ML20214A099
| ML20214A099 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 11/12/1986 |
| From: | Bailey J GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | Youngblood B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| GN-1164, NUDOCS 8611190218 | |
| Download: ML20214A099 (13) | |
Text
!
Georga Pow:r Company Post Offics Box 282 Waynesboro, Georgia 30830 Telephone 404 554 9961 404 724-8114 Southern Company Services, Inc.
Pbst Office Box 2625 b
Birmingham, Alabama 35202 Telephone 205 870 6011 VOgtle Project Novembe r 12, 1986 Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation File:
X79C35 Attention:
Mr. B. J. Youngblood Log:
GN-1164 PUR Project Directorate #4 Division of PWR Licensing A U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 REF:
(1) BAILEY (CPC) TO DENTON (NRC), GN-1143, 10/31/86 (2) YOUNGBLOOD (NRC) TO FOSTFR (GPC), 11/26/85 NRC DOCKET NUMBERS 50-424 AND 50-425 CONSTRUCTION PFRMIT NUMBERS CPPR-108 AND CPPR-109 V0GTLE EI ECTRIC GENERATING PIANT - UNITS 1 AND 2 SER OPEN ITEM 14h:
SAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAY SYSTFM (SPDS)
Dear Mr. Denton:
Reference 1 provided your staff with the results of the maximum credible fault current anti voltage tests for the B0P f sotation devices used in the VEGP SPDS. Attached are the results of the NSSS SPDS digital isolation device test.
The information is presented in a format that addresses all the questions asked by your sta f f in reference 2.
This response completes the GPC submittal on isolation devices used on the Plant Vogtle SPDS.
If your staf f requires any a<lditional information, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Since rely,
n f
4 M.
J. A. Bailey Project Licensing Manager JAD/nm xc:
List attached 00 4
nn gpK,m
r Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation File: X7BC35 November 12, 1986 Log:
GN-1164 Page 2 xc:
R. E. Conway R. A. Thomas J. E. Joiner, Esquire B. W. Churchill, Esquire M. A. Miller (2)
B. Jones, Esquire G. Bockhold, Jr.
NRC Regional Administrator NRC Resident inspector D. Feig R. W. McManus L. T. Cucwa Vogtle Project File 0859V
ATTACHMENT 1 PERMS IS01ATOR TEST
SUMMARY
RESPONSE TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL INF3RMATION CONCERNING THE SAFETY PARAMETER DISP 1AY SYSTEM FOR ALVIN W. V0GTLE UNITS 1 & 2 "A. For each type of device used to accomplish electrical isolation, describe the specific testing performed to demonstrate that the device is acceptable for its application (s). This description should include elementary diagrams where necessary to indicate the test configuration and how the maximum credible faults were applied to the devices."
RESPONSE
The device used for isolation in the Process Effluent Radiation Monitoring System (PERMS) is optical isolator Type 6N136, located on Communication Board Assembly 6091D20G01. Assembly 6091D20001 is class 1E as is its host assembly Safety Related Data Processing Module 6091D45. The channel tested for isolation had 510 VAC and 250 VDC app 1.ied across the output terminals of its Communication Board Assembly. No electrical disturbance was propagated hack through the optical isolation into the 1E portion of the channel which was verified by monitoring the output relays and by visual observance of the 1E indicators of the tested channel and the adjacent channels contained in the Safety Related Data Processing Module.
The Block Diagram of the scope of the isolation test is shown in Figure 1.
i "B. D1ta to verify that the maximum credit faults applied during the test were the maximum voltage / current to which the device could be exposed, and define how the maximum voltage / current was determined."
RESPONSE
The maximum credible fault voltages to which the PERMS isolators could be exposed to are enveloped by the value used for the test which was 510 VAC and 250 VDC, because the potential of cables in proximity of PERMS do not l
exceed these values.
The maximum credible fault current to which the PERMS isolators could be exposed to is 20 amperes. This value is consistent with the distribution system feeding the PERMS system because the circuit line protectors in this portion of the distribution system do not exceed a 20 ampere rating.
A field wiring short downstream of the 20 amp line protector might cause a fault higher than 20 amperes, but this is not considered credibic because, as the test has demonstrated, the fault is cleared before the current reaches 20 amperes. The refo re, the maximum fault current is a bounding value.
(1)
"C. Data to verify that the maximum credible fault was applied to the output of the device in the transverse mode (between signal and return) and other faults were considered (i.e., open and short circuits)."
RESPONSE
The maximum credible faults were applied at the output of the isolators and monitoring was perfo,rmed to evaluate the influence in the transverse mode on the system. It was observed that this did not affect the Class 1E portion of the system output. The implementation of the fault application is shown schematically in Figure 2.
The short circuit was in a separate test applied at the output of the isolator and monitoring was performed to evaluate the influence in the transverse mode on the system.
It was observed that this did not affect the Class IE portion of the system.
"D. Define the pass / fail acceptance criteria for each type of device."
R[SPONSE The pass / fail criteria of the PERMS isolator is based on the need to demonstrate that no safety functions or channels are affected by a non-safety component failure on a tested channel. A fault on the non-safety wiring to the communications console can destroy the non-safety display (s) but can not propagate to safety channels or safety functions.
"E. Provide a commitment that the isolation devices comply with the environmental qualifications (10 CFR 50.49) and the seismic qualifications which were the basis for plant licensing."
RESPONSE
The isolation devices are located in a mild environment and, therefore, are not covered by the 10 CFR 50.49 harsh environment program. The isolators are considered Class 1E.
The isointion device was seismically qualified along with the PERMS because they were mounted in the equipment during the test and were determined to be functionally operable before and after the conditions described in WCAP-8687, Supplement 2 EQDP-ESE-70H and ESE-E70H.
"F.
Provide a description of the measures taken to protect the safety systems from cicctrical interference (i.e., Electrostatic Coupling, EMI, Common Mode and Crosstalk) that may be generated by the SPDS."
RESPONSE
The PERMS isolators were exposed by Westinghouse to the following type of coupled noise testing without affecting the system output Hilitary Specification Noise Test M.1-19900 which addresses radiated noise, i
(2)
"G. Provide information to verify that the class 1E isolation is powered from a Class 1E source.
RESPONSE
The PERMS equipment is powered from a lE instrument bus.
t j
4 4
)
i I
5 1,
S
_- D PS SN Y
O Y
E T
I E
L E
T L
M x
O F
A O
r t
P S
A C
S r
S N
S I
N A
I O
N O
S D
C N
U C
O M
N M
O C
M ARGA ID KCO G
L 1
B Y
N i
L I
T B
R E
t R
S t.
M I
E r
E W
UG T
A S
I S
S Y
F N
A TE O
F I
A TA S
L N
O O
S N
I M
S C
Y P
A F
R L
P P
Y O
d S
TA MTA G
I ET M
FA L
N D
I AD O
R LS S
S I
AE I
W CC ON A
f LA T
T H
A t.
N 1
L A
AO tU S
N D
S I. O t
N TR t M O
UO A
N PF S
T N
UD O
OED T
YR L
AO U
LC A
EE F
RR 1
2
i PERMS ISOLATION TEST SCHEMATIC f
1 STORAGE DATA MODULE OSCILLOSCOPE OUTPUT RELAY CONTACTS INPUT 1
___---.3 I
l ADJACENT E
I CHANNEL s'
l s
INPUT 2 1
1 TEST I
J e CHANNEL e
i_ _ _ _ _. _ a*
INPUT 3 g------
i i
4 ADJACENT I
A -
i CHANNEL I
8_____...)
INPUT 4 X, Y A k FAULT SOURCE POWER 20A[
e 5
C&
250 VDC 1
I' t
I I
LOW VOLTAGE e,
AC SIGNAL f
X, Y: TO COMMUNICATION BOARD ASSEMBLY UNDER TEST I
FIGURE 2
ATTACHMENT 2 PSMS ISOLATOR TEST
SUMMARY
RESPONSE TO REQUEST ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONCERNING THE SAFETY PARAMETER DISPLAY SYSTEM FOR ALVIN W. V0GTLE UNITS 1 & 2 "A. For each type of device used to accomplish electrical isolation, describe the specific testing performed to demonstrate that the device is acceptable for its application (s). This description should include elementary diagrams where necessary to indicate the test configuration and how the maximum credible faults were applied to the devices."
RESPONSE
The Plant Safety Monitoring System (PSMS) isolation devices, which are listed on Table 1, are representative of the isolators that isolate Class 1E instrumentation from non-Class 1E instrueentation in the PSMS. In addition to the testing that has established seismic qualification, noise tests and fault testing have been undertaken to demonstrate that the devices are acceptable for their application. Maximum (i.e., bounding) credible faults and noise disturbances were applied to the output of the devices while at the same time the PSMS was observed by the remote display to obtain data on which to base the evaluation. The elementary diagram of the scope of the isolation test is shown on Figure A-1.
"B. Data to verify that the maximum credible faults applied during the test were the maximum voltage / current to which the device could be exposed, and define how the maximum voltage / current was determined."
RESPONSE
The maximum fault voltages to which the PSMS isolators could be exposed to are enveloped by the values used for the test which are 580 AC and 250 VDC, because the potential of cables in proximity of PSMS do not exceed these values.
The maximum credible fault current to which the PSMS isolators could be exposed to is 20 amperes. This value is consistent with the distribution system feeding the PSMS system because the circuit line protectors in this portion of the distribution system do not exceed a 20 ampere rating. A field wiring short downstream of the 20 amp line protector might cause a fault higher than 20 amperes, but is not considered credible because, as the test has demonstrated, the fault is cleared before the current reaches 20 amperes. Therefore, the maximum fault current is a bounding value.
"C. Data to verify that the maximum credible fault was applied to the output of the device in the transverse mode (between signal and return) and other faults were considered (i.e., open and short circuits)."
(1)
f
RESPONSE
The maximum credible fault voltages were applied at the output of the isolators and monitoring was performed to evaluate the influence in the transverse mode on the system. It was observed that this did not affect the Class 1E portion of the system output.
The short circuit was in a separate test applied at the output of the isolator and monitoring was performed to evaluate the influence in the transverse mode of the system.
It was observed that this did not affect the Class 1E portion of the system.
The maximum credible fault voltages that were applied enveloped the following values:
The implementation of the fault gpplication is shown schematically in Figures C-1 and C-2.
"D. Define the pass / fail acceptance criteria for each type of device.
RESPONSE
The pass / fail acceptance criterion that was used was as follows:
"With the credible fault applied, the PSMS system observed by the remote display must be in a normal operation mode and must provide normal information within the normal execution cycle time of the processor."
"E. Provide a commitment that the isolation devices comply with the environmental qualifications (10 CFR 50.49) and the seismic qualifications which were the basis for plant licensing."
RESPONSE
The isolation devices are located in a mild environment and, therefore, are not covered by the 10 CFR 50.49 harsh environment program.
The i
isolators are considered Class 1E.
l The isolation devices were seismically qualified along with the Plant i
Monitoring System because they were mounted in the equipment during the test and were determined to be functionally operable before and after the conditions described in WCAP-8587, Supplement 1, EQDP-ESE-53, ESE 53B, l
ESE 53C, ESE 61B, ESE 63A, and ESE 63B, (Non-Proprietary) and WCAP-8687, Supplement 2, E53A, ES3B, E53C, E61B, E63A, and E63B (Proprietary).
"F. Provide a description of the measures taken to protect the safety systems from electrical interference (i.e., Electrostatic Coupling, EMI, Common Mode and Crosstalk) that may be generated by the SPDS."
1 (2) i 4
---n
RESPONSE
The PSMS isolators were exposed to the following types of coupled noise testing without affecting the system output:
j a) Randon Naise Test b) Crosstalk Noise Test c) Military Specification Noise Test d) Surge Transient Generator Noise Test "G.
Provide information to verify that the Class 1E isolation is powered from a Class lE source.
i
RESPONSE
It was verified that the Class 1E isolator being tested in the PSMS monitoring system is powered by the Class 1E power source. Each of the Class 1E cabinets are powered by a Class lE power source.
0859V i
E V
1 i
i i
e
= - - - -,. -,. -, - - - - - -. - _ - _ -, _ - _ _.,,._,.
005-A-I9630-1 TRAIN D DISPLAY
- p______,
cot OL NOTE: NOISE AtO FAULT APPLIED 1 THROUGH 5 (tOISE ONLY - e)
L _..
J M'C"F~ A' ]
304 f
TYPICAL "IE" DATA C
C g,l l
FOR SYSTEH M.C.F.A.
e ry
_ q tu pB l
CONTINUITY g
L
_J L
ItO!CATOR l
I DPU-B (NOT FAULTED)
(~~SPOS~ ~~] I &2 ra RPU-A (TRAIN 0)
A g
l (NONIE){V
- 1
<_____J SENSORS -
l l
l DISPLAY l l
(TRAIN A) cot CT q
g i
- e_______,
e e
l H.C.F.A.
l l
h f
[
l S
AN l COMPUTER i-8 l
DPU-A I (NOl; IE) l I (IRAIN-A) I L_____J L
J I: ISOLATOR D = DUFFER M.C.F.A. : MAXIMUM CREDIDLE FAULT APPLIED Figure A-1 Elementary Diagram of Scope of Noise / Fault Test Configuration Applicable to VOGTLE PSMS
- =
HI O
I FAULT TB (
LO O
=
g D7 FIG. C-1 SHORT TEST IN JECTION
AC FAULT CONNECTIONS LINE PROTECTOR h
\\
O E-
) E$p
>(
580V c
O b
/
\\
7.5 KVA 20 A O
3 CONNECTED g7 FOR RESPECTIVE FAULT VOLTAGE DC FAULT CONNECTIONS LINE PROTECTOR
\\
6 KW (20 A)
O VARIABLE C
250V POWER SUPPLY O
N j
C 20 A D7 FIG. C-2 FAULT APPLICATION SCHEMATIC