IR 05000259/1987025

Insp Repts 50-259/87-25,50-260/87-25 & 50-296/87-25 on 870608-12.No Violations,Deviations or Unresolved Item Noted. Major Areas Inspected:Followup Insp of Violations,Unresolved Items & Inspector Followup Items

ML20236C742
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	07/15/1987
From:	Jape F, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20236C691	List: IR 05000259/1987025 ML20236C688
References
50-259-87-25, 50-260-87-25, 50-296-87-25, NUDOCS 8707300175
Download: ML20236C742 (5)

Text

_____

gp rec UNITED STATES

'g oq'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

"

[, -

n REGION 11

'g- j 101 MARIETTA STREcT, * '* ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

%

4.....$

Report Nos.: 50-259/87-25, 50-260/87-25, and 50-296/87-25 Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN' 37402-2601 Docket Nos.: 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296 License Nos.: DPR-33, DPR-52,

, and DPR-68 Facility Name: Browns Ferry 1, 2, and 3 Inspection Conducted: June 8-12, 1987 Inspector: N I d)N ~ d 7- /4 -7'7 h. L. Whitener Date Signed Approved by: N D 7 /[/

F. Jape, Section Chief (/ / Daf,e Signed'

Engineering Branch Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection was in the areas of followup inspection of violations, unre' solved items (UNR), and inspector followup items (IFI),

Results: No violations, deviations, or unresolved items were identifie "

8707300175 B70722 PDR ADOCK 05000259 G PDR

- _ _ - - i

_ _ _ - - _ _ - -_- --. .

s

'N '

'

( >

'

x 1 L .

,

,,

REPORT DETAILS

- l '. Persons Contacted R. Baker, Mechanical Engineer P. P. Carier, Manager, Compliance

• C. S. Hsieh, Compliance Licensing Engineer R. , Laverne',-Compliance Licensing Engineer

'*R. L. Lewis,. Plant Manager .

.

'C. Madden, Compliance Licensing Engineer

• J. D. Martin, Assistant P,lant Manage lC. Miller, Leak Rate Test Group, OES

• D.LC. Mims, Superintendent, Technical Support Services B. ' Morris, Assistant, Site Licensing Manager -

G. Morris, Browns Ferry Nuclear ' Plant Regulatory Licensing Engineer

• K. R.' Mulling,: Mechanical Enginee .

'*J. Sparks, Supervi.sor, System Engineering

• B. E. Worthy, Jr... Supervisor, Mechanical Test OtherJ11censee ' employees contacted included engineers, technicians, and office personne NRC Resident Inspectors G. Paulk, Senior: Resident Inspector

• C Patterson, Resident Inspector C. Brooks, Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview Exit. Interview LThe inspection ' scope and findings were summarized on June 1;2,1987, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above-. The inspector described in detail the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. No new

' items were identified during this inspectio . The licensee did not

' identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or re' iewed v by

the' inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action'on Previous Enforcement Matters- ( Cl o sed): Violation 50-259/83-56-01 -concerned a failure to functionally test an additional 20% of the snubbers in the group in of which. two snubbers failed to pass the functional test. The licensee's response, dated February 17, 1984, to the Notice of Violation issued January 17, 1984, indicated that the error occurred because of confusion in the use of the words " category" and " group" in the surveillance instruction. This confusion led to testing an

- _ _ _ - _ _ __-_-__-_ -

% 1

.y'

.

,

' additional 20% of the snubbers in th'e system in which the failures

' occurred rather than 20% of the grou 'The' as-found functional test.results were reviewed for an additional 15' snubbers which were tested on December 18, 1983, to meet the 20%

requirement. No additional failures were identified in these. test The inspector also confirmed that a precautionary statement L was included in SI 4.6.H-1 and SI 4.6.H-2 to explain that the words

" category" and " group" should be considered interchangeabl This item is close (Closed): Unresolved Items 50-260/83-06-01 and 50-296/83-06-01 concerned' piping and valve. flanges in the containment boundary which could. not be locally tested. This condition was identified for 14 flanges in each unit by the licensee who committed to install double o-ring seals. and test connections in each flang The flange ]

modifications and testing were previously reviewed and closed for Unit 1 (See IE' Report 50-259/83-56). During the inspection, the-inspector confirmed that local leak rate testing.of valve flanges has been incorporated into the surveillance instruction SI 4.7. A.2.g-2,

" Primary Containment Testable Penetrations". The inspector . al so reviewed. the test results for local leak rate testing of these flanges completed October 1984.for Unit 3 and June 1987 for Unit The inspector concluded that the modifications have been completed, the-leak paths have.been tested, and.the procedures have been revised to' ensure that these flanges are tested periodically in the local leak rate progra This item is now closed for Units 1, 2 and (Closed): Unresolved Item 50-259/83-56-02 concerned whether or not Code Case N-236 is applicable to the containment boundar This matter was discussed in a meeting of TVA, NRR, and Region II personnel at Bethesda on August 28, 1985. NRR agreed that Code Case N-236 can be used to defer leak rate testing of modifications to the containment boundary in a limited manneh as specified in the Cod However, Code Case N-236 is not to be used to defer leak rate testing where it is possible to perform a local leak rate test.

l This NRC position was documented in TVA minutes of the August 28, 1985 meeting, which were transmitted to BWR Project Directorate No. 2, by letter, dated February 24, 1986. The inspector's minutes l of the August 28 meeting, dated September 10, 1985, also confirmed .

this NRC position. The inspector further noted that the text of Code !

Case N-236 is substantially incorporated into paragraph IV. A. of a proposed revision to Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 which was published for comment in the Federal Register on October 29, 198 This item is close ]

l l

r 4

$

L <

t ___--___-_-_-___a

~

'

"T;[~ ,

.j '\' >

.

n 3

,

,

m

. . Unresolved Items

' Unresolved items were'not identified during this inspectio . Followup Inspection (92701)

'During this: inspection, a number of items on the outstanding . items list-were reviewed to verify adequate closecu This inspection included the following: (Closed): Inspector. Followup Items. 50-260/83-06-02 and

< 50-296/83-06-02' concerned ~ Type C testing of certain . containment instruments and portions of the instrument lines which were isolated

, during the Type A test. This problem was identified for all three

' units and was closed out for Unit I during' a previous inspection (See' ,

IE Report 50-259/83-56). The licensee developed, a special test procedure, BF ST. 8306, " Reactor Protection ' System Leak Rate Test". 'j

.

'

.The inspector reviewed portions of the test procedure'and the test results for Unit 2 completed March 7, 1983,l and Unit' 3 completed October 11, 198 The special test was a one-time-only tes Instruments ' and instrument lines will be tested during the Type A

,

' test in the' future. The inspector verified that the surveillance instruction SI 4.7.A.2 for Type A testing contains the correct valve h alignment for Reactor Protection System instrument valves in step 7. 3. 24.-l .

This item is now closed for Units 1, 2 and Inspector Followup Item 50-260/83-06-03 concerned the

'

l (Closed):

requirement for the licensee to submit his proposed Type A' test

. schedule for NRC review as a. result of the Unit 2 February 1983 Type A test failure. The licensee submitted the " Reactor Building Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test" report for the Unit 2, Cycle 4

-

test ~ to the NRC for review. The proposed schedule required by Paragraph III. A.6.(a) of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 was included on 1 Page 4 of this document. The report stated that the next Type A test will be . conducted July 1986 followed by another Type A test in May 1989. Specifically, based on the corrective action to be taken and' the fact. that this is the first Type A test failure on Unit 2, the licensee proposed to remain on the 3.3 year test frequency. In a letter to NRR', dated April 22, 1983, Region II management concurred with the licensee's proposed test schedul This item is close ' (Closed): Inspector Followup Items 50-259/85-50-01, 50-260/85-50-01 and 50-296/85-50-01 concerned updating plant containment penetration

.,

"

drawings to show the current plant configuration and establishing an official listing of containment penetration The up to date containment penetration listing, as maintained in the Type A test procedures, was used to identify penetration drawing discrepancies, i

I a

-- -

. o

-

7 p r 4 ,

I l

.These' discrepancies were. verified by.. system walkdown and transmitted to; Design Services .for drawing revisions by a letter from the' Plant o: Manager,; dated December 13,1985, The inspector reviewed the list of L discrepancies ' and verified, for a selected sample, . that the plant )

drawings have been revised and updated. Further, a memorandum from- j the' Technical Services Sup'erintendent, dated January 5,1987, states - i that the Mechanical Test Section verified the accuracy of the' revised drawing I

" An. official; listing of containment penetrations is' now incorporated I into Site Director Standard Practice (SDSP) 17.1 as Appendix A. .This appendix _ lists the penetration number, descriptive title, isolation-components, type of. leak rate test and test medium. The licensee is also currently in- the process of drafting . a revised Technical Specification.for containment' leak rate The inspector conclu'ded that penetration drawings have been revised to r' eflect the current conditions and an official penetration listing ,

,

has been establishe This item is closed for all three unit . Review of Plant Status On June 10, 1987, licensee representatives gave the inspector a briefing on actions taken, subsequent to the August 28, 1985, meeting with the NRC, to bring the containment leakage rate program into compliance with Appendix J to 10 CFR 50. In the meeting, TVA identified plant modifica-tions to be made in order to comply with Appendix J and . stated that all modifications would be complete for Units 1 and 3 before startup of these units. However, the long lead time involved for design work, material procurement, and installation for some of these proposed modifications would have an adverse impact on the Unit 2 startup schedule anticipated for February 198 At the meeting, it was decided that the licensee should determine the specific exemptions needed to support the unit startup and submit a request for exemption to NRR for review. The licensee submitted the exemption request on November 20, 198 Due to extension of the Unit 2 restart schedule, the licensee requested the NRC to defer review of the exemption request on September 30, 198 )

At this time, the licensee indicated that design review and procurement is complete for all modifications for Unit Field installation is beginning and s'cheduled to be complete about August 198 l l

.