IR 05000311/1978029
| ML18078A297 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Salem  |
| Issue date: | 09/11/1978 |
| From: | Caphton D, Higgins J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18078A295 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-311-78-29, NUDOCS 7810250052 | |
| Download: ML18078A297 (7) | |
Text
'.
..
,:..
....
...
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I
- Report No. 50-311/78-29
- ~*
Docket No. _ __..5..,.0_.-3....,li..i.1 __
License No~
CPPR~53 Priority ------
Licensee:
- public Service Electric & Gas. C Park Pl ace*
Newarg, New Jersey 07101 Facility Name:
Salem Nuclear Generating Station Unit 2 Inspection at:
Hancocks Bridge,. Approved by:
~~pector o~tifn, Chief Nuclear Support Section No. 1, RO&NS Branch Inspection Summary:
Category -------
8-1 date signe f;7r d'ate signed 9/7/;r date signed
'1/?br date signed
- Inspection on August ?2-?-4-~ 31,_19.78 (Report Na.* 50.-311178-29 Areas Inspected:
Routine unannounced inspection by regional based inspectors of containment leak rate testing, pipe support and restraint systems and preservice testing. The inspection involved 44 inspector-hours on site by -J:hree NRC regional based inspectors and 15 hours1.736111e-4 days <br />0.00417 hours <br />2.480159e-5 weeks <br />5.7075e-6 months <br /> by a regional based superviso *
Results:
No items of noncompliance were identifie _97910 z~-oos Region I Fann l 2 (Rev. April 77)
.....
....
- .**.
....
DETAILS Persons Contacted The below technical and supervisory level personnel were contacte Public Service Electric & Gas C *S. Chawaga, Project QC Engineer
- Y. Contractor, Site QA Engineer
- J. Cox, Asst Startup Engineer
- F. Diaferio, QC_ Test & Startup Group Head J. Flynn-, Test Engineer (Energy Laboratory)
- R. Griffith9 Senior Staff Engineer, QA
- E. Meyer, Project QA Engineer
- P. String, QA/QC-Coordinator
- O *. Tauber, Site QA Engineer G *. Traylor, Test Engineer (Westinghouse Startup)
United Engineers and Constructors
W. Bloemer, Hanger Superintendent (Auxiliary Building) Brown~ Hanger Superintendent (Containment)
R. DiStephano, Asst Piping Superintendent M. Juister, Mechanical Test Engineer L. McGregor, Mechanical Group Supervisor
- R. Phelps, Field Superintendent, QC D. Snyder, Project Engineer W. Staubmuller, Asst Chief, Mechanical Design
- E. Walsh, Asst Field Superintendent, QC
- denotes those present at the exit interview The inspector also talked with and interviewed several members of the QA and QC staffs, construction personnel and test/startup personne.
Preservice Testing The inspector discussed with licensee personnel their plans for assembling data in perfonning baseline measurements under Subsections IWP and IWV of Section XI to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Cod Under these subsections for testing of pumps and valves the licensee plans to collect preservice data and organize his program for implementation when plant operation commence *
- ~
..
- -------**----~---****-**-----------*-~*** -**~ -*
- - ---*M* *****-~**- * *** *+ --*****-----**-
+**
3 Local Leak Rate 'Testing (LLRT) Test Program The inspector reviewed the licensee's program for preoperational Type B and C local leak rate testing. This review included Startup Procedures (SUP) DTP-30-LRT-l 9-nd 2 dated July 10, 1978 and August 4, 1978 respectively, and some completed test results from these procedure The inspector had the below comments on program conten ( 1) Type C Retest The c~rrent LLRT program for containment isolation valves (CIV's) will serve as a construction verification test, preoperational Type C test and operational Technical Specification Type C test to demonstrate containment integrity. If maintenance is performed on a valve after the initial test is completed, the validity of using that test to demonstrate containment. integrity is brought into question. The curren*1;. program has no provision for retesting valves following maintenance. This item is unresolved pending the establishment of some provision for a Type C retest after maintenance (311/78-29-01).
(2) * Test, Vent. and Drain Lines Test, Vent, and Drain lines, coming off lines penetrating the containment, between the containment isolation valves, provide a path for flow to bypass containment isolation valve Valves in these lines constitute containment isolation valves in themselves, and therefore require local leak rate testin These connections need not be tested, provided:
(a)
(b)
(c)
The 1 in es are 1 11 in diameter or 1 ess; There are two leakage barriers (2 valves, valve and a cap, etc); and, The barriers are under administrative controls to ensure closur The licensee currently does not test valves in these lines, therefore this item is unresolved pending establishment of the administrative controls for times when containment integrity is required (311/78-29-02).
(3)
Reverse Direction Testing The licensee currently rype C tests several CIV's with pressure applied in a direction opposite to that which would occur during the Design Basis Acciden **
--..
-
---** --.-. -~- *- -
-*~-.. -*-----*- ---***--*------------
*-------*---~----~ ----*---- ------------* -----*--*-----* -----**** This testing is permitted by Section III C.l of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 provided the tests will provide equivalent or more conservative results. This item is unresolved pending documentation by the licensee of the conservatism of the reverse directi.on*tests used (311/78-29-03).
Type C Test Procedure Based on the review of SUP-DTP-30-LRT-2, "Reactor Containment Type C Leak Rate Test
, the inspector had the following comments:
(1) Draining Appendix J and step 9.2.3 of the procedure requires draining of both sides of CIV' s. being* tested. A sampling of valve-lineups for individual CIV tests revealed that not all were completely drained of water (e.g. Penetrations 18,. 49 and 54). This is unresolved pending review of the valve lineups-by the licensee and correction to ensure complete draining prior to testing..
(2) *oownstream Venting ln order to ensure that the CIV being tested sees a differential pressure of at least Pa during the full test, the volume downstream of the CIV must be vented to atmosphere. Not all of the valve lineups reviewed provided this downstream vent (e.g. Penetrations 49, 54, and E22).
This item is unresolved pending review of the valve lineups by the licensee and correction to ensure all lineups are vented downstrea (3)
Boundary Valve Leakage Certain CIV tests encompass a large test volume and have many valves on the test volume boundar If any of these valves leak, the test is difficult to complete and pro-cedural changes are generally require The procedure
- currently gives no guidance if problems of this type are encountere If the primary test method is unsuccessful, the other methods used must be verified to provide conservative resu1t These items are designated as Unresolved Item (311/78-29-04).
.!J..
.. "":
-
...
5 Test Witness On August 30,. 1978, the inspector witnessed the Type C leakage rate tests performed on containment isolation valves 2 NT 32 (penetration 21 B), N2 Supply to Safety Injection Accummul ators and 21CS48, 2lC54 (penetrations 43, 44) Containment Spray lines. The inspector verified that: the test was perfonned in accordance with the procedure by qualified test personnel; temporary producure changes had been properly approved and incorporated; instrumentation used in the test was calibrated; and valve lineups, including vents, were correc The tests identified leakage in excess of procedural acceptance criteria for all three valves tested, requiring repairs and subsequent retests at ~ 1 ater dat No items. of noncompliance were* identifie Instrumentation The' licensee is currently using 3 Volumetrics leak Rate Monitors for measuring leakage rates during Type B and C testing. The inspector reviewed calibration dates showing traceability to the National Bureau of Standards.
Two of these units (serial Nos. l 25 and 141) had no low range. seal e ( 0-20 SCCM), yet the 1 i censee was recording 1 eakage: rates in this range from these machine Additionally, the information* reviewed did not specify the calibration condition Based on the inspector's questi ans,. the licensee contacted the vendor, who stated vi a telephone that the Units could detect leakage in the 0-20 SCCM range, however the. accuracy would be +2% of Full Scale vice the nonnally guaranteed +1% of Full Scal The vendors repre-sentative also verbally gave the calibration conditions. This i.tem is unresolved* pending receipt and review of found documen-tation of the above (311/78-29~07). Type C Test on RHR Valves The inspector noted that the valves on the RHR suction line from the containment sump (21 SJ 44 and 22 SJ 44) are not included in the licensee's Type C leakage rate test progra Appendix J to 10 CFR 50 states that. valves that are required to operate intermittently under postaccident conditions should be Type C teste The licensee's representative was unable to provide justification for not Type C testing these valves during the inspection. This is an unresolved item (311/78-29-08).
. j
- Containment Liner Weld Channels
- . The inspector discussed. testing of the containment 1 iner welds with the licensee 1s representative Some of these welds have test channels installed over them and have been individually leak teste The inspector reviewed a sampling of this dat The inspector also stated that during the containment integrated leak rate test any weld. channels installed should be open to containment so that the liner welds -are fully tested at this tim The licensee 1 s repres*entative replied that test plugs would be removed and that all weld channels would be vented. Pipe Hangers and Supports Piping Support Inspection An inspection was conducted of* a random sample. of pipe supports, restraints and snubbers on the following systems; safety injection, pressure -relief, residual heat removal and chemical and volume-control, all of which were at ambient temperatur The* piping support systems were verified against design drawing With exception of the below items no discrepancies were identified *
(1)
Spring *Hanger Settings *
The. inspector noted during. his tour that the spring hangers settings could be read in several wa This could lead to a difference in setting of a significant amount~ Upon questioning licensee personnel, the inspector learned that common practice was to read the spring side of the disc; but that this was not. delineated in a written procedure.* The inspector-also: verified this rnethorl :
of reading with the rnanafacture This item is unresolved pending establishment of procedural controls for setting of spring hangers. (311/78-29-05).
(2)
Disassembled Hangers During several tours of the site the inspector noted several disassembled hangers on apparently completed*
systems. Discussions with licensee personnel indicated that hangers may be disassembled after construction is completed for various reasons, such as maintenance on nearby components, nondestructive testing, et These hangers would be tracked by the cognizant UE and C Test Engineer and reassembled by Test Group craft personnel.
,
......
-~
. <<..
-....
5.. T The inspector noted that the* method of :tracking these hangers was often only verbal and that craft personnel, when reassembling hangers, did not always use design drawings *.. * Additionally,* there was no scheduled verification to ensure hangers were installed precisel.y per design.
The Preoperational Testing Turnover (POTI) would identify major discrepancies but might not pick out minor dev.iations..
This item is unresolved pending licensee review to determine the extent of. the prob 1 em and poss i b 1 e corrective measures. (311/78-29-06).
- Test Program*
The inspector reviewed draft procedures for preoperational testing and inspection of pipe supports and discussed the p 1 anned program for hot functional testing with 1 i censee personne The test program includes: pl ans to measure and record both cold: and hot settings for safety related spring hangers. and snubbers. Additionally there-will be measurements*
and.evaluations performed. for each approximately 100°F increase during the' hot* functional tes *
Unresolved Items Items about which more information is required* to determine accept-ability are considered unresolve Paragraphs 3~.a, 3.b, 3.d, and 4.a. of this report contain unresolved item Exit Interview At the inspection's end the inspectors held a meeting (see Detail 1 *
for attendees) to discuss the inspection scope and findings. The unresolved items were identified.