ML20127H300
| ML20127H300 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Monticello  |
| Issue date: | 02/08/1978 |
| From: | Goranson R NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20127H295 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9211180478 | |
| Download: ML20127H300 (34) | |
Text
.
A v
IOR71!ERN STATES IWER 00!fN#
}DhTICELID hUCLEAR TSERATING PIAhT e
REPORT 'ID 71fE LNITED STATES hUCLEAR REQ 1LA70RY C05f4ISSION DIVISION OF NUCLEAR REACIOR REGULATION LIC!NSE 10. DPR-22 REACTOR 00hTAllo!EhT BUILDING IhTEGMTED IIAK RATE TTST NOVDBER 1977 Report Prepared by:
R A Coranson Report Date:
February 9,1978 R A Coranson T C Silverberg J A Brom 9211180478 780208 PDG ADOCK 05000263 P
' r TABLE OF (DNTEVIS
_Pape 1.
Introduction 1
1.1 Purpose of Containment Leakage Tests 1
1.2 Testing Requirements 1
I 1.2.1 Frequency of Testing 1
1.2.2 Test Acccatance Criteria 2
1.2.3 Required 'rocedure for leakage Testing 2
3 2.
Test Results 2
2.1 T)Pe B and Type C Test Results 3
2.2 Type A Test Results 3
i 3.
Description of Test Procedures 3
3.1 Type B and Type C Test Procedure 3
3? Type A Test Procedure 4
3.2.1 Type A Test Instruments and Equipment 4
3.2.2 Type A Test Stmnary of Events 6
4 Sunmary of Test Calculations 7
l 4.1 Type B and Type C Test Calculations 7
4.1.1 Pressure Decay tbthod Calculations 7
4.1.2 Rotametet bbthod Calculations 7
4.2 Type A Test Calculations 7
4.2.1 Calculation of Parameters 7
4.2.2 Calculation of Containnent Leak Rate 8
4.2.2.1 Point to Point bbthod 8
4.2.2.2 Total Time hbthod 8
4.2.2.3 Mtss Plot hbthod 8
4.3 Calculations for Verification of Type A Test Accuracy 10 5.
Error Analysis 10 5.1 Type B and Type C Test Error Analysis 10 5.1.1 Pressure Decay hbthod Error 10 5.1.2 Rotameter bbthod Error 11 5.1.3 Leak Rate Ibnitor !bthod Error 11 5.2 Type A Test Error Analysis 11 FIGURE 1 13 FIGURE 2 14 FIGURE 3 15 TABLE 1 16 TABLE 2 17
=_ -
. iii.
Page j
TABLE 3 17 TAB 11 4 18 TABLE 5 19 j
APPENDIX A Type B and Type C Test Data and Results 20 J
APPENDIX B Stunary Report of All Type C Tests Failing to thet the Leakage Acceptance Criteria 26 APPFNDIX C Type A Test Data and Calculations 27 APPENDIX D Type A Test Verification Data and Calculations 30 i
t c
1 f
h
+
=.
6 i,
i 1
Introduction 1.1 Purpose of Containment Leakage Tests As stated in 10CTR 50, Appendix J, primary containment leakage 4
tests are conducted to assure that:
a)
Leakage through the primary reactor containment and tystems j
and components penetrating primary containnent shall not exceed allowable leakage rate values as specified in the Technical Specifications or associated Bases.
4 b) Periodic surveillance of reactor containment penetrations and isolation valves is performed so that proper main 0-enance and repairs are made during the service life of the con-tainment, and systems and components penetrating primary con-tainment.
1 Results of containment Icakage tests are reported to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, USNRC, following each periodic containment integrated leakage test (Type A test). This report must include:
l a) Analysis and interpretation of the Type A test results.
b) Sunmary of containment penetration local leakage tests j
(Ty,e B tests) and containment isolation valve local leacage tests (1)pe C tests) conducted since the last Type A test.
/
c) Separate accompanying summary report of Types A, B, and C tests which failed the acceptance criteria.
l 1.2 Testing Requirements 1.2.1 Frequency of Testing Type A tests are scheduled in accordance with Paragraph 4.7.A.2 (d) of the Monticello Technical Specifications.
Testing is required at the following intervals:
I a) During the first refueling outage, b) Within 24 months of the test in (a) above.
c) Within 48 nonths of the test in (b) above and every 48 ronths tnereafter.
In the event that any testing (local or integrated) yields i
t a leak rate in excess of Lt 1.2 weight percent of the
=
contained air per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> at the test pressure P 41 Psig, i
t j
the condition rust be corrected and the testing schedule reverts to:
c l.
,...-.-,n
- - -,, ~,
r wr
' ' ~ ' - -
s 1 '
a) At the first refueling outage following the retest made 1
(local or integrcted) to correct the excess Icakage.
1 b) Within 24 months of the test in (a) above.
c) Within 48 months of the test in (b) above and every i
48 months thereafter.
Type B and Type C tests are scheduled in accordance with paragraph 4.7.A.2 (b) of the Ibnticello Technical Specifi-cations. Testing is required each operating cycle.
1.2.2 Test Acceptance Criteria 4
The acce:,tance criteria for ly,e A tests is contained in I
paragrap'14.7.A.2 (b) (2) of t1e bbnticello Technical Speci-J j'
O.9 weight percent of the contained air per 24 houre at pt fications. The allowable operational leak rate, L o, is t
= 41 psig. The containment leak rate, either as measured or following repairs and retesting, must be less than L to
]
prior to resumption of power operation.
3 i
The acceptance criteria for Type B and Type C tests are contained in paragraph 4.7.A.2 (f).
The allowable leakage rates are:
i a) Double-gasketed seals 34.4 scfh (101 Lto) total leakage 0 41 psig b) Testable penetrations 103.2 scfh total (30% Lto) i and isolation valves 17.2 scfh each ( 5% Lto) except main steam 0 41 psig isolation valves t
c) thin steam isolation 11.5 scfh each valves 0 25 psig 1.2.3 Requited procedure for Leakage Test All containnent leakage tests were conducted in accordance with 10CFR 50, Appendix J, and American National Standard ANSI N45.4 - 1972, " Leakage - Rate Testing of Containment
{
Structures for Nuclear Reactors".
l 2.
Test Results 2.1
_ Type B and Type C Test Results During September, October and November, 1977, local Icak rate tests i
i were conducted on all testable penetrations, double gasketed seals, doors and isolation valves.
Results of all tests are tabulated in Appendix A and sumarized in Table 1.
l
~,
6 l.
-3 A separate stmary report of all Type C tests which failed to meet the leakage acceptance criteria of the Technical Specifications and a discussion of the repairs accomplished is included in Appendix B.
All isolation valves with leakage in excess of the individual valve leakage limit were restored to acceptable leak tightness. Total leakage for double-gasketed seals and total leakage for all other penetrations and isolation valves following repairs satisfied the Technical Specification limits.
i A stmary of Type B and Type Ctests that were perfomed since the November 1975 Type A test and prior to the 1978 refueling outage is included in Tabic 5, 2.2 Type A Test Results The containment integrated leakage rate test was conducted from Novem-ber 6 through November 8,1977 The as left leakage was detemined by three different analytical methods; the mass plot, total time, and point to point. The leakage rate,as determined by the mass plot method,was 0.2488 2 0.0069 wt.l/ day. He total time method leakage
+
for the twenty-four hour interval was 0.2577 wt. %/ day. The average of the point to point leakages was detemined to be 0.2582 1 0.0246 wt %/ day. All error analysis was done at a. 95% confidence level.
This leakage is well within the Technical Specification acceptance criterion of 0.9 wt.%/ day. H e detailed leak rate calculations are presented in Appendix C.
ne measured combined leakage rate during the perfomance of the verification test was 0.9996 t.0089 wt. %/ day. The predicted com-bined leakage was 0.9571 wt %/ day. This comparison is well within the required accuracy prescribed in 10CFR 50, Appendix J.
Data and leak rate c Mulations for the verification test are included in Appendix D.
3 Description of Test procedures 1
3.1 Tvpe B and Type C Test procedure All tests were conducted with air or nitrogen using the pressure decay or rotameter methods or a~1ocal leak rate monitor. De leak rate monitor was manufactured by Volumetrics, Inc. of Inglewood, i
California. The rotameter method was also used to estimate gross leakages. The test voltne (between redundant isolation valves, t
the center of double gasketed seals, or the voltne of an electrical penetration or hot fluid pipe penetration expansion bellows) was pressuri:ed slightly above test pressure. Conditions were allowed to. stabilize and the leakage rate was measured.
In tests using the pressure decay method, d used in conjunction with the knom the decay rate at pf was obtained from the test data an j
test volume to calculate the leakage rate. 1emperature corrections were not made because of the difficulty. of positioning a temperature sensor in the test volume.
In addition, it has been demonstrated in the local leak rate error analysis that these corrections are small compared to other uncertainties in the testing procedure. Rotameter tests were vented to the atmosphere. Temperature and pressure correc-tions were made based upon rotaneter calibration.
In tests using the
s.
leak rate monitor, the test volume is pressurized and the pressure maintained by a precision regulator. The flow rate required to maintain the set pressure is measured by a mass flow transducer and displayed in digital form in a.L d standard cubic feet per hour.
Isolation valves were tested either singly or several in the same line were tested simultaneously depending upon the location of the installed test connections. Nitrogen was used to test all electrical penetrations.
3.2 Type A Test procedure 3.2.1 Type A Test Instruments and F4uipment The integrated containment leak rate test was conducted using the reference vessel method as specified in ANSI N45.4-1972 and where possible and practical, the requirements of ANS N274 were also used. The principal measuring instruments consisted of the.eference chanber system, a Wriam 20-inch inclined tube manoroter, a 0-60 psig Wallace 6 Tieman pressure guage, 20 Rosemont Engineering temperature trans-mitters with platinum resistance cerperature sensors, and six Foxboro dewcells.
~1he reference chamber (Figure 1) consisted of three sections sized in proportion to the containment volume represented by each. All sections were fabricated from 2-inch thin-wall copper pipe connected by 1/4 inch copper tubing, prior to the integrated leakage test the reference system was evacu-ated and filled with dry nitrogen. The reference system and all instrument piping was then subjected to a 24-hour leak test at 50 psig using the absolute method specified in ANSI N-45.4-1972. The reference system leak test was also con-ducted at the conclusion of the integrated leakage rate test.
In both instances, the reference system was verified to have essentially zero leakage under test conditions.
The inclined manometer and a redundant manometer were used to measure reference chamber-to-containment differential pressure. Refer to Figure 2.
pressure gauge PI-1 was used
~
to insure that the reference chamber pressure was higher than the containment pressure when the manometer was being placed in service. Valves E,H,K, and L were opened first to allow a small amount of the dry nitrogen in the reference chamber to flow into the containment thereby equalizing the pressures.
Valves F, G, J, and M were oaened and valves E, H, K, and L were closed and the removaale spool pieces were removed and the ends capped to prevent leakage from the containment into the reference chamber. With the manometers in service -
the purge valve was uncapped and cracked open to reduce the reference chamber pressure to establish an 18 inches of water pressure differential between the reference chamber and the containment. With the pressure lower in the reference chamber any reference chamber leakage would be evidenced as an in-creased indicated containment leakage.
4 i
5-lhe Wallace Tieman hbdel 1500 pressure gauge, pI-2, was used to indicate containrent pressure. This gauge was certified by the manufacturer's cowarison with a calibrating standard traceable to Natural !!ureau of Stand-ards.
Roserount ibdel 442A ALPilALINE Terperature Transmitters were placed throughout the containment to ronitor temera-4 ture. The temperature sensing system consisted of twenty individual 2-wire temperature transmitters each connected 3
to a platinun resistance terperature sensor and a regulated IC power supply. Each resistance temperature detector was assigned a weighting factor proportional to the voltre i
ronitored for use in calculating the average containment t
i temperature. Tables 2 and 3 list the resistance tempera-ture detector locations and assigned weighting factors.
The RTD signals were transmitted to the plant process com-puter where a ten rtinute average of the terperature at each locale was printed by the corputer typer in degrees F.
1 Foxboro ?bdel 2701 RPG dewcels were used to ronitor contain-rent vapor pressure.
Each dewcel was assigned a weighting factor proportional to the containment volume ronitored for calculation of average vapor pressure. Tables 2 and 3 list the dewcel locations and assigned weighting factors, i
The dewcel signals were transmitted to the plant process conputer via resistance to-current converters and a ten minute average of the vapor pressure at each locale was printed in inches of water by the computer tmer.
Reading the dowcel resistance and conversion to vapor mressure was accomplished by entering the required caliSration curves into the computer mencry. Calibration was checked using a certified resistance decade box to simulate each dewcel RTD.
1 Additional data on the integrated leakage rate test instru-nents are sumarized in Table 4 i
The containment was pressuri:ed using one 750 cfn, one 850 cfm, and one 1200 cfm portable diesel air compressors (Figure
- 3). The air was temperature controlled using an air treat-ment pressuri:ing skid. The air was supplied and metered to the drywell through a flange connection on the nitrogen purge system.
Containment ventilation was provided by a two-speed drywell ventilation fan operating at low speed and six portable 10,000 cfm electric fans equipped with oversized rotors to promote mixing of the air.
o 6-3.2.2 Type A Test Sternary of_ Events lhe pre-test containrent inspection was completed on November 5th with no visible structural deterioration found. !bjor preliminary steps were completed and included:
a)
Installation of portable electric fans in the containment.
b)
Final Check-out of temperature and htmidity instrunents.
c)
Completion of pre-test reference system Icakage measurement, d)
Replacerent of all manway covers followed by Type B Tests, e)
Blocking of all vacuum breakers in the open position.
f) Valving out of all drywell pressure switches.
g) Jumpering of all reactor water IDh' icvel switches.
h)
Draining of the reactor vessel below steam and feed-water no::les.
- 1) Draining of steam and feedwater lines.
j) Venting of reactdr vessel to containment atmosphere.
k) Completion of valve lineup sheets.
1)
Isolation of the drywell instrunent air system and venting of the main steam isolation valve and safety / relief valve air accumulators.
On November 6 at 1010, the containrent had been closed and permission to commence pressurization was given. Pressuriza-tion commenced immediately at an average pressurization rate of 8 psi per hour. At 1528 on November 6, the conpressors were shut down at an indicated containment pressure of 42 psig.
During the four hour stabili:etion period, the containment temperatures and vapor pressures were recorded every ten minutes to verify equilibriten conditions.
Data was logged every 30 minutes with the initial data point at 2100 hours0.0243 days <br />0.583 hours <br />0.00347 weeks <br />7.9905e-4 months <br /> on November 6.
At 2100 hours0.0243 days <br />0.583 hours <br />0.00347 weeks <br />7.9905e-4 months <br /> on November 7, sufficient data had been collected and the integrated leak rate test was considered complete.
The controlled bleed verification test was begun at 0000 on November 8.
Data was logged every 30 minutes as in the integrated leak rate test. At 0600 sufficient data had been collected to verify the accuracy of the integrated leak rate test within the allowable accuracy of 10CFR 50, Appendix J and ANS N274.
The containment was depressuri:ed through the torus 2-inch and 18-inch vent lines to the Standby Gas Treatment System.
The containment depressurization was completed at 1115, Nov-ember 8.
The containment was subsequently inspected and no damage was discovered.
7 4
Summarv of Test Calculations 4.1 Type B and Type C Calculations 4.1.1 Pressure Decay hbthod Calculations The Type B and C local leak rate test calculations made using the pressure decay method are as reported in the sumary technical report submitted August 3,1973 entitled " Reactor Containnent Building Integrated Leak Test - May,1973."
4.1.2 Rotaneter Method Calculations The Type B and C local leak rate test calculations' made using the rotancter method are as reported in the summaty technical report submitted January 23, 1976 titled, "Reac-tor Containment Building Integrated Leak Test Novem-her 1975.
4.2 Type A Test Calculations Each 30 minutes during the integrated containment leak rate test and during the controlled bleed verification test, the following calculations were made to detemine the leak rate by the point to point, total time and mass plot methods.
In addition,, calculations were done for the 95% confidence interval for the results from each of the methods.
4.2.1
_ Calculation of Parameters a) Containment Absolute Pressure CONTAI?S!ENT PRESSURE (psia)
Pgg + PPI-2
=
Pg Local Barometric Pressure (psia)
=
PPI-2 = Drywell h'allace Tiernan Gauge Pressure (psig) b) Ca tainment Average Temperature ( R) h'g 1 + 4 59. 72 T
Wi = Weighting factor for RTDi from (tables 2 and 3)
T1 = Computer reading of RTD1 ('P) c) Containment Average Vapor Pressure hTIGITED AVERAGE C0hTAINMEh7 VAPOR PRESSURE (inches water)
W P yi yi i=1 W(,1 = weighting factor for dewcel i (tables 2 6 3)
Pyg = Computer reading (inches water) for dewcel i 1
___________________--------------J
+
8-d) Reference Chamber - Containment aP AP (IN H.,0)
Reading from inclined tube nanometer,
=
i (Entered as a negative because reference chamber was at lower pressure than containment).
4.2.2 Calculation of Containment Leak Rate Nomenclature for all equations is the same. These synbo!.s are as follows:
Containment absolute pressure j
P
=
Reference Chamber to containment differential AP
=
4 Pressure 3
Py= Containment weighted average vapor pressure Containment weighted average absolute temperature T
=
H Total Time since start of test
=
Subscript 1 initial point
=
Subscript i 1 th point
=
4.2.2.1
_ Point to Point bbthod (corrected for vapor pressure) l
% Leakage (wt%/ day)
=
(AP,3 + P g,3) ~
T,3 ( APy+Py,;)
i 3
y, Tg (P,y - P 1,7 )
(Pg+P g
y g,3)
(g
)
4.2.2.2 Total Time lbthod (Corrected for vapor pressure)
% Leakage (wt%/ day)
=
~Ty (APg+Py,g)
, (aPy+Py,1) '
(_2400)
T_ g (Py-Py,y)
(Py-Py,y)
H 4.2.2.3 hhss Plot bbthod (Corrected for vapor pressure)
W 144 (P -Py,y) V
=
y y
RTy Where: W Weight of air in the containnent
=
V =- Free air volume of containment 247,353 cubic feet
=
R Gas constant for air
=
53.35 ft Ibf
=
Ib R n
l
5 *
.g.
i 4
W j
i g,1 (1 - L )
W
=
g 1
1 Where: Lg = (Ar,3 -Py,g,3) - - (T,)/T )(apg,py,g) g g
j (P,1 - py,g,7) j g
L Leakage air mass as function of total
=
contained air mass.
1 l
The leakage rate is _ determined fram the above calculations of the mass of air (W ) at each time 4
l point i by applying.a linear l regression analysis to the data. A linear regression analysis con-sists of minimizing the squares of the deviations of the data points from a straight line:
i j
W = At + B 4
The slope. (A) and the intercept (B) of the line are calculated as follows (all sumations are from j
i - 1_to n),
j A = [ It Wg 1 - (I t IW )/n]
g g
[ It 4 - (It )Z /nj g
i i
)
B=
IWi,, Atti n
n where: t = time since the initial data point.
i The leakage rate in weight percent per day is:
i
% leakage (wt%/ day)
(-A)
T (2400)
=
i i
l Tho' half hour reading and -calculations were used to construct a plot of leakage rates versus time.
(Figure C-1).
This plot was _ usefull for de :
tecting trends or possible anomalies. The con-
-_tainment leakage rate was taken as the mass plot-l method calculated leakage for the 24. hour test i
. period. 1he results of the point to point method averaged leakages and-the results of-the total =
i time method leakage for; the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> period com-:
1 pair favorably with the results from the mass plot j
method. All data and calculated leakages for the t
integrated leak rate test-arel tabulated in Appen-dix-C.
L
I
! e i
4.3 Calculations for Verification of Type A Test Accuracy I
Six hours of useful data were taken with a controlled Icak rate established in addition to the normal containment leak rate. The superimaosed leak verification test acceptability was deronstrated
{
using t1e criterion from ANS N274. Acceptability is proven if:
flo+L
- 0.25 Q) < Lc
- Clo+l
+ 0.25 L )
am am t
Where:
Lam = reasured containment leak rate L
measured containment Icak rate with superimposed Icak
=
c L
t rnximum allowable leak rate = 1.2 wtt/ day
=
superimposed leak rate t
=
o The superimposed leak rate was required to be between 50 and 100 percent of L. Throttle valve R (Figure 1) was opened and adjusted toprovidetbcsuperimposedleak.
Rotameter indication and actual bleed rate are related in the following equation:
Lo (Wt/24-hour) =
1440 100%
hhere:
F = Rotameter indicated flow rate.
Scf = Rotameter scale factor correction for air retered at Pc with 14.7 psia scale.
Pc = Average containment absolute pressure during controlled bleed.
3 Vc = Containment free air volume - 247,353 ft The superimnosed leakage rate (Lo) was calculated to be 0.7083 wt.l/ day.
The test verification criterion were met. Data and calculations for the verification phase of the integrated leak rate test are tabulated in Appendix D.
5.
Error Analysis 5.1 Type B and Type C Test Error Analysis 5.1.1 Pressure Decay Wthod Error The type B and C test error analysis for the pressure decay method has been perfomed using the method reported in the sumary technical report subnitted January 23, 1976 titled
" Reactor Containment Building Integrated Leak Test - Novem-ber, 1975."
4 j J 5.1.2 Rotameter Fbthod Error I
The type B and C test error analysis for the rotameter method has been performed using the method reported in the l.
sumary technical report submitted January 23, 1976, titled
" Reactor Containment Building Integrated Leak Test - November l
1975."
5.1.3 Leak Rate hbnitor hbthod Error
+
4 The leak rate monitor used was manufactured by Volumetrics, 1
i Inc. of Inglewood, California. The monitor is a model number D 14322, dual range unit with ranges of 0-20 scfh and 0-100 scfh. The certified accuracy is'1% of full scale.
i ne total error at a 95% confidence level is therefore i
+ 0.04 scfh for the low range. He high range was used Iinly to determine large as found leakages.
l 5.2 Type A Test Error Analysis i
i As reported in " Supplement No. I to Report of Reactor Containment i
Building Integrated Leak Test - November, 1975," submitted thrch 16, 1976, the error analysis method used was a standard statistical l
T-distribution error calculation. As further reported in the above mentioned supplement, the instrument error analysis previously l
performed would be referenced in future test reports unless changes in the test instrumentation require a revised analysis. The use of l
the inclined manometer causes such a revision to be made.
l Paragraph 2c) of the above mentioned supplement should be revised as follows:
c) Estimate of a 2 ( AP) i 1
ne water filled inclined manometer is readable to within l
0.01. inches of water.
2 (3p),
2 2.5 x 10-5 (inches of water)2 o
=
)
l Paragraph 2e) would be revised as follows:
I (using 1977 data) l e) The overall measurement error is determined using the in-dividual measurement variances and the following parameters obtained from the test data:
E.-=
.2488 wt%/ day Po = 1552.77 inches of water F=
11.14 inches of water y
aF e 15.61 inches of water T = 537.53 'R
1,
o(L) 2o2 (T) g7 (6 7 + P )) 2 + o (p) (%)
2 2
2 loo r
v 2 (3p) (
+ 2o2 (p )
2 2
+2o
)
y
(
)
-5 1.5672 x 10
=
1 The 95% confidence interval for the 47 data points using the instrument error analysis is:
\\-
I+
2e (g 0.248g +,001155 wtt/ day
=
~
6 t
i i
d 1
4 i
4 d
't 4
n.-_,.--
,,.,..,,,,.,,_n
,,e-,
w
13 -
DRWELL WIDE RANCE PRESSURE TRANSHITTEF PT-7368 0i w
=
LS-2997 DRYWELL DRWELL PRESSURE
.i r
~
FLOOD LEVEL CONNECTION Sk' ITCH E
REFERENCE CONTROLLED CHAMBER BLEED DRWELL ROTAMETER SECTION 20 FT ALL REFERENCE CHAMBER SECTIONS CONSTRUCTION OF 2-INCH COPPER PIPE e
X-50E i
REFERENCE CHAMBER REFERENCE CHAMBER CONNECTION VENT PIPE SECTION 1.5 FT TORUS SECTION 15 FT FIG 1:
Cross section of containment vessel showing location of reference chamber and controlled bleed rotameter.
l
14 1
PI-2 PI-l 0-60 psig 0-60 psig Wallace 6 Tiernan Acco B
C Purge D
^
4 Dryvell Pressure Reference i
Connection Chamber Pressure 3
Renovable Connection Spool Piece 1;
Xo N
1 l
Inclined Manometer i
Removable
};
g Spool Piecq M
J l
l I
Redundant Manometer DM-2 FIGURE 2: Installation details of the test manometer and pressure guages
WITROCEN VAPORIZER PS-3372 q_ _
4-INCH FLEXIBLE HOSE FE-3284 O
V I
l T
NITROGEN CONTAINMENT PRES-C A0-2377 SURIZATION EQUIP-MENT SKID I
"n i
t FILTERS, CHILLER-O x
o 'tn. ^"n ^1a COOLER PT-3283 I
A
-C><W -c A0-2381 0 %
Q A0-2378 (TTPICAL IUR EACH COMPRESSOR USED)
VEST WALL OF
~
REACTOR BUILDING
-D<HA-c 18 - INCH 20-INCH DRYWELL PURGE TORUS PURGE LINE LINE FIC 3: CONTAIINENT PRESSURIZATION FLOW DIAGRAM
_=__..
h
~
16 -
o j
i TABLE 1.
StBf4\\RY OF TYPE B AND TYPE C TEST RESlETS - NO\\BBER 1977 Leakage (SCHI)
No. Cogionents No. Components Type of Test As Found As lef t Tested Needing Repair i
J Double Gasketed Seal 2.47 5.339 14 0
hpe B Tests (Conbined Leakage)
All other Type B 9.85 9.85 47 0
Tests (ccnbined leakage)
'T All Type C Tests 778.39 70.288 75 6
except thin Steam Note 1 Note 1 1
Isolation Valves (combined Icakage) i thin Stean Isol-ation Valves 8
2 A0 2-80A 14.64 0.00 A0 2-86A 111.3 0.00 A0 2-80B 7.27 7.27 A0 2-86B 5.99 5.99 A0 2-80C 0
0.00 A0 2-66C 5.99 5.99 l
A0 2-80D 1.91 1.91 A0 2-86D 9.82 9.82 N(7TES:
1.
Total "as found" and "as left" leakage was determined based on a worst single failure analysis 4
.m
4 TABLE 2.
DRYWELL DEWCELS AND RTD's Computer Location
- Voltne Weighting Sensor Type Sensor No.
Foint Elevation Azimuth Factor Dewcel 1
D126 933 90
.2158 l
2 D127 951 180
.2050 3
D128 966 270
.0787 4
D129 994 0
.0936 RTD 1
C133 933 270
.0537 C134 933 0
.0537 3
C135 933 90
.0537 4
C136 933 180
.0537 5
C'137 951 270
.0513 6
C138 951 0
.0513 7
C139 951 90
.0513 4
8 C140 951 180
.0513 9
i C141 966 270
.0198 10 C142 966 0
.0198 11 C143 966 90
.0198 12 C144 966 180
.0198 13 F152 994 270
.0235.
l 14 F153 994 0
.0235 15 F154 994 90
.0235 16 F155 994 180
.0235 l
TABLE 3.
TORUS DEWCELS AND RTD's Computer Location Voline Weighting Sensor Type Sensor No.
Foint Elevation Azimuth Factor j
Dewcel 5
D130 915 270
.2034 6
D131 915 90
.2034 RTD 17 F156 915 270
.1017 18 F157 915 0
.1017 19 F158 915 90
.1017 20 F159 915 180
.1017 Referenced to drywell floor at 920.5 ft., the toms center line at 912.5 ft.,
and the drywell airlock at 0 degrees.
..-=. - -.. -.
TABLE 4.
'IT.ST INSTRIMWT IMTA Instnsnent Range Fhnufacturer Serial Certification Dewccis
-50 F to FOXBORO DV 248 Thnufacturer's Cerification and
+ 142*F DV 255 comparison check with a certified Dewpoint EA 485 decade resistance box.
-15*F to ROSDDlNr
- 96673 thru bbnufacturer's Certification and
+ 185*F
- 96694' comparison check with a certified Ambient decade resistance box.
Barometer 36" hbrcury ERIAM G-75731 Bhnufacturer's Certification.
PI-2 0-60 PSIG WALIACE TIERNAN UU-13922 Comared with certified test device.
PI-1 0-60 PSIG ACCO IIELICOID 2719-0 Compared with certified test device.
DPI 20" !! 0 MERIAM II 90131 bbnufacturer's cerified scaTe.
2 Flow Rator 0-4.6 SCFM FISOIER PORTER 7112 A0 997-A2 Corpared to certified Rotameter
- i TABLE 5.
SlbfMRY OF TYPE B AND TfPE C TESTS CONDUCTED SINCE 1975 ILRT Date Test Number / Penetration Leakage (scfh)
Reason for Perfoming 2-26-76 0137-2 Torus Northeast Hatch 0.01 Torus Entry.
2-28-76 0137-4 Prior to installation A0-2896, A0-2383, 6 1.89 of new isolation G' 2384 valve 1
2-29-76 0137-4 Following installation A0 2896, A0 2383, 4.19 of new isolation G' 2384, 6 O' 7440 valve 5-23-76 0137-2 Torus Northeast Hatch 0.0 Torus Entry CRD Hatch 0.00 Drywell entry 5-24-76 0138 Dove 11 Personnel Airlock 1.034 Drywell Entry 5-26-76 0138 Dr>vell Personnel Airlock 0.0 Drywell Entry 6-21-76 0138 Drywell Personnel Airlock
~0.115 Drywell Entry 8-10-76 0138 Drywell Personnel Airlock 0.3447 Drywell Entry 10-18-76 0137-2 Drywell Equipment Hatch 1,63 Drywell Entry 10-20-76 0138 Drywell Personnel Airlock 0.57 Drywell Entry 3-1-77 0138 Drywell Personnel Airlock 2.07 Normal Surveillance 3-21-77 0138 Dnvell Personnel Airlock 0.0 Drywell Entry 6-15-77 0138 Drywell Personnel Airlock 0.0 Drywell Entry
20 -
APPENDIX A.
TYPE B AND TYPE C T11ST IATA AND RESULTS - FALL 1977 1
Valve or Test Technical Specification hbasured Leak Rate (SCRI) 3 Penetration Volume (Ft )
Leakage Limit As Found At Left X-230 0.76 17.2 SCRI 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-100A 2.26 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-100B 2.31 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 j
j X-100C 1.92 17.2 SCRI e 41 psig 0.00 0,00 X-100D 2.05 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-101B 1.93 17.2 SCRI e 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-101D 1.97 17.2 SCRI O 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-103 2.05 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-104A 1.94 17.2 SCRI 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-104B 2.06 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.24 0.24 X-104C 1.93 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-104D 2.05 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-105A 1.92 17.2 SCRI e 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-105C 2.05 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-105D 1.93 17.2 SCM1 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 A0 2541A 6 A0 2541B
.044 17.2 SCHi 0 41 psig 0.14 0.14 A0 2561A 6
.044 17.2 SCRI 0 41 psig 12.36 12.36 A0 2561B N3 Control System 0.25 17.2 SCHi 0 41 psig 0.76 0.76 Sample Val-ves (Note 1)
CV 3267, CV 3268 6 1.15 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.29 0.29 CV 3269 FD 2373 6 0.973 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 129.5 0.00 l
FD 2374 A0 2-80A 40.74 11.5 SCRi 0 25 psig 14.64 0.00 A0 2-86A 40.74 11.5 SCRI 0 25 psig 111.3 0.00 A0 2-80B 40.74 11.5 SCRi 0 25 psig 7.27 7.27 A0 2-86B 40.74 11.5 SCRI @ 25 psig 5.99 5.99 i
A0 2-80C 40.74 11.5 SCRI 0 25 psig 0.00 0.00 A0 2-86C 40.74 11.5 SCRi 0 25 psig 5.99 5.99
. -. ~
} '
APPENDIX A (Cont'd) 4 3
)
Valve or Test Technical Specification hbasured Leak Rate (SCHi) 3 i
i'enetration Voltre (ft )
Leakage Limit As Found As Left A0 2-80D 40.74 11.5 SCHI 0 25 psig 1.91 1.91 l
A0 2-86D 40.74 11.5 SCRi e 25 psig 9.82 9.82 i
A0 2379 6 DhY 8-2 11.8 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig' 6.38.
6.38 A0 2380 6 DhV 8-1 11.8 17.2 SCR10 41 psig 11.18 11.18 A0 2377
)
A0 2378 6 210 17.2 SCr. 0 41 psig 0.14 0.14 A0 2381 j
A0 2386 4
A0 23S7 6 3.7 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 0.45 0.45 G' 2385 l A0 A0 2896 3.796 17.2 SCHi 0 41 psig 1.41 1.41 g,
G' 7440 50 2034 6 s
hD 2035 10.4 17.2 SCHi e 41 psig 0.679 0.679 HPCI-9 6.7 17.2 SCR1 @ 41 psig 69.0 0.118 4
)
HPCI-14 0.05 17.2 SCRI 0 41 psig 0.07 0.07 RCIC-9 1.1 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 90.8 3.07 RCIC-16 0.06 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 1.79 1.79 G' 2790 G CV 2791 0.04 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig 1.21 1.21 bD 2075 6 5D 2076 1.46 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.049 0.949 XP-6 0.14 17.2 SCHi @ 41 psig 1.90 1.90 FD 2397 6 FD 2398 1.7 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 6.98 6.98 FW 94-1 18.8 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 5.53 5.53 FW 94-2 18.8 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 3.453 3.453 FW 97-1 6.9 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 0.05 0.05 FW 97-2 6.9 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 A0 10-46A 44.1 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 4.01 4.01 1
A0 10-46B 43.1 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 FD 2014 80.9 17.2 SCRI 0 41 psig 0.19 0.19 50 2015 77.1 17.2 SCHI O 41 psig 0.00 0.00
- APPENDIX A (Cont'd)
Valve or Test Technical Specification hbasured Leak Rate (SCRI) 3 l
Penetration Volune (ft )
leakage 1.imit As Found As Left FO 2020 4 FD 2022 5.9 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig 0.17 0.17 bD 2021 6 FD 2023 13.7 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig 0.025 0.025 50 2026 6 bD 2027 1.23 17.2 SCRI 0 41 psig 0.21 0.21 bD ? )'">
20.8 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.07 0.07 FD 2030 83.7 17.2 SCHI 6 41 psig 10.68 10.68 60 1753 8.3 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig 0.16 0.16 FD 1754 7.13 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 A0 14-13A 2.5 17.2 SCRI e 41 psig 459.75 12.56 A0 14-13B 1,69 17.1 SCHI O 41 psig 226.17 3.08 G'7436 0.011 17.2 SCR' 0 41 psig 56.2 0.0 CV 7437 0.016 17.2 SCRI e 41 psig 5.65 5.65 G' 1478 0.977 17.2 SCHI O 41 psig 4.52 4.52 CV 7956 0.0114 17.2 SCRI O 41 psig Note S 5.10 AS 39 0.313 17.2 SCRI O 41 psig 7.55 7.55 XR 25-1 0.29 17.2 SCHI 0 41 psig 0.20 0.20 XR 25-2 0.14 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.33 0.33 XR 27-1 0.25 17.2 Scal 0 41 psig 0.25 0.25 XR 27-2 0.10 17.c SCRI e 41 psig 0.22 0.22 Airlock 380 Ensure Scaling 0 10 psig Not tested 2.29 Torus Fhnway Note 2 Note 3 0.00 0.159 Northeast Note 4 Tonis hhnway Southwest Note 2 Note 3 0.00 0.16 Note 4 i
Note 2 Note 3 0.00 1.73 Ha Drywell Head i.ote 2 Note 3 0.17 0.17 hhnway CRD hhnway Note 2 Note 3 0.00 0.12 Drvwell Equipment Note 2 Note 3 1.43 2.13 liatch
23 -
APPENDIX A (Cont'd)
Valve or Test Technical Specification Measured Leak Ran (SCFH) 3 Penetration Volume (ft )
Leakage Limit As Found As Left Seismic Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.18 0.18 Fort A Seismic
- Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.14 0.14 Pcrt B Seismic I Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.12 0.12
' Port C
!j Seismic Restraint Note 2 Note 3 L
0.11 0.11 Port D Seismic Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.09 0.09 Port E l Seismic l
8 Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.07 0.07 Port F Seismic Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.08 0.08 Port G Seismic Restraint Note 2 Note 3 0.08 0.08 Port H X-7A Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 0.14 0.14 X-7A Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 0.12 0.12
' X-7B Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 3.67 3.67 X-7B Outboard Note 2
^
17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 2.04 2.04 X-7C Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 0.18 0.18 X-7C Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 0.105 0.105 X-7D Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 0.055 0.055 X-7D Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCFf' @ 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-8 Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 0.02 0.02 i
24 -
APPENDIX A (Cont'd)
Valve or Test Technical Specification Measured Leak Rate (SCRI)
Penetration Volume ft3)
Leakage Limit As Fotad As Left i
t I
4 4
X-8 Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCR1 0 41 psig 0.07 0.07 1
X-9A Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.20 0.20 X-9A Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.91 0.91 X-9B l
Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.12 0.12 i
X-9B Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig
..?
0.06 X-10 Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.03 0.03 X-10 e
Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.02 0.02 X-11 Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.13 0.13 X-11 Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.07 0.07 X-12 Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCHI @ 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-12 Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRi @ 41 psig 0.09 0.09 X-13A Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCHi 0 41 psig 0.31 0.31 X-13A Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.22 0.22 X-13B Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.12 0.12 l
X-13B Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.16
6 l
X-14 Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.10 0.10 X-14 Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.12 0.12 X-16A Inboard Note-2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.11 P.11 X-16A Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.13 0.13 X-16B Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCRi 0 41 psig 0.18 0.18 l
X-16B l
Outboard Note 2-17.2 SCRI @ 41 psig 0.13 0.13
,, ~,
APPENDIX A (Cont'd)
Valve or Test Technical Specification Measured Leak Rate (Sr"O 3
Penetrant Volume (ft )
Leakage Limit As Found As Left X-17 Inboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH @ 41 psig 0.00 0.00 X-17 Outboard Note 2 17.2 SCFH 0 41 psig 0.00 0.00 1
FUTES:
1.
The following valves were tested as a group by pressuri::ing a common drain line manifold.
C' 3305 6 G' 3306 G' 3307 6 G' 3308 G' 3309 6 CV 3310 G' 3311 6 G' 3312 G' 3313 6 CV 3314 2.
The volumes of the toroidal spaces in the double-gasketed seals are uncertain due to the presence of flexible rubber, and in any case are quite small.
For all seals except the drywell head, the, volume of the test rig was used as the test volume.
For the drywell head, twice the volume of the test rig was used as the tet.t volume.
i The expansion bellows penetrations similarly have a small volume and the volume of the test rig was used as the test volume.
3.
The Technical Specification for double-gasketed seals is that the total leakage not exceed 34.4 scfh 0 41 psig. No specification is given for an individual' double-gasketed seal.
4.
The "as left" leak rate for these penetrations was the leak rate measured immediately prior to the integrated leakage rate test. All Type B penetrations opened for the outage were retested when closed.
5.
An "as found" leakage could not be detemined for G' 7956 as there were no provisions for testing. The valve was disassembled and inspected prior to the addition of a test connectim. Leak test following reassembly indicated a leakage of 5.10 scfh, It is unknown if the leakage exceeded leakage linits prior to disassembly,
d APPENDIX B SGfMRY REPORT OF ALL TYPE C TESTS FAILING TD hEET THE LEAKAGE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FALL 1977
)
Local leak rate tests were conducted on all testable isolation valves during the fall 1977 bbnticello Refueling Outage. Of the 83 valves tested, 8 failed to meet the applicable individual leak rate acceptance criteria.
1 The following is a summary of the cause of leakage and the corrective action taken for each of the valves.
a) thin Steam Isolation Valves Two BSI\\"s were found to exceed the Technical Specification leakage limit. The pilot valve and main poppet valve seats were lapped and both valves were retested. Both valves exhibited zero leakage following repairs. Outboard valve plug was slightly out of round and apparent cause could not be detemined for inboard valve leakage, b) hbin Steam Line Drain Inboard Isolation Valve The main steam line drain inboard isolation valve, hD 2373, was dis-assembled, valve seats lapped to remove light deposits of foreign 4
material and minor steamcutting of seats, and reassembled. The valve exhibited zero leakage following repairs.
c) Core Spray Isolation Check Valves Both core spray check valves, A014-13A and A014-13B were disassembled and the valve internals inspected and cleaned.
The cause of the leakage was an accumulation of scale on the seating surfaces of both valves.
Both valves were satisfactorily leak tested following reassembly, d) HPCI Turbine Exhaust Isolation Check Valve The HPCI Turbine Exhaust Isolation Check Valve, HPCI 9, was disassembled and examined. The valve failed to meet leak rate criteria due to accumulated dirt.on the seating surfaces. The valve seats were cleaned and lapped. A satisfactory leak. test was completed following reassembly.
e) RCIC Turbine Exhaust Isolation Check Valve The RCIC turbine exhaust isolation check valve, RCIC 9, was disassembled and examined. The leakage was due to a bent disc washer which was caused by the disc striking the valve body. The damaged parts were replaced and a stop was added to prevent the disc from striking the valve body.
Following repair and modification, the valve was satisfactorily retested.
f) Nitrogen Instrument Air System Inboard Isolation Valve CV-7436, the nitrogen instrument air system inboard isolation valve failed the local leak rate test due to accumulated dirt and scale on the seating surfaces. The valve seats were cleaned and the valve was re-tested satisfactorily.
ms
>~
APPENDIX C
'IYPE A 'EST IMTA AND CAlfUIATIO.*5 a cul t ak Rate W ffdence Containment A
a Ref. Chamber Containment Pressure Average Vapor
- Containnent Interval for to b
Pate Time psia IN H O Temp ( R)
Press (in!! 0)
DP (in !! 0) p Mass Plot 2
2 2
t 11-6-77' 2100 56.123 1553.716 537.38 11.23 17.90 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 2130 56.120 1553.614 537.34 11.22 17.74 0.4650 0.4656 0.0000 2200 56.104 1553.195 537.31 11.18 17.58 0.3726 0.4191 0.4190
.3412 U
2230 56.100 1553.060 537.30 11.19 17.45 0.4357 0.4246 0.4193
.0517 l
1 2300 56.090 1552.783 537.28 11.18 17.34 0.3108 0.3961 0.3977
.0455 1.'
2330 56.090 1552.783 537.27 11.18 17.23 0.3424 0.3853 0.3836
.0345 2400 56.090 1552.783 537.26 11.15 17.12 0.2489 0.3626 0.3641
.0367 11-7-77f 0030 56.070 1552.234 537.26 11.15 17.01 0.3427 0.3597 0.3542
.0294 4 0100 56.065 1552.100 537.26 11.13 16.90 0.2805 0.3498 0.3446
.0256 0130 56.070 1552.234 537.26 11.13 16.79 0.3429 0.3490 0.3397
.0210 a
0200 56.070 1552.234 537.27 11.13 16.69 0.3120 0.3453 0.3357
.0176 0230 56.065 1552.100 537.28 11.12 16.60 0.2496 0.3366 0.3301
.0161 0300 56.050 1551.687 537.29 11.11 16.50 0.2808 0.3319 0.3250
.0149 0330 56.045 1551.552 537.30 11.11 16.40 0.3121 0.3303 0.3215
.0134 7 0400 56.040 1551.416 537.31 11.11 16.30 0.3121 0.3290 0.3190
.0119 0430 56.040 1551.416 537.31 11.12 16.20 0.3430 0.3299 0.3178
.0105 0500 56.035 1551.280 537.34 11.10 16.11 0.2191 0.3230 0.3151
.0098 0530 56.030 1551.145 537.34 11.09 16.03 0.2183 0.3168 0.3114
.0097 5' 0600 56.030 1551.145 537.36 11.10 15.96 0.2501 0.3131 0.3079
.0097 0630 56.025 1551.009 537.38 11.09 15.88 0.2189 0.3081 0.3040
.0099 0700 56.025 1551.009 537.40 11.08 15.79 0.2501 0.3052 0.3004
.0099 0730 56.025 1551.009 537.41 11.13 15.70 0.4369 0.3114 0.2993
.0090 0800 56.025 1551.009 537.43 11.11 15.62 0.1877 0.3058 0.2973
.0086 0830 56.025 1551.009 537.45 11.11 15.53 0.2812 0.3047 0.2956
.0081 L
0900 56.021 1550.874 537.47 11.12 15.43 0.3436 0.3063 0.2947
.0075 0930 56.021 1550.874 537.48 11.12 15.38 0.1562 0.3003 0.2928
.0073 1000 56.021 1550.874 537.51 11.11 15.30 0.2191 0.2971 0.2907
.0072 1030 56.011 1550.603 537.52 11.12 15.23 0.2498 0.2954 0.2887
. 0 'I -- ~
H 1100 56.011 1550.604 537.55 11.14 15.17 0.2503 0.2937 0.2868
.0 i9 1130 56.001 1550.332 537.58 11.14 15.10 0.2191 0.2911 0.2849
.0069 1200 55.996 1550.196 537.59 11.14 15.03 0.2187 0.2887 0.2829
.0068 1230 55.986 1549.926 537.62 11.11 14.95 0.1567 0.2844 0.2805
.0070 1300 56.011 1550.615 537.64 11.13 14.88 0.2813 0.2843 0.2785
.0069 1330 55.991 1550.068 537.66 11.16 14.82 0.2812 0.2842 0.2769
.0068
~
g
APPENDIX C (Cont'd)
TYPE A TEST IMTA AA'D CAICU1ATIONS Containment m1ated ak Rate (wt%/
95%
Containment Pressure Containment Average Ref. Chamber Confidence Average Vapor
- Containment Point to Total Fhss Interval for Date Time psia IN 110 Temp (*R)
Press. (in II 0) DP (in 110)
Point Time Plot Fhss Plot 2
2 2
11-7-77
1400 56.001 1550.345 537.70 11.14 14.74 0.1881 0.2814 0.2751
.0067 1430 55.982 1549.796 537.73 11.13 14.69 0.1254 0.2769 0.2730
.0068 l
!?
1500 55.997 1550.209 537.74 11.13 14.64 0.1563 0.2735 0.2706
.0070 1530 55.997 1550.209 537.77 11.15 14.58 0.2502 0.2729 0.2685
.0071 1600 55.997 1550.209 537.79 11.15 14.52 0.1876 0.2706 0.2664
.0071 1630 55.992 1550.073 537.81 11.11 14.40 0.2500 0.2701 0.2646
.0071 4
1700 55.992 1550.073 537.85 11.14 14.43 0.0008 0.2633 0.2621
.0074 1730 55.992 1550.073 537.88 11.13 14.35 0.2190 0.2622 0.2598
.0075 1800 55.990 1550.040 537.91 11.14 14.28 0.2502 0.2619 0.2577
.0075 1830 55.987 1549.938 537.94 11.16 14.23 0.2190 0.2609 0.2558
.0075 1900 55.986 1549.904 537.96 11.19 14.16 0.3125 0.2621 0.2544
.0074 l
1930 55.987 1549.938 537.87 11.20 14.10 0.2173 0.2611 0.2530
.0073 2000 55.971 1549.491 537.95 11.18 14.04 0.1258 0.2581 0.2514
.0072 5
i 2030 55.981 1549.768 537.99 11.19 13.96 0.2816 0.2586 0.2501
.0070 2100 55.981 1549.768 538.02 11.20 13.90 0.2190 0.2577 0.2488
.0069
I 1
i i
Arperdix C
- 29.-
3 1
oh
- m.,
4 i
i.
n i nS
. p..
i.-.
!)I lit w
n.'
i q
+.
.4
.I{
, J.,
N li
':li
' l Ilil l.
p iii Edi ilt-
~~
i i,,,
4 r
- ii s'!i
'j;i ll-l ijj j
i [j{j i;tt
{ll l
t! j.7'"Til
!jjj
~~ ~
4
~
lli t'
'li; j
ll4 Ill il
' li tl I,h,
.,1;,
il l
__q 3
,'I l 11 3
l l
'[i ' ?!}.l l 1 lit lijl.ljl l
- l!
l' It.t li
' l'[l {'I l l j)l.iI.
Ill j j. !!!i lli.
g.
~
i i
i i t il l
_,, _I i':
'li i 1
.it tlI' lli l 'l l
( [I '.:
! i s, i:i: %
l: ill[
it:
l
[
t
'(;
.[
i
-.i i -.i:i> 'lll
, li
- -.i 7
i-4, w'
't l
ili i ' '
!i i l^
(f
( iti i
l
- ?
i' E
~,
" i.", %, :ljj iij 7]i Til fit
' j[ {i O}f% hij il !.
"TJi~
l iT':
I! P
- l' t jj;l t iIIl
!, l l Till l
1 i7 3" '
j1:
' i l.i 11...,I ll il i ll111 III i.,4:n i
l'j
- i h
.i 4 11 l
8
-;L ;i 4
.l i '. '.l!
eli n
- o. u.. Ir.,,
.l!
, l h' l l' E] ' ' it.:
i; illi 'lli ii,
llj
.t.
l l.
14.
', Illi
.i H
m 1
it!l l
!A.
I,ti y
.t i n
s
[11%.I'
';j l,fi.I't li i
!j ;.I llll e r'd.,..i P
I t, i
a;i'
..;} lll4:
i t ;i l
.g'l l.i'i 6! 6 I,
e'k.
il'
.il l'
1 3
1-J, i.
i I
i' 8,:l.l.'liMg l.i - g
! I l. i l,l j..i l:!+'
,ii til ll!
.l q
,6 h.,%;,' i '
.'s 'II.
' < j ):jl*
lei 11 :
j l
li 4
I t
O r
f, ; _'
illl i: i 1 e 3
]
.ti li
.i i-i l l.
tll
- !!l i l l. t lh :
- !>, 'Ill 1.li llil n
.I' l
i'+ N 1
d e -
.i11 I
!i gi
- j:;
i
- i
.i ll!
'Is lll1 l
t i t
lli i
- lli i
ab..5,i!
i l'
!!i ;dj l1 ll,
'li
! 'j l
.i i[.
.;*; lli (11' 311 ll'
{l i g'l
{'
4 Y
IL i.
91 h L: uli :ii liii iiil hl 4ll W m
,.i un 9 I
'l d'i!
.i.,
it;
,il' i.1.
i,1!
lll; !jI
=li jjj lt!'
,7h'. ; 3. r !.'.; l i D
i t
,1 i
o I'l,
'it:
i-1.-
it, i!t
.,i J. p
. 61
, l '.;
g
~
i.
-i,
l
.j fi
+
it!
ii, N"
.il 0
4
- i -
'j;l n
N J
6A-i l l
=>
.i i.
+
{
Ifg fl lil i !'
I!}
!f.
M r
g
,gt i!
li i !!.
~iT --M
- l 2,
i
,J.
lll
>1, 5
\\
, l;
}
,: :-, l;
, +- -'t!;
fj i
,i; il
. al 3,e i, 2, _, t, f.
1,,.
+
i i
. i,
=
a 1,
a, l
.a
,l' if
!l Jj4
. il'f tj i
O 5
4 F
i e
j ;
i i
"r.
P
,l
.t:
i ? !
i i.
-ll iii-
.,.jj,
'l l
l}\\
i 3
illl
- ll
'i.
!,i
- (
l i!
.}'
"~*i
!;{
li:' ~
i l!'
!i
- i;r
',: ' i
- iil
- li
- ?:
.i it
!!1 i
- ti i'
'ti! l';
,it lt;)
t' 1:'i l
e.j i !!
1:i i, j!
.l:
I l
- hi itj j; 'i 4
.I
- I '
ll' 4Ii; jlll
. l
-.i.3 l ' -
6 (l.
' ' l ' l' i
er:
I!,.1 il:
i,.,; :,.
't,'
!i c- -
I'!
t!:'
4 L.._
-a e
.t
i.j !.'
. i j :-
4
! l;
'li:
' !l ~l, 1
.i!;
lf:,
t i,;
4.4 1._
y!i
! ! ',I.
a' i
,i
.. e t
l
'l liit lll) -l3.
l~
lll!
Il!-
i f.. l; J--
.,I il; l
N ll p_
g 1
-i:: :i
!!!! ';j, ill-i.:' __.i-i s.
'.{,l t-_3., 4
+it, q
i t
!!fi
!! ! !i,'
,i:
,ili
!!!i ',1 st,>. w
+
! !i lit'
.i
{
- 7[Il II.
i !!!
m.,l i j8g"
.1 -
fl':
. d...'.! ! i l '. ',!
~ *'
4 a'
l!l r
5 is m
p li i ill.
!Il; til:
!'y illi i j !,.
t il Il
,<l
.; i i >
ii;' lill tl.
l!!i
'l ll!!
.i l l i MW i l.l !
l l' i_.
- l r,,
i 2
il!' I!-
i lif !!l=
- i
!lil
.i @
j!!:
6l'.
11
)
4 1
1 -l@
i!
,1;
' ~,
i W.;..?C.
ll!
j!
']
1 8
{'
1:i-
- .i M
~.
i.
i i li; e ~
i o o.
e.,
co.
e.,
e.
n.
e.
m.
n.
o.m o
s o
o o
o o
o o
e o
on (48P/%M) esrzea 1 Figure C-1 PLOT OF LEAK RITE CALCULATIONS -
- -..-. - - -. _ ~. -. - -... -
. - - -. _... -.. ~. -
e w
LAPPENDIX'D' TYPE A TTST VERIFICATION IMTA AND CALCIRATIONS Containment' Pressure l Containment Containment.
Calculated Leak Rate (wtt/ day 95%
Average Ref. Chamber-Confidence Average Vapor Containment Point to Total Jhss-Interval for Date - ; Time psia IN II 0
=i Temp (*R)
Press. (in 1I 0) DP (in if 0)
Point Time Plot Mas Plot i
2 2
2
.i 11-8 0000 55.971 1549.49 538.12-11.21 13.02 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0030 55.956 1549.08 535.19 11.23 12.75 0.9061 0.9061
. 0.0000
'I 0100 55.956-1549.08' 538.23 11.25 12.48 0.9060 0.9059 0.9058 0.0009 0130 55.946 1548.80 538.27 11.26 12.16 1.0309 0.9474 0.9431.
0.0928 d
0200' 55.946 1548.80..
538.31 11.29 11.86 1.0310 0.9681 0.9680 0.0605 0230 55.936 1548.53 538.34 11.28 11.54 0.9684.
0.9680 0.9750 0.0363 1
0300 55.926 1548.26 538.38 11.29 11.22 1.0310 0.9783 0.9834 0.0268 0330-55.926' 1548.26' 538.41 11.30 10.88 1.0937
- 0.9946 0.9959 0.0259 0400-55.881-1547.012 538.43 11.29 10.56 0.9687 0.9912 0.9998 0.0201 0430 55.862-1546.49-
.:538.45 11.30 10.25 1.0007 0.9920 1.0018 0.0159 i
,0500 55.842 1545.939-538.47' 11.31 9.95 0.9697 0.9895 1.0013 0.0128
!0530 55.844 1545.97
'538.48 11.32 9.64 1.0014 0.9903 1.0009 0.0105 j
0600-55.835 1545.73 538.52 11.30 9.31 0.9697 0.9883 0.9996 0.0089 i
i 1
i a
t t.
l l
3 f
1 i-i w
w
+
- m
6 Appsndix D 31 a
ji,.l'.
l#!I.
i i
't
=,
.i.,
4
)
-.i 'jl s. li:1 li i
i 11!~
i i j..f -,l t
[ l,l 7.l
- j!'
'l'
)
it 1
I a
11-f.
i.i._
I l
i
'i
.t' it
.l!
't.
.il'
't i
j l
. -._ s.-
l' lli.
,i.
,;i 8 >
l 12
=l, i>
i i
i t:
n 4
,i.
- i
,4 1
-o a
4 i.
.it u
4 s
i
'4
!: i
't-1
. A... y._ _ _
it.,
i
>r
-o m
6 i
g a
u i
7
--. 7- _.. _
,. a y
l W._ M
_.IB -- -
re lo 8,
j q
- 4 i
,4.o, 0 L
i1
.-~
i 4
l
!'i t.._
-J..
1t.
a
.. _..t i
I 1
i, 4
__u......
j i
o t.
i,-
i y
}
4
-l.
i I
ie j
l i
.l 8
.k
.-u m, %.._
Q t
I.
I.
l l'
i
,i 8
+
a 4
l I
I
_ 7 __
I
}l I
f i
l
-_._ _ f _ _M L __.._ I j.
J l
..g 8
g_
1
.l 4
o o
..i -.
I I
I j __q.._7 _._ _ __ !
l l
w
_ _ p__._ _. _ ;-
o I
l l'
e e
i i
i o a i
i 4
t j
i
)
,O W
l l
l l
...._ u g
i i
o
_.c
. ',..._._. _. L'-_ u _.I 2l l.
}
}
L A
=
1 5
l-4 t
e i
=
I
+
1-j.__q
+
U l
g c=a t _..
_c 4
i l
- l__._i__.
',I t,
o i
l l
.y
+
-l
}. l a.,
- l
}
t l
. j._ __.j....I E
T.. l n
i i
i o
t
- l i
-_.-__m-._
i-i l
. _. i...,1. a i
I f
l
~'
~
.i l
g' s
i l
1.
t-i t
lI li
}
I i
oN l
i l'
i
}
[!
I d
~
^:
i J-v --
l t
l l
+
m 4 -l 4
c m.
- o.
e.
m.
~.
e.
.n.
~
1 c-i
~
~
s e
o e
o e
o o
(ASP /% 2^) 824 80'l i
Figure D PLOT ' OF LEAR FJ.TE CALCULATIONS DURING VERIFICATIO!: TES1
~~
..