Hz Condition
- Setpoint Time Delay Overvoltage nominal voltage + 10%
j[100 milliseconds tolerance (+0, -2.5%)
Undervoltage nominal voltage - 10%
j[100 milliseconds tolerance (-0, +2.5%)
Underfrequency 57 Hz
< 100 milliseconds tolerance (-0, +2%)
- The nominal voltage is the value of voltage at the input of the EPA's while delivering sufficient current to maintain an RPS component voltage of 115 + 2 volts [Ref.10).
l
- The overvoltage and undervoltage setpoints will be measured l
values based on the voltage drop between the EPA's and the RPS components [Ref. 10].
(2) " Disconnecting the RPS from the abnormal power source shall be automatic."
The monitoring module will automatically disconnect the RPS buses from the abnormal power supply after the set time delay should the parameters setpoints be exceeded.
(3)
"The power monitoring system shall meet the requirements of' IEEE 279-1971, GDC-2 and GDC-21."
The monitoring packages meet the Class lE requirements of IEEE 279, the single failure criteria of GDC-21, and the seismic qualifications of GDC-2.
9 8
9 x
-~
n-
j r
(4)
" Technical Specifications shall include limiting conditions for operation, surveillance requirements, and trip setpoints."
In a letter dated July 30, 1982 [Ref. 11), the NRC granted the licensee's request [Ref 12] to extend the schedule for instal-lation of the EPA's and Technical Specification changes to the Cycle 11 refueling outage planned for mid 1985.
4.
CONCLUSION Based on the information submitted by GPU Nuc' lear for the Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station, it is concluded that:
(1) The proposed setpoints of the relays in the two protective packages to be installed in series, in each of the power sources to the RPS buses, will automatically protect the RPS components from sustained abnormal overvoltage, under-voltage, and underfrequency conditions outside the design limits of the RPS components.
(2) The protective packages meet the requirements of Class lE equipment (IEEE 279,), single failure criteria (GDC-21), and -
seismic qualification (GDC-2).
(3) The proposed time delay before circuit breake'r tripping will not result in damage to components of the RPS or' prevent the RPS from performing its safety functions.
(4) The following minimum and maximum limits to the trip setpoints, limiting conditions for operation (LCO), and surveillance
('
requirements (as outlined in the Standard Technical Specifica-tions), to be incorporated into the plant's Te.chnical Specifica-tions, will protect the RPS components from sustained abnormal power:
(a) Ove rvoltage
< nominal voltage + 10%
time delay j[100 milliseconds a
> nominal voltage - 10%
i time delay fL100 milliseconds Underfrequency > 57 Hz, time delay < 100 milliseconds l
(b) With one RPS electric power monitoring channel for an inservice RPS MG set or alternate power supply inoperable, restore the inoperable channel to operable status within 72 hours8.333333e-4 days <br />0.02 hours <br />1.190476e-4 weeks <br />2.7396e-5 months <br /> or remove th2 associated RPS MG set or alternate l
power supply from service.
~
4_
e
~
4 (c) With both RPS electric power monitoring channels for an inservice RPS MO set or alternate power supply inoperable, restore at least one to operable status within 30 minutes or remove the associated RPS M0 set or alternate power supply from service.
(d) A functional test at least once per 6 months and a channel calibration once per operating cycle to determine the oper-,
ability of the protective instrumentation including simulated automatic actuation, tripping logic, output circuit breaker tripping, and verification of the setpoints.
REFERENCES 1.
General Electric Company letter, MFN 408-78 (G. G. Sherwood) to NRC (R. S. Boyd), dated October 31, 1978.
, 2.
Gene.ral Design Criteria-2 (GDC-2), " Design Bases for Protection Against Natural Phenomena," of Appe'ndix A, " General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," in the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50 (10 CFR 50).
3.
General Design Criteria-21 (GDC-21), " Protection System Reliability and Testability," of Appendix A, " General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," in the Code of Federal Regu3stions, Title 10, Part 50 (10 CFR 50).
4.
IEEE Std. 279-1971, " Criteria for Protection Systems f6r Nuclear Power Generating Stations."
5.
NUREG-75/087, " Standard Review Plan for the Review of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants."
f 6.
NRC cecorandum from Faust Rosa to J. Stolz, T. Ippolito, and G..Lainas, l
dated February 19, 1979.
f l
7.
NRC letter to Operating BWR's, dated September 24, 1980.
- 8.
GPU Nuclear letter (I. R. Finfrock, Jr.) to NRC, dated December 4, 1980.
a 9.
GPU Nuclear letter (P. B. Fiedler) to NRC (D. M. Crutchfield), dated
~
l-April 29, 1982.
e l
,, 10.
GPU Nuclear letter (P. B. Fiedler) to NRC (D. M. Crutchfield), dated l
' October 18, 1982.
A e l
11.
NRC letter (D. G. Eisenhut) to GPU Nuclear (Pv-R - Clark), dated July 30, 1982.
l
_ 12.
GPU Nuclear letter (Pr-R. Clark) to NRC, dated December 24, 1981.
I h $.
_5_
l l
n, - - -
a