•

•

REACTOR CONTAINMENT BUILDING INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST

TYPE A, B, AND C

SURVEILLANCE TEST

VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY

SURRY NUCLEAR POWER STATION UNIT NO. 2

MAY 1980

REGULA TORY DOCiCfT fllE CO Pt

•

•

•

TABLE OF CONTEN~S

Section Title

REFERENCES.

1 PURPOSE.

2 SUMMARY.

2.1 TYPE A TEST.

2.2 LOCAL LEAK RATE TESTS (TYPE BAND C)

3

3.1

3.2

TYPE A TEST.

3.2.1 3.2.2 3.2.3 3.2.4

3.3

EDITED LOG OF EVENTS

GENERAL TEST DESCRIPTION

Prerequisites ..... Equipment and Instrumentation. Data Acquisition System. Data Resolution System

TEST ANALYSIS .

3.4 TEST RESULTS .

3.4.1 3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4

CILRT Results - Mass Point Method. CILRT Results -·Total Time Method. Veri{ication Test Results ..... Type Band C Penetration Leakage·To Be Added To Containment Calculated Leakage ..

Appendix

3A

3B

3C

30

3E

3F

3G

3H

INSTRUMENT LOCATION VERIFICATION DATA SUMMARY.

SITE METEOROLOGY PRIOR TO CILRT.

SITE METEOROLOGY DURING THE CILRT.

INSTRUMENTATION TABLE ..

INSTRUMENTATION LOCATION (PROFILE VIEW).

INSTRUMENTATION LOCATION (PLAN VIEW)

CONTAINMENT INPUT VARIABLES ...

LEAK RATE DATA - ABSOLUTE METHOD

i

iii

1-1

2-1

2-1

2-4

3-1

3-1

3-2

3-2 3-3 3-3 3-4

3-6

3-7

3-7 3-8 3-8

3-8

3A-1

3C-1

3C-l

3D-1

3E-l

3F-1

3G-1

3H-1

•

•

•

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont)

Appendix . Title

3J

3K

3L

3M

3N

LEAK RATE DATA - TOTAL TIME.

CONTAINMENT AIR MASS DURING CILRT VERSUS TIME (HOURLY DATA). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

CONTAINMENT AIR MASS DURING CILRT VERSUS TIME.

FITTED CONTAINMENT AIR MASS VERSUS TIME.

CONTAINMENT LEAK RATE (TOTAL TIME) VS TIME

Section

4 LOCAL LEAK RATE TESTS (TYPE BAND C).

Appendix

4A

4B

1979-198.0 TYPE B DATA SUMMARY.

1979-1980 TYPE C DATA SUMMARY.

ii

3J-l

3K-l

3L-l

3M.:.l

3N-l

4-1

4A-l

4B-l

•

•

•

REFERENCES

1. lOCFRSO Appendix J, Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water Cooled Power Reactors, April 19, 1976

2. Bechtel Topica~ Report BN-TOP-1, Rev. l, Testing Criteria for Integrated Leak Rate Testing of Primary Containment Structures for Nuclear Power Plants, November 1, 1972

3. 2-PT-16.3. Reactor Containment Building Integrated Leak Rate Test, May r4, 1980

4. ANS N274, Containment System Leakage Testing Requirements Draft 3, July 1979

iii

...

•

•

SECTION 1

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present a description and analyses of the Surveillance Types A, B, an~ C Containment Leak Rate Test (CILRT) results conducted on the Virginia Electric and Power Company's Surr·y Nuclear Power Station, Unit No. 2.

This report is submitted as required by lOCFRSO Appendix J, paragraph V.B (Reference~) .

1-1

••

•

•

SECTION 2

SUMMARY

2.1 TYPE A TEST

Three attempts were made to perform an acceptable Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT). The following is a summary of the activities prior to and during the performance of each test.

A.

B.

The first attempt was conducted from February 25 to February 28, 1980. The containment and containment systems were not in a condition that would be found following a LOCA because of steam generator replacement activities. In addition, it was suspected that there were leaks in the secondary side of the steam generators due to indications from the secondary instrumentation. After several hours at test pressure, the leakage rate stabilized at an unacceptable value (0.80 La). The decision was made by the Test Director to list all possible leakage paths and to depressurize and repair all leaks.

The list included packing leaks, suspected seat secondary instrument leaks, and system alignments of related systems which needed reverifying .

leaks, safety

Between February 29 and March 8, 1980, all known leaks were repaired and suspected leaks were verified and repaired as required. The total corrected leakage· was only about ·40 standard cubic feet per day which was less than the amount by which the test had failed. However, it was felt that, with the leaks corrected, further completion of construction activities, and the installation of one outside recirculation spray pump and one low head safety injection pump, system integrity would be ensured, and the decision to repressurize was made.

On March 9, 1980, the containment was repressurized. After several days at test pressure, the leakage rate was still unacceptable ( 1.0 La). After all accessible penetrations had been verified as leaktight, attempts were made to identify and block other possible leakage paths which included flooding of the fuel transfer tube and running the auxiliary feed pumps to pressurize the secondary system to Pa in an attempt to identify leakage paths. These efforts had no apparent effect on the observed leak rate.

A decision was made to align and pressurize safety related systems, such as chemical and volume control and saf~ty injection, to represent a condition that would be found subsequent to a LOCA. This was accomplished by using the primary grade water system to fill and pressurize portions of

2-1

•

•

•

these systems outside containment. The combined effects of these actions had an appreciable effect on the observed leak rate.

The decision was then made to depressurize and perform the following:

1. Dry the steam generators with nitrogen and perform a leak test at Pa or higher.

2. Perform a thorough inspection of the containment liner for possible defects.

3. Revise the test procedure to arrange all systems fn a condition as near as practicable to that following a LOCA.

4. Reverify all types Band C leakage rates.

The containment was depressurized and the following actions.were taken:

1. Steam generator instrumentation was aligned for normal operation.

2. The steam 70 psig. connection

generators were pressurized to approximately Only minor valve packing and instrument

leaks were found. All leaks were corrected.

3. A thorough inspection of the containment liner revealed eight drilled holes extending through the liner. The hole diameters were 1/4 inch. Upon investigation, it was determined that the holes had.been drilled prior to the first attempt on 25 February for receiving resistance temperature detector (RTD) mounting and cable brackets. The holes were repaired and a test channel welded over the entire area and successfully leak tested at 45 psig.

4. The test procetjure valve line-up sheets were revised to better represent conditions subsequent to a LOCA.

5. Retest of all types Band C penetrations resulted in the identification of minor leaks that were either corrected or left as is. The total Band C results were well within the acceptable limit of 0.6 La. The service water containment isolation valves to the recirculation spray heat exchangers had been blanked for the previous two attempts. The eight valves were cleaned and retested but the leakage was found to be excessive. Replacement parts were not available at the time. It was decided that the valves would be blanked for the third attempt and repaired subsequent to the test. The

2-2

•

•

•

respective penetration leakages would.be final upper confidence limit (UCL) conservative for the following reasons:

added which

to is

the more

a. The type C test method requires pressurizing the entire service water piping system inside containment and measuring the amount of air needed to maintain a test pressure of 45 psig (makeup air method). This amount is reported as the type C leakage and includes packing leaks of valves other than the eight containment isolation valves and any other system leakage.

b. Under accident conditions, at least two exchangers would be in servi~e at a pressure would exceed containment pressure.

heat that

C. Pressurization for the third attempt commenced at 2100 hours on May 24, 1980. Construction activities were at a stage which allowed the initial condition for this test to better represent system configurations ,after a LOCA. With the exception of the service water valves and two component cooling water valves, all types B and C testing was completed. The only other abnormal condition was the failure of one chilled mirror, caused by a power cable failure, just prior to pressurization which left four chilled mirrors to be used during the test.

During pressurization, a decrease in the pressurizer level was observed. This condition was judged and later confirmed to be caused by air entrapment in the A loop of the reactor coolant system. The A loop had not been totally vented because of maintenance activities on the A coolant pump motor. Intermittent operation of a low head safety injection pump was required to maintain pressurizer level.

At 0400 hours on May 25, 1980, a low level alarm was received in the neutron shield tank. Concurrently, the component cooling water surge tank level increased. The relation between the level changes indicated a transfer of water between the two systems. This was corrected by securing the component cooling water inlet and outlet isolation valves to the A recirculation air fan cooling coil.

Test pressure of 47 psig was reached at 0812 hours and containment pressurization was secured.

Containment temperature stabilization criteria were met at 1230 hours and the CILRT computer program was initialized.

The first several hours of data indicated a leak rate of approximately La. At 2330 hours, the conversion cards for the quartz manometers failed. This was caused by a

2-3

•

•

•

transistor malfunction in the plant computer which was corrected by replacement of a computer card. The manometers resumed recording pressures at 0355 hours on May 26, 1980. The following 12 hours of data yielded a calculated leakage rate (0.3 La) below the acceptable limit and satisfied the requirements of Bechtel Topical Report, BN-TOP-1 ( Reference 2) .

At 1723 hours, the mass pumpback verification test commenced. At 1910 hours, approximately 555 pounds of air had been pumped into the containment via the service air line.

The computer calculated mass increase compared to the total metered air reading was within the acceptable limit and the test was secured.

Depressurization of the containment at approximately 5 psi/hr commenced at 2145 hours. At 0707 hours, on May 27, 1980, the containment was at atmospheric pressure.

2.2 LOCAL LEAK RATE TESTS (TYPES BAND C)

The local leak rate testing of containment isolation valves and primary containment penetrations was conducted as required by station procedures, commencing in December 1979. The penetrations tested and their associated leak rates are listed in Section 4 of this report .

2-4

•

•

•

3.1 EDITED LOG OF EVENTS

May 24, 1980

SECTION 3

TYPE A TEST

After all procedure prerequisites had been signed, the Surry Unit No. 2 Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) 2-PT-16.3 began at approximately 2100 hours. Initial containment pressurization was accomplished using seven air compressors (9900 scfm). Containment atmosphere was controlled using all three containment recirculation fans operating with throttled chilled water. At 2115 hours it was noted that the water level in the pressurizer was falling. Contai~ment pressurization was immediately secured. Gravity fill from the refueling water storage tank (RWST) to the pressurizer was utilized to reestablish level, and a volume equal to 7 percent was returned to the pressurizer. Containment pressurization was then restarted. Throughout the remaining pressurization the pressurizer water level decreased.

May 25, 1980

Surveillance of penetration areas and test boundaries continued throughout the test. At approximately 0400 hours the low level alarm for the neutron shield tank sounded. A level increase in the component cooling water surge tank was also evident.

At approximately 0425 hours, TV-CC-210A, the supply isolation valve for component coo,;Ling water to the A air recirculating fan cooling coils was closed, and the levels in the component cooling water surge tank and neutron shield tank levels subsequently stabilized.

At 0812 hours, containment pressurization was secured with containment pressure indicating 61.868 psia. When pressurization was secured, the water level in the pressurizer stabilized. At 0930 hours, the Unit 2 computer failed. The Unit 1 computer was then used for data acquisition. At 1140 hours the Unit No. 2 computer was returned to service and continued recording leak rate data. The Unit 1 computer was returned to its backup status (at 1225 hours).

By 1225 hours the containment temperature stabilization criteria had been met .

3-1

•

•

•

At 1230 hours the integrated leak rate test Monitoring continued until 2330 hours when conversion cards for the manometers malfunctioned.

May 26, 1980

period began. the computer

At 0355 hours the conversion cards had been repaired and the Unit 2 computer was again recording 10 minute averaged CILRT data. The data were reviewed every 20 minutes and, after several hours, values for containment leakage (percent/day) and the upper confidence limit (UCL) indicated that containment leakage would be within the allowable limit.

At 1555 hours the leak rate test was terminated. The UCL at this time was 0.0281 percent/day.

At 1723 hours the mass pump back verification test was initiated. Verification air flow was interrupted at 1743 hours because of a loss of instrument air to Unit No. 1. The air flow to Unit No. 2 was restarted at 1803 hours.

At 1910 hours- the mass pump back verification was .secured. The readings taken from the gas meter were compared with the calculated mass change with th'e results within the acceptance limit.

At 2145 hours, venting of the reactor containment building commenced.

May 27, 1980

At 0707 hours, depressurization of the reactor containment building was completed.

3.2 GENERAL TEST DESCRIPTION

3.2.1 Prerequisites

In accordance with the Surry Unit No. 2 CILRT (Reference 3), the following is a partial listing prerequisites that are completed and documented containment pressurization.

2-PT-16.3 of the

prior to

1. General in~pection of the accessible exterior surfaces of the containment performed.

interior structure

and was

2. All equipment and instrumentation that could be damaged or destroyed by test pressure was removed or protected.

3. All instrumentation used for test was calibrated .

3-2

•

•

•

4. Valve line-ups, as required, were completed including closure of the containment isolation valves.

5. Component operable.

cooling and chilled water systems were

6. Plant computers were operational and programmed for the CILRT.

7. Instrument location verification tests were completed (see Appendixes 3B and q).

8. The Official Log of Events book was established and available prior to commencement of the test.

9. Site meteorology data were taken for seven days prior to and throughout the performance of the CILRT.

3.2.2 Eguipment,and Instrumentation

Pressurization of the containment was achieved by utilization of seven air compressors. Air was piped through two aftercoolers in parallel and a refrigerated air dryer. The dryer was sized to deliver air at 100 psig with a 40° dew point. Instrumentation and valving were installed to maintain proper monitoring and control during pressurization. The total capacity of the pressurization system as installed was rated at 9,900 scfm.

During the test, the necessary variables used to determine monitored using

multiple resistance dew point indicators (see Appendix 3D).

containment leakage were continually instrumentation which consisted of temperature detectors (RTD~) chilled mirror and two absolute pressure quartz manometers

A gas totalizer in the service air system was used during the mass pump back verification test. All test instrumentation, except for the gas totalizer is input into the plant computer for data acquisition and averaging.

3.2.3 Data Acquisition System

The Surry Unit No. 2 CILRT utilized a Westinghouse Prodac P250 to scan, log, average, and analyze data received from the containment instrumentation.

The P250 analog scan package reads all the analog inputs in a preestablished manner, converts these readings into engineering units, and then stores these values for use by the plant operators and by the plant application programs .

3-3

•

•

•

For the CILRT, the P250 Plant Computer monitored the following instrumentation:

~

22 RTDs

Scan __ Rate (sec)

5 chilled mirrors 20 20

2

\

2 quartz manometers

Instantaneous values of the CILRT instruments were recorded every 5 minutes during the test period using the P250 digital trend function on the operator's console.

A 10 minute time average of the 29 readings, calculated by the P250 Average and Integrate (A&I) package, was used as input in the plant computer CILRT programs.

The plant computer CILRT program consists of ILRTDATA, which runs every 10 minutes, collects A&I data for all the instrumentation, performs sensor validity checks, and calculates weighted average dew point temperature, vapor pressure, weighted average containment temperature, and containment air mass.

3.2.4 Data Resolution System

After the appropriate data have been acquired and averaged utilizing the plant computer system, the results are manually input to a remote computer system for leak rate calculations.

3.2.4.1 Absolute Method Mass Point Analysis

The Absolute Method of Mass Point Analysis consists of calculating air masses within the containment structure over a period of time from pressure, temperature, and dew point observations during the CILRT. The air masses are computed using the ideal gas law as follows:

M =

where:

M p Pv = R = T V

(P-Pv) V ( 144) RT

air mass, lb total pressure, psia average vapor pressure, psia

(Eg 1)

53.35 ft lbf/lbm 0 R (for air) average containment temperature 0 R containment free volume, 1.8 x 10 6

ft 3

3-4

'

I

I

•

•

•

The leakage rate is then determined by plotting the air mass as a function of time, using a least-squares fit to determine the slope, A - dM/dt. The leak rate is expressed as a percentage of air mass lost in 24 hours or symbolically:

Leak rate= A/B (-2400) B

(Eq 2)

where A is the slope of the least-squares curve and Bis they­intercept. The sign convention is such that an outward leak is positive and the units are in percent/day. The air mass is computed separately and the result is correlated as a function of time by means of a least-squares fit of the form:

m =At+ B (Eq 3)

The slope A and they-intercept Bare then used in Equation 2 to determine the leak rate.

A 95 percent confidence interval is calculated using a T distribution.

The sum of the leakage rate and the 95 percent confidence interval is the UCL.

The leak rate is less than the UCL with a probability of 95 percent.

Absolute Method Total Time Analysis

The absolute method of total time analysis consists of calculating air lost from the containment pressure, temperature, and dew point observations during the CILRT.

The containment air mass is computed using Equation 1 (Section 3.2.4.1).

The measured leakage rate at any time (t) is then determined by subtracting the mass at that time (mt) from the initial mass (Mi) and dividing by the initial mass. The measured leak rate is expressed as a percentage of containment mass lost in 24 hours or symbolically:

MEA. Leak Rate= Mi - Mt (2400) Mi (tit)

The sign convention is such that an outward leak is positive and the units are in percent/day .

3-5

•

•

The estimated leakage rate is then determined by plotting the measured leak rate as a function of time and then performing a least-squares fit of the measured leak rate values as follows:

EST. Leak Rate= At+ B

Where A is the slope and Bis the Y intercept of the least­squares curve.

The 95 percent confidence interval is determined with the T distribution.

This analysis Topical Report, criteria.

method was BN-TOP-1

3.3 TEST ANALYSIS

used in conjunction with the Bechtel (Reference 2), as a test duration

Test data obtained from the data acquisition system for the period of 0352 hours on May 26, 1980 to 1552 hours on May 26, 1980, are utilized for the test analysis. The interval between 0812 hours on May 25, 1980 to 1225 hours on May 25, 1980 represents the containment stabilization period. The period between 1225 hours on May 25, 1980 and 0352 hours on May 25, 1980 was not used for the leakage rate analysis because the data acquisition computer conversion cards for the manometers failed at 2352 hours. The conversion cards were subsequently repaired at 0352 hours and the test continued until completion at 1552 hours on May 26, 1980.

The leakage rate analysis is performed by Virginia Electric and Power Company's (VEPCO) CILRT program (Section 3.2.4). The input data for the VEPCO CILRT program are shown in Appendix 3G.

The Absolute Method Mass Point analysis (Section 3.4.2.1) represents the results on the containment building leakage rate. The results, Appendix 3H, show the UCL to be 0.0281 percent/day, which is within the acceptable limit of 0.07 percent/day (0.075 less the Type C penalty for valves on systems not vented to the containment) .

The Absolute Method Total Time analysis (Section 3.4.2.2) is used in conjunction with the Instrument Selection Guide (ANS N274 Reference 4) to determine the duration of the CILRT if less than 24 hours. The Instrument Selection Guide indicates that the GILRT instrumentation requires at least a 7.6 hour test duration (Reference 3). The 12 hours of data utilized satisfy both the Instrument Selection Guide anq the Total Time analysis criteria as outlined in the Bechtel Topical Report (Reference 2). The results of the total time analyses are tabulated in Appendix J. Appendix 3N has two graphs displaying total time analysis

3-6

•

•

•

results. Graph 4 is a plot showing the measured and estimated leak vs time. Graph 5 shows the average estimated leakage rate of the last 20 calculated values extrapolated to 24 hours (the average estimated leakage rate is determined by linear regression a:1alysis). The graph shown in Appendix 3K depicts the containment air mass during the CILRT. These data are shown at hourly intervals. Data for the 4 hours when the manometer conversion cards were malfunctioning were taken from instantaneous rather than time averaged values and are designated on the graph between the 11th and 14th hour.

The following appendixes summarize the plots provided by this report:

Appendix

3K

3L

3M

3N

Description

Containment air mass vs time (1252 hours on 5/25/80 to 1552 hours on 5/26/80)

Containment air mass vs time during CILRT (0352 hours to 1552 hours on 5/26/80)

Containment leakage rate vs time, mass point analrsis (0352 to 1552 hours on 5/26/80)

Containment leakage rate vs time, total time analysis (0352 to 1552 hours on 5/26/80)

The leakage rate test calculations were back method. Approximately 7,200 scf inserted during approximately 1 hour computer calculated air mass was within value (refer to Section 3.4.3).

verified by the mass pump (La for one day) was of elapsed time. The

0.25 La of the metered

3.4 TEST RESULTS

3.4.1 CILRT Results - Mass Point Method

1.

2.

3.

4.

Leakage rate calcu­lated, Lam

95 percent upper confidence interval

UCL, Lam leakage rate with 9~ percent confid­ence interval (1 + 2)

Correction for types Band C leakage

3-7

0.0243 percent/day

0.0037 percent/day

0.028 percent/day

0.005 percent/day

'• /

•

•

•

5 • Total reportable type A leak rate (3 + 4)

3.4.2 CILRT Results - Total Time Method

0.0331 percent/day

1. The calculated (estimated) total time leak rate was tending to stabilize at 0.024%/day <0.1%/day.

2. The calculated (estimated) total time leak rate was increasing from the last 20 ILRT data points. The calculated leak rate extrapolated to 24 hours is 0.0188%/day ~0.075%/day (Appendix 3J-2).

3. UCL for the total time calculated leak rate is 0.0533%/day (Appendix 3J-l) <0.1%/day.

4. The mean of the measured total time leak rate based on a remake of the last 20 points is 0.0129%/day <0.1%/day (Appendix 3J-2).

5. At least 20 data points (Reference 2) were obtained, and at least 7.6 hours (Attachment 7.2.2 of Reference 3) of testing time had elapsed.

3.4.3 Verification Test Results

1. Metered mass of air inserted

2. Difference between initial computer air mass and final computer air mass

3. 0.25 La verification limit

4. Difference between computer air mass difference and metered air (1-2)

555 lbm

459 lbm

136 lbm

96 lbm

The calculated CILRT air mass increase agreed with the mass pump back verification instrumentation within 0.25 La in accordance with 10CFR50 Appendix J.

3.4.4 Types C and B Penetration Leakage to Be Added to Containment Calculated Leakage

Penetration No./Type C Leakage (SCFH) l

1 I o 16 / 0 79,83/ 0.7

3-8

•

•

•

2 I o

__ 4 __ ,/1.218

5 I o

8 I o

9 / 0

10 · / 0

11 / 0

12 I o

13 I o

14 / 40

17 / 0

18 / 0

24 / 0

2s ; 0.2s

26 / 0.4

21 I o

28 I o.6

45 / 0

SSA/ 0

57A / 0

80,84/ 0.3

81,85/ 1.4

82,86/ 0.15

97A / 0

97D / 0

105D / 4.0

Total Type C leakage to be added 15.018 SCFH

Total Type B leakage to be added

Total Types Band C leakage to

be added

0 SCFH

15.018 SCFH

0.005 percent/day

NOTE: The above penetrations were in a non-vented valve lineup configuration for this test, with their respective leak rates per 2-PT-16.3A,B .

3-9

•

•

•

-- --~-------------------------------

APPENDIX 3A

INSTRUMENT LOCATION VERIFICATION DATA SUMMARY

1. Test No. 1

a. The weighted average temperature verification points was 65.0°F. ·

from the test

b. The weighted average temperature from RTDs was 64.9°F.

Note: Acceptance Criteria

The weighted average temperature from the verification test points is within ±2° F of the weighted average temperature by RTDs (Ia - IB~±2°F).

c. The weighted average dew psychrometer was 29.77°F.

point temperature by

d. The weighted average dew point temperature by chilled_ mirrors was 26.74°F.

Note: Acceptance Criteria

The weighted average dew point temperature by psychrometer is within ±5° F of the weighted dew point average temperature by chilled mirrors (Ic-ID~±S°F) .

2. Test No. 2

a. The weighted average temperature from test verification points was 72.08°F ..

b. The weighted average temperature from RTDs was 71.72°F.

Note: Acceptance Criteria

The weighted average temperature from the verification test points is within ±2° F of the weighted average temperature by RTDs (!Ia - IIb~±2°F).

c. The weighted average dew psychrometer was 56.91°F.

point temperature by

d. The weighted average dew point temperature by chilled mirrors was 58.40°F .

3A-1

·-

•

•

Note: Acceptance Criteria

The weighted average dew point temperature psychrometer is within ±5° F of the weighted average point temperature by chilled mirrors (IIc-IId~±S°F) .

3A-2

by dew

APPENDIX 3B

• SITE METEOROLOGY P~IOR TO CILRT

Barometric Pressure

Date Time (in hg) Dew Point (OF) Dry Bulb (OF)

5/17/80 0200 30.360 44.4 52.2 0500 30. 360 46.1 50.5 0800 30.400 45.8 55.1 1100 30.415 44.6 66.2 1400 30.380 40.2 70.5 1700 30. 345 51. 8 66.7 2000 30. 315 53.1 63.4 2300 30.295 57.7 64.2

5/18/80 0200 30.2.40 58.4 64.3 0500 30.165 63.3 66.1 0800 30.125 65.3 68.1 1100 30.115 66.0 69.9 1400 30.115 66.0 69.9 1700 30.005 69.4 74.3 2000 29.990 59.9 73.4 2300 30.000 59.7 76.3

• 5/19/80 0200 29.985 69.4 72.9 0500 29.975 66.8 67.7. 0800 30.015 64.6 66.9 1100 30.015 60.2 75.7 1400 29.985 61. 7 79.5 1700 29.960 66.1 65.6 2000 29.915 66.7 65.0 2300 29.975 64.5 64.0

5/20/80 0200 29.905 65.6 66.8 0500 29.890 64.9 68.9 0800 29.915 66.1 71.3 1100 ~9.930 66.9 67.2 1400 29.925 66.9 66.9 1700 29.895 66.0 65.9 2000 29.870 65.1 66.4 2300 29.805 66.0 67.0

5/21/80 0200 29.730 67.3 68.4 0500 29.960 66.3 63.2 1100 29.880 63.4 66.4 1400 29.915 62.8 66.9 1700 29.920 60.1 69.5 2000 29.960 60.0 66.1 2300 30.020 59.2 62 .4

• 3B-l

Barometric Pressure

Date Time (in hg) Dew Point (OF) Dry Bulb (OF)

• 5/22/80 0200 30.045 59.2 61. 5 0500 30.060 59.2 59.5 0800 30.110 60.1 64.0 1100 30.115 60.7 71. 8 1400 30.090 59.6 76.7 1700 30.055 60.5 78.5 2000 30.050 65.0 71.9 2300 30.065 62.9 68.1

5/23/80 0200 30.065 62.6 67.5 0500 30.040 63.2 67.0 0800 30.050 60.0 68.7 1100 30.050 68.0 74.7 1400 30.020 68.3 79.0 1700 30.025 69.5 77.0 2000 30.020 68.9 72.6 2300 30.015 68.7 70.1

5/24/80 0100 30.05 68.8 59.8 0500 30.065 69.0 71. 5 0800 3'0.07 68.8 70.5 1100 30.08 70.3 74.8 1400 30.08 69.7 79.4

• 1700 30.095 67.4 81.5 2000 30.15 68.0 70.9

• 3B-2

• •• • APPENDIX 3C

SITE METEOROLOGY DURING THE CILRT

DRY BULB BAROMETRIC WIND WIND DATE TIME TEMP (°F) PRESSURE ( in hg) VEL (MQh) QIB_ DEW POINT (OF)

5/24/80 2100 70.5 30.12 5.8 134 68.1 2200 70.2 30.10 2.4 184 67.3 2300 68.0 30.00 0.9 259 67 .1

5/25/80 0000 67.8 30.00 1.8 154 67 .1 0100 68.3 29.95 3.5 184 67.3 0200 68.5 29.95 2.9 214 67.4 0300 68.6 29.90 2.4 211 67.3 0400 69.0 29.90 1.6 267 67 .1 0500 66.9 29.85 2.4 242 65.3 0600 68.6 29.85 3.0 314 66.8 0700 69.6 29.85 4.2 344 67.5 0800 68.3 29.85 3.8 003 66.7 0900 70.4 29.85 3. 1 035 67.0 1000 71. 3 29.85 3.1 006 66.8 1100 72.8 29.85 4.4 326 67.8 1200 74.0 29.85 4.5 238 68.3 1300 73. 7 29.85 7.7 351 66.9 1400 72.9 29.85 4.6 353 66.4 1500 73.9 29.86 ,. 3 303 66.7 1600 73.9 29.86 2.6 238 67.4 1700 75.6 29.87 2. 1 026 68.3 1800 72.4 29.87 7 .1 306 68.0 1900 70.6 29.87 3.2 344 66.8 2000 70.9 29.87 4.0 350 69.5 2100 71.1 29.87 3.8 355 70.2

' 2200 71. 1 29.87 3. 1 358 70. 1 2300 71.0 29.86 4.2 028 69.2

5/26/80 0000 70.3 29.85 4. 3 037 68.1 0100 70.2 29.85 3.9 048 65.1 0200 69.2 29.85 6.3 031 63.6 0300 68.4 29.85 6.2 044 60.8 0400 67. l 29.85 4.7 025 58.3 0500 65.7 29.85 7.9 020 59.9 0600 64.4 29.85 7.7 014 59. l 0700 64.0 29.85 6.4 003 59.2 0800 64.7 29.85 7.7 016 59.l 0900 66.7 29.85 8.2 052 57.0 1000 69.0 29.85 9.0 058 48.7 1100 69.4 29.85 8.4 073 46.2 1200 70.3 29.86 7.0 064 47.0 1300 71.2 29.85 6. 1 039 48.2 1400 71.2 29.86 6.6 038 44.9

3C-1

• • • DRY BULB BAROMETRIC WIND WIND

DATE TIME TEMP (°F) PRESSURE ( in hq) VEL (Mph) QIB_ DEW POINT (°Fl

1500 71.9 29.85 6.4 052 43.1 1600 72.6 29.84 5.3 319 45.4 1700 73.2 29.84 9.0 001 44.2 1800 73.2 29.84 7.7 341 44.7 1900 71.9 29.84 8. 1 338 39.8 2000 69.7 29.85 5.8 358 41. 5 2100 66.4 29.86 2.2 332 43.0 2200 64. 1 29.89 1. 7 333 45.0 2300 60.1 29.99 1. 5 245 45.4

5/27/80 0000 55.6 29.91 2.4 170 47.5 0100 53.4 29.91 2. 1 213 49.0 0200 55.2 29.92 2. 1 217 49.6 0300 51.4 29.92 1. 7 183 49.4 0400 59.4 29.93 4. 7 027 50. 1 0500 60.5 29.95 6.6 034 45.5 0600 60.4 29.97 7. 1 024 39.0 0700 60.3 29.98 3.3 009 39.0 0800 61.8 29.99 3.5 345 41.4

3C-2

• • APPENDIX 30

INSTRUMENTATION TABLE

The fol lowing instrumentation was calibrated~ and functionally tested no greater than 6 months prior to the performance of this test and ln accordance with 10CFR50, Appendix J, and Field Calibration Procedures using instrumentation traceable to the National Bureau of Standards.

Weight Computer Sensi-Instrument Factor Point· Range . Zone Accuracy t ivitY

RTD-LM-200-1 0.02683 T1000A 55-105°F F-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-2 0.02322 T1001A 55-105°F F-2 ±0. 1 °F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-3 0.02427 T1002A 55-105°F F-3 ±0. 1 °F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-4 0.01820 T1003A 55-105°F E-3 ±0. 1 °F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-5 0.08884 T1004A 55-105°F B-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-6 0.08884 T1005A 55-105°F B-2 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-7 0.08884 T1006A 55-105°F C-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-8 0.08884 T1007A 55-105°F C-2 ±0. 1 °F ±-.09°F RTD-LM-200-9 0.04975 T1008A 55-105°F A-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-10 0.04975 T1009A 55-105°F A-2 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-11 0.04975 T1010A 55-105°F A-3 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-12 0.02460 T1011A 55-105°F D-1 ±0. 1 ° F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-13 0.02460 T1012A 55-105°F D-2 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-14 0.02460 T1013A 55-105°F E-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-15 0.02460 T4024A 55-105°F E-2 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-16 0.04766 T4025A 55-105°F 1-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-17 0.04766 T4026A 55-105°F 1-2 ±0. 1 ° F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-18 0.04766 T4027A 55-105°F 1-3 ±0. 1 °F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-21 0.03608 T4009A 55-105°F H-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-22 0.03961 T4020A 55-105°F H-2 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-23 0.01782 T4021A 55-105°F G-1 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F RTD-LM-200-24 0.06800 T4022A 55-105°F G-2 ±0.1°F ±0.09°F MT-LM-200-6 0.14064 T4039A -40 to +200°F J-1 ±0.4°F ±0.05°F MT-LM-200-7 0.14064 T4040A -40 to +200°F J-2 ±0.4°F ±0.05°F MT-LM-200-8 0.23959 T4041A -40 to +200°F K-1 ±0.4°F ±0.05°F MT-LM-200-9 0.23959 T4042A -40 to +200°F K-2 ±0.4°F ±0.05°F MT-LM-200-10 0.23959 T4043A -40 to +200°F K-3 ±0.4°F ±0.05°F PI -LM-206 0.5 U0960 0-100 psia ±0.068 psia 0.001% °FS PI-LM-207 0.5 U0961 0-100 psia ±0.068 psia 0.001% °FS

30-1

•

•

•

•

ZONE J

ZONEK

MT-8

PROFILE VIEW NOTE:

MT-G MT-LM-200-G(TYP)

3E-1

APPENDIX 3E INSTRUMENTATION LOCATION DEW POINT SENSORS SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST

•

•

•

RTD-9

RT D-5

RTD-13·

RTD-3

RTD-21

NOTES:

RT0-24

RT0-18

PROFILE VIEW

RTD-12

RTD-G

RT D-7

RTD-15

RTD-14

RTD-2 2

RTD-2

RT0-1

I II

~1-27-7

el 132'

eJ 95 I

el 4i4'

el 18'-4" el

-3'-r;/

I. RT D-1= RT D-L M-200-1 (TY P) 2. RTD-19, 20 NOT USED

3E-2

APPENDIX 3E J NS TRUMENTATION LOCATION RESISTANCE TEMPERATURE DETECTORS (RTD) SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 I NT E GRAT ED LEAK RAT E TEST

•

•

RT0-18 I

RT0-21

I RTD-IJ

PLAN VIEW

NOTES: I. RTD-1= RT 0-LM- 200-1 (TYP)

. 2. RTD-19120 NOT USED

'

APPENDIX 3F 1N5TRUMENTATION LOCATION RESISTANCE TEMPERATURE DETECTORS (RTD) ·. · SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 lNTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST

3 F-1

•

•

•

NOTE: PLAN VIEW MT-6 MT-LM-200-6 (TYP)

APPENDIX 3F INSTRUMENTATION LOCATION DEW POINT SENSORS SUR RY POWER 5 TAT ION-UNIT 2 ,I NT EGRAT ED LEAK RATE TEST

3F-2

APPENDIX 3G

• 12.35.48. VEPCO SURRY POWER STATION UNIT 2 5/26/80 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST FROM 0352 HOURS ON 5/26/80 TO

1552 HOURS ON 5/26/80 37 DATA SETS ARE CURRENTLY COMPLETED

TIME ABS PRESS DEWPT VAP PRESS TEMP (Hours) (Psia) De~°F (Psia) De~ 0R

0.0 61. 204 60.89 0.2643 537.57 0.334 61. 201 60.86 0.2641 537.55 0.667 61.199 60.83 0.2638 537.53 1.000 61. 196 60.82 0.2637 537.51 1.334 61.194 60.81 0.2636 537.49 1.667 61.191 60.79 0.2634 537.49 2.000 61.188 60.74 0.2629 537.46 2.334 61.186 60.74 0.2629 537.45 2.667 61.182 60.69 0.2622 537.42 3.000 61.178 60.66 0.2622 537.39 3.334 61.175 60.61 0.2617 537.37 3.667 61.171 60.58 0.2615 537.34 4.000 61.168 60.57 0.2614 537.32 4.334 61.166 60.57 0.2614 537.30 4.667 61.164 60.51 0.2608 537.28

• 5.000 61.161 60.50 0.2607 537.25 5.334 61. 158 60.48 0.2605 537.23 5.667 61.154 60.46 0.2603 537.20 6.000 61.151 60.44 0.2602 537.16 6.334 61.147 60.43 0.2601 537.15 6.667 61.144 60.38 0.2596 537.12 7.000 61.140 60.36 0.2594 537 .10 7.334 61.137 60.33 0.2591 537.07 7.667 61.134 60.30 0.2589 537.03 8.000 61.130 60.30 0.2589 537.02 8.334 61.127 60.25 0.2584 536.98 8.667 61.122 60.24 0.2583 536.96 9.000 61. 120 60,21 0.2580 536.93 9.334 61.117 60.21 0.2580 536.91 9.667 61.115 60.20 0.2579 536.89

10.000 61.112 60.18 0.2578 536.87 10.334 61.107 60.16 0.2576 536.85 10. 667 61.106 60.15 0.2575 536.83 11. 000 61.103 60.13 0.2573 536.81 11. 334 61.101 60.12 0.2572 536.79 11. 667 61. 097 60.11 0.2571 536. 77 12.000 61. 095 60.09 0.2569 536.75

• 3G-1

12.27.53. VEPCO SURRY POWER STATION UNIT 2 5/26/80 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST FROM 0932 HOURS ON 5/26/80 TO

·- 1552 HOURS ON 5/26/80 LAST 20 DATA SETS

TIME ABS PRESS DEWPT VAP PRESS TEMP (Hours) (Psia) Deg___°F (Psia) Deg___ 0 R

0.0 61.154 60.46 0.2603 537.20 0.333 61.151 60.44 0.2602 537.16 0.667 61.147 60.43 0.2601 537.15 1.000 61.144 60.38 0. 2596 537.12 1.333 61.140 60.36 0.2594 537 .10 1.667 61.137 60.33 0. 2591 537.07 2.000 61.134 60.30 0.2589 537.03 2.333 61. 130 60.30 0.2589 537.02 2.667 61.127 60.25 0.2584 536.98 3.000 61.122 60.24 0.2583 536.96 3.333 61.120 60.21 0.2580 536.93 3.667 61.117 60.21 0.2580 536.91 4.000 61. 115 60.20 0.2579 536.89 4.333 61.112 60.18 0.2578 536.87 4.667 61.107 60.16 0.2576 536.85 5.000 61.106 60.15 0.2575 536.83 5.333 61.103 60.13 0.2573 536.81 5.667 61.101 60.12 0.2572 536.79 6.000 61. 097 60 .11 0.2571 536. 77

• 6.333 61. 095 60.09 0.2569 536.75

• 3G-2

•

•

•

APPENDIX 3H

12.35.48. VEPCO SURRY POWER STATION UNIT 2 5/26/80 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST FROM 0352 HOURS ON 5/26/80

TO 1552 HOURS ON 5/26/80 37 DATA SETS ARE CURRENTLY COMPLETED

-------ABSOLUTE TEST METHOD, MASS POINT ANALYSIS-------

Time (Hours)

0.0 0.334

. 0.667 1.000 1.334 1. 667 2.000 2.334 2.667 3.000 3.334 3.667 4.000 4.334 4.667 5.000 5.334 5.667 6.000 6.334 6.667 7.000 7.334 7.667 8.000 8.334 8.667 9.000 9.334 9.667

10.000 10.334 10.667 11. 000 11. 334 11. 667 12.000

Mass (Lbm)

550769.69 550765.61 550770.56 550764.78 550768.04 550742.62 550750.46 550742.63 550741.43 550738.54 550736.12 550733.22 550727.43 550729.84 550737.29 550741.75 550736.80 550733.06 550748.61 550723.51 550731.32 550717.31 550723.44 550739.81 550713.88 550731. 92 550708.03 550723.19 550716.56 550719.81 550714.83 550691.76 550704.06 550699.08 550702.32 550687.47 550691.54

Leakage (Pct/day)

0.0 0.0

-0.005678 0.012760 0.005369 0.049968 0.049566 0.053793 0.053230 0.052105 0.050556 0.049177 0.049218 0.046933 0.041842 0.036227 0.032931 0.030900 0.025750 0. 026314 0.025066 0.026003 0.025562 0.022826 0.023615 0.022017 0.023054 0.022249 0.022044 0.021461 0.021247 0.022664 0.022858 0.023232 0.023233 0.024004 0.024327

Conf (Pct/day)

0.0 0.0 0.243885 0.071668 0.035409 0.073264 0.048360 0.034943 0.026219 0.020476 0.016534 0.013672 0.011418 0.010098 0.010747 0.011636 0.010975 0.010013 0.010899 0.009789 0.008950 0.008185 0.007468 0.007571 0.007011 0.006731 0.006339 0.005952 0.005536 0.005204 0.004867 0.004852 0.004558 0.004306 0.004055 0.003931 0.003734

UCL · (Pct/day)

0.0 0.0 0.238207 0.084429 0.040778 0.123232 0.097926 0.088736 0.079449 0.072580 0.067090 0.062849 0.060636 0.057031 0.052589 0.047863 0.043906 0.040913 0.036649 0.036104 0.034016 0.034188 0.033030 0.030397 0.030626 0.028748 0.029394 0.028201 0.027580 0.026665 0.026114 0.027516 0.027415 0.027538 0.027288 0.027935 0.028061

Initial estimated mass= 550763.72 Final estimated mass= 550696.73

3H-1

•

TIME C Hours l

0.0 0.334 0.667 1.000 1.334 1.667 2.000 2.334 2.667 3.000 3'. 334 3.667 4.000 4.334 4.667 5.000 5.334 5.667 6.000 6.334 6.667 7.000 7.334 7.667 8.000 8.334 8.667 9.000 9.334 9.667

10.000 10.334 10.667 11.000 11.334 11.667 12.000

• APPENDIX 3J

12.35.48. VEPCO SURREY POWER STATION UNIT 2 5/26/80 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST FROM 0352 HOURS ON 5/26/80

TO 1552 HOURS ON 5/26/80 37 DAH1 SETS ARE CURRENTLY COMPLETED

----------ABSOLUTE HST METHOD, TOTAL TIME ANALYSIS----------

MASS ilQ!!lJ.

550769.69 550765.61 550770.56 550764.78 550768.04 550742.62 550750.46 550742.63 550741.43 550738.54 550736.12 550733.22 550727.43 550729.84 550737.29 550741.75 550736.80 550733.06 550748.61 550723.51 550731.32 550717.31 550723. 41+ 550739.81 550713.88 550731. 92 550708.03 550723.19 550716.56 550719.81 550714.83 550691.76 550704.06 550699.08 550702.32 550687.47 550691.54

MEAS LEAKAGE: ( Pct/day)

0.0 0.053245 -.005707 0.021369 0.005366 0.070760 0.041887 0.050516 0.046172 0.045247 0.043878 0.043338 0.046034 0.040059 0.030246 0.024344 0.026865 0.028167 0.015311 0.031765 0.025079 0.032605 0.027481 0.016978 0.030397 0.019746 0.031002 0.022512 0:024802 0.022484 0.023902 0.032859 0.026811 0.027970 0.025899 0.030709 0.028378

MEAN OF MEAS LEAKAGE

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.022969 0.018568 0.029006 0.031153 0.033919 0.035451 0.036539 0.037273 0.037825 0.038509 0.038628 0.038029 0.037117 0.036476 0.035987 0.034839 0.034677 0.034197 0.034121 0.033819 0.033087 0.032975 0.032446 0.032390 0.032025 0.031767

. 0.031447 0.031195 0.031249 0.031110 0.031015 0.030864 0.030860 0.030791

EST LEAKAGE ( Pct/day)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.007031 0.001077 0.038230 0.042340 0.048539 0.050392 0.051103 0.050994 0.050635 0.051083 0.049716 0.046080 0.041766 0.038883 0.036823 0.032504 0.032138 0.030598 0. 0306113 0.029816 0.027404 0. 0271138 0.025868 0.026146 0.025207 0.024698 0.023954 0.023480 0.024166 0. 021+067 o.024117 0.023935 0.024303 0.024393

CONF ( Pct/day)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.340235 0.127806 0.140478 0.105752 0.086625 0. 0745911 0.066397 0.060497 0.055942 0.05,2054 0.049395 0.048269 0.047615 0.046131 0.044468 0.044080 0.042388 0.040999 0.039634 0.038400 0. 037666 0.036630 0.035777 0. 0311940 0.034110 0.033314 0.032575 0.031877 0.031443 0.030841 0.030293 0.029746 0.029326 0.028863

UCL ( Pct/day)

0.0 0.0 0.0 0.347266 0.128883 0.178708 0. 148092 0.135164 0.124987 0.117500 0.111491 0.106577 0.103137 0.099111 0.094349 0.089381 0.085014 0.081291 0.076584 0.074526 0.071597 0.070277 0.068217 0.065070 0. 0611068 0.061645 0.061086 0.059318 0.058012 0.056529 0.055357 0.055609 0.054907 0.054411 0.053680 0.053629 0.053256

Initial estimated leakagE, = 0.037555 Final estimated leakage= 0.024393

24 Hour estimal.ed leakage of last 20 sets= 0.018849

3J-1

•

• • • 12.27.53. VEPCO SURRY POWER STATION UNIT 2 5/26/80 INTEGRATED LEAV. RATE TEST FROM 0932 HOURS ON 5/26/80

TO 1552 HOURS ON 5/26/80 20 DAT/i SETS ARE CURRENTLY COMPLETED

ABSOLUTE TEST METHOD, TOTAL TIME ANALYSIS

TIME MASS MEAS LEAKAGE MEAN OF EST LEAKAGE CONF UCL I Hours l .1JJ!m.l ( PctLda:t) MEAS LEAKAGE I PctLda:tl I PctLda:tl I PctLda:t l

0.0 550733.06 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.333 550748.61 -.203492 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.667 550723.51 0.062335 0.0 0.0 o.o 0.0 1.000 550731.32 0.007580 -.044525 0.061038 1.266450 1.327488 1.333 550717.31 0.051476 -.020525 0.086024 0.515389 0.601412 1.667 550723.44 0.025149 -.011390 0.077951 0.374782 0.452733 2.000 550739.81 -.014727 -.011946 0.050656 0.324121 0.374778 2.333 550713.88 0.035816 -.005123 o. 057174 0.268247 0.325421 2.667 550731.92 0.001851 -.004251 0.046254 0.240197 0.286452 3.000 550708.03 0.036358 0.000261 0.051484 0.213275 0.264758 3.333 550723.19 0.012896 0.001524 0.046531 0.196423 0.242955 3.667 550716.56 0.019603 0.003168 0.044795 0.181874 0.226668 4.000 550719.81 0.014434 0.004107 0.041706 0.170501 0.212207 4.333 550714.83 0.018326 0.005200 0.040238 0.160535 0.200773 4.667 550691.76 0.038559 0.007583 0.044153 0.151206 0.195359 5.000 550704.06 0.025275 0.008763 0.043853 0.143879 0.187732 5.333 550699.08 0.027763 0.009950 0.044052 0. 137401 0.181453 5.667 550702.32 0.023631 0.010755 0.043221 0.131956 0.175176 6.000 550687.47 0.033111 0.011997 0.044376 0.126716 0. 171092 6.333 550691.54 0.028568 0.012869 0.044362 0.122243 0.166605

Initial estimated leakage = -0.022127 Fina I estimated Leakage= 0.044362

3J-2

w -~ ..L

• 1100

~ 1000 ...J -0 0 (0 900 0 LO LO

I Vl 800 V) <(

2 0:: 700 <( -

-~ ' r-,.... - ._ !"-- ' r-- --~ r-...... ~ ~

• INSTANTANEOUS

DATA r ,

....... -- r-- "

I"---,. AIR MASS ~ ~ .. r----K

•

I I

-LINEAR REGRESSION LINE ........ ................ -- -- ~

-.... .... -- -.... ---- r---- ........ SOOO I 2 · 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

TIME, HOURS

1252 5/25/80 TO 1552 5/26/80

APPENDIX 3K GRAPH 1-STABILIZATION&CILRT CONTAINMENT AIR MASS VS TIME SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 J N TEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST

• • • ----------------· ---------.. -.-..-. ... --·-------· -· ____ ... _____.:~-~:··-·---~·J·--'-- ---·-

2 co _J

5_ 0 2 8001t--+--+--+--+--+-+-+--+--+--+--+--+--+-~~-f--+--+--+-~-4-, ~--+--+____.____.--l~~l--l--'--'--""-'--,1......,1

? ..._ - ~i-r'\_ ~-LINEAR REGRESSION LINE

~ ~~~-,...,-~::c:::t: ~ l Al R M~:, --

a:: 700

w <( r;- -

V

_.. '

soo~~i ~~~_._____..,,_.,_~~'' ~~~~~~ 0 . .3 .6 1.0 1.3 1.6 2.0 2.3 2.6 3.0 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.3 4.6 5.0 5.3 5.6 60 6.3 6.6 7.0 7.3 7.6 8.0 8.3 e.6 9.0 9.3 9.6 IO.O 10.310.6 11.0 I L3 11.6 12.0

0352 5/26/80 TO 1552 5/26/80

TIME,20 MIN INTERVALS

APPENDIX 3L GRAPH 2-CILRT CONTAINMENT AIR MASS VS TIME (20 MIN INTERVALS) SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST

• 1--

. Z .16

~ (f) .14 (f)

~ .12

~ Cl .=:- ,I 0 z w ~ .08

w a.. L.J .06

t,J I-~ <{ I a::: .!... .04

~ <{ w _.1 .02

l

'

I

~ ~

"" I f'..

r--....

! -

• • -- ..

i ,

i I I t

-I

~I - -i

~ r-,.... r-..... I --- r",.. ~ ...._

LEAK RATE.J' --I',.._ i-- --

I I r-,,......_ i-

I ' ·00o .3 .6 1.0 1.3 I.G 2.0 2.3 2.6 3.0 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.3 4,6 5.0 5.3 5.6 6.0 6.3 6.6 7.0 7.3 7.6 ao 8.3 8.6 9.0 9.3 9.G IQO ID.3 I0.611.0 11.3 11.6 12.0

TIME, 20 MINUTE INTERVALS

0352 5/26/80 TO 1552 5/26/80

APPENDtX 3M GRAPH 3~CILRT CONTAINMENT LEAK RATE&UCLVS TIME SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 INTEGRATED_ LEAK RATE TEST

w :iE

• 1--J

~ .10

~ .09

> .08 <(

..g_ .07 1-z .06 w (.) a: . 05 w a.. .04 w 1- .03 <( a: .02 'x: <( .0 I

w w

I \ I I f

\ I \ I 'V --......

\ ' \ f 1/ \

i, '

• •

I

l I i

UMEASURED LEAK RATE I u.... ESTIMATED LEAK RATE

~ "" r UMEAR REGRESSION LINE ." , I "" -" J '"'"

F - .,. -- "' / " / '" -~ './ -"'

' z -J .00 .h o .3 .6 1.0 1.3 1.s 2.0 2.3 2.6 3.o 3.3 3.6 4.0 4.3 4.6 5.o 5.3 5.6 6.0 s.3 6j5 1.0 7.3 7.6 ao 8.3 8.6 9.0 9.3 9.6 ro.010.310.s 11.o 11.3 11.6 12.0

0352 5/26/80 TO 1552 5/26/80

TIME, 20 MINUTE INTERVALS

APPENDIX 3N GRAPH 4-CI [..RT CONTAINMENT LEAK RATE VS TIME SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 INTEGRATED LEAK RATE TEST

• w 2: I-_J .05

~ 0 I-. I .04

~ 0 ~ z: .03

w 0 0:: w .02 (l...

.... w

w ~ z .0 I I 0::

N :x:: <( w 0.0 _J

• •

I I I I I I I

LINEAR REC:5RESSION OF ESTIMATED LEAK ~AfE I/

0 I

I -FXTRAPOLATION TO 24 HOURS -- - - 11>0 -- - "(.) I ~ - Col 'I

01 ~ (:)

' 0 ( ~ee, ~G0< ~001 ~---- 1-1,, - -- ---- ----- ---..,~

0 I 2 '3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 II 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

TIME, HOURS

0352 5/26/80 TO 0352 5/27/80

®-ESTIMATED LEAK RATE, 0 /o DAY A-EXTRAPOLATED LEAK RATE IS

0.0188 °/o DAY@ 24 HOURS. APPENDIX 3N GRAPH 5-ESTIMATED LEAK RATE AT 24 HOURS SURRY POWER STATION-UNIT 2 INTEGRATED LEAK "RATE TEST

•

•

•

SECTION 4

LOCAL LEAK RATE TESTS (TYPES BAND C)

Local leak rate tests were performed by pressurizing with air the penetrations listed in the following tables and either measuring leakage across containment isolation valves (Type C) or across resilient seals (Type B).

The total Types Band C leakage documented was verified to be in accordance with station procedures. The following pages list the penetrations tested and their documented leakage .

4-1

• • • APPENDIX 4A

1979-1980 TYPE B DATA SUMMARY

Prerepair Post Repair Leakage Leakage

Penetration No. ~1ent Tested {scfl'.hl { scfl'.hl Remarks

Personne I Air Lock 0-Ring 0 N/A

Equipment Hatch 0-Ring 0 N/A Replaced o rings prior to initial test.

Fuel Transfer Tube 0-Ring 0 N/A

Emergency Air Lock 0-Ring 0 N/A

Electrica I Pe net ration No.

A-1 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-1 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-1 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-1 0-R ng and Body 0.204 0.204 E-1 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-2 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-2 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-2 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-2 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-2 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-3 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-3 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-3 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-3 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-3 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-It 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-4 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-4 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-lt 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-4 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-5 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A

- B-5 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A C-5 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A D-5 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-5 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-6 0-R ng and.Body 0 N/A B-6 0-R ng and Body o., 0.02 C-6 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-6 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-6 0-R n!I and Body 0 N/A A-7 0-R n!I and Body 0 N/A B-7 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-7 0-R ng and Body· 0 N/A

4A-1

• • • Prerepa i r Post Repair

Leakage Leakage Penetration No. To.l!.i.lll)1e n t Tested { scf Lh l {scfLhl Remarks

D-7 0-R n9 and Body -o N/A E-7 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A A-8 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A B-8 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A C-8 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A D-8 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-8 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-9 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-9 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-9 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-9 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-9 0-Rtng and Body 0 N/A A-10 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-10 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-10 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-10 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-10 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-11 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-·,, 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-11 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-11 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-11 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-12 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-12 0-R nCI and Body 0 N/A C-12 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-12 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-12 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-13 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-13 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-13 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-13 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-13 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-14 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-14 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-14 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-14 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A E-14 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A A-15 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A B-15 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A C-15 0-R ng and Body 0 N/A D-15 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A E-15 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A A-16 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A B-16 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A C-16 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A D-16 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A E-16 0-Ring arid Body 0 N/A A-17 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A B-17 0-Ring and Body 0 N/A

4A-2

• • • Prerepair Post Repair

Leakage Leakage Penetration No. IID!.l.m!1ent Tested {scfLhl { scfLh l Remarks

C-17 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A D-17 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A E-17 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A A-18 0-R n9 and Body 0.24 0. 1 B-18 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A C-18 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A D-18 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A E-18 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A FB 0-R n9 and Body 0 N/A

4A-3

• • • APPENDIX 48

1979-1980 TYPE C DATA SUMMARY

Pre Repair Post Repair Leakage Leakage

Penetration No. Valves Tested C scf /day} scf/day Remarks

1 Comp Cooling from TV-CC-209B (OSC) 0 N/A B RHR Heat Exchanger

2 Comp Coo I i ng to 2CC-177 ( I SC) 0 N/A A RHR Heat Exchanger

4 Comp Coo I i ng to 2-CC-176 ( ISC) 32.4 N/A B RHR Heat Exchanger

5 Comp Coo I i ng from TV-CC-209A (OSC) 26.9 0 A RHR Heat Exchanger

7 High Head Safety 2-Sl-225 ( ISC) 2.4 0 Injection from BIT 2-Sl-1~0 (OSC)

MOV-2867C (OSC) MOV-2876D (OSC)

8 Comp Coo I i ng from TV-CC-207 (OSC) 0 N/A Reactor Coolant Pump Therma I Barriers

9 Comp Coo I i ng to C 2-CC-224 ( I SC) 0 N/A Air Rec ire Fan

10 Comp Coo I i ng to A 2-cc-21,2 ( I SC) 4008 0 Lapped valve Air Recirc Fan

11 Comp Coo I i ng to B 2-CC-233 ( ISC) 0 N/A Air Reci re Fan

12 Comp Coo I i ng from TV-CC-210B (OSC) 0 N/A B Air Rec ire Fan

13 Comp Coo I i ng from TV-CC-,'lOC (OSC) 7.4 144 C Air Rec ire Fan

14 Comp Coo I i ng from Tv-cc-,·10A (OSC) 4320 96 Adjusted stroke. A Air Reci re Fan Aligned motor

operator.

15 Chemical and Volume 2-CH-3(19 ( I SC) 840 4.8 Contra I system 2-MOV-,~289A 0 0

4B-1

• Penetration No.

16 Comp Cooling to C RCP

17 Comp Cooling to B RCP

18 Comp Cooling to A RCP

19 Seal Water from RCPs

20 Safety Injection Accumulator Makeup

21 High Head Safety Injection

23 High Head Safety Injection to Hot Legs

24 RHR to RWST

25 Comp Cooling from A RCP

26 Comp Cooling from C RCP

27 Comp Cooling from B RCP

• Valves Tested

2-CC-59 ( ISC)

2-CC-5tl ( I SC)

2-cc-1 ( ISC)

MOV-CH~2381 (OSC)

2-Sl-3,'. (OSC)

2-Sl-224 ( ISC) MOV-Sl-2842 (OSC)

2-Sl-226 ( ISC) MOV-2869B (OSC)

MOV-RH··200

TV-CC-<'.05A ( OSC)

TV-CC-<'.050C ( OSC)

TV-CC-,'05B ( OSC)

Pre Repair Leakage

C scf /day)

240

360

6

0

0

216 21.6

0 4320

216

13.2

32.4

240

28 Reactor Coolant Letdown

TV-CH-?204 (OSC) 14.4 HCV-CH~2200A ( ISC) HCV-CH-2200B ( ISC) HCV-CH-2200C ( ISC)

32 Gaseous Waste 2-GW-H13 (OSC) 0

33

35

36

Primary Ora in Tank Transfer

2-GW-Hi2 ( OSC)

TV-DG-<'08A ( I SC) TV-DG-,'08B ( OSC)

Sea I Water to C RCP MOV-23i'O 2-CH-2"/8

Seal Water to A RCP MOV-23"/'0 2-CH-2";'8

600 14.4

0

0

48-2

Post Repair Leakage scf/day Remarks

0

0

N/A

N/A

N/A

3.6

N/A

0.0

6

9.6

0

N/A

N/A

72 0

N/A

N/A

Lapped valve

Lapped valve

Valve renewed

Lapped seat. Adjusted stroke.

Va Ive repa i red

•

• • Penetration No. Valves Tested

37 Seal Water to B RCP MOV-2370 2-CH-278

38 Aerated Drain Sump Pump Di scha rge

42 Service Air Supply

43 Air Monitoring

44 Monito_ring System

TV-DA-?.OOA ( ISC) TV-DA-~'.OOB ( OSC)

2-SA-8.'. (OSC) 2-SA-81 (OSC)

2-RM-3 ( ISC) TV-RM-200A (OSC)

TV-RM-200C ( ISC) TV-RM-200B (OSC)

45 Primary Grade Water 2-RC-160 ( ISC) to PRT TV-RC-2519A ( OSC)

46 Reactor Coolant

47 Instrument Air Supply

48 Loop Fi I I Primary Vent Header

50 Accumulator Vent Header to Gaseous Waste

FCV-CH-2160 (OSC)

2- IA-864 ( I SC)

TV-VG-.'.09A ( I SC) TV-VG-<'098 (OSC)

TV-Sl-201A ( ISC) TV-Sl-201B (OSC)

51 Rec i re Sp ray Heat 2-SW-208 ( osc) Exchanger SW Drains 2-SW-206 ( ISC)

53 Ni t rogen to PRT

54 Primary Vent Pot Vent

55A Leakage Monitoring

55D Sample System

56B Liquid Sample

2-Sl-234 ( ISC) TV-Sl-200 (OSC)

2-VA-1 (OSC) 2-VA-9 ( ISC)

TV-LM-:: OOG ( OSC)

TV-SS-:::04A ( I SC) TV-SS-t04B (OSC)

rv-ss-::·o6A < 1 scr TV-SS-.'.068 ( OSC)

Pre Repair Leakage

( scf/dayl

0

768 24

288 288

33.3 16.8

192

28.8 0

1320

1200 504

192 120

67.9 4656

28.8 14.4

24 105.6

0.0 9.6

0

0

0

4B-3

Post Repair Leakage scf/day Remarks

N/A

19.2 0

0 0

1.2 0

0

0 N/A

0

312 120

0 0

24 19.2

N/A

0 0

0 0

N/A

N/A*

N/A*

Replaced seat, plug stem, and gaskets.

Replaced valve. Replaced valve.

Piping leaks

Replaced plug and seat assembly.

Replaced valve.

Cleaned valve. Rep I aced O ring.

Overhauled valve. Lapped valve, replaced gaskets, repacked valve.

Replaced gaskets.

•

• Penetration No.

56C Liquid Sample

56D Liquid Sample

57A Leakage Monitoring

576 Sample System

58 Instrument Air

60 Low Head Safety Injection Pump ·

· Discharge

61 Low Head Safety Injection Pump Discharge

62 Low Head Safety Injection Pump Discharge

63 Containment Spray Pump Di scha rge

64 Containment Spray Pump Di scha rge

66 & Recirc Spray and 69 Safety Injection

Suctions from Cont Sump

67 & Recirc Spray and 68 Safety Injection

Suctions from Cont Sump

70 Recirc Spray Pump Discharge

71 Recirc Spray Pump Discharge

• Valves Tested

TV-SS-WOA ( ISC) TV-SS-?006 (OSC)

TV-SS-,~02A ( I SC) TV-SS-?026 (OSC)

TV-LM-,~OOF (OSC)

TV-SS-,~OlA ( ISC) TV-SS-,~016 (OSC)

1-IA-704 (OSC) 2- IA-868 ( I SC)

Pre· Repair Leakage

( scf/day)

0

0

0

0

72 96

2-MOV-2890A 0.0

MOV-Sl-2890C (OSC) 0

2-Sl-2?8 ( ISC) 0 MOV-Sl-·28906 (OSC)

2-cs-211 ( I SC) MOV-CS-201C (OSC) MOV-CS-201D (OSC)

2-CS-13 ( I SC) MOV-CS-201A (OSC) MOV-CS-2016 (OSC)

446.4

625

MOV-RS-255A (OSC) 0 MOV-Sl-2860A (OSC) 96

MOV-RS-2556 (OSC) 360 MOV-Sl-28608 (OSC) 912

2-RS-11 (ISC) MOV-RS··256B ( OSC)

2-Rs-n ( ISC) MOV-RS··256A ( OSC)

360 2589.1

3303.4

46-4

Post Repair Leakage scf/day Remarks

N/A*

N/A*

N/A*

N/A*

0.0 o.o N/A

N/A

N/A

52.8

12

N/A 0.0

0 240

0.0 48

0

Replaced valve.

MOVs renewed.

MOVs renewed.

MOV replaced.

MOV rep I aced.

•

• Penetration No.

79 & SW to and from D 83 RS Heat Exchanger

80 & SW to and from C 84 RS Heat Exchanger

81 & SW to and from B 85 RS Heat Exchanger

82 & SW to and from A 86 RS Heat Exchanger

89 Air Ejector Discharge to Containment

90 Containment Purge Exhaust Line

91 Ventilation System

92 Containment Vacuum Pump Suction

93 Containment Vacuum

94 Containment Vacuum and Leakage Monitoring System

97A Leakage Monitoring

970 Liquid Sample

100 Gaseous Waste

101 Fire Protection

103 Reactor Cavity Purification Inlet

Valves Tested

MOV-SW-2040 (OSC) MOV-SW-205D (OSC)

MOV-SW-204C (OSC) MOV-SW-205C (OSC)

MOV-SW-201lB ( OSC) MOV-SW-2058 (OSC)

MOV-SW-204A (OSC) MOV-SW-205A (OSC

2-VP-12 (ISC) TV-SV-202 (OSC)

MOV-VS-200C ( ISC) MOV-VS-200D (OSC) MOV-VS-201 (OSC)

MOV-VS-200A ( ISC) MOV-VS-2008 (OSC) MOV-VS-202 (OSC)

TV-CV-c.50C (OSC) 2-GW-175 (OSC) TV-CV-?500 (OSC)

TV-CV-250A (OSC) 2-GW-166 (OSC) TV-CV-2508 (OSC)

HCV-CV-200 ( ISC) 2-CF-2 (OSC)

TV-LM-?008 (OSC)

TV-SS-?03 (OSC)

2-Gw-1 ·, 4 ( OSC) 2-GW-1 ~ 3 ( OSC)

2-FP-1~·8 ( ISC) 2-FP-1~,1 (OSC)

2-RL-5 ( ISC) 2-RL-3 (OSC)

• Pre Repair

Leakage ( scf/daYl

4800

108

>4800

>4800

491 2400

2160

99.36 >4800

2.4 120 72

168 720 72

240

0

55.2

0

0

179 >4668

4B-5

Post Repair Leakage scf/daY Remarks

16.8

7.2

33.6

38.4

36 0

42.2

0.0 30

0 0 0

0 0 2.4

0

N/A

0

N/A

N/A

0

Replaced seats.

Adjusted seats.

Adjusted packing.

Seat r i ng i n s ta I I ed in MOV-VS-202.

Reconditioned and lapped valve.

Valve replaced.

Replaced diagphram 0 rings.

•

• "'l • Pre Repair Post Repair

Leakage Leakage Penetration No. Valves Tested (scflda;i} scfLda:i Remarks

104 Reactor Cavity 2-RL-D ( I SC) >4668 0 Purification Outlet 2-RL-1~ (OSC)

105D Leakage Monitoring TV-LM-,'.OOD ( OSC) 0 N/A

106 Safety Injection 2-Sl-73 (OSC) 0 N/A Test Line

112 Instrument Air TV-IA-,'.01A ( ISC) 0 N/A New system TV- I A-,'.01 B ( OSC)

113 Safety Injection 2-51-2,'7 ( ISC) 0 N/A 2-s1-n4 (OSC) MOV-Sl-2869A (OSC)

114 Steam Generator 19.2 N/A · Rec ire and Transfer

NOTE:

* Sample system trip valves replaced under design change.

4B-6