ML060950364: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 2: Line 2:
| number = ML060950364
| number = ML060950364
| issue date = 03/22/2006
| issue date = 03/22/2006
| title = 2006/03/22-GALL AMP: XI.M14, Loose Part Monitoring (Audit Worksheet GALL Report AMP)
| title = GALL AMP: XI.M14, Loose Part Monitoring (Audit Worksheet GALL Report AMP)
| author name = Morgan M
| author name = Morgan M
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/RLRC
| author affiliation = NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/RLRC
Line 19: Line 19:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 1 AUDIT W ORKSHEET GALL R EPORT AMP PLANT: ______________________________
{{#Wiki_filter:AUDIT W ORKSHEET GALL REPORT AMP PLANT: ______________________________
LRA AMP: __________________________
LRA AMP: __________________________                                                       REVIEWER: ______________________
R EVIEWER: ______________________
GALL AMP: XI.M14, Loose Part Monitoring                                                   DATE: __________________________
GALL AMP: XI.M14, Loose Part Monitoring DATE: __________________________
Program             Auditable GALL Criteria                                             Documentation of Audit Finding Element Program             A. The program relies on an inservice monitoring program to         Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Description          detect and monitor loose parts in light-water reactor (LWR)         Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
Program Element Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding Program Description A. The program relies on an inservice monitoring program to detect and monitor loose parts in light-water reactor (LWR) power plants. This in-service loose part monitoring (LPM) program is based on the recommendations from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers operation and maintenance standards and guides (ASME OM-S/G)-1997, Part 12, "Loose Part Monitoring in Light-Water Reactor Power Plants." Consistent with GALL AMP:
power plants. This in-service loose part monitoring (LPM) program is based on the recommendations from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers operation and maintenance standards and guides (ASME OM-S/G)-1997, Part 12, Loose             Comment:
Yes No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:  
Part Monitoring in Light-Water Reactor Power Plants.
: 1. Scope of          A. The program includes measures to monitor and detect              Consistent with GALL AMP:       Yes   No Program              metallic loose parts by using transient signals analysis on          Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
acoustic data generated due to loose parts impact. The program is applicable, but not necessarily limited to, the reactor vessel and primary coolant systems in pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and the reactor recirculation system in boiling water        Comment reactors (BWRs). The detection and monitoring system includes a set of accelerometers installed in the vicinity of regions where loose parts impact is likely to occur. The system incorporates the capability of automatic annunciation (audible and visual),
audio monitoring, automatic and manual signal recording, and acoustic signal analysis/evaluation. Measures for personnel radiation exposure and safety are included as part of the requirements of the LPM system. The objective of the LPM program is to provide early indication of component degradation.
XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring                                                            1


Comment: 1. Scope of Program A. The program includes measures to monitor and detect metallic loose parts by using transient signals analysis on acoustic data generated due to loose parts impact. The program is applicable, but not necessarily limited to, the reactor vessel and primary coolant systems in pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and the reactor recirculation system in boiling water reactors (BWRs). The detection and monitoring system includes a set of accelerometers installed in the vicinity of regions where loose parts impact is likely to occur. The system incorporates the capability of automatic annunciation (audible and visual), audio monitoring, automatic and manual signal recording, and acoustic signal analysis/evaluation. Measures for personnel radiation exposure and safety are included as part of the requirements of the LPM system. The objective of the LPM program is to provide early indication of component degradation. Consistent with GALL AMP:
Program             Auditable GALL Criteria                                           Documentation of Audit Finding Element
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
: 2. Preventive       A. The aging management program (AMP) is a                         Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Actions              monitoring/detection program that provides early indication and   Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
 
detection of the onset of aging degradation. It does not rely on preventive actions.
Comment XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 2 Program Element Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding 2. Preventive Actions A. The aging management program (AMP) is a monitoring/detection program that provides early indication and detection of the onset of aging degradation. It does not rely on preventive actions. Consistent with GALL AMP:
Comment:
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
: 3. Parameters       A. The program relies on the use of transient acoustic signals to Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Monitored/          provide information on the occurrence of metallic loose part       Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
Comment: 3. Parameters Monitored/
Inspected            impact. Reactor coolant system (RCS) background noise may mask the noise generated due to loose part impact. These background noises may arise from sources such as coolant flow and mechanically and hydraulically generated vibrations. To       Comment:
Inspected A. The program relies on the use of transient acoustic signals to provide information on the occurrence of metallic loose part impact. Reactor coolant system (RCS) background noise may mask the noise generated due to loose part impact. These background noises may arise from sources such as coolant flow and mechanically and hydraulically generated vibrations. To differentiate loose part impact noise from background noise, ASME OM-S/G-1997, Part 12, recommends that the monitoring system sensitivity be set on the basis of the background noise and that maximum sensitivity be accomplished that is consistent with an acceptable false alarm rate arising from the background noise. Consistent with GALL AMP:
differentiate loose part impact noise from background noise, ASME OM-S/G-1997, Part 12, recommends that the monitoring system sensitivity be set on the basis of the background noise and that maximum sensitivity be accomplished that is consistent with an acceptable false alarm rate arising from the background noise.
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
: 4. Detection of     A. Impact signals contain significant information on the size of   Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Aging Effects        the impacting object, the impact force and energy, and the         Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
 
composition and shape of both the component struck and the impacting object. In general, the magnitude of the impact signal increases with the impact mass and impact velocity. However, the frequency response increases with increasing velocity and     Comment:
Comment: 4. Detection of Aging Effects A. Impact signals contain significant information on the size of the impacting object, the impact force and energy, and the composition and shape of both the component struck and the impacting object. In general, the magnitude of the impact signal increases with the impact mass and impact velocity. However, the frequency response increases with increasing velocity and decreasing mass. These data may be used to extract information on possible loose part impact and differentiate it from background noise. Consistent with GALL AMP:
decreasing mass. These data may be used to extract information on possible loose part impact and differentiate it from background noise.
Yes No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:  
: 5. Monitoring        A. The impact signals, collected data, frequency, and              Consistent with GALL AMP:       Yes   No and Trending        characteristics are recorded, monitored, and evaluated to locate  Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
and identify the source and cause of the acoustic signals for the purpose of determining the need and urgency for a detailed inspection and examination of the suspected reactor vessel internals components. These activities are performed and          Comment:
associated personnel are qualified in accordance with site XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring                                                          2


Comment: 5. Monitoring and Trending A. The impact signals, collected data, frequency, and characteristics are recorded, monitored, and evaluated to locate and identify the source and cause of the acoustic signals for the purpose of determining the need and urgency for a detailed inspection and examination of the suspected reactor vessel internals components. These activities are performed and associated personnel are qualified in accordance with site Consistent with GALL AMP:
Program              Auditable GALL Criteria                                              Documentation of Audit Finding Element controlled procedures and processes, as indicated by vendor, industry, or regulatory guidance documents.
Yes No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
: 6. Acceptance        A. The LPM alarms that suggest metallic impacts are further          Consistent with GALL AMP:       Yes   No Criteria            evaluated to verify LPM operability and to determine the location Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
of the impact, the impact energy, and mass. Plant process data are reviewed for anomalous behavior, and diagnostic results are assessed by plant personnel.
Comment:
Comment:
XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 3 Program Element Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding  controlled procedures and processes, as indicated by vendor, industry, or regulatory guidance documents. 6. Acceptance Criteria A. The LPM alarms that suggest metallic impacts are further evaluated to verify LPM operability and to determine the location of the impact, the impact energy, and mass. Plant process data are reviewed for anomalous behavior, and diagnostic results are assessed by plant personnel. Consistent with GALL AMP:
: 7. Corrective        A. If LPM diagnostics indicate the presence of loose parts, then    Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Actions              corrective actions are taken. In some cases, the results of the      Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
Yes No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:  
diagnostic may indicate the signal is due to a change in the plant background noise characteristics and not due to the presence of loose parts. In such cases, the LPM alarm rates may in time become so high as to be unacceptable in practice.        Comment:
Adjustment of the alarm threshold (set points) is allowed.
However, the reason for the change in background noise is to be investigated and understood, and the set point change is to be documented. As discussed in the appendix to this report, the staff finds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, acceptable to address the corrective actions.
: 8.                   A. Site quality assurance (QA) procedures, review and approval      Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Confirmation        processes, and administrative controls are implemented in            Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
Process              accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. As discussed in the appendix to this report, the staff finds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, acceptable to address the confirmation process and administrative controls.        Comment:
: 9.                  A. See Item 8, above.                                               Consistent with GALL AMP:       Yes   No Administrative                                                                            Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
Controls XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring                                                            3


Comment: 7. Corrective Actions A. If LPM diagnostics indicate the presence of loose parts, then corrective actions are taken. In some cases, the results of the diagnostic may indicate the signal is due to a change in the plant background noise characteristics and not due to the presence of loose parts. In such cases, the LPM alarm rates may in time become so high as to be unacceptable in practice. Adjustment of the alarm threshold (set points) is allowed. However, the reason for the change in background noise is to be investigated and understood, and the set point change is to be documented. As discussed in the appendix to this report, the staff finds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, acceptable to address the corrective actions. Consistent with GALL AMP:
Program              Auditable GALL Criteria                                        Documentation of Audit Finding Element Comment:
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
: 10. Operating        A. The loose part monitoring program is extensively and       Consistent with GALL AMP:      Yes  No Experience          effectively used by the industry. The program has been        Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
developed and published as a standard in the ASME Standards and Guides for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, Part 12, an American National Standard. Part 12 was developed on the basis of knowledge gained from operating      Comment:
experience and research conducted since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.133 in May 1981.
XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring                                                      4


Comment: 8. Confirmation Process A. Site quality assurance (QA) procedures, review and approval processes, and administrative controls are implemented in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. As discussed in the appendix to this report, the staff finds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, acceptable to address the confirmation process and administrative controls. Consistent with GALL AMP:
EXCEPTIONS Item          Program Elements      LRA Exception Description  Basis for Accepting Exception  Documents Reviewed Number                                                                                            (Identifier, Para.# and/or Page #)
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
1.
2.


Comment: 9.
ENHANCEMENTS Item          Program Elements        LRA Enhancement Description Basis for Accepting Enhancement Documents Reviewed Number                                                                                            (Identifier, Para.# and/or Page #)
Administrative Controls A. See Item 8, above. Consistent with GALL AMP:
1.
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
2.


XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 4 Program Element Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding Comment: 10. Operating Experience A. The loose part monitoring program is extensively and effectively used by the industry. The program has been developed and published as a standard in the ASME "Standards and Guides for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants," Part 12, an American National Standard. Part 12 was developed on the basis of knowledge gained from operating experience and research conducted since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.133 in May 1981. Consistent with GALL AMP:
DOCUMENT REVIEWED DURING AUDIT Document Number             Identifier (number)       Title                                                 Revision and/or Date 1.
Yes  No Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:
2.
Comment:
3.
XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 5 EXCEPTIONS  Item Number  Program Elements LRA Exception Description Basis for Accepting Exception Documents Reviewed  (Identifier, Para.# and/or Page #) 1. 2.    -
4.
ENHANCEMENTS Item Number Program Elements LRA Enhancement Description Basis for Accepting Enhancement Documents Reviewed  (Identifier, Para.# and/or Page #) 1. 2.    -
XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring                                                5}}
DOCUMENT REVIEWED D URING A UDIT  Document Number Identifier (number) Title Revision and/or Date 1. 2. 3. 4.   -.}}

Latest revision as of 07:52, 14 March 2020

GALL AMP: XI.M14, Loose Part Monitoring (Audit Worksheet GALL Report AMP)
ML060950364
Person / Time
Site: Vermont Yankee Entergy icon.png
Issue date: 03/22/2006
From: Morgan M
NRC/NRR/ADRO/DLR/RLRC
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
morgan M NRR/NRC/DLR/RLRC, 415-2232
Shared Package
ML060950189 List: ... further results
References
%dam200611, TAC MC9668
Download: ML060950364 (6)


Text

AUDIT W ORKSHEET GALL REPORT AMP PLANT: ______________________________

LRA AMP: __________________________ REVIEWER: ______________________

GALL AMP: XI.M14, Loose Part Monitoring DATE: __________________________

Program Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding Element Program A. The program relies on an inservice monitoring program to Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Description detect and monitor loose parts in light-water reactor (LWR) Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

power plants. This in-service loose part monitoring (LPM) program is based on the recommendations from the American Society of Mechanical Engineers operation and maintenance standards and guides (ASME OM-S/G)-1997, Part 12, Loose Comment:

Part Monitoring in Light-Water Reactor Power Plants.

1. Scope of A. The program includes measures to monitor and detect Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Program metallic loose parts by using transient signals analysis on Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

acoustic data generated due to loose parts impact. The program is applicable, but not necessarily limited to, the reactor vessel and primary coolant systems in pressurized water reactors (PWRs) and the reactor recirculation system in boiling water Comment reactors (BWRs). The detection and monitoring system includes a set of accelerometers installed in the vicinity of regions where loose parts impact is likely to occur. The system incorporates the capability of automatic annunciation (audible and visual),

audio monitoring, automatic and manual signal recording, and acoustic signal analysis/evaluation. Measures for personnel radiation exposure and safety are included as part of the requirements of the LPM system. The objective of the LPM program is to provide early indication of component degradation.

XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 1

Program Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding Element

2. Preventive A. The aging management program (AMP) is a Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Actions monitoring/detection program that provides early indication and Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

detection of the onset of aging degradation. It does not rely on preventive actions.

Comment:

3. Parameters A. The program relies on the use of transient acoustic signals to Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Monitored/ provide information on the occurrence of metallic loose part Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

Inspected impact. Reactor coolant system (RCS) background noise may mask the noise generated due to loose part impact. These background noises may arise from sources such as coolant flow and mechanically and hydraulically generated vibrations. To Comment:

differentiate loose part impact noise from background noise, ASME OM-S/G-1997, Part 12, recommends that the monitoring system sensitivity be set on the basis of the background noise and that maximum sensitivity be accomplished that is consistent with an acceptable false alarm rate arising from the background noise.

4. Detection of A. Impact signals contain significant information on the size of Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Aging Effects the impacting object, the impact force and energy, and the Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

composition and shape of both the component struck and the impacting object. In general, the magnitude of the impact signal increases with the impact mass and impact velocity. However, the frequency response increases with increasing velocity and Comment:

decreasing mass. These data may be used to extract information on possible loose part impact and differentiate it from background noise.

5. Monitoring A. The impact signals, collected data, frequency, and Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No and Trending characteristics are recorded, monitored, and evaluated to locate Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

and identify the source and cause of the acoustic signals for the purpose of determining the need and urgency for a detailed inspection and examination of the suspected reactor vessel internals components. These activities are performed and Comment:

associated personnel are qualified in accordance with site XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 2

Program Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding Element controlled procedures and processes, as indicated by vendor, industry, or regulatory guidance documents.

6. Acceptance A. The LPM alarms that suggest metallic impacts are further Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Criteria evaluated to verify LPM operability and to determine the location Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

of the impact, the impact energy, and mass. Plant process data are reviewed for anomalous behavior, and diagnostic results are assessed by plant personnel.

Comment:

7. Corrective A. If LPM diagnostics indicate the presence of loose parts, then Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Actions corrective actions are taken. In some cases, the results of the Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

diagnostic may indicate the signal is due to a change in the plant background noise characteristics and not due to the presence of loose parts. In such cases, the LPM alarm rates may in time become so high as to be unacceptable in practice. Comment:

Adjustment of the alarm threshold (set points) is allowed.

However, the reason for the change in background noise is to be investigated and understood, and the set point change is to be documented. As discussed in the appendix to this report, the staff finds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, acceptable to address the corrective actions.

8. A. Site quality assurance (QA) procedures, review and approval Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Confirmation processes, and administrative controls are implemented in Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

Process accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B. As discussed in the appendix to this report, the staff finds the requirements of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix B, acceptable to address the confirmation process and administrative controls. Comment:

9. A. See Item 8, above. Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Administrative Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

Controls XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 3

Program Auditable GALL Criteria Documentation of Audit Finding Element Comment:

10. Operating A. The loose part monitoring program is extensively and Consistent with GALL AMP: Yes No Experience effectively used by the industry. The program has been Document(s) used to confirm Criteria:

developed and published as a standard in the ASME Standards and Guides for Operation and Maintenance of Nuclear Power Plants, Part 12, an American National Standard. Part 12 was developed on the basis of knowledge gained from operating Comment:

experience and research conducted since the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.133 in May 1981.

XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 4

EXCEPTIONS Item Program Elements LRA Exception Description Basis for Accepting Exception Documents Reviewed Number (Identifier, Para.# and/or Page #)

1.

2.

ENHANCEMENTS Item Program Elements LRA Enhancement Description Basis for Accepting Enhancement Documents Reviewed Number (Identifier, Para.# and/or Page #)

1.

2.

DOCUMENT REVIEWED DURING AUDIT Document Number Identifier (number) Title Revision and/or Date 1.

2.

3.

4.

XI.M14 Loose Part Monitoring 5