Text

Primary Containment Leakage Rate Testing 1974-1978.Describes All Reactor Containment Testing Performed Subsequent to the Oct 1974 Type a Test & Up to & Incl a Type a Test Performed in Aug 1978
	ML20023A400
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	11/17/1978
From:	Eichenholz H; VERMONT YANKEE NUCLEAR POWER CORP.
To:	;
Shared Package
ML20023A399	List: ML20023A398; ML20023A400;
References
	NUDOCS 7811270134
	Download: ML20023A400 (45)
	v • d • e

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

f s a,

O O VERMONT YANKEE PRIMARY CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE TESTING 1974 - 1978 H. Eichenholz O

l 1

781127ot 3c t _ _ ____- '

Y >

e e Introduction During the 1978 Torus Outage, which occurred during the period from July 1, 1978, to August 13, 1978, a Type A Containment Integrated Leakage Rate Test was performed. The performance of this test completes the second of three intervals required in the approximate ten-year service period. The first interval was completed by the performance c.I a Type A test during October 1974, and was the subject of a report filed with the USNRC in January 1975.

This report describes all reactor containment testing performed sub-sequent to the October 1974 Type A test and up to and including a Type A test performed in August 1978. In accordance with the requirement of 10CFR50, Appendix J, summary analysis of all periodic Type B and Type C tests that were performed since the October 1974 Type A test are included in this report. These Type B and Type C tests were conducted during the O 1976 and 1977 Refueling Outages and the 1978 Torus and Refueling Outages.

All testing performed during the period covered by this report con-formed to the rules and regulations specified in 10CFR50, Appendix J.

Summary The plant was shut down on July 1, 1978, for repairs to the torus structure. Due to the fact that a lengthy outage was envisioned, it was decided to reschedule the performance of the Type A test to the end of the Torus Outage from its originally scheduled 1978 Refueling Outage date. Sub-sequent to the shutdown and prior to the commencement of the Type A test sequence, the plant impicmented the Type B and C Testing Program.

Pressurization for the Type A test commenced on August 9th with two air compressors of 2100 SCFM total capacity and approximately a 5 psi /hr O charging rate. Containment pressure was raised to the calculated peak accident pressure of 44 psig over a 9-hour and 40-minute interval. This time period included containment pressure hold points at the 5, 15, and 30 psig 1cvels to facilitate detection of containment leakage. Following a 4-hour stabilization period, the 24-hour test period was initiated at 0640 hours0.00741 days 0.178 hours 0.00106 weeks 2.4352e-4 months on August 10th. It was determined from a review of approximately 10 hours1.157407e-4 days 0.00278 hours 1.653439e-5 weeks 3.805e-6 months of collected data that the magnitude of the leakage rate was in excess of the established acceptance criteria. Subsequently, the leakage ;

was located and an isolation effected. Following approximately 15 hours1.736111e-4 days 0.00417 hours 2.480159e-5 weeks 5.7075e-6 months i from the start of the initial 24-hour test interval, containment conditions were reestablished that allowed the start of a new 24-hour test interval at 2030 hours0.0235 days 0.564 hours 0.00336 weeks 7.72415e-4 months on August 10th. A successful 24-hour test period was com-pleted at 2030 hours0.0235 days 0.564 hours 0.00336 weeks 7.72415e-4 months on August lith, i

l

\ .

. _ _ - - _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - ._ J

/ >

The absolute method of 1eakage-rate testing was employed and the containment leakage rate was determined from the slope of a least squares

! fit of a mass of air versus time plot. The measured leakage rate at the 95% confidence level is 0.277 + 0.004%/ day.

Description of Test l The containment was made ready for the integrated leakage rate test and pressurization commenced at 1701 hours0.0197 days 0.473 hours 0.00281 weeks 6.472305e-4 months on August 9, 1978. Pressuri-zation was accomplished by using two mobile, oil-free air compressors, I one with 900 SCFM capacity, and the other with 1200 SCFM capacity. They I

were connected by hose to the nitrogen purge supply line at the flange connection upstream of FCV-1-156-10 as shown on the attached figure. At the end of the first hour of pumping, the 5 psig containment pressure holdpoint was reached and leakage location survey personnel were dispa' s.d .

O As a result of this survey, no gross 1eakage was detected but, a very minor leak was found at a handwheel shaft on the Personnel Hatch's inner airiock door.

Pressurization was continued between 1854 and 2013 hours0.0233 days 0.559 hours 0.00333 weeks 7.659465e-4 months with in-creasing pressurizing rates from 5.75 to 8 psig/hr until the 15 psig con-tainment pressure holdpoint was reached. As before, leakage detection crews were dispatched with the only noted event being the detection of an air leak emanating from the flanges of Flow Element FE-1-156-2 installed in the nitrogen purge supply line. It was determined that this condition occurred because of insufficient tightening of the flange bolting follow-ing the installation of a 4" orifice plate used to measure Type A test con-tainment pressurizing air flow rates. Since this condition was induced by the test setup, as well as a leakage outside the primary containment test boundary, the subject bolting was tightened and pressurization of the containment resumed at 2128 hours0.0246 days 0.591 hours 0.00352 weeks 8.09704e-4 months . By 2328 hours0.0269 days 0.647 hours 0.00385 weeks 8.85804e-4 months , the 30 psig containment O eressere heideeint wes achieved with ne 1eekases regerted bx the eurvex crews. At approximtely 0100 hours0.00116 days 0.0278 hours 1.653439e-4 weeks 3.805e-5 months on August 10, one compressor was shut down at a containment pressure of 42 psig. At this point, the con-tainment pressurizing rate was reduced. The test pressure of 44.45 psig (119.98" Hg Abs) was reached at 0240 hours0.00278 days 0.0667 hours 3.968254e-4 weeks 9.132e-5 months on August 10th.

Data collection was initiated to determine stabilized conditions.

Based upon a review of 4 hours4.62963e-5 days 0.00111 hours 6.613757e-6 weeks 1.522e-6 months of collected data that met the established containment stabilization criteria, it was determined that the start of the 24-hour test interval wou1d be 064., hours. By 1230 hours0.0142 days 0.342 hours 0.00203 weeks 4.68015e-4 months on August 10th, computer calculations showed that leakage in excess of 0.60 percent per day existed. Leakage detection crews were dispatched to determine the location of leaks. Minor leaks were found at various instrument line fittings and l alight leakage noted at the packing of a few valves. By 1740 hours0.0201 days 0.483 hours 0.00288 weeks 6.6207e-4 months , it was determined that the excessive containment leakage was emanating from mois-i ture traps in the Containment Air Compressor System. The computer cal-

! culations, based upon approximately 11 hours1.273148e-4 days 0.00306 hours 1.818783e-5 weeks 4.1855e-6 months of accumulated data at 1740 l hours, indicated that containment leskage at the upper 95% confidence level was 0.809 percent per day. This incIlent was the subject of Reportable Occurrence RO 78-25/3L.

i

[

hAIRSUPPLYSCHEMATIC ' -

r - - - - - -- A ir Pu"ge Supply l =

j d -

3V-16-19-9 9gg, SB-100 Receiver Drywell 2:

FCV r

~

I g @ 1200cfm 7-16-19-1l 7

OPr

Air Compressors

Disconnecting a fitting on &

{ OTI FT-1-156-2 following isolation s TI-1-156-9 and depressurization of charging l line provides required vent path.

I .

I N V-16-19-23 l Torus M V-16-19-10 l

1 I

l l

l L __

Reactor Building _ ]

Figure 1

S f

i Based on the discovery of the leak, it was determined that the Containment Air Compressor System would be isolated and the containment I repressurized to a value slightly greater than Pa. At 2030 hours0.0235 days 0.564 hours 0.00336 weeks 7.72415e-4 months , the containment pressure was at 44.12 psig (119.44 "Hg. Abs). The containment charging line was secured and vented. After approximately one hour follow-ing the establishment of required containment pressure, it was determined that no departure from stabilized conditions occurred. Based upon this fact, time zero for the 24-hour test interval was selected as 2030 hours0.0235 days 0.564 hours 0.00336 weeks 7.72415e-4 months on August 10, 1978. By 2310 hours0.0267 days 0.642 hours 0.00382 weeks 8.78955e-4 months , approximately 21s hours of test data was collected and computer calculations performed, which projected containment leakage rate to be one half that of the test acceptance criteria.

The peak pressure Type A test was completed at 2030 hours0.0235 days 0.564 hours 0.00336 weeks 7.72415e-4 months on August lith. A supplemental test, to verify the accuracy of the instrumentation O- was conducted by metering back to the containment a mass approximately equal to one half of the allowable Icakage. This pumpback of 610 cubic feet was complete at 2039 hours0.0236 days 0.566 hours 0.00337 weeks 7.758395e-4 months , and sufficient data had been gathered by 2140 hours0.0248 days 0.594 hours 0.00354 weeks 8.1427e-4 months to determine that this verification was successful. The containment was depressurized in accordance wlch the appropriate Opera-ting Procedure at 2218 hours0.0257 days 0.616 hours 0.00367 weeks 8.43949e-4 months on August 11, 1978. All systems were returned to normal as required by operational needs by 0500 on August 12, 1978.

Analysis and Interpretation of Test Data The Vermont Yankee computer, as presently programmed, performs a computation of the total air mass on the containment every ten minutes.

This computation is derived from an average of the one-minute stored values of: Drywell and Torus Average Air Temperature; Drywell and Torus Average Dewpoint; and, Containment Pressure. For a 24-hour test interval, then, there are 145 independent data points.

O The data consists of a series of mass of air calculations made at discrete time intervals. The data lends itself to a statistical analysis based upon a time dependent rate of change of the contained mass of air.

A small pressure change over the test interval is the basis for the assump-tion that the containment leakage rate is constant with respect to time.

A linear least square fit is employed to develop the "best" straight line fit to the data. The slope of this least squares fit line is the leakage rate.

l l

r .

The equation of the least squares fit line is of the form:

Q = b + mT where: Q = mass of air b = Q intercept (Q value at time 0) m = slope of line (leakage rate)

T = time The values for b and m are determined from the following equations:

IQ IT - ETIQT b =

NE T - (IT)

N EQT - IQIT N ET - (ET)

The 95% confidence interval of the leakage rate (slope of line) may be determined from the statisgical veriance of the slope and a " students table of t." The variance, S is:

< - .=,

S (m) = 1 NIQ -

(IQ) -m N-2 ,N T -

(ET) _

The 95% confidence range on the slope is:

(*) 0.95 =

"i *0.05 8(")

where:

t 0.05 = the t value at 95% level for 145 degrees of freedom (data points) = 1.98 This method of applying the confidence range on the slope of a line will result in a narrower range than that obtained from a single point.

l

=

f Test Results A linear Icast square fits of the 145 data points calculated during this test and presented in Table I results in the following equation:

Q = 70,877 - 8.1768T where:

70,877 represents the initial mass of contained air in pounds

-8.1768 represents the leakage rate in Ibs/hr The leakage rate expressed in fractional leakage of the initially contaiaed mass is:

Leak Rate = -8.1768 LB/HR x 24" ! DAY x 100 - -0.277%/ DAY 70,877 LBS The 95% confidence range on the slope using the same data is:

0.05 (*) LB/ HR

=

1 0.118 or expressed as fractional leakage:

Leak Rate -

-0.277 1 0.004%/ DAY This measured value is less than the Technical Specification limit of 0.75 La, (where La = 0.80 weight percent of contained mass per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months ), which is equivalent to 0.60 weight percent of contained mass per 24 hours2.777778e-4 days 0.00667 hours 3.968254e-5 weeks 9.132e-6 months .

Verification of Instrumentation Sensitivity Section III.A.3(b)of Appendix J to 10CFR50 requires that the accuracy of any Type A test shall be verified by a supplemental test. The Pumpback Method of verification was selected. In this method, a known quantity (mass) of air is metered back into the containment and is compared with the change in the computer weight of air calculation. Agreement between the metered quantity and the computer calculated quantity is specified in Appendix J to be 1 0.25La.

The quantity metered back was selected to be equivalent to about one 3

half of the allowable of 0.8%/ day. The actual quantity metered was 610 ft at 54 psig and 60 F, which is equivalent to 217.6 pounds mass. The air charge required 9 minutes to complete.

?

The average of the five computer calculated values of mass of air prior to the charge was 70,681.2 lbs. The average of the five computer calculated values of mass of air following the charge was 70,911.2. During the 70-minute clapsed time between before-and-after measurements, at the measured leakage rate of -8.1768 lbs/hr, 9.5 lbs. was assumed to leak.

The balance is as follows:

mass following air charge 70,911.2 lbs.

mass prior to charge -70,681.2 lbs.

difference 230.0 lbs.

(3 " normal" leakage + 9.5

(/ lbs.

total difference 239.5 lbs.

The comparison to the actual charge of 217.6 lbs. is:

239.5 - 217.6 = 21.9 lbs. difference 0.25 La - 141.8 lbs.

The agreement between the actual charged value and the difference aH seen by the computer is well within the accuracy limits specified in Appendix J.

Corrective Action Plan qj During the performance of the Type A test, excessive leakage was found to be emanating from moisture traps in the Containment Air Com-pressor System. This systems takes a suction from the primary contain-ment atmosphere through penetration X-47, and is isolated by two air operated containment isolation valves; CA-96A&B. The discharge of this system passes through two isolation check valves, CA-89B&C, and its associated penetration X-22. The suction and discharge piping are two inch lines.

Prior to the performance of the Type A test, the Containment Air Compressor Suction Valves, CA-96A&B, were local leak-rate tested in accordance with the applicable plant procedure, with results that indica-ted leakage values well within specified limits. Based upon this fact, and the above-noted excessive leakage locations, it was deduced that the leakage path was from penetration X-22. Once the leakage path was identi-fled, the leakage path was isointed. Subsequent to isolating the leakage path, the Type A test was successfully completed with a measured leakage rate at the 95% confidence level of 0.277 + 0.004%/ day.

I

.y*

i The isolation of the as-found leakage path from the discharge side

of Containment Air Compressor System allowed the plant to return to service. Controls were implemented that mandated the isolation be kept in effect until a final determination was made as to the isolation capa-

! bilities of the discharge piping check valves, CA-89B&c.

} Subsequently, during the 1978 Refueling Outage, an attempt was made to conduct local leak-rate tests on the CA-89B&C check valves. The re-sults indicated gross leakage past both valves, since the flow rates encountered exceeded the ability of the test fixture to quantify the leakage rates. From the 1978 Type A test results, utilizing the before-and-after i leakage values associated with isolating the subject leakage path, the

leakage from this boundary was in the order of 0.53%/ day. Following the initial local leak testing, maintenance was performed on these 2" - 600 i

O pound Type 5580W Dresser renewable seat lift check valves. During dis-assembly, both valve's lif t seats were found stuck open, with approximately 1/4-inch of space between the seating surfaces. This was caused by corrosion j product buildup between the lift seat and the guide stud. Tho gh the seating surfaces were found in a good condition, all seating surfaces were given a

! thorough cleaning, corrosion products removed and the application of lubrica-tion to appropriate surfaces.

After repairs were made to the valves, local leak-rate testing was conducted. Results of this testing indicated that the post repair leakages to be assigned to the CA-89B&C valves are 0.262 and 0.404 lbm/hr respectively, which are within the Technical Specifications limits. Converting the higher i^ leakage value of the two valves to an equivalent weight percent per day yields a penetration leakage for X-22 of 0.014%/ day. The sum of the post-i repair leak rate for the penetration and the Type A test leakage rate would be 0.296%/ day. Since this value is 50% of allowable, the combined value

)

O ti tie the ccent ce criteri er the 'vre ^ te t-i Due to the corrective maintenance performed and the subsequent local leakage testing employed to verify the capability of the CA-89B&C valves to support containment integrity, the imposed isolation of the X-22 penetration-was removed. This action then allowed the Containment Air Compressor System to be placed in service.

As a result of conducting the recent Type A test, an excessive leakage path was identified that initially precluded the ability to successfully achieve test results. By determining the cause of excessive leakage and identifying appropriate-corrective maintenance, it was shown by performance of local leakage testing techniques that containment integrity could be maintained. The corrective action plan developed to prevent future inability

. to successfully complete the Type A test, as caused by the excessive leakage past penetration X-22, consists of incorporating the CA-89B&C valves into the Type C testing program. The procedural controls have already been'esta-4 blished to effect this plan. The frequency of testing these valves will i

be identical to all valves presently tested as part of'the Type C testing i program, s

1

---.,--\ -,-..e-- , - , , , - w--.,a ~ . . -- ,--n,: m.,n - m e - w-r y-, -

1 i

l i

i

. Conclusion

The corrective action plan proposed by Vermont Yankee focuses attention on the cause of the inability to meet, on the first attempt, the acceptance criteria of the Type A test and will provide greater ,

assurance of continuing containment integrity. Based upon the above information, the next Type A test will be performed during the 1982 Refueling Outage, which will complete the first ten-year service period. '

i O

t i

O 1

i~

i r -,p-- -n -

v c- w -r --w,m- - - ~ ~ ~ ~ e - w - -- --~-~vr -+-v +- - e-n-- r ,-w - v -

+w '

i , , .s s PRIMARY CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE DATA SilEET (TYPE A)

( AUGUST 1978 z l Time Contained Pressure Temp. $ Time Contained Pressure Temp.

(Min) Mass (pounds) "!!g *F (Min) Mass (pounds) "lig *F

{*

lB.P. 44.12 psig %

!29.59 2030 70892 119.44 106.1 2400 70850 119.38 106.1 l "lig. % 4 l 2040 70875 119.47 106.1

0010 70850 119.38 106.1 l l W 2050 70874 119.44 l l

106.1

0020 70850 119.38 106.1 5

l 2100 70880 119.44 106.1

0030 70848 119.35 106.0 2110 70873 110.44 106.1 0040 70841 119.32 106.1 e

\ a i 2120 70864 119.41 106.1

0050 70841 119.35 106.1 2130 70866 119.41 106.1

0100 70842 119.35 106.1 2140 70863 119.41 106.1 h 0110 70844 119.35 106.1 2150 70864 119.41 106.1

0120 70841 119.32 106.1 2200 70866 119.41 106.1

0130 70835 119.32 106.1

( 2210 70866 119.41 106.1

0140 70837 119.29 106.1 2220 70869 119.41 106.1

0150 70821 119.29 106.1 2230 70870 119.41 106.1

0200 70828 119.29 106.1 2240 70856 119.41 106.1 0210 70829 119.32 106.0 2250 70857 119.41 106.1

0220 70831 119.29 106.0 2300 70856 119.38 106.1 ! 0230 70821 119.26 106.0 2310 70856 119,38 106.1

0240 70816 119.26 106.0 2320 70854 119.38 106.1 0250 70821 119.26 106.0 2330 70857 119.41 106.1

0300 70817 119.26 106.0 2340 70858 119.38 106.1 h 0310 70813 119.26 106.0 2350 70858 119.38 106.1 h 0320 70817 119.26 106.0 Test Asst. Mark T. Leonard

( Date 8/11/78 Approved Harold Eichenholz Test Coordinator

..,- . PRIMARY CONTAIhMENT LEAKAGE RATE DATA SilEET (TYPE A)

(

Tims Contained Pressure Temp. $ Time Contained Pressure Temp.

(Min) Mass (pounds) "lig *F (Min) Mass (pounds) "Ifg *F

{*

0330 70819 119.26 106.0 0700 70788 119.17 105.9 N

0340 70818 119.26 106.0

0710 70792 119.14 105.9 0350 70816 119.26 106.0

0720 70785 119.14 105.3 5

0400 70810 119.26 106.0

0730 70785 119.14 105.8

--0410 70815 119.23 106.0

0740 70786 119.14 105.8 0420 70812 119.23 106.0 0750 70777 119.14 105.8 0430 70809 119.20 106.0

0800 70777 119.14 105.8 2

0440 70804 119.20 106.0

0810 70777 119.11 105.8 5

0450 70807 119.23 106.0

0820 70778 119.11 105.8 0500 70804 119.23 105.9 2 0830 70778 119.11 105.8

( 0510 70810 119.20 105.9 z

% 0840 70777 119.11 105.8 0520 70800

119.20 105.9 0850 70771 119.08 105.8

,,0530 70801 119.20 105.9

0900 70771 119.11 105.8

0540 70801 119.20 105.9

0910 70772 119.11 105.8 0550

70791 119.17 105.9 0920 70777 119.11 105.8 0600 70797 119.17

105.9 0930 70762 119.08 105.8 0610 70795 119.20 105.9

0940 70808 119.08 105.7 0620 70799 119.17 105.9 0950 70764 119.08 105.8 0630 70800 119.17 105.9 1000 70761 119.08

! 105.8 0640

70794 119.17 105.9 1010 70761 119.08 105.7 0650

70791 119.17 105.9 1020 70760 119.08 105.8 Test Asst. Mark T. Leonard Date

( 8/11/78 Approved Harold Eichenholz Test Coordinator

r

, , . . PRU!ARY CONTAI! MENT LEAKAGE RATE DATA SilEET (TYPE A)

I Ticts Contained Pressure Temp. $ Time Contained Pressure Temp.

(Min) Mass (pounds) "lig *F (Min) Mass (pounds) "Hg *F

{

1030 70762 119.08 105.8 h1400 70730 119.08 105.9 1040 70763 119.08 105.8 $1410 70730 119.05 106.0 1050 70761 119.08 105.8 $1420 70732 119.08 105.9 1100 70763 119.08 105.8 $1430 70733 119.08 105.9 1110 70760 119.08 105.8 $1440 70726 119.08 106.0 1120 70759 119.08 105.8 $1450 70729 119.05 106.0 1130 70760 119.08 105.8 $1500 70724 119.08 106.0 1140 70757 119.08 105.8 $1510 70727 119.08 106.0 1150 70754 119.08 105.8 $1520 70726 119.05 106.0 1200 70751 119.08 105.9 $1530 70722 119.05 106.0 C %

1210 70751 119.08 105.9 $1540 70718 119.08 106.1 X

l 1220 70752 119.08 105.9 $1550 70719 119.05 106.1 l

1230 70750 119.08 105.9 *1600 70719 119.05 106.1 1 2

>1240 70748 119.08 105.9 $1610 70717 119.05 106.1 1250 70746 119.05 105.9 $1620 70713 119.05 106.1 1300 70745 119.08 105.9 $1630 70707 119.05 106.1 1310 70743 119.08 105.9 $1640 70705 119.02 106.1 1320 70733 119.05 105.9 $1650 70701 119.02 106.1 1330 70733 119.05 105.9 $1700 70702 119.02 106.1 1340 70729 119.05 105.9 $1710 70701 119.02 106.0 1350 70729 119.05 105.9 $1720 70706 119.02 106.0 Test Asst. Donald R. Duston, Jr.

( Date 8/11/78 Approved liarold Eichenholz Test Coordinator

l '

..,- - PRIMARY CONTAISMENT LEAKAGE RATE DATA SilEET (TYPE A)

[

2 Tims Contained Pressure Temp. $ Time Contained Pressure Temp.

(Min) Mass (pounds) "Hg *F (Min) Mass (pounds) "Hg *F 3

1730 70706 119.02 106.0 f2039 Stopped adding 610 ft 1740 70705 119.02 106.0 2040 70783 119.41 106.1 1750 70707 119.02 106.0 2050 70916 119.38 106.2 1800 70706 119.02 106.0

2100 70910 119.38 106.1

_ 1810 70707 119.02 106.0 h2110 70914 119.38 106.1

- 1820 70706 119.02 106.0 $2120 70912 119.38 106.2 1830 70702 119.02 106.1 $ 2130 70913 119.38 106.2 1840 70704 119.02 106.1 $ 2140 70907 119.38 106.2 1850 70702 119.02 106.1 $

1900 70698 118.99- 106.1 $

'( 1910 70696 118.99 106.1 1920 70695 119.02 106.1 $

F. %

'. 71 1930 70687 118.99 106.1 $

0-S 1940 70682 118.99 106.1 5

1950 70684 118.96 106.1 $

2000 70679 118.96 106.1 $

2010 70684 118.99 106.1 $

2020 70679 118.99 106.1 $

2030 70680 11R_99 106.1 End of 24-hr te it and 2 2030 immodinec1v nen -red addine 610 fr I of air to conta Lnment.

! Test Asst. Donald R. Duston, Jr.

( Date 8/11/78 Approved Harold Eichenholz Test Coordinator

, , TABLE Il PRIMARY CONTAll@fENT LEAKAGE RATE DATA SHEET TORUS DATA TORUS TORUS TIME PRESSURE TEMPERATURE IN HG 'F (AVG)

. 2030 119.44 93.8 t

2130 119.41 93.7 2230 119.41 93.6 2330 119.41 93.5 0030 119.35 93.5 0130 119.32 93.4 0230 119.26 93.3 0330 119.26 93.3 0430 119.20 93.2 0530 119.20 93.1 0630 119.17 93.1 0730 119.14 93.1 0830 119.11 93.0 0930 119.08 93.0 l

() 1030 119.08 93.0 1130 119.08 93.0 1230 119.08 93.0 1330 119.05 93.0 1430 119.08 93.0 1530 119.05 93.0 1630 119.05 93.0 1730 119.02 93.0 1830 119.02 93.0 1930 118.99 93.0 2030 118.99 93.0

?

. . 6 ,

g ,

' _ . ____L_.. ._., ,

.,_._t.,.t_.t...-..

I l

._ ..r . . L .oo , .

l

__7. . _ . . 1.5 J i .-- ._ _. _ _

, i i j ' i -

t i r o , *. l I , -a

.4_. s . J' . . . . _-. l l

._ . . + . _ .

i.

.. l ._

I

. _ -.__w- _ . -

i i t C

-.7 t

l5 -

f' l;' '-

- 7l ,' 8 . _ [

__.g. ..i ._ r. . _ ._.=

~(

~

l

_1._g@_._h _ ,

i ._ _. _ _ _ _

_ . - _ ___ - . L, ! i 1, __

' ~

O , i j

_-.g.. _. ._ . .'_ _ .

_.4. 2 . . ._.7_ _. __

3- -- . - - ... . -.- ._ _ _ .- . _ _ ._ -. p _

] i .

, ., , i ,

f .4 .2 wa I l J

. . _ . .je

.__. i, . g g N.___. .. _4_-....w_L. _4. g . . -

--t--*--+-- -g M i !!

@ Log *

3.l1_

+

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

4 l

t__ _.

.l_.

l a._ _ q l_-.. ! 0 ;

I4

-l I '

l $27 l f -!-

l

_.-;_ l- - --

? .,. : :._

, ,i ; :I i

{

i n.eE bme , j i

.. l i

. .o o

j . . Ii

_.__L _

i,.

i

. __p

._jo . iq 5 ._.

. . . _ _m _m._

y-R I , ,

~~~[ ~ ~~~~'; ~.' ~ ~~ -

j r i

~~ ~ ~' ~ ~

T -+~~ ~ ^^l~- I i' -

' -- F -

a = _ ;

L A '_.4 .Q__ -8 o ___ ,_ _ _ .

_u_=

m .

q _ _ . p uL_

.i . .

_, - __..s

. 7._

.i . ,

(N s

' 6 i

..'_ _u_

t l l _ . _._t'._.

U . _ _ _ . . . .__ _._-_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ .

e

.__.__7_ '

.g ' l

' i * .;

___.___4_._. . , _ _ . _ . . _

_{ . ___

i

.- .a

-. !_ .__..q,._..

9 8

____J.__. _ . _ . _ . _ _

_ __ .-_Ll ._ _'_

l . , _

i t 1. l l ! l_

i , ! : e : o -

.g i

- _ .p _ .._

_m_____

i

. . , _ . _ . i . .L. _ v .. '

i , g . .; .

t i r- 4 6 I . I

.e m 6_ -, t

, --_ s- . t i l I

.q .. -

7 i . . . . __

, e ..

e

. f. ,g.

l gc a L_. a,pi,__ q

., .r. ,. ,. - -. ;

___ L. __ _ -._

! i .

e i

.i.... _ L.

.i. ..i_. 4 _.;__ q... n . ,1 .

.i.. _4 __2_

_r.

i

.4

__._j.

1 '

_l I_ '

_L. 1 p.; ! I i_ i

i. l 6 ! o t i

. L. ,

__7._... .

. _ . q) . ,, .,_,_ ,, ,_

> 2 ,.

p 4 4 .j.$ ! ,_. j.__ i ._ .

.j' .

+ q_ _q._q g. _4

!. l q:_.4_t

_g._ _ __._

47 3 p .

7 7_

__7 _ _.__

y , _ _

.. g .,

... -r _

..,_ 7_ f . . .

, 4 L

o . _.__

7_.

.V 4 i p .L j

[

. [.

..{ q .. .__. I j. .i 4 J. .g' p

+ .

i _

7 l .l. l.

_[~ q'. .

_ j .- _. _-,

- . . _ ' m-

, i 1 l .i ' . : , , .; .

..u pO

__ __ . . -,u __ _2__. y _,_ _._ ! . _ ._

.g.

4 f a r

-4 - . 6 ; ..I . i. . .. . .L .,. y.

1 .

i i o ! , !.

G ,

l i - I , . ! I i i .. .

i 1 i

i : . !

. . _ _ . , _ t..._-. .. . _ .. _g._ g ' , .

e

_.._y...

il . _ - . .. _ . _._

._j.-

l i

i 3

I 8

m Iy l l

_ _.{ _ l ___ _ _ . ___

4 . - j " - _-

-_ ), _._

4 .- :

l

.m . . .

. _ . _ . _ . .o ,

, ___ j _ .. _ ,g.2_._.

g , . .._ [ __.. .._. _ .

7..

! * =

~

i I l

- . 9 .. .

.}_._.i

t. i

._. p. I_ __ _'

l ,

__j_. _

jq .g _. __

a_ _

l 1

i

_ t ___ ._ L

~ i

' .sc

_.;. _ .I. _ .._ __ :_ ai t l

! 7.__ .

i 4 .q . . _ f.

7 I C - t i l l t I

}

! I i m

I i

i O .O..

I * !

i g' l I I . i

's i

s' ',Pu,,s.

.j 8 t

's. !l i I, . l st ,. ..

i -* O O t m I

% ' A l y J o N.4 I

.- k' 8

E

. .. i L164 , >

l 4 ,

__ _a f t

,'_._ *k . I _ ..-. _ . .@._!

_g_I.__

l I '

-* :i

_._ 8 o .i l j .

. . . . . .i.. . _._.

i 7_. _

y i

. p l .. -

j. .

i p or

3. g . _.-

3 ,,

. .g g . . t ,,

_-_f . ,__ m _ a.____. i

{ 3 i

q!8. . _ _ l

. ' _y; . . _ .. . a_l . l' .. l i

_ ,.i.5g. _. _ . .

_r I

_r . _..t__ _ _'- ,

2 e = '

-o - . ..+ l, J4:: ,

g-_ _ . _- . _ l _. .a_

-e-.- _ - - . - - _

i .. i_ _ -.,

3 3 _. .'-- _ . . .._ _ - . _

-: l

_ ._7 . 3, l

.a.

r 8 , -i 3 ., i:l l l.

. ;__ r' q__ .:_ ._

.._ 4 _ 3 -

o -_ .

l '

'b

_.f. f ! l __

. ._ g . '_. __' f _ ;

8 7 ._ ~ ~~-','

u I f _ .. __. 8 . _ . l ___ ' . . ._

y . 1. _ _ .I _. _ e._ ..

.. . . m _ f _ _

__ i _ _.._ -._.# _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ ___..._ _.i O

d 4 I

I , .- i , o '

._ W . .

i L __' ali : '

r- 8 Lb_s.-

i

[ : j .

Sl l _j

.g..l 7

.. p.

L ,

8 .

. _1 n . . _ _ . _

. _ . , . . _ 1 8

_._,_ _ L'

._. E _L

'S

..S _ , _ _ . _ _ _ _ _

.g '

f U i ! ;

4 .

, ,- ._._ . . - - . _. j _ . -. . g ~ . ._u...._ . _ _ . . _ _ .

+ ._..'

l_ y :_ , i 4 1 4

. !g !

T ; !

, _._ _;g ._ . . _ . _ _, _ag _, .-. -_ ._

.__p _ .g=

o .

r i ,. . je 4

-; a

_.1_ . _. 1 _,._ .y. .. _ . . . _._.. ..1 .- _ _ . _ -_ ._ .

._.i 8 . _. _ -[ __..._L___._ . . . _

i

e i i ,8- l l

y. .! -:

8 _ a -._ _ - g y .g .- _.

8 b. -. .o2 e I o

.p - . . . __

_ _ _ . _ __. _.__ __ ~_ L 2 __ !

.. .l lL - f -. .f .. ...f . } ,..i .[. .j. .l. . f ._.

.p _u+ g_p _ .g l . ,

2.

m .

_p_. ;_ _.g o

_. q_;1, m , _ 2._ ,

q_ __

._L q_

_!__j _.

._ _ 4 .

. _4 - -. _

_g _ _ ____

S

.y_p f L $ ._

. .7 l

q_

1

_1 l

.g2 io :

_ _ _ _ "1 _ .

' i ,

m ;

. ,i -

f . ._ -

.+t .7

_p . . .

p 4

..g.i_ , .i j ;

V !

2..

!8' _._

[ j l i ig.

lL__ _3 ' q,! .._ l 7

- , _ 7, _ r.

.S i , . - ; .j a _._

.. - - . - =. n . -. . _. ..__

. _ ..a. _.o _ _____ __ a ! .

l

_a g_ ___ ____ g.

r p y q. ,g .; 1 3

j' g__

e

__m___,

_4 .

l g- .j___ _.

_g.e _ _ ,- [-

3

7. .

i 4o .

I 6

i

.g - F

-[ .!.

-l i = , r - i >

4 ._ 1 I i i i

-- f e

. _ . _ _ . . i .__._ g L _. . . . . . _ _ _ . . _ . . . _ ,

g g_

1- :

I I i f ;.

i l

,-j.- o ' i j gj L .li _

.J_ . .g

~

____q '

' I

,a. I i ;

l ' - i ' !

l' a g i 1 g l f k fg l ! l l[f l

~l~

~ " ~ ~ ~

-f j [g '

1 l .g! q _. -

l___ +__ _

,_E _q

._. - . . . _ , . y . . ->..g-,

l !

l ei ,i ._j t

i_ _ _a _ .s, e

F m__)

a j !

l 8 i i j i I

.h ..i_.. p .. . q _{ _..

j~I . l

.. .. { .. $ .__ _ _ _ ,_

- ;iI"

! g1 !

_- , . 3 i l ;

+

,_ I ;_z _

_.a

. 6 I I i

b.4 S

i i

G

- l. _ .

l l

!'a

)

l j

2 ld _l -

~t i . ;h -

g--~,

.l :

l 1976 REFUELING OUTAGE Containment Leak Rate Testing - Class B & C Summary Description of Testing During the Summer 1976 refueling outage, all Type B&C primary containment leak rate testing was conducted. All valves with leakage rates in excess of those allowed by the Technical Specifications were reported to the Director of the Of fice of Inspection and Enforcement, Region I, on July 30, 1976. Fol-lowing disassembly and repair of the valves, a satisfactory leakage rate was demonstrated upon retesting. The resulting data from all leak rate testing is presented in the following pages and Tables 1976-1 and 1976-2.

Detailed Description of Testing

a. Containment Isolation Valves During the Summer 1976 refueling outage, four primary containment O isolation valves were found to have seat leakages in excess of that permitted by the Technical Specifications. As a result of this event, the four valves were not capable of performing their function of primary containment isolation with individual valve leakage of less than that required by Technical Specifications. On all valves found to have leakage greater than that allowable, a second valve on the same line provided the proper primary containment isolation capability.

The four valves and their "as-found" leakage rates are as follows:

Valve Description As-Found Leakage Rate Date of Event V-16-19-9 Indeterminable 6/30/76 (Drywell Air Purge (Could not pressurize)

Inlet Isolation Valve)

V-12-68 4.809 CFH 7/5/76

() (Reactor Cleanup System Discharge Isolation Valve) 1.433 lbm/hr V-20-94 Indeterminable 7/12/76 (Drywell Equipment Drain Isolation Valve Inboard)

V-20-82 Indeterminable 7/15/76 (Drywell Floor Drain Isolation Valve Inboard)

Testing, repair, and retest details for the four valves found to have ex-cessive seat leakages are described below:

1. Drywell Air Purge Inlet Valve On June 30, 1976, while conducting leak rate testing on primary containment isolat1on valves in the drywell air purge inlet system t

(V-16-19-8, 9, 10 and 23), problems were noted that prevented pressuri-zing the volume between the valves. During this time, testing and maintenance personnel were able to detect an audible noise associated with leakage by the seat of the V-16-19-9 valve. This valve waa re-moved from its piping and subjected to a 15 psig shop test in the direction of flow duplicating the leak rate test condition (seat side) with leakage noted. The valve was removed from the test stand and a visual inspection performed that determined the disc and seat ring to be in good condition. The valve's seating ring was wiped clean and lubricated with Dow-Corning No. 5 silicone grease and sub-jected to another shop test that again indicated leakage past the seat. Repositioning of the valve disc with respect to the seating ring would not inhibit seal Icakage. When the valve was repositioned in the test stand so that pressurization would be from the disc side, test results indicated zero leakage. The disc position was scribed on the disc shaft and operator mounting bracket to facilitate valve installation. Subsequently, the valve was reinstalled in its system

() piping in the reversed direction such that any pressure from the con-tainment would be applied to the disc. V-16-19-9 valve was retested with its associated valves on July 23, 1976, with test results in-dicating a satisfactory leakage of 0.733 lbm/hr for the four (4) valves simultaneously undergoing test. V-16-19-9 is an Allis-Chalmers 18"-150R Stream Seal Wafer Valve, 150 lb, 300 F.

2. Reactor Cleanup System Discharge Valve On July 5, 1976, the Reactor Cleanup System discharge isolation valve V-12-68 was leak rate tested with results that were greater than those allowed by the Technical Specifications. Disassembly and inspection of the valve revealed seating surfaces which required smoothing. The valve plug and seat were lapped and the valve rebuilt. Following this repair, the leakage past the seat was verified to be 0.149 lbm/hr on July 20, 1976. V-12-68 is a Wm. Powell 4" 1500 lb. "Y" Globe valve.

3. Drywell Drain Valves The drywell equipment and floor drain valves V-20-94 and 82 were sub-jected to leak rate testing on July 12 and 15, respectively. The test method for these valves provides for a pressure buildup in the fixed volume between the valve under test and its downstream isolation valve.

For both valves, a rapid pressure increase corresponding to the in-leakage test rig pressurization rate was noted which prevented a determination of the leakage rate.

Disassembly and inspection of V-20-94 revealed the existence of foreign material in the seat and disc area. The valve was reassembled with a subsequent leak rate test performed on July 15, 1976, indicating zero leakage.

Disassembly and inspection of V-20-82 revealed the existence of foreign material which was flushed from within the valve body. The valve body and parts were cleaned and the valve was reassembled. A subsequent Icak rate test was performed on July 17, 1976, which determined its leakage rate to be less than 0.015 lbm/hr. V-20-82 & 94 are Walworth 3" 300 lb Cato Valves.

l 4

.., i i

b. Containment Modifications During the Summer 1976 refueling outage, activities were per-formed that resulted in containment modifications. As required by 10 CFR 50 - Appendix J-IV, special testing was performed. The modi-fications installed and tested were:

1. EDCR 74-18, Containment Air Dilution System Installation

2. EDCR 76-6, Rerouting of Containment Radiation Monitor Return Line l 3. EDCR 75-17, Suppression Pool Water Temperature Measurement (X214 Mod.)

4. PDCR 76-8, Containment Instrument Air Compressor Modification l The measured leakage for the various containment components specified ;

by the above listed modifications are included in the summary test result '

tabulated in Tables 1976-1 and 1976-2 for Type B and C testing. ,

t

c. Shear Lug Access Covers

() Leak rate testing of Shear Lug Access Covers C, E, and F indicated leakage rates that were well within allowable limits. To provide in-creased reliability during the next operating cycle, corrective mainte-nance was performed which included the installation of new gasketing material. Subsequent retesting verified reduced leakage rates. In-itial and retest leakage rate values are included in the Type B sum-mary test results tabulated in Table 1976-1.

Quantitative Calculations of Technical Specification Limits

1. The combined leakage rate of all penetrations and valves subject to Type B and C tests shall be less than 0.60 La. Sixty (60) percent of La - 355 lbm/ day.

2. The leakage from any one isolation valve shall not exceed 5% of Ltm.

Five (5) percent of Ltm = 12.53 lbm/ day or 0.522 lbm/hr.

3. The leakage from any one main steam line isolation valve shall not exceed 11.5SCFH at 24 psig (Pt ),

i i

I l

l 5

Table 1976-1 Summary Test Results for Type B Testing PENETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

NUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST Personnel Lock 0.862 l

Bellows Seals l X-7A Main Steam Line A 0 X-7B Main Steam Line B 0 X-7C Main Steam Line C 0 X-7D Main Steam Line D 0

() X-9A Fetdwater A 0 X-9B Feedwater B 0 X-ll HPCI Steam Line 0 X-12 RHR Suction 0 X-13A RHR Return A 0 X-13B RHR Return B 0 X-14 Cleanup Suction 0 X-16A Core Spray A 0

{} X-16B Core Spray B 0 100A Electrical Penetrations 0 100B Electrical Penetrations 0 100C Electrical Penetrations 0 j 100D Electrical Penetrations 0.0003 101A Electrical Penetrations 0 l 101B Electrical Penetrations Spare (Blank) 101C Electrical Penetrations 0 101D Electrical Penetrations 0.0C03 102 Electrical Penetrations 0.0006 103 Electrical Penetrations 0.0014

i

Table 1976-1 (cont'd) Summary Test Results for Type B Testing PENETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

NUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST 104A Electrical Penetrations 0.0003 104B Electrical Penetrations 0.0076 104C Electrical Penetrations 0.0003 105A Electrical Penetrations 0 105B Electrical Penetrations 0.0003 105C Electrical Penetrations 0 O 105D Electrical Penetrations 0.0006 214 Electrical Penetrations 0.0135 0 Double Gasketed Seals X-1 Equipment Hatch 0.00058 X-4 Drywell Head Access Hatch 0 X-6 Control Rod Drive Removal Hatch 0 X-200A Torus Access Hatch 0.00001 X-200B Torus Access Hatch 0

('T

(, / VBC-A Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-B Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-C Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-D Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-E Vacuum Breaker Ac cess Cover VBC-F Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-G Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-H Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-I Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-J Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0

Table 1976-1 (cont'd) Summary Test Results for Type B Testing PENETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

NUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST S Lil-A Shear Lug Access Cover 0 Stil-B Shear Lug Access Cover 0 S Lil-C Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00047 0.0001 Q(_j S til-D Shear Lug Access Cover 0 S lit-E Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00009 0 S Lil-F Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00034 0 S til-G Shear Lug Access Cover 0 S til-ll Shear Lug Access Cover 0

--- Drywell Head Flange 0.0023 X-213-A Torus Drain 0 X-213-B Torus Drain 0

() Total B Penetration Leakage 0.891 0.877

I Table 1976-2 Summary Test Results for Type C Testing LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

VALVE (S) TESTED DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST MS-77 Main Steam Drain 0 RV39 & 40 Recire. Sample O RilR-57 RilR Disch, to Radwaste O LRW-83 Drywell Floor Drain < 0.015 LRW-95 Drywell Equipment Drain 0 S13-16-19-8,9,10 & 23 Containment Purge 0.733 Pr u e S13-16-19-11A & 12A Vacuum Relief 0 S13-16-19-11B & 12B Vacuum Relief 0 S13-16-19-6,7,6A,6B,7A&7B Containment Exhaust 1.752 RCU-18 Reactor Cleanup 0 V16-20-20 Containment Purge Makeup < 0.002 V16-20-22A Containment Purge Makeup 0.409 V16-20-22B Containment Purge Makeup 0.018 RCU-68 Reactor Cleanup 1.433 0.149 HPCI-16 ilPCI Steam Supply < 0.015 RCIC-16 RCIC Steam Supply 0.073 CA-96A Cont. Air Compressor Suction 0.005 CA-96B Cont. Air Compressor Suction 0.005 NG 13A & 13B CAD Injection 0.014 NG 12A & 12B CAD Injection 0.014 NG 11A & 11B CAD Injection 0 VG-9A CAD Vent 0 VG-22A CAD Vent 0 VG-9B CAD Vent 0.008 VG-22B CAD Vent 0.011

[

Table 1976-2 (cont'd) Summary Test Results for Type C Testing LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

VALVE (S) TESTED DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST _

VG-23 CAD Rad. Mon. Supply 0 VG-26 CAD Rad. Mon. Supply 0 VG-76A Rad. Mon. Return 0 VG-76B Rad. Mon. Return 0 MS-74 Main Steam Drain 0

( llPCI-15 llPCI Steam Supply 5 0.015 RCIC-15 RCIC Steam Supply < 0.073 RCU-15 Reactor Cleanup 0 LRW-82 Drywell Floor Drain Indeterminable ji 0.015 LRW-94 Drywell Equipment Drain Indeterminable O RilR-66 RHR Discharge to Radwaste 0 Total Leakage Following Repairs 3.326 O

VALVE (TESTED) LEAKAGE (SCFil)

DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST MS80A A Main Steam Line O MS86A A Main Steam Line 11.01 MS80B B Main Steam Line O MS86B B Main Steam Line 6.383 MS80C C Main Steam Line 6.240 MS86C C Main Steam Line 8.842 MS80D D Main Steam Line O MS86D D Main Steam Line 1.330 )

5

, i 1977 REFUELING OUTAGE CONTAINMENT' LEAK RATE TESTING - CLASS B&C Summary Description of Testing During the Summer 1977 refueling outal;c, all Tyne B&C primary containment icak rate testing was corducted.. All valves with leakage rates in excess of those allowed by the Technit:a1 Specifications were reported to the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region I, on September 29, 1977. Fol-lowing disassembly and repair of the valves, a satisfactory leakage rate was demonstrated upon retosting. The resulting data from all leak rate testing is presented in the following pages and tables 1977-1 and 1977-2.

Detailed Description of Testing

a. Containment Isolation Valvas During the Summer 1977 refueling outage, seven primary containment

(- ) isolation valves were found to have seat leakages in excess of that permitted by the Technical Specifications. As a result of this event, the seven valves were not capable of performing their function of pri-mary containment isolation with individual valve leakage of less than that required by Technical Specifications. On all valves found to have leakage greater than that allowable, a second valve on the same line provided the proper primary containment isolation capability.

The seven valves and their "as-found" leakage rates are as follows:

Valve Description As-Found Leakage Rate Date of Event V-2-86A 16.83 SCFil 8/20/77

("A" Main Steam Line Isolation Valve Outboard)

V-2-80C 17.69 SCFil S/21/77 A ("C" Main Steam Line k/ Isolation Valve Inboard)

V-20-94 2.54 CFil 8/31/77 (Drywell Equipment Drain Isolation Valve Inboard)

V-12-68 4.54 CFil 9/6/77 (Reactor Cleanup System Discharge Isolation Valve)

V-16-19-8 18.79 CFil 8/31/77 (Drywell Air Purge Inlet Isolation Valve)

V-16-19-7B Indeterminabic 8/31/77 (5Jppression Chamber Purge (Could not Pressurize) and Vent Outlet) ,

V-It-19-6B Indeterminable' 8/31/77 (Suppression Chamber Purge (Could not Pressurize) and Vent Outlet Bypass) ,

A

. . m - . _ - _ __ __ _ _ . .__

'b y ,'

1

) Tosting, repair and retests details for the seven valves found to have excessive leakages are described below:

1. Main Steam Line Isolation Valves On August 20, 1977, while conducting leak rate testing on the outboard main steam isolaion valve V-2-86A, excessive leakage was observed to

be emanating from the packing _and gland seal area of the valve. I-0 mediate corrective action resulted in compressing the packing by tight-ening down the gland seal, with a retest performed on August 21, 1977 indicating a valve leakage rate of 1.68 SCFH.

i

.! On August 21, 1977.- inboard main steam isolation valve V-2-80C was l leak rate tested with results that were greater than that allowed by J

' the Technical Specifications. Disassembly and inspection of the valve t revealed r, eating surfaces which required lapping. The main and pilot discs were ground and lapped by hand, as was the pilot valve seating surface. The main valve seating surface was lapped by hand. Finally, a new set of packing rings was installed during valve assembly. The i valve was reassembled with a subsequent leak rate test performed on O sente der 24. 1976. 1#41e ti=8 =er te

se- v-2-86^ a v-2-8oc re Rockwell 18"01612 JMMY Flite Flow Stop Valves.

j 2. Drywell Drain Valve The drywell equipment drain inboard isolation valve V-20-94 was leak 4

rate tested with results that were greater than that allowed by the Technical Specifications. Disassembly and inspection of the valve revented an accumulation of scale on the valve seating surfaces. The

valve disc was lapped and the seating ring cleaned. On September 21, 1

1977 following repair and reassembly of the valve, the leakage past the' seat was verified t'o be less than or equal to 0.207 lbm/hr. V-20-94

$ - is a Walworth 3" 300 lb. gate valve.

3. Reactor Cleanup System Discharge Valve 4

On September 6, 1977, the Reactor Cleanup System discharge isolation i valve V-12-68 was leak rate tested with results that were greater than i that allowed by the Technical Specifications. Disassembly and inspec-tion of the valve reveal'ed that the valve seat required smoothing due to an accumulation of scale. The valve seat was lapped and the valve reassembled with new packing installed. Following this repair, the leakage past the seat was verified to be 0.292 lbm/hr on September 18, 1977. V-12-68 is a Wm. Powell 4" 1500 lb. "Y" Clobe Valve.

4. Drywell Air Purge Inlet Valve

,1 On August 31, 1977, while' conducting leak rate testing on primary con-

~

tainment isolation valve in the drywell air purge inlet system (V 19-8, 9, 10 and 23), an excessive Icakage rate was experienced. During this time, testing and maintenance personnel determined that the V l '

19-8 valve had leakage past its seat . By observing-the local valve

, position indicator during operation of the valve, it was determined that the valve disc was not attaining the full closed position. Sub-

. sequent to an adjustmentiof'the operator stop screw, the leakage rate ;

was verified to'be 0.393;1bm/hr for the*four (4) valves simultaneously '

undergoing test. V-16-19-8 is an Allis-Chalmers-18"-150R Stream Seal q wafer valve, 150 lb., 300.F. '

i i I

l

f

'J l S. Suppression Chamber Purge and Vent Valves On August 31, 1977, while conducting leak rate testing _on primary containment isolation valves in the primary containment vent system l (V-16-19-6, 7, 6A, 6B, 7A and 7B), problems were noted that prevented l pressurizing the volume between the valves. During this time, testing.

[ and maintenance personnel determined that the two (2) parallel sup-f pression chr.mber purge and vent valves V-16-19-7B and 6B, were allowing l 1eakage past their seats. By observing the local valve position in-l dienor on the V-16-19-7B valve during a cycling operation, it was de-i termined that-the valve disc was not attaining the full closed position An adjustment to the valve operator on the V-16-19-7B valve was made, with a subsequent retest of the system valves indicating a leakage rate of approxfmately 5.36 lbm/hr for the six (6) valves simultaneously under-going test. The three (3) inch bypass valve V-16-19-6B was then'disas-sembled and a visual inspection performed, This inspection determined that the valve's resilient seat material had indications of wear. A new replacement resilient seat was installed and the valve reinstalled in its system piping. V-16-19-6B valve was retested with its associated valvas O e sente der 3o. 1977 ith te t re te 1=aic ti 8 ti r cterv 2e

8e of 1.58 lbm/hr for the six (6) valves simultaneously undergoing test. V 19-7B is an Allis Chalmers 18"-150R Stream Seal water valve, 150 lb., 300 F.

V-16-19-6B is an Allis Chalmers 3"-150R Stream Seal water valve, 150 lb.,300 F.

b. Drywell Head The Drywell Head was satisfactorily tested on August 20, 1977.

Based on past experience, both gaskets were replaced to provide increased reliability during the next operating cycle. The Drywell Head was re-tested and verified to have a leakage rate of 0.0017 lbm/hr on October 3, 1977.

c. Drywell Head Access Hatch The Drywell Head Access Hatch was satisfactorily tested on August 22, 1977. Based on past experience, both gaskets were replaced to provide v increased reliability during the next operating cycle. The hatch was retested and verified to have zero leakage on September 26, 1977.

d. RCIC Steam Supply Valve The RCIC Steam Supply Valve (V-13-15) was satisfactorily tested on August 21, 1977. Subsequent to the testing, the valve was disassembled l

and repaired to correct a valve steam binding. problem. Following the assembly of the V-13-15 valve, a retest on October 1, 1977 verified the leakage to be less than or equal to 0.4 lbm/hr.

e. Reactor Cleanup System Suction Valve The Reactor Cleanup System Suction Valve (V-12-15) was satisfactorily-tested on August 21, 1977. Subsequent to the testing, the valve was dis-assembled and repaired to correct a bonnet leakage problem. Following the assembly of the V-12-15 valve, a retest on October 1, 1977 verified l a zero leakage rate.

f. Primary / Secondary Vacuum Relief Valves The Primary / Secondary Vacuum _ Relief Valves, V-16-19-11A, 12A, 11B, i 12B, were satisfactorily tested on August 24,'1977. Subsequent to'the ~

l L ,

testing, the V-16-19-llA and llB valves had maintenance work performed on their air operators to correct instrument air leakage problems. Fol-lowing the maintenance work performed on the noted valves, a retest was performed on August 29, 1977 with the V-16-19-11A and 12A valves in-dicating a satisfactory leakage rate of 0.044 lbm/hr and the V-16-19-11B and 12B valves indicating a satisfactory leakage rate of less than 0.015 lbm/hr.

g. Containment Air Compressor Suction Valves l

According to Technical Specifications Table 4.7.2b, the Containment Air Compressor Saction Valves V-72-96A and 96B are not subject to Type C leakage tests. This is in part due to the valves being installed in a seismic-qualified line forming a closed loop outside the primary contain-ment. Technical Specifications Section 4.7.3 states that " prior to vio-t lating the integrity of a system outside the primary containment, which is connected to any valve listed in Table 4.7.2b, the isolation valves bounding the opening shall have Type C tests performed which meet the acceptance criteria of Appendix J of 10 CFR Part 50. It was envisioned

,- that during plant operations, maintenance work could be required on the

(_) Containment Air Compressor System that would create a loss of integrity of the system outside the primary containment. With this being the case, j

the Containment Air Compressor Suction Valves V-72-96A and 96B were suc-cessfully tested in accordance with the acceptance criteria of Appendix J of 10CFR Part 50 during the 1976 refueling outage. Furthermore, the Con-ment Air Compressor System did in fact have maintenance work performed that required the line down stream of the subject valves to become open to the secondary containment during the operating cycle subsequent to the 1976 refueling outage.

During the summer 1977 refueling outage the Containment Air Compressor Suction Valves V-72-96A and 96B were leak rate tested on August 22, 1977, with problems noted that prevented pressurizing the volume between the blocking valve V-72-150 and the V-72-96B valve. Acceptable test results were obtained when testing the V-72-96A valve, which indicates that no loss of primary containment integrity occurred during the maintenance activitica associated with the Containment Air Compressor. On August 29,

(~>) 1977, following multiple cyclings of the V-72-96B valve, a retest was performed with an acceptable leakage rate of d.172 lbm/hr. No cause for the initial leakage test failure of the V-72-96B valve could be determined.

h. Containment Air Sampling System Return Valves On August 25, 1977, while conducting leak rate testing on primary containment isolation valves on the Containment Radiation Monitor return line, problems were noted that prevented pressurizing the volume between the blocking valve CAM-77A and the CAM-76A (109-76A) valve. Presently, the CAM-76A valve is listed in Technical Specifications Table 4.7.2b as a primary containment isolation valve not subject to Type C leakage tests. This is an interim situation in that NRC acceptance of Technical Specifications Proposed Change No. 41 will include the subject valve in Table 4.7.2a, and therefore require the performance of Type C leakage testing. The CAM-76A valve was subjected to Type C leakage testing, with results included in this report, to meet the intent of Appendix J of 10CFR Part 50. Disassembly of the CAM-76A valve revealed an accumulation of scale on the valve's seating surface. On September 9, 1977 following cleaning of the seating surfaces and reassembly of the valve, the leakage past the seat was verified to be 0.0027 lbm/hr.

?

i. Type B Testing of Gasketed Seals Prior to opening containment penetrations utilizing gasketed seals, l

a Type B leakage test is performed. In so doing, accurate as-found leakage data is available for the previous operating cycle. During the refueling outage, containment penetrations are opened for personnel and/or equipment entry, or performance of preventative maintenance. Subsequent to a containment penetration closeout, a Type B leakage test is per-formed. This leakage data is combined with all measured leakages of the various containment penetrations as a baseline for the upcoming operating cycle. The Summary Test Results for Type B Testing, Table 1977-1, provides both the initial and retest leakage data associated with those containment penetrations opened during the refueling outage.

l Quantitative Calculations of Technical Specification Limits

1. The combined leakage rate of all penetrations and valves subject to O Type B and C tests shall be less than 0.60 La.

La - 355 lbm/ day.

Sixty (60) percent of

2. The leakage from any one isolation valve shall not exceed 5% of Ltm.

Five (5) percent of Ltm = 12.53 lbm/ day or 0.522 lbm/hr.

3. The leakage from any one main steam line isolation valve shall not er.ceed 11.5 SCFH at 24 psig (Pt ) .

O

. .i .-

Table 1977-1 Summary Test Ratults for Typs B Testing PENETRATION LEAKACE (LBM/HR) f DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST p

NUMBER Personnel Lock 0 0.8603 Bellows Seals i

j X-7A Main Steam Line A 0

X-7B Main Steam Line B 0 j X-7C Main Steam Line C 0 i X-7D Main Steam Line D 0 X-9A Feedwater A 0 X-9B Feedwater B 0 i

] X-11 HPCI Steam Line 0 X-12 RHR Suction 0 i

X-13A RHR Return A 0

)

1

! X-13B RHR Return B 0 l

l X-14 Cleanup Suction 0 i

l X-16A Core Spray A 0 I

X-16B Core Spray B 0 f

() 100A Electrical Penetrations 0

! 100B Electrical Penetrations 0 1 100C Electrical Penetrations 0 4

100D Electrical Penetrations 0 l 101A Electrical Penetrations 0

)

I 101B Electrical Penetrations Spare (Blank) i j 101C Electrical Penetrations 0 101D Electrical Penetrations 0.0006 102 Electrical Penetrations 0.0006 103 Electrical Penetrations 0 4

P d

f 1

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

j ..,

I *(

Table 1977-1 (cont'd) Summary Test Results for Type B Testing

! PENETRATION LEAKAGE'(LBM/HR) l NUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST i 104A Electrical Penetrations 0 l

l 104B Electrical Penetrations 0 l 104C Electrical Penetrations 0 i 105A Electrical Penetrations 0 l

l 105B Electrical Penetrations 0 l 105C Electrical Penetrations 0.0006 i

O 1oso 81ectric 1 re etr tie - o

214 Electrical Penetrations 0.001 1

Double Casketed Seals X-1 Equipment IIatch 0 X-4 Drywell llead Access flatch 0.056 0 i X-6 Control Rod Drive Removal llatch 0 0.0002 i

X-200A Torus Access Hatch 0 I X-200B Torus Access llatch 0.0001 -0.00001 VBC-A Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00004

. VBC-B Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00006

VBC-C Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00081

$ VBC-D Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 l

VBC-E Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00002

VBC-F Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00041 1

4 VBC-G Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00008 0.00001 VEC-11 Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00002 1

1 VBC-I Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00003 l

) VBC-J Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00004 0

}

j !

. . . - - ,- , . . . . . . . . . . . _ .. . . , . . , . .. .,___-.,. ~ ..

Table 1977-1 (cont'd) Summary Test Results for Type B Testing PEiETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

DUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST S til- A Shear Lug Access Cover 0 S til-B Shear Lug Access Cover 0 SL!!-C Shear Lug Accesa Cover 0 S til-D Shear Lug Access Cover 0 S Lii-E Shear Lug Access Cover 0 S til-F Shear Lug Access Cover 0 Stil-G Shear Lug Access Cover 0 SLli-II Shear Lug Access Cover 0 Drywell IIcad Flange .03590 0.0017 X-213-A Torus Drain 0 S-213-B Torus Drain 0 Total B Penetration Leakage 0.096 0.866

Table 1977-2 Summary Test Results for Type C Testing LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

VALVE (S) TESTED DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST _

MS-77 Main Steam Drain 0.1000 RV 39 & 40 Recire. Sample 0.0210 RilR-57 RilR Disch. To Radwaste < 0. 0015 LRW-83 Drywell Floor Drain 0.1450 LRW-95 Drywell Equipment Drain 0.2070 S13-16-19-8,9,10 & 23 Containment Purge 5.5600 0.3930 S13-16-19-11A & 12A Vacuum Relief < 0.015 0.0440 S13-16-19-11B & 12B Vacuum Relief 0.0200 < 0.0150 S13-16-19-6,7,6A,6B, 7A 6 7B Containment Exhaust > 18.59 1.5800 RCU-18 Reactor Cleanup < 0.015 V16-20-20 Containment Purge Makeup 0.0020 V16-20-22A Containment Purge Makeup 0.0280 V16-20-22B Containment Purge Makeup 0.0020 RCU-68 Reactor Cleanup 1.3500 0.2920 llPCI-16 IIPCI Steam Supply 0.0210 0 RCIC-16 RCIC Steam Supply 0.4000 CA-96A Cont. Air Compressor Suction < 0.0150 CA-96B Cont. Air Compressor Suction > 18.59 0.1720 NG13A & 13B CAD Injection 0.0180 NG12A & 12B CAD Injection 0.0290 NGilA & llB CAD Injection 0.0050 VG-9A CAD Vent 0.0310 VG-22A CAD Vent 0.0290 i

s. ' .

! Table 1977-2 (cont'd) Summary Test Results for Type C Testing LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

VALVE (S) TESTED DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST 1

] VG-9B CAD Vent 0.0190 l

VG-22B CAD Vent 0.0250

! i i VG-23 CAD Rad. Mon. Supply

. < 0.0150 VG-26 CAD Rad. Mon. Supply 0.0100 CAM-76A Rad. Mon. Return > 18.8 0.0027 CAM-76B Rad. Mon. Return 0.0020 MS-74 Main Steam Drain 0.0069 HPCI-15 HPCI Steam Supply < 0.0210 J

j RCIC-15 RCIC Steam Supply < 0.4000 < 0.400

)

i RCU-15 Reactor Cleanup 0 0 1

! LRW-82 Drywell Floor Drain 0.0008 LRW-94 Drywell Equipment Drain 0.7430 < 0.2070 RHR-66 RHR Discharge to Radwaste 0 Total Leakage Following Repairs or Retest < 4.2749 LEAKAGE (SCFH)

! VALVE TESTED DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST f

j MS80A A Main Steam Line 1.98 4

l MS86A A Main Steam Line 16.82 1.68

, MS80B B Main Steam Line 0 l

MS86B B Main Steam Line 9.06

MS80C C Main Steam Line 17.69 0 MS86C C Main Steam Line 9.97

< MS80D D Main Steam Line 4.57 MS86D D Main Steam Line 5.95 t

i

Y

,t* .

1978 OUTAGES CONTAINMENT LEAK RATE TESTING - CLASS B & C Summary Description of Testing During the 1978 Torus Outage, which occurred during the period from July 1, 1978 to August 13, 1978, all Type B & C primary containment leak rate testing was conducted. All valves with leakage rates in excess of those allowed by the Technical Specifications were reported to the Director of the Office of Inspection and Enforcement, Region I, on August 4, 1978. Following disassembly and repair of these valves, a satisfactory leakage rate was demonstrated upon retesting. The resulting data from all leak rate testing is presented in the following pages and Tables 1978-1 and 1978-2.

Subsequent to the Torus Outage, a refueling outage was conducted

() from September 15, 1978 to October 13, 1978. During this outage, only Type B testing was performed on the personnel lock and the drywell head flange seal. The resulting observed leakage rates are included under the " Retest" column of Table 1978-1.

Detailed Description of Testing

a. Containment Isolation Valves During the 1978 Torus Outage, five primary containment isolation valves were found to have seat leakages in excess of that permitted by the Technical Specifications. As a result of this event, the five valves were not capable of performing their function of primary containment isolation with in-dividual valve leakage of less than that required by Technical Specications.

On all valves found to have leakage greater than that allowable, a second valve on the same line provided the proper primary containment isolation capability. The five valves and their "as-found" leakage rates are as O- follows:

Valve As-Found Description Leakage Rate Date of Event V-2-86B 14.85 SCFH 7/11/78

("B" Main Steam Line

Isolation Valve Outboard) l V-2-80D 19.85 SCFH 7/11/78

("D" Main Steam Line Isolation Valve (Inboard)

V-20-83 41.62 CFH 7/23/78 (Drywell Floor Drain Isolation Valve Outboard)

V-16-19-8 27.74 CFH*

7/24/78 (Drywell Air Purge Inlet Isolation Valve)

V-16-19-10 Indeterminable 7/22/78 l

(Suppression Chamber Purge l Inlet Isolation Valve)

L

f.

3 i

Testing, repair, and retest details for the five valves found to '

have excessive leakages are described below:

1. Main Steam Line Isolation Valves On July 11, 1978, outboard main steam isolation valve V-2-86B was leak rate tested with results that were greater than that allowed by the Technical Specifications. Disassembly and inspection of the valve revealed seating surfaces which re-

, quired lapping. The main disc was ground and lapped by hand, as was the pilot valve seating surface. A new pilot disc was installed and the main valve seating surface was lapped by hand. Finally, a new set of packing rings was installed

, during valve assembly. The valve was reassembled with a sub-sequent leak rate test performed on July 27, 1978, indicating a valve leakage rate of 6.56 SCFH.

On July 11, 1978, inboard main steam isolation valve V-2-80D was leak rate tested with results that were greater than that allowed by the Technical Specifications. Disassembly and in-spection of the valve revealed similar conditions to that found for the V-2-86B valve. Following the above described corrective

actions, a leak rate test was performed on July 28, 1978, indica-

ting zero leakage. V-2-86B and V-2-80D are Rockwell 18"-1612 JMMY i Flite Flow Stop Valves.

! 2. Drywell Drain Valve The drywell floor drain outboard isolation valve V-20-83 was

! leak rate tested with results that were greater than that allowed l by the Technical Specifications. Observed operation of the valve indicated a slower speed of travel than that of identical air operated isolation valves. Due to the apparent valve stem binding,

() the stem was lubricated and the valve stroked several times. A retest on July 24, 1978 resulted in a reduction in leakage rate i from 11.95 lbm/hr to 1.36 lbm/hr. Sibsequently, the valve was flushed with demineralized water and stroked. This was followed

, by a leakage rate test conducted on July 29, which resulted in satisfactory leakage past the seat of 0.121 lbm/hr. V-20-83 is a Walworth 3" 300 lb. gate valve.

3.

Drywell Air Purge Inlet Valve On July 22, 1978, while conducting leak rate testing on

, primary containment isolation valves in the drywell air purge

+ inlet system (V-16-19-8, 9, 10 and 23), an excessive leakage

! rate was experienced. During this time, testing and maintenance personnel determined that the V-16-19-10 valve had leakage '

past its seat by placing a plastic bag over the penetration l opening in the Torus. The corrective maintenance consisted i

1 l

a . of an adjustment to the operator stop screw, with a retest resulting in a measured leakage rate for the four valves simultaneously undergoing test of 7.97 lbm/hr. In a similar manner, leakage past the seat of the V-16-19-8 valve was found to exist, and was corrected by adjusting the operator stop screw.

A retest was performed on July 25, 1978 with a satisfactory leakage rate of less than or equal to 0.293 lbm/hr for the four valves simultaneously undergoing test. V-16-19-8 and 10 valves are Allis-Chalmers 18"-150R Stream Seal Wafer Valve, 150 lb., 300*F.

b. Drywell IIcad During the 1978 Torus Outage, the Drywell llead was satisfactorily tested on July 31, 1978. Subsequently, during the 1978 Refueling Outage the drywell head was removed. Prior to drywell head installation, normal plant preventative maintenance practice results in both sealing Q gaskets being replaced to provide increased reliability during the next operating cycle. The drywell head was retested and verified to have a leakage rate of 0.0017 lbm/hr on October 8, 1978.

c. Type B Testing of Casketed Seals Generally, it is the plant's practice that prior to opening containment penetrations utilizing gasketed seals a Type B leakage test is performed. In so doing, accurate as-found leakage data is available for the previous operating cycle. During the outages, containment penetrations are opened for personnel and/or equipment entry, or performance of preventative maintenance. Subsequent to a containment penetration closcout, a Type B leakage test is performed. This leakage data is combined with all measured leakages of the various containment penetrations as a baseline for the upcoming operating cycle. The summary test results for Type B Testing, Table 1978-1, provides both the initial and retest leakage A data associated with those containment penetrations opened during the V Torus and refueling outages,

d. Containment Purge Makeup Valve The Containment Purge Makeup Valve (V16-20-22B) was satisfactorily tested on July 15, 1978. Subsequent to the testing, the valve's solenoid operator that functions to open the valve was operating improperly.

As a result of this condition the solenoid was replaced and the valve verified to function normally. To verify the valve's isolation capability and penetration integrity, a Type C leakage test was performed on August 15, 1978, which resulted in a satisfactory leakage rate of less than or equal to 0.015 lbm/hr.

Quantitative Calculations of Technical Specification Limits

1. The combined leakage rate of all penetrations and valves subject to Type B and C tests shall be less than 0.60 La. Sixty (60) percent of La = 355 lbm/ day.

(

, ?' '"

, -4

't

2. The leakage from any one isolation valve shall not exceed 5% of Ltm. Five (5) percent of Ltm = 12.53 lbm/ day or 0.522 lba/hr.

3. The leakage from any one main steam line isolation valve shall not exceed 11.5 SCFH at 24 psig (Pt)'.

4 O- :

O

, I* *

~5-

's Table 1978-1 Summary Test Results for Type B Testing PENETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR) !

NUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST Personnel Lock 0 (tested 0 (tested at end of at end of torus outage) refueling outage)

Bellows Seals X-7A Main Steam Line A 0 X-7B Main Steam Line B 0 X-7C Main Steam Line C 0 X-7D Main Steam Line D 0 i

X-9A Feedwater A 0 (1)

X-9B Feedwater B 0 X-11 HPCI Steam Line 0 X-12 RHR Suction 0 X-13A RHR Return A 0 X-13B RHR Return B 0 X-14 Cleanup Suction 0 X-16A Core Spray A 0 X-16B Core Spray B 0 100A Electrical Penetrations 0 100B Electrical Penetrations 0 100C Electrical Penetrations 0.00056 100D Electrical Penetrations 0.00028 101A Electrical Penetrations 0 101B Electrical Penetrations 101C Electrical Penetrations 0 101D Electrical Penetrations 0.00056 102 Electrical Penetrations 0.00028 103 Electrical Penetrations 0.00056 I

1 l

8

.g Table 1978-1 Summary Test Results for Type B Testing 1

PENETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR) l '

DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST NUMBER 104A Electrical Penetrations 0.00056

-104B Electrical Penetrations 0.00056 104C Electrical Penetrations 0.00028 105A Electrical Penetrations 0.00028 ..

105B Electrical Penetrations 0.00056 f

0.00028 4

105C Electrical Penetrations 105D Electrical Penetrations 0.00028 l () 214 Electrical Penetrations 0 Double Casketed Seals J

X-1 Equipment Hatch 0.00105 X-4 Drywell Head Access Hatch 0

X-6 Control Rod Drive Removal Hatch 0.0007 X-200A Torus Access Hatch 0.00001 0.000006-I X-200B Torus Access Hatch 0.00004 VBC-A Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00005

() VBC-E Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00001 VBC-C Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00002 VBC-D Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 0 VBC-E Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00006 i

VBC-F Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00004 t VBC-G Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00008 J

VBC-H Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 VBC-I Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0.00002 0.0002 VBC-J Vacuum Breaker Access Cover 0 i

1

, l 4

l .

i Table 1978-1 Summary Test Results for Type B Testing ;

PENETRATION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

NUMBER DESCRIPTION INITIAL RETEST SLH-A Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00013 Stil-B Shear Lug Access Cover 0 SLH-C Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00001 SLH-D Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00002 S Lii-E Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00001 SLH-F Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00007 SLH-G Shear Lug Access Cover 0.00002 SLH-H- Shear Lug Access Cover 0.000003 Drywell Head Flange .06 (Tested 0.0017 during Torus (Tested at outage) end of re-X-213-A Torus Drain 0.000002 X-213-B )

Torus Drain 0.00001 Total B Penetration Leakage 0.067 0.009 O

.* i ' ;" Table 1978-2 Summary Test Results for Type C Testing VALVE (S) DESCRIPTION LEAKAGE (LBM/IIR)

INITIAL RETEST MS-77 Main Steam Drain .056 RV 39 6 40 Recirc Sample .041 RilR-57 RIIR Disch. To Radwaste l<0.015 LRW-83 Drywell Floor Drain 11.95 0.121 LRW-95 Drywell Equipment Drain 0.299 S13-16-19-8,9, Containment Purge >17.98 10 & 23 <0.293 1

- S13-16-19-11A Vacuum Relief <0.015 (3l & 12A l .

S13-16-19-llB Vacuum Relief

& 12B

' 0.024 S13-16-19-6,7 Containment Exhaust 6A,6B,7A&7B !' 0.542 l

RCU-18 Reactor Cleanup <0.015 V16-20-20 Containment Furge Makeup I 0.022 V16-20-22A Containment Purge Makeup 0.056 V16-20-22B Containment Purge Makeup <0.015 <0.015 RCU-68 Reactor Cleanup 0.298 IIPCI-16 IIPCI Steam Supply 0.023 RCIC-16 RCIC Steam Supply 0.258 CA-96A Cont. Air Compressor Suction <0.0015 CA-96B Cont. Air Compressor Suction 0.048 ngl 3A & 13B CAD Injection

<0.0015 NG12A & 12B CAD Injection

<0.0015 NG11A & 11B CAD Injection

<0.0015 VG-9A CAD Vent 0.027 VG-22A CAD Vent 0.041

.e

~

t I

o 4*

Table 1978-2 sn===ry Tour Raoulta for Tyne C TestinR VALVE (S) TESTED DESCRIPTION LEAKAGE (LBM/HR)

INITIAL RETEST VG-9B CAD Vent 0.122 VG-22B CAD Vent 0.128 VG-23 CAD Rad. Mon. Supply <0.015 VG-26 CAD Rad. Mon. Supply <0.015 CAM-76A Rad. Mon. Return <0.015 CAM-76B Rad. Mon. Return <0.015 MS-74 Main Steam Drain 0.0014 HPCI-15 HPCI Steam Supply

<0.023 RCIC-15 RCIC Steam Supply 0.0298 RCU-15 Reactor Cleanup 0 LRW-82 Drywell Floor Drain 0.036 LRW-94 Drywell Equipment Drain

<0.299 RHR-66 RHR Discharge to Radwaste 0

Total Leakage Following Repairs or Retest <2.91 l VALVE TESTED DESCRIPTION LEAKAGE (SCFH)

! INITIAL RETEST MS80A A Main Steam Line 0.786 i

MS86A A Main Steam Line 9.02 MS80B B Main Steam Line 0.479 MS86B B Main Steam Line 14.849 6.56 MS80C C Main Steam Line O MS86C C Main Steam Line 8.524 MS80D D Main Steam Line 19.85 0 MS86D D Main Steam Line 9.534-Corrective Action Plan Test Results Obtained During Refueling Outage l VALVE TESTED DESCRIPTION LEAKAGE (LBM[HR1, CA-89B Cont. Air Compressor Discharge 0.262 CA-89C Cont. Air Compressor Discharge 0.404

V O

<'= .ti. ?

j

.- cy . .. . - . . - - - . - . . - , -

(g _ _ *

's -

a e I5 Z

e, i n 8' l c Fm'3 y 9 ~

c 3 B

C

{ . g --

f.n . .- . - - . . . . .. o - , - - - - -

e te s u-

2 j. c3 3 " fE7 y-

/ . .--

of

- i.: A

_7 "_

y ~

t 2 e' w g-5 . . . . , .. ,

b . ..-

. . . . . . .. g -

_ o -

O ^

( ,,;

a

$e/.

- 3 O

ll .s

e e

6e

- 12:

?

L .8.a m 4 3 4

g/s s

'8 f "

()

v

/ e V-

- ,8 a% -

o -- .

~ - e --- - ---- - - - --.

8

/

.-. .g -

e.

.g !

4

.. . ..A O %

- o i s e i

f.

....,...~

sratog k f t ;t iy I . ...... ~ . . . ' 'J *. . * :=M ' '.r

,j,fe4 ..~. . . . . _ . . . . . . .. -. .

.ts.

2 F j

C E -

E ~

.g f .

. g :g. p . - . . .

E3e- 8 a

'I . a

' l 3 : .

t a #

C q ey :1 i 8 If 8 ':

g j. - - -

g ".!!

1 e . .g .

e -

t

~

,g "

O.

t 3

! s 3

' 3 8'

. E .

- 60y 8

g2 a

.o g 9- a

. g .

t .

i '.$ .

O !

5

., 2.,

j .....1 f,. . .

.j g.. . . ..

-. ; [.

j.

.g 1

. ... . 'I.. .

f I 4 > -

y ,,

f . . .g t

L , g .

~

3 , .

T S I l

[.._ .{.... ...___.........g _.. ,

......._.p....._.. . , , ..

3 . ..

3 '

'l g..

a_ .

_ o .o t., 3 s 2

2 0

L._.._ . ._ . -

( ::n := . . . .:..:,r.a n*?;' . Iot 's

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

________________________--____-___J

ML20023A400

Text

Navigation menu

Search