IR 05000400/1988032
| ML18005A658 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 10/07/1988 |
| From: | Blake J, Hallstrom G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18005A657 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-400-88-32, NUDOCS 8810250382 | |
| Download: ML18005A658 (17) | |
Text
gpR AEg(
(,4 C~
yN
~o
)f*~>> +
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSlON
REGION II
101 MARIETTAST., N.W.
ATLANTA,GEORGIA 30323 Report No.:
50-400/88-32 Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light Company P. 0.
Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Docket No.:
50-400 License No.:
NPF-63 Facility Name:
Harris I Inspection Condu ed:
August 29 - September 2,
1988 Inspector:
G.
.
Ha stro Approved by:
J.
.
B ake, ief Ma erials an Processes Section E gineering ranch Division of Reactor Safety Date Signed (0
8~~'ate Signed SUMMARY Scope:
This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of Inservice Testing (IST) of pumps and valves, program, procedures and records; Inservice Inspection (ISI), Eddy Current (EC) examination of steam generator 1C and licensee'ction on previous Inspector Followup Item 88-26-03.
Results:
All licensee activities examined during this inspection were at a
level considerably above average.
This was evidenced by timely and in-depth responses to all technical questions related to the IST of pumps and valves and the EC examinations of steam generator 1C.
All licensee personnel interacted with courtesy, promptness and thorough professionalism.
In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identified.
88i0250332 83i0ii PDR ADOCK 05000400
REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- R
- J J.
G.
- C
- A.
- C R.
- J
- p
- J
- C
- T
- M.
- M J.
%J
- J
- R.
M.
- (
~
Biggerstaff, Principal Engineer, Onsite Nuclear Safety Brown, Senior Specialist, Corporate guality Assurance (gA)
Davis, Senior Control Operator Forehand, Director quality Assurance (gA)/guality Control Gibson, Director, Programs and Procedures Howe, Senior Specialist, Regulatory Compliance Hinnant, Plant General Manager Johnson, Senior Specialist, Inservice Inspection (ISI)
Kloosterman, Project Engineer, Licensing McCarthy, Principal Engineer, Nuclear Engineering Department McKay, Principal Engineer, Site Engineering Unit McKenzie, Principal gA Engineer Morton, Manager of Maintenance Oates, Principal Engineer, Licensing Pugh, Project Specialist, ISI Schaub, Senior Mechanical Specialist, ISI Sipp, Manager, Environmental and Radiological Control Smith, Operations Support Supervisor VanMeter, Manager, Technical Support Wallace, Senior Specialist, Regulatory Compliance Woods, Engineering Supervisor, ISI Other licensee employees contacted during this inspection included craftsmen, engineers, technicians, and administrative personnel.
Other Organizations R. Marlow, Project Manager and Level III Examiner, Conam Inspection J. Tobin, Level IIA Examiner, Conam Inspection B. Jones, Level IIB Examiner, Conam Inspection C. Fuller, Level I Examiner, Conam Inspection M. Caperello, Level IIB Examiner, Conam Inspection NRC Resident Inspectors
- W. Bradford, Senior Resident Inspector
- M. Shannon, Resident Inspector
- Attended exit interview
2.
Inservice, Testing (IST) of Pumps and Valves (73756)
The inspector reviewed procedures, interviewed licensee/contractor personnel and reviewed pertinent quality records, as indicated below, to determine whether inservice testing. regulatory requirements and licensee commitments are being met.
The applicable code, for IST of pumps and valves is ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel
.(ASME..BSPV)
Code Section XI 1983 Edition, Summer 1983 Addenda (83S83);
- .The. licensee's Pump and Valve Test Program became effective on the date of Commercial Operation, May 2, 1987, and continues to May 1, 1997.
a.
The inspector interviewed...licensee/contractor personnel and reviewed th'e below listed documents to verify that the licensee has assigned responsibilities to persons and organizations for:
preparation, review, and approval of IST procedures; scheduling of IST for normal and increased frequency testing, performance of testing per approved procedures; performance of post-maintenance and post-modification IST; proper certification and calibration of IST instruments; and training for those personnel responsible for implementing IST proce-dures.
Documents Reviewed Identi fication ISI-203, Rev.
Titie I
ASME Section XI Pump and Valve Program Plan TAC No. 63586, NRC Safety Evaluation of the IST dated April 27, 1988
-
Program for Pumps and Valves, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant NLS-88-134, dated June 6, 1988 ISI-800, Rev.
2'SI-801, Rev.
ISI-111, Rev. I MMM-012, Rev.
MMM-013, Rev.
PLP-103, Rev.
Additional Relief Request RV-2 and RV-3 Inservice Testing of Pumps Inservice Testing of Valves Personnel Training for ASME Section XI Pump Vibration Measurements Maintenance Work Control Procedure Maintenance History Records Surveillance and Periodic Test Program
b.
The inspector reviewed the below identified procedures for the below listed pumps and an associated representative sample of valves to determine if IST procedures and data reflect the requirements of the appropriate edition of the ASME Code Section XI.
The review included the following:
evaluations of imposing and removing increased frequency testing requirements; evaluation and justification of changes to test acceptance criteria; pump vibration test data analysis and acceptance criteria justification, including location of vibration measurement; requirements that pump tests be conducted at reference conditions, including reference speed; compliance of test instruments to
CFR 50 and ASME Code requirements; performance of positive testing of Category C check valves whose safety function is to open and close; evaluation of Category A valve leak test -data conducted in accordance with ASME IWV-3426 arid -3427 guidelines and including containment isolation and pressure isolation valves; testing of safety and relief valves in accordance with ASME IWV-3510 through -3513; observation of remote position. indicators, including those on the remote shutdown panels, at least once every two years to verify that valve operation is accurately indicated; and indication that valve stroke times are commensurate with the capabilities of the valve test.
Documents Reviewed
~
~
~
Identification ISI-203, Rev.
Tit1e ASME Section XI Pump and Valve Program Plan OST-1028, Rev.
Containment Isolation Valve Operability Post Maintenance Intervals Modes 1-2-3-4-5-6 OST-1072, Rev.
CVCS/SI System Remote Position Indica-tion Test Two-Year Interval Mode
OST-1087, Rev.
OST-1211, Rev.
OST-1007, Rev.
Motor Driven Auxiliary Feedwater Pumps Full Flow Test quarterly Interval Mode
Auxiliary Feedwater Pump lASA Operability Test quarterly Interval Modes-1-2-3-4 CVCS/SI System Operability quarterly Interval Modes 1-2-3-4 OST-1106, Rev.
OST-1008, Rev.
CVCS/SI System Operability quarterly Interval Modes 4-5-6 RHR Pump Operability quarterly Interval Modes 1-2-3 OST-1103, Rev.
RHR Pump Operability quarterly Interval Nodes 4-5-6
Identification Pum Summar Data Examined Test Dates
'Auxiliary Feedwater Pump IA-SA (AF IA-SA)
Auxiliary Feedwater Pump IB-SB (AF IB-SB)
Auxiliary Feedwater Pump IC-SAB (AF IC-SAB)
RKR Pump IA-SA (RHR IA-SA)
/
12/23/86, I/16/87, 3/24/87, 6/11/87, 9/12/87, 10/10/87, I/11/88, 4/7/88, 7/8/88 2/18/87, 3/24/87, 5/22/87, 8/21/87, 9/12/87, 12/31/87, 2/18/88, 5/18/88, 7/13/88
'2/28/86, 2/6/87, 4/I/87, 7/I/87, 9/29/87, 12/21/87, 3/30/88, 6/27/88 9/21/86, 12/10/86, 3/24/87, 6/12/87, 9/11/87, 12/12/87, 3/17/88, 6/15/88 9/21/86, 12/10/86, 3/29/87, 6/12/87, 9/11/87, 12/16/87, 3/17/88, 6/15/88 9/29/86, 12/25/86, I/30/87, 4/10/87, 6/30/87, 6/30/87, 9/28/87, 12/15/87 3/17/88, 6/22/88 9/24/86, 12/25/86, 5/20/86, 5/20/87, 9/21/87, 9/28/87, 12/15/87, 3/17/88 6/22/88 Pum S ecific ualit Data Examined Procedure 0ST-1087 Plant Status
- Mode
OST-1211 Plant Status
- Mode I Test Date 9/12/87 4/7/88 Pum s Tested AF IA-SA AF IB-sB (Full Flow Tests)
AF IA-SA (Recirc.
Fl ow)
Associated Valves Tested Forward Flow Checks I AF-16, 31, 54, 73, 92, 201$ 202, 203 ICE-36 and 46 Recirc.
Valves I AF-5 5 I AF-24 Pump Pressure Control Valves I AF-19 and I AF-34 Full Stroke Test on I AF-5, I AF-55 5 I AF-74
Procedure cont OST-1008 Plant Status
- Mode
OST-1008 Plant status
- Mode
OST-1106 Plant Status
- Mode 5 Test Date 3/17/88 10/30/87 9/21/87 Pum s Tested RHR 1A-SA RHR 1B-SB (Full Flow Tests)
SI IB-SB (Recirc.
Flow)
Associated Valves Tested Full Stroke Test on 1 RH-25, 1 SI-300, 1 SI-310, 1 SI-359, 1 RH-30, 1 RH-31, 1 SI-322, 1 SI-326, 1 SI-340, 1 RH-63, 1 SI-301, 1 SI-311, 1 RH-66, 1 RH-69, 1 SI-323, 1 SI-327, 1 SI-341 No Valve Test ComPleted Backseat of Checks 1 CS-178, 1 CS-192, 1 CS-206, 1 CS-536, Forward Flow of Checks 1 CS-192, 1 CS-193 Full Stroke Test on 1 CS-11, 1 CS-238$
1 CS-235, 1 CS-231, 1 CS-231, 1 CS-217,
.
1 CS-218, 1 CS-219, 1 CS-220, 1 CS-480, 1 SI-287, 1 SI-3, 1 SI-4, 1 CS-278, 1 CS-492, 1 SI-1, 1 SI-2, 1 SI-264, 1 CS-214, 1 CS-170, 1 CS-168, 1 CS-182, 1 CS-169, 1 CS-171i 1 CS-196, 1 CS-210, 1 SI-263, 1 SI-179, 1 CS-746, 1 CS-752, 1 CS-559, 1 CS-563, 1 CS-7, 1 CS-8, 1 CS-9
Procedure cont'd OST-1007 Plant Status
- Mode
Test Date 9/28/87 Pum s Tested SI 1A-SA SI 1B-SB (Recirc.
Flow)
Associated Valves Tested Forward Flow of Nonflow Check 1 CS-179, 1 CS-207, 1 CS-193 Forward Flow of Discharge Checks 1 CS-178, 1 CS-206, 1 CS-192, Forward Flow on Charging Checks 1 CS-167, 1 CS-477, 1 CS-497, 1 CS-500, 1 CS-488, 1 CS-486, Full Stroke Test on 1 CS-210, 1 CS-182, 1 CS-169, 1 CS-171, 1 CS-196, 1 CS-168, 1 CS-170, 1 CS-492, 1 CS-.480, 1 CS-278, 1 CS-214, 1 CS-559, 1 CS-563, 1 SI-179, 1 SI-263, 1 SI-264, 1 SI-287, 1 CS-746, 1 CS-7$
1 CS-8, 1 CS-9 1 SI-1, 1 SI-2, 1 SI-3 1 SI-4 c.
The inspector reviewed a sample of all the above indicated procedures to verify that:
These procedures are the latest ones approved and that test acceptance criteria used were valid for the components being tested.
Inservice test results were recorded per the approved procedures and that data was evaluated within the time constraints deli.ne-ated in the appropriate edition of the'SME Code Section XI, Subsections IWP and IWV.
d.
The inspector examined the pump summary data and specified quality data listed above for the listed pumps and associated valves to verify that:
IST data was evaluated per the requirements of ASME Code Section XI, Subsection IWV, and
CFR 50.55a(g)
and ensured that appropriate followup actions were take IST records are maintained as delineated in ASME IWV-6000; and engineering evaluations are sufficient to justify changes to reference values and removal of increased -frequency testing requirements should be documented and reviewed.
Within the areas examined, violations and deviations were not identified.
3.
Eddy Current (EC) Examinations The inspector reviewed procedures, interviewed licensee/contractor personnel and observed EC activities listed below to determine whether they were in conformance with regulatory requirements.
The applicable code is the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel-(ASME BSPV) Code,-Section XI, 1983 edition, Summer 1983 addenda (83S83).
EC-examinations were being conducted by Conam inspection as a subcontractor to the licensee.
a ~
Review of NDE Procedures Unit 1 (73052)
(1)
The inspector reviewed the procedures= indicated below to deter-mine whether the procedures were consistent with regulatory requirements
.and licensee commitments.
The procedures were also reviewed in the areas of procedure approval, requirements for qualification of NDE personnel, and compilation of required records; and if applicable, division of responsibility between the licensee and contractor personnel if contractor personnel are involved in the ISI effort.
Identification Title CPSL-EST-216, Rev.
Conam-99-CNTP-003, Rev.
Steam Generator Tube Indication Tracking and Reporting Procedure Procedures for the Training, Testing and Certification of Nondestructive Test Personnel Conam-42-LCM-001, Rev.
Conam-42-EC-179, Rev.
equality Control Manual Multifrequency EC Procedure Westinghouse Model D4 Steam Generator Tubing MIZ-18 Digital EC System, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Conam-42-DA-020, Rev.
Data Analysis for MIZ-18 Data Utilizing DDA-4 Digital Data Analysis System Bobbin Coil Examination Shearon Harris
(2)
The inspector reviewed the EC procedures for technical content relative to:
multichannel examination unit, multichannel examination indication equipment is specified, examination sensitivity, material permeability, method of examination, method of calibration and calibration sequence, and acceptance criteria.
b.
Steam Generator Tubing EC Examination (73753)
The inspector observed the EC activities indicated below.
The observations were compared with the applicable procedures and the Code in the following areas:
methods for maximum sensitive is applied; method of examination has been recorded; examination equip-ment has been calibrated in accordance with the applicable performance reference; required coverage of steam generator tubes occurs during the examination; acceptance criteria is specified or referenced and is cons.istent,with the procedure, or the ASHE Code; and, results are consistent with the acceptance criteria.
(1)
In-process tube data acquisition was observed for the following steam generator 1C tubes.
Row Column Row Column
47
24
7
18
24
38
46
48
49
52
52
52
53
53
53
53
53
53
54
48
49
47
40
21
24
46
48
49
49
50
50
50
50
51
51
.51
52 (2)
In-process eddy current inspection data evaluation, including calibration confirmation, was observed for a random sample of the above listed tubes.
The inspector conducted an EC data evaluation verification of the above sample in order to confirm the validity of the reported tubing conditio (3)
Certification records for EC calibration standard 22957 were reviewed for material type, correct fabrication, and certified flaw location and size.
(4)
The inspector reviewed the qualifications documentation for the below 'listed,.examiners in. the following areas:
employer's name; person certified; activity qualified to perform; effective period of. certification; signature of employer's designated representative; basis used for certification; and annual visual acuity.,'olor vision examination, and periodic recertification.
~Com an Examiner" EC-Level Conam II B Conam I
Conam IIB Conam III Conam IIA Within the areas examined, violations or deviations were not identified.
MWC CLF BAJ REM JPT 4.
Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701, 92702)
(Open)
Inspector Followup Item 400/88-26-03, Kerotest Yalves Installed Backwards on Leakoff Lines for RC-107 and RC-103 This item concerns the potential for uncontrolled RCS leakage due to incorrect installation of Kerotest Y-type globe valves.
Evidence of extensive boric acid leakage
.below pressurizer spray discharge valve RC-I03 was identified during a previous inspection.
Leakage from RC-103 and its sister valve RC-107 is considered controlled due to the installation of a leakoff collection system (stem collector shield, drain line, and attendant isolation valves).
The leakoff collec-tion system had been considered operable.
However, leakage had occurred past the stem collector shield of valve RC-103 sufficient to deposit a
considerable amount of boric acid crystals on electrical equipment (Junction boxes and penetrations)
located below the valve.
The leakoff collection iso1ation valves included a Kerotest Y-type globe valve down-stream of the collector shield and a swing check valve downstream of the Kerotest valve.
The Kerotest valve had been installed in opposition to the normal direction of leakoff flow.
There is question as to whether the design of the Kerotest valve is such that sufficient reverse flow would cause the valve to automatically close and "in effect" cause the collector shield to become part of the RCS pressure boundary.
During this inspection, cognizant licensee personnel provided to the inspector a copy of'esign Drawing CAR-2166, G-171, Rev.
5 dated 3/8/84,
"Valve Stem Leakoff Piping - Containment Building - Unit I".
The drawing includes a general note that "leakoff included stem valves to be installed
/
I
with flow above the seat."
The inspector noted that this required the Kerotest valves to be installed in opposition to the direction of leakoff flow.
Further, that the note was not sufficient to remove NRC concern regarding adequacy of the leakoff collection system design.
Cognizant licensee personnel responded that adequacy of the generic design would be addressed by Plant Change Request (PCR)
No.
3562 issued. August 18, 1988.
This item remains open, pending completion of licensee. actions
.to address adequacy of the engineering design involved.
5.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on September 22, 1988, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1.
The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed below.
Proprietary information is not contained in this repor it