IR 05000373/1987012
| ML20207T212 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | LaSalle  |
| Issue date: | 03/18/1987 |
| From: | Danielson D, James Gavula NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20207T204 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-373-87-12, 50-374-87-11, NUDOCS 8703230312 | |
| Download: ML20207T212 (4) | |
Text
p
,
-...
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION-REGION III
,
Reports No. 50-373/87012(DRS);50-374/87011(DRS)
Docket ~Nos.. 50-373; 50-374 Licenses No. NPF-11; NPF-18 Licensee:- Commonwealth' Edison Company.
Post Office Box 767-Chicago, IL 60690 Facility Narr.e: LaSalle County Station, Units I and 2 Inspection At: LaSalle Site, Marseilles, Illinois Inspection Conducted: March 11 and 12, 1987
.
Inspector:
. A. G ula 3 /f f 7 Date b}
W Approved By:
D. H. Danielson, Chief 3[ Ek7 Materials and Processes Section Date Inspection Summary
Inspection _on March 11 and 12, 1987_(Rep _or_ts_No_. 50-373/87012]DRSJ1 S
_
50-374/87011(DRS))
~
Areas Inspected: Routine unannounced safety inspection of the licensee's snubber surveillance and functional testing program (70370), training (41400),
and licensee action on previously identified items (92701)..
Resul ts: No violations or deviations were identified, s703230312 87031s PDR ADOCK 05000373
-
.
-
.
.
DETAILS
,
t
-
'8 1.
Persons Contacted
-
Commonwealth Edison Company (CECO)
' -
-
- J. A. Ahlman, Licensing Group Leader
.
- R. D. Bishop, Services Superintendent
- K. Graesser, Division Vice President
- R. W. Stobert, Station Quality Assurance Superintendent
- D. Szumski, Technical Staff, Snubber Test Coordinator
- C. H. Turley, Station Quality Assurance inipector J. Hill, Technical Staff, Engineer
Wyle Laboratory (Wyle)
J. Murphy, Test Engineer T. Marshall, Field Engineer
- Denotes those attending the exit meeting on March 12, 1987.
2.
Licensee Action on Previously Identified Items
- 2 j
/
j a.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (373/86010-01):
Certain snubber failures
'
could have resulted from maintenance activities in the vicinity of the snubbers.
This matter was tracked by CECO's AIR No. 373-100-86-01001.
During the functional testing, seven PSA 1/4
snubbers were identified as having twisted internals and failed to
meet the acceptance criteria.
One of the potential causes of this installation problem was maintenance work in the vicinity of the snubbers.
Potentially, the snubber may have been disconnected for clearance requirements and then improperly reinstalled The maintenance staff reviewed all of the documentation for maintenance activities in the general vicinity of the seven sNbbera.
The documentation reviewed included drawings, work requaitr,, photographs,
<
and physical walkdowns.
Of the seven snubbers, four did not have
'
any work performed in the general area.
The other three had work done in the area, but the records do not give any indication that the snubber was removed for any reason.
Based on this review,'it was concluded that the installation problems were not caused by maintenance work.
As additional assurance, the station had issued Procedure LMP-H0-01
"-
" Removal and Installation of Pacific Scientific Mechanical Snubbers'I
..
Revision 1, dated August 29c 1985.
This gives detailed instructions
'
and precautions for this type of maintenance activity.
Also, as a result of the 100% functional test performed on Unit 1 snubbers and-the current 100% functional testing being performed on Unit 2, all'
discrepancies of this nature will be corrected.
This it.a is considered closed.
\\
_ _____ _ _________ _______
-
o
_
_
o h
r
,
E
'
r 3.
Snubber Visual Inspection and Functional Testing L
-
a.
Background
_
~
LaSalle Unit'2 currently has approximately 1027 safety-related
snubbers associated with the visual examinations and functional testing as required by Technical Specifications (Tech Spec.).
The
.
E CECO's g plan for the snubber functional testing was specified in samplin letter dated October 17, 1986, from C. M. Allen to
-
y J. G. Keppler.
In the letter, the snubbers were divided into two
.,
separate groups:
Residual Heat Removal (RHR) snubbers and non-RHR
-
e snubbers.
This division was based on the LaSalle Unit 1 functional test results which indicated that some ty)e of operational transient
_
'
had occurred in the RHR system. On this Jasis, CECO committed to
=
>
-
test 300% of the snubbers on the RHR system and treated them as a i,
"
separate group.
The non-RHR snubbers would utilize the normal Tech
'
[
,-
Spec S3mpling Plan which required an additional sample for each 7_-
.
snubber failure.
<
b.
Procedure and,0ccumentation Review
"
The NRC inspector reviewed the following CECO and Wyle Procedures, r
and had no ad/erse comments.
-
o
LTS-500-14 " Mechanical Snubber Functional Testing, Contractor
.
Assisted,", Revision 3, dated January 12, 1987.
'
-
_
F1 LTS-600-11, " Mechanical Snubber Visual Inspections,"
Revision 2, dated June 7, 1985.
'
No. 17875, " Procedure for Functional Testing of PSA Mechanical
.
!
.
Snubbers Using the Wyle Model 100 Testing Machine for CECO,
-
9-LaSalle County Station," dated December 10, 1986.
-
}i (l i
=
c
,
,
LTS-600-17, " Mechanical Component Support Inservice Inspection
'*
-
,
Program," Revision 1, dated May 8, 1986.
-
/,
-
Wyle Equipment Certification and Calibration Records:
-
.
,
[
- Test Machine Model 100, Serial No. 110
,
- -
/
- Digital Panel Meters for Pressure, Load, Velocity
- Transducers for Displacement and Velocity
=
,
Pressure Transducers, Serial No. 56042 E
t
-
-
)
- Load Transducer, 150K, Serial No. 122553
"
Load Transducer, 50K, Serial No. 125462
-
!
Lead Transducer, SK, Serial No. 147210
-
-
--
__
c.
Test Results
_
E There are a total of 383 snubbers on the various RHR Loops in
-
Unit 2.
Of these, 27 failed to meet the functional acceptance criteria.
The character of the failures were very similar to those
{
rr K
-
)
--
,
'
-
e
______2.___
_ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _
f
,
o e
.j-
.'
>
.
e MMt j
q
'
in the same locations *were<found on both u[n1ts.
-found on Unit l's RHR Systems. Basically; the sameltypes of failures
~
The cause of these-failures have been determined; however, the evaluations performed as-a result of these failures were not reviewed during this inspection.
The correctivefactions instituted to mitigate the operational
,
transients causing the snubber failures wiWbe completed prior to the
unit returning to power.
cp Of the 644 non-RHR snubbers, 23 had failed the functional test as of March 10,1987. Although this failure rate is better than ;that G(
originally found on Unit 1, the overall failure rate dictated that 100% of all the Unit 2 snubbers be tested this outage. The type of
'
failures found on Unit 2 were similar -in nature to those found on Unit 1.
To date, no new'trinsient events have been indicated by
~
'
theserfailures.
d.
Training bd The certificatic'n and training records were reviewed fnr the
'
following Wyle and CECO personnel. All certifications were current
'
'
'
,
and appropriate for the functions performed by the individuals..No adverse comments were made by the NRC inspector.-
,.
.
J. Murphy
- VT-4 Level II U
- i
- Mechanical Test Engineer Field Level II
'
'
- MOV Engineer Level II-Tom Marshall VT-4 Level II
-
. 'sl
- VT-3 Level II
'
.
J
- Field Engineering Specialist Level II (
Randy Spivey
-,' ' VT-1 Level II
.
m
.
- VT-2 Level II
'
'- VT-3 Level EI j
VT-4 Level II
g Paul Wisniewski
- Compo'nent Support:. Visual Examination
- YT-2:
,
,
-hMechagical Snubber Visual Inspection
'i V.. Exit Interview
-
,
,
'
,
1The NRC inspector met with licensee represen@dve (denotedin Faragraph 1) at the conclusion of the insret'* w The inspector suninarized the scope and findings of the 6 pd,:. The inspector l
also discussed the' likelpinformational content o< the inspection
,
report with regard to documents reviewed during the inspection.
'
t The licensee representatives did not identify any such documents
'
asu proprietary.
r, (
s,
\\-
t N
L v'
s b
J P
g
- g l
y.'
l'
a.
,
r s
-
-., -,
-
---e
,
7,.
-
-,