IR 05000333/1987013

Insp Rept 50-333/87-13 on 870406-09.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Procedure Review,Test Witnessing & Preliminary Results Evaluation of Periodic Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test.Tables Encl

ML20214J308
Person / Time
Site:	FitzPatrick
Issue date:	05/12/1987
From:	Anderson C, Joe Golla NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I)
To:
Shared Package
ML20214J305	List: IR 05000333/1987013 ML20214J303
References
50-333-87-13, NUDOCS 8705280006
Download: ML20214J308 (13)

Text

,

..

..

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION I

Report No. 87-13 Docket No. 50-333 License No. OPR-59 Licensee: New York Power Authority P.O. Box 41 Lycoming, New York 13093 Facility Name: James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant Inspection ~At: Scriba, New York Inspection Conducted: April 6 - 9, 1987 T

Inspectors: o 9 /'2 '6'7 e by Gol ,R r Engineer date f//L 17

'

Approved by: #.

C11ffoH J. (Anderson, Chief 'date .

Plant Systems Section, EB Inspection Summary:

Inspection on April 6-9, 1987 (Inspection Report No~. 50-333/87-13).

Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced inspection of procedure review,, test'

witnessing and preliminary results evaluation of periodic containmen integrated leak rate tes Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

i .

..

8705280006 870518 ;.

PDR ADOCK 0500033 O PDR .x

- _ - .

_. _ ___-____

.

.

Details 1.0 Persons Contacted New York Power Authority R. Converse, NYPA Resident Manager

• J. Greene, Licensing Engineer

• D. Holliday, Quality Assurance H. Keith, Instrumentation and Control Superintendent

• D. Lindsey, Operations Superintendent

• R. Liseno, Planning Superintendent

• R. Matthews, Instrumentation and Control

• R. Patch, Quality Assurance Superintendent D. Squires, Control Room Shift Supervisor

• P. Swinburne, Performance Engineer V. Walz, Technical Services Superintendent Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation

• J. Busa, Advisory Engineer

• 0. Darry, Supervisor Advisory Engineer

• R. Samson, Advisory Engineer Nuclear Regulatory Commission A. Luptak, Sr. Resident Inspector

• Indicates those present at the exit meeting held April 9, 1987 2.0 Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT)

During the period April 7 - 9, 1987 a periodic containment integrated leak rate test was performed at the James A. Fitzpatrick Nuclear Power Plant. The test was performed in accordance with operations surveillance test procedure No. F-ST-39F, Revision 6. The analysis method (absolute)

consisted of determining the mass of air in the containment from

,

temperature and pressure data utilizing the ideal gas law. Containment

,

air mass was calculated at regular 20 minute intervals. The leak rate I was then determined using a straight line least squares analysis. This I method of analysis (Mass Point) is required by JAFNPP Technical Specifications. A Total Time analysis was also done for comparison with the Mass Point results.

L The test was performed with containment isolation valves and pressure boundaries in an "as-left" condition. Upon completion of the test, subsequent computation of the "as-found" leak rate will indicate a test failure in that condition. This is due to excessive "as-found" local leakage through containment penetrations and in particular through drywell inerting and purge system penetration No. X31AD. This was reported earlier in Region I Inspection Report No. 50-333/87-0 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _

__

.

.

The purpose of the inspection was to ascertain that the CILRT was conducted in compliance with the requirements and commitments referenced in the following sections,'and that the "as-left" test results meet the acceptance criteria specified in the station procedures and Appendix J, 10 CFR 50. The inspector reviewed the test procedure and witnessed preparations and various portions of the periodic containment integrated leak rate tes .1 References

JAFNPP Technical Specifications Section CFR: Part 50, Appendix J, Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water Cooled Power Reactor Final safety analysis report (FSAR).

ANSI /ANS 56.8 - 1981, Containment Systems Leakage Testing Requirement USNRC I&E Information Notice No. 85-71; Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test .2 Documents Reviewed F-ST-39-F, Type "A" test (60 PSIA) primary containment integrated leakage rate test, Revision Calibration records for CILRT instrumentation by JAFNPP, Mensor Corporation and The General Electric Compan *

CILRT test directors Log of Event *

Instrumentation Selection Guide calculatio .3 Pretest Activities A preliminary walkdown inspection was conducted on April 6,1987 to verify the positions of RTD's and dewcells to be used for the containment integrated leak rate tes The inspector verified the position of a sample of RTD's and moisture elements. He also performed a general observation of the accessible interior and exterior surfaces of the containment structure in order to identify evidence of deterioration which may effect leak tightness. The inspector observed the containment pressurization system to'be used for the test and the means for venting the system from containmen No unacceptable conditions were identifie . . _ , -

.

.

2.4 Administrative Control of CILRT and Procedure Review The inspector reviewed controlled test procedures, procedural sign-offs, official Type A Log of Events,' data taking, and observed test activities to verify thatLtest prerequisites were met, the test procedure was adequate to perform the intended activities, and the test was conducted in accordance with the procedur The inspector noted the following deficiencies which were rectified -

by the licensee: Inadvertant ESF Actuation During initial containment pressurization (approximately 3:30 a.m. April 7, 1987) the emergency diesel generators'and core spray system recieved actuation signals from the ESF system upon high drywell pressure, _(the drywell was being pressurized for the CILRT). This was because the wrong electrical-leads were disconnected to defeat the drywell pressure signal for the tes This was the result of a lack of detail in the test procedur Test prerequisite No. 40, pages 22 & 23 of F-ST-39F, Rev. 6 states in part; lead disconnected'and electrically _ isolated for each of the following drywell pressure switch and transmitter trip unit relay leads:

Panel Pressure Switch Lead-Terminals 09-46 10A-K133A T2 BB-3 10A-K134A T2 88-4 09-47 10A-K133B T2 BB-3 10A-K134B T2 BB-4 The ESF actuation occurred because the leads were lifted on the wrong side of terminals BB-3 & BB-4. A " Procedure Initiation /hvision Request Form" was issued with the following change: page 23, step 40 add: lift leads BB 11 & 12 in panels 09-46 & 09-47. This will defeat _the drywell pressure signal during future containment test . Personnel Hatch Equalization Valves Misaligned for the Test During containment pressurization for the CILRT, at approximately 8:00 !

a.m. on April 7, 1987, a large air leak at the drywell personnel hatch was discovered by licensee operations personnel. The leak was due to both personnel hatch equalization valves (drywell to hatch and hatch to reactor building) being in the open positio l I

l

. - _ . _ - _ _

- __

.

.

This was a result of a lack of_ detail in the test procedure. -It was determined that the hatch operating handwheel was left in the " Hatch Locked" position and not the " Hatch Locked - Valves Closed" position. The operating handwheel ^ actuates the hatch doors and the equalization valves. Normally the inner and outer doors and valves are interlocked such that only the inner door / valve or outer door / valve can be opened at any one time'.

This interlock was defeated for the outage to provide access to the drywell with both doors open. Another procedure initia-tion / revision request form was' issued adding appropriate detail to the test procedur The following change was issued to pre-clude similar problems in the future: prerequisite 33, page 8 of 89 add: insure that the personnel hatch operating handwheel is fully rotated to the hatch locked valves closed positio . Containment Isolation Valves (CIV's) Not Tagged Per Procedure During test preparations several CIV's, identified by New York Power Authority Quality Assurance, were found to be not tagged for the tes Caution tags are specified by procedure for CIVs during containment integrated leak rate testing to prevent unauthorized operation. The failure to properly tag out a valve for the test and its subsequent inadvertant/ unauthorized operation would cause a test failur This would result in a violation of the testing requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J. The licensee promptly responded to the apparent oversite and tagged out the valve Based on the foregoing, improved administrative control of the CILRT is needed. The inspector brought this concern to the attention of the license The licensee acknowledged this and stated that surveillance procedures would be reviewed with respect to improving overall administrative control of future testing activities. The inspector had no further questions.

,

2.5 Test Instrumentation The inspector reviewed calibration records for the CILRT instrumen-tation to ascertain that the instruments had been calibrated within the 6-month period prior to the test, as per industry standard ANSI /ANS-56.8-1981. The calibrations were traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. The inspector also verified that the instrument j system satisfied the specifications given in the instrument' selection guide of ANSI /ANS-56.8-198 The' inspector observed the operation of !

the automatic data collection system during the conduct of the tes l Under ANSI /ANS-56.8-1981, a minimum of 1 pressure sensor and 3 dewpoint sensors are required. The limitation on drybulb temperature-sensors is that no sensor may represent a volume fraction greater than 10% during the test. The following is a summary of the CILRT l sensors:

l

,

i I

- .-

.-

_

_

.

.

Sensor Minimum Actual Drybulb Temperature 10 18 Dewpoint Temperature 3 6 Pressure 1 -3*

• Started with 4 precision pressure sensors No unacceptable conditions were identifie .6 Containment Inspection and Test Boundary Verification The inspector conducted several tours independently and with licensee personnel before and during the CILRT. ~The containment was inspected for the existence of artificial boundaries and boundaries showing evidence of leakage. The inspector utilized an ultrasonic leak probe ("Ultraprove 2000 " Manufactured by U.E. Systems Inc.) to search for air leaks at accessible portions of the containment boundary. No~

significant leakage was discovered utilizing-this instrument. On a random sampling basis, the inspector reviewed the procedural valve lineup for piping systems penetrating the primary containment. This review was performed to ensure that systems were properly vented and drained to expose containment isolation valves to.the test differential-pressure. All systems reviewed were found to be in an effective test configuration. No unacceptable conditions were identifie .7 Test witnessing The inspector witnessed portions of the following test activities:

(1) " Leak Chasing" by Licensee (2) Containment Atmospheric Stabilization (3) 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> CILRT Data Acquisition (4) Superimposed Leakage Rate Test These activities were witnessed to verify that the CILRT was conduc-ted in accordance with the test procedure and within the regulatory requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J. Additionally, the following parameters were monitored during the course of the CILRT: . Reactor vessel water level, drywell equipment sump level, -drywell floor drain sump level, and torus water level. Changes in these water levels during the test affect the leak rate calculation due to the changing free volume in the containment. A water level correction has been calculated by the licensee and will be incorporated into'the result No unacceptable conditions were identifie .

.

2.8 CILRT Chronology April 4, 1987 0700 Began valve lineup and performance of prerequisites. A problem with one of the air supply refrigerated ' air dryers is note The compressor operates but no refrigeration effect is realized. Mechanical contractor is working on the proble April 5, 1987 0930 Air compressor dryer problem determined to be air in refrigerant. Mechanical contractor will fix the proble Torus exterior inspection completed. No unacceptable conditions were identified. Torus interior is not accessible

,

for. inspectio April 6, 1987 0830 Valve lineup is nearing completio Installed dewcells and temporary RTD's in torus air space.

. 1800 Completed drywell interior / exterior inspection. The following observation was noted: The drywell to torus vacuum breaker lines have significant rusting on the inside surface. The licensee stated that this will receive further evaluatio The Stone & Webster computer system is set up and operational for the tes i April 7, 1987 0220 Started air compressors 0240 Began pressurization through flow control valve FCV-10 One air dryer is inoperabl Drywell Mensor PIT-101 (Pressure Sensor) not responding to pressure increas I&C investigated and returned it to servic It subsequently restuck and was declared inoperabl Determined pressurization rate to be 3.3 psi /h Large air leakage noted at personnel hatch. Hatch and

'

equalizer valves are controlled by the operating handwheel which was in the " Hatch locked" position not the " Hatch Locked-Valves

,

Closed" position. Both the equalization valves were shut and-the pressurization rate increased to ~ 8 psi /hr.

r

. . .

.

.

0948 Bypass around FCV-101 closed to reduce pressurization' rate due to excessive' temperature' ris Pressurization complete. Beginning stabilization perio Drywell sumps pumped dow Stabilization criteria is satisfie Operations finished snoop tests'. 'No major leaks were identifie Several minor packing leaks were found and note Start of 24 hr, data collection for CILRT.-

April 8,1987 2300 24 hr. data collection period complete. 1 Test was declared sati sfactor April 9, 1987 0119 Start of Supplemental Test 0415 Supplemental test flow meter reading. dropping and cannot be compensated for by valve manipulations. Upon investigation the cause of the problem was determined to be a weak battery in the flow meter. Charger added and meter returned to servic Continuing with supplemental test to insure a good. trend is established and maintaine Supplemental test complet Commenced containment depressurizatio .9 Stabilization period After reaching the test pressure and allowing a minimum of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> to stabilize, the containment atmosphere must meet the following criteria per test procedure No. F-ST-39F: the change in containment

'

temperature should not exceed 0.5 f/hr for the last 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> before proceeding with the 60 psia ILRT. The inspector calculated a change in containment temperature of 0.307 f/hr for the last 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> of the stabilization period.

This met the criteria for atmosphere stabilization. The inspector noted that the containment fans were not utilized'during stabiliza-

tion or other portions of the tes .__ _

. _

._. . . . , _ . _

.__ _

.

.

2.10 Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Results The licensee computed the "As-Left" containment leakage utilizing both the Mass Point Method (required by Technical Specifications)

and the Total Time Method (For comparison with Mass Point results).

Preliminary results indicate a successful CILRT for the "As-Left" condition. The containment leak rate has failed in the "As-Found" condition due to excessive local leakage. This was acknowledged by the licensee. Details of the CILRT results will be presented in the-licensees summary technical report on this test. A plot of the

"As-Left" leakage trend for Mass Point and Total Time analysis is provided in Attachments 1 and 2 respectively. Measured leak rates and the upper bound of the 95% confidence interval are plotted as a function of time. The test acceptance limit is shown by a flat straight line. It is noted that in both cases the leak trend is stable at near-zero slope (flat). A final evaluation of the test-results will be performed by the NRC upon receipt of the licensees summary technical report on the test. A summary of results and acceptance criterion is presented belo .1 TYPE A "AS-LEFT" TEST RESULTS MASS POINT METHOD Leakage Rate Calculated, Lam .208022 Percent / Day UCL, Leakage Rate With 95 percent .212650 Percent / Day Confidence Level Corrections Due To Water Level Changes .013569 Percent / Day Corrections For Type B Leakage .000598 Percent / Day Corrections For Type C Leakage .002530 Percent / Day Total Type 'A' Leakage Rate .229347 Percent / Day Results were within the acceptable limit of .3750 Percent / Day TOTAL TIME METHOD Leakage Rate Caluclated, Lam .197332 Percent / Day UCL, Leakage Rate with 95 Percent Confidence Level .304442 Percent / Day Corrections Due To Water Level Changes .013569 Percent / Day i

_

.

. Corrections For Type B Leakage .000598 Percent / Day Corrections For Type C Leakage .002530 Percent / Day 4 Total Type "A" Leakage Rate .321139 Percent / Day Results-were within the acceptable limit of .3750 Percent / Day 2.1 CILRT Supplemental Test Superimposed Leakage Rate Test The objective of this test is to verify acceptable accuracy of the sensing instruments used for the CILRT. A summary of results and acceptance criterion appears below. The test period started at 0119 hours0.00138 days <br />0.0331 hours <br />1.967593e-4 weeks <br />4.52795e-5 months <br /> on April 9, 1987 and ran for 6.66 hour7.638889e-4 days <br />0.0183 hours <br />1.09127e-4 weeks <br />2.5113e-5 months <br /> The superimposed leakage rate test is' acceptable if Lc falls within the following range:

(Lo+ Lam .25La) <=Lc <= (Lo+ Lam +.25La) where; Lc = Containment leakage rate calculated during the verification test Lo = Leakage rate imposed on containment using a flow measuring device La = Maximum allowable leakage rate for ILRT Lam = Total measured containment leakage rate MASS POINT (.496487+ .208022 .125000)<=.77360<=(.496487+ .208022+.125000)

.579509<=.773629<=.829509 TOTAL TIME (.496487+ .197332 .125000)<=.762873<=(.496487+ .197332+.125000)

.568819<=.762874<=.818819 The superimposed leakage rate test results were acceptable in accordance with Appendix J.

'

3.0 QA/QC Test Coverage The inspector discussed QA/QC coverage of the CILRT with a representative from the QA department. In addition the inspector observed-QA activities related to the preparation, initiation, and performance of the tes It was determined that QA surveillance and audit coverage of the test and t related activities was adequate. It is noted that a QA auditor was l

t

.

.

..

I

.

responsible for identifying several containment isolation valves which-were not properly tagged out for the tes The licensee responded quickly to QA findings. No unacceptable conditions were identifie .

4.0- Local Leak Rate Test Results The inspector reviewed the licensees final results for the local leak-rate testing (LLRT) of containment penetrations. The "As-Left" data indicates a total penetration leakage rate of 1642.4 SCFD. This is within the acceptance criteria of 3216 SCFD (.6La). It is noted that one penetration (X-211b) did not meet the licensees administrative (ISI)-limit and will be reworked and retested after the CILRT. The inspector deter-mined that the licensee utilized maximum pathway leakage criterion to determine the total penetration leakage with respt t to the .6La accep-tance criteria. This is the accepted methodology for recording local leakag The "As-Found" LLRT results (reported on previously in NRC Region I'

Inspection Report No. 50-333/87-08) are in excess of the .6La criteri .0 Exit Meeting Licensee management was informed of the purpose and scope of the inspection at the entrance intervie The findings of the inspection were periodically discussed and were summarized at the exit meeting on April 9, 198 Attendees at the exit meeting are listed in section 1.0 of this repor At no time during the inspection was written material provided to the licensee by the inspector _

• O,g r

9::*

~e, ,

&

l/

f e ~

0:t 9:':' J'

s, f

"

'

.e OOg eer, , ~} ~$ $

Og *

Ogg IS Gee ,' *

OOg *

g O<g

'

' OOg

.

.

.

g

'

-

'

OOg '

.

.

'

'

'

.

g

.

., ,

.

0049 O

'

'

1. eg }

'

-

. , . .

- OOg  !

gs

~

d&&

' 00$ 0 Q

~

,ge ,>

~CO

%

_ _ - _ -

, . l ATTACHMENT 1

. . . . . .

UCLMP

.

,

MASS POINT LEAKAGE VS TIME LRMMP

.

>- -

T -

Q -

\ -

p M 2 -- -

g H -

g Z l -

m -

\ OW ~

y O_ l- '

~

I

[ ~

WE J W '.

o[W EO

.

3 [

.

1 --

-

M .

T -

W -

__J -

.

- Test acceotance limit .375 %/ day

.9 ...

l l l l l maeaeeeeeeaeeeeeeel l l l l l l eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeea l l l l l l l l l l l l eeeeee l l l l l m e -mm e in m N m me-m m to N co os s-m m m e e e a e e e e m - - - - e in - - - --m mm 8 Apr 1987 8 Apr 1987 TIME - HOURS ATTRCHMENT UCL & LAM VS. TIME

_ _ JRFNPP

_

INTEGRRTED.LERKRGE RRTE TEST

.

_ _ _ . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ -__ _--___ __ __

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

. .

ATTACHMENT 2 -

UCLTT TOTAL TIME LEAKAGE VS TIME LRMTT >

I

> .

[ 3 --

.

Q .

\ .

p .\* -

,

c W -

l g E I -

H -

j

,(.FW F

-

'

Jg 2 --

-

,

[T -

'

g F '

OW

, y '

i a HC .

[ .

<

M .

i [ .

W 1 --

.

I J -

.

t

.

~ '

~

l .... . Test acceptance limit .375 %/ day

-

..................

"

!

y--

f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f f I I f f f f f f f f f I I I 5 5 I I I 5 8 I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I L l 4 i j

G G S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S i

,

eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee m e " N GmS emmN eee"N m e in" "m N m m a"N

N N ,8 S S S S S S """"""""N N N

8 Apr 1987 8 Apr 1987

--

TIME - HOURS RTTRCHMENT UCL & LAM VS. TIME JRFNPP

. , INTEGRATED LERKRGE RATE TEST

i *