ML20034C228
| ML20034C228 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/23/1990 |
| From: | Lougheed V, Maura F, Phillips M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION III) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20034C226 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-155-90-07, 50-155-90-7, NUDOCS 9005020192 | |
| Download: ML20034C228 (4) | |
See also: IR 05000155/1990007
Text
,.~-
-
.
.
Y..
-
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Rt.GION ll'1
Report No. 50-155/90007
Docket No. 50-155
License No. DPR-6
Licensee: Consumers Power Company
1945 West Parnali Road
Jackson, MI 49201
Facility Name:
Big Rock Point Plant
Inspection Conducted: January 2, 1990 through~ April 16, 1990
Inspectors:
I
V. P
Date
fl.Loughe6d-w&
We
F. A. Maura 7
Date
Approved By:
2 3dp
"
M. P. Phillips
& te
Inspection Summary
Inspection on January 2, 1990 through April 17,1990(ReportNo. 50,55/90007(DRS))
Areas Ins
TTeensee'pected:
Special . inspection by regional based inspectors of the
s response to the unresolved issues relating to the containment
integrated leak rate test (CILRT) results, as described in inspection
report 50-155/89015. The NRC modules used during this inspection was 92701.
Results: The licensee provided additional information'in their letter of
~
November 1, 1989, which quantified the mass increase during the Type A
u-
test as being due to diurnal effects. The inspectors applied the-same
quantification to the verification test. When this quantification was first
applied, it appeared that the verification test was outside the acceptance
criteria band. This was discussed with the licensee during a' meeting on
-
March 13, 1990. Following submittal of further information by the licensee,
the calculations were rerun, and it was determined that the acceptance
criteria were met. The CILRT was declared a valid test.
However, the values
used for the diurnal effect were calculated using the assumption that changes
to the sphere were uniform.
In order to provide better quantification of the
actual behavior of the steel sphere, the licensee committed to more accurately
measure the changes in containment volume due to atmospheric conditions.
9003020192 900424
ADOCK 0500
5
0
..
_ _ _ _ . . _ . . . . . . _ . .
. . . . . . . .
-
.:
.
~
.
- e
=.
DETAILS
1.
Persons Contacted
Consumers Power
R. Alexander, Licensing Engineer
W. Beckman, Plant Manager
T. Marshall, Technical Engineer
D. Mogenburg, Technical Supervisor
J. Toskey, Sr. Technical Engineer
G. Winthrow, Technical Superintendant
U. S. NRC
E. Plettner, Senior Resident inspector
The above attended the exit interviel held, via telephone, on April 16,
1990.
2.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings
a.
(Closed)-Unresolved Item (155/89015-01(DRS)) : The licensee was
requested to justify why they had not obtained an exemption from the
requirement of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix J, regarding the performance
.
i
of reduced pressure Type A tests at Big Rock without establishing a
correlation between the full and reduced pressures. The licensee
stated that the requirement to perform correlating tests was=
.
discussed only as a preoperational requirement, and since the site
.
!
!
had been operational when Appendix J was issued no exemption'was
required. The inspectors. reviewed the Systematic Evaluation. Program
'
for the site in relation to compliance with-Appendix J, and.found
that the subject of correlating tests had not been addressed. The
licensee has a May 2000 expiration date for their operating license.
Therefore, the licensee will only have'two.or three more CILRTs to
1
perform at most.
Performance of correlation. tests Ft this' time in
i
plant life would not be worthwhile. Therefore, this item is.
j
considered closed.
!
b.
(Closed) Unresolved item (155/89015-02(DRS)): The licensee was
requested to provide better quantification of the diurnal effects on
=j
the sphere, and justification of the increase in mass for the first.
'
seven hours of the Type A test. The licensee.provided sufficient
i
information to show that diurnal effects was the most likely cause
of the increase in mass. The inspectors additionally applied the
i
!
!
2
1
_.
. . . .-
< 13
.-
- +
g4
w
same correction factors to,the verification test,-in order--to ensure-
that the same criteria were used.:to judge both tests._.The initial-
calculations'for the verification test showed'that the test was
-outside the acceptance; criteria.
This was discussed with_the
licensee in a meeting on March 13, 1990. 'The licensee provided
additional-information as to why the test shouldlnot be declared
invalid. Upon fu'rther examination.of.this'information by.the
inspectors, it was found that application _of diurnal effects to the-
verification' test results did not cause;the test to fail. The
inspectors concluded that the July 1989 CILRT,-including verification
test, met the requirements of'10 CFR Part 50, Appendix-J,-and was-
acceptable. However,'the licensee was-requested to continue' efforts
to provide more accurate quantification of.thel diurna 1' effects:on--
the sphere volume, in. order to' ensure that future tests could-
account for such changesLrather than a qualitative explanation of-
" diurnal effects." This was discussed with.'the' licensee during the
exit, and the licensee concurred with the conclusions.1
c.
(Closed)'OpenItem(155/89015-03(DRS)): This-open-item requested
the. licensee calculate the effects of-changestin water level inside
R
containment. and the changes of pressure in'the' control: rod drive
-
and nitrogen accumulators during:the CILRT. ~The: licensee presented;
these calculations in; their~ November 1,1989, , response. 'The' inspectors
have reviewed the calculations and:found them to:be correct. The
effect on the CILRT results wa's negligible.
.
2.
Clarification of Appendix ~J Requirements
The-licensee commented on some'of the' clarifications: submitted in=
.
inspection report 89015._ The inspectors and the licensee discussed the
clarifications and commentsc and concluded that there was no disagreement'
in regard to the clarifications.
Additionally, the effect of air sources _ inside.coritainment (such as the
l
CRD accumulators).on the CILRT_, and the effects of readability and=
sensitivity of instrumentation, as discussed with the licensee during
the test, have been formalized into clarifications. These clarifications
,
are presented below.
I
a.
All air sources left inside containment.duringLa CILRT should be
vented to atmosphere during the test.. If they are not vented,-they:
need to be monitored. The CILRT penalty taken must take into account
-
the readability and- sensitivity ofl the~ monitoring instrumentation.
~
If the air sources are neither vented or; monitored, the penalty added
to the CILRT results must assume that the air _ source went from its
design pressure to the test pressure during the: course of'the. test.
l
a
-
3
1
1
nr
,
,
,.
-
- . ! .
_
,
.
..
.
'
a
t,
b.
When determining the results of-the Type B and C tests, the licensee
needs to account for the minimum readability, accuracy, and sensitivity
of the instrumentation used. No leakage rates should be reported as
zero, but should be reported as the minimum discernable value.
I
3.
Exit Meeting
Following review of all the data submitted by the~ licensee, an exit
interview was conducted by telephone on April- 16, 1990.- The inspectors
summarized the scope and conclusions.of the inspection. _The licensee
- acknowledged these conclusions, as discussed above. The inspectors also
discussed the likely informational content of the inspection report with
regards to documents or processes reviewed by the inspectors during the
inspection. The licensee did not identify any- such documents. or. processes -
as proprietary.
!
i
!
'!
!
!
I
~i
i
i
!
i
!
!
1
I
.. f
-
4
t