IR 05000324/1989010

Insp Repts 50-324/89-10 & 50-325/89-10 on 890508-12.No Violations or Deviations Noted.Major Areas Inspected:Ie Bulletins 79-02 & 79-14,Mark I Containment & Plant Unique Analysis Rept

ML20245D477
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	06/14/1989
From:	Blake J, Robert Carrion NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20245D464	List: IR 05000324/1989010 ML20245D461
References
50-324-89-10, 50-325-89-10, IEB-79-02, IEB-79-14, IEB-79-2, NUDOCS 8906270125
Download: ML20245D477 (6)

Text

. _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ - - - - - ,-

e

pm atop UNITED STATES

-

'o NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION f[*

g j REGION la 101 MARIETTA STREET, *' t ATLANTA, GEOR GI A 30323

\...../

Report Nos.: 50-325/89-10 and 50-324/89-10 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: May 8 -12, 1989 Inspector: 5+ / 3 J"" '87 R .' . 1fr io Date Signed Approved b I J J Blake, Chief tt _

S /'/ 4 Ddte Signed a ials and Process Section n neering Branch Division of Reactor Safety SUMMARY Scope:

This routine, unannounced inspection was in the areas of issues related to IEB 79-02 and 79-14, and the Mark I Containment, Plant Unique Analysis Report (PUAR). More specifically, the six items identified in Report No. 50-325, 324/88-36 were addresse Also, the inspector told the licensee what he would address 50-325/82-19-01 and 50-325, 324/87-18-02, which appear to be the same issue, and 50-325, 324/88-BU-02, which appears to be an erroneous entry, as well as 50-324/80-29-0 Results:

In the areas inspected, violations or deviations were not identifie Based on current status and licensee commitments, including schedules and manpower forcasts, IEB 79-14 is closed. Also, work has been completed and the final report for IEB 79-02 is being prepered. The suppression pool issues appear to be a question of documentation and will remain open pending review of the appropriate documentatio PDR 890620 ADOCK 05000324 PDC

_ _ - - _ - _ _ _ - _

- - -

,y

'

.- ,

y

• -

.

,

v

!

l

,

REPORT' DETAILS M

q

" Persons Contacted

'

Licensee Employee i

• C, F. Blackmon, Manager of Operations L{ '

• J. M. Brown, Resident Engineer- (NED)'

• A. G. Cheatman, Manager - E&RC-  ;

R. Cowen, Structural Engineer

.

• W. J . Dorman, Supervisor - Quality Assurance .;

• K. .E. Enzor, Director-- Regulatory Compliance i

• J. L. Harness, General Manager

• R. E. Helme, Manager - Technical Support D. Hunt, Technical Support Engineer- ,

'

.

J. A. McKee, Quality Control Supervisor l * G. Monroe, Principal Engineer -(NED)

l * J. Pastva, Sr. Specialist Invest - Regulatory Compliance R. M. Poulk, Project Specialist - Regulatory Compliance D. Simkins, Lead Structural Engineer

• R. B. Starkey, Manager - Brunswick' Nuclear Plant A. M. Worth, Engineering Supervisor - Technical Support-Other licensee employees contacted 'during this inspection included operators, and administrative personne ~

NRC Resident Inspectors

• Levis, Resident Inspector

• Attended exit interview j Licensee Action on Previous Enforcement Matters (Closed) IEB 79-14, Seismic Analysis for As-Built Safety-Related Piping Systems (25529).

The objective of this Bulletin -is to verify. that the_ seismic analysis applies to the actual installed configuration of safety-related piping, Two piping verification walkdowns have been performed. One was'done shortly after the Bulletin was originally. issue Later modifications were incorporated due to new loads, design changes, or other requirement The- Quality Control Department conducted inspections of the modified systems only because there was no requirement for inspection of. the non-modified system Afterwards, the Quality Assurance Department-conducted a surveillance (86-004) to verify: the As-Built pipe. support I

drawings. Various discrepancies were noted in the piping systems which

!- had not been modified (nor inspected by QC). In-early 1988, management l- decided to~ conduct a second verification walkdown, on -the piping systems

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

'

.

-

-.

,

which had not been modified after the original IEB 79-14 verification walkdow This walkdown was done by teams of two field engineers and was not inspected by QC nor audited by Q In September 1988, an NRC inspector randomly selected 33 pipe supports on five isometeric drawing Eighteen supports were from the original walkdown effort on which no modifications had been made, and on which the As-Built Phase II Piping System Walkdown Verification Program had been completed (that is, without QC/QA Reverification or Audit). Fifteen supports were the modified supports, which had been QC inspected after the modifications were completed. Discrepancies were noted on 7 of the 33 supports 1 of the 5 isometric drawing These results prompted management to undertake one more all-inclusive j effort to reconcile the As-Built piping and supports with their respective '

drawings and calculation Entitled "UE&C Piping Design Turnover l Program", it consists of two phases, the first of which has been

-

complete Phase I was basically a preparation phase in support of Phase II. It involved the identification of UE&C pipe stress and pipe support calculations of record, packaging to place the calculation packages in a readily useable form, transmittal of the calculations to CP&L, transfer of piping and pipe support design responsibility to CP&L, and rP&L generation of pipe stress isometric drawings as required to match l tb* UE&C calculations. Phase II will involve sclected walkdowns to define t.e As-Built configuration of the plant, updating calculations to reflect the As-Built configuration of the plant, enhancement of calculations to resolve identified problems, and updating drawings to reflect the As-Built configuration of the plan This program is designed to document piping and pipe support criteria used by UE&C to design BSEP; assemble piping and pipe suppor_t calculation packages which represent the As-Built configuration of the plant, satisfy regulatory commitments, and can be used by CP&L personnel for emergency evaluations or future plant modifications; transfer piping and pipe support documentation from UE8C to CP&L; transfer piping and pipe support design responsibility from UE&C to CP& A detailed plan was been devised to assure that the measurements taken by the walkdown teams are accurate and that their information is properly reflected on their respective drawings and calculations. This program is currently scheduled to be completed by late 199 With the licensee commitment to this program and considering numerous past walkdowns, as well as NRC inspections which did not uncover any major discrepancies, IEB 79-14 is hereby closed for both Units 1 and . Action on Previous Inspection Findings (92701) (0 pen) UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-01, Suppression Pool Temperature Monitoring System Adequac _ _ _ _ - _ -

<

.

- l

-

.

,

"

!

3 i

!

The Suppression Pool Monitoring System had been installed before the j Mark I Containment Long Term Modification Program was initiated but j it did not meet the requirements outlined in NUREG-0661, Mark I 1 Containment Long Term Program, or NUREG-0783. Plant Modification  ;

No.81-251 was implemented to meet those requirements. During the  !

88-36 inspection, the licensee was unable to present documentation showing NRC approval of the modified installation. During the  !

current inspection, the licensee presented a letter, dated j March 1984, from the NRC (Division of Licensing, Washington, D.C.),  !

which states in part, "Where deviations from the Acceptance Crfteria j specified in NUREG-0661 wave been taken, they have been found  !

acceptable." The letter was referring to Revision 0 of the Brunswick- i Plant Unique Analysis Report (PUAR) dated October 1, 198 However, the only copy of the PUAR available was Revision 1, dated ,

December 23, 198 The inspector wanted to assure that no changes j were introduced in Revision 1 concerning the Suppression Pool j Temperature Monitoring System which were not addressed in the NRC  !

acceptance letter. Pending a comparison of Revisions 0 and 1 of the  !

PUAR, UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-01 remains ope ,

b. (0 pen) IFI 50-325, 324/88-36-02, Final Summary Report For IEB 79-02; (0 pen) IFI 50-325, 324/88-36-03, Hilti Anchor Bolt Allowable Review and Justifications per IEB 79-02, NRC Information Notices 86-94 and j 88-25. The inspector discussed these two open items with two members i of the licensee's engineering staf The final sumary report is j being prepared and will address the Hilti Anchor Bolt issues as well l as those of the original IEB 79-0 Pending completion of the {

report, these two items, IFI 50-325, 324/88-36-02 and IFI 50-325,  !

324/88-36-03, remain ope ]

l c. (0 pen) UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-04, Accuracy of As-Built Phase II Piping '

,

System Walkdown Verification; (0 pen) IFI 50-325, 324/88-36-05, QA Auditing of the Supports in As-Built Phase II Piping System Walkdown .

Verification Program and the Modified Systems with QC Inspection ,

The inspector spoke to the Principal Engineer (NED) and the Quality Control Supervisor who outlined the plan to be used in the "UEAC Piping Design Turnover Program", which will be used to evaluate some 7330 pipe supports and walkdown about 550 To reduce discrepancies discovered by the QA audit, the walkdown verification program has been reviewed and modified. The walkdown teams will consist of two members, a QC inspector and a field engineer. These teams will work together to review all support drawings per isometric before conducting a walkdow Upon completion of a walkdown, both members

will transfer the field data unto individual ledgible drawings, l verify the data to ensure its accuracy, sign the drawings to indicate their agreement, and turn the drawings in for processing / record  ;

purposes. Engineering will maintain all field copies and make all i modifications / revisions to the drawings. The updated drawings will j be sent to QC for review to assure accurate incorporation of walkdown information. Upon receiving QC concurrence, Engineering will sign  ;

l

. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -

__,

~

,i

. , . .

,

k

off the : drawing as being' complete. 'The Quality Assurance Department -

will then conduct audits to assure the accuracy of the progra Engineering will evaluate the updated drawings for potential impact'

to. the calculations. This ~ entire program is scheduled to be completed by late 1992, assuming:the worst-case scenario. Therefore, these two items, UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-04 o and IFI 50-325,_

324/88-36-05, remain- open and will be periodically. monitored to confirm the status;of the program.- (Closed) UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-06, Dist"epanc'ies Between: As-Built =

Drawings and.As-Installed Conditions in Piping Systems. One piping isometric and seven pipe support drawings ;were found f to..have-discrepancies. All- eight items have been addressed and are in

'various states of - being incorporated .into their 1 drawings and modifying their respective calculations, as required. The positive action taken by the licensee _to correct the discrepancies indicates that they will be completed in a timely' manner. Therefore,- UNR-50-325, 324/88-36-06 is close . Review of Open Items The Open . Items listed in the summary were reviewed to determined their status. The review revealed the following:

50-325, 324/88-BU-02'is in reference to Westinghouse - designed PWR plants and should not appear on the lis '

50-324/80-29-01 is an incorrect item number. The correct number is 50-324/80-29-02 and was closed by Report No. 50-324/87-18, 50-325/82-19-01 is an incorrect-item. number. The correct number is 50-325/82-31-01 and was closed by Report No. 50-325/87-1 *

50-325, 324/87-18-02 -is currently ope Steps have been taken to accurately update the status of the above referenced items, 5. Exit Interview The inspection scope and results were. summarized on May 12,__1989, with those persons indicated in paragraph 1. The inspector described the areas inspected and discussed in detail the inspection results listed belo Although reviewed during this inspection, proprietary information ;is 'not contained.in this repor Dissenting comments were not received from the-license _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _

. -l

'

. . . . ,

.

l

,

i l

l (0 pen) UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-01, Suppression Pool Temperature Monitoring Systems Adequac ;

i (0 pen) IFI 50-325,324/88-36-02, Final Summary Report for IEB 79-0 (0 pen) IFI 50-325, 324/88-36-03, Hilti Anchor Bolt Allowable Review and Justifications per IE8 79-02, NRC Information Notices No. 86-94 and 88-2 .

,

(0 pen) 'UNR 50-325, 324/88-36-04, Accuracy of As-Built Phase II Piping i System Walkdown Verificatio !

(0 pen) IFI 50-325, 324/88-36-05, QA Auditing of the Supports in As-Built j Phase II Piping System Walkdown Verification Program and the Modified ;

Systems with QC Inspection ;

!

(Closed)UNR 50-325,324/88-36-06, Discrepancies Between As-Built Drawings and As-Installed Conditions in Piping System l l

l

<

!

i

!

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _