IR 05000440/1985061

Insp Rept 50-440/85-61 on 850912-16.No Violation or Deviation Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Structural Integrity Test for Drywell

ML20138J414
Person / Time
Site:	Perry
Issue date:	10/24/1985
From:	Norton J, Williams C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III)
To:
Shared Package
ML20138J395	List: IR 05000440/1985061 ML20138J390
References
50-440-85-61, NUDOCS 8510290336
Download: ML20138J414 (8)

Text

'

.

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

REGION III

Report No. 50-440/85061(DRS)

Docket No. 50-440 License No. CPPR-148 Licensee: Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company Post Office Box 5000 i

Cleveland, OH 44101 Facility Name: Perry Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1 Inspection At: Perry Site, Perry, OH Inspection Conducted: September 12-16, 1985 a -f vb6 Inspector: J. F. Norton to /L4 /S C Approveri By: C. C. Williams, Chief lofA/!c3, Plant Systems Section Date Inspection Summary Inspection on September 12-16, 1985 (Report No. 50-440/85061(DRS))

Areas Inspected: Special announced inspection of the structural integrity test for the drywell. This inspection involved a total of 30 inspector-hours l ' nsite by one NRC inspector.

i desults: No violations or deviations were identified.

,

t 8510290336 851024 PDR ADOCK 05000440 0 PDR ,

, , - , . - - , , -c,- ,- w,r- ,,-a, ,- , - -.w ,c-- , m , r

'

.

DETAILS 1. Persons Contacted Cleveland Electric Generating Company (CEI)

• Shuster, Quality Assurance Manager

• Riley, General Supervisor, Construction Quality Section

• Lambacher, Supervisor, Operations Quality Section

• Clifford, Lead Engineer

• McCoy, Nuclear Engineering Department, Engineer

• Pech, Supervisory Engineer, Nuclear Construction Engineering Department

• N. Lehman, Staff Analyst

• Gerber, Element Supervisor

• F. Stead, Manager, Nuclear Engineering Department

• B. Ferrell, Licensing Engineer R. Reifsnyder, Quality Engineer J. Victory, Operations Test Engineer D. Thompson, Lead Systems Engineer M. Kritzer, Supervisor, Civil / Structural Unit Metalweld Incorporated W. Avery, Quality Assurance Supervisor R. Garrett, Assistant Project Manager D. Leaverton, Quality Control Inspector

• Denotes those attending the exit interview conducted September 16, 198 . Drywell Structural Integrity Test (SIT)

l l SIT Procedures and Directives The Region III inspector verified that procedure TP 1E66-P-001, Revision 1 and the test setup was in accordance with NRC requirements and licensee commitments, and that authorized personnel had approved

[

the program documents.

!

l Drywell SIT Pressurization of the drywell was started September 14, 1985, at 0400.

,

Pressurization and depressurization was incrementally accomplished l (7.5; 15.0; 22.5; and 30.0 psig) in accordance with the test l procedure Full pressure was attained at 2020 September 15 and l depressurization was completed at 1500 September 16.

, Test Equipment l

l_ Test equipment included eight Atlas-Copco compressors; 18 linear l

variable differential transducers (LVDTs); 27 type FABR-50R-12XS I Rosette gauges; and 54 Model A10 Carlson meters. Also, optical

!

comparators and pressure gauges were employed, along with electronic l

readout equipment for the LVDTs, Rosette gauges, and Carlson meter *

.

d. Calibration All test equipment (except the compressors) was verified properly to be calibrated. This is documented on " Test Equipment Calibration Signoff Sheets" (FNPP No. 6270, Rev. 5/85). The documentation provides instrument description, identification number, location of use during the test, calibration due date, and signoff verification and date for each instrumen e. Test Criteria and Limitations (1) All construction and maintenance activities (except those necessary to perform the test) were suspended during the tes (2) Drywell pressure was increased or decreased only with authorization of the System Test Engineer (STE) or the Leak Rate Test Directo (3) The shift Test Director was responsible for continual monitoring of structural response to internal pressure loadings so that pressurization could be stopped or depressurization commenced if response exceeded acceptable limits or if other unusual circumstances warranted such actio (4) Pressurization and depressurization rates were limited to 5 psi per hou (5) In the event the above rates were exceeded, the test procedures required the test sequence be repeated, starting from the lowest pressure level exceede (6) All instrumentation and equipment within the drywell which could not withstand 30 psi of differential pressure was required to be removed or vente (7) Any cracks which opened wider that 0.05 inch during drywell

! pressurization were required to be brought to the attention of the ST (8) During the test activities, only authorized personnel were admitted within pre-determined exclusion zone (9) Temperatures inside and outside the drywell were required to be above 60 F for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> prior to and during the tes (10) When preparing the crack mapping areas, care was taken to ensure that any existing cracks were not covered during mapping inspection and preparatio __

'

.

f. Instrumentation location i

(1) STRAIN GUAGES l REINFORCED CONCRETE STRUCTURE AB0VE ELEVATION 600'-10" STRAIN GAUGE NUMBERS AZIMUTH ELEVATION LOCATION SI-A S1-B & 45 -30' 659'-7" INSIDE FACE

S1-C

.,

S2-A

'

S2-B & 45 -30' 659'-7" CENTER OF 52-C WALL S3-A

'

S3-8 & 45 -30' 659'-7" OUTSIDE FACE S3-C-54-A 54-B & 134 -30' 659'-7" INSIDE FACE S4- SS-A

SS-B & 134 -30' 659'-7" CENTER OF S5-C- WALL S6-A 56-B & 134 -30' 659'-7" OUTSIDE FACE

S6-C 57-A

!

S7-B & 265 -00' 659'-7" INSIDE FACE 57-C S8-A 4 S8-B & 265 -00' 659'-7" CENTER OF 58-C WALL 59-A 59-B &' 265 -00" 659'-7" OUTSIDE FACE 59-C i S10-A

! S10-B & 45"-30' 620'-0" INSIDE FACE

!

S10-C

-

S11-A S11-B & 45 -30' 620'-00" CENTER OF S11-C WALL l

.

. , , - , _ . _ . . ._ . . . _ - _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _

. .. . . ._ . . - . . - ,. - . . - _ _ . . . .

.

STRAIN GAUGE i NUMBERS AZIMUTH ELEVATION LOCATION  !

i 512-A S12-B & 45 -30' 620'-00" OUTSIDE FACE '

S12-C

S13-A

. S13-B & 134 -30' 620'-0" INSIDE FACE l S13-C S14-A l S14-B & 134 -30' '620'-0" CENTER OF S14-C WALL l

S15-A S15-B & 134 -30' 620'-0" OUTSIDE FACE

! 515-C

'

S16-A S16-B & 265 -00' 620'-0" INSIDE FACE i S16-C 517-A

517-B &. 265 -00' 620'-0" CENTER OF l S17-C WALL-

518-A i

S18-B & 265 -00' 620'-0" OUTSIDE FACE >-

,

S18-C-( STEEL PLATE STRUCTURE BELOW ELEVATION 600'-10" i S19-A e l 519-B & 45 -30' 579'-1" INSIDE FACE S19-C S20-A

, S20-B & 45 -30' 579'-1" RADIAL WEB S20-C PLATE

i S21-A - .

S21-B & 45*-30'. 579'-1" OUTSIDE FACE i S21-C S22-A . - -

S22-B & 134 -30' 579'-1" INSIDE FACE i

S22-C F

L 5'

f l

l

_-_ _ , . _ , _ - - . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ . . . _ . . _ _ _ w _ a. _ . . _

. ~ - . _ _ . _ . - .

.

- . . - .

.

'

STRAIN GAUGE

,

NUMBERS AZIMUTH ELEVATION LOCATION S23-A S23-B & 134 -30' 579'-1" RADIAL WEB

! S23-C PLATE

,

S24-A i

S24-8 & -

134 -30' 579'-1" OUTSIDE FACE S24-C S25-A S25-B & 265 -00' 579'-1" INSIDE FACE

-

S25-C S26-A S26-B & 265 -00' 579'-1" RADIAL WEB S26-C PLATE I

S27-A S27-8 & 265 -00' 579'-1" OUTSIDE FACE S27-C

, (2) LVDT'S l LVDT

, NUMBER AZIMUTH ELEVATION

, L1A 79 -21' 652'-8"

!

L2A 190 -51' 653 -0"

' L3A 320 -23' 650' 7" L4A 93 -47' 621'-9" L5A 185 -30' 620'-7"

' L6A 309 -14' 624'-0" L7A 82 -43' 595'-0" '

!

'

L8A 186*-53' 595'-0" L9A 313 -12' 595'-0" L1B 81 -03' ~653'-0" L2B 186 -55' 652'-9"

'

L3B 315-00' 650'-1" L48 83 -00' '619'-0" L5B 187 -04' 622'-7" i 'L6B 308 -50' 621'-7" L78 81*-56' 595'-0" i

L8B 186*-06' 595'-0" ,

i L9B 312 -25' 595'-0" NOTE: Radial LVDTs are suffixed "A" and vertical.LVDTs "B."

l

, 6-

.-. . - . - _- -

.. . -. ,. .-. = .-

. . . . _

..

,

g. Crack Inspection Areas Crack inspection areas were established at the following locations on the Drywell exterior:

Location Dimension Remark _s Az. 270 and 7.' x 7.' Wall mid-height C Elev. 624'-6" Az. 284 and 7.' x 7.' Wall - top slab C. Elev. 657'-6" intersection Az. 270 and 28.0' 7.' x 7.' Top Slab west of C C. (Elev. 664'-7")

Az. 145 and 7.' x 7.' Near wall - mat

C Elev. 604'-6" intersection Az. 227 15' 6' width Around Equipment

, all around Hatch NOTE: Azimuths and elevations are approximat h. Crack Survey Documentation Crack survey areas were marked with black marker grid lines 7' by 7' with 1 square foot grids. These grid areas were reproduced on data sheet The survey and data sheet completion procedures were accomplished in accordance with the following:

(1) Scan each square of the grid area for visible cracks. Measure the width of a previously unmarked crack at the point judged to be the widest using the optical comparators/ feeler gauges. If crack width was 0.01 inch or greater, a lumber crayon line was made alongside the entire visible portion of the crack within i the grid area. A short cross line was also made at the point l where the width was measured.

l (2) The crack was then sketched on the data sheet for the survey area

and the end points of the crack were indicated with short cross

lines. The point where width was measured indicate the inspec-tion stage was recorded on the data sheet for the survey are (3) If a crack was marked at an earlier stage, the width was measured at the point previously marked. The crack extremities were examined and the lumber crayon line was extended if the visible

length of the crack had increased beyond the end points of the i existing crayon line. The new stage and width information was then recorded on the specimen data sheet.

i i

L l

'

.7

.. . . . . _ _, _ - - . _ - , . . . . _ . - - _ _ _ - .

. . .

, Designer Concurrence The structural design engineer (Gilbert Associates) were present during the entire testing process to monitor results and verify dat Personnel Qualifications Qualifications of all personnel involved in the testing was certified by the Assistant Quality Engineer in charge of preoperational testing and cr?iewed by the Region III inspecto . tit Results A review of test records and data readouts revealed all structural movements, cracking, and air losses were within acceptable limit Maximum crack opening was 0.008 inch with complete recovery on depressurization. Air loss at maximum pressure was 2300 cfm, considerably less than the 18,000 cfm allowable in the test criteri . Exit Interview The Region III inspector met with the licensee representatives (denoted under Paragraph 1) at the conclusion of the inspection on September 16, 1985. The inspector summarized the purpose and findings of the inspectio The licensee acknowledged this information. The inspector also discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with regard to documents or processes reviewed during the inspection. The licensee did not identify any such documents / processes as proprietary.

l l

l l

!'

!

i.

I

i L