IR 05000387/1982016
| ML20054G844 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 06/08/1982 |
| From: | Bettenhausen, Pullani S, Rekito W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054G820 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-82-16, NUDOCS 8206220347 | |
| Download: ML20054G844 (10) | |
Text
o
.
U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Region I Report No. 50-387/82-16 Docket No. 50-387 License No. CPPR-101 Priority
--
Category B
Licensee:
Pennsylvania Power and Light Company 2 North Ninth Street
Allentown, Pennsylvania 18101 Facility Name:
Susquehanna Stean: Electric Station, Unit 1 Inspection At:
Salem Township, Pennsylvania Inspection Conducted:
May 12-14 and 21-24, 1982 Inspectors:
G h/62-S..L-P'OTlatff, Rea tor. Inspector date signed (d (1 & G 6/7ka W. A. Rekito,' Reactor Inspector datb s(gned
~
Approved By:
MN MIME _
(/g/$2-L. H. Betfenlaussn, Chief, Test Program date signed Section, Engineering Programs Branch Inspection Summary:
Inspection on May 12-14 and 21-24, 1982 (Report No.
50-387/82-16)
Areas Inspected:
Routine, unannounced inspection of licensee action on previous inspection findings; review of local Leak Rate Test (LLRT) and Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT) procedures; LLRT and ILRT witnessing; LLRT and ILRT results evaluation and tours of the facility. The inspection involved 16 inspector hours in office and 102 inspector hours onsite by two region based NRC
,
l inspectors and 9 hours1.041667e-4 days <br />0.0025 hours <br />1.488095e-5 weeks <br />3.4245e-6 months <br /> onsite by an NRC Supervisor.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
I
8206220347 820605
!
PDR ADOCK 05000387 G
__ -. _.. _ _ _ -. _ _ _ _ - -..
._
_ _.
. - _. _. _
_
__
_
_
.-
..
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Personnel Contacted 1.1 Pennsylvania Power and Light Company (PP&L)
+T. Dalpiaz, Startup and Test. Group Supervisor
+F. Eisenhuth, Senior Compliance Engineer R. Featenby, Assistant Project Director
- J. Green, QA Supervisor of Operation
- D. Mitchell, Compliance Engineer C. Myers, Assistant Superintendent of Plant-Outages
+H. Keiser, Superintendent of Plant
+S. Shah, ILRT Test Director
- D. Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Plant 1.2 Bechtel Corporation L. Carson, Test Engineer
+N. Covington, Assistant ISG Supervisor
+P. Dugan, Technical Representative
'
+E. Figard, ISG Supervisor
+M. Fulkerson, Test Engineer L. Young, SST Engineer 1.3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC)
+W. Rekito, Reactor Inspector
- G. Rhoads, Senior Resident Inspector The inspector also interviewed other licensee and contractor employees during the course of the inspection.
- denotes those present in the exit meeting on May 14, 1982.
+ denotes those present in the exit meeting on May 24, 1982.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous NRC Findings (Closed) Unresolved Item (50-387/80-22-01) Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) Acceptance Criteria CILRT Procedure P59.2, Revision 1, did not include provisions to correct calculated leakage rate for:
(1) systems isolated or not properly vented and drained, or (2) changes in test volume due to level changes in suppression pool, reactor vessel, and drywell sump during the test. Revision 2 of the Procedure, in Paragraph 5.2(3)(f), defined a correction factor k to account for items (1) and (2) above, but did not contain sufficient detail to calculate k from the test data.
The licensee subsequently initiated Test Change Notice (TCN)-32 to include such details.
This item is' close. _ _
.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-387/80-22-04) Local Leak Rate Test (LLRT)
Procedure Acceptance Criteria LLRT Procedure, Revision 3, Preoperational/ Local Leakage Rate Testing, lacked acceptance criteria for containment isolation valves being leak rate tested with' water in lieu of air.
FSAR Table 6.2-22, Notes 14 and 26, TCN-4, and TCN-5 identify these valves. TCN-5 provides an acceptance criterion of total leakage for all hydraulically tested valves as 12,457 cc/ min. The licensee stated that this value is based on calculations on the allowable 30 day water leakage volume from minimum post-LOCA suppression pool water level (668'5") to the maximum elevation of suppression pool water sealed line (665'0") as mentioned in Startup Field Reports 1065 and 1760. The inspector noted that this value agrees with the same acceptance criterion in Technical Specification 3.6.1.2.e.
However, FSAR Table 6.2-22, Notes 14 and 26, require an additional acceptance criterion of 1 gpm per penetration for the hydraulically tested valves.
The licensee initiated TCN-12 to include this acceptance criterion.
This item is closed.
(Closed) Unresolved Item (50-387/80-22-05) LLRT Procedure Inadequacies The licensee initiated TCN-5 to include results of instrument error analysis and minimum sensitivity in the LLRT procedure.
TCN-5 also provides for observed changes in temperature of the test medium during pneumatic pressure decay tests. Another element of this Unresolved Item regarding the instrument accuracy and range had already been resolved as discussed in Inspection Report 50-387/81-107 Paragraph 2.d.
This item is now closed.
3.
Local Leakage Rate Testing 3.1 Documents Reviewed
--
10 CFR 50, Appendix J, Primary Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water-Cooled Power Reactors.
--
ANSI /ANS-56.8-1981, Containment System Leakage Testing Requirements.
--
FSAR Section 6.2.6.3, Primary Containment Isolation Valve Leakage Rate Tests.
--
NUREG-0776, April 1981, Safety Evaluation Report related to the operation of Susquehanna Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2.
--
P59.2A, Revision 3, Preoperational/ Leakage Rate Testing.
--
Instrument Calibration Test Report for the Volumetric Flow Measuring and Test Equipment, Control No. MM137, Model/ Type 14362, Calibrated on March 19, 1982 and reviewed on April 29, 198.
.
--
Records of LLRT's performed as of the date of inspection.
--
PP&L Letter, February 23, 1982, to Mr. A. Schwencer, USNRC, Subject: Type A, B, and C Integrated and Local Leak Rate Testing.
--
PP&L Internal Memorandum, April 30, 1982, from Mr. A. M. Male to Mr. E. Figard, Subject: Type A, B, and C Integrated and Local Leak Rate Tests.
3.2 Scope of Review The inspector reviewed the above documents to ascertain that the licensee's preoperational LLRT program was conducted in compliance with regulatory requirements of 10 CFR 50 Appendix J and licensee commitments in FSAR.
3.3 Test Witnessing On May 13, 1982, the inspector witnessed a Type C LLRT for Containment Penetration X-7C including Main Steam Isolation Valves HV-IF022C and i
HV-IF028C and other containment Isolation Valves HV-IF001K, IN051K, and IN061K. The test was being conducted in accordance with approved Procedure P59.2A, Section 7.2.1.2, Pneumatic Flowmeter Test - Volumetric Leak Rate Monitor.
Instrument air was used to pressurize the test volume through a test connection on the MSIV leakage control piping for this penetration. The test pressure was 22.5 psig, one-half containment peak accident pressure, in accordance with P59.2A, Appendix H, Sheet 3, FSAR Table 6.2-22 Note 4, and TS 3.6.1.2c.
The test results met the acceptance criteria, leakage for any one MSIV less than or equal to 11.5 SCFH, and therefore the test was declared a success.
The inspector observed the performance of the test to ascertain that prerequisites were met, proper precautions were taken, measuring and test equipment was properly calibrated, test was conducted in accordance with the procedure, test crew actions were correct and timely, and the required data was recorded.
!
j 3.4 Test Results Evaluation
,
The inspector reviewed the LLRT Results Summary to verify that total leakage for all penetrations and Containment Isolation Valves (Type B and C tests) were within 0.6 La, as specified in 10 CFR 50 Appendix J.
The inspector noted that some LLRT's were conducted at a pressure lower than 45 psig, the peak accident pressure Pa.
The licensee explained that Pa was originally 43.8 psig; subsequent capping of 5
,
out of 87 vacuum breaker downcomers increased Pa to 45 psig.
The
!
inspector stated that results of the LLRT's conducted at less than l
45 psig should be corrected for 45 psig using the standard correction l
l
,
_.
.
-
.
. _ _ -
. _.
.
_
-
-
..
_
i
factor of square root of ratio of. pressures. This is an Inspector Followup Item (50-387/82-16-01).
Since the correction factor is small, and only a small number of LLRT's were conducted below 45 psig, and the_ uncorrected value of'
total LLRT leakage results are well below the acceptance criterion
'
of 0.6 La, it is expected that the final correcte'd results will meet
,
the acceptance criterion.
4.
Integrated Leakage Rate Testing (ILRT)
4.1 General On May 22 through 24, 1982, Susquehanna Steam Electrical Station
. Unit 1 performed a preoperational primary containment ILRT as required by 10 CFR 50, Appendix J.
The test was performed in accordance with Procedure P59.2, Revision 2, approved June 15, 1981, and associated TCN's 1 through 32. The inspector reviewed the test procedure and
>
witnessed preparations and various portions of the test. Details and inspection findings are described below.
-
4.2 Procedure Review
!
The inspector reviewed the ILRT procedure, along with the documents listed in Paragraph 3.1, for technical adequacy and compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix J.
The inspector also discussed various aspects of the ILRT with the licensee's representative, including guidance available in industry standard ANSI /ANS-56.8-1981.
4.3 Test Instrumentation The inspector reviewed the calibration records for the instrument system used for the ILRT to ascertain that the accuracy requirements were met and that the calibration was traceable to the National Bureau of Standards. The inspector also verified that the instrument j
system satisfied the instrument selection guide of ANSI /ANS-56.8-1981.
!
The inspector observed the operation of the automatic data collection system during conduct of the test. The inspector had no further questions regarding the instrument system.
4.4 Containment Liner Weld Test Channels The inspector questioned the licensee regarding the possible existence of construction test channels that may be covering containment liner l
welds during the ILRT. The license explained that the design of the containment liner did not include such test channels. The inspector
'
l later confirmed this fact during tours of the containment.
However,
!
the licensee did identify certain localized liner defect weld repairs j
which were covered with sealed leak chases similar in design to construction test channels. The licensee further provided Startup Field Report No. 2900 which documented that these leak chases were
--
. -,
-
,
-. - - - - - - -. --
--
.
.. - - -..
.
- - - --
.
.
installed and tested as "Q" items and met containment liner specification requirements. This report concluded their existence represented an additional qualified containment leak tight boundary; therefore, it was not necessary to vent them during the ILRT. This information satisfied the inspector's concern. No unacceptable conditions were identified.
4.5 Containment Inspection and Test Boundary Verification The inspector conducted several tours independently and with licensee personnel both before and during the ILRT.
During these tours, the containment was inspected for existence of artificial boundaries, valve lineups were verified on a sampling basis to be in accordance with the test procedure, and test boundaries were surveyed for evidence of leakage.
During the containment inspection before the ILRT, the inspector noted that some spare penetrations, including a few spare CRD lines, were covered with temporary plastic caps inside the containment.
Licensee personnel promptly removed these caps and explained that these penetrations have permanent welded caps outside the containment.
This satisfied the inspector's concern.
As part of the test boundary verification, the inspector noted that the test procedure did not require venting the six Traversing Incore Probe (TIP) system penetrations, X-35 A thru F, and all non-seismic portions of the CR0 piping system. The licensee acknowledged the test requirement to vent these lines, Since the TIP lines could not be vented inside the containment, their LLRT results were added as a correction to the ILRT calculated leakage rate. The licensee also opened a vent on the CRD charging header which resulted in a liquid leakage of approximately 2.5 gallons per minute during the test.
The other three non-seismic headers (cooling water, drive water, and exhaust) were not vented during the test due to an oversight.
Liquid leakage through these leak paths was later measured to be approximately one gpm total.
The licensee explained his intention to add this value as part of leakage rate correction. The inspector agreed that this approach to the ILRT results would be acceptab,le and noted that the leakage rate would still be well within the test acceptance criterion.
The inspector expressed a concern for the identified liquid leakage from the CRD system and stated that the matter should be evaluated and described fully in the ILRT Technical Summary Report.
The Station Superintendent acknowledged this concern and stated that the matter would be evaluated for potential safety significance. The inspector stated that this information would be reviewed further by NRC management.
The matter of CRD system leakage is unresolved pending both licensee and NRC further review and resolution of the problem (387/82-16-02).
.
. _
.
.
4.6 ILRT Chronology May 22 0930 Completed containment inspection.
May 22 1535 Started pressurizing containment.
May 22 1657 A coupling blew at the compressors; stopped pressurizing.
May 22 1755 Drywell Cooling Fan IV414A tripped on thermal overload.
May 22 1800 Restarted pressurizing containment.
May 22 1820 Fan IV414A back in service.
May 22 1945 Stopped pressurization at 10 psig for conduct'
of leak search.
May 22 1950 CRD charging header vent flow measured 3750 cc/m.
May 22 2145 Dew Point Cell ME-095010 fluctuating.
May 22 2243 Closed the CRD vent.
May 22 2338 Resumed pressurization.
,
l May 23 0029 Conducted leak surveys; a few minor leaks observed.
,
May 23 0515 Continued leak surveys; more minor leaks observed.
May 23 0515 Fan IV414A tripped on thermal overload.
May 23 0530 Fan IV414A reset.
May 23 0532 Containment pressure at 46.65 psig; stopped compressors, closed valves 19 and 21.
May 23 0551 The CRD vent valve opened; flow 3750 cc in 22 seconds.
,
May 23 0715 Stopped all Drywell Cooling Fans May 23 0819 Stopped Reactor Building Chillers.
May 23 1200 Started 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> ILRT.
l May 23 2000 Completed 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> ILRT.
!
J
~
_ _ _
_,_ _-
. - _. _ _ _ _ _. _..
_
_. _. _ _ _. _ -.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -. _ _. - _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _,. _ _ _... _
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
,
.
May 23 2130 Started 4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> Verification Test.
May 24 0130 Completed 4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> Verification Test.
j May 24 0135 Took flow data for:
(1) CRD charging water vents:
4000 cc/27.5 sec.
(2) Cooling water vents: 4000 cc/2 min. 34 sec.
(3) Equalizing vents: 4000 cc/42 sec.
(4) Drive water vent:
Note: Attempts were made to identify leaking check valves on CRD charging water lines; 17 were identified as leakers.
May 24 0245 Started taking verification information data with all (4) CRD vent lines (refer 0135 entry)
open; data nearly identical to 0135 data.
May 24 0345 Repeated the above data with all (4) CR0 vents open; 4000 cc/22 sec. (~ 3 gpm).
May 24 0415 Started depressurizing the containment.
4.7 ILRT Results Evaluation The licensee evaluated the ILRT results for the 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> period starting 1200 hours0.0139 days <br />0.333 hours <br />0.00198 weeks <br />4.566e-4 months <br /> on May 23, 1982 and ending 2000 hours0.0231 days <br />0.556 hours <br />0.00331 weeks <br />7.61e-4 months <br /> the same day. The leakage rates, in weight percent per day, not corrected for (1)
penetrations not in proper lineup and (2) decrease in containment free air volume during the test, using the mass point analysis and total time analysis techniques, were as follows:
Mass Point Analysis Total Time Analysis Upper 95% Confidence Limit 0.294 0.379 Calculated Leakage Rate 0.287 0.287
_ _ _ _ _ _
_
.
.
The licensee's preliminary estimates of the corrections are as follows:
(1) Correction for penetrations not in proper lineup 0.008%/ day
=
(2) Correction for decrease in containment
-
free air volume 0.129%/ day
=
TOTAL'
0.137%/ day
=
The licensee estimated corrected upper 95% confidence limit to be 0.516%/ day. The test acceptance criterion is 0.75%/ day. However, the above correction factor (0.008%/ day) applied for the penetrations not in proper lineup did not include those CRD headers not vented during the conduct of the test.
The licensee explained that the leakage rate correction would be revised to include the additional small amount of liquid leakage measured through these leak paths.
The inspector agreed that this approach to the ILRT results would be acceptable and noted that the leakage rate still appeared to be well within the test acceptance criterion.
The inspector independently calculated several mass values and the leakage rate by the mass point analysis technique using the raw data from the test. The results were identical to and verified the
,
'
licensee's leak rate calculations.
.
4.8 Future Leakage Rate Testing and Technical Specifications The inspector held discussions with licensee representatives responsible for containment system leakage testing operational surveillances.
!
Some topics discussed were assignment of responsibilities; status of test and administrative control procedures for containment system boundaries; and technical bases for certain proposed Technical i
Specification Surveillances.
The inspector also discussed current NRC positions regarding reporting requirements and the relationship i
between the ILRT and LLRT results. No program problems or unacceptable conditions were identified.
However, the inspector had several comments regarding the proposed Technical Specification Surveillances which he would refer to the appropriate NRC:NRR representative.
5.
Unresolved Items l
Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to ascertain whether they are acceptable or whether they are violations or deviations.
Unresolved items are discussed in Paragraph 4.5.
6.
Plant Tours The inspector made several tours of the plant including Reactor Buf1 ding, Turbine Building and Control Room.
.
-
- -. _. -,. -
.,. -.
..
- - - -
..... -. - -,. -. -
, -,
- - -,
.
.
During these tours, the inspector observed operations and activities in progress, general condition of safety related equipment, component tagging and system operations to support ILRT.
7.
Exit Interview The inspector met with licensee management representatives (see Section 1 for attendees) on May 14, 1982 and at the conclusion of the inspection on May 24, 1982.
The inspector summarized the scope and findings of the inspection at these times.
_