IR 05000348/1987032

Insp Repts 50-348/87-32 & 50-364/87-32 on 871117-20.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Containment Leak Rate Testing,Including Observation of Portion of Test & Evaluation of Preliminary Test Results

ML20149E671
Person / Time
Site:	Farley
Issue date:	01/11/1988
From:	Jape F, Whitener H NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20149E662	List: IR 05000348/1987032 ML20149E657
References
50-348-87-32, 50-364-87-32, NUDOCS 8802110226
Download: ML20149E671 (8)

Text

..

.. . -. .

,

UNITED STATES

./ p ta ry.q'o

. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMIS$lON

[1 g

n

,- j REolONil

'101 MARIETTA STREET, * ~r ATLANTA, GEORGI A 3o323

\...../

ReportNos.: 50-348/87-32, 50-364/87-32 Licensee: Alabama Power Company 600 North 18th Street Birmingham, AL- 35291-0400 Docket Nos.: 50-348 and 50-364 License Nos.: NPF-2 and NPF-8 Facility Name: Farley 1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: November 17_-20, 1987 Inspection at Farley site near,Dothan, Alabama Inspector: ,

H. L. Whitener

1. w /- // - ff Date Signed Approved by: Ar/sa /[N[N Date' Signed F. Jape, CM ef '" ' y/

Test Program Section Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection was in the areas of containment leak rate testing on Unit 2 including observation of a portion of the test, evaluation of preliminary test results, review of changes to test procedure, review o# local leak rate test results, and follow up inspection of Unit 1 outstanding item Results: No violations or deviations were identified.

8502110226gj$0040 ADOCK PDR PDR G

_ _ _ _ _ _ . -

- _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

A

-

.

__

t REPORT DETAILS: Persons Contacted l

Licensee Employees l

• M. Coleman, Systems Performance Supervisor l

• D. Hartline,-GPE Supervisor L. Huey, Systems Performance Engineer

_

"J. Woodard, General Manager Other licensee employees-contacted included leak rate test personne Other Organizations Bechtel P. Galanti, Alternate Leak Rate Test Director B. Patel, Leak Rate Test Director-K. Pimentel, Leak Rate Technician L. Putnam, Leak Rate Technician Volumetrics P. Zephier, Instrumentation Technician l

NRC Resident Inspector ( * Bradford, Senior Resident Inspector l

.

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on November 20, 1987, with those persons indicated in Paragraph I abov The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection finding No dissenting comments were received from the licensee.

I One outstanding item was closed as follows:

(Closed) 50-348/86-25-03, Verify that the local leakage rate for penetrations 46, 56 and 57 are added to the Type A test result (Paragraph 7).

The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspector during this inspection,

_ - _ _ _ _ _

-

.

2 Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio . Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspectio . Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (70313), Unit 2 The inspector reviewed and witnessed test activities to determine that the primary Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test (CILRT) was performed in accordance with the requirements of Appendix J to 10 CFR 50, ANSI N45.4, and Test Procedure FNP-2-STP-117.0, Revision 5, "Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test."

Selected sampling of the licensee's activities which were inspected included: (1) review of the test procedure to verify that the procedure was properly approved and conformed to the regulatory requirements listed above; (2) observation of test performance to determine that test prerequisites were completed, special equipment was installed, instrumentation was calibrated, and appropriate data were recorded; and (3) preliminary evaluation of leakage rate test results to verify that leak rate limits were met. Pertinent aspects of the test are discussed in the following paragraph General Observations The inspectoi -

witnessed and reviewed portions of the test preparation, containment pressurization, temperature stabilization and data processing during the period of November 17-20, 1987. The following items were verified:

(1) The test was conducted in accordance with an approved procedur Procedure changes and test discrepancies were properly documented in the procedur (2) Test prerequisites selected for review were found to be complete (3) Plant systems required to maintain test control were reviewed and found to be operationa (4) Special test instrumentation was reviewed and found to be installed and operationa (5) Data required for the performance of the containment leak rate calculations were recorded at 15 minutes interval (6) Problems encountered during the test were described in the test event lo .

_

- -

.

,

3'

( 7') Pressurized ' gas sources were properly isolated and. vented to preclude in-leakage or interference of out-leakage through containment isolation valve (8) A temperature survey of the containment was. performed to determine. representative locations of the instrument (9) In-situ instrument checks were perfortrad to confirm channel agreement with the data acquisition syste (10) Temperature, pressure, dew point, and flow data were recorded at 15-minute intervals. Data were assembled and retained for final evaluation and analysis by the Bechtel Corporation for the licensee. A final CILRT report will be submitted to the Office of Nuclear. Reactor Regulatio No violations or deviations were identified in these areas.

- Procedure Review (70307) Unit 2 The test procedure for Unit I and Unit 2 are the same with some minor exceptions. During a previous inspection in November 7-14, 1986, the Unit 1 CILRT procedure, FNP-1-STP-117.0, Revision 6, was reviewed in detai During this inspection the inspector reviewed portions of the Unit 2 CILRT procedure, FNP-2-ST-P-117.0, Revision 5 to verify that the procadure is essentially the same as the. Unit I procedure and conforms to the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix J and ANSI N45.4-197 In addition, the inspector reviewed the 11 procedure changes made to the Unit 2 procedure. Procedural changes included:

Change Number Purpose SA Remove certain equipment from containmen B Change valve position verification require-ment: chance a referenced procedure: change valve resteration positio SC Redefine alignment of certain instrumentatio SD Vent certain electrical penetrations per vendor manua SE Isolate Penetration 28, RCP seal retur Type C leakage will be addeJ to Type A test resul __ _ ___

y;8.

,-,

.

.

.

5F Provide flexibility in system alignment SG Change valve positions in secondary syste H; Redefine valve position-for' drainin SI Provide . flexibility for containment recirculation-fan operatio J Update description of data acquisition system: Isolate SW from RCP motor coolers, Penetrations 32 and 6 SK Redefine valve positions to reflect a valve added in the sump pump discharg Of the above changes, only SE -and 5J affected the containment boundar Specifically, Penetrations 28, 32, and 60_ were not correctly aligned for the Type A test. The licensee has. resolved this matter by adding - the local leakage measurements for these penetrations to the Type A test result. The following penetrations were identified in the test procedure as not aligned in the-required post accident condition:

Penetration Function 71 Containment Leak Test Connection, 72 Containment Leak Test Connection 61A Post Accident Containment Sampling /

Containment Pressure 28 CVCS/RCP Seal Return 46 CCW from excess Letdown /RCOT Heat Exchanger 32 SW from RCP Motor Coolers 60 SW from RCP Motor Coolers The local leakage rates from these penetrations will be added to the Type A test resul The inspector had no further questions on procedure change c. Test Description A brief description of test events extracted from the test log are shown below:

_ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ . .

]i ;

'

,

.- ,

5 l

,

i Date Time Event 11/19 0230 Containment pressurization initiate Pressurization- terminated at containment t pressure of_50 psig.

1 Minimum four hour stabilization period initiate Containment fan coolers secure Stabilization declared - Type A test initiate /20 2100- Twenty-four hour Type A test complete Began preparation for verification tes '

2200 One hour stabilization for verification test complete, b 2215 Verification test initiate /21 0215 Verification test complete, ,

d. -Containment Integrated Leak Rate - Unit 2 A 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> containment integrated (Type A) leak rate test and a four  ;

hour supplemental leak rate test were performed on the Unit 2 primary  :

containment in the period November 19-20, 1987. Mass point-linear  !

regression analysis and total time analysis were used by the licensee  :

'

to determine the leak rate (Lam) and upper confidence limit (UCL) at 24 hour2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> The test met the acceptance criteria for both mass point  !

I and total time analysis as :hown below; the values are expressed as I weight percent per da ;

'

Mass Point Total Time i wt'./ day wt'e/ day .

I La 0.15 0.15 (allowable leakage)

i 0.75 La 0.1125 0.1125 (test acceptance limit)

-

Lam at 24 hr .063 0.059 I UCL at 24 hr .064 0.063  :

! The inspector's calculations agreed closely with those of the [

licensee for a 12-hour span of the test. Although the inspector left .

~ the site prior to the conclusion of the Type A test, the licensee  !

provided the final test results to the Region II office. These data  ;

'

< will be reviewed in the course of the routine leak rate test irspection program.

,

_ _____ ___-_-_ _ _ .. s

Subsequent to- the Type A test, a four hour. verification test was ~ .

performed in accordance with the recommendations of Appendix C of ANSI N45.4-1972. The measured composite leak rate was within the

~

-

,

upper and lower acceptance limits specified by the equation:

Lam + Lo - 0.25 La <- Le < Lam + Lo + 0.25 La for both the mass point and total time analysis as'follows:

Verification Lower Limit Leak Rate Upper Limit Total Time 0.173

'

0.224 0.248 Mass Point 0.176 0.214 0.252 The inspector concluded that the licensee has demonstrated that the ,

containment' leakage meets the regulatory. requirement ' Local Leak Rate Test (70313, 61720) Unit 2 The inspector previously reviewed, in detail, the licensee's local leak rate test program and controls established to determine the "as found" leak rate (see IE Report 50-348/86-25 and 50-364/86-25). During this ,

inspection, portions of local leak rate test results were reviewed and the  :

overall test results' discussed with licensee test personne The 1 summation of the as found maximum leakage paths was 22,528 sec This '

value includes four valves which exceeded the ad:ainistrative limits as  ;

follows: ,

,

-

Instrument air check valve  !

-

Backup air supply for PORV's check valve j

-

CCW water to thermal barrier check valve i

-

CCW return from letdown heat exchanger A0V j This leakage is only 15% of the allowable 0.6 La limi The summation of the as found minimum leakage paths for the Type B and C [

tests was 2.639 secm. This equates to 1.75% of the 0.6 La allowable <

'

leakage or 0.01 La. At this time, the licensee had not calculated the j- exact leakage correction to determine the "as found" containment i integrated leak rate. However, it is clear that if all the minimum path

, leakage was corrected to zero, the "as found" integrated leak rate would be no greater than 0.065 wt.%, which is within 0.1125 wt.% limi In the Unit 1 test, November 1986, the licensee had excluded two  !

components from the calculation of the "as found" integrated leak rate-the equipment hatch, and the fuel transfer tube flange. The inspector  !

confirmed that local leak rate measurem.nts of these components are l incorporated into the Unit 2 "as found" integrated leak rate as follows: {

E t

i f

, -. .- .

-

v  ?

..r

.

Fuel Transfer Tube Flange 10/06/87 1 seem - before removal for outage 11/15/87 4 seem - just before the Type A test Equipment Hatch 10/05/87 10 seem - tefore removal for outage 10/18/87 18 seem - just before the Type A test The inspector concluded that the "as found' containment integrated leak rate is acceptabl . Inspection of Outstanding Item (92701) Unit 1 (Closed) Inspector Follow-up Item 348/86-25-03, Verify that the Type A test result is adjusted for the local (Type C) leakage rates for Penetrations 46, 56, ard 5 The inspector reviewed the Farley Primary Reactor Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test Report for the Unit 1 CILRT performed November 198 Page 2 of this report shows that leakage for the above penetrations was included in the local leakage rates added to the Type A test result. The total add-on leakage of 0.0001 wt.% did not affect the Type A test resul This item is resolved.