IR 05000387/1985017
| ML17139D104 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Susquehanna  |
| Issue date: | 08/07/1985 |
| From: | Jerrica Johnson, Kucharski S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML17139D103 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-387-85-17, NUDOCS 8508210011 | |
| Download: ML17139D104 (19) | |
Text
U.S.
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No.
50-387/85-17 Docket No.
50-387 License No.
NPF-14 Priority Category C
Licensee:
Penns lvania Power and li ht Com an 2 North Ninth Street Allentown Penns lvania 18101 Facility Name:
Sus uehanna Steam Electric Station Unit
Inspection At:
Berwick Penns lvania Inspection Conducted:
Ma 7-10 Ma 29-June
and June
1985 Inspectors:
S. Kucharski, Reactor Engineer ate Approved by:
J.
Johnson, Chief, OPS, DRS date Ins ection Summar:
Ins ection on Ma 7-10 Ma
June
and June
1985 Re ort No. 50-387/85-17 R~ld:
R I, d I I
I C
I k
testing program including procedure review of Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) and Local Leak Rate Test (LLRT) procedures, CILRT witnessing, CILRT and LLRT test review, Bypass test procedure review, LLRT, ILRT and Bypass test results evaluations and tours of the facility.
The inspection involved 77 hours8.912037e-4 days <br />0.0214 hours <br />1.273148e-4 weeks <br />2.92985e-5 months <br /> on site inspection by one region-based inspector.
Results:
No violations or deviations were identified.
85082i0011 85000387 S50809 PDR AD pop
~
I
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
+
J.
R.
+
J.
D.
+*'8T
- C R.
~**D
+R.
AD Aten, Maintenance G.
Byram, Technical Supervisor R. Clymer, N.Q.A. Coordinator Graham, Senior Compliance Engineer Heffelfinger, QA Engineer Iorfida, Plant Engineering A. Myers, Assistant Superintendent of Plant M. Paley, Compliance Engineer Sadvory, Technical Engineer, ILRT Coordinator Shah, Test Engineer, ILRT Director Sherman, Maintenance Thompson, Assistant Superintendent of Plant Bechtel Cor oration
+D. Gower, Technical Staff
""H. Hill, Technical Engineer
+**A. Salley, Technical Engineer United Ener Services
+J. Blessing, Technical Engineer NRC
"R. Jacobs, SRI
- Denotes those present at exit meeting on May 10, 1985
"*Denotes those present at exit meeting on June 2, 1985
+Denotes those present at Special Meeting on June 24, 1985 2.
Containment Local Leaka e Rate Testin 2. 1 Documents Reviewed AD-QA-412, Local Leakage Rate Test Program, Revision 2, 8/20/84 SE-59-022, LLRT, Main Steam Line Isolation Valves, penetration number X-7B, Revision 0, 2/14/85 SE-59-026, LLRT, Feedwater line A (all) and Feedwater line B (Partial),
penetration number X-9A/9B, Revision 0, 4/18/85
3 SE-59-029, LLRT, HPCI Steam Supply, penetration number X-11, t
Revision 2, 2/7/85 SE-59-087, LLRT, RCIC Turbine Exhaust, penetration Number X-215, Revision 0, 2/12/85 SE-59-100, LLRT, RHR Relief valve Discharge, penetration number X-246A, Revision 0, 3/5/85 SE-59-101, LLRT, RHR Relief valve Discharge, penetration number X-246B, Revision 0, 3/19/85 Selected Piping and Instrument Drawings LLRT individual test results LLRT Instrumentation Calibration Records 2. 2 f~f The inspector reviewed the above listed documents to determine compliance g
g p
following failed tests, and the relationship of these items to the"'As-Found" and "As-Left" conditions of containment.
The inspector reviewed the calibration records of the LLRT instrument boxes.
al so with the regulatory requirements of Appendix J to
CFR 50, Technical Specification and conformance with station administration guidelines and applicable industry standards.
The inspector held discussions with the li-censee re ardin documentation of test results the re air and retesting 2.3 Procedure Review The procedures reviewed were technically accurate and in conformance with the regulatory 'requirements of Appendix J to
CFR 50 and applicable in-dustry standards.
The procedural valve lineups and associated instructions were adequate to allow for the proper venting and draining of test Ibounda-ries.
The LLRT coordinator and associated licensee personnel have made a
concerted effort via plant systems walkdowns to assure that the valve line-ups used for local leak rate testing are accurate and in accordance'ith leakage testing requirements.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
2.4 LLRT Instrument Calibration The inspector reviewed the calibration records for the flow,indicat'ors and pressure gages used in the LLRT test boxes.
The instrumentswere appropri-ately calibrated and were marked with current calibration stickers.>
No unacceptable conditions were identifie.5 Test Results The inspector reviewed the LLRT results summary and discussed analysis of test failures, repairs and retests with the licensee.
The "As-found" and
"As-Left" leak rate for every test done on each penetration are documented by the licensee on the LLRT summary and will be in the CILRT test, report.
During the review process the inspector noted that on February 16, 1985, the LLRT for penetration X-11 (HPCI steam supply penetration) failed off scale.
The licensee repaired both valves and performed another LLRT for which the penetration passed.
The licensee contended that even though both valves were repaired, internal work was only performed on the known leaking valve.
The valve that was not leaking had only minor work performed (pre-ventive maintenance).
A meeting was held on June 24, 1985 on site (see Section 1 for Attendees)
to review the events that occurred during the LLRT of penetration X-ll.
The test personnel indicated that it was common practice for them to uti-lize various methods to find the leak source once it is determined that there is an excessive leakage of the test valves.
These methods included snooping the packing with liquid snoop, using a stethoscope, and checking vents.
Mechanics performing the maintenance incorporated these methods and determined that the leakage was caused by one valve only.
The licensee agrees that they should not have performed maintenance on both valves and that precaution will be taken to assure it will not occur in future tests.
In reviewing this situation the inspector concluded that the test personnel performed all the necessary methods needed to determine the location of the leaking valve.
The inspector had no further questions at this time.
3 ~
Containment Inte rated Leak Rate Test 3. 1 Document Reviewed SE-100-003, Primary Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test, Revision 2, May 3, 1985 NQAP-12. 1, NQA Surveillance of Plant Activities, Revision 2, May 7, 1984 CILRT Log Book CILRT Computer Program CILRT Instrumentation Documentation (Calibration Records and Volume Fr acti on Ca 1 cul ati on s)
CILRT Test results Selected Piping and Instrument Drawings
3.2 Sco e of Review The inspector reviewed the above listed documents for technical adequacy and to ascertain compliance with the regulatory requirements of Appendix
!
J to
CFR 50, Technical Specification and applicable industry standards.
The inspector noted that the procedure required a minimum test duration of eight hours.
This reduced duration test is acceptable to the NRC based on the requirements of Bechtel Power Corporation's Topical BN-TOP-1, "jTesting Criteria for ILRT of primary containment Structures for Nuclear Power Plants".
The applicable procedure referenced and was in general conformance with industry standards ANS/ANSI N45 ~ 4, Leakage Rate Testing of Containment Structures for Nuclear Reactors, and ANS/ANSI 56.8-1981, Primary Coptain-ment System Leakage Testing Requirements.
The inspector witnessed a large portion of the activities related to the CILRT, verification test and the Bypass leakage test.
The inspector also perfo'rmed an independent calcula-tion of the test results.
3.3 Procedure Review 3.5 The inspector reviewed the above documentation for technical adequacy and for consistency with regulatory requirements, guidance and licehsee commitments.
Review of the procedures'cceptance criteria, test methods, and references indicated adequate conformance with Appendix J to lO~~CFR 50.
On a random sampling basis, the inspector reviewed the procedure for valve lineups, Appendix C of procedure SE-100-003, for many of the piping penetrations.
This review was to ensure that systems were properly( vented and drained to expose the containment isolation valves to containment atmosphere and test differential pressure with no artificial boundaries'o unacceptable conditions were identified.
CILRT Instrumentation The inspector reviewed the calibration records for the resistance tempera-ture detectors (RTD's), dewpoint instruments, precision pressure detectors, and verification test flowmeters.
Their calibrations prior to the CILRT were found to meet applicable accuracy requirements and were traceable to the National Bureau of Standards.
No unacceptable conditions were
.'~
identified.
f CILRT Chronol o Date Time Activit I
5/31/85 I 0615 I
I0750 I
I Jcommenced pressurization of containment, four I
Icompressors in operation IReached 10 psig in containment I
~
~
a
" CILRT Chronology (Cont)
Date 5/31/8 6/1/8 6/2/85 Time I
I0820 I
I,1115 I
I1220 I
I I1230 I
I 1259 I
I1300 I
I 1304 I
I 1710 I
I 1745 I
I1830 I
I0045 I
I I0100 I
I I0345 I
I I0500 I
I1300 I
I 1330 I
I I1430 I
I 1830 I
I2230 I
I I 0148 I
Activit I
ICheck containment for leaks I
IPower failure on the computer circuit I
a
[Alternate source power for computer entered data Imanually up to present time I
IData auto recorded I
IStop pressurization at 46.25 psig I
IBegan stabilization I
ITurned fans off in containment I
I Completed temperature stabilization period I
IHeasured CRD Vent leakages 19.4 gpm I
ICommenced ILRT IIDiscovered leak in pressure sensing line, when leak Iwas tightened, pressure increased I
I Restart of ILRT Because of the leakage of the Ipressure sensing line I
I Several valves which closed because of a lightning I strike had to be reopened and the test restarted IITest was restarted.
I ICompleted ILRT IIYerification flow 9.5 SCFM was established-began one I hour stabilization period IIStarted superimposed leak verification test I
ICompleted data collection for verification test IIPerform CRD leakage test -11.2 gpm as found, -8.5 gpm
)as left I
IBegan depressurization of containment
,
Date Time Activit 6/2/85 I1100 I
I I 1150 I
I 11300 I
I I1500
)Ceased depressurization of the containment.
(Isolated the drywall and continued suppression, Ichamber depressurization ICeased depressurization of suppression chamber and Istarted stabilization period I
J Started Bypass test, Drywel1 pressure 18.684'sia ISuppression Chamber 14.301 psia I
ICompleted data collection for Bypass test.
precautions were adhered to, especially those related to manipulation of containment boundaries after the commencement of testing.
One prob~lem did occur during the test which the licensee handled adequately.
An electrical storm caused the closure of several valves which affected the ILRT.I The test was stopped, the valves were realigned and the test was restarted.
The licensee evaluated the test results for the eight hour test between 0500 and 1300 on June 1,
1985.
The calculated leakage rate at the upper 95% confidence limit was 0.322 wt %/Day for the mass point calculation and 0.430 wt %/Day for the total time method.
The test acceptance I~
criterion is 0.75 wt %/Day.
The inspector performed an independentIcal-culation of the test results using the raw data from the test to estimate the accuracy of the licensee's leak rate calculation.
The inspector performed the calculation using first the air mass data and then the average temperature, pressure, and vapor pressure.
The results areIas follows:
1.
Licensee 3.7 Test Results Review 3.6 Test Performance/Control The test was performed within the guidelines of the procedure, Procedural Mass point - 0.276 wt %/Oay, UCL - 0.289 wt %/Day Total Time 0.268 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.397 wt %/Oay 2.
NRC a.
Air mass Calculation:
Mass point - 0.27592 wt %/Day, UCL 0.28869 wt Total Time'- 0 '6812 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.39254.wt
%/Oay
%/Day
b.
Average Temperature, Pressure, Vapor Pressure Mass point 0.27575 wt %/Day, UCL 0.28878 wt %/Day Total Time 0.26749 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.40045 wt %/Day The above, values do not include the results of the LLRT's that were,,
performed prior to the ILRT.
A preliminary review of that data incor-porated into the inspector's calculations with the added penalties for non standard alignment are as follows:
1.
Licensee a.
Mass Point Data ILRT 0.276 wt %/Day, UCL 0.289 wt %/Day penalty nonstandard alignment - 0.033 wt %/Day, UCL -.0 '33 wt,%/Day
"As-Found" leakage - 0.338 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.338 wt %/Day (1)
Total "As-Found" Data 0.647 wt %/Day, UCL 0.66 wt %/Day (2)
Total "As-Left" Data - 0.309 wt %/Day, UCL 0.322 wt %/Day b.
Total Time Data ILRT 0.268 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.397 wt %/Day penalty non standard alignment 0.033 wt %/Day UCL 0.033 wtl%/Day
"As-Found" leakage 0.338 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.338 wt %/Day (1)
Total "As-Found" Data 0.639 wt %/Day, UCL 0.768 wt %/Day (2)
Total "As-Left" Data 0.301 wt %/Day, UCL 0.430 wt %/Day Vs 2.
NRC a.
Air Mass Calculation (1)
Mass Point Data (a)
"As-Found Data - 0.64692 wt %/Day,
%/Day (b)
"As-Left" Data - 0.30892 wt %/Day,
%/Day UCL 0.65978 wt UCL 0,32169 wt
~
~
b.
(1)
Mass Point Data The test result was within the acceptance band.
The inspector also verified this result by independent calculation.
The results were as follows:
(2)
Total Time Data (a)
"As-Found" Data - 0.63912 wt %/Day, UCL 0.763S4 wt
%/Day (b)
"As-Left" Data - 0.30112 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.42554 wt
%/Oay (a)
"As-Found" Data 0.64675 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.65978 wt
%/Day (b)
"As-Left" Data 0.3087S wt %/Oay, UCL - 0.32178 wt
%/Day (2)
Total Time Data (a)
"As-Found" Data 0.63849 wt %/Oay, UCL -0.77145 wt
%/Day (b)
"As-Found" Data 0.30049 wt %/Day, UCL - 0.43345 wt
%/Day The inspector concluded that the licensee's calculations were appropriately performed and accurate and that the test was successful.
The CILRT was followed by a successful superimposed leak veri-fication test.
The licensee imposed a leak of 9.5 SCFM. 'he measured verification test leak was 1. 199 wt %/Day for mass point calculation and 1.203 wt %/Oay for total time.
a.
Licensee 1.
Mass point Band (0.888
< 1. 199 < 1.388)
2.
Total time Band (0.880
< 1.203
< 1.380)
b.
NRC 1.
Mass point Band (0 '88 < 1. 19819
< 1.388)
2.
Total time Band (0.880
< 1.20117
< 1.380)
No unacceptable condit,ions were identified.
4.0 B
ass Leaka e Test Once the superimposed verification test was completed the licensee depres-surized the containment and aligned the drywell and suppression chamber to perform a bypass test.
The scope of this test was to determine the, bypass leakage from the drywell to the suppression chamber.
The duration of the test was a minimum of two hours and the acceptance criteria is a minimum allowable bypass area of.770 sq. in.
The maximum bypass area achieved during the test, as witnessed by the inspector, was 0.007 inz.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
The inspector conducted inspection tours independently and with licnesee personnel both before and during the CILRT.
During these tours the inspec-tor observed operations and activities in progress, implementation of ra-diological controls, and the general condition of safety related equipment.
In addition, the inspector examined the containment system boundaries, component tagging, and instrumentation to support the CILRT.
During these tours the inspector also observed licensee personnel checking for evidence of leakage and verifying selected valves to be in the correct position ac-cording to procedural requirements..
No unnacceptable conditions were iden-tified.
6.
Inde endent Calculation The inspector performed independent calculations of the test results of the CILRT and subsequent verification test.
Details are included in Section 3.7 of this report.
The inspector reviewed the gA procedures which are listed in Sections 2. 1 and 3. 1 and found them to be adequate.
The inspector also verified gA in-volvement in monitoring the testing activities.
When questioned the gA personnel were knowledgeable of their responsibilities, how to perform their duties and report their findings.
No unacceptable conditions were identifie ~l
A meeting was held on May 10, 1985, June 2, 1985 and June 24, discuss the scope and finding of the inspection as delineated report (see section 1 for attendees).
At no time during this was written information provided to the licensee.
1985 ito in this inspection
~
~
)
~ I