ML20210C859
| ML20210C859 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Quad Cities  |
| Issue date: | 10/15/1986 |
| From: | COMMONWEALTH EDISON CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20210C833 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8702090468 | |
| Download: ML20210C859 (77) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:i i t i l l REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST I QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT TWO OCTOBER 14-15, 1986 P"%B8Mo9gggg, PDk
7 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE TABLE AND FIGURES INDEX. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 INTRODUCTION . . . ...... .... ........ ....... 4 A. TEST PREPARATIONS A.1 Type A Test Procedures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 A.2 Type A Test Instrumentation. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 A.2.a. Temperature . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 A.2.b. Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 A.2.c. Vapor Pressure. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 A.2.d. Flow. . . . . .... ............... 9 A.3 Type A Test Measurements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 A.4 Type A Test Pressurization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 B. TEST METHOD B.1 Basic Technique. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12 B.2 Supplemental Verification Test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 B.3 Instrument Error Analysis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 C. SEQUENCE OF EVENTS C.1 Test Preparation Chronology. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 C.2 Test Pressurization and Stabilization Chronology . . . . . 15 C.3 Measured Leak Rate Phase Chronology. . . . . . . . . . . . 17 C.4 Induced Leakage Phase Chronology . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 C.5 Depressurization Phase Chronology. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17 1 a TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTINUED) PAGE D. TYPE A TEST DATA D.1 Measured Leak Rate Phase Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 D.2 Induced Leakage Phase Data. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 E. TEST CALCULATIONS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 F. TYPE A TEST RESULTS F.1 Measured Leak Rate Test Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 F.2 Induced Leakage Test Results. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 F.3 Pre-Operational Results vs. Test Results. . . . . . . . . 34 F.4 Type A Test Penal ties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 F.5 Evaluation of Instrument Failures . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 F.6 As Found Type A Tes t Resul t . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 APPENDIX A TYPE B AND C TESTS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 APPENDIX B DRYWELL HEAD SEAL FAILURE. . . . . . . . . . . . 46 APPENDIX C COMPUTATIONAL PROCEDURES . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 APPENDIX D INSTRUMENT ERROR ANALYSIS . . . . . . . . . . . 65 APPENDIX E BN-TOP-1, REV. 1 ERRATA ............71 APPENDIX F TYPE A TEST RESULTS USING MASS-PLOT. . . . . . . 75 METHOD (ANS/ ANSI 56.8)
7 TABLES AND FIGURES INDEX PAGE TABLE 1 Instrument Specifications. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 TABLE 2 Sensor Physical Locations. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 TABLE 3 Measured Leak Rate Phase Test Results. . . . . . . . . 19 TABLE 4 Induced Leakage Phase Test Results . . . . . . . . . . 20 FIGURE I Idealized View of Drywell and Torus. . . . . . . . . . . 7 l Used to Calculate Free Air Volumes FIGURE 2 Measurement System Schematic Arrangement . . . . . . . 11 FIGURE 3 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Calculated . . . . 21 Leak Rate and Upper Confidence Limit FIGURE 4 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Total. . . . . . . 22 Time Measure Leak Rate and Regression Line FIGURE 5 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of .........23 Dry Air Pressure FIGURE 6 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Volume . . . . . . 24 Weighted Average Containment Vapor Pressure FIGURE 7 Measured Leak Rate Phase - Graph of Volume . . . . . . 25 Weighted Average Containment Temperature FIGURE 8 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Calculated. . . . . . 26 Leak Rate and Upper Confidence Limit FIGURE 9 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Total Time. . . . . . 27 Measured Leak Rate and Regression Line FIGURE 10 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Volume. . . . . . . . 28 Weighted Average Containment Temperature FIGURE 11 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of Volume. . . . . . . . 29 Weighted Average Containment Vapor Pressure FIGURE 12 Induced Leakage Phase - Graph of . . . . . . . . . . . 30 Dry Air Pressure FIGURE B-1 Prior to Head Seal Repair - Graph of . . . . . . . . . 53 Calculated Leak Rate and Upper Confidence Limit FIGURE F-1 Statistically Average Leak Rate and Upper. . . . . . . 76 Confidence Limit (ANS/ ANSI 56.8 Method)
4 c INTRODUCTION This report presents the test method and results of the Integrated Primary Containment Leak Rate Test (IPCLRT) successfully performed on October 14-15, 1986 at Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station, Unit Two. The test was performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, and the Quad-Cities Unit Two Technical Specifications. A short duration test (less than 24 hours) was conducted using the general test method outilned in BN-TOP-1, Revision 1 (Bechtel Corporation Topical Report) dated November 1, 1972. Using the above test method, the total primary containment integrated leak rate was calculated to be 0.3225 wt %/ day at a test pressure greater than 48 PSIG. The calculated leak rate was within the 0.750 wt %/ day acceptance criteria (75% of L A). The associated upper 95% confidence limit was 0.3618 wt %/ day. The supplemental induced leakage test result was calculated to be 1.4938 wt %/ day. This value should compare with the sum of the measured leak rate phase result (0.3225 wt %/ day) and the inducted leak of 8.90 SCFM (1.0725 vt %/ day). The calculated leak rate of 1.4938 wt %/ day lies within the allowable tolerance band of 1.3950 wt %/ day 1 0.250 wt %/ day. SECTION A - TEST PREPARATIONS A.1 Type A Test Procedure The IPCLRT was performed in accordance with Quad-Cities Procedure QTS 150-6, Rev. 5, including checklist QTS 150-S1 through S13 and subsections T2, T3, T6, T8, T9, and T10. Approved Temporary Procedure 4255 was written to correct a unit designation in QTS 150-S2 (IPCLRT Operations Department Checklist). Approved Temporary Procedure 4261 was written to change QTS 150-S7 (U-2 IPCLRT Valve Line-up) for a test performed in the "as found"
- ondition and add additional draining and venting steps. Approved Temporary Procedure 4262 was written to correct QTS 150-S8 (U-2 IPCLRT Post Test Valve Line-Up) for the changes in the pre-test valve line-up. Approved Temporary Procedure 4257 was written to document a minor change in sensor locations.
These procedures were written to comply with 10 CFR 50 Appendix J, ANS/ ANSI N45.4-1972, and Quad-Cities Unit Two Technical Specifications, and to reflect the Commission's approval of a short duration test using the BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1 Topical report as a general test method. A.2 Type A Test Instrumentation Table One shows the specifications for the instrumentation utilized in the IPCLRT. Table Two lists the physical locations of the temperature and humidity sensors within the primary containment. Figure 1 is an idealized view of the drywell and suppression chamber used to calculate the primary containment free air subvolumes. Plant personnel performed all test instrumentation calibrations using NBS traceable standards.
TABLE ONE INSTRUMENT SPECIFICATIONS INSTRUMENT MANUFACTURER MODEL NO. SERIAL NO. RANGE ACCURACY REPEATABILITY Precision Pressure Gages (2) Volumetries 846,847 0-100 PSIA i.015 PSI i.001 PSI 44209 to Burns 44238 RTD's (30) Engineering SP1A1-5 1/2-3A inclusive 50-200*F 1 5*F 1 1*F 5835-1, 5835-8 5835-3, 6084-4 6084-9, 5835-6 Volumetrics Lithium 6084-7, 6084-5 Dewcells (10) (Foxboro) Chloride 5835-9, 5835-10 +140*F i 1.0*F 1 5*F Pall Trinity Thermocouple Micro 14-T-2H 0-600*F i2.0*F 1 1*F Fischer Flowmeter & Porter 10A3555 8608A9463R0001A 1.13-11.05 scfm 1 11 scfm Level Indicator Model 180 LI 263-101 Type VSI LT 263-61 GE Mode 1 50-553122CAAU2 0-400" H 2O 0756H/0306Z - . _ _ _ .-
1
, TABLE TWO SENSOR PHYSICAL LOCATIONS RTD NUMBER SERIAL NUMBER SUBVOLUME ELEVATION AZIMUTH
- 1 44209 1 670'0" 180*
2 44210 1 670'0" 0* 3 44211 2 657'0" 20' 4 44212 2 657'0" 197* 5 44123 3 639'0" 70* 6 44214 3 639'0" 255* 7 44215 4(Annular Ring) 643'0" 55' 8 44216 4(Annular Ring) 615'0" 225' 9 44217 5 620'0" 5' 10 44218 5 620'0" 100* 11 44219 5 620'0" 220* 12 44220 6 608'0" 40* 13 44221 6 608'0" 130* 14 44222 6 608'0" 220* 15 44223 6 608'0" 310* 16 44224 7 598'0" 70* 17 44225 7 598'0" 160* 18 44226 7 598'0" 250* 19 44227 7 598'0" 340* 20 44228 8 587'0" 10* 21 44230 8 587'0" 100* 22 44232 8 587'0" 190* 23 44233 8 587'0" 280* 24 44234 9(CRD Space) 586'0" 0* 25 44235 10(Torus) 578'0" 60* 26 44236 10(Torus) 578'0" 22.5* 27 44237 10(Torus) 578'0" 120* 28 44238 10(Torus) 578'0" 180* 29 44229 10(Torus) 578'0" 240' 30 44231 10(Torus) 578'0" 300* Thermocouple (inlet to 11(Rx Vessel) clean-up HX) DEWCELL NO. SERIAL NUMBER SUBV0LUME ELEVATION AZIMUTH 1 5835-1 1 670'0" 180* 2SP 5835-8 2,3,4 653'0" 90* 3 5835-3 2,3,4 653'0" 270* 4 6084-4 5 620'0" 0* 5 6084-9 6,7 605'0" 45' 6 5835-6 6,7 600'0" 220' 7 6084-7 8,9 591'0" 0* 1SP 6084-5 8,9 591'0" 202* 9 5835-9 10 578'0" 90* 10 5835-10 10 578'0" 270* Thermocouple (Saturated) 11 --- --- B
l Idealized View of Drywell and Torus
' used to Calculate Free Volumes I i
1 h' 37'r' ']
; 34'ea A ,,,,,,,
_ sn'sa l
/ ' !
7
/ <" . . *<
*Q y
-tu:::
, 1
- 1. , e e - _ gss. ..
. l//.s.' Z / , # sta'ea
("'* * ' "I 7 / / /jo wi.e
///Av~
/ , e, Free
'g< , 94'1 a ,9 Volume ,j,f./ '/ 635'10" l/,,M / 1 1 . i t / s,_,u/.[ e .; stt'8"
,- ("'3"9I "13 / f g-l, f
, .3 ,
, / ,
5
/*. ',./ / ' _ 614'6"
' *//// / .!,
' / (cre t i r4'.
,,,_, qcs ' ' '
G
-.0s'ln
,- _ 6u io-
.____ 'A ,
10'0" 7
/ 8
- /
-. /l I/
& ?
?. _/ f_593'0" 30'o"
Y W w m b/
= .- %
569'10" M oor) f - - 8
\
c
) 3u . s.. ,
\v FIGURE 1
_ __ cl.
, A.2.a. Temperature i
The location of the 30 platinum RTD's was chosen to avoid conflict with local temperature variations and thermal influence from metal structures. A temperature survey of the containment was conducted prior to the test to verify that the sensor locations were representative of average subvolume conditions. The RTD's were manufactured by Burns Engineering Inc. and are Model SP 1Al-5 1/2-3A. Each RTD and its associated bridge network was calibrated to yleid an output of approximately 0-100 mV over a temperature range of 50-150*F. Each RTD was calibrated by comparing the bridge output to the true temperature as indicated by the temperature standard. Three temperatures were used for the calibration. Two calibration constants (a slope and intercept of the regression line) were computed for each RTD by performing a least squares fit of the RID bridge output to the reference standard's indicated true temperature. The temperature standard used for all calibrations was a Volumetrics RTD Model VMC 701-B used with a Dewcell/RTD Calibrator Model 07782. The standard was calibrated by Volumetrics on September 22, 1986 to standards traceable to the NBS. The plant process computer scanned the output of each RTD-bridge network and converted-the output to engineering units using the calibration constants. A.2.b. Pressure Two precision quartz bourdon tube, absolute pressure. gauges were utilized to measure total containment pressure. Each gauge had a local digital readout and a Binary Coded Decimal (BCD) output to the process computer. Primary containment pressure was sensed by the pressure gauges in parallel through a 3/8" tygon tube connection to a special one inch pipe penetration to the containment. Each precision pressure gauge was calibrated from 62.8-65.1 PSIA in approximately 0.5 PSI increments using a third precision pressure gauge (Volumetrics Model 07726) that had been sent to Volumetrics for calibration. The pressure standard was calibrated on September 23, 1986 using NBS traceable reference standards. The digital readout of the instruments were in " counts" or arbitrary units. Calibration constants (a slope and intercept of a regression line) were entered into the computer program to convert " counts" into true atmospheric pressure as read by the third, reference gauge. No mechanical calibration of the gauges was performed to bring their digital displays into agreement with true pressure. A.2.c. Vapor Pressure Ten lithium chloride dewcells were used to determine the partial pressure due to water vapor in the containment. The dewcells were calibrated using the Volumetrics calibrator described in section A.2.a. above and a chilled mirror dewcell standard (Volumetrics S/N 1263) calibrated on September 22, 1986 by
, Volumetrics. The calibration constants for each dewcell (the slope and
. Intercept of a regression line) were computed relating the 0-100 mV output of the signal conditioning cards to the actual dewpoint indicated by the reference star.dard. A.2.d. Flow A rotameter flowmeter, Fischer-Porter serial number 8608A9469R0001A, was used for the flow measurement during the induced leakage phase of the IPCLRT. The flowmeter was calibrated by Fischer-Porter to within +17. of full scale (1.13-11.05 SCFM) using NBS traceable standards. Plant personnel continuously monitored the flow during the induced leakage phase and corrected any minor deviations from the induced flow rate of 8.90 SCFM by adjusting a 3/8" needle valve on the flowmeter inlet. The flow meter outlet was unrestricted and vented to the atmosphere. The flowmeter was calibrated to standard atmospheric conditions. A.3 Type A Test Measurement The IPCLRT was performed utilizing a direct interface with the station process computer. This system consists of a hard-wired installation of temperature, dewpoint, and pressure inputs for the IPCLRT to the process computer. The interface allows the process computer to scan the inputs and send the data to the PRIME computer without the disadvantages of multiplexers or positioning sensitive electronic hardware inside the containment during the test. The PRIME computer was used to compute and print the leak rate data using the ANSI /ANS mass plot method and the BN-TOP-1 method. Key parameters, such as total time measured leak rate, volume weighted dry air pressure and temperature, and absolute pressure were plotted on a Ramtek color terminal. Plant personnel also plotted a large number of other parameters, including reactor water level and temperature, dry air mass, volume weighted partial pressures and temperature, total time leak rate, statistically averaged leak rate and UCL, and subvolume average temperature and vapor pressure. In all cases, data was plotted hourly and computer summaries were obtained at 10 minute time intervals. The plotting of data and the computer printed summaries of data allowed rapid identification of any problems as they might develop. Figure 2 shows a schematic of the data acquisition system.
, A.4 Type A Test Pressurization A 3000 SCFM, 600 hp, 4 kV electric oil-free air compressor was used to pressurize the primary containment. An identical compressor was available in standby during the IPCLRT. The compressors were physically located on a single, enclosed truck trailer located outside the Reactor Building. The compressed air was piped using flexible metal hose to the Reactor Building, through an existing four inch fire header penetration, and piped to a temporary spool-piece that, when installed, allowed the pressurization of the drywell through the "A" containment spray header. The inboard, containment spray isolation valve, MO 1001-26A was open during pressurization. Once the containment was pressurized, the M0 1001-26A valve was closed and the spool piece was removed and replaced with a blind flange. The outboard containment spray valve MO 1001-23A was closed and out-of-service for the test.
Measurement System Schematic Arrangement , g 3/c- 3/C _, L 'f) LOCAL JUIICTICII BOIES (8) g 3/C = 3/C _. (26) POWER SUPPLY 00X (1)
- OEWCEl.L 5/C - 3/C 00) h Il0V ORYWELL
, TEllMil4RL v,
w 801 FLOl#ETER " CotEAINMENT PRESSURE INSTRUMEIR , 1 Q . RACK 1
+.
PRESSURE m, SEllsING , TUtil48 40/C - 40/C l I IPCLRT (3) - (3) , INSTRUMENT CONSOLE .
.p.
ORYWELL PERSONNEL INTERLOCK BULKilEAD RTO & DEWCELL SIGNAL 40/C (2) i CON 0lT10NING CAROS PROCESS 32/C (2) COMPUTER PRES 5URE GAUGES A/D CONVERSION AND SCAN l il0V l Print 3:1-TOP-1 l COMPUTER METHOD l AND ' CALCULATIONS MASS PLOT ! FIGURE 2 METHOD i 4 ____._m.,..y _ . . - - - _ , . _ _ _ _ - _. _ . _ - - . . . ,
, SECTION B - TEST METHOD B.1 Basic Technique The absolute method of leak rate determination was used. The absolute method uses the ideal gas laws to calculate the measured leak rate, as defined in ANSI N45.4-1972. The inputs to the measured leak rate calculation include subvolume weighted containment temperature, subvolume weighted vapor pressure, and total absolute air pressure.
As required by the Commission in order to perform a short duration test (measured leak rate phase of less then 24 hours), the measured leak rate was statistically analyzed using the principles outlined in BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1. 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, t i , is the leak rate on the regression line at the time tj. The use of a regression line in the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I report is different from the way it is used in the ANSI /ANS 56.8 standard. The latter standard uses the slope of the regression line for dry air mass as a function of time to derive a statistically averaged leak rate. In contrast, BN-TOP-1, Rev. I calculates a regression line for the measured leak late, which is a function of the change in dry air mass. For the ANSI /ANS calculations one would expect to always see a negative slope for the regression line, because the dry air mass is decreasing over time due to leakage from the containment. For the regression line computed in the BN-TOP-1, Rev.1 method the ideal slope is zero, since you presume that the leakage from the containment is constant over time. Since it is impossible to instantaneously and perfectly measure the containment leakage, the slope of the regression line will be positive or negative depending on the scatter in the measured leak rate values obtained early in the test. Since the measured leak rate is a total time calculation, the values computed early in the test will scatter much more than the values computed after a few hours of testing. The computer printouts titled " Leak Rate Based on Total Time Calculations" attached to the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I topical report are misleading in that the column titled " Calculated Leak Rate" actually has printed out the regression line values (based on all the measured leak rate data computed from the data sets received up until the last time listed on the printout). The calculated leak rate as a function of time (t )t can only be calculated from data available up until that point in time, t i . This is significant in that the calculated leak rate may be decreasing over time, despite a substantial positive slope in the last computed regression line. Extrapolation of the regression line is not required by the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I criteria to terminate a short duration test. What is required is that the calculated leak rate be decreasing over time or that an increasing calculated leak rate be extrapolated to 24 hours. The distinction between the regression line values and the calculated leak rate as a function of time is made in Section 6.4 of BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1. Calculated leak rates, as a function of time, are correctly printed out in the " Trends Based on Total Time Calculations" computer printouts in Appendix B of BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1.
, Associated with each calculated leak rate is a statistically derived upper
, confidence limit. Just as the calculated leak rate in BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1 and the statistically averaged leak rate in the ANSI /ANS standards are not the same (and do not necessarily yield nearly equal values), the upper confidence limit calculations are greatly different. In the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I topical report the upper confidence limit is defined as the calculated leak rate plus the product of the two sided 97.5% T-distribution value (as opposed to the one-sided 95% T-distribution used in the ANS/ ANSI standard) and the standard deviation of the measured leak rate data about the computed regression line (which has no relationship to the value computed in the ANSI /ANS standards). There are two important conclusions that can be derived from data analyzed using the BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1 method: 1) the upper confidence limit for the same measured leak rate data can be substantially greater than the value calculated using the ANSI /ANS method, and 2) the upper confidence limit does not converge to the calculated leak rate nearly as quickly as usually observed in the latter method as the number of data sets becomes large. With this in mind, the upper confidence limit can become the critical parameter for concluding a short duration test, even when the measured leak rate seems to be well under the maximum allowable leak rate. A graphical comparison of the two methods can be made by referring to Figure 3 for the BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1 calculated leak rate and upper confidence limit and to Figure F-1 for the statistically averaged leak rate and upper confidence limit based on ANSI /ANS 56.8-1981. This data supports the contention of many that BN-TOP-1, while it may not give the best (most accurate) estimate of containment leakage, is a conservative method of testing. B.2 Supplemental Verification Test The supplemental verification test superimposes a known leak of approximately the same magnitude as LA (LA = 8.16 SCFM or 1.0 wt %/ day as defined in the Technical Specifications). The degree of detectability of the combined leak rate (containment calculated leak rate plus the superimposed, induced leak rate) provides a basis for resolving any uncertainty associated with the measured leak rate phase of the test. The allowed error band is i 25% of LA-There are no references to the use of upper confidence limits to evaluate the acceptability of the induced leakage phase of the IPCLRT in the ANS/ ANSI standards or in BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1. B.3 Instrument Error Analysis An instrument error analysis was performed prior to the test in accordance with BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1 Section 4.5. The instrument system error was calculated in two parts. The first was to determine the system accuracy uncertainty. The second and more important calculation (since the leak rate is impacted most by changes in the containment parameters) was performed to determine the system repeatability uncertainty. The results were 0.1343 wt %/ day and 0.0197 wt %/ day for an 8-hour test, respectively. These values are inversely proportional to the test duration. The instrumentation uncertainty is used only to illustrate the system's ability to measure the required parameters to calculate the primary containment leak rate. The mathematical derivation of the above values can be found in Appendix 0. The method of calculating the equipment uncertainty is in conformance with the method outlined in BN-TOP-1.
, It is extremely important during a short duration test to quickly identify , a failed sensor and in real time back the spurious data out of the calculated volume weighted containment temperature and vapor pressure. Failure to do so can cause the upper confidence limit value to place a short duration test in jeopardy. It has been the stations experience that sensor failures should be removed from all data collected, not just subsequent to the apparent failure, in order to minimize the discontinuity in computed values that are related to the sensor failure (not any real change in containment conditions). For this test, however, no instrument failures after the start of the test were encountered. A single RTD failed inside the torus prior to the start of the test. The effect of this failure is analyzed in section F.5 of this report.
SECTION C - SEQUENCE OF EVENTS C.1 Test Preparation Chronology The pretest preparation phase and containment inspection was completed on October 12, 1986 with no apparent structural deterioration being observed. Major preliminary steps included:
- 1) Blocking open three pairs of drywell to suppression chamber vacuum breakers.
- 2) Installation of all IPCLRT test equipment in the suppression chamber.
- 3) Completion of all repairs and installations in the deywell.
- 4) Venting of the reactor vessel to the drywell by opening the manual head vent line to the drywell equipment drain sump.
- 5) Completion of the IPCLRT data acquisition system including computer programs, instrument console, locating instruments in the drywell, and associated wiring.
- 6) Performance of a temperature survey of the containment confirming instrument sensor locations to be representative of subvolumes.
- 7) Completion of the pre-test valve line-up.
This test was conducted at the beginning of the refuel outage. In the past Quad-Cities Station, like most other plants, has performed the IPCLRT (Appendix J Type A test) at the end of the refuel outage. The station has an exemption to 10 CFR 50, Appendix J requirements to allow performing the test at the end of the refuel outage. This test was performed at the beginning of the refuel outage to test the containment in an "as found" condition without any repairs or adjustments. The reasons for performing the test at the beginning of the outage were numerous, but the station believes that this approach gives a much better indication of containment condition at the start of the outage than the Type 8 and C "as found" minus "as left" penalties required when doing the test later in the outage after repairs and adjustments. While the method using penalties is conservative, it may also give a misleading indication of large leakage. 1
, Some Type B and C tests (Local Leak Rate Tests) were performed chile
. preparing for the Type A test. Unit Two was in cold shutdown at approximately 5:00 A.M. on October 11, 1986. At 3:20 A.M. on October 12, 1986 excessive leakage of the drywell head during a Type B test was noted. Subsequent inspections using bubble solution showed both the inner and outer seal was leaking. LER No. 86-14 was initiated with the required NRC notification. A copy of this report can be found in Appendix B of this report. The station decided to proceed with the test without any repairs to the drywell head since the Type B test did not unambiguously show that the containment would leak more than the allowable leakage (757. of LA )- C.2 Test Pressurization and Stabilization Chronology DATE TIME EVENT 10-12-86 1350 Began pressurizing containment. RTD #28 is failed with no voltage output. Deleted from test. 1530 Began snooping penetrations at 10 PSIG. There was only a slight leak observed from the drywell head. No other leaks were identified. 1915 Reached full containment pressure (65.53 PSIA). Closed MO 1001-26A. Shut off compressor. Began installation of blank flange on pressurization line. Started stabilization phase. 1919 First computer scan for the stabilization phase. 2325 Blank flange installed on pressurization line. 2330 Test stabilization criteria is satisfied. Stabilization period is greater than 4 hours and containment temperature change has been less than 0.5 degrees /hr. for more than 2 hours. Began the measured phase of the test. [ Note: This is test with drywell head seal leaking.] Hater level is decreasing .25"/hr. In reactor. 10-13-86 0450 Checked drywell head seal. There is an 8" long leak on the south-southwest side of the head. There is audible hissing and blowing bubbles (using snoop solution). 0509 Checks for leaks found: A0 1601-56 large bubbles A0 1601-208 small bubbles MO 1001-36A water leak from packing MO 1001-28A ~ 4 drops of water /sec X-12 Test Tap Valve - large bubbles X-16A Test Tap Valve - large bubbles 2-8803C, I, T Inboard valve - medium bubbles No repairs were performed.
, DATE TIME EVENT 10-13-86 1002 The leakage rate was greater than 75% (but less than 100%) of La. It was decided to terminate the test due to the drywell head leakage.
1035 Began taking air samples at the flowmeter location (Rad / Chem) in anticipation of de-pressurizing through SBGTS. 1130 Began de-pressurizing the drywell through SBGTS. 1355 De-pressurization fixture and valve M0 1601-63 are full open. 1500 Containment is at ambient pressure (0 PSIG). Maintenance is beginning the process of decontaminating the drywell head flange area, removing the head, inspecting the defective seal (MM, QC, and TS), replacing the seal, and re-installing the drywell head for a second IPCLRT. Maintenance is re-installing spool piece to pressurize the containment again. 2200 Drywell head is removed. Tech Staff (TS), Quality Control (QC), and Mechanical Maintenance (MM) performed an inspection of the defective seal, including photographs. After inspections, seal replacement and head installation started. 10-14-86 1030 Conference call between Corporate Licensing, Station management, and Region III to discuss head failure and decision to repeat the test at this time (as opposed to at the end of the outage). Decision was made to Type B test the drywell head after installation and again after the Type A test to verify that the Type A test did not cause a seal failure. 1230 Obtained corporate approval to proceed with the second test. 1415 Began re-pressurizing the containment after re-verifying all pre-test checklist items for possible alterations during the period between the end of the last test and the start of this one. Drywell head leaked 0.0 SCFH during LLRT. 1935 Containment is pressurized. M0 1001-26A closed. Began stabilization. 1940 Compressor off and secured. 2100 Snooped drywell head. No leaks. 10-15-86 0005 Stabilization complete. Stabilization criteria satisfied.
. C.3 Measured Leak Rate Phase Chronology DATE TIME EVENT 10-15-86 0005 Containment temperature stable to much less than l'F/hr. (BN-TOP-1). Also less than ANSI criteria for stable conditions (0.5 degrees /hr for more than 2 hrs).
0005 Started Measured Leak Rate Phase. Base data set is #61. 0212 Verified blind flange installed on pressurization line. 0807 Terminated test at 8 hours. All BN-TOP-1 acceptance criteria were satisfied by a wide margin. Calculated leak rate was .3021 wt. %/ day and UCL was .3429 wt %/ day. C.4 Induced Leakage Phase Chronology DATE TIME EVENT 10-15-86 0808 Valved in the flowmeter at 8.9 SCFM (80% scale reading). Radiation Protection is collecting a sample of containment air. 0825 Radiation Protection Department completed sample. The flowmeter is now unrestricted and the flow rate constant. 0926 The 1 hour stabilization required by BN-TOP-1 is complete. 0927 The base data set for the induced phase taken and is number 117. 1328 Terminated the induced phase after 4 hrs. Every data set indicated leakage within the acceptance band. C.5 Depressurization Phase Chronology l DATE TIME EVENT 10-15-86 1330 Rad / Chem taking air sample. 1445 Began containment depressurization using procedure for venting through the Standby Gas Treatment System. (SBGTS). Flowmeter isolated. 1825 Containment depressurized (O PSIG). 2030 Technical Staff personnel entered drywell. No ! apparent structural damage and instruments are still in place. Checked sump levels in drywell. 10-16-86 0236 Made initial entry to suppression chamber. Began removing instrumentation from the containment. L
c, SECTION D - TYPE A TEST DATA D.1 Measured Leak Rate Phase Data A summary of the computed data using the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I test method for a short duration test can be found in Table 3. Graphic results of the test are found in Figures 3-7. For comparison purposes only, the statistically averaged leak rate and upper confidence limit using the ANS/ ANSI 56.8-1981 standard are graphed in Figure F-1. A summary of the computed data using the ANS/ ANSI standard is found in Appendix F. D.2 Induced Leakage Phase Data A summary of the computed data for the Induced Leakage Phase of the IPCLRT is found in Table 4. The calculated leak rate and upper confidence limit using the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I method are shown in Figure 8. The measured leak rate and last computed regression line are shown in Figure 9. Containment conditions during the Induced Leakage Phase are presented graphically in Figures 10-12.
.. _. - _. . . . - .- - - - - - . ~. ..
o TABLE THREE Measured Leak Rate Test Results REACTOR MEAS. CALC. UPPER OATA TEST AVE. DRY AIR VESSEL LEAK LEAK CONF. SET TIME DURATION TEMP. PRESS. LEVEL RATE RATE LIMIT 61 00:05:52 0.0000 89.45 64.159 65.119 --- --- --- 62 00:15:54 0.1672 89.41 64.152 65.119 .4297 --- --- 63 00:25:54 0.3339 89.37. 64.145 64.945 .3991 .3991 --- 64 00:35:55 0.5008 89.33 64.139 64.945 .3867 .3836 .4557 65 00:45:56 0.6678 89.31 64.132 64.807 .4754 .4414' .6633 4 66- 00:55:58 0.8350 189.27 64.126 64.807 .4400 .4456 .5868 ) 67 01:05:59 0.0020' 89.24 64.120 64.702 .4295. .4417 .5522 ! 68 01:15:59 0.1686- 89.21 64.114 64.563 .4161 .4330 .5289 69 01:26:00 0.3356 89.18 64.108 64.563 .4411 .4379 .5203 i 7
'0 01:36:04 1.5033 89.15 64.102 64.425 .4341 .4384 .5114 i
, 71 01:46:06 1.6706 89.12 64.096 64.425 .4474 .4432 .5093 ? 72 01:56:12 1.'8389 89.09 64~091 . 64.251 .4258 .4397 .5020
- 73 02
- 06:14 2.0061 89.07 64.086 64.112 .4187 .4349 .4947 i 74 02:16:14 2.1728 89.04 64.081 64.112 .4165 .4307 .4879 '
75 02:26:18 2.3405 89.02 64.076 64.008 .4116 .4261 .4813 76 02:36:19 2.5075 89.00 64.071 63.869 .4091 .4220 .4751 . 77 02:46:19 2.6742 88.97 64.066 63.695 .3999- .4166 .4686 78 02:56:19: 2.8408 88.95 64.062 63.591 .3896 .4100 .4616 l 79 03:06:20 3.0078 88.92 64.056 63.452 .3934 .4054 .4555 3 80 03:16:21 3.1747 88.90 64.051 63.383 .3910 .4012 .4498 81 03:26:21 3.3414 88.88 64.047 63.313 .3939 .3983 .4452 82 03:36:24L 3.5089 88.85 64.042 63.175 .3813 .3936 .4395
- 83 03:46:25 3.6758 88.83 64.037- 63.001 .3713 .3880 .4334 84 03:56:25. 3.8425 88.81 64.033 63.001 .3745 .3837- .4280
- 85 04:06:27 4.0097 88.78 64.028 62.862 .3679 .3791 .4225
, 86 04:16:28 4.1767 88.75 64.024 62.758 .3598 .3739 .4168 1 87 04:26:29 4.3436 88.73 64.019 62.619 .3538 .3686 .4109 , i 88 04:36:29 4.5103 88.71 64.014 62.445 .3523 .3637 .4054
- 89 04
- 46:31 4.6775 88.68 64.009 62.307 .3515 .3594- .4002-
- 90 04:56:32 4.8444 88.66 64.005 62.202 .3455 .3548 .3950
- 91 05
- 06:34 5.0117 88.65 64.002 62.202 .3495 .3513 .3906 j 92 05:16:34 5.1783 88.63 63.998 62.063 .3436 .3475 .3860
- 93 05
- 26:35 5.3453 88.61 63.993 61.925 .3439 .3442 .3819 i 94 05:36:36 5.5122 88.59 63.989 61.751 .3359 .3403 .3774 ,
! 95 05:46:38 5.6794 88.57 63.985 61.612 .3367 .3370 .3734 i 96 05:56:39 5.8464 88.56 63.982 61.508 .3341 .3337 .3695 97 06:06:39 6.0130 88.53 63.977 61.508 .3380 .3312 .3665 98 06:16:40 6.1800 88.52 63.973 61.369 .3349 .3286 .3634 99 06:26:41 6.3469 88.50 63.968 61.369 .3450 .3274 .3622 100 06:36:41 6.5136 88.48 63.965 61.195 .3348 .3253 .3597 101 06:46:44 6.6811 88.47 63.960 61.195 .3478 .3246 .3596 102 06:56:44 6.8478 88.46 63.956 61.057 .3459 .3239 .3592 1- 103 07:06:45 7.0147 88.43 63.952 61.057 .3457 .3232 .3589 104 07:16:47 7.1819 88.43 63.948 60.952 .3526 .3232 .3599 s 105 07:26:48 7.3489 88.40 63.944 60.883 .3465 .3227 .3598 106 07:36:49 7.5158 88.40 63.939 60.813 .3493 .3226 .3602
- 107 07
- 46:49 7.6825 88.37 63.935 60.675 .3509 .3226 .3609 i' 108 07:56:50 7.8494 88.35 63.930 60.501 .3517 .3227 .3617 109 08:06:50 8.0161 88.32 63.925 60.362 .3476 .3225 .3618 l
E i
- - . , , , - - . - y . _ _ , - - - . - . - - . . . _ , , , . . , . - - ,
e TABLE FOUR Induced Leakage Phase Test Results REACTOR MEAS. CALCc UPPER DATA TEST AVE. DRY AIR VESSEL LEAK LEAK CONF. SET TIME DURATION TEMP. PRESS. LEVEL RATE RATE LIMIT 117 09:26:59 0.0000 88.20 63.853 59.425 --- --- --- 118 09:36:59 0.1667 88.18 63.844 59.425 1.5942 --- --- 119 09:47:00 0.3336 88.17 63.834 59.251 1.5177 1.5177 --- 120 09:57:01 0.5006 88:15 63.826 59.112 1.4752 1.4695 1.6041 121 10:07:05 0.6683 88.14 63.817 59.008 1.5145 1.4832 1.6927 122 10:17:09 0.8361 88.13 63.808 58.869 1.5002 1.4822 1.6289 123 10:27:11 1.0033 88.12 63.799 58.695 1.5096 1.4874 1.6104 124 10:37:12 1.1703 88.11 63.790 58.557 1.5158 1.4939 1.6026 125 10:47:14 1.3375 88.10 63.782 58.452 1.5051 1.4938 1.5887 126 10:57:14 1.5042 88.09 63.774 58.313 1.4943 1.4900 1.5740 127 11:07:16 1.6714 88.08 63.764 58.313 1.5333 1.5010 1.5857 128 11:17:21 1.8394 88.07 63.756 58.175 1.5150 1.5032 1.5817 129 11:27:22 2.0064 88.07 63.748 58.001 1.5350 1.5108 1.5871 130 11:37:24 2.1736 88.05 63.740 57.862 1.5015 1.5073 1.5789 131 11:47:24 2.3403 88.05 63.731 57.758 1.5189 1.5092 1.5770 132 11:57:25 2.5072 88.05 63.723 57.688 1.5400 1.5158 1.5826 133 12:07:28 .2.6747 88.04 63.715 57.619 1.5347 1.5199 1.5844 134 12:17:29 2.8417 88.04 63.707 57.445 1.5250 1.5210 1.5827 135 12:27:29 3.0083 88.04 63.700 57.307 1.5235 1.5217 1.5809 136 12:37:30 3.1753 88.03 63.692 57.202 1.5222 1.5220 1.5789 137 12:47:31 3.3422 88.03 E3.685 57.133 1.5234 1.5225 1.5773 138 12:57:32 3.5092 87.99 63.677 57.063 1.4856 1.5161 1.5720 139 13:07:34 3.6764 87.99 63.671 56.925 1.4629 1.5069 1.5662 140 13:17:35 3.8433 87.99 63.664 56.925 1.4679 1.4999 1.5599 141 13:27:36 4.0103 87.99 63.656 56.751 1.4681 1.4938 1.5536 3
~~
MEASURED LEAK RATE PHASE GRAPH OF CALCULATED LEAK RATE AND UPPER CONFIDENCE LIMIT 1.00-0.80- Acceptance Criteria = .75 Wt %/ Day '3. m R
- 0.60-
~ 3 . n_ g 0.40- [+ - . - g --
- 2 - - ., _
.3 8.20-0.00 3 i i , i i , i 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time From Start of Test (Hours)
FIGURE 3 l l
l MEASURED LEAK RATE PHASE
*- GRAPH OF TOTAL TIME MEASURED
- - LEAK RATE AND REGRESSION LINE i t
- t. ,
w. s 1.00-
! 0.80-
^
4 ' R ^
- o.bo- -
~
3 >
~
,v.+v- e'Q N /%% - -
- #te ;; ,-
m a a 0.20-0 00 i i i i i i i i 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time From Start of Test (Hours) i - FIGURE 4
. -. _____9
MEASURED LEAK RATE PHASE GRAPH OF DRY AIR PRESSURE 3 64.268-b4.416-E l G 5 S 64.100J E a {64.058-t w 2 64.000- .. D m 63.950-63.900, , , , , i i i , a 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time From Start of Test (Hours) FIGURE 5
,- D -
i MEASURED LEAK RATE PHASE GRAPH OF VOLUME WEIGHTED l AVERAGE CONTAINMENT VAPOR PRESSURE 0.3708 [0.365.0-a c. v a
$38.3600-m O= . . . . . . .
h0.3550- - 0.3500 , , , , , , , , , 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 Time From Start of Test (Hours) FIGURE 6
-D.
MEASURED LEAK RATE PHASE
. GRAPH OF VOLUME
. WEIGHTED AVERAGE CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE 98.00-C S
m 89.50-8 0 g89.00-a Y 2 . <
.586.50-
~ B S u 88.00 i , i i i i i i 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 Time From Start of Test (Hours) I TABLE 7
.-,7 - - - , . - , ,.--w- ,--,-..-,-~,-ew-. , - - , - + - , + --*+----,r- -e-' - + - -w - ' - - - ' -
INDUCED LEAKAGE PHASE
. GRAPH OF CALCULATED
. LEAK RATE AND UPPER CONFIDENCE LIMIT 2.00-Upper Acceptance Limit A
/ -
= = = = - = " = =
g .50-L % ; = = a = = a m R x
$ 1, gg_
Lower Acceptance Limit 3 a e J 0.50-0 00 i i i i i i i i
.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Time From Start of the Induced Test (Hours)
FIGURE 8
}
INDUCED LEAKAGE PHASE
.' GRAPH OF TOTAL TIME
- MEASURED LEAK RATE AND REGRESSION LINE 2.06-L.50- y -- - -
^
=
"= " = = - _ ,
3, A h
$ 1.80-m E
a A .
;0.50-a I I l i i l l }
.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Time From Start of the Iriduced Test (Hours)
FIGURE 9
, _ , _ . , . _ , _ _ , _ _ . m.. , , _
INDUCED LEAKAGE PHASE
. GRAPH OF VOLUME
.. HEIGHTED AVERAGE CONTAINMENT TEMPERATURE 88.380-C
,66.250-e9 e x e 88.200- N
\
g88.150-e Y 88.100-i
.E =
7 88.050-o 66.000 , , , , , , , *]
.00 .50 1.00 1. 50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Time From Start of the Induced Test (Hours)
FIGURE 10
INDUCED LEAKAGE PHASE GRAPH OF VOLUME WEIGHTED AVERAGE CONTAINMENT VAPOR PRESSURE 6.3608-6.3580-2 H T m 0.3568-E h0.3540-t
- a. _= = -
L E0 ' s .3520-X" . 9.3500 i i i i i i i 8
.00 .50 1.60 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Time From Start of th; Induced Test (Hours)
FIGURE 11
INDUCED LEAKAGE PHASE GRAPH OF DRY AIR PRESSURE 63.900-63.850-2 {63.800-m S,63.750-E e t 63.700-c N " 63.650- ' i i l i l i i I
.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 Time From Start of the Induced Test (Hours)
FIGURE 12 1
. SECTION E - TEST CALCULATIONS Calculations for the IPCLRT are based on the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I test method and are found in Quad Cities procedure tables QTS 150-T3 and T9. A reproduction of these procedures can be found in Appendix C. In preparing for the first Quad Cities short duration test using BN-TOP-1, Rev. I a number of editorial errors and ambiguous statements in the topical report were identified. These errors are presented in Appendix E and are editorial in nature only. The Station has made no attempt to improve or deviate from the methodology outlined in the topical report.
Section 2.3 of BN-TOP-1, Rev. 1 gives the test duration criteria for a short duration test. By station procedure some of these duration criteria have been made more conservative and in some cases these changes may be required by regulations. A. " Containment Atmosphere Stabilization" Once the containment is at test pressure the containment atmosphere shall be allowed to stabilize for about four hours ( 4 hours required by Quad Cities procedure and actual stabilization: 8 hrs) The atmosphere is considered stabilized when:
- 1. The rate of change of average temperature is less than 1.0*F/ hour averaged over the last two hours.
DATA SET
- AVE. CONTAINMENT TEMP. AT 59 89.554 53 89.824 0.27 47 90.144 0.32 average: 0.295'F/ hour
- Approximate time interval between data sets is 10 minutes.
or
- 2. "The rate of change of temperature changes less than 0.5*F/ hour / hour averaged over the last two hours."
(Not required if A.1 satisfied) B. Data Recording and Analysis
- 1. "The Trend Report based on Total Time calculations shall indicate that the magnitude of the calculated leak rate is tending to stabilize" at a value less than the maximum allowable leak rate (LA )^
By Quad Cities procedure the calculated leak rate must be less than 0.75 LA. The actual value was 0.3225 LA, stable, and decreasing (no extrapolation required). and
. 2. "The end of the test upper 95% confidence limit for the calculated . leak rate based on total time calculations shall be less than the maximum allowable leak rate."
By Quad Cities procedure the upper confidence limit must be less than 0.75 LA . The actual value was 0.3618 LA-and
- 3. "The mean of the measured leak rates based on Total Time calculations over the last five hours of the test or last 20 data points, whichever provides the most data, shall be less than the maximum allowable leak rate."
By Quad Cities procedure this average must be less than 0.75 L. A The actual value was 0.3526 LA for the last 5 hours. and
- 4. " Data shall be recorded at approximately equal intervals and in no case at intervals greater than one hour."
At Quad Cities data scans are automatically performed on 10 minute intervals. No data sets were missed or lost during the 8 hour test period. No computer failures were encountered. and
- 5. "At least twenty (20) data point shall be provided for proper statistical analysis."
There were 49 data sets taken for this test. and
- 6. "In no case shall the minimum test duration be less than six (6) hours."
Quad Cities' procedure limits a short duration test to a minimum of eight (8) hours. The data taken during this test would support the argument that a shorter duration test can be conducted. All of the above termination criteria were satisfied in six (6) hours. SECTION F - TYPE A TEST RESULTS F.1 Measured Leak Rate Test Results Based upon the data obtained during the short duration test, the following results were determined: (LA = 1.0 wt %/ day)
- 1) Calculated leak rate at 8 hours equals 0.3225 wt %/ day and declining
. steadily over time (<0.7500 wt %/ day).
. 2) Upper confidence limit equals 0.3618 ut %/ day and declining (<0.750 wt
.. %/ day).
- 3) Mean of the measured leak rates for the last 5 hours (31 data sets) equals 0.3526 wt %/ day (<0.750 wt %/ day).
- 4) Data sets were accumulated at approximately 10 minute time intervals and no intervals exceeded I hours.
- 5) There were 49 data sets accumulated in 8 hours.
- 6) The minimum test duration (by procedure) of 8 hours was successfully accomplished (> 8 hours).
F.2 Induced Leakage Test Results A leak rate of 8.90 scfm (1.0725 wt %/ day) was induced on the primary containment for this phase of the test. The leak rates during this phase of the test were as follows. BN-TOP-1 Calculated Leak Rate 0.3225 0.3225 (Measured Leak Rate Phase) Induced Leak (8.90 scfm) 1.0725 1.0725 Allowed Error Band +0.2500 -0.2500 1.6450 1.1450 BN-TOP-1 Calculated (Induced Leak Rate Phase) Leak Rate 1.4938 wt %/ day The induced phase of the test has a duration criteria given in Section 2.3.C of BN-TOP-1. The test duration requirements are listed below and were satisfied by the test procedure and the data analysis:
- 1. Containment atmospheric conditions shall be allowed to stabilize for about one hour after superimposing the known leak. (actual: I hour 2 minutes).
- 2. The verification test duration shall be approximately equal to half the integrated leak rate test duration. (actual: 4 hours for 8 hour test)
- 3. Results of this verification test shall be acceptable provided the correlation between the verification test data and the integrated leak rate test data demonstrate an agreement within plus cr minus 25 percent. (actual: see results above)
I
. F.3 Pre-Operational Results vs Test Results Past IPCLRT reports have compared the results of each test with the pre-operational IPCLRT, performed April 20-21, 1971. Over the last 15 years, different test equipment, sensor locations and number of sensors, test methods, and test duration have been used. This test yielded results that compare favorably with recent tests and demonstrate that there has been no substantial deterioration in containment integrity.
The test results for this test were conducted prior to any repairs or adjustments, with the exception of the drywell head seal. The fact that this test compares so well with previous tests would support an argument that the Type B and C repairs do not greatly impact the Type A result. With the redundancies in the containment system and the fact that many of the Type B and C tests are performed on valves for systems that do not onstitute a potential leak path during an accident, this result should not be surprising. There was, however, a deterioration of the drywell head seal over the past operating cycle and the analysis of this problem is given in LER No. 86-14, Docket No. 50-265, DPR-30, Unit Two. A copy of that report is included in Appendix B of this report. F.4 Type A Test Penalties During the Type A test, there were a number of systems that were not drained and vented outside the containment. The isolation valves for these systems or penetrations were not " challenged" by the Type A test. Even though these systems would not be drained and vented during a DBA event, historically penalties for these systems have been added to the Type A test results. AS LEFT MINIMUM PATHWAY LEAKAGE SCFH wt %/ day Primary Sample Valves 0.075 .00015 ACAD 0.600 .00123 RHR 21.915 .04476 Feedwater 5.920 .01209 DWFDS 0.020 .00004 DWEDS 0.180 .00037 RCIC Steam Ex. and Drain 15.400 .03145 HPCI Steam Ex. and Drain 0.500 .00102 All electrical penetrations 0.000 .00000 0xygen Analyzer 0.70 .00143 Clean-up System 5.950 .01215 SRM/IRM Purge 0.000 .00000 TIP Purge Check Valve 3.800 .00776 TOTAL: 55.06 0.1125 The penalties increase the Type A test result to 0.4350 wt %/ day with ar upper confidence limit of 0.4743 wt %/ day.
, F.5 Evaluation of Instrument Failures Prior to the start of the test, RTD No. 28 failed inside the suppression chamber. The failure was after the hatches had been installed and it was decideo not to repair it for the test. The instrument showed a direct short between leads providing a zero ohm input to the bridge circuit.
The effect of this instrument failure on the instrument error reported in section B.3 of this report is minimal. Tha system accuracy uncertainty becomes 0.1353 wt %/ day and the system repeatability uncertainty becomes 0.0198 wt %/ day for an 8 hour test. F.6 As Found Type A Test Result The as found value for the Type A test is the calculated leak rate based on 10 hours of data taken prior to repairing the drywell head seal. That value was 0.8382 wt %/ day with an upper confidence limit of 0.9480 wt %/ day. These values do not include the penalties described in section F.4. above. Tne total as found minimum pathway leakage for the volumes listed in section F.4. was 140.54 SCFH or 0.2871 wt %/ day. Adding this penalty to the ILRT result (prior to making the head seal repair) gives an ILRT result of 1.1253 wt %/ day at an upper confidence limit of 1.2351 wt %/ day. i 4 APPENDIX A TYPE B AND C TESTS 1 i 1 Presented herein are the results of local leak rate tests conducted on all
- penetrations, double-gasketed seals, and isolation valves since the previous IPCLRT in May, 1985. Total leakage for double gasketed seals and total j' leakage for all penetrations and isolation valves following repairs satisfied the Technical Specification limits.
f I i
-. _ ___.__--_.x-____..,_,____ _ .._. , - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . , _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ - _ _ _ . , _ _ _ _ - , _ _ . . _ _ _ . . _ . . _ .
n-I o e AS F0lse (SCFM) AS LEFT (SCFM) WALVE($)/ l l MINIIRAI l 01AX11880 DESGilPT60N l PEIEIRATICII DATE I TOTAL I PAfte4Y I PAileAV OATE I l TOTAL I Paite4Y l MINIIRAI l PAfteAY l MAXilAal
'A' isSiv i 40 203-1A.2A lia si 11 30 l f. /r i > 10 l to-// l J tu i t. i s- 1 J. 3p l
'8' 461v i 40 203-18.28 l io . n 1ru 1 2 Jo I 4 s./ lio -n l Y t/ I J.Jv i 4 er l
'C' isSly I A0 203-1C.2C lis-u 19 >J l Vu i 9 22 I ru -r, t9nl 'f. 6 / l 4.12 1
'D' essly I A0 203-10.2D l fo. n i@ ul 3 vs 1 34. 9v i /> 3 31 3 hR l O.0 l J Td l TOTAL 56. v5 TOTAL /1. 6 /
TOTAL CORRECTED
- 9't . P1 TOTAL 03fMIECTED
- 10.4fs isSL (%AIN l MD 220-1.2 11. -ri i D.iA l io. uc I s2. oJ I, .* p el n . w I /-r w I .Jg. a l PRitdARY SAMPLE I A0 220-44.45 i n - w I c. . , r 1o.nfi o ir i r, w l o
~ l
' A' TORUS COOLING SPRAY l WO 1001-34.36.3?A l s y, [ 0.61 1 o _ to r l n al l fe- C l 0.0 l C. b5 l o.u l lio.2 alp.,2 I w.ci i *A . 1 1 fo- s al 9.,) 1 r. v4 I 9.,2 l
'B' Os $ PRAY l MO 1001-238.268
'8' Fee RETURN 1 MO 1001-298 la>2 IiJ.. I tJ.e I iJ w I n-avil't.r I /v. r i H.s l
'B' TORUS COOLING / SPRAY l MD 100134.36.378 I m-)J l f H l O of I #.;2 1,e -a a i f. 3 ) i O .6/ i /. J J l PAGE TOTAL l NA l l l l NA l l l l (ExCEPT IISaV'R) l D I Ul 8 3 * ** l 389.4/ l I '# l '#I I bb'IE l
-I-10/0168s o
(nili TwJ AS F(MS (SCFHI AS Liff ($(FM) [ gluttg30 [ ig4XitR38 l VALVE (S)/ l l WIN 14ASG l EX11R31 DATE I TOTAL 1 PATHEAY I PAfteAY DATE I TOTAL PAfteAY l PATHEAY_ DESOtlPil0N l PENETRATION I W 1001-47.50 lin - r 5 I o.o I o. o I o,o f in-i I a.O l n, o 1 o. l SitJT0051 (20LiesG i n. 1 l WAD SPRAY l ts 1001-60.63 lti-re i rA 1 I n.i i n.1 l tr ri l o.2 1 a.i g, q r l v l CLEAft UP SUCil0N I 110 1201-2.5 l s. - J# 1h4 i f vr I tr 9 i e, s i i /, e l f, le-a Fil n s I h. 's,' I 31. S I # -is I g.e I (f J l e6 l RCic STEAlf SUPPtY l te 1301-16.17 l ie ie ! 7. 9 I 7 << l 74 I lo se 1 7 <e 1 7.4 1 >v l RCIC STEnlf EXHAUST l CV 1301-41 l v -,e 17s I7s ! -r. e i no-se 1 7, r i 7+ 1 '7 a l RCIC VAC. Ptar ER. 1 CV 1301-40 l A0 1801-21.22.55.561 to in. I w. JH I lo 4 9 i
'tr. m i se rw I 4 r1 1 1.o 7 l 4, e 3 l De/10 flus PLNIGE SUPPLY l l l l l l l A0 1801-23.24,80. l "'
l l D5/1011U5 PURGE EX ##'## 1%d i 4f A 't. O l 61.62.63 1 1 90 1 9'I l 'f O l l l l l l l A01601-20A, l l l
'A' TORUS VENT l CV 160131A l #" I b lI l 3. /
- I r..J 3 l ** 1l 6 13 1l 3. si l 4 /3 l l l l l l l l A0 1601-208 l l l
'8' TORUS VElst l CV 1601-318 l'" l '"
- I' I 7& I 'Y 74 l# IN'Ji l '7 83 i /'r > 5 ' l i e3 S I# f I 0. $ i i /. / lrs-3 i t. t I O. F3 I /. / l Os/f0RUS Pt#1GE l A0 1601-57.58.59 l A0 2001-3.4 Ire-11I o.og i o. o e 1 0 ov i re n I o.04 I o o2 I o yv l De FLOOR ORAIN SLAIP De EO, DR. Star i A0 2001-15. 16 I e, a s 1 o. R I o.is I r3 16 i 1,- s s I o 3r. I c./s I o. se l HPCI STEAtt SUPPty 1 idD 2301-4.5 I n -/v i .i 1 l r .14 1 1.1 l It-ro I a 1 l i,r i >; l 1,o si l o,o 1 06' I oo Iio-a,I o.o I o o l OO l HPCI STEAts Ex. I CV 2301-45 HPCI DRAIN POT EX. I CV 2301-34 l re-<i l o. c i Rf I o.r l 'o -a i o.s I or 1 o.s l De PWLARAflC i A0 4120. 4721 li e71 v.o I oo I a.o I in-it I o o I oo I a.o l I I I I I I 1 1 I PAGE TOTAL l NA 18M 'i l 7 # 3 1 #N.5 7 i NA l'N U# l '/4. 'T 4 l 7V.W l l
I
/
Laeli Two AS F0tse IS&H) AS LEFT ($&M) VALVE (S)/ l l 4HNitRai l 4AAXitRAI l l NINIIGAl l IthX11Rai DESOIIPil0N l PEIETRATION DATE I TOTAL I PAfteAY I PAT W AY OATE I TOTAL I PAtlear i PAi m Y I A0 0001A. 4802A l ia m 1 0. 0 i fLO l 0, o 1 f,-n i o.O l n.o I o, e, l Q2ANALYZER g2ANALYZEA I A0 00018. 48028 I m-2 t I < .o I o.a l o. o I e ir i o .o I n.o I ao l g,AnaAL12tR I A0 8801C. 8802C lis->lI en i no I so 1 o a. n s I s 1 1 o or i v. o l g2 ANALYZER l 40 40010, 8002D I /v-n 1 L l o . e, 1 0.4 1,.3 - 4 I t.) I of I o <> l g2AseALYlER I A0 0003. 8804 l is - n. I si a 1 3c l r, . n Io aw I n.o l C.C 1 ii. o l IIP BALL VAivE I 733-1 in-1 1 __a AI o. > 1 oa li Jo 10. >s I o >r i e . .a r l IIP BALL VALVE l 733-2 In-J le4 l o.4 I o.4 le-za l o cr i c'. m c Ie u- l IIP BALL valve I 733-3 11, 1 1o> 1 oc I 0. s- l e >. le.o le e- I c.- l TIP BALL VALVE l 733-4 1 it 4 I n.o I oe l 0. 0 l , - >v i2> 1 .? .1 i = > l TIP BALL VALVE l 733-5 in i l o.9 1 o9 i C9 1 :- Jo I c, O l <> ' l *t o l IIP Pl#1GE OECM l 700-743 1 n- 1 1 1. a I tv i 3-& 11,- 1 l f. W l 3. H l 3, f4 l CAas 1 50 2499-1A.2A i n -lJ l>.o I oo l oA 1/-3 I o.o I up 1 oo l CAas I SO 2499-18.28 1 n o I < >. o I c.o I n.o I i- 3 Ioo I o.o I o. o l CAas I SO 2499-3A.4A li,- ! l t. o I o.o 1 Oo I#-3 10.0 l c> 0 l o.O l
# 1 SO 2499-38.48 1 n !t i no I n. n I oo i1-1 i o.o 1 oo I o~
CAas l ACAD l A0 2599-2A.23A i , . 1s I o . A l o.o I o.4 I m tol O.L l c) o l o.6 l ACAD 1 A0 2599-28.238 l o tol o J l cn i v.; I o . ta l o. 3 1 oo i ci ,, [ ACAD 1 A0 2599-3A.24A l i> 1v l o.o l o.o l o.O l is -le,l o . o l eo l c) o l ACAD l A0 2599-38.248 l,v-bl O.7 1 6.0 l o. 7 I so Jol o F l OO 1 o. 7 l ACAD l A0 2599-44.5A i1.-81 f.1, 1 o.40 1 0 7f I n-/* 1 1.fr i o.w o i ci 7 r l ACAD l A0 2599-48.58 I n - 13 1 0.4 1 0,3 l o. ~1 I I, o I o.4 i o do 1 o 18 l l t i I I I I I I PAGE TOIAL l NA l Ill. )f 1 'I7'd l "IJ' N l NA IN N lh.T ldd M l l l l l [ l l [ l L , .
r tenst fusa AS FOLee (SCFH) AS LEFT (SCFH) WALVE(S)/ I i MINitats l IA4Xitaal DESCRIPT 60N 1 PEtETRATICII DATE I TOTAL l PAfteAf I PAfte4Y DATE I l TOTAL i PAftenf I PATeeAYl IstNetRAI l EQUIPIENT HATOt I X-1 l le-// l 0.0 1 0.0 1 00 11-1541 0.01 0. 0 1 0. 0 l 05 ACCESS HAIDI l X-4 lie-n ! 0.0 l AO l 0. 0 l i- to t71 00l A./) I g. o l CR0 HATOe l X-s ito./L l 0.0 1 00 1 0. 0 11-12171 001 0. 0 l o. o l TIP PEIETRAil0N l X-364 1// 'I I OO 1 AO l 0O l // 3 i B. O l d. O l O. 0 l TIP PEETRAll0N l X-358 I// 3 1 A0 I 00 i O. 0 I //-3 i A01 00 i O. o l TIP PEE TRATION l X-35C ll/- 3 I 0.0 i d01 0. 0 I // _T I 0. 0 1 0. 0 I ad l ilP PEIEIRATION I X-350 i ll- 3 I O.01 0.01 d o 1 /1 7 1 0.0 1 do 1 0. 0 l IIP PEEIRATION 1 X-35E 1 //- 3 1 0. 0 i O.0 i b. O l //-3 1 0. 0 i do 1 0. 0 l TIP PEllETRATION l X-35F 1// 3 i A01 0. 0 I o. O I//.310.0 l A0 i B. M l ilP PEteETRAil0M l X-35G 1/I- 3 10.01 0.01 0. 0 1//-3 i AdI d. O I Os l TORUS HATCH l X-200A l /0 /01 8. 0 1 0. 0 i O. 0 l /-1sel d. o 1 M. o 1 0. 6 l TORUS HATOs I X-2005 l/d-to 1 0.O I Oo1 0. O I /-2,.rA o. o I 0. o 1 M. o l ORYNELL HEAD l ---- l /d /11 flD l llD l f)D l /-d-F/l O. O l DOI d. O l SHE AR LUG INSP HATOt i SL-1 11/-171 0. O l o.O 1 d.O l //-n 1 0. O l &O l #M l 9tEER LIIG lleSP, HATCH I SL-2 l // // l O.O I O. 0 i B. 0 l //-171 A o1 O. M 1 OO l SHEAR LUG INSP. HATCH l SL-3 I // 17 i O. O l 0O l M. o l //-/ 7 i M. O l O.81 dO l SHEER LUG INSP. HATQi l SL-4 1//-/710.01 0. 0 i O. O l //-17 l M. 0 1 O.O l d. O l SHEAR LUG INSP. HATCH I SL-5 l II-/71 0.3 1 ,M i 0. 3 11/-/ 71 0. ~t 1 , /f f 4.3 l SHEER LUG IIeSP. HATOi i SL-6 111-171 0.0 1 8. 0 l M.o I//-171 M. O l o. O l d. O l SHEAR LUG ileSP. HAIOt i SL-7 11/-/71 Afl O.17 i O. f l/1-171 .f I .1f I .f l SHEER LUG lleSP. HATOI i SL-8 I sf-171 O. O l O. O l M. O l //-171 0.0 l d. O l 8, o l l l l l 1 I i i i PAGE TOIAL l NA i 1 NN l h l NA l
- l
- 1
- l up
Laelf Tw AS Pense (50%) 48 (J f t ($(PH) WALVE($)/ l l NIN14AAI INutilaas NINissal l MAXilRAI tisemiPilogs I MIETMil(NI DATE I TOTAL I PATIGAY PAileAY QATE I l TOTAL PATleAY I PATeeAV lEOs. PEWiMil(NI l X-74 1/o-27I h o 1 o.ol d,o lio-evi o,o loo l o, o l l/o-n i n n I n.a I a.n lio 1/l o.o I o.o I c> . o t W00. PEIETMil(NI l X-M iEas. PEN TMT10N I X-7C l /D >71 n. o I n.n IhD l m -n l o . o I o.o I o,o l W00. PENETMi10N I X-M l /n Pfl n n I o, o i D.o l /o -n l o . o I o, o l O.o l 1/n. 2 7 I n . n 1 0.o I o.o l ie-> > 1 o, o I o. o I o . <> l Wot. PEsETETION l X-a WOt. PE9ETMilGI l X-GA l/o J7I o.D l no I o.D l ia-171 o. o 10.O l o.o l 1 X-98 l /o 2110.3 I n./ l D.i lio -2 71 c. ) I o. / l o. .a l WOt. PEWTMT1011 NEOt. PE9ETM T40N l X-10 Im-nI a.o 1 0.0 l n.o l/o-n I o.o I o.O l o, o l I X-11 1/o-271 0,o 1 0, o I o.O I/o n I o. o I o, o I o.o l IEOt. PEWTMil0N WOt. PEWTMilm l X-12 1/o-n l 3.501 /. 7f 1 3 . 3" 1/o -> 71 3, ( l /. pr 1 3, r l l D.n Iro- > 7 I o. o I o. o Io,o 1E00. PENTMil(Ni I X-13A I /o - 2 s l n O 1 o.O l lio - n i n . _1 l o . /c i oa i ro-> 7 I o . # l 0,er i o.1 l WOt. PEIETMil001 l X-13B l /m -2 71 f. 5 1 n.?r i /. c liu -n l /. _r Io.fr i /,r l WOt. PEIETMT10N I X-14 4E00. PE8ETMil0N l X-23 l/o-J71 n.o 1 o.O l d,o l /o n I o . o Io,o I o.o l W Ot. PtlIETMi10N I X-24 l on-nl o. o l o.o I n.o l/u -> 7 l o . o 10 0 l o.o l WOt. dwimil0el i X-75 1 to-n l / A I a. a i 1. 6 1/o n l /. c I o. 9 I /. e l WOt. PtWiMTI(NI l X-26 lio-771 n.o I a. o I n. o l/o -/t l o, o 1 o. o I o.o l lE04. PftETMil0li i X-36 I in 2 71 o.1 l M./ l o. J 1/o -17 i o. J l o./ I o. 7 l WOt. PEIETMil0le 1 X-47 110 27 I o.o I o. o I o. o l>o >7Io o I o.o I o. o l l X-17 1 ro -M l I. Y l o. 7 1 /. '/ l /* -J 7 l / . Y I o. 7 i /. V l W04. PE9ETMil0N l X-16A 1lo -/o I r o 1 3. c 1 f. n 1/o er 1 5, o 1 J.r i S. o l W Ot. PEIETMil0N 1 1 I i l I I I i PAGE TOTAL l M i13.7 16.85 l 13 7 i M l 3, 7 1 d . Bf I /J. 7 l 1
.- . _ ?.
talli F an AS P0lse (804) As I H T (acPN) VRVE(S)/ IIAXIIsal I sluttsal i teAXleans "lPTitbl l PEIETMfl(bl DATE i l TOTR I PATIGAYl PAThe4V Wlullsal DATE I TOTR PATleAf l PAfteAY 1E01. PEIETRAil(bl l X-le l In -lal 0,0 1 o.O 1 C. O I 101s i o, o I o, o I o. o l I X-100A 1 - 1 - 1 1 - l ~ l - l ~ l - l ELECTRICAL PEIETRATie llo-Dio.o 1 o. o I o.O 1/o jo l o . o 1 o.o I o. o l ELECTRICAL PEIETRhile I X-10m 1 X-1GDC 1 fo-> a l n. o I o. o I o. o I /o .>m I o . o I o , o Io.n l ELECTRICAL PEIETRATIGI ELECTRICAL PEGETRATime lX-1000 l l l ~ ll ~ l - l l ~l ~ l (tself taf GET) l l I i l I ~l l l l X-100E I/e-;,I o.o l C.O I o.O lio 1, I d. o 1 o. o 1 o. o l ELECTRICAL PEIETMilGI ELECTRICAL PEIETMi10N i X-100P i/>-3 i O.o 1 O. o i O.O Ir> - t Io o I o.o Ioo l ELECTRICAL PE45T h il(BI l X-100G l JJ- 1 l oe o 1 o o i c.o I r> i lo.o 1oo I o.o l l X-101A Im-nIo o I M.o I o. O lio-w I o, o I o. o Ioo l ELECTRICAL PEIETRATICII ELECTRICAL PEIETMilott l X-1018 1/o-nIo.o i v. o I o.0 f ro v e I o. o I o,o Ioo l ELECTRICAL PEIEIRATION l X-1010 I/> i 1 O o I oo I o. o tr> 1 I o. o I o. o I o. o l l l l l l ELECTRICAL PEIEikil(bl (talli GIE ONLY) lX-102A l l~l~l l l l l l l~l l
~
l
~
j l l l l l l l l ELECTRICAL PE9ETRAil0N lX-1028 l ! I l/ M I O.O l C.O 1 00 ( fo .j ,1 0. o I o.o I o.o l (UNIT TWO ONLY) ELECTRfCAL PE8ETRAil0N l X-103 I/e->m I n.a 1 0.o I a.o l/o a I o o I o. o I o. o l l l l l l l l l ELECTRICAL PENEIMil0N lX-104A l 0 (Ulsli tug OBILY) I 1/ * *' l # O I O*O IO*# 1/*'>'l 0 0 1 00 1 l ELECTRICAL PEIETRAil0N l X-1048 1/o->+1 o.o I o.O l o.o l/o > f I c. O I o. o Ioo l ELECTRICAL PENETRAff001 1 X-104C 1lo->st o.o lO.o I c.O 1/o n I o.n f0o I o. o l l l l l l l 1 i l PAGE TOTAL l NA I U.O l O'O I O.O g g4 g C,o; 0,o lO.O l l { CL
Lalli 7"h/ O Ag pegg (ggpH) A$ tJ ff ($(FH) l VALVE (S)/ IAAX81Aal NINassal l teAJtlanal assa lPil(BI I PEW TM il0N DATE I l TOTAL I PAileAYl DATE MTleAYNIN14AAB I l TOTAL Mile &Y I PATieAY ELECTRICAL MNETMil0N lX-1040 l l l l l l l l l (talli TW (BILV) i I12-3 I o.o i v. o I o.O l 12-3 l o. O l o. o i c.o l ELECTRICAL PEM TRATION i X-104P 112 1 lc o I oo 1 O. O les 3 1Do Io o i o. e, l ELECTRICAL M E TMil0N lX-106A l l
~
l
~ l - lf -l l l - g
- g (Lalli Off ONLY) i i ~~~ l l l g g g ELECTRICAL PEW iMil0M l X-1068 l l l l l l l l -
l auMIT O W ONLv) ! i- l - i - 1 - i- i- 1 i l ELECTRICAL PEW ik il0N I X-106C lic A 1 v. c, i U. O l o. O lio >al o o I o ,o 1 o. o l ELECTRICAL PENETMi10N l X-1060 l ' l l l l l ~ l ~ ll ~ l (talli ONE ONLY) l l l ~l l l l l l ELECTRICAL PENETMI10N lX-106A l l l l l l l l l (Lself 150 ONLY) I lio + 10. O Io o I o c) I fo pot o.o l p, o g o, o g ELECTRICAL PEETMil0N lX-1068 l l l l l l l l l (Laeli Ts0 0NLv) l l'o n i o. o i v. o i v. o iso a l o. c) i o. o 1o ol ELECTRICAL MIIETRAil0N l X-107A l/c o v I o t' l O.O l v. o Ie sf I o. O li> O l 0 ol ELECidlCAL PENETMT10N lX-1078 l l l l l l l l l (tAlli 150 OleLY) I l'd~ll O'" lO C' I OO l#J 'd 10 O 1 O" l C' 0 l I X-227A I s /i 7 l o . O l o,di O.O l / -/ 71 O O l 6 cm jOo l ToltsS MIETRATION faitsS PEW TRATION l X-2278 11/i7 iool C.ol O o i /-/11 o ol no1m o l I 'A' T01418 LEVEL FLANCES l ---- l//-iti eol 0.0 l C.O idWl0olO.0 lo.o l l 1 1 1 1 I i l l 0# l Pact TCTAL l NA lo u l o. o 1 oo l NA 1G0 1 0O i l
-T-l 1
I 1 l l l l W l l - - - - _ .__
unli Go AS F0Lae (80'H) A8 tJfr (scret) I ulNIIBM IIMIISAR l ussigang l 334313a31 l VALVE ($)/ ] Penmay I PATieAY l PEIETRAilGIs DATE I TOTAL I Per m V Pai m V Q4TE I TOTAL DES (FIPis(pg
'n' vanas tEVEt rt===a 1 --- t/2-<<. I o.O I o. 0 1 0 o I '2-it i o.o i o. o i o. o I l l 1 l l l meannu runaE I-- 1 l l
- o. o i r2-iti o. o i o o i o. o l (elf Tuo Outi) I t r2.ir i o.o i o. o i pe ;t imissina x-2 i x.2 i t.2/ l i7 2oi (co i r 7 2ea t i.s i n 2o1 7 soi /7 2o l l l l l l l l l H /0 tsout10 RING SYSTEtt 2 2 l----
i
/
i // i 2.7o i 1.10 i /. 4 0 l I-If i 2. Foi /. Id i /. 4 o 4,org , 1 l i l l l l l 1 PAGE TOTAL l NA l19.901 9 70 i /F FO i mA i /Mol 9.70 I /P.fo l l l l l TEST TOTAL
- l NA li OP i N li MD n seg i W.nli ll2 T1i lDN l g Non Ub LV-ta Di%
PSIG), multiply by 1.54.
*fo determine the corrected leakage of the WSIV's (as il they had been IEe[a *= shen the maniam pathway leakate onceeds 0.6 La (293.75 SCFH), erste an LEA immediately.
eihe tapt total is the sum of all page totals in the checklist (esclude InlV's f rom all test totals). (final)
.g.
s L
ADDITIONAL TYPE B AND C TESTS SINCE THE LAST TYPE A TEST I AND OTHER LLRT'S TEST DESCRIPTION TEST DATE TEST RESULT X-1 06-01-85 0.00 (SCFH) X-1 11-08-85 0.00 X-1 11-10-85 0.00 X-2 09-13-86 13.70 X-6 10-21-85 0.00 X-6 06-01-86 0.00 X-200A 06-05-85 0.00 X-200A 06-01-85 0.00 D.H. Head Flange 05-24-85 0.00 SDV Vent & Drain: A0 2-302-22A,B 12-16-86 >60.0 A0 2-302-22C,D 12-18-86 >60.0 A0 2-302-21A,B 12-18-86 4.20 A0 2-302-21C,D 12-18-86 45.00 A0 2-302-22A,8 01-16-87 2.70 A0 2-302-22C,0 01-16-87 35.00 A0 2-302-21A,B 01-16-87 4.20 A0 2-302-21C,0 01-16-87 42.00 4 t ) O O APPENDIX B DRYHELL HEAD SEAL FAILURE Quad Cities Nuclear Power Station O Commonwealth Edison 22710 206 Avenue North Cordova, Illinois 61242 Telephone 300/654-2241 RLB-86-227 November 6, 1986 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555
Reference:
Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station Docket Number 50-265, DPR-30, Unit Two Enclosed please find Licensee Event Report (LER) 86-015, Revision 00, for t Quad-Cities Nuclear Power Station. This report is submitted to you in accordance with the requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50.73(a)(2)(v), which requires the reporting of any event or condition that alone could have prevented the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems needed to control the release of radioactive material. Respectfully, COMMONHEALTH EDISON COMPANY QUAD-CITIES NUCLEAR POWER STATION R. L. Bax Station Manager RLB/MSK/dak Enclosure cc: J. Hojnarowski A. Morrongiello INP0 Records Center NRC Region III 0702H I
LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LER) Facility Name (1) Docket Number (2) Paae (1) OUAD-CITIES. NUCLEAR POWER STATION. UNIT TWO Gl El 01 01 of 21 61 5 1 of 0 $ Title (4) Failure of Unit 2 Integrated Leak Rate Test Due to Leakage Through the Drywell Head Gasket it Date f S) LER M
- r (6) Renart Date (7) Other Facilities Involved (8)
- h. .a Day Year Year // sequential
/j//j Revision Month Day Year Facility Names Docket Numberfs)
,/p/p
// Number j//
/ Number 0! El 01 01 01 l l
~ ~
110 113 816 816 0l1 15 0l0 1 l1 016 816 01 El of of of I l THIS REPORT IS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF 10CFR OPER M (Check one or more of the followina) fill 20.402(b) _ 20.405(c) _ 50.73(a)(2)(iv) _ 73.71(b) POWER _ 20.405(a)(1)(1) _.,_. 50.36(c)(1) _a_ 50.73(a)(2)(v) _ 73.71(c) LEYEL _ 20.405(a)(1)(ii) _ 50.36(c)(2) _ _ , , 50.73(a)(2)(vii) _ .other (Specify (101 0 0 0 _, 20.405(a)(1)(111) _ , _ 50.73(a)(2)(1) _ 50.73(a)(2)(viti)(A) in Abstract below
////////////////////////// ,_ 20.405(a)(1)(iv) _ 50.73(a)(2)(ti) _ 50.73(a)(2)(viii)(B) and in Text) ////////////////////////// _ 20.405(a)(1)(v) _ 50.73(a)(2)(iii) ,__ 50.73(a)(2)(x)
LICENSEE CONTACT FOR THIS LER f12) Name TELEPHONE NUMBER AREA CODE E. E. Mendenhall . Technical Staf f Enaineer. Ext. 2291 1 10 l 9 6l El 41 -l 21 21 41 COMPLETE ONE LINE FOR EACH COM FAILURE DESCRIBE 0 IN THIS REPORT (13) CAUSE SYSTEM COMPONENT MANUFAC- REPORTA8LE CAUsE SYSTEM COMPONENT MANUFAC- REPORTABLE TURER TO NPRDS TURER TO NPROS B BlD SIE lA IL l l l Y l l l l l I l
! l I I I I I I I I I I I I SUPPLEMENTAL REPORT EXPECTED f14) Expected Month i Day I Year submission is fif ves. comolete EXPECTED SUBMISSION DATE) l N0 l l l *,3 TRACT (Limit to 1400 spaces, i.e. approximately fifteen single-space typewritten lines) (16)
On October 11, 1986, Unit Two was shutdown for the start of a refuel outage. On October 12 a Primary Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT) was begun to find the as found containment leakage prior to making any repairs or adjustments. By 1002 hours on October 13 it was apparent that the leakage from the containment was in excess of the 75% of La required by Technical Specification 3.7.A.2.b. The calculated leak rate was determined to be 0.8382 wt %/ day. The major source of the leakage was determined to be the drywell head gasket seal. The seal material is silicon rubber manufactured by J-Bar Silicon Corp., Type ASM 3301. The material was found to have reduced resiliency. The material was replaced with a type manufactured by Garlock and the ILRT was successfully completed on October 15 with a calculated leak rate of 0.3225 wt%/ day. Further investigation of a better choice of seal material is continuing. This report is submitted in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(v). s 070lH I LICENSEE EVENT REPORT (LERI TEXT CONTINUATION FACILITY NAME (1) DOCKET NUMBER (2) LER NUMBER f61 Pace (3)
. Year // sequential // Revision
,/p/p/
/ Number /,/p/
p/ Number Cities Unit Two 0l51010101 21615 al6 - 0I1 15 - 0 l0 012 0F 015 PLANT AND SYSTEM IDENTIFICATION: General Electric - Bolling Water Reactor - 2511 MNt rated core thermal power. Energy Industry Identification System (EIIS) codes are identified in the text as [XX]. IDENTIFICATION OF OCCURRENCE: While conducting an Integrated Leak Rate Test the leakage was observed to be in excess of the allowable leakage per Technical Specification 3.7.A.2.b. Discovery Date: 10/13/86 Report Date: 11/6/86 This report was initiated by Deviation Report D-4-2-86-57 CONDITIONS PRIOR TO OCCURRENCE: SHUTDOWN Mode (l) - Rx Power 00% - Unit Load 000 MWe SHUTDOWN Mode (l) - In this position, a reactor scram is initiated, power to the ontrol rod drives is removed, and the reactor protection trip systems have been
.eenergized for 10 seconds prior to permissive for manual reset.
DESCRIPTION OF OCCURRENCE: On October 11, 1986, Unit Two was shutdown for the start of a refuel outage. Preparations began immediately to perform a Primary Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT) at the beginning of the refuel outage. At the same time these preparations were in progress, a number of Local Leak Rate Tests (LLRT) were being performed. At 0300 hours on October 12, 1986, the LLRT on the drywell head flange indicated a high rate of leakage. The LLRT was being performed with a 0-60 SCFH flowmeter and the leakage was greater than the flowmeter capacity. The tester also observed leakage from the outer flange seal using " snoop" bubble solution. Since the total leakage of both seals could not be determined, a Licensee Event Report Report (LER) was initiated with the appropriate NRC notification. This LER (No. 86-014) documented the total leakage of all Type B and C (LLRT's) tests being in excess of 0.6 La as required by Technical Specification 3.7.A.2.c. 0701H _g,
LICENSEE EVENT REPORT fLER1 TEXT CONTINUATION FACILITY NAME (1) DOCKET NUMBER (2) LER Nunate ist Paan (1)
. Y;ir /// sequential / R;vtston
,pp/
,j//,
. // Number /// h=har Cities Unit Two 0 1 5 1 0 1 0 l 0 l 2l Gl 5 816 -
O l1 l5 - Ol0 013 CF 015 After the leakage of the drywell head seal was detected, station management decided to proceed with the ILRT without any repairs or adjustments. The reason for doing so was that the LLRT did not prove that the containment would leak more than the allowable rate, and the best way to determine the actual head seal leakage rate was to perform the ILRT. The LLRT for the drywell head flange pressurizes between two (2) redundant seals and measures the total leakage of both seals. The ILRT, in contrast, pressurizes the whole containment and the leakage is affected by both seals being in series. The latter leakage can be far less than the former if one of the seals is leaking more than the other. For this reason, the ILRT is the better test for quantifying the leakage from the containment. Pressurization of the containment began at 1430 hours on October 12, 1986. At 1530 hours the drywell head was " snooped" at a containment pressure of approximately 10 PSIG and again at 0430 hours on October 13 at full containment pressure of approximately 50 PSIG. On both occasions some through leakage was observed at one location on the SSH (south and southwest) side of the drywell head flange. The containment was fully pressurized by 1915 hours on October 12, 1986. After a four (4) hour stabilization period, ILRT data was taken to measure the containment leakage. By 1002 hours on October 13, 1986, ten (10) hours of data had been taken and it was apparent that the leakage from the containment was in excess of the 75% of La required by Technical Specification 3.7.A.2.b. This LER documents the failure of the ILRT on an "as found" basis. This report is submitted in accordance ith the requirements of 10 CFR 50.73(a)(2)(v), which requires the reporting of ary
.ondition that alone could have prevented the fulfillment of the safety function of structures or systems that are needed to control the release of radioactive material.
APPARENT CAUSE OF OCCURRENCE: The apparent cause of the occurrence is a deterioration in the sealing ability of the drywell head flange seal material. The seal material used on Unit Two was a 3/4" X 1/2" X 110' long silicon rubber material manufactured by J-Bar Silicon Corporation, Type ASM 3301. This seal, after it was installed, was successfully LLRT'd on May 24, 1985, and was in place for the successful ILRT conducted on Unit Two on May 26, 1985. There has never been an occasion when the drywell head seal has been installed and failed a LLRT or an ILRT immediately after installation. The only failures have occurred after the seal was subjected to an operating cycle. 070lH LICENSEE EVENT REPORT fLER) TEXT CONTINUATION FACILITY rAME (1) DOCKET NUMBER (2) LER NuMsER (6) Pace f31
. Year / s;quential /// R; vision
,/p//,
// Number ,,/,
// Number Cities Unit Two 0 I $ 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 21 61 5 ai6 -
0l 1 l5 - 010 014 0F Ol$ There have been similar failures of the drywell head seal on Unit One, but this was the first failure of the seal on Unit Two. The last failure on Unit One is documented in LER No. 86-001. ANALYSIS OF OCCURRENCE: The containment leak rate as measured prior to the drywell head flange seal repair was calculated to be 0.8382 wt %/ day with an upper confidence limit of 0.9480 wt%/ day using the total time methodology of Topical Report BN-TOP-1, Revision 1. When the head flange leak caused the ILRT to be considered an "as found" failure, it was decided to de-pressurize the containment, repair the seal by removing the drywell head and replacing the seal, and immediately perform another ILRT. The advantages of performing another test immediately is that it would allow the leakage of the drywell head to be determined as there would be no other repairs performed except for the head seals. The ILRT was at all times conducted in compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, section III.A. Pressurization of the containment started for the second ILRT at 1415 hours on October 14, 1986. The second ILRT was successfully performed with a calculated leak rate of 0.3225 wt %/ day and an upper confidence limit of 0.3618 wt %/ day. This second ILRT shows that the through leakage from the drywell head was approximately 0.52 wt %/ day (255 SCFH). O evaluate the safety implications of this occurrence the calculated leak rate (0.8382 wt %/ day) should be compared to a number of other values. The Technical Specifications (T.S. 3.7.A.2.a.la) require the containment to leak less than 1.0 wt
%/ day. The value of 1.0 wt %/ day was very conservatively chosen based on the calculated leak rate of 2.6 wt %/ day that would result in a 10 CFR 100 thyroid dose at the site boundary after a design basis accident. This release rate of 2.6 wt
%/ day was calculated using the source term contained in TIO 14844 and is described in the Technical Specification bases. The source term used has been found to be very conservative based on data from the TMI accident. Therefore, the leakage, while it exceeded the limit for an ILRT, is well below a value that would cause a serious impact to public safety in the unlikely event of a design basis accident.
In fact, the leakage was only slightly above the allowable and actually below the allowable leakage at some other BHR's with a Mark I containment similar to Quad Cities. Graphs showing the containment leakage before and after repairs to the drywell head flange seal are attached to this report with the induced phase results of the second test. More complete details of the ILRT's performed will be included with the ILRT report, which will be sent to the NRC. 070lH
LICENSEE EVENT REPORT f LER) TEXT CONTINUATION FACILITY NAME (1) DOCKET NUMBER (2) LER Nupara f6) raa. ( 3) Year sequential R1 vision N, N _. , Cities Unit Two 0 i 5 1 0 l 0 1 0 l 21 61 5 af6 - 011 l5 - 0 l0 015 0F 015 i CORRECTIVE ACTIONS: While this occurrence did not result in a containment leakage that could seriously impact public safety, the station does view this event as a very serious occurrence that must be avoided in the future. The past failures of the drywell head flange
~
seal on Unit One caused an Action Item Record (AIR No. 86-01) to be written to investigate better seal materials that might be available for this application. The immediate corrective action for Unit One, which will now be applied to Unit Two, was to begin using Garlock #8364 seal material as recommended by Chicago Bridge and Iron, the drywell fabricator. The Garlock material is presently being used by other Commonwealth Edison BWR's and has given satisfactory service. Commonwealth Edison is presently doing research to determine if there is an even better choice of materials for this appilcation. Nuclear Services Technical (NST) is working with System Operational Analysis (SOAD) and System Materials Analysis Department (SMAD) to perform tests on various seal materials with a test fixture that will attempt to duplicate actual drywell head conditions. In addition, Station Nuclear Engineering Departnent (SNED) has contracted Bechtel Corporation to perform tests, including radiattori exposure, on a number of seal materials. While it is not considered to be a cause of this occurrence, there is evidence that the knife edges of the drywell head do not always align well with the center of the eal. Station maintenance has contacted Chicago Bridge and Iron to determine if
.nere is anything that the station can do to insure a better fit up of the drywell head during installation. The station proceduri for the installation will be changed to incorporate their recommendations.
FAILURE DATA: UNIT ONE: 01/18/79 LER 79-03 09/06/82 LER 82-26 01/06/86 LER 254/86-001 UNIT TH0: None 070lH UNIT TWO Integrated Leak Rate Test BN-TOP-1 Data Prior to Head Seal Repair L.40-L.20-n E ca 1.00- _ _ _ . . . h "~%... " g "~ m :;: - - _ ge;;e as 2 g,88_ v w $ H0 'bO- 3
$ Allowable 0.40- Calc. Leak Rate =0. 8382 Wt%/ Day UCL Allowable Leak Rate =0. 7500 Wt%/ Day
--*- LEAK RATE 0.20-0.00 i i i i i i i i i i 0 t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TIME FROM START (HOURS) l o
l l
6 UNIT TWO Measured Leakage Phase BN-TOP-1 Method 8.80-6.70-
- Allowable 6.60-UCL b0.50- -*- Meas. Leak
+
0 + 0- \
; _~,%+ ;g ,4;2:;mx:=a
- 6.30-ie J 0.20- Al1owabie Leak Rate =0. 7500Wt%/ Day Ca l e. Leak Rate =0. 3225 Wt%/ Day D.LG- -
0'00 I i i i i i i i i O 1 2 3 4 5 b 7 8 9 l Time From Start (Hours) l i l 1
l UNIT TbJ0 Induced Leakage Phase BN-TOP-1 Method 1.80-A 1.bo- 4' % +- . _ %+ - #: : : ts __. T 1.40-3
$1.20-x 5 1.80-0 0.80- Target Leak Rate-i.3932 Upper Acc.
5 Calc. Leak Rate =1.4938 y 8.60- - Lower Acc. 3 0.40- UCL
- Meas. Leak 6.20-0 00 i i i i i i i i i
.00 .50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50 3.00 3.50 4.00 4.50 Time From Start (Hours) .
P 9 APPENDIX C COMPUTATIONAL PROCEDURE P t APPENDIX C CALCULATIONS PERFORMED FOR IPCLRT DATA Data collected from pressure sensors, dew cells and RTD's located in the containment are processed using the following calculations. If the test is concluded with a test period of less than 24 hours, additional calculations . given in QTS 150-T9 will be required. A. Average Subvolume Temperature and Dewpoint. Tj - E(all RTD's in the jth subvolume) *F (1) Number of RTD's in jth subvolume D.P.j - E(all dew cells in jth subvolume) *F (2) Number of dew cells in jth subvolume where Tj - average temperature of the jth subvolume D.P.j - average dewpoint of the jth subvolume B. Average Primary Containment Temperature and Dewpoint. NVOL T- Ij-1 (VFj) * (Tj) *F (3) NVOL D.P. - Ej-1 (VFj) * (D.P.j) *F (4) where T - average containment temperature D.P. - average containment dewpoint VFj - volume fraction of the jth subvolume NVOL = number of subvolumes If Tj is undefined then Tj - Tj,1 for 1 1 j i (NVOL - 2) Tj - Tj_) for j - NVOL - 1 Tj - estimate for j - NVOL (reactor water temperature) If 0.P.j is undefined . D.P.j - D.P.j,1 for 1 1 j i (NVOL - 2) D.P.j - D.P.j.1 for j - NVOL - 1 D.P.j - estimate for j - NVOL (from reactor water temperature assuming saturation conditions)
, C. Calculation of Dry Air Pressura.
D.P.(*K) - 273.16 + 0.P.(*F) - 32 1.8 X - 647.27 - D.P.(*K) EXPON - X * (Y + Z
- X + C
- X3)
(D.P.(*K))*(1 + D
- X)
Py - (218.167) * (14.696) e(EXPON
- In(10)) (PSI)
P - E(all absolute pressure gauges) (5) Number of absolute pressure gauges - Py (psla) where Y - 3.2437814 Z - 5.86826 x 10-3 C - 1.1702379 x 10-8 D - 2.1878462 x 10-3 Py - volume weighted containment vapor pressure P - containment dry air absolute pressure C, D, X, Y, Z, and EXPON are dewpoint to vapor pressure conversion constants and coefficients. D. Containment Dry Air Mass. H - (28.97) * (144) * (P) * (280327.5 - 25 * (LEVEL - 35))_ (6) 1545.33 * (T + 459.69) where H - containment dry air mass LEVEL - reactor water level 280327.5 - drywell free air space plus suppression pool free air space at 0" water level plus reactor vessel free air space at 35" water level. NOTE This volume is the summation of the subvolumes calculated in QTS 150-T2. These subvolumes calculated in QTS 150-T2. These subvolumes were calculated using QTS 150-T8. o E. Measured Leak Rate. Lm(TOTAL) = (NBASE - Wj)
- 2400 (7) tj
- WBASE %/ DAY Lm(POINT) - (W)_1 - Hj)
- 2400 (8)
(tj - tj_j)
- Hg.) %/ DAY 4
where WBASE - containment dry air mass at t = 0 tt - time from start of test at Ith data set tj_1 - time from start of test at (1-1)th data set Hj - dry air mass at ith data set W)_j - dry air mass at (1-1)th data set Lm(TOTAL)- measured leakage from the start of test to Ith data set Lm(POINT)- measured leakage between the last two data sets 4 F. Statistical Leak Rate and Confidence Limit. LINEAR LEAST SQUARES FITTING THE IPCLRT DATA
, The method of "Least Squares" is a statistical procedure for finding the best fitting regression line for a set of measured data. The criterion for the best fitting line to a set of data points is that the sum of the squarcs of the deviations of the observed points from the line must be a minimum. When this criterion is met, a unique best fitting line is
- obtained based on all of the data points in the ILRT. The value of the i leak rate based on the regression is called the statistically average i leak rate.
i Since it is assumed that the leak rate is constant during the testing ! period, a plot of the measured containment dry air mass versus time
! would ideally yleid a straight line with a negative $1 ope (assuming a ! non-zero leak rate). Obviously, sampling techniques and test conditions l are not perfect and consequently the measured values will deviate from the ideal straight line situation.
Based on this statistical process, the calculated leak rate is obtained from the equation: W = At + B where W = contained dry air mass at time t l 1 i 7-- a B = calculated dry air mass at time t = 0 A = calculated leak rate t = test duration The values for the Least Squares fit constants A and B are given by: A = N
- I(tt) * (Wi) - Its
- IW1 - I(tt - ti) * (W1 N)
N
- I(tg 2) - (It ): E(t - I)2 B =_IWi- A
- Its . I(t, 2)
- E(Wi) - I(ttWi)
- Itg N N
- I(tg a) - (Itg):
where I - the average time for all data sets N = the average air mass for all data sets The second formulas are used in the computer program to reduce round-off-error. By definition, leakage out of the containment is considered positive leakage; therefore, the statistically average leak rate is given by: Ls - (-A) * (2400) (weight %/0AY) (9) B
. STATISTICAL UNCERTAINTIES In order to calculate the 95% confidence limits of the statistically average leak rate, the standard deviation of the least squares slope and' the student's T-Distribution function are used as follows. (
l N
- E(Hj)2 (twg)2 o-( *( ) - A2 }l/2 (N-2) N
- E(tt )2 - (Ett)2 When performing these calculations on the process computer, I(Wj)2 and (IW t )2 become so large that they overflow. To avoid this problem AW) is substituted for Hj. AWi is the difference between Wi and WBASE-The single sided T-Distribution with 2 degrees of freedom is approximated by the following formula from NBS Handbook 91:
T.E. - 1.645 + 1.494 + 1.7136 (N-2) (N-2) The upper confidence limit (UCL) is given by UCL = LS + o * (TE)
- 2400 (weight %/ DAY)
B (10) CALCULATIONS PERFORMED FOR IPCLRT DATA FOR TEST DURATION LESS THAN 24 HOURS Data collected from pressure sensors, dew cells, and RTD's located in the containment are processed using the following equations. Some data needs to be analyzed using equations in QTS 150-T3 prior to using these equations. Those equations are referenced by equation number. The primary reference for these calculations is the Topical Report BN-TOP-1 Revision 1. A. MEASURED LEAK RATE (Total Time) From BN-TOP-1 Rev. 1, Section 4.5 the following equation is given for the measured leak rate using the total time procedure: 2400 * [1_ T o ' P. (1) Mi tj T1 Po where Mg = measured leak rate in weight 7. per day for the 1 th data point assuming n, R, and V are constant in the Ideal Gas Law equations; tt = time since the beginning of the test period to the 1 th data point in hours; To, Ti - mean, volume weighted containment temperature at the beginning of the test and at the data point 1 in *R (Reference EQ. 3 in QTS 150-T3 and convert to *R (*F + 459.69 *R) ).
~
Po , Pj = calculated dry air pressure in PSIA at the beginning of the test and at the data point 1 (Reference EQ. 5 in QTS 150-T3). Using the following relationship derived in ANSI N45.4-1972 Appendix B given below: H H T P o- 1 1 - _o I (2) Ho it Po where Ho, Hj = dry air mass of the containment at the beginning of the test and data point 1, respectively.
, And substituting in the calculation of the containment dry air mass that
, corrects for a change in reactor water level given in QTS 150-T3 EQ. 6 gives the following expression for the measured leakage: Mg . 2400
- j_ To Pg (280327.5 - 25 (leg - 35) (3) ti ( It Po (280327.5 - 25 (leo - 35))
where leo, LEj - reactor water level in inches (narrow range GEMACS) at the beginning of the test and the data point 1, respectively. B. CALCULATED LEAK RATE The method of Least Squares is a statistical procedure for finding the "best fit" straight line, commonly called the regression line, for a set of measured data such that the sum of the squares of the deviations of each measured data point from the straight line is minimized. To determine the calculated leak (L t ) rate at time t i , the regression line is determined using the measured leak rate data from the start of the test to time t . t The calculated leak rate is the point on this line at time t .t Lt-At + Bj tt (4) where tt - time in hours since the beginning of the test to the i th data point; nit M - (I t ) (I M ) Bt, j j j i n I (t t )2 - (Et t ): (IM ) (Et ) - (It ) (Et M ) At. t j g jt nItai - (Et ): t n E-E l-1 n - number of data sets to time tj I
, C. CONFIDENCE LIMITS UCLj - Lt + TD
- a (5)
LCLj - Lj + TD
- a (6)
Where, Lj - calculated leak rate for the i th data point (Reference EQ. 4); TD - value of the two sided T - distribution for the 95% confidence limit and (n -2) degrees of freedom; 2.37226 2.8225 TDj - 1.95996 + (n-2) + (N-2): n - number of data points including the i th data point; o - standard deviation of the measured leak rate from the regression line calculated using the first n data points; I (ti - I): o-s* 1 + n + [I(tj a) - 1 (Itj)aja n n I-E j=1 It i=-i n I (H - N3 )2 \l/2 s -( (3 n - 2) j Nj - At+81
- tj Mj - measured leak rate (total time) at the j th data point.
e O-APPENDIX 0 INSTRUMENT ERROR ANALYSIS IPCLRT SAMPLE ERROR ANALYSIS FOR SHORT DURATION TEST A. ACCURACY ERROR ANALYSIS Per Topical Report BN-TOP-1 the measured total time leak rate (M) in weight percent per day is computed using the Absolute Method by the formula: 2400 * [ T P T H (7. / DAY) ; i_ 1 N l (1) H ( _
/
T P N 1 where: Pi - total (volume weighted) containment dry air pressure l (PSIA) at the start of the test; PN - total (volume weighted) containment dry air pressure (PSIA) at data point N after the start of the test; H - test duration from the start of the test to data point N l in hours; T1 - containment volume weighted temperature in 'R at the start of the test; TN - containment volume weighted temperature in 'R at the data point N. The following assumptions are made: A A P1-PN-P where P is the average dry air pressure of the containment (PSIA) during the test; A A T1-TN-T where T is the average volume weighted primary containment air temperature (*R) during the test; Pi-PN where P is the total containment atmospheric pressure (PSIA); l Pyj - PVN Where Py is the partial pressure of water vapor in the primary containment. l l l l L _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .-
.. Taking the partial derivative in terms of pressure and temperature of (1) equation and substituting in the above assumptions yields the following equation found in Section 4.5 of BN-TOP-1 Rev. 1:
e e /2 eg - t 2400 * (2 ( D )2 + 2 ( t ): H s A A P T where ep - the error in the total pressure measurement system, ep - 1 [(8pT): # (epy): ) 1/2; ePT = (instrument accuracy error) / / no. of inst. In measuring total containment pressure; epy = (instrument accuracy error) / / no. of inst. In measuring vapor partial pressure; e7 = (Instrument accuracy error) / / no. of inst. In measuring containment temperature; eg - the error in the measured leak rate; H - duration of the test. NOTE Subvolume #11, the free air space above the water in the reactor vessel, is treated separately from the rest of the containment volume. The reason for the separate treatment is that neither the air temperature.or the partial pressure of water vapor is measured directly. The temperature of the air space is assumed to be the temperature of the reactor water, as measured in the shutdown cooling or clean-up demineralizer piping before the heat exchangers. The partial pressure of water vapor is computed assuming saturation conditions at the temperature of the water. Volume weighting the errors for the two volumes (Subvolume #11 and Subvolumes #1-10) is the method used. l
,, . B. EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS FLONMETER THERMOCOUPLE INSTRUMENT RTD (*F) PPG (PSIA) DENCELL (*F) (SCFM) (*F)
Range 50-200 0-100 140 1.13-11.05 Accuracy 3 50 1 015 11 1 11 20 2 Repeat-ability 1 10 1 001 1 50 1 02 1 10 l C. COMPUTATION OF INSTRUMENT ACCURACY UNCERTAINTY
- 1. Computing " eT "
Volume Fraction for Volume #11 = .02344 Volume Fraction for Volumes #1-10 = .97656 ei = t (.97656 * .50 + .02344
- _2 )
/30 /1 eT " t .1360'R
- 2. Computing " ePT "
ePT = 1 015
/2
#pT = 1 0106 PSIA
- 3. Computing " 'py "
l At a dewpoint of 65'F (assumed), an accuracy of i l'F corresponds to + .011 PSIA. For subvolume #11 at an average temperature of 140'F, an accuracy of 1 2'F corresponds to i .150 PSI. I 'py - 1 (.97656 * .011 + .02344 * .150 )
/10 /U
'py - t .0069 PSIA
- 4. Computing " ep "
ep - 1 C (.0106)8 + (.0069): )1/2 ep i .0126 PSIA L
?' o 5. Computing total instrument accuracy uncertainty " eg
^ 1/2 og =
-.'2400 H
- 2 * ('.0126 64.0
) +2*( .1360 548.5
):
l A f assuming P = 64.0 PSIA A T = 548.5*R Therefore, for a 8 hour test (H), eM = 1 1343 wt % / OAY
- 0. COMPUTATION OF INSTRUMENT REPEATABILITY UNCERTAINTY l
l 1. Computing " er " l l ei = 1 10
/31 ei = 1 0180*R
- 2. Computing " ePT "
ePT " 1 001
/2 l
'pi = 1 0007 PSIA l
- 3. Computing " 'py "
'py = 1 (.97656 * .006 + .02344 * .008 )
/10 /E
'py - t .0020 PSIA
- 4. Computing " ep "
ep = [ (.0007): + (.0020)8 11/2 ep = 1 0021 PSIA
.. R + 5. Computing the total instrument repeatability uncertainty ".eg" R
1/2 eM = 2400.0021 H g 2
- f (.64.0 ): +2( .0180 ):
548.5 Therefore, for a 8 hour test, s ! R I eM = 1 0197 wt % / DAY E. COMPUTING TOTAL INSTRUMENT UNCERTAINTY A R eH = 1 2 * [ (eg): . (eg>a ) 1/2 eM = 1 2
- C ( 1343)2 + (.0197): )1/2 eM = 1 271 weight % / DAY for a 8 hour test. ;
t l I l l L l l 1 l i l { l f
- i i
o APPENDIX E
.s BN-TOP-1, REV. 1 ERRATA The Commission has approved short duration testing for the IPCLRT provided the Station uses the general test method outlined in the BN-TOP-1, Rev. I topical report. The primary difference between chat method and the ones previously used is in the statistical analysis or the measured leak rate data.
Without making any judgments concerning the validity of this test method, certain errors in the editing of the mathematical expressions were discovered. The intent here is not to change the test method, but rather to clarify the method in a mathematically precise manner that allows its implementation. The errors are listed below. EQUATION 3A, SECTION 6.2 Reads: Lg=A+Btg Should Read: Lg=Ag+Bg t g Reason: The calculated leak rate (L ) at time t is computed using the regression line e notants A ,g B equations 6 and 7). Thesummationsikaskn(computedusing equation 6 are n defined as I = I, where n is the number of data sets up until i=1 time t The regression line constants change each time a newdaka. set is received. The calculated leak rate is not a linear function of time. PARAGRAPH FOLLOWING EQ. 3A, SECTION 6.2 Reads: The deviation of the measured leak rate (M) from the calculated leak rate (L) is shown graphically on Figure A.1 in Appendix A and is expressed as:
- Deviation = M g -L g Should Read
- The deviation of the measured leak rate (Mg ) from the regression line (N,) is shown graphically on Figure A.1 in Appendix A and is express 4d as:
Deviation = M -N where Ng=A p +B p *t g, A,B = Regression line constants computed from all data P P sets available from the start of the test to the last data set at time t p, t g a time from the start of the test to the ith data set.
, Re:sta The calculcted 1=k rata c3 o fun:tica cf time , during the test is based on a regression line.
The regression line constants, Ag and Bg , are changing as each additional data set is received. Equation 3A is used later in the test to compute the upper confidence limit as a function of time. For the purpose of this calculation, it is the ! deviation from the last computed regression line l at time tp that is.important. j EQUATION 4 SECTION 6.2 Reads: SSQ = I (M g - L )2 1 Should Read: SSQ = I (M g - Ng )2 , Reason: Same As Above EQUATION 5, SECTION 6.2 Reads: SSQ = I ( M g - (A + Btg )]2 Should Read: SSQ = I ( M g - (Ap +B
- t )]2 p
Reason: Same As Above EQUATION ABOVE EQUATION 6 SECTION 6.2 Reads: B = ("i
~
)("i ~
)
I(tg - t)3 Should Read: B y= ((E i ~
)("i ~
Il I(tg - I)3 Reason: Regression liae constant Bt changes over time (as a function of e ) as each additional data set is received. BEr of "t" left out of denominator. Susumation signs omitted. EQUATION 6, SECTION 6.2 Reads: B=" i "i ~ ( 'i) ( "i) n It g3 - (I tg)3 Should Read: B g=" "i "i ~
"i ( i n It g3 - (I tg)3 Reason: Same As Above i
, EQUATION 7. SECTION 6.2
.+ l 1
Reads: A=5-Bt Should Read: A g=I-B g t Reason: Same As Above EQUATION 10. SECTION 6.2 Reads: A=( i (I E ) ~ (I E ) (I t M) i i i i aIt 3 g (I t )3 Should Read: A g = (I i) (I D ) * (I E ) (I C M) i i i i nit g3 - (I t g )3 Reason: Same As Above EQUATION 13. SECTION 6.3 Reads: a2 . ,2 [g ,1" ,(t, - t)2 ] ' (tg - t)2 Should Read: oz.32 [g , "1 , (t, - M I (t g - T)U where t = time from the start of the test of the last data P set for which the standard deviation of the measured leak rates (M1 ) from the regression line (Ng ) is being computed; t g= time from the start of the test of the 1" data set; a = number of data sets to time t ; a I = I ; and i=1 T= fit g. Reason: Appears to be error in editing of the report. Report does a poor job of defining variables, i d
,,e EQUATION 14. SECTION 6.3 Reads: aa s [ 1 + 1* + (Ep ~C) ]
(tg - t)3
)
Should Read: a= s ( 1 + *1 + I", ) I (t g t): Reason: Same As Above EQUATION 15. SECTION 6.3 Reads: Confidence Limit = L 2 T Should Read: Confidence Limits = L t T x a , where L = calculated leak rate at time ep , T= T distribution value based on n, the number of data sets received up until time tp; a= standard deviation of measured leak rate values (M,) about the regression line based on data from thi start of the test until time t . p Reason: Same As Above EQUATION 16 SECTION 6.3 Reads: UCL = L + T l Should Read: UCL = L + T
- a Reason: Same As Above ,
! EQUATION 17, SECTION 6.3 I Reads: LCL = L - T Should Read: LCL = L - T
- a l Reason: Same As Above 1
O
,o APPENDIX F TYPE A TEST RESULTS USING MASS - PLOT METHOD MEASURED LEAK RATE PHASE 1
l l
9. 1.00-6.80- Acceptance Criteria = .75 Wt %/ Day ^ res R
- 0.60- -
3 e _- 2 0.40-g ' W -; _ ---- 0.20-0 00 i i i i i i i i 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Time From Start of Test (Hours.1 FIGURE F-1 E
l e
*s ANSI /ANS 56.8-1981 1 4 r DATA
SUMMARY
~
~e-7, ..g e F *- (Me.asured-r 1 - r Y ? (Phase) ;- ;TTYT T x z . 1 r v y s. -
v : *t . ** - I , e l ! t , I
' l y , I I au t t .
wp O Od@NMSMONeeccemMehm ewm PN>eemM9hMPmMmWMme sed @ee MDWMM C OOchd@ Mememe N>mePem>m>N%NMM@ @NDONFMeeNeNNMMMMMO
&Om O OPweOhndempe MNNmOWOSFeeMhd@deneeeMM MMWMM MMMMM 3mr wm OOeed@eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeMMMMWMMOMMMMMMMM MMWMM e **
MMMMM e e e e e o e e e e e e e ne e a e e ne e e e e m e e b e
- N e e M e G % e
- Y9 e ers WM COBOOOOOooOOOaSeOOOmeenOcameoOOwesomeqee=OOOommeO "
) t PU l S { f e e I '
g E = COM wW . OOdemeOO@@ O O r e A N4OnP@ m e W r % O e M N. =dhmodedade@mme g d e m e c e pie d d N e P.q m omemN ee-emenMeeedd~ m e N e e m e N .D O eP e s>Q OOpe@eeNMMeemNmmeGPe peehh dd@peeeMMnNNNNNNNNNNNNNN 4 WEs C eO eeMoe ee ee e ee eeeee ee e e eo eeee. e. e. Me ce Mo M e n M. o M we w me M qen ee g M eq em me M pe M M =l MMWMMmMMMmm e o me e e 4 -e m e e J GQOOOOOQeeMOOpemeOOO meeggOeeeeeeeeWeeemeWegemeeSe 2e W 4 W l .' -
'4
. s e, M-e)eeMcGemPNMEm Mekd w .Nedme*Mk
> emm=Meege
= = OnNemNhneN-Nec eeNNdemn m e .d am e Sj o eNm mMm M9 bed med e@e ..e
'WFQ O edePhmmedmMP MddNem ege pNdeWM edh ekm 4Me h m O MMhNmMdMANMmMMNNeM emm eNmenemem @
MPO em C 40%
- ee * *
- e e e * *
- e e e *
- e **e N#N $NMd WMm '
e e *
- e o er 4 *
- o.494e oo w #
EE, OceOOOOOce OO.m.o emOOO eeqeec e .&.& eee.e eee eems .e-m e OOe -
- 9 w e i
l I. 4 M 9 ! l P J4 Omme=@edeOMemmhemeddhmeeOhemeeedeemmmmeme+ OSe@dE E d m e > # E d m e P P m mM m e e E P.M N mp p WM p deem @ e m >>e ete e M@ @ NdSOmh
*4 4Q O N P e h M N e e M c N a m m O F e P P' P e h h d @l d e n e e es e M W M M W e M e e e eeep@@
mm O gas MMWmm e m n e e e e e e e e e e e ee M e e e e e e e e e e o
- o ee m e ee M eM e ne eeme e.M e e Mo M em o e e do Me M mewemeMeM!M. e o M. M.M M M e e e e o e '
M OOOOOeO909OO OOOOoOOoCooOOOoooOOooeeseoO'emmeeacoOOO 4 s i h c m e e e e e e m e e e e e d e e e e e e e e e e e e e e ee e e e e e.e e e eedeee eeeee 1 W OOOOOOOmeOoOOacDoOOqOeaOOO 0 0 + * * *
- et 9 9 9e * *
- meDOOO .OOmeomeopeo OO m
- 9. e e oe e $ 9 0 $ 9 69 9 44+ 4 $s* *
- 9 0 $( * @ 9 4 9 @t4 4 4V O .JWWWWwQWWdWW WWWwwdWW WW wwdWWWWWWWWWWWWWWdWW .
L OPh N N h t< m m N O P denOPNde Sh Need WmOPipe eWNeSemmm 1 JM s6 OphhetENemethNhhhh d@d gen D enhh hh h NN>>h hm > k h m m Mb g hp eeMMMMMMNNNNNNNMWem
> j W .eh OOmmmmmmmmmmm-mmmmmm m m m > h m u >mM m k$h.h
- m. m.mm N m k mm-mm
>>hhh COmemEEmeSeE me rome ee m e. te e m= w. Se 4 e4 a e W e g ele m m e e m e e W E e
= e e o e e e e e o e e u OOmeeE EasGerEsmeeEsquem me e e o+e w e . me ewe e o seeeeeee e e e. e e ,
emmeeeeeeeE ' l ! I eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
=OOOOOOOOOOOOOOceOOAme@OO eeeeeeeee eeeeeeeeeee \
6 e e * * *
- e e o e *
- e **9 Smee meDOOOmemeOMeeeOO $
9 e o e e! O 4 4 4 4 9 4$ $ae e@ e@ e** * @ 4 @ $I o O 9l @ $ $## e w e V .O*8meMeh w0w w meSpNm%dMhecedePmh w w m u w w W m u d W W W w w d W W u w w w.w u W w W W W u w w w W W W W W w;W W W h w E1@ d @ c e @ n e > N M ein e @ P P S e 3v Ve 4 MMO e4 hOdeOO h eNDeh e P e kc M NimP kw e MOO mec he> > me s e,ie W e mO pe d@ ( en *Nhh edd d @ c e e e e e e M M M A N N N N h h.N m pa m mm m O O O OiS P S e e We e h h h [
=
mmmm mmmmmmmmm mmmmma-ammmm-mm-mm-mm-mm-oGeOOO,OoOOO 4 g o <D e oEeEeeoe eT ee ee e e se e eEeEeS3 e e ee e e o Ee eee WoG e ee ee eo eie ee ee'e e eeeiel ee ee eeeCe e Ete,eeee e,e.Eee oe.'W e e e e 6 ee e& o rottee rOCEezeweseE E Eis e e E r r..e CeEE E;eme=EElmmetet.imetE r P 3mmmm O O O O O m O O O O O O O Os O O O C C O e O O O O O'O O O O O O;O O O O O O'O O O O O t i
., a ?
w w m ? "SQeOe23O
@e N% fe Me#Cm OQQC hNEP@m 3COOOOOOOOO hWMOmm e; & PO@ O> O N OOC N W @OmOM Oc O EO P'P OO O @ O.O h he N:MO OMO@OeO m N OOco W > F = =PP mat&&eOO ce4hNem mO4&? @ Etm k O O d e p encedNOmOO did P r O @ @ e = M O d 2mm % @ @ t e et e mOE 4feWMmOG Em w
a w e e o e e e e o e e o e e o e o e o e * * *
- e o e'
e.de ee eeNoNe Oo Pe kedeCo@e M e M e e m om'O e oOel P4S e ee od e d ee
@eeeeeeeeeeeeemmer e c e m m h WIN N N ee N N-m m m m m m m m m m m O'O O O O O E
4dde04444444 4ddedJ44@ded@ @dddd 4dddddd 444444d'@d444 , h
, seh e m e. d E Phem EN., e=Oe-GOC .de-Nde
& .2a m CMeetweemmMeOmeeocG e d N e P o d N M e e E @ m h y d r o e p p m e erc o m e m i OOdepeMeede.M~em 34 I r4 @ @ m 40 eENd=4mdmem er v *e
& e
*
- e e en e . ce mOOP?E E es em 44(= m&@e Ne Ne P4 e mm m mmm e AENm *e== P & eP en # mOhP*P M Pe ee m Eh 4A M ee d@@P.d @m @NMele P enOWOe@ N4 h w(L m m m O J O O O O O O O OiO O O O O OiO O O O O P4 P P P P P $'P P P P P rip p F'P P [
a am 5 e e e e o e 9 e e e e e e e e e e e o e e e e e o e e e e e e. e o e e e. e e el e e el 9 0 44 e e 9 34 e ee- e. 4de e e e4 e44444 e e * *4 e4e4e 4e 4e e. e4 e4eie 4 4# @ 4 4e Ce 4.4 e e e4 ee 4 4e e4 W 4jMd M 4W 4,4m 4M414 M'M4 M4 n4 e4e@miMMMme @ @ d d 4 a i - t ve#Ph 4 meome e eMh O h m m m e r h m e t. n h' @ h d we e s te M N =r Ph ceeh 4 e e O O#EWCMNema l h E @ m d @ e e W E h @ # P e e p Pi c 4 N e d e' O c 1 9 a
% meth? ? neteeEmpeorcemM@@ ENPh e N e d e d e d a d;p - e hm e e
- d e Eikd Pe e,m a de e,@ e (
-o thP r.P demzcMoeer mod e m P g em P h e e m P h d e W O,p > d e N mee d p e n
= =CC P ? ? DCeehh h>
=+4= e e o e o e e e o e o e e e o d@44 e e o @!@e o. @ @eeeeMeeMMNNNNAMmmmmmaeOOOO e e e e e e o e e e o e o e * * * *i e e o e o ei o e e o e l
. ? G ma i EEaEEE e e e e E e E e e E.i E E &a E E e E E C;E e e E 4 th e e e e e et e e S. E E
- eet^
et ef eeee e e e e e e e e'e t e e t g eeeeeebeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee "I e' ** @ @ f P f @ @ @ C @ @ ilD @ @ d C @,C f @ f @ @ @ @ D @ @ f'D C O @ @ @'C C C'@ @ b i e e-am- @ d e n e. e @ d h e s co edameo@*Pfh EedNMedeembe@ dhenNm
? O&7 iNON4E
" o- G A eewe P @ hNemech N E N m e e* e P mN 4 eO N Ped eO d e 4M2 N< M N N e.h i
e = = %.1 1 = ? * @@MOE m4( e M O O'M rdmbh mWWE@em e d W ** P m ea 0 ech em OOOC E dNOkech elm e @ N P 4 m O h e m es@ N P 4Modemh e at e p h F 4
*w e 2 P EeG #r P 4 M O N M o h e O k e O N e C h e O N e m h e m N e m k e
- Ci e m e * = E e m e e m
~ mM( 4 L mmMcdE mmM@ deOMM@ @EOMM@dEOMM@dE OmM@dEOpM@dE O 3 1 e e e e o e e o e e e o e e e o e e o e e e e o e e. e e e- e e e e e o e o e e o e o e e e e e e e
-{ w - J OG QL m mmmmm h h 4 N N N M WM M M M e fle e e'e @ @lM '
@ @ ( J 4f4 d d d h h h h h h E I l
i 1
, t 1 -
- f. eed 41 ? ?09 d h e t E F eI. w'en@(ee se(se
(.- P.* C Dmue@@h K P P m h e efe d e.P P OIm m e e @ & e r P O O es e ie sese to Ome O se O == esee**se ee se emsee ee es es==se NseNseNseNosNseesesNembee Nf WOseelee es M:M es M eedMtMse seon se et e ese.eeMeee.se es eseoeeee.mege eteeeseese e es er aoer
# ADM( t f@@ dd%* 4484d4 Jedd@Jed EddddddJeded@ @ dd44444
- ea o m N, n e r. eeO m. N.. n e r o m N. Me e, @ m N OesM os N es m.
o e e ..ee .*e se e e es se se se ce eeo see d oe se e . d,s o. e t o. om.. N.. m e. @e se e st ee *e es. ee se t COOOOOmmmmmmhN~~NNenMMWMe ei .M.. se e e . se
@@ .ddh e eh @ - km k.NeM e' c O g e q O O O c e q O O O O O . C O O c O O,m e . O COqOO.c4 OOO
- eeee O O O O .r ,e e e e .eCOe e .e e e e e ,e w e e e e eet.ee.e.eeelooOOOOOO.OO eesece ,e e .e e t h COO.OtaOO OO OOO. COme.Ge. O e O m.e e . OOOO O.OeO O O e. ee ei e.CO OO O c e .e.
CO a endh)POOOOOOlOO,OOOje. O O
.- dmNW .em!NMe..a m
he e.
- w d . m. d . e d o .h~hhh O - ~ M he . . ~ S Pheme.e. e e e m m 2'e P .m W .. o W . .O.OO
. ...PPP h e mm .ee OO in 1 1 I 1h . .A c.,
Mm-mm
.i . . I- . ,.- , = I, _ m. -= lm = x , . = . . . . . = W
.! - e . . . %.4
. . . r. a.r . . . , ,- e r, , , e , , , u (final)
_ -_ . _ _ _}}