IR 05000320/1978005
| ML19220B370 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 01/12/1978 |
| From: | Caphton D, Higgins J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19220B366 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-320-78-05, 50-320-78-5, NUDOCS 7904250677 | |
| Download: ML19220B370 (6) | |
Text
.
.
.
'
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT Region I Report No.
50-320/78-05 Docket No.
50-320
_
.
B-1 License No. CPPR-66 Priority Category
--
Licensee:
Metrocolitan Edison Comoany P. O. Box 542 Readina, Pennsylvania 19607 Facility Name:
Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 2 Inspection at:
Middletown, Pennsylvania Inspection conduc+ed: January 1-3, 1978
/2h C. N %A Inspectors:
J. C. Higgins, Reactor nspector date signed date signed Approved by:
8f
/
D. L. Caphton, Chief, Nuclear support cate signed Section No. 1, RO&NS Branch Insoection Summary:
1-3, 1978 (Recort No. 50-320/78-05)
Insoection on January Routine, unannounced inspection of containment integrated Areas Insoected_:
leak rate test and previously identified items. The inspection involved 26 inspector hours onsite by one NRC inspector.
Results: No items of noncompliance were identified.
(
l (N 2db l
Region I Fom 12
,, SO42f3 O(,77 (Rev. April 77)
e
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted The below technical and superviscry level personnel were contacted.
R. Carlson, Startup and Test Engineer (UE&C)
A. Dominguey, Shift Test Engineer (GPU)
J. Garrison, Shift Test Engineer (GPU)
S. Poje, Startup Engineer (GPU)
M. Nelson, Technical Engineer (GPU)
S. Tapscott, Project Engineer (Brewer)
R. Toole, Test Superintendent (GPU)
GPU - General Public Utilities Service Corporation UE&C - United Engineers and Constructors Brewer - Brewer Engineering Laboratories 2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findinas (Unresolved) Open Item (320/77-26-20): The licensee has not, as yet, corrected temperatures, humidities or verification test flow-rates for instrument error as required by section III.A.3.(c) of Appendix J.
This item is unresolved.
(Closed) Ur. resolved Item No. (320/77-39-01): The licensee obtaine".
a Volumetrics leak rate monitor with which he ineasured flowrates for the local leak rate tests. *The inspector reviewed the calibration data for this instrument and had no further questions on this item.
(Closed) Unresolved Item No. (320/77-39-02):
The inspector reviewed changes made to procedure TP 151/1 subsequent to inspection 77-39 and determined that the procedure adequately covered the three con-cerns addressed under this item.
(Closed) Inspector Follow Item No. (320/77-39-03):
Based on NRR review and acceptance the licensee's leak rate test program as presented in the FSAR, the h3ndling of the Nuclear Service River Water (NSRW) containment isolation valves is acceptable. This item is closed.
!
7b~249
!
.
.
(Closed) Unresolved Item No. (320/77-39-04):
The licensee's pro-cedure TP 150/3, as executed, satisfactorily incorporated both of the conrnents under this item.
3.
Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT)
a.
Chronology The inspector witnessed the preoperational CILRT at Three Mile Island, Unit 2.
A general chronology of the tent follows:
12/31.0200 Commenced pressurization for CILRT.
1/1 0200 Reactor Building pressurization complete.
Pressure at approximately Pa+0.1 (56.3 psig).
0800 Stabilization period complete.
1100 Initial calculations indicate leakage rate is a'pproximately double the acceptance criteria.
Licensee is conducting leak searches.
"
1330 Several leakage paths isolated or repaired.
Comenced new 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> CILRT.
'
2330 Licensee shifting Reactor Building fan cooler linc up due to possible out-leakage through cooling coils.
1/2 1330 Mass point leakage rate after 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> is 0.0964%/ Day, 95% upper confidence level is 0.1012%/ Day.
1/2 1630 Mass point leakage rate after 27 hours3.125e-4 days <br />0.0075 hours <br />4.464286e-5 weeks <br />1.02735e-5 months <br /> is 0.0906%/ Day.
95% upper confidence level is 0.0952%/ Day.
1730 Superimposed leak rate test comenced.
1/3 0430 Superimposed leak rate test completed satis-factorily.
.
l iiV 250
.
b.
Satisfactory CILRT The inspector independently calculated the CILRT leakage rate using data.from 1330, January 1 to 1630, January 2.
The values obtained indicate that the mass point leakage rate at the 95%
upper confidence level is less than the acceptance criteria of 0.75 La (0.0975%/ Day).
Final acceptance of the test results will be contingent on the conservative additions and calibration corrections discussed below and in paragraph 2.
Therefore, the satisfactory completion of the CILRT is considered unresolved pending these corrections (320/78-05-01).
c.
Local Leak Rate Corrections Artificial leakage barriers were installed on 2 penetrations during the CILRT.
Local leak rate tests must be performed on these penetrations and the results added to the measured leak rate at the 95% upper confidence level in order to determine overall CILRT acceptability.
The 2 penetrations are discussed below. This item is unresclved 'No. 320/78-05-02).
(1) SAV-20 The containment isolation valve SAV-20 did not shut properly due to binding in the operator.
Downstream isolation valves were manually closed to limit leakage.
(2)
R-562C Penetration R-562C is used for sensing Reactor Building pressure.' A portion of the tubing connecting the pene-tration to the pressure detector had been inadvertently removed prior to the CILRT and tape installed over the penetration. The taped penetration was discovered leak-ing during the ?ILRT and was capped.
A local leak rate test must be pc 'ormed after the tubing is reconnected.
d.
Sumo Level Changes If water inleakage from other systems causes the various Reactor Building sump levels to increase, the CILRT will be biased in a non-conservative direction. Therefore, sump level changes must be monitored during the test interval. The licensee had taken sump levels prior to the test but instrumentation for (
Yb'kf!31
..
.
level measurements must be made on containment entry following the test and the results evaluated to determine whether con-se. <ative corrections are required. The levels in question are the Reactor Building Sump Level, Reactor Coolant Drain Tank
.
Level and the Reactor Vessel Level. This item is unresolved
(Item No. 320/78-05-03).
Calibration Records e.
The inspector reviewed calibration records for instrumentation used during the CILRT and had no further questions except for The licensee was the humidity and flowrate instrumentation.
unable to provide calibration records for the Dewcels and flowmeters which were traceable to nationally recognized standards, as required by ANSI N45.5,10 CFR 50 Appendix B (Criterion XII), Three Mile Island Test Instruction 19 (para-graph 3.2.3.1) and the Metropolitan Edison QA Program for Additionally the li-Operations (FSAR paragraph 17.2.17).
censee was unable to show that the Dewtel to Dewpoint conver-
.
sion sheet being used during the test was the proper one for These items are use with the installed instrumentation.
unresolved (No. 320/78-05-04),
f.
Verification Test, Verification test results appear to be satisfactory based on preliminary calculations without instrument calibration cor-rections (discussed in paragraph 2). The verification test acceptance criteria are:
(Li + Lam
.25 La) < Lvm < (Li + Lam +.25 La) where:
--
Li = Superimposed leak rate = 6.71 SCFM = 0.0955%/ Day
,
--
Lam = Measured containment leak rate during CILPT
=
0.0472%/ Day (using data only from 8:30 to 1/:00 on
--
January 2,1978, the last 8.5 hours5.787037e-5 days <br />0.00139 hours <br />8.267196e-6 weeks <br />1.9025e-6 months <br /> of the CILRT)
La = Maximum allowable leak rate = 0.13%/ Day
--
Lvm =. Measured leak rate during verification test =
--
0.1359%/ Day Thus; 0.1102 < 0.1359 < 0.1752
--
(
,'W 252
.
.
.
g.
Acceotable CILRT Areas Except as noted in other sections of this report,,he following areas were identified as acceptable.
(1) Witnessing of licensee data taken during the CILRT, to verify proper manning, qualifications and performance.
(2)
Independent calculation of leakage rates from raw data.
(3) Check of 15 penetrations to ensure valves were actually aligred as on the valve linups and that proper venting and draining per Appendix J had been achieved.
(4) Verification that test prerequisites were met.
(5) Observation of the performance of test and control room personnel during the CILRT, including determination cf proper manning with qualified personnel, proper use of procedures and maintenance of Shift Test Engineer Log.
(6) Witnessing of quality control and plant suparvision participation in.the test.
4.
Unresolved Items Items about which more.nformation is required to determine ac-ceptability are considered unresolved.
Paragraphs 2, 3.b, 3.c, 3.d and 3.e of this report contain unres0lved items; i
5.
Exit Interview A meeting was held at the conclusion of the inspection with Mr.
I M. Nelson to discuss the inspection findings including the un-l
_
resolved items.
l (
'j b~'dii3 i
!
i