IR 05000324/1980029
| ML19338G476 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Brunswick  |
| Issue date: | 08/29/1980 |
| From: | Herdt A, Modenos L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19338G462 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-324-80-29, 50-325-80-32, NUDOCS 8010290407 | |
| Download: ML19338G476 (4) | |
Text
_
._
-
i I
i
o UNITED STATES
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
~
o
$
$
REGION 1:
o,
- [
101 MARIETTA ST,. N.W., SUITE 3100 g
g*
ATLANTA, GEORGIA 30303
- **
Report Nos. 50-325/80-32 and 50-324/80-29 Licensee:
Carolina Power and Light 411 Fayetteville Street Raleigh, NC 27602 Facility Name: Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324 License Nos. DP8-71 and DPR-62 Inspector:_ - y'
Es M~3...
23 N L."Mo n6s W
Date Signed Approved by:
(
U'
A. R. Herdt, Sectiott Chief, RCES Branch Date Signed SUMMARY Inspection on August 5-7, 1980 Areas Inspected This routine, announced inspection involved 20 inspector-hours onsite in the areas seismic analysis for as-built safety-related piping systems (IE Bulletin 79-14) and pipe support base plate designs using <.oncrete expansions anchor bolts (IE Bulletin 79-02).
Results Of the two areas inspected, one item of noncompliance was found in both areas (Infraction - Failure to provide adequate procedures Paragraph 5 and 6).
y o 10'a90N
-
.
.
.
-
l
.
l DETAILS 1.
Persons Contacted
!
Licensee Employees
!
,
!
- A. C. Tollison, Jr., General Plant Manager
'
- E. A. Bishop, Project Engineer
- J. M. Waldorf, Resident Engineer
- R. M. Poulk, Jr., Regulatory Specialist
Other Organizations
- A. K. Gambhir, Plant Engineer - UE&C R. Kennedy, Engineer - Reactor Controls Inc.
!
NRC Resident Inspector
- J. E. Ouzts
- Attended exit interview 2.
Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on August 7, 1980 with those persons indicated in Paragraph 1 above.
3.
Licensee Action on Previous Inspection Findings Not inspected.
4.
Unresolved Items Unresolved items are matters about which more information is required to determine whether they are acceptable or may involve noncompliance or deviations.
New unresolved items identified during this inspection are discussed in paragraph 6.
5.
(0 pen) Pipe Support Base Plate Designs Usings Concrete Expansion Anchor Bolts (IE Bulletin 79-02)
_
On January 22, 1980, CP&L submitted a supplemental response to IE Bulletin
79-02 that they have met all commitments and requirements to the bulletin.
On July 29, 1980, CP&L issued a Licensee Event Report (LER) No. 2-80-55, that as a result of IE Bulletin 80-17 concerns _, it had been determined that anchor bolt testing as required by IE Bulletin 79-02 had not been performed on the CRD (Control Rod Drive) piping as designed and installed by Reactor Control Inc. (RCI). As a result of the inspection and testing of the CRD system, the licensee identified a 90% failure rate of the installed anchor bolts.
In a subsequent discussion with Region II, CP&L was questioned
.
.. - -
- - - - - _ - _
_
-
.
.
.
-2-
.
whether the requirements of Bulletin 79-14 had been considered for this system. CP&L responded that they did not, therefore, would have to perform the inspection required to ratisfy IE Bulletin 79-14. The Region II inspec-tor inquired whether other sub-contractors, other than RCI were employed to deslgn and install safety-related systems. CP&L reviewed their system and sub-contractors and discovered that the Recirculation lines were installed and designed by GE and were ommitted from reviews required by IEB 79-02 and IEB 79-?4.
The failure to identify these safety related systems in their procedules and responses to the bulletins, appears to be a noncompliance with Crit erion V of Appendix B,10 CFR 50 and Technical Specification o.8 and is identified as an infraction. Item 325/80-32-02 and 324/80-29-02, Failure to provide adequate procedures.
The inspector reviewed the CRD test results on the anchor bolts which are summarized below. The inspector noted that the criteria for inspecting and repair of this system was that all anchor bolts on each plate successfully pass before the anchor plate is accepted.
Unit 1 Unit 2 No. of Plates tested 154 180 No. of Plates replaced 123 176 No. of bolts tested 339 180 No. of bolts failed 220 176 Types of failures Failed Torgue:
13 Failed Dimension check:
114 108 Other reasons:
55 (Cone Missing; Missing bolt; Tack Welded bolt; Cut bolt; Inaccessible)
CP&L contracted EDS to perform the flexibility analysis for the base plates on the CRD lines. CP&L has replaced the existing base plates with a minimum of 1/2 inch thick plate and will perform the base flexibility analysis with the new installed plates.
The following conditions had been agreed upon by both CP&L and NRC before start up and subsequent time table to be met for both units:
Inside Dry Well - All essential supports plates will be modified including any modifications required due to Flexibility analysis.
Outside the Drywell - replace all essential support plates in accordance with previous commitments of seven days af ter start up.
The licensee will perform all flexibility analysis, modification and reporting requirements by December 31, 1980. This IE Bulletin remains open until all inspections and evaluations are completed by the NR.
..
.
.
-3-6.
(0 pen) Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems (IE Bulletin 79-14)
As mantioned in paragraph 5, the CRD and recirculation lines had been omitted in the orginial inspection and analysis for the requirements of Bulletin 79-14.
CP&L conducted walk-down inspections of both systems and found the recirculation lines in the as-built condition with no major differences from the design drawings. However, the CRD lines in Unit 1, the licensee identified discrepencies with some of the as-built supports with 12 of 30 essential supports requiring modifications and upgrading in order to have structural integrity.
RCI was the designer, fabricator installer of this system for CP&L. The apparent inadequate anchor bolt installation and base flexibility analysis identified above plus the apparent inadequate design of the supports would be identified as an Unresolved Item 325/80-32-01 and 324/80-29-01 " Inadequate Design Review by CP&L of their sub-contractors."
The following conditions were agreed by both CP&L and NRC before start up and subsequent time table to be met for both units:
Inside the Dry Dry Well - All essential supports would be inspected and upgraded to satisfy the new analysis prior to start up.
Outside Drywell - All essential supports with identified problems to be fixed prior to start up.
Technical Specifications requirements will be applied to any new identifed problems that effect essential supports. The licensee agreed that remaining activities and reporting of results will be completed by becember 31, 1980.
Items identified in Nhc Report 50- 124 and 325/80-2 remains open until a final response is submitted and evalut.ted. CP&L's committment for the long term fixes for Unit 1 identified in a letter dated June 2, 1980 to Region II remain as stated in the letter.
This IE Bulletin remains open until all inspection and evaluation are completed by the NRC.