IR 05000324/1986028

Insp Repts 50-324/86-28 & 50-325/86-27 on 860922-26.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas inspected:post- Refueling Startup Tests & Closeout of Bulletins & Open Items

ML20211H139
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	10/27/1986
From:	Burnett P, Jape F, Mathis J NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20211H136	List: IR 05000324/1986028 ML20211H133
References
50-324-86-28, 50-325-86-27, NUDOCS 8611050004
Download: ML20211H139 (6)

Text

._

UNITED STATES

. / p CEig%

~'

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION y" n REGION li g j 101 MARIETTA STRE ET, * e ATLANTA, GEORGI A 30323

\*. .... p#

Report Nos.: 50-325/.?6-27. and 50-324/86-28 Licensee: Carolina Power and Light Company P. O. Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Docket Nos.: 50-325 and 50-324 License Nos.: DPR-71 and DPR-62 Facility Name: Brunswick.1 and 2 Inspection Conducted: S mber 22-26, 1986 Inspectors: ,n /sak Date Signed urne t

_ . hbf J. 1. Mathis: : -,-

/o 23-5 Date Signed Approved-by:

'

- /OM F. Jape, S Ktion Chie V , (/ Date Signed Engineering Branch ~

Division'of Reactor Safety

,

SUMMARY

.

Scope: This routine, unannounced inspec; ion addressed the areas of post refueling startup tests (Unit 2) and close out of bulletins and open items on both unit Results: No violations or deviations were identifie PDR ADOCK 0D000324 G PDR

.

REPORT DETAILS Persons Contacted Licensee Employees

• J. W. Chase, Assistant to the General Manager R. M. Poulk, Senior Specialist, Regulator / Compliance

• D. E. Novotny, Senior Specialist, Regulatory Compliance

• L. E. Jones, Director - Quality Assurance / Quality Control

• E. B. Wilson, Nuclear Engineering Supervisor K. A. Scott, Nuclear Engineer G. A. Wertz, Nuclear Engineer Other licensee employees contacted included engineers, technicians, security force members, and office personne NRC Resident Inspectors

• W. H.' Ruland, Senior Resident Inspector L. W. Garner, Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview Exit Interview The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 26, 1986, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1 above. The inspectors described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection findings. No dissenting comments were received from the licensee. The licensee did not identify as proprietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during this inspectio . Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters This subject was not addressed in the inspectio . Unresolved Items No new unresolved item was identified in this inspectio . Post-Refueling Startup Tests - Unit 2 (72700)

The following periodic tests (pts) completed at the conditions indicated were reviewed for successful performanc No questions arose from the reviews unless otherwise noted. The Technical Specification surveillance requirement addressed by each PT is given in the parentheses at the end of each ite &

. 2' Pre-Heatup (1) PT-1.9E,- TIP System Axial Alignment, was performed' on April 15, 198 (2)' PT-50.4.2, Process Computer New Cycle Update and Verification, was

. completed on June 3, 1986. Heatup (3) PT-50.2, SRM/IRM/APRM Overlap Determination, was completed on June 15 and:25, 198 (4) PT-50.12, . In-Sequence Critical Data, was completed on June 12, 198 (5) PT-09.3, HPCI 165 psig Flow Test, was completed on June 12, 198 (4.5.1.c.2 and 4.6.2.1.b.1)

(6) PT-10.1.3, RCIC 150 psig Flow Test, -was completed on June 12, 1986. (4.7.4.c.2)

(7) PT-11.1.2, ADS Valve Test, was performed on June 12, 1986, with'

unsatisfactory results. Three- maintenance requests were written to correct the problems encountered. All were completed and successfully retested within the allowed time. (4.3.3.2, 4.5.2.b, and 4.6.2.1.b.1) Low Power (10 - 20*s)

(8) PT-14.2.1, CR0 Scram Timing, was completed satisfactorily _ on June 16, 1986, according to the Unit 2 Nuclear Engineers' Log Book. Only a fraction.of the rods were tested on this date; most had been tested prior to criticality. (4.0.5,4.1.3.2.a,b,c,and 4.1.3.3)

(9) PT-09.2, HPCI 1000 psig Flow Test, was performed on June 26, 1986, at 13!4 power. The system delivered 4300 gpm at a-system head of 1120 psig and a steam pressure of 925 psig. (4.5.1.b) An apparent typographical error in the Unit 2 Technical Specifications was identified in that the stated tolerance on steam pressure is +20,

-18 psig, but both the PT and the Unit 1 specification give the tolerance as +20, -80 psi (10) PT-10.1.1, RCIC 1000 psig Flow Test, was completed on June 16, 1986 at 925 psig system pressure. (4.7.4.b)

(11) PT-13.2, Jet Pump Baseline Data, was performed on June 17, 1986, according to the Nuclear Engineers' Log Boo (12) PT-40.2.6, Turbine Testing, was completed on June 17, 198 ._- -

-_ _ - - _ _ _

- - . _ _

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

i

.

,

'

i i (13) PT-01.90, TIP Intercalibration, was completed on June 17, 198 !

l (14) PT-01.11, Core Performance, was complet'ed on June 17,.198 (15) PT-01.9, LPRM Gain Adjustment, was completed on June 17, 198 (16) PT-50.4.'3, Process Computer Low Power Test, was completed on i June 18, 1986, Medium Power (40 - 80%)

(17) PT-01.9E, TIP Axial Alignment, was completed on June 18, 1986, at j 40's power.

(18) PT-13.2, Jet Pump Baseline Data, was performed en . June. 18, 1986,

according to the Nuclear Engineers' Log Boo (19) PT-01.11, Core Performance, was completed on June 27, 1986, at 51?;

'

-

power and on June 28, 1986, at 79% powe (4.2.1.a,b,c, 4.2.2.a,b,c, 4.2.3.1.a,b,c, 4.2.4.a,b,c, and 4.3.1-1 2.c)

!

, (20) PT-01.9, LPRM Gain Adjustment, was completed on June 27, 1986, at t

72?s power.

!

'

(21) PT-50.4.4, Process Computer Medium Power Test, was completed on June 27, 1986, at 60% powe High Power.(80 - 100%)

(22) PT-50.3.1, TIP Uncertainty, was completed on June 29, 1986, at 88?;

power. The procedure uses data collected below and above 75's

'

'

power.- 'The calculations required in the procedure were not performed using the procedure data sheets, but were done using an

.

in-house computer program called TIPUNC.

l (23) PT-50.9, Core Power Distribution, was completed 'on July 3,1986,

,

using data coll'ected at medium power and at 88?; power.

, (24) PT-13.2, Jet Pump Baseline Data, was completed on September 15, 1986, using data obtained up through July 2,198 (25) PT-01.9D, TIP Intercalibration, was completed or Jure 29, 1986, at

,

81?; power.

(26) PT-01.11, Core Performance, was completed on July 3, 1986, at i

99.9% power. All thermal limits were well within the bounds of Technical Specifications. (4.2.1.a,b,c, 4.2.2.a,b,c, 4.2. i l a,b,c, 4.2.4.a,b,c, and 4.3.1-1 2.c)

I

!' (27) PT-50.3, TIP Reproducibility, was completed on July 2, 1986, at

99.6% power.

i s

= ,

.

(28) PT-50.4.5, Process Computer High Power Test, was completed on July 3, 1986, at 999; powe (29) PT-14.5.2, Reactivity Anomaly, was completed July 31, 198 (4.1.2.a,b)

(30) PT-50.5, Core. Flow Calibration, was performed on June 29, 1986, at 87?s power. The procedure was not completed in - that test cables installed in step VII.A were required to be removed by steps IX.A-C, but were left installe A note was added to the procedure that the cables were left in place to facilitate a retest, but no record of a retest was found. Discussions with the Engineering Supervisor confirmed that the cables are not jumpers in a safety or control system, but are simply test signal connec-

'

tions to computer points. The retest'is scheduled for midcycl Following discussions with the Engineering Supervisor and Regulatory Compliance personnel, the i_nspectors had no further questions of the performance of the pts used in the startup activitie No violations or deviations were identifie . Follow-up On Previously Identified Item (92703)

(Closed) Inspector Followup Item 50-325/79-33-03: Provide check out and labeling on .inhouse computer programs used to evaluate data from test PT 50.3 and PT 50.3.1. The licensee deleted PT 50.3.1 and revised PT 50.3 to provide check-out, and labeling on the computer program TIPREP. The inspector considers the action taken adequate to close 'out item 79-33-0 This item.is close (Closed) Inspector Followup Item 50-325/79-33-04: The licensee .should evaluate the need for Technical-Specification related acceptance criteria in procedure _ PT-50.12, In-sequence Critical Data. PT-50.12 was . revised to include an adequate level 2 a'cceptance criterion. This item is close (Closed) IEB 86-01: Minimum flow logic problems that coulm disable RHR pumps. The bulletin identified a potential -problem with the minimum flow logic such that a single failure could disable all RHR pumps. The results of the licensee's review confirm that the minimum flow bypas~s valve logic is independent in each RHR system loop. Therefore, no single instrument failure will result in the loss of the four RHR p' umps ~ . This bulletin is closed for both unit (Closed) IEB 84-03: Refueling water cavity sea The licensee's November 26, 1985 response was found to be adequate for both units -in Inspection Report 85-29. By oversight the bulletin was not closed for

Unit 2.

i i

i

, -- w,- , , ,v, -------,,.--mw,,. . - - . .. --,,.-wn--nn,-a.-. . , .. n,-----

-

..

,

(Closed) IEB 80-06: Emergency safety features (ESF) reset. The inspector reviewed the CP&L rer,ponses dated August 12, 1980 and April 13, 1981, for the Brunswick facilit The licensee's review determined that some components addressed in their response of August 12, 1980, would not remain in their emergency mode upon the resetting of the ESF signal. Those systems and components identified by the licensee in response to IEB 80-06 that did not remain in the emergency mode once the ESF reset control was actuated were modified and reteste The in's pector reviewed the following plant modification packages: 81-153,81-152, 81-156,81-157, 81-158,81-159, 81-170,81-171, 80 028, and 80-02 The control circuits associated with the affected components were changed so that resetting the ESF logic 'can net cause the valves to come out of their emergency mode. Upon completion of post-modification testing the licensee was in compliance with the bulleti IEB 80-06 is closed for both units.