ML20132E646

Notice of Violation from Insp on 961026.Violations Noted: Failure to Operate Facility within Steady State Reactor Core Power Level Limit of 2436 Mw (Thermal).W/Handouts from 961209 Predecisional Enforcement Conference

ML20132E646
Person / Time
Site:	Brunswick
Issue date:	12/13/1996
From:	NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II)
To:
Shared Package
ML20132E632	List: ML20132E629 ML20132E646
References
50-324-96-16, EA-96-442, NUDOCS 9612230358
Download: ML20132E646 (25)

Text

- -- - .__ _ - -

NOTICE OF VIOLATION Carolina Power and Light Company Docket Nos. 50 324 Brunswick Steam Electric Plant License Nos. DPR 62 Unit 2 EA 96 442 During an NRC inspection completed on October 26, 1996, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedures for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG 1600, the violations are listed below:

A. Facility 0)erating License Number DPR-62 Section 2.C,1, Maximum Power Level, autlorizes the licensee to operate the facility at steady state reactor core power levels not in excess of 2436 megawatts (Mw) (thermal).

Contrary to the above during the time periods listed below, the licensee failed to operate the facility within steady state reactor core power level limit of 2436 (Mw) (thermal):

Dates Power Level (HW) Percent Power July 5, 1994 thru September 6, 1995 2446 Mw 100.4% Power (including February 26, 1995 at 2460 Mw 101.0% Power)

March 26 thru August 28, 1996 2441 Mw 100.2% Power (including April 17 thru 26, 1996 at 2492 Mw 102.3% Power and July 19 thru 26,1996 at 2494 Mw 102.4% Power)(01013)

B. Technical Specification 3.2.1 requires in part, that during >ower operation, the AVERAGE PLANAR LINEAR HEAT GENERATION RATE (A)LHGR). for each type of fuel as a function of axial location and AVERAGE PLANAR EXPOSURE shall not exceed limits based on applicable APLHGR limit values that have been approved for the respective fuel and lattice type and determined by the approved methodology described in GESTAR II.

Contrary to the above, between December 10 and December 20, 1995, during power o>eration, the licensee failed to maintain the APLHGR within the applica)le approved APLHGR limit values specified in Technical Specification 3.2.1. (01023)

These violations represent a Severity Level III problem (Supplement I).

Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Carolina Power & Light Company is hereby required to submit a written statement or explanation to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington. D.C. 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region II, and a copy to the NRC Resident Inspector at the Dranswick Steam Electric Plant, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice). This reply should be clearly marked as a " Reply to a Notice of Violation" and should include for each violation: (1) the reason for the violation, or, if contested, the basis for Enclosure 1 961223035u 961213 PDR ADOCK 05000324 G PDR m

i

. i Notice of Violation 2 l l

disputing the violation (2) the corrective steps that have been taken and the results achieved. (3) the corrective steps that will be taken to avoid further violations, and (4) the date when full compliance will be achieved. Your response may reference or include previous docketed correspondence, if the correspondence adequately addresses the required response. If an adequate reply I is not received within the time specified in this Notice, an order or a Demand i i for Information may be issued as to why the license should not be modified, l i suspended, or revoked, or why such other action as may be proper should not be taken. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to extending the

response time.

Under the authority of Section 182 of the Act. 42 U.S.C. 2232, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.

Because your res>onse will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR), to

the extent possiale, it should not include any personal 3rivacy, proprietary, or i

safeguards information so that it can be placed in the P]R without redaction. ,

However, if you find it necessary to include such information, you should j clearly indicate the s)ecific information that you desire not to be placed in I the PDR, and provide t1e legal basis to support your request for withholding the l 4

information from the public. l 1

Dated at Atlanta, Georgia j this[3({,dayofDecember1996 I

l d

, 1 i

s o

j f

4 i

a 4

i d

. 4 /*

r

(

)

I

i t

LIST OF PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE ATTENDEES DECEMBER 9. 1996 Carolina Power and Liaht Comoany I W. Orser, Executive Vice President, Nuclear Generation W. Campbell, Vice President, Brunswick Nuclear Plant I H. Habermeyer, Jr., Vice President, Nuclear Engineering Department I l J. Lyash, Manager, Brunswick Nuclear Engineering T. Walt, Manager, Operations and Environmental Support B. Boylston, Superintendent, Information Technology M. Carroll, Manager, Nuclear Information Technology B. Lindgren, Manager, Site Support Services G. Smith, Superintendent NSSS Engineering R. Hill, Reactor Engineer Nuclear Reaulatory Commission L. Reyes, Deputy Regional Administrator, Region II (RII)

E. Herschoff, Director Division of Reactor Projects (DRP), RII B. Uryc. Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff (EICS),RII M. Shymlock, Chief, Reactor Projects Branch 4 (RPB4), DRP, RII M. Reinhart, Director, Directorate II 1, NRR (by phone)

D. Trimble. Project Manager, NRR G. Golub, Engineer, Reactor Systems Branch. NRR L. Watson, Enforcement Specialist, EICS, RII C. Evans, Regional Counsel, RII C. Patterson, Senior Resident Inspector, Brunswick, DRP, RII l J. Dixon Herrity, Enforcement Coordinator, Office of Enforcement (by phone) l Enclosure 2  ;

l

4 Predecisional Enforcsment Conference Feedwater Flow Temperature Compensation .

i Carolina Power & Light Company December 9,1996 l

[

m, 5i

! CP&L

- i

i Agenda Feedwater Flow Temperature Compensation e introduction i e Background e Event Description  :

o Root Cause .

e Corrective Actions l

e Follow-up Corrective Actions o Safety Assessment e Summary cP&L L

introduction e Self-identified e Corrective Actions e Root Cause Analysis e Comprehensive Follow-up Actions e Safety Assessment i

CP&L 1

t Plant Process Computer Replacement  ;

i Modification Background e Project initiated 1/87 e Specification Approved 5/91

+ Utilized the Nuclear Plant Modification Program mNon-Safety System But Developed in Accordance With The Requirements Of The Nuclea'r Plant Modification Program e Unit 1 Installation 9/93 e Unit 2 Installation 6/94 E

Plant Process Computer Validation Modification Background eGeneric System o Unit 2

+ Generic Software Developed . Adapted Unit 1 PPC

.ABB Developed System Functions a Unioaded Unit 1 Database to Editable File mABB Developed Factory Acceptance Tests a Changed Unit 1 Designations To Unit 2  ;

(FAT) for Each Function a Added Additional Points To Top Of File eBrunswick Engineers Review and Approve Test a Loaded File Design a Comparisons Executed for Adapted Functions and

+ Factory Acceptance Test Tadies eSpecific Test for Feedwater Compensation + Site Acceptance Test ,

hecuted a Same as for Unit 1

+ Startup Test O O e Final Acceptance e Site Acceptance Test a Specific Test to Validate Heat Balance

+ Startup Test + Performance Test a Final Acceptance a Validated Hardware / Software Performance a Specific Test to Validate Heat Balance

+ Performance Test a Validated Hardware / Software Performance CP&L

Event Description o Identified By CP&L Reactor Engineer And Computer Analyst During Review Of Core Thermal Power Calculations For System And l Procedure Affirmation Associated With The Power Uprate Project -

o Operated At Greater Than Licensed Thermal Power Cp&L l

Root Cause o Error introduced in Adapting The Unit 1 PPC Database to Unit 2 e Database Validation Test insufficient To Detect The Error .

4 i i

.: l l' !: i

!  : j!';  ! ! ! ; ! f i

_ n

_ i o

t a

_ s n

e p

_ m o

_ C _

e r

t u

a r -

e p

s n m o n T e i t

i o r e

d i

a t t l

a c

a v

A r w e e d e R e w o e e c

i v P F

d n

t d e l a

c e t a e

r c

u c

e r

B t

r d r a e o e o R C H L C e o e P C

i i

PPC Validation j Follow-up Actions ]

e Revalidation Of Critical PPC Functions eidentification And Execution Of Areas For Improvement

+ Documentation Of Testing

+ Correction Of Failover Function e

Conclusion:

+ Critical Functions Validated And Recommended Improvements incorporated CP&L

Review Of Other Computer Applications Follow-up Actions o Selection Criteria Developed

+ Systems With Direct Control Functions '

+ Systems Utilized To Maintain Technical Specification 4

And Operating License Requirements  :

+ Systems Utilized For Emergency Planning Decisions

+ Systems Utilized For Radiological Effluent Monitoring t

$ i

Review Of Other Computer Applications Follow-up Actions e 24 Systems Evaluated including:

e Steam Leak Detection e PowerPlex -

e Rod Worth Minimizer e Refuel Bridge e Digital Feedwater .

Controller Control System o Offsite Dose e ERFIS/SPDS Calculation Software e Security Computer e Chemistry Analysis System Software CP8aL I

. l t  !  ;! ;lfl ,! i !!

. . +

. +

^

s t

_ n n e i

o m p

t a

c l

o e

i v

l p  : e

_ p mD r n

_ eo A i f

n at a ri r s e

otwre n

_ t Cfop o u oSO n i

t c

p .

T gd i o n nn t u

_ m o

d r a da e u i

,i g F

_ C mDg n a l i

n d e

_ r eiV t d r o cs t s n

_ e f r ae dn T e s n t e

- h s eP T l

a e a n t n l

P nn n c P  :

I O o n i oio n y nd oe

- f i

t c ol si t t a

a r eim a

l

_ OA i t ol rl c l

i e v sr o uf n i wpu i

at a u os re rvu f

nt i cl c e o e - l aCI n V S R nC i

v w o v + o e l l E + + +C+ L o e e R F P

C l .

Computer Product Control Enhancements Follow-up Actions e Reviewed Brunswick Computer Experience e Reviewed Industry Experience e Compared Existing Controls With Industry 4

Standards 4

t 1

CP&L t

Computer Product Control Enhancements Additional Actions e improved Software QA Program

+ Software Quality Assurance Configuration Control And Life ]

Cycle o Enhanced The Guidance For Review And implementation Of New Software e Training

+ Lessons Learned l

+ Software Configuration Control Training Planned For Engineers

+ IT Personnel Enrolled in Engineering Training C

P & ll.

I

Heat Balance Surveillance And Controls t

i Follow-up Actions o Evaluated Surveillance Practices e Evaluated Control Of Heat Balance inputs e

Conclusion:

+ Enhancements Of Controls And Surveillance '

Practices Are Warranted And Have Been implemented i

CP&L .

Summary i

e Comprehensive Corrective Actions e PPC Validation e Review Of Other important Computer Applications -

e Computer Product Control Enhancements e Heat Balance Surveillance And Controls CE

-_________________._________i

Safety Assessment o Majority Of Time During Event Error <;1%

+ Within Reload Licensing Analysis

+ Within LOCA Analysis CP&L

Cycle 11 Safety Assessment

..m,--._...__.,__m _. m. .m . ~%m,--__-~,m._. _ uc u m.msm_m ..u _.,,s , z,.. .. , ,._ ,&

e Power Less Than 100% Of Rated .

e MAPLHGR Calculated To Be 1.008

+ MAPLHGR Generic Curves Used

+ Generic Adjustment Factors Used mMAPLHGR Recalculated To Be 0.958  :

e LOCA Analysis (SAFER-GESTR) Performed At 110%

i CP&L

- i

i Cycle 12 Safety Assessment l e 16 Days Greater Than 102% Power

+ Thermal Margins Greater Than 10%

+ LOCA Analysis (SAFER-GESTR) Performed At 110%

+ No Safety Concern e CP&L Plans To Conduct Feedwater Flow Venturi '

Testing To Evaluate Actual Flow And Reactor Power t

Y Ob I

Summary i

e Self-identified e Corrective Action e Comprehensive Action Regarding Other

. Computer Programs eSafety Assessment i

CP&L i

' ~

PREDECISIONAL ENFORCEMENT CONFERENCE AGENDA BRUNSWICK DECEMBER 9,1996 NRC REGION 11 OFFICE, ATLANTA, GEORGIA i

l. OPENING REMARKS AND INTRODUCTIONS S. Ebneter, Regional Administrator

11. NRC ENFORCEMENT POLICY B. Uryc, Director, Enforcement and Investigation Coordination Staff Ill.

SUMMARY

OF THE ISSUES S. Ebneter, Regional Administrator IV. STATEMENT OF CONCERNS / APPARENT VIOLATION E. Merschoff, Director, Division of Reactor Safety V. LICENSEE PRESENTATION W. Campbell, Vice President - Brunswick Carolina Power & Light Company VI. BREAK / NRC CAUCUS l

Vll. NRC FOLLOWUP QUESTIONS

)

Vill. CLOSING REMARKS S. Ebneter, Regional Administrator l

Enclosure 4 l

e

! ISSUE TO BE DISCUSSED  :

l Facility Operating License Number DPR-62, Section 2,C,1,  !

Maximum Power Level, authorizes the licensee to operate i the facility at steady state reactor core power levels not in excess of 2436 megawatts (thermal).

l Technical Specification 3.2.1 requires in part, that during power operation, the AVERAGE PLANAR LINEAR HEAT GENERATION RATE (APLHGR), for each type of fuel as a function of axial location, shall not exceed limits based on i applicable approved APLHGR limit values.

! The licensee operated Brunswick Unit 2 at steady state reactor core power levels in excess of the license limit of

2436 megawatts (Mw) (thermal) for extended periods of l

time _ Due to an error in the plant process computer j software used for the calculation of core thermal power, i the unit operated in excess of the license limits as follows:

l 7/5/94- 9/6/95 2446 Mw 100.4% Power

(including 2/26/95 at 2460 Mw 101.0% Power) 3/26/96- 8/28/96 2441 Mw 100.2% Power (including 4/17-26/96 at 2492 Mw 102.3% Power and 7/19-26/96 at 2494 Mw 102.4% Power)

The unit also exceeded the Average Planar Linear Heat

Generation Rate thermal limit from December 10 through ,

December 20,1995.

NOTE: The apparent violation discussed in this conference

- is subject to further review and is subject to change prior to any resulting enforcement decision.

1 s

..._.m..~.- .,-w.-