IR 05000324/1979034
| ML19305B175 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1979 |
| From: | Kellogg P, Ouzts J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305B158 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-324-79-34, 50-325-79-35, NUDOCS 8003190269 | |
| Download: ML19305B175 (6) | |
Text
Q, l
N e
o UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
o e
REGION 11 g
g 101 MARIETTA ST., N.W., SulTE 3100 ATLANTA, G EoRGIA 30303
.....
Report Nos. io, 179-35 and 50-324/79-34 Licensee: Carolino Power and Light Company 411 Fayetteville Street f.eigh, North Carolina
.
Facility Name: Brunswick Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324 Inspection at Sout o r
arolina
,
Inspected by:
e,~-
As 4,v
// /r 77 J.
.
l Da1(s 7igned
.
'.pproved by:
/
.
/( /6 7'/
)
P. J.
~ Egg S^" S Chief,~ RONS Branch Datfe' Sfgned SUffiARY Inspected on July 27 - August 31, 1979 Areas Inspected This routine, announced inspection involved 64 inspector-hours onsite by the resident inspector in the areas of plant operations, radiation protection, physical protection, quality assurance program, organization and administration.
Results Of the five areas inspected, no items of noncompliance or deviations were identified in three areas; two apparent items of noncompliance were found in two areas (Deficiency - Failure to have radiation warning signs posted at entrance to radiation area - Paragraph 12(a); Failure to have correct procedure for valving in instrument sensor - Paragraph 12(e)).
l i
!
8008190
?-
.
.
.
DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted Licensee Employees
- A. C. Tollison, Plant Manager
'
- J. M. Brown, Operations and Maintenance Superintendent
- G. Gibson, Acting Administrative and Technical Superintendent
- R. Porterfield, Project Engineer
- R. Poulk, NRC Coordinator Other licensee employees contacted included technicians, operators, mechanics, security force members, and office personnel.
Other Organizations Mayor's Office Southport, N. C.
Brunswick County Manager's Office - Bolivia, N. C.
Brunswick County Sheriff's Office - Bolivia, N. C.
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 17, 24, and 31, 1979.with those persons indicated in Paragraph I above. Tho licensee acknowledged the items of noncompliance as discussed in paragraph 12 of these details.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection F?ndings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items were not identified during this inspection.
5.
Plant Operations The inspector conducted tours of accessible plant areas, reviewed operating documents and followed up on abnormal events as follows:
Reviewed reactor operator's logs to insure that they were properly a.
filled out and signed.
b.
Reviewed auxiliary operators logs to insure that they were properly filled out and signe _
.y
.
.
r-2-Reviewed status of limiting conditions for operation (LCOs) with the c.
operators.
-d.
Inspected the control boards ani the status of safety systems.
Reviewed with the operators the basis for lighted annunciatiors and e.
corrective action being taken.
f.
Inspected status of tags on control board to insure that position indicator lights and romponent status were not obscured by the tags.
g.
During tours of the control room observed that stations were adequately manned in accordance with established requirements.
h.
Toured plant areas to insure that proper housekeeping and cleanliness were being maintained ant that combustible materials were not present in unauthorized areas, i.
Inspected the interior of cabinets for fire hazards and the status of fire doors and fire fighting equipment.
j.
Observed shift turnovers to insure that the oncoming shifts were properly briefed in accordance with approved procedures.
k.
Reviewed and followed up on unusual events and reportable occurrences.
1.
Inspected control and instrument cabinets for abnormal conditions and
.ala rms.
Reviewed results of core thermal power evaluation for units 1 and 2.
m.
6.
Radiation Protection During this period of inspection the inspector made frequent tours of the plant to insure that radiological control requirements were being followed.
Radiation control areas were inspected for the proper handling and storage of radioactive materials and for the posting of proper warning and caution signs.
7.
Physical Protection The inspector made frequent tours of the protection physical barriers and inspected protected areas and security records as follows:
a.
Gates and doors to protected areas were closed and locked or attended.
-b.
Barrier fences enclosing protected areas were in a condition to prevent entry into the area.
_
(
,
.,
.
.
-3-
_>
Isolation zones were free of obstruct'ons and unauthorized objects.
c.
d.
Compensatory measures were implemented where equipment failures or impairment existed.
Performed a sample review of the security forces physical qualifica-e.
tions records.
f.
Witnessed security searches and badging at entrance to controlled area to insure that they were in accordance with the security plan.
.8.
Quality Assurance Program The quality assurance program was discussed with the licensee to verity that any changes to the program were in accordance with his established program and applicable codes, standards and regulatory guides. No changes to the program were reported for the period of this report.
9.
Organization and Administration The inspector discussed organizational changes with members of management to verify that:
a.
The licensee's onsite organizational structure is as described in the Technical Specifications.
b.
Qualification levels to persons filling new positions are in con-formance with applicable codes standards and Technical Specifications.
Organizational changes had been reported to the Nuclear Regulatory c.
Commission.
,
l No organizational changes were reported for the period of this report.
10.
Instrumentation Calibration The following calibration tests were observed by inspectors:
-PT 4.1.16 PC - Containment Radiation Monitoring Channel Calibration-PT 1.1.9 PC - Average Power Range Monitor (APRM) Floor Unit.
-PT 44.1 Flood Status (DG Fuel Tank Room Flood Level Hi)
i These tests were witnessed to verify that:
'
-The status of the system was in conformance with applicable limiting conditions'for operation.
i
1
(L f
.
.
,
-4-
-The procedures in use were the latest revision and had been approved.
-The procedures contained detailed instructions for performing the calibra-tion.
-The calibration frequency was being met.
-Technicians were familiar withthe instruments being calibrated.
'
11.
Acceptance Criteria The inspector used one or more of the following sources of acceptance criteria for evaluating the above areas inspected:
a.
10 CFR-20 b.
Technical Specifications c.
ANSI N 45.2.3 (1971)
d.
ANSI N 18 7 (1972)
"
e.
Regulatory Guides f.
Security Plan 12.
During the inspection of the areas discussed in this report the following discrepancies were identified and reviewed with the licensee. The two items of noncompliance were acknowledged by the licensee:
The following unsatisfactory conditions were noted in the radiation a.
controlled area between the auxiliary building loading dock and the diesel building:
-Radiation warning barriers down
,
-Radwaste containers not labeled and roped off.
-Radwaste containers open and subject to leakage inside the enclosed high radiation area.
-Anti-C clothing found on ground next to the radwaste container not roped off.
b.
Warehouse C is used for short term radwaste storage and for long term contaminated component-storage. This warehouse is also used for storage of non-radioactive material.
Caution (e) of 10 CFR 20.20 requires that warning signs be posted at the entrances to such areas which'contain radioactive material in an amount exceeding 20 times the quantity of such material specified in appendix C of the Regulatio,
.
.
,
o
-5-t These signs are to be conspicously posted with the sign bearing the radiation caution symbol.
On August 23, and again on August 28, 1979 this warehouse was inspected and no signs were found posted. This is an item of noncompliance.
(334/79-34-01, and 325/79-35-01)
The inspector later inspected this warehouse to verify that the correct signs had been posted.
,
c.
A containment penetration box 14-102B-QA9 was found open at the 20 ft.
level in reactor building No.1.
This box contained circuits to safety systems in the drywell. Loose wiring was hanging from the loop, which was later identified as cabling for a new recirculation pump vibration monitoring system, to be installed and connected up at a future outage. Based on available records this box had been open for several months. The inspector brought this condition to the attention of management, who had the box closed and the circuits in the box identified. A followup was done to verify that the circuits were operational, based on routine operations or performance of selected periodic tests. The licensee agreed to review his procedures systems to determine where changes can be made to prevent a recurrence of this type. The inspector will followup on their changes.
This item will remain open pending corrective action.
(325/79-35-03)
d.
The inspector reviewed with the licensee his response to IE Bulletin 79-08 of August 3, 1979, regarding the inadequacy of his response to specific items. He agrend to submit a supplemental response to address visual checks prior to removal and return of systems to service, also
.to include in procedures requirements for reactor operators to review plant staus prior to shift turnover.
e.
While performing periodic test PT 53.3 on unit no.
I reactor vessel level instrumentation on July 28, 1979, inadvertent tripping of the reactor occurred when the low pressure tap valve to the reference leg was opened first. The procedure was written to open the low pressure tap valve first, but only for instruments where this tap is piped to the variable leg. This level instrument had been installed during a recent modification, where the low pressure tap was piped to the reference leg instead of the variable leg. ANSI N 18.7 (1972) states that; applicable procedures shall be reviewed following any modifica-tion to a system. This requirement has been implemented by the licensee in the " Procedures Preparation Manual; Section 10."
This is an item of noncompliance. (325/79-35-02)