Latest revision as of 03:03, 10 January 2025

Text

3 to the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Appendix F, Containment Vessel Design Summary Design
	ML16054A447
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	01/26/2016
From:	; Northern States Power Co, Xcel Energy
To:	; Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML16054A376	List: L-MT-16-004, 3 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Drawings NF-36058 Through NH-36243-1, Rev. 82 (Public); ML16054A388; ML16054A413; ML16054A414; ML16054A415; ML16054A416; ML16054A417; ML16054A418; ML16054A419; ML16054A420; ML16054A421; ML16054A422; ML16054A423; ML16054A424; ML16054A425; ML16054A426; ML16054A427; ML16054A428; ML16054A429; ML16054A432; ML16054A434; ML16054A435; ML16054A436; ML16054A438; ML16054A439; ML16054A440; ML16054A441; ML16054A442; ML16054A443; ML16054A444; ML16054A445; ML16054A446; ML16054A447; ML16054A448; ML16155A258; ML16155A259;
References
	L-MT-16-004
	Download: ML16054A447 (90)
	v • d • e

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F CONTAINMENT VESSEL DESIGN

SUMMARY

DESIGN TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE

1.0 INTRODUCTION

F.1-1 2.0 CONTAINMENT SYSTEM CRITERIA AND DESIGN F.2-1 2.1 General F.2-1 2.2 Applicable Codes F.2-1 2.3 Materials F.2-1 2.4 Design F.2-1 2.4.1 Pressures and Temperatures F.2-1 2.4.2 Design Loads F.2.2 2.4.3 Load Combinations F.2-5 2.4.4 Stresses F.2-8 2.4.5 Design Reconciliation F.2-8 3.0 LEAK AND OVERLOAD TESTS F.3-1 4.0 FIELD REPAIRS F.4-1 4.1 Introduction F.4-1 4.2 Summary F.4-1 4.3 Conclusions F.4-3 ATTACHMENT A LEAKAGE AND OVERLAND TEST PROCEDURES AND RESULTS Vessel Geometry F.A-1 Introduction F.A-2 Procedure General F.A-3 Preliminary Checks F.A-4 Overload Test F.A-5 Leakage Rate Test F.A-6 Measurement of Leakage by Inner Chamber Method F.A-7 Figure A Overload Test F.A-8 Figure B Leakage Rate Test F.A-9 Results of Inspection and Tests Preliminary Checks F.A-10 Overload Test and Soap Film Inspection F.A-10 Leak Rate Test F.A-11 Reference System Hold Test F.A.A Thermocouple Data for Shell Temperatures F.A.B F-i REV 18 8/00 00-481

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F CONTAINMENT VESSEL DESIGN

SUMMARY

DESIGN TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)

Overload Test Chart F.A.C Overload and Soap Film Tests F.A.D Leakage Rate Test Data F.A.E Initial Test Procedure F.A.F ATTACHMENT B CODE CERTIFICATION FORMS AND DRAWINGS Code Form N 1 Drywell and Suppression Chamber F.B1 Code Form N 2 Air Lock F.B3 C.B. & I. Drawing 2 7 Drywell Shell Stretch F.B5 C.B. & I. Drawing 2C 3, Penetration Schedule and Orientation for Suppression Chamber F.B6 F ii REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO CONTAINMENT VESSEL DESIGN

SUMMARY

REPORT

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This report has been prepared for the Atomic Energy Commission by the General Electric Company. Its purpose is to provide technical information on the design of the containment vessel.

It describes design and leak test criteria and methods and contains code forms and leak test results.

Previously submitted material has generally not been duplicated and where possible, references to this material have been included.

The containment vessel consists of a drywell and pressure suppression chamber, with a vent system connecting them. Numerous previously submitted documents contain diagrams of the system. A reactor building encloses the containment vessel and acts as a secondary containment when the containment vessel is in service. Both the containment vessel (primary containment) and the reactor building are described in Section 5.

The drywell is a light bulb shaped vessel with the spherical portion at the bottom and withthe top cylindrical portion closed by a removable, flanged head.

The top head is of a type that can be easily opened. Details are such that all bolts are removable with the head and arranged so that they may be tightened using an impact wrench. A 24 inch diameter inspection opening is provided in the head. The top head closure and the inspection opening have been made leak tight by means of double compression seals with connections to permit leak testing by pressurizing the air space between the seals.

The suppression chamber is in the general form of a torus; however, in lieu of furnishing a double curved surface, the vessel is made up of 16 mitered cylindrical sections. Baffles, catwalks with steel grating floor and two manholes with ladders to the catwalks were provided. Manholes are flanged and bolted with a double compression seal with connections to permit leak testing by pressurizing the air space between the seals. Catwalks are capable of supporting a live load of 50 psf.

The vent system interconnecting the drywell and suppression chamber consists of vents between the drywell and a common header located within the suppression chamber, and downcomer pipes from the header terminating below the normal water level in the suppression chamber.

There are 8 vents equally spaced and uniformly sloped between the drywell and suppression chamber. Joints, permanently accessible, are provided in each vent to allow for relative movement due to expansion and contraction and other differential movements which may occur between the containment vessels. The common header for the vents is also in the general form of a torus and is also made up of 16 mitered cylindrical sections.

F. 1 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO The downcomer pipes are arranged so that there are 4 in panels with vents and 8 in panels without vents. Each downcomer has an outside diameter of 24 inches and a wall thickness of 1/4.

The downcomer pipes terminate 4.0 ft below the minimum water level in the suppression chamber.

The sizes and arrangements of the drywell, suppression chamber and vent system areshown on tables and illustrations in Section 5.

The suppression chamber is centered in the basement of the Reactor Building with the vertical axes of the vessels coincident.

F. 1 2 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO 2.0 CONTAINMENT SYSTEM CRITERIA AND DESIGN 2.1 GENERAL The containment vessel is designed, fabricated and tested to meet applicable codes or standard requirements, in a manner that guarantees without failure the leak tightness and structural integrity of the system during all modes of plant operation or during any design accident condition. Failure of a containment barrier is defined as any failure which increases leakage rates above permissible values.

2.2 APPLICABLE CODES PRESSURE VESSELS The design, fabrication, erection and testing of the vessels conformed to the requirements of the American Society of Mechanical Engineers Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,Section III Class B, 1965 edition, and all applicable addenda and Code Case Interpretations, including Code Cases 1177 and 1330.

The completed vessels were inspected and marked by a recognized inspection agency certifying that the requirements of the applicable standards and codes had. been fulfilled. The vessels were stamped with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code stamp in a permanently visible location, in accordance with Paragraph N 1500.

Other The design, fabrication, and erection of supports and bracing and like applications not within the scope of the ASME Code conformed to the requirements of the Specifications for the Design, Fabrication, and Erection of Structural Steel for Buildings, 1963 edition, of the American Institute of Steel Construction.

2.3 MATERIALS Materials used are in accordance with applicable codes. Plate materials are A212 B FBX and A516 70 FBX to A300. Pipe materials are A333 Gr. 1 seamless, forgings are A350 LF 1, bolts are A320 L7, A194 Gr 4, and A193 B8. Miscellaneous materials are A36, A284 B, API SLX 42, and A283 C.

2.4 DESIGN 2.4.1 Pressures and Temperatures Drywell & Vent System Maximum Internal Pressure:

62 psig @ 281F Maximum External Pressure:

2 psig @ 281F Design Internal Pressure:

56 psig @ 281F Design External Pressure:

2 psig @ 281F Operating Internal Pressure:

0 to l psig @ 150F

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY Operating External Pressure:

0 to 1 psig @ 150F F. 2 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Suppression Chamber Maximum Internal Pressure:

62 psig @ 281F Maximum External Pressure:

2 psig @ 281F Design Internal Pressure:

56 psig @ 281F Design External Pressure:

2 psig @ 281F Operating Internal Pressure:

0 to 1 psig @ 50 to 100F Operating External Pressure:

0 to 1 Psig @ 50 to 100F Lowest Service Metal Temperature 30F 2.4.2 Design Loads Normal Operating Condition During nuclear reactor operation the vessels are subject to the specified Operating Pressures and Temperatures. The suppression chamber also is subject to the pressure associated with the storage of 75, 900 ft3 of water distributed uniformly within the vessel.

Accident Condition In addition to the specified Design Pressures and Temperatures, the drywell shell and closure head are designed and constructed to withstand jet forces of the following magnitudes in the locations indicated from any direction within the drywell:

Interior Area Subjected to Location Jet Force (Max)

Jet Force Spherical part of drywell 664, 000 pounds 3.69 sq. ft.

Cylinder and sphere to cylinder transition 256, 000 pounds 1.42 sq. ft.

Closure Head 32, 600 pounds 0.181 sq. ft.

The spherical and cylindrical parts of the drywell are backed up by reinforced concrete with space for expansion between the outside of the drywell and the concrete.

The above listed jet forces consist of steam and/or water impinging on the vessel causing a maximum metal temperature of 300F. The jet forces listed above do not occur simultaneously. However, a jet force was considered to occur coincident with design internal pressure and a temperature of 150F. Where the drywell shell is backed up by concrete it was assumed that local yielding will take place but it was established that a rupture will not occur.

Where the shell is not backed up by concrete, the primary stresses resulting from this combination of loads did not exceed 0.90 times the yield point of the material at 300F.

The suppression chamber was designed for the specified Design Pressures & Temperatures coincident with the loads associated with the storage of suppression pool water increased in volume to 83,700 ft.3 and a jet force on each downcomer pipe of 21 kips.

F. 2 2 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Equipment Loads in Drywell The vertical loads of the primary reactor vessel and reactor support concrete and equipment within the drywell were supported directly through the concrete fill within the drywell to continuous concrete fill below the drywell.

The design of the drywell in its final support condition included provision for the seismic shear and moments on the base of the reactor vessel support pedestal.

Gravity Loads Applied to the Drywell Vessel include:

The weight of the steel shell, jet deflectors, vents and other appurtenances.

Loads from equipment support structural members.

An allowance of 10 psf for the compressible material to he temporarily applied to the exteri-or of the vessel for use as concrete forms.

The live load on the equipment access opening: 20 tons.

The live load for the depth of water on the water seal at the top flange of the drywell with the drywell hemispherical head removed, or loads from refueling seals without head removed.

The weight of contained air during test.

A temporary load due to the pressure of wet concrete to be placed directly against the exterior compressible material attached to the exterior of the drywell and vents as shown on the drawings. It is intended that the concrete be placed at a rate of 18 inches in depth per hour. It is estimated that this rate of placement will result in a radial pressure on the vessel of 250 psf. Consideration was given to the residual stresses due to the unrelieved deflection of the vessel under this load, applied in successive 3 foot high horizontal bands.

Gravity Loads Applied to the Suppression Chamber include:

The weight of the steel shell including baffles, catwalks, headers, downcomers and other shell appurtenances.

The suppression pool water stored in the vessel.

The temporary load of 200 psf on the horizontal projected areas of the vessel due to the weight of wet concrete and concrete forms to be supported from the vessel during the construction of the floor above. The ASME Code allowable stresses were increased by 33 percent for the combination of this temporary load with other concurrent loads.

The weight of contained air during test.

F. 2 3 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Lateral Loads Wind Load The drywell vessel which was exposed above grade prior to construction of the Reactor Building was designed for wind loads on the projected area of the circular shape in accordance with the height zones below in combination with other loads applicable during this stage with stresses limited to 133% of the ASME Code allowable stresses.

Height above grade (ft.)

Wind Load (psf) 0 30 15 30 100 21 Over 100 27 Earthquake Loads Drywell A lateral force equal to the seismic coefficients indicated in Figures F.2.l and F.2.2 applied to the drywell permanent gravity loads and a vertical force equal to 4% of the permanent gravity loads were assumed as acting simultaneously with each other and were taken concurrently with the permanent gravity loads, accident pressure conditions and other lateral loads.

Suppression Chamber A horizontal acceleration of 12%g was applied at the mass center of the suppression chamber and combined as stated above with a vertical acceleration of 4%g and the gravity loads, accident pressure, etc.

Suppression Chamber Baffles Loads 1)

Horizontal: 6 psi on full area of each member of baffle, to provide support against wave action 2)

Vertical: Dead load of baffle members End Connections Designed as slip joints so baffles do not act as ties or struts for suppression chamber shell. End connections designed for up to 50% overstress so baffle connections will fail before any damage can be done to suppression chamber shell.

Vent Thrust The vent pipes and their connections to the drywell, the suppression chamber and the header were designed for the following loads:

F. 2 4 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Normal and Refueling Operation A force resulting from the differential horizontal and vertical movements between the drywell and suppression chamber due to changes in temperature.

For this condition it was assumed that the drywell temperature is 150F and the suppression chamber temperature is 50F.

Initial and Final Test Conditions A force equal to design pressure times the net area of the connecting ring between the vent pipe and the expansion bellows plus a force equal to design pressure times the flow area of the vent pipe.

Accident Condition Forces similar to those above except the temperature of the drywell was taken as 281F.

Header Loads - The weight of the containment cooling headers in the drywell, the spray header in the suppression chamber and the header on the outside suppression chamber were included in the gravity loads to be considered in the design of the vessels. The header outside the suppression chamber was flooded for all loading conditions. The spray headers in both vessels were considered as being empty except during the Refueling and Accident loading conditions.

2.4.3 Load Combinations The vessels were designed for the loading combinations listed below.

2.4.3.1 Drywell and Vent System 2.4.3.1.1 Initial test condition at ambient temperature at time of test Dead load of vessel Test pressure The weight of contained air Lateral load due to wind or earthquake, whichever is more severe Vent thrusts Vertical earthquake load Header load 2.4.3.1.2 Final test condition at ambient temperature at time of test Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Gravity loads from equipment supports Gravity loads of compressible material Dead load on welding pads Design pressure internal and/or external Loads due to earthquake in combination with internal pressure only Effect of unrelieved deflection under temporary concrete load Restraint due to compressible material Vent thrusts Weight of contained air Header load F. 2 5 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO 2.4.3.1.3 Normal operating condition at operating temperature range of 50F to 150F Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Gravity loads from equipment supports Gravity load of compressible material Loads due to earthquake in combination with 0 psig internal pressure only Vent thrusts Restraint due to compressible material Dead load on welding pads Effect of unrelieved deflection under temporary concrete load Operating pressure internal or external Live load on personnel air lock and equipment access opening Loads from refueling seal Header load 2.4.3.1.4 Refueling condition with drywell hemispherical head removed at operating temperature range of 50F to 150F Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Gravity loads from equipment supports Gravity load of compressible material Dead and live loads on welding pads Water load on water seal at top flange of drywell Effect of unrelieved deflection under temporary concrete Restraint due to compressible material Live load on personnel air lock Live load on equipment access opening 2.4.3.1.5 Accident condition Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Gravity loads from equipment supports Gravity load of compressible material Dead load on welding pads Loads due to earthquake in combination with internal pressure only Design pressure and temperature Effect of unrelieved deflection under temporary concrete load Restraint due to compressible material Vent thrusts Jet forces Header load F. 2 6 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO 2.4.3.2 Suppression Chamber 2.4.3.2.1 Initial and final test condition at ambient temperature at time of test Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Suppression pool water Loads due to earthquake in combination with internal pressure only Design pressure internal or external Vent thrusts Weight of contained air Header loads 2.4.3.2.2 Temporary condition at ambient temperature during construction Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Loads due to earthquake Temporary concrete construction loading Live load on catwalks and platforms Headerload 2.4.3.2.3. Normal operating condition at 50F 100F Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Suppression pool water Loads due to earthquake in combination with 0 psig internal pressure only Header loads Operating pressure internal or external Live load on catwalks and platforms Vent thrust 2.4.3.2.4 Accident Condition Dead load of vessel and appurtenances Suppression pool water Loads due to earthquake in combination with internal pressure only Design pressure Vent thrusts Jet forces on downcomer pipes Header loads F. 2 7 Rev 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO 2.4.4 Stresses - Primary Stresses The enclosure was so designed that primary membrane stresses resulting from the above listed combinations of loads did not exceed those permitted by the Code.

Primary and Secondary Stresses Secondary membrane and bending stresses in the drywell, suppression chamber and vent system resulting from distortions due to specified internal pressure, loads, and temperature were computed. In the calculation of these stresses all resistances to uniform increase in radius were considered. Combined primary and secondary stresses were within limits specified in the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code.

Earthquake Stresses Stresses under seismic loading did not exceed the ASME Code or the AISC Code allowable stresses. Use of the 1/3 increase that is normally permitted when considering earthquake loads was not required.

2.4.5 Design Reconciliation A design basis review of the drywell identified differences between the seismic acceleration curves shown in Figures F.2.1 and F.2.2 and those specified in Appendix A, Section A.3 and as stated in USAR Section 5.2.5.3.1. An engineering review of these differences concluded that results reported in Section 2.4 of this appendix are still valid when the seismic accelerations identified in Appendix A are considered in the analysis.

F. 2-8 REV 18 8/00 00-481

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO 3.0 LEAK AND OVERLOAD TESTS A complete report on the leak test and overload test is included herein as Attachment A. This report was prepared by Chicago Bridge and Iron Company and contains the test procedure as well as the test results. All leakage rates were well within the allowable limits.

F. 3 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO 4.0 FIELD REPAIRS

4. 1 INTRODUCTION In January, 1968, a crack was discovered where a shop assembled nozzle penetration insert plate was welded to the drywell shell of the containment vessel. Extensive inspection, magnetic particle testing and metalurgical examinations were undertaken to determine the cause and extent of cracking. These tests revealed the cracking to be the surface type and most of the cracks were found to be in the insert plate heat affected zone on the chamfered edge. The cracks discovered were longitudinal and immediately adjacent to the weld, ranging in depth from approximately 1/32 to 3/16. No subsurface cracking was detected. The major portion of the cracking occurred on the inside surface and was not confined to a particular type or size of chamfered insert plate.

The fabricator of the containment vessel (C. B.&I.) compiled a detailed report on the cracks, evaluation of the cracks, laboratory simulation of the cracks, analysis of the cause of cracking, and laboratory and field tests of the containment vessel and vessel material. Copies of this report are on file at Chicago Bridge and Irons Oak Brook, Illinois offices and at General Electrics San Jose, California office, as well as the applicants office. Nineteen copies of this report were unofficially distributed to the Chief, Reactor Project Branch 1, DRL, of the USAEC in March, 1968. The cracks, evaluation of the cracks, the above report and weld repair procedures were the subject of an information meeting held with the AEC on March 20, 1968. Because of this extensive reporting, only a summary of the problem and repairs are included as part of this report.

4.2

SUMMARY

A) surface cracking, ranging in depth from 1/32 to 3/16, was initially detected on January 18, 1968, mostly confined to the inside of the chamfered insert plates. No subsurface cracks were found.

B) An extensive field and laboratory investigation revealed that this cracking occurred as a result of the presence of hydrogen, high residual stresses, discontinuities at the surface, and high hardness. Laboratory tests simulating actual field temperature conditions resulted in similar cracks. It was concluded that such cracking could be prevented by using higher preheat and post heat temperatures which would tend to alleviate all of the above conditions, except the surface discontinuities.

C) A magnetic particle examination was made of all field welds, both inside and outside, subsequent to discovery of this cracking and prior to pneumatic testing of the vessel.

D) Cracks were traced out using carbon arc gouging and all cracks were repaired using 200 to 300F preheat and 200 to 300F post heat for one hour. Repaired areas were radiographed and magnetic particle examined after at least 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months delay.

F.4 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO E) All repaired and adjacent areas were again magnetic particle examined during the pneumatic test after the vessel had reached 5 psi pressure. No weld repairs were required.

F) All repaired and adjacent areas were again magnetic particle examined after the vessel had reached 26 psi pressure. Again no weld repairs were required.

G) Following the overload and leak rate test of the vessel, a magnetic particle examination was made of all the field welds around all insert fittings, both inside and outside, and spot checks were made of main vessel joints. No weld repairs were required.

4.3 CONCLUSION

S The absence of cracking as evidenced by the extensive magnetic particle testing during and subsequent to the pneumatic testing of the vessel substantiates the adequacy of the procedures developed for examing welds and for making repairs.

F. 4 2 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F Attachment A C.B.&I. Report of Initial Overload Test and Leakage Rate Determination of the Pressure Suppression Containment for the Monticello Nuclear Generating Plant F.A i REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO INITIAL OVERLOAD & LEAK RATE TEST REPORT OF THE CONTAINMENT VESSEL MONTICELLO NUCLEAR PROJECT MONTICELLO, MINNESOTA INTRODUCTION The Monticello Nuclear Power Project of the Northern States Power Company incorporates a pressure suppression containment system with a drywell having interconnecting vent lines to a suppression chamber. The system is intended to provide a leak resistant enclosure for the nuclear reactor and any steam or gases that may be released. The vessel is of the shape and size as shown on Page F.A 1.

The drywell and suppression chamber were designed, erected and tested by Chicago Bridge & Iron Company under a contract with General Electric Company and in accordance with General Electric Company specifications. The containment was designed and constructed in accordance with the rules of Section III of the ASME Code as a class B vessel. The containment vessel, consisting of interconnected drywell and suppression chamber, was stamped after completion and testing with the ASME symbol for the design internal pressure and design temperature.

The drywell was constructed on a skirt, but the lower portion was embedded in concrete prior to the vessel test. However, a Halogen leak test was conducted on all embedded seams to insure their leak tightness prior to this embedding operation.

The suppression chamber was constructed on permanent steel columns with shear ties to resist all horizontal earthquake forces. All plate seams, excluding the embedded portion, were accessible for inspection inside and outside before and after the pressure test. All permanent connections were welded in place in the shell of each vessel.

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY F.A 2 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Since outside weather conditions were severely cold at the time of test, a temporary encasement was built around the vessel. This temporary encasement was made from patented scaffolding and sheets of polyethylene, and its interior was heated to obtain an environment suitable for testing the vessel.

GENERAL PROCEDURE The following test was made: The procedure for the overload test fulfilled the requirements of Section III of the ASME Code including Code Cases 1177 5 and 1330 1 and the latest addenda as of July 1966. The overload test was made with the suppression chamber partially filled with water to the accident condition level (83,700 cubic feet). Both the drywell and suppression chamber were simultaneously pressurized with air to 125% of the design pressure.

The leakage rate test is performed by comparing a pressure in the containment vessel to a pressure in an inner chamber which is an integral part of the reference system. The reference system was tested with a Halogen leak detector and an absolute pressure test was conductedfor 39 hours4.513889e-4 days 0.0108 hours 6.448413e-5 weeks 1.48395e-5 months prior to the leakage rate test.

The drywell and suppression chamber were tested for leaks in accordance with General Electric Specification No. 21A5642. A general description of the reference system type of leakage test is as follows: By locating the inner chamber inside the drywell and inside the suppression chamber approximately at the center of the individual air masses, the average temperature of each air mass can be proportionately represented. Previous tests have shown that the data of successive midnight to dawn periods can be compared due to relatively uniform temperature conditions during this period.

F A 3 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO The negligible difference in average air temperature between the inner chamber and the containment vessel eliminates the possibility of a pressure differential being caused by temperature. With the reference system tested, any relative decrease in containment vessel pressure must be considered as external leakage. A manometer is used as the pressure differential sensing device between the reference system and the vessel. Page F.A 4 describes the relationship between the differential pressure measurements to the per cent leakage.

Interior measurements of dew point and air temperatures were made and included in the calculation of the leakage rate. The results of the test are shown in Appendix F.A.E.

PRELIMINARY INSPECTION AND TESTING Before the overload and leakage rate test at Monticello, preliminary inspection and testing was performed in the shop and field. All shop welded manholes and nozzles were magnetic particle inspected after stress relief. The personnel lock was shop assembled and tested for structural adequacy. A leak test of the lock was performed in the shop on gasket seals, valves, shaft penetrations, nozzles and piping.

At the Monticello site, the reference system was tested by pressurizing with Freon and using a Halogen leak detector. After installation, the dew cell elements and resistance bulbs were tested in position and found to be operating. The reference system was purged of Freon and pressurized with nitrogen for the absolute pressure test. This test was started at 5:00 P.M. February 7, 1968, and concluded at 8:00 A.M., February 9, 1968.

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY F.A 4 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO The data compiled during this time, showed the reference system to be leak tight within the accuracy of the instruments. However, at the start of the leak rate test and after the final soap film test, a leak was found to have been created at Valve B.

This leak was corrected and retested prior to starting the leak rate test. A discussion was held with General Electric, and it was agreed that another hold test of the reference system was not necessary.

A 2 psig soap film leak test of the inner door and a 10 psig soap film test of the exterior door of the personnel lock was made. No detectable leaks were found in either case.

The air space between the double gasketed connection of the head flange, equipment hatch, stabilizer hatches and manholes was pressurized to approximately 100 psig and soap film tested. No detectable leaks were found.

OVERLOAD TEST After testing of the reference system, the containment vessel was closed for the overload test. The suppression chamber had been filled with water in accordance with Step B 6 of the test instructions and at 12:00 noon on February 9, 1968, pressurizing operations were begun. The vessel was pumped to 5 psig and a complete soap film test of the vessel was ade.

Pressurizing operations were resumed and at 10:47 A.M. February 10, 1968, overload pressure (70 psig) was reached. After one hour the pressure in the vessel was reduced to design pressure (56 psig) and the soap film test was started.

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY F A 5 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO LEAKAGE RATE TEST The leakage rate test of the vessel in the wet condition began at Midnight, February 1 10, 1968, and terminated at 7:00 A.M., February 13, 1968. Internal fans were used in the drywell and suppression chamber for the circulation of air in order to obtain uniform conditions. External heaters were turned on intermittently to maintain a reasonable outside temperature.

To obtain a dew point temperature (and a water vapor pressure) three dew cells were located in the suppression chamber and three in the drywell. Ten resistance bulbs were used for temperatures, three in the suppression chamber, one in the water, one in the vent line, and five in the drywell. These locations are illustrated in Figure B. At 7:00 A.M., February 13, 1968, the leak rate test was concluded and the vessel pressure was reduced to atmospheric.

F.A 6 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO RESULTS OF INSPECTIONS AND TESTS PRELIMINARY CHECKS The field magnetic particle inspection of manholes and nozzles did not find any indication of cracks or defects. The leak tests of the locks in the field at 2 psig and 10 psig were satisfactory and no leaks were found. No leaks were found in pressurizing between the two gaskets of bolted covers.

The pressure temperature data for the holding test of the reference system is tabu-lated in Appendix F.A.A. The results seem somewhat erratic because the internal heaters were operated intermittently during this test. However, to insure tightness a second Halogen leak test was performed on the reference system just prior to overload test. This test proved satisfactory.

OVERLOAD TEST AND SOAP FILM INSPECTION The overload test chart is reproduced in Appendix F.A.C. The hourly pressure ambient temperature data recorded during the pump up of the containment is tabu-lated in Appendix F.A.D. During the overload test one temporary plug blew out of a 1 coupling on a 10 instrument line. The plug was replaced and the test re-sumed without incident.

The soap film test of the containment at the design pressure found several minor leaks. Several leaks were found on the temporary caps on the control rod drive penetrations. The plugs were tightened and the leaks minimized. Small leaks were found at the connection of power leads passing through the drywell. The only correction was to cut the leads and the decision was made to leave them alone and start the leak rate. Leaks were detected in four lock penetrations F.A 10 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO and these were plugged with temporary caps welded on the inside of the drywell.

These plugs leaked somewhat but not sufficiently to stop the test. Also several leaks were found in the stuffing box connections on the lock door operating mech-anism. These were of minor nature and were repaired after the test.

LEAK RATE TEST The hourly data recorded during the February 11 13, 1968, wet leakage rate test is tabulated in Appendix F;A.E. The readings began at Midnight, February 10 and there was indication of large leaks. By 8:00 A.M. February 11, the test was halted in order to determine the location of leaks. The leaks were found to be at a 1 di-ameter coupling and also the power leads for heaters inside the drywell. The pow-er leads were cut and the opening was capped by Bechtel and the 1 diameter plug was changed. At Midnight, February 11, test data gain began to be collected for the leakage rate test. Readings taken at 8:00 A.M. the following morning indicated no large leakage.

The circulating fans operated continuously during the test which helped provide a uniformity in the air vapor space. The data during the periods of 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. on February 12, and 13 proved to be the most stable, and this data is summarized below. The atmospheric temperatures are in F, the containment ves-sel pressures are in lbs./sq. inch absolute, and the differential manometer readings are in inches of water.

F.A 11 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO FEB. 12, 1968 FEB. 13, 1968 Int. Air Cham. Diff.

Int. Air Cham. Diff.

Temp, Press. Mano.

Temp. Press. Mano.

Hours

F. PSIA In. H2O

F. PSIA In. H2O 2:00 A.M.

59.0 68.3 7.25 58.5 68.3 7.50 3:00 58.5 68.1 7.20 58.5 68.3 7.54 4:00 58.5 68.0 7.19 58.5 68.3 7.58 5:00 58.5 68.0 7.20 58.5 68.3 7.60 6:00 58.0 68.0 7.20 58.5 68.2 7.61 7:00 58.0 68.0 7.20 58.5 68.2 7.63 WEIGHTED AVERAGE 58.4 68.1 7.21 58.5 68.3 7.57 The change in water vapor pressure in the air vapor.space can be calculated from the temperature in dew point measurements. The internal air temperatures, the water tem-peratures, and the dew point temperatures all in F are summarized below for the 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. time period.

F.A 12 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO DRYWELL SUPPRESSION CHAMBER* VENT LINE**

Int. Air Dew Int. Air Water Dew Int. Air Hours Temp. F. Point F.

Temp. F.

Temp. F. Point F.

Temp. F.

FEB. 12, 1968 2:00 A.M.

58.0 46.7 60.0 54.0 56.9 60.0 3:00 57.6 46.2 60.0 54.0 56.2 59.0 4:00 57.6 46.7 60.0 54.0 56.0 59.0 5:00 57.6 47.2 60.0 54.0 56.0 59.0 6:00 57.2 46.9 59.6 54.0 56.0 59.0 7:00 56.8 46.4 59.6 54.0 56.0 58.0 AVERAGE 57.5 46.7 59.9 54.0 56.2 59.0 FEB. 13, 1968 2:00 A.M.

57.6 49.1 60.0 55.0 57.4 59.0 3:00 57.4 49.1 60.0 55.0 56.5 59.0 4:00 57.6 49.1 60.3 55.0 57.2 59.0 5:00 57.5 49.3 60.3 55.0 56.7 59.0 6:00 57.6 49.1 60.0 55.0 56.9 59.0 7:00 57.6 48.6 60.0 55.0 57.2 59.0 AVERAGE 57.6 49.1 60.1 55.0 57.0 59.0

Header assumed to have same temperature and dew point as suppression chamber

- Vent line assumed to have same dew point as drywell

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY F.A 13 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO From the above average internal air temperature and dew point temperature, the rela-tive per cent humidity for February 12, calculates to be 68.03% and 87.91%, respec-tively for the drywell and suppression chamber, and 73.75% and 89.7% for February 13.

Considering that the drywell and vent lines have 68% of the total volume of the con-tainment vessel, the average water vapor pressures are.179 psi for February 12, and

.191 psi for February 13.

Correcting the above temperatures to weighted average temperatures and using the above data (without vapor pressure corrections) of the two successive 2:00 A.M. to 7:00 A.M. periods, the preliminary per cent leakage (as a negative number) per 24 hour2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months period is as follows:

Per Cent Loss = (

100 27 7 Int es x

.Pr

)x [Int. P (Final P) x ( Int I A T Fin I A T

)]

= [

100 681 27 7

(

. )

(

. )

] [7.21 7.57 ( 518 4 5185

) ]

=.0190%/24 hrs.

Considering only the change in water vapor pressure, the apparent per cent loss (as a negative number) is as follows:

Per Cent Loss = (

100 27 7 Int P

x

) x [Final W.V. x ( Int I A T Fin I A T Int. W.V.]

= [ 100 681.

] [.191 ( 518 4 5185

).179]

=.0176%/24 hrs.

F A 14 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Combining the above calculated values the corrected per cent loss (as a negative num-ber) is as follows:

Corrected per cent loss =

preliminary per cent loss minus the apparent per cent loss

=.0190.0176 =.0366%/24 hrs.

= ( 100 681.

) [ 7 21 27 7

+.179 ( 7 57 27 7

+.191) ( 518 4 5185

) ]

=.0366%/24 hrs.

The corrected per cent loss of the wet test was well within the acceptable leakage rate of.2 of 1% for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months . The calculated leakage from the test data was acceptable to General Electric Company and Chicago Bridge & Iron Company.

CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY F.A 15 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.A F.A.A i REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO REFERENCE SYSTEM HOLD TEST Temperature Barometric REFERENCE SYSTEM PRESSURE of Ref. Sys.

Pressure Measured Absolute Corrected Deg.

Deg.

Fahr Abs.

In.

Feb. 7

F.

R.

Mercury PSIA PSIG PSIA PSIA 5:00 P.M.

69 529 29.43 14.4 73.0 87.4

6:00 73 533 29.44 14.4 74.3 88.7

7:00 74 534 29.45 14.4 75.0 89.4

8:00 69 529 29.44 14.4 74.0 88.4

9.00 68 528 29.43 14.4 73.8 88.2

Feb. 8 9:30 A.M.

79 539 29.29 14.4 75.6 90.0

11:30 80 540 29.32 14.4 75.9 90.3

1:15 P.M.

81 541 29.25 14.3 76.0 90.3

2:30 81 541 29.20 14.3 75.8 90.1

3:30 80 540 29.19 14.3 75.8 90.1

4:30 79 539 29.18 14.3 75.6 89.9 5:30 78 538 29.19 14.3 75.3 89.6 88.7 7:15 74 534 29.20 14.3 74.4 88.7 8:0.0 72 532 29.20 14.3 74.0 88.3

9:00 70 530 29.20 14.3 73.7 88.0

10:00 69 529 29.24 14.3 73.6 87.9 Feb, 9 7:00 A.M.

66 526 29.30 14.4 72.9 87.3

8:00 66 526 29.30 14.4 72.8 87.2

Initial Data Selected At 6:00 P.M. Feb. 7.

Final Data Selected At 5:30 P.M. Feb. 8 Correct Pressure = (Final Abs. Press.) ( Init Abs Temp Fin Abs Temp

)

F. A. A 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.B F.A.Bi REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO THERMOCOUPLE DATA FOR SHELL TEMPERATURES Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Date

F.

FEB. 9 Noon 79 97 86 100 74 70 70 48 1:00 P.M.

82 88 78 94 75 76 76 49 2:00 80 94 98 94 78 80 78 53 5:00 75 81 95 78 78 78 80 55 6:00 52 61 70 49 60 60 66 40 6:15 48 57 66 48 56 58 64 38 6:30 48 54 64 44 55 58 64 38 7:05 48 54 63 44 56 63 67 44 7:32 41 43 48 36 48 48 54 30 8:20 38 43 50 40 49 52 59 33 8:40 42 45 52 42 55 57 60 34 9:00 44 47 52 44 57 57 64 37 9:30 45 48 52 45 57 59 65 37 10:00 48 49 55 51 61 61 64 39 10:30 54 56 61 60 64 66 70 44 FEB. 10 12:30 A.M.

58 58 64 61 69 69 73 48 1:00 56 56 61 61 69 69 73 48 1:30 55 58 62 54 69 69 75 45 2:00 52 55 60 55 70 70 73 45 3:00 58 58 62 60 70 71 75 48 3:30 55 58 63 60 71 71 73 48 4:00 50 53 60 55 65 65 70 45 F.A.B 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Date

F.

FEB. 10 4:30 A.M.

58 58 62 60 67 61 75 48 5:00 58 58 62 60 69 70 75 49 5:30 55 57 60 59 69 70 73 48 6:00 54 56 61 58 67 72 74 48 6:30 55 56 61 57 67 72 74 48 7:45 53 58 58 53 65 69 75 48 8:00 52 57 58 55 67 70 75 48 8:30 53 58 59 61 64 65 72 48 9:00 54 62 62 65 65 68 70 48 9:30 54 64 65 73 68 68 71 48 10:00 60 71 71 74 67 69 71 48 10:30 61 73 73 76 66 69 74 48 10:47 62 73 74 81 71 71 76 48 11:30 68 81 84 90 69 69 73 48 NOON 73 89 87 94 69 70 75 48 5:30 P.M.

62 69 79 64 67 79 48 6:00 59 66 73 61 71 78 48 6:30 59 65 73 59 69 79 48 7:50 55 63 63 53 71 79 48 8:37 56 56 62 52 67 80 48 10:30 51 51 57 50 67 79 48 11:53 46 50 50 45 65 79 48 FEB. 11 12:30 A.M.

56 58 59 56

74 82 55 1:57 53 56 59 54

77 85 54

Gage 5 was broken during the 56 PSIG soap film test F.A.B 2 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Date

F.

FEB. 11 3:15 A.M.

54 54 63 52 75 84 54 4:15 54 54 56 52 75 85 56 5:00 53 53 55 52 73 86 56 6:20 46 46 49 47 70 76 50 7:05 46 46 46 44 66 76 49 8:00 46 47 49 48 67 79 49 9:00 49 58 58 64 66 79 47 10:00 53 66 62 64 66 77 48 11:00 53 63 66 67 64 77 47 NOON 61 72 72 75 61 64 82 48 1:00 P.M.

67 72 79 74 60 64 79 47 2:00 68 75 86 76 60 66 81 47 3:00 68 73 85 75 60 65 81 48 4:15 67 76 86 76 63 79 84 49 5:00 66 70 80 69 62 62 79 49 6:00 64 65 74 60 61 65 76 49 7:00 55 62 67 55 61 65 80 48 8:00 55 58 62 53 62 65 79 49 9:00 52 55 61 54 69 81 48 10:00 53 56 58 51 64 81 48 11:00 52 53 55 52 63 66 81 47 MIDNIGHT 48 53 54 51 62 64 82 49 FEB. 12 1:00 A.M.

49 51 53 48 60 65 79 46 2:00 48 49 53 51 62 65 79 49 3:15 58 58 61 57 68 73 85 56 F.A.B 3 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Date

F.

FEB. 12 4:00 A.M.

58 58 61 57 67 73 88 56 5:35 54 54 54 54 64 72 83 52 6:10 54 54 54 54 63 71 83 52 7:10 54 54 54 54 62 60 83 52 8:00 53 53 53 54 62 68 81 48 9:00 53 58 58 60 60 70 78 50 10:00 55 59 60 60 60 70 77 48 11:00 55 62 66 69 60 69 77 48 NOON 60 70 70 70 61 66 77 49 1:00 P.M.

61 66 70 70 61 70 83 49 2:00 64 65 70 66 64 71 84 50 3:00 63 69 75 71 66 71 79 50 4:00 65 71 75 71 66 75 84 51 5:00 64 67 74 67 66 68 83 50 6:00 56 60 67 55 64 69 81 49 7:00 56 60 63 54 64 70 83 52 8:00 56 59 60 56 64 70 80 50 9:00 56 57 58 54 66 72 83 52 10:00 54 56 57 49 64 67 81 52 11:00 54 54 56 51 64 69 79 52 MIDNIGHT 52 52 54 51 63 69 79 52 FEB. 13 1:00 A.M.

55 55 55 55 63 70 84 53 2:00 55 55 56 55 64 71 83 55 3:00 55 55 57 57 65 71 83 54 4:00 53 53 53 53 61 66 80 50 F.A.B 4 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Gage 1 Gage 2 Gage 3 Gage 4 Gage 5 Gage 6 Gage 7 Gage 8 Date

F.

FEB. 13 5:00 53 53 53 53 61 67 80 49 6:00 56 56 56 56 63 70 84 50 7:00 56 56 56 56 64 70 86 50 F.A.B 5 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.C F.A.Ci REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.D F.A.Di RE V 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.D F.A.Di REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY CONTAINMENT VESSEL OVERLOAD & SOAP FILM TESTS Vessel Pressure Outside Air Time Temp. F Gage 1 Gage 2 Rec.

Remarks Feb. 9 1968 12: 00 PM 0

Cold, clear, sunny 1:15 5

M.P. Soap tested 5:30 0

2.5 5

Cold & Clear 6:00 4

6 6

6:15 6

10 6.5 6:30 2

10 12 10 Colder 6:38 10.5 12 12 Stopped pumping going into tent to block up leak in tent and to turn on outside heaters.

7:04 10.5 12 12 Opened valves pumping 7:30 13 14 12.5 in tank 7:47 14 15 13 Shut comp. down to tank turned on inside heaters.

8:18 14 15 13 Tied compression into 9:00 19 19.5 19.5 chamber.

Shut pumping down 2 min.

9: 30 21 22 22 10:15 24 25 25 Recorder froze worked on it 10:30 26 27 26 and got it unstuck.

10:33 26 27 26 Blowing off 10:37 25 26 26 Closed Valve M.P. fitting and some weld seams F.A.D 1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY CONTAINMENT VESSEL OVERLOAD & SOAP FILM TESTS Vessel Pressure Outside Air Time Temp. F Gage 1 Gage 2 Rec.

Remarks Feb. 10 1968 1:00 AM 2

25 26 26 Pumping on chamber 1 heater 1:30 27 26 28 on in vessel 4 outside 2:00 30 26 31 4 in supp. chamber area 2:15 32 33 Stop pumping for elec.

3:00 9

Resume pumping 3:30 35 36 36 4:00 38 39 39 4:30 40 39 40 4:50 42 40 42 2 min. hold 5:30 45 40 46 Recorder was frozen.

6:00 11 48 49 49 5 min hold.

6:30 51 51 51 7:00 51 1 plug Blew Shut Down 7:30 51 Resume Pumping 8:00 54 54 54 8:30 57 57 57 5 min. hold Shut down for last look at boiler.

9:00 58 58 59 9:30 61 61 62 Shut Down 1 heater inside.

9:40 63 63 63 Short hold for 634 increment 10:00 64 65 65 Shut Down 2nd inside heater All off.

10:30 67 68 68 F.A.D 2 REV 412/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO CHICAGO BRIDGE & IRON COMPANY CONTAINMENT VESSEL OVERLOAD & SOAP FILM TESTS Vessel Pressure Outside Air Time Temp. F Gage 1 Gage 2 Rec.

Remarks Feb. 10 1968 10: 47 AM 70 70 70 Overlaod test pressure.

11:07 70 70 70 Transfer pressure on lock.

11:47 70 70 70 Start pressure reduction.

12:17 56 56 56 Down to W.P.

F.A.D 3 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.E F.A.E i

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.F F.A.F i REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO APPENDIX F.A.F F.A.Fi REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO LEAKAGE RATE TEST DATA Ves.Ga. Barom. Barom. Absol. Manometer Avg. Dew* Avg.*

%Rel W. V.

I.A.T.

Time Press.

in.Hg psi Press. Vessel Ref Sy. P Pt. Temp.

Dew Pt. Humid Press.

(Rank)

FEB. 11 1968 1:45 AM 54.0 29.18 14.3 68.3 2.60 0.92 1.68 118.5 49.5 73.8 0.175 518 3:00 53.75 28.80 14.1 67.9 2.61 0.89 1.72 117.5 48.8 75 0.170 517 4:00 53.6 29.20 14.3 67.9 2.64 0.89 1.75 117.5 48.8 76.3 0.170 516.5 5:00 53.6 29.18 14.3 67.9 2.78 0.72 2.06 116.5 48.1 75 0.166 516 6:00 53.5 29.22 14.3 67.8 2.83 0.62 2.21 116.5 48.1 77.5 0.166 515 7:00 53.4 29.20 14.3 67.7 2.87 0.53 2.34 117.5 48.8 80 0.170 515 8:00 53.4 29.20 14.3 67.7 3.02 0.40 2.62 117 48.4 80 0.168 514.5 9:00 53.5 29.20 14.3 67.8 3.05 0.35 2.70 117.5 48.8 80 0.170 515 10:00 53.7 29.21 14.3 68.0 3.80 0.00 3.80 118 49.1 77.5 0.172 516 11:00 53.9 29.23 14.3 68.2 4.40 0.50 4.90 119 49.8 77.5 0.177 517 12:00 54.1 29.20 14.3 68.4 5.18 1.10 6.28 120 50.5 77.5 0.181 517.5 1:00 54.2 29.05 14.2 68.4 5.35 1.78 7.13 120.5 50.9 73.8 0.184 519.5 2:00 54.3 29.10 14.3 68.6 6.45 2.80 9.25 121 51.2 71.3 0.186 520.5 3:00 54.5 29.10 14.3 68.8 6.62 3.02 9.64 121.5 51.6 70 0.189 521.5 4:00 54.6 29.10 14.3 68.9 7.21 3.08 10.29 122.5 52.3 71.3 0.194 522 5:00 54.9 29.10 14.3 69.2 7.33 3.10 10.43 123 52.6 68.8 0.196 523 6:00 54.9 29.10 14.3 69.2 7.18 3.00 10.18 123 52.6 68.8 0.196 523 7:00 54.6 29.10 14.3 68.9 7.18 3.10 10.28 124 53.2 70 0.200 523 8:00 54.6 29.10 14.3 68.9 6.41 2.45 8.86 123.5 52.9 72.5 0.198 522 9:00 54.4 29.07 14.3 68.7 6.09 2.20 8.29 123 52.6 72.5 0.196 521.5

All averages shown in Appendix E are straight arithmetical and have not been weighted.

F.A.E1 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO LEAKAGE RATE TEST DATA Ves.Ga.

Barom. Barom. Absol.

Manometer Avg. Dew*

Avg.*

%Rel W. V.

I.A.T.

Time Press.

in.Hg psi Press. Vessel Ref Sy. P Pt. Temp.

Dew Pt. Humid Press.

(Rank)

FEB. 11 1968 10:00 PM 54.25 29.08 14.3 68.6 5.90 2.05 7.95 123 52.6 73.8 0.196 521 11:00 54.25 29.09 14.3 68.6 5.75 1.98 7.73 122.5 52.3 75 0.194 520.5 12:00 54.2 29.10 14.3 68.5 5.62 1.88 7.50 123 52.6 76.5 0.196 520 FEB. 12 1968 1:00 AM 54.0 29.08 14.3 68.3 5.54 1.87 7.41 122.5 52.3 78 0.194 519.5 2:00 54.0 29.1014.3 68.3 5.48 1.77 7.25 122 51.9 78 0.191 519 3:00 53.8 29.14 14.3 68.1 5.45 1.75 7.20 121 51.2 76.5 0.186 518.5 4:00 53.7 29.13 14.3 68.0 5.45 1.74 7.19 121.5 51.6 78 0.189 518.5 5:00 53.7 29.14 14.3 68.0 5.45 1.75 7.20 121.5 51.6 78 0.189 518.5 6:00 53.7 29.13 14.3 68.0 5.45 1.75 7.20 121.5 51.6 79.5 0.189 518 7:00 53.7 29.13 14.3 68.0 5.45 1.75 7.20 121 51.2 78 0.186 518 8:00 53.8 29.16 14.3 68.1 5.43 1.75 7.18 121.5 51.6 79.5 0.189 518 9:00 53.9 29.19 14.3 68.2 5.50 1.75 7.25 122.5 52.3 81 0.194 518.5 10:00 54.0 29.19 14.3 68.3 5.55 1.90 7.45 122.5 52.3 79.5 0.194 519 11:00 54.0 29.14 14.3 68.3 5.60 2.20 7.80 122.5 52.3 76.5 0.194 520 12:00 54.0 29.20 14.3 68.3 5.90 2.42 8.32 124 53.2 76.5 0.200 520.5 1:00 PM 54.0 29.18 14.3 68.3 6.34 2.96 9.30 125 53.9 76.5 0.206 521.5 3:00 54.0 29.18 14.3 68.3 5.90 2.65 8.55 125 53.9 76.5 0.206 521.5 4:00 54.1 29.18 14.3 68.4 6.20 2.81 9.01 125.5 54.3 76.5 0.209 522 5:00 54.1 29.20 14.3 68.4 6.70 3.40 10.10 125.5 54.3 76.5 0.209 522 6:00 54.1 29.22 14.3 68.4 7.05 3.50 10.55 124 53.2 72.5 0.200 522 F.A.E2 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Ves.Ga.

Barom. Barom. Absol.

Manometer Avg. Dew*

Avg.*

%Rel W. V.

I.A.T.

Time Press.

in.Hg psi Press. Vessel Ref Sy. P Pt. Temp.

Dew Pt. Humid Press.

(Rank)

FEB. 12 1968 7:00 PM 54.1 29.24 14.3 68.4 6.10 2.45 8.55 125.5 54.3 79.5 0.209 521 8:00 54.0 29.29 14.4 68.4 5.95 2.25 8.20 124.5 53.6 78 0.203 520.5 9:00 54.0 29.31 14.4 68.4 5.80 2.10 7.90 124.5 53.6 79.50.203 520 10:00 54.0 29.32 14.4 68.4 5.81 1.98 7.79 124 53.2 78 0.200 520 11:00 54.0 29.34 14.4 68.4 5.69 1.93 7.62 124.5 53.6 81 0.203 519.5 FEB. 13 1968 12:00 54.0 29.34 14.4 68.4 5.59 1.89 7.48 124 53.2 81 0.200 S.9 1:00 AM 53.9 29.137 14.4 68.3 5.68 1.86 7.54 123 52.6 81 0.196 518.1 2:00 53.9 29.40 14.4 68.3 5.68 1.82 7.50 124 53.2 82,5 0.200 518.1 3:00 53.9 29.42 14.4 68.3 5.73 1.81 7.54 123.5 52.9 82.5 0.198 518.1 4:00 53.9 29.42 14.4 68.3 5.75 1.83 7.58 124 53.2 82.5 0.200 518.1 5:00 53.9 29.46 14.4 68.3 5.80 1.80 7.60 123.5 52.9 82.5 0.198 518.

6:00 53.8 29.45 14.4 68.2 5.77 1.84 7.61 123.5 52.9 82.5 0.198 518.

7:00 53.8 29.45 14.4 68.2 5.73 1.90 7.63 123.5 5 2.9 82.5 0.198 518.

F.A.E 3 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Resistance Bulbs Dew Cells Time B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 Avg. D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Avg.

FEB. 111968 1:45 AM 60 59 60 56 57 57 58 57.5 58.5 52 58 126 127 126 110 109 112 118.5 3:00 59 58.5 59 55 55.5 56 56.5 56.5 57.5 52 57 126 127 126 108 108 110 117.5 4:00 59 58 59 54 54.25 55.5 56 55.5 57 52 56.5 127 127 127 107 107 110 117.5 5:00 59 58 59 53.5 53.5 54 55 55 56 52 56 126 127 126 105 107 109 116.5 6:00 58 59 58 52.5 53 53.5 54 54 55 52 55 127 127 125 106 106 109 116.5 7:00 59 58.5 59 52 52.5 53 53.5 53.5 54.5 53 55 127 127 125 109 107 110 117.5 8:00 58 57 58 52 52 53 53 53 54 53 54.5 126 126 127 108 106 110 117 9:00 58 57 58 53 53 53 54 54 54 53 55 127 127 127 108 107 110 117.5 10:00 58 57 58 55 55 56 55 56 56 53 56 126 126 128 110 108 112 118 11:00 58 58 58 57 56 57 56 57 58 52 57 127 127 126 113 109 113 119 12:00 58 58 58 60 58 57 56 55 58 52 57.5 128 127 126 113 112 115 120 1:00 PM 58 58 59 62 60 62 59 58 59 52 59.5 128 128 125 114 112 117 120.5 2:00 59 59 59 64 61 61 60 60 61 53 60.5 125 128 127 115 114 118 121 3:00 60 59 59 66 62 62 62 61 62 53 61.5 126 128 127 116 115 118 121.5 4:00 60 59 60 68 63 63 62 62 63 53 62 128 128 127 117 116 119 122.5 5:00 61 60 61 69 64 64 63 63 63 53 63 129 128 126 118 117 121 123 6:00 60 61 61 68 64 64 63 64 64 53 63 128 128 127 117 117 120 123 7:00 61 60 61 65 64 64 63 64 64 53 63 129 129 129 118 118 122 124 8:00 61 60 61 62 62 63 63 63 64 53 62 129 129 129 119 116 120 123.5

NOTE B 10 reads temperature of H2O not in avg.

F.A.E 4 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Resistance Bulbs Dew Cells Time B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 Avg. D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Avg.

FEB. 11 1968 9:00 PM61 60 61 61 62 62 62 62 63 53 61.5 129 128 127 117 117 119 123 10:00 61 60 61 60 60 61 61 61 62 53 61 128 128 129 118 116 119 123 11:00 61 60 61 60 60 60 61 61 61 54 60.5 129 128 129 116 116 118 122.5 12:00 61 60 61 59 59 60 60 60 61 53 60 128 129 129 117 117 119 123 FEB. 12 1968 1:00 AM 61 60 60 58 58 59 59 60 60 54 59.5 129 129 128 115 115 119 122.5 2:00 60 60 60 57 58 58 58 59 60 54 59 130 128 130 114 114 116 122 3:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 54 58.5 129 128 128 115 112 116 121 4:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 54 58.5 128 128 128 115 113 116 121.5 5:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 54 58.5 128 128 128 116 115 115 121.5 6:00 60 59 60 57 56 57 58 58 59 54 58 128 128 128 117 113 115 121.5 7:00 60 59 60 56 56 57 57 58 58 54 58 128 128 128 114 112 117 121 8:00 60 59 60 56 56 57 57 57 58 54 58 128 128 127 116 114 116 121.5 9:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 54 58.5 129 128 130 116 115 118 122.5 10:00 60 60 60 58 58 59 59 59 60 54 59 129 129 129 116 115 118 122.5 11:00 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 60 54 60 129 129 127 117 116 118 122.5 12:00 60 60 60 61 61 61 61 61 61 54 60.5 130 130 128 118 118 121 124 F.A.E 5 REV 4 12/85

ONLINE REFERENCE ONLY REFER TO MASTER HARDCOPY MONTICELLO Resistance Bulbs Dew Cells Time B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6 B7 B8 B9 B10 Avg. D1 D2 D3 D4 D5 D6 Avg.

FEB. 11 1968 1:00 PM60 60 61 63 62 62 61 61 62 54 61.5 130 130 130 120 118 121 125 2:00 61 60 61 62 62 62 61 62 62 54 61.5 130 130 128 120 118 122 124.5 3:00 61 60 61 62 62 63 62 62 62 54 61.5 130 130 131 120 118 121 125 4:00 61 61 61 64 63 63 62 62 63 54 62 130 130 128 122 119 123 125.5 5:00 61 60 61 64 63 63 62 62 63 54 62 130 130 131 121 119 122 125.5 6:00 61 60 61 63 62 63 62 62 63 54 62 130 130 128 118 118 121 124 7:00 61 60 61 61 61 62 61 61 62 54 61 130 130 130 121 119 122 125.5 8:00 61 60 61 60 60 61 60 61 62 54 60.5 130 130 130 118 118 120 124.5 9:00 61 60 61 59 59 60 60 60 61 54 60 130 129 129 118 119 123 124.5 10:00 61 60 61 58 59 59 60 60 60 55 60 130 130 128 118 118 121 124 11:00 61 60 61 58 58 59 59 59 60 55 59.5 130 130 130 119 119 119 124.5 FEB. 13 1968 12:00 61 60 61 57 57 58 58 58 59 55 59 130 130 129 118 117 119 124 1:00AM 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 55 59,5 130 129 127 118 116 117 123 2:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 55 58.5 130 129 131 119 117 118 124 3:00 60 60 60 57 57 57 58 58 59 55 58.5 130 129 127 117 117 120 123.5 4 00 61 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 55 58.5 130 129 130 118 116 120 124 5:00 60.5 60 60.5 57 57 57.5 58 58 59 55 58.5 130 129 128 119 117 119 123.5 6:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 55 58.5 130 129 129 118 116 120 123.5 7:00 60 60 60 57 57 58 58 58 59 55 58.5 130 130 129 117 116 119 123.5 NOTE B10 reads temp. of H2O not in avg.

F.A.E 6 REV 4 12/85