ML20154N180
| ML20154N180 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Peach Bottom  |
| Issue date: | 02/26/1986 |
| From: | Anderson C, Joe Golla, Kucharski S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION I) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154N168 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-278-86-02, 50-278-86-2, NUDOCS 8603170226 | |
| Download: ML20154N180 (7) | |
See also: IR 05000278/1986002
Text
.
.
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
REGION I
Report No. 50-278/86-02
Docket No. 50-278
License No. OPR-56
Licensee:
Philadelphia Electr_ic Company
H01 Market Street
Philadelphia, VA
19IDI
Facility Name:
Peach Bottom, Unit _3
Inspection At: Delta, Pennsylvania
Inspection Conducted: J a n u a ry___17_-23, 1986
j
4
4 r*
3./4
Inspectors:
8
%
Kutnarski,Residentfispector
__
cate
sY dh
.2ldatl.
.ac ,n.
r
- o7, e ctor Engineer
~
C
/W
Approved by:
M
E.~^icerson, CUsyr,
- dite
Plant Systems Section, EB, DRS
Insp
Insp.ection Surmary:ection on January _17-23,1986 (Inspection Report No. 50-27
Areas _ Inspected:
Routine announced inspection of procedure review, test wit-
nessing, ana result evaluation of Integrated Leak Rate Test (ILRT) activities,
review of unresolved items and tours of the facility,
The inspection involved
67 hours7.75463e-4 days <br />0.0186 hours <br />1.107804e-4 weeks <br />2.54935e-5 months <br /> onsite by two region-based inspectors.
Results: No violations or deviations were identified.
0603170226 06031i
ADOCK 0%
G
_- . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
l
'
l
I
r
l
l
.
l
!
l
DETAILS
i
i
l
1.0 Persons Contacted
l
l
1.1 philadelphia Electric Company (PEC0J
i
!
- C. J. Campbell,
Test Engineer, Project Group
- A. Fulvio,
Technical Engineer
i
"D. Smith,
Superintendent, Operations
l
l
- A. J. Wasong,
Results Engineer, Project Group
i
l
l
1.2 General physics
i
- C. Kootstra,
Engineer
,
- E. Levinson,
Engineer
i
1.3 Nuclear Regulatory Commission
f
T. Johnson,
Senior Resident Inspector
i
- Denotes those present at exit reeting held on January 23, 1986.
!
2.0 i.icensee Action on Previous NRC Findings
!
2.1 .(Closed) Violation (50-278/85-32-01) Performance of the fuel
!
reionstitut_fon ifVort without prope d iia lt M oltid Q r7 quired in
station procedures.
The inspector reviewed the response of the Itcensee informing the
!
NRC of the corrective and preventive actions taken to prevent this
occurring in the future and found it to be acceptable.
This item is
!
closed.
[
2.2 (Closed)_V,tolation (50-278/85-32-02)_Fa11ure to follow approved
!
procedures.
.
TW11Einsee fallad to follow approved procedures on two occasions
!
during the fuel reconstitution effort.
The first occasion had to do
with differentiating between a recipient bundle and a donor bundle
,
for the QC inspection.
The procedure has been revised to clarify
!
the intent of step V-2 for donor bundles.
The second occasion dealt
l
with personnel not taking the proper precaution in control areas.
The license, reinstructed all those concerned to comply with HP
!
procedures.
This item is closed.
I
!
2.3 (Closed), Follow-up Iten (50-278/85-32-03) Review of Sa fety~ Evaluation
i
o(Tu~el re c on s t rucif o'n".
~' ~ ~ ~ ^~
~~~
f
The inspector revfeWd'the Safety Evaluation performed by General
[
Electric for the fuel reconstitution effort titled "pB-3-Reload 6,
!
Cycle 7-Safety Evalu.stion" October 1, 1935.
This evaluation verified
l
through calculational methods that there were no safety concerns as
!
a result of the pin swapping of the gadolinium pins.
this item is
l
Closed.
I
i
r
<
d
3
.
i
2.4 .(Closed)UnresolvedItem(50-278/85-10-01)_Licenseenotperforming
Type B & C Testing Results Comparison to 0.6LA at time of shutdown
_
The inspector reviewed the method in which the ficensee keeps records
of the running totals for the "As Found" and "As lef t" condition of
Type B and C leakage testing. All the information for the chrono-
,
logical condition of each penetration is available and accessible.
.
This item is closed.
l
2.5 (Closed) Unresolved Item _{50-278/83-11-04) Testing _of Valves which
perform a Pressure Isolation Function
'
The inspector reviewed the liceidd9 evaluation of certain pressure
isolation valves as requested, and is now in agreement with their
reclassification.
It also has been noted that the table in question
(I.S.2) of the FSAR has been removed.
This item is closed.
3.0 Containment Integrated Leak Rate Test _ Unit 3
3.1 Do_cuments Reviewed
- ILRT Valve Line ups
- Section 4.7 of the Technical Specification - Section 5.2.5.1 of the FSAR
- ST 12.5-1, Integrated Leak Rate Test, Revision 6, January 15, 1986
- Instrumentation Selection Guide Calculation
,
- Containment Volume Fraction Calculation
- CILRT Instrumentation Calibration
- CILRT Sequence of Events Log
t
- Test Results
- Selected Piping and Instrunent Orawings
- DMC 1.0, Integrated Leak Rate Testing Revision 0, May 1985
4
l
- DMC 1.6, ILRT-Attachment, Revision 0, May 1985
.
- ECCS Operability Requirement for ILRT.
l
'
3.2 Scope of Review
The inspector reviewed the test procedure and related documents for
technical adequicy and to determine conpliance with the regulatory
,
I
requirements of Appendin J to 10 CFR 50, Technical Specifications,
I
l
and applicable industry standards.
The Inspector witnessed a large
portion of the CILRT and subsequent verification test.
The inspector
'
I
also performed independent maasurements and calculations of tne test
i
results.
,
L
t
3.3 Procedure Review
the inspector reviewed the CILRT procedure along with the documents
i
listed in paragraph 3.1 for technical adequacy and to ascertain com-
pliance with requirements of Technical Specifications and 10 CFR 50,
Appendiv J.
l
,
I
b
.-
-
-
- -
-
-
.
.
4
On a random sampling basis, the inspector reviewed the procedure line
up of valves in the procedures for piping penetrations. This review
was to ensure that systems were properly vented and drained to expose
the containment isolation valves to containment atmosphere and the
test differential pressure with no artificial boundaries.
The
licensee pointed out to the inspector that the valve line up was
changed somewhat because of leakages discovered. During the perfor-
mance of an ILRT, the RHR configuration has one RHR pump in operation
in the shutdown cooling mode and the others lined up for the LPCI
mode.
This means that containment valves that are normally isolated
during a DBA are open during the ILRT. With these valves open and
the RHR lined up for LPCI, valves that are not isolation valves had
to be isolated so that the vessel would not drain into the suppres-
sion pool during the test.
This would significantly affect the
calculation of the containtrent leak rate. While lining up the
systems to begin the test it was discovered that these valves had
gross leakage. Therefore to perform the test the LPCI injection
valves had to be closed. As stated before since this is not a normal
valve Ifne up for a DBA this was acceptable. This valve line up is
acceptable only for the performance of this test. No unacceptable
conditions were identified.
3.4 CILRT Instrumentation
The inspector reviewed the calibration records for tha resistance
temperature detectors (RTD's), dew point instruments, precision
pressure detectors, and verification test flow meters.
Their cali-
brations were found to meet applicable accuracy requirements, and
were traceable to the National Bureau of Standards.
The inspector
also verified that the instrument system satisfied the Instrument
Selection Guide (ISG) calculation.
The inspector observed the oper-
atton of the data collection during the test.
The procedure was as
follows:
the technician would record the data on a fifteen minute
interval and relay this information to the computer personnel who
would manually enter the information into the computer. On an hourly
basis the data would be verified to eliminate any errors. No un-
acceptabic conditions were identified.
3.5 CILRT Chronolojy
January 21, 1986
0047 -
Commenced Pressurization of Containment,
two compressors in operation.
0100 -
2nd set of data recorded. Data was taken on an hourly
basis during pressurization.
_ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
_ __.
5
-
b
0300 -
Containment pressure was 28.00 psia - started leak
search.
Personnel were instructed on how to search for
leaks and not to adjust or repair any leaks found.
1035 -
Removed Dew cell point 5 (Torus) from calculation
due to erratic reaoings.
1110 -
Containment pressurization was temporarily halted due tc
Reactor vessel temperature dropping. Adjusted Drywell
chiller loading to increase Drywell temperature.
1300 -
Combination of the chilled water temperature increase and
reactor water temperature increase resulted in an
increase of drywell dew point readings and a slight
increase in containment pressure.
Still holding to confirm
Reactor pressure vessel temperature has stabilized.
1445 -
Restarted pressurization.
1535 -
Stooped pressurization at 64.1 psia. Began stabilization
period, and also started recording data at 15 minute
i r, tu rv a l s .
0145 -
Temperature stabilization criteria met.
Commenced ILRT.
January R2,1986
0545 -
lLPT Completed.
0615 -
Established verification flow of 4.35 SCFM.
0715 -
Stabilization period for verification test completed.
4 hour4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> verification started.
1135 -
Verification test completed.
1520 -
Depressurization started.
'
3.6 _ Test Performance and Control
The CILRT was performed as delineated by the procedure and appro-
priate administrative guidelines were followed.
Test personnel
exhibited logical and technically sound approaches to leak searches.
One problem was discovered after the test by the licensee. A sample
sink root valve was found to be misaligned (closed instead of the
test condition, open).
The sample sink root valve was tagged and
double verified to be open as part of the test preparation, but some
time durf - the test, or after the test the valve was manipulated.
,
6
-
The licensee performed a local leak test on the penetration on July
25, 1985 and the leakage was 10 SCCM.
The licensee will perform
another leak test on the penetration and add the results to the ILRT.
This could be cited as a severity violation but since it meets the 5
test requirements of 10CFR2 Appendix C Section V.A, a violation will
not be written. That is:
(1) it was identified by the licensee
(2) it fits in severity level IV or V
(3)
it was repor ted by the licensee
'
(4) it will be compensated for in the final test result and
measures will be taken to prevent a future occurrence.
(5)
it was not an occurrence that could reasonably be expected to
have been prevented by the licensee's corrective action from a
previous violation.
The inspector had no further questions at this time.
,
3.7 Test Results Reviewed
The licensee evaluated the test results for the 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> period between
'
2145 on January 21, 1986 and 0545 on January 22, 1986.
The measured
leak rate was 0.0623 wt. % per day with a 95% upper confidence limit
!
(UCL) of 0.0709 wt. % per day. The inspector performed an indepen-
'
'
dent calculation of the test results using the raw data from the test
to estimate the accuracy of the licensee's leak rate calculations.
The results were as follows:
Lam (Mass Pt.)
UCL(Mass Pt.)
Peach Bottom 3
0.0623 wt %/ day
0.0709 wt. %/ day
NRC
0.0624 wt. %/ day
0.0735 wt. %/ day
The inspector concluded that the licensee's calculations were appro-
priately performed and accurate.
Final computation of the total
integrated leak rate is dependent upon the addition of local leakage
values of penetration not included in the test, and of water level
corrections.
The above value with the additions will reflect the
"as left" condition.
The licansee in their final report will have
to reflect the leakage rate in the "as found" condition based on the
"as found" LLRT for each penetration.
The CILRT was followed by a successful superimposed leak verification
';
test.
The licensee imposed a leak of 4.35 SCFM on the existing leak.
The measured verification test leak was 0.5748 wt. % per day at the
upper 95% confidence limit.
The test result was within the accept-
ance criteria band (0.4336 s L composite s 0.6836) wt. %/ day.
The
,
inspector also verified this result by independent calculation.
l
!
t
,
.
.
.
_
.
7
The containment was then depressurized to 16.4 psia followed by
depressurization of the torus to atmospheric pressure for performance
of the low pressure drywell bypass test. A successful bypass test
was performed with a resulting equivalent bypass area of 0.021 in .
2
The acceptance criterion is 0.785 in2 or smaller.
No unacceptable
conditions were identified.
4.0 Facility Tours
The inspector made several tours of various areas of the site to observe
test activities, other work in progress and general housekeeping.
No
unacceptable conditions were identified.
5.0 Independent Calculations
The inspector performed independent calculations of the test results of
this CILRT and the subsequent verification test.
Details are included
in section 3.7 of this report.
6.0 QA/QC Involvement
During the performance of the CILRT, the inspector verified QC involvement
in test monitoring, and determined that the QC personnel were knowledge-
able of their responsibilities, how to perform their duties and how to
report their findings.
No unacceptable conditions were identified.
7.0 Exit Meeting
A meeting was held on January 23, 1986 to discuss the scone and findings
of the inspection as delineated in this report (See Section 1.0 for
attendees). At no time during this inspection was written information
provided to the licensee.