IR 05000362/1985035

Insp Rept 50-362/85-35 on 851122-1206.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (Cilrt),Including Procedure Review,Interviews W/Personnel,Witnessing Portions of Cilrt & Containment

ML20138R603
Person / Time
Site:	San Onofre
Issue date:	12/09/1985
From:	Clark C, Thomas Young NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138R597	List: IR 05000362/1985035 ML20138R595
References
50-362-85-35, NUDOCS 8512310390
Download: ML20138R603 (5)

Text

= ,

,

'

, ,, .

'

- s

, e ,

,

~

c , j,-

-

s -U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

. . REGION V 4 _

Report No. 50-362/85-35 J

Docket"No!.50-362;; ,

-License-No. NPF-15h i

Licensee: Southern Cal'ifornia Edison Company P. O. Box 800 2244 Walnut Grove Avenue Rosemead, California 91770

Facility Name: San'onofre Unit 3 Inspection at: San Onofre, San Diego County, California

,

j Inspection Conducted: November 22 - December 6, 1985

,

Inspector: M /2/9//'5 Date Signed

frk,ReactorInspector Approved By: 7-ction

/8-h- W Date-Signed CYoung, Chief,ggineeri Inspection during the period of November 22 - December 6, 1985 (Report N /85-35)

Areas Inspected: Routine, announced inspection of activities relating to a periodic Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT). The inspection included procedure review, interviews with personnel, witnessing portions of the CILRT, and inspection of containment. The inspection censisted of 52 inspector hours onsite and 10 inspector hours in the Region office, by one NRC inspector. During this inspection, inspection procedures 61720, 70307B and 70313 were covere Results: No violations of NRC requirements or deviations were identified.

t -

i S ..

!

G512310390 SSILl%

PDR ADOCK 05000362 G PDR

.

DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted Southern California Edison Company R. Plappert, Lead Engineer

• D. Irvin, Engineering Supervisor S. Scholl, Engineering Supervisor J. Simpson, Engineer

• Grosshart, Operation Quality Assurance

• K. Loncar, Operation Quality Assurance

• C. Kergis, Lead Compliance Engineer Bechiel Power Corporation (BPC)

P. Galanti, CILRT Supervisor B. Blum, CILRT Engineer

• Denotes those peronnel in attendance at the exi The inspector also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees involved with containment integrated leak rate test activitie . Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) Procedure Review The inspector reviewed the licensee's CILRT procedures as described in Engineering Procedure S03-V-3.12, Revision 0 of November 7, 1985, (and latest applicable temporary change notices) entitled

" Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test." This review was to ascertain compliance with plant technical specifications, regulatory requirements, and applicable industrial standards as stated in the following documents:

• San.Onofre Nuclear Generating Station 2 and 3 FSAR,

" Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test" (Section 6.2.6.1)

and " Containment Leak Rate Test" (Section 14.2.12.20).

• San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station, Unit 3, Technical Specifications; 3/4.6.1.1 Containment Integrity, 3/4.6. Containment Leakag *

Appendix J to 10 CFR 50, " Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water Cooled Power Reactors."

• American National Standard, " Leakage-Rate Testing of Containment Structures for Nuclear Reactors," ANSI N45.4-197 .

. 2

Topical Report BN-TOP-1, Revision 1, " Testing Criteria for Integrated Leakage Rate Testing of Primary Containment Structures for Nuclear Power Plants," Bechtel Corporatio '

American National Standard, " Containment System Leakage Testing Requirements," ANSI /ANS-56.8-198 The inspector reviewed the Southern California Edison (SCE) Company computer program,-developed for the computation of the Type A

, containment leakage rate. The inspector reviewed the hand calculations used to verify the program as well as the output of the verification checks of the program, performed by both Bechtel and SCE using data from previous leak rate test No violations with NRC requirements or deviations were identifie b. Records Review ^

The> inspector reviewed the records to assure that the following required activities were performed grior to initial pressurization:

'

(1) Completion of all identified local leakage rate testing and

<

ider.tification of leak rates prior to and after any repair 'The type B and C test data summary sheets reviewed, had not

- received the licensee final review yet, and contained some minor _ errors. The licensee stated corrected copies of the-subject summary, sheets would be sent to the inspector office for revie (2) Removal or venting of items listed on the valve lineup lis (3) Inspection of interior and exterior containment surfaces and components for evidence of deterioration or damag (4) Containment sump water levels below high level mar (5) CILRT measurement system properly installed, functionally checked, and all instrumentation calibrated within the last six months with NBS traceability certificates availabl (6) Pressurization system tested; including proper operation of the air compressors, after-coolers, moisture separators, air dryers, valves and blowdown silence t (7) Containment ventilation system adjustments complete (8) Valve lineups complete '

(9) Pressurization system in servic No violations with NRC requirements or deviations were identifie c. Observation of Work and Work Activities

_

-

.

'

l

,

l l

Prior to the CILRT the inspector performed an area survey for instrument location assignments within the Containment Buildin The purpose was to locate and evaluate the placement of the temperature and dewpoint sensors. This inspection revealed that the sensors were located within the tolerances of installation procedur The operation of the pressurization equipment (air compressors, after-coolers and air dryers) used for pressurization of the Containment Building was inspected to assure that procedures for prevention of potential problems were enforced. This included evidence of hourly checking the pressurizing air for evidence of oil contamination, establishment of communications between CILRT control center and the pressurization station, adequate cooling water being supplied to the after-coolers, and control of after-cooler air temperature was being maintained during pressurizatio s The inspector witnessed the following CILRT activities:

(1) Initial pressurizatio (2) Stabilizatio (3) Data Acquisitio (4) Completion of CILR (5) Leakage Rate Verification Tes (6) Initial Containment Building Depressurizatio Applicable electrical and mechanical penetrations were inspecte The valve lineups were completed in accordance with procedure, and no artificial barriers were erecte The overall performance of the CILRT crew members were observed by the inspector. Attributes evaluated were: availability of test procedure; test prerequisites being met; proper plant systems in service; special test equipment calibrated and in service; and crew actions timely and correct. Crew members had received CILRT training prior to the test; this appeared evident by satisfactory performance of their dutie The licensee commenced pressurizing the containment on November 23, 198 No excessive leakage paths were identified that would interfere with the satisfactory completion of the Type A test. On November 23, 1985, the licensee commenced taking data after the required stabilization period for containment temperature. After recording data for five and a half hours, a dome air circulation fan was discovered on when it should have been secured. When the fan was secured the air mass data took an unconservative change of direction, so the test was restarted after an additional two hour stabilization period. The test was concluded after 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, i _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ - - _ - . _ . _ . . _ ' _ _ _- '

'

s >

, .4

_

ollowed by a superimposed leakage rate verification test for 5.25 Jhour .

,

. ,

,

The' licensee's pr'eliminary results for the Type A test, which did

-

notfinclude Type B_or C additions, was a total time leakage rate of 0.048 ,wt. % per day with a 954 Upper Confidence Limit (UCL) of 0.052 wt.-s%'per day and; verified by a mass-point calculation of c.051 w , , % per day with a.95%'UCL of 0.052 wt. % per day. These results were

- <

within the allowed acceptance criteri Nofviolations with NRC requirements or deviations were identifie _

1 . Exit Meeting-

'

The inspector met with licensee management representatives denoted in paragraph 1 on November 26, 1985. The scope of the inspection, observations'and findings as noted in this report were discusse '

.

a