IR 05000250/1986020
| ML17342A525 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Turkey Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/29/1986 |
| From: | Jape F, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17342A524 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-250-86-20, 50-251-86-20, NUDOCS 8605130621 | |
| Download: ML17342A525 (12) | |
Text
e
~p,S IlEGII,Mp0 UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION II
101 MARIETTASTREET, N.IN.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323 Report Nos.:
50-250/86-20 and 50-251/86-20 Licensee:
Florida Power and Light Company'250 West Flagler Street Miami, FL 33102 Docket Nos.:
50-250 and 50-251 License.Nos.:
DPR-31 and DPR-41 Facility Name:
Turkey Point 3 and
7~
Inspection Conducted:
March g4-28, 1986,',
'
I Inspector:
fl H.
. Whitener Approved by:
F. Jape, Section Chief Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety j
Ts ti Date Signed ilpy/
Date Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, announced i nspection involved-39 inspector-hours on site in the areas of witnessing the containment integrated leak rate test, reviewing test procedures and evaluating test results.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
8605130621 860501 PDR ADOCK 05000250
/
I
~(
I jf f I ji If III II I
I II I,
If II I
I>>'j
'(I jf Il I'I
~r <<
ff>>
I'I
'I
.(
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
"C. J.
Baker, Plant Manager
"B. A. Abrishami, System Performance Supervisor K. L. Remington, Test Director R. Gouldy, Licensing Engineer E. Dill, Assi stance Engineer R. Hart, Licensing Engineer Other Organization Stone 8 Webster R. Parry, Fngineer J.
Busa, Engineer R.
Sampson, Engineer B. Kuechler, Leak Rate Consultant NRC Resident Inspectors
"T. A. Peebles, SRI D.
R. Brewer, RI Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 28, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings.
No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.
The inspector informed licensee management that the containment integrated leak rate test and supplemental test demonstrated containment leakage integrity.
The tests were successfully performed within the limits of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 and the criteria of BN-TOP-1, Revision l.
The subject of the containment as-found leak rate was discussed and the licensee stated that the minimum path leakage would be reported in the leak rate test report.
This item was identified for followup inspection as:
Inspector Fol 1 owup Item (IFI) 251/86-20-01:
Review the containment leak rate report to verify the as-found condition of the containment, paragraph I V
The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspection.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during the inspection.
5.
Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test - (70313)
The inspector reviewed and witnessed test activities to determine that the primary containment integrated leak rate test was performed in accordance with the requirements of Appendix J
to
CFR 50, ANSI 45.4 and test procedures 13100.1 and 13100.2,
"Integrated Leakage Rate Test."
Selected sampling of the licensee's activities which were inspected included:
(1) review of the test procedure to verify that the procedure was properly approved and conformed with regulatory requirements; (2) obser-
'ation of test performance to determine that test prerequisites were completed, special equipment was installed, instrumentation was calibrated, and appropriate data were recorded; and (3) preliminary evaluation of leakage rate test results to verify that leak rate limits were met.
General Observations (70313)
The inspector witnessed and reviewed portions of the test preparation, containment pressurization, temperature stabilization and data processing during the period of March 24-28, 1986.
The following items were verified:
(1)
The test was conducted in accordance with an approved procedure.
Procedure changes and test discrepancies were properly documented in the procedure.
(2)
Test prerequi sites selected for review were found to be completed.
(3)
Plant systems required to maintain test control were reviewed and found to be operational.
(4)
Special test instrumentation was reviewed and found to be
~ installed and calibrated.
(5)
Data required for the performance of the containment leak rate calculations were recorded at 15 minute intervals.
(6)
Problems encountered during the test were described in the test event lo (7)
Pressurized gas sources were properly isolated and vented to preclude in-leakage or interference of out-leakage through containment isolation valves.
(8)
Procedures for valve alignment were reviewed against system drawings to verify correct boundary alignment, venting, and draining of specific systems.
No violations or deviations were identified in the above review.
b.
Procedure Review (Unit 3 and Unit 4) (70307 and 70313)
The licensee's leakrate procedures were reviewed in detail during a
previous inspection in June 1985, IE Report 50-250/85-19 and 50-251/
85-19.
At that time IFI 250/85-19-01 was identified.
During this inspection, the inspector found that the acceptance criteria have not yet been revised to reflect the total time 95% confidence limit as 0.75 La.
Consequently, IFI 250/85-19-01 remains open.
The inspector verified that the proper limits were met for the Type A test.
Revision of the test procedure will be reviewed at a later inspection.
During review of the procedure and discussions with leak rate test personnel, the inspector found that the vapor pressure was to be obtained by volume weighting the relative humidity (RH) measured at ten sensor locations and converting to vapor pressure by multiplying the weighted RH by the saturation pressure associated with the average containment temperature.
In that RH is both non-linear with vapor pressure and a function of the temperature at the location where it is measured the inspector was concerned that a loss in accuracy of the measurement might occur from this technique.
This matter was resolved prior to the test when the licensee elected to convert each RH measurement to vapor pressure using the saturation pressure for the local temperature at the sensor and then volume weight the vapor pressure of each sensor to obtain the average value used to calculate the containment mass.
c.
Test Performance - Unit 4 (70313)
(1)
Method The licensee has developed data analysis capability for Total Time analysis in accordance with the requirements of BN-TOP-1, Revision 1,
for a
short duration test and Mass Point-Linear Regression analysis in accordance with the recommendations of ANSI/ANS-56.8-1981 for a 24-hour test.
The Appendix J acceptance limit of 0.75 La was met for the 95% upper confidence limit (UCL)
for both the Total Time and Mass Point analysis techniques.
A supplemental test was performed in accordance with the specifica-tions of Appendix C to ANSI-N4 and BN-TOP-l, Revision
- November 197 l~
(2)
Test Description The absolute method as defined in ANSI-N45.4-1972 was used in determining the containment leakage rate.
Values bounding the test conditions were as follows:
Containment Volume 1.55 x 10'ubic feet Accident Pressure (Pa)
49.9 Psig Maximum Allowable Leakage (La)
0.25 wt.% per Day System conditions for performance of the integrated leak rate test were as follows:
(a)
Reactor Vessel Mater level at mid-nozzle level and vented to the containment (b)
Steam Generators (c)
RHR System Mater filled Operating in shutdown cooling mode (d)
Containment Fans (e)
Instrumentation Secured
- air circulation was provided by ten auxiliary fans Instruments which are exposed to containment pressure post accident were exposed to test pressure (f)
Pressurized Gas Sources
-
Isolated and vented to atmos-phere Containment pressurization was initiated at 11:56 p.m.
on March 25, and terminated at 9:37 on March 26, 1986, with the containment air pressure at about 67 psia.
Temperature stabi li-zation criteria were met at 7:30 p.m.
on March 26, 1986, and time zero for the integrated leak rate test was declared.
A 9.5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> Type A test, performed in accordance with the requirements of BN-TOP-1, Revision 1,
was terminated at 5:00 a.m.
on March 27, 1986.
A 4.75 hour8.680556e-4 days <br />0.0208 hours <br />1.240079e-4 weeks <br />2.85375e-5 months <br /> supplemental test was performed from 6:30 a.m.
to 11: 15 a.m.
on March 27, 1986.
Test Results - Unit 4 (70313)
(1)
Type A Test The Technical Specification allowable leakage (La) for Turkey Point
is 0.25 wt.% of the containment volume at accident pressure (Pa)
per day.
The acceptable test leak rate limit of
0.75 La is therefore 0.1875 wt.% per day.
The calculated leakage rate and 95%
UCL for the Total Time and Mass Point Analysis are shown below for the 9.5 hour5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> test period of 7:30 p.m.
to 5:00 a.m.,
March 26-27, 1986.
Mass Point Total Time Leak Rate UCL 0.08 wt.%/day 0.084 wt.%/day 0.077 wt.%/day 0.109 wt.%/day With the Type C add-on leakage included, the total leak rate is 0. 113 wt.>>/per day by the total time method.
These values are below the acceptance limit of 0. 1875 wt.% per day.
Calculations made by the inspector are in reasonable agree-ment, with those of the licensee.
(2)
Supplemental Test A 4.75 hour8.680556e-4 days <br />0.0208 hours <br />1.240079e-4 weeks <br />2.85375e-5 months <br /> supplemental test was performed in accordance with Appendix C of ANSI-N45.4-1972 and the BN-TOP-1, Revision
criteria.
The measured composite leak rate was within the upper and lower acceptance limit specified by the equation Lam
+
Lo
- 0.25La
<
Lc <
Lam
+
Lo + 0.25La for both the Mass Point and Total Time analysis as indicated below:
Mass Point 0.281 wt.% < 0.333 wt.% < 0.41 wt.%
Total Time 0. 281 wt.% < 0.351 wt.% < 0.41 wt.%
These values meet the requirements of Appendix J.
Within the areas examined, no violations or deviations were identified.
6.
As'ound Leak Rate (70313)
The licensee stated that the preliminary evaluation of local leak rates i ndicates that the as-found condition of the containment is within the acceptance limits.
The minimum path leakage will be included in the containment leak rate report for local leak rate tests (Type B and Type C
tests)
.
This matter was identified as IFI 251/86-20-01, Review the containment leak rate report to verify the as-found condition of the containment.
Within the area examined, no violation or deviation was identifie C