ML20245C654

Summarizes 890313 Meeting w/C-E to Discuss Results of Salem Project & Licensing of Future C-E Projects Re RTD Bypass Elimination.Agenda & Viewgraphs Encl

ML20245C654
Person / Time
Site:	Salem
Issue date:	04/12/1989
From:	Newberry S Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Thadani A Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 8904270314
Download: ML20245C654 (55)

Text

i o t.. ae _

nur ' -

, UNITED STATES ij l

[ g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION l t; j WASHINGTON D. C. 20555 l ]

4,*ss.*/ lh.

v c APR 121989 MEMORANDUM FOR: M . Assistant Director for Systems Division of Engineering & Systems Technology FROM: Scott Newberry, Chief Instrumentation & Control Systems Branch Division of Engineering & Systems Technology

SUMMARY

OF MEETING WITH COMBUSTION ENGINEERING (CE) ON RTD BYPASS ELIMINATION As the request of the C-E, a meeting was held on March 13, 1989 in Rockville,i Maryland. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the results of Sales project and licensing of future C-E projects with respect to RTD bypass elimination including setpoint methodology. The C-E's presentation outline is shown in Attachment I and a list of attendees is shown in Attachment 2.

The removal of the RTD bypass raises the technical concerns regarding RTD response time and setpoint analysis. Also, we expressed concerns regarding scoop mixing because the C-E scoop configuration is different from the Westinghouse scoop configuration.

Scott Newberry, Chief Instrumentation & Contr Systems Branch Division of Engineerin ,steras Technology ec w/ enclosures:

L. Shco H. Balukjian

Contact:

S. Rhow (SICB/ DEST), x20779 I

8904270314 090412 _

[8[

DR ADecK e50ecA7 L

? PU 4 ,l 4

• ~

y  !

A b brnent i AGENDA RTD BYPASS ELIMINATION MEETING MONDAY, MARCH 13, 1989 1:00 - 3:00

~

NRC OFFICES PURPOSE: DISCUSSION OF RESULTS OF SALEM PROJECT AND LICENSING OF FUTURE C-E PROJECTS 1:00 - 1:15 LICENSING ISSUES ,

o RESPONSE TIME o TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT o SETPOINT ANALYSIS 1:15 - 1:45 SALEM RESULTS o RTD RESPONSE TIME o ACCURACY - RTD/OVERALL o TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT / SCOOP MIXING o ALARA  !

~

1:45 - 2:15 LICENSING OF FUTURE C-E PROJECTS o TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT o ACCURACY COMPARISONS - BYPASS SYSTEM VS. NEW  !

SYSTEM o SETPOINT METHODOLOGY 2:15 - 3:00 DISCUSSION

O

( l

- -~~,,

, ~

/

~

i _

i ,

s.

/

v.mt X  % ,

~ ,

O,. _. .

-- ,, ,.s 888.fGWeEnf ,

b M  :

<=.6..

I asaa.e# S48 i ,

~

e Khtf60 nl =4 8 686 o ,

.nans0 0s 8 1 .

e898 f % aige

=0 t 6 6 P.m. ..a f.0a 5.f aos SEE E RTO SYPASS REMOVAL

- 4. ~ p_

I l

I v

GGG l

~

e.ACfte

.Sekant ,

W I g cote 6ss M

f AFTER RTO BYPASS REMOVAL

m,

. ': 7. , , , : .

gn . ..

l LL(INSING ISSUES l^

1' L

e. ' RESPONSE TIME e TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT e SETPOINT ANALYSIS

_ 1 6

,, _____m.__-__--------------------

x .

+

3

. e L '- f RESPONSE TIME i

e RESPONSE TIME nFGINS WHEN THE TEMPERATURE REACHES TRIP i

CONDITION AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE HOT AND COLD-LEG BYPASS LINES AND ENDS WHEN THE RODS ARE FREE TO FALL INTO THE CORE.

e RESPONSE TIME OF BYPASS LOOP SYSTEM WAS 6 SECONDS, e NO CHANGE WITH REPLACEMENT SYSTEM, STILL 6 SECONDS.

e TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION REQUIREMENT NORMALLY INCLUDES ONLY THAT PORTION OF THE 6 SECONDS WHICH CAN BE TESTED,

c. - 2 p<noet; i

l

.- SALEM UNITS 1 AND 2  !

OVERTEMPERATURE DELTA T RESPONSE TIME RESPONSE TIME WITH BYPASS LOOP SYSTEM li

'A B C D 0 0 0 0 4

2 SEC '- 3 SEC 1> r 1 SEC c w cl RESPONSE TIMii WITH NEW SYSTEM -

A B C D C 0 0 0 0.25 SEC 4,75 SEC 1 SEC A MEASURED PARAMETER AT HOT LEG SC0 OPS REACHES THE TRIP CONDITION B MEASURED PARAMETERS AT THE SENSORS REACH THE TRIP CONDITION C OUTPUTS OF THE RTDS REACH THE TRIP CONDITION D CONTROL RODS ARE FREE TO FALL INTO THE CORE

. b f

1 TEMPERATURE MEASUREMFjil s PROCESS MEASUREMENT ERROR - T HOT ONLY e HOT LEG STREAMING e HYDRAULIC BIAS (BYPASS SYSTEM) e SCOOP MIXING e INSTRUMENT (RTD) ERROR e ACCURACY e DRIFT e PROCESSING (RACK) ERROR '.

e ACCURACY e DRIFT l

l> i r

If/DRAJLiC BIAS IN L"/ Pass Innp 1

l

(

\ l

.\

/

WT = TOTAL FLOW TO MANIFOLD 0.32 WT i ,

0.31 WT 0.37 W T se W

..- A,,,

ESTIFATEOFFLOWFROMEaCHSCCCP TO RTD BYPASS LOOP

- ~ - - - - , . _ , _ _

e o

p YN)

-THERMowgLL THERMowgLL SOCKET WELogO INTO SCOOP i

'/ k N .

xqi~.x,T /-

x 6 L s

h (ROTATED 908 )

N F. xp ScoO, a y

' s f

\

5- \ _

N x - ,

s \

FLOW PATH l

)

l

.: f '

3 f

SETPOINT ANALYSIS e DESIGN BASIS RESPONSE TIME OF 6 SECONDS IS UNCHANGED e NEED TO COMPARE ACCURACIES OF NEW SYSTEM WITH OLD SYSTEM e TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT e RTD ACCURACY AND DRIFT e RACK ACCURACY AND DRIFT

~

t l

L ____ - - _ _ - - - -

..g

,

• e TIME RESPONSE e PERFORMED BY ANALYSIS AND MEASUREMENT SERVICES. 1 IC,- ' '

s IN-SITU TEST USING LOOP CURRENT' STEP RESPONSE.

• METHOD VERIFIES PROPER RTD TO THERM 0WELL CONTACT.

e BOTH ELEMENTS TESTED.

4 e CONTACT BETWEEN RTD AND I/W RELIES SOLELY ON TAPER FIT. -

~

e NO SOFT METAL OR " CONTACT FLUID" USED.

1

ljNIT 1 RESilLTS (IN SECONDS)

ELEMENT 1 ELEMENT 2  ;

T/H LOOP l. ,

3.5 3.0 3.4 3-9

. a I

3.7 3.9 T/H L0op 2 3.4 3.9' t- '

3.7 3.3 3.5 2.8 T/H LOOP 3 3.0 3.7 3.5 3.8 3.5 3.4 T/H LOOP 4 3.4* 3.9*

3.4 3.8 2.9 3.4 T/C LOOP 1 3.1 3.8 T/C LOOP-2 _

3.3 3.9 T/C LOOP 3 4.0 3.7 T/C LOOP 4 3.3 3.0

• AFTER REPLACEMENT.

1

4 REPLACED RTD 3 ':

e Op!GINAL TESTED AT 6.6/9.3 SECONDS.

e ONE-OF-A-KIND DUE TO MINIMUM OVERHEAD CLEARANCE ~.

e FOUND TO HAVE A BENT TIP AND A WRONG LENGTH N!PPLE ADAPTER.

e IHERM0WELL INSPECTED SATISFACTORILY.

e AS A PRECAUTIONARY MEASURE:

REM 0vED THERM 0WELL

- ' INSPECTED SCOOP 1 REPLACED WITH NEW THERM 0WELL/RTD t e TESTED SATISFACTORILY AT MODE 3.

l 1

i  !

l l

.,. j 1 -

. l I

l l UNIT 2 RESULTS (IN SECONDS) i

.i I

ELEMENT 1 ELEMENT 2 .

l T/H LOOP 1 1.7 2.2 2.7 2.7 i

2.3 2.6

.]

T/H LOOP 2 2.8 2.7 3.3 3.8 3.4 3.4 T/H LOOP 3 2.3 2.2 3.1 3.5 2.2 2.2 T/H LOOP 4 3.6 3.5 2.4 2.5 2.4 2.6 T/C LOOP 1 -

3.0 3.8 i T/C LOOP 2 2.9 3.8 T/C LOOP 3 2.7 3.0  ;

T/C LOOP 4 3.4 2.9

, J

SUMMARY

l RTD/ THERM 0WELL READILY MEET SPECIFIED TIME, 4 0 SECONDS l

ANALYZED TIME.CONTAINS CONSERVATISM i 101 LCSR ACCURACY

+ 101 DEGRADATION 0 5 SECONDS RACK / BREAKER On F

- .= . . <

. s.

ix

,g.

i RTD ACCURACY p

(!. s.

e CHECKED DUPING' POST INSTALLATION CROSS-CALIBRATION.

0 BOTH ELEMENTS CHECKED.

6- CROSS-CAL REST 1LTS INCLilDE M&TE's.

o COMPARED AGAINST AVERAGE FOR A LOOP.

M

{

y +,

p ;g.' .

1-9 g , UNIT 1 RESULTS 1,

e. 32 ELEMENTS. CHECKED.

1 e 27 ELEMENTS 5 0.2 F.

1i e 3 ELEMENTS.) 0.2 F, auT 5 0.3 F.

e 2 ELEMENTS > 0.30 F, sur 1 0.4 0 F.

W 4

. .? i

'f e G.y > ; ,.  : '

? ',

UNIT 2 RESULTS b

e 32 ELEMENTS CHECKED.

e' 29.wtTHIN i 0.25 F.

e 2 ELEMENTS > 0.25 0 F, suT 1 0.4 F.

.e- 1 ELEMENT + 0.54 0 F. '

4

REMAINING ISSUES ON RTD ACCURACY e DRIFT (GENERIC ISSUE).

e. UNIT 1 COMMITMENT REPLACE TWO RTD's <

FOR NEXT TWO OUTAGES o CONSIDERING RECALIBRATION OF ALL RTD's -

APRIL '89 OUTAGE.

1 l

i l

l

)

l '

SlMMARY RID'S ARE AS ACCURATE AS CAN BE REASONABLY EXPECTED OUTSIDE LABORATORY CONDITIONS.

T HOT ACCURACY IMPROVED BY 3 PARALLEL RTD'S AND MV/I'S.

,,,,j.

sa 'i T 'l ( O _. * , , ' .. . ' 74 RACK ACCURACY MAINTAINED EVEN WITH ADDITION OF I HOT AVERAGER.

BACK UP ELEMENT AT EACH LOCATION TO MAINTAIN SYSTEM'S HIGH ACCURACY. -

,______._,_____m .__i__

{

PROCESS MEASUREMENT ERROR MODIFICATION OF SCOOP RAISED CONCERN ON IMPACT TO I HOT MEASUREMENT: THEREFORE, SALEM

. REVIEWED POST-MODIFICATION I HOT AGAINST PRE-fl0DIFICAT10N I-HOT, AND ESTIMATED SCOOP BIAS (OF NEW SYSTEM) AGAINST HYDRAULIC BIAS (OF OLD SYSTEM) USING SALEM GENERATED DATA.

me 1

l _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _

THOT PRE AND POST MODIFICATION j

l e COMPARED POST-MOD CALOMETRIC AGAINST MOST RECENT BEFORE MODIFICATION.

e COMPARE 3 ENTHALPY RISE (DELTA H) RATHER THAN T-HOT.

T-HOT AFFECTED BY ROD POSITION.

DELTA I AFFECTED BY NON-LINEARITY IN Cp, e ADJUSTED DELTA H TO 100% POWER.

e MASS FLOW DIFFERENCES.

BYPASS FLOW ELIMINATED.

S/G FIRST ROW PLUGGED (UNIT 2 ONLY).

RCP FLUID DENSITY DIFFERENCES.

e ADJUSTED P0fi' MOD DELTA H TO THE UNIT'S PRE-MOD MASS FLOW.

UNIT 1 RESULTS e DELTA H PRE-MODIFICATION (100% POWER): 83.26 Bru/Ls e DELTA H POST-MODIFICATION (100% POWER): 83.09 btu /Ls l

e DECREASE, 0.17 btu /LB, EQu! VALENT TO -0.120 F CHANGE IN T-HOT.

e WELL WITHIN ACCURACY OF DATA.

l

)

i I

t

)

i e

LNIT2RESULTS e DELTA H PRE-MODIFICATION (100% POWER): 83.33 btu /La l

l e DELTA H POST-MODIFICATION (100% POWER): 84.02 btu /Ls e FLOW DECREASE DUE TO S/G FIR 5Y ROW PLUGGING: 0.75%

(WESTINGHOUSE INFORMATION).

1 e INCREASE, + 0.69 sTu/Ls, EQUIVALENT TO A + .48 F RISE IN I-HOT.

e CHANGE, 0.8%, WITHIN ACCURACY OF CALOMETRIC (2.2%).

LOOP T-HOT DEVIATIONS

• PRE-mod Post-M00 Lo0P 21 -1.70 F -1.61 F Loop 22 +1.74 F +1.96 F

.+0.150 F Lo0P 23 .390 F Loop 24 -0. 7.10 F + .03 F

' COMPARED TO AVERAGE OF THE FOUR LOOPS.

i l

l b E_- --_-__- - - )

4 SCOOP MIXING SCOOP MIXING RETAINED.

COMBUSTION ENGINEERING TESTS SHOWED BI AS TOWARDS TOP HOLE TEMPERATURE.

BIAS DEFINED AS:

TRTD = TMIX + BIAS (TTOP HOLE - IMIX)

BIAS / ERROR ON ORIGINAL SCOOP MIXING NOT KNOWN.

ANALYZED BIAS FOR MODIFIED SCOOP:

MEASURED BIAS POSITION ERROR , .

TEST UNCERTAINTIES ROUNDING OFF TOTAL. 25 4

BASED ON REQUIRED INSTALLATION TOLERANCES, POSITION ERROR CAN BE ELIMINATED.

ROUNDING OFF NUMBER ALSO ELIMINATED.

MEASURED BIAS BROKEN DOWN INTO TWO COMPONENTS.

• CE Proprietary information. Refer to CE Report No. CEN-361-P submitted under Docket No. 50-272/50-311 71

(, [ {

b q@

0 Q

h&b a-t f

l MEASilRED RIAS 1

i IHE h*--

Br AS IS BROKEN DOWN AS FOLLOWS:

CE SCOOP MonIFrCATION

• FLOW MALn!STRIBUTION IN RCS _ ,  ;

Ft.0W MALDISTRIRilTION COMPONENT IS BASED ON CONSERVATIVE ASSUMPTIONS ON RCS FLOW ACROSS FRONT OF SCOOP.

IF PRESENT, IT WOULD EXI ST BEFORE AND AFTER MODIFICATION. (

TO EvatuATE NET EFFECT OF MODIFICATION, THIS COMPONENT .

SHOULD BE OMITTED.

SConP RIAS DilE TO CE MODIFICATION REST F. STIMATE TEST UNCERTAINTIES

• TOTAL .

• CE Proprietary information. Please refer to CE Report No. CEN-361-P submitted under Docket No. 50-272/50-311 1

I -

i

i-

? .

STREAMING e SALEM UNIT 1 TOOK STREAMING DATA FOR 3 MONTHS.

e USED SPARE T-HOT RTD ELEMENTS.

e RESULTS TABULATED AND SKETCHED COR READINGS ON FOUR DATES.

H l

j

m" G -

2 8 N 825 47 19 42 6 8 I 821 109 505 468

/ D - .

2 6 A 455 449 540 483 0

/ E 090 009 000 090 6 6 N 656 665 666 656

• 899 758 970 95 A 564 765 271 431 I - '

L 262 112 422 2S0 E

D

- + - ++ - + - -

)

S G

N I

8 G D 8 N 364 207 425 550 5 A

/ I 302 541 056 136 7 E 8 D R .

1 A s65 440 740 572 2 R

/ E 090 000 000 090 0 S E S R 656 666 666 656 6 E' B

) HY M TA U D N F S

( UT P

• 574 572 632 26 NA O G A 644 027 865 881 I H O N I MT C I

L 262 212 211 240 S R E + - + ++ - ++ - + - + GR A D NO E E I F H R D( T I

A S ES S R* I T

PO X 8 G OH I 8 N 534 578 638 86 0 O- F

/ I 104 572 319 366 5 Cl F 2 D . .

S U 2 A 564 439 540 572 2 E S

/ E 090 009 000 090 0 LV 4 R 656 66S 661 656 6 AL UE .

DW R I T E V B I L M

• 873 411 446 850 DL U A 612 129 754 484 NA N T . I L 262 2L1 211 140 F P E + - + + + - ++- +- + EO O D i H O TG L N

SI E I D H A T EE 8 G UR S L I 8 N 944 520 555 961 1 AE

/ I 026 565 199 858 4 VG X 1 D -

A I 2 A 564 430 530 372 2 SR F

/ E 090 000 000 090 0 I E E 3 R 656 666 666 656 6 MV R IA P P .

0 123 123 123 123 )6 0 - - - - - - - - - - - - NV E 111 222 333 444 TA S (

i

y

.is; J

v .. y .

3

d. '

ID

. .hk_ 2R "

• pn lg 5 /

/

r ,

i Rf;k ,

\ -

/ '

i 4

,,e .

e,

\

GRADIEllTESTIMNE HIGHEST SCOOP READING - LO'IEST SCOOP READif1G

, DISTAllCE BETWEEN SCOOP CENTER j l ,

1 t .,. i

, SCOOP BIAS ESTIMATE J

GRADIENT ESTIMATED FOR EACH HOT LEG.

RESULTS l'

GRADIENT HIGH 'F Low *F ( F/ INCH)

' LOOP 1 +2.5 -7.4 55 LOOP 2 +2.1 -2.7 27 LOOP 3 +4.3 -21 35 LOOP 4 +2 4 -5.4 .

43 AV6 4* F/IN.

ITOP HOLE -~IMIX = DISTANCE X GRADIENT = 1*F TEMPERATURE BIAS FOR SCOOP:

3 BEST' ESTIMATE:

• _ _i x 1

• F = .*.

CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATE (* )x 1 F = [' * )

LOOP BIAS: MATHEMATICAL SUM OF THREC INDIVIDUAL SCOOP BIAS DIVIDED BY THREE.

CONSERVATIVELY ASSUME SCOOP BI ASES ARE ALL IN THE SAME DIRECTION: LOOP BIAS EQUALS SCOOP BIAS.

Baseo c3 CE Prc;rietary information. Please refer to CE Report No. CEN-361-P submitted under Docket Nos. 50-272/50-311 I

emm a

l HYDRAULIC BIAS CAUSED BY UNEQUAL EXTERNAL PIPING RUNS FROM SCOOPS TO COMMON JUNCTION POINT.

ELIMINATED WITH REMOVAL OF BYPASS PIPING.

TMANIFOLD FOR LOOP 1 OR 4

• 0 32 (SCOOP 1) + 0 31 (SCOOP 2) + 0.37 (SCOOP 3)

IMANIFOLD FOR LOOP 2 OR 3 = 1 0 32 (SCOOP 1) + 0 37 (SCOOP 2) + 0 31 (SCOOP 3)

T ACTUAL " $. COOP 1 + SCOOP 2 + SCOOP 3 3

BIAS: TMANIFOLD - TACTUAL ASSUMPTION: POST MOD, INDIVIDUAL SCOOP READINGS REFLECT PRE MOD SCOOP TEMPERATURES.

L 1 l l 1

(

l l

l  ;

llll I

, g T Om W

7

[

3 O

T WD OL LO FF I

LN AA TM O

T ,

=

7 W

)

Q X *  ; 1 4 P P OO OO L L

)

(

t W

2 l,@

3 M

I )

T E W A T

G A

1 3 G P, I E R H O T T F l

l O E

M T U

R B

O W I C

S I

1 3 G W E O L L F

I (

a D H

W 2

3 X i 3 2 PP OO OO L L

)

(

.,z _

l F W 7

o 3 T a'

=.

l v- . .

' HYDRAULIC BIAS RESULTS 1

l

! 3/21/88 READINGS:

{

T MAN. T AcT. DELTA LOOP 1 602 18 -

601 99 =

19 LOOP 2 602.95 -

602.89 =

06 LOOP 3 603 40 -

603 35 =

05 LOOP 4 601.53 -

601 42 =

11 6/8/88 READINGS: "

T MAN. T ACT. DELTA LOOP 1 601 99 -

601.75 =

24 LOOP 2 602 80 -

602.70 =

10 LOOP 3 603.43 -

603.37 =

06 LOOP 4 602 40 -

602 28 =

12 ON AN AVERAGE, THE HYDRAULIC BI AS WAS +012*F.

HIGHEST READING 0 24*F.

e

SUMMARY

OF PROCESS MEASUREMENT ERROR PLANT DATA SHOWS NO NOTICEABLE CHANGE PRE-MOD TO POST-MOD.

SALEM ESTIMATES OF SCOOP BI AS '( ADDED) AND HYDRAULIC BI AS (ELIMINATED): COMPARABLE [.* ) F VS 12*F.

ESTIMATED SCOOP BIAS BASED ON INTERPOLATION AND EXTRAPOLATION OF GRADIENTS, BUT:

- ASSUMES ' CONSERVATIVE' BIAS' FACTOR.

- TAKES NO CREDIT FOR SCOOP BI ASES CANCELING EACH OTHER.

- USED GRADIENT FROM HIGHEST TO LOWEST SCOOP.

• Based on CE Proprietary information. Please refer to CE Report No. CEN-361-P submittea under Docket Nos. 50-272/50-311 t'

_.A- a-._--_aa_-- --- - - - . _

. + . -

ALARA ,

UNIT 1 DONE FIRST

- 122 MAN REM NO MAJOR SETBACKS MANY SMALL ONES

- FUEL FLEAS PRESENT UNIT 2 DONE 1 YEAR LATER i

- 52 MAN REM l

- LESSONS LEARNED APPLIED NO SURPRISES OR SETBACKS FUEL FLEAS PRESENT DEMOLITION KEPT SIMPLE .

PORTA-BANDS NO AIRBORNE PROBLEMS DOSE FIELDS IN AREA REDUCTIONS MET EXPECTATIONS

- R E DUC ED IN HALF 4

i L__m-_m______-_ _ ___ _ - _ _

NE 0 0 0 0 0 OS 8 1 6 5 I O TD - - - -

A CA 0 O 0 5 I E 4 R 2 3 FR I A .

D OL MA

- R TE SN OE PG E

C N

A M r R

O h 5 F /

E r T R a N P E S M N E H O T

_ C I A A T R 0 0 0 0 T C E 6 8 5 7 T U 1 1 1 1 A D NS E OO - - - -

R I D T 0 0 0 0 E AA 5 8 5 4 S CE O I R D FA I

DL OA MR

- E EN RE PG L

E G t G G G

' / / / /

4 S S S S 0 3 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1

8 $

A 9 8 E o R o o o t t t

. A t N P P P P O K C C L C C

- I A R R R R T

A W 3 2 4 C T l 1 1 1 O A i 8 $ 8 L C t

I h T /

A r cam I E 2

2

'0 3

S 2

0 2

FRS I AE D T - - - -

OLA MAR 0 6 6 6

- R 1 1 TEE SNS OEO PGD E

C N

A N

R N r O O h F I /

I R T r I E AAa 0 0 0 0 I P CE 2 0 8 0 I RS 1 1 1 E N FAE L O I T - - - -

B I DLA A T OAR 0 0 0 5 T C MR 5 5 3 2 U - EE D ENS E REO R PGD E

S O

D l

e

' G G G G 4 / / / /

0 S S S S 1

1 1 2 4 2 2 2 2 A 8 8 8 8 E

R o o o o A t t t t N

O K P P P P I L C C C C T A R R R R .

A W C T 1 3 2 4 O A 2 2 2 2 L C 8 8 $ 8

e s_ :? , : f, e s *

'. I

}

LICENSING 0F FUTURE CE PROJECTS e TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENTS

-e ACCURACY COMPARISONS' s SETPOINT METHODOLOGY

.i i

l

. 1 4

1 i

l h _ _ _ _ _ _ u_ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ .- _ _ _ _

'.d' '4- a 4

TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT t

e CE DESIGN RETAINS HOT LEG. FLOW SAMPLING WHICH IS USED IN BYPASS LOOP SYSTEM T0 ACCOUNT FOR FLOW STREAMING e RETENTION OF FIFTEEN POINT FLOW SAMPLING BETTER ACCOMMODATES CHANGES IN HOT LEG TEMPERATURE PROFILE THAN THREE POINT (ONE IN EACH SC0OP) MEASUREMENT ,

een l

L-.-~____.---_-

.. . l PROCESS MEASUREMENT ACCURACY l

e ACCURACY OF RTD'S IN REPLACEMENT SYSTEM IS BETTER THAN OR EQUAL _TO ANY. CURRENT BYPASS LOOP SYSTEM RTDS e HAVING 3 PARALLEL PATH RTD'S AND LOW VOLTAGE AMPLIFIERS REDUCES THE T-H0T RTD ERROR OF THESE COMPONENTS BY 1//3 COMPARED TO THE SINGLE RTD AND LOW VOLTAGE AMPLIFIER IN THE !

BYPASS LOOP SYSTEM e ELIMINATION OF BYPASS LOOP ELIMINATES HYDRAULIC BIAS e ERROR DUE TO SCOOP BIAS IS COMPARABLE TO ERROR DUE TO HYDRAULIC BIAS IN BYPASS LOOP BASED ON SALEM SC0OP -

TEMPERATURE DATA e COMPARISON OF HOT LEG TEMPERATURES BEFORE AND AFTER MODIFICATION AT SALEM UNITS 1 AND 2 SHOW GOOD AGREEMENT P

l

L. t . ,

j I

L 4

ERROR COMPARISON - SALEM UNIT 1 L

e SC0OP BIAS ERROR ,[OF (ADDED)

ASSUMPTIONS: 1. ALL 3 SCOOP BIASES ARE ASSUMED TO BE.IN THE SAME DIRECTION WHICH IS WORST CASE.

2. . GRADIENT BASED ON SALEM TEMPERATURE DATA

3. BEST ESTIMATE IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS

[ *', 0F e 0 HYDRAULIC BIAS ERROR .12 F (ELIMINATED)

ASSUMPTIONS: 1. FLOWS FROM EACH SC0OP CALCULATED FROM PIPING CONFIGURATION

2. POST MOD SCOOP TEMPERATURE DATA USED TO i EVALUATE PRE MOD HYDRAULIC BIAS e 0 ERROR REDUCTION FROM 3 PARALLEL RTDs .17 F (REDUCTION)'

ASSUMPTIONS: 0 WEED RTD ACCURACY OF 0.4 F MULTIPLIED BY 1//f TO OBTAIN' ERROR FOR 3 PARALLEL RTDs.

REDUCTION IS LARGER IF BYPASS RTD ERROR IS  !

LARGER. ALSO, PSE&G USED LARGER ERROR FOR WEED RTD IN SALEM SETPOINT ANALYSIS.

e ERROR REDUCTION FROM 3 PARALLEL MV/I's WOULD FURTHER REDUCE ERROR e NET RESULT llSING CONSERVATIVE ESTIMATES IS LOWER ERROR IN NEW SYSTEM.

Based on CE Proprietary information. Refer to CE Report No. CEN-361-P submitted under Docket Nos. 50-272/50-311

l TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT ACCURACIES

. J IMPACT WITH CE  !

SOURCE OF ERROR REPLACEMENT SYSTEM HOT LEG e RTD ACCURACY e EQUAL OR BETTER l

e PROCESS MEASUREMENT e SC0OP BIAS ERROR INTRODUCED IS COMPARABLE TO l

HYDRAULIC BIAS ERROR ELIMINATED e RACK ERROR e THREE PARALLEL RTDS AND MV/I'S REDUCE THE ERROR COMPARED TO SINGLE RTD AND MV/I e ADDED SUMMATOR HAS NO IMPACT COLD LEG e RTD ACCURACY e EQUAL OR BETTER e PROCESS MEASUREMENT e NOT AFFECTED t

e RACK ERROR e NO CHANGE IN ELECTRONICS

4 . ,

i m-SETPOINT METHODOLOGY .

1 e IF CE CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT NEW SYSTEM IS MORE ACCURATE THAN OLD SYSTEM.THEN EXISTING SETPOINT ANALYSIS REMAINS B0UNDING e PSE8G WAS REQUIRED TO HAVE SETPOINT ANALYSIS REDONE DUE TO l CHANGE IN WESTINGHOUSE METHODOLOGY SINCE LAST ANALYSIS i

M

u.y L# ,

~

L: .

SETPOINT METHODOLOGY DILEMMA 1

e POTENTIAL SOLUTIONS e OPTION 1: COMBUSTION ENGINEERING GENERATES NEW SETPOINT ANALYSIS e OPTION 2: UTILITY GENERATES OWN TEMPERATURE SET POINT e OPTION 3: WESTINGHOUSE GENERATES NEW'SETPOINT STUDY e OPTION 4: CE REPORT DEMONSTRATES EXISTING SETPOINT

• ANALYSIS BOUNDING i

CE GENERATE SETPOINT-ANALYSIS e OPTION 1: COMBUSTION ENGINEERING WOULD GENERATE:A NEW SETPOINT STUDY FOR TEMPERATURE RELATED CHANNELS e WOULD RESULT IN " MIXED BAG" SINCE CE WOULD NOT BE RED 0 LNG ENTIRE ANALYSIS e COULD RESULT IN SAME PROBLEMS LATER ON BUT IN REVERSE (I.E. WESTINGHOUSE DOING WORK ON SYSTEM COVERED BY CE ANALYSIS) e -PRACTICAL CONSIDERATIONS e MAJOR FINANCIAL COMMITMENT FOR CE e SIGNIFICANT RISK FOR UTILITY e MAJOR REVIEW EFFORT FOR NRC l

l l.

I t.'

., e .

$ , +

UTILITY GENERATES SETPOINT ANALYSIS

~

e OPTION 2: UTILITY COULD GENERATE SETPOINT STUDY FOR TEMPERATURE RELATED CHANNELS

e. WOULD A3AIN RESULT IN " MIXED' BAG" UNLESS UTILITY CONTROLLED ENTIRE SETPOINT ANALYSIS e- MOST UTILITIES HAVE RELIED ON NSSS EXPERTISE IN THIS AREA -

l l

_ _ _ - - - - - _ _ - - )

, j

.. e-4 1

u: -

1 I

WESTINGHOUSE GENERATES NEW SETPOINT STUDY q e OPTION 3: WESTINGHOUSE WOULD GENERATE A NEW SETPOINT STUDY FOR TEMPERATURE RELATED CHANNELS e MAINTAINS STANDARD PRODUCT e RECENT EXPERIENCE INDICATED PRICE AND SCHEDULE QUOTED FOR WESTINGHOUSE LICENSING SUPPORT OF CE PROJECT WERE-UNACCEPTABLE TO UTILITY .

e CE FORCED OUT OF RTD BYPASS BUSINESS

. j

..4

. :; / , t CE REPORT DOCUMENTS IMPROVED ACCURACY e OPTION 4: CE WOULD PROVIDE A REPORT DEMONSTRATING IMPROVED T-H0T ACCUl.ACY e EXISTING SETPOINT ANALYSIS REMAINS B0UNDING e UTILITY AND NRC CAN DOCUMENT NO USQ e UTILITY CAN UPDATE SETPOINT STUDY AT CONVENIENT TIME AND/0R IN CONJUNCTION WITH FUTURE '. ,

WESTINGHOUSE WORK U

t

J' : .

4 i a

SUMMARY

-SETPOINTMjTHODOLOGY e OPTION 1: CE GENERATE SETPOINT STl!DY.

e NOT PRACTICAL, UNDESIRABLE CONSEQUENCES e OPTION 2: UTILITY GENERATE SETPOINT STUDY e . PRACTICAL IF UTILITY CURRENTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR SETPOINT ANALYSIS,.0THERWISE PROBLEMS SIMILAR TO OPTION 1 e OPTION 3: WESTINGHOUSE GENERATE SETPOINT STUDY e MAINTAINS STANDARD PRODUCT BUT EFFECTIVELY FORCES CE OUT OF RTD BYPASS ELIMINATION BUSINESS -

-e OPTION 4: CE-DOCUMENT ACCURACY, METHODOLOGY UPDATE DEFERRED e COMPETITION RETAINED, PLANT SAFETY DOCUMENTED

_________- - -_ - _ - - _ _ --_ - _ - U

~

, .: , e ~

{BENEFITSOFCEPRESENCEINRTDBYPASSBUSINESS x,

e- CE. DESIGN PROVIDES SOME ADVANTAGES OVER WESTINGHOUSE DESIGN e SCOOP MIXING RETAINED - BETTER ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE CHANGES'IN FLOW STREAMING OVER TIME e FSAR DESIGN BASIS RESPONSE TIME UNCHANGED - RESPONSE TIME FOR WESTINGHOUSE MODIFICATION AT MILLSTONE 3

' CHANGED FROM 6 SECONDS TO 7 SECONDS e CE'S IDEAS AND COMPETITIVE POSITION ON THE MODIFICATION HAVE HAD POSITIVE BENEFITS TO UTILITIES e REDUCED DRAIN DOWN TIME e BETTER RESPONSE TIME

e. LOWER PRICE e SIMPLER SYSTEM DESIGN

_ i

, c., J . "

F LICENSING OF FUTURE CE RTD PROJECTS CE PROPOSES THE FOLLOWING LICENSING ACTIVITY FOR FUTURE CE RTD PROJECTS e . BASED ON SALEM TEMPERATURE PROFILE DATA CE WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT HYDRAULIC BIAS IN BYPASS LOOP IS COMPARABLE TO SCOOP BIAS IN REPLACEMENT SYSTEM.

e CE WILL DEMONSTRATE THAT ACCURACIES OF REPLACEMENT SYSTEM ARE IMPROVED COMPARED TO BYPASS SYSTEM. EXISTING SETPOINT ANALYSIS THEREFORE REMAINS B0UNDING -

e UTILITY CAN HAVE SETPOINT ANALYSIS UPDATED AT CONVENIENT TIME, IF REQUIRED, BUT NOT AS A CONDITION FOR LICENSE CHANGE APPROVAL OF RTD BYPASS ELIMINATION e IF ALL THE AB0VE CONDITIONS CAN BE MET THEN WESTINGHOUSE l INVOLVEMENT NOT REQUIRED FOR LICENSING CE RTD BYPASS ELIMINATION PROJECT f

i l

._.i_______-_____

v

-c. .'d$~ ~,

r- Attachment 2 2;

.[ ATTENDEES SALEM RTD BYPASS M00. RESULTS 3/13/89 John J. Foy (Joe) CE Regional Service Manager  !

Robert B. Swartzwelder PSE &G Licensing j Joginder S. Ahluwalia

' ~

C-E I & CE John T. McGarry CE Mech.

' Harold N. Trenka PSE&G Project Management Charles- B. Brinkman C-E Mgr. Washington Nuclear s Operations .

Robert P. Letendre C-E T&H James Stone NRR PD 1-2 Jerry Mauck NRR I&C Sang Rhow NRR I&C Mike McCoy NRR SRXB a

l

)