IR 05000259/1988019

Insp Repts 50-259/88-19,50-260/88-19 & 50-296/88-19 on 880620-24.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Mark I Containment Long Term Program Mod,Ie Bulletins 79-02 & 79-14

ML20154A320
Person / Time
Site:	Browns Ferry
Issue date:	08/22/1988
From:	Blake J, Robert Carrion, Chou R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20154A316	List: IR 05000259/1988019 ML20154A313
References
50-259-88-19, 50-260-88-19, 50-296-88-19, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8809120151
Download: ML20154A320 (8)

Text

. _ . .

g K8 c v UNITED STATES

, f ,,,'o, NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION y ','. . ( i l T.EGION ll lr j .

101 M ARIETT A STREET.N # e ATL ANTA, GE ORGI A 30323 c, v.....f Report Ncs.: 50-259/88-19, 50-260/88-19, and 50-296/88-19 Licensee: Tennessee Valley Authority 6N 38A Lookout Place 1101 Market Street Chattanooga, TN 37402-2801 Docket Nos.: 50-259, 50-260 and 50-296 License Nos.: DPR-33, DPR-52, and DPR-68 Facility Name: Browns Ferry 1, 2, and 3 Inspection n n: ne 20-24, 1988 Inspecto s: --

.// / E e 5

,

t you Date Signed

^R l v 5_fIth rion Date Signed Approve b  ? f J,/ J Blake, Chief Date Signed

/fia rials and Processes Section E ineering Branch (DivisionofReactorSafety SUMMARY Scope: This routine, announced inspection was in the areas of Mark I Containment Long Term Program Modification, IEB 79-02, and IEB 79-1 Results: In the areas inspected, no violations or deviations were identifie The following was identified as a refuel 7: IFI 50 260/88-19-01, Torus Temperature Monitoring System Instar m ion Completio $$@"$$$b

bbbbf. 'f

-

.

.

.

.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees R. V. Baird, Civil Engineer  !

• R. Baron, Assistant Manager  :

• Task Engineer D.Caldwe 8. Burke,ll, Task Engineer A. Cooke, Mechanical Engineer

• T. Cureton, Civil Engineer

• J. E. Emens Jr. , Associate Electric Engineer l Engineer  ;

• C,S.Hsieh},ComplianceLicensinficensingManager

• C. McFal Acting Compliance -

• C. Morris, Assistant to Site Licensing Engineer  !

C. W. Pratt, Maintenance Section Supervisor l J. Rochelle, Principal Engineer, Knoxville

• J. G. Walker. Plant Manger

• J. E. Wallace, Compliance Licensing Engineer

• B. Willis, IS EG Supervisor Other licensee emplo craf tsmen, engineers,yees contacted during this inspection includedoperators, m tive personne Other Organizations Stone and Webster Engineering Corporation D. Pike, IE8 79-02/79-14 Verification Program Coordinator i W. Murt, Senior QC Inspector j L. Baker, Walkdown Engineer '

NRC Re

• S. gion II Little,TVAProjects,SectionChief NRC Resident Inspectors i

• C, Brooks, Resident Inspector l

• C. Learden, Resident Inspector  ;

• Attended exit interview i Action on Previous Inspection findings (0 pen) Inspector followup Item (IFI) 50-260/88-12-01, Size Discrepancy at }

End Attachment in Torus Ex+ernal Pipe Support i i

!

.

.

.

The calculations and drawing are being revised per F-DCN F0958 Because the revisions have not been incorporated, this IFI remains ope . (Closed) Mark I Containment Long Term Program Modification (25585, TI 2515/85, Unresolved Safety Issue A-7)

This inspection is a continuation of Inspection Report No. 50-259, 260, 296/88-12 and final inspection for Mark I Containment Long Term Program Modification. This inspection focused on the documentation and system installation review, Work Plans Reviewed Most of the standard .ontents in work plans were reviewed. This included work descriptions, instructions, welding procedure numbers, welder qualification v(rifications by QC signature, cognizant engineer verifications, weld data sheets, weld maps, certified records of chemical and mechanical properties for materials, (mill test reports, chemical analysis, electrode heat number, materials used etc.) The following special items were reviewed for each work plan. All Work Plans reviewed u re for Unit (1) T-QuencherandSupports Work Plan 6578, ECN No. P0093, DWG No. 47W401-5, R2 and Work Plan 6766, ECN No. P0555, Work Items 2-433-36 and 2-433-39, Rev. I were used for (MSRV Tailpipes) T-Quenchers and support fabrication and installation. Twenty six quenchers 12'4 schedule 80stainlesssteelpipes,werefabricatedandinstalled with Weld Procedure G-29M and Per.etrant Test inspection according Nuclear Penetrant Testing Procedure. Work Plans 6626, 6693, 6709 wre used for T-Quencher collar fabrication and end arm fabrication and installatio (2) Tiedown Suppo Work Plan 6683, ECH No. P0360 and Work Plan 6759, DWG 48W1246-2, RO were used for Tiedown fabrication and installatio (3) Snubber Attachment Fixtures Work Plan 6812, R1 included the following references as ECH N P0360, OCR No. 2161, FCR No.1169, RI, Dwg. 48W1265*1, R0, and 48W12481, R5. The attachment fixtures 48W1265-3, included wall R0, r ing girder brackets end associated stif fener plate The special items include si.ch things as record of Cognizant Engineer Verification Magnetic Particle of Torus Bracket Examination, Alignment, Ver ification of Bolt Tension at Ring Girder, Power Store Room Requisition (Material) and 1-1/4" Q Maxi-Bolt Receipt Inspectio _ _ _ _ _

-

.

.

I

,

.

(4) Vacuum Breaker Work plan 2114-84 referenced ECH No. P0684, Dwg. 47W103-21, R6, and 47W403-22, R6. The work plan included the fabrication and lower and u replacement limit switches,ofhinge hingearm arms, hingebolts to pallet pins,(mach bushings,ine screws)

and pper pallet gasket. The vacuum breaker primary function is to  ;

prevent the formation of a negative pressure on the drywell containment during rapid condensation of steam f1 the drywell  ;

and in the final stage of a LOCA. The licensee in response to Generic Letter 83-08 dated November 5, 1984, committ;d to modify r the vacuum breakers using higher strength materials to meet the '

reanalysis requirements. The NRC approved the vacuum breakir ,

reanalysis based on the steam condensation and LCCA on November 25, 1986, and attached the Structural Evaluation of the l Vacuum Breakers TER-C5506-323 which agreed with the licer.see ,

committed modification. The ins)ector reviewed the materials  !

listed in the Work Plan against Jrawing Nos. 47W403-22, R6 and i 47W403-H, R6 and P.15 and 16 of TER-C5506-323. Materials of i the hinge arms, hinge pin, hinge bushing, hinge arm to pallet bolts and pallet gasket met the requirement b. Temperature Monitoring System Seven Transient Events Requiring S/RV Actuation were identified and analyzed by General Electric Company using two proprietary corputer codes to evaluated the water temperature of the suppression poo The GE Report, "Browns Ferry Nuclear Power Plant. Units J,, 2, and 3, Suppression Pool Temperature Response" (Document No. NES e40223060),

was reviewed to assure compliance with NRC requirements, lhe results of the study indicate that in all cases evaluated, the pool '

,

temperature remains within the Nr.C limit ;

To accurately monitor the water temperature in the suppression pool, the licensee committed to installing a system to measure the i temperature of the bulk pool water and display that readiry to the .

operators in the main control roo Thc temperature conitoring l system has been installed in Vaits 1 and 3. It is being installed in '

Unit 2 and the licensee has assured the inspector that it will be i functional before fuel load. Paragraph 3.7. A.1.C, Technical Specification, Unit 2, dated May 2, 1988 states "with the f suppression pool water temperature > 95?F Initiate pool cooling and l restore the temperature to 5 95?T within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> ........" which was ,

the assumed temperature limit for normal power or'. Etion in the '

analysis in Paragraph 10.4 of PUAR. Owg. Nos. 1o .6'0-64-3, 2-47E610-64-3, 3-47E610 64-3, and 791E345 were reviewed against the display on the control room pantis and Paragraph 10.5 of FUA ,

,

!

!

,

,.,,ye.--_. , - ,--.-

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

-

.

. .

.

.

'

. Drywell to Wetwell (Suppression Pool) Differential Pressure System Pressure Systems Per Paragraph 1.4 of PUAR, a differential pressure (Ap) system was installed during the Mark I Short Term Program (STP) Activities in each Browns Ferry Nuclear (BFN) unit to mitigate pool swell load effects by maintaining the drywell airspace pressure higher than the torus (wetwell) airspace pressure. The BFN STP plant unique analysis considered the beneficial effects of the op system in evaluating torus support system and attached piping system loa Per discussion with the licenses engineer, the op of 1.5 psid was used in STP analysis and the differential pressure system was installed base on the 1.5 psid. The system was revised to 1.1 psid to reduce the pool swell load impact based on the subsequent tests and analyses ecmbined with the modification of downcomer in PUAR which the downcomer was reduced one foot of length from four feet to three feet which submerged into wate Therefore, PUAR shows 1.1 psid on Tables 8-3, Column 6B & 6C and A-2, Sheet 1. the op was shown on Paragraphs 4.2.5.1 and 5.4.2.7 without figures which means ap = psid. Drawing 47W600-133, Rev. K, Drywell to Suppression Pool Differential Pressure Transmitter Panel Units 1 and 2 shows 1 Panel 25-307, PDT-64-138 at EL. 565' - 0', and Panel 25-306, PDT-64-

, 137 at EL 519' 0". The above panels for Unit 2 were inspected to

assure field installatio Drawing 47W600-133, Rev. J, Hechanical

>

Instruments and Controls, Unit 3 was reviewed for bientity. Draw-ings 47W605-5, Rev. B and 2-47E610-64-2, Rev. O for Unit 2 were reviewed for Display Panel 9-6 in the control room and flow diagram l from the suppression pool to Panel 9-6. The inspectors reviewed the

display at Panel 9-6 and the Technical Specification at control room

for Unit 2. Paragraph 3.7. A.6.a. , Technical Specification, Unit 2, l' dated May 2,1988, states the limiting conditions for operation as

"Differential pressure between the drywell and suparession chamber

. shall be maintained at equal to or greater than 1.:. psid except..."

which confirms the op = 1.1 psid used in PUAR analyses as stated above, i Calculations Reviewed

(1) Downcomer Tie Bar Bracing Calculation No. P0093, "Downcomer Tie Bar Bracing", was reviewed to assure that PUAR commitments of Section 6.7 have been me The calculations satisfy PUAR comm%ments for materials, I geometric configuration, etc. The tie bars and bracing are required to minimize the lateral response to the downcomer,

'

which is induced by condensation oscillation effects.

i

i

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

-

.-

.

'

(2) T-QuencherSupportSystem Calculation No. P0093, "Torus Integrity Long Term Program (Quencher Support)," was reviewed to assure that its ?UAR commitments of section 7.2.1,1 had been fulfille The calculations appear to be done in a competent, professional manner and satisfy the PUAR commitment The analysis includes a detailed computer model which incorporates the support i geometry, design loads, material properties, et The assumptions made during the analysis are reasonable and acceptabl (3) Torus Tiedowns t

!

Calculation No. P0360, "Torus Tiedown", was reviewed to assure that commitments made in Section 5.2.3 of the PUAR have been me The purpose of the tiedowns is to prevent the uplift  !

calculated for various loading combinations, thereby eliminating the potential for damage to either the torus or attached pipin The calculations, including their supporting assumptions and ,

conclusion, are satisfactor '

'

(4) Torus Ring Girder External Reinforcement

'

Calculation N P0360 "Torus Ring Girder External Reinforcement", was reviewed for compliance to P"AR commitments of Section 5.2.2. Analyses indicated that the ring girder required additional stiffness to increase the frequency of its ovalling modes and to reduce effect of dynamic loads. The addition of the reinforcement increases the effectiveness of the large 78000 series Bergen-Paterson snubber, dispensing its influence over a larger portion of the circumference of the ring i

girder, and reduces the ring girder and shell stresses. The  ;

'

calculations adding the external reinforcement are satisfactor !

!

l (5) Bergen-Paterson 78000-Series Hydraulic Snubber

[

'

The Bergen-Paterson structural and performance analytical (

, verification calculation (Calculation No. 1080-197A, Rev. 3) of ,

'

its 70000-Series hydraulic snubber was reviewed for compliance I to Sections 5.2.1 and 5.3.3 of the PUAR. Also reviewed for comoliance was the 300-kip functional test, Document NO. MEB

'830119 90 The functional test established a spring rate of l 7000 kips / inch as well as a static compression test of 300 kip l

,

The detailed calculations qualified the snubber for the required  ;

l design parameter t

!

I i l

'

l

!

'

I l I

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

'

.

.

. Findings and Conclusions Overall, the licensee performance on Mark I Containment Long Term Program Modification conformed to commitments of the PUAR with good war ananshi Pending the completion of the suppression pool temperature monitoring system for Unit 2 before fuel loading, this item is identified as a new open item, Inspector Followup Item (IFI)

50-260/88-19-0 With the exception of IFI 50-260/88-12-01 and IFI 50-260/88-19-01, it appears that all commitments of the PUAR hcve been satisfie Commitments to complete the referenced IFIs before fuel load have been mad Ute to the current re-start schedule the inspector concentrated their resources on Unit 2, extrapolat}ng their findings to include Units 1 and 3. Therefore, the Mark I Containment Long Term Program Modifications are deemed to be complete for all three units and this issue is close . (0 pen) Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Using Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts - IEB 79-02 (25528) and (0 pen) Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems-IEB 79-14 (25529) for Unit As a part of Phase II of the 79-14/79-02 procram, Stone and Webster is conducting verification walkdowns of Phase 1. To assure that the verification teams are consistent in their measurements and observations, the inspector observed the activities of one of the teams as they re-verified two supports which had been previously completed by a different tea The two supports are R-59(RR) and R-60 (05), located on the 20"o RHR line of Drawing No. 47W452-281, Revision 0 in the RHR heat -

exchanger room of Unit 2. The two-man team consisted of a walkdown :

engineer and a Senior QC Inspector, both trained on the "Pipe Support Wc1kdown Procedure" (SWEC-005, Revision 0). The results of their re-verification found that the two teams generally measured weld sizes, i lengths, etc comparably, with weld differences of 1/16" and linear dimension differences of 1/8". It therefore is concluded that the vedfication walkdown teams are providing accurate as-built information ft 'he 79-14/79-02 program

.

.

[ Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were summarized on June 24, 1988, with !

those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed below. Although reviewed during this inspection, prcprietary information is not contained in this report. Dissenting comments were not received ;

from the licensee, f (Closed) TI 2515/85 or Module 25585 Unresolved Safety Issue A-7: Mark I [

Containment Long Term Program Modification. (Closed for 50-259, 260, and 296)

i

, P

, .. . _

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

_-

, .

,

-

.

.

(0 pen) IFI 50-260/88-19-01, Torus Temperature Monitoring System Installation Completio :

I

-

!

i l

h

,

i i

!

'

.

i m