IR 05000324/1987024

Safety Insp Repts 50-324/87-24 & 50-325/87-24 on 870807-31. No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected: Maint & Surveillance Observations,Operational Safety verification,in-ofc LER Review & Onsite Followup of Events

ML20235H844
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	09/25/1987
From:	Fredrickson P, Garner L, Ruland W NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20235H820	List: IR 05000324/1987024 ML20235H818
References
50-324-87-24, 50-325-87-24, NUDOCS 8710010192
Download: ML20235H844 (5)

Text

_ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ . _ _ _ . _ __ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. .

UNITED STATES pMWGuq'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

• /

[" .- n REGloN il )

y

,, j 101 MARIETTA GTREET, l

'* ATLANTA. GEORGI A 30323 i

9 * * * * * ,o l

Report Nos. 50-325/87-24 and 50-324/87-24 Licensee: Carolina Power and Light Company P. O. Box 1551 Raleigh, NC 27602 Docket Nos. 50-325 and 50-324 License Nos. OPR 71 and DPR-62 Facility Name: Brunswick I and 2 Inspection Conducted: August 7-31, 1987 Inspectors: [G %

.

M fr' 7 Oate Signed KW.6.Ruland./%

b L. W. rner i- 6do hate Sfgned~

Approved By: / O w  %, b) /

OfteSFgned]

P. E. Fredrickson, Section' Chief Division of Reactor Projects

.

SUMMARY Scope: This routine safety insoection involved the areas of maintenance observation, surveillance observation, operational safety verification, in office Licensee Event Report (LER) review, and onsite followup of event Results: No violations or deviations were identifie B70925 PDR ADOCK 05000324 0 PDR

..

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

- - _ . _ _ _ _ . .

,.

.

DETAILS

. .

1 '. Persons' Contacted-Licensee Employees P. Howe, Vice President ~- Brunswick. Nuclear Project-

' C. Dietz, General Manager : Brunswick Nuclear Project T. Wyllie, Manager - Engineering and Construction

. J. ' Holder, Manager - Outages R. Eckstein,' Manager . Technical Support E. Bishop, Manager:- Operations L. Jones, Director --Quality Assurance (QA)/ Quality Control (QC)

R. Helme, Director - Onsite Nuclear Safety - BSEP J.'0'Sullivan, Manager - Maintenar.ce G. Cheatham, Manager . Environmental & Radiation Control J. Smith, hanager - Administrative Support K. Enzor, Director:- Regulatory Compliance A. Hegler, Superintendent - Operations W. Hogle, Engineering Supervisor B. Wilson, Engineering Supervisor B. Parks, Engineering Supervisor R.-Creech, I&C/ Electrical Maintenance Supervisor (Unit 2)

R. Warden, I&C/ Electrical Maintenance Supervisor (Unit 1)

W.' Dorman, Supervisor - QA W. Hatcher, Supervisor - Security R. Kitchen, Mechanical Maintenance Supervisor (Unit 2)

R. Poulk, Senior NRC Regulatory Specialist D. Novotny, Senior Regulatory Specialist Other licensee employees contacted included construction craftsmen, engineers, technicians, operators, office personnel, and security force member . Exit Interview (30703)

The inspection scope and findings were summarized on September 2,1987, with the vice president and general manager. The licensee acknowledged the findings without exceptio The licensee did not identify as pro-prietary any of the materials provided to or reviewed by the inspectors during the inspectio . Followup on Previous Enforcement Matters (92702)

Not inspected;

. ___ _ ___-_ - -__ ___,

[.

'

.

.

2 Maintenance Observation (62703)

The inspectors observed maintenance activities and reviewed records to verify that work was conducted in accordance with approved procedures, Technical Specifications, and applicable industry codes and standards. The inspectors also verified that: redundant components were operable; administrative controls were followed; tagouts were adequate; personnel were qualified; correct replacement parts were used; radiological controls were proper; fire protection was adequate; quality control hold points were adequate and observed; adequate post-maintenance testing was performed; and independent verification requirements were implemente The inspectors independently verified that selected equipment was properly <

returned to servic Outstanding work requests were reviewed to ensure that the licensee gave priority to safety-related maintenanc The inspectors observed / reviewed portions of the following maintenance activities:

87-BASA1 Troubleshooting of 1-CAC-V23, Drywell 2 Inch Exhaust Valv MI-16-685H Diesel Engine Bicera Relief Valve Inspectio PM-ENG504 Emergency Diesel Generator Dowel Pin Inspection (87-AYUL1).

PM-84-385 Diesel Generator Building Masonry Wall Support Wall S No violations or deviations were identifie . Surveillance Observation (61726)

The inspectors observed surveillance testing required by Technical Specifications. Through observation and record review, the inspectors verified that: tests conformed to Technical Specification requirements; administrative controls were followed; personnel were qualified; instru-mentation was calibrated; and data was accurate and complet The inspectors independently verified selected test results and proper return to service of equipmen The inspectors witnessed / reviewed portions of the following test activi-ties:

2MST-AMI22R AMI Post Accident High Range Containemnt Radiation Monitor Channel Calibration, Rev. .1 Unit 1 Control Operator Daily Surveillance Repor .2 Unit 2 Control Operator Daily Surveillance Repor . _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _

.

I

.

.

..

l'

j 3 PT-10. Reactor Core Isolation Cooling (RCIC) System Operability Test Flow Rates at 1000 psi No violations or deviations were identifie . Operational Safety Verification (71707)

.

The inspectors verified conformance with regulatory requirements by direct observations of activities, facility tours, discussions with personnel, reviewing of records and independent verification of safety system statu The inspectors verified that control room manning requirements of 10 CFR 50.54 and the Technical Specifications were me Control room, shift supervisor, clearance and jumper / bypass logs were reviewed to obtain information concerning operating trends and out of service safety systems, to ensure that there were no conflicts with Technical Specifications Limiting Conditions for Operations. Direct observations were conducted of control room panels, instrumentation and recorder traces important to safety, to verify operability and that parameters were within Technical Specification limits. The inspectors observed shift turnovers to verify

,

that continuity of system status was maintained. The inspectors verified I the status of selected control room annunciator Operability of a selected Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) train was verified by insuring that: each accessible valve in the flow path was in its correct position; each power supply and breaker, including control room fuses, were aligned for components that must activate upon initiation signal; removal of power from those ESF motor-operated valves, as identi-fied in Technical Specifications, was completed; there was no leakage of major components; there was proper lubrication and cooling water available; and a condition did not exist which might prevent fulfillment of the system's functional requirement Instrumentation essential to system actuation or performance was verified operable by observing on-scale indication and proper instrument valve lineup, if accessibl The inspectors verified that the licensee's health physics policies /

procedures were followe This included a review of area surveys, radiation work permits, posting, and instrument calibratio The inspectors verified that: the security organization was properly manned and security personnel were capable of performing their assigned functions; persons and packages were checked prior to entry into the protected area (PA); vehicles were properly authorized, searched and escorted within the PA; persons within the PA displayed photo identifica-tion badges; personnel in vital areas were authorized; effective compen-satory measures were employed when required; and security's response alarms was adequat ,

_ _ - _ - _

_-_ __ . _ _ _

. , ..

-

,

. . .

The Linspector noted a. problem with a visitor. escort. - A Region II security

. inspector will followup on the item during future-inspection The inspectors also ' observed plant housekeeping controls, ' verified position ~ ~of ' certain containment isolation valves and verified . the -

operability of onsite'and offsite emergency power source l No violations or deviations were. identified.- In Office Licensee Event Report Review (90712)

The listed LER was reviewed to verify' that the information provided met NRC reporting requirements. The verification included adequacy of event-description and corrective action taken or planned, existence of potential generic problems and the relative safety significance of the even '

(CLOSED) LER 1-87-09, Tripping of Reactor Protection System Division I Motor Generator Set Output Breaker No. violations or deviations were identifie . Onsite Followup of. Events.(93702)

With both units' operating at 100% of power and Diesel Generator No. 2 out; for maintenance, Emergency Bus E-2 supply breakers (master and slave) l opened on undervoltage at 3:10 p.m. on August 21, 1987. A technician {

installing a plant modification shorted a wire to ground, blowing a fuse .

!

to the bus undervoltage relay causing an undervoltage condition to be sense "B" Reactor Protection . System (RPS), was lost, causing a logic

"B" RPS trip, standby gas treatment 1A auto start, primary containment isolation system groups 2, 3 and 6 isolation and group one logic "B" trip, as well as isolation of the reactor building ventilatio All Unit 1 Division II Emergency Core Cooling Systems remained operable during the event. Unit 1 power was reduced to about 85% during the event due to decrease in condenser vacuum. The IB Steam det Air Ejector (SJAE) had been . lost and the 1A SJAE was placed in full load at 3:27 p.m. , the-operators transferred "B" RPS to the alternate power supply and the logic

.

"B" RPS trip was reset. The blown fuse was replaced and E-2 re-energized at 3:48 p.m. on August 21, 1987. All affected systems were returned to normal. .The inspector arrived in the control room 10 minutes after E-2 was lost and remained throughout the licensee's recover Unit 2 remained at 100% power throughout the event. Unit 2 lost power to the Residual Heat Removal (RHR) Division II injection valves and two j drywell coolers during the even j l

The inspector concluded that the operators' actions during the event were )

appropriate. The operators had some minor trouble locating procedures in

'

the new control room layout. The operations manager stated that he j noticed the - same problem and that they would look into i Further inspector followup will be conducted after the LER is issue i No violations or deviations were identifie i r__--. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ = _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ .