IR 05000369/1989020
| ML20246D043 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | McGuire, Mcguire  |
| Issue date: | 08/16/1989 |
| From: | Belisle G, John Zeiler NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20246D041 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-369-89-20, 50-370-89-20, NUDOCS 8908250236 | |
| Download: ML20246D043 (7) | |
Text
.,.
__.
_
.
.
'
- g,
z '
-
,
.
<
,
DfGt,q'of
' UPjlTED ST ATES
M
,
NUCLEAR FIEGULATORY COMMISs!ON '
'
'g.
-
,
'
"
' 'g y -
i
RF GION il-
- .
.h
.d I
.
101 MAHIETTA ST REET.N.W.
- - k e
ATLANTA, GEORGt A 30323 k..y
,[
...
,
Report Nos.: 50-369/89-20 and 50-370/89-20
- Licensee': Duke Power Company 422 South Church Street Charlotte. N.C.
28242
- Docket Nos.:
50-369 and 50-370 License Nos.: 'NPF-9 and NPF-17 Facility Name: McGuire 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted. July 17 - 21, 1989 j.< b
/6 Y
Inspectors: J.Nelle d ' g Cate' Signed
?
Approved by:
)'.
&
.9 4'
o G.' Kvilelisle, Chief *
Date Gigfied Test Programs Section Engineering Branch Division.of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, announced inspection was conducted in the areas of containment local leak rate testing and verification of containment integrity.
Results:
m The licensee's LLRT program was adequate in al! areas inspected.
LLRT and containment related procec'ures were developed and were being implemented in accordance with the regulatory requirements. The inspector' witnessed leak rate
testing and concluded that personnel were knowledgeable of test pr3ctic?s and
'
requirements.
In the area of containment integrity, the inspector found adequate procedures.
and controls established to ensure containment integrity during plant startup
,
and operation.
A walkdown cf selected penetrations on Unit 1 identified no 4,
discrepancies; all manual containment'iscelation valves were in their required position for plant operation.
'
,
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations wen not identified.
"
l 890825C236 690818 PDR ADOCK 05000369 O
FDC
_ _._- -_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.-_
,7---
.
r
,
,
.
,
'
..
,.
REPORT DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee-Employees J. Jenkins',. Assistant Operations Engineer E. Jones, Assistant Operations Supervisor
- S. LeRoy, Regulatory Compliance
- J. Uswald, Performance Engineer
- M. Sample, Maintenance Supervisor
- R. Sharpe, Regulatory Conpliance Manager
- J. Snyder, Perfonnance Supervisor
- B. Travis, Operctions Superintendent Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included engineers, technicians, operations and administrative personnel.
NRC Resident Inspectors
- K. Van Doorn, Senior Resident Inspector
- T. Cooper, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview Acronyas and initialisms used throughout this report are listed in the last paragraph.
2.
Local Leak Rate Testing (61720)
An important part of monitoring and maintaining containment integrity is the periodic test 4ing performed to terify the leak tightness of containment leakage barriers. As part of the evaluation of conteinaent integrity, the inspectte witnessed the performance of LLRTs, reviewed the LLRT pr.ocedures, evaluated test results, verified that the summation of lecal leak rete tests meets the allowable leakage limit, and reviewed containment isolation valve maintenance records.
a.
LLRT Procedure and Control Review Documents reviewed either totally or in part to verify that the p
u L
licensee has established adequate procedures and controls included.
l-PT/2/A/4200/01B Electrical Penetration Leak Rate Test PT/2/A/4200/01C Isolation Valve Leak Rate Test PT/2/A/4200f01D Fue? Transfer Tube Leak Rate Test PT/2/A/4200/01E Upper Containment Personnel Lock Leak Rate Test
,
l I
-_
-
_ _ _.
.
-
.
w
-..
,
L
PT/2/A/4200/01F Lower Containment Personnel Lcck "eak Rate L
Test PT/2/A/4200/01H Equipment Hatch Leak Rate Test PT/2/A/4200/01J Unit 2 Containment Leakage PT/2/A/4200/01N VP Valve Leak Rate Test PT/2/A/4200/010 Airlock Isolatien Valve Leak Rate Test PT/2fA/4200/01P_
Non-Bypass Leak Rate Test PT/2/A/4200/01Q Penetration Leak Rate Test The inspector reviewed the above procedures to verify that the following attributas were included to ensure proper testing:
(1) 811 applicable-CPBs_ and CIVs are tested as required by Table 3.6-1 of the TSs and Table 6.2.4-1 of the FSAR.
(2) LLRTs are performed at CILRT peak design pressure, j
(3) The LLRT program utilizes approved methods for testing CPBs and CIVs.
(4) Penetration leakage rates are determined using the maximum i
pathway teakage.
(5) The criteria and response for LLRT and combined leakage rate
!
failure are incorporated in the test program procedures.
,
'
(6) Repairs and _ modifications to CPBs and CIVs are preceded and followed by LLRTs.
!
(7) LLRTs are perfonned at the correct frequency.
Particular attention was devoted to the review of procedure PT/2/A/4200/01C, which controls the testing of CIVs.
A detailed walk-through was performed for valves in the following penetrations to verify adequate alignment, venting, and draining.
Penetration M215 Breathing Air Penetration M216 Pressurizer Relief Tank Makeup Penetration M219 Station Air Penetration M235 Pressurizer Sample Penetration M240 Containment Ventilation Cooling Weter In Penetration M279 Containment Ventilation Coolsng Water Out Penetration M307 Nuclear Service Water to RCP
'
Penetration M315 Nuclear Service Water from RCP Penetration M348 Personnel Airlock Syf tem Discharge Penetration M360 RCDT Gas Space to Maste Gas System Penetration M375 RCDT Heat Exchanger Discharge
Penetration M377 Refueling Cavity from Refueling Water Tank Penetration M385 Containment Ventilation Cooling Water In f
Penetration M390 Containment Ventilation Cooling Water Out
]
_ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _
_
-
p
-
i l-
,
l l
-
.
,
i
'
No unacceptable conditions were identified as a result of this procedure and penetration review. However, during review of previous Unit 2 outage leak rate test results, the inspector observed that CIV 2NM3A,C in penetration M235 had previously been tested in the reverse direction, i.e., pressurized in a direct on opposite to the containment accident pressure direction. The licensee explained that an internal review by the Performance Department, before the current outage, identified the discrepancy.
The present leak rate test procedure reflects the correct test configuration for testing the valve in the accident pressure direction.
This problem identifi-cation and prompt corrective action taken by the licensee provided further evidence that the licensee is sensitive to and knowledgeable of their leak test requirements.
Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were l
identified.
b.
LLRT Witnessing On July 18, 1989, the inspector witnessed various aspects of the
"As-Found" leak rate test for Unit 2 CIVs in penetration M320, Component Cooling Water from the Reactor Vess91 Support and RCP Coolers.
The inspector discussed the system lineup for the test and determined that it was in an acceptable test configuration.
However, since fuel movement was ongoing, which requires containment i.!'
integrity, the outside isolation valve had been closed by the Operations Department. The LLRT procedure, PT/2/A/4200/01C, required both CIVs in the penetration to be ir the open position at the beginning of the test.
Leak test personnel prepared a test dis-crepancy to allow the inside isolation valve to be in the closed position at the start of the test. The inspector verified that this valve alignment change would have no unreviewed effect on the test performance.
The inspector considered the action taken to be indicative of good personnel knowledge and observance of adminis-
,
trative controls governing test procedure changes.
i The inspector observed that test personnel were familiar with the
{
test equipment and the use of the test procedure.
Test data were
'
proper 3y recorded, test equipment was properly calibrated, and the performance of personnel conducting the test demonstrated an understanding of assigned duties and responsibilities.
Also, test personnel consistently approached minor problems enruuntered during
)
f the test in a conservative manner, Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were j
identif*ed.
'
I
I
- - - ___-_____ ___- _ -____
-__
__
__
__-____-_____----____a
- _ _ _ -___ _ - _ _ _ -
.
'
.
c.
Leak Rate Test Maintenance Controls The inspectors tracked the repair and retest of several valves to verify that. controls to ensure valve maintenance and retests were adequate. Unit 2 components reviewed included:
Work Penetration Valve Request Description M216 2NC56B 86966 PRT Makeup Inside CIV 88250 M235 2NM3A 94377 Pressurizer Liquid Sample Line 890026 Inside CIV M279 2RV76A 87199 Lower Containment Ventilation 87642 Unit Supply Inside CIV 95621 M320 2KC424B 48715 RCS Pumps Return Header Inside 93833 CIV 65262 80416 M320 2KC425A 48697 RCS Pumps Return Header Outside 65243 CIV M377 2FW4 129956 Refueling Water Outside CIV 136023 M379 2RV102B 63524 Upper Containment Ventilation 64702 Unit Discharge Outside CIV
!
.
A work request for maintenance is generated by the Performance l
Department when a valve fafls to pass a local leak rate test. This l
request is sent to maintenance planners who prescribe the post-
'
maintenance testing required per. the requirements ?>f Station Directive 3.2.2, Identifying and Performing 91 ant Retesting.
When maintenance is completed, the work request package is routed to the Performance Departmant and leakage retest of the V 31Ve is accomplished.
Completion of tha work request constitutes L
verification that all tests have been performed as required.
The requirements for Type B and C leakage sunaation are cor.tained in procedure PT/2/A/4200/01J.
After valve retests, the LLRT procedurer require
'S DT6?/A/4200/01J be performed to ensure that the Type B and C leatuge summation is within the TS iimit. Review of completed l
Unit 2 leakage summation records during the past six months revealed no discrepancies and the combined Type B and C leakage was well within the TS limit.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
- - - _ _
_
- _ _
.
.-
%
Based on the lin.ited sample reviewed, the inspector concluded that the licensee. has implemented a workable syttem to ensure that maintenance and retest of CIVs are satisfactorily completed.
Within the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identified.
3.
Verification of Containment Integrity (61715)
The inspector's objective was to verify the adequacy.and implementation of procedures designed to ensure and maintain containment integrity.
The inspector reviewed procedure OP/2/A/6100/01, Controlling Procedure for Unit Startup, which outlines the steps necessary to take the plant from cold shutdown condition to 15% full power.
It was verified that the proceJures included the following minimum provisions that ensure primary containment integrity exists before entering Mode 4:
All penetrations not capable of being closed by automatic isolation a.
valves and required to be closed during accident condition are closed by valves, blind flanges, or deactivated automatic valves.
b.
All equipment hatches are closed and sealed.
c.
Each containment airlock is operable.
d.
Containment leakage rates are within TS limits.
e.
All containment purge valves are locked and sealed.
The inspector evaluated procedures PT/1/A/4200/02A, Monthly Containment
,
Integrity Verification, and PT/1/A/4200/02B, Cold Shutdown Containment l
Integrity Verification, which together satisfy TS Section 4.6.1.1.a to demonstrate primary containment integrity exists.
It was verified that the procedures included all required manual CIVs, blind flanges, and
deactivated automatic iso'lation valves as identified in Table 0.2.4-1 of the FSAR. fio naacceptable ccnditions were identifGd.
The inspector reviewed completed records for the above two surveillance procedures over the previous six months of operation for Unit 2.
ihe insnector verified that all valves were found by the licensee to be in i
their correct position.
,
The inspector also conducted a visual walkdown for a sample manual containment isolation valves for Unit 1 to verify their proper pcsition.
This included visual {nspection of the following outside isolation valves:
._ _ - _ _ _ _
- - - - - -
-. - - - - - - - _ -,
"
.
'
...
~
.
Penetration Valve Description M32C NC-142 RCP Motor Drain Tank to Waste Oil Cutside CIV M356 WE-13 Equipment Decontamination Discharge Outside CIV M358 FW-13 Refueling Cavity to Feedwater Pump Outside CIV M377_
FW-4 RWST to Refueling Cavity Outside CIV No unacceptable conditions were identified as a result of this walkdown.
TS required surveillance procedures and records of post-LOCA mitigating systems were not reviewed during this inspection, but will be included in future NRC inspections of containment integrity.
4.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on July 21, 1989, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspectors described the areas inspected ~and discussed in detail the inspection results.
Proprietary information is not contained in this report.
Dissenting connents were not received from the licensee.
5.
Acronyms and Initialisms Used in This Report
-
CILRT -
Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Containment Isolation Valve CIV
-
Containment Penetration Boundary CPB
-
Final Safety Analysis Report FSAR
-
LOCA -
Loss of Coolant Accident LLRT -
Local Leak Rate Test Pressurizer Relief Tank PRT
-
RCDT -
Reactor Coolant Drain Tank RCP
-
Reactor Coolant Pump Reactor Coolant System RCS
-
Refueling Water Storage Tank RWST
-
Technical Specification TS
-
!
l