IR 05000324/1979016
| ML19224D537 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 04/27/1979 |
| From: | Burnett P, Graham M, Julian C NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19224D536 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-324-79-16, 50-325-79-16, NUDOCS 7907120560 | |
| Download: ML19224D537 (5) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:. . UNITED STATES yfp* #f Goq'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION . e . y, ( ' g R E GloN 11 n 101 M ARIET T A sT RE ET, N.W.
- -
c AT L ANT A, GECRGI A 30303
[ o, gv.....f Report Nos. 50-325/79-16 and 50-324/79-16 Licensee: Carolina Power and Light Company 411 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Facility Name: Brunswick Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos.
50-325 and 50-324 License Fos, DPR-71 and DPR-62 Inspection at Brunswick Site near Southport, North Carolina b- - hb.hy [Z 7//f Inspectors: Date Signed C. A. Julian U &Y - Udk29 Date Signed / j ham - . . Approved by: / Mfk g f.[[ P. T. Curnett, Acting Section Chief, ROSS Date Signed SUMARY Inspection on April 10-13, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, unannounced inspection involved 44 inspector-hours onsite in the areas of preparation for refueling, startup after refueling, and review of refueling associated procedures.
. Results Of the three areas inspected, no apparent items of noncompliance or deviations were identified.
,' O ,. n ^ i t- _ t 7909120[ .
. , DETAILS 1.
Persons Contsc_tfd Licensee Employees A. C. To11ison, Plant Manager
- J. M. Brown, Operations Superintendent W. M. Tucker, Engineer and Administrative Superintendent
- R. M. Coats, Maintenance Superintendent
- R. M. Foulk, NRC Coordinator
- M. A. Jones, Project Engineer W. Triplett, Engineering Supervisor D. Allen, Quality Assurance Supervisor B. Wilson, Engineer R. LaBall, Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included several operators and office personnel.
- Attended exit interview.
2.
Exit Interv e and findings were summarized on April.3, 1971, The inspection scope with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. The inspector stated that he had reviewe/, the loose parts analysis for Unit 1 (see paragraph 7) and the recent reactor operator trzining documents (see paragraph 8) and had na further questions. Data f:,the Unit I startups on 4/11 cnd 4/13/79 were found adequate. Three op.i items from a previcus inspection were closed. No deviations or item of noncompliance were identified.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
, 4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
i '. f !' .ci.
o . JJJ L 'i ;. . -2-5.
Preparation for Refueling The inspector reviewed the following procedures on fuel handling: FH-9, " Fuel Receipt and Inspection" FH-11, " Refueling" SP-77-16, " Pressure Sipping" (Rev. 3) The inspector also examined all documentatior available of the perfor-mance of FH-9 and SP-77-16 for the Unit 2 refueling outage.
All new fuel bundles were inspected and found acceptable. Two nundred and ninety eight previously irradiated 7 x 7 bundles intended for reload and ten discharge bundles were pressure sipped to detect fission product leaks.
Four bundles intended for reload were found to leak so four discharge bundles without leaks and having similar exposure histories were identified for reload in place of the leaking bundles.
During the fuel sipping operation, bundle BR 250 was identified as leaking, however retests of BR 250 at a later date revealed no leaks. The licensee determined that during tiie first test a typographical error in the fuel handling procedure caused sper.t fuel bundle BR 515 to be sipped in place of BR 250.
BR 515 is a suspected leaking bundle which was previously retired f rom further use.
The inspector discussed with the licensee representative the potential problems which could result from such errors. The inspector also stated that a clear statement of the criteria for neceptance or rejection of suspecting leaking bundles would be a desirable addition to procedure SP-77-16.
No items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in this area.
6.
Refueling of Unit 2 Scheduling delays forced the start of the Unit 2 core reload past the end of this inspection.
The inspector verified, however, that proper preparations had been made for fuel handling. Inspection of the Unit 2 refuel floor indicated that proper preparations had been made for radia-tion safety and contamination control during fuel handling. The inspector verified that adequate procedures are available for performing the periodic tests and checks required by the Technical Specifications durir.g refueling and that plans call for implementaticn of these procedures and documentation of these actions.
No deviations or items of noncompliance were found in this area.
7CC on* JJJ ti o I
.
-3-7.
Unit 1 Loose Parts Analysis During the refueling outage of Unit 1, two neutron source tubes broke during removal from the reactor. Most of the parts were recovered but accounting shows that approximately 30 inches equivalent length of 304 stainless tubing and some fragmerts of Beryllium metal were not found.
The inspector reviewed General Electric document GKB1-9-39 dated 3/23/79 safety analysis for the startup of Unit I containing which presents a the unrecosered loose parts from the neutron source tubes. The analysis in the concludes that the Beryllium will quickly oxidize and disperse reactor coolant and that the stainless tubing presents no significaat potential for fuel damage due to flow blockage or potential for jamming control rods. The report also concludes that no adverse chemical reaction The report recommends that the eight control rods surrounding will occur.
the two locations where the broken sources occured be functionally tested for f reedom of movement and time response to insertion and scram.
The inspector verified that on 4/10/79 the Plant Nuclear Safety Committee reviewed and concurred with the GE analysis and concluded the loose parts to be a significant safety concern for the restart of Unit 1.
The not inspector further verified that the recommended control rod tests had been perforn ed.
8.
Reactor Operator Training The inspector reviewed a document titled " Reactor Startup at Beginning of Fuel Cycle" which discusses the theory and practical use of suberi-tical multiplication and inverse multiplication (1/M) plots and their approaching reactor criticality.
The licensee representative use in stated that the document had been reviewed by all licensed operating personnel along with the circumstances of short period trips which have occurred at other BWR plants during startups. The inspector had no further questions on these topics.
9.
Startup of Unit 1 On 4/11/79 a startup was commenced and the Unit I reactor taken critical for the first time after its refueling outage. During the startup while in the upper source ran2e level it was recognized that three of the eight intermediate range detector channels were not responding to increasing neutron level. This did not provide the required 3 channels per reactor reactor was made suberitical and the protection system channel so the shorting links removed to enable a noncoincident scram on any one nuclear instrumentation channel. While investigating the problem, the reactor scrammed on a high level spike on one intermediate range channel.
3LE 7n7 JJJ LL -
. - -4-The reactor remained shutdown on 4/12/79 until the three inoperable IRM channels were repaired. One was found to have a faulty preamplifier and the other t Jo had faulty cable connectors under the reactor vessel. On 4/13/79 Unit I was again started up and all IRM channels appeared to function normally.
The inspector discussed these occurrances with the licensee representa-tive.
Na deviations or items af noncompliance were identified in these areas.
10.
Followup rf Items from Previous Inspections Item 50-325/79-09-02: The inspector reviewed revision 15 dated Open 3/15/79 to procedure PT 1.5.2 for periodic tests cf the IRM channels and found it technically adequate. This item is closed.
Open Item 50-325/79-09-03: The inspector found that magnaflux examina-tions had been recently perfo.med on all vital plant crane hooks and This item that procedures have been rt rised to insure periodic retests.
is closed.
50-325/79-09-01: The licensee representative stated that a Open Item review was made of the practice of documenting tests and checks performed The once per shif t with the operators initials only and no time entry.
conclusion reached was that the system is adequate as is. This item is closed.
o 0 ]- , , u L:> J J.) , }}