ML20153G408
| ML20153G408 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Haddam Neck File:Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Co icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/03/1988 |
| From: | Brothers M, Mazzie V, Shaffer T CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20153G394 | List: |
| References | |
| 85-066, 85-066-R00, 85-66, 85-66-R, NUDOCS 8809080149 | |
| Download: ML20153G408 (50) | |
Text
3- .
.. NEO PRCA7ECT DESCRIPTION
's Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0
(
No. 1 PRCL7ECT TITLE ,
CONNECTICLTI YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INS'17.UMENIATION SYSUM PROJECT Please Note that this title page is Page 1 of 38 PREPARED tr.f t , A n 15T M . W. Brtthers, Prdject Engineer Date mRovED Bv. ML 9ra-J t//n/et D6tef V.(J. Piazzie,p C Supervisor
'l 7 S k T. A. S I Manager Date
! f f
. d . E. Lefe re, P oje Manager bate HW G. H. 'Bouchard, CY Urfit Date Superintendent AU/ WORK ORDER NO.: C2/25710101 Copies to:
A. R. Roby C. J. Gladding H. H. Wong T. A. Shaffor W. J. Criggs D. P. Flynn V. J. Mazzie W. H. Becker M. W. Baehr L. J. Nadeau J. R. Ferraro D. D. McCory T. J. Galloway J. N. Kowalchuk T. C. Libby W. Stearns G. E. Cornelius G. R. VanNoordonnen J. Chiarella R. E. McMullen J. A. Blaisdell D. J. Ray J. J. Roncaioli R. A. Crandall G. A. Tardiff J. B. Cichocki G. H. Tylinski J. F. Bibby W. F. Kadlec R. M. Chabak J. H. Ashburner W. L. Varney J. M. Black
( B. R. Danielson D. Goldsmith R. E. Lefebvre R. Rose ,
P
l
,, NEO PNATECT DESCRIPTIM f
- Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 No. 1 M ITLE CCtNECTICtfr YANKEE 4 REP! ACE NUCLEAR INS 11tUMENIATICN SYS71M 1 !
l PRCVECT '
tanut or comms 1.0 PROJECT SCOPE r
2.0 NUCLEAR INGINEERING A!D OPERATIONS GROUP IN!ERFACES !
2.1 Engineering !
2.1.1 Project Engineer i 2.1.2 WSCO Generation I&C Engineering j 2.1.3 NUSCO Generation Engineering Mechanics l l
2.1.4 NUSCO Generation Electrical Engineering j 2.1.5 NUSCO Generation Special Studies 2.1.6 NUSCO Generation Civil Engineering - Structures '
2.1.7 NUSCO Generation Mechanical Engineering 2.1.8 NUSCO Safet Anal sis l l ( 2.1.9 NUSCO Radio ogica Engineering i i
1 2.1.10 NUSCO Generation racilities Licensing '
2.1.11 NUSCO Reliability Engineering 2.1.12 CYAPCO Plant Engineering 2.1.13 CYAPCO IEC Engineering ,
i 2.1.14 NUSCO Quality Services 2.2 Design ;
2.2.1 NUSCO Generation Electrical Design l 2.2.2 NUSCO Generation Civil Design '
3 2.2.3 NUSCO Generation Mechanical Design ;
1 2.3 Implementation 2.3.1 NUSCO Betterment Construction 2.3.2 NUSCO Production Test 2.3.3 CYAPCO Instrumentation and Controls
- 2.3.4 CYAPCO Operations 1
1 1 <
j 1 ,
1 l
. ._,* __ _ _ _ __~~3-~ - = =r_* __s _ t_ 9 _~
____-_t --=_~ i-~~< s -~
F ~ ~'
NEO PRCL7ECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 PRUIET'f1TLE ,
l l
CCMECTICL7I YANKEE ;
3, REFIACE NUCLEAR INS 1RUMENTATION SYS11M I
P ETECT l
2.4 Nuclear Training 2.4.1 NUSCO Operator Training [
2.4.2 NUSCO Technical Training j t
j 2.5 Project Management and Administrative Support j i 2.5.1 WSCO Project Management f 2.5.2 WSCO Cost Estimating !
2.5.3 WSCO Planning and Scheduling ;
j 2.5.4 WSCO Purchasing r i
l 3.0 CONDITICNS AND LIMITATIONS ;
I 4.0 RECUIATORY REQUIRDENTS !
1 (-
5.0 CONCEPRRL DESICN
- {r j 5.1 Bases of current Design j 5.2 Method of change
5.2.1 Details of change I 5.2.2 Der.:ription of Replacement NIS '
5.2.3 Naclear Instrumentation Syster Testi M
).
5.2.4 Design Inputs f 3
- 6.0 CONCE m RL DESICN WALKDOWN j 1 !
f L
l 1 i l
l i
)
}
t 1 l l i
. . . . . . . . . - . . .,.o_
, NEO PRCL7ECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O No. 4 PRCVECT TITLE CQUECTICUT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLFAR INSTRUMDirATICH SYSTDi PRCOECT 1.0 PinTECT SCOPE ne scope of this project is to replace the existing ex-core teclear Instrumentation System (NIS). We project will replace the ex-core detectocs, in-con' ainment cabling, preamplifier asserblies, out-of containment cabling and Main control Board rounted equipnent. Also included in the scope is the replacement of the existing scaler / timer assembly, rod disconnect panel and the relocation of the Bogen Commnications Module and the Refueling Cavity Level Indicator.
2.0 NUCLEAR DCINEERING MO OPEfUMCtG GROUP DTIDFACES 2.1 Engineering 2.1.1 Pro]ect Engineer a) Prepare and revise the Project As::ignment and Project Descriptirm.
b) Prepare and ruise Project Equipment Specifications.
c) Interface with vendors to provide Supplemental design criteria.
I d) Review and approve preliminary and final drawings (functional, logic, schenstic, wiring, P&ID, and equirnent installation). '
l
(
4
_ ________ __, - - e n ,
y .m.-
a
. NEO PET ECT DESCRIPTION s .,
Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O
~
PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YN EEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION SYSTt!21
~
PROJECT e) Coordinate the preparation, review, and approval of the Project Materials Lists.
f) Coordinate the preparation, review, and approval of Purchase Requisitions,.
g) Coordinate the preparation, review, and approval of Project Installation Specifications.
l 1.) Prepare the PDCR and coordinate the review, approval, and submission to the CYAPCO Engineering Supervisor.
, i) Coordinate the preparation, reviea, and approval of Safety E,a uations.
j) Review and approve vendor test procedures and witness the i racility Acceptance Test.
l
- 1) Review P' 4 approve as-built drawings and transmit to design.
m) Prepare Turnover Documentation.
n) Prepare documentation in support of PDCR close-out (rSAR change, MEPL, Recommended Spare Parts, and PMMS updates).
o' Perform Project Close-out. I i
I i
. , w , c .n - - . . e.. .a n a p , , . - - - - -
r ~.c-
. _ - . . . ..n_ . . . - - - - - - - - - -
O
, NEO PPfk1ECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0
' No. 6 r
PROJECT TITLE CCNNECTICITT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUME2EATION SYSTEM PROJECT 2.1.2 NUSCO Generation I&C Engineering -
a) Provide detailed instrumentation and control design requirements.
b) Ensure that the instrumentation and control design is in accordance with appropriate codes and standards.
c) Perform independent review and approval of design documentation.
d) Review and Approve as-built drawings.
e) Provide PDCR Input, f) Perform I&C Safety Evaluation.
2.1.3 NUSCO Generation Engineering Mechanics a) Perform equipnent seismic qualification review and approval.
b) Specify seismic design inputs, c) Specify the seismic design requiremento for the installation of th0 replacement NIS cabinet in Main Control Panel (MCB)
Section "A".
( ,,
. l l
l i
n- ,
1 NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION s
Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O PROJECT TITLE CCNNECTIClTT YANKEE REPIACE NUCIZAR INSTJUME2TIATION SYSTEM PRCAJECT d) Ensure that the seismic design is in accordance with appropriate codes and standards.
e) Review and connent on the Project Installation Specifications, f) Review and approve Civil and Mechanical drawings.
g) Prepare PDCR input.
I h) Parform independent design verification reviews.
( ,
i) Review and approve Civil and Mechanical as-built drawings.
2.1.4 NUSCO Gen 3 ration Electrical _Engoineering a) Specify the electrica.1 design inputs. '
1 b) Determine power requirements and provide . .ces.
c) Perform loading calculations.
d) Provide technical input to Electrical Design.
l e) Review and approve cable routing and electrical drawings. l l
l 9 ,, , .y., , g. . e-g -. rg_, ep , - - - - - - ^ ^
-w- ^
~ .- _
, ,NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTICH Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O PROJECT TITLE 7
CONNECTICtTT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATION SYSTEM PROJECT f) Ensure that the electrical design is in accordance with appropriate codes and standards.
g) Review and coment on the Project Installation Specifications.
h) Prepare PDCR input.
i) Prepare the Electrical Purchase Requisitions.
j) Ptepare tha Electrical Safety Evaluation.
k) Perform independent design verification reviews.
4
)) Review and approve electrical as-built drawings.
2.1.5 NUSCO Generation Electrical Engineering - Special Studies l
a) Specify EEQ design inputs.
I b) Ensure that the EEQ design is in accordance with the appropriate codes and standards.
c) Review and coment on the Project Installation Specifications.
i d) Prepare PDCR input.
C l
- i _ _
- _ __*
- i _? f. ?_ _ __ o _* * * ~2_"_ "_ * "" _* T _' 9_ . *
- 12 * ?_' t ?
- f" ? 9 / - *
- 0 * *0*' -* f
- c **_ o C "-* . o ' o 7 * -n 9 .n
- --. . . . . . . .. . _ . _c., _ .- .---____ -___-__
, NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRUfGNIATION SYST!!M PROJECT e) Perform independent design verification reviews.
f) Review and approve EEQ Walkdown Checklists.
2.1.6 NUSCO Generation Civil Engineering - Structures ;
a) Specify the civil design inputs.
b) Ensure that the civil design is in accordance with appropriate codes and standards, c) Review and coment on the Project Installation Specifications.
d) Provide technical input to Civil Design.
l e) Review and approve equipment mounting drawings.
f) Prepare PDCR input.
g) Prepare the Civil Safety Evaluation.
i h)' Perform independent design verification reviews.
2.1.7 NUSCO Generation Mechanical Engineering a) Specify the mechanical design inputs.
! l
( .l
. I
__ . . . . . _. . . . . . . . . . . -.. . . .. . .m ...
y.m-...-e-- - ,-- c~,.,m - .-. .c .
S ICO PRCATECT DESCRIPTION s
Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 No. 10 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATION SYSTEM PROJECT b) Ensure that the mechanical design'is in accordance with appropriate codes and standards.
c) Specify any welding or material requirements, d) Provide technical input to Mechanical Design.
e) Perform independent design verification reviews.
f) Review and comment on the Project Installation Specifications, g) Prepare PDCR Iriput.
2.1.8 NUSCO Safety Analysis a) Initiate appropriate Technical Specificatior change Requests, b) Prepara PDCR input.
c) Prepare the Integrated Safety Evaluation.
2.1.9 NUSCO Radiological Engineering a) Perform AIARA Design Review. I b) Submit AIARA reconnendations.
{
l l
J
, NEO PRCA7ECT DESCRIPTICE Project Assigranent No.85-066 Rev. 0 No. 11 PROJECT TITLE CCNNECTICtJI YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATICN SYSTDI PROJECT 2.1.10 NUSCO Generation Facilities Licensing a) Identify regulatory requirements.
b) Review and comment on the Project Description and Design Inputs.
c) Provide liaison with all Regulatory Agencies as required.
i
- 4) Coordinate agency review and approval.
k e) Coordinate the approval of any Technical Specification Change Requests.
2.1.11 NUSCO Reliability Engineraring a) Perform a Reliability Analysis on the plant modification in accordance with IEEE Standard 577-1976, Section 4. '
2.1.12 CYAPCO Plant Engineering a) Coordinate the plant's review of design documents and obtain a consensus of plant opinions for the detailed design. I b) Specify, review, and approve the project's Design Inputs.
a . . . . _ _ _ , _ _ _ ,_, c_ . .. . .
. NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rsv. O k No. 12 PROJECT TITLE CCNNECTICUT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRlPENTATION SYSTEM PROJECT c) Responsible for the preparation and performance of test procedures to complete preoperational testing.
d) Review and approve the PDCR and coordinate the PORC approval.
Responsible for insuring, 'through coordination with Operations and Construction Organizations, that Tech. Spec. requirements for minimum equipment operability are maintained throughout system conversion.
e) Review and comment on vendor drawings.
f) Rsview material and installation specifications, g) Review and coment on the vendor test procedures and witness the Facility Acceptance Test.
h) Provide outage support for project implementation (coordinate work orders, testing, significant DCN processing, NCR's, etc...).
- 1) Review the project construction schedule and coordinate plant activities. l l
i j) Ensure that the modification is complete, that all preopera-tional requirements are complete, and that all open items are ;
identified and tracked. I C.
.)
. ~ . - . .
.= ..
, NEO PRC0ECT DESCRIPTICH
. Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O No. 13 PROJECT TITLE
- CONNECTICtJF YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR It:STRUMENTATION SYSTEM P.%7ECT
- 1) Notify the Shift Supervisor of the Engineering Release for Operation. ,
m) Coordinate the collection of all as-bult drawings.
n) Coordinate the preparation and performance of test procedures to complete preoperational testing.
o) Provide outage support for project i.plementation (coordinate testing and troubleshooting). ,
p) Review the project construction schedule and coordinate plant activities.
2.1.13 CYAPCO I&C Egineering a) Specify, review, and approve the project's Design Inputs. !
b) Review and coment on vendor drawings, c) Review material and installation specifications and the PDCR.
l d) Review and coment on the vendor test procedures and witness the Facility Acceptance Test.
l
- 1 l
l l
, ,, , e . . . . . _f .. . .- n m -- ^
y y,w . - -
, . PRO'iECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O PROJECT TITLE c
CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATION SYSTEM PROJECT 2.1.14 NUSCO Quality Services -
a) Review and approve material and installation specifications.
b) Review and approve procurement documentation, c) Perform supplier audits / inspections.
d) Perform material receipt inspections.
C e) Perform field surveillances, f) Coordinate NCR issuance, tracking, and closure.
g) Perform ANO reviews and inspections.
i 2.2 Design l 1
2.2.1 NUSCO Generation Electrical Design 1
a) Provide the design and drafting for the preparation and revision of schematic, wiring, panel layout, and equipnent arrangement drawings.
1
~ !
b) Provide the design and dLafting for the preparation and revision of loop and logic diagrams.
'l
. l
. . . . . . _ . . . ... ~ .. .
.~_~
o ..
O NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O_
C No. 15 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM PROJECT c) Prepare and issue cable and conduit schedules, duct and trench plans, and raceway plans.
d) Prepare and issue the Electrical Materials List.
e) Review and co.mnent on vendor drawings.
f) Incorporate vendor drawings into the NUSCO system.
g) Prepare and issue the electrical as-built drawings.
h) Provide outage support to facilitate the installation of cable and electrical equipnent.
2.2.2 NUSCO Generation Civil Design a) Prepare Civil design calculations.
b) Provide the design and drafting for the preparation and revision of equipnent, conduit, cable tray, and tubing support drawings.
c) Prepare and issue the Civil Structural Material List.
d) Prepare and issue the Civil as-built drawings.
4 w -- . . - .- . . _ , _ . , - - - - - - - . - ,
NEO PRCL7ECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 PROJECT TITLE .
CONNECTIClTF YANKEE REPIACE NLMLEAR INSTRtPENIATION SYSTEM PROJECT 2.2.3 NUSCO Generation Mechanical Design -
a) Provide Review / Comment of Vendor Drawings as required.
2.3 Implementation ;
2.3.1 NUSCO Betterment Construction !
a) Review and comment on the project installation specifications, b) Install conduit and supports and pull new cables in the containment outer annulus.
c) Purchase field materials.
d) Prepare as-built drawings and transmit them to the Plant !
Engineer.
e) Provide input for the preparation and up3ating of the project schedule.
2.3.2 NUSCO Production Test i
a) Review and coment on the project installation specifications. l b) Pull and terminate all field side cabling in the Main Control Room.
I
( - -l,
_ _ _ .. 1
NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTICH Project Assignment No.,85-066 Rev. O No. 17 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICtTF YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMINIATICN SYSTEM PROJECT c) Perform modifications to the Main Control Board (component installations, internal board wiring).
d) Prepare as-built drawings and transmit them to the Plant Engineer, e) Verify the continuity and arrangement of all "field side" wiring.
f) Provide input for the preparation and updating of the project schedule.
g) Install Replacement NIS Rack in MCB Section "A".
2.3.3 CYAPCO Instrumentation and Controls a) Review and coment on the project laistallation specifications.
b) Verify the continuity and arrangement of all "cabinet side" wiring.
c) Review and coment on preoperational testing procedures, d) Perform all Itic pr2 operational testing procedures.
e) Support the integrated operability testing.
(
l l
~ _
_~_- . . . . - ~ .
O
. NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION h Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0
' No. 18 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMDRATION SYSTEM PRCA7ECT f) Prepare as-built drawings and transmit them to the Plant Engineer.
g) Provide input for the preparation and updating of the project schedule.
2.3.4 CYAPCO Operations a) Review and conment on the detailed design.
(
b) Revise and review the affected operations procedures.
c) Support preoperational and integrated testing.
2.4 PNelear Training 2.4.1 NUSCO operator Training a) Modify initial and requalification training programs to incorporate project design changes.
l b) Provide classroom and/or hands-on training for the plant '
operators.
i l
- . _ __ _ :_ : _ . __ _ _ - _ : _ _ --_- __ L-_ :_- :-mm - ~ - - .-- -v~ .: ,- - - - _ - -
. NEO PRCOECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O No. 19 PRCMECT TITLE CCN4ECTICITI YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUt2:NIATION SYSTEM PRCOECT 2.4.2 NUSCO Technical Training a) Prepare training programs for the operation and testing of added plant equipment.
b) Provide classroom and/or hands-on training for the plant engineers and technicians.
2.5 Project Management and Administrative Support
]
i 2.5.1 NUSCO Project Management a) Prepare and issue PERC packages.
, b) Review equiptent and construction bids.
c) Resolve conflicts between various projects and organizations.
d) Provide a project plan to ensure coordination of resources.
2.5.2 NUSCO Cost Engineering i a) Prepare and revise project material and labor cost estimates.
l b) Monitor, evaluate and report on cost variances.
2.5.3 NUSCO Planning and Scheduling
{ a) Prepare and revise project engineering, design, and installation schedules.
,j I
___t' ___i_.___._EI_I._r. ^
$_~_ - ' ' N_ **C*S- *7 ~
'N O '
- b - - - - - -
. NEO PRCL7ECT DESCRIPTION 4.
Project Assignment No.85-066 R(v. O PROJECT TITIS .
CONNECTICLTI YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUM2NIATION SYSTEM ,
I pro &.*r b) Provide input to and coordination of the outage schedule. ,
c) Monitor, evaluate, and report on scheduling variances and critical path items.
2.5.4 NUSCO Purchasing a) Prepare and issue Purchase Orders for mateuals and labor.
b) Provide expediting of materials as required.
c) Report the expected delivery dates of equipment if other th u the "Date Required" on the Purchase Requisitions.
3.0 CCNDITIONS AND LIMITATICNS 21s project shall be installed, tested, and declared operational prior to the c. vnpletion of the 1989 CY Refueling Outage. h is project shall re-quest the performance of pre-outage work, to the extent allowable by ;
CYAPCO Engineering and Operations, to ensure that the plant modification is coupleted within the planned 50 day duration of the outage.
4.0 REXRRAlt)RY RE)QUIRDENIS l l
W is plant design change shall be performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59. h is modification is not *xpected to involve an unreviewed safety question, however, preliminary comission notificottca .nay be prudent.
C .
l n . ..... . _ . . . ~ _ _ l
~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . - . _ _ _ - __ -
.= . .
~
. NEO PRCUECT DESCRIPTION l
( No. 21 Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 l
NE53ELT TITLE !
CCtMCTICITT 'tANKEE 1'
REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM i
PRCUECT l 5.0 CONCEPItRL DESIGt l l
5.1 Bases of Current Design j h e Nuclear Instrumentation System is designed.to detect the neutron flux from suberitical to 120% of reactor "full power".
We system provides an indication of neutron flux indication for 4 the power range. Reactor trip and Rod stop control signals and alarms are provided by this system for safe plant operation. l Equipnent failure monitoring alarma are also incorporated. Con- l trol signals are transmitted to the reactor control and protection .
- k. system for autc.natic plant control. There are also two recorders f on the Main control board with a range from zero to 200% power.
i h e Nuclear Instrumentation System is divided into three over- !
lapping ranges, consisting of the source, intermediate and power i ranges. We source range produces a signal sufficient to allow l for safe start-up of the plant. We intermediate range overlaps !
the source range and has a range sufficient to cover low pou r f operation. he power range overlaps the intermediate range and l t
produces a maximum signal equivalent to 120% of reactor full l power. he calculated neutron flux at 100% Reactor Power (1825 l Mwt) at the detector location is approximately 3 X 10' neutrons per sq. em. per second, which is well within the range for this l system. t
)
l During start-up operations the Reactor Protection System (RPS) '
limits nuclear flux through two protective mechanisms, one being a
( .
. - - - + . - - - _p - ...n .n - - - _-- .. - . - - - y_y- -_ , - - . - . , _ , , , - - , .
l i
~
, NEO PRCA7ECT DESCRIPTION l 1
'. Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT MNKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATION SYSTDI PROJECT rod stop and the other a reactor trip. Both the source range detectors and intermediate range detectors utilize two channels.
If any one channel exceads 2 Decades Per Minute (DPM), it will initiate a rod stop signal and alarm if operation is below the -
setpoint of the P-7 (10% reactor power). hus, four channels (two for source range and two for intermediate range) are monitoring the core during start-up and anyone of these four can prevent further rod withdrawal.
i n e reactor trip is brought about during start-up by the inter-mediate range channels. If 5 DPM is exceeded on either of two ,
k channels, a reactor trip will occur. However, both the rod stop limit described above and this high start-up rate reactor trip are bypassed (inactive) above the P-7 bistable at 10% reactor power.
Once at power, neutron flux is used for different protection devices by the RPS. Four quadrants of the core are monitored by the power range channels.
Should any one of the four Power Rsnge Channels reach a predetermined flux setpoint, both manual and automatic rod withdrawal will be prevented. 'Inis setpoint, referred to as P-1 j permissive, has three settings for different levels of operation (low, medium, high). ney are 20%, 71% and 102% of full power.
( .
I l
h l:
.. ....._..,.m. . . . .
. - - .; . . r 7 ., n . , . . ...,_.7..,...,;.....-.,. .
n ---
, NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION
~
Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 No. 23 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICITT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATICH SYSTEM PRCUECT When the loss of flow protection coincidenter receives signals from 2 of 4 Power Range neutron flux channels, in coincidence, (which indicates that a power level greater than 74% has been achieved simultaneously with a turbine load signal at this same
.. value) then a signal indicating loss of flow in any one loop will cause a reactor trip. Below this level, a cLincidence of two signals from two different loops is necessary to cause a reactor trip.
5.2 Method of Change 5.2.1 Details of Change a) Remove the existing eight (8) Power Range Detectors and three (3) Source Range Detectors.
b) Remove the three (3) existing Source Range Pre-amplifiers.
l c) Remove the rack-mounted electronics located in Main Control l
Board (MCB) Section "A".
d) Remove (or abandon in place), all existing NIS cable and conduit).
e) Seismically mount two (2) Wide Range Remote Amplifier Assem-blies and two (2) Power Range Remote Amplifier Assemblies on the North end wall of the Cable Vault Lower 14 vel. Seis-mically mount one (1) Wide Range Remote Anplifier Assembly and two (2) Power Range Remote Amplifier Assemblies on the outer wall of the Cable Vault directly across from the existing NIS
{ penetrations.
l
.. - . . . , = . , - - ., ,r ... m . . . . . . , ,_.!
w .- -- _ - , - - .
NEO PFa7ECT DESCRIPTIQ1 f Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 No. 24 PRO.7ECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMDTTATION SYSTDI PROJECT f) Seismically mount one (1) Wide Range Remote Anglifier Assemoly, one (1) Wide Range Isolator Assembly, and one (1)
Wide Range Signal Processor (Wall Mounted version) in the containment outer annulus near the electrical penetration area on the (El. l'-6").
g) Seismically mount eight (8) Junction boxes on the outer wall of the biological shield near the MIS Detector Well .1.ocations !
(rour (4) Junction Boxes are for the eight (8) Power Range Detectors and four (4) Junction Boxes are for the four (4) :
I-Wide Range Channels). .
l i
h) Seismically install eight (8) Guua-Metrics cables inside !
containment from the Junction Boxes to the Electrical Penetra- l tions.
- 1) Remove and replace penetration assemblies 9C, 10C, 23C and 30C.
I j) Seismically install seven (7) Gama-Metrics cables from the Cable Vault side of the Electrical Penetrations to the three (3) Wide Range Remote Amplifier Assemblies and the four (4)
Power Range Remote Anplifier Assemblies. (Wide Range One and Power Range One will connect to penetration 630C, Wide Range Two and Power Range 'No will connect to penttration 023C, Wide Range tree and Power Range t ree will connect to penetration 49C, Power Range Four will connect to penetration 410C).
. NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O C. No. 25 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICITT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM PRCA7ECT k) Connect the twisted shielded pair. corresponding to the source Range signal from the Wide Range Isolator Assembly to the ;
containment side of the penetration to be fire-protected by PA 83-117 (Penetration I5C or 6C).
- 1) Route three twisted shielded pairs from the Wide Range ;
Arelifier Assembly which is located in the lower level of the containment outer annulus to the designated "B" Train penetration.
(s m) Route twelve (12) "B" train twisted chielded pairs (three (3) from the cable vault side of the penetration defined in "1" above, three (3) from each of the two (2) Power Range Remote Amplifier Assemblies and three (3) from the Wide Range Amplifier Assembly) to the new "B" train duct that will be installed from the cable vault to the new switchgear room and then to the control room. The twelve twisted shielded pairs must be seismically supported in the cable vault in two l conduits (one (1) for channel "C" and one for channel "D")
from the Remote Amplifier Assemblies to the new duct in the !
outer wall of the lower level of the Cable vault. ,
n) Route twelve (12) "A" train twisted shielded pairs (three (3) from each of the two (2) Wide Range Amplifier Assemblies and ;
three (3) from each of the two (2) Power Range Remote Ampli- !
fier Assemblies) from the Remote Amplifiers described in "e" a- w w --
w '
. NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTICN Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev, 0 -
PRCUECT TITLE CCNECTICUT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATION SYSTEM PRCOECT above to the existing duct which goes from the cable vault to the control room. ne twelve twisted shielded pairs must be seismically supported in the cable vault and all the way to the control room. In the Cable Vault the twelve (12) twisted shielded pairs must be installed in two conduits (one (1) for channel "A' and one for channel "B") from the Remote Anglifier Assemblies to the existing "A" train duct bank in the outer wall of the Cable Vault.
o) Install the new three bay cabinet assembly which houses the replacement NIS signal processing equipment in the location
( vacated by the removal of the original NIS electronics removed in "c" above.
p) Connect all four (4) vital 120 VAC power channels and one (1) channel of 120 VAC semi-vital power to the new three bay rack installed "n" above.
q) Run a new 3C-Il2 cable from the new switchgear room to the wide range signal processor installed inside of containment per "f" above.
r) Remwo the four (4) existing indicators for Power range %
Fower from MCB Section "B" and replace with four (4) new indicators (tentatively of type KX-241).
l
._. .. . .- n .. , ,,..._.....-..._,.m,..-
. N!!D PRCUECT DESCRIPTICH Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O No. 27 PRCUECT TIttE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPI. ACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMINIATICH SYS'IEM PROJECT s) Remove the tw (2) existing SUR indicators and two (2) existing Source Range Level indicators on MCB Section "B" and replace with four (4) new indicators (tentatively of type KX-241).
t) Remove the one (1) existing intermediate Range level indicator and replace it with a KX-241 type indicator. Remove the existing Intermediate Range SUR indicator and replace it with a new indicator (tentatively of type KX-241).
u) Remove the four (4) existing Axial offset indicators located on MCB Section "B" and replace them with four (4) new indicators (tentatively of type Dixson Saws 1).
4 v) Remove the four existing NIS recorders located on the rear of MCB Section "A" and replace them with four (4) new recorders (tentatively of type Foxboro N-227P).
w) Remove the existing multi-channel NIS recorder from MCB Section "A" and replace it with a new recorder (type is undetermined and will be specified by the Project Engineer).
i x) Remove the existing Rod Disconnect Panel located in MCB Section "A". (This panel will be replaced as an integral part of the new NIS Cabinet.) ,
9 C 1 l
- _ - - - :. _ -_ - x _ t _ - .-__r_- r - r r_ r=__ ~ <_o- - ~ _ = - n- r _ ~-
~ . - - - __. . ~. . , . , - , . . _ , , , _ _ -_ _ _ . _ _
=
. NEO PRCUECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No._85-066 Rev. 0 No. 28 PROJECT TITLE C0tMECTICUT DNKEE
[ REP! ACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMENIATION SYSTEM PROJECT y) Remove the existing Canberra Scaler / Timer Assembly located in MCB Sectico "A". (his assembly will also be replaced as an integt11 part of the new NIS Cabinet.)
r.) Remove and relocate the Bogen Comm1nications Module and the Refueling Cavity Level Indicator.
aa) Remove the Internals Vibration Isolation Rack and associated cabling installed in PDCR 9929.
( 5.2.2 Description of Replacement NIS he replacement system will be functionally different from the existing system in the following ways i
h a) here will be four Power Range channels utilizing Guarded ;
Pission Chambers vice un-compensated ion chambers, f I
b) here will be ten (10) Reactor Trips at 17, 27, 37, 47, 57, l 67, 77, 87, 97 and 107% Reactor Power vice the current three !
(3) Reactor Trip setpoints of 22, 72 and 107% Reactor Power. '
nose trip setpoints will be selected by the use of a ten position switch located on each of the new Power Range drawers. 2a reason for the additional trips is to prevent the present necessity of "regaining" the Power Range signal
~
to maintain the trip setpoint within 9% of the Power Range 9
b 8 e * ~,gme-+=ee w .. - _ m e.e eee,,e.*4eey g .o4- .g- *e ,e4 ,* .,e-- , - e , - * ,,,, a
NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O No. 29 PROJECT TITLE ,
CONNECTICtJT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRtRENIATION SYSTEM PROJECT Level. We Rod stops will also be increased from three (3) to ten .0) and will be calibrated 4% less than the High Power Reactor Trips (13, 23, 33, 43, 53, 63, 73, 83, 93 and 103%).
.. c) nere will be four (4) Wide Range channels vice the current two (2) Intermediate Range Channels. %e Replacement Wide Range Channels will utilize un-guarded Fission Chambers vice the current compensated ion chambers.
d) here will be four (4) Source Range Channels vice the current three (3) Channels. h e four (4) Source Range Signals will be k derived from the same detectors which serve as the Wide Range Detectors. As stated in "c" above, the replacement detectors will be un-guarded Fission Chambers.
e) h ere will be two (2) rack-mounted coincidenters which will perform the coincidence for P1, P6, P7, P8, Containment Evacuation, High Power Reactor Trip and High SUR Reactor Trip.
% e Logic for the Permissives, Reactor Trips and Containment Evacuation alarm is given below:
P1)If any one (1) of four (4) Power Range Channels is greater than the telected setpoint, all withdrawal of Control Rods is blocked.
P6)If any two (2) of four (4) Wide Range SURs are greater than 2 DPM, all withdrawal of Control Rods is blocked.
( &
- .. . \
n . -. . . . .
. NEO PRCA7ECT DESCRIFTICH Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 k No. 30 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICLTr YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTR.UMENIATION SYSTDI PROJECT P7)If two (2) of 'four (4) Power Range Levels are greater than 10% Reactor Power, this coincidence provides the NIS input to the P7 circuit. We NIS input will be "anded" with the First stage Turbine Impulse Pressure to block the High SUR Reactor Trip and Rod Stop and instate the "at power" Reactor Trips.
P8)If any two (2) of four (4) Por.ser Range Channels are greater than 74% Reactor Power in Coincidence with First Stage Turbine Impulse Pressure, a loss of flow in
( any single loop will cause a Reactor Trip. Below 74% a loss of flow in a single loop will not cause a Reactor
'Irip. A loss of flow in two or greater loops is l
ressired to initiate a Reactor Trip.
Hi SUR)If any two (2) of four (4) Wide Range SUR are greater than 5 DPM (below P7), this will cause a Reactor Trip.
I Hi Pwr)As described in "5.2.2.b" above, lf any two (2) power range levels are greater than the selected Trip i setpoint, this will cause a Reactor Trip. l 1
f) on each of the four (4) Power Range Drawers there will be an indication of the Upper and Lower Detector current and a switch labeled Incore/Excore. % is switch will select either the un-compensated Axial offset signal or the signal that has -
been gained and biased to account for the calculated differ- .,
{- ence between incore and excore axial offset.
_w _
. NEO PRCUECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 PROJECT TITLE CONNECTICUT YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSTRUPENIATION SYSTD1 PROJECT g) %e Power Range Deviation Alarm will provide an annunciator when the Maxiana Power Range Level minus the minimum P e r Range Level is greater than 5%.
h) 'IW (2) Shutdown monitors will perform two (2) functions. We first function to provide an annunciator if any one (1) of two (2) shutdown monitors indicates a Boron Dilution Event.
% e second function will be to produce a 1/M value for use during Reactor Startup.
( i) Within the Coincidenters, each Permissive /Irip/ Alarm function will be performed twice to increase the system's reliability and to be consistent with the method of coincidence which will be utilized in the RPS Phase II project (Ref. PA 83-113).
his means that a single failure within a coincidenter will not cause a Reactor Trip as would occur if the functions were not performed twice.
j) he replaceme.it NIS cabinet will include four scaler / timer assemblies which will replicate the functions of the ca*'.
scaler / timer being removed by thL project.
k) ne replacement NIS cabinet will include a Rod Disconect Panel which will replicate the functions of the Rod Disconnect Panel which is being removed by this project.
( .
s . . - -
~
. NEO PRCJECT DESCRIPTI N Project Asaignment No.85-066 Rev. O PRCOECT TITLE ;
CNNECTICLTI YANKEE F
REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMDTIATICN SYSTM .
P1WECT 5.2.3 Nuclear Instrumentation System Testing his Plant Design Change will provide testing capability so that the Nuclear Instrumentation System will be testable during periods of operation of the station as well as those intervals when W station is shutdown. 212 testability shall permit the inde-pendent testing of redundant channels whiles (1) maintaining the capability of those systems to respond to bona fide afgnals during operation; (2) tripping the output of the channel being tested; or (3) bypassing the channel consistent with operability require-C ments.
Each Channel of Wide Range and Power Range will have the ability to have its drawer and remote electronics conpletely checked through the use of front panel switches and push buttons. he drawers will not have to be slid out for routine surveillance.
Each coincidenter will be testable through the use of a test i switch and fev puen attons. % rough the correct use of these switches, th er.H N r incidenter will be checked.
Bypass and trip switches will be provided on each Coincidenter to l allow the bypass or defeat of any single Power Range or Wide 'Aange l channel as dictated by plant operability requirements.
s l
.. . , .r. _g 3.,.....,.,.. ,m... . I
o NEO PROTECT UESCRIPTICH Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. O PEfiECT TITLE CCNECTICUT YANKEE REPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMDM. TION SYSTDI PROJECT" 5.3 Design Inputs .
5.3.1 American National Standards Institute a) ANSI N45.2, 1977 Jtality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants b) ANSI C39.1, 1081 Requirements for Elactrical Analog Indicating Instruments
.) ANSI C39.2, 1964 Direct Acting Ele:trical Recording k Instruments, d) ANSI C59.5, 1974 Safecy Requirements for Electrical and Electronic Measuring sad controlling Instrumentation.
e) ANSI /IEEE-ANS-7.4.3.2, 1982 Application criterza for Programmable Digital puter hyste.u and Safety Systems or Nuclear Pcwer Generating Stations, i
5.3.2 Estitute of Electrical and Electronic Erylineers a) IEEE 308, 1980 Criteria for ': lass lE Power Systems for
! Nuclear Pow,r Generating Stations.
s
__.....m__
.~ . __n.
. NEO PN17ECT DESCRIPTICW Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 M .
~
cotWECTIctrr MANKEE l
REP! ACE N0 CLEAR INSMUMD;fATION SYSHM f
FEAT ,
i b) IEEE 317, 1983 Electric Penetration Assesiolies in '!
Containment Structures for Nuclear Power (
Generating Stations. l l
c) IEEE 323, 1974 Standard for Qualifying Class 1E i Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating i Stations.
f d) IEEE 338, 1977 Criteria for Periodic h sting of Nuclear !
Fower Generating Station Safety Systems. !
e) IEEE 344, 1975 Trial Use Guide for Seismic Qualifica-tion of Class IE Electrical Equipment {
for Nuclear Power Generating Stations. !
f) IEEE 336, 1985 Standard Installation, Inspection and {
Testing Requirements for Power, '
i Instrumentation, and control Equipment ;
at Nuclear racilities, i
j g) IEEE 379, 1977 Application of the Single Teilure I criterion to Nuclear Power Generating Station Class 1E Systems. l l
1
] h) IEEE 381, 1977 Criteria for Type h ats of Class 1E
) Modulet Used in Nuclear Power Generating 1 Stations. -
iC -
J .
i I
i m ,n- . _ - _ ~ . . - ~.~. -, ~~g. - - . . .
- v. . . - . _ _ . . . . _ -
t
- NEO PRCkTECT DESCRIPTION Project Assignment No.85-056 _ Rev. 0 PRCUECT TITLE CCENECTICt/I YANKEE REPLACE NUCLEAR INSThtMNIATIt* SYSTFM PRCOECT i) IEEE 383, 1974 Standard for Type Test of Class it Electric Cables; Field Splices and Connections for Nuclear Power Generating
. Stations.
j) IEEE 384, 1981 Criteria for Independence of Class lE Equipment and circuits.
k) IEEE 420, 1982 Design and Qualification of Class lE
. Control Boards, Panels and Racks used in Nuclear pow r Generating Stations.
1
.l 1) IEEE 467, 1980 Quality Assurance Program Requirenents
) for the Design and Manufactura of Class lE Instrumentation and Electrical l Equipment for Nuclear Power Generating
- Stations.
l m) IEEi. 472, 1974 Guide for Surge Uithstand capability (SWC) Tests, n) IEEE 577, 1976 Requirements for Reliability Analysis in the Design and operation of Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
_ _ _ _ + -
W -
. . . l r
, NEO PROJECT DESCRIPTIOli
' l r \
. i 7 Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 '
b No. 36 ROJECT TITLE i CCHIECTICttr YANKEE
^
REPLACE NUCLEAR IriSTRUMENTATION SYSTDI PRCutCT o) Irrt 603, 1980 Criteria for Safety Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations.
p) IELT 990,1984 Design and Insteilation of Cable systars for Class 1E Circuits in Nucl w Power !
t Generating Stations., '
5.3.3 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) 1 a) 10CrR50, Appendix B Cuality Assurance, criteria for Nuclear Power Plants.
b) 10Cr!, Part 21 Reporting of Defects and Non-ccepliance.
j c) 10CrR50, Appendix R rire Protection Program for Nuclear +
Power racilities Operating Prior to January 1, 1979.
4 d) 10CTR50.49 Environmental Qualification of Electric Equipnent Inp trant to Safety for [
Nuclear Pow. Plants, t i
i e) R . G. 1. .?. 2 Periodic Testing of Protection System i-Actuation Functions, I
l J !
i f
e______0____ a *^91 . ** * * ' '
- 199 C"'-*W9***
- _T =*Cr-e "tN** . * * -
, NEO PICTECT DESCRIPTICH Project Assigreent No.85-066 Rev. 0 PIR7ECT TITLE C0tNECTICUT YANKEE PIPIACE NUCLEAR INSTRUMINTATION SYSTEM P7R7ECT f) R.G. 1.29, Rev. 3 Seismic Design classification.
Sept. 1978 g) R.G. 1.38, Rev. 2 Quality Assurance Requirements for May 1977 Packaging, Shipping, Receiving, Storage, and Handling of Items for Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Plants. .
- h) R.G. 1.75, Rev. 2 Physical Independence of Electrical t
Sept. 1978 Systems.
)
j i) R.G. 1.89, key. 1 Environmental Qualification of Certain ;
) June 1984 Electrical Equipnent Important to Safety '
for Nuclear Power Plants.
I j) R.G. 1.97, Rev. 3 U. S. Regulatory Comunission !
Dec. 1980 Instrumentation for Light-Water-cooled Nuclear Powet Plants to Assess Plant and Envi wntal CoMitions during and i l
following an accident.
I k) R.G. 1.100, Rev. 1 Seismic Qualification of Electric
- Aug. 1977 Equipment for Nuclear Power Plants.
j 1) N0588, Rev.1 Interim Staff Position on Environmental July 1981 Qualifiestion of Safety-Related Electrical Equipment. -
g( '
t **' * * * ** '*
=_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _. _ "9 W " * * *'NNO MO O * * * *
?. . :. . :.'.:.' ::: : * *
.L r ' ' ' .'.:.1. * ::.'. ;
e NEO PEECT DESCRIPTICN Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0
(* No. 38
~
FROJECT TITLE CCtEECTICUT YANKEE REPI. ACE NUCLEAR INSTRUME2frATICti SYSUM P W ECT 5.3.4 Instrument Society of America a) ISA, S67.01, 1979 Transducer and Transmitter Installation i
for Nuclear Safety Applications, b) ISA, S67.06, 1984 Response Time Testing of Nuclear Safety-Related Instrument Channels in Nuclear i Plants.
l 5.3.5 Plant Design Documents a) CYAPCO Haddam Neck Station Updated TSAR (May, 1987).
b) NUSCO Nuclear Training Manuals for Connecticut Yankee Systesa.
4 c) Connecticut Yankee System Descriptions, Revision 1.
{
6.0 CXNCEPItRL DESIM MLRD0lW i
A preliminary conceptual design walkdown was performed by the Project Engineer, the Discipline Engineering, and a Plant IsC representative to
) determine approximate equipment locations. A follow-up conceptual design walkdown will be performed to verify the feasibility of li.stallation of these locatiora Lnd to provide inpe" L. the detailed design. Involvement of the following project particip is required:
l l
, ('.
I 1
4
m o v. .m .v v m. . . .
3 i
,, 9 NBO PRCOECT DESCRIPTICH
- e Project Assignment No.85-066 Rev. 0 No. 39 PRCOECF TITLE OcmECTICtir YANKEE '
REPIACE NUCLEAR INS 114JMINIATICH SYS11M FROJ-C Generation Engineering Mechanics Generation Electrical Engineering - Special Studies Generation Electrical Design Generation Civil Design Generation Mechanical Design i Plant Engineering Plant IEC Betterment Construction
(
5 I
l l
- I 1
{
)
l (s 3GB/9ek PD7 88 o 1
- l 1
.~. ..~ . . . . . . . . L . s .. . .> . . s .s su. . w.m . . a .u ; . H.a. c. . \, s'.. . u . i, t
- t. n.. . . '.
e ,'.. .
- g. ': .
ATTACHMENT 8.B SAFETY EVALUATION WORKSHEET ,
Safety Evaluation Numbor: 85 066 1 Revision No: 0 Plant Change Number (if applicable): Revision No:
Plant Change
Title:
Replace the Nuclear Instrumentation System Refareneea CY UFSAR
- 1. Description of the aspects of the change being evaluated.
The scope of this project is to replace the existing ex core Nuclear Instrumentation System (NIS). The project will replace the ex core detectors, in containment cabling, pre amplifler assemblies, out of containment cabling an Main Control Board mounted equipment.
This evaluation will evaluate the instrumentation and Controls portions of the change. The evaluation will verify that the system will function as designed.
The Integrated Safety Evaluation that will be performed by Reactor Engineering
{ will verify the Safety Aspects of any Logic changes from the existing NIS configuration such as the change from three (3) to ten (10) Power Range Trip settings and the change from two (2) to four (4) Wide Range Channels.
- 2. Idcntify parameters and systems affected by the change.
This changa replaces the entire ex-core Nuctoar Instrumentation System. As such, the change effects the Source, Intermediate and Power Range Channels of the NIS along with associted *periphial" circuits such as, Axlal Offset, Power Range Deviation, Audibte Count Rate and the two trains of trip coincidence inputs to the Reactor Protection System.
- 3. Identify the credible falture modes associated with the change.
The following credible failure modes are associated with this change:
W a) cable open circuit b) cable short circuit c) cable shorted to ground
~
d) voltage fault applied to cables e) component failures
\ ...-. ...... . . .....'...-.. . .. ..+ u.., .....<....a.a ..s e..e..
i
[*
l s .
PART1: IMPACT ON THE ACCIDENTS EVALUATED ^
AS THE DESIGN BASIS '
l
1. Identify the design basis accidents reviewed for potential impact by l the change j The design basis accidents reviewed for potentialimpact by this change are:
a) Uncontrolled Rod Withdrawal .
b) Startup of an isolated or Idle Loop -
c) Boron Dilution d) Excess Feedwater e) Excessive Load increa:e f) Dropped Rod Cluster Control Assembly g) Rod Cluster Control Assembly Election h) Loss of Forced Reactor Coolant Flow I) Steam Line Break j) Steam Generator Tube Ruptur k) Loss of Load I) Loss of Normal Feedwater Flow m) RCP Rotor Selzure and Shaft Break n) Radioactive Waste System Failure i
( o) Fuel Handling Accidents Of the above accidents, only the following take credit for action by the NIS to mitigate the acciden effects:
a) Uncontrolled Rod Withdrawal This accident is further divided into two (2) sub. accidents:
I) Uncontrolled Rod Withdrawal from Suberitical !
The Intermediate Range Hi SUR trip and the Power Range ,
HI Power (low setting) trip are credited in the analysis.
- 11) Uncontrolled Rod Withdrawal from Power I The Power Range Hi Power trip is credited in the analysts. [
b) Startup of an Isolated or idled Loop This accident credits the operation of the Power Range HI Power Reactor trip in the analysis. {,
c) Excess Feedwater l
This accident takes crectit for a Power Range Hi Power trip as a back.up -
to the Stearn Generator Hl.Hi Level Alarm alerting the operator. ;
d) Excessive Load increase !
This accident takes credit for a Power Range Hi Power Reactor trip as an ;
{ alternate to Steam Line Break protection. .j, b
....y.:. .....i.i. ..Gh...w.e.'*
. . . . . . . x:r.:2.:i sa.kn .w. , .1.. . .. ..
- ? .
i f e) Rod Cluster Control Assembly Election
\_ , This accident takes credit for a Power Range Hi Power trip to mitigate the effects of this accident. .,
f) Steam Une bc9ak Event This accident tues credit for a Power Range Hi Power trip as an alternate to a Reactor Trip on Imterlock with a Safety injection Signal (SIS).
n
- 2. Discuss how the parar,seters and systems, affected by the change, impact the consequc7 cts of these accidents. Use Attachment 8.A for guidance.
The parameters and systems, affected by the change, do not impact it's consequences of these accidents. Only a limited set of parameters associated with the plant response to an accident have been designated as consequences for determining the bounds of the accident analysis. These parameters relate direc'ly
. to the boundary performance during the accident and are:
a) fuel / cladding: DNBR/MCPR fuel temperature -
fuel enthalpy clad strain clad temperature clad oxidation b) RCS Boundary pressure c) Containment: pressure d) radiological: cbses An increase in consequences is defined as an increase in one of these parameters.
Since the values of these parameters are based upon conservntive calculations, a change in the value of the parameter does not necessarily mee.n an increase in consequences. An increase in the value must be significant be tre it is called an increase in consequences. This modification will increase the ability of the NIS to ,
perform its functions in two (2) ways, (1) The Hi SUR trip coincidence is being '
increased from 1/2 to 2/4, (2) The reliabll'ty of the system will be enhanced due to the use of more up to date components and the elimination of the possibility of a single failure comprimising more than one channel of NIS.
- 3. Identify the design basis accidente, if any, for whico failures modes associated with the change can be an initiating event.
A failure of the Power Range input to the Rod Control section of the Reactor Protection and Control system could result in an Uncontrolled Rod Withdrawal from Power.Since there are no other ties between the NIS and any control sytem, there are no oteher design basts accidents for which a failure of the NIS can be an Initiating event.
In the unlikely event of a mntrot rod withdrawalincident, the core and Reactor Coolant System will not ta adversely affected. Protection is prodded by a -
C combination of the ~'erNwer trip and varlable low pressure trip, as well as by
. a fixed h*g1 pres *.. , trio.
i . . . . . . T. . . f . .u .....~
Discuss the impact of the change on the probability of occurrence of I. 4.
' the design basis accidents identified in 3. Use Attachment 8.A for gult:ance.
The impact of the change on the probabilities of occurance of the design basis accidents identified above is consid3 red to be negilgable since the change replaces existing equipment with upgraded equipment and eliminates any single failure points which may have existed in the original design. The probability of failure of the replacement equipment is considered no greater than the probability of failure of the axisting equipment. The modification does not increase the probabilities to an unacceptable level since the change: 1) does not result in a change in the probability class 2) is not an increase in the probability of occurrence within a category, and 3) does not increase the probability of an accident, previously thought to be incredible, to a point where it is now considered credible. Therefore, the change is not considered an Unrev!ewed Safety Question on the basis of impact on accidents.
- 5. Identify th) safety systems affected by the change.
The entire Nucloir instrumentation System is being replaced by this change. The replacement system is considered Category 1 and is being procured Cat.1 Class 1 E.
- 6. Discuss the impact of the change and/or the failure modes
, associated with the change on il 3 probability of failure of these
( safety systems. Use Attachment 8.A for guidance.
The change anWor failure modes associated with the change are assumed to have no negative impact on the probability of failure of a safety system.
The new equipment should be superior to the existing equipment in the following ways:
a) The new arrangement will have four channels of Source, Wide and Power Range vice the current arrangement of three Source ,two intermediate and four Power Range. channels.
bj The detectors are the Fhslon Chamber type design vice the current arrangement of Boron Trl Flouride and lon Chambers. The Fiss:on Chamber detector det g1 has proven to be a more reliable detector inan the Boron Trl.Flouride and of equal reliability to the lon Chamber.
c) The replacement Rack monted equipment is a solid state efectronic design. This eevipment is expected to be proven to be more re!!able than the existing discrete component system via the Retirollity Analysis required per IEEE 577,1976.
d) All Single Failure points have been remcved.
e) Seperation between Class 1E and non 1E circuitry will be provided by isolators which meet the requirements of IEEE
, 323,1974
- i. . .4 . .-.....-._............m.. .......F...:.....a.,..... ..; .. . . .. ,.
( i f) The existing reiay matrix logic system which develops the Permissives and Reactor Trios is belt a replaced with two completely redundant Coincidenters. These Coincidenters will develop the Reactor Trips and Perrr ssives utilizing Solid State Electronics. Each Trip / Permissive 'illl be developed twice internal to each Coincidenter and A' 4DED to produce the required output to the Reactor Protection S, stem. This ANUNG will increase the reliability of the sys em while maintaining the Single Failura Criterion as specified in IEEE 379,1977.
g) Two seperate Shutdown Monite s will be provided to perform the Boron Dilution Alarm function vice one Source Range Channel (selectable) which is used in .he current configuration.
h) The replacement system will be much less noise sensitive than the existing system. This is because of the state of the. art cable that will be used between the detectors and the remote amplifiers and the use of twisted shielded wires to transmit the signals from the cable vault to the control room vice double.shleided coax.
I) The ten (10) distinct Overpower Trip setpoints will allow long term operation at any power level without the requirement to "re gain" the Power Range channels to ensure that the trip setpoint is within 9% of the Power Range Level, g The above items will ensure that the replacement NIS will perform its safety functions with a greater oegree of reliability than the existing NIS.
- 7. Discuss the impact of the change on the performance of these safety systems. Use Attachment 8 A for guldance.
The change is assumed to have a positNe impact on the performance of the NIS safety functions. Based upon the discusion in #6 above, and the fact that the failure modes of the replacement system are equivalent (from a safety standpoint) to the existing system:
a) The change does not degrade the performance of a safety system assumed to funct!on in the accident analysis, b) The change does not increase the cha!!enges of the safety systems assumed to function in the accident analysis, c) The change does not increase the probability of failurs of systems designed to reduce chaffenges to safety systems assumed to function in the accident analysis, d) The change does not alter the performance of systems designed to reduce challenges to safety systems, such that the system no longer reduces challenges to the safety system.
Therefore, the change is within the bounds of the acc.' dent analysis and is not an .
- f. unreviewed Safety Question on the basis of performance of saf6ty systems.
'.2 ui - L321.~ ~iijd.i 4Ri_1.- . 1 . .I . ... .
E~. .
j, e
(
't
SUMMARY
Yes '
No Based upon 2, does the change increase the
. consequences of a design basis accident?
Based upon 4, does the change increase the probabliity of a design basis accident?
Based upon 6, does the change increase the probability of a failure of a safety system?
Based upon 7, does the change degrade the mformance of a safety system below that assumed n the design basis analysis?
If any of the above is answered yes, the change is an unreviewed safety question.
.I i
n
. I k I i
i i
I i
I i
l 9
C
+
%. - w. ... ... a.Limm Ow s3.; ci. L ii.\ du.>i.il..: .*. 's . .. .. .
/*
~( .
's PART 11: POTENTIAL FOR CREATION OF A NEW UNANALYZED EVENT k
1 Based upon Part I, asses the impact of the change and/or failure modes assocliled with the change, to determine if the impact has
~
{
modified the plant response to the pcInt where it can be considered a new accident. Discuss the basis for this determination.
Part 1 determined that the change, and the failure modes associated with the change, have not degraded the performance of a safety system below that assumed in the design basis analysis. Based on this, it is determined that the impact of the change and'or falture modes associated with the change will not modify the plant response to the point where it can be considered a new accident.
- 2. Determine if the failure modes associated with the change represent a new unanalyzed accident. Discuss the basis for this determination.
The failure modes associated with this change can not be an initisting event for a design basis accident. Therefore, the failure modes associated with this change do not represent a new unanatyzed accident.
- 3. Determine If the change, or a failure mode associated with the change, increases the probability of an accident to the point where it should be considered within the design basis.
The change, and the failure modes associated with the change, do not increase the probability of an accident to the point where it should be considered within the design basis since the change cannot be the initiating event. Therefore, the consequences of a failure will not be worsened.
f I
t l
t i
1 I
- a. i l
l s .
I
s . .._.. .. . ,-. . .. u.. . . ~ . sla ,:G . .w.> . .t.
. . w.a .; tii..Q,:i 4.V i' .) s , l r i . ' .~. . 's . . . . . s (g RUMMArd i 4
',. Yes No i Based upon 1,2, t.nd 3, does the change create the potential for a new unanalyzed accident? f p
i if the answer is yes, the change represents an unreviewd safety question. l 1
e i
t l
b i
[
I I
i t
i f
i r
i
(
I l
1 I
f
< l 1
I l
- f i
l l
1
. ; . a . _ . s 3 :.:u.h a.u a.w c. G ..t:;.1SJI b .1.:L.da i3 a ... ' .:-.
f =
- O
. ~ . . ..
j*e a
l
(, PART lil: IMPACT ON THE MARGIN OF SAFETY l
l 1. Based upon the consequences identified in Part I, discuss the Impact of the consequences on the protective bounderles. Use Attachment y 8.A for guidance.
. No increase in consequences was identified in Part 1 as a result of the change.
Therefore, the impact of the consequences on the protect!ve boundaries is unchanged.
- 2. Identify how the protective boundaries, if any, are directly affected by the change or a failure mode of the change. Use Attachment 8.A for guidance.
. The change has no impact on the protective boundaries.
- 3. Discuss the impact of the change on the safety limits for lla protective bounderles identified in 2. Use Attachment 8.A for guldance.
Since the modification has no impact on any protective boundary, no change to the ss'aty limits results from the incorporation of this modification,
- 4. Discuss the impact of the change on the basis of Technical
(, Specifications. Use Attachment 8.A for Guidance.
l The change does not impact the basis of Technical Specifications. The assumptions made on system performance for accident performance are not worsened. These assumptions are guaranteed by Technical Specifications requirements for l
survelliance and avaltaollity.
1 P
i 1
?
- . .- .... .. + ~- - - . L . G ..w .c a M a s .a a3.. a L G ....... . .
. ., o I 'o 4-
)
i "T
?.
SUMMARY
e t
Yes No Based upon 1. do the consequences of the design :
basis accident exceed the limits for an unacceptable change given in Attachment 8.A? -
l Based upon 2,3, and 4, does the change reduce the ;
margin of safety provided for the protective boundarles? ,.
r if any of these questions are answered yes, the change is unsafe and should not be i implemented.
l r
i f
4 I
l k
f I
I f
. l l
. l
M .~ . - ~ u. .-. '.-. . 2.1.1 i . L.1. . . ' .L.
s d .:. , G : .s . . .. . . . . . . .
. ..,b
[, 'o r
l s, ~
PART IV: SAFETY EVALUATION CONCLUSION -
Based upon the evaluation in Parts I,11, and Ill, the change:
l
[] is safe and is not an unreviewed safety question i l
[] is safe but is an unreviewed safety question l
[] is unsafe and cannot be implemented I
M.H. Brothers Date ,
l&C Engineering l
P 1
r j V.J.Mazzle Date r il l&C Engineering T>A>Shaffer Date I l&C Engineering ,
C r
A.R.Roby Date !
Generation Electrical Engineering l I
I G.LJohnson Cate t Generation Engineering & Design l l,
i l
l I