IR 05000259/1982009
| ML20052B938 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 04/07/1982 |
| From: | Jape F, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20052B927 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-259-82-09, 50-259-82-9, 50-260-82-09, 50-260-82-9, 50-296-82-09, 50-296-82-9, NUDOCS 8205040163 | |
| Download: ML20052B938 (5) | |
Text
..--
.
.
.-
-
-
._.
!
-8 UNITED STATES
.8 o$
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION g
e REGION 11
.Q 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SUITE 3100
%
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303 Report Nos. 50-259/82-09, 50-260/82-09 and 50-296/82-09 i
Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority
.
500A Chestnut Street Tower II
!
Chattanooga, TN 37401 Facility Name:
Browns Ferry Docket Nos. 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296
"
License Nos. DPR-33, DPR-52 and DPR-68 Inspection at Browns Ferry Pla,nt site near Decatur, Alabama
Inspector: N f $ht $~ y J/ f7 /S' 2-n H.~ L. Whitener Date Signed Approved by: M [ [d[ ue [4 fr M*DateSigned7/F2
,
F. Jape, Section Chief
' ~
~
Engineering Inspection Branch Division of Engineering and Technical Programs i
SUMMARY Inspection on March 19-23, 1982
,
Areas Inspected This routine, announced inspection involved 41 inspector-hours on site in the areas of integrated leak rate testing, pipe support systems and followup inspec-tion items.
,
I Results Of the three areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
i
8205040lO
.
_
.
.
---
.-
_.
-
..
.
-
-
.
-
.
-.
-
.. -
.
.- -
-
.
.
..
.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- G. Jones,-Plant Manager
.
K. Clark, Supervisor, Containment Test Section
.
J. Denny, Test Director C. Miller, Tesi. Director M. Cutlip, Night Test Director T. Kerr, Engineering Aide NRC Resident Inspector J. Chase -
- G. Paulk
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on March 23, 1982, with those persons indicated in paragraph I above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Closed: Infraction-(296/79-38-03) concerned the use of a temporary control rod drive (CRD) hatch cover during the containment integrated leak rate test. The temporary cover is later replaced by the permanent cover and only a seal leak rate test performed.
The licensee verified the adequacy of the CRD hatch installation procedure during a subsequent integrated leak rate test on Unit 1.
Also, the temporary -hatch cover is no longer used.
This matter is considered closed.
Closed:
Unresolved Item (296/78-30-03) concerned the. insertion of grease-into hydraulic fluid fill fittings on Bergen-Paterson snubber ~ reservoirs.
This problem is known to have occurred on both Units 2 and 3.
The inspector reviewed documentation which showed that all Bergen-Paterson snubbers in all three Units have been inspected for grease by removing the fittings and checking inside the reservoirs. Also a protective ring has been installed on all fittings which prevents insertions of grease through the reservoir fittings. This item is resolved.
.4.
Unresolved items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
.
.9-
...
_
_
_
.
_
!
'
.,
..
i
-
.
!
5.
Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test i
+
A Region Specialist in conjunction with the Resident Inspector witnessed performance of the primary containment integrated leak rate test (ILRT) to determine that the test was conducted in accordance with the requirements of
'
Appendix J to 10 CFR 50, ANSI N45.4, FSAR, ILRT procedure and Technical i
Specification. Selected sampling of the licensee's activities which were l
, inspected included:
(1) review of the test procedure to verify that the procedure was properly approved and conformed to regulatory requirements,
>
(2) observation of test performance to determine test prerequisites were
,
completed, special equipment was installed and calibrated and that appro-i priate data were recorded and analyzed and (3) preliminary evaluation of
'
leakage rate test results to verify that leak rate limits were met.
Per-tinent aspects of the test are discussed in the following paragraphs.
a.
General Observation The inspectors witnessed and reviewed portions of the test preparation, l
containment pressurization, temperature stabilization and data proces-i sing during the period of March 19-23, 1982. The inspector's findings in these areas are as follows:
,
(1) The test was conducted in accordance with an approved procedure maintained at the test control center.
f (2) A sampling of test prerequisites was reviewed and found completed.
l (3) A sampling of plant systems required to maintain test control was reviewed and found completed.
'.
(4) Special instrumentation was reviewed and found installed and
calibrated.
.
.
(5) Venting and draining of specific systems were reviewed and found completed.
,
(6) Data required - for the performance of the containment leak rate -
calculations were recorded at 15 minute intervals.
(7) Problems encountered during the test were described in the test.
j event log.
(8) Certain pressurized gas sources were reviewed for proper isolation
[
.and venting to preclude in-leakage or interference of out-leakage-
.
through containment isolation valves.
-(9) A sampling of valve positions were observed to verify conformance to procedure valve alignment.
-
--
. - -.,
- - - - -
., - -
-.
,_
. -
,,-
^
.
.
..
.
(10) Temperature, pressure, dew point and flow data were recorded, assembled and retained for final evaluation and analysis. A final ILRT report will be submitted to the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.
No problems were identified in review of the above items.
b.
Integrated Leak Rate Test Performance (1) Method The containment leak rate was determined by the mass point analy-sis-and linear regression techniques on a minimum of 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> of data recorded at 15 minute intervals.
Containment pressure was full accident pressure (64 psia). A statistical 95?; upper confi-dence limit (UCL) was calculated.
(2) Test Description and Results
'
The required four hour temperature stabilization was successfully completed at 9:38 p.m. March 20. Air absorption and redistribu-
,
tion appeared stable so the 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> data run was initiated.
The
-
l 24. hour run was successfully completed at 9:38 p.m., March 21.
j Measured values were as follows:
Lam, measured leakage rate 0.322 wt.?; per day
$
95*4 confidence interval 0.006 wt.*4 per day UCL, Ltm + 95*; confidence interval 0.328 wt.*4 per day
.
0.75 La acceptance limit 1.5 wt.?; per day The UCL is well within the acceptance limit.
'(3) Supplemental Test
' Appendix J requires that a supplemental test be - performed to verify the accuracy of the Type A test and the ability of the ILRT instrumentation to measure a change in ' leak rate. A known leak i
rate (Lo) is imposed on the containment and the measured composite leak rate (Lc) must equal, within 0.25 La, the sum of the measured leak rate (Lam) plus the known. leak rate (Lo).
The acceptance criteria _is. expressed as Lo '+ Lam - 0.25La sLes Lo +
Lam + 0.25La.
~
Results from the supplemental test were as follows:
i N
J
-
...
Lo imposed leak 1.685 wt.f. per day
=
Lam measured leak rate (24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />)
0.322 wt.f. per day
=
0.25La (0.25 X 2.0*J)
0.5 wt.?J per day
=
Lc measured composite leak rate 1.79 wt.?; per day
=
Substituting these values into the acceptance criteria shows that Lc meets the specified limits of 1.5*J 51.79"; s2.5*J.
6.
Followup Inspection Items a.
IFI (259-260-296/79-38-01)
Closed: Inspection Followup Item (259-260-296/79-38-01) concerned the reactor building access door interlock which allowed both the inner and outer door to be opened at the same time. This can result in a breach of secondary containment.
The licensee has installed a key card locking device whi h prevents opening both doors at the same time.
This item is clos-d.
b.
Outstanding Item (80-SB-01)
Closed: Outstanding Item (80-SB-01) concerned a survey to determine if International Nuclear Safeguard Corporation (INC) snubbers were instal-led on safety systems at licensed reactor facilities in Region II. A history of INC snubber failures and a lack of regulations requiring inspection and testing of mechanical snubbers orompted the NRC concern as to the operability of these snubbers.
IEB 81-01 now tracks the operability of mechanical snubbers.
In addition, requirements for verification of the operability of mechanical snubbers are being incorporated into facility Technical Specifications.
This item is closed, k