IR 05000324/1986014

Insp Repts 50-324/86-14 & 50-325/86-13 on 860430-0506.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test & Followup of Previously Identified Items

ML20198P089
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	05/16/1986
From:	Jape F, Macdonald J, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20198P064	List: IR 05000324/1986014 ML20198P060
References
50-324-86-14, 50-325-86-13, NUDOCS 8606060234
Download: ML20198P089 (6)

Text

. . . . . _ _ . . _ _ _ ._ . . _ . .. __ . _ . _ _ _ _ _

.

.

UNITED STATES

,

/ p Keego NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

l y n REGION 11 g

., j 101 MARIETTA STREET, , 2 ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323 l

,

!

s...+/+

l Report Nos.: 50-325/86-13 and 50-324/86-14  ;

l Licensee: Carolina Power and Light Company i P. O. Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602

"

Docket Nos.: 50-325 and 50-324 License Nos.: DPR-71 and DPR-62

'

Facility Name: Brunswick 1 and 2

Inspection Conducted

April 3,0 - May 6, 1986

Inspectors

, , /3) [ N at v d' ~ /6'- [d j gjG.B.Macdonald , Date Signed Y. $ &tw 5* -/ T ~ Yb H. L. Whitener

~

i Date Signed

'

Approved by: #4 h F. Jape, Section Chief, Test Pr((ram'Section Date Signed j Engineering Branch

, Division of Reactor Safety

i i SUMMARY

i Scope: This routine, announced inspection was onsite, witnessing the containment integrated leakage rate test and followup of a previously identified inspector followup item Results: No violations or deviations were identified, i

!

(

!

!

1 .

!

l i

b j i 8606060234 060020 PDR ADOCK 05000324 G- PDR

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

. - , .- - .- ..-. .

.

.

!

REPORT DETAILS I

i i

l Persons Contacted

.

,

Licensee Employees

• Blinson, ISI, Engineer

*K. E. Enzor, Director, Regulatory Compliance

! *B. E. Hinkley, Manager, Technical Support

• M. Hogle, Engineering Supervisor

*R. M. Poulk, Senior Specialist, Regulatory Compliance

• M. Tucker, Engineering Supervisor

• L. W. Wheatley, ISI, Project Engineer

Other licensee employees contacted included leak rate test personnel.

'

Other Organizations

• J. Blessing, Gilbert / Commonwealth In *R. Shirk, Gilbert / Commonwealth In NRC Resident Inspectors I '

• W. Ruland L. Garner 1 * Attended exit interview

!

! Exit Interview

!

>

The inspection scope and finuings were summarized on May 6, 1986, with those

persons indicated in paragraph I above. The inspector described the areas

'

inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any .of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio l Unresolved Items l

l Unresolved items were rot identified during the inspection.

!

i j

i

. _ _ _ _ _ . _ .___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

,

,

,

.

l

5. Type A Test Sequence and Description - Unit 2 (70313 and 70307)

Pressurization of the containment commenced at 1010 hours0.0117 days <br />0.281 hours <br />0.00167 weeks <br />3.84305e-4 months <br /> on May 2,198 Containment test pressure of 50 psig was attained at 2020 hours0.0234 days <br />0.561 hours <br />0.00334 weeks <br />7.6861e-4 months <br /> on May 2, 1986. At 2100 hours0.0243 days <br />0.583 hours <br />0.00347 weeks <br />7.9905e-4 months <br />, the four-hour temperature stabilization bega At 0200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> on May 3, 1986, the licensee met the containment stabilization

,

criteria as established in BN-TOP-1 1972, Revision 1, Section 2.3.A.1, which l states: "The rate of change of average temperature is less than 1.0 F/ hour averaged over the last two hours."

The licensee began the ILRT at 0200 hours0.00231 days <br />0.0556 hours <br />3.306878e-4 weeks <br />7.61e-5 months <br /> on May 3, 1986. By 0800 hours0.00926 days <br />0.222 hours <br />0.00132 weeks <br />3.044e-4 months <br /> on May 3,1986, an excessive leakage rate of approximately 0.8 wt. %/ day had been calculated, at which time an extensive leakage investigation was initiated. The following valves were identified as having leakage paths:

, E11-F024A E11-F0248 CAC-V17 CAC-V5 CAC-X20A The leakage rate remained excessive, at approximately 0.5 wt. %/ day, for the next 26 hours3.009259e-4 days <br />0.00722 hours <br />4.298942e-5 weeks <br />9.893e-6 months <br /> as the licensee evaluated the leakage survey results and planned corrective actions. The licensee believed that the pressure in the torus was slightly higher than the pressure in the drywell, thus affecting the leakage rate results. At 1032 Fours on May 4, 1986, the CAC-V5 and CAC-V6 valves were opened to equalize the torus and drywell pressures and at :

1045 hours0.0121 days <br />0.29 hours <br />0.00173 weeks <br />3.976225e-4 months <br />, the ILRT was restarte The leakage rate was reduced but stabilized at approximately 0.44 wt. %/ day which is above the allowable <

leakage rate of 0.375 wt. %/ da Another leakage investigation was initiated at 1545 hours0.0179 days <br />0.429 hours <br />0.00255 weeks <br />5.878725e-4 months <br />. The licensee evaluated the results and began to pressurize between the inboard and outboard main steam isolation valves on each main steam line in an attempt to locate the leakage path or paths. The lines were pressurized one at a time to a pressure of 48 psig to prevent inleakage to the containment volume. At 2300 hours0.0266 days <br />0.639 hours <br />0.0038 weeks <br />8.7515e-4 months <br />, valves CAC-X20A and CAC-V16 were rechecked. CAC-V16, an offset butterfly valve, was found to be leaking by and CAC-X20A, a check valve, was not fully seated and failed to hold the pressure. At 0035 hours4.050926e-4 days <br />0.00972 hours <br />5.787037e-5 weeks <br />1.33175e-5 months <br /> on May 5, 1986, the volume between CAC-V16 and CAC-X20A was pressurized to 48 psig, which fully seated CAC-X20A, isolating the leakage path through CAC-V16. The 48 psig was maintained between the valves until the test was terminate At 0100 hours0.00116 days <br />0.0278 hours <br />1.653439e-4 weeks <br />3.805e-5 months <br /> on May 5, 1986, the ILRT was restarted, and at 0900 hours0.0104 days <br />0.25 hours <br />0.00149 weeks <br />3.4245e-4 months <br />, the ILRT met all the acceptance criteria established in BN-TOP-1, Section 2. for test termination noted below:

<

-- _ _- _ _ _ _

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

l . i

-

1 l

'

.

3 l

'

l Criteria The trend report based on total time calculations was less than maximum leakage rate allowable (Note: BN-TOP-1, Section 2.3.B.1, indicated the maximum allowable leakage is L However, 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, which was issued subsequent to BN-TOP-1, reduces this to 0.75La. In cases I where there is conflict between test methods and the i regulations, the regulations govern). i

'

i Seventy-five percent of the maximum allowable leakage rate

. (0.75 La) for Unit 2 is 0.375 wt. %/ da The preliminary test results indicated the leakage rate calculated to be i 0.2399 wt. %/ day which was obtained by adding the Type C

'

penalty of 0.003 wt. %/ day to the measured leak rate of i 0.2369 wt. %/ da i i

i Criteria The end of the test upper confidence limit for the calculated l l leak rate based on total time was less than 0.75La (note

discussion in Criteria B.1) including the Type B and C

! leakage penalties. The upper confidence limit for the i j calculated leak rate based on total time was 0.2399 w ;

%/ da (Note discussion in Criteria B.1). The as-found .

, Icakage penalty calculations were not complete. They will be  !

included in the special 90-day ILRT repor ;

!

!

Criteria The mean of the measured leak rates based on total time

calculations over the last points was below 0.75La (note l discussions in Criteria B.1).

l Criteria Data was recorded at equal 15-minute interval I I Criteria The 8.00 hour0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> test provided more than the minimum (20) data sets require by BN-TOP- ! Criteria The test duration of 8.00 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> exceeded the minimum

requirements of BN-TOP- l

! At 0900 hours0.0104 days <br />0.25 hours <br />0.00149 weeks <br />3.4245e-4 months <br /> on May 5, 1986, the one hour stabilization period prior to the -

supplemental test was started. At 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br />, the supplemental test bega i At 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br /> on May 5,1986, the supplemental test acceptance criteria of l BN-TOP-1 Section 2.3.C was me Criteria At 1000 hours0.0116 days <br />0.278 hours <br />0.00165 weeks <br />3.805e-4 months <br /> on May 5, 1986, stabilization for the  :

superimposed verification test was completed. The stabili-  !

zation period of one hour met requirement of BN-TOP- !

Criteria The verification test was concluded at 1400 hours0.0162 days <br />0.389 hours <br />0.00231 weeks <br />5.327e-4 months <br /> on May 5 l and met the minimum required duration of 4.00 hours0 days <br />0 hours <br />0 weeks <br />0 months <br /> (one-half

'

l'

the Type A test duration).

Criteria The resulting measured verification leakage agreed within 25%

of the calculated leakag '

'

'

l

____ _ ___ _ - __ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ __ __ _ - _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __-_____ - ___ _ _ _ ___ - ___ _ ___-__

_ _ . _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . __ _ . . _ . _ . - . . _ _ _ . . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . . _ _ _

.

.

l Synopsis of Unit 2 Type A Test l

l (May 2-5,.1986) -

l May 2, 1986 1010 Commenced Pressurization 2020 Attained test pressure 2100 Stabilization period began  !

i j May 3, 1986 l 0200 Commenced Type A test 0800 Excessive leakage rate calculated, leakage investigation initiated 1100 The following valves found with leakage paths:

E11-F024A E11-F024B CAC-V17 CAC-V15 CAC-X20A

'

May 4, 1986 1032 Opened CAC-V5 and CAC-V6 to equalize torus and drywell pressure Test restarted ,

1545 Excessive leakage rate still calculated, another leakage investi-gation initiated 1715 Began individually pressurizing between MSIVs 2300 Rechecked CAC-X20A and CAC-V16, both were leaking b May 5, 1986

,

0035 Pressurized volume between CAC-X20A and CAC-V16 to 48 psig leakage path isolated 0100 Test restarted 0900 ILRT portion of PT 20.5 was completed satisfactorily. Verifica-tion test stabilization commenced 1000 Verification test commenced 1400 Verification test completed satisfactorily

.

--

I l t

.

.

5 l l

,

'

Test Results (70323)

The unit 2 Type A test performed on May 2-5, 1986, is considered a failed test, in that it was necessary for the licensee to pressurize the volume between CAC-V16 and CAC-X20A in order to fully seat CAC-X20A and isolate the leakage path. This constituted a manipulation of the containment boundary '

which fails to meet the acceptance criteria of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J, paragraph III.A.I.(a), which states that during the performance of the test, l no repairs or adjustments shall be made so that the containment can be tested in as close to the "as is" condition as possible. The licensee concurred with the test result and has agreed to retest valves CAC-V16 and .

CAC-X20A ano perform necessary repairs to ensure they operate properly

'

before startup. The results of these tests will be included in the 90-day special ILRT repor Subsequent Type A Test Schedule This failure was the fourth consecutive Unit 2 Type A failur The licensee acknowledged that the subsequent test dates must be in ;

accordance with Appendix J, paragraph III.A.6.(b) which states that if two consecutive Type A tests fail to meet the acceptance test criteria, a Type A test shall be performed at each plant shutdown for refueling or approxi-mately every 18 months, whichever occurs first, until two consecutive Type A tests meet the acceptance criteri :

6. Previously Identified Inspector Followup Items (IFI)

(0 pen) 325, 324/85-31-01, The inspectors reviewed the status of the CP&L ,

report to NRR evaluating and justifying the testing of isolation valves in the reverse or non-LOCA directio The report was being reviewed by the Regulatory Compliance Department. This item will remain open pending submittal to and response from NR !

l

e m.