ML20059J209
| ML20059J209 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Byron  |
| Issue date: | 01/21/1994 |
| From: | COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20059J199 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 9401310396 | |
| Download: ML20059J209 (65) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. - . - - .
.s: ,
c
?
REACTOR PRIMARY CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST i BYRON NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT TWO ; SEI'TEMBER 9-10, 1993 , L b L 9401310396 9403 ,- [ fDR ADOCK O M 455 I I PDR "* (9784 r/112993 )
r i i
- TABLE OF CONTENTS i L
i TABLE AND FIGURES INDEX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 !
- 1. ABSTRACT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
- 2. TEST PREPARATIONS i F
2.1 Type A Test Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.2 Pre-Test Containment Structural Examination . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3 Type A Test Instrumentation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2.3.1 Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3.2 Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 r 2.3.3 Vapor Pressure . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 l 2.3.4 Flow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.4 Type A Test Data Processing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 f 2.5 Type A Test Sub Volume Determination . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.6 ILRT Plant Equipment Lineup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 2.7 Type A Test Pressurization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 i
- 3. TEST METHOD 3.1 Statistical Analysis Technigme . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.2 Supplemental Verification Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 3.3 Instrument Error Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
- 4. SEOUENCE OF EVP,NTS 4.1 Test Preparation Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 l ,
4.2 Test Pressurization and Stabilization Chronology . . . . . . . 20 ; 4.3 Measured Leak Rate Phase Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 t i 4.4 Induced Leakage Rate Test Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 , i i 4.5 Depressurization Phase Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 4.6 Post ILRT Walkdown and Restoration . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22 (9784 z /112993) 1
- f.
- TABLE OF CONTENTS- .;
(CONTINUEp1
- 5. TYPE A TEST DATA 5.1 Temperature Stabilization Phase Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 5.2 Measured Leak Rate Phase Data . . . . . . . . . . , . . . . 23-5.3 Induced Leakage Phase Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
- 6. TYPE A TEST CORRECTIONS . ... . . . . . , . . . . . . . . , . 36 '!
- 7. INTERPRETATION OF TEST RESULTS ;
7.1 Measured Leak Rate Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7.2 Induced Leakage Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 7.3 Comparison To Previous Tests . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 37 7.4 Evaluation of Instrument Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 -j APPENDIX A STATISTICAL ANALYSIS METHODS . . . . . . . . . . . .
.-38 APPENDIX B QLLCULATION OF INSTRUMENT SELECTION GUIDE . . . . . . 44 APPENDIX C MEASURED LEAK TEST DATA . . . . . . . , . . . . . . t9 APPENDIX D INDUCED LEAKAGE TEST DATA . . . . . . . . . . . 58' APPENDIX E LLRT RESULTS .......... . . . . . . . . . . 63 l
(9784 z /112993) 2
. - n. . - T_ ABLES AND FIGURES INDEX
,i I
TABLE 1 Instrument Specifications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 TABLE 2 Ten 1perature Sensor Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 i TABLE 3 Humidity Sensor Assignments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 ! TABLE 4 BN-TOP-1 Temperature Stabilization Criteria . . . . . . . . . . 24 TABLE 5 Mbss Point Temperature Stabilization Criteria . . . . . . . 25 FIGURE 1 Test Equipment Placement, Upper Subvolumes 1-5 . . . . . . . . 11-FIGURE 2 Test Equipment Placement, Lower Subvolumes 6 & 17 . . . . . . . 12 FIGURE 3 Test Equipment Placement, Lower Subvolumes 8 & 9 . . . . . . 13 9 FIGURE 4 Test Equipment Description, Smart Sensor System Layout . . 14 l FIGURE 5 Test Equipment Description, Penetration I-3 Test Equip. Detail. 15 FIGURE 6 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Calculated . . . . . . . . 26 FIGURE 7 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Mass . . . . . . . . . . . 27 , FIGURE 8 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph Of Dry Air Pressure . . . . 28 FIGURE 9 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Volume . . . . . . . . . . 29: Weighted Average Containment Dew Point FIGURE 10 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Volume . . . . . . . . . . 30 . Weighted Average Containment Temperature 1 FIGURE 11 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Calculated . . . . . . . 31 Leak Rate j FIGURE 12 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Mass . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 FIGURE 13 Induced Leakage Average Phase - Graph of Volume . . . . . . . . 33 Weighted Average Containment Temperature FIGURE 14 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Volume . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 : Weighted Average Containment Dew Point i FIGURE 15 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Dry Air Pressure . . . . . 35 i l l (9784 x/112993) j
i i it . e-SECTION 1 - ABSTRACT-C . t This. report presents the test method and results of the Primary , Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test (ILRT) performed on September 9 10, 1993 at Byron NucleLr power-Station Unit.2. The. Local Leak Rate Tests required to determine the final results were performed frem September 10 through October 18, 1993. Also included in this repm , is a [ summary analysis of all periodic Type B and Type. C Local Leakage nr.te Tests (LLRT) that.were performed. This report fulfills the reporting requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J (V.B.3). 'i The Type A test was performed at the beginning of the refueling outage. ; to test the containment'in an 'As Found' condition, without any repairs or ; adjustments. l i The test was performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50 Appendix J, and the Byron Station Technical Specifications. The test method used was the BN TOP-1 Method in accordance with all requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix J. , Using the BN-TOP-1 method, the total primary containment leak rate was calculated to be within the allowable leak rate'of 0.075 wt % / day (0.75L Ia
- The 'As Found'/'As Left' leakage rate was calculated to be 0.03767 wt %/ day at j a test pressure greater than 44.4.psig (P a) . The associated 95% upper ;
confidence limit (UCL) was 0.06666 wt %/ day. ; The supplemental induced leakage test result was measured at-0.1474 wt %/ day. This value compares with the sum of,the measured 3eak rate phase result (0.03767 wt %/ day) and the induced leak of 7.74 SCFM ' (0.1003 wt %/ day). The composite leak rate of 0.1104 wt't/ day lies withic the allowable tolerance band of 0.1380 wt %/ day 1 0.025 wt %/ day. After the ILRT, during the unit's refueling outage, LLRT's were performed. The results from several of these tests are added to the final ILRT total as a corrective leakrate. These are'added for systems that are in service isolated or not vented during the ILRT (SEE SECTION 6 - TYPE ' A' TEST CORRECTIONS). Corrections to the measured leakrate for level changes in ; vessels or sumps is also accounted for in section 6. The 'As Found' minimum ! path leakage for all corrections was 0.00003 wt %/ day. Adding this leakara to l the ILRT 95% UCL yields a total of 0.06669 wt t/ day which is less than 0.075 wt %/ day. I s a i i l I i (9784 e/112993 ) -b !
t ! i
- c. .
EECTION 2'-' TEST PREPARATIONS' 2.1 Tvoe A Test Procedure .' i t The ILRT was performed in accordance with Byron Procedure 2BVS 6.1.2.a-1, Revision 6. The Computer code used for calculations during the ILRT was the Duke ~ f Power ILRT Program Version 1.75. The test software is controlled under QP 3-54 requirements for quality related software. .! i 2.2 Pre-Test Containment Structural Examination Prior to the containment pressurization, a visual examination of all -{ accessible interior and exterior surfaces was performed per Byron Surveillance' j 2BVS 6.1.6.3-1. The results of this inspection were compared to the findings of the Pre-operational Structural Integrity Test. No degradation of the i containment structure since the previous inspection was noted. q 2.3 Tyne A Test Instrumentation i t Thirty one temperature sensors, nine humidity sensors, two absolute' . pressure gauges and a repeater / convertor rack connected to a standard personal computer were the main instrumentation used in the ILRT. Additional t
~
instrumentation used included ambient pressure and temperature gauges, and a i flowmeter used to measure the induced. leakage during the supplemental . verification test. All instrumentation used was calibrated using. standards traceable to the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). Table 1 shows the specifications for the instrumentation utilized in the ILRT. Table 2 and 3 lists the physical locations of the temperature and ! humidity sensors within the primary containment. Figure 1, 2 and 3 are idealized views of the containment used to calculate the primary containment free air subvolumes. Instrumentation calibrations were performed using NBS h* traceable standards. Byron Station ILRT procedure 2BVS6.1.2.a-1 was used to- l perform the required In-Situ's prior to-testing. i A Graftel, Inc., Smart Sensor Instrumentation System was used in the performance of this test as shown in Figure 4. The Smart Sensors allow for the measurement of temperatures and relative humidity during an ILRT, without ; the aid of a data acquisition system. Each sensor contains its own CPU, memory, signal conditioning, and RS-485 bus interface. All calibration i constants are contained in each sensors nonvolatile memory. [ The Graftel System allows up to 124 sensors to be connected to a communications port at the same time. For this test, 42 sensors were connected. Each sensor responds only to its own unique address. Cable runs ; nmy be up to 10,000 feet long. For this test cables were between 3 and 250 feet long. Since the output of each sensor is a digital signal, cable lengths i have absolutely no effect upon calibration. The sensors were connected in 4 strings with each string containing both temperature and RH Sensors. Although the sensors are physically connected in i series, they are electrically connected in parallel. This ensures that the failure of any one sensor will not affect the others. The strings are ! connected to a standard commt'nications port of an IBM compatible PC.
;i (9784 r /112993 ) !
l
. . _ _ . , , - , _ , . . m._.~ .~~ , ,, ._--- r_ .
/
2.3.1- Tampara tur.2, The location of the 31 temperature sensors was chosen to avoid conflict with local temperature variations and thermal influence from metal structures. A temperature survey of the containment was pr0viously performed to verify ! that the sensor locations were representative of average subvolume conditions. _; Graftel, Inc., Model 9202 temperature sensors were used to provide the i containment temperatures. The model 9202 sensor is designed for the measurement of dry bulb temperatures during an ILRT. The. sensors utilize j super-stable precision thermistors. The thermistors are glass hermetic encapsulated and'aubjected to 100% individual in-process' screening. ' Each thermistor is mated to the signal conditioning circuitry,.A/D converter, CPU, EEPROMs and RS-485 network interface. An isolation circuit is [ used to isolate each sensor from the network. This provides extra assurance- l that the failure of any one sensor will not result in the failure of the entire string. I 2.3.2 Pressure i
~
Two Paroscientific Series 1000 digiquartz Intelligent Transmitters were utilized to measure total containment pressure. Each transmitter was . calibrated from 0 to 100 PSIA. Primary containment pressure was sensed by the ' pressure gauges in parallel through a penetration I-3, refer to Figure 5. Each instrument consists of a standard Paroscientific pressure transducer and a digital interface board in an integral package. The digital j board has a microprocessor-controlled counter and RS-232, port. The j microprocessor operating program is stored in permanent memory (EPROM) . User l controllable parameters are stored in user writable memory. (EEPROM) . The user .l interacts with the transmitter via the two-way RS-232 interface.' ! The microprocessor monitors incoming commands from the computer. When a ; sampling command is received, the microprocessor selects the appropriate ; frequency signal source and makes a period measurement 'using a 124.5 MHz ' timebase counter. The counter integration time is user selectable. Some I commands require measurements of both temperature and pressure signals. In' l that case, the temperature period is measured first, followed by the pressure .1 period. When the period measurement is completed, the microprocessor makes the appropriate calculations and loads the data onto the RS-232 bus. 2.3.3 Vanor Pressura Nine relative humidity sensors were used to determine the partial , pressure due to water vapor in the containment. The humidity sensors used were Graftel, Inc. Model 9203 Relative Humidity Sensors. These sensors I utilize a temperature compensated bulk polymer chip. They have an equivalent accuracy of 2*F dew temperature, and are unaffected by most commonly present .! chemical vapors. , Each RH sensor is mated to the signal conditioning circuitry, A/D ; converter, CPU, EEPROMs and RS-485 network interface. An RS-485 isolation ! circuit is used to isolate each sensor from the network. This provides extra ; assurance that the failure of any one sensor will not result in the failure of : the entire string. ! i f (9784s/112993) -G
1 6 '* ' l 2.3.4 E}sw { A rotameter flowmeter, Fischer-Porter 0-10 SCFM was'used for the flow measurement during the induced leakage phase of the ILRT. q Plant personnel continuously monitored the flow'during the induced e leakage phase and corrected any minor deviations from the induced flow rate of approximately La by adjusting a needle valve on the flowmet'er inlet. The flow meter outlet was unrestricted and vented to the atmosphere. l 2.4 Tvoe'A Test Data Processino i i Containment parameters were acquired by the PC every 10 minutes. .This' included time, Julian date, temperature sensor readings, humidity sensor readings, and absolute pressure sensor readings. The data transfer-and' ! calculations were monitored by plant personnel. Leakage rates, pressures, . temperatures, and calculation summaries were plotted in both tabular and graphic forms at regular intervals. This facilitated the identification and ( real time analysis of trends as they developed. 2.5 Tvoe A Test Subvolume Determination The containment has been divided into 9 discrete subvolumes. Subvolume ' demarcation, size and weighing factors are indicated on Figure 1 through 3. l The subvolume partitioning scheme was the same as the previous ILRT performed ; during Refuel Outage B2R02 in 1990. The subvolume scheme is devised to' ; categorize locations of similar temperature. Figures 1 through 3 also show sensor placement, in each of'the subvolumes. The Graftel Instrument System treats each Instrument'as part of ' its own subvolume. Each instrument has an associated volume fraction. l Therefore the nine subvolumes are not needed for the Duke Power ILRT Program, . l but facilitate te & execution and containment location identification. ! 1 2.6 ILRT Plant Eaufoment Lineun The valve and equipment lineups were detailed and specific, i.e. ! component by component with individual signoffs. This ensured containment integrity conditions as close as possible to those which would exist after a design basis Loss of Coolant Acetdent (LOCA) It also assured penetrations were properly drained and vented, i 2.7 7Yne A Tegt Pressurization i To pressurize containment to full test pressure, a system of ten diesel ' driven, oil free compressors (supplying approximately 15,000 CFM)', ten ; aftercoolers and ten air dryers were used. The compressors were located outside on the west side of the Fuel Handling Building, Pressurization'was accomplished through a six inch header which penetrates containment'at } penetration P-4. Once containment was pressurized, the pressurization header 2 was isolated, and the compressors secured. , (9784 z/112993) l
TABLE 1 INSTRUMENT SPECIFICATIONS INSTRUMENT MMFJFACTURER MODEL NO. ID NO. RANGE ACCURACY REPEATABILITY Precision Pressure 033059DG Gauges Paroscientific 760-100-A 033060DG 0-100 PSIA .01%F.S. SEE TABLE Thermistors (30) Graftel 9202 2 32-158'F 0.5'F 10.01*F SEE 2*F (Dew TABLE Temperature Humidity Sensors Graftel 9203 3 3 0 -1001r RH Equivalent i .11r RH Fischer Flowmeter & Porter 104321Z 0-10 5CFM 1 sefm 7 (9784 z/112993) ..~ _g-> +-w e gy+, m ,e m-- w y- yws-- iw --_ ~4 -e -_a'---- -- .
i 6
- TADLE 3 TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION TEMPERATURE SENSOR LOCATION / ASSIGNMENT H
SUBVOLUME PLACEMENT TEST EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION SENSOR VOLUME SENSOR SENSOR LOCATION FRACTION NUMBER ADDRESS TS1 0.0504 49 1 TS2 0.0504 50 2 TS3 0.0504 51 3 TS4 0.0568 52 4 TSS 0.0568 53 5 TS6 0.0567 54 6 TS7 0.0561 55 7 t TS8 0.0561 56 8 TS9 0.056 57 9 + TS10 0.0545 65 A TS11 0.0545 66 B TS12 0.0544 67 C i TS13 0.0558 68 D TS14 0.0558 69 E s TS15 0.0558 70 F TS16 0.014 71 G TS17 0.014 72 H TS1B 0.014 73 I , TS19 0.014 74 J TS20 0.011 75 K TS21 0.0109 76 L $ TS22 0.0109 77 M l TS23 0.0109 78 N TS24 0.0087 83 S TS25 0.0088 80 P TS26 0.0087 81 Q TS27- 0.0088 82 R 7 TS28 0.0112 84 T TS29 0.0112 79 0 ' TS30 0.0112 85 U TS31 0.0112 86 V 1 (97842/112993) 9
TABLE 3 TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION TEMPERATURE SENSOR' LOCATION /ASSIG10(ENT SUBVOLUME PLACEMENT TEST EQUIPMENT INSTALLATION SENSOR VOLUME SENSOR SENSOR. LOCATION FRACTION NUMBER ADDRESS HS1 0.1512 97 a HS2 0.1703 98 b HS3 0.1682 99 c' HS4 0.1634 100 d HS5 0.1674 101 e HS6 0.056 106 i . HS7 0.0437 103 g HS8 0.035 104 h HS9 0.0448 105 1 3
-h l
f 4 4 (9784 z/112993 ) 1
TEST EQUIPMENT PLACEMENT UPPER SUBVOLUMES Figure 1 E s 596' C PN Subvolune #1
' V 417880 cubic feet l'
- h) 3' 4)N 15.12%
N i
~
- O >
a v 4 y cy l l l 555.281'
,., l l Subvolune #2 470388 cubic feet (p ?" h 17.03 %
524.724' l l Subvolune #3 l h
^ A l
.464803 cubic feet (m Qw) 16.82 %
Gus
! 494,333' l l
- Subvolune #4 l ,'
{ 451546 cubic f eet p$ l l h l 16.34% 465' Subvolune #5
] l A
l 462583 cubic f eet hm . . . . _ .==== Y -:e:. 1n m,- 16.7 4% 426' HUMIDIT Y SENSOP HS NDE NG WDW N ME MW
~ " " " " " " " "
O "r'"^'u"' S'":o* 's (~) m CEILING PULLEY I upsbvol hN/93 (97 84 z/112993) ,yy,
TEST EQUIPMENT PLACEMENT LOWER SUBVOLUMES Figure 2 ELEVATION 398.5' TO 426' R32
,/
/7 ,7p n 9,i S/G S/G 2C 2B TOP VIEW v R27 '
fs) SUBVOLUME 7 - R38 (H56
~
S/G S/G 2IJ 2A
\. U-s
\
\
'N
\ Q ,e SUBVOLUME 6 R24'
/
\'k -
SUBVOLUME 6: 154567 cubic feet 5.60 */. SUBVOLUME 7: 123669 cubic f eet 4,48% TEMPERATURE $EPCDP T0 r f lHJHlMTVODCOR HO t orsbyt? rev 3 7/7/93 (9784z/112993) 12
TEST EQUIPMENT PLACEMENT LOWER SUBVOLUMES Figure 3 ELEVATION 377' TO 398.5' R32 f "=> 9 x 7 S/G S/G 2C 2B
, TSP 6 R24 / ;;,g se4 SUBVOLUME 9 -
Tsee R38 m .A sse O
\ 'N @
\'N SUBVOLUME 8 N'N 9 R42 i
SUBVOLUME 8: 120846 cubic feet
- 4. 3 7'/.
SUBVOLUME 9- gS8p cubic feet , towece4Tunt stw:OR TS w: l l stm:triv scuss 53VL9RV1 REV1 7/7/93 (9784 z /112993 ) -13
l j l TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION SMART SENSOR SYSTEM LAYOUT j Figure 4 i 1
)
/l
/
/' I
/ m d
-/ / -
d 5
/
;PAPE <v a
y d g { ! g 5 4 C ONVEP TT R/PCPC ATER y I 3 6 a g / /
/
3 2 F ACK / / 2 b {. / y
/
/ / RS-232 3)TPUT lec t 1TP trc m>pER
/
/
RS-232 OUTPJT
/ ,
N b9 ggy gg PRE UUFC pptgyg j T EANL WT TE R TEArmrTrp s 2001 s 372
/ y F*0 T LINC e --
"\p% %g/ MODEM M
LATA ACU1;IT][h J T[M .-
- /
t 1 . O
,s CNSRSYS/REV 0/ 3 9 3 (9 784 t /1120" })
U .- TEST EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION PENETRATION I-3 TEST EQUIPMENT DETAIL Figure 5 l l P.01 E DUTSIDE CONT ADett '.' C ON T AINMENT l l 25 t ISOL VLV n i l no ISOL VLV , d l l c vld THROTTLE VALVE r c411 PEN $70 Q[Q ^3 ((g / _ _ l l PRiClSION PRECISION PREISURE PRESSURE MONITDP MONITDR l ELECTRICAL l L-_--_________A____> S]GNAL TD DATA AQUISIT]DN - l i (9784 z/112993) 15-
SECTION 3 - TEST METHOD-l l 3.1- Statistical Analysis Techniaue 1
-)
The absolute method of leak rate determination was used. The absolute method uses the ideal gas laws to calculate the measured leak rate. The inputs to the measured leak rate calculation include-subvolume weighted containment temperature and vapor pressure, and total absolute air pressure. ; The calculations were performed in accordance with the BN-TOP-1 Method. A least squares regression line for the measured total time leak rate versus time since the start of the test is calculated after each new data set is scanned. The calculated leak rate at a point in time, ti, is the leak rate on the regression line at the time ti. Associated with the statistically average leak rate was the upper confidence limit. The calculation of this UCL was based on the standard deviations from the regression line and the one-sided T Distribution function. l An expanded discussion of the BN-TOP-1 Method calculations can be found in Appendix A. 3.2 Sucolemental verification Test The supplemental verification test superimposes a known leak of , approximately the_same magnitude as La (7.72 SCFM or 0.1 wt %/ day as defined in the Technical Specifications). The degree of detectability of the composite leak rate (containment calculated leak rate plus the superimposed, induced leak rate) provides the basis for determining the certainty associated with the measured leak rate phase of the test. As the BN-TOP-1. Method was the official test method used, the induced leakage rate test was performed in a. ' period of time equal to at least half the statistical leak rate test and the statistical leak rate was interpreted to be stable and within the acceptance band. The acceptance criterion for the test is that the statistically averaged composite leak rate be within 10.25 La of.the sum of the statistically averaged ILRT leak rate and the flowmeter induced leak rate. 3.3 Instrument _ Error Analysis An instrument error analysis was not performed. For explanation and ' justification, see Appendix B. An instrument error analysis is used only to demonstrate the system's ability to measure the required parameters to calculate the containment leak rate. The ISG is not based on a statistical. analysis of the leak rate calculations, and does not affect these calculations. The computed error is not added to the value of the calculated leak rate. , No instrument failures or bad data sets were encountered during the execution of this test. t (9784 z/112993) ' 1
+
I
1 1 l ... 'a SECTION 4 - SEQUENCE OF EVENTS 4.1 Test Prengration Chronolouv. Datn
- Ling Deccriotion 08/24/93 Get ILRT instrumentation to talk to PC in electrical penetration area 426'. Start Preliminary data ;
collection for instrument verification. , Training meeting held for ILRT/LLRT personnel. OPS , lineup coordinators Bob Funk and Stu Dresser in ; attendance. : 08/25/93 Instrumentation looks good and is performing ok on test run. Reviewing and Rev lining ILRT Procedure for final revision. 08/27/93 1600 Sign into LLRT Procedure. 08/30/93 1100 Prepare for LLRT of Emerg. Hatch. t 08/31/93 1130 Working with OAD to link TSC to penetration area. IM's supporting cable hook up. ! i 1200 Completed pressure test of emergency airlock. 09/01/93 0900 Testing U-2 personnel airlock. Finish testing on Emerg. Hatch. . Verified link to electrical pen from TSC was working. Was able to scan data the first time. ; 1040 First Atlas COPCO air compressors start to arrive.. 1245 Finished LLRT on personnel airlock. 0.5 SCFH leakage. 1500 Talked to Pete Peterson, NRC Resident Inspector, about the impending ILRT. Peter is looking to close out the violation given to us during the last ILRT. He is going to be watching performance. 09/02/93 0900 Talked with Kelly Welty about notifying CECO insurance Rep. as required by Step 6 of the Prerequisites. Kelly contacted Jeff Hendricks and notified him that we would be perfonming ILRT the week of 9/05/93. l 1015 Reviewed installation record of ILRT software and verified test run ok. Document proper. installation and testing of software per prerequisite Step 19. 1100 Verify ILRT data collection in progress and sensors look ok. i (97C a z/112993) 17-
09/03/93 LO730 Instrumentation working fine. Mode 3 walkdown in progress.
.0800 Meeting at-TSC with directors, lineup coordinators and r assistants to talk logistics and organization:of test. ,
Assistant lineup coordinators started to make plans on.' '* how progress would be tracked. [ 0930 Meeting with entire ILRT crew' to give' final direction before night shift begins. NRC Resident attended the meeting. , 1012 Early boration started.' 1115 J. Glover shows ILRT directors how to backup the computer data,.and transfer it to the backup PC if '; required during the test. Jim recommends backing up-the data at least once an hour, but twice.is better. 1600 Instruments continue to collect data. Ok. l 09/04/93 0612 RCS cleanup still in progress. Mode 3 360*F 900 lb. 0620 Preparing electrical penetration for use for .
. instruments, e
.0751 Rad Protection in progress of surveying containment penetrations.
3150 Walk down compressor pad for final connections, look good.
- 1320 BVS 6.1.2.d-1.6 Completed."as found" test for equipment hatch gasket.
1500 Completed first round of temperature and humidity checks.
- 2230 Completed second round of temperature and humidity checks.
09/05/93 0020 Entered Mode 5. t 0130 Phase B testing starts. 0200 Instruments staged on 426' inside containment. , 0330 Phase 'B' testing complete, operating setting up for phase 'A' testing. ' r 0730 Start Mode S Lineups. 1050 In progress of pressure testing penetration P-4 2. BUS 6.1.2.d-1.24. L 1215 Phase A & B testing is done but has not been declared complete. > (9784z/112993) 10
'1315 J. Lonigro'is complete with the inside and outside containment surfaces inspection. -He will writ'eLup the results and forward a copy to us tomorrow (9-6-93),
1530 BVS 6.1.2.d-1.24 complete on pressurization penetration. 1542 Phase A/B testing declared' complete. 09/06/93 0615 RCP's are still'on, H 022 flush was. completed but chemistry wants to do another H 022 flush, RCP's will have to be on until flush-is done. 0835 ILRT Instrumentation is working in containment. 1030 Compressor functional complete. 1045 Notified Rad Protection to install air samplers in MSIV Rooms. 1615 H 22 0 . flush complete and 2D RCP shut down. . 1830 Venting SI accumulators, 2 RCFC's running. l 2300 Containment air samples ok after depressurizing SI , accumulators. 2330 MM's to remove ECCS sump covers and inspect sumps for water. i- 2345 RCFC's shutdown so containment can' stabilize before pressurization. , 09/07/93 0400 Plant'is close to desired PZR level,'etc. Charging-pump is off. Charging will be isolated'when CV8105/6' are taken OOS. , d 0810 PRT & PZR vent flanges are off. 1015 Realized why Cnmt humidity and temperatures are not steady, emergency airlock is open. i 1100 Atlas COPCO called. Told them estimated pressurization time is 0200 9/08/93. Suggest being here 1 hour early. Will call between 3-4 pm to give final estimate of pressurization time. :
't 1330 Test director does preliminary walkdown of containment. ,
1630 mms notified us interlocks are made'up on both emergency and personnel airlocks. j 2030 Atlas Copco notified. Ed Nash-will be arriving at 0100 for a 0200 pressurization. l 2330 Depress sparger in' fan world is. installed. -Mm entered l containment to remove 2VQO3M after completion of LLRT- ; on pressurization line. ' 1
' (9784 z/112993 ) -19 ; , , __ = ~-l
a: '* . i 09/08/93 0015 Ed Wash (Atlas Copco) on site. Entered containment for walkdown. > 0100 All compressors started but unloaded. 0220 Waldown of containment is complete. . 4.2 Test Pressurization And Stabilization Chronoloov. Date Time Description l 09/08/93 0315 Temperatures /RH% were recorded at various ', elevations /etc. Pressurization started. 4 0420 David Shaw, SF, called and reportedLthat the ionization monitors (fire monitors) are alarmed for containment. Current theory is.that with 10 diesels > running with the exhaust is getting sucked into containment and causing the alarms. Temperatures are. stable in all areas. ; 0530 Containment pressurizing at .7 psi /10 min or 4 psi /hr. ; Computer program working properly. Compressor air ; temp was lowered to 75'F when containment temps'were steadily increasing. Seem to be. stabilizing out. , 0600 10 lbs in Cnmt. 0730 Leak detection first phase. Workers going out. I 0825 Control Room called. 2PS 228B shows no indication on 2PM11J and the group 3 containment isolation status lights show the valve open. Dispatched someone to check vent valves for leaks. 2PS 229A has no indication on 2PM11J, but status light shows' valve to be closed. 0840 No leakage on the downstream vents for the.PS valves. 0920 Emerg. hatch snoops ok. ' 0940 Cnmt press is 24 lbs. Cnmt average temp - 95.7 and [ trending very steady. 1015 Emergency hatch was realigned to close outer door and ' open inner door. Equalization valve-was opened but inner door did not open due to gasket. compressions. ,, we will open door at next rounds. 1045 Realign doors of personnel airlock. Outer door' , closed, inner door open. Can not open interior' door .I after equalization. This is typical. Will reopen after lunch. We realigned doors to challenge the outer door which has never been done for a Byron ILRT. In addition, if the outer door develops a leak,s the inner door can be closed and the airlock vented to
-challenge the inner door without changing the 1'
. containment mass.
(9784z/112993) 20 l
1100 Results of leak busting is in 4 small. leaks at'2SIO56, 2SA039, and 2PS255A and 2PS261A. Not significant. 1140 Checked MSIV rooms. ;dl vents ok. , 1200 Cnmt at 33PSIG. Input air at 70*F. 1550 Pressurization complete. Compressors shutdown @ 60.80 psia. Ops closed OVQ002 and 2VQO12, 2VQO11. 1605 Stabilization begins. 1625 Notified Rad Protection to pull Cnmt air samples to prepare release package. 1800 Cnmt art.a Rad sample complete. t 2210 Declared stabilization complete. f-4.3 Messured Leak Rate Test Chronoloav Dp_La Time Descriotion 09/08/93 2222 Declared start of test with data set 120.
+
09/09/93 0530 BN-TOP criteria satisfied except for extrapolation criteria. More data needed. t 0652 Official end of BN-TOP. test at 0652 with data set number 171. Statistical leak rate = 0.03767 %/ DAY , 95% upper conf. limit = 0.06666 t/ DAY: 4.4 Induced Leakane Rate Test Chronoloav Date Timg Descriotion 09/09/93 0732 Induce leak rate and start stabilization period with date set 175 at 0732 en. Induced leak at 8.25SCFM. 0834 Induced leakage rate test started with' data set #181 at 0832. 0953 Call Rad Protection. Estimated time to blow down .; given as 1230 - 1300. 1252 Satisfy BN TOP verification. test criteria at data set [ 207. End of test declared. Waiting for temp lift on' 2VQOO3 to start blowdown. 4.5 Deoressurization Phase Chronolony 2 Date Time Descriotion 09/09/93 1350 Blowdown initiated. (9784z/112993) ! P o
. . . _. . . - . . .. .. - ~ , _
F l
.. .. .I 1450- 81bs lost in first hour. Admin pressure limit not exceeded.
.i l
1620 Pressure at 29.8 lbs.
~]
09/10/93 0000 Opened sparger valves inside A-7. 0130 ALARA briefing for preparation of entering containment. 4.6 Post ILRT Walkdown And Restorations 1 Date Ting Descriotion 5 09/10/93 0300 ILRT post containment walkdowns started. 0500 Finished post ILRT containment walkdown. No water in-ECCS sumps. ) 0600 Instruments down and bagged. Door interlocks are l defeated. Surveys are done. 0810 Ropes for instrumentation have been coiled and hung ~ above the polar crane. 09/22/93 1600 Last signature obtained on' restoration section. Procedure is complete. l
-)
5 l l i 1 l i d 4
-f
.. i I
(9784 z /112993) - '
, - - , _ _____..:__i_.__i____
i
. o I
EECTION 5 - TYPE A TEST DATA 5.1 Temoerature Stabilization Phase Data The temperature stabilization phase demonstrated proper temperature stability prior to the beginning of the test. BN-TOP-1 and Mass Point thermal ' ntabilization parameters are tabulated and shown in Tables 4 and 5. , 5,2 Measured Leak Rate Phase Data A summary of the computed data using the BN-TOP-1 can be found in Appendix C. Graphic results of the test are found in Figures 6 through 10. 5.3 Induced Leakane Phase Data A summary of the Induced Leakage Phase data of the ILRT can be found.in Appendix D. The calculated leak rate and target value leak rates are shown in Figure 11. Containment conditions during this phase of the test are shown in Figures 12 through 15. , t I l (9784z/112993) -23
. ~ .- -,-- . .
TABLE 4 f Mass Point Temperature Stabilization BYRON 2' ' h3 . (2) @ @ @ .; i
~
TIME TEMP AVE. DT OVER LAST 4 AVE. DT OVER LAST HOURS HOUR t - t-4l t
=
T lTt - Tt -1l h*h-h ;
! HOURS l *F *F/HR *F/HR *F/HR 1605 9571Ti0 17:05 92.445 18:05 91.409 i 19:04 90.805 20:04 90.378 21:02 90.043 0.609 0.344 0.264 ..
22:02 89.764 0.417 0.270 0.138 f 7 1 k 1 i I 4 4 (9784 z/112993) 24-
.i
m
,t, *
. TABLE 5 BN-TOP-1 Temperature Stabilization BYRON 2 ;
pyg TWP AVE. DT OVER'LAST 2 RATE OF DT CHANGE OVER HOURS LAST 2 HOURS i t T It " I t -2l 2 HOURS *F *F/HR *F/HR/HR
~
18 05 '95718 17.05 92.445 18.05 . 91,409 1.885 1.699 - 19 04 . 00.805 0.831 0.425 20:04 90.378 0.523 0.193 21:02 90.043 0.380 0.086 22.02 89,764 0.311 0.066 " T a I a 5 (9784z/112993)
, . , + . . ,, , ,. , . . , , ,, - - - . . .
FIGURE 6
- Calculated Total Time Leak & Total Time Leak at UCL -
BYRON . __.....___-. Calculated Total Time leak Totat Time leak at_UCL 0.50 _ . _ _ . , _ _ _ t 0.40 -- l,
.l ,
O.30 - , i
% l ',
/ ,' s d 0.20 -j l a , ,
y l 's t t
'f.
0.10 - l
\
__________'.'a--_-.--=--===---- ----m.-.-_-__--. -- _ - g . 4.00 ---
-0.10 1 i i i i O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time - Hours (9784s/112993) ~ ..
s --- . - .. w - .
FIGURE 7 Mass BYRON 2 809080 v- -- -- - - - - - ~ 809069 - x [ l\
\/
809058 N/\ l; " I
'\
\/ \
809047 --
\,x /
h 809036 - I r \ b 809025 -- m 809014 - 809003 - f
.808992 -
/
808981 - 8080'O . i i i i , i , , 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7. 8 Time - Hours
- (9784 z/112993) ~ .
a -__s *-_-em_ - whm- &-*u- F w-fr F= tw-7T6 mweesw mu**v w e w w n- e ~w"' er- N tu t - 4 e N- wr 4 - Ta ---1
FIGURE 8 . Average Pressure BYRON 2 60 00 , , N N
\
'N
\
N
\
P 5 g 59.90 - \ 8 c 59.80 , , , , , , , , 0 .1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time - Hours (9784s/112993) 28-
D Average Temperature
' BYRON 2
90.0 ,- N N i \
\
N
'N
\
xx
\
89.0 - h N p 88.0 i i i i i i ' O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time - Hours
. (9784x/112993) - _ >
_ _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . . _ _ . ~ . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . . . _ _ _ . - _ . . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
r2*82 Average Dew Point BYRON 2 70.10 - - ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 70.00 -
\
'N
\
- 3
\ \
69.90 - /\
/
s.
'N-69.80 -
x T x
\/
p 69.70 - -
\
\
69.60 - 69.50 - 69.40 - 69.30 i i ' ' ' ' ' 0 '1 2- 3 4 '5 6- 7 8 Time - Hours (9784 z/112993) 'E t
, _ ...nc,. ""'
Calculated Total Time Leak BYRON 2 0.30 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - l l
/
f__ ^ N\ 0.20 d ,/ \ N l \ s
/ \
/
_ __ __ _... h. w _- -_ _ _ _ . . . . _ _ . ._.._.______.__.____.___j d / s a y 0.10 - 1 0.00 , , i i i . i i 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Time - Hours (9784 z/112933) 31
s rzcan 12 Mass BYRON 2 809000 , --- - - - ~ ~ - - -
- ~'
'\
808900 -1
-,s b
s \, h m
' v \ N
\
\
\
\
808800 -- v x
,/
-808700 i , i . i i i 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Time - Hours (9784s/112993)' __.. . . . . . . , . . . . - - . , . - - . _ - _ _ . - - _ . - _ _
4 FIGURE 13 Average Pressure BYRON 2 59.790 - - - - - - - - - - - - - 1
\\ !
N ! N - 59.780 -
'N
'N h s 59.770 --
P
'N N 59,760 -
59.750 - 59.740 - 59.730 , i , , , i , , 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 ' 3.0 3.5 4.0
. Time - Hours (9784 z/112993) . _ - , ._. - _ , - . _ . . - . _ . _ .. -
Average Temperature BYRON 2 88.30 + - - - --- ----- l 1 {\. i\ x 88.20 -4 Kx
\
NN N
'N p 88.10 -
N 88.00 - N 87.90 , , , , , , , , 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Time - Hours (9784 z/112993) 34
.FIGDRE 15 .
Average Dew Point .- BYRON 69.30 - --- i i N N 69 20 - \~s N /\
\ ' / \
'N '
\
\ \ s F
69.10 -
\
[\
/
/
\\
69.00 i i i i i i i , 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 Time - Hours (9784 x/112993) -
SECTION 6 - TYPE A TEST CORRECTIONS During the Type A Test, there were a number.of penetrations that'were not properly challenged by full containment pressure. Because of this, a local leakrate test was performed either prior to, or af ter th'e ILRT. The minimum path leakrate was then calculated for each of these penetrations and added to the ILRT Test 95% UCL. Pen No. Descriotion Local Leak Test No. MiniPath Leakrate- , P-4 Pressurization Pen. 2BVS 6.1.2.D-1.24 - 0.5 SCFH I-3 Instrumentation 2BVS 6.1.2.D-1.7 Test Line 2VQOl6 & 2VQO18 0.4 SCFH 2VQO17 & 2VQ019 0.4 SCFH-TOTAL 1.3 SCFH- : f Penetrations P-4 and I-3 were in use during the test. Total leakage collections for these penetrations are 1.3 SCFH which is equal to 0.00028 wt %-/ Day. Adjustments were made for volume changes in sump and tank levels inside containment during the test execution. Volume changes were measured and the, corresponding leak rate adjustments were made for the ECCS. sump, floor drains sump, pressurizer relief tank, and reactor coolant drain tank. The volume ' adjustments were assumed to take place over the time period of the test pressurization, stabilization, leak test, induced leak test, and ; depressurization which was approximately 47.5 hours. Normalizing the total leak volume and adjusting that volume over 47.5 hours reveals a total adjustment for vessel level changes of -1.18 SCFH which-equates to -0.00025 wt %/ DAY. The total leakage to be added to the 'As Found' ILRT result due to penetration' adjustments is. 0.00028 wt %/ day. The total' leakage adjustments to ; be added to the "AS Found" ILRT result due-to vessel level changes is -
-0.0025 wt t/ day. When added to the 95% UCL, the Final Leakage Rate is 0.06669 wt %/ day. This leakage is acceptable being less than 0.75 L a*
i v 1 (9784z/112993) -36r s -
. - . - 4 + - - , ,m . - . , . - - ~ v as en- -- , - ,e ~ -- , - - - --,
. J l SECTION 7 - INTERERETATION OF TEST RESULTS l 7.1 Measured Leak Rate Test Regults The Personnel Airlock is aligned with the interior door closed and the' exterior door open. This allows expeditious execution of the test. This is due to the fact that the large volume of the airlock interior would take a long time to equalize with inner bulkhead shaft seals leaking. With the knowledge of acceptable leakage during the operating cycle (6-month test frequency) and an acceptable 'As Found' test just prior .to the ILRT, a detected leak of the inner bulkhead shaft seal can easily be blocked. No. leakage was observed on the airlocks prior. to starting the test. It was decided to realign the doors of the Personnel and Emergency Airlocks for the test with the inner door open and the outer door closed. No leakage was evident throughout the entire test. The statistical leak rate test executed was a BN-TOP method exbcuted in 8.5 hours. No significant events happened during the test to affect the test results. The 'As Found' / 'As Left' statistically average leak rate (95% UCL, . af ter corrections) was 0.06669 wt %/ day. Containment dry air temperature and dew cell temperature trended , downward throughout the test. This is indicative of a stable containment with no major heat sources, i.e. the Reactor Coolant System temperature was kept constant. All sump and tank levels were essentially constant throughout the test, but adjustments are summarized in section 6. 7.2 Sucolemental Verification Test Results 4 i After a 1 hour stabilization, the statistically averaged composite leak rate was started and verified to be stable and within 1 0.25 L of a the sum of the statistically averaged measured leak rate and the average flowmeter induced leak rate. No significant events occurred during this phase of the-test.
- 7. 3 Comoarison To Previous Test Results This was the third ILRT performed at Byron Unit 2. The first test was the pre-operational ILRT, performed 07/02/86 to 07/18/86. The final ILRT' .
total (95% UCL, after corrections) was 0.0257 wt %/ day. ? The total obtained in the second test in 1990 was (0.07105 wt %/ day) - and was within the acceptance criteria of 0.075 wt %/ day for the as left test. The as found leak rate exceeded the acceptance criteria. Leaks were identified and repaired /biccked without having to depressurize containment. - The total obtained in the 1993 test (0.06669 wt %/ day) is within the acceptance criteria of 0.075 wt %/ day. The substantial difference between the first test and the subsequent tests are related to the test method employed and the test duration. 7.4 Evaluation OF Instrument Failures None, t (9784z/112993) -l
.e , a . . - - - . . - - - .. - Ip d* APPENDILA - STATISTIC _AL ANALYSIS METHODS
- 1. Mass Point Method This method is based upon the assumption that the true leakage rate is constant during the testing period. If this assumption is true and if there was perfect containment modeling and instrumentation, a plot of the measured q containment dry air mass versus time would yield a straight line with a negative slope. The leakage rate is proportional to the slope of this line.
In a real case, the mass points are scattered about any straight drawn through > them. The Mass Point Method calls for performing a Least Squares Fit of'the mass points. This fit determines the' Slope and Y-Intercept of r.he line that l minimized ~the total amount of scatter of these points along its path.' The methodology for calculation of this leakage rate and ,its 95 percent upper ., confidence limit is presented here. , Each time a date set is collected during the Type A test, the time of collection and the Total Containment Dry Air Mass at that time are calculated and stored. A collection of K such times / mass pairs are shown'below. ti , M, t2'M2 t3,M3 --- tk-1*MK-1 tg,Mg. Where: ti = Time (hours) at which data set 1 was collected. by definition
- the time at ti equals zero.
Mi = Total Containment Cry Air Mass (Lbm) at time ti. ? L Let i ST = Starting data set number of the calculational range, ; SP = Ending data set number of the calculational range. N = Number of data sets to be Least Squares Fit. H = SP - ST + 1
'{
I I e (9784 z/112993 ) -3fL
, ..,_n . . - ~ ~ . ~ . = _ - - . . ~ . ~ . - . -. - - . . ..
t
. -s For the above set'of data points when containment maso M=At+B, A and B
~for the range of points starting from'ST and extending to SP are calculated as [
shown below. . SP SP SP N [tMi3- [.ti [Mi A, =ST i=ST i=ST l
'3 SP SP N [-(t)2 -
i [ti i=ST, i=ST , SP SP l [Mi-A[ti B= i=ST i-ST
- substituting for A, i
SP SP SP .SP . [M i [ (t )a - i=ST i [t i [Mt i3 '! 3, i=ST i-ST i=ST 2 SP SP N [ (t )2 - i [t i=ST, i i=ST Where: A = Rate of change of Total Containment Dry Air Mass, the slope of-the straight line discussed above (ibm /hr). B = Calculated value of Total Containment Dry Air Mass (1bm) at t i. The leakage rate of dry air from containment at ti, Li, expressed in units of. ' percent per day f.s shown below. 2400A -i q , B +AtsT Let T be the student's t distribution function at the 95th percentile, t expressed as a function of N. . T'= 1. 6449 (N-2)
- 3. 5283 + 0. 885602/ (N-2)
(N-2) + 1.2209 - 1.5162/ (N-2) l (9784 z /112993) 39 i Il
.. s Ignoring ~ negligible terms, the 95 percent Upper Confidence Limit (UCL)
~
.of-the true leakage rate in units of percent per day is given below.
'1 UCL = L + Ta I
2 l N[ M'~ [M i 3 g . 1 i=ST 2=ST _A 2 (2400) (weight % (N-2) SP SP
'3 B + A tgr per day)
N[ t'- i tj i=ST i[=ST l j
~
1 i l i I a (97842/112993) , _ , _ . _ . . . . . .
- 2. Total. Time Method This method is based upon the assumption that the rate of change of leakage rate is constant during the testing period, If this is true, and if there was perfect containment modeling and instrumentation, a plot of containment leakage rates versus time would be a straight line with a negative slope. The leakage rate of dry air mass out of containment is proportional to the equation of the line. In a real case, the leakage rates are scattered about any straight line drawn through them.
The Total Time Method calls for performing a Least Squares Fit of the total time leakage calculations. This fit determines the slope and the Y-Intercept of the line that minimizes the total amount of scatter of these points along its path. Each time a data set i' ~~'lected during the Type A test, the time of collection, the total containment dry air mass, and the total time leakage rate at that time are calculated and stored. A collection of K such points are shown below. ty,My t2,M2 t3'M3 tk-1,M k-1 tk'Mk
*.3..' t t i
<s, . ,
s t t 8 *
. i. . . ,,
.j
. , e
,g * - ,
, g MT ,2 MT ,3 ' *
- MT ,K-1 MT ,K Where: ,
ti e Time (hours) at which date set i was collected. By definition, the time at ti (weight percent per day). M = Total Containment Dry air Mass (Lbm) at time ti. MT ,i = Total Time Leakage Rate at time t i (weight percent per day.) The total time leakage rate at time ti is calculated as shown below. 2400 M; ' Mr'3 " t, - tg 1M- g7, Let ST = Starting data set number of the calculational range. , I SP = Ending data set number of the calculational range. N = Number of Total Time Leakage rates to be Least Squares Fit. i l i 1 1 l (97842/112993) 41-1
-1 l
l N' = SP - ST ) J For the above set of total time leakage rates, A and B for the range of mass points starting from ST'and extending to SP are calculated as shown below. SP SP SP \ C3 M 7 ,, - i=[T+1 t, [ M 7,g
,, Ni[ST+1 i = ST+ 1 SP f SP **
N [ ( tj) 2 _ { e,
^
i=ST+1 si =ST+ 1, j l l
.j l
SP SP SP SP l [ M ,i 7 [ ( t,) ' - ts [ M7,j t, l B, i= T+1 i =ST+ 1 h +1 i = ST+ 1 Sp SP N [ (tj)2 _' { e,' ' ,, i =ST+ 1 r i=ST+1, Where: A = Rate of change of Total Time Leakage Rates, (%/ day /hr) . B = Calculation value of Total Time Leakage Rates at tST (%/ day). The leakage rate of dry air from containment at ti,L, i expressed in units of percent per day is shown below. Li =- (B + Ati) Let T be the student's distribution function at the 95th percentile, expressed as a function of N. T= 1. 6 44 9 (N-2 ) + 3.5283 + 0.85602/ (N-2) (N-2) + 1. 2 2 09 - 1. 516 2/ (N-2 ) Ignoring negligible terTns, the 95% Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) of the true Leakage Rate is given below in units of percent per day.
- UCL = L + To Let SP A
Cp - tj 1 r g , i =[ST+ 3 ,
+
y , N-2 Sp r gp \3 , i =[ST+ 3 ts' y
- [
gl = ST+ 3 ti
't I
- (9784 z/112993 ) -42
Then
' SP SP SP Y' '
a= {g{,) [ r (M .1) * - Bi =[ST+
-A i =[ST+3 M7 ,j t3 3
(i =ST+ 3 n
- 3. BN-TOP-1 Method This method calculates total time leakage rates and the statistical leakage rate in a manner identical to that specified for the Total Time Method. Only the Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) is calculated differently, and that methodology is described here.
The student's t distribution used for the BN-TOP-1 Method is a double sided , distribution at the 97.5 percentile,
.37226 . 2.8225 T = 1.9 5996 +
(N-2 ) (N-2)2 ; Ignoring negligible terms, the 97.5% Upper Confidence Limit of the leakage rate is given below in units of percent per day.- UCL = L + To L was given in Section IX.G.3. , Let SP 1 e UP - (N-2) i=St+3 i ! F=1+ + , N-2 Sp t Sp 12 A t 32 - [ -ti i =[ST+ 3 _ _. ri =ST+3 , 4 Then
' SP SP Y U' SP a= {y{,) (Mr ,3)* - B ,[ Mr ,i - A M7 ,3tj g l =[ST+ 3 2=ST+3 i =[ST+ 3 j, l l
1 i l (9784 z/112993) 43 1
.l 1
Appendix B July 8, 1992 Tot D. Nyman D. Schumacher S. Gupta J. Kuznicki R. Salmi H. King subject: Calculation Of The Instrument Selection Guide For ILRT Instrumentation Systems 10CFR50-Appendix J specifies that all Type A tests be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the American National Standard N45.4-1972. Section 6.4 of that standard requires that the combined precision of all instruments used to perform a Type A test be such that the accuracy of the collected data is consistent with the magnitude of the specified leakage rate. The Instrument Selection Guide,(ISG) formulation defined in Appendix G of the 1987 Standard, ANSI /ANS-56.8 is an acceptable means of datermining the ability of the Type A test instrumentation system to measure the integrated leakage rate of a primary reactor containment system. This rather long formulation is labor intensive to calculate either by hand or by computer. Section 5.4 of NO Directive NOD-TS.13 specifies that all CECO plants shall use a standardized instrumentation system for Type A testing. Attachment A lists the resolutions, repeatabilities, and sensitivities which may be expected when the standardized system - is used. Also listed are the recommended minimum numbers of each-type of sensor. It is shown in Attachment B, that if the standard Type A test-instrumentation specifications and the minimum sensor numbers are met, then the ANS-56.8 ISG acceptance criteria is always satisfied. This eliminates the need to demonstrate by calculation in station procedures that the ISG acceptance criteria is meet. 2 (9 784 z /112993) -44
- l l
Page2 l The requirement to calculate Type A Test instrumentation system ISG values may be eliminated from the IIRT procedures of each CECO station. Instead, the instrumentation requirements listed in Attachment A need be included..This letter along with the attachments may be referenced as the basis for that procedure change. M d
/' Jim Glover Production Services Dept.
^- J
() J. Brunner TeBhnical Staff Support Superintendent G. Vanderheyden R. Shields M. Strait R. Walsh P. Johnson J. Brunner W. T'Niemi (9784 z/112993 ) Attachment A ILRT INSTRUMENTATION SYSTEM SPECIFICATIONS Pressure Transmitters: Resolution 0.0001 psi Repeatability 0.001 psi sensitivity 0.0001 psi Minimum Number 1 ; Temperature Channels: Resolution 0.01 'F Repeatability 0.02 *F Sensitivity 0.01 *F Minimum Number 15 Dew Temperature Channels: Resolution 0.01 'F Repeatability 0.1 "F Sensitivity 0.1 *F Minimum Number 5 l Jnstrument Parameter Defintions From ANSI /AN8 56.8-1987 l l Repeatability: The capability of the measurement system to i reproduce a given reading fran a constant source. j i Resolution: The least unit discernible on_the display mechanism. sensitivity: The capability of a measurement system to respond to change in the measured parameter. 1 (9784z/112993) Attachment B INSTRUMENT SELECTION GUIDE CALCULATIONS FOR ILRT INSTRUMENTATION "These calculabons are based upon the equations listed in Appendir G of ANSI /ANS 56.8-1987" Pressure Transinitter Parameters Temperature Parameters Dew Temperature Parameters Sensstmry Sp := 0 0001 psi Sensitrvity Sr := 0.01 F Sensituty Sd := 0.1 F Repeatatility RPp = 0.001 psi Repeatability RPr = 0.02 F Repeatability RPd = 0.1 F ; Resoluton R5p := 0.000l psi Resolution RSr := 0.01 F Resolution RSd := 0.0l F Number Np : 1 Number Nr :15 Number Nd:S Pressure P := 44 psig Temperature T := 95 F Dew Temp Td := 95. F TEST DURATION t := 8 Pressure Error Calculation Measurement System Error Pmse := RPp + RSp Pmse = 0.0011 Pressure Error Pe:= + P Pe = 0.00ll Np ; l l l l Temperature Measurement Error l Measurement System Error Tmse :: RPr4 RSr Tmse = 0.03 2 Temperature Error Te '-(Tmse + Srf'Te =0.0082 { Nr '8 l l Dew Temperature Measurement Error
^
Measurement System Error Tdmse :RPd+ RSd Tdmse = 0.11 Calculate the vapor pressure rate of change with dew temp from steam tables A = 0.0886717535 B := 22.452 C ::490.59 i Z::d--- A exp B- Z = 0.041 d Td , (Td- 32 + C), l Meesurement System Error Dmse := Z-(RPd + RSd) Dmse = 0.0045 Dew Temperature Error De := Z I De = 0.0027 yg o.s (9784 z /112993) 47
-4 '
Page 2 i Pressue Error Term PE := 2- PE = 7.0813 10 (P+ 14.7),
* ~8 Temperature Error Term TE := 2 TE =4.333610 '
,(T + 459.68),
Dew Temperature Error Term DTE::2- DTE = 4.3179 10"
,(P + 14.7),
ISG := ' -(PE+ TE+ DTE) ISG = 0.0222 i ANSI /ANS 56.8 requires that the ISG be less than 025La to be acceptable STATION La 025La DRESDEN 1.6 0.4 ZION 0.1 0.025 BYRON 0.1 0.025 BRAIDWOOD 0.1 0.025 QUAD CITIES 1.0 025 LASALLE 0.635 0.156 [ T (9784z/112993) 48
APPENDIX C - MEASURED LEAK TEST DATA The following tables present the data for the temperature' stabilization and measured leak test phases of the ILRT. The measured leak test in defined as the interval between data sets 120 and 171 inclusive. This corresponds to. a 8.5 hour test duration. The following data is included: S TABLE TITLE C.1 Summary Table of Leakrates C.2 Summary Table of. Pressures C.3 Summary Table of Temperatures C.4 Summary Table of Dew Cell Temperatures P i 1 3 (9784 z /112993) ,. .-.- . . - - - -. - . _, _ . _ _ _ = _ _
Table C1 Total Time Leak Rate Analysis BYRON 2 RDC TIME (MINUTES) MEASURED LEAK CALCULATED LEAK UCL LEAK (WT (WT %/ DAY) (WT %/ DAY) %/ DAY) 120 0 00 - - - 121 10 00 0.095153 - - 122 20 02 0.001840 0.001840 - 123 30 02 0.015439 -0.002383 0.420145 124 40 02 0.028832 0.007501 0.215106 125 50 03 0.037618 0.018151 0.166025 126 60 03 -0.004397 0.002147 0.114600 127 70 03 0.048126 0.017722 0.126098 12B 80 05 0.002597 0.008678 0.102132 129 90 05 0.012672 0.006727 0.089716 130 100.05 0.039193 0.014718 0.094865 131 110 07 0.017762 0.013716 0.087262 132 120.07 0.015480 0.012392 0.080597 133 130.07 0.023224 0.013593 0.077907 ' 134 140.08 0.028284 0.015875 0.077268 135 150.08 0.033495 0.018971 0.078159 136 160.08 0.022433 0.018946 0.075318 137 170.10 0 023787 0.019240 0.073186 138 180.10 0.031909 0.021165 0.073354 139 190.10 0.042636 0.024859 0.076251 140 200.12 0 034154 0.026377 0.076142 141 210.12 0.033950 0.027623 0.075849 142 220.12 0.048194 0.031102 0.078750 143 230.13 0.036379 0.032151 0.078428 144 240.13 0.037129 0.033166 0.078178 145 250.13 0 032745 0.033380 0.077181 146 260.15 0.038910 0.034457 0.077191 147 270.15 0.027084 0.033736 0.075545 148 280.15 0.038306 0.034617 0.075485 149 290.17 0.033652 0.034781 0.074738 150 300.17 0034878 0.035077 0.074177 151 310.17 0.036133 0.035491 0.073786 152 320.18 0 041965 0.036553 0.074158 153 330.18 0.038200 0.037064 0.073954 154 340 20 0 037131 0.037401 0.073611-155 350.20 0.043512 0.038398 0.074021 1 156 360.20 0.038156 0.038725 0.073736 157 370.22 0.038520 0.039057 0.073485 158 380.22 0.034300 0.038926 0.072843 159 390.22 0.036492 0.039018 0.072418 160 400.23 0.038178 0.039262 0.072156 161 410.23 0.034740 0.039158 0.071605 162 420.23 0.038179 0.039374 0.071358 163 430.25 0.033172 0.039120 0.070725 164 440.25 0.027752 0.038406 0.069791 165 450 25 0.036126 0.038463 0.069443 l (9784 z/112993) 1 l
Table C1 Page 2 Total Time Leak Rate Analysis BYRON 2 RDC TIME (MINUTES) MEASURED LEAK CALCULATED LEAK UCL LEAK (WT (WT %/ DAY) (WT %/ DAY) %/ DAY) 166 460 27 0.033819 0.038319 0.068935 167 470.27 0.034012 0.038198 0.068461 168 480.27 0 036162 0.038258 0.068156 169 490.28 0.034544 0.038183 0.067745 170 500 28 0.031607 0.037883 0.067165 171 510.28 0.032606 0.037677 0.066666
)
1 l l l l (9784s/112993) u - Tabla C2 Summary Table of Prcssuro BYRON- ' 2. RDG TIME Comp 1 Press Psla , 82 16:05:39 60.5357 83 16:15:39 60.4655 84 16:25:39 60.4099 85 16:35:40 60.3640 86 16'45:40 60.3262 - 87 16:55:40 60.2936 88 17:05 41 60.2660 . 89 17:15:41 60.2420 90 17:25:41 60.2202 91 17:35:42 60.2013 , 92 17:45:42 60.1842 93 17:55:42 60.1689
- 94 18:05:43 60.1547 95 18:15:43 60.1414 96 18:25:43 60.1293 97 18:35:44 60.1178 98 -18.43:23 60.1098 99 18:54:06 60.0988
.100 19.04:06 60.0890 101 19:14.07 60.0799 102 19:24:07 60.0714 103 19:34:07 60.0631 104 19:44:08 60.0553 .
105' 19.54:08 60.0477 I 106 20:04:08 60.0402 107 20:14:09 60.0333 108 20:24:09 '60.0266 + 109 20.34'09 60.0200 110 20 44:10 60.0139 + 111 20.51:40 60.0092 112 21.02.23 60.0030 113 21:12:24 59.9974 114 21:22:24 59.9915 .i 115 21:32:24 -59.9862 116 21:42:25 59.9809 ,- 117 21:52:25 59.9759 118 22:02:25 59.9707 119 .22:12:26 59.9659 120 22:2.2:26 59.9613 ' 121 22:32:26 59.9565 122 22:42:27 59.9521 123 22:52:27 59.9476 124 23:02:27 59.9434 'i 125 23:12:28 59.9393. i 126 23:22:28 59.9353 , 127 23.32:28 59.9313 128 23:42:29 59.9270 1 129 23:52:29 59.9233 [ 130 00:02:29 59.9192 131 00:12:30 59.9155 132 00:22:30 59.9120 133 00:32:30 59.9083 134 00:42:31 59.9049 -l (9784 z/112993) e
Table C2 Summary Table of Pressure BYRON 2 RDC TIME Comp 1 Press Psla 135 00.52:31 59.9014 136 01.02:31 59.8980 137 01:12:32 59 8947 138 01:22:32 59.8913 139 01:32:32 59.8884 140 01:42:33 59.8851 141 01:52:33 -59.8817-142 02:02:33 59.8789 143 02:12:34 59.8759 144 02:22:34 59.8730 145 02:32:34 59.8701. 146 02:42:35 59.8671 147 02:52:35 59.8642 148 03:02:35 59.8614 149 03:12:36 59.8589 150 03:22:36 59.8562 151 03:32:36 59.8538 152 03:42:37 59.8510 153 03:52:37 59.8484 154 04:02:38 59.8460 155 04:12:38 59.8434 156 04:22:38 59.8410 157 04:32:39 59.8385 158 04.42:39 59.8361 159 04:52:39 59.8339 160 05:02:40 59.8315 161 05:12.40 59.8294 162 05:22:40 59.8270 163 05:32:41 59.8248 164 05:42:41 59.8226-165 05:52:41 59.8203 166 06.02:42 59.8182 167 06:12:42 59.8161 168 06:22:42 59.8140 169 06:32:43 59.8121 170 '06:42:43 59.8098. 171 06:52:43 59.8079 (97842/112993) <
. .. 'ol
- 1. . ;
Table C3 Summary Table of Temperatures i BYRON 2 RDC TIME Comp .i ( 1 [ ti , B2 16:05:39 95.18 .; 83 16:15:39 94.44 84 16:25:39 93.85 , 85 16:35:40 93'39 B6 16:45:40 93.01 ^! 87 16:55:40 92.70 88 17.05:41 92.44 89 17:15:41 92.21 90 17:25:41 92.03 5 91 17'35:42 91.85 92 ~ 4 i:42 91.68 i 93 t i.eo:42 91.54 j 94 18:05:43 91.41 r 95 18:15:43 9128 96 97 18.25 43 18:35:44 91.18 91.08 [.:' ! 98 143.23 91.00 99 18:54:06 90.90 100 I 19.04:06 90.81 101 19.14.07 90.73 ( 102- 19:24:07 90.66 [ 103 19:34:07 90.58 , 104 19 44:08 90.50 ' 105 19.54:08 90.44 106 20.04:08 90.38 107 20.14:09 90.31 .E 108 20.24:09 90.25 109 20.34:09 9020 110 20 44:10 90.14 111 20.51:40 90.10 112 21 02:23 90.04 113 21:12:24 89.98 - 114 21:22:24 89.95 115 21:32:24 89.90 116 21:42:25 89.86 117 21:52:25 89.81-118 22:0225 89.76 119. 22:12.26 89.72 le0 22:22.26 89.68 i- 121 22:32:26 89.64 - 122 ' 22:42:27 89.60 . 123 22:52:27 89.57 I 124 23.02:27 89.53
- 125 23:12:28 .89.50 126 ll 23:22:28 89,46 '
127 23.3228 89.43 , 128 23.42:29 89.38 : 129 23:52:29 89.36
.t (9784 z /112993) 54- j i , ,, r , - . . . , - * , ~ . . -_ ;_.-
j'..*- Table C3 Summary Table of Temperature ! ~ BYRON .;
- 2. i RDG TIME Comp .l 1 .
130- 00:02:29 89.33'- ! 131 00:12:30 89.29 - 132 00:22:30 89.26 . 133 00:32:30 ~8923 .I 134 00:42.31 89.20 135~ 00:52:31 89.18 136 01:02:31 89.14 } 137 01:12:32 89.12 ; 138 0122:32 89.09- t 139 01:32:32 89.07. 140 01:42:33 89.04 : 141 01:52:33 89.01 l 142 02:02:33. 89.00 l 143 02:12:34 88.97 144 02:22:34 88.95 : I 145 02:32:34 88.92 - 146 02:42:35 88.90 '! 147 02:52:35 88.87- i 148 03.02:35 88.85 149 03:12:36 88.83 150 03:22:36 88.81 ., 151 03:32:36 88.78 152 03:42:37 88.77 1 153 03:52.37 88.75 , 154 04:02:38 88.73 ; 155 04:12:38 88.71 156 04:22:38 88.68 :l ' 157 04:32:39 88.66 - 158 04:42:39 88.64 j 159- ~ -52.39 88.63 ; i 160 05:02:40 88.61- .I . 161 05:12.40 88.59 162 05:22.40 -88.57 .l 163 05:32:41 88.55 164 05:42:41 88.52 ! 165 05:52:41 88.52 166 06:02:42 88.50 l 167 06:12:42 88.48 ' 168 06:22:42 88.46 l 169 06:32:43 88.45 170 06:42:43 88.43 : 1 171 06:52.43 88.41 j l J
-l l
(9784 z/112993) 1 l J
- , . ,s
1
.I Table C4 Summary Table of Dew Temperatures""*'
BYRON l 2 : i f RDC TIME Comp ' 1 I 82 1G 05:39 71.36 i 71,20 ' 83 16:15:39 84 16:25:39 71.06 i . 85 16:35 40 70.98 , 4 86 16:45 40 70.97 87 16.55.40 70.90 , 88 17.05.41 70 87 ) i 89 17:15-41 70.78 90 17:25 41 70.80 91- 17:35 42 70.78 92 17.45.42 70.71 93 17:55 42 70.72 , 94 18 05 43 70.66 95 18:15 43 70.64 1 96 18:25 43 70.62 97 18:35 44 70.60 98 18.43:23 70.58 . 99 18:54.00 70.52 -l 100 19:04.00 70.49 I 101 19.14 07 70.50 1 102 19.24.07 70.46 103 19.34:07 70.41 i 104 19.44:08 70.37 -l 105 19.54.08 70.37' - 106 20.04:08 70.36 107 20:14:09 70.33 , 108 20.24.09 70.27 ; 109 20:34:09 70.23 i i 110 20 44:10 70.22 i 111 20.51:40 70.21 , 112 21 0? 23 70.17 113 21:12:24 70.13 114 21:22:24 70.13 l 115 21:32:24 70.13 1 110 21 42-25 70.13 ) 117 21 52:25 70.09 .; 118 22 02'25 70.05 119 22:12:20 70 00 120 22.22:26 70.05 121 22.32:26 '70.00 .] 122 22.42.27 69.99 123 22:52.27 69.95 124 23 02.27 . 69.94 125 23:12:28 69.93 120 23.22:28 69.87 127 23:32.28 69.92 128 23.42:29 09.89 129 23.52.:29 6906
=-
(9784 z /112993 ) 56 1 l a
r . Table C4 Summary Table of Dew Temperatures **'"' 1 BYROM 2 ' RDC TIME Comp s 1 i 130 00:02:29 69,85 - 131 00:12:30 69.84 132 00-22:30 69.82 ' 133 00.32:30 69.82 _; 134 00.42;31 69.79 ' 135 00.52:31 69.79 I 130 01:02:31 69.78 137 01:12.32 69.74 .; 138 01:22:32 69.75 - 139 01:32:32 69.74 140 01:42:33 69.71 141 01:52.33 .. 69.69 142 02:02:33 69.69 ' 143 02.12.34 ' 69.65 144 02:22:34 69.62 _t 145 02:32:34 69.62 146 02:42:35 69.61 147 02:52:35 69.58 148 03.02:35 69.59 149 03.12:36 69.56 150 03:22:36 69.56 151 03:32:36 69.57' 152 03 42:37 69.55 153 03.52:37 69.53 154 04:02:38 69.51 155 04:12;38 69.53 150 04:22:38 69.51 157 04:32:39 69.50 " 15B 04'42.39 69.44 159 04.52:39 C2 44 160 05.02:40 69.47 161 05:12:40 69.43 162 05 22 40 39.42 163 05:32 41 69.40 164 05:42:41 69.38
?
165 05:52:41 69.39 ; 166 06.02.42 69.34 l 167 06:12.42 - 69.36 168 06:22:42 69.37 169 06.32:43 69.35 170 06 42:43 69.32 171 06.52.43 69.33 e
' ( 9784 z /11293 ) . -!
l
- 1. <- j e
-?
i APPENDIX D INDUCED LEAKAGE TEST DATA The following tables present the data for the induced leakage phase of { the ILRT. The induced leakage test is defined as the interval between data i sets 181 and 207 inclusive. The following data is included: TABLE TITLE . 7
. D .1 Swnmary Table of Leakrates -l D.2 Summary Table of Pressures D.3 Summary Table of Temperatures ;
D.4 Summary Table of Dew Cell Temperatures i i t I 1 i
'I f
i
.I +
9 I, 5 ( I i T
}
r I (9784 z /112993) 58- .i f
Table Di Summary Table of Leak Rate BYRON 2 RDC TIME TT Calc
%/ day 181 08 32:47
. 0.000000 182 08:42:47 0 000000 183 06:52.47 0.138448 184 09.02.48 0.163090 185 09.12.48 0.197229 186 0922:48 0.218203 187 09:32'49 0.217951 188 09.42.49 0.221390 189 09:52:49 0.203965 190 10 02.50 0.195778 191 10:12:50 0.185715 192 10:22:50 0.171479 193 10:32:51 0.168946 194 10.42:55 0.161669 195 10.52:52 0.162823 190 11,02.52 0.160299 197 11:12:52 0.158664 198 11:22:53 0.156348 199 11:32:53 0.153637 200 11:42.53 0.151759 201 11:52:54 0.151722 202 12.02.C4 0.150937 203 12:12:54 0.150978 204 12.22:55 0.150209 205 12:32:55 0.150168 206 12:42:55 0.149768 207 12.52.56 0.147471 (9784 z/112993 ) 59-
~ .i Table D2 Summa Table o(Pressure BY ON ,
2- . RDC TIME Comp 1 Press Psla 181 08:32:47 59.7858 182- 08 42:47 59.7835 183 08.52;47 . 59.7813 184 09:02:48 59.7795. , 185 09.12:48 59.7774 186 09.22:48 59.7753 187 09.32:49 59.7732 188 09.42:49 59.7709 189 09.52.49 59.7690 59.7669 ' 190 10.02:50 191 10:12:50 59.7648' 192 10:22.50 59.7629 .j 193 10.32.51 59.7608 , 4 194 10 42:55 59.7591- ' 195 10 52.52 59.7569 196 11:02.52 59.7553 : 197 11:12.52 59.7531 198 11:22 53 59.7512 599 11:32.53 59.7495' 200 11.42:53 59.7475
'201 11.52:54 59.7461 202 12.02:54 59.7438 203 12:12:54 59.7421 ,
204 12.22:55 59.7405 205 12:32.55 59.7386 200 12.42:55 59.7369 207 12.52:56 59.7351
'i
~
i t (9784 x /112993) .(,0-wn,, . , . , - n u-
E r3 Table D3 Summary Table of Temperatures: 4 BYRON.
- 2. .l RDC TIME ' Comp .
1 181 08:32:47 88.26 s 182 08.42.47 88.24 ,
.183 08:52:47. 88.23 ;
184 09.02:48 88.22 185 09:12:48 88.21 , 186 09:22:48 88.20 187 09.32:49 88.18 188 09:42:49 88.17 g 189 09:52.49 88.15 , 190 10.02:50 88.14 4 191 10:12:50 88.13 ! 192 10:22:50 88.11 193 10:32:51 88.10 .i 194 10 42.55 88.09 ! 195 10-52.52
. 88.09 196 11:02:52 88.07 197- 11:12:52 88.06 1 198 11:22:53 88.04 j 199 11:32:53 88.03 l 200 11:42:53- 88.02- .;
f 201 11:52:54 88.02 202 12.02:54 88.00' 203 12:12:54 87.99 , 204 12:22:55 87.98 205 12.32.55 87.97 206 12:42.55 87.96 207 12.52.56 87.94 ; t i l
.i
~
[ (97842/.12993) . .
_._ _ _ . .. _ ~~ . . _ . . 7p 4, .. . TableLD4. Summary Table of Dew Temperatures*' BYRON 2 i RDC. TIME Comp 1 s B 181 08:32:47 69.22 -; 182 08:42:47 69.20 i 183 08.52:47 69.20 .!_ 184 09:02:48 69.19 185 09:12:48 - 69.18 186 09:22:48 69.17 187 09:32:45 69.18 188 09:42:49 69.20 , 189 09:52:49 69.15 100 10:02:50 69.16 191 10:12:50 69.13 192 10:22:50 69.09 , 193 10.32:51 69.12 194 10:42:55 69.09 ' 195 10:52:52 69.09 ' 196 11:02:52 - 69.06 197 11:12:52 69.08 198 11:22:53 69.10 199 11:32:53 69.07 200 11:42.53 69.05 ! 201 11:52:54 69.06 , 202 12.02:54 69.05 - 203 12:12:54 69.06 .! 204 12:22.55 69.05 . 205 12:32:55 69.04 l' 206 12:42:55 69.05 207 12:52:56 69.00 b i t
?
s (9784*/112993) . 62-
;f
- , - _ _ m_ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ,
e-+,, AREENpJX E - LLRT RESULTS ' Local. Leak Rate Testing was performed during the refuel outage at Byron Unit 2. The results presented below represent the periodic type B &.C tests performed at the 24 month interval specified by CRF 50 Appendix J. PJNETRRT_QJ{ EyJT_EE MA RMJM PATHWAY-LEAKAGE (SCFHL 1), I-3 ILRT Pene 0.4 0.4 2)'. I-3 ILRT Pene 0.4 0.4
- 3) I-5 Instr Pene 0.4 0.4 4). P-1 Cnmt Spray (A trn) 0.9 3.6
- 5) P-4 Cnmt Press. 0.5 0.4
- 6) P-5 Chilled Water 0.4 0.8 7), P-6 Chilled Water 0.4 0.4
- 8) P-8 Chilled Water 1.5 1.5 9). P-10 Chille.r Water 1.7 0.4
- 10) P-11 Reacto.- Drains 0.5 0.5
- 11) P-12 H2 Monitor ('A' dsch) 9.0 0.4 +
- 12) P-13 Off Gas 0.5 0.5 13). P-13 Off Gas 0.4 0.4 14). P-16 Cnmt Spray (B trn) 2.0 2.0 15). P-21 Comp Cooling (bring rtn) 2.8 2.8
- 16) P-23 Off Gas 0.4 0.4 ;
17). P-24 Comp Cooling (thm bar) 0.4 0.4
- 18) P-25 Comp Cooling (supply) 1.5 1.5 19). P-27 Pzr Relief (gas anal) >25* 6.0 e
- 20) P-27 Pzr Relief (Nt sup) 4.7 4.0 ,
21). P-28 CVCS (seal wtr rtn) 0.5 0.5 l 22). P-30 Demin Water 3.9 3.9 23). P-31 H2 Monitor ( ' ]B ' dsch) 8.0 1.8 24). P 32 Fuel Pool Cooling 0.5 0.5 25). P-36 H2 Monitor ('B' suct) 18.0 18.0 ; 26). P-39 Instr. Air 1.6 1.6 27). P-41 CVCS (letdown) 0.4 0.4 , 28). P-44 Pzr Relief (PW sup) 0.9 0.9 '
- 29) P-45 H2 Monitor ('A' suct) 0.4 0.4
- 30) P-47 Floor Drains 0.5 0.5 31)- P-52 Process Rad Mon (suct) 0.6 0.6
- 32) P-52 Process Rad Mon (rtn) 1.7 1.7 33). P-55 Safety Injection (Nt) 0.5 0.5 '
- 34) P-55 Safety Injection (accum) .0.4 8.0 35). P-56 Service Air 11.0 11.0 i 36). P-57 Fuel Pool Cooling 0.5 0.5 I 37). I'-63 Spare Pene 0.5 0.4 j 38). P-64 Spare Pene 0.5 0.4 39). P-65 Reactor Drains (gas anal) 0.5 0.5 i 40). P-65 Reactor Drains (was gas) 0.5 0.5 [
41). P-69 Off Gas 7.0 7.0 ? 42). P-70 Process Sampling (pzr stm) 0.5 0.5 43). P-70 Process Sampling (pzr liq) 04 0,4 44). P-70 Process Sampling (rcs) 0.4 0.4 45). P-70 Process Sampling (accum) 0.4 0.4 I 46). P-74 Spare'Pene 0.5 0.5 l (9784 z/112993) HOL . r
in^~ e i 47). P 80, 3 Bldwn # # 48). P-81 1 Bldwn # #
.49). P-82 s/G Bldwn # #
50). P-83 S/G Bldwn # # 51). P-88 S/G Bldwn # # 52). P-89 S/G Bldwn # # 53). P-90 S/G Bldwn # #' 54). P-91 S/G Bldwn # #. 55). P-94 S/G Bldwn 1.3 2.0 56). P-95 Cnmt Purge (4 8" exh) 15.0 15.0-57). P-96 Cnmt Mini-Purge (sup) 1.0 0.4 58). P-97 Cnmt Purge (48" sup) 3.8 3.8 59). Zone 1 Elec Pene 0.5 0.5 60). Zone 2 Elec Pene 7.0 7.0 61). Zone 3 Elec Pene 1.2 1.2 62). Zone 4 diec Pene 0.5 0.5 i
'63). Fuel Xfer 1bbe Flange 0.5 0.4 i 64). Fuel Xfer Tube Bellow.* 0.5 0.5
- 65) Equip Hatch O-Rings 0.5 0.5 66). Personnel Hatch 1.0 1.0
- 67) Emergency Hatch 4.0 2.1 68), Pers Hatch PR Suct 0.4 0.4 69). Pers Hatch PR Rtn 14.0 14.0 70). Emerg Hatch PR Suct 0.4 0.4
- 71) Emerg Hatch PR Rtn 10.0 12.2 TOTAI, MAXPATH LEArsRATE >277.76 148.6 Acceptance Criteria: TMXPLR < 0.6 La (277 SCFH)
NOTE: The results which are asterisked (*) denote that a failing leak rate was recorded and that component leakrate was considered to be-unacceptable t The results denoted with a pound (#), are not entered due to deletion of the Steam Generator Blowdown valves from the Local Leak Rate Test Program. For this refueling outage there was found unacceptable leakage on valve 2RY8025. Leakage recorded at a pressure greater than P a I44 4 psig) was > 2S SCFH - the administrative leak rate limit'of the procedures used. Some ; flowrates were chosen to not be quantified and therefore are considered 'As Found' failures. Work requests were written and post-maintenance testing , resulted with acceptable 'As Left' leakrates, as indicated above.
~(9784 z/112993) }}